More image quality for future project

[Avotius]

I got a project coming up that I will need more image quality then I am currently able to muster with my 12 megapixel digital and 35mm film cameras. The project will sort of revolve around street photography style photos, but with more set up on location.

It would seem some sort of large format camera is called for as the end prints will have to be of very high quality. Print sizes will be in the range of 50 inches though there may be some as small as 30 inches and some as big as 80.

I have done medium format, with a Mamiya 6 for a while and got some really great results with that printing up to 50x50 inches but the cameras were crap and they kept falling apart so I got rid of them.

Now I am wondering if a medium format camera like a Alpa 12 TC or its little twin the Fotoman 69 is in order or if I should go larger like a Fotoman 45PS or 810PS type, though I will admit I have never used these types of "point and shoot" cameras. Anyone have a site that explains the use of these types of cameras?

Also I see the Fotoman cameras, though "cheap" are more expensive then this type of camera which makes me wonder if they are really appropriate. A field camera like a Horseman 45 FA might be ok if it were not so expensive.

One of the keys will be mobility, I will be shooting in a lot of areas where it wont be appropriate or possible to lug around a suitcase sized bag with camera stuff. Of course also price, best bang for buck is high on my list as I will most likely have to thin out some of my gear I got already to do this.

As always comments or suggestions very welcome.

 

[Merkin]

If you are going to be mostly using a tripod, and you need the most image bang for the buck, what about a mamiya RB67 or RZ67? You can find complete kits at keh for 450-700 bucks in fantastic shape.

 

[Roger Hicks]

Consider an MPP Micro-Technical Mk. VII: http://www.mppusers.freeuk.com/, possibly with Grafmatic holders. For hand-held 'street' 4x5 shots with an MPP look at http://www.rogerandfrances.com/sgallery/g sepia 2.html. They're on outdated Polaroid sepia, so quality ain't brilliant, but they give ou an idea of what you can do with a rangefinder-coupled 150/4.5 lens (Apo Lanthar) or scale-focused 90/6.8 (Angulon).

Alpa will deliver the best quality and (in my view) the best street style you can get out of MF, and of course the company is still in business, but cameras are seriously expensive. This would be my choice (my wife and I still have Alpas but not MPP).

Cheers,

R.

 

[shadowfox]

Sounds like a job for a Mamiya Universal Press. It can do 6x7 or 6x9 depending on the backs (even smaller formats with masks). Very versatile, very flat film, and good lenses, especially the 100/2.8.

Not as compact as the Alpa 12 tc, but not as expensive either.

 

[Avotius]

Alpa will deliver the best quality and (in my view) the best street style you can get out of MF, and of course the company is still in business, but cameras are seriously expensive. This would be my choice (my wife and I still have Alpas but not MPP).

Cheers,

R.

Thanks for that, another reason the Alpa's interest me is the prospect of digital backs as well but it seems for those I should be looking at a 645 camera instead.

Do you have any experience with the Fotoman 69's? It seems to be a similar set up. The flexibility of medium format has me wavering towards it a little more, and if I am going to go medium format I would like to start at 6x9 because the negative is large and I am accustomed to the 3:2 aspect ratio.

 

[photogdave]

I would look into a Fuji 6x9 rangefinder, or an old Linhoff Technica 6x9 with roll back.

 

[Roger Hicks]

Not the Fotoman 6x9 but two or three other Fotoman cameras. Their quality improved steadily from a high starting point, without, of course, ever coming close to Alpa. If you're considering digital, I'd say that Alpa is far and away the best path to take (precision in back location).

Remember that film location matters in roll film as well, and that Alpa scores highly here too (Frances and I have backs from 66x44 to 56x84). As Photogdave says, 'baby' Linhofs are a good idea here: a Tech 70 (I have a modified one) is well worth considering.

You want (1) a good lens -- any camera will take that -- and (2) maximum precision and film flatness, for which I'd back Alpa/Linhof. Personally I'd avoid cut film because of the sheer hassle factor.

Does the Fotoman 69 have interchangeable backs? Because in your situation I'd REALLY want interchangeable backs and auto film stop.

Cheers,

R.

 

[MartinP]

The thought of carrying round thirty DDS's, or some similar large number, suggests why rollfilm is still useful.

But of course, there is always the Leica S2 . . . . 😉

Actually, that could well be easier to hire than an Alpa - if that was even worth consideration, it would depend on when and for how long. Then again, it may be possible to find a secondhand Alpa which would change the cost balance a lot. Note that I have only ever (unfortunately) handled one of these things (Alpa) in a show, but very impressive solid kit.

 

[Al Kaplan]

When prints that large are exhibited most people stand back and admire the picture. Only photographers stick their noses in it and look for sharpness.

 

[Avotius]

When prints that large are exhibited most people stand back and admire the picture. Only photographers stick their noses in it and look for sharpness.

That may be, but as I cant divulge too many details of the project, lets just say the end results will be displayed in places where there wont be enough room for people to stand back too far, and end image quality is also one of the prerequisites unfortunately.

 

[Avotius]

From people who know, what would you say is the enlargement size with 6x9 that you feel still gives decent image quality? (assuming the scans are good)

 

[amateriat]

From people who know, what would you say is the enlargement size with 6x9 that you feel still gives decent image quality? (assuming the scans are good)

I think 6x9 will stand up quite well for the size of enlargements you're contemplating. The really big deal will be in how those big prints are made: I've seen horrific prints dome via allegedly "modern" (i.e. digital) means, while also seeing fantastic stuff made the same way. It's all in the translation, if you will.

Care in camera/lens technique will count for a lot, too, but judging from what I've seen of your work, I'd guess you'll have that down pretty solid once you've gotten too grips with the new gear.

Best of luck with all this!


- Barrett

 

[mfogiel]

If you shoot Ilford Delta 100/ Tmax 100, Acros or Tmax 400-2 and develop in a Pyro developer of last generation in semi stand (Pyrocat HD/MC, Prescysol EF, Tanol/Tanol Speed), and use decent gear on a tripod, I think you could get good prints up to 20x enlargement especially if you print digitally. A serious scanner would be a must.

 

[Turtle]

My Mamiya 7IIs have not fallen apart. LF has some benefits but is a very different way of working. Mamiya 7II would be great, but LF, with fine grain films, obviously of higher quality. However, you will have DOF and shutter speed considerations resulting from this

 

[Avotius]

I am seriously leaning towards the medium format options right now, looking at the fotoman 69 a little more closely, can someone point me to somewhere that explains how to use these "point and shoot" type cameras? I assume it would be rather straight forward if I had it in my hand...looks like hyperfocal shooting is a given, with the helical focus mount and a 90mm lens (which is the equivalent to about 40mm in 35mm?) also would probably get the rangefinder accessory. Looked at the Fuji RF 6x9's but seems the flexibility of changing lenses and also being able to use the same lenses on large format later is too tempting.

The flexibility of roll film might be good because there will need to be a lot of photos taken and taking a changing bag into the field doesn't appeal to me all that much etc etc. I found a conversion table that says to get the same as a 20mm lens in 35mm terms on this camera I would need a 45mm lens, sounds expensive haha...

As for end printing and stuff, that is no problem, I now have access to a Creo scanner that can scan just about anything and competent printing facilities. These photos will be shot on Fuji Provia 100f and scanned and digitally printed, as is my typical work flow. I have not decided if I want to do black and white photos for this project, but later anything is possible.

 

[Chris101]

From people who know, what would you say is the enlargement size with 6x9 that you feel still gives decent image quality? (assuming the scans are good)

80 inches? And people will be right up on it? And you want life-like detail? No you want large format for this - the larger the better. 4x5 at the minimum, but 5x7 or 8x10 will be better.

The biggest I have is 5x7, which I hate, but when I need that "life size and life like" quality that is what does it. You will be able to use medium format, but it will be a compromise.

 

[Avotius]

80 inches? And people will be right up on it? And you want life-like detail? No you want large format for this - the larger the better. 4x5 at the minimum, but 5x7 or 8x10 will be better.

The biggest I have is 5x7, which I hate, but when I need that "life size and life like" quality that is what does it. You will be able to use medium format, but it will be a compromise.

figure the farthest a person will be from the photos is about 2 meters. I recently saw a show in Hong Kong with similar set up like what I have going on here now but the guy used 20x24 and I was seriously unimpressed but I think that is more to do with the photographers technique rather then the film size.

I think what I really need to do before I buy anything is to get a hold of some full size scans taken with the various formats and print them out myself and see what is acceptable.

Like my 6x6 prints at 50x50, there is grain visible and the details are not pin sharp as to be expected but its not so bad really so I am just trying to figure out where to go from there.

 

[Avotius]

Yeah I keep coming back to that Mamiya 7.... a little gun shy after my poor experiences with two Mamiya 6's still.

Also checked out a Fuji GSW690III and the GW690III, those are relatively cheap, just wondering if I would prefer a 28 or 40mm 135 equivalent.

 

[kuzano]

With 6X9... the negatives are Soooo wide anyway

With 6X9... the negatives are Soooo wide anyway

I've used both the GSW and the GW...

The GSW as your only choice is a somewhat overkill on wide, since the negative is so wide to begin with (although the format is still 3:2). Maybe its a bit deceiving to just have so much film in your hands when holding the negs/positives. I also determined that it makes more sense to shoot the 90 or 100, take two shots for panorama and stitch them in Photoshop or other.

I've used the early interchangeable Fuji's and am currently on the watch for a clean G690bl and both the 65 and 100 lenses. The extra 10mm makes a bit of difference on the longer lens. Unfortunately that camera with those two lenses is almost as heavy (all metal) as both the GW and GSW combined.

In the meantime, I am using a Mamiya Press, with a 6X9 back and have the 50, 75, 100, and 127 lenses. Plus, I have a body with a 4X5 back that takes those lenses and can use a 6X12 roll film back on it.

So, I can take my time on the final decision/hunt for a Fuji.

 

[Chris101]

figure the farthest a person will be from the photos is about 2 meters. I recently saw a show in Hong Kong with similar set up like what I have going on here now but the guy used 20x24 and I was seriously unimpressed but I think that is more to do with the photographers technique rather then the film size.

I think what I really need to do before I buy anything is to get a hold of some full size scans taken with the various formats and print them out myself and see what is acceptable.

Like my 6x6 prints at 50x50, there is grain visible and the details are not pin sharp as to be expected but its not so bad really so I am just trying to figure out where to go from there.

When you use a large format, the focal length of the lens is also much longer. You can get away with a much smaller f-stop than you can with a 50mm lens because even at f/45 or so, the physical hole is too large to cause diffraction degradation. This is one what the your extra large print will hold detail.

Another is to be sure to use a STURDY tripod. A weak tripod will ruin the sharpness that even a huge negative will deliver. And large cameras are prone to "tuning fork" vibration that continues unnoticed for quite a while after adjusting it. Let it settle for 20 seconds or so before tripping the shutter. I have even resorted to using a black slide over the lens (but not touching) so that the act of tripping the shutter did not vibrate the camera.

Scanning is the final area to beware. On many large flatbed scanners, right against the glass is not the best position for the negative. If you can focus the optics, do so. Also look into using a wet mount for the negative.

Good luck! And I'm anxious to learn about your project. (Even if you go the MF route.)