Novoflex Bellows Distance with Adapters

[phero66]

Hello,

I'm configuring a Novoflex Balpro 1 setup but am trying to calculate the minimum distance from camera body adapter through the bellows. From Novoflex datasheets I can only get the minimum bellows draw, which is 40mm.

So on my EOS camera the setup would look something like this:

CANA-AF adapter (mm distance?) > Proshift+ -or- APRO adapter (mm distance?) > BALPRO 1 (40mm minimum bellows draw)

I've seen several users here with this setup, could you tell me what your minimum distance is once all the adapters (camera side) are put on the bellows. Also, I'm looking for the outside diameter of the PRO/EOS adapter lens mount?

Thanks!

-John

[dickb]

Hello,

I'm configuring a Novoflex Balpro 1 setup but am trying to calculate the minimum distance from camera body adapter through the bellows. From Novoflex datasheets I can only get the minimum bellows draw, which is 40mm.

So on my EOS camera the setup would look something like this:

CANA-AF adapter (mm distance?) > Proshift+ -or- APRO adapter (mm distance?) > BALPRO 1 (40mm minimum bellows draw)

CANA-AF adapter (20mm thick, 13mm distance)

You also need an adapter between BALPRO 1 and lens of course.

I've seen several users here with this setup, could you tell me what your minimum distance is once all the adapters (camera side) are put on the bellows. Also, I'm looking for the outside diameter of the PRO/EOS adapter lens mount?

I haven't got the BALPRO bellows but an older version of the Novoflex bellows and their rapid focus lenses. I also have two versions of the Novoflex Eos Retro ring, the newer one has what looks to me like a fixed APRO adapter to fit it straight onto the BALPRO without the need of an added adapter. This seems to be a thinner solution than the CANA-AF plus APRO, as the new EOS-RETRO only adds 12mm distance, measured from bayonet mount surface to middle of the groove or just 8mm if measured from bayonet mount surface to the front of the APRO rim. Looking at pictures of the bellows retro ring combination the last measurement seems to be the most accurate.

What lenses are you planning to use with this bellows?

I'm planning to sell one of my Eos Retro rings, if you're interested just let me know.

[phero66]

Thank you for the info. My main interest was to build a solid platform which I could use my RZ/RB lenses on with dSLR. Additionally I would likely get a m39 adapter and use Rodagons or something else. I have not done macro beyond 1:2 in quite awhile, but I want to get back into it.

The issue is however keeping the RZ 105mm flang distance for infinity, and it seems like I'm going to be hurting trying to make this work with the minimum bellows draw at 40mm - it would be much better closer to 30mm - oh well.

For now I'm going to try to find another option. Thanks!

[dickb]

How did you plan to mount the RZ lenses onto the bellows? I can't find any Novoflex adapter for it. If you were to construct your own that would leave you with 105mm (RZ flange distance) - 40mm (minimum bellows distance) - 13mm (CANA-AF) = 52mm for an adapter that allows infinity focus. Substitute the CANA-AF for the EOS-RETRO and you're left with 57mm. That doesn't sound too impossible. On the other hand, I've never held an RZ lens in my own hands and know nothing about any adapters available. Normally extension rings or a trashed camera body are good donors for the bayonet mount.

[ChrisLilley]

How did you plan to mount the RZ lenses onto the bellows? I can't find any Novoflex adapter for it. If you were to construct your own that would leave you with 105mm (RZ flange distance) - 40mm (minimum bellows distance) - 13mm (CANA-AF) = 52mm for an adapter

minus 44mm EOS register distance = 8mm for an adapter.

[dickb]

minus 44mm EOS register distance = 8mm for an adapter.

Thanks, of course, I knew I was overlooking something. 8mm may be too little room for an adapter. If I look at the RZ mount, it appears to be a reversed mount, with the male part on the camera and the female on the lens so to speak. This may allow for a relatively flat adapter with no moving parts on the adapter itself. Substituting the CANA-AF with an EOS-RETRO should get you 13mm. Perhaps not impossible.

[phero66]

Yes, I would have taken an RZ extension tube and removed the female mount from it and found a way to mount it to the outside rim of one of the less expensive Novoflex lens adapters. Alternately you could use the Mamiya 645 lens adapter then fix a 645 bodycap to a RZ/RB lens cap to make a mount that is compatible with both RZ and RB lenses - though this might add too much distance between rear lens distance to sensor.

On Canon it might work, but I will use this with a Nikon body mostly so it would look like this:

RZ needs: 105mm or less
Nikon (46.5mm) + CANA-AF (13mm) + Novoflex Bellows (40mm) + Lens plate adapter (5-10mm?): 104.5-110.5... cutting it a little close

[dickb]

On Canon it might work, but I will use this with a Nikon body mostly so it would look like this:

RZ needs: 105mm or less
Nikon (46.5mm) + CANA-AF (13mm) + Novoflex Bellows (40mm) + Lens plate adapter (5-10mm?): 104.5-110.5... cutting it a little close

For a Nikon camera you need the NIKA rather than CANA-AF adapter. It is narrower than the CANA-AF, about 8.5mm or 9.3mm distance depending on the ridge you measure from instead of 13mm. So you gain another few mm - still close.