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!

A little (personal) perspective...

S

Shelby Lewis

Guest
Just a quick anecdote here...

I was at a craft/art show at a local park here in Nashville the other day with the kids. I really spent some time looking at the photographers' work. I visited many (all!) booths... most of them full of clichéd, over-processed landscape work... warhol-esque even!

There was this one booth where the work seemed really compelling. Colors and detail on the prints were definitely a step above the other booths... naturally vivid might best describe the quality that pervaded the work, akin to fall colors here in the southeast after a misty rain... and the artist surely had an eye for composition. Luckily, he had placards besides the photographs that gave details as to the equipment used in the creation of the artwork.

To my surprise...

... almost all were hasselblad 501cm with the 16mp cfv back.

Then it occurred to me that he didn't push EVERY print into mammoth proportions. Many were nice, diminutive squares, but even the large ones were well crafted and beautiful.

It, once again, allowed me to step back and realize we are in a golden age, of sorts, as far as the amount of quality afforded to us by our gear. I get caught up really pushing for the best that's out there (which is a good pursuit!), but often at the expense of not pushing my current gears' abilities to its limits. He produced beautiful work on a now-inexpensive 30 year old camera with a several generations old back. Would a newer improve his work... I'm not sure. But, then again, his work seemed to take full advantage of his equipment... no more, no less. I'm not taking a stand on this issue, at all. I just thought I'd point out that sometimes you come across someone who is content to make the most of seemingly old-school gear to great effect.

I've personally been on the yoyo between an RZ-system this fall in school and an h-system body... for some reason i continue to return to wanting an rz system to start out with, but get seduced by all the capabilities afforded by the h and mamiya 645 systems. I see great work produced on an old 501/cvf combo and it heartens me greatly!

Just food for thought!
 

Jack

Sr. Administrator
Staff member
Always a good observation to reflect on Shelby: Gear can never replace vision.

Re gear choices :)ROTFL:). Nothing wrong at all with an RZ as a camera. The system has great lenses and the camera is a pleasure to use with a waist-level, 90 degree prism, 45 degree prism or chimney finder. Bellows focus allows for some pretty close focusing distances with standard lenses. Downside, especially for 16MP square backs, is the shortest rectilinear focal is a rather long-ish 50mm.

*IF* I were going to shoot a 16MP square back again -- and it wouldn't matter to me if it were a Hassy, Phase, Leaf or even Sinar version -- and if I didn't have a camera system, I would mount it on a Hassy V body or Contax body. Advantage to Hassy is breadth and quality of lenses and accessories, advantage to Contax is AF. Of course *IF* I were going to do that, I would personally get a Mamiya mount back since I am already invested in the Mamiya system. (But in the same breath I admit the thought of using a Hassy V with a few legacy lenses appeals to inner gear aficionado, much like the desire to own an old tube amp and turntable for listening to jazz and blues on.)

A side comment on square framing. I put a grid focusing screen in my DF body for the very reason I do like to compose square on occasion. With a cropped square frame, my P65+ is still 45MP; and with a P40+ or H40, it would still be 30MP...
 
S

Shelby Lewis

Guest
Always a good observation to reflect on Shelby: Gear can never replace vision.

Re gear choices :)ROTFL:).
Funny Stuff Jack...

I'm not going square. I was just mightily impressed by the quality of the printed work I saw... and then when I saw it was taken with an ancient setup :)ROTFL:), it really gave me pause.

I was also just given (yes, given) an epson 7800 by a biz acquaintance. He acquired it from a business that he bought a while back and even though it's been sitting for a long time, i've been able to get it up and back running as new (and the duty cycle indicators show it was basically unused). So I've been looking at the printed page a lot more.

Guy's comments about his 7900 have gotten me thinking about printing as well.

You see... as a portrait/wedding guy... most of my work is lab printed, and a lot of it is drop-shipped in branded packaging, so I've spent the last several years with a consistent relationship with a lab, but not my prints (except expensive enlargements and albums which I always proof personally). Being that this new phase in my life is going to be more art-based, I'm all jazzed up about what it all looks like on paper again... and seeing those beautiful 501cm/cfv prints made me realize how good I already have it. I'm still a gear-slut though... hopelessly so. Luckily, my pockets stay pretty empty, so I'm not able to be quite as spendy as I'd like :D:D:D

Long way of saying... yes, vision comes first... but also a way of saying... dudes, we have it GOOD these days with our gear. If we want to do something, we can... and in multiple ways if wanted.

Reminding myself how nice our gear is leads me to want to reconnect with the beauty in our artform and stop worrying so much about the latest greatest.

(easier said than done, i know!)
 
T

tetsrfun

Guest
and then when I saw it was taken with an ancient setup..
*******
I am still amazed that my ancient set-up with an several generations old 16MP back can give images that "suck" the viewer into the scene. It take a lot more work and "luck" especially with focus but the best MF images are in a different league then my DSLR's. Web postings of MF digital back images can't reproduce the difference, IMO.

Steve
 

bensonga

Well-known member
and then when I saw it was taken with an ancient setup :)ROTFL:), it really gave me pause.
Oh man, that hurts! My 503CWD-16 is just a few years old and already it's ancient history! :(

Well, I'm just happy to hear that in the right hands, it can still deliver the goods. Now if only my vision, technique and skills were up to the task.

Thanks for the post Shelby.....for those of us afflicted with GAS (myself amongst them), a post like this helps to keep it all in perspective (as best we can) and remember the other reasons we love photography (besides the fun of playing with cool gear).

Gary
 

docmoore

Subscriber and Workshop Member
I have struggled to find a format that I enjoy and produces what I consider optimal output...no commercial interest, just acceptable prints.

This is the best I have found....Mamiya 7 65 scanned then digital negative and printed as Platinum Palladium print. Every time I pass this print I stop and stare in wonder.



All of my other attempts come up a bit short.

Makes one wonder.:toocool:

Bob
 

jotloob

Subscriber Member
Oh man, that hurts! My 503CWD-16 is just a few years old and already it's ancient history! :(

Well, I'm just happy to hear that in the right hands, it can still deliver the goods. Now if only my vision, technique and skills were up to the task.

Thanks for the post Shelby.....for those of us afflicted with GAS (myself amongst them), a post like this helps to keep it all in perspective (as best we can) and remember the other reasons we love photography (besides the fun of playing with cool gear).

Gary

Yes Gary , true enough , it hurst .

It hurts on the one side , but we do not have to compete with professional's studio equipment , because they have a different financial base and different needs for different tasks .

So I am very happy with my HASSELBLAD gear and DBs and they produce all the quality I expect them to do . And so it does not matter to me , if my gear is regarded to be "ancient" or not . The gear must serve me and not please others .

Thanks Shelby for this thread .

Jürgen
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
Funny Stuff Jack...

I'm not going square. I was just mightily impressed by the quality of the printed work I saw... and then when I saw it was taken with an ancient setup :)ROTFL:), it really gave me pause.

I was also just given (yes, given) an epson 7800 by a biz acquaintance. He acquired it from a business that he bought a while back and even though it's been sitting for a long time, i've been able to get it up and back running as new (and the duty cycle indicators show it was basically unused). So I've been looking at the printed page a lot more.

Guy's comments about his 7900 have gotten me thinking about printing as well.

You see... as a portrait/wedding guy... most of my work is lab printed, and a lot of it is drop-shipped in branded packaging, so I've spent the last several years with a consistent relationship with a lab, but not my prints (except expensive enlargements and albums which I always proof personally). Being that this new phase in my life is going to be more art-based, I'm all jazzed up about what it all looks like on paper again... and seeing those beautiful 501cm/cfv prints made me realize how good I already have it. I'm still a gear-slut though... hopelessly so. Luckily, my pockets stay pretty empty, so I'm not able to be quite as spendy as I'd like :D:D:D

Long way of saying... yes, vision comes first... but also a way of saying... dudes, we have it GOOD these days with our gear. If we want to do something, we can... and in multiple ways if wanted.

Reminding myself how nice our gear is leads me to want to reconnect with the beauty in our artform and stop worrying so much about the latest greatest.

(easier said than done, i know!)
Bud coming from shooting digital in 1991 I can't tell how freaking lucky we really are. We are so spoiled by what is available today. I really have to laugh sometimes about the moaning and groaning of what is not on these cams today. If most knew what they came from they would feel damn lucky we evolved this far. I could NEVER print those images compared to todays cams over 8x10 and even than that is a push. 23k dollars for a 6 mpx camera that was so noisy you thought you where shooting stars on every frame. :ROTFL::ROTFL::ROTFL:

Trust me I do pinch myself sometimes working with what I have today and how lucky I am to have lived long enough to see the change.
 

bensonga

Well-known member
Yes Gary , true enough , it hurts.
It hurts on the one side , but we do not have to compete with professional's studio equipment , because they have a different financial base and different needs for different tasks.

So I am very happy with my HASSELBLAD gear and DBs and they produce all the quality I expect them to do . And so it does not matter to me , if my gear is regarded to be "ancient" or not . The gear must serve me and not please others .

Jürgen
Truth be told, I'm happy with my CFV-16 too Jurgen.....although I might be even happier with a CFV-39 like yours! :D

One thing's for sure.....I'm doing my best to keep this thread under my wife's radar. If she sees it I won't have the slightest chance of ever upgrading my gear in the future. :eek:

I really can't complain however....as Guy says, we are all "freaking lucky"!!

Gary
 

Double Negative

Not Available
I was considering the CFV for a while for my Hassy, but now I'm starting to think the CFV39 might be a better choice at this point. I prefer the square format, so I'd be giving up 10MP on the CFV39 most of the time - but at 29MP, it's still better than 16MP... Nevertheless, I think 16MP is plenty, honestly. For one thing, I just don't print that large (right now). And it'll surely lay waste to my DSLR equipment. Heck, even the M8 does that.

My most impressive pictures thus far however, have been delivered by a Mamiya 7II with the 4/50mm lens on PanF+ film. Good lord, the scan of a few shots in particular left me speechless. You could count bricks in a building at a half mile distance...
 

jlm

Workshop Member
i happen to love the V system, had one since the 70's. love the look and gestalt of the thing, sq format, large neg, gg viewing, zeiss optics. but i have moved on, still hasselblad, not as attractive a thing, the H, but there is something to be said for autofocus and better electronic integration in terms of pure functionality.
I doubt the V/CFV39 produces images any less perfect than the H4D-40
 
T

tetsrfun

Guest
I doubt the V/CFV39 produces images any less perfect than the H4D-40
*******
Interesting statement...Even if true, I suspect that the "yield" of perfect with the digital "V"would be considerably less and involve a lot more work and luck.

Steve
 
T

tetsrfun

Guest
Irrespective of image quality, however, the digital back is a means to obtain "instant" feedback (gratification) for the pleasure of handling and using the tools..ie all of the "V" system bits and pieces.

Steve
 
Top