Medium format vs DLSr

[theguywitha645d]

Different implementation and quality control one should assume... and different price. If my humble eye judge from posted jpgs, which show and not show all, files from Pentax look more DSLR, perhaps due similar design aim and/or implementation. The Leica files look MFDB, albeit more like a Kodak sensor  . Dalsa sensor have a different (better?) character.

Best regards
Anders

Perhaps you can show us? Proof is in the pudding. I use both Phase and Pentax and I have no idea what you are talking about. But an example would clear things up.

[fotometria gr]

Some facts to back up these claims for once?

Or are you trying to sell your Leaf back by any chance? 

Cheers,
Bernard

I don't own a leaf back, I do own an Imacon 528c back, for my Contax645 & Fuji GX680 systems (of 5 bodys and 21 lenses if added) and I also own 5 DSLRs and 17 lenses of Nikon which includes anything that you use in that format, ....anymore "evidence"? Next time watch your attitude,  Theodoros. www.fotometria.gr

[Anders_HK]

Back to the OP;

I starting a new fine art portrait project which could entail printing super large down the road.

For those in the know, who have really used all the various size cameras, for printing real large, what have you discovered -- i.e. medium format -- Mamiya Rz for example (film vs Digital)/ vs the best dslr (Canon 5D2 for example which I have and know)

I have never used 4x5 or 8x10 personally, but for those conversant -- how does the Canon 5d2 // medium format digital//, stack up? This is for the few who have actually done A:B tests.

thanks!

More or newer gear will not necessarily get you better pictures, since it takes time to learn the new tools.

The best camera is often the one we have, if it feels comfortable as a tool in our hands. A TOOL is all a camera is, but it helps if it is one we enjoy working with and see images well through.

Thus I would advise to stick to your 5D2 and perfect your shoot from all ways possible with the images in mind. However, if you want to use also a second camera, why not pick up a used RZ on ebay with just one single lens, the standard 110mm. They sell for near free nowadays! Use film. If you like the results you can pay to make some drum scans. If proper exposed and proper light they will most likely blow your images from 5D2 from water based on image quality (do pay attention to DR of film and expose accordingly). If you get hooked, keep it and see what future where will lead .

Be warned, the view from a waist level finder can make you hooked. Looking through such in RZ, Hassy 503, made me go for Hy6 and I am having a ball capturing images that way. It is a brilliant way of seeing and viewing a subject when shooting. Sort of half way towards staring at groundglass on a viewcamera. DSLR viewfinders are small and dim...

Best regards,
Anders

[fotometria gr]

@ Erik, @ Bernard,

Both of the Leica and Pentax uses Kodak sensors yes, but not same ones;

S2:  30x45mm  37.5MP  16-bit  ISO 160-1250
645D: 33x44mm  40MP  14-bit  ISO 100-1600

Different implementation and quality control one should assume... and different price. If my humble eye judge from posted jpgs, which show and not show all, files from Pentax look more DSLR, perhaps due similar design aim and/or implementation. The Leica files look MFDB, albeit more like a Kodak sensor  . Dalsa sensor have a different (better?) character.

Another example was Leaf Aptus 22 and Mamiya ZD which indeed used identical same sensor from Dalsa, different price. Those two were indeed documented different implemented and different quality control. The Aptus 22 was stellar (low ISO), see Frank Doorhof;s website, and ZD came with a design/implementation/quality problem I posted of on LuLa ("ZD has Problem") at the time.

As for a DSLR that you pay a few thousand USD for, how many hours do you believe they spend on quality control and custom mapping of a sensor at factory when there is X number coming right after it on tha band Sorry, no documents to prove. If you search for an older LuLa Video Journal when Michael visited Phase One factory you will see that they do spend much effort in custom mapping a senor. With latest 80MP pixel backs I can assume that Leaf and Phase One quality control and mapping must have been stepped up. I doubt it is mere related to the sensor, and pixels aside my AFi-II 12 blows my prior Aptus 65 straight out of water in preciseness and color accuracy (and more). Saying that, I am not smoking or imagining the latest is best, it is based on my impression from processing files.

It all is of course about more than mere same number of pixels...

Regarding 40MP Phase One and Leaf, those are Dalsa sensors per what I recall, while the 39MP P45+ was an older Kodak sensor. If size of sensor is different, it is different sensor. While it can be same generation sensor that does not make it same sensor.

Best regards
Anders

+1

[Anders_HK]

Perhaps you can show us? Proof is in the pudding. I use both Phase and Pentax and I have no idea what you are talking about. But an example would clear things up.

Sorry no. I told you of my impression, you told of yours. Mutual respect is appreciated. Our opinions differ.

[fotometria gr]

Back to the OP;

More or newer gear will not necessarily get you better pictures, since it takes time to learn the new tools.

The best camera is often the one we have, if it feels comfortable as a tool in our hands. A TOOL is all a camera is, but it helps if it is one we enjoy working with and see images well through.

Thus I would advise to stick to your 5D2 and perfect your shoot from all ways possible with the images in mind. However, if you want to use also a second camera, why not pick up a used RZ on ebay with just one single lens, the standard 110mm. They sell for near free nowadays! Use film. If you like the results you can pay to make some drum scans. If proper exposed and proper light they will most likely blow your images from 5D2 from water based on image quality (do pay attention to DR of film and expose accordingly). If you get hooked, keep it and see what future where will lead .

Be warned, the view from a waist level finder can make you hooked. Looking through such in RZ, Hassy 503, made me go for Hy6 and I am having a ball capturing images that way. It is a brilliant way of seeing and viewing a subject when shooting. Sort of half way towards staring at groundglass on a viewcamera. DSLR viewfinders are small and dim...

Best regards,
Anders

+1. But drum scans, is not necessary.., a Nikon 9000ED in 16x-scanning will do (if you have the patience to wait)! Regards, Theodoros. www.fotometria.gr

[fotometria gr]

Sorry no. I told you of my impression, you told of yours. Mutual respect is appreciated. Our opinions differ.

+1. If I was going to correct words, he puts his impression..., you put your knowleadge (and experience)! MUTUAL RESPECT IS APPRECIATED. Regards, Theodoros. www.fotometria.gr

[theguywitha645d]

Sorry no. I told you of my impression, you told of yours. Mutual respect is appreciated. Our opinions differ.

I don't mind having differing opinions, but I don't understand how you can even form an opinion about a camera you have never used and based only seen JPEGs (sRGB) on the internet. Obviously, you cannot show what you believe. I think it would be more useful for the OP if we can actually offer opinions that have some basis in reality rather than inventing stories.

[fotometria gr]

If I may, with all respect to anybody"s "opinion", an image from a 2005 MFDB, compared to ANY (this includes D3X and 1DS3) DSLR, when compared at what MFDB is designed for (low ISO), It will make the DSLR look like... the cartoon it is! Any evidence for the opposite anyone? Regards, Theodoros. www.fotometria.gr

[fotometria gr]

I don't mind having differing opinions, but I don't understand how you can even form an opinion about a camera you have never used and based only seen JPEGs (sRGB) on the internet. Obviously, you cannot show what you believe. I think it would be more useful for the OP if we can actually offer opinions that have some basis in reality rather than inventing stories.

I wonder "guywitha645D" do you have any experience with a MFDB? (I don't mean an image processes in you neighborhood's lab or in JPEG in your screen (I would trust it isn't a serious monitor)), I really cannot understand how can somebody insist to "have an opinion" on things he actually never compared, your Pentax is a very good DSLR with a larger sensor and that's it! It doesn't do what MFDBs are made for, or share their quality no matter what you say to support your "opinion", you said in once, you don't have to shout all the time about the quality of your choice! My opinion (having tried your camera) is that it should be included to the above statement with the D3X & 1DS3, it just won't compare to a P25(plain) or Imacon132 or Sinarback-Emotion22 (of 2005), in what a MFDB is aimed to do. Do you have any proofs for the opposite? Theodoros (or "guywithno645dslr"). www.fotometria.gr

[Anders_HK]

I don't mind having differing opinions, but I don't understand how you can even form an opinion about a camera you have never used and based only seen JPEGs (sRGB) on the internet.

For correctness, my reply #19 has already stated "which show and not show all".

Obviously, you cannot show what you believe.

That is plain BS to state, sorry. I speak of experience, which (I assume) you also do?

I think it would be more useful for the OP if we can actually offer opinions that have some basis in reality rather than inventing stories.

Ah, but I already did in my reply # 22. Did you have any specific advise to OP?

Appreciate if you refrain from further making me correct what I already stated. Thank you.

Best regards,
Anders

[fotometria gr]

For correctness, my reply #19 has already stated "which show and not show all".

That is plain BS to state, sorry. I speak of experience, which (I assume) you also do?

Ah, but I already did in my reply # 22. Did you have any specific advise to OP?

Appreciate if you refrain from further making me correct what I already stated. Thank you.

Best regards,
Anders

You are correct Anders...., its sad though that some take advantage of your poor "English writing" and treat you as ...inferior photographer! Did you see some of those people pictures?  Regards, Theodoros. www.fotometria.gr

[ErikKaffehr]

Hi,

I have looked at raw files from both Leica S2 and Pentax 645D.

My findings on the Penatx are here: http://echophoto.dnsalias.net/ekr/index.php/photoarticles/51-a-closer-look-at-pentax-645d-image-quality

and the findings on S2 are here:

http://echophoto.dnsalias.net/ekr/index.php/photoarticles/38-observations-on-leica-s2-raw-images

As far as I know, none of the posters have tested Leica S2 or Pentax 645D side by side. The Pentax seems to have an EV higher ISO rating. I was not very impressed by the dynamic range on the Leica S2 on the raw files I have analyzed.

DxO has presented data for the Pentax 645D, these correspond well to data measured on Hasselblad, albeit with a higher ISO rating. The higher ISO for the Pentax may come from it using microlenses while the Hasselblad has not.

I enclose some data from "DxO mark" comparing data for Pentax 645D and two Hasselblads and also comparing Pentax 645D, Nikon D3X and Canon 5DII. Regarding choice of cameras, Canon 5DII is the camera the original poster has, Nikon D3X is probably the best DSLR money can buy and Pentax is MF digital at  reasonable cost. DxO measures essentially sensor noise and CGA characteristics, that does not include important parameters like performance of the lens, focusing precision, but should nevertheless be some valuable information actually measured by folks who actually know what they are doing.

My personal view is that Leica probably has the better lenses. For ultimate quality a technical camera with an MFDB and Schneider or Rodenstock lenses built for digital sensors would be best options.

Best regards
Erik

@ Erik, @ Bernard,

Both of the Leica and Pentax uses Kodak sensors yes, but not same ones;

S2:  30x45mm  37.5MP  16-bit  ISO 160-1250
645D: 33x44mm  40MP  14-bit  ISO 100-1600

Different implementation and quality control one should assume... and different price. If my humble eye judge from posted jpgs, which show and not show all, files from Pentax look more DSLR, perhaps due similar design aim and/or implementation. The Leica files look MFDB, albeit more like a Kodak sensor  . Dalsa sensor have a different (better?) character.

Another example was Leaf Aptus 22 and Mamiya ZD which indeed used identical same sensor from Dalsa, different price. Those two were indeed documented different implemented and different quality control. The Aptus 22 was stellar (low ISO), see Frank Doorhof;s website, and ZD came with a design/implementation/quality problem I posted of on LuLa ("ZD has Problem") at the time.

As for a DSLR that you pay a few thousand USD for, how many hours do you believe they spend on quality control and custom mapping of a sensor at factory when there is X number coming right after it on tha band Sorry, no documents to prove. If you search for an older LuLa Video Journal when Michael visited Phase One factory you will see that they do spend much effort in custom mapping a senor. With latest 80MP pixel backs I can assume that Leaf and Phase One quality control and mapping must have been stepped up. I doubt it is mere related to the sensor, and pixels aside my AFi-II 12 blows my prior Aptus 65 straight out of water in preciseness and color accuracy (and more). Saying that, I am not smoking or imagining the latest is best, it is based on my impression from processing files.

It all is of course about more than mere same number of pixels...

Regarding 40MP Phase One and Leaf, those are Dalsa sensors per what I recall, while the 39MP P45+ was an older Kodak sensor. If size of sensor is different, it is different sensor. While it can be same generation sensor that does not make it same sensor.

Best regards
Anders

[uaiomex]

Bernard, is your post one those that must say: "It looks harder than actually doing it" ?
Cheers
Eduardo

What prevents you from trying to stitch with your 5DII to see whether it gets you where you want to be? It would only take a few hours to figure this out by yourself.

I would suggest the following course of action:

1. Select a typical scene you work on,
2. Identify the longest possible focal length that enables you to get the people in the scene in one single image captured in portrait orientation,
3. For a start, just put the camera on top of a level tripod, start by taking the image of the people until you get it exactly right,
4. Mark down the angular position of the tripod head,
5. Then rotate the head left so that you see a 30% overlap between the first image and the second one (your models are still into place),
6. Add a few more shots to the left,
7. Go back to the initial tripod head position you marked in step 4,
8. Then rotate the head right so that you see a 30% overlap between the first image and this one (your models are still into place),
9. Add a few more shots to the right

This should have take no more than 2 minutes since the end of step 3 (more like 45 seconds if you know what you are doing).

10. Download a free trial from Autopano pro and/or PTgui Pro,
11. [Example of Autopano Giga] Import the images with "select images" and click on "Detect",
12. In the right part of the interface, click on "Edit",
13. Change the projection mode to "planar projection" (4th icon from the left) if it is something else,
14. Click on "render" in that window (3rd icon from the right)
15. 2 or 3 minutes later you will be able to open the image in Photoshop,
16. Try a print at the largest possible size you think you are likely to need -> this will tell you how far you current camera can take you in terms of size when using stitching
17. Multiply this size by 1.2 to figure out how far the 5DIII or a D800 would be able to take you.

You might see some issues, they will typically result from the lack of usage of a pano head and the lack of masking in the super basic workflow I explained above.

Those would need to be checked with a pano head like this one: http://reallyrightstuff.com/ProductDesc.aspx?code=Ult-Pro-OPP&type=3&eq=&desc=Ultimate-Pro-Omni-Pivot-Package&key=it

And of course some more learning of pano software. :-)

This may or may not enable you to save a lot of money in gear. Only you can figure out whether it makes sense it terms of workflow and the time and skills this requires for your applications.

Cheers,
Bernard

[fotometria gr]

40MP Hasselblad and Phase/leaf share the same sensor. Except for size, the sensor is the same as the Leica S2. Pentax seems to have better signal processing and so has made the sensor perform better than its competitors. Having both Phase MFDB and the Pentax 645D, I can say the Pentax is equal to or better than the Phase.

Of course it is...BETTER!  www.fotometria.gr

[BernardLanguillier]

Bernard, is your post one those that must say: "It looks harder than actually doing it" ?

I guess you could say that. The whol thing would take me no more than 10 minutes from start of shooting to opening in PS.

There is no doubt than stitching will be more time consuming, I was only answering to the OP question about this option.

Cheers,
Bernard

[BernardLanguillier]

I don't own a leaf back, I do own an Imacon 528c back, for my Contax645 & Fuji GX680 systems (of 5 bodys and 21 lenses if added) and I also own 5 DSLRs and 17 lenses of Nikon which includes anything that you use in that format, ....anymore "evidence"? Next time watch your attitude,  Theodoros. www.fotometria.gr

Allow me to rephrase the question then, "are you trying to sell your Imacon back?". 

This very answer is the last one you'll ever see from me to your posts Theo.

I don't see value in involving myself in more of your style of conversation:
- State something provocative mostly not relying on any evidence/facts (who has forgotten your 10 pages of claims that analyzing Capture NX2 tiff outputs provides you with any insights about the highlight behavior of DSLRS...),
- Keep debating it forever without answering the points made by the people you treat as "opponents" and not as follow photographers,
- Add a bit of personnal attacks in the mix.

Sorry Theo, this is typical DPreview style and brings no value to the Luminous Landscape forums from my point of view. Bye.

Cheers,
Bernard

[ErikKaffehr]

Hi,

I checked out and the two cameras use different sensors, so you are right on that point.

But I'm under the impression that you have not evaluated actual raw images from both cameras?

One observation may also be that microlenses matter a bit. Microlenses increase the effective fill factor, and that will reduce aliasing but also make the image looking a bit softer. I don't know if Leica uses microlenses, but it seems that on CCDs there is about one stop advantage with microlenses.

I have possibly seen this in the "Great 2006 MFDB shootout" here on LuLa, where they had both P25 and P30, with the P30 sporting microlenses. The P30 image looked softer, and that could depend on the increased fill factor, but could also be difference in focusing.

Best regards
Erik

@ Erik, @ Bernard,

Both of the Leica and Pentax uses Kodak sensors yes, but not same ones;

S2:  30x45mm  37.5MP  16-bit  ISO 160-1250
645D: 33x44mm  40MP  14-bit  ISO 100-1600

Different implementation and quality control one should assume... and different price. If my humble eye judge from posted jpgs, which show and not show all, files from Pentax look more DSLR, perhaps due similar design aim and/or implementation. The Leica files look MFDB, albeit more like a Kodak sensor  . Dalsa sensor have a different (better?) character.

Another example was Leaf Aptus 22 and Mamiya ZD which indeed used identical same sensor from Dalsa, different price. Those two were indeed documented different implemented and different quality control. The Aptus 22 was stellar (low ISO), see Frank Doorhof;s website, and ZD came with a design/implementation/quality problem I posted of on LuLa ("ZD has Problem") at the time.

As for a DSLR that you pay a few thousand USD for, how many hours do you believe they spend on quality control and custom mapping of a sensor at factory when there is X number coming right after it on tha band Sorry, no documents to prove. If you search for an older LuLa Video Journal when Michael visited Phase One factory you will see that they do spend much effort in custom mapping a senor. With latest 80MP pixel backs I can assume that Leaf and Phase One quality control and mapping must have been stepped up. I doubt it is mere related to the sensor, and pixels aside my AFi-II 12 blows my prior Aptus 65 straight out of water in preciseness and color accuracy (and more). Saying that, I am not smoking or imagining the latest is best, it is based on my impression from processing files.

It all is of course about more than mere same number of pixels...

Regarding 40MP Phase One and Leaf, those are Dalsa sensors per what I recall, while the 39MP P45+ was an older Kodak sensor. If size of sensor is different, it is different sensor. While it can be same generation sensor that does not make it same sensor.

Best regards
Anders

[fotometria gr]

Allow me to rephrase the question then, "are you trying to sell your Imacon back?". 

This very answer is the last one you'll ever see from me to your posts Theo.

I don't see value in involving myself in more of your style of conversation:
- State something provocative mostly not relying on any evidence/facts (who has forgotten your 10 pages of claims that analyzing Capture NX2 tiff outputs provides you with any insights about the highlight behavior of DSLRS...),
- Keep debating it forever without answering the points made by the people you treat as "opponents" and not as follow photographers,
- Add a bit of personnal attacks in the mix.

Sorry Theo, this is typical DPreview style and brings no value to the Luminous Landscape forums from my point of view. Bye.

Cheers,
Bernard

The name is Theodoros, if was to be called "Theo", I would sign as "Theo". Bye bye... Berny. Theodoros. www.fotometria.gr

[kevs]

Great posts everyone, I'm taking it all it.

I don't think the stitch idea will work after all with the Canon, the quality is so low frankly comparatively.

Funny, I'm leaning towards the 8x10. Perhaps I can hire a student or assistant to has the gear to come and do it for me.
My thinking: the harder and more challenging, the better in the long run -- wow factors etc. Unfortunately it will cost...

How much/ recommendations on drum scans? same question with price of film... I'm in LA, recommendations on labs for development and scans.
Also I'll rake recommendations on courses for 8x10 in the area.
From those test I see, 8x10 kills 4x5.
I never ever, cared before, but now that I thinking of printing super huge, why not spend a but more and do it right/optimally?

PS this forum now requires a log in every visit?