Site Sponsors
Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst ... 2 3 4
Results 151 to 175 of 175

Thread: A superfast normal on the G1

  1. #151
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Vivek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    13,610
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    21

    Re: A superfast normal on the G1

    Quote Originally Posted by dcouzin View Post
    My last article on RX and C was in 1987.

    The short answer today is: avoid RX-mount lenses. They are lenses designed for a 9.5mm pane of BK7 glass between them and the image. Such a pane introduces spherical aberration, astigmatism, and chromatic aberrations.

    Correct. However, you are still in the film era and are forgetting the digital situation.

    The construction of the sensor (based on a 4/3rds Olympus E-410) is like this:

    1. ~1mm glass permanently fixed on the sensor which is on a flex board.

    2. ~7-8mm thick glass sandwich of AA/UV/IR cut filters (about 4 or 5 layers of various materials).

    3. Dust shake "cover" glass of ~ 1mm thickness.

    Any amount of glass material between the sensor and the lens is going to induce aberrations. See Dr. Brian Caldwell's post here: http://photo.net/leica-rangefinders-forum/00M5ag

    (Brian is a lens designer by profession)

    So, I am afraid your reasoning about RX lenses (and other optical perversions) are grossly misplaced. The amount of glass that Olympus and Panasonic load on their sensors and the issues that ensue can not be beaten by any other glass.

  2. #152
    Senior Member petermcwerner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Geneva, Switzerland
    Posts
    511
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: A superfast normal on the G1

    Quote Originally Posted by dcouzin View Post
    It is conceivable that Kern made some 26mm f/1.1 Macro Switars which were not RX-type. These would be true C-mount lenses and not require the 9.5mm glass pane between them and the image.
    Another example of an "optical perversion", shot through the glass pane of the shop window. Uncropped, 4 to 3 format



    Yverdon - Macro Switar 26mm/1.1 RX on G1 - 1/60 @ f/5.6 - Raw Therapee
    Peter Werner
    Leica M8, R9+DMR & Digilux 2; Nikon D700; Panasonic FX01, FX150 & G1; Samsung TL350 (WB 2000)

  3. #153
    Senior Member petermcwerner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Geneva, Switzerland
    Posts
    511
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: A superfast normal on the G1

    ..
    Last edited by petermcwerner; 22nd August 2009 at 03:31.
    Peter Werner
    Leica M8, R9+DMR & Digilux 2; Nikon D700; Panasonic FX01, FX150 & G1; Samsung TL350 (WB 2000)

  4. #154
    Senior Member petermcwerner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Geneva, Switzerland
    Posts
    511
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: A superfast normal on the G1

    More examples of "optical perversion", again 4 to 3 uncropped



    Yverdon Bike Shop - Macro Switar 26mm/1.1 RX on G1 - ISO=100 - 1/125 @ f/5.6 - Raw Therapee




    Macro Switar 26mm/1.1 - ISO=100 - 1/160 @ f/2.8 - Raw Therapee

    Peter Werner
    Leica M8, R9+DMR & Digilux 2; Nikon D700; Panasonic FX01, FX150 & G1; Samsung TL350 (WB 2000)

  5. #155
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Vivek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    13,610
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    21

    Re: A superfast normal on the G1

    "Optical perverts" are everywhere.

    Josep, in Barcelona (Spain) photographs with classic Nikkors mounted on an Olympus E-410.



    Panasonic G1, Olympus 17/2.8 plus a Ricoh GW-1 (0.75X converter).

    He was pleased to see my Olympus (real) Pen F 40/1.4 and gave me his email to correspond.

  6. #156
    Subscriber Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Toronto, Canada
    Posts
    3,026
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1117

    Re: A superfast normal on the G1

    Someone needs to start an optical perversion thread. Looks like we're getting a lot of perverted images.
    May want to use my G1 Holga thread as a start
    I think we also need an in depth analysis of the Holga lens. Shouldn't take long - it only has one element, or does it? (have to read up on that) How can anything so perverted have such a following?
    Has anyone made an adapter for a Holga lens to a G1 or EP-1 (maybe I'm onto something here, I've already butchered my Pentax 110, why not my Holga?)
    Sorry
    Keith

  7. #157
    Senior Member m3photo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    1,043
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    28

    Re: Optical Perverts Anonymous

    Quote Originally Posted by Vivek View Post
    "Optical perverts" are everywhere.

    Josep, in Barcelona (Spain) photographs with classic Nikkors mounted on an Olympus E-410.
    Hi, my name is Michael ... and I'm an Optical Pervert. Hello Michael

    I can't help myself, it's been two days since I took these and, well, I'm starting to get the craves and I might slip back and put another Nikkor or Pentax 110 lens on my G1 ...
    The last two were with a 105mm f/2.5 wide open and the first with a 70mm Pentax 110 lens also wide open, this latter one doesn't even have a diaphragm and always shoots at f/2.8 ...

  8. #158
    dcouzin
    Guest

    Re: A superfast normal on the G1

    Quote Originally Posted by Ranger 9 View Post
    I don't always care if my pictures are sharp, as long as they're pretty -- although I realize that as a professional cinematographer you can't afford to take such a cavalier attitude!
    Hey, I'm no professional cinematographer. I'm fine with pinhole lenses, cokebottle lenses, etc. I love the images from my Gemini 300 kilopixel camera. I tape old (positive) eyeglass lenses on for focusing. I find misunderstood $1000 lenses in well-machined adapters on a 12 megapixel camera to lack a certain "sportiveness".

    For photography's first 100 years or so lenses had much character (from aberrations and ghosts) and lent their character to the pictures. For about the next 40 years many photographers and cinematographer scrambled to simulate lost lens character with lens front paraphernalia. Then for a while straight-and-clear was in full dominance. Then came digital photography. Among else, image quality modification in Photoshop (and like programs) became easy. This of course is after the original photography and it's often not the photographer doing it.

    It will take more than retro dabbling to shake the new digital dominion. If you believe that lens and light are crucial to photography, then you have to prove this with lenses and light. The picture given to Photoshop is 2-dimensional although the scene given to the camera is 3-dimensional (really 4-dimensional but we're not discussing motion and shutters here). The lens alone transforms the three dimensions into two. The limited depth of field and the lens's "defects" of astigmatism and field curvature can't be simulated after the picture is taken (unlike most other aberrations, distortion, vignetting, etc.). Also the picture given to Photoshop has its dynamic range much limited compared to the scene. The bright sun can send fabulous ghosts through an old uncoated lens which the merely white disk in the image cannot be coaxed to produce. These are some aspects of optical character left to lens-and-light-lovers.
    Last edited by dcouzin; 22nd August 2009 at 09:59.

  9. #159
    Subscriber Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Toronto, Canada
    Posts
    3,026
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1117

    Re: Optical Perverts Anonymous

    Quote Originally Posted by m3photo View Post
    Hi, my name is Michael ... and I'm an Optical Pervert. Hello Michael

    I can't help myself, it's been two days since I took these and, well, I'm starting to get the craves and I might slip back and put another Nikkor or Pentax 110 lens on my G1 ...
    The last two were with a 105mm f/2.5 wide open and the first with a 70mm Pentax 110 lens also wide open, this latter one doesn't even have a diaphragm and always shoots at f/2.8 ...
    Hey m3, do you want to tell us how you created the 110 adapter - I'm half way through mine.

    Keith

  10. #160
    dcouzin
    Guest

    Re: A superfast normal on the G1

    Quote Originally Posted by Vivek View Post
    Correct. However, you are still in the film era and are forgetting the digital situation.

