Technical system for digital camera

[VTech]

Hi all,


new to the forum, but reading certain posts occasionally for a long time.

I've been googling and reading bits and pieces all over about view cameras / technical cameras.
Apparently these are not the same thing.
I didn't know this.

The reason I'm looking into this.
I want to be able to have tilt control (and other movements). But I want it on a budget (No cambo acts)
Mainly for product&food photography. (Architecture or interior 2 to 3 times a year, not a priority just nice to have)
I think such a system is more future proof, flexible and less fiddly than tilt-shiftlenses or tilt-shiftadapters. That's why I'm thinking of skipping those two.
Would want to use it on my current FujiX mirrorless camera, nice if I can use it with a canon dslr as well (not a priority). Might upgrade in the future to the Fuji GFX system.
Movements preferably geared. (Certainly tilt, which some don't have geared)
Weight is not an issue.
Open to quality diy stuff. Frankenstein stuff, etc.
Lens wise thinking of older medium format glass, unless you advise something else.

Are there any old or new technical camera's I should look into?
From what I understand, the problem with older monorail technical setups is the minimum distance between the lens and the camera (in order to reach infinity focus).

I'm base in Europe, so preferably things that are easy to get around here.

 

[Paul Howell]

Not cheap but a Canon PC lens with tilt and shift in EOS mount and Canon to Fuji adaptor. Cheapest is a older Linhof technical camera with 4X5 back a box of color film and a good lab with high quality scans.

 

[Ko.Fe.]

Google for affordable T&S lens. Get matching mount (or via adapter) camera. It doesn't have to latest and greatest since non moving objects could be taken at low ISO. Old cameras low ISO is nice, IMO.

For example. Canon 5D with this https://araxfoto.com/specials/tilt-shift-35/

 

[VTech]

Thanks for the quick replies.
I'm not sure it is what I'm looking for.
T&S lenses seem quite fiddly, and I've heard they are not all that great quality wise
Also, I don't think they are geared? Or am I wrong on this part?

 

[Rockaway Studios]

There is another thread with view camera options, including my setup which mates a Sinar Camera to a Canon DSLR or Leaf back. Yes, a View camera is sort of a cousin to a technical camera, far less portable, far more adjustable.

https://www.photrio.com/forum/threads/digital-view-camera.183172/

If you are going to try to mate a view camera to a fixed body camera, the mirror box, depth of the body, and size/shape of the lens flange all get involved. This REALLY matters if you are trying to use movements at all in the camera, it also greatly affects what lenses you can use.. A digital back is preferable but not strictly required.

for Studio tabletop and architectural work a view camera is extremely workable. I don’t know if it’s the cheapest way but it definitely yeilds very high quality results…

 

[Craig75]

Personally I'd rent a tilt shift lens first and see how you get on with it. You might find them entirely usable or you might hate them but you won't know till you try.

 

[PerTulip]

T&S lenses seem quite fiddly, …

TS lenses are the un-fiddliest solution. I don‘t get what you are looking for. You care about „fiddle“, yet you ask for DYI and „Frankenstein“ stuff. Ever worked with a view camera? TS lenses are nothing compared in the realm of „fiddling“ to them.

Either you want something simple, then go for a SLR/DSLR with a TS lens. Or you want full movements, then go for a proper LF camera and deal with the fiddling.

 

[VTech]

If movements are geared, I don't see it as fiddly.
I don't see diy and frankenstein stuff necessarily as fiddly.

But I get that I might have been a bit too much into GAS and should get my hands on a proper rented or lended TS lens.

From what I've seen online, adapters and lenses seem very fiddly and limiting...

Thanks Rockaway Studios for pointing me to that thread.
I think I read bits of it, I'll give it a thorough re-read.
In the meantime, I see you used a Sinar P2, a system with all geared movements if I'm not mistaken. Is there a source where I can find differend brands/models that lists wether movements are geared or not? Or any recommendations for relatively easy to find systems?

 

[Craig75]

I can't see how Yr going to mate an apsc digital camera to a 5x4 view camera very easily at all.

Personally the only solution I can see is a tilt shift and possibly tethering camera to a laptop for focus checking.

I use an old shift nikon and that has a worm screw. Turn screw and lens shifts very precisely. The latest nikon and Canon ts lenses look exceptional with very precise controls.

 

[Paul Howell]

Not sure what the prices are like in your part of the world, but a Lindhof or Horseman 6X9 with roll film back, Ektar 100 or slide film will out preform a C size sensor no matter how good the tech camera is up front. Downsize is price of film and processing along with a high end scan.

 

[Chan Tran]

The Sinar P3 would be a good system.

 

[Rockaway Studios]

If movements are geared, I don't see it as fiddly.
I don't see diy and frankenstein stuff necessarily as fiddly.

But I get that I might have been a bit too much into GAS and should get my hands on a proper rented or lended TS lens.

From what I've seen online, adapters and lenses seem very fiddly and limiting...

Thanks Rockaway Studios for pointing me to that thread.
I think I read bits of it, I'll give it a thorough re-read.
In the meantime, I see you used a Sinar P2, a system with all geared movements if I'm not mistaken. Is there a source where I can find differend brands/models that lists wether movements are geared or not? Or any recommendations for relatively easy to find systems?

Sinar system is easy, really - The F models ("Field") rely on a lot of friction movements, nothing is geared movement. Same for Norma systems - both are still very precise, but not gear driven.

P systems, and X systems are the gear driven studio cameras. A P3 is a smaller version intended for digital use, but it takes a much more expensive shutter system and specific lens boards, where the P and P2 and X are all very interchangeable. Sinar only made a few models, only the P, P2, and X are 4x5" micrometer geared movements. P3 is it's own thing...

I actually suffered a burglary lately, and my 17mm TS-E was amongst things that were stolen, so there is a deal on a great TS-E lens out there somewhere...

 

[Mainecoonmaniac]

Not cheap but a Canon PC lens with tilt and shift in EOS mount and Canon to Fuji adaptor. Cheapest is a older Linhof technical camera with 4X5 back a box of color film and a good lab with high quality scans.

For those with limited budgets, you could do what a PC lens does in Photoshop. You could use the perspective tool or use the tool to fake a shift in focus. But I think a PC lens is fun to have.

 

[grat]

Fotodiox makes all kinds of weird and groovy adapters-- from a DSLR plate that allows you to bolt your favorite DSLR onto a 4x5 and stitch 6 images together, to tilt-shift adapters that allow you to use things like Bronica MF lenses on APS-C cameras.

 

[Rockaway Studios]

The Fotodiox /Luhndahl/ changwoo/ /Chinese generic adapter sold on Amazon and eBay is a steaming hunk of crap. It is unnecessarily deep, adding about 37mm over the depth of a well thought out adapter. It is poorly machined, vignettes badly (making most all camera movements impossible) and actually a bit too thick for the graflok sliding retainers and feels like your expensive DSLR is about to fall off the back of the camera. It’s mechanically impossible to get anywhere close to infinity focus with a lens shorter than a 150mm with that adapter. Justtogether.de has a much better adapter that does away with that sliding nonsense (Since the rear standard has rise/fall, shift/tilt etc, no need for the adapter to slide anyway).

 

[JWMster]

FWIW, as an "old" topic by now, I'd suggest a review of Tilt Shift lenses vs. Cambo Actus is more of a toss up on cost than you might be thinking. Some of your decision making should be driven by your expectations in terms of what % of prospective shots will use the equipment. The bigger number could argue that you're probably going to push through whatever initial solution you find to another, and it might be cheaper in the long run to cut to the chase and bite the bullet up front. My course has almost always been the one half-step at a time, and it has probably cost me a lot of endlessly trashed dollars that would have been cheaper to step up quicker - or defer entirely. I didn't. So maybe my regret colors my counsel. There's a link to an article about a fellow using a tilt-shift aparatus with Olympus 35mm lenses and a Novoflex shift adapter to approximate what you want with the Fuji XF system, but then he junked that, bought a Fuji GFX system and attached it to a Linhof or other view camera system within 2 years. I think part of the issue is the view camera lenses that work on an APS-C will tend to get shorter than you'll be able to find without jumping up to FF or a GFX. (Yes, I think about this, too. But haven't wriggled through the spendy thing). Ergo.... my caution is simply I guess I'm not the only one who follows the sub-optimal pathway. Good luck... the inspiration is fun, the cost... likely higher than we'd like. BUT if you find the Holy Grail.... don't hesitate to let us know.

 

[Mainecoonmaniac]

How's this Frankencamera?

https://petapixel.com/2021/09/21/di...BO1wiRcGzB9RKLBeDW9hBccbIZms6ueH5v97zrVij9rps

 

[wiltw]

For those with limited budgets, you could do what a PC lens does in Photoshop. You could use the perspective tool or use the tool to fake a shift in focus. But I think a PC lens is fun to have.

Addressing the point in blue: The adjustment of Perspective in any postprocessing program will NOT do this important difference:

A Perspective Control lens, or a techical camera will gather more detail than any program would provide...a program cannot FILL IN detail in the area compressed by perspective distorion, which is later 'spread out' visually via perspective correction software!​

Here is an analysis of optical vs. software correction of keystoning
https://www.bhphotovideo.com/explor...ions/tilt-shift-lenses-vs-photoshop-lightroom

 

[Mainecoonmaniac]

Addressing the point in blue: The adjustment of Perspective in any postprocessing program will NOT do this important difference:

A Perspective Control lens, or a techical camera will gather more detail than any program would provide...a program cannot FILL IN detail in the area compressed by perspective distorion, which is later 'spread out' visually via perspective correction software!​

I agree. I'm a regular user of 4x5 cameras. If I can, I will always do it the analog way. PC lenses are expensive for 35mm and 120 cameras. They cost so much that if I had a limited budget, I'd buy a 4x5 camera with a lens instead of a PC lens. I would like to have a PC Canon FD lens to add to my lens collection.