All About 16:9 Anamorphic Lens Adapter

Jaime Valles · January 16th, 2003, 09:45 AM

I'm not sure if this is the link you mean...

http://www.megameme.com/vx1609.htm

M. Raine Lillibridge · February 25th, 2003, 01:07 AM

I've used an optex unit on my pd 150 and on a trv-900. When I researched the purchase various parties that I came across including some test pictures showed that the optex unit gave you a little more zoom while still keeping focus. Both units are high quality real glass. I liked the feeling and look of the english made unit and bought it despite the higher price. It really fits nice on the pd-150/2000. I mounted a chrosziel matte box on it with a selection of filters and I liked what I could get out of it. There is a slight reduction of sharpness however. You gain way more, however than the sharpness you lose by just cropping the 4:3 image. Overall it's a nice unit. I have a century adapter for a pc-110 w/a 37mm lens front and it seems somehow a little less sharp. I don't know if this smaller/ lower price unit is lower grade glass somehow than the next size up. It wouldn't seem to be the case. This is purely subjective as I haven't shot resolution charts or anything and I couldn't really compare two different cameras. The pdx-10 makes real nice widescreen pictures at full resolution (it seems) and I like the look of this better on a large projected image than I do the optex on my pd-150. It's a bit sharper and the feel of the image is somehow nicer to me. The ergonomics of the pd-150 is much nicer though. I love that camera and I'm selling it because I have two pdx-10s for a matched look and it's the best/cheapest thing going right now in native widescreen(now I just need to get some custom ballast machined for those little guys to smooth out the jitters) Until we have high-def or at least 4:2:2 palm cameras probably. Who knows at what rate the technowizards will let us have the goods.

Frank Granovski · February 25th, 2003, 01:44 AM

Adam Wilt reviewed both the Optex and Century in http://www.dv.com

Michael Tyler · March 7th, 2003, 06:23 PM

I didn't have a good experience with a Century adaptor on a PD150. More pixels, but at the same time the extra glass softens things. It makes it "smoother." Not sharper. I couldn't accept the loss of control. It limited you to medium focal lengths, it would vignette at wide, and at telephoto it would slowly creep into losing focus, so that you wouldn't notice sometimes and certian shots would be ruined.

However, it's a nice look when you can get it right. Some people swear by them. I sold mine to a guy who needed a matching pair. Personally, I think that you can get "better images" by having the freedom to compose them properly, which the adaptors took away from me.

Adaptor free and staying clean.

M. Raine Lillibridge · March 7th, 2003, 11:58 PM

Yeah, I kind of tend to agree with you.
I think the next crop of cameras comeing out the pd-150 replacement and the xl-2 will probably be native 16:9 or something like they did on the pdx-10 with megapixel chips. Although probably just a dedicated chip in the beloved 1/3 inch segment. Then it's moot unless you are after a novelty really stretched 2.35:1 type image. The anamorphic adapters do soften the image to my eyes and I'm happy shooting with my little pdx-10's for that reason alone. Even though I want a camera with the size/weight/fetures of the 1/3 inch class. I have my mantra I'm repeating for the new pd-150. Native 16:9. Progressive 24,25,30 (why not drop the distinction between pal/ntsc market, just make one for the global community) with interlaced capability. Full featured both ways. More detailed menus a 72mm lens front like the Panasonic and if we lived in a world that wasn't about marketing and progressive technological spoon feedings; how about the ability to use the camera as a head that can output not only a dv-25 signal but also a 4:2:2 dv50 if you wanted to record direct to disk. Then go ahead and make a portable device in their line to do just that for remote battery operated capture but a lap top could do it too. I truly am dreaming here aren't I.
Oh I forgot, totally redesigned mic pre's with better A/D converters. How many of us would buy this camera for 5,300 or less. I'll take two in the same dark grey metal body of the 150.

