johnnygoesdigital
New member
Okay, I'm different, and also a 4x5 film user, but if you want that contemplative experience without the insane cost and planned obsolescence of MFD. Get a DP merril and the foveon sensor
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!
Well ... since you mention it - heck, I even use a Zone VI spot meter: http://www.getdpi.com/forum/613476-post2.htmlOkay, I'm different, and also a 4x5 film user, but if you want that contemplative experience without the insane cost and planned obsolescence of MFD. Get a DP merril and the foveon sensor
I sometimes try to think not in certain categories but out of the box.Are people really cross-shopping an A7R and a tech cam? I could see an IQ250 CMOS vs. IQ260 CCD.
There differences are there and law of diminishing returns holds extremely true. But I just don't think someone goes out thinking of dropping 8K and walks out with 60-80K worth of kit.
I use both, but under totally different contexts.
A view camera is more of an advantage the more lenses you got, both concerning economy and size/weight. With only two lenses it's probably not an advantage in either cost or weight. I got seven Digitar lenses myself, and I use all lenses, I work with different framings and perspectives and find it more pleasing to create in camera than to crop a lot in post. I think the total cost of all those lenses was less than a single Rodie 32 for alpa, but then I only bought the 60XL new. I think the system I have today is the most cost effective MFD tech system you can get, and with a 50 megapixel back I'm certainly not far behind the best image quality you can get in MFD.Thank you for the interesting link and your experience. The Techno looks really like closest to a field camera. I am not sure yet if I would prefer an Alpa style camera for the smaller size and distance scale or a Techno-style camera, specially I would not want more than 2 max. 3 lenses.
Maybe I should try to look at a Techno and to handle it to get a feeling about the size and ease of use.
I bought the A7r to use with my old stables of FDn lenses. A family cam and not intended for any commercial use. Since I also have a few Hassy V lenses I was interested in trying out these with the Sony. I did get the Mirex tilt/shift to have a go with my (much loved) Cfe 40/4 IF for more serious landscapes. Yes, it works. Result is nice and files up for printing quite big. However, the feeling in the workflow is definitely not my cup of tea. The menu system is driving me nuts. It still takes me minutes to find where the heck I format the card...I get overwhelmed with buttons and menus high and low. Being a traditional photog this 'modern' (I'm sure most modern dslr's are the same) takes away my inspiration and the feeling I am not in control. Only God knows if the boxes I want to be ticked in fact are ticked!I wondered about user experience between a A7r with a 24mm TS lens (or additionally 17mm later) on a tripod vs an Alpa STC (or other tech cam) combined with an older back (Hasselblad 39 MP) and equivalent lens.
It would be interesting to see some RAW files for side by side comparison between the D810 and the P45+ :thumbs:I had the tech camera, had to sell and go back to DSLR.
I bought a D810, good glass and all the rest. But there was something missing. Sure the files were lovely, but it all felt a bit too clinical to me. I could push the shadows, my live view was amazing and sped everything up, my RRS pano rig got the job done nicely, but it all lacked soul for want of a better word.
So I sold it all for a P45+ and a Cambo. Now I set up my shot using the ground glass, I think far more about my framing and composition and I take my sweet time. My camera doesn't meter for me, my focusing is getting better, and my photography is better because I am enjoying shooting again.
There is no sane reasoning for this. My Nikon kit would have been the envy of most photographers. But after shooting with a tech camera I was hooked, and would not go back again. Sure the back is old and "only" has 12-13 odd stops of DR, but the files are all I need and the experience can't be matched.
It is more the opposit: I would want the Tech Cam more for the handling. I have some experience with 22 and 33 MP older backs and also with the S2 36MP sensor and I really believe that on a tech cam where I would mostly use a tripod anyways (so I can shoot at base iso) a older 39MP back should be more than enough. Also the new high end backs ... I cant justify for my hobby use. They just loose value to fast to much. If live view was working very good, this would be a reason, but just IQ I am sure an older bakc would suit me well. (At the moment I have an offer for a CF-39 + Alpa STC+ 36mm all ready to use for an attractive price) I am not ready to spend 20 or 30 k just for a back alone, and I know from my Leica S I dont need more MP.....
I know all this is very fuzzy and emotional, but if you only want MFD for performance and not for the handling, and you're also interested in keeping costs down, then MFD is bad news. You'll then be forever hunted by better and better performing 135 systems, forcing you to do frequent and very costly upgrades. If you instead consider the absolute performance and like the handling of the system you can stay one step below the highest end and gain from that it's relatively easy to get such gear second hand.
I would love to mate but I no longer own the D810. I had to sell the lot to get back into MF.It would be interesting to see some RAW files for side by side comparison between the D810 and the P45+ :thumbs:
I was happy with my IQ260 until I did a side by side comparison between the IQ260 and the D800E. I could no longer top-up faith to keep using the IQ260 when it is clearly inferior in many aspects, including the most important part - the image quality for long exposure, at pixel peeping level. The purpose was defeated.I would love to mate but I no longer own the D810. I had to sell the lot to get back into MF.
So far I have no complaints from the P45+ and my post wasn't about whether it is better than the D810 or not, more about how I enjoy tech camera shooting so much more. It really does make me a lot happier and gets me out shooting more.
It's not something rational, and something that can't be measured and compared. It's far more personal than that.
. . . . .
I have decided to get the used STC and CF-39 since it gives me the opportunity to experience it myself. And in case I would not like it (which is not my plan) I should be able to not have lost too much money. By the way this was Euro not $ but I still think I got a fair price.
. . . . . .
Thank You.Welcome to the ALPA-LAND in Dante's nirvana . You have arrived .:salute:
Great choice. On my last trip, I took my D800E and the tech cam. Pulled the D800E out once. As many have said here, while the IQ is better with the tech cam, the bigger factor for me is the mindset. Agreed it is all in my head, but if it makes my output better, that is enough for me.Thank you for all the further thoughts and experiences.
I have decided to get the used STC and CF-39 since it gives me the opportunity to experience it myself. And in case I would not like it (which is not my plan) I should be able to not have lost too much money. By the way this was Euro not $ but I still think I got a fair price.
I might also have the opportunity to go to a Linhof workshop in April for large format photography so maybe I will have a chance their to also handle a Techno.
Special thanks to Torger for the Link to "BEFORE THEY PASS AWAY" - Wow, impressive and wonderful images.
I will report back when I have taken the first image with the equipment.
Jürgen, I see you have 39 and 50 MP backs. Do you use boths? Is there a certain reason to own 2 backs?Welcome to the ALPA-LAND in Dante's nirvana . You have arrived .:salute: