Go big, go REALLY BIG. LARGE FORMAT DIGITAL CAMERA - LargeSense

[Aglet]

Move over, medium-format, there's a new back comin' to town!
Packin' 12 million big, fat, 75-micron pixels on a 9 x 11 INCH sensor and a base ISO of 2100.

I wasn't super-thrilled with my P1 test experience, altho very good gear, better bang/buck from the pentax kit, IMO. I've been thinking about REAL large format digital for a while, apparently someone else has been thinking about it hard enough to make it happen.

MF is not all that much bigger than typical 35mm format, kinda like comparing FF vs APSC crop body. There's a noticeable difference sometimes, but it's not huge.

These large sensor backs from http://largesense.com/ are in a completely different league.
The camera's still in the prototype stage, nearing production from what I've learned and a 5x5 inch version is also planned in various versions.

http://largesense.com/products/4x5-large-format-digital-back-ls55/

here's a direct link to the info page for the 9x11:

http://largesense.com/products/8x10-large-format-digital-back-ls911/

I won't disclose other technical info at this time as parameters are subject to change. Suffice it to say, this could be an extremely capable and impressive camera in many respects, providing a type of image you just can't do with present digital imaging systems.
It looks like it's going to be a lot of fun to work with.

 

[Mt Spokane Photography]

I tried to read their blurb, but the text kept jumping up and down as their images at the top were different size when they changed. Truly amateur performance, and they want to convince me they have the technical know to make such a camera when they don't even know how to make a web site thats readable?

 

[KateH]

I tried to read their blurb, but the text kept jumping up and down as their images at the top were different size when they changed. Truly amateur performance, and they want to convince me they have the technical know to make such a camera when they don't even know how to make a web site thats readable?

It is my understanding that building websites and designing CCDs are in fact different skills that are performed by entirely different people within an organization

 

[zim]

I tried to read their blurb, but the text kept jumping up and down as their images at the top were different size when they changed. Truly amateur performance, and they want to convince me they have the technical know to make such a camera when they don't even know how to make a web site thats readable?

Jumping seems fixed ,for my browser anyway, almost like they must have been reading CR! Maybe it's a sign of how responsive their support will be

 

[sanj]

I tried to read their blurb, but the text kept jumping up and down as their images at the top were different size when they changed. Truly amateur performance, and they want to convince me they have the technical know to make such a camera when they don't even know how to make a web site thats readable?

It is my understanding that building websites and designing CCDs are in fact different skills that are performed by entirely different people within an organization

Absolutely true. BUT the company should ensure that the website looks and works well.

 

[Mt Spokane Photography]

I tried to read their blurb, but the text kept jumping up and down as their images at the top were different size when they changed. Truly amateur performance, and they want to convince me they have the technical know to make such a camera when they don't even know how to make a web site thats readable?

It is my understanding that building websites and designing CCDs are in fact different skills that are performed by entirely different people within an organization

Although you might not know it, digital cameras have software running the entire camera.

 

[Aglet]

somebody is developing a NINE x ELEVEN INCH SENSOR and a (now corrected) javascript error on a website is the focus of discussion?!? ???

 

[3kramd5]

somebody is developing a NINE x ELEVEN INCH SENSOR and a (now corrected) javascript error on a website is the focus of discussion?!? ???

Given potential vaporware, you gotta look at context.

 

[Mt Spokane Photography]

somebody is developing a NINE x ELEVEN INCH SENSOR and a (now corrected) javascript error on a website is the focus of discussion?!? ???

Actually, I posted because the site linked to was unreadable, so how could the camera be discussed? From what I was able to read while the screen was jumping around, it was 8 X 10, not 9 X 11.

Its also 12 mp, and 24 FPS. I have a lens all ready for it Actually, I believe its a 4 X 5 lens, but its the closet I can afford, having paid $1 at a estate sale.

 

[3kramd5]

From what I was able to read while the screen was jumping around, it was 8 X 10, not 9 X 11

I believe it said that they refer to it as the closest common format, 8x10, but that it is 9x11.

 

[Mt Spokane Photography]

It looks just the thing for carrying around in your pocket I mean pickup truck.

It makes the Canon 800mm L look puny with its 1meter bellows extension.

 

[Mt Spokane Photography]

From what I was able to read while the screen was jumping around, it was 8 X 10, not 9 X 11

I believe it said that they refer to it as the closest common format, 8x10, but that it is 9x11.

It was hard to read with the jumping around. Now I've reread it, and the sensor is 9 X 11, but I suspect that it crops to 8 X 10 for actual output. They also say the red knob rotates the sensor from portrait to landscape.

They say they have a 4 X 5 coming next year that has a 5 X 5 sensor. That way, it can crop to portrait or landscape I think.


I'd suspect that in the right hands, it will produce some very nice images, but it isn't easily portable. with 4K video at 24 fps, it might make it into some movies.

As a Engineer, I find it fascinating.

 

[Sporgon]

Don't really understand the fuss here: Sinar have been doing LF digital backs since the late 90's.

 

[3kramd5]

Don't really understand the fuss here: Sinar have been doing LF digital backs since the late 90's.

Betterlight too, but do they have 8X10? I thought they were producing 4X5.

with 4K video at 24 fps, it might make it into some movies.

Though with a native ISO north of 2000 at 1/24 you're definitely going to be dealing with heavy ND or shooting very stopped-down for anything approaching daylight.

 

[AcutancePhotography]

I don't know a whole lot about Large Format. But why would the base iso be so high?

 

[Sporgon]

Don't really understand the fuss here: Sinar have been doing LF digital backs since the late 90's.

Betterlight too, but do they have 8X10? I thought they were producing 4X5.

True. Much more versatile than a 10x8

I don't know a whole lot about Large Format. But why would the base iso be so high?

Because the pixels are so large.

A 'fast' 10x8 lens starts at f8, and some stop down to f128. Remember than on a 10x8 300 mm is the 'standard' focal length.

 

[AcutancePhotography]

Because the pixels are so large.

A 'fast' 10x8 lens starts at f8, and some stop down to f128. Remember than on a 10x8 300 mm is the 'standard' focal length.

Wow. I guess it really is pretty different from 35mm stuff. ;D

 

[Sporgon]

Because the pixels are so large.

A 'fast' 10x8 lens starts at f8, and some stop down to f128. Remember than on a 10x8 300 mm is the 'standard' focal length.

Wow. I guess it really is pretty different from 35mm stuff. ;D

Yea, including lugging one around ! The IQ from this thing could be unreal, but I would think it is so impractical that its main uses will be copy work.

 

[Mt Spokane Photography]

Don't really understand the fuss here: Sinar have been doing LF digital backs since the late 90's.

48 X 36mm = 1.9 X 1.4 inches, not exactly large format. While they may mount to a 4X5 camera, they are not 4 X 5 sensors, much less than 9 X 11 inches. The speeds are specified in exposures per minute which is not in the same league as 24 FPS.

There are large scanning backs, but image capture speeds are measured in minutes.

I don't believe there is a cmos sensor in production quite like this, except for prototypes like the large 12 X 12 cmos sensor Canon made for astronomy.

Of course, it will take a entire 12 in wafer to make one sensor. The large pixel size is likely there to minimize excessive waste. I wonder how many wafers it will take to get a good one?

As to price, if you have to ask, you can't afford it.

 

[Sporgon]

Don't really understand the fuss here: Sinar have been doing LF digital backs since the late 90's.

48 X 36mm = 1.9 X 1.4 inches, not exactly large format. While they may mount to a 4X5 camera, they are not 4 X 5 sensors, much less than 9 X 11 inches. The speeds are specified in exposures per minute which is not in the same league as 24 FPS.

There are large scanning backs, but image capture speeds are measured in minutes.

I don't believe there is a cmos sensor in production quite like this, except for prototypes like the large 12 X 12 cmos sensor Canon made for astronomy.

Of course, it will take a entire 12 in wafer to make one sensor. The large pixel size is likely there to minimize excessive waste. I wonder how many wafers it will take to get a good one?

As to price, if you have to ask, you can't afford it.

Yes you are quite right, I was referring to scanning backs that gave the full 5x4. Other than this LF digital backs have been quite small, the original for Sinar with seperate r, g, and b filters on a disc was 20mm x 20 mm and cost about £30,000 !

A case of 'if you can't beat 'em join 'em' now I guess, these LF backs are actually DMF.

Didn't realise that this new camera is a single CCD sensor. Wow ! That will take some culturing.