First back suggestions for Tech cam (and possible MF SLR)

[craigosh]

Thanks Doug, yeah I need to check this all for myself with a real world test.

I'm pretty picky about my color management so no problems there

Strangely, mixed LED colors never look as bad. Purples, yellows, cyans etc all look better than the primary red, green and blue.

Oddly, it seems nobody has a problem with these errors as Google searches have always proven fruitless for answers!

 

[yaya]

Hi Craig,

Cambo UK are based in Manchester and they are also a Mamiya Leaf dealer so should be able to help you with trying out some kit

website

Hope this helps

Yair

 

[torger]

Thanks for the info everyone.
Just to add examples -
5d BaaBar Fleet St - 5dmk2 | Flickr - Photo Sharing!
4x5 Portra BaaBar Fleet St - 4x5 | Flickr - Photo Sharing!

What I think is seen in the 5Dmk2 photo is not wrong color response, but color space clipping, and possibly a clipped red channel. Digital sensors don't handle clipping as well as film do, as they just cut right off. I have a 5Dmk2 myself and I'm quite sure that it can do better than that.

Very saturated colors are a bit tricky to deal with, they might cause overexposure of a single channel (and still not show any highlight clipping blinkies in the camera as they look at luminance channel generally, which may not be clipped). You can also have a file that has no clipping, but get color space clipping in the raw converter depending on the processing parameters.

Set the camera to AdobeRGB color space to get previews closer to the raw capability, and then when you get this problem you can try to underexpose a little until the saturated colors look right (and then push in post). How to avoid color space clipping in the raw converter depends on which raw converter you have. That bright saturated colors become distorted is a quite common problem in digital processing due to color space limitations. You can check with the color picker and see that the red channel is at 255 (max value), and when the raw converter tries to make an even brighter color it then has to desaturate it and then you get a hue shift, eventually ending at white (255 255 255). Highlight reconstruction in the raw converter can solve the problem (or make it worse, depends on raw converter).

If I had been an expert I would have known if it is about color space clipping in raw converter or clipped red channel in the raw file. Now I can only guess, and I think it is more about clipped red channel than raw converter issue, but it could be the other way around or both. Experiment with underexposure and see what happens.

Digital backs also clip right off, so they are no different in principle. But color filters are different and dynamic range better than the old 5Dmk2 for sure (and new 5Dmk3 too, Canon is still a bit behind in base ISO DR, unlike Nikon/Sony) so you may very well get better results. But in any case, film does handle highlights better than digital, so don't expect MFDB to do magic. As Canon is a little bit behind the rest of the pack in base ISO image quality it is thankful for MFDBs to compare against that. Bring out a D800 or even better a Sony A99 and the competition is much tougher, but then you don't have access to the excellent TS-E lenses. And of course, the lens lineup available for tech cameras gives far more opportunities than currently available in DSLRs, that's one of the main reasons I chose MFDB+tech camera (I have also kept my 5Dmk2 though).

 

[craigosh]

Thanks Yair. I had no idea they where only in Manchester, hopefully I can get a demo through them.

I'm not so convinced Torger. When I've dropped the exposure down to try and rectify the problem I've had to go around 3-4stops lower and even then it doesn't look quite right still. The bits that are the 'correct' red end up way to dark then. If I meter the boxes against the usual ambient they are around 1 stop over, not much light actually comes out of them.

 

[torger]

Strangely, mixed LED colors never look as bad. Purples, yellows, cyans etc all look better than the primary red, green and blue.

This makes sense. The camera sensors have red green and blue channels, and computer files are also mixed with these colors. It's a much larger likelihood that you get a hue shift (either due to clipping in the raw file, or in the post-processing) for pure red, green and blue colors than for a mixed color.

I'm no expert so I cannot respond to exactly why mixed colors will not as likely cause a hue shift, but my guess is that with a pure color you have only one channel clipped and two that moves towards brigther (=large hue shift) while in a mixed color you have two channels clipped and only one that moves towards brigther (=small hue shift).

 

[torger]

Thanks Yair. I had no idea they where only in Manchester, hopefully I can get a demo through them.

Could well be a clip in the color space, or over saturation but I've been unable to compensate for it. I've always used the cameras on Adobe 98. When I have tried underexposing to bring the color back its required 3-4 stops reduction to get looking closer. That just makes the rest of the plastic to dark though and still doesn't get it quite perfect.

Do you have any raw files left from that scene? I could try to see what I could do with them if you want to. The best would be if you have a series of exposures with different amount of underexposure so I have both files with the red channel clipped and one without. You can send me a private message if you want me to try.

(In these tricky scenes I think it can be worthwhile to use the "universal white balance" trick, where you set a special white balance and AdobeRGB in camera which is close to the sensor response, it helps out to get an optimised exposure. The problem with most DSLRs is that they show histogram of the generated JPEG not the RAW file, the idea of uniWB is to make the JPEG look as close as possible to what the sensor actually captures. MFDBs generally show the true RAW histogram by the way.)

 

[danlindberg]

For the money (new), the Aptus II 5 is imho unbeatable, depending ofcourse you use it to its strengths. Mine has performed without any problems, also in subzero temperatures. I like the rendering and colour fidelity, good size sensor also allows for selective focus even with slowish tech lenses. No, or very little, issues with colour casts allowing for big movements.

Yes, moire appears sometimes but Capture One sorts it out nicely so it is not an issue.

The main problem I face is my typical interior shot in ambient light with Aptus II 5 and Schneider 28XL. Base iso 25, need f8 for lens to perform well, add centrefilter 2 stops and throw into the mix that noise appears already after 12-15 seconds. It is a challange. This is where the Credo 60 is totally superior.

But still.....I really really like the Aptus, for exterior architecture and for all kinds of landscapes. The texture is delightful and maybe more filmlike than the big guns. A long hike with minimum weight needed I can absolutely see myself using the Alpa TC, SK 35XL and the Aptus! A smaller package I doubt can be had and yet lovely lovely results from out in the wild!

I would not hesitate to recomend it, as long as you are aware of the shortcomings...imo great value.

Thanks for your compliment! :thumbup:

 

[craigosh]

Well I had a little demo courtesy of Charles @ Cambo UK, of a WRS with the Aptus II 7 and Credo 40 along with 35mm and 43mm Schneider.

I'm totally sold on MFDB now.

Think I actually slightly prefer the images from the Aptus, look a little more like what I get from 4x5 and my Imacon. Think its the slightly bigger pixels.

But found the Credo a real joy to use and could easily see me just using the back with live view for composition and focus. Amazed at the DOF at f11.

Only thing I've not understood from the test shots though. I took two shots to stitch using just the vertical shift, and they don't line up perfectly! Stitch really well using automerge in PS, but I was under the impression that if you use back movements the images will just overlap perfectly!?

SO! who wants to buy an Ebony, Alfa 159, kidney, leg..... :ROTFL:

 

[dougpeterson]

Only thing I've not understood from the test shots though. I took two shots to stitch using just the vertical shift, and they don't line up perfectly! Stitch really well using automerge in PS, but I was under the impression that if you use back movements the images will just overlap perfectly!?

Often the first time someone is using the system (or a sales person doing a demonstration rather than taking artistic pictures) they will manhandle the body while doing the rise, or won't tighten the body onto it's quickrelease plate hard enough, such that during the actuation of the rise/fall the body itself moves slightly (rotates around it's mounting point, is bumped forward or backward minutely etc).

With moderate care taken in making the rise/fall you should have images that line up perfectly at a zoom-to-fit level.

In practice you'll still use the automerge in PS (set to "reposition" not to geometrically distort the image together) because alignment down to the last pixel (when you have upwards of 10,000 pixels in one direction) can be disrupted by the moons of jupiter.

 

[craigosh]

I think I must have made the error somewhere with the shift Doug, as the camera was on a sturdy studio stand and firmly attached, so maybe I moved the right/left a little by accident. I was pretty careful not to move anything to roughly, as I didn't want to break anything.

 

[Ken_R]

Hi everyone. I'm sorry if this has been covered before but a search for previous threads proved a little fruitless.

I'm looking to move away from my 4x5 Ebony to a Cambo Wrs for landscapes, interiors and architectural work.
Currently have a 5dmk2 and 24mm ts-e II as well that I use for a lot of commercial projects, but I find I'm not always happy with the look of the files and feel that what I've seen from MFD on this forum is a lot more like what I get from scanned 4x5 Portra.

What I'd like is suggestions for a good entry level back. So far I've looked at -

Aptus 22 - Currently watching one on Ebay with a Mamiya 645 AFD II, 80mm and 55-110mm

Aptus II 5 - as I understand it's the same image quality as the 22 but a newer package. (and Dan L has some awesome shots off one on here )

P25+ - Looks to be a good option with long exposure ability.

P40+ - Seems to be an interesting outside choice that has good res bump over the 5D, high dynamic range and tech cam friendly sensor. I'm not fussed to much about the smaller sensor size as I would just stitch a wider view. Possibly good prices as its not a 'sort after' back from what I gather.

What are peoples thoughts

Chances are I'll go for either the Cambo 1250 or 400, depending on if I decide I need two planes of shift or not. I need to get down to London to try them though. No dealers anywhere near Liverpool. Lens wise I reckon it'll be the 35mm XL.


Cheers for the help.

Honestly, for Landscape and Architecture/Interiors, if you want to significantly improve on DSLR Image Quality you are better served by at least a P40+ back, preferably a P65+ (or similar Leaf). Wide Angle Landscape images are the most demanding in regards to resolution, dynamic range and color range. In architecture I am usually mostly concerned with dynamic range and wide angle coverage.

To get it all you really need the larger sensor backs since there are really no tech camera lenses specifically made for the smaller sensors.

With a P40+ the 24mm Schneider is basically mandatory for architecture and interiors. The dream lens for that is the 23mm HR since with it you can shift and use stitching for a bit more coverage.

For landscape it all depends on your style. Generally my mainstay lens for landscape is the 24mm TS-E on full frame 35mm dslr's.

On a P40+ or similar that means a 28mm Schneider or Rodenstock HR or a 32mm HR. Both very expensive lenses. The 35mm XL might do but you loose some wide angle coverage.

If you use mostly longer lenses for landscape then you avoid having to tap into the very expensive range of lenses.

From what I could gather online, with some of the larger sensor backs yes, you can't really or shouldn't use some lenses due to heavy lens cast, but, a 35mm XL might be wide enough for architecture and even interiors. And if you eventually get a 23mm HR then you would have amazing wide angle coverage.

But, only the Rodenstock HR lenses are recommended for use with the 80mp backs and whatever the future holds. So if you upgrade your back in the future the wide angle schneider lenses are basically useless.

If you need wide angle coverage and cant afford the wider tech camera lenses and one of the newer larger sensor backs then I would check out the D800e. It really has much more resolution, dynamic range and overall better Image Quality at low iso than any Canon DSLR ever made. Its not close. Ive done tests side by side.

 

[craigosh]

Thanks for the reply Ken.
I tried a D800, nice images, but felt really fiddly to use. Also found the 24mm PC lens to be really quite bad, so that put me off straight away.

 

[Ken_R]

Thanks for the reply Ken.
I tried a D800, nice images, but felt really fiddly to use. Also found the 24mm PC lens to be really quite bad, so that put me off straight away.

I did not like using the D800e either.

Yea, there really is no substitute for high quality tech camera lenses. The Canon TS-E's are good but the sensor is not up to snuff. The Nikon has a great sensor but the body is, meh, and the PC-E lenses need an update. Lenses looking for a sensor or sensor looking for lenses, take your pick

With the tech cameras you can get lenses that really outresolve even the 80mp backs and with image circles large enough to do lots of movement.

You can also build a tech camera system basically tailor made to what you want.

 

[Landscapelover]

I did not like using the D800e either.

"....With the tech cameras you can get lenses that really outresolve even the 80mp backs and with image circles large enough to do lots of movement.
You can also build a tech camera system basically tailor made to what you want."

Be careful! You are falling into a trap

Pramote

 

[GrahamWelland]

Be careful! You are falling into a trap

Pramote

But it's nice and warm & toasty down here in the money pit inferno. :chug:

 

[lance_schad]

Honestly, for Landscape and Architecture/Interiors, if you want to significantly improve on DSLR Image Quality you are better served by at least a P40+ back, preferably a P65+ (or similar Leaf). Wide Angle Landscape images are the most demanding in regards to resolution, dynamic range and color range. In architecture I am usually mostly concerned with dynamic range and wide angle coverage.

To get it all you really need the larger sensor backs since there are really no tech camera lenses specifically made for the smaller sensors.

With a P40+ the 24mm Schneider is basically mandatory for architecture and interiors. The dream lens for that is the 23mm HR since with it you can shift and use stitching for a bit more coverage.

For landscape it all depends on your style. Generally my mainstay lens for landscape is the 24mm TS-E on full frame 35mm dslr's.

On a P40+ or similar that means a 28mm Schneider or Rodenstock HR or a 32mm HR. Both very expensive lenses. The 35mm XL might do but you loose some wide angle coverage.

Take a look at our URL="https://www.digitaltransitions.com/page/tech-camera-visualizers"]Tech Camera Visualization Tools [/URL] to explore all of your lens/sensor size options. Also we have updated our Tech Camera Pages for comprehensive information on Arca-Swiss and Cambo solutions we offer.

With this tool you can select a sensor size (or multiple ones to compare), then select your lens choices and you can even go one step further by clicking on the square box next to your selection to see your stitching options, image circle size is located within the color circle to the left.
Also the boxes that represent the sensors are able to grabbed and re-positioned, and in the lower left hand corner you will see the shift/rise measurements.
Here is an example for a 33x44mm sensor (40MP) and the 23HR and 28XL:

Lance

 

[craigosh]

So I'm still thinking. I know that MF is the inevitable next step for tool wise, but just trying to decide if I can afford to do it or if I should wait a little longer.

So currently looking at -

Aptus 75 - Teamwork have one in, along with a Cambo DS/35mm xl combo. The back is £5400. With the cambo I'm looking at £8300ish which is pretty reasonable amount for me to lease over 3 years. I'm just concerned that the back is what !? 6 years old? Concerned about it lasting the three years of the lease. Also it is Contax fit. Now I want an SLR setup as well as the tech cam. I know the Contax is a great quality system but it's also a dead system, so concerned about picking up a good Contax body and lens.

Hasselblad H3DII-39 - Ok I know this needs an external battery pack for Tech camera usage. But I can have a complete SLR for £7194 from the Pro Center. Which is again an easy amount for me to lease. I could hopefully sell the 4x5 camera kit to fun the Cambo from Teamwork. What are peoples thoughts on using these in the field?? Enda Cavanagh uses the earlier version of this back and produces some amazing images, so it can't be bad back!!

Or should I hold out for a p40+??

Cheers

Craig

 

[GrahamWelland]

Craig,

If it were me starting out I'd be looking for the best back that provides image review feedback and ease of use. I'd also look very carefully at which system you want to buy in to long term because it'll cripple you financially if you decide to change later. Personally, that would rule out Contax as you're basically stuck with that DSLR system (albeit an excellent system btw!).

I wouldn't hesitate to go with either a Phase One/Mamiya or Hasselblad H/V mount. Both have good DSLR systems with a wide variety of lens options. The V mount has a lot of versatility for older systems and all can pretty much use the glass. For technical cameras, I'd be sure to try out a back that requires a tethered battery pack to see how that works for you. For some people it is not a concern but others find the extra module a pain to use in the field. You'd just have to find out for yourself by trying it.

I know that if a tornado or flood swept away all of my gear today and I had to start again from scratch I'd be sorely tempted to get a Leaf Aptus II back in Mamiya or AFi mount (I like the Hy6 system) with a Cambo technical camera. I do love my Alpa but I think that the Cambo is the better bang for the buck. The glass ultimately is the same and they are all well made systems. The Leaf UI works extremely well for technical camera work and the colour rendering is superb IMHO. I'm a big fan and kept my Aptus 65 because of the colour support.

As regards holding out for a P40+? If by that you mean that you really want the P40+ but are tempted by immediate opportunities or lack the funds right now, then yes, I'd hold out for the back that you really want. The P40+ is a great back and almost the 'goldilocks' back in many ways. I.e. not too much resolution, not too little. The slightly cropped sensor is more forgiving with affordable technical camera and DSLR glass. The Dalsa colour rendering is excellent plus it has the flexibility of Sensor+ for higher ISO support. It is a very, very good back.

 

[craigosh]

Thanks for that reply Graham.
I agree with you over the Contax, would like one but probably not the wisest buy.

I'm keen on the P40+ because as you say it is that 'goldilocks' kind of back.
The apparently good high iso performance, from what I've seen from a sample file on CI's site, also means I could also use it for a few jobs I'd normally do on the 5dmk2. Just at £10,200 (inc vat) for a refurb, if you can get one, its out of my budget really for now.

I did really like the Aptus-II 7 that Cambo uk showed me and have found an Ex-demo for £7100 (inc vat) so maybe that could be an option (just about on budget for me). What is the higher ISO performance like though? I'm assuming terrible!?

However as I say, I can have a complete H3dII-39 for the price of that Aptus back! and from what I hear the H system is more robust than the Mamiya. I'm not to concerned with having to use an external power source as I could leave it in the backpack, which I usually attach to the tripod anyway when shooting to weigh it down a little. I'm assuming though I can get a relatively light LIPO power pack!? Don't want to be hiking with a lead acid or big nimh pack really. Of course for doing interiors I could always tether to my MBP.

I think I need to try and get a few more demos and see what the SLR's are like, especially the H as I've never even handled one. I have held the MAFD, but it was like 6-7 years ago when they first came out.

Or there is always an ex-demo Aptus-II 5 back for less than £5k (inc vat)

Thanks for the help guys, I'm terrible at making my mind up when serious money is involved.. It took me a year to decide which car to change to, and then I went and bought an Alfa 159 :ROTFL:

 

[GrahamWelland]

Thanks for the help guys, I'm terrible at making my mind up when serious money is involved.. It took me a year to decide which car to change to, and then I went and bought an Alfa 159 :ROTFL:

Well, I see no problem as you clearly demonstrate good taste in motor cars :thumbs: