PDA

View Full Version : Print Reproduction for High Quality Viewing



bob carnie
29-May-2017, 14:06
I have more equipment than I need, but I have come to the conclusion one critical area of my business I need to answer is being able to copy all the work I produce here.

Lately most of my work is Alternative, or Lith or Solarized prints that do not look anything like the files I am producing. I have in the past excellent training in copy work with analoque
methods, but to be honest I never have used a digital camera.

I would like some advice on digital camera with lens that can give me excellent tiff quality for viewing on website or proposals to various art groups. I do not need help with the
lighting setup, and of course I do own a Creo Scanner but I am not interested whatsoever in splicing and joining the artwork.
I am open to buying used equipment but advise on simple camera , high resolution needs, and crisp lens would be of value to me. I am thinking of setting up a copy setup and have a dedicated camera networked so I can scan and archive on the go.

Any suggestions, I do not want to break the bank , and I am never going to use this camera for printmaking file generation.

thanks

Bob

Christopher Barrett
29-May-2017, 14:15
Bob,

I use the Sony A7r2 for my commercial work. If you want to spend under 10k, I'd recommend looking into that rig. Here's how I set it up on a view camera with Rodenstock digital lenses.

https://i2.wp.com/christopherbarrett.net/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/Mf2.jpg

You could also just use a straight mount lens, as there are some great options available from the usual suspects. Let me know if you have any questions.

-CB

Oren Grad
29-May-2017, 14:28
Can you specify the range of print sizes you want to be able to capture and the maximum working distance that will be available in your copy setup?

Pere Casals
29-May-2017, 16:24
Any suggestions, I do not want to break the bank , and I am never going to use this camera for printmaking file generation.

thanks

Bob


Hello Bob,

This if what I'd use:


Camera:

Nikon D810 or D800E. I'd avoid the D800 because it has an optical lowpass filter on the sensor (anti moire) that lowers resolution.

You don't need that extreme dynamic range the camera has, but you want high pixel count.

The low end D3200 (DX) with a good lens would be enough, it will outresolve a 4k TV (8MPix), of the 24MPix some 12MPix would be effective optical resolving power. I see no advantage with the D5200 / D5500. You don't need a tactile screen, but perhaps you may want a model with integrated wifi to not handle SD cards. But any of those can accept a wifi adapter (Nikon WU-1a Wireless Mobile Adapter).

In the middle you have the D610, a 24MPix full frame.

For a D3200 you may want continous power, to get rid fro batteries, so you may use "Nikon 27018 EP-5A Power Supply Connector".





Lens: Micro Nikkor (the 55 2.8 AI-S , the 105mm AF or the 60mm AFD ) depending on the size/distance. Perhaps I'd take both the 60 and the 105mm

http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/55f28ais.htm

http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/60mm-afd.htm

http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/105af.htm


These are distortion free. Camera firmware corrects lens distortion, but better if no distortion is there.


"Nikon is big in the microscope and scientific world. They don't mess around when it comes to macro lenses! This baby is just about perfect optically and pretty well made mechanically for an AF lens."

"This 60mm f/2.8 AF-D has been one of the lenses by which rest of the industry judges itself since 1989"




Illumination:


This is the critical part !!!

You have to use cross-polarization. So your illuminators (perhaps a flash system) needs a polarizing filter on it and the lens needs another POL on it, at 90 to eliminate any glare.

Better if polarizing system is linear, as more effective, but then AF and metering may not work, so if you need those camera capabilities you have to use circular polarizers to not interfere AF and meter optics.

I guess you are aware of cross-pol, just saying if linear type AF/meter may not work.


Here is where I've been buying large ammounts of polarizing sheet to be placed over illuminators, for industrial usage, working very well and near for free:
https://www.3dlens.com/shop/8-inch-lcd-polarizer.php you have linear and circular polarazing types.



You can even do with a (DX) Nikon D3200, with excellent results, but not without cross-polarization.



IMHO this combo (D810 + Micro Nikkor) is hard to beat in performance terms, at not expensive.


Still, if you are to display the full art in a 4k TV you may notice nothing from D3200 to D810. If you enlarge a crop of the art in the 4k TV you should notice a difference at 2x(I mean displaying 1/2 of the art height in the TV). In a full HD 1080 lines TV IMHO you should enlarge 4x to notice something form D3200 to D810.


