You can't do That with medium format

[eronald]

Why should I object? The Paris fashion industry displays the selfsame charm, commanding presence, understanding of human needs, and above all steely eyed avarice of a brothel madam arranging the wrapping of the goods.

I always say that when I go to a fashion show, I am afraid of touching the trade women by accident, their elbows are so sharp they'd cut me to ribbons.

As for shooting, I go with what Jay Maisel says: You never know whether you will get the results, so you should make sure you enjoy the process.

Edmund

Fashion as we know it, contemporary, comes basically from Paris. You have to understand what Paris is about to understand what fashion is about.
Basically, Paris is a prostitute. (Edmund don't jump on me on this one). But, yes, that's the essense of Paris, a very expensive and sophisticated prostitute.

[eronald]

I was kidding. But I know, (I've been living there my life before Madrid after all) that the prostitute can asks sometimes people a very high price to have sex with her, and she's not so young. (no offense to women, those are images and parabols okay?)

Don't ask me. What I have noticed is that when you go to the small fashion shows there are quite a few pretty women in the audience. When you go to the big shows, they're all old birds, too tough to eat

[Brent McCombs]

Well, I've shot Antarctica and Yunnan & Sichuan provinces in China with the D3x/D3s combo, and Iceland with the P40+/Phase 645DF system. Other than birds in flight, there's nothing I shot in Antarctica or China that I couldn't have shot with the Phase. In retrospect, I wish I'd had the Phase with me on those other trips, and will be bringing it with me to Antarctica when I go back in a couple weeks. I very much enjoy the D3x, and I think it's a fabulous camera. But the top of a Mountain in Nepal? Definitely MFDB would be my choice. Hands down.

[Dick Roadnight]

I recall that illuminating comarison between 35mm film and 4x5" film, produced many years ago by Lars Kjellberg of Photodo. Do you remember that?
As I recall, the films used were the B&W T-Max 100 for the 35mm camera and T-Max 400 for the 4x5 format in order to at least increase the shutter speed a bit, at equivalent DoF.

The object of the exercise was to see how 35mm compares with 4x5 at equal DoF, without resorting to the use of tilt lenses.

This is a bit like doing a comparative test between a Citroen 2CV and a Ferrari, and insisting on using the same tyres... or was it just to indicate that, if you used a larger format, you have to use the same high-res film and movements to get the benefit?

There was a time when photographers used 5 * 4 sheet film because it was the best tool for photo-journalism or most other jobs for which you did not need 10 * 8, now, in the real world, we use higher res digital cameras to produce bigger pictures in which you can appreciate fine detail at a close viewing distance.

Why do I bother? This topic should have been left to die with the original post!

[Rob C]

There was a time when photographers used 5 * 4 sheet film because it was the best tool for photo-journalism or most other jobs for which you did not need 10 * 8,

No; in my own experience, many used 4x5 because it was all that the company provided. The Rollei eventually put paid to that in newspapers, not so much because it hadn't been around a long time, but because of availability. When you had a perfectly willing MPP sitting in the office, why would the management think it worthwhile scapping it for nothing and buying a fleet of new, expensive Rolleis?

As soon as they were were made available, they were adopted, in turn to give way to Nikon and Pentax. A 4x5 monster was never the best kite for the flight; it was the tool of last resort.

Rob C

[Dick Roadnight]

No; in my own experience, many used 4x5 because it was all that the company provided. The Rollei eventually put paid to that in newspapers, not so much because it hadn't been around a long time, but because of availability. When you had a perfectly willing MPP sitting in the office, why would the management think it worthwhile scapping it for nothing and buying a fleet of new, expensive Rolleis?

As soon as they were were made available, they were adopted, in turn to give way to Nikon and Pentax. A 4x5 monster was never the best kite for the flight; it was the tool of last resort.

Rob C

That would be the MF (120 film) Rollieflex?

I thought that photo-journalists used European MF roll-film and 35mm cameras before they discovered Pacific-rim cameras when their European cameras failed in the jungle in the Vietnam (or was it Korean?) war?

[ErikKaffehr]

Hi,

The story goes that David Douglas Duncan tested a few Japanese lenses and found them better the corresponding German lenses. If I recall correctly a Japanese photographer had some photos that he said were taken with a Canon lens on a Leica. So they started testing Japanese lenses on the Leica.

Best regards
Erik

That would be the MF (120 film) Rollieflex?

I thought that photo-journalists used European MF roll-film and 35mm cameras before they discovered Pacific-rim cameras when their European cameras failed in the jungle in the Vietnam (or was it Korean?) war?

[Rob C]

That would be the MF (120 film) Rollieflex?

I thought that photo-journalists used European MF roll-film and 35mm cameras before they discovered Pacific-rim cameras when their European cameras failed in the jungle in the Vietnam (or was it Korean?) war?

Yes, the 120 film Rollei; they also made a 35mm thing later on, but it was an amateur's toy. I used a second-hand Rollei T for some time, and eventuallly traded it for a new Hasselblad 500C, only to discover that the 'blad bounced like a monkey on heat in outdoor, hand-held, fashion work; however, in the studio with flash, it ('blad) was fantastic. The Rollei was also the tool of choice for the Italian paparazzo people, the only alternative I ever actually saw being used was a flashless Leica M... even then, the fifties and early sixties, there was money in celebs but I remember feeling surprised that hardly any newspapers or specialist magazines like today's Hola, the old Italian Tempo etc. existed in Britain, trading in celeb culture, whereas in Italy, probably most of Europe, the gossip rags were ubiquitous.

The MPP (think it went up to Mk 7 or 8 if I remember correctly) was a British 4x5 camera, heavy and with a restricted set of movements, but it never pretended to be a monorail! Simple, it was a workhorse for many industrial units and produced very good work if used well.

Instead of all this crap, I wish I remembered how to make money instead.

;-(

Rob C

[Rob C]

Hi,

The story goes that David Douglas Duncan tested a few Japanese lenses and found them better the corresponding German lenses. If I recall correctly a Japanese photographer had some photos that he said were taken with a Canon lens on a Leica. So they started testing Japanese lenses on the Leica.

Best regards
Erik

The way I read it, the war snappers used Japanese cameras whilst their Leicas were being serviced, and when the films reached the States, the editors discovered that though the Leicas had pots of detail, the Jap cameras had more contrast and made for snappier (n.p.i.) pages in LIFE.

And hence the world domintaion of Nikon, Canon and Pentax!

Rob C

[Rob C]

Don't ask me. What I have noticed is that when you go to the small fashion shows there are quite a few pretty women in the audience. When you go to the big shows, they're all old birds, too tough to eat

That's a simple example of the survival of the fittest: the old birds can, and have, outfought everything else in that universe; and with money and winning comes power. They don't need the small shows; those need them and so they won't get them.
 
Rob C

[Ray]

This is a bit like doing a comparative test between a Citroen 2CV and a Ferrari, and insisting on using the same tyres... or was it just to indicate that, if you used a larger format, you have to use the same high-res film and movements to get the benefit?

Only a tiny bit like it seems to me. I think it's probably true that some people buy MFDB systems as status symbols, to attract the opposite sex. But I thought, in this thread, we are attempting to discuss the real and practical advantages, for photographic purposes, of the inflexible MFDB system as opposed to the much more flexible 35mm DSLR system.

In our cities and on our highways, a Ferrari does not get you to work faster than any average car. (A 2CV is the equivalent of a P&S. Get serious!)

[Ray]

Well, I've shot Antarctica and Yunnan & Sichuan provinces in China with the D3x/D3s combo, and Iceland with the P40+/Phase 645DF system. Other than birds in flight, there's nothing I shot in Antarctica or China that I couldn't have shot with the Phase. In retrospect, I wish I'd had the Phase with me on those other trips, and will be bringing it with me to Antarctica when I go back in a couple weeks. I very much enjoy the D3x, and I think it's a fabulous camera. But the top of a Mountain in Nepal? Definitely MFDB would be my choice. Hands down.

Can't understand how you would come to this conclusion. But instead of waffling, let's get down to brass tacks (for the Americas, concrete examples).
Here's a shot I took a few years ago from the top of a small mountain in Nepal (about 3200 metres). I attempted to catch the dawn, so set off hiking in the dark at 4.30 am.

I got a few shots of the dawn, but the difficulties in finding a solid platform for my tripod, and the continual need to wipe the condensation from my lens as a result of the lens suddenly being exposed to a cold environment, after removing it from my camera bag, caused me to miss a few good shots.
Not to mention the complaints from the model because she was shivering with cold. You wouldn't believe the abuse I suffered from that lady, as I stuffed around setting up my equipment.

Anyway, let's do a few technical comparisons. I was using a 12.8mp 5D. The scene was shot with camera horizontal, taking 3 shots for stitching purposes. In fact, the resulting aspect ratio indicates that the middle shot was necessary only for overlap purposes. The resulting composition is very close to just two 35mm shots end on end, ie, 72mm x 24mm.
The lens I used was 30mm at F11 and 1/50th sec exposure.

Let's consider what would have been required had I hauled a P65+ up the mountain.

Could I have captured the same scene with just one shot with the P65+? No way!

To capture  such a scene with a 72x24m sensor, I would have need a 15mm lens. The P65+ sensor is only 54mm wide. I would have needed a lens with a focal length of 72/54 x 15 = 20mm.

Is there such a lens for the Phase DB?

Let's assume that such a lens exisits and that we could shoot this scene with a single shot from the P65+. After cropping to the 3:1 aspect ratio, the 60mp of the P65+ becomes about 27mp (54x18mm), which is very close to the 'real' MP value of the 5D stitch. (2x 12.8 = 25.6). The actual resulting image size is about 40mp after warping and stretching, but this reduces resolution somewhat.

I'd be prepared to accept that a P65+ could deliver this result with just one shot, if a high quality 20mm lens were available.

However, here we're comparing old 35mm technology with newer MFDB technology. The comparaison should be between the 21mp 5D2 and the P65+.

In this scenario I've described, the 21mp 5D2 would produce better image quality than the P65+. (42 MP v 27 MP).

Okay! Why not stitch with the P65+? We might suffer a bit more abuse from the model shivering at the high altitudes, but never mind. We're dedicated professionals.

The equivalent of a 30mm lens on 135 is 45mm on a P65+. Instead of F11, we need to use F16 for same DoF. To get maximum image quality we need to use ISO 50. In stead of 1/50th at F11 and ISO 100, we need to use F16 at ISO 50 and 1/13th sec exposure.

Sorry! There's a slight breeze. I know. I was there. That grass in the foreground is swaying in the breeze, not to mention the shivering of the model. A 50th of a second is a minimum. I'd have preferred a 100th. With a D700 I could have used a 100th. A 13th is not acceptable.

Moral of story: Don't carry an MFDB to the mountain top. A D3X or 5D2 is a better choice.

PS. The nude model in the foreground was placed there just to grab your attention. I'm slightly amazed that some posters in this thread do not seem to get the point that this topic is not about which format can deliver the best image quality, but in what circumstances these formats can deliver the best image quality.

[bradleygibson]

I do a fair bit of mountaineering photography.  I can tell you you're absolutely right that the small format work is quicker, easier, lighter, more consistent, more reliable, doable in lower light, etc., etc.  I wouldn't debate any of that.

For me personally, I'm with Rob on this one.

After having purchased different six digital medium format systems (I'm a slow learner), and then returned to small format Canon with an all-prime setup I can tell you that the MF work I did (frustrating as it was) is simply better.  There's not as much portfolio-grade work, to be sure, and I can tell stories about the big one that got away far more often than I'd like, but whether its the dynamic range, the lenses, or pixie dust, the results are what they are.  (It's why I'm coming back for more lumps to my 7th MF system.)

I can totally see this being the other way around for others (most people, in fact).  But it's nice to know that there are others out there who've found that, despite the (considerable) disadvantages, MF can still be the right tool for remote location work.

[eronald]

Ray,

I agree, it looks much better with that "girlie". Maybe the "girlie" should be taken up there on every shoot, if you want to come back with really interesting pictures.

You can always use content-aware fill to erase her, later  

Edmund

Perhaps you should consider pasting a girlie on to all of your pics.

[Ray]

Ray,

I agree, it looks much better with that "girlie". Maybe the "girlie" should be taken up there on every shoot, if you want to come back with really interesting pictures.

You can always use content-aware fill to erase her, later  

Edmund

Hey! Edmund, you've just given me an idea. I could have a smorgasboard of delightlful, nude ladies in all sorts of provocative poses, spread across the entire foreground of this panorama.

On the extreme right of the panorama is a faint, distant peak known as the 'fishtail' mountain. Here's a closer view of it from a slightly different perspective.

It is said that the Indian God, Shiva, resides on this mountain. It is forbidden to climb the mountain. (Not that that worries me since I never contemplated climbing it). However, the deity Shiva is a complex God embodying various qualities, one of which is sensuality. I don't believe he would disapprove of my project. 

[fredjeang]

200 hundreds repplies and 5679 views so far for that thread ??!!!

I must confess that Ray is a forum genius.

[Rob C]

200 hundreds repplies and 5679 views so far for that thread ??!!!

I must confess that Ray is a forum genius.

Yep, has convinced me that my own failure to do landscape because I find nice ones only as backgrounds for girls is no actual failure at all. It proves that without girls, its just another rock, another tree, another sunset, another desert, another Zabriskie Point. The time and effort and money I've saved myself!

Thanks!

Rob C

[Nick-T]

Keith I don't think you get it. You do not have to have used, or even laid eyes on, a medium format camera in order to have strong opinions on the subject.

Anyway, must dash, I'm off to one of the brain surgery forums to tell them they are using the wrong scalpels.

Nick-T

[tho_mas]

Anyway, must dash, I'm off to one of the brain surgery forums to tell them they are using the wrong scalpels.

you might tell them a chainsaw is much, much faster.
Also easier to use... in a certain way.

[Doug Peterson]

Anyway, must dash, I'm off to one of the brain surgery forums to tell them they are using the wrong scalpels.

Don't forget the DxO lab test for scalpel metal purity. It's the best way to judge scapel quality - don't actually go and cut anything because what matters is the DxO metal purity score.

Doug Peterson (e-mail Me)
__________________

Head of Technical Services, Capture Integration
Phase One Partner of the Year
Leaf, Leica, Cambo, Arca Swiss, Canon, Apple, Profoto, Broncolor, Eizo & More

National: 877.217.9870  |  Cell: 740.707.2183
Newsletter | RSS Feed
Buy Capture One at 10% off