Home · Register · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda

New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site

New Feature: SMS Notification alert

New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist

FM Forums | People Photography | Join Upload & Sell

Archive 2018 · Why medium format for portraits?

sungphoto
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #1 · p.1 #1 · Why medium format for portraits?

All of my photography has been isolated to 35mm film, and digital FF and crop sensors. I've never shot with a medium format camera and I'm curious what it's like to shoot portraits with one in the studio.

I don't really need the extra resolution that modern digital medium format cameras offer, as I shoot with the D850 and have more than enough resolution and image fidelity for my needs.

One thing that I prefer however is to be closer to my subjects, as I feel like the intimacy of a bit less distance between subject/photographer helps with connecting with the subject. I know that's part of why medium format portrait photographers prefer the format. I don't really care about things like the quality of out of focus elements, as in the studio I'm typically shooting with plenty of depth of field.

So for those that shoot medium format, what's the big deal? What makes the additional cost worth it to you?

Nov 23, 2018 at 09:35 PM

Peter Figen
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #2 · p.1 #2 · Why medium format for portraits?

So, back in the day, whatever the hell that means, most art directors would insist on medium format if the image was going to be as large as a magazine cover. That was back in the days of crappy scanners and scanner operators who literally did not know what they were doing. It was also back in the day where very few people had the Forsher Polaroid back for your Nikon F3, so for most, medium format provided an affordable Polaroid option. Taking it further, you were using longer lenses for the same angle of view on medium format so you didn't need crazy fast lenses to isolate your subject, if that was your goal. Lenses like the Hasselblad 150mm and the RZ 210 APO provided the look that many were after. Oh, and let's not forget the little thing called flash sync speed. Hassy and RB/RZ would sync up to 1/500 and 1/400th respectively while a Nikon F3 was stuck at 1/80th. Wasn't until the FE2 that you'd get up to 1/250th.

There also just a certain look that larger format film had that is harder to quantify. However, I think a good photographer with either a Nikon or Canon FF can come pretty close to what we used to get.

Nov 23, 2018 at 11:06 PM

mrca
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #3 · p.1 #3 · Why medium format for portraits?

Take a look at these:

and

Nov 24, 2018 at 03:22 AM

dmacmillan
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #4 · p.1 #4 · Why medium format for portraits?

mrca wrote:
Take a look at these: .

I’d rather not. There are too many blowhards already.

Peter did a great summation. Also, back in the day of Mom and Pop studios, retouching was done on both negatives and prints. The ideal size was a 4x5 or even bigger. 6x6 or 6x7 are the smallest negatives you can effectively retouch. High school Senior photographers needed just about every portrait retouched.

FF digital and modern post processing has made MF an option but not a necessity. I love the look of 6x7 for portraits. I’d love to have a Fuji GF-X 50s or 50r with their 110 for portraits.

Nov 24, 2018 at 08:22 AM

mrca
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #5 · p.1 #5 · Why medium format for portraits?

His personality can be a bit abrasive, but for unique insights, it's worth it. His evaluation of lenses has changed my photography. I now shoot manual focus Zeiss when ever possible and almost always if I know the shot will be b&w.

Nov 24, 2018 at 08:44 AM

dmacmillan
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #6 · p.1 #6 · Why medium format for portraits?

mrca wrote:
His personality can be a bit abrasive, but for unique insights, it's worth it.
Ok , I watched the first video since I haven’t seen much of him. It did change my opinion. He’s worse than I remembered.
I can’t find any background on him that qualifies him to pontificate. I’ve had Con Ed photo students far more knowledgeable and talented than him. There’s tons of resources available that are far better.

Nov 24, 2018 at 09:39 AM

Peter Figen
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #7 · p.1 #7 · Why medium format for portraits?

Like Doug, I labored through the first video. A Jon Lovitz vocal quality with no sense of humor, and the most confusing presentation ever, compounded by someone who actually uses auto white balance making their vintage slate move from gray to brown and back with the simple wave of the hand. But pretty much anyone can post their own youtube vids, so there you have it.

Nov 24, 2018 at 01:18 PM

Peter Figen
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #8 · p.1 #8 · Why medium format for portraits?

I watched the second one as well. Much worse that the first. This dude just confuses the issue with one-eyed hand gestures that don't really explain anything. Kinda at a loss for words about him.

Nov 24, 2018 at 03:00 PM

friscoron
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #9 · p.1 #9 · Why medium format for portraits?

Peter Figen wrote:
So, back in the day, whatever the hell that means, most art directors would insist on medium format if the image was going to be as large as a magazine cover. That was back in the days of crappy scanners and scanner operators who literally did not know what they were doing. It was also back in the day where very few people had the Forsher Polaroid back for your Nikon F3, so for most, medium format provided an affordable Polaroid option. Taking it further, you were using longer lenses for the same angle of view on medium format...Show more →

Peter, thanks for your response. This is really interesting. I had no idea about the sync speeds!

Nov 24, 2018 at 10:13 PM

sungphoto
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #10 · p.1 #10 · Why medium format for portraits?

mrca wrote:
Take a look at these.

Appreciate you responding, but I just can't stand this guy. I don't want to make this into an "angry photographer" bashing thread, but his voice really does sound like this SNL skit:

https://www.nbc.com/saturday-night-live/video/weekend-update-segment---annoying-man/n9886

Nov 24, 2018 at 10:13 PM

sungphoto
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #11 · p.1 #11 · Why medium format for portraits?

dmacmillan wrote:
I’d rather not. There are too many blowhards already.

Peter did a great summation. Also, back in the day of Mom and Pop studios, retouching was done on both negatives and prints. The ideal size was a 4x5 or even bigger. 6x6 or 6x7 are the smallest negatives you can effectively retouch. High school Senior photographers needed just about every portrait retouched.

FF digital and modern post processing has made MF an option but not a necessity. I love the look of 6x7 for portraits. I’d love to have a Fuji GF-X 50s or 50r with their 110 for portraits.

I loved the feel of the GFX cameras, but the 1/125 SS flash sync speed makes it hard to justify

Nov 24, 2018 at 10:16 PM

Peter Figen
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #12 · p.1 #12 · Why medium format for portraits?

And the ironic thing is that, at least using high powered studio strobes we're back for the most part to 1/160th-1/200th sync speeds with a few going to 1/250th. When the Nikons went to 1/250th, they became viable for outdoor strobe if you had 2400 w/s packs to pump out enough light but having that extra stop of shutter speed on the medium format lenses, which were almost all leaf shutter really gave you the latitude to control the ambient very effectively.

Nov 24, 2018 at 10:33 PM

sungphoto
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #13 · p.1 #13 · Why medium format for portraits?

Peter Figen wrote:
So, back in the day, whatever the hell that means, most art directors would insist on medium format if the image was going to be as large as a magazine cover. That was back in the days of crappy scanners and scanner operators who literally did not know what they were doing. It was also back in the day where very few people had the Forsher Polaroid back for your Nikon F3, so for most, medium format provided an affordable Polaroid option. Taking it further, you were using longer lenses for the same angle of view on medium format...Show more →

Really cool to hear some of the background around this. Back when I shot film a lot, it was primarily the oh so original kind of blurry dutch angle shots of bands in Seattle, and I literally had no idea what medium format was haha.

Nov 24, 2018 at 10:43 PM

elkhornsun
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #14 · p.1 #14 · Why medium format for portraits?

When all that were available were APS-C digital camera I had trouble with indoor portraits as the 85mm prime functioned like a 135mm lens in terms of view angle and working distance. When I was able to buy my first full frame digital camera in 2007 I promptly sold my 85mm lens and bought a 105mm one.

Medium format was needed before quality 35mm optics and cameras became affordable. A MFT or 4x5 view camera and a lens was a lot less expensive than a quality Nikon and its lenses. Thanks to computers it became much less expensive to create new optical designs for lenses and to do exotic creations like a 3:1 zoom lens. But people are still stuck in the past.

Most people shooting 35mm or digital will pay the premium involved with top quality lenses. How many people buy the camera with it kit lens as compared to the number that are willing to buy a Nikon 105mm f/21.4 or Canon 105mm L or Zeiss 100mm (with no auto focus).

Even in the days of 5x7 sheet film for portraits there were what were referred to as "portrait" lenses and their virtue was in providing a soft look that helped disguise blemishes and wrinkles and reduced the workload on the touch up people doing "post production" on prints prior to going to clients.

Nov 25, 2018 at 02:16 PM

mrca
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #15 · p.1 #15 · Why medium format for portraits?

Peter, absolutely, I still use the 1/400 sync speed on my RB67. However, it has now been rendered less important with a 46 mp d850 that now dusts the resolution from scanned film and with Zeiss glass matches or exceeds the microcontrast I was getting with film. Not to mention digital doesn't cost $3 per click and I have my results immediately on my monitor and to my client asap. Is the MF "look" that important to me? The real question is whether most of my clients can detect a difference. I'll bet not. Now Fuji definitely got my attention at PPA in Nashville this year where you can get out the door with a MF digital camera and lens under $7K, but the difference isn't warranted for the work I do for a primarily studio camera. It puts MF within reach of more photographers. I wonder how many folks who responded above are using MF digital. Are you using it primarily in studio?

Nov 26, 2018 at 05:30 PM

Peter Figen
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #16 · p.1 #16 · Why medium format for portraits?

No, while I have used medium format digital when I need to, I typically shoot these days with a 5DSR. I'm only shooting film for personal projects these days as there aren't any clients who with pay more to wait, even when I can do my own in house drum scans, and those take time too. And usually I'm doing so much to the images in post that it really doesn't matter how they start out. For some product shots that warrant, I do shift stitching, getting in effect, a Canon medium format. Those three new tilt-shifters from Canon are pretty crazy. Weirdly, I bought the Zeiss 100mm f/2 just before the new Canon 90 t/s came out and the Canon is equal or better in almost ever regard, except f/2, and it shifts and tilts.

In the studio sync speed was never a huge problem unless you (like I did have) were using a Pentax 6x7 which only sync'd at 1/30th.

And the other problem with a lot of the shooters I went to school with is that they all bought Speedotron strobes, which had a full power flash duration of 1/200th and if you sync'd it at 1/400th you'd lose part of your output and not have much action stopping anyway.

Nov 26, 2018 at 09:12 PM

mrca
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #17 · p.1 #17 · Why medium format for portraits?

Peter, I too now shoot film because I enjoy it, not because it produces better results than digital. That's the message of my Alas poor Mamiya shot posted in People. You are so right, I mail my film and it adds additional time to deliver to client. My Einsteins have a 1/13,500 duration at low power for stopping action, and will pop 10 times a second, faster than my max 9 fps burst on the d850. Some times I think I am dreaming with what my camera, lenses and lights can do compared to a mere 20 years ago. Got to love what it enables us to do now. Really lets you stretch your creativity. I still admire those that came before us, Cartier Bresson, Steichen, Karsh, Ritts, Hurrell , Avedon and when I crank that RB67 shutter lever and film advance feel a connection to them. Not to mention how strange it feels not charging a single battery.

Nov 27, 2018 at 05:40 PM


FM Forums \| People Photography \| Join Upload & Sell

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.