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

[Christopher Barrett]

Thought I'd throw my thoughts in since I have some practical experience here. I've been shooting architecture professionally for about 20 years and continue to explore different workflows as they become available. Currently I use a couple systems. My primary kit is a Phase One IQ 260 back on an Arca-Swiss Rm3d with a number of lenses from Rodenstock and Schneider. My newer (backup) system is the Sony A7r with an adapter to use Canon's 17 & 24 mm TS-Es. I also own the Arca M Line 2 and can mount the Sony on there to use all of my German glass with it.

Firstly, how much resolution do you need? I ask because both of your current cameras have very little resolution. Honestly, I'd sell both and buy the Sony A7r. At 36mp, it packs a lot of resolution. The files are not quite as pleasing as my IQ260 files, but they're damn good and much nicer than what my 5d2 provided. With that in hand, I would consider using the adapted Canon tilt/shifts over a view camera. The widest lens you would be able to use on a view camera would be a 35mm and I'm pretty sure that only two cameras would focus it, the afore-mentioned Cambo Actus and my Arca M2. Either of those and the appropriate lenses would get very expensive. Other view cameras (that you could find used cheap) will just not physically be able to focus a lens wide enough for architecture.

Hope that helps,
CB

My blog post on the Arca M2

[Bob Salomon]

..... The widest lens you would be able to use on a view camera would be a 35mm and I'm pretty sure that only two cameras would focus it, the afore-mentioned Cambo Actus and my Arca M2. Either of those and the appropriate lenses would get very expensive. Other view cameras (that you could find used cheap) will just not physically be able to focus a lens wide enough for architecture.

Hope that helps,
CB

My blog post on the Arca M2

Not sure where your information comes from but it is totally wrong!

Both the Linhof Techno and the Linhof M679cs, as well as the older M679cc and the original M679, accept lenses down to and including the 23mm HR Digaron-S. In fact, the 23mm on the Techno focuses to infinity on a flat Linhof Technika 45 board. It does require a triple receesed board for the M679 cameras though.

As for a 35mm, there again, you are wrong. The Linhof TK 23 and 45, the Linhof Master Technika and Master Technika Classic as well as the Technika V and IV, and all Kardan cameras back to the B system can all use lenses as short as 35mm. Except for the IV, V and Master Technika all the others would need a recessed board. On the IV, V and Master Technika/Classic they accept the 35mm on special helical focusing mount lens boards. The Technika 2000 and 3000 take a 35mm on a Linhof recessed board.

[Christopher Barrett]

Sorry, Bob... I was talking about the OP's plans to adapt a view camera to mirrorless body capturing. With that extra depth on the back end, I didn't believe any of the Linhofs to be an option or have the capability. Mind you, I believe all of this discussion is moot considering his budget.

[Bob Salomon]

Sorry, Bob... I was talking about the OP's plans to adapt a view camera to mirrorless body capturing. With that extra depth on the back end, I didn't believe any of the Linhofs to be an option or have the capability. Mind you, I believe all of this discussion is moot considering his budget.

The 23 has a very long FFL distance so some others may work. Depends on the thickness of the adapters. Civets may also have something that can do it as well. Linhof does not have adapters for camera bodies. Sinar did once.

But I agree with your conclusion.

[aeiou11235]

From your statement I can not tell what you really are expecting.

Are you trying to duplicate what Stephen Wilkes does in digital? Or what Peter Lik does in film or what John Sexton does in film?

Thanks for your reply, Bob!

I must admit that I do not have a lot of interest in other photographers' works, I'm pretty much self-centered, for the better or worse. If I had to name someone's work that I admire deeply then it would probably be the usual suspects: Sugimoto, Gursky, Becher, Hoefer, Demand, Struth, ... and furthermore Teller, Tillmans, Araki, Moriyama...

Even though I admire these peoples' works I see no sense in replicating anyone. I try to do my own thing.

How big an image are you trying to make?

Optical quality is a lot more then "distortion free". Most of the lenses for the Canon, especially L series, and the Fuji are "distortion free".

I want to achieve at least 48 Megapixels, just to throw a number into the game ...

Actually all lenses have distortion. Better lenses much less then lesser ones. But distortion takes on many forms.
Are you talking about the bowing of straight lines?
Barrel or pincushion?
Or are you talking about the effect of fore shortening where objects closer to the lens are reproduced larger then things further from the lens?
What about longitudinal chromatic aberration? That means that fine lines in a high contrast field (like fine branches against the sky) reproduce thicker due to color fringing.
How about fall off center to edge?
MTF curves?
At what image ratios?
Bokah?
Where is the lens performing at its optimal?
Is that a magnification ratio and f stop that works for you?
Or, because of a much smaller sensor size compared to medium format, does optimal aperture of the lens create diffraction on the smaller sensor?

Distortion-free in the meaning of: no barrel or pincushion- or mustache- or whatever-distortion.

CA: I don't really care, it's possible to filter that relatively good. Same with fall off.

Image Ratio: I don't care. I love 4x5 even though it's too compressed for most applications, so I usually crop 3x4, but sometimes 1x1 is nice, too. I'm not Bresson, I crop depending either on the format I need for publication or depending on what works best for the image.

MTF/Optimal Lens Performance point: too detailed to worry about in my case. I'm not trying to achieve Gursky-qualities (stepping closer would be nice, though)

Bokeh: secondary for my application. I do care for Bokeh when I'm photographing portraits, but as mentioned before I want to use the system that I am researching for architecture. I made some blurry out-of-focus images of Bauhaus Dessau once, but apart from that it does not play any role for the photos I want to take.

f-stop: I don't need a fast lens, as long as it's sharp enough. If I can't dial down the f-stop to an aperture that allows me to get all objects in focus that I want to be sharp then I work with focus-stacking in PP.

Magnification ratio: I'm not into Macro.

I understand that there might be a problem with lens diffraction when working with a smaller sensor. It's something I'd have to deal with (if I can't avoid)

Just slapping a medium format lens on a small sensor camera will not necessarily result in the quality you think it might achieve. But one thing it will do is eat up money that could be put to better use to get that quality that you want. Whatever you do spend to make this conversion will not come back to you in the event you find that it won't work later.

Yes, I know. That's exactly why I'm writing here in that forum: to find out if the possibilities that I'm thinking of (Adapter-solutions on Fuji-X) can actually deliver a reasonably good quality. For sure it will be hard/impossible to achieve "perfect" quality with this kind of set-up but at least getting three steps closer to perfection than with the set-up that I have right now (shooting 16MP and fighting with low resolution and distorted lines) would be welcome.

[aeiou11235]

Thought I'd throw my thoughts in since I have some practical experience here. I've been shooting architecture professionally for about 20 years and continue to explore different workflows as they become available. Currently I use a couple systems. My primary kit is a Phase One IQ 260 back on an Arca-Swiss Rm3d with a number of lenses from Rodenstock and Schneider. My newer (backup) system is the Sony A7r with an adapter to use Canon's 17 & 24 mm TS-Es. I also own the Arca M Line 2 and can mount the Sony on there to use all of my German glass with it.

Firstly, how much resolution do you need? I ask because both of your current cameras have very little resolution. Honestly, I'd sell both and buy the Sony A7r. At 36mp, it packs a lot of resolution. The files are not quite as pleasing as my IQ260 files, but they're damn good and much nicer than what my 5d2 provided. With that in hand, I would consider using the adapted Canon tilt/shifts over a view camera. The widest lens you would be able to use on a view camera would be a 35mm and I'm pretty sure that only two cameras would focus it, the afore-mentioned Cambo Actus and my Arca M2. Either of those and the appropriate lenses would get very expensive. Other view cameras (that you could find used cheap) will just not physically be able to focus a lens wide enough for architecture.

Hope that helps,
CB

My blog post on the Arca M2

Thank you so much for your input, Christopher Barrett! Checked your work: very impressive!

A Large- or Medium-Format-solution with digital back like what you're using would surely be most welcome for my endeavours but it's financially completely out of reach right now.

In my research for adapter-solutions I stumbled upon the Sony a7r so often already (and was mentioned in the thread here once or twice already, by Bob and Sandy), that I slightly start doubting that buying into Fuji x was the best idea, but selling everything wo switch to Sony a7r also does not work for me. I already spent roughly 4000 Euros on that system, selling it would mean that I'd at least be losing half of the amount (I'm using my cameras daily, so it's definitely not "as brand new' anymore). Last not least I love working with the system for all my other applications (portraits, snapshots, etc...). It might be a good idea to step-up later though, when there's enough budget ...

Your backup-solution with the Canon-glass sounds like the perfect solution for me, but there's - as far as I can see - no solution to control the aperture with the Fuji. I guess you're using the Metabones Smart Adapter so you can control the aperture? Unfortunately there's no adapter like this for me / Fuji x ;(

Nevertheless - from your and all the other information I got here in this thread - I'm slowly shifting from buying into a LF-adapter-system (like Novoflex, Cambo Actus, Arca-Swiss) or MF-adapter-system (Fotodiox Rhinocam) to just adapting a wide-angle TS-lens to my Fuji. It's the easiest and maybe not the most exciting (in terms of 'challenge') solution, but it seems to be the most secure way to step a little bit closer to technical perfection. Hopefully I can take a bigger step in the future and buy into a digital LF-system.

[sanking]

Nevertheless - from your and all the other information I got here in this thread - I'm slowly shifting from buying into a LF-adapter-system (like Novoflex, Cambo Actus, Arca-Swiss) or MF-adapter-system (Fotodiox Rhinocam) to just adapting a wide-angle TS-lens to my Fuji. It's the easiest and maybe not the most exciting (in terms of 'challenge') solution, but it seems to be the most secure way to step a little bit closer to technical perfection. Hopefully I can take a bigger step in the future and buy into a digital LF-system.

I agree that a adapting a wide-angle TS lens to your Fuji is probably the least expensive way to bump up the MP count of your image files.

However, I did see this about your camera and the Actus. http://fuji-x.photos/Cambo/

Sandy

[aeiou11235]

I agree that a adapting a wide-angle TS lens to your Fuji is probably the least expensive way to bump up the MP count of your image files.

However, I did see this about your camera and the Actus. http://fuji-x.photos/Cambo/

Sandy

Hi Sandy, many thanks!

I will have a look on the Cambo Actus next week at a photo-equipment-distributor here in Berlin who invited me to come over and have a look on it. There is no urgency, so I don't need to decide today or tomorrow and can take some time to evaluate my options, of which I have a lot right now:


View Camera System
Cambo Actus with LF- or MF- or FF-lens
+ image area of 43x34 (similar to Leaf Credo), so medium resolution of all the options here
+ full perspective control
+ very wide range of lenses
+ quite 'elegant' solution (a tiny view camera)

Shift Adapters
Fotodiox Rhinocam with MF-lens
+ image area of 62x46 (!!!), so highest resolution of all the options here
+ relatively cheap MF-lenses (eg Hasselblad V 40mm)
+ easy handling, easy post-processing
- might show some weird color shifts in end-result ("italian flag bullseye"), but possible to filter

4x5 view-camera with Multistitch-adapter
- a lot of costs and maybe not in relation to actual usefulness
- a lot of new & heavy equipment means a lot of additional weight to carry around

Tilt/Shift Adapters MF-lens to Fuji x
one of the Hartblei or Zoerk adapter-solutions
- limited resolution in comparison to the other options

Tilt/Shift Adapters for FF-lenses
Kipon Tilt-Shift Adapter Nikon/Olympus/Contax to Fuji
+ some really nice lenses available for cheap (eg Contax Biogon 21mm f/2.8)
- limited resolution in comparison to the other options

Tilt/Shift-lens on new, higher resolution MILC
Canon 17mm TS-E with new camera (Sony a7r)
+ seems to be a favorite for lots of other architectural photographers, due to easy handling and high resolution, so I'm considering buying into the Sony system
+ high resolution and IQ possible in a very convenient way

Panorama-Stitching
Probably with gear from reallyrightstuff
+ have lenses already
- in confined spaces the stitching process produces a lot of discard due to stitching errors

[andyroo770]

Have a look at the gigapan systems, might be an option?
http://gigapan.com/cms/shop/store