Would you replace a 90mm and 135mm with a 110XL?

[audioexcels]

Yes, assuming "best film possible" is a color emulsion too But to be clear, I'm referring to the Super 6K HR version (or 8K), not the 4K.

How much are the Super 6K HR and 8K backs? What format w/film are they closest compared to?

[audioexcels]

I'll have to do that. I did promise my friend a re-test, since he was near tears.

Keep in mind, there's no pretention that this was anything approaching a scientific test. He was just showing me his new toy and we couldn't resist firing a couple frames off in the back yard.

Of course at f/4 I'll need to use the 35L instead of the 24-105L. There wouldn't be any contest if you forced the Canon zoom to shoot wide open. Like Tim I've also found that the 24-105L is just as sharp as the 35L when stopped down.

We may have to match up his 75mm f/1.4 against the Canon 85mm f/1.2L. I doubt that you could find fault with either lens so it's sort of a moot point.

While you are at it, find a Zeiss 50mm Planar (good copy) or 60mm Makro. Should be the equivalent of the cropped Leica and be a much fairer competition. I don't know how any Canon lens can match the Contax/Zeiss better primes period. Maybe the 85mm F1.2, but that's it...but then that lens can go against the Zeiss 85mm equivalent. Also, get the Zeiss 35mm F1.4, 100/2 Planar, etc. and test these primes against the Leica equivalents. People will try and claim that rangefinder glass is sharper, but they don't realize the rangefinder has no mirror=massive window through the glass that gets removed from the SLR camera. I have seen no SLR, Leica/Contax, etc match a Leica/Contax Rangefinder even when using the very best glass on the SLR vs. the worst glass on the rangefinder. So it has "nothing" to do with the glass, IMHO, but the camera objectives themself.

So for a truly fair match, buy the Zeiss 60mm Makro or the 50mm Planar for a test against the Leica 35mm. Do the Zeiss 35mm F1.4 or 28mm F2 against the Leica 28mm and smaller lenses.

I think the Canon with Zeiss lenses will destroy that Leica, but again, I don't think having a Canon zoom or any of their primes except maybe the 85 1.2 would do justice to compare to the Leica or justice to that nice beautiful sensor on the 5D.

Cheers and happy shooting!

BTW...not saying the zoom is bad or any of the canon glass is bad, but to say that if you can manual focus through the 5D just fine, the Zeiss lenses are superior both objectively/scientifically and in print.

[JPlomley]

Decision made. I'll buy the 110XL and hold on to the 90mm/4.5 Grandagon-N and 135 APO Sironar-S until I evaluate how I get on with the 110mm FL. If I am gravitating mainly to the 110XL, I will sell the 90mm; as Ted mentioned, the 135 is just so compact and opticaly brilliant it is worth holding on to.

My apologies for de-railing the thread with the M8 query. Although I must say, I have enjoyed all of the discussions on the topic.

[Ted Harris]

audioexcels, the 6K back is $15K and the 8K is $18K. Remember you will also need a reasonably small and lightweight laptop.

[Jack Flesher]

Ted answered the pricing question.

As for format, all of the backs capture roughly 3" x 4" (72mm x 96mm IIRC). Anyway, I would say the regular 6K is equivalent to a perfectly captured sheet of 4x5 tranny. In 6K HR mode, it exceeds 4x5 and probably is pressing on 5x7*. The 8K in HR mode when used with the best lenses is as good as the best drum-scanned 8x10 I've ever seen. The 10K is in its own league, but even Betterlight will tell you there are precious few LF lenses that can take advantage of the resolution. (The 150 & 180 Rodenstock APO S's and Schneider APO L's seem to be the best current options. Betterlight is actually having a custom repro lens built especially for this camera.) More info here: http://www.betterlight.com/products4X5.html

*To put this in perspective, this is the story of why I bought mine in the first place: Jim Collum was shooting in the Yosemite high country with his 6K in HR mode on his Ebony with a Schneider 150 APO. He was shooting across the road to turtle dome. On turtle dome there was a hiker sitting on a rock -- the distance would be around a half mile away. When we viewed the scan at 100%, you could discern the laces on the hiker's boots. Seriously, I am not exaggerating. One other thing about the Betterlight files is they have INCREDIBLE dynamic range --- about 10.5 stops usable. But, be warned, you have to be willing to haul around a lot of paraphernalia to use it in the field... In the end, I decided that level of detail wasn't worth the hassle for my uses.

Cheers,

[Ted Harris]

On turtle dome there was a hiker sitting on a rock -- the distance would be around a half mile away. When we viewed the scan at 100%, you could discern the laces on the hiker's boots. Seriously, I am not exaggerating. One other thing about the Betterlight files is they have INCREDIBLE dynamic range --- about 10.5 stops usable. But, be warned, you have to be willing to haul around a lot of paraphernalia to use it in the field
Cheers,

Jack underscores my earlier comment about the specialized use of the back. I'll also point out that, had there been any atmospheric disturbance at all, even a slight wind, Jim's results could have been quite different. That said, Jim has done some magnificent landscape work with the back. See particularly his article and images of Angkor Wat in View Camera a few years ago.

[Armin Seeholzer]

Hi I would never sell the 135mm lens and also not the 90mm lens.
I would maybe buy the 110 as adition and then test if it make sence to use it also or maybe you really find out you don't need the 110 or the 135mm I would never sell my 90! It is very often used and is still a standard for architectural!
Cheers Armin

[JPlomley]

I would maybe buy the 110 as adition and then test if it make sence to use it also or maybe you really find out you don't need the 110 or the 135mm I would never sell my 90!

Armin, as stated above, that is the plan. I am strictly a landscape photographer, so the verdict is still out on the 90mm. 110/90 are pretty close in FL to justify keeping both. I do agree re: the 90mm and architecture. Based on what I've seen, it seems to be an ideal FL for that application.

[davidb]

I just did a 24 hour road trip to Amarillo (yeeehaw) and my 110 never came off my camera. I love that lens.

[JPlomley]

Ted, my specs say 200mm IC at life-size magnification.

I double checked, and Ted you were correct. The IC of the 120mm Nikkor is 250mm at life-size. It says right in the spec sheet that came with the lens. I am so not worthy