considering MF jump for large format portraiture

[mstevensphoto]

Hi all, been forever since I've posted here. I'm showing and selling more and more portraiture at 34x40" to 60x80" and repeatedly finding my 5dmkIII wanting. I photograph mostly kids and the photos are mostly 1/4 or 1/2 length. given that I want to show things large I try to get it right in camera but often end up cropping a bit. anyway, looking for a 50mp solution because of the close up viewing of my work AND two not so technical reasons - 1) my clients have $ and I hate when they have my camera (or better) because it feels less special. 2) for the last decade and a half I've missed that feel that I used to get from my old film Mamiya.

I've been eyeballing the 645z, now wondering about the GFX 50R, and frankly hoping for some suggestions because I can't find most of these in store to even play with. A couple years ago Digital Transitions let me Demo the mamiya kit and the images were just lovely and the experience was impractical. I rely on auto focus and it was clunky and often missed in addition to being a beast and a half of a camera.

I've got $8-10k for a camera and 110mm (or so) lens, it's gotta auto focus easily and accurately. I'm gonna blow up the photos large for close view, printed myself in BW usually but not always. help me with my brain damage, what do you pick for the task at hand?

[tcdeveau]

You could look at the GFX-50R or 50s and 110mm - thatd be well under your $8-10k budget and would meet your needs. Plus, with the GFX, you know the GFX100 is around the corner and you could upgrade later if you need more resolution.

For portraiture, I’d look at the GFX or X1D over the 645z. The 645z is great, but for portraiture, on-sensor AF with the GFX/X1D means focus points across the whole sensor (which the 645z lacks) and no focus and recompose and a better hit ratio (at least in my hands)

[Doug Peterson]

Hi all, been forever since I've posted here. I'm showing and selling more and more portraiture at 34x40" to 60x80" and repeatedly finding my 5dmkIII wanting. I photograph mostly kids and the photos are mostly 1/4 or 1/2 length. given that I want to show things large I try to get it right in camera but often end up cropping a bit. anyway, looking for a 50mp solution because of the close up viewing of my work AND two not so technical reasons - 1) my clients have $ and I hate when they have my camera (or better) because it feels less special. 2) for the last decade and a half I've missed that feel that I used to get from my old film Mamiya.

I've been eyeballing the 645z, now wondering about the GFX 50R, and frankly hoping for some suggestions because I can't find most of these in store to even play with. A couple years ago Digital Transitions let me Demo the mamiya kit and the images were just lovely and the experience was impractical. I rely on auto focus and it was clunky and often missed in addition to being a beast and a half of a camera.

I've got $8-10k for a camera and 110mm (or so) lens, it's gotta auto focus easily and accurately. I'm gonna blow up the photos large for close view, printed myself in BW usually but not always. help me with my brain damage, what do you pick for the task at hand?

The XF of today and the Mamiya body from several years ago are a night and day experience regarding autofocus. Might be worth checking back in. We have back, XF, lens kits for around your budget.

[mstevensphoto]

Doug, I'm in Denver, do you still have a satellite office here? I always shot Mamiya 645 film so the brand has happy nostalgia for me. the one I demoed really made beautiful pictures, I'd love to try the current iteration now that I own a toddler to try it on too. I have corneal scarring and am 100% reliant on autofocus.

[Doug Peterson]

Doug, I'm in Denver, do you still have a satellite office here? I always shot Mamiya 645 film so the brand has happy nostalgia for me. the one I demoed really made beautiful pictures, I'd love to try the current iteration now that I own a toddler to try it on too. I have corneal scarring and am 100% reliant on autofocus.

I'll be in Denver in a couple weeks: http://www.dtcommercialphoto.com/events/. You can see how the XF handles and get a pretty good idea if it's a good fit for you or not.

[Richard Man]

Or you can go back to shoot film ;-) They have that "special quality" now you know.

[BobShaw]

Hasselblad X1d and XCD 90 (or better still 80)

[Jeremy Roussak]

I'm showing and selling more and more portraiture at 34x40" to 60x80" ... I photograph mostly kids and the photos are mostly 1/4 or 1/2 length.

I'm fascinated by this. You take photos of half or a quarter of a child and people buy prints which are five feet by nearly seven feet? That must be twice life-size! Who buys such a thing? What do they do with it?

Sorry to deviate from the topic, but I can't begin to imagine such a business model even being tried in the UK, still less succeeding.

Jeremy

[StoryinPictures]

I'm fascinated by this. You take photos of half or a quarter of a child and people buy prints which are five feet by nearly seven feet? That must be twice life-size! Who buys such a thing? What do they do with it?

Sorry to deviate from the topic, but I can't begin to imagine such a business model even being tried in the UK, still less succeeding.

Paintings like this show up in large estates in the U.K., no?

[mstevensphoto]

Or you can go back to shoot film ;-) They have that "special quality" now you know.

I shot my first box of 4x5 film in forever this weekend. it was enjoyable. with little slightly less cooperative things it's handy to be able to capture some extras AND to peep and know I got what I need before I let them go. I can't send them out of there without solid knowledge that I got to the goal.

[mstevensphoto]

I'm fascinated by this. You take photos of half or a quarter of a child and people buy prints which are five feet by nearly seven feet? That must be twice life-size! Who buys such a thing? What do they do with it?

Sorry to deviate from the topic, but I can't begin to imagine such a business model even being tried in the UK, still less succeeding.

Jeremy

1) you are not your customer - just because you can't conceive it on your own walls doesn't mean that people won't/dont want it.
2) houses in the US are big, by many UK accounts they are gaudy monstrosities, but I have clients with 24' ceiling heights
3) there seems to be a notion that I come across regularly that a thing should never be shown bigger than life - this is absolute hogwash and based on nothing useful. a beautiful potrtrait where one can see all the pattern of a loved one's eyes has meaning to some people
4) as mentioned in another reply, paintings of this nature exist all over the place and anyone of status used to commission such a painting. these are loved, and also status
5) art to one person may not be art to another, that's ok. some people pay millions of dollars for a rather lousy reproduction of a campbel's soup can label....or a little girl and a balloon that becomes confetti, or (god forbid) any of the garbage that richard price pedals.

[Joe Towner]

What is your lighting like?  If you're shooting in a controlled space with strobes, doing an IQ 80mp back would be a great 'now' option.

I wouldn't look to the 645z with any hope of a future.  The GFX would be more than able, but the 100mp is next year, and if you have things this holiday you really will want the quality of a digital MF setup.

-Joe

[MichaelEzra]

645z with 75mm f2.8 or 150mm f2.8 would work just fine.

Fuji seems to be a more flexible system, looking to the future, but 645z will get the job done.

You could also look at stabilized 90mm.

[BJL]

... looking for a 50mp solution because of the close up viewing of my work AND two not so technical reasons - 1) my clients have $ and I hate when they have my camera (or better) because it feels less special. 2) for the last decade and a half I've missed that feel that I used to get from my old film Mamiya.

On point (1) — looking different, special and serious — the Pentax 645Z wins! (And on point (2), it probably also offers a more MF film camera feel, for better or for worse.)

[Jeremy Roussak]

1) you are not your customer - just because you can't conceive it on your own walls doesn't mean that people won't/dont want it.
2) houses in the US are big, by many UK accounts they are gaudy monstrosities, but I have clients with 24' ceiling heights
3) there seems to be a notion that I come across regularly that a thing should never be shown bigger than life - this is absolute hogwash and based on nothing useful. a beautiful potrtrait where one can see all the pattern of a loved one's eyes has meaning to some people
4) as mentioned in another reply, paintings of this nature exist all over the place and anyone of status used to commission such a painting. these are loved, and also status
5) art to one person may not be art to another, that's ok. some people pay millions of dollars for a rather lousy reproduction of a campbel's soup can label....or a little girl and a balloon that becomes confetti, or (god forbid) any of the garbage that richard price pedals.

There's no need to get quite so defensive, old chap: I was expressing incredulity, not disdain.

1. Obviously. My lack of conception extended further than my own walls, but that doesn't really matter.
2. Oh; again, I made no comment on aesthetics.
3. The notion may exist; but I made no such comment. It would rule out photomicrography as art, for a start, and I don't.
4. Yes, large paintings exist in English country houses and castles. I'd be very surprised if the number painted in the last hundred years reached triple figures. The operative words are "used to".
5. Again, you seem to imagine that I was denigrating your work. Far from it: if the niche exists and you can fill it (and, given that you're contemplating spending a lot of money, I accept that it does), the very best of luck to you. Clearly the fact that I find it hard to imagine represents a deficiency on my part. I remain, however, convinced that in the UK, you'd be on the dole pretty quickly.

Jeremy

[Dan Wells]

How much of a difference will there be between 50 MP 33x44mm medium format and the near 50 MP DSLR/mirrorless systems with some carefully selected lenses?  Of course, higher resolution medium format (the upcoming Fuji GFX 100, a good used Phase 80 MP system  if you have the light for it (as far as I know, all the 80 MP systems are CCD-based and happiest below ISO 100) or the very expensive Phase or Hasselblad 100 MP systems would reopen the gap.

The only real comparison I've seen between the 50 MP MF sensor and the very best smaller formats have to offer is Imaging Resource's comparometer, which is a highly contrived situation... At least on that, they are very, very close. Imaging Resource also has a Phase One XF 100 (unclear which version) on their comparometer, and that is much more noticeably different from anything else than the Nikon Z7 (I chose the Z7 from among the several 40+ MP 24x36mm cameras simply because I have one) is from the Fuji GFX 50S. I wish someone had a  comparison on something other than test shots...

[faberryman]

It's more about sensor size than resolution, although a MF sensor will have more resolution. A 60"x80" print from a FF sensor is approximately 63x , but only approximately 46x from a 33x44 sensor, and approximately 37x from a 41x54 sensor.

[StoryinPictures]

I find the dpreview image comparison tool is useful, to a point:

https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/image-comparison?attr18=daylight&attr13_0=fujifilm_gfx50s&attr13_1=nikon_z7&attr13_2=phaseone_xf100mp&attr13_3=pentax_645z&attr15_0=raw&attr15_1=raw&attr15_2=raw&attr15_3=raw&attr16_0=100&attr16_1=100&attr16_2=100&attr16_3=100&attr126_2=2&attr171_2=1&normalization=full&widget=1&x=0.6632706827022568&y=-0.7712996172356223

The areas where there are three-dimensional objects, such as the tubes of paint, offer some useful insights.

Even at web resolution. I find the images on Flickr can also be useful, to a point.

What I notice is that the GFX does a better job in giving the person in the image a sense of presence. 

It isn't just the sensor, it isn't just the lens, it isn't just the tonal range or the smooth transitions in the hues of color across skin tones or clothing.  And you will notice that some cameras with smaller sensors outperform some cameras with larger sensors.

My sense from looking at images (digital and print, my own and that of others), doing post processing, working with lighting, etc is that there are a number of factors which go into creating a final image with more presence. It seems that mostly it is the accumulation of many small advantages which leads to the big differences. 

I do find that the GFX makes it easier to get there consistently, and if the light is right, it is likely to be there out of the camera.  Post processing always offers the opportunity to improve, naturally.

Rental and use in your own context is the best way to determine this for yourself.

[mstevensphoto]

How much of a difference will there be between 50 MP 33x44mm medium format and the near 50 MP DSLR/mirrorless systems with some carefully selected lenses?

this is something I also struggle with. I will say that the Dynamic range bits seem to be more than just measurable....that is to say, you can see the difference in real life, not just on a chart. a retoucher I respect always says "If you can't see it, it isn't there" with regard to measurers vs users.

I find my current setup makes really really nice 24x36" prints and gets worse at 30x40 and falls apart rather quickly after that. I've rented the nikon 850 and it was ok. the resolution was lovely, the range/color not what I'm used to or hoped for in a quick test. I've not had my hands on the ar7iii that so many are gaga for but there seem to be real color and range issues when you're not doing editorial weddings where artistic touches are added to coloration anyway.

The mamiya 645d pics with the credo back were simply lovely. all the range I wanted, perfect color, right out of camera. the thing would certainly set one apart but it is a tank and a half. a well managed Hassy setup seems to be the same in terms of color and range, but there's an extra zero added on just for the name.

Shutter life (I know shutters can be replaced) is one real attractant for a 35mm-ish variant. I've put 80k actuations on my 5dmkIII so far this year alone.

[mstevensphoto]

My sense from looking at images (digital and print, my own and that of others), doing post processing, working with lighting, etc is that there are a number of factors which go into creating a final image with more presence. It seems that mostly it is the accumulation of many small advantages which leads to the big differences. 

I do find that the GFX makes it easier to get there consistently, and if the light is right, it is likely to be there out of the camera.  Post processing always offers the opportunity to improve, naturally.

Rental and use in your own context is the best way to determine this for yourself.

I agree with your thoughts. my problem is that I have three real contenders, they are all $350/week to rent with no lens. that is one heck of a trial budget (1/5-1/8th the cost of any of the cameras)....I could literally fly to BH for less. obviously can't try for a week at BH but ouch, they're pricey to rent.