@LPowell @sammy

I did not know the Isco 54 need rails. Its 1Kg. I know the Isco 36 does not need rails and it weights 0.4Kg. Does anyone here use the Isco 42? Does the 0.75Kg Isco 42 need rails?

We can vote on what squeeze to use? http://www.easypolls.net/poll.html?p=50477872e4b0ce84916c0ecc

i am not an expert in anamorphic but i think 1.33x or 1.35x would be the best and more useful option because it turns 16:9 into 2.35:1 or 2.39:1 or 2.4:1 without crop. Also i think an adapter like the LA7200 would be better in terms of versatility if it could mount in front of lenses from 12mm to 50mm. Maybe a 58mm thread would be most useful and use step rings to fit other threads. The chalenge is to design an adapter with good IQ in corners.

@apefos an adapter that would work with a 12mm lens would be 77mm or larger. 58mm thread would not work as it is too small. As discussed before the next issue would be price. Would 2.5K-4K be affordable for an anamorphic adapter that would work with our 12mm T.16 lens? Expect huge 95mm or larger front filter thread to work with 12mm to 50mm lenses.

Just a random question. An anamorphic lens usually works well from 3m-infinity. If there was a choice, would you prefer us to sacrifice 10m-infinity performance for close focus performance? Again, just a random though if it is even possible.

How about ultra-lightweight 8mm Berthiot S.T.O.P. "Baby Hypergonar" anamorphic lens. I was considering a kickstart to make 500 very small adapters like this. Works great on 25mm and 35mm lenses.

http://i.ebayimg.com/00/s/MTA2NlgxNjAw/%24(KGrHqJ,!r!E-ZUiTK-hBPnDet3PPw~~60_3.JPG

@slrmagic Good sharpness at infinity is something very rare with anamorphics, but it is also something that is very filmic. To sacrifice that for close focus ability would not make any sense, as it´s a lot easier to make the lens work OK at close range with diopters, than the other way around.

As for glass vs plastic; well, it all depends on IQ. As far as I know glass is superior, but as long as it performs well and is cheap people won´t care if it´s plastic.

Personally, I think an adapter or anamorphic lens does not have to be designed with fast T stop in mind. If you decide to make a lens, a T value of 3.5 would be very good. Even 4 would be good.

@apefos I appreciate your input. The 14-42 kit is a good suggestion but from my experience it is not a good lens to adapt a huge anamorphic lens. Due to the strength of the focus motor it is better suited for use with small and light lens adapters. I have not tried the other lenses you mentioned. Have you?

This is also why this thread is good and also why we did not want to make an adapter. We do not want people to keep finding the right lens that would work with an adapter we make. We do not have access to all lenses in the market to build a compatibility list either.

@apefos - "the main lenses to work with the anamorphic adapter would be: 14-42mm 3.5-5.6 / 17.5mm 0.95 / 20mm..."

Have you actually tried using an anamorphic adapter with any of these lenses? I don't know of any production-quality adapters that would not vignette with these lenses. Very few of the Lumix or Olympus M4/3 zooms are viable choices either, since their outer barrels extend when zoomed. This makes them unsuitable for use with a matte box.

In practice, anamorphics are only useful when mounted on a tripod and aligned to be precisely horizontal. You cannot produce good footage handheld because the slightest tilt will skew the image in a distorted manner. If the adapter weighs more than the lens + camera, you must mount it separately to rails in order to prevent image jitter.

People are going to want a miniature version of whatever Arri and Zeiss are doing, 4:3 recording with 2x anamorphic. If that is what is going to get you the proper aspect ratio and pixel stretch to get the perfect anamorphic look. Is there a thread that discusses what the limits are with hacks? Can hacks enable 4:3 with the proper frame rates, resolution, and encoding on any current cameras?

@apefos - "If you build a lightweight and inexpensive anamorphic adapter for the 14-42mm lens it will sell like hotcakes."

Sorry, but I think you're talking about hobbyists rather than filmmakers. I'm hoping slrmagic is not looking to market this anamorphic as part of their Toy Lens line.

@LPowell if you read my previous post you can see my sugestion is two adapters or one adapter and one zoom or set of primes. one solution for low budget and one solution for pros. because if you develop just for pros, most people cannot buy, if you develop for low budget the pros will not buy, so why not two different products for different market.

another thing i was thinking about. to get the oval bokeh the background needs to be out of focus, so need to shoot shallow dof. to get shallow dof with m43 sensor the maximum fstop to use is 2.8, better 2.0 so to develop anamorphic zoom or prime lenses to be slower than 2.8 would be a big mistake because they would not give the oval bokeh due to slow fstop does not give shallow dof in m43 sensor.

so the adapter for the panasonic 20mm 1.7 and olympus 45mm 1.8 seems to be the best solution and if it have 52mm thread or a little bigger it can be used with most vintage lenses.

this does not kill the idea of the adapter for the 14-42mm lens because low budget people will have the 1.33x to do the 2.4:1