Luminous Landscape Forum
Equipment & Techniques => Cameras, Lenses and Shooting gear => Topic started by: alatreille on December 12, 2018, 06:05:34 pm
-
Hi,
Has anyone worked out what the image circles of the new crop of TSE lenses is (50, 90 and 135)
Cheers
andrew
-
I wondered the same - for some reason silly Canon has decided to keep them secret! I used to own the Mk2 24mm and it's image circle was 67.2 mm, and a fabulous lens.
-
Hi,
Designed for a 36x24mm full frame, with shift capability of +/= 12 mm, results in an image circle of 64.6 mm diameter beyond which image quality falls outside the design specifications.
Cheers,
Bart
-
Thanks, Bart. Sometimes having Google available makes us forget common math.
-
Thanks Bart.
Yes, that's the calculated image circle, but we know from practice that the image circles of the 17 and the 24 are greater.
So I'm wondering what the 50/90 and 135 really are....
I'm interested in using them on larger sensors and want to work out how much movement there is (initially regardless of quality loss).
It's hard information to find or work out!
A
Hi,
Designed for a 36x24mm full frame, with shift capability of +/= 12 mm, results in an image circle of 64.6 mm diameter beyond which image quality falls outside the design specifications.
Cheers,
Bart
-
Hi,
Designed for a 36x24mm full frame, with shift capability of +/= 12 mm, results in an image circle of 64.6 mm diameter beyond which image quality falls outside the design specifications.
Cheers,
Bart
Not necessarily, unless there is additional information of which you know but have not shared. The shift limit could be due to mechanical, rather than optical, limitations.
-
The TSE lenses are expensive. I'd suggest buying a bellows that allows for movements (or try making one) and buying shorter focal lenses designed for large format. When I need a big image circle & movements I simply shoot 4x5 (or 5x7 :) ).
Kent in SD
-
I for got to add that there are backs made with a built in Nikon rear lens mount that allow you to mount a Nikon camera to a 4x5 camera (and its lenses.) Downside is lenses shorter than 65mm are scarce and expensive, and you'd need a bag bellows.
Kent in SD
-
I for got to add that there are backs made with a built in Nikon rear lens mount that allow you to mount a Nikon camera to a 4x5 camera (and its lenses.) Downside is lenses shorter than 65mm are scarce and expensive, and you'd need a bag bellows.
Kent in SD
I went down that road years ago. It doesn't work.
The Nikon DSLR film plane to lens mount is shorter than Canon's, but on a Canon you are 75mm for a start with the adaptor before you add the camera and bellows and the sensor is minuscule compared to 4x5 film giving a massive crop factor. I doubt that you could use even a 65mm lens with even no bellows or shift on infinity. More likely 125mm. Compare that to a 24 and even 17MM TSE.
Everything in photography is expensive but the most expensive thing I have found is buying the same thing multiple times.
-
I went down that road years ago. It doesn't work.
This is one reason I've kept shooting 4x5. I like small town/rural architecture and nothing seems to beat a view camera for making the kinds of photos I want. :)
Kent in SD
-
Hello Andrew,
FWIW I have been using Canon's 17mm and 24mm (ver II) on my Fuji GFX50s (via a Techart smart adapter) and have been quite pleased with the corners and edges, especially when stopping down slightly. I think the circles on those lenses are quite large! The 45mm can be a bit wonky in extreme shifts but is still usable. (The 50mm is arriving today so I have no experience with it yet.) I've not felt the need to try any of the Canon TS-E lenses with my IQ160 (full-frame 645) back but wouldn't be confident of their coverage on such a large sensor. (The newer IQs with smaller sensors would probably see coverage like the GFX50s.)
Getting here very late but perhaps this will still be useful.
-
You'll find the 50mm version considerably better than the old 45mm, Ken, especially toward the limits of shift travel. The difference between the original 90mm and the new one isn't quite as pronounced, but still noticeable.
-
Two23 - I thought that signature line sounded familiar. ;D Do you sing? Or are you an opera fan? View camera photos of small town architecture - sounds like an excellent excuse for a road trip....
-
Hi,
Has anyone worked out what the image circles of the new crop of TSE lenses is (50, 90 and 135)
Cheers
andrew
Andrew, I’m not sure on the exact specifics, but can say that on the GFX the 50 is tack sharp at full diagonal shift at f11. It’s an incredible lens and possibly my favourite on that format.
-
Thanks for the thread. I'm an architectural photographer and have a similar setup to you - but I'm struggling to make the Fuji GFX50 work or me. I really want it to, but I must be missing a step somewhere. In advance, please forgive my lack of technical phrasing or perfectly worded terms. When I use a Canon 5DSR with a 24mmTS I like the lens length and setup and have been trying to recreate it somehow with the GFX. Here's what I've tried.
The Fuji GFX + Techart adapter + Canon 24mm TS lens.
However, putting a 35mm format lens on a GFX widens the lens by x0.67. So, in 35mm format terms, when using with the Fuji this makes the 24mmTS lens seems like a 17mm (mostly too wide for me). I also have a Canon 17mmTS and when I try to use that with the GFX +Techart adapter it makes it seem like a 14mm (WAY too wide for me). I need something around 24mm with shift. Any ideas?
here's something else I tried
The Fuji GFX + Kipon 645 Shift adapter + Pentax 645 35mm lens.
I also bought a Kipon Shift adapter for Pentax 645 lenses as I had some kicking around, but putting a 645 lens on a GFX increases the lens length by x1.27.
When I use the GFX + Kipon 645 Shift adapter + Pentax 35mm (645 lens) in 35mm format terms it would become around a 28mm lens. SO again I can't get the magic 24mm that I'm looking for. I know the Contax 645 lenses would give me a better quality result but it would still be too long a lens for me with their widest lens being a 35mm (645 lens) which is the same length as the widest Pentax 645 lens.
Any advice would be greatly appreciated.
-
Canon made a 35mm T/S lens for their FD bodies. I still use it on my Sony cameras with excellent results. I'm not sure how well it will do on the GFX50 sensor at the edges mind you, but if you can find one to test (before you buy, or return if it does not work for you) it may be worth investigating.
Mike
-
Thank Mike - that sounds like a great lens and one I didn't know about - I'll look into it.
Appreciate it
-
Is there a Mamiya/Phase One to Fuji Kipon T/S adapter? Mamiya makes a 28mm lens in leaf-shutter and non leaf-shutter versions. It's expensive at $5500 without the leaf shutter, $6000 with (the leaf-shutter version is listed as a Schneider-Kreuznach and the other is listed as a Phase One - not sure if they're optically different). Used versions show up for about half that, generally branded Mamiya. There's also a Hasselblad H system 28mm around the same price (which would, of course, require a Hasselblad to Fuji adapter). The Hasselblad lens is probably a Fujinon underneath it all. The Hasselblad lens is digital-only, covering a sensor slightly larger than the GFX sensor, but not 645 film - shift movements might be somewhat limited. The Mamiya/Schneider/Phase lens is listed as actually covering 645 film - it should have plenty of movements on a GFX.
The other alternative would be a technical camera or "baby" view camera with a digital back. I believe there are technical camera lenses that wide (they look vaguely like view camera lenses, although many of them have a focusing helicoid depending on the design of the camera, and they don't cover 4x5"), and (since the back has no flange distance at all), focusing and movements are easier than with a technical adapter on a Fuji. This is almost certainly even more expensive than a Mamiya lens (a used back new enough to have reasonable live view will be close to $10,000 from a dealer before you add a tech camera and a lens, although they're sometimes cheaper on the forum here).
-
Thanks so much Dan - I appreciate your advice.
I'll look into all of those options. Basically I think I've invested in the wrong gear. I'm trying to make the GFX into something it isn't.
