Large Format Digital

[StandingBear1983]

Does somebody know why there isn't a company that makes large format Digital backs and lenses?!, too expensive?, not profitable for the consumer market? - i mean it would be EPIC if there is the technology to produce it...why they don't do it?.

[Ads]

[o hey tyler]

http://www.aphotoeditor.com/2011/08/23/mitchell-feinbergs-8x10-digital-capture-back/

It's been done, but unless you can afford to finance a second house, it would be prohibitively expensive.

[Sw1tchFX]

better light makes scanning backs, but they're not 4x5 inches.

Digital Scanning Backs for Large Format PhotographyFor most applications, they're not very practical, especially compared to a Hasselblad or a Phase.

[StandingBear1983]

http://www.aphotoeditor.com/2011/08/23/mitchell-feinbergs-8x10-digital-capture-back/

It's been done, but unless you can afford to finance a second house, it would be prohibitively expensive.

I knew it!, so, i guess there might be still hope, right now its super expensive and no mass producing company would see it as profitable, but DSLR cameras are pretty young thing if you look on the history, what, the first DSLR was produced at the year 2000? only 12 years ago...you guys think that we'll see this in 10 years time in the consumer market? - what do you think?

[KmH]

Kodak developed a digital camera in 1975.

The Kodak DCS-100 appeard at Photokina in 1990 and used a modified Nikon F3. Kodak released the DCS-100 in 1991 as the first commercially available fully digital SLR.

Consumer digital (but not DSLR) cameras sold by Apple (made by Kodak) appeared in 1994.

The first consumer level DSLR, the Fuji Finepix S1 Pro was launched in January of 2000.

[Sw1tchFX]

Or you can just shoot 4x5 and 8x10 film...WHUTTACONCEPT!

[StandingBear1983]

KmH I was almost right then , well what do you think, in 10 years we might see it in a consumer level DSLR like Nikon or Canon?

[o hey tyler]

KmH I was almost right then , well what do you think, in 10 years we might see it in a consumer level DSLR like Nikon or Canon?

No. Because the consumer DSLR that you speak of would have to be ridiculously expensive, and EFFIN HUGE. It wouldn't appeal to the majority of consumers. Especially when you consider the resolving power of the glass you'll need to put in front of the sensor.

[Sw1tchFX]

8x10 hasn't appealed to the general consumer since wet/dry plates.....

[StandingBear1983]

We shall see tyler & switch , i would like to revisit this thread after 10 years and see what we thought as unimaginable possible with the advance of technology, i think we WILL have something like that. anyhow, this is only speculative, remember what digital photography was back in the year 2000...back then, there wasn't a FF digital camera there was only APS-C digital, not to talk about Medium format...we had photography for 250 years, but digital for less then 20.

[Buckster]

We shall see tyler & switch , i would like to revisit this thread after 10 years and see what we thought as unimaginable possible with the advance of technology, i think we WILL have something like that. anyhow, this is only speculative, remember what digital photography was back in the year 2000...back then, there wasn't a FF digital camera there was only APS-C digital, not to talk about Medium format...we had photography for 250 years, but digital for less then 20.

But in those 250 years, film manufacturing, capability and use got dimensionally smaller and better, not larger.

Besides, it's one thing to coat a large sheet of plastic or glass with chemicals that can be used in a large format camera. It's a whole 'nuther animal to develop and produce large sheets of photocells and the electronics and software required to work them. That's some serious dollars. You've got to have a seriously large market that wants something like that to make it worth the while to put in all the money it would take to produce them.

So, who wants it? Even the most demanding and stringent commercial photographers don't seem to be clamoring for a large format digital back. Many of them haven't even stepped up to medium format digital backs yet, satisfied with the results they get from the top level DLSRs or MF film for their work, and both DSLR and MF digital back solutions are getting better all the time.

What would it give those shooters? The ability to print larger and still maintain clarity. But what printed material is out there in the real world that's suffering from needing that? Nothing, that I can see. Prints that large are meant to be viewed from a distance. We don't put billboard sized images on living room walls and expect to have 300 PPI that we can walk right up to and count the pores on the model's skin, after all. And for the few times you might want to do that (I saw some in an art museum in San Francisco), there's still film.

I just don't see it happening.

[Sw1tchFX]

We shall see tyler & switch , i would like to revisit this thread after 10 years and see what we thought as unimaginable possible with the advance of technology, i think we WILL have something like that. anyhow, this is only speculative, remember what digital photography was back in the year 2000...back then, there wasn't a FF digital camera there was only APS-C digital, not to talk about Medium format...we had photography for 250 years, but digital for less then 20.

Dude just stop talking..where are you getting your information from?


Digital photography being less than 20 years old? Try 37 years
The World’s First Digital Camera by Kodak and Steve Sasson


Photography being 250 years old? If you count the camera obscura...sure. But a reliable medium has only existed for about 170 years with Daguerrotypes being invented by Lois Daguerre and Joseph Neipce.
http://inventors.about.com/od/dstartinventions/a/Daguerreotype.htm


You need to quit throwing out numbers and formats without doing any research into it.

[3bayjunkie]

It will never happen. DSLRs are popular because they are small and instant. Not many people i know want to lug around a 20 LB camera that takes 30 seconds to render an exposure. Not practicall for 99.9% of the general population. So like i said. It will never happen. Use film.

Sent using PhotoForum

[Atari1977]

Or you can just shoot 4x5 and 8x10 film...WHUTTACONCEPT!

The article says he shoots 8X10 film after checking exposure with the digital back.

[MattxMosh]

I have an adapter to toss my EOS camera on my 4x5 to do test exposures. I save my Polaroids for artsy fartsy stuff, since it currently costs a fortune for type 55.