The GetDPI Photography Forum

Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!

HCam Master TS 11-24mm

Stefan Steib

Active member
Hi what do you mean by the new design does not work properly ?
the only difference between the old version and the new version is the old has a lever that needs to be unlocked.
the new one has a clickstop with springs that click into position.
there is no other difference in rotation.

Regards
Stefan
 
Stefan,
Please reread my post. At no point did I state that the new version does not work properly.

I simply asked if there was any design change of the current Hcam, as compared to the version Daf has, as I have been struggling to do a 4 x image stitch as per his instructions.

This has been illustrated by the photos I have provided. I believe this forum is exactly the place to ask such questions and hopefully have other users with similar equipment help with such queries. As stated in my original post, this could easily be something that I have misread and am not doing properly.

With regards to the flare issue, I do believe this to be a problem, given the shooting situation and where the sun was relative to the camera. Internal flare of adapters has been heavily documented with the original Metabones Canon to Sony adapters when using lenses with large image circles..

As documented here and many other forums..

http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1247661/100

This led to many flocking their adapters with light absorbing material to get rid of internal flare. Marc Aurel provided the template for other users to print and cut out for their own adapters. This to me is a photography forum working as it should.

So, am curious to know how your adapter is different to the issues that people encountered with the original Metabones adapter. I have both now and do not see much difference at all. If anything, I can see the Hcam Master being more prone to internal flare as the section of the adapter that "shifts" seems quite reflective to me (as it is lubricated with some type of grease/oil.) You have suggested in the past that you do not recommend "flocking" due to particles getting on the sensor.. That is fair enough but I have no idea how to avoid the flare issue as shown in my examples above. I do not believe this is something that can be fixed by a lens hood, as mentioned, the sun was directly behind.

Thanks. Look forward to your thoughts.
 

ErikKaffehr

Active member
Hi,

The HCam Master TS has two internal baffles that cut of some beams of light arriving on the sensor. That may help with reducing internal reflections.

The first day I have used the adapter with some of my Hasselblad wide angles I have seen flare, but light was extremely from the side. At that time I used a Photodiox adapter. Since than I replaced the Photodiox with a Novoflex that is nicely matted.

The Novolflex is nicely matted.

I have not seen flare issues recently, but the HCam is nothing I use each day in each situation. But it is always in the bag.

Best regards
Erik
 

Stefan Steib

Active member
Stefan,
Please reread my post. At no point did I state that the new version does not work properly.

I simply asked if there was any design change of the current Hcam, as compared to the version Daf has, as I have been struggling to do a 4 x image stitch as per his instructions.

This has been illustrated by the photos I have provided. I believe this forum is exactly the place to ask such questions and hopefully have other users with similar equipment help with such queries. As stated in my original post, this could easily be something that I have misread and am not doing properly.

With regards to the flare issue, I do believe this to be a problem, given the shooting situation and where the sun was relative to the camera. Internal flare of adapters has been heavily documented with the original Metabones Canon to Sony adapters when using lenses with large image circles..

As documented here and many other forums..

http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1247661/100

This led to many flocking their adapters with light absorbing material to get rid of internal flare. Marc Aurel provided the template for other users to print and cut out for their own adapters. This to me is a photography forum working as it should.

So, am curious to know how your adapter is different to the issues that people encountered with the original Metabones adapter. I have both now and do not see much difference at all. If anything, I can see the Hcam Master being more prone to internal flare as the section of the adapter that "shifts" seems quite reflective to me (as it is lubricated with some type of grease/oil.) You have suggested in the past that you do not recommend "flocking" due to particles getting on the sensor.. That is fair enough but I have no idea how to avoid the flare issue as shown in my examples above. I do not believe this is something that can be fixed by a lens hood, as mentioned, the sun was directly behind.

Thanks. Look forward to your thoughts.
As you have seen yourself, that is always a combination of rotation and movements used.
It is nearyl impossible to prevent any possible combination of lens, movement and rotation to be a little bit differing.

Some lenses are more prone to this and the flare does not come from the adapter firstplace, it also happens in a lens when you change the used angle from the projected beam angle of a fixed mount.

Overall we have e.g. reworked our Hartblei Lenses from the Original Zeiss/Hasselblad flare control to additionally 3 more lighttraps and a completely capsuled TS mechanism to get rid of this.
This is the advantage of dedicated TS lenses and it also costs, must be done for each lens in specific and needs some work, time and thinking.

But overall I think the HCam Master TS works very well, especially when compared with other solutions, even more like the fixed Metabones or similar adapters. And new lenses like the 11-24mm EF-L have a very good flare control. I have not yet seen any of this with the modified 11-24mm that we sell, the Nikon 14-24mm is equally very resistant and the 4/16-35mm EF-L seems to be on par.

So remember: it´s a mixture of effects. Always.

Regards
Stefan
 
I have seen that some people have had success in using the Canon 16-35 zoom with the Hcam Master adapter.

Just wondering if there is a similar Nikon zoom that gives good results?

Am just thinking that if there was, with a simple Nikon G - Eos adapter, it would provide aperture control... :)

Anybody had success in this area?
 

mhespenheide

New member
I don't have an answer for you, but I've thought about the exact same thing...

I'm hoping the clear up some funds to purchase one of the HCam adapters in the next month or so and, if so, I'll post the results here.
 

Stefan Steib

Active member
I don´t have a complete answer for you folks, but one thing I tried , was Tamron´s 15-30mm in Nikon mount, as I was planning to do the exact same thing,
using the Novoflex EOS Nik NT Adapter to control the aperture. But as the Lens shifted inside of the barrel when zooming to the longer end and the Nikon mount is smaller than the EOS mount in diameter, the possible movements were so reduced that it didn´t work well.

If the back lens is not shifting inside it may be working, but that depends on the lens and needs to be tested for each and every lens in specific.

So I´m sorry for not being able to clear this up more, but It is not so easy to test all these lenses if I don´t own them.

Greetings from Germany
Stefan
 
So I have tested my Pentax 67 45mm lens with the Hcam Master and using Daf's stitching technique as illustrated earlier...


I must be doing something wrong as am getting the same results as with the Pentax 645 35mm...

Is there anybody who might be able to point out where I am possibly going wrong?

Also, with the Pentax 67 45mm, I seem to be running into serious vignetting.. I can only assume this is the combination of the lens and maybe the combination of adapters I am using (a Fotodiox Pentax 67 - Eos).

ErikKaffehr, are you using the Pentax 67 45mm? Are these results standard? I know it cannot be anything to do with its image circle, as this lens is obviously designed to cover 6cm x 7cm film.


Also, is there any chance you could follow Dafs stitching directions above to possibly see where I have been going wrong? I have only had success with stitching at the 45 degree mark..

Also, I have seen that you have a number of Hasselblad lenses for use with the Hcam Master. Have you ever considered combining this with a Mirex Hasselblad - Eos adapter, to obtain independent shifts and rises?

Thanks so much in advance!
 

Attachments

ErikKaffehr

Active member
Hi,

I have tested the Pentax 67 45/4 twice, one time with bad results and one time with good results. Same lens, very different results.

In the first test I had a lot of flare and chromatic aberration in the second one I have not seen any of that. First time was bad weather and second time good one.

In the first test I used a Kipon Pentax 67 to Canon mount adapter. In the second test I used the front part of the Kipon combined with the rear part of the Novoflex I use with my Hasselblad lenses. The reason I did this is that the Novoflex is painted black matte inside while the Kipon is quite shiny black.

In the second test the Pentax 67 45/4 was much better than the Distagon 40/4.

I have not observed flare with the Sony A7rII/HCam Master TSII/Novoflex solution with any of my Hasselblad lenses. Right now, I think I much prefer the Pentax 67 45/4 to the Distagon 40/4. I got good results with the Distagon 60 and the Planar 100/3.5.

But, I am not a T&S addict, I just see it as an addition to my photographic capabilities. A good option is to use Canon lenses. The 16-35/4 offers a generous amount of shift.

What I have seen, the great limitation in working with Hasselblad or Pentax 67 lenses are the internal baffles on the Master T&S. What I could se is the inner diameter of Novoflex/Kipon adapters no real limitation.

Chris Barret uses Hasselblad lenses on an Arca Universalis, I think, and he can do 20 mm of shift. He has a Distagon 40/4 CFE (or CFi). That lens uses the same lens group as mine.

Best regards
Erik


So I have tested my Pentax 67 45mm lens with the Hcam Master and using Daf's stitching technique as illustrated earlier...


I must be doing something wrong as am getting the same results as with the Pentax 645 35mm...

Is there anybody who might be able to point out where I am possibly going wrong?

Also, with the Pentax 67 45mm, I seem to be running into serious vignetting.. I can only assume this is the combination of the lens and maybe the combination of adapters I am using (a Fotodiox Pentax 67 - Eos).

ErikKaffehr, are you using the Pentax 67 45mm? Are these results standard? I know it cannot be anything to do with its image circle, as this lens is obviously designed to cover 6cm x 7cm film.


Also, is there any chance you could follow Dafs stitching directions above to possibly see where I have been going wrong? I have only had success with stitching at the 45 degree mark..

Also, I have seen that you have a number of Hasselblad lenses for use with the Hcam Master. Have you ever considered combining this with a Mirex Hasselblad - Eos adapter, to obtain independent shifts and rises?

Thanks so much in advance!
 
Hi Erik,
Thanks so much for the taking the time to respond.. Much appreciated! Yes, I believe that the internal reflections of adapters can be a real issue..


Is there any way at all that you could possibly try the stitching technique as describer previously by Daf?



I would love to know what I am missing and if I am doing something wrong...

Thanks so much in advance!
 
Here are a few very boring samples that I took with the Hcam Master.....

https://www.dropbox.com/home?preview=GetDpi_Canon24mmTSE

https://www.dropbox.com/home?preview=GetDpi_Samyang24mm

https://www.dropbox.com/home?preview=GetDpi_Pentax645_35mm.jpg

https://www.dropbox.com/home?preview=GetDpi_Contax64535mm.jpg

https://www.dropbox.com/home?preview=GetDpi_Pentax645_55mm.jpg


My impressions are, the Pentax 645 35mm is very close to the Contax 645 35mm.. Close enough, that being used with the Hcam master it is actually a no brainer.. :)

This might be different when used with a system that enables the "true" image circle of a lens to display itself, without vignetting from the adapter itself...

Still, a decent test for the system I have now...

Look forward to your thoughts :)
 

Stefan Steib

Active member
Don´t forget the E-mount diameter. it is significantly smaller than Canon EOS in diameter. The same inner adapter opening will not vignette on a larger mount.

Regards
Stefan
 

NoBob

New member
Hi Stefan,

Not sure if this has been asked elsewhere (if so, could you point me in the direction of the post or web page, please?).

What is the difference between the Mirex adapters and the HCam Master TS?

Thanks.
 

Stefan Steib

Active member
Hi Stefan,

Not sure if this has been asked elsewhere (if so, could you point me in the direction of the post or web page, please?).

What is the difference between the Mirex adapters and the HCam Master TS?

Thanks.
The Mirex adapters don´t have the rotational Collar, we have also improved the size of the inner opening by 3mm horizontal and 6mm vertical.
The Locking system of the back rotation is by Clickstops and it uses several Novoflex parts as the mounting plate of the collar.
HCam Master TS V2 is sold exclusively by HCam.de

Regards
 

Attachments

That Mattebox looks very useful indeed.. Surely it vignettes at wider focal lengths though?



Stefan, am thinking of adding a second Mirex to my Hcam Master to use a Hasselblad lens and am just wondering if you knew if there would be much difference between using a Mirex Pentax 645 tilt/shift adapter and then adding a normal Hasselblad - Pentax 645 to it, as opposed to using a straight Mirex Hasselblad - Eos tilt/shift adapter?

From what I have heard, the Hasselblad adapter has a larger opening, so I guess less chance of early vignetting..

If I got the Mirex Pentax 645 tilt/shift, then I would be able use my current Pentax lenses as well...

Any thoughts?
 

Stefan Steib

Active member
That Mattebox looks very useful indeed.. Surely it vignettes at wider focal lengths though?



Stefan, am thinking of adding a second Mirex to my Hcam Master to use a Hasselblad lens and am just wondering if you knew if there would be much difference between using a Mirex Pentax 645 tilt/shift adapter and then adding a normal Hasselblad - Pentax 645 to it, as opposed to using a straight Mirex Hasselblad - Eos tilt/shift adapter?

From what I have heard, the Hasselblad adapter has a larger opening, so I guess less chance of early vignetting..

If I got the Mirex Pentax 645 tilt/shift, then I would be able use my current Pentax lenses as well...

Any thoughts?
Hi David

1. Depending on which adapter you use: the combo of Hasselblad/Pentax adapter and Mirex will be more expensive than the Hasselblad mirex alone.
2. The openings of the new adapters are always the same, there is no bigger one for the Hasselblad.
3. Of course a combo with 2 adapters would be more versatile than a plain Hasselblad Mirex.

4. about the Mattebox - no - it does NOT vignette, as you can adjust the depth of the insertion to the used focal length.
The only negative point about this is, that rotating the camera from landscape to portrait may have less shading than the landscape orientation.

Regards
Stefan
 
Top