The GetDPI Photography Forum

Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!

Why do you use MF? or: I am in the MF crisis...

thomas

New member
While others can say the gap between other formats and MF is closing ... it isn't even with-in a mile of being closed IMO. It was just that the Gap was so incredibly huge before. I don't mistake nice files from the M9, 1DsMKIII, D3X, or my Current Sony A900 as being anywhere in the same league as my Medium Format digital machine ... even with a 8X10 print ... let alone for some of the critical commercial work I do.

Frankly, I found that there is something profoundly disappointing about the IQ of everything else once you use a MFD ... or course that is IF IQ is what floats your boat.
this is why me personally I added a P21+ alongside with my P45 instead of an A900 and some lenses.
To a limited extend I agree with you. Still... at base ISO the A900 with good glass (and there are some very good Minolta/Sony/Zeiss lenses) is not "nowhere near" a P21+. There is a difference. Of course. And it's obvious enough for me to take a P21+ over a A900 (beside other factors). But it's not a world of a difference. At least not with regard to every motif.
 

fotografz

Well-known member
this is why me personally I added a P21+ alongside with my P45 instead of an A900 and some lenses.
To a limited extend I agree with you. Still... at base ISO the A900 with good glass (and there are some very good Minolta/Sony/Zeiss lenses) is not "nowhere near" a P21+. There is a difference. Of course. And it's obvious enough for me to take a P21+ over a A900 (beside other factors). But it's not a world of a difference. At least not with regard to every motif.
Agreed it's "not a world apart" if the comparison is to the highest end, full frame, 25 meg current model of one ... and a crop frame, 18 meg discontinued model of the other. Still, the dynamic range and 16 bit color shows up when compared to a 12 bit A900 ... so, as you say, there is still an obvious enough difference as far as IQ is concerned.

Generally, I think of current MFD as the comparison point to current 35mm DSLRs ... and it's these more recent models that I feel are "there" in terms of a longer range ownership ... except in the case of Guy where "long range" isn't part of his vocabulary. :ROTFL:

-Marc
 

thomas

New member
Agreed it's "not a world apart" if the comparison is to the highest end, full frame, 25 meg current model of one ... and a crop frame, 18 meg discontinued model of the other. Still, the dynamic range and 16 bit color shows up when compared to a 12 bit A900 ... so, as you say, there is still an obvious enough difference as far as IQ is concerned.
true... the comparision is not really balanced. However it's almost the same with a 35mm crop of the P45 (which is also not up to date but at base ISO still amazingly good).
I'm a bit unsure about the 16bit as I thought MF files are actually 14bit (they just blow up the data to 16bit). I think it's the mature interplay of sensor data, firm- and software that adds to IQ more than 14 (or even 12) bit versus 16bit. Besides in Photoshop we are working with 15bit in any case ...
Anyway... obviously 35mm is so good that many, many phantastic photographers can make wonderful images out of it (not only from an "aesthetically" but also from a "technically" standpoint).
 

David K

Workshop Member
2 questions: Does your Hy6 focus without hunting forth and back before locking? And how good does camera metering work for you? In my case I have to dial in anything between +.3 up to +1.5 and more sometimes still get underexposed images.
My Hy6 focuses adequately in good light but in low light it can certainly hunt for focus. At it's best it doesn't compare to my Nikon D3 or the Canon pro bodies I've used in the past. I find the ability to manually focus varies widely from lens to lens. With the Rollei 110 f/2 Planar, for example, the image just pops into focus. I do not have metering problems with my copy of the Hy6, either with the prism or WLF. However, when I open the image in eXposure it appears to be underexposed as it's quite dark. This is easily adjusted in post (I use Lightroom these days) after the RAW files are converted in eXposure. Are you certain you're not assuming the files are underexposed because they show up dark?? By way of comparison, when I switch to the Contax 645 platform I have had significant exposure problems when using the WLF, but none while using the prism. I think it was Son who suggested that this was attributable to light leaking into the WLF. No such metering problems when shooting with WLF on the Hassy 203FE and, as far as the ability to manually focus, this is far and away the brightest and easiest to focus camera I've owned... and there's been a bunch :)
 

David K

Workshop Member
The forces within us compete with each other from time to time. There is no war but only battles to win within ourselves.
Best Regards,
Son
Son,
I always read your posts and find them insightful and extremely informative. Having said that, I suspect you got this one from a fortune cookie :ROTFL:

(After posting this it occurred to me that some readers might not know that Son and I are extremely good friends, which is why I feel I can take this liberty)
 
Last edited:

PeterA

Well-known member
I have not 'personally' experienced the improved focus after sending in to Sinar for a CLA. However i person I know very well and trust has - he also happens to be the Sinar dealer here in Australia.

I will be sending the camera to him with back to be on sent to Sinar - when I get the chance..so will report back in due course. teh reason I havent bothered is that I only have one autofocus lens. and bought into Rollie mount for the old style manual focus lenses..

Son - you sound like you have been busy- gmail me about your new systems!

pete
 

Paratom

Well-known member
My Hy6 focuses adequately in good light but in low light it can certainly hunt for focus. At it's best it doesn't compare to my Nikon D3 or the Canon pro bodies I've used in the past. I find the ability to manually focus varies widely from lens to lens. With the Rollei 110 f/2 Planar, for example, the image just pops into focus. I do not have metering problems with my copy of the Hy6, either with the prism or WLF. However, when I open the image in eXposure it appears to be underexposed as it's quite dark. This is easily adjusted in post (I use Lightroom these days) after the RAW files are converted in eXposure. Are you certain you're not assuming the files are underexposed because they show up dark?? By way of comparison, when I switch to the Contax 645 platform I have had significant exposure problems when using the WLF, but none while using the prism. I think it was Son who suggested that this was attributable to light leaking into the WLF. No such metering problems when shooting with WLF on the Hassy 203FE and, as far as the ability to manually focus, this is far and away the brightest and easiest to focus camera I've owned... and there's been a bunch :)
David,
I also experienced some difference between using WLF and Prism specially if you dont have the eye/head over the WLF. I understand that this must be light leaking into the WLF and I understand it plus dont have a problem with that. Makes only a small difference.
Yes-images do show up dark in Exposure and I have to often push exp comp in Esposure-SOftware between .3 up to over 1 Stop, even when I had dialed in +.3 when taking the image.

I also agree that with the 110/2.0 manual focusing is most easy vs other slower lenses. But its huge and while its my favorite lens I dont allways want to carry it around. The 80 Xenotar AF is much lighter and also a very nice drawing but not aseasy to focus as the 110 IMO.

If you say the Hassy 203 has the brightest viewfinder/easiest to focus-would this also apply for the 205? Are you saying that Hassy viewfinder is brighter than the Rollei?
 

jps

New member
I also have the HY6,arTec and M9 cameras so you may be interested in my thoughts -- as confused as they are ! I know what you are saying about the M9 , it is a wonderful camera , if I could only have one camera the Leica would be it. When I first got it ( I was one of the lucky first ) I abandoned the other cameras to the cupboard and did fantasise for awhile about selling them. However after the initial infatuation dimmed a little I rediscovered the joy of using the Sinar - particularly the arTec. It is a very special camera. Sure it takes care in setting up ,is difficult to backpack with and the software takes getting used to HOWEVER when you nail the image it produces absolutely magnificent landscapes -- and of course with its tilt shift capability with all lenses it does things that the Leica can never do.So the artec is a keeper for me unless/until something better comes along. So the one left to consider selling is the Hy6. I should say I mostly use mine with manual focus on a tripod and just havent had the trouble you speak of... perhaps you should try firmware upgrade as others have mentioned. Anyway my reasoning is since I want the arTec and the back to go with it I would only have the Hy6 body and lenses to sell if I chose that path and I suspect they would not fetch a great deal of $ ,so I figure to hang on to them. Also when I have doubts I just go and touch/fondle the Schneider glass .... I know if I sold it I would just have to buy it back again later.My advice for what its worth is to spend some quality time with your arTec, only when you think you have really exhausted the possibilities with it should you consider selling. By the way I find the M9 and artec make a great combination I use the M9 to help with metering and composition.

Cheers JOHN
 

thomas

New member
I really agree that I could/should go more often out with the main focus of photography and not with the idea to combine activity and photography..
Maybe the deal with your family could be that 1 sunday per month or 1 sunday every 6 weeks is just for you... just for photography? I don't know :)

My decision was based on
a) my wish for a big/bright/interchangable viewfinder
b) in the beginning I just focused on maybe 2-3 smaller/lighter lenses like the 40/80/150 (but later I got inclined by the "monster-lenses" 110/2.0 and 180/2.8)
c) The 75LV is the back which was the best compromise IMO regarding noise-sensor size-flexibility (no micro lenses)-and price
d) if using WLF the rotating back made a lot of sense to me
e) I liked the rendering of the dalsa sensor as well as that of the Schneider lenses
f) I thought I would use fill flash more oftne but actually I dodnt so far

The decision for the Artec was driven by the thought that specially for doing T/S plus for focus accurancy a ground glass would really make sense (and I still believe it does). The Artec is not really heavy - the draw back is that you cant handhold it and it is wider.
As soon as you do use a griundglass the Artec should be much easier to use than a comparable camera.
so a very well thought out selection of gear. With regard to the capabilities of the gear. Not really with regard to the way you usually shoot... at least this is how I see it (of course no criticism here!).
A Hy6 with a 80mm feels like twice a camera like the Contax & 80mm. The arTec is more than twice the size of a Cambo WRS (however the WRS is not really lighter). The Rodenstock HR lenses are much bigger and heavier than the Digitars. Of course they provide one stop more light wide open. But they are bulkier.
I use a (fresnel) groundglass on the WRS all the time - either with the Cambo focussing hood or, for critical focussing, with a Rodenstock 6x loupe. That's fine! Sole drawback is you have to exchange the groundglass frame with the digiback for shooting (this is the beauty of a sliding back). IMO this is very doable if you don't shoot a high amount of variations of the same motif at one location. Usually I take much more time looking at the motiv (through a small viewfinder or just the camera interface plate) than for shooting. When I am ready - so when I know the composition (at least roughly) - I built up the camera, compose, shoot. So for this style of work an exchangable groundglass is quite okay. However sometimes I'd like to have a sliding back as well (especially when it's windy or when it's raining... you have to take care for the digiback here as you move it around with the sensor uncovered. At least for a short moment. So sometimes it's a bit fiddly).
 

Paratom

Well-known member
so a very well thought out selection of gear. With regard to the capabilities of the gear. Not really with regard to the way you usually shoot... at least this is how I see it (of course no criticism here!).
A Hy6 with a 80mm feels like twice a camera like the Contax & 80mm.
Thomas- the Hy6 with the 80 isnt really that big & Heavy- however the 110 is big and heavy and the bad thing is its my favourite lens.
I agree that I could have focused more to the way I usually shoot.

My fault was that I thought that I want that MF-feeling with WLF etc and didnt think so much that I would want to start bringing the gear up a mountain or whereever.
You got my interested to also have a look at a Contax and its lenses and see how big/small it is.

The other thing which also came to my mind earlier was that the Hassy 110/2.0 is much smaller than the Rollei (and less expensive) and if the 203/205 viewfinder are as great as it sounded earlier in this thread a used 205TC with 3 lenses could also be an option in the future if I do not get satisfied with my Hy6.
I am quite happy that my back is so flexible and could be used on several systems.

I struggled lon to decide between Artec and Alpa but as I explained I thought the sliding back of the Artec made really sense. I took images at the beach with it for example where I was happy to not have to put the back off.

What I wish that Sinar offered also a Alpa TC like camera which accepts lenses with Artec-plate. I even thought about getting one build on my own (since I own a mechanical engineering company and we are able to machine).
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
Thomas have you tried a finder instead of the WLF. Myself i focus better with a finder when I shot Hassy years ago I found using a WLF a much harder focusing tool without that little magnifier that popped up. I know the Hy6 does not have one , actually just played with Son's a couple weeks ago and it hunts in low light like anyone else's but I had a little bit of a struggle with WLF but I am so used to using a regular finder that it could be me. Just wondering if you tried a regular finder at all and maybe something you may want to look at.
 

carstenw

Active member
Sequence of sentences slightly re-arranged to ease the answering...

The arTec is more than twice the size of a Cambo WRS (however the WRS is not really lighter). The Rodenstock HR lenses are much bigger and heavier than the Digitars. Of course they provide one stop more light wide open. But they are bulkier.
I use a (fresnel) groundglass on the WRS all the time - either with the Cambo focussing hood or, for critical focussing, with a Rodenstock 6x loupe. That's fine! Sole drawback is you have to exchange the groundglass frame with the digiback for shooting (this is the beauty of a sliding back). IMO this is very doable if you don't shoot a high amount of variations of the same motif at one location. Usually I take much more time looking at the motiv (through a small viewfinder or just the camera interface plate) than for shooting. When I am ready - so when I know the composition (at least roughly) - I built up the camera, compose, shoot. So for this style of work an exchangable groundglass is quite okay. However sometimes I'd like to have a sliding back as well (especially when it's windy or when it's raining... you have to take care for the digiback here as you move it around with the sensor uncovered. At least for a short moment. So sometimes it's a bit fiddly).
The arTec and the WRS are not really equivalent though. Apart from the mentioned sliding back, which is pretty cool combined with the GG loupe of the arTec, there is the T&S. Even for simple landscape shots the tilt can be very useful.

A Hy6 with a 80mm feels like twice a camera like the Contax & 80mm.
I keep feeling that the Hy6 + 5 lenses might be less of a camera than the Hy6 + 2 lenses. For any given situation, not all lenses are valid choices, or one might at least decide to restrict the choice. I think that a small backpack or satchel with a light tripod and the Hy6 and 2 lenses is the best way to do mountains, probably 40+150 or so. For portraits and people, the 110 or 180 are much better.

Tom, do you really find that you use all 5 lenses? Especially 150+180 sounds a little redundant, unless you use them for different reasons, like weight for 150 and DoF for 180... I use my Contax 645 almost exclusively with 35 and 120 Makro, and rarely find that I need a different PoV.

Depending on what you want to do, it is even an option to take just one lens. At the moment I carry my Hasselblad 2000FC/M with the 110mm f/2 FE and Tri-X, as well as a Pentax Digital Spotmeter, every day. It is not so heavy or bulky, and the fast film gives me the option of leaving the tripod at home. I lose a little resolution, but that is no problem, and helps hide the slight blur that I might have due to hand-holding, should I decide to shoot in a darker situation. I might also go out with the 2000FC/M and just the 50/2.8 on a different day.

Going for a hike, you could simply say "today is a 110/2 day" and leave everything else at home. Do you have a nice, rigid, compact, light tripod?
 
Last edited:

thomas

New member
You got my interested to also have a look at a Contax and its lenses and see how big/small it is.
The Body is smaller than the S2!
Whenever your way crosses Cologne point me an Email and I am happy to let you try my cameras/lenses...
 

thomas

New member
Thomas have you tried a finder instead of the WLF. Myself i focus better with a finder when I shot Hassy years ago I found using a WLF a much harder focusing tool without that little magnifier that popped up.
Actually I use the prism more often than the WLF. But in the cases I use the WLF I really don't want to miss it. I always use the pop up loupe for magnification. As I focus with split image screens this is really very easy and very accurate (unless you recompose, of course). The split image screen gives me that extra accuracy the AF might miss. You have to adjust the screen carefully to the film plane of the digiback first, of course ...
 
Last edited:

thomas

New member
Apart from the mentioned sliding back, which is pretty cool combined with the GG loupe of the arTec, there is the T&S. Even for simple landscape shots the tilt can be very useful.
There are TS lens panels for the Cambo available now. So this is not really a difference anymore.
Too, there is the Arca Swiss Rm3d... the WRS is of course not the only alternative. But the WRS is clearly top 1 when it comes to the compromise of small size & light weight combined with large movements.
 
Top