OK, the first part of this thread was GREAT. Some excellent input from a worldwide group of photographers.
(http://luminous-landscape.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=38404)

At this point, I'd like to continue the dialog of the initial thread by breaking it into different threads: Part 2 (this thread) = Gear; Part 3 (future thread) =Setting your price/Marketing/Getting the Job.

From the input of my initial thread, I'm leaning toward as much "Naked Light" as possible, accepting the fact that on occasion I may have to fill selective areas with lights. This reflects best with my vision, and will be adopted as my "style". Yes, I know there will be jobs I'll not get as a result of my decision, but so be it. (Worst case I'll move to Switzerland and shoot with the Europeans. )

Thus, let's get started with Part 2:
Now, let's say a chap or lass has decided to pursue AP work. Here are a few of the initial issues that relate to hardware which must be addressed. (Seems wise to have all gear ready with plenty of test/practice shots mastered before seeking you first job.)

Assuming we start with a Hasselblad H3DII-39MP camera with the 28, 80 and 150 lenses (which is what I own).

What gear (let's keep it digital) have you used with success, or wish you could use? Tech Pan camera? HTS adapter? Artec? etc.
What did you find to be the advantages and disadvantages of your digital capture gear?

Lights - by type/application in a scene: Brands, models, watts, etc. that have worked well for you.

Misc. hardware that I'm not even aware of needing for a shoot.

Hopefully, this thread will generate as much excellent dialog as the last one did. I know hardware discussions can bring out strong opinions in each of us but I ask that prejudices be set aside and suggestions be based on logic and success you have personally experienced from your gear - that which you have kept and that which you have discarded.

Thanks,
Jack

What limitations has your present gear imposed on your style?

if you wants :
focusing precision
tilt with all lenses
ground glass composition
very precise focusing ring
shift and rise on the back
flare proof body
and a camera that can be used without tripod if require

then, it's going to be an arca swiss RM3D with a rotaslide

otherwise, it depends on your priority... Alpa SWA, ALPA MAX, ALPA XY, CAMBO wide RS, Sinar Arctech...

what i use now is the artec with 23/28/35/45/70 + 90 mm lenses with emotion e75 backs and sinar exposure software which creates dngs only,
which i process in lightroom.

and a canon 5dmk2 with 100-400mmzoom for close up details and (new now ) the 17/24/45 tse lenses, together with 1,4 extender.

there are no disadvantages with both setups.
the canon is lightweight and this new shift lenses are fantastic, even the 24 used with the 1,4 extender is still great.

i like the slower style of work with the artec, but the canon in terms of image quality is top notch too.
on the other hand the preparation of the motifs and/ or the waiting for the right light takes long time so the
faster speed the canon allows is not often important for my work and has zero impact on the production times
and also not on the number of images i deliver, so i choose mainly the system which workflow/ results fits better.

i use gitzo carbon tripoids, very large, medium and small.
no lights. i often use cranes or truck based lifting platforms.
i work usualy with one assistant on site.

i have a macbookpro on location with 6gb ram and 50gb ssd drive as temporary disc
and i send a calibrated eizo monitor to my hotel rooms ... sometimes an epson 3800 printer too.

i would not go on working with mf if the camera wouldnt be perfect for my style of working,
means i wouldnt use any mf camera without a complete set of shift lenses or a camera body without a sliding back.

i have a 5D II and an aptus 22, and for me, for architectural photography i've found that they are not in the same league at all... a question of taste maybe !

I think it depends on your shooting style as well...

maybe a question how you postpro your files and how much you stitch and layer and so on.
cant see why taste impacts images in terms of technical quality, except you want to imply that you have "better" taste or my quality needs are lower, which i dont believe.
working with mf files is mostly easier in post ( if the base files dont show color cats and so on ).

GBPhoto has asked the appropriate question. You won't know what you what you need until you find something you want to do but can't.

If you want your images to look like someone in particular then you can use similar equipment.

Use what you have and develop your style, then get what you find you need.

Perhaps rent the HTS since you have corresponding equipment. Scout your location before the shoot and see if you need lights or not.

Rent, rent, rent

And I agree with Rainer (except for the 1.4x with the ts-e's), using 5d2 and aptus, both are extremely capable if used properly, both during shoot and in post.

did you try the 1.4 together with the new 24 ts-e?
i did it after arrival of the lens tuesday, so maybe i am wrong, but first shots looked simply surprisingly well.

i used some years ago the kodak slr, canon 1ds2 and the 5d a lot together with olympus24 shift and the zoerk/pentax645 lenses and it was much of work to get good shots with enough resolution and no visible distortion, but it was possible and a good school for digital work.
later, after the gottschalt and than the artec were in my hands i only used 35mm systems for details.
this might change now again, although the completed canon system is to fresh as i could say how i will use it in my work.
i will play around a lot with it to get a feel where are the limits and than i`ll see how and when and for what i will use it, but all feels very good as far i can say it now. but my new impressions of the canon "system" are based on maybe 50 shots done in the last 3 days,
and this was no working assignment, i did for myself.

I did and found the distortion a bit too much. Also introduced some chromatic aberration. But I only tried one 1.4x and it wasn't an extensive test. If you've seen decent results I'd be prepared to try again with another copy of the 1.4x ... I can see having one and it being convenient, on the other hand stitching 2 with the 45 would give a similar view.

Canon, please make a 32 tse on par with the new 24. Every arch shooter around the world will buy one. Well, maybe there will be the odd exception.

i bought yesterday the 45tse too,- i think CA with the 24tse together with the 1,4 is less than the 45 shows.
sharpness is very good, probably because this combo use only the inner image circle.


i sign your petition for a 32 or 35tse, and i would welcome too a new 45 and 90tse, and maybe a 60 in the middle.

I just received a 17mm tilt shift and will be using it Sunday on an assignment. The Canon I use is still the 1dsmk2, so unless I can find a 5dmk2, the resolution will not be the best (although adequate). The primary camera and lens I use is the Mamiya 645 and their 28mm with a P45 back but there's been several instances where I could use a wider shift lens and thus my purchase of the 17mm. Also, the 1dsmk4 is rumored to take a 32megapixel capture which would certainly be adequate for my clients. Jim

Thank you for signing my petition. Let's scrap it and I'll sign yours, as I prefer that spread. The 90 tse may be good enough as is though (no need to double the price of a very good lens).

Yes, the 45 shows unbelievably bad chromatic aberration. But I've swallowed that pill and will run them through DPP or manually correct in LR. After correction all looks quite good.
The good news is I tested 5 new ones and all were very sharp and the tilt/shift mount felt nearly on par with the new 24 and 17 (older ones I've had/tested were always a bit iffy).

So, Canon - do what Rainer says.

And L4L, shoot with what you have, find your style, find your niche, buy as you need. Unless you're loaded, then buy a lot and keep some of the salesmen/reps here employed. Get and ArTec and 2 Alpas (people with money should all have an SWA). Run the Sinaron/Rodenstock lenses on the ArTec and Schneider on the Alpa (don't ask why). Then your covered. Oh, and have them drop a 5d2 in there as well, you'll need/use it.

Yes,
please Nikon give me a Nikkor 35 PC-e!

Here in Naples, we have numerous beautiful Condo's right on the beach.
I've tried to practice on them, exterior, and find the lack of rise and tilt is a major drawback.
No way to resolve the parallax issue elegantly with CS4.

This file is an HDR from 5 exposures and 4 images (each an HDR) stitched together in PTGui.
Then did best I could in CS4 to try to resolve the building falling over backwards - not good enough:
http://www.shadowsdancing.com/sp%20arch%20...20exposure.html

Would the HTS resolve this issue - hummm - hate to loose the 28mm with the 1.5 factor of the HTS.

Jack

Reiner,

IF you were restricted to only ONE of the two systems you have to use for the MAJORITY of your assignments, which would it be and why?

Thanks,
Jack
PS: Dang Rainer, the capital investment in the Artec is substantial, even frightening to a mortal like myself!

Lust4Life,

Is this better? A very quick fix. You had the verticals correct on the left but not the right. You probably used the perspective option in Transform or Distort->lens.
That is usually not best because if the camera is not absolutely horizontal, the adjustment required on each side will be different. Use vertical guide lines and the
Distort option in Transform. This will let you 'pull out' each side by different amounts, matching each side to its guide. Pull the nodes horizontally or you will introduce
some new distortions. Note when you change one side by pulling over horizontally, the other side may require some readjustment. Back and forth til correct.

With perfect verticals and a very tall building, the effect will look unnatural. The top will look too large. In that case do not correct for perfect verticals, leave some
convergence so that it look natural. Your building does not fall into that category.

Learning to use PS is a whole lot cheaper than than buying new equipment to solve a problem! <g>

I am familiar with this because many years ago as a manual board draftsman, I drew perspective illustrations and had to know the theory.

Larry

Jack,

In the shot above (that Larry attached) you've got quite good light on the building. You really shouldn't need to do any HDR. With the DSLR you've got, what, 10 stops of latitude? I spent a dozen years shooting this stuff on chrome which only had 6 stops (more like 5 for Velvia). HDR can be a great tool, but like any great tool, it doesn't come out of the toolbox every time. The shot feels highly unnatural, as though the building were crudely cut and pasted onto a painted backdrop. Just trust what is naturally happening... good light + good camera = good picture. I wouldn't do any more to the file than maybe open up the shadows (judiciously) with P'Shop's Highlight/Shadow adj (which is quite good).

Actually, when I really need more tone than the P65+ can capture, I'll take a single RAW, process it at +1.5 and -1.5 (well within the pushability of these files) then merge them in Photoshop as layered masks. This guarantees no ghosting in the image and exact alignment. Here is an approach I often employ..

Best,

Chris

and... excuse me if I'm preachy... It's 2:30 am, I'm about to drive to Indianapolis to catch the morning light for some exteriors and I don't have an ounce of coffee in me yet.

That's easy. It would be a the Canon 1Ds Mk3 with a set of new shift lenses which should cover all your architectural needs. Quick, lightweight and easy to use. You can spend your time an energy on perfect composition instead of technical issues. But of course, you clients won't be as impressed as they would if you dragged out a digital view camera and 30x40" prints may not look as good. Personally I would never want to go back to the days of composing and focusing on a ground glass.

having both as i do i still would choose the artec, thinking in architecture/ landscape / design photography only.
having to buy them new it would depend on how filled my agenda would be with hiend work and how much taxes i actually have to pay the next years.
my clients rarely ask which camera i use, if they do they are impressed that sinar and i designed the artec together, but i wouldnt have had one job less working with the canon. anyway in practice thats only the half truth, the canon system is very capable just NOW after the release of the 17&24tse , before it was too complicate and too much work intensive to get professional results with it.
the canon lenses are quite new for me, so i will give a better answer after having the canon with its tse setup a half year in use...

Rainer,

Few years back, I purchased a 1DsMkII with two of the tilt/shift lenses shortly after it was introduced. I also had the H2 with a Leaf P45+ on it at the time. A pro I know, Jamie Cook, highly recommended the camera and I parted with the cash to give it a shot.

Wow, what a disappointment the Canon was for me. Besides finding the lenses (all L class) to be dramatically less is optical quality that what I was used to on my Hassie or Ebony 4x5 with Schneider/Rodenstock glass, the real killer for me was the ramp difference by not being 16 bits deep. I rarely hear this issue discussed on this site but to me it makes a dramatic difference and gives the advantage to MFDBs.

Now, I see Canon has re-engineered their TSE lenses, but we still have the 14 verse 16 bit issue.
Apparently this has not been a concern for you or your clients?

I also noted that a landscape photographer whose work I respect (Elizabeth Carmel) used the new Nikon on a trip to Italy and left her Hassie at home. From exchanges I've had with her, she was not delighted with the results. I attribute her issues with the images from the Nikon primarily as a function of the bit depth.

But I'll be open minded - if it meets the needs of the chap paying the bill, so be it.
Jack

Dear Jack,

The issue 14 vs. 16 bit should not be of any concern in respect to raws and final image quality: although 16 bit, the last 2 bit do not contain any information, respectively are "empty", if I can speak so. If you see a difference in quality between DMF and DSLR, then it has to do with other factors (not in order of importance: DR, CMOS vs. CCD technology, cooling, A/D converter, RAW in-camera processing, proprietary software, ... to speak about the most obvious ones).

But forget about 14 vs. 16 bit, it is simply BS.

Best regards,
Thierry

i dont ask for the needs to pay the bill i ask for an optimum of quality and workflow.

i am not a man of compromises, therefor appeared the brumbaer software as it finally was, exposure with the batch correction
of white shadings and the artec itself. i simply wanted a working hi end solution and was in the contact to exchange this need
with some clever software and hardware constructors.

BUT its a question of creativity to select and to use convenient tools for your work and more so how to use these in a professional and practical sense.
also the camera system has a big impact HOW to compose an image, this is by far more important than 14 real against 16 claimed bits.
there is so much bs., fault of knowledge and missinfprmation in the election of gear, its incredible. and too many people believe that the camera
is making the shots or delivering results the clients might like more, and therefor one will get more work or money. thats bs. i repeat : bs.
the clients like the images and above a certain level of work its absolutely basic that the image quality is top notch, noone ask therefor,- its simply clear
if one gets that assignments. its not that MY clients are content with 14bit images and that there might be any other client in the world who will not be
satisfied by them, because i work already at the hi end of this profession in america, europe and asia.
also i work since years with mf, but i am not blind enough to think that THIS gives me an real advantage. this are other factors, and there would be the money better invested than in too expensive gear,- ( except money isnt such big factor, but we are photographers not dentists ) .
as JR always claims: rent good models for your book ( so i`d advise you to rent maybe a crane or buy a simple ladder and a high tripoid for getting better view points- if you take this better perspective with a g10 and render the shots patiently and good your client and everyone else might like the shot more than your artecalpacambop65e75a10 shot taken from a worse view point and maybe rendered badly,- i promise you that ) and work with tools which actually work and which dont hinder you in terms of workflow, softare or simple unresolved technical defects.
i know too many colleagues who have left behind with more or less unusable gear from all the mf companies, independent of its bit depth and its price. it was not for fun that i asked stefan to write a working and practical usable software to correct centerfolds and color shifts and later to convince sinar to make a camera as the artec is. i did that because i couldnt find ANYTHING in the market i liked and which had let me to work in a similar creative way than with 4x5" groundglas and film.
there is so much nonsense still in the space about gear and its capacities, its hard to read and i am a bit tired to discuss it again and again.
as this 16bit nonsense.
( btw the M9 was since long time the first and only camera who wrote REAL 8 bit files , many of exactly the same group of "16bit" people have been excited with
its clarity and quality ..... )
its so often claimed and written, but people want to believe what they want to believe. maybe it makes the life easier for some but not for me.

Hi All

I hope I don't come across like a party pooper but the whole conversation on how to come a great Architectural photographer seems to be missing the most important thing, that is to say ones understanding and knowledge and appreciation of architecture and ones ability of to contextualize a scheme in its environment. Sure you need some decent kit and the basics are a perspective control kit and full rage of lenses say from 38-240 but its is as important what you shoot (and why) as how you shoot it.

I suggest you allocate some budget and subscribe to the main magazines such as Architectural Review, Domus, Architectural record Wallpaper etc and study what Architects are building who is generally shooting this and how (and possibly why) this is being shot in the manner that it is

For the record I use a leaf kit on an Arca Swiss with lenses from 38-480

Edmund Sumner
www.edmundsumner.co.uk

signed.

word!

This is what I am shooting with....

Cambo ultima 35 with a canon 1ds mark III in the back and hasselblad 50, hasselblad 80 and schneider 28 mm digitar.
Shooting sometimes to a card and sometimes tethered to a macbook pro.
all gitzo carbon fiber tripods an a manfrotto 400 geared head.


I am using the canon as a capture devise because I like high ASA, Live view, and of course the thing is build like a brick shit house.
I like the technical camera set up for rear rise/fall & shift stitches along with front tilt & swings for focus

It all does feel a bit like a compromise, the 28 mm is weird lens with distortion on the edges, the hassi glass is ok but the highlights seem a bit fuzzy.
And the 1ds file quality is not as good as a top of the line MFDB.

Having said that, I am getting great files with some work done in PTGui and CS3.

On a shoot last winter, shooting outside just as the sun was setting temp was 20 degrees F and the wind was blowing a good 15 mph, I was up on top of a 16 foot ladder working very fast creating a pano with this setup, downloading the files my assistant was shaking her head saying that her leaf back could never had taken that kind of abuse and made the shot at the high ISO I was shooting (800 ASA). I think she was right.

Two things I use a lot...I dug out my old schneider loupe and use it on the rear screen of the 1ds in live view mode zoomed in 10X, nice for critical focusing
and
A solid werner multi ladder with a tripod head bolted to an accessory tray

in a perfect world I would switch to an Arca Swiss o2 with an arca cube head, still use the 1ds as a capture devise until I see a MFDB. with a great LCD screen on the back (with live view) and high ASA capability. New glass, perhaps test out the Rodenstock line...

That's my story and I an sticking to it (for now)

My most important:
Alarm clock to get my ass out of bed in time.
Phone/email for coordinating building access, lights on, cleanliness, etc.
Coffee/donuts/beer for building staff who show up early & stay late.
Tall tripod (8'+) / lift / ladder / clamps w/ tripod head for camera position
Ipod w/ scout shots & previous days shots
Extra eyeglasses (dropped & broke mine on site once, made for an interesting day...)
15 years spent in Arch. school & offices

Lighting: (I use all strobe, usually as fill to control contrast)
Packs & heads - 1200 & 2400 WS - I use packs because lights are often on tall stands
Speedlights
CC gels for strobes (I pretty much never gel windows or change bulbs)
Misc. light softeners

Cameras:
50% DSLR stitched
25% 4x5 color neg
25% Rented digiback on 4x5 AS Monolith

50/50 work alone* or w/ 1 photo assistant *often have building/construction staff to operate lights, lifts, etc.
I almost never have a computer on site

Good one! My list:

1. Double alarm clock.
2. No caffeine after noon, the day before an early call.
3. Pepcid AC in every bag.
4. Extra eyeglasses in EVERY camera bag and every personal bag. (My biggest fear of all, having to have my assistant shoot the job, and me standing beside him, looking like Mr. Magoo, squinting my eyes, and trying to tell him when to shoot: "Now. Now. Now. Is it sharp? Now. Now. Now. Is the talent still on set?".
5. Make sure and shave that weird hair that grows out of my ears, the night before the job, if a client is there.
6. Make sure to set iPhone alarm to check in to Southwest flight exactly 24 hours before flight time, to get "A" boarding group.
7. No burritos the night before an early call, (if I know we're shooting in a remote location).
8. Write down the agency people's names, and the clients' name, and their titles.
9. Spend time to create Shot List Cheat Sheet to keep in back pocket of jeans, because once I walk out onto the set, I forget half the stuff I had planned.
10. Backup MacBookPro; backup H2; backup 5d2.
11. Always hire one extra assistant, more than you really need, in case one of them oversleeps or flakes out or gets lost or gets sick.

You think I'm kidding, but that's my Fear List.

classic, I thought I was the only one who would lose his glasses & forget the clients names....

i broke my glasses on a job this spring, very good that i had my backup glasses with me.
after the glasses had been repaired my car was broken in and the second glasses have been robbed.

another advise above cannot be valuated enough:
to create a good relation with facility management and everybody who is helping on site from the building stuff. if one appears here as arrogant or stressfull thhe shooting might become a nightmare,- in no one an architecture photographer depends more on site than on this people.

True that! I used to assist a shooter with terrible people skills, when he would start to argue with security or facilities people, I would step in between them and use my Jedi Voice.

*waves hand* "You don't need to see his identification... these aren't the photographers you're looking for... he can go about his shooting.... move along...."

Calculating the cost of image capture gear alone (no lights, etc.):
Given - starting with an H3DII-39 and a 28mm, 80mm and 150mm lens
Cost of entry into Arch. work considering just the value of the H3DII-38 body and back:

Price and configuration updated 11/10/09 at 4PM EST:
Alternative I:
Arca Swiss RM3d Body $5,500
Adapter Plate to Hasselblad $700
Rotoslide $2,300
28mm Rodenstock HR Lens $6,500
Rodenstock 60mm $3,200
Rodenstock 70mm Digitar $2,800
Leica Laser $400
Total with 28mm and 60mm Lenses $18,600
Plus prior Cost of H3DII-39 Camera with default 80mm lens $20,000
Grand Total: $38,600

Alternative II - Gear as suggested by Rainer:
Canon 5D Mark II - USA Warranty $2,700
Canon 17mm/f4 L TS-E -USA Lens $2,500
Canon 45mm/f2.8 L II TS-E USA Lens $1,300
Canon 90mm/f2.8 TS-E Lens USA Lens $1,250
Canon 1.4Tele II USA $ 325
Canon 100-400 L IS USA $1,680

Total of the above Canon gear $9,755

Still trying to get cost of Sinar arTec gear in USA $'s to give a comparable toolset as the Arca-Swiss.
I've been waiting two days now for a response from SinarBron - we'll see if I ever hear from them.
Will update this post when prices can be confirmed.

From a capital investment viewpoint, and plugging in prior comments posted on this thread, the Canon solution looks very modest in expenditure. Considering the state of the world economy, and the impact of the profession of Arch. Photography, the Canon seems to be the more prudent direction.

Thoughts?
Jack

To be, or not to be: that is the question ...
.. are you still talking about what it takes to be a 'Great Architectural Photographer' or are you just talking about being able to take pictures of architecture.

Canon wins hands-down, if you are talking about taking pictures and are concerned about the state of the World's economy.

Cheers,
Ashley

http://www.ampimage.com
http://www.ashleymorrison.com

It IS a scary proposition, Jack.

Last October I left the studio I'd spent the previous 17 years with and started my own business in the worst economy of my life. I then went out and spent about $75k in gear. I'm a big gear junkie, though, with expensive tastes.

I love my Digi back and my view camera. The lenses are all Rodenstock Digital and they are superb. I feel like I'm finally achieving the quality I've been chasing all my career. The stuff is good!

That said... I'm pretty confident in saying that every one of us could switch to 5D2's with T/S lenses and still make very similar pictures and our clients would never notice the difference.

I would notice the difference, and I wouldn't be happy with the results, but I could do it...

"Still trying to get cost of Sinar arTec gear in USA $'s"

One of Sinar's problems here in the US, no one wants to sell it. I tried to get info on buying the arTec after it came out, SinarBron had no idea and could not have cared less. Shame.
Is there anyone in the US who has bought an artec from a US dealer?

Before you decide on the Arca RM3 make sure you can actually get all the parts you want and when (firm ETA) you can get them. Try to talk to a real person who owns the camera, lenses and accs.
Arca has been showing this camera at shows for 3 (4?) years, does it exist beyond prototypes? At least there are many european photogs using the artec.

"Canon wins hands-down, if you are talking about taking pictures and are concerned about the state of the World's economy"

Not sure what this means, but there is absolutely no reason "great architecture photos" cannot be made with a Canon. And you don't need the 1dsIII, get 2 5dmkII, some gaff tape if you're worried about sealing (been around the world with mine, never had 1 problem), and put the savings into a 24tse.

You wouldn't be happy with the results because the gear was inferior?

Because the camera files are just not as sharp, don't have the same tonal width, or color fidelity and tend to exhibit too much distortion... at least with what I've seen from the 1DS, 5D and D3.

But again... will the client notice on prints or at web size?

I know your not kidding. That's not much different than the list I would make. I don't wear glasses, but I bring backups or doubles for every single electronic device I rely on, every cord, camera, battery, twice the strobe I think I will need, etc. Why? because if things can happen eventually they will. I also rely on companies like Calumet and Freestyle who if they promise something next day-it is there the next day. This was more crucial shooting film on the road, but is very important with digital too. Allot of my work is not in major metropolitan areas that do not have well stocked camera stores. I rarely bring an extra assistant though but insist that the architect lends us someone from the office who has worked that job. They oftentimes have the contacts and clout to get things done that would take us too long or be to distracting while I need to concentrate on shooting. generally I try to minimize my distractions or creativity will suffer. I rely on my long time assistant to shield me from allot of crap that would take me out of the zone.

Heh, it seems like whenever I've said "Screw it, the client's never gonna notice...", that's when some unforseen, ultra-high-quality use comes up for that image.

Now, even on low-budget dslr jobs, I shoot a stitch sequence of any important shots. That way I have high-res material in the bag if another $$$$ use comes up. Especially if it's a difficult-access or unique situation.

I think there is merit to your approach - stitch multiple frames and at least you'll get the res of a MFDB. Other elements will be missing BUT with judicious use of CS4 and LR you can get darn close.

Perfect, no - but the delta in cost is dramatic!

Jack

your lens list looks a bit strange to me
i will give an alternative list, the lenses with* are for a bigger setup, without are the basics i.m.o.

for mf format:
shift camera of your choice ( i´d take the artec -- )

23mm HR (*)

28mm HR

35mm HR or schneider (*)

45mm rodenstock or schneider

70mm HR or equivalent schneider

90 or 100mm HR or schneider (*)


in any case an additional 35mm camera :

canon 5ds2 ( not 1ds3 for weight )
long lens for details.
( i use the 100-400L zoom which is excellent for details,
since canon corrects this lens so perfet in DPP. )

or alternatively only a 35mm canon system with:

17mm TS-E
24mm TS-E
1,4 extender (yes it works fine! )
45mmTS-E
90mm TS-E (*)
same long lens, preferable a zoom (for weight and space )

the canon system is a fine backup system too, if you have the luxury to have both systems.
about backup systems is to say that the canon is perfect for this, cause you still can bring it
together with the mf system and one laptop in the hand luggage in planes, which is quite
important for me. in any case i carry with me a second mf back if travelling.

Rainer,

Interesting menagerie of lens choices you have presented - extensive and I can see where the collection of both MFDB and SLR would be the "ideal".

As you are accomplished in the industry, and I must admit to being one of the chaps who's work I admire and aspire to reach, I can see the need, and financial ability, for you to have such a great assembly of tools - both MFDB and Canon.

What I'm trying to assemble is a set of gear that covers the MAJORITY of needs yet does not break the bank.

Thus, the first decision for a chap like myself is deciding between a MFDB or a Canon/SLR based system, since I do not want to allocate funds for both.

That given, my thinking AND budget are moving me away from the MFDB and on to the Canon approach.

I know there will be an adjustment in image quality that I've become accustom to in my landscape work with the H3DII-39 when moving to a Canon based system. Yet from these threads on this topic, I see that folks have built a fine business on the Canon platform, albeit with some finesse and compromise.

Now, considering I could sell off my current H3DII-39 (with only 2,000 clicks on it) and 28mm, 80mm and 150mm lenses (none of this gear being well suited to doing arch. work), then purchase the full list of Canon gear you suggest, and still have thousands of dollars left over from the sale of my MFDB for marketing and other equipment. Where to pursue the MFDB route will take the ADDITIONAL expenditure of tens of thousands more cash (as I do not believe in debt).

I feel that in order to minimize the financial pressure that comes with starting a change in focus, from landscape to architectural, this is a sacrifice that a prudent person would make. Once I prove myself in the market and build a client base, would that not be the wisest time to compliment my SLR system with MFDB?

Question: Assuming going ONLY with an SLR, would you still choose the 5Ds2 over the 1DsMkIII?
Reasons other than weight/cost delta?

As always, your thoughts and guidance are respected and appreciated by all of us.

Jack

Hi Jack
The first question (before you start producing any image) is: Who's going to buy it i.e. who is your market ?
Followed by: What's their market and / or what all do they need the image for ?

These are questions you need to have answers to, before you (or anyone) can really go much further, on answering the questions above... about equipment, etc.

You really can't go wrong buying the Canon gear - as you will need it anyway.
Even if you do decide to go down the Hasselbald route more - you will still use the Canon as your back-up system and for quick-shots of details.

So I'd say go with Canon and find your market first.
Then when you have the answers to the above questions, you can make the call based on facts and figures.

Cheers,
Ashley

http://www.ampimage.com
http://www.ashleymorrison.com

Also on the business side, there's a great NPPA CODB Calculator. It's somewhat incomplete, and tailored to press photographers, but should give you a good start on creating your own.

A well thought out list. My POV, It is always important when shooting professional level AP with a DSLR to minimize any cropping, stretching and interpolation etc. You have to really work at and be conscious of maintaining file quality. My few differences for the list-I use an Olympus 35PC with a Canon adapter to fill the gap between 24 and 45. I don't own the 17 (I may buy it someday) as I am happy right now flat stitching if I need wider. For details I have 70-200 and a 135 prime. Also I find a good solid tripod with a geared head to be essential for thoughtful, well composed, maximized file use, work.

....(as I do not believe in debt).


For what it's worth, and possibly in my mind only, that's the best show of business acumen displayed yet and the basic reason I managed to survive so many lean years between the fat. Buy what you can afford - rental wasn't an easy option in my day and wouldn't have been attractive either; get the Canon tilt/shifters you can already afford and keep the 'blad until you know and have proved to yourself where you are going. Trust me, there's little worse than wishing you'd kept something when you find yourself having to buy the same thing on the second go round.

I can't tell you a great deal about the technical side of the speciality, but the general idea of keeping debt away is overarching, regardless of genre. Buys you time, at the very least.

Good luck.

Rob C

the Canon with these new tse lenses is a great setup, not a compromise ....

I agree with Rainer here,that Canon set-up is not to be sneezed at and can handle 99% of the jobs.
It's only limited when you can't stitch and need to produce a large file in one shot,like with the P65+.

For myself,I'm getting great results with my D3x and the 24+45+85 PC-e lenses.
The 14-24 Nikkor is nod bad either.At least it's sharp and has very easy to correct barrel distortion.

What Nikon now needs is a 17 PC-e and I would be very happy and a 35 PC-e please Nikon.

N.B If my market would require MFDB,I would go with the arTec.

This is a very interesting and inspiring thread to a special theme. Thanks to all the people for their input!

I started shooting architecture with a 4x5, creating 10-12 images per day at the most. It trained the concentrated view, the cost of film also helped for that. Then I switched to a 6x9 Arca-Swiss. I was thrilled by the speed of work, being able to easily change film on location sped me up to 30-35 images per day. But I already realized that I had to be careful not to lose the concentration. After starting to shoot digital in the studio I also wanted to try it for architecture, using a SLR (digital backs were not ready yet to go outside). WOW, 100 shots a day! But they weren't any good. Not necessarily because of optical quality but because of visual quality.

So I turned back to 6x9 film for architecture until I got an Aptus 22 Back, which I now use for architecture as well, using my Arca-Swiss F-line with my analogue lenses (35, 47, 55, 70, 90, 135, 180, 300 mm, except the 47 all Rodenstock). Mostly I am using the 35, 55 and 90 mm lenses. Because of focusing problems I got used to shooting tethered to a laptop. The results are good (of course the lenses could be better...) but working with a laptop on location is quite cumbersome: problems with batteries (I even used a car battery once, worked for a whole day but was quite heavy to lug around), problems focusing using the laptop (keeping the laptop close to the camera, sometimes the screen is difficult to see in direct sunlight), lots of stuff to carry around (I ended up using Festool Systainer, keeping the laptop in the top element).
This setup basically works (except the 35 is not wide enough) and it slows me down to about 20 images per day (what is good). But handling all that equipment takes the concentration away from the object I want to photograph. And the usage is too slow to allow reacting to changing light.

I guess, the ideal solution for me would be an Arca Rm3d (or was it R2-D2?) with a setup of lenses, about what Rainer recommends. Using the viewfinder (or the sliding back) and controlling the image with the screen on the back should work. However, that would be about 25-30 grand (without a back, but I own one...), which I don't have at the moment.

So, having a little money to spend now, I just ordered the 17 and 24 TS-E mm lenses yesterday to be used with my 5dII. Reading Rainers tip I will also get that 1.4 extender (did you also test the 2x extender to get a 48 mm shift?). That should solve my wideangle problem. The 12-24 Sigma and the 24-105 L Canon were already used as a backup and for a quick documentation (or for extreme situations with the 12 mm), but I always had a bad feeling selling those images.

Now I probably will have to do some meditation before a shooting to keep myself from rushing again. In theory it works: Looking at a building, walking around with a cup of coffee, deciding which perspectives to take and then using a quick system to get them into the box. Well, we'll see...

In any case, this will not be a wrong investigation. I can always use it as a backup or for jobs for people that don't have much money, like young architects or artists. When I see that the visual quality is diminishing again I will have to get that Rm3d (or whatever is top at that time).

Well, these are my thoughts, but having read other people's thoughts and taking profit of their ideas, I thought I'd share them.
Thanks!
gunter binsack

leipzig : germany