Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1] 2 3 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Are there any special lenses to get non-croppe image with digital backs?  (Read 6388 times)
liac
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 24


« on: November 11, 2010, 03:37:03 PM »
ReplyReply

Hi,
most MF digital backs are not full frame, i.e. they are smaller than 60 x 60 mm and we lose part of the image.
Are there any zeiss lenses specifically designed to get rid of the cropping?
I know for example that there are such lenses for DSLRs. And what about the medium format?
And guys, how do you shoot wide angle if there are no such lenses for MF?
Logged
Graham Mitchell
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2282



WWW
« Reply #1 on: November 11, 2010, 03:50:45 PM »
ReplyReply

No lens will get rid of the cropping - the viewfinder will still be the same size as before.
Logged

Graham Mitchell - www.graham-mitchell.com
liac
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 24


« Reply #2 on: November 11, 2010, 04:17:37 PM »
ReplyReply

Can't we put a black mask on the viewfinder or mark the frame? I think this problem can be solved. I heard somewhere that you can order to zeiss to modify your lens to get rid of the cropping. But this must be very expensive for average user.
But probably we can buy a kind of a filter or wide-angle adapter and to screw it on the lens to fight the cropping problem. Has anyone tried this?
Logged
Rob C
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 12213


« Reply #3 on: November 11, 2010, 04:33:31 PM »
ReplyReply

Can't we put a black mask on the viewfinder or mark the frame? I think this problem can be solved. I heard somewhere that you can order to zeiss to modify your lens to get rid of the cropping. But this must be very expensive for average user.
But probably we can buy a kind of a filter or wide-angle adapter and to screw it on the lens to fight the cropping problem. Has anyone tried this?


I'm not sure I understand you original question, but why would you have a lens destroyed when you can make your own screen mask?

Rob C
Logged

Dennis Carbo
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 163


WWW
« Reply #4 on: November 11, 2010, 05:15:30 PM »
ReplyReply

why would you do anything to the lens ?.....just use a viewfinder mask...I use one with my rig ...works like a charm

D

Logged
yaya
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1144



WWW
« Reply #5 on: November 11, 2010, 05:19:41 PM »
ReplyReply

Hi,
most MF digital backs are not full frame, i.e. they are smaller than 60 x 60 mm and we lose part of the image.
Are there any zeiss lenses specifically designed to get rid of the cropping?
I know for example that there are such lenses for DSLRs. And what about the medium format?
And guys, how do you shoot wide angle if there are no such lenses for MF?

I'me guessing that you are referring to a 6X6 camera (56mm X 56mm) ?

If so, a 645 back such as the Aptus-II 12 or the P65+ will give you roughly 1.15 crop and will come with a cross-shaped mask. Your wide angle 40mm lens will become effectively 46mm so still fairly wide

Alternatively you can opt for a 645 camera with lenses as wide as 28mm, see this page

HTH

Yair
Logged

Yair Shahar | Product Manager | Mamiya Leaf |
e: ysh@mamiyaleaf.com | m: +44(0)77 8992 8199 | www.mamiyaleaf.com | yaya's blog
liac
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 24


« Reply #6 on: November 11, 2010, 05:21:00 PM »
ReplyReply

The matter is that that this cropping turns normal lenses into long focus lenses and it means that we cannot get wide angle and enough perspective and lack of perspective means that shots become flat. They lack volume. That's why probably photographers using digital backs shoot only in studios and mainly people models coz long-focus lenses are needed for portraits and it is ok. But as far as artistic photography other than portraits, fashion and glamour is concerned, wide angle is required! Why? Coz you can crop images later in photoediting software. But you image will not look flat, coz when you were using wide angle you could shot far objects and close objects simultaneously, while you cannot do it quite well with long-focus lenses. That's why i am thinking hard what is better to buy canon mark II or digital back H20.
If i have canon, i can use even fisheye, any angle i want and 35 mm full frame is still good to have good tonal ranges. I don't actually know if such backs as H5, H10, H20 have richer tonal range than canon, i doubt that. Some people claim that no DSLR including mark II is capable to create such tonally rich image like even the cheapest H5 digital back but they only claim and do not present any evidence of that. Of course, P65 back will be superior than mark II coz it's almost full frame MF but who can afford this?
Some people think that MF zeiss lenses have best Boke. But boke is the last thing which makes a good photograph. the main thing is composition and to make a good composition you will need a wide angle lens.
Some people think if they get the lens with good boke all their shots will automatically become masterpieces. By my own experience i may say it is far from the truth. I think most art photographers will agree with me about this frustration.
Logged
tbosley
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 35


« Reply #7 on: November 11, 2010, 05:22:32 PM »
ReplyReply

I believe the Hasselblad 28mm was designed specifically for the H3D and marketed as "full-frame"  Wink

Logged
liac
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 24


« Reply #8 on: November 11, 2010, 05:27:20 PM »
ReplyReply

Leaf Aptus II is far beyond the budget of a poor photographer. Otherwise the question about lenses would not be raised here.
Logged
liac
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 24


« Reply #9 on: November 11, 2010, 05:28:23 PM »
ReplyReply

Could you explain what is H3D?
Logged
Zenny
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 22


« Reply #10 on: November 12, 2010, 01:59:05 AM »
ReplyReply

@liac Maybe tbosley is referring to Hasselblad H3D (http://www.dpreview.com/news/0701/07012902hasselbladh3d-31.asp) It reads somewhere in the article that "the world’s first 48mm full-frame DSLR camera system."

zenny

***http://www.thehumanape.org***
Logged
gazwas
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 385



« Reply #11 on: November 12, 2010, 03:00:20 AM »
ReplyReply

Liac, If you are referring to the lens cropping with the older 35mm sized chip digi backs (H5, H10 etc) then there is no possible way to get true wide angle and you would be better off sticking with the Canon.

Getting true MF (well 645) wide angle mean a huge investment in kit and purchasing equipment like the Hasselblad H4D-60, Phase One P65+ and the new leaf Aptus II 12.
Logged

trying to think of something meaningful........ Err?
liac
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 24


« Reply #12 on: November 12, 2010, 03:41:01 AM »
ReplyReply

No way, huge investment is out of question. I think the best thing will be to buy canon or H20 back with installation of the so-called 2x teleconverter on the filter thread to fight against cropping. This is the only way to get normal angle of view. Probably this method will also work well for H5, h10 backs. This will involve some loss of light, probably 0.5 stop, but all the benefits prevail.
One guy showed me his pentacon 6 mf camera with such teleconverter. It gave super wide angle. There must be such also for hasselblad.
Logged
Christoph C. Feldhaim
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2509


There is no rule! No - wait ...


« Reply #13 on: November 12, 2010, 03:49:13 AM »
ReplyReply

How does a teleconverter give you a wide angle ?
Reverse it ?
HuhHuh??
Logged

liac
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 24


« Reply #14 on: November 12, 2010, 04:32:31 AM »
ReplyReply

i made a mistake, i don't remember how these converters are called. i know that they increase angle by 2x. should be wide-angle converters.
Logged
yaya
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1144



WWW
« Reply #15 on: November 12, 2010, 05:10:12 AM »
ReplyReply

With small backs you can look at some of the "specialised" solutions such as the Kapture Group TrueWide (Nikon F mount), Horseman DigiFlex (Nikon F mount), Hartblei (currently Canon EOS mount) or maybe the Cambo Miniwide (Canon mount I think). You can then use almost any Nikon/ Canon wide angle lens

Note that not all of these products are available new but since you're after a low budget solution it might be worth doing some searching

HTH

Yair
Logged

Yair Shahar | Product Manager | Mamiya Leaf |
e: ysh@mamiyaleaf.com | m: +44(0)77 8992 8199 | www.mamiyaleaf.com | yaya's blog
ondebanks
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 836



« Reply #16 on: November 15, 2010, 07:58:06 AM »
ReplyReply

No way, huge investment is out of question. I think the best thing will be to buy canon or H20 back with installation of the so-called 2x teleconverter on the filter thread to fight against cropping. This is the only way to get normal angle of view. Probably this method will also work well for H5, h10 backs. This will involve some loss of light, probably 0.5 stop, but all the benefits prevail.
One guy showed me his pentacon 6 mf camera with such teleconverter. It gave super wide angle. There must be such also for hasselblad.

Ah, so you are actually referring to front-of-lens conversion optics (your references to cropping seems to have confused a few respondents, who thought that you meant doing something at the other end: the sensor/format or the viewfinder).

Well there is no reason why a front-of-lens wideangle converter made for 35mm systems shouldn't help a MF lens to cast a wider angle image onto a digital back. The optical principles are the same (this is guaranteed by the fact that infinity focus is preserved), and it shouldn't matter what brand of lens you are mounting in onto (Pentacon, Hasselblad, Mamiya, ...whatever). Whether you are happy with the edge performance of the image is another matter.

I used one of these cheap converters, picked up 2nd hand in a Series VIII fitting, with some success on my Minolta 35mm rig in the very early 1990s; it worked best on my 35mm f1.8 if I recall correctly. It gave me a look somewhat like a Peleng 8mm lens (round image, hitting the frame edges top & bottom, strong rectilinear distortion), but not nearly as wide as a real circular fisheye. My standout memories are using it for some Milky Way shots and some pretty cool candids of my college mates in their grungy band practice sessions and gigs, on films like P3200. Damn, I must get around to scanning those!  Cheesy


Logged
liac
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 24


« Reply #17 on: November 15, 2010, 09:28:42 AM »
ReplyReply

I don't think it gives any distortion. Any wide-angle lens gives distortion and the reason of it is that the objects which are closer to you are taken in the shot. Actually no distortion takes place. The objects which are closer to you become bigger in shot due to laws of perspective. If you take any image shot with wide-angle lens and crop its central part, you will notice that there is no any distortion in that part. So what will be projected on the sensor will not have any distortion at all.
This is the common myth that wide-angle lens distorts the perspective.
« Last Edit: November 15, 2010, 09:31:32 AM by liac » Logged
ondebanks
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 836



« Reply #18 on: November 15, 2010, 10:11:30 AM »
ReplyReply

You're talking about perspective distortion, and I was explicitly talking about rectilinear distortion: straight lines are not reproduced straight. It is very difficult to design this into non-symmetric lenses, and those front-of-lens converters make lenses extremely non-symmetric and far from optimized. That's not to say that they're not interesting and useful for the look they deliver.
Logged
liac
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 24


« Reply #19 on: November 15, 2010, 11:25:41 AM »
ReplyReply

Maybe you are right about rectilinear distortion. This definitely takes place with fisheye but i don't think that 2x converter will cause this distortion. I saw through my friend's 2x converter attached to pentacon 6 and have not noticed any rectilinear distortion. But even if there is such distortion it tends to be located closer to edges of the frame, definitely not in the center. And if we have 36x24 mm sensor in the back, we will probably get no visible linear distortion since it will be cropped. Moreover, this linear distortion takes place with objects located close to the camera but it does not apply to distant objects. So for shooting portraits we can remove the converter, for shooting landscape we use the converter.

I wonder if you shoot the starry sky with fisheye will you get any rectilinear distortion? Probably not, coz all the stars are so far from us that no perspective distortion could take place. And it's a myth that wide-angle lenses involve any distortion. It sees just the way human eye sees.

I will buy H20 some day and make pics with converter on to show if there is any distortion. Probably I need not 2x but a kind of 1.5x converter to get full-frame with minimum distortion for close objects. If anyone can make such pics right now that would be great.
« Last Edit: November 15, 2010, 12:10:29 PM by liac » Logged
Pages: [1] 2 3 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad