Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Andrew Reid

SLR Magic Anamorphot-50 officially announced

Recommended Posts

There's no holy grail lens, some may be better than others. This whole "filmic" thing is stale...what you're noticing is how this lens resolves detail off the sensor. No matter how it's sliced or diced in camera you're gonna get back what is captured. I think what you're expecting is totally wrong. From what I saw so far this lens will capture the very best as well as the very worst of what the sensor is capable of. To me thats a great lens. No doubt this seems to be a quality set of glass and I bet if it were the baby Hawks you'd be saying the same thing. "It's not filmic"...well wrong. Actually what you mean to say is "cinematic" and there's a lot more that goes with that than a lens can offer. Just my 2 cents, I think it's unfair to blame to a lens when in all actuality you should be blaming the sensor or one better, just blame yourself.

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 lens is very important for the character of the video. The sensor is, but if you can shoot Canon ML raw for example, the sensor is not the problem to get the 'filmic' - or cinematic if you want - look.

 

I was really excited about the SLR Anamorphot, and I still am. It is great to have a single focus option for this money, it's great you can use pretty wide angles, but yes, to me too, the lack of character will keep me from buying it. For 16:9 camera's this is nice. But now we can shoot ML raw in 3:2, 4:3 or whatever we want, I'd really prefer the character of a 2x lens. This will never be achievable by a 1.33x.

 

I don't blame SLR Magic for that, I don't think it's a bad product because of that. But the difference in bokeh (most important aspect of anamorphic for me) is huge between 1.33x and 2x.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

it barely feels like an anamorphic with the semi oval bokehs.

and in my opinion, it flares way too much.

its too distracting.

 

Top frame is SLR Magic (from a sample video).  Bottom frame is from my Iscorama.  Perfectly oval bokeh in both examples.  If I didn't know which is which, I would say the Iscorama looks more "videoish" because of the sharpness (which is more a function of the taking lens IMHO).

 

oval_bokeh.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

some optics have soul.

every lens can be decoded and copied today but can you facsimile a mystery an essence of what was?

 

enough of all this stuff about hawks or panavision c series iscorama already.

that is a little silly and also unfair on newbies.

 

lens should be treasure a financial investment for work or play or collections.

can an optic have dna maybe maybe not but some are magic most optics today not.

maybe it was the radiation of old in the glass that made the look so evocative so disconnected,so filmic and unreal without actuality.

 

modern ism is kind of bland and as for an investment give me 2 old mollers over one new shooting kit that is not quite single point focus.

just sayin

but

it's here.

they made the product for you guys in your  image.

it has arrived so stop moaning just finish off the contract.

  now it is time to pay full fill your bargain.

the reckoyning the bill must be paid.

 

and why not, it works some say it's amazing like panavision c.

so it must be so

cos it is written.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looking at this footage there is no denying the image is sharp, and the flares are also there - I'd like it if my iscorama gave a blue flare of this hue, but maybe not as prominent.

 

I believe this video brings up a valuable factor IMO - that it is key for users of this anamorphic to find a suitable match in terms of taking lens selection - some of the shots bring to me a feeling of disconnection between the taking lens and the anamorphic - from certain shots it's quite obvious it is 2 separate optical designs working together but not fully in unison as you feel with a cinema anamorphic lens.  It's hard to express in words.  But a few minutes into a test i did with Hans_Punk's lomo square front it is illustrated here:- 

 

 

 

 

 I'd like to see the slr magic  lens in partnership with various semi modern primes such as contax zeiss, Olympus OM zuikos, and later FD / Nikon lenses.  I think something like a helios 44 might be a bit too vintage to marry well with this anamorphic, whereas something like a 1980's cutting edge slr lens might have a better time amalgamating with the slr magic.    

 

I also felt the Sony A7 footage though less detailed, had a lot more of a aesthetically pleasing feel to the imagery - probaby because I'm a whore for the Full frame look and it's rare to see anything less than an iscorama delivering in the sharpness stakes on full frame.

 

Please Please Please someone test the slr magic on an oval FF58.  A year ago when i was testing a Century with oval ff58 prototype it automatically made it feel like a real anamorphic.  I think the SLR magic will create better results.    

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's some 50mm Zeiss and full frame from Edwin Lee:

 

 

...I think it's got a great look.  He's got some shots in there where he stacks diopters like in some other videos I've seen which can produce nice looking ovals on even 24mm and 35mm on a 1.33x compression anamorphic but I'm betting an oval FF58 would look sick.

 

Performance coupled with my F.Zuiko 50mm f/1.8 is one of several potential benefits over my Century Optics adapter that I'm most excited about.  I love shooting on it in straight 16:9 but have to be stopped down to near f/6 with the CO adapter if I need infinity focus.  To shoot with it at f/2.8, like the SLR Magic Anamorphot can straight out of the box,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Andrew,

 

Do you have access to the BMCC Speedbooster? I'm curious to know if th s35ish crop with the booster would work on a range of Nikkor AI-S lenses plus the ANAMORPHOT. It'd be great reason to bring the set out. 

 

Thanks for all that you do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@richg101 I'd love to try a DSO Trump w oval aperture.  I wish you have a set that could pair with the SLR Magic - 40mm, 58mm, 85mm, 135mm.  That would be the ultimate set and would do wonders for the images.  I'm seriously thinking of dumping my russian lenses (except the Helios) and just get Contax Zeiss lenses.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If the Anamorphot looks too clinical, pair it with a taking lens that has some soul like the Trumps. Edwin's footage looked pretty good on full frame with the Zeiss. Also bear in mind it's a $899 anamorphic not a $3000 Iscorama. And the flare heavily depends on the light you're using to flare it with. A lot of LED lights are actually multiple bulbs and they don't create a nice flare at all.

 

Everyone is entitled to their opinion :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

DSO oval with the anamorphot would be interesting indeed. But the DSO has a fixed aperture, right? (Except for the trump). I can imagine that's a bit hard to work with.

The video from Edwin Lee looks nice indeed, but the bokeh isn't too obvious anamorphic for my taste. With a 2x lens you still can see the anamorphic character in shots with quite a lot depth of field. I don't care much for the oval highlights (although they are nice), but I love the distorted out of focus background look from a 2x anamorphic, like on the lomo video above...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

DSO oval with the anamorphot would be interesting indeed. But the DSO has a fixed aperture, right? (Except for the trump). I can imagine that's a bit hard to work with.

The video from Edwin Lee looks nice indeed, but the bokeh isn't too obvious anamorphic for my taste. With a 2x lens you still can see the anamorphic character in shots with quite a lot depth of field. I don't care much for the oval highlights (although they are nice), but I love the distorted out of focus background look from a 2x anamorphic, like on the lomo video above...

 

Yeah I prefer the 2x anamorphic bokeh too. Way more dramatic. At the beginning I tried pushing SLR Magic this way, to give us the full 2x, but they wanted to do the 2.39:1 thing. Understandable really, as 3.55:1 is quite extreme.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So long as most of our cameras are locked to 16:9 shooting your higher compression anamorphics simply aren't practical and almost guarantee amateur only potential.  It comes as no surprise not a single company is falling all over themselves to invest the capital and energy into developing a new 2x adapter that only a handful within a handful within a handful of people would get use out of and practically zero commercial or marketing upside.  I expect that's an even smaller market than customers for low power, large diameter achromats. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi all
Just a short question. Is it a stupid idea to use a manual zoom 35-80mm lense with the slr magic? Just wondering

 

In general anamorphics work better with primes. That doesn't mean it's impossible to use a zoom though. Sadly there is only one way to find out if they play nice together...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In general anamorphics work better with primes. That doesn't mean it's impossible to use a zoom though. Sadly there is only one way to find out if they play nice together...

 

Andrew of SLR Magic confirmed that the Sigma 18-35mm worked with the adapter on the BMPCC (but not with a SpeedBooster).  Some may work with the longer portion of the range and vignette on the wider end.  Some may just be soft throughout.  Andrew Reid reported that the placement of the entrance pupil in the optical design is a critical factor here.  

 

On the GH2 I can use my Lumix 14-42mm from ~25mm on up, which means I won't use it at all because I have 24mm, 25mm and 50mm primes that work much better.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Other than the flairs the video looks very videoish... maybe it's the taking lens that's causing it to look so bad, but based on this video, I wouldn't buy this lens. 

 

Interesting take on what a "video" look is, I think.  Maybe the context of the content is altering your conceptions?  Doc style footage does skew to a similar "video" camera use aesthetic.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@richg101

 

I think you might be onto something with your suggested era of lenses that might be a natural sort of pairing with this adapter.  So far I like the look on my most used lens, my 24mm Nikkor f/2 but I was most excited to see how the adapter looked on my 50mm F.Zuiko f/1.8 because I felt so constrained by how I had to make use of it on my Century Optics adapter.  

 

I grabbed my GH2 and chased my nephew around a bit yesterday afternoon.  Cats are so played out so my nieces and nephews are my go to in a pinch, hah-hah.  Working at f/2.8 your arm gets a work out chasing focus at this focal on MFT but I'm really liking the results.  I got several shots with extreme backlight coming in from outside and paired with the Olympus the flaring felt a bit more integral to the image than we see in some pairings.

 

1888966_10153832121915183_425553305_o.jp

131376_10153832225590183_770646220_o.jpg

 

I couldn't have got the same footage with my Century Optics adapter because, to be open to f/2.8 @ 50mm, I'd have had to be stacked up on a +1 at least.  Otherwise I'd be forced to an f/6 or so and while "okay" it just wouldn't have had the same feel at all.  With the Anamorphot I was still able to, in this case, track with him from about 2m or so away to close which, on the Century Optics, wouldn't have been possible because of the +1 I'd have had to use to be at this stop.  

 

You can actually go "run n gun" with a 50mm at a filmic stop on the Anamorphot and then, for controlled beauty close-ups, go to the diopters for enhanced bokeh.  

 

Going by vertical FOV, the 50mm + GH2 should be roughly equivalent to 82mm on anamorphic 35mm.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

some optics have soul.

every lens can be decoded and copied today but can you facsimile a mystery an essence of what was?

 

enough of all this stuff about hawks or panavision c series iscorama already.

that is a little silly and also unfair on newbies.

 

lens should be treasure a financial investment for work or play or collections.

can an optic have dna maybe maybe not but some are magic most optics today not.

maybe it was the radiation of old in the glass that made the look so evocative so disconnected,so filmic and unreal without actuality.

 

modern ism is kind of bland and as for an investment give me 2 old mollers over one new shooting kit that is not quite single point focus.

just sayin

but

it's here.

they made the product for you guys in your  image.

it has arrived so stop moaning just finish off the contract.

  now it is time to pay full fill your bargain.

the reckoyning the bill must be paid.

 

and why not, it works some say it's amazing like panavision c.

so it must be so

cos it is written.

 

When they took the lead (among other elements) out of the glass for RoHS compliance, that's when things got boring.  N-BK7 isnt a patch on good old BK7, which has the lead. The lead is responsible for the micro diffusion which you see in the Lomo example above, Mollers have this look too and Schott glass from the 60s.

 

You take the lead outta the pencil script you have no story, you take the lead outta the glass you have no soul.

 

Get a Xenar from the fifties and it will sing like Aretha Franklin.

 

just sayin'

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When they took the lead (among other elements) out of the glass for RoHS compliance, that's when things got boring.  N-BK7 isnt a patch on good old BK7, which has the lead. The lead is responsible for the micro diffusion which you see in the Lomo example above, Mollers have this look too and Schott glass from the 60s.

 

You take the lead outta the pencil script you have no story, you take the lead outta the glass you have no soul.

 

Get a Xenar from the fifties and it will sing like Aretha Franklin.

 

just sayin'

 

Same with leadless solder...  its a pile o shite.  I only use lead based solder

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...