Longer on the RM3di

[alatreille]

Hi all,

I'm finding that I'm wanting something longer than my 60mm for long context shots of buildings.
It's not something I'm needing a lot, and I can shoot them with either the Canon set up or the Pentax 645 set up, but I often want to incorporate movements into the compostion, so these don't let me.  Thus, I don't want to spend big bucks on it.

I'm thinking longer than 120, maybe up to 200.
I currently use the 43XL and the 60XL.  Wider and I reach for the Canon and 17TSE.

I've read that some of the older 4x5 or 8x10 lenses still provide enough resolution for the 60mpx sensors.

I'm looking for recommendations on either Schneider or Rod long lenses, the I could perhaps purchase second hand and then forward on to Arca to have mounted and calibrated.

Thanks very much.

Andrew

[Paul2660]

A few suggestions:

1.  Rodenstock 90mm HR, (used), 90mm HR-w (used), and 90mm HR-SW (new with yellow band). All have either a 125mm or 120mm IC and are very good glass on the rm3di.  The HR and HR-W do not need a back extension, the HR-SW does. 

2.  Schneider 90mm, APO Digitar new or used as still in production.  Much smaller than the Rodenstock and lighter.  Although IC is much smaller @ 90mm, but not sure on that.  Will be cheaper new than the 90mm HR-SW. 

3.  Schneider 120mm or 150mm.  The latest Schneider, the Aspheric 5,6/120 N Apo-Digitar  120mm is excellent, and has a very nice close focus distance.  Tiny lens, light weight, but needs a back extension.  It has a 153mm IC I believe and it one great lens.  I have one and love it.
    The 150mm I don't know much about and have not read much about it either.

4.  Schneider Schneider 5,6/180 T Apo-Digitar,  Long lens, and a back extension.  I would want some form of Live View on this one. 

I don't know how well the older Nikkor or Fuji or other Schneider/Rodenstock film glass will work.  It should still mount OK in the R mount.

Paul

[Chris Barrett]

I own the SK Super Symmar XL 110 and 150 (for my 4x10).  I tested them alongside the Rodenstock 90HR and 135 and they performed just as well.  Not cheap glass, though.  When I was still shooting MFDB, I would use the RM3d with the 35,43,55,& 70 and then the M-Line 2 with the 90, 135 & 180.  I often found when using longer lenses that I would want more movements than the Rm3d provided and the M2 served well there.


-CB

[alatreille]

Thanks both Paul and Chris.

Thanks Paul.  I think I'd be looking at the 120 before the 90.  As if needed I could fill in the missing focal by stitching.
I've looked at the 120N and it does appeal alot.  I think the 150 or the 180 would be the next logical step for me after that. 

Chris do you know if Arca could/would have mounted the SK Super Symmar XL 110 and 150 for the RM3di?
Also Chris, how did you find the 35 compared to the 43 on the 260 you had?

Thanks again.

AL

[Chris Barrett]

I loved the 43.  The 35... not so much.  It got the job done, but symmetrical wide lenses are just not that compatible with the 60 and 80mp sensors.  If I had stuck with the IQ 260 I probably would have bit the bullet and purchased the Rodie 32HR.  But even that pricey-ass lens exhibits some distortion.  Given that and the fact that the 32 is the widest you can really workably go on the IQ 260 left me feeling that the whole setup was just not ideal for Architectural Photography.  If I was always going to have to carry a 17mm TS-e and a body, why not just build a system around that?

</rant>

edit:  I don't see any reason why Martin wouldn't mount the XL's for you.  Also, just remembered I posted some samples here.

[Paul2660]

Chris, I found the mustache distortion on the 32mm Rodenstock actually to be very harsh.  And would assume for architecture, the distortion would add considerable post work to remove.

Cars, elongated and squat, not normal looking at all, Tree trucks wider and squat.  In fact with any amount of shift the shifted portion of the files were very elongated, towards the middle of the frames.  So any structure that has known dimensions, like buildings, bridges, cars, etc suffered. 

In outdoor landscapes, you still have the problem but I feel it's easier to hide since rocks and the like no one really knows their exact sizes.

I was pointed to Alpa lens correction tools, but I did not feel that they did anything to correct the mustache problems, i.e. fix things that have been made shorter and squatter.   Yes, it could be fixed in CC with the lens correction tools but needing a ton of time.

After using the 32mm Rodenstock, I was so shocked by the distortion, I felt I might have a bad example of the lens.  After a strong push from my side Rodenstock looked at the tests I sent and said, "it's normal for that lens"  WOW.  I was more than a bit surprised. Nothing like a Ford Taurus that looks like it has been sat on by a giant. 

I then tracked back to my 40mm and 28mm and realized that actually both of them also exhibit mustache distortion however IMO not as bad as the 32mm did.  I really only seem to pick up the extreme mustache with the 40mm on shifts of 12mm or more.  On center there is just a bit.  On the 28mm it's even less and since that lens is not shift friendly with a 70mm IC, I never look for it. 

Where as the 35mm Schneider being symmetrical just has none of the mustache issues.  Suffering instead from harsh color shift (red) and detail smearing past 8mm on my 60MP sensor.  I am still hoping to see some results of the 35mm Schneider on the new Sony A7rII.  I know that the A7r had the same issues as the 60MP CCD's in that you could not shift much past 7mm or so (on the Sony A7r) due to extreme color shifts.

Paul

[Chris Barrett]

That's what I've read, Paul (on the 32) and your SK 35 experiences parallel my own.  Frankly, I think I'm probably happier with the Contax 35mm PC on the A7rii that I could ever be with the SK35.

[Paul2660]

That's what I've read, Paul (on the 32) and your SK 35 experiences parallel my own.  Frankly, I think I'm probably happier with the Contax 35mm PC on the A7rii that I could ever be with the SK35.

Chris, on the A7rII, have you shifted to the max with your M2/R mount lenses or with the TS-E? glass?  How is the color cast?  I found the A7r was pretty harsh on shifts with color cast (red).

Thanks
Paul

[Rod.Klukas]

I loved the 43.  The 35... not so much.  It got the job done, but symmetrical wide lenses are just not that compatible with the 60 and 80mp sensors.  If I had stuck with the IQ 260 I probably would have bit the bullet and purchased the Rodie 32HR.  But even that pricey-ass lens exhibits some distortion.  Given that and the fact that the 32 is the widest you can really workably go on the IQ 260 left me feeling that the whole setup was just not ideal for Architectural Photography.  If I was always going to have to carry a 17mm TS-e and a body, why not just build a system around that?

</rant>

edit:  I don't see any reason why Martin wouldn't mount the XL's for you.  Also, just remembered I posted some samples here.

Hey guys,
We can mount any lens in #0 or #1 shutter between 23mm and 210mm and have precise focus as well.
And we maintain tilt capability with all these lenses, as well, at no extra charge.
Not all analogue lenses are equal however, and it is my experience that only the last series from Rodenstock or Schneider are up to the task, albeit with some modifications in technique.  Aperture choice, etc.