I know that you can get a low-res file from a point-and-shoot or SLR digital, and attempt to correct the perspective in Photoshop, and this might be adequate for a postcard sized picture in the parish magazine or an estate agent's leaflet. see recent thread, and please do not waste space in this thread telling us about it.
This thread is about quality commercial architectural work, with higher resolution than Large Format. With a 24x36mm CCD on a Hasselblad magazine mount I could use my Nikon 35mm lenses (with the Horseman Digiflex 2 SLR) and I could get limited movements with PC and sift/tilt lenses. I have a Sinar p and nine lenses, but I think that the large format lenses would not have the resolution to get the best out of a 42 Mpixel 24x36mm chip. I have a 4 lens Hasselblad system, and would like to use the Hasselblad lenses with the Eyelike, as they have better resolution than the LF lenses, and larger image circles than the Nikon 35mm lenses, giving the potential for stacks of movement for architecture: Using Hasselblad kit with film, you need a mechanism to wind the film magazine, and mechanisms to wind and release the shutter - using a digital back saves space, as you do not need the film winding mechanism, and this would allow the use of a bag bellows. My Hasselblad Flexbody MF view camera only allows 15mm of movement, which is a great deal on a 24mm wide CCD. The edge of a 24mm CCD is 18mm from the edge of the 6x6cm image, and the Macro-Planar 120 has enough image circle for 14mm of shift on 66, so you could usefully use about 35mm of shift on 24x36mm. .but you most need shift with wide angles, and the 40mm Distagon does not have enough image circle for any shift on 66, so the 15mm of movement on the Flexbody would use most of it. This might seem to make the Flexbody adequate, but for hi-resolution you need multi-shot, and for multi-shot you need an electronic shutter, and I want to be able to work remotely for wildlife and use on a 10m tripod. Hasselblad bodies are longer than Nikon bodies, so it might be possible to fit a shift lens mount on a Digiflex. If I bought a Horseman ISS shutter for the Sinar, It would not be big enough to use with the Hasselblad lenses. Nikon do a 28mm lens with some shift, but it seems that the best transportable tool for architecture might be the Schneider Digitar 28mm lens with the Rollei electronic shutter. but I had hoped to put together a compact kit and keep the Sinar for the Canham 6x17 roll film back. Now, if we could persuade Hasselblad to make a motorised, mirror-less short body like the 903SWCE with standard lens mount and a shift/tilt back, that would be ideal - and they might sell some lenses. =============================================================== GO TO http://www.prodig.org for ~ GUIDELINES ~ un/SUBSCRIBING ~ ITEMS for SALE
