One (biased) Opinion for MORE MORE MORE IQ

[rainer_v]

Hi there Pete the only lens I've got at the moment is the 70mm Rodenstock (which is stunning BTW) and it is very bright so the loupe is fine. I hope to test it (with some sample shots of course) next week during the show also with the Rod' 28mm. We just need some half decent weather whcih is a rare thing in UK these days...

PS the battery hanging off is just what it is and it's not a problem on any of these cameras, plus you can get a triple size one which last forever (relatively speaking)...

Yair

i agree about the 70mm. stunning lens, and perfect to stitch even at 20mm left right. resulting resultion is amazing and, as yair says, its done in seconds. i often did and do this with the 28hr as well,- ps stitching is a big help here and so this does not cost much work, but you extend the possibilities of your lenses  lot.

i would not recommend to work with a loupe, at least not with 3x mag.
better you use at least 6x, and even there i prefer to zoom in the display to 100%
which is more easy to read. the lens scales on the helicon mounts help a lot,
i am interested how easy it will be work to focus exact with the new linhof techno,
which otherwise looks very appealing to me. the HR lenses really want to be focussed 100% accurate,
more if one use them wide open, which delivers stunning results till the edges, if the focus is set absolut right.

[Ben Rubinstein]

If the shot is vertical
the sensor is vertical

why shouldn't the housing be vertical
to maximize screen real estate?

If he's using the new back with the rotating sensor within the back then his comment makes sense, why would you ever need to rotate the back itself.

[BJNY]

Deleted incorrect attachment

[James R Russell]

When I see threads such as this I'm reminded just how miniscule the MFD market is and how challenging the economic crisis must be for MFD manufacturers and dealers.

Doug does make some interesting points and regardless of where medium format is at the moment there is a compelling case for the working photographer to own (or rent) more than one format or one system.  

Whether there is a compelling case to own anything more than 30 megapixels is debatable and more personal preference than client dictates.

What Doug didn't mention is that no matter what the camera makers offer, current lithographic printing for standard page sizes means anything over 20 something megapixels usually requires downsizing for commercial printing.  Even large format printing like outdoor, shelter cards, in-store is not designed or meant to be viewed at  3 inches but at a much further distance.

In the commercial and editorial world from a client's perspective, camera choice is usually way down on the list, if ever mentioned, so what we buy, what we use is more personal preference than an actual need to have x number of megapixels.

We can all guess at what the future might bring, but as I see my work purposed in a lot of different media and formats, the fastest growing segment is not tradition print, it's viewing on a computer or some other form of  electronic deilivery and once you go to that medium megapixels are not that important.  

In fact the changes I've seen in the last 5 to 7 years in photography have been more production related than anything that revolves around the detail of the capture.  Pre production, shooting and post production routines have changed dramatically in the last half decade and most clients assume that with proper production, almost any professional camera the photographer choses will allow for the required results.
 
It's interesting that today there are volumes of reviews online about the Nikon D3x, basically applauding it as a medium format alternative, with the only real downside to the camera being the $8,000 costs.

In the world of medium format, even used, $8,000 is just the beginning.

[David WM]

Excessive resolution will be a problem for a lot of MF users, who  need to work quick and cant afford to needlessly be working on 300 mb files when 20mb is plenty. Now if we can select the resolution required prior to shooting, it doesn't matter if the job is baseball caps for a web site or a tourism landscape for a BB. Being able to select highest resolution should solve a lot of moire problems too.
David

[PeterA]

Sometimes I think that the really exciting and interesting things in life are about working within certain limitations. Golfers around the world are bemoaning the death of the traditional course structure and length because some geeks in lab coats keep improving the distance a ball can fly. Distance doesn't make the game more fun or any more interesting and in many ways has m,ade teh game worse  - except in the crudest most low brow fashion possible.

I am getting tired of the propeller head world - with NASA price tags and dubious benefits. All these digi improvements haven't helped teh working pro much either - the margins are down and the expectations are up. It  is a giant con and a sham in many ways.

I see direct parallels between the over leveraged world and so called tech improvements - too much leverage in the wrong areas. too much not so bloody obvious yearly improvements and the next great thing to buy right now - or else..I am thinking to myself - or else Fark%^&ng what?

I am no Luddite btw - but enough is enough already. So much focus on a P65+ chip and your base body still has P&S shutter lag - gimme a break.

