Jump to content
Brian Caldwell

SLR Magic 1.33x-40

Recommended Posts

http://www.4kshooters.net/2016/04/15/nab-2016-slr-magic-anamorphot-1-33x-40-is-a-new-anamorphic-adapter-for-mft-and-super-35aps-c/

The 4kshooters article suggests that this single-focus unit is compatible with only two SLR Magic backer lenses, and not with any third party lenses.  I assume this is just a misunderstanding, since I would assume you could use the attachment with any lens that fits, as with any Iscorama-type device.

 

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

The blueness of those coatings makes me want to vomit. There's far more complexity to good anamorphic flares than the coatings that SLR Magic has been slathering on their otherwise exemplary optics. I also consistently find the images out of 1.33X systems to come off as awkward: not clinical enough compared to good spherical, but not unique enough compared to a good 2X Ana. Just.... Awkward looking, checking all the boxes on paper but missing the mark in practice. There's no reason not to shoot 2X now that 4K is so accessible. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, andrew mcmillan said:

I wonder if thats a mistake about the taking lenses. i wonder if this lens could do longer focal lengths on fullframe. 

what do you ghuys think

Any afocal anamorphic attachment should be compatible with fullframe, so long as the focal length of the spherical component is large enough.   You may be restricted in terms of maximum aperture, however, depending on the exit pupil diameter of the attachment and how much aberration you are willing to put up with.  Take an extreme example:  An Iscorama-36 should work just fine on 8x10" format with, say, a 600mm lens, but you would be limited to about f/16.

BTW, in your mind, what counts as fullframe?  24x36mm, or a 16x9 crop (20.25x36mm), or a 4x3 crop (24x,32mm), or ??????

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

16x9 for those of us who shoot on a7s or 5dmlii, just curious i have the 1.33 50 and am pretty happy with it up till i go to my 85 2.8 contax zeiss, I thought the 2.8 85 zeiss with its small front element would do pretty good, but no bananas, maybe this 40 would do better?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, andrew mcmillan said:

16x9 for those of us who shoot on a7s or 5dmlii, just curious i have the 1.33 50 and am pretty happy with it up till i go to my 85 2.8 contax zeiss, I thought the 2.8 85 zeiss with its small front element would do pretty good, but no bananas, maybe this 40 would do better?

What exactly don't you like about the 1.33/50 with your 85/2.8?  I would expect any attempt to focus-through with the rear lens to fail pretty miserably due to astigmatism, but if you set everything to infinity and use a single-focus variable diopter front attachment it should be OK unless you're focusing really close.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

its that i have to stop down so far and yes single focus would be nice too , I curently use contax zeiss 35 45 and the 85 as a lens set. and the 35 and 45 look great even wide open . its the 85 that needs to be at 5.6 or more. the diopeters dont seem to help it much either 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We recommend the SLR Magic HyperPrime 25mm T0.95 III for micro four thirds and the SLR Magic 50mm F1.1 for E-mount S35 because it is not compatible with all lenses and it is not possible for us to try all lenses from other manufacturers to test for compatibility. The lens is better paired with lenses with smaller front elements with a short distance between front element and rear element of the Anamorphot 1,33x-40. At NAB we tried the Anamorphic 1,33x-40 on the Zeiss Loxia 35mm f/2 and the image is great as it fulfills the compatibility conditions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

hey andrew thanks for chiming in here. 

don't get me wrong, I understand very well how the anamorphots work, that's why i use the 45 and 35  2,8 contax  zeiss lenses, very small and very close front elements. 

And the quality has been absolutely great, I am very pleased. 

but on the 85 2.8 which also is very small for an 85 the quality has been ok. Better than other test footage of 85s i've seen

I'd like to know if you think the new anamorphot would work better will tele lenses like an 85 on ful frame?

I know you use a 70mm in the anamorphic primes, is there any way you can tell me about that lens, its characteristics and how you got a good pairing out of it 

 

thanks a bunch

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 I would think only on super 35 as the original anamorphot can only just do 40mm with out vignetting,  and with being targeted at smaller sensors. 

thats why i like slr magic you can get pretty wide, where as most projector lenses only can do tele lenses. 85ff 50 crop  ect...

buts that the trade off i wonder how this 40 will do with tele lenses, Andrew how soon will it be available? I'd like to buy it, to try it out. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 22-9-2016 at 2:49 AM, andrew mcmillan said:

Seriously anybody tried the new 40 ? any reviews?  i might just buy one and return if not up to par

And, did you buy one? Seriously zero reviews online, and I'm also curious about this thing

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.


×
×
  • Create New...