HUILENS 50mm T1.9 1.8x Anamorphic S35 EF Lens

Those who want to buy 1.8x anamprphic lens with EF mount would be excited to hear that in the end of the year Chinese company MAstudio will start selling EF 50mm T1.9 1.8x S25 Anamorphic Lens.

chungdha website review https://bit.ly/3eQMsmZ
private fb group: https://bit.ly/2PO2bKZ

i've been following this for a while. I hope it comes to fruition and it's actually good.
Competition in affordable anamorphics is something i long for.
I do understand how complicated making a good Anamorphic, though, so hopefully it's legit and the price is around $2500 when it's all said and done.

the price is around $2500 when it's all said and done.

I've read in chungdha's website https://bit.ly/3eQMsmZ that the price will be in the range between 1300-1500$ which is great!

These one focal length anamorphic Lenses are a bit frustrating

JB

You can go wider, with a proven quality lens for less, using a BMPCC 4K.

To use this 50mm HUILENS lens on a BMPCC 6K, you would choose the 6:5 aspect ratio of the 3.7K sensor area. This means that you will be limited to the (3728/6144= .60677083 x 23.1) 14.02mm sensor width. This lens would be the full frame equivalent fov of (50/(14.02/36)=128.42/1.8) 71.3mm.

The 4:3 aspect ratio used by the 2.8K anamorphic sensor area in the BMPCC 4K, uses a sensor width of (2880/4096 = .703125 x 18.96) 13.33mm. This is only (14.02/13.33=1.05) 5% smaller than the 3.7K sensor area of the BMPCC 6K. The larger photosites in the BMPCC 4K makes it's 4:3 sensor area closer in size to the BMPCC 6K in spite of it having a smaller M4/3 sensor. A camera would be better suited to using wide anamorphic lenses if it used a 4:3 sensor size. The BMPCC 4K, in spite of using a 17:9 sensor, comes closer to the sweet spot of the widest 2x anamorphic form factor due to it's geometry. It would allow you to go wider, so that you can see more of the anamorphic effect.

If you are going to go anamorphic, go for the full 2x solution with a high quality lens. This will give you more depth. With the Voigtlander or SLR Magic 25mm MFT lens at the 2.8K Anamorphic (4:3) sensor area setting of a BMPCC 4K, there is no vignetting at the near setting of the SLR Magic Anamorphot 50 2x Anamorphic adapter. At the full normal setting, there is a very slight darkening of the corners if you choose a 2.4:1 crop. That darkening goes away if you choose a 2.39:1 crop or the full near adapter setting. This lens would be the full frame equivalent fov of (25/(13.33/36)=81.43/2) 40.7mm. Since the 4:3 aspect ratio on a 2x anamorphic lens produces a 8:3 aspect ratio, or 2.67 when desqueezed, you crop (2.4/2.67=.9) 10% to get 2.4:1, (40.7/.9) a 45mm corrected full frame field of view.

Here is an example of the Voigtlander 25mm with a SLR Magic Anamorphot 50 2x Anamorphic adapter that I bought for $700 USD (this is what Adorama sells used ones for):

Re: Atlas Lens - Orion Anamorphic
viewtopic.php?f=2&t=124376&p=682098&hilit=+3K+anamorphic+sensor+#p682098

Can someone show by photos or videos difference between 1.8x and 2x or between all squeezing formats?

Second question is there any format compairing website, like these ones we see for spherical lenses
http://phfx.com/tools/formatCompare/
https://cvp.com/tools/cameralens
but dedicated for anamorphic lenses and cameras which have in their menu anamorphic settings?

Can someone show by photos or videos difference between 1.8x and 2x or between all squeezing formats?

Squeeze usually can be one of 1.3x or 1.33x or 1.5x or 1.8x or 2x.

What the final image will look like at least in terms of resolution would normally be one of the standard deliverable projection resolutions with or without letterboxing.

The capture (recording) resolution can depend upon the aspect ratio with which you have active photosites.

To illustrate, many modern cameras offer a 4:3 active sensor crop which you would use with a 2x anamorphic lens or anamorphic adapter.

BMD cameras generally have a full sensor in 16:9 aspect ratio which is ideal for use with 1.33x anamorphics. The cameras may also offer additional sensor crops to support 2x anamorphics or smaller capture resolutions for HD.

Standard deliverables for theatrical projection are typically 2K or 4K with letterboxing.

To keep it simple, let’s consider a sensor like the 4096x2160 DCI 4K on the BMPCC4K. If you want to use 1.33x squeeze, it’s economical to select the 3840x2160 UHD crop (16:9 aspect ratio) as the capture resolution. The squeeze of the x-axis means everything will look skinny until you desqueeze in post (and desqueeze in your camera monitor). When you desqueeze you’re making the pixels square again. So your intermediate resolution in post might be 3840x1624. You can downscale this in post to 2048x866 but then crop a few rows to produced DCI 2K 2048x858 for theatrical projection with 2.39:1 aspect ratio.

If you want to begin with 4:3 sensor crop and use a 2x squeeze you can get to DCI 2K at the cost of not using all of the captured resolution. 2x desqueeze results in a 8:3 aspect ratio or 2.66:1 to get to a standard DCI 2K.

If you are not producing for a theatrical projection but only for the web and viewing on a computer, you can use whatever aspect ratio you like for your images but letterboxing will likely be applied according to the site you use such as Vimeo or YouTube.

If all can sound confusing but once you have captured the squeezed footage, seeing the desqueezed images makes it fairly straightforward.

BMD cameras generally have a full sensor in 16:9 aspect ratio which is ideal for use with 1.33x anamorphics.

Thank you for explaining Rick!
What will happen with the image if i will decide to use 1.8x or 2x lens on bmpcc6k pro?

If you use the full sensor, eg. 6K mode, your image will be very wide. Too wide I'd say, as most of your monitor will be just black on top and bottom when you desqueeze the image. Of course, you can use the smaller anamorphic mode and get a normal 2.39 image. There are some sample clips on Blackmagic site with anamorphic lens for that overwide thing, check them out.

That camera has a 6144x3456 (16:9) active sensor area. So ideal for 1.33x anamorphics. However if you use 2x anamorphics, it would be more economical to shoot with the sensor crop 3728x3104 (6:5 aspect ratio) squeezed. When you desqueeze in post, you’ll get 3728x1552 (2.4:1 aspect ratio). To work with DCI 2K, you may want to define your Timeline as 3704x1552 (2.39:1 aspect ratio. You’ll lose a few columns of information but not much. That downscales to the deliverable DCI 2048x858 (2.39:1 aspect ratio).

If you want to shoot 1.8x anamorphic economically, you could record with the same sensor crop 3728x3104. When you desqueeze in post by 1.8x, your digital intermediate would be the equivalent of 3728x1724 (2.16:1 aspect ratio). Now you will lose some lines of resolution by defining your Timeline as 3728x1562 (2.39:1 aspect ratio. If your deliverables are DCI 2K, then you downscale that to 2048:858 2.39:1 aspect ratio).

I’ve suggested using the most economical start points as the captured resolution but if you want to shoot open gate for example, you can of course but eventually you discard more information. The advantage of shooting open gate is that you have more information so that you can stabilize footage or zoom in or reframe in post. Those might be seriously good options depending upon your needs.

Remember when you record a larger frame than you need, that information is still there when you define a Timeline with smaller dimensions. In Edit, you can shift the position of a clip within your Timeline dimensions using the larger captured footage outside your Timeline frame. Some Directors want that extra footage to reframe intentionally (such as David Fincher) whereas most directors may want you to capture in camera images that are close to the deliverable frame.

Got it, thank you.