Medium Digital Format

donaldejose

paulr: To each his own. As for me, my 18 year old 2000 Porsche 911 still provides me with as much pleasure as sex; and that pleasure is much, much longer lasting! 911's are truely special cars, in my experience. Recently I drove 200 + miles on a winding hill country road posted at 45mph (in the fastest parts) but I drove it in the off season so there was very, very little traffic and I could go about 20mph over the speed limit all the time. After 5 hours of intense stimulation when each of your senses and appendages had to be working full time to keep you from going off the road I was absolutely exhaused but fell asleep with a smile on my face.

DenverShooter

I have a 1989 Porsche 951 with 74K on it. Its been worked on by a tech who builds racers (chipped, re-jetted restricter bolt, racing suspension setup and balance) and it turns 288 HP and 425 Ft/Lbs at the rear wheels on 100 octane racing fuel..

PCA member for a number of years. Shot the 60th PCA parade which was a whole bunch of fun.

Denver Shooter

Capt_Spaulding

My sports car stable consists of a Subaru BRZ. It's a very poor mans Cayman, but is a hoot and a half to drive. My wife and I took it on a 4000 mile road trip over the summer. Part of the trip (about 600 miles) was through the mountains of Tennessee, NC and VA. Nothing like it. It would have been even better with a Dramamine dispenser for the passenger.

paulr

When I look back at some of the cars I had new 1969 drop=head E-Type Cost £2000 Now £100,000 Aston Martin DB5 cost £1500 Now £800,000 Porsche 911 Turbo cost £45000 Now £100,000 The list could go on If only we had a crystal ball !!!

WestEndFoto

DenverShooter said:

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

Yes, but after going on mock bombing runs and dogfights (limited to 5g) in a SU-27 Trainer, anything stuck to the ground leaves me cold.

And I can't push a car to the limits without risking killing myself. I break into a cold sweat when my Toyota Sequoia hits 140 km/h - :-). No such restrictions in photography.

DenverShooter

You have the whole speed of light and Theory of Relativity to deal with in photography however. And now you are talking about 299 792 458 meters per second or 671 million (6.71×108) miles per hour.

Thats fast...

And shooting images isn't the safest occupation in the galaxy either. Between the hungry/angry/non-photogenic critters, weather, Whacked Out Mother In Laws, emotional brides, hung over grooms, Out of control clients, neerdowells, reprobates and others, I feel safer on the race track. At least everyone is sober and not texting..


Denver Shooter

WestEndFoto

paulr said:

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.

I took the liberty of downloading these and opening them in Lightroom. I hope you don't mind. They look pretty sharp. At f/16.0, are you worried about loss of sharpness due to diffraction?

I know that depth of field is a bitch with medium format.

paulr

I am on the limit with diffraction at F16, but this lens will shoot at F32 other ingredients like heavy duty tripod and the inbuilt seismometer all help to ensure steadiness and the 100mp back has its own electric shutter.PhaseOne have really developed the Blue Ring Lenses and of course Diffraction was high on their list to minimise.Their one spot focus point is unique to P1 and so far Diffraction does not seem to have been a problem. This was a demo lens and I shot at different settings and again at 400% crop looking at the computer there was little sign of diffraction.

vtc2002

There are several factor that reduce diffraction for Medium Format cameras. Paulr describes one of them as being the quality of the lens. Naturally a lens that has artifacts, lens elements out of alignment, etc. will increase diffraction. Other factors that decrease diffraction are lens diameter and sensor size. This is where Medium Format has an advantage over Full Frame in regards to diffraction. The diameter of MF lens is approximately twice the size of a FF lens and the sensor size ranges from 70 to 150 larger than a FF camera. This allows the MF camera to use smaller apertures with out seeing diffraction that if using a FF would produce diffraction. The same effect can be observed between FF and APS-C. The FF allows smaller apertures than the APS-C before diffraction appears. In short the aperture limit is proportional to the sensor size, the larger the sensor, the more you can stop down. Being able to shoot at larger apertures (f16 and f22), improved image quality, color reproduction, etc. were all factors in my decision to use MF. After using MF for several years, I do not see myself going back to FF as my primary system. Paulr, what are your thoughts and perspective on MF?

paulr

There is clearly difference in quality given the right atmosphere for using a MF. Yesterday I was shooting a ballerina in a poorly lit area, and could not use flash.This made the shooting very difficult due not been able to use a high shutter speed. The Nikon would have done this shoot without any problems.
So I believe that that when the work fits the format you should be flexible. I am slowly replacing my Nikon[Zeiss} lenses with Blue Ring lenses but will not sell all my Nikon Gear. Ebay is becoming my next expensive friend. LOL

vtc2002

@paulr I agree that FF has a purpose/use that MF currently cannot provide. For Landscapes, Cityscapes, Products, etc. I will use MF and don't see myself going back to FF. I am seriously considering the Trichromatic. I had a demo session with Phase One dealer and it is amazing.
@Snowleopard I have the 1Q160 and even though it is suppose to shoot 1 frame per second, my experience it ranges from 2 seconds to 2 plus minutes. It seems the complexity of the scene and light impacts how long it takes to write. Even the Trichromatic did not write as fast as the spec's say it should.

paulr

Vtc2002 If colour is vital like fashion and fine art reproduction the Trichromatic is the way to go.This is not required for my workflow. I started with the 1Q160 but have to say disappointed , Live view was a joke and any open aperture settings brought black squares to the screen due to the CCD sensor.The 1Q3 Cmos 100mp is in a different league and Liveview is a pleasure plus WiFi with iPads is useful. The in-built back body, electric shutter speeds up workflow and of course detail is incredible.
Hand held image inside with no flash just natural light

vtc2002

@paulr The photos you have posted are excellent, especially the lack of noise and resolution (as well as composition). The 1Q160 was the basis for my earlier comment about performance and I too was disappointed. I still have it and use it occasionally. I am looking at the Trichromatic for my landscape work and perhaps portraits. Until the D850 I found Nikon colors to be on the cool side. Fuji colors are in the category of either you like them or hate them. I find them good for certain situations. I have a couple of demo sessions setup with Phase One to test before making the decision to buy.

paulr

vtc2002 If your looking for detail and exact colour reproduction the Trichromatic will perform, but to perfect your requirements you will need Blue Ring lenses. The cost just keeps rising.
I note that a lot of the well know ambassador for P1 who do landscape photography use the BR 240 LS lens. I pick mine up today, will let you know what I think.

[Deleted User]

Paulr. How do you find the comparitive color characteristics of the xf to say the D810, or if you have tried them, the Fuji gtx or hasselblad h6dc series. In a recent article on his website Ming Thein speaks of the H6D-50c and the x1d as having the most natural and balanced color characteristics, the Nikon D810 being somewhat comparable.

I have always found the Phase color output to be perhaps gaudy, oversaturated, and overstimulated visually. Hasselblad seems never to have failed in producing colors which seem closer to my own visual experience. As i consider the x1d as an alternative to the Nikon D850 which to my eye produces warmer cast than I like (having lived with Velvia 50 for so many years) i am curious if you have done a tete a tete.

Also, how are you dealing with maximizing dof without movements?

paulr

Owning both cameras the 16 bit of the P1 compared to the D810 is far superior. plus the 15 stop dynamic range brings tonal ranges beyond belief.
With regard to focus, the new update HAP 4 certainly has improved focus, being able to focus on say an eye then move the camera to a different position. sadly at the moment this only applies to Blue Ring lenses.
A lot of my work is landscape and architectural and using the P1 99% of the time.I have a substantial Nikon collection but the more I use the DMF system the less I am using 35mm.however that would depend on your work flow. I also find that testing any equipment for a reverently short period is not the same as using it on a daily basis. DMF cameras are quite complicated compared to 35mm and the transition takes longer than you would think. I have no experience of Fuji or Hasselblad in the DMF. I sat on the fence for many years contemplating whether I should go DMF.The more I work with the DMF the more I am sure I have made the right choice.
DOF is different with DMF however most of my images are with a tripod so long exposures are not a problem , Things like Defraction and CA are really not an issue.

paulr

Its 6 months since I moved from Nikon DSLR to DMF So is it all what in it seems and is the extreme cost worth the money.
First , You have accept this is a different type of Photography and the workflow is different to a DSLR.
Two things that hit you first are. You take less images and the other factor [For me} was weight.of equipment.

If you want fast grab shots and work in a sport and low level situations forget DMF, having said that it can be done, but not with the ease of a DSLR.

Weight Everything is heavy. I like wide angle lenses My lens 28mm, camera body and back weigh 6.5 Kilos, on its own, plus any other lenses tripods filters , well you know the problem.

Needless to say the end product is incredible and its not just the pixel count,15 stop dynamic range and 16 bit colour space do make an immense difference to the final image.

Cost factor I think that depends on the individual and their circumstance so difficult to assess.

For me it was the right choice, although I plan a lot more prior to going on a shoots. I have slowed down my photography to suit the camera, which for me is a good thing.
Its a big step to move , My advice would be to hire first and try, if it works for you great if not, stay where you are.
One other factor is security , something I never thought about with my others cameras.
I am cautious where i go and never leave equipment in my vehicles. Most people have no idea what the camera is and if confronted I just say its an old Film camera and most people walk away!.
Do I miss my DSLR, Not really, and I found I was leaving it in the studio, so most of my DSLR gear as now gone. I have now 6 lenses so most types of Photography are covered
I look forward ever time I go out and use the equipment and find the challenge of DMF more rewarding than I ever got with DSLR.

WestEndFoto

If Nikon came out with 60mm by 60mm medium format of 200mp and enough primes to cover my landscape and portrait needs AND half the price of Phase One, I would buy medium format tomorrow. No....today.....

I predict that within ten years I will be able to do that, though it may not be Nikon.

However, my Nikon FX system will always be a good light "walk around" format - especially for vacations. So I don't imagine giving up my Nikon besides a few lenses for subjects that are better done in medium format.

mhedges

To play devils advocate- what does anyone need 200mp for? Other than cropping the heck out of an image?

WestEndFoto

mhedges said:

To play devils advocate- what does anyone need 200mp for? Other than cropping the heck out of an image?

Well, it sounds like a lot, but remember that 200 mp is only double the linear resolution of a 46mp D850 sensor.

Which is about what you need to have crisp eyelashes on a full body shot.

mhedges

WestEndFoto said:

mhedges said:

To play devils advocate- what does anyone need 200mp for? Other than cropping the heck out of an image?

Well, it sounds like a lot, but remember that 200 mp is only double the linear resolution of a 46mp D850 sensor.

Which is about what you need to have crisp eyelashes on a full body shot.

Yeah, that’s true. But 4 RAW files per GB will be rough. Hopefully storage can keep up.

WestEndFoto

That always has been an issue.

DenverShooter

In this the day and age of 6TB external USB hard disk drive for $119 is this even a consideration?

And an "enterprise class" internal Seagate 6TB Desktop HDD 6Gb/s 128MB Cache 3.5-Inch Internal Drive Retail Kit (STBD6000100) is under $300

HD are cheap and getting cheaper every day and shouldn't be the determining factor in what resolution you shoot today. Because tomorrow they will be cheaper..

Denver Shooter

WestEndFoto

It can add up. I have a Synology DS1817+ (8 bays) with 10tb drives. And since I wanted reliability I bought Western Digital Gold drives for $600 a pop. But I have only used about 15 tb for images, so I have room to grow.

mhedges

I was thinking more for on-camera storage. You will need several very large memory cards to hold a day's work.