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!

New Member Switching to MF (Intro and Samples)

johnnygoesdigital

New member
Mario,

It's important to note, to achieve 1/1600 sync with the DF, you can only use the much higher end DB's. Also, i'm not sure you can isolate the focal plane shutter from the sequence in a DF camera. Consider a Hasselblad H1 or H2...they have the ability to shoot any H mount DB, and as FredBGG pointed out, film use among higher end wedding/portrait photographers is getting very popular...again.
You can P/U an H1 or H2 kit and a 36x48 Phase One p25+ for about the price of a High end DSLR. You'll get the 12 stops of dynamic range and the benefits of a larger sensor. The initial high price of new MFDB's is insulting, but what it will be worth in several years is even more insulting - that should be part of the equation too.
 
Last edited:

D&A

Well-known member
Guy Wrote---->>>"and Pentax i don't believe has any Leaf shutter lenses and is a focal plane system"<<<

Although the Pentax 645D may not be up for consideration with regards to Mario's application for Medium Format Digital (MFD), I'll just note that Pentax does have two manual focus leaf shutter lenses for their 645 system....the LS 75mm f2.8 and LS 135mm f4 lenses. Each can work with the 645D body and sync up to 1/500. Just some info that may useful for those reading this thread and using the Pentax 645D body.

Dave (D&A)
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
I think the P30 will do 1/800 but P40, P65 and all the IQ's will do 1/1600. Maybe Doug can confirm this. Btw a P40 used is only 10k or so maybe less
 

David Schneider

New member
Shooting with the HC 100/2.2 wide open gives that dreamy look. So does the 150N. The HC80 is like a 50mm ... too short, and is a 2.8 lens compared to a canon 85/1.2 ... the 100/2.2 is my choice for "standard" lens on the Hasselblad H camera and results look remarkably like the Leica 75/1.4 OOF areas.

-Marc
I am amazed how versitile the HC100/2.2 is. It's my go to lens for groups, but am comfident using it for a portrait. Now if Hasselblad ever made a 100-200 zoom, I'd be so happy!

On the retouching, I've lately been looking at my studio Canon images and wishing I had taken them with my Hasselblad. I look at my Hassie images, I don't wish I'd taken them with my Canon.
 

Mario

New member
Shooting over the past 24-hours has been fun! I shot the Hassy yesterday and Canon today.

I really do enjoy the intimacy that I get with my 35mm gear. I feel much better connected to my clients.



The look of the MF is really captivating though. And the files are beyond words.



This is going to be invigorating next couple weeks determining what I want and need out of a camera system for this year.
 

gazwas

Active member
Shooting with the HC 100/2.2 wide open gives that dreamy look. So does the 150N. The HC80 is like a 50mm ... too short, and is a 2.8 lens compared to a canon 85/1.2 ... the 100/2.2 is my choice for "standard" lens on the Hasselblad H camera and results look remarkably like the Leica 75/1.4 OOF areas.
Unless I'm not trying hard enough, I have a Phase 150mm D on test at the moment which, without doubt is one hell of a fine lens but it doesn't produce that very, very soft gaussian blur type of OOF backgrounds that the fast Canon's do and I've never seen any other MF glass that does. Hence the popularity of the 50 and 85 f1.2 L lenses.

That type of blur (I hate the work Bokeh) has no place in my type of work so I don't own any of that glass but I sure do appreciate pictures taken with it and appreciate its pretty hard to get it in any other way.

Mario, I think your work is quite beautiful and intimate. If, for example you said you were after more detail in fabrics or after advise as yo just wanted to go MFD because you a gear head I'd say go for it any day of the week as the detail etc, etc is addictive. However, as a way of improving IQ with your current work its a tough call IMO and you may only just gain bigger files, more headaches and an empty bank account.
 

David Schneider

New member
I really do enjoy the intimacy that I get with my 35mm gear. I feel much better connected to my clients.
I feel a lot better connected using the waist level finder on the Hasselblad than sticking my face in back of my Canon (or my Hassie with eye level finder).
 

Don Libby

Well-known member
Warning - the following thoughts and comments are from a landscape photographers point of view...

Film still has its merits however I feel the downsides of using film out-weight its uses. I've been around long enough to remember using film; I also remember the smells of the darkroom. I also remember loosing work due to packages gone missing. I remember loosing work because the lab royally screwed up.
I don't miss film.

Digital offers so much more for me. It allows me to see almost instantly that I either have what I want or need to reshoot. It allows me the ability to expand on my artistic talents to process the image the way I want - not what some lab thinks is okay. It also allows me more freedom to experiment in both the capture and post processing that film never allowed.

Then there's the speed. I remember being on a shoot (both landscape and commercial) where I shot film. I had to wait sometimes days to see what the lab brought me. I then had to either scan them into a digital file (why not just shoot digital I thought) before printing or ordering prints. Either way I had to tack on several days if not several weeks before seeing the first print.

Not so with digital. Take my last shoot. I spent 60-days in the Jackson Hole area. Every night I'd load the images onto my computer checking for the ones I want and checking to ensure I didn't screw anything up. I also did a little post right then and there while the image of the are was fresh in my mind. I sold 7-images before leaving Jackson off the computer! I got an order to display 8-additional images - off the computer. Only with digital. I've been home since mid December working on the images. I've processed the images. I've printed the images and stretched then all on canvas. I'm ready to return to Jackson for the show next month and have several weeks to now sit back and relax. I've also sold more images since returning home printing and refilling empty wall space in our gallery. All because I choose to shoot digital.

Bottom line is that if you are in a fast paced environment then digital is probably the right choice. If you have your own lab and all that goes with it then film might be okay. Most clients whether they're commercial or collectors don't give a rats arse who use what to shoot. They want quality at an affordable price and in a timeframe that suits their purpose.

Just my 2¢ worth so take it at face value.

Side not to Mario - welcome to the forum and medium format. While I don't do enough people to even make me understand the ins and outs of that type photography I do know enough that what I see as examples (no matter the camera) is outstanding.

Don
 

Mario

New member
I feel a lot better connected using the waist level finder on the Hasselblad than sticking my face in back of my Canon (or my Hassie with eye level finder).
I can definitely see that. I'll make sure to snag a waist level at some point to experiment with.
 
S

Shelby Lewis

Guest
I still can't shoot portraits as consistently well with my MF gear as I could with my Sony a900.

There, I said it.

But... for me, the potential for the work to be better is why I shoot MF. Occasionally I get a file that's just mind-blowing and it's all worthwhile. I shoot far fewer files, and most of them are useable because I shoot more slowly and with greater care. I love coming home with c.60 total files and having 55 to choose from.

I'm in school right now and every other kid on campus, regardless of major, has a DSLR or similar... it's so nice to not be in the majority. It truly does make a perceptive difference. As long as my work is still basically as good as it always has been, and sometimes even better, the switch will have been worth it.

Clients won't see "better"... but I surely do.

Lastly, it's so easy to get caught up in the idea that just because 1/800th (or 1/1600th) flash sync exists that it's needed... but let's face it Mario, you shoot great with the regular old canon flash x-sync. What might be compelling is the possibility of more versatility with regards to flash sync especially as it relates to balancing with ambient conditions. That's why I shoot a leaf shutter camera... that 1/400th sync is perfect for my work (broad shade on bright days with flash for fill).

I guess what I'm saying is that I see little improvement "feel-wise" in your MF images, but I wouldn't expect to on a first outing... but I would hope that your decision would be based on the possibilities that the systems have to offer. If those possibilities are limiting then don't do it... if they are liberating, then go for it.

All of that said... some of the best portraits I've ever taken of my kids have been with my aptus. I'm a happy camper.
 

FredBGG

Not Available
As you probably will agree Shelby, AF is sometimes highly overrated:)

Cesar Lloreda in action

Nice work Mario and let us know if you need any advice!

Yair
This example is not relevant to Mario.
The photographer is shooting stopped way down and with harsh direct strobe.
Both would kill the atmosphere in Mario's photos.
Also the example shown is a case where pre focusing works just fine.
The bike is jumping up in the same spot.
 

FredBGG

Not Available
Bottom line you can't do faster than 1/250 with flash sync on a DSLR PERIOD.

Not quite true. I shoot with hypersync with Canon Speedlights.
Plenty of loss of power, but 4 Speedlights bound up in a pod do just fine.

I also shoot high sync speeds with my elinchrom studio flashes using Pocket wizards special function. it's a little fiddly, but I can reach speeds of 1/2000th.
I do lose significant power, but starting with 3000 w/s or 6,000 w/s that's not a problem.
 

FredBGG

Not Available
......I have a Phase 150mm D on test at the moment which, without doubt is one hell of a fine lens but it doesn't produce that very, very soft gaussian blur type of OOF backgrounds that the fast Canon's do and I've never seen any other MF glass that does. Hence the popularity of the 50 and 85 f1.2 L lenses.
There are MF lenses that have outstanding bokeh

Here are a few...

The very best is the Fuji gx680 180mm f3.2 6x8.

The background in this one is a tough one for bokeh... sun poking through leaves.



Carl Zeiss 110mm f2 Hasselblad or Rollei

From flickr



Carl Zeiss 180mm 2.8 Rollei

Carl Zeiss jena 180mm 2.8

From fickr

Apart from great bokeh the Carl zeiss jena 180 2.8 has a very magical quality to it...


All of these IMHO produce nicer images than the Canon 85mm 1.2. While the backround is smooth the foreground does not have the same dimentional feel of larger format lenses.

A runner up is the Mamiya 200mm f2.8 (although the 2.8 is well a wee bit darker than all my other 2.8 lenses)
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
Not quite true. I shoot with hypersync with Canon Speedlights.
Plenty of loss of power, but 4 Speedlights bound up in a pod do just fine.

I also shoot high sync speeds with my elinchrom studio flashes using Pocket wizards special function. it's a little fiddly, but I can reach speeds of 1/2000th.
I do lose significant power, but starting with 3000 w/s or 6,000 w/s that's not a problem.
Fred seriously not even in the same league as unleashing full juice on the real strobes out there and more important bringing the sun to desktop light. :D
 

Ben Rubinstein

Active member
Thing is though Guy, the sample the OP showed us didn't use that kind of lighting at all, if that is representative of his look then a couple of speedlites on a pole giving up to a 1/8000 (you have to get close up but again for his kind of thing that shouldn't be a problem) is sufficient for when needed and a whole heck of a lot cheaper than fast sync profoto gear. The look of the portraits which he's shows shot with the 'blad are nice but they're very very different to the look of the original pictures (which I prefer, this killing sun dead and blasting strobe thing won't last many more years in portraiture IMO, it's far more suited to fashion). It's a look which suits the MFDB's but personally I far prefer the look of the former stuff.
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
Ben shooting wide open is not always easy. I'm shooting fashion lately outside and to even kill the overblown sky you need flash power that can at least get to F8 and trust me with a 110 the bokeh still sings. I'm not blasting anything just trying to get a good balance. that's hard to do when your in full sun. How about a group shot at a wedding for example your at least 15 ft away and need to cover a large area and get the DOF remember we lose at least 2 stops in MF . I would not shoot anything wider than F11 here. Those small flashes won't cut it. I shoot many things and I want to be ready for bear and those small flash high sync stuff is good to maybe 5ft. There fine for some things but not for everything. I'm not saying its the most important assets here in MF far from it but a consideration when getting a Hassy and Phase gear is your system has this ability over anything else. No question 1/1600 is a rare occasion but 1/800 is a nice option to have when you need it.
 

Ben Rubinstein

Active member
Wrote a whole long post then realised I'd better be able to verify my facts, back soon :D

EDIT good thing I did check otherwise I would have made a fool of myself :D

Having investigated certain solutions to match the shutter lens advantage on 35mm including hypersync, sync at all shutter speeds (at the expense of loss of power), the use of hi-sync (with the same caveat albeit worse), etc, none of these solutions work unless you have a specific type of shooting you do that can work with specific equipment. It can work if you choose one camera, a specific transmitter, a specific light and specific modifier and pretty much never need to change that combo. It works for me for example for my wedding work and to be honest it might work for the OP. The moment you have to be able to rent, use different lights and different modifiers or different cameras, such as a commercial or fashion shooter, all these workarounds have no place in your bag. They're too specific in their requirements, too specific how they will work and when they will work. Pretty much the same for all these strobist types of things. Not that they don't work in a pro enviroment, just that it has to be a very specific type of pro enviroment.
 
Last edited:

fotografz

Well-known member
Thing is though Guy, the sample the OP showed us didn't use that kind of lighting at all, if that is representative of his look then a couple of speedlites on a pole giving up to a 1/8000 (you have to get close up but again for his kind of thing that shouldn't be a problem) is sufficient for when needed and a whole heck of a lot cheaper than fast sync profoto gear. The look of the portraits which he's shows shot with the 'blad are nice but they're very very different to the look of the original pictures (which I prefer, this killing sun dead and blasting strobe thing won't last many more years in portraiture IMO, it's far more suited to fashion). It's a look which suits the MFDB's but personally I far prefer the look of the former stuff.
Not sure I agree with this Ben ... and not just because I happen to shoot MFD ... I also shoot with Sony A900s and a Leica M9 and extremely fast lenses ... the latter with no flash at all. Before that Nikon, and before that Canon.

I do agree that the OPs 35mm stuff is quite appealing and has a certain look. However, no disrespect to the abilities, obvious talent and connection with the subject of the OP, the "look" is getting common based on the proliferation of the same gear used by almost everyone ... my assistant's work is pretty similar with her 5D and 85/1.2 etc.. Keep in mind that I'm speaking about look, not all the other elements that make up a successful shot.

I think some shooters are looking to MFD to differentiate themselves .... employing what I call the Wonder Bra strategy ... "Lift and Separate" :ROTFL:

Shelby became involved in MFD for personal exploration ... and IMO, his work, while not the same look as his A900 shots with fast lenses, has taken him to a new level that is far more involving than his previous work was. It is simply deeper on many levels ... less dependent on superficial impact. I've seen a lot of Shelby's work over the years now, and the ones indelibly burned into my skull are the shots of his children with his RZ and Buff lights. Hell, the guy is just getting going ... can't wait until he's even more versed with the gear.

On the other hand, David S. is exploring the commercial side to see where MFD can take him.

The common element here is that both, while very good photographers, are relatively new to MFD. Trust me, it takes a while for MFD to be an old shoe where you don't have to think about the gear, which I'm sure Guy will confirm. I have almost no distinction between handing my MFD camera and using a 35mm DSLR ... it's just second nature. Then the connection with subject isn't an issue, and I can work the controls of my Hasselblad like a trumpet player without taking my eye from the viewfinder.

Lighting and sync speeds is another subject, and I also disagree that it won't last many more years ... In fact, I believe if one doesn't get with that program, it will be you who is dead in the water in a few years. After all, it is the last bastion to distinguish yourself from the growing herd of shooters that often have as good or better camera than you do, and because of the wide-spread info and instruction on the web, know how to use it.

When I look at the work of my friend Irakly, how his unique content is masterfully lit, I can say for certain that there is no chance in Hell of it becoming a "herd technique" seen on every facebook page in the world.

-Marc

BTW, My 2¢ ...I think shooting Seniors is more like fashion than portraiture anyway.
 
Last edited:

PeterA

Well-known member
Ask yourself what kind off shot(s) you like to make under what kind of condition(s) for what aims and what effects...for what audience and what use at what return ..

I think the word "switching" is a very dangerous word - because no MFD camera can do what a 35mm DSLR can do as well as a 35mm DSLR can do it

Likewise no 35mm DSLR can do what a MFD SLR system can do for you

Each system and the choices within each system are better at something and more compromised at other things

Most replies you got here so far are very good observations based on experience from quite a few pro shooters.

Funny thing is that most use both 35mm and MFD.

Think about adding MF to the arsenal - rather than ditching 35mm, less chance for regret - my guess is you will end up buying a 35mm something if you sell what you have anyway...this can be a needlessly expensive exercise.

love my MF gear - but it can't be a 35mm camera and vica versa.;)

Pete
 
Top