HCam B1 with Canon EF-L 11-24mm New wideangle records

[Stefan Steib]

New record: HCam B1 Medium Format Camera
with Canon EF-L 11-24mm modified by Hcam
14mm focal length and full image circle on an IQ250
15mm focal length and full image circle on a P45+
17mm focal length and full image circle on an IQ380
all longer focal length Zoom settings cover, so this is the superwideangle zoom for all MF Backs.

 

[H3dtogo]

That is great news . No more center filters and Custom White for wide angle images.
I was also wondering if the Hartblei Mamiya RZ to Pentax 645 adapter already is available.
Best, Peter.

 

[Stefan Steib]

Sorry the Mamiya RB/RZ adapter is cancelled. The Helicoid simply would have become so expensive , that we wouldn´t have earned any money with it.

But: we are on the way to get an alternative solution (with much more potential) for all RB-RZ Lens owners. ........soon.

Greetings from Germany
Stefan

 

[gerald.d]

New record: HCam B1 Medium Format Camera
with Canon EF-L 11-24mm modified by Hcam
14mm focal length and full image circle on an IQ250
15mm focal length and full image circle on a P45+
17mm focal length and full image circle on an IQ380
all longer focal length Zoom settings cover, so this is the superwideangle zoom for all MF Backs.

Hi Stefan -

Based on the shift and rise/fall measurements you posted in the earlier thread, the following are the image circles at various focal lengths:

Diagonals of the backs (and so, image circles needed to cover them):

IQ250 - 55mm
P45+ - 61mm
IQ380 - 67mm

I don't see how this lens can cover the P45+ or IQ380 sensors at the focal lengths you are now mentioning?

What has changed (all of this is from your figures - I've not done any testing myself)?

(also, an unanswered question from the previous thread - Why are the landscape vertical shifts and portrait horizontal shifts different?)

Kind regards,

Gerald.

 

[Stefan Steib]

Hi Stefan -

Based on the shift and rise/fall measurements you posted in the earlier thread, the following are the image circles at various focal lengths:

Diagonals of the backs (and so, image circles needed to cover them):

IQ250 - 55mm
P45+ - 61mm
IQ380 - 67mm

I don't see how this lens can cover the P45+ or IQ380 sensors at the focal lengths you are now mentioning?

What has changed (all of this is from your figures - I've not done any testing myself)?

(also, an unanswered question from the previous thread - Why are the landscape vertical shifts and portrait horizontal shifts different?)

Kind regards,

Gerald.

Quite simple: as the maximum movements on the adapter are not indicating that it means the image circle is not even bigger than this,
I used a sony body where the mount is also a limitation, and I used the HCam Master TS which also has a limited diameter (which is ok as it is made for the Sony)
so a larger sensor with a much larger bajonett (as the EOS is compared to e-mount) and no TS adapter can take full advantage of it.
And : I have simply tried it on the HCam. Have done some shots and will post later.
The P45+ was easily covered at 15mm.
the image circle was even growing further (icould see this in my finder on the HCam as this is the full 58x58mm of the blads format)
so I can safely say it covers even the large chips, even the Aptus 10 shouldn´t be a problem.
And the IQ250 is a tad smaller than the P45+ so I can also say it works on 14mm.

Regards
Stefan

 

[ondebanks]

Sorry the Mamiya RB/RZ adapter is cancelled. The Helicoid simply would have become so expensive , that we wouldn´t have earned any money with it.

But: we are on the way to get an alternative solution (with much more potential) for all RB-RZ Lens owners. ........soon.

Greetings from Germany
Stefan

I'm sorry to see it confirmed, that you had to cancel the RB/RZ lens adapter.

Did you see this thread I posted last week, where I fashioned my own RB/RZ lens adapter for the Mamiya/Phase One 645 camera? Not up to Hartblei standards of course, but it does the job for me.

Ray

 

[Stefan Steib]

Here as Promised 4 shots HCam B1 with P45+ at 11mm,15mm,20mm and 24mm - if any TS mechanics would exist for the Canon EF-L 11-24mm (onMF)
from 16mm and Up it could even be shifted......if there would be no additional vignetting, by the mechanism and the bajonett mount.

Greetings from Germany
Stefan

 

[ondebanks]

Here as Promised 4 shots HCam B1 with P45+ at 11mm,15mm,20mm and 24mm - if any TS mechanics would exist for the Canon EF-L 11-24mm (onMF)
from 16mm and Up it could even be shifted......if there would be no additional vignetting, by the mechanism and the bajonett mount.

Greetings from Germany
Stefan

Stefan, thanks for the image samples.

We see that the image just starts to be 'unclipped' in the P45+ sensor corners with the zoom set to a focal length no shorter than 15mm. The sensor is 49.1 x 36.8 mm so this gives a diagonal field of view of 127.9 degrees; call it 128 degrees.

Shooting the 11-24mm at 11mm on a Canon fullframe DSLR (36.0 x 24.0 mm sensor) gives a diagonal field of view of 126.1 degrees; call it 126 degrees.

So there's very little difference really in FOV. The test shows that Canon did not build in any 'excess' image circle for their lens - at its shortest setting, it is designed to cover the 36 x 24mm format with nothing to spare. This is not one of those lenses that yields much wider images on medium format than it can on its native 35mm format.

But at less short settings, there is something to be gained from using it on a medium format sensor - you retain more of the angular field of view while detecting more photons and/or sampling the image with more pixels. There's also the change in aspect ratio which some may prefer - 4:3 vs 3:2 -, and the usual differences in dynamic range & colour response between Canon and medium format Kodak/Dalsa/Sony sensors.

Best regards,
Ray

 

[Stefan Steib]

Stefan, thanks for the image samples.

We see that the image just starts to be 'unclipped' in the P45+ sensor corners with the zoom set to a focal length no shorter than 15mm. The sensor is 49.1 x 36.8 mm so this gives a diagonal field of view of 127.9 degrees; call it 128 degrees.

Shooting the 11-24mm at 11mm on a Canon fullframe DSLR (36.0 x 24.0 mm sensor) gives a diagonal field of view of 126.1 degrees; call it 126 degrees.

So there's very little difference really in FOV. The test shows that Canon did not build in any 'excess' image circle for their lens - at its shortest setting, it is designed to cover the 36 x 24mm format with nothing to spare. This is not one of those lenses that yields much wider images on medium format than it can on its native 35mm format.

But at less short settings, there is something to be gained from using it on a medium format sensor - you retain more of the angular field of view while detecting more photons and/or sampling the image with more pixels. There's also the change in aspect ratio which some may prefer - 4:3 vs 3:2 -, and the usual differences in dynamic range & colour response between Canon and medium format Kodak/Dalsa/Sony sensors.

Best regards,
Ray

Look at it from the workflow: first it´s a zoom, you got 14-24mm usable Image sizes for an IQ250.
second: a Pricing issue: a 23mm Rodenstock is how much - 7900 $ ? And it cannot zoom nor does it have much excess image size for shifting.
third: you wont need a whiteshot nor a centerfilter for this - look at the samples I didn´t do anything with vignetting - or colorcast - as there is none.
fourth: save weight and volume, use only one lens for MF and 35mm, even AF on the 35mm.

fifth: For many a 17mm is already too short, but the 24mm is too long. A 20mm with juice even for shifts is probably a killer focal length.

Greetings from Germany
Stefan

 

[gerald.d]

Quite simple: as the maximum movements on the adapter are not indicating that it means the image circle is not even bigger than this,
I used a sony body where the mount is also a limitation, and I used the HCam Master TS which also has a limited diameter (which is ok as it is made for the Sony)
so a larger sensor with a much larger bajonett (as the EOS is compared to e-mount) and no TS adapter can take full advantage of it.
And : I have simply tried it on the HCam. Have done some shots and will post later.
The P45+ was easily covered at 15mm.
the image circle was even growing further (icould see this in my finder on the HCam as this is the full 58x58mm of the blads format)
so I can safely say it covers even the large chips, even the Aptus 10 shouldn´t be a problem.
And the IQ250 is a tad smaller than the P45+ so I can also say it works on 14mm.

Regards
Stefan

Ahhh.. so there were adapter limitations then. All makes perfect sense now. Thanks!

Kind regards,


Gerald.

 

[kimyeesan]

Here as Promised 4 shots HCam B1 with P45+ at 11mm,15mm,20mm and 24mm - if any TS mechanics would exist for the Canon EF-L 11-24mm (onMF)
from 16mm and Up it could even be shifted......if there would be no additional vignetting, by the mechanism and the bajonett mount.

Greetings from Germany
Stefan

How is the IQ at the corner of this lens? is it use-able？

 

[Stefan Steib]

As much as I can say now, this 11-24mm is much sharper in the corners than the TS-E 17, from 11mm onwwards and even wide open. Less Astigmatism ( better Focus plane flatness)
Very few vignetting and keeping up excellent sharpness even to the long end at 24mm.
I don´t know what kind of Sushi the Canon Lens designers got to eat, but I also want that.
Tremendous lens. Outstanding. And even better: sample Variation nearly zero. I now had about 8 of these in my hands. One like the other.

Probably this lens knowhow is a reason why Canon has their customers. And as long as they build stuff like this: well deserved !

 

[pfigen]

Stefan - Can post 100% crops from the edges with something containing meaningful detail. Considering how soft this lens is in the corners on a 5D3 or 5DS at 11mm, and it never ever gets even close to sharp in the corners, I can only surmise that it gets even worse the farther away from the center you get.

 

[chrismuc]

Stefan - Can post 100% crops from the edges with something containing meaningful detail. Considering how soft this lens is in the corners on a 5D3 or 5DS at 11mm, and it never ever gets even close to sharp in the corners, I can only surmise that it gets even worse the farther away from the center you get.

I have no idea what you are talking about. The lens is tack sharp corner to corner, also and especially at 11mm.
Example: Sony A7R + Metabones, Canon EF 11-24f4 L @*11f11

full pic at 1200x800


100% crop lower left corner


100% crop upper right corner

 

[ondebanks]

I have no idea what you are talking about. The lens is tack sharp corner to corner, also and especially at 11mm.
Example: Sony A7R + Metabones, Canon EF 11-24f4 L @*11f11

That's certainly impressive. But perhaps pfigen's contrary observations might be explained by this: both corners of your shot are in the foreground. Some wideangle lenses have field curvature which bends the focal surface in a way that favours the foreground. Just wondering if pfigen's "it never ever gets even close to sharp in the corners" conclusion is derived from shooting distant objects in the corners.

Ray

 

[pfigen]

The lower left corner of the first crop is not sharp at all. The other one is pretty good. I've been shooting a lot of test images with the lens on a 5DS R and it's a real mixed bag. Focus is extremely critical to get sharp, well focused images, but subject matter is just as important. I shot out in the alley behind my studio and put some chain link fence in the extreme corner and it was what I would say - okay. Pretty good, but not great. I have a huge - something like eight feet by thirteen feet lens test chart on one wall in the studio - y'know, just for the hell of it, and when I put part of that to the corner of the frame, well, it just looks like **** no matter how it's focused or what aperture is used - at about twenty feet away. The black and white alternating resolution lines are pretty harsh on showing what a lens can really do. Acceptable resolution all depends on print size and viewing distance, so for many applications this lens will appear great, but for critical work, I'm not yet convinced. And I have yet to see any full res complete frames posted by Stefan or anyone else using Stefan's system. The reason I'm so skeptical of this application of use for this lens is that the far corner performance is already marginal and I can't see how it's going to get any better shifted. I've asked Stefan about full res frames and have never seen one that he has posted or linked to.

 

[gerald.d]

At 11mm this lens actually resolves more detail in the corners than it does in the center.

We did some extensive tests of this lens to assess its suitability for shooting (spherical) panoramas on the 5DsR.

I'm out at the moment but will post samples later.

Kind regards,

Gerald.

 

[chrismuc]

maybe ur lens is not "perfect"

here another left lower corner crop for your evaluation
i call this "sharp"




and like another dpi fellow said, you might have to focus at the corner via lifeview to optimize the image for corner sharpness due to evtl. field curvature of the lens

 

[gerald.d]

Here are the comparisons to show how this lens actually resolves more detail towards the corners than it does towards the center.

It's all down to the rectilinear projection that is captured at the sensor.

The same object will be projected over more pixels towards the corners of the lens than it will towards the center. When you then re-project the image in spherical space to correct for the distortion of the rectilinear projection, the results are clear.


Kind regards,


Gerald.

 

[rainerv]

In addition: setting the sony a7rii with the 17tse vertical and shifting with the hcam/mirex left and right to the edge of the image circle (which is app. 18mm left & right ) this results in a 85Mp image with a ratio of 2:3 and a field of view very similar than the 11mm lens and you can still shift up and down with the tse app. 5mm. Interesting setup too, at least in arch. and landscape photography with not moving subjects, the practical need for fov wider than 17mm is rare, but in this way even without having a wider lense in the bag this ultrawide range down to 11mm is easily (and shiftable) covered with the 17tse and the genial accessory of a second shift layer. The 17tse is really sharp all over the frame, as is the 24tse and the contax 35pc.

Interesting is also, that the 17tse seems to have a very similar image circle than the 11-24mm, i dont have the zoom but the front element of this both lenses looks very similar as well.