Difference of ISCO Lenses for GH5

[davidivinci]

Hey guys,  

actually I should work on my projects but just for a second I decided to look up some GH5 anamorphic setups. 

Currently I am really happy with my Leica Lenses but something is missing for me. After many hours I have found my desired setup. 

- GH5-

- leica 42 5mm f/1.2 nocticron

- clamp 

- ISCO Ultra Star 2x Anamorphic

- Ultra Wide Adapter? Single Focus System (range finder)

I guess there is still a mistake or a missing piece, so please correct me.

 

My questions:

- One calculator says that I will have a vignette and another one says that I wont. Do I have to crop? Planning on recording 4:3, full sensor. 

- I can't figure out where the difference between these ISCO lenses is. I found a lense for 215 EURO and its called Ultra Anamarphic MC 2X. Another one is 250 and its called Ultra Anamarphic MC 2X R. One more: Anamorphic Lens Gold ISCO - Ultra Star 80mm f:2. 
 

I would normally choose the last one, but it looks different to other blue stars on youtube. (https://www.ebay.de/itm/Anamorphic-Lens-Gold-ISCO-Ultra-Star-80mm-f-2-Very-Rare/223673844769?hash=item3414000421:g:xOMAAOSwiN1dhSjj)

And here is the typical one: https://www.ebay.de/itm/ISCO-LINSE-ANAMORPHOT-ANAMORPH-ANAMORPHIC-2x-ULTRA-STAR-60mm/193105781054?hash=item2cf600613e:g:gtIAAOSwqlNdf6Bw

**Edit: here is another one: https://www.ebay-kleinanzeigen.de/s-anzeige/cinemascope-ultra-star-isco-optic-f-85mm-3-74-in-/1210435889-245-1762 

I have read here that the focal length doesnt matter if it's as anamorphic adapter. So where is the acutal difference? And what lense would you suggest for max. 300 Euro. 

Thanks guys,

Best regards!

[ken]

I can tell you a little bit.  

1. same as 3, but might be different in coating.  it is multi-color coating.

2. earlier version.  IMO, 1 & 3 are better.  If I remember correctly, its front rotating.

3. If I remember correctly, coating is green, more flare than 1.

All of them can be used on full frame camera(3:2 photo mode) with 100mm lens without vignette at infinity.  

[davidivinci]

Thank you ken for your response, 

so I see you acutally own both. Do you have video footage or pictures? 
I really like flares these flares, so I would go for the 3. one.

Do you know anything about the min. focus on these lenses?

 

 

 

[ken]

The min focus distance is 1.5m.  if you want flares, just forget all golden lenses.  ?

 

[heart0less]

8 hours ago, ken said:

The min focus distance is 1.5m.  if you want flares, just forget all golden lenses.  ?

I tend to disagree.

Some copies of Schneider Cinelux have beautiful flares.

( :

[davidivinci]

5 hours ago, heart0less said:

I tend to disagree.

Some copies of Schneider Cinelux have beautiful flares.

( :

I looked up and found some Schneider Cinelux lenses. I have read that ISCO build better ones for my use. Still I'm interested in Schneider because there are so many on ebay. Do you have experience with both?

Here from Schneider: https://www.ebay.de/itm/Schneider-Kreuznach-Super-Cinelux-Anamorphic-MC-2X-Anamorphic-Lens-Cinemascope/264457325410?hash=item3d92e28b62:g:JzkAAOSwqYxdGM4c

What would you choose? 

 

[heart0less]

I do have experience with both Schneiders and ISCOs.

First tip: do not get a Cinelux with these protruding 'lips', because sooner or later you would have to cut them off.

Schneider Cinelux can't be considered as a reasonable option, unless you buy a single focus diopter (Rapido FVD-16A, Rectilux HCDNA or some russian prototypes) for it. These cost more than the anamorphic adapter itself.
The reason for it is: Cineluxes are quite troublesome to focus - to do it, you either need a hex key/allen wrench for the ES (aka flat-top) version or use the built-in screws (the version with lips) since their focus mechanism doesn't feature a helicoid.
Cineluxes are also a bit bigger and definitely heavier.

But they are usually cheaper and some copies give amazing, gorgeous flares (purpleish / orangeish / blueish).

 

On the other hand, ISCOs are quite straight-forward to use. You focus them like a normal lens.

They can also be dismantled to save some weight.

But they are more flare-resistant. Some copies do not flare at all.

 

Both Schneiders and ISCOs are extremely sharp and contrasty - they do not affect your image, at all.
Sankor and Kowa lenses usually tend to soften it a little.

 

Here are results from a recent poll:

 

By Kowa most people mean Kowa 8Z / 16H.

[ken]

3 hours ago, davidivinci said:

I looked up and found some Schneider Cinelux lenses. I have read that ISCO build better ones for my use. Still I'm interested in Schneider because there are so many on ebay. Do you have experience with both?

Here from Schneider: https://www.ebay.de/itm/Schneider-Kreuznach-Super-Cinelux-Anamorphic-MC-2X-Anamorphic-Lens-Cinemascope/264457325410?hash=item3d92e28b62:g:JzkAAOSwqYxdGM4c

What would you choose? 

 

This is older model.  need to modify to use with FM single focus lens.

Schneider Cinelux lens are unable to use as double focus.  But it is perfect to fit with FM lens.  http://anamorphicshop.com/product/fm-lens/

But they like ISCO, very sharp with poorer flares(so I think golden anamorphic lens has the same characters).  Maybe older model's flare has a little bit better.  I found their coatings are not exactly the same.

[davidivinci]

Thank you guys for the answers! 

8 hours ago, heart0less said:

On the other hand, ISCOs are quite straight-forward to use. You focus them like a normal lens.

They can also be dismantled to save some weight.

But they are more flare-resistant. Some copies do not flare at all.

 

Both Schneiders and ISCOs are extremely sharp and contrasty - they do not affect your image, at all.
Sankor and Kowa lenses usually tend to soften it a little.

By Kowa most people mean Kowa 8Z / 16H.

I didn't start searching for kowa or other lenses because I've read that you can't shoot under f/5.6 for example.

Low light performance is important for me, so I excluded kowa, sankor(am I wrong?) & SLR.

As I understand, there are important differences in golden ISCO lenses with Ultra Star or Blue Star. 

 

 

[ken]

4 hours ago, davidivinci said:

Thank you guys for the answers! 

I didn't start searching for kowa or other lenses because I've read that you can't shoot under f/5.6 for example.

Low light performance is important for me, so I excluded kowa, sankor(am I wrong?) & SLR.

As I understand, there are important differences in golden ISCO lenses with Ultra Star or Blue Star. 

 

 

I don't think so.  Here are samples of Elmoscope II (=16H)with Canon 6D, 85mm f1.8 lens @f1.8.

[davidivinci]

Ok, thats interesting. It definitely has more character than an ISCO lense.

 

[ken]

I am pretty sure Kowa B&H, 16H, 8Z and Elmoscope II (there are other re-branded name too) have the same optical glasses.  Only difference are rear diameter, distance marks(only Elmo use metric system, so I keep it) and coatings, actually two color amount them.  

Except 8Z, I owned all other three before.  I don't know why B&H's price is higher.  So I sold it.  Its rear diameter is bigger, so unable to mount closer to some lens.  I also like metric system.  

[Rudolf]

Elmo II is top notch. Elmo built some very advanced projectors and good cameras. They were and are still used by pros. Tito just had a poor example for his test. For the looke I like Moeller even more but sadly the rear is smaller. Moeller is king! Had them all and sold them. I am an idiot...

[ken]

I also like to mount this anamorphic lens and take photos vertically.  So just looks as normal, not widescreen. ?

1. F1.8

2. F5.6 (to get good flare, need to use small aperture)

 

[davidivinci]

18 hours ago, ken said:

I also like to mount this anamorphic lens and take photos vertically.  So just looks as normal, not widescreen. ?

 

Cool Idea and looks really nice.

Probably, I will go for the ISCO lenses as an introduction in anamorphic shooting. 

 

[davidivinci]

Someone managed to do it ?

Nevertheless, I'm looking for a better taking lense. I thought about a Canon FD 50mm f1.4 but  I will get vignette with a speed booster. 
Would you prefer using a normal adapter to a speed booster with vignette (&crop)? 

Best regards!

 

[PeterA]

Hi guys. I'm new to anamorphic & would like to ask for your opinion about an Isco Ultrastar light gold (1st version) that I'm buying. According to the buyer, the focus ring does not turn & is fixed this way. It is set to infinity. Is there a version of this lens that is locked? Is this normal? Also, the rear end of the lens body has metal indentations due to the screw of the clamp digging in to the metal. If that is the case, is this something that will stop you from buying the lens. I'd really appreciate your thoughts on this. Thank you.

[ken]

10 hours ago, PeterA said:

Hi guys. I'm new to anamorphic & would like to ask for your opinion about an Isco Ultrastar light gold (1st version) that I'm buying. According to the buyer, the focus ring does not turn & is fixed this way. It is set to infinity. Is there a version of this lens that is locked? Is this normal? Also, the rear end of the lens body has metal indentations due to the screw of the clamp digging in to the metal. If that is the case, is this something that will stop you from buying the lens. I'd really appreciate your thoughts on this. Thank you.

Post a photo to have a look.

 

[PeterA]

Here's the lens and the metal indentations.

[Caleb Genheimer]

If the rear glass is not cracked I’d say those marks are fine. In the future I’d advise using a rear clamp that has plastic set screws though so as to not over exert force on the rear, or you’ll dig into it more, and possibly crack the glass inside too. 

Not sure if there are infinity only versions, but I doubt it. Most of these lenses have a way to lock the focus (since once installed in a theater for projection you wouldn’t want them to accidentally go out of focus.) It might be that the locking mechanism is seized. Not a big deal if it is truly at infinity, because for any practical purpose, you need a variable diopter to focus anamorphic projection adapter setups. With such setups, you put both the prime and anamorphic at infinity and leave them there.