The GetDPI Photography Forum

Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!

Help re tech camera lenses please

What are the options for RM3Di w/ RotaMount?

120 for cambo can be ordered in a mount without spacer required.

Bit awkward looking, but looks aside a good option for that length. But it is prone to barrel vignette with larger movements.



It can also be ordered in a mount with spacer required. That prevents barrel-vignette issues. It also (optionally) adds the ability to tilt/swing. Which for some long landscape shots can be very very helpful.


Often the spacer can be packed with something else inside it so that not much additional pack-space is required. However, it's still a definite consideration for those looking for a moderate-long lens; if pack space and convenience is important than a 90mm HR or other mid-long lens may be a better option.
 

gazwas

Active member
The Rodenstock 90HR-W (just replaced) is a wonderfully sharp lens with a big 125mm IC and if you're after a real bargain the Rodenstock 90mm Apo-Sironar Digital is the exact same lens as the 90HR-W (RS just renamed it) but can be found used at a much cheaper price.
 
I'm contemplating moving to a tech camera. I would use it with my Phase IQ 180. I particularly need tilt for landscape work; I'm less interested in shift and wide image circles.

From reading posts here it seems the favoured makes are Schneider and Rodenstock. So what are the best in the 45-55 range, the 75-90 and 150 mm ranges?

Thanks!
Bill
Dear Bill, I've not read the other replies. I can say the rodenstock HR40W is simply beautiful. I was fortunate to try the Schneider 43XL which is lighter and actually sharper in the centre, but edge the edge the rodie has it. The 43xl has a more German look which is nice and I think I would choose it for environmental portraits. The colour on the rodie is amazing and this micro contrast just pops. I switched systems and given the choice of any lens, I bought the HR40 again. Caveat is that i love 28mm equivalent perspective. The only drawback to this lens is it quite a beast compared to the SKs. I also used the HR90 but did not add that to my arsenal when I switched. I've selected the SK120, 1:5.6 ASPH, which is tiny and astonishingly good too. I alao use on mild macro up to 1:4 or so. I've not yet needed the extra lens that cropping the 40, or moving back with the 120 has not solved, but caveat 2, I've only been on a couple of short field trips since i switched systems. I'd stand behind both those lenses, and strongly recommend a HR90 or HR70 which both have similar rendering, colour and it's just a matter of preference for length between them. My tuppence worth.


Paul
 
... And want to suggest an alternative to these pancakes is a linhof techno, if you want a smaller bag, forgoe the potential to handhold for more flexibility and dont mind spending a little bit more time focusing.
 

gazwas

Active member
... And want to suggest an alternative to these pancakes is a linhof techno, if you want a smaller bag, forgoe the potential to handhold for more flexibility and dont mind spending a little bit more time focusing.
Or Arca M-Line Two MF also.

Massive tilts,swings and shifts all at the same time. Also lens mounting is easy peasy and much, much, much cheaper.
 

etrump

Well-known member
Don't buy anything without getting a demo in your hands. You should try any of the bodies in your options list with the same lens on each. If you have a quality dealer they will make appropriate arrangements to get the equipment to you. Even though the products are all similar in capabilities the experience is significantly different and I expect you will find one much more to your liking then the others.

Just as an example, the focus on the arca is much more refined than the Cambo but for the type of shooting I do it was over kill and I much preferred the Cambo and have no problems getting critical focus especially with the iq180.

The glass is the same but the approach is totally different with each mfg. if you intend to do stitching with shifts you will find significant differences as well.

Finally, I just picked up an APO sironar digital 55 for a specific shot I am working on where the 72 was too long and 32 too wide. The lens is affordable with great sharpness and clarity and the image circle is huge.
 

Paul2660

Well-known member
Bill:

As my 160 has been in Denmark, I have been able to use a IQ180 with my rm3di and various lenses.

I found that the Rodenstock 28 performed very close to what I had found on my 160. There was a smallish bit of magenta cast on center at the bottom but it cleared up fine with a LCC. As with the 160, the 28 hits the "wall" at 7mm due to a design issue. You will see a hard vignette at 7mm and anything past. It will ruin the top and bottom of the image and can effect the rest. It's an unfortunate issue as the lens itself will easily go to 10mm. I have been told this is a "disc" placed inside the lens to show the image circle, but still not sure what it is. This issue is well documented in Guy's review of the 28 Schneider and Rodenstock. All the HR's Rodenstock's I have used, 23, 28 and 35 have this issue with the 70mm image circle.

Sadly the the 43mm Schneider was another story. A lens that I can easily take to 18mm (20 in a pinch) on my 160 will barely go to 8mm. At 8mm you will see significant loss in color and saturation and increase in noise at 35 iso and 50 iso. On center my 43mm showed a good bit of magenta cast towards the bottom but even worse on one entire half of the image I picked up a very strong green cast. The magenta corrected with LCC, the green cast, sometimes. Never having shot the 40mm Rodenstock but having read about it's attributes on the 180, it should be a better solution. On the 180 with the 43mm I also had a continuous issue where I could see the actual join lines of the various separate CCD's that make up the large 180 sensor. These did not correct out in Capture 7 and had to be manually worked out. I have often seen the same effect with the 160 when viewing an image on the camera LCD, but once I open the shot in Capture One, the software blends these areas together.

The 60mm Schneider was much better, but it still also suffered on the 180. I have taken the 60mm to 30mm of shift (90 degree rm3di camera rotation) many times on the 160 and it has no problems until after 25mm of shift. Most times it's totally correctable. On the 180, the 60 handled well to about 12mm and then started to show color/sat fall off at 15mm. Sharpness seemed good.

Sincerely
Paul
 

miska

Member
Hi,

Sorry for resurecting an old thread for my own purpose :)

I am considering a lens line-up for a tech cam. I am thinking of sort of "copying" my M9 line-up (which I know works for me), consisting of 21mm, 35mm, 50mm and 90mm. It covers the "right" range for me, in 4 lenses.
Now, for the tech cam, I am pretty much convinced that my line-up should start with the 32mm HR. After that, it's a bit less clear. Maybe:
50mm HR
70mm HR
120mm SK

What is important for me (tilting and sharpness are a given :) ):

- Future proof. Who knows what I want in 10 years from now ? So a lens should work with smaller pixels backs like an IQ280. That's why I tend more towards the rodies.

- Relatively dense lens-line-up towards the wides (hence my thinking of 32->50->70, and not 32-> 60XL -> 120, although I haven't excluded the 3 lens line-up, maybe that would make sense and allow some savings in both $$$ and weight to be carried on day hikes)

- "Easy" to use from a workflow point of view. I do lots of nodal point panos, and working without center filter (when non shifted) or even without too much LCC:ing would be an asset. Flare resistance would also go in this section, the lenses should be "easy to work with". So this point puts also constrains on vignetting and color cast (although I'll mostly work at f/8 or f/11), while unshifted.

- Image circle - since I do panos, I may want to experiment with shifting the back. It's not at the top of my list though, since I'm used to nodal point stitching, so I do not "need" huge image circles, if it goes against the points above.

What are your thoughts ?

Thanks !
 

gerald.d

Well-known member
32, 50, 70 is exactly what I have (along with the 23).

If you start with the 32, then I think the longer focal lengths from there pretty much pick themselves.

The ideal set of lenses as I see it is that the next lens up has the horizontal field of view that the lens below it has as a vertical field of view. This would require you to have them all though - 32, 40, 50, 70, 90.

Since you're only looking for 3 under 100mm, then I'd actually recommend skipping alternate lenses, so therefore get the 32, 50 and 90. All are excellent lenses that I believe fit all your other criteria.

I'm not sure which camera you'd be using this on, but if ALPA, then I'd strongly recommend getting the 32HR SB17 FPS, 50HR SB34 and 90HR SB34 (plus appropriate adapters) on the basis that at some point in the future, you might be tempted by the FPS!

Kind regards,


Gerald.
 

Ken_R

New member
I'm contemplating moving to a tech camera. I would use it with my Phase IQ 180. I particularly need tilt for landscape work; I'm less interested in shift and wide image circles.

From reading posts here it seems the favoured makes are Schneider and Rodenstock. So what are the best in the 45-55 range, the 75-90 and 150 mm ranges?

Thanks!
Bill
Hi, I highly suggest the Arca RM3Di. I have one and the rodenstock 40mm HR-W and 70mm HR-W lenses and the quality and ease of use is superb. Tilt is on the body like it has been mentioned and so it works with any lens you mount. The knob is out of the way of the lens and focusing mechanisms. If you do not need a lens as wide as the 40mm (about 27mm 35mm equiv.) then the 50mm HR-W is a great option.

I have also heard good things about the Schneider 47mm Digitar XL but it is not highly recommended for the 80mp backs. It is however a very small/compact/light lens which is great for travel. The Rodenstocks are larger and heavier but have much less color cast on the high MP backs.

You can see your options HERE and visualize them HERE
 

narikin

New member
You can see your options HERE and visualize them HERE
That 'Tech Camera Overview' was a notorious post here, for its compilation by a dealer who does not sell Alpa, and wanted to list things baldly and make what they do sell look good. Created quite a storm, so take it with a big pinch of salesman's salt.

For example, Alpa cameras like the Max do not really have a front and back, so you can swap them about to switch the rise/fall and shift movements if you prefer to have a longer range horizontally (panorama) or vertically (tall building). Moreover, it should also be stated that on nearly all newer design Digital Tech MF lenses, the limiting factor is usually the image circle, not the camera's abilities, so a larger range of movements is somewhat moot.
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
Miska if you love doing panos the Schneider 60mm XL is tops in its class and a nice focal length for panos. It also has the largest image circle in its class for stitching at 120mm image circle and it has no limitations with regard to back and micron size. Its a future proof lens. Also the Roadie 40 is a very nice lens regardless of back and micron size. This is about your break point lens and getting wider than you have to consider the back you are using. Example the older SK 35xl does not play very nice with the IQ 180, but will work fine with the 60 mpx backs. The roadie 32 big and heavy will work fine with any back, same with the roadie 23 and 28. Rule of thumb below 40mm you want to start looking at Roadies as they will work with any of today's current backs. Bottom line the IQ 180 and 280 you have to take the back into account when choosing your lenses. But that SK 60 is very very nice and I consider it the sharpest one I have used. The SK 43mm is also a good lens.
 

miska

Member
Argh, there really is too much choice ! :)
So basically, it comes down to:
32HR -> 50HR -> 70HR -> 90HR or 120SK - nice sampling of focal lengths, but big and heavy
or
32HR -> 60XL -> 90HR or 120SK, less money and less to carry, large image circle for flat stitching

So how did you guys solve this conundrum for yourselves ? Heads or tails ? Months of heavy testing and pixel peeping ? Years of experience choosing fixed focal lengths ? Or trial and error with buying and selling lenses ? In the end, I'm pretty sure I will be perfectly happy with either of the above solutions :)

For the back, I now have an IQ160, so probably I would be fine with also SK wides, but I really would like to have the feeling that if one day I want to upgrade to the IQ4120, I wouldn't need to also change the lenses (probably a dream though...).

Thanks for all the comments, keep them coming !
 

narikin

New member
Don't forget that when you stitch you get 2/3 focal lengths for the price of 1. You can straight shoot single shot or go wider in 2 way stitch, or a bit wider still in 4 way.

