Luminous Landscape Forum
Equipment & Techniques => Medium Format / Film / Digital Backs – and Large Sensor Photography => Topic started by: adam tracksler on May 14, 2013, 07:57:01 am
-
Looking at getting a mfd setup.
I am looking at buying a body and lenses first, renting a back and finally buying a back.
Right now I mostly shoot product and food in studio, and some location.i do some portraits, but would more than likely keep using my leica for people, since it is great for that, and terrible for tabletop studio work....
I'm looking at the mamiya rz67 pro ( probably @$500 with a 65 and 110 lens), and the mamiya AFD (@$900 with a 80 and 150 lens) . The 67 is cheaper, which means the back is closer to being purchased, but the AFD is newer, and all the hoo ha that goes with it.
Which is a more solid buy?
Thanks in advance.
-
I have both. For slower and more deliberate work the rz67 is my favorite, when I need more mobility & speed I grab the 645. The one drawback with the rz67 + digital is the crop factor of x1,5, which means no ultrawides, other than that it's a fantastic camera.
-
As you might imagine neither body is "better". They each have advantages and disadvantages and different ergonomics.
By far the best option is for you to get your hands on both and see which fits your hands, shooting style, and technical needs best.
But I'll outline some of the technical considerations for you...
First, as mentioned above there is no very wide lens on the RZ platform for a digital back. You can use our Visualizer tools (https://digitaltransitions.com/page/tech-camera-visualizers) to see how various focal lengths will look with a given digital back. The platform doesn't matter for this, so a 110m lens will have the same angle of view with a given digital back whether it's on a view camera, RZ, or 645AFD.
Second, there are two types of RZ, the RZ Pro IID is the most recent and accepts M mount digital backs. The RZ Pro II is older and accepts V-mount and H mount backs with some limitations (specific back compatibility is based on whether the back needs wakeup). You'll have a much easier time in NYC and Miami (the two markets I can vouch for) renting a back which is compatible with the RZ Pro IID. EITHER of these bodies (RZ Pro II, RZ Pro IID) will need an adapter which is often more expensive than the body itself.
Third, the older AFD body is not officially supported on the newest Phase One and Leaf digital backs. It does work but it's occasionally glitchy. It'd be preferable, budget allowing, to have an Mamiya AFDIII or Phase One AF which are still fully supported by Phase One and Leaf.
I strongly suggest you find and work closely with a dealer during this process. Even with the forums and thorough research it's easy to make a "beginner" mistake like not taking into account the need for an adapter on the RZ platform.
-
Looking at getting a mfd setup.
I am looking at buying a body and lenses first, renting a back and finally buying a back.
Right now I mostly shoot product and food in studio, and some location.i do some portraits, but would more than likely keep using my leica for people, since it is great for that, and terrible for tabletop studio work....
I'm looking at the mamiya rz67 pro ( probably @$500 with a 65 and 110 lens), and the mamiya AFD (@$900 with a 80 and 150 lens) . The 67 is cheaper, which means the back is closer to being purchased, but the AFD is newer, and all the hoo ha that goes with it.
Which is a more solid buy?
Thanks in advance.
Adam -
Just some quick thoughts. You say the RZ way gets you closer to the digital back being purchased because it's cheaper. It's $400 cheaper, does that really make that much of a difference on which DB you hang on it? How much are you planning to invest in the DB? Don't forget, for the RZ, you'll also need an adapter of some sort, which can cost over $400 even used, plus cabling.
They're night and day different cameras, but remember, for most DB's not necessarily exclusive. It is common to have 1 DB that can fit on both. For studio/product - on a tripod, I would opt for the RZ. You can always add the AFD (or newer Mamiya/Phase 645) later.
Steve Hendrix
Capture Integration
-
Steve, I know that in the grand scheme of things 400 either way is not a huge deal.
I'm looking at Leaf Valeo 22/17 or the DCS Pro.
I know that I am looking at lower end older backs, but my budget is tight right now. (which is why Im actually looking more towards renting backs)
My questions are would either body prevent me from using backs (I know that trying to look into the future of camera hardware is a fools errand at best) in the future?
