alternative to 320

[Cees van Kempen]

Originally Posted by Ian Thomas

Thanks Doug

I have a old 300mm Nikon lens + a 2x converter which give me a good close ups I film birds and animals which on most times are a long way off

I did not realise that you can use still lenses on the PMW-320.

Not so on the PMW-350, is it?

[Ian Thomas]

Cees

the lens works very well on the 320 but i had to buy the nikon to half inch sony bay optical converter from Century Schneider optics, I don't know about the 350

[David Heath]

Originally Posted by Cees van Kempen

I did not realise that you can use still lenses on the PMW-320.

Not so on the PMW-350, is it?

Should still be possible with the PMW350, though with a somewhat different (wider) angle of view. Just remember that the sensors are much smaller with both the 320 and the 350 than any stills camera, so the lens is capable of covering a much wider area. The nett result is a magnification factor when used with either the 320/350 compared to a still camera. For wildlife, that's likely to be a good thing.

Theoretically, lenses designed for single sensors are likely to have flaws when used with three chippers, and vice versa, due to differing designs suitable for a single image plane versus via a beam splitter. Likewise, a lens may have resolution optimised for full design coverage, and used for a smaller image may look soft compared to a lens optimised for 1/2 or 2/3".

Practically, use what you can afford....... :-)

[Cees van Kempen]

Thanks David for your reply. I use the EX3 with Nikon lenses, so I am familiar with the effect of still lenses on smaller chip cameras. I have been told once that you can not use still lenses on 2/3" cameras, due to the flange distance between the lens and the chips. Started to wonder now if that is also the case with the 350 (being a 2/3" camera), since it seems to be possible with its 1/2" sister camera, the 320.

[Alister Chapman]

Cees is correct the flange back for the 2/3" cameras is about 10mm longer than the 1/2" cameras so you can't use most of the common DSLR lenses. Some DSLR lenses can be adapted to work with 2/3" cameras by fitting a B4 flange to the back of the lens.

[Ian Thomas]

A Winter wonderland 2010 watch and enjoy - YouTube

This is a video i shot with the EX3 with nano of the snow in 2010

[Cees van Kempen]

Originally Posted by Alister Chapman

Cees is correct the flange back for the 2/3" cameras is about 10mm longer than the 1/2" cameras so you can't use most of the common DSLR lenses. Some DSLR lenses can be adapted to work with 2/3" cameras by fitting a B4 flange to the back of the lens.

Alister, is there a way to find out which lenses can be adapted. I have no clue what a B4 does. Does it have influence on the optical quality of the lens?

[David Heath]

Originally Posted by Cees van Kempen

I have been told once that you can not use still lenses on 2/3" cameras, due to the flange distance between the lens and the chips.

My apologies Cees, you and Alister are quite right about flange distances, I hadn't realised there was such a difference between 3 chip 1/2" and 2/3" in this respect and was mainly thinking that coverage area would still be more than enough for 2/3" chips.

So the 320 with it's 1/2" chips may well be best bet for the intended purpose.

[Doug Jensen]

Originally Posted by Cees van Kempen

I have no clue what a B4 does. Does it have influence on the optical quality of the lens?

B4 just designates the type of mount. Just like Nikon F, Sony Alpha, Sony e-mount, PL, etc. are all different types of mounts. Almost all 2/3" cameras in the last 30 years have used a B4 mount.

As far as optical quality goes, a B4 could look great (such as a DigiPrime or high-end Fujinon or Canon ENG lens) or it could look like crap at the lower end of the price scale with a cheap lens. All B4 means is that it has a certain type of docking collar and interface for communicating with the camera.

[Cees van Kempen]

Thanks for the explanation Doug. The difficult question is which dslr lenses could possibly be used with for example a PMW-500 and what adapting it takes. But I guess with my large set of Nikon primes it is not a logical/feasible option to move towards a PMW-500. I want to upgrade from my EX3, especially regarding noise. The upcoming large sensor cameras F5/55 are very promising, but a smaller sensor is very beneficial in my wildlife filming. It is a pity that with smaller 3-chip cameras (1/3" and 1/2") dslr lenses are usable, the same for the larger 1 chip cameras, but just the good 2/3" cameras do not match with the dslr lenses. Alas.

[Robin Probyn]

I know it would be a total waste of your Nikons.. but if you could get a 500 with a nice(maybe second hand) B4 2/3 inch standard zoom with a doubler.. you,d be really well set up.. providing you had also a decent tripod of course..

The digital extender function is also pretty good with the 500.. when set to assignable just one quick push of a button and boom.. X2 extender.. no fussing with the iris focus etc..

But yes a pretty big xmas present to yourself.. which Iam sure you richly deserve.. :)

[Cees van Kempen]

I sent Santa Claus my wish list, but she said .....NO

Bad luck. I better stick to my dslr lenses and keep an eye on the F55

[Robin Probyn]

haha... well F55 ... could be worse.. !!

[Cees van Kempen]

Yeh, but santa claus doesn't know yet.Still have to find a way to gently tell her.

[Don Bloom]

Do what I do. buy it, keep it on the down low then when shes see's it tell her you got it a long time ago. :-0

hey it works sometimes!

O|O
\--/