Caleb Genheimer

I for one will be waiting in the wings with my trusty GH2 until the dust settles. This RAW camera turmoil isn't over by a long shot. I personally doubt it will seriously hurt Blackmagic in its current form. The truth is, the Blackmagic cameras and Canon cameras are completely different animals in more ways than just the codec. Add on top of that the fact that the Blackmagic cameras are purpose-built for RAW right out of the box, and it really is hard to say they'll take a hit from this. If faster CF cards come out and MagicLantern can really get this nailed down and reliable, then maybe. But even then, it is a modification-type solution, not a purpose-built RAW camera. There's something very appealing about recording straight to SSD. There's something very, very appealing about global shutter. And on top of that, full frame photographic is not an industry standard and will not play very nice with most cinema glass . . . whereas the Blackmagic 4K cam certainly will. I'm not saying that what MagicLantern has done is not significant, it is. But when something is this amazing for free, a better solution will probably show up as a product soon after. In my book, Blackmagic are slowly moving into prime position to deliver a true knockout hit. Sony could certainly do the same tech-wise, but they price too high. What MagicLantern has proved is that Canon could tech-wise as well, though they either weren't smart enough to implement this or were unwilling to do so for some reason. So I'm going to sit tight and see how it plays out. Sooner or later a real pro-quality and full-featured cinema RAW camera will be available from one of these companies. Until then, I'm going with the GH2. It was and still is very inexpensive, yet perfectly capable in the right hands, as many of these cameras are. But I've become increasingly aware of other features besides RAW that are almost more beneficial, like built-in ND, XLR or similar pro audio inputs, Zebra, Peaking, and alternative aspect ratios (for anamorphic). Such things seem basic because they've been around for a while, but their benefit is not lessened by that.

Hi, All! I had posted a week or so back about some art gallery bound films of mine that I was projecting this past weekend. Here is the first of two films in the series. This one is maybe a month old, and was in a show then at Bethel University in their Johnson Gallery. I displayed it on my Dell U3011 which I built into the wall just for the show along with a laptop for playback. It is not really made with web viewing in mind, it supposed to be viewed in an art gallery, but I uploaded it to share anyway.   I shot it all on GH2 with @Driftwood Moon Trial 5. I used a Kowa 16-H with Redstan clamps and a Lightcraft Workshop Fader ND Mark II, mounted on a Konica Hexanon 40mm f1.8, usually stopped down to f2.8 or even f4.    This is the first, and has certain things that make it very successful in terms of capturing my concept for the project. But technically, I think I prefer the second film even though it is simpler in some ways.   I hope you enjoy it, and I hope it is of some use. Feedback and questions are of course welcome! (Note: I'm going to go ahead and post this, but Vimeo might initially be still in the process of converting the clip.)   http://vimeo.com/66619124

Yes, where is the 2X Ana?! The whole point of Iscos is that they don't give absurd aspect ratios from 16:9. With this hack, you can do what aspect you want, so there's no excuse to not be shooting 2X Ana, none. 

Hey, I'm not complaining about Kowa prices, I'm actually quite happy, because I got one when they were $500  :D  I'm hoping to upgrade soon, and the more I can get for the Kowa, the better. 

Maybe this is an unanswerable question . . . but when for the love of all that is good in this world do the patents/copyrights/whathaveyou on the Iscorama focusing system expire and/or become fair game? It seems like the kind of thing that ought to expire after a set time of not being utilized. Who owns the rights to this stuff, and has anyone ever offered to take it off their hands? I mean, seriously. I know it is a unique optical system but come on. If they could make them back then, someone should be able to make them nowadays without too much hassle. 

I'm still holding out for my "perfect cam" 4K S35 RAW SSD XLR ND Global Shutter Mirrorless with good dynamic range and preferably with anamorphic-friendly aspect ratios too. The new Blackmagic Production cam comes awful close, except for the nonsensical EF mount and no ND. I still have hope that it will show up one day. 'Till then, 'tis GH2 for me. I just saw Upstream Color in a pristine digital cinema, and it lacked for nothing in image quality. It's certainly not all about the camera, but the right tool can make the job much easier.

Hi, everyone!    I'd love to invite you all to my Senior Thesis art exhibition at the Thorp Building in NE Minneapolis during the Art-A-Whirl event this weekend.   I've been working on this non-narrative landscape video piece for the past four months and I will be projecting it through my Kowa, which I also used to film it. Stop by if you have time, there is lots to see besides my work, my colleagues have some incredible art as well.   http://nemaa.org/art-a-whirl/dates

That rolling shutter looked pretty minimal to my eyes . . . that's some pretty harsh whip panning before it really gets bad. It's probably pretty unnoticeable in most shots, certainly correctable.

Wouldn't the ideal anamorphic resolution be 2048 x 1716, half of the DCP 4K standard of 4096 x 1716, if it is possible? That'd be ideal for Anamorphic 2.39:1.

What we want is 2048 x 1716, half of the DCP 4K standard of 4096 x 1716, if it is possible. That'd be ideal for Anamorphic 2.39:1

Hey, All!   I've been wondering . . . there are inflight Iscos that look a lot like the Inflight Kowas. Are all the inflights dual-focus, or do the iscos single focus?

We'll see. IT isn't J.J. I'm worried about, honestly it is the Disney overlords. J.J. didn't do anything fabulous with Star Trek (probably what we should be looking most closely at in terms of what is in store for Star Wars), but then, the writers on his first Trek weren't exactly what I'd call Trekkies, and neither is Abrams.   From all accounts, he IS a longtime Star Wars fan, though . . . and arguably he has better writers than he did on the first Trek film. I think Super 8 shows that he is one of the few big directors out there that understands how those '70s scifi films work, and I hope he brings that to bear in Star Wars.    His visual style is still ultimately too sleek for what I would want in a new Star Wars film (that is one thing that was wrong with I-II-III). If anything, I'd want a director with some serious visual grit . . . Guy Ritchie or Tarantino. Those two have some serious character chops. They understand how to make a character cool . . . that Han Solo mojo. That is what was missing from the Lucas prequels . . . the charisma. I hope J.J. has the presence of mind to carefully analyze what Lucas did wrong in the prequels, and to get whatever help he needs (writing or otherwise) to avoid a repeat flop.    Also, as an aside . . . I wanna see Gosling and Chastain as Jedi. Just throwing that out there.

  I personally think the Kowa is actually better glass in most cases. Certainly they are equal. Other than the dual-focus issue, Kowa has more advantages, IMO. The Kowas are all metal and built like a tank. They are 2X and sharp as a tack. They are the widest 2X around (AFAIK), and on top of all that, the flares are very classic.    Don't get me wrong, those iscos are nice too, but the flare is often clear (or the color of your light), and they're only 1.5X.

  Nowhere close, from what I gather, he is keeping mum on the budget, because he got a lot of criticism for how low the budget was on Primer, and he doesn't want a similar reaction. My guess is it is still a very low budget.   I'm going to see it in theater tomorrow night, and I've been excited for the past month to do so!

I have this same lens, and JohnBarlow is correct. Depending on the taking lens and distance to the subject, the Kowa can vary from 2X to 1.5X squeeze. That's why when I film people I always crop to 2.40. That way, I can vary the stretch down from 2X if need be.

Hi, all! Let me preface this by stating that I'm no optics or lens expert, just a guy with a idea.   But I've been wondering . . . is it possible to turn dual-focus anamorphic setups single-focus by setting the two lenses to infinity and simply moving them closer or farther away from the sensor? Could the dual-focus challenge be solved by a variable-length lens mount adapter with a nice built-in helicoid?

+1, try to cut some more of the CA. Other than that, I wants more pronounced ovals! Maybe you should throw an oval aperture in there just to be tricksy?  ;)   It looks great, though! I hope you offer it with similar coating/flare customization options like the FF58. I wants blue flares! (Yeah, yeah . . . I know. For some odd reason, anamorphic nutters seem to treat flares as taboo . . . loose the snobby hipster attitude, the signature blue flares are cool.)   You might also putts around with other lenses just to see if you can find one or two other focal-lenth lenses that it can synch to. I know, that's a tall order, but you never know! something longer focal length might be nice for closeups, especially if it suffers from "mumps" (y'know, if you're too close, it makes faces look fat).    I just had another idea for the FF58 too. You really should get your hands on a proper blue streak filter and do another promo video with that on front . . . I've always wondered just how close a spherical could come to looking like anamorphic with a good blue streak filter and internal oval aperture mod. I suspect that all but the most stickler wouldn't notice a difference.

I'm surprised no one has jumped on these yet . . . I would just fork over $2K no sweat if I had the cash. Alas, college has severely damaged my financial situation.

Why anyone is still paying heed to Canon for video is beyond me. I'm eagerly watching and waiting, with my eyes mostly on Blackmagic and Sony. Honestly, if Blackmagic would take a few camera body/interface design cues from Sony, I'd be sold. the FS/F cams from sony are the best form factor IMO. Blackmagic's is like a DSLR minimalist box to the point of no ergonomics, which defeats the point of that shape in the first place . . . which is to have hand grips side and bottom. Blackmagic has also gone to the extreme end of the spectrum by putting all tho interface in that touch screen. Some physical interface would be better, and can still be done minimally, even just physical interfaces for iris, iso, white balance, shutter angle . . . these things deserve wheels or buttons.    That is I think one reason folks are still attracted to cameras like the C-100, even if Blackmagic delivers better image . . . these are professionals that don't like messing with touch screens. Sony is getting a lot of stuff right, but the prices are still too high, and the interface a little overwhelming. Blackmagic is well on their way to an ideal 4K RAW cinema camera with the Production Cam . . . but ND and a shorter FFD mount are "musts".   So I watch . . . and wait. I don't upgrade camera bodies often, so when I do, I'm picky. I'm hoping either the next 4K RAW BMCam has ND and a short FFD . . . or that Sony drops price on their cameras.

Ok, seriously . . . I've seen this thing on ebay all the time. It looks insane. big front, short length, smaller protruding rear . . .    Who has actually tried this thing?! I want to see footage or pictures from it. Something about the fact that it pops up again every once in a while makes me wonder if it is a hassle or something.    

I did not realize there were so many larger options out there! Great to know for the future. I can hardly wait to get out of this icky school situation, get a job and start making some money. I love my Kowa, but I'm definitely into anamorphic for the long-haul and definitely ready to upgrade to a single-focus setup. This may be a bit premature, but the craze for these things seems to have settled down somewhat, and some of the better lenses (lomo/iscorama) seem to be freed up somewhat and moving around the marketplace a bit more.

Glad that this is finally an option. I've thought that this should be an ND solution for quite some time now. That being said . . . ND really ought to be built in to the camera body, especially on mirrorless cameras. With this, you still need a different one for each different lens type that you are adapting to your camera, and it also obviously does not work with other adapters like Metabones Speedbooster, etc.

There's no denying . . . it is massive. But AFAIK it is focus-through, and likely far superior to the DV 1.33X lenses from Panasonic, Century, Optex, etc.

Just thought I'd point this out . . . first of the massive "modern" 1.33X projection adapters that I've seen listed as biddable (usually they are buy it now for upwards of $7,000).   http://www.ebay.com/itm/Runco-WideVision-Wide-Vision-Anamorphic-Lens-/140954222271?pt=US_Video_Projectors&hash=item20d186bebf

  All the speedboosters will use the same 0.71X optics, only the mounts change. 0.71X is perfect for adapting fullframe lenses to APSC. So while m4/3 cameras with speedbooster will see a similar benefit, they will not be full frame-equivalent like APSC, because m4/3 is an even smaller sensor than APSC.