Here is the RZ67 Pro
(http://i.imgur.com/I4Y8jXu.jpg)
And the AFD
(http://i.imgur.com/9502F9o.jpg)
To even get started with the RZ67 Pro, I will need an adapter? which looks like it negates the savings...
Is the glass much better with one or the other? (I'm currently shooting with an M8, so manual is totally fine with me, and I have a S5Pro for a SLR.)
Should I expand my horizons and look at another platform as well? Im at the very beginning of this journey....
-
Steve, I know that in the grand scheme of things 400 either way is not a huge deal.
I'm looking at Leaf Valeo 22/17 or the DCS Pro.
I know that I am looking at lower end older backs, but my budget is tight right now. (which is why Im actually looking more towards renting backs)
My questions are would either body prevent me from using backs (I know that trying to look into the future of camera hardware is a fools errand at best) in the future?
Here is the RZ67 Pro
(http://i.imgur.com/I4Y8jXu.jpg)
And the AFD
(http://i.imgur.com/9502F9o.jpg)
To even get started with the RZ67 Pro, I will need an adapter? which looks like it negates the savings...
Is the glass much better with one or the other? (I'm currently shooting with an M8, so manual is totally fine with me, and I have a S5Pro for a SLR.)
Should I expand my horizons and look at another platform as well? Im at the very beginning of this journey....
Both platforms have good compatibility with current and recent generation offerings from both Leaf and Phase One (to a lesser extent, older Hasselblad or older/newer Sinar DB's).
The RZ would require an adapter that costs over $900 new (and a $20 connecting cable).
It is a big horizon....
But I do like the platform selection - either of them - because it provides an easy way to utilize 2 different types of camera systems with the same digital back. If you can stretch to the Valeo 22, that would be helpful for lens coverage with the RZ especially. I still have quite a few clients shooting with Valeos. However, keep in mind that some of the Valeos are un-repairable (certain components are no longer available). This includes Valeo 6 - Valeo 17, I believe.
The glass is good on both. The RZ, paired with 22 megapixels, seems to be a favorite sweet spot, with my clients anyway....
Steve Hendrix
Capture Integration
-
the RZ needs an adapter regardless of the back?
-
the RZ needs an adapter regardless of the back?
Yes, there is no native RZ interface for any digital back. Any digital back will need an adapter (which one will depend on which digital back). For the AFD, there is no interface adapter needed (nor cabling), the native interface of Mamiya will mount seamlessly.
Steve Hendrix
Capture Integration
-
If you are doing mainly studio, product and food you should keep in mind the usefulness of tilt shift lenses.
Neither the RZ or the AFD offer that much in that area and the prices of the tilt shift lens o two they have are very expensive.
Many people are using Fuji gx680 cameras that have a full range of tilt shift lenses. Actually all the lenses are tilt shift.
From 50mm to 500mm.
The cameras can be found on ebay for very good prices.
Kapture group makes an adapter and control box that lets you use digital backs on it.
What is even more interesting is that they make a stitch adapter that lets you shoot two shots and do a very simple stitch.
This would give you a huge 43 to 44 MP file and capture an image capture area twice the size of the top of the line
backs . The stitch adapter also lets you take full advantage of the angle of view of the wide angles
On top of a straight two frame stitch you can also use lens shift to increase the capture area, but for distant subjects like landscape.
This will give you a straight easy to stitch panorama of about 52 MP of a virtual capture area of about 6x11.8
The lenses are outstanding and made at the time in the same plant that makes the Hasselblad H lenses.
The Kapture group adapter for single shot with the control box is about $ 800 new, but you will save a heap of money on lenses
and would have a full range of tilt shift lenses.
Kapture Group
http://kapturegroup.com/solution/two.html
Fuji gx680
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/a9/FujiGX680III_3.JPG)
The Fuji system has some very nice viewfinder options that work very nicely with
the crop factor of using a digital back.
Regarding the Mamiya RZ it is also a nice option, but very limiter tilt shift options.
Regarding the lenses they are excellent and are plenty sharp to go even beyond a 22 MP back.
I owned both the RZ, AFD III, (phase One AF), DF and still shoot with the Fuji gx680.
Like many I found the AFD/DF to be problematic, but the RZ was a very reliable workhorse.
I would recommend the RZ over the AFD/DF. Lenses are very inexpensive and in some ways better.
IF you want more info on the GX680 send me a PM with your email and I can send you a system brochure and manuals I have scanned
Oh and one last thing. The RZ and the Fuji GX 680 are fantastic with film. The 6x7 or 6x8 negative size gives them a very nice true MF look
compared to 645 that back in the day was entry level MF.
Here is an example with the RZ:
(http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8492/8407847602_53ddb885ce_o.jpg)
and because we're on the internet a crop from the same negative (scanned with the relatively modest Epson v750)
EDIT: Close up crop of detail of the clothing removed as it seemed to bother someone.
Replaced with this detail... for everyone one who may be interested.
(http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7284/8739556600_db59588667_b.jpg)
And here is an example shot with the Fuji gx680
(http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7057/6978333439_bef816f9f2_o.jpg)
larger here:
http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7057/6978333439_bef816f9f2_o.jpg (http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7057/6978333439_bef816f9f2_o.jpg)
(http://farm7.staticflickr.com/6132/5935982552_fbbdfea714_b.jpg)
Crop from the same image.
(http://farm7.staticflickr.com/6130/5935423087_2b282d7b8c_b.jpg)
(http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5250/5356464560_f46a54d63a_b.jpg)
Crop
(http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5142/5738647019_08d35d415e_z.jpg)
-
Fred, love the second shot you posted.
The Fuji looks like a nice camera system. However, I would recommend that you, Adam, slow down right now and research all of the possible platforms, talk to those who use the platforms you are interested in and test them yourself. After this, start worrying about prices. Regardless of the platform, it is going to be expensive and I would think it is much cheaper to save and get the platform you are comfortable with than buying a cheaper platform only to become disappointed with (or envious of the platform you really want) and change later.
Since this will probably be the main tool for you, I feel it would be better to save and buy the system that works best for you.
-
I knew it was time for that crotch shot again!
-
Just so no one thinks I am a pervert, I meant the real second shot, not the not so tastefully cropped close up of the woman's crotch.
-
I vote RZ. Great lenses, cheapish, and no electronic interface between body and back to throw errors and lock-ups. The AFd, while great with film, has some issues with digital. The AFdIII and DF cameras appear much better, but I've never used them.
-
I knew it was time for that crotch shot again!
::)
-
Testing is the hard part. I don't know anyone around me that is using mfd... Up in maine, it's pretty lonely...
-
I would do your research and plan a trip to Photo Expo in NYC this Fall. Usually all of the MF companies come to the expo. You could even schedule a meeting with a dealer while your down there.
Are you in Southern or Northern Maine?
-
I would do your research and plan a trip to Photo Expo in NYC this Fall. Usually all of the MF companies come to the expo. You could even schedule a meeting with a dealer while your down there.
We'll be there :).
-
I would do your research and plan a trip to Photo Expo in NYC this Fall. Usually all of the MF companies come to the expo. You could even schedule a meeting with a dealer while your down there.
Are you in Southern or Northern Maine?
Southern Maine. Right near NH and Mass.
-
Southern Maine. Right near NH and Mass.
Hi Adam -
Oh! Well, why don't you contact Dave McRitchie from our Boston office? He is out of the country today, but should be arriving back by Friday. I'll send you his contact info.
Steve Hendrix
Capture Integration
-
I vote RZ. Great lenses, cheapish, and no electronic interface between body and back to throw errors and lock-ups. The AFd, while great with film, has some issues with digital. The AFdIII and DF cameras appear much better, but I've never used them.
I had more lockups with the Phase One DF and Phase One Af with a phase one back than using the Fuji gx680 with the Kapture Group adapter and control box.
-
Third, the older AFD body is not officially supported on the newest Phase One and Leaf digital backs. It does work but it's occasionally glitchy.
This is news to me! :o
1) Define "glitchy".
2) What has actually changed? The Mamiya MSCE digital interface in the AFD and later bodies and later always seemed to be universally compatible with M-mount DBs. What you are implying is that there were different versions of the MSCE in the AFD and the AFD II. That's never been documented, AFAIK.
Ray
-
This thread seems to be about going back in time?
Why not look at the obvious choices, Phase, Leica or Hasselblad?
http://www.phaseone.com/
http://www.hasselbladusa.com/
http://us.leica-camera.com/home/
They are all the worlds best...
BTW, I am an former Fuji GX 680 user and it is not an option for digital no mater how familiar I am with it or how enamored. That system was designed to shoot 6x8 roll film not a 36x48 digital sensor. Digital is not film.
-
This thread seems to be about going back in time?
Why not look at the obvious choices, Phase, Leica or Hasselblad?
http://www.phaseone.com/
http://www.hasselbladusa.com/
http://us.leica-camera.com/home/
They are all the worlds best...
BTW, I am an former Fuji GX 680 user and it is not an option for digital no mater how familiar I am with it or how enamored. That system was designed to shoot 6x8 roll film not a 36x48 digital sensor. Digital is not film.
GoGo both the Hasselblad and Phase One systems are film systems retrofitted, modified for Digital.
The Leica S2 is the only "almost" MF that was developed from the ground up for digital.
Like the Hasselblad the Fuji GX680 evolved into a digital camera but limited to the Japanese market.
(http://4.static.img-dpreview.com/files/news/0856210118/fujifilmmfback-oncamera-001.jpg?v=2165)
The back was actually larger Than the 36x48 sensor size you refer to. It was a 20 MP+ sensor with a dual array of photosites, one for highlights and one for shadows
37 x 52. The SuperCCD chip produced a 41.4 million pixel image (5408 x 7648).They are very hard to find.
Fuji decided to putt out of MF pro digital in "first person" so to speak when it made the arrangement to manufacture for Hasselblad and market it a Fuji gx645 in Japan where much of the camera was made.
If you look at the Fuji gx680 back you can clearly see that it could fit a 645 body, but Fuji chose to move most of it's efforts into far more profitable 3rd part manufacturing and it's own consumer
product.
Here is a thread with a few forum users that use the Fuji gx680. Some examples of table top in their portfolios.
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/forum/index.php?topic=60247.0 (http://www.luminous-landscape.com/forum/index.php?topic=60247.0)
-
considering the added cost of the adapters for the mamiya and fuji platforms, does it make more sense just to get a hasselblad 500 series? (I know... its the cheapskate -- er , thrifty -- scot in me coming out..)
-
considering the added cost of the adapters for the mamiya and fuji platforms, does it make more sense just to get a hasselblad 500 series? (I know... its the cheapskate -- er , thrifty -- scot in me coming out..)
Adam - You could consider it, but unless you're drawn to that camera, your better option might be to go for a Mamiya AFD-II or (AFD-III). Might be another $300-$400 (a bit more for the AFD-III). And whose to say a Hasselblad 500 series with lenses would be less? It may not be.
*And at some point, (as someone else mentioned) you do need to ask yourself, if you're making too many budget-oriented compromises, that you aren't better off saving up some more for some better choices down the road a bit. For those who really want to shoot medium format digital, it can be done (relatively) affordably, but there are limits to how affordable, and at those edges, they do begin to call into question the worthiness of the pursuit.
Steve Hendrix
Capture Integration
-
Adam - You could consider it, but unless you're drawn to that camera, your better option might be to go for a Mamiya AFD-II or (AFD-III). Might be another $300-$400 (a bit more for the AFD-III). And whose to say a Hasselblad 500 series with lenses would be less? It may not be.
*And at some point, (as someone else mentioned) you do need to ask yourself, if you're making too many budget-oriented compromises, that you aren't better off saving up some more for some better choices down the road a bit. For those who really want to shoot medium format digital, it can be done (relatively) affordably, but there are limits to how affordable, and at those edges, they do begin to call into question the worthiness of the pursuit.
Steve Hendrix
Capture Integration
This is sage advice. You can do MFD on the cheap, but not too cheap.
Affordable V series Blads are old, and often out of spec. I shot my 501cm a few months ago with a Phase P21. Everything was "off": Intermittent sync failures, out of focus images. I sent the body and my 80mm CF in. The mirror needed to be adjusted, the hooks that hold the back needed adjustment, and the lens was, essentially, rebuilt. Note that I never had these problems with film. Getting the CLA wasn't cheap, about $650 all in. Note that this was a late model I bought new 10 years ago, and didn't use very often.
-
Adam.
First regarding the cost of adapters for the Fuji gx680 you could opt for a simple chinese adapter plate, but be limited to shooting at 1/15th of a second. This is because the Fuji gx680 sends a 1/15th of a second pulse over the flash sync connector and that is used to trigger the back. You would also have to do a two shot sequence. One to wake up the back and the second to take the actual photo. you can do the two shot actually fireing the camera only once. You use the flash test button on the camera for wakeup and then fire the camera. IF you are shooting in studio with flash and can dimm or turn off the pilot lights this works fine. You could at least start this way and get an Kapture Group One shot for the gx680 later.
However there is another possibility that would give you very high IQ far better than entry level MF if you are shooting still life
product shot. It's called the RhinoCam by Fotodiox. It lets you use MF lenses on in a very simple stitch mode using a Sony Nex camera.
The stitch will take a bit longer than a single shot, but 90% of the time the actual camera shooting time is nothing compared to setting up the shot.
You have a full focusing screen to compose your shot, but also real live view for critical focus.
By stitching multiple 24MP high dynamic range Sony sensor captures the Rhino produces very high quality images that rival even
top of the line DMFB that cost over $20,000
http://www.popphoto.com/gear/2013/04/video-hands-fotodiox-vizelex-rhinocam (http://www.popphoto.com/gear/2013/04/video-hands-fotodiox-vizelex-rhinocam)
Here is a comparison between a P45 digital back and the RhinoCam
(http://fotodioxpro.com/RhinoCam_Images/website/vrc-crop-demo-4up.jpg)
With full frame mirrorless cameras just around the corner we can expect a RhinoCam for those cameras too.
There is also a similar product in the works for use with Nikon and Canon tilt shift lenses.
Sort of like the Rhino cam, but with tilt shift support.
I am working on my own Franken camera. A shift sensor for Nex and Nikon D800 that uses Fuji GX680 lenses.
120 MP tilt shit 4 shot stitch camera.
Keep in mind I'm talking about stitching using back shifting so the stitch is a very straight forward step in photoshop.
-
This is sage advice. You can do MFD on the cheap, but not too cheap.
IMO, unless your just in love with an older blad, or RZ, AND you can shoot in a less than pressured production, older digital takes a lot of work.
Like T and his blad, we go through the same thing with our Contax(s). I have 5 bodies, 5 viewfinders, double the lenses and out of all of that, including yearly service, I have two fully working systems, the rest are sketchy, and keep in mind contax was one of the few film cameras that was born with a digital interface and doesn't require cords and third party adapters to make them work.
The one thing about the Contax is the Zeiss lenses are always sharp and fast and have never required calibrating.
Given that if/when I buy a new MFD for professional work, I personally would look at it in two ways.
If I wanted to spend less and didn't have to worry about tethering I'd go with the Pentax, if tethering was important I'd go with the new H5d.
AT 7 grand the Pentax is virtually the same costs as my Canon 1dxs with lenses, if you shop legacy the lhe costs is less than the Canon.
The H5d40 is obviously more expensive, about double the costs, but with tethering, removable finder, software suite and in lens shutters does twice as much.
BTW: The H5d auto focuses better than any medium format camera I've ever seen. I mean it just snaps to the point and holds and does it quickly, almost 35mm quick.
I spent about 45 minutes trying to fool the focus on the h5 and rarely could. The H5 really is a refined version of the earlier H series.
If your not shooting for direct commerce I can understand using a camera that you like, regardless of the work or usability, but in the long run, the newer cameras in almost every format are very good.
IMO
BC
-
Glad to hear the focus snaps in place just bought the H5 but never tried one before 8) you made my day.
thanks
-
Looking forward to get a real production ones in hand to try this. Till now, only saw some pre-production samples and the AF was the H4 one.
-
Agree with Joe about doing your research and look at all the options, and your upgrade paths!
I'd have to go with Steve on the AFD2; have had one for years, as long as you go for primes. Then you can keep looking out for a Linhof 679cs going cheap, onto which you can stick whatever back you already own, buy a lens, and learn just how wicked camera movement can be.
I suspect that you'll quickly hit the buffers with a camera with no movement! Just my opinion.
Jon