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!

Good bye to Medium Format Digital...

Status
Not open for further replies.

Paratom

Well-known member
After dealing with the lack of reliability (camera lockups and erratic behavior, Phase One), the primitive bodies and the lousy viewfinder/auto focus combination I absolutely had enough of medium format digital. You can add to that poor customer service from Phase One.

Several things brought me to this decision and I'd like to share it here.

I needed a small replacement part from Phase One. The little plastic spacer/guide that fits between the Phase One Body and the vertical grip.

After nearly a month of trying to get it from Phase One or Mamiya I still do not have either the part or an answer. Multiple phone calls to phase one and various dealers got me no where. Phase one just went and sent me the wrong part to get rid of me. Keep in mind I had sent them a photograph of the part I needed..... so I am having the part machined and made out of metal instead of plastic.

In comparison I needed to service an out of production Hasselblad V lens. Three days and it was on it's way back home, despite needing replacement parts.

I won't go into the flakey performance of the Phase One DF. Both mine and rented ones. The Phase One AF was slightly better.

The final decision was after shooting once with a Nikon D800, the 50mm 1.4, the 85mm 1.4G and the 85mm TS. The quality and ergonomics of this camera is quite something. Shadow performance beats even MF digital. The difference is more than I expected. Resolution is so good it's almost ridiculous that it comes out of a little camera you can swing around your neck. It's not quite what I have seen from a higher end MFD, but the sharpest MFD lenses while being very very sharp, they don't have anywhere near the beautiful out of focus rendering of the Nikon 85mm 1.4 or the 85mm TS.
Shooting wide open with the Nikon is a breeze with either live view (best for the tilt shift lens) or the reflex viewfinder.
Shooting tilt shift fashion and portraits with live view from the D800 on an 11 inch tablet screen makes MFD feel like something from last century.
Shooting ultra shallow depth of field on MFD with a subject moving around is just too much of a pain in the *** and just not reliable enough if the feature you want in focus is not in the center of the frame.
In comparison I get a close to 90% hit rate manually focusing an old waist level viewfinder MF film camera, with film or a digital back.

One other really nice thing with the D800 is running video into an HDMI monitor to finely tune optical effects such as shooting with desired lens flare or through partial diffusion or through out of focus foreground elements.
Priceless. The client was very impressed with the rig. Camera and monitor mounted on a movie rig. Using video, not live view is better for absolute high quality image preview. Best of all you don't even have to shut down the video feed to shoot a still.

35mm DSLR digital and true large medium format with film IMHO is a much more powerful combination that Medium format digital. The combination covers a larger range of performance and visual quality than MF digital. The combination also costs about 1/4 of the price. Looks like I might have to buy another car or designer furniture for the office for a tax write off. Actually I'll be putting the investment that ws going to go into the latest and greatest MF digital into a production van and "pied a terre" in Europe.

Arrivederci MFD.... oops actually Adios...

See you in the Nikon section further down the road with some examples....
Fred,
I believe satisfaction and frustration are very close together.

You needed a plastic part and didnt get response for 4 weeks.
I have a digital MF-camera which would allready be out of guarantee and still get it repaired without charge. And even better I received a replacement camera which I can use until I get mine back. I never received such a good service for any 35mm camera.

But overall I am sure that the Nikon bodies would be debugged better than MF-cameras - if you think how many Nikon camera bodies are sold and how few MF-cameras.

I can not share you statemnt regaring lenses though. I am still missing a 50mm lens for Nikon which draws anything close to a 80mm Xenonar or 70mm S-Leica lens. And while the 105DC Nikon or the 85/1.4 are very fine lenses I dont see how they would be better (for my taste) than a Zeiss 110/2.0, Leica 120/2.5 or a Mamiya 150mm lens.
Of course there are much more lenses available for 35mm.

I still can understand your reaction. Sometimes its just too much and then one has to make a decision or a change.

Adn no question that what we see from the D800 looks very good.
 

FredBGG

Not Available
It seems quality lenses for the D800 are the weak link in the chain at the moment. The Zeiss lenses are not even enough according to some reviews. But as Jack says, what is good enough for some, makes others turn towards MF.

It is an exciting time to be in photography!
Nikon and Canon have made significant progress in lens design. Just take a look at the look and results of the Nikon 85mm 1.4g with nanocrystal coatings. Nikon has been very upfront on lens recommendations for the D800.

Some very out standing phase one lenses. The 150mm 2.8 mamiya being absolutly extrodinary despite quite a bit of vignetting wide open
 

darr

Well-known member
Nikon and Canon have made significant progress in lens design. Just take a look at the look and results of the Nikon 85mm 1.4g with nanocrystal coatings. Nikon has been very upfront on lens recommendations for the D800.

Some very out standing phase one lenses. The 150mm 2.8 mamiya being absolutly extrodinary despite strong vignetting wide open
Thanks Fred for the info. I will be upgrading to the D800 as soon as the rush to buy slows.
 

FredBGG

Not Available
I work with a waist-level finder, those don't exist for 35mm anymore. I do not like working all day looking though a squiny viewfinder ... been there done that, and so on.....

....... My old H3D/31 files look better to me ...

-Marc
And how exactly does the waist level finder work when shooting vertical shots?

I have found that the viewfinder of 645 cameras are a bit of a squinting deal whatever you use. 645 is just a bigger postage stamp.

I do like going to and from a pentaprism and a waist level finder. With the new 35mm DSLR cameras you also have the option of massive viewfinder by using live view with realistic color.

My favorite view finder of them all is the Fuji gx680 that offered so many options and looking through the mirror prism and the large eyepiece with a brightscreen installed is hard to beat. My assistant calls it the IMax viewfinder. Nicest thing about this viewfinder is that you do not either have to hunch over a waist level finder or shove your nose into your digital back.



I would love a 6x8 sensor for the Fuji.....
 

fotografz

Well-known member
And how exactly does the waist level finder work when shooting vertical shots?

I have found that the viewfinder of 645 cameras are a bit of a squinting deal whatever you use. 645 is just a bigger postage stamp.

I do like going to and from a pentaprism and a waist level finder. With the new 35mm DSLR cameras you also have the option of massive viewfinder by using live view with realistic color.

My favorite view finder of them all is the Fuji gx680 that offered so many options and looking through the mirror prism and the large eyepiece with a brightscreen installed is hard to beat. My assistant calls it the IMax viewfinder. Nicest thing about this viewfinder is that you do not either have to hunch over a waist level finder or shove your nose into your digital back.



I would love a 6x8 sensor for the Fuji.....
Yep, that Fuji is awesome! My buddy uses one in his studio all the time. I wonder if all this hub-bub will spur on development of a larger sensor? A 56 X 56 sensor for the HY6 would have been something else. I fear that all the bigger medium format cameras except the RZ are on the endangered list or gone.

Nope, the WLF doesn't work in close portrait mode but I like it for environmental portraits, and it is a life saver when the camera is very low, or if it is up high, pointed straight down on a product shot ... not everything is a close portrait shoot.

I know live view on 35mm DSLRs. I don't like shooting with the camera at arms length, and I have to put on glasses to see it ... but it's good on a tripod for zoom in manual focus ... still have to put my glasses on to do that also. My preview in the studio isn't 3" it is a 30 screen ... with exactly the colors seen at size.

Different this different that. Whatever works for you.

-Marc
 

dorigatti

New member
Fred,

I too, gave up MFD in favor of MF film and 35mm digital. I was so frustrated with the constant malfunctions in several camera's. While that was frustrating enough, what I didn't expect, was the nasty tone from a few GetDPI members about my complaints. I find that you've been quite respectful in your posts, and judging from your photography, i'd say MFD(Phase One) is going to regret not earning your loyalty...really good work!

If and when MFD gets more realistic with it's pricing, reliability, and functionality, I might think about a demo, but for now the D800 is a game changer.
I couldn't agree more.
 

jmosier01

Member
You know, until about a year ago, I chased after the best camera Nikon had to offer every 2 years. When I got the D3S, I felt the camera I needed had arrived and to this day for weddings, I firmly believe it's the best camera for my style of shooting with the perfect amount of pixels. With portraits, I decided to take the leap to MFD in December first with an H1 P25+ (Awesome setup, but I hated using Capture One). I got a great deal on an H3D 22 and finally felt like I found a camera that worked with me. I feel so much more connected with my subjects now and it's forced me to slow down considerably. The results are better for me be cause the overall user experience is more enjoyable. Hasselblad has been truly amazing to me and helped me every step of the way to get comfortable with the system. The HC II 120 f/4 is the only lens I decided to keep for my work and it's been thrilling. Through limited testing the D800 is revolutionary. The images are stunning as well, but I don't enjoy the experience nearly as much as standing behind my hasselblad system. Hopefully it stays that way. I just wish I could attach my 22 DB to an H4D =)

Shoot what works for you folks. that's what matters most in my honest opinion.

Cheers,
Jeff

This is from my first session in my new studio this past Friday.
 

JasonQuibilan

New member
Hello everyone!

A bit off-topic, but I'm about to get myself a Mamiya DF to replace my AFD III. Is it really that buggy of a camera? I'd appreciate comments that go either way...


TIA!
 

kipling

New member
Hello everyone!

A bit off-topic, but I'm about to get myself a Mamiya DF to replace my AFD III. Is it really that buggy of a camera? I'd appreciate comments that go either way...


TIA!
I've found mine to be "fairly" reliable.

I've had two issues, one a sticky shutter issue in the LS lenses that turned out to be a firmware issue that was solved...I have to say though, it took a lot of effort on my part to find the problem, neither my dealer or phase one admitted what it was, and when I wanted to send the camera in for them to find the problem, phase one refused to even look at the camera unless I payed for the replacement of the leaf shutters (in two lenses) in advance!
I refused, as I found quite a few people with similar problems that all turned out to be firmware problems. I found that issue to be very frustrating and I lost quite a bit of trust in phase ones way of dealing with their customers.

the second issue was the camera shutter that blew out two weeks after the warranty on the camera body expired. bad luck on my part? maybe, I don't know anyone else who's camera shutter went out on them.

otherwise, no problems with the camera...knocking on wood.

best-
 

Stefan Steib

Active member
....I can't hack 1/250 top sync speed. Where are leaf-shutter lenses for 35mm cameras? I can put my back on a tech camera with full movements and no compromise optics, that has never worked very well with 35mm versions. I work with a waist-level finder, those don't exist for 35mm anymore. I do not like working all day looking though a squiny viewfinder ... been there done that, and so on.

It also surmises that sensor makers like Dalsa are asleep at the wheel, and the same abilities can't be placed in a larger sensor.
.........
-Marc
Marc

There is a very close solution to your request and it is much more easier than putting complicated shutters in every lens (which I think is mad and a total waste of resources). Modern CMOS chips support a so called global Shutter reading, the only thing a shutter needs to do with this capability is finishing the exposure by covering the sensor while its read out. 1 shutter plane, that´s it and any sync that you want/respectively the chip speed supports. With any lens.......... ! Nikon already had built this in a former model in the beginning of their dslr´s (forget the model number).
There is NO reason why this should not be done again.

And about Dalsa: of course they can build a big CMOS ! But as they are profit driven and not a club to save MF camera makers they want money for this ! Shell down around 20 Mil $ and guarantee a minimum number of chips per time and you´ll have it !

SO : Again - either the MF industry reacts and does something or they will dwindle away and this will include all the peripheral makers of connected stuff and Tech cams as well.

Regards
Stefan

PS.: Olympus and Panasonic are already working on this - for their consumer stuff !

http://translate.google.com/transla...n&u=http://egami.blog.so-net.ne.jp/2011-08-17
 
Last edited:

fotografz

Well-known member
Marc

There is a very close solution to your request and it is much more easier than putting complicated shutters in every lens (which I think is mad and a total waste of resources). Modern CMOS chips support a so called global Shutter reading, the only thing a shutter needs to do with this capability is finishing the exposure by covering the sensor while its read out. 1 shutter plane, that´s it and any sync that you want/respectively the chip speed supports. With any lens.......... ! Nikon already had built this in a former model in the beginning of their dslr´s (forget the model number).
There is NO reason why this should not be done again.

