live view on a CCD

[dchew]

If I remember correctly, when the IQ 180 was first released, LV had not been implemented. It was promised in a later FW update. Or at least there was an improvement coming in a FW update. I use Alpa cameras, so I learned to focus with the Leica Disto / HPF rings. Later when the LV improvements came, I tried it. The end result was... I bought the Alpa ground glass. After using the ground glass for a few months, I went back to the Leica Disto / HPF rings. The GG is challenging in all but the brightest conditions.

There are two tasks I hoped LV would solve on the CCD backs: Framing and focusing. I think it can be used for framing with the added steps of ND filters / cranking up the f-stop. But focusing was, frankly, a nightmare. Especially compared with the Disto / HPF which has always been incredibly accurate (same with Arca's system). Unfortunately, on the TK you won't have that option for focusing. As Steve pointed out, the frustrating part of CCD LV is not the prep work with ND filters. It is the "move the lens, wait to see it, move it back, is that any better than what I saw 2 seconds ago??" sequence.

The way I look at this: The CCD's LV works for framing but not so well for focusing. For focusing, I rank it 1) Disto/helical > GG > CCD LV. If you have to put on the GG for focusing, you might as well use it for framing too. If you stitch images together, it gives the added benefit of being useful for framing larger formats. The amount of light weighs heavily into the GG vs CCD LV. If it is relatively dark out, CCD LV may be better than GG. But for most bright / semi-bright situations, I think you will find the GG less frustrating.

All that being said, it's been 7 or 8 years since I did all this. Other's may have more recent experience and better memory!

Dave

 

[vjbelle]

I've done it on a 180. A struggle but it worked - not all of the time but most of the time for what I was shooting. As others have said it was very slow and extremely sensitive to light. Ever so often I would pick up my Nikon and dreamed that one day a DB could have live view that was any where near as good. Then I purchased a Credo 50 cmos. A dream come true. My 180 got maybe 1% use after that.

Don't buy until you try but my best advice is just don't buy. Wait for a 50mp cmos back to come around in your price bracket.

Victor B.

 

[jotloob]

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.

Good CFV-50c backs are very hard to get , at least in europe . I have seen two for 6000€ . In that case , I would rather go for a CFV II 50c , new . But that is beyond your budget .

 

[abruzzi]

Thanks. I haden't thought about a delay, but that makes perfect sense, and can make actions similar to programming Voyager spacecraft--make change, wait to see the results of your action, nudge again, and wait again. I'll need to think about this a bit.

It seems like, no matter how I slice it I should look for a 50mp back. HB, P1, Leaf. That's been in the back of my mind from the beginning, I mostly wanted to make sure other options weren't something I should consider.

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.

Unfortunately Linhof does not. There is a Chinese sliding back, but its intended for the 6x9 technika. On the TK the back mount is not flush and the mount would most likely interfere with the standard L-bracket or the rise/fall lock lever and tilt lock lever. For a back that needs to be swapped between glass and back, Linhof makes M645, H, and V backs--around $1.2k or the same Chinese company makes one for around $200. I'm not sure how accurate the chinese backs are placing the sensor at exactly the same spot as the GG--I assume it should be close. Using live view it wouldn't matter. I suppose I could focus using the ground glass and use CCD live view just to confirm.

Now if they would only do a firmware update to make the live view display upside down.

 

[Steve Hendrix]

Give me live view any day over ground glass. Unfortunately, the only way to view the live feed upside down is if you stand on your hands. But then, how to operate the camera?

An external hdmi might be able to circumnavigate this (depending on the hdmi device), alternatively if you are tethered to Capture One, you can change the orientation of the live view. Not sure if you can do this on iPad via Cascable, but I suppose worst-case (and pretty worst-case) you could lay an iPad flat and walk around to the other side.

Steve Hendrix/CI

 

[jng]

A little late to the party here, but another voice to recommend CMOS over CCD for tech cam use. I started with an IQ160 in V mount, which was mostly fine on the 500 series body. However when I moved to the Cambo tech cam, things got difficult. I tried using a variable ND filter for focusing in the wild and found it pretty close to impossible to do without getting extremely frustration - grainy image, slow refresh rate, blooming, etc. Then I got a focusing screen meant for the Hasselblad SWC/Flexbody together with a magnifying hood. Focusing and even composition became feasible but kludgy, as it required removing the back, attaching the focusing screen, removing the screen, and re-attaching the back. It definitely slows you down if that's what you're looking for! And if you go out shooting with friends with CMOS sensors, be prepared to get laughed at. I don't want to think about how many shots I lost due to changing light, etc. Also as noted by others, focusing on the small screen relative to e.g. 4x5 format wasn't exactly easy, either. For me this was an evolution in gear and learning how to shoot with a MFDB and tech cam. Not to say that the colors out of the IQ160 weren't fabulous, but if I were starting out today, I'd definitely find myself better off with a CMOS-based back. YMMV, of course!

John

 

[drevil]

What i always wondered about, why is LV so unusable on CCD? is the readout so slow, hence the need for ND filters to not overexpose the image? or was the hardware of the back simply not up to the task to read out the 80mp(in case of the IQ180) in 24frames per second(most likely)

i always felt it was such a shame that phase only pushed forward with newer sensors, instead to work together with the sensor makers and improve older sensors, imagine a BSI 39mp ccd sensor as in the p45+ with proper live view

 

[FloatingLens]

It is an inherent limitation of the CCD as a serial device. All columns need to be reset before the stream can be read. It is my understanding that during that time, the sensor and individual cells are sensitive to light. Which means if there is too much light compared to the read speed, the ‚live view’ image data will be way overexposed.

 

[doccdiamond]

As said, live view is slow but works (IQ260 user). In practice for longer distances the ALPA-HPF-ring & Leica Disco Combo is my preferred setup (live view for framing with f32 - most of times no need for an ND). For near distance-work with a very slow movement of the helical you can get used to it to find the focus point - when the pixel noise gets really crispy

If you prefer the CCD vs a CMOS because of the resulting files you can and have to live with it but it is nowhere comparable to CMOS live view.