Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 2 [3]   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: New Arca-Swiss Rm3D arrived  (Read 20659 times)
tom_l
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 217


WWW
« Reply #40 on: August 17, 2008, 02:07:25 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Doesn't work with lenses under about 50+mm focal length, since the back element of the lens interferes with the bellows. Bicam is a much better investment, for a Silvestri.
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Lenses <50mm aren't a problem according to Silvestri
[a href=\"http://www.silvestricamera.it/tabelle_pop_up/tabella_bayonets.htm]http://www.silvestricamera.it/tabelle_pop_...la_bayonets.htm[/url]
The 28HR can't be used with the sliding adapter
I tested the digitar 35mm and will have it in a few months, the digitar 100mm arrived this month.

http://www.silvestricamera.it/tabelle_pop_...shortlenses.htm
the 24 can't be used according to this page

It's sometimes a bit difficult to understand the use of different accessories on different camera models. Why does the Flexicam not have the stitching back or the new viewer? The 4x bellow viewer isn't that good after all, maybe there somthing new at the photokina next month, the simple 90 Hasselblad reflex viewfinder can be used too.
A real 8x loupe would be the way to go,  for me...my eyes aren't that good anymore  , we did some focusing tests, a young student and myself, well she won everytime.  


Please check BJNY's link for some infos about the Flexicam. I didn't regret buying it.


Tom
Logged
jonstewart
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 435


« Reply #41 on: August 18, 2008, 04:49:33 AM »
ReplyReply

The flexicam doesn't have a stitching back to keep the size down, so Silvestri say.

As regards the lens usage, it's sad to see that Silvestri are still saying that it's no problem using these lenses. Perhaps you should have a look here.

Both the 35XL and 45 Sironar had tilt and swing induced when you try to use rise/fall with this camera. No one from Silvestri has challenged my testing, despite the fact that I know they have seen it. I was delighted that the ditributor was perfectly happy to take back the whole flexicam setup I had, and change it for a bicam, which does work. All in all I think the flexicam is anything but. Very compact it is, but heavily compromised in function. The Bicam is much, much better!

Now, is there anyone out there who HAS used the 35XL with this camera successfully, when movement is required? Speak up now!

Hope this helps
« Last Edit: August 18, 2008, 04:50:00 AM by jonstewart » Logged

Jon Stewart

If only life were so simple...
Jack Flesher
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2595



WWW
« Reply #42 on: August 18, 2008, 10:25:18 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Both the 35XL

John:

Are you using the 35 SCHNEIDER digitar on the Bi-Cam with the flex bellows?  I ask because the Silvestri data says that combo is not usable while the Rodenstock 35 digital is...
Logged

jonstewart
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 435


« Reply #43 on: August 19, 2008, 03:48:48 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
John:

Are you using the 35 SCHNEIDER digitar on the Bi-Cam with the flex bellows?  I ask because the Silvestri data says that combo is not usable while the Rodenstock 35 digital is...
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=215806\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

No, Jack. I tested the 35XL and 38 Super Angulon in HELICAL mount with the Bicam (Testing above was with the Flexicam, not the Bicam). While the 35XL works fine as regards infinity focus, it doesn't have a big enough image circle to allow simultaneous shifting (x and y) more than about 10mm. The stitching back for the bicam has detentes at about 16mm increments (left, centre, right). Rise and fall is about the same amount.

The 38SA image quality is no less than the 35XL. It has slightly less contrast across the range, but gives really nice tonal gradation in the midtones, and a little more saturation in the shadow areas (from what I could see). It also shows a much more gentle (and frankly less) fall off in image quality as you move from f11 to f16 (with a P45 back).  So, despite the fact that you tend to see and hear people talking about the 35XL just about everywhere, I found the 38SA actually more usable, and went for it.

My conclusion was that the field of view was so great when shifted in both planes with the 38SA, that tilting was not going to be required. So far, this seems to be the case. The coverage far exceeds what I need.

Hope this helps
Logged

Jon Stewart

If only life were so simple...
Jack Flesher
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2595



WWW
« Reply #44 on: August 19, 2008, 12:31:10 PM »
ReplyReply

Jon, thanks for the cogent reply -- I was really curious about how the 38 SA might work with digital, and glad to hear it is viable!
Logged

jonstewart
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 435


« Reply #45 on: August 19, 2008, 05:35:36 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Jon, thanks for the cogent reply -- I was really curious about how the 38 SA might work with digital, and glad to hear it is viable!
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=216062\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Glad the info was of use. That 38 appears to be the complete anomaly that many say it is ie it's as good as the digital lens .

(Must say, i'm getting used to typing on this iPhone with two thumbs!)
Logged

Jon Stewart

If only life were so simple...
Pages: « 1 2 [3]   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad