Could BMD 4K camera shoot in the frame of 4:3?

I'd like to shoot with anamorphic lens, Could BMD 4K shoot in the frame of 4:3? Just like ARRI

The sensor seemed to be 4:3, rihgt?

It's CMV12000 with a resolution of 4096 x 3072 pixels?

http://www.cmosis.com/products/standard ... s/cmv12000

If it could it will takes a big chunk out of Red and Arri. But unfortunately, I don't think it does. I would expect that a camera made for production be capable of 4:3 for anamorphic. How hard is that anyway? The 4:3 ratio is my number one request for the 4K camera.

The 4:3 ratio is my number one request for the 4K camera.

Why? Just for anamorphic?

If it could it will takes a big chunk out of Red and Arri. But unfortunately, I don't think it does. I would expect that a camera made for production be capable of 4:3 for anamorphic. How hard is that anyway? The 4:3 ratio is my number one request for the 4K camera.

EPIC does not have a 4:3 sensor. But it crops and allows you monitoring modes that allow you to use an anamorphic lens.

Only the Alexa Studio or the 4:3 Alexa PLUS has a 4:3 sensor. Standard Alexa's do not have a 4:3 sensor either.

I think the now defunct Aaton Delta was to as well. It's actually not that common at all.

jb

But why the sensor in the pic of BMD 4k camera is 4:3?

It would be great for anamorphic lenses but also because 4:3 would have more information i.e. its larger. It would allow for a bit more framing from 2.5 to 1080

But why the sensor in the pic of BMD 4k camera is 4:3?

Just because the sensor is that shape, doesn't mean that the camera has the hardware to support the extra data overhead.

BMD choose to use the 16x9 part of the sensor.

I'd love for them to allow for 4:3 but to be really honest, anamorphic is a tiny niche market.

Realistically anamorphic lenses aren't very practical at this price range and are hideously expensive and limited at the higher end.

They may well do it on future models, but it's not going to be of concern when there are other more important things to do....

I say this as someone who loves to shoot anamorphic.

jb

But why the sensor in the pic of BMD 4k camera is 4:3?

Just because the sensor is that shape,
BMD choose to use the 16x9 part of the sensor.

jb

Yes, but why? The superfluous area of the sensor must be useful for some reason, hacked or upgraded for 4:3 in the future? Promising!

Yes, but why? The superfluous area of the sensor must be useful for some reason, hacked or upgraded for 4:3 in the future? Promising!

No.

That's just the package *size*.

jb

Yes, but why? The superfluous area of the sensor must be useful for some reason, hacked or upgraded for 4:3 in the future? Promising!

No.

That's just the package *size*.

jb

I mean that why not BMD use a 16:9 sensor.

I mean that why not BMD use a 16:9 sensor.

Because that's how they come from the sensor supplier. They only make them in that size "package"

I'm trying to get across that it's not a deliberate decision. At best it's a happy accident that might mean in the future you'll see a 4:3 mode, but not from any of the current cameras.

jb

Thanks JB for clearing that up.

so its not gonna happen in current cameras, although i would like to encourage BM to consider implementing different aspect ratios, not only for anamorphic but also for greenscreen-work or internet Projects where films have to be in 4:3 or 3:2 aspects or even 1:1, would be fun to shoot them right away in the desired aspect.

Why not implement anamorphic crop along with 16:9?
I'm liking the anamorphic style crop video clips from ML hack videos. There is a cinema scope look there that set it apart from 16:9.

John that is very disappointing to hear. Aspect ratio is not that hard do implement. Even hack camera is capable. There are huge market for anamorphic. I hope to see it maybe in future firmware

... There are huge market for anamorphic. ...

JB says, "... anamorphic is a tiny niche market ...", and I agree with him.

Anamorphic may loom large in your world, but as my wife & I used to say when we lived in politically-correct Berkeley, California: "Berkeley is not the world."

The world of professional video production is an incredibly vast, complex place. Anamorphic shooting is one tiny hamlet within that world.

Not saying BMD will never make a camera that serves the anamorphic market, but rather that there's no reason for it to be a priority.

-

John that is very disappointing to hear. Aspect ratio is not that hard do implement. Even hack camera is capable. There are huge market for anamorphic. I hope to see it maybe in future firmware

I didn't say they wouldn't do anamorphic cropping.

That's an entirely different thing to using a 4:3 sensor to give full anamorphic shooting.

Or to even cropping a spherical 2.40 out of the 1.78 sensor.

I also don't speak for BMD, they make up their own minds about things. I do know that the current hardware won't do full 4:3 shooting off the sensor.

They could more easily do a cropped version of the current 1.78 part of the sensor.

And no. Anamorphic isn't a huge market. It's got a big enthusiast following of those that like to do home brew anamorphic but in truth, very little of it makes out into the commercial world. That's because the modified "adapted" anamorphic lenses are more difficult to use and suit an owner operator doing personal projects.

Those that can afford to access the true anamorphic lenses rather than those that are modified by adaptors tend to use higher resolution sensors because of the same crop issues we're talking about here with the 4:3 sensors.

Perhaps you also mean 2.40 cropping of spherical ? (not anamorphic)

jb

Listen up people, Grant did not set out to please everyone or remake the Red Epic, He had a simple and elegant idea to create an "affordable" RAW cinema camera for the masses, He has achieved that goal with the 2.5K Cinema camera...
Now on the flip side they saw the need to accommodate and create an Ultra HD Camera that with their Decklink 4K Extreme, Ultra Studio 4K, Hyperdeck Studio pro, And that all include the 6G-SDI will fill another gap and help future proof their cameras and ATM's, we should be rejoicing and celebrating
for BMD and the beautiful camera they have made affordable and simple to use for $4000.00 or less.

All of BMD thoughtfulness was about price, That is why this camera is lacking features we would all love to have, but if they were able implement an Active MFT mount the price would surely be $6000.00 or even $12,000.00 , So what we have is a low cost Cinema Camera, a low cost Pocket Camera, and a low cost 4K Production Camera, Please never forget you get Davinci Resolve with your camera, This is a big deal, and we should be very grateful it was included with our camera purchase.

You can shoot HDR with Epic, and do you think that Epic is a camera just for the HDR market?
You can shoot 4:3 with ARRI, can we say ARRI is a camera just for anamorphic market? Of course not.
We can say that Epic or ARRI is a great camera for every filmaker.

4:3 could be a good thing for BMD 4k camera, everyone can try it just for fun.
BMD have done something impossible at relative low price ,why not do something more? 4:3 is just another professional function. Even you don't like anamorphic, 4:3 is beneficial for post-production(16:9 or 2.35:1) and a IMAX project(1.44:1).

Is there another camera only shoot 16:9 or 2.35:1 , but with a 4:3 sensor? If the answer is yes, it's odd! How wasteful it is. Do not you think so? And we must pay the bill for the waste.

You can shoot 4:3 with ARRI, can we say ARRI is a camera just for anamorphic market? Of course not.

There is only a specific model of Alexa that does 4:3 and it's a significantly more expensive than even the stock Alexa.

So yeah, it's only made for the anamorphic market (the 4:3 version). From memory it adds another 20-30K to the price of the Alexa...that's on top of the regular Alexa price.

http://www.abelcine.com/store/ARRI-ALEX ... arter-Kit/

http://www.abelcine.com/store/ARRI-ALEX ... arter-Kit/

4:3 could be a good thing for BMD 4k camera, everyone can try it just for fun.
BMD have done something impossible at relative low price ,why not do something more? 4:3 is just another professional function.

Except that the hardware can't do it. So maybe on another model of BMD camera.

Is there another camera only shoot 16:9 or 2.35:1 , but with a 4:3 sensor? If the answer is yes, it's odd! How wasteful it is. Do not you think so? And we must pay the bill for the waste.

Panasonic AF 100 ?

Olympus OMD ?

Canon 5Dmk2 ?

It's not wasteful. It's the opposite. It's cheaper because BMD have used an off the shelf sensor, specially tuned to BMD's liking. It just happens to be in that shape. That's how the sensor comes. It's really and truly not as simple as *turning on* the 4:3 mode. The whole camera hardware and back-end has to be able to do it as well. BMD have not designed it with 4:3 in mind.

jb

Anamorphic lens maybe not very popular, but really one of mainstreams, like Star Trek Into Darkness or Ana Karenina. Anamorphic lens give you some unique visual infectivity such as the image out of focus and the magic blue ray come out of the lens. Many anamorphic lens is released recent year. What's next? SAMYANG? Haha

Anamorphic lens maybe not very popular, but really one of mainstreams, like Star Trek Into Darkness or Ana Karenina. Anamorphic lens give you some unique visual infectivity such as the image out of focus and the magic blue ray come out of the lens. Many anamorphic lens is released recent year. What's next? SAMYANG? Haha

You've just quoted two very big budget films.

As yet, no one is making *cheap* anamorphic lenses.

Even Lomo's, which seem to be the least expensive true anamorphic lens option are still in the thousands of dollars per lens. And that's for lenses made in the 1980's.

Arri have just launched Master series anamophics and a kit of those is also $250K.

There are no cheap anamorphic lenses. There are many who like to use anamorphic adaptors to convert still lenses, but they are troublesome when trying to use them in more commercial high tempo production environments. I'm speaking from real actual practical experience.

I'm not against anamorphic. I love shooting anamorphic. I have a film being released right now in the US called 100 Bloody Acres which I shot using HAWK anamorphic lenses. I've also done my own home brew anamorphic as well.

http://johnbrawley.wordpress.com/2011/1 ... era-tests/

http://johnbrawley.wordpress.com/2010/1 ... ic-lenses/

I'm just trying to convey the reality of what you're asking for. There are no cheap anamorphic lenses. Please link to the many recent anamorphic lenses that have been released.

jb

Anamorphic lens maybe not very popular, but really one of mainstreams, like Star Trek Into Darkness or Ana Karenina. Anamorphic lens give you some unique visual infectivity such as the image out of focus and the magic blue ray come out of the lens. Many anamorphic lens is released recent year. What's next? SAMYANG? Haha

You've just quoted two very big budget films.

As yet, no one is making *cheap* anamorphic lenses.

Even Lomo's, which seem to be the least expensive true anamorphic lens option are still in the thousands of dollars per lens. And that's for lenses made in the 1980's.

Arri have just launched Master series anamophics and a kit of those is also $250K.

There are no cheap anamorphic lenses. There are many who like to use anamorphic adaptors to convert still lenses, but they are troublesome when trying to use them in more commercial high tempo production environments. I'm speaking from real actual practical experience.

I'm not against anamorphic. I love shooting anamorphic. I have a film being released right now in the US called 100 Bloody Acres which I shot using HAWK anamorphic lenses. I've also done my own home brew anamorphic as well.

http://johnbrawley.wordpress.com/2011/1 ... era-tests/

http://johnbrawley.wordpress.com/2010/1 ... ic-lenses/

I'm just trying to convey the reality of what you're asking for. There are no cheap anamorphic lenses. Please link to the many recent anamorphic lenses that have been released.

jb

Thanks JB, but this argument is more about what people think is achievable, rather than what is realistically achievable for the BMCC/BMPC 4K for $4000 or less, It seems Imaginations run wild
soon as they know what sensor is being used in the Production camera...Myself included

I shot anamorphic and I would love a 1.33 option even in the Pocket. Why not? I shot anamorphic in R-16mm too.
In fact,I´d settle with a simple vertical letterbox.


I know many people shooting anamorphic and they will rent another camera because BM don´t have 4:3 option.

Well, when the sensor would only be cropped to 4:3 in camera (so pixels on the left and right get thrown away)... wouldn't it be simple and easy to just crop that away in Post?

I mean yeah, in-camera is nice for this, but it's not like it would be a big hassle?

I think that there is No much argument in this discussion about anamorphic.
All of us love or not hate anamorphic even its a small or tiny market now.
The difference of us is "sooner and later" BMD release 4:3, I think( hope) sooner, you maybe think later. And both are pure guessworks, just for fun.

But anamorphic is not 4:3, and 4:3 is not anamorphic, all the carmers of new ALEXA XT series are 4:3 for multifunction( more free space for post-pruction, IMAX in 1.44:1, anamorphic... ).

ARRI-Group_-ALEXA-Model-Comparison.jpg (113.66 KiB) Viewed 14446 times

I have aother use of 4:3, shooting stereoscopic 3D by getting two 2.66:1 frames in one 4:3 sensor.

Is there another camera only shoot 16:9 or 2.35:1 , but with a 4:3 sensor? If the answer is yes, it's odd! How wasteful it is. Do not you think so? And we must pay the bill for the waste.

Panasonic AF 100 ?
Olympus OMD ?
Canon 5Dmk2 ?

It's not wasteful. It's the opposite. It's cheaper because BMD have used an off the shelf sensor, specially tuned to BMD's liking. It just happens to be in that shape. That's how the sensor comes. It's really and truly not as simple as *turning on* the 4:3 mode. The whole camera hardware and back-end has to be able to do it as well. BMD have not designed it with 4:3 in mind.

jb

Panasonic AF 100 is a good one but not a serious functional camera for film. The sensor of Olympus OMD or Canon 5Dmk2 is for taking picture of 3:2 or so too.

I mean that why not BMD use a 16:9 sensor.

Because that's how they come from the sensor supplier. They only make them in that size "package"

jb

Is there only ONE sensor supplier of 4:3 that BMD can choose? Hard to believe!

Panasonic AF 100 is a good one but not a serious functional camera for film. The sensor of Olympus OMD or Canon 5Dmk2 is for taking picture of 3:2 or so too.

Let's not argue about details. You asked for another example not seeming to believe that it's actually pretty normal to put a non 16x9 sensor into camera that only shoots 16x9. I gave you three.

Is there only ONE sensor supplier of 4:3 that BMD can choose? Hard to believe!

There are many sensor suppliers.

Mainly they ALL come on the same package size....as I've already explained.

jb

But anamorphic is not 4:3, and 4:3 is not anamorphic, all the carmers of new ALEXA XT series are 4:3 for multifunction( more free space for post-pruction, IMAX in 1.44:1, anamorphic... ).

Jim.

Have you actually priced up the differences in price for 4:3 Alexa's compared to 16x9 Alexas ?

Go get a quote and tell us the difference.

jb

…it's actually pretty normal to put a non 16x9 sensor into camera that only shoots 16x9. I gave you three.

And let's not forget that all models of the ARRI ALEXA have always had 4x3 sensors, but originally only used the central 16x9 portion of them. The electronics in the first model of ALEXA to ship was (I believe) only capable of processing the data from the 16x9 area (more lines = more bandwidth, even though the pixels are always there on the sensor) and when that first version of the ALEXA shipped there was no guarantee that the ALEXA Studio would ever go into production.

This thread is making my skin crawl. Not to be rude, but do any of you have experience with hardware, software, or design? The amount of armchair experts I've seen flock around this camera has been astounding.

1. Do we know FOR SURE that this is even the sensor BMD is using in the production camera? Send me a link to the press release if so, because I haven't seen it yet.

2. Cameras are machines. Computers. 1010101. From the talk in this thread, you would think these cameras are human beings, capable of finding that last little bit of processing power from within like Rocky training for the big fight. You can't magic or will more processing power, data, and features into this camera, though I understand electrical engineering and computer science can seem more like magic to the uninitiated. That's why I have a job. I get paid to be a a "magician".

3. Capabilities and intent are not related, though they have been lumped together in recent times. ML, for all of the great things they have done, has created an unreasonable mob. Instead of trying to wager what capabilities a camera has, it would be best to judge a manufacturer's intent.

Example: Canon is primarily a stills camera and lens company. Their DSLRs have become incredibly popular for video. Though DSLRs are used for video, the demographics are overwhelmingly using these cameras for stills. The camera is made specifically for stills in mind. The OLPF, image processing, and resolution all factor into creating great stills...with a bonus video feature. Is it a surprise that an organization with a focus for video can hack these DSLRs in ways Canon wasn't concentrating on because they were more concerned with stills? Yes! Now you can understand how DSLRs are capable of more video features. It's because of where Canon is focusing: stills.

Example: BMD is primarily in the video realm. They set a price point, and try to give us as much camera for dollar as possible. Their intent is to optimize their cameras for video and deliver the best cinematic camera for the money. They have stretched the processing capabilities so far that they are having trouble implementing audio meters on the BMCC. Is it a surprise that they are having trouble adding new features? No! The reason is their intent behind their cameras are to give you the best video they possibly can in the price ranges they determine.

When people take a "what is capable" approach first, they completely overlook the previous work and intent of the manufacturer. In short, not every camera is capable of a ML that will grant their camera magical super powers.

Get real. Think. Please stop spreading misinformation based on ignorance and lack of understanding of technology and science. I know we're all excited, and I appreciate that. Let's just not mislead people when it comes to their purchases. I'm a big believer in consumer rights and the best way to make a purchase is with information. Please don't spread the wrong kind.

Much love, though!

There are no cheap anamorphic lenses.

That is about to change
http://www.cinema5d.com/news/?p=13365

There are no cheap anamorphic lenses.

That is about to change
http://www.cinema5d.com/news/?p=13365

Almost of a year of this.
Congratulations to SLR Magic for the initiative,but I´m sceptic.

They said that build a good anamorphic can be $4000 price and they want $1.200 price.
Also they start with "bad" references: Video attachment anamorphics,projectors adapters....
Fear to mump (I love mump) to many obsession to get flares,f3.5,1.33,no oval bokeh..mmm

I think they need rent a good Panavision E,C,G... and copy then

Any way,I hope..and I hope they get a good anamorphic prime for $1.200.

There are no cheap anamorphic lenses.

That is about to change

No it isn't.

SLR Magic have quietly dropped that development. You know why ? Not enough of a market and the market they're aiming at won't pay what it would cost to make them.

jb

There's a thread over on Vitaly Kiselev's site www.personal-view.com that Andrew from SLR Magic started that went in circles for months.

It was clear that, tiny or huge, the anamorphic marke is there and growing, more and more anamorphic lens are released, many people love it even its costly now. Most of new ALEXA is 4:3 ratio. With low price, BMD is doing something that used to be done by ARRI. And could you imagine a DSLR with RAW viedo one year ago?
So, I expect "full frame"4:3 model of BMPC.

…it's actually pretty normal to put a non 16x9 sensor into camera that only shoots 16x9. I gave you three.

And let's not forget that all models of the ARRI ALEXA have always had 4x3 sensors, but originally only used the central 16x9 portion of them. The electronics in the first model of ALEXA to ship was (I believe) only capable of processing the data from the 16x9 area (more lines = more bandwidth, even though the pixels are always there on the sensor) and when that first version of the ALEXA shipped there was no guarantee that the ALEXA Studio would ever go into production.

Yes, by now, BMD is doing something that used to be done by ARRI.

It was clear that, tiny or huge, the anamorphic marke is there and growing, more and more anamorphic lens are released, many people love it even its costly now. Most of new ALEXA is 4:3 ratio. With low price, BMD is doing something that used to be done by ARRI. And could you imagine a DSLR with RAW viedo one year ago?
So, I expect "full frame"4:3 model of BMPC.


Yes, by now, BMD is doing something that used to be done by ARRI.

BMD is doing something that is pretty standard across the sensor using word, especially in the off the shelf sensor market.

Given the limited feature spec of the BMD cameras theres plenty they could add before anamorphic, and much of that would likely be more usable to their intended markets and therfore sell more of their cameras.

Panasonic AF 100 is a good one but not a serious functional camera for film. The sensor of Olympus OMD or Canon 5Dmk2 is for taking picture of 3:2 or so too.

Let's not argue about details. You asked for another example not seeming to believe that it's actually pretty normal to put a non 16x9 sensor into camera that only shoots 16x9. I gave you three.

Sorry for that, I mean "pure video camera", because we are talking about video camera, not about photo carmera. I don't like paronomasia.

Is there only ONE sensor supplier of 4:3 that BMD can choose? Hard to believe!

There are many sensor suppliers.
Mainly they ALL come on the same package size....as I've already explained.

Sorry for that again, I mean "is there only ONE KIND sensor supplier of 4:3 that BMD can choose? "
I think that supplier for 16:9 sensor is more common.

Panasonic AF 100 is a good one but not a serious functional camera for film. The sensor of Olympus OMD or Canon 5Dmk2 is for taking picture of 3:2 or so too.

Let's not argue about details. You asked for another example not seeming to believe that it's actually pretty normal to put a non 16x9 sensor into camera that only shoots 16x9. I gave you three.

Sorry for that, I mean "pure video camera", because we are talking about video camera, not about photo carmera. I don't like paronomasia.

Is there only ONE sensor supplier of 4:3 that BMD can choose? Hard to believe!

There are many sensor suppliers.
Mainly they ALL come on the same package size....as I've already explained.

Sorry for that again, I mean "is there only ONE KIND sensor supplier of 4:3 that BMD can choose? "
I think that supplier for 16:9 sensor is more common.

Even on pure video cameras the it is common to have a 16:9 camera use a non 16:9 sensor. The sensor is chosen for a range of properties, and aspect ratio is an easy thing to to solve, most of the others aren't. 35mm film has been used for a wide range of aspect ratios, both ana and non ana, so this isn't even a new thing to sensors.

But in short BMD found a sensor that had most of the properties they liked and so chose to use it even though it was the wrong aspect ratio and just use part of it.

There are no cheap anamorphic lenses.

That is about to change

No it isn't.

SLR Magic have quietly dropped that development. You know why ? Not enough of a market and the market they're aiming at won't pay what it would cost to make them.

jb

SLR Magic was developing anamorphic lens in anticipation of BMCC MFT. The delays could have impacted on interest. Now the MFT start shipping may resurrect its development.
If the $1200 is true I reckon there wil be interests as long as there is the camera cheap enough but good enough that merit it. We will see.

SLR Magic was developing anamorphic lens in anticipation of BMCC MFT. The delays could have impacted on interest. Now the MFT start shipping may resurrect its development.
If the $1200 is true I reckon there wil be interests as long as there is the camera cheap enough but good enough that merit it. We will see.

No.

I've been discussing it with SLR Magic.

Hope all you want, But the truth is, that cheap anamorphic aren't happening anytime soon. They are just too difficult to make well in small numbers for cheap. End of story.

Even SLR Magic's price which *I* thought was cheap, wasn't what the anamorphic customers wanted to pay. They might do an adaptor now. Maybe.

If someone made a set of 4 anamorphic lenses that were T2.8 and 5K for each lens, I would happily buy them without thinking. Would you ?

I don't think many of those that buy BMCC's want to pay 5k Per anamorphic lens.

And no one even makes an anamorphic lens ANYWHERE NEAR that cheap.

And yet that's an insane cheap price for an anmorphic lens. Second hand lomos go for a lot more than that.

Please stop with this "cheap anamorphics are coming" line because it's just not happening. I want it as much as you but this is just the reality.

jb

I thought Leica SummiLux was expensive until I met anamorphic lens.
John is right.

In any case I got my 35mm Lomo for 600€. With a focus ring adapter I can use the front element with other primes,until 24mm.

I can´t understand why is so expensive even Cooke or watever anamorphic modifications with front element.

Give me crop 4:3 in-camera so framing is easier. John mentioned that it is very easy to do and hopefully bm is reading. We got 4k GLOBAL shutter! For insane price so anything is possible bm.

John at 3-5k range these anamorphic lens will sells. I have been selling used anamorphic lens for years and no other lens attract attention like anamorphic. If they make them right like the lomos or iscorama with 2x or 1.33x ratio.

...Even SLR Magic's price which *I* thought was cheap, wasn't what the anamorphic customers wanted to pay. They might do an adaptor now. Maybe...

jb

John, I haven't spoken with SLR Magic but based on reading their comments on Personal View some time ago, I thought the would make an adapter. I guess the cheapest new anamorphic lenses are the Schneider Ciné-Xenars. Will you buy those or rent?

Rick Lang
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

Rick.

I'm not aware of an anamorphic version of the cine-xenars ?

JB.

John is right, there is no market for anamorphic lenses.

Any anamorphic that is on the market is going to be hand built in limited numbers therefore expensive. Mass production is not an option. You couldn't sell enough of them to cover the initial tooling costs. Trust me. I know.

Even with cameras that are able to shoot 4:3 the vast majority of the time, they won't. Anamorphic production involves a little bit more tha slapping a lens on the front that makes the picture in your monitor look a little bit funny. In addition, many of the bigger studios don't see the point in anamorphic given the ever increasing sensor sizes, just crop your desired ratio out in post - lots of producers don't know or don't care about the other effects of anamorphic.

All this means that anamorphic will continue to be a niche at present.

Given that fact, I'm sure BMD have more pressing priorities than allowing 4:3 recording on their cams.

Owen.

"John is right, there is no market for anamorphic lenses."

The demand for anamorphic lens is high but just nothing affortable right now. Honestly speaking, the film maket is full of wannabe filmmakers who most of the time $1,000 lenses are to expensive for them. If you think $5,000 anamorphic are expensive, than you shouldn't be thinking of using it in the first place. For small production most likely BM4K users who is aiming for a worthy release, I can really see a market for 4:3 sensor and anamorphic uses. I know I would.

"John is right, there is no market for anamorphic lenses."

The demand for anamorphic lens is high

Is that from research or is that a judgement you've made yourself?

Honestly speaking, the film maket is full of wannabe filmmakers who most of the time $1,000 lenses are to expensive for them.

If that's the case where are all these people who would buy a lens set costing $15k+ going to spring from?

If you think $5,000 anamorphic are expensive

I don't.

For small production most likely BM4K users who is aiming for a worthy release, I can really see a market for 4:3 sensor and anamorphic uses.

Whilst I agree that anamorphic shooting gives that little bit extra, it's not needed for a "worthy release"..... unless your trying to replicate Apocalypse Now.

Rick.

I'm not aware of an anamorphic version of the cine-xenars ?

JB.

Neither am I! I meant to refer to the new ARRI-Zeiss Master anamorphic lenses. Sorry about the mental slip. Do you find these tempting and affordable?

Rick Lang
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

Rick.

I'm not aware of an anamorphic version of the cine-xenars ?

JB.

Neither am I! I meant to refer to the new ARRI-Zeiss Master anamorphic lenses. Sorry about the mental slip. Do you find these tempting and affordable?

Rick Lang
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

They will probably be good.

And the most expensive anamorphic lenses on the planet.

JB.