And with lenses made for the camera - I don't know why somebody would need less depth of field than this.
I'm not really making a case -for- the Fuji sensor over full-frame, just that its more complicated.
View attachment 35723
Yes, that is nice and close!
!! Ideally I need shots of Phono carts and tubes to be really sharp and lacking CA when possible as I don't use any post processing, at all.
For crop sensor camera's I found the selection of 1:1 capable ( that is not requiring extension tubes etc) or even 1:2 lenses to be slim, in the lengths I needed -- and the limits of studio "stand back" room.
And there were some other picadilo's too -- but you are probably right --- no reason at all I could not make it with a crop...
Was always fearful of a Speedbooster because of the added lens element. Does it kill a small bit of detail, maybe?
I never had a chance to own a nice crop sensor body like you guys are talking. -- that's for sure.
For the money I just got into full frame for about the same price but that was years ago.
Drooling over all the beautiful film bodies you guys are showcasing, but no time or money to take 8 photos of an item, develop and scan....
like was said above -- my camera's and lenses are daily workhorse items... The vintage lenses are honestly adding something for me and customers I feel in the the "micro-contrast" department.
I don't even shoot RAW, just JPEG, straight to camera.
I find tubes to be really hard for a variety of reasons. You need allot of light.
I want customers to see every speck of detail down to individual getter wires if possible.
This is the sort of work I do with my 100mm Canon 2.5 and 90mm Series 1 (The series 1 is the sharper of the 2, and is an adapted F to EOS mount)
(off site link so I don't hog the haven's bandwidth)
Tele 12ax7 diamonds are really a bear....but the 100mm snaps them and gets the glass texture to boot...
In this shot, only the copper filament pipes, and the Mullard blackburn etched codes are in focus...the codes are probably the single most frustrating thing to get that I do. These little codes rub easily and get faded - but it's the best way to certify that a tube is a Mullard
It's getting really hard to settle for anything less than really, really good 50mm and 100mmish primes these days. Nothing else is sharp enough for proper tube photos.
35mm is not the best format -- but it does have the widest selection of lenses I guess. Even though I only use 3 different ones these days. Would love medium format but finding a 1:1 or 1:2 would be tough as well.
And with lenses made for the camera - I don't know why somebody would need less depth of field than this.
I'm not really making a case -for- the Fuji sensor over full-frame, just that its more complicated.
View attachment 35723