DZO Arcana vs Blazar Remus: Best Budget Anamorphic Lenses?

Product(s) reviewed

• DZO Arcana anamorphic budget lens set (1.5x) – newer release, reviewed as a full kit.
• Blazar Remus anamorphic lens set – older set, purchased by the reviewer, known for “dirty/character” rendering.

Key features compared

DZO Arcana (1.5x) – full kit

• Lens range included: 32mm, 45mm, 75mm
• Kit contents: full kit with a hard case (Pelican-like) and foam cutouts
• Size/weight: compact and low weight (compared to other DZO anamorphics)
• Full-frame compatibility: usable across many camera setups
• Close focusing: very close focusing distance without needing a diopter (uncommon for budget anamorphics)
• Sharpness: described as immediately noticeable and very sharp, even wide-ish
• Wide-aperture performance: suggested usable around T2.1–T2.8 while staying sharp
  • Reviewer personally often shoots anamorphic at T4, but Arcana holds up better
• Flare consistency caveat: the 45mm produced a different flare look—more “ghosty halo”—while 32mm and 75mm had cleaner streaks

Additional context / comparisons mentioned:

• DZO also has other anamorphics (e.g., Pavos, super 35, heavier and more expensive). The reviewer views those as more rental than personal purchases.
• Testing involved Raptor XE in 8K with test footage (and a collaborator).

Blazar Remus – set (as owned by reviewer)

• Lens range included (in the reviewer’s kit): 45mm, 65mm, 100mm
• Case provided: bright orange for A set; B set mentioned in a green case
• Focus tools/accessories: includes tools; also had shims to dial in focus
  • Reviewer reports focus was “spot-on” with shimming
• “Dirty”/character look: described as chromatic aberration / not clean, with consistent character across focal lengths (45/65/100)
• Sharpness downside: overall not as sharp as Arcana
• 100mm weak point: very soft until stopped down to roughly T4 and possibly T5.6 (~56); harder to pull focus
  • Reviewer workflow: stop down to ~T5.6, focus, then reopen to get “critical focus”

Pros noted:

• Despite softness, the reviewer says the look is stellar for narrative
• They shot an entire short film using these lenses (only a few shots were not used, and those were less preferred)

User experience (how it felt to shoot)

Arcana experience

• Easier focusing due to close focusing distance (less reliance on diopters)
• High confidence sharpness—less need to stop down aggressively
• Annoyance risk: lens-to-lens flare behavior difference (not a uniform look; 45mm halo issue)

Remus experience

• Creative consistency: same “Blazar character” across the set
• Operational difficulty: softness (especially 100mm) can complicate focus, potentially requiring substantial stopping down and careful focus pulling

Pricing / value / sales mentions

• Price is a key deciding factor
• Reviewer claims Remus often go on sale, making them a very good deal
• Arcana is positioned as the “better buy,” mainly due to client acceptability and sharpness

Explicit comparisons made (summary)

• Sharpness: Arcana > Remus
• Look/character: Remus more “dirty/character-driven”; Arcana more “clean/sharp” (client-friendly)
• Close focusing: Arcana has closer focusing; Remus may require diopters depending on needs
• Flare behavior:
  • Arcana generally has clean streaks, but 45mm shows different halo/flare characteristics
  • Remus have consistent stylized character (not described as “clean”)

Pros and cons list (as stated)

DZO Arcana

Pros

• Very sharp image quality
• Closer close-focus distance (no diopter needed, unlike many budget anamorphics)
• Can shoot around T2.1–T2.8 and remain sharp (per reviewer)
• Compact and versatile on full-frame systems
• Client-friendly look due to sharpness

Cons

• 45mm flare looked different (more ghosty halo) in this sample set
• Reviewer still notes to consider the 45mm behavior

Blazar Remus

Pros

• Strong, consistent “dirty” character look for narrative work
• Consistency of character across lenses
• Proven success: reviewer shot an entire short film with them

Cons

• Not super sharp overall
• 100mm especially soft; may require stopping down to about T4 to T5.6
• Harder pull-focus on the 100mm
• Less likely to be accepted by clients due to “too much” character look

Overall verdict / recommendation

• Reviewer’s pick: DZO Arcana Primarily because it delivers sharpness + anamorphic look that’s more likely to be client-acceptable, and it’s easier to work with (close focus, confidence at wider stops).

• Remus are recommended if you specifically want dirty/character-driven anamorphic rendering and accept the sharpness and focus challenges—especially on the 100mm—and if you can get them for a good sale price.

Speakers / viewpoints

• Single main speaker (reviewer): provides all product details, test context (8K/Raptor XE), and the client-acceptance recommendation.
• Mentioned collaborator: Ezreal (buddy/channel) — appears in the testing partnership, but does not contribute separate opinions in the provided subtitles.