Q on Canon 135mm TS + Phase One IQ3100 + tech camera

[Enda Cavanagh]

Hi all.
I was wondering if anyone has used a canon 135mm TS lens on a IQ300 or IQ150 with a technical camera. Would be interesting to know if the lens can handle the larger sensor in terms of image circle and sharpness, distortion etc. I quickly tested it on a Hcam adaptor on a Sony A7r in my local camera dealer today and could get about 23mm of shift. A bit more on rise. Feel adaptor itself was partially responsible for vignette as vignette worsened slightly as I went from 22 down to 20. If I’m not mistaken, worst case scenario is I would get 6 or 7 mm shift on the IQ back. I shoot fine art stuff with the Phase One and an Arca Swiss IQ3100. Could be an interesting combination with this lens and camera. It is supposed to be a fine lens with minimal softening with shift and it costs a lot less then the Rodie 138mm. Of course I doubt if it would match the quality! It is focal length that would interest me but would not get enough use to warrant the huge outlay for a 138mm Rodenstock. The fact it has a max aperture of f4 would also aid focusing. I’m getting blinder by the day! Interested to hear any feedback.

 

[rdeloe]

Hi Enda,

I think you're out of luck. I can't find published specs on the size of the image circle, but that Canon lens is designed for 12mm shift on full frame, which requires an image circle of approximately 61mm. That doesn't cover the sensor on your camera. It's also a heavy lens (over 1 kg), and you'd have to figure out how to control the aperture ring because it's designed to be controlled from the body.

I'm going to offer you a mildly radical suggestion: have you considered a good quality enlarger lens? At the focal length you're interested, an enlarger lens will have a huge image circle that not only covers your sensor but also allows for plenty of shift movement.

Conventional wisdom is that enlarger lenses are no good at infinity, and can't possibly be good enough for modern medium format digital sensors. In my opinion, both of those statements are demonstrably not correct. You don't have to take my word for it. Scroll down to the bottom of this page and look for a link to my Google drive site where I've published f/8, f/11 and f/16 infinity frames for the enlarger (and other) lenses I use on my Fujifilm GFX 50R. Judge for yourself. https://www.robdeloephotography.com/Pages/Toyo-VX23D-and-Fuji-GFX-50R

Your camera has a more demanding sensor than my GFX 50R. Nonetheless, if you're not willing to spend the money to get the Rodenstock 138mm, I have a feeling you could be very happy with the right enlarger lens. Clearly the much more expensive modern Rodenstock technical camera lenses should be better performers, but a good enlarger lens might get you where you want to be in terms of image quality and shift capability.

You'll see from my site that I favour Schneider Kreuznach lenses (but I do have one Rodenstock). The Componon-S 135mm f/5.6 enlarger lens is decent, but that's not the one I'd recommend. I'd encourage you to have a look at one of the five 120mm options from Schneider, or the one I use (Rodenstock Rodagon-WA 120mm f/5.6).
* The Schneider Kreuznach Apo-Digitar N 120mm f/5.6 was marketed as a lens for digital medium format backs. Interestingly, the MTF curves and lens design parameters are identical to the Schneider Kreuznach Apo-Componon HM 120mm f/5.6. If it's the exact same lens, I won't be surprised. Were it me, I'd buy whichever of these was came up first for the right price.
* The Schneider Kreuznach Apo-Digitar M 120mm f/5.6 is an updated version of the Schneider Kreuznach Makro-Symmar 120mm f/5.6. Both have good reputations.
* The fifth one is the Schneider Kreuznach Apo-Digitar ASPH 120mm f/5.6. Apparently this is a 6 element design with a larger (150mm) image circle. It may be the best of the bunch.

I haven't used any of the 120mm SK lenses, but from my own digging they are universally considered excellent. They may be better performers than my Rodenstock Rodagon-WA 120mm f/5.6, but if that's the case they'd have to be stellar because the Rodagon-WA is superb. There are samples at that link. It's available used for reasonable money if you shop around.

Cheers, Rob

 

[drevil]

"I think you're out of luck. I can't find published specs on the size of the image circle, but that Canon lens is designed for 12mm shift on full frame, which requires an image circle of approximately 61mm. That doesn't cover the sensor on your camera."


The 12mm shift is within the range of 'exceptional' quality, the circle for sure is much larger. you can easily shift the TSE50 on the GFX fully, and only if you are picky, you might say you see darkening when doing so

 

[rdeloe]

"I think you're out of luck. I can't find published specs on the size of the image circle, but that Canon lens is designed for 12mm shift on full frame, which requires an image circle of approximately 61mm. That doesn't cover the sensor on your camera."


The 12mm shift is within the range of 'exceptional' quality, the circle for sure is much larger. you can easily shift the TSE50 on the GFX fully, and only if you are picky, you might say you see darkening when doing so

Sure, but he's not using a GFX. He's using an IQ3 100.

It's a long focal length lens, so the image circle is likely to be larger than the bare minimum. However, I have to think that the OP is seeking "exceptional" quality given the back he's using. So it's probably best to stay inside the design circle to get that quality.

 

[Steve Hendrix]

Hi Enda, I see you posted here as well as Lula, where I responded. Copy of same response follows.

It should cover. I don't have a 135mm TSE available, but the 24mm TSE does cover with very little if any vignette. Shift will be very limited, however. Perhaps you can get away with 3mm - 6mm, you'll need to lighten the corners. When it comes to shift capacity, as well as optical performance, it certainly will not match the Rodenstock 138mm, which offers historically unique performance. But it will cover, although any shift will be very limited, and YMMV.


Steve Hendrix/CI

 

[Dante Alighieri]

Dante advises you to simply buy the new Rodenstock 138mm. No guessing. You know it works. And this lens remains at the rarified top of the lust-worthy lens list.

You deserve to enjoy the best things in life.

I bet Steve Hendrix can work a good deal on a Rodenstock 138mm.

--Dante

 

[mkphotomedia]

Steve is correct. I've tested on my IQ4150 and the 135TS-E covers--just barely, with no movements as long as you're willing to run an LCC as there is substantial (but seemingly correctable) corner falloff on axis. It should cover on your IQ3100 as the sensor size is identical (if memory serves--I can't find my POCP handbook to check for sure).

The available circle of coverage on the 17 and 24 TS-E's is actually somewhat larger than the 50/90 (probably)/135 TS-E's. On IQ3/IQ4 sensors, the 17 and 24 give you up to about 3-4mm of shift before you hit the edge of the circle. The 50 and 135 behave pretty much identically for that in giving you...zero. (I'd expect that the 90 would as well, but I haven't been able to get my hands on one).

Hi Enda, I see you posted here as well as Lula, where I responded. Copy of same response follows.

It should cover. I don't have a 135mm TSE available, but the 24mm TSE does cover with very little if any vignette. Shift will be very limited, however. Perhaps you can get away with 3mm - 6mm, you'll need to lighten the corners. When it comes to shift capacity, as well as optical performance, it certainly will not match the Rodenstock 138mm, which offers historically unique performance. But it will cover, although any shift will be very limited, and YMMV.


Steve Hendrix/CI

 

[peterm1]

To bring this thread up to date, can anyone comment further on the use of the 135mm TS-E on the IQ3100? I will be using the IQ3100, the Cambo 1600 tech cam, and the Canon 24mm TS-E II and Rodenstock 32mm lenses, and was wondering the the 135mm TS-E might be a good telephoto option since I will already have the Cambo Canon adapter (and I can't afford the Rodenstock 138mm)... Thanks!

 

[drevil]

i think you wont get much out of this thread anymore, what i heard later is that it covers the 44x33 sensor, but shift is limited, on the iq3100 you have to fight in the corners for sure, if it covers at all.

i have seen some 135tse lenses lately for sale, why not just try it out? and report back!

 

[wallpaperviking]

Steve is correct. I've tested on my IQ4150 and the 135TS-E covers--just barely, with no movements as long as you're willing to run an LCC as there is substantial (but seemingly correctable) corner falloff on axis. It should cover on your IQ3100 as the sensor size is identical (if memory serves--I can't find my POCP handbook to check for sure).

The available circle of coverage on the 17 and 24 TS-E's is actually somewhat larger than the 50/90 (probably)/135 TS-E's. On IQ3/IQ4 sensors, the 17 and 24 give you up to about 3-4mm of shift before you hit the edge of the circle. The 50 and 135 behave pretty much identically for that in giving you...zero. (I'd expect that the 90 would as well, but I haven't been able to get my hands on one).

My experience is the opposite of this. There is a difference between "covering" and having sharp results when shifted. I am happy with about 5-6mm with the Canon 24mm TS-E II and GFX 50S combo and am even happier with 12mm of Shift with the 50mm TS-E and GFX 50S combo.

This is with the smaller 33mm x 44mm sensor, so I am curious how you are happy with 3-4mm of Shift on the much larger IQ4150 sensor..