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!

Deciding between Alpa TC, STC or Cambo 1250

carstenw

Active member
Without knowing anything about these things, could a 35XL in Alpa focusing mount also be used on a Cambo, or would that require a mount change?
 

Jamgolf

Member
Without investing too deeply, I would look at the TC + S/K 35mm for use with a Credo 60.

Why Alpa? The system is huge, and with the FPS and the new focus-stacking system there’s something for just about every imaginable scenario. You can deal with Alpa directly (including sales) which is nice - and they reply quickly - as well as through a number of dealers. Pricey, no doubt - but there’s just something about an Alpa. Oh, and they have a good website.

The S/K 35mm is a really nice lens. Lost popularity because of the 80MP sensor design, but it behaves well enough with the Credo 60 and that includes some shifting ability. Small, sharp, light, contrasty and distortion-free. Pricewise you should be able to pick one up for a fraction of the cost new. Forget about people asking $3k, $4k, $5k for this lens used - they’re on the Koolade. The last few sold on GetDPI (months ago) went for the low $2k range, so today I’d expect to pay $2k or less for a nice example. There are a couple on eBay right now struggling to get through the $1k barrier.

So, TC + S/K 35mm + adapter plate = $6k. If you can get the TC and adapter plate used, the kit would probably be under $5k.

Jim
Jim

Thanks for your input. Its certainly an interesting proposition - worth considering.

I've seen Dan Lindberg's posts/images with 35XL + Credo 60. His results certainly speak for themselves - a lot of that is on account of Dan's keen eye and artistic vision and execution though, not necessarily attributable to his 35XL. But if its good enough for him its probably pretty good.

Others have opinions about 35XL's optical quality with 60 mpix backs?

Regards
-Jawad
 
Last edited:

GrahamWelland

Subscriber & Workshop Member
I shot with the 35XL for a few years until recently using both cropped MFDBs and IQ160 & IQ260. It's a great optic, just like all the other Schneider APO Digitars. The only downside with the lens for me was that movements were limited to about 8mm of rise/fall on a 60mp back and that it absolutely needed the center filter. Go beyond that and the LCC correction gets ugly. Optically mine was very sharp and was second only to my 23HR & 90HR Rodenstocks but better than my other Schneiders. It is also nice and compact, easy to use and basically a nice small package to use.

It's a great lens within it's limitations and is still FAR better than any DSLR alternative. The Rodie 40HR is just better ... but remember what level you are comparing at here though. We're in the A -> A++ level, not A -> C-.
 

Don Libby

Well-known member
I shot with a 35XL for many years beginning first with a P45+ then P65 and later an IQ160 all with a Cambo WRS. Decent enough lens however I quickly found I needed to keep the CF on all the time. Movements weren't too bad either. This is one lens that requires a LCC shot for each movement so if I were taking a three row piano I needed 6-shots, 3-image files and 3-LCC files. Good enough lens but after several years of use I decided I needed something more/better and opted for the 40 HR t/s which needs no CF and in every instance so far I haven't seen a huge demand of shooting a LCC.

Bottom line is the 35 is slightly wider than the 40, costs much less however needs the CF for a good file and is more time consuming taking in account the constant need of LCCs. I understand you have a 60 megapixel now however if in the future you have lust in your heart for an 80 then you'll end up like me and have to make the switch. All this said it is a decent enough lens.

After having the 40 on both the 160 and now on the 180 I can say that I truly enjoy what I'm getting from this lens no matter the back.

don
 

carstenw

Active member
Well that's the GetDPI way and your hearing from some of our great members here. Not sure anyone mentioned this but try and decide your final lens count as this gaps differently for a 3 or 4 lens kit. I went in the end with 3 , 28,60,90 but you will see some folks go 23,40,70,120 or put the the 32 in place of the 40.

The 40 is pretty much a standard focal length too regardless of size of sensor. If I had to guess I would say out of 3 than 2 would have the 40 and 1 would have the 32.

Really depends on your shooting subject too.
No 35 option? How is the 35XL on a 33MP 36x48mm back with the Dalsa sensor, for example?

By the way, happy birthday Guy!
 

Don Libby

Well-known member
I just have to remark on this thread. I normally tire quickly of threads asking for help and the thread just goes to hell. This thread hasn't. Somehow we've managed to keep it civil and helpful to not only the OP but anyone else looking to dive into the deep end of the pool.

I'm seeing a lot of good ideas coming out and almost no brand bashing.

:thumbs:
 

GrahamWelland

Subscriber & Workshop Member
:thumbs: to what Don said.

One of the great pleasures also from shooting tech systems is the first day when you go out and fire up the MFDB, tech body and take your first shot with your new Schneider or Rodie wide and then open up the image in Capture One and zoom in. "Holy c@@p" is a very common first statement when you see what these things can really do.

After some five years or so I'm still saying it ...

And then, Dante rubs his hands with glee because the pit just opened and you're now staring into it for another qualitative gear fix - that #2 longer/wider lens, the tilt capability, if my old Schneider is this good just how good is that $9k Rodenstock?, and so you plummet :)

(It probably explains the number of audiophile medium format shooters I've met too)
 

Paul2660

Well-known member
Ditto to Don's and Graham's comments on the 35XL. On a 60MP back. The 35XL does much better on shifts with the P45+, at least 12mm or a bit more. I only was able to use mine a few times on my P45+ before I upgraded to the 160.

I would agree 8mm with sky and maybe 10mm at F16, with no sky. The LCC correction does get ugly and you also will tend to see the mircrolens ripple issue on shifts. CF costs you 2.5 stops of exposure and on a IQ non CMOS back, at iso 50 or 35 (180 backs), this means you will be shooting in the 1/15 or longer shutter speeds. Often I can't go there due to wind, so I will take the 40mm HR-W knowing I can get by with a faster shutter speed.

Upside is cost, weight and size, as on the Arca R mount it's almost a shirt pocket lens, without the CF on. I still keep mine around for when I know I am going to shoot at the sun as I just don't have a lot of luck with the 40mm Rod, without really harsh flare. Others seem to get better results.

I see quite a bit of color cast on my 40mm rod even on center, and find I do need an LCC more often than not. If sky is involved, for sure.

I also feel that C1 doesn't quite get the color cast issues corrected, on shifts with my 40mm as I still often times will see a blue hue shift. With C1 8, this is much easier to fix as you now have the WB adjustments in layers (local adjustments).

Both the 35XL and 40 HR-W benefit from tilt when working close in. 35XL seems best at F11 to F16 for me, where as the 40 HR-W is really quite good wide open to F11.

Paul
 

Wayne Fox

Workshop Member
Don, a keeper for sure. Also looks like I can live with the DR of my CCD 180 for a while :)
I know the CMOS d800 is supposed to beat the 180, but I just don't see it. I shoot both of them (zeiss glass on the nikon) and they're both really good with dynamic range. Some serious pixel peeping might show a difference, but I don't think I could see it in prints.
 

PeterL

Member
The SK35XL is an excellent lens, but be aware that it does have a fairly large curvature of the field of focus. On the Alpa it "focuses" beyond "infinity" - depending on what you want in focus - edges or center. In practical use it's not a problem at all IMHO, but something to be aware of. On a 33x44 sensor there is no need for center filter. The super thin/light weight SK24XL is sharper than the 35 - but of course only offer very limited movement even on the cropped sensor. Good luck with your selection.

Cheers, -Peter
 

vjbelle

Well-known member
I also have the 35XL in my arsenal and for its limited use it is a great lens. I don't use it for landscape but more for those times when I need a wider field of view with an interior shot or a garden shot at about 20 feet. It does have a unique convex field curvature which I had to get used to but at f11 its a killer lens. I don't use the CF anymore as I have found that I can get just as good results in post. As with any used lens you should test for alignment and the lens should be returnable within a short period of time.

Victor
 

Pemihan

Well-known member
One of the great pleasures also from shooting tech systems is the first day when you go out and fire up the MFDB, tech body and take your first shot with your new Schneider or Rodie wide and then open up the image in Capture One and zoom in. "Holy c@@p" is a very common first statement when you see what these things can really do.
Amen to that!
 

Paul2660

Well-known member
I know the CMOS d800 is supposed to beat the 180, but I just don't see it. I shoot both of them (zeiss glass on the nikon) and they're both really good with dynamic range. Some serious pixel peeping might show a difference, but I don't think I could see it in prints.
Wayne I agree with you when both cameras are at base ISO. But do you feel the same when shooting the 180 at 200? To me the CMOS offers a lot more flexibility for landscape shooting. Low light, or wind or both. Optically the 180 with a tech lens is an excellent solution especially wides.

Paul
 
Re: Deciding between Alpa TC, STC or Cambo 125

I know the CMOS d800 is supposed to beat the 180, but I just don't see it. I shoot both of them (zeiss glass on the nikon) and they're both really good with dynamic range. Some serious pixel peeping might show a difference, but I don't think I could see it in prints.
You will see significant difference in the long exposure territory. The D800E can bash the IQ260 and the IQ280 hard if you shoot directly into the sun and do long exposure of over 2 minutes.
 

jagsiva

Active member
I know the CMOS d800 is supposed to beat the 180, but I just don't see it. I shoot both of them (zeiss glass on the nikon) and they're both really good with dynamic range. Some serious pixel peeping might show a difference, but I don't think I could see it in prints.
Agreed. I shoot the D800/D800E/A7R as well, and another difference for me is that I can do a lot more with the IQ180 file in C1P before it starts falling apart, when compared to the files from my other cameras.
 

jagsiva

Active member
Re: Deciding between Alpa TC, STC or Cambo 125

You will see significant difference in the long exposure territory. The D800E can bash the IQ260 and the IQ280 hard if you shoot directly into the sun and do long exposure of over 2 minutes.
I agree, but these are the situations when I would shoot the Nikon or Sony A7R, and who knows perhaps a FF CMOS MFDB down the road. However, there are several occasions when I'd rather shoot the IQ180. Horses for courses as they say...
 

narikin

New member
I see quite a bit of color cast on my 40mm rod even on center, and find I do need an LCC more often than not. If sky is involved, for sure.

Paul
Agreed. There are times when you don't see the need to use an LCC, and then once you realize it, weeks, months or even years later, you are kicking yourself, as the color imbalance is *all* you can see.

Even if you are straight shooting, with no movements, take an hour to make some LCC frames for your LCC preset library at major apertures/distances. You'll regret it later if you don't: once that back is gone or traded up, you'll never be able to make an LCC again. (LCCs are unique to each specific individual back, not the model type)
 

Don Libby

Well-known member
True enough, I started keeping a library shortly after getting the P45+. Better to have it and not need it than to need it and not have it....
 
Top