Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
brucker

going wider?

Recommended Posts

as much fun as anamorphics are,... i've got a bit of a problem in my part of the world,...

every space is so damn tight on this damn island!

what options are there for going wider?

has anyone tried those wide conversion lenses so popular in porn?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
EOSHD Pro Color for Sony cameras EOSHD Pro LOG for Sony CamerasEOSHD C-LOG and Film Profiles for All Canon DSLRs
There was scoffing at "wider" over in the SLR Magic thread but I think that's mostly from second-guessing the small digits and not based on actual experience with anamorphic on M4/3. The numbers I'd like to see viable sound ridiculous from a traditional 35mm perspective and like they'd be full of distortion or like one of those skater "death" lenses but that isn't the case. At least not with the most common 1.33X anamorphic adapters and the M4/3.

http://vimeo.com/50804931

http://vimeo.com/50594617

...I shot both of these with an effective 18mm taking lens, the widest I can use without vignetting on my Century Optics, and it has neither extreme distortion or obscene, fisheye FOV. It feels pretty good actually. But, I like being able to go "too far" and dial back so I'm inclined to want to see what a 14mm or even 12mm option would actually look like, if an adapter existed that could handle a taking lens this wide, [i]not someone pre-judging based on numbers and and a guess[/i].

Qualitatively your results should be based on the quality of your adapters. This may be where I give a naive guess but I'm willing to bet it's no worse than what's incurred with a diopter, which is yet another lens in front of the anamorphic. I'm just not confident the same care and craftsmanship goes into wide-angle adapters as what you find with diopters, given the later is designed expressly for detail and the former is not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
woah, that century lets you go pretty wide then! very nice clips, and yeah distortion doesnt get crazy.

yeah, as long as its not skaterboy warped i'm not too fussed with distortion, and i've been seeing a few wide angle adapter threads on dpreview,... the quality seems to have come up quite a bit from back in the day, so i was hoping someone's tried whacking one of those things in front of an anamorphic. i've seen just the one video before.

i really love the shigascope i've got, but its tiny so the widest i can go is 35mm before a vignette,... which on the nikon v1 is a silly 94.5mm FoV, haha. outdoors its easy to work with, but indoors its like i'm being a facial cavity gynecologist.

so if i want to keep using that then i guess the only thing left to do is find a half decent wide adapter,... or move up to m43, but i'm a tight bastard :D

as long as its watchable, then story trumps gear i reckon, so super duper sharpness clarity isnt a concern.

none of the gear shops round here have a wide i can try out unfortunately,... might just have to bite the bullet and order a bunch.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
@ brucker. To be honest i think using your nikon 1 could have its advantages. get a century and a nice fast 16mm taking lens and it'll probably create some lovely images due to the smaller sensor. the 16mm on the nikon 1 will look like a 35mm lens on a s35 sensor due to the crop of the nikon. 35mm is a nice all round lens and with the extra 33% width you'll have a similar horizontal field of view as a 25mm lens on s35. this is wide. 90% of the time it will be too wide:)

A tokina 11-16mm f2.8 and century on your nikon 1 would be amazing! though quite expensive:)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
you've got uncanny timing rich! a century literally just popped up on my local auction site an hour ago,.. came back here to do some research only to find your post :D

arrghh,.. my shopping was meant to be over!

i do like the 35mm look and a decent wide conversion lens is about as much as a century,... decisions, decisions!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Century Optics x0.8 infront of Isco Anamorphic lens works really well ,
this gives super wide anamorphic image no vingetting
also try the Olympus x0.8 and X0.7 both are very good and work infront of my anamorphics

they also sharpen up the image too which is a nice bonus!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
cheers Julian.

thanks for that Andy, I'll have a look into those.

so its a choice, between

a wide adapter infront of an anamorphic vs the century x1.33 with a wider taking lens.

to be a tight stingy bastard or to go into debt, that appears to be the question :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
go as wide as you can on your taking lens (before it vingettes)
then put a Century or Olympus INFRONT of the anamorphic and you get a very very sharp super wide image
(you do need a 72mm back end on the wide adaptor to cover the front of your anamorphic completely in some cases)
(The Olympus x0,7 and x0,8 is cheap and very sharp, Century are expensive for one with a 72mm back )
I do this alot!! it works! super for panoramas

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yup. The century type anamorphics I've used with a 20mm Panasonic lens on a gh2 without vignetting.
Wide angle converters look like crap in front of a wide lens. I've used them on front of a Tokina 11-16mm and looks awful.

http://vimeo.com/40552806

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
as nice as your video is, and the others as well, i think the century might be a bit too clean for my tastes,...

century in front of a shigascope?

hmmm,.... my rig's gonna look even more ridiculous than it already does :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
A good Century x0.7 wide angle adaptor will cost about 500 Uk pounds and they are made by Schnieder in Germany
they are broadcast hd quality and are stunningly sharp.....its a massive piece of glass in this lens!
They do work very well infront of my Schneider and Isco anamorphics .... and rectilinear wide lenses
They sharpen up your image alot too
So dont write them off with out trying one first !!
If you are using rectilinear lenses they look great!!
your verticles will stay verticle!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm still shocked the 20mm and my zoom at 18mm don't feel nearly as wide as a Wes Anderson movie. I read on a Criterion review site a reference to 40mm (20mm wide of course for Panavision) but have a hard time believing that number is anything but pulled from a blogger's butt.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
i was referring to the century anamorphic,... altho i'm pretty sure i'll find projects that it'll suit better than the older anamorphics i have.

Burnet, isnt the GH2 about a x2 crop? that would make a 20mm look 40ish wouldnt it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote name='brucker' timestamp='1353737494' post='22227']i was referring to the century anamorphic,... altho i'm pretty sure i'll find projects that it'll suit better than the older anamorphics i have.Burnet, isnt the GH2 about a x2 crop? that would make a 20mm look 40ish wouldnt it?[/quote]It's not quite, but you have to also consider that shooting in Panavision, or any modern movie camera, is shooting with a crop factor as well. The last movie shot in VistaVision, 8-perf 35mm, or "full frame" like the size of the 5D, etc. was sometime in the early 1960s, where the film ran through the camera horizontally like an SLR. ILM resurrected this mode of moving picture photography in the 1970s for shooting visual effects plates, sometimes utilizing specially modified SLRs due to their smaller size and the diminished availability of existing VistaVision cameras.35mm movies are shot 4-perf (sometimes 2-perf) with the film running vertically through the camera. It's a crop format, a bit bigger than M4/3 but not anywhere close to full frame. Maybe it's enough to make that kind of difference though and the distortion is that non-linear.[img]http://www.eoshd.com/comments/uploads/inline/13968/50b0f74c5c30f_sensors_003_BMDcontext.png[/img][b]edit[/b]: this is why when you see something shot on the 5D, regardless of its image processing shortcomings, you're still experiencing something very different. Different than what you experience in a movie shot with 35mm movie film. It's more than just shallow DOF. You're seeing an image captured in a way that hasn't been done for movies in a long time. It's both quantifiable and intangible at the same time, as big as the difference between anamorphic and non-anamorphic motion pictures. It's different.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
gotcha.

and yeah your videos def dont look 18mm. had you not said, i might have guessed 35mm equivalent apart from the close ups at the autoshow which had a bit more distortion in the lines making it look wider,... but even then,.. 28ish?

but certainly not 18.

i'm wondering,... if you put your zoom to a 9 or whatever the lowest is, does that not give you more of the Wes Anderson look you're after?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...