Luminous Landscape Forum
Equipment & Techniques => Medium Format / Film / Digital Backs – and Large Sensor Photography => Topic started by: Jeff74400 on June 23, 2008, 12:46:52 am
-
New full frame 6x4,5 sensor and + 60 Mpix for photokina; that's what told me my Phaseone dealer last week.
Best regard's
Jeff
My Webpage (http://www.lumieresdaltitude.com)
-
Who needs it!
33 or 39 is already problems with storage etc.
Also regarding full frame?
No cropping like the current "full frame" from Hasselblad?
Cheers,
Willem.
-
Interesting but the news I wanted to hear from Phase was that they had a back for the Hy6!
-
Gotta love (and hate) rumours.
Good lord, how much is that going to cost (if it's true)?
$60,000?
An incremental increase in the size of the sensor is going to increase the price like crazy, no matter how many megapixels there are. 30, 40, 50, 60, 70, it doesn't matter.
On the bright side, the 36x48mm 33 and 39MP backs should decrease in price. Yay...?
-
I think this is very plausible.
Hasselblad will call it "super-format" to distinguish it from "full format" and will get the tooling for the 645 finders out of storage
On the other hand more and more Hasselblads are being used as location cameras, so I guess we might see a "super D3" version in due course, with high ISO, more DR, and less MP. Now that's a camera we'd all like.
Edmund
-
Well the full size is very welcome news, but 60MP? A 30MP version would be just great.
-
Well the full size is very welcome news, but 60MP? A 30MP version would be just great.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=203012\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
30MP and usable 1600 ISO would be my vote.
Edmund
-
Yeah, there's a whole list of things they should improve on before going for more megapixels imo. Personally I'd like to see higher and better iso and an lcd on par with the latest dslr. Also, faster capture rates and wireless transfer would be cool.
-
Who needs it!
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=202962\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Landscape photographers and anybody who is less concerned about fps, high ISO speeds and storage space.
-
Landscape photographers and anybody who is less concerned about fps, high ISO speeds and storage space.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=203027\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
yeah, well at the moment a 645 fullframe Phase Mamiya with 60MP is an idea I find mildly entertaining given the abilities of the camera component and lenses. I know whereof i speak, I own a P45+. . A 54x54mm Rollei/Sinar/Leaf or Alpa system I find totally believable on the other hand. I won't speak about Hassy, after all they already have "full-frame", right ?
Edmund
-
They had better also announce all new glass. Who wants to see another 30MP of fuzz.
-
How about LIVE PREVIEW? We really, really, really NEED live preview before we need 60 mp. I'm pissed. These MFDB manufacturers are ridiculous. We should start boycotting Phase One, Leaf, etc. until they give us what we want!
rh
-
They had better also announce all new glass. Who wants to see another 30MP of fuzz.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=203084\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Spot on!
-
How about LIVE PREVIEW? We really, really, really NEED live preview before we need 60 mp.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=203124\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Why?
-
Who needs it!
Why?
Everyone has different needs.
-
Everyone has different needs.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=203138\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I thought the Plus series had Live Preview..?
And I agree
WHERE is the new glass and WHERE are the LEAF SHUTTER LEN"S!!!
Snook
-
New full frame 6x4,5 sensor and + 60 Mpix for photokina; that's what told me my Phaseone dealer last week.
Best regard's
Jeff
My Webpage (http://www.lumieresdaltitude.com)
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=202961\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I don't know about you all, but I am going to hold out for the 150Mpx version, where 20 shots will fill your hard drive, and you'll need 48MB of RAM to open a file in photoshop, and 98 MB RAM if you intend to use layers. I'll buy two of those.
By the way, does anyone know what the average resolution of photo paper is? As in, how much actual data will stick to the page of say, a 16x24 print?
-
Everyone has different needs.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=203138\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I didn't mean it in a critical way, am just curious. I can't think of a compelling need for this feature.
-
I would just be happy with a firmware upgrade from 1.5 to 1 seconds. Other than that speed boast not much else i need. Bigger LCD is always a nice feature but 60 mpx is not something I would buy. Rather buy a second back if anything than and actually a P21 plus with a higer ISO at say 1600 would pretty much throw my Nikons on the street.
I think most shooters would like to see Capture speed increase
Bigger and better LCD
Higher ISO's that perform well at 1600 and maybe more
I would think these three would be the most wanted features, with maybe a couple mores small things.
-
I would want a nicer screen and the capability to do MS without being tethered (not necessarily because I need it but it would be nice to have and I could use it).
Besides that I am pretty happy with what I currently have.
I could also use longer exposures, also just for fun.
60MP? I now already cannot process on my laptop without being forced to load up on coffee.
-
I don't know about you all, but I am going to hold out for the 150Mpx version, where 20 shots will fill your hard drive, and you'll need 48MB of RAM to open a file in photoshop, and 98 MB RAM if you intend to use layers. I'll buy two of those.
By the way, does anyone know what the average resolution of photo paper is? As in, how much actual data will stick to the page of say, a 16x24 print?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=203142\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
That should work great on my mac pro since I have 8 gigs of ram making 48 mb just a wee portion.
Seriously, why do you think anyone ever shot 4x5 or 8x10 cameras?? I regularly print at 36 x47": how much "data" do you think will stick at that size?
-
I think most shooters would like to see Capture speed increase
Bigger and better LCD
Higher ISO's that perform well at 1600 and maybe more
I would think these three would be the most wanted features, with maybe a couple mores small things.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=203146\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
anybody want to mention price?
-
That should work great on my mac pro since I have 8 gigs of ram making 48 mb just a wee portion.
Seriously, why do you think anyone ever shot 4x5 or 8x10 cameras?? I regularly print at 36 x47": how much "data" do you think will stick at that size?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=203161\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Er, that's right, I meant 98 GIGS!
I don't know how much data sticks at any size.
Anyone??
You ever compare traditional c- prints 48" or so from 4x5 or 8x10 film to your digital ones?
-
I didn't mean it in a critical way, am just curious. I can't think of a compelling need for this feature.
I also would like to see live preview, on a decent back LCD, without the need for an attached laptop. The reason, for me, is to simplify use of the back with technical cams, to avoid the need to use a ground glass or attached viewfinder to support composition, and to avoid the need for a ground glass for precision focussing. Not many people have such bodies, however, so I could see why it might not be high priority to Phase.
-
I also would like to see live preview, on a decent back LCD, without the need for an attached laptop. The reason, for me, is to simplify use of the back with technical cams, to avoid the need to use a ground glass or attached viewfinder to support composition
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=203169\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Ok, I can understand that, but it's so easy to capture a frame and see it on the LCD screen a second later to check composition. Fine focus is another matter, but I imagine most view camera users work tethered. So, I can understand your wish but the number of view camera users who don't want to work tethered must be a niche market.
-
Ok, I can understand that, but it's so easy to capture a frame and see it on the LCD screen a second later to check composition. Fine focus is another matter, but I imagine most view camera users work tethered. So, I can understand your wish but the number of view camera users who don't want to work tethered must be a niche market.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=203171\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Live preview is not just for view cameras! Anyone doing macro, landscape, street or even architectural photography would have a field day with properly implemented live preview. Shoot, anyone doing manual focus would love it. It is a shame that 35mm DSLRs smoke the high end back makers in live preview functionality. Anyone using it on a Nikon D3 or Canon 1D knows what I am talking about.
It is also a joke that the feature to level the + backs is only available tethered. Any landscape photographer that has used the Nikon D3 will tell you that is one of the best new features. Try reading a bubble level without your reading glasses in pre-dawn light. Maybe I'm getting too old to shoot outdoors.
-
Live preview is not just for view cameras! Anyone doing macro, landscape, street or even architectural photography would have a field day with properly implemented live preview. Shoot, anyone doing manual focus would love it. It is a shame that 35mm DSLRs smoke the high end back makers in live preview functionality. Anyone using it on a Nikon D3 or Canon 1D knows what I am talking about.
It is also a joke that the feature to level the + backs is only available tethered. Any landscape photographer that has used the Nikon D3 will tell you that is one of the best new features. Try reading a bubble level without your reading glasses in pre-dawn light. Maybe I'm getting too old to shoot outdoors.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=203178\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
The power requirements of a MFDB is tons more than a 35mm, and therefore I wouldn't anticipate live view without being tethered.
-
It is also a joke that the feature to level the + backs is only available tethered. Any landscape photographer that has used the Nikon D3 will tell you that is one of the best new features. Try reading a bubble level without your reading glasses in pre-dawn light. Maybe I'm getting too old to shoot outdoors.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=203178\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
The Leaf Aptus does offer an adjustable grid function un-tethered. It's a nice feature for this very reason.
Steve Hendrix
www.ppratlanta.com/digital.php
-
I thought the Plus series had Live Preview..?
And I agree
WHERE is the new glass and WHERE are the LEAF SHUTTER LEN"S!!!
Snook
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=203140\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
PhaseOne announced earlier this year that the leaf shutter lenses would be presented at photokina, I'm pretty sure I've told you this before, on this very forum.
-
60mp??
I understand a select few would welcome this, but without the glass to back it up what is the point?
Would the rodenstock hr lenses even support this?
I would think that leaf and phase ones best selling back are the a65 and p30+
Makes you wonder why they think a back priced x2 the amount when the core audience is very aware of the limitations would buy it...
Also logic would tell me that kodak wouldnt go to the trouble of making such a high priced sensor for one company...I could be wrong though.
Either way I would rather see new innovations than a pissing contest of megapixels.
-
I would be psyched with a 60mpx sensor. My front of book 1/4 pagers for Allure would look even better! I could spend MORE TIME downsizing than I do now when I print pages for my 11x14 book, not to mention the pure joy of shopping in the Apple Store for one of those Octa Core machines I would need to move data around!
I'll pass. I'm sure someone will find a use for it. Landscapers could appreciate the added file size, but who else?
-
"New full frame 6x4,5 sensor" 60mm x 45mm? 56mmx42mm?
does this mean we can not use Rodenstock HR lens on this new back?
J
-
"New full frame 6x4,5 sensor" 60mm x 45mm? 56mmx42mm?
does this mean we can not use Rodenstock HR lens on this new back?
J
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=203193\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
all are rumours only ( how many very reliable phase dealers "promised" a hy/afi adapter for sure ? so where is it now ? ) i see no reason for any headage,- but ... the HR have 70mm minimal image circle. they should work with a 42x56 chip, although not allowing much shift anymore.
-
I think some of you might be forgetting that MP is an area measurement, not a linear measurement. The actual resolution difference in the jump from 39 MP to 60 MP would be roughly the same as that from 26 MP to 39 MP. Plus, I would bet that some of it is from exaggerating the MP count; 60,000,000 pixels is actually 57.2 MP.
I seriously doubt that a 1.2 times increase in resolution is going to make your lenses worthless.
-
New full frame 6x4,5 sensor and + 60 Mpix for photokina; that's what told me my Phaseone dealer last week.
Best regard's
Jeff
My Webpage (http://www.lumieresdaltitude.com)
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=202961\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I mentioned it here last month or so, but nobody new nothing so I thought I heard wrong
Hopefuly, P30+/P45+ will be faster, Better ISO, screen larger (better quality), more affordable too... Oooops, I wish
-
I think some of you might be forgetting that MP is an area measurement, not a linear measurement. The actual resolution difference in the jump from 39 MP to 60 MP would be roughly the same as that from 26 MP to 39 MP. Plus, I would bet that some of it is from exaggerating the MP count; 60,000,000 pixels is actually 57.2 MP.
I seriously doubt that a 1.2 times increase in resolution is going to make your lenses worthless.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=203200\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
yes, i think thats the way to think about it. p45 isnt twice as sharp as a p25.
im all for more for more megapixels, for some uses. but i do think we will be hitting a ceiling soon.
also, the full frame will be really nice for viewing- that will make the h1 (and i guess the hy6) the big view finder options over canon mk3 again. its a bit of a surprise when you remove the crop mask of an h1 and look through the way it was suppose to be.
paul
-
I don't know about you all, but I am going to hold out for the 150Mpx version, where 20 shots will fill your hard drive, and you'll need 48MB of RAM to open a file in photoshop, and 98 MB RAM if you intend to use layers. I'll buy two of those.
By the way, does anyone know what the average resolution of photo paper is? As in, how much actual data will stick to the page of say, a 16x24 print?
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a] (http://index.php?act=findpost&pid=203142\")
Might need something like this to work on the files
[a href=\"http://gizmodo.com/5015730/emperor-workstation-belongs-in-the-death-star-my-office]http://gizmodo.com/5015730/emperor-worksta...-star-my-office[/url]
-
I would think that leaf and phase ones best selling back are the a65 and p30+
I've been told a few times by MFDB sales reps and resellers
that the highest megapixel products are the best sellers,
by far.
-
I've been told a few times by MFDB sales reps and resellers
that the highest megapixel products are the best sellers,
by far.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=203244\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
This is true, but it is due more to price on those particular products, (P30, Aptus 65, and now H3DII-31). What was exposed from the last few batches of digital backs is that the slightly higher premium for larger sensors (49 x 37, 22MP, Upper teen $ - low $20K) vs higher resolution (44 x 33, 28/31 MP, low $20K - mid $20K) was not acted upon. Instead, users chose the lower cost, but higher resolution (and more sensitive) sensor.
But also, until Hasselblad dropped the price on their H3DII-31, most of my H3DII sales were H3DII-39. This is because the price delta between H3DII-31 and H3DII-39 was not dramatic enough ($26,995 vs $33,995). This also explains to some degree why Hasselblad made such a significant price adjustment. Now I will expect - and have already seen - H3DII-31's selling in greater numbers than H3DII-39's.
It is human nature to want the latest and greatest. And despite all the "Oh, 22MP is more than enough" protestations when rumors of 30+ megapixel sensors were rampant, the vast majority of purchasers have shunned 22MP, even though it is relatively low in cost.
That said, 60+ megapixels and higher are on the way - at some point. I do feel that without some form of variable resolution selection at the capture stage, digital backs at this megapixel count may be the first crop of high resolution products that do not produce a volume sales advantage over their lower resolution counterparts.
Steve Hendrix
www.ppratlanta.com/digital.php
-
This is true, but it is due more to price on those particular products, (P30, Aptus 65, and now H3DII-31). What was exposed from the last few batches of digital backs is that the slightly higher premium for larger sensors (49 x 37, 22MP, Upper teen $ - low $20K) vs higher resolution (44 x 33, 28/31 MP, low $20K - mid $20K) was not acted upon. Instead, users chose the lower cost, but higher resolution (and more sensitive) sensor.
But also, until Hasselblad dropped the price on their H3DII-31, most of my H3DII sales were H3DII-39. This is because the price delta between H3DII-31 and H3DII-39 was not dramatic enough ($26,995 vs $33,995). This also explains to some degree why Hasselblad made such a significant price adjustment. Now I will expect - and have already seen - H3DII-31's selling in greater numbers than H3DII-39's.
It is human nature to want the latest and greatest. And despite all the "Oh, 22MP is more than enough" protestations when rumors of 30+ megapixel sensors were rampant, the vast majority of purchasers have shunned 22MP, even though it is relatively low in cost.
That said, 60+ megapixels and higher are on the way - at some point. I do feel that without some form of variable resolution selection at the capture stage, digital backs at this megapixel count may be the first crop of high resolution products that do not produce a volume sales advantage over their lower resolution counterparts.
Steve Hendrix
www.ppratlanta.com/digital.php
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=203250\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
On this I somewhat disagree with you Steve, at least in regards to the Hasselblad and the P30+.
I went with the P30+ not for the reduced cost or reduced sensor size, but because it had better high iso qualities and because it looked fractionally smoother than the 22mp chips. There was also the added benifit of less moire.
I don't want, need, let me put this again, want higher mpx than 20 to 30, but the only thing that would get me to change from the p30+ if there was a 1.1 (excuse me 1.16) crop instead of the 1.3 (excuse me 1.26) crop.
More real estate would be worthwhile, if only to make my lenses a little less squeezed.
In fact I think cropping that 31mpx sensor was a mistake and medium format had a big chance to offer a big one up on 35mm with a microlensed sensor in 1.1 size, especially if they held to a good price.
I don't think you can underestimate how important higher iso is for a lot of work photographers who specialize in people. Higher iso on a medium format back, already working with a slight bellows factor and slower lenses makes a huge difference and unlike most of the iso tests we see on the forums, when we need higher iso, it's usually because the light levels have fallen and we're barely at the last point of getting the shot.
JR
-
Hi
I have heard that Phase will announce something in the fall of this year but nothing concrete. About the leaf shutter lenses I heard @ the PMA show in Brisbane that the 80 mm will be the first lens & will be at Photokina. Larger sensor MFD backs would not surprise me as it has been at least 3 years since the last sensor release from Kodax & Dalsa.
Thanks Denis
-
Denis,
AFIK Dalsa and Kodak have not developed any new sensors.
I've visited both their info on their websites and there is no mention of anything new.
But I could be wrong.
Cheers,
Willem.
N.B Did you shoot the "Dark" chocolate ad?
-
Denis,
AFIK Dalsa and Kodak have not developed any new sensors.
I've visited both their info on their websites and there is no mention of anything new.
But I could be wrong.
Cheers,
Willem.
N.B Did you shoot the "Dark" chocolate ad?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=203258\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Hi
No we did not shoot them - we thought they were for a hair product...are they for chocolate? Are there any other makers of sensors?
Denis
-
Dennis,
I'm confused.
I wasn't revering to sensors.
Wether it was for hair or dark chocolate,to me it looked like one of your images?
Regards,
Willem.
-
http://www.kodak.com/global/en/business/IS...l?pq-path=12138 (http://www.kodak.com/global/en/business/ISS/Products/Fullframe/index.jhtml?pq-path=12138)
http://www.dalsa.com/sensors/products/DSC.asp (http://www.dalsa.com/sensors/products/DSC.asp)
Nothing new on the horizon!
-
Dennis,
I'm confused.
I wasn't revering to sensors.
Wether it was for hair or dark chocolate,to me it looked like one of your images?
Regards,
Willem.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=203285\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Hi
No we did not shoot them.
Denis
-
-
Denis,
AFIK Dalsa and Kodak have not developed any new sensors.
I've visited both their info on their websites and there is no mention of anything new.
But I could be wrong.
Cheers,
Willem.
I doubt Kodak would make all their info public to end-users.
Look how successful Apple is keeping secrets from rabid fans.
Our request for better high ISO performance has been heard at least one year ago:
http://www.dpreview.com/news/0706/07061401kodakhighsens.asp (http://www.dpreview.com/news/0706/07061401kodakhighsens.asp)
Who knows IF and when this will ever make it into a professional product?
-
AFIK Dalsa and Kodak have not developed any new sensors.
I think all we can really say is that they haven't "announced" any new sensors yet. I would be shocked and appalled if they haven't been hard at work on their next generation products for some time now. And they wouldn't announce these until development was practically done.
-
Live preview is not just for view cameras! Anyone doing macro, landscape, street or even architectural photography would have a field day with properly implemented live preview. Shoot, anyone doing manual focus would love it. It is a shame that 35mm DSLRs smoke the high end back makers in live preview functionality. Anyone using it on a Nikon D3 or Canon 1D knows what I am talking about.
It is also a joke that the feature to level the + backs is only available tethered. Any landscape photographer that has used the Nikon D3 will tell you that is one of the best new features. Try reading a bubble level without your reading glasses in pre-dawn light. Maybe I'm getting too old to shoot outdoors.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=203178\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I tried the new AFDIII and P39+ combo, manual focus with lenses wide open is really, really hard. Live preview would make focusing a lot more doable. Shooting stopped down negates the DOF advantage of dMF, and spraying focus bracketed shots is just inefficient. The viewfinder is hardly bigger than the 1DS3 but much dimmer. I don't know how you guys focus honestly. With the new Phase 80mm f/2.8, I did focus and recompose an that totally results in the subject being blurred. That's one thing that really discouraged me about dMF, there are no outer focus points and manual focusing with accuracy is nigh impossible for my eyes.
I currently use the 1DS3 and live view for focusing with almost all my lenses, if you haven't tried it, it's a revelation. I can focus the 50mm f/1.0 in formerly impossible situations, where outer focus points would fail to lock due to lack of light.
-
On this I somewhat disagree with you Steve, at least in regards to the Hasselblad and the P30+.
I went with the P30+ not for the reduced cost or reduced sensor size, but because it had better high iso qualities and because it looked fractionally smoother than the 22mp chips. There was also the added benifit of less moire.
I don't want, need, let me put this again, want higher mpx than 20 to 30, but the only thing that would get me to change from the p30+ if there was a 1.1 (excuse me 1.16) crop instead of the 1.3 (excuse me 1.26) crop.
More real estate would be worthwhile, if only to make my lenses a little less squeezed.
In fact I think cropping that 31mpx sensor was a mistake and medium format had a big chance to offer a big one up on 35mm with a microlensed sensor in 1.1 size, especially if they held to a good price.
I don't think you can underestimate how important higher iso is for a lot of work photographers who specialize in people. Higher iso on a medium format back, already working with a slight bellows factor and slower lenses makes a huge difference and unlike most of the iso tests we see on the forums, when we need higher iso, it's usually because the light levels have fallen and we're barely at the last point of getting the shot.
JR
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=203254\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
James - if you'll read my post again, you'll see I did mention that higher sensitivity was also a factor. The P30 and H3DII-31 products perform very well at high ISO, and I have been surprised that more of my H3DII sales were not H3DII-31, but I believed Hasselblad priced that product too high initially and that was the reason. At $17,995, it sure isn't a problem now....
It's clear photographers do want physically larger imaging sensors and we may see those. The challenge will be to produce technically more difficult yields of larger sensors at price points that don't break the bank. Larger sensors means fewer yields per wafer or larger, more costly wafers, which affects cost - I suspect a lot - so Dalsa and Kodak will have a lot to say about how much a full frame 645 or even 6x6 product ultimately costs. That's just my presumption, I'm sure some who frequent here have a more realistic sense of what the cost challenges are at the sensor level.
Steve Hendrix
www.ppratlanta.com/digital.php
-
I tried the new AFDIII and P39+ combo, manual focus with lenses wide open is really, really hard. Live preview would make focusing a lot more doable. Shooting stopped down negates the DOF advantage of dMF, and spraying focus bracketed shots is just inefficient. The viewfinder is hardly bigger than the 1DS3 but much dimmer. I don't know how you guys focus honestly. With the new Phase 80mm f/2.8, I did focus and recompose an that totally results in the subject being blurred. That's one thing that really discouraged me about dMF, there are no outer focus points and manual focusing with accuracy is nigh impossible for my eyes.
I currently use the 1DS3 and live view for focusing with almost all my lenses, if you haven't tried it, it's a revelation. I can focus the 50mm f/1.0 in formerly impossible situations, where outer focus points would fail to lock due to lack of light.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=203346\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Focusing can be an issue with any camera, though with medium format it's a mixed bag.
I can manually focus my Contax's just because I've done it for so long and I find autofocus to be good, but not great, but I find that also on the Canons. When it's good it's good, but a lot of the times it's not really that accurate either.
One thing I find almost impossible to do is manually focus a 1ds2. That ground glass (plastic) never looks sharp to me.
I am also curious to what the next medium format camera will be. If it's just more megapixels without better previews and a really good lcd, then I think they're going to set on the shelves.
If you've ever shot a D3, next to a medium format back and showed the AD the images on the back of the camera, they will look at the D-3 and say "wow I bet that's a billion megapixels or something".
I have never understood a few things about medium format and the first is why there is no in camera processing of jpegs or larger embedded previews and second why they cannot use these interfaces to wi=fi to something like an Ipod touch or an I-phone or even a laptop.
I know the difference in working a medium format file next to a dslr, but client's don't know ( or should they be concerened) especially at the capture level and more to the point if your shooting non tethered they really should be able to look at the back of that camera and believe that something amazing is going to come out of it.
The maker that makes a "great" camera lcd and develops a "simple" wi-fi to computer to iphone/ipod view system will then have an almost must own camera, but 60mpx's that may move some people but most just won't care and no client I have is even remotely asking for it.
The second thing I don't understand is why are medium format sensors ccd rather than cmos?
I've read the papers where everything points to the fact that a ccd with larger sensors has less noise and will go to higher iso, but in reality that just isn't the case and since cmos is less expensive why not go that route?
Working professionally digital capture can be broken down into very distinct and different processes, but the very first process, the preview is what makes people go wow or hmm?
Now the third thing I am positive medium format must address is the costs.
This week a retail client handed me their digital capture price list that is set from one of their suppliers, a studio that is in multiple cities.
The capture package is now about 1/2 the rate as it was a year ago and instead of being based on the latest digital back or even the Canon Mark III, it was based on Canon 1ds2s.
Now this is a fashion retailer and they don't know or care if its a P30, an A75 or a 1ds2 and they don't care if you use their supplier or not, but they only pay what they pay and owning $60,000 worth of cameras vs. $9,000 doesn't change their pay structure one bit.
Actually the group that is making the most out of this retailer is the digital capture company, because they are essentially selling old tech that pretty much pays for itself in the 2nd week of shooting, vs. investing in new systems.
Now that doesn't mean that I'm going to sell my backs and buy two used Canons or that doesn't mean I won't use what I want to use, but if medium format is going to continue to sell at high prices, then they have to find ways to make working with their cameras easier, not more difficult.
Iso, better and more capable previewing will go a long way to moving us to purchase. Slow iso, rough previews, computer generated processing doesn't make our life any eaiser.
In other words don't look at ways to just sell the photographer, look at ways to sell the photographer's client.
JR
-
I tried the new AFDIII and P39+ combo, manual focus with lenses wide open is really, really hard.
SNIP
The viewfinder is hardly bigger than the 1DS3 but much dimmer.
SNIP
and manual focusing with accuracy is nigh impossible for my eyes.
Hmmm.
To your first point, I use the P45+ with my AFD2 body and manual focus all the time with the Hassy 110 f2 lens at f2 -- almost zero DoF -- and nail it almost every time. There is focus confirmation in the viewfinder and it works perfectly. Finally, you can actually set the af segment to large area or point and point is very good for fine focus in AF, assuming you know how to point the camera at what you want focused and keep it locked there...
To your second point, my viewfinder is brighter than anything else I have used, including the 1Ds3...
To your final point, I think you have zeroed in your problem with MF manual focus: your eyes.
Bottom line is these cameras do not think for you and require you to be in charge of most of the decision making. So the best advice is stick to an auto everything DSLR unless you are willing to put the time in learning to control a camera and working around the MF shortcomings to gain the added image quality.
Cheers,
-
At $17,995, it sure isn't a problem now....
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=203352\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Steve,
Read my post I just placed and see if $17,995 isn't an issue with a lot of photogrpahers.
Actually if it just stopped at $17,995 that would be ok, but then you need extra lenses and oh yes, the dreaded backup. What is the standard medium format backup camera . . . from what I can tell from most of the photographers I know, it's a 5D.
I've said it a billion times but medium format just about forces their customers to buy a competing brand of camera (usually Canon) for backup and higher iso alone (mostly the backup).
I can't imagine running my business where I forced a client to use a competitor on every job.
I probably own one of the most economical medium format kits around using a P30+ a P21+ and Contax's and I'm still much more than double the costs of brand new Canons.
I know that medium format can't exactly match Canon's prices, so if that is the case then they must find ways to make it a real "client" benefit to move to medium format and crappy lcd's, no in camera processing settings and slow "expensive" lenses, doesn't help.
While I'm on the subject of lenses, it's Mamiya more than anyone that I don't understand. They had a huge line of fast lenses, leaf shutters and removeable prisms for their 645 camera and when they went to auto focus all of that just disappeared.
Granted one of the reasons medium format camera companies hit the skids is because there was not an economical solution for digital capture when the first 1ds came out, but I think coming out with new medium format cameras that are even more expensive than the previous film versions doesn't make a lot of sense, especially since everyone is talking money.
I hold to my belief that is somethng like an A22 or a P21 was available for RZ's, Bronicas, Mamiyas, Contax, Hasselblads and it had a great lcd and was priced around 7 grand, the 1ds would not have been that much of a success.
All of those cameras just went on the shelf to collect dust.
I can appreciate why medium format backs are expensive, but that doesn't mean any client can.
JR
-
Hmmm.
To your first point, I use the P45+ with my AFD2 body and manual focus all the time with the Hassy 110 f2 lens at f2 -- almost zero DoF -- and nail it almost every time. There is focus confirmation in the viewfinder and it works perfectly. Finally, you can actually set the af segment to large area or point and point is very good for fine focus in AF, assuming you know how to point the camera at what you want focused and keep it locked there...
To your second point, my viewfinder is brighter than anything else I have used, including the 1Ds3...
To your final point, I think you have zeroed in your problem with MF manual focus: your eyes.
Bottom line is these cameras do not think for you and require you to be in charge of most of the decision making. So the best advice is stick to an auto everything DSLR unless you are willing to put the time in learning to control a camera and working around the MF shortcomings to gain the added image quality.
Cheers,
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=203360\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I have the exact same experience with my first generation AFD, manual focus is a breeze. It's either your eyes or the cam you tried is seriously misaligned, my guess is the first.
-
I always love how someone puerile says a snippy comment and adds a "cheers" like everything is copacetic...
From my very limited experience of using the AFD3, with the 50mm FLE 2.8 and Phase 80mm 2.8, focus was very hard to hit, wide open. Maybe you are a manual focusing genius, lucky or maybe it is my eyes.
Secondly, the viewfinder of the 1DS3 is brighter. Unless your viewfinder is magic.
Lastly, I have bad eyes so I love liveview. Is that a crime that should relegate me to shooting "auto" everything... or maybe manufacturers can work on providing usability for people like me so I am willing to spend blood money working as an artist to "upgrade" my system.
Hmmm.
To your first point, I use the P45+ with my AFD2 body and manual focus all the time with the Hassy 110 f2 lens at f2 -- almost zero DoF -- and nail it almost every time. There is focus confirmation in the viewfinder and it works perfectly. Finally, you can actually set the af segment to large area or point and point is very good for fine focus in AF, assuming you know how to point the camera at what you want focused and keep it locked there...
To your second point, my viewfinder is brighter than anything else I have used, including the 1Ds3...
To your final point, I think you have zeroed in your problem with MF manual focus: your eyes.
Bottom line is these cameras do not think for you and require you to be in charge of most of the decision making. So the best advice is stick to an auto everything DSLR unless you are willing to put the time in learning to control a camera and working around the MF shortcomings to gain the added image quality.
Cheers,
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=203360\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
-
What is the standard medium format backup camera . . . from what I can tell from most of the photographers I know, it's a 5D.
I've said it a billion times but medium format just about forces their customers to buy a competing brand of camera (usually Canon) for backup and higher iso alone (mostly the backup).
I can't imagine running my business where I forced a client to use a competitor on every job.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=203361\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Well it would be nice if there were a cheap MFDB to use as a backup, but I think we all know why that is not economically feasible yet. I hope that changes.
There are other high-end products which are in a similar situation. People who buy a Ferrari don't tend to buy a second Ferrari for when the first car breaks down.
-
Ehmmm....
The very few that make money of their Ferraris do have a backup. I agree there are only 2 of them but they do have a backup car
All the others pretty much only spend money on their Ferraris.
Having said that. It is difficult to get a backup for MFDB unless you are willing to spend a really large amount. This is sometimes a bit disconcerting.
-
I always love how someone puerile says a snippy comment and adds a "cheers" like everything is copacetic...
From my very limited experience of using the AFD3, with the 50mm FLE 2.8 and Phase 80mm 2.8, focus was very hard to hit, wide open. Maybe you are a manual focusing genius, lucky or maybe it is my eyes.
Secondly, the viewfinder of the 1DS3 is brighter. Unless your viewfinder is magic.
Lastly, I have bad eyes so I love liveview. Is that a crime that should relegate me to shooting "auto" everything... or maybe manufacturers can work on providing usability for people like me so I am willing to spend blood money working as an artist to "upgrade" my system.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=203368\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Funny how you admit to having bad eyes and trash MF focusing in the same post, I think Jack was only pointing out this fact. He also told you about a feature that helps out with this exact problem, focus confirmation, so it hardly takes a "focusing genius" as you put it.
-
Well it would be nice if there were a cheap MFDB to use as a backup, but I think we all know why that is not economically feasible yet. I hope that changes.
There are other high-end products which are in a similar situation. People who buy a Ferrari don't tend to buy a second Ferrari for when the first car breaks down.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=203369\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I don't know what this means other than it's a lot easier to find out what a Ferrari costs and when it's avaialble than any real information about new lenses for an HY6 on the Sinar site.
In fact you stand a better chance getting a transcript from a yesterday's Bush and Cheny Breakfast chat than you do finding out when, what, if, how much, anything in medium format offers, costs and will be delivered..
The people that pay us see this differently. They see the art, the photograph they want, the capture/review process and the costs.
For medium format to survive all of those must be addressed and I think finding some way to sell two backs to each user, rather than just one looks like a good plan to me.
Then again maybe your right in comparing these cameras and backs to luxury cars, but if I was Phase, Hasselblad, Sinar and Leaf that would be the last comparison I would want to make as nobody really needs a Ferrari.
I'd build and market these backs and cameras as tools that every working professional "must" have rather than some flashy P****s extension that you display to impress the neighbors.
But if they are going to market these as must have items, they better start making must have features.
JR
-
Well it would be nice if there were a cheap MFDB to use as a backup, but I think we all know why that is not economically feasible yet. I hope that changes.
There are other high-end products which are in a similar situation. People who buy a Ferrari don't tend to buy a second Ferrari for when the first car breaks down.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=203369\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
There is, sort of, at least for Mamiya 645 or RZ shooters: the Mamiya ZD back. Not quite down to 5D territory for pricing, but still a lot less than a 1Ds3...
Cheers,
-
Funny how you admit to having bad eyes and trash MF focusing in the same post, I think Jack was only pointing out this fact. He also told you about a feature that helps out with this exact problem, focus confirmation, so it hardly takes a "focusing genius" as you put it.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=203375\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Exactly, and thank you! (There was no offense intended in my original post, sorry you read it that way.)
-
I think $18,000 is still an issue for most photographers. Hell, even $8,000 is an issue when:
A.) you know a better camera is likely to come out next year, for the same price or less
B.) you could get a lot more mileage with $8K or $18K worth of self promotion
C.) as James said, lame LCD, slow capture rate, and the Canons are close enough in image quality that the client will not see or care about the differences between your back vs. the $8000 MKIII solution.
Re: Mamiya AF
I too found that the new Phaseone/Mamiya is hard to tell what is and what is not in focus. I found that I just had to trust the AF. (re: not great “snap” in and out of focus with the 80 2.8.)
I also found the 1Ds3 viewfinder to be a lot brighter, but not easier to focus manually, unless you install one of these $35 accessories:
http://www.adorama.com/ICASECS.html?search...creen&item_no=5 (http://www.adorama.com/ICASECS.html?searchinfo=precision%20focusing%20screen&item_no=5)
I welcome less expensive MF digital cameras as much as anyone else. Let’s be realistic as to the numbers: isn’t the average photographers yearly income in the U.S. something like $35K? In the big markets like where I live, it’s easy to think we are all making in the 6 or 7 figures, but, hey, that’s simply not the case. So it seems to me that if they are going to start selling in large numbers they still need to be appreciably better than the Canons (I.Q., LCD, etc.), and at least as fast in the studio (1 frame per second is lame for daylight fashion work), if large numbers of photographers are going to start buying them, IMO.
This is especially true now that the skepticism surrounding digital in general seems to be in the past . In my experience the client has a relationship with the LCD and the end results only. They no longer come into the studio and worry – “this guy is shooting digital, will it be good enough?” (regardless of whether it cost $2000 (5D 12MP) or $50000 (next fall’s Ferrari of backs, at 60 or 80MP).
At this point they are confident it will be fine regardless of which digital camera I have. So I guess that makes it difficult for anyone attempting to sell large numbers of cameras where the camera itself costs many times the Canons, the lenses can cost $4000 each and there’s still moiré showing on the LCD during the shoot (ouch!).
-
]
I welcome less expensive MF digital cameras as much as anyone else. Let’s be realistic as to the numbers: isn’t the average photographers yearly income in the U.S. something like $35K? In the big markets like where I live, it’s easy to think we are all making in the 6 or 7 figures, but, hey, that’s simply not the case. So it seems to me that if they are going to start selling in large numbers they still need to be appreciably better than the Canons (I.Q., LCD, etc.), and at least as fast in the studio (1 frame per second is lame for daylight fashion work), if large numbers of photographers are going to start buying them, IMO.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=203384\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Well, I think if a photographer doesn't make at least 7-8 times that figure then he shouldn't consider investing $ 40.000 in a camera system. The camera itself will not make him more money.
You would be surprised how much money good photographers make, and there are quite a few of them.
-
You would be surprised how much money good photographers make, and there are quite a few of them.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=203387\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I don't think I would be surprised. I live in NYC - the capital if big bank photography. Anyway my comment was not about whether some people can afford it - it was more about the percieved payoff of the investment.
-
The new backs should focus on usability and price before we start getting all psyched about 6x6 sensors and 60mpx.
I'd agree with 203 and James, the prices are just stupid for what are imperfect products. What I mean by imperfect is that the backs are all too slow, they all suffer from lockups every once in a while, the screens are aweful , and the cameras we have to attach them to, for the most part, are FAR from perfect, although the Hy6 and 6008 are close, neither will accept my P30+, and the lenses are, again, stupidly expensive. Add to that the price tag and the lack of transperancy in terms of pricing, its a wonder anyone buys MFDB's aside from rental houses and studios.
And for those who think that just because you make $400k means that you should not be bothered by the cost are correct only if an MFDB is necessary to do business. Its not, in most cases. I did well last year, renting MFDB and owning Canon. I stil felt strange about buying a back when I was pretty happy renting.
The IQ is steller but not noticed by clients, most of the time. Cosmetics and products, they notice. Fashion and magazine work, not so much. As much as I love my P30+, I know that I would equally well served with a 1ds3 most, but not all, of the time.
The reason I shoot MF is the format and the look of the lenses. Its just different from the Canon. I think the argument against the Canon is that EVERYONE has one, and EVERYONE is shooting the same L lenses, which can lead to a certain sameness I see in the flood of crap on the web.
I would feel better about the price tag if it translated into a better rate, but as James pointed out, it doesn't. At these price points (above $10k) it would be better to rent these things than to buy, but there is a real advantage to owning your equipment. Its taken me about 5,000 frames on my P30 to get a feel for it under all types of light. The best bet is to buy then rent it out, because the people making the bucks off of MFDB are rental houses, and to a certain extent the post houses.
While I'm on a rant, I'm on a catalogue shoot. I've been in the woods for a few days, now we shoot the interiors and the accessories. We had a videographer shooting video using a Red 1. He makes more money off of a set up that is similar in cost to a P30+ - AFD - set up than I do. His back up to the Red is a Sony Cine Alta something or rather, which runs about $8k. Usability on the Red and the Sony was outstanding, great LCDs, Amazing quality images, including the frame pulls. While looking at the video I realized that this is the future. Stills for a dwindling number of magazines which will increasingly be high end affairs, and the web. Video for EVERYTHING else, inclusing TV, POS displays, walls, posters, etc. as the price of LCD's come down and down. I think that fashion shoots will increasingly be done by one photographer/videographer with an integrated camera, like a Red that also shoots higher res stills. That being said, time to break out those Arri 1k's I have in storage and rethink the business plan.
-
Some of you guys are so high school. Grow up and stop tying your ego to your equipment.
If you read my original post, I have admiration for those who are able to focus accurately with dMF considering how much difficulty I had. Since when was I "trashing" dMF. Sycophantic and immature.
Funny how you admit to having bad eyes and trash MF focusing in the same post, I think Jack was only pointing out this fact. He also told you about a feature that helps out with this exact problem, focus confirmation, so it hardly takes a "focusing genius" as you put it.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=203375\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
-
I think the argument against the Canon is that EVERYONE has one, and EVERYONE is shooting the same L lenses, which can lead to a certain sameness I see in the flood of crap on the web.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=203402\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Hey TMARK, I would agree with most of what you said. Except that with the flood of crap photography you are looking at, I would bet its crap look has a lot more to do with lighting and composition (read: talent) than which lens or camera was used...
Cheers.
-
Well as long as this thread has gone (and even started) into speculation mode----
How about some Hasselblad TSE HC lens offerings?
-
Hey TMARK, I would agree with most of what you said. Except that with the flood of crap photography you are looking at, I would bet its crap look has a lot more to do with lighting and composition (read: talent) than which lens or camera was used...
Cheers.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=203411\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Well, sometimes even the good stuff when its not sent through a ton of post. There is a look associated with different equipment. Be it 35mm, film, polaroids, uncoated lenses, CZ lenses, Leica lenses, Type 55, Portra 400, etc. Of course lighting is the most important aspect and if you can't compose a shot you shouldn't be worrying about lighting or anything else related to photography, much less how to blow $15k on a back.
That being said, I'm keeping my P30, but I am going to rent a 1ds3 for a few days and check it out.
-
Some of you guys are so high school. Grow up and stop tying your ego to your equipment.
If you read my original post, I have admiration for those who are able to focus accurately with dMF considering how much difficulty I had. Since when was I "trashing" dMF. Sycophantic and immature.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=203410\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
There are times - and this is one - where I wish we had more active moderation on these forums.
-
although the Hy6 and 6008 are close, neither will accept my P30+
TMARK, I believe Phase One can change the mount on your back for the 6008.
http://www.captureintegration.com/2008/01/...the-rolleiflex/ (http://www.captureintegration.com/2008/01/31/phase-one-comes-to-the-rolleiflex/)
-
I agree with a lot of what you say, except on a few points.
Yes on certain levels with certain clients there is less payout for the digital "package".
We all knew it was coming when all of these new digital labs came into the market with grand plans to rake it in, some charging huge fees and now my mailbox is full of all of them making deals and offers.
The good ones will survive, the bad ones will go back to being first, second or third assistants.
Keep in mind, I'm not spreading doom and gloom and don't believe that it's time to start selling off your medium format cameras, but for future purchases, if some of our clients are tightening what they pay out and requring more, we have to tighten up what we offer, or find a way to do it where it's less time consuming and less expensive.
In other words the medium format guys need to pull in some of their prices, or offer something that we really can't do without. The can't do without would be good for all of us.
Personally, I don't like equipment rentals of any type and I know I'm in the minority on that, but I'd rather invest $40,000 knowing it will take a period to recoup the costs than just pay out $40,000 that really goes to nobody but another photographic rental company.
I also just don't like the process of renting. Usually things are fine, but I'm not comfortable unless I know that what I use is in good shape, will work, is backed up and I know it front to back.
Now in regards to the Red all of this is interesting. Especially how a real Cinema camera build from the ground up can come it at close to the prices of a still medium format digital system.
Either the Red has very deep pockets and willing to take a loss, or medium format really does neet to revisit their pricing structure.
I also know that there will be more convergence. Everytime I write this somebody tells me that's not possible due to shutter speed, or fps, or something, but the thing is I shoot video and stills in parallel with my projects and I know it has a good return and is worth offering.
Since magazine viewership is down at least 5%, internet viewership is up 8% in the last year, that tells you that the demand for moving imagery will increase.
Whether that happens today (maybe it's already happened) or happens in 5 years we all know it's coming.
JR
The new backs should focus on usability and price before we start getting all psyched about 6x6 sensors and 60mpx.
I'd agree with 203 and James, the prices are just stupid for what are imperfect products. What I mean by imperfect is that the backs are all too slow, they all suffer from lockups every once in a while, the screens are aweful , and the cameras we have to attach them to, for the most part, are FAR from perfect, although the Hy6 and 6008 are close, neither will accept my P30+, and the lenses are, again, stupidly expensive. Add to that the price tag and the lack of transperancy in terms of pricing, its a wonder anyone buys MFDB's aside from rental houses and studios.
And for those who think that just because you make $400k means that you should not be bothered by the cost are correct only if an MFDB is necessary to do business. Its not, in most cases. I did well last year, renting MFDB and owning Canon. I stil felt strange about buying a back when I was pretty happy renting.
The IQ is steller but not noticed by clients, most of the time. Cosmetics and products, they notice. Fashion and magazine work, not so much. As much as I love my P30+, I know that I would equally well served with a 1ds3 most, but not all, of the time.
The reason I shoot MF is the format and the look of the lenses. Its just different from the Canon. I think the argument against the Canon is that EVERYONE has one, and EVERYONE is shooting the same L lenses, which can lead to a certain sameness I see in the flood of crap on the web.
I would feel better about the price tag if it translated into a better rate, but as James pointed out, it doesn't. At these price points (above $10k) it would be better to rent these things than to buy, but there is a real advantage to owning your equipment. Its taken me about 5,000 frames on my P30 to get a feel for it under all types of light. The best bet is to buy then rent it out, because the people making the bucks off of MFDB are rental houses, and to a certain extent the post houses.
While I'm on a rant, I'm on a catalogue shoot. I've been in the woods for a few days, now we shoot the interiors and the accessories. We had a videographer shooting video using a Red 1. He makes more money off of a set up that is similar in cost to a P30+ - AFD - set up than I do. His back up to the Red is a Sony Cine Alta something or rather, which runs about $8k. Usability on the Red and the Sony was outstanding, great LCDs, Amazing quality images, including the frame pulls. While looking at the video I realized that this is the future. Stills for a dwindling number of magazines which will increasingly be high end affairs, and the web. Video for EVERYTHING else, inclusing TV, POS displays, walls, posters, etc. as the price of LCD's come down and down. I think that fashion shoots will increasingly be done by one photographer/videographer with an integrated camera, like a Red that also shoots higher res stills. That being said, time to break out those Arri 1k's I have in storage and rethink the business plan.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=203402\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
-
TMARK, I believe Phase One can change the mount on your back for the 6008.
http://www.captureintegration.com/2008/01/...the-rolleiflex/ (http://www.captureintegration.com/2008/01/31/phase-one-comes-to-the-rolleiflex/)
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=203450\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I might end up doing that if I can justify the switch! Might be about the same price to sell the P30 and get a Hy6, but I like the P30 enough to keep it forever, or five years which is forever in digital years.
-
Does it revolve? By which I mean, can you change orientation without removing the back from the camera?
I might end up doing that if I can justify the switch! Might be about the same price to sell the P30 and get a Hy6, but I like the P30 enough to keep it forever, or five years which is forever in digital years.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=203465\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
-
I agree with a lot of what you say, except on a few points.
Yes on certain levels with certain clients there is less payout for the digital "package".
We all knew it was coming when all of these new digital labs came into the market with grand plans to rake it in, some charging huge fees and now my mailbox is full of all of them making deals and offers.
The good ones will survive, the bad ones will go back to being first, second or third assistants.
Keep in mind, I'm not spreading doom and gloom and don't believe that it's time to start selling off your medium format cameras, but for future purchases, if some of our clients are tightening what they pay out and requring more, we have to tighten up what we offer, or find a way to do it where it's less time consuming and less expensive.
In other words the medium format guys need to pull in their prices, or offer something that we really can't do without.
Personally, I don't like equipment rentals of any type and I know I'm in the minority on that, but I'd rather invest $40,000 knowing it will take a period to recoup the costs than just pay out $40,000 that really goes to nobody but another photographic company and whether we like it or not, (whether we sell ourselves as artists or photographic "solutions"), any company that sends an invoice that is connected to one of my productions in someways is a competitor.
I also just don't like the process of renting. Usually things are fine, but I'm not comfortable unless I know that what I use is in good shape, will work, is backed up and I know it front to back.
Now in regards to the Red all of this is interesting. Especially how a real Cinema camera build from the ground up can come it at close to the prices of a still medium format digital system.
Either the Red has very deep pockets and willing to take a loss, or medium format really does neet to revisit their pricing structure.
I also know that there will be more convergence. Everytime I write this somebody tells me that's not possible due to shutter speed, or fps, or something, but the thing is I shoot video and stills in parallel with my projects and I know it has a good return and is worth offering.
Since magazine viewership is down at least 5%, internet viewership is up 8% in the last year, that tells you that the demand for moving imagery will increase.
Whether that happens today (maybe it's already happened) or happens in 5 years we all know it's coming. Hell all of us in NY watch TV in the back of a cab (I turn it off), but we know it's coming.
JR
P.S. I do know this. If it does come down to every job a client hands me some price list from some "digital service" that requires me to either use their service, or match their prices, then I will go back to film and just use the digital capture as electronic polaroids.
I'll just say film has more mojo, voodo, magic or whatever and hopefully that'll sell it.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=203453\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
A frame pull from the Sony, natural light, looked incredible right out of the camera. No post, no sharpening. Just put on the Mac Book and opened up. So I wonder, why not shoot the same catalogue fashion stuff I shoot now, but on video? Use HMI instead of strobe, become more a DP and director than a camera operator. Perhaps a high end camera that shoots 1080p video and then, say, a 16 megapixel still that has the quality of a 1ds2? Even if not a frame pull, but a seperate still ability. I'd be psyched. Maybe Sony or Red will make it, use CZ lenses, and cost $10,000. Or even $16,000. That's what I'd like to see at Photokina.
-
People who buy a Ferrari don't tend to buy a second Ferrari for when the first car breaks down.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=203369\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Actually Graham,
That's a funny example because most of the guys that I know that have Ferrari's have more than one and often several other cars too. But none of them drive these to work and back.
Going back to cameras I'd like to see at Photokina is something that has more DR, good ISO 1600 and DSLR type autofocus, frame rate, and screen.
How is it that a $4.5k D3 can have a better screen than a $25k back?
I really don't care about pixels - anything more than about 20mp is enough.
-
Pretty simple answer to this, Eric: to get a good LCD/screen/display is not a problem. The price you have to pay for it when ordering only a few thousands of it is another thing, at least up to now.
Best regards,
Thierry
How is it that a $4.5k D3 can have a better screen than a $25k back?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=203471\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
-
Any info on the next generation of "medium resolution" backs in the 40MP range?
I would personnally probably be more interested in a very clean file at 40MP with brilliant DR and a very high quality 400 ISO rather than a 60MP back with lower pixel quality.
This being said, if the new sensors are real 645 then wide angle photography on MF bodies will be a nightmare. The Mamiya 28 mm is already not that great in the corners of a 36x48 mm sensor. I know that it is supposed to be able to handle 645, but I would not want to use it on a sensor larger than 36x48.
I wonder to what extend the digital LF lenses will be able to cope well with real 645...
My personnal view is that this is a stupid move. They should have sticked to 36x48 mm sensors. Those not shooting too much wides will probably have different views on this.
Regards,
Bernard
-
For me, the issue is a bit different: to date, most MFDB makers seem to have been working the model of "its exquisite, its special, its low volume and its high priced". Along with other such specialty products, its also a bit finicky and particular. Many aspects (integration, ease of use, screens) are exceeded by simpler and less special products (DSLR's).
So the question seems to be:
Are there enough users in this shrinking pool to make it worthwhile for these different back makers to service?
Are they chasing an evolving and lessening market?
And if true, who will be the first to break the barriers, and model not on the past but on the future - and take the risk in cutting costs to expand market share?
Do we think that market share would double for a MF digital back maker is the costs were.... $10-12k? Look ath the Hassy now in that light. They are picking up the mantle. Who might be next?
-
And if true, who will be the first to break the barriers, and model not on the past but on the future - and take the risk in cutting costs to expand market share?
Do we think that market share would double for a MF digital back maker is the costs were.... $10-12k? Look ath the Hassy now in that light. They are picking up the mantle. Who might be next?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=203484\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Hasn't Mamiya already captured that niche?
Regards,
Bernard
-
Hasn't Mamiya already captured that niche?
Regards,
Bernard
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=203502\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
From everyone I knew that tried the Mamiya in a professional setting it was hobbled.
It didn't tether well, the lcd was the weakest of the weak, the buffer was very limited and it was also limited to low iso.
On paper the whole idea looked good and I thought would probably move the other makers to compete, but if anything it gave the other back makers more justification for their pricing.
JR
-
I would rather have no features at all
now that is a must have feature for me.
these days everything is so bomb full of features I am sick of it
I only use about 5% of my phone, my remote, my camera and maybe even my fridge
and i still have to pay for all the research and development for all the wistles
and bells.
therefor i wish for a manual camera system with only auto focus as it's main "feature"
m*
-
Does it revolve? By which I mean, can you change orientation without removing the back from the camera?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=203466\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
AFAIK it is bolted to the camera in horizontal position as this solution was designed by Rollei-Metric for specific purposes, you'll probably have to send it to the factory to change orientation, if that is at all possible.
Yair
-
As an owner of the RED-One camera I came to similar thoughts like TMARK.
I think in the near future still and video will merge. This wont be the case for high end fashion or advertising but for all the other smaller projects that many times just end up on the web or small print.
I still cant believe how good the still frames of the RED are. You get a 40MB Tiff still frame out of this baby. I printed it A3 and it looks very good.
It was an eyeopener when I first saw it.
Sometimes I think that the MFDB makers are all sleeping.
A full RED package costs around 30K and you can put your still lenses on it.
The LCD is killer also in bright sunlight. The cam shoots 120 fps in 2K and 60fps in full 4K.
Next year there will be the "epic" (RED2). This baby will shoot 100 fps in 5K.
Now think about our MFDB for a second. How fast are they shooting again?
Again you can get a 40MB Tiff file out of just one damn RED frame.
The MFDB makers got to wake up and bring some new tech or they wont be here for long.
This business will get tougher and tougher for all of us.
I can see people running around with video cams filming and shooting still frames at the same time. Selecting what they need at home at their computers.
A few years and we are there.
Now dont start arguing about art, framing and lighting. I'm just talking tech here.
But everyone can think for them self how this will influence our way of work.
And how this will change a whole industry.
RED is changing the film industry at the moment. They wont stop there...
Tim
-
Speaking of the RED One, my friend showed me this last night
http://www.cinematography.com/forum2004/in...opic=31211&st=0 (http://www.cinematography.com/forum2004/index.php?showtopic=31211&st=0)
As an owner of the RED-One camera I came to similar thoughts like TMARK.
I think in the near future still and video will merge. This wont be the case for high end fashion or advertising but for all the other smaller projects that many times just end up on the web or small print.
I still cant believe how good the still frames of the RED are. You get a 40MB Tiff still frame out of this baby. I printed it A3 and it looks very good.
It was an eyeopener when I first saw it.
Sometimes I think that the MFDB makers are all sleeping.
A full RED package costs around 30K and you can put your still lenses on it.
The LCD is killer also in bright sunlight. The cam shoots 120 fps in 2K and 60fps in full 4K.
Next year there will be the "epic" (RED2). This baby will shoot 100 fps in 5K.
Now think about our MFDB for a second. How fast are they shooting again?
Again you can get a 40MB Tiff file out of just one damn RED frame.
The MFDB makers got to wake up and bring some new tech or they wont be here for long.
This business will get tougher and tougher for all of us.
I can see people running around with video cams filming and shooting still frames at the same time. Selecting what they need at home at their computers.
A few years and we are there.
Now dont start arguing about art, framing and lighting. I'm just talking tech here.
But everyone can think for them self how this will influence our way of work.
And how this will change a whole industry.
RED is changing the film industry at the moment. They wont stop there...
Tim
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=203530\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
-
Exactly, and thank you! (There was no offense intended in my original post, sorry you read it that way.)
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=203382\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I had no trouble focusing my Canon in the shadows with my bad eyes - but the Mamiya is hard. Oh - wait, maybe the F1.2 lens on the Mamiya is a bit brighter ?
Edmund
-
Yeah, the RED one is beeing used on many Hollywood movies at the moment.
Right now Steven Soderbergh is shooting with Matt Damon all on RED.
Sorry dont wanted to high jack the thread.
Just wanted to point out, that there's new high tech stuff out there that puts the todays MFDB offerings in a total new light.
I think the whole picture/movie making industry is changing so rapidly at the moment, it's crazy.
And we are right in the middle. Not always knowing which way to go or to invest.
Interesting times.
Tim
-
As an owner of the RED-One camera I came to similar thoughts like TMARK.
I think in the near future still and video will merge. This wont be the case for high end fashion or advertising but for all the other smaller projects that many times just end up on the web or small print.
I still cant believe how good the still frames of the RED are. You get a 40MB Tiff still frame out of this baby. I printed it A3 and it looks very good.
It was an eyeopener when I first saw it.
Sometimes I think that the MFDB makers are all sleeping.
A full RED package costs around 30K and you can put your still lenses on it.
The LCD is killer also in bright sunlight. The cam shoots 120 fps in 2K and 60fps in full 4K.
Next year there will be the "epic" (RED2). This baby will shoot 100 fps in 5K.
Now think about our MFDB for a second. How fast are they shooting again?
Again you can get a 40MB Tiff file out of just one damn RED frame.
The MFDB makers got to wake up and bring some new tech or they wont be here for long.
This business will get tougher and tougher for all of us.
I can see people running around with video cams filming and shooting still frames at the same time. Selecting what they need at home at their computers.
A few years and we are there.
Now dont start arguing about art, framing and lighting. I'm just talking tech here.
But everyone can think for them self how this will influence our way of work.
And how this will change a whole industry.
RED is changing the film industry at the moment. They wont stop there...
Tim
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=203530\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Tim this can become a very interesting discussion and I think it deserves a new thread.
You are cleverly separating the technical side from the art etc. but I think that these two sides will have to work together as they will for sure affect one another.
I have spent the last 5 days on a big production set where they are filming a new ad campaign, all shot on an ArriMax 35mm. This is a fairly new ground for me and I'm learning something new every day.
However there's an AFi7 there that is located next to the Arri and that is used for capturing as many images as possible during each take, that involves with allot of special effects and difficult lighting conditions, meaning mostly wide open at 400iso
Each take is about 40 seconds and at the moment it looks like the AFi7 is the only capturing device that can produce a minimum of 30 usable frames (usable as in sharp) over 40 seconds sessions and that can be edited/ picked into high quality inkjet posters. No other system would have given us a decent amount of 95MB frames to work from.
This could be where a future RED will be able to do both, but I have doubts as to the usability and the image quality/ size of the images, assuming that stills technology is also going to move forward.
The same AFi7 camera is also used for capturing high-speed motion (think explosions) at 1/500-1/1000 with flash. I cannot see how a 1/100 camera at 5K can achieve this.
Yair
-
Yair
You are right. We probably have to start a new thread about that topic.
I think soon we will have to talk about that kinda stuff.
Dont get me wrong here. I love MFDBs. I'm right on the fence of buying into a system.
But the longer I use my RED on my cinematography stuff, the more I can smell the future and I start comparing stuff. What gives you the most bang for the buck etc.
If I didn't buy the RED I would already have a new 39Blad.
Now I got the 1Ds3 and the RED. So I can produce great pictures in both fields.
The upgrade to the Blad would easily cost about 50K. About the same as the RED package.
Video and still will merge. It wont take another 10 years for that. Maybe 3.
Tim
-
Yair
You are right. We probably have to start a new thread about that topic.
I think soon we will have to talk about that kinda stuff.
Dont get me wrong here. I love MFDBs. I'm right on the fence of buying into a system.
But the longer I use my RED on my cinematography stuff, the more I can smell the future and I start comparing stuff. What gives you the most bang for the buck etc.
If I didn't buy the RED I would already have a new 39Blad.
Now I got the 1Ds3 and the RED. So I can produce great pictures in both fields.
The upgrade to the Blad would easily cost about 50K. About the same as the RED package.
Video and still will merge. It wont take another 10 years for that. Maybe 3.
Tim
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=203570\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Seeing the Sony and Red stills was an eye opener for me. It was, to say the least, an epiphany. I think trying to pull the right still from a few hundred thousand frames would be stupid, you would be relying on luck for your composition. There is also a different feel (for the subject) with stills than with motion that translates to the image. I think a Red camera with an enhanced definition stills function would be the bees knees. You could shoot your motion, then using the same setup shoot the stills, maybe bring in strobes, maybe change the lighting to something more or less dramatic etc. I've worked as a lighting director for films/videos and I grew up on sound stages. The prospect of getting back to that is exciting.
-
If cinematography doen't need larger sensor, I think 12mp is the limit. The diffraction
affects the image quality at f8, and more pixels beyond 12-13mp is simply useless. So we can imagine maybe the frame pulled from a red one(or a future epic) is something similar to a nikon D300 or sony a700 or anything like that. And I dont think a D300 equivalence will suit the ads campaign or high fashion needs,therefore a full frame Dslr(with a pixels limitation of 30mp at f8 ) or bigger MFDB(with a pixels limitation of 60mp at f8) will survive.
Dustblue
Yair
You are right. We probably have to start a new thread about that topic.
I think soon we will have to talk about that kinda stuff.
Dont get me wrong here. I love MFDBs. I'm right on the fence of buying into a system.
But the longer I use my RED on my cinematography stuff, the more I can smell the future and I start comparing stuff. What gives you the most bang for the buck etc.
If I didn't buy the RED I would already have a new 39Blad.
Now I got the 1Ds3 and the RED. So I can produce great pictures in both fields.
The upgrade to the Blad would easily cost about 50K. About the same as the RED package.
Video and still will merge. It wont take another 10 years for that. Maybe 3.
Tim
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=203570\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
-
Pretty simple answer to this, Eric: to get a good LCD/screen/display is not a problem. The price you have to pay for it when ordering only a few thousands of it is another thing, at least up to now.
Best regards,
Thierry
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=203477\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
So, that seems to be an acknowledgement that the lcd's on $2000 cameras are better than on $20,000. cameras! And this is just the problem. When you pay 10x more you kind of expect at least equal quality and ease of use. Perhaps then a solution is to work with those who purchase gazillions of lcd's or be creative and come up with an ipod touch solution. Cost of unit with drop dead gorgeous screen with touch capacitance: less than $300. Wait a second- $300 for a screen, processor, battery and la de da? Huh. Somehow it makes you think you could get a similar screen, even in small numbers, for about that same $300 as the entire ipod touch- or just buy the touch and disassemble it!
-
AFAIK it is bolted to the camera in horizontal position as this solution was designed by Rollei-Metric for specific purposes, you'll probably have to send it to the factory to change orientation, if that is at all possible.
Yair
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=203523\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
What would Rollei charge if they just brought a technician to your set and everytime you had to go from verticle to horizontal he/she adjusted the orientation?
JR
-
Bryan,
If it would be that easy and simple as you put it ....
Best regards,
Thierry
So, that seems to be an acknowledgement that the lcd's on $2000 cameras are better than on $20,000. cameras! And this is just the problem. When you pay 10x more you kind of expect at least equal quality and ease of use. Perhaps then a solution is to work with those who purchase gazillions of lcd's or be creative and come up with an ipod touch solution. Cost of unit with drop dead gorgeous screen with touch capacitance: less than $300. Wait a second- $300 for a screen, processor, battery and la de da? Huh. Somehow it makes you think you could get a similar screen, even in small numbers, for about that same $300 as the entire ipod touch- or just buy the touch and disassemble it!
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=203575\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
-
If cinematography doen't need larger sensor, I think 12mp is the limit. The diffraction
affects the image quality at f8, and more pixels beyond 12-13mp is simply useless. So we can imagine maybe the frame pulled from a red one(or a future epic) is something similar to a nikon D300 or sony a700 or anything like that. And I dont think a D300 equivalence will suit the ads campaign or high fashion needs,therefore a full frame Dslr(with a pixels limitation of 30mp at f8 ) or bigger MFDB(with a pixels limitation of 60mp at f8) will survive.
Dustblue
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=203574\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
To get over this problem they could use a larger sensor in the camera and mask it off for cinema and unmask it for stills. Even if they are different cameras, I think that video production will be a major part of my work in a few years, and in fact, I'm thinking that us fashion/catalogue/studio guys can leverage our production skills for pure film production, providing another revenue stream. I've always sort of run my shoots like a film shoot, roughing in lights, a little rehearsal, blocking shots, marks etc. Much of the production work is the same, so why not produce video/film?
-
deleted
-
I will be preparing myself for the transformation to video a little early by shooting some model videos over the 4th of July weekend, something like Greg Kadel does:
http://www.gregkadelstudios.com/films/elise.html (http://www.gregkadelstudios.com/films/elise.html)
http://www.gregkadelstudios.com/films/eugenia.html (http://www.gregkadelstudios.com/films/eugenia.html)
Anyone use one of those video camera attachments for narrow DOF which they would recommend?
And by the way, you want to see some really nice work being done with Phase backs, check out the rest of his site:
http://www.gregkadelstudios.com/women/ (http://www.gregkadelstudios.com/women/)
(when I said a couple weeks ago that I do not see my heroes on the web forums talking 200% pixel peeps, he is one of the dudes I was referring to. He buys the back, and then kicks ass with it!)
-
I will be preparing myself for the transformation to video a little early by shooting some model videos over the 4th of July weekend, something like Greg Kadel does:
http://www.gregkadelstudios.com/films/elise.html (http://www.gregkadelstudios.com/films/elise.html)
http://www.gregkadelstudios.com/films/eugenia.html (http://www.gregkadelstudios.com/films/eugenia.html)
Anyone use one of those video camera attachments for narrow DOF which they would recommend?
And by the way, you want to see some really nice work being done with Phase backs, check out the rest of his site:
http://www.gregkadelstudios.com/women/ (http://www.gregkadelstudios.com/women/)
(when I said a couple weeks ago that I do not see my heroes on the web forums talking 200% pixel peeps, he is one of the dudes I was referring to. He buys the back, and then kicks ass with it!)
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=203587\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I haven't used them, but a guy I've worked with likes the Redrock. The Letus seems pretty good as well.
As to pixel peeping and all the nonsense, you are absolutely correct. It seems that too many people have their egos wrapped up in their gear. Speaking of kicking ass, my friend who beat me out on a Bergdorf shoot kicks ass with her 5d, Mamiya AF with one 80mm lens. She's never visited a forum in her life!
-
I haven't used them, but a guy I've worked with likes the Redrock. The Letus seems pretty good as well.
As to pixel peeping and all the nonsense, you are absolutely correct. It seems that too many people have their egos wrapped up in their gear. Speaking of kicking ass, my friend who beat me out on a Bergdorf shoot kicks ass with her 5d, Mamiya AF with one 80mm lens. She's never visited a forum in her life!
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a] (http://index.php?act=findpost&pid=203590\")
Thanks, I'll look into those adapters.
Does your friend photographer have a site?? I'd love to see her work. I work with some art directors who work with Bergdorfs, but I have not gotten into their catalog yet. Two of my friends have though, [a href=\"http://christophergriffith.com/]Christopher Griffith[/url] and Bharat Sikka (http://www.julianmeijer.com/photographers/sikka/bio/).
Cheers.
-
Thanks, I'll look into those adapters.
Does your friend photographer have a site?? I'd love to see her work. I work with some art directors who work with Bergdorfs, but I have not gotten into their catalog yet. Two of my friends have though, Christopher Griffith (http://christophergriffith.com/) and Bharat Sikka.
Cheers.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=203593\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
www.Sherriphoto.com. Her site has not been updated for at least a year.
-
Thanks, I'll look into those adapters.
Does your friend photographer have a site?? I'd love to see her work. I work with some art directors who work with Bergdorfs, but I have not gotten into their catalog yet. Two of my friends have though, Christopher Griffith (http://christophergriffith.com/) and Bharat Sikka (http://www.julianmeijer.com/photographers/sikka/bio/).
Cheers.
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a] (http://index.php?act=findpost&pid=203593\")
I own both the Letus and the Redrock and used the P+S technique. They all work, the Redrock is larger but is much more difficult to set up align and use, plus it flips the image so you either need to add a good hdv lcd and mount it upside down, or use a camera that will allow you to flip the image in the camera.
The Letus on the other hand is easier to use and doesn't loose as much light as the redrock. Actually much, much easier to set up and use.
The downside of of the adapters is they all soften the image somewhat because you are focusing on a moving ground glass. They also loose some light and hdv prosumer cameras don't do high iso that well when you bump the gain, especially in low key lighting. You will see a snowstorm of noise and it can be corrected in post but those corrections can be expensive, or time consuming.
Unless you need to throw the background out of foucs it's best to just use the available lenses.
If your video is only going to web play, then stay with standard def as the standard def cameras do higher iso much better.
This was shot hdv codec on a Canon with the Letus with inserted stills from the P21+ and you can see the difference in sharpness and detail.
It's not a deal breaker, but these adapters are just an intermediate step compared to something like the Red.
[a href=\"http://www.russellrutherford.com/greendayfinal.mov]http://www.russellrutherford.com/greendayfinal.mov[/url]
This was shot hdv with and without the redrock
http://www.russellrutherford.com/video/source/sanya.htm (http://www.russellrutherford.com/video/source/sanya.htm)
and this was hot standa def with a long damn lens.
http://www.russellrutherford.com/video/source/soccer.htm (http://www.russellrutherford.com/video/source/soccer.htm)
JR
-
I own both the Letus and the Redrock and used the P+S technique. They all work, the Redrock is larger but is much more difficult to set up align and use, plus it flips the image so you either need to add a good hdv lcd and mount it upside down, or use a camera that will allow you to flip the image in the camera.
The Letus on the other hand is easier to use and doesn't loose as much light as the redrock. Actually much, much easier to set up and use.
The downside of of the adapters is they all soften the image somewhat because you are focusing on a moving ground glass. They also loose some light and hdv prosumer cameras don't do high iso that well when you bump the gain, especially in low key lighting. You will see a snowstorm of noise and it can be corrected in post but those corrections can be expensive, or time consuming.
Unless you need to throw the background out of foucs it's best to just use the available lenses.
If your video is only going to web play, then stay with standard def as the standard def cameras do higher iso much better.
This was shot hdv codec on a Canon with the Letus with inserted stills from the P21+ and you can see the difference in sharpness and detail.
It's not a deal breaker, but these adapters are just an intermediate step compared to something like the Red.
http://www.russellrutherford.com/greendayfinal.mov (http://www.russellrutherford.com/greendayfinal.mov)
This was shot hdv with and without the redrock
http://www.russellrutherford.com/video/source/sanya.htm (http://www.russellrutherford.com/video/source/sanya.htm)
and this was hot standa def with a long damn lens.
http://www.russellrutherford.com/video/source/soccer.htm (http://www.russellrutherford.com/video/source/soccer.htm)
JR
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=203600\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
There is a hack for the lcd on the camera when using the Redrock that flips the image for correct viewing. I'm sure it can be found on the web.
-
Thanks TMARK. I like her colors, look, lighting. Looks like she has an imagination.
Thanks JR. I actually like the soft look. Just to be mundane, where to you buy this Letus, and what does it cost?
-
There is a hack for the lcd on the camera when using the Redrock that flips the image for correct viewing. I'm sure it can be found on the web.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=203606\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I don't think it works with the Canons.
I believe the Panasonic and Sony's flip in the controls.
I went with the Canons because they had incremental higher iso than the Panasonic and Sony, but my testing was somewhat limited.
Still it's difficult to make these hdv codec prosumer cameras look great. You can do it, but it takes a lot of post work and the sensor size is just tiny, tiny.
JR
-
I was going to use something like this:
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/4470..._Camcorder.html (http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/447098-REG/Canon_1191B001_XH_A1_3CCD_HDV_Camcorder.html)
Maybe it offers enough DOF control so I don't need the adapters?
(sure, we should probably take this discussion elsewhere, as it has little to do with new jumbo MF back...)
-
I was going to use something like this:
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/4470..._Camcorder.html (http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/447098-REG/Canon_1191B001_XH_A1_3CCD_HDV_Camcorder.html)
Maybe it offers enough DOF control so I don't need the adapters?
(sure, we should probably take this discussion elsewhere, as it has little to do with new jumbo MF back...)
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=203614\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I have two of those exact cameras. They're ok, but they don't last very well and the controls are the most unintuiative of any camera ever devised.
It really takes about an hour before you shoot to get used to the switches and the menus must have been designed by someone that had too much to drink.
They're not built that well and I have sent both of mine into Canon for repairs, (our fault), but still when you hire film crew and operators they are brutal on equipment and these little plastic cameras just snap and break all over the place.
Under the right light they can produce an amazing image, but it takes a lot of practice and testing to get it down.
JR
-
I have two of those exact cameras. They're ok, but they don't last very well and the controls are the most unintuiative of any camera ever devised.
It really takes about an hour before you shoot to get used to the switches and the menus must have been designed by someone that had too much to drink.
They're not built that well and I have sent both of mine into Canon for repairs, (our fault), but still when you hire film crew and operators they are brutal on equipment and these little plastic cameras just snap and break all over the place.
Under the right light they can produce an amazing image, but it takes a lot of practice and testing to get it down.
JR
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a] (http://index.php?act=findpost&pid=203625\")
I'll just be renting something like that, and it's just a test really. The main thrust will be shooting stills. *Anyway, how is the depth of field on that thing?*
Know anything about something like this?
[a href=\"http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/461818-REG/Sony_HVRV1U_HVR_V1U_HDV_Camcorder.html]http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/4618..._Camcorder.html[/url]
-
I'll just be renting something like that, and it's just a test really. The main thrust will be shooting stills. *Anyway, how is the depth of field on that thing?*
Know anything about something like this?
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/4618..._Camcorder.html (http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/461818-REG/Sony_HVRV1U_HVR_V1U_HDV_Camcorder.html)
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=203630\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
It's no different than the Canon other than the iso or useable gain is lower and the build quality is better than the Canon.
The Sony shoots a very bland file though can be corrected in post.
Still uses a very, very small sensor (well three) but still very small.
The lenses on all of these prosumer cameras breath and use servos for manual focus which pretty much takes the hand to eye coordination of a brain surgeon to hit manually work focus.
It can be done, but's it tricky.
Unless you need it today, I'd wait for the Red Scarlet.
That looks like the digital version of a real super 16mm camera and probably one that will get much more use.
These prosumer cameras by Sony, Canon and Panasonic really are semi professional cameras.
JR
-
I'll just be renting something like that, and it's just a test really. The main thrust will be shooting stills. *Anyway, how is the depth of field on that thing?*
Know anything about something like this?
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/4618..._Camcorder.html (http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/461818-REG/Sony_HVRV1U_HVR_V1U_HDV_Camcorder.html)
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a] (http://index.php?act=findpost&pid=203630\")
Try this one:
[a href=\"http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/520761-REG/Sony_PMWEX1UC_PMW_EX1_XDCAM_EX_SxS.html]http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/5207...CAM_EX_SxS.html[/url]
The videographer had a Red but this was his backup, or maybe it wa sthe EX2. The frame pulls from this cam were really, relly nice. These are all on sale because the EX3 is coming out, which has interchangable lenses and better gain/iso.
-
Thanks guys, I will probably just rent one of the above for the weekend and see how it goes. Is there any DOF control with these or not?
(not making any purchases until maybe one of the Reds one day.)
-
Thanks guys, I will probably just rent one of the above for the weekend and see how it goes. Is there any DOF control with these or not?
(not making any purchases until maybe one of the Reds one day.)
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=203643\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
The chip is bigger than most, not Cinema 35 (Red) sized, but the frame pulls I looked at had a real nice OOF. Mainly, color and tonality were really, really nice.
-
Try this one:
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/5207...CAM_EX_SxS.html (http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/520761-REG/Sony_PMWEX1UC_PMW_EX1_XDCAM_EX_SxS.html)
The videographer had a Red but this was his backup, or maybe it wa sthe EX2. The frame pulls from this cam were really, relly nice. These are all on sale because the EX3 is coming out, which has interchangable lenses and better gain/iso.
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a] (http://index.php?act=findpost&pid=203637\")
It couldn't be the EX2 because it doesn't exist. The PMW-EX1 was introduced in the market a few months ago, so it can be still considered a "new" camera. It's probably the best pro "compact" camcorder you can buy today without any doubt: the first one of its class that incorporates three 1/2 chips (better high iso performance, better DR, a slighty narrower DOF compared to its !/3 and 1/4 chip size HDV counterparts). It also records on XDCAM-HD, a better IQ professional format than prosumer HDV (better postproduccion flexibility and lack of HDV mpeg artifacts).
Sony introduced early this year the HVR-Z7U, an interchangeable lens HDV camcorder with 1/3 and CompactFlash record capability. Maybe this is the camera you`re referring to when you talk about an pcoming "EX3"...
[a href=\"http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/532558-REG/Sony_HVR_Z7U_HVR_Z7U_HDV_Camcorder.html]http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/5325..._Camcorder.html[/url]
-
I have two of those exact cameras. They're ok, but they don't last very well and the controls are the most unintuiative of any camera ever devised.
It really takes about an hour before you shoot to get used to the switches and the menus must have been designed by someone that had too much to drink.
They're not built that well and I have sent both of mine into Canon for repairs, (our fault), but still when you hire film crew and operators they are brutal on equipment and these little plastic cameras just snap and break all over the place.
Under the right light they can produce an amazing image, but it takes a lot of practice and testing to get it down.
JR
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=203625\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
The Canon you have is, yes, more a "prosumer" level camera than a real professional one and it can't be compared with the Sony PMW-EX1 or even the HVR-Z1U or the new HVR-Z7U; I think these ones are real "compact" professional cameras: all of the switches and menus are located in the same places as a broadcast camera and the feel of them is very close. The focus and zoom control lacks the smothness and precision of a 2/3 broadcast zoom lens but it's not that far.
When I had my own video post house we worked with a Sony DXC-30WSP, and amazing 2/3 broadcast SD camera (the first one that incorporated a 16:9 native chip), a DVCAM back and some Fujinon lenses... I've been using the HVR-ZU1 for my personal projects and I really like how rugged and professional it feels; with the right light conditions the IQ can be really great too. I will buy a PMW-EX1 as soon as I can. While waiting for the RED I think you should give it a try.
An interesting thing about the HVR-ZU7 is that you can attach to it 1/2 and 2/3 brodcast lenses with an adapter.
In any case: you get amazing results from your Canons.
Carlos-
-
You are correct. An entire set up should be in about $10k USD, maybe less with rebates.
It couldn't be the EX2 because it doesn't exist. The PMW-EX1 was introduced in the market a few months ago, so it can be still considered a "new" camera. It's probably the best pro "compact" camcorder you can buy today without any doubt: the first one of its class that incorporates three 1/2 chips (better high iso performance, better DR, a slighty narrower DOF compared to its !/3 and 1/4 chip size HDV counterparts). It also records on XDCAM-HD, a better IQ professional format than prosumer HDV (better postproduccion flexibility and lack of HDV mpeg artifacts).
Sony introduced early this year the HVR-Z7U, an interchangeable lens HDV camcorder with 1/3 and CompactFlash record capability. Maybe this is the camera you`re referring to when you talk about an pcoming "EX3"...
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/5325..._Camcorder.html (http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/532558-REG/Sony_HVR_Z7U_HVR_Z7U_HDV_Camcorder.html)
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=203649\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
-
I worked with the EX-1. It's a very good cam. The EX-3 will even be a bit better and more pro.
The RED gets a heavy beast. Sometimes I wish it would be more like an EX-1.
The EX-1 has a very good price/perfomance point.
If the files were thicker, you could use it for almost everything. The files break much faster than for examle the RED files. But the RED gives you 4:2:2 RAW files and you even have a 4:4:4 video output.
The Letus adapter is very good. Gets soft but makes nice pictures.
Stuff from the letus look very filmlike. It can look amazing.
Tim
-
It couldn't be the EX2 because it doesn't exist. The PMW-EX1 was introduced in the market a few months ago, so it can be still considered a "new" camera. It's probably the best pro "compact" camcorder you can buy today without any doubt: the first one of its class that incorporates three 1/2 chips (better high iso performance, better DR, a slighty narrower DOF compared to its !/3 and 1/4 chip size HDV counterparts). It also records on XDCAM-HD, a better IQ professional format than prosumer HDV (better postproduccion flexibility and lack of HDV mpeg artifacts).
Sony introduced early this year the HVR-Z7U, an interchangeable lens HDV camcorder with 1/3 and CompactFlash record capability. Maybe this is the camera you`re referring to when you talk about an pcoming "EX3"...
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/5325..._Camcorder.html (http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/532558-REG/Sony_HVR_Z7U_HVR_Z7U_HDV_Camcorder.html)
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=203649\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
FYI, the Sony EX3 is being demonstrated on Saturday. I'll ask if its the same thing as the HVR-Z7U.
-
FYI, the Sony EX3 is being demonstrated on Saturday. I'll ask if its the same thing as the HVR-Z7U.
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a] (http://index.php?act=findpost&pid=203844\")
Sorry, but you're totally right and I was wrong The Sony PMW-EX3 exists and it's not the HVR-Z7U... Didn't know. As you've said is an interchangeble lens and a more expensive and "pro" version of the PMW-EX1. Here is an interesting review of the camera:
[a href=\"http://philipbloom.co.uk/Philip_Bloom/XDCAMEX3.html]http://philipbloom.co.uk/Philip_Bloom/XDCAMEX3.html[/url]
-
Sorry, but you're totally right and I was wrong The Sony PMW-EX3 exists and it's not the HVR-Z7U... Didn't know. As you've said is an interchangeble lens and a more expensive and "pro" version of the PMW-EX1. Here is an interesting review of the camera:
http://philipbloom.co.uk/Philip_Bloom/XDCAMEX3.html (http://philipbloom.co.uk/Philip_Bloom/XDCAMEX3.html)
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=203853\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I'll post my observations after we check it out on Saturday!
T
-
I'll post my observations after we check it out on Saturday!
Where is the demo?
-
I'll post my observations after we check it out on Saturday!
T
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=203865\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
That will be great, the PMW-EX3 looks incredible. I think I'll have to reconsider my buying plans about the PMW-EX1.
Carlos-
-
Gidday,
Was talking to the New Zealand distributor for Phase One about the new back and of course his wasn't giving much away.
He did say that the new chip might not necessarily be a Kodak chip and that there were some other major improvements as well.
Looks like I might be trading in my Leaf Aptus 75 by the end of the year.
Cheers
Simon
-
Gidday,
Was talking to the New Zealand distributor for Phase One about the new back and of course his wasn't giving much away.
He did say that the new chip might not necessarily be a Kodak chip and that there were some other major improvements as well.
Looks like I might be trading in my Leaf Aptus 75 by the end of the year.
Cheers
Simon
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=203903\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Hello Simon,
Yes there will be an announcement of interest from Phase at Photokina-- sorry cannot say
anymore
Nick T confirmed this also
Charles Howells told me last week in Auck the Leaf v Phase shootout was clear cut in the winner-
-call him he will tell you.
Basically we have had the Phase/Mamiya P45+ setup for testing with mixed results.
We also have a RED outfit inhouse.
Our next door Neighbour Jim Ginnaid the inventor and owner of the RED Camera has some
products in the future that will blow your mind--whether still or Movie based.
If I was Leaf /Phase /etc I would be looking over my shoulder.
Interesting times for MFDB,
Des Williams
-
Yeah RED will kick ass in the near future. DB makers better be prepared.
Dont want to sound like a wyse guy but it's Jim Jannard who is the founder and owner of RED.
Tim
-
Gidday,
Was talking to the New Zealand distributor for Phase One about the new back and of course his wasn't giving much away.
He did say that the new chip might not necessarily be a Kodak chip and that there were some other major improvements as well.
Looks like I might be trading in my Leaf Aptus 75 by the end of the year.
Cheers
Simon
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=203903\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Hi
I heard the same line in Sydney " Who says it has to be Kodak" & that was a few months ago? Hey lets wait for Photokina.....................................!
Denis
-
Anyone have a link to some Red One stills?
-
Hi I dont have stills on the web at the moment. But under this link you will find all clips and still pics
that have been around for month from the RED.
Be aware that not everything is super good. But it has great stuff there.
Link: http://www.reduser.net/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=21 (http://www.reduser.net/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=21)
Tim
-
That Heinz ad is too much!
Thanks for the info.
-
That Heinz ad is too much!
Thanks for the info.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=203980\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Something worth noting is how much more horiziontal I now shoot (expecially for commerce) vs how much vertical I shot in the film days.
With film, probably because it was almost pre web, 90% of everything I shot was vertical, now today, more than half comes to me designed in horizontal layouts.
Maybe it's because AD's and designers are working on horizontal computers screens as a Canvas, maybe because there is more web play for each image and obviously horizontal works a lot better on a computer than a vertical.
Regardless, Horizontal is the new vertical, vertical is the old square.
If a young photographer asks me who they should study, I now say Ridley Scott.
JR
-
Yes, me too. I recently shot a 3 day fashion job, and was told to shoot it all horizontal. Never been asked to do that before.
I was told the art directors are thinking more horizontal now due to the shape of computer screens, and the prevalence of video (youtube!) that people across genres have started to visualize and design everything in horizontal.
Even more recently (a couple weeks ago) I shot a cashmere catalog which we have done vertical the past 3 years - this most recent one which comes out in September is horizontal.
It's nice because for horiz. you can hold the camera the proper way around, but when it comes to prints for the portfolio, you are either going across two pages, making the image very small, or cropping like mad...
Anyway, speaking of the Red One, there is something really involving about the "look":
http://red31.com/footage/hongkong0608/stre...f_hong_kong.mov (http://red31.com/footage/hongkong0608/streets_of_hong_kong.mov)
And by the way, someone asks me who's movies to check out for framing, beautiful visuals, this is the dude I mention:
http://www.imagesjournal.com/issue10/reviews/inthemood/ (http://www.imagesjournal.com/issue10/reviews/inthemood/)
In the mood for Love is a wicked beautiful movie.
-
If a young photographer asks me who they should study, I now say Ridley Scott.
Yeah, Ridley is my man. He has such a great eye. He scetches all his shots first and then shows it to the DP. Most of the time the DP ends up shooting it the way Ridley scribbled it.
His framing is superb.
I also noticed the horizontal shift. Somehow you can use it more often these days.
I like it. It has that moviefeeling to it.
Tim
-
If a young photographer asks me who they should study, I now say Ridley Scott.
Yeah, Ridley is my man. He has such a great eye. He scetches all his shots first and then shows it to the DP. Most of the time the DP ends up shooting it the way Ridley scribbled it.
His framing is superb.
I also noticed the horizontal shift. Somehow you can use it more often these days.
I like it. It has that moviefeeling to it.
Tim
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=203990\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
The interesting thing about the Red is since the founder owns Oakley, they have a real marketing background.
They can take this camera where ever they want and keep it at the professional level, or move it also into the consumer realm.
They seem to have no restraints and I honestly thought when they introduced the first camera that would be it for a long time, now they're two more cameras annnouced.
You can see where with just a few modifications this could also be a still camera. It's obviously the only professional digital camera that has thrown off all the legacy restraints of film and is just it's own device.
Everybody thinks smaller companies like Red have got to look out for Canon or Sony, but honestly I think it's the oppositve. The huge companies need to look over their shoulder at a company like Red.
Obviously they are not going to become the electronics giant like Sony, but that doesn't mean that can't capture the market for professional imaging.
JR
-
Yeah RED will kick ass in the near future. DB makers better be prepared.
Dont want to sound like a wyse guy but it's Jim Jannard who is the founder and owner of RED.
Tim
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=203951\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Good Morning Tim,
My apologies to Mr Jannard-- for the misspelling-- I asked his friend how it was it spelt and he said as in GIN?
Maybe there was another connotation in mind--with tongue in cheek of course?
Des W
-
Where is the demo?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=203866\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Sorry for not posting sooner but I've been working my self into the ground.
It is at:
Abel Cine Tech
609 Greenwich St
I think you need an invite, but I'm sure they would let in potential buyers. There is a session at, I believe, 1:00.
-
Thank you, TMARK.
I'm not able to attend, so I hope you'll report your findings.
-
The direction the recent threads on LL took demonstrate the greatness and banality of the web. Many threads address the future of medium format in particular and still photography in general, or rather "the big picture". Then there are the threads that keep beating the dead horse of 35 v. mfdb in Escher/Goethal/Bach like repetitions that feel like a fever dream. Its really interesting that these threads coexist.
-
Thank you, TMARK.
I'm not able to attend, so I hope you'll report your findings.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=204104\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I'll post something in this thread tomorrow or Sunday.
T
-
Everybody thinks smaller companies like Red have got to look out for Canon or Sony, but honestly I think it's the oppositve. The huge companies need to look over their shoulder at a company like Red.
Obviously they are not going to become the electronics giant like Sony, but that doesn't mean that can't capture the market for professional imaging.
JR
Yes, I also think that the big companys are in chock at the moment because of RED.
RED has over 4000 cameras on order/sold in the last 10 month. Sony sold 5000 high end hdcams in 5 years. RED came in with a big bang and caught Sony, Panasonic etc of guard.
The Reps of the big three wont tell it publicly but they are all pissed.
The could have ripped us off for ever again but they have to adapt to RED quickly now. Performance and price wise.
The RED "epic" will even kick mor ass early next year. So the others better do their homework quick.
As James stated above I also think that a product like RED could easily be used as a still camera. I just did a pitch for a big pharma company in switzerland where the dual use of the RED as a movie and still camera was very strong argument for the company to hire me. As I said it earlier, the RED wont be used for high end fashion or advertising photography but think 2-3 years ahead and you see where it is going. I get double jobs already.
In the end, we are picture makers. We all love to take/create great pictures.
Its that kinda passion that drives us forward.
So maybe in a few years we all will also have to be some kinda director/photographer/dp no mather the field.
Just be open minded an embrace the new technology and possebilitys that it can give us. If we older dudes wont the younger will.
On the other hand we should't get to tech driven or we end up on LL and still discuss the same old 35 vs mfdb debate for ever.
Let's go out and shoot some pics
Tim
wow, Obama couldn't put it nicer.
-
The RED "epic" will even kick mor ass early next year. So the others better do their homework quick.
Think about how much different things would be if a still camera company thought like Red.
Regardless of what happens in stills, the message from Red is simple, just make something that you have to have and it will sell.
JR
-
Thank you, TMARK.
I'm not able to attend, so I hope you'll report your findings.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=204104\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
The demo was pretty great. The E1 and E3 share the same imaging set. There is no difference in IQ between the two. What the E3 has over the E1 is the ability to use many, many lenses including 1/2, 2/3, PL mount, F mount, etc. lenses. Adapter included. The lens that ships with the camera is a Fuji. It is incredibly sharp with great oof. The E3 can also use a seperate time code that syncs with other cameras when used on a multi-camera shoot. Otherwise, its (almost) identical to the E1. Full 1080p.
Ergonomics: The E1 is better, to me. The way the E3 sits on the shoulder is odd, and its front heavy like the E1, but moree so. The E3 has more of a Canon GL2 like shape.
IQ: the images have better tone than almost anything I've seen from a still digital camera. Amazing for people, nice and soft like the RZ lenses. The best skin tones out of the box of any digital camera I've seen. Well, the Red is a little better, maybe. Part of a feature was shown, that was not put through final post. Really beautiful. Great dynamic range. Post Works is going to output some of the E1 files to 35mm film and project it. Time TBD.
Price: about $8,000 for the E3, and $6,000 for the E1.
These Sony xdcams are like the Canon 5d of hi-def digital video. These and the Scarlet are the new 16mm.
Build: like a 5d. Not all gnarly aluminum like the Red, but solid. Rental peeps report that they hold up well.
Known issues: all of the hidef cams with a rolling shutter suffer from frame distortion when wip panned. The E1 and E3 are no exception. The Red does this also. The solution is to turn of the shutter during a wip pan. The other issue is that if a strobe pops the images fall apart. They can be synced so they pop when they won't destroy the frame. I don't have a handel on what or why this happens, but it is an issue.
By the way, I asked the Sony rep about the Alpha. He said the ones on the shelf were not really Sony designs, but that the new Alphas have inherited alot from the xdcams in terms of color rendition. dynamic range, and on board image processing.
Now my time to bitch: For the price of a 1ds3, body only, you can walk out of Able Cinetech with a camera that will earn you a $2,000 day rate as a camera operator. Not a DP, just a camera operator. No creative input, just show up and pull focus. The images are amazing. The new Sony Alpha may be the deal breaker that pulls me from MFDB if it is as good as the E1 in terms of tone and color. I could sell the P30 and get the new Alpha and an E1, have some extra coin left over for an 8 core mac. For the initial investment into a Mamiya P30 system with a few lenses (and I'm talking about used camera and lenses, not the expensive new stuff) you could get a high res dslr and an E3, some lenses, and a new Mac. Ready to face the new era.
In the above E1 and E3 are of course the EX1 and EX3.
-
Thanks TMARK for the infos.
You are right the rolling shutter of the RED sucks. RED knows that.
The epic will be much better in that regard.
To be honest. As a RED owner I am extremly impressed with the EX-1 and EX-3.
Sony could build a real RED killer if they wanted to but then they would caniblize their own high-end line up.
Like James metioned, if only the db makers would funktion like RED.
We would see some realy great products out here.
Jim Jannard is a camera lover just like us. He built his own dream cam, just that simple. He and the RED team just built the coolest cam that they could and they wont stop to improve it. They just released the new camera build 16. This build puts the camera in a new galaxy. The IQ is so much better now.
It would be nice if canon would improve their IQ over a year like the RED Team does. The RED philosophy is just great. They never quit making their product better and it's for no charge. It's so easy. Build the cam you would like to work with. Make it affordable and people will buy it like crazy.
RED did that in only 2 years time. Crazy.
Camera makers wake up please.
Tim
-
So this begs the question, Why are the MF peeps making incremental change in their products rather than leaping buildings in a single bound?
How could Red do what they did and the MF back people can't?
-
This is seriously exciting. After looking at output from the current 1080 cameras, and finding them too sharp and not quite right looking, the new Sonys and of course the Red cameras, give me hope that we can really make video which looks like really good film now - and for "cheap." And with control of depth of field, and with still grabs which rival current dslr and MF back image quality for prints, WOW.
I have often thought, I could really relax in a shoot if I didn't have to constantly be deciding when to fire the shutter. To be able to direct the models/actors and know that every instant is being captured and I can choose from them later - well that makes things a whole lot less stressful, IMO.
P.S. Why is a 16gb memory card for those new Sonys $900?? I just bought some Sandisk 16gb CF cards from B&H which were $99 after rebate. Sheesh.
-
This is seriously exciting. After looking at output from the current 1080 cameras, and finding them too sharp and not quite right looking, the new Sonys and of course the Red cameras, give me hope that we can really make video which looks like really good film now - and for "cheap." And with control of depth of field, and with still grabs which rival current dslr and MF back image quality for prints, WOW.
I have often thought, I could really relax in a shoot if I didn't have to constantly be deciding when to fire the shutter. To be able to direct the models/actors and know that every instant is being captured and I can choose from them later - well that makes things a while lot less stressful, IMO.
P.S. Why is a 16gb memory card for those new Sonys $900?? I just bought some Sandisk 16gb CF cards from B&H which were $99 after rebate. Sheesh.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=204247\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Re the memory card prices: Sony seems to have had some issues with their OEM, Sandisk. The OEM agreement is expiring and we can expect to see major price drops on the 16 gig, as well as the the long awaited 32 gig SyS cards. By the way, dumping a 16gig card via the PCI-X slot on a MacBookPro takes NO TIME at all. There is a new hard drive that attached to the "cold" shoe that has a SyS connector on it, so you can record to the drive directly, then to the PCI-X port on your Mac.
It also has an automated backfocus tool that adjusts the rear element for optimum focus. Just aim it at a resolution chart and KABOOM you have optimal focus. With the H cameras you have to have it calibrated at the factory.
The MFDB makers better step up. The EX3 has so many of the benefits of "integration" ala Hassie H yet allows for open lens selection. Also, the EX3 takes integration really far with the adjustable element etc. The IS really works as well. I mean really works well. The example given was the EX1 on a tripod in the back of a van driving down the autobahn. It was rock steady w/o any push in etc. It just works.
Why can't we have this in a MFDB body/lens? Hassie is probably on the right track with integration, but its really only implemented to be restrictive, for the most part. I know, hyper Phocus or whatever its called is real, but why not a moving element like the Sony? Fiji makes the Sony lens as well as the H glass, so why are half assed integration?
The AF is really, really good, as is the LCD. The EX1 is about $6k, about $10k less than I paid for my P30+. The color and tonal gradation is just amazing, especially with faces.
I think its a matter of time before Red or Sony breaks bad with a hybrid larger than 35mm still/cine 35mm cam.
By the way, have you guys seen Build 16 Red images? I was shown some low light stuff shot on a Build 16 Red and my god, amazing! As someone who looks at images and not pixels, I prefer the Red and Sony images to any dslr. They are slightly better than unprocessed MFDB images. I know my P30 with some work in C1 4 and CS3 can beat it and have the res, but Phuk Me, why deal with the hassle and the EXTRA expense? Come on Phase/Leaf/Sinar/Blad, start the revolution before Sony or Red run you over! Reduce prices, get some real integration going, make it all faster, make pricing transparent, sell a package with value added Macs and storage etc.
I do think that frame grabs are kind of stupid, but real still shots from a higher res version of these cams could be great! Shoot your video, then shoot stills with the same camera . . . use HMI's to light the entire thing. The best part about providing video is that you may be able to benefit from video's high price structure that clients accept. What I mean is that day rates and equipment rentals are all more with video than with stills, yet our rates are unchanged in 20 years and we meet resistance for every 1% price increase.
Now might be a good time to buy a lightly used EX1 from a dealer. I saw at least seven people putting a deposit on a an EX3 and trading in EX1's.
-
I do think that frame grabs are kind of stupid, but real still shots from a higher res version of these cams could be great! Shoot your video, then shoot stills with the same camera . . .
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=204255\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Hey TMARK, assuming the image quality is there, why do you think grabs are stupid? Just curious. (I am talking about shooting something like it was for stills, but with video instead. There would be no chance of missing a facial expression or the perfect gesture...)
-
This is seriously exciting. After looking at output from the current 1080 cameras, and finding them too sharp and not quite right looking, the new Sonys and of course the Red cameras, give me hope that we can really make video which looks like really good film now - and for "cheap." And with control of depth of field, and with still grabs which rival current dslr and MF back image quality for prints, WOW.
I have often thought, I could really relax in a shoot if I didn't have to constantly be deciding when to fire the shutter. To be able to direct the models/actors and know that every instant is being captured and I can choose from them later - well that makes things a whole lot less stressful, IMO.]
If this is the future of photography, shooting high res video with a camcorder and sorting through a few hundred thousand frames to find a few good frames for stills, I am turning to a paintbrush and learning how to paint.
-
Shoot your video, then shoot stills with the same camera . . .
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=204255\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Hello again,
That is coming sooner than you think--
Tim is correct re the rolling shutter but is being corrected, also you cannot shoot OFF the Tripod with
the existing HD-- the supplied CF card allows only 4 mins of shoot time--and they are proprietary
CF's so you just cannot pop in a 16GB San/Lex /etc.
I shall be back in Vegas in 4 weeks and will report more on developments.
DesW
-
Like James metioned, if only the db makers would funktion like RED.
We would see some realy great products out here.
Tim
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=204243\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Hi Tim,
Great to see a fellow "REDDY"-- participating on LL!!
This company is going to shake the foundations of the hardware Market as we know it today!
Incidentally I just attended a Demo from Colin of Hasseblad EURO and he said Phase are putting off staff??
Go figure
Mind they do not have a cashed up 600MUSD Float behind them--Ha!
Best,
DesW
-
James, TMARK, 203, Tim, DesW, et. al. THANK YOU ALL for this very interesting discussion.
-
Hey TMARK, assuming the image quality is there, why do you think grabs are stupid? Just curious. (I am talking about shooting something like it was for stills, but with video instead. There would be no chance of missing a facial expression or the perfect gesture...)
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=204260\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I think that shooting stills has a different psychological effect on subject and shooter that allows something deeper than a motion shoot. Its a different pace. I also like shooting with strobes, or at least the option to use strobes.
By the way, did you know that Red is offering a 100% credit of the purchase price of the Red 1 if you trade up to the upcoming Red Epic? This is revolutionary!
-
I think that shooting stills has a different psychological effect on subject and shooter that allows something deeper than a motion shoot. Its a different pace. I also like shooting with strobes, or at least the option to use strobes.
By the way, did you know that Red is offering a 100% credit of the purchase price of the Red 1 if you trade up to the upcoming Red Epic? This is revolutionary!
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=204271\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I found a recent video shoot i did with a model to be very intimate in feel - not removed as you suggest...but I was hand holding the camera and very close to the model, maybe that helped.
And speaking of price, does anyone know why the Panasonic P2 or whatever it's called is so expensive in the first place? I mean, a video camera for $250K??
-
James, TMARK, 203, Tim, DesW, et. al. THANK YOU ALL for this very interesting discussion.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=204270\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
My pleasure.
-
I found a recent video shoot i did with a model to be very intimate in feel - not removed as you suggest...but I was hand holding the camera and very close to the model, maybe that helped.
And speaking of price, does anyone know why the Panasonic P2 or whatever it's called is so expensive in the first place? I mean, a video camera for $250K??
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=204273\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
It might just be me and my IATSE approach to film production. I think that a still should have all the exposition built into the one frame, which is why I find most fashion stories to be so weak: they don't tell a story really, just a series of beautiful photographs with a goofy theme. They used to call this a "portfolio" of images. There was no pretension of narrative. In any case, I think its hard, for me anyway, to pull a frame from a film/video that stands on its own. Film/video relies on scenes, over the shoulders, eye levels, editing, a series of looks that to tell a story. Film/video shoots are also much more structured than most still shoots. I've always run my shoots more like film shoots, but when it comes to shooting stills you can pop off the QR plate and go with the flow. Not so much with video. It ends up looking sloppy if its not really well structured.
What sucks to a degree is that I havn't used FCP since FCP 2 came out. Now they are on FCP 6!
The P2: The EX1 has better IQ. Is it really $250k? A full Red 1 set up is about $70k.
-
This is seriously exciting. After looking at output from the current 1080 cameras, and finding them too sharp and not quite right looking, the new Sonys and of course the Red cameras, give me hope that we can really make video which looks like really good film now - and for "cheap." And with control of depth of field, and with still grabs which rival current dslr and MF back image quality for prints, WOW.
I have often thought, I could really relax in a shoot if I didn't have to constantly be deciding when to fire the shutter. To be able to direct the models/actors and know that every instant is being captured and I can choose from them later - well that makes things a whole lot less stressful, IMO.]
If this is the future of photography, shooting high res video with a camcorder and sorting through a few hundred thousand frames to find a few good frames for stills, I am turning to a paintbrush and learning how to paint.
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a] (http://index.php?act=findpost&pid=204264\")
There are a few ways to approach all of this.
For moving imagery, the red gives just about everyone the chance to use a cinema camera that equals the quality of 35mm film. That's the traiditonal view and I'm sure a lot of indies, documentaries and demo reels will be shot with this camera.
Then there is the thought that this may replace still photography, which in some instances maybe, like sports, journalism or action type of lifestyle, but overall in traditional media there will still be a need for dedicated still shoots.
That's if traditional media stays traditional and I don't think that is the case. In fact I think sooner than later we will see more convergence between computer, print and television and more convergence between dedicated still shoots and moving imagery shoots. (Forget the term broadcast because with web, cable and satallite transmission there isn't that much broadcast anymore).
I also think we will see advertising and editorial display that is a combination of still and moving imagery and a lot of what's coming probably hasn't been invented yet.
None of this means that it doesn't take talent, study and hard work to produce something worthwhile and none of this means that there isn't a roll in this for anyone willing to invest.
It's up to us to embrace it, or reject it, but don't think somebody won't take it to levels most of us can't imagine.
Regardless of the medium, camera or technique, it will still take talent and creative thought.
[a href=\"http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4N3N1MlvVc4&feature=related]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4N3N1MlvVc4...feature=related[/url]
JR
-
Well this has been a interesting read as far as seeing what maybe coming down the road and very well may happen that it all turns to video. I think I will hang up my camera straps first though. I have been a still shooter for 35 years and everything i shoot is a moment in time, a slice of a fleeting moment and all that stuff. Not sure i can turn on a button and just let it roll at this point and than go pick a frame and say that is it. It just loses my interest a lot. As a still shooter does it not feel like your cheating somewhat. I don't know maybe i am so ingrained into this for all these years i can't see me changing the very core of why i am a shooter. Going from film to digital was more a moment of progress that did not take the core of shooting away as we know it. But going from bang and bang to whirl than cut just seems to take the core of a a still shooter out of his element. At 51 just not sure i can make this shift. Of course we all need to eat and if you force it down my throat than I will have to swallow but it just rubs me the wrong way. Just a thought
-
Well this has been a interesting read as far as seeing what maybe coming down the road and very well may happen that it all turns to video. I think I will hang up my camera straps first though. I have been a still shooter for 35 years and everything i shoot is a moment in time, a slice of a fleeting moment and all that stuff. Not sure i can turn on a button and just let it roll at this point and than go pick a frame and say that is it. It just loses my interest a lot. As a still shooter does it not feel like your cheating somewhat. I don't know maybe i am so ingrained into this for all these years i can't see me changing the very core of why i am a shooter. Going from film to digital was more a moment of progress that did not take the core of shooting away as we know it. But going from bang and bang to whirl than cut just seems to take the core of a a still shooter out of his element. At 51 just not sure i can make this shift. Of course we all need to eat and if you force it down my throat than I will have to swallow but it just rubs me the wrong way. Just a thought
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=204279\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I'm not trying to make light of your statement because obviously you mean this with conviction, but to take it a step further I guess we could go back to the days when photographers put the subjects in head braces and shot 4 minutes exposures.
There is always something from the past that people have mastered and don't want to give up, but everything changes.
I you shoot beautiful stills people will hire you for that, beautiful film(moving images) they'll hire you for that and if you do both, well you might get hired for both.
This camera doesn't mean that your clients will come into your studio with a demand that you do both and regardless of how fast you shoot or at what frame rate it still takes talent.
I somewhat don't understand the I'm a still photograher and nothing else mindset, but I've been going against the system of being catagorized my whole career so I'm probably not the standard art/business model anyone shoud base their decisions on.
In fact a friend of mine said last night he has a difficult time explaing what I do and that made me smile, in fact it made me proud.
Personally, I embraced digital photograpy because it liberated me. With some investment and knowledge I could be my own lab, my own printer and do it with immediacy, at a cost that just impossibile in the film only days.
I see the Red in the same manner. $50k to $70k and you have a cinema package, another 4k and a compelte editing setup. It was just unheard of a few years ago.
Personally I like change and have incorporated it into my business model and I really believe you can be anything you set your mind to.
JR
-
My pleasure.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=204274\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Ditto from Moi
DesW
-
I think I will hang up my camera straps first though. I have been a still shooter for 35 years and everything i shoot is a moment in time, a slice of a fleeting moment and all that stuff.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=204279\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I guess I am not sure that there is such a big difference between the two all of the time.
As I was coming at if from a fashion photographers mindset, much of the hasty video I made looks like it could be stills. I shot a video of a model two years ago, using a rented Sony camera (I think), a 1DII at 6 or 8 fps, and a point and shoot digital camera with video, just so I could see the differences if format. The video edited turned out nicely.
Anyway, here is a still. I think it works fine as a still. Of course if I had been telling a proper narrative with over the shoulders and stuff it may have made for some very goofy stills.
-
I guess I am not sure that there is such a big difference between the two all of the time.
As I was coming at if from a fashion photographers mindset, much of the hasty video I made looks like it could be stills. I shot a video of a model two years ago, using a rented Sony camera (I think), a 1DII at 6 or 8 fps, and a point and shoot digital camera with video, just so I could see the differences if format. The video edited turned out nicely.
Anyway, here is a still. I think it works fine as a still. Of course if I had been telling a proper narrative with over the shoulders and stuff it may have made for some very goofy stills.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=204313\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Well it is hard to describe what I was saying and not to take away from all that is written here and maybe a new thread is warranted. But simply put I guess it comes down to the decisive moment that seems to get a little lost with video. Instead of shooting for it you are just trying to find it. That feeling of, Oh i just nailed it seems to maybe get lost a little. For me it would certainly be a change of direction good , bad or indifferent. Continue on
-
As has been said already, only landscapers really need more pixels.
The problem is that the perception is more pixels equals better pics. This forum is riddled with pixel peepers and it reflects the market as a whole. Sad, but true.
My 39Mp MS is more than enough. I spend hours (and I mean HOURS!) in front of the computer handling these files. Burning DVDs at 20 files per DVD (15-20 minutes) is a royal pain. Right now I'm burning 22 DVDs from a four day shoot. The REAL downside of digital photography.
What I DO need are some TSE lenses. If Hassie produced the functional and optical equivalent of Canon's 90mm TSE (the best lens I've ever owned) I'd remortgage my house to buy it if I had to.
A TSE version of the fab 120mm macro would be wonderful.
D.
-
I'm burning 22 DVDs from a four day shoot. The REAL downside of digital photography.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=204323\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Eh? What's wrong with buying a hard drive? They're cheap, faster, more reliable, etc., etc., etc. $85 for 320GB, $130 for 500GB, $220 for a Terabyte...
Are you giving a client a stack of 22 DVDs? Do them a favor, buy them a $85 Maxtor and give it to them with the images on it.
-
As has been said already, only landscapers really need more pixels.
The problem is that the perception is more pixels equals better pics. This forum is riddled with pixel peepers and it reflects the market as a whole. Sad, but true.
My 39Mp MS is more than enough. I spend hours (and I mean HOURS!) in front of the computer handling these files. Burning DVDs at 20 files per DVD (15-20 minutes) is a royal pain. Right now I'm burning 22 DVDs from a four day shoot. The REAL downside of digital photography.
What I DO need are some TSE lenses. If Hassie produced the functional and optical equivalent of Canon's 90mm TSE (the best lens I've ever owned) I'd remortgage my house to buy it if I had to.
A TSE version of the fab 120mm macro would be wonderful.
D.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=204323\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
That's the thng with stills in someways it's all sideways. Rather than have interchangable backs/bodies, why not have interchangeable lens mounts?
JR.
-
I would expect the single frame from Red and Sony EX1 & EX3 to good enough for use on the Internet, but are you folks saying it is or will be soon good enough for printing full-page in magazines, and in-store poster-size duratrans display?
Billy
-
Tim this can become a very interesting discussion and I think it deserves a new thread.
You are cleverly separating the technical side from the art etc. but I think that these two sides will have to work together as they will for sure affect one another.
I have spent the last 5 days on a big production set where they are filming a new ad campaign, all shot on an ArriMax 35mm. This is a fairly new ground for me and I'm learning something new every day.
However there's an AFi7 there that is located next to the Arri and that is used for capturing as many images as possible during each take, that involves with allot of special effects and difficult lighting conditions, meaning mostly wide open at 400iso
Each take is about 40 seconds and at the moment it looks like the AFi7 is the only capturing device that can produce a minimum of 30 usable frames (usable as in sharp) over 40 seconds sessions and that can be edited/ picked into high quality inkjet posters. No other system would have given us a decent amount of 95MB frames to work from.
This could be where a future RED will be able to do both, but I have doubts as to the usability and the image quality/ size of the images, assuming that stills technology is also going to move forward.
The same AFi7 camera is also used for capturing high-speed motion (think explosions) at 1/500-1/1000 with flash. I cannot see how a 1/100 camera at 5K can achieve this.
Yair
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=203547\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I guess this could be moved to the video section, but when you think about it, this is the most professional of all the areas, so a discussion of high rez digital cinema and high rez still photography belongs here.
I find it interesting that most people view photographers as this one artist that wakes up and goes into the the studio or location, the assistant hands him/her a fabulous medium format camera, the photographer takes a few snaps, drinks an espresso and then goes to the wrap party.
I don't even think that a lot of the camera companies understand who a lot of their market is.
Most photographers are small independent producers. We and our staff search out locations, negotiate talent, cut permits, work budgets, handle payroll, arrange for travel, etc. etc. to the point that the only real difference between what we do vs. what a movie production house does is we wear more hats and cross more territory, usually because our budgets don't always allow for one person per skill set thinking.
Given this, our equipment purchases also have to move us forward. It's fun to buy a new camera, but today buying a new camera isn't something that's probably going to be useable for 10 years, so we have to be wise in where we put our resources.
From my perspective, owning a p21+, P30+ and Contax, what do I really gain by going to a new still system and spending an additional 20, 30 or 40 thousand?
Now wearing my independent producer hat what do I gain from buying something like the Red for the same cash outlay?
Obviously from a still camera makers standpoint you want to see a market where everyone can afford a new 95mb file high rez digital camera every two years and still have the money and time left over to pursue other areas, but for most that's not the case.
In my industry we are always marketing, though the web, print, editorial and we are always driving and pushing our art looking for that edge to get noticed or continue the buzz.
I know for a fact that offering moving imagery in parallel with our still productions has moved us forward and I also know a lot of photographers that would scream to the heavens is someone even suggested they shoot video during a still session.
In a way I hope they keep that mindset, at least the ones I bid against.
My point is not all photographers have the same busienss model, in fact of the successful photographers I know, when you scratch below the surface you will find that the ones that work non traditional are the most successful.
JR
P.S. Yair, now to take this one step further, if at photokina somebody annouces a still camera that will shoot very high frame rates, has a detailed 7" lcd that works in daylight, interchangeable lens mounts, really clean 800 iso, variable frame crops, color and tone (film like) processing in camera, useable in camera previews, wired or wireless tetheering to hand held devices, then you will get my attention.
-
Rather than have interchangable backs, why not have interchangeable lens mounts?
JR.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=204328\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Different photographers have different needs. For instance, I'm a still life guy, I guess I need backs that mount on my view cameras, detachable backs.
Just to defend my own corner, there is still a call for photographers who can and know how to use view cameras with all their movements which are essential for controlling shape, perspective, focal plane placement, depth of field, etc, the very substance of still life photography.
I'm afraid that software correction (a la Hasselblad) just won't do, and anyone who thinks so needs to go back to (photography) school and learn the boring bits that no-one wants to know, for instance, there are still a few photographers alive who know and need to use the "Scheimpflug principle" every day of their working lives. I'm sure I' not alone. A tilt and shift lens may help, but I would be compromising, I need movements front and rear, so a medium format camera/back/lens fixed unit is no good to me unless it can do good front and rear movements.
I'm fine with files of around 100 MB, (not 100 megapixels, my god!) but I want the extra little quality in colour fidelity and edge integrity that you get with four-shot backs incorporated into a one-shot back, maybe a bit like the Foveon system, three chips, one per colour channel or maybe a single chip with three times the amount of pixels and clever electronics that divert each colour to their respective pixel...or whatever other technique that gives me the quality without having to 'guess' by interpolation.
I also want top quality at high ISO, (a gain of four stops over what I use currently, 50 ISO) so that I can ditch flash and work more regularly with my Dado lights, (lights that are mainly used for cinema or video but I love using them on stills, they are so cute) with shorter shutter speeds.
I also want a lens design that is optimised to work best and sharpest at apertures of f22 to f32, not like the current Digitar lenses that start to go furry at f16.
Lastly, I would like to have beautifully clear and sharp (and colour) Live View on big screens (wirelessly) with good refreshing rates.
If the Red, or any manufacturers, could offer all this, I would go for it instantly and pay whatever money it costs (within reason!).
Edward
-
...I spend hours (and I mean HOURS!) in front of the computer handling these files. Burning DVDs at 20 files per DVD (15-20 minutes) is a royal pain. Right now I'm burning 22 DVDs from a four day shoot. The REAL downside of digital photography.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=204323\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Wha? DVD's? Man, hard drives are more reliable, less expensive, easier to deal with and faster to write and read from.
I would abandon ship on the burning of optical discs. It just isn't worth it. Especially for the larger files that originate from medium format digital backs.
It is crazy. It is crazy like 1996 crazy.
-
deleted
-
Re: video recording vs stills photography.
Oh yes, there is that kind of photography that is as empty as empty can be. And there are also those videos. The world is drowning in them. It's just noise. Video cameras will probably be great to create more of this noise, be it as "stills" or as "films". Does anybody here care to discuss this junk imagery? Ah, it's about business? In the sense of "making money"? Big Money? How interesting!
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=204363\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Yes, let's all starve. We might get hungry, but at least we'll have artistic integrity.
Get out of my office.
-
Re: video recording vs stills photography.
Moving film tells its story by showing a series of individual moments placed in a certain order in time. The series adds up in the head of the spectator to a developing experience.
Stills photography condenses a story over time into one frame. The spectator has to "edit" the different aspects of this one frame into an understandable message.
These differences inherently dictate that video will never give you the one still frame that you are looking for. And stills photography will never tell an interesting story when edited to a series of images, assuming that each frame does not tell a story in itself. Usually videos made by photographers are easy to determine because they are just a series of moving photographs. (James posted a few very telling samples in this respect. Totally boring from a cinematic point of view.) And most movie cameramen who handle a stills camera lack to charge the individual images with some interesting narrative.
Oh yes, there is that kind of photography that is as empty as empty can be. And there are also those videos. The world is drowning in them. It's just noise. Video cameras will probably be great to create more of this noise, be it as "stills" or as "films". Does anybody here care to discuss this junk imagery? Ah, it's about business? In the sense of "making money"? Big Money? How interesting!
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=204363\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Do you know the movie "Eraserhead" by David Lynch?
I think that was one of those amazing pieces of art that very few people appreciate. Not because being a great movie production for the masses. But for it's significance. Because how a very talented eye through different techniques can touch you very deep. And the the creative process can make you feel very uncomfortable and "art" isn't always a concept attached to beauty.
/Samuel
-
Thanks guys for this very interesting thread. LL is at it's best at the moment.
As James mentioned, as a photographer, director and dp I wear many hats at the same time.
Here in Switzerland its easier to be multi talented to earn enough money to live a good life.
In the last year I was almost torn apart by the question of giving up one of my professions.
Film or photography. In order to become top notch in one field. I was thinking about the hassy like crazy. At the same time I had my RED on order. Now that the RED is here I changed my mind a bit. The RED is so much power for little money that the Hassy seems to be way overpriced.
More and more I think that it's ok to work in multiple fields. A photographer has always been a director and a DP is a photographer. And when you're good at that stuff, you always tell storys, so there goes the director.
I think film and photography have always been in love with each other.
It seems that multi talented people could have it a bit easier in the next years, when photography and film will start to merge.
I dont think that we will just shoot video and at the end of the day we will browse through millions of stills. We still would shoot filmstyle and then change to photostyle. But the change could be very fast. Very fluent and with just one camera.
Again, dont be afraid of the new stuff. Embrace it and get creative again.
Ok I'm 34 now, so it's easy for me to say that. But I'm sure when I turn 50 I will also have to learn totaly new stuff to stay in business or I will have it harder to be competitive.
That's life. It has always been that way. Why should it stop at photography?
So let's take it easy. Remember, we all have the best job in the world. We get paid to create great pictures. But dont tell anybody.
Tim
-
They had better also announce all new glass. Who wants to see another 30MP of fuzz.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=203084\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
The same pixel size as in current Kodak 39MP sensors would give about 52MP in full 645 format, so this rumor does not sound like much of an increase in sensor resolution (pixel density).
Still I do not particularly trust the rumor: given comments from Kodak a few years ago, I imagine instead Kodak going to about 60MP in its current roughly 48x36 format, using the 5.4 micron cell size of its 8MP 4/3 format Full Frame type CCDs. Then sensor resolution (l/mm) would increase, but still only by about 25%.
Even then, pixel spacing would still be no smaller than in current 12MP "APS-C" DSLR's or 8MP 4/3 DLSRs, and decent moderately priced zoom lenses for those formats have no major resolution problems with those sensors. Are some people suggesting that expensive MF prime lenses are so much worse for resolution in l/mm than many far less expensive zoom lenses for smaller formats? That sounds almost like heresy against "bigger is better" dogma.
-
they are. (they = people..lenses).
Edmund
Are some people suggesting that expensive MF prime lenses are so much worse for resolution in l/mm than many far less expensive zoom lenses for smaller formats? That sounds almost like heresy against "bigger is better" dogma.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=204515\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
-
Don't worry, I'll never set foot in your office. Or is this it?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=204393\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
It's just an expression.
like don't have a cow.
(see what I did there?)
I just wanted to make sure you didn't take my reply as a strong personal critisism by adding a touch of humor. Judging from your reply, it worked.
regards,
Mike