Rudolf

I can only speak as an enthusiast and nonpro but there is so much more about film which is so artistic in other directions. I know people who process with strange fluids (coffee...) and manipulate the image in severeral ways. In that way art becomes also sort of craft instead of just hitting a keyboard. Using, knowing and caring of your gear for decades is good for the environment. BTW every search on Google consumes as much energy as an electric bulb for one hour. So just imagine streaming and cloud computing. If nothing changes in 2023 the whole electricity will be spent for the internet. Buy one or two camera every year is also not the best thing for the environment either. Cutting the film and adding a sound stripe with old machines... doing this with your own hands... and finally projecting your own movie. No digital projection comes close. Trying to make video like film is adding vinyl crackles and lofi sound to your music: You just want to give it a littly bit more soul and atmosphere. Make the digital more pleasing for us analog humans. Cause that is how mother nature still works However I also enjoy video and producing digital music very much. And it definitely gives the people with less money more options and possiblities PS I am looking very forward for my films from Ferrania who will produce film again (hopefully April)

How about colecting expansive and ugly digital cameras and gear

Wow! That is a wonderful music video. Really like videos with a storyline. Kudos!

I agree: Tito did a great job and it is a super addition to Andrew's guide. Regarding the 4k matter I am confused (I meanwhile got the GH4) I am not an optician nore know much about this stuff but I made some different experiences: I think that 4K makes a lot of anamorphics usable which look too soft on other formats. Let me put it this way: For Super 8 anything below Iscorama is unusable. Even Kowa doesn't work because it produces oval grain due to the factor. The only anamorphot to better Iscorama are the Möllers but it is too difficult to nail the focus. The baby Hypergonar for instance is ridicolous for Super 8 altough it was sold with cheap Chinon/Revue pocket cameras. But on 4K it shines. I know a filmmaker who is in business with 35mm projection and he would never ever use something like cinelux for filming due to inferior quality as he says. But now these lenses are becoming more and more popular. Some time ago 'character' was often mentioned and desired especially on this forum. Since a couple of months you read very often (too often for my taste) about sharpness, resolution, 4K, 6K whatever. So maybe more capable cameras make even inferior optics look good and with character. I just saw a GH4 clip here on the forum "Storm" with the huge Rectimascope (I use one for projection but never considered it for filming). But with the GH4 even this guy does a great job... nice

I had the Optex a couple of years ago and I recall it has to be stopped down to get sharp like all focus through adapters. Unfortunately it will still not become that sharp even at f5.6. But as GH4 is so sharp this is not so bad maybe? The Tamron diopter is quite good. Nearly as good as the 0.5 Tokina.

Hi Tito, I just watched Zona S. SP. and I am very impressed! Great job. Really, realy well done. I have to say you definitely are the right man to own those fine lenses as it is much better to make good films than boring flaretests and so on Unfortunately I cannot provide you with any good resources regarding the Iscorama stuff. I know some filmmakers who have decades of experience with Iscos. One in particular knows some engineers from Isco and had a quite close relationship I think. He owns all the good stuff... Keep up the great work! Hope you have a nice time in Vancouver (heard it is a great city)

Hey Cosimo, you should definitely get into gear and make music again! Great stuff!!! Just listening to "For Marcel"... beautiful - reminds me when I've been on a Kraftwerk concert woohoo

Hello Izhar, that is a wonderful video. I really like it very much. Great with your music - kudos!!! The image of the GH4 is great. I often read it is not 'cinematic' (whatever this means?) but a lot of your shot look like film (depends on the stock though - maybe old Revue/Agfa). GREAT! I will definately upgrade from my GH3. You are a strong man... carrying around the Rectimascope-monster. I did not know it would work that good. I use one for projection which works great though. Thanks for making my decision against NX1 for GH4 easy

Thank you very much for your effort. Very intresting read and enjoyed it a lot. I tried to write a comment and some additions but that did not work for some reason. Second try: Maybe Ernst Abbe deserves a mention as founder of the patented anamorphic lenssystem. (He also invented the triplet later called "Cooke triplet") Therefor it is maybe a little bit harsh to say Isco have stolen a russian formular. Isco Göttingen were already in the anamorphic business since the late 1950's. Isco Göttingens concept with the Iscorrama being able to split depends on the fact that the anamorphot has to be used for projetction (was not a discovery by users). Therefore the Iscostat was used (available for all sizes). The Iscorama 36, 42, 54 were targeted at the Super-8 enthusiast. They had also cooperations with Bauer and Beaulieu resulting in the Cingegon (taking lens was a Schneider Kreuznach Macro Cinegon 10mm 1.8). Isco Göttingen put a big effort to make their lenses popular: In 1979 they offered a journey to Israel accompanied by anamorphic experts and lending out Iscoramas to the interested film enthusiast. Unfortunately all this did not prevent Isco from breakup. Maybe the Isco's achromatic diopters especially built for the Iscoramas are worth mentioning too ? Again thank you very much for your work!!! Very inspiring. I wish I could afford more stuff like Lomos and 5D III (I am still on GH3 and mostly Super 8) Tonight I am looking forward to wathch Zona S. SP.

Macroblocking is so annoying on my family and friends videos... I always work with tiff sequence

Great fotos and stills! Although I am the worst photographer on the forum (internet?) I dare to post some images Canon FDn 50mm (plus cheapbooster) and mighty-little-8mm Moeller Canon FDn 28mm and 1968 Exakta Iscorama Schneider Kreuznach Optivaron and late 70's Iscorama 54 (obvisously not MC)

What a pity... Altough I sold mine nearly three years ago I recall it was very easy to dissamble the adapter. I did this for cleaning. Therefore I would suggest to do the same in your case. I think the mounting mechanism is very simple and it is easy to check when the glass and 'mattebox'-like body is seperated. You could then trie to loosen it maybe with the gentle help of some leather or so. Good luck

In my opinion they just wanted to create exactly that look. Vision 3 500 has also much more grain - obviously as 50 or 200t. And the also preserved that rough grain for a reason. They could have gone even furhter for my taste and shoot that on 16mm - would have given an even "rawer" look to it. I like it very much. It is so refreshing to see film!

"Unfortunately I don't think that 150 mins will last me out the year Like this" Andrew, I am looking very forward for hours of great Videos with great Cameras and lenses. Eoshd can be äs entertaining as TopGear

Would like to know why... ??? how about the '42 on ebay?

For € 5000 you can get 150minutes of Vision 3 Super 8 including processing and telecine and a beautiful Braun Nizo camera That looks so close to 16mm hard to spot any difference

Hello Hitfabryk maybe you are paying too much attention on the camera? I recently discovered my GH3 can shine when paired with the right lenses. And I never really liked the image of the GH3 so much compared to the GH2. Therefore I will upgrade to GH4 as this can serve as a reliable camera for usual hopefully. I just think that the lense has a significant influence on the image and not only the sensor?!

That is exactly what I experienced and even worse I did not find them very sharp or mine were not. It is really funny that my (Made in West Germany) Rollei Zeiss also with T* coating has such a different lovely image. A pity that there is no focalrecuder for the Rollei mount. Unfortunately this lens needs to be serviced so I can't post anything. I also own the usual Russian suspects and love their image and the built quality. They also match the aforementione Tokina quite well. If I need something more neutral I use the Canon FD.

This is so impressive! The technical evolution is just staggering. I remember talking to a freind about 8 years ago and he told me about his 4K camera which was cutting edge at that time and I had no idea about what 4K was. The price of that thing and the media was fabulous.

Very interestring but honestly... I am not very clever and this could cause a bad headache... therefore I couldnt't read the whole thing But still I learnd something - thanks a lot!

I had some strange experiences with Zeiss lenses: As they are very popular in C/Y mount I thought it would be an improvment to my old Canons and bought a Zeiss 50mm F 1.4 and a 35 F 2.8 and astonishngly the Canon FD 50mm 1.4 and 35mm 2.0 were sharper. So I sold the Zeiss. But what is really strange about Zeiss is that my Zeiss 50mm F 1.4 for Rolleiflex had a totally different rendition/color and was sharper as the C/Y. All togehter simply much better. I read somewhere that the Zeiss C/Y is different in quality maybe becaus of their producing factory (MMG, AEG, MMJ AEJ)...??? I am just wondering if somebody else was dissapointed with Contax Zeiss lenses?

Thank you very much nahua! The video looks very good to my eyes and also heart warming as it is so grey and rainy and cold in Hamburg/Germany This helped me to make up my mind and I will stick to Panasonic and go for the GH4 (instead of A7S or NX1). I also think low light capabilty is ok (if needed I use some lights anyway).

Wow! I would like to travel to Lisboa rigth now Very impressive but makes things difficult to choose a new camera. I found particular the ungraded shot intresting. Thanks for that. Hope you had a nice time.

I just wish the usual stuff they show here on TV would be as half as funny! Altough I did not understand everything it was very funny and good idea. For the average watcher maybe a tiny little bit shorter would/could be better. Too many people expect/prefer very short cuts - especially when watching on a PC. I also agree on the lens recommandations: I use Canon FDs for years and are happy with them. I also like them more then Contax Zeiss (Zeiss for Rolllei was sharper in my case). The GH2 is still great and would prefer less sharp lenses. I found it very intresting what Rich said: about Speedbooster and gain in sharpness. I use a cheap RJ Reducer for m4/3 - Canon FD but never compared sharpness. However if I adapt my Canons (which are not known for being soft) to my Leitz Super-8 they are nearly unusuable because they are very soft compared to Leitz/Schneiders which are made for that film/size... Keep on with your good work !

I also bought the Tokina 28-70 2.6 as Mr. Lee considered (his suggestions are priceless - thank you very much!). I immediately liked the lens very very much. And it is a wonderful match for the Isco 54. This combo brought me back from small gauge film to have some (much cheaper) fun with my "old" GH3. This brings me to a point: There are so many discussions about 'filmic' look and the lack of it - particular with the GH4. I also think the GH2 looked better than the GH3 but maybe I will buy the GH4 as this Tokina makes me trust more in the lens for some look instead of the camera. So with all my old lenses (Canon FDs, M42's) it could be possible to have a nice and warm look (or whatever filmic is...) with such a modern camera like the GH4 or am I totally wrong? Again thanks a lot for all the great infos! PS I thought the Tokina is an old lens - but mine (I bought it from ebay) was sold new in a store last year (according to the bill in the box)?!