Site Sponsors
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2
Results 51 to 84 of 84

Thread: A Wealth Of Riches: Can't Have Them All : -(

  1. #51
    Administrator, Instructor Guy Mancuso's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    23,623
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2555

    Re: A Wealth Of Riches: Can't Have Them All : -(

    Yea and he is shorter than me, poor guy.
    Photography is all about experimentation and without it you will never learn art.

    www.guymancusophotography.com

  2. #52
    Sr. Administrator Jack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Los Altos, CA
    Posts
    10,486
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1031

    Re: A Wealth Of Riches: Can't Have Them All : -(

    Quote Originally Posted by PeterA View Post
    Top left knob protrusion has a very dark blue line against it - was just wondering what that might be..I can also see a slight magenta caste on the body of the same knob - again maybe evening sunset reflection..

    sorry maybe I have become super conscious of these issues - especially in backs I am considering buying - because truth be told I am very frustrated with the H3D11-39 on the technical camera..
    Pete:

    Excellent call!

    I looked closer at the original file and realized it was CA(!), so I reprocessed this time using C1 lens corrections, which I did NOT use in the first round processing. From my Betterlight days, I learned that APO lenses usually aren't -- the BL software allowed you to live-focus at any of the three color channels, and they NEVER all lined up at the same point, even with the best Schneider or Rodenstock APO glass. Obviously the problem gets exacerbated as you go smaller and smaller in pixel pitch, probably why we don't see it in the binned frame. (Edit note: When I uprezzed the original binned ISO1600 file per Shelby's request below, the CA showed. So I reprocessed the binned file with the lens corrections for the uprez version below.) Also, this shot was done at near the closest focusing distance for the 150, so adds to the issue. (By design, true APO only occurs at one focus distance, a and most modern lenses are usually designed to be their best at around 4-6 meters.) Widest aperture doesn't help either...

    Anyway, here is the reprocess of that same file. This time is I turned on CA correction and purple fringing reduction in C1, AND dialed up Lum NR a few more points -- the result is far superior IMO:



    Here's the original without CA or PF for reference -- clearly more time behind the scenes with the P65+ files and I'll get better at processing them -- my apologies:

    Jack
    home: www.getdpi.com

    "Perfection is not attainable. But if we chase perfection, we can catch excellence."

  3. #53
    Sr. Administrator Jack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Los Altos, CA
    Posts
    10,486
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1031

    Re: A Wealth Of Riches: Can't Have Them All : -(

    Quote Originally Posted by Shelby Lewis View Post
    ... wow. Actually, given the amount of resolution, I wouldn't hesitate to use 400 if I know i weren't going to be printing huge. It's decently impressive IMO.

    For me (and I'll never own a p65+ due to $$$), I'd be interested in a comparison between a iso400 full-res shot and a binned 1600 shot up-res'd to match the full sized iso400.
    Shelby,

    Great idea! (And my advice is NEVER say never! )

    Anyway, here is the ISO 1600 file uprezzed by 400% (200% linear). IMO not too shabby at all for a 60MP ISO 1600 file!:

    Jack
    home: www.getdpi.com

    "Perfection is not attainable. But if we chase perfection, we can catch excellence."

  4. #54
    Senior Member kdphotography's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Carmel/Tucson
    Posts
    2,355
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: A Wealth Of Riches: Can't Have Them All : -(

    Quote Originally Posted by Guy Mancuso View Post
    Yea and he is shorter than me, poor guy.
    I caught that!

    Actually, Don is three inches taller than Jack. I just use the step stool when I'm with Jack. I need the step ladder when I hang out with Don.

