Landscape Lenses

[supernewtent]

I have been an avid voyeur of this forum for a while, whilst saving and saving and selling and selling... so I can build a pot of money to buy an Arca Swiss Rm3di... and I am nearly there!

Selecting a tech camera is difficult although I am happy with this aspect of the choice, but I'm struggling with which lens or lenses to get.

I shoot almost exclusively B&W landscapes, and in my 35mm set up enjoy my 24, 28 and 35mm lenses the most.

I would really value your opinion on what lenses you think are best - I hope over time to build a 3 lens set up, and in the first instance will get 1 or two lenses. I think my first choice will be a 24-26mm equivalent... after that I am stuck, and would value your thoughts, if it's okay to ask after not contributing much to this forum!

Thank you in Advance.

P.

 

[timwier]

If I had to pick only one lens for landscape with a technical camera it would be the 43-47mm range (which would be comparable to a 28-32mm in a 35mm format).

I have a CAMBO WRS with an Aptus 12 back - and with the 47mm you can shift about 19 mm left and right to produce a 3 panel stitched image with a 13 x 6 ratio. The 3 panel stitch has almost no distortion and is sharp(er) than a tack. To me, this works better than shooting with a 35mm and cropping the center out of it.

That being said, the 35mm, 72mm and 90mm are GREAT lens too.

 

[Jack]

I was going to suggest the 40 HR as a starting point. It is basically a 26, so splits the 24 and 28 in 35mm terms.

 

[Guy Mancuso]

Okay given what you like for glass in 35 mm land 24, 28, 35

One a Full Frame sensor

A tech 35 lens is a 22mm in 35 mm world. So that is a starting point but it would help to know what back first. For instance a IQ 180 is not good with a SK 35 lens but it is with the IQ 160. That's just one example.

This is also going to depend on your budget as well. Some of these lenses are very expensive 6 k or more.

 

[Guy Mancuso]

Damn lost a post. Anyway Jacks suggestion on the Rodie 40 is a good one as it works on all the sensors for one including the IQ 180 and is the widest lens at the 4 k range. Anything wider outside the SK 35 which won't work well on the 180 gets into the expensive range. So if your on a budget it's a great choice. Also the SK 43 is excellent but slightly longer. There is a SK 24 lens but pick your sensor before getting one as it may not work with several out there. It won't work on my IQ 160 for instance and frankly I did not like my results even on a P40 crop sensor. It's a mix and match but I would suggest think hard first on budget and sensor. Than compare notes on what lenses will work effectively with it.

 

[dchew]

I agree with Jack, although it somewhat hinges on your comment of "1 or 2 lenses."

If it is only one, the the Rodi 40 (or SK 43xl depending on your interests). If you are starting off with two lenses, then maybe 1) The Rodi 35 and 2) The SK47, Rodi 50 or 55.

Dave

 

[GrahamWelland]

I'd agree with Guy that it really is somewhat dependent upon which size and pixel pitch back you choose. The preference for Rodenstock here i think is somewhat driven by those affected by the "curse" of the 5.2 micron sensors. oke: At 6 microns the world is just fine with Schneider wide glass such as the 28, 35, 43, 47XL's ... Personally I'm much happier with my 35XL & 47XL by choosing to use a centre filter on them full time. For landscape shooting why not?

In the limited time I shot the 24XL on my P40+ I had no issues in particular with LCC's although there was effectively no room for movements. I suspect that the more recent C1 LCC correction algorithms contributed to my acceptance of the same 24mm lens as Guy used.

 

[Don Libby]

My 3-lens kit for my Cambo WRS/P65 is 35, 72, and 120 mm which equate (using Capture Integration's link here) 22, 46 and 77mm.

 

[Guy Mancuso]

I'd agree with Guy that it really is somewhat dependent upon which size and pixel pitch back you choose. The preference for Rodenstock here i think is somewhat driven by those affected by the "curse" of the 5.2 micron sensors. oke: At 6 microns the world is just fine with Schneider wide glass such as the 28, 35, 43, 47XL's ... Personally I'm much happier with my 35XL & 47XL by choosing to use a centre filter on them full time. For landscape shooting why not?

In the limited time I shot the 24XL on my P40+ I had no issues in particular with LCC's although there was effectively no room for movements. I suspect that the more recent C1 LCC correction algorithms contributed to my acceptance of the same 24mm lens as Guy used.

Yes I did not have the latest LCC corrections at the time.

 

[supernewtent]

Gosh, thank you all for the replies, they are greatly appreciated.

I'm not sure about the back, but my budget is a tad stretched and I have a good offer on a Leaf Aptus-II 7 33mp 48x36... is this okay as a landscape back?

Lens wise I think that a 40mm sounds good. My budget for a lens or lenses is enough for one expensive lens or alternatively two cheaper lenses; but I'd be happy to live with one and build a kit over the longer term.

Thanks again.

 

[supernewtent]

Apologies - more research, and it's looking like I might stretch tro two lenses...

- Rodenstock Apo-Sironar digital HR 35mm f/4 OR Schneider 5,6/35mm Digitar
- Schneider Super Angulon XL 5.6/47 Copal OR Schneider Apo-Digitar XL 5.6/47 Copal.

What do you think?

Again, all feedback is very welcome!

 

[vieri]

My kit is 28 Rode (sold & replaced with 35 Rode on its way), 47, 90 & 180 all Schneider. My kit is more spread out than what you need, but as far as your conundrum I can say that:
- The Schneider 47 XL is a great lens, corrects real easy as far as LCC goes (I also use a center filter on it to put less strain on the file's corners); so is probably the Rode 40, though I should say I tried and returned a sample due to very poor performance in the lower right corner; the Rode is much bigger & heavier, but offers better performance on the IQ 180;
- I wouldn't go for a lens that "split the difference" if you are really bound on getting the focals you are used to on 35mm terms; you would end up selling it to replace it with your desired focals, and the market for these specialty lenses is not as good as you are used with your 35mm stuff; I'd suggest starting building the kit you really want a lens or two at a time.
- One more thing: as far as coverage, remember that with the help of rise/fall & horizontal shift you will be able to use the whole image circle of a lens resulting in wider coverage than the lens equivalence in 35mm would; what I mean is, by using horizontal & vertical shifts you effectively use a larger image area than what your sensor is, so your lens ends up covering a wider angle than you would without movements. The basic principle for this is the same which makes a 50 mm lens a "normal" focal on 35mm but an extreme wide angle on 8x10 - so, you might be able to do without having to buy 24, 28 & 35mm equivalent lenses but just with something in the 28/35 and 47/70 ranges. Hence my choice of 35 (with a very large IC), 47 (with a pretty large one), 90 (very large), 180 (pretty large) to cover much of what I need.

Hope this helps, and good luck with whatever you choose

 

[Jack]

What do you think?

The SK35 and 47 APO digitars are good choices if the focals suit you. Note they are slightly older designs and of course why they can be had a little more economically than newer Rodie or SK versions. In their case, the main deficit is smaller usable IC's and more falloff than newer designs; they are good lenses though. Because of the falloff, you will probably want to use a CF 100% of the time with both, so be sure to factor the cost of the dedicated CF for each into your purchase equation.

 

[Guy Mancuso]

Yes I use a CF all the time on the 35XL . Just is much better all around with my LCC and such.

 

[GrahamWelland]

I would point out that I PREFER to use the CF filter on the 47 XL Digitar but it is by no means required, particularly if using a non-full frame back or extreme movements. For the 35XL, it's better all around as Guy mentioned as less clean up is required.

Don't get the SK Super Angulon 47XL as it's really optimized for film use, not MFDBs.

Before making a decision you might also want to compare the size/weight of the various offerings too.

 

[etrump]

If you are going to use the whole IC, you will most definitely want the center filter.

The tolerance on the SK CF for the 35 is so tight that you can't add a filter without getting into your IC. Even with an upsize ring and larger filter the upsize ring digs into the IC. Of course that is moot point if you don't plan to use the whole IC. I rarely used it because it was just too soft on mine.

Even though the SK35 is an older design, with the exception of the extreme edges of the IC the lens is a stellar performer, especially on the P45+ or crop sensors. Very sharp with very good clarity.

 

[supernewtent]

Gosh, I think I'm confused!!

This advice is excellent, and I wonder if I should just ask what are the best 2 lenses that I could get - a first and a second choice, bearing in mind I like the wide to standard range of lens, and a wide lens would be my first choice? Then, if the lenses are much more expensive I might just get one for now!

Sorry to be a pest but it feels like you guys are a mine of information, and you all seem to know more than my dealer! I hope he's not reading this

I told you that selecting a lens was proving tricky!!

Thanks again.

 

[Woody Campbell]

Okay given what you like for glass in 35 mm land 24, 28, 35

One a Full Frame sensor

A tech 35 lens is a 22mm in 35 mm world. So that is a starting point but it would help to know what back first. For instance a IQ 180 is not good with a SK 35 lens but it is with the IQ 160. That's just one example.

This is also going to depend on your budget as well. Some of these lenses are very expensive 6 k or more.

I'm actually getting good results with my SK 35 on my IQ 180, but shifts are out of the question.

 

[Don Libby]

I'm actually getting good results with my SK 35 on my IQ 180, but shifts are out of the question.

That reminds me of when I tried the 24mm great lens just couldn't do any movements...

 

[Jack]

Gosh, I think I'm confused!!

Welcome to the world of tech cams and lens choices

This advice is excellent, and I wonder if I should just ask what are the best 2 lenses that I could get - a first and a second choice, bearing in mind I like the wide to standard range of lens, and a wide lens would be my first choice? Then, if the lenses are much more expensive I might just get one for now!

Depends first on HOW wide for your wide, and we can't say until we know which sensor you buy!!! If you go full frame, my choices would be in this order:

1) Rodie 40 HR-W; 1a) SK 43; but I would not argue against the 32HR-W if you want really wide.

2) Rodie 70 HR-W 2a) SK 72. Both great "normal" options. But again, if you like a loose normal, I would not argue against the new SK60.

Of course if you go with a crop sensor cam, you basically throw all this out and start over -- probably then a 23HR for your wide and a 40 - 50 anything for your normal.

Sorry to be a pest but it feels like you guys are a mine of information, and you all seem to know more than my dealer!

It's not an easy decision as there are a lot of variables to consider. But first and foremost is what back -- that decision is going to drive everything else. And herein lies another pitfall --- if you do go with a crop back, your lens choices may go out the door if you decide to move to a larger back in the future...