Anamorphic video on different Nikon Z bodies

A few months ago, like I wrote in my previous post, I bought a Sirui Astra on a sudden impulse. Yes, it was a typical GAS (Gear Acquisition Syndrome) purchase, I couldn’t resist the temptation created by YouTubers. I already wrote down my photography experiences before, but it’s only fair if I also write about what this lens was actually made for – videography.

As a village wedding photographer, I don’t create big art, don’t think about anything special here. But during my almost 30 years in this career, I developed some kind of worldview on the topic.

Why this lens was made for me

First of all, this lens was made for me. Understand it like this: as a wedding photographer and videographer, I always try to go against logic, physics, and other laws, and I try to do multiple things at the same time. And I want to do all this so that the final result is still interesting, aesthetic, and exciting.

Because of this, things like manual focusing, building the composition, and similar mandatory photo and film steps are not really possible for me. Despite all this, I expect something interesting from myself, not a completely generic solution. Something that is visually a little bit different, and most importantly, something my clients will appreciate. These things are not world-redeeming miracles, in fact, they are often on the borderline of whether they add anything at all to the story.

Honestly, if this didn’t exist, I would highly likely never buy an anamorphic lens. Unfortunately, I never had so much money to buy any tool just for fun, for the sake of experimenting, especially when we talk about such an expensive thing.

The “magic” of the compromise

But the fact itself that the lens has autofocus, and that the manufacturer tried to make it a bit, how to say, boring… not too full of character. This created something like they write in folk tales: it has clothes on, but it also doesn’t.

The squeeze: The image is squeezed, but only just enough that it’s not too obvious or aggressive.
The quality: It keeps just enough sharpness and micro-contrast so the clients don’t feel it’s too much.
The autofocus: It works just enough for someone who comes from the world where I came from (manual focus negatives, cheap and totally overworn D80, D600 bodies, and falling-apart ancient Sigma lenses). The inaccuracy that the anamorphic squeeze does to the camera body’s autofocus is still exactly inside the “it’s okay” limit.

Of course, in today’s perfect, pixel-peeping world, this is not acceptable for everyone.

Yes, you can do it differently. Slower, more planned, more accurate. But that is exactly not the situation in which and how I use it.

The main thing is: right now, maybe it’s also because of the novelty effect, but I am very happy that I bought it. The 2.39 aspect ratio is exactly where enough space opens up for me in the composition that I am still able to control. But it adds just enough so I feel the story is more complete, the composition gets enough extra context, and I found the right word for it in myself: the image is able to “breathe”.

Go ahead filmmakers, you can laugh, it took 30 years for the village photographer to realize what Hollywood realized almost 100 plus years ago.

Conclusion: If someone wants a real anamorphic experience, don’t buy this. I mean, God forbid I hurt the manufacturer, the lens is gorgeous. But it is far from its much more expensive relatives.

But it was created exactly for me.

It has autofocus, so you can do run and gun work with it.
It is anamorphic, so the image is stretched and has a certain character that is still a bit different than a classic spherical lens.

I recommend it to everyone who wants to experiment and has enough money so it won’t really be missing (or the wife won’t send you to the couch for a week because of it :D). For me, it was worth it, I will use it whenever I can 🙂

If anyone is interested in the photography side of the thing, you can find my thoughts here:https://victorweddings.sk/siruiastra50/