Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 ... 8 9 [10] 11 12 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: New to site and DMF... Just in time with H5D ! Help Please.  (Read 29784 times)
tho_mas
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1696


« Reply #180 on: October 15, 2012, 01:10:46 PM »
ReplyReply

What I'd suggest it also shows that it is easy to miss critical focus and some errors pass unnoticed in reasonable sized prints.
It also shows that you shouldn't put too much trust in internet reports ;-)
Logged
tho_mas
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1696


« Reply #181 on: October 15, 2012, 01:19:39 PM »
ReplyReply

Slight focusing shift in this shot does not really make any difference... the subject has a lot of depth.
actually you would expect focus either on the red leaves or on the big trunk in the foreground. But focus is way behind the trunk in the foreground ... and at the same time DOF is not wide enough to draw the trees in the backgorund sharp. Focus is somewhere on the yellow leaves in the center ... but these are soft (due to wind/movement in conjunction with 1'' shutter). There are some thin branches on the very edges that are "sharp" ... all the rest is soft.
And, yes, it makes a huge difference to the perception of "sharpness" in a print.
« Last Edit: October 15, 2012, 06:28:56 PM by tho_mas » Logged
ErikKaffehr
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7640


WWW
« Reply #182 on: October 15, 2012, 01:29:45 PM »
ReplyReply

Hi,

I don't think so. I have downloaded the images myself, and still missed it. Would I have made the experiment myself, I would perhaps missed it. Michael has encouraged us to print the images our selves, I didn't do it.

I made several experiments with prints, and differences that are very obvious on screen can be difficult to see in print.

http://www.pbase.com/ekr/image/107619976/original  (actual pixels with 12MP uprezzed to 24MP)

http://www.pbase.com/ekr/image/107823207/original   (A2 prints rescanned on flatbed at 300PPI)

Best regards
Erik

It also shows that you shouldn't put too much trust in internet reports ;-)
« Last Edit: October 15, 2012, 01:33:05 PM by ErikKaffehr » Logged

FredBGG
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1651


« Reply #183 on: October 15, 2012, 05:12:56 PM »
ReplyReply


Whoa Fred.

Your pulling on a rope and I don't think you know what it's tied to.

I don't know you and your motives may be pure, might not, but I made mine very clear.

For the record, Phase and prior to that Leaf (when I had an Aptus) never asked, insinuated, implied, made mention of me saying anything false . . . ever.

In fact they we're very clear that what they wanted was the user experience and I think that's what I said then and now.

Once again, for the record the reason I didn't like Phase's video was I wanted a day for myself and our crew to rest and feel a little better as we came off of a lot of weeks of 18 hour days and I know I couldn't think straight, I doubt if anyone else could either.  Everyone wants to make the best presentation in public.

Regardless no one asked me to use a Phase/Mamiya body and knew what camera bodies I used.



In regards to tethering c1 has been the gold standard for a long time.  V3 was so solid that we could set it up, capturing to either two drives or a raid 5 and just leave it alone.  Honestly, the only time we touched it was to change the naming.

V4 was new had some issues but were fixed, v5 bullet proof again.

I've found in our case if we want to tether without issue we use clean computers, clean drives and prepare the cameras accordingly with polishing the contacts, making sure all batteries are fresh and new, etc. etc.

People I know that routinely have issues with tethering of any brand usually have some other issues (see my sentence above) and/or don't really know the systems they use.  

Actually, if you want to know anything about Mamiya, Phase or Leaf,  just ask Yair.  I've known him for 8 years, sometimes we've agreed, sometimes we've both strongly disagreed, but Yair is well respected in the industry on both sides of the Atlantic and  will not tell you anything but the truth as he knows it and he knows a lot.

IMO

BC

My use of the word Fiction is directed at Phase One, not directly what you say. The editing probably has a lot to do with it.

First of all the video Starts on a close up of the P45+. That would imply that it was used for the shoot, but a P30+
was used.

There is no mention of the name of the camera and the the logo of the Contax is conveniently blacked out. (not saying it was necessarily deliberate)

You say in the video that when you get a new camera you put it to the test..."try to break it"

"Before I put a camera on set I test it and try to break it I do everything I can.."

then later in the edit

"I have the Phase one because it doesn't break"

the edit then concludes with the line....

"It's impossible to work with cameras that don't work, the Phase works, it's just that simple."

It seems pretty clear to me that the video is skewered by the edit to make people believe that Phase Cameras
are bullet proof, while the camera you use is a Contax. All this while the AFD and DF have known stability and reliability issues.

While you are referring to the back as that is what you use from Phase, there is nothing in the video to indicate that you are talking about the Phase Back and not Phase camera.
No mention of the Contax, not even a mention of the fact that Phase supports Contax compatability.

To make my motives clear. It's about the miss leading information put out by MF manufactures.
Logged
Anders_HK
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1001



WWW
« Reply #184 on: October 15, 2012, 05:15:57 PM »
ReplyReply

This is really getting funny.....
The manufacturer calls the Hy6 an SLR, but you think you know better.
It doesn't get more childish than that.

Really ?

So Wikipedia must be wrong. I see...

Seems you are making friends with many people ...  Wink

(As a mere parenthesis, it appears you do not know digital since have not able produce one single quality digital image to measure up to your film shots. Right? or care to show?  Roll Eyes )

Logged
Doug Peterson
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2838


WWW
« Reply #185 on: October 15, 2012, 05:52:18 PM »
ReplyReply

My use of the word Fiction is directed at Phase One, not directly what you say. The editing probably has a lot to do with it.

First of all the video Starts on a close up of the P45+. That would imply that it was used for the shoot, but a P30+
was used.

There is no mention of the name of the camera and the the logo of the Contax is conveniently blacked out. (not saying it was necessarily deliberate)

You say in the video that when you get a new camera you put it to the test..."try to break it"

"Before I put a camera on set I test it and try to break it I do everything I can.."

then later in the edit

"I have the Phase one because it doesn't break"

the edit then concludes with the line....

"It's impossible to work with cameras that don't work, the Phase works, it's just that simple."

It seems pretty clear to me that the video is skewered by the edit to make people believe that Phase Cameras
are bullet proof
, while the camera you use is a Contax. All this while the AFD and DF have known stability and reliability issues.

While you are referring to the back as that is what you use from Phase, there is nothing in the video to indicate that you are talking about the Phase Back and not Phase camera.

No mention of the Contax, not even a mention of the fact that Phase supports Contax compatability.

To make my motives clear. It's about the miss leading information put out by MF manufactures.

When the Russel campaign was shot there was no "Phase One Camera".

The YouTube video as linked in this thread was re-uploaded in 2010 when Phase One switched video-management systems to YouTube.  
Logged

DOUG PETERSON (dep@digitaltransitions.com), Digital Transitions
Dealer for Phase One, Mamiya Leaf, Arca-Swiss, Cambo, Profoto
Office: 877.367.8537
Cell: 740.707.2183
Phase One IQ250 FAQ
tho_mas
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1696


« Reply #186 on: October 15, 2012, 06:08:31 PM »
ReplyReply

differences that are very obvious on screen can be difficult to see in print.
difficult maybe... but not impossible for a trained eye, I think. In my experience the relation of image components to each other (color to color, gradation, sharpness, smoothness etc.) can be translated from real pixels viewed at 100% or 50% on screen to the respective print to some extend. Naturally a print looks different to a screen view... but if the processing chain is done right it's only the difference of 94 DPI (or whatever resolution of the screen) to 300 DPI (or 360 DPI or whatever resolution of the printer). Normally I can estimate how a capture (a digital file viewed on a screen that is) will look printed - at least this goes for my preferred printing paper in conjunction with the sharpening technique I prefer.
Anyway... a defocused MFD capture will always look like a super sized POS capture ... also in print. An accurately focused MFD capture makes the difference.
I do have the very same DB (P45) and when I saw Michael's capture made for that comparission I thought, okay, if this what you get from your P45, I'd prefer the G10. Because it's easier to use. But the capture is simply nowhere near of what a P45 is capable of.

With regard to the discussion in this thread... I've looked at some D800e RAW files available on the web and actually I am not impressed with regard to sharpness/details or so. I get that from my P45 all the time, even with my not so great lenses. I'd say the D800e is somehere in between my P21+ and my P45. But what really impresses me, however, is that you can push the D800e files at base ISO by 2, even 3 stops in the shadows without even having to think about applying any (luminance-) noise reduction. That is more or less impossible with my P45. Okay, I am comparing a 2005 DB to a 2012 DSLR. But still ... the D800e files I've seen look extremely good when pushed hard in post.
Then again... other than DR... they do not look nearly as nice (subjective perception !!! ) as the P45 captures with my lenses (Contax Zeiss, Digitars, Digarons). They look a bit more washed out (soft/dull) in image areas where I think the P45 would draw finer details/color differentiation.  I am only talking about what I am seeing in the files. I really don't care whether or not a D800 or a Sony RX100 outperforms my P45 - I really don't care at all!
(and BTW... as a side note... I've also seen D800e captures suffering either from a tilted sensor or a misaligned lense ... so welcome to the world of high res imaging and warm greetings to J. Holmes ;-) ... ).


« Last Edit: October 15, 2012, 06:15:24 PM by tho_mas » Logged
tho_mas
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1696


« Reply #187 on: October 15, 2012, 06:22:41 PM »
ReplyReply

It seems pretty clear to me that the video is skewered by the edit to make people believe that Phase Cameras are bullet proof, while the camera you use is a Contax. All this while the AFD and DF have known stability and reliability issues.
Come on... this is childish BS. Essentially BC is really only talking about the P-backs, not about cameras at all...
Logged
tho_mas
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1696


« Reply #188 on: October 15, 2012, 06:27:41 PM »
ReplyReply

Hi Doug - how are you?
Hope things are ging well ...

Logged
Doug Peterson
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2838


WWW
« Reply #189 on: October 15, 2012, 06:33:25 PM »
ReplyReply

Hi Doug - how are you?
Hope things are ging well ...

Quite well, thanks. My move to New York has been very rewarding personally and professionally.

Sorry I didn't see you this year at Photokina - I assume you went; I had to man the fort back home. But next time...

Hope you're well!
Logged

DOUG PETERSON (dep@digitaltransitions.com), Digital Transitions
Dealer for Phase One, Mamiya Leaf, Arca-Swiss, Cambo, Profoto
Office: 877.367.8537
Cell: 740.707.2183
Phase One IQ250 FAQ
tho_mas
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1696


« Reply #190 on: October 15, 2012, 06:51:29 PM »
ReplyReply

Quite well, thanks. My move to New York has been very rewarding personally and professionally.
good to hear!

Sorry I didn't see you this year at Photokina - I assume you went; I had to man the fort back home. But next time...
also wasn't there. I was on production in Spain.
Yes... looking forward meeting you on the next Photokina!!

Quote
Hope you're well!
hmh... too much work. But basically everything is fine :-) Thanks!


Logged
FredBGG
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1651


« Reply #191 on: October 15, 2012, 07:14:13 PM »
ReplyReply

When the Russel campaign was shot there was no "Phase One Camera".

The YouTube video as linked in this thread was re-uploaded in 2010 when Phase One switched video-management systems to YouTube.  

Well well that's interesting especially in light of Phase One's description of the video on the youtube site:

"Phase One camera system: http://www.phaseone.com
Watch professional photographer James Russell working with the Phase One camera system on a photo shooting for Phase One."



This was written and uploaded after both the Phase One AF was available and the DF was introduced.... blacked out Contax logo.... no mention of Contax

That's miss leading in my book.
« Last Edit: October 15, 2012, 07:26:13 PM by FredBGG » Logged
Nick-T
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 462


« Reply #192 on: October 15, 2012, 07:19:58 PM »
ReplyReply

The question is not "Does he use Phase?" because he does.. the question is what camera bag does he use?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UG7doq5Vshw&feature=youtube_gdata_player

Logged

tho_mas
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1696


« Reply #193 on: October 15, 2012, 07:26:13 PM »
ReplyReply

Well well that's interesting especially in light of Phase One's description of the video on the youtube site
There is nothing "interesting"... unless you are a po-faced petty bourgeois.
Do yourself a favour and stop this debate. BC is honest ... always has been.

Logged
FredBGG
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1651


« Reply #194 on: October 15, 2012, 07:30:45 PM »
ReplyReply

There is nothing "interesting"... unless you are a po-faced petty bourgeois.
Do yourself a favour and stop this debate. BC is honest ... always has been.

Don't get me wrong BC from what I can see is BC is honest and a very good photographer.

I wonder if he noticed the description they used on the youtube page. It was uploaded and the description was made by PhaseOneDK.

They are effectively using the video of him as a testimonial for the Camera System in that description.

« Last Edit: October 15, 2012, 07:38:44 PM by FredBGG » Logged
tho_mas
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1696


« Reply #195 on: October 15, 2012, 07:38:42 PM »
ReplyReply

They are effectively using the video of him as a testimonial for the camera system in that description.

who cares?
That's the nature (or at least one side) of advertisement...
That's the world (of communication) we live in... so what?!

Logged
FredBGG
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1651


« Reply #196 on: October 15, 2012, 07:42:05 PM »
ReplyReply

who cares?
That's the nature (or at least one side) of advertisement...
That's the world (of communication) we live in... so what?!



Who cares? maybe some of those people that bought the DF and found it flaky.
Plenty of people complain about it.

Regarding advertising..... there are a few rules to consider....  Wink
« Last Edit: October 15, 2012, 08:10:58 PM by FredBGG » Logged
tho_mas
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1696


« Reply #197 on: October 15, 2012, 07:46:03 PM »
ReplyReply

Who cares? maybe some of those people that bought the DF and found it flaky.
Plenty of people complain about it.
First: BC has absolutely NOTHING to dos with this!
Secondly: who cares :-) Buy a Contax :-)
Logged
ErikKaffehr
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7640


WWW
« Reply #198 on: October 15, 2012, 08:34:59 PM »
ReplyReply

Hi,

The sample I posted on PBase really astonished me. When I looked at the stuff on screen there was an incredible advantage to the larger file, but on the print it was nil. I showed the prints to a friend who was working at a pro lab and he could not tell them apart.

I never said that the thing Joseph Holmes have seen were not relevant to DSLRs. This has been indicated by Diglloyd quite a few times. When the OP decided to go for Nikon I pointed out the need to test everything. Nikon is known to having had problems with one of the AF-sensors being off on the D800. Thom Hogan has discussed this at length. Calibration is done with an 50/1.4 lens and process takes an hour as far as I recall.

As I said, I think the problem is less with DSLRs, simply because they are built to work with f/1.4 lenses. An f/1.4 lens needs twice the precision that f/2.8 lens has. As Diglloyd has pointed out, hanging a DSLR from your shoulders with a 300/2.8 is probably not beneficial to alignment of sensor and lens.

The other factor making Joseph Holmes observations important is that many buyers would use pre owned or rental equipment. If you read Joseph Holmes articles you will find that about two thirds of the samples he had seen had issues. The indication was that Phase backs coming from the factory were probably OK. Several of the lenses were bad, also Schneider and Rodenstock lenses coming from the factory.

Lens Rentals writes much about lenses. It seems that there is a lot of variation in lenses but really bad lenses are few. One interesting observation is that they test all lenses before shipping. They used to have manual inspection but since perhaps a year they are using Imatest. They have observed that lemons do pass trough visual inspection but show up in Imatest.

Once I tested mirror vibration. I made a series of shots with:

- Camera on tripod using Mirror Lock UP (MLU) and no AntiShake (AS)
- Camera on tripod no MLU no AS
- Camera on tripod no MLU and AS
- Camera hand held, no MLU and AS

These shots were done with a 200/2.8 zoom at medium apertures with exposures between 1/15 and 1/125.

To my surprise all the shots were sharp! The tripod/MLU shots were not sharper than free hand shots. Then I measured my test shots with Imatest. Imatest clearly showed that I lost half the sharpness on the non MLU shots. After seeing the numbers I went back to the screen and had a second look. After knowing the numerical difference I could see the difference on screen! I don't recall the camera I used, but I guess that it was a Sony Alpha 700 at 12 MP. Not using MLU made that camera into a 3 MP (half resolution squared) camera and I missed that at actual pixels. The experiment made me critical about relying on the eyes and religious about MLU.

Best regards
Erik

difficult maybe... but not impossible for a trained eye, I think. In my experience the relation of image components to each other (color to color, gradation, sharpness, smoothness etc.) can be translated from real pixels viewed at 100% or 50% on screen to the respective print to some extend. Naturally a print looks different to a screen view... but if the processing chain is done right it's only the difference of 94 DPI (or whatever resolution of the screen) to 300 DPI (or 360 DPI or whatever resolution of the printer). Normally I can estimate how a capture (a digital file viewed on a screen that is) will look printed - at least this goes for my preferred printing paper in conjunction with the sharpening technique I prefer.
Anyway... a defocused MFD capture will always look like a super sized POS capture ... also in print. An accurately focused MFD capture makes the difference.
I do have the very same DB (P45) and when I saw Michael's capture made for that comparission I thought, okay, if this what you get from your P45, I'd prefer the G10. Because it's easier to use. But the capture is simply nowhere near of what a P45 is capable of.

With regard to the discussion in this thread... I've looked at some D800e RAW files available on the web and actually I am not impressed with regard to sharpness/details or so. I get that from my P45 all the time, even with my not so great lenses. I'd say the D800e is somehere in between my P21+ and my P45. But what really impresses me, however, is that you can push the D800e files at base ISO by 2, even 3 stops in the shadows without even having to think about applying any (luminance-) noise reduction. That is more or less impossible with my P45. Okay, I am comparing a 2005 DB to a 2012 DSLR. But still ... the D800e files I've seen look extremely good when pushed hard in post.
Then again... other than DR... they do not look nearly as nice (subjective perception !!! ) as the P45 captures with my lenses (Contax Zeiss, Digitars, Digarons). They look a bit more washed out (soft/dull) in image areas where I think the P45 would draw finer details/color differentiation.  I am only talking about what I am seeing in the files. I really don't care whether or not a D800 or a Sony RX100 outperforms my P45 - I really don't care at all!
(and BTW... as a side note... I've also seen D800e captures suffering either from a tilted sensor or a misaligned lense ... so welcome to the world of high res imaging and warm greetings to J. Holmes ;-) ... ).



Logged

FredBGG
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1651


« Reply #199 on: October 15, 2012, 10:38:06 PM »
ReplyReply

The other factor making Joseph Holmes observations important is that many buyers would use pre owned or rental equipment. If you read Joseph Holmes articles you will find that about two thirds of the samples he had seen had issues. The indication was that Phase backs coming from the factory were probably OK. Several of the lenses were bad, also Schneider and Rodenstock lenses coming from the factory.

Interesting point.

Reminds me of a post I made a while ago about a so called interdependent lens test on the Mamiya USA website.
Hasselblad vs Mamiya lenses..... so nothing to do with MF vs35mm DSLR.

http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1054836

The Hasselblad lenses were randomly picked out from a rental house while the Mamiya lenses came of the shelf at Mamiya USA. Roll Eyes
« Last Edit: October 15, 2012, 11:52:46 PM by FredBGG » Logged
Pages: « 1 ... 8 9 [10] 11 12 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad