Looks like tilt is coming to XT natively

[Paul Spinnler]

 

[SCHWARZZEIT]

I actually tested the 105 vs. the 138 at Alpa's HQ for that purpose with a Kaiser RSD stand (I know, not ideal); the 105 was markedly better at the magnification of 1 and above which could be useful for stitching high-res scans of film or say 35mm. I therefore opted to get the 105 with the Novoflex bellows. I think the best solution would be 105 with a shutter, but this is only possible with an Alpa FPS which is out of production ...

On a rigid copy stand the electronic rolling shutter of the back should suffice for constant LED illumination. Flash has more fluctuations in terms of light output and color temperature than LED. But I’ve also seen film digitization setups with flash illumination. In some environments where vibrations can hardly be eliminated flash can solve that issue.

One learning from that exercise was that although super fast, the workflow with a repro stand still is a lot more "finicky" IMHO compared to a high end flatbed such as the eversmart or IQSmart III which can batch scan ... you need to import all into C1, then neutralize it there, export to LR and then tweak each with NLP ... still a lot better than drum scanning (just in terms of workflow), though, as you surely know

If you’re using NLP, why would you need to import into C1? Or are you talking about the import during tethered capture?
I’m not using NLP. But as far as I understand it’s a raw workflow based negative conversion plug-in for LR where you can import the raw files directly.

The workflow efficiency for film scanning highly depends on the output size and quality you intend to achieve. In high throughput mass digitization compromises are inevitable. To keep this post within reasonable scope I’m picking up just one point here.
Film is a flexible medium. Fluid mounting keeps the film as flat as possible without worrying about Newton Rings. But that’s not a feasible option for mass digitization. Sandwiching the film between ANR glass will also keep the film flat but at the risk of residual Newton Rings showing up under scrutinous quality control. With glassless film carriers the effective output resolution will most likely be limited by diffraction at an aperture that will yield sufficient depth of field to mitigate some film curvature.

I’m running an ICG 370HS drum scanner along with my HXY scanner that I designed and built around an IQ4 back. Of course, the capture process with the IQ4 is much faster. When it comes to digitizing full collections at a given quality standard without curating the content, that’s where a high MP camera-based scanner excels.
In a fine art image production environment the goals are different. Once you factor in the whole processing chain towards a fully retouched ready-to-print master file in a highest quality workflow where the film is wet mounted anyway, there isn’t that much of a speed difference compared to a drum scanner. As an example, it takes my drum scanner about 100 minutes to scan a sheet of 8x10” film at 4000 ppi. But the level of automation allows me to use that time to work on processing or retouching previous scans. With the HXY scanner I can stitch to the same or larger size. But in my experience high quality stitching of very large files is labor-intensive. Extensive quality control is required to ensure that the necessary precision is maintained during capture as well as time-consuming manual adjustments for optimizing the stitch in the stitching software. While it’s still a bit quicker to get the stitched scan into Photoshop, the hands-on manual operation allocates the operator to a far greater extent than with a drum scanner. That’s one use case where I find my drum scanner more efficient.

I imagine if you go digitize books or paintings it will be great, don't you think? With flash to even out exposure at 5600 kelvin to get neutral colours ...

One issue I see with such a long focal length for art reproductions on a vertical copy stand could be limited height of the column to fit larger originals into the frame. I presume that was a criterion when Phase One decided to keep the normal focal length for the 72mm Mk II float reprographic iXH lens. If you have a tall enough copy stand and ceiling height to accommodate it, or if the object size constraints aren’t of any concern to you then based on the MTF data the HR 138 should be an stellar performer on a reprographic setup.

-Dominique

 

[Paul Spinnler]

But the level of automation allows me to use that time to work on processing or retouching previous scans. With the HXY scanner I can stitch to the same or larger size. But in my experience high quality stitching of very large files is labor-intensive. Extensive quality control is required to ensure that the necessary precision is maintained during capture as well as time-consuming manual adjustments for optimizing the stitch in the stitching software. While it’s still a bit quicker to get the stitched scan into Photoshop, the hands-on manual operation allocates the operator to a far greater extent than with a drum scanner. That’s one use case where I find my drum scanner more efficient.

-Dominique

This is the problem I ran into when digitizing 8x10 with the 105 - it just takes a lot of time to really get everything perfect - ie it is "finicky". If one is happy with one-shot, eg for medium format negatives, the medium format back approach is very good - but as soon as stitching comes into play and you have this whole XY table thing and need to ensure planarity with laser, etc. it just takes time and can be annoying vs. fully automated high end flatbed or drum scan as you do it.

I am still searching for a small drum scanner which still produces great results and does not take up a huge amount of space ...

On C1, yes, for tethering ...

 

[Paul Spinnler]

138mm lenses in Aperture Mount are already in the $15k - $16k range from Arca/Alpa/Cambo. So adding an X Shutter is going to push that into the $17k -$18k range, I expect.


Steve Hendrix/CI

Steve, have they been able to get the wiring to go through the lens body for the XT version of the lens, ie, will there be a difference between this version from P1 and the one sold direct via Cambo / Arca / Alpa?

Or is this the only XT lens requiring a cable like all the others given complexity of the build?

Best
Paul

 

[Mexecutioner]

From this photo I cannot see where the cable would attach. The location where it would normally be is not showing a connection port.

 

[Paul Spinnler]

From this photo I cannot see where the cable would attach. The location where it would normally be is not showing a connection port.
View attachment 195295

There's a latch you can open in these shutters on the bottom side of the assembly - the side perpendicular to the Phase One lettering. You can see the square door faintly on the picture you posted. I have a few lenses here - you can open them up to use them on a Cambo wide body.

The point is not about the 40 HR. It looks to me that the 138 HR for the XT will have to use a cable given the complexity of the inner lens assembly in which case the XT version wouldn't be so differentiated anymore and not really an XT version in the real sense, but just the Cambo version with X-shutter. And of course Phase wouldn't underscore that in the marketing materials by showing a dangling cable. And on the Alpa version you can use two 17mm spacers with tilt to create a 138 tilt and shift lens with X-shutter. But I am not sure - maybe Steve knows.

I am asking because as per the announcement the 138 HR is not sold directly, but by Cambo, meaning there's no real XT version of it. I suppose that would also mean no recording of shift information.

I think this is a quite crucial distinction, because it would effectively mean that due to practical constraints Phase One has chosen to not create a fully integrated 138 HR - which is a bit the whole point of paying the XT premium (ie cablelessness and shift info recording). I guess it has to do with the simple fact that the market for this lens is small and they are just taking Rodenstock's re-design to accommodate the X-shutter and for commercial reasons have chosen to just let Cambo sell a cambo mount version (which ofc fits on the XT like any other lens) - ie no real XT lens here ... we are talking about a great almost 20k short tele still ...Does probably not make much sense to invest in an XT mount customization with integrated electronics for shift recording given this lens is constructed in a more complex way and will sell in limited numbers given price

 

[vieri]

There's a latch you can open in these shutters on the bottom side of the assembly - the side perpendicular to the Phase One lettering. You can see the square door faintly on the picture you posted. I have a few lenses here - you can open them up to use them on a Cambo wide body.

The point is not about the 40 HR. It looks to me that the 138 HR for the XT will have to use a cable given the complexity of the inner lens assembly in which case the XT version wouldn't be so differentiated anymore and not really an XT version in the real sense, but just the Cambo version with X-shutter. And of course Phase wouldn't underscore that in the marketing materials by showing a dangling cable. And on the Alpa version you can use two 17mm spacers with tilt to create a 138 tilt and shift lens with X-shutter. But I am not sure - maybe Steve knows.

I am asking because as per the announcement the 138 HR is not sold directly, but by Cambo, meaning there's no real XT version of it. I suppose that would also mean no recording of shift information.

I think this is a quite crucial distinction, because it would effectively mean that due to practical constraints Phase One has chosen to not create a fully integrated 138 HR - which is a bit the whole point of paying the XT premium (ie cablelessness and shift info recording). I guess it has to do with the simple fact that the market for this lens is small and they are just taking Rodenstock's re-design to accommodate the X-shutter and for commercial reasons have chosen to just let Cambo sell a cambo mount version (which ofc fits on the XT like any other lens) - ie no real XT lens here ... we are talking about a great almost 20k short tele still ...Does probably not make much sense to invest in an XT mount customization with integrated electronics for shift recording given this lens is constructed in a more complex way and will sell in limited numbers given price

Theoretically, wouldn't it be possible to have:

- A 138mm Phase One lens with X-Shutter connected to the XT via a cable telling the IQ4 it's a Phase One lens, not a Cambo lens;
- The IQ4 recognising it's a Phase One lens and therefore reading the shift movements from the camera (the IQ4 IS connected to the camera anyway electronically)?

Sounds like it's doable, if Phase is willing.

Best regards,

Vieri

 

[Paul Spinnler]

Theoretically, wouldn't it be possible to have:

- A 138mm Phase One lens with X-Shutter connected to the XT via a cable telling the IQ4 it's a Phase One lens, not a Cambo lens;
- The IQ4 recognising it's a Phase One lens and therefore reading the shift movements from the camera (the IQ4 IS connected to the camera anyway electronically)?

Sounds like it's doable, if Phase is willing.

Best regards,

Vieri

Yes, I guess, this is basically my question a) do we need a cable and b) does it record shift ...

 

[Steve Hendrix]

Steve, have they been able to get the wiring to go through the lens body for the XT version of the lens, ie, will there be a difference between this version from P1 and the one sold direct via Cambo / Arca / Alpa?

Or is this the only XT lens requiring a cable like all the others given complexity of the build?

Best
Paul

Paul, as far as I know, this lens will not be sold by Phase One as a "native" XT lens, only through the Cambo/Alpa/Arca channels (of which we participate with all three).

Meaning that it will always require the communication cable, and as such, my instincts tell me that it will functionally operate just like other cable-required X Shutter lenses (no embedded shift metadata).


Steve Hendrix/CI

 

[Paul Spinnler]

Paul, as far as I know, this lens will not be sold by Phase One as a "native" XT lens, only through the Cambo/Alpa/Arca channels (of which we participate with all three).

Meaning that it will always require the communication cable, and as such, my instincts tell me that it will functionally operate just like other cable-required X Shutter lenses (no embedded shift metadata).


Steve Hendrix/CI

Thanks for clarifying - I think initially the intent was to have it "XT native", but the re-design was done by Rodenstock just now and there's probably not enough RoE to now take that design and further develop a special mount with electrical communication channels to control the aperture at the top ... It is an insanely precise lens, when holding it was evident that it has very high tolerances and is built in a more complex manner than the other lenses so really nice that we have a shutter based option at least ...

 

[anwarp]

I’m surprised that shift information is not recorded. After all, that information comes from the camera.

 

[Paul Spinnler]

I’m surprised that shift information is not recorded. After all, that information comes from the camera.

Maybe dependent on P1, but then they'd break their artificial differentiating factor for the XT lens premium in part as then the next question would why doesn't the back record shift metadata with all Cambo lenses equipped with a shutter on the XT body ... If they'd allow a non-native XT lens to record metadata the natural next question would be to let the XT do this for all "non-native" x shutter lenses it has mounted incl. some special stuff like Photo Greiner X-shutter mounted Schneider Kreuznach lenses with Cambo mount ... then the XT benefit would be reduced to the cablelessness.

So essentially you will be able to get the same lens from all manufacturers with the difference being with the cambo version (vs. Arca, Alpa, Linhof, etc.) that you can mount it onto the XT - but without shift metadata because P1 commercially made the decision to give its XT lenses two key differentiators for a premium price: metadata features + loss of cable.

The Alpa version has the benefit that you can add two 17mm tilt spacers behind the tech cam body making it effectively a tiltable / swingable lens which can be used on a non-bellows / CNC machined body like the XY or Pano which both can exploit the 35mm shift in a very precise manner with the short barrel mounting technique (spacers come behind the tech cam in front of the digital back and lens is mounted with just a short barrel in front of the tech cam which increases useable IC). With the short barrel approach I did not see any vignetting at 35mm left / right ... ie 70mm of shift vs. 24mm available on the XT. Am not familiar in detail with the Cambo / Arca universe, but I think the other solution to exploit the full IC would be via a bellows-style camera setup, e.g. Actus or the Arca / Linhof variants with X-shutter with cable which might not be as precise as a proper CNC milled tech body solution.

 

[vjbelle]

The Actus cameras are limited to 40mm lateral and 27mm approximately vertical. The Arca bellows cameras ( M-two MF - M-two DSLR ) have 70mm lateral and 70mm vertical.

 

[anwarp]

I don’t have an XT. I presume an XT lens also provides focal length metadata?

So thinking aloud, can one (Cambo) make a smart mount that allows the XT to ‘identify’ the lens? Similar to the adapter you can can get to mount contax lenses on canon eos cameras.

Sorry, guess I’m rambling on and going off-topic now.

 

[Paul Spinnler]

I don’t have an XT. I presume an XT lens also provides focal length metadata?

So thinking aloud, can one (Cambo) make a smart mount that allows the XT to ‘identify’ the lens? Similar to the adapter you can can get to mount contax lenses on canon eos cameras.

Sorry, guess I’m rambling on and going off-topic now.

They are the contract manufacturer for Phase One. They produce the XT and mount also the native XT lenses. So they won't ever act against P1's interests because they are legally prohibited from doing so and because it is the hand that feeds them and because they are co-dependent.

The whole concept of "native XT" has been brought to the world of more or less interoperable tech cam lenses to create a differentiation for Phase One so people directly buy from Phase One at a premium. Before Phase One's entry into the space you could just easily send a lens for re-mounting and it wouldn't matter whether you had a Hassy or P1 back; now the entry ticket is a P1 back if you want a shutter ... The point in tech cam land is that none of the camera manufacturers have expertise in tech cam lenses. The monopoly lies with Rodenstock so they can choose to sell to whomever and no one can oblige them to produce only for one manufacturer.

And for those waiting for the 200 megapixel GS sensor - it won't happen. So for the foreseeable future Phase One remains will be the sole place where you can get 150 megapixels + digitally controlled shutters. Of course this privilege costs ...

Since Phase One has the IP for their X-shutter they can, though, create an artificial differentiation in this space by creating "native tech cam lenses" which specifically work better with their digital back. Also, important aspect to note, since the demise of the Sinar e-shutter, there is no alternative to Phase One's X-shutter for Hasselblad digiback owners. The only alternative would have been the Alpa FPS, but this has been discontinued in the wake of the X-shutter. One can dream and think of a revival of the e-shutter in conjunction with Hassy, but this would require sorting out some licensing / IP issues as the rights to this now lie with Leica ...

The importance of this monopoly on tech cam shutters for P1 cannot be underestimated - it is part of the reason why they can stick with their high price point.

If Hasselblad could use another kind of shutter or the X-shutter - why would you pay the price for a Phase back if expectedly there will be a sub-10k alternative with 100 megapixels from Hasselblad in not too long?

This said, it is one thing to force people to use the Phase One backs for the X-shutter (instead of Hassy), but another thing to force the XT onto loyal P1 customers who in the past have chosen to use other tech cams, ie Alpa, Arca, et al. - they could and wouldn't do that, so this is why there's the cable for all other users. It is not a problem per se, but just less convenient than no cable at all. The one thing they did, though, was to very slowly supply the other manufacturers with the x-shutter which led to the point that for a year or so your only option to get the X-shutter was to "go native" even if you had an Alpa or Cambo, Arca. Which in the end was helpful for the kickstart of the XT as a camera ...

So in essence:

a) X-shutter forces you to use a Phase back
b) "Native XT" is a concept introduced to release a proprietary lens mount which costs more based on metadata and cablelessness differentiating factors

The 138 HR was initially planned to be native XT (it was announced to come as part of the product roadmap) - but it evidently was just not possible and is not economically feasible to now go in there and custom engineer a native XT mount with electrical contacts from the bottom of the lens to the aperture on top. Marketing materials are a bit misleading by not showing the cable in the Cambo version.

I'd be surprised if they now sell more than 50-100 of these lenses globally given focal length and price point. My point here is that this lens is made for big shift and hence is best used in the Arca, Alpa ecosystems - with a Phase One back, of course.

For me the biggest reason to get into the XT was the potential coming of auto LCC - which is still nowhere to be seen. Imagine all images from 23HR to 50HR to always be imported into C1 without light fall-off and perfectly color cast corrected - that's then a real workflow improvement ... and worth a lot more than just the omission of a cable ...

 

[Phase V]

If the 138mm won´t get any electrical contacts on the mount i wonder why they did not split it up in two pieces; smaller mount in front and a spacer backside as they did with the 90mm. I doubt you can use the whole possible movements with just that one large mount in front.

 

[Paul Spinnler]

That's why I am actually thinking of getting two tilt spacers for the Alpa which would create a 138 HR tilt and swing setup with a total 70mm shift capability left and right. Even with the Alpa Max you can exploit 25mm left and right if you make use of the symmetry of the body by attaching two small Alpa Arca dovetails on the left and right hand side of the camera. On the Pano you can then very quickly get ultra high res shots in a 4 to 5 ratio if you do a hex stitch (3 shots left and right with 10mm shift upwards, 3 shots left and right downards all in portrait orientation).