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!

POLL: Will you sell your MFD gear if the D800 holds good on its promise?

Will you sell your MFD gear if the D800 holds on its promise?

  • Never. I don't care about paying 10x as much for 10% more quality.

    Votes: 15 16.9%
  • C'mon, D800 will never match DoF, dynamic range and microcontrast of my Phase One!

    Votes: 32 36.0%
  • I'm into tech cams.Won't give up Rodesntocks & stitching, even if that luxury costs me 40k more!

    Votes: 15 16.9%
  • Damn. I just sold off my Canon/Nikon gear to get into MFD!

    Votes: 8 9.0%
  • If that Zeiss/Leica glass on the D800E performs as I think it should ... EBAY here I come!

    Votes: 5 5.6%
  • I just preordered a D800E. Hell it's cheaper than that MFD lens I'm longing for!

    Votes: 14 15.7%

  • Total voters
    89
  • Poll closed .

dougpeterson

Workshop Member
Skin tone is HIGHLY subjective. The reality (actual scientific skintone) varies strongly from person to person and from one region/ethnicity to another. Cultural expectations/biases/preferences vary strongly from one culture to another. Color is relative within a frame (skin may look too magenta when the model is lying in a field of green grass vs. in a field of purple flowers - even if the RGB of the skin is the same in each). Finally Industry/Category standards vary (fashion/portrait/fine-art) and technological possibilities vary over time (what you can do with film responses changed over the years and now what can be done with IR cutoffs, ICC profiling, and Photoshop has changed over the years.

This is why I could not live without the Skin Tone section of the Color Editor in C1. You can roll-your-own skin tone in a few minutes and then in the future preview/apply various presets with a single click.

Doug Peterson (e-mail Me)
__________________

Head of Technical Services, Capture Integration
Phase One Partner of the Year
Mamiya Leaf, Leica, Arca Swiss, Cambo, Profoto, LaCie, Canon, TTI, Broncolor & More

National: 877.217.9870 | Cell: 740.707.2183
Newsletter | RSS Feed
Buy Capture One 6 at 10% off
 

etrigan63

Active member
Have to agree with Doug on that point. My son has a difficult skin tone to get right especially in front of a background with warm red/yellow tones. I struggled with Lightroom and Aperture and finally got it spot on with C1. And these were files from my D700. I am interested in the D800 professionally. MFD would be great for portrait work but not for shooting dance. I have to face economic realities here. I currently cannot afford two cameras for pro work. I have to see what system will get me the most bag for my buck. I will test the D800/D800E and see if it provides me with any benefits. Otherwise I will carry on with what I have and wait for TNBT (The Next Big Thing).
 
Last edited:

pophoto

New member
I think ultimately with skin tones is about accuracy rather than taste right? I mean I have Asian eyes, but I doubt I see things MORE yellow right? :p

Seriously though, I found the RAW files Nikon D700 gave me more yellow skin tones, and feel Canon gives more accurately balance skin tones in general. Both are Japanese manufacturers. So I question the taste comment, even though it may be true!

Samples from the Canon 1DX as a new camera, showed to me better skin hues too! I put an early order on B&H for the D800E, but am now faced with debating about possibly cancelling my order based on two main criteria, one color fidelity and sharpness. Perhaps I'm seeing things, I don't find things sharp upto MF quality, while certainly there is detail with larger MP, from the samples alone there isn't enough definition in the details, while my choice of wording may be wrong, I hope I am conveying what I am trying to say.....or not! :p

There may also be a third excuse I'm hiding too!
 

dougpeterson

Workshop Member
I think ultimately with skin tones is about accuracy rather than taste right? I mean I have Asian eyes, but I doubt I see things MORE yellow right? :p
Shoot a baby at two weeks old and tell me if you want "accurate" or "pleasing" skin tones.

Historically Fuji and Kodak made special films that took colors near a particular "skin tone" and pushed them to be more similar to that particular skin tone than they were (scientifically/accurately). That created more "pleasing" skin tones in that areas of skin that were patchy magenta or unhealthy looking olive were nudged back towards a uniform standard skin tone. It's stunning to me that they were able to do this chemically, but then again we put a man on the moon with 60s technology...

The caveat was that they (Fuji/Kodak) picked what the target skin tone was. The benefit however was that you, the photographer, could pick up a Portra film when shooting portraits and a Velvia when shooting landscapes, and a repro film when shooting Art Reproduction.

Canon and Nikon cameras are used for everything, not just portraits, so they can only go so far. If they (and PP software) were too aggressive at defaults then people who shoot products would complain that e.g. two shades of a red purse were showing as the same color.

That's why the Skin Tone tab in Color Editor is so great. It lets you:
- be as aggressive as you'd like (keep off for product catalogs, use mildly for models, aggressively for newborns)
- also adjust skin luminance (great, when used in moderation, for hard/uncontrolled lighting conditions like weddings)
- target a specific skin tone of your choosing
- apply to incoming shots when shooting tethered (instantly beautifying your subjects)
- greatly reduce the appearance of blemishes when combined properly with the rest of the Color Editor.

This is also why Phase One and Leaf backs come with pre-made Skin Tone oriented profiles ("Portrait" profiles) in Capture One.

If you're shooting people it's hard to beat.

Doug Peterson (e-mail Me)
__________________

Head of Technical Services, Capture Integration
Phase One Partner of the Year
Mamiya Leaf, Leica, Arca Swiss, Cambo, Profoto, LaCie, Canon, TTI, Broncolor & More

National: 877.217.9870 | Cell: 740.707.2183
Newsletter | RSS Feed
Buy Capture One 6 at 10% off
 

tashley

Subscriber Member
Samples from the Canon 1DX as a new camera, showed to me better skin hues too! I put an early order on B&H for the D800E, but am now faced with debating about possibly cancelling my order based on two main criteria, one color fidelity and sharpness. Perhaps I'm seeing things, I don't find things sharp upto MF quality, while certainly there is detail with larger MP, from the samples alone there isn't enough definition in the details, while my choice of wording may be wrong, I hope I am conveying what I am trying to say.....or not! :p

There may also be a third excuse I'm hiding too!
I agree: those two 1DX model samples from their website might or might not be to an individual's taste for skin hues (not to my taste at all) but the details are weird: sort of like they cranked up NR and sharpening at the same time so it looks plastic. Quite nasty in fact, though lots of people seem to be impressed...
 

pophoto

New member
Shoot a baby at two weeks old and tell me if you want "accurate" or "pleasing" skin tones.

[/SIZE]
I'm glad you said that, almost two years ago, my son was born, I had both cameras, the D700 and the 5D2. Pleasing is a choice, something i can adjust to, and CaptureOne and LR and the like can certainly help with that. While my 5D2 gave me something more accurate, the D700 was still too yellow and too much saturation out of camera in my opinion, both of which I could adjust, but certainly to my own taste, looking at both cameras, I certainly prefer the RAW files I was getting from the 5D2.

Either way you can get close to what you need with software, it's the amount of tweaking on a personal level. I've been shooting pictures of my son almost every day to every other day and so on for the first half year, and certainly at least every week now! So if what I see, is in fact a matter of taste, I certainly agree taste wins every time :)
 

dougpeterson

Workshop Member
I agree: those two 1DX model samples from their website might or might not be to an individual's taste for skin hues (not to my taste at all) but the details are weird: sort of like they cranked up NR and sharpening at the same time so it looks plastic. Quite nasty in fact, though lots of people seem to be impressed...
Most people's points of reference for quality files are not the same as yours and I's :).
 

Stefan Steib

Active member
Doug

I know this will sound funny, but maybe as soon as Capture One Pro will support the D800E this will be the day when many people will take this camera for serious. Hard decision for Phase One. If they support it they will sell more software and less backs. If they will not support it the users may just go to Lightroom or Aperture and Phase may even loose the software customers, maybe a bit less back users...........
This is a classic dilemma.......

Proposal for Phase one: sell an OEM Version of Capture One that only runs for Nikon cameras to Nikon and have them send NX where it belongs !
With this money build a CMOS Back.......:D

Regards
Stefan
 

dougpeterson

Workshop Member
Doug, I know this will sound funny, but maybe as soon as Capture One Pro will support the D800E this will be the day when many people will take this camera for serious. Hard decision for Phase One. If they support it they will sell more software and less backs. If they will not support it the users may just go to Lightroom or Aperture and Phase may even loose the software customers, maybe a bit less back users...........
As I've said many times with previous similar-resolution back vs. dSLRs... resolution is the easiest spec to advertise but it's usually the 3rd or 4th reason down the list of why customers choose a digital back. Other reasons may include Color rendition, flash sync speed, built-in flash transmitter, faster and more robust tethered capture, WLF, better vertical ergonomics, post processing flexibility, native 4:3 capture, native 1:1 capture, compatibility with a beloved "older" body (e.g. hassy 500 / contax / RZ), ability to use on a tech camera, ability to use on a view camera, ability to use one sensor on multiple SLR bodies (e.g. RZ and DF) quality/look of MF lenses, lack of AA filter, touch screen iPhone quality LCD, tonal smoothness, dynamic range, reliability (e.g. no moving parts), good upgrade offers from their existing backs, low native ISO, tilts and shifts based on the body (tech camera) rather than the lens, slower working speed (a positive for many who tire of machine gunning), differentiation from competition (not the client's son's camera). And so on.

I don't foresee any meaningful impact on digital back sales based on the release of the D800e. Of that list it improves somewhat on resolution (though it still pales to an 80mp back) and lack of AA filter. But otherwise is just a D700 with more resolution (if/when the lenses used can take advantage of it). Which is to say a really sweet/awesome dSLR that will be a great choice for many photographers --- but mostly the same photographers who would have been using a D700.

Literally EVERY new dSLR I've ever seen come out has raised the same question: is this now a replacement for medium format? I think it must be because all the manufacturers do such a good job of advertising resolution as spec'd in megapixels of the sensor that the natural thing to do is compare cameras based on the number of mp rather than application, cost, ergonomics, overall file quality, etc. Fact is I can take a Phase One H25 or Leaf Valeo from 2003 and it will still (at base ISO for short exposures) produce a more desirable file than every dSLR I've shot. Could that change when I shoot a D800e? It's not impossible and I'll wait and see (I don't say anything I can't test), but I wouldn't hold my breath just because they added a reverse AA filter and increased the pixel count.

I can't speak for Phase One's engineers but Capture One Pro has supported every major Nikon and Canon camera for many years. I don't see that changing.

Doug Peterson (e-mail Me)
__________________

Head of Technical Services, Capture Integration
Phase One Partner of the Year
Mamiya Leaf, Leica, Arca Swiss, Cambo, Profoto, LaCie, Canon, TTI, Broncolor & More

National: 877.217.9870 | Cell: 740.707.2183
Newsletter | RSS Feed
Buy Capture One 6 at 10% off
 
Last edited:

baudolino

Active member
So the question is ...

with Nikon's D800 around the corner and hence the promise of a 36MPX photographic system that shoots at 4fps, has live view, an advanced autofocus system and a huge screen paired with great battery life and uncompressed HDMI output ...

at a price point lower than a new MFD optic ...

do you consider consolidating your gear and selling off your MFD kit?
ABSOLUTELY NOT.
I may buy a new FF or APS-C camera with around 16-18MP, great high ISO performance and fast autofocus/face detection for handheld shooting at available light but I have no reason to believe that the D800 will consistently produce images comparable to those coming out of my S2, not only in terms of "image quality" in the technical sense, but also in terms of the overall "look". But for sure the D800 looks like a nice camera that will make a lot of people happy (once they realize that having MF-like resolution requires MF-like shooting technique...).
 

Stefan Steib

Active member
Doug

I don´t want to argue with you about the advantages that you have offered (we could), just one thing - the H25 or the leaf Valeo may probably be a bit misplaced to compare with any new DSLR. Until you have set them up with a firewire cable and a notebook or a stationary computer, controlled sharpness and exposure,and have taken your shot, the motiv you wanted to photograph has probably disappeared on the horizon together with the DSLR photographer........:)

I also own an H20. It has a nice image quality, but I don´t use it anymore.

Regards
Stefan
 

dougpeterson

Workshop Member
Remember first and foremost that niche markets that have low overall market share do NOT function the same as the mainstream market.

If anything I actually think the release of the D800 will increase sales (yes I'm dead serious) of digital backs because:
1) when anyone and their brother can have "36mp" on the cheap there is more motivation to look into options beyond that (regardless of whether resolution is the most important thing or whether most D800 shooters end up capturing 36mp of details given their lenses/techniques)
2) Canon/Sony shooters may get jealous (rightly or wrongly) and be motivated to switch systems, and every time a photographer mentally accepts they are ready to switch systems there is an opportunity for them to consider something entirely new (the largest hinderance to sales in cameras, IMO, is not competitive product but momentum)
3) Many shooters assume they have no use for more resolution than their current 20ish mp dSLR. Many are right (e.g. shooting for the web, school headshots, etc), but many are wrong and will change their mind when they see how great it is to make large prints. I still remember when I thought an 11x14 was a "big print" and "all I'd ever want to do". Now I'm pissed when I get a great shot and don't have enough detail to make a fantastic 40x60. I also used to think that my 11x14 prints were "detailed" and "couldn't get any better".
4) Every time a new camera is out on the horizon there is an assumption by many photographers that the next announcement will solve all their problems and they wait for that new camera. i.e. "I'm not getting the quality I want out of my D700 but if I just wait for the D800 I know it will be everything I'm hoping for". For some this will end up being true, but for many it will not. Take the pool of those that have been waiting for a D800 (or 5DIII etc). If 80% of them find it matches their wildest dreams (which I think is incredibly optimistic based on prior experience with "the next big thing"s of the past) that's still 20% that have been waiting (and thereby postponing consideration of any other solution) that will be floating in the market. If those 20% were waiting because of image quality (and not, e.g. for 4k video capture or 3D or autofocus improvements) then medium format may well end up on their search for what to do instead.
 

Stefan Steib

Active member
Doug

as you and I know the camera is not making the image. Unfortunately still several people believe this to be the case. The working Pros are probably mostly immune to that idea because they learn every day that only their craft and imagination makes an image happen.
I think you are right with the definition of a niche market. But also the niche market runs into technical limitations after a while when the niche does not keep its uniqueness. It may well be that this D800E is not the final answer for the people who look for an alternative. But the 5D MK3 may be even closer or the Sony XX may be even better suited for this.
MF with CCD´s is hitting a wall right now, 80 Mpix is probably the border.
With real sensitivities more closer to 200 Asa instead of the proclaimed 800 asa you will need full sunlight to be able to shoot them out of hand reliably without shaking the image. A Nikon D800E will have true 800 or 1600asa usable for out of hand shots, because of the smaller format you can also use shorter focal lenght lenses with wider apertures. It´s all about usability. The image quality is probably catching up later, whereas I think with proper Rawfile treatment the difference is VERY small.
I am speaking to many people who use the actual latest generation of backs. It´s always the same: they like them, but after some talk you will hear the same story again and again: No longterm exposures, lack of sensitivity (only perfect low asa performance) and lack of special lenses, may it be long teles, superwides. This is essential and needs to be solved.

Otherwise it will become more and more difficult.
Of course you are right- if someone wants to buy a camera to impress his friends it doesn´t sound good if this was only 3000 $ instead of 40000 $.
Maybe these are many more potential customers than those who "just" want to photograph. I wish you are right and the market will thrive.

But I fear that´s not the case.

regards
Stefan
 

glenerrolrd

Workshop Member
{I can't speak for Phase One's engineers but Capture One Pro has supported every major Nikon and Canon camera for many years. I don't see that changing.}

Doug Peterson (e-mail Me)
__________________

Doug

I thought your point about the skin tones targets that Kodak in particular used to use for film was particularly relevant . With film you picked the type of film that worked best for the situation . You don t have to convince me that larger sensors like larger film formats excel at those subtle tone separations that make renderings look great . This of course impacts ones perception of color but I believe its a different point .

Rather I was focusing in on a common statement ..that Nikon files render skin tones slightly yellow and are difficult to calibrate to a more pleasing (if not necessarily more accurate skin tone). You went on to point out how capture one has a real focus on skin tones and plenty of user control to get it where you feel its pleasing. Then you indicated that Capture One has handled nikon and canon files .

From those statements it would appear that if I had .NEF files and would just learn to use C1 then I could produce skin tones that would be considered pretty decent . I don t think you said this and I am looking for the missing set of facts .
 

Shashin

Well-known member
With real sensitivities more closer to 200 Asa instead of the proclaimed 800 asa you will need full sunlight to be able to shoot them out of hand reliably without shaking the image. A Nikon D800E will have true 800 or 1600asa usable for out of hand shots, because of the smaller format you can also use shorter focal lenght lenses with wider apertures. It´s all about usability. The image quality is probably catching up later, whereas I think with proper Rawfile treatment the difference is VERY small.
??? I really don't understand this. My Pentax 645D, a MFD camera, has very good ISOs and they are real upto 1600. I can handhold as easily as any camera I have used and get sharp images. I don't really think I will need a lens wider than 25mm (19mm on 35mm) but 25mm is short. I have never felt any really limitation with apertures in medium format.
 

D&A

Well-known member
>>>>> "??? I really don't understand this. My Pentax 645D, a MFD camera, has very good ISOs and they are real upto 1600. I can handhold as easily as any camera I have used and get sharp images. I don't really think I will need a lens wider than 25mm (19mm on 35mm) but 25mm is short. I have never felt any really limitation with apertures in medium format" <<<<<

+1! I agree with this statement (in regards to the 645D) with a few exceptions and of course some precautions with regards to hand holding and selection of aperture with use of certain lenses in order to extract the most potential from each file.

Dave (D&A)
 
Last edited:

tjv

Active member
I'm late to the game and can't be bothered reading all the comments above but I'll throw in my personal opinion anyway...

I'm probably the perfect person for the D800E. I'm currently undertaking an artist residency in Asia and have been shooting a Mamiya 7 system and some 4x5" sheet film. Now, as much as I love film and the way the big negs of these systems look, it's just a pain in the a## in terms of time and money being so far away from home and having to try communicate with and rely on labs to do a key part of the process for me. If I were at home, things would be different because I have a setup where I can be self sufficient and can do things in my own time.

Now, when I heard about the D800E announcement, I thought to myself it is time for me to give up on medium format film. At home I shoot 4x5" for 99% of my work (documentary and fine art) and I can't see that changing any time soon. I'm addicted to the process and quality that can be pulled out of the massive neg. But for times like those I'm in now, where I need to work faster and free up valuable shooting time, a 36mpx DSLR *might* be just the ticket. I know depth will render differently, blah blah blah, but moving to the smaller digital format (MFD is unfortunately out of my budget by a long margin) and complimenting my 4x5" kit with a D800E and a couple of PC-E lenses to replicate my preferred focal lengths, I might get the best of both worlds. I'm already frustrated with not having movements on my Mamiya 7, despite the lenses being the best I've ever used. The clincher is perhaps that I had a local lab where I am scan and print four 6x7cm negatives for me at 1.1x1.4m. They looked horrible in comparison to what I'd be able to achieve myself at home using a Nikon 9000 scanner. They were using an X5, so I don't know what the problem was. Anyway, case in point, if I was shooting digitally I'd know exactly how to pull the best out of my RAW files and get them how I want them.

Anyway, this has been a long ramble, but I just really wanted to say that we live in technologically exciting times. Despite the appeal of the D800E I still lust after a H4D-40 / Phase 1Q140. Choices, choices...
 

aztwang

Member
Well I have read all the posts and most of ya'll make some sense. I shoot for a living, am a Nikon shooter, cover mostly sports and events and have a private based studio, shoot with a couple of D3S's and have just about all of Nikons fast glass. Last year I almost bought a Phase 645 with a 40mp back and three Schneider lenses for starts, but I could not justify the purchase. I think if my studio were to really take off, I could justify the switch or even have both products but sports and photojournalism work is a large part of what I do.
That being said, I think the D800e, if IQ follows thru, will be a great add for someone such as myself for the studio. I can keep and USE all my current glass. One thing that was a negative for me after to talking to Guy last year was, for me, the auto focus is not the fastest/accurate in certain instances and I was not sure if I could use the Phase anywhere other than the studio and landscapes. I think Nikons fast A/F will be great for the studio but more so as an outdoor portrait and a runway/fashion application.
I also believe in the long run, the D800e will open doors for MF manufactures. I can imagine DSLR owners eyes opening up with disbelief and after really seeing what a 36MP image looks like and what one can do with that many MP's... what happens next????? GAS... We want the next bigger and best thing.... Enter Phase, Leica, Mamiya...etc.
The price point of where the D800 comes in at is pretty crazy. But this isn't Nikons first rodeo. Nikon has a plan. I do think as another member stated that Nikon's price point will launch lens sales like they've never seen before to take advantage of 36MP
I dont believe current MF owners are going to jump ship. MF is a religion. The D800 will be a great addition to the MF owners bag as it will be to mine.
 

Stefan Steib

Active member
Shashin

I am talking about the IQ180. Leafs Aptus 12 seems to do better (albeit the same chip !). But the 5.2 micron pixel are bleeding edge and need compromising. And I haven´t even spoken about image stabilization.
There are very good ones for DSLR´s but there are none for MF. The best implementations of it gain 4 stops. So all the predictions of the D800E to have the same shaking problems as MF are nonsense, at least when you use stabilized lenses.

Regards
Stefan
 
V

Vivek

Guest
IMHO, it is a bit more useful to discuss the diffraction limits and how these dense sensors can be used (in a separate thread) with actual examples than beating this dead horse.
 
Top