PC Nikkor circle of coverage

Phil_F_NM

Phil_F_NM

Camera hacker
Local time
10:43 AM
Joined
Jun 14, 2004
Messages
5,506
Location
Mid-Atlantic region
View My Gallery
Can anyone find the overall maximum circle of illumination of the 35mm PC Nikkor?
I'm thinking it might be image diagonal of 43mm + 11mm +11mm so 65mm but I'm hoping it's more.
I can't find this info but I'm interested in using the lens for my superwide 35mm panoramic camera. My film gate is over 80mm wide so I was thinking of using a 65mm Super Angulon but if I can use the PC Nikkor (either 35mm or 28mm) then I'll be able to get much more coverage for a very interesting super panoramic effect.

Thanks for any help!

Phil Forrest
 
Cristian,
That XPan thread is what made me think of using the lens for my Kodak (former) Stereo Realist now superwide project. I already have a few Nikon body flanges and fabbing up a wider mount will be cake. I'll probably use opaque plexiglass (very easy to precisely cut and tap.) I might come up with a hood design and have it 3d printed 😀

Even if it vignettes, I'm cool with the lens if it covers close to 80mm. If not, back to the drawing board. Maybe a wide from a Fuji 680 if it has a mechanical shutter. EDIT: Nope the GX680 shutters are all electromagnetic.

Phil Forrest
 
The angle of view of the 35 in your project should roughly equal a 16mm on a standard 35mm frame. That's starting to get into very wide indeed, and lenses at that range may have dedicated graduated neutral density filters. If the mechanical vignetting doesn't get you the light falloff "vignetting" may, as stated above.

On the other hand, the 65mm isn't a super wide lens in your application, about 30mm equivalent. Might/ should be wide enough, though.

If you can find 35mm with movements for SLR, that would probably have coverage.

A recent project posted here used a Jupiter-8 50mm, which had a surprisingly large image circle. A cheap one to try, anyway, particularly compared to your other options. And approaching 90 degree coverage in your application.
 
I think the pc-nikkors are cool lenses, but you won't squeeze 80mm coverage out of them. You'll also have trouble fitting a shutter.
A medium format lens with it's own helical and shutter may be your best bet. There are lots of good and cheap mamiya, bronica and pentax lenses about. You can't either really go wrong with a super-angulon on a Chinese made helical mount.
 
CNNY said:
I think the pc-nikkors are cool lenses, but you won't squeeze 80mm coverage out of them. You'll also have trouble fitting a shutter.
A medium format lens with it's own helical and shutter may be your best bet. There are lots of good and cheap mamiya, bronica and pentax lenses about. You can't either really go wrong with a super-angulon on a Chinese made helical mount.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I used my last shutter with a large enough opening to accept the lens to mate a 28mm f/3.5 Takumar to a broken, highly modified Voigtlander Perkeo II. Only the edges had a bit of vignette and the image it captured was fantastic for that size film. Far edges got smudged though which I didn't like. That shutter is sitting in my parts box in storage.

The Super Angulon is probably going to be the ticket. I like the ~28mm wide field of view anyway, so a 65mm is probably what I'll go with.

CNNY said:
If you have a design, I can help you get it laser cut in black acrylic. It will look really slick.
Click to expand...

It's probably going to look much like a 4 inch wide rectangular vacuum attachment on the front of a camera.

Phil Forrest
 
Hi This is a full frame flat-bed scan of a whole Xpan frame with the 35mm PC-Nikkor (focus is quite near, so coverage more than at infinity).

med_U2246I1384403844.SEQ.4.jpg


As you can see, the lens just DOESN'T cover the full width of the Xpan frame.
I hope this answers your question!
 
Phil_F_NM said:
...
I'm thinking it might be image diagonal of 43mm + 11mm +11mm so 65mm but I'm hoping it's more...
Click to expand...

Nope, less as your math is based on incorrect information.

The 11mm shift is the maximum the barrel allows and is the max allowed when shifting vertically (when body is held horizontal.). The "maximum permissable" shift when shifting along the image diagonal is 7mm (see Nikon's instruction book for the lens, page 11) as indicated on the lens' barrel. This works out to a usable image circle of about 57mm. You might find there is some additional coverage at smaller f/stops, but not much.
 
When the TX-1 came out (pre cursor to the X-Pan) a friend and I adapted a Nikkor 28 PC to it. It worked but the edges were soy. We figured out that the coverage was slightly less than 58mm.
 
CNNY said:
I'd say 65mm sounds about right at 2.8, but it is better stopped down.
Click to expand...
I use a Schneider PC 2.8/28 as a SW for my xpan. You have to stopp down, because of vignetting (not of sharpness) at f8.0 or 11 (it´s also written in the manual of the Schneider PC) . Open at f2.8 the vignetting is imho to heavy. I think the PC Nikkor will act similar.
 
I'll just find a lens between 45mm and 65mm that definitely has the coverage I'm looking for. I was just thinking using the F mount flange would create an easy way to get around building a lens board. I'll probably just take the flanges and make the lens board then have the lens in-shutter easily removable. If I do this right, I can make it interchangeable with different thickness spacers for infinity or hyperfocal focus with different focal lengths

Phil Forrest.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom