The answer is probably "no" but...

L

Lax Jought

Well-known
Local time
4:07 AM
Joined
Jan 4, 2011
Messages
330
... is it not possible to adapt other lenses to the Xpan?



Is the answer 'no' because there isn't another RF lens out there that can cover 24x65 adequately without vignetting wide open?
 
Lax Jought said:
... is it not possible to adapt other lenses to the Xpan?
Click to expand...
You can do this.

Lax Jought said:
Is the answer 'no' because there isn't another RF lens out there that can cover 24x65 adequately without vignetting wide open?
Click to expand...
I am not aware of RF lenses used for this, as they usually do not have a sufficient image circle. However, 35mm Shift-Nikkors have been adapted (I did this myself). They have a slightly too small image circle which causes vignetting, so the usable image size is around 24x62mm, slightly better when you stop down the lens. The only problem is to estimate what will be on the final image, but for 35mm it is a good estimation to use the whole viewfinder image (everything what is visible there + a little bit will be visible on the image).
It is ok to use (especially when you want to know if you really have use for the wider lens), but I eventually got a 30mm lens.
I can look up a few images later made with this combination.
 
dourbalistar said:
Possible...? Based on this article, yes it's possible.
Click to expand...

snaefell said:
You can do this
Click to expand...

Thanks for the links and the info. I am getting the clear impression that the image circle (including diagonal) remains an issue. I did see the photos on the 35mmc website but the photos still needed to be cropped and it was only done with a shift lens.

Is it not possible to adapt, say, a Hasselblad V medium format f/2.8 lens? I suppose the answer is probably no.

I am asking because I wanted to overcome that f/4 minimum aperture restriction. I'd love to take the camera to some really low light places without having to rely on a tripod.
 
A V system lens would need a very big and complicated adapter, I’ve never heard of one. The only fast (f/2.8) MF lenses are 80mm, so they’d end up being pretty long on the Xpan. In the end, you only have scale focus with adapted lenses since they won’t be coupled, making large aperture shooting a bit hit and miss. Fast film would be your friend here. Shoot P3200 or push some Portra 400 to 1600.
 
michaelwj said:
A V system lens would need a very big and complicated adapter, I’ve never heard of one. The only fast (f/2.8) MF lenses are 80mm, so they’d end up being pretty long on the Xpan. In the end, you only have scale focus with adapted lenses since they won’t be coupled, making large aperture shooting a bit hit and miss. Fast film would be your friend here. Shoot P3200 or push some Portra 400 to 1600.
Click to expand...

I'll look up the P3200.

Can you show me some examples of Portra pushed to 1600? It's much easier and aesthetically pleasant when pushing B&W film that far is it not?

I'm new to film photography, thanks for your patience.
 
Lax Jought said:
Is it not possible to adapt, say, a Hasselblad V medium format f/2.8 lens? I suppose the answer is probably no.
Click to expand...


Besides the size, keep in mind that you are fotographing in the medium format. At f 2.8 your depth of field is very limited...


I have three images below, one of the rare exa,ples where I taken the almost similar view with the 45mm Hasselblad lens (first one) on with the 2.8/35 PC-Nikkor adapted to the XPan. In the first image I didn't crop out the vignetting to show how much of the image is lost. Please keep in mind here that there was a lot of light available in the scene so I stopped down at least to 11, most likely even to 16. The vignetting is stronger with a more open aperture. In the cropped image you can still the see the larger field of view.


48660222318_d2fd65ee0e_b.jpg


Taken with the 45mm lens.


48660726292_c0719a8aa7_b.jpg


Taken with the 2,8/35 PC-Nikkor.



48660726137_22dbe39554_b.jpg



Taken with the 2,8/35 PC-Nikkor and cropped.
 
snaefell said:
Besides the size, keep in mind that you are fotographing in the medium format. At f 2.8 your depth of field is very limited...
Click to expand...

The depth of field should roughly be the same if taken with a Hasselblad 500cm isn't it?

I can see some vignetting even when you've stopped down, that looks problematic. It seems I can't take the Xpan to low light unless I'm prepared to push some film.
 
I owned an Xpan years ago and the 30mm lens to me was unaffordable at around $4000. I bought some adapters including Leica, Contarex and Contax C/Y to Xpan. I tried the Zeiss 35/2.8 shift lens, Contarex 35 Curtagon, and various R lenses. The Zeiss and Contarex covered the pano frame however there will be mechanical vignetting. There are light baffles if you look into the Xpan mount and they block both sides of the frame. You will still get a pano image with a few MM cut off on both sides. BTW the Contarex Curtagon is an extremely good performer better than the R mount version though I know they are supposed to be the same lens. If you want to go cheap you can try to find the Exakta mount Curtagon.
 
dourbalistar said:
Also, I think vignetting is the raison d'être for the Xpan lens center filters, because even the native lenses have a degree of vignetting.
Click to expand...


Eventually I did manage to buy the native 30mm Xpan lens and used it without the center filter. I can say the filter is not necessary. It vignettes but barely visible. I shoot b/w often at max aper so your mileage with slide film may vary.
 
Rayt said:
I owned an Xpan years ago and the 30mm lens to me was unaffordable at around $4000. I bought some adapters including Leica, Contarex and Contax C/Y to Xpan. I tried the Zeiss 35/2.8 shift lens, Contarex 35 Curtagon, and various R lenses. The Zeiss and Contarex covered the pano frame however there will be mechanical vignetting. There are light baffles if you look into the Xpan mount and they block both sides of the frame. You will still get a pano image with a few MM cut off on both sides. BTW the Contarex Curtagon is an extremely good performer better than the R mount version though I know they are supposed to be the same lens. If you want to go cheap you can try to find the Exakta mount Curtagon.
Click to expand...
Interesting you say that. I have the 35mm PA-Curtagon shift version, a lens that gets a variety of opinions, positive or negative on the web. I wasn't planning to buy that one, but as soon as I saw the test images I made with the ALPA mount version I was using, I bought it.
 
Lax Jought said:
I am asking because I wanted to overcome that f/4 minimum aperture restriction. I'd love to take the camera to some really low light places without having to rely on a tripod.
Click to expand...

I met a guy at a Beers and Cameras event who was shooting HP5+ pushed to 3200, handheld in his Xpan:

D8U5BzHUIAA-_I4.jpg:large

https://twitter.com/VRSeeker/status/1136377213408825344


Not bad considering it was pretty low light in that brewery. Here's my take with a 35mm f/2 wide open, probably at 1/8 or 1/15, braced on a door jamb.

 
Sarcophilus Harrisii said:
Interesting you say that. I have the 35mm PA-Curtagon shift version, a lens that gets a variety of opinions, positive or negative on the web. I wasn't planning to buy that one, but as soon as I saw the test images I made with the ALPA mount version I was using, I bought it.
Click to expand...

With the Curtagon there is hardly any fall off even at max aperture. The entire image circle maintains even luminance. I still have the lens and the Xpan adapter though regrettably no longer have the camera.
 
Lax Jought said:
I can see some vignetting even when you've stopped down, that looks problematic. It seems I can't take the Xpan to low light unless I'm prepared to push some film.
Click to expand...


At least with the compact lenses you will most likely not get more than 24x60/61mm usable negative size.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom