Technical Camera Help Please!

[Greg Haag]

I don't use my cameras for any commercial reasons and pretty much just landscape use so my choices might not be ideal for a working pro's needs but here's my story:

For the technical camera I went with a pretty standard set up second time around for my Actus - 40HR, 70HR and SK 120. With my Alpa I had 32HR, 90HR and SK150 which was also a very useful combination (It was stolen). In the past I also had the 23HR but TBH that was nice to have but I didn't use it much as it was a tricky lens to deal with (reflections/flare/LCC etc).

The reality (for me at least) is that the two most used lenses by far were the 32/90 or 40/70 with the longer 120mm+ lenses only being rarely used, although obviously when you need them, you need them unless you want to crop. With a tech cam having movements gives you a lot of flexibility when using just a couple of lenses so if you want to go really wide it's easy to stitch without needing to go to the widest lens extremes (like the 23HR).

"(It was stolen)", oh my goodness, that makes me sick to think about!

Graham, since you had both, how would you compare the 40HR to the 32HR?

Thanks!
Greg

 

[Paul2660]

Hi Greg:

I just realized you are in Jonesboro!, can't believe someone else from Arkansas.

If you would like sometime mid Sept to late to meet up somewhere, I can show you my setup, I still use the rm3di, and have many of the lenses that have been mentioned. Acra is the least favored of the three it seems, but it still works for me and the cost to switch to Cambo is just too much as all the lenses would need remounting.

Quickly, on the Arca, several US dealers carry them Digital Transitions and Capture Integration.

The rm3di, is setup for 15mm of shift R/L and 30mm and 20mm of Rise and fall. At first I was worried about only 15mm of shift, as I rarely use Rise/fall, but with most of the wides, 15mm is about all you really can get especially on the 3100 or 4150, due to edge softness and with the Rodenstocks, the hard vignetting that occurs when you hit the image circle edge indicator. The 32 HR-W might to to 20mm, but mine has too much retrofocus distortion by 12mm, that really taking it out further is a waste. The 35XL, just barely did 10mm on my IQ260, really more like 8mm. That was with the CF. On the 3100, less than 5m. Where the 35XL is so good is that it's symetrical in design, thus it has no retrofocus distortion issues (objects towards the edge elongate and flatten, just look at a car at 15mm on the 32 HR-W), where as the 35XL has very little of this and thus it can panned for huge images. I tend to pan most of my shots now and don't shift as often.

Arca allows for either tilt or swing on the lens plate, (Cambo offers both with very small knobs on their tech camera), Arca has a very detailed helical for focus that is built into the camera body, Cambo and others I believe put the helical into the actual lens. You can get more detailed focus support on the Cambo with the focus rings that can be added which act similar to the Acra Helical, i.e. giving you much more detailed focus feedback. Downside to the Acra helical is that on a telephoto lens, you may have several turns to get out to infinity so it can take longer to get to idea focus. However I have long since written down the numerical ranges where I get best focus and always start there.

Arca, has no website (crazy in this day and age), but local US dealers should be able to help out there.

Arca mounts the digital back with a single pressure twisting mount, which I prefer, as I can release the back quickly and have a secure grip on the back also.

Can't speak to Alpa, except that they are even more expensive but I do respect their leadership in the tech lineup, and they do have an excellent website as does Cambo.

The 3100, will do fine with any of the lenses, however you will be required to shoot a dark frame each time you change the shutter speed, and this can become cumbersome, especially if you are working a quick range of shuttter speeds, You can turn off the long noise reduction process with a tech camera if I remember correctly, but you still have to take a dark frame on the shutter speed changes.

The longer lenses, from 90mm out will also need a back extension. This pushes the back out from the back of the tech camera, The extension on the 90mm is manageable, but on the 180mm it's about 6 inches out. I only mention this as it's a bit of a pain in the outdoors to have to move to the extensions as for sure you are going to expose the back to the air, and thus pick up dust.

The other option which has been mentioned a bit is the Cambo Aptus or Arca ????.. sorry I can't remember the name of the Arca one. This is more of a view camera setup, and has a bellows between the lens and back. Setup allows more movements for sure and is lighter. Also lenses no longer need the special mounting, just a standard board to fit. So costs can be less.

The Rodenstocks to consider, would be the 23HR with CF, 28HR with CF 32 HR-W might need CF , 40HR, 50HR 70HR 90HR (magenta band on lens) or 90 HRSW. The 138 costs around 12K, just for the lens, so you are looking at 15K to use it, (not for me). 180HR and 210 (older lens).

The Schneiders to look for (they are no longer in production but still show up used) 28XL, with CF, 35XL with CF, 43XL with CF, 60XL with CF, and the wonderful 120mm Asph if you can locate it. It's tiny, light shirt pocket size makes it a always in the bag lens, as does the 35XL.

Paul C

 

[Greg Haag]

Greg,
The four best lenses out there for technical cameras are the 32hr, 90hrsw, sk120 asph and the new 138hr-float. But, those three Rodenstock lenses add up to well North of $30k, maybe even $40k and you need to be in someone's will to get your hands on a sk120 asph. A tier below that, but still excellent are a mixture of Schneider (sk) and Rodenstock (hr):
sk28xl, sk35xl, 40hr, sk43xl, sk60xl, 50hr*, 70hr, sk72, sk90/100 (either one), sk120N, sk150, 180hr. There are probably a few I missed there, and some on this list may be slightly better than others, especially farther out in the image circle.

To some extent, the back/lens decision is interdependent if you want the most flexibility. If you need these for architecture, you would lean toward the Schneider lenses on the wide end because they have less distortion. Rodenstocks have a bit of mustache distortion which can be difficult to remove, although not impossible. The problem with Schneider lenses on the wide end is their shift amount is limited by lens color cast on anything but the IQ4 150. If you go for the IQ3 100 (which frankly I think is your best path), you really should use center filters on sk lenses wider than the sk72.

As others have stated, the general rule is Rodenstocks are heavier, have more distortion but have larger usable image circles. There are exceptions, like the sk60 and sk120 asph.

Dave

*Never owned the 50hr, but it may sneak into the top tier group. I hear it is quite good.

Dave,
Thank you for the your insights, very helpful!
Greg

 

[Greg Haag]

Hi Greg:

I just realized you are in Jonesboro!, can't believe someone else from Arkansas.

If you would like sometime mid Sept to late to meet up somewhere, I can show you my setup, I still use the rm3di, and have many of the lenses that have been mentioned. Acra is the least favored of the three it seems, but it still works for me and the cost to switch to Cambo is just too much as all the lenses would need remounting.

Quickly, on the Arca, several US dealers carry them Digital Transitions and Capture Integration.

The rm3di, is setup for 15mm of shift R/L and 30mm and 20mm of Rise and fall. At first I was worried about only 15mm of shift, as I rarely use Rise/fall, but with most of the wides, 15mm is about all you really can get especially on the 3100 or 4150, due to edge softness and with the Rodenstocks, the hard vignetting that occurs when you hit the image circle edge indicator. The 32 HR-W might to to 20mm, but mine has too much retrofocus distortion by 12mm, that really taking it out further is a waste. The 35XL, just barely did 10mm on my IQ260, really more like 8mm. That was with the CF. On the 3100, less than 5m. Where the 35XL is so good is that it's symetrical in design, thus it has no retrofocus distortion issues (objects towards the edge elongate and flatten, just look at a car at 15mm on the 32 HR-W), where as the 35XL has very little of this and thus it can panned for huge images. I tend to pan most of my shots now and don't shift as often.

Arca allows for either tilt or swing on the lens plate, (Cambo offers both with very small knobs on their tech camera), Arca has a very detailed helical for focus that is built into the camera body, Cambo and others I believe put the helical into the actual lens. You can get more detailed focus support on the Cambo with the focus rings that can be added which act similar to the Acra Helical, i.e. giving you much more detailed focus feedback. Downside to the Acra helical is that on a telephoto lens, you may have several turns to get out to infinity so it can take longer to get to idea focus. However I have long since written down the numerical ranges where I get best focus and always start there.

Arca, has no website (crazy in this day and age), but local US dealers should be able to help out there.

Arca mounts the digital back with a single pressure twisting mount, which I prefer, as I can release the back quickly and have a secure grip on the back also.

Can't speak to Alpa, except that they are even more expensive but I do respect their leadership in the tech lineup, and they do have an excellent website as does Cambo.

The 3100, will do fine with any of the lenses, however you will be required to shoot a dark frame each time you change the shutter speed, and this can become cumbersome, especially if you are working a quick range of shuttter speeds, You can turn off the long noise reduction process with a tech camera if I remember correctly, but you still have to take a dark frame on the shutter speed changes.

The longer lenses, from 90mm out will also need a back extension. This pushes the back out from the back of the tech camera, The extension on the 90mm is manageable, but on the 180mm it's about 6 inches out. I only mention this as it's a bit of a pain in the outdoors to have to move to the extensions as for sure you are going to expose the back to the air, and thus pick up dust.

The other option which has been mentioned a bit is the Cambo Aptus or Arca ????.. sorry I can't remember the name of the Arca one. This is more of a view camera setup, and has a bellows between the lens and back. Setup allows more movements for sure and is lighter. Also lenses no longer need the special mounting, just a standard board to fit. So costs can be less.

The Rodenstocks to consider, would be the 23HR with CF, 28HR with CF 32 HR-W might need CF , 40HR, 50HR 70HR 90HR (magenta band on lens) or 90 HRSW. The 138 costs around 12K, just for the lens, so you are looking at 15K to use it, (not for me). 180HR and 210 (older lens).

The Schneiders to look for (they are no longer in production but still show up used) 28XL, with CF, 35XL with CF, 43XL with CF, 60XL with CF, and the wonderful 120mm Asph if you can locate it. It's tiny, light shirt pocket size makes it a always in the bag lens, as does the 35XL.

Paul C

Paul,
I would love to meet up in September! Just let me know when you have some time, I am in Little Rock regularly! Thank you for the great information, I will process that over the weekend. I have added my email and cell below.
Thanks again,
Greg

[email protected]
870-219-9919

 

[dougpeterson]

Greg,
The four best lenses out there for technical cameras are the 32hr, 90hrsw, sk120 asph and the new 138hr-float. But, those three Rodenstock lenses add up to well North of $30k, maybe even $40k and you need to be in someone's will to get your hands on a sk120 asph. A tier below that, but still excellent are a mixture of Schneider (sk) and Rodenstock (hr):
sk28xl, sk35xl, 40hr, sk43xl, sk60xl, 50hr*, 70hr, sk72, sk90/100 (either one), sk120N, sk150, 180hr. There are probably a few I missed there, and some on this list may be slightly better than others, especially farther out in the image circle.

To some extent, the back/lens decision is interdependent if you want the most flexibility. If you need these for architecture, you would lean toward the Schneider lenses on the wide end because they have less distortion. Rodenstocks have a bit of mustache distortion which can be difficult to remove, although not impossible. The problem with Schneider lenses on the wide end is their shift amount is limited by lens color cast on anything but the IQ4 150. If you go for the IQ3 100 (which frankly I think is your best path), you really should use center filters on sk lenses wider than the sk72.

As others have stated, the general rule is Rodenstocks are heavier, have more distortion but have larger usable image circles. There are exceptions, like the sk60 and sk120 asph.

Dave

*Never owned the 50hr, but it may sneak into the top tier group. I hear it is quite good.

Some notes from my point of view:
- 50HR should, IMO be considered in that top tier
- DT is the only source for new 120ASPH lenses. Fantastic glass and small/light. We commission custom batch runs of this lens because of our Cultural Heritage business (DTCulturalHeritage.com). But because we are never sure if we can order another batch we unfortunately must reserve them to sell to those that are already DT clients.

 

[dougpeterson]

Hi Greg:

I just realized you are in Jonesboro!, can't believe someone else from Arkansas.

If you would like sometime mid Sept to late to meet up somewhere, I can show you my setup, I still use the rm3di, and have many of the lenses that have been mentioned. Acra is the least favored of the three it seems, but it still works for me and the cost to switch to Cambo is just too much as all the lenses would need remounting.

Quickly, on the Arca, several US dealers carry them Digital Transitions and Capture Integration.

The rm3di, is setup for 15mm of shift R/L and 30mm and 20mm of Rise and fall. At first I was worried about only 15mm of shift, as I rarely use Rise/fall, but with most of the wides, 15mm is about all you really can get especially on the 3100 or 4150, due to edge softness and with the Rodenstocks, the hard vignetting that occurs when you hit the image circle edge indicator. The 32 HR-W might to to 20mm, but mine has too much retrofocus distortion by 12mm, that really taking it out further is a waste. The 35XL, just barely did 10mm on my IQ260, really more like 8mm. That was with the CF. On the 3100, less than 5m. Where the 35XL is so good is that it's symetrical in design, thus it has no retrofocus distortion issues (objects towards the edge elongate and flatten, just look at a car at 15mm on the 32 HR-W), where as the 35XL has very little of this and thus it can panned for huge images. I tend to pan most of my shots now and don't shift as often.

Arca allows for either tilt or swing on the lens plate, (Cambo offers both with very small knobs on their tech camera), Arca has a very detailed helical for focus that is built into the camera body, Cambo and others I believe put the helical into the actual lens. You can get more detailed focus support on the Cambo with the focus rings that can be added which act similar to the Acra Helical, i.e. giving you much more detailed focus feedback. Downside to the Acra helical is that on a telephoto lens, you may have several turns to get out to infinity so it can take longer to get to idea focus. However I have long since written down the numerical ranges where I get best focus and always start there.

Arca, has no website (crazy in this day and age), but local US dealers should be able to help out there.

Arca mounts the digital back with a single pressure twisting mount, which I prefer, as I can release the back quickly and have a secure grip on the back also.

Can't speak to Alpa, except that they are even more expensive but I do respect their leadership in the tech lineup, and they do have an excellent website as does Cambo.

The 3100, will do fine with any of the lenses, however you will be required to shoot a dark frame each time you change the shutter speed, and this can become cumbersome, especially if you are working a quick range of shuttter speeds, You can turn off the long noise reduction process with a tech camera if I remember correctly, but you still have to take a dark frame on the shutter speed changes.

The longer lenses, from 90mm out will also need a back extension. This pushes the back out from the back of the tech camera, The extension on the 90mm is manageable, but on the 180mm it's about 6 inches out. I only mention this as it's a bit of a pain in the outdoors to have to move to the extensions as for sure you are going to expose the back to the air, and thus pick up dust.

The other option which has been mentioned a bit is the Cambo Aptus or Arca ????.. sorry I can't remember the name of the Arca one. This is more of a view camera setup, and has a bellows between the lens and back. Setup allows more movements for sure and is lighter. Also lenses no longer need the special mounting, just a standard board to fit. So costs can be less.

The Rodenstocks to consider, would be the 23HR with CF, 28HR with CF 32 HR-W might need CF , 40HR, 50HR 70HR 90HR (magenta band on lens) or 90 HRSW. The 138 costs around 12K, just for the lens, so you are looking at 15K to use it, (not for me). 180HR and 210 (older lens).

The Schneiders to look for (they are no longer in production but still show up used) 28XL, with CF, 35XL with CF, 43XL with CF, 60XL with CF, and the wonderful 120mm Asph if you can locate it. It's tiny, light shirt pocket size makes it a always in the bag lens, as does the 35XL.

Paul C

Arca absolutely deserves evaluation.

We are one of the largest Arca Swiss dealers in the world (maybe the largest?) and have very few unhappy Arca clients. It definitely has the steepest learning curve but it’s hard to argue against Arca being the most technically powerful and precise platform.

We can do remote demos of the Arca, or arrange an evaluation rental to help make up for the lack of website. I agree the lack of website is strange, but they are a good group of craftsman/engineers/designers without much love for marketing. Their service/support/warranty support to the dealer network is stellar; turnaround for service in the USA is often just a couple days (we’ve even arranged same day turnaround on more than one occasion, though I definitely wouldn’t guarantee it).

Nothing above should be read as a negative toward other brands. Plenty of great options out there from the big three brands.

 

[GrahamWelland]

With decent live view, ALL of the tech cameras are superb. I never got on with the color coded rings / dials of the Arca but once live view entered the scene I wouldn’t hesitate to go with Arca or any of the platforms. Literally ANY. The lenses are the same and they are all superbly made.

 

[GrahamWelland]

"(It was stolen)", oh my goodness, that makes me sick to think about!

Graham, since you had both, how would you compare the 40HR to the 32HR?

Thanks!
Greg

Indeed - especially since they probably ended up in a land fill .... damned car thieves feeding their drug habits.

As regards 32HR vs 40HR, it’s the 99.999% vs 99.99% perfection kind of level. But if that extra .009% matters then the 32HR rocks it. It was beyond my talent level but always gave me that ‘WOW’ vs just ‘wow’ when images were nailed.

For me me one of the biggest differences was that the 32HR is a delicate lens the size of a brick vs 40HR being a pebble in size by comparison. That may or not matter to you ...

Just my $0.02.

 

[GrahamWelland]

Greg,
The four best lenses out there for technical cameras are the 32hr, 90hrsw, sk120 asph and the new 138hr-float.

...

Dave

+1 on what Dave said.

 

[dchew]

My Lens Opus
I should put this in context first: Any lens on this list is wonderful and has, in my opinion, very good to excellent quality. They are in that top tier Otus / Sigma Art / best Canikonsony place on the shelf. Some are a bit better than others, but all can be used with any digital back available, including the IQ4 150. All this is IMO, so take it for what it is worth; not much...

Most of us say, “Pick the widest lens you want then gap up from there.” That’s a reasonable approach. Or if you have a favorite focal length, pick that and gap up/down from there. Don’t forget that you can do two-image stitches by shifting the back. For example, with the sk60xl and the back in the portrait orientation, shifting left/right ~15.5mm gives you a 54x72, 4:3 stitched image. In “FF” equivalents, the 60mm becomes a 29-39mm mini-zoom; the 90hr-sw becomes a 44-58mm zoom (in FF equivalents). Most of these lenses handle that amount of shift except for a few of the wider Schneiders (sk28 and sk35).

For a three-lens kit:
The cost/weight be damned options:

• 32hr, 90hr-sw, 138hr-sw float.
• 32hr, 50hr, 90hr-sw

The sensible really good alternatives; just depends on what FL spread you want:

• 40hr, sk90 apo-digitar, sk120N or sk150N
• Sk35xl, sk72/70hr, sk120N

Mix and match to your heart’s content.

Wide:

• Sk28: Very good, but you really should have the IQ4 150 to go with it. Too much color cast for any shift on other backs. Needs the CF.
• 32hr: Excellent lens, big, heavy, expensive and you need to transport it with some care; don’t walk with it on the camera attached to the tripod over your shoulder. If you want the absolute best wide lens and don’t care about weight or filter size, this is it. 86mm filter threads
• Sk35: Very good out to about a 10mm shift. Really a 36mm. Need a CF or the IQ4 150. Smaller and lighter than the 40hr. No distortion vs the 40hr.
• 40hr: Very good, slightly better than the sk35 with much less color cast. Can shift ~ 15mm. Really a 42mm.
• Sk43xl: Very good if you can find one. On par with the 40hr, but more color cast. If you have the IQ4 150 this is an excellent option. Any other back the 40hr is probably the better choice.

I’ve owned the sk43xl, 40hr and the sk35. I sold the sk43 to get the 40hr because with Alpa you cannot tilt the 43, but you can tilt the 40hr. After several years of not using either lens much, I realized both of those options are not really wide enough for me. 42/43mm is ~ 28mm equivalent, which I’ve never connected with. I prefer ~24mm and 35mm FF equivalents. I now have the sk35, which I really like. Although again with Alpa I cannot tilt that lens.

I would pick the one that fits your needs and not worry about the slight difference in quality from one to the other. The most popular and “safest” option is the 40hr.

50-75mm:

• 50hr: A bit larger than the others, but excellent lens with a very usable image circle. Probably the best of the bunch, with the sk60xl on par or close.
• Sk60xl: Another excellent lens with very big image circle. A bit smaller than the 50hr, but you need the CF with anything but the IQ4 150.
• 70hr: Splitting hairs between this and the sk72. 58mm filter threads.
• Sk72: See above. However, the 72 is really a 75mm.

All these are excellent lenses. Again, choose based on the focal length you want, and where it fits with other lenses. You may skip over this range initially. See how you get along with the technical camera “gestalt” and then decide. That being said, personally this is my most-used focal length. I had 70hr but wanted something a bit wider. I moved to the sk60xl and love that lens. It is my one-lens kit.

90-120mm:

• 90hr-w: The older Rodenstock digital design, “90mm f/5.6 HR Digaron-W.” Very good lens on par with other options except the hr-sw below.
• 90hr-sw: Best lens of the 90-100mm options. Very sharp in the whole image circle out to >100mm. Expensive and heavier with a 72mm filter thread.
• Sk90 apo-digitar: If you are ok with the slightly degraded performance off-center vs the 90hr-sw, this is a great, light lens w/ 40.5mm filter threads.
• Sk100 apo-digitar: Similar to sk90; just a focal length choice. Harder to find.
• 100hr-s: Smaller stated image circle, but it is actually larger than stated. 58mm filter threads.
• Sk120N apo-digitar: Similar in quality to the other schneiders in this range, just longer. Still, 40.5mm filter threads.
• Sk120 asph: Schneider released this lens not long before they got out of the business, so there are not many out there. I’ve never seen an MTF graph but by all accounts, it is one of the best lenses available. 110mm image circle.

This is perhaps the toughest choice. If money and weight are no object, then the 90hr-sw is the winner. The sk120 asph is probably as good, but hard to find. The other 90-100 options should all have about the same quality. My opinion in this range: if you can afford the 90hr-sw and don’t mind the size, go for it. If one of those two things is a limitation for you, the sk90 is almost as good, and the smallest/lightest of the bunch.

If you prefer the longer 120mm focal length, then spend some time trying to find the asph, but don’t lose too much sleep if you can’t find one. Many people love the sk120N.

I’ve owned the 100hr-s, 90hr-sw and now the sk90. My original two lens kit was the sk43xl and the 100hr-s. The 100 got decentered at some point. Instead of repair I traded it in for the 90hr-sw. After using the 90hr-sw for several years, I recently moved to the sk90 to lighten my kit and help fund the IQ4 150 upgrade.

>120mm:

• 138hrsw-float: Dealers now have this in their hands. There are probably a few out in use but I have not heard any user reports. It should be the best lens out there. Huge image circle sharp out to the edge. $12-15k, long and heavy. Two kilos of pure love. Note f/6.5, but probably plenty sharp wide open.
• Sk150N: 40.5mm filter threads. 40.5mm! Punches way above its weight, but not in the rarefied air of the 138 above. Similar quality to the 90-120 field (not counting the 90hr-sw / sk120 asph)
• 180hr-s: this is a really good lens, especially if you have a bellows-based technical camera vs. helical mount. The helical mount version is pretty long; that takes up a lot of space in the bag. Like the 100hr-s, the useable image circle is larger than stated.

Technical cameras are not known for longer lenses. At this point many adapt to other, older lenses. The Zeiss/Hasselblad 250/350 superachromats are popular.

My current lenses: sk35, sk60xl, sk90 apo-digitar, sk150N, Zeiss 250 superachromat. I care a bit more about size and weight and am willing to sacrifice a bit of sharpness at the edges of image circles to get there.

Whew. If you got through this you must really be interested in a technical camera.

Dave

 

[Greg Haag]

My Lens Opus
I should put this in context first: Any lens on this list is wonderful and has, in my opinion, very good to excellent quality. They are in that top tier Otus / Sigma Art / best Canikonsony place on the shelf. Some are a bit better than others, but all can be used with any digital back available, including the IQ4 150. All this is IMO, so take it for what it is worth; not much...

Most of us say, “Pick the widest lens you want then gap up from there.” That’s a reasonable approach. Or if you have a favorite focal length, pick that and gap up/down from there. Don’t forget that you can do two-image stitches by shifting the back. For example, with the sk60xl and the back in the portrait orientation, shifting left/right ~15.5mm gives you a 54x72, 4:3 stitched image. In “FF” equivalents, the 60mm becomes a 29-39mm mini-zoom; the 90hr-sw becomes a 44-58mm zoom (in FF equivalents). Most of these lenses handle that amount of shift except for a few of the wider Schneiders (sk28 and sk35).

For a three-lens kit:
The cost/weight be damned options:

• 32hr, 90hr-sw, 138hr-sw float.
• 32hr, 50hr, 90hr-sw

The sensible really good alternatives; just depends on what FL spread you want:

• 40hr, sk90 apo-digitar, sk120N or sk150N
• Sk35xl, sk72/70hr, sk120N

Mix and match to your heart’s content.

Wide:

• Sk28: Very good, but you really should have the IQ4 150 to go with it. Too much color cast for any shift on other backs. Needs the CF.
• 32hr: Excellent lens, big, heavy, expensive and you need to transport it with some care; don’t walk with it on the camera attached to the tripod over your shoulder. If you want the absolute best wide lens and don’t care about weight or filter size, this is it. 86mm filter threads
• Sk35: Very good out to about a 10mm shift. Really a 36mm. Need a CF or the IQ4 150. Smaller and lighter than the 40hr. No distortion vs the 40hr.
• 40hr: Very good, slightly better than the sk35 with much less color cast. Can shift ~ 15mm. Really a 42mm.
• Sk43xl: Very good if you can find one. On par with the 40hr, but more color cast. If you have the IQ4 150 this is an excellent option. Any other back the 40hr is probably the better choice.

I’ve owned the sk43xl, 40hr and the sk35. I sold the sk43 to get the 40hr because with Alpa you cannot tilt the 43, but you can tilt the 40hr. After several years of not using either lens much, I realized both of those options are not really wide enough for me. 42/43mm is ~ 28mm equivalent, which I’ve never connected with. I prefer ~24mm and 35mm FF equivalents. I now have the sk35, which I really like. Although again with Alpa I cannot tilt that lens.

I would pick the one that fits your needs and not worry about the slight difference in quality from one to the other. The most popular and “safest” option is the 40hr.

50-75mm:

• 50hr: A bit larger than the others, but excellent lens with a very usable image circle. Probably the best of the bunch, with the sk60xl on par or close.
• Sk60xl: Another excellent lens with very big image circle. A bit smaller than the 50hr, but you need the CF with anything but the IQ4 150.
• 70hr: Splitting hairs between this and the sk72. 58mm filter threads.
• Sk72: See above. However, the 72 is really a 75mm.

All these are excellent lenses. Again, choose based on the focal length you want, and where it fits with other lenses. You may skip over this range initially. See how you get along with the technical camera “gestalt” and then decide. That being said, personally this is my most-used focal length. I had 70hr but wanted something a bit wider. I moved to the sk60xl and love that lens. It is my one-lens kit.

90-120mm:

• 90hr-w: The older Rodenstock digital design, “90mm f/5.6 HR Digaron-W.” Very good lens on par with other options except the hr-sw below.
• 90hr-sw: Best lens of the 90-100mm options. Very sharp in the whole image circle out to >100mm. Expensive and heavier with a 72mm filter thread.
• Sk90 apo-digitar: If you are ok with the slightly degraded performance off-center vs the 90hr-sw, this is a great, light lens w/ 40.5mm filter threads.
• Sk100 apo-digitar: Similar to sk90; just a focal length choice. Harder to find.
• 100hr-s: Smaller stated image circle, but it is actually larger than stated. 58mm filter threads.
• Sk120N apo-digitar: Similar in quality to the other schneiders in this range, just longer. Still, 40.5mm filter threads.
• Sk120 asph: Schneider released this lens not long before they got out of the business, so there are not many out there. I’ve never seen an MTF graph but by all accounts, it is one of the best lenses available. 110mm image circle.

This is perhaps the toughest choice. If money and weight are no object, then the 90hr-sw is the winner. The sk120 asph is probably as good, but hard to find. The other 90-100 options should all have about the same quality. My opinion in this range: if you can afford the 90hr-sw and don’t mind the size, go for it. If one of those two things is a limitation for you, the sk90 is almost as good, and the smallest/lightest of the bunch.

If you prefer the longer 120mm focal length, then spend some time trying to find the asph, but don’t lose too much sleep if you can’t find one. Many people love the sk120N.

I’ve owned the 100hr-s, 90hr-sw and now the sk90. My original two lens kit was the sk43xl and the 100hr-s. The 100 got decentered at some point. Instead of repair I traded it in for the 90hr-sw. After using the 90hr-sw for several years, I recently moved to the sk90 to lighten my kit and help fund the IQ4 150 upgrade.

>120mm:

• 138hrsw-float: Dealers now have this in their hands. There are probably a few out in use but I have not heard any user reports. It should be the best lens out there. Huge image circle sharp out to the edge. $12-15k, long and heavy. Two kilos of pure love. Note f/6.5, but probably plenty sharp wide open.
• Sk150N: 40.5mm filter threads. 40.5mm! Punches way above its weight, but not in the rarefied air of the 138 above. Similar quality to the 90-120 field (not counting the 90hr-sw / sk120 asph)
• 180hr-s: this is a really good lens, especially if you have a bellows-based technical camera vs. helical mount. The helical mount version is pretty long; that takes up a lot of space in the bag. Like the 100hr-s, the useable image circle is larger than stated.

Technical cameras are not known for longer lenses. At this point many adapt to other, older lenses. The Zeiss/Hasselblad 250/350 superachromats are popular.

My current lenses: sk35, sk60xl, sk90 apo-digitar, sk150N, Zeiss 250 superachromat. I care a bit more about size and weight and am willing to sacrifice a bit of sharpness at the edges of image circles to get there.

Whew. If you got through this you must really be interested in a technical camera.

Dave

Dave,
That is an incredible overview, thank you so much for taking the time! I feel that I need something like the 32mm in my kit, so I guess I will start there. The system I am looking at comes with the 40mm HR, if I buy it, I guess I will see if I can make that work first. Do you also have something like the XF body for your back, or shoot strictly with the technical camera?
Thanks again!
Greg

 

[dchew]

No XF, just the technical camera for MF. I do have a Sony a7r system with a mix of pretty good 3rd party lenses, but I haven’t used it much lately. I use that if I need to shoot without a tripod.

I’ve made a point to assemble a pretty small and light 4-lens kit at 8-9 lbs* (w/o the 250mm), so unless I’m ditching the tripod, I don’t save any weight by using even a 24x36mm kit.

Dave

*That doesn't count the tripod either.

 

[Pemihan]

and you need to be in someone's will to get your hands on a sk120 asph.
If you go for the IQ3 100 (which frankly I think is your best path), you really should use center filters on sk lenses wider than the sk72.

I have but have never used the center filter for 60XL, not on IQ160, IQ180 or IQ3 100 and have never felt the need for it.
Ohh and regarding the SK120 Asph. I'm not ready to die quite yet :bugeyes:

 

[vjbelle]

Always nice to have Dave's expertise....:thumbup:

Cheers...

Victor

 

[GrahamWelland]

Always nice to have Dave's expertise....:thumbup:

Cheers...

Victor

Indeed - superb lens summary. :thumbs:

 

[Paul2660]

Great write up Dave,

I wanted to add, for longer stuff, don't forget to consider the older Rodenstocks.

https://www.linhofstudio.com/produc...k/RODENSTOCK_210mm_f5.6_Apo_Sironar_S_EDITION

These still can be purchased new, but now only with the aperture only option.

I have read nothing but good reviews on the 210mm, and it appears to be considerably lighter and smaller than the 180HR.

One other consideration on the 90HR (magenta band) is that you won't need the back extension the 90 HRSW uses, and as Dave mentioned it's much lighter. Mine has a strange issue with areas that can show less contrast, as if slightly foggy, and it's due to reflections from what I have been told. Doesn't happen all the time.

Paul C

 

[dchew]

Great write up Dave,

I wanted to add, for longer stuff, don't forget to consider the older Rodenstocks.

Paul C

Good point, Paul.

Here is a summary page for the older Rodestocks. The second "S" group is what Paul is referring to:
http://www.prograf.ru/rodenstock/largeformat_en.html

Dave

 

[vjbelle]

As an addition to the excellent posts by Dave and Paul, I have found that the Rody 90 S/SW is the absolute finest lens I have ever used on a Technical camera. If this is a focal length you can use, can put up with the weight and can afford it then by all means get it. There is nothing that is in its league. It begs to be shot wide open and to stop down more than F8 is almost a crime. An unbelievable lens...... at least for me.

Cheers....

Victor

 

[Greg Haag]

As an addition to the excellent posts by Dave and Paul, I have found that the Rody 90 S/SW is the absolute finest lens I have ever used on a Technical camera. If this is a focal length you can use, can put up with the weight and can afford it then by all means get it. There is nothing that is in its league. It begs to be shot wide open and to stop down more than F8 is almost a crime. An unbelievable lens...... at least for me.

Cheers....

Victor

Thank you for sharing your insights on this Victor!

 

[Greg Haag]

Any chance you can make it to one of our Phase One Texas Roadshow cities (Dallas/Austin/Houston)? We'll have a ton of tech cameras and several suitable Phase One backs.

The world of tech cameras is far broader and deeper than you'd expect for a niche toolset, so having the chance to put your hands on a variety of models is really handy.

If not, we can arrange a remote demo for you via Skype or FaceTime and then followup with an evaluation rental shipped to you of whatever seems most suitable after the demo.

Ton of information here, if you haven't seen it:
https://www.dtcommercialphoto.com/arca-swiss-technical-cameras/
https://www.dtcommercialphoto.com/cambo-technical-cameras/

We'll also be broadcasting this tech camera oriented event via webinar.

Doug,
I think I am going to delay purchasing and attend one of your Texas events, for what I am doing, would Dallas, Austin or Houston be better or are they all the same?
Thanks,
Greg