Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 2 [3] 4 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Why A MF forum, when it sucks ?  (Read 20026 times)
Mark_Tucker
Guest
« Reply #40 on: September 10, 2007, 05:48:53 PM »
ReplyReply

For what it's worth, the viewfinder image on the 1ds2 is larger than the viewfinder on the Contax 645. The viewfinder image on the Hasselblad H is larger than Contax, but it's distorted in the corners. Who knows, the 1ds3 viewfinder image might even challenge the size of the Hassie H series.

I'm having fun disputing all the hype about medium format; the list of folklore is long. Yet, after all that, I'm shooting my Phase/Contax every day and loving it.
« Last Edit: September 10, 2007, 05:58:48 PM by Mark_Tucker » Logged
espressogeek
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 98


« Reply #41 on: September 10, 2007, 09:04:50 PM »
ReplyReply

Horses for courses, I just have found that my style and desires in photography are taking me towards the MF course.

If I loved sports and PJ I would be taking a different course.
Logged
nicolaasdb
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 213


WWW
« Reply #42 on: September 10, 2007, 09:25:20 PM »
ReplyReply

Okay Dutchie.....

I LOVE MY MFDB......A LOT!!!!.....I THINK AND KNOW IT IS BETTER THAN MY DS1MKII

But sometimes I feel the need for speed and got to got to got to DO IT with my canon!

But really who cares what others say or think!! If you see the difference that should be enough.

I see the difference...so I am with you! Bu then again I am Dutch to..eventhough I HATE the Netherlands and the people living in this shitty country...except for my parent of course!! BUT that is my personal opinion! So don't start a tread about this!!LOL
Logged
rinderart
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 15



WWW
« Reply #43 on: September 11, 2007, 12:06:27 AM »
ReplyReply

As A very long time shooter with every format, I look at peoples work before I put to much credence in there words. Nuff said.  How about a used 4X5 a few good lenses and a great new epson scanner. About $2000 total. More Mega pixels than any company will have in 20 years. Im talking landscapes and such of course.
Logged
pixjohn
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 672


« Reply #44 on: September 11, 2007, 12:17:45 AM »
ReplyReply

Not True, The cost of Film, processing and Polaroid I paid my digital back and camera off with 18 months of digital capture fees.

Quote
As A very long time shooter with every format, I look at peoples work before I put to much credence in there words. Nuff said.  How about a used 4X5 a few good lenses and a great new epson scanner. About $2000 total. More Mega pixels than any company will have in 20 years. Im talking landscapes and such of course.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=138566\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Logged
rinderart
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 15



WWW
« Reply #45 on: September 11, 2007, 12:29:22 AM »
ReplyReply

and 600 hours in post, I would be out of business. But,I understand, Im just talking Quality here, Not numbers of shots or anything like that. This is not a fashion rig. Just another tool in the box. But, were talking HUGE quality here Not 39MP for $30,000. Huge Bit depth, Monster prints. Whole other world. Problem is it doesn't look real cool hanging around your neck. Your friends wont go OOO and Ahhh . Always something. My old hassy 501 with a Vback P45 works pretty good for the other stuff and so does my D2X. Im just talking Big MP and big prints with Major sharpness. for $2000, My job is products. Thats it. Back to you guys.
« Last Edit: September 11, 2007, 12:30:43 AM by rinderart » Logged
vgogolak
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 337


WWW
« Reply #46 on: September 11, 2007, 11:46:31 AM »
ReplyReply

Not to change the subject, but I need a Contax 645 55mm 3.5 for my set (35 to 80mm too big a jump

will pay premium for extra clean glass. If it works well body cosmetics unimportant to me

thx
Pls pass the word. I have had good luck buying from colleagues here

regards
Victor
Logged
AndreNapier
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 422


WWW
« Reply #47 on: September 11, 2007, 06:32:30 PM »
ReplyReply

Why MFD?

Because I like to make strong and lasting impression in the eyes of my models.
Shot this Sunday.
http://AndreNapier.com[attachment=3220:attachment][attachment=3221:attachment]
Logged
H1/A75 Guy
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 230


« Reply #48 on: September 11, 2007, 07:28:13 PM »
ReplyReply

Actually, this to me would be the fairest MFD/DSLR shoot out. To see which system gets the cleanest photog image in the pupil. Andre, is that a 100% or 200% blow up? Looks soft.


Quote
Why MFD?

Because I like to make strong and lasting impression in the eyes of my models.
Shot this Sunday.
http://AndreNapier.com[attachment=3220:attachment][attachment=3221:attachment]
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=138757\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Logged
rinderart
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 15



WWW
« Reply #49 on: September 11, 2007, 07:43:41 PM »
ReplyReply

Nice shot , great website and wonderful work. The lips are what draws my attention. Maybe your not done with it yet but there badly cracked. None of your other models have that issue, I teach retouching so I could be to critical. Nice work though, Mostly your personal stuff.
« Last Edit: September 11, 2007, 07:44:43 PM by rinderart » Logged
paulhu
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 50



« Reply #50 on: September 12, 2007, 01:13:45 AM »
ReplyReply

I recently upgraded my H1D to H3D-31, but not having a chance to test the new equipment yet.

Captured with H1D and HC 50-110mm lens:
[attachment=3222:attachment]
« Last Edit: September 12, 2007, 01:15:03 AM by paulhu » Logged
tomholland
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 32


WWW
« Reply #51 on: September 12, 2007, 09:17:41 PM »
ReplyReply

I think the dslr only shooters are missing the point. MF has a big beautiful viewfinder, if you have spent most of your career composing photos with a big bright screen to see with, the switch to a dslr would be a major change on how someone works and very disappointing. Also with only a 1/250 sync speed on dslrs, a location shooter who uses flash is left (with compared to the new sinar and leaf cameras) two stops less of flash sync speed. Lastly MFdb files have more meat on them for tweaking, see how much you can crank contrast via curves and how far you can take a blue sky without noise issues on a mfdb file compared to a dslr file. The extra 8 grand is worth it.
Logged

SecondFocus
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 463


WWW
« Reply #52 on: September 12, 2007, 11:11:19 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Why MFD?

Because I like to make strong and lasting impression in the eyes of my models.
Shot this Sunday.
http://AndreNapier.com[attachment=3220:attachment][attachment=3221:attachment]
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=138757\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Superb images on your website Andre!!
Logged

Ian L. Sitren
SecondFocus
jing q
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 594


WWW
« Reply #53 on: September 13, 2007, 02:51:36 AM »
ReplyReply

just to add in...just did a shoot with my 75s last weekend...lovelovelove the meatiness of the images now
I push my curves quite strongly so it's an real eyeopening to have so much more colour information now before the image posterizes.
« Last Edit: September 13, 2007, 03:09:42 AM by jing q » Logged
Morgan_Moore
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2217


WWW
« Reply #54 on: September 13, 2007, 03:11:26 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
just to add in...just did a shoot with my 75s last weekend...lovelovelove the meatiness of the images now
I push my curves quite strongly so it's an real eyeopening to have so much more colour information now before the image posterizes.
image
100%
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=139080\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I think when fooling heavily whith curves the 16Bit attribute really starts to show as a major positive for MFDBs

jing - your work makes me laugh - a very good thing

S
Logged

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

Posts: 536



WWW
« Reply #55 on: September 13, 2007, 03:28:31 AM »
ReplyReply

The argument that using a  MFDB is more creative as they slow you down dosn't cut it. put a 5d or any other 35mm dslr on a big tripod with a geared head, attach a ts-e lens to it, tether it to a computer and you have very slow. of course having it in green mode with a standard zoom attached handheld lacks all the conrol you might need or wish for, but it gives you a spontaneity which is near impossible with a large MF camera.
Logged

-------------------------
WWW.RANDLKOFER.COM
Graham Mitchell
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2282



WWW
« Reply #56 on: September 13, 2007, 05:04:17 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
How about a used 4X5 a few good lenses and a great new epson scanner. About $2000 total.

Assuming the $2000 figure is true, that's before you take your first photo. Film is MORE expensive than digital. Why do you think digital took off before the quality even compared to film?

I live in a country without a 5x4 film retailer and I'm not sure about development. So I'll look at UK prices:

1 pack of 10 sheets of 5x4 film: ~$40 (Robert White)
Development, per sheet: ~$4.50 (The Vault)

So the cost of shooting just 1000 images per year is $8,500 and that doesn't include the cost of many trips to the lab and back, and many hours spent scanning, etc. Clearly this gets expensive quickly. I shoot more like 10,000 images per year. Ouch.

Quote
More Mega pixels than any company will have in 20 years. Im talking landscapes and such of course.

Well some people have already compared a 39MP digital back to 5x4 film and there isn't a big difference. Scanning backs are already up to 139MP - ahead of 5x4 quality. I'm fairly confident that the next jump up from 39MP in one shot backs (60MP?) will match 5x4 quality, and it won't take 20 years to happen.
« Last Edit: September 13, 2007, 05:05:17 AM by foto-z » Logged

Graham Mitchell - www.graham-mitchell.com
Graham Mitchell
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2282



WWW
« Reply #57 on: September 13, 2007, 05:07:04 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
I think the dslr only shooters are missing the point. MF has a big beautiful viewfinder, if you have spent most of your career composing photos with a big bright screen to see with, the switch to a dslr would be a major change on how someone works and very disappointing. Also with only a 1/250 sync speed on dslrs, a location shooter who uses flash is left (with compared to the new sinar and leaf cameras) two stops less of flash sync speed. Lastly MFdb files have more meat on them for tweaking, see how much you can crank contrast via curves and how far you can take a blue sky without noise issues on a mfdb file compared to a dslr file. The extra 8 grand is worth it.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=139047\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Agreed
Logged

Graham Mitchell - www.graham-mitchell.com
vgogolak
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 337


WWW
« Reply #58 on: September 13, 2007, 06:14:41 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
just to add in...just did a shoot with my 75s last weekend...lovelovelove the meatiness of the images now
I push my curves quite strongly so it's an real eyeopening to have so much more colour information now before the image posterizes.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=139080\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Very good example. nice catch. It shows me  a real spaciousness in the full shot that none of the DSLR example have, and of course, the crop

But you all know that. Instead, look at how effortlessly the trees in background are defined.

A bit saturated for me, but no sharpening artifacts to get the clean outlines.

If you tell me that was really a 5D, I will eat,..... well no, maybe I will ask Graham to eat it

:-)

BTW Graham has excellent points from someone who really exploits MF.

regards
Victor
Logged
jklotz
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 32


WWW
« Reply #59 on: September 13, 2007, 07:07:31 AM »
ReplyReply

Interesting discussion, I'm enjoying it. I've got a Contax 645, Cambo Wide DS (w/ P25) and a 5D. They all have very different looks to them, I'd hate to be limited to just one, particularly the 5D. When it comes to perspective control, I've tried most of the Canon solutions, and let me tell you, nothing comes close to large format lenses and a digital back. Like the Brits say, horses for courses....

On a side note, in the last 2 weeks, I've been on 2 different jobs where the art director (2 different art directors) pulled out a 5D and started taking snaps to evaluate composition, etc. Sure was glad I could pull out something a little more "professional" looking.
Logged

Pages: « 1 2 [3] 4 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad