Justin Bacle

Its marked in feets

It seems I only update this thread every couple of months... Shame on me. These last two months had some long awaited videos, so... check them out!
ON A BUDGET - FLAPJACK LED EDGE LIGHT C-200L
http://www.tferradans.com/blog/?p=9562
ANAMORPHIC ON A BUDGET - ELMOSCOPE II VS KOWA BELL & HOWELL
http://www.tferradans.com/blog/?p=9194
ANAMORPHIC CHOP SHOP - KOWA B&H EDGE BLACKENING
http://www.tferradans.com/blog/?p=9390
ANAMORPHIC CHOP SHOP - KOWA B&H MINIMUM FOCUS MOD
http://www.tferradans.com/blog/?p=9590
ANAMORPHIC CHOP SHOP - KOWA B&H SHARPNESS TUNE UP
http://www.tferradans.com/blog/?p=9592

ANAMORPHIC COOKBOOK - HFOV CALCULATOR V2.8
http://www.tferradans.com/blog/?p=13386
ANAMORPHIC COOKBOOK - DOUBLE FOCUS ON THE FLY
http://www.tferradans.com/blog/?p=9610
ANAMORPHIC CHOP SHOP - JUPITER 9 EXTREME MOD
http://www.tferradans.com/blog/?p=9505
ANAMORPHIC CHOP SHOP - MIR 1B EXTREME MOD
http://www.tferradans.com/blog/?p=9516
Sure, the original thread with the mod is this one: 
 
I hadn't adjusted any of the lenses for that episode, so that might have somewhat affected the results, yes.

Very unscientific test (as I don't have step-up and step-down rings nor do I have a Tripod as I am in a Hotel for work right now)
Used a flashlight to create side lighting.
But here it is. I think I proved your point
No Ultra contrast filter :

Filter In Front of the anamorphic :

Filter between the adapter and lens (sorry for being a different shot, as I did have to put everything on a table) :

Yeah there is a reason a measly BMPCC is still in great demand. Grudge wins at times with overall resolution. Hell BMPCC raw files are bad enough, can't imagine 8k red file storage! But if someone wants to give me the Red for Christmas!! 

4k, 8k, bah.  I was watching a Blu-ray rip of the 1983 Scarface tonight allowing my UHD to upscale the *gasp* 720p footage and thought it looked AMAZING for 33 years ago.  I guess content is always king of course. 

Hi everyone, just wanted to share my experience fixing a bad singer 16D i got on ebay for cheap.
1. I got this Singer 16-D for a very good price on ebay. As shown on the ad's pictures, there seemed to be fungus/dust inside.

2. I received the adapter and noticed that there was no fungus but the coating has gone bad and was partially gone or made tiny bubbles. I tried the adapter but it was just a hazy ghosty mess.

3. I got the adapter open (you can follow @Tito Ferradans guide with his Elmoscope/Kowa B&H as the construction is very similar), removed the the front elements and got to work. I did scratch the remaining coating with my nail (went away very easily) and finished the job with a bit of acetone. The result is not perfect but way better than I expected.

4. Here is a very quick and dirty shot with the Singer 16-D :

Compared to the same quick and dirty shot with my Isco Ultra-Star 

Both shots with the Helios 44M wide open (f/2)
Still hazy but very usable IMO, plus I want the Singer to be hazy and flary as I already has the Isco which is damn sharp and does not flare by itself.
Do you have similar experiences to share or have any remarks on my repair ?

Thanks for the link, but as I described, there were no fungus but only bubly coating  Nice link, and I'll try it next time I have a lens with fungus.
I found a small company that can polish the lenses and apply new coating. The price is around 300 € for spherical lenses. But they are not confident in doing not spherical (e.g. anamorphic) lenses :s

Thanks for posting. I am safe. My thoughts are with the victims of this atrocity and the similar one in Nice, France earlier this year.
Was at the same Christmas market just a few days ago and it's near my girlfriend's place. I just hope that all of my friends here in Berlin are ok.
The market where it happened is right in the middle of the busiest shopping area of Berlin, in the west side of the city.
The Christmas market would have been packed at this time of year with families and friends after work.
There's a children's merry-go-round there, crafts stores and food, pancakes and mulled wine, German bratwurst, it's a very good natured place full of nice people and my heart goes out to the people killed and injured tonight.

When I worked for them I had my suspicions they would try and suppress the strident tone of my reviews when it came to Canon's shortcomings in video.
Now it's plain for all to see what is going on there -
https://***URL removed***/articles/9717214609/filmmaker-scott-dw-trades-his-pro-video-gear-for-canon-eos-80d-watch-the-results
I will be sure to get my fix of Canon PR marketing there from now on and of Ebrahim's latest forum frauds.

Thanks for the advice anamorphic doctor ! As the coating was already 75% gone, I had to remove it anyway. I'll try to find a company in france who can re-do the coating, very good idea

Hi to all! My friend Juan from France sent me Moller 63/2x, so I decided to remake it as rework other bulky ana projector lenses. First impressions - can work with that lens. Overall weigh of lenses without body around 700 gr. Little lighter than 35 NAP 2-4 / 2-2 (800 gr), and much lighter than 35NAP 2-3m (1 kg). First examples:
In future I'll add examples to the extent possible.
 

Hi, Justin! If you remove coating, contrast falls (your sample compare confirms this) and light streaks not blue as usual, but white. You can find the optical plant that causes coating on optics, and if they do that in your case, also try to clear the full coating and give them for work. I have not yet done, but try as an option.

Hi everyone, just wanted to share my experience fixing a bad singer 16D i got on ebay for cheap.
1. I got this Singer 16-D for a very good price on ebay. As shown on the ad's pictures, there seemed to be fungus/dust inside.

2. I received the adapter and noticed that there was no fungus but the coating has gone bad and was partially gone or made tiny bubbles. I tried the adapter but it was just a hazy ghosty mess.

3. I got the adapter open (you can follow @Tito Ferradans guide with his Elmoscope/Kowa B&H as the construction is very similar), removed the the front elements and got to work. I did scratch the remaining coating with my nail (went away very easily) and finished the job with a bit of acetone. The result is not perfect but way better than I expected.

4. Here is a very quick and dirty shot with the Singer 16-D :

Compared to the same quick and dirty shot with my Isco Ultra-Star 

Both shots with the Helios 44M wide open (f/2)
Still hazy but very usable IMO, plus I want the Singer to be hazy and flary as I already has the Isco which is damn sharp and does not flare by itself.
Do you have similar experiences to share or have any remarks on my repair ?

I agree, no way you can beat a Sony F3 if you don't need 4k. Although not as good of Codec, the Canon C100 now, with its sub 2k cost is sort of tempting also especially with the DP AF upgrade in one. Great run and Gun camera also. 8bit out but..

Hey,
I visited Japan for a week, and tested out the 5D III and to see what it can do with Magic Lantern. 
 

Slow motion test. All scenes shot at 1600iso.
 

When snowy. Setup the same as on previous msg.

Can you post some pictures shot with it ? I don't have this lens, as it is quite rare, but I do love my MD 135/2.8, would love to see a comparison. Is it sharp @f/2 ? The rokkorfiles test shows it not being that sharp, but is it sharp enough for video wide open ? Should be great on a full frame (Sony E-mount ?)

It's really difficult to tell the capability of the lens from the Rokkor files site I think, it seems to be a pretty old article and its not the best choice of test shots.
Speaking of not the best test shots...
Heres too very quick and dirty shots out of my NX1, one photo, one video frame. Straight out of the camera (video still was fired into premiere for titling) 
Shot at ISO 200 at F2 and with the camera set to -9 sharpness. 
I tried mainly to focus on the smaller "eye" (or is that his projector like R2-D2?) and the lines around it.
Like I said, its a very quick and dirty test, done on a small Pixi tripod that wasn't quite up to the weight of the camera and lens, so take into account that these are rough results, wide open and with some minor shake. I think the lens makes a pretty good account of itself wide open. 
I'm heading out just now, so I cant do anymore tests tonight, but if anyones got any suggestions of what they'd like to see out of the Lens, just fire up here and I'll do my best :)/

Cheers.
The Sony F3 produces stunning results, but I'm looking to shoot 2x anamorphic w/ a 2.66 delivery, as such, need the extra resolution to compensate for cropping - and as we know, the F3 only shoots 2K. 

$2800 - a $250 giftcard that is included in B&H  
If the GH5 was not on the horizon I would have pulled the trigger on that one. 

Would it be impossible for Mitakon to make a Lens Turbo with interchangeable rear mounts, being as they are just dumb adaptors of slightly different lengths. Going with the EF version, and finding 3rd party adaptors to F, MD, M42 etc seems a bit kludgy.

I am going to revive this topic, but this camera ticks many box. The only thing missing is 10 bit output IMO.
@Mattias Burling did you get a chance to shoot more since your first review ? Any updates on your review ?
I don't see many used LS300 for sale yet, but I don't know how many were sold.

We are using one for a documentaries series. It is the best value for money camera of its kind. A dSLR killer for video. 

Don't do that, trust me, I did not find any acceptable options for monting MD lenses on an EOS mount, and I've tried many things (slims adapters, adapters with optics)
Conversion should be an option, but the people making lens conversions are not interested in "lower" lenses than the mighty 50/1.2 & 85/1.2 :s
The "best" adapter is this one (http://www.ebay.com/itm/Thin-Minolta-MD-Lens-to-Canon-EOS-serial-Camera-Adapter-without-glasses-MD-EOS-/111751120312) but you are still missing around 1mm flange distance -> Infinity focus is not an option wide open