Luminous Landscape Forum
Equipment & Techniques => Medium Format / Film / Digital Backs – and Large Sensor Photography => Topic started by: Morgan_Moore on October 30, 2006, 04:20:57 pm
-
Ok
We know all about Horseman, ALPA etc
Super tripple expensive for jobalong grubby snappers such as myself
Not so much the cameras but the lenses and thier special mountings
I have played with Nikkor glass infront of my chip and the image circle seems about 15MP worth of a 22MP
Plenty for a DPS in a Mag or probably anything really
So has anyone tried the cambo miniwide or any other way of sticking such glass in front of a MFDB
DOes it work ?
Does anyone know a dealer that sells the miniwide who actually returns calls?
Are there other products with copal 3 shutters that allow the full coverage of the glass
(ps not the Horseman digiflex as the 35mm shutter crops the image to a strcit 11mp(/22))
ps I currently have an H1 mount
SMM
-
So has anyone tried the cambo miniwide or any other way of sticking such glass in front of a MFDB
DOes it work ?
Does anyone know a dealer that sells the miniwide who actually returns calls?
Are there other products with copal 3 shutters that allow the full coverage of the glass
SMM
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=82943\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Sam,
Call Calumet on 0207-380-4508 and ask for Sue Jacobs or Andy Johnson. If you are having problems let me know and I'll ask them to contact you.
Yair
-
Ok
We know all about Horseman, ALPA etc
Super tripple expensive for jobalong grubby snappers such as myself
Not so much the cameras but the lenses and thier special mountings
I have played with Nikkor glass infront of my chip and the image circle seems about 15MP worth of a 22MP
Plenty for a DPS in a Mag or probably anything really
So has anyone tried the cambo miniwide or any other way of sticking such glass in front of a MFDB
DOes it work ?
Does anyone know a dealer that sells the miniwide who actually returns calls?
Are there other products with copal 3 shutters that allow the full coverage of the glass
(ps not the Horseman digiflex as the 35mm shutter crops the image to a strcit 11mp(/22))
ps I currently have an H1 mount
SMM
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a] (http://index.php?act=findpost&pid=82943\")
You could try kapturegroups truewide solution:
[a href=\"http://www.kapturegroup.com/]http://www.kapturegroup.com/[/url]
Dg
-
I have both a miniwide as well as the true-wide made by Kapturegroup. I am currently selling the miniwide BTW. The true-wide I only obtained recently and this I will be using with an Aptus17. Before that I used Cantare, C-Most and Valeo.
Next to these I also use a Digiflex II.
I have been very happy with these combinations especially when you carefully pick your lenses.
This is a shot I made quite casually with the Digiflex:
http://www.peperkamp.com/samples/lowres/ka...ton002small.jpg (http://www.peperkamp.com/samples/lowres/karperton002small.jpg)
I have also a link to the high res version which is:
http://www.peperkamp.com/samples/highres/karperton002.jpg (http://www.peperkamp.com/samples/highres/karperton002.jpg)
These have been made with a Valeo/DigiflexII/Zeis50/1.4 planar. When carefully used this will give any larger system a good run for its money. I stitch when I need really large pictures. This was a test I ran to see what would be possible with that system. With a bit more patience and a bit more careful work more quality should be possible. I expect to get more out of the true-wide (I used the Mini a couple of times but expect that thing to be obsolete now I have the true-wide).
Downside of these systems is that no DB vendor is willing to continue to create a 24x36 sensor which I believe is a pity since it is such a nice niche. However a 43x33 sensor like my aptus will also cover about 11/12MP on a Copal1 (MiniWide) and about 15 on a Copal3 (True-Wide).
The MiniWide is a nice piece of work however does not have the same built quality as the True-Wide. In a Copal1 version the Miniwide can cover about a 36x36 sensor. The true-wide supposedly can cover more. I can let you know this as soon as my Aptus is in (which should be tomorrow).
-
I am a bit confused
You used a 50mm lense for that shot
Surely then you must have spun the body on the tripod
I cant see the point of doing that when you could do the same thing with an 80 and a 645 camera (if you have such a thing-I do)
Kapture group dont list a compatability with the H1 mount
Interested in the coverage of the true wide (copal 3 no?) over a big chip
Maybe you could do a snap and leave the dak edeges on - dont worry about high res
----
I am looking to make wide interior shots with a minimum of fuss corrected if possible
Basically I see the 14 as a get out of jail free card where ultra wide is required in a hurry and on a budget - and Im always in a hurry and on a budget
I also feel that my SLRn camera has a limited lifespan and will proably be repaced with a D2x unless nikon pull something out of thier hat
That will leave me totally stuffed for wideness
----
I might consider alpa if there were a way to focus it - maybe thats what Leica could bring to the MF party now they have bought someone up - I cant remeber who and dont really care until product is on the street
-
The true-wide indeed has a copal No3.
The reason I used this was fairly simple. I used to work with 35mm Nikon gear and was looking for something better. This way I started to use the Cantare, etc..
I just had the lenses already and now use multiple systems with the same glass. I use a D200 as a backup.
This system provides a lot of quality for very little although you can end up having to choose for a larger format eventually anyway.
-
. I used to work with 35mm Nikon gear and was looking for something better.
Makes sense - you didnt have 645
-
Doesn't the Sinar modular system do just this?
-
Doesn't the Sinar modular system do just this?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=82971\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Maybe it does - but Id prefer a couple of 5ds and a couple of 24 TSEs for the money..
£1618.00 for the mirror box
£899.00 for the prism and
£4158.00 for the body (!)
And I bet it crops the image back to 11mp
All with a bullet stopping 60th flash synch (not)
I think they got the name wrong - Sinar Millionair System morelike - I supose at least you can see through it
Who conceptualises these things - who buys them ??
SMM
(Off topic I know - but have these people (sinar) forgotten that all we are trying to do is align a chip with a bit of glass and maybe a mirror that gets out of the way - the electronics on that thing are nuts - I dont even need a meter I can chimp)
-
Doesn't the Sinar modular system do just this?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=82971\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Of I forgot you might also want..
cable release.. £82.00
power bit for the bottom £705.00
Sinar back adapter plate £211.00
Tripod adapter £27.00
AND it dont go on my H1 mount so I need the
Other mirror box £2338.00 and a new 80mm lense, £2316.00 and maybe the NON SHIFTING 40mm, £4474.00 and for portraits .. a Sinaron Digital AF Sonnar 4.0 - 180 at £3654.00
A bargain really - maybe they'll give me a good trade in price on my one year old soon to be compatible with nothing Hasselburg - if the front elements dont fall out before I can get to the shop
-
Sinar M is ridiculously priced. It is heavy, it has disappointing spec's (considering price).
It will be obsolete and fade away fairly soon this way.
-
It will be obsolete and fade away fairly soon this way.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=83000\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Now Sinar are backing the hy6 too - even they see this ??
Any way back on topic.. Nikkors and DBs please..
-
I agree it's expensive but it does exactly what you asked so it's not off-topic. Here is a snippet from the website:
"Don‘t sell those Nikon lenses yet! By using the 35 mm Mirror Module, the Sinar m camera can easily also be converted into a 35 mm single-lens-reflex camera that can be used with a large variety of Nikon lenses opening up a great range of focal lengths for your Sinarback that extends from extreme wide-angle to super telephoto lenses. Additional advantages of the modular Sinar m System: It features a significantly larger image area than those of many digital small image single-lensreflex cameras and it does not require the annoying focal length multiplying factors that have to be taken into account because of the smaller sensor formats in other cameras. In any case, the full 24 x 36 mm format is at your disposal – even larger, depending on the digital back and the lens that is being used. "
-
so it's not off-topic.[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=83012\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Correct . it was my subsesquent rant that was OT
SMM
-
I'm VERY VERY interested too in how 35mm nikkor lenses can cover 36mm by 36mm or 36mm by 48mm. Is the fall off acceptable ? is it possible to do any shot without stitching or must stitching be factored in ?
cheers
-
I'm VERY VERY interested too in how 35mm nikkor lenses can cover 36mm by 36mm or 36mm by 48mm. Is the fall off acceptable ? is it possible to do any shot without stitching or must stitching be factored in ?
cheers
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=83021\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
my basic experience using a lashed together system is that
basically the image circle covers about 17mp worth of a 22mp chip (which is good for me)
Because my test rig was home made I cant really comment on quality
I think lenses like the 28PC have good image circle (unshifted)
My 24 (1970s) has good image circle
17-35 and 20-35 look good
I would imagine that lenses with 'tighter design' (also with internal flare baffles) where they are pushing the optics like the 14 2.8 will not be so good but will still give a 11mp file with full 14 coverage in a way that no kinon can exept the SLRn
I will try and dig out my test shot - it is suprising
The plan would not be to stitch - stitching requires a bigger image circle when done 'flat'
I am trying to get away from stitching which can produce phoenomenal results if you have time - my clients dont have time
SMM
-
I'm VERY VERY interested too in how 35mm nikkor lenses can cover 36mm by 36mm or 36mm by 48mm. Is the fall off acceptable cheers
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=83021\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
This image is out of focus
But it gives you a feeling of the drop off over the 22mp sensor
Then lens is a chrome barrel 1970s Nikkor 24 2.8
(the second hand price of which will now double)
SMM
(that is my hair in the top right)
-
This is the image made by a TrueWide Copal3, Nikkor 85/2.8PC and Aptus17 with a 43x31 sensor.
It is actually better than I expected. It apparently covers the whole sensor area. This is a quick and dirty shot. I will make some others together with the MiniWide tomorrow (it is late over here).
This shot is overexposed, making it a bit hard to judge light fall-of.
http://www.peperkamp.com/samples/TrueWideCopal3.jpg (http://www.peperkamp.com/samples/TrueWideCopal3.jpg)
One other thing I immediately notice is that the Aptus17 suffers from the centerfold issue! It might just be an anomaly. But when you would set the black point in levels of the image above very high you can see a line in the center. Makes me curious whether it will show up under normal circumstances.
-
This is the image made by a TrueWide Copal3
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=83120\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Will be interesting to see if the C1 shutter causes a smaller image circle
That looks very adequate coverage to me
Was slightly confused about the image at first now I see its white (with a bit of centerfold!)
-
I can understand. I thought this to be the best way to show the copal3 and Nikkor85 cover the complete sensor area.
I thought it was centerfold at first but try doing the level thingy in PS. You will see the image is made-up from 6 parts equally in size.
-
Image link didn't work for me.
-
Image link didn't work for me.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=83126\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
its a white picture with a bit of darkening at the edges !
-
I have made some pictures wit both the Truewide with Copal3 as well as the miniwide Copal1. Both cameras used the Nikkor 85PC.
The sensor is the Aptus17 which is 43x31. I don't have a 36x36 however previously I tested my Valeo with size 24x36 both in landscape as well as in potrait mode on the Miniwide. This did cover everywhere.
Images taken on my table with light at f4.0/25iso/1/125 ( everywhere with about 1/10 of a stop of tolerance). I took a sequence of 3 starting with 1 stop underexposure.
Truewide:
f5.6) http://www.peperkamp.com/samples/TruewideCopal31.jpg (http://www.peperkamp.com/samples/TruewideCopal31.jpg)
f8.0) http://www.peperkamp.com/samples/TruewideCopal32.jpg (http://www.peperkamp.com/samples/TruewideCopal32.jpg)
f11) http://www.peperkamp.com/samples/TruewideCopal33.jpg (http://www.peperkamp.com/samples/TruewideCopal33.jpg)
Miniwide
f5.6) http://www.peperkamp.com/samples/MiniwideCopal11.jpg (http://www.peperkamp.com/samples/MiniwideCopal11.jpg)
f8.0) http://www.peperkamp.com/samples/MiniwideCopal12.jpg (http://www.peperkamp.com/samples/MiniwideCopal12.jpg)
f11) http://www.peperkamp.com/samples/MiniwideCopal13.jpg (http://www.peperkamp.com/samples/MiniwideCopal13.jpg)
The Copal3 is really nice it covers the complete sensor area, the lens does appear to show a little light fall off, which I find remarkable for a lense made for 24x36. This is very nice, don't forget 35mm lenses have been designed for much more lp/mm than MF or LF lenses.
This would make a Truewide Copal3 unit with a P30 or Aptus65 a really appealing piece of equipment.
Hmmm. I think I need to clean the sensor
-
is it possible for you to drop a couple of frames on the miniwide with the widest nikkr you have
SMM
-
don't forget 35mm lenses have been designed for much more lp/mm than MF or LF lenses.
This is a myth. Modern LF lenses are very high resolution. The Schneider website, for example, rates their lenses at "90 to 200 line pairs per millimeter" which as far as I know exceeds the resolution of any of the sensors we are using (around 70lppm at best). 35mm lenses will therefore not result in higher resolution images.
-
Let me start by saying that I believe the digital LF lenses are magnificent. They are very high resolution but now..
What do you mean myth? Because there are now 2 lines of higher resolution lenses made by Schneider en Rodenstock? This only tells that it is true and that only recently higher res LF lenses are becoming available.
At this moment the 35mm lens with the highest tested res is the Zeiss 50/1.4 with 340lp/mm max. The 85 made by Zeiss comes in as a close second.
This is still substantially higher than the new line of digital LF lenses. So they still are higher res. Naturally it is impressive 90 to 200lp/mm for the image circle these lenses can cover however that is just the point which I am making. There are MF sensors that are somewhat smaller where 35mm (with larger image circles) can be used. These lenses tend to be significantly cheaper and the best of them have higher res than even the new digital LF. 340lp/mm (even if it is only in the center at a specific f stop, which is the way it is usually measured) is stil higher than 200lp/mm (which is probably also measured in the centre).
No myth there, never been. Lenses for larger surfaces simply did not need to be that high res. Since the introduction of digital sensor which especially initially were substantially smaller the need started to have higer res LF lenses and we got them.
-
I only have a 20/3.5. I will put that on the MiniWide and post the images here later.
-
This is a myth. Modern LF lenses are very high resolution. [a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=83199\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Thanks for starting your own thread !
To me the relative meris are somewhat irrelevant, my 24 nikkor I own - a 24 schneider I cant afford
A 14mm nikkor I own a 14 schneider doesnt exist
Many here probably own a DSLR with a wide lens - could they get more out of that lens by getting in front of thier 16bit back than using it on thier DSLR??
SMM
-
I tried the 20/3.5 but this one did not fit on the MiniWide (does fit on the TrueWide though).
It appears the Copal1 on the Mini can be replaced provided you have the right tool for it. Not sure whether that also means you can replace it with a Copal3.
This is the image with the 24mm, same setup as before.
f5.6) http://www.peperkamp.com/samples/MiniWide24mm.jpg (http://www.peperkamp.com/samples/MiniWide24mm.jpg)
-
A 14mm nikkor I own a 14 schneider doesnt exist
Why are you comparing lenses with different FOV?
Anyway I can understand the financial constraints. Is your mission to make use of the full-frame (24x36mm) capabilities of your Nikon lenses? If Nikon introduced a full-frame DSLR would that answer your needs?
-
Why are you comparing lenses with different FOV?
Is your mission to make use of the full-frame (24x36mm) capabilities of your Nikon lenses?
If Nikon introduced a full-frame DSLR would that answer your needs?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=83366\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
FOV - because I want the widest single shot capture which would appear to be a 14 nikkor - on a larger chip - way wider than a SCH 24 - but not as quality - 15mp out of 22mp or less dependant on how it drops off - hense the thread - enquiring about the drop off - which apperas v good on my 24
Is your mission to make use of the full-frame (24x36mm) capabilities of your Nikon lenses?
Absolutley and the 22mp chip I already own
If Nikon introduced a full-frame DSLR would that answer your needs?
Well I already have an expensive chip and all this glass so I dont really want another camera (lets assume its 1ds2price) - but I probably would end up getting it (if they didnt do something dumb inthe design)
This still may not out perform a 16bit chip on the glass - so if I got a ff nikon it probably would be for other reasons like decent AF or high ISO (I already have a fast falling apart SLRn which is a good performer in many situations, but wide low lit interiors with light streaming in the windows aint one of them)
My main mission is to make full use of everything I already own - a 22mp back and nikon glass from 14 2.8 - 600 f4 with minimal further outlay
My Hassy H1 wont ever have a shifting solution or a super wide (THANKS GUYS) - I have a nikkor 28 shift - and I aint going to change backs just cos Blad got stupid - my back is a five year invest that I am going to stick with
It is not particularly that I am scared of the prices of the super expensive kit - say Alpa had a useable range finder or a electronic focus solution it would be attractive but for me all that money on something still half baked seems nuts
I am very tempted by a miniwide with copal 3 shutter - no usewrs here it would apprear and dealers still not too keen !
SMM
-
I tried the 20/3.5 but this one did not fit on the MiniWide (does fit on the TrueWide though).
It appears the Copal1 on the Mini can be replaced provided you have the right tool for it. Not sure whether that also means you can replace it with a Copal3.
This is the image with the 24mm, same setup as before.
f5.6) http://www.peperkamp.com/samples/MiniWide24mm.jpg (http://www.peperkamp.com/samples/MiniWide24mm.jpg)
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=83365\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
the hole for copal 3 is bigger, hence you might need to cut a bigger hole, I'm interested how they managed to put a nikon mount infront of the copal, was it a custom job ? or just some adapter ?
would you be able to use any shifting when using with the true-wide ?
cheers
-
It looks like a factory build Copal with F-mount. Not sure whether it is custom however it might very well be since there are not that many built world wide. It is definitely not an adapter.
I use the Truewide for still work with the 85PC and both shift as well as tilt do not pose any problem.
-
another option to the miniwide is the silvestri bicam photo that can be set up to take nikon lenses on the front and your db on the back.
in the uk the two sellers are morco and linhoff studio.
They both answer the phone..and are both very helpfull and encourage you to go to their stores to look at the set ups.
(I am looking at one version as a medium format wide shift solution..taking super wide lf lenses and film and db options on the back)
definately worth looking into for a wide shift nikon lens db set up.
Marc
-
I also feel that my SLRn camera has a limited lifespan and will proably be repaced with a D2x unless nikon pull something out of thier hat
That will leave me totally stuffed for wideness
Sam-
Why not the D2X with the Sigma 12-24mm f/4.5-5.6 EX DG- that could be a fast cheaper yet "correct" method for interiors, giving you an 18-36 35mm equivalent range?
I know that the name Sigma doesn't tickle the brand fetishists, but this lens looks good to me. It covers the 35mm frame so you wouldn't be using the most distorted part of the lens on a D2X, and it looks to me to have low distortion in any case even in its full frame role.
I'd be surprised if it wasn't nearly as good at the same angle of view as an old Nikkor prime like the 24mm (I use the AF version of this)
This is getting off topic but its an extension of your "MF- why bother? thread."
Better density range is probably the main answer. But then my Kodak 760 has a very good density range, but not many pixels, and it doesn't seem to handle mixed lighting all that well etc etc etc.
The problem with all this is that no matter the system or budget you still do not have the same shifting range at wide angle that you do with film. I find this more of a problem witrh exteriors than interiors.
Dustbak, I see you have a canal and a mosque, so you must be in the Netherlands?
Andrew Parker
Blue Window Ltd
Surrey UK
-
Why not the D2X with the Sigma 12-24mm f/4.5-5.6
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=83621\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Very good point - maybe I need a slap round the head
I could easily spend nearly a couple of grand getting a miniwide 3
This would get me a D2x - I could put my 14mm on it or save up for a 12
And the D2X is a very cool thing to have in the camera bag - there are million (high Iso decent AF) situations where it would come in very handy - my SLRn is shockingly bad in many ways
And you can see through a D2X (almost) which helps
And I bet the D2x has all sort of (DXO??) sofware to help its performance with wides and suitable Data embedding to help that process
I am incedentally one of those Stigma lense haters - only having owned a 80-200 that wasnt that cheap, and constantly didnt talk to the camera
I only own fast primes and would only use a zoom for a royal visit or some other 'penned' event where the togs cant move - maybe I need to investigate the world of cheap gear like stigma lenses
I think the theory is that a miniwide should be a bargain over a D2x - you are just buying a block of metal and a copal 3 shutter compared to a D2x where you are buying a chip, mirror box AFsystem computer pentaprism etc
The reality of economies of scale is that a 2DX could be cheaper
Probably if a miniwide is half the price of a D2x then it will win and if not then a D2x it will be
Again I am not shirking the cost of kit but would prefer to have not just shelled out for a D2X if a FF Nik comes out
CONVERSLY
I recon and 22mp 16bit chip cropped to 15mp using a 28 PC shif lense will blow the nikon sideways
The real question is probably about shooting style - will I be a better photographer producing beautiful files thethered or a better photographer with the convieniece of the P+S Nikon - if it was 16mpFF there would be no doubt in my mind
OR maybe it is time to go for a 5d a Stigma super wide and a 24 TSE
Even harsher question - if I concentrated with my SLRn - multiple layered exposures and every software trick in the book - I could do that for free !
Someone needs to run a test - Miniwide+14/2.8mm versus D2x/Stigma 12 versus 5D+24TSE
I probably look at a few of my biases like 'if it made of metal it is better' and 'if it is a zoom and not 2.8 at least it is cr*p'
Thanks for the wake up
SMM