Medium Format vs. Full Frame Locked

Started 5 months ago | Discussions
This thread is locked.
Macro guy
Macro guy Veteran Member • Posts: 4,559
Re: Medium Format vs. Full Frame

thebbqguy wrote:

Macro guy wrote:

I think I've reached that conclusion. The anomalies I've found are professionals in the business for multiple decades.

I've been taking photos for 35 years+ but I want to do more than that to see what I can do.

I'll just get more active in the local club, network, learn and go from there.

I've got a few 12 megapixel cameras and at this point it makes no sense to buy a 24 megapixel camera to upgrade. It makes more sense to step up to 50 megapixels or more I think.

I believe I saw Clyde Butcher say in one newspaper article that he was impressed with the 36 megapixel he used for a short time while recovering from his health issues. You just work within the limitations of the chosen tools.

Thanks for sharing the knowledge and wisdom in this thread.

Good luck with that.  And remember the number of megapixels is dictated by how large you're going to print.  You don't need 50mp unless you're going to print 20x30" at 300dpi.  If you never print bigger than 11x14, a 12 mp camera is fine.

 Macro guy's gear list:Macro guy's gear list
Canon EOS 5D Mark II Canon EF 50mm F1.8 II +5 more
Greg7579
Greg7579 Veteran Member • Posts: 8,397
Re: Medium Format vs. Full Frame

Macro guy wrote:

thebbqguy wrote:

Macro guy wrote:

I think I've reached that conclusion. The anomalies I've found are professionals in the business for multiple decades.

I've been taking photos for 35 years+ but I want to do more than that to see what I can do.

I'll just get more active in the local club, network, learn and go from there.

I've got a few 12 megapixel cameras and at this point it makes no sense to buy a 24 megapixel camera to upgrade. It makes more sense to step up to 50 megapixels or more I think.

I believe I saw Clyde Butcher say in one newspaper article that he was impressed with the 36 megapixel he used for a short time while recovering from his health issues. You just work within the limitations of the chosen tools.

Thanks for sharing the knowledge and wisdom in this thread.

Good luck with that. And remember the number of megapixels is dictated by how large you're going to print. You don't need 50mp unless you're going to print 20x30" at 300dpi. If you never print bigger than 11x14, a 12 mp camera is fine.

I disagree with this sentiment and talking point.  More MP and res is not just about bigger print capability.  To say you don't need 50 MP unless you are going to print a big 20 by 30 inch print is wrong.  If it were true I would not have bought the GFX 50r 11 months ago and enjoyed shooting it so much all year because of the amazing IQ and res I see on every shot, and I certainly would not be shooting that Beast of a GFX 100 right now. Also, we must remember that (in my opinion) 50 MP looks better on MF that it does on FF.  I know because I shoot both and my eyes are good.  I have never printed an image from my MF cameras.  Other people have, but I have not seen the results.

-- hide signature --
 Greg7579's gear list:Greg7579's gear list
Fujifilm XF 16mm F1.4 R WR XF 90mm Leica Q2 Fujifilm X100F Fujifilm X-H1 +16 more
thebbqguy
OP thebbqguy Regular Member • Posts: 242
Re: Medium Format vs. Full Frame

Greg7579 wrote:

Macro guy wrote:

thebbqguy wrote:

Macro guy wrote:

I think I've reached that conclusion. The anomalies I've found are professionals in the business for multiple decades.

I've been taking photos for 35 years+ but I want to do more than that to see what I can do.

I'll just get more active in the local club, network, learn and go from there.

I've got a few 12 megapixel cameras and at this point it makes no sense to buy a 24 megapixel camera to upgrade. It makes more sense to step up to 50 megapixels or more I think.

I believe I saw Clyde Butcher say in one newspaper article that he was impressed with the 36 megapixel he used for a short time while recovering from his health issues. You just work within the limitations of the chosen tools.

Thanks for sharing the knowledge and wisdom in this thread.

Good luck with that. And remember the number of megapixels is dictated by how large you're going to print. You don't need 50mp unless you're going to print 20x30" at 300dpi. If you never print bigger than 11x14, a 12 mp camera is fine.

