SLR Magic 2x ANAMORPHIC lens

RRRR

1.33 can most likely be unsqueezed as 1.34 (or 1.35) without people noticing the distortion. (Or a very slight crop can be made)

stoney

@slrmagic You look slimmer on the CINE lens. Is it why it's CINE lens? :)

beeldlab

@slrmagic Great to see some tests already!

richg101

@SLR magic. IMO the 1.33x is a good one to go for. users of this are likely to be working with 16:9 sensors. If people want wider aspect ratios they will de-squeeze out slightly more than normal. ie. if i wanted to fill a 2.39:1 frame I would de-squeeze your 1.33x footage by 1.35x or so. the couple of percent wont be an issue IMO.

slrmagic

@RRRR

Yes, I gained a little weight from the desqueeze. It seems either the squeeze factor reduced during close focusing or the squeeze is not enough. Seems to be x1.25x but still looking more into it as assemble process has a lot to do with that too.

we wanted to achieve decent IQ and control anamorphic flares for this prototype. We will look more into squeeze factor in the next prototype. The next one probably has to wait several months as I am now busy working on the SLR Magic HyperPrime CINE 25mm T0.95 lens. We got rid of the purple fringing issue already but still working on minor tweeks. Its top priority now to sell these lenses to fund for our upcoming projects such as the anamorphic lenses. A lot of damage was done to us when we got attacked by the Leica community by releasing the 50mm T0.95 lens. We cancelled the HyperPrime LM 35mm T0.95 and HyperPrime LM 24mm T1.4 for Leica camera project and went along with the HyperPrime CINE 35mm T0.95 and anamorphics project instead due to lack of user support in the Leica community.

RRRR

@slrmagic I see, do you have an approximate target price point for the 25mm? Maybe it´s already been covered, I may have missed it. Seems like you´ve done some great work on the 35mm cine lens! Will the 25mm be similar (as the 35) in terms of mount / adapter e.t.c?

christianhubbard

@slrmagic Although I don't even begin to speak for the entirety of the GhX community, I do believe you are welcomed here with open arms :)

please continuing making great lenses. Hopefully the prices will fall soon ;)

slrmagic

@christianhubbard We work with very low margins so we are very sensitive to manufacturing price changes. Our lenses are usually cheapest when first released.

@RRRR The price of the 25mm T0.95 is $799 but there will be a manufacturers rebate to approximately $650 only for the first hundred lenses.

oscillian

650! That's a nice price :) How does it compare to the Nokton 25 0.95?

christianhubbard

The price of the 25mm t0.95 is $650.

SOLD.

Edit: yeah the 12mm is surprisingly cheap, I was just going off of the price for the 50mm .95 X_X

RRRR

@slrmagic seems very reasonable. I wouldn´t mind trying it out! :)

Vitaliy_Kiselev

We hope to have most interesting lenses on our deals soon :-)

slrmagic

I read on a few forums and got this feedback.

1) Anything more than 1K is out of reach so the lens is not interesting 2) The Anamorphic oval effect is not enough so we are better off making a wide angle lens for cropping for the price.

Anyone have something to deny to that? I actually learnt a lot more on anamorphic from this thread and noticed a recent asia film that turned out to be a big hit was in anamorphic ratio. However, I also noticed no anamorphic bokeh and no anamorphic flares. Maybe this is more mainstream and a better option for us as a small manufacturer? Another wide angle lens instead?

RRRR

@slrmagic

You have to choose. In my opinion a wide angle adapter per se is uninteresting. (I have tried a few and I find I prefer to shoot more narrow and retain as much corner / edge sharpness as possible / have less distortion) You can decide to make a "clinical" anamorphic. That is, an anamorphic that does the squeeze but gives minimum "anamorphic effect" or you can go for an anamorphic that sets its own trademark in anamorphic effect. Anything in-between and you risk having a product which might sell a little bit, but not become used by many.

My reasoning here is:

a) there are benefits from a squeeze only adapter. more apparent resolution in one frame + a wider image with the possibility for a relatively flat focal field that isn´t spherical. (Optical quality is paramount here if you go the clinical route, nobody wants a squeeze that only makes footage look mushy). What you make then is a sort of panoramic adapter.

b) if people want anamorphic effect then the look is the most important thing. Not necessarily corner sharpness. This is why some people feel they are OK with sacrificing a lot of resolution for 2x anamorphic. (The problems with having a 2x anamorphic has been extensively covered in the thread already so I won´t say anything more about that)

c) If you are going for a relatively small squeeze but want an anamorphic look all the same then you need to think about how to make it look outstanding. There has been some ideas in the thread already about how a 2x looking bokeh could be produced in a 1.33x adapter.

d) There is always the option of just cropping the frame without anamorphic (or wide angle) adapter and it´s a much easier procedure. Hence, it needs to be worthwhile to add the anamorphic.

e) It seems like 1.5x has been put out of the picture already and it might be a middleground which puts the adapter in the "indifferent" category – but it could be worthwhile still, if it makes it easier for you to create a unique look.

If you succeed in creating something good and unique then you can charge a pretty high price for it as well, regardless of what some individuals say they are willing to pay. If it´s good but not special, then you can´t charge as much.

slrmagic

@RRRR thanks for the comments. Actually I did not mean a wide angle adapter. I mean make another wide angle lens like our 12mm T1.6. Maybe a wider one like a 10mm?

oscillian

I would find a 12mm f0.95 or a 17mm f0.95 to be more interesting than a 10mm. By the way: Have you ever considered a fast wide cine zoom maybe in the range 12-28mm f1.8?

RRRR

+1 for super-fast (f0.95) 12mm or 14mm.

Not interested in a 17mm. Then again, I already own a voigt 17.5 which is an amazing lens. (it´s very hard to compete with that, unless it´s a lot cheaper).

@slrmagic, I see. Personally, I have reconsidered my need for a really wide lens (I find 12 is the widest I have use for), however there is a gap in the market around 10mm, for sure. 9mm would be cool, for those who shoot a lot of interiors.

When it comes to the anamorphic development, through history people have tried to make the squeeze as clean as possible (in other words, minimize the effects of such an optical construction). Anamorphic development has been for cinema mainly and the key is that it was used for film. Not digital sensors.

As for digital sensors, for film-making, the situation is a bit reversed. For a cinematic (film-like) organic look you need to introduce pleasant optical imperfection (at varying degrees) to have the (clean) sensor record a cinematic image..

So the question then is, are you ready to leave that up to the taking lens (optical, pleasant imperfection) or can you make an adapter that is exceptional as optically imperfect?

IMO, like I said many pages back, a lens range + adapter combo development seems like the best way to create something exceptional, a true trade-mark product and this is something I´d be ready to pay money for, as DoP, film-maker a.s.o.. If it´s "inexpensive", good, but the main thing is that it is exceptional. It looks like you´ve got some great lenses in the works so I have no doubt you could make an anamorphic attachment that is optically imperfect in an exceptional way (for those lenses).

If it seems hard to do at this point, put it on ice and let it rest for a bit. If you can do something in the wide end and in-around 40-45 for MFT to add to the current developments, you are in a very good position to act if there are technical advances which would aid the use of anamorphics f.i. (multi-aspect sensors for one thing).

Gabel

@slrmagic: You haven't gained weight... You've got the mumps! Honestly, they're known as "anamorphic mumps". This was a big problem for close-ups, but Panavision found a solution. This is something you need to look at for your anamorphic. Have a look here: http://www.widescreenmuseum.com/widescreen/wingup1.htm

slrmagic

@Gabel thanks for the link. I had been figuring out what was the cause since we did make it x1.33 in the design. I was thinking of it was due to not enough curvature in the glass towards the center. I will look more into the anamorphic mumps. This is our first prototype (if we do not include all the failed ones) and we wanted to achieve acceptable sharpness, lens speed, and anamorphic flare this time. The next prototype will look into issues such as the double pintch and anamorphic mumps issue.

The design is a double focus type. We are looking into how to make it focus through but again it will increase the cost. It is possible our first design has to be a double focus and maybe after we sell some we will have a higher end and much higher priced focus through version. Similar to our 50mm F0.95 vs 50mm T0.95 and 35mm T1.4 vs 35mm T0.95 releases .

Gabel

@slrmagic: You're welcome!

And double focus? Crap... How am I to get nice focus pulls then? ;) Would it be so that you might "mate" it with one of your lenses instead, for an integrated design?

slrmagic

We thought about that. However, there is a balance between what people want and how much they want to pay. We have received emails we should release one for 10K and focus through as the market value for a new one is 30K. We know that would be great too and maybe we can even make one for 5K only. However, we are working on a 1.5K budget and the market price expectation is around 1K on average so far. We are in a difficult position and thinking everyday if this is a feasible project at all.

slrmagic

for example, the integrated lens design. you could imagine that would add around 1-3K extra to the price of the anamorphic itself and that would not be a cheap solution anymore. We can make anything really but when it cost too much people might be better off to buy a used ISCO single lens solution for $5-7K on ebay if they have the budget for a one lens solution.

slrmagic

This is a good option that is immediately available:

http://www.ebay.com/itm/EX-Isco-gottingen-Iscorama-50mm-f-2-8-lens-fit-M42-mount-50-F2-8-hk3523-/251126964690?pt=Camera_Lenses&hash=item3a785561d2

I am sure it works very well and we cannot make the same lens for much cheaper.

Vitaliy_Kiselev

I am sure it works very well and we cannot make the same lens for much cheaper.

Are you absolutely sure?

What makes such a big price hike in such lenses?

Mihuel

"What makes such a big price hike in such lenses?"

Demand-supply-speculation

Howdy, Stranger!

Categories

Tags in Topic

Top Posters