Anamorphic lens on an F3?
- Thread starter Shoots56
- Start date
As Barry pointed out to me before " Anamorphic lenses for cinema have a 2:1 squeeze factor. Put that on an F3 and you'll get an aspect ratio of 3.56:1. You'll have to cut so much off the sides, that it starts to become a question of if it's even worth it... the proper squeeze you'd want for an HD sensor is a 1.333x squeeze. But those are really rare; only ones I know of are the new Hawks, and those are extremely difficult to find and made in exceptionally small quantities."
Meaning you'd have to cut the sides and blow up the image, causing massive resolution loss. The only way you can do this is...
1) a true 4:3 sensor like the Alexa
2) 1.3x squeeze anamorphic lenses (Hawks, which at $25K+ a piece is most likely out of your budget)
3) Red One MX or Epic shot at 5K and cropped to a lower resolution
and or maybe an adapter but than you most likely lose all the reasons why you want anamorphic.
Meaning you'd have to cut the sides and blow up the image, causing massive resolution loss. The only way you can do this is...
1) a true 4:3 sensor like the Alexa
2) 1.3x squeeze anamorphic lenses (Hawks, which at $25K+ a piece is most likely out of your budget)
3) Red One MX or Epic shot at 5K and cropped to a lower resolution
and or maybe an adapter but than you most likely lose all the reasons why you want anamorphic.
Duke M.
Veteran
Panasonic makes the LA7200G anamorphic lens. New they are about $850, and used about $650. They are 1.33 AR. Its set for a 72mm lens (but don't use it on the XH-A1 because that's already a 1440 anamorphic format.)
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produ...A7200G_AG_LA7200_Anamorphic_Lens_Adapter.html
They work, but then you need to set your NLE to 1.33. You end up with a weird file size of 2554 x 1080. Its a gain of vertical resolution over using horizontal bars to form your 2.4:1 aspect ratio. Then what do you do with the file? I concluded it was just better to mask off the top and bottom with horizontal bars.
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produ...A7200G_AG_LA7200_Anamorphic_Lens_Adapter.html
They work, but then you need to set your NLE to 1.33. You end up with a weird file size of 2554 x 1080. Its a gain of vertical resolution over using horizontal bars to form your 2.4:1 aspect ratio. Then what do you do with the file? I concluded it was just better to mask off the top and bottom with horizontal bars.
Matthew Bennett
Well-known member
The Panny anamorphic is a fun lens attachment, producing big bright blue flares. But it's difficult to work with, and you pretty much have to be at f5.6 wide and f11 telephoto to find any sharpness. The background bokeh is more of an elongated smear than a pretty oval shaped bokeh..
But yes it's a nice cheap 1.33 anamorphic attachment!
But yes it's a nice cheap 1.33 anamorphic attachment!
G
G.P.
Guest
Sadly there is hardly any market (yet) for 1.33x anamorphic lenses outside of HAWK which are as stated before extremely hard to find and massively expensive for owning or renting.
I would hope some where in the world there is a lens manufacturer who will tailor to what will be a huge market soon to come in the s35mm sensor world. In the next 5 years I suspect a TON of s35 sensor cameras which can use PL mounts for cine lenses... With that said, maybe just like the whole DSLR revolution showing there is a market for cheaper cameras in that range, there will be a market for 1.33x anamorphic lenses for all these new s35 cameras which would love to use anamorphic lenses.
I hope!
I would hope some where in the world there is a lens manufacturer who will tailor to what will be a huge market soon to come in the s35mm sensor world. In the next 5 years I suspect a TON of s35 sensor cameras which can use PL mounts for cine lenses... With that said, maybe just like the whole DSLR revolution showing there is a market for cheaper cameras in that range, there will be a market for 1.33x anamorphic lenses for all these new s35 cameras which would love to use anamorphic lenses.
I hope!
Duke M.
Veteran
I'm afraid all anamorphic lenses produce oval bokeh shapes because of the 1.33 width stretch and there is always light loss too. You can do it, but it doesn't tell your story any better.