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!

Just thinking of a volte face

tashley

Subscriber Member
I haven't yet managed to sell my IQ180, no doubt in the foolish hope of getting a reasonable price for it. Gone are my Phase Mammy DF body and lenses, gone is my Cambo wide RS and Schneider 35XL.

But I find myself with an interest in the Alpa STC and maybe one of the shorter Digarons... maybe the 32 or the 40. Trouble is, they look big enough to compromise the nice small form factor of the camera. And I have totally lost track of what lenses these days need LCC on the IQ180.

I have been thinking of getting the HPF ring and Leica disco, too.

Anyone with experience of any of the above have an opinion? I'd be very grateful.
 

gazwas

Active member
Tim, IMO nothing on the 80pix chip is a walk in the park and most lenses, even longer ones (SK120 needed LCC on 60Mpix chips) need LCC for critical colour.

I honestly think go the whole hog or without carful LCC calibrations for every capture you'll be disappointed. Failing that, I'd cut my losses and just get shut before the market changes again, (late 2013/2014 Canon big gun?) chalk it down to experience and forget about it.

I'm in the same boat with my lowly P65+. At the price I'm advertising mine for (that nobody wants to pay) I'm facing loosing a lot and £14K is just way too expensive to cross grade to IQ260 for nice features but very little IQ difference. However, I'm not ready to give up my beautiful Arca R just yet.

Tough call.......
 

tashley

Subscriber Member
Thanks for the straight talk Gareth. If only Nikon made a decent wide TS lens - but I guess Canon do, and that time is a comin'.... I just have seen some amazing really large work by others recently and have a bit of a hankering to go that way again.
 

gerald.d

Well-known member
I haven't touched my AF or Mamiya lenses (I have many of the old MF lenses from the 50 shift up to the 300/2.8) since getting my Alpas and Rodenstocks.

My advice is, if you can spare the cash, just do it.

Not sure what price you're looking for for the 180, but I reckon these days you'll be lucky to get $20K. I paid $27.5K for mine just over a year ago and don't regret it one bit. This stuff isn't an investment, no sense in treating it as such.

Get out there and put it to work :)
 

gazwas

Active member
+1

If Canon had hinted at a high Mpix body couples with the fab TES lenses I might not have got back into MFD after a four year break with the 1Ds3 but we are still waiting.

I do agree though if done properly a MFD file smokes the 35mm files every day of the week and I'd don't care who says different. It's possible it has nothing to do with the chip and could be all down to the lenses and cameras available (Arca/Cambo/Alpa, SK/RS) for MFD backs but the difference is very much there IMO. But as I said to do it properly you have to tick all the right boxes when taking the picture (composition/exposure/LCC/focus etc) to feel the magic and that involves commitment your end Tim.
 

malmac

Member
Tim

I bought the IQ180 realising that the back would depreciate quickly - so figured as long as it keeps working I will keep using it - the files are not shabby afterall.

Yes being a Canon shooter, I look forward to a 30+MP sensor which I can use as my high res work camera. I expect the IQ180 would then see less service in some ways however it still has the larger sensor, the narrower DOF and just beautiful colour when one avoids the magenta cast issues.

Lots of different approaches - by different folk - I guess what is right is what works for you.

MY IQ180 is going on a holiday to Scotland next month so may be it might just take a nice pic or even two.


Cheers


Mal
 

tashley

Subscriber Member
Yup, I never expected the IQ to be an investment (other than as capex) - at least not like Leica lenses are an investment! But for now it's a double or quits type situation: I either take a bigger hit than anyone could have imagined 18 months ago, or I give in to the siren song.

Frankly, pretty much everything I ever did, with extremely few exceptions, on the DF body kit I can do with the D800E (and a whole lot more besides). But for sheer size of output, like Kander, Burtynsky, or my new favourite Olaf Otto Becker (see the Broken Line series then tab to Ilulissat Icefjord 5 if you want to see sheer perfection!) there is only one option (other than the 8x10 film camera he uses - I am NOT going there!) and given that I already own half of it, the other half has to be a temptation...
 
Last edited:

anGy

Member
Told you, printing large is the way to go to enjoy its IQ again ;-)
The 32mm definitively needs LCC shots each time. But I can live without for the 55mm Rodie apo-sironar if no stitched. This is the bargain lens everybody says it is (cheap, compact, huge IC) but I've found resolution in the borders quite disappointing under f13 (even not stitched) with an IQ180. Don't know if the current 55mm HR (not cheap but not the most expensive neither) performs better all around its IC (?).
 

