Page 9 of 9 FirstFirst ... 789
Results 81 to 86 of 86

Thread: Image quality from digital vs analog lens both shot on film

  1. #81
    Moderator
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Northern Virginia
    Posts
    5,074

    Re: Image quality from digital vs analog lens both shot on film

    It is certainly true that short lenses require fine focus because of the very shallow depth of focus. And it is true that the recent 6x9 view cameras generally have very rigid and finely geared movement because of the shallower angles needed with short lenses to get a given Scheimpflug effect. That said, I have gotten critically sharp results from a 47 SA using both a cheap and an expensive 6x12 back. No movements there--coverage is marginal at best--and I tend to always use smallish stops. But I judge the results at least on a par with my Pentax 67 45mm lens, and maybe even a bit better.

    My Sinar F is not usually considered the ideal camera for that application, and I have to be committed and meticulous about focusing it, but it works. With the Wide Angle Bellows 2, all the movements one might need for 6x9 are possible with that lens even on a flat board. It's maybe no match in terms of sharpness with a Mamiya 7, but the Mamiya lacks the same image management tools.

    Regarding bokeh, I learned a while back that the aperture shape is only part of the story, and maybe not an important part. Some lens have harsh and edgy bokeh even wide open, when the aperture is round. And lenses that are designed to snap into high MTF at the relevant spatial frequencies seem to not have that lovely smooth transition from focused to unfocused. Even a Super Angulon might have that issue, as do most plasmats, at least when compared to and old tessar or a Sonnar.

    Rick "whose roll film results at least make the most of a Nikon scanner" Denney

  2. #82
    Drew Wiley
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    SF Bay area, CA
    Posts
    10,542

    Re: Image quality from digital vs analog lens both shot on film

    I'll admit when I want selective focus I'm more likely to be using a handheld Nikon or
    perhaps a dagor in the 8x10. Cooke is the only company I'm aware of making a softish view lens with a modern shutter; but the optics have been specially tweaked for this
    purpose.

  3. #83
    Drew Wiley
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    SF Bay area, CA
    Posts
    10,542

    Re: Image quality from digital vs analog lens both shot on film

    Two different problems, really. Oblique light rays from a wide angle hitting a digital sensor versus modern film. Pros and cons either way. And I'll bet those new "metric"
    cameras from Arca, Sinar, Linhof are a dream to work with in the studio, but don't sound very practical in the field, especially at those prices.

  4. #84
    Kirk Gittings's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Albuquerque, Nuevo Mexico
    Posts
    9,712

    Re: Image quality from digital vs analog lens both shot on film

    don't sound very practical in the field, especially at those prices
    I can't speak for the Sinar or the Linhof but the new Arca technical cameras like the Rmd3i is designed for use in the field and is being used in the field by top architectural photographers that I know around the world.
    Thanks,
    Kirk

    at age 67
    "The woods are lovely, dark and deep,
    But I have promises to keep,
    And miles to go before I sleep,
    And miles to go before I sleep"

  5. #85
    Drew Wiley
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    SF Bay area, CA
    Posts
    10,542

    Re: Image quality from digital vs analog lens both shot on film

    The main problem I'd have with an Arca, Kirk, is getting it dinged up without the
    quick availability of replacement parts. I don't know what Sinar is doing right now,
    but I once fractured a standard bearer in a sudden storm in the Wind River Range.
    I locked it down wise no rise, so the camera was basically usable the rest of the trip. As soon as I got down the hill to a pay phone I called Sinar Bron. Two days later when I arrived back here the correct part had already been delivered to my
    house. Their service was incredible. Now I guess one just buys a spare Sinar on the
    used market. But those beautiful Arcas do make me salivate.

  6. #86

    Re: Image quality from digital vs analog lens both shot on film

    I considered the Linhof M679 when I was looking for a 2x3 for digital. There seem to be plenty on the used market which makes me wonder why so many used. Two big factors influencing my decision were the short bellows limiting long glass and the weight at around ten pounds for the camera alone. A secondary but important factor was the lens boards were totally different and very expensive. I still shoot film too and would have to constantly remount lenses between systems which is something I don't like to do. The Technikardan 23 seemed to be the right answer for me.

Similar Threads

  1. future of 4x5 and 8x10 film
    By bglick in forum Darkroom: Film, Processing & Printing
    Replies: 258
    Last Post: 11-Apr-2009, 12:25
  2. Is digital 6x9cm quality as good as 5x4" film"
    By wnw in forum Cameras & Camera Accessories
    Replies: 52
    Last Post: 14-Jul-2008, 05:08
  3. LF lens manufacturer philosophy
    By Chris Bitmead in forum Lenses & Lens Accessories
    Replies: 23
    Last Post: 8-Oct-2007, 01:12
  4. High-End Digital Vs. 4x5 Film
    By Eric Leppanen in forum Digital Hardware
    Replies: 130
    Last Post: 21-May-2006, 18:11
  5. 8K film recorders for repro vs. original film
    By bglick in forum Darkroom: Film, Processing & Printing
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 21-Sep-2005, 10:38

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •