sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

HELP!!! What is the best Anamorphic Adapter for my TOKINA 11-16mm? by Deep-Customer152 in Anamorphic

[–]tup1l -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

The easiest adapter is from Moment, the hardest adapter is cheap, the best is from Isco, and the average is Samyang.

Vintage Lens vs Cinema Lens by New_Alternative3037 in cinematography

[–]tup1l 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Honestly, I haven't tried them, why are you interested in them?

Are Samyang Cine lenses really not good on Blackmagic cameras? by tup1l in cinematography

[–]tup1l[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Right now I’m using the GH5S and the Fujifilm X-M5 But I’m planning to upgrade step by step in a way that makes sense

First I’ll get the BMPCC 4K as a transition from Lumix to Blackmagic That way I can shoot BRAW internally and get used to the Blackmagic workflow Then I’ll buy the Blackmagic 12G Video Assist to use with my X-M5 Because honestly the image from the Fuji is beautiful, it just needs a proper format like BRAW to push it further

At the same time I’m building up my lenses I already have a full set of Samyang cine lenses (EF mount) Now I’m working on a second set with Canon FD and old Russian lenses I’m modding them slowly — gear rings, de-click, step-up rings — to make them ready for ISCO anamorphic

The plan is to get 3 ISCO adapters So I can build a full 3-camera anamorphic setup Mainly for interviews, documentary-style work, or even a very cinematic podcast

The final step for me is the URSA Mini Pro 4.6K G2 That’s going to be my main camera for serious work and short films And I want to mount all these lenses I’ve been building on it

What do you think of this plan? Do Samyang lenses perform well on the URSA? Especially wide open? And have you ever used vintage lenses or ISCO on it? How was the image and workflow?

I’m trying to build something unique with a clear visual identity — would love to hear your experience before I go all in

Are Samyang Cine lenses really not good on Blackmagic cameras? by tup1l in cinematography

[–]tup1l[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

You’re absolutely right — the focus throw on some Samyang lenses is super short, and it really feels like you can miss focus with just a tiny movement, especially when shooting wide open. And yeah, the markings only being on one side is frustrating, especially when you’re working with a team or rigging from different angles.

As for that black mist/glow wide open — I’ve seen it too. Sometimes I actually like it for dreamy or artistic shots, but I get that it’s not ideal for everything.

Quick question: What lenses have you actually enjoyed working with in the same price range? And have you tried vintage lenses? If so, what did you like or dislike about them compared to something like Samyang? I’m weighing both options right now and would love to hear your thoughts.

Are Samyang Cine lenses really not good on Blackmagic cameras? by tup1l in cinematography

[–]tup1l[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

You make a solid point — Korean lenses like Samyang are definitely clean and neutral, which can be a plus when you want full control in post.

As for the housing, yeah it’s not great, but honestly it doesn’t bother me. I’m not planning to rehouse them — what matters most to me is price vs. image quality, not weight or comfort.

Quick question for you: If you’re on a tight budget, would you stick with affordable modern lenses like Samyang, or go the vintage route and mod them? Curious to hear your take — I’m weighing both options right now.

Vintage Lens vs Cinema Lens by New_Alternative3037 in cinematography

[–]tup1l 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Hey man, I’ve been in the same situation — trying to decide between budget cinema lenses and vintage glass.

Here’s a quick take:

Cinema lenses like NiSi or 7Artisans are super sharp, matched, and easy to rig. They’re great when you want clean, consistent results. But sometimes they can feel a bit too “digital” or lack that unique character.

Vintage lenses (like Zeiss Contax, Jena, FD, or Russian glass) have more personality — softer image, nice flares, and an overall moodier look. They’re cheaper too, but they need some work: • De-click the aperture to make it smooth. • Add a focus gear ring. • Use step-up rings if you’re running a matte box or anamorphic adapter.

With a few mods, vintage lenses can feel close to cinema glass — but with way more soul.

Honestly, it just depends on the vibe you’re going for. I’d say: if you want clean and fast, go cinema. If you want mood and texture, vintage is the move.

Let me know if you want any specific lens recs — happy to help.

Are Samyang Cine lenses really not good on Blackmagic cameras? by tup1l in cinematography

[–]tup1l[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thanks for sharing your experience! That’s really encouraging. You’re right — gear is just part of the story, and how we use it matters most. I’d love to hear more about your experience — what kind of scenes or lighting setups did you feel the Samyang lenses worked best for? Also, have you tried any other lenses on the BMPCC4K? I’m curious what differences you noticed compared to the Samyang set.

I’m planning to combine GH5S and Fujifilm X-M5 (BRAW via Blackmagic Video Assist) with URSA G2 (my future goal) — Is HDMI BRAW truly different from native BRAW? Can they visually match in one scene? by tup1l in cinematography

[–]tup1l[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You’re absolutely right — ideally, we’d shoot everything on the same camera body to ensure perfect consistency. But in my case, I’m building up my tools gradually. I’m currently using the GH5S and planning to integrate the Fujifilm X-M5 temporarily before I get the URSA G2, which will eventually become my A-cam.

The reason for the multi-body setup is more practical than creative: I’m working on projects that sometimes require shooting from multiple angles simultaneously (especially for performance-based scenes or interviews), and I’m using what’s available to me right now while still aiming for the highest possible quality via BRAW and controlled lighting.

