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!
Ideal aperture for Schneider Digitar 35mm 5.6 XL?
- Thread starter tashley
- Start date
tashley
Subscriber Member
Update: Silvestri Response
I sent the following to my dealer and the reply was as then follows:
MY EMAIL
I've done a series of tests and I think I was right in my initial impression: the setup as it stands is backfocussing. So if I take a shot at a subject distance of 1.5 metres focussed using the glass screen, the place of focus falls a few inches further away than the point on which I focus. If I then use a tape measure and set focus using that method, the same thing happens.
If I point the camera out the window and focus using the glass screen on buildings in the middle and far distance, the image is blurred at ALL distances even at F8 thru 16.
If I then set focus at infinity, everything is unsharp but if I pull focus forward to between infinity and 5 metres, things improve and if I set the distance at five metres, I get correct infinity focus and the whole frame looks pretty decent too.
So presumably the lens mount needs shimming or shaving?
ANSWER FROM SILVESTRI (via my dealer)
This 35XL lens was collimated for a Bicam that had a measure of 12,8mm, so a little lower respect to the theoretical measure of 12,95mm. Mounting the lens on a different body, the lens cannot reach the infinite measure.
It is easy to set:
1) place the helical focus mount on infinite.
2) unscrew of 1 turn the three radial screws placed on the circular scale of the helicoide.
3) force the rotation of the helicoide over the infinite acting on the rubber piece.
4) at the same time, check the focus to infinite on the ground glass.
5) when the image is sharp, screw back the radial screws.
In case you go over the infinite position make the following operation:
1) stop on the position where there is focus to infinite after having partially unscrewed the screws.
2) keeping the helicoide rubber piece steady, rotate the meter scale until making the infinite mark collimate with the reference mark.
3) screw the screws back in.
Attention:
the distances we are talking about are in the measures of 1/10 of millimeter so the movements has to be made carefully. This lens in particular is very sensibal to the focusing distance so just a few 1/100s of millimeter are sufficient to go out og collimation.
____________________
Now I have to things to wonder about:
1) I am finding that the lens is focussing PAST infinity when set at infinity or when focussed on very distant objects using the loupe. However, the Silvestri guys say 'Mounting the lens on a different body, the lens cannot reach the infinite measure.' So what do I make of that? Wait for a week or two while the whole lot goes back to Italy ( I am SO not going to do this myself... not unless they pay me a salary!) only to discover that the bad 'collimation' is not the only problem?
2) Should I just give in and get a Cambo or Alpa or, finally, admit that the Gods of Medium Format Digital really don't like me and buy a Nikon D3X?
Just to make all this even more fun, my Phamiya body went off to Denmark for FW yesterday, so convinced was I that this new setup would work out of the box.
I really am stupid, aren't I?
I sent the following to my dealer and the reply was as then follows:
MY EMAIL
I've done a series of tests and I think I was right in my initial impression: the setup as it stands is backfocussing. So if I take a shot at a subject distance of 1.5 metres focussed using the glass screen, the place of focus falls a few inches further away than the point on which I focus. If I then use a tape measure and set focus using that method, the same thing happens.
If I point the camera out the window and focus using the glass screen on buildings in the middle and far distance, the image is blurred at ALL distances even at F8 thru 16.
If I then set focus at infinity, everything is unsharp but if I pull focus forward to between infinity and 5 metres, things improve and if I set the distance at five metres, I get correct infinity focus and the whole frame looks pretty decent too.
So presumably the lens mount needs shimming or shaving?
ANSWER FROM SILVESTRI (via my dealer)
This 35XL lens was collimated for a Bicam that had a measure of 12,8mm, so a little lower respect to the theoretical measure of 12,95mm. Mounting the lens on a different body, the lens cannot reach the infinite measure.
It is easy to set:
1) place the helical focus mount on infinite.
2) unscrew of 1 turn the three radial screws placed on the circular scale of the helicoide.
3) force the rotation of the helicoide over the infinite acting on the rubber piece.
4) at the same time, check the focus to infinite on the ground glass.
5) when the image is sharp, screw back the radial screws.
In case you go over the infinite position make the following operation:
1) stop on the position where there is focus to infinite after having partially unscrewed the screws.
2) keeping the helicoide rubber piece steady, rotate the meter scale until making the infinite mark collimate with the reference mark.
3) screw the screws back in.
Attention:
the distances we are talking about are in the measures of 1/10 of millimeter so the movements has to be made carefully. This lens in particular is very sensibal to the focusing distance so just a few 1/100s of millimeter are sufficient to go out og collimation.
____________________
Now I have to things to wonder about:
1) I am finding that the lens is focussing PAST infinity when set at infinity or when focussed on very distant objects using the loupe. However, the Silvestri guys say 'Mounting the lens on a different body, the lens cannot reach the infinite measure.' So what do I make of that? Wait for a week or two while the whole lot goes back to Italy ( I am SO not going to do this myself... not unless they pay me a salary!) only to discover that the bad 'collimation' is not the only problem?
2) Should I just give in and get a Cambo or Alpa or, finally, admit that the Gods of Medium Format Digital really don't like me and buy a Nikon D3X?
Just to make all this even more fun, my Phamiya body went off to Denmark for FW yesterday, so convinced was I that this new setup would work out of the box.
I really am stupid, aren't I?
gogopix
Subscriber
get a horse
Tim:1) By loupe on ground glass
2) By tape measure
3) By knowing that a building which is four miles away is for all practical purposes at infinity for a 35mm lens at F11....
1) Except with view lenses, infinity at the stop is usually BEYOND infinity and not actual infinity and therefore inaccurate, and measured focus as marked on the lens or camera scales is genreally NOT accurate since the lenses all have varying degrees of back-focus depending on which system they are mounted on...
2) What power is your loupe, and did you check it for PERFECT diopter adjustment for YOUR eyes before use?
3) In short, you need to understand you will never get to perfect focus with that system regardless, the best you can hope for is very close to perfect and then rely on aperture to take care of the rest.
Cheers,
tashley
Subscriber Member
Thanks Jack. I kinda know most of that. Trust me, this setup was so obviously of of whack that the niceties were superfluous and in any event Silvestri have confirmed that this pens was collimated for a different body and is indeed therefore in need of treatment!
Tim,
I really do find it curious that virtually EVERY piece of kit you have obtained over the past 6 months is so severely out of whack. It is so statistically odd, there has to be a geographical connection -- like perhaps your delivery people slam your stuff around significantly and purposefully before delivering it...
I really do find it curious that virtually EVERY piece of kit you have obtained over the past 6 months is so severely out of whack. It is so statistically odd, there has to be a geographical connection -- like perhaps your delivery people slam your stuff around significantly and purposefully before delivering it...
may be this is slipping through the cracks, but when I use a technical camera, the tape measure/distance settings are lowest in value; next is the loupe/ground glass (which is subject to variation between ground glass plane and DB focal plane), finally, the only absolutely accurate method is the image on a tethered computer. It is pushing the envelope to demand "tethered" accuracy from the other methods
i wouldn't fault the lens; instead the register between gglass and DB, both in terms of absolute postioning and repeatability.
i wouldn't fault the lens; instead the register between gglass and DB, both in terms of absolute postioning and repeatability.
Don Libby
Well-known member
Tim
Do me a huge favor and please give me advance warning before you set foot in Arizona or fly over for that matter!:ROTFL:
I think Jack has something ... I'm on very good terms with my UPS, FedEx and DHL delivery persons.:angel:
I really mean this when I say I wish you the best of luck in 2009 - hell is has to be better than 2008.:thumbs:
don
Do me a huge favor and please give me advance warning before you set foot in Arizona or fly over for that matter!:ROTFL:
I think Jack has something ... I'm on very good terms with my UPS, FedEx and DHL delivery persons.:angel:
I really mean this when I say I wish you the best of luck in 2009 - hell is has to be better than 2008.:thumbs:
don
Guy Mancuso
Administrator, Instructor
I agree and i would test this all out on a tethered laptop and see if the slide focusing is off or the back distance is off. My bet is that slide adapter going from focusing to back is off. There is nothing wrong with that lens is my bet but the distance between that slide adapter. Frankly that part of the system i would send back. Get laser distance finder and half the battle is over. Also i would test just the back attached and measure 10 ft on the lens and see if the numbers match up using the tethered setup.
Frankly and i mean this very politely . No one has this much ****ty luck
Frankly and i mean this very politely . No one has this much ****ty luck
tashley
Subscriber Member
Thanks guys,
I suspect that more people have these sorts of outcomes than we might comfortably admit. It's my training since I first entered Leica World that if you want great results you have to accept that the gear is very finely calibrated and that you therefore have to test everything you buy, rigourously and immediately. I always do this and I always find the 'issues' straight away as a result but I know that most people have a different approach and that's fine. Strokes for folks.
But I do also know from the good ol' bad ol' days when I first found that many Leica M 35mm lenses suffer focus shift that some people at least (blushes will here be spared) assured me that their lenses were perfect and it later turned out that they really weren't. In the meantime, every time a new piece of not quite calibrated gear arrives and I post it, any number of well-meaning folks will question my test methodology, experience, eyesight, whatever and in fact these are not at issue. I have an email from Silvestri clearly stating that this lens was calibrated for a different body and back and will not work on mine without adjustment. That really is the end of the story.
Silvestri don't do shimming, as it turns out. They keep a unique serial number record of every bit of kit they sell and each bit is calibrated to work with certain specific others. Somehow my lens and slider and body got separated in the wash and do not belong to each other.
As for how much bad luck I have... well, who knows. My dealer doesn't seem to slam stuff around and I sure don't do so myself. Sometimes a bad run occurs statistically. Maybe Karma owes me a poke in the eye. But as I see it, this stuff is extremely temperamental, and prone to misalignments and over optimistic designs based on engineering concepts not full evolved from film to digital. And then there's me, testing, comparing, questioning and wanting stellar results because I have seen that this gear can produce them when set up properly.
If you ask me it's not bad luck: it's the way this product works if you look at it really carefully. Boring but true. But like I observed earlier, you can't just buy perfect image making technology - you have to work at it too. And that narrows the base of people who will achieve it.
No bad, eh?
I suspect that more people have these sorts of outcomes than we might comfortably admit. It's my training since I first entered Leica World that if you want great results you have to accept that the gear is very finely calibrated and that you therefore have to test everything you buy, rigourously and immediately. I always do this and I always find the 'issues' straight away as a result but I know that most people have a different approach and that's fine. Strokes for folks.
But I do also know from the good ol' bad ol' days when I first found that many Leica M 35mm lenses suffer focus shift that some people at least (blushes will here be spared) assured me that their lenses were perfect and it later turned out that they really weren't. In the meantime, every time a new piece of not quite calibrated gear arrives and I post it, any number of well-meaning folks will question my test methodology, experience, eyesight, whatever and in fact these are not at issue. I have an email from Silvestri clearly stating that this lens was calibrated for a different body and back and will not work on mine without adjustment. That really is the end of the story.
Silvestri don't do shimming, as it turns out. They keep a unique serial number record of every bit of kit they sell and each bit is calibrated to work with certain specific others. Somehow my lens and slider and body got separated in the wash and do not belong to each other.
As for how much bad luck I have... well, who knows. My dealer doesn't seem to slam stuff around and I sure don't do so myself. Sometimes a bad run occurs statistically. Maybe Karma owes me a poke in the eye. But as I see it, this stuff is extremely temperamental, and prone to misalignments and over optimistic designs based on engineering concepts not full evolved from film to digital. And then there's me, testing, comparing, questioning and wanting stellar results because I have seen that this gear can produce them when set up properly.
If you ask me it's not bad luck: it's the way this product works if you look at it really carefully. Boring but true. But like I observed earlier, you can't just buy perfect image making technology - you have to work at it too. And that narrows the base of people who will achieve it.
No bad, eh?
No offense, but I disagree. I got a Mamiya 80D that worked perfectly right out of the gate, and still does. I got a Mamiya 150D that worked perfectly out of the gate and still does. I bought second hand 35, 55, and 300 lenses, and they are all very sharp, and focus properly and evenly across the frame. This is not saying all Mamiya lenses are good, but I think it lends that many are good out of the box and it would be unlucky to get several in a row that were not...
On M lenses, I test too and I would agree that about 50% of the used copies are out of calibration and need adjustment, but every new one I've ever purchased was spot on. But then in fairness, the M body has a far more complex mechanical relationship with its lenses than does the Mamiya or the simpler Silvestri.
Which brings me to your Silvestri. You say the lens is set up for a different body -- but I'd suggest that's almost irrelevant. If it was in focus on the GG, it should be in focus on the back if the sliding back is assembled properly, and if it's new, it should be perfect. And then, focus should be spot on regardless of what the distance markings say. The markings, it could be argued, are in fact are irrelevant unless you plan on using them for precise focus, which is a method virtually nobody wanting the precision you are after would use, right?
Which brings me back to my original assertion -- I think you have been incredibly unlucky with your gear, at least as it respects this particular Mamiya, Phase and now Silvestri purchase.
I sincerely hope things get better soon -- you are clearly due for some good luck
,
PeterA
Well-known member
tashley may be incredibly 'unlucky' Jack, and for sure it sometimes reads like that - - however I would like to say that the threads are very useful for people who may be considering this or that or the other thing.
for example tashley - I'd lbe interested in your thinking rationale behind your Silvestri purchase decision. I am ssuming you checked out the various alternative offerings from Rollie ( xact) Linhof, Arca Swiss and Sinar?
It seems the bucks you paid pretty much allowed for any of these alternatives to be seriously considered - so why the Silvestri?
Pete
- however I would like to say that the threads are very useful for people who may be considering this or that or the other thing.for example tashley - I'd lbe interested in your thinking rationale behind your Silvestri purchase decision. I am ssuming you checked out the various alternative offerings from Rollie ( xact) Linhof, Arca Swiss and Sinar?
It seems the bucks you paid pretty much allowed for any of these alternatives to be seriously considered - so why the Silvestri?
Pete
My oh my....
Tim,
Seems like your luck is not the best but then you seem to have fallen into a pool full of very snarky sharks. I have been reading the responses with some interest that has changed to trepidation as the thread has steadily gone from moderately bad to worse.
While this site has maintained a very even tone since its inception it seems to have taken a bit of a turn to the dark side. I apologize to anyone who may be offended by my comments but I feel that Tim has taken a fair share of hits, not altogether unwarranted but still out of character for the forum.
As I mentioned in a previous thread I found that the calibration system for Alpa backs could be a little suspect for the digital backs and MF lenses. I presently have an Alpa Rodenstock Apo Grandagon that is not focused correctly with regards to the scale on the lens...rather than messing with shims I have "self-calibrated" then lens/back combo and will check my next lens for variance. If both are at the same distance error on the scale the shim makes sense...if not then I will recall both of the lens variances and use them respectively. Alpa themselves recommend not shimming the 35 and 24 XL lenses on their FAQ concerning shimming backs.
So now that you have the Silvestri why not make it work...Lens Align or set out a few targets at variable distances and measure the distance and scale variances for differing F stops...you will most probably find that the lens is exceedingly sharp at a very small circle of sharpness ... much smaller than you expect. The scale will be off consistently in that if 1 meter on the scale equals 6 feet then 2 meter will equal 12 feet etc. Use this information to make pictures. The lines on the lens are arbitrary and although it would be great if they matched your lens you can rescale it in your head. I am suprised that Silvestri does not offer shims...why do you think Alpa does? Because not everthing works like it should in the real world.
Tim, your bad luck is related in part to your expectations which may be a little high with regards to scale focused cameras. Why do you think Guy walked from his Alpa TC? As a pro he did not want to play the is it focused or not game. Great pics but with the AF of the Mamiya Leaf or H2 H3 you do not play that game...take the shot sink the ball move on. When you take a shot why not bracket the focus...not like you need to conserve film. Import the captures and pick the best one...make do with the hand you have been played. I would recommend that you develop a very good relationship with your dealer and if it does not work, return it. Make them prove their product as for this kind of money, the Leica M8 almost focused, must be back focus, just does not cut it.
Marc Williams, Guy M and many others have sent lenses and bodies in to have them calibrated to appropriate specs...its an old story still occurring with the technical cameras but less so with MF autocameras. I enjoy my Alpa but wonder if the small incremental gain of the Rod or Sch MF lenses is worth the imprecise focus dance it entails. Take the H3D close your eyes and it still focuses if you happen to point at the right thing...you do need to point it.
Like all of us, you are attracted to exotic high end equipment. Silvestri is a bit player in a market full of bit players, it just happens to be one of the smaller players. Less support and less information from others using the same equipment who can offer suggestions from their struggles to make things work. A Guaneri is not a Strad but I would not turn down either.
So, keep a level head...enjoy your purchase and find how to make it perform for your needs. You have found that the emotional support here at the present is shall I say a bit lacking...attempts at humor aside. We do share your joy in the pursuit of the capture and hope that you will make it a success. Why not post some winners and hide the losers as you work out the small details with the new system. Long term play the cards you have been dealt well and let luck fall where she may.
Sorry for the run on...
With warm regards,
Bob
Tim,
Seems like your luck is not the best but then you seem to have fallen into a pool full of very snarky sharks. I have been reading the responses with some interest that has changed to trepidation as the thread has steadily gone from moderately bad to worse.
While this site has maintained a very even tone since its inception it seems to have taken a bit of a turn to the dark side. I apologize to anyone who may be offended by my comments but I feel that Tim has taken a fair share of hits, not altogether unwarranted but still out of character for the forum.
As I mentioned in a previous thread I found that the calibration system for Alpa backs could be a little suspect for the digital backs and MF lenses. I presently have an Alpa Rodenstock Apo Grandagon that is not focused correctly with regards to the scale on the lens...rather than messing with shims I have "self-calibrated" then lens/back combo and will check my next lens for variance. If both are at the same distance error on the scale the shim makes sense...if not then I will recall both of the lens variances and use them respectively. Alpa themselves recommend not shimming the 35 and 24 XL lenses on their FAQ concerning shimming backs.
So now that you have the Silvestri why not make it work...Lens Align or set out a few targets at variable distances and measure the distance and scale variances for differing F stops...you will most probably find that the lens is exceedingly sharp at a very small circle of sharpness ... much smaller than you expect. The scale will be off consistently in that if 1 meter on the scale equals 6 feet then 2 meter will equal 12 feet etc. Use this information to make pictures. The lines on the lens are arbitrary and although it would be great if they matched your lens you can rescale it in your head. I am suprised that Silvestri does not offer shims...why do you think Alpa does? Because not everthing works like it should in the real world.
Tim, your bad luck is related in part to your expectations which may be a little high with regards to scale focused cameras. Why do you think Guy walked from his Alpa TC? As a pro he did not want to play the is it focused or not game. Great pics but with the AF of the Mamiya Leaf or H2 H3 you do not play that game...take the shot sink the ball move on. When you take a shot why not bracket the focus...not like you need to conserve film. Import the captures and pick the best one...make do with the hand you have been played. I would recommend that you develop a very good relationship with your dealer and if it does not work, return it. Make them prove their product as for this kind of money, the Leica M8 almost focused, must be back focus, just does not cut it.
Marc Williams, Guy M and many others have sent lenses and bodies in to have them calibrated to appropriate specs...its an old story still occurring with the technical cameras but less so with MF autocameras. I enjoy my Alpa but wonder if the small incremental gain of the Rod or Sch MF lenses is worth the imprecise focus dance it entails. Take the H3D close your eyes and it still focuses if you happen to point at the right thing...you do need to point it.
Like all of us, you are attracted to exotic high end equipment. Silvestri is a bit player in a market full of bit players, it just happens to be one of the smaller players. Less support and less information from others using the same equipment who can offer suggestions from their struggles to make things work. A Guaneri is not a Strad but I would not turn down either.
So, keep a level head...enjoy your purchase and find how to make it perform for your needs. You have found that the emotional support here at the present is shall I say a bit lacking...attempts at humor aside. We do share your joy in the pursuit of the capture and hope that you will make it a success. Why not post some winners and hide the losers as you work out the small details with the new system. Long term play the cards you have been dealt well and let luck fall where she may.
Sorry for the run on...
With warm regards,
Bob
Bob, very interesting answer.
I have to thoughts:
1) Personally owning a digital back I am also quite interested in a Alpa or Cambo or something comparable. However I am really not sure yet how often I would take advantage of the better IQ of those Rodenstock and Schneider lenses. I am also not sure yet if the manual metering and focusing and more difficult framing would lead to a more carefull compostion and crativity or if it would just slow me down. Probably I will have to find out myself.
2)Guessing distance: Just recently I took some images with my Nikon 24PCE. Focusing it through the viewfinder or live view made clear, that even at infinity a very slight change in focus will be visible in the image. Just setting the lens on the infinity sign on the scale is not 100% precise.
Comparing cameras and lenses I made the same experience: even at longer distance precise focus is critical to get the full potential from the lens and the sensor.
So one could use focus bracketting for critical things - or use a ground glass with loupe (how bright is it? How good does this work). The sliding back with included groundglass and loupe of the Artec makes this camera very interesting as well IMO.
The other "wish" would be a live view and display comparable to that of a Nikon d3 to be included in a digital back. Would be a big advantage IMO.
Cheers, Tom
PeterA
Well-known member
The difference between 5 meters and infinity focus on the focus scale using a Schneider 35 digitar is less than 5% of the total focus throw in case anyone is wondering this is a very small amount. At f11 you can pretty much be sure of acceptable focus from less than 1 meter to infinity.
tashley
Subscriber Member
Hey Guys,
I combined response and Thank You to all.
I want to be clear here... I have been too polite about what has been happening and the reason I take the time to document this again now is so that anyone else visiting this forum as they plan a switch to MFD will know the hoops and the pitfalls.
1) My P45+ kit shipped with a dodgy kit lens and many people implied that I either did not know how to use it or that my expectations were too high. On examination by the dealer it was immediately clear to him that I was right, the lens was crap, it got replaced with one that does perform to my expectations.
2) I tried a new 28D and posted examples here, asking what people thought. Largely I was told that I didn't understand the need to stop down with this sort of equipment. As it happened, the lens was shot to S***, a fact my dealer quickly accepted. A few weeks later I tried another one at the same dealer and it was equally bad. Even the dealer suggested that they might have accidentally re-stocked the first lens. I now have a second hand version which is pretty good if not 100%.
3) I initially bought the whole setup wanting access to movements and on the basis that by the end of last year the Hartblei would a) arrive and b) perform like a lens. I foolishly planned a trip around that happening, which I had to cancel when Phase's UK rep lent me a Hartblei that was literally a coke bottle rather than a lens. Of course he hadn't tested it himself but claimed that two or three other pros had used it and had found it to be fine. I'm telling you that lens couldn't resolve an elephant a yard away. I now have a second hand version which is pretty good if not 100%
3) The Phase instruction book for the body is so bad that you have to use the Mamiya version to work out basic functions.
4) I haven't even mentioned that the UK rep agreed that my back's buttons are gritty and with imprecise action.
5) Phase literature and instructions led me to invest hundreds of pounds in a Metz flash setup that was supposed to offer TTL metering and in fact does not.
6) I tried to purchase a silvestri flexcam. It could see the elephant but not its trunk or tail, because it couldn't get the lens exactly parallel to the sensor.
7) I spent many weeks both here and on LL asking for people's views and experiences of certain tech bodies, backs and lenses and eventually found that out of the tiny subset of setups that match my needs (and yes I did consider all the alternatives including those offered by a particular manufacturer which has no website on which product specs and details can be checked... a fact that still leaves me scratching my head) the Silvestri Bicam seemed to get thumbs up. I spent over $11,000 (further) dollars on it and it turns out that it can't tell the difference between 5 metres and infinity. Opinions here vary and suggestions include using a laser to focus and the assertion that you cannot accurately focus using distance scales. One chap indicates that focus on these lenses is never at infinity when the scale says so and implies that I am naive to expect that whereas the manufacturer tells me to adjust the lens so that infinity on the GG is infinity on the barrel, to within less than 2/100ths of a millimetre. The manufacturer and UK distributor admit between them that they have mis-paired this lens and this body by mistake and that they will not achieve correct focus together without adjustment.
I haven't even mentioned the five chargers I went through to get one that works or the fact that my Phamiya body shipped with last generation firmware and is now in Denmark, of all places, for a firmware update, of all things, to improve things like a shutter lag that makes George Bush Junior look sharp. Nor have I made much of the fact that the current version of C1 doesn't work properly on the current spec high end macs as used by imaging professionals worldwide. Oh, sorry, it does if you remove all the RAM down to the last 2 gig pair. Apparently.
So... I have now spent in the region of $30,000 and what do I have today?
* A three month+ history of poorly QC'd components, frustration, endless trips to the dealer and not so many photos
* The knowledge that so far, second hand stuff performs better than new
* A Phamiya body in another country (told to expect ten days turnaround!)
* A tech cam setup which does not focus
In other words, $30,000 down and no ability to take a picture as of this writing
Now, who do I blame?
Myself? I don't think so. I research before purchase, pay a handsome price, and test immediately afterwards with stringent but not unreasonable expectations. I also am a reasonably experienced photographer.
My dealer? To be honest, yes, a tiny bit but only a tiny bit and cock-ups, though rare, do happen to the best of us.
Lady Luck? Maybe a little. It's been an unprecedentedly bad run but I know what a bell curve looks like and sometimes you're gonna find yourself on the left of it. S***t does happen and I don't feel that in general it happens more to me than anyone else.
The real responsibility rests in two clear areas
1) Manufacturers such as Phase who document stuff poorly and or inaccurately and do not apply QC procedures appropriate to the price point of their product. Manufacturers like Silvestri (and or their distributors) who don't understand that in today's economy you do not survive by shipping mismatched components.
2) People who let them get away with it.
I may be on the wrong point of the bell curve at the moment but I do believe that people make their own luck. Except for people in group 2) above. I have no intention of swelling their ranks.
Thanks again to everyone, especially to Doc Moore who was kind enough to say what I was too reticent to myself!
Best
Tim
I combined response and Thank You to all.
I want to be clear here... I have been too polite about what has been happening and the reason I take the time to document this again now is so that anyone else visiting this forum as they plan a switch to MFD will know the hoops and the pitfalls.
1) My P45+ kit shipped with a dodgy kit lens and many people implied that I either did not know how to use it or that my expectations were too high. On examination by the dealer it was immediately clear to him that I was right, the lens was crap, it got replaced with one that does perform to my expectations.
2) I tried a new 28D and posted examples here, asking what people thought. Largely I was told that I didn't understand the need to stop down with this sort of equipment. As it happened, the lens was shot to S***, a fact my dealer quickly accepted. A few weeks later I tried another one at the same dealer and it was equally bad. Even the dealer suggested that they might have accidentally re-stocked the first lens. I now have a second hand version which is pretty good if not 100%.
3) I initially bought the whole setup wanting access to movements and on the basis that by the end of last year the Hartblei would a) arrive and b) perform like a lens. I foolishly planned a trip around that happening, which I had to cancel when Phase's UK rep lent me a Hartblei that was literally a coke bottle rather than a lens. Of course he hadn't tested it himself but claimed that two or three other pros had used it and had found it to be fine. I'm telling you that lens couldn't resolve an elephant a yard away. I now have a second hand version which is pretty good if not 100%
3) The Phase instruction book for the body is so bad that you have to use the Mamiya version to work out basic functions.
4) I haven't even mentioned that the UK rep agreed that my back's buttons are gritty and with imprecise action.
5) Phase literature and instructions led me to invest hundreds of pounds in a Metz flash setup that was supposed to offer TTL metering and in fact does not.
6) I tried to purchase a silvestri flexcam. It could see the elephant but not its trunk or tail, because it couldn't get the lens exactly parallel to the sensor.
7) I spent many weeks both here and on LL asking for people's views and experiences of certain tech bodies, backs and lenses and eventually found that out of the tiny subset of setups that match my needs (and yes I did consider all the alternatives including those offered by a particular manufacturer which has no website on which product specs and details can be checked... a fact that still leaves me scratching my head) the Silvestri Bicam seemed to get thumbs up. I spent over $11,000 (further) dollars on it and it turns out that it can't tell the difference between 5 metres and infinity. Opinions here vary and suggestions include using a laser to focus and the assertion that you cannot accurately focus using distance scales. One chap indicates that focus on these lenses is never at infinity when the scale says so and implies that I am naive to expect that whereas the manufacturer tells me to adjust the lens so that infinity on the GG is infinity on the barrel, to within less than 2/100ths of a millimetre. The manufacturer and UK distributor admit between them that they have mis-paired this lens and this body by mistake and that they will not achieve correct focus together without adjustment.
I haven't even mentioned the five chargers I went through to get one that works or the fact that my Phamiya body shipped with last generation firmware and is now in Denmark, of all places, for a firmware update, of all things, to improve things like a shutter lag that makes George Bush Junior look sharp. Nor have I made much of the fact that the current version of C1 doesn't work properly on the current spec high end macs as used by imaging professionals worldwide. Oh, sorry, it does if you remove all the RAM down to the last 2 gig pair. Apparently.
So... I have now spent in the region of $30,000 and what do I have today?
* A three month+ history of poorly QC'd components, frustration, endless trips to the dealer and not so many photos
* The knowledge that so far, second hand stuff performs better than new
* A Phamiya body in another country (told to expect ten days turnaround!)
* A tech cam setup which does not focus
In other words, $30,000 down and no ability to take a picture as of this writing
Now, who do I blame?
Myself? I don't think so. I research before purchase, pay a handsome price, and test immediately afterwards with stringent but not unreasonable expectations. I also am a reasonably experienced photographer.
My dealer? To be honest, yes, a tiny bit but only a tiny bit and cock-ups, though rare, do happen to the best of us.
Lady Luck? Maybe a little. It's been an unprecedentedly bad run but I know what a bell curve looks like and sometimes you're gonna find yourself on the left of it. S***t does happen and I don't feel that in general it happens more to me than anyone else.
The real responsibility rests in two clear areas
1) Manufacturers such as Phase who document stuff poorly and or inaccurately and do not apply QC procedures appropriate to the price point of their product. Manufacturers like Silvestri (and or their distributors) who don't understand that in today's economy you do not survive by shipping mismatched components.
2) People who let them get away with it.
I may be on the wrong point of the bell curve at the moment but I do believe that people make their own luck. Except for people in group 2) above. I have no intention of swelling their ranks.
Thanks again to everyone, especially to Doc Moore who was kind enough to say what I was too reticent to myself!
Best
Tim
Last edited:
Guy Mancuso
Administrator, Instructor
Tim honestly and i read every thread on this forum very carefully and also am pretty experienced at these tech camera's and such. First off i don't think anyone is really giving you a hard time and let's face it you have had some bad luck compared to other users that slap on a lens and go to town. I think we are all frustrated for you and not at you and maybe that reads wrong to some and I will just flat out apologize for the whole forum right now and everyone in it. If I thought for a second anyone was out of line i would have edited or done something. You know how Jack and I run this place and it is the friendliest game in town and will always be that. I can't speak for Phase and i won't either. I own the system and have been very satisfied with it along with many others here. Our biggest issue is documentation, totally agree there. As far as lenses i don't think anyone hit a really bad one except for the new 45mm D Jack bought and returned. The 28mm as i reported months ago and others as well has some soft corners especially with the framing of the P25 and P45. Now if you go to a store and pick up a Hassy 28mm and look through it the distortion is very evident and only through there software does it corrected. The Mamiya is much nicer to look through distortion wise and there are some corrections for it but the corner sharpness is not there yet with C1 , i made a cheat on that and made it very public about this lens with a zillion shots with it. So some very well known facts right here on this forum alone. You got a bad copy as well as a bad 80mm, not sure what to say but it seems everyones lenses here happen to be fine. Phase's fault sure is and a run of bad luck for you.
What i think some folks are missing here is the outpour of help that was given to you from members that could not understand WHY yours was so bad , in all these cases everyone tries to help and makes suggestions on technique and try to help solve your issues. No one knows exactly how you are testing or let's face it knows if you are even capable of testing. I don't mean that as a slam but you know how this goes , we are not there and we make assumptions just like anyone else that has issues. You been down the Leica path with me and how many people can't even load the firmware, okay rest my case you know exactly what I am saying. Sometimes it just sounds like a whining pig, we all know better than that here in your case but every piece of gear you tried there was a issue. Assumptions again and given the frequency of it, certainly makes all of us scratch our heads. I think you understand what I am saying here. now let's move on. Any Tech camera lens the distance scales on ANY of the lenses can be off according to the actually point it focused on. This is with any of the systems. It is a imprecise setup and really only a guide and not a absolute number. If it says 10 ft we assume it is but it maybe 11. The back to body tolerance is very suspect on everyone of these . Alpa actually gives you spacers to make those adjustments if needed. They would not give them to the buyers if they thought it would not be needed. The tolerance in this is a 1/1000th of a inch sometimes. Now let me add these are not mentioned by anyone that sells this stuff in most cases. These are real facts on tech camera's and honestly it is a serious guessing game on a 15 thousand dollar setup. None of them are dead to nuts in regards to the focus point. I don't care what system it is, some obviously are damn good and pretty precise on there tolerances and adjustments. When I bought my Horseman , my lens had immediate issues went back to the factory and was corrected . My numbers were all over the place and the lens was loose in the mount. My dealer jumped all over it and Horseman had it back within a week from overseas. The only truest way to work these is to test them out and see what is correct and what is not correct. Yes Silvestri screwed up and i would send those mismatch parts back immediately because you may never get there starting off with parts that are completely off but most of these systems are very close and work fine in the field. Sliding backs are suspect to begin with given these tolerances and the only real way for precision is tethered . i think that has been said all along. Not the best solution all the time but the truest one . The lens scales maybe off but the focus maybe dead on with different numbers. Laser distance scale tools are very helpful and once the system is corrected okay than they are very useful to many people. I think the ground glass setup maybe one of the best setups. If the tolerances are the same between ground glass and going to back than it works great. Jim Collum uses this all the time on his Horseman.
Tim honestly this is a repeat of what most of us been saying all along. From comments like these you make the judgement calls on to buy or not. I think the Silvestri has a lot of promise but again a very small fish in a very small pond and support is very small. Just like Alpa and Arca Swiss. There expensive and we expect what we spend or think the product should work out of the gate but given some known facts on these not always easy to achieve.
Anyway I look at it this way and sorry but we are just as frustrated as you and for you. So if we sound a little offbeat don't take it personal it is not intended that way, we are pissed also. We all want these systems to work but if your going to be the guinea pig than expect the worst. i know this fact all to well done this 3 times being the first out of the gate DMR,M8 and 1dsMKII and if you think I don't have any grey hair from that than you are sadly mistaken. I don't even want to go there on issues I had. Thanks Guy
The end of the day we all feel sorry that the money you have spent is not working in your behalf. That just makes us all mad and it should not be that way. many of us are voicing our frustration as well for you and giving as much advice as we can to help. If that comes out wrong than I think everyone here feels the same as me, it is not directed directly at you and we are just trying to help as best we can but not directly in the situation but at a distance.
What i think some folks are missing here is the outpour of help that was given to you from members that could not understand WHY yours was so bad , in all these cases everyone tries to help and makes suggestions on technique and try to help solve your issues. No one knows exactly how you are testing or let's face it knows if you are even capable of testing. I don't mean that as a slam but you know how this goes , we are not there and we make assumptions just like anyone else that has issues. You been down the Leica path with me and how many people can't even load the firmware, okay rest my case you know exactly what I am saying. Sometimes it just sounds like a whining pig, we all know better than that here in your case but every piece of gear you tried there was a issue. Assumptions again and given the frequency of it, certainly makes all of us scratch our heads. I think you understand what I am saying here. now let's move on. Any Tech camera lens the distance scales on ANY of the lenses can be off according to the actually point it focused on. This is with any of the systems. It is a imprecise setup and really only a guide and not a absolute number. If it says 10 ft we assume it is but it maybe 11. The back to body tolerance is very suspect on everyone of these . Alpa actually gives you spacers to make those adjustments if needed. They would not give them to the buyers if they thought it would not be needed. The tolerance in this is a 1/1000th of a inch sometimes. Now let me add these are not mentioned by anyone that sells this stuff in most cases. These are real facts on tech camera's and honestly it is a serious guessing game on a 15 thousand dollar setup. None of them are dead to nuts in regards to the focus point. I don't care what system it is, some obviously are damn good and pretty precise on there tolerances and adjustments. When I bought my Horseman , my lens had immediate issues went back to the factory and was corrected . My numbers were all over the place and the lens was loose in the mount. My dealer jumped all over it and Horseman had it back within a week from overseas. The only truest way to work these is to test them out and see what is correct and what is not correct. Yes Silvestri screwed up and i would send those mismatch parts back immediately because you may never get there starting off with parts that are completely off but most of these systems are very close and work fine in the field. Sliding backs are suspect to begin with given these tolerances and the only real way for precision is tethered . i think that has been said all along. Not the best solution all the time but the truest one . The lens scales maybe off but the focus maybe dead on with different numbers. Laser distance scale tools are very helpful and once the system is corrected okay than they are very useful to many people. I think the ground glass setup maybe one of the best setups. If the tolerances are the same between ground glass and going to back than it works great. Jim Collum uses this all the time on his Horseman.
Tim honestly this is a repeat of what most of us been saying all along. From comments like these you make the judgement calls on to buy or not. I think the Silvestri has a lot of promise but again a very small fish in a very small pond and support is very small. Just like Alpa and Arca Swiss. There expensive and we expect what we spend or think the product should work out of the gate but given some known facts on these not always easy to achieve.
Anyway I look at it this way and sorry but we are just as frustrated as you and for you. So if we sound a little offbeat don't take it personal it is not intended that way, we are pissed also. We all want these systems to work but if your going to be the guinea pig than expect the worst. i know this fact all to well done this 3 times being the first out of the gate DMR,M8 and 1dsMKII and if you think I don't have any grey hair from that than you are sadly mistaken. I don't even want to go there on issues I had. Thanks Guy
The end of the day we all feel sorry that the money you have spent is not working in your behalf. That just makes us all mad and it should not be that way. many of us are voicing our frustration as well for you and giving as much advice as we can to help. If that comes out wrong than I think everyone here feels the same as me, it is not directed directly at you and we are just trying to help as best we can but not directly in the situation but at a distance.
Hi Bob:
Maybe I am missing something... While I think perhaps there has been some fun made of Tim's situation, I don't feel it has been disrespectful. In contrast, I think we're all feeling his pain and have been pretty caring and concerned, and the laughing with him (as opposed to at him) is our way of helping him get through it with his chin up.
~~~
Tim,
I suspect this is directed at my earlier comment, but I stand by it -- helical focus mounts almost always go beyond infinity to accomodate thermal expansion in the metal; so a lens that is set perfectly at 40C will not be deliver the same result at 20C...
Regardless, I don't feel anybody has implied you don't know how to test. When you start a new thread on your newest experiences, you generally do not go into detail on how you obtained them, and usually just post comments about how bad they are. Since many of us do test rigorously ourselves, and have made a variety of mistakes along the way, questions about how you obtained them are naturally going to arise. But this has been in an effort to help, not slight. Perhaps this is where you and Bob feel you are getting slighted, as we are asking precise questions in an effort to make sure variables have been dealt with, and this may seem like we doubt your abilities? If that is the case, I apologize for my part in it, but IMO this has all been for the express purpose of helping you sort it out. And let's face it, your proportion of new gear failures has been inordinately high -- I have been calling that bad luck...
That said, for my part I will avoid any future comments or suggestions on your situation going forward so as not to inadvertently offend.
Best of luck going forward, and I mean that sincerely!
tashley
Subscriber Member
Jack, Guy,
I am so not looking to pick a fight here - in fact the opposite: I value the advice I have been given because regardless of whether it is correct or not on any individual occasion, it is always given generously and with good intent.
I regard this forum as an exercise in collaborative exchange. Between us we get to test and know a far wider range of gear in a far wider range of circumstances than any of us individually will. When I have useful knowledge I will gladly and freely share it and I truly appreciate that others do the same.
What we are collaboratively working on is a complex and shifting puzzle composed of minutely engineered and very expensive components. It is bound to throw up anomalies and puzzles and I apologise unreservedly if my post higher up this thread gave the impression that in the frustration of this process I was biting the hands that feed me. That's not my intention and it's not my way and I do appreciate the hospitality you guys show here, a lot.
My pointing out the apparent contradictions in various bits of advice was not intended as an accusation, but an illustration of the nature of the problem: that the kind advice given by different but highly experienced people can be contradictory.
I think I have often posted my testing methodologies (I am not DXO-head but I have ways and they work!) but no matter how often one states 'I used a tripod, a 10X loupe, mirror up, tethered, focus bracket, blah blah blah) people will always say 'ah but did you use a tripod/MUP/Blah blah blah' because it's human nature not to want to read all the detail of every thread - so in the end I just have to hope that people who have known me from other fora over the years know that I'm fairly sensible about these things - and I must say that on every piece of kit that I called faulty on initial testing it turns out I was right. I have a reasonable track record here.
I also really can take a joke at my own expense (you should see what I look like!) and it wasn't until the Doc said the un-sayable that I chimed in to agree that the tone of a small number of posts have seemed a little snippy. But then hey, I am the Angel of Gloom around here at the moment.
I just want to make sure that we, corporately, learn from all this so that other people avoid the pitfalls or at least know where they might lie.
Jack, please don't stop giving advice. Please?
Tim
ps @ Carsten - I have returned the whole Silvestri setup. Life's too short and I suspect that as Jack said the mismatch of lens to body is not the main issue. What I do know is that there are plenty of people using the Cambo WD and since my dealer can do me one with a Schneider 35 at a very very good price, that's the way I'll go. No bellows means no tilt, no sliding back means no easy and quick focus routine but it's much more likely to let me take photos in focus and at this stage that's what I want.... and there'll be very nearly enough change from the Silvestri refund for a D3X... ;-)
I am so not looking to pick a fight here - in fact the opposite: I value the advice I have been given because regardless of whether it is correct or not on any individual occasion, it is always given generously and with good intent.
I regard this forum as an exercise in collaborative exchange. Between us we get to test and know a far wider range of gear in a far wider range of circumstances than any of us individually will. When I have useful knowledge I will gladly and freely share it and I truly appreciate that others do the same.
What we are collaboratively working on is a complex and shifting puzzle composed of minutely engineered and very expensive components. It is bound to throw up anomalies and puzzles and I apologise unreservedly if my post higher up this thread gave the impression that in the frustration of this process I was biting the hands that feed me. That's not my intention and it's not my way and I do appreciate the hospitality you guys show here, a lot.
My pointing out the apparent contradictions in various bits of advice was not intended as an accusation, but an illustration of the nature of the problem: that the kind advice given by different but highly experienced people can be contradictory.
I think I have often posted my testing methodologies (I am not DXO-head but I have ways and they work!) but no matter how often one states 'I used a tripod, a 10X loupe, mirror up, tethered, focus bracket, blah blah blah) people will always say 'ah but did you use a tripod/MUP/Blah blah blah' because it's human nature not to want to read all the detail of every thread - so in the end I just have to hope that people who have known me from other fora over the years know that I'm fairly sensible about these things - and I must say that on every piece of kit that I called faulty on initial testing it turns out I was right. I have a reasonable track record here.
I also really can take a joke at my own expense (you should see what I look like!) and it wasn't until the Doc said the un-sayable that I chimed in to agree that the tone of a small number of posts have seemed a little snippy. But then hey, I am the Angel of Gloom around here at the moment.
I just want to make sure that we, corporately, learn from all this so that other people avoid the pitfalls or at least know where they might lie.
Jack, please don't stop giving advice. Please?
Tim
ps @ Carsten - I have returned the whole Silvestri setup. Life's too short and I suspect that as Jack said the mismatch of lens to body is not the main issue. What I do know is that there are plenty of people using the Cambo WD and since my dealer can do me one with a Schneider 35 at a very very good price, that's the way I'll go. No bellows means no tilt, no sliding back means no easy and quick focus routine but it's much more likely to let me take photos in focus and at this stage that's what I want.... and there'll be very nearly enough change from the Silvestri refund for a D3X... ;-)
Last edited: