Cons of Anamorphic Projector Lens?

T

tommygdawg

Well-known member
Hey all,


I've been doing some googling and ebay searching and I was wondering if there's any major cons to using an anamorphic projector lens for shooting on the GH1 as opposed to a dedicated camera anamorphic lens? The projector lenses are significantly cheaper on ebay than any of the anamorphic adapters I've found. It seems too good to be true. Thoughts?



Thanks!
 
The large ones are harder to work with. I own a bunch of them....but that is one of the problems. That said....some of the coolest flares some from those lenses too.
 
Thanks for the reply! I do love the lens flares and look of anamorphic lenses. Other than size/weight, there's not really any problems with using projector lenses?
 
Isn't focus a problem on the big projector lenses? Aren't they designed to be focused on screens 50 feet away?
 
that's my main concern.. on most of them (except individual rare or pricey ones), you have to change focus on both lenses (the prime base one and the anamorphic one),
which makes the racking almost impossible for run n gun, and pretty difficult even on controlled environment
 
That's pretty cool...but I'd still like to have a go at actual anamorphic if possible. Wouldn't putting a 16:9 adapter on a 16:9 sensor effectively widen it to 2.35? Or am I way off on this one?
 
OK newbs. Here's some stuff to consider when shooting anamorphic.

1. George Lucas opted NOT to shoot anamorphic for Star Wars I, II, III because of the challenges and difficulties. So...even if you have access to the best anamorphic lenses on the planet: Shooting Anamorphic is HARD. No question...shooting with an Iscorama is easier than shooting with a Hypergonar (big lens)....but either way...it's hard. It is another thing to consider and have to work around. So...if you're going to shoot anamorphic...get the whole "run and gun" thing out of your head...cuz...that's not how it works. I'm NOT saying that you can't do it...but you'll find that EVERY shot takes more time...focus is harder, horizontal setup, more jello, framing is different, setup is heavier...etc..etc..etc. So that's rule number 1.

2. The more expensive lenses at this stage, are generally more expensive for a reason. Don't get me wrong....some idiots are just selling anything anamorphic for 1K+ and that's simply ridiculous at this stage. That said...the Iscorama.....is WICKED cool to work with. Paired with it's ISCO 50mm F2.8...it's as close to "run and gun" as it gets. They're also selling for 3K right now. The larger lenses are generally cheaper (except for the Hypergonar ...prices climbing by the week)....but they're harder to focus and very heavy to lug around. Be aware...NO...they are NOT impossible to focus...but...they are a pain to work with for sure. So...the old addage: You get what you pay for applies as always.

3. Footy can be stunning. All of that aside....there's a reason that some directors INSIST on shooting Anamorphic unless some constraint prohibits it (JJ Abrams for one). Some of us lowly indies have tasted the beauty of these lenses and are willing to put up with the problems....in order to reap the benefits. It's kinda like golf....once you get a hold of ball and rip it 300 yards...you're hooked. Some people never get to the stage where they can do that...so they just crop the image or forget it all together...which is fine.

Here's a quick vid I shot of my kids just as a test shoot at a location: (Keihan 16B...projector lens as you are calling it)


Here's the thread where I discussed renting my Iscorama setup for 500usd per month
http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthrea...ENTING-an-Iscorama-or-other-anamorphic-lenses

Here's the thread where we all discovered this whole phenom on DSLRS
http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthrea...ion-and-Footage&highlight=anamorphic+shootout

The birth of the Iscorama
http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthrea...ophic-Lens-Test&highlight=anamorphic+shootout

Anamorphic shootout
http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?196822-Anamorphic-Shootout&highlight=anamorphic+shootout

Cinema 5d Thread with very good info
http://www.cinema5d.com/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=7022&p=143158&hilit=iscorama#p143158

This will probably keep you busy for a month or so (in reading). :)

I hope this helps! Mad love to DVXUsers everywhere!
 
Thanks for the feedback! I've gotten started on the reading, it's very interesting. Though, are you sure the Star Wars films were not shot on anamorphic lenses? How did they then achieve the 2.35:1 aspect ratio??
 
Thanks for the feedback! I've gotten started on the reading, it's very interesting. Though, are you sure the Star Wars films were not shot on anamorphic lenses? How did they then achieve the 2.35:1 aspect ratio??
Click to expand...

You're welcome! :) Star Wars aspect ratio: Cropped. :) (I'm pretty sure)

HHL, that shot at 0:40 in the youtube video is stunning.
Click to expand...

Thank you. :) Not bad for a quick shoot with my babies. It's fun to shoot anamorphic. Hard...but fun.
 
This anamorphic adapter is 37mm only. Even on small dv camera the Chromatic aberration on sides is prominent.
 
HHL said:
OK newbs. Here's some stuff to consider when shooting anamorphic.

1. George Lucas opted NOT to shoot anamorphic for Star Wars I, II, III because of the challenges and difficulties.
Click to expand...

GOTCHA !

Star Wars: Episode V - The Empire Strikes Back (1980) More at IMDbPro »


ad feedback

Laboratory

Rank Film Laboratories, Denham, UK
Alpha Cine Labs, Seattle (WA), USA (also dailies)
DeLuxe, USA (prints)
Technicolor

Film negative format (mm/video inches)

35 mm
65 mm (special effects)

Cinematographic process

Panavision (anamorphic)

Printed film format

35 mm
70 mm (blow-up)

Aspect ratio

2.20 : 1 (70 mm prints)
2.35 : 1
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top