Using anamprphic lens 16x9 on a 16x9 camera to get 2:35:1

G

Gang_Green

Active member
So I know that i can I use the Panasonic Anamorphic 16x9 lens adaptor on my DVX to make 4:3 into 16x9. - But can I use this adaptor on other cameras - Like an XL2 - they both have the same 72 mm thread size.

So if I had this on the XL2 that is true 16x9 then couldnt I get anamorphic 2:35:1 aspect ratio? I wonder ; What about if you used it on the HVX200 HD camera?

ANyone tried this (2:35:1) with an XL2 and can conferm that it looks good?

Thanks.
 
is 2:35:1 the really really really thin aspect ratio that is used in Pulp Fiction?

And i don't know much about this, but couldn't you just film in 16:9, masking off the area that wouldn't be in 2:35:1, then just put bars on the footage in post?

That'd probably be hard to do with an XL2 though, but it may be a bit less of a hassle than putting on a lens adaptor and stuff.

(again, have no clue what i'm talking about, just trying to speak from logic)
 
Can't speak for pulp-fiction as I honestly can't remember but it's the ratio that is used in many action movies. Lord of the Rings was all 2.35 for instance. It's just over 2 times as wide as it is tall so yeah, it's pretty skinny. Crop 16:9 the same amount you would crop 4:3 to get 16:9 and you have 2.35.
 
Shaw said:
Crop 16:9 the same amount you would crop 4:3 to get 16:9 and you have 2.35.
Click to expand...
If you do that you would end up with a pretty skinny image. Even more skinny than 2.35:1. You would get a ratio of 2.67:1 or something. Here's some math:

640x480 is a 4:3 resolution. Crop that to a 16:9 resolution and you will get 640x360.

480 - 360 = 120 = the black letterbox

Crop the 16:9 resolution (640x360) by 120 pixels:

360 - 120 = 240

Now you have a resolution of 640x240.

640/240 = 2.666666667 which is more than 2.35 :)
 
Doesn't work that way -- it works on percentages of squeeze, not on a fixed amount of pixels.

A 16:9 image, letterboxed, would be 2.35:1. A 16:9 image isn't 360 lines tall, it's 480 lines tall.

If you're talking about cropping 4:3 twice, then you'd have a point to consider -- obviously the second crop would be for less than 120. But if you're talking about cropping an actual 16:9 clip, then you could crop it the same as you would crop a 4:3 image to make it become 16:9.
 
Hmm, you might have a point. But I'm still confused. I have a letterbox mask in case I need to letterbox 4:3 to make it 16:9. If I import that mask into a native 16:9 project in Premiere the mask will be squeezed in height, but it doesn't give the 2.35:1 ratio. It becomes even thinner than that. How come?
 
Probably need to change the aspect ratio on the mask. I defer to any available Premiere Pro experts to answer definitively.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top