Cheap Anamorphic Lens Vs 50mm 1.8
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 4 июл 2024
- Support Siuri and get a lens pre-ordered here:
www.indiegogo.com/projects/ex...
Check out their other products:
cf.sirui.com/Anamorphic-Lens....
Check out some of my other gear used in this video:
Sony 50mm 1.8: amzn.to/3ae1ccB
Sony a7iii: amzn.to/2RvqXN0
Sony a6500: amzn.to/3ait6nB
Manfrotto Mini tripod: amzn.to/38eaWl1
Manfrotto Fluid Video head: amzn.to/2uX1jJj
In this video I share with you the newest product from siuri. Their 50mm f/1.8 anamorphic lens for apsc crop sensor camera bodies. After a quick recap about the origins of the use of anamorphic lenses I jump into a comparison pitting this new lens head to head against Sony's "nifty fifty" lens, their 50mm 1.8 give a good comparison and lets you see how the anamorphic lens changes what we can see with a given focal length.
Please enjoy this video and thank you for watching.
Check out some of my other videos while you're here!
Small gimbal review
• WEEBILL LAB, WORTH $600?
Smaller Gimbal review:
• Ultra light-weight gim...
Amazing camera movement (featured this this lens video you just watched):
• CGI VIDEO WITHOUT THE CGI
Video explaining how I get the table top product shots. ruclips.net/video/7raSuWTBjSE/видео.html
I built a prototype arm this morning to scale the idea to take my FS7. Used a 1.3 metre 2x4 piece of timber and 12.5 kg counter weight - learning a lot about the pivot point versus subject placement.
If you are familiar at all with anamorphic lenses, you'll know that a lot of them aren't very sharp. For instance, this lens is probably noticeably sharper than the $8000 Atlas Orion line that came out recently. Watching your footage I don't think I would want this lens to be any sharper than it is.
His video was fun, I wanna see a video from someone that actually worked with anamorphic lenses before
David B when I get mine I’ll compare it to my red isco
I wonder how pairing it with the dream fx filter from prism lens fx would look
What is it that makes these lenses so expensive?
Although I did feel the quality difference in this video. Not sure what it is though..
@@danlightened just the anamorphic aspect. the only downside is something more in the preference side like the sharpness.
That shot from under the table to reveal the sony e mount label was so creamy bro
How did he do thatt!?!
His shots look like CGI. Sick
@@mattc3510 stable hands. xD
a think he use a circular reel
Crane I guess.
"...the square aspect ratio really wouldn't catch on until Instagram came around." I am pretty sure Instagram's square format was actually inspired by the (almost) square image area of a Polaroid. Square format has also been popular for decades in medium format film. (I enjoyed and appreciated the video, by the way!)
I'm pretty sure Polaroids are dead on square (except for spectra).
@@Huskie Polaroid 600? Instax square ? I mean u can get them at literally all electronic shops
He was making a joke
It was common in 2010 to find toy camera apps that saved 1:1 pictures. Several were much better then IG.
Anamorphic lenses have extra glass elements (that do the squeezing) so that adds to the weight more than the barrel material. It has always been a consideration.
The table shot is freaking awsome
Amazing lens! Great B-roll, screen recording and video editing. Thanks for sharing
Thank you. Im glad you mentioned both positives and negatives. The footage you provided at the end looks very good and I would gladly sacrifice the sharpness to the anamorphic FOV. Looks like a good tool to pick up for the indie filmmaking or stylised documentary work.
Great video as always. Good to see you back!
2:58 technically you did wrong lining lens front threads, correct way to do this is to make sure your flange is lined up this is little circle with a crossing line sign on top of a camera
2:10 Bro that B Roll was absolutely amazing, really top level, I thought it was fake for a moment
Glad to see a video from you. The king of SC in the makes his return.
It's been a while for sure!
i watched "you" (a netflix series) and especially in portrait shoots there were vertical bokehs. and i learned why they were vertcal right now. thanks man 👍🏿
That lens is amazing, I’m so excited about the possibility of finally being able to shoot anamorphic soon
The real anamorphic lens gives a totally different feel. Which cropping the top and bottom doesn't give.
I agree, but I still crop videos, not just to give a cinematic look, but to emulate the feel of watching in the cinema. There is a reason, why movies are anamorphic...simply to replicate our field of view, which could be considered "anamorphic" as well, if you think about it.
If you are like me and would buy this MAINLY for the wider field of view and don’t care about kiddos being so hot about the horizontal lights and oval bokeh 🤦🏻♂️ then good for you.
@@RichieLarpa If you think about it, how exactly our field of view can be considered anamorphic? Anamorphic means distorted. Does human eye see everything distorted?
Your Production quality is great
I really liked the beginning there, I didn't realise the squishing was to fit in the audio, it makes sense.
I like anamorphic because it gives REAL "ultrawide" video. I so often see people doing faked 2.35:1 to try and make it seem more cinematic, but all they're doing is stepping further back and cropping the top and bottom to make things LOOK wide, when in actual fact it's a normal frame that's cropped at the top and bottom.
True anamorphic gives a true wide scene, no pulling back and cropping, actually fitting more to the side of the frames tha a normal lens can't do. This gives a true widescreen experience which is lost on so many videos now. It's not that bad, I'm used to it, but a true widescreen video is something special (the hateful eight)
The main thing that bugs me now is when people try to use the format without really knowing anything about using the format. Lots of films are just better off shot in 16x9 regular because they can't artistically and purposfully fill in that side area.
I love a nice purposefully shot anamorphic film, and to see it come to portable cameras and mobile phones is exciting.
You literally dont fcking know what you are talking about you twat. Lots of high end studio films shoot spherical but have a 2.40:1 ratio. Because it's a fcking industry standard. Stop trying to act all smart and just shut the fck up if you have no clue.
I love the Vlog look ... Amazing it's like a classic RNB image
Greatly appreciate this video. Masterfully done.
great content and info as always man!
My little hellion was annoying me as I was watching this video. Great review! Enjoyed it a lot and Im now subscribed good sir.
Your history of the anamorphic format is pretty far from accurate. It doesn't have anything to do with the soundtrack and in fact debuted about 30 years after we already had audio in motion pictures. It came about during the format wars of the late 50s/60's when movie studios were competing with the hot new invention of Television. They were after ways to get people into the theater and away from their tvs and one of the many ways they came up with doing this was by offering the biggest widest picture possible. There were multiple formats and ways of doing this, cinerama used multiple cameras to capture an ultra-wide angle of view for example. The one that truly stuck was Panavision (yeah thats where the lens and camera company came from). It has nothing at all to do with the soundtrack. Also stating the square aspect ratio didn't come about till Instagram is fairly inaccurate as well seeing as how until the format wars the standard ascpect ratio for movies was 1.3:1 for years (also known as the academy ratio). While not quite square it was pretty close. The more you know...
The Instagram comment was in jest. And I clearly read the wrong article about anamorphic history, I've been told I'm wrong a few times now with varying alternatives to what I said.
ahh yes, Cinemascope was the branded term for films shot in anamorphic at that time!
Thank you! I clicked into the comments to set him straight but you did a far better job then I ever could have and that's not easy to do. I live, eat and breath film. I have had and still have jobs in projection and developing film. Anyway, thanks once again!
History is nice.
But, people have to understand that it is just a “look” and I would only buy such a lens for the nice wider angle of view.
But for the “look” (oval bokeh and horizontal lights...)? 🤦🏻♂️
Anyways.
There are directors and movies who use 4:3 or different formats which, in some cases and movie purpose, look far better than in “hollywood” view.
Respect all film fans out there.
at last, thank you for explaining anamorphic in a way I can at last understand
Even though this is not a lens I would find useful for my needs, I found the video educational. Makes me happy there are lens manufacturers I have not heard of. How did you come across this lens/company?
As others have mentioned, great B-roll!
They actually contacted me and informed me of their crowd funding campaign.
Glad you liked the b-roll!
Great, great video mate!
Hi Christopher, Thanks for the great video. I realized that you also included some shots in full frame mode. Have you also tried how far you can go with clear image zoom to go wider than 1,5 apsc mode yet avoid vignetting? I am asking because I could only go to1.4 clear image zoom while other sources on the web say 1.3 works as well without vignetting. Using the the A73 as well.
Hi Christopher , great video ! How did you make that great close up shot at 2:11 ? gimbal? motorized slider? and what lens? thanks !
Nice, the sirui is definitely the better lens. It won't replace my current anamorphic line-up, but if it gets cheaper over the years, I may use it as a b lens as a back-up.
Great video! I'm new to the channel so I went into the comments to see what the community is like and found a toooon of criticism - both right and wrong, constructive and otherwise. I just want to encourage you that your audience clearly cares about what you're making! If they didn't, you wouldn't get any criticism. Keep it up, man!
thx for the info, great description.
Great info. B&H has the e mount on sale for $299. I was about to buy it when I noticed they had a used one in perfect condition for $249. I am shooting a live acoustic set for a band at a festival this weekend and might try the lens on the opening act.
The gimbal tips for balancing the camera were distracting me at the end of the video. I have the same camera and I ended up removing the lens support clips. I wonder if buying that lens which looks cool is really going to make a substantial difference in my footage and also it would be beneficial once I switch over to a Black Magic Camera? Another thing, can I get rid of the top and bottom black lines once I decompress the anamorphic image into widescreen? Sometimes I don't like the lines.
Being someone who owns a 21:9 monitor. Thank you. Thank you so much.
Why lol, the video was rendered in 16:9 so it's got double black bars for me ._.
what are you shooting this on!! those panning shots onto the lens are smooth loooks like global shutter
Great video!
Maybe you can explain how you do those crazy orbiting shots with the product details? Would love to know...
I'm pretty sure it was handheld, speeded up and then normalized throughout that orbiting
Good review & no arguing the price! Inexpensive way to reduce anamorphic MFD? Diopters. Pluses to that approach? they are dirt cheap and depending on the diopter power, you get a focus falloff that really "cinematizes" closeup footage. And in the end, arguably, the softness tradeoff of ana lenses is ok by me.
This lense on the Blackmagic pocket cinema would be dope as hell. Ultimate "low budget" cinematography camera
That is going to be my setup! :)
So excited to finally get my Sirui 50 mm, they delayed the delivery because of the corona virus :(
Yup. My school has those cameras and that's what i thought of as well. Maybe i'll get my teacher to buy one lol.
Yes!
@@andrifrauenfelder it work with ef mount?
@@ronynikke i think so
great video. stumbled on your channel cuz of the YT algorithm I guess! as an a emoji. enthusiast myself, I appreciate companies providing some cheaper solutions to things like anamorphic. 1.33x squeeze isn’t my cup of tea though (more of a 1.5x, 1.8x and 2x kinda guy) but this looks decent. the flares still seem to be misaligned like i’ve seen in other videos - wish there was a way to align properly without having to mess w the screws in the lens mount. also, you say it’s weird to shoot anamorphic photos but a lot of us do it. and generally, people look to anamorphic to get away from the clinical sharpness of modern lenses. but comparing sharpness between this and a modern lens makes sense for the general population. however, in the anamorphic group, I believe the general consensus is that it’s too actually sharp haha. again, I appreciate sirui taking this leap and I hope to see more from other manufacturers - rumor has it that Rokinon/Samyang are working on some ana glass.
lastly - your table top b roll is freaking dope. it’s like u used a robotic arm like MKBHD has. how did u pull those shots off?????
Thanks for the insight! I really am not well versed in all things anamorphic or the community around it, so it's nice to see someone with a little more experience giving their thoughts. I would like to see a 2x lens, that sounds like it would be super-squeezed!
Here is a link to how I got those table top shots. ruclips.net/video/7raSuWTBjSE/видео.html
Hi, how have I seen that you use the sony a6500 a lot in your videos, I wanted to ask you if you have a soft focus error when shooting at f1.8 with lenses like the sony 35mm. Some photos in my case are soft in focus and others are very focused, in AF-C, Flexible Point also happens to me with the 50mm f1.8
Not if I'm using sony lenses. Sometimes with 3rd party options it's a little iffy but it's gotten way better in recent years.
@@ChristopherBurress yes im use Sony 50mm OSS and 35mm oss
Hate to be that guy, but a couple of corrections: 1) 1.33 (4:3 in tv land) aspect ratio films were some of the first kinds of films to become popular. Almost every classic from the silent era to the early sound era and beyond. Wider formats didn't really become popular until the 50s, even though they existed way before. 2) Anamorphic formats and their adoption didn't have anything to do with the way soundtracks were encoded on film. It was a way to use more of the film negative to capture the image, when you wanted a wider aspect ratio. And of course filmmakers also came to like its secondary properties.
Well I want to try this out!
SIRUI makes a great tripod. Love mine!
Yeah, I'm also one of the SIRUI tripod user, but to be honest, it shocked me a lot that this lens made by SIRUI😃
Very interesting lens. Great video!
I have Panasonic Lumix GH5. Do you think this anamorphic lens can fit with or without an adapter? If I need an adapter, do you have any suggestions?
Great videos. I would be interested in a review of an Opteka 500mm f/8 Mirror Lens. I'd be especially curious about obtaining pin point stars with it for some astrophotography.
Subscribed for the tip and saving couple hundreds
What lens did you use to shot the scene at 2:10? That looks very good!
Nikon 55mm 2.8 micro. It's a vintage manual lens.
thank you for info.
WOW, how did you do the shot at 2.10 ? Did you use the edelkrone motorised rail with the laser ?
Much much cheaper solution, check out the pinned comment for a link to my how-to video.
In the footage at the end I'd have really liked to see a bit more of those signature distorted lens-flares. It's a big part of what you'd get a lens like this for.
The lack of gears could really be a problem. It'll affect the type of moving shots I'd be able to execute with this lens.
Good video though!
Thanks for watching! I probably could have gone after a few more shots like that for sure.
Hey watching this and enjoying your side by sides, but I have to ask if you're using the A7sIII and the A6500 in every test? I'm asking because if thats the case then your side by sides might be quite wrong to compare. I'd assume you're not using the full frame on the A7SIII if you're matching the super 35 sensor on the a6500 so are you in super 35 crop in? If you're then you're only getting like a 3rd of your 4k sensor sharpness and quality on it. That combined with the a6500 actually having a 6K sensor that down samples internally. If thats the case then your tests will always favor whats on the a6500 in sharpness! I gotta know though... Also A7siii has two more stops of dynamic range so that might account for your changes in contrast. Great videos though! Seem to show what we wanna see! Give us more! ha ha.
That depth of field blur, my god.
The real advantage to an anamorphic lens is that the image sensors on most cameras are square(Like 35mm film) and when shooting with an anamorphic lens on a camera like the Gh5 you can use the whole sensor and actually shoot a 6K video! Most cameras crop the top and bottom off the image sensor when shooting 4k video. . .
I don’t believe this lens takes advantage of the anamorphic mode on the GH5. You’d have to create the aspect ratio of anamorphic like you would with a spherical lens.
Wow! Is it possible to mount this lens on a Canon EOS M? Adapter?
Hi Christopher, are you making your camera movements with a motorised slider with automated focus change ? How do you get your kind of "orbital" movement around your gear ?
It's all manual, manual movement and manual focus change. Check out the pinned comment for a link to a video that explains the rig I came up with.
@@ChristopherBurress much appreciated ;-)
you had the sirui for aps-c cameras on the a7 and the fe 50 for full frame on the aps-c 6000 series?
I set the a7 to apsc mode and showed me doing it in the video. I also did showed what kind of vignetting you get if you use it on a FF sensor. What's your question?
Would the colours not be so drastically different like in the video demo at the start because you’re using the a7 for one lens and the aps-c 6xxx for the other lens? The sirui is an apsc lens which is why it’s such a niche product
Yeah I wouldn't bother with comparing the colors outside of the side by side photos that were shot on the same camera.
Did you know you can get an anamorphic lens for the iPhone 5s and up and the filmic pro software does the un squeezing
I wish one of these darn anamorphic lens manufacturers would make an EF mount!
This Campaigns is closed - where can i buy this epic lens?
EF? canon mounts?
Is it available for Nikon Z mount?
The lack of focus/aperture gears is the only reason I'm not buying it. It looks awesome, and I'm kinda shocked they missed that.
its a awesome lens for that price if you shot vids.
If we are NOT talking about the bokeh/flares, is there any reason you wouldn't just use a 35mm and letterboxes? For example at 1:51, if you de-squeeze that 50mm and letterbox the 34mm zoom, the framing will be about the same, right?
Yeah there is really no reason to need this if you are happy with the alternative shots.
Great review 🤟🏻👏🏻 so a question if I use the M 4/3 version using it on the GH5 will I have 100mm?
You have~ 75 mm KB Äquivalent (50mm x 2 : 1,33 = 75,18mm)
Volki Holki thank you, so another question 😅 do you recommend an adapter to make it wider?
Kleber Araujo TV I wouldˋnt recomment to adapt. There are some videos on RUclips who shows a wider accesory lens adapted on the Sirui. 🤷. I personally hope that Sirui will publish a wider lens(35mm)😀
Sick Robotic B Roll
how to do your product shot movement?
This could be pretty good for Panorama style photos. Get more detail in instead of cropping lots out. The alternative to cropping is tripod+stitch, not ideal for quick snaps.
Thomas Jacobsson i always wanted an Xpan for those nice panoramic shots. This is an affordable alternative for the kind of cinematic pictures I want to shoot.
I think that bokeh is similar because you are comparing not to the equivalent field of view lens, if its a 1.33X anamorphic lens you should divide 50 by 1.33, result is 37, so a 35mm should be the lens to compare with, then you observe the difference from there and you should have slightly more bokeh with the anamorphic, unless I am totally wrong...
2:11 that b roll shot was fucking epic
Took a few tries to get the focus change just right.
Christopher Burress that shot is on an advertising level, really awesome! :)
Does he have the anamorphic on a full frame and the 50mm on a crop? Am I missing something here?
sirui is amazing thx for video
did you use IBIS> how does it work on an anmorphic lens? i've this on early bird
Oh good question! If I had to guess since you see the same FOV (width wise) as a 35mm lens you may want to set your ibis you that. But I'm not 100% sure.
It's probably not going to work properly. The lens is wider but only on the X axis. I guess you would have to choose which axis you wanna stabilize for.
Wow at 1:52 the lens is so powerful it actually made the car disappear
I thought film tends to be slightly on the softer side of the digital look. If so, this lens would appeal more. But my question about anamorphic in this digital age relates to resolution. You could put " letter box" on the Sony lens footage and it would look similar to the Sirui. But does the Anamorphic lens basically produce better pixel density - or am I looking at this wrong?
You don't throw away any pixels from the source footage so you should theoretically get higher digital resolution with this lens.
@@ChristopherBurress Thanks for your answer Christopher. That was my thinking.
Great video as always, I really like anamorphic lenses.
Just one thing; I'm probably a minority, but I have a 21:9 monitor. When you "put" the 21:9 video into the 16:9 I got letterboxes on every side. By doing the opposite you should maximize the viewing space for everybody, since the letterbox thing is done automatically by youtube and the pc/phone/ecc.
I see what you're saying, I knew this video would be a combination of both 16:9 and 21:9 I just didn't think about people who have a default wide setup. 🤔
@@ChristopherBurress Yes I think we are very few. It's not a big deal, also Amazon prime did the same thing and they have a much bigger budget than you. However wider aspect ratio are getting more common, especially on phones. It is something to keep in mind, especially beacuse those who have a regular monitor won't notice a difference.
Good content is more important, so keep that up
@@therealolds my 21:9 monitor is out for delivery today actually... So it may be more obvious for me moving forward.
We're not so few, almost every new smartphone has a 2:1 ratio when you put it in landscape mode. Look up the channel metrics but I'm pretty sure a vast majority watches on a phone
@@ChristopherBurress you need to use the ultrawidify chrome addon so it zooms in and you have no letterboxes on 21:9 and you also see the whole video without cropping
hi how did you do the shots 08:29 - 08:37 ? lovit
You could use a gimbal. It's very easy to do
A ton of those anamorphic film flares are done in Visual effects in film. We add those every day haha
Actually the more that you can do in camera the less time that you have to spend in post.
@@lumiere1138 thats very true, but in most productions I work it is done in post, maybe it is the cost of cini lens in comparison but in my experience, a lot of those flare effects are done in post.
@@ChrisDeger they're only done in post for low budget films that can't afford to shoot with high end anamorphic glass.
@@SpektrikMusic and high budget tv shows ya
@@SpektrikMusic they also get added to shots even on high budget production
Ok, so it just makes your image wider with a little less DOF. Why do you need this if you can just use a wider lens and crop it? Is it because of the resolution?
Possibly. There really isn't much need for using it on a digital sensor. But I'm sure that Hollywood productions have their reasons for when they use them.
The "Hollywood" reason for still using them, even with modern technology, is the flattering look it gives faces. Anamorphic keeps the subject from getting the perspective distortion of a wide-angle lens while still giving a wider horizontal field of view than a spherical lens of equivalent focal length. Additionally, the inherent artistic quirks of anamorphic (i.e. horizontal flares, oval bokeh, surreal motion dynamics, and wider aspect ratio) help with the "suspension of disbelief" part of filmmaking, so you'll see it used a lot in a lot of dramas ("La-La-Land", "Ford v. Ferrari") and sci-fi/fantasy films (i.e. almost any Michael Bay or J. J. Abrams film). Granted, most Hollywood productions use 2x anamorphic, which has a more noticeable effect than this 1.33x one.
@@dennissilvas882 OK, thanks for the explanation!
So boke balls are stretched vertically but you unsqueeze the image horizontally. How does it work?
I guess they stretch more than they are unsqueezed. Probably some weird optics things.
I have 50mm lens sony, the result is awesome, silent AF, fast focus, sharp.
Agreed there isn't much to complain about, especially given the price.
@@ChristopherBurress yeah, christopher.
thank you
I appreciate the creamy b-roll
Supper information ℹ️ bro
Okay y not use a smaller focal length an crop in?
This is one of two reasons why I canceled my Sirui order: it can't beat a cheap-ass $200 Sony lens designed in the 90s! Had you compared the Sirui with the Zony 55 f1.8, it would have been even worse.
The other factor was that I needed auto-focusing for video. Ended up buying an SLRMagic 50 1.3x for use with the Zony 55f1.8 while retaining AF-c.
PoMan_911 what do you think of the magic?
@@ConfidenZeTheHumanTorch I am still testing it against the good old Iscorama Ultra Star HD+ (red version) which is the sharpest and most beautiful rendering. I'm waiting for the Tilta Nucleaus M to arrive. BTW the SLR has really bad chromatic aberration below f4. As well, it does something to the color of the Sony 35mm FE 1.8 (2020 version). But it's 2 lbs compared to 10 lbs for the Iscorama set up!
At some point, I'll put up a comparison video.
PoMan_911 I have a Fuji xt3 I’m trying to go anamorphic what route you think I should lean towards?
@@ConfidenZeTheHumanTorch I'm leaning towards the SLR Magic 50 1.33 because: 1) continuous autofocus works; 2) total set up is 3.5 lbs with the a7iii and 35 f1.8 vs 10 lbs for the Isco Ultra Star 3) image is good as long as your f stop is 4 or higher 4) it's a single focus set up. Continuous autofocus is the biggest factor for me. good luck this shit can get out of control!
I understand that anamorphics are known for their softness, and this one is sharper than many. I wouldn't hold that point against it.
How the hell do you record your broll, shit is so goooooood. Can you make a tutorial!?
*Is there any lens that can do the opposite ?*
Filming indoor sports that require at least 4:3 aspect ratio has been a challenge.
Rotate either the lens or the camera by 90°
Use a 3:2 aspect ratio if you want to get a 4:3 image
Hi Christopher, thank you for your review. I have to apologize in advance, as your doing the public an excellent service. I have to disagree with you.
The reason for the introduction of anamorphosis was to change the aspect ratio and not because, as you stated, to make up for the invaded real estate by the soundtrack. But instead, as a tool of expression. FYI, the French experimented with Dialascope anamorphosis during the silent era. When films first got projected to the public, the sheer novelty of a train charging the lens was spectacular enough. In fact, the audience was terrified and some were compelled to run out of the auditorium!
As cinema became more popular, so did the need to wow the audience. The advent of sync sound, then color, and then came
[ ------------------------------------------------------------------[ W I D E * S C R E E N ].----------------------------------------------------------------------]
Catch my drift, brother?
Excelente.
Big like!👍
He's alive!! HE'S ALIIIIIIVVEEE!!!
Just barely!
On film you can not capture video. Video is an electronic signal structure of an image. On film image is form as a result of chemical reaction. First as a latent image and after lab processing a negative image or in some cases a positive image. That can later be scanned. The scan motion picture is now a video.
In my expierience FE 50 1.8 is really sharp especially gor the price
Why not run your full frame in crop sensor mode?
I.... I did....
is it for s35 sensor?
abcd Yes. Super35 is a sensor that has the same width as APSC, but not quite as much height because it is in 16:9 ratio rather than the 3:2 ratio of a stills camera. Many people think that APSC and super35 are identical (they are not) but for all practical purposes when thinking about lenses, APSC always will cover Super35.
interesting lens...
you dont get a cinema lens for sharpness . you get it for characteristics , film look is not super sharp like todays photos lenses .
Great lens ! But now they're double the price and still no EF-Mount available