p.7 #2 · Digital Medium Format / 35mm equiv difference
carstenw wrote:
In your situation, I would work on maximising your results from your existing setup, and keep going until everyone pretty much agrees that there is no more IQ/look to be had from it. If at that point you are still unhappy, then by all means, get a medium format digital setup, but keep in mind that it comes with a whole slew of its own quirks, and MF is not a drop-in replacement for 135 format DSLRs. It will be a *lot* of work to get up to speed with it, and you might need to use artificial lights to take full advantage....Show more →
You got a good point there.
I am working with more advanced setups now mixing different light sources and diffusions. I get rather good results from artificial light, but need to take it out of studio on location.
I know the 5Dm3 is a more than capable camera, but perhaps it's not the tool for this particular task?
What frustrates me is the source of this thread - tones and colours.
I know each format comes with a learning curve - I really was baffled at my first mk3 shots where I could see a lot of mishaps much clearer than I did with my 5DC.
p.7 #3 · Digital Medium Format / 35mm equiv difference
I mean theoretically, I can return to the source using following regression steps:
5Dm3 + expensive Zeiss/Leica (where I am now)
5Dm3 + cheap kit/low end Canon lens (some produce amazing results with this)
5DC + L series lens (some produce amazing results with this)
20D + L series lens (some produce amazing results with this)
20D + kit lens (some produce amazing results with this)
350D + kit lens (some produce amazing results with this)
Let's agree, if a person is able to produce a masterpiece with 350D and kit lens (I seen a few actually), what is the need to get 5Dm3 + Zeiss glass for those who can't match the said results with a camera 4 generations ahead?
At each stage, I reckon I was too hasty to get to next one. So, I could potentially return to 20D + EF 50/1.8 to try and cream the best out of the camera (gave away my 350D to my little sister, so can't get that far back).
p.7 #4 · Digital Medium Format / 35mm equiv difference
Well, you know that I am *really* not a Canon fan, I can't stand the colours, and I am happy to see them mired in their own limited dynamic range and f*cked-up CFA mess, but even I have to admit that many people do amazing work with Canons, and I doubt that any modern camera is the limiting factor in almost anyone's work any more.
Over on LL, in my MF days, there was a guy who was doing amazing work with medium format digital, and I was so in love with the light he was able to get. He could get that Ratatouille-like light at will (if you haven't seen this movie, then by all means watch it, if for nothing else, just for the light. Amazing.), and I was dreaming of a medium format setup.
Then he went back to a Canon DSLR, and continued right on doing amazing work. More work in post, but a lot easier on set, and travelling. And an order of magnitude cheaper (don't compare 50/80/150 MF to 16-35/24-70/70-200). MF guys and gals typically work with some variation of 28/50/90.
It is almost never about the cameras, and all about the talent.
That doesn't stop mediocre guys like myself from wanting fancy stuff and paying outrageous sums for lenses which get used twice a year, but I am hyper-aware that it is only my favourite hobby, and that someone could do better work with less.
If you want to spend 20 grand, and it wouldn't cause financial hiccups, then by all means do so, and get it out of your system. But I think that picking up a book like "Light, Science & Magic" would do much more for your end results. Find your favorite two or three lenses, and then just work the heck out of them until you could operate them in the dark without thinking.
p.7 #5 · Digital Medium Format / 35mm equiv difference
Krosavcheg wrote:
At each stage, I reckon I was too hasty to get to next one. So, I could potentially return to 20D + EF 50/1.8 to try and cream the best out of the camera (gave away my 350D to my little sister, so can't get that far back).
Well, at this point I would say that to do this would be a vast exaggeration. You have what you have, use it.
How much better would you say that the 5DIII is than the 350D? 3x? 5x? Let's say it is 5x better. Is your photography 5x better now that you have the 5DIII? If not, you have some catching up to do, just to be at the point you were. Probably the bottleneck is not in the technology.
Btw, the 20D review in some forgotten magazine was the camera which finally convinced me that digital had surpassed film in all meaningful ways (except look). I still love medium format film, but for the look and the quirkiness of shooting film, not for any technical reason.
p.7 #6 · Digital Medium Format / 35mm equiv difference
Carsten: There you go. It would be only fair to say that the bottleneck is the one who wrote this reply: )
I just unpacked my 20D actually. Going to pick up the 50/1.8 and 85/1.8 lenses tomorrow, if 3hr sleep will keep me through the day...
Have a look at this post - surely the skill with 5D surpasses a lot of current gear shooters.
Edit: I actually don't think it's exaggeration - everything in this world is relative.
p.7 #7 · Digital Medium Format / 35mm equiv difference
Personally, I would not go back to my first DSLR, a 5D. I would just keep what I have, a D800, and go from there. But if you want to set yourself a challenge, then yes, getting great results compared to today's results with a 20D, you will have to really get your sh*t together and master certain things.
I would try to make a battleplan though, just so you don't end up flopping around without goals. For example, get a good book on lighting and try to reproduce a certain result. String a series of these together to make a plan for getting where you want to be. Each time you reach a milestone, get your model into the studio and try it out, measuring your progress.
I have to say that although I love natural light, artificial lighting has its place, and can paradoxically often make results which are more realistic to our eyes than pure natural shooting can, simply because of the processing our brain makes, which the camera can't make. Once you understand that, and how to do it, you will be well on the way to mastery.
My eyeopener came when I decided to pick up an SB900 for my Nikon D3, and try it for my urbex work. I was shocked how much flash I could add to the scene before I could see that it had been done, and furthermore, how much it could help the look. YMMV. (The trick is to use the flash to manage scene contrast and to single out features, not to light up darkness.)
p.7 #8 · Digital Medium Format / 35mm equiv difference
photography is art and gear can't make art. But i won't deny advanced technology can help you achieve better technical level of image.
Better gear can make better images in certain way, but won't make you better photographer. I am sure given better tool with same skill, you can reach your goal easier.
p.7 #9 · Digital Medium Format / 35mm equiv difference
Good gear allows more visual impact from photo. You can do good photo different ways (for example if you make good colors, but you have low res, it can still be good cause of colors). Or you can shoot BW etc.
But you cant fake 36 mpix or more of resolution and/or microcontrast. And that can add a lot to visual impact of photo.
About Canon..
They made two very good cameras with very good CFAs. But both are past and both have still limited DR. Apart from that, not much from Canon really..
p.7 #10 · Digital Medium Format / 35mm equiv difference
Looking at the linked website, Kros is really into artificial lighting in this discussion, I believe. Not to go into why I think the before images can be made to look much better than the after ones, but to say: what that will do is enable you to control for high DR scenes and most other related characteristics very well.
It's vital to be clear about exactly what makes for image quality between cameras and systems. If it's lighting and set up portraits the camera is much less important. Where you are right now, gear wise is plenty good enough for your needs, say I. Some wonderful forums deal specifically with lighting, you can look them up. There are no shortcuts to be had by upgrading to this essential central point.
I hesitate to add this, but anyway. I agree totally with carsten re Canon, and I think you would do much better with Nikon's D800 for this purpose. I see you have always used Canon gear (four cameras). The Sony sensors are just so good these days and make post a breeze rather than a fight. And with Zeiss about to deliver at an even higher level, that might be in your future too rather than dumping money into the MF pit. Nikon also have some truly excellent older options, dating to AI-S days. good luck with it.
p.7 #11 · Digital Medium Format / 35mm equiv difference
Well, if gear doesn't make a photo it shouldn't matter what I use.
I am struggling to show what I really want to do - the examples are so far and wide that I have to pick few select things that don't even come close to what I had in mind.
Last link I posted (F stoppers) showcase some nice work, but this is not really what I want to do.
I don't want to mimic Eugenio's work either.
The shots I took and shared are just few of those I took down the line - I am not a noob with lighting, I just work my way to what I need.
If you think they are shite, well..they most likely are. After all beauty lies in the eye of the beholder.
It's like you ask in baking forums what makes Pavlova fluffy and people tell you how many raspberry tarts you need.
I am sure I can get 20D + 85/1.8 to produce the IQ shown in the P40+ reel - it's all about light and PP in the end, right?
I just find it rather amuzing when people pushing "it's not gear - it's person" keep on buying better cameras and lenses...
p.7 #12 · Digital Medium Format / 35mm equiv difference
Light (reflected off subject)
Lens (collected/converging and projected image diverging)
Sensor/Film (response to projected image/degree of enlargement)
Processing/Algorithm/Profile/PP (latitude for styling)
The process remains the same no matter which format you use. But as you spread the light across a smaller or larger image circle the rate of transition will change for a given amount of light (i.e. natural ambient only @ same). I use my TS-E and M645 glass (larger image circle projection) when I want those slower/gentler transitions. When I want to render a more rapid transition, I choose my more contrasty FF glass.
When I'm shooting in ambient that is low contrast, I may decide to use more contrast glass to offset the lower contrast light, or I may choose to use the larger image circle glass to go for an uber-smooth transition vibe. That combination of low contrast light and larger image circle lets me produce smoother tones when those are my goals for an image. And if that isn't smooth enough or are too smooth the latitude @ finishing in PP can make up the diff for me.
Make no mistake, I'm not saying that 14MP is going to compare with 3X or 4X as many pixels for details, but imo, the lighting, projected image and profile/pp are more important at generating "the look" than the format size itself is. If you're on a smaller image circle platform, then it might be a little more challenging to produce the smoother transitions that MF is known for, but understanding the relationship interplay of the puzzle pieces can go a long way to achieving a "look". Would I like to have some great MF gear ... sure, but I can't justify it now, so I do "my thing" without it.
While these small jpgs may not pass for MF like Graham's work ... I like the transitions I can get without the $10,000 - $40,000 price tag ... if tonal transitions are where your interest are.
p.7 #14 · Digital Medium Format / 35mm equiv difference
Rusty, the shots are fantastic! But this is not a type of shot I would take with MFD.
I f you have a look at a shot I posted in Alt Image thread with Mamiya 120/4 and 5D you can see colour and tone gradation.
Feel free to tell me it's rubbish though (I not sarcastic, but rather serious).
p.7 #15 · Digital Medium Format / 35mm equiv difference
Thanks.
Sure, everyone's style and goals vary ... I guess I'm just trying to say that there are multiple pieces to the puzzle and until you run up against the wall with ALL those pieces, you may be able to achieve your goals with the other pieces of the puzzle without a platform change. Imo, if you don't have your command & control maximizing your current platform to achieve your goals ... the platform change by itself won't be the magical/holy grail answer to achieving those goals.
Personally, I'm still working on my C&C within the FF realm. Until I get my processes really honed in, the change to MF won't fix my need to get better control of my lighting and pp. In the meantime, I can enjoy the benefit of shooting with larger image circle glass and/or smaller image circle glass ... as but one variable piece of the puzzle.
p.7 #16 · Digital Medium Format / 35mm equiv difference
Mescalamba wrote:
Good gear allows more visual impact from photo. You can do good photo different ways (for example if you make good colors, but you have low res, it can still be good cause of colors). Or you can shoot BW etc.
But you cant fake 36 mpix or more of resolution and/or microcontrast. And that can add a lot to visual impact of photo.
About Canon..
They made two very good cameras with very good CFAs. But both are past and both have still limited DR. Apart from that, not much from Canon really..
Exactly. This seems to be the last thing on people's mind when they say "it's not gear - it's the photographer". It always seem to apply to others though. One of my friends constantly repeating this went and bought D600. He could have bought D200 for 1/10th of the price?
Then again, D600 is 1/10th of the price of a decent MFD back.
I can potentially shoot instant, get it delivered as digital and convert to high contrast BW..when I in fact would like to have colour photos. I suppose I need to go with what people think I should do.
Recently I don't find microcontrast that much appealing to me. Sure, I love Ronny's macros and Lars street to mention few examples, but that's not the look I am after.
I was hoping to get new NEX, but as good photographer I need to go with 20D and kit lens. Because it's not gear, right?
p.7 #17 · Digital Medium Format / 35mm equiv difference
RustyBug wrote:
Thanks.
Sure, everyone's style and goals vary ... I guess I'm just trying to say that there are multiple pieces to the puzzle and until you run up against the wall with ALL those pieces, you may be able to achieve your goals with the other pieces of the puzzle without a platform change. Imo, if you don't have your command & control maximizing your current platform ... the platform change by itself won't be the magical/holy grail answer. I'm still working on my C&C within the FF realm. Until I get my processes really honed in, the change to MF won't fix my need to get better control of my lighting and pp....Show more →
Rusty, it never is. This is going to be rather long post so bear with me...
I can give you one example - perhaps a little off track but it will give you idea of what I am after:
I used to be a Windows user. Great OS (schush now!) - I can automate a lot, the WMI allows a lot of scripted automation of pretty much any aspect of the system, not that restrictive, tweakable..etc.
I spent about 90% of the time maintaining my platform and 10% using the apps - what I really really was after.
Now I am a Mac user. I have 0 control over OS (mainly because I chose not to bother) and now spend 100% time using my apps - audio player, photoshop, panostitch, audio editors, Zbrush, Maya, etc...
Some keep telling me that I should install Windows because it's so good to play games (I don't have time for games), others tell me to install Linux because they have full control over OS (I don't want to baby sit my OS!)- all that without asking me what I need.
Imagine, if you want to keep a small database over your lenses and cameras and I come to you and tell you are best off with a 2 node Active-Passive cluster attached to SAN storage and backing up the terabytes to the cloud? It would be daft to say the least.
Here is the deal: Photography has several aspects to it depending on where you were, where you are, and where you are heading. It's so broad it can't even be encompassed in one thread - it ranges from social and behavioral psychology to optic and sensor engineering. Pick your poison.
Can you imagine keeping track of all that?
Why do we have cloud services now btw? To take off data management from users so they don't have to think about it. Equally, rather than me going over the edge in technicality I want to use necessary skill to pick my gear that will leave me concentrating on the light and composition.
That's where the gear technical knowledge is handy imho - it is useful for choosing the equipment suitable your needs and your direction, Photography shouldn't be about prancing about choosing angles and complaining that you wish you had a better gear, Working with models should not have you talking CFA, Interpolation, LoCA, DOF - you need a social skill to direct them.
Do you see what I am getting at?
As long as I don't have gear that can produce results I need I can't concentrate on other things - it's just impossible to chase 4 rabbits at the same time!
I saw Canon shots - amazing stuff hands down, but not my cup of tea, I saw Nikon D800 shots - Super! But not what I want. I see NEX shots - amazing! but you guessed it..
Then I see people shots with MFD and this is what I want.
I know I won't be able to produce the WOW results straight away - I am not a bleeding child.
Especially since my skin PP is waaaay below par - let's not even talk about hair..
But I am getting there. I enjoy the process. I can't say I enjoy chasing models, stylists, MUA of which there are 0.1% in Tokyo - it's like herding cats. But I certainly like the progress.
I don't think there is a camera that is perfect for everything and I don't quite believe it will ever be made (time will tell). But I do believe there is a right camera for the job!
p.7 #18 · Digital Medium Format / 35mm equiv difference
RustyBug wrote:
Thanks.
Sure, everyone's style and goals vary ... I guess I'm just trying to say that there are multiple pieces to the puzzle and until you run up against the wall with ALL those pieces, you may be able to achieve your goals with the other pieces of the puzzle without a platform change. Imo, if you don't have your command & control maximizing your current platform ... the platform change by itself won't be the magical/holy grail answer. I'm still working on my C&C within the FF realm. Until I get my processes really honed in, the change to MF won't fix my need to get better control of my lighting and pp....Show more →
Rusty, it never is. This is going to be rather long post so bear with me...
I can give you one example - perhaps a little off track but it will give you idea of what I am after:
I used to be a Windows user. Great OS (schush now!) - I can automate a lot, the WMI allows a lot of scripted automation of pretty much any aspect of the system, not that restrictive, tweakable..etc.
I spent about 90% of the time maintaining my platform and 10% using the apps - what I really really was after.
Now I am a Mac user. I have 0 control over OS (mainly because I chose not to bother) and now spend 100% time using my apps - audio player, photoshop, panostitch, audio editors, Zbrush, Maya, etc...
Some keep telling me that I should install Windows because it's so good to play games (I don't have time for games), others tell me to install Linux because they have full control over OS (I don't want to baby sit my OS!)- all that without asking me what I need.
Imagine, if you want to keep a small database over your lenses and cameras and I come to you and tell you are best off with a 2 node Active-Passive cluster attached to SAN storage and backing up the terabytes to the cloud? It would be daft to say the least.
Here is the deal: Photography has several aspects to it depending on where you were, where you are, and where you are heading. It's so broad it can't even be encompassed in one thread - it ranges from social and behavioral psychology to optic and sensor engineering. Pick your poison.
Can you imagine keeping track of all that?
Why do we have cloud services now btw? To take off data management from users so they don't have to think about it. Equally, rather than me going over the edge in technicality I want to use necessary skill to pick my gear that will leave me concentrating on the light and composition.
That's where the gear technical knowledge is handy imho - it is useful for choosing the equipment suitable your needs and your direction, Photography shouldn't be about prancing about choosing angles and complaining that you wish you had a better gear, Working with models should not have you talking CFA, Interpolation, LoCA, DOF - you need a social skill to direct them.
Do you see what I am getting at?
As long as I don't have gear that can produce results I need I can't concentrate on other things - it's just impossible to chase 4 rabbits at the same time!
I saw Canon shots - amazing stuff hands down, but not my cup of tea, I saw Nikon D800 shots - Super! But not what I want. I see NEX shots - amazing! but you guessed it..
Then I see people shots with MFD and this is what I want.
I know I won't be able to produce the WOW results straight away - I am not a bleeding child.
Especially since my skin PP is waaaay below par - let's not even talk about hair..
But I am getting there. I enjoy the process. I can't say I enjoy chasing models, stylists, MUA of which there are 0.1% in Tokyo - it's like herding cats. But I certainly like the progress.
I don't think there is a camera that is perfect for everything and I don't quite believe it will ever be made (time will tell). But I do believe there is a right camera for the job!
p.7 #20 · Digital Medium Format / 35mm equiv difference
There are several factual errors (and also one or seven principal errors) on that page, and both I and some other people I know (that he was loosely consulting while he was writing the piece) have tried to make him correct them later - to no avail...
