Pages: 1 ... 9 10 [11]   Go Down

Author Topic: I would like to understand the MF look.  (Read 61432 times)

eleanorbrown

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 637
    • Eleanor Brown Photography
Re: I would like to understand the MF look.
« Reply #200 on: December 29, 2013, 12:07:36 pm »

I've shot Phase One backs on a Hasselblad camera and lenses since 2005. In the last few days I've been shooting my new Zeiss Otus on my Nikon D800e and Sony A7r and I'm getting very very close to medium format look...the combination of blow me away sharpness, micro detail and contrast couple with near to far sharpness vs blur/bokeh and unbelievable color is what I see.  Yes my Phase 60 megapixel has higher pixel count than 36 megapixels but pixel for pixel I think they are now essentially equal.  I'm shooting ALL cameras at iso 50 which gives me incredible creamy smooth  tonal transitions,  so this might have something to with it. Eleanor

Ps, I would also add than when I process both RAW files in capture one I get, for the most part, better results both in micro detail and contrast in detailed areas, and more tonal smoothness in less detailed areas...and I compare the files at 400 percent too.
« Last Edit: December 29, 2013, 01:53:22 pm by eleanorbrown »
Logged
Eleanor Brown
[url=http://www.eleanorbro

EricWHiss

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2613
    • Rolleiflex USA
Re: I would like to understand the MF look.
« Reply #201 on: December 29, 2013, 12:16:26 pm »

Nice example Synn
Wait until you shoot some portraits….   :-)
Logged
Rolleiflex USA

BJL

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6600
Re: I would like to understand the MF look.
« Reply #202 on: December 29, 2013, 12:27:14 pm »

Does this answer the question?



- Better color accuracy and separation.
- Better sharpness and resolution
- Better overall look without having to spend a long time in post

Yep, I can see the "MF look" for sure.
If you want to compare sharpness and resolution, it would help to equalize diffraction and DOF effects by adjusting aperture ratio in proportion to focal length/format size; say f/6 with the D800 if staying at f/8 with the Credo. In your comparison, the D800 has greater diffract effects but more DOF; at least of both image are with focal lengths that cover the same FOV; if not, then comparing crops to the same FOV (and so a different fraction of the full image) is useless for comparing sharpness and resolution.

Next, exposure levels should be equalized, rather than the "6s vs 10s at equal f-stop" used here; either the same exposure time for both at equal f-stop, or with the proposed f-stop adjustment, stay with 6s for the D800 vs 10s for the Credo 40. However, the final D800 image is already brighter despite its shorter exposure time and so lower exposure index, so something is different with the levels used in the conversion or the different meanings of "ISO 200" on the two cameras. Maybe using each at its best (minimum?) ISO speed setting and adjusting exposure time for each to get the best exposure level would be a better comparison; comparisons with one camera at less than optimal settings do not tell us much.

Thirdly, it might help to remove the AA filter by using D800E instead of the D800, since the Credo 40 does not have one!
Logged

ErikKaffehr

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11288
    • Echophoto
Re: I would like to understand the MF look.
« Reply #203 on: December 29, 2013, 12:56:01 pm »

Hi,

I am not concerned about aperture, the scene here probably works with medium apertures. I am not really concerned about ISO either, if you buy an MF camera you probably don't need high ISOs.

What concerns me mostly is that exposure differs and it is not taken care of in raw conversion, Also I'm quite sure white balance differs significantly. The Nikon image is yellowish while Creo image is colder. I would try to grey balance on some neutral part of the image.

Regarding sharpness, I would suggest that the D800 needs quite a bit of more sharpening, small radius large amount to handle the OLP-filtering.

The Creo image lacks shadow detail, but I presume it is due to raw development.

The Creo image also has color moiré, see attachement.

Best regards
Erik



If you want to compare sharpness and resolution, it would help to equalize diffraction and DOF effects by adjusting aperture ratio in proportion to focal length/format size; say f/6 with the D800 if staying at f/8 with the Credo. In your comparison, the D800 has greater diffract effects but more DOF; at least of both image are with focal lengths that cover the same FOV; if not, then comparing crops to the same FOV (and so a different fraction of the full image) is useless for comparing sharpness and resolution.

Next, exposure levels should be equalized, rather than the "6s vs 10s at equal f-stop" used here; either the same exposure time for both at equal f-stop, or with the proposed f-stop adjustment, stay with 6s for the D800 vs 10s for the Credo 40. However, the final D800 image is already brighter despite its shorter exposure time and so lower exposure index, so something is different with the levels used in the conversion or the different meanings of "ISO 200" on the two cameras. Maybe using each at its best (minimum?) ISO speed setting and adjusting exposure time for each to get the best exposure level would be a better comparison; comparisons with one camera at less than optimal settings do not tell us much.

Thirdly, it might help to remove the AA filter by using D800E instead of the D800, since the Credo 40 does not have one!
Logged
Erik Kaffehr
 

EricWHiss

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2613
    • Rolleiflex USA
Re: I would like to understand the MF look.
« Reply #204 on: December 29, 2013, 01:06:11 pm »

The MF look has been clearly illustrated here by Synn's example.   The endless nit-picking and hypothetical conjecture from pixel peepers has also been demonstrated!  :o     

Logged
Rolleiflex USA

Manoli

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1880
Re: I would like to understand the MF look.
« Reply #205 on: December 29, 2013, 01:28:25 pm »

The MF look has been clearly illustrated ... endless nit-picking and hypothetical conjecture from pixel peepers has also been demonstrated!   

I don't know if it has or not. What I do see is an unexplained difference between the two images - look at the 'splurge' on the RHS of the nikon image and compare that to the credo below. 
Logged

synn

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1235
    • My fine art portfolio
Re: I would like to understand the MF look.
« Reply #206 on: December 29, 2013, 02:03:31 pm »

Thanks, Eric and Joe. can't wait to use the credo with some strobes!

Erik, BJL and Manoli: The scene is a very small crop from a much bigger scene. Here's the full scene on the Credo:



And here's the full scene on the D800:



(Slightly cropped on the top and bottom, I tried to match the FoV as close as I can. I'm sorry, I don't have a "63mm" lens for the D800, only a 70. Sucks that it has the 3:2 ratio too.)

I shot the scene like how I would in the real world, not with the intention of microanalyzing and whatnot. Both cameras were set up on a very sturdy tripod, mirror lock up was used and both images were shot at "Fluorescent" WB that the respective cameras provide.

I chose f/8 because of the depth of the scene. I can't be bothered to compensate for diffraction and whatnot because I am shooting an image, not a lab test. I need to get all the important elements in focus and if the smaller sensor has the problem of diffraction kicking in earlier, oh well; sucks.

I trusted the meters in both cameras to deliver me a good exposure. This is what the god knows how many bazillion pixel matrix meter of the D800 and the comparatively rural meter of the Mamiya gave me. So yeah, 6s vs 10s.

WB was left untouched in both images. As far as I can see, the D800 does quite well in the blues. It does a very shitty job of separating the lights near the tree from the color of the leaves on the tree. I tried to separate them in post but nope, the majority of the leaves are in the yellow spectrum. Can I do it with some masking etc.? sure. But the point is, the Credo gets it right out of the box.

As for sharpening, I do sharpen my D800 images in post. Every single one of them. And I am so sick of doing it. I've shot with a D800e before and I do own a D7100 and they are not that much better.

I didn't notice the "Color moire" when I was looking at the image at 100%. If it bothers me that much, I'll touch it up in C1. No biggie.

Oh, and those "Splurges" are people. It's a public place. As much as I want to, I can't stop people from walking into the shot. They are getting cloned off the credo shot right now.



I am sure many people are more than happy to shoot test charts and equalized everything and brick walls and what not. I am not one of those people. I shoot images as I would in the real world. the analysis is secondary. I suspect most people who have seen the "MF look" and wanting to know more about it are looking at real world images too and not test images.
« Last Edit: December 29, 2013, 02:05:11 pm by synn »
Logged
my portfolio: www.sandeepmurali.com

MichaelEzra

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1112
    • https://www.michaelezra.com
Re: I would like to understand the MF look.
« Reply #207 on: December 29, 2013, 02:11:40 pm »

Hi Sandeep, would you mind PM-ing me a link to D800 raw. I'd like to try converting it with RawTherapee and a custom DCP.
Logged

eleanorbrown

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 637
    • Eleanor Brown Photography
Re: I would like to understand the MF look.
« Reply #208 on: December 29, 2013, 02:21:18 pm »

I've been doing many many comparisons of my top primes on my D800e and phase one/Hasselblad system with top primes for sometime now trying to get the medium format look using 36 megapixel full frame 35mm.  Can get close but not there. Then  came along my Zeiss Otus and WOW!  I realized previously my Hasselblad lens blew away my best Nikon lenses...now with the Otus I'm getting as good as or superior results over the Hassy lenses.  I've found for the best comparison I must use 50 iso, my Otus lens, ideally convert in Capture One for both systems and need multiple files to tell the whole story.  With the Otus and shooting at iso 50, or at max, iso 100 on the Nikon I get that three dimensional pop...the high sharpness and intricate micro detail transitioning to smooth tonal gradations which to me is the hallmark of 3D medium format. Eleanor
« Last Edit: December 29, 2013, 03:08:54 pm by eleanorbrown »
Logged
Eleanor Brown
[url=http://www.eleanorbro

Manoli

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1880
Re: I would like to understand the MF look.
« Reply #209 on: December 29, 2013, 02:54:23 pm »

Oh, and those "Splurges" are people. It's a public place. As much as I want to, I can't stop people from walking into the shot ..

Next time you're shooting, call me, a bit of gentle persuasion goes a long way … (just jesting)

From a non-MF guy, my first reaction was to notice the difference in the trees and leaves - both colour and detail. In the second full-frame shot - exactly the same.

Synn/
Congratulations on your new acquisition - hope you really enjoy it.
All the best for 2014,
M
Logged

synn

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1235
    • My fine art portfolio
Re: I would like to understand the MF look.
« Reply #210 on: December 29, 2013, 04:24:34 pm »

Next time you're shooting, call me, a bit of gentle persuasion goes a long way … (just jesting)

From a non-MF guy, my first reaction was to notice the difference in the trees and leaves - both colour and detail. In the second full-frame shot - exactly the same.

Synn/
Congratulations on your new acquisition - hope you really enjoy it.
All the best for 2014,
M

Thank you!

@Michael Ezra: Check your PM.
Logged
my portfolio: www.sandeepmurali.com

ErikKaffehr

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11288
    • Echophoto
Re: I would like to understand the MF look.
« Reply #211 on: December 29, 2013, 04:27:46 pm »

Hi,

What I suggest is that you do two things in Capture One.

1) Reduce exposure by one step on the D800

2) Set white balance on a reasonable area on both images, in the image below I marked and area that I think would be reasonable.

In the image below you can see that the Nikon image has much more detail in the shadows, that probably comes from the exposure difference, but it could be that lens flare also comes into play. My understanding is that MFD often underexposes 1-1.5 steps, possibly to protect highlights while DSLRs tend to utilise the whole dynamic range.



I have been shooting MFD for half a year now, but I don't use exposure meter at all, just work with histogram and try to reach ETTR (Expose To The Right). I have a spot meter but digital exposure is a different world, so I rely on the histogram. My pictures with P45+ and Sony Alpha 99 don't differ a lot, check here:

http://echophoto.dnsalias.net/ekr/Articles/MFDJourney/RawImages/MFDB_VS_DSLR/

http://echophoto.dnsalias.net/ekr/Articles/MFDJourney/RawImages/MFDB_VS_DSLR2/

Regarding the moiré, it may be no major issue, but if it shows up in the first crop of your first posted picture it may indicate that it is quite frequent.

By the way, I enjoy my Hasselblad 555ELD/P45+ combo, and I see benefits, mostly regarding sharpness.

Best regards
Erik



« Last Edit: December 29, 2013, 04:33:08 pm by ErikKaffehr »
Logged
Erik Kaffehr
 

synn

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1235
    • My fine art portfolio
Re: I would like to understand the MF look.
« Reply #212 on: December 29, 2013, 04:53:23 pm »

Dear Erik,

Once more, my aim is not to do a thesis on the images. Both images were shot in a manner showing what the majority of people will see in their typical usage scenario.

I can do a white balance on that spot for sure and it cleans up the yellows and greens in the D800 file, but then the blues go overboard and I have to spend more time fixing that.
The aim for setting both cams to the "Fluorescent" WB setting was to see what they come up with using the manufacturer set presets. Credo gets it right out of the box. D800 needs lot of tweaking to come close. Even on the on-camera display, this was apparent.

...and here's something that I can't demonstrate using charts and graphs. I actually ENJOY shooting with the Credo more. To me, that counts for more than ETTR and histograms and moire and whatnot.
Logged
my portfolio: www.sandeepmurali.com

MichaelEzra

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1112
    • https://www.michaelezra.com
Re: I would like to understand the MF look.
« Reply #213 on: December 29, 2013, 05:58:19 pm »

Sandeep, thanks for sharing the raw file. I must say that all DCP profiles at I had hand failed to render purple colors at all. I used the default camera matrix built in RawTherapee and it worked (with much effort though).
Here is the reduced jpg and 100% crop from RawTherapee.




Logged

ErikKaffehr

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11288
    • Echophoto
Re: I would like to understand the MF look.
« Reply #214 on: December 29, 2013, 05:59:22 pm »

Eleanor,

Thanks for sharing the experience!

Best regards
Erik

I've been doing many many comparisons of my top primes on my D800e and phase one/Hasselblad system with top primes for sometime now trying to get the medium format look using 36 megapixel full frame 35mm.  Can get close but not there. Then  came along my Zeiss Otus and WOW!  I realized previously my Hasselblad lens blew away my best Nikon lenses...now with the Otus I'm getting as good as or superior results over the Hassy lenses.  I've found for the best comparison I must use 50 iso, my Otus lens, ideally convert in Capture One for both systems and need multiple files to tell the whole story.  With the Otus and shooting at iso 50, or at max, iso 100 on the Nikon I get that three dimensional pop...the high sharpness and intricate micro detail transitioning to smooth tonal gradations which to me is the hallmark of 3D medium format. Eleanor
Logged
Erik Kaffehr
 

synn

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1235
    • My fine art portfolio
Re: I would like to understand the MF look.
« Reply #215 on: December 29, 2013, 06:07:29 pm »

Hi Michael,

Thanks for the work on the file. I do not use Raw Therapee, but your treatment of the file is consistent with my observations while editing it in Capture One and LR whe I tried custom white balance and advanced color editing.

In C1, I can more or less get close to your rendering but as you said, it takes much work. Also, similar to the example you've shown, the separation between the shades of green is still nowhere as good as the Credo. In fact, that's a very consistent thing I have encountered while working with DSLR files. That several subtle shades of the same color tend to get blocked up together in a singular mush.


I spent probably 5 minutes editing the Credo file in C1. Just set some basic parameters, a tone curve and some presharpening. I spent 4 times that cloning the people out of the shot in Photoshop.  ;D
Logged
my portfolio: www.sandeepmurali.com

eleanorbrown

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 637
    • Eleanor Brown Photography
Re: I would like to understand the MF look.
« Reply #216 on: December 29, 2013, 06:17:52 pm »

Erik, it's been interesting for sure..I haven't directly compared the Otus to my best Nikon lenses so far, only the Otus on my D800e and Sony A7r to my Phase One and Hasselblad lenses.  However on my previous non scientific tests of Phase One/Hassy vs D800e and my top Nikon primes I was surprised that even my Hassy normal 80mm lens beat out my Nikon top lenses.  It wasn't until I put the new Zeiss Otus on to compare to medium format did I start to see just how important the lens qualities are.  I was honestly shocked.  My medium format files always had a "textured" "pop" to them layered over super smooth creamy tonalities to give a feeling I could just walk into the image…a 3D look if you will.  The qualities of the new Zeiss on a high megapixel Nikon (or new Sony A7r) with no AA filter gives the same "feel" as my Phase set up.  Hard to be precise…it's just a "feel" one gets after looking at file after file .  Eleanor  (also keeping in mind that for me, one needs a super low iso to get the Nikon/Otus files at or nearly at the level of my Phase files…and I'm talking "pixel for pixel" basis…not overall actual file size.)

Eleanor,

Thanks for sharing the experience!

Best regards
Erik

« Last Edit: December 29, 2013, 06:24:52 pm by eleanorbrown »
Logged
Eleanor Brown
[url=http://www.eleanorbro

ErikKaffehr

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11288
    • Echophoto
Re: I would like to understand the MF look.
« Reply #217 on: December 29, 2013, 06:28:04 pm »

Eleanor,

Thanks for sharing. Enjoy your lens! :-)

Best regards
Erik


 

Erik, it's been interesting for sure..I haven't directly compared the Otus to my best Nikon lenses so far, only the Otus on my D800e and Sony A7r to my Phase One and Hasselblad lenses.  However on my previous non scientific tests of Phase One/Hassy vs D800e and my top Nikon primes I was surprised that even my Hassy normal 80mm lens beat out my Nikon top lenses.  It wasn't until I put the new Zeiss Otus on to compare to medium format did I start to see just how important the lens qualities are.  I was honestly shocked.  My medium format files always had a "textured" "pop" to them layered over super smooth creamy tonalities to give a feeling I could just walk into the image…a 3D look if you will.  The qualities of the new Zeiss on a high megapixel Nikon (or new Sony A7r) with no AA filter gives the same "feel" as my Phase set up.  Hard to be precise…it's just a "feel" one gets after looking at file after file .  Eleanor

Logged
Erik Kaffehr
 
Pages: 1 ... 9 10 [11]   Go Up