Advice needed on MF body and lens to rent

[nicolas claris]

Hi all
I have a new assignement that is planned for mid July to shoot exteriors and interiors of a big motor-yacht (about 60 meters long, moreless 180 feet).
As usual I'll bring some light (just a few) and an assistant. I'll use my old 1DSMKII, and, for the interiors the Sigma 12-24 and the Canon L 24_70 2.8 with a tripod.

NOW

I want to use this oportunity to test and try in real world an MF camera with digital back. For interior work only.
I'm looking for more pixels, but most of all to catch more details (i.e. wood veneer)
My aim is to check if, even very expensive for me, this kind of gear is worth it.

I have NEVER used such a camera, film or digital.

What would be your advise for choose to rent:
Body/brand/model

Back/brand

Lens: equivalent to 17mm in 24x36 or at leats 21 mm…

Thanks very much

 

[leonardobarreto.com]

Nicolas

If I was you and had a 1DsMk2 I would probably use a PC shift and take two shots with the Canon for stitching 16mp+16mp=32mp

If you want to do interior with a digital back there are two and a half alternatives, Mamiya and Hasselblad have nice 35mm lenses and both are just coming out with 28mm. You may be able to get the one from H3 and the Mamiya is not out yet.

So that was one and a half solutions -- Mamiya is the half -- the other is to use a Combo/Horseman/Alpa alternative with a view camera type lens, like a Digitar that go beyond 28mm.

The learning curve o all of this equipment will probably be hard to assimilate in one day of shooting on top of the exterior shots done with the Canon, but could be done. For example, if you are familiar with C1 then a Phase One would be kids play, and probably a Mamiya (with the 35mm AF) would be the less complicated camera to work with.(if you do use one remember to turn it off so that the camera batteries are not drained, that way they last a long time)

So, very predictably, my advice is Phase/Mamiya, except for H3+28mm , 35mm. The back has to be P 45 or P 25 because they are the ones with the larger sensor size.

Where are you shooting?

 

[leonardobarreto.com]

I forgot to mention, 35mm is equivalent to a 22mm on a 35mm and the full frame backs have a 1.1 "crop factor"... (the angle of view is 90 degrees) Schneider makes a 24mm ! and Rodenstock 28mm for digital use.

Look at the text that comes with the promotion of the Cambo Digital Wide DS camera

"Digital based lenses from Schneider and Rodenstock offer superior quality and
sharpness because there is no compromise for DSLR or medium format system
convenience. Retro focus designs used for wide-angle lenses in 35mm digital and
medium format, allow the back element of the lens to be further from the capture
plane. This is important to allow space for the mirror systems and more even
exposure for digital capture but compromises sharpness because the cone of light is
being optically extended. The differences here are so great that you really need to
make your own comparisons. An example of how wide angle designs were handled
before retro focus design lenses is the Hasselblad SWC camera, which has a
rangefinder or uses a ground glass for image framing because the body is so close to
the lens. "

 

[Klaus Esser]

rent a Hasselblad H3 with a 28mm and either 22 or 39MPx. Super lens! (ONLY for H3 - not a H1/H2)
you won´t need shift or tilt with that.

Very interesting would be to rent (from Seitz) a Seitz HighRes Digital Roundshot. It´s about 160MPx.
http://german.roundshot.ch/xml_1/internet/de/application/d438/d877/f886.cfm
or the digital 6x17 with a superwide lens:
http://german.roundshot.ch/xml_1/internet/de/application/d438/d877/f885.cfm
it also has 160MPx.

That´s really highres . . . and HDR!

best, Klaus

 

[Asher Kelman]

On the other hand, Leonardo, when the lens is close to the digital sensor, light going laterally to the sides of the sensor, skim the surface at an oblique angle and there can be all sorts of problems with color shifts and metamorism.

What counts is the system as a whole.

It also depends on the surface one is shooting. For example, from Rainer Viertblock, digital photography for open sky or aluminum or other almost monochromatic materials can easily show noise and various backs handle this differently. This is an area where I'd actually get Rainer to reply. If I were getting a back for a project, I'd look to the one with a dealer available to spend time with me.

However, after that, all things being equal, I'd go with Sinar at the moment, since that is what Rainer chose for his highest end architectural work. He uses the back with a Gottschalt camera body, but he uses other bodies too.

From the images I have seen, the files are magnificent. I cannot say the best, since I have not sufficent experience.

We need an update on the Sinar options anyway!

Asher

 

[nicolas claris]

Thanks Leonardo, Klaus and Asher!
Already a lot to dig there!

Yes I know and use daily C1 for years now (though the new ACR 4.1 and LR 1.1 are very interesting now).

The surface of interior is made of large windows, bamboo wood and sylk panelling, wood floor + large carpets, Stainless steel, white laquer.
All light colors, yellow, beige and white + glass and some metal.

Anyway I'll cover all of the job with the 1Ds, I just want to start my MF initiation here as already stated there's certainly a learning curve, and this is not my clients to pay for this!

But no doubt I know I could bring back some interesting frames. (may be with a can of coke;-)

The shoot is planned to be on the Côte d'Azur, maybe Toulon, the other problem will be to find a place to rent that kind of gear, may be in Marseille…

If anyone has more/different suggestions, as I'll dig... (and maybe has to have alternatives if the rental house has not the right thing at the right moment…)

 

[Klaus Esser]

Hey Nicolas!

"The surface of interior is made of large windows, bamboo wood and sylk panelling, wood floor + large carpets, Stainless steel, white laquer.
All light colors, yellow, beige and white + glass and some metal."

This works with HDR only! I had such sujets before. Listen to me: use HDR.

"Anyway I'll cover all of the job with the 1Ds"

I don´t know how familiar you are with stitching - that would be the best way to make a wideangle-shot.
Get a nodal-head, mount the camera in portrait-mode and shoot one row or multirow with an angle up to 120dgree. That´s about the upper number to make a planar-projection from. The longer the lens, the more single shots you´ll have to make. In the stitcher you make a planar-projection and render it highres in 16bit TIFFs.
Because of the overlapping of the severals shots, you use the center-area of your lens and you have no diagonal lightrays hitting the chip.

A Sinar-back wouldn´t do better - and can´t do such a wide angle.

best,, Klaus

P.S.: here´s an example - 100degree-angle horizontal, shot at available-light - no extra lights.
Canon 20D with 20mm Nikon-lens. Two rows of 6 shots each. Was about 2m deep too the opposite shelf.

 

[nicolas claris]

Hi Klaus

Now, I'm completely confused!

Yes I do know (though I'm not a specialist) about stitching:

Gustavia bay in St-Barthelemy, a very rare shot as the bay is almost empty, usually there are hundreds yachts anchored. Made in 2002 with a Nikon D1, 8 vertical shots (handheld!), about 180° (30 Mpix).


Say I follow that route, in your experience, what would be the best focal lens?

30 mm? 35 mm? 50 mm?

 

[Klaus Esser]

"Say I follow that route, in your experience, what would be the best focal lens?"

I would use 35mm or - if you want highres - 50mm on an 1DsMk2 or 20mm/35mm on a 20D/10D. And HDR (Bracketing -2/0/+2) - you´ll get optimal highlights and shadows with very high information and brilliant metals, marble and delicately wood.

best, Klaus

 

[Bart_van_der_Wolf]

Say I follow that route, in your experience, what would be the best focal lens?

Depends on the required field-of-view and the required output file size. In a confined space like a ship's interior there is a limit to your shooting distance. That distance, combined with the total field-of-view angle needed, divided by the number of shots (with some overlap) you want, should give the focal length to use.

I'd expect a 50mm or thereabouts will give super-resolution capability, yet limit the number of shots to a managable quantity for postprocessing. You could consider a TS-E 45mm which will allow to tweak the plane of focus (for each image tile if you want), which may come in handy at such short distances. It is a very sharp lens (much better than the 24mm), but it does exhibit some Chromatic Aberration especially visible towards the corners (which will get partially cut-off due to the overlap between tiles). The TS-E 90mm is optically superior, but you'd need a huge number of images to cover the field-of-view (although with huge magnification potential).

When you set a goal of 2x the required output dimensions in pixels, then you can downsample the result to superior RGB resolution (without aliasing) and very good 16-bit/channel tonal separation.

If you want to avoid postprocessing trouble, you obviously need to invest in a Pano-head assembly as well. I use the RRS Ultimate Omni-Pro package, mounted on the BH-55 ball head, which allows to make accurate multi-row stitches that require little postprocessing to make things fit seamlessly.

The stitching approach obviously can be used with a variety of camera systems, so it is future proof. Personally I would be interested in the 1D Mark III performance (14-bit ADC) and the 1Ds Mark III performance (presumed 16-bit ADC) combined with the stitching enabled FOV and resolution. Since interiors are usually stationary subjects, they lend themselves to stitching quite well, and one can also combine that with HDR bracketing.

Bart

 

[nicolas claris]

Hi Bart
1Ds Mark III?

 

[nicolas claris]

To both Bart and Klaus
You don't imagine the size of such yacht, there's a lot of room:

This is the owner's state room, shot for advertising (during construction):

The same while preparing the above shoot:

Still during construction, the "passerelle":

and this is the main salon during construction:

 

[Bart_van_der_Wolf]

You don't imagine the size of such yacht, there's a lot of room:

Okay, they are not all going to be that size, but what was the focal length for those?

Imagine almost doubling the resolution with a lens having a little less than half the field of view (4-6 images), and in addition having an output size twice the current one if you instead use a quarter FOV lens (16-24 images). The exact number of images needed depends on the final aspect ratio, which is of course flexible depending only on the number of rows and columns in the stitched output.

And the 1Ds Mk II's successor (2008 Q1, or Photokina Q3?) is supposedly going to be 16-bit, according to a little birdy whispering in Asher's ear. Don't know how the smaller sensels will affect the image quality in the end though (maybe same noise as the Mark II, litlle less DR, but with smoother tonality).

Bart

 

[nicolas claris]

Okay, they are not all going to be that size, but what was the focal length for those?

Sigma 12-24, most about 15 mm if I remember well (versions with Exif are in the office, and I'm home now…) The ad shot was @15

Imagine almost doubling the resolution with a lens having a little less than half the field of view (4-6 images), and in addition having an output size twice the current one if you instead use a quarter FOV lens (16-24 images). The exact number of images needed depends on the final aspect ratio, which is of course flexible depending only on the number of rows and columns in the stitched output.

And the 1Ds Mk II's successor (2008 Q1, or Photokina Q3?) is supposedly going to be 16-bit, according to a little birdy whispering in Asher's ear. Don't know how the smaller sensels will affect the image quality in the end though (maybe same noise as the Mark II, litlle less DR, but with smoother tonality).

My own little bird talked to my ear about a coming soon… MF Pentax...

But let's birds for now, they don't fill my pocket!

Imagine almost doubling the resolution with a lens having a little less than half the field of view (4-6 images), and in addition having an output size twice the current one if you instead use a quarter FOV lens (16-24 images). The exact number of images needed depends on the final aspect ratio, which is of course flexible depending only on the number of rows and columns in the stitched output.

I guess the feel and try will direct me for the final field of view.
Number of shots will of course depends of focal lens. I'm affraid that the Canon L 24_70 ƒ2.8 has too much barrel, if so I'll have to find a good 35 or 50.
Or the TS-E 45mm ?

 

[Klaus Esser]

Nicolas - as i mentioned (and Bart too) you can get a bigger angle by stitiching than with the widest ww in another combination! I like to use a 6x17cm-analogue camera with a 90mm and 75mm SuperAngulon.
They´re extremly fine for working from handheld.
But better results i can get by stitching with my 20D.

A word to postpro: using APP (AutoPanoPro) stitching/postpro is done in very short time with exellent quality. Using HDR, you have far more quality at hand than ever possible before . . doing that analogue would take 10 times of work.

 

[nicolas claris]

Klaus
my post just above yours is within the stiching option! With a tripod of course, with Sebastien one of the guys working with me we have built our own nodal plate as we quite oftenly stich VR views from shots made with the 1DsII and a Sigma 8mm F3.5 EX DG Fisheye

Here is an example (47 feet "little" boat)

Burnt sky is done because of horrible marina background…

For many reasons -OT- I won't go to the analogue route. Thanks anyway for suggesting.

 

[Bart_van_der_Wolf]

Sigma 12-24, most about 15 mm if I remember well (versions with Exif are in the office, and I'm home now…) The ad shot was @15

It seems a 45mm would provide the needed gains in resolution. 'Full frame' at 15mm would give a FOV of about 77x100 degrees, the TS-E 45mm is 33x44 degrees, so with overlap for blending say 9 images for an approx. identical FOV but much better resolution and larger output size.

The TS-E 90mm covers a little more than 15x22 degrees, so you'd need a large number of images, in the order of 49+ or so. If you also want to bracket for HDR that might become a bit much to handle, but it is doable and will deliver almost unsurpassable quality if all goes well.

I'm affraid that the Canon L 24_70 ƒ2.8 has too much barrel, if so I'll have to find a good 35 or 50. Or the TS-E 45mm ?

Distortion will be corrected as part of the stitching procedure, but it is best to use fixed focus lenses because you only have to figure out its optimal positioning for pivot point (entry pupil of the lens) once, instead of guessing for multiple semi-repeatable focal length settings in a zoom.

Any good (sharp to the corners, good AR coating) fixed focal length lens will do, but a TS-E will allow to change the focal plane for added DOF.

Bart

 

[Michael Fontana]

Someone says stitching?

Doing that night and days since a week, kinda shooting at day, stitching at night, for a urbanistic architecture job, I'd go the stitching way. Klaus is right, you can't beat that quality:

- using the sweet spot of a lens, only. Thus avoiding the physical downside of every wide lens, it's border weakness in contrast, distortion, etc.

- accumulating object informations, as by no other mean you could do. When stitching this week, with bad wheater conditions - you might ask a architecture photographer to shoot at full moon's light only - no problem - but around the longuest days of the year, light is just crap - the only way to get the shots done within that week - was to stich; I have a 13x 18 sinar, but ...... the stitches with the 100 mm macro (one of the best lenses canon made) would win, hands down. I guess the 50 mm macro-stitches would still be ahead of 13/18.

Bref: very often I was amazed about the result. I might upload tomorrow some screenies, saying more than I wrote here.

When I made the decision MFback vs stitching, I asked myself, like you, how much time I'll really need a MFback. For these magazines, basically a 1 Ds-2 with a good lens is often a overkill. But sometimes, better image quality is required.

Personally, I found the stitching route to be the best; giving me the all possibilities, as using well known equipement, the best results, and - just a example, more freedom when shooting:
When stitching, If you need a bigger angle; no problem: let's just add a additional shot at the left or right side, and you might get another image.

 

[Michael Fontana]

ok, here's one of these stitches:

The pano is 200/50 cm/300 dpi, the bottom left is 100%, straight out of the stitcher and unsharpend.

BTW: when stitching with shiftlenses, you'll never get the distortion away, unless you calculate the sensor's offsett for each frame. That's a hell of a work.

 

[nicolas claris]

Thanks Michael
another one to drive me to the stiching route…

I just come bck from my local Canon dealer and got him lend me a 50mm ƒI.8 II (the one in "plastic"), just to try a validation of the technic for me…

Thanks all for your good advices, continue posting if you have other ideas, that may help more people than me alone ;-)

 

[nicolas claris]

Your pano posted just before my answer to your previous post…

amazing the amonut of details, this is what I'm looking for. What camera/lens combo did you use?

 

[Klaus Esser]

Klaus
my post just above yours is within the stiching option! With a tripod of course, with Sebastien one of the guys working with me we have built our own nodal plate as we quite oftenly stich VR views from shots made with the 1DsII and a Sigma 8mm F3.5 EX DG Fisheye

Here is an example (47 feet "little" boat)

Burnt sky is done because of horrible marina background…

For many reasons -OT- I won't go to the analogue route. Thanks anyway for suggesting.

Hi Nicolas!

Fine shot and - of course - fine boat . . .

Using HDR you´d have had full sky-information while keeping the shown interior impression.

 

[Klaus Esser]

Hey Michael!

Last night i downloaded APP 1.4.0 Alpha Mac - works well! Some minor issues.

best, Klaus

 

[Michael Fontana]

Your pano posted just before my answer to your previous post…

amazing the amonut of details, this is what I'm looking for. What camera/lens combo did you use?

That was with 1 Ds-2 and the Canon 100 macro. For going wider, I use the 50 mm macro, and further, the 28 mm distagon.

 

[nicolas claris]

Hi Nicolas!

Fine shot and - of course - fine boat . . .

Using HDR you´d have had full sky-information while keeping the shown interior impression.

Yes Klaus, I know that HDR would have brung much more details in the sky but I didn't want (cranes in the background…). I also think that sometime, having a pure white sky may bring the feeling of high light, sun, summer, heat…

 

[Michael Fontana]

Hey Michael!

Last night i downloaded APP 1.4.0 Alpha Mac - works well! Some minor issues.

best, Klaus

Yep, I gave it a try, last night too: works much better with the 15 mm fish than the old way, aka, defishing and stitching with APP 1.3. Zenith/Nadir is much easier as well!

 

[nicolas claris]

Yep, I gave it a try, last night too: works much better with the 15 mm fish than the old way, aka, defishing and stitching with APP 1.3. Zenith/Nadir is much easier as well!

Any link for the download ?-)

 

[Dan Walsh]

Stitching Options

Have you considered the Zork adapter with the Pentax 35FA. All reports from those who've used this combo rave about the resolution and lack of distortion plus with the ability to shift, you can obtain the
equivalent view of a 17mm lens. I think the medium format route for this job would be frustrating unless you had lot's of time to test and several brands to compare.

 

[Klaus Esser]

Hi Nicolas!

"but I didn't want (cranes in the background…). I also think that sometime, having a pure white sky may bring the feeling of high light, sun, summer, heat…"

Right! Understand.

best, Klaus

 

[Klaus Esser]

Any link for the download ?-)

http://en.wiki.autopano.net/Latest_Beta

bst, Klaus