Steve's Digicams Forums

Steve's Digicams Forums (https://forums.steves-digicams.com/)
-   General Discussion (https://forums.steves-digicams.com/general-discussion-11/)
-   -   [Recovered Thread: 52281] (https://forums.steves-digicams.com/general-discussion-11/%5Brecovered-thread-52281%5D-50749/)

pianoplayer88key Mar 28, 2005 4:14 PM

so I can crop in several times and get decent detail out of a shot?

(note that this was not posted in the what should I buy forum because I'm not yet looking to plunk $$$ down yet.)

I would like to be able to use a super wide angle lens (so I don't have to point the lens quite at the subject - I was thinking something like 24mm or wider like 18mm (or even 10mm but I don't want too much of a "fisheye" effect.)), but capture enough resolution so I can crop on the subject as if I had used a 400+ (preferably 1200+) mm lens and still get a decent 8x10.

What type / format camera (digital or film) that currently exists is capable of this? I would like fairly fast shutter speeds (enough to freeze most sports action), moderately decent depth of field (about like F/5.6 or F/8 on a small-sensor digicam at hyperfocal wide-angle), and little to no noise (about like ISO 50 on a consumer digicam or ISO 100 on a dSLR). I would mainly use this in daylight conditions, and for low light (indoors at night or outdoors with street lights or by a campfire), I would be closer to the subject AND I would not crop nearly so much, and would be somewhat more tolerant for a slower shutter speed, less depth of field, and a little more noise.

I would assume a digital is prohibitedly expensive (I prefer not to pay more than I would pay for a Rebel body if I was to buy one), so film is definitely an option. I will definitely want to get the shots "developed" into a digital format, though, cause I'll want to edit (and display) them on my computer. I don't mind if each shot takes upwards of several hundred MB or even a few GB, though - I want decent quality in the images (super high resolution, so that, for example, I have enough figure of merit with a 14mm lens as if I had shot a little section with a Panasonic FZ-20 and Crystalvue 8x scope).

What would be the cost of a camera and lens for something like this? I would most definitely NOT be using a tripod!

Monza76 Mar 28, 2005 6:14 PM

Man that is asking a lot. The angle of view of an 18mm lens for 35mm is about 100 degrees diagonally a 1000mm lens would have an angle of only 2.5 degrees, that means that a crop has to be magnified to 40 times its original size to reach that point, or more correctly, divide the vertical and horizontal resolution by 40.

Now lets take a Canon EOS 1Ds Mark II 16.7MP camera. That has an image size of 4992 x 3328 pixels and a full size imaging sensor to allow for the extra wide angle. Now lets do the math, divide by 40 and you get 125 x 83 pixels, very tiny. I know that this is oversimplifying, and I am sure that some people will take issue with my math,but it would take a rather large format film camera to get even close to what you are suggesting.

Sorry

Ira

pianoplayer88key Mar 29, 2005 1:27 AM

Monza76 wrote:
Quote:

Man that is asking a lot. The angle of view of an 18mm lens for 35mm is about 100 degrees diagonally a 1000mm lens would have an angle of only 2.5 degrees, that means that a crop has to be magnified to 40 times its original size to reach that point, or more correctly, divide the vertical and horizontal resolution by 40.

Now lets take a Canon EOS 1Ds Mark II 16.7MP camera. That has an image size of 4992 x 3328 pixels and a full size imaging sensor to allow for the extra wide angle. Now lets do the math, divide by 40 and you get 125 x 83 pixels, very tiny. I know that this is oversimplifying, and I am sure that some people will take issue with my math, but it would take a rather large format film camera to get even close to what you are suggesting.

Sorry

Ira
What would I be able to get with an older 8x10 film camera?

Or would I be better off getting an angle lens for my S1? (I saw a couple "spy" lenses on ebay.)

peripatetic Mar 29, 2005 5:47 AM

I suspect that some of the custom made Hassleblads with digital backs used on satellites by the military might come close.

That sort of camera will cost you at least a million dollars, but I don't think anyone makes the sort of lens you're looking for to go on it. They're usually long telephotos for that sort of camera. Perhaps if you have another million or so to spare you might be able to get Zeiss or Leica to do a custom job for you. Of course it's unlikely to be terribly portable, and many of the designs are classified.

Looking forward to your next thread. They're great fun. ;)

BillDrew Mar 29, 2005 7:56 AM

pianoplayer88key wrote:
Quote:

... I would like to be able to use a super wide angle lens (so I don't have to point the lens quite at the subject - I was thinking something like 24mm or wider like 18mm (or even 10mm but I don't want too much of a "fisheye" effect.)), but capture enough resolution so I can crop on the subject as if I had used a 400+ (preferably 1200+) mm lens and still get a decent 8x10. ...
Do the math. Assuming 200ppi, to print an 8x10" you will need 1600x2000 pixels or a bit over 3Mp in your final crop. Since you are cropping by a linear factor of 20 (20 to 400mm) and the pixel count goes by the square of that, you will need 400 times your final 3Mp. So you just need a 1.2 Gigapixel camera.

pianoplayer88key wrote:
Quote:

...What would be the cost of a camera and lens for something like this?...
I think peripatetic has the price about right for a new unit, though you could save a bit by scrounging.

JimC Mar 29, 2005 8:18 AM

Here is a thread about a nice compact model that you may want to ask the owner about, and it only weighs a little over 100 pounds:

http://www.stevesforums.com/forums/v...mp;forum_id=72

Perhaps you could use it's designas a starting point. ;-)



thebac Mar 29, 2005 10:51 AM

peripatetic wrote:
Quote:

Looking forward to your next thread. They're great fun. ;)
Yep, so true :-)

slipe Mar 29, 2005 11:43 AM

Your effort seems to be directed toward not having to aim the camera directly at someone – I presume so people don't know you are shooting them. Have you considered an articulated LCD? If you aren't standing behind a camera aiming it at someone they aren't usually aware you are shooting them. That seems like a better option than trying to crop from the edge of a super wide angle shot.

thebac Mar 29, 2005 12:07 PM

slipe wrote:
Quote:

Your effort seems to be directed toward not having to aim the camera directly at someone – I presume so people don't know you are shooting them. Have you considered an articulated LCD? If you aren't standing behind a camera aiming it at someone they aren't usually aware you are shooting them. That seems like a better option than trying to crop from the edge of a super wide angle shot.
The OP has an S1, so I'm assuming s/he has already considered it.

pianoplayer88key Mar 29, 2005 12:49 PM

Rather than a "gigapixel" camera (and btw I WAS considering FILM too...)... what about something like one of these?

http://search.ebay.com/angle-voyeur-...fsopZ1QQfsooZ1


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 3:44 PM.