Site Sponsors
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3 LastLast
Results 51 to 100 of 150

Thread: Why did you go back to full frame DSLR?

  1. #51
    Senior Subscriber Member Steen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Denmark, CPH
    Posts
    2,500
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    12

    Why did you go back to full frame DSLR?


    I'm unable to see the question as inflammatory.

    It's no different than asking people why they sold off their DSLR and jumped to e.g. Micro Four Third and wanting to know how it feels.

    Then again I'm in the process to go back to APS-C from 'full-frame' (24x36mm) since a burglar has just parted me with my D800E plus my AF-S 1.4/85mm G, my best optic ever

  2. #52
    Administrator, Instructor Guy Mancuso's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    23,623
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2555

    Re: Why did you go back to full frame DSLR?

    Honestly I did not read his posts as inflammatory at all even after seeing hundreds of the same posts. It was and is a genuine question he asked and honestly I really have not seen anyone fly off the handle in response either but maybe I'm not seeing it. Maybe I have more tolerance for it , don't know but regardless of how many times asked it still is a important question to ask. As reluctant as i was to answer it given my situation I still did and it was a personal one at that and I'm still not out of the woods on it either, not by a long shot.
    Its a very upsetting subject for me as I did not want to sell my MF gear at all. But family is first even as a Pro that has to make money to support ones family giving up very nice gear is a really a sour stomach to say the least. I'm still sick over it.
    Photography is all about experimentation and without it you will never learn art.

    www.guymancusophotography.com
    Likes 6 Member(s) liked this post

  3. #53
    Senior Member Swissblad's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    1,204
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Why did you go back to full frame DSLR?

    Quote Originally Posted by Steen View Post
    I'm unable to see the question as inflammatory.

    It's no different than asking people why they sold off their DSLR and jumped to e.g. Micro Four Third and wanting to know how it feels.

    Then again I'm in the process to go back to APS-C from 'full-frame' (24x36mm) since a burglar has just parted me with my D800E plus my AF-S 1.4/85mm G, my best optic ever
    Sorry to hear about that Steen - which DX system are you considering?
    The FX D600 has pretty good IQ at a good price.

  4. #54
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Shashin's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Florida, USA
    Posts
    4,502
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    141

    Re: Why did you go back to full frame DSLR?

    Quote Originally Posted by Steen View Post
    It's no different than asking people why they sold off their DSLR and jumped to e.g. Micro Four Third and wanting to know how it feels.
    But don't you ask that question in the m4/3 forum? The folks that sold off their DSLR would most likely not be in the DSLR forum anymore and would be in the m4/3 forum. It is illogical to go to a group and ask people why they are no longer members of that group.

    Not that anyone making their first post would troll--just ask the Leica folks.

    I think the OP is sincere, but there is history...
    Will

    http://www.hakusancreation.com
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  5. #55
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    3,623
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Why did you go back to full frame DSLR?

    I dont understand why there is a problem how the OPs asked his question.

  6. #56
    Administrator Bob's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Prescott, Arizona
    Posts
    4,492
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    367

    Re: Why did you go back to full frame DSLR?

    Quote Originally Posted by John Perkins View Post
    Hello,

    I am new to the forum and am considering getting an MFDB. After doing a lot of reading here, it seems that some people have given up MFDB and returned to full frame DSLRs.

    Now that it is mid-2013 and the D800(e) is a well-proven machine, and Canon has hints of an even higher MP DSLR for 2014 possibly, it seems the future cost/benefits of MFDB are even murkier.

    I am curious... Who here has recently left MFDB for the D800(e), and why did you do it?

    Many thanks in advance for your views. They will help me form some of my own future plans.

    John
    The main reason is that I am getting older. It just became tedious to maintain effectively three or four systems.
    First of all I absolutely LOVED the Rm3di and have nothing negative to say at all about it. When the IQ2 series was announced I found that the only interesting back for me was the IQ260 due to the longer exposure. At that point, I found that the cost to go from the IQ180 to the IQ260 was just unacceptable so I took a deep breath and bailed.
    I have three sorts of photography:
    1) Serious Landscape
    2) Girls in studio or out
    3) Travel
    1) was best satisfied with the Rm3di plus IQ180, but the DSLR was not too far behind for nearly 100% of my printing needs (my most sold large print was taken with a Canon 1ds MkIII)
    2) The DF was just a PITA and the AF was marginal. The DF+ is just a tad less marginal and lots of pixels are not necessarily a benefit.
    3) Forgettaboutit OMG my back, shoulders, thumbs, etc, etc

    So with a heavy heart and a bit reluctantly, and later than many, I said goodbye to MF other than my Hassy 500 film bodies.
    I did enjoy the journey and if I was 20 years younger then I probably would still be at it (other than the IQ180-IQ260 insult)
    -bob
    Last edited by Bob; 12th August 2013 at 19:57.
    Likes 5 Member(s) liked this post

  7. #57
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Basel, Switzerland
    Posts
    265
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Why did you go back to full frame DSLR?

    Well then.

    My line of camera equipment "really" started with a 5D Mk II. But I was never satified with the results.

    I bought a used H3D-22, was amazed from the result and upgraded finally to a H4D-40. From there, I used that system for ca. 12 months. You may have seen my pics here and there.

    The Medium Format is so wonderful. The files, the clarity. Etc, etc. But the size, the weight. The low light problem. The AF-hunt.

    I bought a D600 just because I knew that my H4D will get into trouble when I buy this D800. I finally did. When the D800e arrived, it was very clear that there is a difference in the files. You can see it. No way to discuss this away.

    BUT: As soon as I started to use the Nikon CLS System along with Pocket Wizards, it was very clear that I can not work any longer with the big camera and the big flashes.

    I had studio flashes with me, remote controlled via a remote (the Priolite system). With the Nikon CLS, I just arranged the light and the flashes did the measurement and the power control on their own.

    What happens, is nothing less than spectacular. Today, I arrange the light ( in terms of light modfier and position) and don't think about the power control. If I really feel there should be more light, I control this via the Zone Controller.

    For my kind of work, this is very essential. I can interact with my models much more thant before: No light meter, no test shots. I work with the model, arrange the light, tweak the power a little bit.

    The resulting files are 98% of what can be achieved with my Hasselblad. This is, why I changed back from MFD to Full-Frame DSLR. The amount of money freed up allowed me the investment into two very serious lenses ( the Zeiss 135 mm 2.0 and the Nikon 200mm 2.0).

    I'm using up to 4 Nikon SB-910, 4 PW's, Zone Controller, Adapter for Bowens Modifier, Umbrellas etc etc. Everything fits into a small package, makes all much more versatile and easy to handle. The biggest piece of my equipment is the Beauty Dish - but I'm pretty sure I'll find nothing smaller.

    Feel free to ask me anything if your want to know more about. But keep in mind that I decided this for MY WORK. There is a small amount of studio work - I'm mostly on location, in Hotels, Apartments etc. I do no (not much) landscape or the like.

    S.
    stanROX.com

    P.S. The first three pictures from my website slider are taken with the D800e recently. Judge yourself about image quality.
    Last edited by Stan ROX; 12th August 2013 at 22:43.
    Likes 6 Member(s) liked this post

  8. #58
    Subscriber & Workshop Member GrahamWelland's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Vancouver, WA
    Posts
    5,803
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    564

    Re: Why did you go back to full frame DSLR?

    I think Guy, Bob and Stan nailed the three main reasons I hear/see for the shift to FF DSLR systems. Opportunity cost/sunk capital, convenience and versatility being just some of them.

    I think that most MF shooters are also probably also using FF DSLRs or equivalent alongside their other gear.

    I totally understand Bob's feelings about the IQ2 cross grades. I think that there are more than a few folks who have a bad taste in their mouth about this round and that compounds on the other factors mentioned earlier.
    Remember: adventure before dementia!

    As Oscar Wilde said, "my tastes are simple, I only like the best"
    Likes 4 Member(s) liked this post

  9. #59
    Senior Member Swissblad's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    1,204
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Why did you go back to full frame DSLR?

    Quote Originally Posted by Bob View Post
    The main reason is that I am getting older. I said goodbye to MF other than my Hassy 500 film bodies.
    Glad to see you kept your classic HB's

  10. #60
    Subscriber Member Jorgen Udvang's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Pratamnak
    Posts
    9,345
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2157

    Re: Why did you go back to full frame DSLR?

    The question is valid and interesting, and the key factor is obviously the D800/E. However, what makes that camera such a strong proposition is more than the camera alone. It's part of a system that:

    - Compares favourably with Digital MF with regards to resolution as well as general image quality for a much lower price and with better handling
    - Is part of a system that also contains "holiday cameras", like the D5200, using the same lenses and accessories
    - Is part of a system that offers the newest, best film 35mm SLR, the F6
    - Is compatible with funky old cameras and lenses for those of us who also have photography as a hobby
    - Offers one of the best, most advanced lighting systems on the planet
    - Offers high quality lenses from 14-800mm in addition to countless third party options
    - ... and the list goes on

    These days, one must have some very special needs or a very strong passion to spend tens of thousands of dollars on exotic medium format cameras when there's a system around that in real world terms can almost everything a digital MF system does, and most of the time does it better, faster and cheaper. For my own needs, I've found that MF film offers things that 35mm digital simply cannot replicate. When it comes to Digital MF compared to a D800/E, I see more limitations than advantages, at least from a commercial point of view.

    It's like Mercedes Benz vs. Bentley. I would love to have the Bentley of course, but for the extra money, what useful advantages does it offer?
    Things I sell: https://www.shutterstock.com/g/epixx?language=en
    Likes 2 Member(s) liked this post

  11. #61
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    1,538
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Why did you go back to full frame DSLR?

    I think the tech camera use case is still pretty strong. It's not about the backs, but about the camera and lenses.

    I use tilt and/or shift in almost all my pictures. Sure I could alter my style to not require it, but it would be a different shooting style and look. I think that perspective control through shift and DoF control through tilt gives a much larger difference in look than the subtle differences you can see in color rendition etc (to me that part is just different, can't say one is better than the other, but then I do landscape not skin tones).

    Sure there are tilt-shift lenses for the 135 systems, but the key focal length 35mm is missing (I use the 1.4x teleconverter on the TS-E 24 II a lot when I shoot Canon), and the optical quality except for Canon's new versions are a little lacking, and longer focal lengths (90mm+) are missing too. With tech cameras there are more focal lengths to choose from which I find important. So far I have six lenses with my tech camera, and I use them all quite frequently, and still like to have more .

    Despite that I have only a 33 megapixel back (for economical reasons) for my Linhof Techno and I have to struggle more with dynamic range than I would with a D800 I prefer to use this for my landscape photography. And it's not the back that's the attraction, it's the camera and lenses.

    However, I think the tech cameras is moving in the wrong direction and I'm a bit worried about that. There is a limit to how precise you can make a camera with movements. Instead of accepting that and say the sweet-spot is f/11 at 60 megapixels (larger apertures and higher resolution may make parallelism issues etc visible to the pixelpeeper), cameras are made more rigid movements are reduced, lens designs are changed to super-corrected retrofocus, so in the end you'll have a camera just as limited as a DSLR tilt-shift lens with the same lens look with the only feature higher resolution. I'm not super-thrilled by focal plane shutters either, it's probably the future as copal is discontinued but I think keeping the tech cam more different from a DSLR is an advantage instead of making it more similar. Because one of the key attractions of using MF is that one is using something different.
    Likes 2 Member(s) liked this post

  12. #62
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Royal Oak, MI and Palm Harbor, FL
    Posts
    8,498
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    44

    Re: Why did you go back to full frame DSLR?

    IMO, we have to take care in making a laundry list of rationale that panders to one's specific predilections, but presents as an absolute. Reasons to use a particular format need not be funded by a passion to spend tens of thousands ... as if only an indefensible action of a rich idiot.

    In fact, it need not be a format question at all using that criteria. Merely look at those easily spending up to $40K on a Leica M digital kit replete with items like a 50/2 @ $7,200 or an $11,000 50/0.95 Noctilux ... to name a few.

    The passion is for specificity in imagery and an experiential relationship with a specific tool

    ... be it an old MF film camera with its' signature look and feel that some feel can't be duplicated, yet others wouldn't want even if it were free ... or a $1K NEX mirrorless that some may feel is almost as good as the $7K Leica M, produces better color rendering and offers AF to boot, allows use of pass-through TTL radio transmitters, takes a myriad of lenses some of which retain that AF, has a better focus peaking system, and an LCD review magnification that can be scrolled, etc., etc. Skewed rationale that makes the act of securing a M system an indefensible act of a rich idiot.

    It totally depends on a need for specifics that best aid in producing the imagery one desires.

    My S system specifics meets my needs to produce my desired imagery: a laundry list, but one specifically of my own that doesn't negate the choices others may make and paint them the fool.

    - Big bright viewfinder no 35mm can ever match.

    - Same ratio, but larger sensor size than any 35mm DSLR ... producing a specific MF signature, albeit less of it than the big gun 645 sensors.

    - The simplest, fastest, most personally adaptable and easy control layout of any camera I've ever used ... and I've used them all.

    - Versatility in meeting my lighting needs that no 35mm DSLR offers, and second only to Phase One with LS lenses for high sync speed (speed-lights don't cut it for most of the work I do, including the Nikon system which I tried and rejected. I'll take Profoto AIR with full AIR sync, AIR levels control at the camera, and on demand lighting power that would require a bushel basket full of speed-lights crammed into one modifier to match ... for my varied applications both outdoors- i.e., overcome the sun ... or in the studio- i.e., stopped down macro work at minimum ISO ).

    - A consistent set of ground-up designed focal lengths that do not struggle to keep up with the sensor ... and in fact easily outperform it so as to avoid obsolescence should the resolution increase in future. For me, native AF lenses are the reason to own a system, and I do not want to revert back to manual focus only lenses to get the look I prefer ... which is why I do not own a Nikon.

    - A vast pool of other MF optics for creative selection ... fully functional H lenses (including high sync speeds or focal plane, and AF), Fully functional Contax 645 optics, beloved Zeiss CF and FE, Pentax, etc.

    - So far, better service response than anything I experienced with Canon or Nikon, who are squeezing out the independent repair places, and are now rejecting warranty work with claims of abuse at a record level (massive complaint thread about this on the Digital Wedding Forum, whom mostly use Canon and Nikon products).


    BTW, the luxury car analogy is a non sequitur ... it has nothing to do with functional photography needs, or creative subjectivity.


    - Marc
    Likes 4 Member(s) liked this post

  13. #63
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    3,623
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Why did you go back to full frame DSLR?

    Here is my subjective experience:
    When I shoot ff-DSLR: The images do look good on the camera screen, and in most cases do look similary good when I view or print them later on;
    I get many many "just fine" images (if we talk about technical IQ, my skills are another question ); Many images look 95% right to me in regards of color/detail/tones; but not often would they blow me away.

    When I shoot Leica S: Images look good on camera-display-review, but when I look at them later or print them, they look even better than expected. Sometimes I see details in the images which I have not seen in reality.
    I shoot less images of the same subject, get less "good" images, but almost always some which look 99% right to me in regards of IQ. It lo
    It seems quite easy to get what I want even with much post processing knowledge;
    Last edited by Paratom; 13th August 2013 at 05:15.
    Likes 3 Member(s) liked this post

  14. #64
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Shashin's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Florida, USA
    Posts
    4,502
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    141

    Re: Why did you go back to full frame DSLR?

    There are two fundamental criteria in a camera for me:

    1. I think it is cool.

    2. I can afford it.

    Everything else is rather secondary.
    Will

    http://www.hakusancreation.com
    Likes 10 Member(s) liked this post

  15. #65
    Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Lyon, France
    Posts
    225
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    49

    Re: Why did you go back to full frame DSLR?

    I use the H4D50 for landscape. I find the results excellent and the large viewfinder helps to compose and big camera slow the process, so images are better to me. File are amazing for post production

    I use D800e when I need to react quickly or to be more discreet : street photo. With good lens, result is very good and street photos don't need all those details.

    Tilt-shift is a difficult game and my next challenge. Moving to tech cam or to the HTS is the question. It's difficult to focus with the HTS in the field and results have been disappointing for me (not so much keepers, focus error, DOF error).

    In fact, the d50 back doesn't seem to fit with tech cams and I don't know what are the plus vs the HTS.

    At the end, I really love my H4d50 but I like very much my D800e.
    Likes 2 Member(s) liked this post

  16. #66
    Subscriber & Workshop Member GrahamWelland's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Vancouver, WA
    Posts
    5,803
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    564

    Re: Why did you go back to full frame DSLR?

    Quote Originally Posted by Shashin View Post
    There are two fundamental criteria in a camera for me:

    1. I think it is cool.

    2. I can afford it.

    Everything else is rather secondary.
    I may have to change my signature line.
    Remember: adventure before dementia!

    As Oscar Wilde said, "my tastes are simple, I only like the best"
    Likes 3 Member(s) liked this post

  17. #67
    Senior Member MaxKißler's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Berlin
    Posts
    387
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Why did you go back to full frame DSLR?

    Well, I'm not sure whether this is a contribution to the thoughts that were already expresed here but here's my story anyway. I've recently made the switch from MF to 35mm. I sold my entire RZ67 gear to a friend of mine.
    I think she made the right choice as she shoots film a lot and hope she'll be happy with it. It was a tough call but since I had no 35mm camera it was the only reasonable decision to make. If I were photographing solely for the fun of it, I'll probably have kept it, but focussing the RZ with a digital back was permanently eating up my concentration. This was very frustrating especially when I had to focus on more important aspects during a shooting. I'm not saying the RZ was impossible to focus, but with the tolerance levels of digital photography compared to film it was just no fun (especially the short FLs like the 50mm ULD).

    So after all I ended up getting a Leica M9 and so far I'm most happy with it. Why didn't I get a D800e you might ask. The reason is very simple: Files!
    There are certain kind of files I like working with and some I totally hate working with. This applied to the 5D MkII I once owned and does to the D800 aswell as most other 35mm cameras I tested. I've got the impression that it has something to do with CMOS sensors but I don't claim to know anything for sure. It's just a feeling you know. But whenever adjusting contrast for example, images taken with these CMOS based cameras seem to oversaturate disproportionately high which is a behavior I dislike the most. And skin tones are always off. I'm not talking about a correct WB but about skin tones that almost always need some working on. This is something I find way too time consuming and therefore totally unacceptable.

    Of course I still own my Aptus 22 and Mamiya AFD II. This system does almost everything a 35mm DSLR does. By my standard it even exceeds probably 99% of all 35mm cameras. The camera has AF and the back produces files of such great colors and clarity that they often require only little PP. Almost the exact same applies to the M9 files. They seem to be just right, right out of the box.
    I'm not even missing the RZ's leaf shutter lenses when shooting with flash outdoors. I simply slap on a ND filter on the Leica and don't bother as I don't have to focus through the lens.

  18. #68
    Subscriber & Workshop Member GrahamWelland's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Vancouver, WA
    Posts
    5,803
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    564

    Re: Why did you go back to full frame DSLR?

    Max: I applaud your choices.

    I miss my M9's and doubtless will get another M9P at some point. I sort of loath my DF (soon to be DF+) but it actually does the job and the glass is pretty darned decent really. Compared to the D800/D600 etc I'd rather shoot the M every time. The Leica glass is definitely different to anything Nikon & Canon offer and it is the main difference I think, combined with the Leica superb rendering.

    My tech camera is my love. I simply just enjoy using it and that means a digital back, although I do also use film with it.

    Ironically, I recently bought a RZ67 Pro II to complement the DF & Alpa because I really like the system although I haven't had the joy of fighting with the 50 ULD or 37mm and I've only been shooting film so far. (My Pro IID & digital adapter arrives in a few days).
    Remember: adventure before dementia!

    As Oscar Wilde said, "my tastes are simple, I only like the best"
    Likes 3 Member(s) liked this post

  19. #69
    Workshop Member ptomsu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Austria, close to Vienna
    Posts
    3,872
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Why did you go back to full frame DSLR?

    Quote Originally Posted by John Perkins View Post
    Hello,

    I am new to the forum and am considering getting an MFDB. After doing a lot of reading here, it seems that some people have given up MFDB and returned to full frame DSLRs.

    Now that it is mid-2013 and the D800(e) is a well-proven machine, and Canon has hints of an even higher MP DSLR for 2014 possibly, it seems the future cost/benefits of MFDB are even murkier.

    I am curious... Who here has recently left MFDB for the D800(e), and why did you do it?

    Many thanks in advance for your views. They will help me form some of my own future plans.

    John
    My answer is maybe a bit late but here we go:

    I left MFDB (Hasselblad) more than a year ago when I got my D800E. Reasons are simple

    1) MF too expensive and not really justifyable difference to D800E if this one is properly used with right lenses - do not listen to comments here where people say they see the differences, I am sure they don't, this is all marketing hype and nothing for real life

    2) DSLR is lighter and more convenient

    3) much more (excellent) lens choices

    4) much much better AF

    5) much CHEAPER!!!!

    6) could go on like this for a while ......

    Recently talked to one of my dealers where I still have a HC 100 for sale and nobody wants to buy it, as currently the market is swamped with MF gear and lenses. One of the worse is Leica S System he said, especially after the new S showed up - well I had suspected this situation already some years ago

    SO my good advice - go with DSLR (either D800E or a future Canon or a future D4X etc) and you will be more than happy and still have some money left for whatever other things you enjoy in life.

  20. #70
    Subscriber & Workshop Member GrahamWelland's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Vancouver, WA
    Posts
    5,803
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    564

    Re: Why did you go back to full frame DSLR?

    just make sure that shooting 2:3 suits you. If not, look elsewhere (or crop).
    Remember: adventure before dementia!

    As Oscar Wilde said, "my tastes are simple, I only like the best"

  21. #71
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Royal Oak, MI and Palm Harbor, FL
    Posts
    8,498
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    44

    Re: Why did you go back to full frame DSLR?

    Quote Originally Posted by ptomsu View Post
    My answer is maybe a bit late but here we go:

    I left MFDB (Hasselblad) more than a year ago when I got my D800E. Reasons are simple

    1) MF too expensive and not really justifyable difference to D800E if this one is properly used with right lenses - do not listen to comments here where people say they see the differences, I am sure they don't, this is all marketing hype and nothing for real life

    2) DSLR is lighter and more convenient

    3) much more (excellent) lens choices

    4) much much better AF

    5) much CHEAPER!!!!

    6) could go on like this for a while ......

    Recently talked to one of my dealers where I still have a HC 100 for sale and nobody wants to buy it, as currently the market is swamped with MF gear and lenses. One of the worse is Leica S System he said, especially after the new S showed up - well I had suspected this situation already some years ago

    SO my good advice - go with DSLR (either D800E or a future Canon or a future D4X etc) and you will be more than happy and still have some money left for whatever other things you enjoy in life.
    Well stated opinion ... no beating around the bush with you.

    By your reasoning, the smaller mirror-less cameras seem a better choice than what you did, and you should sell your Nikon for one of them.


    - 1/3 the price. Much, much less expensive lenses.


    - Huge selection of lenses including incomparable Leica M lenses for the optical fanatic.


    - Much, much smaller. More convenient, promoting "take with" over any 35mm DSLR.


    - Image quality that many think as good as any 35mm DSLR. Do not listen to comments to the contrary, there is no practical difference for 95% of user applications, and there will be no debatable difference when FF Mirrorless soon hits the street. As a preview of things to come, most Leica M users already think their FF files superior to the D800.


    - 35mm DSLR sales are down a lot ... the format is a "dead man walking" but just doesn't know it yet. The general consumer will speak, and write the format's epitaph. The era of the brick on shoulder is coming to a close. Without P&S or 35mm DSLR sales to general consumers, there will be no source of funding for the meger amount of higher end 35mm DSLRs ... this info is all over the business pages since the latest sales reports were released.

    Flee while you can.





    - Marc

    BTW, I have had numerous offers for my HC100/2.2 and could have sold 5 of them If I was interested in doing so ... which I am not. I hope you are right regarding everyone dumping their S2s for the new S ... it'll keep Leica financially flush, and provide a chance for me to eventually get a second S2 for a song
    Likes 2 Member(s) liked this post

  22. #72
    Senior Member Swissblad's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    1,204
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Why did you go back to full frame DSLR?

    By following the above arguments, I can see why I finally settled for an iPhone.... especially now that Sony makes dedicated lens/camera modules:

    Those are the Sony DSC-QX10 and DSC-QX100 lens camera modules for smart phones | Photo Rumors

    No more lugging a DSLR, mirrorless or what ever for me - hooray!

  23. #73
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Royal Oak, MI and Palm Harbor, FL
    Posts
    8,498
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    44

    Re: Why did you go back to full frame DSLR?

    Quote Originally Posted by Swissblad View Post
    By following the above arguments, I can see why I finally settled for an iPhone.... especially now that Sony makes dedicated lens/camera modules:

    Those are the Sony DSC-QX10 and DSC-QX100 lens camera modules for smart phones | Photo Rumors

    No more lugging a DSLR, mirrorless or what ever for me - hooray!
    Hee, hee, ahead of the curve already!

    Check out the Schneider iPro lens series for the iPhone 4/4S and 5. The Series 2 Trio kit with 2X tele, Super-Wide, and Macro! ...plus even a handle. Freaking Schneider no less!

    iPro Lens System

    It is conceivable that the next round or two of smart phones will further drive a stake into the hearts of most traditional camera company's offerings unless they get much larger sensors into much smaller cameras fast, and learn how to market the advantages of a larger sensor. Perhaps this is what Canon has realized if the rumors are true?

    Here is a chilling POV on why camera sales are down by 43% in N. America. Not that I agree with it all, but there are some interesting points being made that seem to be reflected in real life numbers ... like such a huge decline in such a short amount of time.

    The Visual Science Lab / Kirk Tuck: Has the bubble burst? Is that why camera sales in N. America are down by 43%?

    I think it is possible that the photo world will become polarized into two basic camps ... smart phone type devices with ever increasing capabilities, flexibility, software solutions, creative choices, increased convenience, sharing connectivity and a ubiquitous presence at all times, everywhere on Earth, (the latter already being true).

    Or specialty devices with huge sensors, much larger than 35mm with endless abilities to customize without flushing thousand$ down the toilet to get a new feature ... and touted as the artistic and contemplative choice ... like large format was with film, and MFD 645 ... only easier to carry and use. The issue with the latter is who is going to make it if sustaining revenue from consumer camera sales dry up?

    The other real possibility is game changing technology that disintegrates all existing photo capturing devices ... which the phone folks will simply adopt since they are necessary devices for many other reasons ... while dedicated camera companies will evaporate along with their products.

    Grab your arses everyone ... we are about to go on an interesting ride.


    - Marc
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  24. #74
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Portugal
    Posts
    254
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Why did you go back to full frame DSLR?

    Well, I ditched my Leica S system recently.

    Didnt go for DSLR but "back to my roots", ie my M system.

    I had SLR for years and years , then switched to DSLR and their infite variations ( started with Nikon D80, D100, D1x, changed to Fuji S2, S3, S5 then back to Nikon D2h, D2x then jumped to Canon 1Ds, 1Ds II ) and then "landed" on Leica M7.

    Yap, traded all that digital stuff for a analog camera and loved it so much, that I bought a Leica MP when my M7 was stolen.

    When the M8 appeared, I jumped on it and used it for ages ( skip the M8.2 ) and when the M9 was launched, bought of the first ones that arrived in Portugal.

    After a few thousand clicks, went to Leica S2.

    Files were gigantic, its really a big Leica M sensor with a magnificient viewfinder, great AF and weather seal.

    It's a perfect camera ( or close ) but...

    Its big. Its a dwarf in MF land but vs RF its big. vs a DSLR its pretty much a tad less bulkier than a 1DS and handles much better but.. for everyday usage, family pictures and my own amusement, its a bit overkill.

    So sold it and my wife said "dont buy another camera. your face lights up when you take pictures with the Leica M. If you buy another M, buy the newer after the M9, dont go nuts and crazy with a SLR. You seem to enjoy so much taking pictures with it, something I've never seen even with the big Leica ( S2 ) ".

    So there you go, I've come back to my trusty old M9 ( never sold it ) and I'm a happy camper.

    The slow, mechanical, "must think before doing" process is something i enjoy a lot and I love the RF experience.

    MF is really king of the hill and in terms of absolute image quality, simply, there is no substituite. Nothing even comes close.

    D800E and the likes are very very good but they are miles apart.

    For me, and for me only, Leica M9/M240 is a experience that cannot be matched.

    Its a dying breed in the world of smartphones with huge cameras and stabilizations, gimmicks and son on, but a iPhone with Instagram cannot ever replace the joy of shooting with a Leica - at least for me.
    Leica M9 | 50mm Summilux ASPH | www.proenca.eu
    Likes 4 Member(s) liked this post

  25. #75
    Administrator, Instructor Guy Mancuso's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    23,623
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2555

    Re: Why did you go back to full frame DSLR?

    I was with a client yesterday which sells art to corporate clients and what I found disturbing for someone that works in our industry she knew nothing about MF capture. Asked me several times can my images go big which most images are MF and I tried to explain my files are the best in the industry (size wise) that is. I also let her know I actually teach photography and she still looked at me puzzled, dazed and confused about it. Could not get the concept that I can print as big as a house with them. No excuse she sells art and she should be telling me her needs. I was dumbfounded to say the least. How damn far do we have to educate this industry.

    My morning rant sorry for going off topic but clients are clueless sometimes. Oh and than I heard of the shrinking market and everyone with a iPhone is a photographer. So prices are peanuts compared to yesteryear. Hello tell me something I don't live daily. I'm going to go flip burgers for a living. LOL
    Photography is all about experimentation and without it you will never learn art.

    www.guymancusophotography.com
    Likes 4 Member(s) liked this post

  26. #76
    Senior Member Swissblad's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    1,204
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Why did you go back to full frame DSLR?

    Thanks for the last 3 contributions Marc, Proenca and Guy - all very different - but all very insightful.

    I do believe we are entering a world where everybody with an iPhone is a photographer - akin to anybody who can type with 2 fingers using MS word is a peer of Steinbeck or Hemingway - while those of us who love the craft and the special tools (M9, MF etc) are an archaic dying breed.

    Sadly, it is not restricted to photography but the arts as a whole.

  27. #77
    Senior Member johnnygoesdigital's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    1,579
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Why did you go back to full frame DSLR?

    Quote Originally Posted by Shashin View Post
    There are two fundamental criteria in a camera for me:

    1. I think it is cool.

    2. I can afford it.

    Everything else is rather secondary.
    Eventually, we'll agree on something, but my criteria is:

    1. It serves my purpose

    2. It's reliable

  28. #78
    Senior Subscriber Member Steen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Denmark, CPH
    Posts
    2,500
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    12

    Why did you go back to full frame DSLR?


    Quote Originally Posted by Shashin View Post

    But don't you ask that question in the m4/3 forum? The folks that sold off their DSLR would most likely not be in the DSLR forum anymore and would be in the m4/3 forum. It is illogical to go to a group and ask people why they are no longer members of that group. (...)

    Of course your point is logical, Shashin, but as there is no such thing as a non brand-specific 24x36 format board it is actually ok with me to discuss it on the other format board which I'm sure is followed with great interest even by those who (temporarily) have left the format for another format.
    Still, personally I think the only place I would ever dare start a format discussion is the Sunset Bar, late night, starting with placing a bottle of single malt in the middle of the large, round table

    On a serious note, for me a larger sensor area will always mean room for larger photosites, i.e. larger wells gathering more light (all else equal).
    I believe the general rule still counts that "the larger the photosites, the better the image quality" (all else equal).
    And that goes for the entire range of digital formats:
    Tiny sensors >> 1" >> Four-Thirds >> APS-C >> 35mm >> Medium Format >> and maybe even larger formats in some distant future

    So in general: the larger the better, in my opinion.
    From there I just pick the Price to Quality Ratio that I regard as the sweet spot. For me that is.
    Shortly put: at the end it's all about bang for the buck. Which in my opinion basically ought to make the subject completely harmless instead of being so taboo.
    For some odd reason some people quickly start making fun of others instead of just sharing their personal experiences, views and illustrations with the rest of us.
    We do not need to agree on everything.

    Personally I'd love to own and shoot a 645D, it's just that Medium Format is still too expensive for my taste since the average life cycle of digital cameras is so scary short.
    But someday I'll get there. Sooner or later.
    Maybe sooner if one of the big players with the necessary R&D weight steps into the format and make a modern Digital Medium Format camera at a more competitive price than what we have seen so far.
    Imagine a new beast with electronic shutter, light metering and focusing directly on the sensor, no mirror, no slap, etc. etc.
    Likes 2 Member(s) liked this post

  29. #79
    Senior Subscriber Member Steen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Denmark, CPH
    Posts
    2,500
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    12

    Why did you go back to full frame DSLR?


    Quote Originally Posted by Swissblad View Post

    Sorry to hear about that Steen - which DX system are you considering?
    The FX D600 has pretty good IQ at a good price.

    Thanks, Swiss, actually right now I'm so frustrated and angry that I don't quite know where to go from here.
    I feel a bit like expressed on the poster over the girls left shoulder, see the below snapshot crop. Not good for my karma

    So for a while I think I'm just going back to my six year old APS-C D300 and a couple of old F3 film cameras.
    I've just bought a couple of film rolls and hope they can make me relax and think a bit more clearly.
    Soon you may hear me say that APS-C is every bit as good as full-frame .-)

    After all it's only gear, and Guy, I'm with you, there are far more important things in life !


    ©lick for a bit larger size


    © • Nikon D800E • AF-S Nikkor 1.8/28mm G • 1/90 sec. at f/5.6 ISO 800 • heavily cropped in Lightroom 4.4

  30. #80
    Senior Subscriber Member Steen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Denmark, CPH
    Posts
    2,500
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    12

    Why did you go back to full frame DSLR?


    Sorry for the slight digressions above, just felt I ought to answer those couple of questions.
    Now back on topic.
    To the OP:

    Guy Mancuso showed some comparison pictures between the two formats in this (very long) thread http://www.getdpi.com/forum/nikon/35...rst-blush.html

    And Tim Ashley also showed some comparison illustrations in this thread http://www.getdpi.com/forum/nikon/36...ne-had-do.html

    The threads also contain some downloadable RAW files to process after your own taste.
    I'm all in for illustrations to back up claims.

  31. #81
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Shashin's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Florida, USA
    Posts
    4,502
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    141

    Re: Why did you go back to full frame DSLR?

    Steen, the original intent of the post to John was to why he might be feeling a little annoyance or hostility in some of the replies. Being the internet, it is full of very interesting people, most of which are very honest and sincere. Occasionally, we get a troll. People who come in to push buttons tend to leave a very strong impression. I was just suggesting to John that the framing of his post could be problematic and that is why he might be not be feeling all the love his question may deserve.

    Personally, I am mostly interested in great photography. How other people get there does not interest me--I just enjoy the results. I have been very fortunate to be able to afford very nice gear that I enjoy working with, but I hope people know me for my work rather than my camera.
    Will

    http://www.hakusancreation.com
    Likes 3 Member(s) liked this post

  32. #82
    Senior Member Swissblad's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    1,204
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Why did you go back to full frame DSLR?

    Quote Originally Posted by Steen View Post



    Thanks, Swiss, actually right now I'm so frustrated and angry that I don't quite know where to go from here.

    So for a while I think I'm just going back to my six year old APS-C D300 and a couple of old F3 film cameras.
    The F3 remains a favourite of mine - it just was the symbol of all the photogs I admired in my youth. It was also one of the few Nikon F cameras that outlived its successor!

  33. #83
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    255
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Why did you go back to full frame DSLR?

    Quote Originally Posted by Guy Mancuso View Post
    I was with a client yesterday which sells art to corporate clients and what I found disturbing for someone that works in our industry she knew nothing about MF capture. Asked me several times can my images go big which most images are MF and I tried to explain my files are the best in the industry (size wise) that is. I also let her know I actually teach photography and she still looked at me puzzled, dazed and confused about it. Could not get the concept that I can print as big as a house with them. No excuse she sells art and she should be telling me her needs. I was dumbfounded to say the least. How damn far do we have to educate this industry.

    My morning rant sorry for going off topic but clients are clueless sometimes. Oh and than I heard of the shrinking market and everyone with a iPhone is a photographer. So prices are peanuts compared to yesteryear. Hello tell me something I don't live daily. I'm going to go flip burgers for a living. LOL
    I had a client call me today in the middle of a shoot to explain to him how to work gmail.
    Beat that!

  34. #84
    Senior Member kdphotography's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Carmel/Tucson
    Posts
    2,355
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Why did you go back to full frame DSLR?

    Quote Originally Posted by shlomi View Post
    I had a client call me today in the middle of a shoot to explain to him how to work gmail.
    Beat that!
    I just had a client call (2x) wanting me to help her figure out using a UPS power supply on her computer.

    But she does understand the benefits of using a photographer and medium format digital!


  35. #85
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Shashin's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Florida, USA
    Posts
    4,502
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    141

    Re: Why did you go back to full frame DSLR?

    Quote Originally Posted by shlomi View Post
    I had a client call me today in the middle of a shoot to explain to him how to work gmail.
    Beat that!
    I had someone ask me to help with a dead keyboard. I said it was as easy as turning on the computer.

  36. #86
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Royal Oak, MI and Palm Harbor, FL
    Posts
    8,498
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    44

    Re: Why did you go back to full frame DSLR?

    Quote Originally Posted by Shashin View Post
    Steen, the original intent of the post to John was to why he might be feeling a little annoyance or hostility in some of the replies. Being the internet, it is full of very interesting people, most of which are very honest and sincere. Occasionally, we get a troll. People who come in to push buttons tend to leave a very strong impression. I was just suggesting to John that the framing of his post could be problematic and that is why he might be not be feeling all the love his question may deserve.

    Personally, I am mostly interested in great photography. How other people get there does not interest me--I just enjoy the results. I have been very fortunate to be able to afford very nice gear that I enjoy working with, but I hope people know me for my work rather than my camera.
    Amen to that!

    The actual choices and tools we use has become very public ... perhaps because of the rapid evolution of those tools and ease of gathering information, debating merits, mixed with highly different needs ... which, in the end, are driven by the quest to be known for the work we produce with those tools.

    I know that my relationship to photography is very different with my clients, when looking at work of others, or doing my own personal work, than it is when discussing stuff here.

    Yet, I think it is natural to be drawn to certain work and by extension take an interest in how it was made (craft) and what was used (the tool that helped get there).

    Early on in my trek, I took note of, and admired, certain images that happened to be mostly made with a Leica M camera ... and by extension aspired to use a similar tool after I grasped why they used one for that type of work. After that it was all up to me.

    Do we really care what each of us uses to arrive at the final expression? When you think of it that way, all the teeth grating debates over this stuff seem quite silly.

    - Marc
    Likes 2 Member(s) liked this post

  37. #87
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Hong Kong
    Posts
    691
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Why did you go back to full frame DSLR?

    Whatever the arguments and opinions, the answer is simple, buy a D800 and go post on the Nikon forums where you'll get some love, leave us idiots in peace with our MF gear.

    Alternatively, think back to when the cheapest and most expensive cameras all had the same sensor (say a roll of Velvia 50) and try to understand WHY people went with different systems. Physics means that at a certain resolution it becomes easier to obtain quality from a larger sensitised area. The only innovation changes that somewhat is image stabilisation, this is also proven to be true. Get an A99 it has IS on the sensor as well as other innovations that Nikon hasn't bothered with but instead went for more MPix. Do Nikons still blow their red channels easily?

  38. #88
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    1,069
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    83

    Re: Why did you go back to full frame DSLR?

    Quote Originally Posted by Jorgen Udvang View Post

    It's like Mercedes Benz vs. Bentley. I would love to have the Bentley of course, but for the extra money, what useful advantages does it offer?
    For me, the analogy is BMW vs. Porsche. And the difference is the smile on my face upshifting through a corner at speed. MF does the same thing for me when I'm back on my screen looking at what I shot. Never have that feeling looking at my D800 or D800E files.

    Yes, the D800 is the better tool, a true swiss-army knife. But my MF/Tech it is all about the experience, both in process and result.
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  39. #89
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Bill Caulfeild-Browne's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Bruce Peninsula, Canada
    Posts
    2,535
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    184

    Re: Why did you go back to full frame DSLR?

    I've been enjoying - I think - this thread for the last week but decided not to participate, largely because I'm not one of those who has gone back to a DSLR. I never left!

    But I can't keep quiet any longer. Cameras are tools, pure and simple. I use the best tool for the job at hand - "best" meaning what works best for me. Thus I use MF for static, contemplative work and a DSLR (Sony a99) for more action-oriented work.

    So the original post is simply answered - if I leave MF for a DSLR only, it will be because it is a superior tool for the job at hand.
    Bill CB

    www.billcaulfeild-browne.ca
    Likes 6 Member(s) liked this post

  40. #90
    Senior Member johnnygoesdigital's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    1,579
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Why did you go back to full frame DSLR?

    Nicely stated...

  41. #91
    Senior Member Swissblad's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    1,204
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Why did you go back to full frame DSLR?

    This discussion is pointless, the future is here and the D800 has been rendered obsolete:

    Hyetis the first and only Swiss made smartwatch

    Those wanting to dump their MF equipment, contact me - I'm looking for a near mint CFV-50.
    Likes 3 Member(s) liked this post

  42. #92
    Senior Subscriber Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Englewood, CO
    Posts
    2,489
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1248

    Re: Why did you go back to full frame DSLR?

    My son would love the thread like this for his debate skill, useful or not !
    I can definitely tell the difference between the Nikon D800E and Phase One IQ180 or even Leica S2 especially for the color and 3D look. The difference is not by looking at the small JPEG but from the big print or big monitor. This is something you have to use them for a while and not even for renting for few days or a week. The difference in IQ can't be count in dollars.
    The handling and the process from clicking the shutter to a final image is even more different. Again, the difference in pleasure is nothing money can buy.
    To me, if you love the Nikon D800E, it's good for you, you can save a lot of money and have a varieties of lenses to choose from. It is personal.
    However, there is no point to try to convince other people that the D800 (E) is the best, better than MFDB or the same etc. It may be good enough for you but not for everyone. People have different standard, otherwise, Mercedes-Benz would be bankrupted and Kia would dominate the car business.
    Again, take care of your family first before you even buy the Nikon D800. Fuji X-Pro 1 is more than enough as long as it makes you happy. IPhone is not bad either.
    Life is too short, don't waste it! Go out and shoot some pictures.

    Best
    Pramote
    Last edited by Landscapelover; 15th August 2013 at 10:21.
    Likes 11 Member(s) liked this post

  43. #93
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Royal Oak, MI and Palm Harbor, FL
    Posts
    8,498
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    44

    Re: Why did you go back to full frame DSLR?

    Quote Originally Posted by Swissblad View Post
    This discussion is pointless, the future is here and the D800 has been rendered obsolete:

    Hyetis the first and only Swiss made smartwatch

    Those wanting to dump their MF equipment, contact me - I'm looking for a near mint CFV-50.
    Dick Tracey, eat your heart out!

    41 meg ... so it has more resolution than the D800?

    - Marc
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  44. #94
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    1,538
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Why did you go back to full frame DSLR?

    The reasons I'm in as a price-sensitive amateur:

    1. a good second hand market with substantially lower prices than new
    2. old backs still have competitive image quality => lower investment
    3. good informative forums like this, easy to get information about complex issues
    4. my shooting style and interest fits tech cameras like a glove, I use movements in almost all my pictures.
    5. digital view cameras (Linhof Techno / Arca-Swiss MF-two, I chose the Techno): makes it cheaper having lots of lenses and you get tilt/swing/shift on all, and there's a wonderful romantic large format feel to work with them.

    Basically, I wanted to shoot with large format technique but not mess around with film, so I went for the digital alternative.

    The big obstacle for customers like me is digital back pricing. I could buy camera and lenses new, compared to pro DSLR gear it's not that expensive (lens board mounted Digitars anyway) and you get real good quality, but add on a new digital back and the price gets crazy.

    With the second hand option the pricing gets more comparable and then I don't need that strong arguments for using MFD, it's fun to work with, gives nice image quality and suits my style, so why not?
    Likes 6 Member(s) liked this post

  45. #95
    Senior Member Swissblad's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    1,204
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Why did you go back to full frame DSLR?

    It seems that some are going the other route - ie 35mm FX to DX bodies.

    I refer to Vieri's experience with the Sigma SD1 Merril as shown here and on his blog: VIERI BOTTAZZINI PHOTOGRAPHER'S BLOG: THE AMAZING LANDSCAPES OF ARRAN, SCOTLAND

    My guess is that the photographic world really is in a flux at the moment.

  46. #96
    Subscriber & Workshop Member GrahamWelland's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Vancouver, WA
    Posts
    5,803
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    564

    Re: Why did you go back to full frame DSLR?

    Good colour is good colour and it's certainly true that the Merrill Fovean sensors have a great reputation. The DP1/2/3M's are very popular too amongst those folks who appreciate the quality that this sensor can create. The SD1 is just sad though due to the mis-management of it's release by Sigma. Shame.

    Hopefully more of this technology will end up back in the mainstream DSLRs instead of this mindless chasing of resolution. I'll take great colour, tonality and dynamic range over resolution any day.
    Remember: adventure before dementia!

    As Oscar Wilde said, "my tastes are simple, I only like the best"
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  47. #97
    Senior Member Swissblad's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    1,204
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Why did you go back to full frame DSLR?

    Graham, I agree - perhaps we'll see a D4X with this technology - the results do look impressive.

  48. #98
    Member pedro39photo's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Portugal
    Posts
    95
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Why did you go back to full frame DSLR?

    Quote Originally Posted by Shashin View Post
    There are two fundamental criteria in a camera for me:

    1. I think it is cool.

    2. I can afford it.

    Everything else is rather secondary.


    This its the best technical opinion i saw !!! its true its about passion too...
    No one buy a car because its fast or low on fuel...passion is most of times the key element to buy or not to buy. The brands use this human male feelings for marketing and advertising...

    My 35mm FF Canon system its my work horse, my money making machine.
    My Hasselblad H3DII system its my lover, that make me spend too much money, but put a smile on my face every-time i sleep with her....

  49. #99
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    1,538
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Why did you go back to full frame DSLR?

    Quote Originally Posted by GrahamWelland View Post
    I'll take great colour, tonality and dynamic range over resolution any day.
    I tend to agree, but I think that resolution is a main attraction of medium format, even though people not too often directly says so. Sigma SD1's 15.4 megapixels is lower than I'd want. However I do understand that some IQ180 owners today like do "downgrade" to IQ260, I'd want to as well if I was in that situation. I think a nice balance is 40 to 60 megapixels, and I rather see lower color cast and higher dynamic range, long exposure, high ISO, live view etc, than further resolution increase when up there. But resolution is important.

    The suitable resolution is about what is practically achievable with cameras and shooting technique. For infinity-focused panoramas you can of course make use of extremely high resolution, but for all-around photography the DoF challenges and manufacturing precision challenges just gets crazy if you want more effective resolution than those 40-60 megapixels, which by the way quite well matches what 4x5" film can do in terms of resolution. For lower resolutions say 20 megapixels and below, I feel the tech camera and shooting technique is under-utilized.

    We that shoot landscape photography with tech cameras are generally more resolution-hungry than portrait photographers though. I'm quite pleased with my current 33 megapixels, but I hope to be able to upgrade in a couple of years to 50-60 megapixels (Aptus-II 10, CFV-50, P65+ etc) but I will not get any of the 80 megapixel backs.

    I actually bought Vieri's old camera by the way (a Linhof Techno)

  50. #100
    Sr. Administrator Jack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Los Altos, CA
    Posts
    10,486
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1031

    Re: Why did you go back to full frame DSLR?

    Quote Originally Posted by GrahamWelland View Post
    I'll take great colour, tonality and dynamic range over resolution any day.
    Agree but unfortunately, at least with contemporary sensors, smaller pixels (not more total, but smaller usually = more) often (not always) translates to better tonality, while larger (not more or less) pixels seem to often (but again not always) offer a little better color fidelity; and finally, more pixels (regardless of size) seem to render generally better DR while larger pixels seem to be generally better on noise characteristics.

    So... I see the real discussion at where is the balance best struck? And here I think there are two viable strategies: 1) choosing a tool or tools that offer the best balance to cover YOUR NEEDS or 2) if you happen to be fortunate enough to afford the luxury of multiple tools available to cover all your needs.

    /
    Jack
    home: www.getdpi.com

    "Perfection is not attainable. But if we chase perfection, we can catch excellence."

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •