SIRUI announce new 75mm f1.8 1.33x anamorphic lens for EF-M and other mount

Canon Rumors Guy

EOS-1D X Mark III
CR Pro
Jul 20, 2010
9,209
2,011
Canada
www.canonrumors.com
New York, May 24, 2021 – SIRUI today launches its new 75mm f1.8 1.33x anamorphic lens, giving filmmakers the ability to make telephoto images with an anamorphic look – creating images where the subject really stands out in the frame. This new focal length offers the same characteristic stretched oval bokeh and streaked flares that SIRUI’s 1.33x lenses have become famous for. Its anamorphic look combined with the wide f1.8 maximum aperture, 13-blade iris, and 1.2m close focus distance offers beautifully blurred backgrounds and excellent foreground separation. The result – stunning portrait shots.

The 75mm f1.8 1.33x lens required the SIRUI optical team to overcome key technical problems with a brand new optical design. It took persistent efforts and considerable investment to make this lens possible.
Made for APS-C sensor cameras, it joins the existing SIRUI lens lineup of 24mm f2.8, 35m f1.8, and 50mm f1.8 1.33x lenses. All four lenses have common aesthetics and handling...

Continue reading...


 

jvillain

EOS RP
Sep 29, 2018
274
220
What I don't get is why put an anamorphic in a photo lens housing? If your not giving me auto focus then give me a geared focus ring or atleast include a custom fitted silicon one grabbing and twisting the lens while shooting is a recipe for shaky footage.

Then again I'm not really sold on the 1:33 squeeze.
 
  • Like
Reactions: rontele7

rontele7

EOS M6 Mark II
Nov 8, 2017
55
66
Earth
There are probably less than 7 people shooting video on an EF-M camera, and only 2 of those even know what anamorphic is.

Talk about bad business strategy.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Avenger 2.0

slclick

ILFORD MULTIGRADE RC
Dec 17, 2013
4,545
2,890
After reading 15,000+ "It's not for me, so why would anyone need this" type of comments on CR, I have to wonder if some of you on here can function well with others IRL. The sun is the center of our solar system, not some guy with an R5 and an ego.
 

HMC11

Travel
CR Pro
Sep 5, 2020
50
45
But don't forget you can get cheap adapters from EOS-M to EF and RF and the APS-C sized M sensor is bigger than the S35 video standard. There are a lot of C100/C200/C300I/II/III and C70 users who know what an anamorphic lens is and would use one.
Do you mean EF to EF-M adapters? The other way round is not possible from a physics perspective. Similarly, there isn't any EF-M to RF adapter that I can find, and it would have to be only 2mm thick.
 

privatebydesign

I post too Much on Here!!
CR Pro
Jan 29, 2011
10,431
5,654
Do you mean EF to EF-M adapters? The other way round is not possible from a physics perspective. Similarly, there isn't any EF-M to RF adapter that I can find, and it would have to be only 2mm thick.
Sorry yes, brain fart! Too much coffee and post processing... Keep Calm!
 
  • Like
Reactions: HMC11

kten

EOS M6 Mark II
Oct 3, 2015
77
72
MFT Services proposes Sirui lens conversion for $200 per lens (shipping and lens excluded of course)
Worth mentioning MTF services don't convert users lenses fwiw, they just sell converted stock of their own with reasonable markup (not a straight mount swap, needs housing shaving down). If someone needs for L or RF mount swap I'd wait until they (MTF) have in stock because if you get on indiegogo offer you wont be able to get it converted. They mentioned in past they may start accepting lenses for conversion too in future but unless I'm mistaken that hasn't happened yet but happy to be corrected if that is the case.
 
  • Like
Reactions: slclick

EOS 4 Life

EOS R
Sep 20, 2020
989
786
There are probably less than 7 people shooting video on an EF-M camera
magic-lantern-eos-m.jpg
 

kten

EOS M6 Mark II
Oct 3, 2015
77
72
There are probably less than 7 people shooting video on an EF-M camera, and only 2 of those even know what anamorphic is.

Talk about bad business strategy.
It makes good business sense if you understand the product properly which too many people bashing it seem not to. It is natively mft and comes with addon options to fit sony, ef-m, etc not JUST ef-m. On top of that it is converted but not officially so they are free from selling a lens with caveats regarding frame coverage like if offered rf mount natively which isn't a simple mount swap/adapter and requires minor housing mod. Tito made a video about why he suspected they never did L and RF and I agree it seems smart as much as I'd like RF option without a premium.

I bet there are more than 7 who bought one converted to RF mount for C70/eos r in crop etc, never mind how many bought one in vanilla form for filming on BPCC 4k or a gh5 or whatever. How's that bad for business, they are not only tapping a huge niche but expanding it by tapping extra sales with adapter options with the kit and for those than can't be there is 3rd party business who mod them to other mounts like L and RF proving the demand is there. Sp they sell a lot of lenses AND avoid the issues with modified mounts and different out of spec in some modes coverage so perhaps they understand business better than us forumites who seem to not know much about a product do but bash these people heavily involved and do well do eh?

This thing will be very popular since the others in the series went extremely well and do better than most budget offerings like SLRM and Vazen in many regards at lower price, and size is a benefit when aimed at small mirrorless kits like panasonics and blackmagic pockets on smaller gimbals etc, and you can get aftermarket rings or add them yourself. This isn't aimed at people renting Cookes, at least not in work as I know some folks like that who WILL buy these for their home none work setups, any who have a small ef-m mount camera will likely buy that option (it'll swap to mft if they have bpcc's etc as comes with both fittings). Even pros doing weddings or low end video will likely use professionally since owning this kind of gearfor the price of renting Cooke or Arri masters for that kind of work.
 

Dragon

EF 800L
May 29, 2019
491
454
Interesting thing about anamorphic lenses. The focal length on the horizontal axis is shorter than on the vertical axis. This means that no current IS strategy (other than a gimbal) will work. It would be theoretically possible to modify an IBIS system to deal with the issue by tweaking H to V gain ratios, but AFAIK no such IBIS system exists today. Bottom line, if you are going to shoot with one of these things, you need to be all in to the cinema style of shooting including the gimbal. Also, it is hard to see what the overall advantage is. When you publish the video, it is going to go on a 2k or 4k screen with the same number of horizontal pixels that the camera would have made without the squeeze and also, since you have to letterbox the display, the same number of vertical pixels that a simply cropped image from the camera would have produced. There are a few ultra wide computer displays that provide an exception, but unless you are prepared to slap an anamorphic lens on a video projector, I can't think of any entertainment displays. Seems like a lot of effort to focus on a miniscule group of eligible viewers.
 
Oct 3, 2020
3
4
It's always good to read that EF-m is still considered investing! Sure many people bash the M-series, but same the medium format bashes the actually false "Full frame".
Of course fanatics will always fight, but 90% of the market is people who do never publish on fashion magazines and there likes, neither print huge size (but possible with some work), but basically see their pictures on normal sized prints and monitors.
Why this competition, where there is none (for me), I enjoy the package of high quality pics, even professional with some effort, professional cost for some reason more and even make nice videos... not for Hollywood of course, but good quality for average big screens and monitors...
Will happily see more about this lens.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CanonFanBoy

kten

EOS M6 Mark II
Oct 3, 2015
77
72
Interesting thing about anamorphic lenses. The focal length on the horizontal axis is shorter than on the vertical axis. This means that no current IS strategy (other than a gimbal) will work. It would be theoretically possible to modify an IBIS system to deal with the issue by tweaking H to V gain ratios, but AFAIK no such IBIS system exists today. Bottom line, if you are going to shoot with one of these things, you need to be all in to the cinema style of shooting including the gimbal. Also, it is hard to see what the overall advantage is. When you publish the video, it is going to go on a 2k or 4k screen with the same number of horizontal pixels that the camera would have made without the squeeze and also, since you have to letterbox the display, the same number of vertical pixels that a simply cropped image from the camera would have produced. There are a few ultra wide computer displays that provide an exception, but unless you are prepared to slap an anamorphic lens on a video projector, I can't think of any entertainment displays. Seems like a lot of effort to focus on a miniscule group of eligible viewers.
It is less aimed solely at making content for projector/ultrawide home monitors and more some folks just like the look of scope aspect ratio more, and feel it matches their content framing wise better than 16:9. Much the same way some photographers may find square crop matches some kinds of images better than 2:3 and not just for output intended for IG and the likes. As for gimbals they deal with completely different type of shake compared to IS/IBIS and you don't need anything special for lenses in this weight class and size, even my modest RS2 (consumer gimbal not high end by any stretch) is overkill for this and anyone remotely interested in video (anyone buying this lens) will have access to one. Not that they are always needed since sometimes you may want the handheld aesthetic or are locked down on a tripod.

There are more than squeeze factors to the look, a big part is folks may want the horizontal compression benefits sphericals wont give, the streaking flares, bokeh artifacts and so on. There are issues with these lenses but they get close to the look of much more expensive setups for extremely low price. There are issues such as the squeeze is NOT uniform and changes at close focus which can make ana mumps much much worse if you apply a 1.33 desqueeze uniformly (it shifts to 1.25 iirc). Common for the type of lens design (several ways of makign an anamorphic each with different issues) but hard to get around it at small size and price as the designs that don't suffer from that flaw are much bigger and harder to design. Also for those who want the oval bokeh and so on it is very very mild vs a 2 factor lens.

Just adding black bars to spherical lens in 16:9 output gives a very different look if you have foreground and background planes as it changes framing and so on. Only way it can be made the same is in flat scenes with only background, or only foreground subject against blank background. Otherwise the effects fl distortion on close objects, depth compression and so on all alters the look and is impossible to match adding bars in post. Apologies if that is obvious since it applies in stills world too but I overlook things like that too at times. For stills example like someone may think why get close with 50mm vs standing back with an 85mm and frame the subject the same, because it's gonna effect both my background compression and fov and the subject look, as well as DoF at equal f-stop, add into the mix I can get best of both worlds mix from with fov of wider, vs spherical lens at same fl, with some of the qualities of the longer one horizontally and the appeal (of these lenses) makes sense more.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: stevelee

EOS 4 Life

EOS R
Sep 20, 2020
989
786
Interesting thing about anamorphic lenses. The focal length on the horizontal axis is shorter than on the vertical axis. This means that no current IS strategy (other than a gimbal) will work. It would be theoretically possible to modify an IBIS system to deal with the issue by tweaking H to V gain ratios, but AFAIK no such IBIS system exists today
GH5 IBIS works with anamorphic for sure but identifying the lens settings is a manual process.
I bet S1H works the same way.
 

MoonMadness

EOS M50
May 24, 2021
31
48
There are probably less than 7 people shooting video on an EF-M camera, and only 2 of those even know what anamorphic is.

Talk about bad business strategy.
How is it bad business strategy, when for, what is it - something like $10/$20 - one can get a mount from them and use the same lens on different brand cameras, such as Sony? It's just a few exposed screws to remove is all it takes that anyone can do. Or just get the lens with the correct body mount already. Besides, M50 is super popular with Youtubers. I see tons of videos out there even from Youtubers that got the new M50ii - not to review the camera and send it back, but to actually use it for the content material. Maybe a lot of M owners don't know what anamorphic is because normally those lenses cost thousands of dollars more (and where did you get those super low numbers of 2 and 7? out of your- ). But only recently these affordable ones have come to market so I feel a lot more of them will become aware of it now.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CanonFanBoy

Dragon

EF 800L
May 29, 2019
491
454
It is less aimed solely at making content for projector/ultrawide home monitors and more some folks just like the look of scope aspect ratio more, and feel it matches their content framing wise better than 16:9. Much the same way some photographers may find square crop matches some kinds of images better than 2:3 and not just for output intended for IG and the likes. As for gimbals they deal with completely different type of shake compared to IS/IBIS and you don't need anything special for lenses in this weight class and size, even my modest RS2 (consumer gimbal not high end by any stretch) is overkill for this and anyone remotely interested in video (anyone buying this lens) will have access to one. Not that they are always needed since sometimes you may want the handheld aesthetic or are locked down on a tripod.

There are more than squeeze factors to the look, a big part is folks may want the horizontal compression benefits sphericals wont give, the streaking flares, bokeh artifacts and so on. There are issues with these lenses but they get close to the look of much more expensive setups for extremely low price. There are issues such as the squeeze is NOT uniform and changes at close focus which can make ana mumps much much worse if you apply a 1.33 desqueeze uniformly (it shifts to 1.25 iirc). Common for the type of lens design (several ways of makign an anamorphic each with different issues) but hard to get around it at small size and price as the designs that don't suffer from that flaw are much bigger and harder to design. Also for those who want the oval bokeh and so on it is very very mild vs a 2 factor lens.

Just adding black bars to spherical lens in 16:9 output gives a very different look if you have foreground and background planes as it changes framing and so on. Only way it can be made the same is in flat scenes with only background, or only foreground subject against blank background. Otherwise the effects fl distortion on close objects, depth compression and so on all alters the look and is impossible to match adding bars in post. Apologies if that is obvious since it applies in stills world too but I overlook things like that too at times. For stills example like someone may think why get close with 50mm vs standing back with an 85mm and frame the subject the same, because it's gonna effect both my background compression and fov and the subject look, as well as DoF at equal f-stop, add into the mix I can get best of both worlds mix from with fov of wider, vs spherical lens at same fl, with some of the qualities of the longer one horizontally and the appeal (of these lenses) makes sense more.
I guess if you are into bokeh and DOF that is different on the vertical axis than the horizontal, you may see something unique in an anamorphic, but seems to me that is about as far as it goes. The rest is more like a description of wine tasting.
 

kten

EOS M6 Mark II
Oct 3, 2015
77
72
I guess if you are into bokeh and DOF that is different on the vertical axis than the horizontal, you may see something unique in an anamorphic, but seems to me that is about as far as it goes. The rest is more like a description of wine tasting.
Not sure I follow the wine tasting thing? Composition and framing is arguably almost as important as lighting, almost. That type of lens gives yet another option in the toolkit of controlling that, it isn't just as simple as none typical dof behaviour. Judging by your profile pic I assume you're a wildlife/birder guy though so perhaps you simply don't care about the myriad things video folks care about, much the same way there will be endless wildlife photo aspects that I don't "get" or care about you could likely list are VERY important to your niche that both photographers and intended viewers care about. Regardless of whether I know about such things they may matter to those with deeper understanding and interest in that niche.

People have different needs and just because it isn't someones bag doesn't mean everyone else is wrong. I guess that is what bugs me about photo forums in general as seems we often fall into the trap of because it isn't our area = wrong. Like the endless canon are wrong because I'm not interested in it sentiments. Some folks really don't see the appeal of discrete cameras vs what a phone is capable of if the extra control and options such cameras bring to the table is irrelevant to them, doesn't mean everyone on here is wrong.