Better Light's E-HS digital backs: 144 megapixels for $9,495
posted March 28th 2005 6:30AM
Is that 8 megapixel DSLR just not doing it for you anymore? This time around, instead of doubling or tripling your
pixel count when you upgrade, why not bump it up an order of magnitude with a 144 megapixel medium-format digital
scanning back? That's what's on offer from Better Light, which has a new series of "affordable" backs designed for use
with medium-format film cameras. The E-HS series backs use Kodak's tri-linear color CCD, which captures up to 48
megapixels per color (the 144 megapixel count comes from adding up the red, blue and green counts). Needless to say,
these units aren't for casual snapshooting. Capturing a 144 megapixel image takes "as little as" 66 seconds, and the
back alone weighs over two pounds. But if you're a studio shooter with a big investment in medium-format gear, $6,495
to $9,495 may be a reasonable price to pay to go digital without sacrificing image quality.
[Thanks, Even]
Theya are also coming out with an almost 2000 mp version.
That last sentence should read "large format cameras" and not "medium format cameras."
Old news..
Have seen this done at least a year ago.
Well, this is the first time I've read about it, so shut the hell up, Japroach.
I seriously hate people who say "Old news! Done before!" when not everyone has read something from the very beginning and been reading a source for every waking hour of the day.
This camera is useless outside of a studio. Extreme photographers wont use it.
This is new for better light its not old at all. And its a large format camera in the photo not a medium
"This camera is useless outside of a studio. Extreme photographers wont use it." Quite a strong statement and quite wrong. Try telling Stephen Johnson that he can't use it to photograph all the national parks or other landscape photographers like Shelley Lake and Tom Watson (or myself for that matter). There are no absolutes in this business.
"This camera is useless outside of a studio. Extreme photographers wont use it." Quite a strong statement and quite wrong. Try telling Stephen Johnson that he can't use it to photograph all the national parks or other landscape photographers like Shelley Lake and Tom Watson (or myself for that matter). There are no absolutes in this business.