MaxKißler

New member
Just thinking out loud here but if I had the money to burn, I'd most likely get myself a Silvestri Flexicam. I think the design is just gorgeous and I like the fact that it has built in tilts and swings. Silvestri also makes a sliding adapter for it which I'd prefer to use. Since you're having an IQ180 a normal adapter plate might work better for you. Regarding lenses, I'd only get the one focal length I prefer to use.

Good luck in coming to a decision. It's a dilemma either way....
 

tashley

Subscriber Member
Thanks Max, I tried the Silvestri a few years back and even with a p45+ things weren't great. I think it might be tough, thinking of the 0.01mm shims Alpa use, to compete if you are offering a sliding back system for an 80mp sensor. :-(
 

jagsiva

Active member
Tim,

Heard from a good source last week that Schneider has discontinued the 35XL and 28XL. I can't remember if the 24 Digitar was on the list. Can only mean that they have a new design coming. Sorry, all I know, you may want to look into it, but if true, and the new designs stay in the same ball-park size wise, you could have the small kit you're looking for
 

gazwas

Active member
Tim,

Heard from a good source last week that Schneider has discontinued the 35XL and 28XL. I can't remember if the 24 Digitar was on the list. Can only mean that they have a new design coming. Sorry, all I know, you may want to look into it, but if true, and the new designs stay in the same ball-park size wise, you could have the small kit you're looking for
I've heard rumblings like this about Schneider lenses in the past hoping for new design Digitars but they've always turned out to be Phase/Schneider LS glass. :cry:
 

tashley

Subscriber Member
Hmmmm.... I'd like a nice small 35 but I am guessing that the ray angle problem would mitigate in favour of being larger, even if it is an f5.6...
 

Ken_R

New member
I haven't yet managed to sell my IQ180, no doubt in the foolish hope of getting a reasonable price for it. Gone are my Phase Mammy DF body and lenses, gone is my Cambo wide RS and Schneider 35XL.

But I find myself with an interest in the Alpa STC and maybe one of the shorter Digarons... maybe the 32 or the 40. Trouble is, they look big enough to compromise the nice small form factor of the camera. And I have totally lost track of what lenses these days need LCC on the IQ180.

I have been thinking of getting the HPF ring and Leica disco, too.

Anyone with experience of any of the above have an opinion? I'd be very grateful.
Why do you want to sell the back? Why did you get it in the first place?

I though long and hard before deciding to purchase a MFDB system (Arca rm3di and 40mm HR). I make decent money with my Canon gear (advertising/commercial) and the MFDB is for several projects and to maybe use it for my architecture photography (which I do a bit and sometimes nets me about $5-6k a month for a few days work). I will still use the Canon's for most of my work. The MFD system is just an additional tool for me.

That said, financially speaking, the MFDB systems are not a good value at all. Its no secret that to get that bit extra quality one has to pay a LOT more. But if you know what you want and are a dedicated photographer the systems do offer something unique that might help you achieve your goals. In my case I wanted to make very large prints and sell them in a gallery exhibition. I already have a working relationship with a local art promoter with publishing and international experience and we are in the process of setting everything up.
The theme and look and feel of the project has been agreed and I just have to go out and produce the images and prints.

For the type of images I intend on producing I mostly use the Canon 24mm TSE II on a Canon full frame DSLR. I love setting up on a tripod and composing the image using the rise and fall of the lens and sometimes tilt to achieve the focus desired. For camera movements in the field the "pancake" tech cameras are still the best option IMHO. The Arca offered integrated tilt and seemed like the most versatile and cleanest design out there in a light and compact package.

I chose the 40mm HR for the focal length and the fact that its the best wide angle for the larger backs if you want to do quite a bit of movements. Even though I got it to use it on an IQ160 it works great on the IQ180 (ever seen Rodney Lough Jr's prints? I think he uses an Arca with a 40mm HR) and should work well with future backs. The 40mm HR is also not a huge lens. The 32mm is. I might also get the 23mm HR and the 70mm or 90mm later. Those would be my lens choices.

The guys at Digital Transitions NYC helped me a LOT in deciding what to get. I just think its insane to purchase such expensive systems without a knowledgable dealer to help out with the purchase, service and support. They have a great tool for pre-visializing lenses: https://www.digitaltransitions.com/page/tech-camera-visualizers

[I am expecting the whole back/camera/lens system soon so I have not had a chance to use it yet]

You have the IQ180 with you, why not at least have some fun with it! I would just make the best of it and try not to think of the financial depreciation hit if you sell it. Think of that money as camera rental. (IQ180 rigs are rented out at about $1600 a week or more!)
 

dougpeterson

Workshop Member
Hmmmm.... I'd like a nice small 35 but I am guessing that the ray angle problem would mitigate in favour of being larger, even if it is an f5.6...
35XL is a great lens for the IQ180 with no shift. Sharp, pretty, small, light, and affordable (relatively speaking of course). Requires an LCC but without shift that is a minor hassle to provide via a default import style in C1.

But if you want to, for instance, shift it 15mm then you'd be barking up the wrong tree.

Make sure to consider an Arca Factum and Cambo TC alongside an STC. They each have unique advantages (and disadvantages). For instance the Cambo dances.
 

tashley

Subscriber Member
35XL is a great lens for the IQ180 with no shift. Sharp, pretty, small, light, and affordable (relatively speaking of course). Requires an LCC but without shift that is a minor hassle to provide via a default import style in C1.

But if you want to, for instance, shift it 15mm then you'd be barking up the wrong tree.

Make sure to consider an Arca Factum and Cambo TC alongside an STC. They each have unique advantages (and disadvantages). For instance the Cambo dances.

Doug, part of the kit I have already sold was a cambo wide rs and a 35 XL with CF.

The 35xl was IMHO just about ok unshifted with LCC. Trouble is, a while back during one C1 upgrade cycle, all my historic library of LCCs and the shots they were made for became separated and the resulting mess put me off LCCs. Now I do appreciate that there are workflow solutions to that but if you believe, as I do, that best practice requires an LCC shot for each particular scene, and if that has workflow implications you can't easily live with, and if you have a sneaky feeling that LCC corrections are stretching a file further than is healthy (and that's how I feel about 35xl shots even unshifted) then it has to be worth asking if there are lenses that make life easier.

A while back I shot the same scene on a d800e with Zeiss 21mm f2.8 and the IQ 180 with 35XL. The resulting prints at 36" each had their strengths and weakness but neither was clearly better. I know for a fact that the IQ180 can do better than that, but I think, personally, that the 35XL doesn't help it get there.... So one of the Rodenstocks looks like a better idea though of course they are bigger and pricier. I do like the look of the small cambo and Arca models though, and if I can defined the right lens I will certainly end up with either the STC or one of them so thank you for the tip!
 

torger

Active member
Is cross-grading to a IQ260 possible? Or downgrading to an IQ160. Color cast issues are considerably less with those. You'll always need to do LCC shots though, so if you hate it there's a problem. As tech cameras are all-mechanical and don't provide exif data with lens/tilt/shift/aperture settings having a library of pre-made LCC shots is not really feasible. You could do it if you are sure to write down your settings, but then taking the actual LCC shot is probably quicker, and you get dust spot removal too.
 

torger

Active member
Heard from a good source last week that Schneider has discontinued the 35XL and 28XL.
The 28 was introduced as recent as 2010, seems unlikely to me that they would discontinue it now, especially with the new IQ260 coming (less color cast issues), which I think will be the new king-of-the-hill concerning tech cameras.
 

gazwas

Active member
I know for a fact that the IQ180 can do better than that, but I think, personally, that the 35XL doesn't help it get there.... So one of the Rodenstocks looks like a better idea though of course they are bigger and pricier.
The RS 40 and 32 both need LCC unshifted on a P65+ so you can bet they'll be more fussy on a IQ180.

I honestly don't think there is wide tech lens available that is the no nonsense lens you're hoping for and you'll need to step up in focal length to something like a SK60XL before you'll start to get the simpler workflow you're after.

Lens colour cast, illumination fall off and constant LCC calibrations is the way of the world in wide angle tech camera capture..... a necessary evil IMO. :(
 

torger

Active member
Lens colour cast, illumination fall off and constant LCC calibrations is the way of the world in wide angle tech camera capture..... a necessary evil IMO. :(
Personally I don't find taking LCC shots that messy, and as it fixes dust spots too I'm quite glad that there's something that forces me to make them :)

If we get electronic shutters on our tech cameras and an electrical interface to provide tilt/shift/aperture into EXIF data we could have auto-match LCC in the back. Maybe that will happen in the future.

I think it's important to remind oneself that the fact that tech camera workflow allows the use of LCC, heavy vignetting, center filters, small largest aperture makes it possible to design lenses that have attractive properties in terms of sharpness and distortion which is unattainable if we would start to design lenses the (MF-)DSLR way with heavy retrofocus and very large aperture. I think the soul of the tech cameras would partly lost if we would be forced into the same type of lens designs as seen on the other camera systems.

I'm very glad that Phase One's newest sensor, the one in IQ260, actually take a step back to less color cast compared to the IQ180 sensor, so we can continue to enjoy some of the great tech camera lens designs.
 
Top