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!

Betterlight vs Canon 5D, an informal comparison

F

Francois_A

New member
A shot of my living room with the Canon 5D 16-35mm f2.8 mark II at 35mm f10, 1/5 sec and ISO 100. Camera was on tripod with mirror lock up and self timer. The raw file was process in Camera Raw.

The Betterlight is the super 6K at ISO 553 and 1/20 sec line scan, with the Schneider 110mm XL on a Chamonix 4x5.

First, the whole images:
 
Last edited:
F

Francois_A

New member
What strikes me first, is the greater dynamic range of the scanning back; more details in the highlights and the shadows. The other aspect is the smooth transitions in the mid-tones. There is also an absence of jagged lines in the edges of the windows, as well as no color artifacts in high contrast transitions

The noise of the Betterlight is also more film like.
The noise could have been improved by using the 200 base ISO, but scanning time would have been twice as long (over 12 minutes:eek:)
 
F

Francois_A

New member
Ben, there is a world of difference imo in terms of dynamic range, tonality and resolution! I love my 5D nonetheless :)

Maybe the differences are more obvious if I put both crops side by side on the same image, (please click once on the thumbnail, and then click on the resulting image to view at 100%):
 
kevinparis

kevinparis

Member
not really a surprising comparison considering the back/sensor costs 14K alone before you add camera and lens

still impressive quality.... always good to see what the next level up is like.

cheers

K
 
F

Francois_A

New member
Hi Kevin,
I've agonized a long time before purchasing the scanning back (in LN condition on eBay at half-price). I wish I had access to some comparisons with the 5D then; I would have made the purchase much earlier! The cost of camera in large format is very reasonable (I used an $800 Chamonix); the Canon 16-35 is not cheap, compared to large format lenses!

What would be nice to know is where the medium format digital backs fit between the 5D and the scanning back in terms of dynamic range and resolution.
 
B

Ben Rubinstein

Active member
That file looks exactly like what I used to get with a camera quest adaptor and my 5D to make 200 megapixels files with a LF camera. Utterly georgous tonality. My mistake, I forgot to click before comparing :D
 
routlaw

routlaw

Member
Francois_A said:
A shot of my living room with the Canon 5D 16-35mm f2.8 mark II at 35mm f10, 1/5 sec and ISO 100. Camera was on tripod with mirror lock up and self timer. The raw file was process in Camera Raw.

The Betterlight is the super 6K at ISO 553 and 1/20 sec line scan, with the Schneider 110mm XL on a Chamonix 4x5.

First, the whole images:
Click to expand...
Francois its interesting you have done this, because just last night I was also doing a comparison with my D3 and my Super 6k-HS also. My approach and subject matter were quite a bit different than yours, ie a copy setup. And had also been thinking about posting this on the forum, just was not sure the best place to do it. As one other poster said your conclusions & results here come as no surprise. Simply put if you get it right with the scan backs everything else is second rate by comparison IMO.

Rob
 
F

Francois_A

New member
routlaw said:
...just last night I was also doing a comparison with my D3 and my Super 6k-HS also. My approach and subject matter were quite a bit different than yours, ie a copy setup. And had also been thinking about posting this on the forum, just was not sure the best place to do it. ...
Rob
Click to expand...
Rob, I would be interested in seeing your comparison.

Initially, I got the scanning back because it could be used on the view camera using my current LF lenses; I wasn't expecting such a quantum leap in resolution and dynamic range.

Have you compared MFDB with your scanning back?
 
routlaw

routlaw

Member
Francois_A said:
Rob, I would be interested in seeing your comparison.

Have you compared MFDB with your scanning back?
Click to expand...
Yes, sort of. I don't own an MFDB but have certainly considered the purchase of one off and on. Before buying my BL and while comparatively shopping for the multi shot versions of the MFDB's one dealer had sent me some full res files he had taken also in a copy light setup, ie map, currency small color check chart that sort of thing. They were impressive but once I got my BL I setup the same subsequent copy situation albeit with a different map and still thought the scan back was superior having a more natural look to it among other things.

My setup from yesterday, as boring as it is, really illustrates the superior image quality compared to dslr's and to some extent probably MFDB's as well. But as you know there are limitations with the scan backs. And due to this I still keep searching for an alternative higher quality capture system for those times when the scan back is not usable. Sometimes I feel like tossing my hands up and going back to film for those situtations but really like the digital workflow even for my own personal work.

If you have been following a couple of threads on the MF forums here at getdpi there has been some excellent discussion regarding MF solutions of late, and which also reflect to some degree the same sentiments and frustrations I have. So on Tues and Thurs I am ready to pull the trigger on an MF solution, then on Wed and Friday I say the hell with, I am back to film and scanning. :deadhorse: :confused:

I will try and get my experiments from yesterday posted sometime today if you still want to take a gander.

Rob
 
F

Francois_A

New member
Ben Rubinstein said:
How are you focusing?
Click to expand...
I focus on the ground glass with a loupe, and fine tune it using "live" focus mode from the software. The nice thing is that a bar graph and numerical value shows how accurate the focus is. One can also switch the sound on, which increases in pitch as the focus improves. Note that the scanning back is always tethered to a computer.

The beauty of this approach is that it works equally well for IR photography, which has we know has a different plane of focus than visible light.
 
F

Francois_A

New member
routlaw said:
If you have been following a couple of threads on the MF forums here at getdpi there has been some excellent discussion regarding MF solutions of late, and which also reflect to some degree the same sentiments and frustrations I have. So on Tues and Thurs I am ready to pull the trigger on an MF solution, then on Wed and Friday I say the hell with, I am back to film and scanning. :deadhorse: :confused:

I will try and get my experiments from yesterday posted sometime today if you still want to take a gander.

Rob
Click to expand...
Yes Rob, please post your experiments; I am sure others would be interested too.

For the time being, I will stick to LF neg (color and B&W) when things are not suitable for the scanning back. After all, if I carry the LF camera with lenses, the Betterlight and the laptop, I may as well add a couple of holders for film!
I recently got a Jobo CPP2 processor for color negatives, which I have yet to try.
The problem is scanning the film...
 
routlaw

routlaw

Member
Francois_A said:
Yes Rob, please post your experiments; I am sure others would be interested too.

For the time being, I will stick to LF neg (color and B&W) when things are not suitable for the scanning back. After all, if I carry the LF camera with lenses, the Betterlight and the laptop, I may as well add a couple of holders for film!
I recently got a Jobo CPP2 processor for color negatives, which I have yet to try.
The problem is scanning the film...
Click to expand...
Have an afternoon shoot to do, might take till later to get them up. Understood on the film thing but you are right a good, really good scanner, ie the Hasselblad X5 cost as much as an MFDB solution. The epson V750 is pretty good I guess and will do in a pinch but still not the best option. Some BL folks have adapted their scan backs for film scanning too. But you don't get the digital ice this way either.

Rob
 
Z

zzyzx

Guest
"Note that the scanning back is always tethered to a computer."

This must make it difficult to use in the field. Especially in inclement and cold weather. Have found little in the digital world so far that takes winter weather very well compared to the old tried and true Deardorff/Sinar gear.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top