Medium Digital Format

paulr

Snowleopard said:

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

vtc2002

Paulr I was referring to my experience using a digital back on the Mamiya RZ67 Pro II. It was years ago and not sure of they have update the backs to improve the processing time. The time it would take to process a image often would take four or more minutes to complete. For some situations this was a problem. I also have the Mamiya RZ67 Pro IID that does not require the adapter that the performance is slightly better but this is relatively slow. I no longer have the Pro II but I still use the Pro II D and digital back from time to time. This was my experience but this link to Wikipedia explains in more detail the technical details en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_scan_back
I am not implying that digital backs should not be used, it's just some of the older models are as you mention expensive and performance should be evaluated to make sure they fit your expectations. In November I went to a demo for Phase One IQ3 100 and was impressed that the write speed is pretty fast and seriously considering purchasing one. The Trichromatic color reproduction is the best I have every seen from any camera and may be enough for me to make the decision. However, I am waiting to see what Fuji GFX 100 MP camera spec's and cost are before making my decision.
As far as film and dust specs, I have very few issues with them and when I do they are easily removed in Lightroom. For me it is personal preference of how to get the image into a digital format, whether with a digital camera, film and scanned or digital back. I understand and respect your experience and opinion and by no means saying that my way is better.
I am in total agreement with you that Digital MF is nothing like Film MF, and would add FF DSLR. Any photographer that is seeking maximum resolution and image quality (and color reproduction) digital MF is by far the best solution.

paulr

Phaseone and Sony have worked very closely together on the 1Q3 100 mp back. Phaseone have tried to justify the Trichromatic by mastering the art of stopping bleed through on the primary colours. They seem to be at this time the only manufacture with a true 16 bit performance. I use the 1Q3100 with the XF body and the latest Firmware 4 update with HAP 2 Focus. This has changed the speed and focus dramatically . having said all that it not a camera you can just pick up and go.The XF body is very technical in what it can offer, and you have to make friends slowly.

Snowleopard

IDK, XF is what $8999 + $999 for waist level view finder (So it works like an RZ67) + $49,999 for the 100MP IQ3 + $4999 for the 80mm or 110 eq. lens.

RZ67 Pro ii D with 80mm lens and 140mm macro, 3 film backs, Polorid back, auto rewinder,etc ran me $2499.

Adapter plate for digital backs.... $800 used.

Then the digital backs..... old ones as cheap as $2400 or a brand new IQ3 for $49,000.

I think I saved allot of money going digital medium format, but When I asked the P1 reps for my region they basically treated me like a third class citizen when I told them I wanted the RZ67 with a digital back, why would you do it?

Because the RZ67 and the XF are very different cameras and There is no film option with the XF.

I don't believe there is an issue with the "processing" on modern digital backs because the newer digital backs like the IQ3 have much faster processors and memory than a digital back from 10 years ago. We are also taking a difference between 24MP on a medium format digital back and 100mp on the new ones.

Oh, and the RZ is so much fun to shoot with, I am not sure the XF has the "fun" factor.

WestEndFoto

Not even "second class"? Tsk, tsk.......

paulr

WEF I don't know why they said or did that, I loved My Mamiya RB and RZ cameras. Try Chris Ireland In Leeds he's really helpful, thats if you are in the UK
The problem with the modern DMF is if you get it wrong its Pilot error not the camera!

donaldejose

Looks very interesting and a cheap entry into MF digital, but limited use.

paulr

Brings back memories watching those videos , although mine were with film.
I think comparing or using a Mamiya RZ xxx with a digital back is like comparing a D300 to todays D850. The technology in the Phaseone XF body is designed to make the most of a 100mp back, especially if used with the latest Blue ring lenses.
Phaseone are very expensive camera outfits and careful justification should be considered prior to buying.Personal factors whether for professional or none professional use and of course this is a camera that is best not suited to cover all aspects of photography like the DSLR, and as I stated before, your workflow changes with most DMF cameras.

donaldejose

Yes, that Phaseone XF with the 100 mp back looks absolutely fantastic! But the price brings tears to the eyes! I would rather use the same money to buy a Porsche!

Snowleopard

I agree that the XF is designed around the IQ3 and it is a complete high end system. For me, one of the important factors is the "look" that specific lenses or glass provide.

While the XF is a complete digital system where the glass resolves 100Mp of data and you get very clear, sharp accurate photo's. There is a "look" that the RZ gives you because the glass is different that the XF cannot produce.

In 35mm or Full Frame Digital, the effect is using old 1930's glass on a D810 or D850 or a D5. Yes, you are using a modern digital camera, but there are no modern Nikon lenses that reproduce the (I don't know the proper word), the "look and feel" that the 1930'd Nikon glass does.

Some times the latest and greatest is "not what you want". It gives a "character" to the shots you take.

In this sense, I prefer the RZ67 with a digital back. I am not an expert on the RZ, but if I am not mistaken, the RZ67 and its variations were used to create most of the classic Rolling Stones Magazine covers before going to digital and that is the only camera they would use.

It is like people make a connection to the look of a particular image with out understanding that the image was shot a certain way. In the way 50mm lenses on 35mm/Full Frame (while not the best lens in most cases) it provides a very classic look to the images being shot.

WestEndFoto

Snowleopard said:

I agree that the XF is designed around the IQ3 and it is a complete high end system. For me, one of the important factors is the "look" that specific lenses or glass provide.

While the XF is a complete digital system where the glass resolves 100Mp of data and you get very clear, sharp accurate photo's. There is a "look" that the RZ gives you because the glass is different that the XF cannot produce.

In 35mm or Full Frame Digital, the effect is using old 1930's glass on a D810 or D850 or a D5. Yes, you are using a modern digital camera, but there are no modern Nikon lenses that reproduce the (I don't know the proper word), the "look and feel" that the 1930'd Nikon glass does.

Some times the latest and greatest is "not what you want". It gives a "character" to the shots you take.

In this sense, I prefer the RZ67 with a digital back. I am not an expert on the RZ, but if I am not mistaken, the RZ67 and its variations were used to create most of the classic Rolling Stones Magazine covers before going to digital and that is the only camera they would use.

It is like people make a connection to the look of a particular image with out understanding that the image was shot a certain way. In the way 50mm lenses on 35mm/Full Frame (while not the best lens in most cases) it provides a very classic look to the images being shot.

How do I get a 1930's piece of glass on my D850? Tell me more about that Snowleopard.

paulr

Nice one SL. I think if the equipment you are using brings you pleasure in your Photography then you have achieved your Goal.

donaldejose

WEF: Actual 1930's era lens will be very hard to find, perhaps some leica's can be found.
But many early post-WWII Russian lenses were actually built from pre-war Zeiss blueprints which the Russians took from the Zeiss factories when they occupied East Germany. Thus, may post-WWII Russian lenses are actually pre WWII German designs using the Leica mount.

http://stores.ebay.com/Vintage-photo-equipment-and-other?_trksid=p2047675.l2563

When using an adaptor to mount an old Leica mount lens to a D850 you may well not be able to focus at infinity. However, if you are using the lens for an "old look" portrait your subject likely will be within the focal range. Just use liveview and focus peaking.











Interesting, but more trouble to use then a modern AF lens in Nikon mount.

Snowleopard

I know a few people at machine shops that make custom adapters for me.... no auto focus, etc, etc, but it can be fun.

donaldejose

https://fotodioxpro.com/collections/lens-mount-adapters/nikon-f

paulr

Taken in a City Night scene The 16 bit 15 stop dynamic range of the P1

DenverShooter

Nice!

Denver Shooter

Snowleopard

That is great.... Image quality is on spot...... time to sell of my Nikon equipment.... unless the D900 can match or do better than that. :-D

paulr

Unfortunately the PhaseOne has the same conveyor system as Nikon There are always ways you can improve.P1 images/ They have redesigned their lenses, now Blue Ring lenses, to accommodate 100mp backs and higher, so maximum quality could be achieved This image was taken with their 35mm 3.5 Blue Ring lens on a cloudy overcast day. Zoom in to see detail.

donaldejose

Great Detail Paul. That is a magnificant system. Magnificant price too!

WestEndFoto

donaldejose said:

Great Detail Paul. That is a magnificant system. Magnificant price too!

Time to sell your Porsche. You know you love photography more than going around in circles burning fossilized algae.

DenverShooter

IDK about that..

There is nothing like blasting down the front straightaway at Laguna Seca Raceway at 145 MPH.. It's the most fun you can have in a motor vehicle with your clothes on...

Photography not so much..

LOL

Denver Shooter

Capt_Spaulding

Haven't been on the track at Laguna, but for the investment P1 requires I suspect we're getting into 911 GT3 territory. 145mph may be 40 low. If I could afford one or the other, I'd probably go Porsche. Unfortunately (for moi) the question is moot.

donaldejose

WestEndFoto: Funny! I love them both! I will stick with an FX body until someone pays me to shoot medium format. And I will stick with an 18 year old Porsche 911 because anything more powerful than 300 horsepower is more car than I am driver. My 2000 911 is best driven 20 mph over the speed limit as it is. I couldn't handle more than that and would just kill myself. But I still dream about, and lust after, going bigger for both of them. Dreams are free!

paulr

For my sins I owned a Garage and could use any car I wanted , Now and for a long time, no interest in cars, They were just lumps of metal to make profit on. Golden rule never get sentimental on stock cars. Now cameras, thats a different subject. LOL