    Hope to see you out in Carmel in February, Guy----it'd make for a great photo opportunity with Jack and Don. Don't worry, I've got an extra step stool in the studio you can borrow!



    ken

  5. #55
    Administrator, Instructor Guy Mancuso's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    23,623
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2555

    Re: A Wealth Of Riches: Can't Have Them All : -(

    Good cause I need it after they setup there tripods. LOl
    Photography is all about experimentation and without it you will never learn art.

    www.guymancusophotography.com

  6. #56
    Sr. Administrator Jack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Los Altos, CA
    Posts
    10,486
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1031

    Re: A Wealth Of Riches: Can't Have Them All : -(

    Quote Originally Posted by kdphotography View Post
    I caught that!

    Actually, Don is three inches taller than Jack.
    SO Don is 6'-10"? I thought he was 6'-8" -- my apologies
    Jack
    home: www.getdpi.com

    "Perfection is not attainable. But if we chase perfection, we can catch excellence."

  7. #57
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    32 31' 37.06" N, 111 6' 0.9" W
    Posts
    4,334
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: A Wealth Of Riches: Can't Have Them All : -(

    Quote Originally Posted by Jack Flesher View Post
    SO Don is 6'-10"? I thought he was 6'-8" -- my apologies
    No I'm only 6-9
    Don Libby
    Iron Creek Photography
    Blog
    Tucson AZ

  8. #58
    Sr. Administrator Jack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Los Altos, CA
    Posts
    10,486
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1031

    Re: A Wealth Of Riches: Can't Have Them All : -(

    Quote Originally Posted by Iron Creek View Post
    No I'm only 6-9
    Is that now, or when you were 25? I know I've shrunk almost an inch too Marc!

    Seriously, if you're 6-9 that makes you 2-3/4 taller than I am now. Was 6-7 at my peak, but have shrunk back to 6-61/4
    Jack
    home: www.getdpi.com

    "Perfection is not attainable. But if we chase perfection, we can catch excellence."

  9. #59
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    32 31' 37.06" N, 111 6' 0.9" W
    Posts
    4,334
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: A Wealth Of Riches: Can't Have Them All : -(

    Jack - I know you said the images were taken when it was "pretty dark"; just how dark was it? How far could you see in front of you without the aid of a flashlight? Okay might be easier just to ask what time it was taken.

    Don
    Don Libby
    Iron Creek Photography
    Blog
    Tucson AZ

  10. #60
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    32 31' 37.06" N, 111 6' 0.9" W
    Posts
    4,334
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: A Wealth Of Riches: Can't Have Them All : -(

    Quote Originally Posted by Jack Flesher View Post
    Is that now, or when you were 25? I know I've shrunk almost an inch too Marc!

    Seriously, if you're 6-9 that makes you 2-3/4 taller than I am now. Was 6-7 at my peak, but have shrunk back to 6-61/4
    I don't think I'm shrinking as a matter of fact my waist is growing!
    Don Libby
    Iron Creek Photography
    Blog
    Tucson AZ

  11. #61
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Brockton,MA
    Posts
    134
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    34

    Re: A Wealth Of Riches: Can't Have Them All : -(

    Quote Originally Posted by Jack Flesher View Post
    Is that now, or when you were 25? I know I've shrunk almost an inch too Marc!

    Seriously, if you're 6-9 that makes you 2-3/4 taller than I am now. Was 6-7 at my peak, but have shrunk back to 6-61/4
    that is funny, so i was 5'8" now I'm getting closser to Guy? 5'5"?

  12. #62
    Administrator, Instructor Guy Mancuso's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    23,623
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2555

    Re: A Wealth Of Riches: Can't Have Them All : -(

    I'm 5'8" on a good day otherwise 5'7". On a really bad day I am just considered horizontal
    Photography is all about experimentation and without it you will never learn art.

    www.guymancusophotography.com

  13. #63
    Sr. Administrator Jack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Los Altos, CA
    Posts
    10,486
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1031

    Re: A Wealth Of Riches: Can't Have Them All : -(

    Quote Originally Posted by Iron Creek View Post
    Jack - I know you said the images were taken when it was "pretty dark"; just how dark was it? How far could you see in front of you without the aid of a flashlight? Okay might be easier just to ask what time it was taken.

    Don
    Dooode -- you're a photographer... It was exactly 1/13th sec at f2.8, ISO 400 light!

    I could see okay without a flashlight, but you'd have wanted your headlights on when driving. And I had to crank WB up to 9000K to neutral the blue -- so that should give you a better idea.
    Jack
    home: www.getdpi.com

    "Perfection is not attainable. But if we chase perfection, we can catch excellence."

  14. #64
    Sr. Administrator Jack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Los Altos, CA
    Posts
    10,486
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1031

    Re: A Wealth Of Riches: Can't Have Them All : -(

    Quote Originally Posted by dougpetersonci View Post
    Why do you need the stepped focus from the software and why can you not manually rack the focus? Could you move the subject instead? See my extreme macro work done with a Phase One system, made possible because I could trigger the back without any mechanical movement (not even a shutter). (note I am not saying that solution would work for you since I have no idea what you're shooting - just asking out of curiosity - it does sound like the Hassy integrated focus and shooting system would work better for you, at least until/unless Phase adds these features to the DF body.
    Doug,

    I was waiting on the OP to respond to this, but he hasn't so I wanted to share some thoughts on the topic as it was a consideration for me...

    When shooting product or table-top, you often have your camera situated high above or even directly over the subject pointing downward -- think place setting spreads for a china catalogue. With a 10' cable to your computer the ability to adjust focus from the computer means I don't have to climb up and down the ladder getting focus set just right for the set in question. Obviously gets more problematic when changing sets for differing place settings, or varying stemware for example.

    The fact the P65+ did not allow it was a tic in the minus column when I was making my decision, even though I don't shoot product anymore. (However, in this economy, I may want to start up again!) I for one hope the DF body will allow for it and that Phase adds the option in a future firmware revision.

    My .02,
    Jack
    home: www.getdpi.com

    "Perfection is not attainable. But if we chase perfection, we can catch excellence."

  15. #65
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    32 31' 37.06" N, 111 6' 0.9" W
    Posts
    4,334
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: A Wealth Of Riches: Can't Have Them All : -(

    Quote Originally Posted by Jack Flesher View Post
    Dooode -- you're a photographer... It was exactly 1/13th sec at f2.8, ISO 400 light!

    I could see okay without a flashlight, but you'd have wanted your headlights on when driving. And I had to crank WB up to 9000K to neutral the blue -- so that should give you a better idea.
    Okay I missed that blame it on a blond/senior moment...
    Don Libby
    Iron Creek Photography
    Blog
    Tucson AZ

  16. #66
    Administrator Bob's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Prescott, Arizona
    Posts
    4,492
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    367

    Re: A Wealth Of Riches: Can't Have Them All : -(

    While Jack was shooting corroded faucets I took my P65+ which arrived earlier the same day for an indoor shoot.

    -bob

    oh, and it was pretty dark too

  17. #67
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    32 31' 37.06" N, 111 6' 0.9" W
    Posts
    4,334
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: A Wealth Of Riches: Can't Have Them All : -(

    Very nice Bob! I've got to admit I like your sample image much more.
    Don Libby
    Iron Creek Photography
    Blog
    Tucson AZ

  18. #68
    Subscriber gogopix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    1,383
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: A Wealth Of Riches: Can't Have Them All : -(

    Quote Originally Posted by Jack Flesher View Post
    Dooode -- you're a photographer... It was exactly 1/13th sec at f2.8, ISO 400 light!

    I could see okay without a flashlight, but you'd have wanted your headlights on when driving. And I had to crank WB up to 9000K to neutral the blue -- so that should give you a better idea.
    Right;

    it's about 12-15 Lux or 1 and 1/2 ft-candles

  19. #69
    Administrator, Instructor Guy Mancuso's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    23,623
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2555

    Re: A Wealth Of Riches: Can't Have Them All : -(

    Quote Originally Posted by Bob View Post
    While Jack was shooting corroded faucets I took my P65+ which arrived earlier the same day for an indoor shoot.

