New to site and DMF... Just in time with H5D ! Help Please.

[bcooter]

Isnip......
I'd file that video under Fiction along with quite a few others from Phase One.
.....snip

Whoa Fred.

Your pulling on a rope and I don't think you know what it's tied to.

I don't know you and your motives may be pure, might not, but I made mine very clear.

For the record, Phase and prior to that Leaf (when I had an Aptus) never asked, insinuated, implied, made mention of me saying anything false . . . ever.

In fact they we're very clear that what they wanted was the user experience and I think that's what I said then and now.

Once again, for the record the reason I didn't like Phase's video was I wanted a day for myself and our crew to rest and feel a little better as we came off of a lot of weeks of 18 hour days and I know I couldn't think straight, I doubt if anyone else could either.  Everyone wants to make the best presentation in public.

Regardless no one asked me to use a Phase/Mamiya body and knew what camera bodies I used.



In regards to tethering c1 has been the gold standard for a long time.  V3 was so solid that we could set it up, capturing to either two drives or a raid 5 and just leave it alone.  Honestly, the only time we touched it was to change the naming.

V4 was new had some issues but were fixed, v5 bullet proof again.

I've found in our case if we want to tether without issue we use clean computers, clean drives and prepare the cameras accordingly with polishing the contacts, making sure all batteries are fresh and new, etc. etc.

People I know that routinely have issues with tethering of any brand usually have some other issues (see my sentence above) and/or don't really know the systems they use.  

Actually, if you want to know anything about Mamiya, Phase or Leaf,  just ask Yair.  I've known him for 8 years, sometimes we've agreed, sometimes we've both strongly disagreed, but Yair is well respected in the industry on both sides of the Atlantic and  will not tell you anything but the truth as he knows it and he knows a lot.

IMO

BC

[FredBGG]

Not quite... better to say "tad muddy waters" ... Admittedly Hy6, Hassy H, Mamiya DF are all SLR type cameras but not quite SLRs...  by same Wikipedia "A single-lens reflex (SLR) camera is a camera that typically uses a mirror and prism system (hence "reflex", from the mirror's reflection) that permits the photographer to view through the lens and hence see exactly what will be captured". By that definition, with WLF gets muddier... but still SLR type... though not an SLR...

More common used the term refers to a mirror prism camera by the 35mm system, and a DSLR refers to such digital version. No idea what then the Sony A99 should accurate be called to confuse  ..., and water gets muddier or clearer with the Leica S and Mamiya ZD camera which are DSLR form factor but larger formats.

This is really getting funny.....
The manufacturer calls the Hy6 an SLR, but you think you
 know better.
It doesn't get more childish than that.

[FredBGG]

If you live in a glass house...

What exactly do you mean by "If you live in a glass house".

[FredBGG]

Hi,

I looked at the video.

It's an obvious advantage of leaf shutters that you can use flash to balance daylight.

Regarding focusing, stopping down doesn't help focus, it just masks defocus.

A you tube video will not demonstrate sharpness, anyway.

Best regards
Erik

TITLE OF THE VIDEO: "Shooting with auto focus"

From the video "I will be showing off the speed of focus" "f2.8 to keep our focus shallow"
"and we are trying to get a complete series of images all in focus of the processes coming off this boat"

but I repeat: the manual says:

From page 99 of the pdf manual.

C-19 AF Priority [AF_2]
Accuracy of auto-focusing priority (default setting) or speed priority can be
decided.
0: Speed
(Aperture to f/ 8 is recommended when using this function.)[/quore]

This is a clear case of marketing bullshit. It is clearly put together to miss lead a potential DF
user to believe that it can accurately focus a situation like this at f2.8.

I have owned both the Phase One DF and AF and I can confirm that neither are up to the task
shown in this video.

[ErikKaffehr]

Hi,

What I intended to say is more that what is in front, beneath and behind the camera matters more than the camera itself.

Another observation is that it seems that smaller format cameras are considered OK for serious work. The micro 4/3 system gets a lot of respect those day, respect the original 4/3 system never got. I guess that respect comes from the micro 4/3 being smaller but also from sensor improvements.

A couple of years ago, Michael Reichmann compared a Canon G10 with a P45+ back on Hasselblad. He presented the picture in Super A3 size to seasoned experts in imaging and they could by and large not tell the images apart. To me that indicates that the G10 was good enough. Sometimes I shoot with my Sony RX100, sometimes with my Alpha 77 SLT and sometimes with Alpha 900. Whatever I shoot I'm pretty confident the images will be OK.

What I have found is that for street shooting I use the Alpha 77 SLT. It's pretty small and so is the 16-80/3.5-4.5 lens. The Alpha 900 with the 24-70/2.8 zoom is much more intimidating. For telephoto work a small sensor pitch camera may be preferable and I more often than not use live view at 1:1 for focusing.

Obviously, I would not use the RX100 for long range tele photo work, nor does it have an ultra wide angle, but when the other cameras are not at hand it does a decent job.

Best regards
Erik

Yes, virtually all of the equipment we discuss here is more than good enough, dependent on purpose. However I do believe equipment choice is crucial to the individual. Most photographers using MFD do so out of choice rather than necessity.

My own choices are naturally based on my own preferences, namely the form factor, the format - 4:3, I hate shooting one format and cropping to another - the viewfinders, the simplicity - an almost analogue experience - and of course the quality of the files. I've no doubt the D800 is an accomplished camera and I make no claims of superiority for my own equipment. This isn't a competition, although at times one could be forgiven for thinking otherwise.

I wish you good shooting.

[ErikKaffehr]

Another version of "Let him who is without sin cast the first stone".

Best regards
Erik

What exactly do you mean by "If you live in a glass house".

[yaya]

What exactly do you mean by "If you live in a glass house".

http://youtu.be/jW3j_KXufPE

[tho_mas]

A couple of years ago, Michael Reichmann compared a Canon G10 with a P45+ back on Hasselblad. He presented the picture in Super A3 size to seasoned experts in imaging and they could by and large not tell the images apart.

at print size none of the "experts" could see that the H2/P45 capture was pretty badly focussed and therefore the most dominant features of the H2/P45 photo were quite soft.
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/kidding.shtml
JPGs at 100%: http://files.luminous-landscape.com/downloads/

[FredBGG]

Another version of "Let him who is without sin cast the first stone".

Best regards
Erik

Oh so now I am sinning in that little Tamrac video........ do you mind pointing out what sin I am committing?

[ErikKaffehr]

Hi,

Thanks for pointing that out. It really shows that humans are prone to mistakes.

What I'd suggest it also shows that it is easy to miss critical focus and some errors pass unnoticed in reasonable sized prints.

Best regards
Erik

at print size none of the "experts" could see that the H2/P45 capture was pretty badly focussed and therefore the most dominant features of the H2/P45 photo were quite soft.
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/kidding.shtml
JPGs at 100%: http://files.luminous-landscape.com/downloads/

[FredBGG]

A couple of years ago, Michael Reichmann compared a Canon G10 with a P45+ back on Hasselblad. He presented the picture in Super A3 size to seasoned experts in imaging and they could by and large not tell the images apart.

at print size none of the "experts" could see that the H2/P45 capture was pretty badly focussed and therefore the most dominant features of the H2/P45 photo were quite soft.
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/kidding.shtml
JPGs at 100%: http://files.luminous-landscape.com/downloads/

Slight focusing shift in this shot does not really make any difference... the subject has a lot of depth.

However it is also a scene that does not requite much dynamic range. I'm sure that a shot with more extreme lighting differences
would have shown an advantage for the Hasselblad.

But we have gone a long way since.

[tho_mas]

What I'd suggest it also shows that it is easy to miss critical focus and some errors pass unnoticed in reasonable sized prints.

