Canon lenses on medium format body?

Discussion in 'Medium Format' started by andrevallejo, Jun 2, 2001.

  1. Canon does not have a medium format body,right? So is it possible
    that there's an adapter that allow me to use my Canon L lenses (70-
    200 , 17-35)on any medium format body? If so,which one?
  2. those canon lenses will not cover medium format. they are designed to just barely cover 35mm format.

  3. The registration distance from the lens flange to the film plane will also be way longer on an MF SLR body than it is on an EOS body.
  4. Unless you are looking for the 'peephole' effect, the only way you are going to get the EF lenses to cover a larger film is by using them as macro lenses. Even then, the EF lenses are totally electronically controlled and there is no MF body that knows the first thing about EF commands.

  5. Agreed that the image circle from a 35mm lens won't cover an MF frame, but what happens if you move your film plane back from the lens until the image circle just covers, say, a 6x6 frame? Not being an optics expert I'd have thought that you could then just refocus, and Robert would be your proverbial relation...
  6. Move the film plane back and you have a macro lens.
  7. Yes, and I have a Canon FD-Bronica adapter precisely for the purpose of using Canon Macrophoto lenses with MF, but they won't focus to infinity.
  8. Gavin,

    Linearly moving the film plane or lens (relative to each other) *is* focusing. As you move the two apart, the image circle increases, the amount of light falling per unit area reduces (effective aperture becomes smaller), and depth of field and depth of focus become shallower. What you have therefore is a macro lens, and presumably not a very good one at that - since it was not designed to perform as well at higer magnifications. Other than the irksome problem of not being able to control the aperture on EF lenses (electronic coupling) and the other stuff we just talked about, there is nothing *preventing* an EF lens being used on an MF body (assuming there exists a mount adapter).

  9. Doesn't it make you kind of wonder? With all of our enthusiasm in Canon's lenses, (as well as current investment in them) you would think there exists a ready market for Canon to sell a medium format body. I for one would be very open to purchasing one.

    Has anyone ever spoken to a Canon rep about this?

    Hello Canon !?!?!?!?!?
  10. A Canon MF body just for macro? They'd probably sell one of these for every 10,000 35mm bodies. IOW an insignificant market for a company the size of Canon.
  11. No, not just for macro. Wouldn't it be great if Canon made a MF body for general use, where I can use my existing lenses?
  12. Well, if the sky fell down and Canon decided to produce an MF body, you wouldn't be able to use your existing lenses, because they wouldn't cover the format. They would have to design new, bigger and heavier lenses to work handle both formats. The new Contax 645 lenses have to be designed for the 645, and then they can do double duty on the N-1.
  13. Well, some lenses of the Canon sortiment would be able to nearly cover the image circle of - at least - a 35 x 45 mm negative. The Canon bayonet is huge, with some 55mm diameter and 44mm distance between film and lens it is one of the largest mounts in 35mm.

    For medium format, there are som 10 mm lacking - that's true. So, if you would not want a peephole MF-equipment, it does not make so much sense to use EF-equipment on MF. Not even for macro work, except with some special lenses. Most of the EF lenses have internal focussing elements, and such lenses do not like to get too far away from the film by an adapter, a larger bayonett or even a distance ring.

    The last are the electronic controlled apperture and focus: it would not work on any MF camera, so there is no adapter.

    Greetings, Axel

Share This Page