Luminous Landscape Forum
Equipment & Techniques => Medium Format / Film / Digital Backs – and Large Sensor Photography => Topic started by: uaiomex on November 22, 2009, 02:45:40 pm
-
I know, I know. It's easy to say MF because of the almost 1.5X the sensor area. But would happen if some manufacturer comes with a new camera system with a sensor, let's say 27X38? Would that be MF too?
It used to be no less than 41.5X56mm. 30X40mm is way smaller.
Just food for thought.
Eduardo
-
I know, I know. It's easy to say MF because of the almost 1.5X the sensor area. But would happen if some manufacturer comes with a new camera system with a sensor, let's say 27X38? Would that be MF too?
It used to be no less than 41.5X56mm. 30X40mm is way smaller.
Just food for thought.
Eduardo
I believe, and I could be wrong about this, but when Leica first came out with the S2 they called it "middle" format. ie between medium and 35mm. I think that has been lost in the wash, so to speak, and now most people refer to the S2 as medium format. I agree with you however. 35mm, medium format, and large format (to a lesser extent as 4 x 5, 5 x 7, 8 x 10, etc) were all considered "large" format, but were based on pretty firm dimensions. I guess sensors have changed the "name" of the game.
-
Didn't the early "medium format digital backs" from Phase One and others actually have 24x36mm sensors?
-
I know, I know. It's easy to say MF because of the almost 1.5X the sensor area. But would happen if some manufacturer comes with a new camera system with a sensor, let's say 27X38? Would that be MF too?
It used to be no less than 41.5X56mm. 30X40mm is way smaller.
Just food for thought.
Eduardo
Eduard
Yes , I know of your dream of a 5,6x5,6 sensor . Oh how much I would like a sensor of that size too .
It was my dream too , but I have given up that dream ! ! !
Which camera maker should want a sensor of that size ? ? ?
HASSELBLAD for shure not , because it would not fit their H-SYSTEM .
And . . . . . . who else is on the market , who could drive for a sensor of that size ? ? ?
For what other camera system would it make sense ? ? ?
Looking at the sales figures of MF digital backs , you must say and finally admit , there will not be a bigger square sensor .
Even if you want it , and me as well , I believe it will not happen .
So what I do , speeking in MF and LF terms , I have discovered my 6x9 and 6x12 cameras again
and shoot on film (KODAK EKTAR 100) a great film .
I don't like scanning , but still it is a good alternative .
Best regards
Jürgen
-
As mentioned, early MFDBs were 24x36mm sensors, and were still called MF. Perhaps more realistically, the CFV and CFV-II, as well as the P20/P20+ and some other backs use 36x36mm sensors, and I have never heard anyone questioning their being MF. They certainly deliver results more like MF than like 35mm. The P30/P30+/H3DII-31 have 33x44mm sensors, and the Leica S2 has 30x45mm sensors. I have heard some people questioning the S2 being MF, but given these other sensors, some smaller, some nearly the same size, I think that argument is just silly.
In terms of what is currently on the market, I would say that 36x36mm is a good starting point for MF.
-
Heh.... nomenclature. When people used to ask what I shoot, I'd say "Large Format".... now I say "View Camera"
-
I'd say too that digital MF starts at any sensor size as long it is used with a medium format camera. The question about the S2 is that it is a complete new system from scratch. My question was what would we call it, if another new complete system shows up with a bigger sensor than 24X36 but smaller that the S2's?
I remember Leica said it was a new "mittel" format. Middle format is ok. Only problem is that in spanish middle is said with 2 words. "En medio" Not elegant.
Long sunday anyway.
Eduardo
As mentioned, early MFDBs were 24x36mm sensors, and were still called MF. Perhaps more realistically, the CFV and CFV-II, as well as the P20/P20+ and some other backs use 36x36mm sensors, and I have never heard anyone questioning their being MF. They certainly deliver results more like MF than like 35mm. The P30/P30+/H3DII-31 have 33x44mm sensors, and the Leica S2 has 30x45mm sensors. I have heard some people questioning the S2 being MF, but given these other sensors, some smaller, some nearly the same size, I think that argument is just silly.
In terms of what is currently on the market, I would say that 36x36mm is a good starting point for MF.
-
Hallo Jürgen,
Well, its true and like most dreams, unreachable ($$$$$).
But I swear to all gods That I would be perfectly happy with a CFV39 with a sensor mounted on a built-in turntable.
I'm sure that if the Hy6 returns, sooner or later we would see a 6X6 sensor.
Take care
Eduardo
PS What scanner are you using?
Eduard
Yes , I know of your dream of a 5,6x5,6 sensor . Oh how much I would like a sensor of that size too .
It was my dream too , but I have given up that dream ! ! !
Which camera maker should want a sensor of that size ? ? ?
HASSELBLAD for shure not , because it would not fit their H-SYSTEM .
And . . . . . . who else is on the market , who could drive for a sensor of that size ? ? ?
For what other camera system would it make sense ? ? ?
Looking at the sales figures of MF digital backs , you must say and finally admit , there will not be a bigger square sensor .
Even if you want it , and me as well , I believe it will not happen .
So what I do , speeking in MF and LF terms , I have discovered my 6x9 and 6x12 cameras again
and shoot on film (KODAK EKTAR 100) a great film .
I don't like scanning , but still it is a good alternative .
Best regards
Jürgen
-
Eduard
Yes , I know of your dream of a 5,6x5,6 sensor .!
Which camera maker should want a sensor of that size ? ? ?
For what other camera system would it make sense ? ? ?
Jürgen
Sinar P3
-
The question of where MF starts is not only about sensor size, but also about the price of the equipment. And that makes the S2 certainly a MF camera!
-
But I swear to all gods That I would be perfectly happy with a CFV39 with a sensor mounted on a built-in turntable.
Workflow: take one shot, turn, take another shot, blend the two, turn up the vignetting control until no one can see that the corners are missing, voila, large square shots
-
I thought about that before when thinking about a rotating sensor in a stationary back (fixed, like the CFV39)
If Leaf can do it, Hasselblad can do it too.
Thing is, the CFV39 steals the whole idea. A MF camera that you don't have to turn with a waist level finder in unison with a square format (or a rectangular revolving one).
It is an abomination that the same company that perfected the idea, came with a digital back that severes the whole concept.
Strange days indeed.
Eduardo
Workflow: take one shot, turn, take another shot, blend the two, turn up the vignetting control until no one can see that the corners are missing, voila, large square shots