Vladimir

thanks, u can send me some and i will review them with finished setup) that can be my first review ever i believe i do, but first im gonna do more test (thanks Louis, now i have every component i need). Actually i'm totally ok with sharpness i've already got

dunno. color information? 12bit vs 8bit? stuff like that i think is this information from official source? after some rough calculations i do believe more in imaging-resources which said it has 150 series for jpeg and 71 (3 secs, not exciting anymore) for raw. Im also thinkin about how fast raw cont. shooting will drain a battery)

but if so - i would know duration of that shooting. Which is waay more important for now.

which is not a reason not to try such crucial option i belive) the camera itself still capable of shooting raw continious even if there is no software for decoding at the moment, right?)

damn, i believed till the end its shooting 24fps of raw and folowed the news( is it true that it shoots 6 secs of FineJpeg not 6 secs of RAW? I thought it gonna be my second and a last cam i need) Seems im gonna stick with bmmcc for that and gonna shooting videoblog without 180 degree flipping screen (actually now its without any of screen, gonna do it really-old-style with only measured distance )

u can doubt whatever u want. while i'm shooting and u can sharper any lens u choose in cost of little loss on corners. In atached picture dreamy look is belong more to the nature of 55/1.2 itself instead of created by ana.

here some screengrab from 4x atachment and Nikkor 105/1.8 on a7s, mdf ~1.2m, far from perfect aligning)

yes, it is a SB'ed FF lens on FF sensor. Yes. on paper its 40/0.9 since we crop to 2.4:1 anyway. In reality its something like 40/1.2 because front element of taking lens slightly bigger than rear element of Lomo ana and its totally ok because it taking away additional CA from SB. Strange bokeh - yes. Fallof corner resolution - yes. Increased center resolution - also yes) Im ok with all of that)

thank u, im glad someone like results. Have much more ideas to try, sadly always on low budget, so progress is slow)

Im really like to experiment and aside from 4x ana project i've combined more stuff to get me set i want. And i have some tip i want to share. Of course keep in mind thats for FF camera only (since im in love with shooting low light and obviously a7s series =) So since shooting anamorphic ure gonna crop a third of hFOV theres possibility of using speedbooster and get a load of interesting results. For ex. ive used 0.71x speedboosted Nikkor 55/1.2 (thats where i get 40/0.9 mentioned in topic =), i've got widest AND fastest setup i can get, which still OK with using with a7s rolling shutter effect (while its pretty wide =) And also its the only 2x 35-40mm combo with OOF character i like. And here's some other recipe i can imagine: SB+85/1.4+KowaBH. Interesting to see hows look 60/0.95 with 2x anamorphic, dont u think?) Ataching some stills from SB/ 55 1.2/ Lomo Sq. Fr. on a7s (on bottom - without any crop)

its just every footage i saw on youtube or vimeo is lacking of "character" id like. Had no first-hand experience so cant say it for sure, but that was i saw so far in every source i've met. Actually thats surprise me a lot, didnt thought 2x anamorphic atachment can have different effect on OOF rendition property at all)

im finishing my third prototype, need just rectilux to complete all, but already test it. And its great) i've used 105mm and there is no vignette, thats something between 50-60mm on hFOV. My luck there was a post on selling rectilux cdna now while its almost two month till next production of new units. Gonna pay today and waiting package from japan to complete my prototype)

Main issue with ISCO is OOF character imo. Yes, thet're sharp, but almost like any other well calibrated ana atachment (personally i can say that about sankor-like ana, rectimascope and NAPs which i have), but bokeh seems kinda rough/messy/gross to me and feels like a lack of anamorphic character (of course thats very subjective feelings but thats what i see : ) And i would not advise any of 1.33x solutions for anamorphic aesthetics. I'd rather advise some vintage spherical lens and crop) can add also oval apperture here UPD ive tried to upload here some examples, but they're turned into a real mess...

everyone believed in what they want in the end =/

if he wanted to protect his sister he would have confessed with ANY reason BUT his sister problem. Isn't that obvious? You are just scared him with that WU camera and now he's want to play more time. I do believe now that piece of family violence is going to see if there's actual cam. Maybe someone whos been scammed can ask WU corp for that footage from Egypt?

scam is always like this, waisting your time telling you some "mom" or "sister" thing. I've dealed with one recently and it was same thing. Except only things i lost was my time and hope to sell my gear locally. The only great thing about this topic is that community is reacted and trying to protect itself. Keep this topic and ask for confirmation of sending that rangefinder to anyone it was promised. Or everything that ull get will be another scam deal with the same rangefinder. And correct me if i wrong but here's a thing to keep in mind - in many eastern cultures its a honor to fool someone (just take a look at their childrens fairy tails). ES themself is pointing on difference between his and "west" worlds.

omg those discussion still going on... DOF is a simple a length of a space that is in focus. Which doesn't change with single lens, constant aperture and distance from object. But when were talking about practical application and visual perception FOV/DOF ratio is much more important. So much more important that were replacing that ratio with single term "DOF". And i believe everyone in this thread is understand that. Just give to Mattias his medal of "definitions guardian" and please stop that annoying subject. And of course size of sensor by itself doesnt affect its low light possibilities. Size of photosensitive element does. Which is easier to achieve with bigger size of sensor. Just give to Mattias his second medal.

thank you for sharing, im definitely gonna read whole story since im just about to start selling my Lomo to "world-wide" market. Since u had some experience what scheme of buying is the best reliable for both: seller and buyer? And for your confidence here's a lot of unreliable people around when ure dealing with some valuable things, Im waiting buyer for almost two month and despite we had agreement he even didnt showed up. So im failed at local market and now heading to sell it world-wide. And thats my first time so your story is very revelant for me) UPD Uh, and ill spread that story on local group UPD-UPD My buyer was also from Kazakstan/Alma-ata... and his name was Denis as far as i know.. but i refused to sell it other than personal meeting in Moscow)

something like that (also u can make some covering to avoid reflections and atached it to front glass)

NAP was my first anamorphic attachment i got. Just placed front glass on the rig and put rear int the lens hood. With that i could focus as close as i want, easiest modding ever and best what u can get in terms of IQ and possibilities of using fast lenses. Im using it in my 4x ana project and done a lot of experiments with it. Yes its built like tank and weighs the same, but "not sharp"?) Learn what "aligning" is)

Thank you! It worked. I repeated all this steps with Cineform 10bitRGB codec and result is just sliiightly better than just squeezing footage to 2160x960 at start. Totally doesn't worth all extra steps.

for post process my initial thoughts was to use this scheme to get as much as possible to 10-bit color: i thought working in 10/12/16 bit container and stretching out my vertical area 4x will gave me 4x4px block with four interpolated values in horizontal lines which can be downscaled to one 10-bitish pixel. I'm not much into downscaling algorithms and calculations so i'd wanted to try it on practice but when i've tried that in premiere (put footage on 8540x3840 sequence, rotate and stretch out and then import to 2160x960) it ends up in crapish blocky image with stair-stepish lines instead of smooth straight ones. Can anyone explain what i've done wrong and maybe someone knows software that can properly prepare footage like that (rotate, stretch-out and downscale)?

did a quick test with second prototype, shot with a7s/shogun: frame1: 100mm/1.8 wide open, close focus at 1.2m end up 16:9 ratio - will fix that with rectilux (when i can get it :), graded with lumetri in premiere (curves, wheels, lut - mixed all that to test out how grading posibilities is changed with 1/3 additional data - and it feels like it changed noticeably), there is visible lightened areas on top and bottom - thats because front stack of two glasses is poped out of current housing frame2: closed down to something between f2.8~4 and still missed a focus, so think of it as RS effect test aaand... just look at it and here's a part i totally screwed up - u can clearly can see what's happened) i was so busy nailing focus so didn't notice i forgot to change mode, but still u can watch it as rough background rendition/dof test (wide open, focus at 1-2m, no grading):

if u just rotate a camera then RS still there just in other direction. But if u applied anamorphic and desqueeze in post u got 3.25x/4.2x (for 16:9/2.35:1 ratio) less RS, which is pretty nice i think

U can rotate camera and applied anamorphic coefficient on that vertical 9:16 area. I've already suggested this at anamorphic forum and preparing footage of my second prototype for now. Of course that comes with some knowing issues with focus and monitoring but lets see whether it's worth it.