Marty

Good morning everyone, do you know of any "bokeh correction" plugin or method to remove the vertical lines in the bokeh when using a fishing line or a streak filter ? Even with the expensive schneider streak filter, these line are present :

"Robing a bank" But your honor, my client wanted so much that stretch that makes everything look so credible...

That's a lot of vignette 🙂

Do you think I can have a very wide image, with a 3.79:1 ratio for instance, without vignetting?

Now I wonder : Is there a real difference at all between shooting without any anamorphic adapter, just elongating the image's width in post production, and shooting with this Isco ultra star small version that has less character than other lenses ?

Good evening everyone! I already have the GH5 (not s), the Isco ultra star small version, and I wonder if a Voigtländer Nokton 42.5mm f/0.95 would vignette or not with these and if generally speaking it would be a good idea to combine those 3 or not. I tried to determine whether it will vignette or not using Tito Ferradans' anamorphic calculator. The calculator says it will vignette with a short scope but not a long scope. My understanding for what I could read in this forum is that my Isco ultra star small version is somewhere in between a short and a long scope. Thanks in advance. 🙂

Thanks !

Maybe it looks fine after all. I don't know. 1080p shot from about 1.5 or 2 meters : F/2 : https://nsm09.casimages.com/img/2020/03/07//20030706000125277316676592.png F/4 : https://nsm09.casimages.com/img/2020/03/07//20030706000325277316676594.png F/16 : https://nsm09.casimages.com/img/2020/03/07//20030706160125277316676607.png

No, I don't have any tripod, the gh5 is actually my first video camera ever. I haven't bought a tripod yet. I was going for that cinema look before I bough the camera. Thanks, I get it. Actually on my taking lenses the front doesn't rotate, it's just that it goes back and forth. I'll shoot something tomorrow.

Is it because it's hard on the taking lens and might break it, or is it because it messes with sharpness? Maybe both? Are my troubles the kind of trouble you run into with taking lenses that have rotating fronts? I just did a focusing test at f/2 with enough light, the target was at about two or three meters. I managed to screw the anamorphic adapter without moving the taking lens ring's position, I even marked the position with a piece of tape, but it's still unsharp.

I've already seen this video, but I'm going to look at it again now. I'm using a HELIOS-44M 2/58 ZENIT as my taking lens, and the thread on this taking lens moves back and forth when I focus, so the anamorphic adapter also moves back and forth, maybe it's the issue ? The other lens I have , a Jupiter 37 A 135mm, also has a moving threaded front, so I haven't tried it yet. I don't have any other taking lens. I don't have a tripod, only a lens support system on rods, but I can try to focus the taking lens first and then add the adapter while trying not to move the taking lens ring.

Thanks! Indeed I'm not able to make it stay perfectly horizontal. I also have another problem that is even more concerning : I can't get a sharp image. My guess is I should be able to get a sharp image whether or not it's perfectly horizontal. I can easily tell when the taking lens comes in and out of focus. It's a lot less easier to tell when the anamorphic adapter approaches focus and gets out of focus, yet I can still tell when it does. But my shots don't look sharper than 360p quality, even at 4k. Will the distance between the taking lens and the anamorphic adapter change that ? Could it be a matter of how many times I rotate my anamorphic adapter's focus ring ? Shouldn't I get a sharp image as long as the oval (when I look at the front end) stretches from bottom to top and not from left to right ? Am I missing something ? I'm using a gh5 and the adapter is as close as possible to my taking lens. The camera produces very sharp images on this taking lens without the anamorphic adapter. Each time I turn on my camera I'm asked to confirm and choose the focal length. I don't know what number I should give to my camera. I tried different figures but it doesn't seem to solve the sharpness issue. The seller doesn't seem particularly dishonest. He told me he thoroughly tested the anamorphic adaptor and that it produced excellent sharpness. Yet he tells me he can't really help me, he says he can't tell what's wrong with my optical chain. I have opened a paypal claim just in case, and I have 10 days to return the lens if I can't get it to work by then. I was also thinking about a minimum focus issue, but I don't think the image is sharper when I shoot things that are far away from me.

Sorry I didn't quote correctly on the above post, the picture is Ken's but I just wrote these two phrases:

Thanks but I'm not too much into flares and blur for now, I'm more into sharpness and squeeze compression. I don't like the idea of anamorfake, so I guess the crop will do. I just don't know if I can expect good quality or not. I'd like at least to match the resolution of 1080p anamorphic bluray movies. I'm pretty angry at panasonic and those reviewers who don't even mention essential things like the impossibility to have very slow motion combined with 4:3, in what's presented as a 4:3 very slow motion camera. It's not like I'm rich, I won't be into that game of spending three of four months of savings for the next imperfect camera every two years. I won't buy a camera before 10 years.