Affordable + Sharp, analog lenses for digital

[Anders_HK]

Hi,

This is my first post here. I used to shoot Velvia on 135, but now primarily medium format Leaf digital back. Exploring the idea of 4x5, due view and different way of working please help me with following advises:

My purpose is to use 4x5 for flat stitch panoramas, thus using the full 5 inch width of 4x5. For such purpose, what are affordable yet very sharp analog lenses?

Of following I should perhaps choose 2; 58mm, 65mm, 75mm, 90mm. Any advises much sincerely appreciated!

I am looking at using on an Ebony SW45 or Shen-Hao TFC45-IIB, and posted question of these in another thread.

Yes, dont worry... of course I would be keen to use Velvia in it also... it is just different medias, but film a little difficult because I live overseas and on much travels, current Hong Kong. Yet the look of Velvia remains magic to me :)

Much thanks!

Regards
Anders

[Kirk Gittings]

Anders, Welcome. I am familiar with you from Luminous Landscape. As a starting point, you might want to define what affordable means to you.

[Anders_HK]

Anders, Welcome. I am familiar with you from Luminous Landscape. As a starting point, you might want to define what affordable means to you.

Kirk,

Much thanks, that is difficult to define. If it is too cheap it will be waste of money, so decent balance. I see the new traditional lenses still fetch decent on Ebay, any lesser priced alternatives, or which ones of those to go with? In the end I wish good detailed images, lets remember using medium format sensor on a larger format than the sensor itself, so digitar lenses are out(also because I not need such resolution).

I should say I too remember you from LL, and as someone indeed masterly capable at impressive photography!

Thanks :)

Regards
Anders

[Ben Syverson]

My purpose is to use 4x5 for flat stitch panoramas, thus using the full 5 inch width of 4x5.

If you don't mind, I'm going to question your premise... Why go to all the trouble of LF, only to give yourself even more trouble in Photoshop? Hand-stitching (which is what you'd have to do) 100+ megapixel images is not my idea of fun...

Besides, if you already know you want more real estate than 4x5, why stop at a hobbled-together 5x8 (or 5x10, or whatever)? Why not 8x10, or larger? It can't be weight, because you can get an 8x10 which weighs less than an Ebony 4x5.

[Kirk Gittings]

Thanks Anders, here is an article by a member here that you may find useful:

http://www.thalmann.com/largeformat/future.htm

[Gene McCluney]

Most all of the Large Format lenses from the "BIG 4" manufacturers: Schneider, Rodenstock, Fuji and Nikon, made in the last 25 years are plenty sharp enough for your uses. Nikkor LF lenses, while discontinued a couple years ago, can still be readily found on the used market.

[D. Bryant]

If you don't mind, I'm going to question your premise... Why go to all the trouble of LF, only to give yourself even more trouble in Photoshop? Hand-stitching (which is what you'd have to do) 100+ megapixel images is not my idea of fun...

Besides, if you already know you want more real estate than 4x5, why stop at a hobbled-together 5x8 (or 5x10, or whatever)? Why not 8x10, or larger? It can't be weight, because you can get an 8x10 which weighs less than an Ebony 4x5.

Stitching 4x5 isn't really that big of a deal and it works very well. It eliminates the need for a larger camera. One doesn't actually need to see the entire image on the ground glass as long as you know what you want to accomplish.

Good quality lenses work fine; there isn't any need for special 'digital' lenses in my experience. BTW 100+ megapixel files aren't a big deal either.

Don Bryant

[D. Bryant]

Anders,


For such purpose, what are affordable yet very sharp analog lenses?


Of following I should perhaps choose 2; 58mm, 65mm, 75mm, 90mm. Any advises much sincerely appreciated!

I would choose a 90 mm and a 150 mm lenses. Any of the name lenses will work fine. I also stitch with my 75 mm SA though you can have problems with distortion. Experience will guide you.

Be prepared to do some cropping after stitching. Allow for that when you make your exposures. In short it isn't a perfect science but if you are flexible with your compositions it will work fine. IOW, don't crop extremely tightly.

My 2 cents,

Don Bryant

[Ben Syverson]

BTW 100+ megapixel files aren't a big deal either.

It's not the size of the image that's problematic—it's trying to stitch an area that large... I can't imagine it would be much fun to do manually, and all the automated tools will either choke on files that large, or give a slight mismatch.

Just seems like a ton of work when you could just shoot with a larger camera...

[Anders_HK]

It's not the size of the image that's problematic—it's trying to stitch an area that large... I can't imagine it would be much fun to do manually, and all the automated tools will either choke on files that large, or give a slight mismatch.

Just seems like a ton of work when you could just shoot with a larger camera...

Hi

I made a trial stitch with my Mamiya 645 + 28mm on tripod, just rotating the base of ballhead with camera in portrait position. Subject was rather dark with some castles in a lake in India. The resulting image was around 120MP after cropping.

Dark image with lack of details, the wide angle lens and many frames must have been difficult for CS3, yet... it performed flawless on auto stitch setting :) .

Why then my interest in using a 4x5? Flat stiching + viewing of the image. Worth it?

Regards
Anders

[Ben Syverson]

If you can make it work, don't let me stop you!

I've just never been able to get good automatic stitches from big files... 645 is one thing, but your 4x5 images will be over 120MP each...

Lens-wise, you'd want something that has more image circle than you need, so your edges are nice and sharp. This will help match features in the images, and prevent light falloff. Personally I wouldn't go wider than 90mm, because past that I think you need center filters, or you'll have to rely too much on anti-vignette software...

[Greg Lockrey]

Not to take your idea too far off base but I have a camera set up on a Sinar P base and 90mm SA lens used in "flat stitching" and get a 3x4 stitch limit and the same camera on a RSS Panohead that I use a 200 mm in rotating pano stitching that has no limit to the number of stitches that blows away the flat stitch easily. CS3 auto stitching tool is very forgiving. I hear that the Autopano (TM) tool is even better. The image in my signature is a 2x10 vertical 90 degree angle pano 360 mb file. This image is 17" high and 7 feet long with a resolution of a 5x7" print. It made me a believer.

[cjbroadbent]

Maybe I'm off on a tangent:
The whole idea of stitching is to use a piece of 'film' much bigger than your camera, shooting with the longer lens that goes with bigger film.
That's why we like LF.
A 300mm lens resolves those far away things better than a 90mm - but you need 8x10 film behind it to fit the whole kaboodle in the picture.
If you really want to stitch 4x5, there's no point unless you use a long lens. It doesn't need to be expensive. It just has to cover 4x5 without distortion and fall-off (Xenar?). With a 300mm and a pan-head below the nodal point you have got a vanilla 8x10" and super wide-angle 16x20".
With the short lenses you propose, you're just getting a MF 6x9 wide-angle picture on 4x5 (wasteful) and you might just as well shoot digital mosaics with a 100mm on a DSLR (which in my experience come better than from scanned 4x5s). I use RealViz and it's worth the money. I keep the size of the files down to 200mb which is plenty enough and go for a meal while it's stiching.

[Anders_HK]

What I primarily ask of here is about Affordable + Sharp, analog lenses for digital, but let me explain why using 4x5 interests me:

Below are the two panoramas I mentioned above I stitched using Mamiya 645 + 28mm (on first one I think it was the 55-100mm) + Leaf Aptus 65 (28.6MP digital back having a sensor of 44mm x 33mm). My set up was simply rotating the camera on tripod using the ballhead's panoramic base. Camera was in portrait position. In first image I stitched three frames, in second photo 9 images stitched together, all in one row in CS3. These are not meant to be photographic masterpieces. They were tests I did.

While it is possible to go wide this way, CS3 calculates a perspective. The perspective of nearest foreground looks rounded a bit like a fisheye, plus I must crop the edges seeming too much by stitching this way, see the photos below. More so, it was difficult if not impossible for me to visualize the finished frame when taking the photos. It was difficult to exact determine the edges of the later finished frame and its proportions. These are the primary reasons why stitching on a 4x5 interest me. Most of all I wish to see and work out composition in a frame.

Why stitching? Yes, I still like the look of film, especially Velvia 50. However I work as an expat in different countries and do much travels. Unfortunately film is difficult then, because it is difficult to buy it and find a lab to process it well. That got me into digital in the first place, after three rolls Velvia 135 came back from the only lab in Busan, Korea capable of processing slides one hour away from where I lived before, and they had fine scratches all across all frames!

The Leaf back gives me 28.6MP, yet at times I wish to go panoramic, and I am also curious of stiching to larger 4x5 proportions in order to capture more detail than one frame is capable of. Perhaps stitching on a "ground glass" of 80mm x 100mm would be a reasonable size.

No, I am not interested in stitching multiple 4x5's together. However, I would indeed be excited to also try Velvia 50 in a 4x5. That would be awesome!

Now to the lenses... I shall keep on reading on this, but... perhaps 65mm and 90mm will be good start. Then maybe a 180mm or similar. Any sharp bargains to recommend?

It takes lots more research for me... thus I much appreciate all help and suggestions. Then I will need to estimate the cost...

Current I am thinking of either using an Ebony SW45 or Shen Hao TFC45-IIB, both specific for wide angle photography. Of course the Shen-Hao is lots cheaper... but same rigid?

Much kind thanks for all advises. :)

Regards
Anders

[Ben Syverson]

Dude, I am so confused. You say you're interested in "stitching on a 4x5," and then you say no, you're "not interested in stitching multiple 4x5s together."

Are you just asking about wide angle lenses for 4x5? Because if so, all this digital/stitching talk is just clouding your real question.

If you ARE interested in stitching, you want a lens with low distortion, good coverage, and not too much vignetting. The 90mm Super Angulon would be a good bet, and they aren't too pricey.

If you ARE NOT interested in stitching, then just buy the lens that has the angle of view that you want.

Either way, there's no such thing as an "analog" lens (or "digital" for that matter, no matter what the marketing), so don't worry about that.

[Ben Syverson]

BTW, in the first image you posted, you can see the result of stitching multiple images with substantial fall-off... there seems to be a dark seam in the sky running between the right image and the center image. You can remove this with software, but obviously PSCS3 is not doing it automatically far you...

[Anders_HK]

Dude, I am so confused. You say you're interested in "stitching on a 4x5," and then you say no, you're "not interested in stitching multiple 4x5s together."

Are you just asking about wide angle lenses for 4x5? Because if so, all this digital/stitching talk is just clouding your real question.

If you ARE interested in stitching, you want a lens with low distortion, good coverage, and not too much vignetting. The 90mm Super Angulon would be a good bet, and they aren't too pricey.

If you ARE NOT interested in stitching, then just buy the lens that has the angle of view that you want.

Either way, there's no such thing as an "analog" lens (or "digital" for that matter, no matter what the marketing), so don't worry about that.


Ben,

Sorry to confuse. Yes, I ask of simple wide angle lenses for 4x5.

I aim to use them for digital, but I will not use them like digitar lenses with super resolution to handle resolution for a future 89MP+ medium format sensor.

I will not stich 4x5 images together. I will stitch using a 4x5 camera as the base for my 44mm x 33mm sized digital sensor. 4x5 is 125mm x 100mm, right? Typically my idea is to stitch using my 44mm x 33mm sensor to assemble 125mm x 44mm, 85mm x 44mm, 100mm x 80mm etc, maybe also 125mm x 100mm. With 125mm x 100mm / 44mm / 33mm x 28.6MP = 246MP (max size I will ever stitch). My best experience is that a 22MP medium format back is about similar to Velvia 6x7 (but both different), thus I would be able to go slight beyond resolution of large format film by say 50%.

Thus, I do need sharp lenses (traditional type large format), because I require among sharper of film lenses. Would also be nice to find some bargains. :)

I hope this explains, sorry to conuse. Much thanks for all advises. :)

Regards
Anders

[Ben Syverson]

Ahhhh, now I see.

How are you planning to scan the sensor over the full 4x5 area? You'll probably have to build something...

I still say, why not shoot 8x10? Scan it at 2400 DPI, and you have a 460 MP image. You only have to trip the shutter once, which means you could actually photograph things that move, like water, clouds, people, etc...

[Jeff Keller]

It doesn't look like anyone gave you the link to a useful webpage created by Perez & Thalmanm
http://www.hevanet.com/cperez/testing.html

Also the examples you posted were panorama format. You might find that a 4x10, 5x8 or 5x7 camera matches your desired format more closely. An advantage of the wider format is that you will be using a longer focal length lens and likely have fewer limitations on camera movements. If you are sure you will only use wide angle lenses then a wide angle 4x5 camera setup might do all you want.

Jeff Keller
www.julianalee.com (Real estate for sale images)

[Anders_HK]

How are you planning to scan the sensor over the full 4x5 area? You'll probably have to build something...


Ben,

If I can modify a sliding adapter, e.g. MerginX to permit along the 120mm width of 4x5(or near it), e.g. by using a file (!) to increase width, then... simply I can go vertical row by row by using the rise and fall of back standard. This may require first composition and focus using 4x5 ground glass, then attached sliding adapter and correct focus...

Mmm... stitching means no people and no wind... nothing is perfect!

+ all not solved yet!... need find out if indeed possible with wide angles on 4x5 for this width and that focus can be made for them since digital apparant is more critical than film for correctness of focus depth... I am getting mixed views also on LL on this, but some have apparant tried on a non wide angle purpose 4x5 which may be wrong tool for what I seek.

Anders

[Greg Lockrey]

Anders, I have something similar to what you intend with a Sinar P and digital camera for a back. I used it for 'scanning" large pieces of art work for my reproduction business. It is a slow and tedious process. Ok for studio work but frustrating for outdoor use. You would be better putting a fixed camera on a pano head and just move the head a certain number of degrees up and down and side to side and stitch all those captures together. With practice you can get so fast that even if there are people walking in the scene you will won't even notice.

[Anders_HK]

Anders, I have something similar to what you intend with a Sinar P and digital camera for a back. I used it for 'scanning" large pieces of art work for my reproduction business. It is a slow and tedious process. Ok for studio work but frustrating for outdoor use. You would be better putting a fixed camera on a pano head and just move the head a certain number of degrees up and down and side to side and stitch all those captures together. With practice you can get so fast that even if there are people walking in the scene you will won't even notice.

Greg,

The images I posted before were made with using 'fixed camera' on my ballhead's pano base, stitched using CS3 photo merge on auto. It appears CS3 stitched them per photomerge cylindrical. If I try stitch photomerge perspective instead I get attached. For these images CS3 managed to stich two but failed to do also the third one. Yet I believe it illustrates what happens...

Thus with pano base or head perspective and/or pixels values and resolution get modified. It also leads to cropping of pixel data to get the final image, and... how can I possibly control proportions of the images? Using this type of methods makes me question why I should stitch, unless at certain times I am content with distoreted images, similar to fisheye effects.

Further, I seek to compose my images in the field. That is part of photographic process to me. With pano methods I find it not possible to do in detail. I think you see why I am keen to explore using a 4x5 for flat stitching? Another option is doing flat stitching e.g. with Mamiya 50mm shift lens, but.. it only offers +/- 16mm vert and +/- 13mm horiz. That is not much...

Back to original question of lenses??

Regards
Anders

[jb7]

Thus with pano base or head perspective and/or pixels values and resolution get modified. It also leads to cropping of pixel data to get the final image, and... how can I possibly control proportions of the images? Using this type of methods makes me question why I should stitch, unless at certain times I am content with distoreted images, similar to fisheye effects.

'Distortion' is inevitable with wide angles-
or rather, geometrical projections are created which do not match our normal vision.

Using a pano head leads to cylindrical perspective, or in the case of multi row stitching, spherical perspective, or projection.

Who is to say that one type of 'distortion' is more distorted than the other?

It could be argued that cylindrical projection in a panorama is a more 'natural' projection than using a single view with a 100-120º lens-
objects towards the edge of the frame are not stretched, but at the cost of curvature of straight lines- not often found in nature anyway-

Objects anywhere in the frame maintain their proportion to each other, because they always occupy the axial centre of their particular frame- and more than 2/3 of the frame is usually redundant anyway, to allow alignment-

I understand what you are setting out to do-
and I'm sure that any of the Super Angulons that I use myself would be just fine-
from 47mm up-
but a 120º lens is going to produce what some people might call 'distortion' towards the edge of the frame-

As an example, this is a DSLR stitched image- more than 120º-
if I had done this on a single frame, using a SA 47mm XL on 4x5, I'm quite sure that the tree on the left would be completely out of proportion with the tree in the middle...

joseph