The GetDPI Photography Forum

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!

A 39MP walk through town ...

Tex

Subscriber Member
Guys, I simply don't see what you see in these images. If you want resolution, buy a LF camera and drum scan or buy a high end Nikon or Canon and stitch. Why waste money on a system that is designed for studio use?

However if you just want a new toy, these MF cameras should fill that requirement.
 
T

thsinar

Guest
My front-head is already flat since a few years!

;)

Thierry

PS, and more seriously, IQ is MUCH more than pixel count and resolution, far more. Resolution is just ONE little factor in the whole chain of quality.


Every time someone just compares the MP count it makes me want to hit my head against a wall :LOL:
 

Dale Allyn

New member
I think it's appropriate to repeat Graham's reference to web-viewed JPEGs as well. This is a particularly good forum, with respect to rational thinking and mutual respect of participants, but we're still looking at JPEGs here in most cases.

Ideally, we should be in one room (drinking adult beverages if necessary) and comparing and discussing large prints.

Just sayin'... ;)
 

Tex

Subscriber Member
"PS, and more seriously, IQ is MUCH more than pixel count and resolution, far more. Resolution is just ONE little factor in the whole chain of quality."

If that is the main consideration, use film and a LF system.

Better quality, less money and little if any depreciation.

These MF digital systems will depreciate like a newly purchased gas guzzling American Hummer this summer. Yikes!!!!!!!!!!
 
T

thsinar

Guest
It will depreciate EXACTLY the way YOU want it to depreciate.

I explain myself: if it did the job (in terms of IQ) for you from day one, it will still do the same job years later. Depreciation is only in our heads and a marketing reality, nothing to do with IQ.

And, as a side note: LF is not in contradiction with digital.

Best regards,
Thierry

If that is the main consideration, use film and a LF system.

Better quality, less money and little if any depreciation.

These MF digital systems will depreciate like a newly purchased gas guzzling American Hummer this summer. Yikes!!!!!!!!!!
 

Graham Mitchell

New member
Guys, I simply don't see what you see in these images.
Do you expect to see the full quality of a 16 bit 22-39 MP file in a compressed 8-bit sRGB 0.5 MP JPEG?

If you want resolution, buy a LF camera and drum scan
Very slow to work with, very expensive per frame, noisy images, susceptible to processing errors, inconsistent exposure and colour, most clients ask for digital, not suitable for unusual lighting temps, drum scanners are becoming extinct, Polaroid is closing down, film and processing becoming hard to find locally, etc. The only subjects for which LF film is viable are product, architecture and landscape, imo, and even then you may need the extra speed, low cost, certainty, ease of use, dynamic range and other 'tricks' of digital.

or buy a high end Nikon or Canon and stitch.
Useless for moving subjects, and see my previous post for why there is more to this than megapixels! From your post I assume that you are considering only landscape photography? You conveniently ignore whole genres such as fashion and portrait.

Why waste money on a system that is designed for studio use?
Features such as fast flash sync are only useful OUTDOORS so these cameras are better for shooting people outdoors than any DSLR.
 

PeterA

Well-known member
there is no one system that can do everything. thats why there are different formats. there is overlap in some cases between the formats at the margin. if you don't think you need a MFD back and system - then you probably don't need it.
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
Well for some if not many is film is not even a option too. Yes as Graham pointed out there are many other benefits besides resolution over 35 and even LF film shooting. personally i would have NO clients if I did not shoot digital. It is a demand not a request in many cases. They want it yesterday and Pete is absolutely correct most of us shooting MF have Nikons, Canons or Leica's for the other things we need to do. No one system can do it all but you can get close depending on what you shoot and your style of shooting.
 

Tex

Subscriber Member
"No one system can do it all but you can get close depending on what you shoot and your style of shooting."

Guy, with that logic you could justify the purchase of the high resolution camera used to capture the descent of the Mars Lander by the Reconnaissance Orbiter for more mundane tasks.

It seems as if some (repeat, some) of the most ardent proponents of MF digital on this board are actually MF digital salesmen.
 

TRSmith

Subscriber Member
Thanks for absorbing my head scratching with such good nature. I can understand the need to familiarize oneself with a new system and now, in the morning when I'm more awake, I recognize how natural that is.

I think I have been confused in a way because there are more examples of the "overlap at the margins" between DSLRs and MF than there are examples of the kinds of uses where MF systems really show their stuff and pay off.

One of the great things about this forum is the way Pro and Enthusiast co-mingle and share enthusiasms. But I would love to see more real-world examples of Pros at work. Shots taken for specific reasons and to meet specific requirements from a client. I know it's often dicey to post photos taken for clients since there are legal and ownership issues. Still, it would be great to see more samples of studio work, location photos, product shots, etc. There's a lot that can be learned by using the tools to achieve a very specific and controlled result.

Best,
Tim
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
"No one system can do it all but you can get close depending on what you shoot and your style of shooting."

Guy, with that logic you could justify the purchase of the high resolution camera used to capture the descent of the Mars Lander by the Reconnaissance Orbiter for more mundane tasks.

It seems as if some (repeat, some) of the most ardent proponents of MF digital on this board are actually MF digital salesmen.
I would rather it be called a passion for the best they can deliver given what is available in the market. We have to remember there is a lot of money involved here also and folks naturally tend to defend there purchase. Have you ever been on a Canon forum. LOL Seriously though we have several manufacturing reps here and actually true MF sales folks too plus folks from the executive levels of some of the manufacturing so yes some of that is only natural. But this also gives us the user to hear all the voices and make smart decisions also. So as one owner of this site i welcome that very much to hear all sides of the coin. I know Jack feels the same views. Also for myself I have been away from MF camera's altogether for over 6 years and it killed me to go 35mm when I sat on a full Hassy V system and could not afford a back at the time. So it is time for me to get back to what I love with regards to gear. I was a happy Hassy shooter for years and I like shooting this larger format. There is no question in my mind and anyone that knows me i have been fighting quality issues for years , Nikon, Canon and eventually Leica to squeeze the very last drop of blood out of those systems. They do a great job but bigger is frankly better and always has been. I know the web does not actually show there full capabilities but the quality of file is there and there simply is no question about it. I have been doing this way too long not to see that.

let me say another little secret and that is bragging rights not with members but with clients. You know how hard it is to go to a gig and the damn art director has the same bloody camera as you maybe even better than what you have. Okay i know it should not matter because they hire you and not the gear but seriously do you believe they actually think they could not do it themselves given the same gear. Be honest it is a fact, but walking in with a MF camera that certainly bigger and has more MPX than there Canon 5D does gain some respect. Seriously anyone tells you different there full of crap. Been down this path many times and i always get , hey look at my new 5d and i can shoot some of this stuff myself. You know how much business is LOST with that thinking. Just look at wedding shooters will give you a clear view of this showing up with one body and killing guys that truly are artist in that field. We have several of those real shooters right here and they will tell you the same thing , Joey has a 5d he can shoot the wedding.

We are all gearheads to a certain point in all of the world, we all want the best there is and anything less get's looked down upon in a lot of cases. Not right I know but that is the way of the world and we can't change it. Appearance counts and my clients love the fact that i can now bring a bigger gun to the party. It may have nothing to do with actually producing better for them , you are what you are but don't let anyone fool you . Gear counts and not many folks will say what I just said.

BTW my comments on the 5D are only for illustrative reasons
 

irakly

New member
These MF digital systems will depreciate like a newly purchased gas guzzling American Hummer this summer. Yikes!!!!!!!!!!
that has not been my experience. i've been using digital backs since 2002 and owned since 2003.

what is more important, a car is an expense, unless you drive a lorry for living. a digital back for me is a money-making device. it is way more efficient than film+scanner and produces results superior to stitched 35mm files. digital mf is by no means a toy for me. i am not trying to make you feel stupid, but share with you an opinion of someone who does thing for living.
 
T

thsinar

Guest
So they are, if you feel so. Let them live, they have a right as well to believe in something, isn't it? Nobody here wants to convince by force, but give information and help. If you are feeling this information to be biased for sales reasons, free of you.

;)

Best regards,
Thierry


It seems as if some (repeat, some) of the most ardent proponents of MF digital on this board are actually MF digital salesmen.
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
As I have said before Jack and I welcome everyone here on this forum and having folks from the OEM's is something we all want and need. Information is just information , great information leads to great decisions on the users end. The beauty of this site is we have it all , top pros, representation from the OEM's and willingness to learn and grow. Just can't beat that with a stick. I learned so much of the MF digital field in the last month or so that it helped make my decisions a lot easier and i learned a lot in the process and also told me what i need to have and what i don't need to have so yes cost me money but saved me money as well. This IS the kind of site we want a place to learn , to grow and to share. Now take that info you learn here and use it to your advantage.
 

LJL

New member
As a guy also trying to make a living at this, I want to add a bit to something Guy mentions, as different tools have very different uses and provide solutions others cannot. I shoot a lot of action sports event stuff, and my client base has the bucks to spend on gear. I constantly see them showing up to events with gear that matches mine (Canon 1-series and "L" glass) for the same type of work. Some of these folks will even stand right next to me taking their own shots. In the end, they still wind up buying from me, because they see that my work is much better than theirs...probably because I "practice" about 4,000 frames per week during peak shooting.

What is more scary is having these same clients wanting to use some of my shots in ways that I have not always intended. This multi-purposing of image use is not a problem for smaller format, if the uses are small placements, but it makes a huge difference when they suddenly decide a double-page spread or a poster is how they would rather use the image, or even larger than that. While I may be able to push my FF 35mm files pretty far, there are some significant limitations once you start to need larger printing sizes. If all of the work is small Web-sized, or spot ads, then MF is overkill, in most respects. That is not the way things are heading from what I am seeing. Clients are wanting and now expecting much higher quality images that can be used in a variety of ways, some going well beyond what may have been considered at the start.

Like Guy, I used to shoot MF film back in the day. It was able to deliver things far beyond 35mm film then, just as MFD does today over DSLRs. Is it needed ALL the time? Absolutely not. But if your reputation is riding on the image quality you deliver, it can make a huger difference. I am about to plunge back into MF myself, expressly for the reasons suggested above....to meet both my image quality demands, and those increasing demands/expectations of my clients. There are things that MF will be unable to do in my shooting, and I will keep my DSLRs for that, but there are other areas where it far exceeds what one could realistically do otherwise. Not all shots can be done using 35mm and stitching, so a great MF file will make the day in those cases.

Have to completely agree with Irakly again on this....these are tools for some of us, and they can and do return their cost many times over. They do depreciate, from my accountant's perspective, and that is a good thing, but their capability does not depreciate in the same way, and that is a better thing in my perspective.

If one does not need them, do not bother. If one has the need and/or the means, they bring another level to the imagery that DSLRs cannot in many ways. MF is not just about "studio", unless one thinks about their "studio" as being everywhere and anytime ;-)

LJ

P.S. I wanted to add that I think it absolutely fantastic that there are so many dealers, reps and others from the various gear providers participating here, as they are able to bring a good value/use perspective that is much broader than any one or several users alone. And none that participate on this forum have ever been "pushy salesmen", but instead offer rather candid perspectives hard to find elsewhere.
 

KurtKamka

Subscriber Member
Look at all the discussion a few street-type of images that "shouldn't" be shot with an MFDB have stirred up. Personally, I think it's a great discussion to have and am excited by the response.

Maybe the images are crap; or they could be shot with a different system; or they are ok; or they are overkill. Botton-line for me is that I like where MF may be able to take me. If I can get my images to be as thought-provoking as the discussion of the act of someone trying to be unconventional with a fairly disciplined type of photography then I'll have accomplished something.

If not, then my kids won't be attending college. :D

Kurt
 
T

thsinar

Guest
what I meant to say, is that one often forgets that those "sales men" out in the field live (for) a passion as well. Most if not all working in this field are doing it out of conviction, out of passion for what they do. Most of them have worked as photographers and know the subject and what they are speaking about. Without this conviction and passion one cannot be taken seriously, however good "sales man" one is, not in the photographic field. I for one, do work for Sinar not primarily to sell, but because I like LF, I like MF, and I live out my passion when doing my job. If I would not be convinced myself, I would work for Canon, or Nikon, or Sony, to name a few, or doing any other job not necessarily related to photography. Therefore I do not really care if not taken seriously sometimes, because I know that what I am doing and telling is out of my heart and own belief, and that it is understood as such by others. A passion cannot be taken away, nor can it be thought, it can at the most be shared.

Best regards,
Thierry

As I have said before Jack and I welcome everyone here on this forum and having folks from the OEM's is something we all want and need. Information is just information , great information leads to great decisions on the users end. The beauty of this site is we have it all , top pros, representation from the OEM's and willingness to learn and grow. Just can't beat that with a stick. I learned so much of the MF digital field in the last month or so that it helped make my decisions a lot easier and i learned a lot in the process and also told me what i need to have and what i don't need to have so yes cost me money but saved me money as well. This IS the kind of site we want a place to learn , to grow and to share. Now take that info you learn here and use it to your advantage.
 

LJL

New member
Look at all the discussion a few street-type of images that "shouldn't" be shot with an MFDB have stirred up. Personally, I think it's a great discussion to have and am excited by the response.

Maybe the images are crap; or they could be shot with a different system; or they are ok; or they are overkill. Botton-line for me is that I like where MF may be able to take me. If I can get my images to be as thought-provoking as the discussion of the act of someone trying to be unconventional with a fairly disciplined type of photography then I'll have accomplished something.

If not, then my kids won't be attending college. :D

Kurt
Kurt,
Did not intend to "hijack" your thread with some of that discussion :eek:

I really like several of the shots you posted, and can easily see how some could be used in a "commercial" way, even though that is not what you may have been shooting them for in the first place. The one of the guy on the slick floor is a good example, as are what I would call "lifestyle" shots of the kids playing in the park. Those are the kinds of shots that I was referring to where a client may suddenly decide that they would like to use them as a wall-sized print or mural for a meeting or display. Great captures for just "walking around" as you put it :thumbup:

LJ
 

PeterA

Well-known member
Well said Thierry.

Kurt - there was nothing wrong with any of those shots and a lot right.
 
Top