Luminous Landscape Forum
Equipment & Techniques => Medium Format / Film / Digital Backs – and Large Sensor Photography => Topic started by: Jann Lipka on November 01, 2008, 07:32:22 am
-
Any chance some new backs will have usable Live View ?
I would love this feature like it works on 1DSMK3 with zoom in 10 times for focus check .
Anything similar - hopefully on the backs LCD - without tethering ?
I know my P45+ has Live View but it is totally unusable from my experience ...
-
Any chance some new backs will have usable Live View ?
I would love this feature like it works on 1DSMK3 with zoom in 10 times for focus check .
Anything similar - hopefully on the backs LCD - without tethering ?
I know my P45+ has Live View but it is totally unusable from my experience ...
For un-tethered Live View we will all have to change to either interline CCD (used in P&S) or CMOS chip technologies.
We expect the AFi-II 10 and the Aptus-II 10 to provide an improvement over the already-not-bad tethered Live View that we have on the Aptus-II 6/7 and AFi 6/7 products.
Yair
-
Hi Jann,
Having a live view on the back of an MFDB camera is very difficult due to the architecture of the CCD. It would require a lot of electronics to do it and would probably mean running the battery flat in no time! CMOS sensors would be a different story.
However in Phocus we do have a very nice Live Video function now.
It is completely triggered by the software (ie mirror goes up, shutter opens) and requires you to make no changes to the camera - ie set required aperture or enter B mode for example.
Once in Live Video you can adjust the focus remotely (through the camera control dialogue in the software) with three levels of 'throw' ie Large Adjustment, Medium and Micro. This a 100% view and you can see the whole scene as well.
The output looks like my attachments. The graph below relates to the 'doughnut' in the centre of the screen. The higher the graph the better the Focus. This doughnut can be positioned anywhere on the Live Video view.
You can also bring in a grid, change the number of lines and its X,Y position. (Offset)
Best,
David
-
same feedback as my colleagues from my side: unless there is a change in the type of sensor or technology, the current digital backs do not allow for any live video on the display of the back and untethered.
And same as the others, Sinar proposes the live video function tethered, with focus adjustment at the pixel level at 100%, based on contrast differences.
Best regards,
Thierry
-
OK then. How about creating a live view app that can work in Windows Mobile. That way any windows mobile device can be used. For example, any WM7 PDA or phone can be used and with the current trend toward high resulution VGA screens would be very usable.
I could put any of you in touch with an old highschool friend who heads up Microsoft's interoperability teams
Of course I would need a free 50+ mp back to be a beta tester
-
OK then. How about creating a live view app that can work in Windows Mobile. That way any windows mobile device can be used. For example, any WM7 PDA or phone can be used and with the current trend toward high resulution VGA screens would be very usable.
I could put any of you in touch with an old highschool friend who heads up Microsoft's interoperability teams
Of course I would need a free 50+ mp back to be a beta tester
Would that friend of yours be also able to supply a 50+ MP CMOS or Interline CCD sensor?
Jokes aside, we plan to enable Live View as one of the features of the coming Leaf Remote app for the iPhone/ iPod Touch.
Yair
-
Would that friend of yours be also able to supply a 50+ MP CMOS or Interline CCD sensor?
Jokes aside, we plan to enable Live View as one of the features of the coming Leaf Remote app for the iPhone/ iPod Touch.
Yair
Don't you still need to be tethered to a laptop with your approach? The need is for liveview in the field. The ability to tether straight to a iPod Touch or Windows Mobile device would meet that need (small and could be clipped to the tripod).
Why would you need to change the sensor or architecture to build a WM7 app. It would run on the WM PDA and funtion as a tethering device. With many WM devices having decent size RAM it should not be too difficult. That would allow you to use the WM device as the tethered computer with very limited functionality. It should be purely a software fix since the back is already capable of communicating with a VISTA based application.
My company builds applets for the medical field to utilize WM devices to communicate with Medical Equipment. All you need is the device communication protocols, RAM and some good programmers. We often meet with a company, they give us a copy of the protocols and while we discuss a partnership a couple of our developers develop a quick app to show how easy it is to hook into the device to control it before the meeting is even over (useally 1 to 2 hours). We have not failed on this yet.
-
Not meaning to tweak anyone's nose with my previous post but I get a little surprised at some of the responses I see when it comes to why some features are not implemented in MFD backs. It is one thing to not do it until demand is proven to offset development costs but another to say it would require changes in architecture when the back essentially does it now via an existing app. That means the capability is there and can be replicated in some limited form in a more limited application environment (like WM7).
With the potential for Canon and Nikon entering the MFD market in the future innovation will be a key to any MFD manufacturer's survival. MFD will become less specialized and targeted more toward a generic product like current canon and Nikon. However, the result will be highly capable cameras with sophisticated software. My personal opinion is the MFD market has some wonderfully designed hardware (bodies and backs) with some very poor software development. Current software is designed for a studio environment only where market growth will come from non-studio based purchasers. Future survivors ten years from now will have to cater to both environments.
Sorry for my rant. I just see a lot of potential in the growth of the MFD market but no one really innovating except for the pixel increases which is sucking up all your development resources and preventing true innovation. I am an amateur photographer but the amateur market is what drives growth. Somehow there needs to be products catering to both professional and amateurs. Canon does this by building low cost bodies to try new features/innovations, perfecting them, then building them into their more rugged 1d series bodies geared toward the high-end market.
I am sure I will get flamed on this but I am in the process of deciding which MFD system to purchase and would like to see the market truly survive and flourish.
-
Not meaning to tweak anyone's nose with my previous post but I get a little surprised at some of the responses I see when it comes to why some features are not implemented in MFD backs. It is one thing to not do it until demand is proven to offset development costs but another to say it would require changes in architecture when the back essentially does it now via an existing app. That means the capability is there and can be replicated in some limited form in a more limited application environment (like WM7).
With the potential for Canon and Nikon entering the MFD market in the future innovation will be a key to any MFD manufacturer's survival. MFD will become less specialized and targeted more toward a generic product like current canon and Nikon. However, the result will be highly capable cameras with sophisticated software. My personal opinion is the MFD market has some wonderfully designed hardware (bodies and backs) with some very poor software development. Current software is designed for a studio environment only where market growth will come from non-studio based purchasers. Future survivors ten years from now will have to cater to both environments.
Sorry for my rant. I just see a lot of potential in the growth of the MFD market but no one really innovating except for the pixel increases which is sucking up all your development resources and preventing true innovation. I am an amateur photographer but the amateur market is what drives growth. Somehow there needs to be products catering to both professional and amateurs. Canon does this by building low cost bodies to try new features/innovations, perfecting them, then building them into their more rugged 1d series bodies geared toward the high-end market.
I am sure I will get flamed on this but I am in the process of deciding which MFD system to purchase and would like to see the market truly survive and flourish.
You've got it in a nutshell Scott. If I was Phase, Hasselblad, Sinar or Leaf I'd employ you straight away.....
Pete
-
Not meaning to tweak anyone's nose with my previous post but I get a little surprised at some of the responses I see when it comes to why some features are not implemented in MFD backs. It is one thing to not do it until demand is proven to offset development costs but another to say it would require changes in architecture when the back essentially does it now via an existing app. That means the capability is there and can be replicated in some limited form in a more limited application environment (like WM7).
With the potential for Canon and Nikon entering the MFD market in the future innovation will be a key to any MFD manufacturer's survival. MFD will become less specialized and targeted more toward a generic product like current canon and Nikon. However, the result will be highly capable cameras with sophisticated software. My personal opinion is the MFD market has some wonderfully designed hardware (bodies and backs) with some very poor software development. Current software is designed for a studio environment only where market growth will come from non-studio based purchasers. Future survivors ten years from now will have to cater to both environments.
Sorry for my rant. I just see a lot of potential in the growth of the MFD market but no one really innovating except for the pixel increases which is sucking up all your development resources and preventing true innovation. I am an amateur photographer but the amateur market is what drives growth. Somehow there needs to be products catering to both professional and amateurs. Canon does this by building low cost bodies to try new features/innovations, perfecting them, then building them into their more rugged 1d series bodies geared toward the high-end market.
I am sure I will get flamed on this but I am in the process of deciding which MFD system to purchase and would like to see the market truly survive and flourish.
Hi Scott,
No there is no reason for you to get flamed. Your ideas and requests have definitely got a place.
We've had PocketPC based applications since 2002 (Win CE, WM 2003, WM 5 and WM 6) which initially required an RS232 cable connection and then Bluetooth 1.0 that replaced it (all of our backs have a Bluetooth module built in).
So writing the WM application is not the problem. However, with the current full-frame based CCDs (as opposed to Interline CCDs or CMOS sensors), in order to have Live View that will not require a connection to a laptop/ desktop computer, the WM device will have to carry some serious processing power and a FireWire 400/ 800 connection or in other words it will have to become a powerful little computer...
The two vendors of bigger-than-35mm sensors, Kodak and Dalsa, still use full frame technology for the design and manufacturing of these sensors. Once they (or anyone else) start implementing CMOS or Interline CCD technologies in making large chips that provide the same (or better) image quality as the current sensors, we will be able to utilise Live View in an on-board manner.
I hope this makes sense
Yair
-
I think everything will be fine as long there is no larger change. Phase , Leaf, Sinar and Hasi can go on as before until a larger Japanese company decided to push strong into the market. I still think the Leica S2 is a great concept but will fail, because it probably will cost to much. No if Canon or Nikon would push hard and deliver something like a MF camera with a lot of features they are offering in their 35mm range it will be hard for the current companies to keep up.
I mean really take Live view, it would be such a fantastic feature to have. I mean it works so nice with Canon and Nikon and there is no better way to focus on a tripod. I accept that it is perhaps not the easiest thing to do, but perhaps start thinking about investing resource money into more important thing than to think about how to get even more pixels into a sensor.
If I had a choice between a P85 or a Leaf 11 with 80 mp but still the crappy package around or a 40MP back with good ISO 1600, live view and other nice features I would immediately go for the second option. Does a Japanese company really has to show you first what the market wants ?
Sorry for the rant, but I have to admit what I saw so far from a P65 or Leaf 10 is just resolution with the same bad ISO performance and no really no promising features.
-
Yair,
Yes, it does make sense as a hardware limitation.
In the interim what is keeping MFD manufacturers from implmenting a tethered view of captured images through WM device instead of bluetooth or WiFi via a laptop (too speed restrictive and inconvenient)? Or even using a small bluetooth module to transmit. The requirement to have a laptop in the solution makes it undesireable in non studio or fixed location shooting. There is plenty of memory and processing power in existing WM units (thinking of the new HTC or HP devices) to allow this. This would solve the batter power restrictions everyone is claiming is the hurdle to improving MFD backs as the WM unit is self powered. This would take the "baby steps" approach and position you to be ready to add functionality down the road as hardware limitations are resolved. I just don't see any real innovation to postion MFD for growth. Pixel wars only address a small demand portion of the market.
-
Think of what will happen when Sony (who makes Nikon's chips) decides to move from their new 24mp chips into MFD. That would be a real game changer. I take the example of Intel. AMD started eating their lunch but Intel had vast $ resources and came charging back. This time it would be the opposite. The new players would have the vast R&D resources.
-
Not meaning to tweak anyone's nose with my previous post but I get a little surprised at some of the responses I see when it comes to why some features are not implemented in MFD backs. It is one thing to not do it until demand is proven to offset development costs but another to say it would require changes in architecture when the back essentially does it now via an existing app. That means the capability is there and can be replicated in some limited form in a more limited application environment (like WM7).
With the potential for Canon and Nikon entering the MFD market in the future innovation will be a key to any MFD manufacturer's survival. MFD will become less specialized and targeted more toward a generic product like current canon and Nikon. However, the result will be highly capable cameras with sophisticated software. My personal opinion is the MFD market has some wonderfully designed hardware (bodies and backs) with some very poor software development. Current software is designed for a studio environment only where market growth will come from non-studio based purchasers. Future survivors ten years from now will have to cater to both environments.
Sorry for my rant. I just see a lot of potential in the growth of the MFD market but no one really innovating except for the pixel increases which is sucking up all your development resources and preventing true innovation. I am an amateur photographer but the amateur market is what drives growth. Somehow there needs to be products catering to both professional and amateurs. Canon does this by building low cost bodies to try new features/innovations, perfecting them, then building them into their more rugged 1d series bodies geared toward the high-end market.
I am sure I will get flamed on this but I am in the process of deciding which MFD system to purchase and would like to see the market truly survive and flourish.
I always tell my friends that if any computer related company dipped their toes into another market they would revolutionize it.
Look at what Apple did to the cellphone market. I remember Nokia dissing Apple saying that no one wants a touch screen phone. Now look at the cellphone market. Seeing faster advances on the hardware and software sides.
-
Yair,
Yes, it does make sense as a hardware limitation.
In the interim what is keeping MFD manufacturers from implmenting a tethered view of captured images through WM device instead of bluetooth or WiFi via a laptop (too speed restrictive and inconvenient)? Or even using a small bluetooth module to transmit. The requirement to have a laptop in the solution makes it undesireable in non studio or fixed location shooting. There is plenty of memory and processing power in existing WM units (thinking of the new HTC or HP devices) to allow this. This would solve the batter power restrictions everyone is claiming is the hurdle to improving MFD backs as the WM unit is self powered. This would take the "baby steps" approach and position you to be ready to add functionality down the road as hardware limitations are resolved. I just don't see any real innovation to postion MFD for growth. Pixel wars only address a small demand portion of the market.
Scott, if I was not clear enough, The Leaf WiView PocketPC application does exactly that!
The PocketPC device is connected to the digital back via Bluetooth and is used for viewing and editing the images as well as controlling the back.
I've extracted the relevant pages out of the Leaf AFi user guide [attachment=9377:WiView_Leaf_AFi_UG.pdf]. It basically replicates the GUI that is on the back itself, but on a separate device. The RAW files are stored on the CF card while the previews are cached on the iPaq.
Yair
-
Yair,
I stand corrected. I saw this was announced quite a while back but was not aware it actually was released. Any collateral you can share on the system that shows processing/response time and the configuration? Also the price in $$ I did a search on your website and found a little info under the support but no spec sheets. Will it work in any WM device with a bluetooth 1.0 stack?
-
Yair,
I stand corrected. I saw this was announced quite a while back but was not aware it actually was released. Any collateral you can share on the system that shows processing/response time and the configuration? Also the price in $$ I did a search on your website and found a little info under the support but no spec sheets.
The first DP-67 version was released in 2002 and worked with the Valeo 6,11 and 22 via RS232 and was then updated to support Bluetooth with the Valeo 17Wi and the Valeo 22Wi.
For the Aptus, Aptus S, Aptus-II and AFi/ AFi-II we released the Leaf WiView app (about 2 years ago IIRC). It is free (comes with the back and downloadable from our website) and runs on most recent HP iPaqs. The spec and models supported are in the WiView installation guide (http://www.leaf-photography.com/imgs/uploads/user%20guides/leafwiview_103_installation.pdf). The capture-to-preview time is about 4 seconds depending on the iPaq model.
With the iPhone taking a bigger chunk of the mobile/ PDA market and it being "the coolest professional tool" (raise hands any photographer here that doesn't own one!), we recognise its future potential as a platform and work closely with Apple to develop our app's capabilities further.
[attachment=9382:LC_remote.jpg]
(this was done using the iPhone's simulator which is part of its SDK. What you are seeing is a raw file and it being zoomed into 1:1)
Yair
-
I like the iphone future product. Any estimates on release dates? Will it have a faster download time?
Thanks Yair
-
At this point I might jump in and say that at this point we believe we will have a P65+ with Live View frame rates several times faster than the current P+ series backs. However it's still in development and until (as was said in another post) the rubber meets the road I won't promise anything. We will see soon enough.
That said, while I do not make apologies for the current P+ Live View I would note that with proper training on it (especially the proper usage of the built in light meter) that most photographers can get far more out of it than they initially did. Given your brief comments about the P45+ LiveView I suspect this would be the case for you (that you would think more highly of it with some training). For anything outside it takes extreme care and knowledge to be usable. However, for tabletop work I can say from personal experience it is very practical and useful.
Doug Peterson, Head of Technical Services
Capture Integration, Phase One Dealer (http://www.captureintegration.com) | Personal Portfolio (http://www.doug-peterson.com)
-
Hello Yair!
I asked this a couple of days ago in the LEAF User Forum but never got any reply. Maybe you could help me.
at the moment i'am using a HP iPaq (WiView, bluetooth) to check my shots in the field. I have not the benefit of using a macbook for terthered shooting
For the new AFI/Aptus2 there is an advertise on the Leaf Homepage of the use of an iphone or ipod-touch for remot image viewing when shooting tethered.
Is this done with the WiView software or a new one ?
My questions:
- Is this only possible when i shoot tethered with a mbp: Aptus -> tethered -> mbp -> wifi -> iphone/ipod-touch ?
- If not, do the iphone/ipod-touch do the same job my iPaq does at the moment: Aptus -> bluetooth -> iphone/ipod-touch ?
- can my aptus22 handle this too ?
Glad to hear from you!
Michael!
-
Hello Yair!
I asked this a couple of days ago in the LEAF User Forum but never got any reply. Maybe you could help me.
at the moment i'am using a HP iPaq (WiView, bluetooth) to check my shots in the field. I have not the benefit of using a macbook for terthered shooting
For the new AFI/Aptus2 there is an advertise on the Leaf Homepage of the use of an iphone or ipod-touch for remot image viewing when shooting tethered.
Is this done with the WiView software or a new one ?
My questions:
- Is this only possible when i shoot tethered with a mbp: Aptus -> tethered -> mbp -> wifi -> iphone/ipod-touch ?
- If not, do the iphone/ipod-touch do the same job my iPaq does at the moment: Aptus -> bluetooth -> iphone/ipod-touch ?
- can my aptus22 handle this too ?
Glad to hear from you!
Michael!
Hello Michael,
The iPhone/ iPod touch is connected to the computer via local WiFi or the internet (if your client sits in a meeting away from where you're shooting for example) and watches the folder that is set as your shots folder in Leaf Capture 11. This means that you don't necessarily have to be shooting or connected to the Leaf digital back or even have Leaf Capture running.
At the moment, in order to view the images as they are being shot, you have to be tethered (this works with any FireWire based back BTW). The Mac is doing all the processing and the images come up properly rendered, colour managed etc. The reason for this is that the Bluetooth on the iPhone is fairly basic and only works with devices such as ear sets and handsfree kits.
This project is still under development and we're looking to go into beta (public beta) in late December so we can collect as much feedback as possible. The application will be available for download from the iTunes store once it's ready for testing (as this is the only way to load new applications to the iPhone).
So for the time-being the Leaf WiView via Bluetooth is your solution.
I hope this helps
Yair
-
Thanks Yair!
This clears something up!
At the moment, in order to view the images as they are being shot, you have to be tethered (this works with any FireWire based back BTW). The Mac is doing all the processing and the images come up properly rendered, colour managed etc. The reason for this is that the Bluetooth on the iPhone is fairly basic and only works with devices such as ear sets and handsfree kits
I did know what LiveView is only available when shooting tethered with Mac
But will the iphone/ipod-touch be able (or is there the possibility) to receive the already captures shot via bluetooth to check it afterwards (zoom, gray balance, ... ) ? Like the way the iPaq's work for now. Or is the iphone/touch bluetooth bandwith lower than the iPaq's and thus dont work for this application?
Michael
-
I did know what LiveView is only available when shooting tethered with Mac
But will the iphone/ipod-touch be able (or is there the possibility) to receive the already captures shot via bluetooth to check it afterwards (zoom, gray balance, ... ) ? Like the way the iPaq's work for now. Or is the iphone/touch bluetooth bandwith lower than the iPaq's and thus dont work for this application?
The iPhone/iPod touch's Bluetooth cannot be used for general applications, just for earphones and accessories. Apple has chosen to limit it. They will need to be used with WiFi, which no back has built in to my knowledge, so there is a workflow issue no matter what you do.
-
The iPhone/iPod touch's Bluetooth cannot be used for general applications, just for earphones and accessories. Apple has chosen to limit it. They will need to be used with WiFi, which no back has built in to my knowledge, so there is a workflow issue no matter what you do.
Thanks carstenw!
Too bad - so i have to continue using my iPaq for that matter
-
Thanks carstenw!
Too bad - so i have to continue using my iPaq for that matter
Does anybody know how much it will cost to upgrade a Phase "non Plus" back with the live view option?
-
Does anybody know how much it will cost to upgrade a Phase "non Plus" back with the live view option?
Ziocon,
Hello It depends on what back you have if you can get the live preview feature upgrade. The P21, P30 and P45 can be sent in to Phase One for live preview upgrade for $3,000. Any back can be upgrade to a plus system which has live preview. This pricing depends on what system you have and what you are upgrading to.
-
Any chance some new backs will have usable Live View ?
RED's MF cameras will offer killer Live View if and when they ship! Kodak is also offering to make CMOS sensors to order in sizes up to well beyond MF, so that might offer better LV --- but no-one seems to be choosing that Kodak option for a DMF back yet.