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!

A down to the line decision

T

tetsrfun

Guest
Exactly -- unless something like the HTS with available lenses will suffice for the movement side of the equation.
*******
This discussion is very informative...It will be interesting to see if the combined electro-mechanical-software HTS approach will be better/worse/or the same as the current situation.

Steve
 

carstenw

Active member
Tim, I curious about your "need" for movements. Could you quantify it? As far as I understand, you have gotten on without so far.

If your need is closer to desire than to hardship (!), then there are some half-solutions which might last you for a while, such as looking for a good copy of the Hartblei (not the Phase). It depends on how much shift you need though. There is a decent amount of tilt, but not so much shift.

Or, you might shoot film and scan... It worked for everyone for a long time, and the more time you need to invest in LCCs and so on, the less the time penalty for film. It depends a bit on your expected volume, I suppose.

It just sounds a bit like you are looking for a solution which does not exist (and which everyone else is looking for too). Something small, easy, and part of a single system, yet with large movements and no quality penalties. The HTS comes closest, I suppose. Although there must be quality compromises with it, no one has gone on the record yet saying that they can see them. The wide angles remain the primary compromise there.
 

Paratom

Well-known member
Very interesting thread.
I ask myself which movements would one use how often (and of course this will differ from person to person) and for what purpose.
I think the interesting thing in solutions like the cambo RS or horseman that you could use it with some movements, but you could also use it handheld. I could see myself putting a nice viewfinder on it and use it like a digital Hassy SWD.
If it was just about rise and fall, and if you are not at the limit with Megapixel I also have the thought that one could choose a lens one step wider and get the rise/fall effect by cropping the image afterwards. So one would have the choice to either use the full image circle of a lets say 24mm lens, or crop it to 35mm FOV and get rise/fall effect if wanted.(However I assume that rise/fall is not the most important movement for most of you?)

Now if one needs all the movements I understand it is very important to really see what you do - and in this case I would say the new Sinar Artech does sound pretty appealing.

Am I the only one who thinks that it is a big benefit if you use a technical camera which could be used handheld as well? (with technical camera I include cambo,alpa, horseman etc. - I hope this is correct wording)

Cheers, Tom
 

tashley

Subscriber Member
Tim, I curious about your "need" for movements. Could you quantify it? As far as I understand, you have gotten on without so far.

If your need is closer to desire than to hardship (!), then there are some half-solutions which might last you for a while, such as looking for a good copy of the Hartblei (not the Phase). It depends on how much shift you need though. There is a decent amount of tilt, but not so much shift.

Or, you might shoot film and scan... It worked for everyone for a long time, and the more time you need to invest in LCCs and so on, the less the time penalty for film. It depends a bit on your expected volume, I suppose.

It just sounds a bit like you are looking for a solution which does not exist (and which everyone else is looking for too). Something small, easy, and part of a single system, yet with large movements and no quality penalties. The HTS comes closest, I suppose. Although there must be quality compromises with it, no one has gone on the record yet saying that they can see them. The wide angles remain the primary compromise there.
Good questions Carsten.

I know you're familiar with some of my history of gear and with some of my work.

My current dilemma has the following history: I have been shifting more towards a strange mixture of what I call 'architectural landscape' which is largely about the relationship between landscapes and the structures that humans put in them. This also involves exploring themes of the passage of time and decay.

With the Lyonesse series finished (and half way through a very successful limited edition print auction on behalf of the charity Photovoice) I am moving on to a series exploring man's territoriality: the way he claims, marks off, monitors and defends his land and the structures on it.

So what all this requires me to do is take pictures of

a) landscapes with man made structures in them
b) much closer up situations such as interiors

Additionally what I want is for all this to be in absolute crisp focus from near to far and corner to corner. I want total 'dead pan' with no suggestion that a camera was involved. No selective DOF, no blur, nothing.

My M8 is almost perfect for much of this. No need for shift, since with the right glass and aperture the DOF suffices very well and the files blow up to large exhibition sizes very well. But I found myself wanting sometimes to correct verticals and sometimes wanting to crop or enlarge beyond 24 x 36 so I bought a film based field camera and used that for a while. However, lugging it around on trips, along with all my other gear, and in particular trying to get really good quality development and scanning proved to be a real hassle. I often need, if I've driven a long way to shoot a scene, to be able to confirm I have the shot as I want it before I leave and 4x5 film makes this impossible.

So I moved to digital on the understanding that I could get the movements I want soon enough with either the Hartblei (Reichmann had reviewed it and said that on screen it was as sharp as his Zeiss glass) or the Hassy T/S.

Now I did totally understand that the ultimate quality of the edges was not going to be as absolutely perfect as with a field cam and non-retrofocus lens setup but I did think it would be very good and that by stopping down there'd be a sweet spot that met my needs. Otherwise why would professionals buy the stuff, hey? ;-)

Then I find that the Hartblei not only makes the shots look like they were taken through a coke bottle, at any aperture, but that the alternatives with the Phase back require almost as much (and in some ways, e.g. LCC frames more) hassle as the film setup.

So, I need to shoot scenes which in 35mm FOV terms vary usually between 20mm and 50mm. They need to have perfect perceived focus from let's say five or ten feet away to infinity when printed to very large dimensions (let's say 1 metre wide) and I need to be able to correct verticals both internal and external.

I do understand that this will take time, patience serious money but it is slowly becoming clear that there actually isn't a solution (unless the Hassy TS turns out really well or Hartblei come up with a very good batch of rotators!)at any price that avoids the need for a serious amount of buggering about! More importantly, buy the time you've packed all this stuff for a trip you certainly need at least two largish bags just for the camera gear. Maybe I should sell my toothbrush and clean underpants!

List for camera bag for average trip:

Tripod
M8 and three lenses
Phamiya body
One or two Phamiya lenses
Silvestri Body
L bracket for Silvestri on tripod
At least one lens for Silvestri
Centre graduated ND filters
Black cloth
Loupe
Meter
Wi-Bal card
Opaque sheet for LCC shots and iPod voice recorder attachment for noting the LCC shots
Releases, wake-up cable,
Sensor cleaning gear
Laptop
Chargers, cables cards
Osteopath
...
:(
 
Last edited:

jlm

Workshop Member
doesn't sound to me like swings/tilt is what you want. that will not change the range of DOF, only move the planes of focus, and it is definitely a lenslike effect.

i have tried Helicon Focus and urge you to try it out. Woody Campbell has shown a few images that sold me. you simply click off a series ( i've used five or six) of focus bracket shots and process in computer and it is fast. if nothing has moved in the image, it is very difficult to perceive the blends
 

tashley

Subscriber Member
doesn't sound to me like swings/tilt is what you want. that will not change the range of DOF, only move the planes of focus, and it is definitely a lenslike effect.

i have tried Helicon Focus and urge you to try it out. Woody Campbell has shown a few images that sold me. you simply click off a series ( i've used five or six) of focus bracket shots and process in computer and it is fast. if nothing has moved in the image, it is very difficult to perceive the blends

Yup I've considered this but things do move: I often take shots with water in and in Britain at least, it's nearly always windy to some degree so trees and grasses are moving. I think focus blending is fine for studio packshots and mountains but it probably won't suite me. Whereas a couple of degrees of tilt is what landscape chaps use to increase the perceived DOF and I have seen it done (even done it myself) such that it doesn't look 'lenslike'!
 

PeterA

Well-known member
Linhof have a new Technica designed specifically for digi backs - giving you very portable fold out camera on rails ( all Carbon I believe) with what may be enough of every movement to satisfy...
 

Jack

Sr. Administrator
Staff member
Yes, based on a 6x6 format (80mm IC), the 40mm lens becomes an effective 56mm lens with the PC-Mutar, but it is also true that it still has a 40mm effective focal length with a 113mm IC, with a lot more ability to shift.
But it's then still a 56, just on a larger format -- and yes, 56 on a larger format may have the same *effective* focal length as the 40 on your 6x6, but you don't gain a thing except a longer lens with more IC to shift to. More to the point, since you *have* to shift it to get the larger sensor area to get back to 40mm FoV, you do NOT 'gain' the 40mm FoV effect with more shiftable IC... Instead you simply ended up with a longer lens that has a correspondingly larger IC and therefore allows shifts.

Like most things in photography, there's no free lunch!

Cheers,
 

carstenw

Active member
But it's then still a 56, just on a larger format -- and yes, 56 on a larger format may have the same *effective* focal length as the 40 on your 6x6, but you don't gain a thing except a longer lens with more IC to shift to. More to the point, since you *have* to shift it to get the larger sensor area to get back to 40mm FoV, you do NOT 'gain' the 40mm FoV effect with more shiftable IC... Instead you simply ended up with a longer lens that has a correspondingly larger IC and therefore allows shifts.
True enough. In fact, the two are so closely related that all you got in the end was more work and more resolution.
 

Jack

Sr. Administrator
Staff member
Yep. And you only gain resolution if the lens plus Mutar combo can still resolve higher frequency than the pixel pitch. (And as good as the Mutar is, it is *not* a foregone conclusion that combo will out-resolve a 6.8u sensor. In fact, I'd be willing to bet the 40 by itself cannot outresolve a 6.8u sensor outside the central 2/3rds of the IC...)

Cheers,
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
Myself I just can lose a 28mm focal length and stitching is not always a option and honestly for me it is a last resort. T/S is something for the studio doing product work and if that is the case and did it on a regular basis i would just go for a 2x3 view camera. In this case i maybe looking more at focus blending as the option for the greater DOF with a T/S is not really there and the loss of really wide angles does not appeal to me. Now this is my case and what i shoot but after this pre-dawn morning and the use of the Mamiya 28mm for the last couple months i am seriously addicted to it and not sure I could live without it and I get plenty of DOF.

BTW not sure how I ever got away without a 1200 Elinchrom Ranger before. If I had it my way i would have 3 more
 

David Klepacki

New member
But it's then still a 56, just on a larger format -- and yes, 56 on a larger format may have the same *effective* focal length as the 40 on your 6x6, but you don't gain a thing except a longer lens with more IC to shift to. More to the point, since you *have* to shift it to get the larger sensor area to get back to 40mm FoV, you do NOT 'gain' the 40mm FoV effect with more shiftable IC... Instead you simply ended up with a longer lens that has a correspondingly larger IC and therefore allows shifts.

Like most things in photography, there's no free lunch!

Cheers,
Yes, of course. If you do not wish to stitch, then you do not get the 40mm FoV. In that case, with the PC-Mutar, the 40IF becomes similar to a large format lens (like the Schneider 58 SA-XL) or to the Rollei 55mm PCS Tilt/Shift lens (but with more movements in my case).

Again, even without the PC-Mutar, I am getting +/- 16mm of shift with the 40mm FoV, which is about what you would get from a 35mm digitar.
 

Jack

Sr. Administrator
Staff member
Again, even without the PC-Mutar, I am getting +/- 16mm of shift with the 40mm FoV, which is about what you would get from a 35mm digitar.
David:

That is still obviously excellent :) Is the 16mm figure for a 1.1 crop DB or a 1.3 DB? Also, any chance you could post a 100% pixel crop of the corner frame at full 16mm shift?

Thanks!
 

David Klepacki

New member
Yep. And you only gain resolution if the lens plus Mutar combo can still resolve higher frequency than the pixel pitch. (And as good as the Mutar is, it is *not* a foregone conclusion that combo will out-resolve a 6.8u sensor. In fact, I'd be willing to bet the 40 by itself cannot outresolve a 6.8u sensor outside the central 2/3rds of the IC...)

Cheers,
I think you are in for a very pleasant surprise. The older 40mm lens from Hasselblad does not have the needed resolution at the edges .... but the newer 40IF does! I believe Kornelius at Zeiss measured over 100 lp/mm at the edges (and over 200 lp/mm in the center).

Also, the PC-Mutar is a rather different beast. It is not like telephoto converters where the lens elements are fixed in that case. The PC-Mutar has a movable lens element that sweeps across the shifting area, which more effectively magnifies the lens without degradation.

All I can say is that even with the PC-Mutar, this thing is razor sharp from corner to corner with the 40IF. I am not the only one here who has this equipment, so maybe you can get independent assessment from Marc.
 

David Klepacki

New member
David:

That is still obviously excellent :) Is the 16mm figure for a 1.1 crop DB or a 1.3 DB? Also, any chance you could post a 100% pixel crop of the corner frame at full 16mm shift?

Thanks!
It is for a 1.1 crop (36 x 48).

I will try to get something over the weekend to show corners at full shift.
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
I wanted to adapt one of these to the Mamiya body at one point. It does look interesting but I don't think i can adapt a mamyia lens to a Hassy mount. The other way around yes but not sure how i could accomplish this. Make for a nice shift lens if I could
 

tashley

Subscriber Member
Myself I just can lose a 28mm focal length and stitching is not always a option and honestly for me it is a last resort. T/S is something for the studio doing product work and if that is the case and did it on a regular basis i would just go for a 2x3 view camera. In this case i maybe looking more at focus blending as the option for the greater DOF with a T/S is not really there and the loss of really wide angles does not appeal to me. Now this is my case and what i shoot but after this pre-dawn morning and the use of the Mamiya 28mm for the last couple months i am seriously addicted to it and not sure I could live without it and I get plenty of DOF.

BTW not sure how I ever got away without a 1200 Elinchrom Ranger before. If I had it my way i would have 3 more
That's really nice subtle light Guy, very clean and even but lying on the subject enough to give nice depth and detail. Did you mildly HDR it, or use fill of some kind?

Tim
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
No but I do have a darker sky and was thinking of a HDR. I did use color picker and worked it a little
 
Top