Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1] 2 3 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: More elongated than 2:3 ratio?  (Read 12797 times)
uaiomex
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1001


WWW
« on: July 29, 2008, 02:34:28 PM »
ReplyReply

Or Dalsa as well. This format truly excentric. it would be great for landscape photography, full lenght fashion and pens.

I love the built-in rotating sensor. I propossed that a long time ago. One thing,  I wasn't sure a true 645 sensor would clear the physical boundaries of the back's carcass while rotating.

So, this aproach makes me wonder if they came with a thinner sensor just to be able to rotate it without increasing the outer side of the back.

Don't raise the bridge, lower the river!!  Yeeeeah!

Eduardo
Logged
gwhitf
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 820


« Reply #1 on: July 29, 2008, 04:28:37 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
I just don't get why people think landscape photography is a justifiable genre for $40K+ equipment.
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

[a href=\"http://www.RetiredDentists.com]http://www.RetiredDentists.com[/url]
Logged
flashfredrikson
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 86


« Reply #2 on: July 29, 2008, 05:10:09 PM »
ReplyReply

LOL!!! pens and retired dentists, too good to be true.
Please Phase, just get a deal sorted out with rollei so i can use a hy6 with a nice back. please.
Logged
narikin
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 859


« Reply #3 on: July 29, 2008, 05:36:33 PM »
ReplyReply

must be Mont-Blanc sponsored, surely?

good thinking about the rotating back-format constrictions, too - hmm...

agreed this is mucho-bizarre format.
Logged
bryanyc
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 98


« Reply #4 on: July 29, 2008, 06:05:48 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
must be Mont-Blanc sponsored, surely?

good thinking about the rotating back-format constrictions, too - hmm...

agreed this is mucho-bizarre format.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=211581\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

So bizarre that it was a standard in 35mm and remains standard in top of the line "35" digital that so many pros shoot with.      maybe its not so bizarre after all  
« Last Edit: July 29, 2008, 06:06:34 PM by bryanyc » Logged
Graham Mitchell
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2282



WWW
« Reply #5 on: July 29, 2008, 06:22:00 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Please Phase, just get a deal sorted out with rollei so i can use a hy6 with a nice back. please.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=211571\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Have you even compared the Phase and Sinar backs? I've used both and seen the raw files from both and would love to know what advantage you see in the Phase backs that would stop you from just getting the Hy6 today.
Logged

Graham Mitchell - www.graham-mitchell.com
uaiomex
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1001


WWW
« Reply #6 on: July 29, 2008, 06:33:46 PM »
ReplyReply

I agree with you. 2:3 ratio it's been the standard for 35 film and digital for 80 years or so, but not with the more "pro" bigger formats.Since I can't afford a digital back yet, I've been shooting with digital 35 for all kind of things. with the exception of shooting pj, I always wish my Canon was a 3:4 ratio or even better 4:5 ratio.
Someone here suggested that this world its becoming more and more panoramic "as in TV and monitors". Why would someone buy a 40K usd back to see "slides" on his/her latest top  lcd tv?

A 56mp dback (imho) should be targeted for the fashion, portrait, product market. If I could choose, I'd grab a 4:5 ratio camera over the others.

Bizarre is the intention (of course, we don't know Dalsa/Leaf intentions whatsoever). Perhaps there's a secret agreement among back makers to segment the formats and specialize on each.

One more thing. Since Leaf is not spending money on designing a revolving back, maybe they already have plans for the first 56X56mm sensor on the market. Now, that doesn't sound too bizarre!

Eduardo

Quote
So bizarre that it was a standard in 35mm and remains standard in top of the line "35" digital that so many pros shoot with.      maybe its not so bizarre after all 
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=211585\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
« Last Edit: July 29, 2008, 06:36:32 PM by uaiomex » Logged
free1000
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 403


WWW
« Reply #7 on: July 29, 2008, 06:34:36 PM »
ReplyReply

This thread is too funny...  

Pens...  Dentists...

Splitting my sides.
Logged

@foliobook
Foliobook professional photography folio for iPad
www.foliobook.mobi
bryanyc
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 98


« Reply #8 on: July 29, 2008, 07:13:13 PM »
ReplyReply

Eduardo
And I agree with you that I would probably prefer the plain 6 x 4.5 proportions.
maybe it is a price issue?
Logged
Brady
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 59


WWW
« Reply #9 on: July 29, 2008, 07:31:07 PM »
ReplyReply

whatever....buy your p65+ or hassy 645 when they come out and then you can just crop the top and bottom of your horizontal frames and you get the same pano as you do from this new leaf.......hassy and phase made it optional! isn't everyone on here always screaming about choices.
Logged
EricWHiss
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 2416



WWW
« Reply #10 on: July 29, 2008, 11:53:53 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Have you even compared the Phase and Sinar backs? I've used both and seen the raw files from both and would love to know what advantage you see in the Phase backs that would stop you from just getting the Hy6 today.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=211588\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Hi Graham,
You didn't direct this question to me, but you could since I'm a likely candidate to upgrade my 6008/P20 to either the AFi or Hy6 with leaf or sinar backs but have been reluctant so far.  

The big advantage of the sinar backs is of course the modularity being able to easily switch between camera platforms but a 2nd strong point is the great ISO 800 files.   However, I've been put off from Sinar backs because of what appears to be a cumbersome 2 step workflow with the files.  A second reason not confirmed or scientific is that the Sinar files people have shared all seem to have a green yellow undertone to them that makes them unappealing to me especially for images with skin (IMHO) - You're welcome to try and show me otherwise because everytime I have tried to demo a Sinar back, the closest dealer seems to forget the batteries or otherwise put me off so I haven't a chance to shoot it myself. It appears that even with Brumbaer tools they have a bit less DR than the phase files I am working with.   I don't know if there is anything to the color issues sensor wise as I haven't seen this problem with the leaf files so suspect its software?   Leaf files seem to open natively in a whole lot more apps so the workflow could be easier but I find the UI of the Leaf backs a put off.  I'd like something I can do easily with one hand, even not looking at the screen.  Dunno - I guess if you get used to it?    Well who knows maybe if they were all taken to a lab and studied the differences in quality would be a wash, but it sure seems like there are differences in color and tone between the Kodak chipped backs and the Dalsa chipped backs at least for the last generations.   I'm looking forward to seeing files from the new dalsa sensors.
« Last Edit: July 30, 2008, 12:20:19 AM by EricWHiss » Logged

Authorized Rolleiflex Dealer:
Find product information, download user manuals, or purchase online - Rolleiflex USA
Graham Mitchell
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2282



WWW
« Reply #11 on: July 30, 2008, 03:44:48 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Leaf files seem to open natively in a whole lot more apps
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=211654\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Sinar now uses the DNG format for the widest possible compatibility. Pity that you haven't had a chance to use these backs yourself and do a proper white balance. I can send you a DNG raw file to play with.
Logged

Graham Mitchell - www.graham-mitchell.com
flashfredrikson
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 86


« Reply #12 on: July 30, 2008, 03:46:48 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Have you even compared the Phase and Sinar backs? I've used both and seen the raw files from both and would love to know what advantage you see in the Phase backs that would stop you from just getting the Hy6 today.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=211588\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


Good morning Graham an all,
what I like about the Sinarbacks is that they fit on any camera, that is really nice, I hate the phase one concept. Together with the rotating adaptor it almost sounds perfect. But I would never buy a back for that alone. What puts me off is the software. I must admitt I never shot one in a real working situation but I used it on a demo of the Hy6 and talked about it with the photog who was hired to present it to the public. The Software was so chunky, hard to use, maybe you could get into it, but why that effort when there is something that works? And after 200 shots in one folder it crashes... I like C1 3.7 for tethering, and I always tether. It just works. I won't take the risk to hustle around with the sinar software on a real shoot.
Then avalability is another point which keeps me off buying into the sinar system. I have never seen a sinarback in any rental place on this planet, never. It is phase all the way. And I am in Germany, but nowhere around here you can rent one to really check it out, let alone you need backup because the one you own crashes... You can't even look at one in a store...
I can not commend on the files or their quality and frankly, I do not really care, because I think the differences in IQ are so small and with the right workflow, input profiles and post, what you see printed on paper won't be that different after all. I mean in a lot of situations even a well done 1DS MKIII file can keep up with that. But I like to shoot MF, for the ratio, the slower pace and all those things.
But if sinar willl make a nice 30MP superfullframe645true back, maybe even with microlenses P30 style, working in C1 for tethering or maybe just something like eos utility + input icc profiles which let's me use LR, with a decent display, capable of 1 fps and throws in some new AF lenses like 100 2.0, gets the whole system into the rental places in all major markets, I will get one.

As I never see that happen, please phase and rollei, get together like you did before.

cheers,
martin
Logged
Graham Mitchell
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2282



WWW
« Reply #13 on: July 30, 2008, 03:56:24 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
What puts me off is the software. I must admitt I never shot one in a real working situation but I used it on a demo of the Hy6 and talked about it with the photog who was hired to present it to the public. The Software was so chunky, hard to use, maybe you could get into it, but why that effort when there is something that works?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=211686\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I don't see the problem. I used C1 for years before I got my Sinar and both softwares do the job and are easy to use. You also have the option of using third party software with the DNG files so there's really no issue.
Logged

Graham Mitchell - www.graham-mitchell.com
peegeenyc
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 45


« Reply #14 on: July 30, 2008, 07:25:15 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
So bizarre that it was a standard in 35mm and remains standard in top of the line "35" digital that so many pros shoot with.      maybe its not so bizarre after all 
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=211585\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Errr - did you read the thread opening post properly?

yes 2:3 is a 35mm standard, but this back is not 2:3
its 2:3.1

i.e. even longer.
very odd, must have been some free space on the production wafer, and they thought 'why not?'
Logged
James R Russell
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 984



WWW
« Reply #15 on: July 30, 2008, 08:42:00 AM »
ReplyReply

History repeats itself

Logged

bradleygibson
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 829


WWW
« Reply #16 on: July 30, 2008, 09:59:04 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Have you even compared the Phase and Sinar backs? I've used both and seen the raw files from both and would love to know what advantage you see in the Phase backs that would stop you from just getting the Hy6 today.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=211588\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Hi, Graham,

Assuming your question is not rhetorical, I can help here--as you may know, I had a P45 and a P45+ for about a year before switching over to a Sinar e75LV, which I am using now.  The P45+ had a number of advantages for me as a nature photographer (no particular order):

* Lower noise at low ISO
* Multi-channel histogram
* Battery life
* Superior user interface (eg. one menu button)
* A unified file format (the Sinarback does not produce .DNGs, but rather .WR's, .BR's & .IA's, which must be combined by software to create .DNGs)--allowing one to go direct from camera to your choice of developing software, without having to create .dngs post-shoot.
* More mature software--Sinar eXposure has a number of limitations preventing a serious comparison to Capture One at this time, but Sinar is working on it.  Anything from accessing content copied to a portable hard drive to disabling renaming so that the .DNG filenames correspond to the original camera-generated raw files and several other features are not yet ready.
* ~6% more resolution
* Able to shoot to card when tethered
* Custom WB when shooting to card
* Long exposure capabilities

This is not to say that the Sinar doesn't have its own set of advantages:
* Top-notch high ISO performance
* Excellent shadow detail rendering
* Interchangeable mount for near-universal compatibility
* Internal battery is secure
* Single-push CF card eject button
* Innovative internal memory feature
* eXposure produces a superior .TIFF develop from a e75LV .dng than does either Capture One or Adobe Lightroom 1.41 or 2.0

but it shouldn't be too hard to imagine why someone would see advantages in another brand.  My point isn't that any one brand is the best (there is no such thing), it's that every brand has both advantages over and compromises relative to every other brand.  Depending on how you work, the various advantages and disadvantages might amount to something significant, or they might not.

Best regards,
Brad
« Last Edit: July 30, 2008, 10:07:07 AM by bradleygibson » Logged

bradleygibson
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 829


WWW
« Reply #17 on: July 30, 2008, 10:03:51 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
...a green yellow undertone to them that makes them unappealing to me especially for images with skin (IMHO) - You're welcome to try and show me otherwise because everytime I have tried to demo a Sinar back, the closest dealer seems to forget the batteries or otherwise put me off so I haven't a chance to shoot it myself.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=211654\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Hi, Eric,

Files I've shared with you should not contain this cast--let me know if you'd like raw's to play with yourself.  But for the record, I've not had any color cast issues with my Sinar e75LV.
« Last Edit: July 30, 2008, 10:06:05 AM by bradleygibson » Logged

Graham Mitchell
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2282



WWW
« Reply #18 on: July 30, 2008, 10:59:19 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
* Lower noise at low ISO

I see no noise at base ISO with the Sinar back. Happy to post a sample.

Quote
* Multi-channel histogram

True, you don't get this on the back. I don't miss it personally. It is multi channel in Exposure.

Quote
* Superior user interface (eg. one menu button)

Matter of taste. I think they could both be improved, to be honest.

Quote
* A unified file format (the Sinarback does not produce .DNGs, but rather .WR's, .BR's & .IA's, which must be combined by software to create .DNGs)--allowing one to go direct from camera to your choice of developing software, without having to create .dngs post-shoot.

If you shoot tethered, or import images from a CF card, the images are stored immediately as DNG files. There is no intermediate step.

Quote
* Able to shoot to card when tethered

Not sure I see the point in this feature

Quote
* Custom WB when shooting to card

Again, not sure I see the benefit. You can pick your own white balance for all images with one click or one manual setting in Exposure.

 
Quote
* Long exposure capabilities

That's a valid point for those who need it.

I still don't see aything that would stop you getting a Hy6

I have posted many images in the 'recent work' thread. Please show me an example of the yellow cast you mentioned.
« Last Edit: July 30, 2008, 11:01:35 AM by foto-z » Logged

Graham Mitchell - www.graham-mitchell.com
jimgolden
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 405


WWW
« Reply #19 on: July 30, 2008, 11:14:02 AM »
ReplyReply

maybe they pull a 1-2 and announce the other half - ie 56x56 $100k sensor!?!?
Logged
Pages: [1] 2 3 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad