Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2012/12/31
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Paul wrote: "However, with the tilt, there is still only one thin plane in focus. It's just tilted" and "With focus stacking, the planes of focus, potentially, allow everything to be reasonably sharp." It's a new world for MF just as for 35mm. To say tilt has a very narrow DOF, just tilted, is no longer so in the digital world of MF. The matched sensor/lens focal point in MF is far superior to when film was used. The lenses have greater LPI resolution and they focus much more precisely on an incredibly flat "film" plane. Match the lens to the sensor plane and you have a machine like none that ever was available before. This image, when viewed at 100 or 200 pct. is tack (not reasonably) sharp everywhere: http://www.rgaphoto.com/Kauai/content/TunnelBeach1-Pano_large.html A 50mm Rodenstock digital lens at f/11.6 with "upside down" back tilt (the top of frame leaves were the near, the mountain tops were the far) put absolutely everything into focus. The leaves were about 3 feet from the camera... And it can print 40"x60" at a natural resolution of 240dpi; no up-ressing, etc. It just ain't as portable but it's a heck of a machine... :-) Bob On Mon, Dec 31, 2012 at 9:04 PM, Paul Roark <roark.paul at gmail.com> wrote: > <afirkin at afirkin.com> wrote: > > > ... when I use MF I find the inherent DOF limitations often cramp my > 35mm upbringing ... > > I think the M9 has the best DOF-sharpness combination I've used. > Since final image sharpness is a combination of various factors, in > the past I found the 35 mm film limited the sharpness so much that the > better DOF was wiped out by the inferior resolution compared to medium > format. Now, comparing the M9 to my previous main camera -- the > Bronica RF 645 with Tech Pan -- I think I'm seeing more practical DOF > and sharpness with the M9. > > > ... stacked focus images. The darkroom is looking even more cobwebbed ;-) > > I totally agree. I've been a huge fan of tilts for landscape > photography for a long time. I've owned most of the tilt shift lenses > Canon has made, and the reason I bought the Rollei SL66 was largely > the tilt. However, with the tilt, there is still only one thin plane > in focus. It's just tilted. With focus stacking, the planes of focus, > potentially, allow everything to be reasonably sharp. The software > that does stacking is not really capable of doing a very good job on > most of my shots. So, it's more work in Photoshop at this point, but > I've used it a lot with good success. > > With equipment in general, I like the words of wisdom I heard relating > to tripods: "The best tripod in the world is the one you have with > you when you need one." My most limiting factor is the time I have > for shooting. I need to maximize my good shots per time unit. So, I > analyze what focal lengths produce the highest number of good shots > for me, and what equipment, in reality, I'm most likely to take into > the field. Currently, the M9 with a 35mm lens is the middle of the > bell curve of good shots and most likely to actually be taken with me. > So, the focus stacking and stitching are, even if not necessarily the > best approach, the ones I have with me when I need them. The bottom > line is the the number of good shots per unit time with that combo -- > M9 & 35mm -- is the best I've experienced. > > (16K v. 65K shades of gray? Truth is 256 shades at the printing stage > makes a very good B&W print. QuadToneRip is limited to 256, and QTR > is what many of the best B&W prints made today used. Epson "Advanced > B&W" is also limited to 256 steps. So, with 16K I can still increase > the contrast by 60 times and not run out of steps. I can live with > that.) > > Paul > www.PaulRoark.com > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information > -- Bob Adler