Is there a compelling reason to move to MF?

[mjr]

Not quite. I knew which backs were available and their cost, hence my initial question in this post. If you're referring to my other thread, it had to do specifically with tech cameras. So, your presumption isn't correct.

As far as getting a handle on the market, it doesn't require a rocket scientist to do a bit of market research, to see who the players are, what the sales figures are and where the trends are heading. It doesn't necessarily make me an expert, but it does give me a pretty good understanding of where things stand.

My apologies, I was talking about the first thread where you asked about this sort of thing, 4 weeks ago I believe...

"I think that for maximum flexibility, I'd prefer to go with the non-crop / CMOS sensor. Is it safe to say that all Phase One backs with 60mp and up use a non-crop sensor and their IQ 2x line and higher use CMOS?

What about Hasselblad backs or other manufacturers? Is there anything out there at this moment that would meet the criteria without breaking the bank (assuming around $10k?)

But you are right, a smart guy like you can certainly master the whole shebang in a month, no problem, my presumption was that you had done so without holding a mf kit or ever having taken a shot for yourself with one, I'm a big boy, I can admit when my assumptions are wrong!

Have a good day.

Mat

 

[fotografz]

Old timers?? I think I've awoken the dead! This is the Zombie Apocalypse! :ROTFL:

Yeah, I think Jerome hit the nail on the head: Because they can. I am not sure they'll be able to charge this much longer. The writing's on the wall. With Sony fast becoming the sensor supplier for almost all of the camera manufacturers, and with the pixel pitch of the 100mp back equating to the 42mp sensor on the 135 format, thus stressing the lenses just as much, there's becoming less and less of a differentiation among the formats. Furthermore, with Pentax squeezing Phase on the MF market as well, Phase will wind up doing one of two things: Either they will have to make their systems more affordable (at least introduce a line of affordable cameras/backs to compete with Pentax) or they will become so niche and so specialized that the sales figures they're seeing now, will seem like the golden age of digital MF. It seems they're milking the cow while there's still a cow to be milked.

That "Writing on the wall" prediction, almost verbatim, has been made for years and years now. The FF 35mm sensors where supposed to be the beginning of the end for MFD. They weren't. The Nikon D800 was supposed to be the death knell for MFD. It wasn't. Mirrorless FF high-meg was supposed to be the knife in the heart of traditional 35mm DSLRs and MFD. It wasn't.

Two years ago the naysayers were lowering Hasselblad into a shallow grave …

Reminds me of all the obituaries written for Leica since the advent of the SLR.:ROTFL:

All I see here are "Zombie Lemmings" pushing for soulless uniformity and homogenization … like grey uniformed cult members marching in unison toward the tent where the Kool-Aid is dispensed.:shocked:

Personally, I cheer for diversity and choice. Art never fares well in a regimented environment where party lines must be followed or risk being beaten into submission with boring charts and mind-numbing test shots.

Artistically I see a vast difference in Image Qualities when using a larger sensor camera. It isn't my problem if others can't see it, nor do I feel worried about debating it, because I equate it to describing a sunset to a blind person.

I am delighted I have that artistic option, and am not forced to do everything with tools I see as being a lesser choice for what I do.

- Marc

 

[CSP]

That "Writing on the wall" prediction, almost verbatim, has been made for years and years now. The FF 35mm sensors where supposed to be the beginning of the end for MFD. They weren't. The Nikon D800 was supposed to be the death knell for MFD. It wasn't. Mirrorless FF high-meg was supposed to be the knife in the heart of traditional 35mm DSLRs and MFD. It wasn't.

Two years ago the naysayers were lowering Hasselblad into a shallow grave …

Reminds me of all the obituaries written for Leica since the advent of the SLR.:ROTFL:

All I see here are "Zombie Lemmings" pushing for soulless uniformity and homogenization … like grey uniformed cult members marching in unison toward the tent where the Kool-Aid is dispensed.:shocked:

Personally, I cheer for diversity and choice. Art never fares well in a regimented environment where party lines must be followed or risk being beaten into submission with boring charts and mind-numbing test shots.

Artistically I see a vast difference in Image Qualities when using a larger sensor camera. It isn't my problem if others can't see it, nor do I feel worried about debating it, because I equate it to describing a sunset to a blind person.

I am delighted I have that artistic option, and am not forced to do everything with tools I see as being a lesser choice for what I do.

- Marc

wow so for example peter lindbergh https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tSeW0Voiwkg must be one of this "Zombie Lemmings" a jerk not able to see who low his work is shot with a soulless nikon.

 

[Geoff]

Not quite. I knew which backs were available and their cost, hence my initial question in this post. If you're referring to my other thread, it had to do specifically with tech cameras. So, your presumption isn't correct.

As far as getting a handle on the market, it doesn't require a rocket scientist to do a bit of market research, to see who the players are, what the sales figures are and where the trends are heading. It doesn't necessarily make me an expert, but it does give me a pretty good understanding of where things stand.

Consider that there are several stages to learning about MF digital gear and how it works:

1) market research
2) holding the pieces in your hands and seeing how they work
3) using them in the field, and seeing how your workflow adapts and adjusts to them
4) post processing the files, and adjusting not only the files, but your work process, etc.

Its easy to do the first step, and think that's enough. But actually, steps 3 and 4 are the most important. The change in workflow, and how you work with a very different set of tools, is a subtle change, one that is difficult to assess. It can only be done hands-on.

The forum is filled with people who have all made reasonable decisions based on steps 1 and 2 (research, holding in a shop, and thinking that's enough) only to find that their needs and wants changed once using the gear.

 

[fotografz]

wow so for example peter lindbergh https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tSeW0Voiwkg must be one of this "Zombie Lemmings" a jerk not able to see who low his work is shot with a soulless nikon.

Read the quote I was responding to … not out of context. And please do not embellish by implying I called anyone a Jerk … that is YOUR word, not mine.

The difference is that Peter isn't trying to sell me on his choices nor implying my aesthetic choices should be like his … like what is going on here with comments implying MFD users are the walking dead, and the MFD companies are corpses except they don't know it yet.

Big difference.



- Marc

 

[Pelorus]

I vote that we shoot this thread and then kick it to make sure it's dead.

Let's just go and take pictures.

 

[CSP]

Read the quote I was responding to … not out of context. And please do not embellish by implying I called anyone a Jerk … that is YOUR word, not mine.

The difference is that Peter isn't trying to sell me on his choices nor implying my aesthetic choices should be like his … like what is going on here with comments implying MFD users are the walking dead, and the MFD companies are corpses except they don't know it yet.

Big difference.



- Marc

what lame arguments i never said things like you suggest the opposite ist true i too hope that this companies survive. but this whole talk how superior mf is is just ridiculous considering how much great work is shot and published from smaller formats by top level photographers. real photographers know that only the combination of tools and skills light and post production makes great images and this simplified view you just need to pick the right camera is amateurish at best. furthermore is think most of the users here which feel the need to talk down 35mm actually never have used a high mpx 35mm camera with adequate high quality glass.

 

[Michiel Schierbeek]

This thread just keeps on trucking.

So there are real photographers who took great photographs with 35 mm and there are also real photographerswho took great pictures with MF or large format camera's.
And they all used the best cameras for their purposus.

I like both but for the work I do now I prefer MF because it delivers wonderful spacious files which I can print bigger.

 

[Jamgolf]

furthermore is think most of the users here which feel the need to talk down 35mm actually never have used a high mpx 35mm camera with adequate high quality glass.

I understand that you trying to make an argument but that is hilarious.
At least this thread has some entertainment value.

 

[Abstraction]

My apologies, I was talking about the first thread where you asked about this sort of thing, 4 weeks ago I believe...

"I think that for maximum flexibility, I'd prefer to go with the non-crop / CMOS sensor. Is it safe to say that all Phase One backs with 60mp and up use a non-crop sensor and their IQ 2x line and higher use CMOS?

What about Hasselblad backs or other manufacturers? Is there anything out there at this moment that would meet the criteria without breaking the bank (assuming around $10k?)

But you are right, a smart guy like you can certainly master the whole shebang in a month, no problem, my presumption was that you had done so without holding a mf kit or ever having taken a shot for yourself with one, I'm a big boy, I can admit when my assumptions are wrong!

Have a good day.

Mat

I had shot with med format film and I had shot professionally with med format film. I know how the cameras handle. In the end, we're photographers talking about cameras. There's nothing here that can't be gotten a handle of in a month.

This thread just keeps on trucking.

I vote that we shoot this thread and then kick it to make sure it's dead.

Let's just go and take pictures.

This thread IS the apocalypse zombie. It can't be killed. It eats brains.

 

[ErikKaffehr]

Hi,

I would suggest that great majority of posters have been MFD owners.

For my part, I did som market research but ordered my MFD stuff without seeing any MFD camera in real world.

Used it in the field for 33 months, after which I decided a Sony A7RII was a better match for my needs. So the Hasselblad 555/ELD P45+ combo goes into well deserved retirement.

I think that both positive and negative experiences need to be communicated.

At this stage I feel that high MP 24x36 offers better image quality than the admittedly aged MFD equipment I have. It also does it with more flexibility and at a lower cost.

Added 2016-03-31: I have (or had) the following lenses:

• Distagons: 40/4 FLE, 50/4 FLE, 60/3.5
• Planars: 80/2.8CFE, 100/3.5CF , 120/4CF, 120/4 CFi
• Sonnars: 150/4 CT*, 150/4CF, 180/4 CFi

The lenses I would call great are: all Sonnars and the Planar 100/3.5.

Best regards
Erik

Consider that there are several stages to learning about MF digital gear and how it works:

1) market research
2) holding the pieces in your hands and seeing how they work
3) using them in the field, and seeing how your workflow adapts and adjusts to them
4) post processing the files, and adjusting not only the files, but your work process, etc.

Its easy to do the first step, and think that's enough. But actually, steps 3 and 4 are the most important. The change in workflow, and how you work with a very different set of tools, is a subtle change, one that is difficult to assess. It can only be done hands-on.

The forum is filled with people who have all made reasonable decisions based on steps 1 and 2 (research, holding in a shop, and thinking that's enough) only to find that their needs and wants changed once using the gear.

 

[weldonbrewster]

I've throughly enjoyed reading this thread but I have to say this is one of the silliest things on here in awhile. As a professional for almost thirty years I've never had less than three complete systems. In the film days it was an 8x10 system, multiple 4x5's, multiple 2 1/4s and one lonely dusty nikon. These days, I could shoot anything from my XF/IQ180 to my Canon 5DSR to my Sony A7RII to my Fuji to even a GoPro. You use the appropriate tool for the job in hand. Sometimes we use multiple systems on the same shoot. Just dump everything in C1 and keep going.

Camera systems are like shoes, nobody has just one pair. You wouldn't wear tennis shoes with a nice suit or go jogging in dress shoes. Camera systems are the same, use the right tool for the job. Don't give me any BS that you can't afford multiple systems because if you have a smart phone then you are shooting with two systems at least already.

Peace,

 

[fotografz]

I've throughly enjoyed reading this thread but I have to say this is one of the silliest things on here in awhile. As a professional for almost thirty years I've never had less than three complete systems. In the film days it was an 8x10 system, multiple 4x5's, multiple 2 1/4s and one lonely dusty nikon. These days, I could shoot anything from my XF/IQ180 to my Canon 5DSR to my Sony A7RII to my Fuji to even a GoPro. You use the appropriate tool for the job in hand. Sometimes we use multiple systems on the same shoot. Just dump everything in C1 and keep going.

Camera systems are like shoes, nobody has just one pair. You wouldn't wear tennis shoes with a nice suit or go jogging in dress shoes. Camera systems are the same, use the right tool for the job. Don't give me any BS that you can't afford multiple systems because if you have a smart phone then you are shooting with two systems at least already.

Peace,

Well said.

Although I like to use my MF kit for the IQ and certain applications, especially involving lighting … my most used camera is an 18 meg Leica MM rangefinder. The only thing that the Sony A7R-II did is replace my traditional DSLR in the "Horses For Courses" mix of tools.

