gh2 c-mount lenses and anamorphic test

[powderbanks]

i made this video a few months back after picking up some cheap c-mount lenses and an anamorphic lens off of ebay. it was really more for me to see how i could use some of the lenses and image quality from the cheapo c-mounts. this was the first time i had shot with an anamorphic, so there are a couple shots where the focus and/or alignment is off. i think i'm going to redo the test at night to get an idea of how they do in low light.

 

thoughts, comments, critiques are welcome

 

[url="http://vimeo.com/49446155"]http://vimeo.com/49446155[/url]

 

info from the vimeo page if you don't feel like making the jump:

 

 

24H Cinema = 1080p/24fps
SH = 720p/60fps
VGA MJPEG = 1920x720 MJPEG @ 30fps

ISO400
shutter speed: 1/50 (for 24fps), 1/60 (for 30fps), 1/125 (for 60fps), 1/2 for last two brief time lapses
white balance: 9000K, -2 m
film mode: smooth, -2 on all
OIS: off (with kit lens)
iDynamic: off
iResolution: off
patches: Driftwood GOPSTOPPA (for avchd) and EOSHD MJPEG anamorphic (for MJPEG)
lenses: panasonic 14-42mm/f3.5-5.6
unknown brand c-mount 25mm/f1.2
fujinon c-mount 2.8mm/f2.2
zenitar m42 mount 16mm/2.8
canon fd mount 50mm/f1.8
toyo fd mount 28mm/f2.8
sankor compact cinemascope anamorphic with VAMP clamp
music: dj concept - 'the mask is slipping'

no color correction/grading

[brucker]

the spherical and anamorphic do blend nicely,... i mean there's obviously a difference but its not as massive as i would have thought. 

 

finally figured it out from your video,... apart from the look, the exposure drops a bit ( 1/3-1/2 a stop) with the anamorphic, so if we compensate either when shooting or in post we should be able to maintain enough consistency for it to not matter much.

 

it matches my experience with some sphericals too, like the russian ones and the takumar 35mm f3.5, they get really cinematic when underexposed a tad,... so couple that with the aspect ratio and voila, instant cinema without the hassle of wide adapters!