Jump to content

Isco "1.5x-36" vs serial number


Recommended Posts

Greetings all,


Can anyone give me a definitive answer on whether the two different versions of the Isco 36 (printed "1.5x-36" or those with a serial number) are actually different lenses?  The excellent anamorphic guide says that the two are "practically the same" optically, and the difference is a slightly smaller rear element on the serial number versions.


I have a project where I need a pair of identical lenses, so "practically the same" may not be good enough - is anyone able to tell me if the slight physical differences actually result in any difference in the footage, adapter use, focal distances, etc?  (to clarify, I already have a 1.5x-36 and am now trying to source another that MUST be optically identical, and would like to be sure of the differences before committing the bucks to a serial number version, which seems to be more readily available than the 1.5x)


Appreciate the help, and if anyone has a version with "1.5x-36" printed on it (non-MC) they want to part with, I am a SERIOUSLY keen!


Thanks, Jeff

Link to comment
Share on other sites

EOSHD Pro Color 5 for Sony cameras EOSHD Z LOG for Nikon CamerasEOSHD C-LOG and Film Profiles for All Canon DSLRs

As far as I know they are not the same! Isco developed the early Iscoramas for 35mm stills cameras. Then they started to make anamorphics especially to the Super-8 marktet. They had cooperations with Bauer, Beaulieu, Schneider (Iscorama Cinegon) and also made the Iscorama 36 as a single attachment without lens. These Iscoramas "only" had a 1.5x stretch as they were never built for the pro market. 2x stretch is too much for the small Super-8 film. 

Sorry... that was OT... I am pretty sure that there will in any case be a difference with the older Iscorama and a 36 as the 36 has a different coating. 

Astonishingly I think you can mix an early nonMC 54 with an early Iscorama (I actually do that and think it is okay).


Again just my opinion and I don't own a 36 but that is what I heard from some other people. And I also think that was discussed here before...?



PS Found it: http://www.eoshd.com/comments/topic/2282-iscorama-36-vs-iscorama/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i remember reading here somewhere,

a post not too long ago.

i don't think there's an actual glass difference besides the size rear element




there's a coating difference.  the original iscoramas i think have less of a coat than the iscorama 36.  so they give an amber flare.  the iscorama's have a cooler/bluer flare (i believe it was andrew reid's post that he was theorizing that all the 36s actually were actually multicoated regardless of the MC designation or not).  something like that, someone correct me if i have my facts wrong.


** oh yeah Rudolf found the post above.



Link to comment
Share on other sites

I recently did a modification job to a non 36 iscorama and tested it against my own iscorama 36 (single coated).  the difference is slight, but nothing that should convince you to not use both on the same job.   same flare colour, coatings, fov, sharpness.


though most '36's are multi coated it would seem.  

Link to comment
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.

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.


  • EOSHD Pro Color 5 for All Sony cameras
    EOSHD C-LOG and Film Profiles for All Canon DSLRs
    EOSHD Dynamic Range Enhancer for H.264/H.265
  • Create New...