Also you know much better than me that there is a right way to convert a 36Mpix image to the destination 4k (8MPix) to have a crispy look, this depends on image size reduction algorithms (Bicubic, ideal for reductions version), and sharpen, this should be the same than with the Lambdas. So it's not only the camera and the lens !





Regards.

peter schrager
29-May-2017, 21:21
Bob keep us informed with your progress please

Michael E
30-May-2017, 02:03
Don't overdo it. For web applications you don't need a lot of resolution. In fact, for prints up to 11x14" at 300 dpi, 12 megapixels will be fine. You can get an older dslr for a song. Newer models have the advantage that you can shoot tethered into a laptop computer and don't have to look through the camera to compose or focus. That makes work with a copy stand a lot easier. Get a good lens, any macro lens will exceed your needs for sharpness and lack of distorsion. Chances are that you already have a useable lens from your analog system, just get a matching dslr. Get a decent target (like an X-rite color checker) to adjust color and tones by numbers instead of eyesight. Use your lights like you always have, except for the wider apertures required by a dslr. Needless to say, work meticulously and use a RAW workflow.

Best,

Michael

Pere Casals
30-May-2017, 04:23
Don't overdo it. For web applications you don't need a lot of resolution.
Best,

Michael


Web has changed, today people buy 4k monitors and have high speed service

"excellent tiff quality for viewing on website or proposals to various art groups"


IMHO sensor pixel density is very important in this case. A 12 Mpix sensor won't resolve 12 "optical Mpix", that the half or less, and then we have discretization losses, bayer tiles, optical lowpass filter, losses in the edition...

Then the art can have enlarged grains from the negative, with crispy edges one may want to depict, this interacts with PS edition, and a quality source in necessary to get really sound 4k result.

It can be noted that a 4k image has 8 MPix of the RGB type, this is 24 million of LCD cells or LEDs, 8 million of each color. A 8 Mpix sensor has 8 million photosites, 2,6 million of each color, and then we have discretization, the optical loss...

Christopher Barrett
30-May-2017, 04:42
Another benefit of having a lot of resolution is the ability go in later and crop portions if need be (details of certain areas of the composition). The Nikon is a great sensor, made by Sony, but the A7r2's is a little newer tech with some minor imaging improvements. Hopefully it won't be long before the A7r3 or A9r (whichever it's going to be), a refresh is overdue.

Workflow can also make a huge difference. I always shoot tethered to a laptop via Capture 1 Pro. I can judge sharpness far better on a large screen, than I can by zooming in on camera. It also gives you a better idea of color and tonal rendition. If you're doing this sort of work in studio, it won't take any more time to setup the computer and will likely save time in the end.

My .02,
CB

Pere Casals
30-May-2017, 05:11
Another benefit of having a lot of resolution is the ability go in later and crop portions if need be (details of certain areas of the composition). The Nikon is a great sensor, made by Sony, but the A7r2's is a little newer tech with some minor imaging improvements. Hopefully it won't be long before the A7r3 or A9r (whichever it's going to be), a refresh is overdue.

Workflow can also make a huge difference. I always shoot tethered to a laptop via Capture 1 Pro. I can judge sharpness far better on a large screen, than I can by zooming in on camera. It also gives you a better idea of color and tonal rendition. If you're doing this sort of work in studio, it won't take any more time to setup the computer and will likely save time in the end.

My .02,
CB

Yes, the 42MPix BSI is an strenght, also the tilt screen can be convenient in top table position, it has wifi... weakness is Sony E-Mount lens range, still an adapter can be used to fit a Micro Nikkor.

bob carnie
30-May-2017, 06:36
Can you specify the range of print sizes you want to be able to capture and the maximum working distance that will be available in your copy setup?

Hi Oren

22 - 30 down to 11 x14 inches, I have a Creo for smaller print scans, I do not think I will be working in much larger than 22 x30.

cowanw
30-May-2017, 06:53
Bob, I am making copies of a hundred portraits that I have collected. using a camera gave better images compared to scanning.
I am using a Sony Alpha 900 with a 70-200 zoom plus or minus a 2x lens, two to three metres away from the print. The zoom allows me to fill the frame. This camera has a preview function and I could set the exposure curve to get sufficient exposure for the darks. I get 40 mega bite raw files, which seem OK
My thinking is to get farther away rather than go macro to minimize wide angle distortion.
I use two floods on either side with soft boxes to spread the light. the room is dark and there are black curtains behind the camera. I wear black and work at night to avoid reflections in glass.
Use the 10 sec timer and tripod.
I found F22 was the best fstop for sharpnesss with Daguerreotypes and cased images. smaller fstop caused more diffraction. larger fstop gave insufficient depth of field. sometimes it was necessary to do two shots, one focussed on the daguerreotype and one on the brass mounting and put them together in Photoshop.
The transilluminated lantern slide had too much dynamic range and I bracketed over a range of exposures (14 fstops) and merged the files in the computer.
You will fill close to one dimension of your camera screen with the print and so you can figure your crop loses and need for file size based on printing size.
Colour will be managed in the raw development.
Textured work may be difficult to find the best lighting or photographic angles. One of my coloured daguerreotypes was polished side to side and coloured with a down stroke, needs to be seen from above on an angle. this results in Keystoneing on reproduction which is fixed in Photoshop.
I expect any current camera and lens will do. File sizes for an ipad or other computer screen are much less than for printing.
The issues are more of a classic photographic copying nature and the solutions will be photographic rather than film/digital.
Using a digital level to measure tilt of the copy stand (I use a music easil) to match to the back of the camera and the sides of the viewing screen (or grid) to keep parallel left to right.
Regards
Bill

Pere Casals
30-May-2017, 07:11
I use two floods on either side with soft boxes to spread the light.




Hello Bill,

Floods alone are not right to photograph flat art.

Try this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cp5vRlstpbc

It's the way paints are photographes in museums.

Highly recommended !!!


Regards.

Taija71A
30-May-2017, 07:29
... This is the critical part !!!

You have to use cross-polarization. So your illuminators (perhaps a flash system) needs a polarizing filter on it and the lens needs another POL on it, at 90 to eliminate any glare...

Sometimes, you hate to "Give Credit Where It Is Due"... :p
But, Pere does make an Excellent point here.

For the 'Highest Quality' results... Cross Polarized Light is very important!

-Tim.

bob carnie
30-May-2017, 08:13
I would ask that discussion on lighting and such is not what I am looking for, I made my living for about 10 years doing High End reproductions .

What I am really looking for is a used camera that has semi high resolution capablities and the right lens for that camera.. I am a big fan of mirror up and prime lenses.
I have never owned a digital camera only analoque so I would like recomondations on camera and lens if possible.

Taija71A
30-May-2017, 08:31
... I do not want to break the bank...


Bob, I use the Sony A7r2 for my commercial work. If you want to spend under 10k, I'd recommend looking into that rig...

Budget?

bob carnie
30-May-2017, 08:49
Not sure - I happen to know thousands of photographers via my printing business, so I am sure I can handle a deal that both party's are happy , I suspect like darkroom equipment , three year old digital cameras do not hold value so I am probably thinking between $1500 and $4000 value .

Ted R
30-May-2017, 09:39
It is tempting to go down the road to make very high resolution highly color-corrected files, which would be better than is needed for the immediate purpose. One of the temptations might be that high quality prints made from these files might "stand-in" for the originals one day if the need arose. This route involves a lot of careful work with an expensive camera, lighting and digital editing.

The other approach has a different goal, the presentation of images for display on smartphones, laptops and desktop monitors. No need for high resolution, no need for precision color correction, no need for precision digital editing, and the hardware to achieve it might be one tenth the cost of the "high precision" luxury system. It may only take a competent DSLR and mid-priced lens (22MP Canon 5Dmk2 or mk3 can be used with a 100mm macro lens, tethered, and would cost less than US$1000 for both) and give results probably better than necessary. Editing can be done using Canon's software available free online (Digital Photo Professional).

tgtaylor
30-May-2017, 09:40
I'd get a real camera and not a juvenile's setup:

http://toyoview.com/Products/VX23D/23D.html

Thomas

Pere Casals
30-May-2017, 09:44
Not sure - I happen to know thousands of photographers via my printing business, so I am sure I can handle a deal that both party's are happy , I suspect like darkroom equipment , three year old digital cameras do not hold value so I am probably thinking between $1500 and $4000 value .

Refining my suggestion:

Used Nikon D800E + AF-S Micro Nikkor 105mm f2.8 G VR = $2000. (1500+500) delivers Some Perceptual 21 MPix at distant subjects, still a macro lens

Used Nikon D610 + Micro Nikkor 105mm 2.8 AFD = $1200. (1000+200)


+ $100 for the continous power supply and wifi adapters, that may come with a used camera.



I'd take the VR version, it would work better for unplanned casual shooting.





Another glass option is Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 105mm f/1.4E ED , the sharpest nikon thing under 200mm, delivering some Perceptual 33 MPix on the D810, but €1600 alone.

So D810 + 105mm 1.4 G ED is some $3100, but you also get a rocking portrait setup.

Those 33 Perceptual MPix are not a joke, because killer VR/AF you obtain near that even in very dynamic shootings, just mentioning a potential second use.

interneg
30-May-2017, 10:14
One of the AIS Micro Nikkors will do the job nicely - far easier to use in a copying environment than any AF lens in my experience. The classic 55/2.8 is a pretty good bargain - & rather amazingly still available new for USD400-ish I recall. It'll work on the D8xx cameras without any problems - live view is your friend...

Another thought might be an older Phase One/ Leaf back & the relevant camera setup - I recall that the older 30-40mp backs are under USD5k used these days.

tgtaylor
30-May-2017, 10:40
I'd get a real camera and not a juvenile's setup:

http://toyoview.com/Products/VX23D/23D.html

Thomas

Just out of curiosity I checked the used prices and B&H current has a "DEMO" for under $1,000: https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/801356086-USE/toyo_view_180_023_vx23d_digital_2x3_view.html

They close today for a few days at 2PM Eastern. So if you're going to move on a professional set-up at a good price, now is the time!

Thomas

bob carnie
30-May-2017, 10:58
One of the AIS Micro Nikkors will do the job nicely - far easier to use in a copying environment than any AF lens in my experience. The classic 55/2.8 is a pretty good bargain - & rather amazingly still available new for USD400-ish I recall. It'll work on the D8xx cameras without any problems - live view is your friend...

Another thought might be an older Phase One/ Leaf back & the relevant camera setup - I recall that the older 30-40mp backs are under USD5k used these days.

I have thought about the Phase One as a possibility, What I am trying to achieve is a digital file for Website and Proposal Purposes that the viewer can actually see the nuances of
the prints I am making... I need to do this as an ongoing matter as I am printing Alternative Prints more than ever. The original is too hard to Mimic in PS and for example if I make three
versions of a single image and put them up for sale, I want the viewer to distinctly see the differences (and there always is) between the three images and decide which one to pick.

I am not afraid of the image being stolen or used as a lot of my clients are good lawyers , and can be helpful.

When you go to a decent gallery website any where in the world and look at the images they are really good and this is what I am trying to achieve with this setup.

interneg
30-May-2017, 11:36
I have thought about the Phase One as a possibility, What I am trying to achieve is a digital file for Website and Proposal Purposes that the viewer can actually see the nuances of
the prints I am making... I need to do this as an ongoing matter as I am printing Alternative Prints more than ever. The original is too hard to Mimic in PS and for example if I make three
versions of a single image and put them up for sale, I want the viewer to distinctly see the differences (and there always is) between the three images and decide which one to pick.

I am not afraid of the image being stolen or used as a lot of my clients are good lawyers , and can be helpful.

When you go to a decent gallery website any where in the world and look at the images they are really good and this is what I am trying to achieve with this setup.

Or there's the Pentax 645D which might be worth considering - I recall seeing them in the USD4k range recently for the body - lots of lenses for them floating around.

The Phase iXG/ iXR repro system is something I've started to look at, but mostly because I've been getting more involved in repro & duo/ tritone separation work for books & have been running into the same sort of scanner issues. The price is likely to be astronomical however.

Ted R
30-May-2017, 13:10
bob wrote
"What I am really looking for is a used camera that has semi high resolution capablities and the right lens for that camera.. I am a big fan of mirror up and prime lenses. I have never owned a digital camera only analoque so I would like recomondations on camera and lens if possible."


I can speak from personal experience having used both the items I recommend below.

here it is:

Mirror-up
manual focus with magnified on-screen display (focus point zoom)
21MP
100mm f2.8 macro manual focus prime lens


Canon 5Dmk2 $750 with battery, charger and 14 day return on ebay.com 192201630728

Canon EF 100mm f2.8 $305 OBO on ebay.com 162426156231

enter the ebay number in the ebay search field

both ship to Canada

I am relatively new to digital cameras also, there is a lot to take in, allow time for the "learning curve", the nice thing is that exposures made for practice are free :-)

bob carnie
30-May-2017, 13:13
Thanks Ted this looks like a nice setup to consider , it hits all my points.

peter schrager
30-May-2017, 13:23
great thread; thanks to all of you from a digital novice!!
Peter

faberryman
30-May-2017, 13:30
What size images are you interested in posting on a website or using in the proposals? What is the setup you are using now that you are dissatisfied with?

bob carnie
30-May-2017, 13:35
What size images are you interested in posting on a website or using in the proposals? What is the setup you are using now that you are dissatisfied with?

my scanner is too small for the size of prints I am making. I do not own YET a digital camera so I can do copy work. I want the images to open clean and crisp for viewers to see.

jp
30-May-2017, 13:44
I'm familiar with the Nikon equipment.. A used d800e/d810/d610 with a 55 macro lens or 60mm macro lens would do very nicely with a copy stand.
Shoot raw. Shouldn't be much distortion with a Nikon macro lens, LR will have a distortion profile for it should any fine tuning of barrel distortion or fringing and can correct the white balance real easily; you can copy and paste a white balance correction you made from a target photo to other photos or make it part of an auto-import preset for photos being imported into the software.

bob carnie
30-May-2017, 13:58
I'm familiar with the Nikon equipment.. A used d800e/d810/d610 with a 55 macro lens or 60mm macro lens would do very nicely with a copy stand.
Shoot raw. Shouldn't be much distortion with a Nikon macro lens, LR will have a distortion profile for it should any fine tuning of barrel distortion or fringing and can correct the white balance real easily; you can copy and paste a white balance correction you made from a target photo to other photos or make it part of an auto-import preset for photos being imported into the software.

Thanks- lucky for me I have a lot of talented photographers around me that when I get the set up will fine tune the colour checker and white balance, I think I will have fun with this.

cowanw
30-May-2017, 15:13
Let us know how well you are able to image the differences in your prints. I would think the more you rely on digital algorithms to fix lens distortions, the worse off your objectives (real differences between individual prints) will be.

Pere Casals
31-May-2017, 02:03
Let us know how well you are able to image the differences in your prints. I would think the more you rely on digital algorithms to fix lens distortions, the worse off your objectives (real differences between individual prints) will be.

Today DSLRs correct distortion perfectly in firmware, you won't notice any resolving power flaw because that, absolutely, just deactivate it in the menu and compare USAF 1951 shots. Today's designs can priorize other lens preformance parameters, because distortion and lateral chromatic aberration are solved by the camera itself, camera knows the lens, and has a map for the corrections at every focus distance and zoom position (if zoom). I tested that with my particular gear.

jp
31-May-2017, 05:20
Small amounts of distortion like from a macro lens not being at an ideal focus are easily corrected from raw files and look very natural. Big distortion like if you use a 18-300 superzoom and expect a flat field of focus at macro distances are not fully correctable; you could correct the shape but not the focus. LRs chromatic abberation correcting is simply magic when you need it but will probably not be needed much with a quality macro lens.

aluncrockford
31-May-2017, 11:12
I have found that the best way to copy artwork is using a phase one P45 with a hasselblad and the 100mm lens,I am told it was designed to be distortion free and that seems to be the case. I then cross polarize the light and lens, a brief description of how to go about it is here

https://www.stagedepot.co.uk/lighting/gel-kits-accessories/kits/730011-polarising-filter-lighting-gel-sheet

I get the filters over the lights form here

https://www.polarization.com/polarshop/

In my experience the quality of a 35mm digital, I use a canon D5Mk3 is ok ish but not in any way as good as a phase, and quite honestly the extra cost for the phase is well worth it, and it will hold its value far more than a 35mm option

bob carnie
31-May-2017, 11:31
I have found that the best way to copy artwork is using a phase one P45 with a hasselblad and the 100mm lens,I am told it was designed to be distortion free and that seems to be the case. I then cross polarize the light and lens, a brief description of how to go about it is here

https://www.stagedepot.co.uk/lighting/gel-kits-accessories/kits/730011-polarising-filter-lighting-gel-sheet

I get the filters over the lights form here

https://www.polarization.com/polarshop/

In my experience the quality of a 35mm digital, I use a canon D5Mk3 is ok ish but not in any way as good as a phase, and quite honestly the extra cost for the phase is well worth it, and it will hold its value far more than a 35mm option

My goals are for Web presentation, do you feel a phase outranks a 35mm for this application?

Peter De Smidt
31-May-2017, 17:17
I'd look carefully at a Nikon D810 + a 60mm or 105mm micro-Nikkor. The camera has terrific resolution and dynamic range, there are tons of great lenses for it, it's at the end of it's product cycle, and so it's not that old but can be had for a good price.

Taija71A
31-May-2017, 18:39
Hi Oren, 22 - 30 down to 11 x14 inches, I have a Creo for smaller print scans, I do not think I will be working in much larger than 22 x30.


I'd look carefully at a Nikon D810 + a 60mm or 105mm micro-Nikkor...

Question:

Bob, are you planning to use this Camera on a Copy Stand (Vertical) or on a Tripod (Horizontal)?

At the Image Magnifications cited above...
This decision will also help you to determine your best choice of 'Lens F.L.' -- For the proper 'Working Distance'.
--
Thank-you! Regards,

-Tim.
_________

Jim Andrada
31-May-2017, 19:23
Canon 5D MkIII with Zeiss Milvus manual focus prime should be more than good enough - a lot more than good enough.

Peter De Smidt
31-May-2017, 20:52
Honestly, any of the suggestions made would give very good results with some tweaking.

Oren Grad
31-May-2017, 22:11
Question:

Bob, are you planning to use this Camera on a Copy Stand (Vertical) or on a Tripod (Horizontal)?

At the Image Magnifications cited above...
This decision will also help you to determine your best choice of 'Lens F.L.' -- For the proper 'Working Distance'.

What Tim said. The best of the 100-105mm macros are superb lenses, but unless you've got a monstrous copy stand or are working at some distance from wall-mounted subjects, they'll be too long for the largest works you want to copy. Actually, if you go with a full-frame 35mm format, it may pay off in convenience and production efficiency to invest in two macro lenses - one in the 50-60mm range, the other 100-105.

I don't think you need to go to a medium format camera/back for web use. Careful technique including optimal lighting should allow you to convey an impression of the physical character of your prints even with a 35 format. Especially if you're not intending to make prints from these captures, medium format adds disproportionate expense - not just in purchase but also in repair cost should your equipment ever need service - for marginal improvements in technical quality.

If you want to try to squeeze out maximum technical image quality for the least money, and given that you're working with subjects that sit still, the multi-shot/pixel-shift feature of the Pentax K-1 full-frame camera can yield astonishingly good results.

bob carnie
1-Jun-2017, 06:50
Question:

Bob, are you planning to use this Camera on a Copy Stand (Vertical) or on a Tripod (Horizontal)?

At the Image Magnifications cited above...
This decision will also help you to determine your best choice of 'Lens F.L.' -- For the proper 'Working Distance'.
--
Thank-you! Regards,

-Tim.
_________

Tim

I think Vertical but that could change in my new and final space.

Taija71A
1-Jun-2017, 07:27
What Tim said. The best of the 100-105mm macros are superb lenses, but unless you've got a monstrous copy stand or are working at some distance from wall-mounted subjects, they'll be too long for the largest works you want to copy. Actually, if you go with a full-frame 35mm format, it may pay off in convenience and production efficiency to invest in two macro lenses - one in the 50-60mm range, the other 100-105 ...


Tim, I think Vertical but that could change in my new and final space.

Excellent.

If 'Vertical' for now...
You now know what Lens F.L. you should be looking for (50-60mm) to start.
--
As Oren so eloquently stated...
"The 100-105mm Macro Lenses will be too long for the largest works -- That you want to copy."

Thank-you!

bob carnie
1-Jun-2017, 08:59
Thank you all for the advice , I will chew on this and report back when I make my moves.

Jim Andrada
1-Jun-2017, 13:59
The 5DIII has come down a lot in price new since the IV was announced which is why I got one. And the newer Zeiss lenses are superb if you don't mind manual focus.

Heck - it's probably hard to get a modern digicam that isn't better than what one needs for the Web. I think now a good used 5DII or even the original 5D is really inexpensive, so the money can go for the glass. Same should be true for Nikon.

My complaint (if any) with the 5DIII is that it doesn't support interchangeable focusing screens. but I use an external electronic viewfinder attached to the HDMI port for critical focus anyhow. That should make use of a vertical copy stand easier - you can position the EVF anywhere that makes sense regardless of the height of the camera and utilize the magnification feature of the camera to help with focus. Or tether the camera to your PC/Mac, but I already had the EVF for my video cams.

Peter De Smidt
1-Jun-2017, 14:38
Just shoot tethered via Capture 1.

Oren Grad
1-Jun-2017, 14:48
My complaint (if any) with the 5DIII is that it doesn't support interchangeable focusing screens. but I use an external electronic viewfinder attached to the HDMI port for critical focus anyhow. That should make use of a vertical copy stand easier - you can position the EVF anywhere that makes sense regardless of the height of the camera and utilize the magnification feature of the camera to help with focus. Or tether the camera to your PC/Mac, but I already had the EVF for my video cams.

In the same vein, for most work on my vertical, table-top copy stand I use my EOS 60D rather than my EOS 6D, because the 60D's swivel-screen LCD can be twisted around to a comfortable viewing orientation regardless of how far the camera is elevated on the column. I don't use the swivel feature at all otherwise, but on the stand it's a neck-and-back-saver - no need to strain muscles by twisting myself into awkward positions to get a good view for framing and focusing.

If I were doing high-volume production copy work for professional purposes I would certainly consider a tethered setup.

bob carnie
2-Jun-2017, 06:14
Just shoot tethered via Capture 1.

I was thinking exactly this .

Ted R
2-Jun-2017, 15:19
Canon DSLR cameras (like the 5Dmk2 and later) include this facility using the free Canon EOS Utility software.

Peter De Smidt
2-Jun-2017, 17:27
Canon DSLR cameras (like the 5Dmk2 and later) include this facility using the free Canon EOS Utility software.

In my experience that can certainly work, but it's often flaky, as in it'll lose connection and have to be restarted. Capture One does tethering really well.

Jim Andrada
3-Jun-2017, 00:27
Capture 1 may do tethering really well, but it doesn't seem to do installing quite as well. I decided to give it a try and it (or some driver that it installed) made a huge mess of my Win 7 system that took half the day to get right again. :( Having said that it's finally running and looks quite good.

j.e.simmons
3-Jun-2017, 04:32
Just shoot tethered via Capture 1.

I agree. I also like the Capture One software for most editing. If you like Nikons, the D750 has a tillable screen that may be useful.

Leigh
3-Jun-2017, 09:50
Another vote for the Nikon D800E. I have two of them, and am very pleased.

The 36 Megapixel resolution gives you amazing results. It's the same as my Hasselblad CFV-39.

I suggest using a long focal length lens, like 105 micro or 200 micro, to increase working distance.
Those also reduce the angle of coverage, so you have less light fall-off toward the edges.
Yes, ALL lenses have light fall-off as you diverge from the optical axis.

- Leigh

Ted R
3-Jun-2017, 10:35
Regarding the Canon software, my experience was smooth and painless with Windows 7, both installation and operation. The Canon support webpage offers all the system software including the image editor and remote tether applications Digital Photo Professional and EOS Utility, this is what I use and have found to be reliable. There is an additional item, Imagebrowser, which I do not use because it is aggressive in taking over the default windows picture library, I found this out the hard way :-( I wonder if this was the item that caused a problem with instability? The Canon installation software allows a choice of the items to be installed and I recommend omitting Imagebrowser.

Jim Andrada
3-Jun-2017, 21:27
Sorry I wan't clear - the big problems I had were from installing Capture 1. It was quite a battle but it now seems to be working OK.