QuickHitRecord

Make no promises to the band. Just tell them that you are just interested in testing out your new camera. Set up your safety shot with your other camera and then shoot the show lots of different ways with your GH2. Steadicam, tripod, handheld. Different lenses, different camera settings. Go crazy. Do this and you will learn a lot more than you can on any forum. Good luck.

I don't have an Iscorama yet, but the Nikkor AI-S series has been wonderful with anamorphic lenses in my experience. Especially the 85mm I have (with my GH2). Just make sure to read the reviews. Some are better than others. [quote name='Bioskop.Inc' timestamp='1351018425' post='20182'] Getting a bit fed up with Rip-me-off-Bay! Sent loads of things back recently - "Oh, i didn't realise that was fungus!", "The dent in the filter thread didn't seem that bad!", "I couldn't see 3 marks on the rear element" or "There wasn't that much oil on the blades when i last looked" [/quote] I just recently scored two pristine cine-modded Nikkor lenses on eBay -- for less than the cost of the mod! There are still good deals to be had out there.

[quote name='Julian' timestamp='1350830950' post='20083'] Now I just need a mount.. Since the lens doesn't have any moving parts I might try some kinda DIY construction first. [/quote] The diagram that I made with my 1.5x Iscomorphot posted above might work for you.

I have not been following this new Magic Lantern but it seems pretty impressive to me. HDR video from the 5DMIII DSLR! Acronym city.

Rich, I use Final Cut so I am not very well-versed in Premiere. I suspect that you could export at the native format (MP4?) and then run it through Adobe Media Encoder to create a ProRes 44 file. Or if not, you can send it to me as is and I'll compress it on this end.

[quote name='richg101' timestamp='1350689090' post='20014'] Well.. I went out earlier wit ha mate and got some footage. an Iscorama mounted to a 35mm, 50mm and 135mm taking lens set. each lens tested at its widest aperture and at f11. Just looking through the footage now... [/quote] Sweet! I have a pretty neat concept but it's going to take some preparation.

I've never seen that one before. It does indeed appear to be a front-mounting adapter. I hope that you win so that you can tell us more about it!

[quote name='Julian' timestamp='1350597297' post='19948'] Nice idea. I'll give it a shot! I'd prefer the focus of the collaboration to be on creativity. It's impossible to really compare the different anamorphics anyway since everybody is in a different place, using a different camera, different taking lens.. etc. Can we edit shots into a clip of max. one minute, or should it be single clips? What is your plan for the final result? Vimeo/Youtube? [/quote] I know what you're saying! I'm hoping that it will be a vehicle for both comparison [i]and[/i] creativity. Rich suggested doing a scripted anamorphic collaboration and I like the idea. This is starting small, but if this goes well and people are interested, perhaps we can try something bigger next time around. A series of clips is great!

[quote name='galenb' timestamp='1350597648' post='19949'] Nice! At first when I read the thread title I thought you where asking for matte box recommendations. ;-) The whole time I was reading I kept thinking, "well this one seem fine to me?" I have to confess that I've never really fully understood the use of matte boxes. I mean, holding filters and blocking light from hitting the lens seem to be the main advantages right? But I can just use screw on filters and use flags to block the light right? I always thought matte boxes where used to hold actual holdout mattes painted on glass. Am I missing something? By the way, you have one of the objects I lust after: SmallHD monitor! Mainly because I love their implementation of focus peaking. Sadly, I won't be getting one till I get a new camera. The GH1 doesn't have the ability to send a signal out the HDMI while shooting. :-( Cheers! [/quote] Thanks, Galen. As someone who shot with Fader NDs for years it took me a while to realize why I needed a matte box on my DSLR. I came across this little clip: [media]http://vimeo.com/26687398[/media] Basically, a fader is made up of a circular polarizer rotated against a linear polarizer so you are always polarizing your subject to some degree, and not necessarily controlling the angle of light that you blocking since most people just screw them on until they are snug and won't fall off. It became evident to me that a lot of my very flat-looking portrait shots looked that way because I had unknowingly polarized out the natural reflection that comes off of human skin. I thought about that, and also the fact that I am shooting through this glass -- it had better be just as high quality as the lenses that I shoot through it. It was a painful but necessary purchase, but now that it's over, I can focus on other things!

[quote name='richg101' timestamp='1350596298' post='19946'] nice one man. I'll give you some Iscorama stuff and send over some stuff from when I had an century 1609. I guess when you say 'shade' this is for outdoors and you want a warm look? PS. make sure people give you info about the aperture. It's nice to see how wide you can go with each anamorphic element:) [/quote] Thanks, Rich. I think that a warmer look will go well if we get some fall colors in the shots. And good point about the aperture. I've edited the post.

[color=#222222][font=Helvetica Neue', Arial, Verdana, sans-serif][size=4][background=rgb(255, 255, 255)]I'd like to propose a collaboration: If forum members (or forum watchers) are able to submit clips shot with ten or more different anamorphic lenses, we'd have the most comprehensive anamorphic shootout on Vimeo. If we are able to put together shots from twenty or more anamorphics, this thing would be a definitive one-stop video for anamorphic footage comparisons [i]anywhere[/i]. To keep things cohesive, we need a common element. Something standardized, readily available around the world (as this is a very international community) and inexpensive:[/background][/size][/font][/color] [center][img]http://www.longislandpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/10/41GrnPg_1.jpg[/img][/center] So start shooting those Coca-Cola cans! Close ups, wides, dutch angles; portrait shots, action shots, landscape shots; people drinking from it, spitting in it, playing with it, crushing it, recycling it, putting out cigarettes in it -- anything you want. I'll try to include something from every clip that I receive, but please keep it clean (i.e. suitable for work). Some guidelines:[list] [*]Please make sure to use a standard 12 fl ounces/355 ml Coca Cola Classic aluminum can like the one above (or as close to it as you can get) [*]Limit the footage to one minute or less per anamorphic [*]Include original audio (no music, please) [*]No grading [*]White balance for "Shade" (or 7000 Kelvin) [*]Please stretch them to the correct aspect ratio [*]ProRes 422 codec is preferred [/list] So that proper credit can be given, please also note:[list] [*]Your name (or your handle if you'd prefer) & location [*]Camera used [*]Taking lens used (with aperture) [*]Anamorphic lens used [*]Any diopters used [*]Vimeo page (if you'd like me to link to it) [/list] Send me a private message if you have a clip to submit, and I will tell you how best to get it to me. [b]Please submit by 12pm (New York time) on November 1st[/b] so that I can start the edit. This could be a neat little collaboration and I hope that it is, but it's really up to you guys. I hope to get a lot of messages!

[quote name='kirk' timestamp='1350589099' post='19941'] Looks fine to me (but I get by without a rig, so my vote doesn't count :-) But the whole rig looks way too front heavy on the tripod... should be balanced much further back IMHO... [/quote] You are right about that. I have some plans for this rig. I'll be flipping the baseplate around and adding a riser and shim so that the swing away base can slide back [i]over top[/i] of the baseplate.

I just picked up the updated Cavision 3x3 matte box to use with my GH2 (website image below; pictured here with a T2i): [img]http://www.cavision.com/pictures/T2i/MB3485&T2IWITHLEDP.JPG[/img] It's a compact, fully-featured swing-away mattebox for about $350 that is compatible with high quality filters that seem to go for 30-40% less than the 4x4 filters. Cavision had to modify their swing away to work with this smaller matte box but it works well. I also ordered the 52mm to 85mm Deep Offset Step-Up Ring (AR85M52), and extra filter trays. Here are some first impressions:[list] [*]Quality is okay but not spectacular. I would never stand on one of these things like they do in some of the tests. It's a bit plasticy -- on par or slightly better than the DMatte. [*]I am concerned about build quality of the hinges that attach the flags to the matte box. They consist of plastic shafts that house long tightening bolts. It feels to me like that kind of plastic that may crack easily with repeated use or age. I have removed them for the time being because they add a lot of bulk. [*]The filter trays that come with the matte box are very lightweight plastic. I am not sure that I'd trust them with my expensive Schneider 3x3 filters (which fit perfectly). However, the extra filter trays that I ordered separately are aluminum and feel much better in my hands. I'll be using them primarily and keeping the plastic holders as backups. [*]The rear rotating stage kept getting stuck the first couple of times that I used it (I think that there was a stubborn ball bearing in there somewhere). But after I broke it in, it works very well and turns pretty smoothly. [*]The swing away is all aluminum and feels well-built. It works well in this setup. The 15mm bracket that hugs the rods sits 2.5" or 3" behind the matte box, meaning that I am attaching my Edelkrone FocusOne Pro follow focus [i]in front[/i] of it. I am very glad that I have this follow focus with this matte box, because with its one point of contact I can slip it onto one of the rods and then slide it underneath the matte box before righting it. [*]With the deep offset ring, this matte box does NOT vignette with my SLR Magic 12mm on my GH2. [*]This whole setup will be greatly improved with a sleeve (i.e. "nuns knickers") to keep it light tight. Cavision is working on one but I may rig together something myself in the meantime. [/list] Though the build quality could be better (especially the flag hinges), this matte box is the perfect size for the GH2 and any other DSLR. I have always felt that 4x4 matte boxes were too big for small cameras. I have assembled my kit to be lightweight and functional with nothing extra, and this matte box fits right in. Here are some snapshots: [font=inherit][size=3][img]http://www.eoshd.com/comments/uploads/gallery/album_14/gallery_18451_14_40366.jpg[/img][/size][/font] [font=inherit][size=3][img]http://www.eoshd.com/comments/uploads/gallery/album_14/gallery_18451_14_113892.jpg[/img][/size][/font] [font=inherit][size=3][img]http://www.eoshd.com/comments/uploads/gallery/album_14/gallery_18451_14_143404.jpg[/img][/size][/font]

Beautiful footage.

