ksporry

<p>managed to resolve this. Went to the local dealer who didn't do this stuf fhimself. But he found and printed a set of (chinese) instructions from teh internet. I managed to find an english version and it worked liek a charm!<br>

Here ar ethe instructions I used. Note that my chip is a 6th generation chip, from 2011 I think. Maybe early 2012.<br>

http://www.fotodioxpro.com/manuals/fotodiox-canoneos-chip-manual.pdf</p>

Is not the lens itself. Maybe the chip but not the lens. The lens is pure manual focus and an af confirm chip is glued to it.

The chip does need programming and I think you can also adjust the focusing, though I'm not sure that affects

calibration. Also note that the chip is not from samyang. There are many chip providers and I'm sure some are better

than others. But if focusing is programed in then it makes sense the accuracy is also programmable

Guys,

I got the spider lens cal set and tried to use it on my 5d2 for my samyang 85mm f1.4 lens because I felt the auto focus chip was not

calibrated correctly. First I tried at a distance of just over a meter (4ft). It seemed to be off with about 2cm of back focusing. Which is the

limit of the micro adjustment on my 5d2. Later that day I tried at 3meters distance which is actually cost to the by Canon recommended

distance. This time I found the auto focus chip resulted in a10cm back focus. I cannot correct that. So I wonder about a couple of things

here

1) normally closer focus gives you a narrower depth of field right? So I'm surprised to find at a longer distance the focus error is bigger.

2) how can I improve the accuracy of the auto focus chip when it falls outside the range of my micro adjustment scale? I have no idea

how to calibrate the chip or if calibration is even possible. Do these chips have generic programming or is each chip very different?  

as a note,  I checked my tamron 28-75/2.8 and that one appeared to be spot on at 3 meters distance. So I doubt it's my camera. (Unless

both the camera and the tamron are faulty)

<p>so... Has anyone heard any rumours of sigma expanding their Art line? I mean, the lenses that to me would be mostly interesting are the 24, 35, 50, 85 and 135 type lenses. I'd buy them all!<br>

Actually, I have the Samyang 35 and 85 which are amazing, but the chips are just not accurate enough and I hate having to zoom in on the display. Basically My technique at the moment is to use the lifeview zoom function for critical focussing, and just guess by sight if the composition is going to be adequate. This works way too slow for me.</p>

<p>yeah, figured as much. wouldn't expect the V750 to live up to teh sam equality...<br>

by the way, I'd be thinking 6x6, either velvia or B&W (e.g. neopan)</p>

<p>So, the Pentax 645D has dropped enough to become affordable for serious amateurs and professionals alike. At about 6000 euro's its actually competing with high end SLRs.<br />Now my question is, with the 645D being already 3 years old now, and sporting a 40MP CCD(!) sensor, is it actually worth buying?<br />I heard the Nikon D800 actually has a better IQ, and dynamic range.<br>

Now, dynamic range is seriously important for me, more so than MP count. But I also have to admit I kinda like the design of the pentax and the way it handles as a studio camera (I am likely to use it purely for studio applications, or maybe some location strobist stuff).<br>

I noticed the price has dropped quite significantly quite recently, which could be the prelude of something much better from Pentax. But that to the side, with my main work horse being a 5D2 at the moment, would the 645D be an asset, or is there much better available for the same price? (again, keep in mind that pixel quality is significantly more important to me than pixel quantity...!)</p>

<p>Can anyone tell me where I can find a user manual for a 150/4 chrome Hasselblad lens?<br>

Yes I searched on google, no I didn't find anything, so any help would be very much appreciated :)</p>

So next point, latitude and colour range.

If I'm not mistaken, the bit depth will give us the range of color the sensor can provide. Presumably we should be looking

at native bit depth of the sensor. Any bits above the native bit depth is more likely to be interpolation and doesn't add any

true value to the sensor, right? So for the Kodak sensor I assume that's 12-bits, as it would not make sense to stick a 16-

bit sensor in a device that reduces that bit depth to 12.

Do the manufacturers give the bit depth of the sensor or he whole back?

As for latitude, current day full frame sensors don't have much latitude, at, what 6 stops? Same as slide film basically. It'd

be interesting to know what the exposure latitude of these digital mf backs is. I heard numbers as much as 13 stops,

which presumably is for the latest flagship backs. How can I find out without testing them myself?

<p>I can understand a crop factor being a concern especially when you work with wide angle a lot. Now I come from an SLR world, where crop factors are handled differently I suppose, because for SLRs with a crop factor of 1.5x (predominantly consumer grade SLRs), the choice would go to cheaper grade lenses that are wider angle to resolve the crop factor issue. I can see that being a bigger challenge for MF, where there is no such thing as "cheaper lower grade" wide angle lenses.<br>

Similarly in the SLR world a crop factor of 1.3 wouldn't be that significant and can actually be covered by selecting lenses appropriately without breaking the bank for decent quality lenses.</p>

<p>As for the effect of crop factors when comparing MF with 35mm. I was under the impression that the same focal length provides a different view angle when comparing 35mm with MF, with MF giving a wider field of view than 35mm for the same given focal length. I.o.w. 80mm on a MF would have the same/similar field of view as 50mm on a 35mm camera. I might be thinking too simplistic, but doesn't that mean that a crop factor of 1.5 on MF results in an 80mm lens on MF giving the same field of view as an 80mm lens on a 35mm camera? I probably should add that I am assuming MF to be 6x6. For 645 that field of view might be smaller than for 6x6...</p>

<p>In the SLR world I actually really like working with 85mm focal length. It's one of my favorites for portraiture, and actually also for street photography (though obviously i wouldn't do street photography with older Digital MF equipment)</p>

Interesting stuff. So basically the p20 cfv16 and the Kodachrome DCS are basically the same sensor with a different

jacket.

I understood the maniya zd would be a different system, and I presume it would generally come as a kit (ie camera plus

back). I would be interested to hear how that compares to the others...

<p>I'm open to suggestions. Since my knowledge is fairly limited on the subject, I just ask the questions. The answers I have been getting so far are very useful, so thanks for that :)<br>

So far the CFV 16 or CFV II sounds like the best starter option, so I guess the hunt begins...<br>

Now, how do I check the condition of the back, any things I should be keeping an eye on? I once checked a Leica M8.2, by taking a few shots pure black, and pure white, and checked for dead or hot pixels on a laptop. That worked like a charm for that camera. I could check the number of releases and hot pixels quite easily. <br>

Anything specific I would have to look out for with a CFV? Common faults, etc?</p>

<p>how about the older Kodak DCS Pro plus?<br>

And what about the Mamiya ZD, which seems significantly cheaper? Admitted, that would be a different system altogether...</p>

<p>thanks Paul! I'd be using it for studio kinda stuff, so speed and long exposure performance isn't on the top of my list of things to have.<br>

@Scott: Around 5k USD (give or take 1 or 2k depending on the back)</p>

<p>Was there anything between the CFV 16 and the CFV 39? The latter is significantly more expensive (for obvious reasons I imagine).<br>

How about other brands, such as Leaf?</p>

<p>Sounds interesting! I'm not too much into wide angle. It would mostly be for studio. Portrait, maybe some fashion. I can see wide angle used in fashion, but for portrait an 80mm (plus crop factor) would do fine.<br>

I don't think crop factors are something to be concerned with considering that all consumer grade SLRs all have a crop factor that is the same. Although I'm used to Full Frame, I'm sure I can live with a crop factor of 1.5x as long as I don't do landscapes...<br>

The CFVs sure sound interesting now, as does the P20/20+. Is there any distinct preference of one over the other?</p>

<p>Hi Guys,</p>

<p>Not sure what the best place was for this post considering the mix MF and Digital...<br>

I have an old c/m500 hasselblad camera, and I was thinking of going into Digital MF.<br>

I am aware of the Phase One brand, and Leaf, and a friend of mine uses an old Kodak DCS Pro Back on a Mamiya, and produces great results with that.<br>

First of all, from a practical standpoint, I won't be able to afford the latest/greatest Digital Backs, because they cost a mortgage. So although I am definitely interested in a discussion about their capabilities, My interest probably leans more towards cheaper/older/second hand Digital Backs.</p>

<p>The rumour that I picked up was that MF DBs have a significantly higher dynamic and tonal range than 35mm Ful Frame sensors, like the 5Dmk2 (my current dSLR). Is that actually true? or probably I should ask, to what extend is that true? Would a Kodak DCS Pro Back perform better than a 5Dmk2 Sensor, or would I have to gte something like a P40 or P60 to see some improvements?</p>

<p>I'd also be interested in hearing what other MF DBs are on the market and how they perform.</p>

<p>I think in the end an actual light meter should be used to measure your exposure. But using a digital camer ato get an idea is never bad. As mentioned before, it's a good way to make "proof prints" before taking the final shot. E.g. do you like the effect the setup is giving you? Do you want to modify it for more drama? etc.</p>

<p>I wasn't aware of the REI thing myself, or the fact that the name of the film does not necessarily reflect it's ISO sensitivity, so thanks for that explanation. I guess that means reading the film specs and base your settings on that...</p>

<p>In general i think using digital to get yourself familiar with lighting setup is a great idea, and once you get the hang of it, using MF for eg portraits, is an excellent plan. One I'd like to do myself... :)</p>

<p>wow, so that's 2 out of 2 that are in favour of the munki... curious if there are other experiences.<br>

From what I read the Munki is the better all in one solution and easier to use, but more difficult to fine tune, and doesn't provide consistent neutral greys when comparing colour to B&W images... At least, that's what I read elsewhere...</p>

<p>Hi Guys,<br>

With my Epson R3000<br>

I'm thinking of buying a SpyderStudio calibration kit. I believe the newest version is the S4, and includes the spider Elite 4.<br>

I have a couple of questions though.<br>

1) The Spyder Studio S3 can still be bought new and is about haqlf the price of the S4 generation. Is there a notable difference between them?<br>

2) Does the spyder studio S3 generation also include a spyder Elite 3 or is that a spyder pro 3?<br>

3) I read several reports where people complained that they couldn't get it to work out of the box, and either needed help from support, or just gave up. This sounds to me as if the instructions ar eopen to intepretation and general user understanding of the toolkit rather than actually a defective product. As such, could someone point out the areas that need some attention when working the calibration?<br>

4) I use 2 monitors, an iMac display, and a cinema display. At the moment they have a different tint that I cannot seme to get rid of. Would the calibration kit help me with that?<br>

Thanks!</p>

<p>Oh, I know radio triggers from oen manufacturer are not compatible with another's. Makes perfect sense to me, but that's not the problem here. The problem here is related to the flash and the Rx/Tx radio trigger set used.<br>

When a flash is listed as fully compatible with a particular brand/model camera, and in fact proofs that is the case using the camera, then I wonder why radio triggers that advertise compatibility with that brand/model camera, work with one flash that is fully compatible with the camera, but not with another flash that is also fully compatible with that camera.<br>

In any case, some other forums indicated that the Phottix Odin is not compatible with the Oloong flash, and is only compatible with a very select few 3rd party flashes.<br>

So I guess the search continues for a set that IS compatible with the Oloong flash (and retains ful TTL and functionality support)</p>

<p>Guys,<br>

Recently I got myself an Oloong SP690 II for my Canon 5Dmk2.<br>

On Camera the unit works fine, just in line with the camera's settings. The problems begin when i start using Radio triggers. I have the following triggers:<br>

- Pixel Knight (TR332 I believe)<br />- Phottix Atlas II<br />- Phottix Odin</p>

<p>First I played around with the Odin. The Odin plays flawlessly with my Canon 580EX II Flash. With the Oloong on the receiver however it seems not to flash. The Oloong and the Camera actually do communicate with each other because the Oloong's settings do change when I change basic camera settings such as zoom and aperture. It just doesn't trigger. I then tried the Odin Rx's PC output (jack on the Rx, PC terminal on the flash). That didn't seem to do anything at all. However, later I found that if I pull out the jack 1-1,5 mm out of the Odin Rx the Oloong does trigger (of course PC sync means no TTL, pure manual only). Note that the PC interface does go on very difficult on the Oloong</p>

<p>I tried with the Phottix atlas II units. These units don't seem to do TTL, just plain trigger. That applies to both the Canon flash and the Oloong flash. Interestingly now the Oloong does trigger flawlessly with the Atlas II units. I also used the Odin Tx with just an Atlas II Rx, and that did the same (no TTL comms).</p>

<p>Finally I tried the Pixel Knights. Basically these functioned just like the Odin units, i.e. the Oloong doesn't trigger but does communicate.</p>

<p>I varied the settings between TTL and Manual on both camera and Oloong Flash. I also tried different channels and different groups. Changing these didn't seem to matter.</p>

<p>In conclusion, the Oloong seems to trigger when using Atlas II units as Rx, but with TTL comms it seems to only communicate but not trigger. I hoped that this was an issue with the Odin Rx, but considering the Canon flash works fine with the Odin set, and the Pixel Knight triggers respond the same with the Oloong flash as the Odin units do, I'm a bit concerned that the oloong is just not compatible with the Odin. This is annoying as manual triggering only doesn't help me much with setting the flashes remotely (well, it helps a little of course - no cables...).</p>

<p>If my conclusion is correct and the Oloong is indeed incompatible, could someone tell me which non-Canon flash is fully compatible with the Odin? (I know of Nissin, Yongnuo, Metz, and a whole host of chinese budget copies, but don't know about their compatibility).</p>

<p>ok, that gives me some relief, thanks for that. I have to say I couldn't find anything about this online, hence I posted the question. I'm glad to hear this is normal behaviour.<br>

Thanks!</p>