Luminous Landscape Forum
Equipment & Techniques => Medium Format / Film / Digital Backs – and Large Sensor Photography => Topic started by: alan_b on June 21, 2017, 01:45:38 pm
-
Hi everyone, I've been out of the MFD loop for a while, wanting to check back in. I'm interested in use for architecture/interiors on a view camera w/ live view.
Last I understood, 50MP backs were a practical no-go with Schneider tech wides (35mm & shorter). Do the current Rodenstock wides 23, 28, 32 work for critical use w/ shifts? I recall advanced LCC improvements being touted for the 100MP backs in C1, but not for the 50MPs - has this changed?
Thanks!
Alan
-
On the P1 side, here is my opinion, effects Credo 50 or IQ150, 250 350.
Phase One pretty much always had a very good LCC for color cast, actually amazing considering how much magenta shift and loss in overall saturation. you will see on the 50MP shifted to 10mm or more. Basically the shifted portion becomes very red/magenta. Enough so that when you look at the image on the back, your first reaction is no way will a LCC pull this back. You will be surprised, as the P1 LCC pulls back most of the loss in saturation and the vast majority of the color cast.
That was there from day1.
However the 50Mp back when shifted displays a very faint banding, not regular like the CCD backs and micro lens ripple. THIS issue which I was one of the first to point out to P1, has to my knowledge NOT been resolved and I guess by now never will. You can see it very clearly on a blue sky (solid) or pure grey/white etc. There are some ways to help remove it, but it can be very harsh at times. This also showed up on the IQ100 at launch and P1 DID resolve it later on with improvements to the LCC algorithm. Not sure why they never fixed the 50MP LCC for this.
Paul Caldwell
-
Last I understood, 50MP backs were a practical no-go with Schneider tech wides (35mm & shorter). Do the current Rodenstock wides 23, 28, 32 work for critical use w/ shifts? I recall advanced LCC improvements being touted for the 100MP backs in C1, but not for the 50MPs - has this changed?
I strongly suggest you work with a dealer that is able and willing to provide raw files from various 50mp + Schneider/Rodenstock lenses + shifts. We (DT) do this frequently for clients. That way you can do your own processing, post processing, and printing and come to your own conclusion. What is "minor" to one person is a show stopper to another, and what is a "big problem" to one person is barely worth mentioning to another; I see that all the time. Some opinions you'll read out there will also be a bit outdated as the LCC algorithm improved.
After looking at relevant raws, the dealer can then set you up with an evaluation rental so you can shoot your own work, with it's own unique lighting/subject-matter/etc.
But if you're looking for a very short answer, acknowledging the relativity above, and the value of doing your own analysis... You'll lose a few mm of image circle compared to a 40mp CCD but nearly all of the clients we've had try it (after the LCC algorithm was improved) found the improvements in live view, dynamic range, live view, ISO range, live view, and did I mention live view to easily override that.
If you're in the US we (DT) would be glad to help with this; we're passionate about tech cameras. Contact Us (https://digitaltransitions.com/contact-us/). We have physical offices in LA, NYC, and staff throughout the country along with a busy travel schedule. I, for instance, will be in LA, Portland, Chicago, DC, and NYC in the next two months.
-
Last I understood, 50MP backs were a practical no-go with Schneider tech wides (35mm & shorter).
The problem with most tech cameras is the minimum focal length of the camera.
I wanted to do this and had a purchased Cambo wide DS that I wanted a 35mm lens for. With the cost of the lens and the Combo and adapter It would be a lot cheaper to get the HTS (Hasselblad Tilt Shift) adapter and just use the standard camera. Something to check out.
-
Doug.
Was the algorithm improved for the 50MP to remove the banding? When P1 made the improvement for the 100MP backs over a year ago it did not apply to the 50MP backs. If they did that is a good thing. I am very familiar with this issue as I worked on through several tech cases but at the time P1 did not make a correction as they did for the IQ100 LCC.
There is plenty of documentation on the issue.
Paul Caldwell
-
Ugh... wide angles and MF. I can't even. Try Canon's 11-24 on mirrorless and you'll never look back.
-
Doug.
Was the algorithm improved for the 50MP to remove the banding? When P1 made the improvement for the 100MP backs over a year ago it did not apply to the 50MP backs. If they did that is a good thing. I am very familiar with this issue as I worked on through several tech cases but at the time P1 did not make a correction as they did for the IQ100 LCC.
There is plenty of documentation on the issue.
Paul Caldwell
I have just re-visited my old files with Capture One 10.1.2, and it seems that the banding is less severe but still visible when clarity and structure are both pushed to 100.
Same for my 100MP files.
-
Glad to see some improvements were made four the 50MP files.
Paul Caldwell
-
Thanks for the perspectives guys. I'm looking at Digital Transition's 100MP shifted samples now - surprising how much is cleaned up with the LCC files. 50-60MP seems to be a sweet spot for my work though - I don't really see a benefit to 100MP for the cost.
Anyone have or know of sample files of a shifted Rodie 23 on a 50MP sensor w/ LCCs?
-
I strongly suggest you work with a dealer that is able and willing to provide raw files from various 50mp + Schneider/Rodenstock lenses + shifts. We (DT) do this frequently for clients. That way you can do your own processing, post processing, and printing and come to your own conclusion. What is "minor" to one person is a show stopper to another, and what is a "big problem" to one person is barely worth mentioning to another; I see that all the time. Some opinions you'll read out there will also be a bit outdated as the LCC algorithm improved.
After looking at relevant raws, the dealer can then set you up with an evaluation rental so you can shoot your own work, with it's own unique lighting/subject-matter/etc.
But if you're looking for a very short answer, acknowledging the relativity above, and the value of doing your own analysis... You'll lose a few mm of image circle compared to a 40mp CCD but nearly all of the clients we've had try it (after the LCC algorithm was improved) found the improvements in live view, dynamic range, live view, ISO range, live view, and did I mention live view to easily override that.
If you're in the US we (DT) would be glad to help with this; we're passionate about tech cameras. Contact Us (https://digitaltransitions.com/contact-us/). We have physical offices in LA, NYC, and staff throughout the country along with a busy travel schedule. I, for instance, will be in LA, Portland, Chicago, DC, and NYC in the next two months.
Doug thanks for the reminders - I'll be following those recommendations as I get closer to decision time. My local dealer only has Hassy 100C in rental fleet.
-
Ugh... wide angles and MF. I can't even. Try Canon's 11-24 on mirrorless and you'll never look back.
Chris, your advice is well-received! I'm already incorporating LCC/shifted distortion correction in my workflow w/ SLR lenses, so MFD wouldn't be adding any burden in that department. Whether the extra $20k would be worth it is another matter... :P
-
Glad to see some improvements were made four the 50MP files.
Paul Caldwell
Paul, yes it would still be nice to hear a definitive response to LCC improvements w/ 50MP sensors.
-
The problem with most tech cameras is the minimum focal length of the camera.
I wanted to do this and had a purchased Cambo wide DS that I wanted a 35mm lens for. With the cost of the lens and the Combo and adapter It would be a lot cheaper to get the HTS (Hasselblad Tilt Shift) adapter and just use the standard camera. Something to check out.
Bob,
I like a lot of things about the HTS, with automated shift corrections. 24*1.5 isn't wide enough for me on a crop sensor though.
-
Thanks for the perspectives guys. I'm looking at Digital Transition's 100MP shifted samples now - surprising how much is cleaned up with the LCC files. 50-60MP seems to be a sweet spot for my work though - I don't really see a benefit to 100MP for the cost.
The obvious benefit of 100mp is to make really big prints.
But there are also less obvious adjunct benefits of 100mp, when you feel you only need 50mp:
- Electronic sensor shutter. Makes the use of a tech camera tons faster and easier. You can shoot from live view, change shutter speed by 1/3 increments, shoot from an iPhone, get aperture and GPS in the metadata, and skip the cocking of the leaf shutter.
- Wider maximum wide in a lens line up. Since the 50mp is a crop sensor your widest lens is a bit less wide than with the 100mp.
- More dynamic range; the 100mp has more than the 50mp, although they both have lots
- 16 bit sensor. The 50mp sensor is "only" a 14 bit sensor. I put "only" in quotes because the results from the 50mp are still exceptionally smooth and dynamic range is still very high.
- Every lens becomes a "zoom"; you can crop heavily and still end up with 50mp.
- Lower chance of moire. Already very low at 50mp, the smaller pixel size on the 100mp.
- Stitching-free panoramics. Crop a 100mp raw to a 6:17 image and you still have a 27 megapixels that will print 48” across at 240ppi.
- Squares or Verticals-from-horizontal without compromise. A 4:3 vertical crop from a 100mp horizontal image is still 57mp.
- Future proofing; if you're already happy with 50mp, it's unlikely you'll need more than 100mp in the foreseeable future.
Of course there are also downsides, which you know well: cost, storage (though not as much as you'd think since shooting at 100mp doesn't require processing every TIFF out at 100mp and layered TIFFs are usually what suck up much of a catalog's total size). There is also, maybe a 1-2mm reduction in usable image circle on some lenses, between the increased demand for sharpness and the slightly smaller pixels.
Whether the above benefits outweigh the downsides is up to you. But if you're even a bit on the fence I'd definitely suggest playing with both before you decide on either.
It looks like you're in Oregon; I'll be in Portland there this summer, and of course we're glad to send gear for evaluation via UPS or FedEx. We have plentiful 50mp and 100mp in our rental/demo inventory including an IR version, Achromatic version, Hasselblad and Phase mounts of the 100mp, and every mount of the 50mp (Contax, Hassy V, Hassy H, and P1).
-
The problem with most tech cameras is the minimum focal length of the camera.
How so?
An IQ3 100mp with 23HR looks great, the equivalent of either a 13mm* or 15mm* on a FF35 small-format camera.
If you need something even wider you can do a pan-and-stitch (up to 360 degrees) or with either Arca or Cambo you can use a Canon 17TS or even one of their ultra-wide zooms.
*depending on if you judge image height or width, since the aspect ratios are not the same
-
- Wider maximum wide in a lens line up. Since the 50mp is a crop sensor your widest lens is a bit less wide than with the 100mp.
This is not very accurate. For single exposure, 50MP + 23HR is wider than 100MP + 32HR. For stitching, 50MP and 100MP are identically wide.
-
This is not very accurate. For single exposure, 50MP + 23HR is wider than 100MP + 32HR. For stitching, 50MP and 100MP are identically wide.
are you saying that because you don't believe the 23HR would work with the 100mp? I assume the original point was a 23 on the 100 is wider than a 23 on the 50mp.
-
are you saying that because you don't believe the 23HR would work with the 100mp? I assume the original point was a 23 on the 100 is wider than a 23 on the 50mp.
The 23HR works fine with the 100MP and is wider, but unless you have a cherry picked location to take the shot, you would likely have to crop away much of the pixel from the 100MP to make the framing look right, in the most scenarios where you shoot on the ground without the capability of shift. That is a waste of pixels and a waste of the shift function of the technical camera body. It's a significant waste of money since digital backs depreciate over time, but of course this is not an issue for the wealthy ones.
-
This is not very accurate. For single exposure, 50MP + 23HR is wider than 100MP + 32HR. For stitching, 50MP and 100MP are identically wide.
I was probably not clear enough.
I only meant that thit *absolute* widest shot available (without stitching) is less wide when using a crop sensor.
Like everything on that list, some items may not matter at all to some users. A 23HR (or 17TS canon via adapter) with a 50mp 1.3x crop sensor is still a very wide lens and will cover the needs of most shooters. In fact most shooters I work with have no interest in ultra-wide lenses. But on the other hand, some do, whether it's because they artistically value the odd/jarring feel of ultra-wide or because their profession demands it (e.g. Yacht bathrooms frequently enough that stitching for them is a pain).
Stitching, is of course a reasonable option much (but not all) of the time.
-
Ugh... wide angles and MF. I can't even. Try Canon's 11-24 on mirrorless and you'll never look back.
Chris -- why on mirrorless rather than on canon? The answer may be obvious to many here, but I haven't entered the mirrorless world at all.
Also, this option still seems to lack shift. What do you use for that? Canon 24 and 17? I've mostly used Alpa. Have also used a friend's canon 24.
Thanks
Ethan
-
Chris -- why on mirrorless rather than on canon? The answer may be obvious to many here, but I haven't entered the mirrorless world at all.
Also, this option still seems to lack shift. What do you use for that? Canon 24 and 17? I've mostly used Alpa. Have also used a friend's canon 24.
Thanks
Ethan
Short flange distance of mirrorless allows the use of a shift adapter between DSLR lens & body, or as Chris is doing, use a view camera like Arca Universalis or Cambo Actus.
-
Short flange distance of mirrorless allows the use of a shift adapter between DSLR lens & body, or as Chris is doing, use a view camera like Arca Universalis or Cambo Actus.
Got it. Thank you.
What shift adapter between lens and body?
-
Short flange distance of mirrorless allows the use of a shift adapter between DSLR lens & body, or as Chris is doing, use a view camera like Arca Universalis or Cambo Actus.
Shorter yes, but not necessarily short, as least not as short as medium format sensor which is right up to the camera film plane.
The sensor is still recessed to some extent and then you need an adaptor to convert round to square plus the camera, plus an adaptor to drive a TSE lens if you want to. At least that was my experience.