Wayne Fox
Workshop Member
I find the opposite to be true ... my d800e outfit with 3 zeiss primes and a couple of zooms is only a few pounds lighter than my DF/1Q180 outfit with 3 primes and the 75-150. And everytime I go to a shoot I have both systems in the car, but I can't find a reason to get the Nikon out of the car instead of the Phase.Don,
Having said that - I would not nearly have made all the images with my Hasselblad, let alone a Tech Cam, which I have made in the last 2 months with the D800E.
I've shot side by side with the two systems and while I agree the Nikon is the best sensor ever in a 35mm dSLR and with the Zeiss glass delivers some great qualities, I still struggle with the files getting what I want ... I can get there but it seems to be a lot more work. And sorry, but print a 90" pano and the Nikon just can't handle it as well ... it's a stretch for the IQ180 as well, but there is a difference.
I've shot with MF for so long (since the 70's) that I don't find the dSLR workflow shooting any faster. I never hand hold (I'm strictly a landscape shooter I don't even shoot wildlife) . The only advantage I think I can find with it is with telephoto reach on occasion and for long exposure work (which may be the main reason I end up keeping it)
I'm guessing my Nikon will be for sale in the near future. I wanted to give it a go, but I actually prefer the NEX 7 sensor with the Nikon and Zeiss glass and it holds up just fine to 24x30 and is still pretty good at 30x40. Go to 40x60 and the nikon beats the NEX but at that size it's not holding up against the IQ180.
and of course that's just my 2 cents. as has been said before horses for courses, but the title of this thread seems odd since it's comparing a rather dated and pretty mediocre resolution MFD against the best that a 35mm can offer.