richg101

the A7S is beyond anything else in it's price range. even in Aps-c mode it outdoes all in its price point. it's not just the codec. I bet the a7s shooting avchd will outdo the a5100 in xavc mode. it's everything about the camera that makes it so good. the full sensor readout is something the a6000 and the a5100 don't do. evf built in, audio input and output, s-log2, etc. your 24mm on aps-c mode will be a stellar combination similar to the look of the 35mm f2.8 zeiss full frame e-mount lens.

It looks like the version you have is the one you cannot dissemble the front optical cell. I can;t remember off hand, but I think the earlier units can be taken apart more deeply than the newer ones. The newer version is manufactured in a quicker way with less threaded rings and more glueing meaning it is not able to be taken apart.

I like it man. not tried on a mobile yet but I assume it will be better than the original design which was hard to navigate on the mobile - it definitely looks like it's a mobile friendly site.

'?do=embed' frameborder='0' data-embedContent>>

Yes it will work great for video. You'll lose a little of the low light capabilities, but not much. but for stills the a7s in aps-c mode is a very low mpx count by normal standards You might find (as a previous forum member has shown that using the digital zoom mode while in full frame means you can obtain slightly bigger image circle than aps-c.

beautiful!

This is also rather awesome for anamorphic users since usually say a 50mm only vignettes slightly on full frame (iscorama). so rather than going to aps-c mode you can crop in 1.2x and maintain as much of the image circle as possible.

Awesome find man. And a really good youtube video too. You have talent for video blogging my friend. Will be using this - particularly in aps-c mode! that's a s16mm crop mode. ideal for getting closer to wildlife while shooting 1080p with limited lenses at hand.

Agree. I don't think i've touched the 'movie mode' since realising how bad the focus assist is. you can punch in double as close in stills mode.

Full frame? I assume sony realise that almost all fs100-700 users are using L lenses or other adapted dslr lenses via a metabones adaptor, and as such a full frame sensor (the same as the A7S?) is catered for in the lens dept.

Definitely looks like the aperture is open wide. Feels like when a lomo square is shot at f2 and really needs stopping down a tad - in a good way - looks how a fast 2x anamorphic should do. If it does this with the attachment being hand held I cant wait to see it used properly. Need to know anamorphic used, the diameter of the elements and the amount of rotations it needed for this pull.

looks like a rather impressive focus pull and what looks like it's only needing to be twisted twice for that pull.. At most a 360 degree worth of focus turn for that. Would be nice if he can get it down to 180degrees with a courser helical.

Liking the look of that. Already emailed him with my interest:)

I think his LUT is responsible for the driveway being 'six stops over' to start with. I imagine if the ungraded s-log were to have been toggled, it wouldnt have been quite as drastic since more of the highlight detail would be visible to start with. rather than recovering from 6 stops over, he's pulling down maybe 2 stops of original over exposure at most, and it's not showing up as too harsh in this circumstance. None the less, I am blown away this was 160,000 iso!!! At first I thought he meant 1600!

looks rather good actually:)

A thing from the gods. Would love to see results from it. and own it! it's more than likely a pentacon 6 (medium format) 80mm f2.8 prime lens, with an adaptor taking it down to m42. Onto which is a lomo square front style anamorphot with its focus mech coupled to the rotation of the prime lens. lovely!

It's the rare earth glass elements which allow the improvements since they require less correction than cheaper glass. I imagine the original speed booster was made to a level they felt adequate for the purpose. since the chinese copycats devalued the original product, metabones have decided to go for rare earth glass in order to get the edge and maintain their advantage. The Chinese manufacturers wont deem it viable to utilise such glass (since it's about 4-10 times the price of what would have been used previously,.. only Metabone's pricing can accommodate such an increase in material costs). I'd like to use the full image circle of my hassy lenses on the a7r (since the majority of 35mm format glass wont deliver 36mpx resolution). Squeezing such huge imaging areas onto a smaller format will deliver resolving power if the focal reducing optics are good enough, however I think the likelihood of a decent manufacturer developing a cost effective, high quality solution is slim. - at least until sony start to deliver 50+mpx onto full frame sensors, at which point nearly all 35mm format lenses will fail to deliver the resolving power required to make the file sizes worthwhile.

that 3.5:1 ratio works so well in capturing NY. Lovely

No dirty lies here sir! I think you misunderstand what I mean. I am well aware that the rear optic of the iscorama 36 or iscorama (non 36) is not large enough to deliver the 'light transmission' required to deliver exposures as you would expect from the 85mm f1.4 on it's own, in order for that the rear optic of the iscorama would need to match that of the 85mm f1.4. However, I am sure you're aware that the coupling of the optics will still yield the 'look' of a f1.4. exposure will take a hit granted, but we're here for the 'look'. even if there were 2 stops of light loss due to the limited transmission, we're still talking a f2.8 exposure which is still adequate. At most I'd estimate maybe a noticeable loss of 1/2 - 2/3rd of a stop due to the limitations of the iscorama rear optic. Put an iscorama on the front of a 85mm f1.4 zeiss and it doesnt degrade the image very much at all (even wide open) thus in resolving power terms the Iscorama will support use at f1.4 as well as the fastest cinema anamorphics can!, but do it on a full frame sensor. If you are charging similar amounts of money for your product, put it against the competition your price point dictates otherwise no one will buy them. if you want to remove the loss of transmission effects and the cost of aquiring an 85mm f1.4 for testing purposes just stick a 50mm f1.4 lens on the back instead, on full frame and show us the comparison. The iscorama rear optic is big enough to transmit enough light for a 50mm f1.4. re. weight. A 100g increase in weight, as well as what looks like a 1/3rd length increase (before the diopter is at full extention) is a noticable difference once hanging off a prime. Those rectimascopes are pretty long as standard from that I recall. Have you used an Iscorama before? On a helios 44 it's pretty damn compact and doesnt need any rails. I don't mean to piss on puddings here, but as an Iscorama user, and enthusiast I felt compelled to come in and query constructively the product since there is suggestion that it will be a possible replacement for the iscorama. If this is the case then that's awesome.

Nice project John. Though i am a bit hesitant to believe your focus system is miles away from the patented Isco system... :ph34r: Your stills look pretty good, but the video sample doesnt seem to show very much of that anamorphic quality we all want due to the fact that the shots dont seem to show any shallow dof or any proper focus pulls. What aperture was your zoom set to? I was surprised that even at 70-200 there was little infocus/defocus separation. If I went out with my nex5n, a 135mm f4 and an iscorama the depth of field would be razor thin compared to what i am seeing here. When you put these rather costly and heavy £3000 units up against a smaller, more compact £2000 iscorama36, (or £3000 vandiemen rehoused version!), be sure to show the capabilities between the two on full frame, with an 85mm f1.4 wide open. This is the only way you'll be able to properly show the capabilities against the benchmark 'rama, which will deliver sterling results even wide open!. I love the look from 2x anamorphics but I think the main issue your anamorphics will struggle with when being put up against an iscorama 1.5x is the loss of resolution from having to crop away so much from the sides. I believe selecting a higher spec Kowa 35 (1.5 or 1.75) would have been a better choice for usability in our current climate where resolution is very important. Very few people have access to budgets to rent an Alexa Studio with its 4 perf sensor.

none of the lenses in your images would be worth buying for their 'vintage' qualities. But if you had to go for one, get one with brown/gold coatings and as little rubber on it as possible. Rubber focus grip = 'no vintage look' in my experience. It's almost mathematically so.

The part being machined is very small (only around 60mm wide) meaning it needed a 250mm lens in macro setup relatively close in order to fill the frame. this means that dof is razor thin. (even at f22). Alongside having to run the lens at f22, I had to use a large amount of horizontal tilt to follow the plane of focus desired (the face of the metal billet was the point of interest). if tilt hadnt been used the image would have been usable, but not nearly as sharp across the entire face of the machined part.

this shot would be impossible without tilt. however there would very few times I can imagine myself undertaking a shot like this on a regular basis unless technical photography were a particular interest of mine.

depth of field is solely a lens characteristic and sensors don't affect the depth of field. the sensor size determines the field of view you get from a particular lens. what you are wanting is the same ratio between the dof and the field of view. 200mm f2.8 is lovely - particularly on full frame in order to match the dof and fov ratio of a 200mm f2.8 on the c300 you will need around a 135-150mm lens at f2 attached to your gh4. Your 0.7x focal reducer in combination with your lens actually equals this. What you do need to factor in is that though the numbers add up, your 200mm lens is now no longer a 200mm lens - it's a 140mm lens due to the 'focal reduction' of 0.7x. I have done quite a bit of experimentation on the matter and find that the effect of a longer slower lens on a larger sensor is still impossible to match with a wider, faster alternative on a smaller sensor. the 'step' between the in focus/out of focus material in frame is not as crisp when using a wider lens. Focal reducers mounted between the camera and lens are far from optimal. You will find that although the marketing says that focal reducers improve image quality, they actually boost the prominence of fringing drastically when used wide open. Fringing is probably the least pleasing aberration and one which is very hard to rectify effectively in post.

I thought it would be nice to make a thread where film makers can also share their still photography. Rules of the Thread:- 1. Choose a single image that best sums up your style or favourite shot 2. Post a link to your flickr or 500px profile 3. Explain a bit about why you started playing with image capturing and any more info. 4. If sharing your own work, also comment on other people's work with critique or creative discussion!