Jump to content


Photo

Canon Scoopic MS


  • Please log in to reply
9 replies to this topic

#1 Rolando Fernandez

Rolando Fernandez
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 116 posts
  • Other
  • San Juan P.R

Posted 20 November 2007 - 09:06 AM

Hi , Someone here have test a panasonic LA 7200 widescreen converter in front of a Canon Scoopic lens?

This converter is design for video cameras but I just fit one on a Scoopic camera and looks like it focus ok.
  • 0

#2 Will Montgomery

Will Montgomery
  • Sustaining Members
  • 2030 posts
  • Producer
  • Dallas, TX

Posted 20 November 2007 - 11:36 AM

I've always understood that video anamorphic adapters weren't quite up to the quality required for film... but I'd love to hear how it works. Can you shoot some tests and let us know?

Might be a nice solution to the problem of converting these to Super 16.
  • 0

#3 Satsuki Murashige

Satsuki Murashige
  • Sustaining Members
  • 3510 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • San Francisco, CA

Posted 21 November 2007 - 04:45 AM

I don't know about the anamorphic adapter, but wide angle and fisheye converters which were made for the DVX/XL2 camera series work on the Scoopic just fine, they're both 72mm thread and the macro ring on the Scoopic lens allows you to focus properly.

Do you have to use the macro ring on the Scoopic to make the image focus? How far can you zoom in and remain in focus? I'd also be interested to know how this pans out.
  • 0

#4 Rolando Fernandez

Rolando Fernandez
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 116 posts
  • Other
  • San Juan P.R

Posted 21 November 2007 - 10:10 AM

Thanks for reply, yes the scoopic focus ok without the macro and complete zooming also.

I will shoot some test footage and post the results here, my consern is in the quality or capability for
deph of field.

Thanks.

Edited by Rolando Fernandez, 21 November 2007 - 10:11 AM.

  • 0

#5 Matt Pacini

Matt Pacini
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1246 posts

Posted 21 November 2007 - 01:09 PM

I use a Nizo UWIII on my Scoopic, and it's really wide, and really sharp.
It was originally made for the Nizo Super 8 cameras, so you would think the resolution would not be adequate, but it's a fine, sharp piece of Scneider glass.
I love it!
You will be able to get one of these for much cheaper than what you're looking at.

Matt Pacini
  • 0

#6 Rolando Fernandez

Rolando Fernandez
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 116 posts
  • Other
  • San Juan P.R

Posted 21 November 2007 - 02:18 PM

Thanks Matt, this adapter compress anamophicaly without vinetting all the way to minimun zoom 12.5mm
my expectation on this lens is that the 16mm 1.33:1 format can be streched in post to 16:9 ratio, if this is
true then I just convert my scoopic to "ultra 16".

I'm crazy to watch the test footage!!!
  • 0

#7 Paul Vanderhoof

Paul Vanderhoof
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 29 posts
  • Student

Posted 21 November 2007 - 06:33 PM

Matt Pacini --

How did your cp-16 ultra-16mm experiment work out? Is your Nizo UWIII that you use on our Scoopic the plastic lens or the glass? Screw on 72mm? Also, did you try the ultra-16mm on the Scoopic? Looking for details on results. Your message box is full.

Thanks,

Paul
  • 0

#8 Rolando Fernandez

Rolando Fernandez
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 116 posts
  • Other
  • San Juan P.R

Posted 21 November 2007 - 08:13 PM

Hi, I also have a Frezzolini LW16 with a standard angenieux zoom witch soon will be test it also with LA7200
anamorphic.

I know that 16:9 is aprox. 1.5x anamorphic.

Please contact if someone found more info. on this issue!
  • 0

#9 Matt Pacini

Matt Pacini
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1246 posts

Posted 28 November 2007 - 05:49 PM

I haven't tried the Ultra16 mod on the Scoopic yet, because I'm waiting to find a trashed Scoopic M to canibalize the gate from, just in case the experiment doesn't work!

I did do it on my CP16R/A, with a spare gate I got.
When I telecine'd my footage, it came back blurry on the "ultra" edge.
One of two things happened (and I'm not sure which):
1. I didn't get the gate on right, so it was "lifted off" a bit on one side, which would make the image blur like it did.
2. They didn't understand my instructions during telecine, (they kept referring to Super16 in our conversations, and I had to keep telling them it wasn't), and something went wrong there.
So I put the regular gate back on for a couple projects I did for someone else, but I'm eager to give it a try again.

Matt Pacini
  • 0

#10 Leo Anthony Vale

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

Posted 29 November 2007 - 03:57 PM

I know that 16:9 is aprox. 1.5x anamorphic.


1.5 x 1.33=2.0

1.33 x 1.33=1.78
  • 0


Visual Products

Metropolis Post

Ritter Battery

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Tai Audio

Abel Cine

Broadcast Solutions Inc

rebotnix Technologies

CineTape

Wooden Camera

Rig Wheels Passport

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Opal

Technodolly

Aerial Filmworks

FJS International, LLC

CineLab

Willys Widgets

Paralinx LLC

Glidecam

The Slider

CineTape

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Metropolis Post

Willys Widgets

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Glidecam

Paralinx LLC

Visual Products

Tai Audio

Opal

Rig Wheels Passport

Wooden Camera

CineLab

Technodolly

Ritter Battery

Aerial Filmworks

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

The Slider

FJS International, LLC

Abel Cine

rebotnix Technologies