I disagree with this sentiment and talking point. More MP and res is not just about bigger print capability. To say you don't need 50 MP unless you are going to print a big 20 by 30 inch print is wrong. If it were true I would not have bought the GFX 50r 11 months ago and enjoyed shooting it so much all year because of the amazing IQ and res I see on every shot, and I certainly would not be shooting that Beast of a GFX 100 right now. Also, we must remember that (in my opinion) 50 MP looks better on MF that it does on FF. I know because I shoot both and my eyes are good. I have never printed an image from my MF cameras. Other people have, but I have not seen the results.

I have thought about getting the Nikon D810. It's light years ahead of my current cameras, but at this point it's becoming outdated as well. I'm going to hold out awhile longer and concentrate on improving my skills while I wait. I really desire MF.

This is my aspiration:

http://blog.juliaannagospodarou.com/long-exposure-photography-extensive-tutorial/

I know someone locally who does this style and I love it.

-- hide signature --

I learned a long time ago to stop trying to do what others do, because they're good at it. -- Do what you're good at. (B.B. King)

The Davinator
The Davinator Forum Pro • Posts: 23,234
Re: Emulating the film look

Velocity of Sound wrote:

Hiphopapotamus wrote:

Film has a painterly quality about it, because it's an organic process, it's like a canvas with brush strokes and a colour palette and that's half reason I use it. That shot was shot on motion picture film (Cinestill 800T/Kodak Vision 3 500T) which is a medium format stock they use in cinemas today.

Digital while it can be crisper, also has the inherent problem of being inorganic and can be cold and uninviting. I particularly like the way that shot renders its colour. It may not be wildly accurate but it has a certain aesthetic of it's own. If you want more accurate colour you would lean towards digital, or you would walk around with a colour swatch like we did in the old days and grade it later for colour, then make a profile in Photoshop for the film stock like we did in the good old days if you wanted more accurate colours and you cared. The art of colour grading is a process in itself though, I prefer to just let the colour fall where it may... mostly because I don't need accurate colour.

That's a medium-sized scan so it's not capturing the full resolution of the film, the first image I uploaded of the Pizzeria is a full sized scan from a different lab to the one I use that has a later model Noritsu, but it's interesting...

That shot would make a nice 8x12 at 300dpi or you could downsample it with the same pixel count to 150dpi and it would still come up nicely at 16x24. Although we printed at 150 in the 90s, I prefer not to do that for fine art prints.

You will either love or hate the grain structure but that comes down to personal taste also. I quite like the grain and texture of film, although it's not for everyone.

When I think about film there's the noise, a white balance that tends to feel a bit off, less contrast, and a softer image. All of those things can be accomplished when you process digitally:

None of these things has anything to do with film.

For starters, film is composed of grain...not noise.  The image is actually made up of the grain as opposed to a layer of noise on the digital image.  As to the rest...again...nothing to do with film and everything to do with the user.

Processed in Capture One: changed profile to Fujifilm Velvia, altered white balance to give it an objectively warmer feel, used one of their preset styles to skew a few more things to a warmer look, decreased sharpness and clarity, maintained digital noise reduction but added "harsh" film grain with minimal impact and high granularity, cut back on contrast and further crushed highlights while lifting shadows even though little to nothing was falling off the curves... the only thing I couldn't accomplish with Capture One alone was further reduction of details. Viewed large, the buildings still show too much detail, which would give this away as being digital. I probably could have done a better job with the noise addition - I had one setting that looked like it matched yours up against the buildings, but seemed a bit too much for the sky, so I went for an in-between. DPreview occasionally gives me problems with uploading the full 50-megapixel file so I exported this at a resolution of 90% of the original, but it's uncropped. If you notice some weird artifacts, it's because this was shot through a double-pane window, which ruined parts of the image (of course) but may have worked to my benefit when trying to make it appear a little more film-like. I'd note that Chris' film images appear pretty digital-like, though.

Granted, there's processing involved here that film does all on its own.

