Shift adapter - Mirex or Zoerk

[alatreille]

Hi everyone.

A brief question as I'm about to outlay some money on a Shift adapter to use on a 5dmkII.  The majority of my work is performed for Architects and built environment professionals.

I've a solid collection of Pentax 645 glass (FA35, A55, A120 + some longer lenses) and I'm trying to decide on whether I purchase either a Zoerk or Mirex adapter.

I'm looking for comments on practical usability between the two systems other than the obvious; the Zoerk allows 22mm of movement as opposed to 15 with the Mirex, but the Mirex offers shift.

Regarding the Zoerk - If any architectural photographers are using them, could you please tell me if you're using with the tripod mount and/or L plate.  I would think this is another point of movement in the system, or is it rigid?

Have you used both systems? Do you have any feedback on either?

Thanks in advance.

Andrew

Thanks in advance.

[rickk]

I first tried a Zoerk adapter several years ago, and it performed adequately. I believe it provided shift, but not tilt. Their current offerings are probably quite different. Since then, I have used Mirex tilt-shift adapters for Mamiya 645 lenses (and Pentax lenses via a thin adapter ring) with both Canon and Sony cameras. I can recommend the Mirex very highly. The one item that could be improved is the lock/release control for the tilt mechanism is quite small and not really compatible with large fingers. The craftsmanship on both the Mirex and Zoerk gear is first-rate.

Regards,

Rick

[alatreille]

Hi Rick,

Thanks for the reply.
Just out of interest, does anyone with a Zoerk use the full 22mm of shift?

I don't feel like I will utilize the tilt mechanism to any great extent on the Mirex, however if people felt that the ease of use was significantly better and 15mm of shift is enough, I think I would consider this over the Zoerk.

Andrew

[Craig Murphy]

Can't say if 15mm of shift is enough for you but can say that the Mirex I purchased for my Sony 850 is top notch quality.  I use the tilt all the time for table top set ups and the shift only occasionally.  Just the opposite of you.   

[Ellis Vener]

My concern has more to do with keeping  the lens stationary and shifting the camera body. To that end I started a thread about the Zoerk adapter that allows for this: http://www.luminous-landscape.com/forum/index.php?topic=59354.msg479700#msg479700

[Kirk Gittings]

You probably already know this (but in case you don't) but these lenses, FA35, A55, A120 + some longer lenses, will not be wide enough for general commercial architectural photography. The rule of thumb since I started in 1978 was that you will use a 90mm lens (on 4x5 which translates to approx. a 28mm on 35) 90% of the time. My go to lens on a DSLR has evolved to a Canon 24 II T/S since there aren't quality 28 T/Ss available. That 24 is my 90% these days and the lens I keep on the camera.

[Ellis Vener]

I agree with Kirk about the 90mm on 4x5 = 28mm on 24x36mm formats and also about the advisability of a current  24mm shift /tilt lens on a 24x36mm format digital body. Both the current Canon (TS-E II  and Nikkor (PC-E) 24mm Tilt/Shift lenses are terrific general purpose lenses for architecture and other applications and pretty hassle free to use.

[alatreille]

Hi all,

Kirk, Ellis - yes, I agree with you on this one.  We use the 24 TSE II for the majority of our work, but occasionally I find myself looking for something a fraction longer (generally for detail work/partial elevations with some compression from foreground etc) hence the search for some slightly longer focal lengths.  The ability for stitching is an obvious one, but something I'm not massively comfortable with on a commercial level.

Kirk, given your large format background, have you not explored some of these other offerings for the 35mm digital market?

I've been dabbling with the Pentax 28mm shift, but am finding it has severe barrel distortion when on larger shifts, so like you head back to the 24mm.

Craig, the Mirex looks to operate in a similar fashion to the Canon TSE offerings.  Am I correct in this assumption.

Thanks again everyone.

Andrew

[Kirk Gittings]

Andrew,

I use all the available Canon T/Ss and the 1.4 II Tele extender. The 45 and 90 are due for an upgrade but provide adequate service anything longer does not need T/S. I used to use Olympus PC lenses with EOS adapters and though they are very sharp suffered from allot of CA compared to the Canons.