GH2 Interest in an Anamorphic lens by SLR Magic?

W

wallpaperviking

New member
Hi, I am brand new to this forum and mainly shoot stills with a Canon 5DII but keep an interest in what is going on in the filmmaking world.. I was not quite sure exactly where to post this query so if someone could point me in the right direction, would be great..

So basically, I sent an email to SLR Magic to see whether there was any chance of those guys making an Anamorphic adaptor that was somewhat similar to the Iscoramas that are currently selling for crazy money.. That is, one that enables you to just focus the one lens..

My email is below;

Hi, First of all, I would like to congratulate you guys on the progress you have been having with you new lens offerings.. the 50mm HyperPrime and the 25mm 0.95 for micro 4/3's.

I see that these are being optimised for video, which I think is great.. Just have a quick question, do you ever see the possibility of making an Anamorphic adaptor to be used over other taking lenses? As far as I can tell, there is a real shortage of these and some are going for crazy used prices?


Also, the problem with the bulk of them, is that they require BOTH the taking lens and the anamorphic lens to be focused at the same time.. A real pain in the ass which makes changing focusing during a shot pretty much impossible..


The only two lenses that seem to overcome this problem is the Iscorama line of lenses (am pretty sure they patented this design) and the Panasonic LA7200..


Obviously, this is out of the question for some of the bigger lens manufacturers.. Would be really keen to know your thoughts on this and whether it would be at all possible in the future..


and the response I eventually received from them;

Dear Stefan,

Thank you for your emails. Our Product Manager has been looking into your suggestions. He is on the road since last week and therefore asked us to send you this email. As we are the Sales Department, we hope we can explain this properly:

1) We appreciate your suggestion and our Product Manager thinks that we might about to arrange this anomorphic adapter.
2) We are not familiar with the film industry and wonder what kind of demand will be there. Our Product Manager believes that you are one of the people in the film industry, and would like to hear more from you about the demand side issue.
3) If this suggestion is ever going to start initial investigation and testing, our Product Manager needs that at least 50 direct emails from people who will be interested in such anamorphic adapter with some idea of specifications and expected price range. Then, we will try to see if we can work out something. Without some proof of demand, we cannot go further.

Thank you for your understanding and await your comments.

Best rgds.,
SLR Magic

So, as stated before, I am not a filmaker and only have a vague idea of the demand out there, so I thought I would put it out on here.. I personally really love the look of anamorphic and the more expensive options are really out of the hands of most.. Even though it is not quite out yet, the 50mm 0.95 Hyperprime seems to be of a high standard and demand for that seems to have exceeded expectation..

So what would people be looking for in such an adaptor? Price range? Coated/Uncoated? Squeeze factor? etc etc

Ok, thanks so much. Looking forward to hearing some thoughts.

Cheers Stefan
 
This might get interesting :)

There are lots of Ana adapter users here, plus quite a few people that have anamorphic cinema lenses (Lomo Roundfronts and squarefronts) etc.

Personally, I'd want something that works on a zoom lens also - and I'd suggest a single anamorphic piece that can be adapted to all lenses (to keep the manufacturing process simple).

So, I'd suggest something similar to the LA7200 - but better in optical quality (that was only designed for PAL/NTSC CCD cameras more than 10 years ago).

X2 squeeze would be better, as that'll produce the best eliptical bokeh. Coatings wise, either a special formula that is more like 60/70/80's coatings - or uncoated.
 
Absolutely no interest in an anamorphic adapter. Realize that 2X anamorphic lenses were designed for use with 35mm cameras shooting a 4:3 aspect ratio. On a 16:9 camera the result looks rather silly IMO, and cropping to the correct ratio results in a huge loss of resolution. Shooting with 1.33X lenses on 16:9 gives the correct ratio, but you loose the elliptical bokeh. Many of the more modern anamorphic lenses don't flair like the older lens designs, requiring a streak filter to give the desired result. It would be very different if a camera manufacture implemented an anamorphic mode ratio with monitor de-squeeze for proper framing like the Arri Alexa does for example.

All the Best!

Dave
 
I agree with David, 2X anamorphic + 16:9 sensor doesn't work. The crop is just awful for 99% of the audience(please care about them as well!). The only characteristics I love about anamorphic is the oval bokeh smear, lens flares and sometimes distortion.. which there are already alternatives out there to recreate both physically and in post. My vote goes to a LA7200 type design just like Derek suggested.

-- But seriously.. although I am a happy owner of a SLR Magic 12mm, I do not associate the company with quality optics. Good quality glass and optical formulas for anamorphic is not easy to obtain. And I really don't want optics such as the isco or any kind of 2x projection lens.
 
There are so much types of anamorphic lenses available already in the market, you can always find something that suits your needs.
The LA7200, apart from the ease of use (focus through) and the 1.33x ratio that you can use with wider lenses, is nothing to be excited for. Poor quality glass in a plastic body, becomes blurry under f 5.6, not easy to use diopters on, and no oval bokeh... I wouldn't use this as a benchmark for an anamorphic lens.
Only 1.5x Iscorama type glass with a focusing mechanism would be worth replicating in a modern lens, in order to offer all the anamorphic magic at an affordable price.
However, I highly doubt that such a lens if it could ever be produced would be marketed with a price tag lower than the current market prices of the Iscoramas.
Hence, I see little interest in such an attempt.
 
plenty of interest and excitement about anamorphic shooting but when looking into a new design as i have been doing you come up against 2 equations.
1.the iscorama equation
2.the proskar equation
the iscorama cannot be beat it is a product of it's time.
the price range i believe is still worth it isco make what they call a budget home cinema projection lens made of state of the art plastics i believe it costs 4000 euros.
the state of the art materials and quality controls for a new iscorama is beyond china without foreign help as per apple and zeiss have people working in the factories keeping an eye on quality control.
any lapse in quality between front and back optic results in astigmatism and a raft of other nasties.
even companies with a 30 year history of anamorphic making like kowa and sankor screwed up even isco had bad batches.
century and optex and to a lesser panasonic have shown you can make a budget optic with a state of the art optical recipe much more advanced than kowa or sankor but the result is piss poor compaired to the 30 year old design..so much for super computers.
it shows that plotting something on a piece of paper has trumped modern computer design because of knock it out cheap china mentality.
the proskar equation is simple.
it was one of the cheapest 1970s anamorphics a bit crap really but because it uses complex achromatic correction in good condition a lens should out resolve a red camera.
this modest cheap piece of made in japan glass is a mount everest for a new lens designer.
if you cannot even match the quality of the poorest optic of the 70s how do you get near or beyond iscorama.
with the ebay price of proskar between 70-150 euros how can one compete.
to make money you would need a cheaper design doublets are expensive
panasonics where 800-1200 dollars new.
century optex where 500-700 the generic new maybe 300 then 150 on clearance.
the cheapest anaomorphic i have made cost me 120 english pounds anyone interested it is a new design yes new : )

it was a piece of crap that made the optex look like an optical masterpiece.
8 different types of abberations have to be overcome.
my test lens gave a sharp picture at f16 which kind of limits the use.
many people are working on wacky and not so wacky anamorphic projects i have decided to revamp 1970s optics because i lost a lot of money in china late last year.
and the vintage glass is a bit magic.
the words new cheap and anamorphic do not tend to go together.
but as i said when a proskar or a sankor or a singer can go for 100-200 pounds any new lens are in for a tough time.
the kowa 8z or bell howell to me new would cost over 2000 euros if a new one was made it is that good.
yet vintage ones with old cool coatings go for 300-700 euros.
what we have here is a market that expects everything for next to nothing price trumps quality nearly everytime that is are modern way.
very little of are new **** will last as long as are vintage cameras and lens
people are forever moaning why some corporation cannot just make us an iscorama for 400 dollars
and how about variable compression choice of coating and free use of a focus puller for the first week that is not to much to ask is it..

a new lens can be made really cheap but it will hit a brick wall with the words the proskar equation sprayed on it.
 
Last edited:
I'm suprised at all the pushback on this. I personally would love for them to produce a 1.5x anamorphic lens at a decent cost. I'm tired of all those overpriced "iffy" quality adapters out there.
 
Ian-T said:
I'm suprised at all the pushback on this. I personally would love for them to produce a 1.5x anamorphic lens at a decent cost. I'm tired of all those overpriced "iffy" quality adapters out there.
Click to expand...

yea! why not gather up 50 responses with this? i cannot understand why this thread isn't getting hotter :(
they should build a similar iscorama model, just a lot cheaper. if this can be done it will be e hit.
what's the specs i should email them and what price tag?
 
roei z said:
they should build a similar iscorama model, just a lot cheaper
Click to expand...

Consider the AntiochusWilson detailed reply above (the voice of the expert) and you may understand why this can't be done.
As I said, my personal viewpoint is also that quality anamorphic and cheap are not compatible characteristics. Simply because the underlying R&D and quality glass needed to replicate an Isco cannot be marketed with a low price tag.

After all, I wish there were some company that could replicate Leica and Zeiss lenses for cheap. But this is all wishful thinking.

Iscoramas are still worth every cent.
 
as i stated i know of at least 3 different parties looking at this.
the problem is i am a little old fashioned i like quality stuff.
the panasonic,optex and century plus generic where designed by a famous lens man using the same super computers that panavision use.
those lens where simple yet much more complex than the 1970s optics.
opex/century are air spaced achromatic doublets using state of the art modern glass types
they are s*%t
anyone can make an anamorphic buy a proskar cheap crap lens and see if you can match the quality.
i have been trying for years and am mental and nearly bankrupt trying to do it.
the answer i stated above is not that it is impossible in fact it is easy but most people want an iscorama for 400 dollars.
if people where saying optex quality is ok for me that is different but they will not pay a 1000 dollars for an optex that is what you would need to charge.
all of the pricing drops when you make 10s of thousands but i cannot even get someone to buy a sankor at the moment and it is sharper than any lomo.
i left a message last year on a couple of popular places saying i had a build project i could not even get 8 people to put names down.
if someone makes a lens as good as a proskar for 300 dollars i will eat my hat a film it on an iscorama.
slr magic sure can do something but it won't get near the quality of a proskar unless they use expensive complex achromatic doublets.
using the optex,panasonic optical recipe will always have optical errors
how many optex,century or panasonics would sell for a 1000 dollars.
people will moan and say it is only worth 400 because of the aberrations.
cheap means mass production who is gonna pay the bills for storage.what company will want to sit on 5000 anamorphic lens.
who is gonna put up the budget for the project.
what is slr magic they sure are not leica,they sure are not lens experts they have some clever r&d folks but they a mainly middlemen outsourcing projects and relabelling.
anyone buying into the 0.95 stuff good look but give me a vintage lens or 10 rather than one new china lens.
i look forward to pitching my worst anamorphic which at the moment is a pretty cute but crap mosty 2x lens against any newcomers my worst lens from the groovy 70s will best any new crap.

my hypergonar vintage project if i ever build anything will have a tag line.
this is not an iscorama because that is the nub very little is,
 
Last edited:
Good to hear everyones responses, some really interesting points. As mentioned before, I am brand new to all of this so it is all very helpful. I guess I didn't realize that an Anamorphic lens was that much harder to make than a normal lens... In particular, I found it interesting to note a number of you were only really interested in lenses with a 2x squeeze.. I assume that most of the 'classic' films I associate with anamorphic have this squeeze? If shooting on 35mm film with Anamorphic (Panavision, Hawk, etc etc) are they all a 2x squeeze? It is mentioned above that film is in a 4:3 ratio, so this is different again to stills film of being 3:2?

Is the Arri Alexa the only camera that shoots in 4:3 mode? So the GH2 doesn't have a 4:3 mode, even though its sensor is closest to those dimensions and shoots stills in this mode right? What about the upcoming Blackmagic camera? Is that 4:3 or is it going to give the standard 16:9? If it is 4:3, would this suit a Anamorphic with 2x squeeze and therefore give the bokeh you guys are talking about? Does there exist an Iscorama that is a 2x squeeze and still has the Iscorama unique focusing ability and is competitive in sharpness, flare etc etc as those with a 1.5 squeeze?

Ok, sorry, lots of questions, look forward to hearing some responses back.

Thanks again.
 
I would be interested in something like this but having done the research and played with a variety of anamorphic designs I think it unlikely that one could be produced at a price and quality that would compete with what I have.

That said what I would want is:

-Either an integrated lens (negating the need for a taking lens) OR a focus through attachment (preferably focussing with the anamorphic with the taking lens set to infinity).
-1.5x NOT 2x (a 4:3 will become 2:1, the increasing common 16:9 becomes 2.67:1) we want to end up close to widescreen 2.35:1 and the bokeh is still vertically stretched
-Close focussing, 0.5m would be ideal but even the expensive ones struggle to get closer than 1.5m. I would be happy even with 2-2.5m if:
-A standard front filter thread for mounting diopters is essential. With a front filter thread a close focus distance of 2-2.5m would become acceptable if it reduced costs.
-A rotating clamp for lens alignment - it is crucial that the anamorphic be able to be easily aligned and kept securely in alignment once set.
-Option of coated or uncoated. It is inevitable that a commercial offering would feel compelled to multicoat the lens but most people turn to anamorphics first and foremost for the flares that uncoated lenses delivers.

I would comfortably be prepared to spend $1000-1500 if the optics were of a comparable standard. With all the above features included I would be prepared to sacrifice a small amount of optical quality for convenience. The most desirable qualities anamorphics are sought after for are vertically stretched bokeh, vertical resolution and horizontal flares. These are hard to convincingly fake. There are some cheap attachments and plugins that will approximate the look but those of us who seek out these relics find the fake look, well, fake. There is no way we would use them otherwise because they are a pain in the posterior to use in anger.
 
again, let's all be productive. whether it's possible or not and at what price...

please, can someone here think of the specs required of an optimal lens for 16:9 (1.5x, etc), as i don't know what other specs to think of..
and also an ideal price for a good product (500-1000$ ? - remember the Isco's were sold a lot cheaper a few years ago before the "gold rush"),
and then write down a general request Email we could all copy and send them. anyone? i'm not that good at formal English for those serious emails ;)

thanks!
 
I'd certainly buy one or two, I don't expect a perfect lens, as per Egg Born Son above, I'd also sacrifice a small amount of optical quality for convenience. Around £500 for an adapter maybe more if it was built as an entire lens. Given SLR Magic make manual prime lenses they'd be better off doing an adapter for those people wanting to pair with zooms. I'd want 1.5x
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top