I could get the Fuji GFX view camera adapter and put it on the back of my old Toyo 4x5 field camera but then I'd have to buy the wide digital lenses which are $5k or so.
I thought there would be a cheaper Frankenstein method of being able to shift by putting the GFX with a 35mm lens or with a 645 lens - but there just doesn't seem to be a configuration that would give me shift at around 24mm (in 35mm format terms). I have a full set of 35mm lenses and a full set of 645 lenses. I have adapters, but it just doesn't combine to make it work. Laowa make an adapter which connects an Eos lens with a GFX and magnifies the lens x1.4 to make it closer to the 35mm format nature of the lens (again a thousand apologies for my lack of technical verbiage) by putting it through more glass (which I'd rather not do) but it magnifies it a little too much so my 24mm Canon shift would become a 28mm and I'm back to square one.
Using the GFX with the Cambo Actus and the 24mm Cambo Actus lens is a possible solution but as I understand it doesn't have a lot of room for shift on the GFX. I would love to be wrong about that, as that's a possible route.
-
I am using the 17, the 24,the 45, the new 90 and the 135 on my Fuji GFX and truely love them. some vignetting is apparent at extreme tilt movements, but can be reduced by intelligent shifting. the 50 is on my list for my next lens, but I hardly use this focal length, so I am not sure yet...
I am shooting food, so the 90 and the 135 with the fuji are a true killer combination.
regarding the old vs. the new 90mm TSE: in my opinion they are worlds apart when used at shorter distances than 1m, where the old one was mediocre and the new one is brilliant. also being able to focus much closer ist fantastic. these two lenses replaced my Actus setup in 95% of my shootings.
it feels like 8x10 became hand holdable finally!
-
I don't know anything about the quality of the Laowa adapter, but (if it's optically up to the task), what about the 17mm Canon TS-E on the Laowa and the GFX?
Alternatively, if you're willing to take the GFX out of the picture, there are a couple of solutions... Nikon has a 24mm PC-E lens (that's about due for an update - Nikon guru Thom Hogan likes the 19mm PC-E much better), and there's probably no better body for a tilt/shift lens than a Z7 (the FTZ adapter is really solid). I mention the Z7 instead of the D850 because of the fantastic full-time live view on the Z7. Tilting and shifting is one case where a magnifiable electronic view is far superior to a DSLR.
The Z7/D850 sensor is enough newer than the larger GFX 50 sensor that it's just about the same image quality. I own a Z7, and I looked very closely at output from it and the GFX (50R, but same IQ as the 50S) before choosing the Nikon. It's a real pixel-peep to tell the difference, and the size and weight of the Z7 won the day. Of course the question here is the GFX 100! The very best 24x36mm sensors have caught up to an older "small medium format" sensor, but the 100 MP sensor will almost certainly reestablish a lead for MF.
Canon, of course, has a 24mm TS-E. The next body in the EOS-R series is probably the one you want if you're using a GFX. Canon has a lot of things worked out really well on the EOS-R line (especially the lenses and adapters), but neither the R nor the RP has a class leading sensor. In your situation, I might either wait for whatever they're releasing this year at the top of the EOS-R line or pick up an EOS-RP to get used to how Canon mirrorless does things (you might lose a few hundred dollars selling the RP, but you got a start with the lens and whatever similarities there are in the body)...
There are two other options - one is the Canon 24mm lens on a Nikon or Sony body (the Canon may well be sharper than the Nikon lens, and is the more versatile, with tilt and shift both working on any axis) using an adapter. These lenses would be adapted on any mirrorless body since they are DSLR lenses - but the first-party adapters (Canon DSLR lens to Canon mirrorless body or Nikon lens to Nikon body) are likely to be less problematical than a cross-brand adapter.
The final option is that Fuji is reputed to be working on a native GFX tilt/shift lens... No solid dates on that one.