Lost in 'transition'...pixel size & IQ

[anGy]

Hello everyone,
This is my very first post on this forum.
Just wanna to say hello to all of you guys first.
It has been an helpfull pleasure to read your comments and advices on these posts. Many thanks for that.

I'm an enthusiastic amateur photographer, no pro and am thinking about making the big plunge from DSLR to MFDB since a few weeks. A post like the recent one of Andrews is of a big interest to me. It's a chance some guys are willing to spend so much time sharing their experiences (although I'm sure writing the posts has certainly helped him to structure his own thoughts !).

I've had a quick demo of the phase one P21+ P25+ & P30+ on the new 'phamiya' camera last week. I was impressed on how easy it was to handle this camera, the back settings and so on. A real kid's play. But I also was disappointed about a few things. The autofocus is - by no surprise - very slow. Not to be compared to my Canon. It has had difficulties to work properly on dark lit places inside the showroom (where the canon did find his focus in a micro second). I was hoping the viewfinder to be brighter too (80mm mounted on the camera). I found it no better than my canon (but the 50mm f1,4 was mounted on the canon). The portrait position of the phase one was also less pleasant than the vertical grip of the 1DsmkIII.
During this demo I had the silly idea to make a quick comparison of the 3 backs with the canon. The cameras were put on a table and pointing at a fish tank inside the showroow. Everything on f5,6 iso 100. Autofocus on the fish tank. Later I did compare the files at home. The phase one were developed in C1 v4 (demo version for Mac) and the canon file with Lightroom I know well.

I was hoping to be blown by the MFDB IQ, but at the contrary did find it very difficult to see major differences in these 4 files. Dynamic Range ? all 3 Phase one seem to have the same - the 1Ds was just a bit shorter in the higlight, just. Colors were more difficult to judge, especially on such silly file samples (inside of a showroom). The P30+ was looking best to me - the canon was the least accurate. BUT, with little test and trials I could quite easily make a script in photoshop to make the canon file almost look like the P30+.
The digital backs seem to tolerate lightning temperature differences better. The Canon made a obvious blue cast where natural light was more present and a magenta cast elsewhere. The back files were more neutral. The absence of AA filter was a + point for the backs. Sharpening the canon file to make it as sharp as the backs can easily be done. But the result looked less natural whatever the settings I used.
To be honest all these differences were minor to me.
The only one that made a real difference was how the DB were handling the low greys. No matter how the canon file was postproduced, I was unable to get the smoothness of the low greys of the backs. This did make an important difference on the final appearance of the pictures between these different systems. The canon result lacks the smoothness and natural effect in the low end of the histogram. That point at least was obvious enough it could be pointed without hesitation.

So this demo turned out to be a bit disapointing at the end.
But I still want to buy a digital back !
Why ? mostly because I feel unhappy with some of the DSLR file caracteristics (harsh low lights, annoying 'over' sharpening process due to the AA filter, weak color rendition for portrait). But to be fair, when sitting in front of my computer and looking at those files I made at the dealer place - I can't keep wondering if jumping into the MFDB world is a reasonable choice. My bank manager already has a definitive opinion on that...

I've looked at most of the pictures posted here. They are just great. Most of them I won't be able to produce I think. But I just can't determine how deep the MFDB are involved in these results !! After all some of you guys are pro photographers with sharp shooting skills and certainly strong postproduction skills.
So the real issue for me is to know if I'm 'good enough' to take - but also see and appreciate - all the benefits a MFDB can bring to a shoot.
Of course nobody but me can find an answer to that. Nevertheless maybe sometimes it is also necessary to make some kind of reminder: reading hundreds of posts and looking at great MFDB pics creates a strong envy. Sort of 'I can't live one more month without having my own MFDB' thing. But once the purchase done, someone's own photographic skills (and financial planning) will speed up the come back to reality.

That said, maybe the comparison I made was a very bad idea. The conditions of it were maybe unfair and unappropriate with the DB potential.
But I also have red some posts on the LL forum about comparing the 1DsmkIII with the backs. Opinions were quite different from DB and canon users....

Please do take these words for what they are: fuzzy impressions, lot of 'maybe' from a non pro photographer. I don't want to negate the IQ difference level between DSLR and MFDB. For sure they exist for those who can take the best part of these systems.

For the other more modest shooters like me, well, I hope I can soon report the IQ jump is also obvious.
I wanna use my Sinar P2 for packshots and this is a reason enough to buy a P25 or even a P45. And I'll do.
(I wish I could make better/longer tests (lucky Andrews !). It does just not seem to be possible here in Belgium !)
So I'm pretty confident about the IQ benefit the combination of Sinar, Schneider digitar lenses and a MFDB will bring.

But I'm making a lot of outdoor shoots too (landscape & street shooting). In these conditions, and with all the already known MFDB drawbacks (AF speed, iso limitations) I will just have to rely on hope and faith I guess...

As soon as I find a good refurbished Phase back, I'll buy it, use it on my Sinar with certainly great pleasure. Then I will confront this baby to my Canon, out of the smooth, warm and welcoming studio environment to see exactly what IQ profit I can personaly get there, outside in the wild !!
I will sure try to report on that as fairly as I can.

Thanks again for this forum,

anGy

ps: sorry for the bad english that is not my native language.

 

[woodyspedden]

Hello everyone,
This is my very first post on this forum.
Just wanna to say hello to all of you guys first.
It has been an helpfull pleasure to read your comments and advices on these posts. Many thanks for that.

I'm a enthusiastic amateur photographer, no pro and am thinking about making the big plunge from DSLR to MFDB since a few weeks. A post like the recent one of Andrews is of a big interest to me. It's a chance some guys are willing to spend so much time sharing their experiences (although I'm sure writing the posts has certainly helped him to structure his own thoughts !).

I've had a quick demo of the phase one P21+ P25+ & P30+ on the new 'phamiya' camera last week. I was impressed on how easy it was to handle this camera, the back settings and so on. A real kid's play. But I also was disappointed about a few things. The autofocus is - by no surprise - very slow. Not to be compared to my Canon. It has had difficulties to work properly on dark lit places inside the showroom (where the canon did find his focus in a micro second). I was hoping the viewfinder to be brighter too (80mm mounted on the camera). I found it no better than my canon (but the 50mm f1,4 was mounted on the canon). The portrait position of the phase one was also less pleasant than the vertical grip of the 1DsmkIII.
During this demo I had the silly idea to make a quick comparison of the 3 backs with the canon. The cameras were put on a table and pointing at a fish tank inside the showroow. Everything on f5,6 iso 100. Autofocus on the fish tank. Later I did compare the files at home. The phase one were developed in C1 v4 (demo version for Mac) and the canon file with Lightroom I know well.

I was hoping to be blown by the MFDB IQ, but at the contrary did find it very difficult to see major differences in these 4 files. Dynamic Range ? all 3 Phase one seem to have the same - the 1Ds was just a bit shorter in the higlight, just. Colors were more difficult to judge, especially on such silly file sample (inside of a showroom). The P30+ was looking best to me - the canon was least accurate. BUT, with a little test and trials I could quite easily make a script in photoshop to make look the canon file quite like the P30+.
The digital backs seem to tolerate lightning temperature differences better. The Canon made a obvious blue cast where natural light was more present and a magenta cast elsewhere. The back files were more neutral. The absence of AA filter was a + point for the backs. Sharpening the canon file to make it as sharp as the back can easily be done. But the result looked less natural whatever the settings I used.
To be honest all these differences were minor to me. The only one that made a real difference was how the DB were handelling the low greys. No matter how the canon file was postproduced, I was unable to get the smoothness of the low greys of the backs. This did make an important difference on the final appearance of the pictures between these different systems. The canon result lacks the smoothness and natural effect in the low end of the histograms. That point at least was obvious enough I could point it without hesitation !

So this demo turned out to be a bit disapointing at the end.
And I still want to buy a digital back ! Why ? mostly because I feel unhappy with some of the DSLR results (harsh low lights, annoying 'over' sharpening process due to the AA filter), but sitting in front of my computer and looking at those files I made at the dealer place - I can't keep wondering if jumping into the MFDB world will be a reasonable choice. My bank manager already has a definitive opinion on that...
I've looked at most of the pictures posted here. They are just great. Most of them I won't be able to produce I think. But I just can't determine how deep the MFDB are involved in these results !! After all some of you guys are pro photographers with sharp shooting skills and certainly strong postproduction skills. Not sure to have the right 'level' to take - but also see and appreciate - all the benefits a MFDB can bring to a shoot.

Maybe the comparison I made was a very bad idea. The conditions of it were maybe unfair and unappropriate with the DB potential. I also have red some posts on the LL forum about comparing the 1DsmkIII with the backs. Opinions were quite different from DB and canon users....

Please do take these words for what they are: fuzzy impressions of a non pro photographer. I don't want to negate the IQ difference level between DSLR and MFDB. They certainly exist for those who can take the best part of these systems.
For the other more modest shooters like me, well, I hope I can soon report the IQ jump is also obvious. I wanna use my Sinar P2 for packshots and this is a reason enough to buy a P25 or even a P45.

I wish I could make better/longer tests (lucky Andrews !). It does not seem to be possible here in Belgium ! So let's rely on faith... As soon as I find a good refurbished Phase back, I'll buy it, use it on my Sinar and will confront it outside, in the wild !

Thanks again for this forum,

anGy

Hi AnGy

Welcome to the forum and to the wonderful but difficult process of selecting a MFDB.

First of all, the only prime reason for selecting a MFDB is to be able to print large images and thus the only way to truly evaluate them is by printing. Trying to judge relative quality by looking at the screen is an exercise in futility!

If the only issue was the look and feel of a non-AA filter vs a body with an AA filter, and you do not need to print large you should look at the Leica M8. The files are spectacular and at 11x14 or even 16x20 the prints are gorgeous. Of course you are up-rezzing to get those sizes so you may have some artifacts as a result but i do it all the time and love the results.

I have the Hasselblad H3DII-39 and being able to print 22x30" with no need to uprez (using 240 ppi) is just terrific. If you ran your tests as before, but used 22x30 prints to see the differences you would likely be more amazed. My primary genre is fine art landscapes and being able to print large is a given for my output.

I think a number of people overbuy when going to a MFDB believing that they will see a major difference when viewing files on screen or on the net. Again I emphasize that the real reason to spend the big bucks for an MFDB is the ability to print large without a loss of quality. Otherwise 10-12 Mpx is sufficient for the large majority of applications. For instance, a wedding photographer almost never would need an MFDB for that application. The majority of prints he will provide to the client will be 8x10" or smaller which is smaller than the native resolution from a 10mPx sensor! Of course there are exceptions like the potential need for heavy cropping or where the client wants a very large portrait for framing and hanging on the wall. But I would bet these are the exceptions rather than the rule.

Anyway, the choices of course are personal and up to you. I only advise you to think carefully about your needs and to do the evaluation using real world criteria. Only by doing this can you make an unbiased judgement of the merits of the cameras being evaluated.

Sorry for the long ramble

Best

Woody

 

[andershald]

Hi anGy.

Welcome to the forum and, dare I say, welcome to the very difficult process of choosing a camera. (Well for me it certainly is). I think testing and comparing the systems is definately the way forward and if you can possibly swing it, a test that is relevant to the kind of images you like to do is best.

I think a very important thing to remember also is that a MFDB will not instantly turn you into a great photographer, if anything getting good images from a MFDB is more demanding than from a DSLR. So a bit of practise with the tool will also help.

In my experience the different backs are all very good, so in one sense you can't go completely wrong either. I am sure that you will see an improvement in image quality.

Best regards,
Anders

 

[carbonmetrictree]

Hey AnGy, welcome to the forums!

In regards to the differences of the 1dsMk3 vs MFDB backs, it really depends on which back you are comparing the Canon to. I would honestly say that the type of quality of a P25+ on the "Phamiya" does surpass the 1dsMk3's image quality. But if it were a normal P25, I would have stuck with my 1dsMk3 because of noise reduction, auto focusing, weather sealing. Yes, the P25 does have a unique quality that DSLR cameras cannot capture and does have a lot of detail, but in terms of noise levels and exposure latitude, the 1dsMk3 wins hands down IMHO. But comparing the 1dsMk3 to a P45+, there is almost no comparison needed to see who wins. The plus series' have a huge amount of latitude, I've been playing with a few underexposed images from my tests with the Phase 645 and P45+ and have been able to recover a -1 3/4 stop under exposure without the file turning into a complete pixel mush. If you are unsure about the sharpness of the 1dsMk3, you can also investigate into finding someone who can take off the AA filter from the sensor. The filter is one of the main reasons unsharpmasks do not work well with Canon files, Canon designed the images to be a bit fuzzy, attempting to recover the detail lost from the filter is impossible. The colors on the 1dsMk3 are pretty good! Canon and Phase sensors have different sensitivities towards color temperatures, so it is tough to tell which looks best without doing some necessary tweaking before comparing.

With me being one of the many finally deciding to upgrade to a digital back, make sure that you are certain that this back is an absolute necessity, it is a huge amount of money to put down! I decided to migrate from the Mk3 because I needed the latitude, 16it processing and the detail fom the P45+ for my architecture work. I also tend to crop a lot, sometimes dramatically, and I needed something that could hold up a 40% size reduction and still be acceptable to turn in for a job. I'm not trying to push you away from getting a digital back, but I have seen a good share of people who are dipping their bank accounts for the new P65+, but only print 8.5x11's, do not do heavy cropping, and use most of their images for web use. It's not that they are wasting their money on the back, they just forgot to evaluate what their priorities and goals were with their purchase.

I've included a sample of an interior shot along with a 100% crop from a 1dsMk3 at f/11, ASA 200. Comparing this crop to a P25 non-plus, I'd say you're going to be sitting somewhat around in the same ballpark.


Good luck with your purchase! Feel free to ask anything you need. These guys helped me out a lot when getting my stuff, I'll be glad to do the same

 

[anGy]

Thanks very much for your advices and comments.
I must confess Woody that I do not have to print large for the moment. A3+ is the max. My first concern is to practice photography in a studio environment. Using Tilt/Shift movments are often required for packshots. This is the main reason I want to jump in the MFDB world, I don't believe a good job can be done with a DSLR being attached to a large format camera (for instance the chip standing deep inside de DSLR body won't allow much movement I guess). The M8 has always been temping but won't fit. It's a specific need I have. No large prints or high res files required but a DB, a flexadaptor and a Sinar to get the right tools for product and art repro shoots. I will print the 'poor' shoots I made just to check if differences are already more obvious. Unfortunately I will be limited to A3+.
Sorry Anders, I called you Andrews... You said MFDB are more demanding. You also said in your 'considering H3DII post' that you think it can be an advantage. It's totally reflecting my feeling. Shooting with a DSLR is just too easy sometimes. Using a system that won't accept the smallest mistake will bring the quantity/quality balance more favorable for the quality. Hope so.

Thanks very much Carbonmetrictree for your input and your crop. I just did not get it right: Is it a 100% crop from a 1DsmkIII ? very good quality for one coming from a corner. Which lens did you use ?

I think you've just put my feeling into words. Switching the 1DsmkIII for a P25 won't be a good move. I did not know if the '+' series were just a small or important upgrades. It seems that the '+' is worst the price.
Here's a summary of the today prices from my dealer:
P25 'refurb' + phase one camera + 80mm: 10.000eur + taxes ($14.000+taxes)
P25+ 'new' + phase one camera + 80mm: 15.000eur + taxes ($21.000+taxes)
and
P45 'refurb' + phase one camera + 80mm: 12.000eur + taxes ($16.850+taxes)

Street shooting & landscape are my second concern so the camera kit (just 1.000eur supplement) is a good deal.
You can see that a P45 refurb is 3.000eur ($4.200) cheaper than a P21+ new (I did not find a refurb one).
The P45 is a whole new story, very temping deal at the moment and really complementary to the 1DsMKIII in a certain way.
What are your feeling about the overall image quality compared to a 22mp back ? not regarding resolution (sure it is huge) but more about DR, color and high (200) iso for instance ?

I always heard that the 9 microns pixels are the best ones (Guy Mancuso also speaks about the 9 microns look here and there). Reducing this size should limit the DR and/or raize the s/n ratio. I did not see that when comparing the P30 and P25 files - and I don't understand why: The pixel size differences are huge between P30/45 and P21/25 (canon solved the raizing resolution problem with a new pixel design, 25% less space between pixels and Digic III, but there is 5 years or so between the old 1D/1Ds series and the new ones. Not sure Kodak made a new pixel design when they launched the P30/45).
It could be great to have your feedback on that.
Thanks, have great shoots !

 

[thsinar]

hi anGy,

You may want to have a look on the new "Sinar Hy6 - 65" camera system, featuring a 31 MPx as all others on the market, but with some unique features (on-board processing ---> DNGs and/or JPGs, different files sizes and compressions, large bright 3" display 660x480 pixels/280 ppi, Automatic White Balance, rotatable menu, etc ...).

It is worth to have a look at this completely new system.

you can read more here:

http://forum.getdpi.com/forum/showthread.php?t=3089

and here:

http://luminous-landscape.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=27565

The new brochure can be downloaded from our webpage:

www.sinarcameras.com --->

http://www.sinarcameras.com/site/index__gast-e-1072-24-1154-urlvars-rand-240.html

Prices will be communicated this coming days, but should be around what is available in the market.

Best regards,
Thierry

Thanks very much for your advices and comments.
I must confess Woody that I do not have to print large for the moment. A3+ is the max. My first concern is to practice photography in a studio environment. Using Tilt/Shift movments are often required for packshots. This is the main reason I want to jump in the MFDB world, I don't believe a good job can be done with a DSLR being attached to a large format camera (for instance the chip standing deep inside de DSLR body won't allow much movement I guess). The M8 has always been temping but won't fit. It's a specific need I have. No large prints or high res files required but a DB, a flexadaptor and a Sinar to get the right tools for product and art repro shoots. I will print the 'poor' shoots I made just to check if differences are already more obvious. Unfortunately I will be limited to A3+.
Sorry Anders, I called you Andrews... You said MFDB are more demanding. You also said in your 'considering H3DII post' that you think it can be an advantage. It's totally reflecting my feeling. Shooting with a DSLR is just too easy sometimes. Using a system that won't accept the smallest mistake will bring the quantity/quality balance more favorable for the quality. Hope so.

Thanks very much Carbonmetrictree for your input and your crop. I just did not get it right: Is it a 100% crop from a 1DsmkIII ? very good quality for one coming from a corner. Which lens did you use ?

I think you've just put my feeling into words. Switching the 1DsmkIII for a P25 won't be a good move. I did not know if the '+' series were just a small or important upgrades. It seems that the '+' is worst the price.
Here's a summary of the today prices from my dealer:
P25 'refurb' + phase one camera + 80mm: 10.000eur + taxes ($14.000+taxes)
P25+ 'new' + phase one camera + 80mm: 15.000eur + taxes ($21.000+taxes)
and
P45 'refurb' + phase one camera + 80mm: 12.000eur + taxes ($16.850+taxes)

Street shooting & landscape are my second concern so the camera kit (just 1.000eur supplement) is a good deal.
You can see that a P45 refurb is 3.000eur ($4.200) cheaper than a P21+ new (I did not find a refurb one).
The P45 is a whole new story, very temping deal at the moment and really complementary to the 1DsMKIII in a certain way.
What are your feeling about the overall image quality compared to a 22mp back ? not regarding resolution (sure it is huge) but more about DR, color and high (200) iso for instance ?

I always heard that the 9 microns pixels are the best ones (Guy Mancuso also speaks about the 9 microns look here and there). Reducing this size should limit the DR and/or raize the s/n ratio. I did not see that when comparing the P30 and P25 files - and I don't understand why: The pixel size differences are huge between P30/45 and P21/25 (canon solved the raizing resolution problem with a new pixel design, 25% less space between pixels and Digic III, but there is 5 years or so between the old 1D/1Ds series and the new ones. Not sure Kodak made a new pixel design when they launched the P30/45).
It could be great to have your feedback on that.
Thanks, have great shoots !

 

[anGy]

Thanks for this info.
I followed the links and sow the forbidden words 'micro lenses' !!.
I have to stay away from them as the purpose is also to make T/S on a sinar P2.
Otherwise, price apart, the Hy6 system is very sexy and so full of nice features. I love the old fashioned Hassy/Rolley look mixed with modern evolution by the way.

Have a good day,

 

[woodyspedden]

Thanks very much for your advices and comments.
I must confess Woody that I do not have to print large for the moment. A3+ is the max. My first concern is to practice photography in a studio environment. Using Tilt/Shift movments are often required for packshots. This is the main reason I want to jump in the MFDB world, I don't believe a good job can be done with a DSLR being attached to a large format camera (for instance the chip standing deep inside de DSLR body won't allow much movement I guess). The M8 has always been temping but won't fit. It's a specific need I have. No large prints or high res files required but a DB, a flexadaptor and a Sinar to get the right tools for product and art repro shoots. I will print the 'poor' shoots I made just to check if differences are already more obvious. Unfortunately I will be limited to A3+.
Sorry Anders, I called you Andrews... You said MFDB are more demanding. You also said in your 'considering H3DII post' that you think it can be an advantage. It's totally reflecting my feeling. Shooting with a DSLR is just too easy sometimes. Using a system that won't accept the smallest mistake will bring the quantity/quality balance more favorable for the quality. Hope so.

Thanks very much Carbonmetrictree for your input and your crop. I just did not get it right: Is it a 100% crop from a 1DsmkIII ? very good quality for one coming from a corner. Which lens did you use ?

I think you've just put my feeling into words. Switching the 1DsmkIII for a P25 won't be a good move. I did not know if the '+' series were just a small or important upgrades. It seems that the '+' is worst the price.
Here's a summary of the today prices from my dealer:
P25 'refurb' + phase one camera + 80mm: 10.000eur + taxes ($14.000+taxes)
P25+ 'new' + phase one camera + 80mm: 15.000eur + taxes ($21.000+taxes)
and
P45 'refurb' + phase one camera + 80mm: 12.000eur + taxes ($16.850+taxes)

Street shooting & landscape are my second concern so the camera kit (just 1.000eur supplement) is a good deal.
You can see that a P45 refurb is 3.000eur ($4.200) cheaper than a P21+ new (I did not find a refurb one).
The P45 is a whole new story, very temping deal at the moment and really complementary to the 1DsMKIII in a certain way.
What are your feeling about the overall image quality compared to a 22mp back ? not regarding resolution (sure it is huge) but more about DR, color and high (200) iso for instance ?

I always heard that the 9 microns pixels are the best ones (Guy Mancuso also speaks about the 9 microns look here and there). Reducing this size should limit the DR and/or raize the s/n ratio. I did not see that when comparing the P30 and P25 files - and I don't understand why: The pixel size differences are huge between P30/45 and P21/25 (canon solved the raizing resolution problem with a new pixel design, 25% less space between pixels and Digic III, but there is 5 years or so between the old 1D/1Ds series and the new ones. Not sure Kodak made a new pixel design when they launched the P30/45).
It could be great to have your feedback on that.
Thanks, have great shoots !

Hey anGy

Don't forget that Nikon now has several (24mm, 45mm and 85mm tilt shift lenses) that really perform well. I have the 24 and have never heard a bad review of any of them. Again, depends on your final output as to how that would perform for you.

Woody

 

[carbonmetrictree]

Hi AnGy,

The image was photographed with my recently sold 1dsMk3 with a 24mm TS-E f/3.5 lens. I definitely got a really good copy of the lens, even with it being four years older than the 16-35mm f/2.8L II, it was still the sharpest lens I have ever used with Canon.

There is a significant boost in detail with the P45+ from the 25+. I'm not too sure how to describe the color differences, but the P45+ just looked more resilient, I suppose it looked more like flim than the P25+. All of the Phase backs do a superb job in the noise department, I have been using ISO800 more than ever now. I could have never done that with the 1dsMk3 if I wanted to adjust levels in the shadows. For my night photography, I tend to stick at ISO100 for what ever camera or back I shoot with.

Hope this helps!

Andrew





You might want to talk to Lance at Capture Integration for prices, if it is any one that can get you going with a digital package, it would be him.

Lance Schad
Capture Integration - Miami/Atlanta
Direct: 305-534-5701 x1 | Cell: 305-394-3196
Capture Integration
[email protected]

 

[anGy]

Thanks so much for your answers.
I am using the Canon 24mm T/S and 16-35 mkII currently.
Unfortunatelly my copy of the 24mm is not as good as yours. It seems that making no shift and correcting pictures in CS3 are making less harm to IQ than shifting the lens !
The 16-35 is a very convenient lens, helps in many ways but images aren't sharp enough, no crisp popping out of them. I guess it's time to go check what the big guys are able to do.

By the way, I took contact with my Phase One local dealer again. He kindly told me to be patient. Phase One is organizing an international meeting next sunday, prior to the Photokina. New announcement will be made.

No details are known until now but maybe new tarification will come out of this meeting - and leaf shutters hopefully.

Hope I can join the MFDB club soon - and not only via the equipment but also with making huge pictures as you guys do !

Saw sample of P45+ back, stunning all the way !...

 

[carbonmetrictree]

Hey AnGy, you might want to send your lenses to Canon to have them calibrated to your 1dsMk2. I sent all of my lenses down with my 1dsMk3 when I purchased it and Canon calibrated each of the lenses to the sensor plane of the camera. When I got them back, I did not have to micro adjust any of them, and believe me when I say that they were A LOT sharper than before! The image of the interior shot had a 5mm vertical shift and no apparent softness or vignetting occurred.