AVS Forum banner

1 - 20 of 40 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
I have Panasonic 8000 projector.
Can i use below Digital Camera's lens to connect to my projector as Anamorphic lens to get 16:9 image on 2.35:1 screen?

Below is the description from website:-

"The SLR Magic Anamorphot-40 1.33x Anamorphic Adapter allows you to expand your creative horizons, enabling you to capture footage with a 2.35:1 aspect ratio on your camera with a 16:9 sensor. This results with an image that out of the camera will look distorted, as if your subjects were stretched tall and thin. This is easily corrected with virtually any modern NLE, creating an image suitable for widescreen viewing.

The Anamorphot-40 features adjustable focus marked normal and near. The near adjustment allows you to focus on subjects as close as 4' away; setting the adapter to normal enables you to focus on subjects from 4' to infinity. It mounts to lenses with a non-rotating front and a front thread diameter of 52mm; it incorporates an 82mm front filter thread. SLR Magic recommends that the Anamorphot-40 1.33x be used with lenses that have a front element that is physically no larger than 40mm in diameter.

A 16:9 sensor records an image with an aspect ratio of approximately 1.78:1, and if you want to convert that to a more cinematic widescreen aspect ratio of 2.35:1, you could crop your image in post. However, this leads to a loss in resolution and image degradation. The Anamorphot-40 1.33x squeezes the image horizontally, which creates the classic tall / thin image that must be de-squeezed in post. The anamorphic process allows you to capture your image using your entire sensor, so there is no loss in resolution when compared with cropping your image. "
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,583 Posts
I have Panasonic 8000 projector.
Can i use below Digital Camera's lens to connect to my projector as Anamorphic lens to get 16:9 image on 2.35:1 screen?

Below is the description from website:-

"The SLR Magic Anamorphot-40 1.33x Anamorphic Adapter allows you to expand your creative horizons, enabling you to capture footage with a 2.35:1 aspect ratio on your camera with a 16:9 sensor. This results with an image that out of the camera will look distorted, as if your subjects were stretched tall and thin. This is easily corrected with virtually any modern NLE, creating an image suitable for widescreen viewing.

The Anamorphot-40 features adjustable focus marked normal and near. The near adjustment allows you to focus on subjects as close as 4' away; setting the adapter to normal enables you to focus on subjects from 4' to infinity. It mounts to lenses with a non-rotating front and a front thread diameter of 52mm; it incorporates an 82mm front filter thread. SLR Magic recommends that the Anamorphot-40 1.33x be used with lenses that have a front element that is physically no larger than 40mm in diameter.

A 16:9 sensor records an image with an aspect ratio of approximately 1.78:1, and if you want to convert that to a more cinematic widescreen aspect ratio of 2.35:1, you could crop your image in post. However, this leads to a loss in resolution and image degradation. The Anamorphot-40 1.33x squeezes the image horizontally, which creates the classic tall / thin image that must be de-squeezed in post. The anamorphic process allows you to capture your image using your entire sensor, so there is no loss in resolution when compared with cropping your image."
No.

This lens is used to photograph 2.35:1 on a 16:9 digital camera while utilizing the cameras full 16:9 sensor. The image you get would be the equivalent of a 2.35:1 image from a blu-ray after you applied vertical stretch. In other words, it squeezes the image. You want to un-squeeze the image.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,958 Posts
No.

This lens is used to photograph 2.35:1 on a 16:9 digital camera while utilizing the cameras full 16:9 sensor. The image you get would be the equivalent of a 2.35:1 image from a blu-ray after you applied vertical stretch. In other words, it squeezes the image. You want to un-squeeze the image.
For image capture, that would be great. Then he would have native Scope footage that does not need to be scaled when projected. I did this a few years ago by shooting through my own anamorphic lens. At the time, all I had in the way of a 1080P camera was a crappy SONY Blogger with a fixed focal lens. It worked as proof of concept, and I have always wanted to make a mount that can hold a better camera centre of the rear of the lens.

Didn't someone actually make that capture lens work for projection?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,583 Posts
For image capture, that would be great. Then he would have native Scope footage that does not need to be scaled when projected. I did this a few years ago by shooting through my own anamorphic lens. At the time, all I had in the way of a 1080P camera was a crappy SONY Blogger with a fixed focal lens. It worked as proof of concept, and I have always wanted to make a mount that can hold a better camera centre of the rear of the lens.

Didn't someone actually make that capture lens work for projection?
Yep, if you're after capture, it's viable. Although the quality is questionable based on some youtube reviews/videos out there. Soft focus, CA problems, lots of lens flare and maybe some alignment problems getting it setup. Street price seems to be just under US $500 so it won't break the bank but a little rich for experimentation maybe.

I'm sure someone has made a capture lens work but I don't know about this one. All the lens flare from the youtube video on this one doesn't look too promising... But for screwing around with a rangefinder, maybe it's ok.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,055 Posts
The issue will be fit and quality, not the image compression. I'm thinking the physics on this should in fact be comparable, as with capture the light is going in the lens toward the camera, and with projection it is going the other way, out of the lens. 2.35 shrinks on the way in and 16x9 expands on the way out. same thing.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,583 Posts
The issue will be fit and quality, not the image compression. I'm thinking the physics on this should in fact be comparable, as with capture the light is going in the lens toward the camera, and with projection it is going the other way, out of the lens. 2.35 shrinks on the way in and 16x9 expands on the way out. same thing.
Correct. I should have been more specific I guess.

The lens opening is 40mm and seems to work OK for capture with the right camera body/prime lens size. But a 40mm opening for projection is rather small and will no doubt suffer from vignetting depending on the projectors prime lens and zoom range. In this case reversing the lens will give you an exit of 40mm which will almost certainly be a problem. As a comparison, the small Schneider/Isco projection 1.33 anamorphic is almost double in size with entry exit dimensions of 70mm/97mm. I'll attach a thumbnail schematic as a reference.

There is also the question of quality. Numerous reviews accessible via the internet point anecdotally to problems with bokeh, CA, excessive bluish flare, internal reflections, and set up issues depending on the prime lens being used for capture. Not attributes that translate well for projection.

The above issues are why I said no, mounting issues aside.

At
 

Attachments

·
Registered
Joined
·
14 Posts
I just bought this lens, the SLR 1.33 50 Anamorphot and set it up with my Epson TW9300. This lens is awesome!
The normal near focus makes it that you can vertically and horizontally focus at pixel level. It’s crazy sharp, it doesn’t soften the image at all but makes for a sharper image with the lens in place then without it!
There are no colour infringements or any other image degradations.
Don’t be afraid to use this lens, you won’t be disappointed!!!
I’ve a/b it to an Isco II and it’s sharper, more detailed and without colour bending and stuff.
Amazing lens. And the money?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,078 Posts
Some pics
It would be pretty difficult to see color aberration in movie content like that. How clean do the lines look in a test pattern ? Although, here in the USA, the 50mm lens is $900 where the 40mm lens was only $500. That is a big price difference compared to what the original poster asked..
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
31 Posts
Anamorphic lens

Does the lens lighten the image. Making the image not as bright, as not have the lens on and just zooming out
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,958 Posts
Does the lens lighten the image. Making the image not as bright, as not have the lens on and just zooming out
Light losses occur just from expanding the image. having said that, I was able to measure a 13.5% brightness using the A-lens over the same sized image from zooming. 100% panel use and brighter on screen is a win win for me.

As for CR, that really depends on the optic coatings.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
381 Posts
just found this thread. Assuming you would need the 50mm version, does this lens provide any benefit over a prism based lens (assuming comparable cost)? Wondering if this is an intermediate step for those that can't afford an isco or equivalent.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
509 Posts
I was looking at this also but it's still 800 bucks, definitely want the 50 so there is no zoom change from the lens.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
31 Posts
lens

has anyone tried the 65mm lens. i know it is 1,300, but still a lot less than a isco lll, it should yield equal or better results than the 50mm lens.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
128 Posts
I'm so close to getting this 50mm lens! I have a JVC rs400U.

Anyone like to guess how the Anamorphot would compare to a cinomorph P-100 (prism lens)?

I can get one here in Aus. ex demo, motorised, at double the price of the Anamorphot 50mm.

Or I could get the larger 65mm Anamorphot for almost the same price as the Cinomorph P-100.

Anamorphot 50 1.33x

1. Doesn't use full panel (1.33x = 3840x2160)
2. Less pixels
3. Less brightness (due to not using entire panel)?
4. More brightness due to being able to position the projector closer.
5. Higher sharpness, astigmatism removal (due to cylindrical lens adjustable focus)?
6. Half the price of the cinomorph $885 USD ($1300 AUD new + cost of mount)
7. Better/worse other - CA, etc?

