MF Digital Reliability - Ready for Prime Time?

[ricm]

I'm seriously contemplating the move from scanned film into a full dig workflow via an MF back. My primary application is world travel in extremely remote locations. DSLRS seem to have proven themselves in demanding conditions and are viable options to film SLRs. However, after reading various postings on LL and elsewhere I have doubts about MFDBs. I realize that those that are unhappy with their purchases tend to be the most vocal and those that are content quietly tend to their art.

So, I'd like to ask working photographers their candid, gut level feelings regarding the current state of MFDB reliability - how confident are you when you set out with your MFDBs and power up? Specific to the current level of this technology, is reliability, or lack there-of, a serious concern for you? Is this an expected and/or accepted downside of MFDB ownership? Although I do carry a back-up body, I'm not in a financial position nor would I want to schlep a back-up MFDB. I guess I could carry the usual stash of film as a backup but then why even spring for a MFDB?

Convenience, speed, dynamic range, color palette, dig vs. film debate, yada, yada, aside - is the MFDB a reliable imaging device or, for many of you, a necessary evil? Has the MFDB industry truly arrived?

Thanks,

Rick Murai
______________________

www.richardmurai.com

[flashfredrikson]

Hi Rick,

as a Phase shooter I can tell I like those backs for their ruggedness and in four years I only saw one back go down. But this is what happens. As with every electronic device the day will surely come when the back stops working. In my case it was a P30 and from one day to the next the back didn't recognize the batteries any more so I had to power it from the laptop and luckily I had 5 MacbookPro batteries with me which safed the day.
So for longer trips to remote locations I would always recommend to bring a backup system, but this is where it gets complicated. Especially for your kind of work where I think you would not want to compromise on quality, a Canon (which I think is most peolples backup) or a smaller and cheaper back can't be the way to go. Of course you can always bring some rolls of film, but you are right, what's the benfit then? You would still have the problems with x-rayed film and all that stuff.

Long point short, I will never trust one back alone, from my point of view you have to go the expensive way. Also thinking hardrives, camerabodys, laptops...

cheers,
martin

[Mort54]

So, I'd like to ask working photographers their candid, gut level feelings regarding the current state of MFDB reliability - how confident are you when you set out with your MFDBs and power up?

Phase One backs are as reliable as they come - I wouldn't worry about them. I can't speak for other backs tho. I don't feel the same way about the available camera bodies, however. The bodies just don't strike me as being very reliable. I've never had my Mamiya AFD II fail on me, but it feels like it could at any time. It just doesn't feel as mechanically robust as my Nikons. Maybe it's just a perception problem on my part.

For hiking and going off the beaten path, I'm seriously considering switching over to an Alpa 12TC body. It's small and light weight and is just a slab of metal, so there's nothing on the body to fail. One less thing to worry about.

[James R Russell]

I'm seriously contemplating the move from scanned film into a full dig workflow via an MF back. My primary application is world travel in extremely remote locations. DSLRS seem to have proven themselves in demanding conditions and are viable options to film SLRs. However, after reading various postings on LL and elsewhere I have doubts about MFDBs. I realize that those that are unhappy with their purchases tend to be the most vocal and those that are content quietly tend to their art.

So, I'd like to ask working photographers their candid, gut level feelings regarding the current state of MFDB reliability - how confident are you when you set out with your MFDBs and power up? Specific to the current level of this technology, is reliability, or lack there-of, a serious concern for you? Is this an expected and/or accepted downside of MFDB ownership? Although I do carry a back-up body, I'm not in a financial position nor would I want to schlep a back-up MFDB. I guess I could carry the usual stash of film as a backup but then why even spring for a MFDB?

Convenience, speed, dynamic range, color palette, dig vs. film debate, yada, yada, aside - is the MFDB a reliable imaging device or, for many of you, a necessary evil? Has the MFDB industry truly arrived?

