Good bye to Medium Format Digital...

[homeiss]

Here for example I did a complete portrait shoot with 5 8x8 cm polaroids.

Here are 3 final shots used.

These are fantastic! Which RZ lenses did you use for these shots Fred?

 

[harshdreams]

Never let the top speed of your camera determine the rhythm of your shoot.
If it can do 12 frames per second it is capable of doing 1 per minute too.

Thank you, wise words.. Shall remember that, brilliant work Fred!!

 

[Chris Giles]

Same thing with Larry King

Pretty much the same thing with the other 300 or so celebrity portraits I've done.

Never let the top speed of your camera determine the rhythm of your shoot.
If it can do 12 frames per second it is capable of doing 1 per minute too.

Now you're just showing off :ROTFL:

 

[Willow]

These are fantastic! Which RZ lenses did you use for these shots Fred?

Its 8 x 8 cm pola, so I would think its Fuji GX680 lenses .-)

 

[fotografz]

Fred,

I too, gave up MFD in favor of MF film and 35mm digital. I was so frustrated with the constant malfunctions in several camera's. While that was frustrating enough, what I didn't expect, was the nasty tone from a few GetDPI members about my complaints. I find that you've been quite respectful in your posts, and judging from your photography, i'd say MFD(Phase One) is going to regret not earning your loyalty...really good work!

If and when MFD gets more realistic with it's pricing, reliability, and functionality, I might think about a demo, but for now the D800 is a game changer.

Perhaps just a natural reaction based on counter experiences?

To paint a whole category of photographic tools with anecdotal experiences feels a bit vindictive and maybe a tad self-righteous regardless of tone or the esteem of the photographer. While no one wants bad experiences, and we all have them eventually regardless of brand or category of tools ... it seems odd to repeatedly post specific threads that excruciatingly condemns in one breath while lauding new choices in the next.

In short, we get it. We got it many threads ago. MFD doesn't work for everyone, and other choices may work better. Reporting frustrations in search of solutions is one thing, but to repeatedly post them is another.

When I switched from an all Nikon system to Sony, I didn't post a "Goodbye Nikon" thread in the Nikon section recounting, in minute detail, all of the failures, horrible service experiences, and difficult post processing issues I had endured ... all in support of my new choice. And then repeat it all over and over and over and over in the Nikon section. What's the point of that?

Suffice it to say that Nikon didn't work for me and now Sony does ... and I can say that AFTER 3 years of use, not speculating on it about a camera I had just chose to replace the Nikon. The personal justification came after years of proof, not a couple of days.

Just a thought to lessen the inflammatory rhetoric and get on with exploring new tools without repeatedly condemning other tools that have worked, and continue to work, perfectly well for a good number of folks.

-Marc

 

[trailshooter]

I think another frustrating reality for all of us is the inherent variability in much of the product we buy. This in addition to the wide variations in customer service we get. I have lenses that "everyone" knows should be dogs that are tac sharp and vice-versa! We do our best to research our equipment before purchase but in the end it's the sample we have that makes for our own experience.

I agree the D800 looks to be a game changer and I have one on order. On the other hand, I don't expect an 80mp dslr anytime soon, either, so for high res landscape work MF still seems to be the best choice for me with a technical camera.

 

[Guy Mancuso]

Hey if there was ONE camera system this forum would not have about 10 diffrent brands listed in it. It's really simple what works for one may not work for another. Also for every 1 compliant there could be hundreds of very satisfied folks as well. The problem is we are all individuals with different needs and styles we shoot everyday. One thing I learned in photography is never say never cause even myself I have bought Nikon on three totally separate time periods. I have both MF and 35 they serve diffrent things and for me having the tech cam and back is pure perfection in shooting. Than I have the D800 to do all the stuff the tech cam dont. Is it perfect far from it but very good. I worked 35 years to get to the tech cam level of perfection I personally am not giving that up. I may make adjustments as we all do but Im not very religious about gear anymore. Whatever works than go with it but really the true answer here is this whatever compromise your willing to accept is the one for you since there is not ONE system that can do it all. I have not had many issues with my MF kit over the years but sure I ran into a few frustrating moments. Frankly that's Murphy's law just spitting at you sometimes deal with it or get out. No shame in either. I will say I do care about folks getting in and out of MF because I do care about the format

Fred good luck in your next setup.

 

[johnnygoesdigital]

Forums are about exchanging ideas, questions and experiences. I make no excuse for my comments. I was dismayed at the quality and performance of those MFD cameras. I will not capitulate to an ideology because it's unpopular, or expensive. Perhaps, I lacked wisdom and judgement in my assessment of photographers whose opinions I thought I respected... that is, until they're offended. The curtain was pulled back to reveal more politics and a particular governance of ideas, whose comments towards me, seem more self serving than useful. Fred's expression and application of skill, and imagination with his lighting, and carefully selected models resonates with my idea of portraiture. Naturally, I wanted to know why he's giving up MFD. His reasons are the same as mine. I've toned down my frustration considerably and have tried to contribute in a useful way, but this topic is relevant to my past experience. I would appreciate it Marc, if you could consider this, as my admiration for your countless contributions to understanding photography and technique have elevated many to an awareness with intellect. I thank you for that.

 

[Steve Hendrix]

There is a very big difference between a product released a few days ago and a product that was released years ago being buggy.

I know Fred. I agree. I wasn't making an argument, only a very small point. That I expect 35mm to lose some of its "never had any issues" perceived legacy as they push harder on that format. I also expect them to resolve those issues faster than medium format ever will.

I agree with others that the bottom line on the thread is that shooting medium format can be difficult in numerous ways - compared to 35mm. For some, that difficulty vs how far they'll get with 35mm quality isn't worth the effort. I don't think anyone has any argument with that. But not everyone will agree with going down that path either.


Steve Hendrix

 

[dick]

After dealing with the lack of reliability (camera lockups and erratic behavior, Phase One), the primitive bodies and the lousy viewfinder/auto focus combination I absolutely had enough of medium format digital. You can add to that poor customer service from Phase One.

In comparison I needed to service an out of production Hasselblad V lens. Three days and it was on it's way back home, despite needing replacement parts.

I won't go into the flakey performance of the Phase One DF. Both mine and rented ones. The Phase One AF was slightly better.

Why not get a Hasselblad or Sinar back for your Hasselblad?

...there is more to MFD than Phase!

 

[Jack]

I think one of Fred's points that got bypassed is the relative ease of use. Anybody who has shot MF digital of any sort can tell you it is not usually as simple as picking up your camera and shooting. Correction -- it can be that simple but you won't generally get the optimal result unless you pay attention to a few details, details that may vary by system chosen. Anyway, by comparison, picking up a DSLR and just shooting and getting great results is pretty common. The separator I see here is we now have that DSLR convenience, speed and light-weight portability in a package that generates 36MP of essentially MF caliber image quality. Moreover, you can own an entire outfit for about the same cost as a naked body (no back) and a single lens from P, M or H.

Couple the convenience with the cost and the D800 is a compelling argument to say the least. But if you need the ultimate image quality regardless of workflow and price, MF digital is where you will end up. OTOH, if you can live with results that are say 85% of that ultimate MF IQ, and/or are willing to accept that level to gain the added convenience, then things get murky.

Sometimes "good enough" is, and for those folks MF now seems a much tougher sale...

 

[darr]

It seems quality lenses for the D800 are the weak link in the chain at the moment. The Zeiss lenses are not even enough according to some reviews. But as Jack says, what is good enough for some, makes others turn towards MF.

It is an exciting time to be in photography!

 

[Quentin_Bargate]

Well we are all different but I have not had a problem with my H4D-50 since I purchased it nearly two years ago and regard it as head and shoulders above any 35mm digital camera I have owned or used. On the other hand, I have not tried a D800 (moved to Sony when the A900 came out) but the samples look great.

 

[johnnygoesdigital]

In fairness, the DB's themselves were never the issue - It was always the bundled camera itself. MFD will gain a huge market share...again, if the camera's are up to par with the rest of the technology.

 

[Geoff]

Having gone to MFDB a couple of years ago, I share the frustrations that others have had - any interruption in work, no matter how infrequent, is upsetting. That said, the quality is so good that any interest in lesser setups has disappeared. I keep looking for some way to get both ease of use/portability/smaller size with the IQ of MFDB. Still looking. The D800 goes a long long way to that, as does an M9. Not sure if there are others, but perhaps they will emerge.

And yes, MFDB isn't always forgiving: you have to be willing to get smacked by the gear every once in a while, and some shots just don't make it. Its part of the challenge.

 

[Stefan Steib]

Fred

I remember a time when MF was easy. This was when I used my Pentax 6x7 and it was nearly as fast as my minoltas I used back then. But then came Digital. In the beginning there were tethered backs only. After some years they got off the leash and now after roughly 17 years we are at a workflowpoint where digital KB has been maybe 7-5 years ago. There is a simple reason: the R&D budgets of a Canon or Nikon operation are probably 10 or more times larger per year than what was spent for MF on all makers for the last ten years. Of course because they sell several 100000 x more cameras (though at a smaller price)than MF.
If this would not show it would be crazy- or all Japanese Engineers would be stupid. They are not and no matter what can be done from a creative side and clever marketing for MF there is a point which was to come, and this was the appearance of the D800. This is only the first one, it will not be the last one and the ones to come will be even better.

As I have said "some" times before, it was clear it would happen.
Nobody wanted to hear it. Well there still are the large backs and the best resolution. This will work for some more time. But when the current technical devellopment will continue, there are about a 2-3 years maximum left.

Hartblei makes lenses that feed these 35mm chips with what they need. I already see what the responses are. We also offer outstanding wideangle capabilities that will help to keep MF alive. But there must be more.

If the MF Backmakers do not wake up now - SOON - this will be lethal.

I welcome that this thread was started. You are a working Pro and you show that this matters to you. Now lets hope, our scandinavian friends do listen - and - react soon.

Regards
Stefan

 

[fotografz]

Forums are about exchanging ideas, questions and experiences. I make no excuse for my comments. I was dismayed at the quality and performance of those MFD cameras. I will not capitulate to an ideology because it's unpopular, or expensive. Perhaps, I lacked wisdom and judgement in my assessment of photographers whose opinions I thought I respected... that is, until they're offended. The curtain was pulled back to reveal more politics and a particular governance of ideas, whose comments towards me, seem more self serving than useful. Fred's expression and application of skill, and imagination with his lighting, and carefully selected models resonates with my idea of portraiture. Naturally, I wanted to know why he's giving up MFD. His reasons are the same as mine. I've toned down my frustration considerably and have tried to contribute in a useful way, but this topic is relevant to my past experience. I would appreciate it Marc, if you could consider this, as my admiration for your countless contributions to understanding photography and technique have elevated many to an awareness with intellect. I thank you for that.

Again, I do appreciate that you had a frustrating experience, in turn you should recognize that those that do not agree aren't going to just sit there mute. Did you actually expect that to happen? :ROTFL:

Mostly that is because others haven't had such experiences, but of course you don't see "Why I am sticking with MFD" threads mashing Nikon in the Nikon section either, do you?

I've worked with my H MFD gear for many years now, they have paid for themselves and earned their keep, performed flawlessly with few exceptions. Clients love the results, and don't care what I use ... they trust I'll use what is correct for the job. I just finished 3 HD TV commercials using MFD stills and some very creative editing where we went to the limits of push-ins, tight crops and pans. Client bought it on the first edit, which is pretty rare.

That is my experience in a nut-shell. I don't need to disparage something else to support that.

I see little evidence of an "Ideological conspiracy", maybe some passion in what one believes, based on what they see with their eyes as opposed to a passel of words.

You admire Fred's work, good for you. I admire about 10,000 photographer's work, and don't care what gear they use. Using their gear choices isn't going to make me them.

My favorite photograph of Jack's was shot on film, and damned if can remember what camera or lens he used ... nor does it matter The most creative and inventive photographer I know, and I know quite a few, uses a Contax 645 and 22 meg Phase back, or a Leica M9 .... that is all he ever uses. Etc. etc., etc.

When I think of that, it makes these sort of debates seem rather silly.

-Marc

 

[FredBGG]

Its 8 x 8 cm pola, so I would think its Fuji GX680 lenses .-)

That's right.

Fuji Gx680IIIs with the 180mm 3.2 shot @ 3.2

Here is another shot taken with the 180mm 3.2
This was processed deliberately for strong grain
and inmo still makes the lens shine....

 

[FredBGG]

Why not get a Hasselblad or Sinar back for your Hasselblad?

...there is more to MFD than Phase!

Sold my Hasselblad V System years ago.

Used the Hasselblad 110mm F2 on my Phase One cameras.

The lens is fantastic and was the most stable on the Phase One cameras..... rather ironic.

For the type of look I got with the 110mm I prefer to shoot film with the Fuji gx680 and the 180 3.2 or if I'm going digital I can get a similar look with the D800 and 85mm 1.4 or the 85mm PC-E

 

[fotografz]

Fred

I remember a time when MF was easy. This was when I used my Pentax 6x7 and it was nearly as fast as my minoltas I used back then. But then came Digital. In the beginning there were tethered backs only. After some years they got off the leash and now after roughly 17 years we are at a workflowpoint where digital KB has been maybe 7-5 years ago. There is a simple reason: the R&D budgets of a Canon or Nikon operation are probably 10 or more times larger per year than what was spent for MF on all makers for the last ten years. Of course because they sell several 100000 x more cameras (though at a smaller price)than MF.
If this would not show it would be crazy- or all Japanese Engineers would be stupid. They are not and no matter what can be done from a creative side and clever marketing for MF there is a point which was to come, and this was the appearance of the D800. This is only the first one, it will not be the last one and the ones to come will be even better.

As I have said "some" times before, it was clear it would happen.
Nobody wanted to hear it. Well there still are the large backs and the best resolution. This will work for some more time. But when the current technical devellopment will continue, there are about a 2-3 years maximum left.

Hartblei makes lenses that feed these 35mm chips with what they need. I already see what the responses are. We also offer outstanding wideangle capabilities that will help to keep MF alive. But there must be more.

If the MF Backmakers do not wake up now - SOON - this will be lethal.

I welcome that this thread was started. You are a working Pro and you show that this matters to you. Now lets hope, our scandinavian friends do listen - and - react soon.

Regards
Stefan

Stefan, I think this is somewhat unfair assessment of the achievements made by MFD companies, which largely depends on applications.

For me, moving to 35mm as the sole platform, no matter what meg, is a non-option ... I can't hack 1/250 top sync speed. Where are leaf-shutter lenses for 35mm cameras? I can put my back on a tech camera with full movements and no compromise optics, that has never worked very well with 35mm versions. I work with a waist-level finder, those don't exist for 35mm anymore. I do not like working all day looking though a squiny viewfinder ... been there done that, and so on.

It also surmises that sensor makers like Dalsa are asleep at the wheel, and the same abilities can't be placed in a larger sensor.

There is a lot of hype about the IQ of the D800 ... which I admit I am having a very difficult time seeing, even downloading files and playing with them. I'm sure it is there, I just can't see it. That worries me more than the future of MFD or anything else My old H3D/31 files look better to me ...

Heck, maybe it's time to move from the Sony since I don't like where they are going with their EVF technologies, and get a D800 and a couple of the better lenses ... if I could get one that is, seems everyone here bought them all :ROTFL:

-Marc