Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About DirectorCH

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
  • Instagram

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

DirectorCH's Achievements


Member (2/5)



  1. Haha lucky! Yeah saw one go for $80 the other day, then $150. Seems like $200 US is the middle. Some go for $400, who knows, you can never tell with anamorphics they go up and down and up and up and up lol
  2. That’s awesome, I was looking to pick one up as a cheap second scope since they go for 80-150 US these days. Already got my rectilux and everything else, but it’s nice to know it is an underrated lens and you can create beautiful images with it!
  3. Woah looks like it potentially might exist.
  4. Fantastic work man! This is all with a cheap sun anamorphic adaptor? What are you selling it for?
  5. Never mind seller misspoke. I do find it interesting that rapido has a clamp for a 16f though.
  6. Knowledge base question here. Is there a Kowa 16F? I can find little to no Information on this scope on the internet except for the rapido website that mentions it for a clamp. I may have the opportunity to by one from a seller and I am told that it has same coverage as 16d but is a smaller overall scope. This is very intriguing to me, and I'm trying to find out if this is true or at least get some more information since this seems like a very rare scope. Thoughts?
  7. That won't be my setup but I guess it doesn't really matter, because if I use a step-down ring its all the same, it really has to do with the optics, and the back of the anamorphic anyway. At least thats how I understand it. So if it works for you, then it should be ok for me even if I use a clamp and do a HCDNA on the front.
  8. Yeah you would need a cinema zoom, or at least a long zoom that is parafocal, and very few cheaper stills lenses are. But it seems like the RMC might be parafocal. Has the 72mm front thread of the RMC given you issues? Ana clamps are usually 52mm, and large front taking lenses are usually recommended against for anamorphic.
  9. @Teemu Fantastic stuff man! Usually zooms are out of question for ana setups, but its nice to know you are using one successfully, and able to utilize some of those in-between focal lengths. I think if people keep adding their thoughts and suggestions this could be a beneficial thread for people that are looking beyond the standard suggestions. This is fantastic.
  10. Found a 75mm Meyer-Optik that plays with anamorphics nicely, unfortunately it is not cheap! https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1297905-REG
  11. Nice input guys. @anton.zimin@gmail.com the Biometar looks really nice, its good to know it plays well with anamorphic. I wonder if there are any obscure focal lengths below 80mm in the high 60's to 70mm range. I remember reading somewhere that there was some nikkor that was 67mm or something like that. I can't remember where I read about it, and I can't find any more information about it.
  12. As everyone knows the main recommendations for taking lenses for an anamorphic adaptor setup are generally the Helios 44-2 (58mm) and the Jupiter 9 (85mm) Since some anamorphic setups offer no vignetting between those two focal lengths I was wondering if anyone had suggestions for taking lenses that would fit between 58mm and 85mm that would be suitable to use for an anamorphic setup. Are there any good 65mm 70mm or more obscure focal lengths anyone has come across? In my search I found a possible vintage winner that is just a little wider then the typical 85mm: Carl Zeiss Jena Biometar 80mm f/2.8 Post suggestions below!
  13. Awesome insight everyone. @Bioskop.Inc I imagine you are right about the user error and misunderstanding being to blame for some of the exaggerated mumps online. It is interesting though because if the mumps mostly show on close focus, it seems like this should be negated by using a variable diopter since you are setting your lenses to infinity. Seems like a lot of these mumps examples are using a HCDNA setup. I also wonder how much focal length and crop factor play a roll. I know my specific question was in relation to the Kowas but there seems to be minimal information regarding mumps on this forum, so this is an important discussion. It certainly seems like some brands are more susceptible then others. @Liszon that plugin looks like it works really well. It looks like Tito created a free version of that plugin:
  14. I was just wondering if anyone had any information or opinion on the matter of anamorphic mumps specifically in regards to the larger Kowa 2x anamorphics. Of all the countless tests and videos I have seen it seems to me that the Kowa B&H shows the most mumps when panning. I know everyone says that the 16h/8z/b&h are all basically the same lens and that may be true but for some reason it seems to me that the B&H is the worst, which seems funny since everyone says that is the best one. Maybe I am going crazy, or maybe there are other factors at play (like close focus, or diopter use) between the samples that is throwing me off. Just curious if anyone had some insight into this. I don't own any of the lenses, but I am looking to grab one of them. I love the Kowa look but want to get the one that has the least mumps (if that is possible)
  15. Awesome thanks for the intel! I love that it fits seamlessly with the anamorphic jacket they make. I know you had said that the focus was a bit stiff, and it seems like that is the main issue people are seeing, is it as smooth as the rangefinder in your opinion?
  • Create New...