And as we agreed before, the look of the image is really only one part of the equation. Working with film and a film camera is a very different process from a digital camera and the "digital darkroom." I suppose you could modify a digital camera to prevent image playback, and shoot with a 256 MB (yes, megabyte) memory card to force yourself to have an extremely limited number of shots... but it's still not quite the same.

 The Davinator's gear list:The Davinator's gear list
Canon EOS D30 Nikon D2X Fujifilm X-Pro1 Fujifilm X-T1 Canon EOS 10D +17 more
Chris Dodkin
MOD Chris Dodkin Forum Pro • Posts: 12,177
Re: Medium Format vs. Full Frame

She does do beautiful work - and that write-up is a tour de force

-- hide signature --

Your time is limited, so don't waste it arguing about camera features - go out and capture memories - Oh, and size does matter - shoot MF

 Chris Dodkin's gear list:Chris Dodkin's gear list
Fujifilm X100F Fujifilm X100V Fujifilm X-T2 Fujifilm GFX 50S Fujifilm GFX 50R +43 more
JimKasson
JimKasson Forum Pro • Posts: 28,177
Re: Medium Format vs. Full Frame

Macro guy wrote:

Good luck with that. And remember the number of megapixels is dictated by how large you're going to print. You don't need 50mp unless you're going to print 20x30" at 300dpi. If you never print bigger than 11x14, a 12 mp camera is fine.

Except for aliasing...

-- hide signature --
 JimKasson's gear list:JimKasson's gear list
Nikon D5 Sony a7 III Nikon Z7 Sony a7R IV Fujifilm GFX 100 +2 more
JimKasson
JimKasson Forum Pro • Posts: 28,177
Big prints with 12 MP

Macro guy wrote:

thebbqguy wrote:

Macro guy wrote:

I think I've reached that conclusion. The anomalies I've found are professionals in the business for multiple decades.

I've been taking photos for 35 years+ but I want to do more than that to see what I can do.

I'll just get more active in the local club, network, learn and go from there.

I've got a few 12 megapixel cameras and at this point it makes no sense to buy a 24 megapixel camera to upgrade. It makes more sense to step up to 50 megapixels or more I think.

I believe I saw Clyde Butcher say in one newspaper article that he was impressed with the 36 megapixel he used for a short time while recovering from his health issues. You just work within the limitations of the chosen tools.

Thanks for sharing the knowledge and wisdom in this thread.

Good luck with that. And remember the number of megapixels is dictated by how large you're going to print. You don't need 50mp unless you're going to print 20x30" at 300dpi. If you never print bigger than 11x14, a 12 mp camera is fine.

How large you can print successfully from a 12 MP file depends heavily on the subject matter and technique. I am currently printing for an upcoming exhibition, and yesterday I made two large prints on 44-inch paper from 12 MP captures, and they look great:

Jim

-- hide signature --
 JimKasson's gear list:JimKasson's gear list
Nikon D5 Sony a7 III Nikon Z7 Sony a7R IV Fujifilm GFX 100 +2 more
The Davinator
The Davinator Forum Pro • Posts: 23,234
Re: Big prints with 12 MP

Agreed.  For the faint b&w street look I do...12mp is more than enough for any print size.  For a detailed landscape....16x24 will be satisfactory.  11x14 will be basically perfect

 The Davinator's gear list:The Davinator's gear list
Canon EOS D30 Nikon D2X Fujifilm X-Pro1 Fujifilm X-T1 Canon EOS 10D +17 more
thebbqguy
OP thebbqguy Regular Member • Posts: 242
Re: Medium Format vs. Full Frame

Chris Dodkin wrote:

She does do beautiful work - and that write-up is a tour de force

I enjoy the level of detail she includes. She outlines her technique for the image so you can follow along.

Here's my favorite local photographer:

https://www.brianday.org/architecture

He's known for his Detroit From Above series as well. He uses a DJI drone and long exposure techniques a lot.

-- hide signature --

I learned a long time ago to stop trying to do what others do, because they're good at it. -- Do what you're good at. (B.B. King)

rbf Forum Member • Posts: 67
Re: Big prints with 12 MP

JimKasson wrote:

Macro guy wrote:

thebbqguy wrote:

Macro guy wrote:

I think I've reached that conclusion. The anomalies I've found are professionals in the business for multiple decades.

I've been taking photos for 35 years+ but I want to do more than that to see what I can do.

I'll just get more active in the local club, network, learn and go from there.

I've got a few 12 megapixel cameras and at this point it makes no sense to buy a 24 megapixel camera to upgrade. It makes more sense to step up to 50 megapixels or more I think.

I believe I saw Clyde Butcher say in one newspaper article that he was impressed with the 36 megapixel he used for a short time while recovering from his health issues. You just work within the limitations of the chosen tools.

Thanks for sharing the knowledge and wisdom in this thread.

Good luck with that. And remember the number of megapixels is dictated by how large you're going to print. You don't need 50mp unless you're going to print 20x30" at 300dpi. If you never print bigger than 11x14, a 12 mp camera is fine.

How large you can print successfully from a 12 MP file depends heavily on the subject matter and technique. I am currently printing for an upcoming exhibition, and yesterday I made two large prints on 44-inch paper from 12 MP captures, and they look great:

Jim

That's very nice!

creative edge
creative edge Senior Member • Posts: 1,587
Re: Big prints with 12 MP

JimKasson wrote:

Macro guy wrote:

thebbqguy wrote:

Macro guy wrote:

I think I've reached that conclusion. The anomalies I've found are professionals in the business for multiple decades.

I've been taking photos for 35 years+ but I want to do more than that to see what I can do.

I'll just get more active in the local club, network, learn and go from there.

I've got a few 12 megapixel cameras and at this point it makes no sense to buy a 24 megapixel camera to upgrade. It makes more sense to step up to 50 megapixels or more I think.

I believe I saw Clyde Butcher say in one newspaper article that he was impressed with the 36 megapixel he used for a short time while recovering from his health issues. You just work within the limitations of the chosen tools.

Thanks for sharing the knowledge and wisdom in this thread.

Good luck with that. And remember the number of megapixels is dictated by how large you're going to print. You don't need 50mp unless you're going to print 20x30" at 300dpi. If you never print bigger than 11x14, a 12 mp camera is fine.

How large you can print successfully from a 12 MP file depends heavily on the subject matter and technique. I am currently printing for an upcoming exhibition, and yesterday I made two large prints on 44-inch paper from 12 MP captures, and they look great:

Jim

Jim,

Love that image, wow, nicely done.

-- hide signature --
Macro guy
Macro guy Veteran Member • Posts: 4,559
Re: Big prints with 12 MP

creative edge wrote:

JimKasson wrote:

Macro guy wrote:

thebbqguy wrote:

Macro guy wrote:

I think I've reached that conclusion. The anomalies I've found are professionals in the business for multiple decades.

I've been taking photos for 35 years+ but I want to do more than that to see what I can do.

I'll just get more active in the local club, network, learn and go from there.

I've got a few 12 megapixel cameras and at this point it makes no sense to buy a 24 megapixel camera to upgrade. It makes more sense to step up to 50 megapixels or more I think.

I believe I saw Clyde Butcher say in one newspaper article that he was impressed with the 36 megapixel he used for a short time while recovering from his health issues. You just work within the limitations of the chosen tools.

Thanks for sharing the knowledge and wisdom in this thread.

Good luck with that. And remember the number of megapixels is dictated by how large you're going to print. You don't need 50mp unless you're going to print 20x30" at 300dpi. If you never print bigger than 11x14, a 12 mp camera is fine.

How large you can print successfully from a 12 MP file depends heavily on the subject matter and technique. I am currently printing for an upcoming exhibition, and yesterday I made two large prints on 44-inch paper from 12 MP captures, and they look great:

Jim

Jim,

Love that image, wow, nicely done.

I do too.  Great job!

 Macro guy's gear list:Macro guy's gear list
Canon EOS 5D Mark II Canon EF 50mm F1.8 II +5 more
thebbqguy
OP thebbqguy Regular Member • Posts: 242
Re: Medium Format vs. Full Frame

I guess there's also this option:

https://petapixel.com/2019/11/29/nikon-d850m-vs-d850-a-comparison-of-monochrome-and-color-dslrs/

-- hide signature --

I learned a long time ago to stop trying to do what others do, because they're good at it. Do what you're good at. (B.B. King)

The Davinator
The Davinator Forum Pro • Posts: 23,234
Re: Medium Format vs. Full Frame

thebbqguy wrote:

I guess there's also this option:

https://petapixel.com/2019/11/29/nikon-d850m-vs-d850-a-comparison-of-monochrome-and-color-dslrs/

LOL...resolution surpasses the GFX100???  Lloyd has found something new to smoke.  Let's put a rez chart up and see if the D850m surpasses the GFX100.  Care to play a game?

 The Davinator's gear list:The Davinator's gear list
Canon EOS D30 Nikon D2X Fujifilm X-Pro1 Fujifilm X-T1 Canon EOS 10D +17 more
left eye
left eye Senior Member • Posts: 2,020
Re: Medium Format vs. Full Frame

The Davinator wrote:

thebbqguy wrote:

I guess there's also this option:

https://petapixel.com/2019/11/29/nikon-d850m-vs-d850-a-comparison-of-monochrome-and-color-dslrs/

LOL...resolution surpasses the GFX100??? Lloyd has found something new to smoke. Let's put a rez chart up and see if the D850m surpasses the GFX100. Care to play a game?

The colour resolution of the 100MP GFX100, for pure green is 50MP, for pure red or blue is 25MP. That's irrefutable.

For instance a red hair will only be registered by 25% of the Bayer pixels it is projection onto. In effect the result is not a continuous line but a dotted line. Demosaicing invents some of this missing information.

With the D850m 100% of the red haired is register (albeit in B&W). The result is a hair indicative of a 46MP sensor (whereas upon a GFX100 it would be indicative of a 25MP sensor). The truth due to demosaicing and rarely any subject colour being pure red green or blue means colour resolution being somewhat closer to 50%, so actually fairly equal to the D850m with the bonus of colour.

Of course when the GFX100 implements pixel-shift, colour resolution will be 100%.

 left eye's gear list:left eye's gear list
Olympus E-300 Fujifilm GFX 50S Panasonic GH5 Fujifilm GF 50mm F3.5 +5 more
Macro guy
Macro guy Veteran Member • Posts: 4,559
Re: Medium Format vs. Full Frame

Is it enough to remove the cfa off the camera to make it a monochrome or does the RAW converter need to be adjusted not to demosaic?

 Macro guy's gear list:Macro guy's gear list
Canon EOS 5D Mark II Canon EF 50mm F1.8 II +5 more
Erik Kaffehr
Erik Kaffehr Veteran Member • Posts: 3,740
Re: Medium Format vs. Full Frame

Macro guy wrote:

Is it enough to remove the cfa off the camera to make it a monochrome or does the RAW converter need to be adjusted not to demosaic?

Probably so. The raw converter does not know that the CFA is not present, so it will still demosaic.

Diglloyd used Monochrome2.DNg for this.

But, I think demosaic may cause a around 15% loss of acutance, that figures well with what I can see comparing Leica M and Leica Monochrome.

The MTF 50 value is is like 12% higher for the Monochrome, but going down to 20% MTF the advantage increases to around 30%. On these samples it seems that there is a lot of shutter caused camera motion, but these points come from the least affected direction.
MTF 50 is often said to be a good parameter for sharpness MTF 20 is a pretty much arbitrary cutoff to calculate resolution.

The GFX 100 has 51 million green pixels and that is more than all the pixels on the monochrome converted D850.

It would be very hard to believe that a monochrome converted sensor would yield the same level of detail as the GFX 100.

Would MaxMax supply a photograph of a slanted edge in raw, than we could drain som quantifiable conclusions.

Having subscribed to Diglloyd earlier, I have noticed that he does pretty much sharpening.

Color me skeptical on this one...

Best regards

Erik

-- hide signature --

Erik Kaffehr
Website: http://echophoto.dnsalias.net
Magic uses to disappear in controlled experiments…
Gallery: http://echophoto.smugmug.com
Articles: http://echophoto.dnsalias.net/ekr/index.php/photoarticles

Greg7579
Greg7579 Veteran Member • Posts: 8,397
Re: Big prints with 12 MP

Sir, What you need is a GFX 100 Beast so that when you take a low res kind of moody-foggy-blurry shot that really only needs a 20-year old early 6 MPG digital file to look good, you will then have the pop, depth, dimensionality and special qualities that only MF can bring.  Then people will look at your low res prints and see the magic imbued by the GFX 100 because it transfers to resizing and smaller files from the original 200 MP 16 bit uncompressed raw.  😎

I'm kidding guys!  Lighten up..... 😁

Davinator is not a friend of my Bride.  He is the reason I have spent 25 grand on MF gear in the past year and she blames him and Jim, Chris, tgtlt, Rick, Erik, left eye and other of the great MF salesmen of truth praying on the weak of mind and soul....

-- hide signature --
 Greg7579's gear list:Greg7579's gear list
Fujifilm XF 16mm F1.4 R WR XF 90mm Leica Q2 Fujifilm X100F Fujifilm X-H1 +16 more
Greg7579
Greg7579 Veteran Member • Posts: 8,397
Does Lloyd Love Fuji?

The Davinator wrote:

thebbqguy wrote:

I guess there's also this option:

https://petapixel.com/2019/11/29/nikon-d850m-vs-d850-a-comparison-of-monochrome-and-color-dslrs/

LOL...resolution surpasses the GFX100??? Lloyd has found something new to smoke. Let's put a rez chart up and see if the D850m surpasses the GFX100. Care to play a game?

I was told by two Fuji reps in a European city in a long conversation about marketing in the camera world that he is mad at Fuji because he tried to get a sponsorship with them and free gear and threatened them with his pen on his paid blog when Fuji said no.

We are not allowed to attack individuals on DPR and this is not an attack on an individual but merely a comment about a professional paid journalist running a pay site and an editorial slant he has taken concerning Fuji.

It is fair game for me to say this because the journalist constantly makes outrageous claims about other glass being far superior to Fuji GFX glass, and he uses language to disparage Fuji GF glass that seems over the top and ridiculous. He actually said on his pay site that Fuji GFX glass can not resolve 50 MP much less 100!

He slams GFX whenever he can fit it in and does so relentlessly and almost with a passion. It is fairly obvious that he has some kind of grudge. It is also becoming common to quote Lloyd in articles that suggest other gear is as good or better than Fuji GFX.

I know a local pro in San Antonio that talks about this a lot and he loves Lloyd's work but is disturbed by his obvious anti-Fuji bias and journalistic assaults on GFX, and this pro I know is a Canon guy!

Come on Lloyd.... You are too good a pro for this nonsense.

-- hide signature --
 Greg7579's gear list:Greg7579's gear list
Fujifilm XF 16mm F1.4 R WR XF 90mm Leica Q2 Fujifilm X100F Fujifilm X-H1 +16 more
The Davinator
The Davinator Forum Pro • Posts: 23,234
Re: Big prints with 12 MP

Greg7579 wrote:

Sir, What you need is a GFX 100 Beast so that when you take a low res kind of moody-foggy-blurry shot that really only needs a 20-year old early 6 MPG digital file to look good, you will then have the pop, depth, dimensionality and special qualities that only MF can bring. Then people will look at your low res prints and see the magic imbued by the GFX 100 because it transfers to resizing and smaller files from the original 200 MP 16 bit uncompressed raw. 😎

I'm kidding guys! Lighten up..... 😁

Davinator is not a friend of my Bride. He is the reason I have spent 25 grand on MF gear in the past year and she blames him and Jim, Chris, tgtlt, Rick, Erik, left eye and other of the great MF salesmen of truth praying on the weak of mind and soul....

I'm glad I assisted in corrupting you..lol.  For now, I'm happy with my 50r...but I am considering getting the 100, and replacing my Fuji apsc gear to only use the 50r and 100. Bypass the so called FF format altogether.

 The Davinator's gear list:The Davinator's gear list
Canon EOS D30 Nikon D2X Fujifilm X-Pro1 Fujifilm X-T1 Canon EOS 10D +17 more
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads