Technical Camera Help Please!

[dougpeterson]

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

We’d be very glad to see you! Maybe you and Paul can meet up and carpool . I bet you could find a nice shot or two on the road trip to boot .

Any of the events would be suitable, but in Austin we have our triple header of our Capture One Masters Class, our open house, and the Stand Out event (various Speakers). That would make an especially productive trip!

Definitely touch base with Michelle ([email protected]) before the event (the sooner the better) so she can make sure to have the appropriate equipment there and make any special arrangements suited to your current exploration.

 

[Greg Haag]

We’d be very glad to see you! Maybe you and Paul can meet up and carpool . I bet you could find a nice shot or two on the road trip to boot .

Any of the events would be suitable, but in Austin we have our triple header of our Capture One Masters Class, our open house, and the Stand Out event (various Speakers). That would make an especially productive trip!

Definitely touch base with Michelle ([email protected]) before the event (the sooner the better) so she can make sure to have the appropriate equipment there and make any special arrangements suited to your current exploration.

Thanks, Austin, sounds like it would be beneficial!

 

[Greg Haag]

For your budget I'd recommend IQ3, Arca Swiss Rm3di with rotating back, L60 head for tripod and a Lee hood with adaptors for your lenses.

Lenses: All of the Rode HR's are excellent as well as some of the Schneiders. The problem with lenses is that they are low volume and therefore very expensive.
Used clean is the way to go if you have patience.

The Rode32Hr (Blue ring) is amazing (and equally pricey). The 40mmHR Rode (Blue ring) is far smaller, lighter and a superb lens that is much less expensive...I'd therefore start with that for a wide. If you want to super wide I know of a 23mm Rode that is mint and nicely priced in an Arca mount.

The Rode 70HR (Blue ring) is a great standard length lens. 90mm Rode (Blue or Magenta ring) is the EXACT same lens and is 1/3 the cost of the 90mm HR
but has quality nearly as good in my opinion. 120mmSchneider ASP if you can find one is amazing.

Robert

Robert,
Thank you for your insight, I really appreciate it!
Greg

 

[RLB]

For those of you with the digital back/tech camera setup, would you also recommend getting the XF Camera?
Thanks in advance,
Greg

I don't feel its fair to compare a Tech camera and a XF, very different animals. Choose the right tool for the job:

Tech camera for rise/fall/tilt, stitching, and different lens selection not available on XF.

XF for auto focus, focus stacking, long lens options.

Again, the camera body (XF) will be the smaller part of the $ equation, lenses will get you over budget. For the XF I recommend the 35, 120 and 240 blue rings as stand outs. You'll probably want an 80mm too, just don't shoot wide open with that one, by f4.5 its actually pretty good.

Robert

 

[Greg Haag]

I don't feel its fair to compare a Tech camera and a XF, very different animals. Choose the right tool for the job:

Tech camera for rise/fall/tilt, stitching, and different lens selection not available on XF.

XF for auto focus, focus stacking, long lens options.

Again, the camera body (XF) will be the smaller part of the $ equation, lenses will get you over budget. For the XF I recommend the 35, 120 and 240 blue rings as stand outs. You'll probably want an 80mm too, just don't shoot wide open with that one, by f4.5 its actually pretty good.

Robert

Robert,
I don't think I did a good job explaining myself. What I was trying to ask, if I buy the back and tech camera, would you make the additional investment and add the XF body and a few lenses to take advantage of the back for uses in which the tech camera is not suitable. I have a Leica S007 that I had planned on using for those situations, but open to adding the XF and selling the Leica.
Thanks,
Greg

 

[Boinger]

Robert,
I don't think I did a good job explaining myself. What I was trying to ask, if I buy the back and tech camera, would you make the additional investment and add the XF body and a few lenses to take advantage of the back for uses in which the tech camera is not suitable. I have a Leica S007 that I had planned on using for those situations, but open to adding the XF and selling the Leica.
Thanks,
Greg

Honestly if you dont need the full frame of the iq4150. I would say skip the XF and prob go for a GFX 100.

But that is me.

 

[Greg Haag]

Honestly if you dont need the full frame of the iq4150. I would say skip the XF and prob go for a GFX 100.

But that is me.

Thats a good thought, the GFX 100 seems to be a real disruptor in this category.

 

[kdphotography]

Frankly, I don't see the GFX as a replacement for the IQ3/4 MFDBs on a technical camera.

I do see the Fuji GFX as an ideal complement to the Phase One MFDB on a technical camera though.

The Fuji GFX 50/100 is an excellent camera system. But one thing to consider is to also select a camera system that you enjoy using. As competent a camera as the Fuji is, I still personally group it in with other cameras that I have used, including Canon and Sony. Nice, but simply no emotional attachment for me. I could easily sell these cameras without heartache. And indeed, I converted my GFX 50S to full spectrum in hopes of keeping myself enthused with the camera.

The Phase XF is one step above this group, but again, no great love. It is a fantastic camera, particularly in studio or working with Profoto lights. I think what makes the XF appeal more to me than the others is simply the use of the Phase MFDB and the imagery it produces. It makes my work easier and better.

The Cambo WRS 1600, however, with the Phase One IQ3/4 MFDBs, is pure photographic enjoyment. This system pulls on my heartstrings. This is the camera system that I shoot for me.

Don't discount photographic enjoyment in making your equipment decisions. Choose the system (Dante says, choose at least two systems ) that gives you the biggest ****-eating grin. And sometimes that's not the one that makes the most sense to everyone else.

Ken

 

[Shashin]

As far as technical cameras and flexibility goes, the Cambo Actus allows the use of digital backs and GXF series cameras as backs. If you need a standard camera system like the GFX and also want to use view camera movements, the Actus system is certainly interesting. It is more of a monorail system, than solid body like other tech cameras.

I really think going to Texas to try some of these options out is a great idea. Cameras and how you work with them are so personal. However there is one thing I have learnt with any system that is important: how much does it weigh?

 

[RLB]

Robert,
I don't think I did a good job explaining myself. What I was trying to ask, if I buy the back and tech camera, would you make the additional investment and add the XF body and a few lenses to take advantage of the back for uses in which the tech camera is not suitable. I have a Leica S007 that I had planned on using for those situations, but open to adding the XF and selling the Leica.
Thanks,
Greg

If you have a high quality auto focus camera that does what you need, the XF would be a luxury to add. Its a neat camera with lots of cool features but then you have to buy dedicated lenses and that will quickly add up. Keep in mind also that all of this gear is depreciating at the speed of a dropping anchor...SO if you don't plan to use it I'd suggest not buying it unless you must have another expensive conversation piece.

I find I use the Tech camera 70% and XF 30%, but there are definitely situations where one makes much more sense for the project and style of shooting. Of course you could rent an XF for those needs too...the backs are the expensive rent item, not the body or lenses.

One more item on food for thought: The IQ4 150 and IQ100 are amazing tools...if you have a need to own one at all. We make very large prints; 5'x8' is not uncommon and having the large and detailed file makes a massive difference in the prints detail and tonality. We also use it for scientific and scanning applications where details and color accuracy is extremely important. If you plan to make prints no large than 3'x4' then frankly any high quality 50mp camera with a great lens is very up to the task (assuming not much cropping).

I think its important to ask yourself what you actually plan to do shooting and output wise and base your acquisitions on those parameters (assuming your a business and have to justify this to your accountant), or if you are doing this for your pleasure (and only to justify this with your significant other).

One last bit: I love Tech cameras...but that stems from over 20 years of using a view cameras. It may or may not apply in your situation. As has been suggested, try before you buy is a great idea. As with many such purchases consider the system you are buying into: Arca, Alpa, Cambo...what are the cost and advantages of one system and the working wth the camera. I chose Arca for functionality, system compatibility with other parts...which is a huge plus for Arca, and relative cost comparison with the other companies. Some of the main issues are focus...each camera does it differently, and therefore lens mounts are different and cost different amounts. For sure Alpa is the priciest option, Arca and Cambo are similar in cost. Its a very personal decision, but you want to make the right one as switching systems after the fact can be very expensive.


Robert

 

[Boinger]

Frankly, I don't see the GFX as a replacement for the IQ3/4 MFDBs on a technical camera.

I do see the Fuji GFX as an ideal complement to the Phase One MFDB on a technical camera though.

The Fuji GFX 50/100 is an excellent camera system. But one thing to consider is to also select a camera system that you enjoy using. As competent a camera as the Fuji is, I still personally group it in with other cameras that I have used, including Canon and Sony. Nice, but simply no emotional attachment for me. I could easily sell these cameras without heartache. And indeed, I converted my GFX 50S to full spectrum in hopes of keeping myself enthused with the camera.

The Phase XF is one step above this group, but again, no great love. It is a fantastic camera, particularly in studio or working with Profoto lights. I think what makes the XF appeal more to me than the others is simply the use of the Phase MFDB and the imagery it produces. It makes my work easier and better.

The Cambo WRS 1600, however, with the Phase One IQ3/4 MFDBs, is pure photographic enjoyment. This system pulls on my heartstrings. This is the camera system that I shoot for me.

Don't discount photographic enjoyment in making your equipment decisions. Choose the system (Dante says, choose at least two systems ) that gives you the biggest ****-eating grin. And sometimes that's not the one that makes the most sense to everyone else.

Ken

That is what I meant too. The answer was in regards to him getting an XF in addition to the tech cam.

I agree with you, I think the mirrorless MF is a great companion to the tech cam.

 

[Boinger]

If you have a high quality auto focus camera that does what you need, the XF would be a luxury to add. Its a neat camera with lots of cool features but then you have to buy dedicated lenses and that will quickly add up. Keep in mind also that all of this gear is depreciating at the speed of a dropping anchor...SO if you don't plan to use it I'd suggest not buying it unless you must have another expensive conversation piece.

I find I use the Tech camera 70% and XF 30%, but there are definitely situations where one makes much more sense for the project and style of shooting. Of course you could rent an XF for those needs too...the backs are the expensive rent item, not the body or lenses.

One more item on food for thought: The IQ4 150 and IQ100 are amazing tools...if you have a need to own one at all. We make very large prints; 5'x8' is not uncommon and having the large and detailed file makes a massive difference in the prints detail and tonality. We also use it for scientific and scanning applications where details and color accuracy is extremely important. If you plan to make prints no large than 3'x4' then frankly any high quality 50mp camera with a great lens is very up to the task (assuming not much cropping).

I think its important to ask yourself what you actually plan to do shooting and output wise and base your acquisitions on those parameters (assuming your a business and have to justify this to your accountant), or if you are doing this for your pleasure (and only to justify this with your significant other).

One last bit: I love Tech cameras...but that stems from over 20 years of using a view cameras. It may or may not apply in your situation. As has been suggested, try before you buy is a great idea. As with many such purchases consider the system you are buying into: Arca, Alpa, Cambo...what are the cost and advantages of one system and the working wth the camera. I chose Arca for functionality, system compatibility with other parts...which is a huge plus for Arca, and relative cost comparison with the other companies. Some of the main issues are focus...each camera does it differently, and therefore lens mounts are different and cost different amounts. For sure Alpa is the priciest option, Arca and Cambo are similar in cost. Its a very personal decision, but you want to make the right one as switching systems after the fact can be very expensive.


Robert

I love my tech cam. I like the ability to get everything right in the shot, with minor edits after the fact.

I actually got my tech cam after starting in photography with a dslr. I myself have an iq4 150 but not to print big, just to allow better movements and better color / exposure blending in shots. I appreciate these aspects of the iq4 150. Also to be able to use lightweight schneider glass.

If you are mainly going to be using rodenstock glass then the iq3 100 is probably sufficient.

 

[Greg Haag]

If you have a high quality auto focus camera that does what you need, the XF would be a luxury to add. Its a neat camera with lots of cool features but then you have to buy dedicated lenses and that will quickly add up. Keep in mind also that all of this gear is depreciating at the speed of a dropping anchor...SO if you don't plan to use it I'd suggest not buying it unless you must have another expensive conversation piece.

I find I use the Tech camera 70% and XF 30%, but there are definitely situations where one makes much more sense for the project and style of shooting. Of course you could rent an XF for those needs too...the backs are the expensive rent item, not the body or lenses.

One more item on food for thought: The IQ4 150 and IQ100 are amazing tools...if you have a need to own one at all. We make very large prints; 5'x8' is not uncommon and having the large and detailed file makes a massive difference in the prints detail and tonality. We also use it for scientific and scanning applications where details and color accuracy is extremely important. If you plan to make prints no large than 3'x4' then frankly any high quality 50mp camera with a great lens is very up to the task (assuming not much cropping).

I think its important to ask yourself what you actually plan to do shooting and output wise and base your acquisitions on those parameters (assuming your a business and have to justify this to your accountant), or if you are doing this for your pleasure (and only to justify this with your significant other).

One last bit: I love Tech cameras...but that stems from over 20 years of using a view cameras. It may or may not apply in your situation. As has been suggested, try before you buy is a great idea. As with many such purchases consider the system you are buying into: Arca, Alpa, Cambo...what are the cost and advantages of one system and the working wth the camera. I chose Arca for functionality, system compatibility with other parts...which is a huge plus for Arca, and relative cost comparison with the other companies. Some of the main issues are focus...each camera does it differently, and therefore lens mounts are different and cost different amounts. For sure Alpa is the priciest option, Arca and Cambo are similar in cost. Its a very personal decision, but you want to make the right one as switching systems after the fact can be very expensive.


Robert

Robert,
Thank you for all of the great information and insight! This comment made me wonder if you thought the XF or something else might be better for me "I love Tech cameras...but that stems from over 20 years of using a view cameras. It may or may not apply in your situation.". I do use it for architectural images at work, I develop commercial real estate and take images for our project gallery, but my main purpose is primarily for pleasure. I have shot medium format since the 70's and digital medium format since about 2006. I have had a fascination with technical cameras for the past 5 or so years, but I have only had minimal hands on experience with them. I am at the point where it seems like the next step is to dive in or move on, any additional insight would be greatly appreciated.
Thanks,
Greg

 

[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

Victor, thank you for sharing your insight on the Rody 90 S/SW!

 

[stngoldberg]

If you have a high quality auto focus camera that does what you need, the XF would be a luxury to add. Its a neat camera with lots of cool features but then you have to buy dedicated lenses and that will quickly add up. Keep in mind also that all of this gear is depreciating at the speed of a dropping anchor...SO if you don't plan to use it I'd suggest not buying it unless you must have another expensive conversation piece.

I find I use the Tech camera 70% and XF 30%, but there are definitely situations where one makes much more sense for the project and style of shooting. Of course you could rent an XF for those needs too...the backs are the expensive rent item, not the body or lenses.

One more item on food for thought: The IQ4 150 and IQ100 are amazing tools...if you have a need to own one at all. We make very large prints; 5'x8' is not uncommon and having the large and detailed file makes a massive difference in the prints detail and tonality. We also use it for scientific and scanning applications where details and color accuracy is extremely important. If you plan to make prints no large than 3'x4' then frankly any high quality 50mp camera with a great lens is very up to the task (assuming not much cropping).



I think its important to ask yourself what you actually plan to do shooting and output wise and base your acquisitions on those parameters (assuming your a business and have to justify this to your accountant), or if you are doing this for your pleasure (and only to justify this with your significant other).

One last bit: I love Tech cameras...but that stems from over 20 years of using a view cameras. It may or may not apply in your situation. As has been suggested, try before you buy is a great idea. As with many such purchases consider the system you are buying into: Arca, Alpa, Cambo...what are the cost and advantages of one system and the working wth the camera. I chose Arca for functionality, system compatibility with other parts...which is a huge plus for Arca, and relative cost comparison with the other companies. Some of the main issues are focus...each camera does it differently, and therefore lens mounts are different and cost different amounts. For sure Alpa is the priciest option, Arca and Cambo are similar in cost. Its a very personal decision, but you want to make the right one as switching systems after the fact can be very expensive.


Robert

I bought the Arca Swiss Rm3di because the system is simplistic and competitive compared to the other options. What I didn’t know, when I made the decision, is what an asset Rod Klukus (the US representative) was and continues to be.
He is available by phone and is very generous with his time and knowledge.
Stanley

 

[Greg Haag]

We’d be very glad to see you! Maybe you and Paul can meet up and carpool . I bet you could find a nice shot or two on the road trip to boot .

Any of the events would be suitable, but in Austin we have our triple header of our Capture One Masters Class, our open house, and the Stand Out event (various Speakers). That would make an especially productive trip!

Definitely touch base with Michelle ([email protected]) before the event (the sooner the better) so she can make sure to have the appropriate equipment there and make any special arrangements suited to your current exploration.

Thanks Doug, I have registered for the event, as well as, the Capture One events. I will reach out to Michelle tomorrow.

 

[Shashin]

I have had a fascination with technical cameras for the past 5 or so years, but I have only had minimal hands on experience with them. I am at the point where it seems like the next step is to dive in or move on, any additional insight would be greatly appreciated.
Thanks,
Greg

That is a tough but important question.

I have had a large assortment of cameras. View cameras have always been attractive to me and my Wista VX technical camera was a fine machine.

While I have produced very satisfying images with it, I rarely took it out. The main reason was the lack of spontaneity. i though it might be because of the weight and effort of sheet film, but even with roll-film holders, both 6x12 and 6x6, I was not really using it.

With the tripod and setup, it just presented too much work for the results. Given the amount of gear, including tripod, I simply did not enjoy it.

What did I used? Mostly cameras that I had more intuitive response with. My Mamiya 6 was my most used camera. But I used unusual cameras as well: Horseman SW612 medium-format panoramic camera and Widelux F8 35mm swing-lens panoramic camera.

When I got my Pentax 645D, I started to use a tripod much more. I have produce two books with a Pentax 645D on a tripod and so maybe I have overcome my resistance to heavy, static gear. Except, I bought a camera I can use handheld because I missed that freedom and that seems to have taken over my photography for now.

I guess I am finding this thread interesting because I am thinking of adding a tech camera to my toolbox--a light, compact system with live view might tip the balance for me. I am doing a bit of soul searching to understand if I will really use it or just find the concept attractive--they are marvelous machines. Unfortunately, I might not really know without having the experience: I think we all develop in our process as photographers while maintaining a few constant threads. You may have to take the swim, but I would also analyse what motivates you personally to photograph.

(And to all those other residents of Dante's forum, your sweet cajoling will not move me...I can resist everything (but temptation.))

 

[Greg Haag]

That is a tough but important question.

I have had a large assortment of cameras. View cameras have always been attractive to me and my Wista VX technical camera was a fine machine.

While I have produced very satisfying images with it, I rarely took it out. The main reason was the lack of spontaneity. i though it might be because of the weight and effort of sheet film, but even with roll-film holders, both 6x12 and 6x6, I was not really using it.

With the tripod and setup, it just presented too much work for the results. Given the amount of gear, including tripod, I simply did not enjoy it.

What did I used? Mostly cameras that I had more intuitive response with. My Mamiya 6 was my most used camera. But I used unusual cameras as well: Horseman SW612 medium-format panoramic camera and Widelux F8 35mm swing-lens panoramic camera.

When I got my Pentax 645D, I started to use a tripod much more. I have produce two books with a Pentax 645D on a tripod and so maybe I have overcome my resistance to heavy, static gear. Except, I bought a camera I can use handheld because I missed that freedom and that seems to have taken over my photography for now.

I guess I am finding this thread interesting because I am thinking of adding a tech camera to my toolbox--a light, compact system with live view might tip the balance for me. I am doing a bit of soul searching to understand if I will really use it or just find the concept attractive--they are marvelous machines. Unfortunately, I might not really know without having the experience: I think we all develop in our process as photographers while maintaining a few constant threads. You may have to take the swim, but I would also analyse what motivates you personally to photograph.

(And to all those other residents of Dante's forum, your sweet cajoling will not move me...I can resist everything (but temptation.))

Will, I think that is about where I am as well, I think I might regret having never tried.

 

[RLB]

Robert,
Thank you for all of the great information and insight! This comment made me wonder if you thought the XF or something else might be better for me "I love Tech cameras...but that stems from over 20 years of using a view cameras. It may or may not apply in your situation.". I do use it for architectural images at work, I develop commercial real estate and take images for our project gallery, but my main purpose is primarily for pleasure. I have shot medium format since the 70's and digital medium format since about 2006. I have had a fascination with technical cameras for the past 5 or so years, but I have only had minimal hands on experience with them. I am at the point where it seems like the next step is to dive in or move on, any additional insight would be greatly appreciated.
Thanks,
Greg

Greg,

What I was saying is that if one has never used a view camera (large, heavy, manual focus, somewhat cumbersome) camera then a Tech camera might be something you want to try before you buy. I enjoy the Tech camera as with the view camera it forces one to slow down and shoot with intent. That can fit your style and preferences or not. Some might find the focusing too cumbersome. With the IQ180 live view was worthless, so I had to use charts and the ECloud with my Arca. It worked but was tedious. With the IQ4 and focus peaking its very easy to nail focus perfectly every time.

Lastly, I'd reflect on Stanely's comments: Rod Klukas is a great resource for those shooting Arca. I spent two days with him before deciding on the system and I'm glad I did. I have 3 Arca cameras: M monolith for studio work, RM3di and the Factum. All of Arca's parts are designed to be fully integrated and interchangeable between cameras. It is in my opinion the best option for those looking for more than just a "stand alone" camera.


Robert

 

[Greg Haag]

Greg,

What I was saying is that if one has never used a view camera (large, heavy, manual focus, somewhat cumbersome) camera then a Tech camera might be something you want to try before you buy. I enjoy the Tech camera as with the view camera it forces one to slow down and shoot with intent. That can fit your style and preferences or not. Some might find the focusing too cumbersome. With the IQ180 live view was worthless, so I had to use charts and the ECloud with my Arca. It worked but was tedious. With the IQ4 and focus peaking its very easy to nail focus perfectly every time.

Lastly, I'd reflect on Stanely's comments: Rod Klukas is a great resource for those shooting Arca. I spent two days with him before deciding on the system and I'm glad I did. I have 3 Arca cameras: M monolith for studio work, RM3di and the Factum. All of Arca's parts are designed to be fully integrated and interchangeable between cameras. It is in my opinion the best option for those looking for more than just a "stand alone" camera.


Robert

Robert, thank you again for your insight, I appreciate you taking the time to help me!