DSLRUsers.com

Which camera is right for sheetshooter?
(considering his name and the resolution that he is used to)

Heath,

I thought, 'What a lovely young man to set up a charity to Help Poor Old Sheetshooter' - and I was right.

You raise an interesting point here and I will offer my observations and seek any comment that folk may choose to offer.

At the core of any decision I must take into account my age and the inherent life-expectancy of any kit in terms of getting my investment back. If I were younger I could well see merit in getting into a Medium Format digital system. My best mate flogs Sinar and Leaf — single- and three-shot — and I have been fiddling with this stuff for at least 10 years. But the prosp[ect of an investment of $100,00.00 (getting cheaper now, I admit) has presented too much of a challenge to my aspirations.

Just the day before yesterday I had a natter with the geezer who distributes Hasselblad. The H2 is just around the corner along with a new Imacon back. A $50,000.00 ask for a body, back and three lenses. Closer, but no Kewpie doll. The widest lens they have is a 35mm and, with the crop factor, that is just not wide enough for me and the work I do.

Other options I have investigated are the Alpa and Cambo cameras which have lens adjustment and use big backs.

[Incidentally, the 39MP Phase-One is not a reality just yet. The technology has been around for quite a while. At Photokina last year Leaf already discussed 31MP and 39MP backs but said that they were noready for release just yet. Phase have a different marketing strategy and will sell now based on a subsequent upgrade.]

The DSLR option provides the greatest flexibility for the variations of my work load - the best bang for my buck.

So really, the debate boils down to D2x and EOS1DS MkII. You see, my days are taken up with shooting for architects, interior designers, decor and assocuated stuff in the built environment. And for that I need RECTILINEAR wide-angle images with considerable resolution and colour FIDELITY. Truth be known I hate Canon but .... on a 24x36 chip a Tilt/Shift 24mm is still a wide-angle lens. And using a technique of lateral shift and stitching I could get images to rival a 6x12 on my view camera. I far prefer the Nikon system and image quality but the wide-angle issue is the Achilles Heel. Yes, I know I can use TRANSFORM to correct vertical perspective and that some plug-ins will correct optical aberrations and distortions, but as I dscussed with Kristian Polak the other day, the correct restoration of proportional integrity is potentially a fiddly job.

I also shoot customised Harley Davidson Motor Cycles on a regular basis and so control of high values in reflective metal and intricate detail in full length profile portraits of the machines is of paramount importance. Many of my contemporaries in this area have been shooting digital for some time but they have not as yet displayed an ability to differentiate the differences in metal colours and surfaces effectively in a wide-shot (and many, not even in a cloise-up).

Just yesterday I was shooting a selection of three swimming pools for an advertising brochure. Each time I looked through the ground-glass and saw what was there I had the same recurring thought pass through my vacuous cranium: "For the sake of commercial expediency, I am about to throw the baby out with the bathwater."

heath, I love your work - both the subject and your ability - and for that there would be no greater option than what you have. But photography - particularly COMMERCIAL photography covers a vast range of subjects, treatments and needs. There are specialised tools in most crafts and trades. Making an informed choice where new technology is still in its relative infancy is not a straight-up decision some of the time.

Now, if you could also HELP by just moving my wheel-chair over to where it is a little more sunny - and empty the bag at the end of my catheter, please?

So it would seem that the 1ds 2 is not your preference, but your only real suitable option?

I'm about to get a D2x, but I can see why the Canon suits your needs more.

I always feel a little weak in response to your posts as I can't really match your industry experience, so I don't have too much to write!

Heath,

Your work speaks volumes for you. When I was a young bloke all fired up in the 1960s I felt the same as you. Times change. My intent is to try and provide a bit of light on the path for those who follow behind.

Incidentally, during part of the time that I was writing that post I was on the phone to a mate who has been in the industry about as long as me - albeit in a more 'technical services' area and I mentioned your name and he know of you. In fact he spoke of you and your skills in quite glowing terms. I think it is always good to get a bit of unsolicited feed-back.

Cheers,

Sheetshooter

have you considered the Hasselblad H1D?

You're right to wait. Digital photography will come to nothing.

Actually I suspect we're in the music CD phase, with the ipod of digital imaging yet to come. It may be phonography of a sort, perhaps. Or the multimedia player that's also the camera.


To continue the music analogy - as a group we're buying the modern versions of the sort of cameras we aspired to as young people - in the same way that music radio stations play the music that their target demographic lost their virginity to.

You'll end up going digital back, I reckon, even if you don't think so yet. When did price ever stop you from going for quality?

There's one option that this discussion, so far, appears to have ignored.

What is it about Canon that you hate, Sheetshooter? Is it the glassware? The ergonomics of the bodies? Or the build quality?

Perhaps some other factor that I've neglected to mention?

While it's an eggaration for me to say that I hate Canon, it would certainly be true to say that I prefer Nikon for a number of reasons, but the primary one is that of build quality. Having used both brands in exactly the same, professional, circumstances, Nikon wins in the build quality stakes hands down. I have dropped examples of both marques - numerous times - whilst in a hectic working environment, and the end analysis is that Nikons keep on working, and Canons, IME, don't.

In a working, professional environment, that's a serious issue.

That said, Canon provide the only body that has a solution that permits you to use your wide angle and PC lenses as wide angle and PC lenses.

A Canon body also affords you one further advantage - the ability to use Nikon glass on the Canon body with a suitable adaptor.

This fact opens up for you one other option, and I'm wondering whether that might represent a suitable compromise to satisfy your needs - using Nikkor PC lenses on a Canon EOS 1Ds Mk II body.

Damn! The wheels on your wheelchair need oiling. Again!

When are you going to get one of motorised ones?

Wenedell,

I did make mention of the 'Blad in my rave and the wide-angle capabilities are too inhibiting.

Bob,

I believe that my aspirations have shrunk as a results of experience reducing my options of choice where seeking gigs is concerned. Admittedly I have never been one to shy away from overkill - but I am happy to continue with large film as my overkill these days.

It was me who gave the first vote in the poll for the D2x and my gut feeling (a diminishing but nevertheless substantial gut, still) the D2x will win on the day. I may just have to come to terms with a 12-24mm zoomand calculating my own equation for an increase in image height governed by the amount of widening in transform. I do have a regular need (almost every soot) to go to a double-page spread in mags a little bigger than A-4 (46mm on wide dimension) and I know I would npot be happy upsizing something smaller for my (and my clients') purposes. Unlike a road-side 24-sheet poster which is 'read' from afar, a magazine is scrutinised at will at arm's length.

At one stage when I was still shooting the bikes on 4x5 there was an owner contacted the magazine concerned because in the magazine one could clearly see the bike-frame number punched into the metal. The other side of that debate is that if a guy has spent a fortune on fuel lines braided in a particular pattern, he wants to see them. As in most instances these things are market-driven.

Gary,

As you'd expect, HATE is a somewhat puerile and emotional terms for me to have used and was possibly a bit tongue in cheek.

I had an EOS1N briefly years ago and I just never felt a connection between me and the subject. The presence of the camera was always an intrusion due to it being so different to what I was accustomed to.

I have to say that the glass was very good. Previously I had a system of Leica Reflex and I did stringent comparative tests between Leica primes and the Canon zooms (28-70 and 70-200) in which the zooms outperformed the Wetzlar eyes in various ways at all apertures and focal lengths.

I also know that Canon's reputation for wide-angle lenses these days is far from wonderful but I would want to see that proven by myself. The Canaon Tilt/Shift is more appealing in terms of field of view than the 28mm Nikkor PC.

It bears mentioning, by the way, that a trip to Fox Studios will reveal a great many Canon stills lenses on Panaflexes!

There are other issues with Canon's sensor and their excessive low-pass filtering which I find give a look quite removed from what the Nikon gives. I really think that the D2x has an almost film-like quality to it. And then there is the issue of the red channel in the Canon system tending to clip rather readily.

What will be, will be, in the final decision. Cost is also a consideration. If the comparative tests conclude that the image resolution of the D2x is better than the EOS1DS MkII then there is little hope for the EOS 5d(?) to be any better. The $5,000.00 difference between the D2x and the EOS1DS MkII would almost buy me all the lenses I intend buying. (12-24, 35 f2, 60 Micro, 85 f1.8 )

I'm not silly enough to ever allow a misinformed prejudice to influence unduly a commercial decision, however.

Sheetshooter

I am getting my 12-24DX tomorrow from birddog
over the weekend I can do some wide shots indoors and outdoors of architectural subjects that will test the lens to the extreme, I can identify the amount of barrel distortion rectalinear distortion and it's sweetspots with the D2X, then you can scrutinize them at your leisure.

Streetshooter, I would not be bold enough to suggest what you should purchase, but can readily see the benefit of tilt/shift lenses rather than just tilt lenses for architectual work. There are modifications possible to the Nikon lenses to enable this and also I believe adaptation of the Canon lenses to fit. The $5k saving over the Canon may help to pay for those modifications (or $40k over the Hasselblad).

I am not really a believer that one tool can be made to do every job well, but digital technology has a much accelerated depreciation rate
and a large investment may mean a heavy work schedule just to match the rate of depreciation. Not maybe what you want whilst staring out the window from your wheelchair

Link to some T/S Nikon lenses

http://www.naturfotograf.com/28pc.html

Sheetshooter wrote: You see, my days are taken up with shooting for architects, interior designers, decor and assocuated stuff in the built environment.

sheetshooter

may i be so bold as to ask what current or past architectural mag or building you have photographed?? AA, AR, M ??

I ask because in work in the architectural profession. And intereste to see your work.

wendellt wrote:Sheetshooter

I am getting my 12-24DX tomorrow from birddog
over the weekend I can do some wide shots indoors and outdoors of architectural subjects that will test the lens to the extreme, I can identify the amount of barrel distortion rectalinear distortion and it's sweetspots with the D2X, then you can scrutinize them at your leisure.

I have this lens and like it a lot. However, I shoot landscapes, not architecturals.

I think the distortion will be too much for SS's requirements.

Apparently the Sigma has less distortion, but I haven't used one.
In any case, I doubt that it would get near a proper shift lens either.

...... shift Lens are not zooms and are limited in their focal length. I have found using 12-24 sigma and Photoshop for lens correction on room interiors and exteriors of buildings to be of a high quality. As I used to use a 50mm shift lens on a 645 Body, I have found that the 12-24 Sigma to be of compatible quality and due to photoshop gives me a lot more control.......

Sheetshooter, I too am interesting in seeing some of your works. I always find your posts interesting and I just learnt something new - Digital Backs for Medium Format Cameras. I never realised that these cameras were existing film cameras just with a digital back on them instead of the traditional method.

It kind of gets you thinking as to why companies like Nikon/Canon didn't just come up with something where you could remove the existing camera door and replace it with a back that sat inside of the camera, and slightly extended out if required that captured digital using existing 35mm cameras. It's suprising nobody has even tried to do it either as I'm sure they'd get heaps of buyers out there with perfectly good 35mm film bodies.

Btw, we're all just voting for the 39MP Phase-One so that if you ever get it and turn up to a D70 Mini-Meet we can druel over it

kipper wrote:Sheetshooter, I too am interesting in seeing some of your works. I always find your posts interesting.

......here here..... ':P'

Well fellas,

Tomorrow afternoon I shall be doing some comparative stuffing about with a Hasselblad H1 with a 22MP back. I also hope that my colleague can bring a D2x to check it against. If he can, I am pretty sure that the D2x will have the 28-70 f2.8 attached which is one of the zooms that would interest me if I wasn't so hell bent on primes.

I'll let you know how things pan out.

By the way, I feel really honoured that you see fit to have a gag with me in the poll. It is always nice to feel we are all among friends. Thank you.

I did post a scan from an 8x10 colour shot some time back. I do not have a great deal of stuff digitised but I'll have a look and see what I can find.

Cheers,

......... I must admit that I was a bit reluctant to change from prime lenses to zooms...... as I already had 2 zoom lenses for my F4 it did not take long to get to know them on my D70.......but only after the D70 sat on a bench for a few days as I was a bit reluctant to change.....glad I have.....