Anamorphic Lenses

D

DDirector

Veteran
I have always been interested in using Anamorphic lenses. Well, perhaps I can own one?
I know nothing about them other than they look freaking cool and suit almost every type of story I tell. So, they would be very useful for me.

I currently own a Canon T2i DSLR with a Canon 17-55mm f/2.8 IS & a Contax Zeiss 85mm f/2.8

I want to get some Anamorphic lenses. But after some research, it seems like they are adapters that you attach to your lens.
The one that I keep hearing most about is the Kowa Bell & Howell Anamorphic Lens.

I want to know more about Anamorphic lenses:
-How much do they sell for?
-Where do I buy it?
-Which one do I get?


Most of my videos I shoot end up being letter-boxed to 2.35:1 or 2.39:1
-Is it better to have 1.5x or 2.0x?

-Will this also work on larger sensor cameras? ~ Full frame/Red One, Scarlet, Epic?
 
Last edited:
Great topic, but my knowledge is not in anamorphic lenses of that type.

1.3x lenses are better for 16:9 sensors, while 2x lenses are better for more square ones, like motion picture academy frame or 4:3 video.

Considering almost every HD+ camera is 16:9 except a few high end cinema cameras, I'd say 1.3x is better but good luck finding those. Those seem to be a newer thing in reaction to 16:9. Most film anamorphic lenses, especially older, are going to be 2x.
 
On the broader topic of anamorphic, get ready for NAB 13.

It's going to be very anamorphic thanks to Arri/Zeiss, Cooke, Hawk, Scorpio, and Angeniuex all announcing or showing off new anamorphic prototypes/announcements/products.
 
For M43 SLR Magic are rumoured to be working on an anamorphic as well, which should be a cheaper option. By coincident I Tweeted them yesterday asking for some news.

I think there's a bit too much hype about vintage anamorphics, they're overpriced, sometimes difficult to use with variable results. The people usually hyping up anamorphic filming on forums (by pure concidence LOL) are often seen buying and selling them.
 
Which anamorphic you want depends on your sensor aspect ratio.

1.33x gives you native 2.39 widescreen (or thereabouts) on a 16:9 sensor or 16:9 on a 4:3 sensor
1.5x gives you native 2.66 cinemascope (my favourite) on a 16:9 sensor or 2:1 on a 4:3 sensor
2x gives you ridiculous 3.55 ned kelly mask anamorphic on 16:9 or native 2.39 on a 4:3 sensor

But there's more to it than that.

2x gives you the complete look in terms of (oval-shaped) stretched bokeh, full width lens flares and the stretched pixels soften the digital image some in a way that is quite film-like. You can trim the edges off the ends which allows some horizontal reframing to get a more useable aspect ratio but that will cost you horizontal resolution. About the same as you are gaining in vertical resolution. So essentially you are swapping horizontal detail for vertical detail with no improvement in total pixels, just getting the look.

1.5x is the compromise, you get the full vertical and horizontal resolution for cinemascope or for widescreen you only have to trim half as much so with a 1.5x you are effectively gaining pixels over a letterbox masking. The tradeoff is that the anamorphic characteristics are less pronounced. On a 16:9 sensor this is worthy of consideration if you can't stomache using less than your full sensor's worth of pixels. The flares aren't impacted too dramatically but the bokeh characteristics are. The final image is softened but not as extreme as with the 2x.

1.33x gives you the aspect ratio but very little of anything else. You use the full resolution of your sensor in either format, it will flare readily but depending on the adapter you may or may not get horizontal flares at all and if you do they will only be short and will not be across the entire frame.

There are other characteristics that vary from adapter to adapter. Anamorphics designed as taking lenses are very expensive ($2,000-20,000). These are by and larger turnkey solutions, no further consideration is needed. The 1.33x adapters such as Optex, Soligor, Century and Panasonic LA7200 are likewise easy to use. Just put them on and go, although they each have their issues, mostly that they don't work well at telezoom ranges. Most affordable anamorphic solutions are adapted projector lenses.

There are two main considerations on adapted projector anamorphics. Focus-type, some are fixed focus and permit rack focus; and focussing which require you to focus both the anamorphic and the taking lens. This all but eliminates the ability to rack focus. Even if you master the technique with your hands there is inevitably going to be some movement in the lens so why even bother developing the skill? The other is the size of the rear element, a full frame sensor may not be covered by a smaller anamorphic but a crop sensor might. Some of the smallest 8mm can be used on a GH2 due to crop sensor and ability to digital zoom. 35mm anamorphics tend to be too bulky, 8mm too small so 16mm projector lenses are the best compromise.

