Nikkor Posted June 3, 2015 Share Posted June 3, 2015 It will be 12MP, price is tba (and I don't think it will be cheap).Base Iso 2100...10" is 7 times wider than a Fullframe sensor.http://largesense.com/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Julian Posted June 3, 2015 Share Posted June 3, 2015 It's actually a 9x11" sensor, so they say...http://largesense.com/products/8x10-large-format-digital-back-ls911/But basically it is impossible to make a cmos sensor that size.Sensors are made out of round silicon wafers, the current (biggest) standard is 300mm (12"). 9x11" does not fit on a 12" wafer. Even if it would, it would be _extremely_ expensive, because a large part of the wafer would be 'waste'.On top of that, there is always a part of the wafer that has some fault. With small sensors, that's not a big problem, because you just have to throw away a small part (1 sensor) of the wafer. This is the reason fullframe is much more expensive than aps-c.If you'd make large format sensors this way you'd have to throw away the whole wafer for any error. Damphousse 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nikkor Posted June 3, 2015 Author Share Posted June 3, 2015 They probably are using xray sensors like this one http://aphotoeditor.com/2011/08/23/mitchell-feinbergs-8x10-digital-capture-back/I'm intrigued. Julian 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Julian Posted June 3, 2015 Share Posted June 3, 2015 I remember reading that story once. Good point. Still makes me wonder how they produce a chip that size. Maybe stitch it from multiple parts? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Liam Posted June 3, 2015 Share Posted June 3, 2015 that's crazy. wasn't RED working on a gigantic sensor camera? Mysterium Monstro 617 or something? can't find much info on it Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Ebrahim Saadawi Posted June 3, 2015 Share Posted June 3, 2015 I personally Don't believe it until someone I trust tests it and gives a thumb up. The sensor is simply too large and claiming they can read it for 4K video makes it even harder to swallow. Plus, I have a reservation. Back in the days I used large format for RESOLUTION, for large landscape printings, not portraits and shallow depth of field (FF + 1.2 is already the verge of what's humanely acceptable to shoot with). So having that size of a sensor with just 12mp kind of defeats the purpose of a large format camera system. That's a pure opinion. I don't find a useful application for this beyond fullframe and medium format unless it matures to be an ultra high megapixel sensor (60-100) with ultra high lowlight performance that truly exceeds normal limits. Otherwise what's the point? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leeys Posted June 4, 2015 Share Posted June 4, 2015 Otherwise what's the point? "LOL amateurs use 35mm, real photographers use LF Lolololol" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wulf Posted June 4, 2015 Share Posted June 4, 2015 Ebrahim, you saved me a lot of typing. :-)Exactly my thoughts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ed_David Posted June 4, 2015 Share Posted June 4, 2015 The stills on their gallery page look pretty digital - nice concept - I still think shooting with a digital back on a medium format camera is the best way at this point but maybe I shall be surprised soon. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nikkor Posted June 4, 2015 Author Share Posted June 4, 2015 You guys are so boring, if it turns out to be for real and affordable it will open up a world of new looks. Just have a look at old photographs or read through this https://www.theasc.com/ac_magazine/November2012/TheMaster/page1.php Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wulf Posted June 5, 2015 Share Posted June 5, 2015 we are boring?maybe, but why on earth not building you own large film format by yourself??? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Damphousse Posted June 5, 2015 Share Posted June 5, 2015 I don't find a useful application for this beyond fullframe and medium format unless it matures to be an ultra high megapixel sensor (60-100) with ultra high lowlight performance that truly exceeds normal limits. Otherwise what's the point? Camera movements. IF this is true and the price is reasonable it would be an architecture beast. 12 MP is a bit limited for print. But think of all the real estate stuff on the web. Even pamphlets don't need anything beyond 12 MP. This would make shooting tricky interiors and exteriors a breeze. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Ebrahim Saadawi Posted June 5, 2015 Share Posted June 5, 2015 What about camera movement? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Damphousse Posted June 5, 2015 Share Posted June 5, 2015 What about camera movement?Not “camera movement,” “camera movements”Camera movements allow you to move the lens and the film plane in relation to each other. It allows you to change the focus plane and allows the elimination of things like converging parallel lines when shooting architecture. Tilt shift lenses allow this type of thing to a degree. But they are far more limited than large format cameras. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Ebrahim Saadawi Posted June 9, 2015 Share Posted June 9, 2015 Not “camera movement,” “camera movements”Camera movements allow you to move the lens and the film plane in relation to each other. It allows you to change the focus plane and allows the elimination of things like converging parallel lines when shooting architecture. Tilt shift lenses allow this type of thing to a degree. But they are far more limited than large format cameras.Perhaps that's the only real point you could sell it for. Pretty niche and not exclusive to this one. I see no practical point in this product, just a technology expo maybe. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dan Posted June 10, 2015 Share Posted June 10, 2015 I just scanned the article but iirc he says he was spending $50k/yr on polaroid, if he's primarily using it for the test and it's cost effective why not. We used 5x4 and 10x8 polaroid for years to check the shot and that certainly wasn't high resolution either.dan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.