    The construction of the sensor (based on a 4/3rds Olympus E-410) is like this:
    1. ~1mm glass permanently fixed on the sensor which is on a flex board.
    2. ~7-8mm thick glass sandwich of AA/UV/IR cut filters (about 4 or 5 layers of various materials).
    3. Dust shake "cover" glass of ~ 1mm thickness.
    ...
    So, I am afraid your reasoning about RX lenses (and other optical perversions) are grossly misplaced. The amount of glass that Olympus and Panasonic load on their sensors and the issues that ensue can not be beaten by any other glass.
    Your information that there is approximately 9 to 10 mm of flat glass between the lens and the G1 sensor is completely new to me. That would make the optical situation practically the same as in the Bolex H16 RX camera. Then of course a RX type lens is needed for the G1 camera.
    It's surprising information, but I'll assume you or someone else has measured it. The old RX/C rule is still very applicable to the interests of this strand. Just the conclusions will be different based on the new information. 1987 RX/C Rule:

    A C-mount lens works well on a RX camera or a RX-mount lens works well on a C camera, if and only if:
    (1) the lens is slower than about f/2 or f/2.8, or stopped down this far;
    AND (2) the lens has a deep set exit pupil, about 1 inches or farther into its screw mount.

    [Note the second clause in the rule is based on the 12.6mm image diagonal of 16mm. The exit pupil distance would need to be increased for a 21.6mm diagonal sensor.]

    This is not really about C and RX mount lenses and cameras. It's about lenses designed to image directly onto the sensor versus those designed to image onto sensors covered by 9.5mm of BK7 glass, and about cameras with uncovered sensors and those with sensors covered by 9.5mm of BK7 glass. It is not terribly important that the thickness be exactly 9.5mm or the glass be exactly BK7. (The glasses you describe are generally like BK7.) The location of the 9.5mm pane, nearer or farther from the sensor, is immaterial.

    The point remains that you can't have it both ways. If at full aperture the 26mm f/1.1 Macro-Switar RX lens works well on a camera (because the camera is effectively RX type) then at full aperture the popular and common 25mm f/0.95 Angenieux does not work well on that camera. Likewise the Zeiss, Canon, Kowa, Nikon and most all superfast normals don't work well at full aperture on that camera.
    Last edited by dcouzin; 22nd August 2009 at 13:59.

  11. #161
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Vivek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    13,610
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    21

    Re: A superfast normal on the G1

    Here is the AA plus UV/IR cut filter of an E-410, the sensor dust shaker plate is visible on the photo as well and the fixed cover glass on the senor is inside.


    Panasonic G1, Senko 25/0.95.

    The material used for the AA filter is most likely LiNbO3 (lithium niobiate), plus there are layers of other materials. It is a complex piece of engineering. The sensor cover glass and the dust shaker glass could be "some" glass (unlikely BK-7). So, the total refractive index of these layers may or may not match the BK-7 of a Bolex RX prism.

    This is the general scenario with all digital cameras and lenses (even the current ones as each model of the camera tends to have slightly different filter combinations).

    The question you need to ask yourself is, is photography an exact science?

    To me, the answer is no.

    Mind you, I have and use(for special purposes) some the best lenses (perfect lenses to be precise) ever made. I can use a color corrected Printing Nikkor 95/2.8 for distortionless (0.0000% distortion) copy purposes, for example.

    That lens was incidentally made for copying movie films.

    To me, this "analysis" that movie camera lenses are ill suited for digital still photography by stringing partial information from various sources and coming here and dissing equipment, usage and the users gives clear indications of boredom.

    This kind of "web analysis" isn't a bad pastime but I would think picking up a camera (Gemini or otherwise) and making use of it is a better way to kill the time.

  12. #162
    dcouzin
    Guest

    Re: A superfast normal on the G1

    MODERATOR WARNING
    there will be no insulting labguage.
    Please respect other members
    thanks
    -bob
    Last edited by Bob; 22nd August 2009 at 18:20.

  13. #163
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Vivek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    13,610
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    21

    Re: A superfast normal on the G1

    Correction noted (on the magnification). Yes, I can even show them off if you like.

    In fact, I have the 95/2.8N, 105/2.8N and the 150/2.8A (the last version) Printing Nikkors (the last two optimized for 1:1) or even a Repro Nikkor 85/1!

    Perhaps you measured the distortion of the 95/2.8 Printing Nikkor. Neither my feeble tests not the Nikon literature I have claim that 0.02% distortion.

    Although, the Printing Nikkors are corrected from 400-800nm light (thus qualifying to be APO), Nikon did not classify them as APO.

    If you have suggested cheaper ones and some benefited out of that, that is a good deed, indeed (sorry, your external links, I can not access). [You should have suggested that to Nikon as well.]

    If you have something positive to contribute, by all means do it and it will be appreciated. Otherwise, stop making characterizations.

    Again, if you have something to show (pics), show them. I am not into this wordy duels and chest beating "i am an expert" deal.

    I am reporting this to the mods as well.

  14. #164
    dcouzin
    Guest

    Re: A superfast normal on the G1

    Revision of the moderator-deleted post.

    Quote Originally Posted by Vivek View Post
    The question you need to ask yourself is, is photography an exact science? To me, the answer is no. Mind you, I have and use(for special purposes) some the best lenses (perfect lenses to be precise) ever made. I can use a color corrected Printing Nikkor 95/2.8 for distortionless (0.0000% distortion) copy purposes, for example. That lens was incidentally made for copying movie films.
    Funny that you mention a Printing-Nikkor lens. In 1978 got a small NEA grant for motion picture optical printing research and immediately blew $2600 of it on a Printing-Nikkor 105/2.8. That's the 1:1 lens in the series, and being fully symmetrical it is distortionless at 1:1. (Every fully symmetrical lens, even a single element, is distortionless at 1:1.) The Printing-Nikkor 95/2.8 you mention was designed for 2:1 and is not distortionless at 2:1. According to the Nikon literature it has 0.2% distortion at 2. Every photographic lens is of course "color-corrected". Nikon described the Printing-Nikkor's as "apochromatic" in its first brochure.
    I believe photography is an art which rests on much exact science. I've done serious work to help students and artists find simple lenses for their purposes. For example in Good cheap lens for 16mm optical printer (1986) I suggest a $100 lens to substitute for the (by then) $4600 Printing-Nikkor. This was based on sophisticated measures while being down to earth.
    That old 1986 problem resembles this strand's problem. An inexpensive lens is desired for a certain imaging task where none is made. Seemingly inappropriate lenses are tried out with some pretty good results. Mounting the lenses is a little pain. What's missing from this strand is the application of any lens sharpness evaluation methods beyond looking at JPEGs with less than a million pixels.
    A big difference between the 1986 problem and this strand's problem is that the former involved optical printing and the later involves picture taking. In optical printing the big analog woe was loss of sharpness from generation to generation. The sharpness demands on the optical printer lens were therefore extreme. What are the sharpness demands on the G1 picture taking lens?

  15. #165
    Senior Member m3photo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    1,043
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    28

    Re: Pentax 110 lens on G1

    Quote Originally Posted by woodmancy View Post
    Hey m3, do you want to tell us how you created the 110 adapter - I'm half way through mine.
    I wouldn't go so far as say I "created" an adapter to be honest. I found a deal on E-Bay that included a 24mm and a 70mm lens with a non-functioning Pentax-110 body. I took the body apart and then stuck the lens mount onto a C-Mount adapter with black electrical tape. I find that if I pull the lens mount towards the camera whilst focusing (the tape doesn't make for a perfect flush mounting but suffices for the time being) and using focus magnification, infinity focus is certainly attainable with these little lenses - the church example is here to prove it. One might think what the purpose of mounting these on the G1 is, it's really down to being stealthy whilst in a street environment. A 140mm equivalent, or better still 238mm with the cutest 1.7 multiplier you ever saw, is way smaller and unobtrusive when photographing passers by on the other side of the pavement, for example.
    I'll be buying the GF1 or similar to mount the 18mm Pentax-110 on it as a street shooter when I get round to it. I will then of course seek a more permanent lens mount as for the moment the sticky-tape/focus-magnification/pull back with two fingers route isn't exactly fast!
    If anyone needs images of what I'm talking about I'll be glad to whip out my trusty G9 and take shots of the "set-up" for y'all

  16. #166
    Subscriber Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Toronto, Canada
    Posts
    3,026
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1117

    Re: Pentax 110 lens on G1

    Quote Originally Posted by m3photo View Post
    I wouldn't go so far as say I "created" an adapter to be honest. I found a deal on E-Bay that included a 24mm and a 70mm lens with a non-functioning Pentax-110 body. I took the body apart and then stuck the lens mount onto a C-Mount adapter with black electrical tape.

    If anyone needs images of what I'm talking about I'll be glad to whip out my trusty G9 and take shots of the "set-up" for y'all
    I for one would love to see a picture - best shove it in the 110 thread that Vivek started

    Thanks
    Keith

  17. #167
    seb33
    Guest

    Re: A superfast normal on the G1

    I've found on the WEB a c mount Vivitar 25mm 0.95.

    Does anyone have ever heard about this lens ? I would like to buy it for my GH1.

    Thank you

  18. #168
    Senior Member pellicle's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Southport, Australia
    Posts
    1,429
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: A superfast normal on the G1

    Hi

    Quote Originally Posted by dcouzin View Post
    The sharpness demands on the optical printer lens were therefore extreme. What are the sharpness demands on the G1 picture taking lens?
    surely that depends on you intended print size and willingness to accept softness. David Hamilton style images would no doubt be obtainable with a lens baby ... but I personally don't see much problem with old 35mm lenses from the 80's ... do you?

  19. #169
    seb33
    Guest

    Re: A superfast normal on the G1

    Quote Originally Posted by butterdada View Post
    Angenieux 25/1.4 is ok
    Nikon cine nikkor 25/1.4 & Bausch & lomb 26/1.9 --> the front ring is a little too long.
    So just small vignetting developed when wide open .
    I've just bought a Nikon cine nikkor 25/1.4. Is it ok with GH1 ?

  20. #170
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    1,642
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: A superfast normal on the G1

    Quote Originally Posted by seb33 View Post
    I've just bought a Nikon cine nikkor 25/1.4. Is it ok with GH1 ?
    I think it is OK. How much it costs to you ?
    G1 with Cine-Nikkor 25/1.4


  21. #171
    seb33
    Guest

    Re: A superfast normal on the G1

    Quote Originally Posted by hakkalo View Post
    I think it is OK. How much it costs to you ?
    G1 with Cine-Nikkor 25/1.4

    I bought it 305$ on Ebay.
    Did you crop this picture ?

  22. #172
    seb33
    Guest

    Re: A superfast normal on the G1

    Quote Originally Posted by seb33 View Post
    I've found on the WEB a c mount Vivitar 25mm 0.95.

    Does anyone have ever heard about this lens ? I would like to buy it for my GH1.

    Thank you
    badly I missed it...

  23. #173
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    1,642
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: A superfast normal on the G1

    Quote Originally Posted by seb33 View Post
    I bought it 305$ on Ebay.
    Did you crop this picture ?
    No.

  24. #174
    seb33
    Guest

    Re: A superfast normal on the G1

    Quote Originally Posted by seb33 View Post
    badly I missed it...
    I'm selling my Cine-NIKKOR 25mm 1:1.4 here !!!! This is my favourite lens on my GH1 :

    http://cgi.ebay.fr/Cine-NIKKOR-C-mou...#ht_529wt_1167

  25. #175
    Senior Member apicius9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Honolulu, Hawaii
    Posts
    329
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: A superfast normal on the G1

    Well, since that thread is up anyway... I got a few few shots done today before and after dinner. Here are a few with the Zeika Nominar 25/0.95.







    This lens keeps puzzling me. I have the suspicion that it needs work, infinity is not really sharp and, not surprisingly, it's also quite soft wide open (last picture, the others were slightly stopped down). Wide open it is difficult to focus in the dark, but that's more a general observation, I guess. I like the handling, it's a bit heavier than the other 0.95 c-mounts - I hope to get this serviced and then see again.

    Stefan

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •