Basic questions - wannabe MF user

Started 4 months ago | Discussions
NotASpeckOfCereal Senior Member • Posts: 2,018
Re: Basic questions - wannabe MF user

Greg7579 wrote:

NotASpeckOfCereal wrote:

Greg7579 wrote:

NotASpeckOfCereal wrote:

Macro guy wrote:

Greg7579 wrote:

I bet you Greg would not be able to pass the Pepsi challenge himself if he were faced with a number of photographs from FF and GFX.

Oh yes I would. Send an emissary with all the top cameras from SonCaNikon and Fuji. Take a series of shots at my direction. Then blind test me on a monitor of my choosing.

I will nail it on every shot. No need to print big.

Oh yeah? Let's negotiate the terms of the test.

Okay, I got $20 on Greg. Who's taken the markers?

Chris

During the test, it might help if I am allowed to take a peek at the metadata while viewing in LR. šŸ‘€šŸ‘€

You wanna make sure the horse wasn't doped?

No, silly ... I want to get a peek at which camera was used.

Oh, yeah, I forgot where I was for a second ...

 NotASpeckOfCereal's gear list:NotASpeckOfCereal's gear list
Nikon D3 Nikon D850 Fujifilm GFX 100S Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR Nikon AF-S Nikkor 14-24mm f/2.8G ED +16 more
Greg7579
Greg7579 Forum Pro • Posts: 13,594
Re: Basic questions - wannabe MF user

JimKasson wrote:

DMillier wrote:

Greg7579 wrote:

enigmatico wrote:

So, why use such a system? Because the files are clearly richer and contain more information than images I get from other cameras. The IQ is stunning.

This is the crux of the matter and the absolute truth. It is why the camera world is freaking out right now at the high end. It is why DPR melts down on so many Boards.

Does that mean you should buy GFX? Hell no. It is extremely expensive and FF will get you what you need.

But it won't get you what you want. And knowing GFX is out there creates that want.

Why?

Because it has stunningly superior image fidelity and everybody who shoots it sees it and knows.

What do you think about Foveon?

Personally, I think Foveon sensors completely blow even the largest full frame medium format out of the water when examined 1:1 at pixel level at base ISO for per pixel acuity and sharpness.

They have a couple of significant problems, that hold back the technology, however: poor noise handling as the ISO goes up even a little, weak dynamic range, and occasionally questionable colour.

Of course, in your frame of reference, the high resolution 25MP is nowhere near enough. But even so, a Merrill sensor image, properly done, simply offers the highest per pixel fidelity I've seen. Pinpoint sharpness that equals a full mono sensor, amazing edge rendition, complete absence of colour aliasing and no de-mosaic artefacts. The lack of artefacts leads to a huge enlargeability factor despite the low pixel count.

The GFX impresses because of its sheer size and beautiful rendering, and at pixel level it's excellent for a Bayer sensor, but it isn't as good as as low ISO Foveon. If you were to crop an equal sized section out of your favourite GFX and compared it at pixel level to a (ISO 100) Merrill, you might be surprised. Basically, everyone who looks carefully at a Foveon image at 1:1 is wowed by the incredible sharpness and lack of artefacts. You just have to look to see it (you see what I did there?).

it's debateable if the slightly larger than 35mm GFX sensor really has the medium format look, but there certainly is a Foveon look. If Sigma ever get the Full Frame Foveon into production,it might be time to dump your Fuji gear

First off, the prize is the finished image, not pixel peeping at 100%.

Second, if you say the per pixel fidelity of the Merrill is the best you've ever seen, you've never used a Betterlight Super 6K.

Googling ferociously now.....

Merrill?  Betterlight?  What is it?

6K?  I know there are 8K TVs for 22 grand, but what is this 6K?  I want a 6k pro photo editing monitor if it is under 5 grand. Is there one?

If there is, I get it now if Jim says it is good.

Then the MFL will just bounce off your face.....

 Greg7579's gear list:Greg7579's gear list
Leica Q2 Fujifilm GFX 50R Fujifilm GFX 100 Fujifilm GF 32-64mm F4 Fujifilm 120mm F4 Macro +8 more
JimKasson
MOD JimKasson Forum Pro • Posts: 33,984
Re: Basic questions - wannabe MF user

Greg7579 wrote:

JimKasson wrote:

DMillier wrote:

Greg7579 wrote:

enigmatico wrote:

So, why use such a system? Because the files are clearly richer and contain more information than images I get from other cameras. The IQ is stunning.

This is the crux of the matter and the absolute truth. It is why the camera world is freaking out right now at the high end. It is why DPR melts down on so many Boards.

Does that mean you should buy GFX? Hell no. It is extremely expensive and FF will get you what you need.

But it won't get you what you want. And knowing GFX is out there creates that want.

Why?

Because it has stunningly superior image fidelity and everybody who shoots it sees it and knows.

What do you think about Foveon?

Personally, I think Foveon sensors completely blow even the largest full frame medium format out of the water when examined 1:1 at pixel level at base ISO for per pixel acuity and sharpness.

They have a couple of significant problems, that hold back the technology, however: poor noise handling as the ISO goes up even a little, weak dynamic range, and occasionally questionable colour.

Of course, in your frame of reference, the high resolution 25MP is nowhere near enough. But even so, a Merrill sensor image, properly done, simply offers the highest per pixel fidelity I've seen. Pinpoint sharpness that equals a full mono sensor, amazing edge rendition, complete absence of colour aliasing and no de-mosaic artefacts. The lack of artefacts leads to a huge enlargeability factor despite the low pixel count.

The GFX impresses because of its sheer size and beautiful rendering, and at pixel level it's excellent for a Bayer sensor, but it isn't as good as as low ISO Foveon. If you were to crop an equal sized section out of your favourite GFX and compared it at pixel level to a (ISO 100) Merrill, you might be surprised. Basically, everyone who looks carefully at a Foveon image at 1:1 is wowed by the incredible sharpness and lack of artefacts. You just have to look to see it (you see what I did there?).

it's debateable if the slightly larger than 35mm GFX sensor really has the medium format look, but there certainly is a Foveon look. If Sigma ever get the Full Frame Foveon into production,it might be time to dump your Fuji gear

First off, the prize is the finished image, not pixel peeping at 100%.

Second, if you say the per pixel fidelity of the Merrill is the best you've ever seen, you've never used a Betterlight Super 6K.

Googling ferociously now.....

Merrill? Betterlight? What is it?

The  Betterlight Super 6K is a 6000 by up to 64000 pixel scanning back. At 6000x8000, the equivalent sensor size is 96x72 mm. It captures R, G, and B values at each pixel location.

Iused mine on a Linhof Master Technika.

6K? I know there are 8K TVs for 22 grand, but what is this 6K? I want a 6k pro photo editing monitor if it is under 5 grand. Is there one?

If there is, I get it now if Jim says it is good.

Then the MFL will just bounce off your face.....

-- hide signature --
 JimKasson's gear list:JimKasson's gear list
Nikon Z7 Fujifilm GFX 100 Sony a7R IV Sony a9 II +1 more
JimKasson
MOD JimKasson Forum Pro • Posts: 33,984
Re: Basic questions - wannabe MF user

Greg7579 wrote:

DMillier wrote:

Greg7579 wrote:

enigmatico wrote:

So, why use such a system? Because the files are clearly richer and contain more information than images I get from other cameras. The IQ is stunning.

This is the crux of the matter and the absolute truth. It is why the camera world is freaking out right now at the high end. It is why DPR melts down on so many Boards.

Does that mean you should buy GFX? Hell no. It is extremely expensive and FF will get you what you need.

But it won't get you what you want. And knowing GFX is out there creates that want.

Why?

Because it has stunningly superior image fidelity and everybody who shoots it sees it and knows.

What do you think about Foveon?

Personally, I think Foveon sensors completely blow even the largest full frame medium format out of the water when examined 1:1 at pixel level at base ISO for per pixel acuity and sharpness.

They have a couple of significant problems, that hold back the technology, however: poor noise handling as the ISO goes up even a little, weak dynamic range, and occasionally questionable colour.

Of course, in your frame of reference, the high resolution 25MP is nowhere near enough. But even so, a Merrill sensor image, properly done, simply offers the highest per pixel fidelity I've seen. Pinpoint sharpness that equals a full mono sensor, amazing edge rendition, complete absence of colour aliasing and no de-mosaic artefacts. The lack of artefacts leads to a huge enlargeability factor despite the low pixel count.

The GFX impresses because of its sheer size and beautiful rendering, and at pixel level it's excellent for a Bayer sensor, but it isn't as good as as low ISO Foveon. If you were to crop an equal sized section out of your favourite GFX and compared it at pixel level to a (ISO 100) Merrill, you might be surprised. Basically, everyone who looks carefully at a Foveon image at 1:1 is wowed by the incredible sharpness and lack of artefacts. You just have to look to see it (you see what I did there?).

it's debateable if the slightly larger than 35mm GFX sensor really has the medium format look, but there certainly is a Foveon look. If Sigma ever get the Full Frame Foveon into production,it might be time to dump your Fuji gear

Once you have reached my level of camera gear acquisition insanity, trust me.... If it was better and I found out about it I would get it for sure.

The get an IQ4 150, a Alpa back, and a bunch of HR Digarons. Bring money.

How long can I live in this level of camera usage? You can't take it with you.

I'm banking on 7 more years of camera mobility. If I'm lucky....

-- hide signature --
 JimKasson's gear list:JimKasson's gear list
Nikon Z7 Fujifilm GFX 100 Sony a7R IV Sony a9 II +1 more
Theia Regular Member • Posts: 454
Re: Basic questions - wannabe MF user

Greg7579 wrote:

6K? I know there are 8K TVs for 22 grand, but what is this 6K? I want a 6k pro photo editing monitor if it is under 5 grand. Is there one?

If you like Dell, then their 8K 32" IPS monitor is now $3,999. Apparently it does 100% AdobeRGB.

Stan Disbrow Veteran Member • Posts: 5,249
Re: Basic questions - wannabe MF user

Hi,

Cubic Money.

Like at the top of auto racing: It isn't the Cubic Inches, it's the Cubic Money.

Says the author of Medium Format On The Cheap.....

Stan

-- hide signature --

Amateur Photographer
Professional Electronics Development Engineer
Once you start down the DSLR path, forever will it dominate your destiny! Consume
your bank account, it will! Like mine, it did!

 Stan Disbrow's gear list:Stan Disbrow's gear list
Kodak DCS520 Kodak DCS760 Nikon D1H Pentax 645D Nikon Df +17 more
Antennum New Member • Posts: 6
Re: Basic questions - wannabe MF user

Fellow hobbyist and amateur here, with no experience in MF. I have however read a great deal on the subject of camera sensors/tech as i've been acquiring gear. I own or have played with a Sony a7iii, Nikon DF, Olympus em1ii, Ricoh GRiii.
With print size a non-factor, the main differences I see are with respect to workflow and color reproduction and tonality.
Do you appreciate the ability to shoot a wide scene and crop significantly in PP.

Do you want a wider flexibility in editing colors for creative reasons.

Do you have a high resolution, color calibrated monitor to really make the most out of 16-bit MF.

Do you have the patience or wherewithal to handle and store 100mb+ files?

I've found most important for web viewing or small prints, are pixel size and the rendering quality of lenses. Thats why i've settled on my Nikon DF with a paltry 16MP and huge pixel size. I've got 24MP on my asp-c Ricoh GR and I much prefer the juicy image qualities coming from my DF. You can buy the MF camera if you've got the money, as it helps companies to move technology further when people buy. The cameras you have now are plenty good enough.

 Antennum's gear list:Antennum's gear list
Ricoh GR III Nikon Df Olympus E-M5 II Nikon AF Nikkor 20mm f/2.8D Voigtlander 40mm F2 Ultron SL II +2 more
Forum GAS Forum Member • Posts: 76
Re: Basic questions - wannabe MF user
1

I would suggest you rent the camera you are considering with one zoom that covers your favorite focal lengths.   Go out with both the rental and your current camera.  Shoot several scenes with both cameras.  If the difference makes you happy, buy the new camera.

JimKasson
MOD JimKasson Forum Pro • Posts: 33,984
Re: Basic questions - wannabe MF user

Antennum wrote:

Fellow hobbyist and amateur here, with no experience in MF. I have however read a great deal on the subject of camera sensors/tech as i've been acquiring gear. I own or have played with a Sony a7iii, Nikon DF, Olympus em1ii, Ricoh GRiii.
With print size a non-factor, the main differences I see are with respect to workflow and color reproduction and tonality.
Do you appreciate the ability to shoot a wide scene and crop significantly in PP.

If I crop materially in both directions, I have almost always made an error at capture time.

Do you want a wider flexibility in editing colors for creative reasons.

MF has slightly higher DR, but it's hardly night and day.

Do you have a high resolution, color calibrated monitor to really make the most out of 16-bit MF.

There is very little difference between 14 bit and 16 bit precision in the GFX 100x.

Do you have the patience or wherewithal to handle and store 100mb+ files?

I've found most important for web viewing or small prints, are pixel size and the rendering quality of lenses. Thats why i've settled on my Nikon DF with a paltry 16MP and huge pixel size.

You must love aliasing.

I've got 24MP on my asp-c Ricoh GR and I much prefer the juicy image qualities coming from my DF. You can buy the MF camera if you've got the money, as it helps companies to move technology further when people buy. The cameras you have now are plenty good enough.

-- hide signature --
 JimKasson's gear list:JimKasson's gear list
Nikon Z7 Fujifilm GFX 100 Sony a7R IV Sony a9 II +1 more
bobby350z Regular Member • Posts: 106
Re: Basic questions - wannabe MF user
1

Renting isn't cheap IMHO. To get an idea of a new camera/lens system I think you need 1-2 weeks for a minimum if not more. You can buy used, try it and sell it and it will cost a lot less than any rental.

Antennum New Member • Posts: 6
Re: Basic questions - wannabe MF user

JimKasson wrote:

Antennum wrote:

Fellow hobbyist and amateur here, with no experience in MF. I have however read a great deal on the subject of camera sensors/tech as i've been acquiring gear. I own or have played with a Sony a7iii, Nikon DF, Olympus em1ii, Ricoh GRiii.
With print size a non-factor, the main differences I see are with respect to workflow and color reproduction and tonality.
Do you appreciate the ability to shoot a wide scene and crop significantly in PP.

If I crop materially in both directions, I have almost always made an error at capture time.

Do you want a wider flexibility in editing colors for creative reasons.

MF has slightly higher DR, but it's hardly night and day.

Do you have a high resolution, color calibrated monitor to really make the most out of 16-bit MF.

There is very little difference between 14 bit and 16 bit precision in the GFX 100x.

Do you have the patience or wherewithal to handle and store 100mb+ files?

I've found most important for web viewing or small prints, are pixel size and the rendering quality of lenses. Thats why i've settled on my Nikon DF with a paltry 16MP and huge pixel size.

You must love aliasing.

I've got 24MP on my asp-c Ricoh GR and I much prefer the juicy image qualities coming from my DF. You can buy the MF camera if you've got the money, as it helps companies to move technology further when people buy. The cameras you have now are plenty good enough.

Thanks for the insight. Im just like the OP, in that i've only experienced the differences on paper. Regarding aliasing on digital viewing formats-- I'm more concerned with how images will look when compressed on social media, etc for web viewing, but that is just me.

