Rudolf

The Trump looks great! I would love to test this on day on some old super 8 stock I still have in the fridge. Is the Trump 38 on MIR 38 basis? The Helios is very long for S8.

I would shoot spherical and apply all that flares in AE. You can achive this look much easier with videocopilot stuff or similar... And if it has to be anamorphic - maybe the adapter from SLR magic is the one to go with as it produces blue flares and looks modern/"artificial" or clinic and is just easy to use I think.

I wouldn't be dogmatic at all! Anamorphic was invented for film and used for every format (not sure about 9,5 Pathé). The intention was to get a larger image and not shallow depth, more and more anoying flares, bokeh whatever! Shallow dept is a side effect of longer lenses which had to be used. However filters were not so popular or maybe available like today and therefore and for sharpness they stopped down. That is why older films don't have this extreme shallow depth. For me this is more a digital look than filmic. Keep in mind: Quentin T. (his work was mention above) quitted filmmaking - be it anamorphic 65mm or whatever - cause sadly film as we knew it is nearly dead.

I'm on holiday and therefor had to watch the clip on my ipad. The bmpcc with 54 and tokina is a great combo! This is my favourite zoom lens with the Iscorama 54. i like the atmosphere and the colors as well. There is not much to critisize especially not from my side as I am not a pro. maybe some grain could add something to the atmo (like the vinyl crackle)? For my taste there is a little bit too much shallow depth. I' d prefer a more dirty 16mm film style. Otherwise you did a great job so far and I would really really like to see the finished doc (i am also into the music as well)!

It is so stunning that these old pieces of glass can still deliver so well. Remeber they were built nearly 60 years ago!!! The DV crap from Panasonic, Optex, Century is no match for most of them. The fact that 2x stretch is so rare depends on the low resolution of 8mm. There is also too much grain and that distorts as well. Therefore the Hypergonar was not good for 8mm: I never saw acceptable film with it.

Great! Thank you very much for your work Tito

Thank you for sharing your tests and comparisions Zak! Very intresting. I also watched your footage with the SLR Rangefinder and I think the Rectilux looks better in terms of image quality and sharpness. I don't like the blueish haze and softness (?) on the Rectilux but maybe it is too early to judge? Would be great to have a final verdict from you on both - of course after intense testing and playing around.

Hey Julian, your Petit Cinevision must be really one of the rarest anamorphic adapters out there and I remember the discussion about it here on the forum back then... And YES - you should take it out as the image looks very good! BTW the focusing with the Bolex-Möller is so easy because you can just grab both taking lens and the Möller and focus both at the same time. This works because the throw of the Möller from 1m to infinity is only about 90º (from 0.5 to 1m it is another 90º) But this doesn't work with Nikons of course... but great with Canon FD for example.

When I bought my second Möller 8/19 1.5 I sold my Baby Hypergonar with ease. For me the Möllers are the best in terms of quality, character, sharpness (focus as close as 0,5meters and it is a peace of cake) Wish I had a 16/32 as well. I even often prefer it to my Iscoramas! Here is some old footage shot with the Möller: http://vimeo.com/72038962 Maybe your recognize some sort of rackfocussing which can be achieved with the Möller if you do some practicing

You have a great collection of lenses at your disposal Tito! And you are doing great stuff. Thanks for your work and letting people paricipate of you experiences! Hopefully you did not get me wrong about my VanDiemen comment?! Was not ment offensive. If I had an Isco in bad shape I would for sure have gone the same route. But if it is ok I just think it looses it's versatility which I love very much about it. BTW I would like to know if you guys always have lenssupport with the '54? With the Tokina it has to be of course but who about lighter taking lenses. In the old days the '54 was mounted without support on the Super-8 cameras!

I recall Carl Zeiss refuses to repair lenses with fungus... The device from B+W is indeed intresting and btw B+W is a member of Schneider Kreuznach (like Isco) - they should know what they are doing

http://www.eoshd.com/comments/topic/5216-getting-the-best-footage-on-vimeo/#comment-55339 When I began filming I read some books and when I bought my first digital camera I bought the GH2 guide from Andrew. That helped a lot! Otherwise I just can second Antonis: Your footage is overexposed and washed out. I prefer it more steady as well. I also like the Canon FD lenses and use them often together with a cheap lensturbo.

I do not own the Kowa 16 d but have a Moeller 32/2 which is rather similar I think. I just tried it with the Canon FDn 35 F2 on GH4 and that combo works without vignetting in c4k anamorphic mode. But with speedbooster it is too wide. Canon FDn 50 F 1.4 is ok. However it is not only about shooting as wide es possible.With anamorphics you can shoot with longer lenses and that is a benefit! Much more than flares and oval bokeh. Especially for the GH4 this is a good way to get rid of the "video-sharpness".

I like the choice of music - adds a good atmosphere. As always music is a key. The blurry image corresponds with the soundscape. I would have cropped more of the vignetting image. Maybe the SLR Magic could be used with an autofocus lens? However I've never shot with autofocus but that could sometimes be helpful. I am just thinking of it as I own a Pana 35-100 and the autofocus is not that bad. Anyway I think you will have some fun with the SLR anamorphot. And that is the most important thing

Rich - as always - valuable and very good input! I agree and would like to add that sometimes people have wrong expactations or reasons for the use of anamorphics. If you would like to create an 'intimate" film or a horror film anamorphics are usually a bad choice. BTW you did very well with your Century! I had the Optex which is similar and that was disapoint at all - but I was very unsexperienced with digital camaras at that time... I am still

That was great Tito! Thanks a lot. But run and gun is not ideal with the '54: I like to pair it with the Tokina 28-70 and lensturbo. That is heavy stuff and therefore I've never really used that combo - ridiculous... What I really like about the '54 is its built quality. Mine fell down and has a only a littly dent on the filter (can still add a filter) otherwise nothing serious happened - works just fine. Try that with a 'Van Diemen Isco'... !

Thank you very much Ebrahim for your appreciated and useful information! But I am wondering if the filmic look is so much about shallow dof? Isn't that super-shallow dof a matter of fashion and taste? If you watch some older movies either 35 or 16mm film shallow dof is much rarer.

I learnt a couple of things here again and it seems this speedbooster is a great for the GH4 in some cases (especially with the Sigma 18-35 sounds great). The thing is tho that I do not have these numbers in my head like 28 or 31mm during shooting. I just don't care. If I am fine with my framing it's okay otherwise I move my ass. Thats probably very amateurish! And another 1/3 stop of light... I think that is not much and do we need it? Another problem could arise for the use with anamorphics. For example the Tokina 28-70 2.6 works just brilliant with the Isco 54 and cheap Lensturbo 0.72 with the better new Speedbooster you will have to be carefull with vignetting. Or a 28mm with Iscorama might not work at all.

This sounds very intresting. Especially for high-quality anamorphics like the Moellers and Kowas (and the likes). At the first moment I was considering to sell one of my Iscorama but until the optical quality isn't proven I have doubts about it. Otherwise a Moller 16/32 or 8/19 single focus could be one of the best anamorphic out there with their unique character, sharpness and without the need of diopters.

That sounds very intresting but I don't fully understand the difference: I have 'cheapboosters' for M42, Nikon and FD mount for my Gh4. Ok the crop is 0.72 so this new thing is wider and brighter?! But the gh4 remains 'videoish' as many people complained. So why is the new speedbooster a gamechanger? Why shouldn't I buy a sony a7s (if I could) I rember A Reid pionting out he would never be shoot on crop mode camera again... I never cared for crop or not: never experienced ff or apsc

...the rare Cinegon! Wish I could watch your clip. Unfortunately due to license problems with the music the video is blocked on youtube Germany. The Cinegon is the predecessor of the 36 and came with the schneider Cinegon lens for a couple of super 8 cameras. With a special step ring made by Heliopan for a Leitz cinegon (Leitz has a special thread) I have coupled my Exakta Iscorama which is smaller (32 instead of 36mm). Luckily it worked great without vignetting (super-sharp combo). The 1.5 stretch is very good for 8-16mm film and absolutely common since the late 50's. 2x stretch is too wide and produces oval grain on revearsal film. But I think Kowa/BH, elmoscope, Moeller 32 work good even wide open.

Tokina is too expensive and over the top for Century. Even with Iscorama it is not so easy to see the difference with cheaper Tokina 0.5 or even cheaper and slightly inferior Tamron 0.5. Kostas Petsas made a nice test (youtube). The Tamron is also 72mm and you can find them from time to time. They are for bayonet or threaded. For example the bayonet version: http://www.ebay.com/itm/TAMRON-Close-Up-Adaptor-Lens-for-28-200mm-F3-8-5-6-72mm-/150993854685 If you are looking for an upgrade check out the Moellers. IMO they produce the sharpest and best looking images out there. I have had many of the popular anamorphots except Lomo and the Baby Moeller is somehow my favorit even over my Iscoramas. And for sure I will buy it's bigger brother 16/32 one fine day. SLR magic is not very interesting with 1.33 stretch.

I LOVE IT! Thank you very much for the heads up Julian

Hello Bold I had the Optex anamorphic adapter which is very similiar and the main problem is that these adapters (LA7200, Century, Optex, Generic...) are very soft (especially at the edges) and you have to stop down at least f 5.6. Otherwise you won't get a sharp image. All these things were made for DV to produce a 16:9 image so... not so much resolving power. On the other hand they are super easy to use (focus-through), and versatile and therefor not bad for a start. Maybe better than a huge impractical Rectimascope Hope you enjoy anamorphic shooting!

I was just looking for a used GH2 because I thought there must have been a pricedrop meanwhile - no way!!! There is no significant decline in price that speaks for itself. 'Staffpick' - well deserved :)