Justin Bacle Posted September 21, 2016 Share Posted September 21, 2016 Just wanted to share my anamorphic experiences on the forum in one topic for simplicity. For now I have been using : - 50D (MLRAW in 1280 x 1058 for 1.2:1 aspect ratio) - ISCO UltraStar (gold one with 1.5m minimum focus) w/ RafCamera Clamp - Helios 44-2 58/2 - Practika 135/2.8 (Industar-9 and Mir-1B are coming soon) Next items to buy IMO are : - New clamps (front and rear) as I don't like the tiny tiny screws that come with the RAF adapter and would like my clamps to be tool-less - SLR Magic rangefinder for rack-focusing ability Workflow is the following (whilst I don't find a more efficient way) : - MLVFS -> AfterEffects (CameraRaw & VisionLog) -> Premiere (dynamic link) & Lumetri -> DNxHD 4:4:4 10bit Export As I have no front clamp (yet), everything is shot without ND filter. Which is not a problem atm as I love the super16 look you get in sunny days The second video was the first time I really got to shoot at night, I have to say I enjoyed it a lot A few shots are misaligned and I saw it on the computer :s The screen of the 50D is just too tiny shooting 1.2:1 with in camera desqueeze to notice it whilst shooting) If you have advices, please do not hesitate to tell me, I'd love to hear them funkyou86 and Liam 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Liam Posted September 22, 2016 Share Posted September 22, 2016 Those are freaking beautiful videos Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Justin Bacle Posted September 22, 2016 Author Share Posted September 22, 2016 6 hours ago, Liam said: Those are freaking beautiful videos Thank you so much Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Justin Bacle Posted September 23, 2016 Author Share Posted September 23, 2016 As I can't find a way to edit the first post... Just received the Jupiter-9 (I wrote Industar-9 in the first post, but that was a mistake). So far, I am not very impressed but i'll have to try it in daylight on full frame Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dustin Posted September 29, 2016 Share Posted September 29, 2016 I don't know a ton about anamorphic but that second one to me looks amazing. Classic even! Justin Bacle 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Justin Bacle Posted October 3, 2016 Author Share Posted October 3, 2016 On 9/29/2016 at 4:40 AM, Dustin said: I don't know a ton about anamorphic but that second one to me looks amazing. Classic even! Thank you so much BTW, I also received the Mir 1-B 37/2.8 ! YAY ! Dustin 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Justin Bacle Posted October 29, 2016 Author Share Posted October 29, 2016 Great news ! I am finally able to get nice flares with the ultrastar ! I just put a cheap variable ND filter in front of the anamorphic and boom. Mind -> Blowned. (50D, Helios 44M, shot at iso 800, f/2 and 180°) PannySVHS 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Justin Bacle Posted November 1, 2016 Author Share Posted November 1, 2016 Flares (and other stuff) in action : Sorry for using the infamous warp stabilizer, but I didn't have my rig as I lended it (with my other camera) to a friend. Very quick edit, and graded using a Fuji lut after processing the luts with visionLog in ACR. Just wanted to try the flare technique with the ultrastar, nothing more intended in this video. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Justin Bacle Posted November 26, 2016 Author Share Posted November 26, 2016 Just did a stretch factor measurement as shown by @Tito Ferradans in his video about the Kowa B&H mods. Isco Ultrastar @ infinity (measured with a +1 diopter) : 1.99x stretch -> 2.0x Isco Ultrastar @ 1.5m (measured without diopters) : 1.82x stretch -> 1.8x What got me to measure it is Eddie (from Vid-Atlantic, from which I bought my new clamps), who is advertising the isco ultrastars on sale on vid-atlantic's website being advertised as 1.9x stretch anamorphic. I wanted to test that I'm wondering if I should just unsqueeze everything @1.9x for simplicity or match the stretch factor for each shot (to this date, I always used the 2x stretch factor for ease of use with after effects) Tito Ferradans 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Justin Bacle Posted April 4, 2017 Author Share Posted April 4, 2017 Here is the last video I shot with the Canon 50D, Helios 44-2 and Pentax 135/2.5, Isco Ultrastar and SLR Magic rangefinder. Not impressed by the reduced sharpness caused by the rangefinder but very usefull in these conditions. The throw is waaay to long though for a single operator :O Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Justin Bacle Posted April 10, 2017 Author Share Posted April 10, 2017 So, here is my problem with the Rangefinder : It is everything but sharp ! Here are a few test pictures (captured with the AF100, a Jupiter-8 and the Ultrastar) First one with the rangefinder : And then with a "hama" +1 diopter (I had to move the camera a bit to get good enough focus) The thing I noticed on these "not so contrasty" pictures is that everything is a bit less sharp, high contrast zones tend to show some haze. I guess this is okay for the price, but then comes my real complain. On bright tiny light sources, I get a weird coma like effect as seen on this picture (50D, Helios 44-2 @~f/3.5, Ultrastar, SLR Magic Rangefinder) Plus there is a lot of haze on high contrast areas :s (50D, Helios 44-2 @~f/3.5, Ultrastar, SLR Magic Rangefinder) Do I have a bad copy of the SLR magic Rangefinder or are you experiencing similar results ? I like to shoot wide open, when I bought my Rangefinder I knew it was not that sharp, but the results I saw online are not as bad as what I have seen so far on mine :s I thought i could stop down my lenses for a bit, but it is just not the way I shoot mainly because I don't have a good high ISO camera. (AF100 and 50D are only acceptable up to 800ISO) Maybe I just need to sell it and get a Rectilux :O (My bank account already disapproves !) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Julien416 Posted April 11, 2017 Share Posted April 11, 2017 Well the thing is supposed to be very soft up to F2.8½ - F4. Even with their anamorphic primes, they recommend shooting at F4 / F5.6... What was your average aperture when you used it ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Justin Bacle Posted April 12, 2017 Author Share Posted April 12, 2017 On 4/11/2017 at 9:24 PM, Julien416 said: Well the thing is supposed to be very soft up to F2.8½ - F4. Even with their anamorphic primes, they recommend shooting at F4 / F5.6... What was your average aperture when you used it ? The live images were shot around f3.5 - f/4. But still, I don't really see the point of going f/4 then. If you shoot anamorphic, it is mainly for the flares and anamorphic bokeh. If I shoot at f/4, I don't get any of these :s Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Julien416 Posted April 13, 2017 Share Posted April 13, 2017 It seems really reasonnable indeed. It shouldn't be so soft. You're right, shooting at f5.6 is really defeating the point of shooting anamorphic to get the look. However, i recently shot something with some pana serie C anamorphic gear and my DOP was really reluctant to go under 2.8. He really was fond on shooting at f4 where they supposedly shine. What i mean, is that f4 isn't something very unusual for anamorphic shooting. Anyway, a friend just received a rangefinder, i'll compare it to my hardcoreDNA to check if it's THAT soft. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Justin Bacle Posted April 14, 2017 Author Share Posted April 14, 2017 On 4/13/2017 at 9:50 AM, Julien416 said: It seems really reasonnable indeed. It shouldn't be so soft. You're right, shooting at f5.6 is really defeating the point of shooting anamorphic to get the look. However, i recently shot something with some pana serie C anamorphic gear and my DOP was really reluctant to go under 2.8. He really was fond on shooting at f4 where they supposedly shine. What i mean, is that f4 isn't something very unusual for anamorphic shooting. Anyway, a friend just received a rangefinder, i'll compare it to my hardcoreDNA to check if it's THAT soft. Great, thank you for your comparison BTW, I changed my workflow from : MLVFS -> After Effects -> Log cineform Intermediate -> Premiere to : MLVFS -> Resolve I miss the noise reduction and RWA processing of ACR, but the time needed to create the intermediate files is just not worth it :s Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.