Home

Please support mflenses.com if you need any graphic related work order it from us, click on above banner to order!
SearchSearch MemberlistMemberlist RegisterRegister ProfileProfile Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages Log inLog in

Cine lenses better for FF or APS-C?
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home Manual Focus Lenses  Cine lenses
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Wed Aug 24, 2022 2:43 am    Post subject: Cine lenses better for FF or APS-C? Reply with quote
Today on a whim I bought a camera lot with a Minolta Auto Wide (cool camera!) and some Kodak cine lenses. I ended up with a Kodak Anastigmat 63mm f2.7 and a Anastigmat 15mm f2.7, both "Lumenized". If my research is to be believed this puts these lenses in the 1947 to 1948 time frame. That's pretty cool!

So, in researching adapters for these lenses I find myself in a pickle, FF or APS-C sensor? I own both a Sony A7ii that is my latest toy for vintage FF lenses (in fact, I do not own an AF lens for this camera), and a Fuji XT-1 that I still own and love. After actually holding these Kodak cine lenses I can see just how small format these lenses are. I originally intended to use these lenses on the Sony, but now I'm wondering if the smaller sensor of the Fuji would be better? Any help here?


PostPosted: Wed Aug 24, 2022 6:13 am    Post subject: Re: Cine lenses better for FF or APS-C? Reply with quote
[quote="mr_tibbs2004"]Today on a whim I bought a camera lot with a Minolta Auto Wide (cool camera!) and some Kodak cine lenses. I ended up with a Kodak Anastigmat 63mm f2.7 and a Anastigmat 15mm f2.7, both "Lumenized". If my research is to be believed this puts these lenses in the 1947 to 1948 time frame. That's pretty cool!
So, in researching adapters for these lenses I find myself in a pickle, FF or APS-C sensor? I own both a Sony A7ii that is my latest toy for vintage FF lenses (in fact, I do not own an AF lens for this camera), and a Fuji XT-1 that I still own and love. After actually holding these Kodak cine lenses I can see just how small format these lenses are. I originally intended to use these lenses on the Sony, but now I'm wondering if the smaller sensor of the Fuji would be better? Any help here?[/quote]

Both of them are for 16 mm film, not 35 mm film/APS.
Even the 63 mm barely covers m43 [url]https://www.flickr.com/photos/fotocrit/albums/72157659585016838/[/url]

Hold them in front of each camera to determine their coverage and see whether pursuing [i]any [/i]adaptation is worthwhile to you.
...and whilst you're at it, I'm sure we'd all appreciate a little sample photo or two:) I know I would[/url]


PostPosted: Wed Aug 24, 2022 5:00 pm    Post subject: Re: Cine lenses better for FF or APS-C? Reply with quote
kathala wrote:


Both of them are for 16 mm film, not 35 mm film/APS.
Even the 63 mm barely covers m43 (https://www.flickr.com/photos/fotocrit/albums/72157659585016838/)

Hold them in front of each camera to determine their coverage and see whether pursuing any adaptation is worthwhile to you.
...and whilst you're at it, I'm sure we'd all appreciate a little sample photo or two:) I know I would


Many of the wider cine lenses are for 8mm film. So coverage will be minimal.
In my experience c-mount lenses 35mm and longer will usual cover MFT (but not with much spare) most below that start to show vignetting even on MFT. The other cine lenses I've tried have even smaller image circles but at least the sensor on my Pentax Q gets coverd. Often these lenses are rather soft & unimpressive on digital sensors, but they are fun to play with Smile


PostPosted: Wed Aug 24, 2022 5:08 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
"Cine" lens...LOL! Be specific by specifying camera format...

Now a Cine lens for 35mm movie camera will definitely cover FF sensor...


PostPosted: Wed Aug 24, 2022 10:50 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
visualopsins wrote:
"Cine" lens...LOL! Be specific by specifying camera format...

Now a Cine lens for 35mm movie camera will definitely cover FF sensor...


Maybe, maybe not. Keep in mind that 35mm cine camera is moving the film with the perforations on the vertical, so the actual format is quite a bit less than that of a 35mm still camera. That is, instead of the image length being 36mm, it's 24mm.

I know that "D" mount lenses are for 8mm cameras and "C" mount lenses are for 16mm cameras, but I don't know what the lenses are called for 35mm cine cameras. "B" mount?

Anyway, to the topic, I've some experience with a couple of C-mount lenses I own. They're Kern Paillard. I have one in front of me, it's a 25mm f/1.4 Switar, made for the Bolex REX Reflex 16mm cameras.

I bought a 16mm adapter for my APS-C Sony NEX-7. The above Switar has an interesting "look" -- very warm. But the vignetting is rather severe. The corners are completely gone. I'd imagine that with a FF camera, a 16mm lens would provide an almost circular image.

However, I need to mention one more thing and that is that this lens achieves infinity focus at about 2 feet, so obviously my adapter has issues. And perhaps with an adapter that achieves actual infinity focus, the vignetting won't be as severe.

One more thing about cine lenses that bears mentioning, especially if you're into really high magnification photography. I picked up a 1/2" Wollensak "D" mount (i.e., 8mm cine) lens somewhere and, recalling that wide angle lenses make very good macro lenses when reversed, I got the idea for an experiment. I decided I would mount the 1/2" Wollensask backwards to the front of my Tamron 90mm macro. To do this, I got an old 49mm lens cap, drilled a 1/2" hole in the center, and glued that Wollensak onto the cap. Then I went outside to take pix with the setup, see how it would do.

I was amazed. The magnification was incredible, and most surprising of all, the images weren't vignetting at all on my APS-C camera. So, if you've got a short focal length D-mount lens laying around and a decent macro lens, you might want to give this little experiment a try for yourself.

Last edited by cooltouch on Thu Aug 25, 2022 11:47 pm; edited 1 time in total


PostPosted: Wed Aug 24, 2022 11:54 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Thanks to all for the input! I knew I was venturing into uncharted for me when I purchased these lenses, but I was looking for something with character! After seeing the physical size of the lenses I started to wonder if they would work on the FF sensor. I didn't have a ton of hope for the 15mm, but thought the 63mm might be fun!

I'll try them on the Fuji first to see if they cover that sensor and go from there. Who knows, they might be fantastic fun!


PostPosted: Thu Aug 25, 2022 7:18 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
cooltouch wrote:
visualopsins wrote:
"Cine" lens...LOL! Be specific by specifying camera format...

Now a Cine lens for 35mm movie camera will definitely cover FF sensor...


Maybe, maybe not. Keep in mind that 35mm cine camera is moving the film with the perforations on the vertical, so the actual format is quite a bit less than that of a 35mm still camera. That is, instead of the image length being 36mm, it's 24mm.

I know that "D" mount lenses are for 8mm cameras and "C" mount lenses are for 16mm cameras, but I don't know what the lenses are called for 35mm cine cameras. "B" mount?

Anyway, to the topic, I've some experience with a couple of C-mount lenses I own. They're Kern Paikkard. I have one in front of me, it's a 25mm f/1.4 Switar, made for the Bolex REX Reflex 16mm cameras.

I bought a 16mm adapter for my APS-C Sony NEX-7. The above Switar has an interesting "look" -- very warm. But the vignetting is rather severe. The corners are completely gone. I'd imagine that with a FF camera, a 16mm lens would provide an almost circular image.

However, I need to mention one more thing and that is that this lens achieves infinity focus at about 2 feet, so obviously my adapter has issues. And perhaps with an adapter that achieves actual infinity focus, the vignetting won't be as severe.

One more thing about cine lenses that bears mentioning, especially if you're into really high magnification photography. I picked up a 1/2" Wollensak "D" mount (i.e., 8mm cine) lens somewhere and, recalling that wide angle lenses make very good macro lenses when reversed, I got the idea for an experiment. I decided I would mount the 1/2" Wollensask backwards to the front of my Tamron 90mm macro. To do this, I got an old 49mm lens cap, drilled a 1/2" hole in the center, and glued that Wollensak onto the cap. Then I went outside to take pix with the setup, see how it would do.

I was amazed. The magnification was incredible, and most surprising of all, the images weren't vignetting at all on my APS-C camera. So, if you've got a short focal length D-mount lens laying around and a decent macro lens, you might want to give this little experiment a try for yourself.


There are quite a range of image sizes for each of the cine film formats (at least half a dozen for 35mm IIRC) but most are smaller than the FF stils size. I think most 35mm cine lenses are probably in on of the Arri mounts or Sony FZ, I know very little about these Sad

c-mount is used for a wide variety of sizes beyond 16mm film lots of CCTV stuff (from 1/3" to 4/3") and some 8mm. I'm pretty sure some I've picked up were the latter.

see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flange_focal_distance for more info on all these.

I like the idea of using cine lenses as diopters for macro. It's probably the best way to get something from cs mount lenses but isn't the working distance an issue? I've got that 1/2" Wollensask (it can be used normally on the Pentax Q) so will have to give that a try Smile


PostPosted: Thu Aug 25, 2022 11:52 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
DConvert wrote:

I like the idea of using cine lenses as diopters for macro. It's probably the best way to get something from cs mount lenses but isn't the working distance an issue? I've got that 1/2" Wollensask (it can be used normally on the Pentax Q) so will have to give that a try Smile


To be honest, it was several years ago when I conducted this experiment and I've used that Wollensak in its current configuration only a couple of times since. But as I recall, yes, the working distance is quite close, but really no more than you might encounter with a 50mm lens and bellows attachment.


PostPosted: Tue Sep 13, 2022 6:42 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Thanks for the idea. I will surely try this out. But before that I want to visit https://www.topessaywriting.org/samples/overpopulation here because I want to complete my essay assignments and on that website, I can read essay samples for free.


PostPosted: Sat Aug 05, 2023 5:31 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
My experience with Kodak S mount cine lenses is on MFT cameras - and even on these, not all lenses cover the entire sensor.

For example, the Kodak Cine Ektar 15mm 2.5 will not, I suspect your Anastigmat 15mm f2.7 will likely be the same, not even MFT sensor coverage.

The Kodak Cine Ektar 25mm 1.4 is just a bit smaller than the MFT sensor. I would imagine the 1.9 is the same, but I do not have any experience with it. FWIW, the 25mm 1.4 was Kodak's most expensive Cine lens - and it shows, the resolution and sharpness is rather astonishing for it's age.

The 63mm 2.7 Anastigmat is my favorite Kodak Cine lens (so far), it covers MFT fine with a little bit of vignette. It is quite frankly, a lens that is always a joy to use. I always get lovely results from it.

I also own the 102mm 2.7 lens, it will also cover the MFT sensor.

FWIW, my other 16mm cine lens is a Kern Pailard Pizar 26mm 1.9 (c mount) - it will not cover the

I have heard, but never confirmed, that the Wollensak Velostigmat 25mm 1.5 covers an APS-C sensor and I would imagine the 1.9 would do the same - but as I said, no experience with it.

Here is a sample of the 63mm 2.7 wide open on an Olympus E-PL7 MFT camera:



PostPosted: Sun Aug 13, 2023 8:03 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Edit - I have recently acquired a copy of the Kodak Cine Anastigmat 50mm 1.6 - this one does not vignette at all on an MFT sensor. It does swirl a lot however.

Sample image on an Olympus E-PL7



PostPosted: Tue Nov 28, 2023 6:19 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
rloewy wrote:
Edit - I have recently acquired a copy of the Kodak Cine Anastigmat 50mm 1.6 - this one does not vignette at all on an MFT sensor. It does swirl a lot however.


I love this look! Great sharpness, even greater swirl. And so much field curvature that the drummer is in focus, despite apparently sitting much closer to the camera than the couple in the centre.


PostPosted: Tue Nov 28, 2023 9:45 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
C mount lenses have a 1 inch diameter and a 32tpi thread. D mount lenses are smaller. This should help identify which is which.

C mount will cover MFT, possibly with some vignetting on wides. D mounts have a tiny image circle.

Adaptors are most likely not available for D mount lenses as the flange focus distance is too short for MFT cameras.
C mounts, though they have the same threads, might have different FFDs. Though normal 16mm lenses use the same 17.523mm length. CS lenses, with the same thread will only manage macro as they have a 12.526 mount.


PostPosted: Mon Dec 04, 2023 7:15 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
1 inch is usually the sweet spot regarding coverage of C-mount lenses to MFT. Any wider gets mechanical vignetting... Wink


PostPosted: Wed Dec 06, 2023 5:40 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Nordentro wrote:
1 inch is usually the sweet spot regarding coverage of C-mount lenses to MFT. Any wider gets mechanical vignetting... Wink


Yep indeed, this translates often to 25mm focal length (personal experience).


PostPosted: Sun May 12, 2024 7:45 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Only longer foci are usable with FF cameras. I just bought a Kern, Aarau Macro Switar 150mm f/3.3
This lens can be use with full size sensors but the C-Mount socket has to be change. I want to give the lens a M42 or T2 mount socket.
The Macro Yvar is not a tele lens that´s why it is usable with the larger format. A Schneider Cine Tele Xenar 150mm f/4 can be us with APSc cams when the frame reducing ring in the rear is removed.

The kind of the lens design is important for the covered image circle. All lenses are made for a film size and when you use it for a larger format you will lost quality, this is a fact. Since the digital cameras are on the market the photgraphers find that the swirls and muddy backgrounds are beautiful. But this kind of background is a sign of the usage of a too lage format.
A Dallmeyer Kinematograph 2" f/1.9 covers FF but only a circle of ~20mm has a good quality. The rest of the pictures shows high distortion, CA and PA and no sharpness, reduced contrast.

It is the photographers choice to use it or not.

This dicuss is not realy new. In the large format photography you can find similar chats about this theme.


PostPosted: Tue Nov 12, 2024 12:07 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Olympus OMD E-M10 iii w/ Kodak cine Ektar 25mm 1.4





Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home Manual Focus Lenses  Cine lenses
Page 1 of 1