Site Sponsors
Results 1 to 49 of 49

Thread: Fotodiox challenges medium format resolution

  1. #1
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    492
    Post Thanks / Like

    Fotodiox challenges medium format resolution

    I thought some folks might find this interesting:

    Vizelex RhinoCam for Sony NEX E-Mount Cameras

    Although the idea and technology is not new, I find their marketing approach quite interesting as they try to target the 645 format.
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  2. #2
    Senior Member stephengilbert's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Santa Monica, CA
    Posts
    2,272
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2

    Re: Fotodiox challenges medium format resolution

    This sure looks like the death knell for MFD.

  3. #3
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Victoria, BC, Canada
    Posts
    71
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Fotodiox challenges medium format resolution

    Yep - this will get rid of 'stitching errors' but still requires multiple shots to get the final image. I do this all the time (without this type of system) but the simple fact is that you still need multiple shots.

    I imagine this is aimed primarily at landscape and urban photographers, where the subject is not moving, which is pretty much the only subject you can shoot in this style. Unfortunately this eliminates water (a fairly common occurrence) unless it's possible to do long exposure.

    And if you want to do long exposure in general, multiple long exposures end up taking much longer than desired, and the light doesn't stay the same forever.

    That's why I personally use/want high-resolution single exposures, and if I can't afford the digital, then I simply use film.

  4. #4
    Senior Member thrice's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    1,265
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Fotodiox challenges medium format resolution

    Stitching works well for architecture and landscape using a nodal head.
    Doing this will net you no additional benefits.
    My Nodal Ninja has markings for the nodal points of all my lenses, probably quicker to set up than the Vizelex.

    Interesting idea none the less.

  5. #5
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    198
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Fotodiox challenges medium format resolution

    Quote Originally Posted by David Klepacki View Post
    I thought some folks might find this interesting:

    Vizelex RhinoCam for Sony NEX E-Mount Cameras

    Although the idea and technology is not new, I find their marketing approach quite interesting as they try to target the 645 format.
    sooner or later, someone would think of it. I suppose someone might take 8 of these and make a 2000 MP image one day.. but for sure, the prices on MF backs will slowly decline.

  6. #6
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Hong Kong
    Posts
    691
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Fotodiox challenges medium format resolution

    I think they should be turned over for misrepresenting their product. Apart from the fact that stitching is a PITA, shooting a NEX is very different to a 16 bit RAW file through the best engineered APO glass, because the hassle of this compares with a tech camera. Why didn't they stitch the P45 to the same resolution then compare? They've also chosen a subject at the correct frequency to introduce moire and then scaled it up in the P45 image.

  7. #7
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    655
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Fotodiox challenges medium format resolution

    Ha... thats all I have to say.

  8. #8
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    W. NY, close to Toronto, far from NYC
    Posts
    1,427
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    9

    Re: Fotodiox challenges medium format resolution

    MFD dead again! On the bright side, I have some excess Pentax 645 glass I haven't sold because of the low prices, this should drive the market
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  9. #9
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Marseille, FRANCE
    Posts
    972
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Fotodiox challenges medium format resolution

    i prefer the original... The QuadStitch by Kapture Group !

    Kapture Group QuadStitch sample shots



  10. #10
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    492
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Fotodiox challenges medium format resolution

    Quote Originally Posted by Pierrard View Post
    Yep - this will get rid of 'stitching errors' but still requires multiple shots to get the final image. I do this all the time (without this type of system) but the simple fact is that you still need multiple shots.

    I imagine this is aimed primarily at landscape and urban photographers, where the subject is not moving, which is pretty much the only subject you can shoot in this style. Unfortunately this eliminates water (a fairly common occurrence) unless it's possible to do long exposure.

    And if you want to do long exposure in general, multiple long exposures end up taking much longer than desired, and the light doesn't stay the same forever.

    That's why I personally use/want high-resolution single exposures, and if I can't afford the digital, then I simply use film.
    This Fotodiox kit will not be as useful if you need high resolution and very long exposures. But, it does provide a very inexpensive alternative for those people who do not need such long exposures.

    On another note, this stitching technique is not limited to landscape and architecture. On the contrary, it has now become extremely popular in the wedding photography business, since it can produce an extremely shallow DOF effect with a wider field of view. Of course, this same technique can be done with an actual 645 camera, but the point is that it can be done as well in the smaller, cheaper, lighter format. You can see some examples from this photographer's blog: Woo-hoo! “Brenizer Method” (bokehrama, etc.) instructional video, produced by B&H! » Ryan Brenizer — NYC Wedding Photographer. Problem solver, storyteller.

    BTW, I currently use a technical camera and high end digital backs. I have also stitched images that exceed its resolution using smaller sensors and the results are as good or even better. In fact, the effective dynamic range of the Nex-7 is actually greater than the Phase One IQ180 back (you can look at one comparison here: DxOMark - Compare Camera Sensors). For harsh weather environments or for long treks when size and weight become an issue, I sometimes leave my technical camera gear behind.

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

    Re: Fotodiox challenges medium format resolution

    You get the whole camera body for $500, i e to the price of an adapter plate for a normal MFD system. Add a NEX and lenses. You can probably have quite fun with it. For serious work a nodal ninja head with a DSLR is better though, and a high res tech cam the best. But there's a slight difference in cost...

  12. #12
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    492
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Fotodiox challenges medium format resolution

    Quote Originally Posted by archivue View Post
    i prefer the original... The QuadStitch by Kapture Group !
    Kapture Group QuadStitch sample shots

    Bulkier, heavier ... and 10x the price of the Fotodiox.

  13. #13
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Victoria, BC, Canada
    Posts
    71
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Fotodiox challenges medium format resolution

    On another note, this stitching technique is not limited to landscape and architecture. On the contrary, it has now become extremely popular in the wedding photography business, since it can produce an extremely shallow DOF effect with a wider field of view. Of course, this same technique can be done with an actual 645 camera, but the point is that it can be done as well in the smaller, cheaper, lighter format. You can see some examples from this photographer's blog: Woo-hoo! “Brenizer Method” (bokehrama, etc.) instructional video, produced by B&H! » Ryan Brenizer — NYC Wedding Photographer. Problem solver, storyteller.
    I've used this method as well, though not for weddings; I just wonder, given the time to set this up, if it would be easier just to freehand it?

    Also, the aperture on the MF lens usually maxes out at f/2.8, though I know there are a few faster; if the intention is an extremely shallow DoF, wouldn't a faster lens be more useful? A friend of mine did an amazing example with 66 shots from a 135/2, and I've seen many good examples with the 85/1.2.

    As an aside though, wouldn't a system like this be resolution-limiting? Whatever lens you use can resolve to a certain power, but beyond that there's nothing to gain. With a high-pixel density sensor like the 24MP APS-C NEX 7, that limit may be exceeded. This is exactly why new 'digital' lenses have been introduced for the high-resolution digital backs.

    I do agree that this system can be useful in certain circumstances, but there are often much better ways to accomplish your goal.

  14. #14
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    1,068
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    83

    Re: Fotodiox challenges medium format resolution

    Here we go again.....

    1. for the format size they are talking about here, a FF MFDB covers it in a single shot, with AF/Tech lens etc. etc.

    2. If I wanted to flat-stitch, the format size with a MFDB back and 120mm IC lens would be 3x this

    3. Not sure the MF SLR lenses will be up to the task in the corners with such a small pixel pitch, and if you want to run off and buy the latest Digital tech lenses, then why not go all the way and by a MDFB, you're already in a different price point

    4. If you did go with above, not sure infinity focus capability on anything semi-wide will work -- even the mirrorless bodies have the sensor inset by a large margin compared to how a close a DB sits again the rear element on a tech cam.

    5. Also assumes that IQ (not just resolution) is apples to apples between something like an IQ160/180 and a Sony NEX

    6. Try infinity focus with this thing, especially

    7. Then again, Hassey is using the NEX sensor, so perhaps this will be new the setup when the space program resumes, I'm sure some modifications could be easily made for zero gravity and the need to do everything in compressed time

    8. I would personally still use a GX680 and D800 for this kind of critical work

    9. Not sure why I am spending my time writing this, I should be busy looking for loose change in the sofas to fund my IQ260 Achro back.
    Likes 3 Member(s) liked this post

  15. #15
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    1,198
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Fotodiox challenges medium format resolution

    I did a 3x3 stitch earlier this week.

    IQ180, Max, Rodie 50HR.

    On one axis, I shift-stitched. On the other, I pan-stitched (because shifting the lens wouldn't have given me the field of view I was after).

    Frankly, if you were look at the resulting 280MP image, I would challenge anyone to be able to tell me which axis was shifted, and which was panned. It was an interesting test though, and one that I wanted to carry out.

    In the future, if shift-stitching can only give the FoV I'm after on one axis, then I won't bother shifting at all - I'll get the VR Drive out and pan-stitch the whole thing.

    It's utterly pointless to try to promote a piece of tech by saying "using stitching, we can match what another system can do with a single shot". Because of course, if you want to compare apples with apples, then you should stitch with both and compare those results.

    Regards,

    Gerald.

  16. #16
    Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    27
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Fotodiox challenges medium format resolution

    Quote Originally Posted by gerald.d View Post
    It's utterly pointless to try to promote a piece of tech by saying "using stitching, we can match what another system can do with a single shot". Because of course, if you want to compare apples with apples, then you should stitch with both and compare those results.
    Gerald.

    Unless, of course, the *whole point* of the claims of one of the systems is that it can be had for 1/20th the price of the other system.

  17. #17
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    1,198
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Fotodiox challenges medium format resolution

    Quote Originally Posted by rawhead View Post
    Unless, of course, the *whole point* of the claims of one of the systems is that it can be had for 1/20th the price of the other system.
    Well no, because for 1/20th of the price of the MF system, the Rhinocam cannot do what the MF system can do - which is of course to create an image on a medium format size sensor with a single exposure.

    Whilst it's a fun piece of kit, I would question whether the Rhino's approach would actually provide a better result than using native glass (i.e. - that designed for the sensor size and pixel pitch of the NEX) pan-stitching, and then rendering to a planar projection.

    Regards,

    Gerald.

  18. #18
    Subscriber Member Jorgen Udvang's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Pratamnak
    Posts
    9,343
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2157

    Re: Fotodiox challenges medium format resolution

    Quote Originally Posted by stephengilbert View Post
    This sure looks like the death knell for MFD.
    ... and the D800/E. There should be a separate thread about this, minimum 48 pages with suggestions about what Nikon, Phase One etc. will do after this revolutionary new technology has bankrupted them. Like a diamond studded Phase One Solar, based on a Nokia camera phone with Lomo technology integrated.
    Things I sell: https://www.shutterstock.com/g/epixx?language=en
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  19. #19
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    198
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Fotodiox challenges medium format resolution

    Quote Originally Posted by rawhead View Post
    Unless, of course, the *whole point* of the claims of one of the systems is that it can be had for 1/20th the price of the other system.
    well, in that case, for $20, you could make a wooden grid to tightly fit 24 lousy point and shoots each costing about $59 and simultaneously trigger them, then stitch to get whatever sized banner you wanted.

    you could extend this to having a 100 point and shoots firing (maybe even at the same time)

    why did they even invent the 35mm ? should just have had 1mm sensors !!

    defeats the purpose.

  20. #20
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    1,538
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Fotodiox challenges medium format resolution

    I guess you could do rough focusing on the ground glass, and then slide in the NEX camera at suitable position and do critical focusing using live view.
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  21. #21
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    492
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Fotodiox challenges medium format resolution

    Quote Originally Posted by gerald.d View Post
    Well no, because for 1/20th of the price of the MF system, the Rhinocam cannot do what the MF system can do - which is of course to create an image on a medium format size sensor with a single exposure.
    The issue is how "best" to capture an image with resolution of 140+ megapixels. Basically, there are three ways to achieve this:

    1. Use a single chip sensor and stitch multiple shots (e.g., Rhinocam)
    2. Use a multiple chip sensor and stitch with less shots (e.g., MFDB)
    3. Use a single chip sensor with a single exposure (e.g., Sietz: overview)

    If single exposure is the most important criteria in getting there, then the Seitz looks to be the best tool for the job. Or, if cost is the most important criteria in getting there, then the Rhinocam (or similar stitching kit) appears to offer the overall lowest cost.

    And, none of these solutions will be perfect and without problems.

  22. #22
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    1,538
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Fotodiox challenges medium format resolution

    We also have motorised panorama heads, or manual panorama heads. I'd say for typical stitching applications a manual panorama head like nodal ninja with a DSLR is the "best" alternative. Quick to work with, forgiving when the right software is used, very high quality and fairly low cost.

    To me stitching with an MFDB is not exactly the best use of money. One big reason for doing MF for landscape/architecture is to be able to capture all the quality you need in one shot, it's not only simpler but to me also a more pleasing way to work - if possible I prefer if my fine art prints is one single exposure and not something merged in the computer. But sometimes you need wider angle than the focal length you happen to have.

  23. #23
    Senior Member Stefan Steib's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Lindenberg im Allgäu
    Posts
    1,294
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    12

    Re: Fotodiox challenges medium format resolution

    The most interesting part of this device is that it seems such technique has now reached mainstream. It uses a camera that is made in the millions, uses widely available (leftover) lenses from former highend MF that can be had cheaply now and does so at a stunning low price of 499 $.

    A better and larger image for a small price for many , that alone is remarkable. And it has started some ideas in my head already......

    regards
    Stefan
    because photography is more than technology - and " as we have done this all the time "
    facebook:hcam.de - www.hcam.de - www.hartblei.de
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  24. #24
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    1,198
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Fotodiox challenges medium format resolution

    Quote Originally Posted by David Klepacki View Post
    The issue is how "best" to capture an image with resolution of 140+ megapixels. Basically, there are three ways to achieve this:

    1. Use a single chip sensor and stitch multiple shots (e.g., Rhinocam)
    2. Use a multiple chip sensor and stitch with less shots (e.g., MFDB)
    3. Use a single chip sensor with a single exposure (e.g., Sietz: overview)

    If single exposure is the most important criteria in getting there, then the Seitz looks to be the best tool for the job. Or, if cost is the most important criteria in getting there, then the Rhinocam (or similar stitching kit) appears to offer the overall lowest cost.

    And, none of these solutions will be perfect and without problems.
    The Seitz 6x17 is a scanning back. It doesn't really do a "single exposure" in the typical sense. Because it's a scanning back, it actually introduces a whole bunch of problems that you'd never get from shooting and stitching multiple exposures. Also, it limits you to its pre-determined aspect ratio. Not saying it's a bad aspect ratio of course, but it is a limitation.

    I doubt there are many people out there who have as much experience of stitching across multiple formats and approaches as I have. I've done 60 gigapixel images created from 4,500 individual photos with a Canon DSLR and a 300mm lens using a VR Drive 2, down to a two shot shifted stitch on a MFDB using an Alpa Max, and pretty much everything in between - including shooting, scanning, and stitching 5x7 large format film (nice idea in theory, PITA in practice).

    I remain to be convinced that the Rhinocam approach would be any better than shooting around the nodal point with a lens that is actually designed for the NEX sensor. If you've got a constrained budget and already have a NEX, you don't need to spend a dime on the Rhinocam and MF lenses, just use what you have already.

    That's not to say the Rhinocam is a bad idea - I think it's a great bit of kit. It would be a load of fun to shoot with, and I don't doubt for one moment that people will get some excellent results out of it. But it simply doesn't make sense to me if your main criteria is cost-driven. You don't need to use one of these in order to deliver the results you can get from it.

    Speaking from considerable experience, there is absolutely no question whatsoever in my mind that to "best" capture images in the 140MP+ range, there is only one approach. You shoot with an IQ180 using Rodenstock glass on an ALPA FPS under the control of a Seitz VR Drive 2. Pricey, yes. But if you truly want the best, then that's the way to do it.

    Regards,

    Gerald.
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  25. #25
    Senior Member Stefan Steib's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Lindenberg im Allgäu
    Posts
    1,294
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    12

    Re: Fotodiox challenges medium format resolution

    Hi Gerald

    that is all true for images that don´t have a foreground and no parallaxerror.
    The closer you go the more valuable the Rhino will be. And not to forget, productshots, Furniture, industry...... a lot more than pano´s involved here.
    Not to forget the wideangles used by Rhino will get a better image angle than on any other 4,5x6 solution as the image area is larger than any existing chip.

    regards
    Stefan
    because photography is more than technology - and " as we have done this all the time "
    facebook:hcam.de - www.hcam.de - www.hartblei.de
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  26. #26
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    39
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Fotodiox challenges medium format resolution

    I wonder which Hasselblad lens they used in their sample. Looks pretty crisp!

  27. #27
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    1,198
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Fotodiox challenges medium format resolution

    Quote Originally Posted by Stefan Steib View Post
    Hi Gerald

    that is all true for images that don´t have a foreground and no parallaxerror.
    The closer you go the more valuable the Rhino will be. And not to forget, productshots, Furniture, industry...... a lot more than pano´s involved here.
    Not to forget the wideangles used by Rhino will get a better image angle than on any other 4,5x6 solution as the image area is larger than any existing chip.

    regards
    Stefan
    Hiya -

    You don't get any parallax errors if you spin the camera around the nodal point of the lens.

    The wide angles used by the Rhino will not give you a better image angle than on "any other" 645 system. If you're shifting, then you're limited by the image circle of the lens - regardless of what sensor and shift mechanism you're utilising. If you're panning, then you have no limitation - you can shoot and render images that can mimic any wide-angle focal length for a real lens, and well beyond that into the realm of lenses that physically don't exist.

    Again - to stress - I'm not saying the Rhinocam is a bad system, and I don't doubt that many people will find a use for it, but it's important to look beyond the marketing hype and understand which (very limited) scenarios it would actually provide a real benefit.

    Regards,

    Gerald.

  28. #28
    Senior Member Stefan Steib's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Lindenberg im Allgäu
    Posts
    1,294
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    12

    Re: Fotodiox challenges medium format resolution

    Hi Gerald

    ??? The format of the Rhinocam with an 8 Stitch is 62,4x46,8mm. With a 4/40mm Distagon this will result in an image angle of 88,5 degr. diagonal.
    If you use the same lens on an IQ180 53,7 x40,4mm you will get 80,1 degrees.

    And parallaxerror: In theory you could do a pano on a tabletop Gerald. But have you ever done this ? Good luck ! I don´t doubt you have a lot of experience with architecture but you will go completely mad before this will come to work. There is : A) Focus changing B) Perspective changing and C) falling lines you will have to correct otherwise in Photoshop.
    After some hours of postprocessing when you "may" have gotten one image that is usable you will long be done with a flatstitch.........

    Regards
    Stefan

    PS.: of course you could do panning with several flatstiches also Gerald............... :-)
    because photography is more than technology - and " as we have done this all the time "
    facebook:hcam.de - www.hcam.de - www.hartblei.de

  29. #29
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Manchester/Jerusalem
    Posts
    2,652
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    290

    Re: Fotodiox challenges medium format resolution

    Not quite sure this is new in any way? Stitching, including nodal point stitching or the use of a t/s lens for flat frame stitching has been around for many years. So have adaptors for putting your DSLR's on a stitching adaptor on the back of your 4X5 from the cheap ebay adaptors to the Camera Fusion adaptor that I used to own. Why the hubbub now? I've been matching the resolution of MF for many years using a 12 megapixel 5D and a variety of lenses. That isn't really the point though. Yes the requirement for MFDB's are only a small percentage of the photographic industry and that has been the same for many years. However the percentage using 60-80 megapixel cameras, in the main, will not be in any way impressed with giving them up for stitching, if they had then they wouldn't have bought them in the first place methinks.
    I am not a painter, nor an artist. Therefore I can see straight, and that may be my undoing. - Alfred Stieglitz

    Website: http://www.timelessjewishart.com

  30. #30
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Manchester/Jerusalem
    Posts
    2,652
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    290

    Re: Fotodiox challenges medium format resolution

    Quote Originally Posted by Stefan Steib View Post


    And parallaxerror: In theory you could do a pano on a tabletop Gerald. But have you ever done this ? Good luck ! I don´t doubt you have a lot of experience with architecture but you will go completely mad before this will come to work. There is : A) Focus changing B) Perspective changing and C) falling lines you will have to correct otherwise in Photoshop.
    After some hours of postprocessing when you "may" have gotten one image that is usable you will long be done with a flatstitch.........
    I have done a lot of stitching architecture, both indoors and out Stefan, with modern software it is extremely easy. Sorry. You don't need to even correct for verticals when shooting, it's a simple click or two in the stitching software, faster than doing it in camera or in PS from my experience. What you are talking about above is about 5 years out of date.
    I am not a painter, nor an artist. Therefore I can see straight, and that may be my undoing. - Alfred Stieglitz

    Website: http://www.timelessjewishart.com

  31. #31
    Senior Member Stefan Steib's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Lindenberg im Allgäu
    Posts
    1,294
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    12

    Re: Fotodiox challenges medium format resolution

    Hi Beni

    try a tabletop maybe 50x60cm and packshots or a closeup (maybe a watch) with panning. That was what I was writing. And then tell us your findings.

    Have fun.

    regards
    Stefan
    because photography is more than technology - and " as we have done this all the time "
    facebook:hcam.de - www.hcam.de - www.hartblei.de

  32. #32
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    1,198
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Fotodiox challenges medium format resolution

    Hi Stefan -

    Quote Originally Posted by Stefan Steib View Post
    Hi Gerald

    ??? The format of the Rhinocam with an 8 Stitch is 62,4x46,8mm. With a 4/40mm Distagon this will result in an image angle of 88,5 degr. diagonal.
    If you use the same lens on an IQ180 53,7 x40,4mm you will get 80,1 degrees.
    As I said in my earlier post - "If you're shifting, then you're limited by the image circle of the lens - regardless of what sensor and shift mechanism you're utilising."

    You can of course also shift the IQ180 on the 4/40mm, so your point is not relevant.

    And parallaxerror: In theory you could do a pano on a tabletop Gerald. But have you ever done this ?
    Yes.
    PS.: of course you could do panning with several flatstiches also Gerald............... :-)
    And I've done this too - just last week in fact.

    All you're doing here is reinforcing the very point that I was making - there are only a few limited scenarios where the ability to shift a NEX sensor around the image circle from a MF lens will actually produce a better result than pan-stitching using lenses designed specifically for the sensor.

    IF you want to do panos of close-up objects and need to keep a flat focal plane, and IF you can get hold of a MF lens that is going to work well with the 4 micron pixel pitch of the NEX 7 sensor, and IF you need the extra resolution, and IF you don't have the budget for "proper" MF kit, then yes. This would be a solution worth investigating.


    Kind regards,

    Gerald.

  33. #33
    Senior Member yaya's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    London, UK
    Posts
    1,168
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    38

    Re: Fotodiox challenges medium format resolution

    Can the NEX do the stitching in-camera? Can it be used tethered or do you have to shoot those 8 frames, download them from the card and then stitch them? Can you do lens corrections (CA, vignette etc.) on the stitched image or do you do it on the separate smaller images? All in all IMO it's a nice gadget that expands the capabilities of small cameras. It is also great (for us) that they mention the Credo 80 as the MF reference (but do not show any images...)

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

  34. #34
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    1,198
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Fotodiox challenges medium format resolution

    Yair -

    The images would not be stitched in-camera (there is no way the NEX could know that it was being used for shift-stitching). You'd use either Photoshop or one of the pano stitching programs (Autopano, PTGui, etc) to do the stitching. These programs have very advanced lens correction algorithms.

    Regards,

    Gerald.

  35. #35
    Senior Member Stefan Steib's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Lindenberg im Allgäu
    Posts
    1,294
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    12

    Re: Fotodiox challenges medium format resolution

    Hi Gerald

    "All you're doing here is reinforcing the very point that I was making - there are only a few limited scenarios where the ability to shift a NEX sensor around the image circle from a MF lens will actually produce a better result than pan-stitching using lenses designed specifically for the sensor."

    there is about ONE central condition that applies for probably 99 % of the people who will buy this device from Fotodiox: they do not have around 50-60k $ to spend for such a setup.

    They will get a 140Mpix file (or more if they pan) for around 3k$.
    I´d call this pretty essential.

    Nobody says it will be better than the Large solution. I say it will be good enough for maybe 99 % of the people.

    Regards
    Stefan
    because photography is more than technology - and " as we have done this all the time "
    facebook:hcam.de - www.hcam.de - www.hartblei.de

  36. #36
    Senior Member Stefan Steib's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Lindenberg im Allgäu
    Posts
    1,294
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    12

    Re: Fotodiox challenges medium format resolution

    Hi Yair

    A Nex 5R(500€) or a Nex 6(600€) can do Wlan out of the box. so you just shoot into your laptop´s hotfolder and then hit go/or do a droplet when the 8 images are there.

    Regards
    Stefan
    because photography is more than technology - and " as we have done this all the time "
    facebook:hcam.de - www.hcam.de - www.hartblei.de

  37. #37
    Senior Member yaya's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    London, UK
    Posts
    1,168
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    38

    Re: Fotodiox challenges medium format resolution

    Quote Originally Posted by Stefan Steib View Post
    Hi Yair

    A Nex 5R(500€) or a Nex 6(600€) can do Wlan out of the box. so you just shoot into your laptop´s hotfolder and then hit go/or do a droplet when the 8 images are there.

    Regards
    Stefan
    Do they transfer the RAW files or JPEG images?
    Yair Shahar | Product Manager | Phase One | Mamiya Leaf
    e: [email protected] | m: +44(0)77 8992 8199 | yaya's blog

  38. #38
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    1,198
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Fotodiox challenges medium format resolution

    Stefan - this isn't about comparing with a MF set-up.

    This is about comparing with using a NEX and simply nodal stitching. Which, for the vast majority of usage cases, I believe would provide better results than using MF glass and shift-stitching.

    Regards,

    Gerald.

  39. #39
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Hong Kong
    Posts
    691
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Fotodiox challenges medium format resolution

    I think it's easier to just buy a Mamiya 7 if you don't have the budget.

  40. #40
    Senior Member Stefan Steib's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Lindenberg im Allgäu
    Posts
    1,294
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    12

    Re: Fotodiox challenges medium format resolution

    Quote Originally Posted by yaya View Post
    Do they transfer the RAW files or JPEG images?
    I don´t know. But will soon as I´m going to buy a 5R or a 6.

    Regards
    Stefan
    because photography is more than technology - and " as we have done this all the time "
    facebook:hcam.de - www.hcam.de - www.hartblei.de

  41. #41
    Senior Member Stefan Steib's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Lindenberg im Allgäu
    Posts
    1,294
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    12

    Re: Fotodiox challenges medium format resolution

    Quote Originally Posted by gerald.d View Post
    Stefan - this isn't about comparing with a MF set-up.

    This is about comparing with using a NEX and simply nodal stitching. Which, for the vast majority of usage cases, I believe would provide better results than using MF glass and shift-stitching.

    Regards,

    Gerald.
    Of course you can do this out of hand Gerald , but I think what you would need definitely for a proper pano stitching is a good pano head (500 € and up ?) or a Gigapan or a Seitz motor (€?).
    The Fotodiox will just sit on the head and do it all for you. A Mamiya 645 45N or a 55N will cost 100 € ?
    And not to forget : if I only want to do One shot I have a spectacular shift device.

    regards
    Stefan
    because photography is more than technology - and " as we have done this all the time "
    facebook:hcam.de - www.hcam.de - www.hartblei.de

  42. #42
    Senior Member yaya's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    London, UK
    Posts
    1,168
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    38

    Re: Fotodiox challenges medium format resolution

    To make this solution count as a real innovation it should employ Sony's swipe-pan technology (or whatever it is called, I think they were the first to have it) so that you can use the device as a jig, drag the camera up/ down/ sideways and let the camera generate a RAW 140MP file...

    ...But we're not there yet...
    Yair Shahar | Product Manager | Phase One | Mamiya Leaf
    e: [email protected] | m: +44(0)77 8992 8199 | yaya's blog

  43. #43
    Senior Member Stefan Steib's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Lindenberg im Allgäu
    Posts
    1,294
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    12

    Re: Fotodiox challenges medium format resolution

    Maybe in April Yair !
    It is rumoured that the new Nex 7 will come out and one feature I´m nearly 100% sure they will do is Wifi.
    The Panorama sweep right now has "only" about 54 Mbyte as a finished image in Large res.
    But if Autopano Giga supports auto queing from a Hotfolder (?) I don´t see a reason why it should be done in Camera if you can have your MBPro Handy.

    Attention: feature request for Capture One version 8 !

    Regards
    Stefan
    because photography is more than technology - and " as we have done this all the time "
    facebook:hcam.de - www.hcam.de - www.hartblei.de

  44. #44
    Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    27
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Fotodiox challenges medium format resolution

    OK, so my good friend Stefan nailed about every single point I wanted to make in follow-up, so I'll just shut up

    OK, maybe not.

    I find it interesting here and elsewhere that some people really are quick to jump in and declare a product useless. Similar outcries abound with another recent product, the MetaBones SpeedBooster.

    This Fotodiox is not "innovative" in that nothing like it has been done before (hmm, I think the same was said about SpeedBooster... de ja vu?), because, as has been pointed out, it has. What's exciting/innovative is that the extremely short flange distance of the NEX system results in a huge flange delta between the lens that is used (e.g., M645's 63mm - 18mm = 45mm) allows for a relatively simple construction contributing to the relatively low price of the product (compare pricing with e.g., Zörk Shift adapter with tripod socket and L-brack, which does something similar with MF lenses and DSLRs: http://www.zoerk.com/Zoerk%20info/pr...de_current.pdf).

    It was also this huge flange delta that also contributed to the "innovation" of the SpeedBooster. So I'd actually argue that the "innovation" lies mostly in the short flange focal distance of the Sony NEX system But, besides the point for now.


    While Stefan hit most of the points I wanted to make, there's one that he, of all people, forgot, which is the possibility of using MF tilt/shift lenses (Schneider, Hartblei, etc.), specifically with tilt, for example in a desktop product photography.

    There is absolutely no way you are going to achieve the same effect of scheimplug with multiple shots around a nodal point and stitching... unless you start doing focus stacking

    And, finally, of course this product isn't for everybody. It's providing a cheaper (and, admittedly, a more limited) alternative to DMF, which is an extremely niche market. Why would anyone expect it to be? 'Nuff said.
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  45. #45
    Senior Member Stefan Steib's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Lindenberg im Allgäu
    Posts
    1,294
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    12

    Re: Fotodiox challenges medium format resolution

    I´m glad you actually DID say something Satoru........

    Greetings from Lindenberg
    Stefan
    because photography is more than technology - and " as we have done this all the time "
    facebook:hcam.de - www.hcam.de - www.hartblei.de

  46. #46
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    544
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Fotodiox challenges medium format resolution

    I had Fotodiox's idea long time ago. I'm sure many others had it too. The price point is determinant for the success (I'm almost sure) this device will attain. Being able to see and exactly frame the actual stitched final picture is the whole point. I've done numerous stitches but usually found the result to lack a point of interest or if it has it, chances are its location inside the frame is far from ideal or far from the golden spot. Once I intented to attach an external wider VF to my dslr but couldn't for technical reasons. I've been successful visualizing my final stitched picture visualizing first with a 17mm lens and then using the 24TS for a stitched final picture out of 3 shifted frames. It does works but of course is limited to the circle of the TS.
    I can't hardly wait for Fotodiox to come with one for the EOS family of FF dslr's. The price is right.
    Eduardo

  47. #47
    New Member Lictor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    Zagreb, Croatia
    Posts
    14
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Fotodiox challenges medium format resolution

    Quote Originally Posted by stephengilbert View Post
    This sure looks like the death knell for MFD.
    I can already imagine a studio photographer on a fashion shoot saying: "Ok, everybody, now just hold still for a couple of minutes."
    The most pathetic person in the world is someone who has sight, but has no vision. - Helen Keller

  48. #48
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Hong Kong
    Posts
    691
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Fotodiox challenges medium format resolution

    Quote Originally Posted by rawhead View Post
    ...And, finally, of course this product isn't for everybody. It's providing a cheaper (and, admittedly, a more limited) alternative to DMF, which is an extremely niche market. Why would anyone expect it to be? 'Nuff said.
    But that's not how they market it, which is the point I made that they mis-represent the product capabilities. The poor man pays twice.

  49. #49
    Member dierk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Hamburg, Germany
    Posts
    105
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Fotodiox challenges medium format resolution

    after all these theories I posted some real images:
    http://www.getdpi.com/forum/medium-f...ss-lenses.html

    dierk
    regards
    dierk
    my flickr

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
  •