Usually pretty well any endeavour that people find worthwhile doing there is ALWAYS a demand for better quality --whether it's you as a SHOOTER or simply as knowlegeable CLIENT / CUSTOMER who wants the best image he can afford.
Kyle hit the nail on the head with the above remark. I am only a amatuer I recently changed my monitor from crt to lcd and agonised over it. I finished up buying an Ezio coloredge 210 for uk £1445.00. Really what the hell do i need that for. but i wanted the best, not quite what i quite got but on my pension and ( you can't take it with you) I am reasonably satisfied.
I have followed Guy and his posts for probably three years. I remember the picture of his Kitchen taken with Canon D1s. we were blown away. then the Canon D1s mark2, then the change to Lieca glass. and finally the change to Lieca.
Each step was an advance in quality. I am convinced that medium format with a digital back would be streets better, My Hassy V still produces to my mind clearer sharper prints to my Canon D1 mark 2.
Guy you will be like the rest of us always chasing the rainbow, and that ain't a bad trait for any human being. Any ways good luck with your quest .Jack
eronald wrote:
The problem with MF is starting to be that there are no bodies to put the backs on ...
Basically, you get a choice of Hasselblad or Haselblad, and all of us do not want Hasselblad.
Edmund
I sold my blad simply for the reason I can't afford a db currently and have some more film gear for mf use.
Someday I am back and want to pick the right mf camera for my needs.
The Hasselblad V is still a very good system and a Leica 20 mp will never come close to what a p30 is delivering with it. There are downsides on this system, but qualitywise it is excellent and will outperform 35mm.
Even Leica will suffer at 20 mp, I bet...
Just for clarity's sake, and not to start a war here, why the hell does anyone care if Leica (or anyone else) puts out a 24x36 chip? The only reason this is 'full frame' is from the film days. Sure, the lenses were designed for a piece of film this size, but as one of my favorite photogs says "Film is dead." So, aside from the marketing hooplah from Canon, what is the current Leica chip lacking that you think a full 24x36 chip will give you? A much more significant difference would be gained with a 38x49 chip, or any of the other current mfdbs...
Are you just dying to see those outermost corners on the Leica lenses? I guess my point is that it's time to stop thinking in terms of film, and realize that digital is a horse of a different color. In fact, I almost welcome a smaller-than-designed chip so that only the best part of the lens is being utilized. Forgive me if you think I sound ignorant, but this is something that I think needs to be re-addressed, especially when people are guessing that a FF Leica chip would be in the 10k terrirtory, not much cheaper than an mfdb at this stage of the game; penny pinching at this level is only for hobbyists. I put my money where my mouth is already, and even the Aptus 65 I bought is technically not 'full frame' 645.
So, go ahead, flame me if you'd like, but while we're all moving ahead with technology, it's time to leave behind old terminology and norms. This is a different, exciting field, no matter how similar it seems to be to the old film days.
glowrider wrote:
aside from the marketing hooplah from Canon, what is the current Leica chip lacking that you think a full 24x36 chip will give you? A much more significant difference would be gained with a 38x49 chip, or any of the other current mfdbs...
Higher resolution with same or less noise, larger viewfinder image, true FOV on all lenses, and better DOF.
Of course a MFDB gives you even more of the above.
glowrider wrote:
I almost welcome a smaller-than-designed chip so that only the best part of the lens is being utilized.
What is the point in designing oversized lenses which are heavier and more expensive than they need to be? The circle of light cast by a lens should match the sensor size. The problem is in the lenses, not the sensor. Better lenses are what we need.
glowrider wrote:
especially when people are guessing that a FF Leica chip would be in the 10k terrirtory, not much cheaper than an mfdb at this stage of the game;
I doubt this would happen. People are extrapolating from today's MP/$ ratio but Moore's law kicks in. You'll soon get double the resolution of today at the same price. Just look at the original price of early DSLRs with their low MP count.
glowrider wrote:
So, go ahead, flame me if you'd like, but while we're all moving ahead with technology, it's time to leave behind old terminology and norms. This is a different, exciting field, no matter how similar it seems to be to the old film days.
Yes, i agree that film is dead and there is no reason not to create a new 'format' whic doesn't relate to any traditional film size except that you would need a whole new lens line-up to match and no manufacturer wants to take such a gamble.
Ya'll need new lenses for "FF" as it is...so why stop at just a 24x36 format is my point...not that "FF" is pointless...Manufacturers already have taken the gamble in recreating film formats with the DX/EF-S lines of lenses...why 'settle' on 24x36, especially when lots of the lenses aren't up to the task since they were designed for a more forgiving format...
Edited by glowrider on Apr 10, 2006 at 06:49 PM GMT
I agree, the new sensor sizes present something of a paradigm shift. One of the problems as I see it is that the lens lines are quite slow to catch up to this change in formulation. Certainly for Leica, changes in the R (and to a lesser extent M) lenses will occur at a glacial pace, if at all. Canon at full frame at least leaves me with a halfway viable wide angle tilt-shift lens--one of the three reasons I switched from Nikon to Canon 3 years ago. The Canon IS super teles and the TS lenses are the only reason I haven't gone to the Leica DMR 100%. I'd love to switch to a mf digital back and system, but I'd be sleeping on the couch for the next 20 years.
Jeff-
That's what I'm saying...we need better lenses designed for digital, not film. I had a long convo with my Hasselblad tech today out at their place in Fairfield, NJ and he told me that even the HC lenses are only going to be good up to this current line of mfdbs. They're already working on the next gen stuff in Sweden for the next version of db's to come out.
glowrider wrote:
Ya'll need new lenses for "FF" as it is...so why stop at just a 24x36 format is my point...not that "FF" is pointless...
It is a lot easier to release improved lenses in a line up one by one rather than release a range of 10 totally new lenses in a new mount simultaneously.
Don;t get me wrong - I am no fan of 24x36 but I can see the compelling commercial forces at work.
Well it's done. I take delivery of the P25 tomorrow. For the moment I'll be using it with the Hassy and on the Sinar with a stitching back adapter. Going all the way with an Arca and a 35mm Digitar was just too much all at once. Think I better get used to the couch, this is gonna be a long road ahead. Kind of fun dusting off the MF gear though.
with new 280 you see there is still alot of new stuff to get from 35mm DMR!
I need to some time to see where I would really need MF no, as I do not need for product work. Maybe really big landscapes... but pano is starting to look promising as well.
However as someone pointed out, there is a 'feel' to medium format that 35mm does not have. The detail is EASY not a struggle. But then it can be too analytical as well.
Back to a question of lens limits, what is consensus on the Digitars and th HRs? are they really sharper than the Zeiss contax and hassey's?
hi, I thought I would pipe in on this topic as my dilemma is similar.
I bought into a imacon ixpress96 when introduced 3 years ago, I was coming from large format
so I needed something to work on miniviewcamera.. and being a mf back I wanted to shoot it
like a normal slr 2 1/4.. the rollei was the only way to go for me.. I feel the faster and in some cases sharper schneider lenses were up to the digital challenge.. I have used the 22mp version of this back and did a 4shot exposure and the rollei apo 90mm lens still was not hitting it's limit. 384mb file and very nice.. so my point..I'm thinking of switching to the sinar emotion22 back that is bundled with the 6008af..this would be about the same money as I would have to spend to upgrade my imacon to a 22mp back..this is with me selling my 16mp back! With this new bundle price I could keep the 16 or sell off..however, I now know the imacon and it has been a very good preformer for me..it is though just too small a format for a still life shooter..it is surprising the difference between 16mp to 22..just from a crop and optics point of view... and now that I am up to speed with my dmr.. I can use that for most things I would have shot in 120 film..
lengthly first post, my apologies..paul
Foget the HRs. They'll outresolve everything (designed for sub 7 micron sites), but there is ZERO image circle. 6mm up/down, 5mm left/right. The Schneider XLs are a better option, but you'll either have to get the Schneider electronic shutter controller, or pay a grand+ extra for a copal 0 shutter. The compromise at this point is the rodenstock/schneider digital lenses, but I've heard from numerous industry folks that these are little more than redesigned apo-grandagon lenses. May not make much of a difference in sub-30x40 prints, but im sure some of you guys are looking for 100% screen res. Now, if you're talking about an Alpa XY or a variant thereof, then the HRs are the way to go since you're shifting the whole front standard to stitch, rather than to get technical movements.
I walked around the city this afternoon with my H1 and loaner Aptus back, few hours, wasn't worn down or anything, even with the Metz planted on top. I'm sure it'll be different lugging the Arca 6x9 around that I just ordered last week.
What kind of back are you planning to use? A slidingf stitching back? I am considering a back from Kapture Group with Hassy H adaptor. I also ordered Arca a couple weeks ago and am anxiously waiting for its delivery, 6 - 8 weeks.
Also, what do you mean by paying 'a grand+ extra for a copal 0 shutter?' I ordered Schneider Apo Digitar 47mm XL with Copal 0 from Badger for just over $1,200.
Ok, at great riskI am going to try to show what you get for MF.
It struck me that everybody (including me) look at crops, same size etc. Maybe FOV etc. When taking image, all that matters is IMAGE. SO, I pick an image, and I pick ONE lens. Turns out I have excellent hasselblad 180mm f5.6 lens with adapter for both Contax 645 P25 and for R9/DMR.
So I compose image (yes, I need to be far away for Leica so different FOV.I also do contax 120mm vs R9 50mm show later!)
