Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: A Comparison of the 24XL, 28HR and 35XL  (Read 17031 times)
mkravit
Guest
« on: February 19, 2007, 02:44:53 PM »
ReplyReply

Here are some comparison images of the Schneider 24XL, Rodestock 28HR and the 35XL made recently.

http://homepage.mac.com/archarazzi/fc1/lens/L35V+17.jpg

http://homepage.mac.com/archarazzi/fc1/lens/L28V+10.jpg

http://homepage.mac.com/archarazzi/fc1/lens/L24V+0.jpg

Look carefully at the edges of the Rodenstock 28HR. A lot of distortion is visible.
« Last Edit: February 19, 2007, 02:49:48 PM by mkravit » Logged
rainer_v
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1134


WWW
« Reply #1 on: February 19, 2007, 03:15:00 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Here are some comparison images of the Schneider 24XL, Rodestock 28HR and the 35XL made recently.

http://homepage.mac.com/archarazzi/fc1/lens/L35V+17.jpg

http://homepage.mac.com/archarazzi/fc1/lens/L28V+10.jpg

http://homepage.mac.com/archarazzi/fc1/lens/L24V+0.jpg

Look carefully at the edges of the Rodenstock 28HR. A lot of distortion is visible.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=101709\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
who made that shots?
i work on a nearly daily base with that HR  lenses in architecture and i react hysteric to distortion. if the 28HR shows some distortion it remains under 1% with symmetric barreling. attached another image shot with the 28hr.

[attachment=1885:attachment]
« Last Edit: February 19, 2007, 03:47:40 PM by rehnniar » Logged

rainer viertlböck
architecture photographer
munich / germany

www.tangential.de
mkravit
Guest
« Reply #2 on: February 19, 2007, 03:49:54 PM »
ReplyReply

I do not defend nor criticize, I look and call it as I see it. If I take your image and move it into Photoshop and apply the index lines, the left side of your image shows that the vertical wall is bowed.

All three of the images I posted are taken in the same spot with or without rise as noted. These test images show that the 28HR (In this test shoot) exhibited the most amount of distorsion.

These images were not adjusted in Photoshop at all except to add the index lines.

It is what it is. I hope some find them useful as a reference, nothing more, nothing less.
« Last Edit: February 19, 2007, 03:50:59 PM by mkravit » Logged
ericstaud
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 384


WWW
« Reply #3 on: February 19, 2007, 03:55:59 PM »
ReplyReply

Rainer,

It appears your sample has very little shift, and so it only shows a little pincushion in the upper left.  Is there a chance you have any shots like the .mac samples which show a larger shift (like would be necessary for shooting a High Rise building)?

Eric
Logged
rainer_v
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1134


WWW
« Reply #4 on: February 19, 2007, 04:04:03 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Rainer,

It appears your sample has very little shift, and so it only shows a little pincushion in the upper left.  Is there a chance you have any shots like the .mac samples which show a larger shift (like would be necessary for shooting a High Rise building)?

Eric
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=101722\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]



i already had posted that sample in a earlier post. its shifted to the ends and stitched together.
not the 28/35HR nor the 24/35xl are free from distortion, but in my work i never had the case that i ended up with unmanageable files for that reason.
[attachment=1887:attachment]
« Last Edit: February 19, 2007, 04:15:03 PM by rehnniar » Logged

rainer viertlböck
architecture photographer
munich / germany

www.tangential.de
Prakash Patel
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 62


WWW
« Reply #5 on: February 19, 2007, 04:14:42 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
I do not defend nor criticize, I look and call it as I see it. If I take your image and move it into Photoshop and apply the index lines, the left side of your image shows that the vertical wall is bowed.

All three of the images I posted are taken in the same spot with or without rise as noted. These test images show that the 28HR (In this test shoot) exhibited the most amount of distorsion.

These images were not adjusted in Photoshop at all except to add the index lines.

It is what it is. I hope some find them useful as a reference, nothing more, nothing less.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=101721\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


Mkravit,

I think all Rainer is asking is the source of these images....
Did you perform this test? Or is it a test that someone else performed and you are just posting the results?

regards
Logged

mkravit
Guest
« Reply #6 on: February 19, 2007, 04:19:19 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Mkravit,

I think all Rainer is asking is the source of these images....
Did you perform this test? Or is it a test that someone else performed and you are just posting the results?

regards
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=101731\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I am the source of posting the image.
« Last Edit: February 19, 2007, 04:20:32 PM by mkravit » Logged
rainer_v
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1134


WWW
« Reply #7 on: February 19, 2007, 04:19:53 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Mkravit,

I think all Rainer is asking is the source of these images....
Did you perform this test? Or is it a test that someone else performed and you are just posting the results?

regards
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=101731\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

exactly thats what i was asking, ok thats great that you did it yourself- i am sceptic for second hand infos.
some detail: the shot with the 28Hr the camera is not put horizontally correct which increases the visual distortion effect in the comparation  much. the schneider shots are done in straight positions.
( also it seems that the camera was put closer to the object after the 24xl shot , maybe i am wrong herein ).
what astonish me  is the strong barreling in the upper horizontal line, the vertical can be in parts explained from the slightly bevelled camera stand. at all it seems too much for that lense.
maybe sample variations? no idea about but i listened from a friend that this can happen in terms of distortion also,- but in this price class sure it should not.

about my first shot: i dont remember the shift settings exatly, but i believe the lense was moved to the left ( not so little, otherwise the elevator would be much more in the frame  ) and some mm down.
« Last Edit: February 19, 2007, 04:24:31 PM by rehnniar » Logged

rainer viertlböck
architecture photographer
munich / germany

www.tangential.de
rainer_v
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1134


WWW
« Reply #8 on: February 19, 2007, 04:27:55 PM »
ReplyReply

see the vertical line here, also some barreling at the top line-but i am not sure if this is caused by constructtion:

shifted up and left.


[attachment=1888:attachment]
« Last Edit: February 19, 2007, 04:28:27 PM by rehnniar » Logged

rainer viertlböck
architecture photographer
munich / germany

www.tangential.de
ericstaud
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 384


WWW
« Reply #9 on: February 19, 2007, 04:37:18 PM »
ReplyReply

The chairs on the left side appear to tilt very slightly to the right, no?  
Logged
mkravit
Guest
« Reply #10 on: February 19, 2007, 05:15:45 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
The chairs on the left side appear to tilt very slightly to the right, no? 
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=101744\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

We are dealing with lenses and cameras, albiet very expensive ones, however, I am not sure that there is any accessible lens that is absolutely free of distortion.

With that said, and for my use, I have basically settled on my 24XL, 35XL and 47XL, something between the 24 and 35 would be great but the 28HR is too expensive for what it is, especially in light of these results.

BTW, with respect to the images, the camera and tripod remained stationary.
Logged
Danijela D. Karic
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 221


« Reply #11 on: February 19, 2007, 05:17:14 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Here are some comparison images of the Schneider 24XL, Rodestock 28HR and the 35XL made recently.

http://homepage.mac.com/archarazzi/fc1/lens/L35V+17.jpg

http://homepage.mac.com/archarazzi/fc1/lens/L28V+10.jpg

http://homepage.mac.com/archarazzi/fc1/lens/L24V+0.jpg

Look carefully at the edges of the Rodenstock 28HR. A lot of distortion is visible.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=101709\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Michael K,

Every second opinion is very important & appreciated, especially when comparing lenses of such high standard.

It is very good idea that you started this thread, perhaps you could call it/or start one for the future reference Performance of Scheider/Rodenstock LF Digital Lenses or something in that regard, where we can put the performance of all our lenses on display. Because as soon I get my lenses, I will try to do my test and post my experience for the record. I must admit 28HR looks a bit awkward for my taste. Although looking at Ranier's images I could not see nothing of the sort, perhaps images posted by Rainer were shot horizontally not vertically and that could be the reason why I missed to realize hidden distortion.

Regards
Danijela
« Last Edit: February 19, 2007, 05:26:38 PM by Danijela D. Karic » Logged
mkravit
Guest
« Reply #12 on: February 19, 2007, 05:24:01 PM »
ReplyReply

Ranier,

When I downloaded your image to add index grid lines I accidentally pushed the levels a bit. I think there may be centerfold in yoru image.

Can you check it out and see what you find. I also see some magenta and cyans splotches of color cast. I wonder if the Brumbaer program is "painting" the centerfold like a smudge tool so that it is not visible when the image is at normal levels?
« Last Edit: February 19, 2007, 05:33:58 PM by mkravit » Logged
rainer_v
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1134


WWW
« Reply #13 on: February 19, 2007, 05:46:28 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Ranier,

When I downloaded your image to add index grid lines I accidentally pushed the levels a bit. I think there may be centerfold in yoru image.

Can you check it out and see what you find. I also see some magenta and cyans splotches of color cast. I wonder if the Brumbaer program is "painting" the centerfold like a smudge tool so that it is not visible when the image is at normal levels?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=101764\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

definitive nothing what has to do with centerfold effects.
 its a 10 or 20 seconds exposure and i removed color casts  partially, so not at the same level at the paintings. dont you think you are going to peep a little bit pixels?
what you call raising up the levels "accidently" a little bit appears if you raise the shadow slider in the level window in photoshop from level 0 to level 185 and increase afterwards the saturation, - all that in a jpeg with quality7. very closed to practical needs isnt it? further i think its a nearly spectacular good result for an longtime interior shot to hold its color integrity so well if a file is in such a way abused.
« Last Edit: February 19, 2007, 06:00:14 PM by rehnniar » Logged

rainer viertlböck
architecture photographer
munich / germany

www.tangential.de
rainer_v
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1134


WWW
« Reply #14 on: February 19, 2007, 05:50:35 PM »
ReplyReply

see, i did exactly the same setting apply to your 24xl image. very informative also.... isnt it?

[attachment=1892:attachment]
« Last Edit: February 19, 2007, 05:51:25 PM by rehnniar » Logged

rainer viertlböck
architecture photographer
munich / germany

www.tangential.de
mkravit
Guest
« Reply #15 on: February 19, 2007, 06:15:06 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
see, i did exactly the same setting apply to your 24xl image. very informative also.... isnt it?

[attachment=1892:attachment]
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=101774\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Touche, but seriously Ranier, the problems with the MFDB's are across the spectrum. None of them is perfect, none work 100% as advertised, all are still in their infancy.

The amazing thing is how good Schneider and Rodenstock have actually made their digital lenses. I think that eventually the issues with color cast and distortion and centerfold will be solved through firmware and to a lesser extent software. The lens manufacturers will begin to do things that were never even considered possible with optical design.
« Last Edit: February 19, 2007, 06:17:02 PM by mkravit » Logged
Danijela D. Karic
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 221


« Reply #16 on: February 19, 2007, 06:27:06 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
see, i did exactly the same setting apply to your 24xl image. very informative also.... isnt it?

[attachment=1892:attachment]
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=101774\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Hi Ranier,

I highly enjoy positive spirit and the joke about it, but seriously what is going on in the middle of that image, you could see the split is centered but you don't see the line, it appears as Michael said like it was painted and to me it looks like it was altered in one or the other way.

We pay the money, companies make us pay even more then we should, so why walk backwards. When I get my lenses Rodenstock or Schneider perhaps even both, I would like to participate and contribute to this thread or perhaps the new one dedicated to LF digital Lenses with what ever results I have, on every Lens & Camera I own, otherwise If we all walk backwards, we may start to like it and that could be the very end of it.

I think the more we are relaxed about it the more people will participate. Otherwise
people like to read when they feel the tension is building up, but they rarely participate.

Let's be constructive about it, so that others too feel comfortable participating.

I hope you agree.

Regards
Danijela
Logged
rainer_v
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1134


WWW
« Reply #17 on: February 19, 2007, 06:33:09 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Touche, but seriously Ranier, the problems with the MFDB's are across the spectrum. None of them is perfect, none work 100% as advertised, all are still in their infancy.

The amazing thing is how good Schneider and Rodenstock have actually made their digital lenses. I think that eventually the issues with color cast and distortion and centerfold will be solved through firmware and to a lesser extent software. The lens manufacturers will begin to do things that were never even considered possible with optical design.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=101777\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

i agree 100%.
we just can hope that the things will become better and that the companies not will go further forcing themselves to compete with products which are not completely ready for selling. after these products are out they spend some weeks or months correcting the issues ( we have found after buying ), they find solutions for some of these issues or they are not able to do so and create workarounds or simply nothing happens except promises for later fw updates and so on.... and than, soon, they are involved with all energy in the next generation of backs, ..... beeing pressed by their competitors and by us photographers to bring the next generation in the market as soon as possible. this happened last time after the surprising announcement of the p45. all other competitiors have had to follow fast....... and so it will go on probably with the next generation, after all have made this *.+ upgrades as interlude.

in the time when  the announcement of the p45 and the following a75 and e75 was made, nearly all of us agreed that we professional photographers dont want higher resolution, we want mature products. but after few weeks this was forgotten and now some speak from 22mp sensors as "old" stuff, although nearly no one - me included- really need the 33 and 39mp resolution. the 22mp backs have brought excellent results if used well.
i sometimes mix in productions my canon 5d with e75 shots and print out all that with my epson7800 at A1. if i put my nose on the print i can see a difference, thats true...... i still have the 100% opinion that a good photographer will deliver great results with any of the existing mf backs and ofcourse he will not f*up any shot just for using schneider or rodenstock lenses.... he will know its limitations and respecting their shortcomings. 4x5" filmwork has had so many limits, if you did not respected them you simply delivered horrible chromes. so it is now also.
« Last Edit: February 19, 2007, 06:47:57 PM by rehnniar » Logged

rainer viertlböck
architecture photographer
munich / germany

www.tangential.de
rainer_v
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1134


WWW
« Reply #18 on: February 19, 2007, 06:39:57 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Hi Ranier,

I highly enjoy positive spirit and the joke about it, but seriously what is going on in the middle of that image, you could see the split is centered but you don't see the line, it appears as Michael said like it was painted and to me it looks like it was altered in one or the other way.


[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=101780\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

the cf issue is not a line which appears and which could be "smeared out". it is that the 6 zones of the sensor have a sligtly different amplitude of their signals. what becomes mostly visible is this line in the horizontal center, but in fact it is not a line, simply one half of the image is a little bit darker than the other.
brumbaers tool does not smear over that stitch zone... it adjusts the levels so finally all these six zones match the same brightness. if it would "smear" over these stitches you should see six of them afterwards in these levels-raised-up image.
anyway, not anything which becomes visible after raising up the shadows so heavy is  saying anything, cause its simply way too much of manipulation....
« Last Edit: February 19, 2007, 06:41:48 PM by rehnniar » Logged

rainer viertlböck
architecture photographer
munich / germany

www.tangential.de
Danijela D. Karic
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 221


« Reply #19 on: February 19, 2007, 06:57:05 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
i sometimes mix in productions my canon 5d with e75 shots and print out all that with my epson7800 at A1. if i put my nose on the print i can see a difference, thats true......
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=101781\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

At A1, I am sorry but I just can't believe that 5D or any other 35mm will hold
their own compared to bigger chip+more resolution/detail of e75,H3D,a75,P45. Perhaps you think A4? but even A4 could be argued.


Regards
Danijela
Logged
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad