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!

Upgrading: torn between a DB / Sony IV / GFX50-100

Hi

I need your recommendation, pov.
Premise: I'm a semi pro photographer (im a designer as main job) and I own already Sony A7RIII, Canon 5DSR, Actus Mini and XL, Stackshot, and a bunch of Schneider lenses from 47mm to 150mm (i used to have 4x5 and 8x10) and I love to shoot only product/architecture and rarely portraits

Im probably in a middle life crisis (i bought a motorcycle last year) and now i feel i want to do a "big" upgrade but I'm torn between few options:
1. be responsible and wait for 2021 for Canon to release the 80MP R camera?
2. Upgrade to Sony IV (pixelshift provide quality similar to MF but man what a pain in the *** the workflow)
3. move in the used market for a DB MF... a Credo Leaf seem decently priced... or stick to mirrorless like the FUJI GFX 50 or 100...Hasselblad 50...

the easiest of course would be to stick to Sony for now since my system wouldn't need any change... but the temptation is to finally move to MF... (that beautiful feeling when I bought my first Hasselblad 500C)
 

MGrayson

Subscriber and Workshop Member
There is only one answer, and I am deadly serious:

Try them.

No specs, examples, recommendations, or anecdotes from others matter in the slightest. The system you feel best with will serve you best. If nothing feels better (use and output) than what you have, wait.

Enjoy!

Matt (for example, I didn't like the GFX 50 bodies at all, but the GFX 100 is my second favorite.)
 

eisbaer

Member
lf you shoot mainly architecture / landscape and want to have the same feeling with your 500c...

Get an Alpa STC a Rodenstock 40mm and an IQ3 100....

So slow but so great...
 

Don Libby

Well-known member
I've used a Phase One DB for several years chasing the upgrade path from a P30+ ending with an IQ1-100. I've used a Mamiya and Phase One body as well as a Cambo tech camera. My work is primarily landscape, nature and wildlife (in that order).

I used the IQ1-100 in Hawaii hanging out of a helicopter shooting the lava fields in the big island and got great results. I actually loved using the Phase One setup until it got too big. I found that the older I got the less I wanted to slep around a system weighing close to 8 pounds around my neck. Packing the system in a case that I had everything I needed for an extended period also became challenging especially flying.

Then Hasselblad and Fuji came around and introduced their mirrorless systems. Both have the same basic sensor with the crop factor the same as my older P30+. I opted for the GFX50s and as soon as I had it I knew that was the system for me. I quickly sold everything that I had named Pahe One and Cambo and began what has been several years of using a Fuji system. I've flown to Scotland with the GFX packing everything I needed for several weeks in a single carryon; likewise I flew to Alaska to capture northern lights again packing everything in a single carryon.

I just upgraded the GFX50s to the GFX100 and am just as pleased with that. I've found the GFX systems near as perfect as you can get for landscape, nightscape (capturing the milky way), nature (macro waterdrops) and wildlife.


It helps that Sandy (my wife) shoots with a Sony A7rIV and I get to see the difference in the files. For me, my choice would be a GFX100. And yes I know that's expensive however it's well worth the added money compared to the GFX50 and will save you a lot more when compared to a regular digital back system.

So there you have it, one persons take on the question. I fully expect there will more folks that will respond telling you why they think their system is better. We have a couple dealers here that will chime in saying why you should go with a DB. In the end it'll be up to you. What fits you hand the best. What brings a smile every time you use it. The camera maybe just a tool however you need to like using it. You need to look forward to taking it out and capturing your idea.

Best of luck to you. In some ways I envy you as when I made the jump to medium format there was no mirrorless systems and what we had was just the very beginning of the digital revolution.


Don
 

dj may

Well-known member
A key question; do you shoot in inclement weather or other unpleasant environments? If yes, then you should look at weather resistant systems.

That was a big factor for me when I chose Leica S. Prior to that 4x5 view cameras were my main tools. However, I could not use them in wind, rain, snow, dust etc.
 

mristuccia

Well-known member
Another key question is whether you need movements (rise, fall, shift). You said you do architecture, so this could be the case.
If you need such features then the Fuji and Hassy mirrorless could not be the best option. In this case you would need additional tools like shift lenses (plus adaptors, no native solutions for the Hassy X and Fuki GF right now AFAIK) or something like a Cambo-GFX. Then all the pluses of having a lightweight mirrorless system will evaporate in a sudden, and maybe digital back in conjunction with a Cambo WRS, an Alpa STC, or PhaseOne XT become a better combo, IMHO.
 
Last edited:

vjbelle

Well-known member
Already some good advice given by other members. However, you may want to think about looking at your current assets. You already own an Actus, as do I, which can become the shift/tilt camera for whatever you purchase. I own a Phase 4150, GFXs and the new Sony 7RM4. What I have found is that the Sony marries with the Actus extremely well and delivers wonderful files from a focal length of 60mm and beyond with LF lenses.

'IF' you need more pixels for whatever reason the Sony becomes the camera of choice. It will deliver not only more pixels than the GFXs but FMPOV better quality pixels. I shift a lot of time 15mm LR with the Sony (three shots portrait position) and end up with a file that is 137MP and is very comparable to the same image shot with the 4150. Plus there is the added benefit that the lens used for shifting changes its focal length by a crop factor of 0.66 giving a little extra real estate. My Schneider 60XL becomes a 40mm lens on the Sony once shifted 15mm LR. The other added benefit to the size of the Sony sensor is that even shifting 15mm the sensor never leaves the real estate taken up by a single shot 54 X 40 sensor - always staying in the sweet spot of the lens image circle.

Food for thought......

Good luck with whatever path you take.....

Victor
 
Last edited:

Pelorus

Member
Choosing the next camera system, for me, is not dissimilar to choosing a life partner. You may think you know what you want, but you can't be sure until you handle them:D

We recently chose the Fuji GFX system, much to my surprise as it happens. It is worth considering that Fuji have put considerable muscle behind the system and are growing it fast.

Get some candidates then go and handle them. For instance, I acknowledge the technical merits of the Sony Axxx systems, however I find myself wanting to do physical harm to the camera every time I use one, even briefly.

It's personal I think.
 

rdeloe

Well-known member
The choices you've outlined are all very different, and lend themselves to different shooting scenarios. If your pockets are deep enough to let you buy, try, and sell until you find something that works, then go nuts. But if not, I'd ask myself some questions...

For example, why do you need a larger sensor? What's the equipment you already own not doing for you? I don't think there's any magic in medium format, so I'm pretty hard-nosed about this question. I did go medium format, but only after I could see some tangible benefits relating to the kind of equipment I would be able to use with the camera.

You said product/architecture is what you do. Do you need movement? Lots of people shooting architecture and product seem to get by with focus stacking and software perspective correction. I personally love using camera movements, but I recognize there are alternatives. You can very easily do product and architecture with your Sony. In fact, put some of the excellent Canon T/S lenses on that thing and you're good to go. It's also great on your Actus. You can even use smaller sensors. Before I switched up a couple sensor sizes, I built an entire tilt-shift outfit around a Fuji X-T2. It didn't have the full range of movements I have now, but I got a lot done using that gear.

Are you going to use the equipment only in controlled conditions (and indoors)? Or will you need to worry about rain and snow? I use a "studio" camera in swamps, so I think you can use almost any equipment anywhere if you take precautions. But that is a consideration. In a similar vein, do you want to be able to have a flexible solution that lets you use the camera as a "back" on a tech camera outfit, but also hand-held with native lenses?

Finally, how much of the motivation is "business" versus "life is short so use equipment that makes you happy"? If it's the latter, then that changes everything. ;) Cameras are cheaper than motorcycles, and life really is short.


For what it's worth, I use a Fuji GFX 50R with adapted lenses because the kind of photography I do is done better (in my opinion) with camera movements. My main "adapter" is a Toyo VX23D because I wanted as close to a digital view camera as I could get. But that imposes some constraints that may matter more to you than me. For instance, there really are no affordable options with my setup wider than 35mm. I could go as wide as 25mm and still have all the movements, but that's a major investment which I can't currently justify given how little I shoot wide.

One thing I really like about the GFX 50R solution is the ability to use it with the excellent Fuji GF lenses hand-held. I find it really awkward to use my adapted lenses hand-held, even though I can do that with a different adapter. I also just really like Fuji cameras.

Good luck!
 

dougpeterson

Workshop Member
There is only one answer, and I am deadly serious:

Try them.
It's great advice.

If, as your handle implies, you are in NYC, we're in midtown and are the largest Phase One dealer in the world and would be glad to earn your business. Glad to arrange a test of just about any Credo or Phase One back on a variety of tech cameras or XF body.
 

GrahamWelland

Subscriber & Workshop Member
As a member of FOD (Friends of Dante) you can probably treat the following personal feedback with a grain of salt.

For personal pleasure when shooting for shooting’s sake, for me, it’s the IQ4150 on my Cambo Actus. Very engaging but also challenging at times. However the process is very enjoyable (most of the time).

For 95% of my shooting its with the Fuji GFX, originally the 50s but now the GFX100. Great system camera that does everything I actually need. Adapted lenses from Canon such as TSE can cover the tilt/swing needs too. The GF lenses are simply excellent and in my experience every bit as good in real world use as my Phase One lenses. I also shoot the GFX50s full spectrum now which reminds me of why in some ways I like the form factor of the 50s better than the 100 - I’m sure that’ll change over time as the 100 is relatively new to me and I’ve used the smaller form factor 50s since its launch.

If I need a workout then the Phase One XF system fits the bill - excellent but bulky and heavy.

I had the Sony’s up to the A7RII - for me they were soulless computers. I can’t fault the results but I just never loved using them.
 
I agree the Sony + Actus is the perfect match, and i bought mainly it for stitching reason (i wanted to have 40+40MP files in outdoor situations) ...until I started hating stitching...too much work for my personal taste

I'm now convinced to upgrade medium format... and i may take the crazy leap of the GFX100... (although i love the 50R for many reasons)
 
I had the Sony’s up to the A7RII - for me they were soulless computers. I can’t fault the results but I just never loved using them.
I agree on the Sony III, I was shocked how bad the interface was and how flimsy / toy-like it compares to my 5DSR...I bought pre-owned out of an impulse...i still don't understand the hype....
 

tcdeveau

Well-known member
I agree on the Sony III, I was shocked how bad the interface was and how flimsy / toy-like it compares to my 5DSR...I bought pre-owned out of an impulse...i still don't understand the hype....
They're very capable cameras but not for me either. I had an A7R I had converted to full-spectrum and an A7RII. An image from the A7RII almost won me $15k USD in a national competition - I was one of 40 something finalists out of tens of thousands of entries - but I never particularly liked using them and sold them.

DB/GFX is tough. I'm hoping to get a DB for my tech cam setup sometime in the not-too-distant future. If I were starting over today, I might go with the GFX100 as the practical option, but I'm not so sure. I went the practical route with the 645z once, and, great value for the money, but didn't really satisfy me.

As others have said, try your options if you can. Many of us choose based on the intangible factors beyond spec sheets you can only discover for yourself through trial. Good luck!
 

MrSmith

Member
An image from the A7RII almost won me $15k USD in a national competition - I was one of 40 something finalists out of tens of thousands of entries - but I never particularly liked using them and sold them.
Do you think you would have won if you had used a different camera?...
 

tcdeveau

Well-known member
Do you think you would have won if you had used a different camera?...
Nope. Tools for a job as it says in your signature.

Just trying to illustrate that for my uses even though I didn't like the A7RII, for me it was obviously a perfectly capable camera and it's done more for me than any of my MF images, and the reason I'm not currently using it is just personal preference. Have a similar story with a D500.

My own outlook is that cameras across systems these days are so good that just about any of them are up to the task (for landscapes, what I like to do anyway - obviously not every camera is going to be the right tool for the job).... try them and see what fits one's budget/preference.
 

rdeloe

Well-known member
My own outlook is that cameras across systems these days are so good that just about any of them are up to the task (for landscapes, what I like to do anyway - obviously not every camera is going to be the right tool for the job).... try them and see what fits one's budget/preference.
Would it be too cheesy of me to quote Edward Weston in support of your excellent observation? ;)

"The fact is that relatively few photographers ever master their medium. Instead they allow the medium to master them and go on an endless squirrel cage chase from new lens to new paper to new developer to new gadget, never staying with one piece of equipment long enough to learn its full capacities, becoming lost in a maze of technical information that is of little or no use since they don't know what to do with it".
- Edward Weston
 

ErikKaffehr

Well-known member
I've used a Phase One DB for several years chasing the upgrade path from a P30+ ending with an IQ1-100. I've used a Mamiya and Phase One body as well as a Cambo tech camera. My work is primarily landscape, nature and wildlife (in that order).

I used the IQ1-100 in Hawaii hanging out of a helicopter shooting the lava fields in the big island and got great results. I actually loved using the Phase One setup until it got too big. I found that the older I got the less I wanted to slep around a system weighing close to 8 pounds around my neck. Packing the system in a case that I had everything I needed for an extended period also became challenging especially flying.

Then Hasselblad and Fuji came around and introduced their mirrorless systems. Both have the same basic sensor with the crop factor the same as my older P30+. I opted for the GFX50s and as soon as I had it I knew that was the system for me. I quickly sold everything that I had named Pahe One and Cambo and began what has been several years of using a Fuji system. I've flown to Scotland with the GFX packing everything I needed for several weeks in a single carryon; likewise I flew to Alaska to capture northern lights again packing everything in a single carryon.

I just upgraded the GFX50s to the GFX100 and am just as pleased with that. I've found the GFX systems near as perfect as you can get for landscape, nightscape (capturing the milky way), nature (macro waterdrops) and wildlife.


It helps that Sandy (my wife) shoots with a Sony A7rIV and I get to see the difference in the files. For me, my choice would be a GFX100. And yes I know that's expensive however it's well worth the added money compared to the GFX50 and will save you a lot more when compared to a regular digital back system.

So there you have it, one persons take on the question. I fully expect there will more folks that will respond telling you why they think their system is better. We have a couple dealers here that will chime in saying why you should go with a DB. In the end it'll be up to you. What fits you hand the best. What brings a smile every time you use it. The camera maybe just a tool however you need to like using it. You need to look forward to taking it out and capturing your idea.

Best of luck to you. In some ways I envy you as when I made the jump to medium format there was no mirrorless systems and what we had was just the very beginning of the digital revolution.


Don
Thanks for sharing your experience, seems to be good and sound advice.

Just to say, I doubt the benefits of multishot in the real world. Shooting repro or architecture it would probably remove aliasing and moiré like effects, but else not very usable I would guess.

Staying with what you have may also make a lot of sense.

Best regards
Erik
 

Paul2660

Well-known member
Would it be too cheesy of me to quote Edward Weston in support of your excellent observation? ;)

"The fact is that relatively few photographers ever master their medium. Instead they allow the medium to master them and go on an endless squirrel cage chase from new lens to new paper to new developer to new gadget, never staying with one piece of equipment long enough to learn its full capacities, becoming lost in a maze of technical information that is of little or no use since they don't know what to do with it".
- Edward Weston
It would be interesting to get Weston’s opinion today as the vast majority of people using cameras today haven’t a clue about the technical material he was referring to as all they do is point a phone and snap. And today the idea that a photography = a print on paper has long since moved to a photography = a selfie uploaded to the web.

The paradigm shift in the definition of a photograph is tragic.

Paul C
 
Top