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!

Is Medium Format Right for Me?

Shashin

Well-known member
I have btw. calculated the cost per click for the Fuji. If I take 10,000 photos with it over its life time, it's $1.54 or lower per photo, including film, developing (which I don't do myself) and scanning (which I do myself). Then all the gear is written off, including scanner and lenses. If I take more photos or I'm able to sell the gear or if I start developing myself, the cost per photo will go down. Particularly if I start developing myself. If I had used 6 x 4.5 film, like a Mamiya or Pentax 645, the cost per photo would go down more than 40%.
So, from your numbers, then you concur that film is not a cheaper solution. Which was the point I was trying to make.

The aesthetics of format choice is a personal one, as you have pointed out, and really not something that can be "better" or "worse." I assume you have not been shooting MFD and so you are basing what you see on the internet, which is really not a great measure of the properties of any system. I happen to print with it and at large scales. I certainly see a significant difference in the size of the format and I am not talking about splitting hairs when pixel peeping. YMMV.
 

Jorgen Udvang

Subscriber Member
So, from your numbers, then you concur that film is not a cheaper solution. Which was the point I was trying to make.

The aesthetics of format choice is a personal one, as you have pointed out, and really not something that can be "better" or "worse." I assume you have not been shooting MFD and so you are basing what you see on the internet, which is really not a great measure of the properties of any system. I happen to print with it and at large scales. I certainly see a significant difference in the size of the format and I am not talking about splitting hairs when pixel peeping. YMMV.
But I'm not "bashing" it. I'm just trying to see how useful it is and to what degree it stands out from other formats.

As a graphic designer, I frequently work with other people's photos, and sometimes, those photos are printed large, either as a part of a design or on their own. That is where I learn the most about photography, what works the best from a visual as well as a technical point of view. That has also taught me to be very critical to any established truth, particularly during these internet times, where facts, true or not, are killing many interesting discussions about creativity.

Still, studying and trying to understand the underlying technology is important to be able to "connect the dots" and not having to try out every single piece of equipment on this earth to reach one's visual objectives. Whatever photo we look at, esthetically pleasing or not, is made with some kind of equipment, and that equipment, either we like it or not, influences the end result to some degree. That's what this forum is all about, isn't it? The crossroads between technology and visual arts. Heck, that's what photography is all about if you ask me.
 

bumgardner

New member
Well I got to try out the H3DII-39 today. Honestly I was amazed. I thought the camera would seem a lot slower. I really did not find myself waiting on the camera. I was actually surprised by how accurate the af was.

I have a few more days to make my final decision. I really wanted to test out an AFDII body and a back preferably like the Aptus 75... but it looks like no one locally to test out.

Anyway here are a few pics...




 
Top