Home · Register · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda

New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site

New Feature: SMS Notification alert

New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist

FM Forums | Leica & Alternative Gear | Join Upload & Sell

2 end

Archive 2011 · Digital vs 617 film

pahrens
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #1 · p.1 #1 · Digital vs 617 film

I'm wondering if anyone might have experience making panoramas with both film and high resolution digital cameras and stitching.

I'm using a Sony A850 then stitching in Photoshop. It's a pain with scenes that contain movement like a beach with waves.

What would the quality be like comparing Fuji Velvia 120 roll film and stitched digital?

Mar 12, 2011 at 05:27 AM

wbrad
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #2 · p.1 #2 · Digital vs 617 film

I use both digital and 617 for panos. I use a 5D2 and take 7 vertical shots then stitch with PTGui. I shoot Velvia 50 120 mostly and can say that in terms of resolution of detail there's not that much between them. The film wins on terms of colour and tonal graduations, it is also much better if there is any movement, especially seascapes. Digital has more latitude in exposure (Velvia is particularly unforgiving in shadows) and with digital you have the compositional advantage of being able to shoot with zoom lenses. Having said that, the Schnieder Super Angulon 90mm lens on my Widepan leaves most 35mm lenses for dead.
Overall I prefer the look of film and there's nothing quite like examining one of those big trannys on the lightbox. On the cons, film and processing gets a bit costly, and scanning can be a pain and also costly if you outsource it. High res digital is very good but I don't get quite the same feeling of satisfaction from it as I do from getting a really nice film shot. But then digital is in many ways more practical.
617 equipment isn't cheap but cameras do come up in the used market at times. The only way to know if you are really going to like it is to give it a try. Perhaps you can find a rental to try out.
Anyway, my theory is that shooting both gives you the best of both worlds.
I hope I've been of some help.

Wayne

Mar 12, 2011 at 06:28 AM

pahrens
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #3 · p.1 #3 · Digital vs 617 film

Hi Wayne, I was looking around your website only a couple of weeks ago after finding it on Google. You have some beautiful photographs. It must have taken a very long time to build a collection of that size.

Do you use any kind of pano rails with the 5D MKII? I'm looking at the Really Right Stuff single row package but am a bit worried about it always needing to be completely level. I haven't been using a rail up to this point.

There's a few Fuji and Linhof cameras on eBay right now and they all cost a reasonable sum. It would be truly great having both. I had kind of figured the resolution would be similarish and that the colours and graduations would be better by things I've read on Luminous Landscapes. You've confirmed it for me now.

Recently I just started to have my prints made using Fujiflex crystal archive and absolutely love it. I'm going to sell my Epson 3880 because it's just so nice. It really started making me think more and more about the Fuji Velvia film to go with it.

Thanks for the really thorough reply too, it's very helpful.

Mar 12, 2011 at 07:10 AM

Morfeus
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #4 · p.1 #4 · Digital vs 617 film

Be careful with Velvia 100. It can have a quite strong purple cast, which I find annoying especially when shooting landscapes.

Mar 12, 2011 at 07:15 AM

pahrens
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #5 · p.1 #5 · Digital vs 617 film

Thanks Morfeus, I had no idea Velvia 100 did that.

Mar 12, 2011 at 08:04 AM

philip_pj
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #6 · p.1 #6 · Digital vs 617 film

Velvia 100 is a shocker of an emulsion! I did a whole trip of Tibet with that junk, what a loss...stick to classic 50 or if you need an extra stop Astia 100F - a truly stylish slide film, which works well with nature, and tolerates plenty of colour work in post if need be. Very fine grain too.

I recently got a Zeiss Contax 21mm and on the Sony A900, it is the first time I have seen something close to film with medium format. Stitching does not require much work if things stay still - which of course they so often do not.

There is a terrific lab in Adelaide - PM if you need the contact details.

Mar 12, 2011 at 09:48 PM

pahrens
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #7 · p.1 #7 · Digital vs 617 film

Thanks Philip. That will save me making an expensive mistake if/when I decide to try it out. I really had no idea the 100 ISO film was so much worse. I was thinking about it last night and I may end up purchasing a RRS pano head for the moment. I still would love to try the film though.

Mar 12, 2011 at 09:58 PM

philip_pj
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #8 · p.1 #8 · Digital vs 617 film

I think that 24Mp with an excellent lens is about 'equal' (leaving the special film look aside) in impact with a mid level 645 shot. So 4-5 shots stitched will definitely give you a good file, with loads of detail.

Have you had much joy with stitching? I am new to the idea but I have some great opportunities for it coming up mid-year, so would be pleased to hear your views on it.

I also want to pass on an article with lots of images done by an Austrian photographer whose take was that it is not that hard to get right for many subjects. You might like to see it:

http://forum.mflenses.com/a-beginners-guide-to-panorama-stiching-t19182.html

On software he says this:

"CS4 is good for panos, Hugin even better, PTGui is fantastic, AutopanoPro1.4 is a masterpiece of a software (there is a new version out, I've to buy it)."

Mar 12, 2011 at 10:43 PM

Ben Horne
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #9 · p.1 #9 · Digital vs 617 film

Honestly, stitching is a pain in the butt. I tried it, and hated it. There are some serious DOF issues to deal with, and it's difficult to shoot anything during the good light (sunrise/sunset). You'll learn that the light changes very fast. It is far easier to setup a panoramic camera, and concentrate on getting a good exposure.

The other problem with stitching is that you can't be critical of your composition when you shoot. You must overshoot the bounds of your desired composition, and crop down afterward. With a panoramic camera, you have a viewfinder or ground glass to work with. You can be more precise (and creative) when you are able to compose the composition through a viewfinder.

I use a Fuji GX617, and love it. One click, one shot.

Here is one of my favorites from my Fuji last year

http://benhorne.com/images/fa0033.jpg

Mar 12, 2011 at 10:53 PM

pahrens
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #10 · p.1 #10 · Digital vs 617 film

That article was very good Philip. I've been using my camera on a tripod with ball head and haven't been having too much trouble lately. You can see in this photograph a small amount of curve in the horizon http://peterahrens.com.au/collection/a-simple-life/. It's not too bad though and makes me wonder if I really need to correct for parallax error. When I was along the coast I was having much more trouble with beach shots though.

I was thinking of getting an RRS multi-row setup, even though I'm doing single row, just so I can angle the camera up or down. But I think I've found a much simpler, lighter and cheaper option. Using an RRS BH40-LVL bubble level to get the tripod perfectly level will allow me to use the ball head base to rotate. Then just putting in the MPR-CL II rail straight into the ball head clamp to correct for parallax error. If I have a bubble level in the hot-shoe of the camera I should be able to angle the camera up or down, level it horizontally and then rotate with the ball head base. That's my theory. If you use the RRS pano elements package attached on top of the ball head you have to have it level with the horizon always. No pointing your camera up or down.

This is probably still more complicated than it needs to be though. Add this to the points Ben has made and the Fuji camera starts to look so simple in capture. That's a beautiful photo Ben.

Something that worries me with film is how much longer Fuji intends to make Velvia 50. Maybe we need to petition them to build a digital GX617?

Mar 12, 2011 at 11:27 PM

sirimiri
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #11 · p.1 #11 · Digital vs 617 film

That's a very pretty shot, Ben. How/where did you end up scanning it? A Nikon 9000 could only do an image like that in sections, which means you're going to end up stitching anyway.

I have used the TS-E 17 and 24II for architecture and it's fantastic, really. Of course, people move all over the place, but it didn't bother the client and they wanted the image to focus on the architecture and lighting anyway!

Mar 13, 2011 at 12:00 AM

pahrens
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #12 · p.1 #12 · Digital vs 617 film

By what you describe it doesn't really sound like you would need to correct for parallax. If you're far away from your subject it's really a non issue. Getting the base of rotation level is important though. If you can't get the base level though you can more or less just guess each shot and shoot them in succession, the stitching software is pretty good but you will lose resolution.

I have a photograph where the light was not consistent from left to right because each shot was about 30 seconds. It looks quite weird but I do wonder how the Kolor Autopano Giga would go at correcting this. It might work for your photograph too.

Mar 13, 2011 at 12:40 AM

pahrens
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #13 · p.1 #13 · Digital vs 617 film

I was just reading something and am not so sure of the Fuji GX617 now. Is it not possible to point the camera up or down? Does it need to be completely level?

Mar 13, 2011 at 12:42 AM

Ben Horne
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #14 · p.1 #14 · Digital vs 617 film

pahrens wrote:
I was just reading something and am not so sure of the Fuji GX617 now. Is it not possible to point the camera up or down? Does it need to be completely level?

It doesn't get much more "down" than this I can focus a bit less than 1m away with the 105mm lens on my GX617.

http://benhorne.com/photos/maplelitter_sm.jpg

http://benhorne.com/photos/crackmud.jpg

Edited on Mar 13, 2011 at 01:06 AM · View previous versions

Mar 13, 2011 at 12:54 AM

pahrens
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #15 · p.1 #15 · Digital vs 617 film

lol, point taken Ben. Very nice photographs.

Mar 13, 2011 at 12:58 AM

Ben Horne
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #16 · p.1 #16 · Digital vs 617 film

sirimiri wrote:
That's a very pretty shot, Ben. How/where did you end up scanning it? A Nikon 9000 could only do an image like that in sections, which means you're going to end up stitching anyway.

I have used the TS-E 17 and 24II for architecture and it's fantastic, really. Of course, people move all over the place, but it didn't bother the client and they wanted the image to focus on the architecture and lighting anyway!

I use a flatbed for preview scans, and a drum scanner if I intend to print. The flatbed doesn't yield anywhere near the quality of a drum scan, but it's good to preview the image. If someone wants to buy a print, or I want to print it for myself, I'll have the film drum scanned. This is an expensive process, but it yields the best tonality and detail. This is a shot that I just had drum scanned. When exposed properly, you can hold some impressive detail -- even on slide film.

Here's an image I just had drum scanned.

http://www.benhorne.com/photos/mapleforest_drum.jpg

Here's a 100% crop of the scan. I didn't have this scanned at max resolution, but the file will still print nearly 7 feet long. When a very large print is needed, I'll have the file scanned at 2GB. This was scanned at just 1GB.

http://www.benhorne.com/photos/maple_crop.jpg

Mar 13, 2011 at 01:18 AM

pahrens
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #17 · p.1 #17 · Digital vs 617 film

That's a really beautiful photograph and the detail is indeed very high. I think though for the time being I'm going to have to go with the stitching route.

I'm not sure whether to get the Pano elements package or not. You can't angle the camera up or down with it. Otherwise I will purchase a rail and levelling plate for the tripod. It's a little less elegant but will allow me to angle up and down. Right now I don't know if angling the camera will be a problem though. I'm going to Wilpena Pound in a weeks time and it is hilly. This is an aerial photograph of the area.

It is very tempting to go the film route though I must admit.

Mar 13, 2011 at 01:28 AM

carstenw
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #18 · p.1 #18 · Digital vs 617 film

pahrens wrote:
I was thinking of getting an RRS multi-row setup, even though I'm doing single row, just so I can angle the camera up or down. But I think I've found a much simpler, lighter and cheaper option. Using an RRS BH40-LVL bubble level to get the tripod perfectly level will allow me to use the ball head base to rotate. Then just putting in the MPR-CL II rail straight into the ball head clamp to correct for parallax error. If I have a bubble level in the hot-shoe of the camera I should be able to angle the camera up...Show more →

Well, you would end up capturing a curved section of the world, and the resulting stitch would be the world's first banana-shaped panorama

What you want is to use the BH-40 PCL. Use the PCL-1 clamp to rotate in a straight line (from the camera's perspective).

Mar 13, 2011 at 04:30 AM

pahrens
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #19 · p.1 #19 · Digital vs 617 film

Very well put Carstenw :-) I did not realise that would result in a banana shaped panorama. So does that mean the camera can never be tilted up or down when taking a stitched panorama?

Mar 13, 2011 at 04:58 AM

carstenw
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #20 · p.1 #20 · Digital vs 617 film

No, please read my comment again

If you point the camera down and rotate the ballhead 360 degrees, I think it is clear that you would capture a circle from around the tripod.

However, If the rotation is not done around the base of the ballhead, but around the base of the camera (as with the PCL-1 rotating clamp), then you get an image which is side-to-side (in image space). To visualize this, just think of loosening the camera a little on the ballhead, and turning the camera while the ballhead, including base, is locked.

Here is a link to the BH-40-PCL you need (plus an L-bracket).

http://reallyrightstuff.com/ProductDesc.aspx?code=BH-40-PCL

I have a Burzynski ballhead and a PCL-1, so if you don't yet see what I mean, I could post some photos to make it clear.

Edited on Mar 13, 2011 at 04:40 PM · View previous versions

Mar 13, 2011 at 04:15 PM

1 2 end
FM Forums \| Leica & Alternative Gear \| Join Upload & Sell 1 2 end

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.