16x9 EX II 0.6X Wide Angle Adapter or Panasonic AG LA7200 Anamorphic Adapter?

[GRENCH]

16x9 EX II 0.6X Wide Angle Adapter or Panasonic AG LA7200 Anamorphic Adapter? Will they do the same thing? Or are they 2 completely different looks?

As far as image quality I'm inclined to believe that the 16x9 will deliver better results. But as far as the cinematic 2.35 look I believe the Panasonic will come out on top. But will the image be as clean after the unsqueeze?

Is it possible to get the same 2:35 look by using the 16x9 and cropping in post?

And the biggest question:

• Will either of these lenses help with the crop factor of the AF-100?

http://16x9inc.com/store/cart.php?m=product_detail&p=684

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produ...A7200G_AG_LA7200_Anamorphic_Lens_Adapter.html

 

[Ryan Patrick O'Hara]

Two different things. A wide angle adapter is completely different than an anamorphic adapter. One changes the horizontal and vertical FoV while the other compresses just the horizontal FoV. If you want 2.39:1 without cropping, the Wide Angle adapter will NOT serve your needs.

Wide angle adapters simply makes a certain focal length a wider focal length. You'll still need to crop, because the image will still be 16X9! PLUS... wide-angle adapters should only be used on a fixed camera lens only after it is all the way zoomed out (or if you can't afford the real solution), because with wide angle adapters you will experience some quality loss, potentially added aberrations, and distortion. This is usually because the adapters are of less quality than using a wider focal length lens. For example. A .5x wide angle adapter would make my 50mm lens into a 25mm lens. But I'd be better off just using or acquiring a 25mm lens to begin with because using my 25mm lens I don't lose any light and I guarantee the lens will be sharper, have less distortion, less aberration and etc. So to make up for crop factor you could use a wide angle converter to make your widest lens a bit wider in FoV, as how it might appear on a larger sensor size it covers (say a photography lens on a full frame sensor).... that would compensate for crop factor but will not save you from cropping to 2.39 and from losing resolution.

In order to get a wider than 16x9 aspect ratio without cropping and losing resolution, you need to squeeze a wider horizontal FoV into the sensor aspect.

Almost all camera sensor aspect ratios, these days (in the prosumer range), are 16x9 the standard aspect of High Definition content. You'll need an anamorphic adapter. The Panasonic one you have there is an interesting choice. It is not the typical 2x squeeze lens designed for 4:3 to 2.39:1. In fact it was made for 4:3 to 16:9. Put in-front of a 16:9 chip it would come closer to 2.39 than 2x anamorphics would. It would not be exact of course, but the cropping would be minimum if non-apparent. However, this was made for the DVX100 so quality would have to be inspected. That is purely in reference to resolution and sharpness considering it was made for standard definition and is now being used on high definition. With that said, it will have different quality performance on different lenses. Just as doublers are usually rated for certain focal lengths, I'm sure this adapter is only at it's unknown best on a certain range of focal lengths, not to mention it was designed for a zoom lens on a 1/3" chip. Much different than lenses used on 4/3" chip!

Either way, if you want 2.39 aspect ratio without cropping just forget about wide angle adapters. That is not what you are looking for.

 

[GRENCH]

Thanks Patrick

Thanks Patrick

Thanks Patrick. I needed to hear that. I will be preordering my AF-100 next week and knowing this helps me out a lot. I have been looking at the Lomo anamorphic lenses which are becoming harder and harder to come by. A year ago I couldn't go on Ebay without finding 1 for very cheap. Now they are very hard to find at a low price. So I am trying to find some cheaper options. I own a set of Zeiss ZF's on Nikon mounts which I love. I was looking for an adapter that would give me a 2:39 while not reducing the quality of my image.

BTW, I saw the Hawk lenses.:thumbsup: Very nice!

 

[Ryan Patrick O'Hara]

Those Lomo's are still 2x squeeze. These lenses were really made for Russian film cameras, which was not 16x9. Those on an AF100 should have something around 3.50:1 instead of 2.40:1. This is because the Lomo's were originally supposed to turn 35mm format (around 4:3) to 2.35 and 2.39 after 1970 something.

If you were to use that on your AF-100, you'll end up with a much wider image if un-squeezed properly.

Who knows, if less expensive anamorphics, all 2x squeeze on 16X9 chips became popular, we might see the reoccurring emergence of a new but not official wide-screen format.

 

[GRENCH]

Agreed! We might.

 

[mcbob]

I have the 16x9 0.6x; there's some, but not much, image degradation and light loss. I've used it with a Vivitar 28-90 on my AF100 to get an actual wide-angle from that combo (~17mm).

The bigger deal is that it's not "zoom-through" and won't work with focal lengths above about 35. This may or may not matter if you try to use it for this purpose.