Leaderboard

lens alignment issue in the anamorphic attachment i would think. the petrascope i have illustrates pretty clearly how misalignment between cylindrical optics renders everything unfocusable. i imagine anyone with any apefoscope could say the same thing (i.e. get something in perfect focus - rotate one of the elements as little as you possible can (( <1 degree)) = everything soft)

  Plenty of truth there. 60D + editting software + spending time doing it. Learn! LEARN!  :D  I personally chose GH2 to get things started. The image quality after all is enough for a real film  if it comes to that .. even tho the GH 2 sucks with it's monitors ( my biggest gripe with it)

I think you shouldn't buy anything. You already have something to play with that lets you learn film. For the handful of days a year* you need better quality than that, you should rent a professional cinema camera appropriate for the budget of your productions. Working with a professional kit will teach you more about film and what you're looking for than just a notch or two kludges up from where you are now would. And it will authentically deliver the quality you're seeking rather than just get close to it. And it will work out cheaper in the long run.   * EVERYONE thinks that if they only got the camera of their dreams they'd be out shooting every day. That has nothing to do with reality. Professional camera operators shoot every day, and some of them have their own cameras but most use what's provided or rent. But camera enthusiasts are people who rather than take what they have (even a cellphone) and shoot with it every day they sit around and think getting a better camera is what's holding them back from shooting. Sadly no. And anyone who isn't a pro camera operator, but is instead making entire productions themselves, will learn that capture is only about 10% of the process at most. Pre- and post-production in all its forms is at least 90% of your time. So the actual cost comparison of rental has to take that reality, so strongly denied by the ambitious amateur, into account.   Plus you can usually find a friend with more money than sense who has made this error to just lend you a better camera rather than buy one yourself.

do not buy either of those lenses -   for that money buy a Carl Zeiss Vario Sonnar 28-70mm in Contax Yashica Mount - stunning super sharp Zeiss lens great on a GH3 very useful zoom range  - aspheric elements so super sharp   or get a Canon FD 24-35mm zoom a stunningly sharp lens widely regarded as sharper than most prime lenses and a very useful zoom range on a GH3

if you can go down to 80mm the Carl Zeiss 80mm f2.8 Biometar is a stunning very very sharp lens ! as used by Director Paul T Anderson       and its a great lens with anamorphics

Hey folks....I'm about to jump head first onto the 5D3 raw bandwagon. So I am going to have a Nikon v1 for sale (body only) to help towards funds...but the cool thing that I can offer is a DIY  EF mount that my genius friend Richard Gale knocked up for me. This mount cleverly tricks the Nikon into thinking that the 'approved' kit lens is attached, when in fact it is attached at the end of a short umbilical cable!   Sorry, I don't want to split the two...only Camera and DIY adapter for sale.   This is it...   http://www.eoshd.com/comments/topic/2274-nikon-v1-shooting-4k-60fps-raw-for-200/?p=32048     This setup allows the user to attach any EF lens to the mount and use as normal....although you may get funny looks with a cable and wrapped up kit lens dangling from the EF mount...but hey, that's part of the fun.   Modifications are to the EF adapter only...the camera itself is untouched and virtually new condition, it just lacks the kit lens. I'll have original box, charger/battery etc that I can retrieve from under my bed if motivated :)   PM me with an offer if interested, I would prefer it go to a good home where experimental modifications are appreciated, and someone will give it the use that I should have done.   Cheers

  At least if you're planning on getting cheap C-mount lenses I think it's not looking very promising. By the way, the guys from Germany sent me the Schneider Kreuznach Variogon 18-90mm f2 zoom now, but Tungee already showed it works perfectly!

Lucas has already cashed out his chips to the tune of $4 Billion dollars and is finished as a filmmaker.  Spielberg has been looking for foreign money to prop up Dreamworks and to finance his films and I don't think really cares anymore about making quality films, but money, even though he's already super rich.   Lucas burned out in 1983 after Jedi, but with Spielberg, I think he's reached his theoretical event horizon long ago, probably around the time of Jurassic Park.  So I think both of them are saying, "Look, if we can't make good movies anymore, and the system is abhors new talent, and new ideas, then Hollywood is pretty much screwed." BUT, what both Spielberg and Lucas are VERY good at is finding new talent.  If they focused on finding the newest talent, they could save Hollywood...perhaps. Sometimes I think that bombs like "The Lone Ranger" are intentional; simply a payout for the actors and producers as a reward for previous hit projects AND also act as a way for studios to mitigate any of the remainder of tax losses.  Disney is a HUGE corporation, and probably pays little taxes as is, and flops such as TLR probably help to mitigage any tax burdens.

Great, another announcement of a possible announcement.   I'm sure it has nothing to do with the fact that today, rumours of a 4K Alexa are rife.

Wonder if it has something to do with a 50 year old white guy playing a Native American. Cause we all know there are 0 Native American actors...

They never asked if anyone was interested in seeing a Lone Ranger movie and that is why it failed.

It only took a year of living in LA to understand why the industry is headed in this direction: nepotism. And not so much literal nepotism... but more-so the broader idea of "who you know-ism". Your only chance of landing a job in Hollywood is through a "connection"... ESPECIALLY in the business/executive roles that make the financial decisions. It's all very simply. The people in charge are the kids (and friends of kids) of the last generation who only learned THE BARE MINIMUM requirements to take over these positions. Now that there are so many other options for entertainment... and the system has to be reworked to adapt... nobody has any clue as what to do. Basically, these people have learned how to do a "job"... not how to "make films". The couldn't innovate if they tried. But, hey, it's not all the execs faults... there is a such thing as "workers greed" as well... and it also runs rampant through Hollywood. Let's say for a minute, that somehow a producer or executive DOES have a genuinely good business idea... can he/she execute it? Nope. Not really. The unions are still going to demand the picture be made to union standards... i.e. hiring 8 people for a 1 person job. Why do the unions do this? Well, obviously, the more jobs they can keep around... the more pockets they can take union dues from. And the longer it takes to make a film... the more they can justify taking. Unions benefit from throwing wrenches into the machine, and then demanding you hire "thier workers" to pull it out... for you know, oh, about 100x the labor value. This is why the execs are taught it's better practice to kill films... then to green-light them. It's a circle of destruction from both ends.   It's top-to-bottom corruption... and the ones who are getting screwed are the audience, the next generation of creatives who might actually be able to make better material for 90% less $, and the industry/art form itself. The film execs want million dollar salaries for having nothing but their arbitrary titles they earned for networking/sleeping their way to the top... and the union workers want $1000/hr for jobs, that more often than not, don't need to exist. Things have to adapt. They're basically using the same film-making model since the last overhaul in the 70's. Innovation needs to happen. We have the technology and capability to make films for about 80% less money and require 80% less labor... better start putting it to practice soon.

Hi Folks!   I'm new here.   I'm also new to anamorphics.   I just want to say thanks to Tito and everyone else for creating this resource.   This is an awesome help. To date, I haven't purchased my first lens yet but I am actively seeking the right one (cheap of course).   Every time I see another I've not seen before I find myself digging for information.    Later when I'm no longer a rookie I'll contribute to the cause.   Again Thx! 

Ahhhh my bad, makes sense haha   But everything works perfect now, the quality is ridiculous!   Seriously... Thanks!