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!

A7r + Canon TS vs Alp STC

Paratom

Well-known member
I know, i know, strange question coming here:
I am after a slower pace type of landscape photography.
I wondered about user experience between a A7r with a 24mm TS lens (or additionally 17mm later) on a tripod vs an Alpa STC (or other tech cam) combined with an older back (Hasselblad 39 MP) and equivalent lens.
In theory it seems the A7r could technically deliver the same functions, but I am afraid such a combo might feel "strange" to use.
On the other side life view in each and every part of the image with magnification sounds like one can take full advantage of T/S options.
I also understand digital backs should deliver superioir IQ (DR and color and detail) but any of the newer generation backs is not an option for me due to price and the fact that this would be only an addition to my Leica S gear for slow pace landscape photography with movements.
 

dougpeterson

Workshop Member
In my (highly biased and self serving opinion) working with a digital back on a tech camera is not an experience which can otherwise be replicated.

Don't get me wrong; there are some real PITA parts of it. But it's as enjoyable, relaxing, and immersive of a photographic process as I've experienced outside of a chemical darkroom.

Of course this is highly subjective and personal. I like big knobs and mechanical timers. I like the tactile nature of the process.

So the question is: have you shot with a tech camera before? If not, I'd do that first, and then ask your technical questions after. There are workshops, forum members spread around the world that might meet with you over a beer, and of course (again highly self serving) dealers that can do remote demos, rentals toward purchase etc.
 

Paratom

Well-known member
In my (highly biased and self serving opinion) working with a digital back on a tech camera is not an experience which can otherwise be replicated.

Don't get me wrong; there are some real PITA parts of it. But it's as enjoyable, relaxing, and immersive of a photographic process as I've experienced outside of a chemical darkroom.
Thanks Doug,
I have been afraid to get this kind of answers ;)
 
I also understand digital backs should deliver superioir IQ (DR and color and detail)
As of today, the only medium format digital backs which can deliver dynamic range better than or equal to the A7R are the IQ250, IQ150, Credo 50, CFV-50C, H5D-50C, H5D-200CMS, 645Z, which are all using a 44x33mm Sony CMOS sensor.

All CCD digital backs will fail if you compare DR against the IMX094 Sony CMOS sensor in the A7R (or D800E/D810).

I would advise against purchasing any CCD digital back unless you want compatibility with legendary technical camera lenses such like the Schneider 28XL. I would also advise against purchasing an A7R at this stage as a newer model around 50 MP (probably named as A9 or A7R-II) will be announced in the next weeks.
 

daf

Member
Hi Paratom,
I used to work with a Cambo wrs and wrc400 +22 and 33mpxLeaf+digitar lenses...
I moved to sony a7r+tse +mf lenses, because of high iso usability and because around 30/40mpx is enough for me...dr and color are good on the sony sensor...and you know : liveview is cool;)
Must be honest i sometimes really regret my cambo setup, but this is more a nostalgy of having a cool manual workflow...
Regarding lenses performance don't expect them to come close to digitar lenses, even the best ts or mf lenses don't come close, in both sharpness or distorsion...i'll not speak of rodenstock as i haven't used any...
But if you only need A2 or A1 print from the A7r, i think canon tse, contax TS, and Mf lenses+ts adapter can do the job really properly..(i can send you some raw if you need to see a particular combination)
I just bought the HCam master from Stefan Steib, mus say this is the perfect adapter for a "techcam like" adpater, combining this with ts lenses is perfect! look here:
http://www.getdpi.com/forum/sony/51166-final-version-hcam-master-ts-14-24mm-2.html

I would say:
- if you're after real good photographic experience, and best quality then go for Alpa stc + rodenstock :)
-last option for fast shooting, convenience, high iso, then A7R+yts lenses is a good option or alpa fps and iq250 of course;)
 

Paul2660

Well-known member
It's a question I have asked myself quite often of late.

The A7R will do a very good job with a metabones and Canon TS set of lenses, the 17mm and 24. There are some reports of loss of contrast on shifts with the metabones, so I would do a search on that. With this solution I don't think you would need to shoot a LCC for color cast, but you still might want to try one for light fall off. C1 will correct it, as I have worked with the A7r on a Arca DSLR2 and tech lenses, (a bit different setup).

With the A7II coming, I would agree to wait as once the new body comes, you might see a better price on the A7r.

The Sony A7r/TS lenses can have some parallax as you are only shifting the lens, but you can also move the camera body, the opposite direction the same amount and that will help quite a lot.

No doubt the 50MP CMOS backs have better DR, I see it as shadow recovery others see if differently, but the CCD backs at base iso can still turn in a very nice image. But past base it becomes a CMOS win. Unless you use sensor plus, and can live with the 3/4 loss in overall resolution.

Paul
 

torger

Active member
I know, i know, strange question coming here:
I am after a slower pace type of landscape photography.
If you're like me that's into "large format" style of photography but too lazy too deal with film, a digital field view camera like the Linhof Techno or Arca-Swiss Universalis, Schneider lenses and a 33/39/50MP CCD back will serve you nice. Be prepared though that this *is* slow photography, but still faster and easier than shooting large format film.

I think the greatest weakness of the A7r combo is the limited choice of T/S lenses. Price is unbeatable though.

Concerning image quality the older CCDs have their limitations (you need to expose well and shoot at base ISO, and use grads in backlit situations), but if you keep within what they can do, you get great results.
 
If you're like me that's into "large format" style of photography but too lazy too deal with film, a digital field view camera like the Linhof Techno or Arca-Swiss Universalis, Schneider lenses and a 33/39/50MP CCD back will serve you nice. Be prepared though that this *is* slow photography, but still faster and easier than shooting large format film.

I think the greatest weakness of the A7r combo is the limited choice of T/S lenses. Price is unbeatable though.

Concerning image quality the older CCDs have their limitations (you need to expose well and shoot at base ISO, and use grads in backlit situations), but if you keep within what they can do, you get great results.
Hi Anders, the truth is that your Kodak CCD sensor is indeed better than the Dalsa CCD sensors in terms of shadow recoverability! I have done some tests and obtained the data, but publishing them might cause some negative impact. PM me if you are interested.
 

daf

Member
As said before, TSE do really good, but they don't come close to what people are used to see in techcam world...but again that just pixel peeping..

I've been using the metabones3 with some flare issue even with the lee wide lenshood, then moved to the metabones4 which is well improved in this regards...no more flare problem.
I'm still using the lcc feature with the sony and ts lenses, because of the lightfalloff which is sometimes difficult to correct due to the shift...

Regarding the paralax free shifting, you can go for the hcam master adpater instead of the metabones, as it will allow you to get +/-15mm free paralaxe shift...plus some more cool features..

For sure the sony sensor have a good shadow recovery;) much more than my olds leaf...
And for sure if i could afford it today i would have by an alpa set, and rod lenses to use with a Sony 50mfdb...
 

mbn

New member
As said before, TSE do really good, but they don't come close to what people are used to see in techcam world...but again that just pixel peeping..
gerald posted some pretty good examples, showing how the TSE's perform on his IQ180. esp. the new TSE 24 is an awesome performer and shouldnt have any problems to shine on the upcoming A9.

money aside, i would buy me an IQ250 and IQ260 achromatic with rodis.
but if i had to choose between an mid range older ccd back, and an A9 with TSE's, i would go -wait- with the A9.
 

Paratom

Well-known member
gerald posted some pretty good examples, showing how the TSE's perform on his IQ180. esp. the new TSE 24 is an awesome performer and shouldnt have any problems to shine on the upcoming A9.

money aside, i would buy me an IQ250 and IQ260 achromatic with rodis.
but if i had to choose between an mid range older ccd back, and an A9 with TSE's, i would go -wait- with the A9.
Lets hope the A9 will have a clearer and more intuitive user interface than the A7 series (I get along with the A7 user interface but its far from impressing me).
 

torger

Active member
I've seen that the TS-E pushes the A7r sensor to its limit, you do get some desaturation issues with large shifts like you can see with the IQ250 with tech lenses. A 50 megapixel sensor will be even more sensitive if Sony has not changed its pixel design. It will probably work well enough for most people, but maybe not without LCC.

If Canon does announce their 53 megapixel camera next month (haven't I heard that rumor before?) it shall be interesting to see how they have made their pixel design. Or maybe it sits a Sony sensor in it :), that would solve the DR problem though... Sony doesn't seem to have cared anything at all about crosstalk but think that everything should be solved by more retrofocus optics.

In any case, if you're going for the 135 system it may be wise to wait a few months to see what happens. On the other hand you can always sell if you want to upgrade later, compared to what MF gear cost you lose like a lens cap in cost...

If you're still really into slow shooting and large format style, you can take a look at my Linhof Techno review which goes into details how it is to shoot with such a camera: http://www.ludd.ltu.se/~torger/photography/linhof-techno-review.html

I'm an engineer and extremely interested in technology progress in the camera space, write image processing software and so on, but still I feel comfortable with when I do photography to use a bit more old-school gear... it's somehow relaxing and I don't feel the same urge to get the latest when a new fantastic product is released.
 

Paratom

Well-known member
Thank you for the interesting link and your experience. The Techno looks really like closest to a field camera. I am not sure yet if I would prefer an Alpa style camera for the smaller size and distance scale or a Techno-style camera, specially I would not want more than 2 max. 3 lenses.
Maybe I should try to look at a Techno and to handle it to get a feeling about the size and ease of use.


I've seen that the TS-E pushes the A7r sensor to its limit, you do get some desaturation issues with large shifts like you can see with the IQ250 with tech lenses. A 50 megapixel sensor will be even more sensitive if Sony has not changed its pixel design. It will probably work well enough for most people, but maybe not without LCC.

If Canon does announce their 53 megapixel camera next month (haven't I heard that rumor before?) it shall be interesting to see how they have made their pixel design. Or maybe it sits a Sony sensor in it :), that would solve the DR problem though... Sony doesn't seem to have cared anything at all about crosstalk but think that everything should be solved by more retrofocus optics.

In any case, if you're going for the 135 system it may be wise to wait a few months to see what happens. On the other hand you can always sell if you want to upgrade later, compared to what MF gear cost you lose like a lens cap in cost...

If you're still really into slow shooting and large format style, you can take a look at my Linhof Techno review which goes into details how it is to shoot with such a camera: Review: Linhof Techno

I'm an engineer and extremely interested in technology progress in the camera space, write image processing software and so on, but still I feel comfortable with when I do photography to use a bit more old-school gear... it's somehow relaxing and I don't feel the same urge to get the latest when a new fantastic product is released.
 

Steve Hendrix

Well-known member
As of today, the only medium format digital backs which can deliver dynamic range better than or equal to the A7R are the IQ250, IQ150, Credo 50, CFV-50C, H5D-50C, H5D-200CMS, 645Z, which are all using a 44x33mm Sony CMOS sensor.

All CCD digital backs will fail if you compare DR against the IMX094 Sony CMOS sensor in the A7R (or D800E/D810).

I would advise against purchasing any CCD digital back unless you want compatibility with legendary technical camera lenses such like the Schneider 28XL. I would also advise against purchasing an A7R at this stage as a newer model around 50 MP (probably named as A9 or A7R-II) will be announced in the next weeks.

When pushed, yes the advantage is in favor of the CMOS sensors over CCD, and even so not pushed, but then the advantage is slight. If DR is at the highest priority above all other considerations - and especially if pushing is a necessary or desired frequent occurrence - then weigh in favor of CMOS. But if you're not a pusher, a CCD solution can be perfectly viable.

While I love the files out of the new CMOS products (MFDB as well as Sony DSLR/Mirrorless), I still find a place for the CCD products and have some preferences in the CCD camp as well.


Steve Hendrix
Capture Integration
 

stephengilbert

Active member
We can still look at pictures taken with CCD backs, though, can't we?

I mean, there's no need to delete them all and start all over again.
 

ErikKaffehr

Well-known member
Hi,

I see some advantage of CMOS over older CCD technology regarding DR, but I guess that is more about advances in CMOS than CMOS vs. CCD as technology.

CMOS has a couple of practical advantages over CCD, like high ISO capability due to low readout noise and live view capability.

The CMOS sensor we have right now has some limitations with large beam angles, present day CCDs are more forgiving.

I would guess that you can live with both technologies. It is a balance between advantages and disadvantages.

Just to mention, the A7r has some issues. There is the shutter shock issue, something that will probably resolved in the next generation.

Best regards
Erik

When pushed, yes the advantage is in favor of the CMOS sensors over CCD, and even so not pushed, but then the advantage is slight. If DR is at the highest priority above all other considerations - and especially if pushing is a necessary or desired frequent occurrence - then weigh in favor of CMOS. But if you're not a pusher, a CCD solution can be perfectly viable.

While I love the files out of the new CMOS products (MFDB as well as Sony DSLR/Mirrorless), I still find a place for the CCD products and have some preferences in the CCD camp as well.


Steve Hendrix
Capture Integration
 

Steve Hendrix

Well-known member
Hi,

I see some advantage of CMOS over older CCD technology regarding DR, but I guess that is more about advances in CMOS than CMOS vs. CCD as technology.

CMOS has a couple of practical advantages over CCD, like high ISO capability due to low readout noise and live view capability.

The CMOS sensor we have right now has some limitations with large beam angles, present day CCDs are more forgiving.

I would guess that you can live with both technologies. It is a balance between advantages and disadvantages.

Just to mention, the A7r has some issues. There is the shutter shock issue, something that will probably resolved in the next generation.

Best regards
Erik

Yeah, I'm just saying, as someone who works with an amazingly wide range of photographers with a huge variety of subjective (and objective?) preferences, that I find absolute statements or opinions don't have much use for me (and I feel, realistically, not for others).

Yesterday I sold a Leaf Aptus-II 8 in Contax mount to a client. But maybe a Sony A7R would have been better for him, in the opinion of some? Which doesn't matter, because all that matters is what the product can do and whether, in the opinion of the prospective owner, that is the best solution for them and their objectives.


Steve Hendrix
Capture Integration
 

GrahamWelland

Subscriber & Workshop Member
I use both systems these days - Alpa STC with IQ260 & rodies with t/s adapters, and Sony A7r/s/II bodies with native glass and Canon TS-E / metabones IV.

Are they different in real world use? Yes, significantly. As mentioned the slower more considered shooting approach forced by using the tech camera without some of the newer tools such as live view with focus peaking etc is a factor. DR? For landscape shooting it is manageable by you.

With the Sony & TS-E lenses, the ability to dial in tilt by zooming in on regions via decent live view and also visualizing focus peak is really engaging and a huge efficiency gain. I don't particularly care for the lens based movements for rise/shift vs body with the STC but you get used to it.

One thing that I really have challenges with personally is the image aspect ratio. I just don't think 2:3 and I am much more comfortable with MFDB 4:3 or 5:4 ratios; I realize that this is my own personal hangup (yes, yes, I know that I can compose & crop later) but for me it gets in the way when I compose portrait aspect images using the Sony. Coming from the Leica you probably wouldn't have an issue like I do.

Image quality? From the sensor there is a different look to the files and I'd concede that there is more shadow elasticity from the Sony but expose the IQ2 properly and it can be somewhat moot. I'll leave it to the more techy folks here to delve into the sensor/image quality minutiae but suffice to say that you can print huge files with great colour from either.

Economics? No brainer. You can buy a complete Sony/Canon TS-E outfit for the price of a Rodie 32 or 90HR. However, you definitely can clearly see the difference at the pixel peeping level between the TS lenses and true tech lenses. Will that translate to prints? well, that depends on you and I suspect your tolerance for knowing that you could be getting better quality at capture time - something that I know for some people will gnaw at your mind.

Ultimately as Doug & Steve mentioned, you need to get hands on to decide what works for you. Is it purely the end result you are after or is the image capture process important too (I realize that probably sounds quaint). I personally enjoy using my Alpa immensely although I wouldn't mind having some of the automation and live view quality tools that the Sony brings. The new CMOS backs are there now but at a cost.

I just got back yesterday from a two week shooting trip where I took my Sony kit vs the Alpa/IQ outfit. I enjoyed carrying a smaller camera although overall the Sony outfit was bigger due to more bodies/lenses. However, the overall feeling now I'm home is that I would have enjoyed the experience more with the Alpa, taken less images but probably would have less variety in the shots in the end vs the Sony.

My $0.02 ... (you get what you pay for :D )

Yeah, I'm just saying, as someone who works with an amazingly wide range of photographers with a huge variety of subjective (and objective?) preferences, that I find absolute statements or opinions don't have much use for me (and I feel, realistically, not for others).

Yesterday I sold a Leaf Aptus-II 8 in Contax mount to a client. But maybe a Sony A7R would have been better for him, in the opinion of some? Which doesn't matter, because all that matters is what the product can do and whether, in the opinion of the prospective owner, that is the best solution for them and their objectives.


Steve Hendrix
Capture Integration
What Steve said - I couldn't agree more!!
 

jagsiva

Active member
Are people really cross-shopping an A7R and a tech cam? I could see an IQ250 CMOS vs. IQ260 CCD.

There differences are there and law of diminishing returns holds extremely true. But I just don't think someone goes out thinking of dropping 8K and walks out with 60-80K worth of kit.

I use both, but under totally different contexts.
 

jlm

Workshop Member
one of the reasons i went to the V-blads, rollei, systems was the joy of viewing in the GG, made so much better with 4x5, compared to peeping into that little hole in my Nikon, at the time.

now the MFD tech cameras are basically blind, and the sony AR7 has a viewing screen similar to the old 6x6 GG.

so i went with the v-system again (still has the GG; after all it is an SLR) and am moving to the Cambo Actus with the CFV50c CMOS, which has real live view.

still use the A7R with canon T/S wides, but that makes a kit as big as the blad. at least you don't have to wind it.
 
Top