Exclusive: SLR Magic ANAMORPHOT 1,33X 50 pricing announced

[tony wilson]

nobody is  suggesting i think that it is not a true anamorphic.

even some rough 1950s plastic 8mm ones are true anamorphic.

a simple test at f2 will show if this is based on the century design.

if they used complex cemented doublets it would be sharp at f1.6.

 

this design like tests various tests  i did on my own designs  gives a nice sharp picture at 2.8.5-  f4 nothing shabby about that.

but making a new lens like this commercially it makes sense for letus and slr to use and tweak an existing recipe single element design concave convex made of different materials.

century optex was actually a nice design badly made the tolerance could be rough because of tiny sensor size and heavy f stop.

as someone has already said price point is the key here  even if letus is better quality slr wins on price.

 

if the slr design's  of the anamorphic and achromat are original and they have spent big and this is a new way they should protect themselves in patent law.

 

 

 

[richg101]

I have a 3 element, focusable century 1.33x here on my desk.  if it is indeed based in any way on this type of design they're onto a winner.

 

Please please please give me some samples on aps-c or full frame at f2 and f2.8 in daylight with an ND.  This will truly give an accurate idea of what we can expect with minimal and/or battery powered lighting setups.

 

re. the 77mm diopter set...  This sounds like a great set.  I'd buy the pair straight away. - since the tokina +0.4 being only 72mm vignettes ever so slightly on iscorama and 35mm taking lens.

[silvertonesx24]

I'm up for replacing my LA7200.  Damn thing is plastic, the knubs inside holding the front element broke so the element shifts and moves all the time, the rear aligning thread is near stripped, etc etc.  That's not even talking about the optical quality.  Even if it performs almost the same, I'll spend as much for a NEW optic rather than one with plastic housing.  I just wish the CINE prime was 17mm for MFT rather than 35mm, unless it's 35mm for Canon EF mount.  The one thing I am worried about is the need for diopters, I thought there was a close focus switch?  At least the front is round, I was using tape to hold diopters on my LA7200.  Yes I dropped a bunch already (none cracked thankfully).

 

I think you hit this exactly on the head. This is for people unhappy with the LA7200, and it hits that market well. Personally I can't believe the prices that LA7200s go for considering that bulkier or wider 2x lenses with sharpness that I consider usable are much cheaper, and this SLR at $800, it'll eat the LA7200 alive.

 

But for people like me who moved to 2x after losing patience with smudgy LA7200 and Century, it doesn't really do anything for us unfortunately. 1.33x just doesn't do it for me anymore, I'll just crop. I haven't been impressed whatsoever with any of the demos from SLR or Letus.

[Liszon]

SLR Magic is really pushing the gas now, and I actually like the early bird stuff but I do agree that some sort of a return would be fair.

 

Also if you are that kind who likes to speculate the market, after you done all the tests and videos you can still sell the lens and I'm sure you will have a good profit on it until production ramps up.

If this would be a 1.5x lens I would start saving right now.

[silvertonesx24]

Also if you are that kind who likes to speculate the market, after you done all the tests and videos you can still sell the lens and I'm sure you will have a good profit on it until production ramps up.

 

Better watch out, the it's-not-fair-that-someone-else-makes-a-profit crowd will be along shortly to admonish you for that statement.

 

And completely agreed on the 1.5x. I'm way too used to 2x at this point to go all the way back to 1.33x. Especially now with Magic Lantern raw and having a creative choice in resolution.

[Liszon]

And completely agreed on the 1.5x. I'm way too used to 2x at this point to go all the way back to 1.33x. Especially now with Magic Lantern raw and having a creative choice in resolution.

 

Since the two Andrews are collaborating lately I'm sure they are watching the forum for time to time, and the most common "complaint" was about the squeeze ratio, so a 1.5x lens shouldn't be too far away I think. There's a demand for it.

[Nikkor]

I wish it were any good so I could get a good price on an iscorama (keeps dreaming...)

[tony wilson]

I have a 3 element, focusable century 1.33x here on my desk.  if it is indeed based in any way on this type of design they're onto a winner.

 

Please please please give me some samples on aps-c or full frame at f2 and f2.8 in daylight with an ND.  This will truly give an accurate idea of what we can expect with minimal and/or battery powered lighting setups.

 

re. the 77mm diopter set...  This sounds like a great set.  I'd buy the pair straight away. - since the tokina +0.4 being only 72mm vignettes ever so slightly on iscorama and 35mm taking lens.

if you are talking about the rare focus century it will not be like that.

that was 3 times the price of the non focus century.

 

i have 3 of those very nice full focus helicoid quality product perfect fo m/43 still not an iscorama but better than panasonic big chunk of glass.

[Ian]

Can you use a wider prime lens with the adapter?

[HeroWorship]

I am very excited by this! I think the price is spot on. I have always felt a little Johnny come lately to the vintage lens scene and the anamorphic craze on EBay which has prevented me from using such a potential creative option. I emailed about being a volunteer and have a wonderful idea to showcase this exciting new lens combo. Fingers crossed.

[KarimNassar]

Pricing is very good.

Still have to see what the new flares look like though.

 

Any 50mm full frame footage coming?

[Andrew Reid]

It will work on full frame. It's an adapter, you don't have to only use it on the 35mm T1.4 and Micro Four Thirds.

 

Once lens is out of prototype stage and into pre-production stage, samples will likely come from full frame.

 

Edwin Lee says it works well with Zeiss primes.

[Andrew Reid]

if you are talking about the rare focus century it will not be like that.

that was 3 times the price of the non focus century.

 

i have 3 of those very nice full focus helicoid quality product perfect fo m/43 still not an iscorama but better than panasonic big chunk of glass.

 

Tony my friend...

 

Enough of the bullshit now.

 

You don't know if the SLR Magic lens is like the rare focussing century as you've never had your hands on it.

 

Stop making blind assumptions just because they are Asian.

[Andrew Reid]

Once the final version is ready, with final coating, housing, etc. then there's going to be far better tests out there so people can properly evaluate it.

 

My footage shows the lens is sharp on the Blackmagic Cinema Camera and 35mm T1.4. What it doesn't show is the character on full frame, the sharpness at fast apertures, the performance against the LA7200, and a ton of other stuff because it was only a prototype.

 

I think critics need to bear this in mind. Indeed like myself, nobody has all the facts yet.... it's early days.

 

In my opinion the volunteer kit is good value for money and it is the final lens. Compared to similarly priced existing lenses -

 

- It is more practical than the LA7200 especially getting close focus.

- It is WAY more practical than dual focus stuff and heavy projection lenses

- Much sharper at fast apertures than LA7200

- Much sharper edges than LA7200

- The 35mm T1.4 is a nice prime for Micro Four Thirds users

- Build quality is very good, not cheap plastic like LA7200

- Edwin and my footage to judge it from - both were nice looking in my view

 

So yeah not a full battery of tests or info yet but for those not sure, just be patient. Don't sling mud at something without having all the facts.

[Julian]

So yeah not a full battery of tests or info yet but for those not sure, just be patient. Don't sling mud at something without having all the facts.

 

I agree, but a bit more samples/info would be nice.This is a new version, the flares have changed, right? I'm curious to see that, and probably not the only one. I've heard it works on 50mm fullframe. It would be nice to actually see that!

SLR Magic made a fine sample video before. I think it would help if they had done the same for this new 'evaluation program'.

 

Anyway, best of luck to SLR Magic and the testers. I'm looking forward to the results.

[tony wilson]

no bullshit here andrew what am i sayin.
i said it will not be based on the focus century as complexity would mean cost would be at letus levels.

both lens will be good but they will not be cemented corrected doublets.

they are simple single element optics with an airgap.
try a moller at f1.4
try these new lens and tell us about state of the art optics.
user friendly with a good price yes but nothing nasa here.
since nasa is dead it is up to china to take us to the stars but not for a few more years methinks.
but what a price not many can beat it.



"We are the slr Borg.  letus Lower your shields and surrender your ships.

[Rudolf]

This is causing a stir for the AG LA 7200/Century/Optex - lovers and probably for good reason.

 

The only thing I really don't understand is the compression... 1.33 

Even 1.5 is just half the way (still perfect for single 8 and super 8). We are talking about anamorphics and not flare attachments! Maybe I have a different point of view as I am not so much into video/dslr

 

But cmon Tony don't compare Moller with SLR Magic ( http://www.moeller-wedel.com/company/history.html )

That is just not fair  :)

Anyway... I don't buy untested things at all btw.

 

[Sean Cunningham]

This is causing a stir for the AG LA 7200/Century/Optex - lovers and probably for good reason.

 

The only thing I really don't understand is the compression... 1.33 

Even 1.5 is just half the way (still perfect for single 8 and super 8). We are talking about anamorphics and not flare attachments! Maybe I have a different point of view as I am not so much into video/dslr

 

It's because a majority of the cameras this thing will be used for shoot 16:9.  It would be foolish to design an optic that worked great with a hack on one manufacturer's camera that allowed 4:3 shooting.  Productions shot on RED or higher end cameras with true variable aspect ratio functionality are going to be shooting on Panavision or Hawk or Cooke or Zeiss anamorphics, or one of the $40,000 sets of Kowas out there for sale or rent.  Maybe the odd fellow here or there will have a consumer/prosumer adapter and be experimenting.  Without excluding them, these aren't the target consumers.

 

1.33x compression ratio, while not the most optically interesting, is the one that makes the most sense for the cameras in use today, at the enthusiast and prosumer level, creating a 2.36:1 final aspect ratio paired with the most common taking aspect ratio.  This is not a ratio without significance or parity in cinema terms either given that squeeze ratio is determined based on the taking format and final projection ratio.  Hawk has a 1.33x line of lenses that serve a purpose.  Large format anamorphics, what few there were, had ratios even smaller, like 1.25x because they were already starting with a wide format (2.2:1 65/70mm).  

 

Forcing the end user to crop is not a viable solution.  Forcing an unusually wide aspect ratio is not a viable solution.  Ridiculous-wide will work great for some people with no commercial or customer-oriented expectations or purchasing considerations.  Wider than standard scope aspect ratio will alienate any new adapter from buyers that want to be more than Vimeo superstars.

 

That's not favoritism or love for SLR Magic, as I've been accused, or love of 1.33x adapters, like some other schmoe has said.  That's common sense and logic.  That's being able to observe what is available and understanding what is acceptable.  

 

But cmon Tony don't compare Moller with SLR Magic ( http://www.moeller-wedel.com/company/history.html )

That is just not fair   :)

 

 

He can make that comparison because he doesn't actually grok how these things are used (and I doubt he cares anyhow) but is instead myopically fixated on precious glass for its own sake.  Dual-focus + telephoto-specific (in the modern application) is useless unless you're the kind of filmmaker that gets off on hipster, self-induced dogma of shooting with a limited cinematic vocabulary and grammar.  People who don't know what they don't know can say all day long that "anamorphic is best with long lenses" or "focus pulling is lazy".  They simply can't appreciate the ridiculousness of these statements.  

 

It wouldn't matter the specs on this system.  The clamp cobbler is so corrupt now in his distaste for this and anything from this company and anything from that country that, beyond dithering out his ass, he's now pro Letus and pro 135-format sensor shooting for anamorphics.  So long as it's convenient at least.

[tony wilson]

hot burnin roads  a texan midnight toilet trading cowboy talks of clamp cobbler corruption.

tracking shot king i cannot wait for your shots of the fat girls of your home town.

joe buck der king of der bent glass has spokenun : )

nuttin wrong wid be in queer fella you should stand proud.

dontes talk of my corruption talk of your own foulness.

bring it on trackin shot cowboy then beat some man meat to earn some pennies for your plastic new asia

optiques.

 

butt kid hows about save your pennies and buy an iscorama and give us all a rest.

[Sean Cunningham]

I stopped reading his posts, because they were gibberish.  But odds are he's not on-topic, on point, addressing the facts of the situation either or offering any real information to counter anything that I've actually said.  Because he can't, any more than than the projector optics guy.  And so what do you do when you can't actually argue based on facts?  There you go.