Medium format photography the old way, is it advisable?

Started Feb 24, 2014 | Questions thread
(unknown member) Veteran Member • Posts: 5,593
Re: It depends on size, imo
1

TheChefs wrote:

Basalite wrote:

Dave Luttmann wrote:

tex wrote:

Basalite wrote:

tex wrote:

FF is catching up with 645 film, if it hasn't already.

It passed it a long time ago. The better ones have matched and surpassed 6x9.

Citations/links please.

That said, you could get(as I have) a nice 645 outfit plus good scanner (Epson V700, for instance) for less money than a 36mp FF camera body.

Sure, but then you have the cost of film and processing.

Over 645---6x6, 6x7, and especially 6x9---you will still exceed what FF digital can do, at less cost, and obviously a fraction of MF digital.

No, you will not "exceed what FF digital can do." There are plenty of comparison reviews online that go back quite a few years.

Links, please. I'd truly like to see these comparisons.

I use a lot of b&w....and even my d800 couldnt match MF fine grain b&w. By the way...many of us have pointed this out to him many times. Don't waste your breath.

You are not "us;” you are simply you.

He also doesnt seem to grasp that 35mm FF systems render different than MF lenses.....and film looks different as well.

I shot medium format for years and printed it in my own darkroom. I know exactly what medium format is all about. There are many online resources showing very clearly that MF quality was passed over by digital long ago. Here is just one.

http://kbesios.com/blog/2012/07/nikon-d800e-vs-6x9-medium-format-film/

http://kbesios.com/blog/2012/07/nikon-d800e-vs-6x9-medium-format-film-part-ii/

And even if we agree with your silly statement.

You are not "we;" you are just you.

I didn't bother with your crops, I believe the person should stop down the lens. I don't see any grain in this photo, just soft lens and no sharpening applied.

The images speak for themselves.

Now, if I look at the whole image. The film looks way better. Nicer colours, more pleasant tones and shadow details. Look at the water wheel.

All things that can be adjusted for when developing RAWs.

I'm surprised he didn't bring down the blown highlights in film down a bit. I can even do it with my not so great Epson V700.

The dynamic range differences between the D880/e to color film is well known and essentially insignificant.

My conclusion is, if you take crapy photos and masturbate over pixels and troll about them.

The samples provided speak for themselves.

Spend $10,000 on D800E and lenses.

The body costs $3300 American. Another $6700 in lenses? Really?

If you enjoy great looking photos, spend $500 on MF camera and a lens.

And spend more for film and developing, not to mention the cost for your time, and to get lesser quality.

I'm still surprised you have not mentioned your sigma yet

You mean the fact that my little Sigmas give me medium format film quality in an APS like sized sensor?

Also while you were posting and arguing about which camera is better, I went out and took a photo. I think it came out quite well. Enjoy!

Uh, OK.

Fushimi Inari - Hasselblad 501c - Carl Zeiss 80mm lens @ f2.8 (I think) - Fuji Provia 400X

Post (hide subjects) Posted by
tex
(unknown member)
tex
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
ecm
ecm
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow