Why use long lenses on technical cameras?

[PaulSchneider]

Hi guys,

is there any advantage (besides easier stitching) of using long lenses on tech cams?

Resolution-wise, has anyone compared the Mamiya 200mm+ options with longer lens options for tech cams? It appears to me that all longer tech cam lenses such as the SK apo digitars are older designs, at least compared to the steadily evolving lower-end of the tech cam lens landscape? That is, comparing that to new releases with 80 lp/mm such as the SK 28mm XL, RS 32mm or the RS 23mm?

Is there still a marked quality advantage on tech cams for longer lenses? When looking at images produced of say an 43 XL the resolution differences are really clear compared to fixed focal length options onf the 645 system; but how do longer lenses compare, especially considering the fact that longer lenses traditionally are easier to design and show more homogenous quality?

I imagine focusing anything but infinity with longer lenses on a tech cam to be a tedious task? Could it be that the only realy advantage seems to be stitching when shooting landscapes or anything at infitnty settings?

Would be nice to hear some of your thoughts on that subject!

Regards

Paul

[dchew]

Paul,

This subject is touched on in this post here:  What Long Lens for MF iq180

It depends.  Does the photographer need large image circles for tilt, shift or stitch?  If not, I don't think anyone buys a technical camera for the long lenses.  It can be tough to focus, but IMO that is less of an issue than some make it out to be; a few focus brackets can be done in about 10 seconds.  Compared to all the other things associated with setup and framing, focus bracketing is trivial. 

If you want the flexibility and features of a technical camera on the wide end, and/or the wide image circles, then a technical camera is arguably the best option.  I am certainly not going to also carry a medium format SLR for the long lenses just because it might be easier to focus. 

Could it be that the only real advantage seems to be stitching when shooting landscapes or anything at infinity settings?

For long lenses, I think you are correct that it comes down to whether or not you need a large image circle.  Personally, I like the process and the way I work with a technical camera.  It is kinda like the difference between hiking on a trail (SLR) vs. off-trail bushwacking (technical camera).  Bushwacking might be a miserable experience or a glorious one.  You just never know until you're out there!

Dave

[Marlyn]

The main reason as I see it, is not carrying two different systems.
A longer lens on a technical camera is a pain, yes,  but I think less 'pain'  than carrying a whole different body, lens just for the different lengths.

I guess it depends just how 'long' you need to go.

Still investigating myself.

Regards

Mark.

[Graham Welland]

Focusing with a longer tech camera lens isn't difficult btw. I use a Leupold rangefinder to gauge longer distances for my SK 150mm which is accurate enough for landscape use plus I'm not shooting wide open or aiming for super narrow DoF anyway. For closer up a distometer provides more accuracy and the focus helicoid provides for much finer control over focus point too.

I do still see quality benefits with the SK lens on my Alpa which I put down to the lack of moving parts and simpler lens. The quality difference just isn't as dramatic as you'll see with wider glass.

As I think we've all mentioned, it isn't very practical to haul a technical camera AND DSLR along together out in the field. I've done it in the past but I wouldn't recommend it once you stray far from your vehicle.

[Kevin Sink]

Good question; one I have been giving a lot of thought to, since I'm about to embark into the Tech Camera realm.  I just processed 70 images from a shoot in NC last fall.  I currently shoot a Contax 645 with a P65.  40% of my shots were done using the Zeiss 35mm, and surprisingly to me, 39% were shot using my Zeiss 120mm.  The remainder were shot with a Zeiss 80mm, stitched into pano's.  While I was processing the files, I took note of how many of those 120mm shots would have benefitted from some lens tilt or shift. About 50% of the 120mm shots would have benefitted from the camera movement.  What these statistics DON't show is that there are quite a few shots that just aren't valid to try with the 120mm without the camera movements.  Some good friends I shot with in NC shot some reflections on water shots and forest floor shots on their ARCA's, with 150mm lenses, and used lens tilts.  The resulting dof was nothing that could have ever been accomplished with my Contax/120mm combo due to the lack of tilt.  They were astonishingly beautiful shots by the way!
The other benefit is the stitching aspect & large image circle you referred to - this is especially advantageous if you are making very large prints.  You would avoid the "bow-tie" effect of panning & stitching.  Also, camera raises would allow you to compose certain shots without tilting the back, thus introducing small convergence distortion (more applicable to wide angle lenses).  
All that said, the biggest advantages are still with the wide angles, and that will be the focal length range lens I purchase first. Hope that helps.

[Gary Ferguson]

is there any advantage of using long lenses on tech cams?

How else are you gonna shoot motor sports?

[Stefan.Steib]

If you want to use Teles up to 1000 mm - HCam is the solution for Backs up to 80 Mpix.
Not all of the Superteles work without vignetting, but e.g. several Mirrorlenses do work full format
the long telezooms like 200-500 and similar.
I am using a Zeiss Vario Sonnar N 70-300 and it is pretty nice to have such a zoom range on MF AND 35mm Autofocus Canon
especially for the price  ( Conurus converted this costs 1000 $).

regards
Stefan

[nazdravanul]

If you want to use Teles up to 1000 mm - HCam is the solution for Backs up to 80 Mpix.
Not all of the Superteles work without vignetting, but e.g. several Mirrorlenses do work full format
the long telezooms like 200-500 and similar.
I am using a Zeiss Vario Sonnar N 70-300 and it is pretty nice to have such a zoom range on MF AND 35mm Autofocus Canon
especially for the price  ( Conurus converted this costs 1000 $).

regards
Stefan

So why isn't there any other tele lens except the aforementioned zoom on your official compatibility list ? Can you please specify which tele / supertele lenses do work without vignetting on a 54x40 sensor ?

[Stefan.Steib]

Simply spoken- because testing is something else than taking a quick look if it seems to work.
I do not have an engineering department,I do this all by myself besides , website, sales, service, support and forum work......it´s a long day believe me....
The lenses on my List I have either tried or I own them and use them all the time.
It is not so easy getting all these highend 3-5 k lenses home to try them out in detail.
I have also already tested the Canon line of Superteles (2,8/300 and so on) and these do NOT work, which I mentioned- the reason is the
last lens is too deep in the barrel, thus we have barrel vignetting.
I am just now working on the usage of the Canon ApoTeleconverters with the HCam, which seems to be very promising, more of this later.

regards

Stefan