Just subscribed.☺️I'm kinda clueless when it comes to gear. I got to this channel looking at anamorphics for my pixel 6 pro, but seeing as they're expensive anyway, this video has also drawn my attention. I still have an old Sony a65 SLR that maybe could still be used for decent video - I'm guessing better than a phone. Should I look for an anamorphic lens for that? I am a little lost and don't know what I should be looking for to obtain quality image for a low budget. 🙏
Thank you so much for the comment and support! That's no problem at all, if youd like to try anamorphics on that camera your best options are probably to get a fixed focus 1.33x adapter like the panasonic LA700 or to make a custom scope rig with a projection lens and an old manual focus lens. The later giving you more ability to capture what many would consider a proper anamorphic image! It will take some research but I highly recommend you look up the channel "anamorphic on a budget" www.youtube.com/@AnamorphicOnABudget for some of the most comprehensive videos and tutorials on anamorphics out there!
Wow, full frame open gate coverage on the 70 is pretty impressive! Thank you for sharing that info! I remember reading somewhere, maybe even SLR Magics own product page, that the longer focal lengths can cover larger sensors and being frustrated by the lack of mount options. Did you do the conversion yourself? If not where did you get the conversion done?
@@TheWholePicture curious if these lenses can be used for APS-C as well, they make x mount cine primes but not anamorphic sadly. Sirui also does but I can’t find anything more than 1.33 or 1.5x anamorphic
Thank you very much for the compliment! It really means a lot as I put a lot of time and effort into the videos. If I ever get the chance I would love to test these on something like the Z cam which has MFT mounts but larger than MFT sensors. Now that APS-C sensors (and full frame now for some time) are starting to get open gate filming options these lenses could have a lot of potential for the price! Maybe if Jeroens conversion is an easy DIY solution it could open up use of these lenses to a lot more cameras and film makers! As far as higher squeeze ratio anamorphic cine lenses for Fuji X mount your best bet might be finding a PL or EF mount lens and adapting it. Sirui and Great Joy also now have stackable anamorphic solutions to get even more squeeze on their existing lenses which is an interesting solution and one I've wanted to try out! With PL and EF you might even be able to use a speedbooster depending on the lens! I'm thinking about picking up one of the xh2 cameras so I might be able to talk about this further in a future video!
@@TheWholePicture Hi man, whats up? so i know slr magic a bit. I used to do some video for them, for the apo series. Also have visited them in HK. So when i won a set of these lenses on an auction my idea was always to ask Andrew to send me some of his mounts from the PL series. But his reply was: no can do. His concern was 1. the lenses lose too much quality on a larger format. 2. the flange distance is too critical on anamorphic lenses. Now he is right about both points. So i had to make something myself, which i did. Using my little cnc mill and some steel PL mounts i had lying around for my arriflex S mounts. I have made a drawing in freecad and as we speak now the new parts are being send to me from china. If i manage to be successful, i can sell you a part. Its kind of very simple to exchange the rear part for a new one. You can 100% go back to how it was. You might void warrantee though, just saying ;) So to Andrews two valid points. 1. Distortion, yes there is quite some. Let's forget the 35mm for now, but there are some hacks to be done on that lens also. But the 50mm you can correct it easily in post. The 70mm has only some on fullframe 3:2 open gate. But most gets lost when you crop your 2.66 ratio to 2.39. Then the 2nd point of flange distance. It is true, that the tolerance is about 0.02 millimeter. But here is the beauty of PL, most you can shim. I have a Novoflex PL adapter for my S1 and it comes with shims. Now lastly i had a feeling the 35mm has more juice in it. So i went on to removed the rangefinder assembly. And found that you can get a little more image circle without it. Also what i found is that the actual image of the lens is sharper, that with focuser. I would love to try them out with a rapido fvd-24, just don't want to spend that kind of money now on this. The last hack i found is, you can actually screw out the range finder part (this is how you also remove it) and get more close focussing this way 😅. Hmm maybe i should have done a video about this right?? haha
I don't understand why people worry so much about the size of the sensor in their cameras, they should worry about the size and quality of their stories, they should worry about the quality of their content and not the quality of their lenses. it is useless to have the biggest sensor in the world if your mind is small, it is useless to have the best lens in the world if your way of observing is short. i have seen people win international film festivals using iphones, there are those who are born with the gift of singing and there are those who are born with the gift of photography, if you were not born for that even using the alexa 65 you won't win an oscar...
Hello and thank you for your perspective. While the story is important, I think the way we tell the story visually is also important. Anamorphic lenses in particular lend a unique visual language to projects and stories, one that can elevate the story or one that could weaken the story. While a film maker with an iPhone could win awards and a layperson with an Alexa might not achieve much of anything that might not be the most realistic way of framing things. Talent is also more about the story we tell ourselves than something innate or bestowed upon birth. The person accepting the award for their iPhone film is with out a doubt talented, but they also worked very hard to learn the craft and had to make decisions on the production and equipment. While people like to argue this or that about cameras all day, which might just be going in circles, it is important to pick the right tool for the job, the right lens or camera to achieve the visual language we wish to convey. I talk about sensor size in this video, in no small part, because these lenses are limited to one type of sensor but also because it produces an image that does not always line up with my expectations of anamorphics visual language. It is not just about the bokeh but also about compression and noise and the look of a focus rack and all kinds of things that change with the sensor. If you don't put a lot of thought into the cameras and lenses and lights and all kinds of equipment in pre production, to find the appropriate visual language for the project, you could have the best story in history and it can fall flat. That's a bit of a rant from me, I'd be happy to have a constructive talk, but I do have to disagree with how you are approaching the subject. Thank you.
Just my two cents, but when making a youtube video about lenses where you pull up a lot of website grabs, I don't think a 2.39:1 aspect ratio is the way to go. If you have actual clips shot in the 2.39:1 ratio, then just have black bars on the 16:9 video. Every time there is a website grab, I keep having to squint to see what's on the screen. In my opinion. 2.39:1 should be saved for when you're making a short film.
Sorry for the late reply, and thank you for the constructive criticism! I understand where you are coming from and for web content aspect ratios can be difficult. I chose to not use black bars on a 16x9 video because I feel it allows for a better viewing experience of the sample footage on more devices/monitors. I also find it can be jarring to go from a bright 16x9 web page to footage with black bars without some kind of transition, that could add quite a bit of time to my production. It is a compromise thhough, as you point out, and other aspects of the video are not the best experience they could be. If I had more hands on and b-roll with the nanomorphs and other lense it would be more ideal and I probably wouldn't have to resort to screen grabs. For now I cant pick up all the lenses I mentioned in the video but hopefully one day the channel gets to a point where I can and so I hope you understand the compromise, and for the next anamorphic video I will consider your advice and try to make the right compromise in the moment. Thank you!
I’m a professional and I use a mft system. It doesn’t matter about the sensor size. Any professional would know that.
Just subscribed.☺️I'm kinda clueless when it comes to gear. I got to this channel looking at anamorphics for my pixel 6 pro, but seeing as they're expensive anyway, this video has also drawn my attention. I still have an old Sony a65 SLR that maybe could still be used for decent video - I'm guessing better than a phone. Should I look for an anamorphic lens for that? I am a little lost and don't know what I should be looking for to obtain quality image for a low budget. 🙏
Thank you so much for the comment and support! That's no problem at all, if youd like to try anamorphics on that camera your best options are probably to get a fixed focus 1.33x adapter like the panasonic LA700 or to make a custom scope rig with a projection lens and an old manual focus lens. The later giving you more ability to capture what many would consider a proper anamorphic image! It will take some research but I highly recommend you look up the channel "anamorphic on a budget" www.youtube.com/@AnamorphicOnABudget for some of the most comprehensive videos and tutorials on anamorphics out there!
Thats why i have converted them to PL. The 70mm actually covers open gate 3:2 on a fullframe camera. The 50mm covers S35.
Wow, full frame open gate coverage on the 70 is pretty impressive! Thank you for sharing that info! I remember reading somewhere, maybe even SLR Magics own product page, that the longer focal lengths can cover larger sensors and being frustrated by the lack of mount options. Did you do the conversion yourself? If not where did you get the conversion done?
@@TheWholePicture curious if these lenses can be used for APS-C as well, they make x mount cine primes but not anamorphic sadly. Sirui also does but I can’t find anything more than 1.33 or 1.5x anamorphic
Great production quality btw, you should have more subs than you do
Thank you very much for the compliment! It really means a lot as I put a lot of time and effort into the videos.
If I ever get the chance I would love to test these on something like the Z cam which has MFT mounts but larger than MFT sensors. Now that APS-C sensors (and full frame now for some time) are starting to get open gate filming options these lenses could have a lot of potential for the price! Maybe if Jeroens conversion is an easy DIY solution it could open up use of these lenses to a lot more cameras and film makers!
As far as higher squeeze ratio anamorphic cine lenses for Fuji X mount your best bet might be finding a PL or EF mount lens and adapting it. Sirui and Great Joy also now have stackable anamorphic solutions to get even more squeeze on their existing lenses which is an interesting solution and one I've wanted to try out! With PL and EF you might even be able to use a speedbooster depending on the lens! I'm thinking about picking up one of the xh2 cameras so I might be able to talk about this further in a future video!
@@TheWholePicture Hi man, whats up? so i know slr magic a bit. I used to do some video for them, for the apo series. Also have visited them in HK. So when i won a set of these lenses on an auction my idea was always to ask Andrew to send me some of his mounts from the PL series. But his reply was: no can do. His concern was 1. the lenses lose too much quality on a larger format. 2. the flange distance is too critical on anamorphic lenses. Now he is right about both points. So i had to make something myself, which i did. Using my little cnc mill and some steel PL mounts i had lying around for my arriflex S mounts. I have made a drawing in freecad and as we speak now the new parts are being send to me from china. If i manage to be successful, i can sell you a part. Its kind of very simple to exchange the rear part for a new one. You can 100% go back to how it was. You might void warrantee though, just saying ;)
So to Andrews two valid points. 1. Distortion, yes there is quite some. Let's forget the 35mm for now, but there are some hacks to be done on that lens also. But the 50mm you can correct it easily in post. The 70mm has only some on fullframe 3:2 open gate. But most gets lost when you crop your 2.66 ratio to 2.39. Then the 2nd point of flange distance. It is true, that the tolerance is about 0.02 millimeter. But here is the beauty of PL, most you can shim. I have a Novoflex PL adapter for my S1 and it comes with shims. Now lastly i had a feeling the 35mm has more juice in it. So i went on to removed the rangefinder assembly. And found that you can get a little more image circle without it. Also what i found is that the actual image of the lens is sharper, that with focuser. I would love to try them out with a rapido fvd-24, just don't want to spend that kind of money now on this. The last hack i found is, you can actually screw out the range finder part (this is how you also remove it) and get more close focussing this way 😅. Hmm maybe i should have done a video about this right?? haha
You can be professional on mft.
I don't understand why people worry so much about the size of the sensor in their cameras, they should worry about the size and quality of their stories, they should worry about the quality of their content and not the quality of their lenses. it is useless to have the biggest sensor in the world if your mind is small, it is useless to have the best lens in the world if your way of observing is short. i have seen people win international film festivals using iphones, there are those who are born with the gift of singing and there are those who are born with the gift of photography, if you were not born for that even using the alexa 65 you won't win an oscar...
Hello and thank you for your perspective. While the story is important, I think the way we tell the story visually is also important. Anamorphic lenses in particular lend a unique visual language to projects and stories, one that can elevate the story or one that could weaken the story. While a film maker with an iPhone could win awards and a layperson with an Alexa might not achieve much of anything that might not be the most realistic way of framing things. Talent is also more about the story we tell ourselves than something innate or bestowed upon birth. The person accepting the award for their iPhone film is with out a doubt talented, but they also worked very hard to learn the craft and had to make decisions on the production and equipment. While people like to argue this or that about cameras all day, which might just be going in circles, it is important to pick the right tool for the job, the right lens or camera to achieve the visual language we wish to convey. I talk about sensor size in this video, in no small part, because these lenses are limited to one type of sensor but also because it produces an image that does not always line up with my expectations of anamorphics visual language. It is not just about the bokeh but also about compression and noise and the look of a focus rack and all kinds of things that change with the sensor. If you don't put a lot of thought into the cameras and lenses and lights and all kinds of equipment in pre production, to find the appropriate visual language for the project, you could have the best story in history and it can fall flat.
That's a bit of a rant from me, I'd be happy to have a constructive talk, but I do have to disagree with how you are approaching the subject. Thank you.
Small sensor, bigger sensor, it doesn’t matter. With the image falling “flat” that’s where lens choices come in the picture.
Just my two cents, but when making a youtube video about lenses where you pull up a lot of website grabs, I don't think a 2.39:1 aspect ratio is the way to go. If you have actual clips shot in the 2.39:1 ratio, then just have black bars on the 16:9 video. Every time there is a website grab, I keep having to squint to see what's on the screen. In my opinion. 2.39:1 should be saved for when you're making a short film.
Sorry for the late reply, and thank you for the constructive criticism! I understand where you are coming from and for web content aspect ratios can be difficult. I chose to not use black bars on a 16x9 video because I feel it allows for a better viewing experience of the sample footage on more devices/monitors. I also find it can be jarring to go from a bright 16x9 web page to footage with black bars without some kind of transition, that could add quite a bit of time to my production. It is a compromise thhough, as you point out, and other aspects of the video are not the best experience they could be. If I had more hands on and b-roll with the nanomorphs and other lense it would be more ideal and I probably wouldn't have to resort to screen grabs. For now I cant pick up all the lenses I mentioned in the video but hopefully one day the channel gets to a point where I can and so I hope you understand the compromise, and for the next anamorphic video I will consider your advice and try to make the right compromise in the moment. Thank you!
@@TheWholePicturethank you for your work!