It also shows that you shouldn't put too much trust in internet reports ;-)

[tho_mas]

Slight focusing shift in this shot does not really make any difference... the subject has a lot of depth.

actually you would expect focus either on the red leaves or on the big trunk in the foreground. But focus is way behind the trunk in the foreground ... and at the same time DOF is not wide enough to draw the trees in the backgorund sharp. Focus is somewhere on the yellow leaves in the center ... but these are soft (due to wind/movement in conjunction with 1'' shutter). There are some thin branches on the very edges that are "sharp" ... all the rest is soft.
And, yes, it makes a huge difference to the perception of "sharpness" in a print.

[ErikKaffehr]

Hi,

I don't think so. I have downloaded the images myself, and still missed it. Would I have made the experiment myself, I would perhaps missed it. Michael has encouraged us to print the images our selves, I didn't do it.

I made several experiments with prints, and differences that are very obvious on screen can be difficult to see in print.

http://www.pbase.com/ekr/image/107619976/original  (actual pixels with 12MP uprezzed to 24MP)

http://www.pbase.com/ekr/image/107823207/original   (A2 prints rescanned on flatbed at 300PPI)

Best regards
Erik

It also shows that you shouldn't put too much trust in internet reports ;-)

[FredBGG]

Whoa Fred.

Your pulling on a rope and I don't think you know what it's tied to.

I don't know you and your motives may be pure, might not, but I made mine very clear.

For the record, Phase and prior to that Leaf (when I had an Aptus) never asked, insinuated, implied, made mention of me saying anything false . . . ever.

In fact they we're very clear that what they wanted was the user experience and I think that's what I said then and now.

Once again, for the record the reason I didn't like Phase's video was I wanted a day for myself and our crew to rest and feel a little better as we came off of a lot of weeks of 18 hour days and I know I couldn't think straight, I doubt if anyone else could either.  Everyone wants to make the best presentation in public.

Regardless no one asked me to use a Phase/Mamiya body and knew what camera bodies I used.



In regards to tethering c1 has been the gold standard for a long time.  V3 was so solid that we could set it up, capturing to either two drives or a raid 5 and just leave it alone.  Honestly, the only time we touched it was to change the naming.

V4 was new had some issues but were fixed, v5 bullet proof again.

I've found in our case if we want to tether without issue we use clean computers, clean drives and prepare the cameras accordingly with polishing the contacts, making sure all batteries are fresh and new, etc. etc.

People I know that routinely have issues with tethering of any brand usually have some other issues (see my sentence above) and/or don't really know the systems they use.  

Actually, if you want to know anything about Mamiya, Phase or Leaf,  just ask Yair.  I've known him for 8 years, sometimes we've agreed, sometimes we've both strongly disagreed, but Yair is well respected in the industry on both sides of the Atlantic and  will not tell you anything but the truth as he knows it and he knows a lot.

IMO

BC

My use of the word Fiction is directed at Phase One, not directly what you say. The editing probably has a lot to do with it.

First of all the video Starts on a close up of the P45+. That would imply that it was used for the shoot, but a P30+
was used.

There is no mention of the name of the camera and the the logo of the Contax is conveniently blacked out. (not saying it was necessarily deliberate)

You say in the video that when you get a new camera you put it to the test..."try to break it"

"Before I put a camera on set I test it and try to break it I do everything I can.."

then later in the edit

"I have the Phase one because it doesn't break"

the edit then concludes with the line....

"It's impossible to work with cameras that don't work, the Phase works, it's just that simple."

It seems pretty clear to me that the video is skewered by the edit to make people believe that Phase Cameras
are bullet proof, while the camera you use is a Contax. All this while the AFD and DF have known stability and reliability issues.

While you are referring to the back as that is what you use from Phase, there is nothing in the video to indicate that you are talking about the Phase Back and not Phase camera.
No mention of the Contax, not even a mention of the fact that Phase supports Contax compatability.

To make my motives clear. It's about the miss leading information put out by MF manufactures.

[Anders_HK]

This is really getting funny.....
The manufacturer calls the Hy6 an SLR, but you think you know better.
It doesn't get more childish than that.

Really ?

So Wikipedia must be wrong. I see...

Seems you are making friends with many people ...  

(As a mere parenthesis, it appears you do not know digital since have not able produce one single quality digital image to measure up to your film shots. Right? or care to show?   )

[Doug Peterson]

My use of the word Fiction is directed at Phase One, not directly what you say. The editing probably has a lot to do with it.

First of all the video Starts on a close up of the P45+. That would imply that it was used for the shoot, but a P30+
was used.

There is no mention of the name of the camera and the the logo of the Contax is conveniently blacked out. (not saying it was necessarily deliberate)

You say in the video that when you get a new camera you put it to the test..."try to break it"

"Before I put a camera on set I test it and try to break it I do everything I can.."

then later in the edit

"I have the Phase one because it doesn't break"

the edit then concludes with the line....

"It's impossible to work with cameras that don't work, the Phase works, it's just that simple."

It seems pretty clear to me that the video is skewered by the edit to make people believe that Phase Cameras
are bullet proof, while the camera you use is a Contax. All this while the AFD and DF have known stability and reliability issues.

While you are referring to the back as that is what you use from Phase, there is nothing in the video to indicate that you are talking about the Phase Back and not Phase camera.

No mention of the Contax, not even a mention of the fact that Phase supports Contax compatability.

To make my motives clear. It's about the miss leading information put out by MF manufactures.

When the Russel campaign was shot there was no "Phase One Camera".

The YouTube video as linked in this thread was re-uploaded in 2010 when Phase One switched video-management systems to YouTube.  

[tho_mas]

differences that are very obvious on screen can be difficult to see in print.

difficult maybe... but not impossible for a trained eye, I think. In my experience the relation of image components to each other (color to color, gradation, sharpness, smoothness etc.) can be translated from real pixels viewed at 100% or 50% on screen to the respective print to some extend. Naturally a print looks different to a screen view... but if the processing chain is done right it's only the difference of 94 DPI (or whatever resolution of the screen) to 300 DPI (or 360 DPI or whatever resolution of the printer). Normally I can estimate how a capture (a digital file viewed on a screen that is) will look printed - at least this goes for my preferred printing paper in conjunction with the sharpening technique I prefer.
Anyway... a defocused MFD capture will always look like a super sized POS capture ... also in print. An accurately focused MFD capture makes the difference.
I do have the very same DB (P45) and when I saw Michael's capture made for that comparission I thought, okay, if this what you get from your P45, I'd prefer the G10. Because it's easier to use. But the capture is simply nowhere near of what a P45 is capable of.

With regard to the discussion in this thread... I've looked at some D800e RAW files available on the web and actually I am not impressed with regard to sharpness/details or so. I get that from my P45 all the time, even with my not so great lenses. I'd say the D800e is somehere in between my P21+ and my P45. But what really impresses me, however, is that you can push the D800e files at base ISO by 2, even 3 stops in the shadows without even having to think about applying any (luminance-) noise reduction. That is more or less impossible with my P45. Okay, I am comparing a 2005 DB to a 2012 DSLR. But still ... the D800e files I've seen look extremely good when pushed hard in post.
Then again... other than DR... they do not look nearly as nice (subjective perception !!! ) as the P45 captures with my lenses (Contax Zeiss, Digitars, Digarons). They look a bit more washed out (soft/dull) in image areas where I think the P45 would draw finer details/color differentiation.  I am only talking about what I am seeing in the files. I really don't care whether or not a D800 or a Sony RX100 outperforms my P45 - I really don't care at all!
(and BTW... as a side note... I've also seen D800e captures suffering either from a tilted sensor or a misaligned lense ... so welcome to the world of high res imaging and warm greetings to J. Holmes ;-) ... ).

[tho_mas]

It seems pretty clear to me that the video is skewered by the edit to make people believe that Phase Cameras are bullet proof, while the camera you use is a Contax. All this while the AFD and DF have known stability and reliability issues.

Come on... this is childish BS. Essentially BC is really only talking about the P-backs, not about cameras at all...

[tho_mas]

Hi Doug - how are you?
Hope things are ging well ...