Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 2 [3]   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: canon 24TS-E lenses compared with rodenstock 35HR  (Read 21595 times)
harshdreams
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 12


WWW
« Reply #40 on: December 20, 2009, 12:46:03 AM »
ReplyReply

Great discussion!!, I hope I am not digressing, with so many experts here I would like to hear if I can use the Nikon TC-14E II with my Nikon 24TS similar to the way Rainer has been using it with Canon. I have a 1.7x TC but that does'nt work with the Nikon 24TS Thank you. Harshan
Logged
JeffKohn
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1671



WWW
« Reply #41 on: December 20, 2009, 01:09:56 AM »
ReplyReply

The Nikon teleconverters are only meant to be used with AFS telephoto lenses. There's a tab on the TC that will prevent other lenses from mounting. You can file away the tab to get around this problem; but you need to be careful which lenses you try to mount, since the rear element of the lens could hit the front element of TC depending on the lens's design (not a problem with the 24 PC-E though, since the rear element is pretty deeply recessed). I have not tried this myself.

There's a Kenko/Tamron TC for Nikon mount (actually two, a cheapo one and a more expensive "pro" version) that doesn't have the extra tab and should allow most Nikon lenses to mount. I have no idea how good the optical quality is, though.
Logged

asf
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 506


WWW
« Reply #42 on: December 22, 2009, 11:14:52 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: rainer_v
i tested today the 24TS-eII outside and also together with the 1.4ext ( newer version)  against the 45digitar and the 35HR.
i will post my findings the next days in a new tread, but to anticipate it:
the extender works very very well with the 24tse together. you will see.

Do you think you'll be able to post these results?
Logged
rainer_v
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1128


WWW
« Reply #43 on: December 22, 2009, 04:20:36 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: asf
Do you think you'll be able to post these results?
i will post it, although i am a bit lazy to post images for it, more so after the discussion of valid or not valid 35mm related treads.
but i announced to do complete this test  and so i post what i found out: i compared my lenses to get a more round view which of my systems can be used together with which lenses.

the situation in the 35mm world has changed.
have it been before the wide angles where was the problem for architecture uses, now the longer lenses between 30 till 70mm are the problematic aerea.
overall the schneider/ rodenstock lenses win now more in this aerea than in the wide angle field, where the exceptional good corrected canon lenses are simply better in terms of distortion ( compared to rodenstock ) and in terms of fall of ( compared to rodenstock + especially schneider ). sharpness of the canons is very good, but not as sharp as the rodenstock if you have in mind that these even dont need to be stopped down to be sharp till the edges of the image circle.

i bought a 45tse after i got the 17+24tse and it does not hold up at all with the quality with the two tse wides.
it shows significant CA if shifted, and although CA normally is easy to correct, not so with shifted lenses cause it starts to be unsymmetric
and what you gain in the correction on the left side you loose on the right side.

urther i compared the 24TSE together with the 1.4ext ( vers2 )  with my pentax 645 35mm af lens, together with the zoerk shift adapter for the canon.
formerly this was the best shiftable wide angle for 35mm, even better than the 24PC olympus which i own as well.
to make it short: the canon 24tse together with the extender is way better than the pentax 35mm fa af. the 24/extender combo is  sharper and dont show as much CA,
although CA is stronger visible with the 24+extender than without.
the extender also adds some barrel distortion, but because it is not moving with the shift movements its symmetric and for the absence of apo lenses in it its a simple barreling form which can be removed in photoshop lens correction to 100% if you set the correction to +3%.
so this is clearly the way to go in 35mm if one needs longer shift lenses, which for sure will be the case if this system will be used professional for architecture.
the 24tse is not as good as it is without the extender and it adds a more complicate workflow, but its still a very sharp lens and  its the best solution at the moment for a shift lens in the 35mm range which i have seen, and i have seen all available 35mm shift  lenses except the contax 35PC.
CA still  is not much, but its there now, and in case you have motifs with very saturated colors, esp. in the red/yellow area and high contrast it becomes very visible.
i dont like that much.
beside CA the sharpness holds up as well against the 45 digitar rodenstock >( together with the sinar back ) as does the 17tse against the 23HR and the 24tse against the 35HR.
I dont own the 40HR so i couldnt compare this lens, it might be better  than the 45 digital, although this is a good performer too, but inferior compared with the HR line up.

further i compared the 45TSE with the 55mm pentax FA/AF  lens, the 55 again with the zoerk adapter.
here the 55mm pentax lens is clearly better than the canon 45tse , and it has over 20mm of shift with the zoerk, which results in a similar fov. than the 45tse ( full shifted too ).
so this is a highly recommend lens, always together with the zoerk,-  but i am not sure if he still makes these adapters.
same about the 75mm pentax lens. it is just a great performer on the canon, although both lenses want to be stopped down at least to f11 to be sharp till the edges, better even at f16.
i did not bought the 90tse, cause the pentax 75mm is just perfect.

BTW.:
i had the good luck that i met stefan steib, the ceo of hartblei, last week in munich, together with his new hartblei cam, which recently was reviewed  by MR.
aside that i liked a lot the hartblei 40/80/120 tilt/shift lenses which are exceptional good manufactured, i think that the tested 35mm lens setup could be fantastic for his cam,  
together with any mf back mounted on it:
17tse, 24tse, 1.4extender for it, zoerk shift adapter together with pentax 645 55mm and 75mm lense and maybe also the 120mm hartblei tilt shift.
and all this would be way more afortable than anything else in the mf world till now,  together with a 33 or 39mp back from the 2.hand market its just a bit more expensive than a canon 1dsmk3, and it would cost app. the half than any other shift camera together with an similar set of "real" mf lenses from schneider or rodenstock.
very interesting setup i.m.o.
« Last Edit: December 22, 2009, 05:55:12 PM by rainer_v » Logged

rainer viertlböck
architecture photographer
munich / germany

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

Posts: 506


WWW
« Reply #44 on: December 22, 2009, 06:11:38 PM »
ReplyReply

Thank you, I appreciate the response. I will get another 1.4 and retest.

I agree about the 45, although some copies are sharper than others, all show objectionable CA. If I come across a Zoerk will try the 55 and 75.

Thank you again for your comparison posts.
Logged
brianc1959
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 53


WWW
« Reply #45 on: December 22, 2009, 10:17:56 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: rainer_v
i will post it, although i am a bit lazy to post images for it, more so after the discussion of valid or not valid 35mm related treads.

Your format comparison posts are very helpful and much appreciated.
Logged
erick.boileau
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 469


WWW
« Reply #46 on: December 23, 2009, 12:38:50 AM »
ReplyReply

I don't understand why it will not  be possible to compare 35mm lenses and bodies vs  MF
Logged
harshdreams
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 12


WWW
« Reply #47 on: December 25, 2009, 08:34:19 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: JeffKohn
The Nikon teleconverters are only meant to be used with AFS telephoto lenses. There's a tab on the TC that will prevent other lenses from mounting. You can file away the tab to get around this problem; but you need to be careful which lenses you try to mount, since the rear element of the lens could hit the front element of TC depending on the lens's design (not a problem with the 24 PC-E though, since the rear element is pretty deeply recessed). I have not tried this myself.

There's a Kenko/Tamron TC for Nikon mount (actually two, a cheapo one and a more expensive "pro" version) that doesn't have the extra tab and should allow most Nikon lenses to mount. I have no idea how good the optical quality is, though.

Thanks Jeff, I think the tab on the TC is the problem. I shall try the non nikon TC's. regards, Harshan
Logged
Pages: « 1 2 [3]   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad