What really matters to you for ultimate digital image *quality*?

[Paratom]

For me it matters:

• natural and "good" ( ) color
• fine tonality, good midtones, nice highlight rolloff
• lens rendering and that the lenses offered for the system work for my needs; at the moment I really like the 80/1.9 and the 35-75 Hassy
• precise AF (speed is not as important, but I hate misfocused images)
• portability (thats why I like the x1d system a lot)
• simple user interface

 

[Jack]

Okay, several great responses, thank you and keep them coming!

I would like to add one more question for you all to answer if you feel so compelled: The top 5 favorite images I've ever made, were made with
__________________,
__________________,
__________________,
__________________, &
__________________.

For me it would be,
Nikon 8008 35mm film cam with Velvia and early Nikon 24mm/2.8 AF (plastic) lens,
Linhoff TK view cam Provia, and Nikkor 90mm LF lens,
PhaseOne IQ 180 with 55mm lens,
Nikon D800 with 24-120 zoom lens at 24mm,
Nikon D810 with 50mm Sigma Art lens.

It is however not lost on me that for 4 of those captures, the camera was also on top of a good tripod. For all the images, I took time to carefully compose. I was also stopped down to at least f8 for all of them, which mitigates lens weaknesses to a certain degree. The 24-120 image was shot handheld and that lens had VR, and I was also well-braced against a wall -- I basically got lucky LOL.

But looking back on it, I conclude that having the best possible gear with me has not been a criteria in creating an image of technically high -- or at least "high enough" quality. What seemed to matter most was using the gear I had at hand carefully and purposefully -- and then capturing compelling content with it...

 

[dj may]

Conclusion first: my expectations from a camera for good image quality are detail, tonality and exposure latitude.





I transitioned to digital from 4x5 film. Therefore, my requirement for image quality was no less than 4x5 film. I had been using digital cameras to record my activities, including shots of scenes that I shot with 4x5. Hence, I did not consider anything less than medium format digital for my art.

A digital camera is a system in itself (sensor, firmware, processor, etc.), which means it is a subsystem of the overall system consisting of camera, lenses and accessories. It is the design philosphy of the manufacturer that determines the results. That is why the results of some cameras, using sensors with fewer pixels, are better than cameras using sensors with the highest number of pixels available.

My main criterion is a sensor larger than 35mm. Next is the manufacturer's design criteria that produce a result that meets my expectations for detail, tonality and ease of use. Weather was the last straw that moved me to digital. I could not use the view camera in “bad” weather. The camera must be weather resistant. I also exclude mirrorless cameras, because of the viewfinder. The best solution is an optical viewfinder with live view.

My first medium format digital camera was in 2016. I was pleasantly surprised how it compared to 4x5. I am now on my second medium format digital camera (I kept the first for a backup).

 

[dj may]

My top five were with

Cambo 4x5 monorail
Toyo 4x5 field camera
Leica S 006
Leica S3
Leica M9

 

[JAB]

I've seen several times now that people say they like MF because it slows them down, makes them observe the environment better and therefore improve the quality of their photo's. I fully agree that being more conscious of your environment and taking more time to set up your camera and composition increases the chance of a good photo. My question is why you need MF to do that, nothing stops you from setting your camera (MFT, APS-C or FF) on a tripod, load a smaller memory card so you don't "spray and pray" and take the same time and attention as you would with a MF camera. Wouldn't that achieve the same objective and results, except for the inherent quality a bigger sensor is supposed to deliver?

You're absolutely right! Photography is a mental process that can be influenced by many factors. Speaking for myself, the camera I'm using is part of that mental process. Using a smaller format camera does not prevent me from slowing down and contemplating what I am shooting. But I feel the psychological aspect of my Canon 5D Mk IV leads me to fire away more. When I shoot with my Hasselblad, the process just feels different. I don't have the bazillion settings that I can fiddle with. I have aperture, shutter speed, ISO, and manual focus. I find myself now really concentrating on what I am doing. Yes, I can ignore all those settings on the Canon, but silly me, they are there! I also admit there is an entirely different physical feel to shooting with the Hasselblad since I find the camera to be a work of art in itself. And yes, I find the image quality itself to be much better from the MF.

I am basically echoing Jürgen.

 

[Don Libby]

Top 5 medium format in order of age...

P30+
IQ160 with Cambo
IQ180 with Cambo
GFX 50s
GFX100

I no longer have any of the above except for the GFX100. I've also picked up a GFX 50R which looks like it'll be good.

While not medium format I can't not include the following 35mm as they more than paid for themselves...

Canon 1Ds MKII
Leica M9
Sony A7r

 

[Jack]

@ Don:

If I were to get back into MF capture, it would be a Fuji GFX 100 and GFX50R combo; 23, 32-64, 50 and 110. Actually it was that internal mental discussion that triggered this thread --- what did it take for me to produce my most compelling images? After I looked closely at what I'm getting technically out of my simple little Nikon Z7 right now and compare it to what I'd expect or even hope to gain from the MF investment, I end up where I can't wrap my arms around justifying the relatively large cash outlay. Would I enjoy owning and using it? Absolutely. Do I have to have it for my imaging? Being completely honest with myself, no... But that in no way is meant to belittle MF, it's just my own personal reality.

 

[pegelli]

Thanks for the answers Jürgen and JAB (sorry, I don't know your real name). Indeed if you prefer a larger/slower camera to slow down your photographic process there's a lot to say for MF. For me I don't have a problem with my smaller cameras to put them on base iso, mount it on a tripod, put on a manual focus lens and and set the dial to "M" and slow down. When I'm in a mood like that I'm oblivious to menus and other gizmo's on the camera. Even in the base case of more relaxed shooting I don't use 95% of the cameras options and basically only go in the menu for formatting a memory card, all the rest I do doesn't require the use of the menu. Another way to mentally get there is loading a film in my M2, all manual with a handheld exposure meter can also be a way to slow down and think more about every shot you take.

What stops me from getting into MF is the price as well as the size. Every time I even see a GFX50R (probably the smallest MF camera around) I still think "wow, that's big" and add to that the much bigger lenses I probably wouldn't take it with me too often. I see the quality these larger sensors can deliver, even at the small web presentation size, but every time I think about it I come to the conclusion it's not for me. Maybe I should rent one for a few days and really test it out, allthough that might be financially risky.

 

[Jorgen Udvang]

My best 5... it's an impossible question, but here's in no particular order some photos that I keep coming back to:

Nikon F6 with Samyang 135mm f/2 and HP5
Fuji S3 with Tamron 24-135mm f/4-5.6
Panasonic GX8 with Panasonic 35-100mm f/2.8
Nikon D810 with Nikkor 50mm f/1.2
Nikon D810 with Nikkor 24-120mm f/4

The first one is my favourite, probably because it's of my daughter and taken with my favourite camera ever and a film that I like really well:

... and the one with the Panasonic:

As always when I watch photos taken with less than perfect equipment or under less than perfect circustances, I ask myself if I would have liked these photos more if they had been taken with the latest, greatest high-end camera like a GFX100, with perfect colour, resolution and sharpness and. The answer is, as almost always, no. Except for some landscape and architectural photography (which are sports that I rarely participate in), the gear has little bearing on the result for me, other than its ability to get the job done. That's also why I like the F6 so much. It's a camera that becomes invisible when in use.

 

[Hasslebad]

I selected my medium format digital back for its color depth, 48.9x36.7mm sensor size for field of view different than full frame 35mm; ability to use it with Capture One Pro, and ability to extend my Hasselblad V system. I am happy on all these counts. Ironically, I didn’t slow down when using the back. When I have my MFDB on, I end up shooting more frames than when I have a full back on. I guess I know that I don’t have to process the film and I fire off more frames.

 

[gerald.d]

Great questions, and fascinating to read the responses.

For me, number one (now) has to be the ability to manipulate the focal plane, and number two, image quality.

I actually dropped out of the MF game a while back and currently shoot with a Panasonic S1R. But that camera is mounted to a CAPcam, and I shoot with the Linos 5.6/105 Float. To all intents and purposes, it is a medium format system, just with a smaller sensor. Yeah - I know that won't make sense to many, but it does to me , and - resolution aside - I'm as happy with the image quality coming off the S1R's sensor as I was with my IQ3 100.

I'm hoping that the new rumoured camera from Fuji will be the modular GFX 100 based system that was shown in Dubai in February 2019, since I would love to mount that sensor on the CAPcam.

Top 5 favourite images (in no particular order) were made with...

CAPcam, S1R, Linos 5.6/105 Float (a watch)
Hartblei HCam-B1, IQ180, Canon 17mm TS-E (a cityscape with fireworks display)
Walker Titan XL Wide 5x7, Velvia 50, Schneider 5.6/210 XL (a cat)
Phase One 645 DF, Ilford PanF Plus, Mamiya 1.9/80 (a portrait)
...

The 5th I'm going to leave unfilled. I can't imagine taking a photo in the future that would knock any of those four out of the top five, so will save a slot for what's to come.

Kind regards,


Gerald.

/edit
Apologies. I've just realised I answered the question "what matters most to you for ultimate digital image quality" by answering "image quality". Hehehe.

Ok so to break that down a little, right now it's very different to what it used to be, because of what I shoot these days. And beyond the ability to manipulate the focal plane, the next most important one has nothing to do with the camera system -

1. The ability to manipulate the light
2. The lens (I could never go back to shooting 1:2 to 2:1 macro with anything other than the Linos)
3. Sensor dynamic range
4. The ability to manipulate the subject (by which I mean the ability to remotely move the subject around in 3D space, because I don't move my camera)
5. Tethered live view
6. Capture One
7. Sensor resolution

 

[Ed Hurst]

Obviously, the most important component is the photographer (and equipment that frees that component to follow his/her vision and, by so doing, simply seems to vanish so that the photographer has a direct relationship with the image itself). However, that's not answering the question! So, concentrating on the gear itself, for me, the key considerations are:

- Resolution (my current 51MP is 'enough' but I would like more - as long as it's not at the cost of the variables below)
- Dynamic range
- High ISO noise performance
- Colour rendition and subtlety of tonal transitions (which does imply sensor size and high bit depth, all other things being equal)
- Ability to turn off dark frames and to shoot continuous frames with a minimum of gaps between them; speed of writing to the card (these are all vital for my star trail images)
- Pliability of the files in post without noticeably losing quality
- Quality of lenses available at a price I can justify (which, in practice, likely means ability to use the P645 and P67 lenses I already own!) - though in a 'money is no object' world, that would mean technical camera lenses
- Optical viewfinder is much preferred
- Quality and usability of the camera screen - to assist precise manual focusing when zoomed right in
- The tripod and head

One thing I have never had the chance to use, but which I suspect I would value highly if I had, is camera movements.

Finally, as you requested Jack, the top 5 favourite images I've ever made were made with:
- Pentax 645Z with 6x7 400mm EDIF lens
- Pentax 645Z with 28-45 DA lens
- Pentax 645D with 25mm DA lens
- Pentax 67ii with 105mm f2.4 lens and Velvia 100F
- Mamiya C330F with 80mm (black, late series lens) with 100 ISO Ektachrome Panther film

 

[med]

I think a lot of why I like/love medium format has been said already. I love the feel and process of working with mechanical and simpler cameras (tech cam, Hasselblad V, etc), and I also love composing through gigantic optical viewfinder (Hasselblad H, Phase XF). And of course the lenses and sensors offer some special qualities that I just don’t see in smaller formats as consistently. Also, leaf shutter lenses!!

5 favourite images:

Arca Swiss F-Line 4x5 with 135 Sironar-S
Arca Swiss F-Line 4x5 with Grandagon 90
Hasselblad H2 with Leaf Aptus 22 DB, Zeiss 80mm CF
Nikon D700 with Micro-Nikkor 200
Arca Swiss RM3Di with Phase One IQ250, 43 XL

 

[Jack]

Fascinating reading through this. Some interesting things to add...

> My most *pleasurable* camera to use for composition and capture was probably my Ebony SW 45 Ti -- my Lotus 8x10 was a close second. If I ever got back into LF imaging, it would likely be a 5x7 Ebony or Chamonix. (I'd shoot reversal, and only need 3 lenses: a 110XL, a 210 and a 360.)
> For my 35mm Velvia film image, I had to do a double exposure to capture the DR I wanted in the frame -- that required a lot of effort and planning. When I went to the view camera, I the image I referenced above was made in flatter winter light, so didn't require any expanded latitude. But I learned to use the Zone system with the color tranny emulsions to protect the high tones; keep zone 8 from going over. It wasn't long before I discovered the added 2-3 stops I could glean by using color reversal emulsions -- I made the change and found the second and very happy benefit: that it was very difficult to totally blow a highlight with reversal film I then used the Zone system to guarantee my Zone 6 or even 5 tone was where I wanted it.
> The ah-ha for me from MF digital was both the exquisite detail, and awesomely manipulable DR, which of course also gave control over tonality. The initial sensors did horrible greens IMHO, so that was a significant turn-off for my landscape work and so I still used the view cams with film.
> Then MFDB somehow cracked the greens and I was in heaven LOL. AND it rendered in 3:4 format which IMHO is IDEAL!
> But now that modern FF35 has cracked detail, DR and greens, so I am finding joy in shooting a small camera again.
> But full disclosure is I absolutely miss the compositional control I had with the view or even MFDB technical cameras. I have used a few the small camera tech solutions like the Cambo Actus, and while with live view composition and focusing it sort of gets me there, it really doesn't satisfy like looking at a large GG under the hood upside down and reversed did...

 

[Audii-Dudii]

> But full disclosure is I absolutely miss the compositional control I had with the view or even MFDB technical cameras. I have used a few the small camera tech solutions like the Cambo Actus, and while with live view composition and focusing it sort of gets me there, it really doesn't satisfy like looking at a large GG under the hood upside down and reversed did...

Have you considered adding an external HDMI monitor to your outfit? If the monitor is small and light enough (i.e., most 7" monitors), it's an easy matter to mount it directly to the camera body via the 1/4-20 tripod mount boss, which then allows it to rotate with the camera as the orientation is changed from horizontal to vertical:

If you want to use a larger, heavier monitor to achieve an experience similar to working with an 8x10 ground glass, such as the 12.5" model shown below, then it's not too awfully difficult to fabricate a rotating mounting bracket that attaches to the Actus via the Arca-compatible dovetail on the bottom of the mounting rail, and allows the monitor to rotate independently of the camera body:

In both cases, you can power the monitor directly via batteries that mount on the rear side or you can add an external battery pack, as I have, and power your camera from it as well, which provides a couple of additional benefits. If you wish, you can also flip the image displayed on the monitor upside-down and reverse it left-for-right, which achieves the proper view camera experience!

 

[Jack]

Audi, that's awesome. Maybe I'll give one a try

 

[Bill Caulfeild-Browne]

I'm going to interpret my top five images as the ones that have sold most..
Leica M9 50mm
Phase IQ4 55mm
Phase p65 80 mm
Rollei 6008 80mm
Canon F1 50 mm

 

[darr]

Medium format (MF) film was my commercial workhorse system for a few decades and I preferred it then over the 4x5" due to weight and size.
I honestly like all camera systems, but prefer the extra real estate MF offers and not just for resolution, but for post processing advantages too.
FF 35 digital just did not make sense to me after I started shooting APS-C alongside MF. IMO the APS-C sensors got real good a couple of years ago.
My last FF 35 was a Nikon D700 I owned and sold, and a D750 the college I taught at provided me. I had a long history with Nikon and still shoot a F3T occasionally.

Medium format digital is fun for me to use with my old Hassy 500 system because I like the character of the lenses.
I also enjoy using my MF back on my 4x5 with older brass lenses for art making.

I have spent my life in photography; career, hobby, etc. The images that really matter to me are of my loved ones!
Just off the top of my head my favorite images are mostly of my son through the years:

Age 1, Hasselblad 500cm, 150 CF, VPS III film
Age 4, Hasselblad 500cm, 150 CF, B&W film
Age 12, Ebony 45SU, Rodenstock 135, Polaroid 55
Age 17, Arca Swiss 4x5 FC, Cooke PS945, B&W film
Joey the cat, Fuji X-Pro 3, XC50-230mm (used $150 lens - a keeper!)