Don,
I thought I'd wait for a few other answers before responding myself. Let me begin by simply saying I agree with what you wrote above.
My landscape course ran from a start with the 35mm SLR, then though various MF cameras, then to a wide variety of view cameras including 4x5 through 8x10. I even used a digital scanning back on a 4x5 to get there. With that in mind, I was very aware of the limitations of each system to begin with: 35 was too small a neg for holding lots of detail in a larger print; then with MF you got better detail for larger prints but now very often could not get enough DoF. Enter the view camera. Here I got the image detail and control of DoF and perspectives I wanted, although it wasn't very portable and certainly forced you to pick and choose your compositions with care due to time and media constraints.
Now enter digital and I *assumed* I wanted the same view movements and shooting techniques I had with film. However, I knew from LF days that adjusting the 8x10 for perspective and DoF was a magnitude of order easier than doing the same with 4x5, and then 4x5 was a magnitude of order easier than doing the same with a MF view camera, I realized MF digital with movements might be more problematic than for MF view, and eons more problematic than 4x5; as we all know, precise alignment is hyper critical with high res MF digital so anything "off dead true zero" is going to show in the final. I proved this once again with the scanning back -- even with the relatively large 3x4 inch scanning area, you needed digital focus confirmation to get precise focus, and no way you hit it exactly even using a 10x loupe on a perfectly aligned groundglass...
So as I've learned to compensate for lack of camera movements by adjusting for perspective in post, learning to focus stack for added DoF and learned to blend exposures for DR (eliminating the need for SND filters), my desire for a full movement digital MF tech camera has essentially gone away. At least until they make one I can zero out *perfectly* and set all movements precisely with AND is as totally rigid and precise as my SLR. And to date, I have not seen that camera. In the meantime, I am additionally waiting for a true un-tethered live focus built into a back. When I get that camera and back together, I will have the ultimate rig. Until then, I'll stick with my current back and camera because it works as well as anything else I've seen, at least for MY uses...
I thought I'd wait for a few other answers before responding myself. Let me begin by simply saying I agree with what you wrote above.
My landscape course ran from a start with the 35mm SLR, then though various MF cameras, then to a wide variety of view cameras including 4x5 through 8x10. I even used a digital scanning back on a 4x5 to get there. With that in mind, I was very aware of the limitations of each system to begin with: 35 was too small a neg for holding lots of detail in a larger print; then with MF you got better detail for larger prints but now very often could not get enough DoF. Enter the view camera. Here I got the image detail and control of DoF and perspectives I wanted, although it wasn't very portable and certainly forced you to pick and choose your compositions with care due to time and media constraints.
Now enter digital and I *assumed* I wanted the same view movements and shooting techniques I had with film. However, I knew from LF days that adjusting the 8x10 for perspective and DoF was a magnitude of order easier than doing the same with 4x5, and then 4x5 was a magnitude of order easier than doing the same with a MF view camera, I realized MF digital with movements might be more problematic than for MF view, and eons more problematic than 4x5; as we all know, precise alignment is hyper critical with high res MF digital so anything "off dead true zero" is going to show in the final. I proved this once again with the scanning back -- even with the relatively large 3x4 inch scanning area, you needed digital focus confirmation to get precise focus, and no way you hit it exactly even using a 10x loupe on a perfectly aligned groundglass...
So as I've learned to compensate for lack of camera movements by adjusting for perspective in post, learning to focus stack for added DoF and learned to blend exposures for DR (eliminating the need for SND filters), my desire for a full movement digital MF tech camera has essentially gone away. At least until they make one I can zero out *perfectly* and set all movements precisely with AND is as totally rigid and precise as my SLR. And to date, I have not seen that camera. In the meantime, I am additionally waiting for a true un-tethered live focus built into a back. When I get that camera and back together, I will have the ultimate rig. Until then, I'll stick with my current back and camera because it works as well as anything else I've seen, at least for MY uses...
D). (Admittedly, there seemed to be more of an issue with Phase non-plus backs of a few years back than we see now.) He also had a few assorted lens issues, but most of these were with Tech camera lenses and not his Mamiya glass. While he's had some focusing screen issues, I know of no specific camera body issue I recall him mentioning (FWIW Joe shoots Mamiya mount)...
