Which MF Would you use to Shoot weddings

[rollsman44]

  If you had to choose a MF camera to shoot weddings which one would you use with a Budget around 6500 for Body, Digital Back and 1 lens( 80mm)  Thank you. Will be using flash and ISO range max 1600( with no noise)  Thank you

[Doug Peterson]

I've shot many weddings with a variety of Phase and Leaf gear and would be glad to send you raws.

The high speed flash sync, and quality of the modern leaf shutter lenses both stopped down, and more importantly, wide open is very helpful.

But even a older generation back would be tough to fit to that budget. A ton of options (from all brands) start to pop up if your budget is flexible to $10-$15k, but at $6k you'll be quite limited in choices.

A lot of our commercial clients do a lease to own to reduce their initial cash outlay. Given that our customers typically hold onto their MFD kit much longer than they did when they were in the 35mm dSLR world, a 2-3 year lease is quite sensible.

On a personal note, for my wedding shooting I rarely want "no noise" - I just want any noise present to be well structured, uniform, natural looking noise that looks more like film grain that crappy digital clumping noise. I often add additional grain (using C1v8s new film grain tool that, IMO, outperforms any plugin I've seen for realistic beautiful adjustable film grain).

[rollsman44]

Hi Doug, I was thinking more on a Pentax 645Z Used if there is one  available and the 75 FA lens to start with. I dont do many weddings anymore so I have to keep my budget in that area( I could go to about 8k but thats max) If I shot more weddings it would justify the extra money I would spend. I dont need any big files just ISO up to 1200 would work for me.  Thank you

[Ken R]

  If you had to choose a MF camera to shoot weddings which one would you use with a Budget around 6500 for Body, Digital Back and 1 lens( 80mm)  Thank you. Will be using flash and ISO range max 1600( with no noise)  Thank you

At that price?

None. Minimum would be a Hasselblad H4x with a IQ140 back. The sensor plus mode (10mp on the IQ140, 15mp on the IQ160/260 and 20mp on the IQ180/280) is superb. Fast and great quality file even at iso 800. The IQ backs have a SUPERB lcd screen good enough to really judge image quality and sharpness. The AF of the H4x (or H5x) is really good. The setup wont be as fast as a DSLR obviously but it is fast enough.

[ndevlin]

Well, first, if you haven't shot weddings, you should shoot a few with gear you are *very* familiar with to find out (a) if you have the stomach for it and (b) like it before you buy MF gear for it.

Weddings are a relatively benign form of spot-news event, from which you are expected to derive studio still-life levels of art.  They are *not* easy and not that many people enjoy the pressure, and fewer still do it well.

That said, the only system in the range you describe is the 645z.  It is an ideal wedding rig. Perfect high ISO when you cannot/don't want to strobe, with enough speed and good AF.

Paired with a AF45-85, you're good to go.  If you need LS for outdoor formals, get the two LS lenses.  For the weddings applications where LS might be needed, they are perfectly suitable.

- N.

[rollsman44]

  Hi Nick, I have shot weddings for over 40 years and I now want to use MF. I did have an interest  on the 645Z with that 45-85 lens.
   You must have read my mind.  I have the 645D but it will not work out for me. The processing time is too long in between shots and ISO not high enough.  What is your opinion on the Hassy H3d2-22 ?  I dont need Big files but an ISO of about 1200 would be enough.
   Thank you

[douglevy]

I've shot 175 weddings, and will do another 25 this year. My primary body is a Nikon D4, but last year I owned a Hasselblad H1 and Credo 40, which I found the AF was too crappy to use even for wedding portraits. This year I've upgraded to an h5X, and plan on using it for all of the portraits. In a perfect world I'd have my D4, 24-70 and 70-200 and a Credo 50 or IQ250 on the Hassy, but that's not within my current budget. I have played with the Pentax, and found the files to be lacking - they just looked like big D800 files to me. I only had it for a few hours, but that, coupled with the lack of current leaf shutter lenses and the fact that you can't run the files through Capture One were huge negatives for me. FWIW, the Credo 40 (there's no sensor plus option on the Leaf backs) isn't really usable above 400 ISO.

-Doug

[rollsman44]

Hi Doug, I am now semi retired from shooting. I guess I just want to be able to still shoot  afew weddings and using MF as My main camera. I was thinking of a Hassy H3D2-31 or 22. I can live without ISO over 1000. I dont need Hi ISO or Big Files. I have been shooting so many years and with MF Hassy filnm days.  I appreciate your comments. Thank you

[Theodoros]

My opinion is to get yourself a S/H Nikon D4 and forget all about MF gear.

[bpepz]

I've shot many weddings with a variety of Phase and Leaf gear and would be glad to send you raws.

The high speed flash sync, and quality of the modern leaf shutter lenses both stopped down, and more importantly, wide open is very helpful.

But even a older generation back would be tough to fit to that budget. A ton of options (from all brands) start to pop up if your budget is flexible to $10-$15k, but at $6k you'll be quite limited in choices.

A lot of our commercial clients do a lease to own to reduce their initial cash outlay. Given that our customers typically hold onto their MFD kit much longer than they did when they were in the 35mm dSLR world, a 2-3 year lease is quite sensible.

On a personal note, for my wedding shooting I rarely want "no noise" - I just want any noise present to be well structured, uniform, natural looking noise that looks more like film grain that crappy digital clumping noise. I often add additional grain (using C1v8s new film grain tool that, IMO, outperforms any plugin I've seen for realistic beautiful adjustable film grain).

I would recommend picking up a h3d-39 or h3d-31, I've seen them go for 3-5k these day.

[rollsman44]

  Thank you all for your suggestions.  I appreciate  it

[voidshatter]

At that price?

None. Minimum would be a Hasselblad H4x with a IQ140 back. The sensor plus mode (10mp on the IQ140, 15mp on the IQ160/260 and 20mp on the IQ180/280) is superb. Fast and great quality file even at iso 800. The IQ backs have a SUPERB lcd screen good enough to really judge image quality and sharpness. The AF of the H4x (or H5x) is really good. The setup wont be as fast as a DSLR obviously but it is fast enough.

None of these CCD backs can perform as good as the current APSC CMOS cameras when you bump ISO over 800 (regardless of sensor+). Try a side by side comparison against a Nikon D5300 / Sony A6000 and you'll see.

Another problem with these CCD backs is that if you shoot at high ISO you would eventually get different color temperatures in different lithography partitions on the sensor ruining the picture (usually discrepancy between the upper half and the lower half of the frame). I've witnessed 3 x IQ260s, 1 x IQ280 to have the same issue. A re-calibration at the factory would be required.

[voidshatter]

Sorry, for wedding only CMOS will do the game. A Pentax 645Z will fall within the range of your budget, but you are limited to 1/125 flash sync. However it is not that bad since you can rely on the state-of-the-art dynamic range of the sensor instead of flash.

If you had more budget then perhaps get H5D-50C/Credo50/IQ150/IQ250. (Credo 50 is most cost efficient but you might want to check compatibility.)

Other than these, stay with Nikon D4/D4S.

[ndevlin]

Rollsman, the "z" is in a whole other league that the "D".  WAY faster in all respects, and I think you'd be happy using ISO 4000 for most shots.  Seriously. 

The Hassy and Phase 50CMOS backs are good too, just stupidly, and insanely, overpriced, respectively.

I can see no reason to go with a Generation 2 back, like an H-31.  The cameras are painful to use, like the 645D. And High ISO isn't that good.

- N.

[douglevy]

You say you can live without ISO over 1000, but with a CCD back and your budget, you're looking at not really being able to use over 400. @voidshatter, disagree completely in regard to dynamic range reducing the need for flash. Better DR doesn't give you control over crappy lighting conditions you're often faced with at weddings the way flash does.

-Doug

[voidshatter]

You say you can live without ISO over 1000, but with a CCD back and your budget, you're looking at not really being able to use over 400. @voidshatter, disagree completely in regard to dynamic range reducing the need for flash. Better DR doesn't give you control over crappy lighting conditions you're often faced with at weddings the way flash does.

-Doug

For crappy lighting conditions I use the following setup without flash at ISO 3200 - 102400:

Nikon D4S + Sigma 35mm f1.4 Art and Nikon 85mm 1.4G
Canon 1DX + Canon 50mm f1.2 L + Canon 85mm f1.2 L II (but the AF of Canon in low-light struggles)
Sony A7S + Leica 50mm f0.95 Noctilux + VM-E Close Focus Ring

These produce more natural look without the need of assistants carrying flash and umbrella around, as well as flash doing damage to the original atmosphere. Virtually unlimited amount of continuous shooting is also possible.

[Ken R]

Hi Doug, I am now semi retired from shooting. I guess I just want to be able to still shoot  afew weddings and using MF as My main camera. I was thinking of a Hassy H3D2-31 or 22. I can live without ISO over 1000. I dont need Hi ISO or Big Files. I have been shooting so many years and with MF Hassy filnm days.  I appreciate your comments. Thank you

Forgot to mention the Leica S2 (or S). Check it out if you can. I loved how it felt in hand and the files are nice. The AF was good and it can work with many lenses thanks to the factory adapters. That includes the Hasselblad H and the Contax 645 lenses (with fully functional AF!).

The 645z is a superb body but I find that that the lenses did not work great wide open and there are no AF lenses with Leaf Shutters for the Pentax.

[Paul2660]

It's always interesting in this type of discussion to see how well the industry has beat into a photographers head, that a CCD can really shoot anything but base iso.  Excepting being a sensor plus enabled Phase One back, I don't believe by increasing ISO on a CCD, you gain (no pun intended) anything.  The readout on a Phase is the same, it's just a metadata writing that shows you set the iso higher. 

This has been shown to be true with many tests, I have read both on this site and others, where a 50 iso sample is compared to a 200 iso sample and basically the image will look the same, either with the 50 sample way underexposed, or vise versa. 

So I ask again for the experts, does a real "higher than base" iso really exist on a CCD MF back, besides moving to sensor plus, where you do see a definite improvement, still not sure it's really a higher iso, but it's sure 4:1 pixel binning.  So with a good lens, you can get a good iso 800 image from a IQ180 albeit it's a 20MP file, thus it's not really a result of a higher iso, due to the loss in 3/4's of the resolution.

I fully understand with CMOS, you can actually increase the "gain" of the chip via the higher iso settings.  But with CCD, you best case is maybe 1 step from base, thus on a 50 iso chip, you might increase to 100 iso, but that's not going to do much for a wedding in low light or natural light.

If anyone has information to prove that CCD's in a MF back really can write a high iso file, say true 400 or 800, I would love to see it, as I have never found anything to show this. 

Paul

[Chris Livsey]

Excepting being a sensor plus enabled Phase One back, I don't believe by increasing ISO on a CCD, you gain (no pun intended) anything.  The readout on a Phase is the same, it's just a metadata writing that shows you set the iso higher. 

So you mean they work the same way as the A7r?

Quote
You can see that you don’t gain anything by turning up the ISO past the base value of 100. If the position of the ISO control has no effect on the SNR after Exposure corrections have been made in your favorite raw converter, some people say that that camera is ISO-less. That looks to be the case with the a7R.
http://blog.kasson.com/?p=3821

[Paul2660]

Hi Chris.

Can't soeak to Jim's blog comments but having used a A7r on several occasions in the ISO range of 800 to 1600 I would have to say I feel the A7r reacts a bit differently and does show the effect of increasing the gain on the chip via setting the ISO. Same with the Nikon D800e and D810. 

Not having a engineering back ground but a good reader. So maybe both chips CCD and CMOS work the same way but that's not to my experience. 

Paul