shifting to MF

[alifatemi]

That's why Jonathon I think you better take part in that discussion by sharing yours and help.

[JonathanBenoit]

Honestly, I think 20-25k is too much to spend if you are just getting into MF digital. There are plenty of great options out there in the 22mp range. Usually people tend to jump into this too quickly before truly understanding their needs and what fits those needs. Myself included.

[feppe]

There is a lot of inaccurate information on all photography forums, but dpreview is by far the worst forum for photographers. Mostly because so many uneducated picture-takers post on it.

While you are right in general about DPReview forums, the thread linked to above includes much of the critique which has been put forward here by many working pros who have tried MFDBs, and some have even moved to DSLRs after getting sick of MFDB limitations and seeing that some FF DSLRs offer on-par IQ for their purposes in a much more manageable form factor along with other perks of the format.

[ondebanks]

P+ has a stronger filter against IR than P.

Doug, as always, thank you for your informative post. Love the IR photos in your link, BTW!

But you know me - one answer often spurs another question. Can I get hold of the spectral response curves of the P and P+ filters? Not the CCD response curves, which I already have (in the various Kodak datasheets).  I'm talking about either the filters alone, or the net combination of filter and CCD. I especially want to see what happens around 656 nanometres...

[Doug Peterson]

All I have is the CCD response curves and the spectral filtration charts for several filters (all public info - though sometimes obscure).

Of course you can create your own just by renting one of the AChromatic Plus from us for $600/day or a standard 45+ for $400/day. Sometimes we have 45 non plus units in stock and if so rental would be $350/day :-).

[rueyloon]

I try to chime in when I hear of people wanting to go into MF digital backs.

If you are doing it for fun - give it a go
If you are doing it for business - give it a rest

Unless you need to challenge people like Tim Griffith in architectural photography, any other camera will do just as well and your clients probably don't care nor
willing to pay top dollar for your work. (DSLR vs digitalback wise)

Buying a digital back for business is like deciding what car to drive to a shoot. You may look nicer arriving in a Maybach but your client isn't going to pay for that.
BUT if you happen to be a super star coming out from that Maybach, they will pay you top dollar no matter which car you arrive in.

[JonathanBenoit]

I try to chime in when I hear of people wanting to go into MF digital backs.

If you are doing it for fun - give it a go
If you are doing it for business - give it a rest

Unless you need to challenge people like Tim Griffith in architectural photography, any other camera will do just as well and your clients probably don't care nor
willing to pay top dollar for your work. (DSLR vs digitalback wise)

Buying a digital back for business is like deciding what car to drive to a shoot. You may look nicer arriving in a Maybach but your client isn't going to pay for that.
BUT if you happen to be a super star coming out from that Maybach, they will pay you top dollar no matter which car you arrive in.

There are plenty of digital back options (new and used) around the same price as top end dslr. We aren't talking much difference. Your argument about clients not paying top dollar doesn't make sense. Does owning a digital back make a photographer's fees higher? I would hope their photography and the market would set their prices.

Who's Tim Griffith? I'm sure he will be glad he has a fanboy.

[ondebanks]

All I have is the CCD response curves and the spectral filtration charts for several filters (all public info - though sometimes obscure).

Of course you can create your own just by renting one of the AChromatic Plus from us for $600/day or a standard 45+ for $400/day. Sometimes we have 45 non plus units in stock and if so rental would be $350/day :-).

Errr...thanks for the offer Doug, but it would be ludicrous for me to spend that sort of money just to acquire straightforward information that really should be in the public domain anyway.  I could tell by your grin that you feel the same way about it too.

The spectral response of an imaging system is a fundamental specification, that should be provided freely to prospective customers, or the technically interested.
Film and sensor manufacturers understand this - all their product datasheets provide the response curve. Why can't sensor integrators like MFDB manufacturers do it?

OK...looks like I'll have to open a support case with P1. I have found their online documentation to be excellent, but the lack of these response curves is one big omission. I know they're not alone in this, but they could lead the way in putting it right.

Am I making too big a deal of this? I don't think so. Here's an analogy:

A man walks into a hifi store. He sees an impressive set of speakers and asks the shop assistant about their frequency response, impedance and power output.
The shop assistant hands him a brochure or product flyer, detailing these specifications. Or perhaps he points to where they are printed on the packaging.
The shop assistant does not say "Well sir, if you rent or buy the speakers, you can go measure it yourself"!

[alifatemi]

my main concern, shifting to MF is mostly large size printing at 44"*66"(110cm*165cm); How many Megapixel (what digital back) for printing real size without upres does it need?

[tho_mas]

my main concern, shifting to MF is mostly large size printing at 44"*66"(110cm*165cm); How many Megapixel (what digital back) for printing real size without upres does it need?

at 300dpi?
250MPx

[alifatemi]

at 300dpi?
250MPx

So I need 250MPx digital back!?

[tho_mas]

So I need 250MPx digital back!?

if you find someone who produces one for you...
The hightest resolution is somthing around 140MPx as far as I know. But that is a Scanning Back.
But no... you need to re-think the workflow. I am printing around your desired size. I use "only" a P45.

[Dick Roadnight]

my main concern, shifting to MF is mostly large size printing at 44"*66"(110cm*165cm); How many Megapixel (what digital back) for printing real size without upres does it need?

60Mpx (Hasselblad H4D-60, Phase P65+) @ 150/180ppi would come close... or stitch 6 or 8 60 Mpx @ 360 ppi.

[Bart_van_der_Wolf]

So I need 250MPx digital back!?

Only if you need to print it at 300 dpi without interpolation (261.4 MPx to be a bit more precise). If you need to print it at 300 ppi then it depends on a lot of circumstances you've not yet mentioned.

You did mention "mostly landscape and sometimes fashion", and later you mentioned "mostly large size printing at 44"*66"(110cm*165cm)".

Please also tell us what the intended output and viewing requirements are for both, IF you want some reasonably useful advice. That's not to say that the advice so far wasn't, but there's missing guidance for a more specific/to-the-point answer.

Cheers,
Bart

[spotmeter]

I am thinking of shifting to MF around 40 Mb and spend around 20-25k $ for camera and back. I do mostly landscape and sometimes fashion. my choices are Hasselblad H4D40 or Phase one 45+. Assuming both have rather the same quality or very near, as Micheal mentioned in his review of phase one 45+, my concern is that I can easily upgrade phase one back in future without buynig new body but not the same with Hasselblad. what is your recommendations or any hint and suggestions please? I have not tryed any MF before just downloaded some files that were amazing and also reading some articles that says working with MF is not that easy.Thanks.

Joseph Holmes has a couple of very good articles on his website detailing the technical problems he encountered migrating to MFDB from large format. He describes numerous incidents of faulty lenses and backs. His conclusion was that spending tens of thousands of dollars does not guarantee you will be getting a system that works correctly. He recommends testing everything, no matter how good the reputation of the brand.

[ndevlin]

 Having spent a few hours with a Pentax 645D this weekend, I think you owe it to yourself to give it a look before leaping to the tune of $20K.  For landscape work it may end up offering some real advantages (like weather sealing) for about the price of a top-end 35mm camera. If you need to shoot tethered in-studio, forget it, but otherwise he 645D may be a game-changer when it comes ashore.

btw: a 40-60MP back will do a very nice 40x60 print.  Even apart from the physics of viewing distance, the information in a well-exposed and processed file at that size will suit your purposes.


- N.

[alifatemi]

how did you find  Pentax 645D? is it available in US?