From what I remember, it is installed [i]behind[/i] a cine taking lens (and this is something that needs the touch of a professional, so it can't be easily swapped out like a front adapter). Also, it eats up a lot more light than the front adapters; I seem to remember three stops. Tony will know more.

[quote name='brucker' timestamp='1350560546' post='19900'] very nice footage indeed. did you do much post? [/quote] Moderate grading. The deep sunset shots weren't pushed very much.

[quote name='tony wilson' timestamp='1350529179' post='19883'] footage is nice. the design of the lens is classic the back cylindrical convex optic is about 5mm to small. so you get smearing,ghosting and a little double imaging . if it had of been a little bigger it would be a beast simply relationship between focal length of taking lens and importantly massive size difference between 2 optics coupled with focal length of iscomorphot i suppose it is a question of finding the perfect taking lens. i have had some and they where in pretty poor shape it is quite a complex lens amazing for it's time really. it was designed for bolex reg 8 so amazing it does that well. i gave up on them because i could not find a perfect one and i did not want another dumb 6 month repair job. [/quote] You are right about finding the right taking lens. So far, I like it best with my Nikkor 85mm Non-Ai f/1.8. Second place goes to the Helios 44 (with which I shot the video above). And I really do not like this lens with my Nikkor 50mm AI-S f/1.8. The edges are soft and there seems to be even more ghosting.

This is a new benchmark. I think that we're only 18 to 24 months away from ALL new professional cameras offering 4K. At this rate, I'll be surprised if it's not in the next iPhone.

Looking forward to the 25th!

[quote name='Julian' timestamp='1350492944' post='19861'] I don't see much reason to hate it :) Which Iscomorphit is it? 8/1,5x or 8/2x? I'm waiting for my 8/2x to arrive. My first reasonably small anamorphic.. Curious how it will work out. [/quote] It's the 8/1.5x, like this: [img]http://www.eoshd.com/comments/uploads/gallery/album_14/gallery_18451_14_27471.jpg[/img] Isco couldn't let things be too simple, so their Iscomorphot 8/2x and 16/2x are a completely different series that looks like this: [img]http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7220/7307238896_31593601c5_z.jpg[/img] I believe that both of those are dual focusing. I have seen some wonderful footage from the 8/2x.

[quote name='Germy1979' timestamp='1350488234' post='19852'] Let the chastising begin, lol. [/quote] What do you think this is, Personal-View? ;-) Thanks for the workflow. I have Premiere on my work machine so I'll give it a shot.

I can't decide whether I love this lens or hate it. It is very easy to use with rack-focusing and no need for diopters (focuses as close as 1' or so) but there is often ghosting if I shoot faster than f/4 or sometimes f/5.6. But at those apertures, it acts like a shallow DOF amplifier. Still, I do lose the light. Here it is coupled with my Helios 44: [media]http://vimeo.com/51600001[/media]

[quote name='Xiong' timestamp='1350440923' post='19835'] I would love to know more about this shooting style with anamorphic in mind. Whats the benefit from just shooting with OCT-18 over just adding black bars? Resolution? Since Im still in the process on getting started I would love to hear more info on this subject if anyone can tip more or lead me to some really good articles on it. [/quote] Take a look, this is a good place to start: [url="http://www.eoshd.com/anamorphic-guide"]http://www.eoshd.com/anamorphic-guide[/url] But be warned, it's an addiction.

Here is a composite of the Quicktime screen grabs for the time being: [img]http://www.eoshd.com/comments/uploads/gallery/album_15/gallery_18451_15_471134.png[/img] It looked different in Photoshop. The FCP side actually looked cleaner. After the new file was created for posting here, I'm back with an image that reinforces my initial observation. I am sure that someone more knowledgeable than I can shed some light on this.

[quote name='Julian' timestamp='1350422595' post='19825'] Squeeze factor changing because of the focus distance? That sounds quite inconvenient... Is it possible at all? If I squeeze the still to 3,55:1 (16:9 x2) it looks more natural. [/quote] I don't understand the optics behind it, but that's how it appears to be. At least in my experience with my OCT-18 set.