Site Sponsors
Results 1 to 14 of 14

Thread: Dalsa FTF6080C, any more backs than Sinar Exact?

  1. #1
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    1,538
    Post Thanks / Like

    Dalsa FTF6080C, any more backs than Sinar Exact?

    I think 48x36mm 50 megapixels is a great tradeoff size/resolution for a tech camera. Even if money was no problem I think I would prefer that rather than an IQ180 or similar. More shift margin and less of maximize-resolution-angst, plus hopefully less color cast issues thanks to larger pixels.

    There's a 50 megapixel kodak sensor in the Hasselblad CFV-50, but I suspect it kind of sucks on a tech camera (color cast, wakeup procedure, poor screen for focus check), not sure though.

    I'd prefer a Dalsa sensor and then the only one I've found is Sinar Exact (48 megapixel), which does not have a screen at all.

    Are there any other products with this sensor? I'd love to see Leaf make one.

    I am a little bit worried that the big MFDB makers may stop providing great tech camera options, the new Credo line for example just as the IQ line seems to be more aimed at the 645 SLR cameras. Sure the IQ180 works quite nicely, but concerning color casts and movements it is a step backwards compared to a 33 megapixel Aptus for example.

  2. #2
    Senior Member Steve Hendrix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    420
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    4

    Re: Dalsa FTF6080C, any more backs than Sinar Exact?

    Quote Originally Posted by torger View Post
    I think 48x36mm 50 megapixels is a great tradeoff size/resolution for a tech camera. Even if money was no problem I think I would prefer that rather than an IQ180 or similar. More shift margin and less of maximize-resolution-angst, plus hopefully less color cast issues thanks to larger pixels.

    There's a 50 megapixel kodak sensor in the Hasselblad CFV-50, but I suspect it kind of sucks on a tech camera (color cast, wakeup procedure, poor screen for focus check), not sure though.

    I'd prefer a Dalsa sensor and then the only one I've found is Sinar Exact (48 megapixel), which does not have a screen at all.

    Are there any other products with this sensor? I'd love to see Leaf make one.

    I am a little bit worried that the big MFDB makers may stop providing great tech camera options, the new Credo line for example just as the IQ line seems to be more aimed at the 645 SLR cameras. Sure the IQ180 works quite nicely, but concerning color casts and movements it is a step backwards compared to a 33 megapixel Aptus for example.

    Hi Torger -

    Dalsa sensors are available in the following current products:

    44mm x 33mm
    - Phase One P40+
    - Phase One IQ140


    48/49mm x 36/37mm
    - Leaf Aptus-II 33
    - Sinar eVolution 75H
    - Sinar eVolution 86H
    - Sinar eXact

    56mm x 36mm
    - Leaf Aptus-II 56

    54mm x 41mm
    - Leaf Aptus-II 80
    - Leaf Credo 60
    - Leaf Credo 80
    - Hasselblad H4D-60
    - Phase One P65+
    - Phase One IQ160
    - Phase One IQ180


    Regarding your conundrum, it's true the IQ180 does not have quite the range for shift (generally) compared to a Dalsa 33mp sensor without encountering unacceptable color casts (roughly 3mm - 5mm each direction less in most situations). However, there are other candidates that would seem to fit what you have stated that would match and even exceed the coverage of the 48mm x 36mm Aptus 33. These include the Aptus-II 56, Credo 60, P65+, IQ160, and even the H4D-60.

    I don't exactly understand what you mean by the "angst" you speak of when referring to resolution. Can you expand on that? If I had the right product, the right size sensor, having 80 megapixels vs say, 40 or 50 megapixels would produce no angst for me. Certainly more storage required, but other than that, I only see newer sensor, better color, better resolution of digital artifacts (color aliasing, edge detail, moire, etc), greater ability to crop, larger files for high ISO (20MP for Phase One IQ180).

    I also don't see the IQ180 or the Credo products being targeted more toward DSLR. If anything, I see those products targeted much more toward tech camera field use. They certainly also provide a benefit for DSLR shooting, but DSLR capture can just as often be in a studio, or tethered to a computer, while the vast majority of tech camera shooters are in the field and as a result, these users greatly benefit from the enhanced LCD screen and functionality built into the IQ and Credo products. If by this you mean the greater potential for color cast with the 80 megapixel sensor, I get that, but that is more a sensor-specific issue rather than an overall product issue, and is only present in 1 of the 3 Credo or IQ available models (respectively).

    The biggest disadvantage - to me - for using a CFV-50 on a tech cam would be the lack of rotation. (disregard this, I brain cramped and forgot that you would just release the adapter plate and rotate that, although being able to rotate just the digital back can be an advantage, depending on the camera).


    Steve Hendrix
    Capture Integration
    Last edited by Steve Hendrix; 10th August 2012 at 08:04.
    Steve Hendrix, Sales Manager, www.captureintegration.com (e-mail Me)
    Digital Cam: Phase One | Leaf | Leica | Sinar Authorized Reseller
    TechCam: Alpa | Cambo | Arca Swiss | Sinar Authorized Reseller

  3. #3
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    1,538
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Dalsa FTF6080C, any more backs than Sinar Exact?

    The angst thing is as follows. MFDBs are priced according to resolution, it's not my choice but that's the way it is. 80 megapixels is much more expensive than 48. This means that if my 80 megapixel prints are no sharper than my 48 it will feel like a waste of money. To make my 80 megapixel prints (considerably) sharper I need to shoot at larger apertures. This means that my DoF gets limited and it becomes tougher to shoot.

    If pricing was not on resolution or the price differences were small then the more resolution the better (except that it seems like color cast gets worse with smaller pixels, but I'm not sure it must be like that), but now that is not the case and then it is nicer with a well-balanced system. For me this is when one can have f/11 as the optimal aperture and not feel like one is wasting pixels, because if I need larger aperture the thin DoF becomes really tough to work with.

    I don't see 54x41mm as an advantage at 90mm image circles, especially since many lenses on the wide side do not have high quality all the way to the edge. Again if larger sensor where priced similarly it would be quite ok, but now I think 48x36mm is a better balance. And I also think 6 um pixels is a good balance concerning aperture range. Sure if I did not need to pay extra for smaller pixels and it would perform as good concerning color cast I'd like smaller.

    Indeed, I think IQ160 is "the best" you can get currently in terms of a high-end well-balanced product for tech cam. A 48x36mm 50 megapixel would be considerably less expensive and even better balanced though, at least for my shooting style.

    What I see in tech cams is that ultra-high resolution and poor color cast handling is forcing complex (and expensive) retrofocus designs, exemplified by the 32mm Digaron-W, an excellent lens but so large and heavy it is in risk of breaking its copal shutter. If lenses could be made for f/11 like the Digitars rather than f/8 or even f/5.6 and sensors had better color cast handling not requiring retrofocus I'd think it is much better balanced and one could extract the strengths from classical large format lens designs, like we see in most Digitars.

    But the development does not seem to go that way, none of the newest backs matches the Schneider 28 XL very well for example.

    I think we have something unique in the Digitar lenses. Thanks to the larger pixels and not needing micro lenses we can have much better color cast performance than other systems, and therefore have these unique lens designs that no other system can use (even if mirrorless). I hope this niche continues to be supported in the future.

  4. #4
    Senior Member Steve Hendrix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    420
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    4

    Re: Dalsa FTF6080C, any more backs than Sinar Exact?

    Quote Originally Posted by torger View Post
    The angst thing is as follows. MFDBs are priced according to resolution, it's not my choice but that's the way it is. 80 megapixels is much more expensive than 48. This means that if my 80 megapixel prints are no sharper than my 48 it will feel like a waste of money. To make my 80 megapixel prints (considerably) sharper I need to shoot at larger apertures. This means that my DoF gets limited and it becomes tougher to shoot.

    If pricing was not on resolution or the price differences were small then the more resolution the better (except that it seems like color cast gets worse with smaller pixels, but I'm not sure it must be like that), but now that is not the case and then it is nicer with a well-balanced system. For me this is when one can have f/11 as the optimal aperture and not feel like one is wasting pixels, because if I need larger aperture the thin DoF becomes really tough to work with.

    I don't see 54x41mm as an advantage at 90mm image circles, especially since many lenses on the wide side do not have high quality all the way to the edge. Again if larger sensor where priced similarly it would be quite ok, but now I think 48x36mm is a better balance. And I also think 6 um pixels is a good balance concerning aperture range. Sure if I did not need to pay extra for smaller pixels and it would perform as good concerning color cast I'd like smaller.

    Indeed, I think IQ160 is "the best" you can get currently in terms of a high-end well-balanced product for tech cam. A 48x36mm 50 megapixel would be considerably less expensive and even better balanced though, at least for my shooting style.

    What I see in tech cams is that ultra-high resolution and poor color cast handling is forcing complex (and expensive) retrofocus designs, exemplified by the 32mm Digaron-W, an excellent lens but so large and heavy it is in risk of breaking its copal shutter. If lenses could be made for f/11 like the Digitars rather than f/8 or even f/5.6 and sensors had better color cast handling not requiring retrofocus I'd think it is much better balanced and one could extract the strengths from classical large format lens designs, like we see in most Digitars.

    But the development does not seem to go that way, none of the newest backs matches the Schneider 28 XL very well for example.

    Thanks for the clarification Torger. On this forum particularly, "angst" is sort of a vague (and often loaded) term. Your reasons are well presented.

    Unfortunately, at least for now, medium format digital backs are offered as multi-purpose devices, and naturally so. Perhaps the most compelling reason to shoot medium format is the amazing array of cameras and lenses one might choose from. Considering that perspective, some compromises inevitably come into play.

    If you see the sensor size of 48mm x 36mm as more or less ideal (and everyone will have their own view on that of course), the idea of 50 vs 33 megapixels seems like an advantage potentially, though perhaps not as dramatic as one would think. And as noted by you, for the same sensor size, you will encounter some measure of diffraction as the pixels are smaller.

    I don't know that the next step up for you ideally exists currently. A 50 megapixel, 48 x 36 sensor provides 17 more megapixels, so at 240 dpi, for example, you go from 21 x 28 (33MP) to 26 x 34 (50MP). A P45+ (39MP) would give you a 23 x 30.

    I guess you're saying you'd prefer a Dalsa-based sensor roughly the same size as what you have, but with more megapixels, but not too many, to keep diffraction at bay. But I don't see a very tangible gain for you in that scenario.

    Megapixels do impact pricing of course, but sensor size probably is more impactful, when you consider that going from an IQ140 to an IQ180 is more than double the price, but going from an IQ140 to an IQ160 is also nearly double, and if based just on megapixels, the IQ160 would be closer in price to the IQ140.


    Steve Hendrix
    Capture Integration
    Steve Hendrix, Sales Manager, www.captureintegration.com (e-mail Me)
    Digital Cam: Phase One | Leaf | Leica | Sinar Authorized Reseller
    TechCam: Alpa | Cambo | Arca Swiss | Sinar Authorized Reseller

  5. #5
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    1,538
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Dalsa FTF6080C, any more backs than Sinar Exact?

    You are right of course, going from 33 to 48-50 is not that big deal in absolute numbers. I'm just feeling that the 33 is a liiittle bit underresolving at f/11, I think it is good to have some diffraction onset to compensate the lack of moire filter, and I think ~50 (6um) would be just right. So I guess it is more about getting a better balanced system and feeling good about that than printing bigger.

    I also think it would be an excellent product to fit into the current range, just look at it: 40 mp 44x33, 50 mp 48x36, 60 mp 54x41, 80 mp 54x41.

    I also think such a product would strengthen the D800 vs tech cam+MFDB case. Now it is either an "old" product with similar pixels as the D800 or the Credo 60 / IQ160 (ouch!). A ~50 mp 48x36 which can do Digitar wides fits just right in there.

    That plus an updated Schneider 35 XL and all would be just fine

  6. #6
    Subscriber and Workshop Member MGrayson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    1,575
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    4

    Re: Dalsa FTF6080C, any more backs than Sinar Exact?

    I went with the IQ140 for pretty much these reasons. I would have preferred a slightly larger sensor - the 48mm size seems nice, but that would imply an older design, and I really wanted the fast 100% view (more even than focus mask), and that means IQ or Credo. From that point, the dramatic price difference between IQ140 and IQ160 made it easy. Since I'm only working on a tech camera, the ability to stitch when more pixels are desired (or just a wider view) make the 40MP back less of a hardship (yes, that is said tongue-in-cheek). I did an 80MP stitch from the SK 35 XL this morning and it was fairly easy.

    Best,

    Matt

  7. #7
    Senior Member yaya's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    London, UK
    Posts
    1,168
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    38

    Re: Dalsa FTF6080C, any more backs than Sinar Exact?

    Torger the Aptus-II 10 when cropped to to 48x36mm (or with Sensorflex set to 4:3 when tethered to Leaf Capture) gives you 48MP. Uncropped it saves you from stitching two horizontal frames or it produces a nice square 56x56 when stitching two verticals

    If you get a 10R you also benefit from the rotating sensor

    All Dalsa 6nm sensors use the same basic design. It's just that the 6080 is the only one that's listed as an off the shelf product. The others are custom made for Leaf and Phase One

    Hope this helps
    Yair Shahar | Product Manager | Phase One | Mamiya Leaf
    e: [email protected] | m: +44(0)77 8992 8199 | yaya's blog

  8. #8
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Hong Kong / Asia
    Posts
    524
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Dalsa FTF6080C, any more backs than Sinar Exact?

    Gents,

    It is not mere about the pixels and size of sensors. There are different generations of sensors and with them different generation technology and implementation. Those have led to improvements in image quality. Or Yair, please correct if there are image quality improvements between Credo and Aptus-II/AFi-II backs, and specific what such for different sensors?

    Newest: 80MP Leaf & P1
    Second: 40 & 56 MP Leaf, 40 & 60MP P1
    (Steve left out the 40MP 44x33mm Leaf, the Credo 60MP assumably is same sensor as P1?)
    Third: 28 & 33 MP Leaf, 30 & 39 MP P1
    Fourth: 20 MP Leaf & P1

    Sorry, no idea of Hassy. All Leaf are Dalsa sensors. P1 sensors are Dalsa from 40MP and up.

    Personally I much prefer character from Dalsa sensors. My prior 28MP Aptus was identical sensor as the 33MP but a smaller crop.

    Stepping up from the 28MP to the 80MP Leaf AFi-II last year, neglecting the more pixels I have found there was a significant step up in image quality. There are better colors, more colors, finer gradation of colors and I can push the files much more. Frankly it made me finally drop Velvia 50 slide film which I for landscapes had shot side by side at times for the appealing colors. The 80MP does not give Velvia colors, but bring per my critical eye indeed very pleasing colors (considerably more so and better than the 28MP). There is also less noise with the 80MP. And yes, the more pixels help in all these, including that I can crop and do so frequent. It does require more careful technique to get sharp images because many pixels.

    I looked at sample files also from the 56MP Leaf and 60MP P1+, and found the 56MP Leaf to be a very minor step up in image quality compared to my 28MP Leaf, but the 60MP to be around halfway up in image quality to my 80MP Leaf. Though difficult to say precise how much up for the 60MP, they too are very good sensors indeed though not to level of 80MP backs.

    I current use on Hy6 camera which is complete awesome and pleasure to use. That camera helps me to hand hold steady. If I used 80MP for Mamiya I am sure I would fail many more shots. One reason being that Hy6 has a waist level finder, thus I can cradle it to hold steady, as compared to lifting camera to eye level when standing. Also because camera is significantly more ergonomic, more balanced and much better quality with very precise focusing.

    Regarding color casts, there is no difference if stitching within same image circle. If no stitch and need wides, with smaller size sensor arguably the SK 24 XL may prove more problem and lenses are more $$$ for similar width of field. You should look at specific lenses for the focal lengths you prefer.

    Worthwhile to consider is also the Credo/IQ vs. Aptus-II/AFi-II/P1+ interface and price. Though I purchased my AFi-II prior the Credo backs were announced, the AFi-II offer a modern version back case of the Aptus-II and with rotating sensor and tilt screen. I find the AFi-II as very attractive also for a tech camera and plan on adding a tech camera eventually. The AFi-II is also considerably cheaper than Credo/IQ... and only tad more than Aptus-II. Prices vary in different regions, but the higher end Leaf backs in non Credo are well worth to look into as comparison to Credo and offerings from P1 and Hassy.

    I am very very pleased with Leaf. Support from Yair is excellent. And from Gavin and his team in HK is truly superb! The solid product, service and support is what made me to spend the $$ to upgrade last year. Plus that the Leaf backs are durable to point I know I can trust.

    Lastly, the rotating sensor from Leaf in the AFi-II backs is super. Prior using it I was concerned if due to the 80MP and the strict tolerances required for digital it really would measure up. It does. I get very sharp images both in landscape and portrait mode. Works excellent on my Hy6, and should work equally great on an Alpa. To my surprise I frank also frequent use and ejnoy the tilt screen on the AFi-II back. Should be great on a tech camera as well.

    Sorry Yair, but doubtful if I will upgrade to a Credo. Love my AFi-II with Hy6 !!!

    Hope above helps!

    Best regards,
    Anders
    Last edited by Anders_HK; 10th August 2012 at 13:41.

  9. #9
    Senior Member Steve Hendrix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    420
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    4

    Re: Dalsa FTF6080C, any more backs than Sinar Exact?

    Quote Originally Posted by Anders_HK View Post
    Gents,

    It is not mere about the pixels and size of sensors. There are different generations of sensors and with them different generation technology and implementation. Those have led to improvements in image quality. Or Yair, please correct if there are image quality improvements between Credo and Aptus-II/AFi-II backs, and specific what such for different sensors?

    Newest: 80MP Leaf & P1
    Second: 40 & 56 MP Leaf, 40 & 60MP P1
    (Steve left out the 40MP 44x33mm Leaf, the Credo 60MP assumably is same sensor as P1?)
    Third: 28 & 33 MP Leaf, 30 & 39 MP P1
    Fourth: 20 MP Leaf & P1

    Best regards,
    Anders
    Anders, I'm sending all my future correspondence to you first for proofing, great catch. But for accuracy, also the 30 & 39 MP P1 sensors are Kodak (technically 31MP) and the 20 (you mean 22MP, yes?) for Leaf was Dalsa, for Phase was Kodak). Essentially Phase was Phillips (ultimately Dalsa) from 6MP - 11MP, Kodak from 16MP - 39MP, Dalsa from 40MP - 80MP). Leaf, as you noted, has always been Phillips /Dalsa since 6MP.

    You're right about the newer sensors, they're better. Specifically, it has been noted by quite a few that the 80MP has a quality of color and tone that is noticeably improved over all previous sensors.

    There was a video Phase put out with an engineer discussing the 80mp sensor in relation to previous sensors, regarding the smaller pixel pitch, and how engineering must overcome that challenge to produce quality that creates no more noise than the previous generation of larger pixel sensors.

    In his words, they overachieved (out-punted their coverage) and found the quality they were able to coax out of the 80mp sensor exceeded their expectations. User anecdotes regarding the quality improvement had already been expressed before the release of the video. I found it interesting. It's the 6th video to the far right of the top row, called "Image Quality"

    IQ180 Image Quality


    Steve Hendrix
    Capture Integration
    Steve Hendrix, Sales Manager, www.captureintegration.com (e-mail Me)
    Digital Cam: Phase One | Leaf | Leica | Sinar Authorized Reseller
    TechCam: Alpa | Cambo | Arca Swiss | Sinar Authorized Reseller

  10. #10
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    1,538
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Dalsa FTF6080C, any more backs than Sinar Exact?

    Quote Originally Posted by yaya View Post
    the Aptus-II 10
    Thanks Yair, I know about the 10 and 10R, and it is an interesting option although I've become more of a 5:4 guy recently

    Do you happen to know how color casts are with the 10 compared to the 33 megapixel Leafs (which are really good, I would guess partly thanks to fat pixels and no micro lenses)?

    (I would still love to see a new 48x36mm 6um product in the future but I guess for that to happen it will have to be more people than I that think it is the perfect balance of size and resolution )

  11. #11
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    1,538
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Dalsa FTF6080C, any more backs than Sinar Exact?

    Quote Originally Posted by Steve Hendrix View Post
    You're right about the newer sensors, they're better. Specifically, it has been noted by quite a few that the 80MP has a quality of color and tone that is noticeably improved over all previous sensors.
    So far I've learnt that this type of aspect is something that some see and some do not, which means it always ends with someone getting upset . Unfortunately (or perhaps fortunately) I'm not able to see any significant improvement, so I'm quite pleased with the color of the older Dalsa sensors. Noise levels of the older ones are indeed a bit worse but "good enough" according to me (except that they cannot do multi-minute exposures, but the newer ones are not too good either).

  12. #12
    Subscriber and Workshop Member MGrayson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    1,575
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    4

    Re: Dalsa FTF6080C, any more backs than Sinar Exact?

    Quote Originally Posted by torger View Post
    (I would still love to see a new 48x36mm 6um product in the future but I guess for that to happen it will have to be more people than I that think it is the perfect balance of size and resolution )
    Another one here!

  13. #13
    Senior Member Steve Hendrix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    420
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    4

    Re: Dalsa FTF6080C, any more backs than Sinar Exact?

    Quote Originally Posted by torger View Post
    So far I've learnt that this type of aspect is something that some see and some do not, which means it always ends with someone getting upset . Unfortunately (or perhaps fortunately) I'm not able to see any significant improvement, so I'm quite pleased with the color of the older Dalsa sensors. Noise levels of the older ones are indeed a bit worse but "good enough" according to me (except that they cannot do multi-minute exposures, but the newer ones are not too good either).

    Yes - agreed. The differences between sensors and comparative digital back image quality can often be hard to quantify. The same is even true of camera lenses and print media, as other examples. On this very forum, rather famously, there has recently been praise and also sentiments of dissatisfaction over the Nikon D800. The extremes of "I don't really see it" to "I can't live without it" randomly exist.


    Steve Hendrix
    Capture Integration
    Steve Hendrix, Sales Manager, www.captureintegration.com (e-mail Me)
    Digital Cam: Phase One | Leaf | Leica | Sinar Authorized Reseller
    TechCam: Alpa | Cambo | Arca Swiss | Sinar Authorized Reseller

  14. #14
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Hong Kong / Asia
    Posts
    524
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Dalsa FTF6080C, any more backs than Sinar Exact?

    Quote Originally Posted by Steve Hendrix View Post
    Yes - agreed. The differences between sensors and comparative digital back image quality can often be hard to quantify. The same is even true of camera lenses and print media, as other examples.
    True. A large part in equation is also cost, and the cost of a digital back versus how long time we estimate will keep it. In my case I considered upgrading to the 56MP by Leaf but went with the 80MP. It cost more yes, but considering that the image quality will stack up at tops more beyond the generation of sensors to come (100MP and more), I believe the extra $ were well worth it to spend now. But that extra was also based on the price in the region where I purchased at that time, and likewise that there was a significant jump in image quality to me beyond the 56MP.

    How do you quantify improvements in image quality? You can ask of what differences here online (even message folks here) and then study sample RAW files yourself to try to see what they point out (I recommend to test drive RAW of shots of subject types similar to the ones you shoot yourself). I pointed out what I have experienced in above by using the 28MP vs. 80MP backs. I can add that for portraits I found the 28MP totally satisfactory, while for landscapes I was not totally satisfied with the colors, as implied in above (though colors from 28MP were indeed very very correct compared to DSLR, there was something missing to my eye for landscapes). There is more I missed with the 28MP: the creation in post of sensation of light, which was partially based on the back and partially based on my processing. With the 80MP I can recreate sensation of light similar to levels I got from film, partly due to the back and sensor itself, and partly because I read books on painting to learn also aspects of how painters accomplish this. It is largely about contrast curve and similar functions, including difference in lights and darks in a picture. It is also about emphasizing where to lead the eye, e.g. eyes of a model by improving their contrast, saturation and light in post. Attaching two examples, which I could not have achieved same way using the 28MP. Sure, it was studio lighting, but based on my experience with the 28MP and I could not have obtained same sensation of light with that sensor. The attached are more ehh film like, and look more real. My website is still in tad trial mode (due text primarily), but all beauty shots and first 8 shots from China are using the 80MP sensor; andersloof.com. It is also about optimal exposure (not necessary ETTR but optimal with regards to DR of back compared to scene including for a broad DR scene optimally capturing the highlight transition when exposing). Second shot in my library from Sweden is the 28MP Leaf and all from India and Bangkok, and 12-17 in my Boracay gallery. All pictures on my website are recent postprocessed irrespective of media used, and I only use Capture One (no photoshop).

    Steve and Yair can fill you in on the 40MP sensors, but they are same generation as the 60MP. If they are same sensors as the 60MP but only crops of them, then they may be the current bargain for the second top notch image quality today (number of pixels aside)... Of course, the 645 sized sensors utilize lenses in a different way for a shallower DOF and more. I prefer this, but I still say I was very satisfied indeed with the image quality from the 28MP, per what explained in above.

    Lastly, in regards to micro lenses only the 31 MP sensor from P1 utilize such among P1 sensors, no Leaf sensors use such.

    Best regards,
    Anders
    Last edited by Anders_HK; 10th August 2012 at 22:02.

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
  •