Digital back and a view camera

[tho_mas]

arTec mounts-it has a range of film/cameraback fittings

are you kidding? which mounts?

[tom_l]

...

And too there are Silvestri and Gottschalt (anyone else?)...
http://www.silvestricamera.com/
http://gottschalt.de/
..

edit: ah, yes...: the Linhof Techno: http://linhof.de/news-1_e.html

Just a few words on the Silvestri Flexicam
we already discussed the advantages and disadvantages here:
http://luminous-landscape.com/forum/index....=23800&st=0

The Flexicam is a mini view camera with bellow focussing. Tilt/swing and horizintal shift on the front element, vertical shift on the back. It takes all mounts, with a V-Mount back you can switch the back alone (of course). With another mount you would have to turn the camera 90°. The back can be mounted via live view adapter or sliding adapter (with specific mounts, they don't have inserts like P1 Flexadapter). All Schneider/Rodenstock lenses can be used up to 105mm. Zeiss Hasselblad lenses can be used via adapter. There is a stitching problem with wide angles lenses like the 35mm, the bellow moves the front standard by 1mm when heavily shifted!


The Linhof Techno seems to be the big brother of the Flexicam, supreme quality it seems, but twice as heavy and (probably) 2x as expensive.


Tom-

[etrump]

I am upgrading from a P30 to a P45+ and wondering if moving from a Mamiya AFDII to a view/technical camera and newer digital lenses is worth it for the improvement in image quality?
In landscape and nature photography what improvements would I realize?
I do a fair amount of stitched panos, what camera would you recommend? are front movements important?
Do you have to use a sliding back to focus accurately? if not how do you focus?
What lenses do you prefer? with my P30 I've noticed that I use my 55-110mm more than any other lens.
Thanks
Marc

Marc,

I think you will notice the P45 is significantly sharper than the P30.  The better the glass the more you will notice as long as your technique is good.  There is definitely a learning curve switching from 645 AFD II.  

Regardless of wether you use a focus screen or not, you will need to get really good at using your hyperfocal calculations.   For most of my landscape images I set f/11, use the hyperfocal scale on the lens then dial it back two stops (f/5.6) to compensate for the difference between the dial which is 4x5 and the P45.  If I need closer focusing then I either stop down or shoot multiple focal points and blend in post.  I don't use a viewfinder or focus screen, I use a geared head and tweak things taking sample images until I have the composition I am looking for.  It sounds difficult but I have found it improves my composition substantially.  Once I have what I want I bracket exposures and finally do a lens cast exposure.

The 72mm XL is my favorite followed closely by the 35mm XL then the 24mm XL.   I wouldn't call the XL glass anything but excellent and every time I use it the image quality amazes me.  Perhaps the HR glass is better, I don't know, but you are talking 3-4x in cost and 2x in weight.  The XL glass is designed for pixel densities that would yield a 645 back of 80-90MP.

I use the Cambo WRS and simply love the thing.  I do 2 and 3 shot stitching into panoramic format and for that it is perfectly engineered.  

Since purchased I use it 90% of the time and my brand new P1 645 sits in it's backpack.   Sometimes it is just not convenient to use the Cambo such as macro, long lens, shooting mobile, moving subjects, etc. but when it works it works wonderfully.

[Dick Roadnight]

Hi again, Marc

Like Edwin says:

The Sinar F2 (4x5) or F3 (100mm) are the best full movement cameras for landscape/architecture because they are lighter than the P equivants at the expense of a full set of microprecision adjustments. the can use the same lens/bellows/film+digital back systems as the 'P' series
The Sinar M   has 2 distict operation modes
1) as an electronic shutter for the p2/p3 systems in a studio
2) as a tripod mounted camera - you can also use a range of hasselblad/nikon lenses with it in this mode.
Edwin

Once you are into the Sinar system, there are options, and you can use an F3 and a P3 with the same lensboards.

The Sinar P3/F3 is an open system, but I do not know of any other camera that uses the standard P3 lensboard. (The Linhof Techno is similar but different.)

How much extension will you need (for long lenses or Macro)?

How wide a lens will you want to use?

[Gary Ferguson]

I am upgrading from a P30 to a P45+ and wondering if moving from a Mamiya AFDII to a view/technical camera and newer digital lenses is worth it for the improvement in image quality?
In landscape and nature photography what improvements would I realize?

Marc, I'll take a more polemical position and say "no" and "none".

I use a Linhof M679cs with Rodenstock digital lenses and a P45+. It's a combination that makes sense for the architectural work I chiefly do, but I don't see any sustained or material quality differences versus using the same back on Hasselblad V series cameras. If it wasn't for the architectural requirement for substantial camera movements and wide angle lenses with low distortion, then I'd drop large format digital like a shot.

View cameras were designed to manage 4x5 or larger film, which would then be usually enlarged by an undemanding x2 to x4. That's a process that stressed neither the camera nor the photographer. Contrast that experience with the reality of a digital back, you'll be struggling to precisely fix focus with an oversized loupe (that the groundglass was never designed for), and making micron level adjustments (which your thumbs were never designed for), in order to deliver satisfying results with enlargements that might run to x10, x20, or even more. To stand any chance of success requires very expensive micro-gearing, a heavy camera chassis, and an awful lot of concentration.

[Anders_HK]

Hi,

Being new to large format and large format digital stitching I am current learning my custom made digital adapter (designed per my concept)   .

I can add following;

1. Sharp traditional large format lenses works. My Schneider 72 XL & 58 XL and Rodenstock 150 Sironar-N seem more sharp than my Mamiya lenses, save for the Mamiya 28mm which I am not sure if it is sharper yet or not. If you need digital lenses depends on your subject, size of stitching and resolution of digital back. I use Aptus 65.

2. While digital large format lenses are sharper, you cannot use them for 4x5 film due to their small image circles. I simply like to use same lens for both digital and film.

3. For landscape my interest is in using digital for panoramic (flat) stitching. Thus digital large format lenses have small image circles, due to that I seek to make up to 3:1 (~617) format stithces.

4. Fabrication tolerances on a digital stitching adapter are important, but depend on the width of lens you use. Wider lens means more shallow depth of focus and need for tighter tolerances. On my adapter fabrication tolerances on groundglas versus sensor plane are 0.05~0.07mm and seem ok for up to 58mm width of lens, but borderline.

5. Critical focusing is essential. I use Maxwell screen, and using my 58mm focusing seem a tad critical because things are already small on groundglass.

6. Why custom made stitching adapter? All others sold (save cheap ones on Ebay) are way too expensive and too tiny grounglasses. Mine was intended for up to 118mm width, however due reflections along internal side of it I seem limited to slight over 100mm. I also have a groundglass on which I can see the whole resulting image that I will stitch, thus to assist me in accurate composition of images. That is very important to me.

7. Using also 4x5 film in Quickloads, I am struck how simple it is with film instead, although... having digital for stitching is an interesting additional media...  

8. I use my adapter on a Shen-Hao non folder -yes! That works, the critical is again the tolerances on the stitching adapter itself, while if a technical camera without lens movements then one would only need to focus.... Using my adapter in more than one row of stitching on the Shen Hao, then it seems I need to refocus for each row due inaccuracy of the rear standard sliding. Else it simply seem to work!  

9. Worst experience so far, first time I used with digital adapter, a guy with DSLR around his neck politely walked up and asked if what I was using was a camera....  


Regards
Anders

[marcmccalmont]

Hi again, Marc

Like Edwin says:


Once you are into the Sinar system, there are options, and you can use an F3 and a P3 with the same lensboards.

The Sinar P3/F3 is an open system, but I do not know of any other camera that uses the standard P3 lensboard. (The Linhof Techno is similar but different.)

How much extension will you need (for long lenses or Macro)?

How wide a lens will you want to use?

I'll keep my AFDII kit for the 120 macro and longer lenses so I see myself using between 40mm and 100mm lenses
mostly for stitched panoramas
Marc

[etrump]

Hi,

Being new to large format and large format digital stitching I am current learning my custom made digital adapter (designed per my concept)   .


Regards
Anders

Anders,

Sounds cool, how about a picture.

Ed

[tho_mas]

Marc, I'll take a more polemical position and say "no" and "none".

I find that kinda refreshing to read. Honestly!
However you don't shoot everything wide open (especially not in landscape) and with wide angles you rarely shoot anything else than at infinity (and with helical focus mount that's quite easy). So focussing is not always an issue and in this case you take advantage of the superior lenses.
But when focussing is an issue... it is certainly a serious one.

[marcmccalmont]

Marc, I'll take a more polemical position and say "no" and "none".

I use a Linhof M679cs with Rodenstock digital lenses and a P45+. It's a combination that makes sense for the architectural work I chiefly do, but I don't see any sustained or material quality differences versus using the same back on Hasselblad V series cameras. If it wasn't for the architectural requirement for substantial camera movements and wide angle lenses with low distortion, then I'd drop large format digital like a shot.

View cameras were designed to manage 4x5 or larger film, which would then be usually enlarged by an undemanding x2 to x4. That's a process that stressed neither the camera nor the photographer. Contrast that experience with the reality of a digital back, you'll be struggling to precisely fix focus with an oversized loupe (that the groundglass was never designed for), and making micron level adjustments (which your thumbs were never designed for), in order to deliver satisfying results with enlargements that might run to x10, x20, or even more. To stand any chance of success requires very expensive micro-gearing, a heavy camera chassis, and an awful lot of concentration.

Well that is concerning would any one be willing to shoot a subject with both cameras same back, SLR and view at equivalent focal lengths for a comparison?
Marc

[Anders_HK]

Anders,

Sounds cool, how about a picture.

Ed

Hi Ed,

Yes it is cool, but aint for de faint hearted   , takes lots of experimenting to learn how it works and its limits   - at which I still am at - , including strange discoloration across half frame which was due internal reflections of the adapter when I was tad near an edge of the adapters full inner frame which caused low light reflections... cannot explain simpler by words on that than so. Next test will be shooting and stitching to within what I believe I figured out are the max limits of this adapter, and to the different combinations of stitched up formats. Photography is my hobby, thus I go about this tad slow....

Attaching a single frame from my Aptus 65 (including 100% crop) using the Schneider 72 XL just to show that I am really doing something   , that was just a part of a testing. Add some sharpening to it and see how looks! Of course, pixel peeping with digital lenses you shall find those are sharper, but... what we all need might be a tad different, right? Digital lenses, technical cameras and all extras cost $$$$$$. That was not the way to go for me. Thus I ventured into simplicity () with a custom made adapter - per my concept design.  

As for photo of my adapter, sorry none. At current it is prototype #1, which may be developed further, and maybe into a production model. We shall see...

My personal opinion though, technical cameras are oversold for way too much $$$. It is not necessarily needed to use such, it all depends. As they say, digital requires more exact, but that does not necessarily mean that you need buy a $$$ technical camera and $$$ lenses, it all depends on our actual needs as I stated in above post. Once you go line of technical camera though, it seems you actually step into medium format, not large format since the image circles are medium format sized, apart perhaps maybe the Rodenstock APO digital lenses. Thus, because medium format it requires tighter tolerances on also cameras.... while if stay on a 4x5 for panoramic stitching might be different...  

Regards
Anders

[Gary Ferguson]

Well that is concerning would any one be willing to shoot a subject with both cameras same back, SLR and view at equivalent focal lengths for a comparison?
Marc

Marc, I can go one better. I'm in the process of trading in my Hasselblad V system/P45+ for a Mamiya AFD system/P65+, so if you can wait a couple of weeks I'll be able to email you comparison shots between say a 45mm Rodenstock Digital on a Linhof, and a 45mm D Mamiya/Phase One on a Mamiya/Phase One 645 AFD, both with the same full-frame digital back.

So it'll be a comparison that directly relates to your current camera system. I'm pretty confident you won't find any meaningful image quality differences, but you be the judge. Why don't you contact me offline.

[tho_mas]

I'm pretty confident you won't find any meaningful image quality differences

yes, in this case maybe not.
From the specs the...
- Rodenstock Digital (non HR) are desigend for sensors up to 9microns pixel
- Schneider Digitar for sensors up to 6microns
- Rodenstock Digital HR for sensors up to 5microns

The P45+ has 6.8 microns so from the specs you have to use Digitars or even HRs.

My Digitar 47XL is a completely different thing to the Distagon 2.8/45 (Contax 645) on my P45. And the Distagon is actually not bad... not at all!
It's just that the Digitars is superior (from f8 and smaller)

[Don Libby]

Hi Marc just noticed the thread and your questions.

I've been shooting my landscape work 100% now with the Cambo WRS1000 and P45+ for several months now and enjoy it.  I got the WRS last October and early this year decided to sell my Phase AFD and all the associate Mamiya lenses as I just wasn't using it.

I've shot the North & South Rim Grand Canyon last Fall and Winter, the California Redwoods January this year, Carmel and Big Sur, Monument Valley, Sedona, Canyon de Chelly and I just returned from the South Rim (again).  I have a collection of very good to great lenses all Schneider, 24mm, 35mm, 72mm, and 120mm.  

Here's what I've found and my general impressions based on being strictly a landscape photographer:

While I truly loved the P30+ I knew it would work with a technical camera so I made the move to the P45+ which is so good I no longer miss the P30+.

I shoot with the Cambo WRS-1000 a truly great little system; Cambo just released this body late last year. The WRS is designed to be used with solely with a digital back with all the movements on the rear so the lens is static.  I have stitched multiple images having close to 99.99% of useable finished image to work with.

Your question regarding the worthiness of moving from an AFDII to a technical camera and associated lenses is good however the answers you'll receive will be based (or should be) on personal experiences.  In my opinion the answer is yes.  This is based on moving from an AFD III and the Mamiya 28mm, 75-150 and 300mm lenses.

I have found the image quality to be equal to or superior to the lens lineup I had used.  

The WRS does not allow for a sliding back however you can use a groundglass; it also has an optional viewfinder.  I have the groundglass however I don't use it for focus instead I use it mainly to assist me when I use a filter.

Focusing with the WRS:  I have found that this really isn't as difficult as I thought it was going to be.  I have never lost an image due to improper focus.  Again remember I do nothing but landscape work. Nevertheless I've shot from distances of several meters out to infinity.  

The most difficult thing I've encountered using a TC has been 2 things.  Remember to take the lens cap off - I've gotten much better!  And remember to cock the shutter - that is my number one error now encountering it maybe 1 in every 100 shots.  

I enjoy the Zen like feel of shooting landscape with a TC.  Setting up the camera on the tripod is a joy, taking my time to fully see the landscape and deciding on the proper focal length, f/stop and shutter speed.  All this slows you down, slows the heart rate down and allows you to see possibilities that you may have missed otherwise.  The simple act of closing the shutter release can be a joy.  Okay enough of this..

You ask are front movement important?  Again different answers from different people.  I choose the WRS simply because all the movement are on the back.  The back moves around the lens circle - not the lens around the back.  The Cambo WDS offers a little of both with shifts on the back and rise and fall on the front (lens).  I did a comparison of the two bodies June this year and posted my thoughts here and here.

Cambo has recently announced the ability to use tilt/shift on their lens boards as well. Go on Cambo's website for information (click on June 26,2009 news pdf).

I haven't really touched on your last question of which lens do I prefer as that is based on location and conditions.  I used all four of my lenses this past week at the South Rim.  I love the colors I get with the 24mm/center filter however I equally like the large image circle of the other lens and the ability to shift to 20mm and the rise/fall they give me.  My first lens was the 35 followed shortly my the 72.  I didn't get the 24 and 120 till after I decided to sell my AFD/lens kit.

Okay this answer is now bordering on a novel and getting much too long.  Good luck with your decision.

Cheers

Don

[jonstewart]

The simple act of closing the shutter release can be a joy.

Yep, I can relate to that! Also, slowing the process down can sometimes be almost relaxing.

[Gary Ferguson]

yes, in this case maybe not.
From the specs the...
- Rodenstock Digital (non HR) are desigend for sensors up to 9microns pixel
- Schneider Digitar for sensors up to 6microns
- Rodenstock Digital HR for sensors up to 5microns

The P45+ has 6.8 microns so from the specs you have to use Digitars or even HRs.

My Digitar 47XL is a completely different thing to the Distagon 2.8/45 (Contax 645) on my P45. And the Distagon is actually not bad... not at all!
It's just that the Digitars is superior (from f8 and smaller)

Thomas, take your point but you also have to consider the image circle, doubly so as the original poster was talking about using the sliding carriage for stitching.

There's a trade-off between movement capability and resolution, and as sensors like the P65+ have completed the move to genuinely full frame 645, the image circle constraint has just become even tighter still. As well as Rodenstock Digital lenses I also have had to keep some more traditional large format lenses for when I need extreme movements or sliding carriage stitching.

[marcmccalmont]

Marc, I can go one better. I'm in the process of trading in my Hasselblad V system/P45+ for a Mamiya AFD system/P65+, so if you can wait a couple of weeks I'll be able to email you comparison shots between say a 45mm Rodenstock Digital on a Linhof, and a 45mm D Mamiya/Phase One on a Mamiya/Phase One 645 AFD, both with the same full-frame digital back.

So it'll be a comparison that directly relates to your current camera system. I'm pretty confident you won't find any meaningful image quality differences, but you be the judge. Why don't you contact me offline.

Gary
Thanks a million! yes I can wait I'm not going to do anything until September, just trying to educate myself at this point
Marc

[tho_mas]

There's a trade-off between movement capability and resolution, and as sensors like the P65+ have completed the move to genuinely full frame 645, the image circle constraint has just become even tighter still. As well as Rodenstock Digital lenses I also have had to keep some more traditional large format lenses for when I need extreme movements or sliding carriage stitching.

that's right, of course.
With the Digitar 47XL on the P45 I feel I can go quite good up to +/- 17mm lateral in horizontal composition.
Here's a (boring) test shot I prepared recently; I've drawn in the amount of shift at the top on the image.

Scene [red part is the P45 film plane at center position; plus 20mm shift]:
[attachment=15842:scene.jpg]

Here's a crop from the center area showing far distance:
http://tinyurl.com/lz2mgu

And here's the crop with 20mm shift lateral (a flat motif would have been better but I think it's well enough as an example):
http://tinyurl.com/lgzwk2

[marcmccalmont]

Thanks for all the inputs and answers to my questions. I now have a lot of information to digest. I'll let you know what the outcome is
Thanks again
Marc