And about Dalsa: of course they can build a big CMOS ! But as they are profit driven and not a club to save MF camera makers they want money for this ! Shell down around 20 Mil $ and guarantee a minimum number of chips per time and you´ll have it !

SO : Again - either the MF industry reacts and does something or they will dwindle away and this will include all the peripheral makers of connected stuff and Tech cams as well.

Regards
Stefan

PS.: Olympus and Panasonic are already working on this - for their consumer stuff !

Google Translate
Yes, I grasp the possibilities of doing away with the traditional shutter all-together. Lots of benefits including no shutter vibration, and any sync speed up to what the t.1 sync of the lights themselves are capable of (which are more the limiting factor than current Leaf shutters).

For any working photographer, all of this is a nice speculation, but vaporware until someone actually does it. I have photographs to take now, not in some distant future. Most can't wait for dreams to catch-up with reality ... so either are committed to something that gets the job done, or will commit.

RE: Dalsa-Teledyne. They tout their willingness, focus and ability to economically produce custom sensors for industrial/medical and photographic applications, including off-sensor technologies, and they already have a number of off-the-shelf innovation/abilities that exceed what is now in current cameras. So I'm not so sure your $20 Million quote is correct, or an exaggeration for the sake of argument. For example, I seriously doubt that Seitz paid Dalsa $20,000,000 up front to make the 160 meg sensor for their 6X17 D3 Panoramic camera, so Seitz could sell a handful of them @ $45,000 each :)

The dichotomy in these discussions is impatience.

When MFD stood at the pinnacle with a 22 meg near 645 sensor, most 35mm DSLRs were half that and cropped frame. 35mm caught up to the meg count with a FF camera like the 5D, and MFD moved further out toward 40 meg ... then 50 ... then 60 ... then 80 ... even 200 with a MS H4D.

The other reality is that if a vast majority can't see the difference in the MFD aesthetic, or don't care, then it doesn't matter what the MFD companies do. Short of some miraculous proprietary technology (which I tend to doubt will happen), they are headed for extinction, or very specialized and exotic applications.

I for one see the difference even in the face of D800 images now all over the internet. Detail is one thing, over-all look and feel is another. So far, I see nothing that equals the breathtaking aesthetic impact of what is even just posted here on GetDpi in the "Fun with MFD" section. Common sentiments seem to disagree with my opinion. That doesn't bode well for the MFD companies ... and the critics of MFD have the "bully pulpit".

In addition to looking forward to what is possible from a technological POV, the MFD companies had best attend to educating the photographic community as to that unique aesthetic made possible by a MFD system ... or meg count and other tech goodies will bury them.

For example, it may behoove these competitive companies to band together in an effort to promote what MFD can offer the artistic eye. Stop pointing wiggling fingers at each other and bring them together into a fist. Not holding my breath on that one, but it is not uncommon in other product categories ... even stubborn and arrogant ones.

Of all, I think Leica is the wisest to date. They sell the Leica aesthetic, an attitude toward photography, and unique solutions not meant for everyone nor priced as such. Artistically, I'd rather shoot with a Leica S2 and the 120/2.5 Macro over almost anything ... followed by the M9 and 50/1.4 ASPH ... neither camera of which leads in technological innovation, but each is unique in the shooting experience. If Hasselblad rumors are true, then a new smaller camera is coming soon ... my only hope it that it is dual shutter capable and doesn't require all new lenses ... because it it does, the D800 will be looking better and better as a replacement for the Sony A900s I currently use.

-Marc
 

rayyan

Well-known member
I do not subscribe to the belief that ' if your cam does not work don't rat about it. Many others are using the same and are happy with it '.

Think about statements such as the one above.

Who cares if your same camera is working? My similar one does not work. Ok,
I need it repaired. Wait a month!! For a pro making a living of his/her equipment, this is unacceptable.

Excuse makers for such unacceptable levels of customer service have an axe to grind.

Statistics of failures to normal functioning? To me, it is apologists making excuses. My money ( MF is big money but applies to all others too ), I want it working and/or I want it fixed..pronto.

Every other excuse is vaporware. Always brings out the excuse makers from the woodworks.

Else I have spent thousands on a piece of paperweight. MF or M is not for everyone. Neither are spectacles one wears. But many wear them. They expect to be able to have their vision ( or lack of it ) compensated.
 

kdphotography

Well-known member
Hello everyone!

A bit off-topic, but I'm about to get myself a Mamiya DF to replace my AFD III. Is it really that buggy of a camera? I'd appreciate comments that go either way...


TIA!
Imho, the squeeky wheel syndrome is applicable here. The MFDB community, and hence the Phase/Mamiya DF body users pool, is relatively small. Any complaints, and you will definitely "hear about it" whether from a dealer, fellow user, and especially the web. I think you would be remiss to fall into the fallacy of a hasty generalization: One user's experience (or lack thereof) does not necessarily reflect the experience (or needs or wants or desires) of the whole. And certainly medium format digital photography as a whole (money hole? :ROTFL:) or specialized subset falls into this.

To be sure the Phase DF has had it's issues, but for the most part I believe it to be a fairly stable camera body. I'm convinced that outside of firmware updates (there was one update that was in err and that was quickly resolved) the major culprit for lock-ups is power: low battery or inconsistent power from rechargeable AAs. Aside from using new Energizer Lithium AAs (or ghastly v-grip), the new Li ion insert I believe addresses this.

In the years that I've had the Phase DF----in reality I've experienced probably the same numerical amount of lock-ups with my Canon 1Ds Mark III---both of which resolve with shutting off and/or removing/reinserting the battery pack. It's just that when you drop some $, slow down and enjoy your expensive MFDB, imho, you are much more sensitive to anything that may go wrong or upset that experience. I expect more (want/desire more). I paid a lot of money for this system, and damn it, it better work.

I can't recall a single camera that I've used that has performed perfectly, flawlessly for me. It's like a musical instrument (hey just like medium format digital) that you need to learn to play well, including all its idio(t)synchracies---and how to resolve them.

That being said, my personal experience with the DF over the past couple of years has been a good one (and yes to affirm, I've experienced lock-ups which I believe to be battery/power related) and I do believe the DF to be a stable and good body overall. It is a vast improvement over previous generations. I believe the new Li ion battery insert should be included as standard equpment with all new DF bodies, with normal AAs as a back-up option.

ken
 

yaya

Active member
Re Global shutters...it ain't as easy as one might think...
Dalsa use global shutter technology in CMOS and also in Interline CCDs in their industrial cameras to try and dove the "rolling shutter" effect.
But these are smallish sensors with relatively low MP that or most used for high-speed imaging. How ever this "high speed" is normally ALLOT slower than 1/800, 1/1600 or 1/4000 that you can get with MF cameras these days

Many DSLR aerial applications such as mapping & photogrametry where image dimensions accuracy is a must, for example, require shutter speeds of at least 1/1200 to try and avoid rolling shutter issues, resulting in increased shutter wear and higher running costs.

So yes a global shutter that can be fast enough (faster than 1/300-1/400) will be a breakthrough especially if it can work on sensors larger than 24x36mm and 29MP...

Perhaps we should move away from this thread and start a new one discussing "Future digital technologies and applications" or somesuch?
 

fotografz

Well-known member
I do not subscribe to the belief that ' if your cam does not work don't rat about it. Many others are using the same and are happy with it '.

Think about statements such as the one above.

Who cares if your same camera is working? My similar one does not work. Ok,
I need it repaired. Wait a month!! For a pro making a living of his/her equipment, this is unacceptable.

Excuse makers for such unacceptable levels of customer service have an axe to grind.

Statistics of failures to normal functioning? To me, it is apologists making excuses. My money ( MF is big money but applies to all others too ), I want it working and/or I want it fixed..pronto.

Every other excuse is vaporware. Always brings out the excuse makers from the woodworks.

Else I have spent thousands on a piece of paperweight. MF or M is not for everyone. Neither are spectacles one wears. But many wear them. They expect to be able to have their vision ( or lack of it ) compensated.
Who is disagreeing with ratting on poor service and shoddy gear?

It is going on-and-on with it to the point of disparagement, and using anecdotal experiences to paint a whole industry with the same brush. "Why I'm leaving Medium format" isn't the same as saying, "Why I'm leaving Phase One who provided poor service".

I didn't pronounce my dismay for 35mm DSLRs as a category because Nikon took over 4 months to finally do something about repairing my 24-70 mainstay wedding lens because the parts were on back-order... depriving me of it for the entire wedding season, and forcing me to buy another one in the mean-time. Nor when the camera lit up like a Christmas tree and irretrievably ate all the images? Or miss focussed Canon 1DMK-III images, which Canon denied until forced to act and replace the crappy mirror box ... which took forever for them to acknowledge.

I also didn't post a whole thread on how Hasselblad sold me a H2 that shot native DNGs and wasn't ready for prime time ... BUT immediately acknowledged their error, and replaced the camera with a new camera literally over-night. That thread would be about 2 posts long because no-one likes good news. :)

Just different ways of looking at things I guess.

-Marc
 

gerald.d

Well-known member
I seriously doubt that Seitz paid Dalsa $20,000,000 up front to make the 160 meg sensor for their 6X17 D3 Panoramic camera, so Seitz could sell a handful of them @ $45,000 each :)
Hi Marc -

Seitz don't have a 160 meg sensor in the D3. It's a scanning back.

Regards,

Gerald.
 

johnnygoesdigital

New member
"I'd rather shoot with a Leica S2 and the 120/2.5 Macro over almost anything ... followed by the M9 and 50/1.4 ASPH"

Marc, I agree with this sentence, because for me, it comes down to lenses. Many have mentioned the flat look of the D800, that it doesn't have that 3D "pop". That's never been the case with MFD. Bigger sensor, shallow DOF, really, really good lenses to exploit the technology. My #1 best selling print was shot with the H4D/40, using Fuji lenses, it was published in a Travel magazine, but now is being sold to private/corporations in very limited editions. The point is, i've been chasing that "look" in every camera i've shot since then, but alas...have not obtained that particular, indispensable, look of MFD, in a 35mm dslr...yet.
 
Last edited:

johnnygoesdigital

New member
Who is disagreeing with ratting on poor service and shoddy gear?

It is going on-and-on with it to the point of disparagement, and using anecdotal experiences to paint a whole industry with the same brush. "Why I'm leaving Medium format" isn't the same as saying, "Why I'm leaving Phase One who provided poor service".

I didn't pronounce my dismay for 35mm DSLRs as a category because Nikon took over 4 months to finally do something about repairing my 24-70 mainstay wedding lens because the parts were on back-order... depriving me of it for the entire wedding season, and forcing me to buy another one in the mean-time. Nor when the camera lit up like a Christmas tree and irretrievably ate all the images? Or miss focussed Canon 1DMK-III images, which Canon denied until forced to act and replace the crappy mirror box ... which took forever for them to acknowledge.

I also didn't post a whole thread on how Hasselblad sold me a H2 that shot native DNGs and wasn't ready for prime time ... BUT immediately acknowledged their error, and replaced the camera with a new camera literally over-night. That thread would be about 2 posts long because no-one likes good news. :)

Just different ways of looking at things I guess.

-Marc
I think the term anecdotal only applies if this was based on one experience only...it is not! Price differentials really add to the instinctive reactions you'll get when a camera does not function.
Your first S2 was documented here, but you stuck with it, and have a great camera. However, if you had 4 different models that all malfunctioned, as upgrades to the other, would you consider that anecdotal? There's little value in a camera that doesn't work, compared to the price paid. Quite often, I find that you are unwilling to acknowledge these critiques from others, just because its worked for you. Hence, the defensive replies from some (me too) because they're told they're opinion is wrong.

It's the intrinsic nature of most photographers to get emotional, and intimate about cameras...we are after all, artists!
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top