Posted by Larry Fischer on September 26, 2008 at 9:43 AM
I purchased PhaseOne CaptureOne4 Raw conversion program.
In their continuing information program, to which I subscribed, they talk about their camera. It is listed as PhaseOne 645 Camera System. It features a 60.5 megapixel capacity. Other information I've gleaned from thier data is shooting "tethered" which I guess is by radio signals to a computer? And the featuring of "backs" for their cameras. Can anyone take time to explain this stuff. The cost is up there, too, with lenses associated with Leica. Thanks for any replies. Larry
Posted by David Bostedo on September 26, 2008 at 12:03 PM
PhaseOne (along with Sinar, Hassleblad, Mamiya, now Leica, maybe someone else I'm missing) make cameras, or parts of camera systems, with sensors larger than 35 mm film.
In the case of PhaseOne, Sinar, and Hassleblad they make a module that contains the screen and sensor and other electronic components. These attach to the rest of the camera that hold the lens, viewfinder, etc. These electronic parts are the digital backs. They can in some cases be swapped for different ones (sometimes even different brands, although Hassleblads new stuff will only take Hassleblad backs). They could also take a film back I think.
Tethered isn't usually wireless - it literally means you're tied to a computer through a USB or Firewire cable, and the camera can be controlled that way and images can be viewed on a full monitor. (Some of this may be wireless by now - I know it's moving that way, but I'm not sure if that exists yet or not.)
Posted by Robert Fisher on September 26, 2008 at 12:59 PM
I don't think, but I could be wrong, that there are any MF digital systems that can shoot and transmit wirelessly to a computer yet. There are DSLRs that have wireless transmission capabilities but I think even for those, to control the camera from the computer you need to be tethered via a cable.
Some older MF digital backs required you to be tethered because they didn't have on board memory capability. I think most, maybe all, large format backs still operate that way.
And yeah, the cost is up there. Think about what a full frame Canon 1Ds Mk III costs then increase the size of the sensor even further and that begins to explain the cost of MF digital backs. It's almost an exponential price jump as the sensor size increases.
Here is a useful review of a Phase back, features and performance. It should really help clarify.
As for tethered shooting, we've carefully considered it for our studio and event shooting, but rejected it. It's just one too many layers of complications, equipment and software details for my wife to manage, weighed against very small returns in convenience from her viewpoint. She is near overload on that stuff now, and I'm afraid tethered shooting would be too much compared to simply pulling a CF card from the camera and downloading it.
Posted by David Bostedo on September 26, 2008 at 1:18 PM
Think about what a full frame Canon 1Ds Mk III costs then increase the size of the sensor even further and that begins to explain the cost of MF digital backs. It's almost an exponential price jump as the sensor size increases.
The other component in there is that not only are large sensor's more expensive to produce, but all sensors are more expensive if you're making smaller numbers of them. The simple fact that Canon will sell tens or hundreds of thousands of full frame sensors keeps the cost down. If Phase could sell 50,000 sensors, the cost of each sensor would be significantly less. That's where the exponential impact comes from - big sensor -> more expensive -> less sales -> more expensive.
Posted by Kelly Rowe on September 26, 2008 at 1:52 PM
Canon Live is a wireless "tether" but it requires you to buy an expensive ($800) transmitter for your camera to get to your wireless network. It's dog slow. Even the Canon reps at Photoshop World couldn't get it to work right or work at all last April.
Hank is right about the extra layer of complexity shooting tethered. We evaluated it for our studio and decided that it was too clumsy and restrictive.
I'll tap the drum one more time following Kelly's point.
My wife's main shooting room has a direct line of sight from the subject's position into the next room and her computer display. If she's already shot a bit and displayed it, then taken the subject back for more shooting, she has to be sure to turn the monitor off or away so the subject can't see it. She's found it to be way too distracting to subjects, interfering greatly with her interactions with them. She's very afraid that tethered shooting would only make that worse if the screen was in view of the subject. Hope that's clear.
In any case, I'd wash your mind of any notion that tethered shooting will provide any service through allowing the clients to see shots as you progress through your shoot. You'll be hiding it from them, and it's way too much effort and expense for your own convenience in providing a bigger image for you to view shot by shot through a shoot. If we were working all the time with models and had AD's, PR's and GA's who needed to review images one at a time as a shoot progressed, that would be an entirely different matter. But we probably still would not allow the models to see the shots till the shoot was over.
Posted by David Bostedo on September 26, 2008 at 5:44 PM
This is one place where improvements could definitely occur in DSLRs. It's also a place where P&S cameras may have some advantage. I've done some small scale studio tethered shooting with my S2 IS, which is an EVF camera. Since it's an EVF, it's easy enough to wire the LCD output out to a computer running Canon's tethered software. The software isn't all that great - but it does work pretty smoothly, giving you control of the camera, and showing you the shots right from the computer. If they ever work it out properly, it could be a nice way to do some things in the studio.
Discussion
7 repliesIn their continuing information program, to which I subscribed, they talk about their camera. It is listed as PhaseOne 645 Camera System. It features a 60.5 megapixel capacity. Other information I've gleaned from thier data is shooting "tethered" which I guess is by radio signals to a computer? And the featuring of "backs" for their cameras. Can anyone take time to explain this stuff. The cost is up there, too, with lenses associated with Leica. Thanks for any replies. Larry
http://www.phaseone.com/Global/newsletters/rawnewsplus008_v2.aspx
In the case of PhaseOne, Sinar, and Hassleblad they make a module that contains the screen and sensor and other electronic components. These attach to the rest of the camera that hold the lens, viewfinder, etc. These electronic parts are the digital backs. They can in some cases be swapped for different ones (sometimes even different brands, although Hassleblads new stuff will only take Hassleblad backs). They could also take a film back I think.
Tethered isn't usually wireless - it literally means you're tied to a computer through a USB or Firewire cable, and the camera can be controlled that way and images can be viewed on a full monitor. (Some of this may be wireless by now - I know it's moving that way, but I'm not sure if that exists yet or not.)
Some older MF digital backs required you to be tethered because they didn't have on board memory capability. I think most, maybe all, large format backs still operate that way.
And yeah, the cost is up there. Think about what a full frame Canon 1Ds Mk III costs then increase the size of the sensor even further and that begins to explain the cost of MF digital backs. It's almost an exponential price jump as the sensor size increases.
As for tethered shooting, we've carefully considered it for our studio and event shooting, but rejected it. It's just one too many layers of complications, equipment and software details for my wife to manage, weighed against very small returns in convenience from her viewpoint. She is near overload on that stuff now, and I'm afraid tethered shooting would be too much compared to simply pulling a CF card from the camera and downloading it.
The other component in there is that not only are large sensor's more expensive to produce, but all sensors are more expensive if you're making smaller numbers of them. The simple fact that Canon will sell tens or hundreds of thousands of full frame sensors keeps the cost down. If Phase could sell 50,000 sensors, the cost of each sensor would be significantly less. That's where the exponential impact comes from - big sensor -> more expensive -> less sales -> more expensive.
Hank is right about the extra layer of complexity shooting tethered. We evaluated it for our studio and decided that it was too clumsy and restrictive.
My wife's main shooting room has a direct line of sight from the subject's position into the next room and her computer display. If she's already shot a bit and displayed it, then taken the subject back for more shooting, she has to be sure to turn the monitor off or away so the subject can't see it. She's found it to be way too distracting to subjects, interfering greatly with her interactions with them. She's very afraid that tethered shooting would only make that worse if the screen was in view of the subject. Hope that's clear.
In any case, I'd wash your mind of any notion that tethered shooting will provide any service through allowing the clients to see shots as you progress through your shoot. You'll be hiding it from them, and it's way too much effort and expense for your own convenience in providing a bigger image for you to view shot by shot through a shoot. If we were working all the time with models and had AD's, PR's and GA's who needed to review images one at a time as a shoot progressed, that would be an entirely different matter. But we probably still would not allow the models to see the shots till the shoot was over.