MF Digital Precision

[PeterA]

the more capable the resolving power of the chip - the more obvious the weakest chain in the shooting becomes. The more discerning the eye - or the more important fine detail is ..again - not surprised.

I freaked out when I first switched form Canon 1dsmk1 - to mk11 - had to modify my shooting to cater for it. Now the MFD is pretty much confined to fat light or tripod situations.

Still ( fortunately for me) I dont have a very discerning eye for such matters - sometimes I wonder if we dont set the benchmarks so high that we just find another reason to beat ourselves over the head about..

 

[Guy Mancuso]

True one reason I like the P25 plus or the 9 micron sensors in particular is it is very lens friendly. You can use almost anything on it and get great results than forget about everything else. It is so close to the p45 and p65 backs that I really find no need for more. I need the P30+ for different reasons and detail is not one of them. My conclusion after a full year shooting MF digital is this we are so far above the 35mm curve line that almost any back you use will be extremely good and all we are really talking is very very small detail as you go up in size. Most of this difference will not show up in print unless you get REALLY big. Sometimes I really question this and in 35mm it was so important to get the absolute finest and best resolving power lenses and in MF that is NOT the case. I have said this at least several times on this and other forums. The step up is truly a step up and way beyond what 35mm can do. MPX is such a BS guide line that manufactures go by and us consumers buy into the hype. My lonely 10 mpx DMR beat the crap out of anything you could put up against it in 35mm in it's day even. It means very little in MF, good lenses will never hurt you ever in any system but I find this less important in MF than I ever did in 35mm. Different ball park different city all together and not even in the same country. I don't care what back anyone buys the difference is huge over 35mm. Not just resolution either but everything that counts. Frankly you could hand over ANY MF back to me and i would be a happy dog with my tongue hanging out. I know many folks on this forum alone that feel the same way. I go back and look at files that I shot and am just amazed at what we get out of these backs, sure the P65 is a awesome back and love to have one but maybe more for king of the hill thinking than real life working. Almost any back in the market will render a 30x40 print with no issues. You want bigger than stitch.

 

[kdphotography]

the more capable the resolving power of the chip - the more obvious the weakest chain in the shooting becomes. The more discerning the eye - or the more important fine detail is ..again - not surprised.

I freaked out when I first switched form Canon 1dsmk1 - to mk11 - had to modify my shooting to cater for it. Now the MFD is pretty much confined to fat light or tripod situations. ....

I have found this to be so true. And similarly when I added the 1DsMkIII to the fold with my 5D....

And now even moreso with the P65+. I found the transition between my previous medium format backs to be simple--- Kodak 645M to P30 to P45+ Easy and no change in approach or workflow. Not true with the P65+

Proper hit-and-run landscape photography was perfect with the P30 and P45. :thumbup: The P65+ has a small learning curve or adjustment period that I didn't expect. It certainly makes you slow down and think a bit.... I guess perfect for an aging body that isn't hiking as fast now...

And IMHO, Guy is right. Any MFDB trumps a 35mm based DSLR. It's just a different format and feel altogether. Many shooters would just love to have any MFDB in their hands.

Guy---you're gonna love the Phase Pee-30 + (had to do that). But Guy---you're in trouble, because I really think the Sensor+ capabilities of the P65+ really do suit you....

 

[PeterA]

Totally agree with you Guy - and I have doen the hard yards myself and paid up with hard cash myself to test ALL the systems. Now I have 3 backs and 6 different camera systems and lens collections just in MF..i'd seel some stuff if prices hadn't collapsed so much - something that I wasnt planning for!:ROTFL:

I just posted a longish response to Peter in another thread about exactly this topic - I think we must be reading from the same playbook.

Really it all boils down to what we already knew:

1. Any MF back used appropriately delivers in bucket loads of IQ.
2. All Mf lens systems are good and better than good
3. Choose a dealer you want to do business with and is capable of helping
4. Make sure you understand that error in technique will make the MF digital back show up your every flaw. For many uses - this means that the typical shooter is probably better off shooting with 35mm cameras! eg tele, eg low lihht, eg when you need IS, fast shutter speeds etc etc etc ( not to mention MUCH smaller files!)

True one reason I like the P25 plus or the 9 micron sensors in particular is it is very lens friendly. You can use almost anything on it and get great results than forget about everything else. It is so close to the p45 and p65 backs that I really find no need for more. I need the P30+ for different reasons and detail is not one of them. My conclusion after a full year shooting MF digital is this we are so far above the 35mm curve line that almost any back you use will be extremely good and all we are really talking is very very small detail as you go up in size. Most of this difference will not show up in print unless you get REALLY big. Sometimes I really question this and in 35mm it was so important to get the absolute finest and best resolving power lenses and in MF that is NOT the case. I have said this at least several times on this and other forums. The step up is truly a step up and way beyond what 35mm can do. MPX is such a BS guide line that manufactures go by and us consumers buy into the hype. My lonely 10 mpx DMR beat the crap out of anything you could put up against it in 35mm in it's day even. It means very little in MF, good lenses will never hurt you ever in any system but I find this less important in MF than I ever did in 35mm. Different ball park different city all together and not even in the same country. I don't care what back anyone buys the difference is huge over 35mm. Not just resolution either but everything that counts. Frankly you could hand over ANY MF back to me and i would be a happy dog with my tongue hanging out. I know many folks on this forum alone that feel the same way. I go back and look at files that I shot and am just amazed at what we get out of these backs, sure the P65 is a awesome back and love to have one but maybe more for king of the hill thinking than real life working. Almost any back in the market will render a 30x40 print with no issues. You want bigger than stitch.

 

[Guy Mancuso]

I have found this to be so true. And similarly when I added the 1DsMkIII to the fold with my 5D....

And now even moreso with the P65+. I found the transition between my previous medium format backs to be simple--- Kodak 645M to P30 to P45+ Easy and no change in approach or workflow. Not true with the P65+

Proper hit-and-run landscape photography was perfect with the P30 and P45. :thumbup: The P65+ has a small learning curve or adjustment period that I didn't expect. It certainly makes you slow down and think a bit.... I guess perfect for an aging body that isn't hiking as fast now...

And IMHO, Guy is right. Any MFDB trumps a 35mm based DSLR. It's just a different format and feel altogether. Many shooters would just love to have any MFDB in their hands.

Guy---you're gonna love the Phase Pee-30 + (had to do that). But Guy---you're in trouble, because I really think the Sensor+ capabilities of the P65+ really do suit you....

I know I like the Sensor Plus idea and in my case i could actually really use that shooting these event gigs. I don't need the big files and actually it hurts processing time on deadline. I actually use the S settings for the smaller file to deal with. Sensor plus a 15mpx sensor is perfect and with the high ISO right up my alley. Just money is to tight right now otherwise it makes sense to me at least , some folks it does not.

 

[Jack]

4. Make sure you understand that error in technique will make the MF digital back show up your every flaw. For many uses - this means that the typical shooter is probably better off shooting with 35mm cameras! eg tele, eg low lihht, eg when you need IS, fast shutter speeds etc etc etc ( not to mention MUCH smaller files!)

Peter,

This is so true it bears repeating. There is a learning curve and it doesn't come instantly -- it requires some effort. Folks that expect DSLR convenience from MFDB's will be severely disappointed... To obtain optimal results from MFDB's requires that one utilizes optimal (read exercises perfection in) capture AND processing technique.

Cheers,

 

[Dale Allyn]

Peter,

This is so true it bears repeating. There is a learning curve and it doesn't come instantly -- it requires some effort. Folks that expect DSLR convenience from MFDB's will be severely disappointed... To obtain optimal results from MFDB's requires that one utilizes optimal (read exercises perfection in) capture AND processing technique.

Cheers,

Interesting that you picked this point out too, Jack. As I was reading down this thread this a.m. I was going to quote item #4 of Pete's list too, and say that this fits my experience as well. I does really bear repeating, as you say. It's real.