Thanks,

Rick Murai
______________________

www.richardmurai.com
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=207837\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Medium format can be challenging and somewhat slower than a dslr, but with the Phase backs I've never had a back go down.

This isn't a commercial for Phase, because anything can break, but we use the P30 and the P21 plus backs very hard and the only glitch is battery use, as the Contax and Plus series backs won't go a full day on one charge the way we shoot, but then again we shoot into the 1,000's of frames a day.

Anything can break, every project of importance (personal, editorial or commercial) must have backups.

A lot of this depends on how you shoot and work a file in post production.  

For me the benifit in a back vs. a dslr isn't in the pixel numbers, but the depth of the file.  You can work a medium format file much harder and deeper than a dslr file.

I assume some of this is just realtive size, or bit depth, I think a lot of it is the lack of an aa filter.

It just looks different.

This will obviously bring up 200 posts of why one system is better than the other (regardless of format) but I didn't move to the Phase backs because of money, or file size.

I moved to them because the software was stable and to date my backs have been solid.

Also because shooting compressed high or compressed low, the files go straight into almost any 3rd party processor without conversion or de compression.

At the rate we shoot, anything that can simplify post workflow is a huge benifit.

As far as cameras, the Contax's are the strongest camera I've ever used, film or digital.

I have 4 backups and never needed them.

JR

[jecxz]

Rick,

With MFDB, think backup systems for other components too - laptop, data, power, etc... Any element in a work flow can fail - consider each element and figure out how you would continue shooting if that element fails. Good luck.

Kind regards,
Derek

[ruraltrekker]

I think going extremely remote with a MF system is going to be hard. I find even the 1Ds series & a few lenses to show it's weight. I find that when I go remote, even slightly remote, the less crap to get in the way the better - just a body, just enough battery, a few lenses, a light weight tripod & a bunch of cards. Remember, when possible, stitching becomes your best friend. When the gear gets in the way, even a little, the pictures suffer. At least in my experience.

Ken

[Juanito]

MF is definitely ready for primetime. It's really a matter of whether it's appropriate for what you're doing. I'd never go to any remote location without backup so, if you're not going to take another MF system, then you need a small format system for backup. Unless you're not worried about weight, space and cost, it's probably not worth the hassle of carrying both systems.

You also need to think about the subject matter. If all you're doing is shooting landscapes, then MF is great, but if you're going to shoot the locals on the street, you'll have much better results with small format. And what about the conditions? Extreme cold, wet weather, dust, sand, heat etc don't play well with electronics and the MF systems are nowhere near as protected as something like the Canon 1d series.

Unless I had a very specific reason for shooting MF digital, I'd leave it at home. But you should test it out to see if it's going to work for you.

John

[Dustbak]

I take my Nikons when I go remote.

I have never had any back going down on me in the last 5 years. I have used Leaf (C-Most/Valeo/Aptus) and Hasselblad (Ixpress/CF). All backs are just extremely reliable up to the point I dare to go out and just take one (I know someday I will be punished for that   )

My Aptus always felt more rugged and reliable than my CF does but sofar that has only been a feeling without actual substantiation (which is not unimportant I find).

I have been living on a ship sailing the North Atlantic for 2 years (over 5 years ago), the only thing that survived that ordeal was my D1x. If I would be testing a MFDB that would be the ultimate test, anything that will survive a 2 year ocean voyage can probably take everything else as well .

[Don Libby]

I’m home in Tucson after driving over 10,000 miles to Alaska and back.  During this trip I drove many miles on unpaved, unimproved roads (Alaskan Highway and Dalton Highway for example) took two separate bush planes to areas that I couldn’t drive to, in all this time I had my Mamiya AFDII and P30+ with me.  The camera was either sitting on a seat or in my lap (confession time – I forgot to bring the camera up to the front and the camera actually took a slight tumble, this was in Montana towards the very end of the trip).  I shot in all types of weather ranging from cold rainy to just hot humid.  In all that time I had absolutely no problems that were caused by the camera or back (human error did come into play).

Before this trip I’ve taken the same setup with me when I was shooting the South Rim of the Grand Canyon in December – very cold with a heck of a lot of snow both on the ground and falling; again no problems that wasn’t caused by human error.

is the MFDB a reliable imaging device
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=207837\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

– my answer is yes.

don

[Bill Caulfeild-Browne]

I'm seriously contemplating the move from scanned film into a full dig workflow via an MF back. My primary application is world travel in extremely remote locations. DSLRS seem to have proven themselves in demanding conditions and are viable options to film SLRs. However, after reading various postings on LL and elsewhere I have doubts about MFDBs. I realize that those that are unhappy with their purchases tend to be the most vocal and those that are content quietly tend to their art.

So, I'd like to ask working photographers their candid, gut level feelings regarding the current state of MFDB reliability - how confident are you when you set out with your MFDBs and power up? Specific to the current level of this technology, is reliability, or lack there-of, a serious concern for you? Is this an expected and/or accepted downside of MFDB ownership? Although I do carry a back-up body, I'm not in a financial position nor would I want to schlep a back-up MFDB. I guess I could carry the usual stash of film as a backup but then why even spring for a MFDB?

Convenience, speed, dynamic range, color palette, dig vs. film debate, yada, yada, aside - is the MFDB a reliable imaging device or, for many of you, a necessary evil? Has the MFDB industry truly arrived?

Thanks,

Rick Murai
______________________

www.richardmurai.com
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=207837\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I took my AFD II and P45+ around the world in Jan/Feb. Cold and damp in London, hot and damp in Singapore, very hot and humid in Sydney, cool and unusually rainy in Tasmania with salt spray from the ocean, very hot and dry in Western Australia (with blowing sand in Pinnacles desert) and quite temperate in Hong Kong. This was all outdoor photography. Absolutely no problems (apart from user error!) of any sort at all.

And when I got back to a Canadian winter...more of the same.

Bill

[ricm]

I’m home in Tucson after driving over 10,000 miles to Alaska and back.  During this trip I drove many miles on unpaved, unimproved roads (Alaskan Highway and Dalton Highway for example) took two separate bush planes to areas that I couldn’t drive to, in all this time I had my Mamiya AFDII and P30+ with me.  The camera was either sitting on a seat or in my lap (confession time – I forgot to bring the camera up to the front and the camera actually took a slight tumble, this was in Montana towards the very end of the trip).  I shot in all types of weather ranging from cold rainy to just hot humid.  In all that time I had absolutely no problems that were caused by the camera or back (human error did come into play).

Before this trip I’ve taken the same setup with me when I was shooting the South Rim of the Grand Canyon in December – very cold with a heck of a lot of snow both on the ground and falling; again no problems that wasn’t caused by human error.

 – my answer is yes.

don
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=207951\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Hi Don and Bill,

Glad to hear of your trouble-free excursions.

Just wondering - if any, what backup(s) did you have at your disposal?

Rick

[Don Libby]

Hi Don and Bill,

Glad to hear of your trouble-free excursions.

Just wondering - if any, what backup(s) did you have at your disposal?

Rick
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=207959\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Rick

Not sure I’d call it a back up but I also had a 1Ds II as well.  

My reasoning for saying the above is that the 1Ds II was there for wildlife only, plus the only lens I had for it was a 400 DO with both 1.4 and 2x extenders.  

I shot all my landscape with the Mamiya and experimented with wildlife if they were standing still.

don

Edit:  Also had a Canon G-9

[michael]

Same experience here, including a Kodak DCS Pro Back, Phase One P25, P45 and P45+. Antarctica, Africa, jungles, deserts, rain, snow... not a problem, ever.

Backup? A second body and a film back, but I stopped carrying the film back because after the same 10 rolls of Provia 100 went though X-rays about 30 times I trashed them. Now I carry a small DSLR as backup and for more casual shooting

Michael