Site Sponsors
Page 8 of 9 FirstFirst ... 6 7 8 9 LastLast
Results 351 to 400 of 432

Thread: Is there a compelling reason to move to MF?

  1. #351
    Senior Member ErikKaffehr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Nyköping Sweden
    Posts
    1,190
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Is there a compelling reason to move to MF?

    Hi,

    I would suggest that great majority of posters have been MFD owners.

    For my part, I did som market research but ordered my MFD stuff without seeing any MFD camera in real world.

    Used it in the field for 33 months, after which I decided a Sony A7RII was a better match for my needs. So the Hasselblad 555/ELD P45+ combo goes into well deserved retirement.

    I think that both positive and negative experiences need to be communicated.

    At this stage I feel that high MP 24x36 offers better image quality than the admittedly aged MFD equipment I have. It also does it with more flexibility and at a lower cost.

    Added 2016-03-31: I have (or had) the following lenses:
    • Distagons: 40/4 FLE, 50/4 FLE, 60/3.5
    • Planars: 80/2.8CFE, 100/3.5CF , 120/4CF, 120/4 CFi
    • Sonnars: 150/4 CT*, 150/4CF, 180/4 CFi


    The lenses I would call great are: all Sonnars and the Planar 100/3.5.

    Best regards
    Erik




    Quote Originally Posted by Geoff View Post
    Consider that there are several stages to learning about MF digital gear and how it works:

    1) market research
    2) holding the pieces in your hands and seeing how they work
    3) using them in the field, and seeing how your workflow adapts and adjusts to them
    4) post processing the files, and adjusting not only the files, but your work process, etc.

    Its easy to do the first step, and think that's enough. But actually, steps 3 and 4 are the most important. The change in workflow, and how you work with a very different set of tools, is a subtle change, one that is difficult to assess. It can only be done hands-on.

    The forum is filled with people who have all made reasonable decisions based on steps 1 and 2 (research, holding in a shop, and thinking that's enough) only to find that their needs and wants changed once using the gear.
    Last edited by ErikKaffehr; 31st March 2016 at 13:31.

  2. #352
    New Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Posts
    16
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Is there a compelling reason to move to MF?

    I've throughly enjoyed reading this thread but I have to say this is one of the silliest things on here in awhile. As a professional for almost thirty years I've never had less than three complete systems. In the film days it was an 8x10 system, multiple 4x5's, multiple 2 1/4s and one lonely dusty nikon. These days, I could shoot anything from my XF/IQ180 to my Canon 5DSR to my Sony A7RII to my Fuji to even a GoPro. You use the appropriate tool for the job in hand. Sometimes we use multiple systems on the same shoot. Just dump everything in C1 and keep going.

    Camera systems are like shoes, nobody has just one pair. You wouldn't wear tennis shoes with a nice suit or go jogging in dress shoes. Camera systems are the same, use the right tool for the job. Don't give me any BS that you can't afford multiple systems because if you have a smart phone then you are shooting with two systems at least already.

    Peace,
    Weldon

    weldonbrewster.com
    Thanks 6 Member(s) thanked for this post
    Likes 14 Member(s) liked this post

  3. #353
    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: Is there a compelling reason to move to MF?

    Quote Originally Posted by weldonbrewster View Post
    I've throughly enjoyed reading this thread but I have to say this is one of the silliest things on here in awhile. As a professional for almost thirty years I've never had less than three complete systems. In the film days it was an 8x10 system, multiple 4x5's, multiple 2 1/4s and one lonely dusty nikon. These days, I could shoot anything from my XF/IQ180 to my Canon 5DSR to my Sony A7RII to my Fuji to even a GoPro. You use the appropriate tool for the job in hand. Sometimes we use multiple systems on the same shoot. Just dump everything in C1 and keep going.

    Camera systems are like shoes, nobody has just one pair. You wouldn't wear tennis shoes with a nice suit or go jogging in dress shoes. Camera systems are the same, use the right tool for the job. Don't give me any BS that you can't afford multiple systems because if you have a smart phone then you are shooting with two systems at least already.

    Peace,
    Well said.

    Although I like to use my MF kit for the IQ and certain applications, especially involving lighting … my most used camera is an 18 meg Leica MM rangefinder. The only thing that the Sony A7R-II did is replace my traditional DSLR in the "Horses For Courses" mix of tools.

    - Marc
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  4. #354
    Senior Member ErikKaffehr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Nyköping Sweden
    Posts
    1,190
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Is there a compelling reason to move to MF?

    Hi,

    Thanks for good comments. Just to say, I am an engineer having photography as a hobby. My quite analytic profession pays for my hobby. That also means that my spendings are a bit limited and I need to make best use of money.

    My take is that is great if you can have some gear that can do all jobs. The main benefits are:
    • Purchase
    • Transportation
    • Knowing your gear

    Spending of one set of gear is obviously cheaper than sharing expenses over different gear that may even overlap, like buying three wide angles instead of one.

    The other issue that you have absolutely no use of gear that is not available when you need it. Much simpler to get a single set of equipment to a shooting location than two or three sets.

    The third part is that it is good to have good knowledge of the stuff used. Having multiple kits doesn't make it easier.

    Shooting MFD I found that I carried two kits. The Hasselblad with 4-5 lenses and a 24x36mm with 3-4 lenses. To that comes tripod of course, something like 18.5 kg, around 40 lb, I guess.

    I can fly economy from a local airport to almost all of Europe, but carry on limit is 10 kg. I can make it with a single kit but not with two.

    What I also have found that I have and had have a bunch of small cameras, like Sony RX-100, but almost never use them.

    So, now I got my Sony A7rII and it fills the list:
    • Long zooms? Yes!
    • Ultra wides? Yes!
    • Fisheye? Yes!
    • Tilt (Scheimpflug)? Yes!
    • Shift? Yes!
    • Macro? Yes!
    • Magnified live view? Yes!


    So, the Sony can fulfil all my needs, not necessarily well but well enough.

    Best regards
    Erik






    Quote Originally Posted by weldonbrewster View Post
    I've throughly enjoyed reading this thread but I have to say this is one of the silliest things on here in awhile. As a professional for almost thirty years I've never had less than three complete systems. In the film days it was an 8x10 system, multiple 4x5's, multiple 2 1/4s and one lonely dusty nikon. These days, I could shoot anything from my XF/IQ180 to my Canon 5DSR to my Sony A7RII to my Fuji to even a GoPro. You use the appropriate tool for the job in hand. Sometimes we use multiple systems on the same shoot. Just dump everything in C1 and keep going.

    Camera systems are like shoes, nobody has just one pair. You wouldn't wear tennis shoes with a nice suit or go jogging in dress shoes. Camera systems are the same, use the right tool for the job. Don't give me any BS that you can't afford multiple systems because if you have a smart phone then you are shooting with two systems at least already.

    Peace,

  5. #355
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

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

    Re: Is there a compelling reason to move to MF?

    THe cool thing is that systems move closer:
    FF DSLR get better in resolution/DR and color
    and MF cameras become faster in handling, better in high ISO etc
    I also own several systems and find - the S007 handles close to a 35mm DSLR (except for sports). The AF is somewhat slower but also somewhat more precise. I have had MF and FF-Dslr side by side for many years, and over the time the MF cameras have developed in a way (better AF, usable up to 3200 ISO, weatherproof,...) that I can use MF more and more for things where I would have choosen a 35mm DSLR 5 years ago.
    Likes 2 Member(s) liked this post

  6. #356
    New Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Posts
    16
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Is there a compelling reason to move to MF?

    Erik, Couple of things. First and foremost the Sony kit you've assembled is great and will shoot just about anything. Your points about multiple sets of lenses and weight, I have the luxury of having an assistant to help cart everything around. I load my truck with the kitchen sink, we have hundreds and hundreds of lbs of gear. If I'm shooting on my own, I make choices based on where and what I'm shooting not weight. Knowledge of gear comes from years and years of testing. My friends and family are sick of being my test subjects. The dog runs and hides when FedEx delivers a package because he knows he's not going to get any peace for awhile. I try to figure out what are the strengths and weaknesses of each piece gear. You don't want to be on set and not have something work like it's an extension of your hand or mind. The Sony menu system is the only thing I can't memorize (who can?) Below is a funny test photo to see if face detection auto focus on a Sony A7RII works on marine iguanas. Yes, it does and you get the cool little green boxes on their eyes confirming focus

    So, this gets me to your second kit. You have arguably one of the best digital backs ever made mounted on a legendary camera system. You have thoroughly showed us what it can't do. I offer you a challenge. Lets see what it can do, what are it's strengths? Head out at dawn on a crisp spring morning and photograph the city hall in Nyköping. I looked on Google earth and it looks like there is beautiful historic building next to the modern city hall. Lets see the contrast of the two. You only need one camera, one lens and a tripod. I'm confident that you will get some great images that will surprise the heck out of you. I make this suggestion with the best of intentions and I will certainly accept any challenge thrown my way.

    For inspiration, I leave you with Nick Merrick. This is the top photographer at the best architectural photography firm in the world. In two little Pelican 1510s he carries a pile of lens, a Hasselblad system, an Arca Swiss system, a laptop and you guessed it... A P45+
    http://hedrichblessing.com/nm-portfolio

    Peace,
    Weldon

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	Galapagos_Oct2015_1968.jpg 
Views:	18 
Size:	603.6 KB 
ID:	117573
    Weldon

    weldonbrewster.com
    Thanks 1 Member(s) thanked for this post
    Likes 11 Member(s) liked this post

  7. #357
    Senior Member stngoldberg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    newport, RI
    Posts
    801
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    12

    Re: Is there a compelling reason to move to MF?

    Weldon,
    The portfolios from hedrich blessing and your own work are superb.
    Stanley

  8. #358
    Senior Member ErikKaffehr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Nyköping Sweden
    Posts
    1,190
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Is there a compelling reason to move to MF?

    Hi Weldon,

    Thanks for the challenge and taking time to check out Nyköping. I have been shooting very little at Nyköping centre. So, next time I have reasonable opportunity I will shoot there. Thanks, again. Also, nice to have a challenge for the Blad. Still it would surprise me if it would have any benefits to the Sony, but I will try and report back.

    I agree the Sony has a bad menu system, but I almost never use it. The camera has a set of presets, so I switch between two setups and have function keys set for most things. But finding anything that is not on a key is a PIA.

    Reason weight is important for me is flight limits on carry on weights. Last year almost all my shooting was on travel by air. If going by car I have both 24x36 and Hasselblad.

    This is one of my favourite P45+ images from Nyköping, shot with Distagon 50/4CF, two images, stitched. I had a good horizontal composition, but realised the sky was interesting so I made an additional exposure with camera tilted upwards and merged in LR.


    Best regards
    Erik







    [QUOTE=weldonbrewster;686939]Erik, Couple of things. First and foremost the Sony kit you've assembled is great and will shoot just about anything. Your points about multiple sets of lenses and weight, I have the luxury of having an assistant to help cart everything around. I load my truck with the kitchen sink, we have hundreds and hundreds of lbs of gear. If I'm shooting on my own, I make choices based on where and what I'm shooting not weight. Knowledge of gear comes from years and years of testing. My friends and family are sick of being my test subjects. The dog runs and hides when FedEx delivers a package because he knows he's not going to get any peace for awhile. I try to figure out what are the strengths and weaknesses of each piece gear. You don't want to be on set and not have something work like it's an extension of your hand or mind. The Sony menu system is the only thing I can't memorize (who can?) Below is a funny test photo to see if face detection auto focus on a Sony A7RII works on marine iguanas. Yes, it does and you get the cool little green boxes on their eyes confirming focus

    So, this gets me to your second kit. You have arguably one of the best digital backs ever made mounted on a legendary camera system. You have thoroughly showed us what it can't do. I offer you a challenge. Lets see what it can do, what are it's strengths? Head out at dawn on a crisp spring morning and photograph the city hall in Nyköping. I looked on Google earth and it looks like there is beautiful historic building next to the modern city hall. Lets see the contrast of the two. You only need one camera, one lens and a tripod. I'm confident that you will get some great images that will surprise the heck out of you. I make this suggestion with the best of intentions and I will certainly accept any challenge thrown my way.

    For inspiration, I leave you with Nick Merrick. This is the top photographer at the best architectural photography firm in the world. In two little Pelican 1510s he carries a pile of lens, a Hasselblad system, an Arca Swiss system, a laptop and you guessed it... A P45+
    Nick Merrick - Portfolio — Hedrich Blessing

    Peace,
    Weldon
    Last edited by ErikKaffehr; 1st April 2016 at 11:33.

  9. #359
    New Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Posts
    16
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Is there a compelling reason to move to MF?

    Thank you for your kind words, Stanley. To be honest though, I get inspired every time I look at the Fun with MF Images thread or the Tech cam thread or the BTS thread. There are a lot of awesome photographers with great images in there.

    Erik that exactly what I'm talking about. That image looks cool. When you get time, shoot something with your P45+ and post it up in the MF image thread. I'll do the same.

  10. #360
    Senior Member dchew's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Northeast Ohio
    Posts
    969
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Is there a compelling reason to move to MF?

    So after 360 replies to the question, "Is there a compelling reason to move to MF?", we have found out that "compelling" depends on some combination of:
    1. The photographer's perception of quality
    2. The photographer's workflow in the field and in the "darkroom"
    3. How big the prints are going to be
    4. What the subject is
    5. How price sensitive the photographer is

    Eureka.

    It's official:


    Feeling Snarky Dave
    How glorious a greeting the sun gives the mountains! - John Muir

    davechewphotography.com
    Likes 6 Member(s) liked this post

  11. #361
    Member Abstraction's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2016
    Posts
    233
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Is there a compelling reason to move to MF?

    Depends on how you look at it. You might say that we have cut through a lot of obfuscation and gotten to the core of the price/performance ratio. Everything became much clearer and simpler once we got there.

  12. #362
    Workshop Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Brooklyn
    Posts
    4,043
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1253

    Re: Is there a compelling reason to move to MF?

    Quote Originally Posted by Abstraction View Post
    If you're telling me that the reason you or other folks on this forum got their MF cameras because "you can", that would certainly be the type of an answer that would put this entire discussion to rest.
    I can. Will that bed it down?
    Likes 5 Member(s) liked this post

  13. #363
    Senior Member darr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    North Florida
    Posts
    980
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Is there a compelling reason to move to MF?



    "Abstraction"
    "Creativity takes courage." ~ Henri Matisse
    Darlene Almeda, photoscapes.com
    Likes 5 Member(s) liked this post

  14. #364
    Senior Member Jamgolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    North Texas
    Posts
    516
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Is there a compelling reason to move to MF?

    Quote Originally Posted by Abstraction View Post
    You might say that we have cut through a lot of obfuscation and gotten to the core of the price/performance ratio. Everything became much clearer and simpler once we got there.
    Really glad to hear that you finally got your answer. Great success !
    IQ3 100 • Cambo 1600 • Rodenstock 23,32,50,90 • Zeiss 350SA
    UnTroubled Land
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  15. #365
    Member Abstraction's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2016
    Posts
    233
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Is there a compelling reason to move to MF?

    Quote Originally Posted by Jamgolf View Post
    Really glad to hear that you finally got your answer. Great success !
    I believe I mentioned that I got my answer about 4 or 5 pages ago.

  16. #366
    Senior Member Jamgolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    North Texas
    Posts
    516
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Is there a compelling reason to move to MF?

    Quote Originally Posted by Abstraction View Post
    I believe I mentioned that I got my answer about 4 or 5 pages ago.
    Brilliant.
    So that should be it then.
    IQ3 100 • Cambo 1600 • Rodenstock 23,32,50,90 • Zeiss 350SA
    UnTroubled Land
    Likes 2 Member(s) liked this post

  17. #367
    Member Abstraction's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2016
    Posts
    233
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Is there a compelling reason to move to MF?

    Quote Originally Posted by Jamgolf View Post
    Brilliant.
    So that should be it then.
    Yeah, theoretically it should be, but as Al Pacino said in Godfather III, "Every time I try to get out, they drag me right back in!"
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  18. #368
    Senior Member Jamgolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    North Texas
    Posts
    516
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Is there a compelling reason to move to MF?

    Quote Originally Posted by Abstraction View Post
    Yeah, theoretically it should be, but as Al Pacino said in Godfather III, "Every time I try to get out, they drag me right back in!"
    Sounds like you are having second thoughts.
    You came to a decision. Stick to it.
    You can do it.
    Be strong.
    IQ3 100 • Cambo 1600 • Rodenstock 23,32,50,90 • Zeiss 350SA
    UnTroubled Land
    Likes 2 Member(s) liked this post

  19. #369
    Member Abstraction's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2016
    Posts
    233
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Is there a compelling reason to move to MF?

    Quote Originally Posted by Jamgolf View Post
    Sounds like you are having second thoughts.
    You came to a decision. Stick to it.
    You can do it.
    Be strong.
    I think I can... I think I can... I think I can...
    Likes 2 Member(s) liked this post

  20. #370
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Michiel Schierbeek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Amsterdam/Normandy
    Posts
    4,055
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    762

    Re: Is there a compelling reason to move to MF?

    This thread is getting a very high semantic level. I think I am going to finish my study in philosophy.
    Likes 3 Member(s) liked this post

  21. #371
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    1,347
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    12

    Re: Is there a compelling reason to move to MF?

    Quote Originally Posted by weldonbrewster View Post
    You have thoroughly showed us what it can't do. I offer you a challenge. Lets see what it can do, what are it's strengths?
    now, this is really a great thought and also a nice challenge

    Personally I use quite a similar kit. P45 non plus! (and P21+) in conjunction with Contax 645 and Cambo WRS and a Sony A7R2 (and A7R). I use the Sony when I need its speed (both AF speed compared to the Contax and the much higher sensitivity compared to my prehistoric backs) and for some kind of "point and shoot" scenarios. But when the conditions are appropriate to shoot the P45 I use it without even thinking about. Whenever I directly compared the A7R/2 to the P45 the Sony images looked somehow flat and lifeless. The P45 images look deeper and more nuanced ... also show finer textures in "flat" surfaces (though I am using Zeiss glass on both the Contax and the Sony). The image aesthetics is simply different (appart from DR and/or noise and/or resolution or so ... and therefore not so obvious in 100% crops) and personally I clearly favour the good old P45. Now, I could sell my whole MF kit and buy a nice set of the very best lenses and tilt/shift adapters available for the Sony. But if at all, I'd sell the Sony kit and would live (again) with the limitations of the MF kit. Fortunately I can use both...
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  22. #372
    Senior Member ErikKaffehr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Nyköping Sweden
    Posts
    1,190
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Is there a compelling reason to move to MF?

    Hi,

    I had my first day of that challenge. Weather was quite boring, but still a good learning experience. I was actually shooting with both cameras. One thing I noticed that the histogram on the Sony has lured me into very short exposures, because the bright sky.

    Here are the first images from that shot, with full size jpegs and raw files: http://echophoto.dnsalias.net/ekr/Ar...ldonChallenge/

    Best regards
    Erik






    Quote Originally Posted by thomas View Post
    now, this is really a great thought and also a nice challenge

    Personally I use quite a similar kit. P45 non plus! (and P21+) in conjunction with Contax 645 and Cambo WRS and a Sony A7R2 (and A7R). I use the Sony when I need its speed (both AF speed compared to the Contax and the much higher sensitivity compared to my prehistoric backs) and for some kind of "point and shoot" scenarios. But when the conditions are appropriate to shoot the P45 I use it without even thinking about. Whenever I directly compared the A7R/2 to the P45 the Sony images looked somehow flat and lifeless. The P45 images look deeper and more nuanced ... also show finer textures in "flat" surfaces (though I am using Zeiss glass on both the Contax and the Sony). The image aesthetics is simply different (appart from DR and/or noise and/or resolution or so ... and therefore not so obvious in 100% crops) and personally I clearly favour the good old P45. Now, I could sell my whole MF kit and buy a nice set of the very best lenses and tilt/shift adapters available for the Sony. But if at all, I'd sell the Sony kit and would live (again) with the limitations of the MF kit. Fortunately I can use both...

  23. #373
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    598
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Is there a compelling reason to move to MF?

    Quote Originally Posted by ErikKaffehr View Post
    Here are the first images from that shot, with full size jpegs and raw files: http://echophoto.dnsalias.net/ekr/Ar...ldonChallenge/
    This is quite surprising. On the full-sized jpegs, the A7RII jpegs appear to have a narrower dynamic range and a noticeably higher noise level. The A7RII image looks busy and over-sharpened. I would not have expected the difference to be that large, actually. OTOH, the Sony lens is impressive.

  24. #374
    Senior Member ErikKaffehr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Nyköping Sweden
    Posts
    1,190
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Is there a compelling reason to move to MF?

    Hi Jerome,

    The lenses used on the Sony are all Canon lenses 16-35/4, 24/3.5 TS and 24-105/4L.

    I agree on the Sony having higher noise and less DR. Two of the Sony images were significantly underexposed. But the second row of images has the same exposure. The exposures were based on the histograms and blinking highlights on both cameras. I have observed that the A7rII histograms are way to conservative, while the A99 I used before was quite accurate. One of my colleagues used to say: "Do it again and do it right!"

    I had the same sharpening on both Sony and Hasselblad. Essentially, I agree with you observations. Nice to hear that we see the same things.

    Best regards
    Erik

    Quote Originally Posted by jerome_m View Post
    This is quite surprising. On the full-sized jpegs, the A7RII jpegs appear to have a narrower dynamic range and a noticeably higher noise level. The A7RII image looks busy and over-sharpened. I would not have expected the difference to be that large, actually. OTOH, the Sony lens is impressive.
    Last edited by ErikKaffehr; 5th April 2016 at 22:06.

  25. #375
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Posts
    22
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Is there a compelling reason to move to MF?

    I don't think there is many situation with a compelling reason to do anything... (Well, except for life-and-death decision maybe)

    First of all the resolution is not the reason, because A) 35mm system get higher and higher resolution (which actually may not be that good since the density is higher and pixel size is smaller) B) For certain use, 35mm system digital solution is enough.

    Other factors, dynamic range, details are making difference between MF and 35mm. Yes there is difference, but how much? To justify the price increase?

    Most of the products come to this end: expensive cost to bring tiny improvement. So the question is, do you care? If you view all the photos on iPad, the answer is no; if you client request a high quality product shot, the answer may be yes.

    Personally, with a good used equipment deal, I think it is worth getting into MF. Just like driving a car: even a tiny improvement, you will feel all your previous experience is off, and you just don't want to get back...

  26. #376
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    1,347
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    12

    Re: Is there a compelling reason to move to MF?

    Quote Originally Posted by Shineofleo View Post
    35mm system get higher and higher resolution (which actually may not be that good since the density is higher and pixel size is smaller)
    which brings us back to the situation of film days... somehow.
    When the sensors today utilze more or less the same pixel pitch (or the same resolution with a larger pixel pitch on the larger sensor) ... so when digital cameras use more or less the same "film"... then the larger formats will have the same advantages over the smaller formats they always had.

    The captures Erik posted have no relevance in terms of a "comparison", IMHO.
    The captures are focussed differently and have gone through interpolating post processing.
    They may show what is (potentially) possible in terms of composition and/or "look", though. But this is also related to the tools used (primarly the lenses)... and the "look" is also related to the software used to process the files.
    We all know the tool of choice to process Phase One files is Capture One... especially with older generation DBs.
    That someone who invests hours and hours of testing tiny differences in image-details and who is more than anything else concerned about technical aspects of photography ... that this person is using a software that clearly produces more artefacts (color aliasing and halos) and that clearly extracts less details from the files totally escapes me.
    But so be it...
    Thanks 1 Member(s) thanked for this post
    Likes 2 Member(s) liked this post

  27. #377
    Senior Member ErikKaffehr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Nyköping Sweden
    Posts
    1,190
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Is there a compelling reason to move to MF?

    Hi,

    I don't think that interpolation is done on my images. I almost always post images at actual pixels, unless clearly stated. The P45+ and the A7rII have essentially same resolution when cropped to P45+ resolution around 39MP. So you cancompare images at actual pixels and there will be a very good match in size.

    It is a bit hard to know which images you are referring to, but I generally put great effort into focusing on the Hasselblad, I always use a Zeiss 3X monocular which gives me a 9X magnification, but achieving exact focus is still a challenge. On the Sony I have 12.5X magnification on the sensor and not on a ground glass serving as a proxy for that sensor. So focusing is clearly more accurate.

    It may be that LR produces more artefacts than C1, but C1 one does not eliminate them. You may check these three links:

    Demosaic - Quick comparison of three raw converters and four algorithms
    Demosaic - Quick comparison of three raw converters and four algorithms
    Demosaic - Quick comparison of three raw converters and four algorithms

    Short version is that I complain about artefacts in an image. Mark Segal makes a large print and finds that those artefacts are not visible with the naked eye but visible with a good loupe. I make an even larger print and can see the artefacts at 20-25cm with the naked eye, but I am near sighted. With progressive glasses I cannot see them. But i certainly feel that Adobe-s raw converter is in need of improvement regarding demosaic artefacts.

    What I would say is that if I would make a large print I would convert the image in RawTherapee and use FocusMagic to do capture sharpening and still handle the resulting TIFFs in Lightroom that works much better than C1 one for me. C1 one has done quite a lot of progress with C9.

    I don't say C1 is a bad product but it doesn't work for me. I would never ever buy a camera that forced me to use a certain tool for processing the images.

    Check the images below. This was a very simple test, a flower shot. The bottom images shows the correct colours of the petals and the green leaves. How I know they are correct? I measured with a spectrometer. So, yes C1 is a great product, but it has a quite a few issues of it's own (I can post a few other bad samples). Much preferable to have a camera that delivers a good raw image that you can use with the raw converter of your choice.
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	Screen Shot 2016-04-06 at 19.58.23.jpg 
Views:	21 
Size:	20.6 KB 
ID:	117746

    The way I see it, it is very clear that if we compare similar technology the larger format almos always wins. The present MF CMOS sensors are all made by Sony and they use similar technology. That technology is clearly coming from Sony. The signals coming out from those sensors are bits and not voltages. A larger sensor clearly gives advantages.

    So, very clearly a full frame 100 MP sensor will deliver superior results to a 42 MP 24x36mm sensor. There is one exception and that is when you need to stop down for depth of field. If you shoot f/16 on the 100 MP but can do with f/8 on the 24x36 mm sensor most of the advantage of the large sensor will be lost.

    On the other hand, it is not very clear that a cropped MF sensor will produce superior results to a 24x36 sensor with good lenses.

    As a final note, I have some issues with folks complaining about other folks tests. Share your own stuff and be prepared to take some flak.

    Best regards
    Erik






    Quote Originally Posted by thomas View Post
    which brings us back to the situation of film days... somehow.
    When the sensors today utilze more or less the same pixel pitch (or the same resolution with a larger pixel pitch on the larger sensor) ... so when digital cameras use more or less the same "film"... then the larger formats will have the same advantages over the smaller formats they always had.

    The captures Erik posted have no relevance in terms of a "comparison", IMHO.
    The captures are focussed differently and have gone through interpolating post processing.
    They may show what is (potentially) possible in terms of composition and/or "look", though. But this is also related to the tools used (primarly the lenses)... and the "look" is also related to the software used to process the files.
    We all know the tool of choice to process Phase One files is Capture One... especially with older generation DBs.
    That someone who invests hours and hours of testing tiny differences in image-details and who is more than anything else concerned about technical aspects of photography ... that this person is using a software that clearly produces more artefacts (color aliasing and halos) and that clearly extracts less details from the files totally escapes me.
    But so be it...

  28. #378
    Senior Member ErikKaffehr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Nyköping Sweden
    Posts
    1,190
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Is there a compelling reason to move to MF?

    Hi Jerome,

    I have checked out the images a bit more. Let's take this pair:

    P45+ stitched Sony A7r single exposure and shift

    Now, let check out the raw images in RawDigger:

    Here is the raw image from the P45+ (note that it is stitched), it has significant clipping in the sky:
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	Screen Shot 2016-04-06 at 20.33.47.jpg 
Views:	15 
Size:	20.6 KB 
ID:	117747

    And here is the Sony image, it has no clipping and is exposed one step under ETTR:
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	Screen Shot 2016-04-06 at 20.35.11.jpg 
Views:	21 
Size:	20.6 KB 
ID:	117748

    Very clearly, the histogram on the Sony made me underexpose the image. Actually, I was a bit confused by the short exposure time when shooting the image.

    Best regards
    Erik




    Quote Originally Posted by jerome_m View Post
    This is quite surprising. On the full-sized jpegs, the A7RII jpegs appear to have a narrower dynamic range and a noticeably higher noise level. The A7RII image looks busy and over-sharpened. I would not have expected the difference to be that large, actually. OTOH, the Sony lens is impressive.

  29. #379
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    598
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Is there a compelling reason to move to MF?

    Quote Originally Posted by ErikKaffehr View Post
    Very clearly, the histogram on the Sony made me underexpose the image. Actually, I was a bit confused by the short exposure time when shooting the image.
    I don't understand what is going on here. I see the clipping in raw digger, but the sky in the P45 image shows more details in the clouds than the sky in the Sony image.

  30. #380
    Subscriber & Workshop Member GrahamWelland's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Vancouver, WA
    Posts
    5,800
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    564

    Re: Is there a compelling reason to move to MF?

    Quote Originally Posted by ErikKaffehr View Post

    I don't say C1 is a bad product but it doesn't work for me. I would never ever buy a camera that forced me to use a certain tool for processing the images.

    Check the images below. This was a very simple test, a flower shot. The bottom images shows the correct colours of the petals and the green leaves. How I know they are correct? I measured with a spectrometer.
    Erik

    now you know that you are guilty of picking THE worst color to check with a spectrometer vs the eye.

    Bluebells or the flowers you showed typically do not photograph well due to UV/IR and what you show are the classic blue vs purple/pink rendering that technically 'correct' rendering vs what the eye sees. I have hundreds of images of pink/purple bell flowers that only a specific qualitative filter/rendering presented as the correct color that I saw. I see the same thing happening with the C1 rendering vs adobe.

    Lets see a more neutral comparison without full spectrum influence.
    Remember: adventure before dementia!

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

  31. #381
    Senior Member ErikKaffehr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Nyköping Sweden
    Posts
    1,190
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Is there a compelling reason to move to MF?

    Hi Graham,

    Lets just say that they are very natural colours. :-) And those petals were definitively not blue…

    The reason I took this is that I had a discussion with the publisher of OnLandscape, a British Journal, who stated that the P45+ was not capable of correct reproduction of green vegetation, while I sort of believed it could be more of a colour profile issue.

    The interesting thing here is that Capture One reproduces the colour as blue, both on P45+ and A99, while Adobe actually does a good job on both.

    The Colour Munki Colour picker picked the petal sample as "deep bluish purple" on the pantone palette. Using the color picker in Photoshop CS it picked the very same Pantone colour on the A99/LR conversion, so that repro was quite good.

    I don't understand your statement: "Lets see a more neutral comparison without full spectrum influence.", you mean that back/software is not expected to handle full spectrum?

    Best regards
    Erik


    Quote Originally Posted by GrahamWelland View Post
    Erik

    now you know that you are guilty of picking THE worst color to check with a spectrometer vs the eye.

    Bluebells or the flowers you showed typically do not photograph well due to UV/IR and what you show are the classic blue vs purple/pink rendering that technically 'correct' rendering vs what the eye sees. I have hundreds of images of pink/purple bell flowers that only a specific qualitative filter/rendering presented as the correct color that I saw. I see the same thing happening with the C1 rendering vs adobe.

    Lets see a more neutral comparison without full spectrum influence.

  32. #382
    Senior Member ErikKaffehr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Nyköping Sweden
    Posts
    1,190
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Is there a compelling reason to move to MF?

    Hi,

    Sky is obviously very bright in both images and both are processed to taste with quite a lot of manipulation. Obviously, LR CC handles the clipped sky quite well, a bit to my surprise.

    One thing to consider is that the P45+ image has a lot of clipping, but only in the green channel. LR is pretty good at reconstructing blown out highlights if only one channels is clipped.

    This is one of the advantages of having raw images, anyone can download them and try their own processing.

    Now, this was not intended as a test shoot, in that case I would have shot more alternative exposures. This is a part of a challenge I have taken to shoot a specific subject with the blad, but I of course take the opportunity to shoot with both camera systems.

    The raw images are here: http://echophoto.dnsalias.net/ekr/Ar...ldonChallenge/

    The Panos are DNGs as they were merged in Lightroom CC, I don't know how "raw" they really are. I am pretty sure they are demosaiced.

    Best regards
    Erik


    Quote Originally Posted by jerome_m View Post
    I don't understand what is going on here. I see the clipping in raw digger, but the sky in the P45 image shows more details in the clouds than the sky in the Sony image.

  33. #383
    Senior Member stephengilbert's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Santa Monica, CA
    Posts
    2,272
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2

    Re: Is there a compelling reason to move to MF?

    I don't have time to read all of this.

    Is there a compelling reason, or not?

    And, is there a compelling reason to leave?

    A new thread idea, perhaps?

  34. #384
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    198
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Is there a compelling reason to move to MF?

    I wonder if there is a COMPELLING reason to have a compelling reason.
    ie. is Reason being compelled?


    Quote Originally Posted by stephengilbert View Post
    I don't have time to read all of this.

    Is there a compelling reason, or not?

    And, is there a compelling reason to leave?

    A new thread idea, perhaps?
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  35. #385
    Workshop Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Brooklyn
    Posts
    4,043
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1253

    Re: Is there a compelling reason to move to MF?

    Tonight I feel compelled to put reasons in my couscous

  36. #386
    Senior Member Jamgolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    North Texas
    Posts
    516
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Is there a compelling reason to move to MF?

    Finally - a compelling reason to use forum's "ignore list" feature.
    IQ3 100 • Cambo 1600 • Rodenstock 23,32,50,90 • Zeiss 350SA
    UnTroubled Land

  37. #387
    Member Abstraction's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2016
    Posts
    233
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Is there a compelling reason to move to MF?

    What a great article! I wish I had found it sooner.


    http://www.ludd.luth.se/~torger/photography/mfdb-guide.html
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  38. #388
    Senior Member ErikKaffehr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Nyköping Sweden
    Posts
    1,190
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Is there a compelling reason to move to MF?

    Hi,

    Yes it is a good article. The author developed Lumariver HDR and DCamProf, doing that development he learned a more than he wanted about MFD raw formats and he is also a developer of RawTherapee. I actually read it before buying my P45+ and it is one of the reasons I chose the P45+ over the Leaf alternative.

    Anders had bad experience with repairs and dealers. I have my P45+ since June 2013 and I am actually quite happy with it. But I have not seen a lot of benefits with it, except the resolution and that advantage is pretty much gone by now.

    But, it depends how and what you shoot. I like to shoot with it but the results say it doesn't really work for me.

    On the other hand, prices for old MFD (like my P45+) are going down, so MFD is available at more affordable costs. The new CMOS backs use Sony sensors so they are probably on the same technology curve as other Sony users, so they can play the full advantage of size.

    Whatever you shoot from 1" to MFD, it is a good time to be a photographer.

    Best regards
    Erik

    Quote Originally Posted by Abstraction View Post
    What a great article! I wish I had found it sooner.


    Guide to second hand medium format digital backs
    Last edited by ErikKaffehr; 6th April 2016 at 17:48.

  39. #389
    Member Abstraction's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2016
    Posts
    233
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Is there a compelling reason to move to MF?

    Is this the same Torger who's on this forum? If so, thank you, Torger.

  40. #390
    Senior Member dchew's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Northeast Ohio
    Posts
    969
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Is there a compelling reason to move to MF?

    Quote Originally Posted by Abstraction View Post
    Is this the same Torger who's on this forum? If so, thank you, Torger.
    Yup! He did a great job on that, just like everything else he does. You should try Lumariver.

    Dave
    How glorious a greeting the sun gives the mountains! - John Muir

    davechewphotography.com

  41. #391
    Senior Member ondebanks's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    518
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Is there a compelling reason to move to MF?

    Quote Originally Posted by Abstraction View Post
    The fun part makes sense to me, but the money to fun ratio doesn't.
    For me, it's significantly about the fun. And the money to fun ratio is actually low if you build your kit from the used market. I'm still shooting a 15 year old back design on a 15 year old camera design, largely with 30 year old lenses. For the type of shooting that system is suited to, I could hardly be happier. For other things, I use DSLRs and an iphone.

    How many people are still shooting 15 year old Canon or Nikon DSLRs? Not many. And how many of those are doing so for economic reasons and wishing they could have a more recent Canon or Nikon DSLR? Probably all of them. But old medium format gear is not like that. It delivered great quality then, and still delivers great quality now.

    Ray

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by satybhat View Post
    Without money, there would be no art. So much is known.
    Sweeping statement alert. Not all art has to involve the exchange of money. In truth, very little of it does. From the school-wall mural that my 10 year old daughter (a far better artist than me!) designed, to the prehistoric cave paintings of Lascaux...

    Ray

  42. #392
    Senior Member ErikKaffehr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Nyköping Sweden
    Posts
    1,190
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Is there a compelling reason to move to MF?

    Hi,

    I wouldn't talk about 15 years old stuff in digital. But, what you say is interesting…

    For my part, I used to shoot Minolta and kept on with Minolta in 2006 so I could use my old lenses. But, just a few years later I had all new lenses. I could as well have switched to Canon or Nikon.

    In 2015 I started to switch over to Sony A7rII. Although it can use all the old lenses, most of the old lenses went to pasture.

    On the other hand, I still use some of my Hasselblad or even Pentax 67 lenses on the A7rII. Add to that, I have a Contax 35-135/3.3-4.5 stuck in the mail that I bought for the A7rII.

    So, I see that I switch to new designs like my Canon 16-35/4L and 24/3.5 TSELII but also buy into some older designs. The main reason for that is that older designs have manually controlled apertures.

    It is sort of interesting, lenses can live for very long. I guess that most of my lenses are 20+ years old. But, the older lenses may just get irrelevant.

    Getting back to the P45+, I enjoy shooting with it and it is capable of delivering great images. But, it starts getting irrelevant. The Sony A7rII can deliver similar image quality, but does it in a smaller, less expensive and more flexible package.

    Just as an example. I have a really nice 400/4.5G APO from Minolta. On the other hand I have a Sony 70-400/4-5.6G that seems to be a pretty good match for the 400/4.5G at 400 mm but also covers the 70-400 range. I love the 400/4.5G APO, but it does offer little benefits over the zoom. I will do some more testing but the old great Minolta may be next to go to EBay.

    Best regards
    Erik

    Quote Originally Posted by ondebanks View Post
    For me, it's significantly about the fun. And the money to fun ratio is actually low if you build your kit from the used market. I'm still shooting a 15 year old back design on a 15 year old camera design, largely with 30 year old lenses. For the type of shooting that system is suited to, I could hardly be happier. For other things, I use DSLRs and an iphone.

    How many people are still shooting 15 year old Canon or Nikon DSLRs? Not many. And how many of those are doing so for economic reasons and wishing they could have a more recent Canon or Nikon DSLR? Probably all of them. But old medium format gear is not like that. It delivered great quality then, and still delivers great quality now.

    Ray

    - - - Updated - - -



    Sweeping statement alert. Not all art has to involve the exchange of money. In truth, very little of it does. From the school-wall mural that my 10 year old daughter (a far better artist than me!) designed, to the prehistoric cave paintings of Lascaux...

    Ray

  43. #393
    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: Is there a compelling reason to move to MF?

    Some of this amusing, and probably the only reason anyone keeps reading this thread.

    That Erik mentions size factors is a Duh! observation. He's comparing a Sony A7R-II to a high-volume studio production 555ELD work-horse … like comparing a Clydesdale to a trick pony Interestingly, the 555 is an 18 year old camera design and the last one made was 10 years ago. I'd hazard a guess that the A7R-II will be in a landfill in a few years. Still, I wouldn't want to travel with a 555 either.

    Erik, I really like that shot you posted from Nykoping. Even a small web jpeg shows that "striking presence" that many subscribe to MFD. I guess it just goes back to whether you truly think the A7R-II can deliver that … if so, question answered. To me it is obvious, but that's just me (as a reminder, I do have a A7R-II, yet prefer my Leica S images to it by a great margin … while still liking the A7R-II for all it can do).

    Anyways …

    The Dictionary called to say they are running out of words

    We could expend half a million more words, link to an endless stream of blog posts pro or con, publicize this chart, or some macro crop comparison (all of which are suspect) … and not one person is going to alter their opinion any more than they have yet … which is no one as far as this thread is concerned.

    Hey, let's start a new thread comparing the A7R-II to the new Nikon D5 … which is what I wish I had rather than the A7R-II because 20 meg FF is more than enough for that sort of work, and the Nikon murders the Sony on every performance criteria that matters to me and many, many, many others …

    The trick pony verses a thoroughbred … Hee, Hee …

    - Marc
    Likes 3 Member(s) liked this post

  44. #394
    Senior Member stephengilbert's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Santa Monica, CA
    Posts
    2,272
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2

    Re: Is there a compelling reason to move to MF?

    I love it when posters suggest that this thread has run it's course.

    As if that's ever stopped anything.
    Likes 4 Member(s) liked this post

  45. #395
    Workshop Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Brooklyn
    Posts
    4,043
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1253

    Re: Is there a compelling reason to move to MF?

    Or the canon 5D

  46. #396
    Senior Member ErikKaffehr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Nyköping Sweden
    Posts
    1,190
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Is there a compelling reason to move to MF?

    Hi Marc,

    Your postings are always an interesting reads, thanks a lot!

    Regarding the "Duh" argument it is not about size, but more about weight and the 10 kg carry on limit on flights. If you fly business you can have two carry ons, but I don't fly business. The other way to see it, the A7rII kit covers my needs from 16-400 mm within those 10 kg. I don't know if a modern camera is lighter than the old Blad.

    Regarding the Nyköping image, if you are referring to this:
    Sony A7rII P45+ (stitched)
    This was shot on the A7rII with the Canon 24/3.5 TSE LII. With that lens I achieved the composition I wanted, with a single exposure and without moving back. Histogram and auto exposure lured me into 1/400 s, so the image is a bit low on exposure. Do again, do it right! This was shot on the P45+ with the Distagon 40 at f/11. I needed to move back 3-5 m to get the both buildings into the image. That also meant the park bench is hanging into the image. I considered moving it, but it is quite heavy. I could turn the camera vertically and stitch, that would give me a better composition. I didn't think about it. Do again, do it right!

    Best regards
    Erik




    Quote Originally Posted by fotografz View Post
    Some of this amusing, and probably the only reason anyone keeps reading this thread.

    That Erik mentions size factors is a Duh! observation. He's comparing a Sony A7R-II to a high-volume studio production 555ELD work-horse … like comparing a Clydesdale to a trick pony Interestingly, the 555 is an 18 year old camera design and the last one made was 10 years ago. I'd hazard a guess that the A7R-II will be in a landfill in a few years. Still, I wouldn't want to travel with a 555 either.

    Erik, I really like that shot you posted from Nykoping. Even a small web jpeg shows that "striking presence" that many subscribe to MFD. I guess it just goes back to whether you truly think the A7R-II can deliver that … if so, question answered. To me it is obvious, but that's just me (as a reminder, I do have a A7R-II, yet prefer my Leica S images to it by a great margin … while still liking the A7R-II for all it can do).


    - Marc
    Last edited by ErikKaffehr; 8th April 2016 at 11:55.

  47. #397
    Senior Member Lars's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Sunnyvale, California
    Posts
    1,811
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    19

    Re: Is there a compelling reason to move to MF?

    Quote Originally Posted by ErikKaffehr View Post
    Regarding the "Duh" argument it is not about size, but more about weight and the 10 kg carry on limit on flights.
    Just keep in mind that carry on limits are quite different between continents, in terms of rules as well as actual enforcement.

    In Europe and Australia I have often been asked to weigh my carry-on, as well as have it measured for size.
    In Spain I even witnessed an argument about carry-on size turn into a fist fight between staff and a hot-tempered passenger.

    This just doesn't seem to happen in the U.S. I'm sure my wheeled carry-on has been close 20 kgs at times.

    All this will of course change over time, as airlines seek revenue while attempting to stay competitive.
    Monochrome: http://mochro.com

  48. #398
    Senior Member ErikKaffehr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Nyköping Sweden
    Posts
    1,190
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Is there a compelling reason to move to MF?

    Hi,

    When traveling to US I try to find a carrier that has generous weight limits, often meaning longer and less convenient flights. Here in Europe 10 kg is generous allowance.

    Another issue is size. Most of my visits were to the US ended in Idaho Falls, something like 24 hours door to door. The last leg is usually on one of those Canadair Regional Jets. My Gura Gear Kiboko used to fit in the overhead bins on that aircraft.

    There is always some room for cheating. I have a Domke photo west and can carry my Macbook 13" in one of the inside pockets. On some flights you can have a personal item, and that can be my 70-400/4-5.6 zoom.

    Best regards
    Erik


    Quote Originally Posted by Lars View Post
    Just keep in mind that carry on limits are quite different between continents, in terms of rules as well as actual enforcement.

    In Europe and Australia I have often been asked to weigh my carry-on, as well as have it measured for size.
    In Spain I even witnessed an argument about carry-on size turn into a fist fight between staff and a hot-tempered passenger.

    This just doesn't seem to happen in the U.S. I'm sure my wheeled carry-on has been close 20 kgs at times.

    All this will of course change over time, as airlines seek revenue while attempting to stay competitive.

  49. #399
    Subscriber & Workshop Member GrahamWelland's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Vancouver, WA
    Posts
    5,800
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    564

    Re: Is there a compelling reason to move to MF?

    Being a big guy i seldom run into these issues and when I do I just put stuff into my jacket. If I want to go light I'll take the Sony. If I want to get the BEST from the destination I'll take the phase one gear one way or the other! It's worth the effort I find.YMMV
    Remember: adventure before dementia!

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

  50. #400
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Bill Caulfeild-Browne's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Bruce Peninsula, Canada
    Posts
    2,534
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    184

    Re: Is there a compelling reason to move to MF?

    I use a Manfrotto bag that contains the XF/IQ3 100 with the SK 80 mm lens fitted, along with the SK 55 mm, SK35 mm and SK 120 mm. Also several filters and spare batteries. It weighs 7.8 kg and I've never had a carry-on problem with any airline - and I've used a lot. Tripod and other gear goes in checked baggage.

Posting Permissions

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