Comparision between Digaron-W 32 mm and Digaron-S 35 mm ( Apo Sironar HR)

[Alkibiades]

I can see that there are lot of interested guys in a great wide angle lens for technical cameras.
As we all know the first choice for all large sensors ( 53.4 x 40.0mm ) will be Digaron-W 32 mm, that will allow biggest movements at best sharpness and resolution. Also for me is this lens the first choice when I use my large sensor back. But nowadays the little sensors backs ( 43.8 x 32.9mm ) became more and more interesting in terms of costs and flexibility. Hasselblad, Phase one and leaf with Sony CMOS 50 megapixels ( and I hope sun 100 megapixels) are great tools that dont really need the big and very expensive Digaron -W lens and works perfect with the little brother Digaron-S 35 mm ( known earlier as Apo Sironar HR).
Having both lenses I made a little comparison of these lenses on a Phase one 250 back with 50 MP.
My Digaron-W is mounted on Cambo WRS, my Digaron-S on Linhof techno.
I will try to upload the files and hope that it help by serching for the right lens ...

 

[Alkibiades]

first Digaron-W 32 mm, 8 mm shift, raw, LCC, corrected, detail 100%. no sharpenig, standart capture one exported as Tiff and scale to jpg in PS.

 

[Alkibiades]

now the same with 4/35 mm Apo Sironar HR- Digaron-S, the same position, 8 mm shift on Linhof techno.

 

[Alkibiades]

I forget to mention that no distorion correction have been made and I used aperture 11 on both, this is what I use in my architecture shots most to get all sharp when movents are
necessary. Here is a shot with the 35 mm where you can see that the angle of the lens is great on the 33x42 mm sensors, not too wide but wide enougt to catch the most subjects.

 

[TheDude]

Alkibiades,
since you took and looked at all the photographs, what is your informed opinion?
Wonder how far one can shift the 35mm Digaron-S on a 54x40mm sensor and still get acceptable results?

 

[Alkibiades]

Alkibiades,
since you took and looked at all the photographs, what is your informed opinion?
Wonder how far one can shift the 35mm Digaron-S on a 54x40mm sensor and still get acceptable results?

My opinion:
According to the usement with the smaller sensor 33x44mm both lenses delivery
nearly same results and the 35 HR allows quite big movement without decrease in image quality.
It is smaller and much cheaper, therefore a great deal.
For the big 54x40 mm I always used the 32HR becouse I know that the 35 HR with much smaller image circle will not allow bigger movements, I think max 7mm. But I can try to test the 35HR on my big back and let you know my results.

 

[usm]

Is 8mm the maximal shift for the 35HR on the 33x44 Sensor?

 

[Alkibiades]

Is 8mm the maximal shift for the 35HR on the 33x44 Sensor?

No, afcourse not.
I get this question from few guys now so I test today the max shift.
I will add the pics today.
The max shift will be 15-16 without any Degradation! no soft edges like at Schneider lenses or 35 mm shift lenses from Canon/ nikon, that I also use on my Sony for fast and easy work.

 

[Alkibiades]

here the test 35 HR with Phaseone 250.
Pics shifted: 5mm, 10 mm, 12 mm, 15 mm.

 

[Alkibiades]

here the LCC files.
I have made a little mistake, the front standart of my camera was not putting on 0, I have seen it on the pics, that the camera is not centered,
the front standart of my Linhof techno was moved 2 mm to left, therefore the black corner on the right.

 

[Alkibiades]

here shift 18 mm.
This is too much, the image circle is reached and color degradetion in the corners is visible, where the detail sharpness in still good.

 

[Alkibiades]

here the pics with 15 mm shift- now the camera is right centered.
my conclusion- I hope is good to see on the pics-the lens work well even at 15 mm shift. there is no visible degradation in sharpness or color. the extem corners are still very sharp, the LCC can remove the color cast very well.
So for the 33x44 mm sensors the lens play in their own class, deliver simply best quality.
I will make later some test with the big sensor back- but for this big sensor the 32 HR will be the king afcourse.

 

[rdeloe]

This is a very helpful comparison Alkibiades. Thanks for doing all the work to make this available to us.

 

[TheDude]

For the big 54x40 mm I always used the 32HR becouse I know that the 35 HR with much smaller image circle will not allow bigger movements, I think max 7mm. But I can try to test the 35HR on my big back and let you know my results.

The 70mm coverage circle stated by Rodenstock (which would give 2mm movement on 54x40mm) may be just a "guaranteed' minimum. May have left a bit more on the table? Max. 7mm would be great.

 

[Alkibiades]

The 70mm coverage circle stated by Rodenstock (which would give 2mm movement on 54x40mm) may be just a "guaranteed' minimum. May have left a bit more on the table? Max. 7mm would be great.

I have done the test shots on the big sensor:
- I would say 7 mm shift are guaranteed.
- at 10 mm you see the end of the image circle and the edges stay dark. If you make classic architecture shots with the sky, so it would not be big problem, you simply use the stamp tool in Photoshop.
There are no problems with the color cast at all.

 

[Alkibiades]

here are the pics made with the big sensor: 54x40mm .
first 5mm shift, than 7 mm shift and 10 mm shift.
7 mm works perfect.

 

[usm]

Thanks for the comparison - very helpful!

 

[Alkibiades]

here some details from the pic with 7 mm shift. in my opinion the sharpness in the edges is simply impressing.

 

[TheDude]

here are the pics made with the big sensor: 54x40mm .
first 5mm shift, than 7 mm shift and 10 mm shift.
7 mm works perfect.

Thanks, very helpful, and greatly appreciated.

We all know that the 32HR is optically in another league than the 35HR but also also twice as heavy, bulky, and expensive - and even second-hand almost as expensive as new!

 

[PASCVAL]

Good comparison!! THX. Both lenses are superb!