You will be unlikely to be able to use the wider lenses as taking lenses however due to vignetting. The best ones allow use of 50mm taking lens with workable vignetting of a full frame sensor. There is some variation between taking lens and anamorphic combinations but that's the rule of thumb. I use mine with a 35mm adapter on my HVX. This permits me to zoom right in to the ground glass (equivalent of a S16 frame) and some of mine will work with a 28mm in those circumstance (and the grain of the ground glass gets bigger too, further looking like 16mm grain). The longer the taking lens the fewer issues you have. Zoomed out to full frame some of my anamorphics vignette on an 85mm, some are free of it. By 105mm all my anamorpics are okay.

You also need to consider close focus, since they are designed for projection only a few models focus closer than 5-6ft. Many have a minimum focus of 15ft or more. You can get closer with the use of diopters but it is best if you start with an anamorphic that can focus at 5-6ft for the most flexibility. It must be born in mind these lenses were not designed for this use, any set up is going to involve trial and error to find the best combination. Different lenses for different situations may be necessary. That said, it's part of the fun....but not so fun on your wallet.

Also note that all projection anamorphics were small run, typically hand built lenses. There was never the demand for proper industrialisation of production. So every one is a little different, 2x rarely means exactly 2x. I have one 2x that is very close, another that measures 1.7x in reality. I don't have a 1.5x yet because the one I bought was described incorrectly and turned out to be 1.33x (exactly). No projection anamorphic is the perfect lens, all are a compromise so it is a matter of finding the lens combination that meets your needs. I hope to reduce my collection to 4 or 5 once I've found the winning combination.

So to summarise you are looking for a short length (front to back - minimises vignetting), large rear element (also minimises vignetting), short focus (5-6ft minimum focus), compact and light weight (for obvious reasons, it will be hanging off your filter threads) lens - typically a 16mm, of a squeeze factor best suited to your sensor. There are many brands, some known, some rebrands, many noone else has ever seen. Noone ever wrote anything down about them. There is virtually nothing concrete on the internet. I'm fairly confident I have found at least 90% of what information there is and I don't know a great deal that isn't hearsay or my own conclusions based on experimentation.

If you get something that matches the above shortlist you should be fine. My first, the 1.7x, is one of my favourites. I paid $40 (bargain) and have never seen one before or since - a Mosty SE. You will pay a premium for a known brand but the benefit is you will be able to find customised clamps for them to fix to your taking lens, undisputedly redstan on ebay makes the best ones. Kowa 16H or 8Z, Singer or Sankor 16D, Sankor 16C are a good place to start. These are the most common ones, you're looking anywhere between $350-700 for these, they may come with clamps as they are the most popular models. If you're prepared to devote a lot of time and effort to research and experiment there are many others that can be made useful. I've bought a few just because they are interesting, not so much because they are useful, like the Panavision UltraPanatar (a HUGE drive-in model that uses adjustable prisms) but is too big, heavy and far focussing to be useful.

I'll stop now, this post got real long but I'm addicted to these things...spent a year playing, have 9 or 10, just need to actually make something narrative with them now!
 
In the past month I've noticed 3 or 4 commercials that keep their footage in a 3:56 ratio from shooting with 2x anamorphic lenses. I wish I could remember what they were for (I guess the advertising didn't work) but it was a couple of car commercials, and a perfume commercial. Can anyone confirm this, or am I in the middle of some sort of psychotic break?

Anyway the look worked for the commercials. I doubt we will be seeing it in anything narrative soon though.
 
robmneilson said:
In the past month I've noticed 3 or 4 commercials that keep their footage in a 3:56 ratio from shooting with 2x anamorphic lenses. I wish I could remember what they were for (I guess the advertising didn't work) but it was a couple of car commercials, and a perfume commercial. Can anyone confirm this, or am I in the middle of some sort of psychotic break?

Anyway the look worked for the commercials. I doubt we will be seeing it in anything narrative soon though.
Click to expand...

It's also happening in the UK with a few commercials too. Plus the pillarbox 3:56/3:66 is used a lot in pop promos... so you're not having an 'episode' :)

It seems odd, but I think people see it adding production value... almost as if traditional anamorphic isn't wide enough! A bit like all the very wide formats that came and went in the 60's before a common anamorphic/widescreen was settled upon.
 
DDirector said:
I have always been interested in using Anamorphic lenses. Well, perhaps I can own one?
I know nothing about them other than they look freaking cool and suit almost every type of story I tell. So, they would be very useful for me.

I currently own a Canon T2i DSLR with a Canon 17-55mm f/2.8 IS & a Contax Zeiss 85mm f/2.8

I want to get some Anamorphic lenses. But after some research, it seems like they are adapters that you attach to your lens.
The one that I keep hearing most about is the Kowa Bell & Howell Anamorphic Lens.

I want to know more about Anamorphic lenses:
-How much do they sell for?
-Where do I buy it?
-Which one do I get?


Most of my videos I shoot end up being letter-boxed to 2.35:1 or 2.39:1
-Is it better to have 1.5x or 2.0x?

-Will this also work on larger sensor cameras? ~ Full frame/Red One, Scarlet, Epic?
Click to expand...

Everybody has given really good info, so no need to repeat any of it.

In a nutshell, you have 'real' lenses that are anamorphic - all PL mostly and they'll work in 5K anamorphic on Epic and other S35 cameras (or Alexa in Ana) as these modes crop the sensor to produce a more acceptable frame (or use 4:3 in the Alexa's case).

X2 cinema lens anas were made to record to 4:3 sensors, so recording them onto modern 16:9 means you get a much wider image when you have adjusted and corrected the aspect ratio (unless you are using the aforementioned cameras with Ana mode or a 4:3 sensor).

If using ana 'adapters', you are adding a lens that wasn't designed for shooting anamorphic but more for projecting it. Egg Born Son's description is detailed and complex - so I won't add anything there, for fear of getting some 'monkey magic' :) - but there are many types here, with some being heavy lenses and others being small ones designed for Super8mm.

There's a massive thread on DVX about anamorphic adapters - it'll be worth your time reading through it all.

If you want some to work on S35 pro cameras and a crew, you really need to be thinking of cine lenses (repeatable focus and decent mechanics etc) - but, if you're looking to use with the camera you have, you mght want to experiment with the LA7200 adapter I seem to remember that a lot of people coupled this with your zoom and got decent results (I might be wrong, so don't quote me!)... this will give you X1.5 so you just desqueeze your image (rather than zoom or crop)... it also means you only focus your normal lens, as you're shooting through the Anamorphic...

Failing that, if you really want to go for a more antique look, you should think about getting a cheap X2 unit and an antique 'taking' lens... the Helios 44-m is the one most start with (and it gives really nice results)... the disadvantage will be how much cropping and zooming you'll be doing as you're on a HD/1080 image. Most flexible for this style of shooting is the GH series, as you don't have much trouble with vignetting at the wider end as the sensor is smaller. But, you may end up with dual focusing, having to focus your taking lens and your ana... so this isn't good on set (when time is money).

Antique/older Cine Anas in PL range between $4K to $10K per lens... condition pushes up the price. The new lenses coming soon will hit at $20K to $30K per lens. BTW, the Scorpio lenses are rear anamorphics - so you don't get flares or oval bokeh etc - and you loose a stop or two due to reduced light transmission.

LA7200's go for around $1K (ish) - and the various ana adapters range from a few hundred dollars right up to (and beyond) some of the older cine Anas.

Hope that helped!
 
Derek Chingwell said:
It's also happening in the UK with a few commercials too. Plus the pillarbox 3:56/3:66 is used a lot in pop promos... so you're not having an 'episode' :)

It seems odd, but I think people see it adding production value... almost as if traditional anamorphic isn't wide enough! A bit like all the very wide formats that came and went in the 60's before a common anamorphic/widescreen was settled upon.
Click to expand...

I'm sure that during a camera test the DP is saying, so then you just have to crop the image a bit to get the proper ratio, and some producer in a power suit is saying "NO, LEAVE IT HOW IT IS!" as the DP shrugs.
 
....damn....
Never knew that they could be such a hassle but yet so great at the same time.

It was really a consideration as I love the oval bokeh and the lens flares. But with the problems with focusing and apparently with a 16:9 sensor having a 1.3x anamorphic with limited results of oval bekeh and flare is bumming.
I've seen some videos of the 1.3x anamorphics before anyone replied and it is true. I barely saw any results. Sucks.
 
DDirector said:
....damn....
Never knew that they could be such a hassle but yet so great at the same time.

It was really a consideration as I love the oval bokeh and the lens flares. But with the problems with focusing and apparently with a 16:9 sensor having a 1.3x anamorphic with limited results of oval bekeh and flare is bumming.
I've seen some videos of the 1.3x anamorphics before anyone replied and it is true. I barely saw any results. Sucks.
Click to expand...

In that case, go for a cheaper X2 solution to get going...

Get a Helios 44-m (around $20-$80) - check up as there are a variety of these, can't remember which is best & then get a cheapie adapter and ana step ring ($100 range) & then one of the cheaper anas (say $200-$500). Play around and if you catch the bug, you're away - if not, you should be able to sell on at very little loss - maybe even a few $'s profit.

Or - you could try the Vidatlantic cinemorph adapter - it fits on your lens, you'll loose a stop or so, but you'll get ovalur bokeh and flares... but recorded onto a normal 16:9 frame (as the filter isn't squeezing the image - it's cheating to get flares/bokeh). This way, you carry on shooting as you are - start framing for 2:35:1 (as you are now - knowing you'll crop later)... but you'll get some of the look you're after. http://www.vid-atlantic.com/cinemorphic.html

Disclaimer here, I have not used a cinemorph - but the tests look promising!

Good luck :)
 
DDirector said:
....damn....
Never knew that they could be such a hassle but yet so great at the same time.

It was really a consideration as I love the oval bokeh and the lens flares. But with the problems with focusing and apparently with a 16:9 sensor having a 1.3x anamorphic with limited results of oval bekeh and flare is bumming.
I've seen some videos of the 1.3x anamorphics before anyone replied and it is true. I barely saw any results. Sucks.
Click to expand...

If you've got the cash you can get into Lomo anamorphics. They are the cheapest proper anamorphic lenses you can get, but "cheap" is relative. A roundfront in OCT-19 runs about $3500, and a squarefront anywhere from $1800-3000. If you go OCT-18 mount you can get them even cheaper. I was lucky to finally put together a good set, and love shooting on them. Close focus is usually about 1 meter, so much easier to deal with than the projection lenses.

you can even get the front anamorphic part of a squarefront and pair it with another lens, same double focus deal as with a projection lens...but you get the close focus. I took an old lomo front, and krazy glued a set of step down rings and paired it with a Helios lens for very good results. I think total cost of the rig was around $500 bucks.
 
Last edited:
Hi Michael,

I have an unused Panasonic 7200 lens that I was just about to list for sale (AG-LA7200G). If you are interested please let me know. I was going to ask about $750 for it, which is well below the others I've seen online.
 
robmneilson said:
If you've got the cash you can get into Lomo anamorphics. They are the cheapest proper anamorphic lenses you can get, but "cheap" is relative. A roundfront in OCT-19 runs about $3500, and a squarefront anywhere from $1800-3000. If you go OCT-18 mount you can get them even cheaper. I was lucky to finally put together a good set, and love shooting on them. Close focus is usually about 1 meter, so much easier to deal with than the projection lenses.

you can even get the front anamorphic part of a squarefront and pair it with another lens, same double focus deal as with a projection lens...but you get the close focus. I took an old lomo front, and krazy glued a set of step down rings and paired it with a Helios lens for very good results. I think total cost of the rig was around $500 bucks.
Click to expand...

http://www.ebay.com/itm/LOMO-ANAMOR...96067766?pt=Camera_Lenses&hash=item3a7c73cfb6 - Lomo's used to be the cheap way in - but the Russian dealers and the rush on ana's earlier this year pushed prices up. But I don't think he'll achieve this price - although they are PL - and seeing the 100 and 150 together is rare. Note that the 100/150 are the 75mm with extension tubes - this is the way they were made :)
 
Derek Chingwell said:
http://www.ebay.com/itm/LOMO-ANAMOR...96067766?pt=Camera_Lenses&hash=item3a7c73cfb6 - Lomo's used to be the cheap way in - but the Russian dealers and the rush on ana's earlier this year pushed prices up. But I don't think he'll achieve this price - although they are PL - and seeing the 100 and 150 together is rare. Note that the 100/150 are the 75mm with extension tubes - this is the way they were made :)
Click to expand...

I wish I had the cash to drop to get the 100, and 150! I had no idea that they were just 75mm's with extension tubes. I've got a spare 75mm that I was going to put up for sale in a week or two. I suppose I could just get an extension tube and turn it into a 100?
 
robmneilson said:
I wish I had the cash to drop to get the 100, and 150! I had no idea that they were just 75mm's with extension tubes. I've got a spare 75mm that I was going to put up for sale in a week or two. I suppose I could just get an extension tube and turn it into a 100?
Click to expand...

I think there's a bit more to it than that, (I'm not a lens tech!).. but the 75mm was the base model that they used to build the 100mm/150mm from. Maybe they have extenders too - as they do loose a few stops.
 
Derek Chingwell said:
I think there's a bit more to it than that, (I'm not a lens tech!).. but the 75mm was the base model that they used to build the 100mm/150mm from. Maybe they have extenders too - as they do loose a few stops.
Click to expand...

I'll look into it for sure. I usually send all my Lomos to Bernie at Super 16 and if he can't do it, probably no one can!
 
I'd love to have Lomos but even selling my entire set of projector anamorphics wouldn't cover the cost of a good one (all the good ones have been sold a long time ago, the bad ones are still being sold at the same price by less reputable dealers).

Derek Chingwell said:
so I won't add anything there, for fear of getting some 'monkey magic' :)
Click to expand...

Too late!

DDirector said:
....damn....
Never knew that they could be such a hassle but yet so great at the same time.
Click to expand...

That's it in a nutshell. Plus they are addictive. The results are great but while I haven't used them on a major project yet I foresee the impact on my workflow being significant. I firmly believe the best way to get a thorough understanding of these is to get a few, including a less ideal one or two. eBay is the place to get them. I check daily. I you want I can alert you to a good one if you PM me your budget.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top