So the new 90mm HR Alpagon (the best Tech lens I have owned) gives you something like a 70mm when 2 way stitched, and a 60mm when 4 way.
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
Argh, there really is too much choice ! :)
So basically, it comes down to:
32HR -> 50HR -> 70HR -> 90HR or 120SK - nice sampling of focal lengths, but big and heavy
or
32HR -> 60XL -> 90HR or 120SK, less money and less to carry, large image circle for flat stitching

So how did you guys solve this conundrum for yourselves ? Heads or tails ? Months of heavy testing and pixel peeping ? Years of experience choosing fixed focal lengths ? Or trial and error with buying and selling lenses ? In the end, I'm pretty sure I will be perfectly happy with either of the above solutions :)

For the back, I now have an IQ160, so probably I would be fine with also SK wides, but I really would like to have the feeling that if one day I want to upgrade to the IQ4120, I wouldn't need to also change the lenses (probably a dream though...).

Thanks for all the comments, keep them coming !

Right now with the 160 the 35Xl works fine. Ands it's far cheaper and smaller than a 32. To me the IQ 160, IQ 260 chips give you the best lens options for a tech cam. You at least have some choices. Getting into the IQ 180 as others here will note they went Roadies under 40mm. This is a tough call thinking for future products and something we all face. What's the next back going to be and what lenses will be okay with it. Myself I would not go past a IQ 260 more than plenty for me. But I totally get people want more
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
The end of the day when I had the IQ 160 I had the Roadie 28, SK 60 and SK 90 as my three lenses. I would have added a 150 at some point.

Today if I bought back in with the IQ 260. I would go roadie 23 cause that was a load of fun to shoot a couple weeks ago than 40, 70 and 120

Or go back to the 28, 60, 90 and add the 150 at some point.

Obviously this will depend on your style of shooting. Some folks never go wider than a 40 or 43.
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
Btw I shot the older SK 47 with the IQ260 and really liked the results from it. I think the roadie 40 is sharper though. The newer SK 43 is also very nice and very close to the Roadie 40. If I had to give a slight edge over those two than I would say the 40 is a touch sharper but I liked the look of the 43 as well.
 

gerald.d

Well-known member
Argh, there really is too much choice ! :)
So basically, it comes down to:
32HR -> 50HR -> 70HR -> 90HR or 120SK - nice sampling of focal lengths, but big and heavy
or
32HR -> 60XL -> 90HR or 120SK, less money and less to carry, large image circle for flat stitching

So how did you guys solve this conundrum for yourselves ? Heads or tails ? Months of heavy testing and pixel peeping ? Years of experience choosing fixed focal lengths ? Or trial and error with buying and selling lenses ? In the end, I'm pretty sure I will be perfectly happy with either of the above solutions :)

For the back, I now have an IQ160, so probably I would be fine with also SK wides, but I really would like to have the feeling that if one day I want to upgrade to the IQ4120, I wouldn't need to also change the lenses (probably a dream though...).

Thanks for all the comments, keep them coming !
I'm going to repeat myself here...

32, 50, 90, 120.

The 70 IMO is too close to both 50 and 90. I really don't think you need it if you have either of those. If you have both of them, then it's pretty redundant.

Check out the fields of view these lenses give you and the decision should become a lot easier - 70>90 is pretty insignificant.

60 or 70 to 120 is too big a jump IMO.

Repeat after me.

32, 50, 90, 120.
32, 50, 90, 120.

:)

(This is driven by your choice of the 32 at the wide end. If you'd picked a different lens there, I'd be recommending a different set.)

Kind regards,

Gerald.
 

gerald.d

Well-known member
32, 50, 90, 120.
32, 50, 90, 120.
32, 50, 90, 120.
32, 50, 90, 120.

or maybe the 60 XL :D
Subbing the 60 for the 50 is worth considering. The 60 would be a nice length for nodal stitching.

So you're down to just one lens decision now.

32, 90, 120 are virtually in the bag already.

See? That wasn't so hard ;)
 
Top