Adapting Canon EOS and/or Fuji X-T1 to Large Format? Complete n00b asking...

Hello there at the LFP-forums,

This is my first post, so I guess I'll need to write something about my background first (if too much or not interesting then jump down to /////HERE...) : end of the nineties I studied Media Arts with a focus on Analogue Photography and Digital Post-Production (basically I learned how to expose and develop films and how to scan it). I've used analogue photography quite early in the game (around 1998) and kept working with digital cameras ever since. My favorite (analogue) camera-system was the Contax 645, especially for the Zeiss-lenses. The system I'm working with now is Canon 5d MkII and Fuji x-Pro1 and Fuji X-T1. I love the size of the Fuji-system and the quality of the images, especially the colors of the Fuji sensor and the amazing dynamic range. The only downer I have with Fuji and Canon and digital (small format) photography in general is the resolution and the optical qualities of the format. I loved Medium Format for its shallow depth of field and I'm missing it ever since I sold my Contax system (sold it because I could not use it anymore for several years... my clients needed copious amounts of images quick and cheap, the process of developing and scanning film was just too slow and expensive for most (if not all) of my jobs for magazines and commercial clients).

I'm usually working as a portrait photographer with a focus on the architectural setting, meaning: I put people into architecture or spaces and photograph them there. I'm able to do studio-photography fairly well, as I have understanding of lights and their modifiers, but I'm not a very big fan of it because it's an 'artificial' setting, only built for photography. I like my images to have a more real feeling, so I prefer on location. In negative terms one could say that I'm a snapshot-photographer who's ideally delivering results that look like they were staged. Even though I'm working with small format cameras I'm putting a lot of effort into postproduction in regards to removing optical distortions, defining colours, etc... (I'm not a big fan of retouching though).

Anyways, I'm drifting off...

I love the versatility of the cameras that I am using right now but the one downer I have with Small Format (Canon EOS) and MILC (Fuji X) cameras is the aforementioned resolution as well as the optical qualities of the format. Recently my focus has slowly been shifting from photographing "people in architecture" to "architecture with people in it": the person in my images is becoming less important, while the surrounding architecture is getting more important. At the same time I'm also beginning to photograph documentations of art-shows (art reproductions) as well as purely architectural photos (without people).

I'm also more and more getting fed up with the speed of photographing with small cameras like the Fuji and Canon (burst mode 5 images per second snap snap snap...), the inaccuracy of the small format. These inaccuracies include: distorted lines that need to be post-processed even though I was double-checking for distortions when taking the image... the viewfinder is just too small! OR trying to manually focus precisely on a point in an image which is in my opinion nearly impossible with the Canon Viewfinder (it's better with the Fuji though, because of the excellent EVF and its Focus Assist).


//// HERE's my main concern:
I would like to find a system that allows me to take time for single shots and that allows me to work more precisely than small format to document art-exhibitions and take architectural photos. I'm also interested in achieving a higher resolution as small format can deliver.

Nevertheless I do not want to
a) spend too much money on it (otherwise I'd have a Sinar digital back or something similar already)
b) would like to adapt the digital systems that I already have (Fuji X, Canon) to that system

For several years I am thinking of getting a large-format-camera (which I have a basic understanding of but never worked with) and get a shift-back to adapt my digital cameras to the large-format system.

I was thinking of getting a Fotodiox adapter to adapt my Canon to a 4x5 Large Format system ( http://goo.gl/ze7Pso ) as well as another adapter (from Canon to Fuji) to also be able to adapt the Fuji on the Large Format. This shift-back would allow me to 'scan' the whole image from the large-format camera to be stitched together into one seemless image in very high resolution.

My main question is: does anyone in here have a recommendation in regards to the Large Format system and lens? It should be professional enough to be able to achieve great image quality, cheap enough to be affordable for me (less than 1500 USD maybe?) and small enough to be transportable by one person. I'm a complete newbie in this regard and I've looked into different options already, but any recommendation as a starting point would be welcome.

The lens should be fairly wide-angle with low distortion, maybe a Schneider Kreuznach or Rodenstock? Again it should not be more expensive than maybe 1000 USD.

And my last question: I don't want to invest into a system that is not able to deliver in regards to image quality. I'm still wondering if I might be running into the wrong direction and put together a system that I was never working with just to find out that the images with aforementioned adapters stitched together in Photoshop look like something that came out of a Lomo, if you know what I mean. Does anyone here have experiences with systems like the Fotodiox-system?

Another option for me would be to buy a similar shift-adapter for Medium-Format-lenses, which would maybe be a less challenging set-up, but as I always wanted to get into Large Format and have nothing against carrying around a Large Format camera and setting up the camera for quite some time to shoot a single image I thought I could give it a try.

Any thoughts are welcome...

Simply won't work. When you mount an interchangeable lens camera body to the back of a view camera you are making quite a long tube. Assuming that your body has a full format sensor you will find that it will be impossible to focus a short lens at infinity with that type of set-up. Even with a bag bellows. And lenses for digital view cameras range from 23mm at the widest up. Fo architecture you probably will want to use one of these short lenses, but you will not get it to focus your way. In fact, most 45 view cameras also will not be able to handle them as well. even with a deeply recessed board and a bag bellows. Analog view cameras simply were never designed for these type lenses. Lastly the analog view camera does not have precise enough movements to get the best results out of digital.

And you obviously have not priced 23mm, 28mm, 32mm, 35mm, 40mm, 45mm, 55mm digital view camera lenses in a mechanical Copal 0 shutter.

What Bob said, just buy a few 4x5 sheet film backs, use those, not a 35mm back, that's just counter productive to your "good details" effort. Don't try and re-invent the wheel, just roll with it ;)

Could be what you are after?

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produc...amera_for.html

Have you looked at MultiStitch?
I met the inventor in New York last month, and the applications for stitching seem interesting, though I do not do any stitching myself.
www.multistitch.com

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ari

Have you looked at MultiStitch?
I met the inventor in New York last month, and the applications for stitching seem interesting, though I do not do any stitching myself.
www.multistitch.com

---

Hi Ari!

Thanks for your input!
Yes, I've had a look at Multistitch but I am somehow more impressed by the Fotodiox Rhinocam

http://www.fotodioxpro.com/vizelex-r...t-cameras.html

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by andred2809

Could be what you are after?

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produc...amera_for.html

---

Hi Andred,

thanks for your reply. The Arca Swiss-system is the luxury-version of the Cambo Actus that I've found in the meantime.
http://www.cambo.com/Html/products_p...Item34298.html

The Fotodiox Large Format adapter would not work with Wide-Angle-lenses (as already mentioned by Bob Salomon) but a sales-representative at Cambo guaranteed that their Actus would get close enough to the sensor to be perfectly usable with wide-angle-lenses.

I'm still not 100% sure which way to go.

The Cambo Actus looks like an amazing tool, but it might be a bit too over-ambitious for what I actually want (higher resolution by stitching shift-photographies).
The MultiStitch or Fotodiox Medium Format adapter might work very well for what I want to do, and it's actually cheaper than the Actus.

I'll think about it.

You might find this thread interesting. I was pretty impressed when the subject came up. It was done with a small camera and stitching software--no view camera required, as you can see when you read the thread:
http://www.largeformatphotography.in...terior-Example

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mdarnton

You might find this thread interesting. I was pretty impressed when the subject came up. It was done with a small camera and stitching software--no view camera required, as you can see when you read the thread:
http://www.largeformatphotography.in...terior-Example

---

Hi Mdarnton,

thanks for pointing this thread out. I am already shooting and stitching panoramas, but must confess that 50% of the panoramas I shot need to be discarded because of stitching errors. I'm often working in quite small rooms (private gallery spaces) and 50% of the time I have issues with distorted lines (in single stitched images inside the panorama) that are just not levelled enough. It would probably be possible to align these images by hand, but the process - apart from taking a long time - can sometimes feel more like 'guessing work' than a real depiction of the scene.

This is the reason why I would like to switch to a system that allows me to take a 'panorama' (I dislike that term for the photos I'm taking because for me it's always only about planar projections in aspect ratio 2x3 or 1x1, I'm not taking very wide images in a panorama-format) without the need to un-distort the single images that need to be stitched into it. I hope you understand what I mean: in a normal panorama the central image is usually the only one without distorted lines (all lines angled at exactly 90 degrees). All other images need to be corrected for distortion because of the angle of view, even if the nodal-point is perfectly aligned. I somehow do not like that, it's Frankenstein-work.

On the other hand if I create a 'panorama' with a MF or LF-lens by shifting the camera body all the images share exactly the same distortion, the single image does not need to be corrected for distortion, but the stitched panorama can be corrected very easily.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by aeiou11235

...that are just not levelled enough...

---

just to explain more detailed: we are talking about single images inside the panorama that might be off less than 1 degree, which might be a ridiculous amount for landscapes or panoramas with a lot of information in it. but if you have a room with artworks hanging on pristine white walls then even the best pano-stitching software often just fails. one distorted line inside an image like that, even though it's off for just one degree, is just a complete failure and the whole image needs to be discarded.