camera heads up...
- Thread starter Mr Cat
- Start date
cliffpatte
Speed camera anarchist
wow, whats the handle for, does it spit out the used memory card?
Derek Wright
pfm Member
I wonder if the crop factor is more to prevent excessive vignetteing that a full frame sensor would experience due to the individual sensors being at the end of short tubes so light arriving from an angle (ie at the edge of a full frame ) gets restricted access to the sensor.
A film is essentially flat so light at the edges of the full frame still can be recorded on the film.
This is better explained by Olympus at
http://www.olympus.co.uk/consumer/dslr_7045.htm
scroll down to "Lens resolution & corner-shading"
A film is essentially flat so light at the edges of the full frame still can be recorded on the film.
This is better explained by Olympus at
http://www.olympus.co.uk/consumer/dslr_7045.htm
scroll down to "Lens resolution & corner-shading"
Joe P
Memory Alpha incarnate | mod; Shatner number = 2
Some of amazing shots I've seen from digital Hasselblads can be attributable to fancy Carl Zeiss primes, but this comparison was damn near the most telling I've ever seen for getting good glass and a camera with a big, high-res sensor.
Here's a shot with a greyed area from which actual pixels from a 12MP Nikon D2X and a 39MP Hassy will be shown.
First, the actual pixels from the crop as resolved by the D2X...
... then the actual pixels from the crop as resolved by the Hassy.
(Another crop from the Hassy processed a bit differently to recover the highlights and shadows is here.)
I don't know which lenses were used in the test, but the Nikon probably had a pro f/2.8 Nikkor zoom of some sort and the Hassy probably had a Carl Zeiss prime mounted. It's worth noting that if this is the result you're after, a used medium format camera and a nice scanner will get you pretty close at a fraction of the cost... well, as long as you're not shooting 12 rolls of 120/220 film a day.
Joe
Here's a shot with a greyed area from which actual pixels from a 12MP Nikon D2X and a 39MP Hassy will be shown.
First, the actual pixels from the crop as resolved by the D2X...
... then the actual pixels from the crop as resolved by the Hassy.
(Another crop from the Hassy processed a bit differently to recover the highlights and shadows is here.)
I don't know which lenses were used in the test, but the Nikon probably had a pro f/2.8 Nikkor zoom of some sort and the Hassy probably had a Carl Zeiss prime mounted. It's worth noting that if this is the result you're after, a used medium format camera and a nice scanner will get you pretty close at a fraction of the cost... well, as long as you're not shooting 12 rolls of 120/220 film a day.
Joe
long-time-dead
pfm Member
That's an incredible difference.
However, am I correct in saying the Hasselblad is close to £20,000 ?
However, am I correct in saying the Hasselblad is close to £20,000 ?
Joe P
Memory Alpha incarnate | mod; Shatner number = 2
LTD,
The digital Hassy is around $11k in the U.S., which includes a 80mm f/2.8 CZ prime, so it isn't that much more than a Nikon D3 or a Canon 1Ds Mk III.
If money were no object and if I shot landscapes primarily, the choice for me would be clear -- digi-Hassy plus a couple of CZ primes. But I mostly take pictures of my daughter drawing on the driveway, so any pro camera would be overkill.
Joe
The digital Hassy is around $11k in the U.S., which includes a 80mm f/2.8 CZ prime, so it isn't that much more than a Nikon D3 or a Canon 1Ds Mk III.
If money were no object and if I shot landscapes primarily, the choice for me would be clear -- digi-Hassy plus a couple of CZ primes. But I mostly take pictures of my daughter drawing on the driveway, so any pro camera would be overkill.
Joe
Mr Cat
Owner
I heard 10k - and they're only making 500...you'll have to be quick!