Jump to content

FAKE ANAMORPHIC - CANON EOS M2


ASMR Experience
 Share

Recommended Posts

I want to see your results of fake anamorphic lens like Helios 44-2 Mod Bokeh-Flares.

I am using EOS M2 RAW Footage with Viltrox Speed Booster.

Do You Have similar footage?

The only problem with fake anamorphic is that even when i decompressing the footage from 4:3 to 2:35 is still a bit too much stretchy (all the footage not only the background). I am trying new experimental shots this month for making direct recording RAW at 2:35 aspect ratio at MCM Rewire 1080p,it looks a little better but still not the same with anamorphic look of an original anamorphic lens. (My apologies about some errors in my English writing. Thank you.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Γεια σου πατριώτη!

Nice footage! You're not supposed to decompress anything on a fake anamorphic recording though. It's still square pixels. So when you shoot with Magic Lantern, you should not tell it that it's anamorphic recording, but rather normal recording. Then it will appear correctly when editing.

Here is mine from today (Canon M50, Helios 44-2, Viltrox Speedbooster, Vid-Atlantic anamorphic aperture filter). I also have a modded Helios 44-2 (that doesn't require the Vid-Atlantic filter to get anamorphic bokeh) in the mail, coming soon:

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bokeh can be made to look anamorphic but the thing these anamorphake lenses don't reproduce is the differing look in the foreground compared to the background (or in focus vs out of focus areas). This is where true anamorphics (especially those with bigger squeeze such as 1.75-2x) get a lot of their look. Bokeh shape is part of it but it's not everything.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is the closest we will ever get with spherical lenses. There are a few more tricks to play though, like adding anamorphic lens distortion, as I have done so above. Overall, it's close. If you look at some modern anamorphic lenses, they lack the character of the old anamorphic lenses too. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thank you, appreciated! Regarding your question:

ML footage comes out a little bit contrasty compared to the VisionColor CineTech picture style I'm using (which is my favorite of all I ever tried, and it has more dynamic range than even Technicolor Cinestyle or Miller's C-Log). Being contrasty, it means it's more difficult to manipulate MLRAW footage. For that reason, while I own three EOS M cameras that are capable of ML RAW, I still use the M50, with just 32 mbps h.264 bitrate at 1080p. It works well enough. I'm planning on buying the new M5 MkII in October, that reportedly has IBIS. The 4k on the new M cameras has 120 mbps, and while 4k is 4x the 1080p resolution, the 4x bitrate is actually like 8x (it's how perceivable quality works). So h.264 at 4k at 120 mbps is more than enough to do a good job, without the need of the unstable ML RAW. Even at 8 bit, the kind of grading I do does not destroy the footage. If someone doesn't need IBIS, I'd highly suggest the M6 MkII, that already has proper 4k with AF, without crop and without the massive rolling shutter of the M50 in 4k mode.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, Eugenia said:

ML footage comes out a little bit contrasty compared to the VisionColor CineTech picture style I'm using (which is my favorite of all I ever tried, and it has more dynamic range than even Technicolor Cinestyle or Miller's C-Log). Being contrasty, it means it's more difficult to manipulate MLRAW footage.

Aren't MLV raw files are "raw?"  If so, such files have the same initial linear contrast as Canon h264 does, before the in-camera processing.  Thus, with the proper post processing, one should be able to duplicate the contrast of the h264 files (combined with a given picture style).

 

I have dabbled a little with MLV files and MLV-App.   It seems one can output images with an exceedingly flat contrast by merely using one of the log profiles, if one wants to grade in a program other than MLV-App.

 

On the other hand, ML instability and full res capability are understandably important concerns.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Anything is doable, but more labor-intensive. The biggest problem I have with ML RAW is not even the instability (since I would only take a few seconds worth of footage usually for my videos), but the aliasing artifacts that are very prevalent on the EOS M (I own three of these cameras!). There's no way around them, and people who shoot with ML RAW have often to throw away footage for that reason. Not a great experience IMHO. There is not enough processing power on that old ARM CPU in the EOS M to apply any filters.

Personally, as I wrote above, I find the normal 8bit h.264 files at 120 mbps (in 4k) to be good-enough, even for a feature film, if the right picture style was used when recording. I'm able to get the look I want without destroying the 8bit footage when using the VisionColor CineTech picture style. For me, that has been a lifesaver.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I shoot MLraw on EOSm a lot, I've never found the aliasing to much of an issue in my uses, maybe I'm shooting different stuff though.

As said above, MLraw has much greater ability to get flat image (or any image) because it's a 14bit raw file, not an 8bit codec with a picture profile baked in. ML footage is as contrasty as you make it, with no grade it's actually pretty flat. If you really want max DR this small camera can give use the  dual ISO mode (this does have noticeable aliasing though in the wrong scenes).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've shot with ML Raw for years on and off, and I find its aliasing a big issue. It's also very visible on youtube footage by others. Overall, ML has massive issues on various levels (including a terrible UI). It's a cool toy, but nothing more than that. Still, the EOS M is the camera I always suggest people start their journey into filmmaking, exactly because they can have the standard easy use, but they can also delve in to ML and learn how a camera works more in-depth -- something that will help them  down the line. But after that initial phase is over, it's time to upgrade.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you don't like the aliasing you can buy an AA filter, they do exist.

I really like the UI, way better than a lot of manufacturers DSLR mazes, also with way more options than any DSLR I've encountered.

If a camera with ability to shoot continuous 14bit raw is a "cool toy" so are all DSLRs for film making, they all have the similar issues, mostly just with worse IQ. 

I would agree that MLraw previously wasn't functional and stable enough for me (especially on the eosM), but those days have passed, I've come full circle and back to the eosM and the experience is completely different. I don't use it as my main camera, but I've basically retired my GH5 in favour of it now, even without 4K the image it's just a lot nicer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

ML RAW is still not stable for "continuous" raw. I don't know how you get it to be stable, but here, it's not. Hence the "cool toy". We can go back and forth on this, but you won't convince me, because I've been trying ML on and off for years now. And yes, its UI is absolutely dreadful. As I already mentioned, the EOS M is a great starter camera, which is why I suggest newbies to get one, and also why I own 3 of them. But using ML RAW for serious work, with its aliasing problems and having to overcrank the SD controller to manage to write fast enough (which eventually leads to overheating and drop in frames, and often in crashes), is not acceptable in a professional setup. It's great for small videos like the one I posted above, where only a few seconds are shot every time, but not much more than that. Even Zeek on Youtube (which I follow) hasn't posted anything more than video vignettes with his EOS M. Show me ONE *serious* narrative short film that was shot with ML RAW simply because it's a cheap way to get RAW.

I wouldn't shoot a short film with ML RAW myself. I would shoot though a short film with the built-in h.264 encoder, simply because I know that I can trust it to be stable. Plus, I like the look I get from it anyway. I don't always need raw. I just make sure my scenes are not so contrasty to have to change ISOs or to recover highlights in post. In such a non-random setup, the bare Canon cameras do manage fine. I shot a number of official music videos with the 5D MkII in 8 bit, and it worked fine, for example. These days, I could get an even better image and bitrate with an M6 MkII at 4k with 120 mbps. If I can also get 10bit in the future, even better (just for even more advanced color grading purposes). Which is why I'm eyeing the upcoming Canon R6. But raw, I don't necessarily need it. If anything, I *degrade* the image I get out of most of my cameras, to make them softer, in order to get the vintage film look. I own a BMPCC 4k that shoots RAW, and I haven't used it for more than a few hours since last year. I don't like the Sony sensor look (that all non-Canon cameras use), and I quickly found out that I don't need its RAW capabilities. Which is why I mostly use my Canon M50 these days. On paper, the M50 is a toy compared to a BMPCC 4k. But it produces the image I like and it's ultra stable (more so than the BMPCC 4k).

To give you an idea where I'm coming from: I used to be the editor in chief of a big tech news web site in the early 2000s. During my time there, I took up on to myself to try and configure Linux in new ways for multimedia purposes (it was weak back then in video, wifi or bluetooth performance). So I was hacking code and config files, finding ways to make things work, and then write tutorial articles. Well, come 2005 I was already sick and tired of trying to make other people's messes work. These days, if something is not perfectly polished (from my OS,  to computer, camera, laptop to my refrigerator and washing machine) I simply don't bother with it. My tweaking days are long gone, and I don't want them back.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I received the modded Helios 44-2 today, from a Ukraine seller who mods them for both anamorphic, declicked aperture, and cine gears. Looks less swirly than my other Helios, but I think it also looks more convincingly anamorphic. Massive flare at f/2.0 (wide open), but thankfully lots of it goes away if using a filter (any filter) in front of the lens. I loved the results.

 

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.

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.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...