Fitting 19/2.8 (Solms) on full frame Canon

I'm wondering if anyone has trimmed the rear barrel parts on their

19/2.8 current to fit full-frame Canon cameras? I tried it on an

EOS3, and the mirror just barely touches the barrel. If I file down

the barrel a little, the mirror should clear it. But I want to check

that it will also clear the rear element... so, has anyone done this?

I'm using the Cameraquest adapter. (Yes, I know to file upside down

so filings don't drop down into the lens! :) ) The reason I'm asking

is that with the delay on the DMR I'll probably get a used 1Ds for

now, and using my 19 on a 1Ds would be, well, a major attraction to

put it mildly.

Hi, Jan, there's a guy on Rob Galbraith's forum whose name is Arne Hvaring, he just modified a Elmarit 19 to fit his 1Ds2 ... you may want to talk to him.

Thanks for the pointer Simon! It seems like 1.5mm or so tapered over the top 1/3 will be sufficient. About 1/3 is where the EOS3 bumps it as well. If you've seen the lens you'll realize it's not a difficult mod to make, the main problem I see is making sure no filings go in the lens. Running a vacuum cleaner sounds like it might work.

OK, did it! Wooohooo!!! I carefully masked it off with some black gaffer tape (chose black so I could see the filings), put a file in a small vise (third-hand type), turned on the vacuum, and then carefully filed down the top 1/3 to where I could just make out a slight angle. With a steel ruler I could see about 1mm of light at the top end. Cleaned it, took off the tape, carefully cleaned again, then put it on the EOS3 to give it a try. Off it rattled half a dozen frames -- without any problems whatsoever!!!

Hello Jan. Sounds interesting. Could you post a picture, please?

I'll post one tomorrow. The problem is so little is removed it's really difficult to tell, and even more difficult to show. But I'll give it a try!

Great, another mad projecteer! To check for clearance you could try sticking layers of tape on the back until it jams the mirror when focussed on infinity, at least you would know.

Huw, that's a possibility... or I could just let things alone and stop whacking the mirror against it! :) See what you've done Huw, people hacking their perfectly fine, ridiculously expensive (!!!) gear. *g*<br><p>

Here's a few photos. Nothing exciting... The first one is the vise setup (pretty simple), file is your ordinary garage item. Once I've gotten a 1Ds I will go over it with a finer file and create a smooth beveled top. But no point doing so if I find I need to take off a little more. Instead I deburred and cleaned it and left it at that for now.<br><p>

This shows just the vise, file, gaffer tape, lens, and steel ruler.<br>

<img src="http://www.rockgarden.net/download/CRW_5000.jpg"><br>

<br>

Here's the portion that was touched. I just held the lens and ran it over the file. First just a few times to get a sense of whether the filings <i>really</i> wanted to find their way into the lens. Very little wanted to stay with the lens though. The gaffer kept the lens clean. The lens was racked out to minimum distance to protect the rear element. (Do this before masking. Don't ask how I found out.)<br>

<img src="http://www.rockgarden.net/download/CRW_5003.jpg"><br>

<br>Below is an attempt to show the angle. To check my progress I'd lay the ruler on top of it and visually inspect the light gap.<br><p>

<img src="http://www.rockgarden.net/download/CRW_5004.jpg"><br>

<br>

So, that's it. Doesn't get much simpler -- just spend the time to mask it properly, this is actually the critical part. And go slow and careful, pencil in tick marks for the area you want to file down. I was extremely careful, and it still less than an hour, including setup, thinking things through, saying a prayer, and swallowing hard several times.

You're a brave man, Jan. ;-)<p>BTW, with a nice set of R lenses collecting dust in my drawers I was wondering whether getting a digital Canon body plus adapter was a good reason to keep them. What would you suggest? Is the quality worth the painful stepping down for each shot - or am I missing something? Is there an adapter that would allow for focussing/shooting/measuring at full aperture?

Thank you Jan, that helps. Owning a 1Ds and some Leica Lenses, I'll give it a try. Cheers.

Heads-up: I got a 1Ds and had to remove a bit more from the lens. But it works fine now. Went over it with a small very fine file afterwards to get a nice smooth surface. The 1Ds *does* have a significantly bigger mirror than the EOS3.

<i>You're a brave man, Jan. ;-)</i>

<br><p>

It's a special kind of insanity. :)

Great write-up Jan -- thanks for posting this! I am even more curious as to how it performs on your 1Ds... Please post soem images as soon as possible!

 

Jack

It has literally rained here for four days straight. The only let up was when I went down to meet the seller of the camera... But, I headed out to give it a spin in my rainy neighborhood, around 5pm, so pretty good twilight (for whatever light there was).<br><p>

Shot at ISO 100, 1/10s, 19mm f/2.8. WB set to 5000K, shot raw and converted in ACR using the default 1Ds camera parameters (haven't played with the calibration yet). CM 4, ARGB working space. Scale focused, me braced on a pillar (with an overhang to keep me and the lens at least somewhat dry). Lens filter turret on NDx1. (My lens has a KB12, YG, OR in the turret.)

<br><p><center>

<img src="http://www.rockgarden.net/download/intherain/CC4S7845-800.jpg">

<br><i>BYU: bring your own umbrella</i><br><br>

<img src="http://www.rockgarden.net/download/intherain/CC4S7845-crop.jpg">

<br><i>About center. USM 100% r0.4 t5</i><br><br>

<img src="http://www.rockgarden.net/download/intherain/CC4S7845-crop2.jpg">

<br><i>Along the edge. USM 100% r0.6 t0</i><br><br>

</center>

Overall impressions... Vignetting effect is strong at f/2.8. Center sharpness is beyond the 1Ds, edge sharpness a good match at f/2.8. Corners may go a little soft (my images don't really test them well). The ministry sign is a little soft probably due to lack of DOF. Color is somewhat hallmark Leica, with good blues, but still somewhat Canon DSLR as well (i.e. tending more towards the snappy than the accurate). Not a bad combination IMO.<br><p>

Here's one I shot with a KB12 filter on the turret, just snapping into a coffee shop. At 0.5s, so it's obviously quite blurred, but I wanted to get a sense of how the KB12 and 1Ds cooperate in incandescent. Camera was set to 5500K, but I had to adjust the slider to 4700K in ACR to get a somewhat neutral WB. The green tint needed a little tweaking as well (forget how much, but it wasn't a big deal).

<br><p><center>

<img src="http://www.rockgarden.net/download/intherain/CC4S7838-800.jpg">

<br><i>Incandescent with KB12 on turret. USM 150% r0.9 t0</i><br><br>

</center>

<br><p>

Well, what can I say. I'm pleased as pie! The lens is a little overkill for the 1Ds, especially in center, but on the positive side once the mk3, mk4, and mk10 start coming around the next 5-10 years (and the previous gens become affordable to me) it should be fairly future-proof.

<br><p>

No comments on the camera -- it's a pretty well known quantity, so no real need to digress into that. The only comment I'd like to make is I'm not terribly pleased with the blow-out pattern (lack of shoulder) on the blue hanging lights in the coffee shop. Severely banded. Clearly something to look out for.

Oh, I forgot to mention: all exposures were made in Av, evaluative, with no adjustments or compensation.

This is more to my liking. Used the K channel from a CMYK as a screen, desaturated, increased a ch contrast (Lab), added a slight cool dodge along the top.<br><p><center>

<img src="http://www.rockgarden.net/download/intherain/CC4S7842-800.jpg">

</center><br><p>

Fun!

Looks great Jan! Thanks for posting the follow-up images.

 

Jack

I've got this project coming up soon! The 19 on the Kodak slr/c (fullframe canon eos mount). Thanks for posting this.

 

I've already filed down: 35 1.4 summilux, 24 2.8. Both of these were harder than what you describe, I'd not advise anyone do the 35 1.4 summilux on a kodak this way, but they may be better at it than I was.

Jan, I don't know how many lenses of that wide focal length you've used, but that performance of the 19/2.8 R is stunning for such a wide angle. Notice how little halation there is around the bright lights and the detail in the dark sign, where you can read every word clearly is superb. This si not a 50 mm lens where you expect that kind of sharpness. It's hard to talk about color balance for a digital image, the the color discrimination of the lens doesn't seem to be a problem. BTW, that level of vignetting for a 19 mm lens at F/2.8 is not bad at all. Believe me, I've seen much worse. Overall, I think the image quality is superb.

Thanks for sharing your journey, Jan. You inspired me to pursue the same project, all went

well, and I'm thrilled with the result. It is a little daunting to start filing away on something

that expensive, but doing it right really isn't that hard.

 

Oddly, while the image quality is striking and all that, I found the thing I liked the best was

being able to reliably scale focus again, after fighting mostly losing battles with the

worthless scales on Canon AF lenses. Scale prefocused is SO much faster in street use.

 

For other contemplating this, perhaps unfamiliar with all the 19/2.8s, there is one

particular version you want to do this to, the version with the integral filters, but not the

ROM contacts. The ROM contacts double the price of the lens without adding any

functionality in this application. The version without the integral filters is an earlier,

simpler, and somewhat inferior optical formula. Not a bad lens, but not as good.