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!

IQ 140/IQ 160 movements with tech cam

gazwas

Active member
I remember when trying to decide between a full and a crop sensor my dealer incorrectly pushing me towards the full frame as the only choice as I wanted to use it exclusively on a tech camera. Now I look back on that decision and with regards to tech camera use feel the chip size is of less relavence as we have movements. Sure, if your lazy you'll alway see more of what the lens projects in a single capture but you don't generally shoot tech if you like the easy life.

IMO, when just considering stitching using a same gen sensor (IQ140/160, P40+/P65+) the only difference between the two is Mpix count.
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
Well there is a big price difference too between a 160 and 140 if we go by list it's around 15k or so. Other than mpx it's exactly the same sensor. When I decided to drop down I'm only on a tech cam so really not a big deal. But my 28mm very expensive lens is now a 22mm instead of a 18mm in a single shot. Now given I can shift 12mm left and right than I get I think 18mm right back but it's a two shot image now. So really not bad. Of course I could shift on the 160 about 7mm either side and wind up with maybe a 15mm or so. I'm not finding this as a big deal either. In all honesty it's pretty rare to get wider than 22 so a little extra work.
Also my LCC will work less harder in post to clean up . I'm not pushing the edge of the FF of the 160 which can be a issue with these wides. The SK 28 did not work out in the end as I was getting a magenta cast in the upper right quadrant and we tested it a couple more times at my dealer and I just decided to switch to the Roadie 28mm and not deal with any issues. These 28mm are around 7-8 k and was not worth playing games on it. But yes if your only on a tech cam the crop factor is less of a importance. I bought the 160 because of the DF body and wanted to eliminate the crop lines of my P40 in the finder.

So that cost savings could buy you a few lenses. There is no shame in owning a crop sensor and 40mpx is enough and I think the sweet spot in digital capture. I have a Epson 7900 which is 24 inches wide and if I can get stellar images on that size printer I'm happy. I know this file will go even bigger when needed too. My laptop like them much better too. Lol
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
Having the Nikon D800 now all my files are the same size which is nice to have for various reasons . I'm actually down to a very very short list of things to buy. Scary I may just go into deep depression without using my buy button finger. ROTFLMAO
 

gazwas

Active member
The 60Mpix sensors do of course add additional benefits than just pixel count over the 40Mpix sensors but in relation to stitching they are pretty much the same.

The crop in the DF was a big part of me going for the P65+ and something I could never give up even for the (too) much adored Nikon.
 

Jack

Sr. Administrator
Staff member
Guy, I think your logic is circular and you really did not gain anything. If you could move back with the 40, you could have moved back with the 60 or 80 too, and captured the entire scene identically with less shift and an appropriate crop -- or not. And the fact you can, but do not have to crop is advantage larger sensor.

Stated another way, what you did loose is the wider AoV that the same lens provides on a larger sensor, which is a benefit when you cannot move back as is often the case in architectural shooting and always the case when shooting a subject at relative infinity; even if you can move back physically, it makes no difference since the subject is so far away. What you gained was having a sensor that resides in a smaller, sweeter spot of the lens' image circle, and the cost of that is net longer effective focals for every lens -- something you can also get by cropping with the larger sensor. So really, there is nothing "gained" from the crop sensor other than economy at purchase, and possibly some efficiency at capture as long as your desired image can be fit to it and you didn't need the extra pixels of a larger sensor.
 

MGrayson

Subscriber and Workshop Member
Jack,

You are correct. Guy has gained $$ at the expense of crop. Full stop.

Guy,

That is a good trade and doesn't need any defense. Some prefer one way, others the other. I would be on the fence, but am biased by having only used the 160. I absolutely loved my Canon 1D (the first one - still have it). 4MP, but eleven micron pixels, and a 1.3x crop. I never minded the crop, and most wide Canon glass was icky in the corners, so moving to a FF 1DsII was mixed bag. (Well, except for the quadrupling of MP - that was a very unmixed bag :toocool: )

Enjoy the damn thing! I'm jealous. :chug:

--Matt
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
Matt and Jack totally understand both your comments. My thinking all along here was I may get 2mm or so of extra rise. Okay it's has to do with vertical space . Let's say I'm shooting a wall if I am up close to it I cut the vertical angle down but moving back I would think I would increase that vertical angle. This is hard to get into words , I need to be in the field . You guys know me it would make sense if we where standing in the same spot. I could actually be wrong but some warped sense of logic tells me I'm changing the angle by moving back but net effect maybe not. Oh well it's not a big deal anyway. Honestly I'm happy with either back, net net I get the best there is.
 

Jack

Sr. Administrator
Staff member
Bud, you are correct that you change the angle from moving back, but you change it the same amount regardless of what sensor you have mounted to your camera. Image circle is image circle is image circle, and no matter what size or how you move your capture frame (sensor), it remains bounded by the limits of the image circle the chosen lens projects, period :)


BTW, this reminds me when we were at the slat flats in Death Valley and we had 3 engineers, a physicist and a mathematician using four tripods to show visually how Scheimpflug worked and how focus and/or aperture changes affected the "wedge" of DoF -- we so should have videoed that for UTube! :ROTFL::ROTFL::ROTFL:
 

Don Libby

Well-known member
Guy, sorry however I'm on Matt and Jack's side of the theory here. All things being equal (which they rarely never are) you really didn't gain anything. Okay that might not be entirely true however whatever you gained is so small as to defy measurement. Then on the other hand if you feel better then screw it - that's what counts.

Don
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
Okay I'll give up, you know I'm stubborn as hell. LOL

I thought something might be there. Maybe the sense of going 12mm got me over excited in my thinking. I'll start carrying a sledge hammer in my bag for any walls that get in my way. LOL
 

gazwas

Active member
As long as you feel you're getting more movement then that is all that counts Guy! :p

I would try and stop getting hung up on all that lens equivalence stuff and crop vs FF sensor rubbish. Going IQ140 didn't turn your 18mm equivalent lens in to a 22mm because the image angle is all that matters with tech lenses and your 28mm has a 101° field of view regardless of the chip you stick behind it.
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
Thanks I know but I think I will go buy something to get over it, just a touch sad I sold my 160 but that's okay I don't get hung up too much on gear anyway, it's all disposable with my buy and sell track record. LOL

Need to keep that buy button finger warm. LOL
 

MGrayson

Subscriber and Workshop Member
Hey! No one is saying you gained nothing! Several thousand dollars is a LOT of beer!:ROTFL:

--Matt
 
Top