Affordable digital back for 4X5?

[John Conway]

I am curious. I wonder if someday there will be a back , the size of a 4X5 film holder, that can be used in a 4x5 camera for digital capture. I remember a few years ago there was a company that came out with a device that fit into a 35mm camera that captured digital images. That idea was wiped off the map. I love film, but I would like the flexibility to use both types of capture in the same camera.

[Jim collum]

i've been using http://www.betterlight.com/ with very few problems since 2001 (90% field work)

not as flexible as film for working conditions (wind is the biggest issue.. against the camera more than the subject)..but i've found it an excellent tool

[vinny]

nope.

[Kirk Gittings]

i've been using http://www.betterlight.com/ with very few problems since 2001 (90% field work)

not as flexible as film for working conditions (wind is the biggest issue.. against the camera more than the subject)..but i've found it an excellent tool

And doing some damn fine work too.

[Nathan Potter]

Check into large format Xray backs used in hospitals. The best (smaller of course) have 35 to 75 um pixel pitches. Larger run 75 to 160 pitch. B&W only of course.

Nate Potter, Austin TX.

[Ari]

nope.

If brevity be the soul of wit, you, sir, must be a riot at parties.

:)

[Jim collum]

And doing some damn fine work too.

wow... thanks Kirk for the kind words!!

hope to get out your way some day to actually meet you in person

jim

[bob carnie]

Just make sure he gets something to eat and Paletti is not around.


wow... thanks Kirk for the kind words!!

hope to get out your way some day to actually meet you in person

jim

[Brian Ellis]

The first digital camera was the Kodak DCS 100 that came out in 1991. It had a 1.4 mpx sensor and had to be tethered to a big bulky monitor/control unit. The whole rig was carried around in a custom-made suitcase. It cost $30,000. Back then who would have thought that a cell phone or pocket-size P&S would be infinitely better and cost next to nothing?

That was only 20 years ago. Considering what's happened in just 20 years, I think it would be foolish to think that an affordable 4x5 back can't be produced in the next 20. The only question IMHO is whether the potential market is big enough for anyone to bother doing it.

[Kirk Gittings]

wow... thanks Kirk for the kind words!!

hope to get out your way some day to actually meet you in person

jim

Maybe for the reception at the LFF FS exhibit (assuming it happens)?

[Kirk Gittings]

Just make sure he gets something to eat and Paletti is not around.

Words of wisdom from a partner in crime............

[Drew Wiley]

Heck, they make adapter backs for Nikon and Canon cameras to view camera. Should be
easy enough to make one for a cell phone!

[John Conway]

Come on, you guy's know what I mean. Something the size of a film holder, with two buttons on it, on and off. Jim, your work is top notch, and though I will always like film better, I have respect for people that create great images with digital. I have seen digital black and white that blew me away. It just seems so complicated when I look at the set up in the field with all the equipment. And then there is the price of the equipment, man, the current stuff is way up there.

[PhiloFarmer]

I bought a Leaf Aptus-65 for under $10K....a sliding back adapter and loupe for $350+$150...and have been stretching my P-2 wings ever since. I keep my eyes open for opportunities to upgrade......! Sigh...money!

[Jim collum]

Come on, you guy's know what I mean. Something the size of a film holder, with two buttons on it, on and off. Jim, your work is top notch, and though I will always like film better, I have respect for people that create great images with digital. I have seen digital black and white that blew me away. It just seems so complicated when I look at the set up in the field with all the equipment. And then there is the price of the equipment, man, the current stuff is way up there.

thanks John!

yea.. i know what you mean.. there are times that I don't feel like hauling out the Betterlight, and just stick to film... but the 'effort' involved is relative... i'm sure someone who shoots p&s digital doesn't understand why we'd be hauling around these huge wooden cameras and actually use a tripod.. when the p&s is sooo much easier.
(just look at what the wet plate shooters do for field work.... )

but.. realistically speaking... if i had a choice that gave me the same image quality as the Betterlight, single shot, and it came self contained in a film holder size package... i'd go that route.

as far as price goes.. there are sub $6k Betterlights that show up on ebay all the time.. which is less than you'd pay for a good full frame DSLR

[John Conway]

The wet plate comparison is a good point. I think for me personally, warming up to technology is a big obstacle. Even with my Nikon D40 dslr, I use the camera in the most basic mode. I see that the large format digital options are improving as far as size, cost, and ease of operation.

[Drew Wiley]

Just look at the way portable laptop computers and viewing screens have evolved.
I've said it before, but pardon me if I say it again, everything we call digital today will probably be extinct before sheet film is. Something completely different will replace both. It will be some vastly lighter and more affordable kind of technology.
But I'm not going to wait. Digital just ain't there yet for me, and when it finally does
arrive at my quality expectations, I'll probably be in a rockin' chair anyway, reminiscing about wading thirty miles a day with bleeding bare feet through the snow with my 8X10 and clubbing hungry packs of sasquatch with my Ries tripod -
or at least some such story that will entertain any yung uns visiting the old folks home.

[brian mcweeney]

There won't be any 4x5 sized digital backs made because there won't be any customers to pay the kind of price it would demand. My iphone takes better pictures than the first set of DSLR cameras did, and the full frame DSLRs with good lenses now take better pictures than my Phase One back on a Hasselblad did. Plus the cost of a 5D Mark II is 10% of what a digital back cost and it produces 60mb size files.

The math just doesn't add up for a 4x5 size digital back ... no matter how cool that would be!

[AJSJones]

There won't be any 4x5 sized digital backs made because there won't be any customers to pay the kind of price it would demand. My iphone takes better pictures than the first set of DSLR cameras did, and the full frame DSLRs with good lenses now take better pictures than my Phase One back on a Hasselblad did. Plus the cost of a 5D Mark II is 10% of what a digital back cost and it produces 60mb size files.

The math just doesn't add up for a 4x5 size digital back ... no matter how cool that would be!

You're talking getting one functional sensor out of a single 6 or 8 inch silicon wafer at 100% yield - someone in the industry might be able to give us an idea of the cost of that processing. Normally, they get 100s or even 1000's from such sizes and the processing costs are divided by that number .....

[keithwms]

Stitching is still insanely cheaper than the backs out there. I am surprised we haven't seen more price movement- must be very limited demand still.

[Leigh]

Not exactly the OP's intent, but...

I have an adapter for my Sinar F2 so I can mount a Hasselblad body on the F2.

That enables me to use my Hasselblad CFV-39 39Mpixel back on the Sinar.
Obviously it's a small sensor compared with 4x5, but it's no slouch, and the available LF lenses work very well.

- Leigh

[Peter De Smidt]

Leigh,

You should be able to get a back adapter for the Sinar so that you can mount the digital back without having to mount the Hasselblad body. That's what we did back at the old studio.

[Drew Wiley]

Stitching is also an incredibly clumsy method for taking a picture, if you want to even
call it that. We should invent an ASA system just for stitching, probably in the minus
numbers. And just focusing a small screen is a headache, esp if movement are needed.
Be interesting in twenty years or so to look back and chuckle at all the evolutionary
side branches to this kind of technology which become extinct. Ordinary sheet film is
still the most practical thing for detailed imagery in the field, or for those who can't
depreciate huge sums of equip expense every few years. Probably see a pal of mine
this morning who does all his own work Betterlight now - but he specializes in food
photography in the studio and never shoots on location. But even Betterlight is doomed due to lack of ongoing component mfg.

[Leigh]

You should be able to get a back adapter for the Sinar so that you can mount the digital back without having to mount the Hasselblad body.
Hi Peter,

That might be possible.

However, the CFV-39 is designed to work with the V-series bodies. You may have been using the CF-39, which is not.

I use the 555ELD body which provides the correct electromechanical interface for the back.

This arrangement also allows me to shoot the Hasselblad film backs on the Sinar.

Thanks.

- Leigh

[photoSmart42]

You can't get more affordable than a cheap scanner... there's your digital back.

[Jim collum]

You can't get more affordable than a cheap scanner... there's your digital back.

it'll need to be a bit better than 'cheap' if you want to give the 4x5 neg/trans what it's due :)

you can find some relatively inexpensive high end scanners (Eversmart Pro's and such) for under $2k out there. I've been using an Eversmart Pro for a few years now.. and it's pretty bulletproof.. older tech, but still very functional