Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in
  • Hey all, just changed over the backend after 15 years I figured time to give it a bit of an update, its probably gonna be a bit weird for most of you and i am sure there is a few bugs to work out but it should kinda work the same as before... hopefully :)

Is it possible to adapt an anamorphic lens designed for projection?

At a minimum I assume you'd have to attach your own mount, and an iris unless you want to shoot only wide-open.
 
How can I get it? Where? How much can it cost?
 
Caesar said:
How can I get it? Where? How much can it cost?
Click to expand...

I have two Todd AO converted Fujinon lenses that have the large anamorphic element on them which i think would be much better and more useful in anamorphizing a PL or Nikon type lens. I would sell the anamorphic element for about $500. (These probably cost the original user $5K to $10K) pm if you are interested.

I'm not sure how those projector versions would work, but it looks kind of small so even if it works could only work with a very small lens. The elements I have were on the Fujinons with a 72mm or 77mm front end and the anamorphic elements are much larger - about 5" across.
 
I would be careful where you put an Iris. The iris has to coincide with the true aperture stop of your optical system; otherwise you will introduce mechanical vignetting in to the final image.

Also, as AquaVideoRed206 pointed out, it looks small, so not only do you have to use only small lenses, but most likely anything tending toward wide-angle will probably not be possible.

Andres
SERVICEVISION
Barcelona-SPAIN
 
Maybe for 2K purposes, what do you guys think?
 
I know this is going to sound very negative - it's not menat to: You'll spend a lot of money and effort making it work and end up with a single mediocre lens. It would be a much better idea to seek out a set of round front Lomo's and not try to re-invent the wheel...

Matt Uhry
www.mattuhry.com
 
Caesar said:
Why? Is this glass not qualified?

But a set of round front Lomo cover 35mm right? Not 2k 120fps at wideangle end or am I missing something here?
Click to expand...

You can hang it in from of a spherical taking lens and shoot through it and get an anamorphic effect. The quality at best is like that of wide angle aspherons.

It's going to be especially hard to get it to work as a wide angle, even in 2k or Super 16mm formats. The diameter of the glass needs to be very big to cover a wide angle of view.

Buy a cheap one and experiment, best way to learn.

Matt Uhry
www.mattuhry.com
 
Caesar said:
Why? Is this glass not qualified?

But a set of round front Lomo cover 35mm right? Not 2k 120fps at wideangle end or am I missing something here?
Click to expand...

1. Yes it's not worth it.


2. No it will not be wide angle on 2K, you're best option is to find a 22mm anamorphic lens for that, but they're quite expensive - even the cheapest ones.

PS. Depends on what wide angle is for you of course.


Fredrik
 
Caesar!
I hope you are not expecting to get anamorphic style out of focus ovals using that adaptor, because you arent.

Johlan
 
Caesar said:
Maybe for 2K purposes, what do you guys think?
Click to expand...

Caesar:

For 2K you could just buy the B4 mount lens I have that was converted by Todd AO with a large anamorphic. It is on a 7mm to 49mm fujinon lens and I would sell it for $2K so 2K for $2K. and you would still have the nice anamorphic element if you wanted to try to use it to convert a cine lens.
 
Caesar said:
Why ?
Click to expand...

The nature of squeeze was discovered in the early days of anamorphic shooting.
The closer the objects got to the camera the lesser squeeze-factor they got so in order to make people NOT look fat in CU shots the squeeze ratio had to be improved. Coupled with the focus element of the lens, a variable prism system corrected the matter.

So the thing that people love about anamorphic imagery comes from the fact that the lens squeezes the image more the closer to the camera you pull focus.

Hope that makes any sense.

IF what you put in the front of the lens HAVE a variable squeeze ratio, then things may turn out well for you, besides the fact that you have to correct the ratio manually..

Johlan
 
johlan said:
The nature of squeeze was discovered in the early days of anamorphic shooting.
The closer the objects got to the camera the lesser squeeze-factor they got so in order to make people NOT look fat in CU shots the squeeze ratio had to be improved. Coupled with the focus element of the lens, a variable prism system corrected the matter.

So the thing that people love about anamorphic imagery comes from the fact that the lens squeezes the image more the closer to the camera you pull focus.

Hope that makes any sense.

IF what you put in the front of the lens HAVE a variable squeeze ratio, then things may turn out well for you, besides the fact that you have to correct the ratio manually..

Johlan
Click to expand...
Elaborate please...
 
Well, seems to me THERE IS a fixed variable squeeze ratio. Am I wrong there?
 
16mm anamorphics have more focus range

16mm anamorphics have more focus range

Caesar said:
Here is an example:
Is it possible to adapt this for shooting with the Red One?
Click to expand...

16mm anamorphics have more focus range and wider angle of view for using on a camera than 35mm projection adapters since they were made for both camera and projection use, you would use a 60mm to 80mm prime lens with the large size 16mm anamorphic. To focus closer than 6 feet you need to use diopter +1/2, +2, +2, +3 in front of the anamorphic lens.

Both the anamorphic and the prime lens need to focus on the same mark, then the diopter goes on to of that, you make a table to tell you the conversion for the distance with and without the diopters.

It is hard to pull focus.

ISCO made a anamoprhic for 16mm that has a focus group so the prime and anamorphic are set to INF all the time, like the round front LOMO. The square front LOMO use linked focus between the prime group and the anamorphic adapter.

The anamoprhic used for projection in 35mm are for long focus lenses like 150mm to 300mm, and do not focus close, but you could use them for telephoto shots with slow tele lenses as the prime group (not the large red 300mm, but maybe a process camera lens or old ARRI lens by Kilfitt. Some of the Kollmorgen anamorphic lenses for 35mm projection rooms can focus closer and are wider angle.

You should stop down as much as you can, unless you want the elipse out of focus COF.

You can also get a elipse COF if you modify the iris in a regular fast lens, so the footage would look a little like shot with scope lenses, i.e. waterhouse stops.

Here is a link with some detailed information on anamorphic adapters,

http://super8wiki.com/index.php/Anamorphic_Lenses

I have a 16mm Bolex with a f/0.95 26mm and 2:1 anamorphic on it, it gives me 2.66:1 ratio negatives. I also use an Eyemo with a f/1.1 50mm and 1.75:1 anamorphic that gives me 2.39:1 scope when scanned and adjusted for 2:1 squeeze prints. They work OK, but it is hard to pull focus, you would need two people to each turn one of the focus rings.
 
Mr. Orange said:
Elaborate please...
Click to expand...

Ok Ill try!

In the early days of anamorphic shooting it was soon discovered how the squeeze had lesser effect on subjects closer to the camera. While objects were perfectly shaped from a distance they "broadened" as they came closer. Im sure someone can give you the correct explanation in physical terms to this phenomena. I dont know if there are projection lenses with variable squeeze and if there is I guess they have to be controlled separately (as in not integrated with the focus mechanism.

Some anamorphic lens systems have their squeeze block placed towards the back of the lens and therefor minimizing this problem, causing heavier lenses. (look at the different Hawk series and you´ll see)

Nowadays the optical squeeze block is always (to my knowledge) internally coupled with the focus mechanism so you never have to care about this.

All in all it makes an astethic contribution to the format dont you think?

Ill try to dig out a couple of links on the subject if this rather shallow explanation didnt satisfy you.



Edit:
look out for the word "mump" at about the center of the frame

http://www.panavision.com/in_frame_detail.php?spotid=13
Johlan
 
Diopter, three or four kinds of Anamorphic lens...

Diopter, three or four kinds of Anamorphic lens...

johlan said:
Ok Ill try!
In the early days of anamorphic shooting it was soon discovered how the squeeze had lesser effect on subjects closer to the camera.
Johlan
Click to expand...

There are about four kinds of anamorphic lens.

With the ones that have moving elements in the front Anamorphic section you do get a width vs. height "zoom" effect as you focus because the negative lens gets closer to the positive lens.

In anamorphic lenses where the focus is done with Diopter or adjustable focus group using spherical optics, the magnification change on focus is the same about in both height and width like any other spherical lens, the negative and positive spherical lenses in the focus group just act like an adjustable Diopter.

Here are the types:

1) Negative cylinder lens in front Positive cylinder lens in back, in Lomo square fronts the Positive lens floats inside, in adapters for 16mm cameras and 35mm projectors the Negative lens in front moves in and out. Both of these show the fat-thin "cool" zoom effect on pull focus. This type exapnds the image view like a wide angle adapter effect, a 50mm prime group becomes about a 25mm wide screen image width, and 50mm height in scope frame.

2) Positive cylinder lens in front Negative cylinder lens in back, this is like type 1 but the adapter is turned around and re-focused, this works for long focal length lenses, rather than make the image view wider it makes the height of the view shorter, it is a tele-scope adapter. This would be for focal lengths longer than 150mm probably. This will also show the anamorphic pull focus zoom, but probably less so since the subject would be at a greater distance.

3) This type has both the prime group and the anamorphic group focused at INF and only the negative and positive spherical lenses in the front focus group just act like an adjustable Diopter. Most of the "zoom" on pull focus will be equal so there would be less or no fat-thin effect. These are like the round front Lomo, so far as I can tell.

4) Anamorphic teleconverter in the rear, these are used on zoom lenses to expand the center 1/2 part of the image height to full frame image height. They divide the image resolution by one half like any 2x teleconverter, but just in the vertical direction. Since the prime image cannot move out of its image plane, the fat-thin effect does not show up, it is just like adjusting the height control on your computer monitor for all focus and zoom settings of the lens in front of the adapter. You can get some scope vignetting effects depending on the quality of the optics used.

There were some mirror periscope lenses that may have moving mirrors that give a slight change to the squeeze ratio on focus. And the effect of the Diopter on the scope lenses may change the ratio a little, best to use a large Diopter at a distance in the matte box, maybe, you can check to see if the ratio changes with your lens by using a chart large for distance and small for close up with the Diopter.

The 50mm square front Lomo came with two special made Diopter for close focus work.
 
I'm lost.

Possible anamorphics 2k with such lens device?

Or not?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top