Options for long focal length lenses on a small tech camera

[Lorenz(X)]

Hello there,

Now that the idea of a digital back ist off the table for a few years (I guess) I can concentrate on the lenses I want to use with the Swebo tech cam and the GFX50s.
I read @rdeloe `s and @John Leathwick `s articels on lens selection with these small tech cams and mirrrless cameras. I thank both of you for your effort and the sharing of wisdom and ideas.
Unsurpisingly I came to the same conclusion as John, and a full set of Mamiya RZ lenses is just.... really heavy.
Till a 150mm I am well covered, but I really like using telephoto lenses for landscape sometimes, and I would like to know your opinions on options.
I am thinking about the Mamiya RZ 360, wich might be a good compromise for such a long lens, cause I can use my existing rail and bellows for that. I don´t need a hole selection of teles with small increments in focal length.

Right now, it starts at 35mm with a M645 lens, Schneider 47mm, Rodi 80mm, M645 110 and 150 wich are great as non tech lenses with a simple or TS adapter, and finally a RZ 180mm.
I would like to have something around 200mm as a tech lens, wich would replace the 180mm RZ, and then preferably a big step to have something with a lot more reach.
Maybe you can point me in a direction that I missed so far, and my experience with, and knowledge about tech lenses is, well, practically zero.

Thanks in advance

 

[Precision]

Longer view camera lenses are incredibly inexpensive anymore, as the primary use case for them (studio tabletop work with a 4x5 film camera) is no longer a commercial thing.

I found a very late Sinaron S 210 5.6 (a tremendous lens, basically a bin selected Apo Rodenstock) for under $200 in a DB board in perfect condition. if you find one in a regular shutter, you’ll end up paying the difference for the shutter cost, probably plus a little more for the convenience. my one question would be can you hit infinity focus with your camera? its like a 9” bellows draw for a 210.

Other than my 150 f5.6 apo-super-symmar, it’s my favorite lens In studio.

and, to pre-empt a follow up question, no, the DB aperture assembly cannot be used with anything but a DB shutter.

 

[John Leathwick]

Hello there,

Now that the idea of a digital back ist off the table for a few years (I guess) I can concentrate on the lenses I want to use with the Swebo tech cam and the GFX50s.
I read @rdeloe `s and @John Leathwick `s articels on lens selection with these small tech cams and mirrrless cameras. I thank both of you for your effort and the sharing of wisdom and ideas.
Unsurpisingly I came to the same conclusion as John, and a full set of Mamiya RZ lenses is just.... really heavy.
Till a 150mm I am well covered, but I really like using telephoto lenses for landscape sometimes, and I would like to know your opinions on options.
I am thinking about the Mamiya RZ 360, wich might be a good compromise for such a long lens, cause I can use the my rail and bellows for that. I don´t need a hole selection of teles with small increments in focal length.

Right now, it starts at 35mm with a M645 lens, Schneider 47mm, Rodi 80mm, M645 110 and 150 wich are great as non tech lenses with a simple or TS adapter.
I would like to have something around 200mm as a tech lens, and then preferably a big step to have something with a lot more reach.
Maybe you can point me in a direction that I missed so far, and my experience with, and knowledge about tech lenses is, well, practically zero.

Thanks in advance

I have a couple of longer lenses that I use. The smallest and lightest is a Nikkor M 200/8, which is a superb performer, but I have to carry an extension rail and longer bellows if I wish to use it. However, once setup, it is very capable and can be easily used with movements, e.g, to do a flat-stitched panorama or using front tilt.

I have also kept my two Mamiya RZ Apo-Sekors, a 210mm and a 350mm, both of which are superb optically. I can use them on my F-Universalis, but do so using a small home-made plywood support that I place between the front of the rail and the underside of the lens. That works well for rear shifts or rise/fall, but tilt is tricky. I mostly use these lenses directly on a Photodiox RZ-GFX adapter, which works very well. I initially found flare troublesome, but adding some black flocking inside the adapter solved that. I have very successfully shot panoramas with these, as images taken with long lenses are generally easy to stitch when taken using a rotating tripod head.

-John

 

[rdeloe]

@Lorenz(X) , John has more experience with very long lenses than me, so I'm glad he's shared his perspective on your question.

The longest lens I use regularly is a S-K APO-Digitar 150/5.6. It is excellent and not very heavy. I have it in a custom mount that gives me enough extension that I don't need a longer rail on either of the two technical cameras where I use it.

A couple years ago I convinced myself that I needed something longer. My Lightroom catalogue says I was wrong about that, which is why I have several longer lenses sitting in a drawer unused. I did not want to use a longer rail and bellows on my F-Universalis, so I tried telephoto design lenses from several manufacturers. These are the ones I went through:

• Pentax-FA 200/4. This is a good choice because it has a decently large image circle and is good quality.
• Pentax 67 200/4. Optically this is a nice sharp lens, but something gets in the way of the light path when I shift, which limits shift to ~10mm. It's also very heavy and overweights the front standard.
• Mamiya N 210/8 (hacked). The Mamiya N lenses are all superb, except this one which I'd say is just very good. It's relatively tiny and light, which is a big plus. It's as good at f/8 as it gets, so the slow max aperture is not as big a liability as you might think. The hack job you have to do is permanent and requires a technician.
• Fuji GX 680 210/5.6 and 250/5.6 (severely hacked and rehoused). These are good performers -- about the same as the Mamiya N 210/8. They have a huge image circle, and are not so heavy that they completely overweight the front standard.

If you decide you want to try a large format lens with a symmetrical design, you need to confirm that you can get enough rail and bellows extension on your Swebo. Track down the flange distance for a lens you're interested in, and then compare to the maximum amount of extension you can get.

My advice: by far the easiest and most economical solution is the Pentax-FA 200/4 on a Pentax lens board on your Swebo. You'll get a good 10mm of shift, and possibly a bit more.

 

[John Black]

If you just want to add tele range to kit and have mild ambitions about shift ranges, adapting a 6x6 and 645 lens might be a cost effective option. The Hasselblad 180/4 CFI is good performer. Likewise, the Mamiya 200/2.8 APO.

 

[Lorenz(X)]

Thank you guys!

@Precision : I think for symmetrical lenses 150mm is the maximum without needing a longer rail and bellows. 9 inches are not possible. But a 150mm large format lens will probably find its way to me.

@John Leathwick : I did not initially plan on getting the Fotodiox GFX-RZ adapter, but then I saw one for 80€ in like new condition and I couldn´t say no to that. Mine is already nicely structured and matt black coated inside by the way, maybe they changed that. Something similar happened with the Fotodiox TS adapter for M645 lenses on GFX cameras. When it arrived I was very happy to find out that they added a tripod mount. And it is mounted to the part that holds the lens, wich means all movements are happening behind the stationary lens. Great for flat stitching. I guess the 350 apo or 360 are a good compromise for me for the longest focal length that I plan on getting. I will certainly not have it with me all the time. But I tend to revisit spots. I am pretty confident that the Swebo can handle the weight. At least there is no problem with the 50mm RZ. Well not for the camera that is..

That kind of leaves me with the want for a lens with around 200mm.

It is a real pitty that right now it's kind tight to use the M645 lenses on the Swebo with the GFX and its sensor beeing so deep inside the camera body. I was using the 210mm, and I actually liked it a lot. Till the aperture mechanism disintegrated.

@rdeloe : I will look into the Fuji GX 210mm, that sounds interresting! I do have access to a metal workshop, and a skilled craftsman who could help me get the modification done right.

@John Black: Using M645 and RZ lenses was my starting point. I really like the results.

Again, thank you all. I do have options that I will check.
I will find out if I can get a bag bellows for the Swebo. That would make working with the M645 lenses much better. I will keep these lenses anyway since they are just great for everyday shooting without movements on a simple adapter.
There still is the TS adapter for M645 lenses, so I could always use that with long focal length lenses. The tech cam of course is nicer to use...
I found your topic on the use of GX lenses on a tech cam @rdeloe , thank you a lot!
And I guess I am pretty set on getting another RZ, either the 350 or the 360mm

One more question: With the wide angle tech lenses there is a difference between the SKs and the Rodies, Rodies tend to have longer FFL distances. Are there longer LF lenses wich are more of retrofocus desings and shorter FFLs compared to their focal lengths?

I am learning a lot, so keep it coming! Thanks

 

[rdeloe]

One more question: With the wide angle tech lenses there is a difference between the SKs and the Rodies, Rodies tend to have longer FFL distances. Are there longer LF lenses wich are more of retrofocus desings and shorter FFLs compared to their focal lengths?

Large format lenses from all manufacturers tend to be symmetrical or nearly so. Exceptions included "telephoto" design large format lenses. Nowadays "telephoto" has come to mean "a fair bit longer than normal" in popular usage, but it's an actual lens design where the flange focal length is significantly shorter than the focal length. This allowed people with short bellows extension to use longer focal lengths.

Most of the Schneider-Kreuznach technical camera lenses designed for digital or repurposed for digital are close to symmetrical, which is why they have low distortion. Rodenstock's stock in trade for tech camera lenses was to create retrofocus designs where the flange focal length is significantly longer than the focal length. This made it possible to use them on many more tech camera designs with medium format backs. The price paid for that is distortion. The S-K APO-Digitar 35/5.6 is such a gem because it is a wide focal length with a decent image circle, good sharpness, and virtually no distortion -- all for a "reasonable" price.

The next easiest way to get a wider focal length on your Swebo is a Pentax-A 645 35/5.6. It has strong moustache distortion, which becomes evident as soon as you start shifting. This is endemic with the design of lenses from that era. It's great value. I used that lens for many years and have no complaints about the resulting images on a 100 MP sensor. What I don't like about lenses like that is you need to set them at their flange focal length on the rail and then focus by the helicoid. It's a minor pain, but I strongly prefer focusing lenses by rail.

 

[Precision]

I now want to start a heavy metal barbershop quartet called "Mustache Distortion"

 

[daz7]

I found a very late Sinaron S 210 5.6 (a tremendous lens, basically a bin selected Apo Rodenstock)

As a side note, Sinar's markings may be somewhat misleading at times- their "S" lenses are Rodenstock's "N" lense, while "SE" lenses are Rodie 's "S" series.
Anyway, I agree, that 210mm from Sinar are really great. I prefered their "SE" over "S" model though and liked even better their 210mm digital version of that lens. Was really great in the studio but finally replaced it with Nikon m 200mm which to my eyes was better at longer distances and for studio use in that range I settled with a Makro symmar HM 180mm which I found simply amazing (or maybe I was lucky with my copy) and too close to 210mm to keep them both for short distances.

 

[rdeloe]

I now want to start a heavy metal barbershop quartet called "Mustache Distortion"

That group exists already! You can find their stuff on YouTube.

They are best known for a cover of Pink Floyd's "Another brick in the wall". This is the image that was used for their album cover (made with a Pentax-A 645 35/5.6 and 15mm of left and right shift -- way more than the lens was designed for, but nicely illustrating the moustache).

 

[John Black]

Eek...!... fixing that without dedicated lens profile would be quite "project" in photoshop.

 

[rdeloe]

Eek...!... fixing that without dedicated lens profile would be quite "project" in photoshop.

I've encountered one person who had a technique for fixing it, but it sounded very complicated. There's no solution in Lightroom that I can think of.

However... the image circle for which this lens is designed is around 70 mm, and it takes an 80 mm circle on a 33mm x 44mm sensor to shift 15 mm left and right on the long edge. Thus, this sample image is completely unfair to the lens because I'm out of the circle of good definition and into the circle of illumination where Pentax never expected anyone to venture.

I used this lens a ton before I adopted the S-K APO-Digitar 35. It's a very good performer, unless you shoot architecture and interior with lots of shift.

 

[John Black]

I wholly agree that a lens can have a fantastic look regardless of its distortion. Most of my pictures happen to be buildings and such, so wavy distortions are a pet peeve.

The irony there is... sometimes these structures are in such bad condition, that finding anything level or true is pointless. In these cases, it's more about aesthetics what of "looks" right regardless of whether it's "technically" right -

But a lens with wavy distortion on a building like this... forget about it

Both shots were the Hasselblad 40mm IF. Both were shifted 8-10mm shift on a 54x40mm sensor (IQ3 Achromatic).

 

[Lorenz(X)]

Both pictures are marvelous!

 

[Niddiot]

The 'T' lenses from Nikon in copal 0 shutter were good back in film days. The only downside of them today I think is more CA than you would like, they come in 270 (one option) and then a 360/500/720 set which are probably not so practical today due to size. Fuji also have a 300 & 400 T lens. Probably the Nikon 270 or fuji 300 are the only sensible options. The fuji 400 was always a bit sketchy on film & I couldnt recommend it.

 

[Lorenz(X)]

I did ask Swebo if they (or actually he I guess) has a bag bellows for the TCS20. And he does. Wich is great. I will get that, and it will help with the wideangles, and the use of the M645 lenses I already have. I don´t know when I will get it though, because the product is not in the shop and communications are sloooow.
He also also offers a special lensboard for the GX lenses. That is an option I will consider.

 

[Precision]

I wholly agree that a lens can have a fantastic look regardless of its distortion. Most of my pictures happen to be buildings and such, so wavy distortions are a pet peeve.

The irony there is... sometimes these structures are in such bad condition, that finding anything level or true is pointless. In these cases, it's more about aesthetics what of "looks" right regardless of whether it's "technically" right -

But a lens with wavy distortion on a building like this... forget about it

Both shots were the Hasselblad 40mm IF. Both were shifted 8-10mm shift on a 54x40mm sensor (IQ3 Achromatic).

Red Filter or did you delve into the IR spectrum? (guessing the former because the trees in bottom image look dark)

I do love those Full Spectrum Achromatics!

 

[DMPhoto-IT]

I did ask Swebo if they (or actually he I guess) has a bag bellows for the TCS20. And he does. Wich is great. I will get that, and it will help with the wideangles, and the use of the M645 lenses I already have. I don´t know when I will get it though, because the product is not in the shop and communications are sloooow.
He also also offers a special lensboard for the GX lenses. That is an option I will consider.

Hi, I have a doubt: is the bag bellows for the TCS20 actually a soft pillow bellows, or is it just like the normal one but with a single wider fold? I can’t find it on the site. Thank you.

 

[John Leathwick]

The 'T' lenses from Nikon in copal 0 shutter were good back in film days. The only downside of them today I think is more CA than you would like, they come in 270 (one option) and then a 360/500/720 set which are probably not so practical today due to size. Fuji also have a 300 & 400 T lens. Probably the Nikon 270 or fuji 300 are the only sensible options. The fuji 400 was always a bit sketchy on film & I couldnt recommend it.

It would probably pay to check with @rdeloe about the Nikkor, as from memory he has tried one and it did not play well with a digital back. I've looked at the S-K Apo-Tele-Zenars but they all require long bellows extensions, e.g., 195mm for the 250mm, and even longer for the other focal lengths. The advantage with the Mamiya RZ teles is that they all share a common flange to sensor distance that is workable with a standard bellows and rail. The downside of that is that they are longer and that makes their use challenging. I made a small support out of ply that I use as a prop between the lens and the front of the rail and that works well with the 210mm and 350mm Apo Sekors, preventing forward tilt in the front standard - in the photo it's shown in use with my RZ 140 macro, an under-rated gem in the RZ lineup. Tilt is a little more awkward to use, but is achievable through coordinated use of the front rise and tilt adjustments. Optically the Apo-Sekors are as good as any long lens I've used.

-John

 

[DMPhoto-IT]

I wholly agree that a lens can have a fantastic look regardless of its distortion. Most of my pictures happen to be buildings and such, so wavy distortions are a pet peeve.

The irony there is... sometimes these structures are in such bad condition, that finding anything level or true is pointless. In these cases, it's more about aesthetics what of "looks" right regardless of whether it's "technically" right -

But a lens with wavy distortion on a building like this... forget about it

Both shots were the Hasselblad 40mm IF. Both were shifted 8-10mm shift on a 54x40mm sensor (IQ3 Achromatic).

The second image you posted is truly beautiful!