What digital system for commercial still life?

[kipling]

My situation: I find myself doing more and more still life commercial work and would like

to build on this. I'm currently using a Sinar system for most of my work, I've also use a

Rollei 6008 on several occasions. <p>

Recently, I had a job doing a folder with a number of smaller shots of kitchen

knives and I decided to rent a canon digital set up for the smaller shots in the folder. The

canon set up (10D) I used just blew me away. It was so easy and so fast, I ended up

shooting hundreds of shots I wasn't planning on shooting and had a tremendous amount

of material to choose from, without the usual expense and time consuption of developing

and scanning. This was perfect for this sort of job.<p>

I've read a lot of threads and heard a lot of good and bad things about digital equipment. I

have found one system that I think as a commercial still lifer would be a good choice. The

Contax 645 AF with a digital Back. I think that the Contax would be the most flexable

choice, it will allow me to shoot film and digital, it's very mobile, I can rent the digital back

when I need it or purchase one in the future, but know I'll have the Contax for a longer

period of time without it becoming obsolete, I'll still have my Sinar for tricky stuff where I

need real movements but will have the Contax for everything else with the digital

advantage. <p>

It kind of sounds like I've made up my mind but I would really like to hear what you people

think about this set up and what you use in terms of digital for commercial still life work,

in and out of the studio. Does anyone have experience with the auto bellows for the

contax?

<p>

Thanks for any tips you guys might be able to give me.

[awindsor]

Still life is an ideal medium for a scanning back for a large format camera. Such backs are similar to desktop scanners turned on their sides and stuck at the film plane (though many are in fact monotone and do mulitple passes with different filters to capture RGB). The are essentially useless for anything that moves but still life is, well, still. <P>

 

This of course depends on what you want but that will get you huge digital files with resolutions as good as your LF film. They are not fast and convenient however but significantly cheaper than even a true MF digital back (which incidentally normally captures an image area smaller than the orginal format). The Rollei Gamma S12 is a scanning back for your Rollei 6008 which delivers a 12MP image. For true digital backs you can take a look at <A HREF="http://www.eyelike.de/temp/index.php?language=2&primaercolumn=1&column=1">Jenoptik</A> or <A HREF="http://www.betterlight.com">BetterLight</A><P>

 

Digital backs for MF cameras are not cheap. Depending on what your needs are a full frame DSLR might be enough. The Canon 1Ds is an 11MP CMOS chip dSLR. <P>

[gary_ferguson1]

I've just starting using the Linhof M679 in anticipation of getting an untethered MF digital back this year. The precision and rigidity of the camera is astonishing, for a movement camera it's like a cross between a micrometer and the Rock of Gibraltar!

 

This type of set up (the Arca Swiss 6x9 would be another alternative) has a couple of key advantages. Firstly there's full movements on both standards. Secondly there's slide backs which allow simple and precise stitching, so a 22MP back becomes a 41MP back.

[._._z]

Budget?

[kipling]

Under $10.000 for the initial investment in the system with the possibility renting certain

items for the time being. For example buying the Contax system and renting the digital

back or a 1ds Body/kit and renting certain lenses, etc.

[gary_ferguson1]

Kipling, if you want some samples of tabletop work with a 1Ds and Canon Tilt & Shift lenses contact me off line.

[david choo]

Think carefully about post processing. =) Main reason I don't move digital is because I don't want to do post. But if post doesn't bother you then a Canon 10D is usually enough for those smaller shots, the Canon 1Ds or Kodak 14n, could very well give you better image quality then 120 film.

[qdb]

If you have hot lights, a scan back will provide awesome results, but the setup lacks flexibilty.

 

No doubt about it, a Contax 645 plus medium format back will add in the versatility, and you could try and pick up a 16mp Kodak Proback inexpensively, now that they have been discontinued.

 

Another, cheaper, option would be a Kodak SLR/n, the improved 14mp dslr from Kodak, or if you prefer Canon glass, it's sibling, the SLR/c. I use a 14nx (the 14n with SLR/n upgraded sensor), and it can give great results, meeting your quality needs, and coming in well under budget.

 

Quentin

[peter_phan]

Kodak SLR/c and Canon tilt-shifts if you're on a budget, Canon 1Ds and Canon tilt-shifts if you aren't.

[steve_hovland]

What is the end use of the pictures?

 

If it is 2" by 2" pictures in some catalog you don't need very many pixels.

[kipling]

End use is for commercial photography, in my case is between billboard and smaller

photos for folders and the like. I'm not concerned with those extremes though because

like I mentioned above, I have my Sinar equipment for 4x5 that handle anything. What I'm

looking for is more speed and versatility when I'm not just doing single photos. <p>

The 1Ds sounds interesting with the tilt/shift lenses, if anybody has some examples of

tabletop photos they've done with this equipment I'd be very interested in seeing them. I'm

not doing fine art so I don't need to be able to make huge prints, a single or double page

ad is about as big as it gets. The Contax equipment I thought interesting because it could

shoot both film and digital, giving me the freedom to just rent a digital back and wait until

prices come down and excellent image quality from a digital back is affordable. <p> Is

anyone using this set up? So far no-one has really made any comments on this alternative,

which is making me kind of nervous.

[steve_hovland]

I believe Brooks Short has had some experience with the 22 MP backs for medium format and was thrilled by what he saw. You should be able to find his email on this site.

[gary_ferguson1]

Here's a table top Canon 1Ds shot with the 90mm tilt and shift lens. Kipling, I've e-mailed you the full size, unsharpened shot so you can play around with it. The shot was f11 with a few degrees of both tilt and shift applied.<div></div>

[gary_ferguson1]

And here's a 100% crop.<div></div>

[gary_ferguson1]

And another<div></div>

[gary_ferguson1]

And if anyone wants to buy the camera in the photograph it's on Ebay right now!

[brooks short]

Kipling,

 

Your idea of using a Contax (or Mamiya etc) and a medium format digital back is the right choice for the studio and most location work. A Kodak 14 N or Canon 1Ds is easier to use outside with available light and longer lenses are available for 35mm type camera bodies.

 

I shoot a lot of table-top, product and food on 4x5 film. Until about 2 1/2 years ago. Since then I've been using a Kodak ProBack Plus on either a Sinar or Mamiya RZ Pro II. The Kodak backs have been discontinued but the same chip is in the new Leaf and Phase One Backs.

 

Because the chip in these backs is physically larger thqan that in the 14N, which I also own, and the 1Ds, the color and image quality is better. The ProBack shoots a 48mb RGB 8 bit (96mb 16 bit) file with a 13.5"x13.5" image at 300 dpi. Good enough for 8.5x11 full page magazine reproduction at a 150 line screen with some cropping. The image quality is really incredible. Better than 2 1/4 film. Honest.

 

I haven't had a chance to shoot with the new 22mp chip, also made by Kodak, in the new larger backs but I imagine the files are stunning. This new 22mp chip is not square like the ProBack. It's rectangular with the short dimension identical to the one in the square Proback. I'm guessing a 13.5" x16" image at 300 dpi. This will requiring tilting the camera between horizontal and vertical crops.

 

I have been very pleased with the Kodak software for their ProBack called Capture Studio. It really is impressive.

 

I'd suggest one of these three choices using the MF format camera of your choice. Actually I'd save some money and buy the Mamiya 6x4.5 rather than the Contax then......buy a used 16mp ProBack designed for these bodies, or a Phase One H20 16 mp Back or....the 22mp Phase One or Leaf back.

 

Post production on your digital captures is just something you have to get used to. But there's the control, isn't it ? There will always be some dust with these removable backs. The raw file capture software makes it easy to do a neutral balance, adjust curves and make all the changes in density, color, saturation etc. that you would in PhotoShop. In fact it's best to some of these corrections in the capture software before exposting to PhotoShop. So the quality and depth of the capture software is really important. Check out Kodaks Capture Studio and the Leaf and Phase-One softwares carefully. Be sure you can shoot to a contact sheet with as many images as you want before converting to tiffs, etc. Kodak's Capture Studio allows an umlimited number of images displayed in a contact sheet as you shoo, firewired to a computer.

 

A scanning back will limit you to hot lights, quartz or HMI...$$$$$$ and also limit you to shallow depth of field by forcing you to use only certain shutter speeds which match the scan rate of the back. And, of course, no motion, pour shots, candle flames, steam, heads of beer, spritz on glasses, or people when you use a scanning back.

 

By the way, you can use any of these digital backs on your Sinar with the proper $2500 adapter from Kapture Group.

 

Do the right thing. Get the new 22mp Back and never look back ! #8^)

[kipling]

I would like to thank everyone for their input on this subject. <p>

Brooks, you and Ellis Vener, who wrote me an email, essentially gave me the same advice -

buy or lease (Ellis) one of the digital backs (Sinar, Leaf, Phase one, Kodak...) and use it on

the Sinar. I was thinking along these lines with the idea using the Contax 645 as a more

mobile alternative along side my Sinar and using a digital back that will work on both

cameras. This sounds like a good investment and I think I'll pursue this route. <p>

I'll have to look closer at the software end of this idea. I've heard good things about the

Kodak pro back capture software as you've also stated. <p> Thanks again, you guys are

fantastic.

[ellis_vener_photography]

For all of the high end backs (Leaf Valeo, Jenoptik Eyelike, Phase One, Imacon, Sinar)

the one medium format camera all of the backs will work with are the square format

Hasselblad bodies. As I recommended in my e-mail to Kipling, For the studio still life

work I would use the back on a Sinar (or similar) high end very stable view camera like

the: The Arca-Swiss F or M-line cameras, The Linhof & Horseman studio monorails,

[kelly_flanigan1]

Re <i> And, of course, no motion, pour shots, candle flames, steam, heads of beer, spritz on glasses, or people when you use a scanning back. </i><BR><BR>With the old Phase One PhotoPhase 4x5 back here; the scan times are long; and a IR cutoff filter is required in front of the lens. Any object that moves creates a wierd color fringe effect. <BR><BR> Here I use the rig on a 4x5 to shoot flat artwork; and sometimes VERY still "still lifes". Since no camera shutter is required; a classical 6 element enlarging lens works well; as long as little movements are required. One can do prescans; check for "blown highlights"; and do scans of cropped areas to get spot on focus. With digital; many times a much tighter DOF table is required; a trial scan can be used to check and tweak the focus. This eliminates any errors of focus between the ground glass and "film holder"; since one has feedback after one scan; via a tethered old PC on my old rig.<BR><BR>This rig uses a scan bar 5000 pixels wide; that travels in minutes in the long dimension for 7000 pixels. The active area is 7x10cm; thus the pixels are about effectively 14 pixels wide; wide by todays standards. This means older lenses work well.