Point and shoots are up to 10megs now I'm sure in a few years they will be 40megs.
The Hassy will have nothing on them and for only a couple hundred dollars too.
WAYCOOL wrote:
Point and shoots are up to 10megs now I'm sure in a few years they will be 40megs.
The Hassy will have nothing on them and for only a couple hundred dollars too.
Think about sensor size which conditions picture quality. Mircoscopic sensors in point and shoots are crap compared to "normal" and large sensors.
CarloDidier wrote:
Think about sensor size which conditions picture quality. Mircoscopic sensors in point and shoots are crap compared to "normal" and large sensors.
Carlo,
The smiley face at the end of his post is there to indicate that he is joking.
Sean - you couldnt give me a 30 or 40 MP 35mm sensor....don't even want it. Just look at the 12MP P&S for the reason why.....insane noise due to pixel density....diffraction would limit me to f/2.8....its just not even feasble.....and my D2X already out resolve my nikon glass....I would have to move to Zeiss glass just to get sharper....
TimV - Ok...since I like instant feedback....that rules that out.....add in what I would need to purchase (drum scanners...dark rooms...etc) to be 100% in control of the process like I am in digital...and it isnt as inexpensive as it seems.
No thanks...will find a way to get MF digital...even if I have to eventually start out with the Mamiya ZD 22MP unit and work up from there. (closer to about 15,000..with basic lens setup)
Yeah, you are right. It's an interesting subject. Based on all I've read, and what's posted here, it seems the ceiling for the balance of IQ and MP in the 35mm format is extremely near.
Oh and for what it's worth... BH does have a Mamiya ZD with 22mp back, and 80mm 1.9 lens bundled for $9999. Maybe in a few years when it's time to upgrade that will be tangible.
Yep....for 35MM....FF at about 16-18MP...and crops about the same pixel density.....were about there for physical limitations on sensors of that size. Now...if we could get the bitrate up to 16, and a DR of about 12 stops....I would be quite pleased with the 35MM arena.
The 15,000 price includes what I would consider a "basic lens setup" dont want to be limited to one lens...lol. I need super wides and medium range....wouldnt mind zooms either....keeps my compositions tight.
I shoot with a Mamiya 645AFD and Phase P30 back (only 31.6 MP), which produces amazingly nice images, and also for reasons beyond megapixels. It's easy to become spoiled! I recently returned from a trip in Alaska and chose to bring a Canon 5D, as it was the more appropriate platform for me. Even on smaller images (only 16x24), I found myself wanting the MFDB as the difference in range and detail is very apparent. Nice images with the 5D to be sure, but I felt like I was slumming!
A little insight about shooting MF digital. I'm shooting with the same Mamiya 645AFD and lenses that I shot film with. Over the course of several years, I've probably spent more overall on DSLR camera bodies, lenses, and accessories than I have with my investment into a MFDB. Once "you're there"---the spending is not the same as in the DSLR market. (hey, I'm just trying to help some of you guys out that have significant others/wives....)
Same computer, same raw processor (C1Pro), same workflow with CS3.
And the best part: no dust problems on the sensor!
kdphotography wrote:
I recently returned from a trip in Alaska and chose to bring a Canon 5D, as it was the more appropriate platform for me. Even on smaller images (only 16x24), I found myself wanting the MFDB as the difference in range and detail is very apparent. Nice images with the 5D to be sure, but I felt like I was slumming!
Oh you poooor thing! .
<--- 5D user. Last time I was in Alaska I only had a 20D. Now I can only WISH I had the DR and resolution of the 5D on those shots. Let alone what your Mamiya could have done.
And the best part: no dust problems on the sensor!
The 5D is a great camera, but dust on the sensor is a major annoyance. In studio or at events, dusting issues on the 5D are not as apparent. But when shooting outdoors using smaller apertures (landscapes and open sky!), dust is more noticeable. When changing lenses on a DSLR (ala 5D), the camera sensor is exposed to the open air, creating the opportunity for the dust to gather on the sensor. MFDBs remain on the back of the camera the same as the MF film back. When changing lenses, the sensor is never exposed (actually it would be the glass filter over the sensor). Cleaning a MFDB is very easy.
OK, got it.
I'm exploiting this thread to answer all my own MF questions as well as 'ohhh and ahhh' at the first image posted. Thanks much for the answers!
kdphotography wrote:
When changing lenses on a DSLR (ala 5D), the camera sensor is exposed to the open air, creating the opportunity for the dust to gather on the sensor. MFDBs remain on the back of the camera the same as the MF film back. When changing lenses, the sensor is never exposed (actually it would be the glass filter over the sensor).
In a DSLR isn't the sensor behind the shutter and not directly exposed to the open air? On the MF using either a film or digital back - what is different? Is there something else between the shutter and the sensor?
I would think in either case - allowing dirty air (air with dust) into the lens camber would allow dust to hit the sensor when the shutter is open. I don't see the difference.
i understand the interesting aspect of this thread, but is it really that hard to believe? you get what you pay for. i can blow up pictures shot with my P&S and show just how much my 5D and L lens blow it away. if you spend 10 times as much you better get some pretty damn impressive results, like are shown here.
A little knowledge is a dangerous thing... I thought that I would check on the price of a Digi back for my Bronica. No I didn't want to hock the house. I like your illustration..
Tom
I agree that dynamic range and bits are important. I am always limited by the dynamic range with my 1ds2. Its the number one thing I fight when snapping a shot.
But if your a landscape and animal shooter what do you do to replace your 500-600f4 when your shooting medium? You would have to carry both cameras I guess. Thats an even more expensive solution.
I am going to rent a P45 for m next trip to Yosemite. Im going to bolt it on to my RRS pano head and shoot some wicked 2x14 panos of the park.
... ... ... You have shown me the light........ *sniff*.... i don't know if i can go back to my 20D now. Maybe I'll have to shoot a pic with a P&S and compare that with my camera.
madmax200 wrote:
But if your a landscape and animal shooter what do you do to replace your 500-600f4 when your shooting medium? You would have to carry both cameras I guess. Thats an even more expensive solution.
quote]
I don't think there is a viable MFDB option for shooting wildlife----focus is generally not fast with MF, and focal lengths are limited. DSLRs are much better suited for wildlife shooting......
.