I was reading this article on No Film School about the new Sirui 20mm T1.8 anamorphic lens:
https://nofilmschool.com/sirui-af-20mm-t1-8-anamorphic-lens
It kind of got me thinking.
Anamorphic has always had this… draw. It just feels more cinematic. But for the longest time, it felt completely out of reach unless you had studio backing or access to old vintage glass. And sure, there was (and still is) this whole community of DIY folks doing wild stuff with projector lenses and clamps and weird dual-focus rigs. I've gone that approach and although the visuals can be achieved, there are heavy drawbacks.
My take away from my personal experience is. Most of it just isn't reliable enough for production. If you’re running and gunning or you have a small crew and a tight schedule, fighting with lens alignment or hoping your adapter holds focus isn’t exactly ideal. It's cumbersome and very limiting.
That’s why the recent releases of more affordable solutions for budget anamorphic lenses is honestly exciting. Not in a flashy gearhead way, but because they finally make that look usable for people shooting real projects on small budgets. The Sirui 20mm, for example is a fast, compact, anamorphic
it actually delivers a clean anamorphic image that can slot into a normal workflow. No weird hacks. No duct tape.
What excites me is that we’re finally at the point where independent filmmakers can get that classic cinematic feel without jumping through hoops or spending half their budget on a lens rental to simulate a "Filmic/cinematic" style to their images.
What’s exciting about all of this isn’t just the gear it’s what it opens up. It means more filmmakers can take creative risks, lean into stylized storytelling, or simply add a layer of emotional texture to their work that used to be locked behind studio gates. That’s a shift worth paying attention to.
So I’m curious about how my fellow Stage 32ers have incorporated shooting on anamorphic.
Is it something you’re looking into? Still feels a little intimidating? Or do you have a success story using it on a project?
I would love to hear how others on Stage 32 are approaching it or thinking about using it in upcoming work. And would love to help encourage understanding and approach to it!
3 people like this
This is such a thoughtful post, Jordan Smith! The fact that we’re entering an era where filmmakers no longer have to compromise their vision because of gear limitations is huge for independent creatives.
I love that you’re opening up this conversation because these are the kinds of tools that democratize visual storytelling. Looking forward to hearing what other creatives are doing with anamorphic!
4 people like this
Thanks for your post Jordan. I love the 2.4:1 aspect ratio but often prefer spherical lenses over anamorphic when playing in that space. I have always been bothered by the focus pull effect when using anamorphic lenses. It draws attention to itself, and I'm of the opinion that the cinematography needs to support the story, not draw attention away from it. Maybe in the hands of a much better cinematographer, this isn't an issue, but for me... I get annoyed with the look. That said, there are plenty of films shot using anamorphic lenses that are so beautiful I forget about some of the the artifacts inherent with those lenses but if given the choice... I almost always go spherical. Probably one of the many reasons I'm not at the helm of $100M movies. LOL!!!
3 people like this
Jordan Smith thanks for posting this, Jordan. I had always assumed that any production of mine wouldn’t be able to afford anamorphic lenses.
What also appealed to me, other than the price, was that it is a good lens in low-light conditions. A must, for my next film. Thanks again for the share.
2 people like this
@Geoff Hall you are welcome, there is usually always some sort of solution to achieve a look at any budget. If you ever need advice on gear within a budget that you think would assist your vision, give me a message. Happy to help!