Hawk Anamorfic lenses...

Matias Nicolas · October 11, 2015

Hi! What can you tell me about this set of lenses? Cause Im probably shooting a feature film, and would like to try them.

Another doubt: In the rental they have 28 35 45 55 65 80 110 140. As Im shooting in anamorphic eith alexa XT, the 28 equals a 14mm UP? and so on each lense?

So the 140 is 70 mm?

How is the comparision with a normal set of ultraprime or Cooke s4?

ANd another doubt, as I need a 200mm or a 300mm, wich brand do you recommend to match as more as posible to the resolution and quality of the Hawks? DO you think an optimo 24-290 Is ok?

David Mullen ASC · October 11, 2015

If the Hawks have the standard 2X squeeze (they also make a 1.3X anamorphic set) then you can roughly think of the equivalent focal length in spherical being half if comparing horizontal view, so yes, a 28mm anamorphic is like a 14mm spherical, doesn't matter if it is UP, Cooke, etc.

It all depends on whether when shooting in anamorphic, the width of the sensor you end up using for a final 2.40 image is the same width if you shot spherical and cropped top & bottom for 2.40, and in the case of the Alexa XT, it is since the sensor is 4x3 -- in many other digital cameras, you have to crop the sides of the sensor when using anamorphic so that affects the field of view, which affects your calculations for equivalents between anamorphic and spherical.

There are telephoto lenses converted to anamorphic with a rear anamorphic element, and zooms as well. Or you can just use spherical lenses for those shots and set-up new frame lines for cropping to 2.40 and remember to treat those shots differently in post.

Satsuki Murashige · October 11, 2015

Matias, please have at this: http://www.cinematography.com/index.php?showtopic=4690&page=1

Lots of info there about anamorphic lenses in general and the Hawk lenses in particular. Sounds like the rental house has a set of V-Lites.

Matias Nicolas · October 23, 2015

Thank you all!!

Gregory Irwin · October 24, 2015

We tested them exhaustively and found them underwhelming. They didn't perform at all when compared to Panavision or Zeiss Master Primes. They were in line with the Cooke anamorphics that were very distorted and mushy sharpness around the perimeter of frame, even at a T5.6.

G

Mark Kenfield · October 24, 2015

We tested them exhaustively and found them underwhelming. They didn't perform at all when compared to Panavision or Zeiss Master Primes. They were in line with the Cooke anamorphics that were very distorted and mushy sharpness around the perimeter of frame, even at a T5.6.

G

Greg, do you mean compared to the Zeiss Master Anamorphics? I'd be keen to hear your thoughts on the Cookes, I'm looking into their anamorphics for a feature next year, but they're tricky to get hold of down here as there aren't many sets about.

Gregory Irwin · October 24, 2015

Greg, do you mean compared to the Zeiss Master Anamorphics? I'd be keen to hear your thoughts on the Cookes, I'm looking into their anamorphics for a feature next year, but they're tricky to get hold of down here as there aren't many sets about.

Hi Mark! I just wrapped up STAR TREK BEYOND for Paramount Pictures and yes, we tested several different sets of anamorphic glass since Panavision couldn't supply the demands of our movie. The Hawks were immediately rejected due to their lack of optical performance lacking overall sharpness and contrast. You need a very deep stop before they truly begin to perform and that is not always reasonable. They are also very heavy for hand held work. The Cookes were similar but had the added attraction of distortion. Verticle lines were diagonal on the wider focal lengths and horizontal lines were curved. As with the Hawks, there was an elliptical oval in the middle of the frame that would be sharp and everything outside of that oval experienced extreme fall off in sharpness due to a very curved field of focus. Even at deep stops.

The Zeiss Master Anamorphics are a completely different beast. They are sized well and are not that heavy. As far as optical performance, they are perfect. In a way, too perfect. Wide open they are flat, no visible distortion and sharp edge to edge. They barely flare at all thus looking a bit antiseptic for an anamorphic lens. Not much of a bouquet like other manufacturers which could be a drawback for some. In 80 days, we had no issues with the lenses and we really put them through their paces. They also have the displayed lens data, including real time depth of field that as a focus puller, I found very helpful. Well, there it is in a nutshell. Hope this helps...

G

Satsuki Murashige · October 24, 2015

Greg, did you get the camera package from Otto? Hope your 2nd AC is in town when the package gets check in! ;)

Gregory Irwin · October 24, 2015

Greg, did you get the camera package from Otto? Hope your 2nd AC is in town when the package gets check in! ;)

Oh yes. He will be there. We have a week of wrap here in Vancouver and then we have 2 days at Otto's. We will both be there to police the check in to avoid exactly what you're inferring!

G