Medium Digital Format

paulr

I am sure some members of NR have at some time have complimented going to DMF, and balanced the virtues both negative and positive of using such a system. I was familiar with medium format with film cameras such as Hasselblad, Mamiya and Linhoff, so the concept was not new to me. 35mm has so many avenues that the photographer can take, so I think anybody looking at DMF should not move completely, but work with which system suits the images taken.
The reason I have added DMF is for purely my own photography. The time to set-up mainly on tripods to get maximum DOF is part of the process of using the DFM . You either love it or hate it. For me the set-up time is part of the pleasure composing the image with a clear view on the digital back is quite amazing.The machine gun effect that some photographers use with 35mm just does not apply.Hence it will suit everybody.Down side is clearly cost, weight, limited lenses unlike 35mm and low ISO numbers. Shallow DOF which can be a bonus and lenses that cost serious money.I took 5 years sit on the fence not sure what to do, and I having to relearn some of the hardships I had to endure with MF film. Having said that, it as opened a new and different path again in my photography.One I intend to enjoy.
The good news is the quality these cameras can give is astounding , but you are more meticulous in your workflow to get the maximum these cameras can produce.So for me its a "yes".

Gjesdal

What do you shoot with it and when do you use it?

I've looked into it several times over the years, but not actually used it. Can't say I've been very tempted, there are so many other things I'd get before it, but mainly think to myself "do you want a new camera or travel somewhere?"

WestEndFoto

I took a close look at Phase One this spring. I am surprised how many people I run into that use it - or perhaps I run in a small circle. I think that the only medium format game in town is Phase One. The rest I regard as "fake" or "medium format lite". If I am going to go into medium format, I want to go all in.

As it stands now, a 100 megapixel body plus three lenses is about a $100k in Canada. There are financing options, but then I am just paying someone else more in the long run.

I have to think that it would be more competitive if there was more than one supplier. I have often wondered what a Nikon medium format would look like with Nikon ergonomics.

I have spent a lot of money on photography in the last year and could have gone the Phase One route if I sacrificed my IT, lighting etc. in addition to the Nikon gear that I bought. But instead I went the route I chose (new Nikon gear and photography infrastructure) and will re-evaluate it in 5 to 10 years or if Nikon comes out with medium format.

paulr

Gjesdal I use a PhaseOne XF with a 1Q160 with a 45 and 80LS lens Bought to do landscapes and some studio work but mainly self indulgence Photography.
Will still continue to use 35mm systems due to a large amount of lenses I keep, looked at selling but no point due to poor prices offered I managed to find a Uk dealer who was very helpful and sold me the system at shall we say not silly prices.
WEF we all make choices.,If I had continued with 35mm i know i would have still at some stage wanted DMF, so I bought it now, while I can still get out and enjoy it. I seem to be going through a stage when I seem to be loosing good friends, and it puts a different perspective on Life, sometimes.

WestEndFoto

That is an important difference in our perspectives. I understand that.

vtc2002

@paulr I had the same camera and switched to the Fuji GFX 50 earlier this year. You have made a great purchase, it is truly a great camera. Their lense selection is somewhat limited but they had the selection I needed. I have access to the camera through work and still have the 45, 80 and 120 macro, 150. The 150 is a excellent portrait lense. I switched to Fuji because I shoot mostly landcapes and wanted a lighter weight system for hiking to locations. For shorter hikes I will still take the Phase One. I do like the GFX and very pleased with the the images it produces. The IQ from the Fuji is better than my D810 and D850. Roughly 70% increase in sensor size results in better IQ. 250% from Phase One is significantly better. Fuji has plans to release a series of GFX cameras with larger MP's/sensor and I will evaluate then if I will stay with them or go back to Phase One.

I am sorry to hear about you losing some of your friends. The past year has been hard for me and my family and has changed all of our perspectives. We never really think about our morality until we stare it down ourselves or lose a close friend(s).

Enjoy your new camera.

paulr

Thanks for the kind words vtc2002 I know two Fuji ambassadors who have nothing but praise for the GFX. I held back on the Fuji due to a rumour that a 100+mp camera was going to be announced and probably with 4k video. I still think there is a use for both formats 35mm and DMF, however the 35mm camera now feels quite small to handle after using the P1.

vtc2002

I still think there is a use for both formats 35mm and DMF

I agree and I believe will be that way for some time.

DaveyJ

Having owned MANY medium format cameras, and a whole fleet of large format, I would warn those thinking of embarking on such a path.....expensive, slower, and certainly having spent more than I care to print in that arena, a complete waste of time and money. I owned Hassys, Mamiyas, Fujis, Linhoffs, Zone 6, Horseman, Schneider, Rodenstock, Calumet. The only ONE I miss is the Fuji GX 617. I'd rather have a Nikon D500 or a D850, or even a D7500 and some good lens! Fortunately I stopped metering with expensive spot meters and started using Nikon F5 and lens.....the 35mm ended up,being often more useful,than the big photos!

paulr

It's taken me just over a month to get my head round DMF I am sure many photographers have thought about it. Well my judgement is, forget the sales talk, it really is Different in a good way. So much I am selling all my Nikon Gear and upgrading to a IQ3 100. Now where do I sell £20,000 of Nikon Professional gear cause for sure its going.

WestEndFoto

That is a big step paulr. I too have been thinking about this, but I am not as close as you are to pulling that trigger. I also shoot a very wide variety of subjects, so I suspect that I would be keeping my Nikon gear, though perhaps scaled down. For example, a D850 with an RRS travel tripod and six or seven prime lenses would still be good travel kit for me. I also don’t imagine hauling around a Phase One lens with the same focal length as my recently acquired 400 2.8E. I would use a Phase One setup for landscapes, cityscapes, studio etc.

And perhaps Nikon will come out with a serious MF system. Then many of the accessories would be inter-changeable. However, that may never happen or perhaps not for a long time.

For now I am happy with my current gear but am watching medium format developments closely. I have met the Phase One reps in Vancouver.

I, and I am sure other members of this forum, would be curious how your Phase One experience progresses. Let's keep this thread going.

paulr

I will WEF. Sure the dark long distance images are out, but i took a shot with 45mm thats 28mm in 35mm terms and zoomed in on the computer and the detail was amazing even at 400%. Now have 4 lenses so getting there slowly

vtc2002

@paulr I am in your corner. I sold (actually traded in) most of my Nikon, Fuji and Pentax cameras and lenses for the IQ3 and lenses. I kept my D850's, several E and a couple G series lenses. The a couple of G lenses they offered considerably less than I can get on FM. They are on FM. I didn't want to deal with the hazzle of eBay or FM to sell that much gear and I figured the longer I waited the more I would lose. I had been contemplating this decision for about a year and decided it was time.
I do not see Nikon having a medium format mirrorless camera anytime in the near future and there are too many uncertainties with a full frame mirrorless camera from them as well.
I will still use the 850's.

DaveyJ

Your direction seems rather oblique. A RED camera has outstanding resolution, etc., video is swiftly replacing still photos almost completely. I know of Pro photographers who,say it is impossible anymore to make more than $150 a day with their gear., it seems odd that reference is made to keeping D850 cameras like they were in a multiple set. It is a new camera. It is also about as good a camera for photos as any camera out there. Hasselblad got bought by Freddy Wang, DJI quadcopters, and their medium formats are as good as it gets. Medium format has never had as small a list of users (percentage wise for all people) as it does today. Mediums share if the market is totally threatened and you are looking to upgrade to this rapidly abandoned format? And you think Nikon should have one. Also why does Nikon not have a mirrorless large format? Maybe because it is a risky business maneuver. I have shot with mirrorless cameras as that is what allview and mediums are with very few exceptions, and I would rather have a D7500 myself!

WestEndFoto

The D850 is as good as Full Frame is going to get, if you ignore the marginal improvements that will still come. If you want better, medium format is the only way to go.

I also think that the prices will come down, albeit it will always be expensive.

So as long as you don't expect explosive growth, I think medium format is a good bet.

paulr

After 3 months of using a Phaseone XF 1Q160 I have sold it. The P1 was a testing ground camera to see if it fitted into my workflow and whether I could manage without the assets a 35mm camera could offer.
The simple answer is Yes. In fact I have upgraded to the PhaseOne XF 1Q3 100MP
Nikon high megapixels cameras with Zeiss lenses were great, medium format took it to the next level,1Q3 100mp takes it beyond belief.

spraynpray

Show us an image you are happy with @paulr. Will be interesting.

paulr

This images approx one tenth of the whole image taken with just house lights in a kitchen This is the RAW file no photoshop at all." alt="" />

Snowleopard

I have been struggling with this also. My daily driver is a D810 (works perfectly fine). But I am getting tired of version 1,2,3,4,5, etc of a lens with new features and the lens prices going through the roof.

I could have just put the money in an XF with the 100mp sensor and a few choice lenses.

The difference is, the XF is not going to be good for sports, nascar, etc. It will be good for still life, people, landscapes, etc. I mean try spotting eagles with the XF and IQ3 and their zoom lens with the tele converter on it. Not that you can't do it, but it isn't going to be easy as it is with a main stream DSLR.

And the XF will be suited more for my studio work also.

I did make the medium format jump in film though. I bought a Mamiya rz67 pro iid. It will accept digital backs or film backs with the right adapters so I get the best of both worlds.

The Phase One reps kinda shunned at the idea of using the Mamiya rz67 pro iid with a digital back, but it is allot cheaper than the XF with the IQ3. But the RZ67 has a look that the Phase One cannot replicate even though it is medium format. It produces photos with that "Classic" look because of the glass and the bellows, etc whether I shoot film or digital.

paulr

Snowleopard There are some things the 35mm can just do simply better. You can use a 240mm with a 2 times converter from P1, but i am told it is very difficult to use, and a not a hand held lens.I just love the way I can use a wide angle lens and then crop it like a telephoto lens and the quality is still perfect.From little experience I have had so far, I would not bother with 1Q1 backs, go direct to 1Q3 backs, everything is so much better with the Cmos sensor
MF is a different type of Photography, but very enjoyable,You have to approach it with a different attitude from 35mm.

Snowleopard

Do you know if they have updated adapter plates to put an IQ3 on a Pro iiD?

WestEndFoto

Snowleopard said:

I have been struggling with this also. My daily driver is a D810 (works perfectly fine). But I am getting tired of version 1,2,3,4,5, etc of a lens with new features and the lens prices going through the roof.

I could have just put the money in an XF with the 100mp sensor and a few choice lenses.

The difference is, the XF is not going to be good for sports, nascar, etc. It will be good for still life, people, landscapes, etc. I mean try spotting eagles with the XF and IQ3 and their zoom lens with the tele converter on it. Not that you can't do it, but it isn't going to be easy as it is with a main stream DSLR.

And the XF will be suited more for my studio work also.

I did make the medium format jump in film though. I bought a Mamiya rz67 pro iid. It will accept digital backs or film backs with the right adapters so I get the best of both worlds.

The Phase One reps kinda shunned at the idea of using the Mamiya rz67 pro iid with a digital back, but it is allot cheaper than the XF with the IQ3. But the RZ67 has a look that the Phase One cannot replicate even though it is medium format. It produces photos with that "Classic" look because of the glass and the bellows, etc whether I shoot film or digital.

I have the same model of Mamiya that you are referring to. It didn't even occur to me that putting a digital back on it would be possible.

paulr

Snowleopard As far as I know there is no difference between any of the backs to fit the Mamiya RDs/Rzs providing you have the adapter. A call to any P1 dealer would answer your query . There are quite a few XF bodies coming on Ebay which are sensible on price.

vtc2002

Snowleopard I have found the digital backs to be slow and a pain to use. Personally, I prefer to shoot film and then use my drum scanner to convert to digital for post processing. When shooting landscapes (especially sunrises or sunsets) when the light is changing quickly the backs can result in a loss shot. The same is true with macros, when your subject is moving. I also think the drum scanner produces higher resolution images than the backs and if you are shooting E6 better colors. This is my personal preference and I know others hate the idea of film.
The digital backs do provide a good and cheaper alternative to the digital MF cameras and I am not trying to discourage you from using them, just information from my experiences. The digital back will produce higher resolution images than the D810 or D850. However as paulr stated both MF and FF cameras have their pros and cons and better suited for different situations. Did the Phase One rep say why he was not keen on the digital back?

WestEndFoto

That is a good point about using film and then scanning it in. You may end up with better resolution than a D850 using it this way.

paulr

Vtc2002 I don't understand why you say DB are slow and a pain. Using a DSLR and a MF is the same with modern DBs,unless you are using a DB on a technical camera. In fact in Live View the MF is clearer than a DSLR. I came from a Film background and using film without getting dust specks on it was near impossible unless you worked in a definitive dust free room. Modern photographers probably don't remember such problems, its a lesser problem with digital when compared to film. Digital Medium Format is nothing like Film Medium Format. The only downside I have encountered is weight and of course cost.