New to Digital Medium Format - Seeking Advice for First Back

[bw13366]

Hello! While I am not so new to photography, I am new to larg(er) digital sensors.  Some info about me:  I am a serious amateur that enjoys shooting landscapes almost exclusively. I have been shooting medium and large format film for years.  My current digital setup is a Nikon D850.  Film-wise, I shoot an Arca Swiss M line 2 that has been adapted to 4x5.  I have a medium format function carrier/bellows that came with the camera.  I am hoping to use this camera with a digital camera or back of some sort.  The reason I want to adapt my view camera to digital is so that I can use view camera movements with the convenience of digital and to get an observable increase in image quality.  My work usually doesn't involve long exposures over 4 minutes.  My film back budget is 5K USD, preferably less.  Since I don't need a digital back immediately, I am open to waiting up to a year for a sale/deal or new models to be introduced.

With that being said, if you were in my shoes, what medium format digital back would you recommend?  If it had a shorter flange focal distance, I would have already purchased one of the fuji GFX bodies, but I think that would leave me without a wide-angle lens that can focus at infinity.  I believe this leaves me with the option of a Hasselblad 907 50C, a used Phase One IQ 1 or 2 50 (or similar), or some other option (I am open to suggestions). 

The only features I am looking for in addition to being a solid landscape camera is to have decent long exposure performance up to about 5 minutes and live view to aid in focusing/focus stacking.  I also would like to add that I have access to two Rodenstock lenses: the Apo-Sironar Digital 70mm 5.6 and the HR 100mm f/4.  I would like to get something similar to the Rodenstock HR Digaron-W 40mm as a wide-angle lens sometime down the road.

I have never used a medium format digital camera of any kind.  If you were in my shoes, what would you do?

Thank you all  for your suggestions!

[Joe Towner]

Hey BW,

Welcome to LuLa.  I think you need to get an introduction to a dealer in your area.  Live view may be the biggest shift for you - generally I'd recommend a CCD 50/60/80mp back but their live view ability is not the same as you're use to with CMOS chips.  The GFX with the view camera adapter is as straight forward as it gets, but you give up the wider options in that format.

Have you tried your Nikon on these old film lenses?  It may be worth testing your workflow and methods especially given things like LCC's you may not want to deal with.

-Joe

[BobShaw]

Well for what it's worth, I was in a similar situation few years back.
This may save you about three years. You can never get the same wide angle on digital as you can on 4x5, 6x17 or even 6x7.
Sell the lot and buy an X1D. If you want tilt shift add a Canon TSE 24 or 17.
You can then carry your entire kit on a strap around your neck. (:-)

[OlekVerze]

there is no one sensor that can solve all your problems. It's always a compromise.
Color - CCD sensors - Kodak, Dalsa. But there will be no direct viewing. Or Hasselblad with its MC technology
Modern sensors - look - do you like the color?
This is the cornerstone - color and convenience))
Stopped for myself on a few -
P45 + - slow shutter speed
IQ 280 - large sensor and wide viewing angles. Nice color.

[Doug Peterson]

I have never used a medium format digital camera of any kind.  If you were in my shoes, what would you do?

You don't mention where you're from.

While medium format is a niche, there are still places where you can go and see many of your options in one go, and places from which you can rent (with credit toward purchase). Since part of the equation is the "feel" and "heart" rather than the technical specs, having a quick flyover of a wide range of options can really help focus your research and search.

For example if you're in the USA, we (Digital Transitions), have offices in LA, NYC, and outside of DC, and have stepped up our remote-demo center for the pandemic to do video chats for those that can't make it to an office in person.

If I can just pose one specific piece of advice that I think has served our clients exceptionally well: Make "finding a deal" the last step, rather than the first step of your search. That is, take a 10,000 foot view of the world of options, then do a bit more detailed research on the options that stick out to you, and only once you've otherwise narrowed down to know which options are a good fit for you, and only then, start to look to see where you can find a fair price (keep in mind things like condition, warranty, training, support, accessories, etc). Our DT Outlet holds some of our inventory of used gear, but it's only a small part and it's always changing as new systems come in; if you speak with one of our sales people they can look out for a suitable systems to come in.

[Balafre]

Leverage your sensor first!
Get some adapters for those lenses you can access and try them out.
A point worth considering is that the Achilles heel in 35 mm DSLR's are the lenses not the sensors. Good German glass resolves 100% better than proprietary 35 mm and effectively gives you a correspondingly quantum better image. If you can shoot manual (and landscapes tend to be, right?) try it out before jumping.
Shooting RAW, I used to use medium format Blad CF Zeiss 50 & 180 mm f4 via an adapter on my Canon DS1Mk3 and the resolution was literally two factors of enlargement better than a corresponding image shot on Canon L lenses. The L series would begin to artifact at 100% and while the shots off the Zeiss MF at the same magnification were only at 50%, and you could dive deeper to 67% and deeper still to 100% and there was nothing but more and more precision detail.
It was often hilarious to see how much more could be coaxed out of the image.
You're still stuck with less latitude than MF but it's predictable so you can work around it.

I also ran a Schneider 35mm 90mm PC / TS with an EF mount (yes they purpose built them for Nikon as well) and it too produced similar resolutions but with incredible tonal qualities that some art directors in a few leading ad agencies could not tell apart from MF when presented. These shots were easily up to excellent A1 and in some cases, utterly adequate for A0 output.
The Schneider's are hard to find but worth every cent, and the Zeiss lenses are abundant and cheap, and both provide you with a 67% solution for 5% of the price! Money you keep in your back pocket opens up options and lets you sleep better
Enjoy the journey!

[kers]

Leverage your sensor first!
Get some adapters for those lenses you can access and try them out.
A point worth considering is that the Achilles heel in 35 mm DSLR's are the lenses not the sensors. Good German glass resolves 100% better than proprietary 35 mm and effectively gives you a correspondingly quantum better image....
...

I think this is not the case anymore.
Thanks to the competition of Sony and Sigma many of the new 35mm lenses that you can buy today are extremely good. Nikon, Sony, Sigma Art and Canon.
Often they are on the same level or even higher level than the Zeiss Otus serie at lower cost.
My thoughts are that for better image quality wide angle and shifting, you might as well buy a fuji GFX 100MP camera and the 23mm lens and then just crop the image.
It is not a very elegant solution, but it works. The focusstacking is done automatically without touching the camera.
An other plus is that the lens is always perfectly aligned with the sensor- for that gets more troublesome at 100MP quality and tilt-sfit mechanisms.

[MN]

for better image quality wide angle and shifting, you might as well buy a fuji GFX 100MP camera and the 23mm lens and then just crop the image ... focusstacking

Despite (or because!) being a dyed-in-the-wool technical camera fan (Linhof Techno, PhaseOne IQ3, large format style Rodenstock/Schneider lenses), I see the wisdom in this recommendation. 

I suspect that this recommendation is based on extensive experience & expertise.

[Balafre]

Manufacturers survive and thrive by selling their products. The art of commercial survival is to choose your own path, not be pushed down one.
So you can go exclusively with brand names or you can use your brain.
The chap 'kers' who asserted "this is not the case anymore" may be right in part, but no one can make such an unequivocal statement accurately.
I take my work very seriously and now run a full P1 IQ3-100 system with numerous BR lenses but still use special oddities via adapters (eg Blad CF Zeiss 30 mm) ( and ALL PRAISE to Steve Hendriks of Capture Integration!) and have extensive use of many top Zeiss medium format lenses and top Canon L series over two decades. Mixing up the systems allowed and still allows me to achieve certain looks a full proprietary system could not achieve, but I also thrived commercially when many of my competitors fell.
Thinking about it, Rodenstock produced a set of 3 spectacular Grandagon lenses for the Hasselblad Arc Body system and via an adapter those would fit on 35 mm too. You'd be using the sweet spot of the lens, have a huge image circle and massive movements.
So whilst Nikon or Canon don't want us to, think of your current DSLR as a data back. I urge you to think laterally and try simpler options first with your existing fully paid-up equipment - find the adapters and test those beautiful Rodenstocks et al on your Nikon before you do anything else.
If you don't like it then you've lost very little.
But you might discover a unique world you're happy to inhabit. Those who deny such places exist simply shout aloud that they have closed minds !

Enjoy the journey!

[kers]

Manufacturers survive and thrive by selling their products. The art of commercial survival is to choose your own path, not be pushed down one.
So you can go exclusively with brand names or you can use your brain.
The chap 'kers' who asserted "this is not the case anymore" may be right in part, but no one can make such an unequivocal statement accurately.
I take my work very seriously and now run a full P1 IQ3-100 system with numerous BR lenses but still use special oddities via adapters (eg Blad CF Zeiss 30 mm) ( and ALL PRAISE to Steve Hendriks of Capture Integration!) and have extensive use of many top Zeiss medium format lenses and top Canon L series over two decades. Mixing up the systems allowed and still allows me to achieve certain looks a full proprietary system could not achieve, but I also thrived commercially when many of my competitors fell.
Thinking about it, Rodenstock produced a set of 3 spectacular Grandagon lenses for the Hasselblad Arc Body system and via an adapter those would fit on 35 mm too. You'd be using the sweet spot of the lens, have a huge image circle and massive movements.
So whilst Nikon or Canon don't want us to, think of your current DSLR as a data back. I urge you to think laterally and try simpler options first with your existing fully paid-up equipment - find the adapters and test those beautiful Rodenstocks et al on your Nikon before you do anything else.
If you don't like it then you've lost very little.
But you might discover a unique world you're happy to inhabit. Those who deny such places exist simply shout aloud that they have closed minds !

Enjoy the journey!

Hey; I only stated that there are now good 35mm lenses that will fill the 46mp sensor with true information without any problem.  Most do 100- 150MP in the central area, only the bayer matrix is putting them down.
I own a d850 and only the very wide angle lenses could be improved on the sides, but the latest offerings deal with that problem.
I am sure there are BlueRing Schneiders and Rodenstock lenses that are better, but at huge costs.
Still they only can make 46MP images on a 46MP sensor. So if you want more quality, as the poster suggests, you need a sensor with more pixels and/or a debayer mechanism.
I agree it is always a simple route to buy 'the best' is not always better.
Also at 100MP the mechanical parts have to be so perfectly aligned that it is difficult to make a good TS-lens/mechanism - that was different with 4x5 inch when i could make my own perfect aligned viewcamera of wood by hand.
I do a lot of stitching for it provides me wide angle views and quality that does not exist in a single shot with any lens, but it cannot be applied in many circumstances.

[MN]

Thinking about it, Rodenstock produced a set of 3 spectacular Grandagon lenses for the Hasselblad Arc Body system and via an adapter those would fit on 35 mm too

Recommending using what are basically large format film lenses with a digital 35mm camera!

[bw13366]

Thank you all for your input.  This has given me a lot to think about.  I realize now that there is no easy answer to my situation.  If I were to give up one of my 'must haves', I would sacrifice having live view. 

Doug:  I live in Colorado.  I am unsure if there are any dealers locally.  I am hesitant to contact one (at least until I have narrowed down my options)--especially because I am sure my budget will not go far.  I appreciate the advice in regards to searching for a deal--I could easily see trying to wag the dog by the tail in this instance.

Balafre: Interesting to hear your experience with Hasselblad MF lenses.  I have both lenses you mention for film and I've never thought of trying them on a Nikon.  I also thought of trying the SK T/S lenses back when I ended up purchasing a Nikon 24mm PC-e.  Needless to say, I am not a fan of the Nikon--it's just not as strong a performer than similar Zeiss offerings.  I plan on selling the T/S lens to fund whatever back/camera I end up going with.

kers: An interesting idea you propose in terms of cropping images out of a Fuji GFX.  I hadn't thought of Fuji's new offering due to price, but I am sure a used one could be within budget in a few years.  In terms of stitching, one route I could take would be to get a GFX 50 MP body (well under my budget) and pair it with a Rodenstock 70mm to get something similar to a 55mm FF equivalent.  Then two stiched images would yield something like a 27 mm image, which is plenty wide for my needs.  The obvious drawback would be whenever taking images of moving objects--I used to do a fair amount of work with a nodal slide and have spent hours editing artifacts caused by moving objects.

MN: What makes you such a fan of technical cameras?  I assume its the perfect alignment they provide to sensor/lens plane.  Do you see any issues using a compact and very stable view camera to meet the same ends?

Thank you all again for the input... keep it coming

[ErikKaffehr]

Hi,

My experience is that I would disagree on the color thing. Just to say, I am quite aware that Tim Parkin (who is the publisher of On Landscape) and Joe Cornish have found issues with the color rendition of the P45+, that used Kodak CCD. The IQ 160, using a Dalsa CCD was not having the same problem. My guess may have been that the IR-filter may have been involved.

But, I would say that color is much more dependent on color profiles than on sensors. There is no real difference between a CCD and CMOS, both use the same kind of photodiode. All color is coming from the CFA (color filter array) sitting in front of the sensor. Different vendors may have different CFA designs.

I published like half a dozen polls comparing my P45+ (Kodak CCD), Sony Alpha 900 (Sony 2008 generation CMOS) and Sony A7rII (Sony 2015 generation CMOS) asking which of the two or tree readers would pick as P45+ or CCD. In all tests there was a tendency that readers guessed that one of the Sonys was CCD, MFD, P45+ or whatever.

Best regards
Erik

there is no one sensor that can solve all your problems. It's always a compromise.
Color - CCD sensors - Kodak, Dalsa. But there will be no direct viewing. Or Hasselblad with its MC technology
Modern sensors - look - do you like the color?
This is the cornerstone - color and convenience))
Stopped for myself on a few -
P45 + - slow shutter speed
IQ 280 - large sensor and wide viewing angles. Nice color.

[kers]

Thank you all for your input.  This has given me a lot to think about.  I realize now that there is no easy answer to my situation.  If I were to give up one of my 'must haves', I would sacrifice having live view. 

Doug:  I live in Colorado.  I am unsure if there are any dealers locally.  I am hesitant to contact one (at least until I have narrowed down my options)--especially because I am sure my budget will not go far.  I appreciate the advice in regards to searching for a deal--I could easily see trying to wag the dog by the tail in this instance.

Balafre: Interesting to hear your experience with Hasselblad MF lenses.  I have both lenses you mention for film and I've never thought of trying them on a Nikon.  I also thought of trying the SK T/S lenses back when I ended up purchasing a Nikon 24mm PC-e.  Needless to say, I am not a fan of the Nikon--it's just not as strong a performer than similar Zeiss offerings.  I plan on selling the T/S lens to fund whatever back/camera I end up going with.

kers: An interesting idea you propose in terms of cropping images out of a Fuji GFX.  I hadn't thought of Fuji's new offering due to price, but I am sure a used one could be within budget in a few years.  In terms of stitching, one route I could take would be to get a GFX 50 MP body (well under my budget) and pair it with a Rodenstock 70mm to get something similar to a 55mm FF equivalent.  Then two stiched images would yield something like a 27 mm image, which is plenty wide for my needs.  The obvious drawback would be whenever taking images of moving objects--I used to do a fair amount of work with a nodal slide and have spent hours editing artifacts caused by moving objects.

MN: What makes you such a fan of technical cameras?  I assume its the perfect alignment they provide to sensor/lens plane.  Do you see any issues using a compact and very stable view camera to meet the same ends?

Thank you all again for the input... keep it coming

I think you will be surprised if you try the (heavy) 40mm Sigma Art on your d850. Corner to corner sharpness already at f1.4- my widest best lens. And a beautiful bokeh. Flat field of sharpness.
https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2019/03/mtf-results-for-recent-sigma-art-lenses/

[MN]

MN: What makes you such a fan of technical cameras?

Historical. Used for decades a Linhof Technikardan in combination with a Polaroid Back using Readload/Quickload/Polaroid sheet film. During the film days, there was a marked and noticeable quality difference between 4x5" and 35mm, say, when printing 16x20" Ilfochrome/Cibachrome. Tilt (focus) and shift (perspective) were often needed because, unlike digital, focus stacking was not available and extensive cropping of the negative did affected print quality of large prints.

P.S. On second thought, hard to escape the thought that technical cameras are now an anachronism. But there is something smoothing and relaxing hearing a COPAL shutter doing its deed, even if due to personal laziness, the electronic shutter is now generally used.

[ErikKaffehr]

Hi,

I have used a Phase One P45+ back on a Hasselblad 555/ELD from 2013 to 2015. I still have it, but it sees very little use.

The reason it sees little use is that on every occasion I consider, the Sony A7rII is a more flexible and mostly also better choice.

Putting an old CCD back on a view camera may be tempting, but you would need replace the back with a ground glass for focusing and than switch back. It is extremely inconvenient in the field.

A modern CMOS back, with good live view, may be a better option.

But, in the end, I would say that a mirrorless 24x36 camera is probably the best option for 100% of my shooting needs. The fact is that I can not find a single case where using an old CCD back would benefit my shooting.

There is one exception. When I am shooting macro outdoors with flash, the leaf shutter of the Hasselblad CF lenses yields an advantage. But, I can live with HSS and having autofocus with selectable focus point is a great advantage.

In the end, shooting with the Hasselblad is enjoyable. But, I would never consider it for serious work.

Best regards
Erik

Hello! While I am not so new to photography, I am new to larg(er) digital sensors.  Some info about me:  I am a serious amateur that enjoys shooting landscapes almost exclusively. I have been shooting medium and large format film for years.  My current digital setup is a Nikon D850.  Film-wise, I shoot an Arca Swiss M line 2 that has been adapted to 4x5.  I have a medium format function carrier/bellows that came with the camera.  I am hoping to use this camera with a digital camera or back of some sort.  The reason I want to adapt my view camera to digital is so that I can use view camera movements with the convenience of digital and to get an observable increase in image quality.  My work usually doesn't involve long exposures over 4 minutes.  My film back budget is 5K USD, preferably less.  Since I don't need a digital back immediately, I am open to waiting up to a year for a sale/deal or new models to be introduced.

With that being said, if you were in my shoes, what medium format digital back would you recommend?  If it had a shorter flange focal distance, I would have already purchased one of the fuji GFX bodies, but I think that would leave me without a wide-angle lens that can focus at infinity.  I believe this leaves me with the option of a Hasselblad 907 50C, a used Phase One IQ 1 or 2 50 (or similar), or some other option (I am open to suggestions). 

The only features I am looking for in addition to being a solid landscape camera is to have decent long exposure performance up to about 5 minutes and live view to aid in focusing/focus stacking.  I also would like to add that I have access to two Rodenstock lenses: the Apo-Sironar Digital 70mm 5.6 and the HR 100mm f/4.  I would like to get something similar to the Rodenstock HR Digaron-W 40mm as a wide-angle lens sometime down the road.

I have never used a medium format digital camera of any kind.  If you were in my shoes, what would you do?

Thank you all  for your suggestions!

[KDINDC]

I have an Arca Swiss F Line 69 and recently acquired the Hasselblad 907x 50C II.  I shoot mostly landscape.  My background in digital are Sigma DSLRs, then Pentax 645Z, for the last two years, I have been indulging myself with film. First a Shen Hao 4x5, with a little play with my Mamiya C330.  I was impressed with the modula flexibility of the Arca Swiss line. When I saw one online for a good price, I bit the bullet. I stopped using the Shen Hao as I had moved all of my large format lenses to the AS lens boards.  The AS 69 came with a Hassy A-12 film back.  So, I shot 120 film while waiting for the 50C II to come out.  I have to say that I have been overjoyed with the combination of the AS and the 50C II.
1) Live view and focus peaking. You can see the effect of movements; really see!
2) Selecting exposure with test shots and reviewing the histogram.
3) Add the Hassy back to your bag and subtract the ground glass, film backs and dark slides, lupes, light meters, dark cloth, or release cables.
4) The electronic shutter won't stop action, but for everything else, including long exposures, it works beautifully. I haven't used the shutter sync option yet.

After shooting film primarily for two years, it feels like cheating!  So much easier.

I have to say that the combo doesn't give you the wide angle of view that you would expect from a full frame.  My widest lens is a Rodenstock 55mm f/5.6 Digitar.  The sensor at 44x33mm only exposes the middle of the image circle. So, I use shift, and rise and fall on the rear standard, take multiple exposures, and stitch them together in LR. But, coming from the Pentax 645Z, most of my work is stitched as there were no real wide angle solutions for that system.

Before buying the system, I read many posts about how large format lenses won't work.  Getting focus right is too difficult. Or the F Line won't work because the movements aren't geared. Or...