Anamorphic Shootout

Derek Chingwell said:
You might want to note on the auction that this Foton A will not pair with a Foton 37-140 zoom. It's missing an essential collar section that that allows it to connect to teh Foton zoom (and makes the unit single focus).

I believe you got this from Sovjak or one of the other Russian dealers? I was looking at this one a while ago too - but the lack of the focus collar connection meant it couldn't mate (at all).

However, the condition on the photos from the seller looked excellent (I saw it before it went on Ebay)... and your comments have backed that up too... it does really look in great condition.

The diopters are also unique to the 1960's vintage Foton-A's (the design was changed in the late 60's/early 70's - and removed the slot mechanism at the top of the unit - and replaced it with a slide/clip on design for the diopters).

I'm sure it'll go quickly!
Click to expand...

Thanks for the tip. I will note it on the auction now. :)
(That it is missing the collar for pairing with the 37-105mm zoom.)
 
HHL said:
Thanks for the tip. I will note it on the auction now. :)
(That it is missing the collar for pairing with the 37-105mm zoom.)
Click to expand...

No problem, figured that's worth noting as then, if anyone is trying to make a set of the 37-140 and 1A, they probably won't know the difference... and also, better for you so that there can be no troublesome Ebay issues ;)
 

Attachments

  • 1-CU with Diopter.jpg
    1-CU with Diopter.jpg
    32 KB · Views: 0
  • 2-105mm.jpg
    2-105mm.jpg
    28.6 KB · Views: 0
  • 3-75mm.jpg
    3-75mm.jpg
    30.9 KB · Views: 0
  • 4-50mm.jpg
    4-50mm.jpg
    37.5 KB · Views: 0
  • 5-35mm.jpg
    5-35mm.jpg
    44 KB · Views: 0
  • 6-24mm.jpg
    6-24mm.jpg
    43.1 KB · Views: 0
Hey Peeps. I heard this one debated for a while, and I'm sure this won't end it, but...here a little image that shows how much compression there is in the ISCO 2000 MC Anamorphic lens. I decompressed it like it was a 1.5x. To my eye, that looks about right. I'm sure someone else is going to say 1.33x, and that's fine. Anywho...I just thought I'd share. :)

IMG_3889.jpgIsco 1_5x crop example.jpgISCO 2000 MC decompressed2.jpg
 

Attachments

  • ISCO 2000 MC decompressed.jpg
    ISCO 2000 MC decompressed.jpg
    32.4 KB · Views: 0
First night with anamprhic lens

First night with anamprhic lens

Hi guys. This is my first test with my recetly arrived Eiki 16F, mounted on a nikon 35mm f2 in the BMPCC. Some shoots handheld, very hard to focus as I shoot all in the night and the crapy lcd of the pocket didnt was very helpful.

 
HHL said:
Hey Peeps. I heard this one debated for a while, and I'm sure this won't end it, but...here a little image that shows how much compression there is in the ISCO 2000 MC Anamorphic lens. I decompressed it like it was a 1.5x. To my eye, that looks about right. I'm sure someone else is going to say 1.33x, and that's fine. Anywho...I just thought I'd share. :)
Click to expand...

Haha, the debate will rage forever because both 1.33x and 1.5x were made. That's how I ended up with a 1.33x after buying a '1.5x'. This on top of the fact (by fact I mean I've read it in a few places) that all anamorphics are handmade (due to low volumes) and exhibit variations to greater or lesser extent in actual compression even across the more desirable models. 2x can be as little as 1.7x in anamorphics I own (one reason why I like my Mosty 2x, 1.5x decompression not only looks 'close enough' but takes the 10lbs the camera adds back off again!)

angelopoulos said:
Hi guys. This is my first test with my recetly arrived Eiki 16F, mounted on a nikon 35mm f2 in the BMPCC. Some shoots handheld, very hard to focus as I shoot all in the night and the crapy lcd of the pocket didnt was very helpful.
Click to expand...

Nice one! As far as I can tell through the youtube compression that looks pretty sharp all the way to edges. There seemed to be some chromatic abberation at the very edges but only in the areas you'd trim off to achieve a widescreen 2.35/2.39/2.40 ratio. Another plus is that you are able to use a 35mm without vignetting which not all anamorphics can do even on M4/3. If you plan on trimming down to widescreen ratio then you will probably be able to go even wider. I noticed in a lot of the shots the adapter wasn't straight, trees/walls etc leaning on an angle. A good tip for checking alignment is to shine a torch into the lens and adjust using the horizontal flares. Although it didn't seem to flare much, even when the car was heading directly towards you the blue flares were quite minimal. If the LCD isn't particularly useful then that won't help in this situation either.
 
Hello. I'm not an expert on diopters. I have a Sankor 16C which has a minimum focus distance of a little under 5ft. What diopter strengths would be most useful? Also, I don't have a lot of money to spend on them, so are normal macro filters good enough to use?
 
Hey guys, reviving this thread a little, I just finished translating my graduation work from December 2013, mainly about anamorphic lenses. I've owned more than twenty different ones over the last years, and compiled about a hundred pages of research and results about how to choose them, work with them and get the best results possible with as little money as you might have. :)

The whole essay is at my blog, at http://www.tferradans.com/blog/?page_id=5268

The chapters talk about each type of lens (focus through, single focus, double focus and a little about cine lenses), damage, repairing, taking lenses, diopters, raw shooting, concept development for the project I was working on and post-processing workflow.

To encourage anyone willing to go through all this ammount of text in the search for answers, here’s the end result of the process, a two-part episode for a webseries, almost totally developed by myself (I wrote, directed, shot, edited and did all the post-production work). Both parts are absolutely 100% anamorphic and will be carefully analyzed over the following chapters. Oh, be sure to enable english subtitles!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opnuNQqGV1k
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SX5fMrjH1IM
 
AdrParkinson said:
Hello. I'm not an expert on diopters. I have a Sankor 16C which has a minimum focus distance of a little under 5ft. What diopter strengths would be most useful? Also, I don't have a lot of money to spend on them, so are normal macro filters good enough to use?
Click to expand...

The ideal diopters are the +0.4 (probably costs more than the lens) and +0.5 (still around the $100 mark) since these allow sharp focus at useful distances. Macro lenses will work but will likely exhibit significant chromatic abberation, especially if they are cheap and are rarely found in values less than +1 which requires you to get very close to your subject. Ideally you want doublet diopters (expensive) since single optic diopters will exhibit some CA although with good ones such as the Tokina +0.5 can be tolerable. Achromatic diopters are great although very expensive. So yes you can get cheap diopters/macros that will work (sort of) but you will have to spend some money to get the results you've probably seen.

Luckily you have the Sankor 16c which has a front ring (can hardly call it a shade) that is attached by a 52mm filter thread. Removing it and adding a 52-72mm step ring you have one of the only adapted anamorphics that doesn't require a front filter clamp.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top