Jump to content


Photo

diopters for Lomo round front anamorphics?


  • Please log in to reply
18 replies to this topic

#1 James Steven Beverly

James Steven Beverly
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 4199 posts
  • Director
  • El Paso, Texas

Posted 11 August 2007 - 01:25 AM

In reading Max's thread on anamorphic lenses in the FAQ section, I noted that he stated sense many anamorphic lenses wouldn't focus under 7 feet from the subject, it was a good idea to have a set of diopters to compensate for this. I would imagine that Lomos being somewhat older anamorphics probably fall into this category so my question is how available are diopters for Lomo round front anamorphics and who would carry them? I saw some diopters on Raf's web store but none for the round front (Kinor, Konvas) 35mm Lomos although he did have a couple that he didn't know what they were for, but I suspect if those were for Lomo round fronts, he would be aware of that. Anyone? (I don't remember these EVER coming up on Ebay otherwise I wouldn't ask....No one seems to sell Russian filters either, strange.) B)
  • 0

#2 Leo Anthony Vale

Leo Anthony Vale
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2010 posts
  • Other
  • Pittsburgh PA

Posted 11 August 2007 - 02:09 PM

I saw some diopters on Raf's web store but none for the round front (Kinor, Konvas) 35mm Lomos although he did have a couple that he didn't know what they were for, but I suspect if those were for Lomo round fronts, he would be aware of that. Anyone? (I don't remember these EVER coming up on Ebay otherwise I wouldn't ask....No one seems to sell Russian filters either, strange.) B)


Any dioptre thats physically large enough would work.
Though you'd probably have to mount them in the matte box.
  • 0

#3 Adam Frisch FSF

Adam Frisch FSF
  • Sustaining Members
  • 2009 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles, USA

Posted 12 August 2007 - 03:29 AM

No worries - my Lomo's all focus down to under 4ft (0.9m), except for the 150mm.
  • 0

#4 James Steven Beverly

James Steven Beverly
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 4199 posts
  • Director
  • El Paso, Texas

Posted 12 August 2007 - 10:32 PM

UNDER 4 feet?!! Gotta love those Russian! Just outta curiosity in your practical experience, what is the actual lowest effective stop you can shoot with these puppies? I've heard it's 3.3 but I wanted to hear it from some one who's actually used them under real world conditions. Also is it worth getting a set of diopters just to have around and under what circumstances would they be useful? Also Leo mentioned you can use any diopter that in physically large enough to cover the front element of the lens, do they make diopters that are designed to work with the matte box filter holder and do they make one that would cover that HUGE 5 1/2 in front element of the 35mm Lomo anamorphic? Sorry if these question are a bit elementary, I don't know that much about diopters and need to learn more. Thanks B)

Edited by James Steven Beverly, 12 August 2007 - 10:34 PM.

  • 0

#5 Olex Kalynychenko

Olex Kalynychenko
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 868 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Dnepropetrovsk, Ukraine

Posted 13 August 2007 - 02:56 PM

UNDER 4 feet?!! Gotta love those Russian!


The russian square front glass anamorphic prime lenses ( 35 BAS-4-15 and similar )have minimum distance of focusing 1.6 m ( 5.3 feets).
But, This is lenses can have original square glass additional front lens attachments for shooting with short distances. This is attachments for 0.8 m ( 2.64 feet ) and 1 m ( 3.3 feet ).

A some time ago , we had idea to shoot of part of keyboard ( 40 x 20 mm ) of mobile phone with anamorphic
lenses. We use of 150 mm anamorphic lens with close-up front attachment ( additional optical system).

If you need shoot of subject with size 140 mm x 60 mm, you can take of 4 pcs of close-up glass M77 F 1734 mm from set of K-3 camera.

50 mm and 75 mm anamoprhic lenses have big size of front glass and additonal lenses must have big size too.
That's why, 150 mm ( 100 mm ) good choose for close-up shoots.
  • 0

#6 James Steven Beverly

James Steven Beverly
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 4199 posts
  • Director
  • El Paso, Texas

Posted 14 August 2007 - 11:57 PM

Olex, what I'm using are the round front Lomos. Did the Russians make diopters for the 35, 50 and 75 anamorphic lenses which are the ones I have? Also, how available are the round front 100 and 150 anamorphic Lomos out there in your country? Do the 22 and 30mm ever become available and if so is the barrel distortion on them severe? How often do the factory de-anamorphic viewfinders for the Kinor 35C come up for sale? Also how much do each of these items sell for when they do become availible for sale? Thanks-Steve B)

Edited by James Steven Beverly, 14 August 2007 - 11:59 PM.

  • 0

#7 Olex Kalynychenko

Olex Kalynychenko
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 868 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Dnepropetrovsk, Ukraine

Posted 15 August 2007 - 01:21 AM

Olex, what I'm using are the round front Lomos. Did the Russians make diopters for the 35, 50 and 75 anamorphic lenses which are the ones I have? Also, how available are the round front 100 and 150 anamorphic Lomos out there in your country? Do the 22 and 30mm ever become available and if so is the barrel distortion on them severe? How often do the factory de-anamorphic viewfinders for the Kinor 35C come up for sale? Also how much do each of these items sell for when they do become availible for sale? Thanks-Steve B)



I don't know original close-up lens for LOMO round front glass lenses.
The front glass of 35 mm, 50 mm lenses have big diameter and clouse-up lenses problematical for this lenses.
I don't know original close-up lenses for 100 mm and 150 mm LOMO anamorphic lenses too.
I told, what we made of (hand made ) close-up lens for 150 mm 35 BAS-2-2 lens for our shooting.
You can search of LOMO 100 mm, 150 mm anamorphic lenses on ebay, but, this device rare.
You can ask of modern anamorphic lenses on Elite Optic company from St-Petersburg.

I don't have long time experience to use LOMO anamorphic lenses 22 mm, 30 mm, that's why can't tell you any about real distortion of this lenses.
35 mm lens work fine.
About disanamorphic components of Kinor-35 viewfinders, I know, this is super rare devices, made at very small quantity.
The old optical technicians to use of disanamorphic compconnets from other cameras for modify of Kinor-35 viewfinders.
  • 0

#8 Adam Frisch FSF

Adam Frisch FSF
  • Sustaining Members
  • 2009 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles, USA

Posted 15 August 2007 - 06:55 PM

Just outta curiosity in your practical experience, what is the actual lowest effective stop you can shoot with these puppies? I've heard it's 3.3 but I wanted to hear it from some one who's actually used them under real world conditions.


I've had them up on the optical bench at Take 2 Films here in London and seen it with my own eyes: they don't fall apart even wide open except for the 150mm.

The ones I tested were the 50mm, 75mm and 100mm. They all performed very well wide open, with only the slightest abberation towards the very edge (outside CS gate area at the fringes of the S-35 area). The 150mm (the older "slit" one) that opens to T4.2 did however show a lot of chromatic abberation wide open, but it disappeared after T5.6. So that's the only lens one really has to stop down slightly to get to perform.
  • 0

#9 James Steven Beverly

James Steven Beverly
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 4199 posts
  • Director
  • El Paso, Texas

Posted 15 August 2007 - 11:05 PM

I've had them up on the optical bench at Take 2 Films here in London and seen it with my own eyes: they don't fall apart even wide open except for the 150mm.

The ones I tested were the 50mm, 75mm and 100mm. They all performed very well wide open, with only the slightest abberation towards the very edge (outside CS gate area at the fringes of the S-35 area). The 150mm (the older "slit" one) that opens to T4.2 did however show a lot of chromatic abberation wide open, but it disappeared after T5.6. So that's the only lens one really has to stop down slightly to get to perform.


WOW! Like I said before, ya gotta hand it to those Russians. How's the DOF? Is it better or worse than say Ziess or Cookes of the same era? Also, is there any softness wide open or is the image sharp all the way through the stop range?

Edited by James Steven Beverly, 15 August 2007 - 11:08 PM.

  • 0

#10 Adam Frisch FSF

Adam Frisch FSF
  • Sustaining Members
  • 2009 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles, USA

Posted 16 August 2007 - 11:35 AM

They are slightly softer wide open (especially at the edges), but hardly perceptible. In the center of the frame I could not see any difference. But this is true for almost all lenses - they get slightly softer when shot wide open. Master Primes probably being the only exception.

They are great lenses and you get a lot of bang for your buck. But as with all russian stuff quality control sometimes lacks a bit and one can end up with a lemon. But when they work, they work fantastic. I also have the sense that the lenses from Russia had less of a lemon-factor than other russki gear and I've never had a problem with a russian lens, only the cameras.
  • 0

#11 Christian Appelt

Christian Appelt
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 470 posts

Posted 16 August 2007 - 04:20 PM

The russian square front glass anamorphic prime lenses ( 35 BAS-4-15 and similar )have minimum distance of focusing 1.6 m ( 5.3 feets).
But, This is lenses can have original square glass additional front lens attachments for shooting with short distances. This is attachments for 0.8 m ( 2.64 feet ) and 1 m ( 3.3 feet ).


There seem to be different versions: My 35mm SF lens will focus down to 1 meter (3.28 ft) and gives sharp pictures even wide open. Never checked the compression factor, but since one hardly uses a 35mm for actor's closeups, I wouldn't have opticed.

The 50mm SF will go down to 1.75 meters (5.74 ft), the 80mm to 1.50 meters (4.92 ft).

Posted Image
Posted Image
  • 0

#12 James Steven Beverly

James Steven Beverly
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 4199 posts
  • Director
  • El Paso, Texas

Posted 17 August 2007 - 01:28 AM

They are slightly softer wide open (especially at the edges), but hardly perceptible. In the center of the frame I could not see any difference. But this is true for almost all lenses - they get slightly softer when shot wide open. Master Primes probably being the only exception.

They are great lenses and you get a lot of bang for your buck. But as with all russian stuff quality control sometimes lacks a bit and one can end up with a lemon. But when they work, they work fantastic. I also have the sense that the lenses from Russia had less of a lemon-factor than other russki gear and I've never had a problem with a russian lens, only the cameras.


You had trouble with a commiecam, which one? :D
  • 0

#13 Adam Frisch FSF

Adam Frisch FSF
  • Sustaining Members
  • 2009 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles, USA

Posted 17 August 2007 - 05:58 AM

Well, the Konvas is sturdy and generally works pretty well, it's just a bit crude in its machining and the fit isn't always right. The flange focal distance is one thing that can vary
quite horribly with their combination of aluminium lens mount and the whole front (to which the lens mount is attached) that detaches with four screws. It's like asking for FF trouble. Also, the prism angles in the viewfinder makes it a very dark optical system /they should have done it with mirrors instead). And the ground glass is not easily adjusted if that goes out of whack. But other than that, it's built like a tank. And the movement is a marvel in simplicity.

The Kinor is a different kettle of fish. The electronics are horrible and the main shaft to the Mitchell-type movement is not a bearing, so it can seize up on you if it isn't oiled and
looked after very stringently. That happened to me on a shoot and it took ages of sanding, reassembling, sanding and reassembling before it finally worked. Good thing is that the mount and the gate are made out of one unit, which eliminates FF problems. They forgot to attach the viewfinding system to that block, though, so the image wobbles in the finder when you have long lenses on that are heavy. Also there's a belt system that drives the whole movement that is rather fragile - it's underdimensioned and those bloody belts are not easy to find. Belts are good for silent operation, but they're not ideal for longevity.
  • 0

#14 Olex Kalynychenko

Olex Kalynychenko
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 868 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Dnepropetrovsk, Ukraine

Posted 17 August 2007 - 03:24 PM

There seem to be different versions: My 35mm SF lens will focus down to 1 meter (3.28 ft) and gives sharp pictures even wide open. Never checked the compression factor, but since one hardly uses a 35mm for actor's closeups, I wouldn't have opticed.

The 50mm SF will go down to 1.75 meters (5.74 ft), the 80mm to 1.50 meters (4.92 ft).


All information from original user manual of lenses.
I think, you show on picture of 35BAS-10-2 35 mm anamorphic lens.
This is lens have minimum distance of focusing 1.0 m
50 mm anamorphic lens with square front glass 35 BAS-4-15, minimum dustance of focusing 1.6 m
80 mm , 35 BAS-4-16, minimum distance of focusing 1.6 m.
But, the next editions of this lenses can have a some different a minimum distance of shooting.

The close-up lenses had 50 mm and 80 mm lenses.

About flange focal distance of Konvas cameras.
The flange focal distance of Konvas-1M camera can depend from gap between body of camera and disk of turret ( the value of bolt tightening inside turret ) and other parts.
The flange focal distance of Konvas-2M have more stable value, because, the design of body too hard.
The front and rear side of body unite by a many screws and two pins.
The lens mount unite by a many screws and two pins and if the screws have necessary a tightening torque, all will OK.
From other side, the film gate have thin part and if you push on this part too much, the flange focal distance can change on 0.01-0.02 mm.
But, the design of film magazine don't have high value of push on film gate.
The ground glass of camera unit with body by a two screws and two pins and change of position of ground glass can't be possible.
If you not lost of spring inside a body of main prism.

But, if the drawbar of axis of mirror disk lost a tightening torque, the position of mirror disk can be change and you will have lack of coincidence of sharpness image on ground glass and sharpness image on film.
Need service of camera.

The optical system of camera have one prism only. This is main prism with ground glass on one side.
[attachment=2514:abturatr_1.jpg]

The other reflection surfaces - mirrors.

I think, this is correct idea, because, you don't have problem with dust, similar of problem with ground glass with collecting lens ( dust at surface of collective lens ).

The lost of position of ground glass inside of viewfinder can be from falling of camera and move of any mirrors inside of viewfinder ( #4, #5, #7 on diagram ). The position of body of mirrors $4, $5 contract by two pins and two screws.
  • 0

#15 Bruce Taylor

Bruce Taylor
  • Sustaining Members
  • 482 posts
  • Other
  • Los Angeles

Posted 17 August 2007 - 03:53 PM

In reading this thread which is primarily concerned with close focusing using OCT19 mount anamorphics, it occurs to me that the OPF18 Lomo 20-120 zoom has both macro settings at the rear of the lens and an available rear anamorphic adapter. I haven't tried it, but that combo might work well- has anyone had experience with this?

Also, concerning the 35C de-anamorphic viewfinder, I just got one of Steve Morton's Konvas de-anamorphic viewfinder to Kinor adapters for my 35H and it works great (nice fit and finish too). It's a simple bolt on solution to the scarce parts dilema. I don't know if it works for the 35C, but I think it would be worth asking him about it.

Bruce Taylor
  • 0

#16 James Steven Beverly

James Steven Beverly
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 4199 posts
  • Director
  • El Paso, Texas

Posted 18 August 2007 - 01:51 AM

Thanks Bruce, I've heard from a few other people that Steve's 35H/konvas hybrid works very well . I did email Steve about adapting a de-anamorphic Konvas viewfinder or it's parts to a 35C viewfinder and he said he hadn't ever done a 35C before but would be willing to give it a shot. I'd have to buy a Konvas de-anamorphic and a spare 35C viewfinder (I would prefer to dedicate the spare to a de-anamorphic set-up so the standard and de-anamorphic viewfinders could be quickly switched out) which should be about 5 to 6 hundred for both then have send both to Steve and let him screw with it for a while so I'm not sure how much that's gonna cost. I may end up spending a grand or more for it, though I HOPE Steve will cut me a break on it AND hopefully he won't have to keep the Konvas eye-cup (that thing is stiff and hard on the eye socket). I don't have the cash for it right now anyway so it's academic at the moment and will have to wait. If I run across an original one, I would probably prefer that but at least I know Steve can probably set me up if I can't. I still have to find an anamorphic gate which takes priority at the moment. I can probably shoot anamorphic without the luxury of a de-anamorphic viewfinder but not without a anamorphic gate, but everything in it's time. At least I'm a lot closer to to completing my anamorphic set and am within striking range of shooting Blood Moon Rising in anamorphic (though I'd still like to have a 100 and 150mm but I'll go with what I got if I have to.) B)

Edited by James Steven Beverly, 18 August 2007 - 01:52 AM.

  • 0

#17 Henri Titchen

Henri Titchen
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 125 posts
  • Other

Posted 18 August 2007 - 06:40 PM

Maybe extension tubes could be used instead of diopters...I have never seen any other than for the Arri std mount though.

Is a Matte box available for the 35mm Lomo anamorphic?

Henry.
  • 0

#18 Olex Kalynychenko

Olex Kalynychenko
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 868 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Dnepropetrovsk, Ukraine

Posted 19 August 2007 - 01:06 PM

Maybe extension tubes could be used instead of diopters...I have never seen any other than for the Arri std mount though.

Is a Matte box available for the 35mm Lomo anamorphic?

Henry.



The extension tubes can't be used instead of diopters with anamorphic lenses.The optical system of anamorphic lens ( LOMO ) must have
spherical lens at infinity. The my test confirmed of this idea.

About matte box for anamorphic lenses.
Kinor-35H camera have special kit of matte box for anamorphic lenses. This is kit have a few adapters for holders of filters with different size.
Matte box of Kinor-35H can be used with Konvas-2M camera too.

About 35OPF-18-1 20-120 mm zoom lens. ( anamorphic version 40-240 mm F3.5 , with rear anamorphic adapter )
Yes, This is lens have special possibilities of move of rear optical component for shooting from short distance.
This is ring of control of position of rear component have 6 positions ( 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ).
The user manual have information about minimum distance shooting with different position of macro ring.
This is distance can be 12. 2 mm from front glass of lens ( position of macro ring " 1 " and position of focus ring " 0.75m ).
From my experience of repair and service of OPF-18 zoom lenses, the control of macro components capricious ( uncertain ).
And many lenses work fine without control of macro components.
Possible, this was used lenses and " new " lenses have good control of macro components, i don't know.
At my experience, the control of macro components at anamorphic version not possible.
Any case, i don't have a good result of adjusting of zoom lens with anamorphic adapter and with control of macro ring.

The other russian zoom lens 35 OPF-7-1 25-250 mm with anamorphic version ( rear anamorphic componnet ) have close up lens at set for shooting with short distances.
  • 0

#19 Nick G Smith

Nick G Smith
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 88 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • London UK

Posted 19 August 2007 - 03:56 PM

James,
I have a set of round front anamorphic PL mount Lomos - 50/75/100 . I have recently been using Schneider 138mm +2 and +3 diopters to get some particular close up shots. You have to mount the diopters in a matte box. I have been using them with a MB 19 - be careful with the 50mm that you do not crop into the picture area. I stop down if possible when using the diopters to give a bit more dof - They have worked great.

Nick
  • 0


Aerial Filmworks

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

FJS International, LLC

Visual Products

Abel Cine

Glidecam

CineTape

The Slider

Ritter Battery

Wooden Camera

Technodolly

Willys Widgets

Paralinx LLC

Opal

Rig Wheels Passport

rebotnix Technologies

Broadcast Solutions Inc

CineLab

Metropolis Post

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Tai Audio

CineLab

Ritter Battery

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Wooden Camera

Rig Wheels Passport

Opal

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

rebotnix Technologies

Glidecam

Technodolly

Paralinx LLC

CineTape

The Slider

Willys Widgets

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Visual Products

FJS International, LLC

Metropolis Post

Aerial Filmworks

Abel Cine

Tai Audio