Pages: 1 [2]   Go Down

Author Topic: Technical camera or Phase one body  (Read 9641 times)

alifatemi

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 278
    • ali fatemi photography
Re: Technical camera or Phase one body
« Reply #20 on: December 06, 2013, 02:23:57 am »

Very true indeed Juliuno!
Logged

Mr. Rib

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 865
Re: Technical camera or Phase one body
« Reply #21 on: December 06, 2013, 10:53:34 am »

What you just wrote is what I wanted to suggest- after all, getting a 645DF camera and a lens or two to cover the longer focal lengths is not such a big cost if you look on the big picture. It's worth roughly one of these Rodie HR wides in Alpa mount... Settle for both and work without any concerns about compromises in the equipment you made along the way.
Logged

alifatemi

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 278
    • ali fatemi photography
Re: Technical camera or Phase one body
« Reply #22 on: December 22, 2013, 04:41:54 pm »

Considering to get Alpa TC with iQ280 for landscape, I wonder what is the best lens choice equivalent to my 21mm Zeiss for D800E? I am thinking of Rodenstock HR Digaron-W 32 mm f/4. Any comment please?
Logged

Ken R

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 849
Re: Technical camera or Phase one body
« Reply #23 on: December 22, 2013, 05:11:03 pm »

Considering to get Alpa TC with iQ280 for landscape, I wonder what is the best lens choice equivalent to my 21mm Zeiss for D800E? I am thinking of Rodenstock HR Digaron-W 32 mm f/4. Any comment please?

Stunning lens from what I have seen. But, it is pretty large and heavy and most of the weight and size is in the front so care must be taken while handling it and traveling with it. It should work great with an IQ180/280. With that back the Rodenstock lenses are a must. I have the 40mm HR-W and works amazingly well with my IQ160. It allows a lot of movement. A 2 image stitch can have the same angle of view of a 28mm lens approx. The 23mm HR and the 28mm HR do not allow much movements at all because they have a much smaller image circle than the 32mm and the 40mm.
Logged

Paul2660

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4066
    • Photos of Arkansas
Re: Technical camera or Phase one body
« Reply #24 on: December 22, 2013, 05:50:29 pm »

^^ to Ken's comments. 

From my understanding, a 35mm lens on a medium format would equate to around a 24mm on your D800, so to hit it dead on, you would need the 32mm Rod.  That lens is heavy and pretty delicate it seems.  I have only shot it once, excellent around lens.  For my work it could probably replace all my wides as a 2 part shift would come to about the same field of view a the 28mm Rod and a bit more.   The 32 will easily shift to 15mm without hitting the artificial vignette that Rodenstock seems to feel has to be put inside the lens.  You could probably take it to around 20mm if not for the vignette issue. 

Only real issue on the 32mm is:  Cost, CF, filters

Cost, it cost around 7.5 to 8K for the lens, and then you will add an add between 900 and 1200 for a cambo, Alpa or Acra mount
CF, Rodenstock makes a physical CF for the lens, takes you from 86mm to 105mm.  It can probably take on slim filter in front of the CF before you start to see vignetting.  Not sure how well the Lee system would work on this lens. CF cost 960.00 or so.
      Most people I know who have this lens also have the CF.  You would have to try it both ways and see.  One aspect of the 40mm Rod, (it needs no physical Cf)  which is "friggin" awesome. 
Filters,  you can't really stack 105mm  on it, and I don't know of anyone who makes a "slim" 105mm CL-PL.  or ND for that matter.  Lee makes a 105 adapter that would allow you put a wide angle hood around the CF. 
Flare.  It seems that all the retrofocus lenses from Rodenstock are prone to flare.  The 40mm can get a very mean center flare that will ruin a shot.  I use a hood on mine all the time.  I have been told the 32mm needs this also.  The 28mm is a bit more forgiving as I rarely find
          I need a hood for it unless I am shooting a very direct angle to the sun. 

One other note, the Schneider 35mm would get you very close (24mm) and this is an excellent lens, but you are looking at the 280 and that is not a very good combination.

Paul Caldwell
Logged
Paul Caldwell
Little Rock, Arkansas U.S.
www.photosofarkansas.com

gerald.d

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 438
Re: Technical camera or Phase one body
« Reply #25 on: December 23, 2013, 07:46:29 am »

Considering to get Alpa TC with iQ280 for landscape, I wonder what is the best lens choice equivalent to my 21mm Zeiss for D800E? I am thinking of Rodenstock HR Digaron-W 32 mm f/4. Any comment please?

Equivalent to a 21mm on a D800? It is the only choice.

One word of warning - with the TC, you'll regret not being able to shift this lens. I'd strongly recommend you consider the STC.

Kind regards,


Gerald.

BTW - If your decision is to go for ALPA, then another recommendation I'd make would be to purchase the FPS SB17 mount version of the lens, along with the intermediate 17mm adapter . That will enable you to use the lens with the (S)TC. In time, if (probably when!) you decide you want to get the FPS, you won't need to get the mount on the lens changed.
« Last Edit: December 23, 2013, 07:54:03 am by gerald.d »
Logged
Pages: 1 [2]   Go Up