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!

MFD 'the look' conundrum

MrSmith

Member
So this is a blatant troll post but I promise no further flaming, bashing your equipment choices or shouting at you.
A thought occurred to me last night and that was if I took my 120 apo-digitar (a superior MFD lens) and stitched a couple of frames with my Sony A7r using my cambo Actus would the resulting image have 'the look' and superior dynamic range/detail/sharpness/colour separation that is evidently so apparent with MFD? After all the lens is the same and the sensor is the same.

(As a side note the whole system cost about £3.5k with 3 lenses, one of the best investments my business has made)

I'll also add that the new H6 might get me to wander into a dealer and have a look, especially if the new Focus software has improved usability. I'm certainly not anti mfd and have shot many jobs with it.
 

fotografz

Well-known member
The A7R sensor is the same as "what"? A 50 meg CMOS MFD sensor? A 100 meg CMOS MFD sensor?

What about a 60 meg 645 CCD MFD sensor? A 80 meg 645 MFD sensor?

Not sure I get what you are after here. Stitching is limited in application compared to one shot.

- Marc
 
M

mjr

Guest
Well you certainly could take a stitched shot, post it declaring it as good as anything you got with MFD, you could get a load of people agreeing with you, a load of people disagreeing with you, it could go on for pages and pages of people posting crops and charts to prove why you are right or why you are wrong, or you could just concentrate on taking beautiful images and not giving a toss about proving anything to anyone and simply enjoy the experience. I guess we will see.

Mat
 

MrSmith

Member
well a stitched image would be roughly 60mp and lets say 45x32mm in size.
yes stitching is more work than a single shot.

i think my point is that good lenses make a big difference, i’m sure somebody versed in the science/technology aspect of optics and sensors would be able to shine some light on my question.

- - - Updated - - -

Well you certainly could take a stitched shot, post it declaring it as good as anything you got with MFD, you could get a load of people agreeing with you, a load of people disagreeing with you, it could go on for pages and pages of people posting crops and charts to prove why you are right or why you are wrong, or you could just concentrate on taking beautiful images and not giving a toss about proving anything to anyone and simply enjoy the experience. I guess we will see.

Mat
i’m not looking to prove anything, it’s up to others to prove i’m either right or wrong (i dont know the answer to that!)
 

CSP

New member
there is no mf look so it is not possible to replicate it by stitching images ! most of the todays mf gears is also just a little larger than 35mm to call this medium format is a joke anyway imho. the vague superiority beside some resolution advantage some are able to see in mf files is a perception phenomenon and normal human behavior but this belongs to psychology and not to photography.
 

jlm

Workshop Member
guess not, i used tri-x in 35, 2-1/4 and 4x5, all the same emulsion.

but in the context of this post, there are "mechanical" differences between stitching with a 50mpx sony and trying to match the sensor size of a 50mpx DB. more like comparing pan-x to tri-x, using your example.
 

Abstraction

Well-known member
there is no mf look so it is not possible to replicate it by stitching images ! most of the todays mf gears is also just a little larger than 35mm to call this medium format is a joke anyway imho. the vague superiority beside some resolution advantage some are able to see in mf files is a perception phenomenon and normal human behavior but this belongs to psychology and not to photography.
Pixel pitch and pixel size differs between the two sensors
So this is a blatant troll post but I promise no further flaming, bashing your equipment choices or shouting at you.
A thought occurred to me last night and that was if I took my 120 apo-digitar (a superior MFD lens) and stitched a couple of frames with my Sony A7r using my cambo Actus would the resulting image have 'the look' and superior dynamic range/detail/sharpness/colour separation that is evidently so apparent with MFD? After all the lens is the same and the sensor is the same.

(As a side note the whole system cost about £3.5k with 3 lenses, one of the best investments my business has made)

I'll also add that the new H6 might get me to wander into a dealer and have a look, especially if the new Focus software has improved usability. I'm certainly not anti mfd and have shot many jobs with it.
From what I've been able to ascertain, the MF "look", if there is one, comes from the large pixel CCD backs. There is a thread on these forums where people showcase their work from the older, large pixel (9 micron) and there seems to be that pop that people attributed to the MF. However, I think that's really the large pixel look. The original Canon 5D has it too.
 
Of course stitching essentially "enlarges" your sensor size and gives you identical look and result if given the same pixel density. You could save lots of money if your work allows stitching.
 

AreBee

Member
Abstraction,

From what I've been able to ascertain, the MF "look", if there is one, comes from the large pixel CCD backs.
The look, if there is one, existed prior to digital capture. It was not considered to be a function of film type or grain size. Therefore, it cannot be a function of sensor type or pixel size respectively.
 

ErikKaffehr

Well-known member
Hi,

A Sony sensor of similar construction as the 50 or 100 MP sensor.

So, yes, same lens, same sensor gives same result. The result depends on how you stitch. A shift stitch would give identical results.

It is of course not always possible to stitch, but it is a good way to explore lenses, before buying.

I made that experiment on my A7rII, it produces something like a 48x36 image at arond 80 MP, much better detail than on the P45+, that I know. Large pixel magic, I don't know.

Best regards
Erik

The A7R sensor is the same as "what"? A 50 meg CMOS MFD sensor? A 100 meg CMOS MFD sensor?

What about a 60 meg 645 CCD MFD sensor? A 80 meg 645 MFD sensor?

Not sure I get what you are after here. Stitching is limited in application compared to one shot.

- Marc
 
Last edited:

Lars

Active member
Or huge prints.
Or great photographers. Seriously, it's not the camera.

As Marc noted - stitching is obviously not single capture so it's a bit apples to oranges.

BTW I'm trying something similar, coincidentally also with a 120 Apo-Digitar as well as a 100 Apo-Symmar. No movements yet.



This is the 100 Apo-Symmar focused at infinity.
 
Last edited:

GrahamWelland

Subscriber & Workshop Member
So what about the alleged "Brenzier" look? Supposedly the closest to MF 'look' out there.

(and I realize that to many this isn't a new or uniquely Brenzier technique).
 

Lars

Active member
I think this thread would benefit from image samples visualizing an MF look.
The obvious challenge would be to find images where the sensor is the differentiator - vs. lens, lighting, leaf shutter, photographer, subject, or client.
 

CSP

New member
when there really would be a kind of mf look which anybody can distinguish form side by side samples i bet the mf dealers would have already used this to their advantage, no ?
 

JohnBrew

Active member
Or great photographers. Seriously, it's not the camera.

As Marc noted - stitching is obviously not single capture so it's a bit apples to oranges.

BTW I'm trying something similar, coincidentally also with a 120 Apo-Digitar as well as a 100 Apo-Symmar. No movements yet.

Lars, that is a really cool setup! Any images to post yet?

I have a large print on the wall I took with a CFV-50c/ALPA/HR 40. For me it is a richness of color and tone that sets it apart from 35mm. I use this image as a reference. I can achieve a similar look with a D810, Zeiss Otus, focus stacked AND stitched.
Please note I stated "similar", not same. The finished file is quite large and as noted before it's a long way from a single capture.
 

Lars

Active member
Lars, that is a really cool setup! Any images to post yet?
Well, it's an ongoing experiment with an extremely limited budget. The crappy mostly plastic bellows cost about $25 and flexes like crazy.
Initially I modded a Nikon body cap to attach the lens to the bellows (that's what you see in the pic). Light leaks all over but it let me verify that at least the 100 and 120 lenses focus at infinity.
Rev 2 is a plastic Nikon lens bayonet, I need to attach it to the rear of a copal shutter.
Issues so far include said flex in the bellows - at the very least least a full metal bellows construction is required - and a massive amount of internal reflections due to the wide IC of the lens. Hood and internal baffles need to be added for this contraption to perform reasonably well.
So - not yet ready for actual use.
 
Top