Tito Ferradans

You can go as wide as 21mm on FF with the Letus 1.33x PRO.

It's rare for an adapter to surprise me, and the Anamorph-X 1.33x Pro from Letus achieved that. It allows you to go super wide and it holds up image quality like very few other adapters out there. Flares could be improved, but as these are still being made, we can just email Letus a bunch and get things changed - which is another great advantage of this lens over vintage adapters. What do you think of the footage and the results? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GplZGXPXmS0

Accepting people in that group is a real pain. Sorry for that, guys. The backlog is months long and I can't do anything about it. @webrunner5 I've been chatting with @mirekti for a little while already.

There has been a recent crop of big diopters on eBay so I'm sharing here the ones I found. Canon 105CL-UP900H - 105mm +1.1 - $280 - https://ebay.to/2JeoDnX Canon 105CL-UP900H - 105mm +1.1 - $350 - https://ebay.to/2kKODg7 Canon 82CL-UP800H - 82mm +1.25 - starting at $75 - https://ebay.to/2JckUeA Canon 82CL-UP800H - 82mm +1.25 - $100 - https://ebay.to/2sFp6IH (3 available) Canon 82CL-UP1300H - 82mm + 0.7 - $130 - https://ebay.to/2xGp7C4 SLR Magic duo 77mm +0.33 and +1.33 Achromatic - $200 - https://ebay.to/2Ligdg6 Minolta 72mm + 0.33 Achromatic - $350 - https://ebay.to/2kMFMuj And I got a few myself I'm letting go: Minolta 72mm +0.33 Achromatic - $350 - https://ebay.to/2JfpB3s RedRock Micro 72mm +10 Achromatic - $165 - https://ebay.to/2sttk71 Fujinon 8072 72mm +1.25 CRACKED - $30 - https://ebay.to/2Hg8NaB The 105mm are quite rare and work with a great number of high-value lenses recently like the Iscorama 54, or the Rectilux HCDNA for that little bit closer focus and can also be wedged in front of the LA7200, so I don't expect these to last long.

http://www.tferradans.com/blog/?p=8591 And also, everything you can see at http://www.tferradans.com/anamorphic and http://www.youtube.com/tferradans lots of options. no right answer.

Split diopters are tricky to find in smaller sizes, I noticed. So I cut my own. You can follow my steps here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WNNHJowFN54 The schneider ones on eBay are like $300/each, right? I don't think they're worth this much, plus how are you mounting that size of glass in front of a Bolex 16/32? I also never heard of achromatic split fields... As for century and slr magic achromats, yes, they're pretty great, just a little thick.

Today's most frequent search on eBay: "Kalee Anamorphic" Awesome stuff, Justin!

all of them. hahahaha. everything you have!

Hahaha, it's a valid question I think! I would still stick with Pre-36 or original Iscorama - since that's what they were, by coming attached to an infinity-fixed 50mm (various mounts) -, the anamorphic attachment was labeled purely "Iscorama", and the differences between the original one and the 36 are tiny. I would love to hear other people's opinions as well, though! :D

wasn't that what he just implied?

Do you mean a DIY clamp? Since lenses vary a lot in size, there's no "one solution fits all". I've been making my own clamps with a 3d printer for a while now. check it out at www.youtube.com/tferradans As for the step rings, most projector lenses don't have standard filter threads, which prevents the use of regular step down/up rings to fit the taking lenses.

The GH5 rules are still broken on the calculator, but you can work out the math based on this weekend's video reviewing the Kowas. The vignetting tests were done using full frame, so you can go backwards with crop! :D

No. The Rectilux's screws can go right on the front bit of these Kowas.

Damn! I just remembered this thread, and I've posted a decent number of videos since the last update! hahaha ANAMORPHIC COOKBOOK - A CRY FOR HELP http://www.tferradans.com/blog/?p=8752 ANAMORPHIC ON A BUDGET - SINGLE FOCUS SHOOTOUT http://www.tferradans.com/blog/?p=9496 ANAMORPHIC CHOP SHOP - ANAMORPHIC MUMPS CORRECTOR http://www.tferradans.com/blog/?p=13852 ANAMORPHIC COOKBOOK - UPCOMING, 2017 http://www.tferradans.com/blog/?p=13941 ANAMORPHIC ON A BUDGET - CINEMORPH SIGMA 18-35MM F/1.8 ART http://www.tferradans.com/blog/?p=13960 ANAMORPHIC ON A BUDGET - CINEMORPH FILTERS http://www.tferradans.com/blog/?p=13998 ANAMORPHIC ON A BUDGET - SLR MAGIC ANAMORPHOT 1.33X-40 http://www.tferradans.com/blog/?p=13954 ANAMORPHIC CHOP SHOP - SLR MAGIC FLARE FIX http://www.tferradans.com/blog/?p=14073 ANAMORPHIC CHOP SHOP - ANAMORPHIC AND DAVINCI RESOLVE http://www.tferradans.com/blog/?p=14107 ANAMORPHIC ON A BUDGET - KOWA 8-Z http://www.tferradans.com/blog/?p=13963 ANAMORPHIC ON A BUDGET - SANKOR 16-D http://www.tferradans.com/blog/?p=13962 ANAMORPHIC ON A BUDGET - ISCO ULTRA STAR http://www.tferradans.com/blog/?p=14072 ANAMORPHIC ON A BUDGET - SINGLE FOCUS SHOOTOUT "HELD" http://www.tferradans.com/blog/?p=14158 ANAMORPHIC COOKBOOK - WE'RE BACK ON A BUDGET! http://www.tferradans.com/blog/?p=14179 ANAMORPHIC ON A BUDGET - LETUS ANAMORPHX-GP 1.33X http://www.tferradans.com/blog/?p=13953 ANAMORPHIC CHOP SHOP - INSTALLING THE LETUS ANAMORPHX-GP http://www.tferradans.com/blog/?p=13958 And, on the side, I had a few narrative projects that I posted about, in case anyone is interested in the stuff I do besides the reviews! OVERNIGHT - PRODUCTION OVERVIEW http://www.tferradans.com/blog/?p=14090 OVERNIGHT - PRODUCTION UPDATE http://www.tferradans.com/blog/?p=14106 UP & AWAY - INDIEGOGO CAMPAIGN

If you get a cheap 95mm UV and knock out the glass, that has male 95mm threads and costs very little.

Thanks guys! Yeah, I'm coming to the conclusion that labeling would've fixed the majority of the issues. Something I learned for next time. :P I laughed hard at this. Wise words.

It took me only forever to find the time, place and people to shoot this. It's the second part to the Single Focus Shootout I posted back in December. It's a lengthy post, but I could really use your feedback! The goal was to compare the performance of the three most popular single focus solutions with similar setups. For that I used the same taking lenses and identical Kowa B&H's paired with the Rangefinder, Rectilux 3FF-W and FM Lens. I planned a similar number of shots using each of those combinations through a variety of wide, medium, close ups and extreme closeup shots. In the end, the question is: do the single focus solutions stand in the way of story, and if so, which ones bother you, and which don't? In this other video I went a little more in detail about what I wanted to achieve, the shooting process, the crew, score and lenses, just to give it some context and. Finally, I made a blog post with a cheat sheet for all the shots and tech specs. All of this went up online yesterday and I've noticed the strangest behavior. First of all, the view count was incredibly low when compared to regular reviews. Then, the number of dislikes is high, the number of likes is low in raw numbers, and the ratio between them is about 25% dislikes. I usually get between 0 and 2 dislikes for a review (even a rushed one). Comments are also all over the place, both on Youtube and the facebook groups I posted it on. The combination of all these factors got me thinking and that's what I wanted to discuss. 1 - Everyone is ALWAYS asking for narrative pieces, and actual work using anamorphic adapters. It's common knowledge that cat videos and girlfriends aren't enough to judge a lens' performance, since you won't relate to the material, you can nitpick about vignetting, softness, CA and so forth. When you have a story on the screen, it instantly overrides nitpicking, and people will only notice flaws if they're really glaring (like the on-and-off vignetting in the first video). Anyway, I thought the thirst for narrative work using these adapters would be a boost for views, it's a 3-min story vs a 7-min review. So why aren't people interested? Or they just don't care about other people's work? 2 - Regarding the dislikes and feedback: I can't quite figure out if they dislike THE STORY, or THE TEST. I think it's a bit insane that I went way out of my way to shoot something more interesting and the audience completely ignores the original goal (TEST!), judging the piece for STORY and using elements for the TEST as reasons they didn't enjoy the video. Confusing? Here's an example: I wanted to compare how the FM, Rectilux and Rangefinder perform when paired with a 50mm lens, heavily stopped down. I could shoot a chart (boring), but I shot a story instead. It turns out the FM vignettes like crazy and the Rangefinder barely shows any dark edges. Instead of noticing this objective piece of information ("wow, the FM can't handle wides as well as the Rangefinder!"), I got comments like "you should've noticed the vignetting on set and addressed it". I'm not blind, I knew it would vignette. I shot in a way to SHOW IT! hahahaha My overall feeling of the piece is that it's making me look bad as if I didn't notice all the issues and solved them. Any advice or comments about that? Did you guys get my original goal was to highlight such issues? Thank you!

Yes. :D Not really, it depends on the taking lens. The rear element is what limits light transmission. In terms of sharpness, I'm good all the way down to f/1.4 with a Isco. Haven't tried 1.2 because I have no lenses. hahahah

The iscorama is the lightest, widest and most compact setup. You can go 40mm with a pancake on full frame, and nothing quite beats those warm flares. The only issue I see is close focus, but that is also workable with regular diopters, since you have a 72mm front, which is easy to cover. Oh, and the 49mm threads at the back are also super easy to mount to taking lenses.

The Canon EF 40mm f/2.8 doesn't. It impresses me every time, but works. I might get a tiny little bit on the edges, it's been a while since I used the combo, I don't remember if it's 100% clear.

The widest you can possibly go is 28mm + Panasonic LA7200. That matches 21mm horizontal FOV. Jesse's solution on facebook, with the 40mm and B&H, at 2.4:1 equals a 30mm FOV at 2.66:1 you can use a 40mm and an Iscorama (1.5x) goes to 27mm. There's lots of variables. You'll probably have fun with my calculator: www.tferradans.com/anacalc/go

Thank you! Make sure to subscribe! And yeah, that sums it up. I bet one of those compact 85/2.8 would do an amazing job, but I haven't had the chance to test one yet! :D

www.tferradans.com/anacalc/go :D aaaand http://www.tferradans.com/blog/?p=8330 it's not that you CAN'T go beyond 85mm, is just that image quality starts to drop considerably.

No, I really meant you can go as wide as 58mm for your taking lens on full frame, with certain anamorphics. http://www.tferradans.com/blog/?p=9194 BUT you'll end up with a massive 3.56:1 frame. horizontal FOV of a 29mm. Or 40mm for a 2.4:1 crop. Equivalent field of view is 30mm.

You can get away with full sensor coverage with the Helios (58mm) and a Kowa B&H. For 2.4 crop, I think you could even go as low as 40mm.