RVB
Member
LOL :ROTFL:
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!
Return of the Warrior
- Thread starter tashley
- Start date
RVB
Member
Wise words...
Kudos Graham! You have summed this entire business up perfectly in 4 words -- well 5 if picky ones don't allow the contraction
:clap::clap::clap:
manouch shirzad
Workshop & Subscriber Member
It's funny, I've gone pretty much the opposite direction of Tim. I haven't touched a DSLR in 2 years, but I have bought a Hassy 501cm and the other day I complemented my Mamiya AFD with an rz67 IID. I also plan on getting into large format in the near future. I couldn't be less interested in DSLRs, no matter how many megapixels you cram into them, and I'm sure I'm not the only one who feels that way. So can we please bury this false conclusion that one (or many for that sake) person's choice means the "death" of everything else out there? Quite frankly it's ridiculous and it's boring many of us to tears.
Last edited:
GrahamWelland
Subscriber & Workshop Member
Mammy,
I'm absolutely with you on this. In the last year I've shot almost exclusively with my Alpas & IQ / P25+ and fill in with my Fuji X-Pro1 / X-E1 and D600. However, I've had great joy shooting with my Fuji G617 and Rollei 6008i2. I'm also tempted to get another 5x4 or maybe a Techno for both analog and digital.
My full spectrum D800 has been conspicuous by it's absence in my day to day photography. That's not because it's deficient in any way - absolutely NOT!! - but I just have no love for it. My buddy has been borrowing it for a couple of months to shoot astro images. I actually prefer my measly 24mp D600 for the travel and convenience shooting.
At the end of the day, it's all good.
I'm absolutely with you on this. In the last year I've shot almost exclusively with my Alpas & IQ / P25+ and fill in with my Fuji X-Pro1 / X-E1 and D600. However, I've had great joy shooting with my Fuji G617 and Rollei 6008i2. I'm also tempted to get another 5x4 or maybe a Techno for both analog and digital.
My full spectrum D800 has been conspicuous by it's absence in my day to day photography. That's not because it's deficient in any way - absolutely NOT!! - but I just have no love for it. My buddy has been borrowing it for a couple of months to shoot astro images. I actually prefer my measly 24mp D600 for the travel and convenience shooting.
At the end of the day, it's all good.
I agree that part of the fun is to make pictures with an odd camera that's not everyone else is using. I only have a tech cam now, but I'm thinking about getting an old Hasselblad H1/H2 for my H-mount back just for fun. A friend of mine has several legacy cameras which he can use with his V-mount 22 megapixel back, it's fun and unique looks can be had.
Anyway, the key issue is of course that new MF gear, mostly the backs, are so offensively expensive and the actual image quality difference is no longer huge. This is the main reason why these discussions exist. In the film days the quality difference was much larger and the price difference much smaller.
As long as MFDB makers can motivate the huge difference in price towards professional photographers they have their market and all is cool. If that is possible a few years from now I'm not sure, and if the market shrinks further then we might have a situation when medium format backs will be as common as scanning backs are today, i e speciality equipment for reproduction photography, industrial or aerial photography for mapmaking.
If the pressure could lead to a shift towards more affordable digital backs I'd be happy, but it seems more likely to me that we'll rather see further price increases due to higher end products (to keep distance from smaller formats) and possibly smaller market. I think the DSLR-like bodies can take on a different direction (Leica S and Pentax), but I'm personally more interested in digital backs as this is needed for tech cams and this is what makes MF fun, being able to use it on different camera systems.
I as the amateur photographer I am will hang in there as long as I can motivate the cost.
Anyway, the key issue is of course that new MF gear, mostly the backs, are so offensively expensive and the actual image quality difference is no longer huge. This is the main reason why these discussions exist. In the film days the quality difference was much larger and the price difference much smaller.
As long as MFDB makers can motivate the huge difference in price towards professional photographers they have their market and all is cool. If that is possible a few years from now I'm not sure, and if the market shrinks further then we might have a situation when medium format backs will be as common as scanning backs are today, i e speciality equipment for reproduction photography, industrial or aerial photography for mapmaking.
If the pressure could lead to a shift towards more affordable digital backs I'd be happy, but it seems more likely to me that we'll rather see further price increases due to higher end products (to keep distance from smaller formats) and possibly smaller market. I think the DSLR-like bodies can take on a different direction (Leica S and Pentax), but I'm personally more interested in digital backs as this is needed for tech cams and this is what makes MF fun, being able to use it on different camera systems.
I as the amateur photographer I am will hang in there as long as I can motivate the cost.
tashley
Subscriber Member
I want to be really clear... This thread was never started or responded to with the belief that perfection is a sufficient condition for making good art, not is it even usually even a necessary condition. But sometimes it is necessary - depending on what the vision is for the finished work.
I really do acknowledge the danger of questing for perfection being something that can get in the way of making art. But actually I don't think I do that - because the great majority of my work is not concerned with perfection at all. Not that a great deal of my work qualifies as art
In fact most of my own most favourite work, regardless of what sells, is truly madly deeply imperfect... such as this one, shot on an MP and processed by me in a cupboard under the stairs and scanned on a useless home scanner...
I really do acknowledge the danger of questing for perfection being something that can get in the way of making art. But actually I don't think I do that - because the great majority of my work is not concerned with perfection at all. Not that a great deal of my work qualifies as art
In fact most of my own most favourite work, regardless of what sells, is truly madly deeply imperfect... such as this one, shot on an MP and processed by me in a cupboard under the stairs and scanned on a useless home scanner...
