Luminous Landscape Forum
Equipment & Techniques => Medium Format / Film / Digital Backs – and Large Sensor Photography => Topic started by: henrikfoto on December 16, 2008, 09:54:54 am
-
Has anyone tested multishot-backs vs. modern scanning-backs like Betterlight?
Henrik
-
Has anyone tested multishot-backs vs. modern scanning-backs like Betterlight?
Henrik
Hi Henrik
Yes, I have tested both and nothing can beat the H3D-II 39 MS from Hasselblad.
In a still-life studio environment you can increase the color resolution of your captures by means of a unique multiple-exposure technique controlled by the optional 4*Res module on the H3D-II 39 MS. The result is maximum resolution and absolutely moiré free images. The H3D-II 39 MS comes with the 4*Res module already built in and is very easy to use.
-
Hi Henrik
Yes, I have tested both and nothing can beat the H3D-II 39 MS from Hasselblad.
In a still-life studio environment you can increase the color resolution of your captures by means of a unique multiple-exposure technique controlled by the optional 4*Res module on the H3D-II 39 MS. The result is maximum resolution and absolutely moiré free images. The H3D-II 39 MS comes with the 4*Res module already built in and is very easy to use.
Thank you. That is very interesting. Do you think the Hasselblad MS is even better than the 16 shots made before by Sinar and Imacon?
Henrik
-
Dear O., Dear Henrik,
Not to be forgotten, the Sinarbacks multishot models have this possibility too, with the same quality and true colour information, without interpolation:
- The Sinarback 54 H is a 1-, 4- and 16-shot back, with a 22 MPx sensor. Using it with the 16-shot mode increases the (true) resolution by the factor 4 and gives a resolution of 88,8 MPx
- The Sinarback eVolution 75 H is a 1- and 4-shot back, with a 33 MPx sensor
In fact, most National Museums, Art Galleries, Libraries, etc ... have changed to the multishot technology years ago already. If you wish Henrik, I can PM you a reference list of some of them using it, possibly in your country.
Best regards,
Thierry
Hi Henrik
Yes, I have tested both and nothing can beat the H3D-II 39 MS from Hasselblad.
In a still-life studio environment you can increase the color resolution of your captures by means of a unique multiple-exposure technique controlled by the optional 4*Res module on the H3D-II 39 MS. The result is maximum resolution and absolutely moiré free images. The H3D-II 39 MS comes with the 4*Res module already built in and is very easy to use.
-
Dear O., Dear Henrik,
Not to be forgotten, the Sinarbacks multishot models have this possibility too, with the same quality and true colour information, without interpolation:
- The Sinarback 54 H is a 1-, 4- and 16-shot back, with a 22 MPx sensor. Using it with the 16-shot mode increases the (true) resolution by the factor 4 and gives a resolution of 88,8 MPx
- The Sinarback eVolution 75 H is a 1- and 4-shot back, with a 33 MPx sensor
In fact, most National Museums, Art Galleries, Libraries, etc ... have changed to the multishot technology years ago already. If you wish Henrik, I can PM you a reference list of some of them using it, possibly in your country.
Best regards,
Thierry
Dear Thierry!
I would be happy to get a list from you.
I am also very interested in seeing some side-by-side shots with the 75H and the 54H in 16-shots mode.
Is that possible?
I am very interested in buying one of them.
My best
Henrik
-
Dear Henrik,
I will send you a reference list with some of them: which country are you interested in?
I unfortunately don't have side-by-side comparison files of these 2 multishot backs.
Best regards,
Thierry
Dear Thierry!
I would be happy to get a list from you.
I am also very interested in seeing some side-by-side shots with the 75H and the 54H in 16-shots mode.
Is that possible?
I am very interested in buying one of them.
My best
Henrik
-
Dear Henrik,
I will send you a reference list with some of them: which country are you interested in?
I unfortunately don't have side-by-side comparison files of these 2 multishot backs.
Best regards,
Thierry
Norway would be fine.
But I guess you have seen both backs in action. Can you tell me what back you think make the best files?
Is it still the 54H?
Henrik
-
Is the 54H still available today ???
PdF
-
Is the 54H still available today ???
PdF
It's not available new any longer, no. We have a used one for sale, and likely some others coming. Contact me via private message for more details if you wish.
-
Dear Philippe,
we have from time to time refurbished 54 H backs, but they are sold immediately and there is a waiting list for it.
Best regards,
thierry
Is the 54H still available today ???
PdF
-
Henrik,
Frankly, when comparing the 16 shot with the 54H and the 4 shot with the 75H, I couldn't tell the difference in terms of details. I have however the feeling that the 16 shot file has a better modulation and "smoother" tonal values, but again, I haven't seen it side-by-side and with the same subject shot with both backs.
However, one thing is sure and very critical with the 54 H in 16-shot mode: you need to use the digital HR lenses to get these ultimate details.
Best regards,
Thierry
Norway would be fine.
But I guess you have seen both backs in action. Can you tell me what back you think make the best files?
Is it still the 54H?
Henrik
-
Henrik,
Frankly, when comparing the 16 shot with the 54H and the 4 shot with the 75H, I couldn't tell the difference in terms of details. I have however the feeling that the 16 shot file has a better modulation and "smoother" tonal values, but again, I haven't seen it side-by-side and with the same subject shot with both backs.
However, one thing is sure and very critical with the 54 H in 16-shot mode: you need to use the digital HR lenses to get these ultimate details.
Best regards,
Thierry
although i got fantastic results with the old hassy 3,5/100 on my modified contax 645 as well in 16 shot mode. sure the HR lenses will resolve more, but the 16shot delivered much much more detail than the 4shots. and every moire was gone, not just the color moires. i am still a big fan of the 54h and i think sinar should follow the 4/16 shot path ....
-
Henrik,
As mentioned above, the multishot backs outperform the scanning backs. I use a Sinar 54H. The 4-shot results are outstanding with rich colors and no artifacting. When extreme detail or large prints are needed, the 16-shot capability is there. Taking 4-shot images is basically foolproof. On the other hand, the 16-shot mode requires much more careful technique and equipment. In 16-shot mode, the sensor is displaced by a half-pixel width (4.5 microns) in each direction to increase the resolution by a factor of 4 (2x in both horizontal and vertical dimensions). You must make sure that your sensor is calibrated and checked frequently (easy manual process), but most of all you must have no vibration in your studio. Even someone walking nearby in their bare feet during the 16-shot exposure can cause enough vibration to blur out the finest details.
Here is the basic math. The 4-shot mode with the Sinar 54H (9 micron pixels) has a maximum resolving power of about 55 lp/mm. With the 75H (7.2 micron pixels), it would be about 69 lp/mm. These are very decent resolving capabilities, and there are a variety of lenses that can reach these abilities into the corners. However, with 16-shot mode of the 54H, the maximum resolving power is now doubled to about 110 lp/mm. So, not only is careful technique and the control of vibration absolutely critical, but the choice of lenses is much narrowed in order to reach this kind of resolving power into the corners.
So, 16-shot backs like the Sinar 54H offer the highest resolution for fixed position camera shooting (ie, non-stitching), but can be a PITA to get it right. The market for those who are willing to do 16-shot commercially was too small, so these backs were suspended from being manufactured. I use the term "suspended" as opposed to "discontinued", since one of the engineers at Jenoptik recently told me that they would gladly produce more 54H backs if the demand was there.
David
-
Henrik,
As mentioned above, the multishot backs outperform the scanning backs. I use a Sinar 54H. The 4-shot results are outstanding with rich colors and no artifacting. When extreme detail or large prints are needed, the 16-shot capability is there. Taking 4-shot images is basically foolproof. On the other hand, the 16-shot mode requires much more careful technique and equipment. In 16-shot mode, the sensor is displaced by a half-pixel width (4.5 microns) in each direction to increase the resolution by a factor of 4 (2x in both horizontal and vertical dimensions). You must make sure that your sensor is calibrated and checked frequently (easy manual process), but most of all you must have no vibration in your studio. Even someone walking nearby in their bare feet during the 16-shot exposure can cause enough vibration to blur out the finest details.
Here is the basic math. The 4-shot mode with the Sinar 54H (9 micron pixels) has a maximum resolving power of about 55 lp/mm. With the 75H (7.2 micron pixels), it would be about 69 lp/mm. These are very decent resolving capabilities, and there are a variety of lenses that can reach these abilities into the corners. However, with 16-shot mode of the 54H, the maximum resolving power is now doubled to about 110 lp/mm. So, not only is careful technique and the control of vibration absolutely critical, but the choice of lenses is much narrowed in order to reach this kind of resolving power into the corners.
So, 16-shot backs like the Sinar 54H offer the highest resolution for fixed position camera shooting (ie, non-stitching), but can be a PITA to get it right. The market for those who are willing to do 16-shot commercially was too small, so these backs were suspended from being manufactured. I use the term "suspended" as opposed to "discontinued", since one of the engineers at Jenoptik recently told me that they would gladly produce more 54H backs if the demand was there.
David
What id like to see is the 54h come back under a different guise with only 4 shot. I dont need the 16 shot and can do with the extra cost implementing it. An affordable 22mp with 4 shot is what id like to see.
-
Dear Kyle,
there was such a "only 4-shot" SB 54 proposed some years back: the SB 54 Q (if my souvenir is right). It was not very successful, since the price difference was very little. In fact, the production costs were exactly the same.
Best regards,
Thierry
What id like to see is the 54h come back under a different guise with only 4 shot. I dont need the 16 shot and can do with the extra cost implementing it. An affordable 22mp with 4 shot is what id like to see.
-
Thierry that makes sense actually. Although, if sinar did release a new 22mp back with 4 shot like a 54h evolution, the price new could be significantly lower than the 75h Id assume.
I understand that there might not be much interest for it though at this point. Most people that want the quality of multishot also want the higher res of the 75h.
-
The problem is that this sensor is not longer available.
Thierry
Although, if sinar did release a new 22mp back with 4 shot like a 54h evolution, the price new could be significantly lower than the 75h Id assume.
-
What about the dalsa 22? Not possible due to the slightly different dimensions?
-
certainly possible, but this means a complete new development and design, with all what is involved in R&D, in other words, the costs would be driven to the same level of the 33 MPx multishot, for sure. And one cannot even and simply take over the experience with the Dalsa 33 MPx sensor, since they are completely different.
Thierry
What about the dalsa 22? Not possible due to the slightly different dimensions?
-
Thanks David, for your experience, and I do absolutely agree with all you say here.
Best regards,
Thierry
Henrik,
As mentioned above, the multishot backs outperform the scanning backs. I use a Sinar 54H. The 4-shot results are outstanding with rich colors and no artifacting. When extreme detail or large prints are needed, the 16-shot capability is there. Taking 4-shot images is basically foolproof. On the other hand, the 16-shot mode requires much more careful technique and equipment. In 16-shot mode, the sensor is displaced by a half-pixel width (4.5 microns) in each direction to increase the resolution by a factor of 4 (2x in both horizontal and vertical dimensions). You must make sure that your sensor is calibrated and checked frequently (easy manual process), but most of all you must have no vibration in your studio. Even someone walking nearby in their bare feet during the 16-shot exposure can cause enough vibration to blur out the finest details.
Here is the basic math. The 4-shot mode with the Sinar 54H (9 micron pixels) has a maximum resolving power of about 55 lp/mm. With the 75H (7.2 micron pixels), it would be about 69 lp/mm. These are very decent resolving capabilities, and there are a variety of lenses that can reach these abilities into the corners. However, with 16-shot mode of the 54H, the maximum resolving power is now doubled to about 110 lp/mm. So, not only is careful technique and the control of vibration absolutely critical, but the choice of lenses is much narrowed in order to reach this kind of resolving power into the corners.
So, 16-shot backs like the Sinar 54H offer the highest resolution for fixed position camera shooting (ie, non-stitching), but can be a PITA to get it right. The market for those who are willing to do 16-shot commercially was too small, so these backs were suspended from being manufactured. I use the term "suspended" as opposed to "discontinued", since one of the engineers at Jenoptik recently told me that they would gladly produce more 54H backs if the demand was there.
David
-
Reply from Scanback user required in this discussion.
anyone????
-
The one plus point going for scanning backs is the size of the capture area. Most will cover the full 4X5 area which means one can use any old 4X5 lens without having to calculate a new focal length.
However IMHO with the new 50+MP single shot digital backs we are nearing a point were any advantages that multi-shot or scanning backs may have will become practically irrelevant, especially considering the speed and simplicity for most applications.
Yair
-
Dear Yair,
It is a very interesting information.
Have you checked how the new Leaf-10 shoots fabric and other moiré prone substances?
Did you or the Leaf engineers compare how the AFI-10 -Aptus-10 compete with multi - shot backs from Sinar and Hasselblad?
Can we hope to get moiré free images?
Thank you,
Yevgeny
However IMHO with the new 50+MP single shot digital backs we are nearing a point were any advantages that multi-shot or scanning backs may have will become practically irrelevant, especially considering the speed and simplicity for most applications.
Yair
-
The one plus point going for scanning backs is the size of the capture area. Most will cover the full 4X5 area which means one can use any old 4X5 lens without having to calculate a new focal length.
However IMHO with the new 50+MP single shot digital backs we are nearing a point were any advantages that multi-shot or scanning backs may have will become practically irrelevant, especially considering the speed and simplicity for most applications.
Yair
I don't think a 50 MP back will be able to hold a candle to a 39 MP multi-shot capture, both in terms of sharpness and color fidelity.
-
According to Victor mag Hasselblad are planning to expand their multishot line to 31mp and 50mp backs (if possible).
edit: typo
-
All single shot backs have color moire, even the 50MP backs. This is because any single shot back captures only 25% of the red and blue color information, and 50% of the green color information. For example, a 50MP single shot back can only capture 12.5MP worth of information in either the red or blue channels, and the missing 75% of the color information in these channels must be estimated post-capture. No estimation can recover this missing information perfectly, and so color artifacts will ALWAYS be possible. On the other hand, a 22MP 4-shot image will contain 22MP of captured color information for each of the red and blue channels (and green of course), which is almost double the amount of red and blue color information that is captured by a single shot 50MP back.
A 16-shot back like the Sinar 54H delivers even more resolution and color information (ie, 88MP of captured color in each of the red, blue and green channels). Even adding 4-shot capability to a 50MP back (ie, 50MP of captured color information each color channel) will still only deliver about 57% of the resolution and color information as compared to the 16-shot image. To my knowledge, the 39MP and higher MP backs will not be capable of 16-shot.
-
I have the Sinarback 54H and I just did a reproduction of a painting. Just for myself I did a 16-shot additional. I used a Rodenstock 60 HR. First here is an overview, than a crop from a 4-shot with 590 x 590 Pixel an than a crop from the 16-shot with 569 x 569 Pixel.
-
I have done a lot of tests and always came to the same conclusion: nothing can compare to multishot..... only microstep(16 shot) on a sturdy studiostand will be better. Shot taken with my ixpress 384, still my most used back. I only use the H3d31II when i need to shoot at high iso such as 800 or 1600 iso. I also tried high iso on my canon but that was never as good as with the H3d 31II.
-
I don't think a 50 MP back will be able to hold a candle to a 39 MP multi-shot capture, both in terms of sharpness and color fidelity.
Please read my post again, thanks
Yair
-
Thanks for many interesting comments. I still really miss to hear if someone has tested the modern scanning-backs and also the 16-shot backs.
Has anyone used and tested both?
Henrik