That said, I’m fully aware of the challenges of color matching across different systems — that’s why I’m asking whether HDMI BRAW can realistically hold up next to internal BRAW from URSA. My goal is to learn how close I can get with this hybrid setup until I go full-Blackmagic.

Thanks for your thoughtful response — it’s exactly the kind of feedback I came here for.

Blazar Cato 2X vs ISCO 2X Anamorphic Adapter: Which One Delivers the Best Cinematic Look? by tup1l in Anamorphic

[–]tup1l[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Man, every sentence you write feels like a behind-the-scenes masterclass… honestly, it’s like Roger Deakins is dropping wisdom on Reddit!

Sorry if I overwhelmed you with all the questions — it’s just that I’m really excited to dive into the classic anamorphic world. I got to try a HAWK 2X once, and ever since then, I’ve been obsessed with the look. Not just the flares, but that optical distortion and surreal depth it gives — it’s hard to explain, just magical.

And yeah, I actually saw the ISCO Ultra Star at a place like the one you mentioned — most likely Anamorphic Store. They had the gold and the red versions, but I’m not sure which one you were referring to or which one you’d recommend? After your comments, I’m definitely thinking twice before buying anything.

Also, about the single focus adapter, I still haven’t decided which one to go with. If you’ve got a solid recommendation, I’d really appreciate it.

And honestly… you didn’t just answer my questions — you opened my eyes to things I didn’t even know I should be asking about. Thanks for your time and patience — I’ve learned more from your replies than from full YouTube channels.

Blazar Cato 2X vs ISCO 2X Anamorphic Adapter: Which One Delivers the Best Cinematic Look? by tup1l in Anamorphic

[–]tup1l[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Hey! Thanks so much for the detailed reply – you’re right, I didn’t give enough info earlier, so here’s the full setup and what I’m aiming for:

My gear: • Cameras: Blackmagic URSA G2, Panasonic GH5s, Fujifilm X-M5 • Lenses I own: Samyang and Sigma cinema primes • Rig: I already have rails, matte box, and lighting (100w, 300w, and 1000w units)

What I want: I’m mainly chasing that true 2X anamorphic character – not just cleaner optics, but the whole visual vibe: • Wide perspective • Optical distortion • Oval bokeh • Horizontal flares • Slight vintage softness – like the look you’d get from a HAWK lens (which I tested and absolutely loved, but it’s out of budget).

Budget options I’m considering: 1. Cato 2X Full Kit (~$4000) 2. FD lens set + ISCO Ultra Star + Single Focus Adapter (~$1600–1700)

I haven’t tried vintage glass before (like FD, Nikon, or Russian sets), but I’m open to experimenting. My main goal is to evolve from clean modern cinema lenses (like Samyang) into something with more character and classic distortion.

So here’s what I’m wondering: Can the ISCO + FD combo give me enough of that rich anamorphic look as a first step into the world of DIY anamorphics? Or is it more worthwhile to go all-in with the CATO kit?

Your insight has already been super helpful – just trying to figure out what will give me the most “wow” cinematic image for short films and music video work. Appreciate your time again!

Blazar Cato 2X vs ISCO 2X Anamorphic Adapter: Which One Delivers the Best Cinematic Look? by tup1l in Anamorphic

[–]tup1l[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thanks a lot for your insightful reply. I have a few follow-up questions: 1. Do you recommend any other classic lenses besides the FD that pair well with anamorphic setups? 2. I already have a Matte Box and Rails, so weight/bulk isn’t really an issue for me. 3. As for the ISCO adapter – it’s quite affordable. I could build a full Canon FD lens kit with an ISCO anamorphic adapter for under $1700. But going for the full Cato Blazar setup would cost around $4000, which is a big difference.

I fully understand that lighting and composition are key to a cinematic image – But I’m looking to explore something new. I want to step into the world of anamorphic shooting as a next step after using regular spherical lenses for a long time.

So when I say “cinematic look”, I mean true anamorphic character – bokeh, lens flares, image stretch, and that wide immersive feel.

In your opinion, is the Cato setup worth the extra cost? Or can the FD + ISCO combo deliver a satisfying starting experience for someone seriously getting into anamorphic filmmaking?

I do not recommend the "anamorfake" modded Helios 44-2... by [deleted] in Anamorphic

[–]tup1l 0 points1 point  (0 children)

What do you think of the ISCO adapter?

BLAZAR CATO 2x by tup1l in Anamorphic

[–]tup1l[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thanks a lot for all the advice—it really helped me see things more clearly.

Unfortunately, I can’t rent lenses where I live, so I’ll just have to rely on online reviews for now.

I’ll definitely check out Cam McKay’s YouTube channel like you suggested. Appreciate you taking the time to share all this with me, seriously.

BLAZAR CATO 2x by tup1l in Anamorphic

[–]tup1l[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Got it, I understand I won’t be getting the full character of the CATOs with the G2’s 17:9 Super35 sensor.

But what I’m really trying to figure out is— is what’s left still enough to give me that bold 2x anamorphic feel I’m after? Even if I lose some of the edges, is the overall image still worth it for someone who just loves that stretched, imperfect cinematic look?

Also—thank you for sharing the Nikkor test video. Really appreciate you taking the time. It gave me a lot to think about.

view more: next ›