C-mount lenses on 35mm camera

[sdivot]

I've noticed that people are adapting the old c-mount movie lenses onto the newer micro 4/3 digital cameras.
I was thinking of adapting one of these to a film camera, but the distance to film plane will not allow infinity focusing on a standard 35mm slr.
Does anyone know of a film camera that can be used with this type of lens? Someone told me an Olympus Pen F will work. I wonder if they make adapters for that one.
Anything else?
Thanks,
Steve
www.scdowellphoto.com

 

[Rol_Lei Nut]

Coverage...

IIRC, the Olympus Pen F is half frame, while c-mount lenses are calculated for 16mm (much smaller).
You *might* get lucky with some c-mount lenses which have an unusually large coverage, but as a rule it shouldn't work (at least with acceptable quality).

On a standard 35mm frame, even if it could focus to infinity, it would only project a small(ish) circle into the middle of the frame...

This is the same reason why lenses made for 35mm won't "work" with larger format cameras.

 

[Rol_Lei Nut]

Re my previous post: The exception has always been using such lenses for macro use... Then coverage (within reason) stops being a factor.

 

[sdivot]

Thanks for the reply. I wouldn't really mind if the lens vignetted on the 35mm (or half frame, in the case of the Olympus Pen F). In fact, some of those lenses I'm talking about are of a modified petzval design (such as the Kinic, or so I've heard). So getting all the way to the edges of the image circle would be fine with me for the edge effects.
Steve
www.scdowellphoto.com

 

[ic-racer]

Its a little crazy adapting the cine lenses to a Stecky or other 16mm still camera with screw on lenses (where they don't really fit or cover the format), but to try to put them on a 35mm camera is way out there

 

[sdivot]

Well, I'm not sure it's WAY out there. )
People are using these lenses on the new micro 4/3 digital cameras, such as Lumix G1 and Olympus EP-1.
I was thinking it would be cool to adapt one to a film camera. Someone said it could be done with an old Olympus Pen F.
I'd like to get the look of those lenses on a "carry around" camera.
Steve
www.scdowellphoto.com

 

[Kerik]

Here's a link to a guy's blog who's been doing such things. I'm thinking about getting a micro 4/3 camera to try some of this. Adapters for Cine lenses to cameras like the G1 are available on eBay and elsewhere. The Oly Pen sounds intriguing as well.

 

[ic-racer]

Since the pen-f is an SLR, the flange-focal length of a C-mount lens (17.5mm) is probably going to interfere with the mirror.

What kind of film does a 4/3 camera take... ?

Actually if you were really serious about geting this little circle of an image on 35mm you could have SK grimes make an adapter for an early focal plane Leica or clone (for a small fortune ).

 

[sdivot]

Kerik,
Thanks for the link. The truth is, I'd just get the Lumix G1 (forgive me APUG'ers) and use that with those lenses. It's more of a money issue than anything. The camera will be $650-750, then the lenses are not particularly cheap if you find the right one. The adapter is extra of course.
Maybe I'll just kick the idea around until I can afford to act on it.
Steve
www.scdowellphoto.com

 

[fabulousrice]

I've noticed that people are adapting the old c-mount movie lenses onto the newer micro 4/3 digital cameras.
I was thinking of adapting one of these to a film camera, but the distance to film plane will not allow infinity focusing on a standard 35mm slr.
Does anyone know of a film camera that can be used with this type of lens? Someone told me an Olympus Pen F will work. I wonder if they make adapters for that one.
Anything else?
Thanks,
Steve
www.scdowellphoto.com

Maybe on a camera with a smaller film gauge, such as the KMZ Narciss? I was thinking about it but the threads are a different size...

 

[ph]

I used some c mount lenses when i had my digital 4/3 device. The shorter focal lengths did not cover the frame while some longer ones (20mm+) did. I was perticualrly pleased with a modified Schneider 50/0,95 (where the obstructing rear baffle was removed) The problem with m4/3 adapters with sunken c mounts (to enable infinity focus), was that this blocked thicker lens bodies from fitting. So for those who wish to adapt C -mount it is essential to try before buying No zooms worked (but a monstrous Angenieux for three-sensor ENG cameras did cover the frame (with a complicated and very expensive adapter and then only at the longer zoomrange))

p

 

[guangong]

Coverage...

IIRC, the Olympus Pen F is half frame, while c-mount lenses are calculated for 16mm (much smaller).
You *might* get lucky with some c-mount lenses which have an unusually large coverage, but as a rule it shouldn't work (at least with acceptable quality).

On a standard 35mm frame, even if it could focus to infinity, it would only project a small(ish) circle into the middle of the frame...

This is the same reason why lenses made for 35mm won't "work" with larger format cameras.

Not all lenses for 35mm. I have used Leitz 90mm and 500mm, Zeiss Olympic Sonears, and early Nikon 180mm lens designed for Nikon rf cameras (essentially a Zeiss design twicked with very small increase in speed) successfully on Hasselblad 1000F and 2000FCM. Perfect coverage. However, in general I agree with your comments.
There was a time when I could afford Hassy camera but not Hassy lenses.

 

[Bronson Dugnutt]

In most cases, adapting C-mount lenses to an SLR for anything but extreme close-ups is physically impossible due to the mirror box & flange distances, as previously mentioned. Interchangeable lens rangefinder cameras or mirrorless digital cameras are more suitable with an appropriate adapter.

On the digital side, I've found the Nikon 1 series to be excellent for c-mount. The system flange distances are 17mm & 17.53mm respectively and the 1" (smaller than m4/3) sensor experiences less of a vignette, being closer to a native 16mm frame size. You'll lose most or all of the automatic functions of the camera using such a lens.

 

[gorbas]

With longer C mount lenses, let's say above 25mm, most likely you will be able to fill APSC frame. With shorter lenses you coverage of the sensor will be way less. Sorry, I don't see point of using those lenses with 35mm film, either Half or full frame. It's too complicated on many levels, but if you insist, you can do it.
I'm using Canon C mount 1.4/50mm and it slightly vignettes at f1.4 on APSC, but totally usable.

 

[reddesert]

Adapting C mount lenses to something can be fun. However, getting them to focus correctly is going to require either (1) an adapter that matches the film-to-flange distance so you can scale-focus with the lens scale; or (2) a through-the-lens viewing system - SLR or digital mirrorless. Also, part of the fun of C mount is cheap fast aperture, which makes scale focusing less attractive.

The short film-flange distance of C mount means matching the distance is hopeless for 35mm SLR or half-frame, so you're left with submini SLRs. The KMZ Narciss is a rare camera most of us will never see. What's the film to flange distance of a Pentax 110 SLR? And then is there much distinction of C mount lenses over the Pentax 110 native lenses?

Digital mirrorless is more promising, although my experience agrees with what ph said above, for some C to mirrorless adapters, the rear body of many C mount lenses mechanically interferes with the adapter so you can't screw all lenses in securely.

 

[BobD]

Maybe on a Pentax 110 SLR?

 

[fabulousrice]

Maybe on a Pentax 110 SLR?

Ohhhh that would be a fun adapter to design... Maybe I'll make one

 

[ph]

it is worrth noting that the 16mm cine frames were substantially enlanged to fit on a cinema screen, so the demand for resolution were much higher that for optics calculated to fill larger formats. But used on a larger "negative" the corner performance is bound to be less good. I vaguely remember Kern or paiaalard publishing an extreme number of lpm for their optics. i did not complain of bad center resolution when I used longer Kinoptic, Kern and Angenieux glass on M4/3 but did not do any rigorous testing. However, the industrial Schneider that I mentioned in a post above had superior contrast when stopped down a little.

p.

 

[xkaes]

Maybe on a Pentax 110 SLR?

110 film is 16mm film with different perforations.

 

[benveniste]

Maybe on a Pentax 110 SLR?

I have a C-mount adapter for my Nikon V2 with a 1" sensor. If you know of anyone with an Angénieux 12-120mm or 9.5-95mm in C-mount they would like to sell at a reasonable price, I'd likely play with one on both the V2 and GX85.

 

[ph]

I happen to have a c mount 12-120 lying unused on a shelf since I gave up on making silver iodide family movies, BUT
1; I have no idea what a fair price would be plus carriage, duty, VAT etc. and more important;
2; I vaguely recall trying it on MFT and it did not perform like its longer relatives, Only narrow coverage, but sharp enough.

p.

 

[ph]

I happen to have a c mount 12-120 lying unused on a shelf since I gave up on making silver iodide family movies, BUT
1; I have no idea what a fair price would be plus carriage, duty, VAT etc. and more important;
2; I vaguely recall trying it on MFT and it did not perform like its longer relatives, Only narrow coverage, but sharp enough.

p.

corrigendum, I had a lookat it and it is the 15 to 150/2,8. not the 12 to 120, but it is the same one that vignetted severely.

 

[KinoGrafx]

Just as a C-mount reference, here’s a Sony “TV Zoom” 12.5-75mm f1.8 on M43 (GH1) at 4:3.

Lots of vignetting that never goes away, even on the long end. These are all shot wide open, 12.5mm, 25mm and 75mm (the sharpness improves dramatically stopped down even a little) As the overlay shows, it also would not cover Super-16, but regular-16 is no problem (I’ve used it on a reg-16 filmo)

 

[Yezishu]

Due to the short flange focal distance of C-mount lenses, using them on film cameras may require modifications like removing the SLR mirror and creating a custom adapter, but this setup might still face issues with lens functionality and image field coverage. Small flange focal distance system like Leica M-mount (27.8 mm) or Olympus PEN F (28.95 mm) or Contax G-mount (29.00 mm) may help，but C-mount (17.5mm) still need to be deeply embedded for about 10mm, it might affect the functionality of the C-mount lens, such as focusing and aperture control.

Alternatively, if you just want to DIY and try, consider using very cheap plastic film cameras (<5$). They feature a complete film advance and frame counting mechanism, a fixed shutter (~1/125 s), and a prime lens with a fixed aperture (~f/8) and a fixed focus (~infinity), and that's all. You would need to remove the original plastic lens and create your own adapter for C-mount lens.

​

 

[geirtbr]

You need to keep in mind that some C-mount lenses where made for use with a prism-camera (like bolex-reflex). They will give somewhat blur effect if you use them on a camera without a prism.
The flange distance of the pentax 110 is too large for it to work with c-mount. C mount flange distance is 17.526mm.
I would have liked someone to design a small camera in super 16 or square format (12.4x12.4mm) where one could use 16mm single perf film and make singular exposures. Right now the option is to carry around a large Bolex if I want to make still photos with C-mount lenses, which is not so tempting.