Site Sponsors
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3 LastLast
Results 51 to 100 of 121

Thread: Architecture/Interior Design - Tech or that camera!

  1. #51
    Member Aryan Aqajani's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Posts
    166
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Architecture/Interior Design - Tech or that camera!

    Quote Originally Posted by fotografz View Post
    Many really know lighting, and when shooting daytime interiors use low ISOs and the leaf shutter high sync speed to balance out broad bright ambient window light without NDing the windows.
    Marc, thanks for sharing your opinion As far as I know, using strobes to illuminate interiors are not very common here in Australia when shooting architecture or interiors where the emphasize is on the work of the interior designer or architecture including all artificial lighting used in the building! Although I think if one use strobes for interiors, some clients may not disagree! Not sure though!!!


    Quote Originally Posted by fotografz View Post
    You have a nice DB (love those big real estate, fat pixel backs!), rent a tech camera and W/A lens for a month with the option to buy, and ... practice until it is second nature. Invest the time, before investing the money.

    -Marc
    I love my back for portrait work specially when I used it with strobes! However, I need to find out how practical it is to shoot at base ISO25 with max 30s exposure if I don't want to use strobe for interiors or shoot exteriors at dusk!

    Quote Originally Posted by MarkoRepse View Post
    This +1
    I also don't shoot architecture. But still in my view the solution is obvious. You already have a DB. You love the RZ so will probably find tech cameras great. So unless you want one, why bother with DSLRs at all? Two systems to support and two systems to upgrade. You will be fighting with limitations in either way. Go with the option that will make you happy, as happy will make good pictures and not some technical advantage that might be useful once a year.
    Thank you so much Marko for giving me your opinion as well Yes, I love the RZ and honestly like to work on old school cameras for the fact that it makes me happy! However, I have to confess that shooting RZ with a digital back is not as enjoyable as film! The main beauty of such camera is that big viewfinder and the sense of making your photo on something special! Since I have put the crop mask on the RZ, it gives me a different feeling and when I get rid of it to shoot film, I smile

    Quote Originally Posted by gazwas View Post
    Because if the OP shoots without lighting, wants a SK35XL for big movements he will need a centre filter. Centre filter adds 3 stops ND to each capture and if to avoid field curvature (a must for architecture) of the Schneider wides that means shooting at f11-f16. Long exposures need to be shot at base ISO, f16 at ISO50 with a 3 stop centre filter and you might as well use the iPhone.....
    +++++++
    You couldn't have said it better! That's one of my big difficulties!

    Guys, I think it would be better to share some images with you so that you get a better idea of the look I am after! Here are some images by an Australian architecture photographer, Shannon McGrath. She shoots with Canon 1Ds MK III and the latest Canon tilt shift lenses!





















    Aryan Aqajani - Photographer in Melbourne, Australia
    Website | Blog | Facebook | Flickr | Vimeo
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  2. #52
    Member Aryan Aqajani's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Posts
    166
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Architecture/Interior Design - Tech or that camera!

    Quote Originally Posted by torger View Post
    The Digitar 35 XL on 22 megapixel 36x48mm vs Canon TS-E 24mm on 24x36mm 21 megapixel would indeed be an interesting test. I cannot say which one which would win the corner sharpness test. My guess is that the Schneider will win for small shifts but that the Canon may win for large.

    This thread may be of interest to you:

    http://forum.getdpi.com/forum/medium...rformance.html

    The problem is that Schneider is less than conservative concerning image circles, so you see a clear sharpness falloff within the claimed circle. If you are a really picky user you'd probably find that you don't want to shift more than ~10mm on the 35XL, which corresponds to ~7 mm on the 135 format. 22 megapixel will be more forgiving though, especially if stepping up to f/16. And as always, people's expectations differ, what one person may consider perfectly okay corners may disappoint someone else (that maybe expected that corners would be indistinguishable from the center as often seen in longer lenses), therefore you can hear many different things about the 35XL.

    One thing to note is that the Schneider has 0 distortion, which you can't have with retrofocus designs like the Canon (or indeed Rodenstocks). I think that has some value, although you of course can digitally correct these days.

    I don't think vignetting will be a problem with a center filter attached, but rather corner softness. For the low pixel count backs the color casts are relatively mild, but many of the modern backs require retrofocus designs to be able to shift any reasonable amount (I think that trend is unfortunate).

    With pancake camera I mean Alpa, Arca-Swiss RM3Di the Cambos, that is flat cameras with helicon focus that you can set at a specific distance rather than having to focus on the ground glass (as I do with my Linhof Techno which is a view camera). To really make use of that you should use a laser distance meter like a Leica Disto D5 and have high precision focusing rings so you can set exact distance. This is very useful when you need to focus on something flat like a wall. A view camera indoor with wide angles is a bit tough to focus, but some of us manage anyway . Some pancake camera lenses do not have those tightly spaced high precision markings on the focusing rings and then you don't get to enjoy the focus placement precision, which I think is the major feature of that camera type.

    In normal daylight you will have sub-second exposures at f/16 with the 35XL. Say if we compare the ISO25(?) DM22 at f/16 with 35XL centerfilter to a ISO100 5DMk2 f/11 TS-E24, I would guess we have about 4-5 stop difference. So when it comes to lower light situations there may be a significant issue. When the DM22 is up at 32 seconds the Canon makes the same exposure in 1-2 seconds.

    I have not actually been able to test the 35XL myself, just looked at a whole lot of user opinions and some test pictures. For my Aptus 75 I consider it to be "good enough" and it is on my "to buy"-list, but I will limit shifts to ~10mm which is alright for my shooting style anyway. If I was to use it for indoor shooting with a ISO25 back I would be a bit worried about maybe needing to shift more than 10mm quite often and having trouble with hitting the 30 second limit. So if you have the ability to test before buy certainly do. At the very least you should look at some test images.
    Wow, thanks for all this valuable information! Really helped me to understand some technical points! An eye opener!

    I would love to have the chance to test it for some days however, I believe I have to pay like $300 per day to hire the setup although my local dealer be generous enough to let me try it for few days!!!

    Quote Originally Posted by Guy Mancuso View Post
    Maybe the tech cam bargain lens in wide angle.
    Guy, my local dealer has a second hand 35XL and that made me think about tech cam route although I know it would be the beginning of the disaster lol
    Aryan Aqajani - Photographer in Melbourne, Australia
    Website | Blog | Facebook | Flickr | Vimeo

  3. #53
    Administrator, Instructor Guy Mancuso's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    23,623
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2555

    Re: Architecture/Interior Design - Tech or that camera!

    BTW you can use the Alpa HPF on any Cambo lens that Alpa sells except on the T/S lenses since there is not enough room because of the mount. Our dear friend here on the forums John Milich (spelling Guy) has been known to customize these rings on the T/S lenses though and it's pretty cool.
    Photography is all about experimentation and without it you will never learn art.

    www.guymancusophotography.com

  4. #54
    Workshop Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    3,275
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    7

    Re: Architecture/Interior Design - Tech or that camera!

    I really don't understand any disappointment with the 35XL. It is a truly fantastic lens.

    Yes the image circle is a few mm optimistic (all schneiders are).

    But no distortion, very very low CA, great sharpness, small, and light.

    Also to say that you see CA with a 47XL... Either your lens is whacked out of alignment or you are VERY picky. Compared to any SLR lens I've ever used a 47XL has *nearly* no CA. Yes I suppose it's not technically "zero" but only in the sense that no lens has "zero" CA. It is a very clean, very sharp image.

    These lenses look great with backs many times the resolution of the OP's back; at 22mp they are running with the wind at their backs.
    Doug Peterson , Digital Transitions | Email
    Dealer for: Phase One, Mamiya Leaf, Arca-Swiss, Cambo, Eizo, Profoto
    Office: 877.367.8537. Cell: 740.707.2183
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  5. #55
    Administrator, Instructor Guy Mancuso's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    23,623
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2555

    Re: Architecture/Interior Design - Tech or that camera!

    I think the one factor here is you have the back already so this does keep you within a good spending budget. A tech cam and a 35 XL is about 5 k and your in the door. You could also cheat like I did above grab a DF body and a Mamiya 28 no movements though but it's workable again maybe 6 or 7 k. Problem with Canon right now is no 35 mpx body which will probably change. But again to get in a setup around the same money , so yes it's a tough call. Myself I would make use of the back I had on hand. That's me though.
    Photography is all about experimentation and without it you will never learn art.

    www.guymancusophotography.com

  6. #56
    Administrator, Instructor Guy Mancuso's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    23,623
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2555

    Re: Architecture/Interior Design - Tech or that camera!

    Quote Originally Posted by dougpeterson View Post
    I really don't understand any disappointment with the 35XL. It is a truly fantastic lens.

    Yes the image circle is a few mm optimistic (all schneiders are).

    But no distortion, very very low CA, great sharpness, small, and light.

    Also to say that you see CA with a 47XL... Either your lens is whacked out of alignment or you are VERY picky. Compared to any SLR lens I've ever used a 47XL has *nearly* no CA. Yes I suppose it's not technically "zero" but only in the sense that no lens has "zero" CA. It is a very clean, very sharp image.

    These lenses look great with backs many times the resolution of the OP's back; at 22mp they are running with the wind at their backs.
    I agree . Damn lens is really sharp
    Photography is all about experimentation and without it you will never learn art.

    www.guymancusophotography.com

  7. #57
    Senior Member MaxKißler's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Berlin
    Posts
    387
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Architecture/Interior Design - Tech or that camera!

    Quote Originally Posted by Aryan Aqajani View Post
    ... Thank you so much Marko for giving me your opinion as well Yes, I love the RZ and honestly like to work on old school cameras for the fact that it makes me happy! However, I have to confess that shooting RZ with a digital back is not as enjoyable as film! The main beauty of such camera is that big viewfinder and the sense of making your photo on something special! Since I have put the crop mask on the RZ, it gives me a different feeling and when I get rid of it to shoot film, I smile ...
    Hey Aryan, don't mean to hijack your thread but it was Marko who suggested to use a cheap Kaiser 4x loupe on the RZ67 as a finder. I modified mine and it works great! You'll love using your RZ digitally with this. It doesn't necessarily have to look as bad as mine if you use black or navyblue tape. Unfortunately I didn't have some at that moment...



    Do you still have your 645 gear? I'd suggest you get the 50mm Shift. You could do two or four shots stitched, depending on how large your FOV should be and see whether that works for you. You'd gain large files from your DB, focussing wouldn't be an issue aswell and you can still get a tech cam later.

    Regards
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  8. #58
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    1,538
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Architecture/Interior Design - Tech or that camera!

    To show an example of what I mean with visible CA on the 47XL:



    this is 100% crop midframe on a 22 megapixel (9 um) back (it's a foggy scene if you wonder why the contrast is low ). You can see the pole is a bit red on the right side and blue on the left. Quite easily corrected by the raw converter, but CA correction often kills a bit color in small details so I prefer not using it (I can do local corrections for fine art prints).

    I e not a huge amount, so you may call me overly picky , but if someone claims zero CA then I expect it to be invisible even at 100% check on screen without digital lens corrections. I'd expect the more modern and more expensive 43XL perform better.

    I'm very pleased with my 47 though, while it has some CA it does not degenerate quickly, my point is that one should not expect perfect from these lenses.

    Here is a 100% crop from the same lens shift 20mm, i e right at the edge of the 90mm image circle (well they do claim 113mm on the 47...)



    Interestingly enough not any more CA there, looks like even less, but there is some clear sharpness loss (I admit that the object in the picture is not ideal to evaluate sharpness though, easier to see the difference when one has the whole picture). This is for a 33 megapixel back though, 7.2um pixels. To my knowledge the 47XL handles large shifts considerably better than the 35XL, and it should as it claims 113mm IC while the 35 claims 90mm.

  9. #59
    Workshop Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    3,275
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    7

    Re: Architecture/Interior Design - Tech or that camera!

    Well, I'll easily agree with you cannot expect perfect from any lens.

    The Phase 150D and the Schneider 60XL are as close as I'd say I've come to seeing perfection in a lens, but even these are not "perfect" - just as good as money can buy.
    Doug Peterson , Digital Transitions | Email
    Dealer for: Phase One, Mamiya Leaf, Arca-Swiss, Cambo, Eizo, Profoto
    Office: 877.367.8537. Cell: 740.707.2183

  10. #60
    Subscriber and Workshop Member MGrayson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    1,575
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    4

    Re: Architecture/Interior Design - Tech or that camera!

    My only disappointment with the 35XL is that it requires a center filter if you want more than a little movement, and that makes the whole setup a few stops slower. With its image circle, you get the coverage of a 21mm lens on a FF Canon or Nikon. And you get all the crispness of a Zeiss 21 with none of the distortion.

    Unbeatable for the price.

    --Matt

  11. #61
    Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Munich/Guangzhou
    Posts
    138
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Architecture/Interior Design - Tech or that camera!

    Gerald, IMO yes the 35mm shift is the key lens for the Hartblei Hcam and the Alpa FPS systems with full format 645 sensor because it relates to the view angle of a 24mm shift lens for 24x36mm cameras. And that's the most important view angle for architecture and interior design photography work. Due to the fact that the tech lenses don't work with shift on the Hartblei or the Alpa FPS cams, I was looking for an alternative lens with sufficient flange distance and image circle.
    When I saw the Photodo MTF measurement of the Contax 645 35f3.5 Distagon I thought if the MTF is so very high still at the corner of the 645 image circle this could mean that the real image circle is larger and therefore could be useful as a shift lens for 645 full format sensors.
    So I asked Mirex if they could produce a custom made Contax 645 to Canon EF shift adapter for me and they agreed. The adapter matches super precisely the register difference between Contax (64mm) and Canon (44mm). I tested the adapter first on the Canon 5d2 where I saw that the image circle of the Contax 35 easily covered the +-16mm shift movement.
    Later I had the opportunity to test the lens with the adapter on a Hartblei HCam B1 with a Leaf Credo 80 at the friendly Leaf/Nexor dealer Alwick in Guangzhou.
    I added some green lines to the pano pic of that test that I posted before.
    The center area is the sensor unshifted.
    The right edge is the image 16mm shifted which is not fully covered by the image circle of the lens.
    The two other lines show roughly the 80mm total image circle (= 7mm hor shift or 9mm vert shift) and the 76mm sharp image circle (= 5mm hor shift or 6mm vert shift).
    These shift movements are less than one can achieve with the 32mm Rodenstock lens on a tech cam but more than with the 35mm Schneider.
    From the lens section view graphics you see how much farer away the 35mm Contax lens sits from the sensor than the two other lenses and therefore don't require LCC files.
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  12. #62
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    1,538
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Architecture/Interior Design - Tech or that camera!

    The properties of the 35XL (and the 47XL) comes from its traditional "large format" design, i e simple symmetric designs. The advantages is zero or very near zero distortion, robustness, low weight, and low price.

    The disadvantage is large natural vignetting (requires center filter) and issues with field curvature so these are generally not good with larger aperture than f/11.

    I like these traditional designs, and they work extremely well for longer lenses. For wides one may need a bit higher correction, and in the future I would like to see a "middle way" for the 35mm, a "Super Digitar" (as the 28mm). To me many of the Rodenstocks is over the top, getting too large and bulky and very expensive.

    The focus on megapixels seems to push the tech cam lenses off the "middle way" map though. If everyone's going to have IQ180s it's the death for those designs. For the future I personally hope to see the return of the 48x36mm format in the leaf and phase product line, something in the 50 megapixel range (well-balanced with f/11) and less severe color cast, and continue to see elegant simple designs in the Digitar series intended for f/11 work.

  13. #63
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Marseille, FRANCE
    Posts
    972
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Architecture/Interior Design - Tech or that camera!

    i used to shoot with
    5D2
    24 Tse
    35 PC Oly
    45 Tse
    90 Tse
    Hasselblad Zeiss 50f4 FLE + Mirex 16mm tilt/shift adapter
    Hasselblad Zeiss 100f3.5 FLE + Mirex 16mm tilt/shift adapter

    and went for the Rm3D + Aptus 22... it was 3 years ago
    i manage to upgrade to an Aptus II 7 (but if 22mp is enought for your job, the aptus 22 delivers nice files under 15s )
    i've never came back to 35mm...

    But to be honest, i won't go for the cambo because i really need to compose on a ground glass... so the arca rotaslide was for me !
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  14. #64
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    253
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Architecture/Interior Design - Tech or that camera!

    Quote Originally Posted by Aryan Aqajani View Post
    The idea of using LCC with each shift movement is a nightmare! It seems that some folks believe they got used to it after a while!
    I wouldn't say, it's a nightmare. Sometimes, it's annoying but once you got used to doing a white shot after each and every 'successfull' exposure, it's not a major issue but a habit which takes a bit of time. To me, the more annoying part is (was?) the handling of LCC in C1 but it seems to me that this has improved considerably with C1 v7.

    Also, LCC is not necessarily just about colour shift and vignetting. If you got to work in a dusty environment, being able to use it for dust mapping is pretty useful, IMHO.

    Chris
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  15. #65
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    1,538
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Architecture/Interior Design - Tech or that camera!

    Quote Originally Posted by cly View Post
    I wouldn't say, it's a nightmare. Sometimes, it's annoying but once you got used to doing a white shot after each and every 'successfull' exposure, it's not a major issue but a habit which takes a bit of time. To me, the more annoying part is (was?) the handling of LCC in C1 but it seems to me that this has improved considerably with C1 v7.

    Also, LCC is not necessarily just about colour shift and vignetting. If you got to work in a dusty environment, being able to use it for dust mapping is pretty useful, IMHO.

    Chris
    I agree, I don't find LCC for every shot very disturbing at all, *except* for long exposures... not great doing a 30 second exposure and having to shoot a LCC for that. Dust and even sensor glass scratch removal is also a great plus. One could make a LCC library and stuff, but I have never cared to do that so far, I just do that extra shot for every final shot.

    The thing is that setting up a perfect shot of architecture will take some time and adjustments, the extra time it takes to shoot one LCC is not a big burden.

    In a way we should be thankful for the LCC, that we accept this hassle is what makes it possible to use the unique lens designs that makes tech cams strong on wide angle.
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  16. #66
    Workshop Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    3,275
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    7

    Re: Architecture/Interior Design - Tech or that camera!

    Quote Originally Posted by torger View Post
    I agree, I don't find LCC for every shot very disturbing at all, *except* for long exposures... not great doing a 30 second exposure and having to shoot a LCC for that.
    Take along a pocket flashlight with a diffuser (or two) and shine light evenly across the LCC (I'd keep the light moving as a third layer of defacto diffusion) and you can do it much faster.
    Doug Peterson , Digital Transitions | Email
    Dealer for: Phase One, Mamiya Leaf, Arca-Swiss, Cambo, Eizo, Profoto
    Office: 877.367.8537. Cell: 740.707.2183
    Likes 3 Member(s) liked this post

  17. #67
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    1,538
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Architecture/Interior Design - Tech or that camera!

    Quote Originally Posted by dougpeterson View Post
    Take along a pocket flashlight with a diffuser (or two) and shine light evenly across the LCC (I'd keep the light moving as a third layer of defacto diffusion) and you can do it much faster.
    Cool trick! Thanks!

  18. #68
    Workshop Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    3,275
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    7

    Re: Architecture/Interior Design - Tech or that camera!

    Quote Originally Posted by torger View Post
    Cool trick! Thanks!
    Credit where credit is due: Yaya was the original source for this trick (at least I got it from him).
    Doug Peterson , Digital Transitions | Email
    Dealer for: Phase One, Mamiya Leaf, Arca-Swiss, Cambo, Eizo, Profoto
    Office: 877.367.8537. Cell: 740.707.2183

  19. #69
    Administrator, Instructor Guy Mancuso's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    23,623
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2555

    Re: Architecture/Interior Design - Tech or that camera!

    I point a strobe at the camera with LCC when working with strobes.
    Photography is all about experimentation and without it you will never learn art.

    www.guymancusophotography.com

  20. #70
    Member Aryan Aqajani's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Posts
    166
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Architecture/Interior Design - Tech or that camera!

    Quote Originally Posted by Guy Mancuso View Post
    I think the one factor here is you have the back already so this does keep you within a good spending budget. A tech cam and a 35 XL is about 5 k and your in the door. You could also cheat like I did above grab a DF body and a Mamiya 28 no movements though but it's workable again maybe 6 or 7 k. Problem with Canon right now is no 35 mpx body which will probably change. But again to get in a setup around the same money , so yes it's a tough call. Myself I would make use of the back I had on hand. That's me though.
    Thanks for that! It is a tough decision so I think I need to slow down a bit and test Cambo + 35XL with my back for sure before committing to any purchase!

    Quote Originally Posted by MaxKißler View Post
    Hey Aryan, don't mean to hijack your thread but it was Marko who suggested to use a cheap Kaiser 4x loupe on the RZ67 as a finder. I modified mine and it works great! You'll love using your RZ digitally with this. It doesn't necessarily have to look as bad as mine if you use black or navyblue tape. Unfortunately I didn't have some at that moment...

    Max, it is all right The problem with that setup is that it is not a good solution for shooting RZ handheld which I do quite often! If on tripod, yeah maybe fine since working with RZ make me slow already and if I use the loupe to check focus every single time, I'm sure it makes the model tired and bored!

    I am used to shoot with crop viewfinder by now so that's okay for me!

    Quote Originally Posted by MaxKißler View Post
    Do you still have your 645 gear? I'd suggest you get the 50mm Shift. You could do two or four shots stitched, depending on how large your FOV should be and see whether that works for you. You'd gain large files from your DB, focussing wouldn't be an issue aswell and you can still get a tech cam later.

    Regards
    Nope, already sold all my 645 stuff except 80mm f/1.9 N! So, all I have now is the RZ and my back, kinda

    Quote Originally Posted by MGrayson View Post
    My only disappointment with the 35XL is that it requires a center filter if you want more than a little movement, and that makes the whole setup a few stops slower. With its image circle, you get the coverage of a 21mm lens on a FF Canon or Nikon. And you get all the crispness of a Zeiss 21 with none of the distortion.

    Unbeatable for the price.

    --Matt
    Matt, can you tell me what the max rise, fall and shift would be with a 35Xl on 36x48 without using CF? 10mm shift? How much rise/fall?

    Quote Originally Posted by archivue View Post
    i used to shoot with
    5D2
    24 Tse
    35 PC Oly
    45 Tse
    90 Tse
    Hasselblad Zeiss 50f4 FLE + Mirex 16mm tilt/shift adapter
    Hasselblad Zeiss 100f3.5 FLE + Mirex 16mm tilt/shift adapter

    and went for the Rm3D + Aptus 22... it was 3 years ago
    i manage to upgrade to an Aptus II 7 (but if 22mp is enought for your job, the aptus 22 delivers nice files under 15s )
    i've never came back to 35mm...

    But to be honest, i won't go for the cambo because i really need to compose on a ground glass... so the arca rotaslide was for me !
    Thank you! 22MP should be more than enough at least for a while but to be honest, I'd prefer to have a back with higher base ISO and longer exposure capabilities! Unfortunately, longer exposure than 30s is not possible on Leaf backs and to my eyes, Phase One back colors are more saturated that suits landscape photography probably unless do more work in PP!

    I love the functionality of Arca RM3Di especially the built in tilt function, alas out of my price range!

    Quote Originally Posted by cly View Post
    I wouldn't say, it's a nightmare. Sometimes, it's annoying but once you got used to doing a white shot after each and every 'successfull' exposure, it's not a major issue but a habit which takes a bit of time. To me, the more annoying part is (was?) the handling of LCC in C1 but it seems to me that this has improved considerably with C1 v7.

    Also, LCC is not necessarily just about colour shift and vignetting. If you got to work in a dusty environment, being able to use it for dust mapping is pretty useful, IMHO.

    Chris
    Good points Chris, thank you
    Aryan Aqajani - Photographer in Melbourne, Australia
    Website | Blog | Facebook | Flickr | Vimeo

  21. #71
    Member Aryan Aqajani's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Posts
    166
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Architecture/Interior Design - Tech or that camera!

    Okay, I ask this question here so appreciate it if anyone who has worked with these systems before, share their experience

    What is the max "usable for architecture" rise/fall/shift (preferably without using CF, introducing soft corners and sever color cast or vignetting) with Digitar 35XL and Cambo WRS on 36x48 back like DM22!?

    What is the max "usable for architecture" rise/fall/shift (without introducing soft corners and sever color cast or vignetting) with Canon 24mm TS-E II and 5D MK III?

    Thank you all
    Aryan Aqajani - Photographer in Melbourne, Australia
    Website | Blog | Facebook | Flickr | Vimeo

  22. #72
    Senior Member MaxKißler's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Berlin
    Posts
    387
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Architecture/Interior Design - Tech or that camera!

    Quote Originally Posted by Aryan Aqajani View Post
    Max, it is all right The problem with that setup is that it is not a good solution for shooting RZ handheld which I do quite often! If on tripod, yeah maybe fine since working with RZ make me slow already and if I use the loupe to check focus every single time, I'm sure it makes the model tired and bored!

    I am used to shoot with crop viewfinder by now so that's okay for me!
    You got me wrong. The loupe sits in there completely tight. It is being locked there by the cover plate so it behaves just like a normal WLF. You could turn the camera upside down and it wouldn't fall off. You can press your face against it and it doesn't move a bit. For storage and carry you can remove it so the cover plate pops down. The loupe enlarges the center of the finder so that the two rectangular 48x36 crop lines are filling your view entirely. The only minor downside is, it shows pincushion distortion at the edges.
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  23. #73
    Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Munich/Guangzhou
    Posts
    138
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Architecture/Interior Design - Tech or that camera!

    Aryan
    the two Canon TSE lenses are just terrific. Stopped down to f11, both lenses have sharp corners at full 12mm sidewards shift on a Canon 24x36 camera and no vignetting. The little CA can easily automatically be corrected in ACR (if wanted). The 24 is - in contrary to all other retrofocus lenses on the market (Rodenstock 23, 32, Schneider/Phase 28, Contax Zeiss 35, Nikon 24 aso.) - nearly totally free of linear distortion, the 17 is a little bit worse but still better than the competition (eh, there is anyhow no shift lens competition in that focal length).
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  24. #74
    Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Munich/Guangzhou
    Posts
    138
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Architecture/Interior Design - Tech or that camera!

    Found some 5D2 samples.
    TSE 24 @f11 with crop of 12mm shifted corner (quite;-)
    TSE 17 @f13 with crop of 12mm shifted corner
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  25. #75
    Member Aryan Aqajani's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Posts
    166
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Architecture/Interior Design - Tech or that camera!

    Quote Originally Posted by MaxKißler View Post
    You got me wrong. The loupe sits in there completely tight. It is being locked there by the cover plate so it behaves just like a normal WLF. You could turn the camera upside down and it wouldn't fall off. You can press your face against it and it doesn't move a bit. For storage and carry you can remove it so the cover plate pops down. The loupe enlarges the center of the finder so that the two rectangular 48x36 crop lines are filling your view entirely. The only minor downside is, it shows pincushion distortion at the edges.
    Max, thanks for letting me know Is there any how to do description anywhere?

    Quote Originally Posted by chrismuc View Post
    Aryan
    the two Canon TSE lenses are just terrific. Stopped down to f11, both lenses have sharp corners at full 12mm sidewards shift on a Canon 24x36 camera and no vignetting. The little CA can easily automatically be corrected in ACR (if wanted). The 24 is - in contrary to all other retrofocus lenses on the market (Rodenstock 23, 32, Schneider/Phase 28, Contax Zeiss 35, Nikon 24 aso.) - nearly totally free of linear distortion, the 17 is a little bit worse but still better than the competition (eh, there is anyhow no shift lens competition in that focal length).
    Chris, thank you so much for sharing those images, they are really impressive! It seems these two lenses are more than "good enough" when it comes to commercial architecture/interior works, especially over here in Australia where market is small and competitive!

    In an interview, the Australian architecture photographer, Shannon McGrath says she just use an Alpa with P65+ for personal work and Canon 1Ds MK III with those TS-E lenses for commercial work! Simply because DSLR is faster to works specially for the times you are loosing the light so quickly like near dusk! TWiT Photo 63: Architectural Photography Shannon McGrath - YouTube

    It is so interesting to hear about different approaches to this type of photography!
    Aryan Aqajani - Photographer in Melbourne, Australia
    Website | Blog | Facebook | Flickr | Vimeo

  26. #76
    Senior Member malmac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Toowoomba, Queensland, Australia
    Posts
    538
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Architecture/Interior Design - Tech or that camera!

    I love the functionality of Arca RM3Di especially the built in tilt function, alas out of my price range!
    Aryan

    I have a Cambo WDS with an IQ back and if I had my time again I would probably opt for the RM3Di - but once one is on one railway line (Canon vs Nikon) it just costs so much to change - it is better to save up and get the right stuff first, cause then you can avoid the expense of changing later on - or the frustration of not being that happy with the system.

    What do I like about the RM3Di - over the Cambo - one simple thing - the focus set up.
    Where focus is so critical, and always manual, and there is no meta data, it is nice to be able to keep notes on where you have set your focus compared with your distance calculation ( I have a Disto) but on the Cambo lens board the markings are fairly general 3m then like 5m - and a big blank between. As others have noted you can use the Arca focus rings on the Cambo lens board ( as long as not Tilt lens) but that does not change the helical pitch -

    Just a few more thoughts when you already have so many to consider.

    Mal
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  27. #77
    Member Aryan Aqajani's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Posts
    166
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Architecture/Interior Design - Tech or that camera!

    Quote Originally Posted by malmac View Post
    Aryan

    I have a Cambo WDS with an IQ back and if I had my time again I would probably opt for the RM3Di - but once one is on one railway line (Canon vs Nikon) it just costs so much to change - it is better to save up and get the right stuff first, cause then you can avoid the expense of changing later on - or the frustration of not being that happy with the system.

    What do I like about the RM3Di - over the Cambo - one simple thing - the focus set up.
    Where focus is so critical, and always manual, and there is no meta data, it is nice to be able to keep notes on where you have set your focus compared with your distance calculation ( I have a Disto) but on the Cambo lens board the markings are fairly general 3m then like 5m - and a big blank between. As others have noted you can use the Arca focus rings on the Cambo lens board ( as long as not Tilt lens) but that does not change the helical pitch -

    Just a few more thoughts when you already have so many to consider.

    Mal
    Thank you Mal for sharing your experience I totally agree with you about taking my time to choose a system that would not force me to change to another one very soon! And since my budget is a bit limited at the moment, it makes me be more cautious with what I choose to purchase at the end!

    You are dead right about the Cambo lens board, as far as I can remember, there was nothing between 5m and infinity just a huge gap! I thought since the depth of field would be huge then there shouldn't be a huge problem in distance variation say between 7 or 8 meter! It seems I've been too optimistic or better word, ignorant

    Regarding that focus ring, isn't the Alpa HPF ring that can be used on Cambo lens board?
    Aryan Aqajani - Photographer in Melbourne, Australia
    Website | Blog | Facebook | Flickr | Vimeo

  28. #78
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    1,198
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Architecture/Interior Design - Tech or that camera!

    Quote Originally Posted by chrismuc View Post
    Gerald, IMO yes the 35mm shift is the key lens for the Hartblei Hcam and the Alpa FPS systems with full format 645 sensor because it relates to the view angle of a 24mm shift lens for 24x36mm cameras. And that's the most important view angle for architecture and interior design photography work. Due to the fact that the tech lenses don't work with shift on the Hartblei or the Alpa FPS cams, I was looking for an alternative lens with sufficient flange distance and image circle.
    When I saw the Photodo MTF measurement of the Contax 645 35f3.5 Distagon I thought if the MTF is so very high still at the corner of the 645 image circle this could mean that the real image circle is larger and therefore could be useful as a shift lens for 645 full format sensors.
    So I asked Mirex if they could produce a custom made Contax 645 to Canon EF shift adapter for me and they agreed. The adapter matches super precisely the register difference between Contax (64mm) and Canon (44mm). I tested the adapter first on the Canon 5d2 where I saw that the image circle of the Contax 35 easily covered the +-16mm shift movement.
    Later I had the opportunity to test the lens with the adapter on a Hartblei HCam B1 with a Leaf Credo 80 at the friendly Leaf/Nexor dealer Alwick in Guangzhou.
    I added some green lines to the pano pic of that test that I posted before.
    The center area is the sensor unshifted.
    The right edge is the image 16mm shifted which is not fully covered by the image circle of the lens.
    The two other lines show roughly the 80mm total image circle (= 7mm hor shift or 9mm vert shift) and the 76mm sharp image circle (= 5mm hor shift or 6mm vert shift).
    These shift movements are less than one can achieve with the 32mm Rodenstock lens on a tech cam but more than with the 35mm Schneider.
    From the lens section view graphics you see how much farer away the 35mm Contax lens sits from the sensor than the two other lenses and therefore don't require LCC files.
    Many thanks for taking the time to reply in such detail Chris - it is much appreciated.

    I clearly need to look into this as a serious alternative to an STC and 32HR.

    Kind regards,

    Gerald.

  29. #79
    Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Munich/Guangzhou
    Posts
    138
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Architecture/Interior Design - Tech or that camera!

    Ur welcome, my pleasure, Gerald.
    Btw I forgot to mention one essential point: The Contax 645 35f3.5 lens is an af and auto aperture lens without mechanical connection of the aperture ring at the lens and the actual aperture. It is not possible to close the aperture without a Contax 645 camera. So what to do? I put the lens on the Contax cam, set the aperture ring at the lens to f11, press first the "aperture test" button at the Contax camera then at the same time the "release lens" button at the cam and then third at the same time turn the lens to take it off. Then the aperture stays at f11:-)
    This of course means that one has to focus the lens at f11 via distance guessing or via live view on the 5D/1Ds or on the Hartblei Hcam/Alpa FPS with IQ or Credo back. I tried both and had no problem focussing well with either combination.
    The only Contax 645 - Canon EF adapter providing AF and auto aperture is the Contax NAM-1 adapter modified by Conurus/Bo Ming in Canada. But this adapter is not a shift adapter like the Mirex (which is completely mechanical).

  30. #80
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    253
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Architecture/Interior Design - Tech or that camera!

    Quote Originally Posted by Aryan Aqajani View Post
    You are dead right about the Cambo lens board, as far as I can remember, there was nothing between 5m and infinity just a huge gap!
    [...]
    Regarding that focus ring, isn't the Alpa HPF ring that can be used on Cambo lens board?
    Yes, as long as you don't go for TS-lenses or favour a do it yourself approach. As Guy wrote earlier: you can't fit it a HPF ring to TS lenses unless you are as brave as jlm (there are pictures of his mod somewhere in this forum).

    A note on the Arca way of focusing: I had a RM3d briefly and wasn't happy - I ended with an Alpa Max. For my jobs (exhibition design/interior and architecture) I don't see an advantage in their body-based helical. It is different if you do a lot of close range photography or if you use longer focal lengths. Having to lookup a value on the lens table is, IMHO, much more painful than doing an LCC.

    BTW: There is one thing which is really great with the Alpa: Stitching is very fast as you can disengage the gearing and slide the back to the other position (you can have marks on the internal rail, so you feel 0mm and, e.g. -10mm, +10mm). But, looking at the investment, I'd say a Cambo (with Alpa HPF rings) is a very attractive solution.

    Chris
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  31. #81
    Subscriber and Workshop Member MGrayson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    1,575
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    4

    Re: Architecture/Interior Design - Tech or that camera!

    A helpful fact about distance markings - they're spaced as a constant / distance along the focus ring. So if your last two markings are 5m and infinity, then 10m is exactly half way between those marks, 20m is 1/4 of the way from the infinity mark, etc.

    Having said that, if I weren't using a back with focus mask, I'd want a disto and the HPF ring or Arca's focus helical.

    --Matt
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  32. #82
    Member Richard Osbourne's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Norfolk
    Posts
    74
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Architecture/Interior Design - Tech or that camera!

    Quote Originally Posted by dougpeterson View Post
    1- Apart from personal experience and enjoyment of working with a tool you like, what would you choose if you were in my shoes!?

    It's a very sad day when you must neglect the personal experience and enjoyment of working with a tool you like. Life is short; you should always try to find ways to work with the tools you like.

    If I have two possible assistants and both of them can carry the same weight, handle lighting adjustments equally fast/efficiently, and both show up on time, but one annoys the crap out of me while the other one makes my day more enjoyable, I will gladly pay a little more for the one that makes things more enjoyable. Why would it be different with cameras?

    2- Do you think the quality of DSLR system like D800E and some wide or tilt and shift lenses would be excellent enough for today's market even if the IQ of those lenses are inferior to their LF brothers!?

    I've yet to see any lens that can come close to the quality of the Schneider/Rodenstock wide angle lenses. The bonus of having movements with all of them (but the 24XL) is huge for interiors/architecture. MANY areas of photography do not benefit much from lenses with sharper edges, less chromatic aberration, less distortion, and native movements; take for instance portraiture where sharp lens-corners usually won't improve the image, and may even hurt it. But in architecture/interiors the quality of your lens is first, second, and third on my list of items to worry about regarding technical quality of the image. A 100mp dSLR with 100 stops of dynamic range would still be trounced by a DM22 with a Schneider lens because of the glass; you simply cannot underestimate how important the glass is.

    IMO LCC is annoying. But that's it: annoying. With a DM22 you can store the LCC in the back itself and work off a finite number of presets; or you can grab an LCC shot after each good capture (when you've changed aperture/position/lenses).

    Focusing for these applications can be really dead simple; find (by practical testing, not chart or calculation) the hyperfocal for your system at f/16 (which will be sharp on a DM22), and then find the closest point you are sharp (write it on the inside of the lens cap in case you forget) and then leave it there forever more and don't place anything closer than your acceptable near point.

    I think you really have to address these points seriously:
    - will the long exposure really hinder you? Look through your images of the last year or two and find the longest exposure and translate it into f/8 at ISO50 (which is the highest I'd recommend for long exposures). If you regularly push past 8-15 seconds, and looking at those shots you couldn't have done them differently without great business or personal compromise - then this is a deal killer.
    - will the overall working speed being a bit slower prohibit you from doing what you need to do business wise? Tech cameras, once you're used to them, can be quite fast. However, they will never be as fast as a D800 (which you can even pump ISO and shoot handheld when really rushing).

    IMO the greatest temptation in business is the race to the bottom. The best move I ever made in my wedding photography was to double my prices. "Good enough" is the start of that race in my opinion. Pick the equipment, marketing, rates, and customer approach of where you want to be, not where you feel yourself being dragged down into. But then again I'm young and naive and I make no claim that wedding photography is akin to any other kind of photography, nor do I do it as my only income, nor have I ever tried to do it in a smaller secondary market (Miami and NYC have treated me quite well for wedding clients).


    Well said Doug. That's the only time, in all the discussions about focusing tech cams, that I've seen someone mention the method of focusing I've found to work - just do a bit of experimentation to find the maximum DOF and keep it there! No need for ground glass etc.

    Having done architectural and interior photography using natural light only with DSLR's previously and now with a Cambo Wide DS and P45+, I'm very happy at the stunning difference in quality on two counts: 1 the dimensional accuracy, sharpness and DOF of the Schneider 24XL and 35XL lenses; 2 the much more accurate colours and dynamic range of the Phase back.

    I've actually found the Cambo much faster to work with and exposures up to 15 seconds no problem. There are centre filters on both lenses so 2 stops extra exposure required for every shot but I usually just use one lens - the 24 - and crop down rather than change lenses, extra LCC shots etc. Most architects and interior designers are more than happy with 20+Mpixel shots and I've never been asked for more resolution.
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  33. #83
    Member Richard Osbourne's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Norfolk
    Posts
    74
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Architecture/Interior Design - Tech or that camera!

    I should add that I was using a Canon 1DsIII and 5DII with 24 TS-E II. Yes, there is a convenience for composition - live view is wonderful - and the short exposure times are easier, but the Cambo is so much more 'disciplined' and obviously designed for architecture. Even without a viewfinder, I find composing natural and quick with only a little shooting and recomposing required most times.

    On the Canons, I found myself using a polariser all the time just to try to get more colour in the images - so there was the 'no centre filter' advantage gone.

    The 24 TS-E is without doubt a remarkable lens. It's flare resistance alone makes it worth the price. But the Schneider lenses are in another league for dimensional accuracy. Even when using software lens correction, it doesn't match the Schneiders.

    I was using it to stitch 3 vertical shots to make a 42MPixel 4:3 aspect ratio image with an equivalent FOV of a 16mm lens. I worked ok but used at full shift the edges did fall apart unfortunately. And 42 Canon Mpixels are still a long way from Schneider/Phase 39Mpixels. And I was genuinely very surprised about that, though the lack of AA filter accounts for some of it obviously.

    Capture One 7 I think makes the case for the MFD solution even more attractive - the highlight recovery tool (in conjunction with the wider dynamic range) will mean those blown windows can be rescued.

    One other solution that I have looked at is a D800e with 14-24 lens. Certainly that lens is damned good (for 35mm) and the resolution / cropping possibilities may make up for lack of shift on the lens.
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  34. #84
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    1,538
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Architecture/Interior Design - Tech or that camera!

    If you go for the Canon option don't forget though that Canon's base ISO is still not that great (shadow noise!), it is worse than your DM22 for sure. If you do a lot of shadow pushing in post-processing it can be a problem. You can shoot HDR to work-around in difficult situations of course, but then you lose workflow speed. Being careful to expose to the right to make use of every stop in the camera is very important with the Canon.

    The shift and tilt gears on the TS-E lenses work alright, but it's far from the feel of a real tech camera controls.

    Anyway, I sure would like to see yet another tech cam user, but if you're on a budget and do it for normal commercial work I think it will be hard to rationally come to the conclusion that a MF tech cam is the better choice for the use case you've presented.

    Arca-Swiss RM3Di or an Alpa with Rodenstock Digarons and an IQ160 would blow the Canon away of course, but it is a major investment to make and typical customers don't need that quality.

    When we instead compare the DM22 + Cambo + Schneider Digitar 35XL with a Canon system, the tech cam will still give you an edge, better colors and dynamic range from the sensor, distortion-free lens (corner sharpness after shift I don't dare to say is better though, neither are perfect and I haven't seen an A/B test), but the image quality advantage will be small (unless you are an MFDB CCD connoisseur ) and you need to put it in relation to the practical issues with the long shutter speeds and lack of live view, plus what I assume the higher price, although the 5DMk3 plus a TS-E 24II is not cheap either.

    Oh, 22 megapixels without AA filter can be an issue concerning moire when shooting architecture. But I guess you are familiar with that already. Higher megapixel digital backs usually has less issues. I've noted a difference between 22 and 33 even, but I think it is managable. It's probably worse with fabrics than with architecture.

    If you stitch indoors, note that TS-E shifting will move the lens element rather than the sensor which may lead to parallax issues, although there are some custom lens mounts for that if you need to work around it.

    Here you have an example of the TS-E 24II + 1.4X III extender combination used in a professional setting (goto 02:00 min):
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature...&v=5HkrjQkanSw
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  35. #85
    Member Aryan Aqajani's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Posts
    166
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Architecture/Interior Design - Tech or that camera!

    Quote Originally Posted by cly View Post
    Yes, as long as you don't go for TS-lenses or favour a do it yourself approach. As Guy wrote earlier: you can't fit it a HPF ring to TS lenses unless you are as brave as jlm (there are pictures of his mod somewhere in this forum).

    A note on the Arca way of focusing: I had a RM3d briefly and wasn't happy - I ended with an Alpa Max. For my jobs (exhibition design/interior and architecture) I don't see an advantage in their body-based helical. It is different if you do a lot of close range photography or if you use longer focal lengths. Having to lookup a value on the lens table is, IMHO, much more painful than doing an LCC.

    BTW: There is one thing which is really great with the Alpa: Stitching is very fast as you can disengage the gearing and slide the back to the other position (you can have marks on the internal rail, so you feel 0mm and, e.g. -10mm, +10mm). But, looking at the investment, I'd say a Cambo (with Alpa HPF rings) is a very attractive solution.

    Chris
    Thank you so much Chris for giving me your personal experience, appreciate it

    Quote Originally Posted by MGrayson View Post
    A helpful fact about distance markings - they're spaced as a constant / distance along the focus ring. So if your last two markings are 5m and infinity, then 10m is exactly half way between those marks, 20m is 1/4 of the way from the infinity mark, etc.

    Having said that, if I weren't using a back with focus mask, I'd want a disto and the HPF ring or Arca's focus helical.

    --Matt

    Matt, thank you Considering what other fellow photographers have told me, for architecture and interiors getting the focus right is not really that simple like shooting landscape which most folks set it at infinity! And where precision and critical focus for wide lenses required, Alpa HPF ring or Arca focus helical is the way to go!


    Quote Originally Posted by Richard Osbourne View Post
    Well said Doug. That's the only time, in all the discussions about focusing tech cams, that I've seen someone mention the method of focusing I've found to work - just do a bit of experimentation to find the maximum DOF and keep it there! No need for ground glass etc.
    Thank you Richard for very informative reply I understand that method but let's imagine we are done with focusing and now we need movements! How do you guys check your movements without using ground glass? Eyeball? Shoot/check/shoot again? And also how do you compose? Again eyeballing or shoot/check method if using a back without focus mask and live view like DM22?


    Quote Originally Posted by Richard Osbourne View Post
    Most architects and interior designers are more than happy with 20+Mpixel shots and I've never been asked for more resolution.
    That's good to know

    Quote Originally Posted by Richard Osbourne View Post
    One other solution that I have looked at is a D800e with 14-24 lens. Certainly that lens is damned good (for 35mm) and the resolution / cropping possibilities may make up for lack of shift on the lens.
    That is what I am considering as well but with a Zeiss 18mm lens until a quality 24mm PC-E is being introduced for Nikon!

    I know it is quite impossible to predict how much movement is required for a specific situation but if we need like 10mm rise and instead use the 18mm lens on 36x42 sensor, can anyone tell me what the view angle would be? Would it be like a 24mm lens after doing perspective correction in PS?

    Quote Originally Posted by torger View Post
    If you go for the Canon option don't forget though that Canon's base ISO is still not that great (shadow noise!), it is worse than your DM22 for sure. If you do a lot of shadow pushing in post-processing it can be a problem. You can shoot HDR to work-around in difficult situations of course, but then you lose workflow speed. Being careful to expose to the right to make use of every stop in the camera is very important with the Canon.
    I would not push a single image that far for sure! Three shots with 2 stops over and under the normal exposure, then using layers in photoshop to recover some specific shadows and highlights so definitely not HDR or tone-mapping!


    Quote Originally Posted by torger View Post
    Anyway, I sure would like to see yet another tech cam user, but if you're on a budget and do it for normal commercial work I think it will be hard to rationally come to the conclusion that a MF tech cam is the better choice for the use case you've presented.
    If I had a P45+ back, I would jump in straight away! The limitation of my back for this type of work plus all the hassle of working with a tech cam hinders me!

    Quote Originally Posted by torger View Post
    Arca-Swiss RM3Di or an Alpa with Rodenstock Digarons and an IQ160 would blow the Canon away of course, but it is a major investment to make and typical customers don't need that quality.

    When we instead compare the DM22 + Cambo + Schneider Digitar 35XL with a Canon system, the tech cam will still give you an edge, better colors and dynamic range from the sensor, distortion-free lens (corner sharpness after shift I don't dare to say is better though, neither are perfect and I haven't seen an A/B test), but the image quality advantage will be small (unless you are an MFDB CCD connoisseur ) and you need to put it in relation to the practical issues with the long shutter speeds and lack of live view, plus what I assume the higher price, although the 5DMk3 plus a TS-E 24II is not cheap either.
    1+

    That's the point! I wish I could see a fair comparison in real situation between a DM22 back on a tech camera plus 35XL and Canon 5D MK III plus 24mm TS-E II. For my portrait work, I would never ever doubt that the DM22 back produce better files but not sure about it when used on a tech cam along that lens shooting available light!

    Quote Originally Posted by torger View Post
    If you stitch indoors, note that TS-E shifting will move the lens element rather than the sensor which may lead to parallax issues, although there are some custom lens mounts for that if you need to work around it.

    Here you have an example of the TS-E 24II + 1.4X III extender combination used in a professional setting (goto 02:00 min):
    Intercontinental Exterior Shoot - YouTube
    Thanks for the tip and the link
    Aryan Aqajani - Photographer in Melbourne, Australia
    Website | Blog | Facebook | Flickr | Vimeo

  36. #86
    Member Aryan Aqajani's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Posts
    166
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Architecture/Interior Design - Tech or that camera!

    I am coming to this conclusion that maybe the easiest way to work with a tech camera is shooting tethered! Regardless of the system, many architectural photographers shoot tethered so that make it easy to compose and zoom in at 100% to get the focus right and confirm the shift movements!

    If that would be "the proper way" of shooting, then I need to find a way to fight against the exposure limitation of DM22
    Aryan Aqajani - Photographer in Melbourne, Australia
    Website | Blog | Facebook | Flickr | Vimeo
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  37. #87
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Marseille, FRANCE
    Posts
    972
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Architecture/Interior Design - Tech or that camera!

    shooting tethered is not an option for me... light change too quickly...!
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  38. #88
    Member Aryan Aqajani's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Posts
    166
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Architecture/Interior Design - Tech or that camera!

    Quote Originally Posted by archivue View Post
    shooting tethered is not an option for me... light change too quickly...!
    I hear you loud! Each system has it's own limitations and compromises! Overall, it seems Canon is a better option! Still doing more research
    Aryan Aqajani - Photographer in Melbourne, Australia
    Website | Blog | Facebook | Flickr | Vimeo

  39. #89
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Chicago
    Posts
    550
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Architecture/Interior Design - Tech or that camera!

    Another way to look at it is a "curve of excellence". As you get more particular some solutions are better than others, although each approach has its limitations. Thr trick is to find the solution that gives you (the photog) the best results within your own approach and needs.

    For most people and most situations, Canikon systems are not only just fine, they are a very good answer. In a few situations, and for a lesser number of people, MFDB gives better results and the images are that much stronger. How much and for whom is a matter of debate, and on these pages, often intensely so.

    You can get very close to MFDB results with more flexible and less expensive systems, so "overall" many consider that a better approach. However, there is a joy and a delight with MFDB files that is hard to quantify and not achieved readily (if at all) in the Canikon world. The choice is personal, not just technical.
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  40. #90
    Senior Member Antonio Chagin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Miami-Fort Lauderdale
    Posts
    476
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Architecture/Interior Design - Tech or that camera!

    This post is very interesting but difficult to approach.

    I could say that there is not one valid formula for working architecture, it all depends on factors like the kind of clients that you are dealing with and the kind of budgets they can handle.

    If you are working with small to medium budget clients, they would want you to make as many final images as possible in one day and they usually do not need big files as the use is provably magazines, web, and medium size prints that a 22 or 24mpx camera can handle very well. In this case you need speed, live view, Tilt shift lenses and a good Canon or Nikon solution.

    If your expecting high budgets type of clients, you would need a Technical MFD solution tethered to a computer.

    This would be a slower, less final images in a day and provably extending the shooting to several days for a known location.

    Most of my work in done in Venezuela where Architects only destine small budget to photography sessions. I usually extend location shooting to 2 days to be able to secure down and dusk shots and the rest of the spaces they need to photograph.

    ACH
    www.achdigital.com
    Likes 2 Member(s) liked this post

  41. #91
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Germany near FFM
    Posts
    93
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Architecture/Interior Design - Tech or that camera!

    Quote Originally Posted by Richard Osbourne View Post

    One other solution that I have looked at is a D800e with 14-24 lens. Certainly that lens is damned good (for 35mm) and the resolution / cropping possibilities may make up for lack of shift on the lens.
    I used a D800 with a 14-24/2,8. The lens is great, but used at 14mmm you have to correct that much in PS or a different software that you lose the 14mm again and fall back to 16, maybe 17 when you look at the corrected files.

    CA is an additional issue with the 14-24. You find it very prominent in the corners and some in the center as well at 14-17mm.

    The best lense for work like that (if preferred to do it with the D800) is the newer Zeiss 15mm. But with it there is no AF. LiveView is not very helpful in low light situations for focussing even if you can blow up the lv picture very good but all the nice pixels shows nothing really useful any more if it is dark at the focussing point.

    There is a nice comparison here about the UWW for the Nikon.
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  42. #92
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    118
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Architecture/Interior Design - Tech or that camera!

    The d800E low light performance is not impressive. You have to use the LENR. Nikon glass is Not by any means impressive when you compare to the Rodi. I have the 800 and 800E as well *** multiple digital backs. It is very unfair to compare medium format systems to D800.
    If you want low light DSLR, D4 is the camera for you. For long exposure, 45+ is the best back.

    Amr
    Likes 2 Member(s) liked this post

  43. #93
    Member Aryan Aqajani's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Posts
    166
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Architecture/Interior Design - Tech or that camera!

    Quote Originally Posted by Geoff View Post
    Another way to look at it is a "curve of excellence". As you get more particular some solutions are better than others, although each approach has its limitations. Thr trick is to find the solution that gives you (the photog) the best results within your own approach and needs.

    For most people and most situations, Canikon systems are not only just fine, they are a very good answer. In a few situations, and for a lesser number of people, MFDB gives better results and the images are that much stronger. How much and for whom is a matter of debate, and on these pages, often intensely so.

    You can get very close to MFDB results with more flexible and less expensive systems, so "overall" many consider that a better approach. However, there is a joy and a delight with MFDB files that is hard to quantify and not achieved readily (if at all) in the Canikon world. The choice is personal, not just technical.
    Geoff, I am well aware of the difference between a DSLR and MFDB (especially the real deal, 6x7 MF). I never ever go back to 35mm to shoot portrait, fashion as I am in love with tone and depth of filed that even my Dm22 back produce, no doubt about it! However, since it has so limitations for long exposure, that makes my life hard!

    Quote Originally Posted by aeaemd View Post
    The d800E low light performance is not impressive. You have to use the LENR. Nikon glass is Not by any means impressive when you compare to the Rodi. I have the 800 and 800E as well *** multiple digital backs. It is very unfair to compare medium format systems to D800.
    If you want low light DSLR, D4 is the camera for you. For long exposure, 45+ is the best back.

    Amr
    Amr, IMO that is why Canon seems a better system for this type of work at the moment!

    What if there was a 22mp, Dalsa sensor with exposure time around an hour and base ISO25
    Aryan Aqajani - Photographer in Melbourne, Australia
    Website | Blog | Facebook | Flickr | Vimeo

  44. #94
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Germany near FFM
    Posts
    93
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Architecture/Interior Design - Tech or that camera!

    Quote Originally Posted by Aryan Aqajani View Post

    What if there was a 22mp, Dalsa sensor with exposure time around an hour and base ISO25
    Well, it was sold out very fast I guess...
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  45. #95
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    122
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Architecture/Interior Design - Tech or that camera!

    Quote Originally Posted by fotom View Post

    The best lense for work like that (if preferred to do it with the D800) is the newer Zeiss 15mm. But with it there is no AF. LiveView is not very helpful in low light situations for focussing even if you can blow up the lv picture very good but all the nice pixels shows nothing really useful any more if it is dark at the focussing point.
    But there is focus confirmation with Zeiss lens, which helps a lot. If it's too dark, of course, it would struggle, but Nikon's autofocus lens would struggle, too.

  46. #96
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    1,387
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Architecture/Interior Design - Tech or that camera!

    I really don't think the choice really boils down to focus issues with a tech or 35mm camera. With arcitecture focus doesn't change that much IMO. Heck, I've got an Arca ML2 that I've used to great effect for interior architecture and once focused it never changes for the rest of the shoot, I just repositioned the camera for the next shot. And while its a bit low tech, you can cut or have made blocks of a specific size that you place between the function carriers corresponding to set focus distances, thus never having to remove the back from the camera to focus.

    IMO, the big deciding factor are:

    1. Speed of operation when you're on a tight budget or with limited time on site.
    2. Exposure limitations of the digital back vs 35mm
    3. Extra expence of MFD over 35mm be that the lenses you use to the tripod you put it all on.
    4. Will your clients care and book you more because of the kit you use.
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  47. #97
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Germany near FFM
    Posts
    93
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Architecture/Interior Design - Tech or that camera!

    Quote Originally Posted by Pics2 View Post
    But there is focus confirmation with Zeiss lens, which helps a lot. If it's too dark, of course, it would struggle, but Nikon's autofocus lens would struggle, too.
    Yes, you are right on that. The focus indication helps a lot.

    But I do not have any idea if that will work with LV as well? Never tried that.

    To be honest: There is a great discussion in several German forums about D800 and the need of Medium Format since the D800 came on the market.

    One reason I sold my D800 was the Autofocus. I could not see anything in that viewfinder to set the focus manual on my own. And AF in general is NOT very good at the D800 in combination with any lens I tried... and believe me, I tried a lot. With my D3x I had less pixels (who cares?) but a slightly better AF. Still, if it was dark, I couldn´t set the focus manual. I don´t remember if the D3x had LV? If, I never used it.

    The AF on my MF is way better. And if that does not work for some reasons I can use that huge viewfinder or simply put the HVM on top...

    Besides that, if you take pictures in architecture you might have enough light and enough time. What shall run away when taking pictures for an expensive job?

    Those who want the best results will give you as much time as you need to get best results. Those who want to get fast food and pay fast food will get what they pay for. Fast food.
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  48. #98
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Posts
    2,338
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    52

    Re: Architecture/Interior Design - Tech or that camera!

    Just a hint - if you are serious about architectural shooting - I'd look at a Sinar artec - before commiting to any other camera system.

    Good Luck.
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  49. #99
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    82
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Architecture/Interior Design - Tech or that camera!

    It's pretty late, and haven't read through all the posts, so apologies if I'm doubling up.

    I shoot architecture, also in Melbourne. I use a WRS 1200 P45+, 24/35/47 or Canon kit w/TSE's depending on clients. I prefer the IQ of the medium format but the convenience of the Canon and their brilliant TSE's is undeniable.

    I'll always push clients to use the Cambo as results tend to be better, not only in IQ, shadow detail, colour, sharpness etc, but also in framing. The medium format pace of shooting, while a detrimental aspect, forces you into the zone of constructive visualisation far more than 35mm. I'm always more impressed with my images through the Cambo system over the Canon.

    Just an extra note, the MF tech lenses are brilliant. Comparing to 35mm lens is an exercise in futility. Such quality may or may not be noticed by your client though. You will see a BIG difference though.

    One issue I'm finding in regarding to my Cambo setup though is at the wide end. If I'm really wanting to push things, stitching the 35mm or the 24mm can be limiting. The very expensive 23mm Rodenstock would be a good option. In such situations a 17mm TSE stitched can be very handy.

    If it's an option, go with both setups, a full Cambo setup, along with a Canon and only selected lenses ie 17mm/24mm TSE's to keep cost as low as possible...
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  50. #100
    Member Aryan Aqajani's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Posts
    166
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Architecture/Interior Design - Tech or that camera!

    Quote Originally Posted by Flynnyfalcon View Post
    It's pretty late, and haven't read through all the posts, so apologies if I'm doubling up.

    I shoot architecture, also in Melbourne. I use a WRS 1200 P45+, 24/35/47 or Canon kit w/TSE's depending on clients. I prefer the IQ of the medium format but the convenience of the Canon and their brilliant TSE's is undeniable.

    I'll always push clients to use the Cambo as results tend to be better, not only in IQ, shadow detail, colour, sharpness etc, but also in framing. The medium format pace of shooting, while a detrimental aspect, forces you into the zone of constructive visualisation far more than 35mm. I'm always more impressed with my images through the Cambo system over the Canon.

    Just an extra note, the MF tech lenses are brilliant. Comparing to 35mm lens is an exercise in futility. Such quality may or may not be noticed by your client though. You will see a BIG difference though.

    One issue I'm finding in regarding to my Cambo setup though is at the wide end. If I'm really wanting to push things, stitching the 35mm or the 24mm can be limiting. The very expensive 23mm Rodenstock would be a good option. In such situations a 17mm TSE stitched can be very handy.

    If it's an option, go with both setups, a full Cambo setup, along with a Canon and only selected lenses ie 17mm/24mm TSE's to keep cost as low as possible...
    Thanks mate for the sharing your experience, appreciate it. In my situation, I think it would be easier on my pocket to start with a DSLR setup and if need arises, just hire a tech system for a while! Again, have not decided yet but if I had a back like yours, decision making would be much easier for me!
    Aryan Aqajani - Photographer in Melbourne, Australia
    Website | Blog | Facebook | Flickr | Vimeo

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •