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!

Entry-level DMF combo for landscapes

dhazeghi

New member
I know that the words 'digital medium format' and 'entry-level' (i.e. budget-constrained) don't really belong in the same sentence, nonetheless...

If you were looking to do landscapes (mostly wide-angle), what DMF kit would you pick if the objective was to minimize cost while still being capable of better quality results than state-of-the-art 135 format digital (D800, A7R etc.)? By better quality, I mean essentially more dynamic range and resolving power at base ISO.

Thanks!

DH
 

dougpeterson

Workshop Member
You don't mention what I'd consider some of the most important parts of any landscape kit:
- availability of movements (rise/fall/shift/swing/tilt)
- quality of lenses (e.g. are the corners as sharp as the center)
- enjoyability of shooting (obviously very subjective)

Credo 40 on a Cambo Wide RC400 is one (of many) great examples of a kit that will blow away any 135 format system without getting into very high-budgets (relatively speaking of course).

I'd speak to a dealer and get sample raws from a variety of relevant systems, then arrange to try/rent a system or two and compare based on how/what you actually shoot.

Note my bias in my signature. There are many great systems (Phase/Leaf/Hassy/Cambo/Arca/Alpa/Pentax) you should consider before narrowing down. Cambo and Credo come to mind primarily based on price since you say that's important.
 

mbn

New member
I mean essentially more dynamic range and resolving power at base ISO.
imho, there is little to no reason to "upgrade" from an d800/7r to dmf, just for the sake of dynamic range. you need to shell out big cash to get the latest backs, to get an theoretical better dynamic range.

switch to dmf for pixels, movements, the bigger format or even the color.
but dynamic range?... just get that d800/7r.
 

torger

Active member
You can't find better DR in a technical sense. You might find slightly better midtones, but differences will be tiny.

What you can get is more resolving power, movements and a lot sharper wide angle lenses. Tech cam is the way to go. View cameras like the Linhof Techno are a bit more expensive in terms of body, but cheaper lens mount, so with many lenses it can be more economical.

I think the Credo 40 might be a bit too close in terms of resolution and actually slightly worse DR to really impress. A second hand P65+ maybe? Same DR, larger sensor more resolution.

I use a Linhof Techno and a 33 megapixel Aptus 75 back with Schneider Digitar lenses, most components second hand. Quite affordable, but the back is a bit aging. Still competitive though, and thanks to lenses I generally get better single shot quality out of this system than I would from a D800/A7r. To me using the Techno is about enjoyment in the photographic process, and I really like having movements when making landscape pictures. I think you should think about that - how you want to make images. If it's all a race about image quality, it's going to get costly, and there's always something better around the corner.
 

alajuela

Active member
You can't find better DR in a technical sense. You might find slightly better midtones, but differences will be tiny.

What you can get is more resolving power, movements and a lot sharper wide angle lenses. Tech cam is the way to go. View cameras like the Linhof Techno are a bit more expensive in terms of body, but cheaper lens mount, so with many lenses it can be more economical.

I think the Credo 40 might be a bit too close in terms of resolution and actually slightly worse DR to really impress. A second hand P65+ maybe? Same DR, larger sensor more resolution.

I use a Linhof Techno and a 33 megapixel Aptus 75 back with Schneider Digitar lenses, most components second hand. Quite affordable, but the back is a bit aging. Still competitive though, and thanks to lenses I generally get better single shot quality out of this system than I would from a D800/A7r. To me using the Techno is about enjoyment in the photographic process, and I really like having movements when making landscape pictures. I think you should think about that - how you want to make images. If it's all a race about image quality, it's going to get costly, and there's always something better around the corner.
Hi

I agree with Torger - a full frame sensor is much better for the wide, which if you decide to go tech - is where it really shines, (apart from the process) and with a 60 meg back, you can use the (comparatively speaking) the less expensive Schneider Lenses.

It you go tech, then there are light weight bodies.
Arca Swiss - Arca-Swiss Rm3d factum - an advantage of AS is that should decide later you want a view camera, you can use the AS mounts on a F line.

Alpa - ALPA 12 STC - Small and light.

Cambo - WRC - 400 - very nice - I have one

All of the above give you rear movements (rise and fall - or shift) one at time - You rotate the camera for one or the other - this is nice for panos or changing the horizon.

For swing and tilt - I believe the AS you have swing and tilt built in Alpa you can add an adapter for Cambo you have to get swing and tilt in the lens mount.

The Linhof - has an a advantage as Torger says as you can put most any LF lens on just by mounting on a inexpensive lens board.

If you do not want movements now or later and going wide is not a pressing concern - then from what I have read, the new (or second hand) Pentax is good value for the money.

-- you will have fun!!

best

Phil
 

dhazeghi

New member
Thanks for all the comments and responses. I should say that at this stage, my question is largely to gather information - I won't be buying anytime soon.

At least a good part of my interest is simply due to the difference in format - I had great fun with a Mamiya 645 Pro TL a few years back, but film just isn't a whole lot of fun for me any more. At the same time, the results do matter, so they need to be at least comparable to the current smaller-sensor state of the art. For landscapes, that'd be Nikon's D800 and PC-E 24/3.5 (tilt-shift, although movements are not that significant for my use - mainly it's the corner sharpness that I value). I don't mind older/secondhand backs/bodies either. The technical cameras look like a lot of fun, but I do value the ability to shoot handheld, at least on occasion.

From what I can tell, the Pentax 645D and 35/3.5 is one of the more affordable options (although I've read reviews saying it's not a notable improvement over the D800). Are there any other options with similar (or better) quality in that price area?
 

dougpeterson

Workshop Member
You can shoot on a tech camera.

A few users on this forum do so.

It's definitely not its core strength, but it's also not impossible.

More to the point a digital back can come off a tech cam body and onto an SLR body in seconds.
 

Professional

Active member
You can shoot on a tech camera.

A few users on this forum do so.

It's definitely not its core strength, but it's also not impossible.

More to the point a digital back can come off a tech cam body and onto an SLR body in seconds.

And which tech cam to go with? there are plenty, and each has its own pros and cons, so how can i decide on which one? leave the digital back later and also the lenses, just i am curious about the tech cam body only first
 

weinlamm

Member
About the dynamic range the others had spoken; I think it's nearly all said.

Nikon's D800 and PC-E 24/3.5 (tilt-shift, although movements are not that significant for my use - mainly it's the corner sharpness that I value).
You prefer the 24 PC for "sharpness"? :confused: I think, if this is right, than you should really think about the step to MF.

I had a system with 22 MP (Mamiya ZD) and tested the 24mm from a friend. This is not comparable at all. The Nikon has "no sharpness" - not on 12 MP, even not on a 36 MP D800.
The feeling with a MF is quite different: more sharpness overall, other DOF (ok.; if you are a portrait shooter with a 85/1.4 I would prefer the Nikon - but not for landscape), other sharpness in the structure and so on. And this starts with a Mamiya ZD with 22 MP.

For landscape I would prefer MF every time. For portrait the Nikon-systems offers a 85/1.4 or 135/2 or 200/2, which you can't get with MF.
 

torger

Active member
Thanks for all the comments and responses. I should say that at this stage, my question is largely to gather information - I won't be buying anytime soon.

At least a good part of my interest is simply due to the difference in format - I had great fun with a Mamiya 645 Pro TL a few years back, but film just isn't a whole lot of fun for me any more. At the same time, the results do matter, so they need to be at least comparable to the current smaller-sensor state of the art. For landscapes, that'd be Nikon's D800 and PC-E 24/3.5 (tilt-shift, although movements are not that significant for my use - mainly it's the corner sharpness that I value). I don't mind older/secondhand backs/bodies either. The technical cameras look like a lot of fun, but I do value the ability to shoot handheld, at least on occasion.

From what I can tell, the Pentax 645D and 35/3.5 is one of the more affordable options (although I've read reviews saying it's not a notable improvement over the D800). Are there any other options with similar (or better) quality in that price area?
If to compete with 645D pricing with other MF options there is only one way to go: second hand, and then you need to compromise a bit on the back or it's going to blow your budget.

A Silvestri Bicam with Schneider digitar lenses and an Aptus 75 back could be similarly priced as a 645D system. With expectations set right you would appreciate the system. But with DSLRs being at 36 megapixels getting into MF att 33 may feel a bit low, even if your wide angle sharpness will certainly be superior. I shoot with an Aptus 75 myself. It's a good starting point.

If you manage to get a second hand Hasselblad CFV-50 you'll probably find good price/performance there for 50 megapixels, or if you like wide formats an Aptus-II 10. At 60 megapixels 645 fullframe you have the P65+ quite easy to come by, but still quite expensive.
 

Ken_R

New member
I know that the words 'digital medium format' and 'entry-level' (i.e. budget-constrained) don't really belong in the same sentence, nonetheless...

If you were looking to do landscapes (mostly wide-angle), what DMF kit would you pick if the objective was to minimize cost while still being capable of better quality results than state-of-the-art 135 format digital (D800, A7R etc.)? By better quality, I mean essentially more dynamic range and resolving power at base ISO.

Thanks!

DH
Hi,

A Cambo WRC400 or an Arca FacTum would make a great platform. A Schneider 35mm Digitar and a PhaseOne P65+ would provide stunning image quality. Certainly much more resolution than what you can get with a top end 35mm outfit like a d800e or A7R. It is not close. That is the minimum setup I would try to go for.
 

torger

Active member
Schneider 35xl is a little problematic on P65+, due to crosstalk (desaturation of colors), but if shifting is not too large it's okay. Or if you use my crosstalk cancellation algorithm I currently develop ;-)

The 35 is pretty easy to come by second hand though as many sell it when they switch to Rodenstock wides. I have a 35xl myself and I'm very pleased with it, as long as you know its limitations. The result is certainly better than a Nikon 24 PC on a D800, and it's virtually distortion free which is good for shifted lenses which is a bit messy to correct otherwise.
 
Last edited:

gazwas

Active member
On an IQ level to get real, noticeable improvements over the latest top 35mm gear you need to be looking at least P40/P65 generation gear and then ONLY paired with a tech camera/lenses. Less than this save your money as your chasing a rose tinted dream.

On a sanity and usability level the minimum requirement you need to be looking at IQ140/160/180 generation or above paired with a tech camera/lenses for their usability improvements and comparable (ish) 35mm workflow.

So unless you plan on spending considerable amounts on the MFD gear from the start or plan a pretty aggressive upgrade plan I'd hedge a bet you'll be selling it off again with in 12-18 months and moving back to the latest and greatest 35mm camera (Canon please).

Nothing wrong with older MFD gear but the do require considerable effort and cost to get similar results to a D800/A7r.
 

kdphotography

Well-known member
....
On a sanity and usability level the minimum requirement you need to be looking at IQ140/160/180 generation....
Or the Leaf Credo series. Very capable, nice screen, less expensive, and USB3 enabled.

There is also much to be said about "photographic enjoyment" using the equipment/tools/toys that you enjoy most, regardless of megapixels, capability, etc. I don't care how capable the 35mm FF sensor/DSLR segment has become---it's still format limited and just doesn't bring me that same type of photographic enjoyment as a MFDB.

I shoot with a DSLR because it may be the best tool for certain jobs, but when done well, a MFDB is better, and provides me with oodles more photographic enjoyment.

:) ken
 

stephengilbert

Active member
As Ken said, different people want different things from their cameras. I think the process involved in shooting with a tech camera is a plus; the fact that it doesn't focus for me or decide what the proper shutter speed should be isn't a defect.
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
As Ken said, different people want different things from their cameras. I think the process involved in shooting with a tech camera is a plus; the fact that it doesn't focus for me or decide what the proper shutter speed should be isn't a defect.
Like to call it old school and in its simplistic form its a wonderful way to enjoy photography. It's all about you as the shooter not a cam dictating to you what it wants to do. Ultimate control over your tools. I really enjoyed using a tech cam.
 

jotloob

Subscriber Member
As Ken said, different people want different things from their cameras. I think the process involved in shooting with a tech camera is a plus; the fact that it doesn't focus for me or decide what the proper shutter speed should be isn't a defect.
Like to call it old school and in its simplistic form its a wonderful way to enjoy photography. It's all about you as the shooter not a cam dictating to you what it wants to do. Ultimate control over your tools. I really enjoyed using a tech cam.

I can only agree to what Steve and Guy say .:thumbs:
I appreciate , that I can control , what my gear shall do and not the other way round .
 
Top