Jump to content

Recommended Posts

https://atlaslensco.com/

 

Anyone going to Nab might want to stop and see these.

Pricing looks surprisingly affordable.

I'd like to see some more tests, but if they perform as well as it appears these could be a big deal to those of us who've watched decades-old-Lomos get super expensive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They look really affordable, shipping on Q1 2018 though!

Hopefully these lenses will be bought by many camera rental houses and people will start shooting on anamorphic more often :)

 

Have a good day.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interestingly enough, the video has the model always center punched. I would like to have seen her framed more to the edges to see if these lenses hold up horizontally. This makes me wonder if they intentionally kept her center framed. Thanks for sharing this!

 

 

G

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess further promo vids will reveal more. It seems at this point only the 65mm has actually been built. They do mention that their goal was to create lenses with a more traditional anamorphic character, including breathing, flare and 'waterfall' bokeh, so I wouldn't expect them to hold up all the way to the edges.

 

What intrigues me is that these seem to have come out of nowhere. This time last year the self-taught designer was on forums talking about an anamorphic adapter he was tinkering with. That's not a long time to develop a range of cine anamorphic lenses, a challenging brief even for established lens manufacturing companies.

 

But at the price point they've indicated, 20K for a set of 3, I imagine they'll sell a bunch. There's certainly a gap in the market, and as Phillip noted, even old and rather flawed anamorphics like Lomos or Kowas go for more than this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm just wondering why a 3-lens set deposit costs more than 3 deposits for single lenses bought separately 17995 vs 14985 :lol:

maybe they should correct that the 65 costs 4995 and the other lenses are more expensive for a single lens purchase

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm just wondering why a 3-lens set deposit costs more than 3 deposits for single lenses bought separately 17995 vs 14985 :lol:

maybe they should correct that the 65 costs 4995 and the other lenses are more expensive for a single lens purchase

Isn't it $4995 deposit for a single lens, or $7995 deposit for the 3 lens set? The full price for 3 lenses is $17995 with the pre-order discount.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hard to tell too much from that video (without knowing aperture settings etc.), but for the most part, I think the rendering looks very nice.

Will be very interested to follow the development of these. People want almost $20k USD per lens for 30-year Kowas these days.

There's a substantial amount of haloing going on with the bokeh in those shots of city lights, which I'm not a big fan of. But to have some affordable anamorphics that are easier to use than some of the manky old beasts that are currently getting around - that'd be lovely.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Isn't it $4995 deposit for a single lens, or $7995 deposit for the 3 lens set? The full price for 3 lenses is $17995 with the pre-order discount.

 

oh it was:

  • 40mm T2 $6499 List Price. [$5849 Preorder Special.]
  • 65mm T2 $6499 List Price. [$5849 Preorder Special.]
  • 100mm T2 $6999 List Price. [$6299 Preorder Special.]

I read it incorrectly the first time :)

So it would be 19 997 usd normal price for the 3lens set.

sounds very reasonable for a anamorphic set IF the mechanics are good and they are optically OK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

These sort of offers always have me suspicious because I know how expensive the professional lenses we use really are.

 

G

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.newsshooter.com/2017/04/24/atlas-lens-co-orion-anamorphic/

 

According to this interview, they're hoping to produce some other focal lengths after the first three, a 32mm, 50mm, and 80mm.

I kind of wish they'd started with those lengths.

Either way I have high hopes for these, because there's such a big gap between the work-arounds like mickey mousing projector lenses, used Lomos and full prices name brands(Cooke, Hawk, etc.)

If they're good enough for feature work, they'll be a bargain.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looked like there was some weird fringeing going on, almost like a reverse vignette, where the corners were lighter than the rest of the frame

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looked like there was some weird fringeing going on, almost like a reverse vignette, where the corners were lighter than the rest of the frame

That's pretty common for a lot of old 'scope lenses. You're actually seeing the inside of the front housing, backlit by the light source. It normally shows up as a dark vignette and is so out of focus at f/5.6 or wider that it's not really noticeable until backlit. If you stop down, you will see the lens porthole.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's pretty common for a lot of old 'scope lenses.

Except that these are brand new lenses, and it's not consistently visible at what appear to be similar focus distances, under identical lighting conditions. It's also there even on low light shots.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Except that these are brand new lenses, and it's not consistently visible at what appear to be similar focus distances, under identical lighting conditions. It's also there even on low light shots.

Right, but I think they are specifically trying replicate the look of vintage 'scope lenses. And because they are targeting the low to mid budget market, I doubt they really had the ability to design and manufacture something as optically sophisticated as Master Anamorphics or other super clean modern bent glass. Otherwise the lenses would cost much more than $7k each.

 

I think the way to think of this effect is just as another type of flare that can be used or not as needed. Until we actually get our hands on the lenses, we won't know exactly how hard it will be to control. Should be interesting though!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Referring to flaws as features because you don't have the resources to fix them is an excellent marketing ploy, but it does have the potential to limit the usefulness of these lenses. Time will tell, I guess.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Referring to flaws as features because you don't have the resources to fix them is an excellent marketing ploy, but it does have the potential to limit the usefulness of these lenses. Time will tell, I guess.

I think in this particular case, they may be able to fix it easily as it seems there is an aggressive mask or shroud built into the front of the housing. I suppose if they hear enough complaints right now, they can do something about it as they say these are still prototypes. As you say, time will tell.

 

Still, I think we may be setting our expectations a tad high for such affordable anamorphic lenses. A few years ago, I paid $3k USD for a custom cine re-housing on my $2k 1.5x Iscorama 36 and never dreamed I would be able to own a proper 2x cine lens set like this for less than $20k! I was recently looking at comparable three lens vintage mis-matched Cineovision sets for like $80k. And those were of potentially dubious quality.

 

I've spoken directly to two manufacturers of budget anamorphic lenses ($5k-$8k-ish price point/each) in the last year, and they've each told me they don't want to tackle one of the following specs due to high cost or perceived lack of market: 2x front, proper cine housing with focus marks like we are used to, fixing wide lens distortions, PL/EF mount. So to me, the Atlas Co. specs are well above and beyond the price-point.

 

The features announced or shown already are quite astounding:

 

- 2x front anamorphic

- classic vintage look, contrast

- corrected for mumps (on the 65mm at least)

- single-focus lens with decent close focus

- common 110mm front with lip for clip-on MB

- well-spaced, engraved, and windowed focus marks on both sides!!

- manageable size/weight (I wish it could be 2lbs lighter!)

- (what appears to be) high quality anodizing and painting (though still a prototype, could be not as nice on production models)

- excellent choice of starting focal lengths (40, 65, 100)

- user interchangeable PL / EF mount (they'll need to add a lens support foot for EF)

- supposedly easy to service (Duclos, Focus Optics, etc)

 

I think the focal length choice is especially important and rather overlooked. I find most of the 'magic look' of anamorphic really starts showing up between 55-75mm. Below that, you usually get less classic bokeh and more distortion issues and softness.

 

So a lens set that starts with a 65mm is rather smart and makes me think these guys know what they're doing. A lot of people are saying, why not start with more classic focal lengths like 35, 50, 85mm? Well, how often do you wish that your 35mm was a 40mm, 50mm was 55mm, and 85mm was 100mm? I'd say pretty darn often with anamorphic, actually.

 

Most vintage 'scope 35mm focal lengths have a lot of barrel distortion and seem to be softer than the mid-focal lengths. With a 40mm on 4-perf or a 4:3 sensor, you could usually get away with that as your widest lens in the set, as long as it doesn't look terrible like the Kowa 40mm.

 

But again, time will tell.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree that these lenses are highly specced for this price point, and I'm certainly not discounting them on the basis of a promo video shot with pre-production lenses. There are many flaws in older anamorphic lenses, that's why we like them, after all, but not all flaws are equally desirable. That odd vignetting (which seemed more pronounced at longer focus distances) is something that would make the lens unusable for me, unless it was easily dealt with by mattebox and mattes.

 

And you're right; 40, 65 &100 is a great choice of focal lengths.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, you should reach out to Dan Kanes and let him know! He posts frequently on Reduser, and I'm sure he'd love feedback from more working DPs who would potentially be renting his lenses.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, you should reach out to Dan Kanes and let him know! He posts frequently on Reduser, and I'm sure he'd love feedback from more working DPs who would potentially be renting his lenses.

 

I try to avoid Reduser, for my sanity's sake.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm definitely one of those guys that was surprised by the initial focal lengths. But as a novice I am probably mostly influenced by the lengths of the vintage sets I've been seeing for years.

Almost anything that's been within reach for purchase have been 35/50/75, or 40/50/75 with a 100mm as a possible one to get down the line.

In the interview he mentions 32/50/85 as in the works, and if I had the option of only one choice that would be set I'd get, but they've got their reasons for which ones to start with.

Suffice it to say, I'm kinda over the moon that SOMEBODY is attempting to pull off lenses for this price range.

There's clearly a market for this in the same way there's a market for those Rokinon Xeens.

They must have seen some of us mounting old anamorphic projector lenses onto our cameras and figured it was time for another option.

Why now, would I spend 5-15K on an Old Lomo when these are actually less expensive and possibly better in most ways?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Almost anything that's been within reach for purchase have been 35/50/75, or 40/50/75 with a 100mm as a possible one to get down the line.

 

I think the focal length choice will really depend on the size of sensor you are working with. For Alexa XT/4:3/Mini, Red VistaVision (cropped to 18x22mm), and 4-perf 35mm, I think 40mm is plenty wide. Wes Anderson shoots his films mostly on a 40mm, I believe.

 

But on shorter sensors where you will have to crop in more, 40mm is often not wide enough - on an F55, Red Epic/Dragon, and C300, it's not really wide at all. On the wide end, Lomo Round 35mm, Kowa 40mm, and Cineovision 24/25mm are all heavily distorted and soft until stopped down quite a bit. So I think most people would want to avoid using those lenses if they didn't need the field of view.

 

 

Suffice it to say, I'm kinda over the moon that SOMEBODY is attempting to pull off lenses for this price range.

 

Yes!! Totally agree!

 

 

They must have seen some of us mounting old anamorphic projector lenses onto our cameras and figured it was time for another option.

 

Actually, it sounds like the guy who designed the lenses was doing exactly that before getting hired to make these. In some eyes, that could be seen as a dubious distinction - but again, only time will tell. I think designing the wider focal lengths will prove to be much trickier than the 65mm.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



  • CineLab



    Metropolis Post



    Paralinx LLC



    New Pro Video - New and Used Equipment



    Tai Audio



    Rig Wheels Passport



    Abel Cine



    Ritter Battery



    Visual Products



    Serious Gear



    Gamma Ray Digital Inc



    Wooden Camera



    Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS



    Glidecam



    Broadcast Solutions Inc


×
×
  • Create New...