Would like some advice

[boinger]

I have a question or two....

I currently shoot with a d800 (thinking about swapping it out for the d800e)

I shoot a little bit of everything. Mainly landscapes and night photography. I understand that DMF are not good at night photography / long exposures.

For my work I shoot jewelry. Not high end jewelry but low cost fashion jewelry and MANY pieces of this jewelry. This is where my curiosity for medium format comes into play. I wanted to know if I should go for an entry level MF system like a leaf aptus ii-7 kit.

My reasoning is that I will be shooting at small fstops to maximize depth of field, the reason this is problematic for me with my d800 is that I get noticeable softness when I stop down to f/16 or higher. For jewelry its not ideal. So I am wondering will the MF application be better for me?

It is a very specific use I have in mind. Basically I would like to be able to capture a bracelet entirely in focus in one shot without having to shoot multiple shots for focus stacking etc.

Any advice would be greatly welcome.

[MrSmith]

Stick with the d800 and get a horseman VCC-pro and a rodenstock lens of whatever focal length you wish to use.

[Ken R]

You can get something like this (Arca Swiss body / Schneider lens) to use with your D800:

[Ken R]

Or you can get this lens for your Nikon:

http://www.nikonusa.com/en/Nikon-Products/Product/Camera-Lenses/2175/PC-E-Micro-NIKKOR-85mm-f%252F2.8D.html

you can rent it here: (also has a review)

https://www.lensrentals.com/rent/nikon/lenses/specialty/nikon-85mm-f2.8d-pc-e

[Dustbak]

You could do with a low end MF, forget about being able to use smaller apertures to get more DoF. Any gain in that area will be offset against the larger format of the sensor.

I do the same type of work and prefer using my HB over my d800 mostly because of one reason, tethered shooting.

Shooting tethered with MF is still much smoother and faster than doing it with the D800. For high volume fast work the HB works nicer than the D800.

Especially if you combine the HB with the HTS or with the HCII macro.

[JoeKitchen]

I have a question or two....

I shoot a little bit of everything. Mainly landscapes and night photography. I understand that DMF are not good at night photography / long exposures.


It is a very specific use I have in mind. Basically I would like to be able to capture a bracelet entirely in focus in one shot without having to shoot multiple shots for focus stacking etc.

Any advice would be greatly welcome.

First off, the long exposure thing is not true.  The P45+ and the IQ260 both offer long exposures of up to 1 hours with out any noise (now getting that done with out any stars from lights may not be possible  ).  I would dare say that any of the backs will out perform any DSLR with long exposures too, so long as you do not go outside of their exposure limit. 

MD format does have the same defraction problem as what you get with the D800, meaning that the image starts to soften past f/11.  You can use tilt to adjust the focal plan so the entire front of the ring is in focus at the same time, but the background and probably part of the back side of the ring with be out of focus.  Also, MF has less depth of field due to the larger sensor. 

The RM3Di has very precise focus, and focus stacking should be easier.  However, one thing that I do not like about macro photography with the R is that in order to focus, the lens is moved.  For what I shoot, architecture, this does not matter.  But when you are shooting macro and moving the lens closer to the object to focus, thus increasing the distance you need between the lens and sensor to focus continuously, you are kind of working against yourself. 

[ErikKaffehr]

Hi,

With a larger format you need to stop down more, so you get even more diffraction. The best way exapand DoF is either using focus stacking or Scheimpflug. Both are discussed here: http://echophoto.dnsalias.net/ekr/index.php/photoarticles/29-handling-the-dof-trap

Best regards
Erik

I have a question or two....

I currently shoot with a d800 (thinking about swapping it out for the d800e)

I shoot a little bit of everything. Mainly landscapes and night photography. I understand that DMF are not good at night photography / long exposures.

For my work I shoot jewelry. Not high end jewelry but low cost fashion jewelry and MANY pieces of this jewelry. This is where my curiosity for medium format comes into play. I wanted to know if I should go for an entry level MF system like a leaf aptus ii-7 kit.

My reasoning is that I will be shooting at small fstops to maximize depth of field, the reason this is problematic for me with my d800 is that I get noticeable softness when I stop down to f/16 or higher. For jewelry its not ideal. So I am wondering will the MF application be better for me?

It is a very specific use I have in mind. Basically I would like to be able to capture a bracelet entirely in focus in one shot without having to shoot multiple shots for focus stacking etc.

Any advice would be greatly welcome.

[BJL]

With a larger format you need to stop down more, so you get even more diffraction.

To be pedantic: in order to get the same depth as judged by images displayed at the same size and viewed from the same distance, you need to increase the aperture ratio used _roughly_ in proportion to the format size and focal length used, and that increases the diffraction spot size on the sensor in the same proportion as the increase in image size, so when you view same-sized images, diffraction effects are roughly equal.

However, this is an approximation that breaks down at close range, like subject distances less than ten or twenty times focal length, which is likely the case with jewelry work. Then, I do not have the formulas in front of me, but IIRC, adequate DOF gets even tougher for the larger format, so you truly will have somewhat worse diffraction in the larger format once you stop down for adequate DOF.


TL;DR: what Erik said about focus stacking, or using tilt-shift lenses to align the plane of focus with the plane in which the subject lies.

[EricWHiss]

Some of the software out now can bring back losses due to diffraction - so that lets you stop down one or two stops more but its no panacea.  I'm not a nikon shooter, but have used the Canon 90mm TSE in the past and this was a great lens. Perhaps Nikon has an equivalent? Using a t/s lens and the recovery software could be the easiest path.

Other suggestions of using the VCC or Cambo X-2 are also good paths too to get movements. Other options would be a Linhof technika or a Rollei X-act2.  You can get DSLR mounts or digital backs mounts for either.  Benefits of using something with movements are perspective control as well as getting the plane of focus to cover the area of interest.

Even if you went to a digital back, you might still want movements or at least T/S. 

The d800e has good luminosity detail but fine color details are smeared together and highlight control is traded for shadow detail.  Therefore I think for jewelry you'd have a nicer looking file with a digital back.

[eronald]

An old Imacon multi-shot back will set you back by about $1000 and will do wonders for jewelry.
The downside is this is strictly for studio, tethered use.


Edmund

[HarperPhotos]

Hello Boinger,

The two images attached are tale with a Nikon D800E with a Horseman VCC adaptor using a Rodenstock 120mm Apo Rodagon lens.

I shot a F11.00 and each image is made up of 12-15 images which where then focus stacked.

I used to own a Leaf Aptus 75 but sold it as the Nikon D800E is superior in every way.

It amazes me that a camera like the Nikon D800 costing three grand can be so versatile.

Also Nikon are meet to be unveiling there new Nikon D4x next year which could have improvements over the D800E which in my opinion is the best camera on the market at this time.

As a advertising photographer the Nikon D800’s achieve every aspect of my type of work.

Cheers

Simon

[boinger]

This is what I currently use.

http://www.zoerk.com/pages/p_mfs.htm

I have the shift adapter and the MFS system which allows me to tilt the lens. But I still cant get a lot in focus at f/8 etc. I have to stop down to f/16 to get most of the object in focus.

I would like to avoid focus stacking at all costs. It is far to time consuming and I have to shoot 100 pieces of jewelry a day. Also since this is low cost jewelry I don't necessarily need the highest quality shot.

But more like a "Good enough" quality shot.

I would like to get there using the fastest route with minimal post work.

I was under the impression that with digital backs I had a little bit more room to stop down vs a d800. That is why I was looking at an Aptus ii 7 for around $7500 - $8000 ish.

Of course I would not be getting rid of my dslr the MF would prob be a compliment tool.

[ErikKaffehr]

Hi,

Diffraction is benign to sharpening as it's PSF (Point Spread Function) can be approximated by a Gaussian. Personally, I find that Smart Sharpen in Photoshop with Gaussian works best.

If you are shooting close up you need also take extension into account. So if you shoot 1:1 at f/16 the real aperture would be around f/32, unless you are shooting one of those macros with floating elements. 

You cannot regain detail that is lost to diffraction. Deconvolution can help, but if edge contrast (MTF) goes below a few percent the information is lost. Don't expect wonders from software.

The problem you have is essentially without solution. The two options are Scheimpflug and focus stacking. Focus stacking can be automatised using Helicon Focus and Stackshot: http://www.cognisys-inc.com/stackshot/stackshot.php

The two images below show effects of diffraction on P45+, left at f/5.6 and righ at f/22:

Best regards
Erik

Some of the software out now can bring back losses due to diffraction - so that lets you stop down one or two stops more but its no panacea.  I'm not a nikon shooter, but have used the Canon 90mm TSE in the past and this was a great lens. Perhaps Nikon has an equivalent? Using a t/s lens and the recovery software could be the easiest path.

Other suggestions of using the VCC or Cambo X-2 are also good paths too to get movements. Other options would be a Linhof technika or a Rollei X-act2.  You can get DSLR mounts or digital backs mounts for either.  Benefits of using something with movements are perspective control as well as getting the plane of focus to cover the area of interest.

Even if you went to a digital back, you might still want movements or at least T/S.  

The d800e has good luminosity detail but fine color details are smeared together and highlight control is traded for shadow detail.  Therefore I think for jewelry you'd have a nicer looking file with a digital back.

[EricWHiss]

There's no free lunch in photography. Everything is a compromise. 

Erik - have you tried Caron?  Or ImageJ ?  You should have a look.   You can get back some details, just not everything. 
And Erik, remember that some people's goals here are to get work done, not dissect and only study.   
 

[Ken R]

There's no free lunch in photography. Everything is a compromise. 

Erik - have you tried Caron?  Or ImageJ ?  You should have a look.   You can get back some details, just not everything. 
And Erik, remember that some people's goals here are to get work done, not dissect and only study.   
 

True.

Also, you can get moire with almost any camera, Usually when you get the right combination of repetitive detail and magnification (focal length, focus (subject) distance and composition). Obviously AA filterless cameras (sensors) are more prone to it but usually the moire issue can be solved on site by identifying it and moving back a touch or forward and shooting again. I was shooting corporate portraits a few months ago and one of the subjects showed up with a suit that had very thin stripes that were quite darker than the lighter suit fabric. Moire city with the Canon 5D3. A camera not known to produce much moire at all. I was however using the 50mm f1.2L at f8 which no matter what a lot of tests indicate it is WICKED sharp at that aperture and typical portrait focus distances.

[ErikKaffehr]

Eric,

The OP is running into diffraction (at f/16) and he asks if he would be helped by moving up into larger formats. If he moves up to a larger format he needs to stop down to f/22 or more. The sample shows him what to expect. Smart sharpen does a good job on restoring sharpness, but there are limits to what you can restore.

Getting extended DoF in macro has always been a challenge.

Best regards
Erik

There's no free lunch in photography. Everything is a compromise. 

Erik - have you tried Caron?  Or ImageJ ?  You should have a look.   You can get back some details, just not everything. 
And Erik, remember that some people's goals here are to get work done, not dissect and only study.   
 

[Ken R]

Eric,

The OP is running into diffraction (at f/16) and he asks if he would be helped by moving up into larger formats. If he moves up to a larger format he needs to stop down to f/22 or more. The sample shows him what to expect. Smart sharpen does a good job on restoring sharpness, but there are limits to what you can restore.

Getting extended DoF in macro has always been a challenge.

Best regards
Erik

Like I mentioned before. the best way to get extended DOF in macro (or control of the focusing plane) in single image capture is by using tilt/swing on a camera or lens that allows it obviously. Both solutions are available for the Nikon he already has. Several view cameras allow the mounting of DSLRs and Mirrorless cameras and allow the use of view camera lenses (some are very very good). Nikon also has the 85mm PC-E lens which is perfect for what the OP intends to do. The PC-E is the simplest solution. The others are much more involved but are there if he wishes to get really into it. With a view camera he could mount almost any back and have the same control.

Also, besides the camera side, color management is key and consistency in light output (color and intensity) but that is a whole nother subject.

[EricWHiss]

We've all mentioned T/S lenses and/or some kind of technical camera with movements.  What's left is focus stacking, and deconvolution software. Unfortunately not every subject can be stitched or focus stacked and there will be times when you need to shoot at f/18 or f/20 or whatever to make it work. This is not all just for the fun of discussion.

The best results are going to be had with a technical view camera type set up to both control plane of focus and perspective with a digital back, and even then you'd probably want to focus stack shots taken at f/8 or something.

But that's a lot of work and expense most will not go to for average jobs.

The only other way to get big DOF is to use smaller sensors, but then you have other issues.

The only other surprise that I found is that when you shoot with a multishot back, you can stop down almost 2 stops more before the diffraction is visible. I can shoot to f/25 on my CF 528 when in multishot mode when I'd only go to f/18.   I think this has to do with the way the software handles the assembly of information more than anything but its really nice for product work.  But again mulishot is more work and a bit more difficult.

That's why I wrote it's always a compromise // no free lunch.


and Erik - I just suggested you look at those softwares since you seem to really enjoy spending time looking at this stuff.  It's only loosely connected to this topic.   I do use the smart sharpen in LR sometimes ImageJ with the pulgins and also Caron for some of my images that I shot at small apertures.

[ErikKaffehr]

Hi Eric,

Thanks for suggestions on Software, I am using ImageJ from time to time. I'll check out the Caron stuff, too.

Your observation on Multishot having less problems with diffraction is interesting. The Multishot back you have, does it quadruple resolution? I guess that increasing resolution may be helpful with restoring diffraction effects, as the PSF would be more accurate. Tim Parkin looked into this and has indicated that a Nikon D800 shot at f/22 had better detail than his Sony Alpha 900 at f/8, after correct sharpening was applied.

The OP has tried Scheimpflug, and wants an efficient workflow for shooting jewelry, that is the reason I suggested StackShot, it moves the camera automatically on a focusing rail. It is also affordable at 500-600 $US. I would buy that stuff if I was shooting macro. The StackShot also operates with Helicon Focus or Zerene Stacker.

Best regards
Erik

We've all mentioned T/S lenses and/or some kind of technical camera with movements.  What's left is focus stacking, and deconvolution software. Unfortunately not every subject can be stitched or focus stacked and there will be times when you need to shoot at f/18 or f/20 or whatever to make it work. This is not all just for the fun of discussion.

The best results are going to be had with a technical view camera type set up to both control plane of focus and perspective with a digital back, and even then you'd probably want to focus stack shots taken at f/8 or something.

But that's a lot of work and expense most will not go to for average jobs.

The only other way to get big DOF is to use smaller sensors, but then you have other issues.

The only other surprise that I found is that when you shoot with a multishot back, you can stop down almost 2 stops more before the diffraction is visible. I can shoot to f/25 on my CF 528 when in multishot mode when I'd only go to f/18.   I think this has to do with the way the software handles the assembly of information more than anything but its really nice for product work.  But again mulishot is more work and a bit more difficult.

That's why I wrote it's always a compromise // no free lunch.


and Erik - I just suggested you look at those softwares since you seem to really enjoy spending time looking at this stuff.  It's only loosely connected to this topic.   I do use the smart sharpen in LR sometimes ImageJ with the pulgins and also Caron for some of my images that I shot at small apertures.

[BernardLanguillier]

It is also possible, with lenses not suffering from focus shift, to mix 2 images, one shot at f22 and one shot at best possible aperture and to merge them.

This provides a good mix between DoF and detail where peak sharpness is required.

Cheers,
Bernard