I have used the CFV-39 on my 903SWC and it works to satisfaction. There is a little magenta cast which can easily be removed with Phocus or with CS5. There is no blur in the corners if I work with f>8.
Medium Format Forum
Register a free account now!
If you are registered, you get access to the members only section, can participate in the buy & sell second hand forum and last but not least you can reserve your preferred username before someone else takes it.
Digital back vs scanned film
- Thread starter fraiseap
- Start date
blowupster
Member
The old and new types PME work with CFV and acute mate. (With the first version of PME, you have to modify iso setting:For 800 asa on CFV set 1600 asa… but the CFV is a lightmeter it self !)
However, the 3.5 magnification of PM(E) give no chance for foccusing. Personaly I preffer the new type of PME that allow the dioptry correction as by night I need more correction than by day.
I'm thinking about modifying the ocular lens of my old PM to get direct 6x magnification with this viewfinder. Funny for me that I modified the same viewfinder 20 years ago to put a flashmeter inside.
However, the 3.5 magnification of PM(E) give no chance for foccusing. Personaly I preffer the new type of PME that allow the dioptry correction as by night I need more correction than by day.
I'm thinking about modifying the ocular lens of my old PM to get direct 6x magnification with this viewfinder. Funny for me that I modified the same viewfinder 20 years ago to put a flashmeter inside.
Putzing about the house with the new CFV50. Nice piece of equipment and well keeping with the size and style of the original camera. -30 F and darkish so not much outside opportunity today. calumet did include a Sony battery which is not part of the original Hassy equipment, but not having a suitable charger, a trip to the local camera emporium was necessary. A special accu mat screen is included with crop marks and split image focusing aid. no wonder the Hassy software is called. Phocus..... The PME 90 is of course a no fit, but only by a milimeter or two.... Arrrg.
A lot of promise in this with careful work!
Cheers. T
A lot of promise in this with careful work!
Cheers. T
wbulte
Active Member
That... and the fact that Kodak is close to going tits up it seems :-( :-( :-(
blowupster
Member
I'm shoked to imagine Kodak could diseapear…I recieved my 9 last Kodachrom 64 exactly one year ago (sent december the 28th of 2009 !).
However 10 years ago when the Fuji S2 was a refference for digital sensor, I never understood why, Hasselblad used Fujifilm to new H body and lenses contribution instead of using fuji digital sensor knowhow.
However 10 years ago when the Fuji S2 was a refference for digital sensor, I never understood why, Hasselblad used Fujifilm to new H body and lenses contribution instead of using fuji digital sensor knowhow.
I would hate to see Kodak go away. I can see going back to compounding our own developers like the really good old days.... I still have freezer full of enough 120 film to keep my needs going for a while.
Came across a 32 MB CF card in a drawer the other day, sort of like sheet film by today's standards. My neighbor who is a wildlife photographer told me many years ago that digital would never cut it for wildlife as you couldn't take enough photos.... For me the CFV helps with aerial work as it was always a PITA changing backs and reloading them whilst also flying the plane in the high mountains. That it might also be a bit cold was merely a given. The ability to check exposure and function in real time is also invaluable.
Cheers. T
Came across a 32 MB CF card in a drawer the other day, sort of like sheet film by today's standards. My neighbor who is a wildlife photographer told me many years ago that digital would never cut it for wildlife as you couldn't take enough photos.... For me the CFV helps with aerial work as it was always a PITA changing backs and reloading them whilst also flying the plane in the high mountains. That it might also be a bit cold was merely a given. The ability to check exposure and function in real time is also invaluable.
Cheers. T
My understanding of the SWC issue with digital deals with the oblique angle with which the light impacts the digital sensors, as opposed to the more straight on angle of a retro focus lens. For this reason some lenses that have done well with film are sometimes not optimal with digital. It may be that improving sensor technology will help this out at some time in the future.
Everything is always a compromise in one way or another.
T
Everything is always a compromise in one way or another.
T
Not yet a chance to test this outdoors but did and impromptu food shot for my lady who might like to do an illustrated recipe booklet for family and friends. On the counter via available tungsten and halogen light, the tungsten setting in the back worked well indeed color wise and the clarity on a 21" screen is spectacular.
Getting impatient to give this a good workout!
T
Getting impatient to give this a good workout!
T
One interesting issues arose with one of my CF readers. It was corrupting the data on the CF card for some unknown reason. My other one works fine. This is only an issue since my PC laptop which I travel with does not have FireWire. Both of my "mainframes" have FireWire cards and the one in the studio can be used to tether if desired.
Still a learning process.
Cheers. T
Still a learning process.
Cheers. T
Bit of a Blizzard in Anchorage Alaska yesterday, took a snow test shot out the window (not great art) and started pixel peeping. I saw what I thought was film like grain, but when I got to the wall, I was amazed to see it quite smooth. The back was resolving the individual snow crystals. Where I am hoping that this works out well will be in very smooth skies. In my high altitude mountain aerials with the Canon MK5II the skies do have a discernable granularity (if slight) in 16x21" prints.
Cheers: T
Cheers: T
I'll jump in.
I have a 503EX and tried film. Two rolls and had to take the plunge... just got in my way. Thought I was going to love getting back to my beloved Velvia... nope.
Got a Phase One P20 on ebay.
"Just" 16MP... big fat pixels with incredible resolution.
Have to say, the 80 did not cut it with the P20. A nice 60 did the trick.
Lusting for a "+" back for better night performance.
Small sync cord, not a problem. Have one on each lens, so only the small plug into the back gets changed.
System lacks the zip of the H, but don't need it for my use.
I have a 503EX and tried film. Two rolls and had to take the plunge... just got in my way. Thought I was going to love getting back to my beloved Velvia... nope.
Got a Phase One P20 on ebay.
"Just" 16MP... big fat pixels with incredible resolution.
Have to say, the 80 did not cut it with the P20. A nice 60 did the trick.
Lusting for a "+" back for better night performance.
Small sync cord, not a problem. Have one on each lens, so only the small plug into the back gets changed.
System lacks the zip of the H, but don't need it for my use.
The CFV50 seems to be a fairly straightforward substitute for film, operationally. The camera with the 45 deg finder is not particularly easy to use on it's side. However it is very easy on a tripod to merely shift the camera upward slightly to obtain a square or vertical pan of extreme quality. These look amazing even way zoomed in on a 27 inch monitor.
Film has no comparison quality wise, though for the V system small changes in working are necessary. The battery hanging down does prevent use of the tripod shoe, my favorite accessory, and my PME 90 which I greatly liked, is not useable by a very small interference.
As nearly everyone here has said, careful focusing is especially necessary with the wide angle lenses. The care necessary is similar to large format working, and possibly of at least equal quality.
In black and white conversions I am still getting some more granularity of the sky than I might like. I haven't printed any of these as yet so can't make a direct comparison to the Canon 5DII prints that I have been making.
The computers protest a bit at the file sizes and a new terabite external drive was necessary for traveling.
Cheers. Tom
Film has no comparison quality wise, though for the V system small changes in working are necessary. The battery hanging down does prevent use of the tripod shoe, my favorite accessory, and my PME 90 which I greatly liked, is not useable by a very small interference.
As nearly everyone here has said, careful focusing is especially necessary with the wide angle lenses. The care necessary is similar to large format working, and possibly of at least equal quality.
In black and white conversions I am still getting some more granularity of the sky than I might like. I haven't printed any of these as yet so can't make a direct comparison to the Canon 5DII prints that I have been making.
The computers protest a bit at the file sizes and a new terabite external drive was necessary for traveling.
Cheers. Tom
polarcircle
Member
Do you mean that film is better than CFV50 or the contrarry?
Stitching MF can give some amazing results. WHen you go near such a picture you discover more and more. That's why I like MF compared to 35mm/APS-C.
[
quote=Fliger747;47358]The CFV50 seems to be a fairly straightforward substitute for film, operationally. The camera with the 45 deg finder is not particularly easy to use on it's side. However it is very easy on a tripod to merely shift the camera upward slightly to obtain a square or vertical pan of extreme quality. These look amazing even way zoomed in on a 27 inch monitor.
Film has no comparison quality wise, though for the V system small changes in working are necessary. The battery hanging down does prevent use of the tripod shoe, my favorite accessory, and my PME 90 which I greatly liked, is not useable by a very small interference.
As nearly everyone here has said, careful focusing is especially necessary with the wide angle lenses. The care necessary is similar to large format working, and possibly of at least equal quality.
In black and white conversions I am still getting some more granularity of the sky than I might like. I haven't printed any of these as yet so can't make a direct comparison to the Canon 5DII prints that I have been making.
The computers protest a bit at the file sizes and a new terabite external drive was necessary for traveling.
Cheers. Tom[/quote]
Stitching MF can give some amazing results. WHen you go near such a picture you discover more and more. That's why I like MF compared to 35mm/APS-C.
[
quote=Fliger747;47358]The CFV50 seems to be a fairly straightforward substitute for film, operationally. The camera with the 45 deg finder is not particularly easy to use on it's side. However it is very easy on a tripod to merely shift the camera upward slightly to obtain a square or vertical pan of extreme quality. These look amazing even way zoomed in on a 27 inch monitor.
Film has no comparison quality wise, though for the V system small changes in working are necessary. The battery hanging down does prevent use of the tripod shoe, my favorite accessory, and my PME 90 which I greatly liked, is not useable by a very small interference.
As nearly everyone here has said, careful focusing is especially necessary with the wide angle lenses. The care necessary is similar to large format working, and possibly of at least equal quality.
In black and white conversions I am still getting some more granularity of the sky than I might like. I haven't printed any of these as yet so can't make a direct comparison to the Canon 5DII prints that I have been making.
The computers protest a bit at the file sizes and a new terabite external drive was necessary for traveling.
Cheers. Tom[/quote]