I've seen several discussions on CML about using 35mm still
lenses on S16 cameras, but I'm still somewhat unclear about
some of the specifics. My scenario would be Nikkor 28mm f3.5,
55mm f3.5, 105mm f2.5, and 35-135mm f3.5-f4.5 mounted on Aaton
Would these combinations be feasible and produce good results?
What issues should be considered? Where does one find a Nikkor/PL
Charlie Clemmons writes :
>Where does one find a Nikkor/PL
The Nikon lenses will certainly fit on an Aaton LTR camera
and cover Super-16 no problem, but not with a PL mount. Nikon
mount has a shorter flange depth than PL, so you cannot focus
properly with an adapter between them. You can use an Aaton
mount camera with a Nikon to Aaton mount adapter. I have one
in my kit and use telephoto Nikons with some regularity.
Charles M. Clemmons wrote:
>My scenario would be Nikkor
28mm f3.5, 55mm f3.5, 105mm f2.5, and >35-135mm f3.5-f4.5 mounted
on Aaton LTR S16.
The question is why? They're slow for the focal lengths (as
they need to cover a 35mm still frame, which you don't need
to do for S16) and there are probably better film lenses out
there (say, a set of older SuperSpeeds).
I can see if you have these lenses and love them that you
might want to try them, but nearly any cine zoom would probably
outdo that 35-135. Maybe even a 12-120...
Thanks. Where can I get the Nikon/Aaton adapter? From Nikon?
From Aaton? From third party?
can I get the Nikon/Aaton adapter? From Nikon? From Aaton?
From third party?
They come up on eBay from time to time. Abel Cine Tech in
the US probably has them for around $400, and I believe they
were originally first produced by Optex. Perhaps a used equipment
dealer such as Visual Products would also carry it. Be sure
to get one with a small rear iris and matte black interior
finish to avoid spill and reflections from the unused part
of the lens projection.
Strictly economics. We do mostly non-commercial stuff and
operate on a limited budget. If we upgrade from standard 16
to Aaton S16, we could avoid some costs in the short run by
using Nikkors we already have on the shelf.
Jeff Kreines wrote :
>I can see if you have these
lenses (NIKON) and love them that you >might want to try them,
but nearly any cine zoom would probably outdo >that 35-135.
Maybe even a 12-120...
I think the deal with Nikons - if you've got them and they
work well, they are very cost effective. I used a Nikon 50-300
on my Aaton XTR.
Only problem is the mechanics are not motion friendly.
Jeff Kreines writes:
>I can see if you have these
lenses... and love them that you might want >to try them, but
nearly any cine zoom would probably outdo that 35->135. Maybe
even a 12-120...
I second that.
Most still lenses are not designed for film work and don't
translate well to film use for a couple of reasons aside from
optics. They are generally not as well constructed mechanically
as film lenses which means a lot of slop in the focus ring
making pulling focus very difficult.
Likewise the accuracy of the iris ring. Nowadays still lenses
are designed for auto iris so the marking don't have to be
precise. Also, very few still zooms track with any accuracy.
Also fitting any kind of standard film accessories is a real
IA 600 DP
Richard Stringer wrote :
>I used a Nikon 50-300 on my
Aaton XTR. Only problem is the >mechanics are not motion friendly.
And that makes sense, as the focal lengths aren't easily available
in a common cine zoom...
One of the problems with using Nikkor lenses on an Aaton (or
any other film camera) is the difficulty of focus; anything
shorter than a 135 is difficult due to the close spacing of
the footage (i.e., a slight move of the focus ring makes for
a BIG shift in focus); I use the longer lenses (180/2.8, 200/2,
etc) without any problems- and find that by adding a focus
gear it's a lot easier.
I have a very sharp 28mm f1.4 Nikkor (latest generation),
but it is extremely difficult to focus, so I gave up on it.