Any new thoughts on CCD v CMOS sensors for landscape on technical cameras?

[rogerxnz]

Thank you BJL. I am sure you meant to help but your amazing use of acronyms made that impossible for me. I understood about three of them.

However, do not add a dictionary for my sake as I am certain your message is way beyond my brain’s capabilities. Others who understand your message will probably know the acronyms!

Thank you anyway.
Roger

[rogerxnz]

Hi, Orley
Thank you for your comments. Great sky shot! We have good skies in New Zealand because we have a very clear atmosphere. See my shot from my CCD sensor on an H2 with the 50mm lens. No edits or enhancements.

I am very interested on how you set the hyperlocal distance when the Techno does not have a distance scale (although I have fastened a ruler to the base board). would you please pm me with details or send a link to your post describing what you have done.

I seem to have worn out my sliding back. It is very hard to move the back. Have you experienced this?
Roger

Hey Roger,

We are in a small minority but I have to say shooting with a Linhof Techno has helped me feel the satisfaction of 'making a photograph' verses taking one. 

I had an IQ180 when I bought the Techno.  It worked OK using the sliding back, bright GG and a magnifier.  Moving to the IQ3 100 has been a major step forward.  The Live View is great (using a Hoodman to view the preview screen in bright light), it handles wide lenses well and the Electronic shutter coupled with the wired release is super for landscape and architecture.  The attached image captured through a 23 HR at Ft Myers recently.  Capture 1 v11 processes the LCC's in a blink.

Using the Techno with wide lenses was a challenge until I created a focus 'puck' for each lens that sets the hyper-focal distance and aligns the center plane of the lens with the sensor plane.  I'll share this in another post as the concept would work with any view camera including the Actus.

Once the 150 mpx back is announced, you should expect significant $ incentives.
Best Regards, Orley

[ErikKaffehr]

Hi,

I think you are both right.

But, what I see with my P45+ is that the entrire workflow is biased towards exposure long below ETTR.

• The histogram is very conservative and so are the blinkies.
• Capture One and the "Film Curve" are also quite a bit on the bright side.
  

So what looks good in C1 is often 1-2 stops underexposed in a tool like RawDigger.

Best regards
Erik

Agreed! The is just dynamic range (with a rather ambiguous bottom end, deep in the shadows.) The idea of "highlight DR" and "shadow DR" is simply a split based on how much of the DR is above the midtone placement and how much is below, but of course photographers can move that placement around: see several thousand posts about "ETTR". A very mysterious use of the word "underexpose": if camera A's light-metering recommends an exposure levels that blows highlights as soon as they are more than three stops above meter midtones whereas following camera B's metering blows highlights less often, some people still say that the camera B is underexposing, whereas I am tempted to suggest that camera A is prone to recommending overexposure! But that would also be wrong; with the variable gain of digital cameras, the idea of one true and correct level of exposure and gain is nonsense. It is in part driven by the DXO "SSat=ISO" error, in which an ISO 12232 standard guideline for minimum safe exposure index, as in a recommended maximum amount of exposure (SSat, a.k.a. "base ISO speed", placing metered mid-tones at about 12.5% of FWC, about three stops from the top) is misinterpreted as a mandated correct exposure level. Perhaps the misunderstanding is enhanced by the myth that the ISO "REI" standard opens the door to arbitrary choices of exposure level, wheres in fact it is simply there to allow for fancy "pattern light metering": in simple center-weighted metering modes, there is clear evidence that the metering on cameras is always close to ISO SOS (Standard Output Sensitivity) — otherwise OOC JPEGs of simple low contrast scenes would look too dark or too light. And that is anyway all about default JPEGs, with the 8-bit JPEG standard forcing an undesirably low amount of headroom between midtones and maximum level; only 2.5 stops.

Given that good modern ILCs having ten or more stops of photographically useful DR (and thirteen or more stops of total DR above the noise floor), and recalling all the agonizing in the early digital era about how digital cameras are vastly inferior to film in highlight handling, it mystifies me that people are still arguing that the one and only one correct way to use that DR is for the light metering system to recommend an exposure level that gives a bare three stops above metered midtone level and seven or more usable stops (ten or more total stops) below. More so at higher EO settings, when additional amplification to raise midtone raw level placement to that "-3" level does little or nothing to improve shadow noise.

And those old CCD MF backs were in fact very close to "ISO independent" as fas as shadow noise, because any variable gain came off-chip and too late, after almost all noise had entered the signal, and their ADC DR was often far better than in-photosite DR.

[Wayne Fox]

I would think that the current price is around 4-5 K$ while the original one was above 35 K$ (Later lowered to 25 K$)?

So similar then to the BMW?  Not particularly worse. 

$35 k seems high based on the press release price of 19,559 euros and the exchange rate at the time.  Hard to believe it would have been over $30k. They seem to be going for around 6-8k on eBay, but not too many so maybe temporarily over priced.  pretty similar track so far.

[OrleyD]

Hi Roger,
 
Thanks for your comments.
 
Regarding setting the Hyperfocal distance on a camera like the Techno which doesn't have a focus scale.  (BTW, the Linhof focus stops could be used but for a limited number of lenses but they can move)
 
Anders Torger created a great App, Lumariver, that gives the hyperfocal focus point for specific lenses at various apertures.  I used this tool to determine the focusing point. 

Next, a target was set at the indicated distance.  Camera was tethered to C1, live view on, critical focus on the target, then locked the focus at that point.  Next a measurement was made from the back of the lens to the mounting plate where the digital back adapter contacts the camera.  This was done with a digital caliper.  A block of Delrin was machined to this dimension to provide a 'depth stop' or puck that provides a positive stopping point for the lens in relationship to the sensor.

The puck was then used to set the camera for a test in live view mode.  Using a very accurate ( 1/10,000th of an inch accuary) depth gauge, a measurement was made of deviation between this starting point and the perfect hyperfocal point for that lens.  Then the a new puck was made which is dead on. 
 
In use, you can feel the lens bump up against the puck, you can feel the alignment of the lens, if it's swing or tilt is not 0'd- forgot to reset from last shoot.  With wide angle lenses, having the lens aligned perfectly with the sensor plane is more critical than longer lenses.  This overcomes the one fault the Techno has which is the pinch clamp of the front lens standard can allow misalignment.

Dropbox link to images of the 'puck' which might help understand the process.   https://www.dropbox.com/sh/v28374emsmar8iz/AAC80IAWryYUk-2DR1x0hzKYa?dl=0

BTW, I was pleased to see that this approach can be replicated to other TECHNO cameras.  I met John Lytton from AZ at the PIGS gathering at Carmel in Feb.  I told him about my project and offered to send him the puck I use for my 40 mm Rodie.  He tried it and said it worked fine on his rig.
 
Your question about sliding back sticking has not been a problem for me.  Until the IQ3, I used the short sliding back with ground glass.  Now I use the Stitching back which is perfect.  Very compact, little additional wind resistance, and gives the 17 mm shift each way from center for quick pano work.

 
Best Regards,
 
Orley

[Gigi]

great images on focus puck on Dropbox. Very clear. Thanks for posting.

[rogerxnz]

WOW, Orley!
The work and precision you have achieved is amazing!

I might try using the ruler on the bed of the Techno. I won't get the precision you have but I will get more DOF than I get by just focusing on an object.

Thanks, again
Roger

Hi Roger,
 
Thanks for your comments.

. . .

Your question about sliding back sticking has not been a problem for me.  Until the IQ3, I used the short sliding back with ground glass.  Now I use the Stitching back which is perfect.  Very compact, little additional wind resistance, and gives the 17 mm shift each way from center for quick pano work.

 
Best Regards,
 
Orley