Luminous Landscape Forum
Equipment & Techniques => Medium Format / Film / Digital Backs – and Large Sensor Photography => Topic started by: henrikfoto on July 17, 2012, 07:13:11 pm
-
Many weeks ago I bought a Phase One 120TS. This is a manual lens and it is very hard to focus
without the focus-indicator in the DF camera. This works fine with all lenses I have tried, but not with this lens.
I told Phase One, and they told me it was a bug in the Firmware that would be fixes within a week or two.
Still, 6-8 weeks later nothing has happened >:(, and the lens is useless..
Anybody else have this lens and the same problem????
I will send the lens back to Phase on Monday for a full refound if this isn't fixed this week.
Maybe if we all did the same something would happen?
I think they need to check their products better before selling them. This is not my only bad
experience with Phase One quality control lately. I think we can expect that all products are checked before shipping from the money we pay. Don't you?
Henrik
-
Are you having problems with the lens when it's not shifted or tilted?
The problem could also be that the DF just can't focus indicate accurately with a 5.6 lens of that focal length.
I found that the focus indicator was far from accurate with the Hasselblad 110mm f2.
Could be a similar problem while at the opposite end of aperture size.
I also had problems using the focus verify with my 5.6 Fuji lenses on an adapter I made for the DF.
The 3.2 lenses did better.
(I modified the adapter to fit the Nikon D800. Live view focusing with them is a real treat).
However I think that the 120 TS is going to be limited on the DF body simply due to the low magnification of the viewfinder
and lack of waist level finder. Relying on the focus confirmation even if they fix it will be limiting as you need verify focus
in areas beyond the center due to the shifting focusing plane. Realtime live view would help, but the slow live view is
IMO too slow to mess around with complicated tilt shift.
If you do end up returning the lens you could always get a Fuji gx680 as a tilt shift side kick for your Phase One system.
The 680 has fully independent tilt shift both vertically and horizontally on all lenses from 50mm to 500mm.
The lenses go for about $200 to $400 used. The 125mm is available in 5.6 as well as 3.2.
(http://farm7.staticflickr.com/6160/6239328568_28ba0eac56_b.jpg)
Best of all you would also be able to use the loup viewfinder for super accurate focus all around the frame because it is mobile.
The loup can be moved up down, left and right to explore the whole frame.
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/a9/FujiGX680III_3.JPG)
You would need a kapture group to phase one adapter and keep in mind that the 680 is big!
Here is an example of critical focusing with the Fuji gx680 Phase One P25+ and the 180mm 3.2 wide open
(http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7250/7025845503_04c98e7578.jpg)
(http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7085/6879750742_4a80bb66ef_b.jpg)
Focus hit rate on the shoot was almost 100%. Keep in mind it was posed.
-
Tape the contacts on the lens and the focus indication will work.
-
Tape the contacts on the lens and the focus indication will work.
from the Phase One website:
645DF CAMERA SYSTEM
Phase One redefines medium format digital capture with a seamless integration of lens, body, back and software.
So much for seamless integration... just keep the duct tape handy. ;)
This has got to be pretty unnerving for someone who has bought this lens.
-
Fantastic...another thread that lasted less than two posts before turning into a GX680 promo...(great camera BTW, if not the most suitable for digital capture...)
-
Tape the contacts on the lens and the focus indication will work.
A representative from Phase One did this when I watched, and it still didn't work.
Anyway- should this be needed on a brand new lens costing tousands of dollars???
Phase need to do their work BEFORE they deliver expensive lenses.
The Fuji is very nice, but it's big and heavy..
Henrik
-
Fred, what is the best Fuji GX680 lens for macro and product work? (Sorry for keeping the thread turned into Fuji promo, but just had to ask :-X )
-
Just got the feedback from Phase One.
New firmware might be ready in september :-\ :-\ >:(
My lens is being returned to Phase One now.
Great idea to sell lenses that the camera might be ready to handle 6 months later.
Maybe Hy6 is a better route..
???
-
Just got the feedback from Phase One.
New firmware might be ready in september :-\ :-\ >:(
My lens is being returned to Phase One now.
Great idea to sell lenses that the camera might be ready to handle 6 months later.
Maybe Hy6 is a better route..
???
CONTAX ? HASSELBLAD ?
-
Contax is dead, Hasselblad seems to be sleeping and with no lenses to cover the 80mp sensors..
Hy6 is some kind of secret for strange reasons..
So I guess it's eather Phase df or Nikon?
-
Contax is dead, Hasselblad seems to be sleeping and with no lenses to cover the 80mp sensors..
Hy6 is some kind of secret for strange reasons..
So I guess it's eather Phase df or Nikon?
Keep in mind that the Fuji covers far beyond the 80MP sensors.
Kapture group even makes a stitch back adapter letting you do two captures and stitching them moving the back.
160mp without stitching software.
Without the back you can also do lens shift stitches without moving the camera. You won't get 160mp, about 100 or so.
-
Fred, what is the best Fuji GX680 lens for macro and product work? (Sorry for keeping the thread turned into Fuji promo, but just had to ask :-X )
PM me your email and I'll send you a PDF with a listing of all the lenses including minimum focus and close up subject size (subject image area size)
Includes values for both 40mm and 80mm extension rails.
Keep in mind the values are for 6x8cm
Also the communication between camera and lens is over a flat cable. Extensions can be found at electronic component stores.
I made a double long bellows modification for a friend with two 80mm extension rails for a total of about 200mm.
Regarding macro I have heard that the 100mm f4 is a popular choice.
With the 80mm rail extension it focuses to .45m and has a magnification of 1.3 and an image area of 41mm x 55mm
-
Fantastic...another thread that lasted less than two posts before turning into a GX680 promo...(great camera BTW, if not the most suitable for digital capture...)
Actually very good for digital Tilt shift.
First of all there are 17 tilt shift lenses in the system from 50mm to 500mm.
Second several viewfinder options including the mobile magnifier hood that has an 8x magnification and opens so you can see the full frame.
The eyepiece can be moved around to check focus right into the corners.
Third the rear lens elements are further from the sensor with reducing color shifts a bit when tilting or shifting.... this is thanks to the large mirror for 6x8.
With the kapture group adapter the Phase One backs work just fine.
Limitations are size, weight and fastest shutter speed being 1/400th
-
The 680 lenses aren't so great when used with higher resolution backs, especially shifted and when compared to some LF lenses. Also the KG box can be finicky at times and is tricky to operate with live view
But the major drawback for many is the lack of any wide or moderately wide angle lens
And BTW colour shifts are reduced because the lenses are retrofocal, making their exit pupil sit away from the sensor and the light travel in a relatively straight line
-
The 680 lenses aren't so great when used with higher resolution backs, especially shifted and when compared to some LF lenses. Also the KG box can be finicky at times and is tricky to operate with live view
But the major drawback for many is the lack of any wide or moderately wide angle lens
And BTW colour shifts are reduced because the lenses are retrofocal, making their exit pupil sit away from the sensor and the light travel in a relatively straight line
Regarding wide angles ... yes the system was designed for 80x60mm film and not 55x40mm sensors. The 50mm on 6x8 is actually wider than the 28mm Mamiya/Leaf is on a sensor.
True though 50mm is not very wide on a 50x40mm or smaller sensor.
Regarding high res sensors and the Fujinons. The Fuji lenses look great. The 100mm f4 is a really sharp lens. It will hold up against any Hasselblad or Phase lens.
The real strong point of the Fuji lenses is the look they have Bokeh is smooth at all apertures. Not the case with the 5 blade iris Phase/Schneider lenses.
The Mamiya 150mm 2.8 IF on the other hand is brilliant. Sharp and with state of the art bokeh. However my favorite MF lenses remain the Fuji gx680 180mm 3.2 and 250mm 5.6... when used full frame... with film.
I use the Fuji GX680 lenses on the Nikon d800 and in the past on the Canon 5DII. These sensors have a pixel size that is the same as higher res MFDB. No problem with fine details.
This image was shot with the P25+ and at F3.2
100% pixel peep:
(http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7085/6879750742_4a80bb66ef_b.jpg)
That's plenty sharp detail on the eyelashes... and this was shot with tilt.
180mm 3.2 (not the sharpest 680 lens)
-
No offence but a 9µ 48X36 sensor focused on the centre of the frame doesn't really push the lens....same with the D800, its tiny sensor covers a very small section of the image area....try a 60MP or an 80MP back on it, shifted at f11 and you'll see what I mean...
The "look" and bokeh may still be very nice but sharpness wise these lenses are not the best.
-
Sorry to bring this back on topic...
A representative from Phase One did this when I watched, and it still didn't work.
Anyway- should this be needed on a brand new lens costing tousands of dollars???
Phase need to do their work BEFORE they deliver expensive lenses.
Don't know who the "Phase One Rep" was or what they did, but taping the contacts will make the focus indication work. It doesn't need to be any special tape other than it needs to block the electronic communication.
"should this be needed on a brand new lens?" (of any cost). No, of course not. It's a bug and will be fixed.
The lens is incredibly sharp and the movements are mechanically solid. I used it recently to shoot a collection of Audemar Piguet watches. Stunning quality and a lot faster than using a full sized view camera.
-
No offence but a 9µ 48X36 sensor focused on the centre of the frame doesn't really push the lens....same with the D800, its tiny sensor covers a very small section of the image area....try a 60MP or an 80MP back on it, shifted at f11 and you'll see what I mean...
The "look" and bokeh may still be very nice but sharpness wise these lenses are not the best.
Sorry your wrong about the pixel pitch.....The pixel pitch on the Canon 5D II is pitch is 6.25µm and on the Nikon D800 it is 4.88 microns.
That is the same about the same as the 60 and 40 MP sensors for the Canon.
However the pixel pitch of the D800 is even smaller than the 80mp MFD sensors.
Regarding the smaller sensor... I did a test with the sensor offset from the center of the lens.
I did a comparison between the Canon 200mm 2.8L one of the sharpest canon lenses.
Here it is (copied from a post I made on another forum)
I did a little comparison between my Fuji GX680 250mm f5.6 and the Canon 200mm F2.8L Mark II @5.6.
I used the Canon 5d Mark II for the captures. To capture the Fuji lens images I held the Canon 5D II behind the Fuji 680 body.
I expected the Fuji lens to be somewhat inferior as it is about 20 years old and has an image circle of about 200mm while the Canon has an image circle of 50mm
well it was quite interesting...
Here is a 100% crop (scaled down by Flickr) from the Fuji/Canon capture (sensor placed to the right of the lenses center):
(http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5060/5439549093_844b892a74_z.jpg)
And here is the same from the Canon/canon capture
(http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5212/5439549893_0cdd10f55c_z.jpg)
Quite amazing how well the Fuji compares, especially considering that the Fuji is shooting at full aperture while the Canon is shooting stopped down two stops ... at 5.6 that is it's best aperture.
Here are the full frames:
Fuji/Canon capture:
(http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4073/5440153938_248728f0c4_b.jpg)
Canon/canon capture
(http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5219/5440154130_3f3cd8ae85_b.jpg)
See how the Bokeh on the Fuji is nicer and you get it already at 5.6. This is important to me as I like to shoot at slowish shutter speeds so that I can get some movement such as a dress or hair in the wind.
Then if you consider ontop of that the fact that if I was using the full frame I would be closer to the bush and would have even better bokeh on the background.
Throw in the higher dynamic range of film especially in the highlights and it's a formula that I like.
And one other thing. When running the images of the Fuji/canon and the Canon/canon through the JPEG compressor the Fuji lens files always came out larger indicating that there is more information in the Fuji lens images.
One thing that this test clearly indicates one interesting thing. If you consider that the Fuji lens when using the full 6x8 frame will be projecting about 6x more information..... well it indicated that for now only film gives you the opportunity to capture these large format images projected by these unique lenses.
Here is a diagram to show how little of the full frame the Canon was capturing:
(http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5255/5439549195_a8d50956cc_b.jpg)
And just to give an idea of how sharp the Canon 200mm 2.8L II is (and how damn cute my son was... he's 6'4" now ;) :o):
(http://farm7.staticflickr.com/6166/6199503901_13ec738d92_b.jpg)
Shot at 2.8
-
Sorry your wrong about the pixel pitch.....
Am I ???
P25+ utilises 9 micron pixels in a 49x37mm sensor (you should know as a seasoned Phase user...)
You're showing an image that has focus on the centre and that was shot wide open. Try the same setup on a flat subject stopped down and tell us how the corners look like. Then try it with an 80MP back...
The D800 sensor covers an even smaller area...again not utilising the large image circle.
Don't get me wrong the Fuji at the time was a great film camera and we have several customers who still use it for studio work with 22MP back. But the lenses unfortunately are not up to snuff when used with larger, higher resolution sensors
Yair
-
What I meant is that the lenses preform very well even with shift when used on sensors with pixel pitches
that are the same as the 80MP MFDB as well as sensors with smaller pixel MP pitches.
I know of several photographers that use the p65+ with the 680 and love the combination.
It really is a great and inexpensive side kick for someone that owns a Phase, Mamiya or Hasselblad H MFDB camera.
-
Try the same setup on a flat subject stopped down and tell us how the corners look like. Then try it with an 80MP back...
The Fuji lenses do very well stopped down, but I do not specialize in photographing flat subjects. That is why I favor cameras with more tilt and shift options.
You can have all the hyper sharpness, but IMHO being able to shift the pane of focus on your focal length of choice
is more important. You can acheive more sharpness when you have more flexibility keeping more of you subject in focus.
I find this is particularly important with medium format. One of the big pluses of MF is the shallow depth of field.
I often photograph two models in a shot and still want shallow depth of field, but I also want the freedom to pose them at different distances
from the camera.
Here is an example.
Without tilt:
(http://farm7.staticflickr.com/6118/6241351131_aa6f1963ec_b.jpg)
With tilt:
(http://farm7.staticflickr.com/6168/6241351155_3ceef9d332_b.jpg)
I both shots I achieve shallow depth of field keeping the background almost similarly blurred.
However I the second shot both models eyes are sharp.
(Sorry about the quality.. these are scanned from a contact sheet.)
-
Here is a shot taken with the Fuji gx680 that shows off the quality of the lenses...
(http://farm7.staticflickr.com/6132/5935982552_fbbdfea714_b.jpg)
and a crop:
(http://farm7.staticflickr.com/6130/5935423087_2b282d7b8c_b.jpg)
and a second crop
(http://farm7.staticflickr.com/6145/5935423037_d1328e07f1_b.jpg)
-
The last image shows that the lens is sharp in the centre with film.
-
The last image shows that the lens is sharp in the centre with film.
Oops the first crop's link was not typed correct.
I think I can safely say that the first crop shows that it is very sharp
even away from the center of the frame. It's also important
to keep in mind that the image circle is very much larger
than any MFD sensor so you will be comfortably in the sweet spot.
Hasselblad chose Fuji as the lens maker for the H System because of the
quality of Fujinon Lenses. The Fuji GX680 lenses were very advanced
for when they came out. Also several New lenses were launched
with the GX680 III and the Fuji 22MP back for the 680. Also most 680
lenses used the Fuji Electron Beam Coating lens coating method
that is still used by Hasselblad/Fujinon lenses.
This is also thesame coating used on Fuji's very hi end motion picture lenses
-
You don't seem to get the point so let's just move on or get back to the topic....
-
You don't seem to get the point so let's just move on or get back to the topic....
No I get the point very well. You claim that the Fuji gx680 lenses are not sharp enough for digital.
This crop is what would be the edge of the frame with a 53.7 x 40.4 sensor.
(http://farm7.staticflickr.com/6130/5935423087_2b282d7b8c_b.jpg)
I think that it is quite clear that the lenses are sharp enough.
And this discussion is on topic.
The discussion started regarding problems with the Phase One 120 tilt shift lens
and focusing problems.
My point is that a very viable and inexpensive option for someone looking to do tilt shift
with a wonderful Phase or leaf back can do so with a Fuji gx680.
Even if it's a temporary option till the 120 TS focusing issue is fully fixed.
It's also a good second option if users need focal lengths with tilt shift that are other than 120mm
as well as more flexible tilt shifting.
Good thing about going with a GX680 as a temporary option is that you buy at used prices and sell it again for about the same amount.
For less than half the price of a 120 TS Phase One you could get 4 lenses a body and an adapter kit.
I'll do a test with an 60 or 60MP when I get a chance and post the results.
-
Fantastic...another thread that lasted less than two posts before turning into a GX680 promo...(great camera BTW, if not the most suitable for digital capture...)
I find it fascinating that for the last billion years of digital capture there has been the same discussion from all the digital makers that their competitors lenses aren't as sharp are sharper than their own, or if that doesn't work, then a 80 mpx back will show the defects a 22mp back won't, or a 18mp dslr will never hold up to a digital back, or . . . well you get the idea.
But getting back to topic . . . all the guy wants is a new lens he can focus and he doesn't have to put gaffer tape on it to make it work. That's a pretty simple request and once again to stay back on topic, nobody really gives him a satisfactory answer.
I find all of this rather fascinating as some of the most beautiful photography I've ever seen really isn't that edge to edge sharp. In fact most beautiful photographs I've seen in any genre are usually kind of soft and do not look like reality . . . they are an interpretation of life.
Not that there is not bias on all fronts and all that bias isn't just from factory reps pushing their brand , it comes from users, chart readers, pixel pushers that are just positive the perfectly sharp camera hasn't really been invented yet, though in my experience nothing adds sharpness like getting the image in focus.
Maybe a flat field edge to edge sharp lens is important to some product guys (and I say some) or if you work in the basement of the Nation Portrait Gallery copying art work, but in the world of making a pretty picture, sharpness can be extremely over rated.
Speaking of NPG this is from their website (http://www.npg.si.edu/exhibit/earhart/images/02_full.jpg) but by the standards of today's digital explorers, they would tear it apart saying "I think their is 5% noise in the shadows and it's really not a true 80mpx file".
Anyway, I like the guy here that uses a fuji 680 cause it's different, he's experimenting and let's face it, in the artistic photography world you can do a lot more with a bendable camera than you can a Mamiya 645 and no offense to mamiya 645 owners, but I fail to understand how anyone really falls in love with the 645 Mamiya and what a strange state photography is in where only 2 1/2 new medium format cameras are even still produced. The Mamiya with a fixed prism, the H series blad and the Rollei/HY6 that nobody seems to want to make a real push for.
Maybe it's just me but when I bought my contax(s) I did so because I heard they had stopped production. For me that was perfect, because I could mount a billion different lenses on them, they cost less than a ticket to a concert and in all the years I've used them the only sharpness issues I've seen (actually I find them too sharp) is when focus is missed.
Still I've shot pretty pictures with them, never worried about warranties because their cheap to buy and they've worked for a long time.
I believe if there were more inventive cameras and were as well built like the fuji 680 that really fitted medium format sensors, (or any sensor for that matter) you'd see much more interest than than the warmed over film cameras that are being sold as the digital solution.
IMO
BC
-
Speaking of NPG this is from their website (http://www.npg.si.edu/exhibit/earhart/images/02_full.jpg)
What a beautiful portrait and what an amazing face!
The quality of that portrait has more to do with lighting than any camera/lens IMO but that is for another discussion another day..... ;)
-
It is very true that from an artistic point of view the sharpest lens is not always the right lens to use.
However there is a myth going around about "digital lenses" being far superior and that your state of the art
lenses from just a few years ago.
Here is a very interesting article by Hasselbld about the evolution of lenses and it is without doubt that Hasselblad H lenses
are optically state of the art for MF.
C-type and HC lenses are separated by a turn of the millennium, changes
in the way lenses are designed, and shifting requirements to comply with
modern camera designs. Still, a great 20th century lens design makes for a
fine lens even today, so what are the differences between C-type and HC
lenses, and how do comparable lenses fare head-to-head?
http://www.hasselbladusa.com/media/1663143/the_evolution_of_lenses.pdf (http://www.hasselbladusa.com/media/1663143/the_evolution_of_lenses.pdf)
It's important to note that the Fuji gx680 lenses were made and designed by the same Fuji plant as the H lenses, with Hasselblad adding their own lens designer for the early stages of the process.
If anyone has any doubts on the lens quality of the Hasselblad H lenses just take a look at the 100% magnifications in this article about the Hasselblad 200MP multishot back.
http://www.hasselblad.com/promotions/h4d-200ms-milo-profi-fotografie.aspx (http://www.hasselblad.com/promotions/h4d-200ms-milo-profi-fotografie.aspx)
-
Maybe it's just me but when I bought my contax(s) I did so because I heard they had stopped production. For me that was perfect, because I could mount a billion different lenses on them, they cost less than a ticket to a concert and in all the years I've used them the only sharpness issues I've seen (actually I find them too sharp) is when focus is missed.
If you have the Contax 645 you should check out the 120mm macro... beautiful look.
-
Photographers are story tellers, we need tools that tell help us tell that story.
If a lens is measurable sharper, or if there is 5 or 10% in the shadows is all irrelevant.
For some people however and we have forums filled with them the story telling part is not important, they just love camera (gear porn) and will tear apart a system when you can't pull it four stops without noise.....
I've been seeing this trend getting worse and worse.
Now a days we have some amazing gear, the best ever..... But I wonder why we so little really great photography, if you take into account how many photographers there are, the balance is 100% gone.
For me, I love my credo60 on the DF and RZ, I love my 5DMKIII and Fuji's. But also recently started shooting film and Polaroids again, just because I love the look. Some people say "why, the quality is so much worse" until they see the images and see things I can't do with the clean digital files but can with the Polaroids. Film I just love for the unique look.
So instead of focusing on gear, focus on the image.
Typing contacts should indeed not be necessary for a lens, however even if the focus indicator works with a T&S lens I find it of little use, my focus point is actually never in the middle of the frame so I will use focus conformation in capture one to make sure I nailed the focus.
-
Photographers are story tellers, we need tools that tell help us tell that story.
If a lens is measurable sharper, or if there is 5 or 10% in the shadows is all irrelevant.
For some people however and we have forums filled with them the story telling part is not important, they just love camera (gear porn) and will tear apart a system when you can't pull it four stops without noise.....
I've been seeing this trend getting worse and worse.
Now a days we have some amazing gear, the best ever..... But I wonder why we so little really great photography, if you take into account how many photographers there are, the balance is 100% gone.
For me, I love my credo60 on the DF and RZ, I love my 5DMKIII and Fuji's. But also recently started shooting film and Polaroids again, just because I love the look. Some people say "why, the quality is so much worse" until they see the images and see things I can't do with the clean digital files but can with the Polaroids. Film I just love for the unique look.
So instead of focusing on gear, focus on the image.
Typing contacts should indeed not be necessary for a lens, however even if the focus indicator works with a T&S lens I find it of little use, my focus point is actually never in the middle of the frame so I will use focus conformation in capture one to make sure I nailed the focus.
+100000000
-
I've been seeing this trend getting worse and worse....
Now a days we have some amazing gear, the best ever..... But I wonder why we so little really great photography, if you take into account how many photographers there are, the balance is 100% gone....
So instead of focusing on gear, focus on the image.
Well said Frank.
It isn't that the gear is not important but it is just a means to an end.
I do have some pretty nifty stuff myself but I am only interested in the end result.
Regards
Tony Jay
-
What a beautiful portrait and what an amazing face!
The quality of that portrait has more to do with lighting than any camera/lens IMO but that is for another discussion another day..... ;)
If you were the photographer who took this picture and you knew that it was going to be digitised for heritage archiving purposes, how important would it be for you that the digital file provides a true representation of your work?
Do you know how many glass plates from the 19th century exist in archives around the world, waiting to be digitised? The image quality of many of those plates is absolutely phenomenal and there are many institutions, organisations and governments that spend huge amounts of money on equipment that ensures that all this amazing work is being digitised to the highest possible standard so that future generations can enjoy it.
If you for example digitise documents: birth, marriage and death certificates, flight-squadron log books, municipal/ urban planning docs etc. which usually need to be OCR'ed then edge to edge sharpness is critical for a trouble free workflow. There's a whole bunch of other applications where resolution and sharpness across the frame are crucial for making the image useful rather than useless...how about digitisation of old ceramic tiles or wooden floor boards and printing them on fake laminates? Do you know how much money that industry turns every year???
If you're a high-flying car or fashion photographer it is easy to talk down about that guy who works in a basement down at the NPG. There is no glory there and he doesn't hang out with beautiful models, win APA awards or drive exotic cars, but the work done by that guy, in the great scheme or things, is not less demanding and in many ways far more important for our world than the next hair conditioner campaign...
Just my opinion...
Yair
-
For some possible reasons that I just can start to imagine, all the digital captures out of RZ's that I've seen (online only) are beautiful as hell. They posses the "undigital" look of the film without leaving behind the clarity of digital.
These pictures shown here whit the Fuji 680 raise the bar for the most film-like digital capture. In my opinion, this is more beautiful. Wish I could see a big print in person!
Eduardo
Here is a shot taken with the Fuji gx680 that shows off the quality of the lenses...
(http://farm7.staticflickr.com/6132/5935982552_fbbdfea714_b.jpg)
and a crop:
(http://farm7.staticflickr.com/6130/5935423087_2b282d7b8c_b.jpg)
and a second crop
(http://farm7.staticflickr.com/6145/5935423037_d1328e07f1_b.jpg)
-
The shot was shot with one light. Elinchrom SL35 with the Fuji gx680 and 250mm5.6 Lens at f8 or maybe f11.
It was shot on Velvia 50 with a very mild bleach pass.
It's not digital.
Keep in mind that it was shot on a very large rock solid studio column stand (150 kg at least)
and with strob, so quite ideal setup for sharpness.
It funny how there is so much discussion about ultimate sharpness of lenses, but if you don't stick
the camera on a really really solid stand you won't get the best results.
-
If you were the photographer who took this picture and you knew that it was going to be digitised for heritage archiving purposes, how important would it be for you that the digital file provides a true representation of your work?
Do you know how many glass plates from the 19th century exist in archives around the world, waiting to be digitised? The image quality of many of those plates is absolutely phenomenal and there are many institutions, organisations and governments that spend huge amounts of money on equipment that ensures that all this amazing work is being digitised to the highest possible standard so that future generations can enjoy it.
If you for example digitise documents: birth, marriage and death certificates, flight-squadron log books, municipal/ urban planning docs etc. which usually need to be OCR'ed then edge to edge sharpness is critical for a trouble free workflow. There's a whole bunch of other applications where resolution and sharpness across the frame are crucial for making the image useful rather than useless...how about digitisation of old ceramic tiles or wooden floor boards and printing them on fake laminates? Do you know how much money that industry turns every year???
If you're a high-flying car or fashion photographer it is easy to talk down about that guy who works in a basement down at the NPG. There is no glory there and he doesn't hang out with beautiful models, win APA awards or drive exotic cars, but the work done by that guy, in the great scheme or things, is not less demanding and in many ways far more important for our world than the next hair conditioner campaign...
Just my opinion...
Yair
High end flat bed scanners will do a better and more consistent job from corner to corner and produce gigabyte files.
Cutaway bezel flatbeds will get sharp images of pages in old logs and logs with a gutter.
I modified and Epson v750 with a friend to digitize his antique books. Best solution for the pages.
Covers came out better with a camera and lighting setup to capture better 3 dimensional texture.
Also I don't think anyone here is down talking any lab technicians or repo technicians weather they are in a basement or not.
-
High end flat bed scanners will do a better and more consistent job from corner to corner and produce gigabyte files.
Cutaway bezel flatbeds will get sharp images of pages in old logs and logs with a gutter.
I modified and Epson v750 with a friend to digitize his antique books. Best solution for the pages.
Covers came out better with a camera and lighting setup to capture better 3 dimensional texture.
Fred, you seem to have very good googling skills, so I suggest that you take some time and do some reading about art and document digitisation...
There is no such thing as "high end flatbed scanner" anymore...Kodak discontinued the Creo iQ line more than 2 years ago and the older Eversmart Supreme doesn't even run on non PPC Macs! Fuji, Screen and Heidelberg have all left this business a long time ago...
Your friend might be getting good results from his V750 but this is hardly a viable, high volume commercial production solution and while you can stitch 2 A3 scans it is a laborious and a slow process so if your original is larger than A3, your options are limited to either a camera which is fast and consistent or an e.g. Zeutschel type scanner which is very, very expensive and slow
Some books are so delicate and expensive that you cannot just flip them upside down on a scanner, there are companies who invest millions in developing robots and automatic/ semi-automatic book cradles and multi-camera devices and so on..
I can send you some links if you want, but perhaps we should start a new thread for this...
Yair
-
If you were the photographer who took this picture and you knew that it was going to be digitised for heritage archiving purposes, how important would it be for you that the digital file provides a true representation of your work?
Do you know how many glass plates from the 19th century exist in archives around the world, waiting to be digitised? The image quality of many of those plates is absolutely phenomenal and there are many institutions, organisations and governments that spend huge amounts of money on equipment that ensures that all this amazing work is being digitised to the highest possible standard so that future generations can enjoy it.
If you for example digitise documents: birth, marriage and death certificates, flight-squadron log books, municipal/ urban planning docs etc. which usually need to be OCR'ed then edge to edge sharpness is critical for a trouble free workflow. There's a whole bunch of other applications where resolution and sharpness across the frame are crucial for making the image useful rather than useless...how about digitisation of old ceramic tiles or wooden floor boards and printing them on fake laminates? Do you know how much money that industry turns every year???
If you're a high-flying car or fashion photographer it is easy to talk down about that guy who works in a basement down at the NPG. There is no glory there and he doesn't hang out with beautiful models, win APA awards or drive exotic cars, but the work done by that guy, in the great scheme or things, is not less demanding and in many ways far more important for our world than the next hair conditioner campaign...
Just my opinion...
Yair
Hmm,
Somebody didn't have their Granola before they went for a bike ride this morning.
Yair, your a smart guy and no way was anything said negative about some cat shooting copy art in a basement.
Since I started my career with below zero funds, at the start I shot a lot of stuff for money and some of it was fine documents, pre Colombian art and a whole bunch of other images I won't admit to.
But, when I shot this stuff I did it until my eyes bled and did it as good as possible, but never once did I think that as a ambitious photographer that every minute I was using up shooting some copy, I could be shooting something a whole lot better for my art and career.
Still, as I say your a smart guy and sell your product well, but you do sell your product and know that talking about edge to edge 8 billion pixel sharpness and detail isn't the entire agenda, or even a large part of it for a lot of us.
Anyway, lenses have different effects (and we could talk about it for hours) and I chose a lens for more than focal length or sharpness or whatever.
Both of these images are shot with the Contax and both with different lenses and post production for effect.
(http://spotsinthebox.com/2_2_show.jpg)
The one on the left with an old Boris tilt shift to purposely throw focus, the one on the right with a zeiss 80mm which is more than sharp on any edge.
The cool thing is the lenses costs about nothing and didn't take any gaff tape to see the focus indicator. (insert one of those silly smiles here).
Now, back to real business, to decide if I drive the Veyron Bleu Centenair or the orange Lambo Aventador L on my way to the Gulfstream today.
Man, I hate these choices.
IMO
BC
-
Since I started my career with below zero funds, at the start I shot a lot of stuff for money and some of it was fine documents, pre Colombian art and a whole bunch of other images I won't admit to.
But, when I shot this stuff I did it until my eyes bled and did it as good as possible, but never once did I think that as a ambitious photographer that every minute I was using up shooting some copy, I could be shooting something a whole lot better for my art and career.
(out-of topic)
I was reading this thread by "accident" and appeared those 2 sentences.
It's exactly the answer to what I was looking for through the mist during those weeks. ;)
Cheers.
-
Fred, you seem to have very good googling skills, so I suggest that you take some time and do some reading about art and document digitisation...
Yair
This is incredibly rude.
Ad hominem attacks reflect more on the person dishing them out, than the person on the receiving end.
-
Back on topic, and ignoring any future PM's...
I think we're all agreed that it's not exactly a laudable situation for Phase One to be selling this lens when it does not work as advertised with their cameras. Someone remind me of the prices again we're talking about here?
Given the considerable number of people here who have an inside line into the company, when can we expect this to be sorted out to the satisfaction of the OP?
Regards,
Gerald.
(A Phase One customer)
-
Back on topic, and ignoring any future PM's...
I think we're all agreed that it's not exactly a laudable situation for Phase One to be selling this lens when it does not work as advertised with their cameras. Someone remind me of the prices again we're talking about here?
Given the considerable number of people here who have an inside line into the company, when can we expect this to be sorted out to the satisfaction of the OP?
Regards,
Gerald.
Hi Gerald!
This lens actually cost about 6.000 US$.
It should be possible to test it within this price??
Henrik
(A Phase One customer)
-
(http://spotsinthebox.com/2_2_show.jpg)
Nice images.
-
Your friend might be getting good results from his V750 but this is hardly a viable, high volume commercial production solution and while you can stitch 2 A3 scans it is a laborious and a slow process so if your original is larger than A3, your options are limited to either a camera which is fast and consistent or an e.g. Zeutschel type scanner which is very, very expensive and slow.
Never said our scanner modification was for industrial quantities and all his books are smaller than A3.
It's just a nifty way of delicately getting into the gutter of the book (deep area along the spine between pages).
He also wanted this option because he preferred to do the digitizing himself rather to take the books somewhere.
There are still several large format scanner manufactures. They use plotter type machines that either drag poster sized originals through them
sort of the way large format roll printers work. Some also have a large tray that can support more delicate originals.
However scanning is always "lighting limited". An oil painting for example has relief to it as well as the image depicted.
Using a camera lets one light the original artwork in different ways.
I recently photographed some modern art that had quite a bit of relief on it... up to about 1.4 of an inch. They looked the best
when light form one side only, but with the light source quite far away so as to keep the fall off from one side to
the other as little as possible.
-
I recently photographed some modern art that had quite a bit of relief on it... up to about 1.4 of an inch. They looked the best
when light form one side only, but with the light source quite far away so as to keep the fall off from one side to
the other as little as possible.
You can also shoot a reference shot of a piece of clean white paper in front of the artwork and use the LCC function in Capture One to even out the exposure across the frame.
This should give you some idea of what kind of industrial strength solutions are out there in the market that Yair refers to at places like the Getty, Library of Congress, National Archives, and Harvard:
http://www.dtdch.com/page/bc100-book-capture-system
-
Very nice machine.
Looks similar, but higher end to the free designs from http://www.diybookscanner.org/
the open hardware and software project.
We are a community of people crazy enough to build our own book scanners. We also write Free software for book scanning. We are the missing link between your bookshelf and your e-reader. Join us! Get involved by trying a simple scanner, or push the limits of scanning technology.
http://vimeo.com/29184137 (http://vimeo.com/29184137)
Here is one of their fancier designs available for free.
http://diybookscanner.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=495 (http://diybookscanner.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=495)
(http://diybookscanner.org/forum/download/file.php?id=1425)
Another site
http://www.instructables.com/id/DIY-High-Speed-Book-Scanner-from-Trash-and-Cheap-C/ (http://www.instructables.com/id/DIY-High-Speed-Book-Scanner-from-Trash-and-Cheap-C/)