Pages: [1] 2   Go Down

Author Topic: 5dmkII vs. 4x5 & v750- Resolution  (Read 13218 times)

MarkSe

  • Guest
5dmkII vs. 4x5 & v750- Resolution
« on: March 21, 2011, 02:37:48 pm »

I shot a lot of architecture and landscape the last years, mainly with a sinar 4x5. I used to scan the film (pro160s) with an epson v750.
I would like to know if the resolution of a 5dmkII is as good as 4x5" film & v750. Maybe someone has done some tests?!
Logged

Lightbox

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 136
    • http://www.shaunquinlan.com
Re: 5dmkII vs. 4x5 & v750- Resolution
« Reply #1 on: March 21, 2011, 02:54:16 pm »

Depends on your scanner and if you can get sharp results from it, I have a V700 and have given up using it, have never been able to get a decent sharp scan from it. A real shame as the 6x7 negs look amazing under the loupe...
Logged

Kirk Gittings

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1561
    • http://www.KirkGittings.com
Re: 5dmkII vs. 4x5 & v750- Resolution
« Reply #2 on: March 21, 2011, 03:00:02 pm »

I have allot of experience with this. Are we talking color or B&W? Talking resolution, I would say the 5D II is not quite as good as a well tuned 750 scan, but certainly a double stitch from a 5D II is in the ballpark.
« Last Edit: March 21, 2011, 03:01:52 pm by Kirk Gittings »
Logged
Thanks,
Kirk Gittings

langier

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1502
    • Celebrating Rural America, the Balkans and beyond
Re: 5dmkII vs. 4x5 & v750- Resolution
« Reply #3 on: March 21, 2011, 07:38:48 pm »

I can tell you from recently using a friend's 5DII image in my magazine that the quality image he gave me for this back cover was stunning!

He was died-in-the-wool 4x5 shooter for years getting drum scans as needed until digital hit. He's struggled with it at the start, but I'd say that he's mastered it and now shoots mainly 5D2 with the Canon shift lenses.

The photo I used of his was 9 images shot with the 17mm TS, stitched together in Photoshop and was flawless.

To see the image go to this link <http://asmpnorcal.org/drupal/node/1051>Download the PDF and it's pix on the last page. I can tell you that I've known Steve Whittaker this photo's photographer for years and can tell you that he is a perfectionist. He wouldn't be showing me the work if it wasn't anything less than perfect.

So, bottom line, the Canon 5D Mk. II images in most cases are simply stunning if the photographer has vision and knows his craft!
Logged
Larry Angier
ASMP, ACT, & many more! @sacred_icons
https://angier-fox.photoshelter.com

KevinA

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 979
    • Tree Without a Bird
Re: 5dmkII vs. 4x5 & v750- Resolution
« Reply #4 on: March 22, 2011, 09:33:43 am »

Kirk is the one that will know this inside out like he said.
One thing you must keep in mind is that a 5x4 you have to work a certain way, when you pick up a DSLR you could be tempted to work with less precision. Work the DSLR like a 5x4 and it might be close enough, I think top quality lenses are more important on these smaller format cameras. LF cameras and film had a less critical need to obtain decent large prints. I think as soon as you start trying to compensate with software for weak links in the digital chain, then it soon falls down.
But go with whatever Kirk says, he works both and produces excellent work.

Kevin.
Logged
Kevin.

Kerry L

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 177
Re: 5dmkII vs. 4x5 & v750- Resolution
« Reply #5 on: March 22, 2011, 10:29:55 am »

I have been exploring the options of using my 4X5 and a roll film back and the Epson V750-pro with a fluid mount rather than my Nikon D3 for some work.

Almost all that I have read and seen point to fluid mount scanning being essential to maximizing quality. This is something that few commentaries comparing DLSR vs scanning mention.

Another other point that I find to be persuasive in using the 4X5 is the cost of having to re-equip in top line DLSR lenses such as Zeiss or Schneider if even available for your choice in digital model. My 4X5 lenses cost in the neighbourhood of $2000 and are of course prime lenses. The very best DLSR lenses are certainly in this range. Dumping my investemnt on E-Bay won't cover starting over in the equipment race.

There are other points to consider too: the use of full camera movements, the flexibility of the DLSR with zooms, the instant feedback of digital, the time of a film - scanning workflow. And the intangeble, the enjoyment of using a view camera and ground glass, something that I found important.

This is a far more convoluted issue than the "pixel-peeping" of resolution. Like taking a good image...... one needs to take time to ensure that all important elements are in focus
Logged
"Try and let your mind see more than you

Kirk Gittings

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1561
    • http://www.KirkGittings.com
Re: 5dmkII vs. 4x5 & v750- Resolution
« Reply #6 on: March 22, 2011, 12:30:55 pm »

Thanks for the kind words Kevin. Yes I do all my commercial work with a 5D II and most of my personal b&w work with a 4x5 and my output is Piezography (in some cases I have successfully stitched 5D II files for b&w prints).

FWIW I do use the 750 wet. I use the Better Scanning wet mount holder. BUT I only find the 750 any good for small prints-I don't find it good enough to do a scan that will hold up at 16x20 or above (some would argue that 16x20 is acceptable-I personally think a 16x20 is large enough to demand the best scan you can get). Wet mounting is the only way to really get the film flat and these scanners have very little DoF. When I need a larger print I spring for a drum scan. So what this means is I don't end up using the 750 much as there is so much work involved in producing a file for a fine print that I do not want to do all that work to limit my output to smaller than 16x20. The 750 gets used mainly for proofing these days.
« Last Edit: March 22, 2011, 01:33:40 pm by Kirk Gittings »
Logged
Thanks,
Kirk Gittings

fredjeang

  • Guest
Re: 5dmkII vs. 4x5 & v750- Resolution
« Reply #7 on: March 22, 2011, 12:45:44 pm »

A good friend of mine is now using the 5DMK2 after years of LF.
He is an art photographer and very happy with its Canon.

That said, it depends on the output.

In art print about 1m50 squared, the 5DMK2 defends itself but it has no comparaison with the works done previously in 4x5 drum scanned. It simply falls appart for large size art-print and you have to ad grain and play tricks in pp and it never reaches the quality of the drum scan. For magazines or big advertising sizes on location the Canon is great. For fine arts IMO it's not the right tool.
Logged

Bart_van_der_Wolf

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8914
Re: 5dmkII vs. 4x5 & v750- Resolution
« Reply #8 on: March 22, 2011, 01:04:03 pm »

A good friend of mine is now using the 5DMK2 after years of LF.
He is an art photographer and very happy with its Canon.

That said, it depends on the output.

In art print about 1m50 squared, the 5DMK2 defends itself but it has no comparaison with the works done previously in 4x5 drum scanned. It simply falls appart for large size art-print and you have to ad grain and play tricks in pp and it never reaches the quality of the drum scan.

Hi Fred,

Never say never ;)

With stitching, the resolution is just what you want it to be. It can even exceed 4x5in drum-scanned resolution if one desires, just use a longer focal length and use more tiles to stitch. Whether it's practical or not is not covered by "never".

Cheers,
Bart
Logged
== If you do what you did, you'll get what you got. ==

Rob C

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 24074
Re: 5dmkII vs. 4x5 & v750- Resolution
« Reply #9 on: March 22, 2011, 04:05:51 pm »

Hi Fred,

Never say never ;)

With stitching, the resolution is just what you want it to be. It can even exceed 4x5in drum-scanned resolution if one desires, just use a longer focal length and use more tiles to stitch. Whether it's practical or not is not covered by "never".

Cheers,
Bart


But a lot of 'art' means models - best their stitches don't show...

;-)

Rob C

fredjeang

  • Guest
Re: 5dmkII vs. 4x5 & v750- Resolution
« Reply #10 on: March 22, 2011, 04:31:07 pm »

Hi Fred,

Never say never ;)

With stitching, the resolution is just what you want it to be. It can even exceed 4x5in drum-scanned resolution if one desires, just use a longer focal length and use more tiles to stitch. Whether it's practical or not is not covered by "never".

Cheers,
Bart
You're pretty correct Bart. I actually don't like to use "never", but...
In the end results on print, drum scans of LF in sizes that are from 1m50 and above stand still while the 5D2 aren't that much and it's really visible. (I'm talking fine arts prints) I guess with the latest digital backs it's another story but we are not then in the 5D2 files but another league.
I've seen it each time, with different printers, and each time the choice was clear about the LF drum scaned.
Logged

MarkL

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 475
Re: 5dmkII vs. 4x5 & v750- Resolution
« Reply #11 on: March 23, 2011, 08:23:02 am »

I can't understand why anyone would go through the process of shooting 4x5 and then scan on a flatbed.
Logged

fredjeang

  • Guest
Re: 5dmkII vs. 4x5 & v750- Resolution
« Reply #12 on: March 23, 2011, 08:55:16 am »

I can't understand why anyone would go through the process of shooting 4x5 and then scan on a flatbed.
Yes,
I had this fantasy some time ago simply because the costs of drum scan are huge so I asked here about flatbed. But in the end it does make little sense.
Logged

MarkSe

  • Guest
Re: 5dmkII vs. 4x5 & v750- Resolution
« Reply #13 on: March 23, 2011, 10:20:13 am »

thanks to all of you. I think I`ll rent a 5dII and make some test prints.
@ MarkL: The v750 is not bad for scanning 4x5". In my experience the older imacons aren`t much better when scanning large format film!

Logged

feppe

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2906
  • Oh this shows up in here!
    • Harri Jahkola Photography
Re: 5dmkII vs. 4x5 & v750- Resolution
« Reply #14 on: March 23, 2011, 01:08:43 pm »

I can't understand why anyone would go through the process of shooting 4x5 and then scan on a flatbed.

It's fine for proofing and web display.

Then again, if you're only shooting for web why go through the trouble of 4x5. Shooting film is not all about trouble, though ;)

A.K.A. Armando

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 10
Re: 5dmkII vs. 4x5 & v750- Resolution
« Reply #15 on: March 24, 2011, 08:49:16 pm »

I can't understand why anyone would go through the process of shooting 4x5 and then scan on a flatbed.

Me neither.
You could get better resolution with a 6x9 and a Nikon 9000.
Aso, with the Anti-Aliasing filter the real capture in the 5D is limited to 1/4 of the 21MP (~5MP).
« Last Edit: March 24, 2011, 08:52:04 pm by DonPalino »
Logged

feppe

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2906
  • Oh this shows up in here!
    • Harri Jahkola Photography
Re: 5dmkII vs. 4x5 & v750- Resolution
« Reply #16 on: March 24, 2011, 09:31:39 pm »

Me neither.
You could get better resolution with a 6x9 and a Nikon 9000.
Aso, with the Anti-Aliasing filter the real capture in the 5D is limited to 1/4 of the 21MP (~5MP).

Great first post - I smell a resident joker or troll in the making.

Kirk Gittings

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1561
    • http://www.KirkGittings.com
Re: 5dmkII vs. 4x5 & v750- Resolution
« Reply #17 on: March 24, 2011, 11:26:37 pm »

I can't understand why anyone would go through the process of shooting 4x5 and then scan on a flatbed.

there are flatbeds and then there are flatbeds. Have you ever worked with a Screen Cezanne Elite? They cost 35K new. It will kick butt on many drum scanners.
« Last Edit: March 27, 2011, 12:24:44 am by Kirk Gittings »
Logged
Thanks,
Kirk Gittings

RobertJ

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 706
Re: 5dmkII vs. 4x5 & v750- Resolution
« Reply #18 on: March 26, 2011, 11:41:22 pm »

There's a lot of good drum-scanning services, like west coast imaging. Just send them your chromes with an order form and you're done.  Yeah, it's not cheap and you have to wait, but I still wouldn't use a flat-bed...not worth it.
Logged

adrian tyler

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 103
    • http://www.adriantyler.net/
Re: 5dmkII vs. 4x5 & v750- Resolution
« Reply #19 on: March 28, 2011, 05:35:49 am »

Almost all that I have read and seen point to fluid mount scanning being essential to maximizing quality. This is something that few commentaries comparing DLSR vs scanning mention.


that really depends on the scanner, certainly drumscans are fluidmointed but i have a creo flatbed and the results are actually better if you dry mount UNLESS the filmstock is scratched then fluid mounting helps. of course you have to tape the film down flat as kirk mentions.

« Last Edit: March 28, 2011, 05:39:18 am by adrian tyler »
Logged
Pages: [1] 2   Go Up