digital back on MF vs digital 35mm?

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Howdy!

I'm hoping this isn't a too obvious question.

I watched a professional shoot the other day and the photographer had a
hassey with a H1 digital back.Which got me wondering - what is the advantage
of a digital back on a MF camera compared to a digital SLR, assuming the
lenses are comparable (ie. zeiss vs zeiss)?

With film, the format size is a significant factor between MF and 35mm. With
digital, is it a question of electronics? If the electronics (sensors,
chips, etc.) AND the lenses are comparable, is there any advantage of MF
(w/digital back) over a digital SLR (35mm)?

While I've been shooting film (35mm & lately MF) for over 20 years, I have
been studying the digital scene for the last couple of years. I've decided
it's only a question of when before I make the leap into digital as well.

Thanks for all replies!

Norm

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

ColdCanuck <cc@cold.ca> wrote:
> Howdy!

> I'm hoping this isn't a too obvious question.

> I watched a professional shoot the other day and the photographer
> had a hassey with a H1 digital back.Which got me wondering - what is
> the advantage of a digital back on a MF camera compared to a digital
> SLR, assuming the lenses are comparable (ie. zeiss vs zeiss)?

All other things being equal, large sensors perform better than small
ones. That is, a 22 megapixel medium-format sensor will perform
better than a 22 megapixel 35mm size sensor. [1] This is because the
sensor elements have a limited capacity for photoelectrons before they
saturate. The more photoelectrons that can be held by a sensor
elements, the greater the signal to noise ratio, the higher the image
quality.

Andrew.

[1] If a 22 megapixel 35mm size sensor existed, which it doesn't...

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

See the thread ... in this forum ... started by Bill Hilton

"Canon 1Ds MII vs medium format digital back"
Thursday, December 02, 2004 7:12 AM

And additionally, see the page he referenced at
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/ [...] -p25.shtml





"Cold Canuck" <cold@canuck.ca> wrote in message
news:WlRFd.93434$dv1.79470@edtnps89...
>
>
> Not having access to either, does anyone know of any links to such a
> comparison?
>
>

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

ColdCanuck wrote:
>
> Howdy!
>
> I'm hoping this isn't a too obvious question.
>
> I watched a professional shoot the other day and the photographer had a
> hassey with a H1 digital back.Which got me wondering - what is the advantage
> of a digital back on a MF camera compared to a digital SLR, assuming the
> lenses are comparable (ie. zeiss vs zeiss)?

I think that is a 22mp back, with a 36x49 mm sensor.
about 4,000 x 5,000 pixels in single shot mode.


>
> With film, the format size is a significant factor between MF and 35mm. With
> digital, is it a question of electronics? If the electronics (sensors,
> chips, etc.) AND the lenses are comparable, is there any advantage of MF
> (w/digital back) over a digital SLR (35mm)?
>
> While I've been shooting film (35mm & lately MF) for over 20 years, I have
> been studying the digital scene for the last couple of years. I've decided
> it's only a question of when before I make the leap into digital as well.
>
> Thanks for all replies!
>
> Norm