Anamorphic adapter choice

Flintstone

Well-known member
Geez! I’ve been away for a few months, and what do I see, John Hudson's posts goes from 500 to 5000+... Wow, how many keyboards did you go through John?  ;D

OK! Now, I know the policy is to search through the forums prior to posting, but it’s becoming hard to sort through the millions of posts on the subject.  So, at the risk of being flamed and stoned to death, here's my question… with a violin intro. :'(

A couple of months ago, I made the mistake of purchasing a Sony PD170 (I know, I know, shame on me) on the sole basis that it was better then the DVX100A in low light...  And it is... but it has faults that I can no longer live with.  1) No 24p.  2) Disgusting manual zoom and focus control.  3) to 10) loads of other crap.  11) An inherent design flaw in the back focus (when in manual).  Long story short, I’m selling it next week, and on the following day, am getting the DVX100A.  I’ve learned my lesson the hard way… through the wallet.  AND, I am now repenting my sins at the DVXuser.com altar. :-X

OK!  Now that the violin story is out of the way, I need to know some things about the anamorphic adapter.  There are 2 brands out there, right?  Pany and Century?  Any others?  Also, while perusing the gazillions of threads on the matter, I’ve come across some disturbing information that the auto focus does not work well with the adapter?  And there is some distortion when fully zoomed in (or is it out)?  Any other things I should be dreadfully aware of?  Could one use this adapter in event videography, or is it better suited for controlled shots?

Happy to be back!  I missed this place, especially the knowledge, the humor… and sarcasm, right John? 8)
 
Re: Anamorphic adapter choice

[quote author=Flintstone link=board=Links;num=1095307481;start=0#0 date=09/15/04 at 21:04:41]...and sarcasm[/quote]

Shut up, I hate you.

Okay, now that we've got that out of the way (;)) I would suggest the Panny, there are problems yes, but if you get the manual that Barry Green has so kindly made for us, they are easy to overcome.
 
Re: Anamorphic adapter choice

There is still only one choice. Century's adapter doesn't exist yet. Century said that maybe they'll be showing something this December, or maybe at NAB next year. It's anticipated to cost over twice as much as the Panasonic, but with a separately-focusable front element it may be worth it.

Autofocus is most definitely a "no-no", unless you want to guarantee that your shots are out of focus. The adapter changes the focal plane on almost all AF numbers, with 80 & 81 being about the only ones that don't change. So unless you're shooting at exactly AF80 or AF81, yes your footage will be out of focus (depending on your zoom setting and aperture, that is).

I would shy away from using the adapter for uncontrolled event photography. While you can use it in most any circumstance if you follow the focus and aperture charts, you're going to kick yourself repeatedly if you blow a shot because you were fiddling with the adapter... squeeze mode might be the better choice, even though it's lower in rez. And autofocus works fine with squeeze mode. The anamorphic adapter is really more suitable for controlled shooting circumstances.
 
Re: Anamorphic adapter choice

Great info Barry. Too bad there isn't a nice clean cut solution. So I'll stick to 4:3 letterboxed in post for events, and for my corporate shoots, I'll use the adapter.

As for the squeeze mode, anybody have comparative frame grabs between true anamorphic, in-camera digital squeeze, in-camera letterbox, letterboxed in post, and squeezed in post? I'd really be currious to see real world examples.
 
Re: Anamorphic adapter choice

Just a thought... You may want to check out the XL2. Native 16x9 and 24P. $5000, though. But the DVX + Anamorphic is, what, $4300? It's a tough call, indeed.
 
Re: Anamorphic adapter choice

Tough call? Perhaps not! Low light capabilities are not as good as DVX. (Important for events) Lens not wide enough, so it's another expenditure for the 3X lens wide lens. So the difference is getting bigger and bigger. Plus, I have yet to see proof that the image quality of the XL2 is comparable, better, or worst, then the DVX.

Well, at least, it's not a call I'm willing to do right away. But by the time the XL2 will have proven itself, it will be too late, as I'll already be owning the DVX. :)
 
Re: Anamorphic adapter choice

[quote author=Flintstone link=board=Links;num=1095307481;start=0#3 date=09/16/04 at 13:14:24]anybody have comparative frame grabs between true anamorphic, in-camera digital squeeze, in-camera letterbox, letterboxed in post, and squeezed in post?  I'd really be currious to see real world examples.[/quote]

It's coming... I'm putting a full squeeze/letterbox/anamorphic segment on the DVD portion of the book I'm working on...
 
Re: Anamorphic adapter choice

Barry, can we order the manual your working on right now, and the ana guide at the same time, to save on shipping? What about adding the filter test to that equation?
 
Re: Anamorphic adapter choice

The Filter DVD is sold by Jarred, not by me, so there's no package deal available there.

I'm thinking of working a deal for anamorphic adapter guide buyers, but I don't know exactly how I'll do that yet. Gotta finish this project first! :)
 
Re: Anamorphic adapter choice

It's coming... I'm putting a full squeeze/letterbox/anamorphic segment on the DVD portion of the book I'm working on...
Cool, keep us ip to date.  I"ll be the first in line to purchase it.  8)
 
Back
Top