Nikon F Lens to Hasselblad Camera Adapter?

[timwitt]

<p>Scroll down this completed listing and look at the mount adapter on the 2X multiplier that is connected to a Nikon F mount Kiron 70-210 zoom.<br>

This link should direct you to the listing or below is the item number.<br>

I don't want to steal the photo and put it here.<br>

<a href="http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&_trksid=p4340.l2557&rt=nc&nma=true&_rdc=1&item=150595679277&ru=http%3A%2F%2Fshop.ebay.com%3A80%2Fi.html%3F_from%3DR40%26_trksid%3Dp5197.m570.l1313%26_nkw%3D150595679277%26_sacat%3DSee-All-Categories%26_fvi%3D1&si=TzIc%252BLIxbA%252FpxZ32nVYf4pjCwj0%253D&viewitem">http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&_trksid=p4340.l2557&rt=nc&nma=true&_rdc=1&item=150595679277&ru=http%3A%2F%2Fshop.ebay.com%3A80%2Fi.html%3F_from%3DR40%26_trksid%3Dp5197.m570.l1313%26_nkw%3D150595679277%26_sacat%3DSee-All-Categories%26_fvi%3D1&si=TzIc%252BLIxbA%252FpxZ32nVYf4pjCwj0%253D&viewitem</a>=<br>

Item Number 150595679277<br>

Is this a Hasselblad to Nikon F lens adapter?<br>

What would someone want to acheive with this zoom lens/2x and adapter on a 6X6 camera?<br>

Would this project a full image for 6X6?</p>

 

[timwitt]

<p>The link will take you to the item but you have to click on "see full description".</p>

[joseph_wisniewski]

<p>A perfect 2x teleconverter will double the image circle of a lens, so a lens for a 35mm camera could cover 6x7, which has an 86.6mm diagonal, exactly twice the 43.3mm of 35mm. And it is no trouble to design a teleconverter that increases the backfocus, the distance from the rear lens element to the film or sensor, so, theoretically, it is possible to do what you want.</p>

<p>However, since the person selling this thing specifically uses the word "macro", and that looks like an ordinary TC attached to an ordinary "macro type" lens adapter, I'm assuming that the conversion does not extend the back focus enough to preserve infinity focus.</p>

<p>Now, as far as the optical quality of a Kiron 70-210 on a 2x converter, well...</p>

[q.g._de_bakker]

I can't see a 'link' between the items in the auction and both Nikon and Hasselblad. All i see is a Canon mount (as per description) lens on a Canon mount teleconverter.

[timwitt]

<p>Yes, the seller claims a Canon fit. The adapter is marked V-NF. Hasselblad 500 series lens mount is referred to as V mount. The adapter mount "ears" resemble the mount of a lens for 500 series cameras.</p>

<p>Q.G., If the adapter fits Canon, it isn't EOS, FD, FL or R mount, is it some Canon mount from before 1959?</p>

<p>I suppose someone wanted a lot of magnification, macro or very close focus for cheap. It probably doesn't focus to infinity, if it adapts to Hasselblad and it doesn't look like there is any glass in the adapter.<br>

The "quality" of the image is not in question. I find many adapters available to use Hasselblad lenses on other cameras but not the other way.<br>

Just curious.......inquiring minds.</p>

 

[randy_boren1]

<p>To me it looks like the seller doesn't know what camera this fits so he is just guessing it is Canon. It's not Canon or Hasselblad, or any 35mm that I've seen. This was probably part of some machine, a counting scanner or an optical device that required a tele lens. I think that if you take off the part that says "V-NF" you will have a perfectly usuable zoom with a teleconverter. Someone got a good deal.</p>

[dan_fromm2]

<p>Hmm. </p>

<p>The word "Canon" doesn't appear in the listing the link goes to. The lens in the listing is in Nikon F mount, probably AI, possibly AIS. It has the metering prong and the second, smaller, aperture scale. The TC appears to be in AI or AIS mount, hence is prong-less. The gadget marked V-NF that's attacted to the TC has to have Nikon AI/AIS mount at the front; at the rear it seems to be made to attach to a bayonet. No idea what the application was. Almost certainly an adapter to Hasselblad.</p>

<p>Several of the responses refer to Canon. Which listing are you folks looking at? Item #150595679277 as posted by the OP goes to the same listing as the link. I bet you looked at the seller's Canon 70-210, not at the Kiron the OP asked about. That Canon lens is perfectly ordinary with no adapters, foul alien unclean or entirely correct Cannon-made.</p>

[rodeo_joe1]

<p>Quote from the description in link above - "and it will fit a Cannon 35mm model".</p>

<p>I have one of those old Kiron Zoomlock 70-210s, and the lens and teleconverter shown are definitely Nikon fit. Nothing else uses an Ai coupling ridge like that, and you can see the pre-Ai Photomic eyelet coupler on top of the lens in one picture. I remember that the lens got good reviews when it came out in the late 1970s or thereabouts, so when a used one came up at a junk-bin price I couldn't resist it. However I soon wished I'd saved my money. The lens is optically very mediocre with lots of edge CA and central residual spherical aberration - I dread to think what it performs like on a teleconverter. As for using the lens on medium format; that's very wishful thinking.</p>

<p>Incidentally adding a teleconverter doesn't increase the coverage of a lens. It simply turns a normal lens into a telephoto construction, or increases the telephoto ratio of an existing telephoto design. Telephoto lenses actually have a more restricted image-circle than a lens of normal construction for the same focal length. For example: On large format a 300mm telephoto lens will usually only just cover 5"x4", whereas a 300mm lens of normal design will easily cover 10" x 8".</p>

[dan_fromm2]

<p>Joe, you and I are looking at different listings. To see the full listing for the Kiron lens that is this discussion's subject, click on the link in the original post. It will take you to a page that has "Kiron zoom lock 70-210mm 1/4 Macro camera lens NR" at the top. There's a link "See Full Description" six lines down from it. Click on it, and you'll be taken to the full listing. Use your browser's search function and look for "Canon". Firefox 4.0.1 couldn't find it, and neither could a visual scan.</p>

<p>ARRRGH!<br>

<strong><strong id="mainContent"> </strong></strong></p>

[q.g._de_bakker]

Dan,<br><br>Same listing: description, 8th word, 3rd line: "Cannon" (spelled with two n's, to elude your browser's search function ;-) )<br><br>I'm not sure which Canon mount it would be, if any.

[dan_fromm2]

<p>Thanks, QG, for pointing out what I missed. The seller's wrong, the lens is in F-mount. As I said, it has the metering prong. Canon had a different coupling between lens and meter.</p>

[paul_ong1]

<p><a href="../photodb/user?user_id=587835">Joseph Wisniewski</a> mentioned that "it is no trouble to design a teleconverter that increases the backfocus, the distance from the rear lens element to the film or sensor." I wonder if such an converter exists? Is the V-NF converted such a creature? It looks like a separate converter attached to a teleconverter. I realize that there may be a problem with a small image circle, but for my purpose, that is ok. Thanks.</p>

[User_4136860]

<p>A lens designed for any 35mm camera will not have the covering power to cover a medium format negative, so even if a Nikon F mount lens can be fitted to a Hasselblad it won't be any use.</p>

[timwitt]

<p>1 for- Adapts to something other than a camera<br>

1 for- almost certainly Hasselblad<br>

At least one for- not Hasselblad<br>

1 for- Canon<br>

2 for- not Canon</p>

<p>Anyone else want to take a stab at what camera the adapter fits?</p>

[q.g._de_bakker]

You're going to use statistics to decide what's it for? ;-)<br><br>It's absolutely, definitely not Hasselblad.<br>I'm highly confident that Dan is correct, so it's definitely not Canon either, but Nikon.

[dan_fromm2]

<p>The rear adapter has a female bayonet mount at the rear. Whatever it attaches to has to have a male bayonet that plugs into it. I b'lieve that some Miranda SLRs had one, could be mistaken, and that it was referred to as an external bayonet (or something like that). In that context (or was it Exakta/Topcon? My memory is failing and I don't feel like using Google ...) the normal female bayonet at the front of the body was called an inner bayonet. I know, odd nomenclature but I didn't invent it, am just reporting, perhaps incorrectly.</p>

[q.g._de_bakker]

I don't see a female bayonet, Dan.