Sivestri Flexicam

[JeffKohn]

Geared or not, you still have to rely on ground glass/bellows focusing which with these short lenses is quite difficult.  The Cambo and many other 'digital' view cameras use helical focus mounts with distance scales on a fixed camera body.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=136884\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

So what do people using these backs for landscape work do to get adequate DOF without tilts? Maybe this isn't so much of a problem at 24mm or 35mm, but at longer focal lengths it seems like this would be a serious issue.

[jing q]

So what do people using these backs for landscape work do to get adequate DOF without tilts? Maybe this isn't so much of a problem at 24mm or 35mm, but at longer focal lengths it seems like this would be a serious issue.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=136986\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

that's exactly my question...f16 isn't exactly getting me great depth of field with people's faces on my mamiya with a 45mm.
Would help to have tilts to get a nice perspective too, while not dragging out a whole 6x9 monorail system.

I was reading an article on the Cambo which suggested shifting the back and then rotating the camera in the same direction to achieve perspective correction, and I hear some people saying there may not be a need for tilt, can more people chime in to explain why this may be so or why not? I admit my technical knowledge of large format is not the sharpest, I usually just mess around with my Toyo until I get a perspective I like through the groundglass.

Can someone with experience focusing on a groundglass the size of a 645 chip chime in to tell me if it's really that difficult? I see that silvestri has a reflex viewer attachment for the groundglass, sounds like a good idea.

[Jeffreytotaro]

If you really need tilts then the Silvestri may work well for you, but realize that you are going to spend some time fussing with focus on every shot, even those without tilt.  I shoot architecture and used tilts often with a 90mm lens on 4x5, but with a 35XL, the equivalent for the 645 chip, tilts might be nice occasionally but I'd rather have quick and accurate focus the other 99% of the time.  

Yes, these shorter lenses do not need tilts and swings as much as 4x5 since they are much shorter focal length.  Shorter lenses have deeper depth of field at equivalent apertures compared to longer lenses.  Longer lenses may still need tilt, not sure what to say about that, everyone has different expectations.  My longest lens on the Cambo is 90mm.

Shooting at f16 is not recommended for digital.  Schneider's Digitar series lenses are optimized for between f8 and f11.  Diffraction will soften the images beyond that.  

I've never tried this, but somewhere out there is a software tool for bracketing focus.  You could focus near, then far and stitch these exposures together somehow.  The magnification will be different, but I think that's what the software corrects for.

I think the new Arca camera may employ both helical focus and tilt.  I'll check it out in New York in October.

[jing q]

If you really need tilts then the Silvestri may work well for you, but realize that you are going to spend some time fussing with focus on every shot, even those without tilt.  I shoot architecture and used tilts often with a 90mm lens on 4x5, but with a 35XL, the equivalent for the 645 chip, tilts might be nice occasionally but I'd rather have quick and accurate focus the other 99% of the time. 

Yes, these shorter lenses do not need tilts and swings as much as 4x5 since they are much shorter focal length.  Shorter lenses have deeper depth of field at equivalent apertures compared to longer lenses.  Longer lenses may still need tilt, not sure what to say about that, everyone has different expectations.  My longest lens on the Cambo is 90mm.

Shooting at f16 is not recommended for digital.  Schneider's Digitar series lenses are optimized for between f8 and f11.  Diffraction will soften the images beyond that. 

I've never tried this, but somewhere out there is a software tool for bracketing focus.  You could focus near, then far and stitch these exposures together somehow.  The magnification will be different, but I think that's what the software corrects for.

I think the new Arca camera may employ both helical focus and tilt.  I'll check it out in New York in October.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=137068\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

forgive me if I sound like an idiot but how do you control perspective distortion without tilts? I use tilts liberally sometimes for selective focusing and was hoping to do so with a digital view camera that's portable enough to carry out on travels

Also, what is your experience with the amount of depth of field when photographing near-far objects such as a human being 3 metres away together with a building 10 metres away? I'm too used to having superb depth of field with my 1Ds MkII so I'm trying to see if I can achieve a similar look with my MF back

[jing q]

forgive me if I sound like an idiot but how do you control perspective distortion without tilts? I use tilts liberally sometimes for selective focusing and was hoping to do so with a digital view camera that's portable enough to carry out on travels

Also, what is your experience with the amount of depth of field when photographing near-far objects such as a human being 3 metres away together with a building 10 metres away? I'm too used to having superb depth of field with my 1Ds MkII so I'm trying to see if I can achieve a similar look with my MF back
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=137111\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Ok I did abit more research and found that the Silvestri Bicam is quite a sturdy looking system, was wondering if anyone had experience with it?

Looks like there's the option of using helical focusing or bellows focusing so there's that safety option. and the price seems reasonable too

Bromwell seems to be the only distributor in the US. Can't seem to find a price list from an european distributor, was wondering if it may be cheaper there after tax deduction since I'm flying there for work next month?

[JeffKohn]

If you really need tilts then the Silvestri may work well for you, but realize that you are going to spend some time fussing with focus on every shot, even those without tilt.  I shoot architecture and used tilts often with a 90mm lens on 4x5, but with a 35XL, the equivalent for the 645 chip, tilts might be nice occasionally but I'd rather have quick and accurate focus the other 99% of the time. 

Yes, these shorter lenses do not need tilts and swings as much as 4x5 since they are much shorter focal length.  Shorter lenses have deeper depth of field at equivalent apertures compared to longer lenses.  Longer lenses may still need tilt, not sure what to say about that, everyone has different expectations.  My longest lens on the Cambo is 90mm.

I guess there's no free lunch. Right now I shoot a D2x, and while I do frequently use a 12-24, I use my 28-70 as much or more; and sometimes even with hyperfocal focusing DOF can be an issue in that range. Extrapolating to the 645 digital sensor size I guess that would be roughly 80-200mm, which is going to be a real problem for DOF without tilts. Guess I'll have to do some more research, maybe that 20+mp Nikon that's rumoured to be coming next year will be a better option for me after all.

[david.westphal]

I shoot with the silvestri bicam II.  excellent camera.  I shoot it with a P45 H mount.  I have the 35mm Rodenstock HR, 55mm rodenstock, 75mm nikkor analog and 105 rodenstock.  This type of set up makes the lenses sharper.  There is a noticeable in quality when I shoot with that camera versus my regular 4X5 with phase flexadapter.  The focus is so much more precise.  It is compact and sturdy.  It's all metal.  I took it to Iceland with me.  It was nice to have it and it was almost like shooting with the hasselblad H2.  You just set it up, level it, focus it and shoot it.  Very quick and very simple.  They are coming out with a 2 shot adapter hopefully soon.  I would recommend this camera to anyone who would be shooting architecture, desire the best lens quality, and wants light weight portability.

SOLD!!

[jing q]

I shoot with the silvestri bicam II.  excellent camera.  I shoot it with a P45 H mount.  I have the 35mm Rodenstock HR, 55mm rodenstock, 75mm nikkor analog and 105 rodenstock.  This type of set up makes the lenses sharper.  There is a noticeable in quality when I shoot with that camera versus my regular 4X5 with phase flexadapter.  The focus is so much more precise.  It is compact and sturdy.  It's all metal.  I took it to Iceland with me.  It was nice to have it and it was almost like shooting with the hasselblad H2.  You just set it up, level it, focus it and shoot it.  Very quick and very simple.  They are coming out with a 2 shot adapter hopefully soon.  I would recommend this camera to anyone who would be shooting architecture, desire the best lens quality, and wants light weight portability.

SOLD!!
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=137377\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

thank you for the info....was looking for some user feedback
yesterday I called Silvestri in Italy and got a lot of information from Silvia
the Bicam seems like a great choice, I can't tell what benefit the Flexicam has over the Bicam since they both seem to have the same specs (except that the Bicam looks sturdier)

David, what is your experience with analog lenses?I'm looking at a bunch of lenses right now and still scratching my head over the differences even between the digital lenses of both companies

[david.westphal]

I would stay clear of analog if you are shooting digital.  For the most part, it has to do with lens cast issues.  Plus, analog lenses are not built to the tolerance as digital.  I mean, they completely re-designed the lenses for digital. I happen to have one analog lens that works for whatever reason.  It's not as sharp as digital, but it is a hold over from film days so I have kept it.  It is especially nice with the bicam focus...  If you are in North America, you can contact Blazes Photographic, Mike will help you.  Very knowledgeable.  I bought my silvestri through him.

[david.westphal]

Sorry,

Differnces between Schneider and Rodenstock.  Rodenstock has HR lenses that are retro-focus so cleaner image with larger circle of coverage.  I think that in my opinion, only, Rodenstock is better.  I just like them.  Shot with some schneider but I just like the rodenstock lenses.  But you can ask the experts and they will give some long explanation one way or the other, but it's personal preference.  

David