- Marc

 

[ErikKaffehr]

Hi,

Thanks for good comments. Just to say, I am an engineer having photography as a hobby. My quite analytic profession pays for my hobby. That also means that my spendings are a bit limited and I need to make best use of money.

My take is that is great if you can have some gear that can do all jobs. The main benefits are:

• Purchase
• Transportation
• Knowing your gear

Spending of one set of gear is obviously cheaper than sharing expenses over different gear that may even overlap, like buying three wide angles instead of one.

The other issue that you have absolutely no use of gear that is not available when you need it. Much simpler to get a single set of equipment to a shooting location than two or three sets.

The third part is that it is good to have good knowledge of the stuff used. Having multiple kits doesn't make it easier.

Shooting MFD I found that I carried two kits. The Hasselblad with 4-5 lenses and a 24x36mm with 3-4 lenses. To that comes tripod of course, something like 18.5 kg, around 40 lb, I guess.

I can fly economy from a local airport to almost all of Europe, but carry on limit is 10 kg. I can make it with a single kit but not with two.

What I also have found that I have and had have a bunch of small cameras, like Sony RX-100, but almost never use them.

So, now I got my Sony A7rII and it fills the list:

• Long zooms? Yes!
• Ultra wides? Yes!
• Fisheye? Yes!
• Tilt (Scheimpflug)? Yes!
• Shift? Yes!
• Macro? Yes!
• Magnified live view? Yes!

So, the Sony can fulfil all my needs, not necessarily well but well enough.

Best regards
Erik

I've throughly enjoyed reading this thread but I have to say this is one of the silliest things on here in awhile. As a professional for almost thirty years I've never had less than three complete systems. In the film days it was an 8x10 system, multiple 4x5's, multiple 2 1/4s and one lonely dusty nikon. These days, I could shoot anything from my XF/IQ180 to my Canon 5DSR to my Sony A7RII to my Fuji to even a GoPro. You use the appropriate tool for the job in hand. Sometimes we use multiple systems on the same shoot. Just dump everything in C1 and keep going.

Camera systems are like shoes, nobody has just one pair. You wouldn't wear tennis shoes with a nice suit or go jogging in dress shoes. Camera systems are the same, use the right tool for the job. Don't give me any BS that you can't afford multiple systems because if you have a smart phone then you are shooting with two systems at least already.

Peace,

 

[Paratom]

THe cool thing is that systems move closer:
FF DSLR get better in resolution/DR and color
and MF cameras become faster in handling, better in high ISO etc
I also own several systems and find - the S007 handles close to a 35mm DSLR (except for sports). The AF is somewhat slower but also somewhat more precise. I have had MF and FF-Dslr side by side for many years, and over the time the MF cameras have developed in a way (better AF, usable up to 3200 ISO, weatherproof,...) that I can use MF more and more for things where I would have choosen a 35mm DSLR 5 years ago.

 

[weldonbrewster]

Erik, Couple of things. First and foremost the Sony kit you've assembled is great and will shoot just about anything. Your points about multiple sets of lenses and weight, I have the luxury of having an assistant to help cart everything around. I load my truck with the kitchen sink, we have hundreds and hundreds of lbs of gear. If I'm shooting on my own, I make choices based on where and what I'm shooting not weight. Knowledge of gear comes from years and years of testing. My friends and family are sick of being my test subjects. The dog runs and hides when FedEx delivers a package because he knows he's not going to get any peace for awhile. I try to figure out what are the strengths and weaknesses of each piece gear. You don't want to be on set and not have something work like it's an extension of your hand or mind. The Sony menu system is the only thing I can't memorize (who can?) Below is a funny test photo to see if face detection auto focus on a Sony A7RII works on marine iguanas. Yes, it does and you get the cool little green boxes on their eyes confirming focus

So, this gets me to your second kit. You have arguably one of the best digital backs ever made mounted on a legendary camera system. You have thoroughly showed us what it can't do. I offer you a challenge. Lets see what it can do, what are it's strengths? Head out at dawn on a crisp spring morning and photograph the city hall in Nyköping. I looked on Google earth and it looks like there is beautiful historic building next to the modern city hall. Lets see the contrast of the two. You only need one camera, one lens and a tripod. I'm confident that you will get some great images that will surprise the heck out of you. I make this suggestion with the best of intentions and I will certainly accept any challenge thrown my way.

For inspiration, I leave you with Nick Merrick. This is the top photographer at the best architectural photography firm in the world. In two little Pelican 1510s he carries a pile of lens, a Hasselblad system, an Arca Swiss system, a laptop and you guessed it... A P45+
http://hedrichblessing.com/nm-portfolio

Peace,
Weldon

 

[stngoldberg]

Weldon,
The portfolios from hedrich blessing and your own work are superb.
Stanley

 

[ErikKaffehr]

Hi Weldon,

Thanks for the challenge and taking time to check out Nyköping. I have been shooting very little at Nyköping centre. So, next time I have reasonable opportunity I will shoot there. Thanks, again. Also, nice to have a challenge for the Blad. Still it would surprise me if it would have any benefits to the Sony, but I will try and report back.

I agree the Sony has a bad menu system, but I almost never use it. The camera has a set of presets, so I switch between two setups and have function keys set for most things. But finding anything that is not on a key is a PIA.

Reason weight is important for me is flight limits on carry on weights. Last year almost all my shooting was on travel by air. If going by car I have both 24x36 and Hasselblad.

This is one of my favourite P45+ images from Nyköping, shot with Distagon 50/4CF, two images, stitched. I had a good horizontal composition, but realised the sky was interesting so I made an additional exposure with camera tilted upwards and merged in LR.

Best regards
Erik

Erik, Couple of things. First and foremost the Sony kit you've assembled is great and will shoot just about anything. Your points about multiple sets of lenses and weight, I have the luxury of having an assistant to help cart everything around. I load my truck with the kitchen sink, we have hundreds and hundreds of lbs of gear. If I'm shooting on my own, I make choices based on where and what I'm shooting not weight. Knowledge of gear comes from years and years of testing. My friends and family are sick of being my test subjects. The dog runs and hides when FedEx delivers a package because he knows he's not going to get any peace for awhile. I try to figure out what are the strengths and weaknesses of each piece gear. You don't want to be on set and not have something work like it's an extension of your hand or mind. The Sony menu system is the only thing I can't memorize (who can?) Below is a funny test photo to see if face detection auto focus on a Sony A7RII works on marine iguanas. Yes, it does and you get the cool little green boxes on their eyes confirming focus

So, this gets me to your second kit. You have arguably one of the best digital backs ever made mounted on a legendary camera system. You have thoroughly showed us what it can't do. I offer you a challenge. Lets see what it can do, what are it's strengths? Head out at dawn on a crisp spring morning and photograph the city hall in Nyköping. I looked on Google earth and it looks like there is beautiful historic building next to the modern city hall. Lets see the contrast of the two. You only need one camera, one lens and a tripod. I'm confident that you will get some great images that will surprise the heck out of you. I make this suggestion with the best of intentions and I will certainly accept any challenge thrown my way.

For inspiration, I leave you with Nick Merrick. This is the top photographer at the best architectural photography firm in the world. In two little Pelican 1510s he carries a pile of lens, a Hasselblad system, an Arca Swiss system, a laptop and you guessed it... A P45+
Nick Merrick - Portfolio — Hedrich Blessing

Peace,
Weldon

 

[weldonbrewster]

Thank you for your kind words, Stanley. To be honest though, I get inspired every time I look at the Fun with MF Images thread or the Tech cam thread or the BTS thread. There are a lot of awesome photographers with great images in there.

Erik that exactly what I'm talking about. That image looks cool. When you get time, shoot something with your P45+ and post it up in the MF image thread. I'll do the same.

 

[dchew]

So after 360 replies to the question, "Is there a compelling reason to move to MF?", we have found out that "compelling" depends on some combination of:

1. The photographer's perception of quality
2. The photographer's workflow in the field and in the "darkroom"
3. How big the prints are going to be
4. What the subject is
5. How price sensitive the photographer is

Eureka.

It's official:
:deadhorse:

Feeling Snarky Dave