Luminous Landscape Forum
Equipment & Techniques => Medium Format / Film / Digital Backs – and Large Sensor Photography => Topic started by: Mr. Rib on September 26, 2010, 10:14:21 pm
-
I've been planning to get an RM3D along with M line 2 for quite a time now, but opportunities keep popping out of nowhere and this time I find it hard to skip it.
I can get a mint set of Horseman 4x5 LX-C camera with many accessories, including the shades, double bellows, two screens, oculars, revolving adapter for my back etc etc.
I'm not a LF wit, I know that this camera is for advanced users and there's a learning curve- I'm not afraid of that. What I'm afraid of is running into trouble while using it with my digital back. The trouble which I can't foresee due to my lack of LF experience... 99% of my work will be P45+ based, I want to use it for tabletop/product and architecture/interiors. Are there any particular problems I'll be experiencing? Despite obvious problems like camera weight, fact that parts are hard to get etc etc. The problem is that I'm under pressure of time, there are only few days for me to make up my mind and I know it's too short to gather enough information to even be able to know what river I'm diving into.. your help is much appreciated.
-
You might have issues focusing wide lenses for architecture. I'm not familiar with the lx-c, but you might want to look at the toyo vx23d. Great camera for the price.
-
Thanks for your reply.
As I've heard, focusing wide angle lenses on LF seems to be a painful process.
One more question to add to my list- what can I expect from Super-Angulon XL lenses in use with P45+ back? In particular, 72mm.
-
There is of course a learning curve but is it is a pleasant challenge and very rewarding. I am using a Leaf Aptus 7 on a Cambo with 3 Schneider Apo Digitar lenses. Lots of cross movements cause some odd colour shifts which can be an issue to correct, especially when stitching. In reality, for most usage, the amount of movements used are very small and cause no trouble. A lot of the things I do with movements can be done in photoshop or with a TS lens on a DSLR but I get something extra in my life with the contemplative approach forced by the view camera.
-
Make sure you get a recessed board and a double-pleated wide angle bellows. Sinar bellows and lens boards will fit the Horseman.
Kumar
-
Hey Mr. Rib:
Aside from your need to shoot product, I would stay away from bellows cameras for architectural work. I used a Arca 6x9 F metric (beautiful camera for sure), but it was torture to get sharp, so much so that I hesitated to change lenses once I got one if focus. The RM3D gets you some tilt which you would need for product work, but I've never used one, and you may not get the close-up range that you need from it. Are there extensions available?
I used the 72XL on a P25 on a Cambo Wide DS system and it worked great, but not as sharp as the digitar 72. The XL is also a tank by comparison in weight matters to you at all.
Making an investment in a camera system should not be taken lightly or quickly. A bellows camera and film lenses will become harder and harder to unload if you decide to change later.
For architectural work I use the Alpa system now with a P45+ and love it. No tilt though.
How much product work will you be doing? That may be where the answer lies.
-
Thanks for your reply Jeffrey. I think it'll be 50/50 in terms of usage for architecture / product application. That's why I wanted to get an Arca Swiss M Line 2 and RM3D- one as a product/studio workhorse while latter for architecture. This way my lenses would be switchable.. but the Horseman LC-X comes in a fraction of the price I had to pay for M line 2 + RM3D. Although not perfect, it is tempting for economic reasons.
And about ALPA- I loved the idea of shooting with 12 XY, but lack of tilt (and limits if tilt adapter is used) kills the purpose, at least for me.
After my research, I know that 72XL is a bit soft and I think I wouldn't like that for architecture, so I'll skip. Can you give me feedback on how these lenses perform with a digital back? (P45+):
Makro-Symmar: HM 5.6/120 (this one should be good, shouldn't it?)
SUPER-SYMMAR 5.6/110 XL ASPHERIC (are all XL lenses soft on digital backs?)
Apo-Symmar 5.6/180
Apo-Symmar 6.8/360
Are any of these good for use with digital or do I simply HAVE TO stick to Rodenstock / Schneider digital lenses to get the sharpness and quality I'd expect from P45+?
And since it's my nearest assignment- what would be your lens suggestion for jewellery / watches work with LF camera? I always have RZ with tilt/shift adapter if I can't handle it with the LF, phew :D
One more question to add- is anyone familiar with Horseman revolving back adapter? Can I use it with Phase one back with any success (I"m thinking about the tolerances)?
-
(are all XL lenses soft on digital backs?)
Not the Schneider Apo-digitars
-
Hey Rib:
Any of the new digitars will certainly be sharper than the film lenses. I haven't used any of the lenses. I believe that 110Xl is an 8x10 lens and well regarded for that use. Others can better comment on good lenses for close-up or product work. In general I would try to get lenses made for digital capture, there is a difference, sharpness and color fringing top the list.
Good luck!
-
The LX-C is a great camera (I use an LS-45, it's little brother), but as others have stated, even with the bag bellows - you're pretty much limited to longer than 45mm lenses, even with recessed boards. That's great for 4x5, but is limiting on the wides for MFDB - and you'll lose even more mm room with a sliding back.
The more purpose built cameras Linhof m679, Arca M2/M3 will probably work better for archi applications. But for tabletop, you're golden. The ability to use Sinar accessories is nice with the Horseman's - since horseman original accessories can be a bit of a treasure hunt (but when you can find them, they offer great quality and great prices).
-
Again, thanks for your responses.
Liam: Thanks, that helps me much- I definitely need wide angle lenses and I haven't been aware of the fact that I can't go below 45mm - I thought that with recessed boards I can go all the way down to 24mm like Sinars. You mentioned that I can use Sinar accessories with Horseman cameras, does it mean that I can use Sinar electronic shutters/ sliding backs made for Sinar P cameras as well? Speaking of Sinar:
Dick, a question to you. You own a P3 right? Do you have any experience with P3 and very wide angle lenses (used with MFDB of course)? How hard is it to focus these wides on P3 and can I use a sliding back with P3 and super wide lenses (23mm / 24mm / 28mm)?
And one more question- is anyone familiar with Sinar P2/P3 conversion kit, is it worth to alter a P2 camera to make it more P3-like for digital application?
-
I own an Arca M-Line and a Toyo VX and a large number of lenses including the 72mm XL.
I've spent many years shooting film with these cameras and have been lately been using the Arca extensively with P65+ backs (rented) and digital lenses for architectural and travel work.
1) For critical work you cannot reliably focus with a ground-glass alone. This is true with all lenses but particularly wides. There is no special ground-glass that will solve this problem because the degree of exactitude required is too fine. To achieve 100% guaranteed focus you need to be tethered and focus by a process of trial and error. In my view this is what makes the Arca RM3D (or indeed the RL3D) very attractive but though I have spent quite a few hours playing around with them I have not shot with either. Any view camera for digital work needs to be very solid and precise and everything needs to be in perfect alignment otherwise you are wasting your time. Arca laser align their cameras and would imagine that a current Sinar or Linhof would be comparable.
2) Most modern highly corrected lenses will give a pleasing result but they will not be as sharp or as contrasty as the digital lenses and may suffer from (correctable) chromatic aberration. My 72mm XL works well if used at F11. The same applies to my 120mm Super Symmar HM. The main lens designer at Schneider indicated to me that the 72mm was one of the better film lenses to use for digital. I personally like its look which is more 'film-like' but you should test. Of course the image circle of film lenses enables you to stitch multiple frames and if you do that you will far exceed the resolution of a single frame with a digital lens.
3) A sliding back is a very good idea. The Linhof, Arca and Capture Group ones work well. I cannot speak for others.
4) Were I starting from scratch, for travel and architecture I would buy an RL3D (which allows larger movements than the RM3D). For studio work I would look closely at the Arca M-Line the Linhof 679 and the Sinar P3.
-
Jdev, thanks for the information regarding syper symmar and 72 XL. Could you possibly show me some of your photos shot with 72 XL / super symmar and a digital back? It would be a great help. I would be able to stitch to my hearts content with 72 XL and then downsize the final image to get superb quality shots, but stitching is not always possible.
Getting an M-line 2 along with RM3D/RL3D has one advantage- you can use the same lenses for these two cameras without the need of switching the lens boards on the lenses. Heck, you can use RM3D as a front standard of M-line 2 which sounds pretty cool too. I think I'll end up with two camera systems anyway...but the thing is that my 'architecture camera' will be using mostly wides, while my studio camera will be using lenses for macro / product photography mainly, so this advantage doesn't seem very practical in this case.
And about Sinar- is it a good idea to pick up a used P2 and then use the conversion P2/P3 kit? Would I be able to critically focus with wides on such a setup (initially I'll have one LF camera for both architecture and studio work) or should I be after a new, never used P3?
-
The P3 is a bit heavy for architecture, especially when looking at the other options. You're budget might dictate which direction you go, but I wouldn't do the P2 converted. If it was me, I would go with the M Line 2. it will do everything you want. Like you said, you can use the same lenses on the rm3d if you decide to buy that down the road.
Now Toyo needs to make a fixed plate camera
-
Dick, a question to you. You own a P3 right? Do you have any experience with P3 and very wide angle lenses (used with MFDB of course)?
No, but I have a 100 degree Apo-Digitar 47XL en route, which I intend to use on a P3 with a Sinar eShutter... I think this is the best WA to get.
I have a Super Angulon mounted on a P2 board, which will focus to infinity, but the lens is too large (diameter) to fit inside a P3 board.
How hard is it to focus these wides on P3
I would always use live view for critical focusing.
...and can I use a sliding back with P3 and super wide lenses (23mm / 24mm / 28mm)?
I think the official shortest lens for the P3 is 35mm, without a sliding back. There is a SK Grimes special for the Apo-Digitar 47XL... but I do not know if it allows for tilt or a sliding back. The wider lenses are retro-focus, and, I believe poor optical quality and very expensive.
And one more question- is anyone familiar with Sinar P2/P3 conversion kit, is it worth to alter a P2 camera to make it more P3-like for digital application?
I have converted one of my P2s to P3... and this can be better than a straight P2, as you get more movement, so you can stitch without a sliding back.
One of the nice things about the Sinar system is that there is a great deal of interchangeability, and you can have a P3 for studio work and a lighter F3 for back-packing and use the same set of lenses.
-
Liam: Thanks, that helps me much- I definitely need wide angle lenses and I haven't been aware of the fact that I can't go below 45mm - I thought that with recessed boards I can go all the way down to 24mm like Sinars.
That has not been my experience with the LS-45 (which shares the basic standard as the LX-C). The way the standards hit, I don't see how they could get a lens that close, even with recessed boards, but I've not personally tried to go below 55mm, and that was pretty tight.
You mentioned that I can use Sinar accessories with Horseman cameras, does it mean that I can use Sinar electronic shutters/ sliding backs made for Sinar P cameras as well?
Some of them should work. I don't think the shutter would be dependent on the camera since those are board mounted and they do share boards easily. The sliding backs, will depend on how much it needs to slide to the left. The problems come in if the back must go too far over - you end up having to flip the frame around backwards, which offsets is further back. The result is plenty of room for sliding/rotating backs, but pushes the standard 10-15mm back, requiring an additional offset in recessed boards.
-
I shoot architecture with the Rm3d and in studio with the M2. I find each beautifully suited for each application. Focusing on view cameras is definitely more tedious than the tech camera and older / used cameras that have greater slop in their mechanics are only going to compound your frustration, especially if you're trying to focus the extreme wides. Like others have mentioned, you're going to have great difficulty finding many view cameras that will even focus shorter than 45mm and forget about sliding backs.
One thing I love about the R is that it seems to always be in focus... pull it out of the case, swap lenses, fly to a job and set it up.... if I'm doing interiors, wherever I last left it focused at is generally pretty close to dead on for the next setup (this all due to the focus mechanism being on the camera body rather than the lens).... I do check my focus on the laptop but I have way more confidence in sharpness than I ever did before buying the R and am shooting to the P65+.
I use the R with lenses from 35mm - 70mm and the M2 with the 90mm - 180mm. I've ditched all my film lenses in favor of digital glass and saw huge improvements in sharpness and color casts.
I've reviews of both cameras on my blog, but if I can answer anything the other's haven't yet... feel free.
Cheers,
Chris
-
I have converted one of my P2s to P3... and this can be better than a straight P2, as you get more movement, so you can stitch without a sliding back.
Dick, what do you mean by that? I thought that conversion kit simply changes the size of the standards and the bellows, how can that affect the movements?
Another thing- what are the practical (crucial for actually working with the camera) differences between P3 and a P2 converted to P3? Hard to get info on that if you don't know both systems.
As I understand, the price of eShutter is still TBA ?
-
I use a Sinar X with a Hasselblad 132C, and stitching is extremely easy by just moving the rear standard on its geared track. If your back has Live View, focusing is also quite easy. You need to be tethered, however. I don't know if the Horseman's standards will interfere, but a 35mm lens with a recessed board and the Wide Angle Bellows 2 (with the double pleats) can be used on a Sinar. For the utmost flexibility, Sinar makes a sliding back that will fit directly on the rear standard. I tried to sell this here some time ago, but found no takers. I ultimately sold it to a Japanese photographer at a substantially higher price. This sliding back will also fit a P2/P3.
Kumar
-
Chris, thanks for your input. I've read your review few times before, I just went through it again. If I may, just a few questions:
How much do you miss tilt on back standard? I dont know if you used it when you had it with different cams, I have an idea of what I'm missing but no practical knowledge, so I guess it's better to ask..
How wide can you actually go with it, did you try for instance 35mm with your M (with a rotaslide / kapturegroup sliding back)?
Can an M line 2 handle architecture / interiors? I'm mainly concerned about the difficulties everybody mentions- focussing issue.
Maybe I can put getting RM3D on hold and go for M Line 2 for the time being and use it for all applications (both studio and arch.) until I earn some more (this way I can get myself more lenses for the beginning, yay!)?
One more question- what about macro capabilities of M line 2, can you use it with additional bellows / middle standard? I know there's an extension rail as an accessory, but I wonder if I could use it for some serious macro application (just in case I need it in product photos)
Again, thanks everyone for your help.
-
Rib,
I don't miss rear swing/tilt at all. The only times I ever used rear tilt was when I was trying to gain more rise than the camera was capable of... then employing the old "tilt the front and back both forward and tilt the camera up until level" trick. The M2 (with 30mm rise) has given me more movement than I've ever required on the P65+. I have used my Schneider and previously Rodenstock 35mm's on both the M2 and the R with both the Rotaslide and the KG slider.... no probs. While the M2 is not nearly as easy to focus as the R, it is quite a capable camera for Arch shooting and served me well for about 6 months until the r came along. I wouldn't trust shooting it untethered, where I would feel comfortable focusing the R with a digital distance finder. I happen to have an old 50cm rail and bellows that fit the M2 which allows me extreme closeups! I haven't tried to go longer with a middle standard.
I think the M2 plan is not a bad idea... you can always have your lenses retrofitted to the R when you buy it (as I did) and you can use the adapter board to go back and forth (as I do now). The modularity of this system is a no brainer given your requirements.
Cheers,
CB
-
Dick, what do you mean by that? I thought that conversion kit simply changes the size of the standards and the bellows, how can that affect the movements?
Another thing- what are the practical (crucial for actually working with the camera) differences between P3 and a P2 converted to P3? Hard to get info on that if you don't know both systems.
As I understand, the price of eShutter is still TBA ?
The P2 has more shift/rise fall/than the P3,,, so, if you convert a P2 to a P3 you have more movement... have you looked up the specs on the Sinar web site?
¿are you there Edwin?
The P3 has finer focusing.
-
The P3 has finer focusing.
The P3 has the same (gear) focusing as P2, a camera first introduced 20-30 years ago.
Recently I've tested the Arca Monolith and indeed (for my big surprise) I didn't find the focusing mechanism any better than my old Sinar P2.
I do hope that the M2 has a finer mechanism.
If so, I wouldn't miss the rear tilt/swing either, but sometimes I would probably miss the front rise/shift, especially for extreme closeup work.
-
Dick,
You wrote:
"I have converted one of my P2s to P3... and this can be better than a straight P2, as you get more movement, so you can stitch without a sliding back.
If you enter "P3" instead of "P2" in the second part of that sentence, it would make sense :) Otherwise not, that's why I questioned it, but now I understand that it was simply a typo. And of course I went throught all the data available on P3, P2 and a lot of other stuff we were talking about, one of my intents is to not make you waste your time on obvious things I can check up myself :) Well, maybe Arca case is a bit different because there's no official website available- thus no obviousness here. Thanks for the provided anwsers.
Chris,
Thanks for help again, I guess I'll stick to my M2 + RM3D plan, it seems the most sensible thing to do.
-
I went through this recently. I had a project to shoot for, and with, my father, an architect. The brief was to document all his existing buildings/public art/landscapes over a year or two, whenever I'm not working. We did this 20 years ago with a Sinar P. We looked at all the options, including digital with one of my Leaf backs. We settled on an Arca Swiss F Line Compact and Kodak Ektar film, and the Mamiya 7 system loaded with Ektar. In ariving at this conclusion, we tested many many cameras and camera types, and given an over all budget of about $20k, no real time constraints, and an overarching interest in traveling light, the F Line and Mamiya 7 with film was the way to go.
If we had another $15k - $20K we would have used the Arca R3 with digital lenses. These digital wides are so difficult to focus on the ground glass that anything not in a mount is cumbersome, requiring tethered operation. The M2, while really nice, was just too cumbersome for what we had in mind, given the difficulty in focusing and the required tethered operation and the attendant batteries, chargers, wires, etc.
Digital on my existing 4x5 cameras was less than satisfactory because of the small movements required for digital and the difficulty of squaring the standards. My worn out Sinar P is unworkable because the gearing is both worn and not precise enough. My Linhof Technika IV doesn't cut it because, aside from rise, none of the front movements are geard and it won't take lenses wider than 90.
So we settled on film, and the mamiya 7 system, which I already have. We needed a 4x5 camera that is light, rigid, and has plenty of movements for wide lenses. The Technikardan 45s works, is REALLY compact, but, even used, is more expensive than an Arca F Line, and the bellows are $700. The F Line is more rigid, less compact, about the same weight, and new accessories such as wide angle bellows are less than the Linhof.
Bottom line, for digital architecture, a plate camera and digital lenses is the way to go.