Cambo Actar, anyone ?

[nazdravanul]

I would appreciate any experience with these lenses, on larger formats.
I plan to use them on he Fuji GFX 100, on the Actus-G setup but I cannot seem to find much informtion on the IQ of the 60, 80, 90 and 120.
I cannot afford the special (and probably discontinued) 105 HR and I’m not sure the 80, 90, or 120 can live up to that level of performance (or even to the level of the GF native optics).

 

[Alkibiades]

do you mean the 4/100HR or the new 105 macro?

 

[rdeloe]

Fujifilm GF lenses are excellent performers. However, depending on how you're measuring "level of performance", lots of lenses you can you use on an Actus G setup easily match them. I use or have used several Schneider-Kreuznach lenses on my setup that would work on an Actus G, and all are stellar. The ones I currently use are the Apo-Componon HM 60/4 and Apo-Componon HM 90/4.5. Both are easily as good as my GF 45-100 at corresponding focal lengths and apertures. I don't use it anymore but the Makro-Symmar 120/5.6 I used to own is unmatched within its design distance. The current owner finds it easily outperforms his GF 120 macro lens in some situations.

I don't know what Cambo is using for the Actar models you're interested in, but they're rehousing lenses that are likely to be comparable. In other words, I wouldn't assume that the GF lenses are better performers in all cases. Of course, the GF lenses don't allow movements, so if movements are crucial, then there's really no comparison.

 

[nazdravanul]

do you mean the 4/100HR or the new 105 macro?

The Cambo Actar 105 HR is the Rdenstock 105 macro, with floating element(s?) and with a dedicated ring - it allows you to select the magnification for which you need the lens IQ to be optimized. It’s expensive and I couldn’t really find stock anywhere and it doesn’t appear on the rodenstock website / pdf, that’s why I assume it was a short lived product.

 

[P. Chong]

The Actar 105 HR is also very expensive. I guess The less pricey 120 wouldn’t be as good, but wonder what is the difference. Anyone compared?

Is there a way to use the leaf shutters in large format lenses if they are so equipped with the GFX Actus? For high speed flash sync.

The Cambo Actar 105 HR is the Rdenstock 105 macro, with floating element(s?) and with a dedicated ring - it allows you to select the magnification for which you need the lens IQ to be optimized.

 

[vvince]

Hello,

I have the Actus, the Fuji GFX50R, and the Actar 60mm and 90mm.

When stopped down to f8 or better f11 I find the 60mm very sharp, comparable to the GF63mm, at least in the center.
You can shift the 60mm up to 20mm horizontally (in landscape orientation) until the hard vignetting appears, but the corners start to darken from 15mm. I guess 17-18mm is still usable (it‘s hard to give the exact number since I usually crop the final image if vignetting is to strong in the corners).

I have been looking for the perfect lens for the Actus in the range 50-60mm (and did not find it yet…) and the Actar is the one I use the most. Appart of that I have a Nikkor SW65mm which is much softer (but has no vigneting for the whole shift+raise range of the Actus), as well as the mamiya 67 ULM 50mm (larger shifting capabilities than the Actar, sharper than the Nikkor, but has some distortion, is large and heavy, and is not convenient to use).

If you plan to use the 60mm at f8 or f11 (forget about f4, f5.6 is OK if you do not shift and do not look too much in the corners), do not need crazy shifting, I guess that you‘ll be happy with the Actar. The unsharp areas (especially highlights) of the image are not so smooth, not that nice as with the GF lenses. So the lens is not perfect, but for me the best option in this focal range.

The 90mm is good, you can shift and raise all the Actus range without vignetting, and at f11 the image is sharp everywhere except the extreme corner when fully shifted/raised. I also have a Nikkor SW 90mm, which is also good, but the Actar is better. The Actar 90mm is also usable at the smaller aperture numbers when less shift is applied.

So, the Actar 60mm and 90mm are now my lenses of choice.

A member of this forum has tested the Actar 120mm and the 90mm, and could not see much difference in image quality between those two lenses.

Hope this help,

cheers

Vincent

 

[vvince]

Is there a way to use the leaf shutters in large format lenses if they are so equipped with the GFX Actus? For high speed flash sync.

Yes you can, but it is not very convenient.
Fire the GFX with Bulb speed setting, and then fire the shutter of the lens at desired speed (and of course connect your flash to the synch plug of the lens) while the GFX is in Bulb exposure.

 

[nazdravanul]

Hello,

I have the Actus, the Fuji GFX50R, and the Actar 60mm and 90mm.

When stopped down to f8 or better f11 I find the 60mm very sharp, comparable to the GF63mm, at least in the center.
You can shift the 60mm up to 20mm horizontally (in landscape orientation) until the hard vignetting appears, but the corners start to darken from 15mm. I guess 17-18mm is still usable (it‘s hard to give the exact number since I usually crop the final image if vignetting is to strong in the corners).

I have been looking for the perfect lens for the Actus in the range 50-60mm (and did not find it yet…) and the Actar is the one I use the most. Appart of that I have a Nikkor SW65mm which is much softer (but has no vigneting for the whole shift+raise range of the Actus), as well as the mamiya 67 ULM 50mm (larger shifting capabilities than the Actar, sharper than the Nikkor, but has some distortion, is large and heavy, and is not convenient to use).

If you plan to use the 60mm at f8 or f11 (forget about f4, f5.6 is OK if you do not shift and do not look too much in the corners), do not need crazy shifting, I guess that you‘ll be happy with the Actar. The unsharp areas (especially highlights) of the image are not so smooth, not that nice as with the GF lenses. So the lens is not perfect, but for me the best option in this focal range.

The 90mm is good, you can shift and raise all the Actus range without vignetting, and at f11 the image is sharp everywhere except the extreme corner when fully shifted/raised. I also have a Nikkor SW 90mm, which is also good, but the Actar is better. The Actar 90mm is also usable at the smaller aperture numbers when less shift is applied.

So, the Actar 60mm and 90mm are now my lenses of choice.

A member of this forum has tested the Actar 120mm and the 90mm, and could not see much difference in image quality between those two lenses.

Hope this help,

cheers

Vincent

Thank you, that's really helpful.
I do not plan to stop down further than f8, on the GFX 100, due to diffraction (I do aggressive enlargements and it does show up). The GFX will also be more demanding on lens performance due to the smaller pixel pitch.
Damn, I really cannot afford those Rodenstocks. I was honestly hoping that the Actar 60, 80, 90 and 120 were based on some solid digital designs, with some trade-offs like smaller image circles and not so good wide open performance. The problem is I can only afford to stop down to f8, and I need some solid 20mm of movements.
Anyone else's input is more than welcome.
Also some general feedback on the Actus is welcome. I would have preferred an Arca Swiss Universalis or even M2, but but budget is a solid consideration, so I can only hope the Actus-G is good enough.

 

[FloatingLens]

I don't use it anymore but the Makro-Symmar 120/5.6 I used to own is unmatched within its design distance. The current owner finds it easily outperforms his GF 120 macro lens in some situations.

Are you referring to the Makro-Symmar 5,6/120 HM?

 

[rdeloe]

Are you referring to the Makro-Symmar 5,6/120 HM?

Qualified yes. The one I used was the Makro-Symmar 120mm f/5.6 in the Makro-Iris industrial mount. The one you're referring to (I think) is the "HM" version in the Copal shutter. Basic specs are slightly different (in part because there are multiple variants of the industrial one). Also, the image circle for the Makro-Iris mount version is much tighter (on paper) than for the HM version.

There's lots of good info on the Makro-Iris industrial version I used here at Robert O'Toole's excellent site: https://www.closeuphotography.com/schneider-makro-symmar-sr-120

When I used it, I concluded that under 2m, it was already outstanding wide open, and got just a bit better closed down to just shy of f/8. At long distances, it was fairly terrible at the edges until f/11, when it became excellent right across the 33mm x 44mm frame, and stayed excellent with generous shifts. I sold it to someone once I found a good 90mm and a good 150mm.

If you want to see some full resolution JPEG samples of long distance performance, I've posted a series here from f/5.9 (the marked largest aperture on this lens) to f/22, including an f/11 pano made by flat stitching 20mm left/right shifts. There's a "readme" file that explains the test setup.

 

[Alkibiades]

there are a lot of very nice and not expensive lenses at the range of 60-120 mm.
If you want a lens for standart-normal use and want to use f8 or even 5,6 so you should take a look rodenstock Digaron -S HR lenses: 60 and 100 mm. Thay are even extremly sharp at f4.
And thay will allow you 20 mm movements on 33x44 even at f 8.
when you want even 30 mm movements so Apo Digitar 100 mm is here a great performer.
When you focus on macro, close distance so all Macro lenses from rodenstock and schneider are superb, yes even the older analoge versions.
Makro-Symmar HM 120mm and 80 mm are really good, the digital versions as Apo Digitar M even little sharper, especially the last version.
The same with rodenstock 120 mm macro.

 

[nazdravanul]

there are a lot of very nice and not expensive lenses at the range of 60-120 mm.
If you want a lens for standart-normal use and want to use f8 or even 5,6 so you should take a look rodenstock Digaron -S HR lenses: 60 and 100 mm. Thay are even extremly sharp at f4.
And thay will allow you 20 mm movements on 33x44 even at f 8.
when you want even 30 mm movements so Apo Digitar 100 mm is here a great performer.
When you focus on macro, close distance so all Macro lenses from rodenstock and schneider are superb, yes even the older analoge versions.
Makro-Symmar HM 120mm and 80 mm are really good, the digital versions as Apo Digitar M even little sharper, especially the last version.
The same with rodenstock 120 mm macro.

Valuable insights, thank you!

 

[Hemmi]

Hi I've got Actar 120 and 90 + gfx50 + Actus, shooting still life and macro. Both are great performers to me. Although I've just barely started, still building up my studio, so haven't tested them in all situations. The 120's got a bit more micro-contrast then the 90 and the depth of field is more esthetic when doing close ups. But the 90 is quite good in macro as well. Sometimes I can't really tell the difference.

Not happy with Actus at all for now. Focusing is a pain and it's not stable at all - you touch the lens - image shifts/ changes, you lock the focus - image shifts/changes. Feels like every element's got a little play. I have not tested focus stacking yet, so maybe stability is not an issue but I would not buy it if I knew all that beforehands.

 

[nazdravanul]

Hi I've got Actar 120 and 90 + gfx50 + Actus, shooting still life and macro. Both are great performers to me. Although I've just barely started, still building up my studio, so haven't tested them in all situations. The 120's got a bit more micro-contrast then the 90 and the depth of field is more esthetic when doing close ups. But the 90 is quite good in macro as well. Sometimes I can't really tell the difference.

Not happy with Actus at all for now. Focusing is a pain and it's not stable at all - you touch the lens - image shifts/ changes, you lock the focus - image shifts/changes. Feels like every element's got a little play. I have not tested focus stacking yet, so maybe stability is not an issue but I would not buy it if I knew all that beforehands.

Hmm, the wobbly Actus sounds like a real pain. Is it the G or the B version ?

 

[Hemmi]

Hmm, the wobbly Actus sounds like a real pain. Is it the G or the B version ?

It's Actus Gfx
I don't think the stability would be an issue if I haven't used it for close ups/composite shots. You should also bear in mind that the only other view cam I've briefly tried was the old Cambo Ultima which seemed more stable so I don't really know if other view cams perform better...

 

[nazdravanul]

It's Actus Gfx
I don't think the stability would be an issue if I haven't used it for close ups/composite shots. You should also bear in mind that the only other view cam I've briefly tried was the old Cambo Ultima which seemed more stable so I don't really know if other view cams perform better...

I need to use the view camera for the exact same type of shots. It looks like I need to start saving for that Arca M2 ….

 

[Hemmi]

I need to use the view camera for the exact same type of shots. It looks like I need to start saving for that Arca M2 ….

If I could rewind I would go for Arca. Especially knowing you could use 55mm sironar digitar w GFX on it. With Actus you are stuck with Actars for large angles... Than you get Arca d4 and you'll be fine. I went with Cambo all way down, got also Cambo PCF head which also has some play. Seems like they are not exactly the kings of stability.

 

[Alkibiades]

I need to use the view camera for the exact same type of shots. It looks like I need to start saving for that Arca M2 ….

I own also Arca Swiss M-2 and would always recommend this system.
it is the mix of size, quality, usability and endless possibilities.
You can use the camera with film till 8x10 inch, with all digital backs, with all digital cameras with best possible freedom.
with the GFX you can use also the 47 xl from schneider or with the sony cameras also the 35 xl and 43xl.
it is still not a perfect camera but i think the best if you want use all possibilities.

 

[Steve Hendrix]

It's Actus Gfx
I don't think the stability would be an issue if I haven't used it for close ups/composite shots. You should also bear in mind that the only other view cam I've briefly tried was the old Cambo Ultima which seemed more stable so I don't really know if other view cams perform better...

There are certainly compromises with every design. And a few of the key features of the Cambo Actus series is the amazingly small size, the versatility with cameras and lenses, and the price. With this design, self locking was not ideal, so there are locking levers and yes the locking levers can adjust focus. I tend to keep my locks semi locked so they act in a way like self locking. Somewhere between fully locked and completely loose. For those who desire more rigid self locking solutions, then yes, a Cambo Ultima or Arca Swiss M2 or even Universalis can be very positive alternatives.


Steve Hendrix/CI

 

[Alan]

If I could rewind I would go for Arca. Especially knowing you could use 55mm sironar digitar w GFX on it.

with the GFX you can use also the 47 xl from schneider or with the sony cameras also the 35 xl and 43xl.
it is still not a perfect camera but i think the best if you want use all possibilities.

Another happy Arca M2 user here! I recommend getting the Rotafoot mount. It eliminates the L-bracket mount which is very difficult to keep aligned to the sensor plane for critical use. The downside is that it eats up some flange distance, so will impact ability to use shorter lenses.