jackflesher

PS: Notwithstanding my above comment, I will stand by my claim that the M8 file is capable of producing *stunning* 32" prints.

Cheers,

Jack

>>> "...has found that M8 files print as well as 4x5 scanned film and better than any other small-format digital camera at sizes as large as 30"x40""

Pure rubbish. <<<

I agree, that is a ridiculous statement. Scanned 4x5, at least quality drum scanned 4x5 still edges out MF digital back capture from a detail standpoint IMHO.

(However, the latest generations of 33+ MP MF DB's are very good and maybe close enough to scanned 4x5 for some; they certainly more convenient at getting a high resolution digital file into your computer ;) )

Basically, everything Doug and Jamie are saying is true. A few of you might remember me from the old days when I was nearly shunned from this forum because I sold all my Leica M film gear to fund a complete immersion into Canon digital :) Doug and Jamie will remember me from then for sure. And for full disclosure, Guy is a friend of mine too... For fuller disclosure, I still own a whole lot of Canon and regularly shoot with the 5D.

Anyway, that intro out of the way, I have owned every high end Canon camera ever made, so speak with some authority, and I can assure you the 1Ds2 does not "blow away" the DMR or the M8, even upon cropping. In fact, the 1Ds2 is only slightly more detailed than its smaller brother, the Canon 5D. The fact is, all of these are top-notch cameras, as is the Nikon D2X, and are capable of making great prints.

The M8 however seems unique in its ability to take digital upscaling and I have printed stunning 32x40" prints from its files. Yet I cannot make the same claim for the 5D files, and even compared to 1Ds2 files, the M8 at that size are superior. (I don;t shoot Nikon so cannot comment specifically on D2x files at that size.) No it doesn't make logical sense that an 11MP file can out perform a 16MP at that size, and I don't know exactly why it works that way... I have educated guesses, but the bottom line is, the proof is in the final prints.

All that said, the M8 is not without its operational warts -- but nobody can argue the outstanding quality of the M8 file.

Cheers,

Jack

I sleep just fine, thank you.

But at least now I understand your thinking completely...

Nels... I'm a Canon shooter and I have to say you simply aren't making any sense with your claim. Leica has not missed any target here, but rather done what it always has: Made a camera for a very specific clientelle.

The fact you don't agree with the cost/benefit/features of what they've produced is certainly your prerogative, but the fact remains there are many who relish what it offers. And I include myslef in that mix even though I don't own one.

Hey Chuck!

I'm glad you posted here... Do me a favor and post the shot of Guy lighting up I took with your DMR and 15mm lens... I think it was hand-held, wide open at f2.8, 1/8th sec? Anyway, I want to re-inforce TWO points Marc made: 1) Manual focus is not all that tough with a bright viewfinder like the R8/9's, and 2) being able to see AROUND the outside of the frame is a huge benefit!

The image I hope Chuck posts is one of my first ever with the DMR...

>> <i>Is the framed photos > 1000 pixels an EOS thing? Lovely frames though.</i> << <P>

Not really an EOS thing, more like an old man with bad eyes thing LOL! I like to be able to see <i>some</i> detail in the images I post ;) -- sorry if it offended to have them this big. <P>

>> <i>Good post Jack. What lenses did you have in your bag?</i> << <P>

Hi Rene! I took three lenses to mexico, all zooms; 17-40, 24-105 IS and 75-300 IS (old style). Most of the images I took were captured with the 24-105. <P>

Cheers,

Well, I guess I'll jump in on this one... <P>

For those that don't know me, I USED to be a regular poster here in the Leica forum -- for those that do remember me, hello again! <P>

FWIW, I happened to be in Mexico with Guy when he took some of the above images. I have a few similar I took with my Canon 1D2 and I'll try and insert a few of them for comparison at the end of this post. <P>

But before I do, let me just say there is something unique about the files the DMR produces. I think a lot of it has to do with the glass, but that isn't all of it, since I use both CZ and Leica glass on my Canons and I don't get the same look. I think Marc summed the subtleties up perfectly so I won't repeat them here. <P>

I am not sure the DMR has any extra DR over the Canon 1's, but it certainly handles the DR it has better in the shadows -- I saw this first hand in Mexico when Guy and I were processing our raw files. Yes, I am facile with my raw converter and Photoshop and can get excellent results with my Canons, but the DMR still takes first prize IMO -- and I am NOT a Leica shooter any more... (Guy says Yet ;) ) <P>

Here are a few of my Canon shots from Mexico. More can be found here: <a href="http://jack.cameraphile.org/gallery/view_album.php?set_albumName=album12">Jack's Mexico Gallery</a> <p>

Fountain Flowers: <br>

<img src="http://jack.cameraphile.org/albums/album12/foutainflower.jpg"> <P>

Ruins: <br>

<img src="http://jack.cameraphile.org/albums/album12/ruins.jpg"> <P>

Folks Waiting: <br>

<img src="http://jack.cameraphile.org/albums/album12/folks.jpg"> <P>

And one last one for high-contrast AM light, Dog-walk: <br>

<img src="http://jack.cameraphile.org/albums/album12/dogwalk.jpg">

AFAIK, Osaka = Tachihara = Nagoaka = Ikeda But those are all Japanese. Their main advantage is weight, some being less than 3 pounds -- though equally flimsy.

There is also the Raja which is something else.

For nearly the same cost of most any of the above you can buy a Toyo 45 CF -- adn IMO the Toyo will be a much better camera.

I currently own 4 DSLR's and two light meters; a Sekonic 558 and a Pentax Zone V Digital.

Guess what I use -- make that rely on -- when shooting film in my 4x5? Yep, the Pentax Digital with it's Zone scales...

Cheers,

I have owned a Digitar 80 and currently own a Digitar 90. First off, these lenses are NOTABLY sharper than their conventional non-digital counterparts. In fact, I have heard that Schneider specs these lenses at over 120 lp/mm!

My 90 has an image circle of just over 100mm, so it will easily cover 6x7 with some movements.

The sharpest apertures are f8 and f11, but the loss of resolution at f16 is neglegible. By f22 you are about down to conventional LF lens performance, which is certainly not too shabby in itself.

Like all lenses, the resolution does fall off as you approach the outer edges of the IC, but the overall performance remains exceptional across the field.

Hope this helps,

An old really soft toothbrush and Cascade or similar liquid dishwasher gell. The toothbrush gets into the grooves of the fresnel and the dishwasher gell cuts the greasy build-up. Rinse well in warm water.

Whatever you do, do NOT use Windex, 409 or similar GP cleaner as they contain enough ammonia to etch many plastics.

A good plastic polish will remove minor scratches and rub marks from the smooth side of the fresnel, but don't get it into the grooved side!

Of course the other option is to just buy a new one ;)

These may not be exact, but are pretty close:

toyo VX125, 6.5; Rod 55 APO, 1; SA 75, 1; SS110XL, 1.1; Rod 150S, 0.7; Nikon 300M, 0.8; Toyo Loupe, 0.3; Pentax Meter, 0.5; Kodak Holder, 0.5; Dark Cloth (custom made for light-weight), 0.5; tools, 1; mini headlamp, .5; 2 @ 20 Readyloads, 2; f64 Large pack, 3.5; Gitzo 1325, 4.5; Arca Cube, 2.2; total: 26

Obvioulsy I can trim two lenses when wanting to go really light -- probably the 55 and 75 or 55 and 110 -- and save 2 pounds, but in most cases I would not find the weight-savings worth the effort making the decision. I could also use my Gitzo 1228 and Kirk BH-3 and save almost 3 pounds and then pare down the tools I carry to save another .75 or so. Again, I like the stability and convenience of the larger pod and head so in most cases would not do this, and the tools have saved the day more than once so probably not either. But the weight savings are there if I have to ;)

Greg:

Would you care to elaborate on your normal set-up protocol? I am currently comparing the Toyo VX 125 to the Arca Field compact/Orbix.

From what I have seen, the Toyo is more compact and sets up very quickly. The Arca needs to have the rail removed to fit in my pack thus apparantly slowing set-up.

Also, any comments on Toyo rigidity? (Arca is legendary.)

Thanks,

Jack

I even converted an old Horseman as a lighter-weight and more compact field option. Horseman uses the same bellows as Sinar, so the StudioTool bellows fits. However, the Horseman is not nearly as elegant in movements, nor does it have the range of movement that the Sinar does, so the Sinar is preferred for in the studio -- and in the field if the distances are not too far from the car ;) <p>

I have had a QR plate machined and adapted to the Horseman, replacing half the rear standard. With some more machining, I expect to get the field weight down to about 5 pounds. <p>

<img src="http://jack.cameraphile.org/albums/album08/BigRigSide.jpg">

A few comments since I use this set-up currently and FWIW I used the Cambo before getting the Studiotool for my Sinar...

Some points that I think are being missed above are:

The bigger benefit to the set-up is the ability to seamlessly stitch multiple frames for higher resolution. You cannot get to the full 4x5 image circle due to the mirror box casting a shadow, but you can get about 2x3 inches of image or about 64MP of image from 4 1Ds2 frames. This gets you into the top end of MF formats, so many of the standard LF lens focals tend to be a bit more useful.

You get seamless stitches because the lens remains stationary as you shift the rear standard with camera, so you have NO parallax issues to deal with.

In this vein, you can obtain stellar results from existing LF lenses, though the better lenses deliver the best results. Other choices that are superb are Rodenstock and Schneider APO enlarging lenses, since you don't need shutters in the lenses for this application. These lenses are also optimised for about 1:2 to 1:10 magnification, the range where most product/tabletop shooting takes place. One of my personal favorites for all-around use with this st-up is the Rodenstock 75mm APO Rodagon.

Lastly, Sinar offers front lensboards that will accept many MF lenses like Hasselblad, Mamiya and others. This further opens up the selection of optics, especially if one already owns glass for those systems.

FTR, the kit will allow focus on a 150 to nearly 1:1 and the 210 to a useful intermediate range.

Cheers,

>>And we have MF where frames go from 1:1 all the way to 3:1. And we have cropping because one size doesn't fit all.<<

THIS is my new favorite quote!

May I steal it?

;),

Better to make the selection however you prefer, then toggle on the quick-mask and edit that selection, then blur the mask itself instead of feathering the selction... In this fashion you can see the effect on the actual edge of the mask.

Cheers,

Here is an article I wrote a while back on generating a watermark signature action -- you can place any text in it you wish:<p>

<a href="http://www.outbackphoto.com/workflow/wf_54/essay.html">http://www.outbackphoto.com/workflow/wf_54/essay.html</a>