still life guys: praise your view camera

linhof 679 cs (newer)

3 (6.1%)

linhof 679 (older)

1 (2%)

sinar p3

10 (20.4%)

sinar p2

14 (28.6%)

arca swiss monolith

4 (8.2%)

rollei x-act

2 (4.1%)

plaubel 66

0 (0%)

silvestri ?!

2 (4.1%)

other

7 (14.3%)

cambo ultima

6 (12.2%)

Total Members Voted: 47

[ctz]

Probably this is not the perfect time for investments in new equipment but maybe I can give my old trusty Sinar P2 a break and play with a newer toy.
The geared movements are still fine, tough a little not as new, to say the least.
What bother me more is the fact that the tilt/swing axis, once cleverly placed at 1/3 on 4X5 format are now outside of smaller (P45+) sensor format, loosing the yaw free design in the process.
I'm not that keen in Sinar P3 (I've understood that the gears are just as good as of P2's, fine for film days, but you might expect something finer these days).
I guess I can borrow an Arca to see for myself, but my favorite would be Linhof 679 which unfortunately I can't test drive. The integrated tripod head is cool, keeping the camera lighter, tough 90% of the time I should not mind, I use a heavy FOBA column stand. but probably I can live as well with an Arca Cube head, tough at a bit larger expense.
The yaw free design looks the same to me (correct me if I'm wrong) for both Linhof and Arca (central axis of the lens).

So, any opinions?
Please chip in.

mysite: http://tinyurl.com/o7tan6

[ThierryH]

Some remarks, "ctz",

1. about the Sinar p2

- even the Sinar p2 is a well capable tool for digital imaging, provided that it is adjusted correctly: there are hundreds of studio photographers using it with their digital backs.
- although the tilt & swing axis are not inside the frame, it is still possible and easy to get your Scheimpflug correctly and precisely set, by using the live video.
- in this respect, it is wise to convert, for very little money, your p2 into a p3: all what has to be done is the exchange of the lens and film frames together with the bellows: this provides you a tool almost perfect for your digital back, again provided that your movements/gears are well adjusted.

2. Yaw-Free

There has always been many misinterpretations of what means "yaw-free". Many false statements have been made here, since this design has been introduced by Sinar with the Sinar p.

"Yaw-free" means that the VERTICAL Swing axis remains in the tilted plane when you are using your HORIZONTAL tilt axis to adjust your sharpness plane, nothing more but nothing less. It is a mechanical construction property.
In this respect, the Sinar p/p2/p3 remains a "yaw-free" camera, with the tilt/swing axis being inside the capture frame or not.

3. Sinar p3

The gears on the Sinar p3 are adjusted differently than on the Sinar p2, allowing a more precise adjustment of either tilt/swing movements or focusing. But it remains a typical studio camera, not especially built for location work outside.

4. Sinar arTec

You have forgotten to mention this view camera in your poll listing. IMO this camera is worth to have a look at it and to test it.

Best regards,
Thierry

Probably this is not the perfect time for investments in new equipment but maybe I can give my old trusty Sinar P2 a break and play with a newer toy.
The geared movements are still fine, tough a little not as new, to say the least.
What bother me more is the fact that the tilt/swing axis, once cleverly placed at 1/3 on 4X5 format are now outside of smaller (P45+) sensor format, loosing the yaw free design in the process.
I'm not that keen in Sinar P3 (I've understood that the gears are just as good as of P2's, fine for film days, but you might expect something finer these days).
I guess I can borrow an Arca to see for myself, but my favorite would be Linhof 679 which unfortunately I can't test drive. The integrated tripod head is cool, keeping the camera lighter, tough 90% of the time I should not mind, I use a heavy FOBA column stand. but probably I can live as well with an Arca Cube head, tough at a bit larger expense.
The yaw free design looks the same to me (correct me if I'm wrong) for both Linhof and Arca (central axis of the lens).

So, any opinions?
Please chip in.

[yaya]

Tough choice since each camera has its strengths and weaknesses: In no particular order I would look at the Linhof M679cs, Cambo Ultima 23D, Arca-Swiss Monolith and Sinar P3 and explore the various options e.g. adapter plates, sliding backs, extension rails, compendium bellows, release cables with recessed lens boards and so on. I'd also look at service, support and availability of accessories.

They're all very good cameras, none is perfect though:-)

Good luck!

[Dick Roadnight]

Tough choice since each camera has its strengths and weaknesses: In no particular order I would look at the Linhof M679cs, Cambo Ultima 23D, Arca-Swiss Monolith and Sinar P3 and explore the various options e.g. adapter plates, sliding backs, extension rails, compendium bellows, release cables with recessed lens boards and so on. I'd also look at service, support and availability of accessories.

They're all very good cameras, none is perfect though:-)

Good luck!

One of the neatest solutions is to have a P3 and an F3, so you have compatible spare standards for lens shades and multi-bellows extension, and a lightweight camera for location work that takes the same lensboards.

I have two tapered P2 to P3 bellows, so I can use my P or P2 to extent the P3 for macro or long lenses.

[ctz]

thierry: thanks for input. much appreciated, especially coming from a man who knows the sinar system inside and out.

i cannot regard artec as an appropriate camera for product shots or still life.
it is indeed a perfect tool for architecture and all rainer's and sinar's efforts are showing, indeed, beautiful.
probably this kind of approach will be suited in developing future backs dedicated to this type of studio work. the war is going to be lost to nikon/canons on the fashion/portrait front, eventually, but still it will be a lot easier to defend the product shots view camera front. adding some tilt-shifts lenses to a dslr is not really an alternative to having a proper view camera. and a still-life shooter care less about high iso and fast fps, but still needs a lot better live preview and lens cast corrections.

from what i recall, converting p2 to p3, plus adding a proper head, like an arca cube is not a lot cheaper than having a linhof 679cs in the first place.
i'll be grateful if you can elaborate more on some advantages of p3 vs 679. also it is not clear to me if by converting p2 to p3 you will have the tilt/shift axis inside the sensor area. not having is, imho, a big minus.


yair, thanks
as you said, "various options e.g. adapter plates, sliding backs, extension rails, compendium bellows," is what i'm looking for to compare. any further comments from owners/users appreciated.

dick, i hear you.
i sometimes use too parts from a sinar f1 to extend the p2 for some jobs. if i decide to get a p3 i'll probably take those old bits in consideration.

i'm not at all interested in decreasing weight as i rarely leave the studio.
i'm more interested in better precision for gears and swing/tilt axis inside the sensor area.

[yaya]

yair, thanks
as you said, "various options e.g. adapter plates, sliding backs, extension rails, compendium bellows," is what i'm looking for to compare. any further comments from owners/users appreciated.

The best sliding back if you ask me is the Cambo one, especially for stitching as it is geared (you can get it for your P2 as well BTW)

I've been working with most of these manufacturers over the years and they all have some clever people who can come up with neat solutions and are happy to listen to specific requests etc.

As they are all European if you're not in Europe you should look for the best service and support where you are with the fastest turnaround in case you have to send it in for service or repair.

[Dick Roadnight]

The best sliding back if you ask me is the Cambo one, especially for stitching as it is geared (you can get it for your P2 as well BTW)

I've been working with most of these manufacturers over the years and they all have some clever people who can come up with neat solutions and are happy to listen to specific requests etc.

As they are all European if you're not in Europe you should look for the best service and support where you are with the fastest turnaround in case you have to send it in for service or repair.

I have a Silvestri stitching/sliding back for my P3/H3D11, and it is not fit for purpose because:

You need a screwdriver to secure the digiback

The Ground glass focus is not aligned with the CCD - so you cannot focus.

There is no option to connect the Hasselblad  battery to the sliding back, so you have to work tethered or buy a firewire battery.

The nominal format is only 5 * 7 cm, so it seems that it will not accommodate two position of the H3D11-60 sensor without clipping.

A format of about 55 mm * 110 mm is required, even for stitch 2 images end to end or side to side, but the nominal format of the P3 is only 6 * 9, so I might need a 54 back as well.

What are the options?

[jimgolden]

theirry - re: p2 - can you explain what you mean by "well adjusted" movements/gears? I'm a new-to-me p2 owner and I wish the gearing were a bit tighter for 645 applications...

[ctz]

A format of about 55 mm * 110 mm is required, even for stitch 2 images end to end or side to side, but the nominal format of the P3 is only 6 * 9, so I might need a 54 back as well.

What are the options?
[/quote]


On Sinar P2 I use Phase One's Flexadapter. Looks like good enough for me, I've purchased it almost free, with my first H25, five years ago. I guess I'll keep it, even if I'll go for a newer view camera. The groundglass is something like 7.5X7.5cm and you can stitch two 37X49mm vertical frames. I use to stitch sometimes, in the H25/22mpixels days, but not too much these days when imo 39 megapixels is a lot right off the bat.

The Arca adapter looks nice, with a kind of rotating back. (If you need to alter the sensor angle transversally you can do it fast, not needing to touch the tripod head and set all the other adjustments over and over)

HTH

[Dick Roadnight]

I use to stitch sometimes, in the H25/22mpixels days, but not too much these days when imo 39 megapixels is a lot right off the bat.
HTH

60 Mpx is quite a lot right off the bat, and will work well with a 24" Epson printer, as you can print 24 * 18" @ 360 original camera pixels per print inch, having to crop off only about 300 pixels, but if you want big prints @ 350 ppi, 24 * 34, 48 or whatever size should look impressive.

[ctz]

60 Mpx is quite a lot right off the bat, and will work well with a 24" Epson printer, as you can print 24 * 18" @ 360 original camera pixels per print inch, having to crop off only about 300 pixels, but if you want big prints @ 350 ppi, 24 * 34, 48 or whatever size should look impressive.

I have to agree, even I'm not doing that much this kind of indoor prints. For outdoor, tough, 39 megapixels are already plenty.

[yaya]

I have a Silvestri stitching/sliding back for my P3/H3D11, and it is not fit for purpose because:

You need a screwdriver to secure the digiback

Can you explain? Are you referring to the latch lock being on the inside of the adapter plate?

The Ground glass focus is not aligned with the CCD - so you cannot focus.

Best is to talk to Vincenzo at the factory, he may ask you to send your back and plate so they can adjust everything to perfectly match. If you bought it through Paula she might be able to help.

There is no option to connect the Hasselblad  battery to the sliding back, so you have to work tethered or buy a firewire battery.

None of the sliding backs AFAIK offer this. Hasselblad talked about it last year but I don't know if it came to fruition. Other backs use on-board batteries and I believe they are more popular for that reason so there's no incentive for the adapter manufacturers to develop such thing.

The nominal format is only 5 * 7 cm, so it seems that it will not accommodate two position of the H3D11-60 sensor without clipping.

Good feedback, the 5cm is more of an issue than the 7cm as you need some overlap. Bare in mind that most of these adapters were designed for the 24X36 chips (and some lenses offer limited image circle for the same reason)

A format of about 55 mm * 110 mm is required, even for stitch 2 images end to end or side to side, but the nominal format of the P3 is only 6 * 9, so I might need a 54 back as well.

Most stitching software require 20% or more overlap for best results, depending on image content, alignment of the frames etc. This is also how the stitching backs are designed. 9cm is good enough for two 54mm horizontal frames IMO

What are the options?

I'd start with a chat to Silvestri but you could also look at some other adapters

[ThierryH]

ctz,

- even though the arTec was designed mainly for architecture/landscape/location photography, it has IMO also its place and interest in studios. However, its longest accepted lens is the 135mm.

- this being said, and since your main work is studio stills and products, I would only consider the "live video" option, certainly not a sliding back with ground glass to make the precise settings needed for those kind of shots (although the sliding adapter can be used together with live video).

- I can't comment on the price comparison with the Linhof, but a p2-p3 conversion costs roughly a 1/3 of a new p3.

Coming to the p3 advantages and features:

- 100% yaw-free camera, as the p2, EVEN for combined tilt and swing (since we were speaking about "yaw-free")
- micrometric geared driven knobs allowing for precise adjustments of either focus, tilt & swing movement or H & V shifts with self-locking drives (no locking of the knobs needed)
- the p3 can be used in different configuration, starting with the Sinar m controlling automatically the CAB lenses via eXposure software (integrated electrical couplings ---> no cables)
- absolute vibration-free exposure with CAB and CMV lenses, due to their integrated between-the-lens electronically controlled shutter (especially important when using multishot like 4- or 16-shot modes)
- can be either used with a sliding adapter or with the back on the Sinar m
- fully integrated in the Sinar modular system (accessories of older Sinar cameras like the p/p2, etc ... can be used with the p3

etc ... ---> a complete and exhaustive description of the Sinar p3 can be found here:

http://www.sinarcameras.com/site/index__ga...72-50-1893.html

But what makes the p3 unique, IMO, is what you are asking: yes, the tilt and swing axis ARE inside the sensor area, respectively IN the sensor plane, in an assymetrical way like on the p2.
And the reason why I said that I would use Live Video rather than a sliding adapter is because those tilt and swing axis are very nicely displayed in the live image, allowing the Scheimpflug settings the very same way as it was done on a p2 on the ground-glass (2-point assymetric tilt and swing): nothing can "beat" the easiness, convenience and accuracy of this method when it comes to set the sharpness plane and the focus and eventually the DoF.

Best regards,
Thierry

PS and BTW: the tilt & swing axis could as well be in the sensor plane with the Sinar p2, by using to so-called "Carrier Frame Wide" (not longer available, but could possibly be found second-hand somewhere).

thierry: thanks for input. much appreciated, especially coming from a man who knows the sinar system inside and out.

i cannot regard artec as an appropriate camera for product shots or still life.
it is indeed a perfect tool for architecture and all rainer's and sinar's efforts are showing, indeed, beautiful.
probably this kind of approach will be suited in developing future backs dedicated to this type of studio work. the war is going to be lost to nikon/canons on the fashion/portrait front, eventually, but still it will be a lot easier to defend the product shots view camera front. adding some tilt-shifts lenses to a dslr is not really an alternative to having a proper view camera. and a still-life shooter care less about high iso and fast fps, but still needs a lot better live preview and lens cast corrections.

from what i recall, converting p2 to p3, plus adding a proper head, like an arca cube is not a lot cheaper than having a linhof 679cs in the first place.
i'll be grateful if you can elaborate more on some advantages of p3 vs 679. also it is not clear to me if by converting p2 to p3 you will have the tilt/shift axis inside the sensor area. not having is, imho, a big minus.

[Dick Roadnight]

Thanks for your reply

I have a Silvestri stitching/sliding back for my P3/H3D11, and it is not fit for purpose because:

You need a screwdriver to secure the digiback

Can you explain? Are you referring to the latch lock being on the inside of the adapter plate? There is a D-shaped knurled thing you rotate with you thumb to lock.. which either does not lock, or jams on, but it rotates on a screw, and by loosinging and tightening the screw you can make it work

The Ground glass focus is not aligned with the CCD - so you cannot focus.

If you bought it through Paula she might be able to help. I am discussing it with Paula, and she has asked me to supply some test shots before she contacts the factory.

There is no option to connect the Hasselblad  battery to the sliding back, so you have to work tethered or buy a firewire battery.

None of the sliding backs AFAIK offer this. Hasselblad talked about it last year but I don't know if it came to fruition. Other backs use on-board batteries and I believe they are more popular for that reason so there's no incentive for the adapter manufacturers to develop such thing. The Linhof back has a connection for a battery, but I do not think it is a stitching back

The nominal format is only 5 * 7 cm, so it seems that it will not accommodate two position of the H3D11-60 sensor without clipping.

Good feedback, the 5cm is more of an issue than the 7cm as you need some overlap. Bare in mind that most of these adapters were designed for the 24X36 chips (and some lenses offer limited image circle for the same reason)

A format of about 55 mm * 110 mm is required, even for stitch 2 images end to end or side to side, but the nominal format of the P3 is only 6 * 9, so I might need a 54 back as well.

Most stitching software require 20% or more overlap for best results, depending on image content, alignment of the frames etc. This is also how the stitching backs are designed. 9cm is good enough for two 54mm horizontal frames IMO Yes, Most/many of the Schneider apo-digitars 47 mm+ have an image circle of about 100 mm, and you can always combine three images if you need to

For Giga-res you cannot get enough pixels into a digital lens's image circle, so you need to use a large format lens, like the Schneider fine art gold 1100 mm, which is a 50 degree lens!

I'd start with a chat to Silvestri but you could also look at some other adapters

[yaya]

For Giga-res you cannot get enough pixels into a digital lens's image circle, so you need to use a large format lens, like the Schneider fine art gold 1100 mm, which is a 50 degree lens!

230MP was almost unheard of at the time...

[photo570]

I use a p2 and looked at changing to a p3, but beware if you have a lot of lenses, as the difference in price is huge, and conversion is not cheap, and must be done by Sinar, they will not sell you a mount to do it yourself. For 5 lenses it was going to cost over $15k Aussie to convert them or approx. $25k to replace them. Not cheap. The "Wide carrier frame" is the way to go if you can find one.

Which brings me to a point which has been made a few times 'on the boards' is who do these camera companies talk to when designing new products, or choosing to discontinue old ones?

I know Sinar is better than others, and the Artec is a shining example of doing it right. But they have made several backward steps with regard to Studio photography, especially with regards to computer control of the camera. Any one remember the expolux shutter, or the Sinarcam's? The current product is the mechanical one which is a piece of junk compared to the OLD electronic one. What is going on? I know the first response will be low sales, but come on, you've spent the money on R&D, got the tooling, just don't throw it away, and drag it out every few years when stock runs out.

Sorry, had to get that off my chest.

Cheers,
Jason.

[GregShapps]

The best sliding back if you ask me is the Cambo one, especially for stitching as it is geared (you can get it for your P2 as well BTW)

The Cambo back is terrible!   The Flex Adapter blows it away.

[ctz]

The Cambo back is terrible!   The Flex Adapter blows it away.

Hello Greg

It's not the first time when I look at your site, I've noticed it some years ago. Cool, refreshing visual style.
Don't know for sure why I ask this, but I'm just curious what camera do you use.

[ctz]

I use a p2 and looked at changing to a p3, but beware if you have a lot of lenses, as the difference in price is huge, and conversion is not cheap, and must be done by Sinar, they will not sell you a mount to do it yourself. For 5 lenses it was going to cost over $15k Aussie to convert them or approx. $25k to replace them. Not cheap. The "Wide carrier frame" is the way to go if you can find one.


Cheers,
Jason.

Jason
Thanks for the tip.
But I would not consider CAB or CMV shutters, instead I'll stick with Copals. This amonut of money are indeed huge for 5 plain lensboards. Did I understood something wrong?

[ctz]

- I can't comment on the price comparison with the Linhof, but a p2-p3 conversion costs roughly a 1/3 of a new p3.

Best regards,
Thierry

PS and BTW: the tilt & swing axis could as well be in the sensor plane with the Sinar p2, by using to so-called "Carrier Frame Wide" (not longer available, but could possibly be found second-hand somewhere).
[/quote]


Hello again, Thierry

Converting P2 to P3 sounds pretty interesting. I've found this older post: http://luminous-landscape.com/forum/index....28mm+lens+on+p2, where you wrote this:
"this conversion kit consists of the 2 4x5" frames (lens and image) which are exchanged with 2 100mm p3 frames and with in addition a 100mm p3 bellows"
Is this all? You simply change the frames and you can use the 2-points sharpness plane adjustment? The old 4X5 2-points axes are placed at a distance bigger than sensors size. As long as you use the same old standard/bearer I can't see how you might have 2-points sharpness plane adjustment.

Regards,
Ciprian