New CMOS sensors and cameras.

[Clyde RF]

A while ago, I posted a thread inquiring about the possibility of a 24/35 manufacturer producing a 24/35 detachable cmos back for technical cameras, so that increased precision and versatility, along with extremely precise and long-term appropriate lenses, could be utilized at a cost not too much higher than that of a 24/35 outfit with a variety of the best t/s lenses. The silence of optimistic response was deafening, but with continuing new developments, this thread would seem a good place to raise the question again, for the benefit of those who would really like to be able to use an affordable cmos equipped tech camera for landscape or architecture. The cost of development and tooling for the 24/35 back might be less prohibitive than that of producing the mf cmos back.       

[ondebanks]

Hi Clyde,

I agree. Sounds like you were proposing the same thing I was, when I started this thread?

Ray

[Kitty]

I don't care what people are saying but my D800 files do not have the same quality as those from my H4D60. The first delivers files that are usable the other files that make me wanna get more.
 

+1

[JeffKohn]

A while ago, I posted a thread inquiring about the possibility of a 24/35 manufacturer producing a 24/35 detachable cmos back for technical cameras, so that increased precision and versatility, along with extremely precise and long-term appropriate lenses, could be utilized at a cost not too much higher than that of a 24/35 outfit with a variety of the best t/s lenses. The silence of optimistic response was deafening, but with continuing new developments, this thread would seem a good place to raise the question again, for the benefit of those who would really like to be able to use an affordable cmos equipped tech camera for landscape or architecture. The cost of development and tooling for the 24/35 back might be less prohibitive than that of producing the mf cmos back.       

I'd buy one if it were priced right. Put the D800 sensor in a digital back with live-view and I'd pay 5K for it.

[ctz]

me too.

[Hening Bettermann]

Would the bare back need to be more expensive than the whole D800? Make that 2K and I'm in.

[JeffKohn]

Would the bare back need to be more expensive than the whole D800? Make that 2K and I'm in.

Due to the quantities that it would sell in, I assume so. On the one hand you could drop a lot of parts/functionality from the D800 in a back (AF, matrix metering, flash, etc), but market for such a back would be pretty tiny compared to the D800 so the R&D and fixed prodocution costs would have to be spread over a much smaller allocation of units.

[Clyde RF]

It is encouraging to see that my interest in a 24/35 detachable digital cmos back is not unique.Thus we have a reenactment of the old truism about several great minds arriving independently at the same conclusion . It is a good thing that some of us who wield a medium format slr, as well as the technical camera users, would both stand to gain from the availability of this item - thereby generating more demand.

Although much great work has been produced by photographers using a variety of other systems, pancake camera such as an Arca, Alpa, Cambo, or Sinar appear to me to be most ideally suited for landscape or architectural photography, due among other things to their inherent simplicity, durability of precision, and portability convenience. Despite excellence of design and execution, the best 35mm t/s systems seem to be a solution which should not be required, if only the above referred too item were made available to those who are reluctant at this time to invest in the present crop of mf backs. (great as the potential imaging quality therein would be)

I have been thinking a bit about the Arca rm3di, which being mirrorless, would especially benefit from live view, in spite of the fact that the Arca f series already has a very effective and sophisticated focusing system; in never hurts to have available both a belt and suspenders in an emergency. Possibly Arca-Swiss or one of the other pancake manufacturers would be willing to team up with one of the major cmos sensor producers to resolve the issue, as such probably would be more within the niche market company's business model.         

[FredBGG]

You know what could be really neat.... a sort of hybrid auto stitching back.

Tale a D800 sensor and put it in a big ass back that could do a relatively high speed series of shots covering various formats.

With two shots... it almost covers 645. A few more shots and you could cover 6x8cm.

Combined with a Fuji gx680 or Mamiya 6x7 you would get massive MP count captures of what these great 6x7 and 6x8 lenses can take.

[Clyde RF]

Fred... That is really a great idea which should be added to Nick Devlin's post today entitled "Five technologies we want." To me, the most significant aspect of that tech would be the speed of application. When I am doing landscape, I am often operating so slowly that the snails seem to go flying by, but when making use of quickly changing ambient light, time is very much of the essence. This fact tends to make me take a pessimistic view of the potential efficacy for me of being very adventurous with digital hi-jinks, like stitching, focus stacking, or exposure stacking. If the speed of the automatic stitching were fast enough, considerably more benefit in landscape would follow. Maybe high speed focus and exposure stacking could also be implemented - all at the same time? - or would that be killing the goose that laid the golden egg?         

[Jim2]

Is it not possible to create a Nikon mount for the Arca rm3di or alpa / cambo etc ?
I know they have Cambo X2, arca mline2 etc but those are a bit bulky, but might be better (in price) than going rm3di + iq back.

[Doug Peterson]

Is it not possible to create a Nikon mount for the Arca rm3di or alpa / cambo etc ?
I know they have Cambo X2, arca mline2 etc but those are a bit bulky, but might be better (in price) than going rm3di + iq back.

The purpose of a tech camera is that it has a very minimal space between the lens mount and the sensor of an attached digital plate.

Canon/Nikon and all other general purpose cameras have a space between their lens mount and the sensor (used in most cases for a shutter/mirror assembly). Putting them on a Arca/Cambo would mean you can't focus at infinity - a pretty important requirement for most photography.

An IQ or Credo on a tech camera is a really great combo - it's not $5k, sorry, but it's a niche market and independent of the technology used it will be more expensive than a general purpose dSLR.