What I use medium format cameras for

[UsherFellig]

A 60MP FF camera can possibly deliver more detail than a 50MP medium format. It will also depend upon lenses used. If one is using the same lens on both then this favours FF. If one is using current medium format lenses on the larger camera then MF is favoured. Of course there are other aspects of the larger pixels in a 50MP MF which could be of importance.

MF also has 100 and 150MP available. It is more difficult to challenge these with FF.

Certainly. But unless you're printing over, what, 20X24, prolly up to 24X36, say, . . . does that matter? I've repeatedly mistaken color gallery show prints in those sizes for 4X5 analogue that turned out to be D850 images. Without a doubt, the results Crewdson gets with Phase One are knockout-stunning. But they're huge, look at the size:

The video doesn't seem to work but one can click through the individual hung prints in situ. Amazing stuff. And ginormous.

Gregory Crewdson: An Eclipse of Moths, Beverly Hills, September 24–November 21, 2020 | Gagosian

I've also enjoyed a series titled "Russia at Dusk" by Dmitry Ersler, who uses current Hasselblad digital. The work is kind of in the Crewdson vein, and the prints are very large.

49X36": Instagram

39X29": Instagram

47X26": Different series, image shot in Thailand Instagram

Clicking through views of the Thailand print you can see it hung in the gallery. This is very large-scale stuff.

 

[SilverEagle1962]

It does. Thanks for the detailed answer (and pictures). Much appreciated.
That gives me stuff to ponder…

If you want to see more examples of my starting point verses the final result, this section on my website may be of interest: Before & After.

Like I said before, as far as I'm concerned, besides making me think differently about everything, I don't think it would really matter which camera system I used in the end to record the light and/or what is in front of me in the end.

-

A photographer [the Greek φῶς (phos), meaning "light", and γραφή (graphê), meaning "drawing, writing", together meaning "drawing with light" or "writing with light"] is a person who takes, makes, produces or even creates photographs.

Personally, I'd normally use my iPhone or the little Sony...



.. to take pictures - whereas I'd mainly use the Hasselblad...



.. system...



.. to produce or even create images - or the Canon...



.. if I felt that would do a better job - which isn't that often - is my thinking.

Cheers,
Ashley.

On the first great image in the blog , why didn't you get the chandelier lights on? wouldn't it add to the royal atmosphere of the stunning image?

--

https://www.flickr.com/photos/151760793@N02/

 

[SdeGat]

It does. Thanks for the detailed answer (and pictures). Much appreciated.
That gives me stuff to ponder…

If you want to see more examples of my starting point verses the final result, this section on my website may be of interest: Before & After.

Like I said before, as far as I'm concerned, besides making me think differently about everything, I don't think it would really matter which camera system I used in the end to record the light and/or what is in front of me in the end.

-

A photographer [the Greek φῶς (phos), meaning "light", and γραφή (graphê), meaning "drawing, writing", together meaning "drawing with light" or "writing with light"] is a person who takes, makes, produces or even creates photographs.

Personally, I'd normally use my iPhone or the little Sony...

.. to take pictures - whereas I'd mainly use the Hasselblad...

.. system...

.. to produce or even create images - or the Canon...

.. if I felt that would do a better job - which isn't that often - is my thinking.

Cheers,
Ashley.

Thanks again Ashley. Very nice post with the “storyboard“.

So, this part “which isn't that often - is my thinking”, is really interesting. If we’re good enough in post processing, we don’t need fancy cameras.

 

[ampimagedotcom]

On the first great image in the blog , why didn't you get the chandelier lights on? wouldn't it add to the royal atmosphere of the stunning image?

They were on at the start, as you can see here...


(Screen shot of Capture-195322)

.. so I turned them of - because that wasn't really what I wanted you (the viewer) to be looking at...


(The dining room in Straffan House at The K Club in County Kildare)

.. which you can read all about on my blog here: A dream come true.

-
Creating images to tell a story... just for you!
Cheers,
Ashley.

 

[ampimagedotcom]

So, this part “which isn't that often - is my thinking”, is really interesting. If we’re good enough in post processing, we don’t need fancy cameras.

True - but it may depend on one's starting point...



.. because not everything can be done in post...



.. or would I even want to work like that - is my thinking as a Photographer, rather than a computer operator or a digital artist.

Or to put it another way:





Cheers,
Ashley.

 

[Chez Wimpy]

I had been doing landscapes with tilt-shift Canon lenses since 2010 on FF and APS-C, side by side, stitching in instances to widen the FOV via the oversized image circle, so the idea had existed for a while that a larger sensor could only have upsides to my work. The addition of the GFX (50R) to my kit in 2018 meant I sidelined the FF camera (a7II) as the "crop mode" on the GFX actually gave me more pixels to work with. While I make a couple of large format poster prints a year, in general the increase in resolution is not a factor at all. Now I shoot the 50R / a6000 with the Canon 24II/50/90 TSE lenses which tends to cover 95% of my work, also using a shaved Sigma 12-24 ART lens for UWA interior commissions and the occasional "active skies" landscape. Also do a fair bit of environmental portraiture with the GFX and adapted lenses in film simulation modes: Helios 44, Minolta 135/2.8, 45/2, 58/1.2, and the Sigma 28/1.4, 50EX, 105/1.4. On the rare occasion I will use my Fuji 32-64 for run-and-gun landscape work, but mostly leave the non-tripod work to my m43 kit.

Overall a very fine addition to my workflow, and in retrospect, probably the only possible "upgrade" path for my usage (61MP FF vs 24MP FF would have been an absolute waste!). Almost certain I will never give this camera up, every time I use it the results still feel like magic.

 

[DavidMillier]

A 60MP FF camera can possibly deliver more detail than a 50MP medium format. It will also depend upon lenses used. If one is using the same lens on both then this favours FF. If one is using current medium format lenses on the larger camera then MF is favoured. Of course there are other aspects of the larger pixels in a 50MP MF which could be of importance.

MF also has 100 and 150MP available. It is more difficult to challenge these with FF.

I can get 150MP from my Sony using the Fotodiox Rhinocam vertex. But that's just stitching

 

[John Crowe]

You are correct. I, for instance, have only printed to 24" x 36", so far. I know my shifted/stitched 50MP images from a FF camera could easily print to at least double that size, probably more. And still display them in my modest sized house!

My desire to achieve the best image quality possible started back with the use of Kodachrome 25, and took me up through 6x6 and 4x5, and then through a myriad of digital cameras and lenses.

It has not helped that digital started out at such a low bar and continued to provide improved image quality through two decades. Image quality eclipsed even 4x5 film years ago, and advancements in sensor technology has now ground to a halt, or at least a crawl.

So, while my obsession, and other's, with image quality, may now be over the top, I've always enjoyed being capable of delivering the best image quality possible, when my luck, effort, determination, skill, and eye deliver.

 

[John Crowe]

Absolutely! That's how I get 85MP to 225MP images with my Canon and three shift lenses. Sometimes, by simply stitching, with regular lenses, to even larger sizes. Whatever it takes! Have fun!

Medium format would just make it a little easier.

 

[Rand 47]

I mostly like landscape work, and medium format works well for that.

But to be honest, what keeps me investing in my medium format system is “the giggles.”

Here’s an example. I photographed this building w/ a large group of people in front of it (I’ve removed the people and other identifying things from this jpeg):



(GFX 100, 30mm T/S)

And while doing my initial survey of the image, I started to giggle. Why? Because of this:



To the right of the #1 sign, on the face of the wall is a little loop of utility chain hanging over the parapet of the building. It’s not very detailed in this highly cropped jpeg, but you can see it. In the raw file, you can see each little link in the chain very clearly.

And it gives me the giggles. And this kind of detail makes fabulous LARGE prints!

Rand

 

[ampimagedotcom]

And it gives me the giggles. And this kind of detail makes fabulous LARGE prints!

Yep - there's nothing quite like seeing one's work printed really big...


(Our work as seen on the 'Discover Northern Ireland' double billboard - showing 'The pool with a view' image which was produced in the Spa at the Slieve Donard Hotel in County Down, using the Phase One P25 digital back on the Cambo Wide DS camera with the Schneider 24mm f/5.6 Apo-Digitar XL lens attached in 2007)

.. up close, to put a smile on one's face.

So what's the biggest you have seen your work printed?

-
Creating images to tell a story... just for you!
Cheers,
Ashley.

 

[Pd printer]

I am biased to aspect ratio of 4:3 or 1:1. My first camera as a kid was using roll film but made an image of only 40x40mm and that gave some early imprinting to that format. I wish that the 907X would use also square format (not very usable in portrait direction). I got quite used to 4:3 ratio and I tried Olympus MTF twice but was completely dissatisfied with the lack of DR. I also had many generations of Leica but was never fond of the aspect ratio of FF. Of course one can always crop but it is much easier to compose with the format one likes. So presently I am using the 907X50C and X2D for everything as a lot of higher spec FF cameras are not much more compact and lighter. FF cameras are faster but that is not so important for my subjects except for focus bracketing.

I would like a compact photo camera for backpacking and outdoor macro photography. The closest I found in terms of IQ was the Sigma FpL but is had so bad UI that I thought it is not useable enough. A lot of FF cameras, especially compact ones are mostly designed for "content creators" and photography is more a side consideration.

 

[MyReality]

And it gives me the giggles. And this kind of detail makes fabulous LARGE prints!

Yep - there's nothing quite like seeing one's work printed really big...


(Our work as seen on the 'Discover Northern Ireland' double billboard - showing 'The pool with a view' image which was produced in the Spa at the Slieve Donard Hotel in County Down, using the Phase One P25 digital back on the Cambo Wide DS camera with the Schneider 24mm f/5.6 Apo-Digitar XL lens attached in 2007)

.. up close, to put a smile on one's face.

So what's the biggest you have seen your work printed?

-
Creating images to tell a story... just for you!
Cheers,
Ashley.

I suppose that would looking stunning viewed up close, nothing like viewing posters next to highways in the US from 300 meters away made with 5 or 6 mpx cameras. Viewing distance is almost everything.

 

[Rand 47]

And it gives me the giggles. And this kind of detail makes fabulous LARGE prints!

Yep - there's nothing quite like seeing one's work printed really big...


(Our work as seen on the 'Discover Northern Ireland' double billboard - showing 'The pool with a view' image which was produced in the Spa at the Slieve Donard Hotel in County Down, using the Phase One P25 digital back on the Cambo Wide DS camera with the Schneider 24mm f/5.6 Apo-Digitar XL lens attached in 2007)

.. up close, to put a smile on one's face.

So what's the biggest you have seen your work printed?

-
Creating images to tell a story... just for you!
Cheers,
Ashley.

Nothing that large yet! That’s very cool. But the finished file I shared above will be 10 feet on the short side, so we’ll see. (Ultimately it’s not my work product, I was helping a friend.)

Rand

 

[UsherFellig]

I am biased to aspect ratio of 4:3 or 1:1. My first camera as a kid was using roll film but made an image of only 40x40mm and that gave some early imprinting to that format. I wish that the 907X would use also square format (not very usable in portrait direction). I got quite used to 4:3 ratio and I tried Olympus MTF twice but was completely dissatisfied with the lack of DR. I also had many generations of Leica but was never fond of the aspect ratio of FF. Of course one can always crop but it is much easier to compose with the format one likes. So presently I am using the 907X50C and X2D for everything as a lot of higher spec FF cameras are not much more compact and lighter. FF cameras are faster but that is not so important for my subjects except for focus bracketing.

I would like a compact photo camera for backpacking and outdoor macro photography. The closest I found in terms of IQ was the Sigma FpL but is had so bad UI that I thought it is not useable enough. A lot of FF cameras, especially compact ones are mostly designed for "content creators" and photography is more a side consideration.

It's such a shame some of these compact little FF cameras don't have an accessory EVF available. Then everybody can be happy rather than shutting out a whole cohort of potential users.

 

[Stan Disbrow]

Hi,

The largest I have ever seen that wasn't a billboard was 18 x 60 feet. Kodak's Colorama.

Stan

 

[MyReality]

I am biased to aspect ratio of 4:3 or 1:1. My first camera as a kid was using roll film but made an image of only 40x40mm and that gave some early imprinting to that format. I wish that the 907X would use also square format (not very usable in portrait direction). I got quite used to 4:3 ratio and I tried Olympus MTF twice but was completely dissatisfied with the lack of DR. I also had many generations of Leica but was never fond of the aspect ratio of FF. Of course one can always crop but it is much easier to compose with the format one likes. So presently I am using the 907X50C and X2D for everything as a lot of higher spec FF cameras are not much more compact and lighter. FF cameras are faster but that is not so important for my subjects except for focus bracketing.

I would like a compact photo camera for backpacking and outdoor macro photography. The closest I found in terms of IQ was the Sigma FpL but is had so bad UI that I thought it is not useable enough. A lot of FF cameras, especially compact ones are mostly designed for "content creators" and photography is more a side consideration.

It's such a shame some of these compact little FF cameras don't have an accessory EVF available. Then everybody can be happy rather than shutting out a whole cohort of potential users.

Then they would not be compact anymore.

 

[JimKasson]

It's such a shame some of these compact little FF cameras don't have an accessory EVF available. Then everybody can be happy rather than shutting out a whole cohort of potential users.

Then they would not be compact anymore.

DIdn't the RX1 have an accessory EVF?

 

[MyReality]

It's such a shame some of these compact little FF cameras don't have an accessory EVF available. Then everybody can be happy rather than shutting out a whole cohort of potential users.

Then they would not be compact anymore.

DIdn't the RX1 have an accessory EVF?

Yes it did and I wish that I had bought one at the time.

 

[JimKasson]

It's such a shame some of these compact little FF cameras don't have an accessory EVF available. Then everybody can be happy rather than shutting out a whole cohort of potential users.

Then they would not be compact anymore.

DIdn't the RX1 have an accessory EVF?

Yes it did and I wish that I had bought one at the time.

Mine kept falling off.