Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 2 [3] 4 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: leaf aptus 65 centerfolding issues?? image inside  (Read 16552 times)
awofinden
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 173


« Reply #40 on: November 14, 2006, 01:57:31 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Those of us dealing with this are very upset.  We have all lost sleep over it.  And yes, it does seem unfair.  We bought a back which was said to not have an issue with non-uniformity.  We have now learned that ALL 33 and 39mp back have non-uniformity with the non-retrofocal lenses.

If we knew then what we know now, would we have chosen to stay with film?  Maybe.  Leaf is telling it's customers shooting with these lenses that they are trying to produce backs which are free of this non-uniformity.  Has anyone with Phase, Hassy, or Sinar backs been told this by those companies?  If Leaf totally fails to cure this non-uniformity, or gives it up entirely, then the Leaf backs will be just the same as the other makers backs in respect to this issue rather than being better.

"I guess it's a  virtue of you guys to put up with this"

My nikon lenses all have barrel and pincushion distortion, and Chromatic abberation.  The camera has ugly noise at High ISO, and noise at long exposures.  It also does a terrible job of handling blown highlights compared to the MFDB's.  I put up with it.  The 1Ds II I used had better noise, but worse lenses.  I put up with it.  I could characterize all these as defects and ask for my money back.  The people who are telling me to demand a refund from Leaf would Laugh at me for demanding a refund from Nikon or Canon.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=85204\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Barrel and pincushion distortion is a known charecteristic of lenses. If the centrefold problem is a charecteristic of the back why don't leaf come out and put it on there spec sheets for the backs?
Logged
Willow Photography
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 255


WWW
« Reply #41 on: November 14, 2006, 02:04:02 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
here we have a perfect example why this forum is pretty much useless to anyone who actually owns a MF back....people making comments about problems they don't have and that they don't know anything about...."haha another leaf back has a problem, let's all bash leaf!" it is simply childish and such a waste of time...
this forum should be renamed: the almost MF digital forum..people on the verge
always the same questions: which back should i buy? and the answers from the people who actually own backs are always the same...go and test them! and yes they are better! we do people like edmund keep posting on issues that don concern them? if this forum was the only good info on DMF, leaf must be worried, it seems like their backs are faulty and every new product comes out too early...i have owned a leaf back, never had any problems at all...i prefer phase and that workflow...it seems like some people here are happy if there are problems, because they haven't been able to afford the systems they keep reading and writing about, and when these systems have problems...it actually makes them feel better...it is sad...
there is no discussion here about photos, techniques or even photography! it is all leaf v phase v the rest...how faschist hasselblad has become...how this back has this problem (with most of the posts coming from people who don't own the prduct!!!)......at the same time people complain about products being released too early, it is the same people who lust for every rumor and every press release....
edumnd...do another poll...who actually owns a back in here, i can't come here for questions and i am sick of writing the same answers to the same questions, from people on the fence....
i just ordered a new back...the rep and dealers bent over backwards to get the product in my hands...and i am talking about 2 great deals from 2 different companies...anyone out there SERIOUSLY looking for a back should not have a problem handling one and getting a good price....
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=85191\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


YES!!!

Finally somebody who says what many of us think.

Why not a new thread for people who HAVE a MFDB and wants

to talk about photography and practical use.

Not why and what to buy, no talk about things that will or not will come,
 but rather how to use the one we have!

Share some knowledge how it is in practical use.

Willow
« Last Edit: November 14, 2006, 03:31:55 PM by Willow Photography » Logged

Willow Photography
awofinden
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 173


« Reply #42 on: November 14, 2006, 02:10:59 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
YES!!!

Finally somebody who says what many of us think.

Why not a new FORUM for people who HAVE a MFDB and wants

to talk about photography and practical use.

Not why and what to buy, no talk about things that will or not will come,
 but rather how to use the one we have!

Share some knowledge how it is in practical use.

Willow
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=85211\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I have owned both medium format backs and the 1ds mark 2 and I find it usefull to debate the relative merits/problems of various companies products. If this thread isn't interesting to you there are many other threads regarding different topics. I don't know why you'd be upset by people debating this. Is dissent not tolerated?
Logged
richardhagen
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 67


« Reply #43 on: November 14, 2006, 02:49:52 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
SNIP

Has anyone with Phase, Hassy, or Sinar backs been told this by those companies?  If Leaf totally fails to cure this non-uniformity, or gives it up entirely, then the Leaf backs will be just the same as the other makers backs in respect to this issue rather than being better.

"I guess it's a  virtue of you guys to put up with this"

My nikon lenses all have barrel and pincushion distortion, and Chromatic abberation.  The camera has ugly noise at High ISO, and noise at long exposures.  It also does a terrible job of handling blown highlights compared to the MFDB's.  I put up with it.  The 1Ds II I used had better noise, but worse lenses.  I put up with it.  I could characterize all these as defects and ask for my money back.  The people who are telling me to demand a refund from Leaf would Laugh at me for demanding a refund from Nikon or Canon.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=85204\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

This to me is an incredibly ridiculous analysis totally lacking in logic. I don't think one can equate the Leaf centerfold defect with these other issues like chromatic abberation, noise at high exposures, pin cushioning, etc. These problems are limitations in the technology. In my humble opinion, the Leaf centerfold looks to me like a defect in sensor manufacturing.

Richard
Logged
ericstaud
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 384


WWW
« Reply #44 on: November 14, 2006, 02:59:54 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
This to me is an incredibly ridiculous analysis totally lacking in logic. I don't think one can equate the Leaf centerfold defect with these other issues like chromatic abberation, noise at high exposures, pin cushioning, etc. These problems are limitations in the technology. In my humble opinion, the Leaf centerfold looks to me like a defect in sensor manufacturing.

Richard
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=85221\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Which MFDB's do you use?
Logged
awofinden
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 173


« Reply #45 on: November 14, 2006, 03:09:29 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Which MFDB's do you use?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=85226\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Why is that relevant?
Logged
ericstaud
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 384


WWW
« Reply #46 on: November 14, 2006, 03:18:06 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Why is that relevant?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=85228\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

He is comparing the centerfold to chromatic abberation and barrel distortion.  I would like to know how he deals with these different image defects in his workflow.  For me, the centerfold has an easier and more fullproof solution than any of the defects he mentions.
Logged
Dustbak
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2368


« Reply #47 on: November 14, 2006, 03:24:45 PM »
ReplyReply

How do you know besides your opinion that the centerfold problem is a manufacturing problem instead of a limitation of current technology?

Even my Aptus17 suffers from centerfold when I put it in the right circumstances, actually I can even push it so it shows 6 rectangulars 3 by 3 with a centerline. I think a lot of sensors (if not all) suffer from this provided they are pushed in places where you should not (when you do not wish to pay the penalty).

The other stuff you mention being limitations of technology are also varying in degrees of severity considering sample variations. When these are only limitations due to the technology why would there be any sample variation?

All in all, whether they are manufacturing errors, variations or technological limitations, the problems are there and need to be addressed.

Somehow it seems like it is worse when it is a manufacturing fault instead of a technology barrier, why? So you can point an accussing finger towards the manufacturer? Pfff.. I don't really care what the reason might be, I am not into blame only in solutions.

Actually I would prefer a manufacturers fault since that can be resolved much more easily than a tech barrier.

Indeed the centerfold is a lot easier to address with the custom gain adjuster than any form of CA or purple fringing (not taking distortions in consideration, DxO is fairly good in fixing these).
« Last Edit: November 14, 2006, 04:22:19 PM by Dustbak » Logged
Willow Photography
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 255


WWW
« Reply #48 on: November 14, 2006, 03:29:48 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
I have owned both medium format backs and the 1ds mark 2 and I find it usefull to debate the relative merits/problems of various companies products. If this thread isn't interesting to you there are many other threads regarding different topics. I don't know why you'd be upset by people debating this. Is dissent not tolerated?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=85213\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


I did NOT say that we should shut this thread down!
I am NOT upset by people debating this, I am doing it my self.
I will still read and participate in this thread
Quote
Is dissent not tolerated?

How on earth can you read that into what I said?

I just was happy that someone pointed out that we need a new thread where
we can discuss more practical and photography related MFDB topics.

Willow
Logged

Willow Photography
awofinden
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 173


« Reply #49 on: November 14, 2006, 03:35:35 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
I did NOT say that we should shut this thread down!
I am NOT upset by people debating this, I am doing it my self.
I will still read and participate in this thread
How on earth can you read that into what I said?

I just was happy that someone pointed out that we need a new thread where
we can discuss more practical and photography related MFDB topics.

Willow
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=85237\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I think you probably could post a thread like that if you wanted to.
Logged
mkravit
Guest
« Reply #50 on: November 14, 2006, 03:48:51 PM »
ReplyReply

This is all getting repetitive,

The bottom line is Leaf has a serious problem. They have been unsuccessful solving it and their are a number of people who have decided to either change their order, move to another manufacturer or hold off on their purchase.

The linearlity problem (Magenta/cyan split screen) that resulted from trying to fix the centerfold issue and the latest vertical magenta/cyan banding problem resulting from the newest firmware to fix the linearity magenta/cyan problem are just making people more and more frustrated.

My suggestion to Leaf is to make a worldwide announcement that all back sales and production will be stopped until these issues are worked out and a real and workable solution found.

I also think that people shoudl be constructive and not muck rakers like Edmund. I am glad that Michael put a stop to that quickly.
Logged
rainer_v
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1130


WWW
« Reply #51 on: November 14, 2006, 04:09:28 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
The centerfold issue is specific to Non-Retrofocal lenses (large format lenses like the 24, 35, 47, and 60mm Schneider digitars).  Do you know how the other backs perform with these same lenses?  The eMotion, Leaf, Phase One, and Hasselblad MFDB's all suffer from a lack of uniformity using these lenses.  So you can return your Leaf back, but then what are you going to replace it with?  Anyone with a real interest in this issue would be asking how each manufacturer solves the issue through hardware or software, rather than demanding a refund. 

Leaf and Sinar resolve this issue by creating new RAW files using reference captures to remove the defects in the image.  It is a permanent and archival solution.  Sinar and Leaf users can then process their RAW files in any software package. 

-Eric
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=85186\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

eric, this is only in parts right. the centerfold issue is created by the 6 zones of the dalsa sensor, normally just shows up the centerline. this it does under all circumstances, the line becomes just more or less visible, but its allways there. even all imagers have the issue, it just can be in a region where the tolerances are low enough that it hardly becomes visible.
the subtracting with white referemces is not a solution which will provide good enough solutions under all circumstances, although it can be good enough under many that the lwo parts of the image may look uniform enough.
the way sinar remove the cf issue is not working with inverted files, here is implemented some software code who adjust the different levels of the (6) sensor-zones to the same level.
the white references are taken fr the emotion only for compensation of vignetting and color uniformity.
Logged

rainer viertlböck
architecture photographer
munich / germany

www.tangential.de
ericstaud
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 384


WWW
« Reply #52 on: November 14, 2006, 04:18:51 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
eric, this is only in parts right. the centerfold issue is created by the 6 zones of the dalsa sensor, normally just shows up the centerline. this it does under all circumstances, the line becomes just more or less visible, but its allways there. even all imagers have the issue, it just can be in a region where the tolerances are low enough that it hardly becomes visible.
the subtracting with white referemces is not a solution which will provide good enough solutions under all circumstances, although it can be good enough under many that the lwo parts of the image may look uniform enough.
the way sinar remove the cf issue is not working with inverted files, here is implemented some software code who adjust the different levels of the (6) sensor-zones to the same level.
the white references are taken fr the emotion only for compensation of vignetting and color uniformity.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=85255\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Thanks for the informative reply Rainer.  I did not understand the issue this way before.  I can say that with all the images from my Aptus 75 that I do not have a centerfold after the Custom Gain Adjustment.  I have run the Custom Gain adjustment on about 500-1000 images so far.
Logged
rainer_v
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1130


WWW
« Reply #53 on: November 14, 2006, 04:26:53 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Thanks for the informative reply Rainer.  I did not understand the issue this way before.  I can say that with all the images from my Aptus 75 that I do not have a centerfold after the Custom Gain Adjustment.  I have run the Custom Gain adjustment on about 500-1000 images so far.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=85261\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

yes, it may not be visible, but it will be there. sounds  illogic, but so it is,- and therefore it will depend very much on the subject, the contrast, the luminance and the colors if it becomes visible or not. there are sensors out where the specs ( dalsa claims 3% for the amps ) are hit better, in some backs good enough that the cf issue will not become visible.
 in the several backs i tested, which used the dalsa33 imager i could make it visible in all, although in reality it may become visible or not, depending on these factors and of the tolerances of the sensor read out ( probably the  amps..).
Logged

rainer viertlböck
architecture photographer
munich / germany

www.tangential.de
ericstaud
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 384


WWW
« Reply #54 on: November 14, 2006, 04:32:17 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
yes, it may not be visible, but it will be there. sounds  illogic, but so it is,- and therefore it will depend very much on the subject, the contrast, the luminance and the colors if it becomes visible or not. there are sensors out where the specs ( dalsa claims 3% for the amps ) are hit better, in some backs good enough that the cf issue will not become visible.
 in the several backs i tested, which used the dalsa33 imager i could make it visible in all, although in reality it may become visible or not, depending on these factors and of the tolerances of the sensor read out ( probably the  amps..).
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=85265\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Can you describe the working process of the Sinar solution to centerfold?  Is the centerfold solution seperate from the eMotion DNG converter?  Is it written into the back firmware, the computer software, ....?

I have not been able to make the centerfold evident on the RAW files which have been corrected through the Custom Gain Adjuster.  For all practical purposes it does not exist.   I can make the centerfold visible, on all files which have not been corrected, by extreme adjustments in contrast and color in ACR.

I am not clear how Sinar's solution works for the centerfold.
« Last Edit: November 14, 2006, 05:01:16 PM by ericstaud » Logged
rainer_v
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1130


WWW
« Reply #55 on: November 14, 2006, 05:04:52 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Can you describe the working process of the Sinar solution to centerfold?  Is the centerfold solution seperate from the eMotion DNG converter?  Is it written into the back, the computer software, ....?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=85266\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
for detailled info about that lets wait if stephan "brumbaer" want to jump in here....
the cf solution was develloped together with the improving eMotion DNG konverter,
after we have worked on the color linearity of certain dalsa sensors.
parts of this cf code have been implemented than in capture shop. the cf issue is corrected meanwhile the *.sti ( capture ) or *.dng ( eMotion DNG ) files are created.

to correct the cf issue it is NOT necessary to shoot white files or to do anything. it is corrected automatically for all files meanwhile the raw data is read out from the back memory or the cf card.
« Last Edit: November 14, 2006, 05:11:39 PM by rehnniar » Logged

rainer viertlböck
architecture photographer
munich / germany

www.tangential.de
ericstaud
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 384


WWW
« Reply #56 on: November 14, 2006, 05:11:59 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
for detailled info about that lets wait if stephan "brumbaer" want to jump in here....
the cf solution was develloped together with the improving eMotion DNG konverter,
after we have worked on the color linearity of certain dalsa sensors.
parts of this cf code have been implemented than in capture shop. the cf issue is corrected meanwhile the *.sti ( capture ) or *.dng ( eMotion DNG ) files are created.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=85274\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Thanks Rainer,

I am not looking for the technical answer that Stephan could provide.  Just an understanding of the process and the results.

So lets see if I understand this....

The initial eMotion 75 files have centerfold, even if it is barely visable.
The files are corrected in the computer software after downloading.
The resulting RAW files have no centerfold remaining.

Is this correct?
Logged
ericstaud
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 384


WWW
« Reply #57 on: November 14, 2006, 05:15:45 PM »
ReplyReply

Also Rainer,

Do you find that, for color uniformity, you still shoot white files?  Is it necessary with all your lenses, or just particular lenses with particular ammounts of shift?
Logged
eronald
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 4015



WWW
« Reply #58 on: November 14, 2006, 05:17:25 PM »
ReplyReply

James, Aon,

I have been testing the backs and looking at files. My next step now is going to be to improve my client relationships, and invest some time and money in creating some storyboarded portofolio shoots with decent models.  I'll buy new equipment if the clients like the setups.  The Canons will have to handle this current bunch of projects for the next 3 months; I don't like the results but if it was good enough for James three years ago it will do ok for me today.

Edmund


Quote
Edmund,

Unless you use one of these backs, day in day out you really can't understand the value and consequently you won't find the issues and workarounds.

Just looking at a few frames from different sessions really tell you nothing.  What looks good with flash, may not work with continuous light, what works with tungsten looks different with HMI's, what is good at 400 iso and slightly overexposed could be full of noise at 200 iso and slightly underexposed.

I see this all the time, people make generalizations of a certain brand and then report, _________ is awful or __________ is better.  I've been guilty of the same and recently being able to test three backs from three manufacturers opened my eyes.

In fact I can give you compelling reasons why each back has an advantage and conversely why any of the three would be a better purchase.

Everyone wants a definative answer and in the internet age, one, two or three anomolies or even mispoken words can unfairly brand a product.

Still, the only thing that matters to me is what works for me.

My suggestion is before anyone make absolute remarks about a product is to try it and not in an hour or a day but really put it too work and find it's limits.

JR
http://www.russellrutherfordgroup.com/
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=85137\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Logged

Edmund Ronald, Ph.D. 
josayeruk
Guest
« Reply #59 on: November 14, 2006, 05:53:45 PM »
ReplyReply

My rep said that Hasselblad's launch of their earlier 39MP products were delayed in part by a centrefold issue too.

So I guess with the right firmware / software tweaks then Leaf will be able to do the same thing.

As others have said, I am sure they will be working hard to correct it - perhaps not an easy fault to fix!

Jo x
Logged
Pages: « 1 2 [3] 4 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad