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!

D800/D800E/IQ180 comparison

FredBGG

Not Available
Marc, how many of the greats are known for the 'look' of the equipment they use rather than the content and the way they use them? (honest question) .
I agree that it is more about what you shoot and how you interpret, influence or maniputlate the subject infront of the lens rather than the tools you use. However I consider using the right tools to be of importance because it is important in reinforcing what you do with your head.

This very short video sums it up pretty well:

http://youtu.be/18wmonxTjX0

But the right tool for what you have in mind puts it onto a print in a better way.

I shoot from 35mm (digital), medium format (film and digital) and 8x10 film and alternative processes.

While I shoot similar subjects with all three I have over the years told many times that I was chosen due to this or that image. They are pretty much all 6x8cm or 8x10 film/Polaroid. While many say the layman cannot distinguish one format from the other it is clear to me that I get different uumms and aaahs from larger formats. I see no significant difference in reaction to digital 35mm and digital medium format.
 

fotografz

Well-known member
Marc, how many of the greats are known for the 'look' of the equipment they use rather than the content and the way they use them? (honest question)

It's a point I've been musing about for the past few weeks after the end of year exhibition from my art students. So much incredible and diverse work, all 8X12" prints, 90% shot on p&s's or on my lent 5Dc + 50mm lens set at f5.6. I was sitting at the display at the end of the evening when a couple of students from a nearby college walked by. They stopped to look and I overheard a muttered comment about two of the displays 'if I had a better camera..'. I really enjoyed walking over and telling them that the photographs were taken on p&s's, one of which had been set to 3 megapixel mode to make the pictures faster to load up to facebook! That sent them off red faced.

I honestly want to believe, as an artist, that the differences in nuance which most other photographers cannot see nevermind the viewing public, can only be a personal need and not a necessity for producing the art.
Good question Ben, and one that goes to the heart of many of these technical discussions or debates.

My mentor was/is a very successful fashion/lifestyle photographer in mega competitive NYC who initially infected me with an interest in exploring the array of interesting optics and photographic tools available to photographers as part of the look and feel imparted on a photographic artist's vision.

The camera/media was of secondary importance, being just the box to hold the optics. His gear vault was amazing ... all sorts of exotic lenses , mostly Contax and Leica and a few obscure optical delights. Some of it was beyond me, but his talent and skill was unquestioned, as were his results.

He was not a gear snob, and the proof of that came when he chose a 6 meg P&S to shoot a major campaign for international client because it fit his concept and vision for the imagery. BTW, he showed me huge prints from that shoot :shocked: So, size wasn't the criteria, it was the look and feel as part of the idea ... which is why I use those terms a lot in these discussions.

The last point being the most important distinction in relation to some of these debates. Concept, vision, content first, selection of executional tools to follow. NOT pick the tool and force the concept, vision, or content to it.

So, for example, I would not even consider telling an artist like wild-life photographer Doug Herr that his choice of a Leica DMR and the exotic manual focus Leica Teles he uses ... fraught with all sorts of impediments compared to most any modern DSLR, is technically archaic and there are better tools. That would be techno-snobbery fruitlessly arguing against obvious personal creative results.

I wouldn't think to brow-beat my friend Irakly for his death grip on his long discontinued Contax 645 system and need for expensive DB to shoot digitally ... hard to argue against his use of those Zeiss/Contax optics for some of the work he does. If he eventually changes that out, it'll be for a Leica S2/3/4 ... because of the lenses.

I could subjectively cite 100 such examples, including famous shooters, who bucked or are bucking the homogenization of our tools, and exalt diversity of choice, some very subtile but important to their look and feel. Conversely, I also feel some if not many have stepped backward into a more technologically homogeneous grey area that has lessened their rendering of a personal vision ... just as they were getting it down pat.

So IMO, personal need for a specific look and feel IS part of the art.

BTW, I don't think the differences are all that subtile in terms of how an idea or some content is rendered ... and that people can't tell the difference is at best an indictment of how we have come to evaluate those differences, at worse an indication of the slow but steady homogenization of photographic art ... that does more to hide a vision than to bring it to the forefront.

Of course, if you don't have a personal vision or aren't working on one, then it is all a moot point ;)

-Marc

BTW, I think you are doing the right thing with your students :thumbs: ... teach them about ideas, content and craft ... focus on building that vision ... then they can make more informed decisions as to personalizing it with the tools they choose to use ... be it a P&S, an IQ180 on an ALPA, or anything in between.
 

Ben Rubinstein

Active member
I don't think we are disagreeing however Marc that outside of requirements (the need for printing large that others have mentioned and there are many other similar examples), the choice of a tool as that of artistic expression is essentially a personal one and therefore any argument about whether it is the correct tool is by definition a silly one. If it is correct for you and your choice of expression then it is by definition the correct tool for you. How anyone could argue that point because another tool is correct for them and their needs is beyond me.

For you a WLF finder, the micro contrast, the drawing of your lenses is important, crucial to what you do. Whether that is due to the requirements for your clients, print, etc or due to your personal needs for a look or a feel. That someone else does not have those requirements cannot in any way be used as an argument that your choices are wrong! Your choices are extremely subjective as are the choices for everyone else.

That was my point, that the question of which tool to use can only be answered by the person who will be using it. Period. At that point the idea of anyone taking others choices personally is silly in the extreme.

Heck it's what we love about getdpi isn't it? That one of the figureheads is a guy who has used every single system on earth, owned every system on earth and that will continue until his wife finally kills him. :ROTFL: The objective strengths of each system have to be sought out and placed before us so that we can make a rational and personal choice based on our requirements, needs, choices, hangups, etc.

To round it up, I'm not arguing that the choice of tools needed to create an artistic expression are not valid, just that it is and has to be so personal that any argument about that choice is a waste of time.
 

fotografz

Well-known member
I don't think we are disagreeing however Marc that outside of requirements (the need for printing large that others have mentioned and there are many other similar examples), the choice of a tool as that of artistic expression is essentially a personal one and therefore any argument about whether it is the correct tool is by definition a silly one. If it is correct for you and your choice of expression then it is by definition the correct tool for you. How anyone could argue that point because another tool is correct for them and their needs is beyond me.

I agree. Which is why I will continue to debate discounting a whole category of tools on the competitive basis of "almost as good" ... when actually it is "good, but different", and it is nice to have the choice to make or reject based on your own rendering of ideas that you as an artist require for a look or feel.

For you a WLF finder, the micro contrast, the drawing of your lenses is important, crucial to what you do. Whether that is due to the requirements for your clients, print, etc or due to your personal needs for a look or a feel. That someone else does not have those requirements cannot in any way be used as an argument that your choices are wrong! Your choices are extremely subjective as are the choices for everyone else.

An over-simplification and too much emphasis on a few features, but ... Yep! However, shooting 1/800 or 1/1000 high sync speeds with my choice of lighting systems isn't a subjective need, it is critical to some of the vision I have for new areas of photography I'm exploring. That eliminates a number of choices for the tools needed.

That was my point, that the question of which tool to use can only be answered by the person who will be using it. Period. At that point the idea of anyone taking others choices personally is silly in the extreme.

Yet, isn't that what you are implying when you say " ... the argument about spending tens of thousands of dollars on a couple more percent of subjective IQ is a techy argument, not an artists argument IMHO." When in fact, it isn't a technical argument at all ... it is a lot more about the over-all look and feel one gets with certain system/lenses/or capabilities ... or should be IMHO.

For someone like Fred, it may be a larger format approach that suits his style and solicits the ooohs and aaahhs from his audience despite the perceived inconvenience or what-ever others may see compared to other tools and processes. Subjective? Yes! Art is subjective.

I spent well over a year debating and testing the Leica S2 before committing long term to the system. It sure the Hell wasn't based on the sensor size, I already had a 40 meg camera. It sure the Hell wasn't based on price, being heart-stopping expensive. It was because I finally understood the nature of what Leica had accomplished with this camera and the S lenses, and how it could assist me in a certain look and feel that I subjectively deemed as more inherently and effortlessly natural looking (which others have also noticed and commented on)


Heck it's what we love about getdpi isn't it? That one of the figureheads is a guy who has used every single system on earth, owned every system on earth and that will continue until his wife finally kills him. :ROTFL: The objective strengths of each system have to be sought out and placed before us so that we can make a rational and personal choice based on our requirements, needs, choices, hangups, etc.

IMO, there is a difference between hopping around and changing systems like underwear, and finding what suits you and building on it. Guy has his rationale as does everyone else. Personally, I'd still be shooting with a Contax 645 and Contax N Digital with Zeiss optics if Kyocera hadn't baled on photography ... if those systems had continued to evolve I wouldn't have been jumping around so much myself. Not until the A900 did I get back to that which suited my eye, mostly due to the Zeiss lenses. I've shot a Leica M for 40 years, still do, and will continue until I can't focus it anymore.

To round it up, I'm not arguing that the choice of tools needed to create an artistic expression are not valid, just that it is and has to be so personal that any argument about that choice is a waste of time.
-Marc
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
You woke up the lens whore my ears where ringing. LOL

I was having 200mm F 2 dreams. Than I had a SK28 dream on my 140. It was like Claritin commercial someone pulled the foggy coating off. Ouch that is sharp. Crap I really like both systems. Need to start knitting another ski mask
 

Shashin

Well-known member
Group 1 who currently own a MFDB have roughly three options
(a) BAIL OUT - sell and move on
(b) RATIONALIZE - defend the current benefits of IQ180 files for example.
(c) WAIT - maybe Phase 1 will bring out a better camera, a bigger sensor etc, etc
????? Can't I simply keep using this great camera I have to continue to make great images? I always thought the point of photography was photography, not trying to purchase the latest camera manufacturers produce. Oddly enough, the fact the D800 exists has zero impact on my photography--my images still look just as great.
 

Ben Rubinstein

Active member
I have a confession to make. Did a lot of playing about with raw files from the D800 and 5D3 last night, um, I like the colours and tones of the 5D3 better. I shall now fall on my lensbaby and begone from the world of serious photography. :ROTFL:
 

fotografz

Well-known member
????? Can't I simply keep using this great camera I have to continue to make great images? I always thought the point of photography was photography, not trying to purchase the latest camera manufacturers produce. Oddly enough, the fact the D800 exists has zero impact on my photography--my images still look just as great.
Finally, someone said it.

-Marc
 

fotografz

Well-known member
I have a confession to make. Did a lot of playing about with raw files from the D800 and 5D3 last night, um, I like the colours and tones of the 5D3 better. I shall now fall on my lensbaby and begone from the world of serious photography. :ROTFL:
:ROTFL:

-Marc
 

stephengilbert

Active member
"This decision may result in me having the most expensive paper weight in the street."

Can't you use it to take photographs?
 

Shashin

Well-known member
"This decision may result in me having the most expensive paper weight in the street."

Can't you use it to take photographs?
But think of the embarrassment. My Pentax 645D is only 6th in DoX Mark score out of 165 cameras. Who will think if I am real photographer if I don't have the camera du jour. And my image won't have the best IQ that they could possible have. It is such a disgrace. (You wouldn't want to go back to the dark ages and judge a photograph based on its merit when we can easily quantify the work based on the DR of the sensor.)
 

studio347

New member
There is a new camera. People are saying it is great. We want to buy it.
Maybe we buy too many and too often.. for some reasons.
 

mvirtue

New member
Just got done shooting dancers in a studio setting for four hours, 9 more hours tomorrow. At my feet was a bag with my 1Ds3 and 5D3. What I used was my RZ with a Leaf 7-II. 35mm does not have a waist level finder...

Now two weeks from now, the RZ stays home. Could I have done today with either of my FF bodies? Yes. Would I have had more fun? No. Would the number of in focus frames have been different? Yes but the advantage is actually with the RZ :) The last time I used the 1Ds for this gig 2 years ago it sucked rocks :(
 
From what I know of photography, light is everything. You can change the details in a photo with proper lighting much more than comparing the difference between a d800 and IQ180. For me just the sync speed of the medium format cameras is enough to keep my camera. And regardless of everything else, the look medium format produces will never be rivaled by 35mm. Medium Format has also trained me to take less and less shots and create better composition before shooting, as 35mm makes you just want to shoot and prey
 

Geoff

Well-known member
Imagine for a moment that the perfect MFDB sensor is in a DSLR body. Take the issue of the sensor out of the mix. Then what you have is an well functioning, integrated, smaller system-based camera, with lots of lenses, and the ability to shoot at high ISO.

It also comes with some downsides: such as 2:3 image size, a less-than ideal viewfinder, and most of the lenses won't match the needs of the sensor.

Diffraction raises its head, as the sensor has smaller pixels etc.

The need for good lenses means the Zeiss primes, or similar, adding weight back to the equation. The sensor is demanding of good technique, likely tripod based for landscape work.

Its trade-offs again. While cheaper, smaller, and of high quality, at the end of the day, its is just a different approach. Not better, not worse, just a different collection of the various aspects that go into making the high quality photo.
 

yaya

Active member
As an amateur, I shoot A DSLR because it gives me good AF and zoom lenses so I can have more freedom in the way I compose and I can leave the tripod in the car. I also don't need to worry about cleaning the sensor because I never take the lens off...

In fact Nikon just announced a new super-zoom DX lens, the 18-300/3.5-5.6 and I bet you that it is just as bad as my 18-200...(I might still buy one because it has a lock button to stop the barrel from dropping when the camera in hanging off you shoulder)

Yesterday I saw some D800 test files that were shot on a repro setup with a Schneider 90mm Macro T/S lens. They were very good but not as good as 33MP, 4 yr old MFDB files shot with a similar lens.

As an amateur, if shooting a DSLR means that I have to cary a tripod, use manual focus prime lenses and rely on live view (because I can't focus manually with a tiny viewfinder), then I'm loosing the benefits of shooting a DSLR

That's my opinion, YMMV...

Yair
 

GrahamWelland

Subscriber & Workshop Member
As an amateur, if shooting a DSLR means that I have to cary a tripod, use manual focus prime lenses and rely on live view (because I can't focus manually with a tiny viewfinder), then I'm loosing the benefits of shooting a DSLR

That's my opinion, YMMV...

Yair
I'm with Yair on this one. But then again I shoot tech + IQ, DF + IQ or a Fuji XPro1 for travel. ( confession - I also have an astro D800 coming but For non-Fuji use & LOOONG exposures).
 

fotografz

Well-known member
They have a big 2 day expo "rep fest" here at the last remaining large camera store ... so I went to pick-up a few lighting items I was looking for because they typically beat B&H pricing by a lot, and no added tax.

While there, I had my first hands-on with the D800. Nice compact size, but sturdy feeling as you'd expect of Nikon ... but when I raised it to my eye I was shocked at the small little window on the world ... it's funny how experiences are colored by expectations. I have been shooting continuously for the past few weeks with the S2 and H4D/60, and had grown accustomed to the big bright viewfinders.

Also re-connected with the Mac Group rep that wrote a nice deal on some Profoto goodies for me, and he wants to get one of new Leaf Creo backs in my hands for my opinion. If I can swing it, I have a major conceptual portrait session coming up, and it'd be great to try it then where I'll be using the S2 and H4D/60.

Wish I could get my mits on a D800 and new 35 and 85 then also. Anyone with a D800 near the Detroit area that has Thursday, July 12 open? PM me. Lots of cool lighting, stylists, and the whole shebang!

-Marc
 
Top