Pages: 1 [2]   Go Down

Author Topic: Technical Cameras with integrated sliding back: why not?  (Read 7928 times)

asf

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 510
    • http://www.adamfriedberg.com
Technical Cameras with integrated sliding back: why not?
« Reply #20 on: November 02, 2009, 12:44:20 pm »

Quote from: rainer_v
the artec works simply perfect i.m.o. and its my opinion too that together with the exposure batch correction of the white files its the only fast, transportable and reliable workflow out there in the market. but thats my personal opinion, although based on much experience now.

Rainer - how does this workflow differ from others, say Leaf Capture with their batch gain file processing? Also, you have been using your ArTec for a while now - has it needed any service?
Logged

rainer_v

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1194
    • http://www.tangential.de
Technical Cameras with integrated sliding back: why not?
« Reply #21 on: November 02, 2009, 02:35:27 pm »

Quote from: asf
Rainer - how does this workflow differ from others, say Leaf Capture with their batch gain file processing? Also, you have been using your ArTec for a while now - has it needed any service?
no idea about the actual state of the gain converter, some reported a bug inj the newer version, but i havent tried it recently myself.
no service for the artec needed till now, and i hope that this will be like that, i cant need a mechanical camera which would need that often service, i mean e.g. in the first 4 - 5 years.

btw. just arrived today the new tse lenses from canon. first test with the 17 tse looks amazing , amazing. fantastic.
« Last Edit: November 02, 2009, 02:38:26 pm by rainer_v »
Logged
rainer viertlböck
architecture photograp

asf

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 510
    • http://www.adamfriedberg.com
Technical Cameras with integrated sliding back: why not?
« Reply #22 on: November 02, 2009, 02:59:17 pm »

I'm aware of the "bug", although I can't say if it's a bug or not. The one user I'm aware of seems to want the software to do something it's not designed to do. Otherwise in my experience it works perfectly.

The 17 tse is a fantastic lens. Been using for a couple months now. No complaints and worth every penny.
Logged

Gary Ferguson

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 550
    • http://
Technical Cameras with integrated sliding back: why not?
« Reply #23 on: November 02, 2009, 03:15:04 pm »

Quote from: Mr. Rib
Is there any sliding  "Stitching" Back Adapter precise enough to be used with 39+ mp digital back? Any opinions on Kapture Group "QUADSTITCH" product?

I've stitched with the Linhof sliding carriage using the Phase One backs I've had (P25, P45+, P65+). "Precision" could be interpreted differently, with these backs the physical overlay was pixel perfect on the P25, virtually so with the P45, and needs only a minute crop with the P65+. In other words the mechanical precision is sufficient. But what I've found is the more practical issues are the image circle of the lenses I've been using (which have tended to shrink in three distinct steps alongside these three backs), and also the increasingly bloated file sizes that result.

The bottom line is that in practical terms I'm less tempted to stitch with the P65+ (because I just don't have a need for file sizes that big) and it's also becoming more difficult to execute a full sliding carriage stitch within the image circle, especially when accompanied by lens movements. Occasionally I find I'm using a sort of "semi-stitch" with the 40mm Rodenstock Digaron-W to get the result of a slightly wider lens, but nowadays it's the exception rather than the rule.
Logged

rainer_v

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1194
    • http://www.tangential.de
Technical Cameras with integrated sliding back: why not?
« Reply #24 on: November 02, 2009, 03:15:25 pm »

Quote from: asf
I'm aware of the "bug", although I can't say if it's a bug or not. The one user I'm aware of seems to want the software to do something it's not designed to do. Otherwise in my experience it works perfectly.

The 17 tse is a fantastic lens. Been using for a couple months now. No complaints and worth every penny.
same about the new 24 tse, which i just used for the first photograph. the fov is amazing if the 17tse is used stitched, i cant see much sharpness degradation as sometimes reported even in the outest zones of the image, if stopped down to f 11 - 16. probably i will use that canon system more often again, cause its so versatile. i although have a zoerk shift adapter with 35/45/55/75 pentax 645 lenses. looks as a nice travel setup if going to "stranger" regions, e.g. have to shoot in s.africa next year.
« Last Edit: November 02, 2009, 03:25:08 pm by rainer_v »
Logged
rainer viertlböck
architecture photograp

asf

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 510
    • http://www.adamfriedberg.com
Technical Cameras with integrated sliding back: why not?
« Reply #25 on: November 02, 2009, 05:46:53 pm »

Agree on the new 24 tse, and I've been using the Canon much more than I expected since getting those 2 lenses this summer.

I'm on the fence about the Zoerk shift adapter though, I've been offered a system with a couple Pentax lenses for a reasonable amount, but am not sure how useful it will be. How do you find the chromatic aberration and distortion on the FA 35? For convenience reasons have stuck with the 45 tse which is good enough (sharp and ca is fixable), and the 90 tse is no slouch. A good 35 shift would be welcome - Canon? Any reason not to make one?
Logged

Mr. Rib

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 865
Technical Cameras with integrated sliding back: why not?
« Reply #26 on: November 02, 2009, 06:06:08 pm »

Quote from: Gary Ferguson
I've stitched with the Linhof sliding carriage using the Phase One backs I've had (P25, P45+, P65+). "Precision" could be interpreted differently, with these backs the physical overlay was pixel perfect on the P25, virtually so with the P45, and needs only a minute crop with the P65+. In other words the mechanical precision is sufficient. But what I've found is the more practical issues are the image circle of the lenses I've been using (which have tended to shrink in three distinct steps alongside these three backs), and also the increasingly bloated file sizes that result.

The bottom line is that in practical terms I'm less tempted to stitch with the P65+ (because I just don't have a need for file sizes that big) and it's also becoming more difficult to execute a full sliding carriage stitch within the image circle, especially when accompanied by lens movements. Occasionally I find I'm using a sort of "semi-stitch" with the 40mm Rodenstock Digaron-W to get the result of a slightly wider lens, but nowadays it's the exception rather than the rule.

Hi,

You got me wrong:) If, let's assume, shift for stitching is made on X and Y axis, I'm speaking about Z axis . The problem is that even the mounts you get with your digital back are off by some value, possibly by a value in the brand's tolerance, however that's not always the case. I've heard about P45+ backs which are off by even 150 microns. Obviously in critial situations like shooting wide open with wide angle lens, it produces blurry pictures and nasty color fringing. That's why I'm thinking how precise are the sliding 'stitching' adapters, since I would like to get one of these along with Linhof/P3. And this element adds another piece which can shift the back depth-wise. Lenses are imperfect, digital backs are imperfect..all of these sum up for a focal-plane-to-db-plane shift. You can spend a lot of money on equipment which doesn't take sharp images  Yes, even some top of the line Schneider-Kreunzach (or Rodenstock digitar) are faulty in that matter.
« Last Edit: November 02, 2009, 08:04:06 pm by Mr. Rib »
Logged

archivue

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 417
Technical Cameras with integrated sliding back: why not?
« Reply #27 on: November 02, 2009, 06:52:11 pm »

RM3D and rotaslide... the groundglass and bino viewer for composition only... focus made via their incredicle helicoidal mount !
Logged

Harold Clark

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 275
Technical Cameras with integrated sliding back: why not?
« Reply #28 on: November 02, 2009, 08:46:34 pm »

Quote from: asf
Agree on the new 24 tse, and I've been using the Canon much more than I expected since getting those 2 lenses this summer.

I'm on the fence about the Zoerk shift adapter though, I've been offered a system with a couple Pentax lenses for a reasonable amount, but am not sure how useful it will be. How do you find the chromatic aberration and distortion on the FA 35? For convenience reasons have stuck with the 45 tse which is good enough (sharp and ca is fixable), and the 90 tse is no slouch. A good 35 shift would be welcome - Canon? Any reason not to make one?

