Didn't someone remove the fixed lens from a Z1 ?

[Michael Totten]

I recall seeing pictures of the new Sony Z1 fitted with a nice Canon lens. Apparently a couple of guys learned how to remove the fixed lens and then retro-fit the Z1 with a nice Canon lens. If this is possible, then why couldn't someone figure out how to rig 35mm lenses directly onto an HDV cam (by-passing the stock/fixed glass)? This seems better than the mini 35 to me. There is LESS glass, so more light gets through right? Better performance in low light situations. Also, better optics = better picture.
Does anyone know anything about this?

Also, what's up with movietube? There website hasn't changed at all in a long time... and I never see any updates. Did they bail on that idea or is it still on?

[Noah Yuan-Vogel]

I was wondering about this as well. In the quest for DIY HD cameras, it seems it would be very useful to be able to hook up a GG/wax adapter with minimal glass. Would it be relatively easy, for example, to build a device that would screw into a regular c-mount and use a simple one-element, fixed focus no-iris lens to view a GG and project it onto the camera's sensor? just doesnt seem necessary to use a complex lens with all kinds of unnecessary functions to do nothing but view a GG if you can avoid it.

[Matthew Wauhkonen]

The problem with simply mounting 35mm lenses is that the effective focal length (since the 1/3'' sensor is so much smaller than 35mm film) is about 7 times greater than it otherwise would be. So your ultra-wide-angle 20mm lens is 140mm, while your 200mm telephoto is 1400mm. This is fine for photographing birds, but you can't shoot anything indoors. Also, the vast majority of the lens is wasted since the image it projects is picked up by only 1/50th the surface area of 35mm film.

I agree that a mini35 would be best with a simpler relay lens (JVC's new camera, anyone?), but at least include iris control. Otherwise, to control the f-stop effectively, there would be a huge reliance on ND filters. The relay lens is just so much easier when it can be adjusted carefully to get whatever DOF you want with the adapter.

I'm convinced that 2/3'' sensors are the way to go. At f1.4, the DOF is as shallow as 35mm at f2.8 at equivalent focal lengths. Plus, no ground glass means greater ease of use and a sharper image.

[Dan Diaconu]

Originally Posted by Noah Yuan-Vogel

and use a simple one-element, fixed focus no-iris lens to view a GG and project it onto the camera's sensor? just doesn’t seem necessary to use a complex lens with all kinds of unnecessary functions to do nothing but view a GG if you can avoid it.

I do not think any SLR lens manufacturers would have gone the long way (using "a few" lenses instead of "a simple one-element") for one 50mm lens (for ex) if it was possible. Even the most basic C mount (or even $10 surveillance lens) have "a few" lenses to compensate for all aberrations (chroma, spherical, etc) and provide a distortion free image. Iris has to be there (by all means) and focus as well:
http://www.schneideroptics.com/oem/c...egon_17_10.pdf
the price (for a quality lens) would raise the price of the contraption (for if the quality is not there?.... why bother?)
If the GG is not there, gone is the "look" generated by the 35 SLR lens (imo)
To sum up, yes it is possible to replace the stock lens on any camera with a equally high quality prime lens (such as the one in the above link) and an image converter to take 35mm lenses. The question is... who's got the budget for it?

[Kyle Edwards]

Italian guys on a FX1 and Fuji lens, I'll edit the link once I find it.

EDIT: Here you go

http://www.eidomedia.com/hdve/ziess_fuji.htm

http://www.eidomedia.com/hdv/test/immatest/test_1.htm

http://www.eidomedia.com/hdv/