First architectural lens for a Cambo WRS-1000?

[andyptak]

I've become rather confused looking at the options. Obviously a Schneider or Rodenstock, but after that where to go? I intend to do stitched Panos as well as require the tilt and shift of the camera. I'm currently using a P25 back, but will be going to a P45+ in the future.

Obviously it depends upon a person's style and technique, but I'm looking for suggestions at a first "all-rounder", that may have some limitations in certain areas, but will give me the biggest bang for the buck. Thanks.

[marcmccalmont]

My favorite all around lens is the rodenstock 70HR
Marc

[gazwas]

I've become rather confused looking at the options. Obviously a Schneider or Rodenstock, but after that where to go? I intend to do stitched Panos as well as require the tilt and shift of the camera. I'm currently using a P25 back, but will be going to a P45+ in the future.

Obviously it depends upon a person's style and technique, but I'm looking for suggestions at a first "all-rounder", that may have some limitations in certain areas, but will give me the biggest bang for the buck. Thanks.

For Architecture on a P25/P45, best bang for buck you can't go far wrong with a Schneider 43XL as distortion is almost non existent. If you need something wider the Schneider 35XL is also a great choice.

Worth considering also is the Rodenstock 40 HR-W that is obviously a bit wider than the 43XL but is a lot larger, heavier, has more distortion (easily corrected but more work) and is more expensive.

[cng]

I have both the SK35 and 43 paired with an IQ180, also shooting architecture.  No complaints, both are excellent lenses with well-known trade-offs against the Rodenstock versions.  I also don't understand the angst surrounding the SK35 and IQ180 – my experience (expectation?) seems to be different than others.  If you stay within the official IC's then both lenses are stellar.  You can always shift beyond the official IC's, but then expect more colour cast and a fall-off in resolution at the edges, with the SK35 being the least forgiving in this regard.  Since you will be using a P45+, then expect to be able to shift even more with less colour cast and resolution fall-off.

I like the SK's compared to the Rodenstocks mainly because they are smaller, lighter and have less distortion.

For your first lens, either the SK35 or 43 will be great.  When originally purchasing my kit I swore that I would depend primarily on the SK43 (mainly because it is less extreme – I don't generally like superwides) but am now pulling the SK35 out of the bag first in most instances.  I am using a FF 645 sensor so you may want to factor this into your considerations.  As always, try to first test the lenses with your choice of back if possible.

[skimasks]

The biggest bang for your buck IMO is the Schneider 47mm Digitar. I actually just started using this for product work (on my wrs1000) but originally used it for architectural interiors. Bill Cahill seems to like the 47mm for his work too ( http://www.popfoto.net/2012/01/17/billcahill/)

For interiors you basically have to stitch 4 shots in most cases, but the image circle is one of the biggest of the digitar series and distortion is basically invisible. and I am quite picky when it comes to distortion..the 28mm won't cut it. The 35mm's image circle is so small you may as well have gotten a camera without movements at all. The Rodenstocks I've read have visible moustache distortion which seems to be harder to correct for than barrel...? My next lens for the system will be the 72mm.

[cng]

skimasks has a point.  From what I remember of the MTF charts, the SK43 is comparable to the 47 but slightly sharper wide open.  I also seem to remember that there have been prior threads on LL or GetDpi comparing these two lenses.

[Enda Cavanagh]

I use the Schneider 28mm and 35mm the most and to a lesser extent the 47mm. I have a 24mm also which I occasionally use for very tight spaces. All are truly great lenses.

I use the 35mm and the 28mm the most. The 28mm is wider so is not suitable for some situations where that stretched look of a wide angle lens just doesn't look right (more so when you're shooting images for panoramics. More movement = more of a stretched look as you move towards the edge of the image circle) but when you use it right it really is an amazing lens.

The 35mm is a lovely lens. I use it quite a lot for both my landscapes and architectural work. Great for panoramics.

The 47mm lens is the one I use the least but I would always definitely have it with me on shoots. They are great for images where you just want to show the less is more approach to a shot. I haven't used the 43mm Schneider although it's supposed to be a great lens. You are going for the Back with the 49 x 36mm sensor so you should just have the typical colour cast issues which are standard and can be corrected. Once you move up the larger sensor cameras you may have much stronger color casts some of which cannot be corrected without image degradation, worst of which is the IQ180.

[gazwas]

I forgot about the 47XL.

With my 43XL it's sharper in the centre at F8 than at F11 but the edges are much better at f11. As I understand it, you need to shoot at f11 all the time on the 47XL and that is why I went with the 43. A bit more choice when you don't need as much DOF.

[andyptak]

Thanks Guys

I liked the 43 and 47 too. but I'm confused about the suggested apetures - f8-f11 for a medium format lens and camera? That's what I use on my DSLR so wouldn't that be very shallow DOF on this camera and lens combo?

[gazwas]

I'm confused about the suggested apetures - f8-f11 for a medium format lens and camera? That's what I use on my DSLR so wouldn't that be very shallow DOF on this camera and lens combo?

Schneider and Rodenstock LF lenses are designed to produce their best results at f8-f11. Below f11 diffraction takes hold and while its perfectly acceptable to shoot at f16 or below, you won't be getting the best performance from the lens.

Shooting interiors at f11 with a 43 or below produces plenty DOF. For landscapes or subject without lots of vertical objects near to the camera a little front tilt will get you around 2-3m up to infinity in focus. The wider the lens the more DOF.

[andyptak]

So, the trick is in the tilt?

[harshdreams]

Hi Enda, What amount of shift is possible with the 35mm Schneider/Rode lenses? Also how much can the 28mm be shifted? Thanks

[Paul2660]

Shifting results are very dependent on the back.  You have mentioned a P45+ and with that back, you should be able to shift to the edge of the image circle without much problem i.e. color shift.  Backs like the IQ180 seem to have real issues with the Schneider wides, 28mm, 35mm and some claim even the 43mm but seem to work OK with the Rodenstock line up, 32mm and 40mm W series. 

As for aperture,  The Rodenstocks (at least the 35 and 28 Digaron S) are designed work best from F4 to around F11.  I would say on the 28mm the Sweet spot is F5.6 to F8 as any more than that you will start to see diffraction starting and by F14 very noticeable.  However at F5.6 to F8, really amazing details.  I would have to say the 28mm Rodenstock on a P65+,  with a rm3di produced some of the most detailed wide angle medium format images I have ever taken.  However when I first tested the lens I was using it at F11 to F16 (my old mind set from years of using the Mamiya 28mm) and I totally missed the real power of the Rodenstock 28mm, the F5.6 to F8 range.  If you add just a bit of tilt then you have a really amazing range of focus to infinity.  The 35mm Rodenstock preformed the same way for me.  As for shifting, I don't think you can take either lens much past 6mm on a P45+ and 4mm on the P65+.  You will see the edge of the image circle and get hard vignetting. 

Schneiders the 43XL is a wonderful lens on the P45+ and P65+.  I have found it's more of a F8 to F14 range with F11 possibly the best.  At F5.6 pretty soft in the corners, F 8.0 good and F11 excellent.  Again by adding about 1 movement of tilt you can start to really see excellent sharpness from about 7.5 feet out to infinity.  Color and clarity very good also.  Shifting, on the P45+ easily I was able to get 20mm to each side.  There was just a bit of detail smearing from 18mm out but no real loss of saturation/color.  With the P65+,  I have found you can take the lens to 15mm (I have taken it to 20mm).  At 15mm you will see a bit of smearing on the every edges but very little color/saturation fall off.  I feel the 43mm is great all round lens and is a joy to shoot. 

Centerfilter: really needs to be factored into the equation.  The Rodenstock wides 28mm, 32mm and 35mm all could  benefit from using a center filter.  Rodenstock makes one for the 28mm, and 32mm but I don't think there is one for the 35mm. 
I feel the 43XL would benefit from a physical center filter and hope that Schneider eventually makes one. 

Colorshifts:
From my testing I got considerably less color shift on my P45+ with the 43XL, a LCC is still required however.  On the P65+ there is more color shift but it's totally correctable with the LCC.  On shifting the P45+ preformed very well, besides the inevitable light fall off which you can fix with a LCC.  On the P65+ as long as you keep the shifting within 12mm to 15mm the 43XL does very well.  As I mentioned earlier, the 28mm Rodenstock is good for about 4mm to 5mm max on the P65+ (never got to test it on the P45+).
The 35mm Rodenstock might go to 8mm or 9mm before you pick up the edge of the image circle, but even worse you start to lose color saturation at anything past this and I feel it's non recoverable.

The real key I feel is you have to test these setups for yourself, with your shooting style in the field or studio.  Depending on your location this can be very hard to do.  I found another photographer who was using the 28mm Rodenstock and let me shoot with it for 4 days, and Capture Integration/Atlanta  was very helpful in letting me test both the Acra and Cambo platforms on the P45+, P65+ and IQ180.  Dealer selection can be very important in tech camera purchases.

[cng]

As I mentioned above, and following from Paul's comments, I have found that the officially-stated IC's for the SK35 and SK43 to be a good guide when used in combination with an IQ180.  I shift a maximum of 10mm with the +/-SK35 and +/-20mm with the SK43.  I suspect that I may be able to shift +/-25mm with the SK43 but haven't had any reason to do so yet.

The SK35 smears details at the edges and also exhibits strong colour casts when shifted 10mm.  Loss of detail doesn't usually worry me because I'm usually gaining sky when I shift.  I use a CF permanently with this lens, which almost completely reduces the vignetting and definitely helps C1 clean up (neutralise?) the file.  Plus, the SK35 is light, small and has an astonishing lack of distortion, which is a big plus for me.

The SK43 has slight colour cast and vignetting when shifted 20mm.  Haven't yet had cause to look for smearing at the edges when shifting with this lens, so can't comment on this.  I don't think that it's imperative to have a CF for this lens, but I will definitely order one when it finally (!) gets released – it's long overdue, and Schneider keeps pushing back it's promised release date.

If using a P45+ you will be able to shift more than this, as well as encounter less issues with colour casts etc.  Regardless, any colour casts and vignetting can be dealt with using C1's LCC tool (within reason).

[ChristopherBarrett]

I use the SK 43mm XL for about 80% of my interiors on the P65+.  It'll be tighter, of course, on a smaller sensor back. The 35mm XL is quite good as well, but a  bit wide for my taste and not quite as nice as the 43mm.  I'm typically at about f/11 on the 43 (f/8 1/3 on the 35mm) and find that at that width you have plenty of DoF on a 645 sensor.  I never seem to need tilts or swings on the wides... ok maybe once in a great while for an interesting foreground ceiling detail.

Both of these lenses have a fair amount of fall-off, especially when I compared them to my Cine lenses, but it's easily corrected with the LCC.

Yada yada,
CB

[andyptak]

Thanks for all of the replies and advice so far.

An associated question for me is the suitablity of a 43mm on a Fuji GX680III. I have the optional large format lens adaptor for it and wonder if the Schneider would work on it using my P25 back? I had a suggestion that a lens that wide may not focus to infinity because of the depth of the camera body, from lens to digital back - it's big.

[gazwas]

Nope, won't work on the Fuji because the flange focal distance is only 48.9mm on the 43XL.

It probably won't focus at 10cm, never mind infinity!  

[andyptak]

Thanks for the speedy reply.

Do you have any suggestions of a quality digital wide angle lens that would work?

[gazwas]

Sorry, I don't have any experience with the Fuji so can help with lens choice on that platform.