View camera lens options most similar to a Canon TS-E 50 for product work

[gaufde]

Hi All,

I am in the planning stages of mapping out what ~50 mm lens options I would like to get for doing product photography using a GFX 50s and view camera.

My shortlist right now is the:

• Schneider APO-Componon 4/60
• Mamiya G 50 mm f/4 L with shutter and bayonet mount conversion

The Schneider can be found very inexpensively in the Makro-Iris mount. Also, I think that this lens will do very well at close focusing distances and could even be pushed into macro work. I don't expect to do that with this lens as the Makro-Iris 120 mm macro lenses are also affordable and probably better suited for that purpose.

However, I think that the image circle of the Schneider is a bit small. I know that will get better when I focus closer for product work, but I'd also prefer a wider focal length. The Mamiya G 50 mm f/4 L seems to solve both of those issues. As far as I can tell, the Mamiya G 50 mm f/4 L is the widest lens that offers more than 8 mm of shift on something like a Universalis with Rotafoot. However, I don't think that the Mamiya has been discussed quite so much from the perspective of table-top / product work.

For the people who have used a Mamiya G 50 mm, do you have any additional insights for me when it comes to using the lens at closer focusing distances? Besides price, are there any advantages to the Schneider 60 mm that I should consider? Are there any other lenses that I should consider that would give me similar performance as the Canon TS-E 50 mm while staying below about $1000 USD?

Thanks!

Edit: pinging @diggles and @rdeloe as the people who I know have experience with the Mamiya G 50 mm!

 

[rdeloe]

No need to ping me. I found your post.

For closer focusing distances in the 50-60mm focal length range, get the Schneider-Kreuznach APO-Componon HM 60/4 in Makro-Iris. It's excellent and covers the sensor well. The biggest limitation is the image circle is small, so realistically you shouldn't expect a lot of shift. You probably know this already, but it's the same optics (exactly the same) as the APO-Digitar 60mm f/4. Another option is the Rodenstock (or Sinar) HR Digaron 60mm f/4. I haven't used this one, but it is sold by Linos as a lens for inspection in factories, so it will do very well for close up work.

A hacked Mamiya G 50mm f/4 L is not the answer. These lenses have become very expensive, they are not designed for close focus work, and most importantly, while the conversion (shutter removal etc) is straightforward, nobody will calibrate it for GFX for you so you have to figure that out for yourself. It is time consuming, and success is not guaranteed. I just spent a very frustrating time trying to get my 2nd copy of the Mamiya N 65mm f/4 L to perform as well as my 1st copy. I've given up after several days trying. I suspect the housing took some damage and is misaligned; that could be the case for any of the Mamiya G or N lenses -- all of which are decades old.

If you really need 50mm, the smart choice is the Canon TS-E 50mm. I have only read good things about it. Importantly, if you drop your copy, you can get a new one and be up and running. In contrast, if I break my Mamiya G 50mm f/4 L, replacing it will be very difficult. As an added concern, once the fellow who does the work for me stops (which will happen in a couple years if not sooner), I don't know that I'll be able to find anyone else who can.

Here's another option to consider... You're already thinking of a 120mm lens, so it may be redundant, but the Schneider-Kreuznach APO-Componon HM 90/4.5 in Makro-Iris is excellent at close distances. There are many different flavours in the industrial lineup, some tuned for closer distances than others.

 

[gaufde]

A hacked Mamiya G 50mm f/4 L is not the answer. These lenses have become very expensive, they are not designed for close focus work, and most importantly, while the conversion (shutter removal etc) is straightforward, nobody will calibrate it for GFX for you so you have to figure that out for yourself. It is time consuming, and success is not guaranteed. I just spent a very frustrating time trying to get my 2nd copy of the Mamiya N 65mm f/4 L to perform as well as my 1st copy. I've given up after several days trying. I suspect the housing took some damage and is misaligned; that could be the case for any of the Mamiya G or N lenses -- all of which are decades old.

Oh, I guess I should take it as very telling that you of all people are suggesting I take a different route than the Mamiya G. When you say it isn't designed for close focus work, at what sort of distances would you be switching to a different lens like the Schneider?

If you really need 50mm, the smart choice is the Canon TS-E 50mm. I have only read good things about it. Importantly, if you drop your copy, you can get a new one and be up and running. In contrast, if I break my Mamiya G 50mm f/4 L, replacing it will be very difficult. As an added concern, once the fellow who does the work for me stops (which will happen in a couple years if not sooner), I don't know that I'll be able to find anyone else who can.

Yeah, that makes a lot of sense. I don't think the difference between 50 and 60 mm won't matter too much for me in the end. However, I'd like to go as wide as possible while still being able to clear any sort of mechanical interference with the rear standard. I may eventually look at wider options like the Schneider-Kreuznach APO-Digitar 35/5.6 for mostly non-product work (though I have used the Canon TS-E 24 II once when shooting a product that I wanted to make look expansive). The 50 and 90 TS-E lenses are optically great, but I'm looking to solve some issues with magnification changes during focus stacks and perspective changes during stitching by using a view camera instead. I think the workflow benefits will make it challenging to go back to a tilt-shift lens, when correcting the problems in focus stacked images takes a day of computer image compositing work. I'd prefer to spend that time making more creative compositions!

Here's another option to consider... You're already thinking of a 120mm lens, so it may be redundant, but the Schneider-Kreuznach APO-Componon HM 90/4.5 in Makro-Iris is excellent at close distances. There are many different flavours in the industrial lineup, some tuned for closer distances than others.

Yeah, the 90/4.5 is on my for-sure list as well, and I anticipate it will end up being my most used lens by a large margin. I'll just need the 60 for working in tighter spaces and large products (the size of a fridge or dining-room table). The 120 will probably end up being a more specialized lens to give me a longer working distance when I need that, but for general use the 90 will likely be most practical in the amount of space I have to shot in. I'd say the 120 would be a dedicated macro lens, but from what I've read the industrial lenses in Makro-Iris all seem to be pretty capable from infinity down to close focus if not true macro distances. So its looking like I'll probably end up with a trio of these industrial-mount lenses.

Speaking of which, what lens board do you use with the 60 mm on your Universalis? Does it work on a flat board or do you need the 7 mm or 15 mm recessed one?

 

[stevev]

As Rob says, the Rodenstock HR Digaron 60mm f/4 is pretty sharp. I just received a Sinar-branded copy and have only had the chance to take it out on one date, but it is pretty sharp across the frame (shifted on a Cambo Actus), and the image circle seems to be in the range of 74mm to as much as 80mm, rather than the stated 70mm. Also, I don't know if you've considered the Mamiya RZ67 50mm ULD. It is a very good lens albeit a bit bulky and heavy.

 

[gaufde]

As Rob says, the Rodenstock HR Digaron 60mm f/4 is pretty sharp. I just received a Sinar-branded copy and have only had the chance to take it out on one date, but it is pretty sharp across the frame (shifted on a Cambo Actus), and the image circle seems to be in the range of 74mm to as much as 80mm, rather than the stated 70mm.

Thanks for the report! I was debating between tacking my question on to the end of the thread you started about the 60 mm XL alternatives, but decided that I had enough of my own questions to start something different. What focus distance did you use for this initial test? Also, did you end up re-housing the lens or did you find the Sinar in a copal 0 already?

Also, I don't know if you've considered the Mamiya RZ67 50mm ULD

This was my original pick! However, if I end up going for a Universalis instead of an Actus I'd have to make a custom lens board, and I've had a few people steer me towards the Schneider Apo-Componon instead now.

 

[stevev]

It came housed in, and calibrated for, a Copal 0 shutter mount. The subject was about 20 metres away. How close will you be shooting, and at what aperture?

 

[gaufde]

For product work I'll likely be shooting from distances of 4 meters or less at F11

 

[rdeloe]

Oh, I guess I should take it as very telling that you of all people are suggesting I take a different route than the Mamiya G. When you say it isn't designed for close focus work, at what sort of distances would you be switching to a different lens like the Schneider?


Yeah, that makes a lot of sense. I don't think the difference between 50 and 60 mm won't matter too much for me in the end. However, I'd like to go as wide as possible while still being able to clear any sort of mechanical interference with the rear standard. I may eventually look at wider options like the Schneider-Kreuznach APO-Digitar 35/5.6 for mostly non-product work (though I have used the Canon TS-E 24 II once when shooting a product that I wanted to make look expansive). The 50 and 90 TS-E lenses are optically great, but I'm looking to solve some issues with magnification changes during focus stacks and perspective changes during stitching by using a view camera instead. I think the workflow benefits will make it challenging to go back to a tilt-shift lens, when correcting the problems in focus stacked images takes a day of computer image compositing work. I'd prefer to spend that time making more creative compositions!


Yeah, the 90/4.5 is on my for-sure list as well, and I anticipate it will end up being my most used lens by a large margin. I'll just need the 60 for working in tighter spaces and large products (the size of a fridge or dining-room table). The 120 will probably end up being a more specialized lens to give me a longer working distance when I need that, but for general use the 90 will likely be most practical in the amount of space I have to shot in. I'd say the 120 would be a dedicated macro lens, but from what I've read the industrial lenses in Makro-Iris all seem to be pretty capable from infinity down to close focus if not true macro distances. So its looking like I'll probably end up with a trio of these industrial-mount lenses.

Speaking of which, what lens board do you use with the 60 mm on your Universalis? Does it work on a flat board or do you need the 7 mm or 15 mm recessed one?

Clarifying the kind of work you'll do was helpful. When you said "close" I was imagining watches and jewellery rather than refrigerators.

The Mamiya G 50mm f/4 L was designed for a rangefinder camera with a minimum focus distance of around 1 metre. I just did a quick test and it's not usable at 15 cm, but at 40 cm it's fine and at 50cm I would not hesitate to use it. I sorted through images I made during my 2024 field season and there are several where I'm at distances less than 1 metre. The one with the red mushroom might even have been 20 cm.



It really is a fantastic lens now that it's calibrated for my GFX 100S and F-Universalis. I've chosen all the lenses I use not only for optical performance, but also for size (small) and weight (as light as possible); this Mamiya fits right in with those criteria. I can recommend it enthusiastically if you have the skills and time to do the necessary modifications, mounting and calibration. Most people don't, which is why I generally advise people to go with an off-the-shelf solution wherever possible.

I don't have the Schneider-Kreuznach APO-Componon HM 60/4 anymore. I sold it a couple years ago, and regretted doing so ever since because it is so small, light and excellent. If I had one today, I would use it for images like the two on the right because it excels at those distances. I'd have to do the measurements but I would definitely use a 15mm recessed board to give myself the most working room. It's not difficult to build a custom M42x1 mount board by the way. The M42x1 female thread drops through a Copal 1 hole, so if you can find a recessed Copal 1 board, you can drop a 5mm M42x1 extension ring through the hole and screw it on from the back. You can also use it with a 39mm x 1/26th inch threaded V-mount adapter, and use an OEM board (if such exists).

However... if I needed 60mm today, I think I would take a good close look at the Rodenstock HR Digaron-S 60mm f/4. It comes in the Sinaron version that Steve bought, and you can also get it as a Linos Inspec.x industrial lens. That extra 10mm of image circle diameter is very useful, and the lens performance charts for the Rodenstock suggest it's an extremely sharp lens with just a bit of distortion. I'm actually considering one of these for times when I need to save even more weight. I could use a 60mm instead of carrying my 50mm and 65mm.

You also mentioned the Schneider-Kreuznach APO-Digitar 35/5.6 XL-102. That's an excellent lens, but it's not one I recommend for GFX unless you are up for the calibration work. You mentioned you're using a GFX 50S. That's a FSI sensor, so you're going to have to live with nasty lens cast; it should tidy up well enough with an LCC frame, but you'll need an LCC frame every time, and colours will be affected. The bigger issue is that I had to close up the cell spacing to make it usable on my GFX 100S. I believe it's due to the cover glass (thickness and how it's arranged). Apparently the 50S has a different arrangement of cover glass so I'm not certain that the issue is present on that camera, but you'd need to be ready in case it is. There's a long thread you may have seen already about dealing with this.

A much simpler wide option is the SMC Pentax-A 645 35mm f/3.5. A good copy is excellent and gives you a lot more shift. The catch is the moustache distortion that is typical of all the wide retrofocus lenses from this period. There isn't a simple software correction for that. In landscape settings it never bothered me, but the lens is not a good choice for architectural and interior work.

And now for the unsolicited advice part of the show... I have to ask, is a digital view camera solution really the best one for someone doing your work? Wouldn't it be much cheaper and easier to use your GFX 50S with the Canon 24mm ts-e, the Fuji GF 30mm t-s, the Canon 50mm ts-e, and the Fuji GF 110mm t-s? You won't have to worry about lens cast and faffing around with machining and closing up lens cells. If you break or lose a lens, you can buy a new one and be back to work. I really don't like tilt-shift lenses and will always go out of my way to avoid them, but I'm not a commercial photographer. Photography is currently a core part of my professional work, but I'm not a commercial photographer with demanding clients and constant short deadlines, so I have a bit more breathing room. Plus I have to carry everything all day like a pack mule, and my outfit is much lighter than that list of tilt-shift lenses. Food for thought.

 

[gaufde]

Clarifying the kind of work you'll do was helpful. When you said "close" I was imagining watches and jewellery rather than refrigerators.

Yeah this is always an issue with general language like this! Everyone has a different connotation/assumption for the same words in the same context.

The Mamiya G 50mm f/4 L was designed for a rangefinder camera with a minimum focus distance of around 1 metre. I just did a quick test and it's not usable at 15 cm, but at 40 cm it's fine and at 50cm I would not hesitate to use it. I sorted through images I made during my 2024 field season and there are several where I'm at distances less than 1 metre. The one with the red mushroom might even have been 20 cm.



It really is a fantastic lens now that it's calibrated for my GFX 100S and F-Universalis. I've chosen all the lenses I use not only for optical performance, but also for size (small) and weight (as light as possible); this Mamiya fits right in with those criteria. I can recommend it enthusiastically if you have the skills and time to do the necessary modifications, mounting and calibration. Most people don't, which is why I generally advise people to go with an off-the-shelf solution wherever possible.

Thanks for testing that for me! That definitely makes it an attractive option for me again. Though your points about uncertainty/risk when trying to find a good copy and the difficulty of getting a replacement are still good considerations. Maybe I’ll wait and hope to find one sold as non-functioning since a failure in the electronics wouldn’t matter to me.

You also mentioned the Schneider-Kreuznach APO-Digitar 35/5.6 XL-102. That's an excellent lens, but it's not one I recommend for GFX unless you are up for the calibration work. You mentioned you're using a GFX 50S. That's a FSI sensor, so you're going to have to live with nasty lens cast; it should tidy up well enough with an LCC frame, but you'll need an LCC frame every time, and colours will be affected. The bigger issue is that I had to close up the cell spacing to make it usable on my GFX 100S. I believe it's due to the cover glass (thickness and how it's arranged). Apparently the 50S has a different arrangement of cover glass so I'm not certain that the issue is present on that camera, but you'd need to be ready in case it is. There's a long thread you may have seen already about dealing with this.

A much simpler wide option is the SMC Pentax-A 645 35mm f/3.5. A good copy is excellent and gives you a lot more shift. The catch is the moustache distortion that is typical of all the wide retrofocus lenses from this period. There isn't a simple software correction for that. In landscape settings it never bothered me, but the lens is not a good choice for architectural and interior work.

Ah, the difference between the FSI and BSI sensors is a bit of a pain it seems. Do you know what is the widest lens that avoids too many color cast issues on the FSI GFX 50s? It seems most people around here have moved to the BSI sensors for these sorts of reasons, so there isn’t as much recent GFX view camera discussion with FSI sensors in mind. I don’t really need this focal length for my product work, so this be something I’d consider down the road if I wanted something wider for more personal explorations. For that work, I could probably live with shooting LCC frames.

The Pentax sounds decent, but I think the distortion makes it unappealing to me. I like geometric forms a lot. Actually images like your photo of the concrete tunnel over Hanlon Creek are similar to some of the things I like. Also, the distortion would be a complete show-stopper if I tried to use the lens for product work for the once in a blue moon time I might want that. So, I think I’d much prefer having to shoot an LCC frame if that was my only option.

I know a TS lens would be better in this range, but I never really liked the Canon 24 mm II lenses I used. I also found 24 mm too wide on the GFX. The Fuji 30 TS looks awesome, but the expense is much too high for how much I’d use it.

And now for the unsolicited advice part of the show... I have to ask, is a digital view camera solution really the best one for someone doing your work? Wouldn't it be much cheaper and easier to use your GFX 50S with the Canon 24mm ts-e, the Fuji GF 30mm t-s, and the Canon 50mm ts-e, and the Fuji GF 110mm t-s? You won't have to worry about lens cast and faffing around with machining and closing up lens cells. If you break or lose a lens, you can buy a new one and be back to work. I really don't like tilt-shift lenses and will always go out of my way to avoid them, but I'm not a commercial photographer. Photography is currently a core part of my professional work, but I'm not a commercial photographer with demanding clients and constant short deadlines, so I have a bit more breathing room. Plus I have to carry everything all day like a pack mule, and my outfit is much lighter than that list of tilt-shift lenses. Food for thought.

I appreciate the thoughts! The reason I want to switch to a view camera is two-fold. It’s also partially inspired by Tin House Studio on YouTube who does pretty big ad campaigns using a Cambo Actus MV, so I don’t think it’s unheard of for this sort of work. The first reason is that I think a view camera will give me real workflow benefits with regard to focus stacking and/or stitching. The magnification of the image changes a lot on the TS-E 50 and 90 mm lenses as the focus is changed. When I’ve done focus stacks using these lenses, that change in perspective has lead to some really terrible ghosting, halos, and blurry portions in the final focus stack that take a lot of pain-staking work to manually fix. It’s especially bad when there are overlapping features on a subject. I’m hoping that a lot of these headaches will go away by having the lens remain completely still and just moving the sensor to change focus. Another workflow benefit will be the larger amount of movements on the view camera and being able to precisely adjust things in Cartesian coordinates rather than radial coordinates.

The second reason is because I’ll enjoy it more. I really loved shooting 4x5 film in college, so I just want to re-create that experience as much as possible. I also like to tinker and the view camera opens up a lot of possibilities to experiment. For example, the 6x9 Universalis could allow me to do some work with roll film which would be cost effective but still feel like I’m shooting a larger format. Not to mention trying random lenses or other more custom modifications.

I’m also not sure how pricing will end up working out. Depending on what lenses I choose the view camera could be cheaper. cost. For product work, a set of two Canon TS-E lenses (the 50 and 90 L) would probably cost about $3400 when bought used in excellent condition. A view camera might cost about $3300, the SK Apo-Componon 90 mm in Makro-Iris seems to be easily found for $500. The 60 and 120 seem to be even cheaper at maybe ~$300. So for two focal lengths on a view camera we are now at about $4600. If you add a third focal length it starts to get a lot closer in price, and I think a fourth focal length might tip the scales in favor of the view camera. Though, if I convince myself to get a Sinaron Digital 60mm HR, then all the cost arguments will probably vanish .

Lastly, while I do get paid for the product work I do, photography is not my day job. I have a hope that one day it might be, but for now I’m an engineer who develops scientific instruments, and then becomes the photographer when needed. I’ve just found I like this type of photography, and I hope that I can develop it further to go beyond what I’ve done for the company I work at.

 

[rdeloe]

Yeah this is always an issue with general language like this! Everyone has a different connotation/assumption for the same words in the same context.

Thanks for testing that for me! That definitely makes it an attractive option for me again. Though your points about uncertainty/risk when trying to find a good copy and the difficulty of getting a replacement are still good considerations. Maybe I’ll wait and hope to find one sold as non-functioning since a failure in the electronics wouldn’t matter to me.

Ah, the difference between the FSI and BSI sensors is a bit of a pain it seems. Do you know what is the widest lens that avoids too many color cast issues on the FSI GFX 50s? It seems most people around here have moved to the BSI sensors for these sorts of reasons, so there isn’t as much recent GFX view camera discussion with FSI sensors in mind. I don’t really need this focal length for my product work, so this be something I’d consider down the road if I wanted something wider for more personal explorations. For that work, I could probably live with shooting LCC frames.

The Pentax sounds decent, but I think the distortion makes it unappealing to me. I like geometric forms a lot. Actually images like your photo of the concrete tunnel over Hanlon Creek are similar to some of the things I like. Also, the distortion would be a complete show-stopper if I tried to use the lens for product work for the once in a blue moon time I might want that. So, I think I’d much prefer having to shoot an LCC frame if that was my only option.

I know a TS lens would be better in this range, but I never really liked the Canon 24 mm II lenses I used. I also found 24 mm too wide on the GFX. The Fuji 30 TS looks awesome, but the expense is much too high for how much I’d use it.

I think it depends a lot on the lens design whether you'll have issues with an FSI sensor. As a rough guide, the closer the rear of the lens is to the sensor, the worse it is likely to be. I was expecting issues with my Mamiya G 50/4 because it is quite close, but I had none when I used it extensively with a GFX 50R cameras -- which means it would be fine on your 50S.

If you can find a nice G 50mm with bad electronics, it might be worth a shot. I had the same idea, and bought one that had a bad helicoid with the intention of having my Mamiya tech repair the helicoid and hack the guts so that I could have a backup. Tracking says it's coming back from its trip to the technician tomorrow... unrepaired. He put it on his test bench and concluded that it had taken a bad fall and the housing was a write-off. So now I have some spare lens cells, but not a spare lens.

It also really bothers me that I am unable to calibrate my backup N 65mm. I think it must have taken a fall in its life too because I pulled out all of my tricks and skills to no effect. Again, I now have a spare set of N 65mm cells.

I'm sharing this sorry tale with you because it highlights the risks involved in going down that path. I really wanted backups for these lenses, but that's looking to be an expensive and risky proposition. So today I activated "Plan B". I just bought a Linos Inspec.X L 60mm f/4 from South Korea. This is an industrial version of the Rodenstock HR Digaron-S 60mm f/4 (also sold as Sinaron Digital 60mm H). A 60mm lens falls neatly between my 50mm and 65mm. These are readily available and reports are that it does not need any special calibration for GFX. If it works out, I will have a lightweight option and a backup that will be easy to replace. The one I bought comes in an odd industrial housing, but the cells should work in a Schneider-Kreuznach B-0 housing. If this sounds attractive, you need to watch the prices. I saw a bunch on eBay for 3-4 times what I paid, which is odd. I'll report back here on the forum about on how the Linos works out.

Regarding the distortion on the Pentax, I don't think I've corrected a single image that you'll see on my website. These ones from various projects are all with the Pentax. The distortion really kicks in when you make large shifts. If you don't shift, it's really just mild barrel that corrects easily. Once you start shifting, the moustache begins to form -- but you'll only see it with buildings and interiors and the like. So it's very subject dependent.

I appreciate the thoughts! The reason I want to switch to a view camera is two-fold. It’s also partially inspired by Tin House Studio on YouTube who does pretty big ad campaigns using a Cambo Actus MV, so I don’t think it’s unheard of for this sort of work. The first reason is that I think a view camera will give me real workflow benefits with regard to focus stacking and/or stitching. The magnification of the image changes a lot on the TS-E 50 and 90 mm lenses as the focus is changed. When I’ve done focus stacks using these lenses, that change in perspective has lead to some really terrible ghosting, halos, and blurry portions in the final focus stack that take a lot of pain-staking work to manually fix. It’s especially bad when there are overlapping features on a subject. I’m hoping that a lot of these headaches will go away by having the lens remain completely still and just moving the sensor to change focus. Another workflow benefit will be the larger amount of movements on the view camera and being able to precisely adjust things in Cartesian coordinates rather than radial coordinates.

The second reason is because I’ll enjoy it more. I really loved shooting 4x5 film in college, so I just want to re-create that experience as much as possible. I also like to tinker and the view camera opens up a lot of possibilities to experiment. For example, the 6x9 Universalis could allow me to do some work with roll film which would be cost effective but still feel like I’m shooting a larger format. Not to mention trying random lenses or other more custom modifications.

I get that -- completely. I did a lot of good work with tilt-shift adapters and some tilt-shift lenses, but I never enjoyed it. I loved shooting 4x5 with view cameras and field cameras, and missed the experience when I switched to digital. I've had a couple other digital view cameras before the F-Universalis, but none as good or as flexible. I really enjoy working with it.

I think I may have watched the same Tin House video as you. He uses a Cambo Actus G with Mamiya RZ lenses. The RZ 50mm ULD he has in that video is an excellent performer on GFX, but it does have strong distortion. The other thing you have to watch for with very heavy lenses is unwanted tilt as the weight of the lens drags the front standard down. I think the 50mm is fine, but some RZ lenses might be a problem. @John Leathwick has a nice blog post about using RZ lenses with an F-Universalis.

I’m also not sure how pricing will end up working out. Depending on what lenses I choose the view camera could be cheaper. cost. For product work, a set of two Canon TS-E lenses (the 50 and 90 L) would probably cost about $3400 when bought used in excellent condition. A view camera might cost about $3300, the SK Apo-Componon 90 mm in Makro-Iris seems to be easily found for $500. The 60 and 120 seem to be even cheaper at maybe ~$300. So for two focal lengths on a view camera we are now at about $4600. If you add a third focal length it starts to get a lot closer in price, and I think a fourth focal length might tip the scales in favor of the view camera. Though, if I convince myself to get a Sinaron Digital 60mm HR, then all the cost arguments will probably vanish .

Lastly, while I do get paid for the product work I do, photography is not my day job. I have a hope that one day it might be, but for now I’m an engineer who develops scientific instruments, and then becomes the photographer when needed. I’ve just found I like this type of photography, and I hope that I can develop it further to go beyond what I’ve done for the company I work at.

It's said that the best way to destroy your love of a hobby is to make it your job. I made my hobby a major part of my job starting in 2020. So far so good! Thankfully I don't have to chase clients for late payments, so the "business" side of it has been manageable; I think that's the aspect that leads to the lack of enjoyment for most people.

 

[gaufde]

I'll report back here on the forum about on how the Linos works out.

I’ll be eagerly waiting to see your report!

Regarding the distortion on the Pentax, I don't think I've corrected a single image that you'll see on my website. These ones from various projects are all with the Pentax. The distortion really kicks in when you make large shifts. If you don't shift, it's really just mild barrel that corrects easily. Once you start shifting, the moustache begins to form -- but you'll only see it with buildings and interiors and the like. So it's very subject dependent.

Oh, this actually sounds more usable than I had realized. I might have to circled back around to it when I want a wide lens.

I think I may have watched the same Tin House video as you. He uses a Cambo Actus G with Mamiya RZ lenses. The RZ 50mm ULD he has in that video is an excellent performer on GFX, but it does have strong distortion. The other thing you have to watch for with very heavy lenses is unwanted tilt as the weight of the lens drags the front standard down. I think the 50mm is fine, but some RZ lenses might be a problem. @John Leathwick has a nice blog post about using RZ lenses with an F-Universalis.

That sounds right to me. I was originally thinking I would use those Mamiya RZ lenses because they were known to be good enough and the prices looked good. However, I’ve had a little correspondence with John already and he has steered me towards the Schneider Apo-Componon lenses instead.

I made my hobby a major part of my job starting in 2020. So far so good! Thankfully I don't have to chase clients for late payments, so the "business" side of it has been manageable; I think that's the aspect that leads to the lack of enjoyment for most people.

That’s great news! Congratulations! I’m not sure how things will go for me, but there’s no way to know but find out

 

[stevev]

Here is the Rodenstock 60HR vs the Mamiya 50 ULD on a brick wall to show the 50 ULD distortion that Rob mentioned, vs the R60 showing very little. In each case nine images - 3 rows and 3 columns - stitched together. The Rodenstock (Sinar) is first.

 

[rdeloe]

Nice demo.

There's our classic moustache distortion in the Mamiya RZ 50 ULD! The 60mm is showing what looks like pincushion, which should be easier to fix.

 

[stevev]

However...I will say, for me, shooting at longer subject distances, the Mamiya M RZ67 50mm f/4.5 ULD is excellent. I agree that it is heavy and bulky compared to a lens like the diminutive 60 HR, but if its heft and distortion are not an issue, it is a very capable performer. I have never seen the Cambo lens plate fail to hold the lens at an immovable 90 degrees to the sensor. Any errors are usually because I failed to zero out swing or tilt.

When I shot the following comparisons, it was a grimy, dull, windy day. I will reshoot in better conditions. I focused in the centre of the centre frame. I shot and stitched 9 shots, using all the shift and rise/fall available, on a 36x24mm sensor.

Here is the final shot with all nine images stitched together, made with the Mamiya 50.



Here are some comparisons of the two lenses, first near the centre of each lens, shot at f/8 in each case. Mamiya 50 first.



And then near the left edge of the shifted frame - about 30 to 35mm off axis, shot at f/11. Mamiya 50 first.



The 60 HR is crisper in the centre, but I thought it might be a little better towards the edges than I see here, so I will reshoot the scene carefully in better conditions. I must bear in mind that the image circle is officially 70mm, not more.

 

[rdeloe]

The Mamiya looks very good.

I used a lens with strong moustache distortion extensively and was never bothered by it, but that's because I tended not to have subjects where the distortion was evident.

 

[John Leathwick]

Looks really interesting, Steve. I'm currently out of town with very limited internet, so will check out more closely when back. My impression was that my F-Universali front standard struggled to keep parallel with the sensor when the ULD was mounted.

-John

 

[accwai]

[...] The magnification of the image changes a lot on the TS-E 50 and 90 mm lenses as the focus is changed. When I’ve done focus stacks using these lenses, that change in perspective has lead to some really terrible ghosting, halos, and blurry portions in the final focus stack that take a lot of pain-staking work to manually fix. It’s especially bad when there are overlapping features on a subject. I’m hoping that a lot of these headaches will go away by having the lens remain completely still and just moving the sensor to change focus. Another workflow benefit will be the larger amount of movements on the view camera and being able to precisely adjust things in Cartesian coordinates rather than radial coordinates.

Yup, the headaches w.r.t focus stacking will certainly go away when the TS-E lens is on a view camera. Plus you basically have two sets of movements that could complement each other, e.g. the geared tilt on the TS-E replacing the swing the on the Universalis then you have geared angular movements on two axis. Best of both worlds...

The second reason is because I’ll enjoy it more. I really loved shooting 4x5 film in college, so I just want to re-create that experience as much as possible. I also like to tinker and the view camera opens up a lot of possibilities to experiment. For example, the 6x9 Universalis could allow me to do some work with roll film which would be cost effective but still feel like I’m shooting a larger format. Not to mention trying random lenses or other more custom modifications. [...]

Umm... That would depend on how one defines cost effectiveness. First, try finding out how much it costs to convert from a Univeralis DSLR to a Universalus 6x9 plus the Graflock 23 frame (I'm assuming you're not running Universalis 6x9 now because only GFX 50R can get on that, S class GFX can't). Anway, just did a comparison between the 6x9 and 4x5 forms on a dual format F-Classic body. To me they are quite different operationally. The 6x9 doesn't have nearly the screen size of the 4x5 to let you see things crystal clear. Nor does it have a digital backend on a Universalis DSLR that allows you see things in many different ways.

The Britch landscape photog Bruce Percy talks about shooting film as a way of cutting off all escape routes for onself. That surely could be a way to build up ones level of mental commitment, but for some of us that might be too hardcore. That's why I have stopped shooting film for quite a while. Now if I were to start fresh and do a format conversion from Unvisersalis, I would skip the 6x9 and go to 4x5 directly. The hardware cost is quite comparable actually. Of course before going ahead with something of this magnitude, might not be a bad idea to first find somebody who can do such a demo. Good luck

 

[gaufde]

Yup, the headaches w.r.t focus stacking will certainly go away when the TS-E lens is on a view camera. Plus you basically have two sets of movements that could complement each other, e.g. the geared tilt on the TS-E replacing the swing the on the Universalis then you have geared angular movements on two axis. Best of both worlds...

That could be kinda nice! However, I've been thinking of finding a cheaper alternative to the TS-E to use on the view camera. A smaller/lighter lens would be nice, and a manual aperture would be preferred so that I don't have to get an expensive electronic lens board or keep a canon body around to use the depth of field preview to close the aperture before removing the lens from the mount. We will see how things shape out once I have a chance to play with some of the 50 or 60 mm lens options discussed in this thread.

Umm... That would depend on how one defines cost effectiveness.

I was mostly thinking in terms of film and development costs. Plus if I want to have more than a few shots, a roll-film back is more space and weight efficient than sheet film holders. However, I think you are right that the equipment for each Universalis format kit costs a similar amount. I do find shooting sheet film somewhat alluring; but I found a used Universalis 6x9 with GFX rotafoot that makes the cost of considering the 4x5 format kit much less appealing. If I want to shoot sheet film in the future, I'll probably end up looking at other cameras and then I'll have to decide between 4x5 or 8x10 .

 

[accwai]

I was mostly thinking in terms of film and development costs. Plus if I want to have more than a few shots, a roll-film back is more space and weight efficient than sheet film holders. However, I think you are right that the equipment for each Universalis format kit costs a similar amount.

Well the concept of "kit" here isn't totally straightforward: The Universalis 4x5 format conversion kit is ready for film shooting while the 6x9 kit by itself isn't. In addition to the roll film holder you need a Graflok 23 frame, so don't forget to price that in too. A vinatage F-Classic 6x9 has groundglass frame hooking itself onto the Graflok 23 just like the way things are done on 4x5, but apparently the groundglass and Graflok are totally separate in the Universalis 6x9 design. That might be because Universalis 6x9 are much more for digital backs, so groundglass frame isn't really necessary and got thrown in more as an afterthought...

I do find shooting sheet film somewhat alluring; but I found a used Universalis 6x9 with GFX rotafoot that makes the cost of considering the 4x5 format kit much less appealing. If I want to shoot sheet film in the future, I'll probably end up looking at other cameras and then I'll have to decide between 4x5 or 8x10 .

Well Universalis 6x9 has its own sqare frame at the back and can't take a Rotafoot. If you have Rotafoot now, it's a Universalis DSLR. The bellows system on the two forms aren't interoperable. To change from DSLR to 6x9, say goodbye to your Rotafoor and existing bellows. To that, you then add the cost of the Graflok 23 frame...

Anyway, if I were to shoot film again I would seriously consider the LomoGraflok 4×5 Instant Back. One shot, one print, end of story. Just you, the scene and the process. No post-processing and no escape route. Pure photography... And reasonable running cost too

 

[gaufde]

Anyway, if I were to shoot film again I would seriously consider the LomoGraflok 4×5 Instant Back. One shot, one print, end of story. Just you, the scene and the process. No post-processing and no escape route. Pure photography... And reasonable running cost too

Thanks for the suggestion!

Well the concept of "kit" here isn't totally straightforward: The Universalis 4x5 format conversion kit is ready for film shooting while the 6x9 kit by itself isn't. In addition to the roll film holder you need a Graflok 23 frame, so don't forget to price that in too. A vinatage F-Classic 6x9 has groundglass frame hooking itself onto the Graflok 23 just like the way things are done on 4x5, but apparently the groundglass and Graflok are totally separate in the Universalis 6x9 design. That might be because Universalis 6x9 are much more for digital backs, so groundglass frame isn't really necessary and got thrown in more as an afterthought...

Well Universalis 6x9 has its own sqare frame at the back and can't take a Rotafoot. If you have Rotafoot now, it's a Universalis DSLR. The bellows system on the two forms aren't interoperable. To change from DSLR to 6x9, say goodbye to your Rotafoor and existing bellows. To that, you then add the cost of the Graflok 23 frame...

I appreciate you trying to help, but I have all the details regarding the camera under control already. Also, this isn't what this thread is about. My hope was to learn a bit more about 50 – 60 mm lenses that I could potentially use to replace a TS-E 50 mm for product work when using a FSI sensor on a view camera.

So far, the most compelling options to me are the Mamiya G 50 mm f/4 L and the Linos inspec.X L 60 mm f/4. The runner up, and the one I will likely buy first, is the Schneider Apo-Componon 4/60. If the image circle ends up being large-enough, then maybe that will be enough lens to get started with while I wait for a good copy of the first two options to show up.