Architectural Photography and film

[Henry Ambrose]

Thanks for your input Rafael.

I know I've experienced nearly all levels of computer expertise when dealing with clients. Some can take the computer apart and put it back together blindfolded and others have to be shown where the CD or DVD goes in. And neither extreme was necessarily better to deal with. Like in the rest of the world, it takes all kinds, I suppose.

[JW Dewdney]

Rafael -
I wanted to take the opportunity for thanking you for your considered reply - but not only that - bring up a clarification. Simply that, while you may have been lucky in your office - most offices use astoundingly poor equipment - equipment that is really not suited to reproduce visual images. Documents maybe. Letters, etc... that is fine. I am not for a single moment looking down on those with their 'low-end' equipment in any way... but this, in conjunction with practices which are very common in MOST architectural offices - is something that affects the reputation of people such as Kirk and myself.

Namely, that our work is getting reproduced on equipment that is not up to the task, by people who are not well-versed in the ins and outs of reproduction. That means that the work of photographers is getting scanned and printed on color lasers and epsons, whatever, with who knows what kinds of bizarre aberrations.

Most of us work hard to keep an open policy to provide low-cost or no-cost help with respect to reproduction (providing prints, sometimes at cost, etc...) so we can make sure OUR work AND THEIR work looks it's best. Okay - maybe I'm being nit-picky about this... but if you actually consider the problem - we can lose work because of practices like this - especially if it gets distributed. I'm not really uptight about it... even though I seem to be... but I am concerned. It happens. Nobody can stop it... because that's the way architects work (under deadline, etc..). But it's something that would best be avoided, and it's something that I thought relevant to bring up within the context of the discussion. I hope that makes sense.

Thanks for letting me bend your ear.

Fine. All I was doing was trying to provide guidance from inside the profession as to what was important to us, as your clients, for someone who asked. The scanners we use are mostly for prints, but they are very good. The comment that what we have is not good was uncalled for. It is not so for the use we put them to. Maybe for fine art photography they are lacking, but that is not what we do for a living, and the question was about Architectural photography, not artistic photography.

My experience is based on most of the architectural offices I know. 28 years ago they would not have had the equipment, so it's not fair to use your experience from all those years either. If I were to count the years before scanning was available then I could call on 33 years of professional experience, but you know as well as I do that the digital equipment has been in general use a lot shorter than that!

I am not looking to argue here, but I thought the generalization unfair. So be it. Keep your opinion, I'll keep mine.

[neil poulsen]

DrPablo,At least with my samples, the Canons have all been better than all the Zuikos I have tested. i have now compared a dozen or so PC Zuikos of various focal lengths against my two Canon TS. I personally now think that the Zuiko mystique is a myth.

Have you compared the two 24mm PC lenses? The Zuiko 24mm PC with the Canon 24mm TS? I've heard from some sources that the Zuiko is better, and they can auction for upwards of $2500 on EBay.

At the same time, I have the 24mm TSE, and I'm quite happy with it. It distorts a bit, but this is correctable in PS. So, I wonder if I should really aspire to the 24mm PC Zuiko. Not sure.

[Kirk Gittings]

Neil,
I compared one that a friend of mine had, but it too was softer and had more distortion than the Canon. I do not get this rep that he Zuikos have. None that I have compared are better than my Canons. I do use a 35 Zuiko to fill in the gap between the 24 and 45 Canon. It is usable. And I just bought another. I will test it against the one I have and sell the lesser.

[Howard Slavitt]

I agree with Kirk Gittings that the Canon t/s lenses can be excellent. I tested 2 24mm tse lenses, both new. One was quite a bit better than the other, so I kept it. It is excellent. When not shifted, it will, in many circumstances exceed the resolution of the Canon 5D sensor. When shifted it is still very good to excellent until the last mm or so of shift. I use it primarily at f11. The Canon 24mm tse does not do as well on my Rebel xti, which has higher pixel density (thus demanding higher resolving lenses), but it's still pretty good. The 45mm tse that I have (again tested two and kept the better one), is superb, whether shifted or not, and regardless of whethr used on the Canon 5D or xti sensor. The only problem with both lenses is that when shifted or tilted they can produce quite a bit of chromatic aberration, but it is fairly easy to correct in photoshop with an "action" that I bought from someone off the web several years ago for $5 or $10.

[Michael Mutmansky]

The Zuiko PC lenses were hand assembled from my understanding. There are a number of not real great samples out there, but apparently, the best samples beat the Canon lenses hands down. They apparently can have very little CA, and are sharper, as well.

I have a cherry picked 35mm Zuiko, and it is a great lens. I also have a Canon 24 TS, and I find it to be acceptable, but with some CA and distortion.

Actually, I find all of the retrofocus lenses (TS or not) to have high levels of distortion, but that is the nature of smaller format camera systems. You get spoiled with LF optics, and nothing else quite holds up after that.

I don't know if things get better in the MF digital options, but it pains me to make images with the 35mm options after using LF exclusively for a number of years.

What about viewing in the field? Kirk, are you working tethered? I was wondering about plugging a larger screen into the camera, and was thinking about whether there are viable options out there for a screen that does not require a computer to be attached.

There used to be two good forums (RG and FM) that had subforums for things like the Zuiko cross-use and these 'alternate' applications, but they've gone away. Anyone know where the goo people from those forums have gone?


---Michael
---Michael

[QT Luong]

I agree that if your 24 TSE is "very soft", a trip to Canon or ebay may be in order. On the other hand, I should probably get a couple more from amazon for testing, since mine isn't as sharp as my other 24 lenses.

[Marko]

I agree that if your 24 TSE is "very soft", a trip to Canon or ebay may be in order. On the other hand, I should probably get a couple more from amazon for testing, since mine isn't as sharp as my other 24 lenses.

So, the tip of the month is: do not buy your TSE lens via eBay!

[Al Seyle]

The 24-TSE is approx $1100 new. How do you guys buy 2 and send the other one back without paying a restocking fee (of around $150)?

[QT Luong]

It was explaned in my post: "amazon". Free shipping. 1 month return. Issue your UPS shipping label back in one click. By the way, one might as well not let the referal fee go to waste by following the link:
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/re...argeformatphot
(this is found on the bottom of the main LF page as well).