New Tilt-Shift Lenses Announced

Doppler9000

Community Leader
Forum Moderator
Messages
3,906
Solutions
1
Reaction score
4,059
From Phase One, the 32mm W and 50mm W.

The “W” designation refers to one of the (at least) three potential definitions of “wide”. In this case, it refers to a large (90mm) image circle. The 32mm is described as being “ultra wide angle”, the second potential definition, with a 107 degree field of view. Strangely, the 50mm lens, with a quoted 84 degree field of view is described as having a “standard” field of view. For reference, 84 degrees is the horizontal field of view of a full frame camera with a 20mm focal length lens.

The lenses are $13.5K and $12.5K, respectively.
 
Last edited:
Wow. For $13K, I think I'll just stay home and commission Anselm Keefer to make a painting of the thing.
 
From Phase One, the 32mm W and 50mm W.

The “W” designation refers to one of the (at least) three potential definitions of “wide”. In this case, it refers to a large (90mm) image circle. Then32mm is described as being “ultra wide angle”, the second potential definition, with a 107 degree field of view. Strangely, the 50mm lens, with a quoted 84 degree field of view is described as having a “standard” field of view. For reference, 84 degrees is the horizontal field of view of a full frame camera with a 20mm focal length lens.
The new lenses are tilt lenses without shift. Shift is provided by the camera body. The 50 mm lens is described by Phase One as "a playful accompaniment to a standard lens" — whatever that means. You can find an announcement which mirrors Phase One specifications and descriptions at Capture Integration.

The current Rodenstock digital lens series nomenclature is defined by image circle diameter range and not the angle of coverage as in years past nor the angle of view.

The W-series (wide) of Rodenstock HR Digaron digital lenses refers to an image circle diameter range of 88–100 mm. They range in focal length from 32–70 mm. The SW-series (super wide) has an image circle diameter range of 110–120 mm.

Phase One communicates lens specifications poorly. They list the image angle (angle of coverage) for the entire image circle diameter (in this case 90 mm, like a 72 x 54 mm format would have as an image diagonal) and call it angle of view, instead of specifying the actual angle of view for the image diagonal of the sensor format (66.72 mm for the 53.4 × 40 mm sensor format). It makes for unnecessary confusion which could be avoided by providing proper labeling and sufficient details in their specifications.

The angle of view produced on the sensor for the nominal focal length is 67° with the HR Digaron-W 50 mm. It's equivalent to a focal length 32 mm on a 36 x 24 mm full-frame sensor. For the specifications of this lens, they use the nominal focal length of 50 mm, but the actual focal length is 51.68 mm.

The angle of view produced on the sensor for the actual focal length of 33.09 mm is 90° with the HR Digaron-W 32 mm. It's equivalent to a focal length 21 mm on a 36 x 24 mm full-frame sensor. For the specifications of this lens (to make things as inconsistent and confusing as possible), they use the actual focal length of 33.09 mm, instead of the nominal focal length which they use for some lenses but not others.

Why Phase One lens specifications and labeling are so sloppy, I have no idea.
 
Last edited:
From Phase One, the 32mm W and 50mm W.

The “W” designation refers to one of the (at least) three potential definitions of “wide”. In this case, it refers to a large (90mm) image circle. The 32mm is described as being “ultra wide angle”, the second potential definition, with a 107 degree field of view. Strangely, the 50mm lens, with a quoted 84 degree field of view is described as having a “standard” field of view. For reference, 84 degrees is the horizontal field of view of a full frame camera with a 20mm focal length lens.

The lenses are $13.5K and $12.5K, respectively.
I didn't know photographers are high income professionals.
 
From Phase One, the 32mm W and 50mm W.

The “W” designation refers to one of the (at least) three potential definitions of “wide”. In this case, it refers to a large (90mm) image circle. The 32mm is described as being “ultra wide angle”, the second potential definition, with a 107 degree field of view. Strangely, the 50mm lens, with a quoted 84 degree field of view is described as having a “standard” field of view. For reference, 84 degrees is the horizontal field of view of a full frame camera with a 20mm focal length lens.

The lenses are $13.5K and $12.5K, respectively.
I didn't know photographers are high income professionals.
The ones shooting with Phase One probably are.
 
From Phase One, the 32mm W and 50mm W.

The “W” designation refers to one of the (at least) three potential definitions of “wide”. In this case, it refers to a large (90mm) image circle. The 32mm is described as being “ultra wide angle”, the second potential definition, with a 107 degree field of view. Strangely, the 50mm lens, with a quoted 84 degree field of view is described as having a “standard” field of view. For reference, 84 degrees is the horizontal field of view of a full frame camera with a 20mm focal length lens.

The lenses are $13.5K and $12.5K, respectively.
I didn't know photographers are high income professionals.
The ones shooting with Phase One probably are.
and then become broke.
 
From Phase One, the 32mm W and 50mm W.

The “W” designation refers to one of the (at least) three potential definitions of “wide”. In this case, it refers to a large (90mm) image circle. The 32mm is described as being “ultra wide angle”, the second potential definition, with a 107 degree field of view. Strangely, the 50mm lens, with a quoted 84 degree field of view is described as having a “standard” field of view. For reference, 84 degrees is the horizontal field of view of a full frame camera with a 20mm focal length lens.

The lenses are $13.5K and $12.5K, respectively.
I didn't know photographers are high income professionals.
It's specialized, highly niche gear for people with lots of money.

I think Phase is making most of their money in cultural heritage and industrial applications. I'm just happy to see that they're bothering with still photography. Their gear is one of those things that I can't afford, but am glad exists.
 
The choice to limit tilt to +/- 3 degrees is interesting.

That's a useful amount of tilt if you're at eye height. But you're out of luck if you need to be closer to the ground.

To be fair, they are pitching the 32mm at "iconic Landscape photographers", which I take it means grand vistas where 3 degrees of tilt will usually get the job done.
 
I'm just happy to see that they're bothering with still photography. Their gear is one of those things that I can't afford, but am glad exists.
Exactly.

I just hope their market doesn't become so niche that it vanishes completely.

My gripe with these lenses: why isn't tilt a feature built into the camera? Tilt should just be be table stakes with a technical camera, not a luxury add-on.

Maybe someone who knows more about tech cams can jump to Phase's defense here.
 
I'm just happy to see that they're bothering with still photography. Their gear is one of those things that I can't afford, but am glad exists.
Exactly.

I just hope their market doesn't become so niche that it vanishes completely.

My gripe with these lenses: why isn't tilt a feature built into the camera? Tilt should just be be table stakes with a technical camera, not a luxury add-on.

Maybe someone who knows more about tech cams can jump to Phase's defense here.
I think the logic is that to get the best from the backs and the carefully calibrated lenses, they removed anything that would compromise performance on these pancake cameras. That leaves you with shift, and no swing or tilt. If the market is people shooting panos, flat stitching, and architecture, that probably works fine. But tilt means these add-ons.

In fairness, they're not wrong if the goal is as close to perfect parallelism as possible. It takes an extremely tiny amount of misalignment on swing or tilt to make a mess of of things. I had swing and tilt on both standards on my VX23D, and I doubt I ever had it aligned perfectly. The small apertures I use masked a lot of the error. Even my F-Universalis, which only has swing and tilt on the front, had an alignment issue that needed replacement parts to solve.

I've never been a customer for the pancake design because I use tilt and swing a lot more than I use shift. Plus there's the whole "not having enough money" thing I have going on. ;)
 
These lenses were introduced ~2010. What's new here is Phase One offering them in their (Cambo) focus-tilt mount with their e-shutter.

Here's their introduction info from 2010: https://allphotolenses.com/public/files/pdfs/c7e1717aaa882b9802680c5d6baba927.pdf

For comparison, the HR-W 32mm was around $7,500(?) with Copal shutter (no focus mechanism) in 2010. Inflation calculator puts that at $10,500 now.
 
Last edited:
I'm just happy to see that they're bothering with still photography. Their gear is one of those things that I can't afford, but am glad exists.
Exactly.

I just hope their market doesn't become so niche that it vanishes completely.

My gripe with these lenses: why isn't tilt a feature built into the camera? Tilt should just be be table stakes with a technical camera, not a luxury add-on.

Maybe someone who knows more about tech cams can jump to Phase's defense here.
I think the logic is that to get the best from the backs and the carefully calibrated lenses, they removed anything that would compromise performance on these pancake cameras. That leaves you with shift, and no swing or tilt. If the market is people shooting panos, flat stitching, and architecture, that probably works fine. But tilt means these add-ons.
And anybody who wants full movements can hang a Phase One back on a real tech camera.
In fairness, they're not wrong if the goal is as close to perfect parallelism as possible. It takes an extremely tiny amount of misalignment on swing or tilt to make a mess of of things. I had swing and tilt on both standards on my VX23D, and I doubt I ever had it aligned perfectly. The small apertures I use masked a lot of the error. Even my F-Universalis, which only has swing and tilt on the front, had an alignment issue that needed replacement parts to solve.

I've never been a customer for the pancake design because I use tilt and swing a lot more than I use shift. Plus there's the whole "not having enough money" thing I have going on. ;)
 
And anybody who wants full movements can hang a Phase One back on a real tech camera.
This might be the part I'm missing. What's considered a real tech camera? And what category does the XT fit into?
I didn't use the phrase "real tech camera". I did talk about full movements. To me that means tilts, swings, vertical and horizontal shifts at both ends.
 
From Phase One, the 32mm W and 50mm W.

The “W” designation refers to one of the (at least) three potential definitions of “wide”. In this case, it refers to a large (90mm) image circle. The 32mm is described as being “ultra wide angle”, the second potential definition, with a 107 degree field of view. Strangely, the 50mm lens, with a quoted 84 degree field of view is described as having a “standard” field of view. For reference, 84 degrees is the horizontal field of view of a full frame camera with a 20mm focal length lens.
Below are the nominal and actual angle of coverage and angle of view for the Rodenstock HR Digaron-W 32 mm and 50 mm lenses. Rodenstock's inconsistency in using nominal focal length for one lens and actual focal length for the other in stating angle of coverage is copied by Phase One.

Angle of coverage is called "image angle" by Rodenstock and called "angle of view" by Phase One. Angle of coverage and angle of view are two different things and Phase One mixes them up in their specifications which leads to confusion for end users.

The difference between nominal and actual focal lengths and the resulting angles is minimal, but Rodenstock being inconsistent in their use also just adds to the inaccuracies and confusion.

I have no issue with what they choose to sell or the prices. It's their choice what they offer and for how much, but I wish they would both put a little more effort into accurately and clearly specifying what it is they're selling!

Rodenstock HR Digaron-W 32 mm and 50 mm lens specifications

Rodenstock HR Digaron-W 32 mm and 50 mm lens specifications
 
Last edited:
And anybody who wants full movements can hang a Phase One back on a real tech camera.
This might be the part I'm missing. What's considered a real tech camera? And what category does the XT fit into?
I didn't use the phrase "real tech camera".
You didn't?
And anybody who wants full movements can hang a Phase One back on a real tech camera.
It looks like you did. Not to worry, that sort of misfire happens to us all from time to time.
I did talk about full movements.
I don't see that in this thread. You may be thinking of another discussion.
To me that means tilts, swings, vertical and horizontal shifts at both ends.
That's what I generally consider to be full view camera movements. I usually expect a tech camera to have some kind of limited movements.
 
Last edited:
And anybody who wants full movements can hang a Phase One back on a real tech camera.
This might be the part I'm missing. What's considered a real tech camera? And what category does the XT fit into?
I didn't use the phrase "real tech camera".
You didn't?
And anybody who wants full movements can hang a Phase One back on a real tech camera.
It looks like you did. Not to worry, that sort of misfire happens to us all from time to time.
Oops. You are right.
I did talk about full movements.
I don't see that in this thread. You may be thinking of another discussion.
Look above at the purple text.
To me that means tilts, swings, vertical and horizontal shifts at both ends.
That's what I generally consider to be full view camera movements. I usually expect a tech camera to have some kind of limited movements.
I don’t look at tech cameras the same way you do, apparently. My Swebo TC-1 is advertised as a technical camera. It’s even in the model identifier.

Let us forget the names for now. My point is that if you want more movements for your P1 back, you can have them.

--
https://blog.kasson.com
 
Last edited:
It looks like you did. Not to worry, that sort of misfire happens to us all from time to time.
Oops. You are right.
I did talk about full movements.
I don't see that in this thread. You may be thinking of another discussion.
Look above at the purple text.
Got it. I was connecting that to...
To me that means tilts, swings, vertical and horizontal shifts at both ends.
...that followed, but I see what you mean regarding mentioning full movements
That's what I generally consider to be full view camera movements. I usually expect a tech camera to have some kind of limited movements.
I don’t look at tech cameras the same way you do, apparently. My Swebo TC-1 is advertised as a technical camera. It’s even in the model identifier.
It's kind of ill-defined and up to individual perception I suppose. For decades, I've categorized monorail cameras like the Cambo Actus or Arca-Swiss view cameras as generally offering full movements at both ends, though some models may have limitations to save weight or reduce cost.

I've categorized cameras like Cambo's Wide RS technical cameras (and related Phase One XT) or Arca-Swiss tech cameras with helical focusing lenses along with drop-bed cameras like Linhof Technikas or Wista Technical cameras as tech cameras with generally having more limited movements.

But you're right, It doesn't make any difference in how they operate or what they offer and a rose by any other name...
Let us forget the names for now. My point is that if you want more movements for your P1 back, you can have them.
Having a removable digital back does allow for a lot of flexibility in mounting.
 
Last edited:
Let us forget the names for now. My point is that if you want more movements for your P1 back, you can have them.
Are the ones with all the movements monorail designs?

I always hoped for something with a more compact form that would allow tilt, even if just at the lens plane.
 

Keyboard shortcuts

Back
Top