Go | New | Find | Notify | Tools | Reply | |
| Member |
since film is gone or not used, how is Small ,med and Lrg format determined ? used to be 110 and 35 mm were small and 2 1/4 X 2 1/4 medium and bigger was large format. what do the use now ? as far as format size ? Safety, Situational Awareness and proficiency. Neck Ties, Hats and ammo brass, Never ,ever touch'em w/o asking first | ||
|
Member |
Medium and large format are still around in the digital camera world, and still mean pretty much the same thing they did with film cameras, because the digital medium- and large-format cameras are all pretty much based on medium- and large-format film cameras and use the same lenses. In a lot of cases, the medium- and large-format digital cameras actually ARE the old medium- and large-format film cameras, only with a new back that has an image sensor instead of film. Probably the most common medium-format digital camera is essentially just a Pentax 645 with a digital image sensor stuck on the back. | |||
|
| Member |
It really is amazing the quality of images produced by phones these days, with REALLY small sensors. Check this out ... http://photoseek.com/2013/comp...-thirds-1-inch-type/ | |||
|
Step by step walk the thousand mile road |
I am unaware of any large format (i.e., 4"×5" or larger) digital backs commercially available for use on a view camera. There are smaller backs (e.g., the previously mentioned Pentax 645, and I believe Hasselblad has a 6cm by 6cm digital back that can be mounted on a view camera) but nothing truly large format. My information is somewhat old but the last time I researched this there were two factors involved in not making 4"×5" digital backs. First, the cost a 4"×5" digital back was prohibitive, north of $400,000. Not exactly something that's going to sell everyday. The other one was technical. The amount of time it took to collect the image on a 4" x 5" digital back was so long it was really only useful for still product photography and for architectural photography. Nice is overrated "It's every freedom-loving individual's duty to lie to the government." Airsoftguy, June 29, 2018 | |||
|
eh-TEE-oh-clez |
35mm digital is now called "Full Frame" Anything smaller than that is called a "Crop Sensor." The two popular crop sensor formats are APS-C and Micro Four-Thirds, which are about 75% and 50% of the width of a 35mm frame, respectively. Anything larger than that, currently, is being called a Medium Format. I haven't seen any consumer or pro-sumer Large Format (8x10"+) digital cameras out there, but there might be some that are commercially available for specialty use. | |||
|
Member |
I recently traded in my Nikon equipment for the new stuff. I went from a Nikon D200, which had an APS-C sensor to a full-frame sensor camera - a Sony Alpha a7RII. The Sony is a 42mp 35mm full-frame mirrorless camera. I strongly believe the foreseeable future is full-frame(35mm) mirrorless cameras. Because of Sony, Canon, Nikon and Fuji had to step up their game to win back some of Sony's market in mirrorless. Canon just released their new EOS-R, Nikon just released their Z6 and Z7 and Fuji has their X-T line. What is nice is that you can add adaptors to these cameras and use older lenses or lenses from other manufacturers. Retired Texas Lawman | |||
|
| Member |
There used to be a number of companies making them, but they are largely discontinued. Here's a company that still makes them: https://www.rencay.com/en/renc...ts-rencay-scanbacks/
High cost is a factor of small production quantities and weird, outdated designs (specifically, the large format backs all use a line-shaped sensor that they physically sweep across the image capture area, rather than a rectangular sensor covering the whole capture area). When I looked, I don't remember them being THAT expensive. A scaled-up "normal" digital imaging sensor, produced in quantity, wouldn't be anywhere near that expensive.
This is also due to the fact that all the existing large-format backs I am aware of use the aforementioned weird design and are produced in small quantities. The transfer speed out of the sensor is low, and you have to sweep the sensor across the whole image area, transferring out data as you capture it. A modern sensor design could take fast exposures. (The time between exposures would be limited by the transfer rate out of the sensor, but not the exposure time itself - modern sensors basically capture the image all at once during a brief exposure, then remember it until the camera electronics read the information off the sensor.) | |||
|
| Member |
what parts on two different cameras would a person require to differentiate a medium format camera from a regular old 35mm size ? if the lenses are the same on old film cameras, there must be something inside the camera that allows getting the larger format. say , these two A. http://www.ricoh-imaging.co.jp...roducts/k-1/special/ B. http://smartechnologynow.blogs...antastic-medium.html Safety, Situational Awareness and proficiency. Neck Ties, Hats and ammo brass, Never ,ever touch'em w/o asking first | |||
|
| Little ray of sunshine  |
Digital backs for the medium format cameras are crazy expensive. I've priced Hasselblad compatible backs. They cost as much as cars, on up to the price of pretty nice cars. The fish is mute, expressionless. The fish doesn't think because the fish knows everything. | |||
|
| Member |
Oh, I know they are expensive, but he said $400,000. The ones I have looked at in the past were expensive but nowhere close to that. | |||
|
| Member |
When I said they used the same lenses, I mean that, e.g., a lot of the medium-format digital cameras use the Pentax 645 lens mount and can use the old Pentax 645-compatible lenses used on medium-format film cameras. For a larger sensor, generally speaking, you need a larger lens mount and larger lens. | |||
|
| Powered by Social Strata |
 | Please Wait. Your request is being processed... |
|
© SIGforum 2024