Hi,
Either of those photographers use a 50 MP camera with a 44x33 mm sensor? It has 27% larger linear size than 24x36 (on the diagonal)
and (50/39)^0.5 * 100 -100 = 13% more linear pixels than a 39 MP DSLR.
Is that 13% advantage enough to make wall size prints that can be viewed really close?
For best sharpness from a single exposure, I would still guess that large format film drum scanned at high PPI (6000-10000) and expertly processed still is king, the next best is probably a high end digital back on a technical camera with Schneider or Rodenstock HR lenses using optimum aperture. With stitching, essentially any resolution can be achieved, but there are many cases where stitching is not practical.
Just to say, my experience is with 6x7 film (Pentax 67), Hasselblad V-series and P45+ (being trough eight different Zeiss lenses) and Sony 24MP cameras. I am not really happy about film, but I have seen some decent samples of drum scanned film.
If you check Hasselblad MTF curves, it is quite obvious that the new H-series lenses are better than the old Zeiss lenses, almost without exception, that may explain some of the differences between your experience and mine. I feel the Pentax my 67 lenses are a bit weaker than my Zeiss lenses for the "blad", that doesn't say anything about Pentax 645 lenses I don't have. This thread happens to be about the P645Z, I know.
Tim Parkin made some tests with large format film and also including both P45+ (which I happen to have) and a Phase One IQ 180, the difference between the P45+ and the IQ-180 was a bit larger than I would have expected.
Some examples here: http://static.timparkin.co.uk/static/tmp/cameratest-2/800px.html
Best regards
Erik
Hello Erik
Good points as always.
My goal has always been to capture images that will hold up to large scale printing. The largest single image I have made was a single image broken into (4) 36 x 72 panels. I have had prints made even larger, however I did not do the final uprez.
I also feel that the best printing solution is one done with the least amount of uprezing. As has been pointed out in Jeff"s Digital Print, and other publications, for an Epson inkjet the best output dpi is either 360 to 720. For say a 23 x 33 at 360 dpi, even a single shot from a 60MJP back will not print this without uprez. What tools are used is another topic.
Since 2003, I have worked to come up with ways to gain raw resolution, starting with a Zork adapter on a 1ds MKI and moving up to the current solution of MP back and Acra tech camera. Most often I still stitch a solution with the Acra working again to gain as much overall resolution as possible, thus keeping uprez work later on to a minimum. As anyone who uses this equipment knows this is a much more involved workflow involving multiple captures and LCC work. The results still impress me. So far none of the current 50MP Sony solutions really mean much to me since the current chip is not friendly with wides at all. My shooting environment the wides are most common, 28mm or 40mm max 60mm.
Do I feel that the difference between a single D810 and single P645Z frame is important, yes, sure there is more useable resolution in that single frame, however I could easily stitch my D810 for 3 frames have have more useable resolution. And sure someone could stitch 3 frames with a 645Z so question comes back to the knowledge base of the photographer. If you just had to use a single frame from a 645Z or D810 then I believe the 645Z would make a larger print with less effort. Good technique needs to be used on both of these platforms with wide lenses to allow you to use the full frame taken, and not crop due to corner softness.
Everyone has their own levels of what constitutes a good print, and I don't feel any two photographers will ever agree. I know what I like to see from a 30 x 40 print in details and I feel I have a solution that gets me there. Was it a cheap not in the least but I still prefer the output from the Schneider and Rodenstock glass, no matter what the workflow is. It does tend to make you a bit more focused on the shot at hand.
For me it's a balancing act of can I carry the weight all day to get a shot I know will hold up in larger print sizes. Many times I know that a 5 to 8 mile hike in 100% Arkansas humidity is not where I want to carry a Phase One solution all day, and thus I compromise with either Nikon or Fuji. Many tend to also forget it seems that all the current 50MP chips are 1:3 cropped and that's 30% less overall image. For a wide shooter that's a big deal. I still remember the issues I had with the 1:1 (10%) crop of the P45+.
I hope Pentax is successful for sure as I have always liked their medium format gear. However knowing what I have learned in the past 8 years of stitching, if I did not own the Phase One/Arca gear I know I could still get great results with the D810 and stitching.
Paul