    -bob

    oh, and it was pretty dark too
    Geez Bob sorry you could not find another faucet to shoot , guess this will have to do.
    Photography is all about experimentation and without it you will never learn art.

    www.guymancusophotography.com

  20. #70
    Sr. Administrator Jack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Los Altos, CA
    Posts
    10,486
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1031

    Re: A Wealth Of Riches: Can't Have Them All : -(

    Got to love the shadow tonality
    Jack
    home: www.getdpi.com

    "Perfection is not attainable. But if we chase perfection, we can catch excellence."

  21. #71
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Posts
    2,338
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    52

    Re: A Wealth Of Riches: Can't Have Them All : -(

    Quote Originally Posted by Jack Flesher View Post
    Pete:

    Excellent call!

    I looked closer at the original file and realized it was CA(!), so I reprocessed this time using C1 lens corrections, which I did NOT use in the first round processing. From my Betterlight days, I learned that APO lenses usually aren't -- the BL software allowed you to live-focus at any of the three color channels, and they NEVER all lined up at the same point, even with the best Schneider or Rodenstock APO glass. Obviously the problem gets exacerbated as you go smaller and smaller in pixel pitch, probably why we don't see it in the binned frame. (Edit note: When I uprezzed the original binned ISO1600 file per Shelby's request below, the CA showed. So I reprocessed the binned file with the lens corrections for the uprez version below.) Also, this shot was done at near the closest focusing distance for the 150, so adds to the issue. (By design, true APO only occurs at one focus distance, a and most modern lenses are usually designed to be their best at around 4-6 meters.) Widest aperture doesn't help either...

    Anyway, here is the reprocess of that same file. This time is I turned on CA correction and purple fringing reduction in C1, AND dialed up Lum NR a few more points -- the result is far superior IMO:



    Here's the original without CA or PF for reference -- clearly more time behind the scenes with the P65+ files and I'll get better at processing them -- my apologies:

    Hi Jack - thanks for your explanation - and apologies if I came across as a pixel peeping nerd. Thansk for walking through what was going on...I owe you a beer.

    This stuff has become very important to me as I am seriously considering the P65+ and much of its useage will be on tech camera platforms - regarding using normal cameras - i dont need anymore than 30-40 megapixels so I dont really care about 60 megapixels on an SLR rig..

    I need now to compare the white shading procedure that C1 employs versus Hasselblad - ironically Sinar's approach is the most elegant and easy to use for architectural and landscape type work - ironic because Sinar Expose software is very primitive compared to C1 and Phocus - but with coour caste and temp fix - Sinar tools are outstanding and easy - maybe I just need to do some learning re Phiocus and c1

    Next port of call is Doug @ C1 for a workflow..

    Pete

  22. #72
    Sr. Administrator Jack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Los Altos, CA
    Posts
    10,486
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1031

    Re: A Wealth Of Riches: Can't Have Them All : -(

    Hi Pete:

    No problem, was glad to figure it out! Re C1 white frame, it has been updated in 5.0.x to do BOTH color and falloff corrections in one swoop, so theoretically, a CF is no longer needed. Note I have not tested this for myself yet...

    Also, you are no doubt aware that Dalsa sensors are superior for lens shifts to Kodak sensors? Joe Holmes has a nice discussion of it here: http://www.josephholmes.com/news-med...precision.html

    Unfortunately, we still need to do the white frame if we shift, but may not need to with Dalsa in a tilt.
    Jack
    home: www.getdpi.com

    "Perfection is not attainable. But if we chase perfection, we can catch excellence."

  23. #73
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    72
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: A Wealth Of Riches: Can't Have Them All : -(

    I shoot Sinar 75LV with Hasselblad V lenses, and none of my Superachromat lenses, and even 100CFi, 180CFi etc. exhibits purple fringing at wide open even in some worst scenarios, could be something wrong with the Mamiya 150mm lens?

  24. #74
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Royal Oak, MI and Palm Harbor, FL
    Posts
    8,498
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    44

    Re: A Wealth Of Riches: Can't Have Them All : -(

    I was curious, so I did some available light ... or lack of ... shots with the H3D-39 @ ISO 100 and ISO 800 to compare them side by side. Not bad at all.

    I set Phocus to zero NR and zero sharpening ... then used Smart Sharpen in PS (which rocks IMO) and applied a small amount of Nik Define 2 manually and cut the Nik layer by 50% before flattening.

    800 is quite usable from this camera depending on application and final file size ... but I've done 17X22s from 800 files with good results.

    (BTW, red square indicates the focus point).

  25. #75
    Sr. Administrator Jack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Los Altos, CA
    Posts
    10,486
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1031

    Re: A Wealth Of Riches: Can't Have Them All : -(

    In my experience, testing ISO noise in good light does not tell the whole story. What I try to find is a even toned zone of mid to darker tones without detail where the noise pattern is clearly visible.
    Jack
    home: www.getdpi.com

    "Perfection is not attainable. But if we chase perfection, we can catch excellence."

  26. #76
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Royal Oak, MI and Palm Harbor, FL
    Posts
    8,498
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    44

    Re: A Wealth Of Riches: Can't Have Them All : -(

    Quote Originally Posted by Jack Flesher View Post
    In my experience, testing ISO noise in good light does not tell the whole story. What I try to find is a even toned zone of mid to darker tones without detail where the noise pattern is clearly visible.
    Well, this was hardly good light (a couple of incandescent room lights requiring fairly long exposures) ... if figured all the shadow areas would reveal any scary noise.

    Hey, here is something I just discovered that you can try when testing the S2 ... I reprocessed some ISO 640 files and this time I shut down the sharpening to zero (the lenses require less), and luminance NR to zero and boosted the color NR a bit ... and it cleaned up the files pretty nicely ... then applied a little Smart Sharpening in PS.

    Way better results.

  27. #77
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Munich
    Posts
    876
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: A Wealth Of Riches: Can't Have Them All : -(

    It doesn't matter if it is in good or bad light. You can do very nice ISO tests in full sunlight. The only thing one has to do is not look at crops which are very bright. Just look at darker shadow crops.

  28. #78
    Sr. Administrator Jack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Los Altos, CA
    Posts
    10,486
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1031

    Re: A Wealth Of Riches: Can't Have Them All : -(

    Quote Originally Posted by Christopher View Post
    It doesn't matter if it is in good or bad light. You can do very nice ISO tests in full sunlight. The only thing one has to do is not look at crops which are very bright. Just look at darker shadow crops.
    That was my point -- you need to look into an area that is even toned and preferably out of focus. If you look at my ISO 1600 faucet shot above, it's harder to see noise in the in-focus wood grain or brighter in-focus chrome areas for example, but relatively easy to see in the more even-toned or oof areas. That's all...
    Jack
    home: www.getdpi.com

    "Perfection is not attainable. But if we chase perfection, we can catch excellence."

  29. #79
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Royal Oak, MI and Palm Harbor, FL
    Posts
    8,498
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    44

    Re: A Wealth Of Riches: Can't Have Them All : -(

    Quote Originally Posted by Jack Flesher View Post
    That was my point -- you need to look into an area that is mid to darker even toned and without texture. If you look at my ISO 1600 faucet shot above, you cannot see any noise in the shiny chrome surfaces, but it is obvious in the smooth-toned darker background.
    Oh, I get ya. The crops should be of the shadow and shadow transition areas. Yes I agree, that's where noise is most obvious and annoying.

    I still like to see what effect noise has on the transition areas and main subject detail which is where selective NR like Nik Define 2 isn't as easy to apply without affecting that subject detail.

    Jack, I'm interested in hearing any subtile differences you notice between the Kodak and Dalsa sensor since I am looking to move in the same direction with the H4D/60 with Dalsa chip.

    -Marc

  30. #80
    Administrator Bob's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Prescott, Arizona
    Posts
    4,492
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    367

    Re: A Wealth Of Riches: Can't Have Them All : -(

    Quote Originally Posted by fotografz View Post
    Oh, I get ya. The crops should be of the shadow and shadow transition areas. Yes I agree, that's where noise is most obvious and annoying.

    I still like to see what effect noise has on the transition areas and main subject detail which is where selective NR like Nik Define 2 isn't as easy to apply without affecting that subject detail.

    Jack, I'm interested in hearing any subtile differences you notice between the Kodak and Dalsa sensor since I am looking to move in the same direction with the H4D/60 with Dalsa chip.

    -Marc
    I can tell you this...
    At least in the P65+ vs P45+ implementations, the system noise (lumpy periodic noise) is much reduced in the P65+. It almost looks as good as cmos sensor noise with nice regular random-ish speckles,
    Shadows are nice and clean.
    This is testable at even base ISO at the lowest levels of illumination. It is all about what those low order bits are doing.
    -bob

  31. #81
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Royal Oak, MI and Palm Harbor, FL
    Posts
    8,498
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    44

    Re: A Wealth Of Riches: Can't Have Them All : -(

    Quote Originally Posted by Bob View Post
    I can tell you this...
    At least in the P65+ vs P45+ implementations, the system noise (lumpy periodic noise) is much reduced in the P65+. It almost looks as good as cmos sensor noise with nice regular random-ish speckles,
    Shadows are nice and clean.
    This is testable at even base ISO at the lowest levels of illumination. It is all about what those low order bits are doing.
    -bob
    Thanks Bob. Sounds Promising.

    I previously worked with a Leaf Aptus 75s that uses a Dalsa sensor, and was always pleased with the noise structure ... very good ISO 800 from that back.

    -Marc

  32. #82
    Sr. Administrator Jack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Los Altos, CA
    Posts
    10,486
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1031

    Re: A Wealth Of Riches: Can't Have Them All : -(

    Dalsa is definitely different, and for the most part better, but the distinctions are subtle IMHO. Bob mentioned the pleasant noise characteristic, this behavior remains even when the file is pushed around significantly.

    Color is probably the next biggest area they differ. Dalsa is smoother -- tough to describe it, but it is more film-like and less digital if that makes sense? On color, I find greens to be a bit warmer than off the Kodak, yet blues remain similar and Dalsa skintones are awesome. One would think this is totally profile based, but it seems to be more a response thing. And maybe the skintones seem better because of the smoother color mentioned earlier? It's early with the files for me to be more definitive, and again this is pixel-peeping to the max.
    Jack
    home: www.getdpi.com

    "Perfection is not attainable. But if we chase perfection, we can catch excellence."

  33. #83
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Posts
    2,338
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    52

    Re: A Wealth Of Riches: Can't Have Them All : -(

    Well Jack I've shot with both types and the only difference I can see (on the rare occasions I could be bothered comparing) aka pixel peeping, is Kodak is warmer out of the box and Dalsa is cooler - and that probably has more to do with the engineers preferences whilst doing their oh so mathematically complicated coding ( joke ) than anything else. One little adjustment on a temp slider and you can match the out of the box look of one or the other.

    We are all wishing that the digi thing was more like film - this is the subconcious or conscious psychology behind a lot of our reactions - anyway thats my take on this FWIW.

    After a few years mucking around with this hobby and dropping a small wad of cashola for the privilege - I always come back to its about the glass and what you do with it.

    Hasselblad should wake up to themselves and make a focal plane body to please eccentric amateurs - its ridiculous that I have had to buy a Mamiya or a Contax to use the Zeiss glass I prefer - I mean totally ridiculous.

    and no I dont like the CF adaptor by hasselblad - it is TOTALLY CLUNKY


    Here I am scratching my head and thinking - hmm Phase One P65+ - I can use my Zeiss lenses - or upgrade to the hasselblad same sensor - and I have to use a CLUNKY CF adaptor grrrrrr

  34. #84
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Royal Oak, MI and Palm Harbor, FL
    Posts
    8,498
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    44

    Re: A Wealth Of Riches: Can't Have Them All : -(

    Quote Originally Posted by PeterA View Post
    Well Jack I've shot with both types and the only difference I can see (on the rare occasions I could be bothered comparing) aka pixel peeping, is Kodak is warmer out of the box and Dalsa is cooler - and that probably has more to do with the engineers preferences whilst doing their oh so mathematically complicated coding ( joke ) than anything else. One little adjustment on a temp slider and you can match the out of the box look of one or the other.

    We are all wishing that the digi thing was more like film - this is the subconcious or conscious psychology behind a lot of our reactions - anyway thats my take on this FWIW.

    After a few years mucking around with this hobby and dropping a small wad of cashola for the privilege - I always come back to its about the glass and what you do with it.

    Hasselblad should wake up to themselves and make a focal plane body to please eccentric amateurs - its ridiculous that I have had to buy a Mamiya or a Contax to use the Zeiss glass I prefer - I mean totally ridiculous.

    and no I dont like the CF adaptor by hasselblad - it is TOTALLY CLUNKY


    Here I am scratching my head and thinking - hmm Phase One P65+ - I can use my Zeiss lenses - or upgrade to the hasselblad same sensor - and I have to use a CLUNKY CF adaptor grrrrrr
    I don't even know what "out of the camera" means any more. Digital out of the camera untouched is all green ... I've seen it.

    It has everything to do with how you set up any one of the proprietary RAW processors with preferences set and/or profiles selected.

    My Hassey/Flexcolor (and eventually Phocus) was set up to be "product" neutral by my dealer when he delivered my camera so I could shoot consistently in studio with Profoto strobes where the camera is used most. This dealer is pretty knowledgeable because he is a working digital tech for studios. My then Leaf dealer couldn't find his bum with both hands when it came to digital capture, so I had to set up my Dalsa sensor Aptus 75s myself for the same neutral base. It was actually a bit warmer going in at default Leaf Capture settings.

    Yep Peter, the CF adapter is a bit "clunky" ... the penalty for adding mechanical lenses to an electronic non-focal plane camera which requires some sort of cocking mechanism.

    However, none of the other solutions provide stop down metering and shooting ... which IMO was a much bigger PITA and crappy work flow when shooting when I used V lenses on my Contax or my Mamiya 645 ... and I absolutely hated the Mamiya AFD-II when using those V lenses ... the shutter lag drove me bananas ... (something that is supposedly much better now with the latest Mamiya body) ... but that viewfinder was so dim in low light I couldn't focus the 110/2 FE to save my life. And stopping down with a dumb adapter? Forget about it.

    The counter point is that with the Contax and Mamiya, you can shoot the delicious F and FE lenses which is not possible with the H camera ... so the desire for a Focal Plane H is one I share with you.

    LISTEN UP HASSELBLAD! YOU CAN BLUNT THE NOTION OF PEOPLE JUMPING SHIP TO PHASE ONE, LEICA S2 AND EVEN HIGH END 35MM DSLRS BY JUST OFFERING A FOCAL PLANE BODY FOR USE WITH V LENSES AND HC LENSES WITH 1/4000TH SHUTTER ... HOW HARD CAN IT BE?

    I'd pay 8K in a NY heartbeat for such a body ... which is a lot cheaper than two systems or swapping systems midstream. Besides the back, the lens investment is where all the money is. The issue would be how to retro fit existing "integrated" systems backs to a new body. So it would probably either have to be a back and body, which runs into some serious coin, or you would have to send the back in for the camera to be calibrated to it ... which I understand can be done with a second back-up H body now.

    -Marc

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •