Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1] 2 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: wait for canon 1Ds MIII or get leaf aptus 17  (Read 8038 times)
tqphoto
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 2



WWW
« on: September 12, 2007, 12:54:46 AM »
ReplyReply

hello my fellow medium format lovers.  i am new to this forum and need help help help.  ive been doing the research and now im stuck.  first of all i just bought the nikon d2xs.  the noise was so bad i bought noise reduction software.  i emailed nikon and they agreed they had noise.    so after a life time of nikon im done.    i also shoot contax film 645..... THE QUESTION IS:  for fashion editorials (11x14)(studio and location), which in your opinion has proven to have less noise, more sharpness, and an overall yummyness?Huh?  the new canon or the leaf back?
Logged

Tania Quintanilla
www.tqphoto.com
Dustbak
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2372


« Reply #1 on: September 12, 2007, 01:04:40 AM »
ReplyReply

I have no experience with the Canon (how could I). I do use an  A17. I am very pleased with it . Steady and very stable platform, gorgeous files.

It is comparing apples and oranges.

I would opt for the A17 however I rarely need AF speed, I rarely work on high ISO (The A17 only goes to ISO400 and is really 'grainy' which I happen to like BTW).

Do you use the Contax often and often with WA, in that case would the A22 make more sense.

I have chosen to use MFDB as my main platform and have Nikon DSLR as a backup (currently D200 and maybe later D3 as well). I take the Nikon under less than perfect circumstances or when I need a fast AF or High ISO (even when the Nikon is not as good as eg. the 5D).

Under good circumstance the A17 is very sharp, even sharper than my CF39. My A17 does not need sharpening! (my CF39 does).

The colors of the A17 are very lovely, more exuberant than my CF39 (my Nikon makes me want to cry so I don't even compare that).

At ISO200 to ISO400 under good light the A17 produces files that are definitely not clean but have a nice 'grainy' appearance which I happen to like (but others might regard it differently). Under ISO 100 files are very very clean. I certainly like the ISO25! I miss it in the CF39.
« Last Edit: September 12, 2007, 05:09:11 AM by Dustbak » Logged
Morgan_Moore
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2221


WWW
« Reply #2 on: September 12, 2007, 01:53:38 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
hello my fellow medium format lovers.  i am new to this forum and need help help help.  ive been doing the research and now im stuck.  first of all i just bought the nikon d2xs.  the noise was so bad i bought noise reduction software.  i emailed nikon and they agreed they had noise.    so after a life time of nikon im done.    i also shoot contax film 645..... THE QUESTION IS:  for fashion editorials (11x14)(studio and location), which in your opinion has proven to have less noise, more sharpness, and an overall yummyness?Huh?  the new canon or the leaf back?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=138791\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Unless you can formulate a really good reason why you dont want the canon wait for the canon.

Reasons could be

Flash sysch

ergonomics

look of lenses

S
Logged

Sam Morgan Moore Cornwall
www.sammorganmoore.com -photography
yaya
Guest
« Reply #3 on: September 12, 2007, 02:02:35 AM »
ReplyReply

Welcome on board Tania!

Take a look at Yuval Hen's work, mostly done with an Aptus 17 on an RZ

enjoy

Yair
Logged
Graham Mitchell
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2282



WWW
« Reply #4 on: September 12, 2007, 05:05:27 AM »
ReplyReply

There is no right or wrong answer.

If you need high ISO and high frame rate, the Canon it is.

If you want maximum image quality (due to better looking files and better lenses), go with the Leaf. Unfortunately the Contax doesn't offer some of the advantage of the other MF platforms when it comes to large viewfinder and high flash sync speed.
Logged

Graham Mitchell - www.graham-mitchell.com
Camdavidson
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 164


WWW
« Reply #5 on: September 12, 2007, 06:12:42 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
hello my fellow medium format lovers. i am new to this forum and need help help help. ive been doing the research and now im stuck. first of all i just bought the nikon d2xs. the noise was so bad i bought noise reduction software. i emailed nikon and they agreed they had noise. so after a life time of nikon im done. i also shoot contax film 645..... THE QUESTION IS: for fashion editorials (11x14)(studio and location), which in your opinion has proven to have less noise, more sharpness, and an overall yummyness?Huh? the new canon or the leaf back?
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


Tania,

The new Nikon D3 has stellar low-light capabilities and from examples shown, extremely low-noise.  It is a full-frame chip.  If you own a stable of Nikon glass, and enjoy shooting 35mm, I would suggest waiting for the D3 to arrive in Novemember.

Please take a look at this preview  [a href=\"http://www.robgalbraith.com/bins/content_page.asp?cid=7-8742-9083](Nikon D3 Preview)[/url] on the Rob Galbraith site.

I've seen a couple of files from the D3 and it is very impressive.  Very clean with exceptional color.  I would lay money down that Nikon will have an answer to the 1Ds III within a few months.  The quality of the files from the D3, from everything I've read and heard from people who have tested the camera, is that they are , truly amazing.  Nikon just released some new samples images.  Follow this link to take a look at them.  Nikon D3 Sample Images

I switched to Canon from Nikon a few years ago, and it took me a couple of  months to become comfortable with the system.  I would test or rent the Canon before making the decision to switch away from Nikon.

The Aptus 17 is an older generation back.  If you are going to make the switch to MF digital, I would talk to Steve Hendrix in Atlanta about Aptus backs or Dave Gallagher at Capture Integration about Phase Backs.  Yair is a wealth of knowledge about all models of the Leaf (plus a good guy) - he may be able to direct you to a dealer.
« Last Edit: September 12, 2007, 06:25:37 AM by Camdavidson » Logged
Frank Doorhof
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1524


WWW
« Reply #6 on: September 12, 2007, 06:14:43 AM »
ReplyReply

If you want ABSOLUTE best in IQ go with the LEAF.

If you want high-iso, speed etc. go with Canon.
For me (fashion glamour) MF is the best choice.
The image are razor sharp and the dynamic range is stunning.
Logged
Aboud
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 132


WWW
« Reply #7 on: September 12, 2007, 06:37:42 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
hello my fellow medium format lovers.  i am new to this forum and need help help help.  ive been doing the research and now im stuck.  first of all i just bought the nikon d2xs.  the noise was so bad i bought noise reduction software.  i emailed nikon and they agreed they had noise.    so after a life time of nikon im done.    i also shoot contax film 645..... THE QUESTION IS:  for fashion editorials (11x14)(studio and location), which in your opinion has proven to have less noise, more sharpness, and an overall yummyness?Huh?  the new canon or the leaf back?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=138791\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Hi Tania,

I have a contax 645 with a Phase One P25 back (a near full frame for 645 format) and it produces amazing images. It is a 22 mgpx unit as will be the new Canon III. The difference is the same as in film, the larger sensor, even with the same megapixel count, will give you a better image. The question for you is the write speed of the back, the P25 may be too slow for your fashion shots. There are other backs from Phase One, as well as Leaf that you could consider. I am sure one of them will work well for you. Another bonus with Phase One is that you can buy a refurbished back with a good warranty and save several thousand dollars. Depending on your financial strength there is another thing to consider. If you buy the new Canon, at about 8K, and I assume you will need to buy serveral lenses, you may get close to the cost of the refurbished Phase One back. Either way, this is going to be an expensive decision. Finally, if you aren't making images larger than 11X14, why not consider a used Canon 5D. You'll get a sensor big enough for your print size and the speed and portability of the 35MM format.

The attached image was taken with the Contax 80MM Phase One P25 at 400 ISO by available light.
Logged
Ken R
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 533


WWW
« Reply #8 on: September 12, 2007, 07:49:22 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
hello my fellow medium format lovers.  i am new to this forum and need help help help.  ive been doing the research and now im stuck.  first of all i just bought the nikon d2xs.  the noise was so bad i bought noise reduction software.  i emailed nikon and they agreed they had noise.    so after a life time of nikon im done.    i also shoot contax film 645..... THE QUESTION IS:  for fashion editorials (11x14)(studio and location), which in your opinion has proven to have less noise, more sharpness, and an overall yummyness?Huh?  the new canon or the leaf back?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=138791\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

For fashion the new Nikon D3 should do quite nicely, but, its has yet to ship. Of all the Canon cameras id pick the Canon 5D and or the 1DsMk3 when available. Most fashion photographers use the 1DsMk2, specially for editorial work. Of the medium format cameras the hasselblad H system is the best for fashion due to the high flash sync capability. Its widely used with a variety of backs but its a very expensive system.
Logged
Frank Doorhof
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1524


WWW
« Reply #9 on: September 12, 2007, 08:09:18 AM »
ReplyReply

Biggest problem with the Nikon I find is the native ISO200.
What happens when you boost to ISO100, if the highlights are exposed for ISO200 you will run into some problems with flashwork in the studio or outside if you want to use wider apertures.
Logged
Graham Mitchell
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2282



WWW
« Reply #10 on: September 12, 2007, 08:58:20 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Of the medium format cameras the hasselblad H system is the best for fashion due to the high flash sync capability.

The Rollei 600x or Sinar Hy6/Leaf AFi all sync up to 1/1000. The Hass H only goes up to 1/800, iirc.
Logged

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

Posts: 507


WWW
« Reply #11 on: September 12, 2007, 10:43:53 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Most fashion photographers use the 1DsMk2, specially for editorial work.

I used the Canon 1DsII for 2 years, about 34,000 clicks. The way I work in fashion - pretty fast - it was the only good choice for me in January 2005.

It is, in many ways, the best camera I ever used.  Obviously everything is a compromise - my second choice would be the 6x7 film Mamiya 7II, but that was hard to focus in dim light, a rangefinder, limited close focus (1 meter), etc.

I have made stunning 24x36 inch, 2/3 body, fashion images without sharpening or rezzing up from the 1DsII (native rez at about 167dpi I think.)  I sharpened the eyes and lips, then I had to go back and do a lot of retouching on lips (MUA mistakes), gaussian blur on arms for fine hairs, etc. on a near perfect 20 year old model.  For people, there is a limit to the usefulness of extra resolution.    

Would a MFDB be better? Yes, no question. Would it fit my working style? No. Fast work, lots of location, street work, both lit and natural light, etc. Do I still want one? Yes, of course!!!  


Quote
Depending on your financial strength there is another thing to consider. If you buy the new Canon, at about 8K, and I assume you will need to buy serveral lenses, you may get close to the cost of the refurbished Phase One back. Either way, this is going to be an expensive decision.

I am going to start another thread to try to get some information on the true cost of a MFDB soon.  For the Canon, I can give you some detail.

First, the true cost is the annualized real world depreciation (not your *tax* depreciation) after you sell.  Purchase price + repairs + warranty - sale price.

For example, I bought my 1DsII for $7,880 shipped in January 2005. I sold it in February 2007 for about $4,900 after Ebay fees, etc. So call it an even $3,000 for 2 years.

So my annual cost of usage for the 1DsII was $1,500 a year.  Compared to the $5,000 I averaged on film & developing per year for personal projects - ignoring commercial use - it was a bargain!!  

(That comes to $.10 per frame.  For comparison, color 35mm film for me is about $.33 bper frame, 6x7 $1.00, 4x5 $4.00 for film & developing.)

If you buy clean *used* Canon lenses they will retain almost 100% of their retail value!  So essentially you are *borrowing* the lenses and putting down a deposit.  I prefer to buy new, because the used cost with Paypal fees and shipping is so close to new, especially with triple rebates, etc. I have used Canon (plus Nikon, Mamiya, Pentax, Toyo, Cambo, etc.) for 30 years. I don't think lenses have ever cost me anything!  I do have about $10K invested in glass, but I could easily get that down to $3K if needed.

As I said, I would like to post a thread and try to get real world depreciation costs on some MFDB's.  That is really valuable information needed to make a good business/financial decision (beyond the technical.)  Unfortunately there are a lot of variations in backs, but there should be enough info to predict.  Canon prices are fairly stable and easier to predict.  

(Also, FWIW: My total cost to own a Canon D30, 10D, 20D, and 30D, after sales, is about $600 in depreciation - total, for all 5.)

Good luck!  Nice thread too folks - back on track!    

Best,
Michael
Logged
oscar falero
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 58


« Reply #12 on: September 12, 2007, 12:26:18 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Hi Tania,

I have a contax 645 with a Phase One P25 back (a near full frame for 645 format) and it produces amazing images. It is a 22 mgpx unit as will be the new Canon III. The difference is the same as in film, the larger sensor, even with the same megapixel count, will give you a better image. The question for you is the write speed of the back, the P25 may be too slow for your fashion shots. There are other backs from Phase One, as well as Leaf that you could consider. I am sure one of them will work well for you. Another bonus with Phase One is that you can buy a refurbished back with a good warranty and save several thousand dollars. Depending on your financial strength there is another thing to consider. If you buy the new Canon, at about 8K, and I assume you will need to buy serveral lenses, you may get close to the cost of the refurbished Phase One back. Either way, this is going to be an expensive decision. Finally, if you aren't making images larger than 11X14, why not consider a used Canon 5D. You'll get a sensor big enough for your print size and the speed and portability of the 35MM format.

The attached image was taken with the Contax 80MM Phase One P25 at 400 ISO by available light.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=138849\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Tania,

These forums seem to provide a great deal of information as well as confusion.  Seems like every thread here in LL has some comparison over MF or DSLR since the announcements from Canon and Nikon in recent weeks. If they were more affordable then most people would have the luxury to own both and pull out the best tool for the job.

This image of a P25 at 400 should does not do any good to prove the merits of choosing MFDB over DSLR. The P25/45 and even Aptus 17 asa 400 is practically useless in commercial applications unless ugly grain and color noise is what you're after in your fashion editorial work. Had this image been shot againsnt a dark color wall we would probably not seen it posted. Look at the man's jeans. A similar at asa400 shot with a 5D, 1Ds, D3 would probably look better. Does that mean their better-not necesarily.

I shoot with a Phase P45 and Canon 1Ds. The P45 is my first choice when shooting below asa200 with good light, but for fashion and lifestyle where capturing people in movement, in mixed or low light then the Canon 1Ds MK2 or 5D is often the best choice. For still life and crontrolled lighting then the MF would serves me better in addition to interior work. This is not like the film days when 35mm was inferior in quality but more versitile than MF. Todays DSLRs in the hands of a good photographer can at times produce better images than with MF film.

Thing only way to be sure would be to test these two systems in your normal work environment.  In other words a REAL JOB. This rental fee would be a good expense to teach you on what is best for Tania and the type work you and your clients demand.
« Last Edit: September 12, 2007, 02:15:35 PM by oscar falero » Logged
eronald
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 4208



« Reply #13 on: September 12, 2007, 02:01:48 PM »
ReplyReply

I have never heard of a photographer who didn't find a use for a 5D  Warning, though, a new model will probably be out soon. Probably teh same is true for the new Nikons.

Don't take this as criticism of the backs, I like them, but they're less universal.

Edmund
« Last Edit: September 12, 2007, 02:03:32 PM by eronald » Logged
pss
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 960


WWW
« Reply #14 on: September 12, 2007, 02:54:24 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
hello my fellow medium format lovers.  i am new to this forum and need help help help.  ive been doing the research and now im stuck.  first of all i just bought the nikon d2xs.  the noise was so bad i bought noise reduction software.  i emailed nikon and they agreed they had noise.    so after a life time of nikon im done.    i also shoot contax film 645..... THE QUESTION IS:  for fashion editorials (11x14)(studio and location), which in your opinion has proven to have less noise, more sharpness, and an overall yummyness?Huh?  the new canon or the leaf back?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=0\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

i went from a 1DsmkII to a leaf valeo 17 (same chip as aptus17 but with external storage, no screen,...) to a P20! and now a P30......shooting MF will give you a cleaner file (at base speed), more DR, much more room to tweak the files in post processing and much sharper files, partly because of the backs, partly because of the lenses....the new canon/nikon will get closer to that but the lenses will be the same, the 14bit will give you more room to play in PS and the extra resolution a little more room to crop.....
for my type of work, i would take any MF back over any DSLR....i don't need high shooting speed or high asa, i like WLF and MF lenses let me keep the sharpening slider off most of the time....i don't mind the obvious handling disadvantage (i shoot RZ and just sold my 645 mamiya)....
i find the P20 a steal for the money....the P21 looks amazing as well, both are in the canon price reach....i find the phase files cleaner and with lightroom they have a great film look....this is very personal and many might disagree...
you can contact me if you have any questions...
Logged

Jonathan Wienke
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5759



WWW
« Reply #15 on: September 12, 2007, 03:22:20 PM »
ReplyReply

If you shoot primarily in studio with strobes at low ISO, and your budget allows, a MF system is probably the way to go. But if you shoot action stuff (fashion shows, etc. where being able to shoot quickly is necessary to avoid missing a shot while the back is recycling) or shoot on location where ambient lighting requires ISO higher than 200. At ISO 1600, the Canon will be far cleaner than any file from any MF back. And the Canon shoots in frames per second, not seconds per frame. The best tool depends on the shooting conditions.

The new Nikon may be worth considering as well; someone just posted a link to sample images in one of the other forums here.
Logged

eronald
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 4208



« Reply #16 on: September 12, 2007, 04:22:53 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
If you shoot primarily in studio with strobes at low ISO, and your budget allows, a MF system is probably the way to go. But if you shoot action stuff (fashion shows, etc. where being able to shoot quickly is necessary to avoid missing a shot while the back is recycling) or shoot on location where ambient lighting requires ISO higher than 200. At ISO 1600, the Canon will be far cleaner than any file from any MF back. And the Canon shoots in frames per second, not seconds per frame. The best tool depends on the shooting conditions.

The new Nikon may be worth considering as well; someone just posted a link to sample images in one of the other forums here.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=138971\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

In my experience, the problem in fashion shows isn't shooting quickly, it's shooting continuously over 20 minutes or so - often you need to shoot each dress, and if you hit the buffer you're dead.

Edmund
Logged
Jonathan Wienke
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5759



WWW
« Reply #17 on: September 13, 2007, 08:45:19 AM »
ReplyReply

OK, maybe I wasn't the clearest in the way I worded it. If it's acceptable to make the action wait on the camera, or there is no action, MFDB is probably the best choice. If it is not acceptable or possible to make the the action wait for the camera (fashion show, wedding, horse show, sporting event, concert, etc), a DSLR is probably a better choice.
Logged

samuel_js
Guest
« Reply #18 on: September 13, 2007, 03:20:36 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
the P21 looks amazing as well, both are in the canon price reach....i find the phase files cleaner and with lightroom they have a great film look....this is very personal and many might disagree...
you can contact me if you have any questions...
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I agree. I hear a lot ot people saying the P45 is very noisy at 400, almost unusable. I haven't seen the files but my P21 looks very nice even at ISO 800. Very film-like.
I just posted a few P21 images in [a href=\"http://luminous-landscape.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=19486]this thread[/url].
Logged
digitalcameraman
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 67



WWW
« Reply #19 on: September 14, 2007, 08:59:13 AM »
ReplyReply

Tania:

I think you should rent a camera and you will find out right away what works for your type of imagery. Nice images and a nice site. I have been selling high end digital cameras for 15 years now. I have a Phase One Test Studio in Florida where photographers come and are able to test variuos cameras in a new high tech fashion studio. Take a look at Jorge Alvarez's work www.alvarezphoto.com. I have consulted Jorge since he went digital 6 years ago. He started with slower cameras at that time and recently switched from Phase One P25 to P21 Plus because of the speed. He can now shoot 2 shots to his older P25. So the P25 can be too slow for fashion if you do not change the speed in which you like to shoot. He thinks that there were many times when he saw the image he wanted to shoot through the viewfinder and he could not because the camera was not ready. Not any more. He sometimes out shoots his strobes in the studio now.I have seen these images enlarged to 12 feet in some of the new Venus retail stores around the US. You may also see Jorge's work at www.Venus.com. The is no comparision when you see the depth of color and sharpness when compared to 35mm.  He shot over 250,000 captures on his P25, then got a loaner P21 until the Plus arrived. He shot 21,000 captures on that back, he now has the P21 Plus and he is just amazed at the quality of the preview screen. If you would like to get some P21 files or speak with many of the professionals I have set up in Florida with the P21, please send me an email off line. I will be glad to make the introduction for a reference.

Good Luck,


Chris Snipes
Image Productions, Inc
www.imageproduction.com

Phase One Digital Camera Backs
Phase One Test Studio Florida
Phase One Mobile Production and Support Vehichle
Logged

Chris Snipes
Business Development Manager
Calumet Photo
1001 N Federal Hwy
Fort Lauderdale, FL 33304
chris.snipes@calumetphoto.com
813-335-2473 Cell
Pages: [1] 2 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad