What gear for weddings/events/more AND landscape?

[JD_Winston]

I'm not new to photography but new to medium and large format.  I would like to produce large photography prints (landscape primarily) for fine art resale (I have an Epson 9800 Pro with Colorburst Proof) as well as improve the sharpness and total pixels of my wedding/event/product  photography shots.  

I'm torn between medium format with a 39MP back (looking at a phaseone) or large format with the same digital back.  Any advice?  I would like to stay digital in my workflow but IF a 39MP digital back is NOT as good as a scanned 4x5 film (I hear that it is or even a tad better), I would like move towards film, I suspect.

Make the assumption that I will use the finest lenses, on either system, that money can buy and we will also assume that technology does NOT replace technique.  But, all things being equal...as they say.

Any advice?  Am I asking too much for one system to do both?  If using one system for both is really unadvisable, what are my best compromises?  Large format with digital back?  Large format with film?  I don't really care about brand at this point.  Just looking for an ideal solution that produces world class large format prints.

In return for your valuable advice, ask me anything about marketing (20 years in the biz) and I will gladly advise for free (if I can...I'm not a know it all ny any means).  Especially on Web dev, branding and search engine optimization items.  As a sign of good faith that I'm not promoting marketing services for pay, I hereby reject any attempt to work with any respondent to this post in any way that involves renumeration.  Just trading advice.

TIA.  

JD

[pixjohn]

My Leaf Aptus 75 takes better pictures then my 4x5 scanned film connected to my Cambo wide DS or 4x5 camera. I can also connect it to a H1 camera and shoot people the same day. I save more on film, processing and Polaroid  then the cost over 18 months to pay the whole digital system.

[Wim van Velzen]

I do both landscape and wedding myself (and the occasional portrait). I use a Rollei with a somewhat older Hasselblad 22MP back.

There are so many variables in getting to top quality landscape prints, that the quality difference between 4x5" and MF digital will be a minor point.
At least when working in Western Europe, with rapidly changing conditions, I think that I would have missed a lot of photos if I would have used a 4x5". Things like that do matter too when thinking about top quality (and yes, I know there are good reasons for 4x5" as well - it really depends on personality and vision).

Another observation would be that for a more journalistic approach to weddings, you'll also need a good dSLR system.
I myself use the MF for the groups shots, portraits of bride and groom and for grand interiors - but use a dSLR for everything that is happening around me.

Have you ever done wedding photography? A bit of experience before buying the ultimate kit for you (if such a thing exists) would certainly help. Not everything works for everyone...

[JD_Winston]

Thank you for the insight.  I do indeed currently shoot weddings with a Nikon D200 with all the great lenses.  85mm f/1.4, 17-55mm f/2.8, and others.  But these two are my money lenses.  I use the Nikon creative lighting system with 4 SB800 flashheads, 1 remote master and the Gary Fong Lightsphere diffuser on several of the flash heads.  It works pretty well.  I still have much to learn to make this system perform its best thought.

I had a D1x when they first came out but when evaluating the D2x and the D200, I couldn't cost justify the few features in the D2x when compared to my needs.  So the D200 won out.  Still disappointed with noise at ISO 400 though.  Back to ISO 100 and 200 and just crank up the flash heads to full and shutter lag a bit at about 1/40 or so.

Overall, I want MORE!!!  LOL!  More detail with wider lenses.  Thus the move into medium or large format but I really don't want to have to master film techniques if I can avoid them.

Thanks again.  

I do both landscape and wedding myself (and the occasional portrait). I use a Rollei with a somewhat older Hasselblad 22MP back.

There are so many variables in getting to top quality landscape prints, that the quality difference between 4x5" and MF digital will be a minor point.
At least when working in Western Europe, with rapidly changing conditions, I think that I would have missed a lot of photos if I would have used a 4x5". Things like that do matter too when thinking about top quality (and yes, I know there are good reasons for 4x5" as well - it really depends on personality and vision).

Another observation would be that for a more journalistic approach to weddings, you'll also need a good dSLR system.
I myself use the MF for the groups shots, portraits of bride and groom and for grand interiors - but use a dSLR for everything that is happening around me.

Have you ever done wedding photography? A bit of experience before buying the ultimate kit for you (if such a thing exists) would certainly help. Not everything works for everyone...
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=131259\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

[JD_Winston]

You're making me feel better.  Thanks for the input.  You're a gem.  Ultimately, I want the best images possible, regardless the technology.  I assume most of us think that way.  Money is no issue as I can always save up and wait until I plan properly.  I'm only 40 and have a lot of good shooting years ahead of me.

My Leaf Aptus 75 takes better pictures then my 4x5 scanned film connected to my Cambo wide DS or 4x5 camera. I can also connect it to a H1 camera and shoot people the same day. I save more on film, processing and Polaroid  then the cost over 18 months to pay the whole digital system.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=131253\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

[LA30]

39mp will shoot sloooooooooooooooooooooow.  

If you miss it it won't matter how big the file is.....

35mm digital and MF for the slow stuff.

ken

[JD_Winston]

Ken,

How slow?  I've seen specs like 1 shot per 1.4 seconds untethered and 1.2 seconds tethered from some digital backs like the H3D from Hasselblad.  Do you consider that slow?

I mean, I'm not shooting any near that rate at weddings, for product shoots or for any other use.

Please explain what you mean.  But I appreciate your input, all the same.  Perhaps if I needed lots of shots in rapid succession of Brittney's cooter as she jumps out of her car, I might be on your side here.  LOL!

Anyhoo, thanks again.

[Randal32]

see below

[Randal32]

I think you're asking to much for 1 system.  I wish it were that way though.

I wouldnt hire you to shoot me eating cake at my wedding if you were shooting a shot every 1.4 seconds.  a lot can happen in that time shooting doc work.  scary if you ask me.

I shoot with a p30+ - one of the faster MF cameras and I couldnt imagine shooting a wedding or event with that thing.

like they said, shot 35 digi for the fast work and MF for the slow work.

[JD_Winston]

LOL!  Thanks for the comments.  I DID mention that I do shoot the D200 for speed and action events.  Let's stay focused though.  My fault perhaps for not making it clear enough though.  The quality I want is for portraits and landscape for large format prints.  I know I won't get the speed I need for candid action shots.

THAT being cleared up, Is it reasonable to shoot MF with a 39MP digi back for protraits AND salable landscape prints that rival 4x5 film?  Or is it better with LF 4x5 film body with digital back?  Better is defined or measured not only by the sharpness and overall color quality of the images but also control over the final image.  With shift/tilt not being a feature on MF like LF, can I produce viable prints, of the same quality, as LF film on a MF with digi back?  Is the control there in Photoshop to correct distortion without the need for the manual control on LF film cameras?

I hope that clears things up.  My original investigation into this topic was based on wanting to do strictly LF film for outdoor panos, landscape and the like.  THEN, I started seeing some people say MF with digi back is just as good as LF film, in terms of total pixels and visual quality.  So I go to thinking perhaps I could buy one system for both portrait shots at weddings, studio AND landscape.  

The ultimate end goal is salable landscape prints.  It's only a bonus if I can reuse it in the studio and at weddings.  It would NEVER replace my DSLR for faster action shots at events and weddings.

Thanks again.

I think you're asking to much for 1 system.  I wish it were that way though.

I wouldnt hire you to shoot me eating cake at my wedding if you were shooting a shot every 1.4 seconds.  a lot can happen in that time shooting doc work.  scary if you ask me.

I shoot with a p30+ - one of the faster MF cameras and I couldnt imagine shooting a wedding or event with that thing.

like they said, shot 35 digi for the fast work and MF for the slow work.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=131291\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

[etrump]

I think JD IS saying he intends to shoot the Nikon gear for most of the wedding shots but wants the higher detail for group shots where popping a frame every couple of seconds is more than fast enough.

[LA30]

I think JD IS saying he intends to shoot the Nikon gear for most of the wedding shots but wants the higher detail for group shots where popping a frame every couple of seconds is more than fast enough.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=131359\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Got it...We are cool then.  I love the + back but yes, getting out of the limo....no go.  You will notice that .2-.4 seconds from an 18mp back or 22 or 32 or 39mp back....You kinda need 2 systems...for large prints and great dynamic range and color you can beat a back vs 35mm digital.  Not to get into the whole digital vs film....But the digital is right there, no dust or spots....web galleries, back up etc...It is faster than film.  When you have a LF film body with a back on it is it way slower...almost forget portraits...honestly  I have shot portraits with a LF and digital back and forget it.  That was in a studio let alone on location with a large group.  I would go with a 645 body and back and fix it in photoshop...Or get a really right stuff pano setup.

Ken