| Author | Thread |
|
|
08/26/2005 07:28:10 PM · #1 |
|
|
|
08/26/2005 07:35:14 PM · #2 |
|
|
|
08/26/2005 07:39:54 PM · #3 |
| PhaseOne has had 22MP digital backs for Hasselblads for more than a year now... |
|
|
|
08/26/2005 07:48:19 PM · #4 |
why do those cameras look so retarded?
they look like a lens strapped onto a horse bit
|
|
|
|
08/26/2005 07:50:31 PM · #5 |
Also, the Mamiya ZD is 22Mpx.
|
|
|
|
08/26/2005 07:51:44 PM · #6 |
|
|
|
08/26/2005 09:07:01 PM · #7 |
I've seen that before. It's just a film camera.
|
|
|
|
08/26/2005 09:09:01 PM · #8 |
Originally posted by Fetor:
why do those cameras look so retarded?
they look like a lens strapped onto a horse bit |
There big. Retarded? I think they look like honey.
|
|
|
|
08/26/2005 09:09:42 PM · #9 |
So what is the street price? I want one.
|
|
|
|
08/26/2005 09:11:39 PM · #10 |
I would guess $18,000 for the whole thing.
|
|
|
|
08/26/2005 09:11:58 PM · #11 |
Originally posted by nsbca7:
I've seen that before. It's just a film camera. |
QFT, a rediculously large format camera. wasn't it a 9 x 18cm film camera?
|
|
|
|
08/26/2005 09:14:17 PM · #12 |
Originally posted by kyebosh:
Originally posted by nsbca7:
I've seen that before. It's just a film camera. |
QFT, a rediculously large format camera. wasn't it a 9 x 18cm film camera? |
I believe the film size is 9 x 18 inches (!!)
|
|
|
|
08/26/2005 09:15:37 PM · #13 |
oh geez, yeah rediculous!
|
|
|
|
08/26/2005 11:19:12 PM · #14 |
Man, having 88,000 x 44,000 images to work with would be quite nice!
|
|
|
|
08/27/2005 12:25:58 AM · #15 |
Originally posted by justin_hewlett:
Man, having 88,000 x 44,000 images to work with would be quite nice! |
It's just a film view camera with an ungodly scanning system . Just think, in ten tears they may really have gigapixel digital backs for view camera at a half way reasonable price.
|
|
|
|
08/27/2005 01:06:20 AM · #16 |
Originally posted by nsbca7:
So what is the street price? I want one. |
The Phase One 39MP Sensor back was reported this month in Australia as shipping before the end of this year for approximately AU$40,000 (just over US$30,000).
I'll be waiting for the after Christmas specials... in 2020! |
|
|
|
08/27/2005 01:27:49 AM · #17 |
Originally posted by bhowie:
The Phase One 39MP Sensor back was reported this month in Australia as shipping before the end of this year for approximately AU$40,000 (just over US$30,000).
I'll be waiting for the after Christmas specials... in 2020! |
I don't want the back. They have been around for a while and are usually awkward and cumbersome. Integrated units like the Hasselblad H2D or the Mamiya ZD you can pick up and walk out the door with and go take some (awesome) pictures.
I'm unipressed with the small 1.8 inch LCD display on the back of the Mamiya. The display on the Hasselblad (above image) looks larger then that, but I have not yet seen the specs.
Message edited by author 2005-08-27 05:28:16.
|
|
|
|
08/27/2005 01:40:49 AM · #18 |
| Can someone explain to me why you would need a 22 megapixel camera? |
|
|
|
08/27/2005 02:03:19 AM · #19 |
Originally posted by Behind You:
Can someone explain to me why you would need a 22 megapixel camera? |
Need? Who said anything about need? I need food, water and air to breath. Everything else I have, I have because I want it.
|
|
|
|
08/27/2005 03:12:38 AM · #20 |
I always understood that digital backs were just a cleaner, faster form of proofing images for switching back and forth from true 4x5 film.
My friend who used to assist pro's who were into shooting medium and large format told me that they are little more than a replacement for polaroid backs because you don't have to carry so many damned polaroid slides with you.
Of course it would be acceptable for fashion photography as well where resolution is only ever as good as the printed pages which aren't even as high quality as 8x10 glossies. |
|
|
|
08/27/2005 03:22:37 AM · #21 |
Originally posted by eschelar:
I always understood that digital backs were just a cleaner, faster form of proofing images for switching back and forth from true 4x5 film.
My friend who used to assist pro's who were into shooting medium and large format told me that they are little more than a replacement for polaroid backs because you don't have to carry so many damned polaroid slides with you.
Of course it would be acceptable for fashion photography as well where resolution is only ever as good as the printed pages which aren't even as high quality as 8x10 glossies. |
The 22Mp backs for medium format cameras and the images they produce are far superior to anything you can do with film in that format. I̢۪m sure the 39MpC45 digital back that was mentioned earlier in the thread will be the envy of any view camera photographer. People don̢۪t pay $40,000 for a Polaroid back replacement.
|
|
|
|
08/27/2005 05:55:21 AM · #22 |
Originally posted by nsbca7:
Originally posted by Behind You:
Can someone explain to me why you would need a 22 megapixel camera? |
Need? Who said anything about need? I need food, water and air to breath. Everything else I have, I have because I want it. |
Now there's a lot of truth in that!
With regard to photographic "needs", landscape photographers are a prime example of those who "need" that kind of resolution. The large prints typically made from these images would just not impress if they lacked detail upon close inspection. Fashion photography is another area that benefits from very high resolution, and product photography is yet another area where it can be very useful.
Remember too that the medium format digital cameras & backs use very large sensors, almost half again the area of full-frame 35mm. This means the pixel pitch is quite large, which in turn means the noise levels are very low. Dynamic range in these systems is very high. The end result is performance that clearly exceeds that for the film-based versions of these formats, just as cameras like the 1DsMkII and even the 5D exceed the capability of 35mm film, producing results closer to medium format film in resolution and with greater dynamic range.
BTW, I agree with nsbca7 that no one buys a $25k to $40k back to replace polaroids, at least not if they have any business sense.
|
|
|
|
08/27/2005 07:57:53 AM · #23 |
Cool. I was glancing back at that press release and I also noticed that they have gone the Foveon/Sigma route and include 3 photoreceptors per pixel. This will make their results rather smashing.
I was still of the understanding that most hardcore medium format shooters still felt that film beat the stuffing out of digital.
I was of the opinion that this was really only a valid point of view with interpolated sensors.
I hope canon comes out with non-interpolated sensors in their 20D range soon :) |
|
|
|
08/27/2005 08:11:47 AM · #24 |
Originally posted by eschelar:
Cool. I was glancing back at that press release and I also noticed that they have gone the Foveon/Sigma route and include 3 photoreceptors per pixel. This will make their results rather smashing.
I was still of the understanding that most hardcore medium format shooters still felt that film beat the stuffing out of digital.
I was of the opinion that this was really only a valid point of view with interpolated sensors.
I hope canon comes out with non-interpolated sensors in their 20D range soon :) |
What are you talking about? Most hardcore medium format film shooters will probably go to thier graves with that notion, not because it is a fact, but because many of them are hard-headed and don't want to think thier very high dollar investment is becoming obsolete. If film does hang on (and I think it will) it will be because of people who don't want to change and people who want to use film for artistic purposes, not because it is a superior medium. It isn't.
Also, I'm pretty sure that the 8Mp comeing from the 20D is a straight 8Mp, not interpolated. That goes for the 350D too.
|
|
|
|
08/27/2005 09:09:33 AM · #25 |
You can (with some practice and careful attention to detail re: manual controls useage) make very large MP photos now with your existing equipment. Pick your subject and zero in to small portions of it, recording the entire subject in multiple shots to be later stitched together. It takes some practice, but the result is pretty impressive. Controlled environments such as still life situations are the simplest with which to start learning. Landscapes can be tricky.
|
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 04/09/2025 05:58:15 PM EDT.
