Menu
What's new
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!

Why did you go back to full frame DSLR?

Shashin

Shashin

Well-known member
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.
 
Swissblad

Swissblad

Well-known member
Steen said:




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.
Click to expand...
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!
 
S

shlomi

Member
Guy Mancuso said:
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
Click to expand...
I had a client call me today in the middle of a shoot to explain to him how to work gmail.
Beat that!
 
kdphotography

kdphotography

Well-known member
shlomi said:
I had a client call me today in the middle of a shoot to explain to him how to work gmail.
Beat that!
Click to expand...
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!

:ROTFL:
 
F

fotografz

Well-known member
Shashin said:
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.
Click to expand...
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
 
W

wentbackward

Member
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?
 
J

jagsiva

Active member
Jorgen Udvang said:
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?
Click to expand...
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.
 
Bill Caulfeild-Browne

Bill Caulfeild-Browne

Well-known member
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.
 
L

Landscapelover

Senior Subscriber Member
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:
T

torger

Active member
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?
 
GrahamWelland

GrahamWelland

Subscriber & Workshop Member
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.
 
pedro39photo

pedro39photo

New member
Shashin said:
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.
Click to expand...
:):clap::):clap::):clap:

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....
 
T

torger

Active member
GrahamWelland said:
I'll take great colour, tonality and dynamic range over resolution any day.
Click to expand...
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)
 
Jack

Jack

Sr. Administrator
Staff member
GrahamWelland said:
I'll take great colour, tonality and dynamic range over resolution any day.
Click to expand...
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.

/
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top