So, you ultimately got me! After owning this lens for 2 weeks now I can say it has become my new always-on lens for my S1H! The current series is so high quality, tack sharp, very resistent to unwanted flaring or ghosting. And I love this 1.6 squeeze which is a match made in heaven for my Lumix S1H. You have been one - if not THE - anamorphic ambassador for me in YT - thanks for bringing anamorphic to many of us!
My wife is a flamenco dancer and I knew i had to watch this video as soon as I saw your dancer subject in the thumbnail. Nice work, I hope that was a fun shoot!
Just got my Sirui 50mm full frame anamorphic delivered this afternoon. First quick test shooting in open gate mode with my Panasinic S1H completely knocked me off my feet - just wow how immersive the footage becomes. Only thing I somehow underestimated: both Sirui and Panasonic should contribute to a 3 month subscription to a gym - handheld the combo gets really heavy, and I am very lucky that I bought the famous Nitze top handle to have a propper grip on my rig.
Will be interesting to watch this comparatively speaking with the Great Joy sitting patiently on the sidelines, waiting to come into the competition cage.
I bought this a few months ago to use on my C70, but I tried it on my travel rig yesterday, an R6 Mark II👌. Loving the results and that lens mount is really handy for an Arca plate to go on the 40cm travel slider. I'm heading to Tokyo in 3 weeks and I'm already loving the idea of this lens in those streets!
@@supergrammarbecause I will make a cinematic review about it, I got a additional discount off the early bird price from Sirui(which originally is 1190$ or something like that).
Just a quick update for all of you who want to use this lens with the Ronin RS2 and the 3D Focus module: This setup can be a killer because it provides AF for this lens mounted on a gimbal. BUT, the 3D Focus module has a range limitation of appr. 6-7 meters, and whenever there is nothing in the range it automatically sets the focus to infinity which makes completely sense. Infinity for the 3D Focus module is at the end of the focus throw of the lens barrel - i.e. if this position is over the optical infinity of the lens, far away objects and backgrounds get blurry. This can get fixed by adding shimming rings to the lens, and Sirui Germany was very friendly to send me a set. So, I could get the optical infinity in perfect sync with the end of the lens barrel throw for my S1H - is also very handsome for manual focusing - you just turn the barrel to the ende, and you are focused at infinity.
Just pulled the trigger on this lens, and a Panasonic S1H because of this video! Can’t wait to shoot 6k open gate!!
2 года назад
Hey Glenn ! :) cool to see you here :) i guess for youtube having no AF is a downside, are you back at making music videos? I can't wait to see what you make with it! Do you cover that also on your youtube channel ?
@SpectreSoundStudios, I am going to buy a camera this weekend and am torn between getting the Panasonic S1H or the A7SIII. What made you go for the S1H instead of another competion camera such as A7SIII or BMPCC6kpro.
So how does it pair with the S5? Thinking of getting one. Looks great on the s1h for sure, super cinematic, if i dare say the word lol. Great video man.
While i would like to order one now. I'll wait for more alternatives. Will probably pop up more cheap offerings (this price range) in the near future. It's clearly possible to manufacture Anamorphics at a lower cost.
It's interesting to me to see how big of a deal the "squeeze change" was for the Sirui APS-C lenses, but your review seems to be the only one to really mention it for the Full Frame models. 1.6x infinity to 1.55x close on the FF vs 1.33x infinity to 1.25x close on the APS-C? That is only a ~1% improvement with the FF model. Why isn't this a bigger deal for these lenses when it was such an issue for the APS-C ones for other reviewers?
Do you reckon ATOMOS will update firmware to have 1.6 de-squeeze on the Ninja V at some stage? Btw - love the look of this. The dancing scenes were beautiful!
First off, great video!! I have a question though. I'm a livestreamer who is looking into potentially moving to a full frame anamorphic setup to add a bit more of a cinematic quality to my broadcasts, and the way you're framed in this video is superb. I was wondering around how far from the camera you were when filming this, if you remember?
An important analysis that helps us clearly understand this wonderful lens. Congratulations. My doubts are the following: 1- I think I understand in your explanation that 50mm with 1.6 sequeeze is equal to 32mm. Does that mean it will give me less wide angle than the LUMIX 16-35mm full frame I have ? 2 - I'd be missing out the huge pan of the lens if I downscale to c4k 4128 x 2176 ( S1H + Ninja Atomos V / DCI 4K 17:9 ). 3- Ninja Atomos V allows me to visualize with the appropriate anamorphic decompression? . I can't figure it out for myself. thank you very much for your help with these reports S1H sirui. My unconditional support for your channel.
hey dude! great video! as usually! can You tell me more about color profile? did U use some LUT? Did You made color correction in DaVinci or Premiere Pro? or mean its natural color rendering of this lens? Bests and keep doing what You doo because You doing it very well!
Thanks adam! I'm using a LUT that's not out yet. A friend has been working on it for a long time. Color correction for this video was done in Resolve, but it was very mild - mostly bringing down highlights. This is very close to what you get straight out of camera.
You got me hyped for S1H, but I think 3:2 6K mode might not justify buying S1H. Is this mode available only as internal 4:2:0/10 bit recording in 200Mbit L-GOP? Is it possible to push this via HDMI? If so what bit depth, chroma sampling and format?
The shallow mirrorless mounts allows many more optical design choices for lens. Allowing them to be made lighter, or cheaper, or faster than old DSLR mounts would allow.
Hi man! Thanks for video! Colours and contrast and overall image so beautiful! Can't help but ask - how did you do this? Simple log footage with rec 709 lut and some tweaks or something really special?
Hi Tito, I would have a question re working with S1H 5.4K footage (for the benefit of 30fps over the 6K true Open Gate) and the Sirui 50mm T2.9: De-squeezing the 5.4K sensor (5376 x 3584) horizontally by 1.6 results in a format of the footage of 8.600 x 3584 (rounded) which is pretty much 2.4:1 or DCI Scope 2.39. In Davinci Resolve, I would adjust the project / timeline dimensions to this huge value or go for any reasonable fraction of it, depending on the desired export format. So, for example, I could got with: - 8.600 x 3584 (that's really huge) - 5.184 x 2160 (if I want to export with a height matching UHD or C4K) - 4096 x 1716 (same logic, but here for the width) - 2048 x 858 (just for a fast render and quick review) I have tried out all of those formats for export (just leaving the timeline at the largest format), and they all look good - expecially the two larger ones are awesome! My question for you: Where does this extra horizontal resolution come from when de-squeezing the footage in an NLE sich as Davinci Resolve? In other words: in my case of shooting at 5.4K on the S1H, I am ending up at a resulution of (5.4 x 1.6) K = 8.64 K (!!!). I would assume that Davinci Resolve does a superb job during the desqueeze, interpolating the new pixels from the original sensor format and adding those in between horizontally. I do not have any other explanation to this. Anyway, the results are soo great! What are your thoughts on this? To be honest, after having this lens for only 2 weeks or so, I felt like watching 'amputated' footage after switching to my sperical lens for use with a gimbal. Okay, for all you who might think I am kind of crazy about anamorphic: Yes, I am! One of my first visits of a cinema theater was the legendary 'Ben Hur' which was even wider than 2.39:1. I remember well that I couln't watch TV for a couple of days after this cinema visit. And only two years later when I stood in the original arena in Rome, exactly in the curve of one of the camera positions, I understood what great job the DP and his team had done for the movie, just alone to capture the final fight scenes in the arena. Cheers, Alex
Hey Alex! You have it all right in your comment already. The pixels come from interpolation. I'm a big fan of actually reducing the height instead of increasing the width - very few screens can play 8k, so why upscale and then have the player downscale? ;) I made a calculator for these aspect ratio decisions: www.tferradans/arcalc/go
@@AnamorphicOnABudget Hi Tito, thanks so much for your response! Reducing the height in my 5.4 example would mean to go for a timeline and render output of 4096 x 1716, right - this is an already predefined format in DR, btw. Will also try your calculator.
It's not about the "brightness" itself, but what that means for the image. A slower lens will decidedly give you smaller bokeh, and that's a lot of what anamorphic is about - especially at a short telephoto/medium focal length (50mm).
The spherical inside pretty clearly has green coatings. Do you know if that's just an error on the preproduction units, or will every piece have the green bullet?
@@AnamorphicOnABudget in Bradon Lis video, the main flare is also punchy green. Oof. I really hope they fix this, but still, these are the copies for marketing material, it's weird it's not nailed for them :(
Hello Tito! Will you be making a video on the new Sirui 1.25x anamorphic adapter? Have you received a review sample? I want to see if it is worth to use on spherical lenses while shooting DCI to get close to a 2.35:1 image.
How do you think these will mix with the other lenses? On the Z cam we can use different mounts. On the F6 this lens would allow me to shoot open gate but then maybe I use some of APS-c/MFT set for other shots. I have the full set of those.
'Hi, may I ask? I just received my Sirui 2,9 50mm anamorphic and I cannot record on my R5…….pressing the REC button does nothing!!!! Am I missing something? Please, help, Thanks
What is your recommendation for settings with this lense om my Canon R6 ... i normally shoot 4K 50 fps IPB light ... Canon C-Log-3 ... IS on ... auto WB .. PAL ... thank you upfront for taking time ... i primarly use primes Canon EF 50 mm 1.2 and 85 mm 1.2 ... but this Sirui 50 mm T2.9 with RF mount is on its way so was curios what you would recommend ... i use an external monitor and also a Ronin M gimbal and handheld and on my Sirui tripod as well as to the situation .. kindest regard, Klaus
hello there! Greetings from Greece!! so , if i shoot at 3:2 with these lens and my sony a7iii full frame the only think left to do is to disqueeze 1.6 right??? cause me neither dont like these ''fat'' black lines !!
@@AnamorphicOnABudget what if we switch to photo mode to use 3:2 and only record with an external monitor? I’m not sure how that would affect the video quality and I would have to connect a mic to the monitor itself.
You can use it on 4:3, as long as you know your resulting aspect ratio will be 2.12:1, and you might need to crop to adapt to more common aspect ratios.
Yes there's light loss to the slower aperture, but even very expensive anamorphics or cinema lenses don't typically go above f2.8. In a lighting-controlled scenario its also not really desirable to get that much bokeh anyway.
What are you talking about, there are a lot of anamorphic/cinema lenses that go above f2.8, even budget ones. Also "its also not really desirable to get that much bokeh anyway" ?? Some of the most famous DPs shoot wide open all the time
@@kidcoma1340 Sad I need to explain this to you, but what some select people do and whats more common are two different things. 1.33x is barely anamorphic, I'm talking real anamorphic like 1.8x-2x. Even Cooke anamorphics go to T2.3 for full frame and no higher. Use your head. Use google.
Find it interesting that a lot of reviewers seem to be ignoring Komodo when talking about this lens and how “no camera can de-squeeze it properly”. Or V-Raptor for that matter. Both of which have a native mount this lens comes in and can do proper 3:2 1.6x de-squeeze in camera…plus you’re getting VV coverage on V-Raptor in 7 & 8K. I get it’s a budget lens and those aren’t exactly “budget” cameras, but they exist and they can do the thing you say “no camera can do”.
I was wrong in that sentence. You're right about that. Yet, the Komodo ain't full frame and the sensor aspect ratio is 1.89:1, so the 3:2 recording mode is cropping the sides of it. The V-Raptor is full frame, but still has a shorter (not-as-tall) sensor as the S1H (21.6 vs 23.8mm), again, with 1.89:1 aspect ratio, which means cropping in. They CAN do 3:2 recording with 1.6x desqueeze (which was a very hard piece of information to find in writing), but they still don't beat the S1H in terms of sensor height, simplicity and budget. More specifically on the Komodo, I find it funny to bring up that camera since the big selling point of this lens is being full frame. So you're wasting coverage with the Komodo's S35-ish sensor.
@@AnamorphicOnABudget pretty sure the 3:2 1.6x anamorphic mode info is pretty readily available in the tech specs on the Red website. Also I get FF is one selling point, and is certainly at the forefront in the spherical glass world. But anamorphic at a more than 1.33x squeeze built like cinema glass should be in a mount I can use at this price point is what sold me. As a primarily S35 shooter, I like having FF coverage if I ever need it, but it isn’t the selling point for me at all. None of the other offerings from Sirui covered S35 or were even offered in a mount that’s adaptable to most S35 sensors. And nobody else is making similar glass at this price point right now for FF or S35 coverage. So limiting the lens to FF sensors only just because it covers FF seems odd to me. Anyways. Love the channel and the review. Wasn’t aimed at you in particular just seems to be a running theme in reviews I’ve seen. Thought it was curious.
@@TwoShotPics actually, i looked at the time of this review and didn't find anything about the 1.6x desqueeze. I found if afterwards, on some reviews and still couldn't find it in writing! Super strange. As for coverage, good point there, but Sirui's previous set was very much focused on S35, just not on RF mount, even though you could still get that through MTF services. :)
A note, and question, for you, Tito, from a professional: First, I highly respect your work and watch as a loyal fan. That being said, I believe that the decimal measurement markings really aren't a problem--and I say this as a focus puller. I'd be curious to hear your specific reasons for having this objection. As a result of our base-10 number system that people are accustomed to in life, 0.8 and 0.9 ft is likely easier to determine than something like 0'9" and 0'11" inches, for most. I'm guessing that this is more of a personal pet peeve, Tito, potentially since you have a very fond relationship with many other anamorphic lenses that use inches (which I won't knock you for at all--they are beautiful technical works, after all, let alone the history and other factors). I wonder though, is the reason that this is a problem for you because you want the markings to match the markings of a measuring tape (whether physical, or digital)? Comparing the two systems directly--base-10 and base-12--would either require a bit of math, or a good intuitive sense of both measurement systems, A.K.A., an ability to easily visually parse a foot into 10 sections and 12 simultaneously. To be completely honest, I don't think this is very difficult to do, or that it even poses much of a problem if you /can't/ do it. But, nevertheless, if you aren't using Lidar or Ultrasonic tape with a focus puller, this "issue" itself is completely null anyway. That is, unless you require a need to very quickly and repeatedly measure with a physical tape and translate that to a focus mark on the lens without any moment for thought; which seems a little... unscrupulous. Maybe most importantly, these markings are on the very close focusing end of the lens, where digital tape measures wouldn't even be accurate because of their off-lens-center nature--this essentially negates every point I just made about why inches may be easier to use. Furthermore, for the intended consumer of this lens--videographers, low budget DPs, and prosumer hobbyists--the potential issue that this difference in markings would create (even at further distances, if they existed on the lens) is an exceedingly rare scenario. Even for those in which it did occur, I don't think that it would be any more of an annoyance as one might have with visually determining distance in the first place. Lets be honest, if the subject is only "0.9" feet away from the sensor, you aren't focusing by distance marks anyway, but by monitor sharpness. Maybe you disagree or have another opinion about this, which I'd love to hear. Thank you for reading!
Thanks for the extensive writeup! The main reason I keep hammering the feet and inches is because ultimately the "fractions of feet" measurement is mixing imperial and metric system. If I had a say, I'd prefer EVERYTHING to be in metric, as I still find feet and inches too convoluted. I too find it easier to visualize 0.5 feet than 6 inches. But for a lens company which is trying to break into the film industry - especially the American film industry, which is where most money is -, I'd say stick to the standards. While using this lens (and other lenses that use fractions of feet, like Vazen) to film behind the scenes for other projects, I've been approached by multiple focus pullers who are interested in the lens, but they all pointed the inconvenience of this mixed measurement. And the particular scenario mentioned was for close ups at fast apertures, where the difference of an inch can get you bad results (like focusing on someone's ear instead of their eyes). I find that focus pulling is already challenging and stressful enough without adding unnecessary math on top of it. It's easier for the user if the lens sticks to the standard than to ask an entire group to adapt to a never-used-before calculation. What are your thoughts?
Heya. Great video. Question. Say I'm currently shooting on an APS-C camera but have plans to upgrade to full frame at some point. And I want to purchase an anamorphic lens set (specifically the SIRUI, for my budget haha) to shoot with. But, obviously I don't want to/can't afford to purchase two whole sets (APS-C & full frame - when the eventual other full frame lenses are released). What would I get on the APS-C body with this lens? Still a theoretical 1.6x squeeze, but just with the same crop factor as I'd see on other Full Frame lenses on an APS-C body? Would I be better served getting the APS-C and using 1.3 clear zoom on a full frame body?
Yes to the first question. And I'd say no to the second. I'd stick with this one because of the stronger squeeze factor (it's not theoretical, it's 1.6x regardless of sensor size). The APS-C set is much more limited in terms of coverage and 1.33 is too subtle in comparison.
Nice video. Just my thoughts, china uses metric system, and as a Chinese brand I think it makes a lot of sense to do it that way, Komodo does offer 1.6x squeeze. Cheers
Yes, it makes sense. My point about imperial scales (which I also despise) is that it's the standard in the film industry. So if they wanna break into that rich market, imperial is something to consider.
Hi I just bought a Sirui anamorphic 35mm f1.8 and my camera is Panasonic GH5 and also I have Viltrox speed booster EF-M2II ( used typically for Sigma 18-35mm ). So Sirui offers an ef-mount adapter for their 35mm anamorphic. Will this work to combine 35mm anamorphic mft converted and mounted on ef speed booster and then mounted on GH5? And if yes how good or bad will be the results? Thank you
@@AnamorphicOnABudget thank you for your answer . But ! why not? My sigma is also ef-m ( Canon mount ) and is compatible to Viltrox speedbooster (ef-m to mft) . What will happen if I convert my mft sirui 35mm anamorphic to ef-m ( sirui offers this adapter for 35mm anamorphic) and then attach it to my speedbooster for what reason it shouldn't work? I want to know if I will get more extra light oder less crop or it will not work at all . And if not please I need logical explanation to know why not. I mean nothing is impossible right?
Okay so would it be better to de-squeeze everything in post by 1.6x, 1.51x, 1.555 (the in-between), or custom based on the shot? Just curious on how to handle that issue correctly
I'd desqueeze everything by 1.6x and not worry about it too much. If any shots look too strange, then experiment with the value. But overall, nobody notices the diffference.
Could you try something with added filtration on this? I feel like this is the first usable anamorphic at this price point (mechanically...), let's not talk about the Sirui 1.33x... But it's still way to clean, although better than the 1.33x obviously. I have a feeling if you throw on a 1/4 Black Satin or HBM, Glimmerglass, BPM, whatever - doesn't really matter at this point - it could go somewhere with this lens. It is sharp on it's own - would be interesting to detune this somehow. Are you able to test this?
You say the S1H is “the only camera capable of squeesing the most performance out of the lens” Are you forgetting the Kinefinity Mavo Edge? I do believe it has FF 8k and 4k open gate 3:2 recording modes 🤔
Hey thanks for this video, you mentioned to manually desqueeze but i don't think there is a way to manually on Davinci Resolve there's only presets 1.5 or 1.8 ... please help 😢
Mind giving you thoughts on the new Sirui 50mm versus the old Sirui 50mm + Great Joy adapter? I have all the old Sirui lenses and preordered the adapter, not certain if i should go with the new 50mm as well. What's your opinion? Shooting on a Sony A7S III. Thanks a lot!
@@AnamorphicOnABudget It looks like you had your hands tied with the mirror and favored free movement for the camera and settled to have no lights for most of the set and then changed your mind and added a single light shooting from the corner of the room to account for the overall flatness created by the reflective walls and mirror. With dance it is hard for sure because you don't want lights to get in the way but another cheap solution would have been to use negative fill (bringing in some black bed sheets even) to help create a bit more shape. The key light in some of the shots was also a bit hard, bouncing it off the ceiling could have helped supposing it could still compete with the window light. I also feel like you exposed for the windows to preserve the view but since the skyline is out of focus and not really the most important element of the shot I would have personally exposed the subject higher and let the view outside be a bit hotter. The shadows where her face live most of the time are a bit flat suggesting you shot at a low ISO which caused the shadows to get a bit crushed at the bottom of the gamma curve and as a result they lacked detail and tones started to blend together. This could also be a result of the grade, its hard to say for sure. When at a Low ISO stops in the shadows begin to blend together and flatten and it made the shots with flat lighting look even more flat. If this were more of a videography type think it would be fine but for a cinema lens this really does not put it in the best light. Just my opinion, I wasn't there.
@@HalloweenTelevision A good assessment still! I went somewhere in the middle for the sky and dancer, as if I only have a blown out bg, I can't account for the bokeh either. This whole thing took less than two hours, and the sun travelled so much across the sky, the light was exactly to make up for how flat things got, but still didn't work for much. The biggest issue is I messed up and forgot my NDs at home, so I had to shoot at shutter angle 11 and bottom out the ISO, relying in post production to add the motion blur. :P
