SLR Magic Anamorphot + LA7200

[Sean Cunningham]

I don't know.  I don't think Kubrick's weighted down, controlled style must be used for anamorphic (which he only shot in once I believe).  I don't think the content of either film would have been served had they been so studied and imposing.  For something like Django, yeah.  Serious subject matter should dictate a serious, studied style not necessarily the lenses.  Anamorphic can be fun too.  Scott Pilgrim, like that director's other films, has fun with the format.

 

Even though Panavision had their really lightweight series for steadicam work I think much of the shooting style of classic anamorphic films is simply a matter of physics.  The cameras were big and heavy and so were most of the lenses but producers and studios dictated stops that required massive amounts of lights for their slow stocks (DePalma's Blow Out was shot on sub-200ASA stocks!).  A lot more than artistic preference went into the overall feel of a production back then because they simply couldn't do a film like today, even using the same lenses.  All the equipment, all the lights they had to have, everything about the process was slow and heavy and controlled and studied.

 

Nowadays you have filmmakers using these classic lenses that supposedly weren't any good until being stopped way down only they're using them wide open, because they have a bit more freedom from the executives that would complain too much of the frame wasn't in focus (or that films like The Godfather were too dark).  

[nahua]

Yeah, once you go sufficiently stopped down you get fewer cues that funky optics are involved, in the sense of a still image.  I still think you get a different sense of perspective and spatial relationships between objects that's different than that of a spherical lens though, revealed through Z-axis movement.  I think the cues end up "feeling" different even if you were to match horizontal FOV with an equivalent spherical lens.  

I agree with you.  Practically I can't get a wide enough anamorphic lens.  I wanted to keep my LA7200, but the smearing is terrible.  I look forward to the Letus adapter although that thing is huge.  It's a compromise at this point - accept that 40mm FF is the widest I can shoot and reframe - or shoot spherical and at small apertures of F11 or larger.  I love the anamorphic look, but it's difficult for sure.

[Sean Cunningham]

I agree with you.  Practically I can't get a wide enough anamorphic lens.  I wanted to keep my LA7200, but the smearing is terrible.  I look forward to the Letus adapter although that thing is huge.  It's a compromise at this point - accept that 40mm FF is the widest I can shoot and reframe - or shoot spherical and at small apertures of F11 or larger.  I love the anamorphic look, but it's difficult for sure.

 

Yeah, it pretty much ends up being a wash, horizontal-FOV wise, between larger and smaller sensors with these adapters at the wide end.  You can get maybe a few mm wider with a GH2/GH3 but you would be hard pressed to really tell in the footage.  Still, you have to consider this is, with a 1.33x adapter, close to the same FOV you get from a 30mm Panavision lens which isn't as wide as they go but it's pretty wide.

 

The thing that needs to be confirmed by other sources, and possibly tested at multiple distances throughout the focus range, is whether the Letus is actually 1.33x or not.  A few folks have reported an effective ratio of more like 1.21:1 which would have an impact on our shared affinity for wider angles.

[nahua]

Yeah, it pretty much ends up being a wash, horizontal-FOV wise, between larger and smaller sensors with these adapters at the wide end.  You can get maybe a few mm wider with a GH2/GH3 but you would be hard pressed to really tell in the footage.  Still, you have to consider this is, with a 1.33x adapter, close to the same FOV you get from a 30mm Panavision lens which isn't as wide as they go but it's pretty wide.

 

The thing that needs to be confirmed by other sources, and possibly tested at multiple distances throughout the focus range, is whether the Letus is actually 1.33x or not.  A few folks have reported an effective ratio of more like 1.21:1 which would have an impact on our shared affinity for wider angles.

I think the widest anamorphic shot was from the remake of Total Recall.  I read that they used a custom old Panavision 20mm lens.  I think all the terminal scenes were shot with it.  But that's maybe too extreme?  I mean it's a one-off lens.  So yeah it's impossible to get ultra-wide, but around 30mm is good.  I think with the LA7200 I could get 28mm with lots of smearing, but equivalent of 24mm FF.  In any case, I guess it's just a lot of preplanning a shot and making sure to get the right angles.  Thanks for the opinions!

[Sean Cunningham]

Hey, since you're also a fan of really wide where do you stand on distortion?  Do enjoy bow?  I guess you would have to at least to a certain extent but I know my buddy has this crazy weird ultra-wide rectilinear lens he sometimes shoots on with is 1D.  I think it looks too strange, personally, when the camera moves or especially when it tilts but he's a stills photographer and likes it for some of his landscape photography.

[nahua]

"bow" as in barrel distortion?  I don't like it personally but it's unavoidable for proper wide shots.  I do a lot of landscape panoramics too and I stitch a lot of wide shots.  It's just the nature of the shot.

 

As for video, well it does have a weird perspective.  And no I don't really like it.  But I'm trying to go from a photo stills view to a video view.  Adding motion makes things so much different.  In the end I really like 35mm FF as the widest.  Anything wider and you do get that "bowing" effect.  So in essence I guess having 40mm as the widest for the SLR Magic Anamorphot is a good thing.  Stops me from going too wide.  LOL

[Andrew - SLR Magic]

3d-kraft.com managed to shoot 35mm f/2.8 on the A7R FF sensor with the Anamorphot 1,33x - 50

 

http://3d-kraft.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=152:anamorphic-project-slr-magic-anamorphot&catid=40:camerasandlenses&Itemid=2

 

Please note not all 35mm lens combo works on FF.

[Sean Cunningham]

 

"bow" as in barrel distortion?  I don't like it personally but it's unavoidable for proper wide shots. ...

 

 

Hmmm, interesting.  Well, I really like the gentle distortion I get with my 24mm when shooting anamorphic.  I think it tends to be a little more pronounced than when I shoot with my Lumix lens at wider focals because of the corrections happening there.  

[Rcorrell]

I've worked with a lot of people who use this as well..  It's called a blue streak filter.

 

http://www.filtergallery.com

[nahua]

I think I was getting confused on how wide is "wide".  Comparing spherical to anamorphic, 40mm at 1.33x is 30mm in FF.  I prefer the 35mm in spherical, so I guess 40mm is wide enough on the SLR Magic Anamorphot.  I just need to get used to the angle of view.  Time for a few more tests...