Luminous Landscape Forum
Equipment & Techniques => Medium Format / Film / Digital Backs – and Large Sensor Photography => Topic started by: thsinar on February 11, 2007, 05:05:06 am
-
hi All,
Since many have asked those last days about differences between sensors, I was thinking that this topic might interest a lot of you. It is a bit technical, however containing a lot of interesting information concerning the differences between 2 current sensors from 2 different companies: 33 MPx from Dalsa and the 39 MPx from Kodak.
A little addendum: most of the information comes from information collected by Sinar, and from our technicians.
Best to all,
Thierry
-
Thank you Thierry,
Two questions:
1) Why does the Kodak sensor excel at long exposures?
2) Will the eVolution75 be free of pattern moire? I'm looking into acquiring since a Precision M22 is unavailable here in the U.S.
Billy
-
Thank you Thierry,
Two questions:
1) Why does the Kodak sensor excel at long exposures?
2) Will the eVolution75 be free of pattern moire? I'm looking into acquiring since a Precision M22 is unavailable here in the U.S.
Billy
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=100319\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
hi Blly,
instead of the eVolution 75, there is also the possibility of the SB 54 H (22 Mpx), which gives fantastic results, in 4- or in 16-shot modes. Of course the single shot is also availabe with this 54 H. The eVolution 75 will have as well multishot capability, thus not the Moiré issues like with a single shot.
As for your first question: I have no information that this is related to the sensor. Noice due to long exposure can be reduced by noice filters integrated in the software. But you have to find a compromise, the tendency is to loose also details if filtering is too strong, among other issues.
But i will ask for some more information about it, and come back to you if I find it.
Best regards,
thierry
-
Thierry,
4-shot = true color (no interpolation)
16-shot = no pattern moire
Correct?
If yes, this means eVolution will have pattern moire since it's ONLY 4-shot, no?
Billy
-
Hi Thierry
Thanks for the article. I'm currently using the Leaf Aptus 65.
We expect to receive the new Leaf Aptus 54 which will use the Dalsa 22MP chip.
Would you know the differences and/or benefits from any of those 2 chips.
Thanks,
Esben
CaptureForce (http://captureforce.com)
-
Thierry,
Thank you for the above article. It was of interest.
One question as I am not fimilar with multishot backs. In 4 shot mode on the eMotion 54/75, what would be the total time to capiture an image if shutter speed is set to 1 second? And, I presume you only press the shutter release once. Or, do you have to cock the shutter and trip it 4 times? (Digitar lens)
Thanks, Dave
-
eMotion22 + eMotion75 are single-shot only, no?
-
Yes, Thanks for waking me up. Your are correct - eMotion 75 IS single shot only.
I meant eVloution 75 which is multi-shot.
Thanks for the correction.
-
eMotion22 + eMotion75 are single-shot only, no?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=100335\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Yes, right.
thierry
-
Thierry,
Thank you for the above article. It was of interest.
One question as I am not fimilar with multishot backs. In 4 shot mode on the eMotion 54/75, what would be the total time to capiture an image if shutter speed is set to 1 second? And, I presume you only press the shutter release once. Or, do you have to cock the shutter and trip it 4 times? (Digitar lens)
Thanks, Dave
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=100332\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Dave,
Multi Shot backs are really best used with an electronic shutter system. It can be something like the Sinar P3 with CMV or CAB lenses, a Sinarcam 2 shutter on a P2, the Rollei electronic shutter system, or any host of electronic medium format cameras. I do have one customer that uses a 54H on Multishot with a copal shutter, but that means having all the lights off including modeling lights. That is a very complicated and problematic solution if you ask me .....
Thanks,
Matt LaPointe
National Sales Support Specialist
Sinar Bron Imaging
(219) 670-9905
mlapointe@sinarbron.com
-
Thierry,
Thank you for the above article. It was of interest.
One question as I am not fimilar with multishot backs. In 4 shot mode on the eMotion 54/75, what would be the total time to capiture an image if shutter speed is set to 1 second? And, I presume you only press the shutter release once. Or, do you have to cock the shutter and trip it 4 times? (Digitar lens)
Thanks, Dave
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=100332\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
same as your exposure time set on the lens: you release and the lens x-contact triggers the eMotions automatically.
Thierry
-
Hi Thierry
Thanks for the article. I'm currently using the Leaf Aptus 65.
We expect to receive the new Leaf Aptus 54 which will use the Dalsa 22MP chip.
Would you know the differences and/or benefits from any of those 2 chips.
Thanks,
Esben
CaptureForce (http://captureforce.com)
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=100330\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Hi Esben,
Aptus 54 is the same sensor as the eMotion 22. The 65 is a 28 MPx, with a smaller sensor, 44x33 mm, so the crop factor is obviously different. the 28 MPx is a different sensor design making it much cheaper.
that's all I know, but Leaf certainly detailled specifications.
thierry
-
Thank you Thierry,
Two questions:
1) Why does the Kodak sensor excel at long exposures?
2) Will the eVolution75 be free of pattern moire? I'm looking into acquiring since a Precision M22 is unavailable here in the U.S.
Billy
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=100319\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Billy:
Precision M22's are still available in the US. In fact, they were just reduced to $19K. As long as you can live with the meager and non-adjustable ISO (rated 25, seems more like 18), this may be worth pursuing.
Also - while 16 shot is considered a "never moire" mode, it's extremely rare to get moire in 4 shot captures, although it can happen.
Steve Hendrix
PPR Digital
-
Thank you Steve and Matt,
I won't be paying $19K for an M22, since it was mentioned on another thread here that it cost as little as 10-12K Euro when paired with the Hy6 early adopter promotion. It's a shame SinarBronUSA doesn't mirror the same promotions available in Europe...I would have been all over an M22 with Rollei6008AF to tide me over until the swapout to Hy6.
Billy
Edit: attributed M22 (10-12K Euro) cost to correct source.
-
Thierry,
Thank you for the above article. It was of interest.
One question as I am not fimilar with multishot backs. In 4 shot mode on the eMotion 54/75, what would be the total time to capiture an image if shutter speed is set to 1 second? And, I presume you only press the shutter release once. Or, do you have to cock the shutter and trip it 4 times? (Digitar lens)
Thanks, Dave
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=100332\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Dear Dave,
the eMotions are single shot backs designed for on location work, with display, internal storage of 6 GB hard-state memory, CF-card slot, fast shooting rate of 0.9 sec/frame, etc ...
The multishot backs are the Sinarbakc 54 H (22 MPx) and the new eVolution 75 (33 MPx).
In 4 shot mode the software controls the 4 shots automatically and the exposure is released in so-called slave mode i the captureshop software. The 4 shots are taken consecutively and one can set a "delay" between the shots to let the power packs recycle within the shots, for the next one. The actual exposure time of each shot is the time you are setting on your camera shutter, being it a MF or a view camera. Acually this process is very fast, basicall 4 times the time of single shot.
From this one gets a full and true colour file, without any interpolation like one has with single shot backs. Beside all the quality advantages, such a 4-shot files can be opened as well much much faster than a single shot, simply because there is no interpolation process included during opening.
I hope this answers fully.
Best regards,
thierry
-
Thank you Steve and Matt,
I won't be paying $19K for an M22, since my friend Grant in Paris paid a whole lot less during the Hy6 early adopter promotion. It's a shame SinarBronUSA doesn't mirror the same promotions available in Europe...I would have been all over an M22 with Rollei6008AF to tide me over until the swapout to Hy6.
Billy
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=100387\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Hi Billy,
I would check again the price: it has been reduced very recently.
Thierry
-
Thierry,
4-shot = true color (no interpolation)
16-shot = no pattern moire
Correct?
If yes, this means eVolution will have pattern moire since it's ONLY 4-shot, no?
Billy
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=100327\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Dear Billy,
no exactly correct:
- 4- and 16-shot: always true colours, always "no Colour Moiré" and no interpolation, but sometimes "Pattern Moiré" = "Luminance Moiré".
Pattern or Luminance Moiré is something which can sometimes not be avoided, when 2 patterns coincide (sensor pattern with subject).
Addendum: Luminance Moiré is of course happening less with 4-Shot and even less (seldom) in 16-Shot modes. Luminance Moiré is the most difficult to take away: it is happening in the "Luminance" channel and therein is also contained the information for the sharpness. This means one cannot just "smear" (filter) it out without destroying the sharpness information and with the result of unsharp files.
Thierry
-
So if you went to a sensor that captured all 3 primary colours at once (foveon type) you essentially get the same results as a multishot back? Basically I'm asking how we can achieve multi-shot quality with the convenience of single shot capture. Obviously it's more difficult that we hope but is this the direction sensor designers are heading towards or are they trying to do a better job with interpolation?
-Nik
Dear Dave,
the eMotions are songle shot backs designed for on location work, with display, internal storage 6 GB memory, CF-card slot, fast shooting rate of 0.9 sec/frame, etc ...
The multishot backs are the Sinarbakc 54 H (22 MPx) and the new eVolution 75 (33 MPx).
In 4 shot mode the software controls the 4 shots automatically and the exposure is released in so-called slave mode i the captureshop software. The 4 shots are taken consecutively and one can set a "delay" between the shots to let the power packs recycle within the shots, for the next one. The actual exposure time of each shot is the time you are setting on your camera shutter, being it a MF or a view camera. Acually this process is very fast, basicall 4 times the time of single shot.
From this ine gets a full and true colour file, without any interpolation like in single shot backs. Beside all the quality advantages, such a 4-shot files can be opened as well much much faster than a single shot, simply because there is no interpolation process included during opening.
I hope this answers fully.
Best regards,
thierry
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=100429\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
-
So if you went to a sensor that captured all 3 primary colours at once (foveon type) you essentially get the same results as a multishot back? Basically I'm asking how we can achieve multi-shot quality with the convenience of single shot capture. Obviously it's more difficult that we hope but is this the direction sensor designers are heading towards or are they trying to do a better job with interpolation?
-Nik
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=100441\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
hi Nick!
a not very productive answer, but that's a difficult question which I personnaly don't dare to risk too much.
Honesltly, if I would have to say I would not put a cent on my guess!
The Foveon way has been gone already a long time ago, with the results we know. For sure, this type of recording the image would bring us back to the film times. This would certainly be the dream of all and the most logical.
As for the softwares, also difficult to guess how far interpolation algorithms can be improved to a level of almost perfection, although the quality achieved so far is already amazing. But then, interpolation time will increase, asking for more powerfull processors, and so on ... Where will it stop? I personnaly don't know, but wondering as well.
Thierry
-
I'm sure Phase can come up with their own spin sheet as to why the Kodak sensor excels. they are not tied to anyone and chose to use that after all...
no personal criticism Thierry, your back looks nice product, though the lack of a screen rules it out for me.
-
I'm sure Phase can come up with their own spin sheet as to why the Kodak sensor excels. they are not tied to anyone and chose to use that after all...
no personal criticism Thierry, your back looks nice product, though the lack of a screen rules it out for me.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=100471\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
nothing to apologize, and I know that everybody has its arguments: I have put the facts which seem important for me.
Display?: our eMotion models have a display, like any other competitor
All the best,
Thierry
-
The multishot backs are the Sinarbakc 54 H (22 MPx) and the new eVolution 75 (33 MPx).
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=100429\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
the eVolution 75 - your 'new' back - and the one most discussed here, has no screen in the pictures I've seen, including your own website.
hence it of no use to me when I can't see a histogram on location. I'm sure its a very good studio product though.
-
Hi Thierry
Thanks for all the info.
What I was looking for was how the Dalsa 22 compare to the Dalsa33/28MP architecture, i.e. compared to: e,f,g,h, in your list.
Is the Dalsa 22 thinner or thicker than the Dalsa 33, and what does that mean for i.e. DR, centerfold issues, and wide-angel lenses ?
I would guess the Dalsa 22 have 2 read-outs as well ?
Does the Dalsa 22 use less or more power than the Dalsa 33 ?
One ad-on question.
You are the second I have heard referring to Sinar backs having a shoot rate of 0.9 sec./frame.
The Sinar US. info details 1.2 sec./frame for the eMotion 22.
What back/camera/coputer set-up do you use to get 0.9 sec./frame, and measured over how long time ?
I know all manufacturer details very "optimal" frame rates and I can only get around 36 frames/min. tethered, from my Aptus 65 and I believe the Phase One P30 is just about the same when you press the shutter for one minute.
Sincerely,
Esben
CaptureForce (http://www.captureforce.com)
Dear Dave,
the eMotions are single shot backs designed for on location work, with display, internal storage of 6 GB hard-state memory, CF-card slot, fast shooting rate of 0.9 sec/frame, etc ...
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=100429\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
e. The silicon design of the pixels of the Dalsa sensor requires less physical depth (is thinner) than the
Kodak design.
f. Nominal clock rate (how fast can the Sensor be operated): Dalsa = 27 MHz versus Kodak = 24 MHz.
g. Outputs: The Dalsa sensor can be operated with alternatively one or two outputs. With the Kodak sensor
there is no other way than to operate it using two outputs.
h. Power consumption: although working at higher speed, the Dalsa sensor uses considerably less power
thank to its design.
-
There does seem, as expected, to be a bit of spin in favor of the Dalsa sensor, like the hand-waving argument that lens resolution limits prevent the Kodak sensor from giving any greater image resolution. (Lens resolution is not a brick wall, so even increasing sensor resolution significantly beyond a lens's 50% MTF resolution limit will continue to improve total system resolution.)
In particular, I would like to comment on these claims in section 2 "What does all the above really mean?"
2. c ...Comparing pixels of the same generation, the old rules are still valid, however: the bigger the pixel the better is light sensitivity and contrast/dynamic range. [claiming or implying an advantage for the Dalsa's 7.2 micron pixel pitch over the Kodak's 6.8 micron.]
2 e. Dalsa pixels have not only a larger surface; they are also thinner, i.e. they are less tall. As a consequence, they are better suited for wide-angle applications and photography with view cameras (movements). Incident light hitting a pixel in a flat angle will therefore produce less shadow if the pixels are less tall.
Unfortunately, both of these claims, based on generalities, seem contradicted by the specific facts from the spec. sheets, which show that Kodak's "narrower but deeper" photo-sites have greater well capacity and equally good off-perpendicular sensitivity.
A. The off-angle sensitivity is essentially equal, and very good in both cases:
the Dalsa and Kodak are both about 90% at 20º and a bit over 80% at 30º;
the Kodak graphs go further to 40º where it is still over 70% (about 1/2 stop fall-off).
B. The Kodak sensor has a well capacity of 60,000e compared to about 55,000e for the Dalsa, despite the larger photo-sites of the latter. This seems to be an advantage of deeper electron wells: greater volume for a given horizontal dimension. Indeed I have read that Kodak deliberately deepened the wells in recent sensors in order to increase well capacity to this 60,000e, compared to 40,000e in earlier FF CCD's of the same 6.8 micron pixel spacing.
(I get that 55,000e for the Dalsa by dividing the maximum (linear operation) output voltage by the charge to voltage conversion factor.)
Dynamic range depends on read noise levels too, but the only numbers I can find to compare for linear dynamic range are
Kodak: 71.4dB
Dalsa: >70dB
Inconclusive, but certainly not evidence of the claimed Dalsa DR advantage.
Finally sensitivity. The 12% greater pixel area might give about a 12% gain if quantum efficiency were equal, but it is not:
Dalsa: Red 22% Green 15% Blue 15%
Kodak: Red 20% Green 23% Blue 18%
The Dalsa is better in red, but Kodak's QE is about 50% higher (23/15) in green and 20% higher (18/15) in blue.
-
the eVolution 75 - your 'new' back - and the one most discussed here, has no screen in the pictures I've seen, including your own website.
hence it of no use to me when I can't see a histogram on location. I'm sure its a very good studio product though.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=100486\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
yes, the eVoltuion is not location back: designed for studio, multishot and ultmate quality.
Thierry
-
Hi Thierry
Thanks for all the info.
What I was looking for was how the Dalsa 22 compare to the Dalsa33/28MP architecture, i.e. compared to: e,f,g,h, in your list.
Is the Dalsa 22 thinner or thicker than the Dalsa 33, and what does that mean for i.e. DR, centerfold issues, and wide-angel lenses ?
I would guess the Dalsa 22 have 2 read-outs as well ?
Does the Dalsa 22 use less or more power than the Dalsa 33 ?
One ad-on question.
You are the second I have heard referring to Sinar backs having a shoot rate of 0.9 sec./frame.
The Sinar US. info details 1.2 sec./frame for the eMotion 22.
What back/camera/coputer set-up do you use to get 0.9 sec./frame, and measured over how long time ?
I know all manufacturer details very "optimal" frame rates and I can only get around 36 frames/min. tethered, from my Aptus 65 and I believe the Phase One P30 is just about the same when you press the shutter for one minute.
Sincerely,
Esben
CaptureForce (http://www.captureforce.com)
e. The silicon design of the pixels of the Dalsa sensor requires less physical depth (is thinner) than the
Kodak design.
f. Nominal clock rate (how fast can the Sensor be operated): Dalsa = 27 MHz versus Kodak = 24 MHz.
g. Outputs: The Dalsa sensor can be operated with alternatively one or two outputs. With the Kodak sensor
there is no other way than to operate it using two outputs.
h. Power consumption: although working at higher speed, the Dalsa sensor uses considerably less power
thank to its design.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=100516\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Dear Esben,
I have no tech info for these Dalsa sensors, but I would say the difference is minimal, and the influence is nearly nill. The centrefold issue is another problem, nothing to do with thickness.
Power comsumption is also about the same, when i compare battery lifes with my e 22 and e 75.
Shooting Rate: yes, we state 1.2 frames/ sec: I think we are the only manufacturer giving not "optimal" rates, but are very carefull and "conservative" here. Try the eMotion out and you will see that it is "+" since the begining!
Yes the dalsa 22 has 2 read-outs as well: it is the same technology more or less.
All the best,
Thierry
-
Dear Thierry -
Exactly what is the cause of the centerfold problem ?
Edmund
Dear Esben,
I have no tech info for these Dalsa sensors, but I would say the difference is minimal, and the influence is nearly nill. The centrefold issue is another problem, nothing to do with thickness.
Power comsumption is also about the same, when i compare battery lifes with my e 22 and e 75.
Thierry
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=100547\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
-
Dear Thierry -
Exactly what is the cause of the centerfold problem ?
Edmund
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a] (http://index.php?act=findpost&pid=100548\")
Dear Edmund,
There is a very good explanation and detailled description about it by Stefan Hess in an earlier tread here.
I just dont have time yet to search it: have to go out for some work!
If you didn't find it this eve, I shall go on search!
Have a nice evening,
Thierry
PS & Addendum: have found the tread and Stefan's detailled explanation:
[a href=\"http://luminous-landscape.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=12581&st=20&p=80861&#entry80861]http://luminous-landscape.com/forum/index....861&#entry80861[/url]
-
There does seem, as expected, to be a bit of spin in favor of the Dalsa sensor, like the hand-waving argument that lens resolution limits prevent the Kodak sensor from giving any greater image resolution. (Lens resolution is not a brick wall, so even increasing sensor resolution significantly beyond a lens's 50% MTF resolution limit will continue to improve total system resolution.)
In particular, I would like to comment on these claims in section 2 "What does all the above really mean?"
hi BJL,
I was expecting ( and fearing ) that my post was subject to controversy. But my purpose was to give some technical differences between the 2 technologies and the experience we have gathered with the 2 sensors, as well as the problems we have encountered by dealing with it.
At the end it comes always down to the same and single important fact: try and test by yourselves and look for what is important for you.
Thanks and best regards,
Thierry
-
There does seem, as expected, to be a bit of spin in favor of the Dalsa sensor, like the hand-waving argument that lens resolution limits prevent the Kodak sensor from giving any greater image resolution. (Lens resolution is not a brick wall, so even increasing sensor resolution significantly beyond a lens's 50% MTF resolution limit will continue to improve total system resolution.)
In particular, I would like to comment on these claims in section 2 "What does all the above really mean?"
2. c ...Comparing pixels of the same generation, the old rules are still valid, however: the bigger the pixel the better is light sensitivity and contrast/dynamic range. [claiming or implying an advantage for the Dalsa's 7.2 micron pixel pitch over the Kodak's 6.8 micron.]
2 e. Dalsa pixels have not only a larger surface; they are also thinner, i.e. they are less tall. As a consequence, they are better suited for wide-angle applications and photography with view cameras (movements). Incident light hitting a pixel in a flat angle will therefore produce less shadow if the pixels are less tall.
Unfortunately, both of these claims, based on generalities, seem contradicted by the specific facts from the spec. sheets, which show that Kodak's "narrower but deeper" photo-sites have greater well capacity and equally good off-perpendicular sensitivity.
A. The off-angle sensitivity is essentially equal, and very good in both cases:
the Dalsa and Kodak are both about 90% at 20º and a bit over 80% at 30º;
the Kodak graphs go further to 40º where it is still over 70% (about 1/2 stop fall-off).
B. The Kodak sensor has a well capacity of 60,000e compared to about 55,000e for the Dalsa, despite the larger photo-sites of the latter. This seems to be an advantage of deeper electron wells: greater volume for a given horizontal dimension. Indeed I have read that Kodak deliberately deepened the wells in recent sensors in order to increase well capacity to this 60,000e, compared to 40,000e in earlier FF CCD's of the same 6.8 micron pixel spacing.
(I get that 55,000e for the Dalsa by dividing the maximum (linear operation) output voltage by the charge to voltage conversion factor.)
Dynamic range depends on read noise levels too, but the only numbers I can find to compare for linear dynamic range are
Kodak: 71.4dB
Dalsa: >70dB
Inconclusive, but certainly not evidence of the claimed Dalsa DR advantage.
Finally sensitivity. The 12% greater pixel area might give about a 12% gain if quantum efficiency were equal, but it is not:
Dalsa: Red 22% Green 15% Blue 15%
Kodak: Red 20% Green 23% Blue 18%
The Dalsa is better in red, but Kodak's QE is about 50% higher (23/15) in green and 20% higher (18/15) in blue.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=100535\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
thanks BJL, an interesting and well informed response.
its a little sad that Sinar is having to spin its product here. it should make people wonder.
the + series phase seems like it will be the highpoint of digiback evolution for 2007. despite what others would have you believe.
-
thanks BJL, an interesting and well informed response.
its a little sad that Sinar is having to spin its product here. it should make people wonder.
the + series phase seems like it will be the highpoint of digiback evolution for 2007. despite what others would have you believe.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=100663\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Let's watch - a kick in the rear end re pricing, resolution and features, is overdue. I expect our friends from company C will deliver it quite soon.
Edmund
-
thanks BJL, an interesting and well informed response.
its a little sad that Sinar is having to spin its product here. it should make people wonder.
the + series phase seems like it will be the highpoint of digiback evolution for 2007. despite what others would have you believe.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=100663\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
The highpoint of 2007? Really? Is this what you would have us believe?
It's awfully early in 2007 to be making those kind of statements.
I don't find that Sinar's white paper is anything other than what everyone else - including Phase One, Leaf, Hasselblad - puts out there: Marketing blah, blah to help sell product. They have no exclusive on that. Everyone is a market leader in that category.
The Phase + series will:
Improve the screen: It needs it.
Extend the ISO: Kudos there.
Increase the speed: They will still be in 3rd place.
Look, it's admirable that you own and like the product. And Phase One has maintained the #1 market share position in recent years - deservedly so. Market share fluctuates though, based on the success of the current product and how it compares to it's competitors. But the continuous annointing of Plus backs as the be all and end all, without anyone really even comparing apples to apples is a joke.
Steve Hendrix
PPR Digital
-
thanks BJL, an interesting and well informed response.
its a little sad that Sinar is having to spin its product here. it should make people wonder.
the + series phase seems like it will be the highpoint of digiback evolution for 2007. despite what others would have you believe.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=100663\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Narakin,
I think Thierry is doing a very good job in telling how good a product Sinar actually makes.
And he's right as well that you should try before you buy.
Yes,I bought the eMotion-75 and did try the Aptus-75 and P-45.
For my needs,the Sinar came out on top.
Regards,
Willem.
-
willem hit the nail on the head...try before you buy....the best numbers on paper don't mean anything....
thierry, i feel for you...you put the info out there and that is what you get for it....having to justify why a 4 and 16 shot back does not have a screen for location work....
so far the companies with an honest track record for specs are clearly phase and sinar...my leaf back never got close to shooting as fast as it was supposed to....my phase backs have actually been a tad faster then advertised....when i asked the phase rep about that he said i was shooting the fastest cards (ideal circumstances), not everybody does and so they take a conservative medium in their specs....as does sinar (as far as i know) their backs shoot FAST and nobody seems to know.....
and then we have hasselblad of course, who is simply always the "first!" and "full frame!"
whatever anyone says about sinar...they don't come to mind for hyping or overstating facts....just like they have made relyable, perfectly engineered cameras and other professional photosupplies for decades, they also have a loooong history of Dbacks...workhorses that have made money.....
the P30 is the best all around Dback ever....price/size/speed/pixelcount/all in one package...there are better solutions for more specialized needs, but in general....
yes hass just came out with their version....
just in time for phase to put the updated + versions out....
-
hi PPS,
- i did say nothing different: try it our AND under your conditions, not under the ones of yur sales rep.
- 4- & 16-shot not having a display: this is a choice to have a back for studio, exclusively, with best possible quality. Best possible quality means NOT having to correct the Raw's being produced, or as less as possible. The heat generated by a display is an issue, as well as CF slots and internal memory, when it comes to noise, among other "little details", which wen summed up makes a difference.
- thanks for the specs: here again, try it out after having read the specs of the product. You shall be surprised. "Shooting Rate" is just one example. Another good example is "battery life". Sinar claims 2 1/2 to 3 hours with eMotion: I can easily get 6 to 8 hours at about 20°C.
sorry if I have given the feeling to want to "spin" the product.
Thierry
willem hit the nail on the head...try before you buy....the best numbers on paper don't mean anything....
thierry, i feel for you...you put the info out there and that is what you get for it....having to justify why a 4 and 16 shot back does not have a screen for location work....
so far the companies with an honest track record for specs are clearly phase and sinar...my leaf back never got close to shooting as fast as it was supposed to....my phase backs have actually been a tad faster then advertised....when i asked the phase rep about that he said i was shooting the fastest cards (ideal circumstances), not everybody does and so they take a conservative medium in their specs....as does sinar (as far as i know) their backs shoot FAST and nobody seems to know.....
and then we have hasselblad of course, who is simply always the "first!" and "full frame!"
whatever anyone says about sinar...they don't come to mind for hyping or overstating facts....just like they have made relyable, perfectly engineered cameras and other professional photosupplies for decades, they also have a loooong history of Dbacks...workhorses that have made money.....
the P30 is the best all around Dback ever....price/size/speed/pixelcount/all in one package...there are better solutions for more specialized needs, but in general....
yes hass just came out with their version....
just in time for phase to put the updated + versions out....
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=100702\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
-
thierry...
you did not spin anything...
it does not make a lot of sense for a 4 shot back to have a display....who shoots 4 shot untethered? ...maybe handheld, now that's an idea!....
-
thierry...
you did not spin anything...
it does not make a lot of sense for a 4 shot back to have a display....who shoots 4 shot untethered? ...maybe handheld, now that's an idea!....
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=100730\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
That's our point: studio = tethered
4-shot untethered and handheld? Would be an idea! But then 16 shot!
Seriously: the eMotion (single shot) with untethered/tethered operation is a location back with display, the eVolution (1-, 4- & 16-shot) a studio back with tethered operation without display.
2 different concepts, 2 different possibilities and 2 different features.
Thierry
-
although i would not say no also to a back which has 4 (+16 ) shot mode for studio use and the 1 shot mode for location work, ofcourse than with display.
-
So you're stating the eVolution75 will be 1/4/16-shot.
Seriously: the eMotion (single shot) with untethered/tethered operation is a location back with display, the eVolution (1-, 4- & 16-shot) a studio back with tethered operation without display.
2 different concepts, 2 different possibilities and 2 different features.
Thierry
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=100733\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
-
thierry...
you did not spin anything...
it does not make a lot of sense for a 4 shot back to have a display....who shoots 4 shot untethered? ...
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=100730\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
damn, there's a lot of weird opinions here.
I can think of dozens of landscape photographers who would jump at the chance of having a multi shot back on location, and I'm kind of surprised that Sinar thinks only people in the studio are concerned with Quality.
err... no.
there's plenty of us out there who want obsessive maximum quality, but work on location.
why do you think 4x5 field cameras exist? or 8x10 ones?
there was a device invented a while ago, I can't exactly remember, but I think, yes, it was to steady the camera on location, and called a "tri-pod."
-
damn, there's a lot of weird opinions here.
I can think of dozens of landscape photographers who would jump at the chance of having a multi shot back on location, and I'm kind of surprised that Sinar thinks only people in the studio are concerned with Quality.
err... no.
there's plenty of us out there who want obsessive maximum quality, but work on location.
why do you think 4x5 field cameras exist? or 8x10 ones?
there was a device invented a while ago, I can't exactly remember, but I think, yes, it was to steady the camera on location, and called a "tri-pod."
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=100765\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
There can be no movement at all for a multi-shot camera. You cannot use it for landscape at all because of the changing light quality ....the possible movement of anything (leaves move ..clouds move ...)
In order to put the images together there needs to be less than a 10% difference in light for each of the exposures. If the sun goes behind a cloud ..... You are toast.
I know food shooters that have to shoot some shots in single shot because of things like sauces that drip ..ice that moves ...etc.
Matt LaPointe
National Sales Support Specialist
Sinar Bron Imaging
(219) 670-9905
mlapointe@sinarbron.com
-
in addition to Matt's argument for the multishot use on location (movements are everywhere), I just want to add that there is the possibility to shoot multishot outside: just take a powerbook with you and shoot tethered,and on a stable tripod
Sinar does certainly not think that only studio photographers do need quality: far from us this idea. Our first concern is to provide quality files in each situation.
I hope this clarifies,
Thierry
There can be no movement at all for a multi-shot camera. You cannot use it for landscape at all because of the changing light quality ....the possible movement of anything (leaves move ..clouds move ...)
In order to put the images together there needs to be less than a 10% difference in light for each of the exposures. If the sun goes behind a cloud ..... You are toast.
I know food shooters that have to shoot some shots in single shot because of things like sauces that drip ..ice that moves ...etc.
Matt LaPointe
National Sales Support Specialist
Sinar Bron Imaging
(219) 670-9905
mlapointe@sinarbron.com
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=100773\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
-
So you're stating the eVolution75 will be 1/4/16-shot.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=100741\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
for the moment the eVolution is single and 4-shot: we are seriously thinking about (or not) offering the 16 shot as well. Technically it is not more difficult since the piezo plate is already there.
more when it has been decided to implement or not. Your suggestions are of course very welcome.
Thierry
-
for the moment the eVolution is single and 4-shot: we are seriously thinking about (or not) offering the 16 shot as well. Technically it is not more difficult since the piezo plate is already there.
more when it has been decided to implement or not. Your suggestions are of course very welcome.
Thierry
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=100782\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
if the piezo is there..... i will insist very much to implement the 16shot mode, after my experience in my quilt shooting. its so great to shoot 16 shot...
-
if the piezo is there..... i will insist very much to implement the 16shot mode, after my experience in my quilt shooting. its so great to shoot 16 shot...
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=100822\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Same here. When you can do 4-shot in most cases you can do the 16-shot as well. I seriously doubt whether you can make a (good) shot outside with multishot, tethered to a laptop or not.
I sometimes make exposure bracketed shots to create HDR files, even on a very sturdy tripod on a day it appears the wind has gone I have great difficulties generating exactly the same files (to be able to generate proper HDR files).
I believe the idea of not putting a screen in a multi-shot back (keeping it lean and also cutting into manufacturing costs) is sound and wise.
I would love to hear from people that did make succesful multi-shot files outdoors!
-
I can think of dozens of landscape photographers who would jump at the chance of having a multi shot back on location.... ...there was a device invented a while ago, I can't exactly remember, but I think, yes, it was to steady the camera on location, and called a "tri-pod."
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=100765\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
The landscape needs to be still as well. So long as you can get things like leaves, clouds, water to hold for a half a minute you'll be right.
-
The landscape needs to be still as well. So long as you can get things like leaves, clouds, water to hold for a half a minute you'll be right.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=100837\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Actually, more like 5 to 8 seconds, depending on the light. Stephen Johnson is well known for producing landscape work with a BetterLight Scanning back. Now there's a challenge!
Steve Hendrix
PPR Digital
-
Actually, more like 5 to 8 seconds, depending on the light. Stephen Johnson is well known for producing landscape work with a BetterLight Scanning back. Now there's a challenge!
Steve Hendrix
PPR Digital
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=100843\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I have seen work from people that do landscape with scanningbacks, especially images with repeating motion patterns (like waves) turn out very very beautiful, surreal actually. However as far as I am aware a scanning back doesn't need to align multiple exposures into 1 correct image. This makes a scanning back even a better option to use outdoors than a multi-shot back.
Correct me if I am wrong here though.
-
I have seen work from people that do landscape with scanningbacks, especially images with repeating motion patterns (like waves) turn out very very beautiful, surreal actually. However as far as I am aware a scanning back doesn't need to align multiple exposures into 1 correct image. This makes a scanning back even a better option to use outdoors than a multi-shot back.
Correct me if I am wrong here though.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=100844\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Dustbak,
not exactly: a scan back does tausends of small steps along the whole surface, scaning line by line the whole image surface: in fact, each of this single step is one exposure.
Thierry
-
Dustbak,
not exactly: a scan back does tausends of small steps along the whole surface, scaning line by line the whole image surface: in fact, each of this single step is one exposure.
Thierry
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=100845\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
That is true but isn't each line fixed/done after one pass? Meaning that even if there are movements in the landscape this will only affect the next row that will be scanned. A scanning back doesn't have to scan 4 times to get to the uninterpolated colors or 16 to get the added resolution as well. So yes it does expose in many different steps but each exposure is a single one leaving less room for colors being wrong, etc..
What I understand from multishot backs is that they will generated the final image after having made the 4 (or 16) shots. This would impose a bigger problem when the images are not perfectly aligned.
-
That is true but isn't each line fixed/done after one pass? Meaning that even if there are movements in the landscape this will only affect the next row that will be scanned.
What I understand from multishot backs is that they will generated the final image after having made the 4 (or 16) shots. This would impose a bigger problem when the images are not perfectly aligned.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=100846\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
yes, absolutely, but each line will/can therefore be moved, from one step to the next, producing weird results because not "corresponding" to or being in line with the preceeding lines. With a multishot the result when moving is a bit different, the 3 RGB colors in their whole do not align exacly anymore in the whole image (in the places it moves). The result/effect is certainly different, but both scaning and multishot need absolutely still subjects.
Thierry
-
yes, absolutely, but each line will/can therefore be moved, from one step to the next, producing weird results because not "corresponding" to or being in line with the preceeding lines. With a multishot the result when moving is a bit different, the 3 RGB colors in their whole do not align exacly anymore in the whole image (in the places it moves). The result/effect is certainly different, but both scaning and multishot need absolutely still subjects.
Thierry
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=100849\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Allright than we agree on this.
I believe the difference is that with the scanning back the results can be very pleasing. I have seen images of coastal lines where the waves became truly magnificently surreal as well as other moving stuff like trees in the wind. Naturally this will not apply for everything. I will try to find the images I am talking about and post the URL as soon as I did.
I believe the results of movement for multi-shots will be quite horrific when movement comes into play unless you are in for colors going completely insane and blur in unsuspected places.
-
Allright than we agree on this.
I believe the difference is that with the scanning back the results can be very pleasing. I have seen images of coastal lines where the waves became truly magnificently surreal as well as other moving stuff like trees in the wind. Naturally this will not apply for everything. I will try to find the images I am talking about and post the URL as soon as I did.
I believe the results of movement for multi-shots will be quite horrific when movement comes into play unless you are in for colors going completely insane and blur in unsuspected places.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=100852\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Right!
Would be interested to see such effects on waves, although I have tried it out during the times of the Dicomed scanback in the Swiss montains, with clouds (and - 10ish).
Thierry
-
Allright than we agree on this.
I believe the difference is that with the scanning back the results can be very pleasing. I have seen images of coastal lines where the waves became truly magnificently surreal as well as other moving stuff like trees in the wind. Naturally this will not apply for everything. I will try to find the images I am talking about and post the URL as soon as I did.
I believe the results of movement for multi-shots will be quite horrific when movement comes into play unless you are in for colors going completely insane and blur in unsuspected places.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=100852\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Just for the record - I was not advocating multi-shot or scanning backs as the ideal landscape solution, of course....
Single shots are the obvious preference in that environment.
Steve Hendrix
PPR Digital
-
Just for the record - I was not advocating multi-shot or scanning backs as the ideal landscape solution, of course....
Single shots are the obvious preference in that environment.
Steve Hendrix
PPR Digital
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=100854\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Yes, me neither!
Thierry
-
Right!
Would be interested to see such effects on waves, although I have tried it out during the times of the Dicomed scanback in the Swiss montains, with clouds (and - 10ish).
Thierry
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=100853\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
~humbug... just wading through tons of URL's to get to these images but no luck sofar. I will continue to look if anybody else knows what I am talking about (this does sound kind of silly) please don't hesitate to help out.
Otherwise I might put it on my to test list
Naturally we did not take that as an advice Steve. Single shot is a lot less hassle but scanning (maybe multi as well though I really doubt that) might give you a lot of fun and unsuspected results (some even really nice).
I still would like to have multi shot for in my studio but than again I invest like crazy but for some reason my wishlist appears to be growing only
-
If you shoot a single shot and a multishot you could piece them together and if there are any movements e.g around a few leaves etc you could leave them.
-
If you shoot a single shot and a multishot you could piece them together and if there are any movements e.g around a few leaves etc you could leave them.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=100862\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
think of the multishot images like of the layers in a negative...or cmyk printing plates...if they don't line up....not pretty
a scanning back does just that it scans the image top to bottom and movement will simply be blurred, like a long exposure....
-
think of the multishot images like of the layers in a negative...or cmyk printing plates...if they don't line up....not pretty
a scanning back does just that it scans the image top to bottom and movement will simply be blurred, like a long exposure....
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=100864\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
the effect of movement or ( even little ) variations of lumince result in a chessboard-like pattern, which is not very pleasing. a scanback expose line after line so a slight change in exposure ad example has not a dramatic impact on the image, except that it becomes a little bit darker at the bottom than at the top or the opposite,- but its still a coherent image. not so the 16shot cause the shots are added on a pixel per pixel pattern.