View Camera for architectural photography ?

<p>(wasn't sure whether to post here in beginners - or medium format - apologies if I picked the wrong one)</p>

<p>I'm looking to expand into some architectural photography - for which a form of perspective correction lens would be at least desirable.</p>

<p>I currently use a D90, and none of the currently availabe nikon PC lenses will be fully functional with it (also would be very limited due to crop factor and nowhere near wide enough).</p>

<p>I have read that a view camera would be able to accomplish the same perspective control. So I'm looking at what would be a good setup to get started with.</p>

<p>I would prefer digital, but have no idea what sort of cost we are talking about (had a quick look, but got a bit overwhelmed by choices available in medium / larger format cameras).</p>

<p>Bearing in mind the starting kit for 35mm would be a D700 + PC lens - that would equate to approx £2,800 - what would you recommend as an alternative in the view camera field - and what sort of cost ?</p>

<p>I intend to gradually establish some sort of business in the architectural photography field (I'm an architect - so have the specialised field knowledge, just severely lacking in the appropriate technical aspects outside of the 35mm/DX format) - so I know I will have to invest in equipment and appropriate training/experience first. This is long term, I'm not expecting to pick this equipment up and trade straight away - I'm fully expecting a steep learning curve here.</p>

<p>Many thanks,<br />Martin</p>

<p>Most view cameras are large format rather than medium format with an image size of 4x5 inches or more. There are digital backs available for them but they are very expensive. Here is a link to the Betterlight website. They make scanning LF backs.</p>

<p><a href="http://www.betterlight.com/">http://www.betterlight.com/</a></p>

<p>So unless you are really keen on digital this effectively leaves you with the option of using film in your large format camera. You should be able to get a very good LF kit together for the money you mention especially if you buy second hand. Here is a link to Q. -Tuan Luong's Large format website which gives very useful info on all sorts of aspects of LF from camera and lens selection down to the detail for taking a LF picture..</p>

<p><a href="http://www.largeformatphotography.info/">http://www.largeformatphotography.info/</a></p>

<p>Here is a link to Robert White's website. They are an excellent pro shop in the south of England so may not be much use to you but they carry a wide range of LF gear. You can also look up auction sites for s/h examples. LF Lenses and cameras wear well and are often useable for decades.</p>

<p><a href="http://www.robertwhite.co.uk/">http://www.robertwhite.co.uk/</a></p>

<p>A digital view camera? There are many prohibitive factors. You can get a digital back for a 4x5 camera but they're rare and very expensive. The most practicable solutions would be a large format view camera with film (bit of a learning curve from SLRs) for best quality - there is just no way to get a DSLR to match the image an experienced shooter can get with a 4x5 sheet of film - or if the cost doesn't scare you off go to the D700 solution. If you can't pay for the D700 right now a lower cost option would be to get the PC lens and use it with the D90, and add something like a used F4 or F100 for when you want "full frame".</p>

<p>There are shift lenses for some medium format systems as well, but they're not really more practical than the Nikon solution and you're still left with the choice between shooting film and buying a very expensive (10x the cost of the D700) digital camera or digital back.</p>

<p>Thanks for the info - yup I'm completely new to anything outside of 35mm, so I'm kinda floundering.</p>

<p>Colin, thanks for the links - some useful looking info there to get me started.</p>

<p>Andrew - That's a very good idea - using the PC lens with a film body, that would at least allow me to start learning the tilt/shift processes before splashing out on a new (and potentially very expensive) body. If I could use it on the D90 to get the immediate feedback at the start - albeit with a cropped image, then use the film body to compose 'full' images. I have a Coolscan LS2000 so I could still scan slides.</p>

<p>Anyone know if the tilt and shift lenses are compatible with the D90 ? - I seem to remember reading that they would not work (it may have been that the controls / movement was restricted by the body) ?</p>

<p>thanks,<br>

Martin</p>

<p>Using a digital back on a view camera goes back along time; ie President Clintons first term; maybe about 1 year after photo.net was born; or say Photoshop 3.0 days and mighty 75Mhz Cpu's on Win 3.1; say 16 years ago!<br /> <br /> The ones here are from circa say 1996; a 35 and 50 Megapixel scan back. One tethers them to a computer for a scan. The scan area is 7x10cm ; ie about Lantern Slide size; what folks new to digital call today cropped. If anything moves during a minutes plus long scan; it gets blurred. One gets thus with a building shot birds to retouch out. Even a brand new 4x5" scan back today is cropped; it is not 4x5"; it is still about the same as my ancient ones.<br /> <br /> Digital back have always been expensive; film offers alot less capital outlay. For small stuff I use a 35mm F2.8 Shift Nikkor on a dslr.<br>

<br /> One can also shoot aiming up and then scan the 4x5 film and correct it in photoshop too. A massive correction does degrade the image. One can mask this issue by using some margin; a big negative! Sometime I do both; I correct as much in the camera; the the final correction in Photoshop; it is a poor mans way but it works.</p>

<p>Mart,</p>

 

<p>Since you’re considering changing formats, it’s worth observing that Canon has two

superlative and three excellent tilt/shift lenses. The just-released-a-couple-months-ago 24 may be the

best wide-angle prime made for the format, and the just-as-new 17 is almost as good. (According to reviews, such

as those at <a href="http://the-digital-picture.com/">http://the-digital-picture.com/</a>.) The much older

24, 45, and 90 are all highly-regarded lenses. My 24 has been my favorite lens, and I’m just now

getting ready to sell it to help pay for the new 24. The Canon lenses offer the full range of movements;

the new ones don’t require a screwdriver to achieve them.</p>

 

<p>You can also mount medium format lenses to pretty much any 135 (or smaller) format camera with

a bellows.</p>

 

<p>Cheers,</p>

 

<p>b&</p>

<p>What's more, not to rub it in, but Nikkor shift lenses--like my old, beloved PC-Nikkor 35mm f/2.8--will also work well on Canon EOS bodies. I bought an older 35mm-sensor size Canon 5D just to put the PC-Nikkor back into its original "equivalent" focal length. I haven't tried newer Nikkor shift/tilt lenses, but I would suppose that they would work in totally manual mode. I have used a recent Nikkor fisheye to good effect on EOS bodies.<br>

However, there are a few medium format tilt/shifts but some of them from the former USSR are, well, maybe worth no more than you pay for them. Medium density digital is also very expensive.<br>

Large, view cameras are definitely the way to go, but becoming increasingly difficult. New, film cameras are not cheap, although you maybe can find one used for less. For this, you are really into getting a very high quality scanner too, since the option of a large format digital back is daunting in cost terms. We're talking the price of a car or small house here. Developing the film is not without its own costs, but then you can scan in the negatives.</p>

<p>At the least, you need to buy a Nikon body that will give 35mm sensor size and will work with the Nikkor T/S lenses.</p>

<p>This is not a cheap area to specialize in.</p>

<p>You can do various perspective and other controls in post-processing in things like Photoshop, but this will not produce results that are as good as getting the image right to start with. I doubt that one would be able to do this and make a living at architectural photography.</p>

 

<p>Thanks for the comments.</p>

 

<blockquote>

<p><strong>JDM</strong> : This is not a cheap area to specialize in.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>LOL You're telling me ! just racked up thousands on my fantasy shopping list already.</p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>You can do various perspective and other controls in post-processing in things like Photoshop, but this will not produce results that are as good as getting the image right to start with. I doubt that one would be able to do this and make a living at architectural photography.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I've used photoshop extensively, and you can get so far with perspective correction in PP, but it doesn't really cut it. Most of the in-house shots I've taken via work have been edited that way, and it's probably OK for web viewing, but too much degradation for publication.</p>

<p>Obviously I will need to put a stake in the ground at some point and start with some kit better suited to architectural shots. It is looking increasingly as thought that will be via FX and the PC lens. I could rent the lens from calumet, at least for a couple of days to get a feel for it - but I don;t think it is that compatible with the D90, so I need access to another body at the same time.</p>

<p>The 24mm PC seems a bit limited in angle (I'm used to 12-24mm on DX), but presumably stiching panoramics (either interior or exterior) is slightly more straight forward with a PC lens ? at least from reading on sites such as: http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/tilt-shift-lenses1.htm</p>

 

<blockquote>

<p><strong>Ben</strong> : Since you’re considering changing formats, it’s worth observing that Canon has two superlative and three excellent tilt/shift lenses.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>If I go with FX - it wont be changing formats completelt, and I have a number of Full Nikon lenses - so I would prefer to keep to Nikon if possible (I know I started off talking about view cameras, but I think I have been talked round to sticking with 35mm - which should please my bank manager at least).</p>

<p>I'll read around some more anyway.</p>

<p>Thanks again for the info all.<br>

Martin</p>

<p> </p>

<p>Martin, as you have by now gathered, the view camera is still the workhorse of the architectural photographer; many field cameras and a few press cameras will work, but they will still be more limited in movements and perspective controls than a full view camera. I use a Cambo rail camera for most shots, indoors and out, and back it up with 35mm (with PC lens), 6x6, and, only very occassionally, a DSLR. The smaller formats are used mostly for detail shots that are very difficult to reach with the Cambo, such as the top of a tall ornate column or crown molding. With the view camera, you will use wide to normal lenses about 90% of the time with longer lenses only occassionally useful. As has been mentioned, digital backs which fit on view cameras are very expensive and also very slow and cumbersome in the field.</p>

<p>I do use a Nikon 35mm and a PC lens on occassion, but it can never replace a view camera. View cameras are not all extremely expensive; you could easily get started with a Calumet 400 series camera with two lens boards, a 90mm and a 150mm lens, a half-dozen film holders, and a sturdy tripod. Use a black t-shirt for a focusing cloth and one of your other cameras for a light meter and go to work. There is a learning curve involved in the effective use of a view camera, but it'll come faster than many folks would have your believe.</p>

<p>To answer your other question, a PC-Nikkor is compatible with a D90 (unless there are any really old PC-Nikkors out there that are not AI?) but the meter... okay, I haven't tried the newer models on cameras that lack mechanical aperture coupling, but I do believe that even though they are manual focus they have electronic connections and can work the meter... somebody help me out here...</p>

<p>With a 35mm F2.8 Shift Nikkor on a 4x5 camera; one gets a round image like an 1890's<br>

Kodak box camera; and alot of weird looks from folks too! The lens about hits the shutter</p>

<p><img src="http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y148/ektar/35mm%20PC-%20Nikkor%20on%204x5%20speed/tripods-298.jpg?t=1267487282" alt="" width="398" height="424" /></p>

Martin,

 

I don't want to discourage you from learning to use either a view camera or a lens that incorporates movements - either one will open up fascinating possibilities. That said, you're looking at a significant investment of money for gear and time to learn to use the gear properly.

 

A less expensive solution would be to take multiple shots from a single vantage point and combine them to make one large image of the room. If you combine multiple shots in photoshop you'll have options available for correcting perspective distortion. You'll also be able to capture a wider field of view than most PC lenses can capture. There are tricks to this type of shooting/processing, but you can learn about it by searching the web (and even this site) for tips on shooting "panoramas." All you'll need is your D90, a decent tripod, and a copy of Photoshop on your computer (which hopefully you already own).

 

Best of luck to you!

<p><strong>Andrew:</strong> I can't find the exact report outline incompatibilities between the D90 and the Nikon PC lenses - but it wasn't about the mount, AF or metering, it was more a case of the physical restriction of applying tilt / shift with the viewfinder / flash assembly clashing. I think the same restriction is also present with the D700 (to a lesser extent ?) again that is from memory, I've been unable to find the article again.</p>

<p><strong>Dan:</strong> I already use photoshop pretty extensively via work and 3d modelling / texturing work, and have already used it to create seamless textures from stiching multiple images etc. It's very time consuming to get right although you are spot on with it being a much cheaper approach.</p>

<p>My intention is to ultimately to establish architectural photography as the lynchpin in a photography/architecture business - for this I would really need to develop skills with PC lenses / view camera format, so this will be a first step in that direction. It will cost me, and it will effectively be an investment (albeit a possibly risky one) in setting that up.</p>

<p><strong>Vick:</strong> I'm in the UK, and from looking around, it is incredibly hard to find Calumet 400 series gear here (tried Calumet themselves, but they have nothing here) - the only sources I've found are from ebay with shipping from US - something I'm a bit reticient to do.</p>

<p>Thanks for the comments - it is looking as though a PC lens will be the more practical first step (the camera upgrade + lens will be useful in other areas too), with a view camera coming as a second stage once I am further along and possibly able to supplement costs with some income.</p>

<p>Still applying a lot of thought though - so keep any ideas coming.<br>

Thanks,<br>

Martin</p>

<p>Martin; the a "shift the lens route" on say a view camera one here as a reader has really no idea of your target variables.<br /> <br /> (1) One persons idea of a building might be only a 2 story one; and one has a GIANT vacant lot across the street; thus only a minor vertical shift is required.<br /> <br /> (2) Another job might be in a big city with a 10 story building in narrow street downtown; and there is no far away point to shoot from.<br /> <br /> Case (1) only requires a minor vertical shift; case (2) requires alot; plus a short lens with *alot* of coverage.<br /> My 4x5 Speed Graphic with a 127mm Ektar will often do case (1) ; IF the building does not fill the frame. The lens barely covers 4x5; one gets a dark vignetting with a shift. If one doesnt have tall trees it works; with a 250 buck rig<br>

<br /> For case (2) The field camera can run out of vertical shift too. Even one has a view camera that can be tied into a pretzel; the lens often is a big issue. A len with moderate/average coverage like a Xenar/Tessar lens will not cut it; since one has to use a long lens to get coverage. One often does not have the luxury of a wrecking ball crew to knock a neighboring building. Thus to get the tall building in one needs a maybe a Symmar-S with 70 degrees of coverage; or maybe a Super Angulon with 100 degress of coverage. With a 4x5 this means say 90, 75 or even 65mm wide angle lenses with "coverage" With a digital 4x5 back one has the dinky 7x10cm format too which further is limiting. Even MF digital backs are cropped too!<br>

<br /> <br /> To shoot straight verticals in a downtown area with narrow streets has one to either get into the mid floors of the building across the street; or a short 4x5 lens and film and a alot of shift.<br /> <br /> For me I sometimes use a 12cm F6.8 Angulon on a Speed Graphic where I want straight verticals; it has some shifting room; or a 90mm Angulon that just covers 4x5. If I run out of shift/or cut of the top floors/trees I do the hybrid approach and tilt the camera *also* then do a lessor correction in photoshop; NOT a massive one. Since there is less remapping/stretching of pixels; there is less degradation to the image.<br>

<br /> <br /> In the USA a typical "learn view camera" school rig has a 210mm say F5.6 Xenar; one learns tilts without breaking the bank. If one tries a shot of case (2); one finds the lens is about 2 to 3 times too long!<br /> <br /> With view camera selection; chose the subject; then the lens; then the body. A short great wide angle 4x5 lens can cost more than the body.<br /> <br /> Here in printing for the public; I see less and less film; less and less LF and MF usage. For moderate Arch shots many folks are moving to dlsrs and shift lenses.<br /> <br /> With digital one has the other issue of off axis weirdness/flaws/abberations with some sensors and lenses too.</p>

<p>Kelly, thanks a lot for that breakdown on the likely scenarios and implications for camera type.</p>

<p>Been hunting around for likely sources of view cameras - even cheap learning tools - here in N.Ireland. They are very few and far between, even casting the net further afield to Ireland / Dublin. I can find plenty of sources for Cambo and other such manufacturers, but nothing in the 'affordable' range to learn from.</p>

<p>You mention flaws / abberations - is that a particular source of concern on say the Nikor PC-E lenses with the D700 / D3, or a more generalised comment ? I haven't seen mention of it in any reviews on the 24mm PCE. I realise that wider lenses (such as the 12-24 that I currently use) do tail off to the corners at the wider settings, but is this still the case with a 24mm prime ?</p>

<p>Martin</p>

<p>Hi Martin; I am not sure about the 24mm PCE lens.<br /> <br /> My comment about the far off axis can have some weird issues is general one. Some sensors have issues with non normal; ie non perpendicular light than others.<br /> <br /> With a wide angle lens of a given focal length say 24mm for example; one design can have more straight on light towards the sensor; and have less issues (ie a retrofocus lens design).<br /> <br /> Thus a specific wide angle lens and camera/sensor should be "google searched for"; to see if anybody has any issues; or is it clear sailing.</p>

<p>Mart E, a few people on the Nikon Forum have some experience with the 24mm PC-E Nikkor and FX format Nikon dSLRs. Off the top of my head, <a href="../photodb/user?user_id=24372">Shun Cheung</a> (Nikon forum moderator) has used this combination. I think <a href="http://www.google.com/url?q=http://www.photo.net/photodb/user%3Fuser_id%3D19054&ei=j52NS8qpH4rSNdaCmW4&sa=X&oi=spellmeleon_result&resnum=1&ct=result&ved=0CAYQhgIwAA&usg=AFQjCNF18ItlYe8gjy2brEiJwkXhd47sig">Ilkka Nissila</a> has used that lens with an FX dSLR as well.</p>

<p>I've used the 28mm PC-Nikkkor (lateral shift, rise-fall only, no tilt) for several years with 35mm Nikons and the DX format D2H and find it adequate for my needs. The structures I photograph seldom exceed a single story, usually two stories at most, so a moderately wide angle or normal focal length is satisfactory for exteriors. It's also useful for some interior detail photos. But for interiors I don't often need a perspective correction lens. A wide angle on a high enough tripod is often adequate. But, again, the particular project I've been photographing - mostly rural petrified wood structures - doesn't really require wide angle lenses.</p>

<p>My advice is to buy a cheap secondhand view camera and a good secondhand lens to go with it just to try out the idea of using film / view camera for what you want to achieve. I suggest a decent monorail camera with bag bellows will permit wide angles and plenty of movements which are essentials for architecture. The wooden or metal field type cameras are often more restricted in this regard though if you can fit bag bellows they are easier to work with wide angle lenses. </p>

<p>The point about bag bellows is that when short focal length, wide angles are sed the normal bellows become stiff and so movements are restricted. The bag bellows are softer and so still allow a wide range of movements.</p>

<p>Mr Cad in Croydon and Ffordes in Scotland both have second hand monorails which might suit. For a starter lens I would go for a recent (multicoated) 90mm f8 Schneider Super Angulon or the equivalent Rodenstock Grandagon 90mm f6.8. These are equivalent to about a 28mm lens on 35mm. A 75mm lens is roughly the same as a 24mm lens on 35mm and 65mm equates to about a 20mm lens on 35mm. You can get faster and more expensive versions of these but I would start small so if you decide the whole LF thing id not for you then you can sell the gear again with minimal loss.There are also more modern designs such as the Schneider Super Symmar but they tend to be more expensive.</p>

<p>There are four main manufacturers of LF lenses - all four are excellent quality and there is little to choose between them. Schneider, Rodenstock, Nikon and Fuji all make superb LF lenses in a range of focal lengths. You will also need some film holders, a big old tripod and a good loupe. Going the secondhand route means your investment will mostly be in time mastering the techniques which I found to be not so much difficult as really easy allowing great scope for making mistakes.</p>

<p>I enjoyed using my LF camera and if digital backs became cheaper would take it up again - a very satisfying way of taking picures and the ability to print large from LF still beats digital hands down in my view. Having said that if you want sizes up to A4 you will in my experience be pushed to see any difference between a good DSLR file and a scan from an LF camera. Bigger than that it starts getting more and more obvious.</p>

<p>Another option which is still viable is to look into medium format gear. This would stll be film based but the technology is and techniques is more similar to 35mm. There is a lot of good quality suff around secondhand to keep the investment down. A chap I know who specialises in underwater photography still iuses Hasselblads (in housings obviously!) and film and doesn't seem to see the need to go digital.</p>

<p>Many thanks for the detailed information there - plenty to think about (especially from Colin). I need to do a bit of preparation reading on exactly what constitutes the necessary kit - the different components that is - so that I can price a system up and make a decision.</p>

<p>If it's OK - I'll post a typical setup for some feedback, make sure I'm on the right sort of track.</p>

<p>Many thanks again - its greatly appreciated.<br>

Martin</p>

<p>Mart E,<br>

Colin is right on with his explanation. My business requires quite a bit of LF work of high rises undergoing rehab or renovation, and new construction also. Most of my work features the use of a 90mm lens in 4 x 5 (equal to about a 28mm in 35 format) sometimes a 75mm for those really high buildings without too much room to back up and get the shot (be careful of vignetting at the top when you shift), and the 150mm which is equal to about a 45mm in 35mm. The 150 is considered a "normal" lens for 4 x 5. Learn also how to tilt the lens forward a bit to achieve sharpness at wider apertures, then stop down to shooting aperture. I have found the sweet spot for most of my lenses is f22 or f22 1/2. Get the most sturdy tripod you can afford and then also anchor it down with a weight that attaches to one leg. A focusing cloth that is white/black is good also as the white side goes over your head and keeps you cool. Be sure it is weighted so it does not fly around too much in breezes.<br>

I use an older Cambo SCX and it works just fine for this work.<br>

One item no one has mentioned: If you use any image enhancement with your digital cameras, then you cannot state that your images are true and unaltered. This is a requirement in the event your images need to be entered into evidence during a legal proceeding. Many times I have had to attest that my film images received no manipulations. I would also suggest that if you do shoot digitally, shoot in raw as attorneys will want the data for each shot if needed.</p>