Jump to content

Recommended Posts

From the discussion around the huge new Nikon Z-mount with 55mm diameter to support f/0.95 lenses, while the old Nikon F-mount with 46,5mm was struggling with lenses faster, than f/1.4 I was wondering, whrere our X-mount's limits would be.

As I understand this limitation it's not a hard border - depending on the lens construction you could route the light "around the mount-borders" - but the lightrays will then fall less and less perpendicularly on the sensor, resulting in vignetting and other IQ tradeoffs. That's why Nikon had almost no f/1.2 lenses in the past.

Since the X-mount with 44mm diameter and 17.7mm  flange distance almost has the dimensions of the Sony E-mount (46.1mm and 18mm flange dist.) I would expect, with just an APS-C sensor it would support pretty high apertures... but I can't do the maths behind that assumption myself.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's a non-trivial question. The size of the lens's exit pupil is focal length divided by f-number. So, a 50 mm f/0.95 lens has an exit pupil of about 52-1/2 mm. Then you need to concern yourself with the (diagonal) size of the sensor and the distance the exit pupil is from the sensor. Then do the math, and you can determine how large the mount opening has to be at any given distance from the sensor.

But you probably don't know the distance the exit pupil is from the sensor.

More realistically, you can determine how far the lens's exit pupil has to be for a given sensor and mount size. Fuji's X-Trans III sensor is about 28.2 mm in diameter, so the maximum exit pupil size increases by about 0.89 mm for each mm of exit pupil distance. So that 50mm f/0.95 lens needs to have its exit pupil at least 27-1/2 mm from the sensor.

The problem comes in when you increase the sensor size, as Sony did. Sony's full-frame sensor is 43mm diagonal. Maximum exit pupil size then increases by only 0.17mm per mm of exit pupil distance. That 50mm f/0.95 lens will need to have its exit pupil at least 55.7 mm from the sensor.

[No guarantees my math is 100% correct. Feel free to check me.]

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Similar Content

  • Posts

    • I use a TECHART ring to mount Canon EF lenses on the GFX 50S-II and 100S-II, maintaining image stabilization and autofocus. The only limitation are lenses with a small rear element diameter that make it impossible to cover medium format. Fast lenses like the EF 85/1.2L or the 100-400L, however, work great.
    • I also use a Nikon to GFX Fringer and it works very well.  24mm f/1.8 vignettes so best used on 35mm mode.  50mm f/1.8 covers the entire frame very well with no issues and is a superb little lens. 105mm Sigma vignettes slightly but is perfectly usable. 300 f/4 likewise the 105.  I have a 70-200 f/20+.8 incoming to test so will report back but I'm expecting a little vignetting.  Even in 35mm mode the image is still 60MP and if you're prepared to manually crop and correct you can get 80-90 MP images.  I also have a C/Y to GFX adapter.  The 24mm Sigma Superwide vignettes strongly. Ditto 28-80 Zeiss Sonnar. 80-200 f/4 Sonnar is perfectly usable. All work fine as 35mm mode lenses.  I also have an M42 adapter which I tried with the Carl Zeiss Jena 135mm f/3.5 with good results. 
    • Thank you. I will research it.
    • Ahh, the infamous brick wall photos… 😀 According to internet lore, if the dng converter does not properly apply the corrections, you can have it apply custom profiles that should work for you. How to do that is waaaaaay outside of this comment’s scope, but there are plenty of sites listed in the search engines that step you through the processes. Best wishes.
    • Jerry Thank you very much. That is extremely helpful. It seems that the camera and the lens have the latest firmware update, so it appears that the corrections should be applied automatically. The lens arrived this afternoon and I took some quick test shots, in which the correct lens information appeared in the EXIF files, so that sounds good. I used Adobe DNG converter to convert the Raw (RAF) files, and then opened the DNG files and saved them in PSD format. However, with a beautiful, clear, cloudless blue sky, there were no lines near the edges to check if distortion had been corrected. Another day I plan to photograph a brick wall. Thank you for your help.
×
×
  • Create New...