Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1]   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: why did Sinar stop making 16-shot backs?  (Read 1539 times)
henrikfoto
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 697


« on: March 06, 2011, 03:38:34 PM »
ReplyReply

I wonder if anybody knows why Sinar stopped making 16 shot backs?
I have asked Sinar but they don't want to answer this queston.
They just tell me that 4 shots is enough now with higher res than before.

The last 16-shot back was the 54h. As far as I have seen this is still the best back
they have ever made. Why change a winning team?
Is this technology too difficult as the pixels are getting smaller and smaller?

I have done some private testing against Phase one P45+ and a borrowed P65.
With the Sinar in 16-shot mode, the Phase backs (almost 10 years newer) are not
even close. Why did Sinar stop to make these 16-shot backs??

 
Logged
Peter Devos
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 465


« Reply #1 on: March 06, 2011, 03:47:27 PM »
ReplyReply

Because they have to find a way to move the sensor a fraction of a pixel, 16 times without moving anything to avoid false captures... very very difficult and th.e higher the pixelcont, the smaller the movement that is needed.
Logged
henrikfoto
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 697


« Reply #2 on: March 06, 2011, 03:50:54 PM »
ReplyReply

Because they have to find a way to move the sensor a fraction of a pixel, 16 times without moving anything to avoid false captures... very very difficult.

Yes, I think that is the real reason.
But they did it great up to 9 my pixels. Amazing how those old backs still are not
matched by any back still after 10 years!!
« Last Edit: March 06, 2011, 03:56:47 PM by henrikfoto » Logged
PdF
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 286



« Reply #3 on: March 06, 2011, 04:08:16 PM »
ReplyReply

I also use the 16 shots mode of Sinar, who gives fine results, but only with a constant lighting. The flashes have to be perfect, and any little movement of something of the subject gives a trashy picture.

Impossible to use outside, or with any living subject.

It is an ultimate material, particularly sharp. To use with extreme rigor, for exceptional results.

I love this system.

PdF

Logged

PdF
fredjeang
Guest
« Reply #4 on: March 06, 2011, 04:08:17 PM »
ReplyReply

Yes, I think that is the real reason.
But they did it great up to 9 my pixels. Amazing how those old backs still are not
matched by any back still after 10 years!!

Please, this is interesting. Could you develop a little further on that?

edit: what about the 16 shots mode with continuous lightning (par), any experience?
« Last Edit: March 06, 2011, 04:11:47 PM by fredjeang » Logged
Peter Devos
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 465


« Reply #5 on: March 06, 2011, 04:18:20 PM »
ReplyReply

I stil use a 384, a 3020 and a 528c back all the time in microstepmode. Mostly with tungsten, Halogen lights. I am lucky to be at the beginning of the powergrid, so i almost gnever have powerfluctuations. Even a 16 Mp MS is still unmatched by most nowadays backs ( and can be bought for a few 1000 euro). A 65 or better a 80Mp back is of course better but at what price.
Logged
henrikfoto
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 697


« Reply #6 on: March 06, 2011, 04:26:10 PM »
ReplyReply

Please, this is interesting. Could you develop a little further on that?

edit: what about the 16 shots mode with continuous lightning (par), any experience?

Compared to the new one shot backs these old ms backs produce pictures that are sharper, with no moire, perfect colours and even finer resolution. Every small dust is visible. It makes my P45+ look like a compact-camera.

Of course it's just for objects. But it CAN be used outside if the conditions are correct. For buildings in quiet weather with a nice and heavy tripod.

It just have to be experienced.
Logged
JerryReed
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 272


jerry@jerryreed.net


WWW
« Reply #7 on: March 06, 2011, 04:36:03 PM »
ReplyReply

I use the SINAR 54 H, and am told that KODAK, no longer provides the sensor.

Jerry Reed
Logged

henrikfoto
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 697


« Reply #8 on: March 06, 2011, 04:38:01 PM »
ReplyReply

ok, that is likely.
Do you like the back?
Logged
fredjeang
Guest
« Reply #9 on: March 06, 2011, 05:07:47 PM »
ReplyReply

Compared to the new one shot backs these old ms backs produce pictures that are sharper, with no moire, perfect colours and even finer resolution. Every small dust is visible. It makes my P45+ look like a compact-camera.

Of course it's just for objects. But it CAN be used outside if the conditions are correct. For buildings in quiet weather with a nice and heavy tripod.

It just have to be experienced.
Of course, but I supposed (my experience with Sinar backs is close to the absolute zero) that the mode can be activated or not, wich makes it extremely versatile on non-moving subjects and even for arquitecture as you pointed if not cloudy and windy.
That is indeed an information to be known.

Thanks.
Logged
henrikfoto
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 697


« Reply #10 on: March 07, 2011, 12:50:47 AM »
ReplyReply

Of course, but I supposed (my experience with Sinar backs is close to the absolute zero) that the mode can be activated or not, wich makes it extremely versatile on non-moving subjects and even for arquitecture as you pointed if not cloudy and windy.
That is indeed an information to be known.

Thanks.

The Sinarback 54h is very versatile. In 1, 4 and 16 shot mode. The only weakness is that it has no screen.
Just to be used with a computer.

A new 54h with a screen would be great!!
Logged
PdF
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 286



« Reply #11 on: March 07, 2011, 01:26:46 AM »
ReplyReply

The 16 shots backs don't have incorporated display, because the program managing the assembly of multishot images works on the computer. Hasselblad offers a new 50 Megapixel multishot. But I don't know if it needs or not a link with the computer to work in this mode. The old models did not have screen.

The presence of the computer has in any case an advantage: it allows the most control over the quality of images produced, which is impossible with a mini-screen. But an iPad might as well do the job. But, when someone operates with this type of material, it's often is a technical camera. We are not in a lightweight configuration. Especially because the multishot configuration also requires a heavy and stable stand!

PdF
Logged

PdF
henrikfoto
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 697


« Reply #12 on: March 07, 2011, 03:08:46 AM »
ReplyReply

The 16 shots backs don't have incorporated display, because the program managing the assembly of multishot images works on the computer. Hasselblad offers a new 50 Megapixel multishot. But I don't know if it needs or not a link with the computer to work in this mode. The old models did not have screen.

The presence of the computer has in any case an advantage: it allows the most control over the quality of images produced, which is impossible with a mini-screen. But an iPad might as well do the job. But, when someone operates with this type of material, it's often is a technical camera. We are not in a lightweight configuration. Especially because the multishot configuration also requires a heavy and stable stand!

PdF

You don't really need a very haevy stand to do 16 shots. I use a medium sized Gitzo carbon tripod. If the conditions are difficult I hang on a bag of stones to weigh it down.

The only thing that is critical is to use electronical shutters and don't have too much vibrations in the floor.
Logged
Pages: [1]   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad