Medium format in the 21st Century

KM-25 said:
For me it was less about what it offered over my D810 and more about what it allowed me to do in the field in terms of workflow. For example, one of my biggest clients is the local ski area which happens to be one of the best in the world and has a pretty big budget for marketing. So they use my images in size ranges that are for web / social to huge 30-40 foot wide murals in ticket offices, airport banners at Denver International, etc. The issue I have always had is that I have needed to carry a D750 / D810 in addition to a MF camera while shooting black and white film for fine art. So add one of those digital Nikons to my Hasselblad system and you are talking a lot of weight and a rather fragmented workflow. Now with the digital back I am just carrying the Hasselblad system when out doing the scenic work that they need and can swap between digital and film backs in seconds, a really intuitive and productive workflow. As for the image quality gains over the Nikons, the color and the tonality is better out of the 50MP digital back VS my Nikon D810. They take very little work in post and make *huge* stitched files. Also, even though the dynamic range on paper is better with the D810, the way it falls into place with the CFV50c back is better overall, a more natural range of tones and again, fabulous color. It's no different than film in terms of formats, the larger sensor just takes in and displays light better, the files are quite beautiful.
Click to expand...

Thank you - I hadn't even considered the workflow aspect. I your circumstances it makes perfect sense. In 35mm/full frame terms if I had a digital back for my OMs or Autorefkex it would be huge for me.
 
Trius said:
Hope this doesn't sound like a stupid question, and it really is serious ..

What does a medium format back offer that is truly necessary or required by clients? I'm not saying it doesn't or can't ... it's just that the quality of top end "full frame" sensors is pretty astonishing.

What are the actual gains?

I really shouldn't ask since I'm liable to seek out some prints from MF sensors and be ruined for anything less. Not even a possibility with my budget unless I win a substantial lottery!
Click to expand...

Yes, I too fear that this thread might not be the best thing for my bank balance, I'm trying to look away but.....
 
My take is, if you are like me and:

Like to -

1 - shoot portraits
2 - shoot landscapes, particularly wide or panoramic formats
3 - hang or give enlargements as gifts
4 - use a monopod or tripod for maximum clarity
5 - expand your possibilities using new film offerings - CineStill, Ferrania, etc
6 - the challenge of film

But don't like to -

1 - mess with Lightroom or spend hours on computer manipulation
2 - buy new digital camera models every six months
3 - accumulate numerous cameras which are never used and aren't worth much any more
4 - don't want to get into large format cameras


Go medium format

My choices currently include 6X6,6X7,6X9,6X12,6X17 - Norita,Fujica,Mamiya,Linhof, and Noblex cameras.


Texsport
 
I don't really see a point of MF digital - if you like digital, there are already myriads of options for smaller sensor cameras that will let you print quite large.
For me the whole point of MF is to make it as remote from the digital type of output aesthetics as possible, so I stick to MF B&W and cherish the robust mechanical cameras like Rolleiflex TLR or Hasselblad V. Mamiya AFD has a couple of advantages: it is still relatively "current", so repairs should not be a problem for a few years, and the negative to flange distance is very short, so you can adapt almost any MF lens and some 35mm lenses to it, - have a look here:https://www.facebook.com/PalecwnosieCameraWorks You can even adapt the 90/2 Summicron M to get a great portrait lens.
 
mfogiel said:
I don't really see a point of MF digital - if you like digital, there are already myriads of options for smaller sensor cameras that will let you print quite large.
For me the whole point of MF is to make it as remote from the digital type of output aesthetics as possible, so I stick to MF B&W and cherish the robust mechanical cameras like Rolleiflex TLR or Hasselblad V. Mamiya AFD has a couple of advantages: it is still relatively "current", so repairs should not be a problem for a few years, and the negative to flange distance is very short, so you can adapt almost any MF lens and some 35mm lenses to it, - have a look here:https://www.facebook.com/PalecwnosieCameraWorks You can even adapt the 90/2 Summicron M to get a great portrait lens.
Click to expand...

I'm not looking at digital for printing large necessarily... my M9P's 18mp files are plenty large enough for anything I'd ever do. I'm looking for the three dimensionality that MF gives that you just don't get in smaller formats. I realize that 645 digital sensors still aren't as large as film, but they still allow for that medium format "look;" better subject isolation with shallow DOF and generally a three-dimensional look. I never used to care much, but I realize now how much more depth medium format offers, and I want my images to have that.

I've got a couple of personal projects in mind and I want to shoot them on MF film, and I decided that I wanted a camera with more modern options over my Hassy 501cm like those offered by the AFDii.

It will likely be some time yet before I'm ready to buy a MF digital back, but I figured it made sense to buy a body that would allow me to have that option should I want it.
 
hepcat said:
I'm looking for the three dimensionality that MF gives that you just don't get in smaller formats.
Click to expand...
Don't forget the smoothness of changes in tonality.. That was what pulled me to analog MF over 15 years ago. Even if you make exactly the same size prints, you can pick out the ones from MF without problem. The difference between digital FF and MF will be similar; but the price premium has increased to the point where I can't justify the move a second time.. Otherwise I'd be shooting digital MF in an eye blink.
 
Well, three weeks into having the 645AFDii setup, I have put it back up for sale. I'm just not bonding with it. It doesn't have a waist-level finder, which I really miss. I didn't think I would but I do. You can't hand-crank it. You're stuck with the auto-wind. The film even auto-winds. I could live with all of that, I suppose, but the electronic controls really don't do it for me. The camera doesn't engage me, I'm sorry to say. I have a self-winding watch. I shoot Leica M bodies and M-mount lenses, and I drive a six-speed, manual transmission Jeep. I like my mechanical 'stuff' to engage me.

Frankly, I miss the Hassy already. But I don't shoot the gear enough to warrant having that much cash tied up. So, I found a 645 Pro TL outfit with both the metered prism and WLF, two 120 backs, a 135 back, a polaroid back and three "N" lenses with the 80mm f/1.9 for a really good price.

So, we'll see how I get on with that. I'm kind of excited about it, frankly, and the 135 back is a kick!

So... I guess I wasn't up for moving into the 21st Century after all... *sigh*
 
I just received a Rolleiflex 6002 with a 80mm f2.8 lens and it such a joy to use
if you find a good one, put 2 rolls thru it already and the square format is great.
 
Frankly, I miss the Hassy already. But I don't shoot the gear enough to warrant having that much cash tied up. So, I found a 645 Pro TL outfit with both the metered prism and WLF, two 120 backs, a 135 back, a polaroid back and three "N" lenses with the 80mm f/1.9 for a really good price.

So, we'll see how I get on with that. I'm kind of excited about it, frankly, and the 135 back is a kick!
Click to expand...
The 135 back seems like a waste of time, ditto the Polaroid back; the rest is a great combination. You still need a 500C/M in the mix, though. ;)
 
Range-rover said:
I just received a Rolleiflex 6002 with a 80mm f2.8 lens and it such a joy to use
if you find a good one, put 2 rolls thru it already and the square format is great.
Click to expand...

The Rollei SLRs always seemed a little exotic to me... and accessories seem to be hard to come by used as there were so few of them sold.

ruby.monkey said:
The 135 back seems like a waste of time, ditto the Polaroid back; the rest is a great combination. You still need a 500C/M in the mix, though. ;)
Click to expand...

Apparently you've never shot Polaroids? They're great fun and have a look all to themselves. Obviously the back was made for proofing... and in the digital age, that is an idea that's lost like buggy-whips... but Polaroids, once shot, can also be scanned and are unique in their color palate.

And what could be more fun than having the largest 35mm camera in the crowd? <grin>

I still love the Hassys, but I'm tired of maintaining leaf shutters. I had a pretty nice Kiev 88cm two-body kit with some amazing glass that I sold some years ago, and I find myself yearning for that, believe it or not. I won't buy one as they're about as expensive as the Mamiya now... but I had a lot of fun with those. I'll get along with the 645 Pro TL. ;)
 
hepcat said:
And what could be more fun than having the largest 35mm camera in the crowd? <grin>
Click to expand...
Some MF systems have 35mm panoramic backs with a 24 x 56 mm frame. Not sure whether that's the case here, but if so, then a 35mm back really rocks..
 
pvdhaar said:
Some MF systems have 35mm panoramic backs with a 24 x 56 mm frame. Not sure whether that's the case here, but if so, then a 35mm back really rocks..
Click to expand...

This one is the standard 35mm back... but it's an interesting option.
 
giganova said:
If all you need is 20 Mpix, why did you buy a MF camera? Isn't MF all about resolution?
Click to expand...

Nope. It's about depth and luminosity. It's about the transitions of tone. No, resolution is just a small part of what medium format brings. If you really want to see those qualities, look to large format... but medium format has them as well.
 
hepcat said:
That's a new interpretation for me. Tonality transitions would depend on resolution perhaps? In any event, I like the look of medium format images made on film.
Click to expand...

Yeah I don't think tonality is determined solely by resolution. Affected by? Yes, but there are other factors. One analogy from film is making identical shots on the same film and processing with different developers. That's analogous to both raw file generation and post-processing.
 
hepcat said:
Well, three weeks into having the 645AFDii setup, I have put it back up for sale. I'm just not bonding with it. It doesn't have a waist-level finder, which I really miss. I didn't think I would but I do. You can't hand-crank it. You're stuck with the auto-wind. The film even auto-winds. I could live with all of that, I suppose, but the electronic controls really don't do it for me. The camera doesn't engage me, I'm sorry to say. I have a self-winding watch. I shoot Leica M bodies and M-mount lenses, and I drive a six-speed, manual transmission Jeep. I like my mechanical 'stuff' to engage me.

Frankly, I miss the Hassy already. But I don't shoot the gear enough to warrant having that much cash tied up. So, I found a 645 Pro TL outfit with both the metered prism and WLF, two 120 backs, a 135 back, a polaroid back and three "N" lenses with the 80mm f/1.9 for a really good price.

So, we'll see how I get on with that. I'm kind of excited about it, frankly, and the 135 back is a kick!

So... I guess I wasn't up for moving into the 21st Century after all... *sigh*
Click to expand...

I have reversed course again!

I got the 645 Pro TL outfit and some additional accessories like the WLF. I figured out very quickly that it seemed like sort of a hobbled and primitive version of the 645 AFDii. The plastic body didn't feel as substantial, and when used with the AE finder, did exactly the same thing as the 645 AFDii without the elegance of the newer body.

So... I've moved the 645 Pro TL outfit on to a new home and I'm holding on to the AFDii body and AF lenses. FWIW though, I am holding onto the f/1.9 80mm manual lens in addition to the AF lenses. The AFDii kit came with a 150 f/3.5 MF lens, and I think I'll upgrade that to the f/2.8 version because I really prefer availalble light and shallow DOF in portraiture.

That's the latest report... maybe one day when I grow up I'll know what I really want to do...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom