schuster
Active member
By the way, @marchaers, I just looked at your site, and your monochrome images have a beautiful "film" quality. You might be "channeling" Irving Penn.
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!
Thank you so much I see that as a huge (!) compliment. I only first heard that specific comparison about 5 or 6 years ago from someone I admire but it's spot on. The moment I saw his style I knew why it was said. He's a legend of the highest order lol. ThanksBy the way, @marchaers, I just looked at your site, and your monochrome images have a beautiful "film" quality. You might be "channeling" Irving Penn.
marchaers, I just looked at your website too. Really really impressive. Out of curiosity, and noting your comments above - on your website's home page, are any of the images taken with film?@schuster Yeah very true. I think the 'look' of the images can always be adjusted as you said. It's the main reason why I've always mainly stuck around in digital and didn't do a full transition to film. I could always replicate the look at a much faster and easier pace. At a very young age I was always looking at my uncle's analog photos and my then cool digital camera didn't look the same. So I at a young age I learned how to replicate that 'timeless' look that his photographs had hence one of the main reasons I built a career - I was doing this before it became so popular to imitate film. It already developed into my own personal look with the main focus being timelessness, so I was discovered for the feel of the images, because it's digital with a hint of that film/timeless-feel.
Alright everyone so I'm back home with some test shots pocketed and an experience richer. Let me start:
The good:
It is a camera to fall in love with at first sight. Amazing feel, handling and it is true the files are amazing. If compared to the GFX you definitely see a recurring difference in the highlight roll-off on the skin tones. GFX is more contrasty and loses a bit of that smoothness where the transition is harshest. I can get the images to look alike with that roll-off being the main difference. There's more to work with on the H6D (which is to be expected).
The okay:
I'm not blown away by the difference between the 100S and 100C. They're both truly amazing cameras to work with and the files are both as impressive. It's about that last 5% of quality which will make the difference. I need to figure out whether that 5% is worth the risk and possible extra cost. Which I'll elaborate further below.
Tethered shooting worked well in Phocus & Lightroom (with the plugin) so no problems there.
The bad:
Now, sadly there were a couple of 'bads' in the short time I spent with the H6D. One was within the first five shots I saw the dreaded 'switch magazine' error. Which is (as I've read) possibly quite a big issue. A quick battery reset and it was fixed. Though it only showed once while testing and I'm aware of the fact that Medium Format comes with quirks like this. It is something that I'll take into consideration. It'll drastically change my views on the pricing though. Second one was a weird instance on import. I shot on a (fast) SD card I had with me and one moment the flash didn't trigger which gave me an underexposed image - which is fine. BUT, it had this crazy blue noise all-over the file. Almost like a sensor issue looking thing. Both Lightroom and Phocus showed it. Again, only showed once. But with the short time I spent with it it is something to talk about. Other thing is it has 151000 shots on the counter. Which in my eyes isn't necessarily an issue. But good to know nonetheless. He shot weddings with it so it doesn't really translate into many shoots, he's a trigger happy fellow that's for sure.
The conclusion (so far):
I like the camera, the way it feels and I LOVE the images it puts out. But the price he's asking is too high for the risk I'm willing to take. I can have a GFX100S + 63mm lens for about 7500 euros, his kit will set me back (including the 80mm 2.8) around 10.000 euros. I'm going to talk to him about the above issues, explain that it's either 7500 for a new GFX system (with warranty and good support) or this very risky second hand Hasselblad. I'm willing to take a risk for the sake of getting the best possible images, also to maintain the camera and treat it well. Though it should be a WAY less pricey risk. If I can negotiate the price down significantly then I'm willing to think about it. I've taken risks like this before and they paid off. He'll also get me in touch with his personal dealer that can help me out as well if there's any issues. As it stands right now - it's a no-go. I'll let you know after I've called him in a minute.
Another issue to consider is resale value. If you want/have to sell the GFX within the warranty period, you may have to sell it 25% of purchasing price but shouldn't have any difficulties selling; but you may be really challenged selling the H system camera at any price.I can have a GFX100S + 63mm lens for about 7500 euros, his kit will set me back (including the 80mm 2.8) around 10.000 euros. I'm going to talk to him about the above issues, explain that it's either 7500 for a new GFX system (with warranty and good support) or this very risky second hand Hasselblad.
That's pretty amazing, there were some others that I really thought would be film. Certainly I've always much preferred the rendering of film over digital (personally using 35mm, 120, 4x5 for ages as a result), but increasingly cannot deny the benefits of digitally taking the image in the first place .... and when I see the timeless and very convincing "analogue feel" to the output that you've achieved despite digital capture, I find your work rather motivating!@Jon Warwick Hey Jon! Thank you SO much for the compliments. There is exactly one photo shot on film (I recently removed some others) - it was shot with my large format camera, developed and digitised myself. If you start counting left to right - #23 (two people hugging).
I would have advised to send the camera for a check-up after reading your previous mail, so that's good news. A camera with recent check-up is some kind of reassuring, especially for this kind of beast.Update (after phonecall)
He's going to send his Camera in for a full check (with that one weird photo I took as reference) and the error. He'll report back somewhere this week. I've read that these errors can end up with a full sensor replacement (which I wouldn't mind actually - it'll be like new). He's insured so if a repair needs to be done it'll be covered. I'm still treading very carefully but I know him and do trust him. So it'll probably be another short wait for him to report back with any issues.
Quick question, why f/11? With flat field like copy work you certainly don't need depth of field.Just a data point: I had the 907x/CFVII 50c doing copy work for several hours yesterday (digital capture of about 100 Polaroid prints). It was fitted with the XV Adapter, extension tube, and the Makro-Planar 120mm lens, and operated using Phocus Mobile 2 on an iPad Pro 11" for the effort.
The whole operation was seamless and enjoyable. I photographed a gray card to establish an exposure baseline and used it to also set a fixed color temperature for white balance. I set focus once, set f/11 on the lens, and varied capture times over a 3EV range based on what I was seeing in the individual prints. I made many bracketing exposures for some of the originals due to the nature of Polaroid integral film and its complex rendering. On a very few occasions, the software lagged behind an adjustment in capture time by a bit, likely due to the 300ms readout speed, but it was never out of bounds of my patience.
Power economy I felt was pretty remarkable. My 907x battery was at 91% when I started. The camera was powered and WiFi connected for the duration of the effort, and after 250 exposures the battery still showed 21% capacity left. The back was fairly warm at the end of the effort, but cooled quickly once I powered it off.
Imported into LR Classic and Phocus from the card after the fact, all the exposures are dead on the money with respect to color correction and reflect the original prints very very accurately. Of course, they may not stay that way after I finish rendering work... LOL! And the sensor presents a much wider dynamic range than nearly any other camera I've done this work with, making it possible to do more with the often-fussy Polaroid print's short latitude and contrasty output.
I was going to tally up the costs, but we all know what a 907x/CFVII 50c Special Edition cost new in 2019, and the XV Adapter, an extension tube, and the used Makro-Planar 120 lens—plus the copy stand and lights—probably means I didn't break the $9000 mark total for the whole setup.
Not inexpensive, but I'm very happy with performance like this.
G
Polaroid prints are not exactly optically flat and are hard to hold flat. Also, nearly any lens (including the Makro-Planar 120mm f/4 T*) will typically perform a little better across the entire imaging field stopped down by 1-2 stops from wide open. So normally I'd use f/8 for paper or film, but to accommodate the 3D form of the Polaroid prints, I went one more stop. At the ~1:3 magnification required, that nets ~1.5-2mm DOF and ensures good focus regardless of the prints' variability.Quick question, why f/11? With flat field like copy work you certainly don't need depth of field.
Satisfaction or dissatisfaction with color usually and most likely has to do with the color profile used in the RAW editor. If you've used various RAW editors with your Fuji and you're still not satisfied with the color, you should probably create your own color profile and that will most likely cure all the color ills you've been experiencing.marchaers ,
FWIW, and it isn't worth much, as your own testing is all that matters, here are my totally biased opinions.
I have a good deal of experience with Hasselblad X1D, Fuji GFX 100, and Leica S cameras, and just a little with Phase One (older CCD sensors). It could be that I am simply a victim of price snobbery, but the only color I've been dissatisfied with is the Fuji. The other three manufacturers seem to be the only ones taking trouble to get colors right for photographers - especially for portraits. Fuji takes a "we'll give you many different styles and you can choose from our list" approach. If the size and weight weren't prohibitive, I'd have Phase One or the bigger Hasselblads. On a technical camera, that would certainly be my choice, but I am mostly a hand-held shooter. The ergonomics of the Leica S are much better for me, so that's what I have stayed with.
As for sensor size, as big as possible - full stop. My dream camera would be a Mamiya 7 digital. Sigh. I suspect it's actually the lenses designed for the larger sensors that make the difference, but it doesn't really matter.
Best,
Matt