Guy Mancuso
Administrator, Instructor
****. Did that work
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!
Tech Cam advice please !!
- Thread starter satybhat
- Start date
dchew
Well-known member
I don't have a lens that has a wider image circle than the 18mm can reach, so for me it is not an issue. BTW 18mm shift is about a 94mm IC. There are a few lenses that could potentially handle more, like the SK 60, 120 and the Rodi 90. I also have the IQ180, so shifting out there on the wides doesn't work anyway. A 45mm shift is a whopping 141mm IC!
Guy's comment about shifting together (at the same time) with rise and fall is important. The STC does not do this. I can't remember the last time I was in a situation where I needed that, but that just goes back to your list and your priorities. Although the relatively new A/S Fulcrum is lighter, I don't think it does rise, fall and tilt (? somebody correct me if that is not right?). The STC is really a unique design. I think it is the smallest package that has rise/fall, shift and tilt (again, with some lenses). I think it does what it does extremely well, but that's all it does. There's a lot it will not do!
Dave
Edit: Note those IC's are for a 54x40mm sensor.
Last edited:
Guy Mancuso
Administrator, Instructor
I maybe wrong here but I think the 60 SK is the widest lens that will get to 20mm shifts either way without getting into serious issues. Its image circle is 120mm. Now how often you use a lens to this degree is a great question to ask. I did because it could. I'm also speaking on the IQ 160 sensor but truthfully in landscape work panos are far easier and you can use any lens. Don't get me wrong the SK 60 is a awesome lens with its unique abilities. A lot of friends got them after I did and love them. Its a lens that you can build around. Not every system or cam for that matter can do it all without some limitations or cost to expand it. Cambo for tilt and swing you need to buy that mount, Alpa to get more functions in general you have to expand it through accessories or sometimes a different body. Some Alpa folks have both a Max and a STC. The Max for example would be better suited towards architecture than landscape but also would be fine for landscape just a bigger unit to deal with than the nice little STC. BTW I like the STC and would have no issues about buying into Alpa or Cambo. I had the Cambo AE model and loved it. But I could easily buy into a Alpa and Linhof looks interesting.
OK, so really looking into the Alpa STC now.
Coming down to the technicalities (no pun intended) : someone suggested ( looking at what I shoot - and most of my favourite shots were with the 45pce on D800) - so I'm more of an intimate landscape kind of a chap. Hence the suggestion was Schneider 60XL and 120ASPH with the tilt mounts.
Querys: would these excite you and would they mount with the same tilt mount on the ALPA ? How would the 120 fare as a macro / semi-macro ?
I'll add another for the vistas at some point, so a suggestion in that area would be helpful as well.
And before I forget, this has to be the best freaking forum on the internet.
Heartfelt thanks to all chiming in. I suppose the only way I can thank you all is to pass on the help to someone else in similar doldrums in the future. Jeff / Mal hope to shoot with you sometime when I'm out and about.
Saty
Coming down to the technicalities (no pun intended) : someone suggested ( looking at what I shoot - and most of my favourite shots were with the 45pce on D800) - so I'm more of an intimate landscape kind of a chap. Hence the suggestion was Schneider 60XL and 120ASPH with the tilt mounts.
Querys: would these excite you and would they mount with the same tilt mount on the ALPA ? How would the 120 fare as a macro / semi-macro ?
I'll add another for the vistas at some point, so a suggestion in that area would be helpful as well.
And before I forget, this has to be the best freaking forum on the internet.
Heartfelt thanks to all chiming in. I suppose the only way I can thank you all is to pass on the help to someone else in similar doldrums in the future. Jeff / Mal hope to shoot with you sometime when I'm out and about.
Saty
dchew
Well-known member
With Alpa, the 120-sb (Short Barrel) needs a 34mm spacing, so if you want to use the same tilt mount for that and the 60XL-sb, you would purchase the 17mm t/s adapter and one 17mm "multi-use" adapter. Use both together on the 120mm for a total of 34mm. The 60XL-sb only needs a 17mm spacing, so you would use just the 17mm t/s adapter.
If you want to build around the 60 and 120, then I would suggest a wide around 32 or 40, just depending on what focal length you want. They are all awesome, although even with the IQ260 you might prefer the Rodi's on the wide end because there is less color cast.
Dave
If you want to build around the 60 and 120, then I would suggest a wide around 32 or 40, just depending on what focal length you want. They are all awesome, although even with the IQ260 you might prefer the Rodi's on the wide end because there is less color cast.
Dave
Last edited:
dchew
Well-known member
You will be on an IQ260 right? If you really like the 45mm focal length you could do the 70hr instead of the 60xl. 70mm= 45mmE, while 60mm = 38mmE.
However, the 60xl really sounds marvelous. If I was doing this today I too would build around the 60xl because it would be a great single lens kit. I would take the 60xl and the 150xl as my two lens kit, but I like to shoot longer than most people and in 35mm format I love the 35mm focal length. Back to the good discussion here, especially Dan's Post #43:
Help re tech camera lenses please
A few notes:
Dan's post #43 in the above link is a very expensive post!
The quoted image circles are sometimes "overstated", and on the long end the camera might vignette before the image circle. With the 34mm adapter on the lens side my sk150 barrel vignettes at about 15-16mm horizontal (pano) shift, which correlates to about an 84mm IC (there is no vignetting when stitching vertically, or with the adapter on the sensor side). Not sure about the sk120 but I'm pretty sure it is better because of the shorter focal length.
Dave
Last edited:
Guy Mancuso
Administrator, Instructor
Nice combo 40 and 90 . Most would go the 70 than get a 120 and 150 at some point. Need to think also how many lenses you want as your final setup . You want 3 than you need to gap more but if its 4 than you can be a little closer together. One question to finalize as well the IQ 260 or IQ 280. That helps on the wide end that eventually you will get to that point.
Also what focal length is pretty common today with your 35mm gear. If you like the 85 mm for instance than you will like a 120.
David did bring up a good point also with Alpa on the long end about getting cut off on your movements. If you think you will do a lot of stitching than everyone here would say the 60mm is excellent for that but it needs to fit in your lineup well. Its a odd focal length for some. The 40 HR is a laser and it does stitch nice but again if one the IQ 280 maybe some restrictions on movements. Ill let 180 folks answer that better. This is tough you have 3 main categories to get through body, back and lenses. You pick one it determines the others pretty much in some cases but not all.
Crap you need to remember where you are as well and getting gear and support in your country. I don't know Alpas channels over there
Also what focal length is pretty common today with your 35mm gear. If you like the 85 mm for instance than you will like a 120.
David did bring up a good point also with Alpa on the long end about getting cut off on your movements. If you think you will do a lot of stitching than everyone here would say the 60mm is excellent for that but it needs to fit in your lineup well. Its a odd focal length for some. The 40 HR is a laser and it does stitch nice but again if one the IQ 280 maybe some restrictions on movements. Ill let 180 folks answer that better. This is tough you have 3 main categories to get through body, back and lenses. You pick one it determines the others pretty much in some cases but not all.
Crap you need to remember where you are as well and getting gear and support in your country. I don't know Alpas channels over there
dchew
Well-known member
Saty,
Just to be clear, you can do any combination of short barrel lenses with only one tilt adapter, the 17mm t/s. However, you will also need a 17mm std adapter (no tilt function, just a straight spacer) for the longer lenses.
Picking a lens plan seems tougher than it should be isn't it!
A good approach is to think about what the widest lens is you eventually want, then gap up from there. Even if you don't buy that widest lens for several years. They tend to be the most expensive so it makes some sense to plan from the wide end.
Dave
The reason for the two lens setup is three-fold:
1. I wouldn;t want to go wider that 40 (never went wider than 24mm on 135 cameras )
2. I believe that a limited gear range provokes compositional awareness in field.
3. One less lens change to annoy the already exasperated wife ( I often shoot during our family trips by making morning forays towards landscape photography (on strictly limited times before the kids are up ) !!!
Having said that I'll likely add another slightly longer lens to the arsenal ( not sure about the 120 asph (SK) or any other alternative from Rodenstock.
In that situation, it almost makes sense to have 2 adapters: one 17mm and one 34 for the 40 and 90 ? That way I could have the adapters permanently fixed to the lenses saving time in the field. or am I ignorantly talking BS ?
Saty
GrahamWelland
Subscriber & Workshop Member
For Alpa you would want the 17mm t/s adapter and the 17mm spacer (or a second t/s adapter). That will allow you to use the SB17 and SB34 lenses.
You certainly could use dedicated spacers. I have a 34T/S and 34mm spacer which gives me options. For the longer lenses though you will most likely put the spacer on the rear of the body which negates the value of dedicated spacers.
The 40/90 combo is actually what I would select for the core of my outfit if I didn't already have a 35/47. You might want to consider going longer than the 120 to say the 150 if you go with the 90mm. I considered the 120 after I got my 90HRW and I'm glad I went with the longer 150mm Schneider if only because of spacing. If they are too close, you won't change lenses.
You certainly could use dedicated spacers. I have a 34T/S and 34mm spacer which gives me options. For the longer lenses though you will most likely put the spacer on the rear of the body which negates the value of dedicated spacers.
The 40/90 combo is actually what I would select for the core of my outfit if I didn't already have a 35/47. You might want to consider going longer than the 120 to say the 150 if you go with the 90mm. I considered the 120 after I got my 90HRW and I'm glad I went with the longer 150mm Schneider if only because of spacing. If they are too close, you won't change lenses.
A couple of things to think about.
1. The R/S 40mm is in fact almost a 42mm (41.85mm to be precise).
This means that on an IQ260, it's 35mm equivalent is a 27mm (26.88mm TBP)
Now, if your favourite wide-angle in 35mm is a 24mm, the difference is going to be noticeable. Every 1mm at the wide-angle end of the spectrum is significant. As stellar a performer as the 40 is, I always think images take with it are a tad too long for a true wide-angle. On a smaller sensor, that effect is going to be even more magnified. Of course, you can stitch if needs be, but that's not always possible.
2. Because of mechanical vignetting on an Alpa, you'll never benefit from the 150mm image-circle of the 120Asph.
If you can, save yourself some $$ and find a used 120N - 'only' a 120mm image-circle, but less distortion, less light fall-off, and - outside of an MTF chart - no noticeable difference in sharpness at the print level. Lens design is always about compromise, and in getting the 150mm image-circle, S/K sacrificed distortion and light fall-off. I'd rather have those back than an image-circle I couldn't fully use.
1. The R/S 40mm is in fact almost a 42mm (41.85mm to be precise).
This means that on an IQ260, it's 35mm equivalent is a 27mm (26.88mm TBP)
Now, if your favourite wide-angle in 35mm is a 24mm, the difference is going to be noticeable. Every 1mm at the wide-angle end of the spectrum is significant. As stellar a performer as the 40 is, I always think images take with it are a tad too long for a true wide-angle. On a smaller sensor, that effect is going to be even more magnified. Of course, you can stitch if needs be, but that's not always possible.
2. Because of mechanical vignetting on an Alpa, you'll never benefit from the 150mm image-circle of the 120Asph.
If you can, save yourself some $$ and find a used 120N - 'only' a 120mm image-circle, but less distortion, less light fall-off, and - outside of an MTF chart - no noticeable difference in sharpness at the print level. Lens design is always about compromise, and in getting the 150mm image-circle, S/K sacrificed distortion and light fall-off. I'd rather have those back than an image-circle I couldn't fully use.
dougpeterson
Workshop Member
Sounds like a good reason to go for an RL3Di where you can use such lenses without mechanical vignette, and don't have to use any adapters to use tilt.
Is this firsthand knowledge? I'd double check ... It seems to me that the XY wouldn't make sense at all if this was true but then I don't have a lens above 90mm.
Long Lenses for Alpa
Long Lenses for Alpa
We all know that doug is into Arca
Please do yourself a favor and try each candidate in your own setting. Not everyone likes the Arca way of focusing and not everyone is happy with the Arca tilt solution: mechanically this isn't an optimal solution. And if you intend to do a lot of (flat) stitching, the Alpa will be way faster as you can unlock the body movements. There is no body which will be the perfect solution, they all have shortcomings and that's why it can't be stressed enough that you have to use them yourself for more than a couple of shots.
Chris
Disclaimer: I had a RM3di, sold it and went for an Alpa Max.
The handling of tilt isn't as easy as one would like it to be: the mechanism is quite stiff and dialing in, say, half a degree is difficult.
I remember that a few people remarked on this - but I don't remember if it was here or over at LL.
Still, I think that the idea of moving tilt into the body is great - unless you want to have both tilt and swing in which case the Cambo solution is a possible answer.
Chris
stngoldberg
Well-known member
I don't find the mechanism at all stiff on my Arca, and I have never needed to adjust tilt to one half of a degree
The focusing on the Arca RM3DI is incredibly precise and the focusing data on the cards that are supplied is dead nuts accurate.
Stanley
The focusing on the Arca RM3DI is incredibly precise and the focusing data on the cards that are supplied is dead nuts accurate.
Stanley
Alpa Report #2, page 6 - 'Alpa image circle of 120asph = 110mm".
The Alpa mount is basically a ~75mm x 75mm x 'focal length' box - fairly narrow - a quick diagram of a lens 120mm away from the focal plane, at the end of such a box (i.e. a box 75mm x 75mm x 120mm), will show you that light rays travelling to the edge of an image circle 150mm in diameter can never get there. This doesn't change if you move the lens or the sensor, the outer part of the image circle is clipped.