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!

Let's begin a discussion on technical cameras

tjv

Active member
Just to confuse things even more, I'd suggest the Linhof Techno and Linhof's new ultra bright GG. :chug:

Question that may be more complicated to answer than i imagine:

What is the best system (Cambo/Arca/Alpa) if I want to use a ground glass with it (i.e. most convenient to use with GG)? Sliding back perhaps?

I've always been used to larger formats and their ground glasses, not to mention the lack of live view in most backs, so a GG would be nice. And LOL at the rear lens cap –*I realize that much earlier when I go "where's there image on the ground glass?". Problem never goes away.
 

Don Libby

Well-known member
Sitting here in my overstuffed easy chair on a quite Sunday afternoon and I asked myself, based on what's been discussed so far, and given that I just won the mega lottery (wish I had) what changes if any would I do.

The answer so far is an easy one - keep using the WRS as I really like it and it has more than paid for itself. Keep the IQ180 as once again I don't think there's a better back on the market (for me).

That leaves us to the lenses. When I brought the WRS I also included a SK35 which served me well. The next lens was a SK 28 that I quickly found wouldn't allow me the movements I wanted (I had based the decision on the 28 as I had used a Mamiya 28 with great success on a P30+ and a P45+). Sold the 28 and bought a SK72 that I still have today. The other lens I got early on was a short barrel 120 that I just recently sold. So, if I had money to burn and based on my current love affair with the 180, I'd buy a HR32.

Since I haven't won the lottery I'll add this. The advent of the IQ series being equipped with a USB port and Microsoft releasing the Surface Pro has caused a major change in using a tech cam. I have found that tethering in the field is not that difficult and has helped advanced the level of landscape photography. Phase One is now pissed at Ken Doo and myself for showing just how easy it is to tether and save a boatload of cash at the same time without the need of upgrading to the IQ-2 series.

Regarding CMOS vs CCD technology - in my opinion only - I enjoy the files I get from CCD over and above anything I've ever gotten using CMOS. Liveview while it might be a nice to have tool could also be used as a crutch. I simply prefer a more traditional method of photography (and yes I realize tethering a SP3 flies in the face of that statement). Once again personal taste and subjective reasoning.

Thank you all for continuing this conversation, I wish I had this amount of knowledge to draw on when I first made the move.

Don
 

Harry

Member
Thanks for the great info everyone.
I have had an Apla system before. The ground glass was a a real pain for me, not to mention juggling $20K backs. Every removal of the back brings dirt into the equation too. Now with the newer backs this is a non issue and really opens up a new safer world.
 

Dogs857

New member
Sitting here in my overstuffed easy chair on a quite Sunday afternoon and I asked myself, based on what's been discussed so far, and given that I just won the mega lottery (wish I had) what changes if any would I do.
This is a good question.

Money no object I would keep the Cambo, it's proving to be an excellent body. I really like the indents for shift and rise. The Arca doesn't have this and I always felt that the zero setting was open the interpretation. It's not hard to line up, but I would have been a lot happier with an indent.
Back - I'd buy the IQ180. That thing was amazing. Sure I would lose long exposure capability but it is only a very small part of what I do. I could always keep the 45+ for that anyway as I would now be super rich :)
Lenses, I would need to add the 32HR and the 120XL. Probably add a 60XL for super stitching as well. While the 43XL is not supposed to play well with the 180 with a 32 in the bag my wide is covered.

If money was an issue (far more likely scenario) I would wait for the funds to pick up a good used 180, sell the 45+, the 24XL and 43XL and pick up a HR40. With the HR40 and HR70 on the IQ180 you have most bases covered and an excellent setup.

If money was even more of an issue I would keep what I have now and just enjoy my photography. In fact that is what I am doing :D
 

f8orbust

Active member
...as far as pricing goes here is an example of pricing of similar kits...


Now, I wonder what systems* Digital Transitions sell? Hmm, let's see...

With all due respect, to see a sales pitch masquerading as 'advice' doesn't do this thread any favors whatsoever.

IMHO the spirit of the OP would be better served if dealer's removed their corporate hats before posting.

Just my 2c.

Jim

*and no, the A-series doesn't count - it's just an oddly contrived 'TC+DB bundle' marketed as a 'mirrorless' camera. Go figure.
 
Last edited:

dchew

Well-known member
What wold I do differently? Not much besides get out more and take more pictures!

I would not sell the 43xl. I almost always regret selling lenses. I never should have bought the 100hr, but now I have an f/4 portrait lens for my newly aquired TC. That and the 43 would have made a pretty good walking kit. Not related to tech cameras, but I should have bought the 9900 instead of the 7900. Go big or go home. :(

Dave
 
Last edited:

Wayne Fox

Workshop Member
(I apologize for the long post, sitting in my room at the MGM Grand a little bored, vegas really isn’t my kind of town.)

Read through this thread and was going to quote things I agreed or disagreed with, but decided just to add my “history” and how I ended up shooting tech for most of what I do.

I shot medium format film since I began my career as a portrait wedding photographer in 1975. My first foray into serious digital was the Kodak 560 shortly after it was introduced. I later moved to a Canon 1ds, which was a big step up, but still pretty weak for what I was after because my interest had moved away from people photography to landscape photography. So I moved to the Kodak DCS back, soon followed by the p25, p45, p45+, p65, p65+ and finally to the IQ180 which I still use.

The point of all of this is about how deeply entrenched I was in the medium format workflow and shooting style. My first try with a tech camera was a alpa 12max with the Rodie 28, 40 and 70 and a couple of other lenses (don’t remember which). I was using the p65+ at the time. It was a disaster - I just couldn’t get my head around the workflow, focusing and composition challenges. Sold all of that and moved back to the DF where I was pretty happy, other than how heavy everything was and sharpness issues with some of the glass.

A couple of years ago I attended a Rodney Lough workshop in Yosemite. I had met him at his Vegas gallery and seen his work in person on several occasions and the quality was impressive. He had moved to a digital back and tech combination because he could no longer buy Astia 8x10 film and didn’t like the rendering of other chrome films. During that workshop I watched him use an Arca Swiss rL3di, (he uses only 3 lenses, the 40, 70, and 180 rodenstock). He stitches almost all of his digital work, if he has to get it in one frame he will still try to use 8x10 from his diminishing supply of Astia in his freezer.

I decided to try tech again. Because of the workshop and also equally because of Jack and other discussions of the arca on this forum I decided to try Arca ... mainly for the tilt and focusing helical. Lenses were 40 and 70 hr-w and 150. I added the Kapture Group sliding back and release system as well. I also setup to shoot panos using a Manfrotto pano rotater and a sliding assembly to get the correct nodal points centered.

All of this showed up as I was headed to Eastern Washington (palouse). I put it all together for the first time as I setup to shoot and ended up with a very nice image (well I thinks it’s nice, you can see it here if you want. 9 shot stitch.

What kept me going was how light the pack was. Compared to the DF system (which now included 28, 45, 55, 75-150 and 240 lenses) significantly easier to pack around. I calibrated all lenses, created my own focusing charts which included depth of field distances for various f stops and then put them into my iPhone. I tried focusing with the ground glass and really couldn’t do it well, so the ground glass was relegated to composition, and focusing was done with hyperfocal distances based on my tested settings. Since nearly everything included infinity it worked pretty well. As I became more comfortable with the workflow I found I began to work faster (although still slower than with the DF). I was still a little frustrated with focusing for anything other than infinity so I found myself using lots of focus stacking, which is easy to shoot on the arca, but doing so as part of a stitch makes it complicated and adds serious workflow time in post,

What really changed everything for me was the addition of the variND filter and live view focusing and composition. I found I could focus quickly enough I didn’t bother with the charts any more, I found I could actually manage to use tilt effectively and quickly for depth of field when it was possible. Late last year I gave up on the sliding back and switched to the RotaMount (not to be confused with the RotaSlide). I no longer have a ground glass in the camera bag. I really like the RotaMount because I don’t ever have to take the back off the camera except when packing everything up.

I tried the 23, decided it was too wide and finicky and switched to the 28 with center filter and really like this lens if I can’t stitch the 40. I’ve also added th 90mm Rodenstock which is really sharp and has a big image circle, 120 Schneider (also very sharp), and have the 180 Rodenstock on the way (sold the 150). If hiking in, I usually only take 3 or 4 of the lenses, depending on what I’m shooting.

I still occasionally use the DF system, mainly when I want a little more reach, the 240 really is a nice lens. Sometimes I know there will be a ton of possible compositions and I will need to work quickly, so I may opt for the DF.

So that is my journey, I’m very content with my current system and the quality of what I get. I also have a full Nikon d800 setup with zeiss 35, 50, and 100 lens, which is spectacular, and a Sony a7r as well but I enjoy the deliberate nature of the tech workflow now, and love the results I get.

What would I do “different” - I guess my story already sort of relates that. I have nothing against the Alpa and based on what I now know and my current abilities would probably be just as happy, since it was more about me than the system.

There are two things I don’t like about the Arca. One has been mentioned by another poster ... the lack of indents for 0 on the shifts. Fortunately the tilt control does have one so it’s easy to make sure it’s set right. The other is the way the lens mounts in the camera, it’s a little bit of a pain to make sure it’s aligned and on tight and correct, and it’s easy to get just a tiny bit of grit in the grooves which are a little hard to clean out.

It’s been a long journey, and to paraphrase Steve Jobs, sometimes “the journey is part of the reward”.
 

dchew

Well-known member
...120 Schneider (also very sharp), and have the 180 Rodenstock on the way (sold the 150).
Cut it out Wayne. I know you and Jagsiva are ganging up on me to pick up the sk120 asph. Probably subsidized by some other thread lurker who is eying my sk150.

Only out of my cold dead hands, as they say.
;)

Dave
 

archivue

Active member
Question that may be more complicated to answer than i imagine:

What is the best system (Cambo/Arca/Alpa) if I want to use a ground glass with it (i.e. most convenient to use with GG)? Sliding back perhaps?
i've bought an arca RM3D for that reason... and the top of it, you can use your lens on a monorail camera as well !
 

Don Libby

Well-known member
If ever there was a location ready made for a tech cam it's the Palouse. Our first visit there was last year and we plan 2-return trips this year.

We never travel light any more since installing a "truck vault" in our Raptor. When we go out we take everything, complete WRS kit, complete DF kit and 2-Sony A7r (one converted to full spectrum) and in their own individual bags. The weight difference between the WRS and DF is amazing.

Like Wayne and others I use my tech cam much more than any other system. The DF is used for wildlife and those situations where things are moving so fast that it's easier that the WRS. I'll also use the DF on scouting trips where we haven't been and are out walking around (like the Grand Canyon) and want to get a feel for things. This is the great thing of being able to have the same capture system on multiple cameras. The Sony FS is more of a toy camera for me, while it's now Sandys full time camera having totally left Canon.

Don
 

Geoff

Well-known member
Most folks here are Alpa, Arca and Cambo users - all good equipment. So from another perspective, the Techno. Its a more traditional view camera setup, with a rigid back allowing only rise/fall, with side shifting either from the front standard or with a stitching back. Some might not care for that, but its main benefit is use of simple view camera lenses on a board, with all your movements (tilt and swing too) without needing any special mount. For me, that flexibility was attractive, especially since I didn't know what lenses I would prefer over time. It also allows for easy (cheap) trying of different lenses.

The major use change in a tech camera for me was first, the dedication to shooting from tripod only. That was easy enough, but harder was setup in the field, especially when using a stitching back. I like to walk and shoot, so a fixed setup point at one place isn't ideal - and its not like you want to walking with the stitching back on. For this , the pancake cameras are easier to use.

One way to deal with this is to directly attach the back to the camera, and find some way to focus. Surprisingly, this works - you set the lens stops to infinity, and use hyper focal (f11) for landscape shots. You can chimp for composition (Usually 3-5 shots gets the focus if other than infinity), and sling the camera over your back for short walking. I'm not a fan of taking backs on and off - too much dirt and risk.

TJV is exploring a CMOS back on the Techno; others have used ND filters and live view. One could also imagine that a faster back (say a Credo) on the camera might make chimping more workable.

Use of a stitching back allows GG composition and focus, which is good fun, and focusing isn't that hard. Torger's analysis on focus is pretty much spot on, but its pretty easy with the 12X loupe. Of course, I'm not doing much critical shooting close up (say 8') where the DOF is really small - and for that one would need to check the files anyway. If you really want to shoot wide open at close distances, then there might be better ways to go. But use of the GG allows you to consider what stitching might look like before you shoot.

Linhof makes two stitching backs, a really long one (essentially 3 parts wide), where the GG is always covered, even when the back is shifted on the camera. While ideal, its heavy and makes for a great wind sail. They also have a shorter one (2 parts wide), which works fine too. My Leaf AFI back mounts won't work with their shorter back, so two alternatives:

Kapture Group makes a 3-way back that will take almost any mount (front and back). Nicely made, easy to use, and all sorts of formats can be done with it. Issues: it won't focus the 35mm lens (it sits too far back), and more importantly, the digital back mount is held in by a sturdy but spring-loaded clip which is fine for standing still, but not foolproof if moving about.

Silvestri make a stitching back with a lock to hold the back in place, and it also focuses the 35mm (on a recessed lens board). But its not as flexible as the KG, nor as easy to use. The KG ground glass (probably Maxwell) is better, you can pretty much focus in daytime almost without cover.
 

torger

Active member
Tech cams are generally considered as an expensive way to get the sharpest wide angle corners. To me it's much different. Buying mostly second hand and chosing the best price/performance options the cost is about the same as a DSLR system with a couple of bird teles. The "magic" formula is view camera (Linhof Techno in my case) Schneider Digitar lenses and Hassy 50MP Kodak. I have seven lenses in my system, including wides with unrestricted movements. Resolution is not the same as IQ180 on Rodie32 but image quality is certainly not far behind, and freedom of movements is greater.

What I wanted was large format without having to mess with film, and I think I got that. Tilt swing and movements on all focal lengths, even the wides, and the 50MP Hassy back exceeds 4x5 film in quality I think. For me this is a good offer at a reasonable price. A new Alpa system with Rodie wides and new Phase One back would not work out for me. Less flexible and just too high cost.

Getting systems just below the highest end and getting some components second hand is an option I think should be suggested more often. My shooting style don't gain that much from the latest in DR, and my eyes are still good enough for the ground glass, and I am sure I am not the only one. I do enjoy and use movements on the lenses a lot though, and the flexibility I have on the Techno with seven lenses from 35 to 180 (all fitting in one bag by the way) can't be found in a SLR system, unless you crop and stitch. I prefer the one shot image with little or no cropping though, it's just more satisfying.
 

Don Libby

Well-known member
Just remembered that I had serious lust for a Linhof at one time which in turn made me look at the Cambo Ultima 23. Still wouldn't mind either just so long as I could find someone to carry it...
 

mmbma

Active member
I went head first into the Alpa tech cams when I saw a great deal on an Alpa XY on this very forumn. Then I acquired two lenses, 24xl and the 47xl schneiders. I sold the 24 due to it's small image circle that limited movements, and I still have the 47xl digitar, which is my favourite lens: a good balance between sharpness and versatility. Last year, I sold my XY because I just don't use its extreme movements enough, and got myself a SWA.

I gave up on longer focal length because for me, tech cameras really shine in the ultra wides. I have no doubt that longer focal lenses are equally good, but I prefer my HY6 systems for longer focals, and the newer rollei glasses are equally outstanding.

So now, i trimmed my ALpa set up to just a SWA (for the shift and the occasional handheld shots), and 47xl. I use an Aptus 12 back that can be shared between the Alpa and my Hy6.

It's meeting my needs now, but somewhere in the future I might consieder a wider lens (like the 32 HR), and going for an Alpa max
 

tjv

Active member
With regards to the Linhof Techno, Linhof now make a third stitching slide especially for backs with live view. This new slide is neither big nor cumbersome (like the older stitching backs with integrated GG,) and allows for stitching in all directions, if utilising the back rise / fall in combination with the slides movements.

I absolutely love my Techno. As most know, I am using it to shoot film and I scan with my Imacon 949, or works Hasselblad X1. With the Rodenstock 55mm APO SD and Rodenstock 90mm HR W I get stunning results, but the cost of materials and slow degradation of quality labs to process C-41 film is forcing me to seriously consider digital.

Anyway, the Techno was the most attractive system for me because I'd been shooting almost exclusively with a Technika V for some years. The workflow and GG experience was a very important part of my workflow and the way I visualised my final shot. I tried the Techno and found the smaller GG to be vey sharp and, contrary to popular belief, I didn't find the smaller GG to be any harder to judge composition, etc. In fact, the Silvestri GG which I have is far sharper than the (brand new) GG and fresnel I had mounted on my Technika. With a 12x loupe, focus is exceptionally easy, admittedly on film which is more forgiving than digital.

With CMOS technology I firmly believe that the Techno might now be the unsung hero of the technical camera world. It's comparitively light and quite portable – especially considering the lenses don't need funny mounts – and it's easy to use with any lens, from wide to tele. Thank goodness you don't need strange spacers etc on your lenses like Alpa...

The ONLY thing I don't like about my Techno is that the lens horizontal shift mechanism zero marker is slightly off. I think Torger has reported this is the same on his Techno. I am going to send my camera back to Linhof Studio at some point to get this fixed. It's not a big deal as I know where the zero point is, but I want it perfect and am a little sick of having to remember where neutral is!

Lastly, with regards to the new short slider for live view backs, you can also use it with the new bright GG if you want. I think it just requires an adaptor. That way you have the best of both worlds. Might not be great to swap backs out in the field, but in the studio or inside, it might not be a problem for dust, etc.
 

Pemihan

Well-known member
First I came into the MF world by pure coincidence. I had a Canon 400mm DO IS lens for sale and a guy wanted to trade his DM22 kit for it which I did. Didn't take long for me to get hooked and looking for info on lenses I stumbled upon GetDPI and then I got sucked into the tech cam world and began lusting...

I looked at Alpa, but the only one that fit the bill (both shift and rise/fall) was the Max (with shift adapter) and since I do a lot of hiking and backpacking to remote locations I found it to be too big and heavy.
Then coincidence (again) had it that a dealer in Ireland sold a Cambo WRS kit with SK35XL and SK47XL for a reasonable price and I jumped on it and I haven't looked back since.

A year later I upgraded the back to a Leaf Aptus-II 7 and got a SK24XL and SK120 Asph in T/S mount as well.
The Aptus was upgraded to a IQ160 last spring and in the same process I sold the 24XL, 35XL and 47XL and got the HR40 and SK60XL instead, both in T/S mounts.
Recently I got a great deal on a SK150 so now I have the 40HR T/S, SK60 T/S, SK120 Asph T/S and SK150.

I kinda miss a lens a bit wider than the 40 so I might get one at a later time but the 40 will "have to do" for now :angel:
Oh yes and the first Cambo WRS 1000 has been upgraded to a WRS 1250 with the nice wooden handles.

I love the slower process of shooting with the tech cam. I even have arranged with Don to buy his ground glass solution to go even slower and try to get everything right in the first shot :)
 

torger

Active member
Just a note on long lenses, I mostly use my 180 for "intimate landscape" scenes, rather than shooting long distance stuff. Tilt is rarely used with it (has happened though) but shift is often used to align background elements or get things more upright.

I could probably live and make images without movements, but when I have them I have adopted a style which makes use of them. Composition becomes more interesting, challenging and rewarding when you have movements in the equation.
 

Pemihan

Well-known member
As I wrote above I'm thinking of adding a wider lens to my kit.
The 32HR would be an obvious choice, but it is very expensive and heavy and somewhat fragile. Also quite close to the 40HR but of course I could sell that.

Anyway I'm thinking of the Rodie 28 instead, but the 70mm image circle is quite small compared to the 32 leaving almost no room for shifting.
I have read elsewhere that it' is possible to shift about 6mm with a full frame back (I have an IQ160) before hitting the disc inside the lens. Can anyone confirm that?
 

Paul2660

Well-known member
The 28 Rodie will allow only allow 6mm of shift on your IQ160. This is because Rosensrick uses a device inside the lens to show you when you hit the image circle. They do this in all their lenses in fact.

You will start to see a hard black vignette at 6mm and is you go any further the vignette becomes very damaging to the file.

This is most unfortunate as I believe the lens would easily make a clean 100 to 12mm shift. I have taken mine that far and the parts of the image not ruined by the vignette are very good.

The 32 starts to show this issue at around 16mm is shift due to the larger IC.

The 28 also benefits from the CF. The CF is the same part for both the 23 and the 28.

Paul
 

Pemihan

Well-known member
Thanks Paul.

So it is possible to shift lets say 5mm with the 28HR without any issues?

Peter
 
Last edited:
Top