Might be Bob also on the Rodie you can see something from the lamp just outside the frame. Ala Leica M8 . Lol
The exteriors shots are a close call but to my eye the SK version of Guy's kitchen is more pleasing than the RS file. Which is most accurate I obviously don't know.
Sheesh too windy out. I just rotated the focus ring from meters to Feet and thought I lost infinity. Okay its back now. Scared the bejesus out of me. Bully bars are off, gloves are off so time to shoot in the morning. LOL
Photography is all about experimentation and without it you will never learn art.
www.guymancusophotography.com1 Member(s) liked this post
Okay reprocessed them exactly to the LCC. The only thing I did was use highlight recovery 27 points on each one. That part shows exactly the same. Color wise have to say the SK wins. the upper right ceiling on the Rodie is greenish. Not a big deal though.
My guess Bob is correct given the color of my lamps it may just be edge bleed. I have no other explanation but I think it is the sensor
End of day these lenses are killer. Still waiting on word for a Optical CF on the SK. I know the Roadie there is one for sure. A Cf would not hurt either one of these lenses and better off than without them. Your going to have to keep your exposures correct here go to far south and you could bring in a ton of noise.
First, the R still clearly shows more contrast. But how about reprocessing them with EVERYTHING zeroed out, no highlight recovery, no black point, no nothing, and exact same WB for both.
I see a LARGER color shift in both the upper RH and upper LH corners of the SK than I do in the R, net. I do see what appears more green to the upper RH corner of the R, but there is clearly a shadow or reflection in BOTH images at that point, and the SK could be an uncorrected magenta shift warming it up. You really should shoot a large white or gray panel to get more data on this.
Finally, your tripod moved between the shots: we can see more of the LH lamp in the SK shot, but at the same time we see more of the cabinet holes at the rear LH of the Rodie frame -- a physical impossibility unless camera moved or you shifted one and not the other. And a camera move can change the color shift; and did the camera move before or after the LCC frame? Too many questions. Really need to reshoot these as IDENTICAL as possible without moving the camera at all, same exposure and no added processing settings. I know I'm being a PITA and it's a lot of work, but we are essentially comparing apples to oranges in these frames...
On the upside speaking of apples and oranges, the oranges, apple and lemon on the counter all look very accurate color-wise in both frames!
Only thing was highlight nothing else. I did not do WB but I can.
Honestly there is so much mixed lighting going on here its scary the covers to those drop downs are burnt orange and throw off really warm ugly light in digital. Nice for mood and that is about it plus i got the blue north shade light barreling in on the left. I will shoot a big white card and double check to be sure though. I will use strobes in that so it is even and color balanced light. Your also seeing shadows in the upper right and left.
You should always have a corkscrew in the kitchen...
Geez dragged out all the lighting crap. I only do this when i am getting paid. LOL
Actually this was on my bucket list to do just got lazy
The lens cast cleans up nicely. The photographer cast on the other hand...
you would think C1 would have something where the photographer enters his profile, so to speak.
Okay dragged out my D1 Profotos and did a copy setup of a full roll of seamless 8 ft. Got the exposure correct watch a color checker.
here is the background unaltered
Than I actually ran the background as a LCC just to see how that looked
Than went back reset background to normal corrected a LCC that I shot and applied it like normally one would do.
Looks good. Not going to post but I did WB this after the LCC and it cleaned up color a touch more.
Bottom line its cleaning up fine as I thought it would. I needed to do this anyway so thanks for the push. LOL
My kitchen just is too weird in the ceiling with casts all over the place , reason I ignored it in the first place it was really a noise test under crap light. Always check for noise under tungsten, I do that on every review.
I want to see the Rodie shot on the same seamless -- I am curious about that green cast you keep mentioning.
Bud where the hell where you a 1/2 hour ago. Everything packed back up in safe . But if YOU really want me too I will in morning this will cost ya a cocktail at least. LOL
Yeah, I want it, of course I want it! You already owe ME a cocktail, so how about I let that one slide AND add another one in for you?
Consider it done. You should know as well
Had a big dust storm today so I could not shoot. Bummer
Guy - thanks for doing all this, it's really very helpful to see first hand.
is the sk a tiny bit wider FOV than the rodie? instead of tripod moving?
Guy, here is a bit more info on the CF's for both the 28HR and 28 Schneider.
I found two part numbers for the Rodenstock CF's. Notice that the same CF is used for the HR23mm and HR28mm and then there is a 2nd filter for the HR-W32mm. I found these back in December on a French Rodenstock PDF when I was able to briefly shoot with a HR28.
1094-2403-147-020 E82 1,5x pour Digaron-S 5,6/23 mm et 4,5/28 mm
1094-2403-148-020 E82 1,5x pour Digaron-W 4/32 mm
The front threads of the HR 28 are 72mm, and with the CF you step up to 95mm. You can mount one 95mm Slim Filter (5mm or less) in front of the CF on the 28 without seeing any hard edge vignetting from the filter. But with even a slim 95mm filter installed, you may start to see the edges of the filter if you shifted. I believe you could step up from 95mm to 112mm without seeing the edges on shifts, however the number of filters in the 112m size are very limited from what I have found. Rodenstock claims that there is a approximately a 2.5x exposure difference with the center filter attached.
I believe that the HR-W32 goes from 86mm to 105mm with the center filter.
On the Schneider, I had called them in December, NY office to get more info on the 28mm Digitar. They told me at the time there was not a physical (optical) CF being made for the 28mm, however for me not to rule it out for the future into 2012. I also asked Schneider if one could install a filter in front of the 28mm since from the pictures I had seen there were no threads.
Schneider said that with the lens, you are supposed to get 2 rings, one has a outer diameter of 95mm and the other 112mm. You have to remove a ring on the front of the lens, which apparently covers the threads to mount these rings. When I asked about vignetting, I was told that @95mm you should be starting to see vignetting from a 5mm thick filter after about 80% of the image circle was used, with the 112mm ring they felt you should be able to shift all the way use 100% of the image circle, however they said this was dependent on the filter's thickness. Since I did not pursue the 28mm Schneider, I don't know if they include the rings with the lens or if they are an option at time of ordering.
Now just need to find a CF that may work. I wonder if the Rodie would work. Need to find this out on size
Great test Guy The SK looks very sexy and it really is nice to read of how it handles on your sensor. I remember all too well the disaster thread when the iq180 was new and the SK 28 tested with it.
I see that your comfort level of shift is 7mm, how much more do you think this can be extended on a 36x48 sensor? or even on a 33x44 sensor?
OMG 90mm image circle. I was told 70. Wow
Okay I will have to really push it than. Not sure it will hold up with that magenta cast coming in but if I can get a little more that would be great. I did get noise at 12mm. So maybe with a CF it would really help to gain more of the image circle.
Just got this email from Cambo . Yahooooooooooooooo
the 28XL has a detachable ring on the front element. *You will notice that this ring hides the screw threading for the 2 filter rings you got with it.
Because of the wide angle of view, a default threaded front element would be either too big or vignetting, hence this tapered ring.
This ring is quite thin, so any too much pressure on it while trying to screw it off will work against you, use gentle force…
When you replace it with the “smaller” threaded filter ring, you can use M95x1 threaded filters;* this size will slightly vignette
When you replace it with the “larger” threaded filter ring, you can use M112x1.5 threaded filters;* this size will not vignette but adds a lot of size.
Schneider offers a dedicated Center Filter for this 28XL, which we do have in stock here at the factory.
This Center Filter screws directly onto the exposed m85 threading.
It has been made so that this Center Filter will not vignette.
Hope this information helps you further,
When I did my testing between the Rodi 32 and the Schneider 28 i looked at them from all sites. Now on a IQ 180 the decision was very easy, as the 28 is just unusable.
My thoughts are that I would like to have a 90Image cirlce to actually USE it. I mean if I have it I want to shift at least 10mm or even better 12 or 15. This is possible on the 32 and isn't on the 28 because of the Color Cast Problem.
It is great to see that it actually works OK with an IQ160.
Yes I am pretty excited with the 160 being able to handle it and with the Cf I might be able to get to 12mm pretty easy. That would mean a stitch could get me to a 23 focal length or something like that. Certainly wider. LOL
Glad you mentioned the 180 here since I had a gut feeling it will just throw too much of a cast to correct. I'm actually thrilled I can get 8mm on my 160 but heck I will try for more. Already replied with send me the CF. I'm hoping Dave at CI will order a bunch. I'll call him this morning for sure.
It's funny I was looking at Schneider site last night and saw 90mm but I thought it was a typo.
Man do I love this forum. Nice to actually learn something new.
On the Roadie getting to a clean 7mm is very good. I'm hoping the 180 can do it for those folks. Wish I had one sitting here to test. Jack jump on a plane this morning. LOL
Info direct from Schneider that I got from my dealer when enquiring about a few SK lenses last year.
It was in the PDF press release of the 43XL and 28XL lenses so I've just pasted the text below. As it was not released yet some of the date is missing but might be of interest.
NEW Schneider Super-Digitar XL 5,6/28 XL 115°
Schneider-Kreuznach follow up the request of professional photographers and introduce at the PDN PHOTOPLUS in New York in October 2009 a brand new calculated, well designed and powerful new wide angle for digital imaging. Target group for this lens will be photographers who search for a wide angle with large image circle for perspective control or space for shift. The lens design is especially made for the professional backs of Hasselblad, Phase One and Sinar with large CCD size up to 40mm x 54mm and more.
Focus length of the lens is 28mm, max. aperture 5,6. The full coverage of 115°/90mm image circle diameter will be reached at f-stop 8 when the lens is free of mechanical vignetting. The huge coverage of 90mm allows movements up to the limits of modern digital cameras. The apochromatic correction of the 10element double Gaussian lens shows with open iris a high resolution and at working aperture 8 an even resolution with 80 line pairs and high contrast. Maximum distortion of that 115°lens is 0,7%! Latest production technologies and know how for serial production make it possible to build a lens of never known quality.
Focus length: 28mm
Max. aperture: 5,6
shutter: size 0 – Schneider Elektronik recommended
flange focal distance: 35mm
coverage: 90 mm
distortion: < 0,7%
reommendet format: CCD size of 40mm x 54mm and more
iris range: 5,6-22
front thread: XXX
accessories: Digitales Centerfilter als Photoshop Plug-In für Mac
There is one compelling reason for getting either of the 28mm offerings that has not been pointed out.
The 28 mm will less likely make you spend your hard earned dough for a second wide lens. I learned the hard way when my 28 SK which was OK on the P65+became unusable on my IQ180
So I sold it and got the Rodie 32 but and here is the catch always felt the need for the "extra something"
so long story short I caved in and to the 23HR.
I think the 28 overall is a great
Local length that will help you avoid" straghing off"
I had t learn the hard and expensive way and ended up spending more that I anticipated.
On another note Guy I would also seriously consider the 32 HR, this lens as unwieldy as it might seem it gives me 15 mm of rise even on the long side with a bot of work.
IMHO if shift is crucial to your work this is the widest workhorse lens there is.
Again the 28 ( either one of them ) will / might prevent you from another lens purchase done the road , but if you feel no need to go wider with your work consider the 32HR
I think you get the same if not more FoV given the additional movements .
Just My 2 cents
Thanks and you bring up a good point and I shot the HR 32 and it is a sweetie of a lens no question about it. And yes I got away with about 12mm of shift with it and without a CF. Pretty amazing and I agree a great workhorse lens. I don't stitch often with wides so wanted a single shot focal length that I like which the 28mm has been a great focal length for me. Now the added benefit of at least 7mm of movement has my extremely excited for now but now a CF filter is available on on its way to me right now I maybe able to squeeze some more out of it. Heck if I can get to 12mm like I did and it was a clean LCC but had noise than I am guessing now that with the CF it could be without noise and usable than I am exteremely excited that I could pull a rabbit out of the hat and get even wider to the likes of a 23 or even a 21mm (have to do the math here ) than the 28mm just became a more valuable lens. I was just thinking of something which am going to try today. Has anyone on there stitch LCC shots increased the noise suppression on the file before making the LCC in C1. I'm wondering by applying that ahead of the LCC analyze that it could reduce the noise levels in the LCC itself before applying to the image. Now its just a thought and not sure it would truly work, but i don't think anyone has tried this. Also i think on these stitch shots to push the exposure as far as you can on the histo and LCC so you try not to underexpose the corners as much. These are 2 things i can think of to get the noise levels low enough to pull in 12mm or more of movement. Granted the LCC analyze has to do the work but if we can make it easier on the tool I don't think it would hurt it but help it.
This review is not going to end until i explore every damn trick or workaround I can think of. I will also be adding the whole CF testing as well. Eventually I will put this in our digital review section so historically it will be available for the future. For the folks that have contributed such vital info thanks so much for your time.
And the beat goes on. At Jacks request i dragged out the profoto's again still setup just in case. LOL
Its Rodie hour.
Same test as the SK 28
Background as LCC Corrected
Reset Background than applied corrected LCC or a real LCC shot
Okay after corrected LCC applied I WB the image and went from 5500 kelvin no tint to these number. So it jumped up in Kelvin and the tint number went up. More just FYI here
Awesome Guy, thanks -- what is the exact droppered WB number for the same finished shot with the SK? (Curious about the net CT difference!)
There are some additional shadows visible on the SK shot -- a less smooth tone across the image -- are these on your background or is it a weird LCC artifact from the heavier lifting needed on the SK file??
Checking the SK now as well
Not sure what you are referring too but watch this next post coming up after i give you the SK Numbers
You know what let me shoot it again with the same setup as the Roadie. That way nothing has changed, give me a few.
Sorry folks this is a review in progress.
Interesting it went to Kelvin 6044 and a tint of 1.4