Table of APS, C mount, and projection lenses covering FF online

Started 3 months ago | Discussions
kathala
kathala Forum Member • Posts: 74
Table of APS, C mount, and projection lenses covering FF online
2

For the experimentally-minded, or those using non-standard crops or aspect ratios:

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1tSuVwWQDFzPEI9RmrFG9fMzP2D6avFkHUBDYinL5PWg/edit?usp=drive_web&ouid=108628632450090560676

Very much a work in progress; if you have additional information, you are always welcome to leave a comment directly in the google doc, or in this thread.

-- hide signature --

The better you look, the more you see (B. E. Ellis)
My Art and Books: ChristianSchnalzger.de
My Exploration of Panoramic Photographic Storytelling:
 flickr.com/photos/hach_und_ueberhaupt/

petrochemist Senior Member • Posts: 2,891
Re: Table of APS, C mount, and projection lenses covering FF online

Very useful, but I fear it might inspire some more GAS

 petrochemist's gear list:petrochemist's gear list
Pentax K100D Sigma SD14 Pentax K-7 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GF2 Panasonic Lumix DMC-G5 +15 more
kathala
OP kathala Forum Member • Posts: 74
Re: Table of APS, C mount, and projection lenses covering FF online

Really? It so cured me!

Have a look at the 35/.95 7artisans in case that is anywhere near your interest area. It sounded soooo great (and looked it, as well) - until I tried it in the real world. Field curvature destroys any separation effect. With other lenses, it's vignette or dismal edge sharpness.

My takeaway with that table is: if the lens is sold as APS-only, there's always a reason for that...

-- hide signature --

The better you look, the more you see (B. E. Ellis)
My Art and Books: ChristianSchnalzger.de
My Exploration of Panoramic Photographic Storytelling:
flickr.com/photos/hach_und_ueberhaupt/

petrochemist Senior Member • Posts: 2,891
Re: Table of APS, C mount, and projection lenses covering FF online

kathala wrote:

Really? It so cured me!

Have a look at the 35/.95 7artisans in case that is anywhere near your interest area. It sounded soooo great (and looked it, as well) - until I tried it in the real world. Field curvature destroys any separation effect. With other lenses, it's vignette or dismal edge sharpness.

My takeaway with that table is: if the lens is sold as APS-only, there's always a reason for that...

Sometimes the reason is simply that the manufacturer didn't make a FF body when the lens was sold.

I currently have 5 APSC bodies, 2 MFT bodies & only 1 FF, so using crop lenses on my FF kit is quite common.

This listing certainly shows a few that I might have been tempted to try & now know it's not worth while, but there are also a few that cover FF when I wouldn't have expected it.

The comments also highlighted a way to improve coverage on one of the lenses I have used on my A7ii.

 petrochemist's gear list:petrochemist's gear list
Pentax K100D Sigma SD14 Pentax K-7 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GF2 Panasonic Lumix DMC-G5 +15 more
kathala
OP kathala Forum Member • Posts: 74
Re: Table of APS, C mount, and projection lenses covering FF online

Sometimes the reason is simply that the manufacturer didn't make a FF body when the lens was sold.

sometimes is the keyword

I currently have 5 APSC bodies, 2 MFT bodies & only 1 FF, so using crop lenses on my FF kit is quite common.

feel free to share any findings! ^^

ProfHankD
ProfHankD Veteran Member • Posts: 7,596
1.4X/1.5X Teleconverters as APS-C->FF converters

kathala wrote:

Really? It so cured me!

Have a look at the 35/.95 7artisans in case that is anywhere near your interest area. It sounded soooo great (and looked it, as well) - until I tried it in the real world. Field curvature destroys any separation effect. With other lenses, it's vignette or dismal edge sharpness.

My takeaway with that table is: if the lens is sold as APS-only, there's always a reason for that...

You're absolutely right -- although in a few cases it's just a light baffle in the way.

However, the real way to use APS-C lenses on FF is with a FF 1.4X/1.5X teleconverter. In some cases, the 1.2X glass adapters would probably suffice too -- I haven't tested this because the only 1.2X glass adapter I have in Minolta SR/MC/MD to Minolta AF/Sony A, so it's not particularly convenient to mount any designed-for-APS-C lenses on that.

BTW, your growing collection of data-mined tables is really impressive.

 ProfHankD's gear list:ProfHankD's gear list
Canon PowerShot SX530 Olympus TG-860 Sony a7R II Canon EOS 5D Mark IV Sony a6500 +30 more
aidaho Regular Member • Posts: 399
Re: Table of APS, C mount, and projection lenses covering FF online

Olympus Pen-F 38/1.8 fully covers FF up to a meter or two.

7Artisans 7.5/2.8 fisheye does not deserve a green flair. One has to get rid of the built-in hood before using it on FF and the very extreme edges suffer from some color shift. The resolution is rather good though.

Zonlai 22/1.8 does not cover even 1:1.

Really skeptical about 75/1.3(4) lenses covering FF. I have Navitar 75/1.3 and it struggles to cover APS-C. Computars may very well be different lenses, but the whole 75mm C-mount family looks awfully similar and huge coverage differences seem unlikely. You sure the samples you found were not from APS-C sensor?

-- hide signature --

I like to shoot with manual lenses. Here are some of my photos: https://www.flickr.com/photos/curry-hexagon/

aidaho Regular Member • Posts: 399
Re: Table of APS, C mount, and projection lenses covering FF online
1

aidaho wrote:

Olympus Pen-F 38/1.8 fully covers FF up to a meter or two.

Speaking from memory, I was cautiously conservative.

Looking at the past shots, it does fully cover FF with a steep falloff at all focus distances if stopped down to F8.

Nevertheless, I think it's a gimmick.

There is fun in it, but I wouldn't consider any such lens as my "go-to" one.

-- hide signature --

I like to shoot with manual lenses. Here are some of my photos: https://www.flickr.com/photos/curry-hexagon/

kathala
OP kathala Forum Member • Posts: 74
Re: Table of APS, C mount, and projection lenses covering FF online

Nevertheless, I think it's a gimmick.

There is fun in it, but I wouldn't consider any such lens as my "go-to" one.

Aidaho, thank you for your input!

I had been very curious personally about the Zonlai.

And I completely forgot about the Pen. I guess I was so disgusted with Olympus after my Pen M4/3 died after only ten thousand shots that I couldn't believe they EVER made something worthwhile if they're incapable of doing so NOW. The 38/1.8 and 6o/1.5 are impressive!

Do you happen to have a picture with the 7artisans 7.5? What I saw gave a round image, just like any old SLR 7.5mm fisheye lens - a matter of taste.

C mount probably shows the widest variation in coverage. Not surprising since it's also the least standardised/most diversely used format, from old amateur film cameras to machine vision. Most C mount lenses will not cover FF (or even APS). The ones I list were documented with samples purported to have been taken on FF. I elected to trust the documentations, but am happy to be proven wrong

Hank, a tele converter is an interesting idea!

aidaho Regular Member • Posts: 399
Re: Table of APS, C mount, and projection lenses covering FF online

kathala wrote:

And I completely forgot about the Pen. I guess I was so disgusted with Olympus after my Pen M4/3 died after only ten thousand shots that I couldn't believe they EVER made something worthwhile if they're incapable of doing so NOW. The 38/1.8 and 6o/1.5 are impressive!

I have Pen-F 38/1.8 and 40/1.4. Both are excellent on APS-C sensor.

https://www.flickr.com/photos/curry-hexagon/albums/72157709094159071

https://www.flickr.com/photos/curry-hexagon/albums/72157716178555556

Do you happen to have a picture with the 7artisans 7.5? What I saw gave a round image, just like any old SLR 7.5mm fisheye lens - a matter of taste.

Sure:

Unlike with rectilinear, it's pretty normal for a fisheye to have it's borders inside the frame.

One has to have GFX sensor to get a circular fisheye from a 7a 7.5/2.8.

-- hide signature --

I like to shoot with manual lenses. Here are some of my photos: https://www.flickr.com/photos/curry-hexagon/

ProfHankD
ProfHankD Veteran Member • Posts: 7,596
Crop circles

aidaho wrote:

kathala wrote:

And I completely forgot about the Pen. I guess I was so disgusted with Olympus after my Pen M4/3 died after only ten thousand shots that I couldn't believe they EVER made something worthwhile if they're incapable of doing so NOW. The 38/1.8 and 6o/1.5 are impressive!

I have Pen-F 38/1.8 and 40/1.4. Both are excellent on APS-C sensor.

https://www.flickr.com/photos/curry-hexagon/albums/72157709094159071

https://www.flickr.com/photos/curry-hexagon/albums/72157716178555556

Do you happen to have a picture with the 7artisans 7.5? What I saw gave a round image, just like any old SLR 7.5mm fisheye lens - a matter of taste.

Sure:

Unlike with rectilinear, it's pretty normal for a fisheye to have it's borders inside the frame.

One has to have GFX sensor to get a circular fisheye from a 7a 7.5/2.8.

You'd also have to remove the lens hood to get a full circle anyway. The cheaper answer is to put it on a FF body using a focal reducer... unfortunately, there aren't any that take an MFT lens.

The view you're showing is a pretty good match for the old 12mm Spiratone fisheyes, which give complete circles on FF using a focal reducer, as does the 8mm Samyang or 6.5mm Opteka. Don't let the wildly different focal lengths fool you; fisheyes can use several different projection formulas, so the view angle:focal length correspondence is wacky. Still, I get about 190-195 degree circle using the Opteka on an A7 via a focal reducer.

 ProfHankD's gear list:ProfHankD's gear list
Canon PowerShot SX530 Olympus TG-860 Sony a7R II Canon EOS 5D Mark IV Sony a6500 +30 more
aidaho Regular Member • Posts: 399
Re: Crop circles

ProfHankD wrote:

You'd also have to remove the lens hood to get a full circle anyway. The cheaper answer is to put it on a FF body using a focal reducer... unfortunately, there aren't any that take an MFT lens.

Yep, I've mentioned the need to dismount the hood. I had to make my own DIY front in order to fit a custom protective cap too.

Don't let the wildly different focal lengths fool you; fisheyes can use several different projection formulas, so the view angle:focal length correspondence is wacky. Still, I get about 190-195 degree circle using the Opteka on an A7 via a focal reducer.

For sure. I've noticed there isnt a reference "fisheye" projection, fisheyes can basically get away with anything not causing that much of a discomfort to viewer and manufacturers leveraged this advantage to the fullest extent.

Modified 7Artisans 7.5/2.8 seem to have an angle of view slightly exceeding 180°, looking a bit behind itself.

Overall, not exactly a workhorse, but there is an undeniable fun factor going so ridiculously wide, it leaves most wide lenses far behind in the dust.

-- hide signature --

I like to shoot with manual lenses. Here are some of my photos: https://www.flickr.com/photos/curry-hexagon/

petrochemist Senior Member • Posts: 2,891
Re: Crop circles
1

aidaho wrote:

For sure. I've noticed there isnt a reference "fisheye" projection, fisheyes can basically get away with anything not causing that much of a discomfort to viewer and manufacturers leveraged this advantage to the fullest extent.

I've seen references to five standard fisheye designs, which all give different FOV for a given sensor/focal length & different displacements from the centre of the image for a given subject angle. For comparison a rectilinear lens has displacement = f.tan (angle)

These are:

Equisolid displacement = 2f.sin (angle/2)
Apparently the Sigma 8mm f4 AF EX & convex mirrors show this sort of image.

Equidistant displacement = f. (angle in radians)
The Peleng 8mm f/3.5 was claimed to match this design

Orthogonal displacement= f. sin (angle)
Rarely used in photography no examples known

Stereographic displacement = 2f.tan (angle/2)
Rarely used in photography no examples known

Thoby displacement= A.f.sin(angle.B) (where A & B are constants in any one design)
The AF DX Nikkor 10.5mm f2.8 ED being given as an example.

Apparently most real world fisheyes often don't quite match any of these projections!

I've found some of the fisheye converters I have cramp a lot of the FOV into the edges of the image - which doesn't make for a pleasing image!

 petrochemist's gear list:petrochemist's gear list
Pentax K100D Sigma SD14 Pentax K-7 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GF2 Panasonic Lumix DMC-G5 +15 more
Sjak
Sjak Senior Member • Posts: 5,863
Re: Table of APS, C mount, and projection lenses covering FF online
1

kathala wrote:

My takeaway with that table is: if the lens is sold as APS-only, there's always a reason for that...

Yes, but that reason can be unrelated to optical numerics.

E.g. the Pentax DA 300mm f/4 was launched in 2008, a time when Pentax did not have any FF-camera. It is a FF-lens though, and Pentax itself markets it as such nowadays.

Anyways, I really appreciate the considerable time and effort that goes into this list, and the others that you posted.

 Sjak's gear list:Sjak's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX7 Pentax K100D Pentax K10D Leica M-Monochrom Fujifilm X-T1 +1 more
kathala
OP kathala Forum Member • Posts: 74
Re: Table of APS, C mount, and projection lenses covering FF online

Do you happen to have a picture with the 7artisans 7.5?

Sure:

Thanks, Aidaho.

Imho, the edges and their colours look no worse than what is sold as native FF circular fisheyes.

Am I right in presuming you mechanically removed the hood for this picture (i.e. destructive, not just unscrew)?

The 7artisans then renders just like the 6.5mm Meike/Opteka, i.e. like an old 12mm FF - exactly, Hank

-- hide signature --

The better you look, the more you see (B. E. Ellis)
My Art and Books: ChristianSchnalzger.de
My Exploration of Panoramic Photographic Storytelling:
flickr.com/photos/hach_und_ueberhaupt/
My Photography Reference Tables:
drive.google.com/drive/folders/1aJ5F8XM6t5AK4bydthcDoiwhsh5CUx3N

kathala
OP kathala Forum Member • Posts: 74
Re: Crop circles

Equisolid displacement = 2f.sin (angle/2)
Apparently the Sigma 8mm f4 AF EX & convex mirrors show this sort of image.

Equidistant displacement = f. (angle in radians)
The Peleng 8mm f/3.5 was claimed to match this design

Orthogonal displacement= f. sin (angle)
Rarely used in photography no examples known

Stereographic displacement = 2f.tan (angle/2)
Rarely used in photography no examples known

Thoby displacement= A.f.sin(angle.B) (where A & B are constants in any one design)
The AF DX Nikkor 10.5mm f2.8 ED being given as an example.

Apparently most real world fisheyes often don't quite match any of these projections!

I've found some of the fisheye converters I have cramp a lot of the FOV into the edges of the image - which doesn't make for a pleasing image!

Thanks Petrochemist! The 12/2.8 FF Samyang fisheye is reported to be stereographic. I saw some intriguing comparisons on which it looks less "fishy" than other 11-15s

-- hide signature --

The better you look, the more you see (B. E. Ellis)
My Art and Books: ChristianSchnalzger.de
My Exploration of Panoramic Photographic Storytelling:
flickr.com/photos/hach_und_ueberhaupt/
My Photography Reference Tables:
drive.google.com/drive/folders/1aJ5F8XM6t5AK4bydthcDoiwhsh5CUx3N

petrochemist Senior Member • Posts: 2,891
Re: Crop circles

kathala wrote:

Equisolid displacement = 2f.sin (angle/2)
Apparently the Sigma 8mm f4 AF EX & convex mirrors show this sort of image.

Equidistant displacement = f. (angle in radians)
The Peleng 8mm f/3.5 was claimed to match this design

Orthogonal displacement= f. sin (angle)
Rarely used in photography

I've found a note that the 'Yasuhara - Madoka 180 circular fisheye' is an orthogonal example.

Stereographic displacement = 2f.tan (angle/2)
Rarely used in photography no examples known

Thoby displacement= A.f.sin(angle.B) (where A & B are constants in any one design)
The AF DX Nikkor 10.5mm f2.8 ED being given as an example.

Apparently most real world fisheyes often don't quite match any of these projections!

I've found some of the fisheye converters I have cramp a lot of the FOV into the edges of the image - which doesn't make for a pleasing image!

Thanks Petrochemist! The 12/2.8 FF Samyang fisheye is reported to be stereographic. I saw some intriguing comparisons on which it looks less "fishy" than other 11-15s

Thanks the samyang 12/2.8 is now added to my camera reference notes

 petrochemist's gear list:petrochemist's gear list
Pentax K100D Sigma SD14 Pentax K-7 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GF2 Panasonic Lumix DMC-G5 +15 more
aidaho Regular Member • Posts: 399
Re: Table of APS, C mount, and projection lenses covering FF online

kathala wrote:

Do you happen to have a picture with the 7artisans 7.5?

Sure:

Thanks, Aidaho.

Imho, the edges and their colours look no worse than what is sold as native FF circular fisheyes.

Am I right in presuming you mechanically removed the hood for this picture (i.e. destructive, not just unscrew)?

The 7artisans then renders just like the 6.5mm Meike/Opteka, i.e. like an old 12mm FF - exactly, Hank

Technically, the removal is not destructive, but you'll have to go trough lens disassembly process to put it back again.

One has to beware: there are two mechanically different versions of 7A 7.5 and by following the disassembly guide for v1 I've destroyed my v2.

Later I was able to build custom parts and restore my v2 copy, you can read the story here: https://www.flickr.com/groups/4038847@N21/discuss/72157670455241007/

-- hide signature --

I like to shoot with manual lenses. Here are some of my photos: https://www.flickr.com/photos/curry-hexagon/

kathala
OP kathala Forum Member • Posts: 74
Re: Crop circles
1

Thanks the samyang 12/2.8 is now added to my camera reference notes

As is the Yasuhara Madoka to mine It reminds me of any skater video I ever saw. Tastefully trashy.

I became curious and had a look around. There's an excellent article including mappings of the different projection styles: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fisheye_lens

Turns out, all the Samyangs are stereographic. I couldn't have identified why, but when I had looked at sample pictures, considering the purchase of a fisheye, both their lenses, FF and APS, caught my attention over other offerings. Now I know why.

-- hide signature --

The better you look, the more you see (B. E. Ellis)
My Art and Books: ChristianSchnalzger.de
My Exploration of Panoramic Photographic Storytelling:
flickr.com/photos/hach_und_ueberhaupt/
My Photography Reference Tables:
drive.google.com/drive/folders/1aJ5F8XM6t5AK4bydthcDoiwhsh5CUx3N

petrochemist Senior Member • Posts: 2,891
Re: Crop circles

kathala wrote:

Thanks the samyang 12/2.8 is now added to my camera reference notes

As is the Yasuhara Madoka to mine It reminds me of any skater video I ever saw. Tastefully trashy.

I became curious and had a look around. There's an excellent article including mappings of the different projection styles: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fisheye_lens

I had a vague memory of those mapping function images, but the page has changed quite a bit since i last looked at it.

I suspect one of my fisheye converters is close to orthographic It doesn't get that much into the image & most of what it does get is crammed into the edge.

I must try & produce some comparative shots with my various fisheye options - even if I can't manage to put labels on them all...

 petrochemist's gear list:petrochemist's gear list
Pentax K100D Sigma SD14 Pentax K-7 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GF2 Panasonic Lumix DMC-G5 +15 more
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads