The GetDPI Photography Forum

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

Phase One vs TS-E lenses for Architecture

timn420

New member
I love my IQ160 back and the fact that it’s full frame and has the CCD color rendition. It’s been great for using in the studio and on location with strobes.

However, my work is shifting more towards architecture and interiors, and I’m at a lost on what I should do. It took a lot of time to save up for the IQ160, and I really don’t want to sell it, but I’m afraid I need to make some compromises and either sell it and buy a set of canon TSE lenses for my DSLR or find some other way to use my phase back without having a huge negative ROI due to buying additional equipment. The thought of paying out 10K more for an alpha setup is out of reach at the moment.

Just wanted to get some opinions from this group on what would be the smartest and least costly option for me. It would be great to get better perspective control in camera. Owning a phase has been a dream, but I’m worried on spending too much more due to ROI for my business. Are there cheaper options that allow movements with an IQ back?
 

tcdeveau

Well-known member
I love my IQ160 back and the fact that it’s full frame and has the CCD color rendition. It’s been great for using in the studio and on location with strobes.

However, my work is shifting more towards architecture and interiors, and I’m at a lost on what I should do. It took a lot of time to save up for the IQ160, and I really don’t want to sell it, but I’m afraid I need to make some compromises and either sell it and buy a set of canon TSE lenses for my DSLR or find some other way to use my phase back without having a huge negative ROI due to buying additional equipment. The thought of paying out 10K more for an alpha setup is out of reach at the moment.

Just wanted to get some opinions from this group on what would be the smartest and least costly option for me. It would be great to get better perspective control in camera. Owning a phase has been a dream, but I’m worried on spending too much more due to ROI for my business. Are there cheaper options that allow movements with an IQ back?
What are you currently using with the IQ160? DF/DF+/XF or tech cam/Alpa FPS?

I would probably just go the 35mm route just to keep costs down and to maximize overhead vs ROI if I were you. There are ample 35mm options out there, like a 5DSR + TSE, D850 + PCE, A7RII + Canon TSE, A7RII + Cambo Actus + MF lenses, A7RII plus HCAM TS + Canon 11-24/TSE, etc etc that will give you good results with wider FOV than possible with MF (at least with full movements). 35mm options can be cheaper than some available MF options, but it also depends on what you are currently mating your IQ160 with. Since you're a Phase user currently, you'd also still get Capture One support which shouldn't alter your workflow tremendously. With 35mm, you'd also get live view with focus magnification which you don't really get with the IQ160...something that would speed up my workflow considerably if I were working with movements. All of that of course also assumes there aren't cost-friendly options for the IQ160 though, and as I'm not an architectural shooter, I don't really know the best options for MF.

Another question I guess you'll have to ask yourself when making the decision is what happens if your work shifts back away from architecture and interiors?
-Todd
 

timn420

New member
What are you currently using with the IQ160? DF/DF+/XF or tech cam/Alpa FPS?

I would probably just go the 35mm route just to keep costs down and to maximize overhead vs ROI if I were you. There are ample 35mm options out there, like a 5DSR + TSE, D850 + PCE, A7RII + Canon TSE, A7RII + Cambo Actus + MF lenses, A7RII plus HCAM TS + Canon 11-24/TSE, etc etc that will give you good results with wider FOV than possible with MF (at least with full movements). 35mm options can be cheaper than some available MF options, but it also depends on what you are currently mating your IQ160 with. Since you're a Phase user currently, you'd also still get Capture One support which shouldn't alter your workflow tremendously. With 35mm, you'd also get live view with focus magnification which you don't really get with the IQ160...something that would speed up my workflow considerably if I were working with movements. All of that of course also assumes there aren't cost-friendly options for the IQ160 though, and as I'm not an architectural shooter, I don't really know the best options for MF.

Another question I guess you'll have to ask yourself when making the decision is what happens if your work shifts back away from architecture and interiors?
-Todd
I'm currently using the DF with the IQ160. I guess I'm trying to see if there might be some "cheaper" options that would allow me to still use the IQ160 without having to buy something like the Arca Swiss RM3DI ($5600) and Schneider lenses! Something like the Cambo Actus that is affordable and would work with an IQ back would be nice. There is a chance that my work could change away from interiors, although it's been strong the past year or so. Plus I hate the idea of having an expensive back losing value and not being utilized properly.
 

daf

Member
I'm currently using the DF with the IQ160. I guess I'm trying to see if there might be some "cheaper" options that would allow me to still use the IQ160 without having to buy something like the Arca Swiss RM3DI ($5600) and Schneider lenses! Something like the Cambo Actus that is affordable and would work with an IQ back would be nice. There is a chance that my work could change away from interiors, although it's been strong the past year or so. Plus I hate the idea of having an expensive back losing value and not being utilized properly.

An Actus+ a CCD digitalback is from my point of view a very bad idea for interior/architecture ... it mean that you'll have to always work with liveview to focus, which is a pain when working outside with brigth light or inside with low light.
If you want to keep using your IQ160,help yourself and go for an Alpa or Cambo +HPF rings (precision ring) or with an Arca Rm3d.
Actus is only good with Cmos ...
Cheaper option might be go 24x36 +any of the TS option, or just keep working with you DF and C1 Keystone correction.
 

GrahamWelland

Subscriber & Workshop Member
What DAF said. I love my Actus DB+ but I hated live view on the IQ160/260 and it wasn't until I got the IQ150 and then IQ3100 did I find the Actus really usable. It's not to say that it can't be done with the IQx60 but the live view on CCD is a lot tougher to use with a camera like the Actus that requires accurate manual focusing via LV only.
 

ErikKaffehr

Well-known member
Hi,

I am using the A7rII with a Canon 24/3.5 TSE LII. I also have a HCam Master TS II that I sometimes use with the Canon 16-35/4L. The 16-35/4L gives a few mm of shift at 16 mm but quite generous shift at 20 mm. The 11-24/4 is said to be great.

Cambo makes some adapters that allows for controlling the aperture on Canon EF lenses. Else you need stop down on another body and remove the lens with DoF preview pressed.

You can just use a normal wide angle and tilt upwards and use software correction to fix it. Works reasonably well, but it is easy to miss lower corners.

Canon 16-35/4 at 16 mmCanon 16-35/4 at 16 mm corrected for keystone

I have a Hasselblad Flexbody. It is very nice but grossly unpractical for field use. Used Hasselblad-V lenses are very affordable. Another downside with that solution is that I don't feel most of the Distagons are that great.

Another possible route would be a technical camera and a sliding back, paired with affordable Schneider lenses.

Anyway, going the MFD route almost always means significant costs.

Here is a bunch of images I shot using the Canon 16-35/4 with the HCam Master TS II. I simply used preset the lens to f/11. Most of the images have some shift and some are stitched. Processing is not so great, the images are intended as a demo.

https://echophoto.smugmug.com/Technical/16-354l-and-Master-TS/


Best regards
Erik


What are you currently using with the IQ160? DF/DF+/XF or tech cam/Alpa FPS?

I would probably just go the 35mm route just to keep costs down and to maximize overhead vs ROI if I were you. There are ample 35mm options out there, like a 5DSR + TSE, D850 + PCE, A7RII + Canon TSE, A7RII + Cambo Actus + MF lenses, A7RII plus HCAM TS + Canon 11-24/TSE, etc etc that will give you good results with wider FOV than possible with MF (at least with full movements). 35mm options can be cheaper than some available MF options, but it also depends on what you are currently mating your IQ160 with. Since you're a Phase user currently, you'd also still get Capture One support which shouldn't alter your workflow tremendously. With 35mm, you'd also get live view with focus magnification which you don't really get with the IQ160...something that would speed up my workflow considerably if I were working with movements. All of that of course also assumes there aren't cost-friendly options for the IQ160 though, and as I'm not an architectural shooter, I don't really know the best options for MF.

Another question I guess you'll have to ask yourself when making the decision is what happens if your work shifts back away from architecture and interiors?
-Todd
 

jng

Well-known member
As both daf and Graham mention, focusing (and composing) via liveview on the IQ 160 is a pain, but do-able. I use a ground glass for composing and focusing on my Cambo + IQ160 (as I did with my Flexbody) but this too is a bit kludgy and not guaranteed to hit focus on the first attempt. Plus, recomposing involves starting the entire process all over again. I don't earn money making pictures (quite the opposite in fact), so spending extra time futzing around and sometimes getting frustrated doesn't exact any real cost to me in terms of productivity and therefore income. With all that said, there's an interior/architectural photographer in the U.K. named Ashley Morrison who uses an old Phase P25 back on a Hasselblad Flexbody, with amazing results. So if you love the look that the IQ160 gives you, it can be done.

A used tech cam could be an economically reasonable (or at least not totally ridiculous) way for you to keep using your IQ160. However the cost of all the little doo-dads like back adapters, tilt-swing lens plates etc can add up quickly. Lenses can also burn a hole in your wallet although as Erik mentions there are some nice used Schneider lenses to be found (some with big image circles friendly for shifting, for which the Dalsa CCD sensor is well suited) for a more reasonable price than any of the Rodenstocks purchased new. Check out the for sale page here and on other forums. There is some nice used gear out there if it fits your needs.

Good luck!

John
 
Last edited:
Top