New demand for LF lenses from large sensor cameras? Photokino news

[Tin Can]

Bob Salomon just posted this (http://www.photokina-show.com/0382/s...ras/seitz6x17/) in an odd place on another thread.

Could ULF large sensor digital cameras spur the market for existing LF lens, especially since no more BIG ones are in production?

:)

[Corran]

I think it will.

Some disagree, but I think larger and larger sensors, up to our "standard" 4x5 or larger, will eventually come to market. Obviously there's the guy right now working on a prototype 4x5 and 8x10 even digital back.

[Tin Can]

The Seitz 6x17 is already here, more to come I bet.

I also bet new BIG LF lenses will be made, but the prices will be astronomical. Anybody notice what digital video camera lenses cost...

Game on

[bob carnie]

I agree they will be expensive but they will come.


I think it will.

Some disagree, but I think larger and larger sensors, up to our "standard" 4x5 or larger, will eventually come to market. Obviously there's the guy right now working on a prototype 4x5 and 8x10 even digital back.

[Bob Salomon]

In case you didn't recognize what lens was on the camera it was the 72mm Super Angulon XL for the Linhof Technorama 617 SIII and the finder is the Linhof Technorama 617 SIII finder for the 72mm lens.

However, this lens is no longer in production.

[Christopher Barrett]

Also, that article is from '06. I guess digital capture formats larger than 645 are still waiting to take off?

[Tin Can]

Yes, I caught that late. I assumed Bob was reporting from Photokina. This year!

I can still hope...or be hopeless...


Also, that article is from '06. I guess digital capture formats larger than 645 are still waiting to take off?

[Bob Salomon]

Yes, I caught that late. I assumed Bob was reporting from Photokina. This year!

I can still hope...or be hopeless...

Actually I did not go for the first time in 30 years but that Seitz report is from a press release from this year's show. Maybe something has changed with the camera. Since we are not involved with Seitz we wouldn't know. It was a report that popped up doing a search of this years show by entering Linhof and another one entering Rodenstock.

Sorry if it is old news. But boy, that is either a large camera or a small user!

[Corran]

There must be a tipping point where the cost of the chip and the potential demand will meet, and a large-sensor camera back will be feasible to make and not cost more than most cars.

We'll see. Alternatively, that Seitz is a scanning back apparently, but can scan in 1 second. I have no idea how that tech works but I think most of us are pretty used to 1 second exposures (or many more) so that's not too bad. Perhaps a (relatively) cheap scanning back will be the first thing we see for digital LF.

[Matsushime]

Also, that article is from '06. I guess digital capture formats larger than 645 are still waiting to take off?

Haha!

[dsphotog]

Bob Salomon just posted this (http://www.photokina-show.com/0382/s...ras/seitz6x17/) in an odd place on another thread.

Could ULF large sensor digital cameras spur the market for existing LF lens, especially since no more BIG ones are in production?

:)


It looks BIG..... 6x17... INCHES????!!!! Now that would be a large sensor!

[Jonathan Barlow]

And only around $40,000 back in 2007. I wonder how many they sold?

[mdarnton]

How many pixels do we really need, and does spreading them over 4x5 inches instead of 1x1.5 matter? I've been thinking lately that I could probably do what I'm trying to do with 8x10 with my Nikon D300, or better yet, a D810 or D750, and a different attitude--use a tripod, shoot close to wide open, pretend that each shot counts. The 8x10 forces me into a mode, but there's no law saying i couldn't do that with a tiny camera instead of the big one.

I do, however, realize that digital gives a different look. But that might not be insurmountable, either.

When it comes down to it, the thing that really caught me on large film was the special look of x-ray film, not the size. Until I discovered that film, I wasn't shooting much LF recently. I guess there's probably a plugin to do that--the digital x-ray look--too. . . .

[tgtaylor]

What are you waiting for? Switch to digital and be done with it.

Thomas

[paulr]

Deleted. No need.

[Emmanuel BIGLER]

that article is from '06.

.. yes, the 6x17 Seitz scanning camera is not new but is still there.
I attended the recent 2014 Photokina In Cologne, and Seitz AG was there and the 6x17 [cm] digital camera was on display as a current product.
I have no idea about how many of those expensive beasts were sold, definitely out of reach for the hobbyist, but Seitz offers to rent it for specific jobs, which sounds more reasonable.

We had a nice demo and could see the inside of the machine and this confirms what I had guessed.
This scanning back is fast, about one second, because there is a plate with about one centimeter of pixels in width, moving as a block.
With a regular scanning back and few pixel colums, the scan time is about one minute. So the solution implemented by Seitz AG is to scan with more pixels in width.
With even more pixels e.g. 17000 pixels in width (one pixel every 10 microns for example) you would not even have to move the plate and could reach the 1/500-th of a second ;)

[Toyon]

Does anyone make a compact and portable lens shutter anymore?

[Bob Salomon]

Does anyone make a compact and portable lens shutter anymore?

Mechanical? No. Electronic? Rodenstock. But while it is very compact it still needs to be plugged into a computer to operate.

[Tin Can]

http://www.packardshutter.com/

[John Berry]

That much money, and you still have to have someone give you a reach around to punch the shutter button.

[Toyon]

http://www.packardshutter.com/

A fun relic, but not a useful speed shutter, and not compact.

[Tin Can]

I have some small ones that almost make 1/30th. Snappy.


A fun relic, but not a useful speed shutter, and not compact.