Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1] 2 3 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Testing P65+ for architecture tomorrow.  (Read 15747 times)
JdeV
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 120


WWW
« on: March 18, 2009, 02:24:50 PM »
ReplyReply

Hi, I'm doing a test of a P65+ tomorrow against 4" x 5" and 8" x 10" film cameras with negative and transparency film to be drum scanned.
I want to know what the state of the art in digital backs is like now for architectural work.
I have in mind to shoot a big Paris train station interior from on high. This will provide a great deal of fine detail and difficult shadow/highlight information.
Unfortunately I have not been able to get my hands on a sliding back/digital view camera combo so have to put the P65+ on an H2 or Mamiya/Phase body.
Has anyone tested the Hasselblad/Mamiya lenses against the Schneider/Rodenstock digital lenses? Setting aside the larger image circle of the view camera lenses, are they comparably sharp?
I am thinking of using the Hasselblad with a 50mm or a Mamiya with a 45mm. Will these provide a fair demonstration of the back's abilities? I am worried that if I go wider than this (say a 28mm or a 35mm) the lens defects might limit the performance.
Any comments?
Logged
eronald
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 4209



« Reply #1 on: March 18, 2009, 02:40:48 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: JdeV
Hi, I'm doing a test of a P65+ tomorrow against 4" x 5" and 8" x 10" film cameras with negative and transparency film to be drum scanned.
I want to know what the state of the art in digital backs is like now for architectural work.
I have in mind to shoot a big Paris train station interior from on high. This will provide a great deal of fine detail and difficult shadow/highlight information.
Unfortunately I have not been able to get my hands on a sliding back/digital view camera combo so have to put the P65+ on an H2 or Mamiya/Phase body.
Has anyone tested the Hasselblad/Mamiya lenses against the Schneider/Rodenstock digital lenses? Setting aside the larger image circle of the view camera lenses, are they comparably sharp?
I am thinking of using the Hasselblad with a 50mm or a Mamiya with a 45mm. Will these provide a fair demonstration of the back's abilities? I am worried that if I go wider than this (say a 28mm or a 35mm) the lens defects might limit the performance.
Any comments?

Tell me where you want to shoot and I'll bring along my D3x and 24mm shift lens, and P45+ and Mamiya shift. We can do some serious comparing here.

Edmund
Logged
pixjohn
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 673


« Reply #2 on: March 18, 2009, 03:05:22 PM »
ReplyReply

I would think if you really want to test the back, you should find a Cambo or Alpa camera to mount it on.  My own experience shooting with a Cambo Wide DS next to a Hasselblead, the Cambo lenses will out perform the Hasselblad glass.
« Last Edit: March 18, 2009, 03:05:58 PM by pixjohn » Logged
alan100
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 6


« Reply #3 on: March 18, 2009, 03:40:16 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: JdeV
Hi, I'm doing a test of a P65+ tomorrow against 4" x 5" and 8" x 10" film cameras with negative and transparency film to be drum scanned.
I want to know what the state of the art in digital backs is like now for architectural work.
I have in mind to shoot a big Paris train station interior from on high. This will provide a great deal of fine detail and difficult shadow/highlight information.
Unfortunately I have not been able to get my hands on a sliding back/digital view camera combo so have to put the P65+ on an H2 or Mamiya/Phase body.
Has anyone tested the Hasselblad/Mamiya lenses against the Schneider/Rodenstock digital lenses? Setting aside the larger image circle of the view camera lenses, are they comparably sharp?
I am thinking of using the Hasselblad with a 50mm or a Mamiya with a 45mm. Will these provide a fair demonstration of the back's abilities? I am worried that if I go wider than this (say a 28mm or a 35mm) the lens defects might limit the performance.
Any comments?
Hello
I shoot architecture on a leaf Aptus 75 on an Alpa system. If you want to test this new back make sure you shoot with a lot of shift on a wide lens ie 35mm Digitar or wider. This back has a Dalsa chip which is prone to centre fold and colour casting. It will be interesting to see if Phase  has truly over come these shortcomings. The other test would be to long exposures of a predominantly dark subject matter ie night shot. The chip will work well at 50 or 100 but how much noise will there be at 200 and 400. Again Phase suggest this is improved. Finally all the back manufacturers claim speeds that are not really there, Its a bit like shooting Velvia, it claimed 50 asa but in reality was 40 ish. I don't know how you could check that. The resolution of these practical problems will determine whether I will buy this back as gain adjust steps and post production time loss are killers
Logged
JdeV
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 120


WWW
« Reply #4 on: March 18, 2009, 05:11:53 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: alan100
Hello
I shoot architecture on a leaf Aptus 75 on an Alpa system. If you want to test this new back make sure you shoot with a lot of shift on a wide lens ie 35mm Digitar or wider. This back has a Dalsa chip which is prone to centre fold and colour casting. It will be interesting to see if Phase  has truly over come these shortcomings. The other test would be to long exposures of a predominantly dark subject matter ie night shot. The chip will work well at 50 or 100 but how much noise will there be at 200 and 400. Again Phase suggest this is improved. Finally all the back manufacturers claim speeds that are not really there, Its a bit like shooting Velvia, it claimed 50 asa but in reality was 40 ish. I don't know how you could check that. The resolution of these practical problems will determine whether I will buy this back as gain adjust steps and post production time loss are killers
Sadly I don't think I will be able to get hold of a digital view camera system. I think therefore that I will only be able to test for resolution/colour/dynamic range at this point. I will only have the back for a few hours tomorrow morning. It is €760 a day rental on its own and I am being lent it by the rental company with a body and lens for free so I can't push my luck too much!
I am not interested in bothering to test high ISOs because I've long ago concluded that except in dire emergencies there is no point going more than 1, (maybe 2 stops) above the base ISO of the back. I am very interested in long time exposures but I don't think circumstances will permit much in that direction.
Do you have any comments about the relative merits of the Hassleblad/Mamiya lenses versus Rodenstock/Schneiders when no movements are being deployed?
Logged
archivue
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 417


« Reply #5 on: March 18, 2009, 06:11:47 PM »
ReplyReply

i've just test a rodenstock sironar digital 90 against an hasselblad 100 cf... quite similar in the center... on a 5D Mark II.

I will test them with a phase one next week.
Logged
rethmeier
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 780


WWW
« Reply #6 on: March 18, 2009, 07:43:52 PM »
ReplyReply

The P65 will not be able to do long exposures,as it is a Dalsa sensor.
I would say 60 seconds tops.
The P45+ would be a better choice in this case.
Also the results from a P45+ are as good as 10x8.
Why on earth you want to shoot architecture on a 10x8?

Anyway,that my opinion anyway and I've used 10x8 in the old days,but for today maybe not.

However,if you have a big time client that wants to pay for 10x8 sheet film,go for it.



Logged

Willem Rethmeier
www.willemrethmeier.com
Sydney Australia
mtomalty
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 536


WWW
« Reply #7 on: March 18, 2009, 11:44:20 PM »
ReplyReply


I'm certain the P65+ will show itself to be among the best,if not the best, current digital product
for fine detail rendering but I will look forward to your experience with how the back handles
exposures in the 30-60 second range.

If possible, try to include a significant area of continuous tone to check for banding.

There is another thread at GetDPI that has an example of of P65+ 30 second capture that exhibits quite significant
banding.
The posted sample was shot at 400 iso and 30 seconds so it would be interesting to hear if you can see similar banding
at lower iso's with long exposures

http://forum.getdpi.com/forum/showthread.p...6039&page=2

Scroll down to post #40 for the example

Mark
Logged
rainer_v
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1134


WWW
« Reply #8 on: March 19, 2009, 02:18:11 AM »
ReplyReply

i dont think it makes any sense to test the back for architecture without using shiftable lenses .
the lesss important thing in architecture photography  is resolution, once a certain level is reached,- which i would rate at 22mp. the most important thing are the lenses, and here esp. the wides from 45 down to 24/23mm as well as the shift capacities.
( one reason why a 8x10" is so nice to use is the image composing on the screen and the narrow dof one can get.
its not that it resolves more than a 4x5". )
Logged

rainer viertlböck
architecture photographer
munich / germany

www.tangential.de
CBarrett
Guest
« Reply #9 on: March 19, 2009, 07:24:37 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: rainer_v
i dont think it makes any sense to test the back for architecture without using shiftable lenses .
the lesss important thing in architecture photography  is resolution, once a certain level is reached,- which i would rate at 22mp. the most important thing are the lenses, and here esp. the wides from 45 down to 24/23mm as well as the shift capacities.
( one reason why a 8x10" is so nice to use is the image composing on the screen and the narrow dof one can get.
its not that it resolves more than a 4x5". )


While 22mp is an abundant amount of information for most uses.  I have found the P25+ to be much more prone to moiré than the P45+.  I have seen this in a wood slat wall as well as in fabric covered panels on an interior.  I expect the P65+ to handle this even better, but yeah.....every once in a while I want a long exposure....

Logged
KevinA
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 899


WWW
« Reply #10 on: March 20, 2009, 04:10:28 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: rainer_v
i dont think it makes any sense to test the back for architecture without using shiftable lenses .
the lesss important thing in architecture photography  is resolution, once a certain level is reached,- which i would rate at 22mp. the most important thing are the lenses, and here esp. the wides from 45 down to 24/23mm as well as the shift capacities.
( one reason why a 8x10" is so nice to use is the image composing on the screen and the narrow dof one can get.
its not that it resolves more than a 4x5". )

Hi Rainer,
Interesting what you said about 22mp being enough. If the Canon new shift lenses turn out to be top performers will that be serious competition? DR in one shot might be an issue but with 35mm it's easy to bracket the exposure.

Kevin.
Logged

Kevin.
rainer_v
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1134


WWW
« Reply #11 on: March 20, 2009, 09:05:35 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: KevinA
Hi Rainer,
Interesting what you said about 22mp being enough. If the Canon new shift lenses turn out to be top performers will that be serious competition? DR in one shot might be an issue but with 35mm it's easy to bracket the exposure.

Kevin.
yes it will be for sure for many architecture shooters a bif relief to have good shift possibilities soon in 35mm. although there will also be several ( than me ) who appreciate the different way to compose images on ground glass and the still existing better output of the actual mf sensors and lenses enough to go on with mf. but resolution is the less important point herein i.m.o.
Logged

rainer viertlböck
architecture photographer
munich / germany

www.tangential.de
Kirk Gittings
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1552


WWW
« Reply #12 on: March 20, 2009, 09:58:06 AM »
ReplyReply

"The overwhelming majority of architectural clients these days are more than content with the quality from DSLRs and few care to pay more for the MFDB premium."

It strikes me that if fees are based on the quality of your camera more rather than the quality of your vision, then photographers are way out of touch with current client needs. My fees and billable expenses are much higher than they were two years ago when I was shooting only 4x5 film because I am more creative and productive with a DSLR. Even a DSLR can exceed the quality needs of most client applications. Rather than repeat the point here please read this post on my blog: Is Full Frame DSLR Good Enough? and From 4x5 Film to DSLR
« Last Edit: March 20, 2009, 10:06:03 AM by Kirk Gittings » Logged

Thanks,
Kirk

Kirk Gittings
Architecture and Landscape Photography
WWW.GITTINGSPHOTO.COM

LIGHT+SPACE+STRUCTURE (blog)
CBarrett
Guest
« Reply #13 on: March 20, 2009, 10:16:51 AM »
ReplyReply

I tried out all the Canon T/S lenses on a 1DS before committing to my Phase  Back/Arca 6x9.  The biggest gripe I have is that not only would these lenses distort in the corners but they would often render perfectly straight architecture as a "wavy" line right through the center of the lens.  It was just unacceptable.  Also, I just find that I make more refined compositions with a view camera than a DSLR... they make me sloppier for some reason.

I dunno, after shooting for 12 years at Hedrich Blessing (prior to my resignation), maybe I'm just spoiled when it comes to good gear and visually literate clients.

Christopher Barrett
View Camera Snob
Logged
SeanBK
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 510


« Reply #14 on: March 20, 2009, 10:34:52 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: CBarrett
............  Also, I just find that I make more refined compositions with a view camera than a DSLR... they make me sloppier for some reason.

I dunno, after shooting for 12 years at Hedrich Blessing (prior to my resignation), maybe I'm just spoiled when it comes to good gear and visually literate clients.
Christopher Barrett
View Camera Snob
                  That IS an impressive resume!! Just on that I am inclined to believe your statements. Ofcourse there is a ring of truth in your statement @ DSLR vs View Camera. Often speed does make one shoot first & then fix later.
Logged
marcwilson
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 411


WWW
« Reply #15 on: March 20, 2009, 10:43:52 AM »
ReplyReply

Kirk,

How do you overcome the inbuilt distortion of the canon 24mm shift lens. (I assume the newer version, and the 17mm shift also will still suffer there)
I have found a programme like dxo optics can sort out the lens correction of most lenses really well, but not shift lenses.

To me this is where the inbuilt software lens camera correction of the H 28mm (even with the hts I believe) or shift cameras with their non distorting lenses have the upper hand.

Marc
« Last Edit: March 20, 2009, 10:48:03 AM by marcwilson » Logged

CBarrett
Guest
« Reply #16 on: March 20, 2009, 11:09:36 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: John Schweikert
A Canon 21MP frame is fine but the process is soul-less.

I couldn't of said it better....
Logged
rainer_v
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1134


WWW
« Reply #17 on: March 20, 2009, 11:27:12 AM »
ReplyReply

the big shortcoming of 35mm systems of course are the lenses, not the sensors.
not much changed here just because the digital part of both worlds became better and has more pixels.

my assumption that the upcoming 17 and 24mm tse lenses of canon will be better in terms of edge sharpness and especially of distortion still has to be prooved, after these lenses will be available. if they will be better ( because for me the current canon 24tse , or schneider 28pc, or the older 28/35m nikon shift lenses are simply out of discussion for their bottle glass qualities  ),- 35mm will be a serious option, if not,- the things will remain the same than now.
its a lot of hassle and much more time consumptive to eliminate this 35mm -lens issues than to start with good corrected files coming from medium format lenses using schneider or rodenstock glass, independent of the final digital output.
if someone works a lot its the cheaper way to work with mf because its faster to deliver professional quality,- although the initial investment is much higher. i dont speak here about the lower level work or work which affords to shoot hi quantities of  images and where the clients want an acceptable but not outstanding quality.

the new 5dmk2 delivers very good file quality, so i am back to use 35mm too,  but for the longer focals above 100mm and for aereal shootings.
for the wideangle shift work my artec together with the rodenstocks hardly can be beaten in terms of quality and efficiency.
but as i said above, resolution is the last important factor here.

to come back to the topic: therefor it dont make much ( if any ) sense to try out a p65 with a retrofocal camera/lens system for architecture shooting.
« Last Edit: March 20, 2009, 11:29:25 AM by rainer_v » Logged

rainer viertlböck
architecture photographer
munich / germany

www.tangential.de
Kirk Gittings
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1552


WWW
« Reply #18 on: March 20, 2009, 11:32:18 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: CBarrett
A Canon 21MP frame is fine but the process is soul-less......I couldn't of said it better....

I couldn't disagree more. Understand. I made my living pretty much exclusively with a 4x5 and film for almost 30 years. To me, making images is never soulless unless you have detached yourself from the process and that is about you-not the camera being used or the quality of the architecture. I used to make my AP photography students photograph a small building near the University of New Mexico that was pretty much a stucco box, because sometimes for clients your you have to photograph crappy architecture and make it look good. Some students balked at the project but once they got into it they made the most astonishing images in amazing light. Its all about your attitude-not the camera or the architecture. At 58 years old with 31 years in the business, I am having more fun now than ever. I also continue to use the 4X5 VC pretty much exclusively for my personal work and of course for the beloved HABS projects. I love the "shift" in workflow from what I do everyday.

As per the old Canon T/S lenses. (I will buy the new ones if tests confirm they are better in the corners less with less distortion etc., the rotating tilt is of very little use to me). I work very carefully, which is easy for me having learned my trade on VCs. So, I shopped for the best copies I could find, am careful in the field to not exceed their capabilities and work with the images very carefully in PS to correct the flaws. None of my high profile clients from New Mexico to Chicago, Boston or New York, including magazines or designers have ever complained about the image quality of my work from DSLRs.
« Last Edit: March 20, 2009, 01:36:48 PM by Kirk Gittings » Logged

Thanks,
Kirk

Kirk Gittings
Architecture and Landscape Photography
WWW.GITTINGSPHOTO.COM

LIGHT+SPACE+STRUCTURE (blog)
Professional
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 306


« Reply #19 on: March 20, 2009, 11:49:54 AM »
ReplyReply

Nice to read all that, and not sure what will this thread discussions help us with, as beginner who never used film or MF camera in the past, and no experience in photography yet, and also can't afford many expensive gear like P45+ or P65+ alongside with some great bodies like Cambo or 4x5 or 8x10 what we can get from this all these discussion points?

Now if we will say that we will not work in business with photography then many will say ignore about gear competitions and comparisons issue, but if i want to be a serious photographer and say professional and working in Photography, should i read about all the equipments are there used for photography and test them all to see which help me in my profession and get whistles or get paid out of them?

I was looking to buy that current TS 24mm, but as Canon announced to release new TS lenses soon so i just looked at one of the new TS lens, but i am looking to try to find many job in architecture and interior design photography in my country, and you know most of them are looking for large print for posters or billboard, so what i can do if i can't afford higher MF and LF bodies?
« Last Edit: March 20, 2009, 11:50:48 AM by Professional » Logged
Pages: [1] 2 3 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad