Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Does anyone know of a manufacturer making a tilt/shift adapter that would use Hassleblad/Fuji XPAN lenses.  The image circle is well over 65mm, and the lenses are outstanding and very small for being medium format in coverage (90mm f4 is smaller than FE 50/1.8).  I am surely not the only one to think of this.  It would make an extremely small and light landscape & product setup that would provide a tremendous level of technical camera/lens movement.

 

Shouldn’t be hard to get Kiron to make it since they already make an XPAN to E adapter, just not the T/S version like they do for Nikon F, Olympus OM, & C/Y

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Why not just adapt the N/F version to your E-mount body  ? 

  

That possibility is prolly the reason they don't feel obliged 

to build a version direct-fitting to E-mount. Like ... doesn't 

EVERY [geeky/techie/advanced] E-mount user already 

have a N/F adapter in use already ? Acoarst they do :-) 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Not sure what you are talking about since there are no XPAN to Nikon F adapters since the registration distance on XPAN is about 12mm shorter than Nikon F, hence no adapting them with a Nikon-E adapter, unless you are only shooting macro, and I specifically stated this would be for landscape and products. 

 (You can get an N/F lens to XPAN mount adapter, but why would you want to put a big clunky and inferior uncoupled 35mm Nikon lens on a 65mm image circle rangefinder body via an adapter? Makes no sense)

 

Nikon F T/S lenses are large/heavy/expensive/scarce and not able to offer the same image circle or movements, and are overpriced for the optics. Canon EF T/S glass is good, but large, heavy and overpriced as well.

Nikon F lenses, or any other conventional 35mm lens via a T/S adapter are unsuitable due to the fact that they will not cover full frame once any lens movements have been made. They only work for APSC.

 

A direct E-XPAN T/S adapter is the only way to make it work, and would offer superior performance, size/weight, and value vs. other options.

Why not just adapt the N/F version to your E-mount body  ? 

  

That possibility is prolly the reason they don't feel obliged 

to build a version direct-fitting to E-mount. Like ... doesn't 

EVERY [geeky/techie/advanced] E-mount user already 

have a N/F adapter in use already ? Acoarst they do :-) 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 year later...

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Posts

    • I've been using this lens extensively without any sharpness issues. At long focal lengths, you'll have to factor in the need for a faster shutter speed (< 1/500-ish at 350mm) and other factors like atmospheric distortion, fog/dust haze, etc. All these factors contribute to a deterioration of image quality at longer focal lengths.
    • That's supposed to be a pretty good APS-C lens. Can you try it on a different camera just for the heck of it? Friend? Camera shop? The lens is noted for sharpness, so if you're having as much trouble as you say, you may want to look into a replacement or repair. 
    • Hi everyone, I’m reaching out to the community because I’m facing a persistent image quality issue with my Sony 70–350mm f/4.5–6.3 G OSS lens, and I’d like to know if this is normal behavior or if my copy is defective. Problem description: I’ve extensively compared the 70–350mm G OSS with my Sony 18–135mm f/3.5–5.6 OSS, using a Sony A6700, under controlled conditions: • Identical lighting and background • Same subject and position (LEGO figure, consistent framing) • Tripod or steady support • Manual focus or AF with center point • Same shutter speed (e.g., 1/200s), similar ISO (ISO 4000–6400), RAW + JPEG • OIS turned on (and also tested with OIS off) My observations: • At 135mm, the 70–350mm G OSS delivers softer, flatter images than the 18–135mm, even when stopped down. • At 350mm, the sharpness drops significantly – the center is soft, and textures (like LEGO tiles or fabric) appear blurred or smudged. • Contrast and micro-detail are noticeably inferior across all focal lengths. • The 18–135mm at 135mm (even cropped) retains better edge sharpness and detail definition. • Both JPEG and RAW files confirm the issue – this is not just JPEG processing or noise reduction. Question to the community: • Have others experienced similar softness with the 70–350mm? • Is it possible I have a decentered or optically misaligned copy? • Is there a known issue with OSS introducing softness at long focal lengths? I wanted to love this lens due to the range and portability, but currently it’s unusable for anything where image quality matters. I’m considering returning or sending it for service. Thanks in advance for any feedback or comparison results you can share.  
  • Topics

×
×
  • Create New...