Luminous Landscape Forum
Equipment & Techniques => Medium Format / Film / Digital Backs – and Large Sensor Photography => Topic started by: eronald on September 17, 2006, 08:15:03 am
-
I want to use MF digital on the go. I tend to carry my camera everywhere, with fairly little protection. I use it for fun shooting (travel, street, portrait, available light) and in occasional high-use bursts for fashion (flash) and runway (tungsten and available daylight) . The fun stuff sometimes gets sold as art prints, the other stuff goes to press.
So I'm shopping for a system with a really good viewfinder, high ISO ability, tough body and tough back that can be transported like an SLR. The Canon 1Ds pretty much fits the bill and gives me good skin tone, except I want a better viewfinder and even better files at ISO 400-800.
I like the Mamiya AFDII. Also it seems cheap enough that I can get lenses and a second body if one fails or is worn out. The new Hasselblad doesn't quite appeal to me. The problem now is finding a back I can afford that works with it and is physically robust. Aptus has a nice look to the files I've seen, but Phase seems tougher and better integrated (and no fan).
What are the opinions of people who use Leaf and Phase backs on the go ? Is the Mamiya AFDII tough enough for such treatment ? Whatever I use needs to be able to be dropped in a daypack, wrapped in a T-shirt. Hard cases are not an option.
Edmund
-
Dare I say it but if you're going to put 20k worth of camera and back through what you describe that you might want to just stick with the Canons.
-
H1 & P25 is as tough as old boots. You can stand on a P series back apparently (stunt performed by rep at a photoshow). It's all modular and pretty hardy. H1 body with prism went for £735 on ebay last week in 'as new condition' (Item number: 290029308612) so should be fairly cheap to replace should the worst happen. There are a lot of H1's out there at the moment. I think Hasselblad are offering deals on the integrated H2D leaving H1's redundant.
P25s are reputedly going for £7000 as factory refurb units from main dealers. There are a lot around now as catalogue companies, fashion houses and photographers have upgraded to P45. That makes the H1 & P25 about £8500 complete with standard lens in excellent condition. ZD is £7k inc VAT.
It's never been better time to buy MF digital. The difference is worth the effort. My kit lives in and out of my Billingham. Dust on the sensor is really easy to remove. The sensor is smaller than the lens image circle yet twice the size of Canon 1DS and the extra definition especially at the edges really shows. The H1 zoom is not as tough as you would need it to be. It is very heavy and suffers barrel loosening as a result.
Damien
-
I had an H1, 50-110, and Aptus 75 knocked over on a tripod 5 feet to a concrete floor. The Pocket wizard snapped off near the base. The smaller connector plate holding the A75 to the H1 (the one at the top where the spring loaded hook connects) was ripped from the A75. Leaf received the back via Fedex, replaced the screws, recalibrated to sensor, and shipped it back via Fedex in 2 or 3 hours. The pocket wizard has been gone (to the same Mac Group building in New York I think) for 3 weeks.
I have only tried this once, but everything else still works perfectly. The areas of the sensor and electonics in the Aptus 75 are said to be sealed off from the Fan/air circulation area.
-Eric
-
Edmond,
I sold my H2 system and bought a AFDii. I did this mainly because of the weight (H2 stuff is 30-50% heavier). I also tested some of the lenses and felt there was no sacrifice in going to Mamiya. (I further think the bokeh is better with Mamiya, but that's maybe a personal thing.) The HC zoom is a monster, better suited to a studio than schlepping around. So from what you describe, the Mamiya sounds better for you in terms of travel. (BTW, while you didn't ask, the Contax 645 weighs about the same as the Hassy stuff.)
The price, as you've observed, is significantly less with Mamiya. You can buy many of the wide angles for $300 to $500, or pick up a used AF 300/4.5 APO for less than $1500, and even the manual focus 300/2.8 APO (preset use only) can be bought for relatively little money (the 2x-N converter was made for the 300/2.8 APO and yields a 600/5.6 with _amazing_ resolution wide open at f5.6). This 600/5.6 combination can be found for less than $3k; nothing similar for H2.
The Leaf back integrates well with the AFDii. I don't know how the P45 works with the AFDii, probably just fine (I think Cramer is using one with his AFD). If you later get a ZD, all Mamiya AF lenses will work.
As far as throwing the equipment around, I think Mamiya will be fine, and if you do need a replacement lens, a used one will be less expensive than a used Hassy HC. My guess is that a ZD might take rough treatment a bit better than the AFDii/back combo if only because of fewer parts. However, if you go with a ZD, you might not be much further ahead of whatever Canon replaces the 1Ds2 with. If the replacement is a 22MB, the Canon might be a better option for you as all of your present EOS lenses will work the same.
I went with the Leaf 65 (only about 2mm smaller in each dimension, but thousands of dollars less than the Leaf 75). I look at removable backs as a more desirable option. I also have an Alpa for their wide angle capability, so switching a Leaf 65 from the Alpa to the AFDii will give me greater flexibility, and means the ZD or an improved Canon is less useful to me.
Regards, Robert
-
I carry my P25/500cm around in my day pack all the time. Wrap it in a big lens wrap and go. It'll even fit in my LowePro Slingshot 100, the little teeny one with another lens and battery.
If you can swing the 20K+ price of a MF back, it would be foolish not to have it insured. Some of us prefer working on a MF system, and the look of the 16-bit files. Most times when I'm out on the street shooting people assume I'm using an old-school camera. My 1Ds attracts more attention. The notion of "keep it in the studio" doesn't work for me. After all I've gone through to afford a MF back, the notion of not using it where and when I want seems rather absurd.
-
After all I've gone through to afford a MF back, the notion of not using it where and when I want seems rather absurd.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=76706\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Way to go, Eric !
Eric, Damien -
I've been looking at the Hasselblad HC lens prices - they're enough to make me faint ! I think I'd end up with only the standard 80 if someone threw that at me for free. All HC lenses seem to have impossible $3K price tags.
In comparison, the Mamiya stuff looks fairly cheap, it would give me an AF camera that can be shot like an SLR, which is not the case of the remaining option, the Hasselblad V system. I just wish there was a fast 100 to 150 mm lens there. Oh, there's one more possibility, I can hear James muttering "Contax" in the background
Robert,
What's the focal length multiplier on the Aptus/Mamiya combo ? Have you tried using the 800 ISO ?
Edmund
-
So I'm shopping for a system with a really good viewfinder, high ISO ability, tough body and tough back that can be transported like an SLR. The Canon 1Ds pretty much fits the bill and gives me good skin tone, except I want a better viewfinder and even better files at ISO 400-800.
I like the Mamiya AFDII. Also it seems cheap enough that I can get lenses and a second body if one fails or is worn out. The new Hasselblad doesn't quite appeal to me. The problem now is finding a back I can afford that works with it and is physically robust. Aptus has a nice look to the files I've seen, but Phase seems tougher and better integrated (and no fan).
Edmund
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=76666\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
[/quote]
Take a look at this Aptus 17 on ebay from a good seller Item number: 130028136985 .The price is around 7300.00 USD.
Also my favorite lens is the 55-110 4.5 zoom. You can pick these up on ebay in the 700 to 900.00 USD range.
Thanks Denis
-
I shoot with a Phase back in everything...rain, snow. cold, wind, dust, humidity. it goes in my backpack in the colorado high country. I shot with it for 6 days in the olympic rain forest and it rained every single day--all day. (I used a kate rain cover but the back still got very wet). I've fallen in a stream with it too and bumped it on a rock. i'd go with phase. Eleanor
-
Edmund,
The focal length multiplier for the Leaf 75 (and P45) is 0.72 and for the Leaf 65, 0.78. That is, an 80 on the APDii behaves like 0.72 x 80 on 135 format, or 58 mm, while on the Leaf 65, it is like a 62 mm.
The Leaf 75/P45 are 36 x 48 mm sensors; the Leaf 65, 34 x 44 mm.
Good AF lenses are 45, 80, 120 macro (floating elements, APO, goes 1:1), 150 and 300/4.5 APO. The 55 and 210 are very good too. The 35 is pretty good, but I've not yet tested it. I can give more details if you're interested.
Robert
-
Edmund,
The focal length multiplier for the Leaf 75 (and P45) is 0.72 and for the Leaf 65, 0.78. That is, an 80 on the APDii behaves like 0.72 x 80 on 135 format, or 58 mm, while on the Leaf 65, it is like a 62 mm.
The Leaf 75/P45 are 36 x 48 mm sensors; the Leaf 65, 34 x 44 mm.
Good AF lenses are 45, 80, 120 macro (floating elements, APO, goes 1:1), 150 and 300/4.5 APO. The 55 and 210 are very good too. The 35 is pretty good, but I've not yet tested it. I can give more details if you're interested.
Robert
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=76728\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I usually image almost everything with my 85/1.2, with occasional recourse to a 24mm shift. I guess This would mean that on a Mamiya I would be using the 120 macro most of the time,.
I wonder whether I'll get the blur/bokeh which is the point of the exercise, when shooting at F4.
thank you for the information, I will arrange to test the 120. What annoys me a bit is the 3 1/2 stop differential, I feel I shall have to use at least 400 ISO much of the time, possibly 800 or 400 underexposed by one stop.
I'm starting to understand James infatuation with the Contax.
Edmund
-
I assume you are shooting available light because of the high ASA you are listing. If this is the case then .... because of the longer equivalent focal lengths (moving from an 85 to a 120), heavier camera, smaller wide apertures (moving from 1.2 on your 85 to F 2.8 or 4 on your 120), and a bigger mirror slapping around, I would venture a guess that you will not achive the same level of sharpness on a MF system that you could achieve with a Nikon or Canon.
I try to shoot with my ALPA 12SWA handheld (No moving parts). With the 35mm lens (very wide) at 1/60 I am suprised again and again that the images are not critically sharp. The 33mp sensor I am using might as well be 12mp so that the camera shake would only be smearing the detail across 1 pixel instead of 3.
With strobe lit fashion/advertising, or tripod mounted architecture this is not an issue. If you could get some real world shooting time with the system you decide upon you could find your expetations will shift.
Good Hunting,
Eric
-
Edmond,
With the larger sensors, MF lenses behave in terms of DOF as if they were 1 f-stop larger. That is, the DOF at f2.8 on MF is like an f2.0 on 135 format. Also, since the lenses are longer, the DOF shallower, focusing anything more open than f2.8 becomes more difficult.
The Mamiya 150/3.5 is very sharp. I've taken handheld head and shoulder portraits at 1/30 f3.5, with a Kodak DCS 645M (16MB) back, a will show facial pores when enlarged, if that's what you're after. At f3.5 eyeglass and eyes are in focus and ears are very blurry with background wonderfully fuzzy.
However, if you want to duplicate your 80/1.4, you can buy a used f-series Hassy 110/2.0 with a Fotodiox adapter (run about $80 on eBay). This will give you an 80/2.0 equivalent on a Leaf75/P45 with an effective DOF about like an 80/1.4. This adapter forces you to use the lens in stopped down (preset) fashion, but if you're shooting wide open, its a moot point.
I recently compared the Zeiss CFE 120/4 makro on an adapter on the AFDii against the Mamiya AF 120/4 macro. All comparisons were on a tripod, using an older Kodak DCS back at ISO 100, all images processed the same in Raw Developer.
The Mamiya was slightly sharper and had more contrast than the Zeiss at the closest focusing point of the Zeiss (1:4.5 ratio). However, the background blur of the Zeiss was as if it was shot f-stop more open. I added an extension tube to the Zeiss and re-shot both at a closer distance; Mamiya was sharper, but not by much. At infinity focus, the Mamiya was decidedly superior.
You mention Contax. AF is slower and the viewfinder is dimmer than the AFDii (I compared this with Mamiya before selling my H2). Besides, if get the Zeiss 350mm (the 210 is supposedly a dog; so you go from 140 to 350), this lens weighs as much as the AFDii body and the Mamiya 300 APO combined. You talked ealier about traveling, so weight becomes an issue.
Here are some data regarding mass for all three systems (focal length on left, weight in grams on right):
Mamiya 645AFDii
body/finder/back - 1430
35 - 480
45 - 480
55 - 430
80 - 300
120 - 845
150 - 540
210 - 720
300 - 1430 (1240 without tripod collar)
55-110 - 870
105-210 - 990
Contax 645
body/finder/back - 1530
35 - 880
45 - 825
80 - 530
120 - 800
140 - 680
210 - 1220
350 - 3610
H2
body/finder/back - 800+330+475=1605
35 - 975
55-110 - 1650
80 - 475
120 - 1410
150 - 970
210 - 1320
300 - 2120
As for shift lenses, the there is nothing as wide as a 24mm for MF unless you go with an Alpa/Horseman. The 35XL with the Leaf/P45 is about like a 25mm, but you have no tilt like the Canon 24, but a much better lens (at a hefty price).
Regards, Robert
-
I agree that the 50-110 Hassy is a beast in size and weight but boy it is by far the best zoom lens I have ever used. It is tack sharp even wide open at f4. It is comparable to the 120mm macro HC at distant shooting. mark
Edmond,
I sold my H2 system and bought a AFDii. I did this mainly because of the weight (H2 stuff is 30-50% heavier). I also tested some of the lenses and felt there was no sacrifice in going to Mamiya. (I further think the bokeh is better with Mamiya, but that's maybe a personal thing.) The HC zoom is a monster, better suited to a studio than schlepping around. So from what you describe, the Mamiya sounds better for you in terms of travel. (BTW, while you didn't ask, the Contax 645 weighs about the same as the Hassy stuff.)
The price, as you've observed, is significantly less with Mamiya. You can buy many of the wide angles for $300 to $500, or pick up a used AF 300/4.5 APO for less than $1500, and even the manual focus 300/2.8 APO (preset use only) can be bought for relatively little money (the 2x-N converter was made for the 300/2.8 APO and yields a 600/5.6 with _amazing_ resolution wide open at f5.6). This 600/5.6 combination can be found for less than $3k; nothing similar for H2.
The Leaf back integrates well with the AFDii. I don't know how the P45 works with the AFDii, probably just fine (I think Cramer is using one with his AFD). If you later get a ZD, all Mamiya AF lenses will work.
As far as throwing the equipment around, I think Mamiya will be fine, and if you do need a replacement lens, a used one will be less expensive than a used Hassy HC. My guess is that a ZD might take rough treatment a bit better than the AFDii/back combo if only because of fewer parts. However, if you go with a ZD, you might not be much further ahead of whatever Canon replaces the 1Ds2 with. If the replacement is a 22MB, the Canon might be a better option for you as all of your present EOS lenses will work the same.
I went with the Leaf 65 (only about 2mm smaller in each dimension, but thousands of dollars less than the Leaf 75). I look at removable backs as a more desirable option. I also have an Alpa for their wide angle capability, so switching a Leaf 65 from the Alpa to the AFDii will give me greater flexibility, and means the ZD or an improved Canon is less useful to me.
Regards, Robert
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=76691\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
-
The one HC lens thats missing from the chart is the only one you need. 100 f2.2 is as small as the standard lens, very compact , designed to work wide open and will give the closest look to match your 85 f1.2
The 210 f4 is amazing wide open too but if you need long glass then the 300 and 2 times is available at a price.
My 120 is currently on ebay as I've ordered a 100 f2.2 and I'll sell my 80 too once the 100 arrives. My 120 is currently at $1000 and I hope will fetch $2k. I expect my 80 will fetch about $1k. Look, now I've made a second hand market :-)
Damien.
--
-
The one HC lens thats missing from the chart is the only one you need. 100 f2.2 is as small as the standard lens, very compact , designed to work wide open and will give the closest look to match your 85 f1.2
Damien.
--
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=76807\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Robert -
Thank you for your information.
Damien, that is also my opinion - the 100mm lens is the one I'd need to use.
But a $3K for the lens, several K for the body etc, and the sticker price for the back, Mamiya is looking more appealing every minute. Here things are still measured in hundreds rather than thousands.
Last not least, I really like the Hasselblad V series somehow, but the new one doesn't feel nice to me, and feel is important.
Edmund
-
The Mamiya is such good value all round. Does it produce 16 bit files oozing with quality? I've yet to hear anyone who is convinced. I haven't been aware of bad reports either, I've only seen the output of dodgy pre production versions.
I bought my kit 2 years ago and got a deal that saved me about £14K. I couldn't get that kind of deal again but I think the price point of MF is about right. It is worth noting that I still get inspired just holding the H1. A tingling in my veins and a pasion in my work is enhanced by using the right kit for me. - Be led by your heart!
Damien.
-
The ZD would seem to be intrisically un tough
a failure of the mirror or shutter would render the back inoperable
mechanical failure is the highest risk so keeping your chip in action is most likely acheived by having a chip seperable from the camera
owning two bodies is an option to many of us
owning two 22mp or above devices is not so likely
----
Owning three canons is even tougher again
I long ago decided that 2 d200s are far tougher than one D2x
-
The Mamiya is such good value all round. Does it produce 16 bit files oozing with quality? I've yet to hear anyone who is convinced. I haven't been aware of bad reports either, I've only seen the output of dodgy pre production versions.
Damien
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=76837\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Damien, Morgan
I am thinking of the AFD II body, not the ZD, add a back for quality and stir The probable failure point is then the body, and original AFD bodies are going really cheap these days on eBay.
As for Canon and focus, yes it's a constant fight. One thing you MUST do is get rid of all lens filters, they interfere with the AF on the luminous lenses.
Edmund
-
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
-
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, 180f2.8) 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...
-
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] (http://index.php?act=findpost&pid=76853\")
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 (http://www.gioiadesign.com/gallery/index.html)
Edmund
-
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
-
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
-
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
-
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/ (http://www.e-photoart.com/)
-
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?
-
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/ (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
-
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
-
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
-
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
-
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
-
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
-
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