Cameras & Photography Because there aren't already enough ways to share photos...

When medium format digital just won't cut it: Building the best digicam

Thread Tools
 
Old Mar 9, 2006 | 06:03 AM
  #1  
Dan Martin's Avatar
Thread Starter
Photography Nerd
 
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 21,489
Likes: 11
From: Toronto
When medium format digital just won't cut it: Building the best digicam

This is truly an amazing piece of equipment: http://www.luminous-landscape.com/re...tal-view.shtml



I'm looking forward to seeing his gallery one day. I can only imagine how good his prints are going to look with this new toy.
Reply
Old Mar 9, 2006 | 08:11 AM
  #2  
Bdog's Avatar
Not Registered
20 Year Member
Liked
Loved
Community Favorite
 
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 5,831
Likes: 87
From: Virginia
Not as expensive as I thought, but I see there is focusing issues with it. Cool read!

I hope he didn't take this pic that in his article with that camera... out of focus.


Originally Posted by michael
The Linhof is less expensive than a Canon 1Ds MKII (a pro staple) and less than a Hassy H1 with Fuji lenses, again a pro staple. The Rodesnstock lenses cost about the same as Canon L series zooms.
Originally Posted by schaubild
But when I look at the work it took to calibrate a digital back to a viewfinder camera, I had to adjust with a precision of 1/100mm, otherwise you could see the focus issues in the print, how is it possible to focus such a view camera precisely enough to take advantage of the impressive number of pixels? And will you be able to get to this setup repeatedly in the field, even after adjusting the camera?
Originally Posted by Jack Flesher
One comment: In one paragraph, you admit that achieving perfect focus is difficult at best -- and anybody who has shot with high-res digital backs knows what you mean.
Reply
Old Mar 9, 2006 | 09:38 AM
  #3  
Billiam's Avatar
Big Block go VROOOM!
 
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 8,578
Likes: 1
From: Chicago Burbs
Originally Posted by Bdog
I hope he didn't take this pic that in his article with that camera... out of focus.
Did you forget the red text? Looks fine to me.
Reply
Old Mar 9, 2006 | 09:54 AM
  #4  
Bdog's Avatar
Not Registered
20 Year Member
Liked
Loved
Community Favorite
 
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 5,831
Likes: 87
From: Virginia
Originally Posted by Billiam
Did you forget the red text? Looks fine to me.
Machine Art, Toronto – March, 2006 ...this text? It's an alright pic, I want to see something incredible. I don't see anything special in the photo except slightly out of focus. I expect Michaels pics to blow this guys away.

http://www.pbase.com/manny_librodo/2005
Reply
Old Mar 9, 2006 | 01:19 PM
  #5  
srika's Avatar
Moderator Alumnus
20 Year Member
Community Influencer
Loved
Top Answer: 1
 
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 64,187
Likes: 14,330
the pic does look a little soft to me.. I mean, its not razor-sharp, as you would expect.

look around the pipes at the bottom..
Reply
Old Mar 9, 2006 | 04:05 PM
  #6  
proaudio22's Avatar
-S namyaC-
 
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 4,099
Likes: 0
From: TN
This is like what I was talking about in another thread. All the pixels in the worlds...but if you can't focus, you still have a crappy print.

Interesting camera...if I had one I def wouldn't let Michael Reichmann touch it tho!
Reply
Old Mar 9, 2006 | 04:11 PM
  #7  
Dan Martin's Avatar
Thread Starter
Photography Nerd
 
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 21,489
Likes: 11
From: Toronto
I don't know what you guys are looking at, but that shot looks tack-sharp to me.

It's really a pointless comment though conisidering the shot has been reduced in size by a factor of 84.
Reply
Old Mar 9, 2006 | 04:12 PM
  #8  
Dan Martin's Avatar
Thread Starter
Photography Nerd
 
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 21,489
Likes: 11
From: Toronto
Originally Posted by Bdog
Machine Art, Toronto – March, 2006 ...this text? It's an alright pic, I want to see something incredible. I don't see anything special in the photo except slightly out of focus. I expect Michaels pics to blow this guys away.

http://www.pbase.com/manny_librodo/2005
Well for the price, it had better be faster than my TSX.

Why are we comparing cameras to photographers?
Reply
Old Mar 9, 2006 | 06:48 PM
  #9  
srika's Avatar
Moderator Alumnus
20 Year Member
Community Influencer
Loved
Top Answer: 1
 
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 64,187
Likes: 14,330
most of the pic is fine but the pipe at the bottom center looks soft. I'm sure the pic looks much much better at full-size.
Reply
Old Mar 9, 2006 | 07:52 PM
  #10  
Bdog's Avatar
Not Registered
20 Year Member
Liked
Loved
Community Favorite
 
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 5,831
Likes: 87
From: Virginia
Originally Posted by Dan Martin
Why are we comparing cameras to photographers?
I was actually comparing sharpness in the other guys photos, but yea it's not apples to apples with equipment and styles. I guess just reading the whole article I was expecting to see better sample pictures.

Also... I'd rather have your TSX!
Reply
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
mlody
5G TLX (2015-2020)
85
Dec 4, 2019 02:11 PM
rp_guy
Member Cars for Sale
9
Jul 16, 2017 07:33 AM
08_UA7_Gr33k
3G TL (2004-2008)
1
Sep 27, 2015 12:42 PM
polish_pat
3G TL Audio, Bluetooth, Electronics & Navigation
1
Sep 25, 2015 12:24 PM




All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:18 AM.