Best 35mm lens for ALPA system , with P25+

[steflaurent974]

Can someone tell me about this : what is the best 35mm lens for the ALPA system ?

there are :

Schneider ALPA Apo-Switar 5.6/36 mm
ALPA AAA Apo Alpar 4.5/35 mm
Schneider Apo-Digitar 5.6/35 mm XL
Rodenstock Apo-Sironar digital HR 4.0/35 mm

a lot of choice, my main use is digital with the phase on P25+....

Thanks for your help.

Stephane

 

[Paratom]

As far as I understand (no own experience but I just ordered the Rodenstock 35HR for Artec) the Schneider 35mm has a much larger image circle for better shifting and stitching, little less distorsion, but more vignetting (which could be compensated by a center filter).
What I heard is that the Rodenstock is sharp wide open but the Schneider should be stopped down 1-2 steps for max sharpness.
Easy choice for the Artec because there is only the Rondestock 35HR available for artec mount as far as I know.
I think with the SWA I would also have decided for the Rodenstock because I think the SWA is a camera which you could use handhold sometimes and f4 of the Rodenstock compared to stopped down Schneider to f8 plus a factor for the center filter would make it nearly impossible to shoot handhold as long as the light isnt very bright.
Could also be nice in windy conditions to open the f-stop.
On the other side if you shoot tripod only anways the Schneider would give you more shift posibilities.
again-I have no own experience.

 

[steflaurent974]

your advice seems wise. I am actually building my kit and all the lens technical datas disturb me. Your thinking from the photographic point of view is the good one I think.
So maybe the Rodenstock....

 

[Paratom]

there is also this thread: http://forum.getdpi.com/forum/showthread.php?t=3259&highlight=35+rodenstock+schneider

 

[PeterA]

It all depends on your platform and intended useages. I use Schneider 24 and 35 on Alpa and will be using Rodenstock from 40mm upwards on arTec. You can hand hold an Alpa at very low shutter speeds - this makes the camera more useful for editorial and reportage type shooting isf you are into that. You need larger image circles for tilt and shift - hence Rodenstock for arTec.

 

[Paratom]

I wonder why the dont offer both for the Artec so that everybody can choose.
I think itmakes sense what you say that the Rodenstock 35 HR makes even more sense for the Alpa.
I will see how good I get along with the 12mm shift capabilitiy of the 35HR.
I thought the sharpnes and resolution of HR should be nice though.
The new announced 40HR sounds very interesting with large image circle but who knows when it will be available.

 

[thomas]

You can hand hold an Alpa at very low shutter speeds - this makes the camera more useful for editorial and reportage type shooting

but in this case the faster lenses would make sense as well, no?

I will see how good I get along with the 12mm shift capabilitiy of the 35HR.

is this 12mm in one direction or +/- 6mm? On the short or on the long side of the image format (so is it 12mm shift lateral in landscape composition)?
Do you know the diagonal shift capabilities?
Thanks!

 

[PeterA]

but in this case the faster lenses would make sense as well, no?
Thanks!

The sweet spot for Schneider 24 and 35 is f8-11. This also coincides with extreme DOF - before diffraction kicks in. If you are shooting reportage or casual - this is a major benefit.

Rodenstock make beautiful glass too. The 35HR was not available when I bought my 35 digitar. The Rodenstock 23mm was not available when I boiught my Schneider 24. I would still go for Schneider in wide in any case as I prefer the smaller size of the lenses.

It is a very good idea to actually see each system before you buy into it. Quality cant be described very well in words or photos on forums you must try for yourself.

hope this helps
Good Luck.

 

[thomas]

The sweet spot for Schneider 24 and 35 is f8-11. This also coincides with extreme DOF

ah, okay... due to DOF. Makes sense!

It is a very good idea to actually see each system before you buy into it. Quality cant be described very well in words or photos on forums you must try for yourself.

this is very true! As to the 35HR my question was more about the usable image circle. All I heard about this lens was based on a 48x36mm / 33MP / 7.3 microns chip... I would definitely have to try it on my 49,1x36,8mm / 39MP / 6.8 microns chip to make a final evaluation.

 

[Paratom]

Thats what I found on the Rodenstock Website:

HR Digaron-S
The new Rodenstock HR Digaron-S lenses (former name: Apo-Sironar digital HR) with a 70 mm image circle (80 mm for a focal lengths of 180 mm) for sensor sizes from 24x36 mm up to 33x44 mm provide excellent sharpness and brilliance already from open aperture (f/4 to f/5.6). For reduced camera movement they are also recommended for sensor sizes up to 37x49 mm and without any camera movement even for sensor sizes up to 36x56 mm or 40x54 mm.

HR Digaron-W
The lens series HR Digaron-W with an image circle from 90 mm to 125 mm is the first choice for large sensors from 37x49 mm up to 36x56 mm or 40x54 mm and for technical cameras, if parallel lens shift and lens swing and tilt require large camera movement. Currently this new series comprises the focal lengths 40, 70 and 90 mm. In spring 2009 it will be supplemented by a 50 mm lens, and further lenses will follow in the near future.

 

[PeterA]

The above is an excellent underlining of a very important issue for technical camera users - image circle size. IF you want to maximise the functionality of the camera ( shift, tilt) you want the largest image circle you can get - for a given level of IQ.

If you are just going to do shifts in two dimensions you have much more choice in camera platform - and really just buy the appropriate Alpa.

With the artec - I dont get a choice of lenses it is Sinar's choice of Rodenstock - I am not complaining by any means -

As a final note - if you consider the limits of lens design regarding resolving power - you will pay far less attention to megapixels than many seem to ..

Pete

 

[steflaurent974]

all this is very interesting, i have choosen the following combo : 24 35 47 SCHNEIDER XL ; The 24 mm as an IC of 60 wich is exactly matching the P25+sensor. I just hope it is enough sharp at the border to exploit the corner !!!

From the diffrent post I'vre read, it should be ok ...

 

[Paratom]

...

As a final note - if you consider the limits of lens design regarding resolving power - you will pay far less attention to megapixels than many seem to ..

Pete

Pete, how did you mean this sentence?

 

[Chris Barrett]

Is the 12mm of movement on the 35HR fully useable? Though the standard 35 and the Schneider 35 Digitar both have larger image circles, I've found that diffraction softness occurs around 10mm. And so I try to limit my movements on the 35 to around 7 or 8 mm. Hell, much more than that and things start looking pretty distorted anyway. Actually, I find myslef using much less movement in my composition than I did with 4x5 in the past. I don't know if it's a subconscious desire to keep things sharp or just a feeling that those heavily shifted images always felt off balance... Funny, I shoot everything with a view camera and I bet 1/3 to 1/2 the time I don't even shift.

-C

 

[Paratom]

Is the 12mm of movement on the 35HR fully useable? Though the standard 35 and the Schneider 35 Digitar both have larger image circles, I've found that diffraction softness occurs around 10mm. And so I try to limit my movements on the 35 to around 7 or 8 mm. Hell, much more than that and things start looking pretty distorted anyway. Actually, I find myslef using much less movement in my composition than I did with 4x5 in the past. I don't know if it's a subconscious desire to keep things sharp or just a feeling that those heavily shifted images always felt off balance... Funny, I shoot everything with a view camera and I bet 1/3 to 1/2 the time I don't even shift.

-C

I can not tell you about the 12mm based on own experience. Officially Rodenstock says 8mm shift, I heard from an Artec-User 12mm should work, and that the image would be still sharp in the corners. (with a 36mm x 48 mm Sensor).
I can tell more in a week

 

[PeterA]

Pete, how did you mean this sentence?

Well my thoughts are currently in 'draft' form and I haven't finished my own little summary with a touch of math - however, I can say that I think that the lens line pair stats of even the highest quality lenses currently available indicate that they are reaching the outer bounds of real world limits as far as their ability to match the resolving power that the chip manufacturers are producing...especially at the edges as far as resolution goes. when you consider you haevlittle movement potential with wides - you are in fact paying a heck of a lot of money for a lens which is best used in a flat shot or with some very simple lateral stitching...

This is why I am not 'upgrading' from 33 and 39 megapixels...for my purposes there is no point...

Secondly, even at 'only' 39 megapixels - technique becomes absolutely critical in order to get the best out of this equipment OR to put it in another way - I am not surprised to see lets say a NikonD3x or equivalent - on first glance deliver MFD type resolution in normal shooting. These SLR cameras are just easier to use and their lenses 'lower' resolving power are better matched to the lower resolving power of the chips.

The MFD backs deliver far better colour and DR etc etc..however critical sharpness ie getting the absolute best from the chips in this area - is VERY dependent on using the very best glass - AND the utmost care in shooting...

the writer above pretty much reflects also another real world fact - employing shift and tilt in clumsy fashion - will actually degrade IQ and with wide angle lenses - well we simply dont have the image circle size to employ the movements.

Stitching and panning around a nodal point is ok with any lens ..but one doesn't need exotic lenses to do just simple stitches...

hence my 'eccentric' compromise - Alpa for flat shooting with wides ( I keep what i already have) and arTec for longer - 40mm WHR up to 135mm lenses - because they will give me the image circle large enough to use 'some' tilt and shift at same time.

which brings me to final point...

ask yourself do you 'really' need a technical camera and all the specialised 'cost' associated ...I have agonised over this decision for a year..before giving in to my gearheadedness..and only after trying out a whole range of traditional systems from Linhoff 679 /Sinar ( P3) / Rollie xact etc..

the limiting factor on all this technical gear is the physical dimension of the chips - compared to film ( 4x5/ 8x10 ) the chip areas are tiny..

So we have teh gods of technology delivering better resolving power than teh best scanned LF film - in an area the size of a postage stamp...the machinery of view cameras is just not designed to handle such micro movements easilly...and optical design is reaching its limits...

I dont mean to put you off..it is just that a lot of shots I see with this gear - can be made by cheaper gear..and a lot of shots made by (relatively ) cheaper gear cant be made by these more expensive systems - think telephoto type landscapes - even a 150MM ( or longer) lens used so well in the examples from the recent Arizona workshop for example..well these teles don't exist in technical camera size..

there are signicant mobility and set-up compromises involved in shooting outdoors with technical cameras and movement..

ok end of my lat night 'dump'.

 

[Paratom]

Peter, interesting and logical thoughts.
One of ther reasons I thought to go for the Rodfenstock HR 35 vs the non-HR 45 with larger image circle was: I would probly rather shift a little less but get very good resolution vs more shift capability with overall a little worse resolution.

I would prefer to have both (like the announced 40mm HR), but when will that lens be available for Sinar?

 

[thomas]

if you consider the limits of lens design regarding resolving power - you will pay far less attention to megapixels than many seem to ..

I agree here. I don't feel my P45 is a limiting factor but the lenses. Shooting without movements or just moderate movements a P65+, Aptus II or the upcoming 60MP Hassy-Back might be a good choice. But shooting with larger movements you immediately notice that you will gain nothing here. "Sharper" pixles are better than "more" pixels. Especially when uprezzing...

 

[archivue]

i just went for the 35xl... for
the low distortion value
the small size of the lense... better with recessed lens board and less weight
the working aperture of F8/F11 (for my use, i prefer to be able to shoot at F11 for deph of field, than to have a lense optimized for 5,6...)

but it's difficult to see the image on the ground glass...

So it depends on intend of use, camera, Working aperture require...