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!

Landscape Photography: D800E or MF Tech?

Many of you own Nikon D800 and MF Tech cameras.

May I ask what are the factors influences your decision to use a particular system, when you own both, specifically for Landscape Photography?.

I'm using my Phase One DF with IQ160 and Mamiya 75-150 "D" & 55mm. I shot some with Mamiya 28mm "D", however finally I sold it. I was thinking to move to MF technical camera for wide angles.

However since Nikon came up with 36Mp DSLR, and 35mm format has better DOF than MF, better low light performance (when required), and availability of Nikon 24mm f/3.5 PC-E, does it make any sense to invest in MF technical cameras for Landscape Photography anymore?

I would like to sit back and listen what you have to say.

Thanks,

Subrata
 

tashley

Subscriber Member
I have a D800, D800E and IQ180.

The camera I chose would depend on the exact sort of landscape, the size of the intended print, and how far I had to walk to get to it! If the scene suited a wide lens AND needed movements, I would choose the Phase back on my Cambo with whatever wide lens suited the scene. If I needed a very large print, over about 36 inches on the long side, I would always choose the Phase.

For everything else I would choose the D800E. There are lenses available at all focal lengths that will suit this sort of work and make very good (if not always utterly perfect) use of the sensor. The weakness is that there are no very good wide angle lenses with movements. The 24PC-E largely gets a bad rap on the D800 though Ming Thein is a valiant voice in its defence and must have an extremely good copy of the lens. The longer PC-E lenses, I have not tried, but sound better than adequate.

But if I had to hike a long way (more than a mile round trip) I would not even think of taking the Phase gear. Not unless I heard of a 2,000 metre tall waterfall surrounded by dinosaurs and naked virgins that no one else had ever photographed.
 

gazwas

Active member
Both can produce fantastic imagery!

IMO the decision boils down to what gives you the most kicks.

Give me a beautifully engineered Rm3di and some of those funny looking LF lenses any day of the week over any 35mm camera. Not because they're more expensive or produce better IQ but just because they make me happy using them.

Without sounding like a new age tree huggin hippy (Mannn), some only see the value (£$€) of a piece of kit, I see the joy. The camera that made me enjoy the process more would be the one I choose.
 

David Schneider

New member
But if I had to hike a long way (more than a mile round trip) I would not even think of taking the Phase gear. Not unless I heard of a 2,000 metre tall waterfall surrounded by dinosaurs and naked virgins that no one else had ever photographed.
Off topic, but wasn't it Ansel Adams who said something like, "If I have to walk more than 200 yards, it's not photogenic."
 

tashley

Subscriber Member
Off topic, but wasn't it Ansel Adams who said something like, "If I have to walk more than 200 yards, it's not photogenic."

200 yards is just lazy... a one mile round trip hardly makes me an athlete! Maybe he had a Zone system like public transport in London, where he just wouldn't go to anywhere further than Zone 1

:D
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
No question MF tech cam. Why is there any doubt . Your using the best optics made period. The D800 can't match it . Close but it's still a stretch. Why I have both even if I went to a 40 mpx back it still will have more detail and range. The D800 is not the smoking gun . I own both and the tech cam wins plus there is nothing in Nikon that can do movements like a tech cam and never will. I would not call the 24pc lens killer in any category. There is nothing that can beat a tech cam. Why I want to keep mine.
 

dick

New member
No question MF tech cam. Why is there any doubt . Your using the best optics made period. The D800 can't match it . Close but it's still a stretch. Why I have both even if I went to a 40 mpx back it still will have more detail and range. The D800 is not the smoking gun . I own both and the tech cam wins plus there is nothing in Nikon that can do movements like a tech cam and never will. I would not call the 24pc lens killer in any category. There is nothing that can beat a tech cam. Why I want to keep mine.
...trouble is... what do you call a tech cam?

There is not a decent tech cam on the market... one that gives you a full range of yaw-free movements both ends, with the ability to use 100 degree to 3(0) degree lenses, without resorting to retro-focus or tele lenses, and with adequate rigidity between standards for multi-shot WA without an electronic shutter?
 

gazwas

Active member
There is not a decent tech cam on the market... one that gives you a full range of yaw-free movements both ends, with the ability to use 100 degree to 3(0) degree lenses, without resorting to retro-focus or tele lenses, and with adequate rigidity between standards for multi-shot WA without an electronic shutter?
.....or a bag big and sturdy enough to carry that beast in. ;)
 

torger

Active member
I have a Linhof Techno and a Canon system. I'm a bit new on the Techno still but so far I've noted a few things.

The Techno system is in practice not heavier than my Canon when I go hiking, it is about 8 kgs + 2.5 kg tripod/head. The difference is that I get more lenses with the Canon so I can do some tele shots, and perhaps catch some wildlife if I'm lucky.

I'm a bit of a view camera romantic, guess I've read too many Ansel Adams books. I really want to have good tilt and shift options when I do landscape to fine-tune composition, and the quality of the Techno gears are much nicer than the tiny knobs on my Canon TS-E (although they do the work too).

Concerning image quality I think my 33 megapixel Techno system would slightly outperform a D800 thanks to better corner-to-corner sharpness at working aperture of f/11, but it is probably not a huge difference, need higher resolution backs for that which I cannot afford.

For me as an amateur it is as much about having a pleasing photographic experience as the technical quality of the end result. This is a very personal thing. I know some think digital view cameras suck badly (dark ground glass on wides, more limited movements than 4x5" etc), but to me it is a large step forward compared to tilt-shift lenses on a DSLR, and I think pancake camera manufacturers have spread a little bit too much FUD in the view camera direction. I recently said in a similar thread if it was all about image quality I'd have a Nikon D7000 and a pano head and stitch my images, it would be possible in 80% of my pictures since my scenes are most of the times static. But that's not how I want to create pictures, I prefer one-shot when possible. I'm not really into the focus stacking technique either, I rather make a tilt/swing compromise instead or let the background be out of focus.

I actually invested in this system very recently when I already knew about the D800.
 

dick

New member
...trouble is... what do you call a tech cam?

There is not a decent tech cam on the market... one that gives you a full range of yaw-free movements both ends, with the ability to use 100 degree to 3(0) degree lenses, without resorting to retro-focus or tele lenses, and with adequate rigidity between standards for multi-shot WA without an electronic shutter?
.....or a bag big and sturdy enough to carry that beast in. ;)
This is a major problem... as anything that can or would provide all the functions and movements I would like, and rigidity and quick and easy setting of movements, would be likely to be too heavy to carry many hundreds of meters, but, if I could focus stack and shift-and-stitch without touching the camera, I could leave the 10Kg tripod behind and use the Gitzo carbon... so it will probably be more of an architectural camera rather than a Landscape camera.
 

dick

New member
I have a Linhof Techno and a Canon system. I'm a bit new on the Techno still but so far I've noted a few things.

For me as an amateur it is as much about having a pleasing photographic experience as the technical quality of the end result. This is a very personal thing. I know some think digital view cameras suck badly (dark ground glass on wides, more limited movements than 4x5" etc),
If you use MFD on a 54 camera, you get the same movements, which are effectively bigger due to the smaller format. I converted my Sinar P3 from a P2, so it is an MFD camera with all the movements of 54, good for shift-and-stitch without additional hardware.
 

jlm

Workshop Member
speaking as a mechanical designer, once you reduce the format size, say from 4 x 5 to MFDB, the lens focal lengths shrink accordingly for the same fov; so now instead of the 210 Schneider on a 4x5, i am using a 120, for example. what this does is reduce the real estate left for the standards, since now the flange to sensor distance has been reduced. so the mechanism for making the movements work gets quite constrained
 

dick

New member
speaking as a mechanical designer, once you reduce the format size, say from 4 x 5 to MFDB, the lens focal lengths shrink accordingly for the same fov; so now instead of the 210 Schneider on a 4x5, i am using a 120, for example. what this does is reduce the real estate left for the standards, since now the flange to sensor distance has been reduced. so the mechanism for making the movements work gets quite constrained
I am also a mechanical Engineer (and Electronic and Agricultural).

You are talking about the distance between the standards, which makes it difficult or impossible to get infinity focus/room for much tilt with non-retro-focus lenses of short focal length on traditional view cameras?

For WA, most photographers resort to a pancake cameras with limited or no movements...

I am going to try to overcome this by putting my 100 degree Schneider Apo-Digitar 47 XL in a recessed mount in an electronic shutter with the special Sinar Sliding back that replaces the rear carrier frame... Pancake cams are not cheap, but the (new) cost of this setup is horrendous,,, but I have been buying bits on Ebay as they come up.
 

torger

Active member
However since Nikon came up with 36Mp DSLR, and 35mm format has better DOF than MF, better low light performance (when required), and availability of Nikon 24mm f/3.5 PC-E, does it make any sense to invest in MF technical cameras for Landscape Photography anymore?
A comment about the DOF. If we assume perfect lenses and that we can accept longer shutter speeds format size has no effect, only resolution has.

A D800 with PC-E 24mm at f/8 is (roughly) equivalent to my MF Aptus 75 (33 megapixel 36x48mm) with a Schneider 35mm at f/11 -- same FOV, same resolution reduction to diffraction, same DOF, longer shutterspeed at MF due to smaller aperture.

What you win in shorter focal lengths on the smaller format you lose on smaller pixels and thus larger aperture is needed to avoid resolution loss due to diffraction.

However, in practice people are typically more afraid of diffraction in MF, and MF lenses like Rodenstocks are optimized to work optimally at f/8 (Schneiders probably more like f/11), and of course many get 60 or 80 megapixels rather than 33 or 39, so you generally worry more about DOF in MF, but then you get higher resolution pictures too.

My estimation is that with f/8 as working aperture on D800 one will have more corner sharpness issues than with f/11 as working aperture on a MF tech camera system. There isn't lots of D800 (or Tech camera) resolution testing around though.

At these levels of resolution (30+ megapixels) I personally think it is highly valuable with tilt, to make the best of the DOF you have. Some prefer doing focus stacking instead though.
 

dick

New member
At these levels of resolution (30+ megapixels) I personally think it is highly valuable with tilt, to make the best of the DOF you have. Some prefer doing focus stacking instead though.
If you have the ability to tilt, it is great, and suitable for moving subjects, like a line of ballerinas.

...but a DSLR with built-in auto-stacking would be very useful, especially for 3D (non-co-planar) subjects for which tilt cannot get everything in focus.
 

lmeiners

New member
It seems to me that with the introduction of the D800 we have passed the tipping point in digital cameras. I started using 4x5 and MF format cameras before digital got started and have waited out the digital era until something came along that was both as good in terms of IQ and that I could afford. I was about to pull the trigger on getting a MF camera that had a full frame sensor and was leaning toward getting a HB. Then I started poking around this forum. I find a post from year or two back from Guy Mancuso saying that he doesn't care much for 35mm. Then the D800 comes out, he gets one, and has to admit it's pretty darn good. Time passes. Now his MF back is for sale but not for technical reasons, which I can understand. Yet, the back is for sale. Hmm. I ordered my D800E a few days ago.
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
LOL yes freely admit I hated 35mm as it never lived up to its worth or IQ . Functionally its great but lenses and sensors always fell way short of the mark. The D800 does change that some what . Its much better and Nikon G glass is better than i thought which is a huge plus for it. But Im only selling my back for a lower one and not getting out . I still know the value of MF and i don't want out. I'm just stuck in a situation that i have been avoiding to pay off. But Im not stepping down much at all 40 mpx MF is still amazing and i can never get what a tech cam can do with a Nikon. I can split these systems and cover myself extremely well for almost any gig. Thats something most folks don't consider for me its covering everything thrown at me . Hobbyists luckily don't have to deal with this. Heck i can go from a micro chip to a Boeing 787 in the same day. LOL

Its that crazy. But I still love these challenges and honestly its the only thing that keeps me from boredom.
 

Wayne Fox

Workshop Member
If I needed a very large print, over about 36 inches on the long side, I would always choose the Phase.
I guess my question would be how do you know when you are going to need a large print before you've ever taken the shot?

I have hundreds of images take in the earlier days of digital with sensors that cannot handle printing large that would look awesome large. Certainly not every shot qualifies, but as a landscape photographer who's primary goal it is to print large images, I live in fear of heading out with a lesser camera (as I did on a trip to Tuscany) and get some fantastic images only to be limited as to what I can do with them. When I shoot my plan is to always get something good enough to print large.

I'm going to give the 800e a go as soon as I can get one, and the biggest advantage for me is telephoto work which MF doesn't do very well. I agree I think up to 36-40" it should be very good. I would be surprised if well equipped it is a much lighter backpack than a tech camera setup. I don't think it will be much lighter than my Phamiya gear. but it will be more flexible.

At this price it's hard to pass up just to see what I can do with it.
 
Top