I also recently got the new 24 tse, night and day difference compared with the original. A 35 tse would be grand ( I had the FD version when I used film ). I currently use a 35mm Olympus/Sinaron for the Canon, which has 12mm rise/13mm fall & 10mm shift. It lacks a lock screw though, which means it could move by accident.
Logged

rainer_v

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1194
    • http://www.tangential.de
Technical Cameras with integrated sliding back: why not?
« Reply #29 on: November 03, 2009, 02:30:14 am »

Quote from: asf
Agree on the new 24 tse, and I've been using the Canon much more than I expected since getting those 2 lenses this summer.

I'm on the fence about the Zoerk shift adapter though, I've been offered a system with a couple Pentax lenses for a reasonable amount, but am not sure how useful it will be. How do you find the chromatic aberration and distortion on the FA 35? For convenience reasons have stuck with the 45 tse which is good enough (sharp and ca is fixable), and the 90 tse is no slouch. A good 35 shift would be welcome - Canon? Any reason not to make one?
the pentax fa35 is very good in respect of ca , distortion and sharpness. as are the other pentax lenses which i own.
Logged
rainer viertlböck
architecture photograp

bernhardmarks

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 9
    • http://www.bernhard-marks.de
Technical Cameras with integrated sliding back: why not?
« Reply #30 on: November 03, 2009, 03:29:48 am »

Quote from: rainer_v
the pentax fa35 is very good in respect of ca , distortion and sharpness. as are the other pentax lenses which i own.

i agree. pentax fa35 is great. (see my websites). i use it with eos5d (1) and thinking about bying a eos5d II. would it be a big improvement (resolution)?
i am sometimes afraid of the clients question: "how large can we print it?"

rainer_v

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1194
    • http://www.tangential.de
Technical Cameras with integrated sliding back: why not?
« Reply #31 on: November 03, 2009, 04:07:09 am »

Quote from: bernhardmarks
i agree. pentax fa35 is great. (see my websites). i use it with eos5d (1) and thinking about bying a eos5d II. would it be a big improvement (resolution)?
i am sometimes afraid of the clients question: "how large can we print it?"
buy it.
at least 60x90cm with the 5d2.
Logged
rainer viertlböck
architecture photograp

stefan marquardt

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 144
    • http://www.stefanmarquardt-architekturbild.de
Technical Cameras with integrated sliding back: why not?
« Reply #32 on: November 03, 2009, 04:29:31 am »

Quote from: bernhardmarks
i use it with eos5d (1) and thinking about bying a eos5d II. would it be a big improvement (resolution)?

the gain in resolution is worth it. but for me the best feature of the mark2 is the live focus ability on the much improved lcd.  especially with manuel lenses this feature is very helpfull!
and yes - the 17mm shift is a jewel! together with the live focusing a joy to use for architecture and interiors.

stefan
Logged
stefan marquardt
stefanmarquardt.de arch

clawery

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 512
    • http://www.captureintegration.com  / www.chrislawery.com
Technical Cameras with integrated sliding back: why not?
« Reply #33 on: November 03, 2009, 10:02:28 pm »

Just wanted to clarify something.  The Rm3d will accept the Rotaslide.  It can be utilized for stitching if wanted.  I also learned from Arca-Swiss that the Rm3d can be used as a front standard and is interchangeable with their other large format systems / accessories.  

Below are images of the Rm3d as well as a press release and camera specifications.


Chris Lawery
__________________
Sales Manager, Capture Integration
Phase One, Leaf, Cambo, Canon, Apple, Profoto, Eizo & More
National: 877.217.9870  |  Cell: 404.234.5195
Newsletter: Read Latest or Sign Up
RSS Feed: Subscribe[/font]

[attachment=17672:ARCA_SWI...Ddoppel2.jpg]

[attachment=17673:CP_Rm3d_ENG_2.jpg]

[attachment=17674:CP_Rm3d_ENG_3.jpg]
« Last Edit: November 03, 2009, 10:03:09 pm by clawery »
Logged
Pages: 1 [2]   Go Up