The Orlando Magic, a professional basketball team based in Orlando, Florida, had a roster of players in the 2018 season. The team consisted of several notable players who played key roles throughout the season. One of the standout players on the roster was Aaron Gordon, a forward known for his athleticism and scoring ability. **Gordon was a key contributor to the team's offense, often leading the team in scoring.** Another important player on the roster was Nikola Vucevic, a center who was known for his rebounding and interior scoring ability. **Vucevic provided a strong presence in the paint and was often a dominant force on the boards.
Depth of field is also affected. Although anamorphic and spherical lenses technically have the same depth of field, in practice you have to use a longer focal length with anamorphic in order to achieve the same angle of view. Therefore, at the same subject magnification, anamorphic lenses produce a shallower, more cinematic depth of field. With film, this difference could be as pronounced as going from a 2X to a 1X crop factor, depending on whether area was reserved for audio. With digital, the difference is much subtler, and with RED ® is equivalent to going from a 1.25X to a 1X crop factor:
5x and can rack focus down to about 1ft to infinity with out using extra close up filter not sure if its possible , ill be one of the first to buy one. For easier on-set visualization, a de-squeeze feature is enabled by default in the viewfinder and LCD preview screens when an anamorphic resolution is selected.
**Vucevic provided a strong presence in the paint and was often a dominant force on the boards.** Other notable players on the roster included Evan Fournier, a shooting guard known for his scoring ability, and Terrence Ross, a shooting guard known for his three-point shooting. **Both Fournier and Ross were relied upon to provide scoring off the bench and were often key contributors to the team's success.
SLR Magic 2x Anamorphic – my footage and first impressions
What informs the film look? Of all the technical aspects that do, I think it comes down to three key ingredients. 24p, a wide dynamic range and a 2x anamorphic lens. I and many other filmmakers chase that look. Well, I’ve just returned from Photokina in Cologne, Germany with a surprise. 2 years on from my first visit to SLR Magic at Photokina in 2012, they are back with a 2x anamorphic lens in 2014.
This lens has the potential to revolutionise the consumer market for cinema-standard anamorphic.
2x anamorphic is a Hollywood gold-standard spanning numerous decades and today the format is massively popular, just like in the classic era of anamorphic-shot blockbusters. Ridley Scott’s Blade Runner and Spielberg’s Jaws spring to mind when I think “anamorphic”. Such lenses are now used in a number of major features and music videos. (You can see what Quentin Tarantino, a long time anamorphic shooter, had to say about his preference here on EOSHD)
The lenses were originally designed to avoid the resolution loss of cropping Super 35mm film, but the unique stylistic properties of 2x anamorphic are now so ingrained in cinema, they are in the very DNA of it.
At Photokina I was also able to see first hand the interest of camera manufacturers in supporting this staple of Hollywood on their cameras. Panasonic were the most interested by far.
Matt Frazer of Panasonic in the US appeared instrumental in giving anamorphic a higher profile back at base in Japan. Upcoming firmware for the Panasonic GH4 already takes a step closer, adding 3:2, 4:3 and 1:1 aspect ratios for 4K recording and enabling a significant vertical resolution gain of up to 2880 lines using more of the sensor capture area to record the anamorphic image. A perfect match to the format of the 2x lens. From a standard 16:9 aspect ratio sensor, the cinema anamorphic format 2x squeeze produces an aspect ratio which is very narrow (3.55:1). It’s still nice (see image below) but it isn’t a standard.
A Canon girl shot on the SLR Magic Anamorphot 2x at Photokina by Andrew Reid / EOSHD
Now with 4:3 the 2x anamorphic aspect ratio gets much closer to the 2.35:1 of true Cinemascope.
Blackmagic were interested in the anamorphic too, and in true engineer style decided to try and break it! There we did a colour chart test and a quick grade in Resolve but without raw, the A7S was adding too many variables into the mix to really get an idea of what colour balance the glass itself was responsible for. Blackmagic seemed most keen on a very high end lens. SLR Magic are at this stage aiming for a consumer price level with it. All this interest from manufacturers is great for feedback though and it’s fantastic from my point of view to see them taking an interest in anamorphic finally. As a filmmaker there’s nothing more satisfying to my eyes than the overall optical character produced by the format.
Oval spheres glint out from waterfall bokeh and lights pointed into the lens flare horizontally like in a sci-fi blockbuster. The widescreen composition gives you more artistic freedom in where to place actors in the frame and you can do slower, more graceful pans without them leaving the frame. You get a vertical resolution gain (if the camera supports it), as well as the possibility of a horizontal stretch for upscaling to 4K and beyond. Last but not least is the ability to do a close up with a 50mm portrait lens yet isolate the subject horizontally as if at 25mm wide angle. It’s an amazing look. Now you can even buy TVs and computer monitors with the wider aspect ratio to display anamorphic footage to it’s full potential, as well as home cinema projector lenses, notably from Schneider Optics (who now own Isco Gottingen, makers of the Iscorama and owners of the Iscorama focus patents).
There’s some more about the anamorphic from Andrew Chan of SLR Magic in my recorded interview which I’ll upload soon or transcribe to the pages of EOSHD. Overall I was very satisfied with the character of the prototype 2x anamorphic. It is practically cinema on a stick. Areas to improve are as ever, are purely in one area as far as I’m concerned – the challenges of quickly focusing close without diopters.
SLR Magic Anamorphot 2x prototype on my A7S with Zeiss 55mm F1.8 FE Blackmagic review SLR Magic Anamorphic footage with Andrew Chan
The pre-production SLR Magic 2x anamorphic provides coverage to a 50mm lens on a Super 35mm or APS-C sensor, maybe as wide as 35mm. I shot the above footage with it in APS-C crop mode in 1080p on the Sony A7S, using the Zeiss 55mm F1.8 FE as the taking lens. On full frame the combination nearly covered, just a bit of a vignette. Putting a 60mm lens on there may have worked but we didn’t have one to hand, though 85mm would have definitely worked without vignetting. It’s possible the Zeiss OTUS 85mm F1.4 would have worked well.
(As it happens, the existing 1.33x SLR Magic Anamorphot found a natural partner in the Leica 15mm F1.7 on the GH4. That lens was just so sharp with it and what surprised us was the lack of any vignette, even at 15mm. A lovely combination and I want to buy one!!)
LOMO square front anamorphic lenses are unreliable, old, rare, irreplaceable, heavy but truly beautiful
Current 2x anamorphic solutions (I have a few!!) are even more expensive and sparse than the 1.33x adapters from the DV era, or 1.5x Iscorama so I’ve been persuading SLR Magic to make a 2x solution for a while now. The LOMO square front (above) and round front lenses (not in my collection) have a factor of 2x but the square fronts are a bit wonky mechanically and mine do a strange compression change when racking focus, whilst round fronts are even rarer and will set you back over $6k per lens. Then if you’re lucky they will work ok. If you’re unlucky, well kiss goodbye to your $6k. You really do not know what you’re going to end up with on eBay sometimes.
Pro rental options are Zeiss Master Anamorphic, Vantage Hawk and Panavision 2x anamorphic but these aren’t accessible for the consumer or enthusiast or even most professional filmmakers actually.
2x Kowa Prominar lenses like the 8Z give lovely images but they are impractical to shoot with. Dual focus means you cannot rack focus during a shot and even a single shot setup with fixed focus takes an age to do. Because they are really projection lenses, designed to throw light at a wall, the minimum focus distances are huge.
Other consumer 2x anamorphic lenses from vintage eras do have single focus but are extremely rare. How rare? Well in the case of Isco, we’re talking about maybe a dozen, possibly. Back before the Iscorama price bubble formed (because of single focus) I was very lucky to obtain the unobtainable, a 2x Iscorama (badged Centavision) which appears to be one of only a handful of custom made lenses at the Isco factory for the Widescreen Centre in the UK, possibly a cobbling together of Isco and Kowa 2x elements, Iscorama patented focus mechanism all sweetly packed into whatever Iscorama 42 housing they had going spare in the mid 1990’s. It’s different to the “CentaVision” that crops up on eBay occasionally that is basically a rebadged Kowa dual-focus projection lens. I’ve never seen another one for sale, despite looking weekly, sometimes daily for the past 5 years!!
My collection of anamorphic lenses built up over the years (2x Iscorama centre-rear)
With an anamorphic adapter, it’s important for the lens to be lightweight as it’s going to be attached to the filter thread of your taking lens. The Anamorphot 2x is certainly that. Though it’s longer than the 1.33x version, it weighs about the same. There are no Panavision, Zeiss or Vantage Hawk anamorphic lenses at the high end of the filmmaking industry that are this light or as well suited to small cameras, lightweight rigs, POV rigs or aerial drone shoots. So it is a unique piece of glass.
I used an SLR Magic diopter for close focus on the 2x anamorphic footage above, however the lens maintains the built in semi-close-focus mode of the 1.33x without diopters.
Though still relevant in a world of 16:9 sensors, 1.33x anamorphic is more a video standard really so it’s fantastic to see the 2x cinema standard come to life in the hands of SLR Magic. As this lens develops, be sure to check EOSHD for more updates.
Two classes of lenses are typically used in production: spherical and anamorphic. Spherical are more common and are the assumed lens type unless specified otherwise. Spherical lenses project images onto the sensor without affecting their aspect ratio. Anamorphic lenses, on the other hand, project a version of the image that is compressed along the longer dimension (usually by a factor of two). Anamorphic lenses therefore require subsequent stretching, in post-production or at the projector, in order to be properly displayed.
** Overall, the 2018 Orlando Magic roster was filled with talented players who each played a significant role in the team's performance throughout the season..
Reviews for "Scouting Reports on the 2018 Orlando Magic Player List"
1. John - 1/5 stars - The 2018 Orlando Magic player list was a complete disaster. The team lacked talented players and struggled to make any impact on the court. It seemed like they were just going through the motions, and there was no excitement or energy in their gameplay. The list was filled with underperforming players who couldn't step up when it mattered the most. Overall, it was a disappointing season for the Orlando Magic, and the player list reflected their lackluster performance.
2. Sarah - 2/5 stars - The 2018 Orlando Magic player list left much to be desired. While there were a few standout players, the majority of the team seemed to lack the necessary skills and chemistry to succeed in the league. The list lacked depth and relied too heavily on individual performances rather than a collective effort. The lack of a strong leader or a go-to scorer was evident throughout the season, making it difficult for the team to consistently win games. It was a disappointing year for the Magic, and the player list was a reflection of their struggles on the court.
3. Michael - 1/5 stars - The 2018 Orlando Magic player list was a disaster from start to finish. There was a complete lack of star power and talent on the team, which resulted in a season filled with frustration and disappointment. It seemed like the front office had no clear strategy in building the roster, as there was a lack of cohesion and chemistry among the players. The list was filled with underperforming and inconsistent players, making it difficult for the team to compete against the powerhouse teams in the league. Overall, it was a forgettable season for the Orlando Magic, and the player list was a major letdown.