Why did you go back to full frame DSLR?

[John Perkins]

Hello,

I am new to the forum and am considering getting an MFDB. After doing a lot of reading here, it seems that some people have given up MFDB and returned to full frame DSLRs.

Now that it is mid-2013 and the D800(e) is a well-proven machine, and Canon has hints of an even higher MP DSLR for 2014 possibly, it seems the future cost/benefits of MFDB are even murkier.

I am curious... Who here has recently left MFDB for the D800(e), and why did you do it?

Many thanks in advance for your views. They will help me form some of my own future plans.

John

 

[Ben Rubinstein]

:watch:

Seriously though I have a feeling that it's mainly economics. Lots of people hurting in this economy and although there is no doubt of the advantages of MFDB, for many it's just no longer economically viable. I've also got an idea that for a lot of people the real world advantages of MF are just not that apparent in the work they do. It's a niche requirement to need the look, the resolution and the other advantages which as always when you work in the rarified atmosphere of the very best quality, is expensive, harder to use and not really the need of the majority. If you do need it of course then for all the DSLR evangelists, a D800 is just not going to cut it.

We just finally took out our D800e from the box it has sat in for the past 10 months in the studio. There were various reasons why we hadn't used it until now. When I get the chance I'm going to do a side by side with our Leaf Aptus II-8 back in our repro studio using C1 7.1.3. I'm actually really interested in the results. To be frank though, even if the D800e is as good (I doubt it will be as good and we need every single advantage we can get) the 40 megapixel backs aren't worth that much on the 2nd hand market. We'd lose more that we would gain selling it. It's being used for what it was built for. A studio. Wouldn't be worth bothering. Again that's if the D800e is as good and I don't think it will be. Should be fun to compare though next time I'm bored.

 

[Shashin]

I use my Pentax 645D far more than my D800E.

Personally, I don't choose my camera by what the "majority" of what other people do. I don't chase pixels either. I would encourage you to do your own research and not use anecdotal stories to purchase expensive equipment. People's opinions really don't mean much.

Personally, this being your first post, I would say stick where you are happy. That D800E will be perfect for you and the D800E is a fine camera--I have one myself.

 

[John Perkins]

I use my Pentax 645D far more than my D800E.

Personally, I don't choose my camera by what the "majority" of what other people do. I don't chase pixels either.

Personally, this being your first post, I would say stick where you are happy. That D800E will be perfect for you and the D800E is a fine camera--I have one myself.

I like the D800e for certain, but I would not say I am "happy" with it. I am a former 8x10 shooter, so it really lacks compared to that.

 

[Shashin]

There are a few vendors here, I would contact them for sample images. I would also get your hands on some of these cameras and shoot some files and look at them. That is the best way. There are rental places and some dealers may lend demos.

BTW, you are simply not going to get the look of 8x10 with MFD. That is not a saying one is better than the other, but there is no substitute.

 

[Paratom]

I am a hobby shooter using a Leica S and also a Canon 5d (I switched from Nikon to Canon last year for color reasons and some Canon lenses I like).
The Canon images are just fine and the 5dIII is very fast and nice to use.
Sometimes fast AF, Zooms etc are a benefit.
However everytime I use the Leica S I feel to be rewarded by the Image quality.
The Canon IQ is just fine, the IQ from the Leica S makes me WOW.
I think it is the same thing if you browase through the Nikon or Canon image thread and then through the MF-image thread. There is a difference even at web size.

 

[wentbackward]

[Sigh] Just buy a D800, post on the Nikon forum and don't start another one of these threads. There are tons of threads that discuss this ad nauseum

 

[dougpeterson]

There are a few vendors here, I would contact them for sample images. I would also get your hands on some of these cameras and shoot some files and look at them. That is the best way. There are rental places and some dealers may lend demos.

Self serving of course, but I can't +1 this enough.

We have plenty of raw files and are glad to provide remote demos of functionality, in person evaluations, or shipped-rental-towards-purchase arrangements. We also work hard to keep real-world experience on the relevant cameras. For instance I shoot weddings and portraits with Phase, Leaf, and Canon cameras, and assist/tech for a variety of our clients. We also create a variety of tools such as our focal length visualizer, both public and private, to help our clients choose equipment. In short we're happy to do anything we can to help customers make informed, well-considered decisions on which, if any, medium format solutions best fit their needs.

If there was one camera that was the best option for every person for every purpose then there would only be one camera in the world. But instead there are myriad options; even in niche areas like technical cameras there are several companies with several models each.

It's good to do research, but a very open ended question like "why did you go back to full frame DSLR?" is as useful (IMO) as a question like "why do you drive a sedan"? You'll get reasons, but they won't necessarily be relevant to you.

If you are going to ask for forum advice I strongly suggest you outline a LOT more about you, your needs, your likes, your dislikes, your shooting style, your subject matter, your priority, your budget considerations, options you've researched/tried/ruled-out etc etc etc. If you come to the table with more details about you then others can chime in more specific and relevant advice. It won't be infallible as everyone's preferences will vary (I've literally seen two people pick up the exact same camera at trade shows and in turn claim it was the best feeling and worst feeling body they'd ever held) but at least it will be aiming to address the specifics that matter to you.

 

[tashley]

I went from MFD>D800 and found that it covered many, possibly even most, of the bases as well as I needed. But not all. So I eventually upgraded my MFD optics and technical camera body and went back to using my IQ180. For my practice, both are needed. And that is not cheap!

 

[John Perkins]

Self serving of course, but I can't +1 this enough.

It's good to do research, but a very open ended question like "why did you go back to full frame DSLR?" is as useful (IMO) as a question like "why do you drive a sedan"? You'll get reasons, but they won't necessarily be relevant to you.

Doug, yes, I agree with all you said, and, of course, I would try a system before buying. I have already spent some time working with full-size RAW files in C1 and PS. They are better than the files that come out of my D800e. So that isn't really what I am questioning. I mainly shoot portraits in the studio, so, again, it is clear that is a viable use case.

What "why do you drive a sedan?" will get you is possibly someone suggesting something about sedans that you have not thought of or uncovered in your research. In particular stories of "it wasn't worth it to me, and here's why" would interest me. Sure, some of those stories would not apply to me, but I would still find it interesting. It's a lot of money.

 

[jeffreytotaro]

Hello John:

There are lots of reasons to use MFDB. Counting pixels is almost least of them. For me, its the lenses. Nothing is better for low distortion, edge to edge sharpness, and overall look as the medium format lenses available for a technical camera. Even if Nikon or Canon had a 60MP camera, I'd still prefer the IQ260 and my 5 lenses on my Alpas. All have in-camera perspective control. Get your hands on some files and you'll see.

 

[Nick-T]

FWIW here is my digital camera journey as far as I can remember:

Kodak DCS460
Imacon Flexframe 3020
Imacon ixpress 384
Nikon D2X
Hasselblad H2D22
Hasselblad H3D31
Nikon D3
Canon 5D2
Nikon D800
Hasselblad H4D40

The italicised ones I still own and use.

Find the tools that work best for you and use them.

 

[fotografz]

I can't say why I would leave MFD for 35mm since I didn't. I still have both, and use each for their relative strengths.

However, per Ben's well reasoned reply, I no longer have a big gun 60 meg large sensor 645 MFD camera ... mostly because I no longer need one as I retired from the commercial work I did with it. It wasn't a pure economic issue as much as a specialty need that tied up a lot of cash to accomplish work I no longer do.

I now use a Leica S2P and CS lenses which isn't exactly inexpensive ... especially compared to a Nikon D800 kit. It is more about economic means matched to changing needs and personal creative preferences. If pure economics forced the issue, I'd have no qualms with going to a Nikon D800 or whatever meg monster Canon brings to market ... knowing full well that megapixels isn't everything, but it IS something worthwhile if you have the need.

The S2P fits a number of functional and creative criteria that my current Sony, or a Canon, or a Nikon of any meg count would not meet. I need high sync speeds because I do a LOT of work with lighting, especially outdoors ... and the S syncs to 1/1000 ... or with a flip of a switch focal plane speeds to 1/4000. Functionally, I like a big viewfinder, and it is tough to go back to a smaller one. I creatively prefer the look and feel of MFD images, and especially like the Leica AF CS optics which I paid dearly to get.

So, for me a 24 meg full frame 35mm DSLR is plenty for how I use the format and the functionality of such cameras.

RELATED NOTE: There was an interesting recent business article on the camera industry, and the rapid decline of sales for smaller sensor cameras ... primarily P&Ss, but effecting everything all the way to 35mm DSLRs. The business point being made was that the makers must begin re-tooling their marketing focus away from meg count and concentrate on sensor size as the point of difference. Cell phones are killing off sales because the consumer cannot tell the difference, and they do not want to carry around a brick to get that difference ... even including those more educated in photographic imagery.

On a selective note: it seems the very notion of sensor size being the new criteria of excellence and photographic performance would seem to benefit MFD with a halo effect since they are the largest sensors available.

- Marc

 

[kdphotography]

I never "left" the 35mm FF DSLR format to begin with. And frankly, I think the reality is that few ever can make a clean break from one format or the other. Different tools, and they do complement each other well. Right now the best marriage imho is a Phase IQ MFDB and the D800/e. I'm still waiting for Canon's response to upgrade my 1Ds Mark III. Totally happy with the IQ180 paired with the next Canon flagship....

From a pure "photographic enjoyment" perspective---yes, I could easily leave a FF DSLR and the Phase DF for a technical camera and MFDB.

 

[Ken_R]

I use both a 35mm DSLR and a MFDB system. Neither one replaces the other.

My Arca Swiss Rm3Di with the Rodenstock lenses and the Phase One IQ160 is the ultimate tool when you need the best wide angle image quality combined with camera/lens movements. The 35mm lenses do not come close to the performance of rodenstock glass. Also, the precision of the Arca and the range of movements is unmatched by any dslr option.

For studio work I mount the phase one back on a Hasselblad H1 and can shoot portraits just like with any dslr.

The phase one back so far has been rock solid reliable. If something happens the back is fully serviceable and since I bought from a dealer (Digital Transitions) they should be of great help in the process. Same with the Arca and Rodenstock lenses.

Bottom line, with medium format digital backs one can build a system from the ground up to suit your needs/wants. There are many possible combinations of backs/bodies/lenses.

Nowadays there are digital backs like the IQ260 that are designed to be good (at base iso) in any light since it can do very long exposures. It's best to call a dealer and discuss the options available with your budget.

Is it for anyone. No. It is just another alternative that is available.

A 35mm dslr like a D800E is generally much more versatile and of course, cost effective.

I wrote a bit about my experience HERE (I am a client not an employee of DT)

 

[Swissblad]

Like many I use both MFD and 35mm FF.
Unlike many Nikon users I've not jumped on the D800E bandwagon, as the D700 (and occasional use of a D4) meets most my 35 mm needs, and is not a diffraction limited, a hindrance in macro work. I also did not want to invest in a whole lot of new non-AF Zeiss glass, which defeats the 35mm objective IMHO.
Instead, I acquired a used H3D at a good price, and although I've not bonded with it like my HB 503, it does allow me to use my old HB Zeiss glass, whose qualities I really like. The colours are magnificent straight out the camera, and tethering in simple and a pleasure to use with Phocus. MFD is different - period.
That said, if I had the $, I would buy a CFV 50 and a ALPA tech cam...... one can dream

 

[Swissblad]

I mainly shoot portraits in the studio, so, again, it is clear that is a viable use case.

.... It's a lot of money.

In your case I would rent (or test) a MF system, which will allow you to appreciate the big viewfinder, the way MF lenses render portraits, more pleasing skin colours etc.

If you are impressed and hooked, then scout for a good 2nd hand system to start with.

Mind the motto of this forum section though... abandon all hope....

 

[Ben Rubinstein]

Just actually did the test in the studio between the Aptus II-8 and the D800. The MFDB is sharper and crisper at the pixel level but it's pretty close on resolution, as close as you would expect from the numbers which surprised me. Keep in mind that I'm comparing a schneider lens to a Nikkor which would probably explain the crisper results. Colour accuracy and separation seem to be a clear win for the MFDB but again I'm using the single canned D800e profile in C1 in comparison to the Leaf Product Profile which is specifically tuned for the kind of shooting I'm doing. Until I can work out a custom ICC profile for both, I'm just wandering around blindfold with this comparison.

I've got a feeling that the MFDB would cream the D800 on skin tones and tonality but it's just a feeling, I've never shot portraiture with either. Even then you have to see if you can 'see' it, trying to explain the difference in tonality between formats is pretty difficult, hard to find the words, you either see it or you don't and if you don't then why bother spending the money? I've got a feeling that the money would be better spent on lighting and modifiers at the 40 megapixel level if you're looking for better tonality. Please note again, this is just my musings based on zero experience with MFDB's with portraiture.

 

[tcdeveau]

I've got both a D800E and a Hassy H4D-40. I personally don't see it as a MFD or 35mm thing and shoot with both when I'm shooting (Hassy on tripod, Nikon handheld). I've not done any detailed comparisons because it's just not worth the time or effort for me. For me both systems are complimentary. There are things I like about the Hassy (color rendition, monster viewfinder, lens quality, long exposure with no LENR/blackshade) and things I like about the Nikon (lens selection, ISO, size, FPS). There are also things I don't like about each system, but shooting with the MFD system gives me a feeling I don't get with 35mm...I just enjoy shooting with the MFD more. I don't see myself going back and am working on planning for an IQ260/IQ260achro in a couple years. That being said, I'm not getting rid of my D800E.

As others have stated, the D800 vs MFD issue has been discussed ad naseum on many forums. Forums are great sources of information, but you really just have to get your hands on a MFD and see if it's worth the investment for you. There are several MFD dealers on this forum (Digital Transitions, Capture Integration) and I'd recommend speaking with them. They will go out of their way to let you try MFD without pressure or an obligation to buy. You can also rent from them and try out stuff in your own environment.

 

[etrump]

The title of this post is a bit disingenuous. In my opinion it would be a better question in the Nikon forum. Especially if you're trying to talk yourself out of purchasing an MFDB or just need to feel better about not being able to afford an MFDB system.

The D800e is a fantastic camera and the price point is equally as appealing so I doubt anyone here would trash it. I own one and use it where it fits but most of my shooting is with the IQ180. If you want crisp, lifelike prints larger than 36-40 inches and can't stitch due to subject and lighting the MFDB is very appealing.

Personally, I am not worried about cost as the resulting image is most important. I invest a lot of money on travel and coming back with the best quality possible is more important than the cost of the camera system. A 3-4 year amortization of the camera system cost is relatively small compared to my travel budget.