Menu
What's new
The GetDPI Photography Forum

Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!

Show us your Tech Cam

S

Shelby Lewis

Guest
Oohhh... I love how we "big camera" folk are staging an insurrection in this thread.

(ok, truthfully, I'm just jealous I don't own an alpa)
 
F

FredBGG

Not Available
IF phase could achieve full motion live view it would be great to shoot fashion and portrait with a mini tech view camera.

I have already made one with two front ends or a Fuji GX 680.
 
Shashin

Shashin

Well-known member
The meaning of "technical camera" has become very loose (if it has any meaning at all now). In fact, a technical camera was considered a flat-bed metal view camera like the ones made by Linhof and Wista and was even carried over to some monorail cameras. The Fuji is much more of a technical camera than an Alpa TC (which is not a technical camera by definition), which has its roots in ultra-wide cameras like the Hasselblad SWC, Brooks Veriwide, or Horseman SW612 (the one without the shifts). Actually, the Fuji falls under the classic definition of a technical camera (the RZ67 does not, sorry Shelby).
 
Thierry

Thierry

New member
It has effectively become very loose, the definition of "technical". At the origine it was meant for cameras with tilt/swing possibilities with the image plane. In this respect the Fuji isn't any more a technical camera than any other. The Alpa TC can as well be fitted with accessories allowing tilt/swing.
But as said, the term "technical" is very loose.

Thierry

Shashin said:
The meaning of "technical camera" has become very loose (if it has any meaning at all now). In fact, a technical camera was considered a flat-bed metal view camera like the ones made by Linhof and Wista and was even carried over to some monorail cameras. The Fuji is much more of a technical camera than an Alpa TC (which is not a technical camera by definition), which has its roots in ultra-wide cameras like the Hasselblad SWC, Brooks Veriwide, or Horseman SW612 (the one without the shifts). Actually, the Fuji falls under the classic definition of a technical camera (the RZ67 does not, sorry Shelby).
Click to expand...
 
S

Shelby Lewis

Guest
Oh, look what I've started. I know fully my RZ isn't a tech cam... I was just having a little light-hearted fun :D:D (seeing that my heavy RZ set-up is kind of the antithesis of what most around here call a "tech cam".)

I still want an alpa, regardless of how you label it. :ROTFL:

Cheers!
Shelby
 
Guy Mancuso

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
Honestly I'm not so sure the word MF would even be correct. That was for film so really what are we now large sensor. Well than the question is how large is large. Hmmmm


Funny on Calumets site they call our lenses large format. Which we all think 4x5 or larger.

Are we really nameless by definition . Interesting thought
 
F

FredBGG

Not Available
Jeff asked me this in a PM, but I thought I would answer here
as it is relevant to technical cameras...

"I use the tilt and swing as well as the shift.

shift is great for those portraits from below the eye line. Gives the image a less distorted look without the head being a little smaller and the shoulders heavier.

Here are a couple of examples:"

Dear FredBGG,

May I ask, what did you do to first image example? (looks great by the way)
Shift up or down? how?

thanks


jeff
Click to expand...
Here is what I did in these images:



Here I just shifted the lens up so as to compensate for the camera pointing up towards the model. It made the proportion of the shoulders and head more natural.
The head is made a wee bit larger and less "distant" giving the image a bit more of the look of a shorter focal length despite being shot with a 250mm.






In this image I shifted the lens up. but also used tilted the lens down just a little and swing (horizontal tilt) slightly to the right.

The shift was to compensate for the lowish angle. The tilt and swing was for put the focus just where I wanted it. On the eyes (both)
and down the neck to the texture on the dress.... but the real magic is Dawn's beauty.....
 
M

m21apsh

Member
FredBGG said:
IF phase could achieve full motion live view it would be great to shoot fashion and portrait with a mini tech view camera.

I have already made one with two front ends or a Fuji GX 680.
Click to expand...

DearFredBGG,

Please show us your custom modify Fuji GX680?

Best

J
 
F

FredBGG

Not Available
Guy Mancuso said:
Honestly I'm not so sure the word MF would even be correct. That was for film so really what are we now large sensor. Well than the question is how large is large. Hmmmm
Click to expand...
No... our sensors are piddly little sub 645 sized...

This is the real thing:


8x10 digital sensor
 
carstenw

carstenw

Active member
Lance, what is the resolution and performance (colour tonality, dynamic range) of this back? I understand the owner/developer uses it as a digital polaroid, but does the final frame with film?
 
Stefan Steib

Stefan Steib

Active member
Fred

I don´t do this all too often, but these portraits are perfect, old school craftsmanship - on point ! Love the style - and you are right - this model definitely helps! ;-))))

Greetings from Munich
Stefan

FredBGG said:
Jeff asked me this in a PM, but I thought I would answer here
as it is relevant to technical cameras...

Here is what I did in these images:

Here I just shifted the lens up so as to compensate for the camera pointing up towards the model. It made the proportion of the shoulders and head more natural.
The head is made a wee bit larger and less "distant" giving the image a bit more of the look of a shorter focal length despite being shot with a 250mm.

In this image I shifted the lens up. but also used tilted the lens down just a little and swing (horizontal tilt) slightly to the right.

The shift was to compensate for the lowish angle. The tilt and swing was for put the focus just where I wanted it. On the eyes (both)
and down the neck to the texture on the dress.... but the real magic is Dawn's beauty.....
Click to expand...
 
Thierry

Thierry

New member
beside the model, the composition, the angle and focus, one must also say that the light is just beautiful.

Bravo.

Thierry

FredBGG said:
Here is what I did in these images:

Here I just shifted the lens up so as to compensate for the camera pointing up towards the model. It made the proportion of the shoulders and head more natural.
The head is made a wee bit larger and less "distant" giving the image a bit more of the look of a shorter focal length despite being shot with a 250mm.

In this image I shifted the lens up. but also used tilted the lens down just a little and swing (horizontal tilt) slightly to the right.

The shift was to compensate for the lowish angle. The tilt and swing was for put the focus just where I wanted it. On the eyes (both)
and down the neck to the texture on the dress.... but the real magic is Dawn's beauty.....
Click to expand...
 
J

jlm

Workshop Member
that 8" x 10" back is 10 mp resolution, close to an M8; must be giant sensor cells and it cost as much as a small house to develop. As far as i can tell it is for previewing and a direct digital substitute for previewing with 8x10 polaroid, then the final shot would be 8x10 film.
 
GrahamWelland

GrahamWelland

Subscriber & Workshop Member
jlm said:
that 8" x 10" back is 10 mp resolution, close to an M8; must be giant sensor cells and it cost as much as a small house to develop. As far as i can tell it is for previewing and a direct digital substitute for previewing with 8x10 polaroid, then the final shot would be 8x10 film.
Click to expand...
You can see how it could pay for itself in film costs alone eventually for someone like this. One set up, as many proofs as you need and then shoot the money shot and hopefully extract a premium for it being on traditional media. :thumbup:

Aside that, it is cool technology too.
 
lance_schad

lance_schad

Workshop Member
jlm said:
that 8" x 10" back is 10 mp resolution, close to an M8; must be giant sensor cells and it cost as much as a small house to develop. As far as i can tell it is for previewing and a direct digital substitute for previewing with 8x10 polaroid, then the final shot would be 8x10 film.
Click to expand...
Yes it produces a 10MP file which he uses as an onscreen polaroid then shoots the final film. The image quality on screen is nice, he also has it color managed to match Velvia.

Lance
 
kuau

kuau

Workshop Member
Whatever Fred uses, his images are amazing period.
Irving Penn and Richard Avedon I'm sure would agree if they were still around.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top