Anamorphic on si2k

[Bob Hart]

Here is a link to a quick test of a Century Optics 16:9 optical anamorphic adaptor which was originally engineered for the Sony DSR PD150 standard definition camera. It is more of an academic exercise than being of real world utility.

ANAMORPHIC 25mm 1280 X 720 25p VERSION.wmv - YouTube
The jpg image below was with the CP ULTRA T* 12.5mm at a wider aperture than the outdoors shot.

[Bob Hart]

I stuck the Proskar anamorphic 16mm projection lens on to see what would happen. As it is designed for working with a 50mm projection lens, the vignette on a 25mm was expected. It is also a true cinemascope lens so the "squeeze" is more aggressive. Optically it seems superior to the Century lens.

ANAMORPHIC PROSKAR TO 25mm 1280 X 720 25p VERSION.wmv - YouTube
The frame grab below is from the same clip. From 25mm and narrower, it would be workable but as mentioned above, only suitable as a "look" or visual effect. Too much real estate off the edges is lost from the image which is more aggressively squished by the lens.

[Buba Kastorski]

So Bob,
from what you've seen is it Century, or Proscar, what do you like better?
I tried Panasonic LA7200 on Scarlet it looks great, can be focused from 0.5 M to infinity, but CA is definetly there, really curious about century adapter,
thx!

[Bob Hart]

My impression is that the Proskar lens appears to be sharper. However, its exit pupil is smaller and it is already vignetting a Super16mm 25mm prime lens. It is also true cinemascope, which means more squish into the camera and more stretch in post.

Normal cinemascope occurs on a 4:3 imager but excessively wide when shot with a 16:9 sensor. The image when reproportioned is over-wide and would need cropping of the edges.

For practical utility, depsite its apparent lesser sharpness, the Century lens might be better than the Proskar. It works down to 12.5mm on CP Ultra T* primes. It won't work on the 9mm which has a larger front element and filter mount.

Anecdotally, the Panasonic lens seemed to be well regarded. Optex made a few as well which were supposed to be the best but they were discontinued. Chroma separation is an issue with the Century I have. These anamorphics were designed to be one size fits all as far as the camera lens focal lengths were concerned, from about 12mm to about 70mm. Likely the chroma separation may be a compromise by-product

For 35mm frame imaging, maybe forget about the Proskar 16mm projector lens. It did work with some Nikon lenses down to about 35mm but on longer lenses it became impossible to find sharp focus beyond about thirty feet away.

Some of my old AGUS35 test frame grabs including some anamorphics used to be here on www.dvinfo.net/media/hart before posting still images was introduced. Chris Hurd kindly set up an archive for a few of us builders at the time way back.

These anamorphics were not desgned to be used with 35mm sensor cameras.

[Buba Kastorski]

thanks Bob!
I heard about optex, but one review i found says it is identical to Century, i guess I need start to save for lomo or isco,
best

[Bob Hart]

My last reading on the Optex was way back in the PD150 heyday and ther article was written for the VX1000 from memory. My recall is that the Optex was better into the edges and you got a little more wide-angle on the zoom before you hit a corner vignette. Otherwise they were regarded as similar.

The PD150 had an offset sensor relative to the optical centre and it would "walk" the image centre sideways during a zoom movement. Century modified their 16:9 by cutting reliefs in the front rim where the corner vignettes occurred. I went a bit furthur by dressing as much as I could from the left side of the internal plastic shroud to get just that little bit more.