live view on a CCD

[abruzzi]

I've been considering getting a digital back for my Linhof TK S23--I'm a 99% film and 80% view camera shooter at the moment so this is a bit new to me. I also don't have the budget most of you seem to have so I'm looking used at the low end of the spectrum. After much thought, I'm thinking swapping out ground glass for a digital back with every shot is not the way I want to work, so I've decided live view is a necessity.

As best as I can tell, that limits me to a Leaf Credo, a Phase One IQ, or some of the Hasselblad backs (though to be honest I have a hard time deciphering the Hasselblad options.) I know both the Credo and IQ series have both CCD models and CMOS models. In searches I've seen a number of people trash the CCD live view on something like a Leaf Credo 40, but I've not found comments on something like an IQ160, so I don't know if it is implemented better on the Phase One?

Also most of what I've heard references the dynamic range and needing a ND filter to darken the scene enough to focuswide open. I use a Cokin P series filter system, and I wouldn't think it would be too hard to mount a ND in the front slot and just lower or raise it for focusing and taking. Are there other problems with using the live view on the Credo CCD backs? Will my idea with the cokin filter holder not work?

FYI, I am an outdoor shooter, so this needs to work on a sunny day. I can certainly go with something like a IQ150 if the CCDs are simply not workable, but CCD backs give me the option of a larger sensor which makes it easier to go slightly wider than normal with my setup.

 

[diggles]

The Hasselblad CFV II 50c is a quite capable CMOS back that will give you excellent live view and electronic shutter. In order to get electronic shutter with a Phase One back you’ll have to go with the IQ3 50 or newer.

 

[abruzzi]

Thanks, but the going rate on the CFV II is a bit beyond me, and I'm not sure if any of the earlier HB backs have live view. I did (briefly) consider attaching a X1D to the back, but the Linhof mount adds about 39mm (including the X1D's 18mm FFD) to TK's 48mm minimum distance making wides completely unusable without a lens that is significantly retrofocal, even with a recessed lens board. (I'm not much of a wide shooter, but I'd like to be able to shoot a ~45mm on a 44x33.)

 

[TechTalk]

The original version of the current CFV II 50C back is the CFV-50c which was released in 2014. Recent completed sales of the CFV-50c on eBay have been in the $3,500–$4,000 range. It would be worth a look if in your price range.

Here's a link to the CFV-50c data sheet. The manual can be found here.

 

[tcdeveau]

The original version of the current CFV II 50C back is the CFV-50c which was released in 2014. Recent completed sales of the CFV-50c on eBay have been in the 3,500–4,000 range. It would be worth a look if in your price range.

Here's a link to the CFV-50c data sheet. The manual can be found here.

The integrated battery and electronic shutter of the CFVII make it worth the extra $$ over the first one IMHO. Live view is also much much better.

Op if I were you I’d probably wait. Even the CFVII is pretty old by todays standards, theyre believed to announce a CFVIII sometime in the future which will drop the prices of existing models.

The CCD IQ backs can do live view to various degrees but the experience is definitely not a universal one. Some say it’s unusable, others say usable, others usable only for framing (not focusing). I’d skip a CCD if I needed live view personally but YMMV

 

[4x5Australian]

After much thought, I'm thinking swapping out ground glass for a digital back with every shot is not the way I want to work, so I've decided live view is a necessity.

I'll encourage you to reconsider this decision. With 4x5, I framed and aligned all the elements of my composition carefully on a gridded ground-glass using a monocular reflex viewer that magnifies the entire field of view and makes the image upright. Coming to digital, I became immensely frustrated by the lack of an equivalent workable system for either of the two technical camera systems I bought into and the expectation from the people I spoke to that I could compose my architectural photographs perfectly well using only the small LCD screen on the digital back. I found and still find it irritating to have to do so. Eventually, I found a work-around using a Hasselblad gridded ground-glass and viewfinder. Even though I now have the IQ4, a digital back with excellent live view, I still prefer whenever possible to frame and align my intended shot by viewing it on the gridded ground-glass. A critical part of making this approach work is mounting the digital back permanently to the Phase One adapter and storing it this way using a clip-on cover over the adapter, which makes interchanging the ground-glass and digital back much smoother and easier.

 

[TechTalk]

The integrated battery and electronic shutter of the CFVII make it worth the extra $$ over the first one IMHO. Live view is also much much better.

I agree, but being a new and improved version is also why it costs more. Sometimes budgets have a hard limit. The live view from either would be vastly better than any CCD live view back which I ever used.

Op if I were you I’d probably wait. Even the CFVII is pretty old by todays standards, theyre believed to announce a CFVIII sometime in the future which will drop the prices of existing models.

The CCD IQ backs can do live view to various degrees but the experience is definitely not a universal one. Some say it’s unusable, others say usable, others usable only for framing (not focusing). I’d skip a CCD if I needed live view personally but YMMV

It's always a question of how long you can wait and how much can you spend.

My experience with various CCD live view backs tethered to a computer with a decent size monitor in a studio with controlled lighting was that it was quite slow and just barely good enough to be usable.

 

[abruzzi]

I guess the other option, is leave the Linhof at home, buy a $2200 used X1D, with a $500 tilt/shift adapter to mount my Pentax 67 lenses. It would get me some of the functionality, but its just not as appealing.

@4x5Australian : interesting point--I really love the GG approach but I'm used to using a loupe to focus 4x5. I was not sure it would as usable with 44x33. I was also figuring it would require the process I use today for 6x9--pulling off the glass to replace with the back on the mount. I was worried that the mount doesn't seem to protect the sensor so instead I'd be juggling three things instead of two--and pluggin/unplugging sync cables.

Unfortunately, Linhof only makes their sliding adaptor for the Techno/M679 mount. There are some Chinese made sliding mounts but I'm not sure they will fit. They have the right type of mount, but I think they might interfere with the L-shaped frame-bearer. I'll have to look closer to see if there would be enough clearance (even if there is, the sliding bit would prevent any rear tilt.)

 

[4x5Australian]

On digital, I use the gridded ground-glass to compose and align. I focus using the live view on the IQ4.

People have told me that it's possible to focus the live view of older Leaf and Phase One CCD backs using a loupe.

As a firm policy, I never juggle the ground-glass and digital back. I hold only one thing at a time. The Hasselblad adapter + GG + VF is a single assembly. The Phase One adapter + DB is a single assembly. You take one off and put it into the bag, then put the other on.

My budget-friendly suggestion: Save your Linhof TK23 for film. For digital, buy a used Cambo WRS 1000 or 1200 or, if tilt is important to you, a Cambo Actus.

 

[Ben730]

In order to get electronic shutter with a Phase One back you’ll have to go with the IQ3 50 or newer.

The IQ 350 does not have electronic shutter.
If you want electronic shutter with Phase One, you need a 100 MP or a 150 MP back.

 

[richardman]

One reason I use the CFV II 50C with my 203FE, as the Hasselblad ground glass is lovely. Not quite 4x5 or 8x10 lovely, but will do just fine.

 

[FloatingLens]

One reason I use the CFV II 50C with my 203FE, as the Hasselblad ground glass is lovely. Not quite 4x5 or 8x10 lovely, but will do just fine.

Do you use a modified 203?

 

[diggles]

The IQ 350 does not have electronic shutter.
If you want electronic shutter with Phase One, you need a 100 MP or a 150 MP back.

Thank you Ben for catching this mistake. I used to have the CFV II 50c, but never the IQ3 50. I'm glad I didn't get the IQ3 50 thinking it did have the electronic shutter!

 

[dougpeterson]

My advice: do not buy a CCD expecting to use Live View without the chance to test it in advance.

On the one hand, when it was the only option people had they used it, and some made great images using it. On the other hand it's objectively low in visual quality, slow to update, sensitive to bright light (often requiring an ND filter to produce any remotely useful result), and overall pretty terrible to use. CMOS live view is enormously better.

Sliding backs, CMOS backs, pancake cameras with rangefinder focus that don't assume through the lens viewing at all... all of these are likely better options for you than counting on CCD live view. But who knows, you might find the experience of CCD Live View to be a satisfying struggle or something – people are a strangely varied animal .

But in any case don't do it (buy CCD for Live View) without being able to test before you commit. That could very quickly lead to significant regret.

 

[Geoff]

Very good advice.

Struggled w CCD live view, believing it could work and it did (sort of). CMOS live view is so much better, it’s a game changer. Would never go back.

 

[kinglang]

I have tried live view on IQ160 and CREDO60, but it is very slow and can only be used under indoor.
Curious if frequent use of live-view on ccd will cause DB corruption? @dougpeterson

 

[Steve Hendrix]

I have tried live view on IQ160 and CREDO60, but it is very slow and can only be used under indoor.
Curious if frequent use of live-view on ccd will cause DB corruption? @dougpeterson

It will not cause corruption.

Remember, the most common environment for ccd-based digital backs for decades before cmos sensors became available in the medium format world was a product shooting studio. As bad as we think of the ccd-based live view today, back then it was continuously used hourly, daily, weekly, monthly, yearly, with ccd-based digital backs shooting catalog work. We may wonder how or why that quality of live view was used so extensively, but in the studio with appropriate lighting, it got the job done. In all the years I've been working with digital backs, I've never had a client report of any degradation or corruption of the sensor due to live view. It just didn't happen.

Steve Hendrix/CI

 

[abruzzi]

testing is unfortunately not an option I really have, hence the inquiry. The only camera shop where I live is BestBuy (seriously!) and I don't know anyone that has something like this. I have a high tolerance for slow processes (I do mostly shoot large format, after all.) What I need to avoid are things that are actually not or minimally usable--i.e. frustrating. So I appreciate the details on this. The interest in using the TK S23 as opposed to some of the other types of cameras is that a large part of the process would mirror what I do today with my TK 45. Of course the other reason is I have it in hand.

I've seen some reference to "speed". Can I take this to mean a low frame rate? Can you estimate what kind of frame rate to expect? Or is it something else? (Sorry if I'm trying to be very specific, but that helps me understand better.)

 

[Steve Hendrix]

testing is unfortunately not an option I really have, hence the inquiry. The only camera shop where I live is BestBuy (seriously!) and I don't know anyone that has something like this. I have a high tolerance for slow processes (I do mostly shoot large format, after all.) What I need to avoid are things that are actually not or minimally usable--i.e. frustrating. So I appreciate the details on this. The interest in using the TK S23 as opposed to some of the other types of cameras is that a large part of the process would mirror what I do today with my TK 45. Of course the other reason is I have it in hand.

I've seen some reference to "speed". Can I take this to mean a low frame rate? Can you estimate what kind of frame rate to expect? Or is it something else? (Sorry if I'm trying to be very specific, but that helps me understand better.)

In terms of speed, think of waving your hand across the front of the lens. And then you would see it 1-2 onscreen seconds after. There's a delay. In a studio shooting still life product, where you have control of the ambient light, this can work, though it is not ideal. The amount of light from a flash head modeling lamp is about right. Any more than that, and you'll have artifacts and streaks through the live view. Less than that, and it becomes too murky/grainy.

If this would be for outside use, the above restrictions generally make it a no go. The cost of a 50mp cmos-based digital back isn't necessarily more than say, a 60mp ccd-based digital back. If your lenses have copal shutters, you can consider the Leaf Credo 50, Phase One IQ1/2/3 50 models. And of course the Hasselblad CFV-50 and CFV-50 II (part of the 907x kit), but the CFV digital backs do also have a built-in Electronic Shutter that would not require a copal shutter in many situations.

All these solutions can be found in the $3k - $5k or so range. We have an IQ2 50 unit @ $2,990 right now.


Steve Hendrix/CI

 

[anyone]

In my opinion, live view on CCD is unusable. It's not only slow, but also very cumbersome. This comes from the perspective of an outdoors shooter.
Why?

• You cannot really find the focus point moving back and forth due to the delay.
• In order to see anything in the live view, you need in most cases a ND filter. I acknowledge there are good filter holders and most landscape users use them, but I'm not one of them. For me it meant a screw-in filter every time. If it gets darker, you won't see anything.
• The back heats up, it consumes battery.

So back to ground glass (which is not bad and you are used to it anyways - just expect to add another layer of precision to your own technique, at least that was the case for me). I'm not familiar whether Linhof offers a sliding back for your camera. But most likely there exists a Hasselblad V adapter? If yes, you can attach a V-mount digital back. In a non-sliding setup, you need to be aware that you obviously need to interchange digital back and screen each time, same as with your 6x9 setup. I do this with my Cambo and it's not problematic for me. Or you follow the advice and buy a CMOS back.