Justin Strock · March 12th, 2003, 03:12 AM

well i just bit the bullet and got a pd150, it'll be here by the end of the week.

the first piece i'm shooting will be in 16:9 and i wanted to know if it's worth it to get an adapter to make the piece look less distorted.

here's the url for the century optics choice:
http://www.centuryoptics.com/products/dv/2/16x9_adapter/index.htm

so, any thoughts? i'm going to bed now, but i'll check the thread in the morning.

-justin

Tom Hardwick · March 12th, 2003, 03:24 AM

Well worth having a look at the Optex anamorphic as well Justin. Test pictures here on the web show it to be a better performer than the Century, which is a turn-up for the books.

If you decide to simply use the native 16:9 built into the 150 then be aware (be very aware) that you've sacrificed 25% of your vertical resolution, and there's no going back.

tom.

Don Berube · March 12th, 2003, 04:44 AM

I wouldn't shoot using the built-in electronic 16:9, it's just too soft.

The Century Optics 16:9 anamorphic adaptor is excellent and highly useable.

Century Optics also offers their LCD Magnifier which is an excellent solution that allows you to properly view your anamorphic image with the flip-out LCD panel on the camera.
http://www.centuryoptics.com/products/dv/lcd_magnifier/

- don

Frank Granovski · March 12th, 2003, 05:10 AM

Adam Wilt tested both the Optex and Century, from what I recall, and he rated them both the same; but he liked the Century a bit better (for reasons I can't recall). Both tests where published in DV Magazine a few years ago. Perhaps they are still posted somewhere on the http://www.dv.com website.

Mike Rehmus · March 12th, 2003, 11:48 AM

Don,

Do you have and use the Century LCD magnifier? If so, would you report on its use and good/bad features in a separate post?

I am interested in attachment speed and whether it will allow me to use the LCD screen without wearing my reading glasses.

Justin Strock · March 12th, 2003, 11:58 AM

hey, i'm awake. thanks guys. if i get an adapter, does this mean i should shoot and edit in 4:3? does the adapter do all the work?

Mike Rehmus · March 12th, 2003, 09:04 PM

No, what you get is a 'squished' image if you attempt to edit in 4:3 aspect ratio.

I'm not certain just what settings you would have to make other than select 16:9 which should squeeze it the other way and make it look OK.

Don Berube · March 12th, 2003, 09:13 PM

http://www.kenstone.net/fcp_homepage...ding_16_9.html

Justin Strock · March 13th, 2003, 12:43 PM

oops, i miss typed. i knew i had to edit in 16:9, what i was asking was should i leave it in 4:3 on the camera.

this thing is pricey!!! anyone know if i can rent one in the san francisco bay area?

Don Bloom · March 13th, 2003, 01:25 PM

Mike,
I use the LCD magnifier by Century and I will tell you that it depends on how bad...err I mean how strong your reading glasses are as to whether on not you can ditch them. 1st the magnifier is slightly adjustable AND can be used as a sunshade when needed. 2nd, it slips on easily and to get it off you pull with some pressure. It does make a difference, depending on how tired my eyes are, most of the time I do not have to wear my reading glasses and since I use the LCD about 95% of the time, it makes for a more comfy night shooting. Hope that helps
Don

January 16th, 2003, 09:45 AM	#16
Jaime Valles Major Player Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: New York City, NY Posts: 316	Is this it? I'm not sure if this is the link you mean... http://www.megameme.com/vx1609.htm

February 25th, 2003, 01:07 AM	#17
M. Raine Lillibridge Regular Crew Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: burke, sd Posts: 26	optex anamorphic for 2000/150 I've used an optex unit on my pd 150 and on a trv-900. When I researched the purchase various parties that I came across including some test pictures showed that the optex unit gave you a little more zoom while still keeping focus. Both units are high quality real glass. I liked the feeling and look of the english made unit and bought it despite the higher price. It really fits nice on the pd-150/2000. I mounted a chrosziel matte box on it with a selection of filters and I liked what I could get out of it. There is a slight reduction of sharpness however. You gain way more, however than the sharpness you lose by just cropping the 4:3 image. Overall it's a nice unit. I have a century adapter for a pc-110 w/a 37mm lens front and it seems somehow a little less sharp. I don't know if this smaller/ lower price unit is lower grade glass somehow than the next size up. It wouldn't seem to be the case. This is purely subjective as I haven't shot resolution charts or anything and I couldn't really compare two different cameras. The pdx-10 makes real nice widescreen pictures at full resolution (it seems) and I like the look of this better on a large projected image than I do the optex on my pd-150. It's a bit sharper and the feel of the image is somehow nicer to me. The ergonomics of the pd-150 is much nicer though. I love that camera and I'm selling it because I have two pdx-10s for a matched look and it's the best/cheapest thing going right now in native widescreen(now I just need to get some custom ballast machined for those little guys to smooth out the jitters) Until we have high-def or at least 4:2:2 palm cameras probably. Who knows at what rate the technowizards will let us have the goods.

March 12th, 2003, 03:12 AM	#21
Justin Strock New Boot Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: Oakland, CA Posts: 16	16:9 lense adapter? well i just bit the bullet and got a pd150, it'll be here by the end of the week. the first piece i'm shooting will be in 16:9 and i wanted to know if it's worth it to get an adapter to make the piece look less distorted. here's the url for the century optics choice: http://www.centuryoptics.com/products/dv/2/16x9_adapter/index.htm so, any thoughts? i'm going to bed now, but i'll check the thread in the morning. -justin

March 12th, 2003, 04:44 AM	#23
Don Berube Moderator Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Boston, MA (travel frequently) Posts: 837	I wouldn't shoot using the built-in electronic 16:9, it's just too soft. The Century Optics 16:9 anamorphic adaptor is excellent and highly useable. Century Optics also offers their LCD Magnifier which is an excellent solution that allows you to properly view your anamorphic image with the flip-out LCD panel on the camera. http://www.centuryoptics.com/products/dv/lcd_magnifier/ - don __________________ DONALD BERUBE - noisybrain. Productions, LLC Director Of Photography/ Producer/ Consultant http://noisybrain.com/donbio.html CREATE and NETWORK with http://www.bosfcpug.org and also http://fcpugnetwork.org

March 12th, 2003, 11:48 AM	#25
Mike Rehmus Wrangler Join Date: May 2002 Location: Vallejo, California Posts: 4,049	Don, Do you have and use the Century LCD magnifier? If so, would you report on its use and good/bad features in a separate post? I am interested in attachment speed and whether it will allow me to use the LCD screen without wearing my reading glasses. __________________ Mike Rehmus Hey, I can see the carrot at the end of the tunnel!

February 25th, 2003, 01:44 AM	#18
Frank Granovski Outer Circle Join Date: May 2002 Location: Hope, BC Posts: 7,524	Adam Wilt reviewed both the Optex and Century in http://www.dv.com

March 7th, 2003, 06:23 PM	#19
Michael Tyler New Boot Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: San Diego, CA Posts: 6	I didn't have a good experience with a Century adaptor on a PD150. More pixels, but at the same time the extra glass softens things. It makes it "smoother." Not sharper. I couldn't accept the loss of control. It limited you to medium focal lengths, it would vignette at wide, and at telephoto it would slowly creep into losing focus, so that you wouldn't notice sometimes and certian shots would be ruined. However, it's a nice look when you can get it right. Some people swear by them. I sold mine to a guy who needed a matching pair. Personally, I think that you can get "better images" by having the freedom to compose them properly, which the adaptors took away from me. Adaptor free and staying clean.

March 7th, 2003, 11:58 PM	#20
M. Raine Lillibridge Regular Crew Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: burke, sd Posts: 26	Yeah, I kind of tend to agree with you. I think the next crop of cameras comeing out the pd-150 replacement and the xl-2 will probably be native 16:9 or something like they did on the pdx-10 with megapixel chips. Although probably just a dedicated chip in the beloved 1/3 inch segment. Then it's moot unless you are after a novelty really stretched 2.35:1 type image. The anamorphic adapters do soften the image to my eyes and I'm happy shooting with my little pdx-10's for that reason alone. Even though I want a camera with the size/weight/fetures of the 1/3 inch class. I have my mantra I'm repeating for the new pd-150. Native 16:9. Progressive 24,25,30 (why not drop the distinction between pal/ntsc market, just make one for the global community) with interlaced capability. Full featured both ways. More detailed menus a 72mm lens front like the Panasonic and if we lived in a world that wasn't about marketing and progressive technological spoon feedings; how about the ability to use the camera as a head that can output not only a dv-25 signal but also a 4:2:2 dv50 if you wanted to record direct to disk. Then go ahead and make a portable device in their line to do just that for remote battery operated capture but a lap top could do it too. I truly am dreaming here aren't I. Oh I forgot, totally redesigned mic pre's with better A/D converters. How many of us would buy this camera for 5,300 or less. I'll take two in the same dark grey metal body of the 150.

March 12th, 2003, 03:24 AM	#22
Tom Hardwick Inner Circle Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Billericay, England UK Posts: 4,711	Well worth having a look at the Optex anamorphic as well Justin. Test pictures here on the web show it to be a better performer than the Century, which is a turn-up for the books. If you decide to simply use the native 16:9 built into the 150 then be aware (be very aware) that you've sacrificed 25% of your vertical resolution, and there's no going back. tom.

March 12th, 2003, 05:10 AM	#24
Frank Granovski Outer Circle Join Date: May 2002 Location: Hope, BC Posts: 7,524	Adam Wilt tested both the Optex and Century, from what I recall, and he rated them both the same; but he liked the Century a bit better (for reasons I can't recall). Both tests where published in DV Magazine a few years ago. Perhaps they are still posted somewhere on the http://www.dv.com website.

March 12th, 2003, 11:58 AM	#26
Justin Strock New Boot Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: Oakland, CA Posts: 16	hey, i'm awake. thanks guys. if i get an adapter, does this mean i should shoot and edit in 4:3? does the adapter do all the work?

March 12th, 2003, 09:04 PM	#27
Mike Rehmus Wrangler Join Date: May 2002 Location: Vallejo, California Posts: 4,049	No, what you get is a 'squished' image if you attempt to edit in 4:3 aspect ratio. I'm not certain just what settings you would have to make other than select 16:9 which should squeeze it the other way and make it look OK. __________________ Mike Rehmus Hey, I can see the carrot at the end of the tunnel!

March 12th, 2003, 09:13 PM	#28
Don Berube Moderator Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Boston, MA (travel frequently) Posts: 837	http://www.kenstone.net/fcp_homepage...ding_16_9.html __________________ DONALD BERUBE - noisybrain. Productions, LLC Director Of Photography/ Producer/ Consultant http://noisybrain.com/donbio.html CREATE and NETWORK with http://www.bosfcpug.org and also http://fcpugnetwork.org

March 13th, 2003, 12:43 PM	#29
Justin Strock New Boot Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: Oakland, CA Posts: 16	oops, i miss typed. i knew i had to edit in 16:9, what i was asking was should i leave it in 4:3 on the camera. this thing is pricey!!! anyone know if i can rent one in the san francisco bay area?

March 13th, 2003, 01:25 PM	#30
Don Bloom Inner Circle Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: Chicago, IL Posts: 6,609	Mike, I use the LCD magnifier by Century and I will tell you that it depends on how bad...err I mean how strong your reading glasses are as to whether on not you can ditch them. 1st the magnifier is slightly adjustable AND can be used as a sunshade when needed. 2nd, it slips on easily and to get it off you pull with some pressure. It does make a difference, depending on how tired my eyes are, most of the time I do not have to wear my reading glasses and since I use the LCD about 95% of the time, it makes for a more comfy night shooting. Hope that helps Don