Luminous Landscape Home
Luminous Landscape Forum > Equipment & Techniques > Medium Format / Film / Digital Backs – and Large Sensor Photography > Better than digital MF ?
Pages: [1] 2   Go Down

Author Topic: Better than digital MF ?  (Read 10114 times)

eronald

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6642
    • My gallery on Instagram
Better than digital MF ?
« on: April 16, 2007, 05:44:36 pm »
Logged
If you appreciate my blog posts help me by following on https://instagram.com/edmundronald

pss

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 960
    • http://www.schefz.com
Better than digital MF ?
« Reply #1 on: April 16, 2007, 05:52:46 pm »
12mpix at 12bit for 60frames/sec.....all that for an unheard price (still a bit more then any MF back)....in terms of file quality this hardly beats a DSLR...

did they ever get the stolen prototype back?
Logged

eronald

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6642
    • My gallery on Instagram
Better than digital MF ?
« Reply #2 on: April 16, 2007, 05:58:31 pm »
Quote
12mpix at 12bit for 60frames/sec.....all that for an unheard price (still a bit more then any MF back)....in terms of file quality this hardly beats a DSLR...

did they ever get the stolen prototype back?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=112733\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


 The price is less than that of a P45.

 I couldn't make those gallery images with anything I own. The color is superb. Could you match that image quality and color ?

Edmund
« Last Edit: April 16, 2007, 05:59:40 pm by eronald »
Logged
If you appreciate my blog posts help me by following on https://instagram.com/edmundronald

bcroslin

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 324
    • http://www.bobcroslin.com
Better than digital MF ?
« Reply #3 on: April 16, 2007, 06:09:44 pm »
Quote
Could you match that image quality and color ?

From the looks of it, yes.
Logged
Bob Croslin, Photographer
[url=http://ww

pss

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 960
    • http://www.schefz.com
Better than digital MF ?
« Reply #4 on: April 16, 2007, 06:17:13 pm »
Quote
The price is less than that of a P45.

 I couldn't make those gallery images with anything I own. The color is superb. Could you match that image quality and color ?

Edmund
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=112736\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

the price is 17000 for the base camera module...a complete (useable) camera is more then twice that....but still cheap for what is can do....or what it might be able to do...this camera has been floating around, was supposed to ship,.....either way seems to be a revolution for digital video.....but with the announcements today at NAB...things are moving fast for the Dvideo people....

yes i can match the color and quality....this does not seem to impressive to me, am i missing something?
Logged

heinrichvoelkel

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 394
Better than digital MF ?
« Reply #5 on: April 16, 2007, 06:18:06 pm »
Actually from the specs and the price: the chip in the red smells like the canon eos 5d one. but how do they manage to get 60 frames out of it?

wondering
Logged

eronald

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6642
    • My gallery on Instagram
Better than digital MF ?
« Reply #6 on: April 16, 2007, 06:18:17 pm »
Quote
From the looks of it, yes.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=112740\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Maybe I need to invest in a better makeup artist, then, or purchase some rolls of skin

Edmund
Logged
If you appreciate my blog posts help me by following on https://instagram.com/edmundronald

godtfred

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 293
    • http://
Better than digital MF ?
« Reply #7 on: April 16, 2007, 06:43:37 pm »
Quote
http://www.red.com/skin/img/workflow/hero_b.jpg
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
looks like competition for origin...

[a href=\"http://www.dalsa.com/dc/]http://www.dalsa.com/dc/[/url]
Logged
Axel Bauer
godtfred.com H2|M679CS|P45+

Mort54

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 590
    • http://
Better than digital MF ?
« Reply #8 on: April 16, 2007, 09:56:28 pm »
Quote
Actually from the specs and the price: the chip in the red smells like the canon eos 5d one. but how do they manage to get 60 frames out of it?
It's not. Their website says the sensor is 24.4mm wide x 13.7mm high. That's smaller than the APS-C sensors in Canons consumer DSLRs, with even smaller photosites.
Logged
I Reject Your Reality And Substitute My

heinrichvoelkel

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 394
Better than digital MF ?
« Reply #9 on: April 17, 2007, 05:26:32 am »
Quote
It's not. Their website says the sensor is 24.4mm wide x 13.7mm high. That's smaller than the APS-C sensors in Canons consumer DSLRs, with even smaller photosites.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=112777\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


Your are right. I got fouled by the 12 MP 35mm super size. Still wondering.
Logged

samuel_js

  • Guest
Better than digital MF ?
« Reply #10 on: April 17, 2007, 05:34:42 am »
To me it looks like Canons. Not comparable to a MDB.

Br
Samuel
Logged

josayeruk

  • Guest
Better than digital MF ?
« Reply #11 on: April 17, 2007, 01:29:09 pm »
Quote
The price is less than that of a P45.

 I couldn't make those gallery images with anything I own. The color is superb. Could you match that image quality and color ?

Edmund
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=112736\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Even if the quality /  colur is good a slice of one frame of HDTV is still relatively low Megapixel wise.
Logged

eronald

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6642
    • My gallery on Instagram
Better than digital MF ?
« Reply #12 on: April 17, 2007, 02:49:31 pm »
Quote
Even if the quality /  colur is good a slice of one frame of HDTV is still relatively low Megapixel wise.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=112894\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

This is 10MP.


Edmund
Logged
If you appreciate my blog posts help me by following on https://instagram.com/edmundronald

josayeruk

  • Guest
Better than digital MF ?
« Reply #13 on: April 17, 2007, 04:37:48 pm »
Quote
This is 10MP.
Edmund
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=112910\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Then I guess you have answered your own question.  
Logged

scott_dobry

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 57
    • http://www.scottdobry.com
Better than digital MF ?
« Reply #14 on: April 20, 2007, 10:26:53 am »
Are you suggesting that shooting stills with a this video camera is (or could become) an alternative to shooting stills with a still camera?


Quote
To me it looks like Canons. Not comparable to a MDB.

Br
Samuel
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=112812\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Logged
[span style='color:orange'][url=http://w

Randal32

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 71
Better than digital MF ?
« Reply #15 on: April 20, 2007, 10:49:21 am »
Quote
Are you suggesting that shooting stills with a this video camera is (or could become) an alternative to shooting stills with a still camera?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=113401\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

For certain genres of photography, I absolutely believe this is what will eventually happen.  I don't think it's crazy to believe that within 5 years we'll be grabbing 22 MP raw files off a motion camera.  For lifestyle shooters, action shooters, photojournalists, and some fashion, this would be quite attractive.

The decisive moment will no longer be decided by our fingers pressing a trigger, but selecting the perfect frame out of 60 from that one second in an editing house.  

I'm sure this is being discussed elsewhere.  I would love to hear others thoughts on this...

Also, I'm sure within 10 years Nano-Tech will play a huge role in this as well.


Randal
Logged

Graham Mitchell

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2281
Better than digital MF ?
« Reply #16 on: April 20, 2007, 10:50:56 am »
This topic is plain silly!
Logged

pss

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 960
    • http://www.schefz.com
Better than digital MF ?
« Reply #17 on: April 20, 2007, 12:21:51 pm »
Quote
This topic is plain silly!
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=113408\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

thank you...
Logged

eronald

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6642
    • My gallery on Instagram
Better than digital MF ?
« Reply #18 on: April 20, 2007, 03:36:53 pm »
Quote
For certain genres of photography, I absolutely believe this is what will eventually happen.  I don't think it's crazy to believe that within 5 years we'll be grabbing 22 MP raw files off a motion camera.  For lifestyle shooters, action shooters, photojournalists, and some fashion, this would be quite attractive.

The decisive moment will no longer be decided by our fingers pressing a trigger, but selecting the perfect frame out of 60 from that one second in an editing house. 

Randal
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=113406\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

In any case, one of these belonging to the "pool" might get rid of a lot of catwalk photographers ...

Edmund
Logged
If you appreciate my blog posts help me by following on https://instagram.com/edmundronald

samuel_js

  • Guest
Better than digital MF ?
« Reply #19 on: April 20, 2007, 06:41:06 pm »
Quote
Are you suggesting that shooting stills with a this video camera is (or could become) an alternative to shooting stills with a still camera?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=113401\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Well the quality looks "photographic". No doubt. It's not like the still pictures from normal videocameras.

Br
Samuel
Logged
Pages: [1] 2   Go Up
Luminous Landscape Forum > Equipment & Techniques > Medium Format / Film / Digital Backs – and Large Sensor Photography > Better than digital MF ?