Julien416

The longer focal length are indeed a PITA. But with a 50 or 58, or even 85, you can honestly have a quite practical and manageable setup if you combine your diopter with the metal jackets from rapido technology. 

It weighs about 1.7 kgs which is not that different from any (small) anamorphic cinema lens. But obviously it's a little longer and it's quite front heavy because of the rectilux.

@Tito Ferradans The Square front are very nice, but I hope you like optical flaws (and mumps for the 35mm) because they are full of it :))

Flares are exceptionnaly nice though.

4 hours ago, CfFilmmaker said:

Don't go for a Hypergonar S.T.O.P. though, as you know Tito isn't a huge fan. 

I really don't get the hate for the hypergonar. There are six different iterations. Tito only tested one, the biggest and latest, and honestly it looked kinda good even though the lens looked misaligned. I have the first iteration, the rarest, the glass is larger than the rest of the bunch. I guess I was fortunate to get it. And even though it's not in the best shape, it's probably one of the most organic and best anamorphot I have. And I do have a LOT of them, Kowa 16h, Kowa B&H, dyaliscope junior, kowa 16D, Cinelux, ruralscope... You name it. But the hypergonar is definitely one of my personnal favorite. Soft yet sharp, a lot of anamorphic characters, blue flares. And small.   

Tito has been more and more critical of the old anormorphic projection lens. I kinda get it. But honestly, on a TV series I am directing, I have been intercuting shots taken with my Hypergonar 16 / rectilux combo with shots taken on Panavision B series and no one ever noticed the difference. The old cinema anamorphics are REALLY soft and full of flaws, and not that different at least image wise from a GOOD projection lens combo. And I've shot with a LOT of different cinema anamorphics when doing commercials.

Of course, in practical terms of course they are not in the same league and that's probably why Tito can't be bothered with projection lens anymore

I am sorry to break it to you, but what you're looking for already exists. It's called a GH5 or a GH5s. Those colors that you don't like can be tweaked with luts and color grading. Instead of losing your time trying to find something that doesn't exists, you better buy what's available. By the way, you're forgetting the Z cam E2 that looks pretty cool. It also has a M43 sensor with an anamorphic mode.

By the way, I've bought my fair share of those focal reducer, and honestly the only ones that really impressed me are the original speed boosters, the other ones are either too flimsy to attach a 2kgs anamorphic lens, or simply optically inferior.  

What you're asking simply doesn't exist. There's no such thing as a x0.85 speedbooster.

You want super 35 4 perf size? Get a x0.71 speedbooster and a m43 sensor, end of story. For info, on the Alexa in 4/3 mode, the sensor is actually a little smaller than a speedbooster m43 (23.76x17.83mm) and no one ever noticed the difference with s35 4 perfs. I use it all the time (the Alexa that is) and even crop in it when necessary... And no one ever complained either... I also own a speedboosted gh5s and anamorphic glass and couldn't be happier. 

Couldn't have put it in a better way. To see an example of a coupled anamorphot to a taking lens, you might to check this link , it's in french and it's about the Franscope system, but the pictures are self explanatory.

And I'm also very curious to see this Möller in action.

I am not sure to understand what you really are looking for but a base plate and some 15mm rods paired with a lens support will probably help you. You might want to add a rapido technology metal jacket ensemble to wrap your setup. I went this way and never looked back.

There was a topic about that rumour last year. Seems it was deleted by Jon who was a still moderator at the time. Because this rumour was disturbing I tried to retrace where it was coming from. A lot of the original messages involved got erased but here what supposedly happened from what I was able to gather online.

Last year on reduser forums, when the atlas Orion were announced, John Barlow from rectilux posted some mail exchanges between him and the guys behind Atlas that had taken place months before. They were asking John how much it would cost to rehouse shneider cinelux anamorphic projection lenses with a rectilux. The deal never got through but when Atlas showed their Orion lens, the lens signature was so close to a shneider cinelux coupled to a rectilux that a lot of people in the very small anamorphic world asked themselves if they had not done a rehousing with another partner, hence the barlow mail leaks.

The thing is that the technology Atlas used to focus its anamorphic group is called a variable diopter. The same exact method used by rectilux. However this very simple technology is widely used in the anamorphic world and doesn't belong to John Barlow. I am pretty sure the new cooke anamorphics use it, the iscorama also used it - it was even patented - and I know it was also used back in the 50's in some exotic french anamorphics. Let's say this clue is inconclusive.

Another thing to add is that it's highly unlikely to imagine Atlas buying all the cinelux online and rehousing them. 

But still. There were some messages between Barlow and the Atlas founder unless the former is lying. 

So what really happened ? My personnal opinion, which is absolutely not a fact, is that Atlas might have have been inspired by a cinelux / rectilux combination to built their prototype with a third party partner (let's say a chinese optics factory). But the housing is undisputably 100% atlas, glasses are also 100% cut from brand new optic glass. There is no way it's a rehousing. I bet the coating is a new formula as well. Remains the optic formula which is nothing new, as anamorphics is simple as it can be by today's standards.

The truth is we will never know. Everyone is inspired by other's people work so I have no problem living with the small possibility that Orion was inspired by cinelux lenses. It kinda looks the same but it looks great, and the housing looks genuinely good. It's certainly more expansive than buying a cinelux and a rectilux but you won't have to deal with fishy clamps ... Sure anamorphics cine lens are way too expansive but that's the way it is. High demand, etc. Fun fact : 6 or 7 years ago, a DOP I know bought a kowa anamorphics series for 5000€. You'd be lucky to get it under 50K nowadays... 

Well, what this forum certainly lacks at the current moment is proper moderation.

Getting tired of all the unnecessary drama tbh. 

The arri D21 had 10 stops of DR in 2010. At the time everyone was drooling and saying how cinematic and filmic it was, how film was beaten, bla bla bla... It was a dream camera for a lot of us. 

The GH5s is supposed to have around 12 to 13 stops of DR.

So, to read that the GH5s isn't made for "serious use" because of its "limited DR" just puts a smile on my face. All these cameras - sony, fuji, panasonic, canon - are all extraordinary tools that few people could tell apart, even on this forum. Instead of calling people names because of brand fanatism, some of us should spent more time using them...

On 16/02/2018 at 9:54 PM, docunagi said:

Hello,

I happen to have the same lens but without the steel balls. Would it be possible to know the diameter and number of balls

to try to fix my lens?

Does all the balls are placed around the thread ring with some grease?

Hope you get this message…

 

thanks

Hi, I have exactly the same hypergonar. I remembered I had one steel ball left when I finished servicing mine. I am not too eager to dismantle it again so I can only give you the diameter. It's 3mm. You can get a few dozens of them, having spare ones won't harm you  

24 minutes ago, OliKMIA said:

Very good. What did you do on this one? (grading, filming, gears used?)

Thanks! I *just* directed it. It was shot with two Alexa's with panavision C series lenses and also a kowa series occasionally. Cinematographer is a talented French fellow. Graded on resolve by someone much more talented than I am as well. 

Kinda proud of this one. My best work I guess. 

Got a GH5s and finally tried the photo mode yesterday. My take is that it's plenty good as long as you can live with the 10mpx limitation. I do. I seldom print 50 cm large posters and, like about everybody today, tend to show my pictures to peaple through a screen. So 10mpx is fine. But if you like to reframe, if you're the kind of guy who print a lot of large format posters, then i'd say, get something else. I still have a good old D800 not that far that still takes the most gorgeous pictures when I need some resolution, so I am spoiled.  

As it's been said, 99.99% of people don't have hdr display (let alone 4k...). 

In my country the delivery format for broadcast TV series is rec709 1080p. Just saying. 

Is all of this really worth the hassle? At least for now? All this good money and effort being spent could be used for something more useful, like investing in a short film, a model, whatever more important than being a lonely pioneer... 

8 minutes ago, jonpais said:

and the reason for posting a link to imdb is...?

Vesku talking about grain added to Star Wars. The movie was shot on kodak film, hence the grain. Seems people magically forgot how grainy film was.

He was just pointing the technical specs in his link. 

2 hours ago, Vesku said:

The new Star Wars movie in 4k theater has added noise which looks like GH5 iso1600-3200.

It is called FILM GRAIN for christ sake !

Star Wars was shot on motion picture film. You know : Kodak, celluloid, grain... Have people really forgotten what film grain looks like ? 

@Brian Caldwell From what I gathered online, seems the 4/3 anamorphic sensor area is exaclty the same as the GH5. 

I think they are reaching for the pro market, or make people think it's more of a cine camera than anything else since they suppressed the ibis.

And it's working. We're already thinking of using gh5s as C or D cameras on French TV series or even feature mixed with two Alexa.

It's just so cheap and the quality isn't too far off. When you're shooting 5 or 6 minutes a day, having 3 or 4 cameras can be a big plus. But renting additional Alexa can be a strain on a budget especially when you're not on Hollywood budget scale.

Having a rigged up gh5s (or gh5 but the 5s seems to have slightly more DR and it counts) lying around with a PL adapter can make a difference as it's easily gradable and just good enough if you need additional coverage. It can be said about a lot of hybrid cameras I know, but 10 bit added to low light is really impressive and that can not be ignored. 

2 hours ago, Damphousse said:

It depends who you are.  For the vast majority of movies I simply would not get the use out of it before I could get the 4k HDR version for the same price or cheaper.

1080p Blu-rays simply never reached the level of market penetration DVDs did and they are already obsoleted.  4k may end up being a reasonable point to get off the resolution train and combined with whatever HDR format wins there may be a point in a few years where more aggressive library building makes sense.

It's like cell phones.  I can't imagine a cell phone 3-4 years from now being amazingly better that what we have now.  There will come a time when it makes sense to get off the consumer upgrade treadmill but for now I don't think we are there yet with Blu-ray discs.

I don't get your point. 

VHS looked like shit, even when they were the standard... 1080P blu ray, even in SDR, will still look good for quite a while... You know, 2K looks fine in my not so up to date IMAX theater -  but the screen is only 25 meters large, you may have a bigger one...  

I don't know why anyone would need absolutely need 4K right now... BTW Most of the movies from 1993 to 2015 were released in 1080p... When I'll get a fancy 4K oled, i'll be glad to get 4K movies, yet I am pretty sure my BR collection will look just fine.

By the way I still have to meet one producer IRL who heard of HDR and rec2020. Gear addicts do not count.... I am extremely skeptical by nature about those so called revolutions. I directed a 3D feature back when it was supposed to be the next big thing. Been there, done that. 

1 minute ago, Sage said:

Mmm. I definitely need a normal lens option. I heard something about Metabones looking into anamorphic. If so, that would be significant as they do precision work with optics (making the impossible possible)

50mm anamorphic is all you need in S35. It's definitely a "normal lens", 35 is super large. It has the field of view of a 17.5mm lens...

11 minutes ago, Sage said:

I wonder how a 35mm would perform with that .64 SB + 2X combo? A 'normal' field of view is most important to me

A 35mm wouldn't work as it would heavily vignette, especially with a 0.64 SB. It could work with a 0.71 and a 35mm but without single focus solution that brings its share of additionnal vignetting. 

40/45mm is supposedly the lowest possible focal lenght with a single focus Kowa in S35 format.  

5 hours ago, Vesku said:

I think they have added tons of film grain because the IQ cant be so noisy otherwise. It may be some kind of retro thing

That retro thing is called film... *sigh*

@Neumann Films just told us that he had probably used @Sage GH5 alexa lut. It obviously wouldn't make any sense to use it with another sensor I guess. Or a damn close one maybe.

Raw recording sounds more likely, it has been around with magic lantern and blackmagic for a while now and unleashing  the full power of the GH5 sensor would make a lot of sense and wouldn't insult the GH5 userbase. But I don't know how they could do it though so really not convinced of my theory...

It's probably a basic hypergonar formula. Just very well corrected and coated. Google it. 

If you have sharpness trouble, you might want to try a little bit before infinity on your taking lens. If it's not changing anything, try another taking lens. If it's not sharp, then your isco has alignment issues. Not that complicated to correct actually but still a little pain. 

At close focus the stretch ratio WILL NOT be 2x... I told you the other day about breathing... It will most likely be 1.8x at close focus and 2x at infinity.