p.1 #1 · which lens for Art reproduction photography
I have to photograph Art drawings for reproduction, which lens for studio set up, two big softbox, A7III.
Drawings are 50x65 cm.
Done it before with sony 90mm macro, looking for better results between f8- f13. Thinking of Zeiss planar 50mm f1.4 or Sony GM 85mm f1.4. (i will rent first)
Any advice is welcome.
p.1 #2 · which lens for Art reproduction photography
Arty73 wrote:
I have to photograph Art drawings for reproduction, which lens for studio set up, two big softbox, A7III.
Drawings are 50x65 cm.
Done it before with sony 90mm macro, looking for better results at f13. Thinking of Zeiss planar 50mm f1.4 or Sony GM 85mm f1.4. (i will rent first)
Any advice is welcome.
What was unsatisfactory the last round?
My experience with painting repro is that it’s all in the lighting, playing some more with it may be the answer.
p.1 #3 · which lens for Art reproduction photography
Since I assume the drawings are a flat subject, why do you need to shoot at f/13? Won’t f/5.6-f/8.0 be plenty? The lenses achieve max sharpness at those apertures.
p.1 #6 · which lens for Art reproduction photography
Arty73 wrote:
@vdo1@
I expected more sharpness and crisp of the macro lens,
results were not bad, but could be better.
@stoffer@
have tried some different aperture on the 90mm macro, stil not a big difference. Focus by mf and af.
Then maybe you could explore the Voigtlander 65mm and 110mm and the Batis 135mm, rentals if available, they are said to be the “crispest” E mount lenses and they”re also APO all three of them. One of them would surely fit the bill.
p.1 #7 · which lens for Art reproduction photography
vdo1 wrote:
Then maybe you could explore the Voigtlander 65mm and 110mm and the Batis 135mm, rentals if available, they are said to be the “crispest” E mount lenses and they”re also APO all three of them. One of them would surely fit the bill.
p.1 #8 · which lens for Art reproduction photography
Arty73 wrote:
unfortunately they don't have those lenses...
If those lenses are not available, I’m afraid there isn’t anything else much sharper in the Sony lineup, except maybe the recently announced but not yet available 135mm.
Maybe you could rent a different 90mm sample, rumours are that there is high variability with them and some samples are much sharper than others.
p.1 #10 · which lens for Art reproduction photography
I use the Minolta MD 50/3.5 Macro. It was designed for this sort of thing. Fabulously flat field. Maximum Magnification is 1:2 without the special adapter. The Sony 55/1.8 is also quite good at it, too. I would shoot at f/3.5-4 just to ensure I didn't have any curvature issues. And as was said before, lighting is everything. I ended up using an enormous soft box. It helped a lot. The hard part was getting the camera and the same angle as the paintings, as they varied in size. It is easier on a wall, but the lighting is trickier. Its always about the trade-offs. For me, the light was the biggest thing. I have had artists who would tell me the color was off. So I ended up sitting down with them while we adjusted color on my calibrated screen. Then they would get mad that it didn't look right on their iPhone.
p.1 #11 · which lens for Art reproduction photography
If the Sony 90 macro isn't sharp enough, OP has procedural problems that a new lens cannot fix. I specialize in studio tabletop and my priorities, in order, are lighting, camera support and the lens. Xenon flash is essential to prevent any motion blur and generates perfect full-spectrum light. A geared head is really useful for attaining a normal angle onto flat art. Sharpness is easily obtained with modern lenses (even non macro) but many suffer linear distortion which remains after stopping down and can be a pain to correct in post. Example below used studio strobes, Manfrotto 410 head, Canon TS-E 135/4L Macro:
p.1 #12 · which lens for Art reproduction photography
vdo1 wrote:
If those lenses are not available, I’m afraid there isn’t anything else much sharper in the Sony lineup, except maybe the recently announced but not yet available 135mm.
Maybe you could rent a different 90mm sample, rumours are that there is high variability with them and some samples are much sharper than others.
I did not know that, high variability in sharpness for the 90mm. I will check the rental store!
p.1 #14 · which lens for Art reproduction photography
TheEmrys wrote:
I use the Minolta MD 50/3.5 Macro. It was designed for this sort of thing. Fabulously flat field. Maximum Magnification is 1:2 without the special adapter. The Sony 55/1.8 is also quite good at it, too. I would shoot at f/3.5-4 just to ensure I didn't have any curvature issues. And as was said before, lighting is everything. I ended up using an enormous soft box. It helped a lot. The hard part was getting the camera and the same angle as the paintings, as they varied in size. It is easier on a wall, but the lighting is trickier. Its always about the trade-offs. For me, the light was the biggest thing. I have had artists who would tell me the color was off. So I ended up sitting down with them while we adjusted color on my calibrated screen. Then they would get mad that it didn't look right on their iPhone....Show more →
Yes, very hard to getting the camera the same angle as the paintings! had not thought of the 55mm 1.8, have rent it, i wil look at the pictures to get an idea of corner sharpness.
I use the ColorChecker Passport and print the photos and discuss the colour, look and feel. Artists are very exactly on colour.
p.1 #15 · which lens for Art reproduction photography
I agree that soft box lighting is important.
Although it is technically a 1:1 reproduction lens, I'd probably try my Apo-Rodagon D 75/4 lens on a bellows. I don't have a normal macro SLR lens such as the Minnolta 50mm macro just mentioned, which may even work better at that 1/20 magnification ratio.
p.1 #18 · which lens for Art reproduction photography
rico wrote:
If the Sony 90 macro isn't sharp enough, OP has procedural problems that a new lens cannot fix. I specialize in studio tabletop and my priorities, in order, are lighting, camera support and the lens. Xenon flash is essential to prevent any motion blur and generates perfect full-spectrum light. A geared head is really useful for attaining a normal angle onto flat art. Sharpness is easily obtained with modern lenses (even non macro) but many suffer linear distortion which remains after stopping down and can be a pain to correct in post. Example below used studio strobes, Manfrotto 410 head, Canon TS-E 135/4L Macro:
I rent a lot of lenses for documentary photography, shooting artists when they creating art. The studio work for reproduction (photobook) is new for me, perhaps the 90mm is not my cup of tea or the lighting was not good enough. Used the falcon eyes gn300ad with big soft boxes, i have the Manfrotto 410 head, and the colorchecker. Never used Xenon flash, the falcon eyes
are perhaps not the best, but have no big budget yet for studiowork.
p.1 #19 · which lens for Art reproduction photography
I would still be surprised if the Sony 90mm Macro can't outresolve the 24 MP sensor in the A7III. The copy of that lens has to be pretty terrible for that to be the case, right? Or what am I missing here?
