Luminous Landscape Forum
Equipment & Techniques => Medium Format / Film / Digital Backs – and Large Sensor Photography => Topic started by: ToddP on December 09, 2013, 03:20:16 pm
-
Yep, first post. Anyway, here goes... I must say I have practiced some restraint searching for (and not buying) the first system that seems like a good deal. I have been wanting to take the Medium Format plunge for a while now, and as I get closer to pulling the trigger on a system, my head starts to spin at the choices, marketing bamboozlement, image quality, crop factors, etc.
I shoot weddings as my main source of business and to support other things I like to photograph, which are people/lifestyle, a bit of food, and editorial work that can span the gamut. I shoot with a D3 and D800, with mainly fixed primes. I would like to start and transition away from weddings and do more commercial, editorial, and portraiture work. Instead of going all in like I normally do, I am trying to figure if a better move would be to start off with a smaller and/or older system to see if I really enjoy working with MF?
I've narrowed down the possibilities to a Phase or Leaf back. Now the marketing would have you believe that the Leaf backs aren't as amazing and rugged at a Phase, and maybe there's a bit of truth to that - but I am not going to be shooting in a rain storm, nor having people stand on the back itself. I am a touch concerned about it being a little bit more exposed than the Phase... but once again, maybe that's just marketing? There are most likely plenty of people still going strong with the Leaf backs. However, I don't know how thrilled I am about a little fan whirring by my face the whole time I shoot. Do I spend a bit more a get a Phase back that's silent? Hmmm.... Looking at the DM22/28 vs Phase P25+ or 40+ I am guessing the image quality is going to be similar with these backs, minus each manufacturer's rendering profiles.
I guess I am looking for some experience (I know... it's all subjective) to help me avoid buyer's remorse; but not in the way of wishing I hadn't bought a system in the first place - I want to avoid buying a system I am not completely thrilled with. It seems like the low end is around $6-$7K for a something along these lines, which is totally doable. But for a few thousand more, I can get... hehe... Here we go.
Thanks for any advice in advance.
-
First: Welcome aboard!
Now to your post:
Its very simple.
A single word.
Rent!
Tons of advice will follow in this thread and be found on these forums if you search a little, but in the end you will need to rent and test.
Most dealers will pay you back the rent price when you purchase if you talk to them ahead.
Cheers
~Chris
-
#1) Renting, especially from a dealer that can credit your rental towards a purchase is a great way to avoid buyer's remorse. I can't speak for all dealers, but that is something we do very frequently.
#2) In studio testing at a dealer, if you're near enough to a dealer to come for a few hours or have a trip coming up to a major photo city, is a no cost way to get some hands on experience with. Most of the specialized dealers will have no problem setting you up with some lighting, a small space to shoot in, and time to play. Or in your case, perhaps walking around the city and shooting, as that more closely emulates most wedding work than in-studio testing. This isn't as useful as #1, but useful none the less.
#3) Before you get to that point, working with a dealer that can provide raw files, from weddings, shot with the backs you're considering is another good way of doing your own analysis. This isn't as useful as #1 and #2 but it's still worth doing, especially to narrow down your options for when you do #1 or #2.
Working with a dealer also means you'll be getting a system with warranty and support/training. The former is nice because of the high cost of repair in medium format (remember the system you are buying for e.g. $7k used to cost e.g. $30k). Being new to medium format the later will come in handy, especially when it comes to Capture One, which will get the most out of your phase or leaf files.
-
+1
BTW, Leaf and Phase and Mamiya all seem to belong to Phase now.
I don't know how they can have so many models with so few sales.
Edmund
First: Welcome aboard!
Now to your post:
Its very simple.
A single word.
Rent!
Tons of advice will follow in this thread and be found on these forums if you search a little, but in the end you will need to rent and test.
Most dealers will pay you back the rent price when you purchase if you talk to them ahead.
Cheers
~Chris
-
As a wedding shooter myself (full disclosure, see my signature for my 9-5 job), who frequently uses medium format, the build quality of the back is important, but I think you might be over placing it's importance relative to other elements of performance and usability.
The P40+, especially when processed in C1, produces beautiful ISO1600 sensor+ files, something the Leaf backs can't come even close to. This means you can extend the use of the P40+ into parts of the wedding day which the Leaf back would have to go back in the day for.
To be clear, at nearly every wedding there are parts which are better shot with a dSLR, especially if you don't have a second shooter. Events like the "bride's bouquet toss" are too fast moving, and usually in too low of light, to justify medium format over a good dSLR. So at every wedding I have a MFD system, a dSLR, and a backup camera (as of recently this is a Fuji X-Pro 1).
But it's still nice that I don't have to put the MFD system away every time I walk around the corner to a slightly less bright environment.
Bride/Groom portraits are easy pickings for MFD:
(http://www.doug-peterson.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/414_05_Formals_Felicia-Steve.jpg)
ISO800
The "Details" shots are ripe for MFD (any back):
(http://www.doug-peterson.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/570_08_details_Felicia-Steve.jpg)
ISO50
And more spontaneous work is also absolutely possible with MFD, once you get dialed into the system:
(http://www.doug-peterson.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/203_03_Pre-Ceremony_Felicia-Steve-small.jpg)
ISO140
-
BTW, Leaf and Phase and Mamiya all seem to belong to Phase now.
I don't know how they can have so many models with so few sales.
Partly the appearance of having "so many models" comes from the fact that the backs break/die so infrequently that the pre-owned market is vibrant even SEVERAL generations back. We sell P non plus backs all the time, which were first made in 2004; I wager there is not as much activity selling used Canon 20Ds (also from 2004) in the pro market.
There are really only three "current" backs on the P1 side and three "current" backs on the Mamiya/Leaf side: IQ260. But they/we still sell a lot of IQ1, P+, P non plus, Aptus, and Aptus II backs.
But I, too, am sometimes surprised a the diversity of products in the high-end speciality market. Whether you're talking about the number of models of backs, or the number of brands that make tech cameras.
-
Partly the appearance of having "so many models" comes from the fact that the backs break/die so infrequently that the pre-owned market is vibrant even SEVERAL generations back. We sell P non plus backs all the time, which were first made in 2004; I wager there is not as much activity selling used Canon 20Ds (also from 2004) in the pro market.
There are really only three "current" backs on the P1 side and three "current" backs on the Mamiya/Leaf side: IQ260. But they/we still sell a lot of IQ1, P+, P non plus, Aptus, and Aptus II backs.
But I, too, am sometimes surprised a the diversity of products in the high-end speciality market. Whether you're talking about the number of models of backs, or the number of brands that make tech cameras.
I am surprised at the impressive quality of your wedding work!
Few dealers use what they sell.
BTW, I got an old used 400D, and it actually makes very good pictures for my purposes. I think people underrate the plastic fantastics of the consumer market, they are really well tailored to private use.
Edmund
-
All good suggestions - thank you everyone. Doug, I would definitely bring MF to my weddings, but the system would have limited use, unless the settings were ideal. Using all 1.4 glass and my Nikon bodies, my clients would be hard pressed to tell much difference. Plus, the focusing system on the D3 is hard to beat - only the D4 tops it, IMHO. I am interested in a system for location/editorial work like a couple of these images attached. With that in mind, high ISO isn't really a huge issue since a lot of my work is lit and controlled. I just want something that works when it has to and produces stunning results.
Studio testing doesn't really do me any good. It's just my personality. I need to take a camera for a serious test drive, and so renting would be the way to go for that. That being said, I've played around with the Phase DF+ IQ180 for 20 minutes or so, and tried some of the different lenses. It was fun, but difficult to really work it out in the parking lot of Bear Images :)
I've got a friend with a Contax with a 75s attached, so I will reach out to him for the good, the bad, and the ugly.
Again, thanks for the helpful suggestions.
Todd
-
Hi, for working on location (untethered) the PhaseOne IQ backs are superb. I own the IQ160 and although I mainly got it for landscape to use on a tech camera I have used it on a H1 and used sensor+ and works great (iso200-1600). The files are 15mp in sensor plus but look awesome. With the IQ180/280 they are 20mp in sensor+. The rear screen (lcd) in the IQ backs is also superb and the ability to check focus will give you a lot of confidence from day 1. Obviously the IQ backs are superb in the studio with strobes and for landscape and architecture (on tech cameras) so they are very versatile.
I also tried the Leica S and it is a superb camera and lens system. The lenses are superb and work great wide open (they are designed to). But the system is also very expensive and closed so no upgrade path other than changing the body. Also the sensor is not as big as the one in the phase 60 and 80 mp backs so the DOF is not as shallow on the Leica given equals. Also I really like the 4/3 frame of the phase backs.
Even with the smaller IQ140/P40+ backs you can get a really nice look in your images. Using medium format will alter your style a bit. It is slower to work with and not as convenient. I really like the larger viewfinder. If you have not used one rent a MF camera and test it out. Or go to one of the dealers, I'm sure they can arrange a demo for you.
-
All good suggestions - thank you everyone. Doug, I would definitely bring MF to my weddings, but the system would have limited use, unless the settings were ideal. Using all 1.4 glass and my Nikon bodies, my clients would be hard pressed to tell much difference.
As one of several difference that anyone could notice: On a DF+ with leaf shutter lenses flash sync at up to 1/1600 means fill flash can be done from great distance with a standard canon/nikon speedlight. This means you can shoot wide open for an outdoor portrait or during an outdoor ceremony from further (with longer lenses). In contrast in my experience the HSS setting on Canon/Nikon used to sync above their focal plane limit reduces the effective power of the flash so far that you can only shoot at close distances which means either you can't use fill flash or you have to be much closer to the subject.
Studio testing doesn't really do me any good. It's just my personality. I need to take a camera for a serious test drive, and so renting would be the way to go for that. That being said, I've played around with the Phase DF+ IQ180 for 20 minutes or so, and tried some of the different lenses. It was fun, but difficult to really work it out in the parking lot of Bear Images :)
I've got a friend with a Contax with a 75s attached, so I will reach out to him for the good, the bad, and the ugly.
IQ180 is not well suited for what you do. Too slow and needless resolution.
I think we're back to the advice you keep getting: rental. We (or other dealers) can ship you a back/body/lens for you to use in the real world for a few days. Then either you find you hate it and you spent a little money to find out you don't need to spend a lot of money, OR you find you love it and the rental cost is counted toward the purchase. A Contax, like any tool, can be used to make amazing images (see: BCs work) but in general it's not my #1 recommendation for a location editorial photographer who is just getting into medium format. Limited flash sync speed, availability of warranty/rental/repair being the two top reasons.
I think you'll also find some of the usability improvements of the Aptus II series to be advantages compared to the Aptus S series. Especially in light of the minimal difference in cost now between a new-with-warranty-with-support-from-dealer Aptus II 7 and a used-from-ebay Aptus 75s.
-
Good to know you have found Bear Images is local to you. Shooting with the IQ180 isn't a grand idea, as it's teasing you with megapixels most will never need, but it's extremely sexy to look at. Get a proper demo/rental setup and really dig into the details as to how you'd be shooting with one. Lots of refurb and used gear to select from, so figure out what your budget can afford, and have fun with it.
-
Yep, first post. Anyway, here goes... I must say I have practiced some restraint searching for (and not buying) the first system that seems like a good deal. I have been wanting to take the Medium Format plunge for a while now, and as I get closer to pulling the trigger on a system, my head starts to spin at the choices, marketing bamboozlement, image quality, crop factors, etc.
I shoot weddings as my main source of business and to support other things I like to photograph, which are people/lifestyle, a bit of food, and editorial work that can span the gamut. I shoot with a D3 and D800, with mainly fixed primes. I would like to start and transition away from weddings and do more commercial, editorial, and portraiture work. Instead of going all in like I normally do, I am trying to figure if a better move would be to start off with a smaller and/or older system to see if I really enjoy working with MF?
I've narrowed down the possibilities to a Phase or Leaf back. Now the marketing would have you believe that the Leaf backs aren't as amazing and rugged at a Phase, and maybe there's a bit of truth to that - but I am not going to be shooting in a rain storm, nor having people stand on the back itself. I am a touch concerned about it being a little bit more exposed than the Phase... but once again, maybe that's just marketing? There are most likely plenty of people still going strong with the Leaf backs. However, I don't know how thrilled I am about a little fan whirring by my face the whole time I shoot. Do I spend a bit more a get a Phase back that's silent? Hmmm.... Looking at the DM22/28 vs Phase P25+ or 40+ I am guessing the image quality is going to be similar with these backs, minus each manufacturer's rendering profiles.
I guess I am looking for some experience (I know... it's all subjective) to help me avoid buyer's remorse; but not in the way of wishing I hadn't bought a system in the first place - I want to avoid buying a system I am not completely thrilled with. It seems like the low end is around $6-$7K for a something along these lines, which is totally doable. But for a few thousand more, I can get... hehe... Here we go.
Thanks for any advice in advance.
I'm on the same boat as you. Gonna make my purchase very shortly; had a thread up here a few weeks ago and received a lot of good advice. I have since demoed some gear and these are my, very personal and subjective observations.
1) Build quality: The Leaf Aptus backs indeed have an exposed battery, some vents etc. so theoretically, they are less weather resistant that the Phase backs. Doesn't make them less rugged, though. The build quality is pretty tough.
Personally, I wouldn't shoot with any of these backs in harsh weather like one might do with a pro DSLR. I know there are people who have; just ain't my thing with so much money on the line.
The Aptus fans don't work all the time (At least, not when I was using one), but the backs do have a big honking beep when they start up!
2) Screen quality: Given your genre, you have similar requirements as me (Untethered, mostly. I do fine art, on location portraiture). I am not quite sure if the Phase P series backs have a screen good enough for this. The Aptus screens are low res by current day standards and somewhat dim, but they are indeed good enough for focus confirmation.
The Phase IQ and Leaf Credo backs are pretty much on par when it comes to build. The screen is awesome and you don't need to tether to confirm focus. They are also overall more responsive than the older gen backs.
I have no serious experience with Hasselblad gear other than handing one for a very short period of time, but they are a cost effective option to enter the MF field. The upgrade path isn't as easy as with Phase/ Leaf, though.
Lastly, do try to go for the DF+ body. I was pleasantly surprised at the AF performance. Yes, there are only 3 points (And let's be honest, only one is really usable), but it locks on pretty fast and is very accurate. The build did feel better than the old AF-D bodies.
I'd skip the V-Grip. It's needlessly overpriced and the build quality is on par with the $40 ebay grips for Canikon.
Good luck.
-
Shooting with the IQ180 isn't a grand idea, as it's teasing you with megapixels most will never need, but it's extremely sexy to look at.
Totally agree with you there. I knew that going into it, but it was fun for sure. I am definitely in line with finding the right system that fits my work, and the 40mp range is where I seem to be. I would like to have a 1.1 crop factor vs the 1.3, but I'm not sure why. I figure a bigger sensor will look better and have more of a MF feel to it. Am I wrong on that front, or is that a whole other can of worms?
As one of several difference that anyone could notice: On a DF+ with leaf shutter lenses flash sync at up to 1/1600 means fill flash can be done from great distance with a standard canon/nikon speedlight. This means you can shoot wide open for an outdoor portrait or during an outdoor ceremony from further (with longer lenses). In contrast in my experience the HSS setting on Canon/Nikon used to sync above their focal plane limit reduces the effective power of the flash so far that you can only shoot at close distances which means either you can't use fill flash or you have to be much closer to the subject.
Doug, I am well versed with the different flash systems out there, having used quite a few - Profoto, Broncolor, Alien Bees, Speedlights - 1/1600 is deliciously tempting, and an influence as to why I want to head into MF. That being said, I have lights that can overpower the sun, they just take so damn long to set up! Actually, not all that long. It took me about 10 minutes to take the portrait of the guy by the Golden Gate Bridge. Thank god for assistants!
Also, I was thinking about the DM22/28, but it seems they cannot sync up to 1/1600 and their iso is pretty limited... so they are out.
A Contax, like any tool, can be used to make amazing images (see: BCs work) but in general it's not my #1 recommendation for a location editorial photographer who is just getting into medium format. Limited flash sync speed, availability of warranty/rental/repair being the two top reasons. I think you'll also find some of the usability improvements of the Aptus II series to be advantages compared to the Aptus S series. Especially in light of the minimal difference in cost now between a new-with-warranty-with-support-from-dealer Aptus II 7 and a used-from-ebay Aptus 75s.
I am on board with the DF+ Body. It's just finding the back that's going to work for me and my wallet. My point was that I've got a great contact (that I sort of forgot about) that can give me their take on the back after using if for 3-4 years. But as I type this, I seem to be leaning towards a Phase DB anyway, but it never hurts to chat.
Even with the smaller IQ140/P40+ backs you can get a really nice look in your images. Using medium format will alter your style a bit. It is slower to work with and not as convenient. I really like the larger viewfinder. If you have not used one rent a MF camera and test it out. Or go to one of the dealers, I'm sure they can arrange a demo for you.
Indeed Ken. I love looking through the viewfinder too - so much real estate + bigger. The zoom feature is nice, but not a deal maker/breaker for me. And I can always update the back down the road if I decide I have to have it... from all those missed shots. Nooooooooo! I will say this, shooting primes at f1.4 and f2.0 has definitely made me a better shooter, thus I feel I can handle a P+ back sans review.
-
I currently use a D800E and an IQ260. Before the IQ260 I shot with the Leica S. I can't add anything new to what's already been said with one exception. You should consider your workflow for image processing. To me, the big negative going to Phase One was having to use Capture One software. Although, it is a great piece of software you will need to process your images in Capture One to get the most out of them. Prior to owning a Phase One system I used LR and PS exclusivity. Now I need to import images to Capture One then export them to LR. This is an added step that's a real pain. If your not committed to LR then no problem.
-
I work with a P30+ on a Hasselblad H2. Based on your post that seems to be a system you could get.
It is available used at very attractive prices, has leaf shutter lenses, really nice quality at 400 ISO and is great for people shots even with the basic 80 mm lens.
Unless you really need extensive dealer support, I would get this combination. Personally I do not think that a camera is such a complicated item and I do not see the value of the dealer support other than for repairs and/or warranty. But the warranty will in any case be limited to 1 year max.
I have tried the Phase/Mamiya body and did not like it at all (the last version I used was the Phase one AF though) but really like the Hasselblad system. If you want more recent features, you can even get the h4x body (which is expensive though).
If you buy the Phase P30+ and h2 combination used (you can find this for $7 k), you will not go wrong. Even if you don't like it you can sell it again and not lose more than you would pay for 2 days renting.
Kind regards,
Alex
-
I work with a P30+ on a Hasselblad H2. Based on your post that seems to be a system you could get.
It is available used at very attractive prices, has leaf shutter lenses, really nice quality at 400 ISO and is great for people shots even with the basic 80 mm lens.
Unless you really need extensive dealer support, I would get this combination. Personally I do not think that a camera is such a complicated item and I do not see the value of the dealer support other than for repairs and/or warranty. But the warranty will in any case be limited to 1 year max.
I have tried the Phase/Mamiya body and did not like it at all (the last version I used was the Phase one AF though) but really like the Hasselblad system. If you want more recent features, you can even get the h4x body (which is expensive though).
If you buy the Phase P30+ and h2 combination used (you can find this for $7 k), you will not go wrong. Even if you don't like it you can sell it again and not lose more than you would pay for 2 days renting.
Mind you we, as a dealer, sell a lot of this and similar combinations (P30+, P25+, P40+, Aptus II 7, Aptus 75, on used H1s, H2s, or pre-owned DFs, DF+). So it's not a choice of buy-something-recent-from-a-dealer or buy-something-used-from-eBay. Especially with items like a P30+ you'll find our pre-owned pricing, with warranty and support, is very competitive to the average eBay sale of the same back without warranty/support.
The Phase One AF compared to a Phase One DF+ is night and day in any number of areas, speed of focusing, quality of lens availability, build quality, reliability, features, and lag. The OP may love that body; he may also connect better to a H body – only he can tell that. I'm just saying that your experience with an AF is not very good point of comparison for someone evaluating a DF+.
-
If you buy the Phase P30+ and h2 combination used (you can find this for $7 k), you will not go wrong. Even if you don't like it you can sell it again and not lose more than you would pay for 2 days renting.
Alex, in many ways, those are my sentiments and actions. I picked up a great deal on a Nikon 200-400 f4, and will most likely make money on it when the time comes to sell! I looked at renting, but for the time I needed it, it made more sense to buy a used one. I feel the same about MF, but...
Mind you we, as a dealer, sell a lot of this and similar combinations (P30+, P25+, P40+, Aptus II 7, Aptus 75, on used H1s, H2s, or pre-owned DFs, DF+). So it's not a choice of buy-something-recent-from-a-dealer or buy-something-used-from-eBay. Especially with items like a P30+ you'll find our pre-owned pricing, with warranty and support, is very competitive to the average eBay sale of the same back without warranty/support.
...what Doug says is absolutely true too. After snooping around eBay, prices are fairly competitive. Plus, if a customer who babies their equipment wants to upgrade, the dealer knows this and can contact me with a nice back vs "always babied" in the eBay tagline... and then I find out it's not :( And with being a bit unfamiliar with MFDB's, it would be nice to have support if I needed it. I understand systems very well, but I reckon if something's not going to work, it'll happen sooner than later. It's nice to have some sort of warranty and/or dealer around when it does.
Regarding the body - I will stick with the Phase DF+ The Hassy feels a little plasticky to me, and moving forward, I think the Phase is the right choice for me.
Now I need to import images to Capture One then export them to LR. This is an added step that's a real pain. If your not committed to LR then no problem.
camgarner - I use LR, but I have no issues using C1. The way it renders the RAW files is the best. Why drop so much coin to get lackluster results with a cheap (in comparison) program, even if it adds time? For me and MF, less is more. But absolutely something to consider - thanks for the info!
-
Hi, maybe you should try the options yourself after all. I hear that the new Phase DF+ is an OK camera but I would recommend you try it before you buy. The shutter lag of previous models was such that it was not usable for people shots at all.
The Hasselblad was much better in this regard. Concerning the use of plastic I do not think there is much difference as both are ten year old designs and cannot compete with DSLRs or Leicas regarding build quality.
If you find a truly competitive offer from a dealer it may be the best path, but if price is important to you I am sure you will find a much better deal when buying from a private seller (especially on the Hasselblad as this system seems to be losing market share).
-
I bought my first MFDB last year (P45+) with an old Mamiya AF-D and a nice Cambo tech camera. I'm really just getting used to using them after a decade of using Canon. The cameras and way of working really take some getting used to compared with Canon's engineering excellence and 100% uptime. In fact, they are really clunky and sometimes just plain unreliable. BUT, BUT! The image quality is to die for. Really, after 10's of thousands of images I'm still stunned every time I see the results on the back or, better, on a big screen or in print. I forgive everything for that image quality!
As has been said, it's also worth getting to know C1 (or Phocus) as it really does get the best out of the files, especially the latest version. The workflow is different if you aren't already using it and that's been part of the learning curve - knowing what I have to get right in camera and what I can correct / push later.
-
I also tried the Leica S and it is a superb camera and lens system. The lenses are superb and work great wide open (they are designed to). But the system is also very expensive and closed so no upgrade path other than changing the body. Also the sensor is not as big as the one in the phase 60 and 80 mp backs so the DOF is not as shallow on the Leica given equals. Also I really like the 4/3 frame of the phase backs.
S2's are going for 10k and under.
check this out.
Nice semi real world test.
http://www.dpreview.com/articles/3214761610/leica-s2-against-megapixel-arms-race
BC
-
S2's are going for 10k and under.
check this out.
Nice semi real world test.
http://www.dpreview.com/articles/3214761610/leica-s2-against-megapixel-arms-race
In that review the guy compares an S2 file against a somehow-defective Aptus II 12 (the strong magenta cast intraframe) which he calls a "Phase One Leaf Aptus II 12" (it's not a Phase One branded product), and incorrectly refers to ISO200 as "one stop above native" (it's 2 stops above the native for that back), and is processing the Aptus files through LR rather than C1 (LR at that point was especially bad at handling mid-ISO leaf files). I stopped reading at that point.
This is like comparing Car X to a "BMW Rolls Royce" with defective tires, driven by a drunkard, and finding the handling is not as good.
(Note nothing in this post is a slam/insult/slight to the S2. Only the reviewer's technique in evaluating the Aptus II 12.)
Just goes to show the importance of doing your own testing with a knowledgable dealer rather than relying on what's posted on the internet.
-
S2's are going for 10k and under.
check this out.
Nice semi real world test.
http://www.dpreview.com/articles/3214761610/leica-s2-against-megapixel-arms-race
BC
That Guy made a few HUGE mistakes when testing the Leaf back. He used it at iso 200 and used ACR/Lightroom to process the files. But if that how he was going to use it then he did the right thing for his purposes obviously.
I have used the Leica S (briefly) and looked at the files and image quality is no better than a Nikon D800E w/ the best lenses at optimum settings and technique. That said however, the Leica S lenses are the best I have ever seen. Mechanically and Optically superb. They work awesome wide open and handle tricky high contrast lighting situations and light sources in the frame amazingly well. They are cost prohibitive for most though so thats where the adapters come in but then again you loose the biggest edge of the Leica S system which are the lenses.
The Leica S body oozes quality though, feels great in the hand, and the viewfinder and focusing screen are just superb. It is a VERY versatile camera, the most versatile Medium Format Digital camera made. I am sure they can keep the design as is and just upgrade the sensor as needed.
That said the 60/80mp Phase backs absolutely destroy the Leica in terms of resolution and I believe dynamic range also when used at base iso. So the Leica is in some middle ground since the 35mm format cameras have come so far in image quality. I felt it is a Body and Lenses looking for a sensor. Phase is the opposite, it is looking for a body since the Imaqe Quality is second to none.
-
In that review the guy compares an S2 file against a somehow-defective Aptus II 12 (the strong magenta cast intraframe) which he calls a "Phase One Leaf Aptus II 12" (it's not a Phase One branded product), and incorrectly refers to ISO200 as "one stop above native" (it's 2 stops above the native for that back), and is processing the Aptus files through LR rather than C1 (LR at that point was especially bad at handling mid-ISO leaf files). I stopped reading at that point.
This is like comparing Car X to a "BMW Rolls Royce" with defective tires, driven by a drunkard, and finding the handling is not as good.
(Note nothing in this post is a slam/insult/slight to the S2. Only the reviewer's technique in evaluating the Aptus II 12.)
Just goes to show the importance of doing your own testing with a knowledgable dealer rather than relying on what's posted on the internet.
Doug,
This is one of those -fortunately rare- cases when I have to completely agree with you :)
Edmund
-
Todd,
I find it interesting that you what to go from Nikon to DMF so you can shoot more commercial.
I’ve been an adverting photographer for 28 years and have used Sinar, Mamiya RZ, Mamiya 645AFD, Horseman, Noblex, Rollie and Nikon.
Now all I use is a Nikon D800E and Nikon D800 for all the different type of work I do. Go to my website and you will see the sort of stuff I do.
Now this is my opinion don’t was your money on DMF period. Wait cause next year Nikon will bring out the Nikon D4X which I think will have some improvement over the Nikon D800’s for a fraction of the cost of you wasting your money on DMF.
Those CCD sensors are just awful.
Cheers
Simon
-
you are right your head is going to explode that is why most buy MFDB systems
-
you are right your head is going to explode that is why most buy MFDB systems
medication or meditation can help preserve your bank account :)
Edmund
-
Those CCD sensors are just awful.
Don't be shy now Simon. Come on tell us how you really feel! ;)
My personal preference is for the CCD, but for me its more the viewfinder and ergonomics that I choose MF, and also the look of the image, the crop ratio. I dunno, I just don't feel good with the DSLR's. I'd probably feel lost with the A7. Anyhow my view is it sure is great to have all the different options, even film too.
-
Doug,
Obviously the Aptus had problems, though the Sinar didn't, neither did the Leica.
But discounting that I didn't post the link to diss a leaf I posted to link to show the attributes of the S2.
Earlier this year I got very close to switching (or adding systems), a new h5d 40. With three standard lenses the price was $27,000 and would make my Contax not as much as a backup as a separate system.
With the S2 going now for under $10,000 using my contax lenses it almost all becomes one cohesive system for bargain rates.
And be honest. If it was your money, you were paying list, would you spend 25k on a blad or a Phase, or 10k for a Leica, especially if you had a zeiss lens set that covered 35mm to 210 mostly doubled?
Also I love the look of that kodak sensor, I've seen it in the blad I've seen it in the Leica and Pentax and think it produces a unique look and I'm not the world's biggest fan of dalsa.
Now as I've written, I've had great luck with my Phase backs and will continue to use them, but my new rule (after 4 medium format backs and three REDS) is i will not buy a camera that costs over 10 grand.
IMO
BC
-
And be honest. If it was your money, you were paying list, would you spend 25k on a blad or a Phase, or 10k for a Leica, especially if you had a zeiss lens set that covered 35mm to 210 mostly doubled?
For what I personally do (weddings, nudes, and landscape) flash sync speed up to 1/1600th, high continuous frame rate without buffer limit, ISO up to 3200, 3:4 frame instead of a 2:3 frame, and tethering into C1 would bring me to the IQ140.
But I never said anything bad about the S2 option - just that the tester of the Aptus II 12 reached conclusions about a product which he had little knowledge of, used in very non-ideal ways, and had a defective copy of.
-
J,
The part I don't understand is why you want a different camera (S2) if it has exactly the same Kodak sensor as a P30, and on top of that you lose the wonderful processing from C1 :)
I thought you liked the Contax experience. If you swap to the S2, what is gained here?
Maybe you need more wine, women, drugs and rock and roll, or just a really quiet month in a Zen Monastery :)
Edmund
Doug,
Obviously the Aptus had problems, though the Sinar didn't, neither did the Leica.
But discounting that I didn't post the link to diss a leaf I posted to link to show the attributes of the S2.
Earlier this year I got very close to switching (or adding systems), a new h5d 40. With three standard lenses the price was $27,000 and would make my Contax not as much as a backup as a separate system.
With the S2 going now for under $10,000 using my contax lenses it almost all becomes one cohesive system for bargain rates.
And be honest. If it was your money, you were paying list, would you spend 25k on a blad or a Phase, or 10k for a Leica, especially if you had a zeiss lens set that covered 35mm to 210 mostly doubled?
Also I love the look of that kodak sensor, I've seen it in the blad I've seen it in the Leica and Pentax and think it produces a unique look and I'm not the world's biggest fan of dalsa.
Now as I've written, I've had great luck with my Phase backs and will continue to use them, but my new rule (after 4 medium format backs and three REDS) is i will not buy a camera that costs over 10 grand.
IMO
BC
-
J,
The part I don't understand is why you want a different camera (S2) if it has exactly the same Kodak sensor as a P30, and on top of that you lose the wonderful processing from C1 :)
I thought you liked the Contax experience. If you swap to the S2, what is gained here?
Maybe you need more wine, women, drugs and rock and roll, or just a really quiet month in a Zen Monastery :)
Edmund
The first part of that sentence makes you sound like Father Christmas! If I promise to keep the fire unlit on the 24th...
Rob C
-
The S2 is a very tactile and pretty camera. It just feels good, which is more important than many would admit.
It does have a similar look to the P30 but you don't buy an S2 for its sensor, you buy the camera. The VF is one of the best, better than the H series, which is really good. That's why I would buy one.
J,
The part I don't understand is why you want a different camera (S2) if it has exactly the same Kodak sensor as a P30, and on top of that you lose the wonderful processing from C1 :)
I thought you liked the Contax experience. If you swap to the S2, what is gained here?
Maybe you need more wine, women, drugs and rock and roll, or just a really quiet month in a Zen Monastery :)
Edmund
-
Maybe you need more wine, women, drugs and rock and roll, or just a really quiet month in a Zen Monastery :)
Drugs? Coot is already addicted: heavy work, stress, airports noise, stress, editing, 2 hours of sleep, airport
Women? He is a married man, and for what I've seen, no need to look elsewhere.
R&B? As a Texan, no need more explainations
Wine? He has an office in Paris
No....
What may have happened is that he bought a Kia.
so...
for Coot: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7iYtGHKSG3M and bought in Texas
for Rob: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tCIGrGX95F0
and for me: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jv-KNI6iG54
and for TMark, let's see...this one: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NAWI9VlHFJM
-
That said the 60/80mp Phase backs absolutely destroy the Leica in terms of resolution and I believe dynamic range also when used at base iso. So the Leica is in some middle ground since the 35mm format cameras have come so far in image quality. I felt it is a Body and Lenses looking for a sensor. Phase is the opposite, it is looking for a body since the Imaqe Quality is second to none.
Hi Ken,
I am not disagreeing with this but if you are mainly shooting people you don't need 60-80 MP, 22-30 MP is more than sufficient, 40 MP probably already overkill.
More and more I see 2 main directions in MFD:
1) landscape, architecture, re-production, etc: tech camera + Phase One IQx60/IQx80
2) fashion, people, portraits: S2 or H5d-40 or DF+IQ140
If you are in the 2nd group cooter's rule of thumb of $10K make sense IMO because the difference with other smaller and cheaper formats is no longer big enough to justify the investment.
Joris.
-
Hi,
Just to say, there are other means of re-production…
Best regards
Erik
1) landscape, architecture, re-production, etc: tech camera + Phase One IQx60/IQx80
-
The S2 is a very tactile and pretty camera. It just feels good, which is more important than many would admit.
It does have a similar look to the P30 but you don't buy an S2 for its sensor, you buy the camera. The VF is one of the best, better than the H series, which is really good. That's why I would buy one.
I have to say after using the R8/R9 for a few years, I had different expectations for the Leica S system. I did think the viewfinder was very good, but not better than either the H or the Rolleiflex (but better than the Phase/Mamiya DF), plus you have no other options. I'm not a fan of the 90 degree SLR shooting position either. I think images look better taken a bit lower with the 45 degree finder position and that position is much more stable for shooting since you hold the camera closer to your body. It's one of my grips about the DF and the S. I always assumed people bought into the S system mostly for the lenses? But I've not seen anything compelling showing how they are so much better than other offerings actually.
I do agree with BC about the Kodak sensors having a different look than the Dalsa, but after using digital backs with both for a few years, I'm not sure that I think one is better than the other. They are just different. The Dalsa can produce a file with more film like 'grain' to it.
-
Hi Ken,
I am not disagreeing with this but if you are mainly shooting people you don't need 60-80 MP, 22-30 MP is more than sufficient, 40 MP probably already overkill.
More and more I see 2 main directions in MFD:
1) landscape, architecture, re-production, etc: tech camera + Phase One IQx60/IQx80
2) fashion, people, portraits: S2 or H5d-40 or DF+IQ140
If you are in the 2nd group cooter's rule of thumb of $10K make sense IMO because the difference with other smaller and cheaper formats is no longer big enough to justify the investment.
Joris.
Yeah, for people specially 3/4 shots and headshots 40mp is more than enough. In fact, a 20mp would do. More important, in that case, would be the color and skin tone rendition, post processing would have a lot to do with it as would lens/optical rendering.
-
I am not disagreeing with this but if you are mainly shooting people you don't need 60-80 MP, 22-30 MP is more than sufficient, 40 MP probably already overkill.
More and more I see 2 main directions in MFD:
1) landscape, architecture, re-production, etc: tech camera + Phase One IQx60/IQx80
2) fashion, people, portraits: S2 or H5d-40 or DF+IQ140
#2 is also very well satistified by an DF+IQX60 or IQX80 in sensor+ mode. Which provides ISO up to 3200 and faster frame rate and still either 15mp or 20mp (which, with c1v7, a sharp lens and no AA filter, and coming from a large sensor array - is much better than you'd think if your point of comparison is a dSLR).
-
#2 is also very well satistified by an DF+IQX60 or IQX80 in sensor+ mode. Which provides ISO up to 3200 and faster frame rate and still either 15mp or 20mp (which, with c1v7, a sharp lens and no AA filter, and coming from a large sensor array - is much better than you'd think if your point of comparison is a dSLR).
Doug, I though I was not going to use sensor + but I have started experimenting with it and the results are awesome. It just extends the capability of the IQ160 tremendously. I know 15mp does not sound like much but they are very clean and sharp 15mp files like you have mentioned. Very different from DSLR files that are larger in size but not as crisp as the 15mp sensor + files.
-
#2 is also very well satistified by an DF+IQX60 or IQX80 in sensor+ mode. Which provides ISO up to 3200 and faster frame rate and still either 15mp or 20mp (which, with c1v7, a sharp lens and no AA filter, and coming from a large sensor array - is much better than you'd think if your point of comparison is a dSLR).
Doug,
With all due respect, in low light you don't use F8. So the back may give great files but if it's a Phamiya I'd be surprised if it focuses as well as your average D4 or 1Dx. In fact, you know what? If I agree that you can plausibly claim the IQ has a considerably better file than the dSLR, then as an ex-Phamiya owner I also think that Nikon and Canon can plausibly claim that the dSLRs have considerably better focus abilities than the Phamiyas, live view (helps for focus, sometimes), faster lenses, and less mirror-induced shake.
Edmund
-
With all due respect, in low light, the back may give great files but if it's a Phamiya I'd be surprised if it focuses as well as your average D4 or 1Dx.
You'll get no objection from me here.
All medium format I've tried (which is literally ever option) struggles to focus in low light compared to a D4 or 1Dx. Those two bodies can focus on a dark car in the middle of the night - kinda scary actually.
At any given wedding I shoot, when the light goes down far enough, a Canon or Nikon comes out.
The only question is for any given back+body combo how long into the evening that is. With the DF+ I find the body and back give out about the same time for hand held shooting. If I'm on a tripod the body AF will give out before the back, but it's also easier to do MF on a tripod so it's a little less of an issue.
-
Doug,
With all due respect, in low light, the back may give great files but if it's a Phamiya I'd be surprised if it focuses as well as your average D4 or 1Dx.
Edmund
I wouldn't be surprised at all.
I do believe Sensor Plus has other advantages also - for some landscape shooters, wind creates an issue for slower shutter speeds, so Sensor Plus is a tool to have in the back pocket for those conditions.
I also believe Sensor Plus was a very important development in terms of allowing a company to be able to continually increase megapixel counts, while creating an option for lower megapixel count captures with the same product. If medium format extends megapixel counts into the hundred megapixel and higher mark (as expected), then being able to only offer the full rez file, let's say, 125 megapixels for everything you shoot is a restriction. I anticipate seeing Leaf or Hasselblad also develop reduced file capture technology - the nice thing about where Phase One has gone is that the technology has an additional benefit (the 2 stop noise decrease).
But Edward, that's a good point about lower light - the file doesn't just have to be able to handle the noise, the camera also has to be able to focus.
Steve Hendrix
Capture Integration
-
Doug, Steve,
Are you taking preorders for the new Phase One body? ;D
Edmund
But Edward, that's a good point about lower light - the file doesn't just have to be able to handle the noise, the camera also has to be able to focus.
Steve Hendrix
Capture Integration
-
Hi Steve,
I would suggest that you over-exaggerate the benefits of sensor+ . The theoretical advantage in DR is 1 EV over simple downsize. Regarding noise there should be no advantage at all. The DxO figures illustrate it well, in the figures below the stretched part is sensor plus. So you are throwing away 75% of the resolution for a one stop advantage in DR and no advantage in noise.
But, that is only sampling theory and measurement data from DxO.
update: I have read a few good postings in favour of your statement.
Best regards
Erik
I wouldn't be surprised at all.
I do believe Sensor Plus has other advantages also - for some landscape shooters, wind creates an issue for slower shutter speeds, so Sensor Plus is a tool to have in the back pocket for those conditions.
I also believe Sensor Plus was a very important development in terms of allowing a company to be able to continually increase megapixel counts, while creating an option for lower megapixel count captures with the same product. If medium format extends megapixel counts into the hundred megapixel and higher mark (as expected), then being able to only offer the full rez file, let's say, 125 megapixels for everything you shoot is a restriction. I anticipate seeing Leaf or Hasselblad also develop reduced file capture technology - the nice thing about where Phase One has gone is that the technology has an additional benefit (the 2 stop noise decrease).
But Edward, that's a good point about lower light - the file doesn't just have to be able to handle the noise, the camera also has to be able to focus.
Steve Hendrix
Capture Integration
-
Erik,
Maybe they also gain in pattern noise, or use a trick to limit banding ?
My experience with Phase is that at high ISO pattern noise eg. banding and sensor non-uniformities kill you well before "statistical" noise becomes an issue. You can downsample a 40MP image get rid of noise, but it's hard to run away from high-iso banding without special-purpose tricks such as histogram matching per column. At least there was no way the last time I tried, I've now sold my back - which to be fair to Phase worked superbly up to something like ISO 200 and decently to 400.
Edmund
Hi Steve,
I would suggest that you over-exaggerate the benefits of sensor+ . The theoretical advantage in DR is 1 EV over simple downsize. Regarding noise there should be no advantage at all. The DxO figures illustrate it well, in the figures below the stretched part is sensor plus. So you are throwing away 75% of the resolution for a one stop advantage in DR and no advantage in noise.
But, that is only sampling theory and measurement data from DxO.
Best regards
Erik
-
Edmund,
That is a good point. The DxO figures don't show the quality of the noise.
I have a P45+, that back has not Sensor+ so I cannot check. Also I only shoot ISO 50, but I often expose low to protect highlights, so I feel that noise lurks around in the shadows.
Best regards
Erik
Erik,
Maybe they also gain in pattern noise, or use a trick to limit banding ?
My experience with Phase is that at high ISO pattern noise eg. banding and sensor non-uniformities kill you well before "statistical" noise becomes an issue. You can downsample a 40MP image get rid of noise, but it's hard to run away from high-iso banding without special-purpose tricks such as histogram matching per column. At least there was no way the last time I tried, I've now sold my back - which to be fair to Phase worked superbly up to something like ISO 200 and decently to 400.
Edmund
-
*Shrugs*
All I know for sure is I've been very happy with ISO800-1600 while shooting weddings with an iq260.
I'm even ok with iso3200 provided I convert to b+w, add some contrast, and add some grain.
I cannot acomplish that same versatility by under exposing and downsizing at full res.
Once I'm finding iso3200 is needed consistently then the phase goes back in the bag and the canon (or Nikon) comes out.
-
Edmund,
That is a good point. The DxO figures don't show the quality of the noise.
I have a P45+, that back has not Sensor+ so I cannot check. Also I only shoot ISO 50, but I often expose low to protect highlights, so I feel that noise lurks around in the shadows.
Best regards
Erik
With Sensor+ they have 4x less data to read, so they can run the bucket brigade much slower, and I believe will have substantially lowered pattern noise aka banding generated by the readout circuitry. Some dSLRs (ask Iliah) have slower readout ability and a high precision mode. I have always wondered why Phase does not offer the same, after all landscape shooters do not care about fps.
Edmund
-
Doug,
You really would rather spend a day with a Mamiya 645 than a Leica? OK, I guess you'd rather have a date with the Duck Dynasty wives than a double with Kate Moss and Kate Upton? (at least you wouldn't have to worry about getting their names mixed up).
I'd never pay 25 something thousand for a 645 Mamiya if it had three Rolex glued to the back of it. I know phase has improved it and I know that Leaf in that test was defective, but my two Aptus 22 did the same thing, even worse because they would centerfold and overheat. The aptus 33 I owned for a day had grey balances so off I packed it up 12 hours after I received it and believe it or not I really really really like the people at Leaf and before you start the defense of leaf and dalsa, I remember the quotes in the phase one kodak sensor only era.
And btw: Leaf was fixing al their issues and I wish Leaf could have stayed on their own because they really were a photographers camera company, and they had a roster of the world's best to prove it.
I think if they hadn't been bought and sold so many times they would have really produced some more inventive equipment than they are allowed to produce now.
Also I'm pretty much done with C-1. I have many multiple licenses and this upgrade your software - buy a computer, buy a camera - upgrade your software - buy a computer routine is as close to a bait and switch scheme as life can get and phase isn't alone with this as everyone does it, they just signed on.
At least the Leica use a dng format that of course won't run on C-1 but at this stage I consider that a plus.
C-1 use to be bullet proof and low power but now it's heavy and needs new graphics cards. I have those open cl computers but they're used for editing and a two generation old computer should run still software quickly. I mean still images aren't that big.
Older C-1 I think 5 or something is fine, runs my Contax and I'm not going any further with C-1. Plus C-1 really needs single channel corrections like Iridient or single color settings like lightroom.
Anyway we're talking cameras and look at the files from the Leica, forget about the other cameras just look at the leica files.
Oh and by the way on 1600 sync speed? Really? You need to try some different strobes. This was shot at 90th of a second with monoblocks and this guy was rocking so fast any shutter speed is not going to add the sharpness of quick flash duration.
(http://spotsinthebox.com/rb_swing_blk_3.jpg)
All a fast shutter speed does is cut into the flash like it was a continuous source and you loose a lot of light and the file gets kind of muddy looking. BTW: Nudes need fast duration? Jeez what are you doing with these naked people, and out of curiosity are the naked people photographed during your wedding sessions, because that would be a hell of a marketing trick.
Edmund, (I always get your name mixed up. Would you change it to Bedumandandronald?)
I over think s__t.
In order of cameras. Love the Contax, love the olympus em-5, love the RED ones, love using the gh3 (don't love the camera but love the digital video from it).
Loathe the 1dx orange d3/d4 look, don't like Nikon g glass, it's too clinical. I want to change still cameras because this is how we now work.
(http://spotsinthebox.com/the_river_styx_.jpg)
We shoot motion, usually with dialog, or foley sound, either inside or outside. The stills are important but lately they're starting to become more a grab and shoot than something defined. With a larger camera I shoot different.
Other people will argue, but T left something off.
If you point a Leica, I promise you your brain works different. If it feels important in your hand it will look important in the viewfinder (you can quote me on that). I have about 15 minutes (at most) to relight, make the subject into a pretty still and then back to the next setup. I don't need a billion iso, just 800 and with the fast contax glass I can get there with a kino or a 500 to 800 watt hmi, or if I look a window light and a cutter will do it.
If I was smart (no chance of that), I'd just buy two 1ds3's and never mess with it again, but what I want, really want is a new contax.
They don't make it, never will, so the S2 is like a modern version of a contax given it uses the lenses and focus them faster.
What got me started thinking about the Leica (which btw: has one stop more a than pee30 and has better color) is that I looked at those little A7 things. They're actually ok, except the viewfinder looks like a Sony over saturated video cam, actually when I was at the Sony store, they looked exactly like those over saturated TV's that they have stuck on every wall. (btw; don't diss all evf because the OMD em-1 and 5 look like film in the viewfinder), but the thing about the Sony's are even though I own two A mount zeiss zooms, to buy primes, two bodies, adapters, blah blah blah I'm at 9 to 10 grand and it hit me . . . I'm at the price of an S2 and I'll keep an S2 way way way longer than I'll keep a mobile phone with a viewfinder.
And Sony has to sell you proprietary media AND a usb cable. That is so Sony. You can steal my car, but don't expect me to pay to wash it.
But bottom line, find me a medium format anything that has good autofocus, will accept zeiss glass and sell for under ten thousand.
Your on the clock.
IMO
BC
P.S. Take all of this with a grain of salt, because I can change my mind tomorrow.
P.S. 2. If you want to see a pretty still file look at a panasonic gh3. It's not that detailed (in stills) it doesn't do anything past 800 iso without getting painterly, but it's one thick pretty file.
If only Panasonic would tap onto leicas industrial design and make a camera that didn't look like somebody shrunk a 5d2, or if they would just marry olympus
(http://www.russellrutherford.com/oly_web.jpg)
they'd be a lot easier to take, but for video and some stills the gh3 is the deal of the century.
-
Todd,
I find it interesting that you what to go from Nikon to DMF so you can shoot more commercial.
I’ve been an adverting photographer for 28 years and have used Sinar, Mamiya RZ, Mamiya 645AFD, Horseman, Noblex, Rollie and Nikon.
Now all I use is a Nikon D800E and Nikon D800 for all the different type of work I do. Go to my website and you will see the sort of stuff I do.
Now this is my opinion don’t was your money on DMF period. Wait cause next year Nikon will bring out the Nikon D4X which I think will have some improvement over the Nikon D800’s for a fraction of the cost of you wasting your money on DMF.
Those CCD sensors are just awful.
Simon, I guess it's just a natural progression of wanting to use/learn a different format. I'll be entering the market with used gear, thus avoiding a huge loss financially. Plus the high sync speeds could be damn fun and worthwhile.
Cheers!
-
Hi BC,
Thanks for putting some things in perspective. Just a few comments.
I own Sony and go with Sony mostly because of the lenses. Not because I love them but because I have a lot. I feel the Sony lenses are a bit expensive. The lens program should be a prime consideration when buying into a system.
A small system has it's attraction. Personally, I shoot everything from 12 mm ultrawide to 800m. A 70-400/4-5.6 (or so) telezoom will never be light. With 4/3 a xxx-200 mm zoom would make the same service.
Video from the Sonys could be better. Panasonic video looks nice (the samples I have seen). I guess that the problem with Sony is that they use line skipping and need to do a lot of artificial softening to reduce moiré. Perhaps Panasonic reads out full image and down samples in real time? Sony RX10 is supposed to that and offer superior video quality.
Regarding the Leica vs. Leaf test the Leaf was obviously broken. But Leaf should not have sent him a bad sample to begin with. Now I know that s__t happens time to time, but I guess the author was sort of p____d off. Reviewers need to live with bad samples but those testing at opportunity seldom get another chance.
Best regards
Erik
-
Hi,
Yes, of course, but it does not show up in the DxO data. But I respect Doug's judgement on this. I would also say that Steve Hendrix used to have solid info.
Would be nice to see raw files to compare.
Best regards
Erik
With Sensor+ they have 4x less data to read, so they can run the bucket brigade much slower, and I believe will have substantially lowered pattern noise aka banding generated by the readout circuitry. Some dSLRs (ask Iliah) have slower readout ability and a high precision mode. I have always wondered why Phase does not offer the same, after all landscape shooters do not care about fps.
Edmund
-
B. Cooter Esq,
C1 can be flipped into a "free" mode that only does DB files.
The only "real" MF camera currently in production that seems to work right seems to be the Hassy, but it can only do AF with those Fuji lenses most of which seem to offer the subject about as much gentleness as Torquemada (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tomás_de_Torquemada).
Concerning the S2, I'm a bit wary that it might expect a 35 hour workweek, and retirement at 50 like a french train driver.
The 1Ds3 feels right, and works well. At highish ISO makes really nice files with DPP or the Irident thingie and the "good glass". It kind of cooperates with the lenses in dim light in a way my 5D2 didn't; it's a "real" camera with a personality like the first 1Ds. I was surprised after I got my salvage dog. You might get a used body from a friend for less than your daily catering bill, and with the fast glass the viewfinder probably beats the Contax P30 tunnel by a wide margin ;D.
For all I know, the Sony is wonderful, or the next Nikon (I doubt that); or the next Phase body which we all keep hoping for will be a cure for cancer. But I see a preloved H4D40 in my future as my outdoor camera in a year or so.
Edmund
PS. I know you're a really smart guy, I can't imagine that the 1Dx you use is so bad that you cannot get it to make decent stills for you by candlelight, or that you really need that extra bit of rez which the 1Ds3 gives ...
Edmund, (I always get your name mixed up. Would you change it to Bedumandandronald?)
I over think s__t.
In order of cameras. Love the Contax, love the olympus em-5, love the RED ones, love using the gh3 (don't love the camera but love the digital video from it).
Loathe the 1dx orange d3/d4 look, don't like Nikon g glass, it's too clinical. I want to change still cameras because this is how we now work.
We shoot motion, usually with dialog, or foley sound, either inside or outside. The stills are important but lately they're starting to become more a grab and shoot than something defined. With a larger camera I shoot different.
Other people will argue, but T left something off.
If you point a Leica, I promise you your brain works different. If it feels important in your hand it will look important in the viewfinder (you can quote me on that). I have about 15 minutes (at most) to relight, make the subject into a pretty still and then back to the next setup. I don't need a billion iso, just 800 and with the fast contax glass I can get there with a kino or a 500 to 800 watt hmi, or if I look a window light and a cutter will do it.
If I was smart (no chance of that), I'd just buy two 1ds3's and never mess with it again, but what I want, really want is a new contax.
They don't make it, never will, so the S2 is like a modern version of a contax given it uses the lenses and focus them faster.
What got me started thinking about the Leica (which btw: has one stop more a than pee30 and has better color) is that I looked at those little A7 things. They're actually ok, except the viewfinder looks like a Sony over saturated video cam, actually when I was at the Sony store, they looked exactly like those over saturated TV's that they have stuck on every wall. (btw; don't diss all evf because the OMD em-1 and 5 look like film in the viewfinder), but the thing about the Sony's are even though I own two A mount zeiss zooms, to buy primes, two bodies, adapters, blah blah blah I'm at 9 to 10 grand and it hit me . . . I'm at the price of an S2 and I'll keep an S2 way way way longer than I'll keep a mobile phone with a viewfinder.
And Sony has to sell you proprietary media AND a usb cable. That is so Sony. You can steal my car, but don't expect me to pay to wash it.
But bottom line, find me a medium format anything that has good autofocus, will accept zeiss glass and sell for under ten thousand.
Your on the clock.
IMO
BC
P.S. Take all of this with a grain of salt, because I can change my mind tomorrow.
P.S. 2. If you want to see a pretty still file look at a panasonic gh3. It's not that detailed (in stills) it doesn't do anything past 800 iso without getting painterly, but it's one thick pretty file.
-
I’ve been an adverting photographer for 28 years and have used Sinar, Mamiya RZ, Mamiya 645AFD, Horseman, Noblex, Rollie and Nikon.
Now all I use is a Nikon D800E and Nikon D800 for all the different type of work I do. Go to my website and you will see the sort of stuff I do.
Now this is my opinion don’t was your money on DMF period. Wait cause next year Nikon will bring out the Nikon D4X which I think will have some improvement over the Nikon D800’s for a fraction of the cost of you wasting your money on DMF.
Those CCD sensors are just awful.
Cheers
Simon
You know Simon, we usually shoot different stuff and I give you a hard time but your right.
Nothing comes close to a Nikon in the blacks and honestly for the price the D800 is amazing in the fact it is a full featured pro camera.
BC
-
The conclusion that I draw of all this is that:
in the holy Word of digital imagery
we never had so much choice and many options
in wich
none is satisfying anyone
or to say it differently: the big lucrative business
consists in inundating the market
with very short-life new tech (carefuly planned not to be
too good at once) gear of all sort
beta tested by the consumers by the way,
but never good enough
so that people will buy the next generation
hopping the definitive camera
that never comes and never will
because it's planned in such a way.
-
Maybe Doug can supply files if asked nicely (hint) :)
Re. DxO, I don't stand in awe of them, as I'm a bit (!) full of myself. What impresses me is their ability to do tests systematically under controlled conditions; however for determining a single parameter like noise, I'd just randomly guess that picking any old Raw file apart would get you the juicy optical black pixels - masked off from light on the edges of the sensor to provide a reference. Then once you grab these black pixels, doing a statistical noise test on them would be a quite reasonable alternative to real hard work for a lazy individual. :) Of course if you want to look at pattern noise, I'd guess you'd want to do something more sophisticated, maybe use Matlab to fourier transform the vector of black pixels...of course just looking at pictures is in the end a better criterion IMHO.
Edmund
Hi,
Yes, of course, but it does not show up in the DxO data. But I respect Doug's judgement on this. I would also say that Steve Hendrix used to have solid info.
Would be nice to see raw files to compare.
Best regards
Erik
-
The Leica S2 might feel like a better put-together system than the Phamiyas or the Blads, but there's one thing about it that pots it out of contention for me, no matter how cheap it gets; and that's the 3:2 ratio. I simply hate working with this aspect ratio. Almost everything I shoot with the D800 is cropped down to 4:3 (Or to a lesser extent, 5:4). Every time I pick my Bronica up, I see the world differently. In a way that appeals to me a lot more than how it looks through a 3:2 viewfinder. And that's a major reason why I am going DMF.
In other words, the S2 is perfect for those who like the "35mm DSLR feel". For the rest, it's a non-player.
-
The part I don't understand is why you want a different camera (S2) if it has exactly the same Kodak sensor as a P30, and on top of that you lose the wonderful processing from C1 Smiley
I thought you liked the Contax experience. If you swap to the S2, what is gained here?
anybody wants to swap their s2 for a contax just to feel like they are correct line please send me a pm... meanwhile back to my medication
-
You really would rather spend a day with a Mamiya 645 than a Leica? OK, I guess you'd rather have a date with the Duck Dynasty wives than a double with Kate Moss and Kate Upton? (at least you wouldn't have to worry about getting their names mixed up).
Hey, what's wrong with Jessica Robertson (https://www.google.com/search?q=Jessica+Robertson&safe=off&espv=210&es_sm=91&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ei=C3iqUsKyF4HksAS08oCICQ&ved=0CAkQ_AUoAQ&biw=1280&bih=728)??
Also I'm pretty much done with C-1. I have many multiple licenses and this upgrade your software - buy a computer, buy a camera - upgrade your software - buy a computer routine is as close to a bait and switch scheme as life can get and phase isn't alone with this as everyone does it, they just signed on.
Really?
C1 Upgrades are $50/computer.
From 2005 until today there have been 4 upgrades, 2 of which were free to owners of v3.
This is really unreasonable to you for one of the most important non-human components of your tethered shoots??
My guess is you've spent more money on gaffe tape than you have on C1 upgrades.
Older C-1 I think 5 or something is fine, runs my Contax and I'm not going any further with C-1. Plus C-1 really needs single channel corrections like Iridient or single color settings like lightroom.
Single channel RGB levels and Single Channel RGB Curves were added many versions ago.
C1v7, including those features, is free for use with any of your digital backs. Or $99 upgrade for a 2-computer license if you also want to use it with your Canon/Nikons.
Oh and by the way on 1600 sync speed? Really? You need to try some different strobes. This was shot at 90th of a second with monoblocks and this guy was rocking so fast any shutter speed is not going to add the sharpness of quick flash duration.
All a fast shutter speed does is cut into the flash like it was a continuous source and you loose a lot of light and the file gets kind of muddy looking. BTW: Nudes need fast duration? Jeez what are you doing with these naked people, and out of curiosity are the naked people photographed during your wedding sessions, because that would be a hell of a marketing trick.
I only shoot naked brides.
Seriously though, fast flash sync isn't about stopping motion in the studio while stopped down. For that, as you say, flash duration is the only thing that really matters.
I use fast flash sync in my wedding work. It allows me to, e.g. shoot wide open during an outdoor ceremony (which requires a fast shutter speed even at low ISO), while still being able to use fill flash from any reasonable distance. This isn't to create a dramatic effect or drop the ambient light so far you create the "day as night" effect - it's just to get a bit of fill in an otherwise too-contrasty situation where I don't have any control over where the subjects are standing relative to the sun, and I only have a limited number of places I can stand without being intrusive.
With a Canon or Nikon and their psuedo-fast-sync the effective power output drops like a rock at high shutter speeds, meaning I could only fill from a short distance. With P1 I can crank the shutter speed to 1/1600th, shoot at f/2.8, and use a simple 580EX flash to fill (on camera or off), even from the back of a ceremony.
Others would use fast flash sync with studio strobe, on location, and have independent control of the amount of ambient vs. fill - regardless of the aperture they are shooting at. This applies to editorial and fashion that your mind jumps to right away, but it also applies to architecture/interiors/event.
It's really freeing knowing that you can increase or decrease your shutter speed as needed, regardless of where you happen to be.
-
or to say it differently: the big lucrative business
consists in inundating the market
with very short-life new tech (carefuly planned not to be
too good at once) gear of all sort
beta tested by the consumers by the way,
but never good enough
so that people will buy the next generation
hopping the definitive camera
that never comes and never will
because it's planned in such a way.
Only if you get sucked in. I'm talking about purchasing a 6-7 year old system to get my feet wet. I have yet to upgrade (nor do I see myself doing so) to the D4. The D3 more than fulfills mine and my client's needs for wedding work. And the focusing - man, once you use a D3/D4 - nothing else comes close. I use the 3D tracking at f1.4 or f2.0 when the brides walking down the aisle. Gravy. And it's sharp (as can be for that shallow DOF).
I'm looking for something different - nothing wrong with having a quiver of boards when heading on safari, if you catch my drift ;)
-
The Leica S2 might feel like a better put-together system than the Phamiyas or the Blads, but there's one thing about it that pots it out of contention for me, no matter how cheap it gets; and that's the 3:2 ratio. I simply hate working with this aspect ratio. Almost everything I shoot with the D800 is cropped down to 4:3 (Or to a lesser extent, 5:4). Every time I pick my Bronica up, I see the world differently. In a way that appeals to me a lot more than how it looks through a 3:2 viewfinder. And that's a major reason why I am going DMF.
In other words, the S2 is perfect for those who like the "35mm DSLR feel". For the rest, it's a non-player.
+1 I'm with you on the 3:2 ratio.
-
Hi,
Although I am cropping my images to content, so I actually almost never use camera ratio I tend to agree, 645 ratio often gives a good starting point. Something I start to appreciate after shooting 645 for half a year.
Best regards
Erik
+1 I'm with you on the 3:2 ratio.
-
o 4:3 (Or to a lesser extent, 5:4). Every time I pick my Bronica up, I see the world differently. In a way that appeals to me a lot more than how it looks through a 3:2 viewfinder. And that's a major reason why I am going DMF.
In other words, the S2 is perfect for those who like the "35mm DSLR feel". For the rest, it's a non-player.
I agree, for most still images 4:3 is better, 4:5 even better than that, except 90% of every still I shoot is horizontal. Don't know why, I guess it's just the designs are all worked on a horizontal computer so that's the dimension they work from.
I'd love it if every camera had a setting that if you turned it vertically it would black the screen to 4:3, go horizontal and it becomes 2:3.
Now I love the Bronicas also, I used them forever and their screen makes the contax look tiny, though if you want a big view of life, look at the new Olympus omd e-1. That's bloody 4:3 huge and you can actually autofocus it without the enlargement setting. Pretty crazy for a 1300 buck camera.
Since I use the m43's a lot and we insert stills into video for intros, effects, I find that I set them for 2:3 anyway just to give a better approximation of the video frame, though they capture the whole 43 sensor in raw.
BC
-
Hey, what's wrong with Jessica Robertson (https://www.google.com/search?q=Jessica+Robertson&safe=off&espv=210&es_sm=91&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ei=C3iqUsKyF4HksAS08oCICQ&ved=0CAkQ_AUoAQ&biw=1280&bih=728)??
Really?
C1 Upgrades are $50/computer.
From 2005 until today there have been 4 upgrades, 2 of which were free to owners of v3.
This is really unreasonable to you for one of the most important non-human components of your tethered shoots??
My guess is you've spent more money on gaffe tape than you have on C1 upgrades.
Single channel RGB levels and Single Channel RGB Curves were added many versions ago.
C1v7, including those features, is free for use with any of your digital backs. Or $99 upgrade for a 2-computer license if you also want to use it with your Canon/Nikons.
OK I'll admit lately I have a bug up my a__ over software and computers. We run 13 machines and no not 13 people running all of them, rarely more than two people, but I am insane enough to live in multiple cities and have 5 in LA (2 editing, 1 transcoding, 2 still stations) two powerbooks that travel in the dit station, 1 for motion, 1 for stills, 3 in Dallas, 1 editing, 1 combined, 1 still, and three in london, so when I go to upgrade to c1 it's not $50 it's $650 if I load them all up and it's such a pain.
Lately I've added two more and Apples insistence on Maverick is going to turn me into that hooded guy that wears sunglasses and sends notes out of scrap newspaper. I'll bet I've spent over $1500 this last month just on plug ins, little functions like ftp upload apps, dam software, all that stuff you don't think about until you need it.
In fact two of the Imacs I bought were full tilt loaded and identical, only bought 1 week from the other and one will run mountain lion which is rock stable for me, the maverick computer crashed like every 4 minutes running final cut. I finally wiped the drive three times and reinstalled the software and found out if I didn't do the "demanded" video card upgrade it is now solid, so yea, I'm a little more crazy than normal which is really going some.
But Doug maybe it's me but we bought a bunch of liscenses from Steve and every time I go to add them into a machine they get rejected. I'd call Steve up, but I doubt seriously if he wants me buzzing him at 4:15 in the morning, so I just flip over to lightroom, fight the orange face syndrome and process.
Also C-1 7 is bog slow on my older older machines that don't have open cl enabled and after working terabyte of video footage, no still processing should be slow.
I wish Phase would do the apple store thing where you just put in the secret code and it downloads and no Phase's secret code never works for me.
Also I've never skanked a piece of software in my life, but the little spotty kids that work for me can download anything faster than I can legally buy it.
I only shoot naked brides.
Seriously though, fast flash sync isn't about stopping motion in the studio while stopped down. For that, as you say, flash duration is the only thing that really matters.
They're you go, I knew there was a reason you'd put up with doing a wedding.
I think I found one of your images here.
(http://www.russellrutherford.com/plexi_for_ref.jpg)
Hey, you use what you like and that's great. It's just me that's nuts, not you.
For one I hate to use what everyone uses (which is why I probably cringe over the d800).
I also just loathe spending more than 10 grand on a camera body. RED kind of did me in on the R1's. I wrote two 25 grand checks for two bodies and I think they dropped to 8k then 4k in price in a week. Not that I still can't use them or plan on selling them but it kind of pi--es me off. That and dropping $4,500 three times for RED rockets which two died with the only response is they sell me two more for 3 grand a pop, though they sell them to anyone at 3 grand now.
(And they say good will is dead).
So compared to RED you guys are a bargain.
But I'll probably still buy the Leica. It's a decent price, has a big viewfinder, will take my lenses and let me fool myself into believing that I'm a photographer and not a content provider.
Also it's a leica, I'll use it until the paint peels and it's just a camera that hides the fact it's really a computer.
Everybody jukes the stats.
IMO
BC
-
We run 13 machines and no not 13 people running all of them, rarely more than two people, but I am insane enough to live in multiple cities and have 5 in LA (2 editing, 1 transcoding, 2 still stations) two powerbooks that travel in the dit station, 1 for motion, 1 for stills, 3 in Dallas, 1 editing, 1 combined, 1 still, and three in london, so when I go to upgrade to c1 it's not $50 it's $650 if I load them all up and it's such a pain.
---
But Doug maybe it's me but we bought a bunch of liscenses from Steve and every time I go to add them into a machine they get rejected. I'd call Steve up, but I doubt seriously if he wants me buzzing him at 4:15 in the morning, so I just flip over to lightroom, fight the orange face syndrome and process.
We frequently consolidate licenses for our customers (at no charge). So instead of several 2-seat licenses, you end up with one XX-seat license. This makes it a LOT more easy to manage.
You can keep that (one) license linked to your email address, which you can use to login to phaseone.com to manage at any time.
Moreover P1 will let you reset the activations on your license from their website (24/7, free). This means you only need as many licenses as you plan to use at the same time. If you have the budget/inclination you can have enough licenses to activate all the computers at the same time, but it's not necessary.
I think P1's licensing and upgrade policies are some of the most generous in the pro-photography market. The only license I find more photographer-friendly is Aperture. Certainly P1's policies are more photographer-friendly than Adobe.
-
Doug,
I must say I know quite a few people who run cracked software *while in the possession of valid licenses* because of the irritation not with the cost or terms but with the licensing process itself. In fact there are some specialist online shops which seem to "sell" cracks to exactly this customer base. I know some very respected individuals in the industry who "shop" for cracked software they have already licensed -in effect paying twice just to avoid hassle. I myself run at least one piece of dongled software which I will end up buying a crack for because although I own 3 (!) dongles, the dongles are always in the wrong place.
In my capacity as an analyst I'd estimate that copy protection nuisance issues are responsible for at least 30% of the cases when a piece of software gets dropped from a workflow, at least for individuals.
Our esteemed friend who goes by the name of Cooter seems to be a paying customer, I would suggest you listen carefully to what he is saying, because in his high pressure situation he will drop any product that creates a workflow issue. Telling him there is a solution is no use - either the solution is there at once or he really has a problem and then you have one less customer. Don't forget, for someone like him the easiest solution is to go all-Adobe.
Edmund
We frequently consolidate licenses for our customers (at no charge). So instead of several 2-seat licenses, you end up with one XX-seat license. This makes it a LOT more easy to manage.
You can keep that (one) license linked to your email address, which you can use to login to phaseone.com to manage at any time.
Moreover P1 will let you reset the activations on your license from their website (24/7, free). This means you only need as many licenses as you plan to use at the same time. If you have the budget/inclination you can have enough licenses to activate all the computers at the same time, but it's not necessary.
I think P1's licensing and upgrade policies are some of the most generous in the pro-photography market. The only license I find more photographer-friendly is Aperture. Certainly P1's policies are more photographer-friendly than Adobe.
-
Cooter wrote:
"If you point a Leica, I promise you your brain works different. If it feels important in your hand it will look important in the viewfinder (you can quote me on that). I have about 15 minutes (at most) to relight, make the subject into a pretty still and then back to the next setup. I don't need a billion iso, just 800 and with the fast contax glass I can get there with a kino or a 500 to 800 watt hmi, or if I look a window light and a cutter will do it."
This is VERY true.
-
Doesn't Leica have a program like Canon's "explorers of light" where a deserving upstanding member of the community like ... can apply for his free S2? It's so sad to witness this unrequited yearning and adoration:)
Edmund
Cooter wrote:
"If you point a Leica, I promise you your brain works different. If it feels important in your hand it will look important in the viewfinder (you can quote me on that). I have about 15 minutes (at most) to relight, make the subject into a pretty still and then back to the next setup. I don't need a billion iso, just 800 and with the fast contax glass I can get there with a kino or a 500 to 800 watt hmi, or if I look a window light and a cutter will do it."
This is VERY true.
-
I don't think Leica has ever given anything away for free. Ever.
The Canon Explorers of Light (a painful name that conjurs the "ARTIST" Thomas Kinkade) never gave anything away, it was sort of like an expanded CPS program. Long term loan in trade for using your name and personal work for marketing.
The thing about the S2 is that all of Nikon's DF marketing applies. Perhaps more so than the DF.
I get the same feeling of purpose from a Nikon F4, F5, Hasselblad V, Rollei. Heft and simplicity, tripod free.
It is yearning. I often think of the private school tuition I pay, and how neatly one year of tuition would pay for an S2, the 70 2.5 and a few adapters for my V lenses. As someone said, the kids will adjust to public school. It not so bad. They can already read and do math, One speaks French fairly well. Its only a year.
Doesn't Leica have a program like Canon's "explorers of light" where a deserving upstanding member of the community like ... can apply for his free S2? It's so sad to witness this unrequited yearning and adoration:)
Edmund
-
I often think of the private school tuition I pay, and how neatly one year of tuition would pay for an S2, the 70 2.5 and a few adapters for my V lenses.
Yeah so true! Starting a private school might be a good business to get into…
Totally off topic
In SF there was a lottery system where the parents put their first choice in grade schools - out of about 50 there are maybe 3 good ones. We got one and people told us we won the lottery - and actually that's almost true … K-8th x 2 kids x $30k/year
-
We did the lottery system, got one of the good schools, then the budget was cut such that there were 31 kids in a class and the school was forced to take some really bad teachers close to retirement. So, yeah, back to $22k x 2, for the forseable future. Better than NYC, where private is between $33k and $40k.
T
Yeah so true! Starting a private school might be a good business to get into…
Totally off topic
In SF there was a lottery system where the parents put their first choice in grade schools - out of about 50 there are maybe 3 good ones. We got one and people told us we won the lottery - and actually that's almost true … K-8th x 2 kids x $30k/year
-
The Canon Explorers of Light (a painful name that conjurs the "ARTIST" Thomas Kinkade) never gave anything away, it was sort of like an expanded CPS program. Long term loan in trade for using your name and personal work for marketing.
TMARK
I used to know one of these guys - a beauty/fashion guy, I learnt a lot of retouch tricks from him - and he had a very good relationship with Canon, testing new cameras in development etc. I am sure every manufacturer does something similar, officially or unofficially, as I keep running into camera testers.
Pretty sure Leica gives stuff away, when the name of the person it's given to promotes the brand or gets their foot in a door. I think this is called celebrity marketing.
BTW, what does top talent like our friend shoots now charge for a day's work? I have a feeling this story is like the owner of a Caddy complaining about the price of whitewall tires.
Edmund
-
BTW, what does top talent like our friend shoots now charge for a day's work? I have a feeling this story is like the owner of a Caddy complaining about the price of whitewall tires.
That has changed quite a lot.
Unless few ones at the very top, not only in the craft recognition but also (and a lot) on the celeb gossip parade.
-
That has changed quite a lot.
Unless few ones at the very top, not only in the craft recognition but also (and a lot) on the celeb gossip parade.
Don't be shy, Fred, give us some numbers for an intl. ad campaign ...
After all people here are saying how much their cameras cost, and what the school fees are ...
Edmund
-
No one charges a day rate, its all usage and mark ups on rentals or renting your own gear, file prep, etc.
That being said, its all in the usage and the media buy.
I rarely see estimates now adays, unless its brought to me to look over if it seems high or low. It usually includes production, so I see a bottom line number that includes usage and production, including travel and estimated AMEX bills. Also, I've only had one campaign in the last three years that was shot stills only. It was Nadav Kander. I don't know what his rate was but the ad buy was relatively large and the client relatively rich.
IN NYC for a fashion editorial, if it was a big spread, I'd net $3k - $12k, on usage. Maybe. Single shots for a newspaper's Sunday edition around $0 - $800, but they pay for production. Corporate headshots for a website and print collateral, say 20 delivered files, $20k, where ALL RIGHTS are transferred.
So it depends.
Don't be shy, Fred, give us some numbers for an intl. ad campaign ...
After all people here are saying how much their cameras cost, and what the school fees are ...
Edmund
-
I'm not in still (fashion) industry anymore, but if my memory is correct
the lastest campaign we had one top model (wich name I won't reveal), fashion brand
and per day she was earning 5000 with hotel and facilities payed of course.
It's about 3500 or a Little more for her net per day wich is not astronomical at all.
The photographer, way less.
I talked with the model about that and she told me that a few years ago she was
earning the double.
Of course, this does not take into account the photocalls she did for the sponsors
but that was not part of the campaign.
Now in video...it's the wild west. The latest I did that involved a fast editing and some retouch
basicaly to recover some artefact in the oblics and it was a day of work plus the DCP
and they paied me 650 euros in wich I have taxes. So approx a day of work is in between
250 and 600 depending.
I would say that in the low-end, if one can make 2000euros/month you can say it's quite good.
(this is approx the salary of the building watchman...)
-
Doesn't Leica have a program like Canon's "explorers of light" where a deserving upstanding member of the community like ... can apply for his free S2? It's so sad to witness this unrequited yearning and adoration:)
Edmund
T's right Leica doesn't give out stuff for free, few companies do, but trust me, you don't want it.
I know a celeb that Kauffman gave a noctilux to and some of them will cut you a mediocre deal if you say what they want.
In fact the only two companies I've dealt with that I think actually like professional photographers are Fuji and was Leaf. They both respected professionals that used their equipment.
Those two companies were photographer centric though even leaf got suckered in by a few looks like a photographer but not a photographer types.
In my experience the rest not only don't respect photographers some hold contempt. Kodak was the worse.
Now companies will give free s__t out to real celebrities and if your shooting a real celeb, they'll show up in 12 seconds to drink wine and schmooze.
Camera companies will also kiss the a-- of reviewers and some bloggers with high count sites, even pay some for consultation, though usually once the review is over they want their camera back, even if its 2 grand.
There is one camera company who I worked with that I would never write a check to, even if they gave me their house and I get an email a week where some asks "should I buy a ----- ---. I say sure, if you want to donate to the devil.
No the best deal is buy retail and try to buy from a local store that's not b+h, samys or amazon, so you can actually walk in and touch the equipment before you buy.
In that part of the industry, my favorite person is Steve Hendrix. As far as I know he's never once fibbed to me, or shaded the truth and the people that buy from him are usually loyal for life (and full disclaimer I get nothing for free from Steve, would never ever expect it). I just like him.
In fact as I write this I got an email from Steve whose standing in line at the dmv. He tracked down some very esoteric equipment I use and found the whole set new. I bought it as fast as I could write.
So in my view . . . Call Steve.
IMO
BC
-
Sometimes, I think out of the box…
(http://echophoto.smugmug.com/Travel/US-NorthEast-National-Parks/i-bVBxjcD/0/XL/20081213-LewisCanyon_01-XL.jpg)
Best regards
Erik
I agree, for most still images 4:3 is better, 4:5 even better than that, except 90% of every still I shoot is horizontal. Don't know why, I guess it's just the designs are all worked on a horizontal computer so that's the dimension they work from.
I'd love it if every camera had a setting that if you turned it vertically it would black the screen to 4:3, go horizontal and it becomes 2:3.
Now I love the Bronicas also, I used them forever and their screen makes the contax look tiny, though if you want a big view of life, look at the new Olympus omd e-1. That's bloody 4:3 huge and you can actually autofocus it without the enlargement setting. Pretty crazy for a 1300 buck camera.
Since I use the m43's a lot and we insert stills into video for intros, effects, I find that I set them for 2:3 anyway just to give a better approximation of the video frame, though they capture the whole 43 sensor in raw.
BC
-
In fact as I write this I got an email from Steve whose standing in line at the dmv. He tracked down some very esoteric equipment I use and found the whole set new. I bought it as fast as I could write.
So in my view . . . Call Steve.
IMO
BC
Wasn't a set of Leica Summilux-C's by any chance was it? ;)
-
\
BTW, what does top talent like our friend shoots now charge for a day's work? I have a feeling this story is like the owner of a Caddy complaining about the price of whitewall tires.
Edmund
I don't know who your referring to but I can fortunately afford what it takes to run my business, but it takes a lot and I do it in a very complicated way.
Buying an S2 isn't a problem. Using it is. Do I need it . . . NO. Do I want it . . . kind of because I want a new STILL camera.
Anyway on your question on rates, I won't give numbers as only the government gets access to that, but with increased taxes, multiple locations, costs of doing business in motion imagery and inflation costs have gone up dramatically and rates haven't.
We've found ways to keep the numbers good, but the base line for most is you work twice as hard for half the pay. My neighbors in LA are all in the biz in different specialties, writer, costumer design, production company rep, DP, effects person and they all have the same answer. Twice the work, half the pay, twice the demands, no complaining or coming back for more.
In fact two people on my block have basically just walked away from the biz. They suffered a kind of sick of this s__t burnout and are exploring new life options, (whatever that means).
For the last 5 years the industry did a flip. 82% of all corporate advertising manager jobs have disappeared, the hardest hit job category in the U.S., Those are the people that manage the people that hire us, so work that out.
Also the biz world has gone conservative. No bat shit crazy concepts where people toss money at the job to get it done. It's now 3 creative treatments, 4 estimates and hitting the bottom line.
The money can be a drag, but the lack of creativity is a heart breaker. The world just doesn't want to have fun anymore and fun seems defined by an i phone and one beer instead of going out and doing stuff that actually increases spending and gets you in fun trouble.
And NO social media and internet advertising has not made up the difference.
In fact most metrics don't show social media as a replacement for traditional advertising. Amazon may sell a lot, but that's only after someone advertised the product for them. Let's face it you walk though google like you do on soho with the attitude of hope I see something I'll like.
You go on google after visiting the car dealer or a camera store and type in Leica S2 for sale and see the results.
That's why I say buy from a smaller dealer you know. Saving $400 might save a job or two.
Facebook Autoplay may open up new venues for advertising, but we'll have to wait on that because the web has a reputation for cheap and a cheap media buy usually means cheap content.
You can't blame advertisers though because they can only sell so much to so many. Forget the BS you hear about the lower employment rate (which doesn't count people that fell off the unemployment roles or just gave up) or the inflation numbers that don't count energy costs and food (duh?).
The U.S. has more people looking for work than any time in 35 years, so add it up, if you are only going to have 300 people a day walk into a store, no matter how you advertise your still going to get 300 people a day.
The world is on buzz kill mode right now and unfortunatley believes this really is the new normal, but so far, we're doing ok as long as I pull very long days.
IMO
BC
-
Wasn't a set of Leica Summilux-C's by any chance was it? ;)
No it's another Broncolor HMI. Not Kobal Bron, but the blue 500 to 800 watt broncolors.
I own a bunch of them, some older, some newer and love em. They have the same look as a profoto flash and are small enough to travel with.
The only downside is my older ones are fragile for long distance travel and TSA, the new ones are good.
I got turned on to them by a Hong Kong Gaffer I love working with and was amazed at how efficient they were.
Steve has found them before for me but Steve always comes through faster than anyone I work with.
Doug's good, I dig Yair (though he's a factory rep) and Lance is a good guy, but Steve's my go to source. I just wish he sold motion equipment, but that's not his deal.
IMO
BC
-
I'm not in still (fashion) industry anymore, but if my memory is correct
the lastest campaign we had one top model (wich name I won't reveal), fashion brand
and per day she was earning 5000 with hotel and facilities payed of course.
It's about 3500 or a Little more for her net per day wich is not astronomical at all.
The photographer, way less.
I talked with the model about that and she told me that a few years ago she was
earning the double.
Of course, this does not take into account the photocalls she did for the sponsors
but that was not part of the campaign.
Now in video...it's the wild west. The latest I did that involved a fast editing and some retouch
basicaly to recover some artefact in the oblics and it was a day of work plus the DCP
and they paied me 650 euros in wich I have taxes. So approx a day of work is in between
250 and 600 depending.
I would say that in the low-end, if one can make 2000euros/month you can say it's quite good.
(this is approx the salary of the building watchman...)
I just picked up the bill for my neighbour's car servicing for him - he's coming out here during January.
The official, Ford dealership charge for the mechanic: €38 per hour.
On the basis of a 40 hour week - maybe they work more - that's bringing in €1520 a week, and if they get half of that after the business takes its bit, that's about €750 a week, or around €3000 a month...
Would any of those guys want to be snappers?
Yeah, right; it was so different in my time.
Rob C
-
Yeah,
Life is hard. No, he doesn't get to keep half on what is billed, but maybe he can make something by doing cash deals.
Edmund
I just picked up the bill for my neighbour's car servicing for him - he's coming out here during January.
The official, Ford dealership charge for the mechanic: €38 per hour.
On the basis of a 40 hour week - maybe they work more - that's bringing in €1520 a week, and if they get half of that after the business takes its bit, that's about €750 a week, or around €3000 a month...
Would any of those guys want to be snappers?
Yeah, right; it was so different in my time.
Rob C