Clayton Lai
August 29th, 2002, 10:15 PM
I have been wondering:
Since the physical frame size of 35mm film is much bigger than the 1/3" CCD of the XL1, one would not get an exact reproduction when using this adapter; the image size formed by the take-up lens exceeds the area covered by the CCD.
Which also means that the flange focal length has overshot the focal plane (i.e., the CCD) and is converging to a point somewhere behind the CCD.
Would it help if we extend this flange focal length by moving the take-up lens further forth of the CCD (and the camera body) so that the focal point can fall onto the focal plane?
Correct me if I'm wrong, but if we try and preserve the flange focal length of the PL mount (2.047 inches, 51.9938mm), wouldn't we essentially have a 35mm image hitting the CCD? However, I suspect there will be heavy vignetting at wide open.
I have absolutely no idea if I'm making sense or not. Any thoughts or opinions to share?
Clayton Lai
Since the physical frame size of 35mm film is much bigger than the 1/3" CCD of the XL1, one would not get an exact reproduction when using this adapter; the image size formed by the take-up lens exceeds the area covered by the CCD.
Which also means that the flange focal length has overshot the focal plane (i.e., the CCD) and is converging to a point somewhere behind the CCD.
Would it help if we extend this flange focal length by moving the take-up lens further forth of the CCD (and the camera body) so that the focal point can fall onto the focal plane?
Correct me if I'm wrong, but if we try and preserve the flange focal length of the PL mount (2.047 inches, 51.9938mm), wouldn't we essentially have a 35mm image hitting the CCD? However, I suspect there will be heavy vignetting at wide open.
I have absolutely no idea if I'm making sense or not. Any thoughts or opinions to share?
Clayton Lai