Cinomorph P-100R (prismasonic): https://www.chromapure.co.uk/files/p100r_manual_web.pdf

1. Full panel use (1.25x possible = 4096x2160)
2. More pixels (sharper?)
3. Higher brightness? (or does the prism technology loose more light than the cylinder?)
4. Less sharpness & astigmatism due to prism tech?
5. Double the price of the Anamorphot $1700 USD ($2500 AUD ex demo, [$5000 AUD new])
6. Remote contol AR

7. Better/worse (other thing)?

I reckon their performance would be pretty close but the Anamorphot is far better bang-for-buck. Yes? No?

If I go for the Anamorphot 50mm - any suggestions of how to make an el cheapo stand/mount?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,055 Posts
I'm so close to getting this 50mm lens! I have a JVC rs400U.

Anyone like to guess how the Anamorphot would compare to a cinomorph P-100 (prism lens)?

I can get one here in Aus. ex demo, motorised, at double the price of the Anamorphot 50mm.

Or I could get the larger 65mm Anamorphot for almost the same price as the Cinomorph P-100.

Anamorphot 50 1.33x

1. Doesn't use full panel (1.33x = 3840x2160)
2. Less pixels
3. Less brightness (due to not using entire panel)?
4. More brightness due to being able to position the projector closer.
5. Higher sharpness, astigmatism removal (due to cylindrical lens adjustable focus)?
6. Half the price of the cinomorph ($1300 AUD new + cost of mount)
7. Better/worse other - CA, etc?

Cinomorph P-100 (prismasonic)

1. Full panel use (1.25x possible = 4096x2160)
2. More pixels (sharper?)
3. Higher brightness? (or does the prism technology loose more light than the cylinder?)
4. Less sharpness & astigmatism due to prism tech?
5. Double the price of the Anamorphot ($2500 AUD ex demo, [$5000 AUD new])
6. Better/worse (other thing)?

I reckon their performance would be pretty close but the Anamorphot is far better bang-for-buck. Yes? No?

If I go for the Anamorphot 50mm - any suggestions of how to make an el cheapo stand/mount?
Your JVC does not use a 17x9 panel so you should not be considering the 1.25 expansion option as a an immediate feature, though it may be valuable for a future projector. I have seen used ISCOs sell for similar price to the used Prismasonic. Many are abandoning them for easier lens memory solutions. That Prismasonic requires a manual AR change, as would be the anamorphot, so you will need to plan for that as well.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
128 Posts
Your JVC does not use a 17x9 panel so you should not be considering the 1.25 expansion option as a an immediate feature, though it may be valuable for a future projector. I have seen used ISCOs sell for similar price to the used Prismasonic. Many are abandoning them for easier lens memory solutions. That Prismasonic requires a manual AR change, as would be the anamorphot, so you will need to plan for that as well.
No 17:9? Manual is as follows:


Capture.PNG


Also, I should have noted that the Cinomorph is motorised (R model): https://www.chromapure.co.uk/files/p100r_manual_web.pdf


However, I don't like the idea of leaving the lens in place when I do 16:9 (I have a masking CIW system). And the Anamorphot would require manual change.



And, I should have converted the prices to USD:


1) Anamorphot 50mm: $885 USD
2) Cinomorph P-100R: $1700 USD
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,055 Posts
No 17:9? Manual is as follows:


View attachment 2597696
That is saying you have a 16x9 panel so the edges of a 17x9 image will not be projected.

Also, I should have noted that the Cinomorph is motorised (R model): https://www.chromapure.co.uk/files/p100r_manual_web.pdf


However, I don't like the idea of leaving the lens in place when I do 16:9 (I have a masking CIW system). And the Anamorphot would require manual change.
The motorized function is extremely valuable. Maybe a slide would be preferable, but not having to stand up to touch anything to engage it is (almost) priceless.
And, I should have converted the prices to USD:


1) Anamorphot 50mm: $885 USD
2) Cinomorph P-100R: $1700 USD
There is a listing one ebay today for a used Runco that has the motorized sled and ISCO attached for less than that Prismasonic. You could give the projector away and still be better off.
 
1 - 20 of 40 Posts
Top