Rf to mft mount possible?

Started 2 months ago | Discussions
Jordan Seitzinger New Member • Posts: 2
Rf to mft mount possible?

So in light of all the new cinema cameras, particularly for me, the red raptor and Komodo, higher frame rates look really cool but come with a severe sensor crop, so it seems like a good opportunity to use some smaller mount lenses such as APS-C, super 35, and maybe even MFT for 2K cropping, but with the RF flange distance only being .75 MM longer than MFT but significantly wider is it possible for a mount adapter to fit somehow? If it’s recessed or something?

ProfHankD
ProfHankD Veteran Member • Posts: 8,154
Re: Rf to mft mount possible?

Jordan Seitzinger wrote:

So in light of all the new cinema cameras, particularly for me, the red raptor and Komodo, higher frame rates look really cool but come with a severe sensor crop, so it seems like a good opportunity to use some smaller mount lenses such as APS-C, super 35, and maybe even MFT for 2K cropping, but with the RF flange distance only being .75 MM longer than MFT but significantly wider is it possible for a mount adapter to fit somehow? If it’s recessed or something?

MFT has a significantly smaller throat (about 16mm smaller diameter), which I suspect means you'd be getting serious vignetting with at least some lenses. There is also the issue that RF lenses are generally fully electronic, so you'd need to deal with that. In sum, not likely. In fact, it is almost possible to adapt the other direction, but typical MFT lenses are about 2mm too wide to fit inside the RF mount.

There is a theoretical possibility of adapting RF lenses to Nikon Z, Fuji X, or Sony E/FE, but I think Nikon Z is the only one with a high probability of success.

Basically, we're headed back to the bad old days of lenses only mounting on the camera brand for which they were made.... 

 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
Lightshow
Lightshow Veteran Member • Posts: 7,647
Re: Rf to mft mount possible?
1

Canon RF mount or RF = rangefinder? Honestly I'm surprised Canon didn't pick FD, MF, MFD, or FOV as the new mount designation like Fuji picked X mount, they seem to love confusion in the marketplace.

-- hide signature --

A Manual Focus Junky...
One photographers junk lens is an artists favorite tool.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/lightshow-photography/
[My Lens list](http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/viewprofile.php?Action=viewprofile&username=LightShow)
####Where's my FF NEX-7 ?????
https://c1.staticflickr.com/1/447/31518420576_7916966b11_b.jpg
https://c2.staticflickr.com/2/1962/31024497798_85526ac8ca_b.jpg
Firmware request:
-A button map for toggling the EVF & LCD
-Still waiting for the minimum shutter speed with auto ISO for my NEX-7 and A7r. I know it will never happen.
-Customize the display screen layout, I'd love to have both Histogram and level at the same time.
-More peaking options, being able to set peaking sensitivity and a threshold level.
-An RGB overlay on the histogram https://c1.staticflickr.com/1/602/20236258313_c604dd9522_n.jpg
-An option to return the focus assist zoom to one button press
-An option to return to how the NEX-7 handled playback, ie. center button to zoom, then you could use the control dial to zoom in and out, then center button to exit the zoom mode.

 Lightshow's gear list:Lightshow's gear list
Sony Alpha NEX-7 Sony a7R Leica Elmarit-M 24mm f/2.8 ASPH Leica APO-Summicron-M 90mm f/2 ASPH Voigtlander 15mm F4.5 Super Wide Heliar +20 more
MOD Tom Caldwell Forum Pro • Posts: 43,372
The RF R3ii is already on the drawing board

ProfHankD wrote:

Jordan Seitzinger wrote:

So in light of all the new cinema cameras, particularly for me, the red raptor and Komodo, higher frame rates look really cool but come with a severe sensor crop, so it seems like a good opportunity to use some smaller mount lenses such as APS-C, super 35, and maybe even MFT for 2K cropping, but with the RF flange distance only being .75 MM longer than MFT but significantly wider is it possible for a mount adapter to fit somehow? If it’s recessed or something?

MFT has a significantly smaller throat (about 16mm smaller diameter), which I suspect means you'd be getting serious vignetting with at least some lenses. There is also the issue that RF lenses are generally fully electronic, so you'd need to deal with that. In sum, not likely. In fact, it is almost possible to adapt the other direction, but typical MFT lenses are about 2mm too wide to fit inside the RF mount.

There is a theoretical possibility of adapting RF lenses to Nikon Z, Fuji X, or Sony E/FE, but I think Nikon Z is the only one with a high probability of success.

Basically, we're headed back to the bad old days of lenses only mounting on the camera brand for which they were made....

Surely that is what the major manufacturers have always wanted?

To sell an entry level body with kit lens then the more lenses that their devoted users buy the more they are locked into the brand that they have come to fancy.

Canon thought that they had cracked the perfect egg when they devised and released the electronic EF mount and it was only perchance of the runaway success and huge numbers of EF mount type lenses that made it worth while for effective adapters to be made for them.

Canon made sure that their transition to RF was accompanied by the very best EF adapters ever made. Also surprisingly the first commercial focal reduction adapters EF-EF-M only appeared when the demise of the dslr was officially announced. They had to provide a path for their aps-c dslr body refugees.

Camera and lens manufacturers might make the gear that we love to use but their motivation is truly only another way to make money and lock their customers to their product.

From time to time there have been shared mount systems, but usually these have been stop-gap collaborations between second tier makers in an effort to get enough camera bodies with their mount system out in the hands of users in order to make a market for their lenses.

I think that Panasonic and Sigma have put the eggs of the lenses in front of the camera body chickens and might have some issues getting enough chickens out their to allow their crates of eggs to be hatched. Sigma has a sort of bob each way as they are quite capable of making different mounts (shells) for their eggs.

Panasonic seems to have been intent on making premium niche camera bodies in L-Mount and releases so far seem to bear witness to this. But the R3 and A1 might disappoint that ambition - even if it is ephemeral as such expensive bodies might be on a higher pedestal labelled “UNOBTAINABLE for envy-only”. But such gear sells entry level by the truckload.

Noteworthy for each new digital mount system there was a rush to adapt legacy lenses to it but users quickly joined a collective rant for new lens releases (as they do).

It seems that camera users just must have plenty of new stuff to titivate the innate urge to spend.

Not so much sad as inevitable.

Probably why I have avoided buying new lenses for FF use since my naive rush to spend up big with EF - now I simply adapt and more by luck than divine guidance EF became the electronic lens mount of interchange. I did invest in M4/3 as well.

EF lenses became forever but I simply could not keep up with the pace of the dslr camera body updates. If we must have the best let it be the lenses as the camera body is only as good as the next sensor release if you want to stay at the pointy end of the game The R3ii is already on the drawing board ….

But I survived Samsung NX with two lenses only, Sony E/FE with zero oem lenses and now I enjoy Panasonic in L-Mount with zero lenses. Ricoh GXR-M launched me into MF adapted lenses and any LM lenses I acquired can be adapted. As can my film slr PK lenses.

RF, Z, E/FE, electronic PK and any other early electronic except some Nikon = all dead end streets. But we all love our respective brands.

We know this and are unabashed. Talk to a Samsung NX true-believer and ask just how many most capable lenses they have. Or Nikon One? or Pentax Q?

Heck, I forgot that I have the very nice kit prime that came with the Pentax Q but adapted the rest as usual ….

-- hide signature --

Tom Caldwell

ProfHankD
ProfHankD Veteran Member • Posts: 8,154
Re: The RF R3ii is already on the drawing board

Tom Caldwell wrote:

ProfHankD wrote:

Basically, we're headed back to the bad old days of lenses only mounting on the camera brand for which they were made....

Surely that is what the major manufacturers have always wanted?

That's far from clear. I think it's just a matter of it having been expedient for most companies to do their own development. In some sense, it's more a matter of CIPA not being a very strong organizing force and having generally very weak standards. About half the camera makers have actually stated intent that their mount would become a standard, but as far as I know, none have been fully open since M42.

... I think that Panasonic and Sigma have put the eggs of the lenses in front of the camera body chickens and might have some issues getting enough chickens out their to allow their crates of eggs to be hatched. Sigma has a sort of bob each way as they are quite capable of making different mounts (shells) for their eggs.

I don't get this yolk.

Lesser players / late entries have stronger motivation to work together. Sigma, despite being a really major 3rd-party lens maker and a camera maker, is a family-owned business; let's just say they seem to not be invited to a lot of the parties thrown by the cool kids. The interesting thing is Nikon Z. They seem to have had a real change of corporate heart in moving from F's longish and narrow mount to the very short and wide Z, and thus arguably making themselves the easiest mount to adapt to (or for 3rd-party lenses to target).

 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
MOD Tom Caldwell Forum Pro • Posts: 43,372
Re: The RF R3ii is already on the drawing board

ProfHankD wrote:

Tom Caldwell wrote:

ProfHankD wrote:

Basically, we're headed back to the bad old days of lenses only mounting on the camera brand for which they were made....

Surely that is what the major manufacturers have always wanted?

That's far from clear. I think it's just a matter of it having been expedient for most companies to do their own development. In some sense, it's more a matter of CIPA not being a very strong organizing force and having generally very weak standards. About half the camera makers have actually stated intent that their mount would become a standard, but as far as I know, none have been fully open since M42.

Yes it is hard to stay committed to mount interchangeability - the M4/3 seems to have a tight specification but both Olympus and Panasonic have gone their own way in some respects.  I agree that having one's own mount system allows the manufacturer to do their own thing and not be fettered by needing the decision of a committee.

Likewise companies seem to prefer to control their own oem raw file format.

... I think that Panasonic and Sigma have put the eggs of the lenses in front of the camera body chickens and might have some issues getting enough chickens out their to allow their crates of eggs to be hatched. Sigma has a sort of bob each way as they are quite capable of making different mounts (shells) for their eggs.

I don't get this yolk.

Lesser players / late entries have stronger motivation to work together. Sigma, despite being a really major 3rd-party lens maker and a camera maker, is a family-owned business; let's just say they seem to not be invited to a lot of the parties thrown by the cool kids.

Yes as far as I know Canon with RF and possibly Nikon with its Z as not sharing their lens secrets with anyone trying to make for their exclusive cool kid soiree.  At least not until they have sold enough of their own oem lenses to make a decent party.

This presumably led to Panasonic and Sigma getting into the same mount system bed.  Sigma could produce a truckload of lenses quite quickly - (joking) probably more lenses than Panasonic could make bodies - so L-Mount spoiled for lens choice and they can even buy Leica ones as well.  But (say) an average of three lenses for every new L-Mount camera sold is not a lot of lenses.  But I suggest that Panasonic is investing for a longer haul.

Less lens variety and more lenses of each type sold - more lens variety and not a lot of bodies and it might start to be a wonder just how many of some types of lens are actually sold and delivered.

Not so bad for Sigma where the lenses are compatible over several mount systems.  Just make up racks of partly completed stock lenses and fit the mount ends according to demand.  Panasonic on the other hand only makes their FF lenses for L-Mount.

The interesting thing is Nikon Z. They seem to have had a real change of corporate heart in moving from F's longish and narrow mount to the very short and wide Z, and thus arguably making themselves the easiest mount to adapt to (or for 3rd-party lenses to target).

Among other things they possibly were in a greater bind to make their lenses adaptable as they were probably under greater pressure to win over users from other mount systems.

-- hide signature --

Tom Caldwell

ProfHankD
ProfHankD Veteran Member • Posts: 8,154
Re: The RF R3ii is already on the drawing board

Tom Caldwell wrote:

ProfHankD wrote:

The interesting thing is Nikon Z. They seem to have had a real change of corporate heart in moving from F's longish and narrow mount to the very short and wide Z, and thus arguably making themselves the easiest mount to adapt to (or for 3rd-party lenses to target).

Among other things they possibly were in a greater bind to make their lenses adaptable as they were probably under greater pressure to win over users from other mount systems.

Nikon is a smaller company than many people realize -- much smaller than Canon or Sony. I wouldn't be surprised if they really want 3rd-party lenses to fill-out their line because that can happen faster than they can make a full line of new lenses.

 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
OP Jordan Seitzinger New Member • Posts: 2
Re: Rf to mft mount possible?
  1. Hmm interesting. Thanks for the reply. I don’t think I’m worried about vignetting as the use case I’d want for the mft glass is on a sensor that’s like 8mm x 14mm. Real small. Also not worried about electronics bc id use manual lenses. Really what I’m trying to get is the widest possible lense and mft can usually go wider bc they don’t have a full frame sensor to cover. Not in any way a lens scientist here. Just thinking out loud.  
ProfHankD
ProfHankD Veteran Member • Posts: 8,154
Re: Rf to mft mount possible?

Jordan Seitzinger wrote:

  1. Hmm interesting. Thanks for the reply. I don’t think I’m worried about vignetting as the use case I’d want for the mft glass is on a sensor that’s like 8mm x 14mm. Real small. Also not worried about electronics bc id use manual lenses. Really what I’m trying to get is the widest possible lense and mft can usually go wider bc they don’t have a full frame sensor to cover. Not in any way a lens scientist here. Just thinking out loud.

That size, you're probably best off looking at C mount lenses.

 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
MOD Tom Caldwell Forum Pro • Posts: 43,372
Re: The RF R3ii is already on the drawing board

ProfHankD wrote:

Tom Caldwell wrote:

ProfHankD wrote:

The interesting thing is Nikon Z. They seem to have had a real change of corporate heart in moving from F's longish and narrow mount to the very short and wide Z, and thus arguably making themselves the easiest mount to adapt to (or for 3rd-party lenses to target).

Among other things they possibly were in a greater bind to make their lenses adaptable as they were probably under greater pressure to win over users from other mount systems.

Nikon is a smaller company than many people realize -- much smaller than Canon or Sony. I wouldn't be surprised if they really want 3rd-party lenses to fill-out their line because that can happen faster than they can make a full line of new lenses.

I basically knew that already - thanks.  It helps in commerce if you have a company that is huge and has many diverse products.  The Ricoh folks used to worry that Ricoh would go broke and exit the camera business. That they might exit the camera business is easily arguable but going broke is quite another issue.

Ricoh is a huge diverse company. I once had a statistic of just how many factories they had just in China - I forget but I guess-remember (say) “30”.  They had a strike in one of them and the quoted number of employees there alone was more than the entire  workforce of Leica-camera.  Ricoh almost treats it camera division as a hobby.

I am a retired professional accountant and did study Cost Accounting as well and therefore know that there many ways to account for business and would  hesitate to accept any pronouncement of economic health without quite a lot of inside information that I am not entitled to have

For an easy to understand example: a large firm with (say) 100 nation wide stores can run a few of them at a loss.  Locals might wonder if their store might go broke.  But their buying power is huge and if the rest of the stores are making money they can keep this up effectively forever if it suits their purpose.  Of course this sort of carry-on is probably illegal in most civilised countries but it does go on in semi-subtle fashion.  Called “buying a market”.

A national firm will move into a growing town set up shop and discount until they get whatever market share they are after then re-regulate their prices - simple.  Those local stores that try to compete go to the wall and provide the necessary market share.

I think that I noted Sony buying their market on an international scale with sharp pricing of their first series (at least) A7 type. Now that they have achieved the share of the market that they wanted the re-regulated and Sony gear is much of a muchness with the other majors.  They also seem to have made adapting lenses easier which they were still Sony-who? in the camera industry.

Getting market share and keeping it is what this is all about.

Panasonic who could have done a similar thing did not have the same niche exploitable and decided that they would produce into a quality niche rather than a head on price challenge - which of course might have been great for consumers but might have been devastating for the industry if we had a serious direct confrontation by corporations with very deep pockets at an inauspicious time.  Panasonic would no doubt have been the loser and Nikon would have struggled, like Olympus, through lack of product diversity and deep enough pockets.

As Panasonic is taking another path it would explain why their EF-L electronic adapter are  only truly good for Sigma EF mount lenses and a selection of easy-adapted EF lenses made by Canon and others.

Large highly diverse companies can withstand divisions that are not producing a lot of contribution to general overhead as long as they are contributing something over the direct cost of providing the goods that they sell. Just what level of patience might be applied depends on corporate strategy more than anything else.  But other parts of the business have to be highly profitable or the whole enterprise will fall in a heap.

-- hide signature --

Tom Caldwell

paul hofseth New Member • Posts: 4
Re: The RF R3ii is already on the drawing board

mr. Caldwells reply is most appropriate, But before adding to it, allow me to complain about the inordinate difficulties of logging in when absent for a while; the aphanumeric codes required , do not work ,  so I was forced to re-register.

Yes, a companys economic muscles does count, especially when selling to the fashion market. However, those who take the trouble to  learn the ins and outs of photography may well be another market (which Nippon Kogaku and  Leitz for years have catered forr.

A basic cosideration when adapting optics is whether one takes time to select the motive, and really need autofocus and autoaperture, If not, a simple mechanical adapter is sufficient and the camera makers can compete on viewfinder  & sensor qualities, while having short mount-to- sensor distance and not try to excel in on the number of buttons and features. Although I realize that neo-luddite simplification to only DNGs out no high speed frames and no wifi may not save that much in development and production costs since the chips nevertheless  contain such battery eating extensions. BUT , launching high priced simplified camaea bodies might actually create a new fashion market for "slow photography" rather like the market that has grown for triplets and less well corrected lenses.

Makers of optics may not be able to make cheaper products by having software fixing corerectable lens faults rather than doing it in the design plhase, but if they sell old fashioned stuff at high prices they may still survive.

Myself I find the inelegant and volumious Nikon Z7 plus ancient Leitz , Zeiss , Nikon, Kinoptic  and Angenieux optics quite usable,  apart from its unfortunate tendency to randomly move the focus point (a button named "Do nothing" would be excellent.)

p.

MOD Tom Caldwell Forum Pro • Posts: 43,372
Re: The RF R3ii is already on the drawing board

Paul, thanks  for your contribution it was helpful.

On the matter of signing in - I cannot help, but seem to recollect that dpreview made users update their passwords some time ago. Perhaps that was your problem.

-- hide signature --

Tom Caldwell

Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads