Recently purchased an Eclair ACL 2.0. It came with two lenses—One of which is an Angenieux 9.5 - 57 in Cameflex mount.

It’s currently not par-focal from what I can tell..

My instincts would say that the back-focus is off. Anyone have experience working with these?

This is my first time posting here, so please let me know if there is a better forum to post this in.

My Angenieux 12-120 Type B lens seems to be missing its lens mount, can anyone confirm if this is the case? At first I thought it was just threaded for an M42, but I tested it on my K3 and it is not. I am wondering if the lens itself is missing a piece that screws into this threading which is then mounted to the camera.

I am hoping to be able to use it on an Arri 16s. If anyone happens to know where I could get the correct part to do this, I would greatly appreciate it.

Thanks,

Malcolm

Usually Panavision has "Panavised" versions of various cameras, did they do that with their Primo Primes? Are they rehouses of Master Primes or something?

I've always wanted to get my hands on these, just about all of my favorite films have been shot with them.

Thanks to all.

what do I need to set the lens to after I meter. I always split the difference because I’m not sure which is correct. 
 

Like right know I’m metering 200 film stock at 24 fps and 144 angle and getting a 3.6. So I’m setting the red numbers to 4 and the white numbers read a little past 2.8 (see photos) 

I’ve shot a million times with it and have never had an issue splitting the difference. I just want to know what the 2 sets of numbers are for.

for reference: the white number have stops— 2.2, 2.8, 4, 5.6, 8, 11, 16, 22

red numbers have stops—

3, 4, 5.6, 8, 11, 16, 22

My thought is the red numbers are if you’re using it on a  non-reflex camera?? Idk? Help. lol. 

I recently acquired a Bolex H16 Rex 5 and have been reading quite a lot about the RX correction for reflex Bolex cameras.

From what I’ve learned, the common recommendation is that lenses shorter than 50mm should be RX-corrected when used on reflex Bolex models because the prism introduces additional optical path length and spherical aberration.

However, I’m curious about how significant this actually is in real-world shooting.

For those who have compared RX and non-RX lenses side by side:

• How noticeable is the difference in practice?
• Is the degradation obvious across the entire frame, or mainly near the edges?
• Does stopping down to f/4, f/5.6, or f/8 largely eliminate the difference?
• Are there certain non-RX lenses (for example, Kern Switar, Schneider, Zeiss, Angénieux, etc.) that perform surprisingly well despite not being RX-corrected?
• Has anyone done controlled comparisons using the same film stock or high-resolution scans?

I’m particularly interested in practical experience rather than just the theoretical explanation. Many articles state that image quality is affected, but very few show examples or describe how noticeable the difference actually is in everyday filmmaking.

I would really appreciate seeing sample images, frame grabs, or hearing about your own experience.

Thank you!

I did a test shoot on this lens using the ISO 12233 test target and found the MTF is down about 50% at about 90 lines per millimeter at T4, even at the edge, which is better than I expected for a $700 Chinese lens.  It's actually a much better performer than the 24-105mm zoom lens that came with the camera.

If anybody has the 50mm Full-Frame version of this lens, can you do a similar test?  I suspect the MFT will be at 50% around 50L/MM.

Thanks!

If this were 10 plus years ago I would send this to someone like Bernie at Super 16 and have it CLA'd for a modest price.

Unfortunately that is not the case these days and I would like to clean the elements of have and clean/relube the helical.

I've serviced some Angenieux zooms, Switar/Yvar c mount and Leica screw mount lenses but can't quite figure out the plan for disassembly on this lens.

Found a few links to the 25mm 0.95 lens which is similar.

https://thecinelens.com/2011/11/01/vintage-lens-restoration/

https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2015/06/the-space-lens-mystery-screw/?srsltid=AfmBOoqmQShaiCKFw9nh_V4MGXs1DJJmJaIqyYP0U_eiA23vrb17hjFf 

I have messaged lens houses, DuAll, every single film enthusiast DP and no one has an answer. Maybe some one here can help?

I recently purchased two CP 16Rs.  One is supposed to be a working camera in great shape.  The other is beaten up.  I'm really excited for both, as the beater camera I'm going to take on as a reclamation project and will use it to gain experience in servicing the camera.  

What I am most curious about is finding adapters and lenses for the it.  I've seen the Arri adapter on Du-All site.  The adapter I can not find is the the Nikon one.  I am really interested in purchasing one.  So if anyone has any leads or has one that would part with, please let me know.  The CP16 Prime lenses are also hard to track down.  I've seen a few sets of them but I would love to just by a couple( budget concerns) than a whole set.

My last question, how much do you think having the camera adapted to a PL mount would cost and any good recommendations for such a service?

I just wanted to share a new online library that I've been working on with my focus puller to share our lens and filter tests with other filmmakers, cinematographers, directors, camera crews etc.

It's called the LFL - Lens & Filter Library and is available at rwpreisner.com/lfl 

So far there are over 80 lens and filter tests with many more to come in the next few months.

It's currently in the early stages of development and I'm looking for feedback to see how useful people find it to be and what improvements they would like to see. I'm also looking to see how useful the choice of tests are to those that use the library.

It's available to be saved as a quick shortcut on IOS & Android devices so can essentially function as an App on Ipad and Android as well as the videos being available in 4k for viewing on larger monitors. 

It's appeared a couple of times in the BSC magazine news and they have been supportive. You can read their short article about it here

Have a look and it'd be great to know your thoughts!

Thought it's an interesting topic, and I'm open to advice or recommendations for other affordable options to enter the world of cine lenses.

I am looking for information - and possibly for footage too - about this lens.

There are some short videos somewhere in this site, and a Vimeo link to 16mm footage as well. Unfortunately it asks me facial recognition for age check and no, I am not doing that.

Is it a fish-eye lens or do the lines in the image remain straight?

Also, does anybody know the filter thread measure?

Thanks.

I have a Zeiss 10-100 1.8 (looks like MK2). It has a problem with the zoom: The zoom feels sticky especially in the 75-100mm range when zooming out and 10-20 range when zooming in. Yet it's not consistent, sometimes super light tension is on before released when further zooming, sometimes there is more tension before it releases the 'knot' – feels like an element not in place or moving incorrectly with the speed of the zoom. It also creates a focus problem in this very moment and parafocality is lost before getting back into place when further zooming. I've read the MK2 had more problem. Also that you service this lens. 

Would be great to know if you know this problem and if you know a great service, 

Thanks

I thought this might be of interest to the lenses section.

I recently tested the TLS Prometheus 55mm T1.5 on Sony VENICE 6K Full Frame and wrote a short practical analysis from a cinematographer’s perspective.

The article focuses on coverage, contrast, spherical aberration, flare behavior, bokeh and the way the lens changes between T1.5 and T2.8. It also includes a UHD video test.

Link here:
https://ignacioaguilardop.com/tls-prometheus-55mm-t1-5-test-sony-venice/

I would be curious to hear whether anyone else has used or tested the Prometheus, and how you found it compared with other fast Full Frame primes.

Also, does anyone actually knows what lens is the donor lens? I was only told that it's a extremely rare one. 

Best,
Ignacio Aguilar, AEC

These are not just “fast lenses” in the obvious sense. My impression is that T1.3 is genuinely usable, with strong resolution, but without the harsh or overly clinical rendering that some modern lenses can produce.

Color felt mostly neutral, with a slight warmth that I found very flattering on skin tones. Contrast is medium-high and well controlled, while the flares and small imperfections give the lenses a more expressive character than I initially expected.

One of the most interesting aspects for me was the focus falloff: smooth, gradual and very elegant in large format. The bokeh is creamy and circular in the center, with natural cat’s-eye behavior toward the edges.

Overall, I found the AIZU Primes to be refined, practical and visually elegant lenses for cinematographers working with large-format digital sensors. This was not intended as a laboratory test, but rather as a practical look at how the lenses behave with charts, flares, bokeh and simple lighting situations.

I have a Kern POE 16-100mm for the Bolex but I'm not very familiar with it. At f4 and f2.8 the iris opening is 'lopsided' - it's 'squared off' on other stops. Wasn't sure if this was normal for this lens. Surprisingly both the zoom and auto exposure are functioning.

im hoping to get some insights regarding the Zeiss Highspeed S16 50mm lens on ARRi digital cameras. I’ve been able to use the entire Prime set on Alexa 35 and Amira without an issue but the 50mm just doesn’t fit. It seems like the back of the lens is just too wide.

Is this normal or could it just be my specific model of the lens (probably a mk2, from my understanding) or is this just a known limitation?

could there be a work around in some way?

thanks in advance 

cheers Tim

Am i going to get much more out of an anamorphic telephoto lens than a spherical lens with the the top and bottom cropped out?

I'm wondering if there is a decline in the character and optics as you go higher up in focal length? 

Pete