16mb is plenty for my case if not zooming or cropping, and the OP has a D810, should he need all that detail. Its funny that I was just looking at your site, prior to seeing your post, and admiring all those great shots. I especially like the street gallery. But I see way more aliasing, banding, pixilation, whatever you call it, from the <1mb uploads in your "from my window" series. I believe that the prints or original files would look amazing in excess of a 1000x than what was uploaded, with a 16 megapixel version possibly 90% as good on normal laptop screen.

 Antennum's gear list:Antennum's gear list
Ricoh GR III Nikon Df Olympus E-M5 II Nikon AF Nikkor 20mm f/2.8D Voigtlander 40mm F2 Ultron SL II +2 more
Erik Kaffehr
Erik Kaffehr Veteran Member • Posts: 5,852
Re: Basic questions - wannabe MF user
2

Antennum wrote:

Fellow hobbyist and amateur here, with no experience in MF. I have however read a great deal on the subject of camera sensors/tech as i've been acquiring gear. I own or have played with a Sony a7iii, Nikon DF, Olympus em1ii, Ricoh GRiii.
With print size a non-factor, the main differences I see are with respect to workflow and color reproduction and tonality.
Do you appreciate the ability to shoot a wide scene and crop significantly in PP.

I can do that with any camera, but I mostly stitch for wide scenes.

Do you want a wider flexibility in editing colors for creative reasons.

Much of that is probably a myth. There is no fundamental advantage to MFD with regard to color. Having a 68 percent larger sensor allows shooting at 168 ISO instead of 100 ISO, that is significant but not huge advantage.

Do you have a high resolution, color calibrated monitor to really make the most out of 16-bit MF.

High resolution screen just gives less magnification, 4K is just around 10 MP, so it will throw away something like 80 percent of the pixels, on 50 MP.

Do you have the patience or wherewithal to handle and store 100mb+ files?

I've found most important for web viewing or small prints, are pixel size and the rendering quality of lenses. Thats why i've settled on my Nikon DF with a paltry 16MP and huge pixel size. I've got 24MP on my asp-c Ricoh GR and I much prefer the juicy image qualities coming from my DF. You can buy the MF camera if you've got the money, as it helps companies to move technology further when people buy. The cameras you have now are plenty good enough.

Well 16 MP is certainly good enough for many purposes. But, megapixels are just a means of transporting data.

The main benefit of having high MP is reduced aliasing, that is false detail. Having larger pixels means more false detail, unless false detail is suppressed by an AA-filter or say camera shake.

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

SeeingSomeThingsMissingMany Regular Member • Posts: 204
Before Life hits and if we will Love Re: Basic questions - wannabe MF user

Satyaa wrote:

Hi.

I am planning to get out this summer and shoot some landscapes and nature. The D810 I have is sufficient for the purpose. I know that I don't "need" something else, not even the Z, BUT the idea is tempting

Am I aiming for more than I can handle? Should I really give up this thought and focus on something else? Or, is there something I should do to be ready before I spend on a MF camera like this?

Thanks!

We know Life is gonna hit. For everyone.

So whilst we are still physically able and have the financial means to do so I think we can get the thing which will help us Love something more.

Anything which helps us Love more is easily worth it.

So if you feel MFDigital will help you Love photography more then it is worthwhile

-- hide signature --

Photography after all is interplay of light alongside perspective.

 SeeingSomeThingsMissingMany's gear list:SeeingSomeThingsMissingMany's gear list
Fujifilm FinePix X100 Panasonic Lumix DC-ZS70 Konica Minolta Maxxum 7D Olympus E-PL8 Huawei P20 Pro
Antennum New Member • Posts: 6
Re: Basic questions - wannabe MF user

Do you have the patience or wherewithal to handle and store 100mb+ files?

I've found most important for web viewing or small prints, are pixel size and the rendering quality of lenses. Thats why i've settled on my Nikon DF with a paltry 16MP and huge pixel size. I've got 24MP on my asp-c Ricoh GR and I much prefer the juicy image qualities coming from my DF. You can buy the MF camera if you've got the money, as it helps companies to move technology further when people buy. The cameras you have now are plenty good enough.

Well 16 MP is certainly good enough for many purposes. But, megapixels are just a means of transporting data.

The main benefit of having high MP is reduced aliasing, that is false detail. Having larger pixels means more false detail, unless false detail is suppressed by an AA-filter or say camera shake.

Best regards

Erik

That is interesting. So the main reason I upgraded to FF from m43 was because I found the m43 files (raws processed to high quality jpegs) to scale poorly when compressed to smaller sizes, as common when sharing on web. It looked like moire/aliasing but along all the outlines/edges of things like tree branches. Crunchy. I attributed it to the smaller pixels being difficult to compress?
Second reason was the shadow detail. Having to absolutely ETTR to preserve colors/details in shadows for editing flexibility in post. Tendency for shadows to take a magenta hue with noise, rather than a detailed and smooth contrast gradient (mtf?).

My aps-c camera shares far more similarities to FF, than m43 does to asp-c. Thats why i'd believe anyone who stated the law of diminishing returns applies beyond FF or asp-c. If I need to take so many additional steps to properly capture and process the m43 files, i'd rather just go full frame, as it is more forgiving. Otherwise, I loved everything else about those cameras (em5ii em1ii).

 Antennum's gear list:Antennum's gear list
Ricoh GR III Nikon Df Olympus E-M5 II Nikon AF Nikkor 20mm f/2.8D Voigtlander 40mm F2 Ultron SL II +2 more
JimKasson
MOD JimKasson Forum Pro • Posts: 33,984
Re: Basic questions - wannabe MF user

Antennum wrote:

JimKasson wrote:

Antennum wrote:

Fellow hobbyist and amateur here, with no experience in MF. I have however read a great deal on the subject of camera sensors/tech as i've been acquiring gear. I own or have played with a Sony a7iii, Nikon DF, Olympus em1ii, Ricoh GRiii.
With print size a non-factor, the main differences I see are with respect to workflow and color reproduction and tonality.
Do you appreciate the ability to shoot a wide scene and crop significantly in PP.

If I crop materially in both directions, I have almost always made an error at capture time.

Do you want a wider flexibility in editing colors for creative reasons.

MF has slightly higher DR, but it's hardly night and day.

Do you have a high resolution, color calibrated monitor to really make the most out of 16-bit MF.

There is very little difference between 14 bit and 16 bit precision in the GFX 100x.

Do you have the patience or wherewithal to handle and store 100mb+ files?

I've found most important for web viewing or small prints, are pixel size and the rendering quality of lenses. Thats why i've settled on my Nikon DF with a paltry 16MP and huge pixel size.

You must love aliasing.

I've got 24MP on my asp-c Ricoh GR and I much prefer the juicy image qualities coming from my DF. You can buy the MF camera if you've got the money, as it helps companies to move technology further when people buy. The cameras you have now are plenty good enough.

Thanks for the insight. Im just like the OP, in that i've only experienced the differences on paper. Regarding aliasing on digital viewing formats-- I'm more concerned with how images will look when compressed on social media, etc for web viewing, but that is just me.

Oh. Then 16 MP is overkill.

16mb is plenty for my case if not zooming or cropping, and the OP has a D810, should he need all that detail. Its funny that I was just looking at your site, prior to seeing your post, and admiring all those great shots. I especially like the street gallery. But I see way more aliasing, banding, pixilation, whatever you call it, from the <1mb uploads in your "from my window" series. I believe that the prints or original files would look amazing in excess of a 1000x than what was uploaded, with a 16 megapixel version possibly 90% as good on normal laptop screen.

Aliasing, banding, and pixelation are three different things.

-- hide signature --
 JimKasson's gear list:JimKasson's gear list
Nikon Z7 Fujifilm GFX 100 Sony a7R IV Sony a9 II +1 more
OP Satyaa Veteran Member • Posts: 4,310
Re: Basic questions - wannabe MF user
1

Macro guy wrote:

...

How do you derive satisfaction? Do you derive it from handling the equipment or the work that you produce? If it's the former, get whatever you like and don't look back. If it's the latter, don't spend another penny on equipment.

Thanks to all responses, tips and questions from everyone.

The questions are being more helpful to me, especially this one!

I'm following all posts over last two days but I've been stuck thinking over and over about this one. I will respond with my thoughts soon.

thanks.

OP Satyaa Veteran Member • Posts: 4,310
Re: Basic questions - wannabe MF user

Greg7579 wrote:

...

Let me tell you that it does. The differences in image fidelity is significant and you will see and enjoy it. It can have an effect on you and your photography.

But what really matters is the word "want" not "need". You want it, and you know why.

This was another comment that got me thinking. I sure know what I want but I am not sure why. Could be valid reasons, may be not. I am trying to understand all tips here an get a better idea of why I want what I want. Only then can I justify the cost.

Thanks

The only question is can you afford it, and if you can, are you willing to go in for ten grand and up?

If so, then you have already decided.

bobby350z Regular Member • Posts: 106
Re: Before Life hits and if we will Love Re: Basic questions - wannabe MF user

Well said. If you can afford it, just buy it and try. You can buy used and sell it for not much loss, if you decide it doesn't work for you.

DMillier Forum Pro • Posts: 22,604
Re: Basic questions - wannabe MF user
1

Satyaa wrote:

Greg7579 wrote:

...

Let me tell you that it does. The differences in image fidelity is significant and you will see and enjoy it. It can have an effect on you and your photography.

But what really matters is the word "want" not "need". You want it, and you know why.

This was another comment that got me thinking. I sure know what I want but I am not sure why. Could be valid reasons, may be not. I am trying to understand all tips here an get a better idea of why I want what I want. Only then can I justify the cost.

Thanks

The only question is can you afford it, and if you can, are you willing to go in for ten grand and up?

If so, then you have already decided.

It's a good philosophical debate to have with yourself. If you have the money and you can afford to make a mistake with no consequences, I guess it doesn't really matter and you may as well buy the most expensive gear you can find.  But if you are not in that fortunate position, then buying into MF is a very significant cost.

And only you can perform the cost benefit analysis for your situation.

I've done it for mine:  I could afford to buy into a GFX system, but it would destroy my carefully laid financial planning, and that is not something to be taken lightly. Also, I know that my desire to join the GFX family is pure G.A.S. In objective terms, I have no need for a 100MP behemoth:  the maximum print size I print at is A3 and any camera will do that, and mostly I print on A4 paper.  At that size any camera of 6MP or so is going to look identical to any other.  My GAS issue, kind of got killed (but not entirely!) when I saw the price of a decent lens outfit to go with a G100s. Hmmm. Is photography worth that much to me?  But only you can answer that question for yourself.  I know Greg will go ballistic for me saying this, but the real benefit of 100MP is if you are printing larger than 32" wide. At the larger sizes, you will really see the benefit of the big sensor. IMO, at print sizes below this, it's bling, really.

In my opinion, if you can shake the GAS, and you don't need to print huge, there other ways to spend your money that might yield more bang for the buck - such as an extended photographic trip!

-- hide signature --
66GTO Veteran Member • Posts: 4,308
Re: Basic questions - wannabe MF user
1

4 Simple words here. Rent before you invest.

-- hide signature --

Crazy old man! Slow down. You are way too old to be
hunting hemi's in that 66GTO.

 66GTO's gear list:66GTO's gear list
Sony Cyber-shot DSC-R1 Canon PowerShot G1 X Sony RX100 Nikon Df +1 more
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads