Henchman

This is how you you do it on the gold Isco as well. 
What I dud was leave about an inch gap between the taking lens and scope. Just enough so I could get a, toothpick in one of the holes on the rear element. And I slightly turned it. 

Yes, it does.

Received notice they are shipping now. Very excited 

So as I'm getting ready to start shooting my micro budget feature, I decided to do a final test between those 3 scopes and a Voigtlander 40mm F2 as taking lens, wide open at F2.
Well, I was surprised.
I used the cover of a book at 40 feet.
The scope I expected to perform the worst, in fact was the sharpest of all three. I could read the title from 40 feet away.
Here are the picture.

So as I'm getting ready to start shooting my micro budget feature, I decided to do a final test between those 3 scopes and a Voigtlander 40mm F2 as taking lens, wide open at F2.
Well, I was surprised.
I used the cover of a book at 40 feet.
The scope I expected to perform the worst, in fact was the sharpest of all three. I could read the title from 40 feet away.
Here are the picture.

The scratched lens from yesterday,  polished today. 
Footage coming today 

I was reading the most recent 5 pages of this thread and this made me literally laugh out loud
Andrew, you have this weird thing against Blackmagic that I think is personal.
Things you complained about on the BMPCC4K (no IBIS, no AF, no tilt screen, no EVF) are all literally true for the Sigma Fp.
Not all cameras are made for vloggers and hybrid shooters. Cinema cameras fall into that category. It's ignorant to expect a cinema camera to conform to the same expectations as a stills camera that shoots video.
None of the cameras you listed output better IQ nor do they have the ergonomics or user interface of a proper cinema camera (a la BMPCC).
Please, for the sake of your readers - myself included, get over your grudge against Blackmagic. It's childish.

Have you thought of creating a repository for lens profiles?

Short video of test shots with the BMPCC 4K
Lens was wide open as it was quite dark in the room.
 
https://youtu.be/WArcKh-lXWY

Heads up.
Tilta has a deal on their motor. $135
https://tilta.com/shop/nucleus-nano-motor-kit-i/
But you can get an open box system from them as well for $171
https://tilta.com/shop/nucleus-nano-wireless-lens-control-system-open-box/

But, would it be able in the future to use the motor of an autofocus in combination wiht a gear for the Anamorphic scope.
Just an Idea.

I should have specified I was meaning using the autofocus with a bmpcc 4k

What's the difference between them, N and M models?
Why three cables for M model?
Don't I need any cable if I am using the Nano?
Tilta Nucleus N is Nano, yes?

Got mine ordered. 
Hope delivery will stay on schedule. I have a no budget feature I'm starting in the New Year that this will be perfect for.

Decided to pick up a Nikon AIS 28mm f/2.8 for $160

And that's exactly why I was asking for f2 or faster suggestions. So when I'm shooting in low-light conditions, I can still stop down a 1.4 lens to 2.8 and know I'll have a sharper image than using a 2.8 lens, wide open. 
 
And since this is for filmmaking, I'm mostly concerned about the center of the image anyway.
The Voigtlander is very sharp wide open at f/1.4. 

And that's exactly why I was asking for f2 or faster suggestions. So when I'm shooting in low-light conditions, I can still stop down a 1.4 lens to 2.8 and know I'll have a sharper image than using a 2.8 lens, wide open. 
 
And since this is for filmmaking, I'm mostly concerned about the center of the image anyway.
The Voigtlander is very sharp wide open at f/1.4. 

I ended up picking up a voigtlander 40mm f/1.4.
not 50mm but close enough.

I recently bought a Moller 32/2, with some front lens issues for cheap. 
I started looking for a donor front, and found one of the "Useless" telecine versions in immaculate shape.
The lens arrived, and I swapped out the front. Except the lense didn't line up properly from one barrel to the next. So I tried loosening the ring, to adjust the lense. I could not get it to budge. So I thought, great. Waste of money. I started to compare the lenses, and noticed that the only difference between the 2 was that the telecine version had the rear lense closer to the front lense.
I took it apart, removed the focusing guides, and started shifting the front lens forward, and suddenly it focused.
I had to modify the focusing guides. allowing for only one screw to be used to fasten it. But now it's razor sharp, and with a Single focus adapter, it can focus up to 16 inches.
The easiest thing would be to loosen the back retaining ring, remove the lense. Slip in some kind of spacer to get the rear lense all the way to the rear, nd scerw the retainer ring in.
 
Either way, that "Useless" version of Moller 32/2, is now completely useful.

I hate the look of the Sigma 18-35. I had one.
I actually bought a voigtlander 40mm, it's awesome.

So, it arrives today, and this thing is mint. Not a scratch anywhere.
It's identical to my Sankor 16C, but in much better condition. 
Going to do a flare and sharpness test later. 

So, it arrives today, and this thing is mint. Not a scratch anywhere.
It's identical to my Sankor 16C, but in much better condition. 
Going to do a flare and sharpness test later. 

I also figure, worst case, If need be, I wait to find one for parts, and replace the back lense.