digital back and architectural photography

[goran]

Hi,
I would like to purchase a digital back for my camera (toyo vx). I do mostly Architectural & Interior photography. Here are my problems so far I couldn't find any digital back that will cover all of this:
1. To be able to be used with strobe lights
2. To be able to do multiple exposures. Like on film for example when you stop your exposure to turn of or on certain lights in your interior, and then continue your exposure.
3. To sync with strobes on more than 1/250 of the second
4. To have longer exposure then 32 seconds
5. To shoot RAW files (basically you don't have to worry about white balance that much, you can correct it afterwards in your computer)
It does not seems much of the requirement but so far I wasn't able to find one that will do all of this. Any suggestions?
Thanks
Goran

[Kirk Gittings]

In my opinion your questions are right on and the reason (plus a few more) why I, as an architectural photographer, am not ready to jump to digital backs. Myself and most AF in the US are shooting film still and scanning it. The big boys like Timothy Hursley and Hedrick-Blessing are still shooting film and they have the resources to do what they want. I ran into Hursley the other day and we had this very same discussion. He uses the digital Canons 35mm as an adjunct to LF film for certain jobs, but primarily still shoots film.

[Ellis Vener]

1.) Yes.

2.) No (the Nikon D2x can do this however ,and of course you can layer different exposures using Photoshop CS).

3.) Do you mean longer or shorter than 1/250th?

4.) Most digital cameras or backs do not do well with very long (longer than a few seconds) exposure time. The Canon EOS 1D mk. II does this well up to 30 seconds (I haven't tested for longer exposures) and I'll be testing the Nikon D2X long exposure capability later this week.

5.) All digital backs and high end DSLR cameras do a "raw' capture.

[Will Strain]

so essentially, you want (or rather I want) a single capture (not scanning) full coverage back for 4x5. With a raw mode, long exposure range, good flash sync and multi-shot capabilities.

I don't think such a beast exists... and if it does, i can't even fathom the price.

[Michael S. Briggs]

Re 2: With a digital back, you are probably better off making several separate exposures and combining them later in Photoshop, rather than combining them at the taking time. Combining multiple exposures in a wet darkroom isn't trivial, and the additional film costs. Additional separate digital exposures only cost disk space, and give you the option of combining the exposures with different weights.

These suggestions don't mean that I think that "LF" digital backs are the best choice for architecture, or cost effective for most photographers.

[giancatarina]

reducing the cost ? arca swiss F line 69 and scan direct bthe film on a frontier ...///
best quality ? 4x5 scan, or even 20x25///
work quickly ... Canon 1DS mark 2 + 24 tse + 45 tse and x1,4///
be trendy, having trouble with dust... and spend a lot ? digital back ///
i still dream of a digital back, but it just can't do the job for now !

[katheo]

Does anyone have any updates for this same question in 2009?

I am interested in shooting high quality architecture & interior images. Besides a high-end DSLR with a PC lens and a little Photoshop magic, are there any affordable digital LF options (<$10K)? I would like to use strobes so BetterLight backs are out.

thanks for any advice...

[brian mcweeney]

There are MF digital options but not LF, and not under $10K. Something like an Arca Swiss 6x9 metric view camera with orbix with a Phase One back and some Digitar lenses and a new 17" Mac laptop ... oh wait that's my list for Santa Claus ...

[Kirk Gittings]

Katheo,

Go to my blog (link below in my signature) and scroll down to the thread with the list of recent links on Luminous Landscape about architectural photography. Some of the top APs in the world have contributed to that discussion. It is allot of reading but you will find out what various experts are actually using and why.

[percepts]

There are MF digital options but not LF, and not under $10K. Something like an Arca Swiss 6x9 metric view camera with orbix with a Phase One back and some Digitar lenses and a new 17" Mac laptop ... oh wait that's my list for Santa Claus ...

You're out of luck Santa Claus would have to mortgage the north pole to pay for that lot and mortagages are hard to come by this Christmas...

[Brian Ellis]

Katheo,

Go to my blog (link below in my signature) and scroll down to the thread with the list of recent links on Luminous Landscape about architectural photography. Some of the top APs in the world have contributed to that discussion. It is allot of reading but you will find out what various experts are actually using and why.

Kirk - I read - actually skimmed - most of the responses in Part II, which seemed to be the one devoted to equipment. It looked to me like every single architectural photographer that posted a response was using digital, often a Canon DSLR. But you said in your 2005 message above that most architectural photographers were using film back then. Has it changed that much in four years or did I miss the part of the blog where everyone talked about using film?

[Kirk Gittings]

Kirk - I read - actually skimmed - most of the responses in Part II, which seemed to be the one devoted to equipment. It looked to me like every single architectural photographer that posted a response was using digital, often a Canon DSLR. But you said in your 2005 message above that most architectural photographers were using film back then. Has it changed that much in four years or did I miss the part of the blog where everyone talked about using film?

Brian,

I don't personally know of anyone using film for commercial AP, and I know APs all over the country. Nor have any of my out of town clients mentioned any APs photographers using film for a few years now. Hedrich-Blessing switched a couple of years ago to MF digital too.
__________________