aitor
Newbie
Hello,
I'm new here. I have buy a Fuji TX-1 today. I have been searching info in internet and fina frech website that have a "trick" to adapt a wide angle adaptor to tha 45 lens.
http://xpan.free.fr/trucs_accessoires.htm
Yes, I know it is not the best solution, but the 30mm is very very expensive. And I can't afford it now.
with the a lot of new digital compact cameras there is a lot of wide angle adapters now from differents brands ( Nikon , Olympus, Canos, Kenko...... ) I figure out any of them could have a decent quality
I wonder if one of them could be adapted to the 45 lens for ocassional shots, ( yes, I know it isn't the best solution ) if anyone have any experience with them or have any comments about it.
best regards
I'm new here. I have buy a Fuji TX-1 today. I have been searching info in internet and fina frech website that have a "trick" to adapt a wide angle adaptor to tha 45 lens.
http://xpan.free.fr/trucs_accessoires.htm
Yes, I know it is not the best solution, but the 30mm is very very expensive. And I can't afford it now.
with the a lot of new digital compact cameras there is a lot of wide angle adapters now from differents brands ( Nikon , Olympus, Canos, Kenko...... ) I figure out any of them could have a decent quality
I wonder if one of them could be adapted to the 45 lens for ocassional shots, ( yes, I know it isn't the best solution ) if anyone have any experience with them or have any comments about it.
best regards
My wife has the wide and long add-on lenses for her Nikon 990 digital. In going over her pictures that have used the wide adaptor, the barrel distortion is immediately obvious. But it's wider! There's also the possibility of vignetting at the corners, since putting one on the TX-1 might exceed its field of view... But if I were you, I'd find a wide-angle add-on intended for a camera that normally zooms out to 28mm equivalent and give it a try!
Oh, and of course welcome to RFF! A Fuji TX-1 could be fun to use...
aitor
Newbie
Hi Doug,
I know it could be problems with vigneting, and barrel distorsion. I figure out that as the 45mm filter is 49mm. an adaptor with a bigger size with a ring adapter could minimize these problems.
best regards
I know it could be problems with vigneting, and barrel distorsion. I figure out that as the 45mm filter is 49mm. an adaptor with a bigger size with a ring adapter could minimize these problems.
best regards
Hi -- That's another good point. The one for the Nikon 990 is pretty small, but the set for my Dad's old Petri 7s fits 52mm filter size... It's only that large because the lens itself is surrounded by a selenium meter grid, so coverage is still a question. The rear element of the Petri adaptor unit is about 29mm diameter. I'll be interested to see how your search comes out!
Last edited:
wdenies
wdenies
As a test I connected the Sony .7 adapter to my Canon 50mm & 28 mm lens.
It is impossible to focus. Are there better adaptors?
It is impossible to focus. Are there better adaptors?
pagpow
Well-known
I ran the page referenced below through BabelFish. It produced the usual half helpful half humorous translation. I'm wondering if I have the practical implications correct:
• Converter does cover elongated format
• Thus the use of converters designed for digital on larger formats is possible
• Quality not good until f22, though acceptable at f11
• Converter reduces focal length, thus marked focusing distance is incorrect and one must correct for nominal vs. real focusing distance (procedure described)
• Correction for focusing distance is irrelevant at infinity (infinity x 1.5 = infinity)
• Correction also irrelevant when shooting hyperfocal distance for prime lens as the depth of field for the modified lens will be longer (and thus include the depth of field of the prime lens) In other words, using marked or calculated hyperfocal focusing for the prime lens will give a margin of error for the (shorter) combination of prime lens and converter.
• The viewfinder needs to be made/modified to reflect the new field of view of the lens – unless one is satisfied with central aiming, letting the exact framing go for correction later
• Quality of converter is important
• While this was tried on the Xpan, it suggests that using a high quality converter on a folder should allow for that wider view some are looking for with folders.
Any corrections to be made?
• Converter does cover elongated format
• Thus the use of converters designed for digital on larger formats is possible
• Quality not good until f22, though acceptable at f11
• Converter reduces focal length, thus marked focusing distance is incorrect and one must correct for nominal vs. real focusing distance (procedure described)
• Correction for focusing distance is irrelevant at infinity (infinity x 1.5 = infinity)
• Correction also irrelevant when shooting hyperfocal distance for prime lens as the depth of field for the modified lens will be longer (and thus include the depth of field of the prime lens) In other words, using marked or calculated hyperfocal focusing for the prime lens will give a margin of error for the (shorter) combination of prime lens and converter.
• The viewfinder needs to be made/modified to reflect the new field of view of the lens – unless one is satisfied with central aiming, letting the exact framing go for correction later
• Quality of converter is important
• While this was tried on the Xpan, it suggests that using a high quality converter on a folder should allow for that wider view some are looking for with folders.
Any corrections to be made?