My thoughts on T/S for techical cameras

[Don Libby]

I had originally begun this as a response to Paul from Optechs Digital, responding to his excellent series of videos. It soon became apparent to me this response was going way far away from a simple response regarding being a traditionalist and the use of software. Not wanting to take away from Paul's post I decided to separate this to a thread by itself. I'm still uncertain what to title this (venting?) and may just call it an editorial if I may all the while knowing I'm not in the same league as Jack or Guy nor am I connected in anyway other than being a mere member so the use of the term editorial is a stretch.

I'm somewhat traditional myself to a point. Being a landscape photographer this allows me a certain amount of leeway in what I do and how I do it. I used a t/s lens for a short time while I was still shooting 35mm then went away from that when I moved to MF. Now I'm shooting strictly with a technical camera and using a combination of hardware and software to achieve my goals.

Change is good and needed however I now have a difficult time wrapping my head around what camera manufactures are doing in order to achieve a tilt/shift/swing. Maybe I'm just too dense (just ask my wife) however there's got to be a better solution to this problem than what is being currently offered. In every case I've seen (speaking strictly technical camera) the solution at first blush appears to be simple till you dig deeper; change lenses to short barrel or retrofitting the lensboard - all of which is going to cost a lot more money. Reminds me of the cure being worse than the cause...

I no longer feel the need nor desire to have a T/S capability for what I do. Maybe this is partially due to the fact that if I take my time, plan it out, I can produce an image where it is in focus from my toenails to infinity; yes that requires several frames and a kickass imagery software program to put everything together but it simply works. Period.

I also admit there are photographic applications (such as architectural) photography where you might really need the ability to tilt/shift.

What I'd like to caution folks against is running out and jumping into the deep end of the pool just because your technical camera manufacture has suddenly brought out the latest and greatest for tilt/shift because with proper planning (reminds me of the 6-P Principle) you can do almost the same effect and save a bundle of money.

There I've had my say and will kindly craw back under my rock ...

Don

 

[stephengilbert]

Don,

I had a similar reaction to the T/S video. It ignores the fact that the ALPA T/S adapter is about $2000, and requires short barrel lenses that cost three or four thousand dollars each, and are no shorter than 80mm. I thought it'd be fun to play with if someone else paid for it.

Steve

 

[kdphotography]

....I was thinking that after you've dropped about 2K on the Cube, dropping a couple more on a nice T/S adapter would be peanuts....

I very much understand Don's way of thinking (that alone is a scary proposition) but it doesn't stop me from wanting a good t/s alternative. I recognize Helicon focus offers an alternative to some, but for some reason it (software solution) just does not seem as satisfying....

Eleanor Brown was so kind to share with me a quick down and dirty image she took with her H2 and P65+ outfitted with the HTS 1.5. And I was impressed. Certainly better than a spit-shined Hartblei.... I wish the Phase platform had something like this.

The better alternative, of course, is a technical camera. And having t/s---it's just sexy.... I've spent too much this year already.....but I would love to have a technical camera with a t/s option--- Cambo or Alpa...

 

[Don Libby]

I tried the Cambo Ultima and liked it other than the humongous weight. The trick would be to have a WRS/WDS size body with the same movements of the Ultima bellows.

The same time I wrote the above I also figured it just wouldn't matter what gizmo whiz-bang attachment we come up with as it would still require a change of lens.

Oh well ...

Don

 

[Paratom]

Don,
I feel you mix to questions in one answer:
1. question: do we want/need tilt
2.question: is the way Alpa or Cambo achieve it price wise and handling wise interesting/ appealing

1.In the end I believe that you can use tilt either to get a very shallow DOF and you can play with this effect, or you can use the lens at its peak f-stop (which is usually not f22) and still get a very deep DOF.
Howoften does one need it- I am too unexperienced yet to answer this question.

2. I also saw the video and thought - wow - thats kind of strange to have different lenses. And I was kind of disappointed that the Cambo tilt adapter has to be mounted for each lens (as far as I understood).
In the end I believe that the Sinar Artec offers 2 significant advantages: the built in tilt, and the sliding adapter which allows you to judge the image through the loupe and then just quickly change to the back. What you give up is handholding the camera.
Maybe Alpa and Cambo would rather come up with another body instead of trying to offer pricy adapter solutions.

As great as heliofocus in software might work, personally I prefer to achieve optically as much as possible rather than melting images later in software.

 

[thomas]

You can't fix everything in post. Working with Helcion focus is limited.
We have to wait for the prices of the Cambo TS adapter. It will be clearly less pricy as Alpas solution and at the same time works for much wider lenses as the 80mm for the Alpa (with Rodenstocks from 28mm with Digitars from 47mm). Cambo's approach here is that one would rarely need all lenses with TS. You need maybe two lenses with TS (say the 47XL and a 70mm or 90mm). For the Digitar 35XL and wider you actually don't need TS as DOF is already quite wide. And if you look at the prices of TS lenses for DSLRs they are much more expensive as the respective focal length without TS. So actually you decide if you buy a regular, say, 47XL or a 47XL-TS... and the TS version is more pricy of course.
One might share Cambo's approach or not. But at least it's a doable solution without redesigning the cameras. And at the same time the actual camera body is kept at a reduced rate (compared e.g. to the arTec) for those who don't need (or want) TS. I payed something around €5K for the WRS body, interface, groundglass, flexible lens hood, finder with extension and mask and the 47XL with lens panel. So compared to the arTec there is still a very nice lens in the budget. Or a case with some TS adapers ;-)

Tom: yes, with the 47XL I'd sometimes like to have slightly more DOF.

 

[Paratom]

I payed something around €5K for the WRS body, interface, groundglass, flexible lens hood, finder with extension and mask and the 47XL with lens panel. So compared to the arTec there is still a very nice lens in the budget. Or a case with some TS adapers ;-)

Wow, I thought the Cambo body alone was around 2k and the lens around 3k +vat.

I bought the arTec as a Set with a lens and digital back so it wasnt really much more money compared to the Cambo or Alpa solutions.

I am not saying one is better than the other
and - yes-you dont need tilt in all lenses. it doesnt hurt though to have it in the body instead of having it in the lens.

 

[thomas]

I am not saying one is better than the other

.. nor do I ;-) ...

it doesnt hurt though to have it in the body instead of having it in the lens.

I agree - the arTec was designed with TS from the very beginning. The Cambos originally were not. So they offer TS now as an additional option. As long as implementation will be fine (I do not doubt it will be) it's a useful addition. If you buy a new camera and TS is essential to you then the Cambos probably wouldn't be first choice. Arca Swiss Rm3d probably or the arTec...

 

[carstenw]

I often think I detect a subtle bias in what people write, for the Arca Rm3d and against the arTec, although it is never blatant. I personally find the arTec more compelling, and I am wondering if I missed something. Does the Arca have some advantage over the arTec?

 

[thomas]

I often think I detect a subtle bias in what people write, for the Arca Rm3d and against the arTec, although it is never blatant. I personally find the arTec more compelling, and I am wondering if I missed something. Does the Arca have some advantage over the arTec?

Carsten, yes, I am biased - the arTec would probably be MY camera and from the capabilities it is by far the most advanced and best thought out camera especially for the things I shoot. I just mentioned the Rm3d as its dimensions and basic concept is quite similar to the WRS. Size and weight matter as well for me personally so I am not totally sure about the arTec yet, but I think it would not be too heavy and too big for me.
Anyway... no compatibility by now with my Contax mount Phase backs (and Schneider lenses). And at this particular point I am biased as well: I find the "politics" of compatibility especially regarding Sinar totally reprehensible. Apart from this I find the products extremely good.

 

[jlm]

I'd like to know how the T/S users can see what they are attempting to do in the tiny ground glass image; tethering can deal with this, but i doubt that is used much outdoors

 

[dougpeterson]

In case you missed it Cambo has announced a Tilt-Shift solution set for its Cambo Wide series (DS, RS, Compact).

http://www.captureintegration.com/2009/07/02/cambo-wide-tilt-shift-mechanism/

This solution will start at 47mm for the Schneider XL series and at the 28mm in the Rodenstock series. It can be retroactively added to existing lenses for around $1300 (final price TBD) or ordered on new lenses.

IMO, a Schneider 47mm XL or Rodenstock 28mm with tilt on a Cambo Wide RS (which has generous shift) with a Phase One back is, on paper, the best tilt-shift solution ever made. Needless to say we are VERY excited for this product to start shipping. The Sinar solution, of course, is also nice but they have locked out any backs not made for the Hy6 or Hasselblad V mount and the price is astronomical. The HTS is a great system, but basing a tilt-shift lens on SLR glass by means of adding 6 new elements of glass rather than a mechanical only design using large format lenses is a major compromise.

My foreseen usage personally would be to find and mark the 1-shot and 2-shot hyperfocal points for f/11.5 with (e.g.) 5 degrees of tilt. This would fudge me a little extra depth of field and, once I do the initial hour or so of experimentation I would have a point-and-shoot solution which gains additional DOF in most landscape situations, along with a relatively point-and-shoot solution for taking two pictures for DOF-stacking.

Really, really, really cool. Hope it all pans out; Cambo is one of the few MF companies that has a pretty good history of not promoting vaporware.

Doug, Head of Technical Services
Captureintegration.com

 

[dougpeterson]

Don,

I had a similar reaction to the T/S video. It ignores the fact that the ALPA T/S adapter is about $2000, and requires short barrel lenses that cost three or four thousand dollars each, and are no shorter than 80mm. I thought it'd be fun to play with if someone else paid for it.

Steve

The "no shorter than 80mm" lens is what dooms it for me. There are few applications that desire tilt-shift without a easy/fast Through-The-Lens viewing system. In fact I find it hard to think of something other than Landscape.

While portraits, still life / product, architecture can all use tilt/shift they really require through-the-lens focusing. In these situations a viewcamera with a sliding back or a system like the HTS or the Phase 45mm T/S lens are much better choices than a tech camera with a T/S.

So where exactly is the market for an 80mm and longer tilt-shift solution on an Alpa??

 

[dougpeterson]

I'd like to know how the T/S users can see what they are attempting to do in the tiny ground glass image; tethering can deal with this, but i doubt that is used much outdoors

Exactly. If the degrees of tilt are simply factored into your previously established hyperfocal points at your desired shooting aperture then you can use it without thought/effort. This method only works on things like landscape, but for landscape works really really well.

 

[Don Libby]

I'm pleased to see my thoughts have been well received and not dismissed as ravings from a lunatic.

Breaking down the anticipated price of the Cambo of $1300 shows that the t/s solution is around $300 as they normally charge $1000 to change/fit a lensboard. This makes me wonder what the price (after all the dust settles) of a lens with the t/s will be if bought directly from Cambo? Will it only be an extra couple hundred dollars? If so great.

I feel better taking in the above scenario of buying a lens with the t/s lensboard for a couple hundred dollars more vs sending a lens in to be retrofitted. If that turns out to be the case then I just might have to see about where I can fit yet another lens in my kit.


Don

 

[Don Libby]

Exactly. If the degrees of tilt are simply factored into your previously established hyperfocal points at your desired shooting aperture then you can use it without thought/effort. This method only works on things like landscape, but for landscape works really really well.

You beat me to this!

 

[Don Libby]

Carsten - I'll admit to having a bias which at times is not all that subtle. I've tested three different Cambo systems (Ultima, WDS, WRS) and like everyone. I'd go with an Ultima in a heartbeat if I could only find someone to carry it for miles so I could use it. In my opinion the WRS is the next best option followed by the WDS.

As far as digital backs go there simply isn't anything better than a Phase One - how's that for subtle bias?

Don

 

[Jack]

I often think I detect a subtle bias in what people write, for the Arca Rm3d and against the arTec, although it is never blatant. I personally find the arTec more compelling, and I am wondering if I missed something. Does the Arca have some advantage over the arTec?

My bias is easy: IMO both are essentially vaporware. So show me a dealer who has IN STOCK a complete RM3D OR ArTec outfit with lenses and the sliding back that I can buy today. Not special order, but take home TODAY...

 

[thomas]

I'd like to know how the T/S users can see what they are attempting to do in the tiny ground glass image; tethering can deal with this, but i doubt that is used much outdoors

am not quite sure as I am not experienced with tilt yet. Regarding DOF to a certain degree you can judge about it on the groundglass.
Actually I guess DOF... based on my pre-experience of similar or comparable shots with the same lens. I think I would do the same with tilt as I would use it primarly for wider DOF at f11 or f16. So I think I would end up with similar settings frequently... if not always the same settings.

It can be retroactively added to existing lenses for around $1300 (final price TBD) or ordered on new lenses.

I've heard different prices. Over $1K would be too pricy... but let's wait for the final prodcut.

The Sinar solution, of course, is also nice but .... the price is astronomical.

actually if you sum up all the parts it's not that astronimical. The arTec price includes a lot of things you have to buy serparately at Cambo. The WRS is still less pricy but it has no sliding back and the finder of the arTec (GG and loupe and magnetic masks) - honor to whom honor is due - is simply better. Too, the tilt board is included in the arTec and as long as your price of $1300 will be the final price you can add $1300 or $2600 on the Cambo price and then the arTec is nearly a steal. But then again, of course, the HR lenses are more expensive than the Digitars... so finally it's all quite close depending on the actual setup you assemble.

 

[thomas]

Carsten - I'll admit to having a bias which at times is not all that subtle. I've tested three different Cambo systems (Ultima, WDS, WRS) and like everyone.

Don - which other tech cameras did you take in your hands or looked through?