Tim McC

Any word on when these will be available for purchase?

I like the Nikon 35-70mm f/2.8 when paired with the Iscorama. It's a push-pull design, but with the focus as a separate mechanism. Also, it stays at f/2.8 throughout the zoom.

Is it worth it? If you're planning on using your Kowa for any kind of actual shoot, then yes. If you just want to play around with anamorphics, shoot some tests, etc. then you could probably get away with a cheaper option.

Redstan, no question. I've used one on a Kowa 16d and if fit like a glove!

I saw Pulp Fiction in a theater a few years ago and I had no idea it was digitally projected until after the show. It looked the same to my eyes as the celluloid print I saw 20 years ago. But If Pulp Fiction hadn't been SHOT on film, it would be another story altogether...

This looks really good, Jeff! I shot a feature ten years ago for about the same budget and I WISH I'd had the set up you have here (that was back in the days of mini-DV). If you want some constructive criticism, I'd say start your trailer with some wider shots to establish the environment and mood before cutting to close ups of people talking. (Unless of course, it's a famous person, then absolutely start with them.) Audio is a beast all its own and will probably take more of your time than the edit. I'd suggest enlisting some experienced help as soon as possible, especially if you don't feel like you have an "ear" for it. The audience will totally look past imperfections in the photography, but they are absolutely unforgiving on the sound...

I really don't get why people are complaining about these lenses. This is some of the most "cinematic" footage I've seen come out of the GH4 yet. And I think it looks better (in a purely subjective sense) than the mini Hawk tests. Am I going to trade in my Iscorama for one of these? Probably not. But if I had to go on a shoot with this set, I'd be more than happy to do so.

Rich, I'd love to see some side by side (or otherwise) comparison on large vs. small sensors, if you have any. Maybe with the Iscorama paired with a FF58...?

​But it doesn't vignette without the speedbooster, right? f/2 is pretty wide of an aperture for anamorphic to begin with...

This is a music video I shot for a local band, using the Iscorama Cinegon and two Nikon Zooms (35-70mm f/2.8 and 70-210mm f/4). Everything was shot wide open with ND filters.

​The above video is 2.37:1

The 2x anamorphics definitely have a stronger "look" and more pronounced bokeh, but I don't know of any 2x options that are usable below f/4 or so...

​16 x 1.5 = 24. 24:9 = 2.66 which is more than wide enough to fit a Cinemascope frame.

The BMPCC doesn't have a 4:3 option. Are you thinking of the GH4?

I liked it a good deal. Only some of the more obvious CGI work (like TriceraCop) looked out of place. The dinosaurs in the "Viking Age" had more of a Harryhausen look to them somehow...

Just a simple lens test trying to see how wide an aperture I can get with this setup...

Is your speedbooster the BMPCC version, or one of the others? This will make a difference...

This looks fantastic! Is this all shot at f/4?

The best way to "fake" the oval aperture is to have an actual oval aperture, one of the options for DSO's FF58 lens. Here's an example: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y_MZDAgkR_4 And that's just the 1.5x squeeze. Also available in 2x.

Looks great! Let's see some footage, please!

I've never had this happen to my Cinegon...

And there's that 96fps HD feature (on the GH4).

For 2x anamorphics, I would heartily agree, QuickHitRecord. But with 1.5x, I'm on the fence between BMCC and GH4. I prefer the look of the BMCC, but the ease of use of the GH4 can't be ignored either...

Well, going from the GH2 to GH4 would be a pretty painless transition... Something about the footage just seems very "video-y" to my eyes, compared to the BMCC...