Schneider TS f/5.6

[alifatemi]

Hi, I need a very sharp lens without distortion for studio photography of flat surfaces like art painting for museum and art galleries for my XF+IQ380. I am thinking of Schneider LS f/4120 Macro or even TS f/5.6 does anybody has any idea about these lenses? Which one do you recommend mostly please? minimum barrel  distortion is a must.

Regards

[Joe Towner]

The 120 macro will do you very good.  Are you shooting the items hanging on a wall or are you shooting like a copy stand?  What volume are you looking to accomplish?  A lot of folks have been doing it, so you'll get some advice here.  I would also recommend getting in touch with http://dtdch.com/ as they've got a few tools that will make your job more efficient.

-Joe

[alifatemi]

thanks for help, I hang items on a wall or put them on vertical stand. the volume is not much though around 10 piece per week but they can be big sometimes around 150x200cm   

[Joe Towner]

You also can get away with the non-LS model, and there are a lot of the manual focus 120 macros in high use still because they just work.  What lenses have you been working with so far?

[alifatemi]

You also can get away with the non-LS model, and there are a lot of the manual focus 120 macros in high use still because they just work.  What lenses have you been working with so far?

I use Schneider LS 80mm that comes standard with every XF camera but it has lots of barrels distortion; I fix it with lens profile and little tweaking in PS but still got distortion and the result is not satisfactory, especially with big paintings. I also use Nicor 85mm f/1.8 which is far less distortion than LS 80 because of more focal distance of course but picture quality is not in the same league of MF.

[gdh]

I use the Phase One (Schneider) Macro MF 120mm and love it.  It's extremely sharp and stands up to the high resolution capabilities of my IQ3 100 just fine.  It's the only non-LS lens I have but since I exclusively use it for art reproduction, I don't need the high synch speed of the LS lenses.  Before I bought, I compared images from the SK macro 120 LS to this non-LS and it's every bit as sharp and distortion free as the newer LS and for a lot less cost. Since I focus in live-view, the manual (only) focus is not an issue, although even without live-view, I'd use manual focus for art work.

[alifatemi]

I use the Phase One (Schneider) Macro MF 120mm and love it.  It's extremely sharp and stands up to the high resolution capabilities of my IQ3 100 just fine.  It's the only non-LS lens I have but since I exclusively use it for art reproduction, I don't need the high synch speed of the LS lenses.  Before I bought, I compared images from the SK macro 120 LS to this non-LS and it's every bit as sharp and distortion free as the newer LS and for a lot less cost. Since I focus in live-view, the manual (only) focus is not an issue, although even without live-view, I'd use manual focus for art work.

Thanks a lot; this lens will save me almost 3k! And I like its retro looks. remind me of my Nikor 50mm f/1.2

[ErikKaffehr]

Hi,

https://captureintegration.com/phaseone-120mm-comparison-test/

CI used to have excellent information.

Best regards
Erik

[Theodoros]

My bet for the job would go with adding a used Sinarback 54H or an Imacon 528c in your system and shoot in multishot 16x mode... You can then use an old AFD body if you use the 120m lens, but ultimately, a sturdy view camera along with a Rodenstock 100mm HR lens and electronic shutter should have your customers jump. Sinar's own LC shutter (if added with the 54H back) should make it a piece of cake as to nail focus (by using LV) too....

[BobDavid]

Back in the day when I had a repro studio, I used a Hasselblad CF39-MS mounted onto a custom pancake camera with a Schneider Digitar 72mm with electronic shutter. I was able to control f/stop and shutter speed in Phocus. For art smaller than 11 X 14,  I used an H2f + HC 120 macro.

I had a copy stand with a nine foot column and a rail system on the ground for large pieces.

If I were to build a fine art repro studio today, I'd still use the CF39-MS. Very nice back with excellent 4-shot capabilities. The 528c is a nice back, however I hated using 16-shot mode. It takes a long time to cycle through 16 clicks and the strobe lights got pretty annoying.

[Theodoros]

Back in the day when I had a repro studio, I used a Hasselblad CF39-MS mounted onto a custom pancake camera with a Schneider Digitar 72mm with electronic shutter. I was able to control f/stop and shutter speed in Phocus. For art smaller than 11 X 14,  I used an H2f + HC 120 macro.

I had a copy stand with a nine foot column and a rail system on the ground for large pieces.

If I were to build a fine art repro studio today, I'd still use the CF39-MS. Very nice back with excellent 4-shot capabilities. The 528c is a nice back, however I hated using 16-shot mode. It takes a long time to cycle through 16 clicks and the strobe lights got pretty annoying.

I have both CF-39MS and 54H (FW) and used to have a 528c before... I agree that the CF-39MS is an excellent back, but the thing with the 16x backs is that the Nuquist frequency is quadrupled, which of course leads in jaw dropping detail, especially with larger pieces of art.  IMO, strobes should be avoided for art repro work, it's best to use Daylight florescent with high CRI valves (CRI>97 Dulux L is what I use) which resembles the lighting that the Cruse scanners also use.

[alifatemi]

I have both CF-39MS and 54H (FW) and used to have a 528c before... I agree that the CF-39MS is an excellent back, but the thing with the 16x backs is that the Nuquist frequency is quadrupled, which of course leads in jaw dropping detail, especially with larger pieces of art.  IMO, strobes should be avoided for art repro work, it's best to use Daylight florescent with high CRI valves (CRI>97 Dulux L is what I use) which resembles the lighting that the Cruse scanners also use.

Thanks for advice but why should strobes avoided? Becouse of UV or lower CRI?

[Theodoros]

Thanks for advice but why should strobes avoided? Becouse of UV or lower CRI?

Hi Ali... The suggestion for one to avoid strobes refers to multishot captures using equipment that both me and Bob are familiar with... The reason (IMO) for one to avoid strobes (especially for 16x captures) is because there can be a temperature variation  between flashes (up to 200 C between coolest and warmest shot with the best of them - I have Profoto) which will then affect colour calibration and colour distribution with respect to the original (obviously -as Bob mentioned - the problem magnifies with 16x captures)... I can't comment for single shot process, since whenever I tried it, the results where not up to what can be achieved if one uses a "true colour" multishot process instead...

The answer as to why there are not many multishot backs sold anymore, or why development with them seems to be rarely renewed, lies with the fact that multishot backs have no interpolation colour process happening but no presence of artefacts too (for technology to eliminate/hide) and thus older backs are as good as modern for the job without depending on technological advancement... Hence people stick with them and have it  "as good as it can be" without having to worry if a new release will improve on the results...