Pages: 1 ... 14 15 [16] 17 18   Go Down

Author Topic: Valid MF criticism or not?  (Read 111389 times)

jing q

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 596
    • we are super
Valid MF criticism or not?
« Reply #300 on: September 11, 2007, 07:09:57 am »

You guys not finished yet?
*goes get more popcorn*
Logged

Morgan_Moore

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2354
    • sammorganmoore.com
Valid MF criticism or not?
« Reply #301 on: September 11, 2007, 07:17:44 am »

Quote
You guys not finished yet?
*goes get more popcorn*
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

You could also try posting [a href=\"http://forum.hifichoice.co.uk/]here[/url]

enjoying my H1 and my D80 and looking forward to my D3 - only missing a replacement for my contax T2 - each tool has its place

S
« Last Edit: September 11, 2007, 07:18:26 am by Morgan_Moore »
Logged
Sam Morgan Moore Bristol UK

nicolaasdb

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 213
    • http://
Valid MF criticism or not?
« Reply #302 on: September 11, 2007, 11:39:49 am »

Morgan you got a way with words...--- EACH TOOL HAS ITS PLACE!!!----why couldn't I come up with this!
Logged

johnkraus

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 70
    • http://www.johnkrausphotography.com
Valid MF criticism or not?
« Reply #303 on: September 11, 2007, 11:47:26 am »

You guys are a bit silly, but then I've just spent over an hour reading 16 pages, so who's silly now?
To add my own silly comments:
I've found that SO much depends upon your attitude to your equipment. If you love your gear while accepting its strengths and weaknesses you'll get different images than if you're not really happy with your gear. Don't know how this works but its true. At some point, whatever you're shooting with, love it, enjoy it, and make it work for you.
Along the same lines, if you spend real time with your system, whatever it is, you'll come up with wildly different imagery than trying to make it work out of the box, or the first week. Choice of Raw Converter, sharpening, post work- it takes a while to learn how to play your horn as someone near Carnegie Hall must say.
Aside from obvious differences (Canon for speed and low-light, MF for dynamic range and 16-bit color), etc I keep discovering unique plusses and minuses of any system. I shoot a 5D and P30+ at the moment, and there are ongoing discoveries, such as (in no particular order)- the P30+ loves blue tones, so magic hour and post magic hour shots that fall apart with the Canon are amazingly rich with the 30. On another note... Canon color through DPP is astounding. Not very slick software but the color and conversions... gorgeous. Color out of the P30+ in C1Pro with Phase profiles- often not my favorite. P30+ color through Raw Developer- astoundingly rich and subtle.
I don't think there's a winner take all answer. As someone else says here, use the gear that works to your style. And whatever system you currently have- appreciate the great things in CAN do for you. And if its more frustrating then inspiring- move on.
p.s.- Mirror slap on the H system is MUCH less of a problem with the new firmware. Huge difference.
« Last Edit: September 11, 2007, 12:41:10 pm by johnkraus »
Logged

vgogolak

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 344
    • http://
Valid MF criticism or not?
« Reply #304 on: September 11, 2007, 12:47:25 pm »

Well, with so many particpants, thought I would ask;

Not to change the subject, but I need a Contax 645 55mm 3.5 for my set (35 to 80mm too big a jump

will pay premium for extra clean glass. If it works well body cosmetics unimportant to me

thx
Pls pass the word. I have had good luck buying from colleagues here

regards
Victor
Logged

jjj

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4726
    • http://www.futtfuttfuttphotography.com
Valid MF criticism or not?
« Reply #305 on: September 11, 2007, 12:49:23 pm »

Quote
[jjj-But then you wouldn't buy a £4000 amp and use a £200 Cd player] I would. , especially if I already owned the CD player, and I might feel a bit dubious about the benefits of a 1000 pound CD player.
Well that's an idiotic attitude. Go listen to it and if it sound better then buy. If it doen't don't. Not a difficult concept really.

Quote
Generally, the factors that have the greatest effect on any recording and its playback are; the acoustics of the auditorium where the recording was made; the skill of the sound engineer in placement of mics and later mixing of tracks if required; the loudspeakers used during playback, and the acoustics of the listening room.
And the amp, cabling and player make no real difference then? I've heard the difference and it can be significant.
Plus it's blindingly obvious [you'd think] that if it was a duff recording then a good hifi won't improve it. Oh BTW, Speakers are part of the hifi in case you missed that class.

Quote
These are the critical factors that have to be got right for good results. Everything else is basically secondary and even irrelevant, within reason of course. The amplifier has to have sufficient power to drive the speakers. The copper interconnects have to be of a sufficient gauge to pass the current with negligible resistance. The CD player needs to be at least of basic quality. (A bottom of the range portable CD player designed for listening to music whilst jogging would probably compromise quality.)
CD players vary enormously in sound quality. As does every component. That's like saying all lenses on SLRs are good enough/the same. Which is an obviously dumb thing to say.

Quote
The issue here is, if you believe that $500 interconnects, $5,000 CD players and/or $10,000 exotic amplifiers improve the sound quality to a clearly identifiable and audible extent, can you demonstrate it with a double blind test?

If you can, then goodonya. You've got remarkable hearing   .
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=138586\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I've listened to expensive gear and have been quite taken aback at the difference in sound even between very pricey gear. And good hi-fi makes a huge difference. Unless you have crap hearing, as then it's a waste of money. And as I said before, more expensive is not always better. Besides better sound quality is as nebulous as better picture quality in one sense and then there's the law of diminising returns you get with any very high end stuff, which is what you are talking about here.
You may need to spend an extra 30K to get your track car to go a fraction of a second faster than the already silly speed it goes even, though it only cost say 10K to get it tweaked up up to the current fast speed, but to some people it's money worth spending. Most people would laugh at a £2k camera let alone the £6k- £20K+ camera people are talking about here. It doesn't mean there is no point in spending that money. If you can tell the difference, if you can afford it and think the difference [in speed, efficiency, quality...] is worth spending on, then spend it. And ignore those carping ignoramuses who cannot tell the difference. My guess is you cannot tell the difference with good hifi and you seem to have a real bee in your bonnet about those who can. If so get over it. It's not as if it affects you in any way.

If all hifi sounds the same to a purchaser, he/she can buy cheap goods, but if your hearing isn't damaged and you really do appreciate the difference, spend whatever you like/can afford.
Same for a DB, if you cannot appreciate or need what a DB can do, don't buy one. If a 1DsIII doesn't do the job for you don't buy one of them. Anyway the cameras are ultimately only as good as the photographer.


How's the pocorn jing q?
Logged
Tradition is the Backbone of the Spinele

ronno

  • Guest
« Last Edit: September 11, 2007, 05:44:57 pm by ronno »
Logged

pixjohn

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 716
Valid MF criticism or not?
« Reply #307 on: September 11, 2007, 06:47:07 pm »

Is the first image even sharp?
Logged

Craig Lamson

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3264
    • Craig Lamson Photo Homepage
Valid MF criticism or not?
« Reply #308 on: September 12, 2007, 07:11:23 am »

Sometimes we get caught up in the small things in life and forget the big and important stuff.  Life happens fast and can end just as quickly.

Yesterday a peer of mine was killed doing some marine photography.  May he rest in peace.

http://www.abcactionnews.com/content/news/...a8-6a87cdb8124e
Logged
Craig Lamson Photo

Frank Doorhof

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1522
    • http://
Valid MF criticism or not?
« Reply #309 on: September 12, 2007, 07:12:58 am »

Oh my,
I wish you all the best
Logged

ronno

  • Guest
Valid MF criticism or not?
« Reply #310 on: September 12, 2007, 08:27:28 am »

« Last Edit: September 12, 2007, 08:31:19 am by ronno »
Logged

Willow Photography

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 279
    • http://www.willow.no
Valid MF criticism or not?
« Reply #311 on: September 12, 2007, 06:03:06 pm »

Quote
You guys are a bit silly, but then I've just spent over an hour reading 16 pages, so who's silly now?
To add my own silly comments:
I've found that SO much depends upon your attitude to your equipment. If you love your gear while accepting its strengths and weaknesses you'll get different images than if you're not really happy with your gear. Don't know how this works but its true. At some point, whatever you're shooting with, love it, enjoy it, and make it work for you.
Along the same lines, if you spend real time with your system, whatever it is, you'll come up with wildly different imagery than trying to make it work out of the box, or the first week. Choice of Raw Converter, sharpening, post work- it takes a while to learn how to play your horn as someone near Carnegie Hall must say.
Aside from obvious differences (Canon for speed and low-light, MF for dynamic range and 16-bit color), etc I keep discovering unique plusses and minuses of any system. I shoot a 5D and P30+ at the moment, and there are ongoing discoveries, such as (in no particular order)- the P30+ loves blue tones, so magic hour and post magic hour shots that fall apart with the Canon are amazingly rich with the 30. On another note... Canon color through DPP is astounding. Not very slick software but the color and conversions... gorgeous. Color out of the P30+ in C1Pro with Phase profiles- often not my favorite. P30+ color through Raw Developer- astoundingly rich and subtle.
I don't think there's a winner take all answer. As someone else says here, use the gear that works to your style. And whatever system you currently have- appreciate the great things in CAN do for you. And if its more frustrating then inspiring- move on.
p.s.- Mirror slap on the H system is MUCH less of a problem with the new firmware. Huge difference.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=138640\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


Thank you for telling me about Raw Developer.
I thought I had to use C1 until Adobe Raw 4.2 was ready for the P30+.

Tried Raw Shooter for my P30+ files and loved it!!!
« Last Edit: September 12, 2007, 06:04:01 pm by Willow Photography »
Logged
Willow Photography

mcfoto

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 940
    • http://montalbetticampbell.com
Valid MF criticism or not?
« Reply #312 on: September 12, 2007, 06:52:16 pm »

Hi
You have to wait to see files when the Canon & Nikon are released. Yes there are a few cameras out there but they will not be the same as the final production models. For example there will be some firmware upgrades before then. I can't wait to get my 1DsIII!
Logged
Denis Montalbetti
Montalbetti+Campbell [

Aboud

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 132
    • http://www.abouddweck.com
Valid MF criticism or not?
« Reply #313 on: September 12, 2007, 07:19:30 pm »

Quote
The gauntlet is thrown down to the MF back manuafacturers:

"...Consider, too, the question of continuity, a matter of considerable relevance when the
purchase of an $8,000-or- more camera is on the table. Where the EOS-1Ds MarkIII is
completely compatible with virtually all vast EOS System, and can be expected to
remain compatible—and supported—for decades to come (note the current software
support for the D6000 and D2000), today’s medium format digital backs often do not fit
even recent products from the same manufacturer. Will a newly-purchased component
be compatible with same-brand software and hardware in the not-too-distant future?
Betting on, and investing in, the EOS-1DsMarkIII isa sure thing."
http://cpn.canon-europe.com/files/news/pro...-Whitepaper.pdf
So is this a valid point or just marketing spin? I'm sure Contax owners (not a digital back manufacturer I realise, but a warning none the less?) can relate to this. Are Mamiya owners feeling nervous? Pentax fans have just had their hopes dashed. What about those who bought the Fuji MF back? Or the Kodak backs?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=136138\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Continuity is a concern, but open platforms like the Phase One are good choices as well. I use a Phase One P25 back on my Contax 645. I am considering an upgrade to the P45+ and I can do that for about 16K plus my old back. If I decided to switch platforms, like to the Hassy H2D - because the H3D is a closed platform, I could trade my back for the Hassy version for only about 2K. (That is cheaper than the move I am about to make from my 5D to the 1Ds MkIII). The point I am trying to make is that Canon doesn't have an upgrade path, and perhaps they do not need it because of their original cost and reasonable resale value. But for high end equipment, like the Phase One, a path for the next generation does exist. I do not know about Leaf, I would assume they have a competitive program as well.
Logged

vgogolak

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 344
    • http://
Valid MF criticism or not?
« Reply #314 on: September 12, 2007, 08:03:25 pm »

I often can't travel with MF so the last trip was a chance; little trekking abnd a car. I have not tried Conon, but regularly use Leica R9/DMR even Kodak SLR/c with leica and zeiss lenses.
It is difficult to express the 'being there feeling of looking at these 220MB files in ACDSEE color managed on two side by side 24" calibrated Samsungs. It is a different world. Yes, many still want printing, but I think in a few years large screen displays will be more the norm. Then these MF backs will really shine.

The first shot I could easily reproduce with a 10MP Leica, so a 20 MP Canon (and I have liked the 5D with Leica R lenses a lot when I borrowed) would have no problem.

However, in the second shot the detail would stand two 30" monitors from these files.

No sharpening, no Nuthin. The workflow is trivial

C1 exposure/WB to Tif That is IT. Print file dye sub, view on screen or send to jpg (as here, to annoy people !  :-)

The 100% crop is not something the canon will do, and I doubt that the depth of the full frame would be achieved.
[BTW Contax 645/P45+ and contax glass]
Victor
« Last Edit: September 12, 2007, 08:06:00 pm by vgogolak »
Logged

jpjespersen

  • Guest
Valid MF criticism or not?
« Reply #315 on: September 12, 2007, 08:07:28 pm »

Quote
Continuity is a concern, but open platforms like the Phase One are good choices as well. I use a Phase One P25 back on my Contax 645. I am considering an upgrade to the P45+ and I can do that for about 16K plus my old back. If I decided to switch platforms, like to the Hassy H2D - because the H3D is a closed platform, I could trade my back for the Hassy version for only about 2K. (That is cheaper than the move I am about to make from my 5D to the 1Ds MkIII). The point I am trying to make is that Canon doesn't have an upgrade path, and perhaps they do not need it because of their original cost and reasonable resale value. But for high end equipment, like the Phase One, a path for the next generation does exist. I do not know about Leaf, I would assume they have a competitive program as well.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=139011\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Not to mention the positive effects of recycling your camera with the camera manufacturer.  There will be a lot of shitty broken DSLR's out there in the future that will not be worth fixing and no way to recycle, this means that all the materials used to make them will eventually be wasted and end up in a landfill.
Logged

canmiya

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 158
    • beyond stills
Valid MF criticism or not?
« Reply #316 on: September 12, 2007, 09:26:57 pm »

Quote
Continuity is a concern, but open platforms like the Phase One are good choices as well. I use a Phase One P25 back on my Contax 645. I am considering an upgrade to the P45+ and I can do that for about 16K plus my old back. If I decided to switch platforms, like to the Hassy H2D - because the H3D is a closed platform, I could trade my back for the Hassy version for only about 2K. (That is cheaper than the move I am about to make from my 5D to the 1Ds MkIII). The point I am trying to make is that Canon doesn't have an upgrade path, and perhaps they do not need it because of their original cost and reasonable resale value. But for high end equipment, like the Phase One, a path for the next generation does exist. I do not know about Leaf, I would assume they have a competitive program as well.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=139011\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Yes,  Leaf does have an upgrade program which is similar to the Phase program.  When you consider that the digital technology is integrated within the body of dslr products, vs mf, with the exception of the Zd camera, where the digital technology is an "add on component", it is easy to understand why Canon and all dslr's upgrade path is tied to giving the consumer a reason to buy a  new body. But as I look at some of the features which are beginning to appear on dslr's, like face recognition and greater in camera processing, it seems that dslr's are becoming more like high prices point and shoots!  
The one thing that Nikon has done in the past that I really admire is to offer firmwear updates to some of the existing cameras which gives them some of the new model functionality.
Logged

jpjespersen

  • Guest
Valid MF criticism or not?
« Reply #317 on: September 13, 2007, 12:30:08 am »

Quote
That's 1Ds, not DS1. A thing someone who owns the camera should probably know...
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=138561\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I personally think that Wienke is a wanker.
Have you ever heard of a typo.  I am sure that being in the military you are familiar with mistakes.
Your language and attitude on these posts is very indicative of the top officers I met while I spent a month with the US Marines in Africa.  You act like you know everything and there is no other way.
« Last Edit: September 13, 2007, 12:32:52 am by jpjespersen »
Logged

Ray

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 10365
Valid MF criticism or not?
« Reply #318 on: September 13, 2007, 01:06:21 am »

Quote
Well that's an idiotic attitude. Go listen to it and if it sound better then buy. If it doen't don't. Not a difficult concept really.

And the amp, cabling and player make no real difference then? I've heard the difference and it can be significant.
Plus it's blindingly obvious [you'd think] that if it was a duff recording then a good hifi won't improve it. Oh BTW, Speakers are part of the hifi in case you missed that class.

 CD players vary enormously in sound quality. As does every component. That's like saying all lenses on SLRs are good enough/the same. Which is an obviously dumb thing to say.

I've listened to expensive gear and have been quite taken aback at the difference in sound even between very pricey gear. And good hi-fi makes a huge difference. Unless you have crap hearing, as then it's a waste of money. And as I said before, more expensive is not always better. Besides better sound quality is as nebulous as better picture quality in one sense and then there's the law of diminising returns you get with any very high end stuff, which is what you are talking about here.
You may need to spend an extra 30K to get your track car to go a fraction of a second faster than the already silly speed it goes even, though it only cost say 10K to get it tweaked up up to the current fast speed, but to some people it's money worth spending. Most people would laugh at a £2k camera let alone the £6k- £20K+ camera people are talking about here. It doesn't mean there is no point in spending that money. If you can tell the difference, if you can afford it and think the difference [in speed, efficiency, quality...] is worth spending on, then spend it. And ignore those carping ignoramuses who cannot tell the difference. My guess is you cannot tell the difference with good hifi and you seem to have a real bee in your bonnet about those who can. If so get over it. It's not as if it affects you in any way.

If all hifi sounds the same to a purchaser, he/she can buy cheap goods, but if your hearing isn't damaged and you really do appreciate the difference, spend whatever you like/can afford.
Same for a DB, if you cannot appreciate or need what a DB can do, don't buy one. If a 1DsIII doesn't do the job for you don't buy one of them. Anyway the cameras are ultimately only as good as the photographer.
How's the pocorn jing q?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=138658\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

You've so completely missed the point, JJJ, I don't know what else I can say.

Of course all hi fi systems do not sound the same. Where have I written that they do? My own hi fi system is supposed to have a reasonably flat response from 16Hz to 20kHz (+/- 3db), although in practice room acoustics will play havoc with that response. The 200 watt RMS amplifier dedicated to the stereo pair of subwoofers is really not powerful enough for certain recordings with 'show-off' amounts of bass that cause loose things in the room to rattle.

Once again, whilst the differences in the sound from loudspeakers can vary enormously, the add-on jewelery such as silver-plated cables, oxygen-free copper cables, expensive and exotic designs of amplifiers with the same RMS rating as much cheaper amps, and (I suspect) ridiculously expensive CD players, have such a subtle effect on the over-all sound quality, that they apparently cannot be heard during double blind tests.

Outside of double blind tests, there's no doubt of course. Once you've been told which amplifier, whatever, is supposed to 'sound' better, then human vanity ensures that you hear the difference so you don't reveal yourself as a complete fool to either the salesman or yourself.

But it's also true that, when comparing complete systems, expensive loudspeakers will often be coupled with equally expensive auxilliary equipment. It's the job of the salesman to convince you that the amplifier is the heart of the system and that silver cables will transmitt the signal better because silver has lower electrical resistance than copper, etc etc. And it's true, silver does have a lower electrical resistance than copper. But a thin length of sliver cable does not have lower resistence than a thick, or heavier gauge, copper cable.

Most people fall for it. People are often very gullible, you know.  
Logged

jing q

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 596
    • we are super
Valid MF criticism or not?
« Reply #319 on: September 13, 2007, 03:57:41 am »

Quote
You've so completely missed the point, JJJ, I don't know what else I can say.

Of course all hi fi systems do not sound the same. Where have I written that they do? My own hi fi system is supposed to have a reasonably flat response from 16Hz to 20kHz (+/- 3db), although in practice room acoustics will play havoc with that response. The 200 watt RMS amplifier dedicated to the stereo pair of subwoofers is really not powerful enough for certain recordings with 'show-off' amounts of bass that cause loose things in the room to rattle.

Once again, whilst the differences in the sound from loudspeakers can vary enormously, the add-on jewelery such as silver-plated cables, oxygen-free copper cables, expensive and exotic designs of amplifiers with the same RMS rating as much cheaper amps, and (I suspect) ridiculously expensive CD players, have such a subtle effect on the over-all sound quality, that they apparently cannot be heard during double blind tests.

Outside of double blind tests, there's no doubt of course. Once you've been told which amplifier, whatever, is supposed to 'sound' better, then human vanity ensures that you hear the difference so you don't reveal yourself as a complete fool to either the salesman or yourself.

But it's also true that, when comparing complete systems, expensive loudspeakers will often be coupled with equally expensive auxilliary equipment. It's the job of the salesman to convince you that the amplifier is the heart of the system and that silver cables will transmitt the signal better because silver has lower electrical resistance than copper, etc etc. And it's true, silver does have a lower electrical resistance than copper. But a thin length of sliver cable does not have lower resistence than a thick, or heavier gauge, copper cable.

Most people fall for it. People are often very gullible, you know. 
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=139060\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

let's get back to the topic...enough of the sound system analogy.

I hope you realise that the people who actually buy MFDBs do quite alot of research and they also test the equipment first before they actually decide on it.
It's not like a Canon where you read a review in a magazine and rush out to buy it and then start arguing about Nikon Vs Canon.
It is irritating to hear somebody tell me that I'm extolling the virtue of a product based on a delusion.
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 14 15 [16] 17 18   Go Up