Reading mode: Light Dark

1Ds or medium format ???

Go to last post
A

Arthur Li

Leading Member
Messages
632
Reaction score
0
Location
Surrey, UK
I decided to share my (longwinded) thoughts and perhaps get some feedback from people more experienced than me.

I have been a keen photographer for many years. I currently have the 1V and D60, I shoot mainly static objects - people, still life, landscape etc. I have a studio flash set-up and I make some money from doing portraits and other "people" images. I still use the 1V regularly, shooting mainly slides and scanning them with a Canon 4000 dpi scanner or use print film for family snapshots. I really would like to do more landscapes.

I like what I have read about the 1Ds and it looks like the natural upgrade route for me, ie sell the D60, buy the 1Ds and end up with 2 EOS 1 bodies which can utilise all my existing lenses etc. The problem is the price. In the UK, it will retail for about £6.500 (approx US$8,500) and if I get £1,250 for my D60, I still have to find more than £5,000 upgrade costs. Money is not a problem but I am not a pro and £5,000 is a lot of money for what is in effect an expensive toy. It won't improve my "eye" or technique and it won't make me a better photographer, BUT it will produce better quality images than the 1V and D60, although that may be academis as I rarely print above A3+.

So if mostly what I get from the £5,000 upgrade costs is quality improvement, there must be a cheaper means to the same end. I read the 1Ds review on Luminous Landscape and we are told that medium format still has the edge over the 1Ds. I can keep my existing gear but add a used Bronica SQ-A outfit with wide angle, standard and telephoto lenses (for about £2,500). If I shoot 3 rolls of 120 SLIDE film a month, that will be about £30 per month for film and processing. If I then want to scan 5 images onto CD via a pro lab using Imacon 5750 dpi scanner (to produce say 50MB TIFFs) for manipulation etc in PS7, that will cost £75 per month. It adds up to £105 per month (or approx US$136.50).

I worked out it would take me about 24 months of paying for film and processing (£2500), add the purchase costs of the Bronica (£2500) before I reach the magic £5,000 upgrade costs for the 1Ds. And if I sell my 1V for £800 and use the proceeds for 120 film & processing etc, it will give me a total of 31 months before I get to the £5,000 figure.

Yes my outfit bag would be big, the Bronica will be slow and awkward to handle after the 1V, I will need to use a light meter (or the 35mm bodies) to meter for the Bronica and I will have to wait to see results rather than the instant gratification from the D60. But I will get big fat punchy slides, high quality digital files and big prints, especially if I want to do more landscape photography.

Is it a "no brainer" or have I no brain, did I miss something blindingly obvious??

Any thoughts on the above would be appreciated.
--
Arthur Li
http://www.pbase.com/akl
EOS 1V + D60
 
Arthur Li said:
Is it a "no brainer" or have I no brain, did I miss something
blindingly obvious??

Any thoughts on the above would be appreciated.
Click to expand...
I think you missed this part of Michael's comments about the image quality of the 1Ds as opposed to a 645 image.
Arthur Li said:
What does this all mean? Here's what I see on prints, not just on the
JPGs that I've created for this page, but real-world 11X17" and 13X19"
prints made on an Epson 2200. In any print size up to 13X19" (Super
A3), prints made from the 1Ds are sharper and have less grain than
those from 35mm or 645 film scans. There is no area in which 35mm film
scans are superior, and the 645 scan is only superior in terms of its ability
to make prints larger than 13X19".
Click to expand...
It's your money so you get to decide what path you're going to take.
 
Arthur Li said:
Is it a "no brainer" or have I no brain, did I miss something
blindingly obvious??
Any thoughts on the above would be appreciated.
Click to expand...
I think you covered it quite well. You can get to medium format much cheaper too, though flexibility suffers. I'm looking forward to buying a Yashica-D, a 80mm/f3.5 TLR that uses 120 film. I have 18 rolls (15 Provia 100F, 3 Provia 400F, 3 Reala - don't remember ISO) waiting... I do have a Yashica-A (got it for free over a month or so ago) but it doesn't work, the shutter is stuck.

The Yashica-D would cost about 70-80 euros. True, it isn't of the best possible quality. But still, something like a Rolleicord Va/b would have a very good lens and ease of use. Though I'm not sure if those too have a lens that you can't change. But still, very cheap. 250 euros or so. And you get great quality. Comparing to 10000 euros... now, how many rolls of film is that anyway?? :)

Well more seriously, this is what I plan to do, get an inexpensive TLR to shoot 6x6 with, and that way get very good quality at a low price. Can't wait to actually get one. Too bad I have trouble raising the money - for that matter, I still have 45 euros of the 75-300mm left to pay :/

I'd sure like a 1Ds, but that's not gonna happen in a long time grin . Either way is good for you, I'm sure. Personally I'd, even in your situation, probably go with medium format.

--
Teppo @ Finland
 
As a D60 and EOS 1n owner I share your concerns. I am a long time ETR-s Bronica user (I owned a GS1 for a couple of years but found out that for big enlargements it required mirror lock-up for almost every shot. Last year a large part of my medium format equipment got stolen while doing a job at Malpais, a small town on the Costa Rican pacific coast.

I looked into the cost of buying all that medium format equipment again and after testing D60 RAW possibilities from the web, decided to get one. Six months of D60 usage and many more upsampling, noise reduction and sharpening tests have confirmed that, at present, digital photography is MORE technique dependent than film photography.

I make about 50% of my income from photography, the rest I make teaching photography at the Veritas University. I recently started working for Estilos y Casas, a thick glossy coffe-table style magazine that showcases the houses of the rich and famous living in Central America. This magazine has high printing standards, so high in fact that it is printed abroad and until my arrival there it only accepted fine grained medium format transparencies (the other top costa rican photographer working for Estilos y Casas shoots Provia 100F with a Hassy).

So what's the point of all this? To confirm your statement that "So if mostly what I get from the £5,000 upgrade costs is quality improvement, there must be a cheaper means to the same end". Well there is: The D60 up to ISO 200 approaches the resolution of Provia 100F scanned at 4000 dpi, BUT with great technique, its perceived image quality (including acutance or perceived sharpness) looks as good as 645 color film because of the absence of grain and smooth tonal and color transition.

I know you have good photo technique, because I checked your portfolio before writing this (I enjoyed your Final Journey photograph), but I am talking about subtle things that added make a difference in perceived sharpness, such as using a prime lens, tripod, and medium aperture, in-camera sharpening and contrast set to minimum and ALWAYS upsampling in 16bit mode and 110% steps BEFORE applying any tonal corrections (levels or curves).

The only two things I do before upsampling my 16-bit converted Tiffs is to assign Nilsens ETC-4 color profile ( http://home.online.no/~etc.etc/artimages ) and some pre-set Hue&Saturation adjustement to correct for color sensor deficiencies (I learned this the hard way when reproducing some paintings). The nice thing about 110% step upsampling is that it works in 16-bit mode, while Genuine Fractals, Spline 36 and VFZoom, do not. Upsampling in 16bit mode makes a visible difference once unsharpmask is applied (for the highest quality always apply it through an edge mask and as the last step) since it shows much less "quadrant" or "checkerboard" artifact.

The above technique is not for all images, for instance my 6x8 wedding photo prints (gorgeous on Ilford Galerie Classic Pearl Paper with Colorlife Profile) receive straight USM.

Since you portfolio suggests an introspective and careful nature I thought I'd share my toughts with you, maybe even help you avoid the "equipment masturbator" level of photography ( http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/7.htm ).

Me? I think I will keep my D60 and Sigma 14mmEX for a while, specially after looking at Galbraith's samples of 1Ds chromatic aberration ( http://www.robgalbraith.com/diginews/2002-10/2002_10_20_eos1ds.html#chromatic lateral).

Jorge Alban
Costa Rica
 
I shoot professionally, though not as much as many pros. (I've only had a pro studio for a few years.) Still, switching from shooting medium format with my Contax 645 to shooting with my D60 has paid for the D60 in only 3 months. (Unfortunately, necessary upgrades in computer hardware and software has used up half that savings!)

The resolution is down just a bit using the D60, but overall I think my photos up to 16x20 are better (due to the flexibility of digital over film).

The net result is that I'll be listing my Contax gear on eBay today to raise cash for another digital. As much as I'd like a 1Ds, I'm afraid the sale of the 645 and those fine Carl Zeiss lenses will only bring me enough for a 1D. Hopefully, if the coming year is good, I'll be able to upgrade to a 1Ds next year.
 
... what I said was based on what he approximated to be his amount. And I wouldn't shoot all that much either, especially since the Yashica wouldn't be the only camera I'd shoot with, with both the EOS 600 and Nikon CP5700 also in use.

But it's true that for those who use it for a living a 1Ds might be the better choice. Instant feedback can be very important in studios, etc. But I think he said he's only in photography as a hobby.

But all said, both give good results, depends on what you do and need and what you can afford :)

--
Teppo @ Finland
 
That was my point, though I guess I didn't make it well. If you aren't shooting a lot of photos where you need high resolution, the $7500 for a 1Ds just doesn't make sense. Actually, the same is somewhat true for D60 vs. Elan 7. If you don't shoot it a lot, it just doesn't make financial sense to go to digital yet.
Teppo Hytönen said:
... what I said was based on what he approximated to be his amount.
And I wouldn't shoot all that much either, especially since the
Yashica wouldn't be the only camera I'd shoot with, with both the
EOS 600 and Nikon CP5700 also in use.
But it's true that for those who use it for a living a 1Ds might be
the better choice. Instant feedback can be very important in
studios, etc. But I think he said he's only in photography as a
hobby.
But all said, both give good results, depends on what you do and
need and what you can afford :)

--
Teppo @ Finland
Click to expand...
 
Interesting.

What is that 110% steps exactly? A program, a technic? Do you have any urls for that?

much appreciated.

bernd
Jorge Alban said:
As a D60 and EOS 1n owner I share your concerns. I am a long time
ETR-s Bronica user (I owned a GS1 for a couple of years but found
out that for big enlargements it required mirror lock-up for almost
every shot. Last year a large part of my medium format equipment
got stolen while doing a job at Malpais, a small town on the Costa
Rican pacific coast.

I looked into the cost of buying all that medium format equipment
again and after testing D60 RAW possibilities from the web, decided
to get one. Six months of D60 usage and many more upsampling, noise
reduction and sharpening tests have confirmed that, at present,
digital photography is MORE technique dependent than film
photography.

I make about 50% of my income from photography, the rest I make
teaching photography at the Veritas University. I recently started
working for Estilos y Casas, a thick glossy coffe-table style
magazine that showcases the houses of the rich and famous living in
Central America. This magazine has high printing standards, so high
in fact that it is printed abroad and until my arrival there it
only accepted fine grained medium format transparencies (the other
top costa rican photographer working for Estilos y Casas shoots
Provia 100F with a Hassy).

So what's the point of all this? To confirm your statement that "So
if mostly what I get from the £5,000 upgrade costs is quality
improvement, there must be a cheaper means to the same end". Well
there is: The D60 up to ISO 200 approaches the resolution of Provia
100F scanned at 4000 dpi, BUT with great technique, its perceived
image quality (including acutance or perceived sharpness) looks as
good as 645 color film because of the absence of grain and smooth
tonal and color transition.

I know you have good photo technique, because I checked your
portfolio before writing this (I enjoyed your Final Journey
photograph), but I am talking about subtle things that added make a
difference in perceived sharpness, such as using a prime lens,
tripod, and medium aperture, in-camera sharpening and contrast set
to minimum and ALWAYS upsampling in 16bit mode and 110% steps
BEFORE applying any tonal corrections (levels or curves).

The only two things I do before upsampling my 16-bit converted
Tiffs is to assign Nilsens ETC-4 color profile
( http://home.online.no/~etc.etc/artimages ) and some pre-set
Hue&Saturation adjustement to correct for color sensor deficiencies
(I learned this the hard way when reproducing some paintings). The
nice thing about 110% step upsampling is that it works in 16-bit
mode, while Genuine Fractals, Spline 36 and VFZoom, do not.
Upsampling in 16bit mode makes a visible difference once
unsharpmask is applied (for the highest quality always apply it
through an edge mask and as the last step) since it shows much
less "quadrant" or "checkerboard" artifact.

The above technique is not for all images, for instance my 6x8
wedding photo prints (gorgeous on Ilford Galerie Classic Pearl
Paper with Colorlife Profile) receive straight USM.
Since you portfolio suggests an introspective and careful nature I
thought I'd share my toughts with you, maybe even help you avoid
the "equipment masturbator" level of photography
( http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/7.htm ).

Me? I think I will keep my D60 and Sigma 14mmEX for a while,
specially after looking at Galbraith's samples of 1Ds chromatic
aberration

( http://www.robgalbraith.com/diginews/2002-10/2002_10_20_eos1ds.html#chromatic lateral).

Jorge Alban
Costa Rica
Click to expand...
 
bernd1234 said:
What is that 110% steps exactly? A program, a technic? Do you have
any urls for that?
Click to expand...
Do a search on the site for "Stair Interpolation".

Basically, instead of using PS to rez up an image directly to the size wanted, you do it in "steps" of 110%. The end result looks better and has fewer artifacts.

Fred Miranda has a PS "SI" action for sale on his site.
 
You may want to consider what a Bronica SQ outfit will be worth at the end of the time frame you've mentioned.

In two or three years there could be such a glut of used MF equipment on the market that it's value is effectively zero. (There's already a lot out there.)

So in two years after you've spent 2500 on processing and 2500 on the SQ, you're out 5000 (not counting scanning). And you're still going to want to buy a digital camera, and are still going to have to start from scratch to do so.

Whereas if a 1DS has the quality needed to do the job now, it will still be able to do the same job two years from now.
 
My friend shoots about $300 per month of 35mm film and processing, in a 1V and 1N. I observed that if he bought a 1Ds now, it'd take only about 2 years of saving that F&P cost to pay for the camera. If he DIDN'T buy the 1Ds now, he'll still spend the $7-odd-thousand dollars in 2 years and STILL not have a DSLR.

--
http://community.webshots.com/user/jeffreybehr
 
It makes a lot of sense to import one, then.

At this price level, the shipping costs are vanishingly small compared to the potential savings. $10,000 for a camera would almost be funny if they weren't so serious about it. There have been plenty of threads recently on just how easy and fast it is to bring a 1D over from the States.

Andy.
SteveHorn said:
Your currency conversion is wrong. £6,500 is more than US$10,000.

See http://www.exchangerate.com/quick_calculator.html

Ouch!
Click to expand...
 
Jorge Alban said:
As a D60 and EOS 1n owner I share your concerns. I am a long time
ETR-s Bronica user (I owned a GS1 for a couple of years but found
out that for big enlargements it required mirror lock-up for almost
every shot. Last year a large part of my medium format equipment
got stolen while doing a job at Malpais, a small town on the Costa
Rican pacific coast.

I looked into the cost of buying all that medium format equipment
again and after testing D60 RAW possibilities from the web, decided
to get one. Six months of D60 usage and many more upsampling, noise
reduction and sharpening tests have confirmed that, at present,
digital photography is MORE technique dependent than film
photography.

I make about 50% of my income from photography, the rest I make
teaching photography at the Veritas University. I recently started
working for Estilos y Casas, a thick glossy coffe-table style
magazine that showcases the houses of the rich and famous living in
Central America. This magazine has high printing standards, so high
in fact that it is printed abroad and until my arrival there it
only accepted fine grained medium format transparencies (the other
top costa rican photographer working for Estilos y Casas shoots
Provia 100F with a Hassy).

So what's the point of all this? To confirm your statement that "So
if mostly what I get from the £5,000 upgrade costs is quality
improvement, there must be a cheaper means to the same end". Well
there is: The D60 up to ISO 200 approaches the resolution of Provia
100F scanned at 4000 dpi, BUT with great technique, its perceived
image quality (including acutance or perceived sharpness) looks as
good as 645 color film because of the absence of grain and smooth
tonal and color transition.

I know you have good photo technique, because I checked your
portfolio before writing this (I enjoyed your Final Journey
photograph), but I am talking about subtle things that added make a
difference in perceived sharpness, such as using a prime lens,
tripod, and medium aperture, in-camera sharpening and contrast set
to minimum and ALWAYS upsampling in 16bit mode and 110% steps
BEFORE applying any tonal corrections (levels or curves).

The only two things I do before upsampling my 16-bit converted
Tiffs is to assign Nilsens ETC-4 color profile
( http://home.online.no/~etc.etc/artimages ) and some pre-set
Hue&Saturation adjustement to correct for color sensor deficiencies
(I learned this the hard way when reproducing some paintings). The
nice thing about 110% step upsampling is that it works in 16-bit
mode, while Genuine Fractals, Spline 36 and VFZoom, do not.
Upsampling in 16bit mode makes a visible difference once
unsharpmask is applied (for the highest quality always apply it
through an edge mask and as the last step) since it shows much
less "quadrant" or "checkerboard" artifact.

The above technique is not for all images, for instance my 6x8
wedding photo prints (gorgeous on Ilford Galerie Classic Pearl
Paper with Colorlife Profile) receive straight USM.
Since you portfolio suggests an introspective and careful nature I
thought I'd share my toughts with you, maybe even help you avoid
the "equipment masturbator" level of photography
( http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/7.htm ).

Me? I think I will keep my D60 and Sigma 14mmEX for a while,
specially after looking at Galbraith's samples of 1Ds chromatic
aberration

( http://www.robgalbraith.com/diginews/2002-10/2002_10_20_eos1ds.html#chromatic lateral).

Jorge Alban
Costa Rica
Click to expand...
--
Arthur Li
http://www.pbase.com/akl
EOS 1V + D60
 
Well said Jorge

... and sadly Costa Rica didn't win the World Cup! ..this time...but they played great.

Regards
Jon
Jorge Alban said:
As a D60 and EOS 1n owner I share your concerns. I am a long time
ETR-s Bronica user (I owned a GS1 for a couple of years but found
out that for big enlargements it required mirror lock-up for almost
every shot. Last year a large part of my medium format equipment
got stolen while doing a job at Malpais, a small town on the Costa
Rican pacific coast.

I looked into the cost of buying all that medium format equipment
again and after testing D60 RAW possibilities from the web, decided
to get one. Six months of D60 usage and many more upsampling, noise
reduction and sharpening tests have confirmed that, at present,
digital photography is MORE technique dependent than film
photography.

I make about 50% of my income from photography, the rest I make
teaching photography at the Veritas University. I recently started
working for Estilos y Casas, a thick glossy coffe-table style
magazine that showcases the houses of the rich and famous living in
Central America. This magazine has high printing standards, so high
in fact that it is printed abroad and until my arrival there it
only accepted fine grained medium format transparencies (the other
top costa rican photographer working for Estilos y Casas shoots
Provia 100F with a Hassy).

So what's the point of all this? To confirm your statement that "So
if mostly what I get from the £5,000 upgrade costs is quality
improvement, there must be a cheaper means to the same end". Well
there is: The D60 up to ISO 200 approaches the resolution of Provia
100F scanned at 4000 dpi, BUT with great technique, its perceived
image quality (including acutance or perceived sharpness) looks as
good as 645 color film because of the absence of grain and smooth
tonal and color transition.

I know you have good photo technique, because I checked your
portfolio before writing this (I enjoyed your Final Journey
photograph), but I am talking about subtle things that added make a
difference in perceived sharpness, such as using a prime lens,
tripod, and medium aperture, in-camera sharpening and contrast set
to minimum and ALWAYS upsampling in 16bit mode and 110% steps
BEFORE applying any tonal corrections (levels or curves).

The only two things I do before upsampling my 16-bit converted
Tiffs is to assign Nilsens ETC-4 color profile
( http://home.online.no/~etc.etc/artimages ) and some pre-set
Hue&Saturation adjustement to correct for color sensor deficiencies
(I learned this the hard way when reproducing some paintings). The
nice thing about 110% step upsampling is that it works in 16-bit
mode, while Genuine Fractals, Spline 36 and VFZoom, do not.
Upsampling in 16bit mode makes a visible difference once
unsharpmask is applied (for the highest quality always apply it
through an edge mask and as the last step) since it shows much
less "quadrant" or "checkerboard" artifact.

The above technique is not for all images, for instance my 6x8
wedding photo prints (gorgeous on Ilford Galerie Classic Pearl
Paper with Colorlife Profile) receive straight USM.
Since you portfolio suggests an introspective and careful nature I
thought I'd share my toughts with you, maybe even help you avoid
the "equipment masturbator" level of photography
( http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/7.htm ).

Me? I think I will keep my D60 and Sigma 14mmEX for a while,
specially after looking at Galbraith's samples of 1Ds chromatic
aberration

( http://www.robgalbraith.com/diginews/2002-10/2002_10_20_eos1ds.html#chromatic lateral).

Jorge Alban
Costa Rica
Click to expand...
--
Jon Stewart
[email protected]
 
Another thing to consider is that film is becoming more and more difficult to deal with. I'm a die-hard MF shooter, but getting ready to switch to digital. A principal reason is that one fine lab I deal with stopped processing E-6 and I've gotten processing blotches on film from a couple of other "pro" labs with Kodak Q-Lab ratings. 220 is much more trouble here (Europe) than 120, but it seems that one thing to ask yourself is whether the support services for shooting film are deteriorating to the point where all of it becomes just too much trouble.
Don
Arthur Li said:
(NT)
--
Arthur Li
http://www.pbase.com/akl
EOS 1V + D60
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top