Shneider Apo Digitar's, and IQ Phase one Backs IQ 160 IQ 180

[julienlanoo]

Hi,
So i use
Shneider Apo Digitar 35 XL 5.6
Shneider Apo Digitar 47 XL 5.6
Shneider Apo Digitar 90 N 4.5

On Phase one P45+ ( guess my specialisation :p hehe)
I would like to upgrade my back, or forsee an upgrade..

Are there still problems with the IQ backs ?  the IQ180 or IQ160 ( whatever works best..)-> Refering to the colorshift and berations ? ..

[Ken Doo]

You're probably okay with the Schneiders on the IQ160.

If you go with the IQ180, I think you're better off with the Rodenstocks particularly at the wide end; Schneider 35XL is problematic on the IQ180.

ken

[julienlanoo]

mhm, are there any tests to find ? with similar lenses on the IQ 160,
it's not that much a hunt for the Mpix's,
i have to update at one point .. Better check

[Don Libby]

I've been using a WRS with a basic 3-lens kit for the past 4plus years; all Schneider.  A 35mm XL (with CF) a 72mm and a short barrel 120mm.  During this same timeframe I've used a P45+, P65 and now an IQ160 with great results.

When I decided to upgrade from the P65 to an IQ the deciding factor at the time was how well the 35XL played with the 160 and 180.  I found the 35XL played very well with the 160 and just sucked at the 180.  There's been many thoughts written about how badly the 35XL/180 works both here and on GetDpi.  At the time I made my decision I was still very pleased with the 35XL and didn't wish to change lenses and that is what swayed me to the 160.

Recently I began thinking of lenses and backs and how a t/s lens would fit into my workflow.  I asked for comments and possible LCC samples from the fine folks that frequent GetDpi which resulted in this thread   http://www.getdpi.com/forum/medium-format-systems-digital-backs/43117-schneider-35mm-iq180.html.  Speaking to people who have used the 35XL with a 180 I quickly learned that even with the advances made in C1 it still nevertheless unusable due to severe uncorrectable color cast.  Through that thread I was able to receive RAW unprocessed LCCs and image files which I processed in C1 7.2 and found for myself the lenses is just unsuitable (at least for me) when used with an IQ180.

I agree with Ken that you will be okay with what you currently have using an IQ160.  What I've ended up doing is ordering a HR40 t/s which keeps me very close to the original focal length while also allowing me the chance to possibly upgrade the back in the future.

My suggestion is to look at what's been written about the 35XL and IQ backs and maybe set up a demonstration for yourself.

Let me know if I can help you anymore.

Don

 

[JoeKitchen]

If I was thinking a purchasing a system from scratch, would you recommend to stay away from the Schneider 35mm? 

How about the new Schneider 28mm?

[Don Libby]

If I was thinking a purchasing a system from scratch, would you recommend to stay away from the Schneider 35mm? 

How about the new Schneider 28mm?

Joe - Speaking from personal experience using the 35XL with a P45+, P65 and now a IQ160.  The lens is great.  If I weren't thinking of upgrading the back (no time soon) or wanted t/s I'd keep it.  This is a lens I've been very happy using for well over 4 years along with my WRS.

My answer is depending on which back you plan on using.  If you have anything from an IQ160 downwards then the lens is great to use.  If on the other hand you have a 180 then no. 

Here's a caveat -  the 35XL and 180 failed to play well in the beginning.  C1 6 added technical wide angle to the LCC profile and it began to work slightly better.  C1 7.2 makes it work slight better yet (but by no means perfect).  Who know what other advances will be made.

Don

[julienlanoo]

Thanks Don, for the great feedback,
I'll look into it, yeah the 35 is a great lens..

Why i would like to stay with it
- it's robust.. , in comparison with Rodenstock similars, as with my work (day to day), the camera isn't always in the best situations, and i can't put the camera back into my bag every time i move..  So the retroreflection ones of Rodenstock , are GREAT lenses only as they are only fixed with 3 small screws to the copal i do not dear to us them, afraid they eventually will fall of..

- I like 35 mm on mid format, and find 28 to wide...


Ok if the P65 and IQ160 are working fine, lets go for one of those then

[FredBGG]

Ok if the P65 and IQ160 are working fine, lets go for one of those then

They are both full frame and the actual resolution difference compared to an IQ180 is really hard to see.

I also think that it is more than just pixel size. 5.2 microns instead of 6 microns is not that much difference.

[Don Libby]

Julien, I tend to agree with you regarding the 28 too wide compared to the 35.  Actually sometimes I've found the 35 a bit too wide; that's why I decided to switch to the 40.  Not too much of a difference yet its there all the same.

Speaking of difference - my hands down favorite back to date (after using a P30+ for approx 18 months, P45+ for approx 24 months, P65 for approx 12 months and now the IQ160 since last April) is the IQ back.  The last three backs mentioned have been used primarily on a Cambo WRS with the last two on a DF. 

What makes the IQ shine for me is the larger back, focus mask, and level to mention just three.  Okay lets not forget the ability to double tap the screen for instant 100% checking.  My feelings is that Phase had people who use technical cameras in mind when they designed them. 

There are good deals out there for IQ160's.  My back was used and I got a heck of a deal.  Remember digital backs have almost no moving parts to wear out and much like the energizer bunny they just keep running/working.

Don

[lance_schad]

Joe,
Stay away from the Schneider 28 and 35 if you plan to use an 80MP sensor.

Lance

[Don Libby]

Joe,
Stay away from the Schneider 28 and 35 if you plan to use an 80MP sensor.

Lance

No personal experience with the 28 but I agree with the 35mm.  This is an example where a good dealer comes in hand.

[JoeKitchen]

Joe,
Stay away from the Schneider 28 and 35 if you plan to use an 80MP sensor.

Lance

I would agree here; 60 MP is where I will be headed.  The concern I have is what will happen in the next 10 years?  Will MF companies come to the senses and stop the MP race?  If I buy schneider lenses now and than need to upgrade the back in 10 years, will there be backs made with a pixel pitch that works with the lenses?  Or will there only be 100+ MP backs available (for full 645 format)?

[julienlanoo]

I agree, i don't realy need 80 mpix, ( how large can you print, even with a stich ) at 300dpi..?
60 is enough,

What i would like in future is "large" sensors.. like a 6x9 sensor, even a 4x5inch in the far future, back to the roots.. mhm the 4x5 would change a bit the size of the camera, but hey what do we love ? ..

A 6x9 would be great, i like the proportions, and if that size sensor has 80 mpix that's OK, even when it only has 50 mpix, i would be more than happy with that size ..