DV Info Net

DV Info Net (https://www.dvinfo.net/forum/)
-   Alternative Imaging Methods (https://www.dvinfo.net/forum/alternative-imaging-methods/)
-   -   4:4:4 10bit single CMOS HD project (https://www.dvinfo.net/forum/alternative-imaging-methods/25808-4-4-4-10bit-single-cmos-hd-project.html)

Eric Gorski June 24th, 2004 12:23 PM

would a F-C mount adapter like this work?

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=30035&item=3822549795&rd=1

Rob Scott June 24th, 2004 12:35 PM

Quote:

Eric Gorski wrote:
would a F-C mount adapter like this work?
Yes, actually I'm planning to buy one of those pretty soon. It won't do me much good right now though; I have no F-mount lenses either.

I have a pretty nice (but slow) Canon EOS lens, but haven't seen any C-mount adapters for EOS. Nikon F-mount seems the way to go for using 35mm SLR lenses with a camera like this, especially if I can build a good GG (ground glass) adapter at some point.

Steve Nordhauser June 24th, 2004 12:39 PM

C mount adapters:
Yes they work fine. You will get a narrow FOV because the c mount sensor is smaller. Edmund has them for $65 and bhphotovideo lists one at $29.95 out of stock though.

General Brand
Price : $ 29.95
Shipping Cost >
C-Mount Adapter for Nikon Lens

Mfr # VA304 • B&H # GBCMN

Great way to have excellent optics cheaply.

Rob Scott June 24th, 2004 12:46 PM

Quote:

Steve Nordhauser wrote:
You will get a narrow FOV because the c mount sensor is smaller.
Yup, which a GG adapter will fix, and also give shallower depth of field. I wonder how practical (and expensive) it would be to design and produce a quantity of C-mount-to-F-mount GG adapters that would work directly with these cameras. That would be really nice.

Eric Gorski June 24th, 2004 01:37 PM

does a 'narrow FOV' mean that it would negate the properties of a wide-angle lens?

Dennis Jakobsen June 24th, 2004 01:59 PM

If so you could just add a fisheye to get some of the FOV back, or would the image still be distorted?

Rob Scott June 24th, 2004 02:25 PM

Quote:

Eric Gorski wrote:
does a 'narrow FOV' mean that it would negate the properties of a wide-angle lens?
That's correct. It would be like putting instamatic film into a 35mm camera -- only the center of the image would be used; the rest would be cut off.
Quote:

Dennis Jakobsen wrote:
...fisheye to get some of the FOV back, or would the image still be distorted
Yes, you could use an extreme wide angle lens to try to get a "normal" FOV, but you would probably end up with a lot of distortion.

Steve Nordhauser June 24th, 2004 02:43 PM

Rob:
I would test that distortion because it tends to be worse at the edges of the lens. You will be using the center of the lens. I don't have anything wider than about a 28mm in my Canon bag or I could do a test shot. But, you can get a 6mm c mount lens for $120 or so. If you aren't solving the DOF problem, as Obin found, c mount might be easier.

Rob Scott June 24th, 2004 02:55 PM

Quote:

Steve Nordhauser wrote:
But, you can get a 6mm c mount lens for $120 or so. If you aren't solving the DOF problem, as Obin found, c mount might be easier.
Thanks for the info! Using 35mm SLR lenses is more of a long-term idea right now. I just ordered a cheapo C-mount lens off eBay for this phase of the project.

Once the system gets to where it's usable I'll decide where I want to go with it. There is something very attractive about having access to a wide variety of high-quality F-mount lenses ...

Juan M. M. Fiebelkorn June 24th, 2004 02:58 PM

Just to refresh, from a post within this thread.
About FPGA designs and camera


http://www.elphel.com/model313/index.html

Just a thought.Wouldnīt be useful to have a sticky thread with a compendum of all this technical things to be accessed in a simple way?

I mean chips, software tools, codecs, camera sensors, shutters, raid cards, source code, etc,etc.

@Nordhauser, could you give an idea of the pricing a sensor , Bayer pattern of 1920x1080 active pixels, 24x18 mm would have?
two, three more times the price? I mean only the sensor not the camera head....An IBIS4 1280x1024 costs around 1,000.
I think about same chips we have now (same design) but with bigger pixels...
Donīt know if small pixels but with a wider space between them would be cheaper (I think it would be a waste of space but know nothing about manufacturing procedures)

Eric Gorski June 24th, 2004 03:16 PM

a 6mm c-mount lens... isn't the same as a 6mm f-mount? in terms of field of view? right? like a 6mm f-mount would be crazy fish-eye?

is there an easy conversion table?

Valeriu Campan June 24th, 2004 03:18 PM

<<<--

Donīt know if small pixels but with a wider space between them would be cheaper (I think it would be a waste of space but know nothing about manufacturing procedures) -->>>

Smaller pixels will give much more noise and less sensitivity. Look at the compact digital cameras and DSLRs side by side for same pixel count

Juan M. M. Fiebelkorn June 24th, 2004 03:25 PM

I know,I know, but I said bigger sensor total area, with the same pixel area we have now.Clearer now?

Eric Gorski June 24th, 2004 03:27 PM

i'm alittle confused by the siliconimaging website... is the SI-1300 camera you guys are using just the circuitboard with the little lens on it, or is it the black box with the connections?

Rob Scott June 24th, 2004 04:19 PM

Quote:

Eric Gorski wrote:
is the SI-1300 camera you guys are using just the circuitboard with the little lens on it, or is it the black box with the connections?
It's the cute little black box.


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 01:15 PM.

DV Info Net -- Real Names, Real People, Real Info!
1998-2024 The Digital Video Information Network