A switch: Phase One to Nikon.........

[fotografz]

no problem jack but i do understand the relation between flash power, nd filters and shutters very well. the main question is what look do we want - an unnatural day for night style or a more balanced result with the flash as key light. if it is the first than yes you will need more flash power with an nd filter and the higher sync cameras has a clear advantage but if you are for the later it works very well in practice with just the use of an weak nd filter. i did use this technic in the past for a couple of people shootings most of the time at noon on sunny austrian glaciers with my elinchrom ranger and i did never run into not having enough flash power.

but when you look closer it gets more tricky anyway and another problem appears. high sync speed can come with the penalty that you loose some of the emitted power. a hensel porty needs 1/300 sec to deliver his 1200 J so depending on the flash head the power pack, the shutter speed and also how you tripgerr the flash, wirless or with a cord you end up with very different power results minimizing some of the advantages of higher sync speeds.

the last point i also think you made an error with you f stop calculations - my hasselblad h3dII for example syncs at 1/800 my sony a7r2 at 250 so the hasselblad has a speed advantage of 1 2/3 stops but in practice it is enough to compensate the flash power by 1 1/2 stop because of the better dynamic range of the sony.

christian

I'm glad NDs work for you and how you shoot Christian.

They do not work for me, and never have.

ND filters do not affect the lighting ratio when you trying to change that ratio. Shutter speed is what affects ambient while not affecting flash exposure … allowing you to alter the ratio.

In practice I never get the Day-For-Night effect in the conditions I'm shooting in where I need flexibility in changing conditions … which is easily accommodated by tweaking shutter speeds even 1/2 stop, and then adjusting flash output to achieve just the right balance.

While your Hensel Porty data is correct it is narrowly selective to support your POV. It assumes t1 @ 100% output using a ProMini 1200P head … I use the Speed Heads which are twice as fast @ t1, and t5 duration of 1,580 at 1200W/s is well above the max sync speed of my Leica S camera using the built in Profoto AIR radio in the Hensel Porty 1200L. I've yet to see any negative t5 effect @ 1/1000 sync with the Porty/Speed Head at full output.

BTW, it is a well documented issue that the 1/250 sync speed of the Sony A7R-II refers to use of Sony speed-lights. There is a deep discussion on DP Review with loads of experiences that place the sync speed at 1/160 for a clean image when using studio strobes. I've found the same thing with my A7R-II and Profoto, Hensel and EL Quadra systems, and so has my friend with Photogenics. Elinchrom is supposed to be working on a SkyPort transmitter for Sony to help achieve 1/250 … reported to be available in June.

- Marc

 

[tjv]

If one is to use NDs in this situation, how does the AF work? If you're cutting that much light out, doesn't the AF system of the camera start to stutter? At least whenever I've tried something like this it has been less than reliable
.

 

[CSP]

If one is to use NDs in this situation, how does the AF work? If you're cutting that much light out, doesn't the AF system of the camera start to stutter? At least whenever I've tried something like this it has been less than reliable
.

when you start with a fast lens on a a7rII i have seen no issue even with an nd 1.8 on a bright day. ovf cameras are hurt much harder because the af system has already lost a lot of light trough the transparent mirror construction.

 

[jerome_m]

All this is quite simple really. On MF cameras, focal plane shutter sync is about 1/125s. Central shutter sync is about 1/800s. The difference is about 3 stops: 1/125, 1/250, 1/500, 1/1000.

So to keep the same aperture, we would need a x3 ND filter. That is not a big deal, that is about the density of a polarizing filter (and with these, we can still get AF and see what is going on in the viewfinder).

On the flash side, we will need 6-8 times the power (each stops doubles the energy, or simply divide 800 per 125, which is 6.4). So if we need a 400 Ws strobe with a CS, we will need a 3000 Ws strobe with a focal plane shutter. That is a big difference. If we needed a couple of Porties with 1000 Ws with a CS (because we have large modifiers which are not too close from the model), we will need a generator truck with the focal plane shutter... renting a second camera is cheaper.

The relationship in power is the same for the high speed modes.

 

[Lars]

Curious... would there be a market for a leaf shutter adapter for a focal-plane shutter SLR?
Do such adapters exists?
Basically delay leaf shutter for a few milliseconds until focal plane is fully open, keep the focal plane shutter fully open while the lens leaf shutter and flash fire?

 

[Malina DZ]

Curious... would there be a market for a leaf shutter adapter for a focal-plane shutter SLR?
Do such adapters exists?

I'm sure there is a huge market for a leaf shutter lens to SLR camera adapter. I'd buy one now. David Hobby inquired about it in his blog post back in 12/2012, and there's been no attempt from anyone to offer such a product to public. He is contemplating about adapting a leaf shutter lens.

 

[Lars]

I'm sure there is a huge market for a leaf shutter lens to SLR camera adapter. I'd buy one now. David Hobby inquired about it in his blog post back in 12/2012, and there's been no attempt from anyone to offer such a product to public. He is contemplating about adapting a leaf shutter lens.

Interesting.
My gut feel is to make something simpler - a cable release adapter that fires the focal plane shutter at B when initially pressed, and triggers the leaf shutter in the lens when bottomed out. Conceptually this is VERY similar to a shutter adapter for Phase One that Alpa makes - purpose there is to wake up the back at initial press and trigger mechanical shutter at full press. The same electrical signal at initial press can be used to trigger a wired remote to a DSLR. This would of course be far less practical than a fully integrated system.

Alpa sells this adapter for $700 - about the same price per ounce as 24K gold :ROTFL: but I'm pretty sure the Chinese can make one for $1.99 plus $3 shipping.

 

[fotografz]

I suspect that High Speed Sync will eventually be solved on the lighting side verses the camera side.

Profoto has introduced HSS for Canon and Nikon with their TTL B1 and B2 strobes. While HSS is much weaker, introducing it to higher powered strobes mitigates it somewhat when compared to a speed-light using HSS, (a point Profoto makes in their marketing). While not nearly as good as full output @ 1/800, 1/1000+ sync, it would most certainly go a long way in many circumstances.

It is conceivable that a 1000W/s mono could be HSS capable, and a top shutter speed be recommended at 1/1600 for a balanced approach.

It'd be very interesting if HSS could be added to the big packs … heck, maybe they're already working on that for all I know.

- Marc

 

[Lars]

I suspect that High Speed Sync will eventually be solved on the lighting side verses the camera side.

Profoto has introduced HSS for Canon and Nikon with their TTL B1 and B2 strobes. While HSS is much weaker, introducing it to higher powered strobes mitigates it somewhat when compared to a speed-light using HSS, (a point Profoto makes in their marketing). While not nearly as good as full output @ 1/800, 1/1000+ sync, it would most certainly go a long way in many circumstances.

It is conceivable that a 1000W/s mono could be HSS capable, and a top shutter speed be recommended at 1/1600 for a balanced approach.

It'd be very interesting if HSS could be added to the big packs … heck, maybe they're already working on that for all I know.

- Marc

HSS is continuous flash output over the entire time the focal plane shutter is travelling, right?

 

[fotografz]

HSS is continuous flash output over the entire time the focal plane shutter is travelling, right?

HSS is a series of super fast pulsed light that covers the entire time the focal plane shutter slit travels across the sensor. In many cases the speed-light is using maximum energy.

This is a pretty good blog post on the subject … the author shares my enthusiasm for Profoto's recent adoption of HSS and also thinks it signals that HSS will indeed be solved by all light makers eventually.

https://fstoppers.com/originals/demystifying-high-speed-sync-68527

Take note that a lot of the current examples he references are situations where both he and the lighting are close to the subject, and that HSS is limited during some times of day. HSS sync gets more problematic in situations where you are further away and the so is the lighting. He even references use of NDs, but that is also dependent on being pretty close and using more light. As soon as you pull back it starts requiring Nuclear Power Plant levels of lighting energy

I hope Profoto offers TTL and HSS for Sony … I'm sure TTL will be done eventually, but I'm not sure about HSS.

Until then I'll soldier on with Leaf Shutter lenses.

- Marc

 

[jerome_m]

HSS is a series of super fast pulsed light that covers the entire time the focal plane shutter slit travels across the sensor. In many cases the speed-light is using maximum energy.

Actually, the total maximum energy of the flash is spread over the pulses. The effect on flash power is equivalent to using a ND filter.

I hope Profoto offers TTL and HSS for Sony … I'm sure TTL will be done eventually, but I'm not sure about HSS.

Until then I'll soldier on with Leaf Shutter lenses.

Profoto HSS is interesting for people using a 24x36 camera. These DSLRs usually have a sync speed of 1/250s (only 2-3 times slower than a CS in typical use), so compared to a CS, the flash power is only divided by 2 or 3. Carrying twice the amount of flash heads on a shoot is usually doable and people may prefer more lights and a 24x36 to a MF camera with a central shutter.

 

[fotografz]

Actually, the total maximum energy of the flash is spread over the pulses. The effect on flash power is equivalent to using a ND filter.

Profoto HSS is interesting for people using a 24x36 camera. These DSLRs usually have a sync speed of 1/250s (only 2-3 times slower than a CS in typical use), so compared to a CS, the flash power is only divided by 2 or 3. Carrying twice the amount of flash heads on a shoot is usually doable and people may prefer more lights and a 24x36 to a MF camera with a central shutter.

Your first statement depends on how you define "maximum energy" … all flash delivers maximum energy with the amount of light hitting the subject (exposure) varied by the duration that the flash stays on, not the amount. Each flash stores a defined level of energy, and how much of that energy is used depends on the duration it is on. Otherwise, recycle times would always be the same, which they are not, even when using HSS. However, in most situations, a speed-light is using near or all power available, and so is the new Profoto HSS feature on the B1 and B2 TTL Monos … as mentioned by Profoto:

"To ensure a perfect exposure and a stable flash pulse, the B1 uses only the upper part of its power range when in HSS Mode. That is 7.0-10.0 for Canon and 8.0-10.0 for Nikon. For the B2 the energy range is 7-10 for both Canon and Nikon. Know that one f-stop of flash light is lost for every doubling of the shutter speed. In other words, when shooting with the extremely short shutter speeds that Profoto HSS offers, the B1 and B2 will in most cases be used at its max or near max power."

The difference between 7 and 10 power setting on a B1 is faster recycle (about 1.3 seconds verses 1.9 seconds at full power setting) … A typical speed-light at or near full power is 5 to 5.5 seconds recycle (an eternity). To match the total output of the B1/500 with speed-lights (70W/s), you'd need 6+ of them ganged in one modifier with a radio receiver … it is just physics. Plus shooting a speed-light at or near full power consistently beats the snot out of them … and repeated HSS shots can and does cause a thermal shut down, (been there, done that).

RE: Your second statement … HSS may be of interest for anyone using a focal plane shutter camera, not just FF 35mm users. What is quite true is that most photographers do not have as high a demand for working with HSS and lighting. So, even if speed-lights are limited in use compared to leaf-shutter cameras, ganging a couple of TTL/HSS speed-lights is obviously the more prudent path.

For others who face this more frequently, especially for pay, leaf-shutter cameras in tandem with any strobe lighting or speed-light is HSS @ 1/800, 1/1000 or 1/1600 depending on the camera, and the less limited ability to light larger scenes with larger modifiers at distance is a must have ability depending on the photographers approach, ideas, style and desire to concentrate on the subject at hand rather than the mechanics of taking the image.

As usual, Horses for courses.

- Marc

 

[jerome_m]

Your first statement depends on how you define "maximum energy" … all flash delivers maximum energy with the amount of light hitting the subject (exposure) varied by the duration that the flash stays on, not the amount.

That actually depends on flash circuit design. Older studio flashes only charged the capacitor bank partially when power was reduced. Small on-camera strobes quite early had a thyristor to cut the power to the tube during flash, effectively varying flash duration to vary output, but the cut power was limited to relatively small flashes. Now that higher power thyristors are available, you'll find the same design in studio strobes, most notably Profoto. A thyristor cut being a necessity for HSS, HSS now becomes available on moderate power studio flashes (but not on the 3000 Ws monsters...).

This being said, we could discuss electronic design all day, but the photographer's summary is quite simple: you have a flash which has a power of, say, 500 Ws. Between with a shutter with a sync speed of 1/X (say, 1/800s) and a shutter of 1/Y (say 1/125s), if you need to cut continuous light and whatever the process you use for doing so (HSS, ultrasync or filters), the effect of the flash is divided by X/Y between the two systems.

For example: X=800 and Y=125, the power is cut by 6.4, so you 500 Ws flash behaves like a 80 Ws flash.
Other example: X=1/500 (Hasseblad H) and Y=1/300 (Minolta 9xi), the apparent power is only cut by 1.7.
Still other example: X=1/1600 (Phase One) and Y=1/125 (Pentax 645z), the apparent power is cut by 12.8.


:deadhorse:

 

[Mgreer316]

What I find most interesting is what this brings up as as a discussion point: Historically (and I suspect presently) MFDB manufacturers have seen their prime customers as the working pros in commercial fashion, studio and advertising. Will this now morph toward the serious hobbyist/artist? I for one think probably so...

Thanks for writing this Jack. I'm very much like your Chinese friend and the author or this article. I run a commercial portrait studio in Michigan. For years I drooled over a medium format system. Finally, almost 4 years ago I decided to make the addition. It took me a little while before I settled on a Phase One camera with Credo back. I knew all of the shortcomings of the system and was prepared to deal with it. For me, DSLRs had become too good. They did practically everything for you. I wanted to slow down and be more deliberate. Plus I wanted extremely detailed images with great color. I wanted to be rewarded for the relative pain of capture. My system (Phase One 645DF, V-Grip, Credo 60, assortment of SK lenses) does exactly what I was looking for. However, the article's #2 issue (the continued expense of P1 stuff) is what has really gotten under my skin over the past several months. It started with the cost of the SK 40-80mm lens. $9K? Really!? Then after waiting for a body that focused reliably, out comes the XF. But $8K! That's more than the Pentax 645Z complete with 50MP sensor. When I bought into the Phase system, the cost of entry was high. But I was fine with that. I viewed it as an entry fee. However, I thought that subsequent expenditures would be incremental. The XF price tag for those with legacy P1 bodies is ridiculous IMO. I had a discussion with Doug from Digital Transitions about the issue of pros vs. amateur enthusiasts. I'm sorry, with the advent of the Nikon D800 series, the Canon 5DS series, and the Sony A7RII, I just can't see MFD gear being enticing to profit driven pros. While my P1 system has delivered what I was after, there are several things that make shooting it a substandard tool compared to what's currently available irrespective of the price difference.

Here's the main failing as of right now. Flash systems. If you're a landscape or technical photographer, you might not care about flash systems. However, in the portrait/fashion world, it's a completely different ballgame. First of all, all these modern DSLR cameras producing super clean extremely high ISO images, everybody is a "natural light" photographer. In challenging lighting conditions a trained monkey can get a good technical image (accurate exposure and sharp focus). Therefore, we no longer need auxiliary lighting for their light in many cases. Instead, I need light today to craft my images so they look way different than what somebody with a high ISO camera is capable of capturing. I'm truly using light as a paint brush rather than just a light source. The tools to do this are way more convenient when using DSLRs than MFG. For instance, take the Profoto B series strobes. They have TTL and HSS when used with Canikon gear. Locking in your desired "look" via TTL, then locking down the power levels and shooting manual fron then on is a TREMENDOUS benefit. But you can't do that with MFD gear. Take the Canon 600 series flash system, nothing like that for MFD gear. And Nikon just released their radio controlled flash system. If Phase released something like this we'd probably be looking at a $8000-$10000 system.

Anyway, I'm writing out my frustrations as I really like shooting my Phase gear. But honestly, as a professional studio operation, it's an indulgence that doesn't currently return any significant benefit. In fact, I'm coming to the conclusion it's actually a detriment. I love the resolution and detail of my Credo 60. Which is probably why instead of upgrading to an XF, I'll upgrade to a 5Dsr for less than half the cost. I don't know if I'm at the point where I'm going to sell my Phase stuff (feel like a failure and take a bath on price), but I'm close. However, I should add that the native sync speed of my SK 75-150 lens is what is keeping me from pulling the "sell" trigger. My business is in transition (all I want to do is classic studio portraiture) and I just don't know how much outdoor portraiture I'll be doing in the future. As long as that remains an unknown, I'll probably continue to keep my MFD gear.

 

[fotografz]

Interesting subject:

I've observed photography as a profession undergo a massive transition in the past decade. However, "professional" is a wide swath, and involves varying levels of demand and success.

I would say that pros dealing with the public directly (weddings/events/portraits/family/babies/pets) have less perceptual need for MF in any configuration anymore. In fact, weddings/events made the transition from MF to 35mm long before digital came on the scene. In my experience, "public" tastes and expectations have gravitated downward in terms of the type of image quality and end use that MFD is capable of delivering.

I've watched the business model for weddings/events go from print/album income to virtually nothing ... yes, there are exceptions, but I'm taking "in general" industry wide. Wedding photography income has remained stagnate for almost a decade now, and in some demographic categories has significantly declined.

Advertising for publications (product, lifestyle, food, and tabletop such a jewelry etc), and other commercial work like industrial and corporate ... we're slower to change and only recently have become prime targets for the higher resolution 35mm cameras. Part of the reason for this is the shift in what the photographer can line item invoice compared to just a few years ago.

When the publication and printing industries switched over to digital is was swift and traumatic. Commercial and studio photographers who shot film were then competing with those who adopted digital capture. While the cost of digital was staggering (just like it is today), those costs could be recovered by line itemizing rental or usage fees. For a typical day shoot, I could bill a $1,200 digital capture fee. Clients paid it because it was cheaper than the film/processing/scanning costs and they got the images immediately. It only took 10 to 12 day shoots to pay for a digital back for my Hasselblad V system ... which in a typical year became a separate profit center, especially when writing off the gear on taxes. Two years later I'd repeat the process with a new digital back. In essence, I never paid for any of this stuff out of pocket ... and to this day I'm still cruising on those earlier "salad days" of pro MFD capture ... but only a little bit since semi-retiring.

Now that business model has all but evaporated except for a few major clients. Everyone is digital, and buyers are more cost conscience than ever before. If you are paying for the gear with no way to recover costs except with your business acumen and talent ... the gear costs comes under more scrutiny.

IMO, these days the biggest differentiator for semi and full-time pro photographer is lighting ... more than what camera. Where a MF camera can help is if it a leaf-shutter capable system. It is one key reason I maintain a Leica S system ... high sync speed ... I do a lot of outdoor commercial and people photography and I'm located in Florida all winter, and Michigan in the summer. I don't have a brick and mortar studio so use a portion of my homes in both places. Neither are light tight so higher sync even helps there on occasion.

The only part of the previous post that I question is the need for TTL strobes ... I have a TTL radio triggered flash set up for my Sony A7R-II and it is hardly all that convenient since the compensation takes just as much time effort as adjusting strobes with the AIR sender ...

- Marc

 

[GrahamWelland]

Unlike Marc I can't speak to the industry in general but the limited exposure I have to landscape (basically workshop and limited print income driven ) professionals and baby shooters is that there is no compelling reason for either to go MF these days. They can't afford it from a business perspective.

Interestingly the ones making good money that I know personally are women semi-pro baby photographers who seem to have a very steady income stream, at least the ones I know who shoot high art quality images. However, none of the ones I know personally shoot MF today, although lighting is one of their differentiators from what I've seen.

Just to reiterate, these are the half dozen or so pro shooters I know personally, half of which do make incomes but with the baby market not other commercial endeavors. I know that Marc and others here have a MUCH bigger pro pool to base opinions from.

In my world, other than a single hold out MF Digital guy I know locally, it's only my amateur friends who shoot MF Digital as their primary platform. (I'm ignoring my buddies Ed, Ken, Don, Jeffrey et al in all of this as whilst I know them all personally I have no idea how they're doing professionally and would never ask anyway).

Btw, the only pro I know locally who shoots MF digital is very happy shooting with his P45+ on a DF+. We all worry about gear quality a LOT more than he does. He just earns a living ...

 

[Mgreer316]

I discussed this very topic (pro vs amateur use of MFD gear) with Doug Peterson on Facebook a number of months ago. I don't know if he remembers or not. Maybe he'll chime in here. But I tried to explain to him that as a pro trying to earn a living when you're investing your own money, making the case for MFD is almost impossible. When I spoke to my Halsey rep 5 years ago he told me the vast majority of their clients were in fact well heeled enthusiasts. Doug claims that's not the case for Phase One. I was specifically referring to buys, not rentals. I find it hard to believe that Phase One use amongst pros is growing,ehich is what he said. If so, more power to them.

 

[tcdeveau]

Interestingly the ones making good money that I know personally are women semi-pro baby photographers who seem to have a very steady income stream, at least the ones I know who shoot high art quality images. However, none of the ones I know personally shoot MF today, although lighting is one of their differentiators from what I've seen.

My fiancee does baby shoots and I've gone along on a couple. From my experience, babies move around a lot and the autofocus limitations of MF compared to canon/nikon/sony would make a baby shoot with MF a headache and you'd have less "keepers" with MF. I even had trouble nailing shallow DOF shots with a D800E/70-200mm on the last one I did a couple months ago. Lighting and stopping down would obviously help and someone more skilled than I would probably have less trouble. Personlly I'd rather use a system with face tracking AF for babies than MF. I also found that razor sharp detail isn't something that's necessarily desirable for the finished product of baby pictures, so I feel like MF would be overkill. Skin tones/colors may be better with MF but that was never something those types of clients seem to fuss about....especially because baby pics do well with black and white conversion. I've also never heard from her that one of her clients wanted to blow up a baby photo to 30"x40" or an otherwise huge print, so the resolution of MF (even of the D800/810/A7r/A7rii/5DS) is overkill. Also, FWIW, she made more money and had more jobs when she was shooting with a Nikon D90 and 50mm f1.4D than she did with a D800E or her current Fuji X-T1. That market sector seems to be relatively gear-agnostic IMHO.

 

[MrSmith]

my clients see a funny little bellows camera with a bellows lens hood, they then see the crisp images shot with schneider digitar lenses appear on screen and seem happy enough to give me repeat business.
they didn’t question anything when a P45 was used or a 5DIII but like most people running a business spending 5k or 25k but not increasing revenue by a similar proportion means it just doesnt make sense to spend big.
that said a lot of people mention the word ‘hate’ when discussing recent MF/35mm type threads. this suggests they have some kind of emotional involvement with their personal purchasing decisions and like to post rationalise with peer led affirmation. so they see this questioning as some kind of personal attack.
apart from a few oddballs with an axe to grind does anyone really hate a camera system/company that much?:argue:

i do think that MFD has shot itself in the foot over the last few years but now seem to be coming back on track and i think thats down to Hblad getting back to what it does best and the outlier that is Pentax shaking things up a bit. but the big push has come from sony and their sensor.
i might come back to MF but there has to be a compelling reason to invest and at the moment it’s not quite there for me, though h/blad might change that.

 

[Jeffery Salter]

For instance, take the Profoto B series strobes. They have TTL and HSS when used with Canikon gear. Locking in your desired "look" via TTL, then locking down the power levels and shooting manual fron then on is a TREMENDOUS benefit. But you can't do that with MFD gear. Take the Canon 600 series flash system, nothing like that for MFD gear. And Nikon just released their radio controlled flash system. If Phase released something like this we'd probably be looking at a $8000-$10000 system.

The Profoto Air remote allows you to control the light packs (I use Profoto 8a, Profoto B4 and Profoto B-1) directly from the remote mounted on the camera’s hotshoe. You can easily control the lighting ratios from the camera even if your camera doesn’t have TTL.

I use a flash meter to set my lights. If any other adjustments need to be made I use the Air remote which has clearly indicated minus / plus buttons.

In regards to light crafting. I find one of the best ways to add character to lighting is by experimenting with different modifiers. Something as simple as feathering the light can create some nice lighting effects. I rely heavily on scrims and flags to even further finesse how the light falls on the subject. Matthews makes a great portable kit called “Roadrags”.

The profoto B-1s are very portable and setup quickly. However they are handicapped due to having only 500 watts of power. This is definitely not enough to overpower the sun, especially when used with a very large modifier. For example if you use a 74 inch octabank, you would have to place the light inches from the subject to have the correct intensity of light for a suitable f-stop when shooting outside in bright sunny conditions. (of course when you are shooting with a leaf shutter lens you have a wider range of shutter speed / f-stop options). I tend to use my B-1 kit as edge lights fitted with a Profoto Magnum reflector.

Anyway, I'm writing out my frustrations as I really like shooting my Phase gear. But honestly, as a professional studio operation, it's an indulgence that doesn't currently return any significant benefit. In fact, I'm coming to the conclusion it's actually a detriment. I love the resolution and detail of my Credo 60. Which is probably why instead of upgrading to an XF, I'll upgrade to a 5Dsr for less than half the cost.

How each professional finances his photography equipment purchases is a complex subject. I have been able to retain a good mix of clients who allow a digital fee charge that helps maintain my XF + IQ260 system (And my Canon Kit). Other photographers have set-up two companies, one for their photography business and the other for production. That separate production company allows them to rent gear back to the photography company. Depending upon the scope of the production this is way to pay for everything from a lowly C-clamps to your Hassy or P-1 digital backs. Equipment finances are spread out from a small corporate headshot to a large complex advertising shoot with a goal toward paying overhead and making a profit. (I know a certain forum member G-R-A-H-A-M who will help you spend it.....)

Just food for thought. Hope this helps.

Thank you.

If in the end you decide to go the 35mm route, then I highly suggest you rent the Canon first before purchasing just to make sure you like how the skin tones look in the files.