[rainer_v]

Sometimes I think that the really exciting and interesting things in life are about working within certain limitations. Golfers around the world are bemoaning the death of the traditional course structure and length because some geeks in lab coats keep improving the distance a ball can fly. Distance doesn't make the game more fun or any more interesting and in many ways has m,ade teh game worse  - except in the crudest most low brow fashion possible.

I am getting tired of the propeller head world - with NASA price tags and dubious benefits. All these digi improvements haven't helped teh working pro much either - the margins are down and the expectations are up. It  is a giant con and a sham in many ways.

I see direct parallels between the over leveraged world and so called tech improvements - too much leverage in the wrong areas. too much not so bloody obvious yearly improvements and the next great thing to buy right now - or else..I am thinking to myself - or else Fark%^&ng what?

I am no Luddite btw - but enough is enough already. So much focus on a P65+ chip and your base body still has P&S shutter lag - gimme a break.

100% agreed.

[thsinar]

Sometimes I think that the really exciting and interesting things in life are about working within certain limitations. Golfers around the world are bemoaning the death of the traditional course structure and length because some geeks in lab coats keep improving the distance a ball can fly. Distance doesn't make the game more fun or any more interesting and in many ways has m,ade teh game worse  - except in the crudest most low brow fashion possible.

I am getting tired of the propeller head world - with NASA price tags and dubious benefits. All these digi improvements haven't helped teh working pro much either - the margins are down and the expectations are up. It  is a giant con and a sham in many ways.

I see direct parallels between the over leveraged world and so called tech improvements - too much leverage in the wrong areas. too much not so bloody obvious yearly improvements and the next great thing to buy right now - or else..I am thinking to myself - or else Fark%^&ng what?

I am no Luddite btw - but enough is enough already. So much focus on a P65+ chip and your base body still has P&S shutter lag - gimme a break.

100% agreed, too, Peter.

Thierry

[klane]

Sometimes I think that the really exciting and interesting things in life are about working within certain limitations. Golfers around the world are bemoaning the death of the traditional course structure and length because some geeks in lab coats keep improving the distance a ball can fly. Distance doesn't make the game more fun or any more interesting and in many ways has m,ade teh game worse  - except in the crudest most low brow fashion possible.

I am getting tired of the propeller head world - with NASA price tags and dubious benefits. All these digi improvements haven't helped teh working pro much either - the margins are down and the expectations are up. It  is a giant con and a sham in many ways.

I see direct parallels between the over leveraged world and so called tech improvements - too much leverage in the wrong areas. too much not so bloody obvious yearly improvements and the next great thing to buy right now - or else..I am thinking to myself - or else Fark%^&ng what?

I am no Luddite btw - but enough is enough already. So much focus on a P65+ chip and your base body still has P&S shutter lag - gimme a break.

Very well said and I couldn't agree more.

[gwhitf]

Sometimes I think that the really exciting and interesting things in life are about working within certain limitations. Golfers around the world are bemoaning the death of the traditional course structure and length because some geeks in lab coats keep improving the distance a ball can fly. Distance doesn't make the game more fun or any more interesting and in many ways has m,ade teh game worse  - except in the crudest most low brow fashion possible.

I am getting tired of the propeller head world - with NASA price tags and dubious benefits. All these digi improvements haven't helped teh working pro much either - the margins are down and the expectations are up. It  is a giant con and a sham in many ways.

I see direct parallels between the over leveraged world and so called tech improvements - too much leverage in the wrong areas. too much not so bloody obvious yearly improvements and the next great thing to buy right now - or else..I am thinking to myself - or else Fark%^&ng what?

I am no Luddite btw - but enough is enough already. So much focus on a P65+ chip and your base body still has P&S shutter lag - gimme a break.

1. I tend to agree with Doug. I find it incredibly comforting to have a giant file to work with, when doing advertising. There are always retouching requests -- head swaps, new skies, merging four or five partial frames into the final TIFF, whatever -- and it's just nice doing the retouch on a very large file, and then rezzing it down and resharpening for the final repro size. I too would welcome the P65 when the price gets realistic. Not to mention a noncropping viewfinder image.

2. Yes, that Mamiya body is still not near ready for heavy duty advertising, but what was Phase to do when Hassie slammed the door? Seriously. Do you have a better solution than what they did? Stand there and do nothing? So they get in bed with Mamiya and try to salvage a half-ass camera design -- it was the only (bad) option that they had left. Who knows if the shutter lag will ever be fixable. But i'm feeling that anyone writing the check for a p65 is going to be using H bodies anyway, or Contax in the least. Mamiya will generally fall to the price-conscious crowd only.

3. Good to remember that, in the grand scheme, the MF market is a tiny sliver of the marketplace. You could say that the fact that we have as many choices that we do to be a miracle, really. It is truly a 35mm world out there. Exponentially.

Just one opinion.

[lisa_r]

In the commercial and editorial world from a client's perspective, camera choice is usually way down on the list, if ever mentioned, so what we buy, what we use is more personal preference than an actual need to have x number of megapixels.

...almost any professional camera the photographer choses will allow for the required results.

Here's some videos for you.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2009_swim...lyn-decker.html

Maybe it's no surprise, but just about every photographer shooting for this entire 2009 issue, which is viewed by tens of millions, is shot on a Canon. Think they are getting many complaints about IQ from the Canon vs. Phase 30+ images? Does anyone here have the magazine? If so, can you tell which are which? Do you care?

[yaya]

1. I tend to agree with Doug. I find it incredibly comforting to have a giant file to work with, when doing advertising. There are always retouching requests -- head swaps, new skies, merging four or five partial frames into the final TIFF, whatever -- and it's just nice doing the retouch on a very large file, and then rezzing it down and resharpening for the final repro size. I too would welcome the P65 when the price gets realistic. Not to mention a noncropping viewfinder image.

2. Yes, that Mamiya body is still not near ready for heavy duty advertising, but what was Phase to do when Hassie slammed the door? Seriously. Do you have a better solution than what they did? Stand there and do nothing? So they get in bed with Mamiya and try to salvage a half-ass camera design -- it was the only (bad) option that they had left. Who knows if the shutter lag will ever be fixable. But i'm feeling that anyone writing the check for a p65 is going to be using H bodies anyway, or Contax in the least. Mamiya will generally fall to the price-conscious crowd only.

3. Good to remember that, in the grand scheme, the MF market is a tiny sliver of the marketplace. You could say that the fact that we have as many choices that we do to be a miracle, really. It is truly a 35mm world out there. Exponentially.

Just one opinion.

Welcome back George

[Guy Mancuso]

I wish some would actually try a AFDIII body with the latest firmware. The Shutter lag is so much more improved before i had to shoot a golfer at the top of his back swing , not no more and much more at about 2 feet from contact. That is a big improvement. A new design would be nice and i hope to see one very soon. I'm sure we will see it too.

[ziocan]

Here's some videos for you.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2009_swim...lyn-decker.html

Maybe it's no surprise, but just about every photographer shooting for this entire 2009 issue, which is viewed by tens of millions, is shot on a Canon. Think they are getting many complaints about IQ from the Canon vs. Phase 30+ images? Does anyone here have the magazine? If so, can you tell which are which? Do you care?

Honestly Lisa you provided a bad example.
SI is of average print quality and the reason why those photos are taken and what really matters about them, is clearly explained by Brooklyn Decker early on the video. She did not need to say a word while she is lowering her bikini to the point of almost revealing why the world is spinning.

[lisa_r]

I gather the new firmware is not for the older bodies, right? (so they are still slow?)
Guy, with the new III, are you stuck with the new $3000 lenses? Or are the older lenses fine with the new body?
Thanks.

[lisa_r]

Honestly Lisa you provided a bad example.
SI is of average print quality and the reason why those photos are taken and what really matters about them, is clearly explained by Brooklyn Decker early on the video, when she is lowering her bikini to the point of almost revealing why the world is spinning.

Do you have this issue? Have you looked at it?
I agree it's not the ultimate in print quality, but it is no worse than the vast majority of what is out there in terms of commerce on the printed page, is it? Of course it was not meant to be a sample of utmost quality. It is, though, big time high profile, big time viewership, big big big time budgets. And is anyone (other than us photo nerds) complaining about IQ?

What's the IQ of my favorite photographers...Peter Lindbergh (grainy), Paolo Roversi (fuzzy), Ellen von Unwerth (grainy) etc., etc., etc. In a technical sense, what you are seeing in SI is better/sharper/smoother than these amazing photographers above. And with more MP, bigger chip, yada yada yada, you could get even better/sharper/smoother, but will it elevate your work? Will people buy more magazines because of it? Will you get the job because of it? Will it ever make you better than this guy?? (who by the way shoots for SI in some of those videos, shoots for Bergdorf Goodman, etc., etc...:

http://www.miconworldwide.com/fashion-2006.htm

[ziocan]

Do you have this issue? Have you looked at it?
I agree it's not the ultimate in print quality, but it is no worse than the vast majority of what is out there in terms of commerce on the printed page, is it? Of course it was not meant to be a sample of utmost quality. It is, though, big time high profile, big time viewership, big big big time budgets. And is anyone (other than us photo nerds) complaining about IQ?

What's the IQ of my favorite photographers...Peter Lindbergh (grainy), Paolo Roversi (fuzzy), Ellen von Unwerth (grainy) etc., etc., etc. In a technical sense, what you are seeing in SI is better/sharper/smoother than these amazing photographers above.

Anyway, my point is another, first SI is not big time high profile or for a very sophisticated readership. I have nothing against that kind of photography, since half of my work is like that, but the scope of that photos is not showing photography at is best state but just get us men horny. let's do not confuse this.
A couple of friends of mines shoot those stories on SI and they use canon (as I would as well), but they are smart enough to discern between sexy girl twisting their bodies and looking at the camera sexy work, and other work they do, where they use different kind of equipment.

As someone mentioned above, we shot we with a certain kind of equipment to satisfy our pleasure of getting a certain kind of image.

I can shoot with what ever I want. Nobody ever asks what I'm using.

[ziocan]

double post

[PeterA]

I wish some would actually try a AFDIII body with the latest firmware. The Shutter lag is so much more improved before i had to shoot a golfer at the top of his back swing , not no more and much more at about 2 feet from contact. That is a big improvement. A new design would be nice and i hope to see one very soon. I'm sure we will see it too.

G'day Guy - some points which you may not like to hear.

Firstly I wasn't criticising Mamiya bodies , I was trying to make a general point about too much focus on too little value add - from the whole industry.  

Second point - I play off a handicap of four. it has blown out because these days I am on only one and half legs - two feet from point of contact the golf club is travelling at a speed of between 70 mph and 130mph - depending on wether you are photographing a hack or a pro hitter.  

As a photographer you cant trigger at two feet from impact for either - so I dont get your point on Mamiya improved shutter repsonse - it wouldnt make any difference wether one was shooting Mamiya / Hasselblad or whatever - club head speed is too fast for a photographer to guess and react. Thats where DSLRs and strobes kick in with set -up trigger units - but you know all that  - new tech coming where you shoot video and pick whatever still you want - will help. In the meantime good luck trying to shoot "two feet from from impact".

As for comments on what Phase should or should not have done - again not my point. The 'easy' money has been made delivering tweaks on chips to boost megapixel count and charging fortunes every year in MF land. Phase makes great backs with great software - as do others. I am just not a buyer anymore - the BS is over till someone gives me a proper 6x6 coverage chip so I can use my MF glass better - and I dont care about  megapixel count or high ISO BS either ...

or RED delivers on their promises - if they do - it is syonarra time for a lot of camera manufacturers- and everyone knows it.

Cheers
Pete

[bcooter]

............I too would welcome the P65 when the price gets realistic. Not to mention a noncropping viewfinder image.

........Yes, that Mamiya body is still not near ready for heavy duty advertising, but what was Phase to do when Hassie slammed the door? .....................

Medium format relies on the past historical reference of bigger is better and in some scenarios it is.    The question is is it worth it and is it the frame that much bigger?

What was Phase to do?  I don't know, I would think make a better camera, or maybe hook up with Rollei.  If  Nikon made a $800  n90 with the lcd, the shutter lag, the autofocus and the build quality of the AFD III they would be behind casio in sales.

As to where the market is going for me,  I'm not a medium format buyer anymore.  I've done my stint, ground through the changes, the hardware workarounds, the software glitches and I'm done because at the end of the day I doubt seriously if I could trade either one of  my medium format backs for one used  d3x.

Because of this I'll keep what I have but 15k to upgradge from a 1.24 crop to a 1.04 crop in a 645 frame.  I don't see it.