Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 [2]   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Which back is tougher ?  (Read 8260 times)
pss
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 960


WWW
« Reply #20 on: September 18, 2006, 05:09:47 PM »
ReplyReply

mentioning mf and tough in one line is strange...like portable 4x5...
some MF systems are "tougher" then others, but the idea of running around and banging around with a 20-30,000$ back attached to a 5000$ camera...i guess if i was independently rich i might do that...does not mean i haven't done just that on a stroll, but...
even shooting on a beach is just not the perfect environment for MF...the only advantage of MF over canon or nikon (which are made for tough....) is imagequality (and a lot of people will argue that...) and to get the extra quality, i for example almost always shoot or set up the shot with a laptop tethered...if you use lights, you need to set it up with a laptop, none of the MF screens will show you the fine details and transitions and you cannot tell those from a histogram either...if you use on camera flash TTL, you might as well use a canon, the difference in the file will be very very small...
i shoot MF on the beach, if it is windy i have the camera wrapped, the laptop is set up in a "tent" but with all the precaution it really does not matter which system i shoot with...i hope you get the point...
i shoot with rollei which is a solid (tough?) system...but dust, sand, water....it is not made for this kind of thing...neither are any of the MF systems...that is why the canons/nikons are weather proof...the rollei lenses (110f2, 180f2.Cool will give you better wide open performance then anything you can dream about with DSLR...would you want to wear the 6008 with 110 or 180 around your neck ? hell no...

someone else asked the right question: what do you shoot? from what you are asking your camera to do, i don't think MF is right for you...digital or film...you are describing the perfect environment for a weather/dust proof 35/DSLR kit...
it seems like you want MF to do things it is not really meant to do...does not mean you can't do it...i have shot hand held with a 4x5 field camera..worked, i got the shots...
Logged

eronald
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3859



WWW
« Reply #21 on: September 18, 2006, 05:14:29 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
You still dont say what is wrong with the first option put to you - a Canon or two

Mr Croslin links to his site - is very qualified to talk sence

You dont link to a website so we dont know what work you do so it is not apparent

If I have missed this in earlier posting I appologise

And dont forget that the flash synch on the Mamiya sucks if you use flash!
LOL
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

You're right Mr. Croslin's site is impressive. Yours is too. I don't really have a decent site, my stuff isn't in the same league but here's my composite anyway. As for the Canons, my old 1Ds shot the images in the comp which were then carefully retouched to deal with noise, but my 1DsII cannot deliver hat skin texture. Which is why I'm thinking of MF.

[a href=\"http://canon1d.com/Pix/comp.jpg]http://canon1d.com/Pix/comp.jpg[/url]

Here is some commercial stuff:
http://www.gioiadesign.com/gallery/index.html

Edmund
« Last Edit: September 18, 2006, 05:19:53 PM by eronald » Logged

Edmund Ronald, Ph.D. 
damien
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 111


WWW
« Reply #22 on: September 18, 2006, 05:29:18 PM »
ReplyReply

Some digital MF systems are tough, very tough. I bang my kit around and it more than survives. It's like a trusty Land Rover - All metal body, built to last, not for speed. - Beach pictures are no problem and it's easy to clean the sensor too.

Damien
Logged

www.lovegroveportraits.com
www.lovegroveweddings.com
www.lovegroveconsulting.com
H1/P25 -35mm,80mm,100mm,210mm
Nikon D200 - 17-35,28-70,70-200VR all at f2.8
Canon 5D - 16-35,24-70,70-200IS all at f2.8
Ex Rollei 6008 kit, Hass V kit, Mamiya 645 pro TL kit.
Morgan_Moore
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2206


WWW
« Reply #23 on: September 18, 2006, 05:33:33 PM »
ReplyReply

Thanks for the praise - please understand that I am not trying to start a whos better war - James Russell is better and many of the old RG gang - legends !

That doesnt mean even college kids dont have a lot to contribute

Linking to sites just helps gain a picture of who's talking

Damien is obviously worth listening to if you are into weddings for example

----------

On topic

I dont think there are many MF failures as most camera failure is in the moving parts

Also the users would tend to keep them held pretty tightly !

The aptus have been slated for thier fans but no one has ACTUALLY reported a failure

I can ACTUALLY say my Eyelike has been on rockclimbing and exposed to a lot of sea air and sand with no worries thus far - my H1 too
Logged

Sam Morgan Moore Cornwall
www.sammorganmoore.com -photography
eronald
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3859



WWW
« Reply #24 on: September 18, 2006, 05:48:25 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Some digital MF systems are tough, very tough. I bang my kit around and it more than survives. It's like a trusty Land Rover - All metal body, built to last, not for speed. - Beach pictures are no problem and it's easy to clean the sensor too.

Damien
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=76862\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I like using equipment that has been banged around a bit (not too much) because it usually doesn't have any surprising failure modes - anything that can cause problems has already failed and got fixed. The Canons I have are good that way.

Edmund
Logged

Edmund Ronald, Ph.D. 
rljones
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 90


« Reply #25 on: September 18, 2006, 08:23:41 PM »
ReplyReply

Edmund,

You mentioned getting some used AFD bodies. While I have not had any to directly compare with my AFDii, the AFD  reportedly has a slower AF than the 'ii' version and has a mechical trigger for the mirror lock up as opposed to the electronic trigger on the 'ii', plus a few other smaller differences. The AF difference seems to get the greatest comments, but you might want to research this aspect.

As I mentioned earlier, an F or FE 110/2.0 could be used on a Mamiya (or Contax too, I believe) with an adapter to give you an 85/1.4 (or HC 100/2.2) look. Used these go from 1100 to 1800 (F's are less; FE's are more). The Fotodiox adapter is < 100. Of course, this is manual focus. With this adapter, you can use any Hasselblad lens (C, CF, CFi, CFE, F, FE) except HC models.

Regards,

Robert

Edited: after reading snide comments from those who cannot respect someone's writings without knowing their background, I can provide a detailed CV on request (maybe we should post our GPAs and degrees too, for proper respect, of course). For snapshots to prove that I can click a shutter please see http://www.e-photoart.com/
« Last Edit: September 18, 2006, 08:40:39 PM by rljones » Logged
Morgan_Moore
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2206


WWW
« Reply #26 on: September 19, 2006, 01:50:13 AM »
ReplyReply

RJones..

I hope I did not appear snide - please see the other thread going "Secret MF Forums" my 'snideness' was towards Edmond not yourself hopefully he understands in the context of that thread. You points are valid and stregthened by your linking

------------------------

Edmond

If you are thinking Mamiya have you considered the Pro TL series - so cheap you can have many spares.

With a Pro TL you get more robust lenses (cheaper)

With a Pro TL you can use the 70 Leaf shutter lense should you require high flash synch

With a Pro TL there is a F1.9 80 - the fastest MF lense I think

With Pro TL there is a 55 Shift lense

With PRO TL there is a 24 fish

I dont think any of that is true for the AFD series

OK you lose AF but center point AF is of limited value IMO anyway

---

But most important of all have you questioned canon experts in depth on gaining most skin tone from Canon?

Also your comp card appear to show catwalk images - how do you intend to focus with an MedoumFormat system in such an environment?
« Last Edit: September 19, 2006, 01:56:18 AM by Morgan_Moore » Logged

Sam Morgan Moore Cornwall
www.sammorganmoore.com -photography
eronald
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3859



WWW
« Reply #27 on: September 19, 2006, 07:11:07 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Edmund,

You mentioned getting some used AFD bodies. While I have not had any to directly compare with my AFDii, the AFD  reportedly has a slower AF than the 'ii' version and has a mechical trigger for the mirror lock up as opposed to the electronic trigger on the 'ii', plus a few other smaller differences. The AF difference seems to get the greatest comments, but you might want to research this aspect.

