DTcommercialphoto.com article: "10 resons to choose MF"

[pegelli]

I got an email today directing me to this article about the 10 reasons to choose Medium Format:

https://www.dtcommercialphoto.com/10-reasons-to-choose-a-medium-format-digital-camera/

I think most of the stated reasons are true if you're striving for the ultimate technical quality and don't worry about cost and/or weight of the equipment.

But I think their reason #4 is hogwash:

4) A New Perspective

Because the sensor itself is larger, you get a wider field of view with less visual distortion than you would with an equivalent 35mm sensor. This means you can capture sweeping vistas with less of the fisheye look distorting your image. A 50mm lens on a medium format sensor appears more similar to how we actually see the world, and has a big impact on the overall “look” of medium format.

If you stand in the same spot with a different format camera and the same "equivalent" focal length (of a decent lens) you get exactly the same perspective and visual distortion. In my mind this is true from a phone camera to a 6x10 film plate (or larger). You'll be able to spot many other differences between the shots, but the perspective and visual distortion will be exactly the same among all of them.


So I guess it's down to 9 reasons for me :ROTFL:

 

[faberryman]

I think most of the stated reasons are true if you're striving for the ultimate technical quality and don't worry about cost and/or weight of the equipment. But I think their reason #4 is hogwash:

You have got to ask yourself if they are willing to make up an absolute untruth, what about the credibility of the other nine reasons as well. There is really only one reason to shoot digital medium format: better technical quality. You don't need to divide it up six ways from Sunday to get a longer list.

 

[baudolino]

I got the same email and thought it was a bit "insufficient"...(don't want to use stronger words, like "lame", to keep this forum a pleasant space). What I mean, the biggest event in MFD (GFX100 launch) is taking place tomorrow (with leaks already out there for the past few days and 23 May being known as the launch date for at least the past month) and.......Hasselblad and Leica are completely silent.....and Phase One have nothing to say, except for a dealer sending around an email telling us that it is worth paying 4-5 times as much for the same resolution. I am dumbfounded as to what the PR guys at these companies are thinking. Why are there no teasers, new image files to play with, competitions, special events, workshops, limited time offers, special upgrade deals? Or at least comparisons of the different "look" one can get from the 54x40 sensor, compared with 44x33.....when they bother to make these claims. Like the proverbial deer frozen in the headlight, all three of them. (btw, I do appreciate the "look" of the bigger sensor, hence my recent purchase of a second hand IQ280...funded through the sale of my GFX50s system... so no Fuji fanboy here).

 

[kdphotography]

Another way to think about perspective is the format itself. I simply don't like the 2:3 ratio of 35mm cameras. I much prefer the "medium format perspective" closer to 4:3.

There are many reasons to grab a 35mm DSLR. There are many reasons to go with a mirrorless camera. There are many reasons to go with medium format.

Shoot what you like----they are all acceptable photography tools. But only medium format digital is Dante Approved.

 

[pegelli]

I much prefer the "medium format perspective" closer to 4:3.

I always considered 4:3 was "4/3rd" (or "m4/3rd") and P&S format :facesmack:

I personally use 5:7 quite often, (no kidding), cropping top and bottom from my 4:3 sensor shots and left/right of my 3:2 sensor shots.
Maybe that is because I as a European am exposed to a lot of A-size paper formats which also have roughly that aspect ratio.
In general the aspect ratio of my final photo's are almost never set by the sensor aspect ratio, I use what I think is best for the image.
And in my mind "perspective" has nothing to do with the aspect ratio of the sensor or final photograph, it's simply the size relation between subjects in the foreground vs. subjects in the background.

Now bring on the square sensor so you don't have to rotate your camera between portrait and landscape shots :lecture: and we can take my OP way off topic :ROTFL:

 

[darr]

Now bring on the square sensor so you don't have to rotate your camera between portrait and landscape shots :lecture: and we can take my OP way off topic :ROTFL:

My most used digital camera the X-Pro2, has its aspect ratio set to 1:1 99% of the time. I also crop to the image and not to the sensor size.
It saves on buying all those "L" frame tripod adapters.

 

[dchew]

Reminds me of the everlasting Lula thread many years ago, where someone was arguing with the Rest of the World saying focal length changes perspective. I'm in the camp that the only way to change perspective is with your feet. Move the camera, change perspective. Everything else is just cropping in one way or another. Not that cropping is bad, but it is cropping. After all, MF is severely cropped 8x10.
:lecture:

Dave

 

[Don Libby]

I wonder how long before marketing responds.. :watch:

 

[ErikKaffehr]

My most used digital camera the X-Pro2, has its aspect ratio set to 1:1 99% of the time. I also crop to the image and not to the sensor size.
It saves on buying all those "L" frame tripod adapters.

Hi Darr,

Good take on the L-plate!

I did a small experiment recently, looking for the best pictures I made 2015 (the last year I had significant use of my P45+) and 2018. Theory could be that 2015 my choices would be more affected by the P45+ back.

2015


2018


I see some change from 2015 to 2018 one thing is that aspect ratio was lower back in 2015. Another change is that it may have been that my shooting style got more dynamic. In 2015, one of the shots were tripodless, in 2018 three out of 17.

Some other small reflections...

• European formats are more elongated compared to US formats. I like to print large, but have limited printing size, so I tend to use the largest format paper I have, A2 and it is pretty close to 3:2 (1.41), which happens to be the square root of two.
• I would think that presentation goes into the direction of large screens and they are normally wide aspect ratio.

Best regards
Erik

 

[ErikKaffehr]

I got an email today directing me to this article about the 10 reasons to choose Medium Format:

https://www.dtcommercialphoto.com/10-reasons-to-choose-a-medium-format-digital-camera/

I think most of the stated reasons are true if you're striving for the ultimate technical quality and don't worry about cost and/or weight of the equipment.

But I think their reason #4 is hogwash:


If you stand in the same spot with a different format camera and the same "equivalent" focal length (of a decent lens) you get exactly the same perspective and visual distortion. In my mind this is true from a phone camera to a 6x10 film plate (or larger). You'll be able to spot many other differences between the shots, but the perspective and visual distortion will be exactly the same among all of them.


So I guess it's down to 9 reasons for me :ROTFL:

Let us see:
1) 16 bits

Technically a lie. All Phase One cameras prior to IQ3100 MP and IQ4150MP were 14-bit devices using 14 bit data files.

"To start with, all Phase One cameras shoot in true, native 16-bit color, without no upscaling like other smaller medium-format systems. Most smaller-format cameras have, at best, 14-bit color depth, meaning they are doing a little better with 16,384 tonal levels. Some may digitally upscale their files to 16-bits, but information can’t just be made up. Because Phase One digital systems capture at 16-bit natively, you get the marvelous ability to record and distinguish 65,536 tonal levels per channel. 16-bit color gives you smooth flawless gradations of skin tone and smooth open skies"

2) The Best Image Quality

A question of taste. If you like Capture One, it may make sense. It could be argued that other processing pipelines are better, depending on photographers needs.

'With Capture One processing the RAW files, and the files themselves being shot in 16-bit color, there simply isn’t a better quality image available in a consumer camera system. A big factor that many photographers aren’t aware of is that even the math converting the light energy captured by the sensor into color data can have a huge impact on the final image. It’s no secret that Capture One has the most accurate RAW processing algorithms available, and its native integration with Phase One hardware means you are getting the most accurate color – from rich skin tones to subtle shadow detail often lost in lower-end cameras, it’s a marked difference, and one of the reasons you’ll constantly hear photographers talk about the “look of medium format.” While Capture One provides excellent support for many camera systems, Phase One cameras will always perform head-and-shoulders above the others – one of the benefits of having one company design the entire imaging pipeline, from pixel to print.
In a way, I object to this. The images are my images, I process them in the way I want.

3) Best dynamic range

Probably true, regarding the new cameras using Sony's CMOS sensors. Fuji launched GFX 100 that seems to offer true 16 bit readout on 44x33 mm. Sure the IQ4150 beats it, but at a stiff price.
But modern CMOS is pretty good regarding DR, anyway.

CCD stuff sucks regarding DR.

4) New perspective...

Fake statement. Already discussed.

5) Better lenses...

Very questionable. Phase one compared their lenses with Hasselblad's pretty ancient line of H-series lenses. What does that say about newer designs for the Hasselblad X1 and the Fuji GFX. Did any one compare Phase One lenses on 44x33 mm with Fuji GFX lenses?

Not that I am a Fuji fan, but Fujifilm has put a lot of design work into their lenses. Also the lenses are calculated for the 55 mm image circle of the GFX format.

If you look at technical cameras, that is another thing...

6) Speed

Are they joking?

7) Connectivity

I cannot comment on that.

8) Flexibility

I love the concept of the technical camera. So, that is a point for the MFD systems. But we have technical camera solutions for the GFX and 24x36 mirrorless, too. GFX and 24x36 mm have built in focal plane shutter, so they work with almost any lens.

9) The most advanced features

May be, may be not.

10) Highest resolution

That is the case. But resolution is possibly not the most important feature for many photographers.

Resolution is not sharpness.

Image reproduction capability needs to be seen in perspective of:

• Focusing accuracy
• Diffraction
• Lens quality
• And other factors.

DTCommercial could make the list shorter and gain more credibility.

No doubt, Phase One makes great cameras and they are alone with the 150 MP 54x41 mm sensor.
It is also probably true that Phase One's cameras and tools integrate very well with Capture 1 and that Capture 1 is a leading application

Not least, Phase One has done a great job with starting invention in medium format and staying on top. Think about losing the Hasselblad and the Contax 645 platforms and buying Mamiya to build a new MFD system.

Best regards
Erik

 

[MrSmith]

9) The most advanced features

Like it’s autofocus?

I would be surprised if the Fuji isn’t in another league compared to to the phase1.

I await the political spin on that from the sales team.
(E.U. Polling day here in the U.K. and a ruling party meltdown so my cynicism and bull detector is in overdrive)

 

[ErikKaffehr]

Like it’s autofocus?

I would be surprised if the Fuji isn’t in another league compared to to the phase1.

I await the political spin on that from the sales team.
(E.U. Polling day here in the U.K. and a ruling party meltdown so my cynicism and bull detector is in overdrive)

Well, the XF has some pretty advanced features, like built in 'seismograph' and tools for tuning flash sync. I doubt the GFX from Fuji has features like that.

The IQ backs have probably good live view, but the GFX has that live view in the viewfinder, phase detection across the whole sensor and eye focus.

I guess that many shooters find Fuji GFX features more useful than Phase One features.

Best regards
Erik

Just to say, good luck with EU related stuff!

 

[algrove]

FYI, I am told DT does not sell Fuji only Phase or Hassy. That certainly is plenty of reason to launch the article as they must feel the heat from Fuji.

 

[dchew]

We should go easy on Doug. If I remember right, he and his wife were due right around late May!
:toocool:

Dave

 

[drunkenspyder]

Got the same email as everyone else. I am not at all surprised that neither Phase nor Hassy has anything to say about the Fuji (which appears to be a very fine and robust, but ugly camera). It’s Marketing 101 that you don’t talk about your competition, especially if (as with Phase) you don’t see them as competition. Further, we all know that Hassy’s S&M group never have anything to say. So no one should be surprised.

I think the DT email was a lot of marketing speak, some of it factual and some of it hyperbole. The perspective thing was silly, but I don’t think the 16-bit color thing was a lie at all. It’s written in the present. And I do believe all current P1 products output 16-bit color in a format that is larger and “deeper” than the Fuji.

The DT piece may have been a stalking horse authorized by Phase, maybe not. In any case, I think it was a small mistake. But not a big one. To me, the Fuji puts some pressure on Hassy to “deliver the goods” with their X1D successor announcement, still rumored to be this month. Depending on Hassy’s actual road map, the Fuji might be worrisome, though Hassy can afford to come in at a modest premium in exchange for its compactness and elegance. But as noted elsewhere, for Phase, I see real problems. 80-90% of the Phase (with bonus stuff that might be better), for 10-20% of the cost and just 2/3 the weight. That’s pretty impressive. I had an interesting discussion today about whether we might be seeing the start of a Phase/Fuji convergence. Fuji is already in C1. That would be interesting.

Don’t get me wrong. I love my Phase and my Hassy. I have zero desire to switch and won’t. But the future “feels” different today, though my photography feels the same.

 

[pegelli]

It’s Marketing 101 that you don’t talk about your competition, especially if (as with Phase) you don’t see them as competition.

huh.........

This is their opening sentence :facesmack::

With the pending release of the Fujifilm GFX 100, there are a lot of questions .......

And near the end:

And finally, yes, the resolution. A 100 megapixel Fuji system provides a lot of detail, but it’s still not the most out there.

So next to some outright misinformation (let's stay positive ) they seem to be violating Marketing 101 as well :bugeyes:

 

[Christopher]

Honestly, this Marketing "BS" is horrible to read... SO much miss information...

Put pressure on Phase to finally get their act together and provide a firmware update with all promised features and missing features from the IQ3... AND don't trying to sell it as "Feature Update...."

 

[drunkenspyder]

huh.........

This is their opening sentence :facesmack::

And near the end:


So next to some outright misinformation (let's stay positive ) they seem to be violating Marketing 101 as well :bugeyes:

I think you missed my point, which was in response to those who noted that Phase and Hassy are officially silent. Marketing 101 says they should be, until they have something substantive to say in their own right, e.g., with prices or product. My only point was to suggest that Phase and Hassy’s silence made perfect sense from a marketing perspective.

DT’s email may be an authorized Phase piece, but in coming from a dealer and sent to Phase or Phase-interested customers, it’s something of an under-the-radar communication. From the broader market’s perspective, neither Phase nor Hassy has had any reaction to the Fuji announcement (but I might have missed something), unless one includes the recent price drops on certain equipment. My point about Marketing 101 was very distinct from the content of DT’s mail.

 

[algrove]

DT’s email may be an authorized Phase piece, but in coming from a dealer and sent to Phase or Phase-interested customers, it’s something of an under-the-radar communication.

No arguements here, it's just that current "Phase and Phase-interested customers" are such a small group that IMHO the article makes very little impact on the market Fuji is going for.

 

[pegelli]

I think you missed my point

I don't think so, wouldn't the same "Marketing 101" be valid for a dealer who only sells P1 and Hasselblad (and some TC stuff) and doesn't even carry Fuji?