New half frame camera - call for Beta testers!

[reddesert]

FCC is only required if it contains Wi-Fi or Bluetooth electronics

There are different levels of FCC testing/certification. Testing is required for anything that operates above some frequency (9 kHz), which includes virtually any digital circuit or switch-mode power supply. Certification, the more stringent form, is required for intentional radiators, things that broadcast RF as part of their function, including Wi-fi and Bluetooth. See for ex https://blog.clevercompliance.io/electrical-product-compliance/do-i-need-fcc-certification/

 

[r_a_feldman]

I bought an m43 and a sony e mount version of a ttartisan lens. I haven't taken it apart to check for sure, but what I noticed was the lens seems to be designed with a specific flange distance, probably 22-25mm-ish, and the mount is then screwed on, whether it be m43, fuji x, sony e.

This is where wish one of the Chinese companies selling Leica M mount lenses would do something similar and put a pen f mount on some of their lenses. Though I am guessing there probably isn't much demand for it and then they'd have to design the mount to have the lens release on it.

One can dream to have some reasonable wide angle options that aren't off an EOS mount APS-C SLR on my Pen F (been holding off on trying an EOS mount Samyang aps c wide angle due to size)

What I see as the problem with this approach (issuing Leicia M mount lenses in a Pen F/FT mount) is that the film-to-flange distance for the Pen F is 1mm more than the Leica M distance. The Leica lens would not be able to focus to infinity on a Pen F/FT/FV.

 

[aw614]

What I see as the problem with this approach (issuing Leicia M mount lenses in a Pen F/FT mount) is that the film-to-flange distance for the Pen F is 1mm more than the Leica M distance. The Leica lens would not be able to focus to infinity on a Pen F/FT/FV.

However, my point is like I mentioned in my post, with those Chinese lenses for their full frame and aps-c mirrorless lenses, they tend to be designed with a flange distance that you can just screw the mount on, (ie. EOS M/R, Sony E, Lecia/Panasonic L mount, etc.)

Example below: The shiny metal part of the lens is the actual mount itself, which is screwed onto the lens and is interchangable between the common mirrorless mounts. However one thing I do not know is how the rangefinder coupling system attaches to those lenses and if that would hit the mirror on the Pen F.

 

[r_a_feldman]

However, my point is like I mentioned in my post, with those Chinese lenses for their full frame and aps-c mirrorless lenses, they tend to be designed with a flange distance that you can just screw the mount on, (ie. EOS M/R, Sony E, Lecia/Panasonic L mount, etc.)

Example below: The shiny metal part of the lens is the actual mount itself, which is screwed onto the lens and is interchangable between the common mirrorless mounts. However one thing I do not know is how the rangefinder coupling system attaches to those lenses and if that would hit the mirror on the Pen F.

I must add that I am not familiar with these lenses and have not measured them, so it might be possible to adapt them to a Pen F. For the lens you picture, there might be enough room taken up by the factory mount to provide the extra millimeter of spacing needed.

One additional consideration is that the rear of the lens can only extend behind the Pen's lens flange by about 2 mm, or it will hit the Pen's reflex mirror. That was the problem I ran into in trying to adapt a Carl Zeiss Jena 3 1/4 cm tessar made for a Behring Robot camera to my Pen FT. Even though the Robot's Film-to-Flange distance is about 2 mm greater than the Pen's, the lens extended too far behind the plane of the lens flange.

If you want to try adapting one of the Chinese lenses, a good source for the Pen F lens mount is a Pen F-mount extension tube or tele extender, which can be gotten on eBay for not exorbitant prices. I have done this to make adapters for Nikon F and Olympus OM1 lenses.