elubes

alignment buttons are replaced with a screw.  so you can freely turn the lens, and you lock it down by tightening the screw.  they make turning the alignment a little more viscous, which i kind of like, so you it feels secure.  if the screw is loose, the alignment generally will stay in place.  but it just sucks, cause i can see myself easily loosening this screw by accident and losing it.

rich on the 25mm, i was at a f2.0.  I might've stopped up to a f1.4 but i honestly can't remember.  definitely not at 0.95 because it's too soft.  (im looking forward to trying your DSO optics soon too on this rehoused iscorama)   with the rehousing, minimum focus is like 3' 7" feet.  i guess it was worth it for me because now the housing feels so much more secure, i'm not afraid of breaking anything, the focus gear is nice but haven't really used it yet (you WILL need a speed crank i think), van diemen completely regreases it, and i'm not worried about the original plastic housing that would've shrunk and tightened with the weather as much, clear witness marks are engraved, close focus mod (pretty much takes the place of a +0.5, and for me), and i feel like it secures a resale value.   -e

thanks starcentral its an actual 36 with the iscorama anamorphot -36 on the front. i stole that term from wikipedia when they called it the rebadged cinegon.

paulio i think the bmpcc is an amazing bang for your buck.  i guess not to belabor the reviews that are out there about poor battery life and stuff, as far as anamorphic goes, couple things i noted:   -lightness/form factor doesn't really make that much of a difference with an iscorama/bell howell weighted lens.  you're better off supporting with rails and lens support with this thing even if your taking lens are metal-housed.  maybe i'm paranoid, but feel like it could torque open the m43 mount off.  i don't trust plastic zooms or even plastic primes in general with this. -focus peaking is really great with this blackmagic.  i pulled focus off the poor lcd of the pocket cam with the squeezed image.  on the 5diii with ML i for some reason have a hard time trusting the peaking even with a magnified viewfinder because it feels a little more chaotic.  maybe i haven't really figured out the threshold stuff, but just a general feeling. -the anamorphic 1.5x and up are great for countering the ridiculous crop sensor.  not by much, but enough for the main narrative focal lengths i'm comfortable with.  -i tried a 17.5 voigtlander with this and unfortunately it was vignetting for me.  also the front lens element of that 17.5 was touching the back element of the iscorama.  i find myself needing to get a filter or two and punching out the glass and placing between the two, so the lens elements don't scratch each other.  this lens combo i may do and scale up to 2.35 ratio...if it works. -my favorite lens taking lens by far is the 58mm helios, but i almost feel like i can forget that on this bmpcc bc it turns out to be what, almost at 180mm.  anyone know of an equivalent with super 16?   hope that helps.   -audio: i used a wireless g3 into camera.  guesstimated the levels.

so i talked to one of my DP friends yesterday about this whole anamorphic/bokeh thing.  i notice that when I shoot with my 5d mark iii, i get a lot more cylindrical distortion in the background.   Something like this:   [attachment=716:distortion.jpg]   you'll notice in the upper right corner and the left side on the grass there's this kind of smearing.  which I really like and think is dreamy.   i don't get that kind of smearing on the pocket camera.  my DP friend said it was mainly because the 5iii sensor uses the whole lens element and that will always get more distortion.  that's why i'm getting that.  whereas the pocket camera crops even the m4/3 lenses that i'm using.   is this what you guys meant mainly by the sensor size having an effect on the bokeh? thanks

cool thanks everyone, much appreciated, i haven't posted much work up here so really good to hear the feedback/tips.  i knew sensor size had an effect on bokeh size, but not on shape.    the tightest closeups i used the one tokina, on the medium shot was just the close focus mod.  i'm pretty sure i shot at 2.0, bc the voigtlander is really soft wide open.  i might've cheated to 1.4.   julian - here's the pic of the rig [attachment=715:bmpc isco36rig.JPG]   it's rehoused.  i sent it to van diemen in april and just got it back.  even though the turnaround time was a bit dramatic, i think they did a good job.  the only problem with it is that i wish the front element didn't rotate cause there isn't an elegant way to put a mattebox on this thing, since the focus throw telescopes the lens enough that you either hit your filters or pull out of your donut.  but hey you gotta deal with what nature gave you you know?

wanted to share a short narrative scene i made with iscorama 36, tokina diopter, blackmagic pocket camera, and voigtlander 25mm f0.95.    https://vimeo.com/78510126   it's the rebadged 36, not the 1968, so i noticed the flares off the taxi's brake light was pretty subdued.  the voigtlander probably subdued it more.  and it was a weak brake light anyway.  and on top of that probably doesn't work to have flares in this particular scene anyway.   for some reason the bokeh i was getting on the CU's with the diopter honestly looked a little spherical to me.  any thoughts on that?   any other critique that could probably help me shoot better anamorphic? thanks erik  

also bought and received everything i ordered from redstan. couple diopters and a bunch of quality clamps. he doesn't always reply, but he always delivers. +1.

is the focus ring on your taking lens working okay?  if it is and you still can't get focus doing dual rack, then sounds like you have to return that sankor.

i guess the big elephant in the room for me is with these new 1.33x anamorphics from slr magic and letus coming out, whats the possible depreciation value of these old anamorphics? i dont suddenly want my la7200 and maybe iscorama to be worth pennies in a year or so and become hard to resell. esp for the iscorama (even though its 1.5x) is there a standard of quality that slr magic and letus you think just cant match unless they are charging what itd cost to buy one of these vintage lenses?

i remember reading here somewhere, a post not too long ago. i don't think there's an actual glass difference besides the size rear element   but...   there's a coating difference.  the original iscoramas i think have less of a coat than the iscorama 36.  so they give an amber flare.  the iscorama's have a cooler/bluer flare (i believe it was andrew reid's post that he was theorizing that all the 36s actually were actually multicoated regardless of the MC designation or not).  something like that, someone correct me if i have my facts wrong.   ** oh yeah Rudolf found the post above.   erik

if ure looking for the same exact one i dunno. but cavision has one of these for 70 something bucks. just look on bh http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/750371-REG/Cavision_R15_LS25100M_Lens_Support_with_Metal.html zacuto and chrosziel have them but not sure if those fit a 54

bernie and julie i think are good. i just got my iscorama done by them. the focus isnt that much looser on mine unfortunately. whats a little weird to me though was that i had loosened the front ring from this forum but didnt dare take it apart any more...so i sent it to bernie. i said it needed to be relubed for tight focus. he said he couldnt get into the lens and could only do it from the rear and had to rotate the lube in. then i mentioned to julie that i had gotten the front ring off before and they gave me a new quote and said bernie was able to get inside. not sure why he didnt know about it from the first place to take the front ring off unless hes only lubed them from the back or maybe after i said that he tried again. i guess with how old mine is you can only relube it so much. it still feels like tight focus. it seems like the age of the plastic determines how well it can be relubed? i think the tight focus on mine is permanent no matter who does the regreasing. does anyone know if this is true?

ah that makes sense. I had my diopter focusing at 3 feet away. The only thing I dont understand is how does that work with monobloc anamorphics, ie higher end ones, that focus from infinity down to minimum close focus without a diopter? How do editors deal with that, do they have to adjust the desqueeze factor in the middle of a shot? or is it not a problem? Thanks Caleb for the reply.

Not sure if this has been answered before, but I'm using a 2x Kowa B&H anamorphic with VLC and the custom aspect ratios.   Does anyone else notice the 3.55 aspect ratio feels a little too squashed for 2x in VLC?  That the 3:1 actually feels normal? Is there something I'm doing wrong?   I'm using a 58mm helios on a Canon 7D. Thanks E

If im understanding the question correctly, you're just talking about 2.40 or greater aspect ratio?   There isn't a substitute for anamorphic lenses, no matter what resolution camera you have, where you get the kind of flares/bokeh/and especially that dreamy cylindrical distortion you get in the background.  

Hey Paulio I usually shine a flashlight into the lens and make sure the horizontal flare is perfectly horizontal.  That's the only way I know how to do it...even with an anamorphic desqueeze monitor, I still check that way...

cool...thanks for the replies guys!

Hi, Had questions about flares.  1) Is there some technique to get a bunch of flares without seeing the actual source of the light or having it come anywhere near the frame?  Are some of these DP's spotting a mini dedo/beam from far away who's sole purpose is just for flares?  I think it was Punch Drunk Love where there's a lot of flare, but I don't remember seeing the source of the light in many of the shots.    2) And then the other thing is when I'm testing my own anamorphics, the source light just off frame produces an intense purple flare (almost opaque) at the frames edge in addition to the normal flares I'm used to.  Where's that purple flare coming from?  My anamorphic or the taking lens?  I was using a Helios and a Kowa 16-S.   Thanks so much! Erik

julien, im not a fan of the vamp clamp. it has metal screws scratching up the body of your iscorama which would depreciate the value if you were to resell. at least try to replace it with some strong plastic screws if the redstans are not available.

Ive noticed this too and always wondered why. I thought it's bc usually the stuff i focus on is usually way farther than the last focus mark but probably closer than actual infinity even though it looks like it should be infinity. and when you set a lens to infinity usually the depth of field thats in focus begins at this point of "infinity" rather than being in the center of the actual window of focus. thats my own hypothesis though so im not sure if thats the reason or if thats even right...i also guess it depends on how the lens is made. but yes i definitely have to do that, set focus back for a couple of my taking lenses. also my m42 50mm taking lens that came w my iscorama is severely out of focus on my gh3 when i use it alone. dunno why.

Hi, Can anyone recommend a widest fast taking lens for a GH3 and 1968 Iscorama? I was going to get the 28mm Canon FD mount f2.8 but would like the extra stop of this lens: http://www.ebay.com/itm/Mint-KIRON-28mm-f-2-0-Fast-Wide-Angle-Lens-Canon-FD-Mount-w-Caps-Lens-Bag-/151062512798?pt=Camera_Lenses&hash=item232c07049e Anyone tried this before? Is it worth the buy? Thanks Erik

hey tommy was curious where we can get isco rehoused. is it for cinema? is it the van diemen mod in the uk? i emailed them but didnt get an answer thanks erik

hey mathias alan told me the same thing too about his stock depleting. if he stops that would be terrible. dod he say hes quitting for sure or thinking abt it. there arent any other good clamps in my opinion. the metal screw vamp clamps have cosmetically damaged my anamorphics before and arent secure enough for specific lenses. is there anyway we can all keep him in business? im just a little concerned....

I read somewhere that for most anamorphics, it's about 0.5 stops, but i could be wrong...