Need Help\Ideas for a MF Camera Sys for Product Photography

[MedShooter]

Hi everybody, I've been lurking in the forum here for a few weeks doing research. I'd really like to get some ideas and help from the professionals here.
Ok, so I'm not a professional photographer but a business owner, specifically I design high end jewelry. I've tried a couple of 35mm DSLRs like the 40D and the quality really looks sub par. I mean even after professional color correction and everything, there is still the missing graduations of the metal, the dynamic range, the diamonds for example just looks white with some black inside. This is all shot using professional lighting, in a light tent. Also with a nice Canon macro lens.

I have a photographer though who charges per shot, who uses a Mamiya 645AFD and older Leaf back. His pictures are like night and day better than ours. I've even considered buying a 5d MkII but I still don't think it's going to give us the quality of a medium format camera.

I'm trying to see if it would be cost effective for us to buy a medium format camera for "studio shooting" in our offices. I've done quite a bit of research and see that the Phase One and Hasselblad H4d-40 and its respective competitor with Phase One or Leaf are the ones to get for this type of work. They're a bit too much for us to spend. I've also been researching the Pentax 645D which seems like a really interesting piece of hardware. I don't think it has tethering though, so would a person just go back and forth with the CF card to the computer? Would there be a better solution than that? Also are there refurbished Phase One hardware that one could look at or something? The magic number is about 9K for us. Mostly the work is going to be macro photography and we'd need a nice macro lens to use. I know that Depth of Field becomes a little bit of a problem in MF but DOF is very important to us as well….

Thanks

 

[mediumcool]

Lighting is extremely important; if you don’t get that right, no MF camera is going to help you get good results.

If your needs are mostly for catalogues/leaflets and for the web, a “35” DSLR would work fine and give you more depth of field than any MF, unless you use a tilting lens (look up Scheimpflug). MF cameras with late-model backs do enlarge better than any “35” DSLR but this is only an issue if you make big prints.

And you can buy tilt-shift lenses for Nikon and Canon. I use Pentax gear and am buying a tilt-shift adapter to use my old Mamiya MF lenses on the Pentax—I want to do more tabletop and closeup work (yes, including jewellery).

Having said all this, I think you still need to consider lighting as a priority; why not ask your current photographer if he will provide tuition and build a lighting set-up for you? Pay him well for this, because you would save money long-term. Or you could negotiate to do the simpler “bread-and-butter” jobs yourself, and call him in for the premium work.

And don’t forget that shooting is only part of the job; the resulting images need to be processed in software such as Photoshop or Capture One (I use both) on a robust and colour-calibrated computer system to provide superior results.

My 0.02c

 

[MedShooter]

Well, the lighting is pretty similar. He's using 3 large strobe lights behind the tent while we're using fluorescent light. The goal is to get diffused light on the product.

I don't think it's a lighting issue. Even when we resize the images to web size, there's still a big difference. I've seen a couple of shots with a 60d and that was a little bit better but still nothing like the MF stuff. I can tell the difference in the dynamic range between cameras. The platinum for example on our shots looks almost pixelated compared to his which have extremely smooth and natural graduations.

Maybe we should rent a 5d mk2 for a day and give that a whirl too.

 

[mediumcool]

Here's something else to try, then. Shoot a duplicate or two on a DSLR camera when your hired photographer is doing a shoot (or ask him to do it if he has the gear).

That will establish whether the lighting set-up is making any difference—BTW fluoros can be pretty bad for colour if they have a CRI below 90 or so.

 

[Mike M]

Could a scanning back be a possible option?

Some of the best digital jewelry shots that I've ever seen have been done on scanning backs.

 

[evgeny]

I use 5 Hensel lights, Sinar M with their superb lenses and Sinar 54H multi-shot digital back, which are well over your budget. Consider how much you are willing to spend in photo studio or pay the photographer, when you deal with such expensive stuff as diamonds. As others said, the final result need :thumbs:be mastered :lecture:

 

[Valentin]

Well, the lighting is pretty similar. He's using 3 large strobe lights behind the tent while we're using fluorescent light. The goal is to get diffused light on the product. ..

The characteristics of the different types of light are different so you are not comparing apples to apples.

Second, as mentioned, post processing plays a BIG role into this.

 

[mediumcool]

Put up some samples of each approach, with detailed info about which is what ...

 

[FromJapan]

I'm not getting this. You're a high-end jewelry designer. And you want to show them off with amateur photos? Your current professional photographer uses an older Leaf back. That is the only difference between his photography and yours? What about his lighting skills and experience?

I'm sorry if I sound rude, but this isn't really your job. Your job is to design jewelry. His is to photograph it. If you want to cut costs, perhaps you could negotiate with him. Doing it all yourself might save you a few bucks in the short-term, but prove to be more expensive later, when sales dwindle because they're not photographed well...

Kumar

 

[Dustbak]

My father in law is a high-end jewelry designer (being the only person on this planet having won the prestiguous Diamond Award 3 times!). Via him I know where to get diamonds, Titanium, all sorts of gold and even things like 3D modelling. I also have access to all of his tools.

I still cannot design like him or probably you while there is hardly any difference between us? You get the point?

 

[fotografz]

Welcome MedSooter!

Obviously you have a good eye for detail, and a passion for the products you design and sell. Bravo!

IMO, do not waste your time and money struggling with 35mm DSLRs for this type of work. I do studio work that involves the same attention to subtile detail ... ranging from interior fabrics and chrome wheels for Cadillac, to high end jewelry, watches, and premium incentives.

Yes, lighting and light modifiers are a key part of table top work, as are all the do-dads like cut and black flags, reflectors, mirrors, etc. However, it is especially difficult to render the contrast & tonal range, color depth, and specular highlights with any current 35mm DSLR. It can be done, and I'm sure there are fine examples of it ... but, trust me it is a struggle ... and often can't be fully realized or involves a compromise. Believe me I tried using the most expensive 35mm DSLRs out there. None could hold a candle to even the simplest MF Digital rig.

Now, if asked to professionally advise you regarding an in-house studio (which is not unusual BTW), I'd ask what kind of product volume you produce over say a 5 year period and compare that to the cost of professional photographic services ... which you already know does the job.

Secondly, I advise that your budget is anemic at best.

Lighting: Continuos lighting doesn't cut it for this type of work unless maybe it's a full blown HMI kit like Dedolight for a mere $15,000. Studio strobes provide the quantity of light needed to stop down for DOF, and quality of light that is a consistent color temperature from shot-to-shot no matter what level of light is being used. I use Profoto and Hensel ... but there are a number of other excellent choices ... and kits can be found used.

Camera: Since you are involved with basically one type of photography, you don't need a highly versatile set-up, but one that is specialized ... probably more specialized than your current photographer uses since he may do other types of work and needs more versatility.

If I was setting this up for you, I'd get a 6X9 studio view camera and outfit it with a 120mm Rodenstock or Schneider Digital Macro lens (which no MFD DSLR lens can match), and at least a 39 meg Phase One or Hasselblad digital back. This will provide much more DOF control than any 35mm or MFD DSLR even one equipped with a Tilt Shift lens since none of them give you the degree of movements or rear controls. Both the backs I mentioned work very well tethered, and I believe both provide live view on the computer screen for evaluation. Careful shopping can find all this stuff used and in mint condition for a fraction of the new prices.

As you can see, to achieve the degree of quality you demand of your products is no inexpensive or simple matter. However, once set up and calibrated to the specific task, it becomes pretty routine and consistent with minor adjustments of lighting and additive elements such as black reflectors and other do-dads used for this type of work.

If not prepared to make this investment or something like it, then stick with your professional shooter.

Marc

 

[mediumcool]

Could a scanning back be a possible option?
Some of the best digital jewelry shots that I've ever seen have been done on scanning backs.

Betterlight backs are very good, but also very expensive, and you need a large-format camera, suitable lens and continuous lighting to go with it. Not for 9K.

And a big, sturdy tripod.

 

[dick]

As others have said,,

Lighting, and post-processing make a big difference, and 35mm might be adequate for enlargements up to A4.

9k$US? If you accumulate kit off eBay as it comes up, over about a year... you could get a Sinar system for a few k, and a 22Mpx DigiBack and lighting for similar money.

Sinars are big and ugly and cumbersome, so you can pick them up cheap, but they are ideal for studio work.

You could get a stackshot and DOF merge.
…but jewellery photography is an art in itself, and it seems that you could spend a month with the best equipment and not produce anything you would be happy with.

Where are you? Perhaps someone here could show you what is possible with what equipment, and help you to get some kit, and show you how to get he best out of it.

I think that (some) jewelry specialists use fiber-optic for spectral lighting, and a light tent for fill.

 

[dougpeterson]

Camera: Since you are involved with basically one type of photography, you don't need a highly versatile set-up, but one that is specialized ... probably more specialized than your current photographer uses since he may do other types of work and needs more versatility.

If I was setting this up for you, I'd get a 6X9 studio view camera and outfit it with a 120mm Rodenstock or Schneider Digital Macro lens (which no MFD DSLR lens can match), and at least a 39 meg Phase One or Hasselblad digital back. This will provide much more DOF control than any 35mm or MFD DSLR even one equipped with a Tilt Shift lens since none of them give you the degree of movements or rear controls. Both the backs I mentioned work very well tethered, and I believe both provide live view on the computer screen for evaluation. Careful shopping can find all this stuff used and in mint condition for a fraction of the new prices.

If you're going with a view camera I'd suggest a Leaf over a Phase One (despite being a big fan generally of Phase One) if the back is dedicated to this purpose.

Live View from Leaf is faster/higher-quality than Phase One. It's not a night and day difference, but well worth it if you will be doing mostly Live View to focus.

An alternative is to a full view camera something like a Cambo X2 would be easier to use since you don't have a background in full view camera operation. This requires a body with a built in shutter such as a Mamiya or Phase One body, or Contax.

It would provide you macro capability, use of Rodenstock/Schneider large format lenses (I think everyone here agrees that would be the ideal lens to use for this application) and retain through the lens focusing and other conveniences of using a normal SLR body.

Doug Peterson (e-mail Me)
__________________

Head of Technical Services, Capture Integration
Phase One Partner of the Year
Leaf, Leica, Cambo, Arca Swiss, Canon, Apple, Profoto, Broncolor, Eizo & More

National: 877.217.9870 *| *Cell: 740.707.2183
Newsletter | RSS Feed
Buy Capture One 6 at 10% off

 

[Mike M]

Betterlight backs are very good, but also very expensive, and you need a large-format camera, suitable lens and continuous lighting to go with it. Not for 9K.

And a big, sturdy tripod.

Yeah, you're right, it's an expensive route and I am not too familiar with scanning backs. HOwever, jewelry photography seems like a perfect match for them and there's the possibility of using some tilt movements and smaller apertures for better focus and DOF.

http://www.betterlight.com/eModels.html

It says on this page that there are adapters available for Mamiya RZ and RB cameras. I'm wondering if maybe something like a used Mamiya body with tilt shift lens and/or macro lens with scanning back might just be a decent little setup for jewelry photography...and come in right around the 9k price. Or maybe somebody around here knows a way to pick up a used scanning back for decent price.

Anyhow, just bringing up possibilities. I really don't have any idea what will work for the OP and am definitely no expert on scanning backs. 9k is a lot of money but it's still hard to think of something that I'd be really confident about recommending within that price range.

 

[Jack]

Hi MedShooter and welcome to GetDPI!

I think the first basic comment is that just having the correct equipment will not insure you generate similar results to the Pro you hire. In addition to decent equipment, you really need to understand lighting and post-processing of the files to get optimal results. Moreover, MF camera files generally require (and also allow) more post processing adjustments.

The second basic comment is that a photographer who knows lighting and post processing well, can probably generate a superior product shot with a "regular DSLR" 98% of the time than a newbie using the best equipment available...

Hence my advice as follows: If you want to head down the path of being your own photographer, in addition to budgeting for the investment in gear, you'll need to budget in an investment of time learning how to optimize results from it. Assuming you are willing to do that, then I would start out by RENTING the gear you think you want and testing the waters so to speak. You may find afterwards that for your needs, hiring the pro is more cost-effective, or you may indeed find your own results more than adequate for your needs and thus gain the convenience of having it all in-house.

Cheers,

 

[dick]

If you're going with a view camera I'd suggest a Leaf over a Phase One (despite being a big fan generally of Phase One) if the back is dedicated to this purpose.

Live View from Leaf is faster/higher-quality than Phase One. It's not a night and day difference, but well worth it if you will be doing mostly Live View to focus.

Doug Peterson (e-mail Me)

How does Leaf live view compare to Hasselblad, Phase and Sinar?

It is not relevant to this thread, but I am interested in daylight live view for landscape.

 

[David Schneider]

I think the first basic comment is that just having the correct equipment will not insure you generate similar results to the Pro you hire. In addition to decent equipment, you really need to understand lighting and post-processing of the files to get optimal results. Moreover, MF camera files generally require (and also allow) more post processing adjustments.

Or to say it another way, it's the swordsman, not the sword.

 

[fotografz]

How does Leaf live view compare to Hasselblad, Phase and Sinar?

It is not relevant to this thread, but I am interested in daylight live view for landscape.

Live View is not on the camera's LCD, it is a live video feed to the computer screen when shooting tethered. I've only used it while tethered to a Mac tower in the studio, so I don't know how it would work with a laptop in the field.

The newer developments in WiFi currently require computer tethering also in order to view on another device.

-Marc

 

[stephengilbert]

It seems to me that the information needed is missing: when you ask whether something is cost effective, you have to compare what you're paying now to the cost of what you propose doing instead.

Even assuming that you are capable of duplicating the image quality of your current photographer, it's impossible to say whether buying an MF camera is cost effective without knowing what you pay now and comparing it to the cost of the alternative.

I don't think this is as much a photography question as an accounting question.