Is it possible to use modern camera lenses on the Large Format cameras?

[nagairaj]

Is it possible to use modern Nikkor Manual lenses on Large Format cameras? If possible what type of LF Camera one would use? What are advantages and limitations. I have many Nikkor lenses just lying around. I would love to use them
Thanks

[richardman]

If they are lens for 35mm cameras, then no. They only project images large enough to cover 35mm film, not large film. Do a google search of "large format lens"

[jnantz]

you might be able to use a nikkor manual lens but since the image circle is so small
you will have to use it as a macro lens. a 50mm lens for example you might have to
use at 150 or 200mm. some put lenses that don't cover the format on in reverse
(so the back of the lens / lens mount is in front sticking OUT ... ) some suggest that it will
work better if used this way .. i have no idea, never really tried using a 35mm lens that way.
enlarger lenses, ive used that way .. it might take a bit of experimenting to see what you can do with your nikkor ( if anything at all )

good luck !

[Greg]

Have had luck using a 28mm PC Nikkor and Nikon's full frame fisheye (with built in lens shade cut off) mounted on a Sinar board, board mounted on Sinar Copal shutter, and finally Sinar 4x5 back. These two optics produce nice circular images inside 4x5 film.

[Willie]

You might enjoy the smaller than full sheet circular image you get. Similar to using a 47mm Angulon on 8x10 film.
There is a place for it among all the lenses that cover the entire field. Try it and maybe you will produce images that are excellent and then people will be trying to do what you do.

[Jac@stafford.net]

You might enjoy the smaller than full sheet circular image you get. Similar to using a 47mm Angulon on 8x10 film.
There is a place for it among all the lenses that cover the entire field. Try it and maybe you will produce images that are excellent and then people will be trying to do what you do.

I'm glad you brought that up, Willie. I do not readily have an 8x10 that can accept a 47mm Super-Angulon as-is. Does the lens have a physically restricted cut-off (built in), or does it just project a gradually diminishing circle of coverage?

Anyone?

[Bob Salomon]

Even if you could you have other problem then not covering the film size. Maybe the most important is the loss of maximum resolution due to diffraction. Modern, high performance lenses for 45 are optimized to deliver optimal performance at f22 or 16. Since a 35mm DF film area is only 1 X 1.5" the aperture required for optimal resolution on 35mm is much larger then 16 or 22. However, to get the depth of field on 45 that you would be happiest with would require stopping that 35mm lens so far that you would be well into diffraction. Then there is the problem of flange focal length. That is the distance the lens needs to be to be in focus at infinity. However, your lenses are not short mount lenses. They are in focus mounts and fit a body that is much thinner then most 45 cameras. Then you would also need a shutter, and if that is a standard Copal 3 size shutter that you manage to graft your lens to that shutter has physical depth that will increase the distance from the lens to the film plane. That means that you may not even to be able to get the lens in focus at infinity. Lastly is the focal length problem. A true normal lens for your Nikon is 44mm but the commonly accepted normal is a 50mm. A normal lens for 45 is 135 to 150mm. A normal lens being defined as the diagonal of the negative. There are very few 45 cameras, with or without a wide angle bellows that can accommodate lenses as short as 50mm this really means that only long lenses might work but you will still have that diffraction and flange focal length problems.
Now, if you are only considering doing macro work it might be possible to use some of your lenses but they will still have the diffraction and mounting problems.

And you might just consider that very few, if any, 35mm camera lenses can match many current, modern, large format lenses optically. There are some really outstanding lenses out there.

[Jac@stafford.net]

Oh, gee whiz Bob, you are right but so very discouraging.
Let us move on to what other lenses other than LF lenses which would work.
There are a couple MF lenses to add to the adventure.

With respect,
Jac

[Bob Salomon]

Oh, gee whiz Bob, you are right but so very discouraging.
Let us move on to what other than LF lenses would work.
Besides a couple MF lenses, what else?

With respect,
Jac

Many large format digital lenses will cover a 150mm circle, so they would cover, without movements, and are optically spectacular on either film or digital. But they are also optimized for optimal performance at larger apertures then 16 or 22 since the chip sizes they were designed for are, at most, only ¼ the size of 45 film. So the DOF at f8 on that chip size is about the same as the DOF at f22 on 45.

Not that much different then going to a hardware store to buy a new tool. There isn't one type of hammer or one type of saw or one type of saw or one type of drill, etc., etc.. For best result you use the tool designed for the job in hand.

[Greg]

I'm glad you brought that up, Willie. I do not readily have an 8x10 that can accept a 47mm Super-Angulon as-is. Does the lens have a physically restricted cut-off (built in), or does it just project a gradually diminishing circle of coverage?

Anyone?

From my experience the smaller the aperture the more abrupt the image cut-off is. Think of it this way... Remove the GG and set the lens at its minimal aperture. Move to the side till the aperture ceases to transmit any image light. Within the distance of maybe 5mm you will go from transmitting light to no transmission of light. Now open up the lens to its maximum aperture. Do the same thing. This time the circular aperture opening will slowly go from being a circle, through being an oval, and finally no transmission of light but this will take moving you eye maybe a couple of cm. Does that make sense?

[Mark Sawyer]

"Is it possible to use modern camera lenses on the Large Format cameras?"

If it is a modern large format camera, then yes. However, using a modern lens on a vintage large format camera can cause conflicts and paradoxes in the space-time continuum. I tried it and my film came out as tintypes. Many photographers are currently using this to their advantage, as can be seen in the current revival of wet plate and other historic processes. But if you use a lens from the future on a camera from the past, they balance each other out, and you're back to conventional modern film. Something to do with tachyons and the flux-capacitor, I believe...

[Tim Meisburger]

"Is it possible to use modern camera lenses on the Large Format cameras?"

If it is a modern large format camera, then yes. However, using a modern lens on a large format camera can cause conflicts and paradoxes in the space-time continuum. I tried it and my film came out as tintypes. Many photographers are currently using this to their advantage, as can be seen in the current revival of wet plate and other historic processes. But if you use a lens from the future on a camera from the past, they balance each other out, and you're back to conventional modern film. Something to do with tachyons and the flux-capacitor, I believe...

:rolleyes:

[Jim Jones]

Don't believe what Mark says. The Pixie has him confused.

[Dan Fromm]

I'm glad you brought that up, Willie. I do not readily have an 8x10 that can accept a 47mm Super-Angulon as-is. Does the lens have a physically restricted cut-off (built in), or does it just project a gradually diminishing circle of coverage?

Anyone?

Do the arithmetic. A 47 mm lens that covers 8x10 will cover 145 degrees. Can a Super Angulon cover 145 degrees? I just asked the broken 90/8 SA I use as a paperweight whether it can illuminate 140 degrees. It can't. There's no sharp cut off, just a combination of cos^4 falloff and mechanical vignetting by the cells' rims.

[Dan Fromm]

From my experience the smaller the aperture the more abrupt the image cut-off is. Think of it this way... Remove the GG and set the lens at its minimal aperture. Move to the side till the aperture ceases to transmit any image light. Within the distance of maybe 5mm you will go from transmitting light to no transmission of light. Now open up the lens to its maximum aperture. Do the same thing. This time the circular aperture opening will slowly go from being a circle, through being an oval, and finally no transmission of light but this will take moving you eye maybe a couple of cm. Does that make sense?

No. None.

In my experience, the smaller the aperture the less effect mechanical vignetting has. My paperweight of a broken 90/8 Super Angulon agrees with me.

[nagairaj]

Thanks for all the replies. I have a Sinar PII with lens Board and Copal shutter. May be I will experiment with some Fuji instant films and see what the image looks like and go from there. As for Richardman, I do have several large format lenses fro 90mm to 203mm which I use regularly. I was only trying to see what I can do with these excellent Nikkor lenses, some kind of alternate use.. If something interesting turns up, I will post it here. Thanks once again

[John Kasaian]

"Is it possible to use modern camera lenses on the Large Format cameras?"

If it is a modern large format camera, then yes. However, using a modern lens on a vintage large format camera can cause conflicts and paradoxes in the space-time continuum. I tried it and my film came out as tintypes. Many photographers are currently using this to their advantage, as can be seen in the current revival of wet plate and other historic processes. But if you use a lens from the future on a camera from the past, they balance each other out, and you're back to conventional modern film. Something to do with tachyons and the flux-capacitor, I believe...
Funny that you should bring this up---I've experienced similar issues with the space-time continuum!

[LabRat]

Most small format multi-element lenses have rear element groups that converge the rays for the smaller IC... LF lenses do the reverse and expand...

Maybe ultra macro (I use a 55mm Micro Nikkor for VERY close-up work), or long 2 element teles (if the barrel does not cut off the IC might work), but a better application for those nice lenses might be a DSLR with the proper adapter...

Steve K

[Jac@stafford.net]

Do the arithmetic. A 47 mm lens that covers 8x10 will cover 145 degrees. Can a Super Angulon cover 145 degrees? I just asked the broken 90/8 SA I use as a paperweight whether it can illuminate 140 degrees. It can't. There's no sharp cut off, just a combination of cos^4 falloff and mechanical vignetting by the cells' rims.

I was asking about mechanical vignetting. Thanks for roundabout answer anyway.
.

[Bob Salomon]

Thanks for all the replies. I have a Sinar PII with lens Board and Copal shutter. May be I will experiment with some Fuji instant films and see what the image looks like and go from there. As for Richardman, I do have several large format lenses fro 90mm to 203mm which I use regularly. I was only trying to see what I can do with these excellent Nikkor lenses, some kind of alternate use.. If something interesting turns up, I will post it here. Thanks once again
But do you have modern large format lenses or only old ones like the 203mm. There is a very big difference between a 203 antique and a 210mm Apo Sironar S or between a 90mm Angulon and a 90 mm 4.5 Grandagon N or a SA 90mm XL!

[Jim Jones]

Modern small format lenses do work well on large format cameras when reverse mounted and used for micro photography. For example, a 50mm lens from a 35mm camera used thus on a 4x5 camera with 200mm bellows extension provides 4X magnification on the film with good illumination and sharpness to the corners. If that lens works well when focused at 200mm on its original camera, it will work well when used as described. The effective f/number will be much smaller, though. This should be measured from the front of the camera, not calculated, as it may be different than expected. Depth of field will be very small. Stopping down more than a few stops to improve this may quickly limit sharpness due to diffraction.

[Professional]

I think the OP maybe talking about those modern lenses that are used for medium format tech camera, they have lenses from Rodenstock and Schneider, and i think those are large format lenses but digital, but who knows, maybe those lenses have no much image coverage so they are not good enough for analogue LF cameras with movements.

[DamenS]

I think the OP maybe talking about those modern lenses that are used for medium format tech camera, they have lenses from Rodenstock and Schneider, and i think those are large format lenses but digital, but who knows, maybe those lenses have no much image coverage so they are not good enough for analogue LF cameras with movements.

KEH?? Which "Modern Nikkor Lenses" owned by the original poster (read the original post) are being made by Rodenstock and Schneider ??!!

[wasiraj032]

there are many lense which is avaliable easy in market u can adjust into them easily

[rdenney]

No. None.

In my experience, the smaller the aperture the less effect mechanical vignetting has. My paperweight of a broken 90/8 Super Angulon agrees with me.

Man, your Super Angulon is good. Mine only speaks German.

The point is especially true with the Super Angulon, which has a design that projects a round aperture at the extremes of coverage to a much greater extent than normal lenses.

Modern-era lenses are more apt to be designed with a sharp barrel cutoff rather than letting the image just fade out.

To the OP: a 300mm lens for your Nikon makes a 2-inch(ish) image circle when focused at infinity. A 300mm lens for a large-format camera is more like 15 or 20 inches, depending on design. If you just look at the illuminated part, however, the elements of the scene will be nearly identical. You just won't see as much of the scene with the Nikon lens.

Rick "in case we are answering the wrong question" Denney

[Jeff Keller]

Sinar made lens boards which would mount Olympus 35mm lenses and boards which would mount Nikon 35mm lenses.

The Olympus 35mm-80mm zoom was even produced with Sinar labels. I believe they may have been promoting this for digital backs but don't remember for certain.

jeff

[Luis-F-S]

I was only trying to see what I can do with these excellent Nikkor lenses, some kind of alternate use.. If something interesting turns up, I will post it here. Thanks once again

Nikkor lenses work great on Nikon 35 mm and Nikon digital cameras. To try to use them on large format just doesn't make sense, but hey, people do dumb things all the time..........