As I mentioned earlier, an F or FE 110/2.0 could be used on a Mamiya (or Contax too, I believe) with an adapter to give you an 85/1.4 (or HC 100/2.2) look. Used these go from 1100 to 1800 (F's are less; FE's are more). The Fotodiox adapter is < 100. Of course, this is manual focus. With this adapter, you can use any Hasselblad lens (C, CF, CFi, CFE, F, FE) except HC models.

Regards,

Robert

Edited: after reading snide comments from those who cannot respect someone's writings without knowing their background, I can provide a detailed CV on request (maybe we should post our GPAs and degrees too, for proper respect, of course). For snapshots to prove that I can click a shutter please see http://www.e-photoart.com/
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=76882\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Yes, I was thinking of the fact that a reserve "obsolete" AFD body could be got reasonably now. If I had an all-in one like the ZD, the first mechanical body failure would leave me with a problem - also mechanical body repair is pretty easy over here, while an all-in one like the ZD is a more delicate beast that needs to be shipped back to the manufaturer for any surgery. French cuisine is pretty good, local tech support pretty bad.

As for people who ask about why I want to take an MF digital out of the studio to the street, it's because I want the file quality when I get back. I also took a Hasselblad to the street when film was still there. To people who remark that I might not find MF suitable for catwalk, I say - we'll see. If it's not, I'll just use Canon for that. Or maybe my camera phone  

Edmund
Logged

Edmund Ronald, Ph.D. 
eronald
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3859



WWW
« Reply #28 on: September 19, 2006, 07:48:16 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Edmond

If you are thinking Mamiya have you considered the Pro TL series - so cheap you can have many spares.

With a Pro TL you get more robust lenses (cheaper)

With a Pro TL you can use the 70 Leaf shutter lense should you require high flash synch

With a Pro TL there is a F1.9 80 - the fastest MF lense I think

With Pro TL there is a 55 Shift lense

With PRO TL there is a 24 fish

I dont think any of that is true for the AFD series

OK you lose AF but center point AF is of limited value IMO anyway

---

But most important of all have you questioned canon experts in depth on gaining most skin tone from Canon?

Also your comp card appear to show catwalk images - how do you intend to focus with an MedoumFormat system in such an environment?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=76900\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Does a 645 back mount on the ProTL. ?

I lways use AF center point exclusively. I've looked at the 645 focus, it seems good enough for what I do.  In fact it seems to hunt less than the Canon with the lenses I use today. I like the MF finders.

Re. the Canon skin tone, colors, and retouching, I'm afraid I am one of the canon experts and I certainly have talked at length with others about this. The files can be fixed up to a point, but not perfectly - I think it's a consequence of design decisions.

Edmund
« Last Edit: September 19, 2006, 07:48:55 AM by eronald » Logged

Edmund Ronald, Ph.D. 
awofinden
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 173


« Reply #29 on: September 19, 2006, 09:08:47 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Does a 645 back mount on the ProTL. ?

I lways use AF center point exclusively. I've looked at the 645 focus, it seems good enough for what I do.  In fact it seems to hunt less than the Canon with the lenses I use today. I like the MF finders.

Re. the Canon skin tone, colors, and retouching, I'm afraid I am one of the canon experts and I certainly have talked at length with others about this. The files can be fixed up to a point, but not perfectly - I think it's a consequence of design decisions.

Edmund
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=76929\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
You certainly are Edmund and I've often read and apreciated your expert advice in regards to colour. If I can give you a little general advice with regards to medium format digital, although it can be a pain for all of the obvious reasons there is no doubt in my mind, after using both a 22mp back and canon for quite a long time, the medium format files are, to me, superior. Although it can be quite hard to quantify the difference, the files are "thicker" and more imediate and textured. I think someone mentioned that the clients are fine with canon files, and they all seem to be, but of course whoever shoots thinking, I guess this is "good enough for the client" is on a long road to mediocrity. Only by pleasing yourself will you ultimately please the client and I think you'll find that you please yourself a whole lot more a back. Good luck with it, I have apreciated all the advice you have given us, I hope my advice is usefull to you.
-andrew
Logged
eronald
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3859



WWW
« Reply #30 on: September 19, 2006, 12:46:30 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
You certainly are Edmund and I've often read and apreciated your expert advice in regards to colour. If I can give you a little general advice with regards to medium format digital, although it can be a pain for all of the obvious reasons there is no doubt in my mind, after using both a 22mp back and canon for quite a long time, the medium format files are, to me, superior. Although it can be quite hard to quantify the difference, the files are "thicker" and more imediate and textured. I think someone mentioned that the clients are fine with canon files, and they all seem to be, but of course whoever shoots thinking, I guess this is "good enough for the client" is on a long road to mediocrity. Only by pleasing yourself will you ultimately please the client and I think you'll find that you please yourself a whole lot more a back. Good luck with it, I have apreciated all the advice you have given us, I hope my advice is usefull to you.
-andrew
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=76934\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Andrew,

 I agree with your statement - the files I've seen from the backs just look better color-textured., although Leaf and Phase seem to have a very different personality. Also, what's the point of spending so much time teaching myself to see color and process color if I then take pictures with lousy color ?

Thing is, everybody here realizes that consumer cameras have spiffed-up color, but many don't seem to notice the ways in which the pro cameras are biased. With the original 1Ds, Canon made a device that could do studio work. Use tons of light and no overexposure, and it records lots of colors and texture in the midtones and beautiful medium skin tones and texture, with a signature flared-out look in the quarter tones and noisy shadows, and pretty harsh burnt out highlights which need strong retouching. The 1Ds has to be exposed on the nail, likes lots of light,  and it works well with strong and controlled studio flash.

The 1DsII, 1DII and 5D seem to be different beasts - they can be used in good or bad light, short or long exposure, and with mobile flash in the marriage market, and the bride's dress won't get flashed out, but the fine texture in high-key skin tones is -in my hands-on experience-  often unrecoverable, with a characteristic "clingfoil" look, and the shadows have texture and less noise, they are colorful but a bit harsh Also, the burnt out highlights need less work. I hate it for people, but it's wonderful for things - and I've sometimes used it with modelling lights alone or weak incandescents to good effect.

So far I've owned a Nikon D1x, a 1Ds, a 1DII and a 1DSII, and seen the results here first-hand. I've also assisted a commercial photographer using a 5D, who is a very good very detail-oriented guy, and I can see the new Canon "signature" in every file he sends me for comment - and this guy is good. Another portrait photographer could see the issues, he contacted me and showed me the way he fixed the files, he has worked really hard at it, and we played around with his tricks, going to the length of creating our own film curves from intuition, measured data and manufacturer's published data - but there are some files which just break when I try to do it.

 What I fear is that as Hasselblad and others move back into the marriage/paparrazi market they will make similar adjustments to their own cameras to accomodate their evolving use base - better to have lots of clients getting usable imagery with approximate exposure than having a fussy camera that gives a few clients very good results. Think of it as color negative film succeeding Ektachrome succeeding Kodachrome, each easier to use and intended for a widening userbase. We've now reached the stage where the 35mm pro cameras are like Ektachrome, and I think the next batch will be like color negative film.

 Basically each camera is like a new fim box - you have to try it so see whether you like it, and there are situations when using the wrong film will make one work very hard in post. At the moment I'm shopping for a new film.

Edmund
« Last Edit: September 19, 2006, 12:56:37 PM by eronald » Logged

Edmund Ronald, Ph.D. 
Morgan_Moore
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2206


WWW
« Reply #31 on: September 19, 2006, 02:20:17 PM »
ReplyReply

Edmond

"Does a 645 back mount on the ProTL. ?"

As far as I know Eyelike/Sinar

"I lways use AF center point exclusively. I've looked at the 645 focus, it seems good enough for what I do. "

You may use center point on your DSLR which has more Depth of field typically

With MF it is my experience FOR MY KIND WORK (which tends to be pretty close with open apertures) that say for a mid length portrait with an 80 to focus on the tee shirt will render the face wildly out of focus - this may not matter for YOUR KIND OF WORK becuase you may not use those lenses or apertures

For close up portrature focusing and recomposing also does not work as the 'triangluation effect' of recomposing renders an OOF image

Shooting on a tripod and trying to focus and recompose is also a liability

The added resolution of an MFDB when stepping from DSLR  also makes you reconsider 'what is a sharp image'

You start to see camera shake and focus errors an a scary way !

I think the myth of the MF DSLR is pretty much that  - a myth - it is just very hard to record that much detail hand held and fast

I implore you to test any MF back significantly and in depth in exactly the situations you use before purchase

---------------

Today I shot for 9 hours - food and interiors - maybe Im just a loser - but how did I ensure really sharp images - I used a tripod and shot tethered - checking focus on my laptop - so instead of using an H1  I may as well have been using a second hand screenless MFDB mounted on a second hand PRO TL or chaep Hassy - the lenses are less clinical too  - had I shot handheld the movement and focus errors would have shown unless I had down ressed the file size to that of a Canon (or maybe D70!) - AND we had to shut the location and lose the customer sales while I trawled around with my Dog and Pony show - IT will be worth it if the client moves this job to posters or advertising A3 or larger


--------------

This is the story of RG..

I took some still lives in the shops studio or some quick portraits of the sales man - it all seemed fine

Then I took it on a job.. clients - pressures - speed - crashes - workflow - the keeper image was not sharp ect ect

I admit to coming from the perspective of the harrased client pleaser trying to make a living (from brochures and glossy mags -  not selling fine art)

There is no finer experience than enjoying an MFDB outside of those pressures

And the files are absolutely better there is no debate in my eyes
« Last Edit: September 19, 2006, 02:47:30 PM by Morgan_Moore » Logged

Sam Morgan Moore Cornwall
www.sammorganmoore.com -photography
eronald
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3859



WWW
« Reply #32 on: September 19, 2006, 02:56:33 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Edmond

I implore you to test any MF back significantly and in depth in exactly the situations you use before purchase

[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=76970\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

It's impossible to  disagree with such advice.

I was very interested in the Leica DMR as a poor man's digital back - unfortunately a quick comparison test showed me that although image quality was superior I couldn't focus the R8/R9 system reliably with the fast lenses I intended to use, and the viewfinder didn't inspire me.

That was the end of it.


Edmund
Logged

Edmund Ronald, Ph.D. 
rljones
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 90


« Reply #33 on: September 20, 2006, 10:40:47 PM »
ReplyReply

Edmund,

645AFD backs do _not_ mount on Pro TL or any other Mamiya manual focus body, nor vice versa.

There are no electronic contacts for the TL series for digital backs. The Leaf backs mount either on V-Hassy and RB bodies OR Mamiya AFD (and the AFDii) and RB bodies, but not both. (I do not know about P45 backs; maybe their web site has details).

Any manual focus lens will work on the AFD + digital back while showing focus confirmation. The confirmation is active by pressing the shutter release about 1/2 way. You can hold this position and monitor when the subject hits your pre-focused plane and release. There are triangles on either side of the circle that indicates proper focus; these triangles show which side of the focus plane your subject is on (or which way to move the focus ring).

No shuttered lenses work on the AFD bodies as they do on the Pro TL bodies (unless you raise the mirror first). But it doesn't sound like this feature is so important for you.

-Robert
Logged
Pages: « 1 [2]   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad