Digital medium format

[MDM]

38 minutes ago, Gervais Montacute said:

 

The Leica Q3 is very hard to beat in todays world. Naturally it's a fixed 28mm lens. So it's a waste of time comparing to very good zoom lenses and non fixed lens good cameras. 

 

This is a completely pointless statement. You say it's hard to beat and then say it's a waste of time comparing .......Why even say that? In any case, I would argue that there are numerous excellent cameras that would easily beat the Leica Q3 in terms of features and image quality for a similar or lesser price. If it's that good, let's see what you can do with it and how it's hard to beat. 

 

 

[Harry Harrison]

30 minutes ago, MDM said:

This is a completely pointless statement.

Gervais can speak for himself but I think you've taken his statement out of context and that's partly my fault. Ian said the following "with my Mamiya I only had the 50mm lens compared with my Fujica 35mm + zoom. Just going out with the Mamiya made my approach to photography different."

 

So really I'm looking at cameras that might rekindle that approach for him. I suggested the Q3 as a possible contender as there are very few quality cameras like it, and the fixed lens would certainly concentrate the mind. Sony did one with an excellent fixed 35mm lens and Fuji of course have their X100 series with its '35mm' equivalent lens, albeit on APS-C. I have also suggested any full frame high MP mirrorless with a 24mm prime which you leave on all the time.

[geogphotos]

This is intended to be a friendly chatty discussion topic....

[Gervais Montacute]

4 hours ago, Harry Harrison said:

Gervais can speak for himself but I think you've taken his statement out of context and that's partly my fault. Ian said the following "with my Mamiya I only had the 50mm lens compared with my Fujica 35mm + zoom. Just going out with the Mamiya made my approach to photography different."

 

So really I'm looking at cameras that might rekindle that approach for him. I suggested the Q3 as a possible contender as there are very few quality cameras like it, and the fixed lens would certainly concentrate the mind. Sony did one with an excellent fixed 35mm lens and Fuji of course have their X100 series with its '35mm' equivalent lens, albeit on APS-C. I have also suggested any full frame high MP mirrorless with a 24mm prime which you leave on all the time.

 

Absolutely.

 

I think this guy is very good. For anyone who is maybe starting photography or has been going at it for while, this is a pretty good video on the topic of lenses on cameras - either zooms of fixed.

 

 

Edited June 24 by Gervais Montacute

[MDM]

3 hours ago, Harry Harrison said:

Gervais can speak for himself but I think you've taken his statement out of context and that's partly my fault. Ian said the following "with my Mamiya I only had the 50mm lens compared with my Fujica 35mm + zoom. Just going out with the Mamiya made my approach to photography different."

 

So really I'm looking at cameras that might rekindle that approach for him. I suggested the Q3 as a possible contender as there are very few quality cameras like it, and the fixed lens would certainly concentrate the mind. Sony did one with an excellent fixed 35mm lens and Fuji of course have their X100 series with its '35mm' equivalent lens, albeit on APS-C. I have also suggested any full frame high MP mirrorless with a 24mm prime which you leave on all the time.

 

OK Harry. It was just the statement about the Leica Q3 being hard to beat and not backing it up in any way that I took issue with. I have an academic, scientific background and believe in arguing (in the academic sense) with evidence. Just saying it is the best camera and leaving it at that is rather pointless in my opinion. At least say why one holds that opinion. 

 

As for the one wide angle lens walkabout camera topic, I do that myself. In fact I have just come back from a walk with my now aging Z7 (45 MP with a fantastic sensor) and my even older Zeiss 25 mm lens, an incredibly sharp lens with beautiful colour rendition. I’d happily put this combo in the ring with any full frame mirrorless camera and I would bet it would stand up well to any medium format cameras on the market as well.

 

All that said, if I only have to use one lens for walkabout, I would pick a 50mm or so macro as it is far more versatille. I was trying to photograph a nice display of urban wildflowers on my walk, wishing I'd brought the 50mm macro instead of the 25mm. I could use the 50 for urban landscape and even architecture by shooting vertical panoramas. 

[Harry Harrison]

22 minutes ago, MDM said:

I have just come back from a walk with my now aging Z7 (45 MP with a fantastic sensor) and my even older Zeiss 25 mm lens

That sounds like a very good suggestion. For many years in the film era my walkaround camera was a 35mm Summilux on a Leica M2, still have them. They were both well used when I got them so they were affordable, originally used by a press guy. I was absolutely delighted when the X100 was announced and I took to it straightaway, back button focus is a good substitute for AF, particularly on that first generation camera. At the time I took the trouble to write to Fuji asking for a similar camera with a fixed 50mm equivalent lens (35mm). No reply of course and one never appeared, instead they brought out an ungainly screw on adaptor.  I don't like 28mm much but I suppose when you've got 61MP to play with you could get used to it.

[MDM]

1 hour ago, Harry Harrison said:

That sounds like a very good suggestion. 

 Yes I've been giving my old manual focus prime lenses a run out lately and I've been using them in one camera, one lens mode when out and about as in the original post. The venerable 55mm Micro Nikkor, which we have discussed before in relation to slide copying, remains one of my all time favourites. Like the Zeiss 25, it is incredibly sharp. 

 

I don't know about other systems but the newer Nikon mirrorless cameras have a focus indicator box in the viewfinder which you can use to determine focus (it goes from red to green) on a lot of manual focus lenses if they are communicating with the camera (adapters required with Nikon Z cameras). This is incredibly useful, as determining precise manual focus with digital cameras can be very difficult visually without some aid. It is extremely accurate, even for close-up 1:1. It has really reinvigorated my interest in my older lenses. 

 

Going a step further, the Nikon Zf (I've not got one) and the newly arriving Z6III (I'm considering it mainly for video) can even use subject detection with manual focus lenses so can put an indicator box on eyes, for example, as with autofocus. Obviously you still have to manually focus but I find this amazing. 

Edited June 24 by MDM

[Julie Edwards]

I had a Fuji GFX for a few years. Loved its quality. 50MP sensors on full frame are just not the quality of the medium format (in the same way as APS-C compares to Full frame  etc etc all the way down to phone images)… as I said before , all pixels are not created equal…
 

Is it overkill ? depends what you are doing and what you want - i found I could shoot interiors / architecture without resorting the bracketing/blending due to the increased dynamic range of the sensor… and when it came to studios portraits, nothing matched it…

 

However, 6 weeks ago I traded it in as I dont have enough of these types of jobs to justify it.. Im already missing it but I am shooting more by having the new x100…..

Edited June 24 by Julie Edwards

[Betty LaRue]

18 hours ago, Sally Robertson said:

Although more often used by landscape photographers, I found out that a local West Australian bird photographer, Shelley Pearson, uses Fujifilm medium format which is interesting. These are her comments on the Fujifilm GFX 100 II when she was first testing it out:

https://fujifilm-x.com/en-au/stories/gfx100-ii-bird-photography-x-shelley-pearson/

 

You can apparently choose whether you even want to track the left or right eye. Fujifilm have put out a 500mm prime for GFX too ($6000 here in Australia).

 

I hadn’t thought of medium format for wildlife, but there is certainly some advantage in the capacity for cropping and still having a high resolution image.

 

I cannot afford to buy into such a system but it’s interesting to know what’s out there and what people are doing with it. Of course everything about the system is very expensive and I think insurance would be absolutely necessary.

I think as you mention Ian using a different camera system makes you think differently, which I imagine applies across all subjects of photography.

 

Sally, looking at the images from that link, check out the bird carrying a wad of nesting material. Around the edges of the bird, is that sharpening artifacts? Enlarge (zoom) it & see.

Edited June 24 by Betty LaRue

[Sally Robertson]

5 hours ago, Betty LaRue said:

Sally, looking at the images from that link, check out the bird carrying a wad of nesting material. Around the edges of the bird, is that sharpening artifacts? Enlarge (zoom) it & see.

Hi Betty, I’m away at the moment and only have my phone on me from which I cannot see the detail in the image. I will be back at my computer on the 28th June and will have a look then. It may also be the quality and size of the jpeg that has been used for the article. Though it sounds from what you are describing it affects the bird in particular suggesting selective sharpening?

[Mark Scheuern]

On 23/06/2024 at 09:30, MDM said:

 

 

One is for making very large prints or for display on high resolution screens where very high levels of detail are desired e.g. landscape, architecture, studio macro etc.

 

Two is the ability to crop heavily, especially useful for ahooting where there may not be time to compose in camera e.g. news, action, weddings,nature  macro etc. 

 

 

 

 

 

A motorsports photographer friend of mine uses a GFX for studio work (driver portraits) and he also really likes it for car-to-car shooting because of the ability to crop and the excellent image stabilization. 

[Ric Holland]

I know I could always load the Mamiya with film and scan to create digital images. Must try it one day.

Edited Sunday at 22:27 by geogphotos

 

May well be worth a go. There’s a YouTuber, Steve O’Nions, who is a medium format film advocate. He shoots mostly 120 in b/w though and scans them. 

 

https://m.youtube.com/@SteveONions/videos

 

 

[geogphotos]

3 hours ago, Ric Holland said:

I know I could always load the Mamiya with film and scan to create digital images. Must try it one day.

Edited Sunday at 22:27 by geogphotos

 

May well be worth a go. There’s a YouTuber, Steve O’Nions, who is a medium format film advocate. He shoots mostly 120 in b/w though and scans them. 

 

https://m.youtube.com/@SteveONions/videos

 

 

Thanks Ric👍

[Harry Harrison]

Not wanting to morph this into a scanning thread but there's this for 120 now, I've seen it mentioned favourably but don't know anything about it, a bigger version of your custom 35mm setup, the Camflix FDA-120L:

 

https://www.aliexpress.com/item/4000415610562.html

 

I've bought two things off Aliexpress recently, low value but very impressed with the service.

 

Edited June 27 by Harry Harrison

[M.Chapman]

19 hours ago, Harry Harrison said:

I've bought two things off Aliexpress recently, low value but very impressed with the service.

That's interesting to know as I see they also sell a variety of kits to convert old 5K iMacs into a 5K monitors, which I might be brave enough to try one day.

For example https://www.aliexpress.com/item/1005006601657994.html

 

Mark

[Harry Harrison]

1 hour ago, M.Chapman said:

That's interesting to know as I see they also sell a variety of kits to convert old 5K iMacs into a 5K monitors, which I might be brave enough to try one day.

For example https://www.aliexpress.com/item/1005006601657994.html

 

My items were low value, less than £10, but valuable to me, for instance an obscure CD drawer micro-switch for a venerable Marantz CD player which is otherwise unobtainable. I managed to discover that it was shared with a cult Philips 'beat-box' cassette player so I could get a pack of 5 for a few pounds from Aliexpress. Full of trepidation I put in an order and it was so smooth and easy with helpful emails every step of the way. Two swallows don't make a Summer etc. but it did rather diffuse any worries I may have had, very fast delivery as well.

[Vincent Lowe]

3 hours ago, Harry Harrison said:

.... a venerable Marantz CD player....

I've got one of those!  Model CD-45 from the mid eighties, still fully working though I don't use it much these days.  It sits below my Ferrograph Series 7 reel-to-reel....🙂

[Harry Harrison]

1 hour ago, Vincent Lowe said:

5 hours ago, Harry Harrison said:

 

I've got one of those!  Model CD-45 from the mid eighties, still fully working though I don't use it much these days.

I'm tending to buy CDs more than ever these days, mostly charity shops, I like the fact that you have all the information about who's playing on them, I never understood why streaming services don't do that (AFAIK). My CD85 drawer stopped opening and closing and there is a supplier on ebay who provides new, high quality belt kits for many models. It was a bit fiddly to do, no instructions, but would have been fine had I not caught that microswitch with my sleeve as I was putting the cover back on! All good now though.

Edited June 28 by Harry Harrison

[Sally Robertson]

On 25/06/2024 at 03:53, Betty LaRue said:

Sally, looking at the images from that link, check out the bird carrying a wad of nesting material. Around the edges of the bird, is that sharpening artifacts? Enlarge (zoom) it & see.

 

Hello again Betty, I am back home again now and able to look at the image on my computer. I can see the funny area around the bird. I can also see a splotchy effect in the sky. I actually see both of these things often happen with our images here on Alamy when they are converted to a lower res image to appear on the Alamy website. For example, if you have a look at areas of blue sky on many Alamy images you will see that splotchy effect. So it's like something similar has happened with the osprey image. I don't think it's sharpening artefacts and I don't think it would be in the RAW file, but somehow has happened in the JPEG conversion. You can see it a bit in the other images as well. I wonder if it is more pronounced taking such large image files from a medium format camera and reducing them to much smaller jpegs to appear in an article?

[Sally Robertson]

On 25/06/2024 at 22:33, Mark Scheuern said:

 

A motorsports photographer friend of mine uses a GFX for studio work (driver portraits) and he also really likes it for car-to-car shooting because of the ability to crop and the excellent image stabilization. 

 

Mark, that's very interesting that your friend is using the GFX for car-to-car shooting. It is only in the past few weeks I have been seeing videos and articles for the GFX being used for wildlife when I'd never thought of that use for medium format before. It will be interesting to see if it's increasingly used for sports as well. It's interesting how Fuji have focused on crop sensor and medium format but not full frame. It's like they are making their medium format offering increasingly a competitor of sorts with full frame, though full frame is still going to do better in certain areas at present. I found this article quite interesting on the increasing viability of medium format for wildlife and it includes some lovely images too with the GFX 100 II:

https://photographylife.com/medium-format-for-wildlife-photography

[M.Chapman]

37 minutes ago, Sally Robertson said:

 

Hello again Betty, I am back home again now and able to look at the image on my computer. I can see the funny area around the bird. I can also see a splotchy effect in the sky. I actually see both of these things often happen with our images here on Alamy when they are converted to a lower res image to appear on the Alamy website. For example, if you have a look at areas of blue sky on many Alamy images you will see that splotchy effect. So it's like something similar has happened with the osprey image. I don't think it's sharpening artefacts and I don't think it would be in the RAW file, but somehow has happened in the JPEG conversion. You can see it a bit in the other images as well. I wonder if it is more pronounced taking such large image files from a medium format camera and reducing them to much smaller jpegs to appear in an article?

Yes, Alamy's compression of thumbnails and previews noticeably reduces image quality and introduces compression artefacts. No doubt it's done to save server space and improve response time. In some ways it's a shame when their "shop window" degrades the appearance of the product which has passed the much higher QC standard. OTOH it does help deter piracy of our images. If customer wants a decent copy they have to buy it (or have a download now declare later contract).

 

Mark

Edited June 29 by M.Chapman

[Mark Scheuern]

1 hour ago, Sally Robertson said:

 

Mark, that's very interesting that your friend is using the GFX for car-to-car shooting. It is only in the past few weeks I have been seeing videos and articles for the GFX being used for wildlife when I'd never thought of that use for medium format before. It will be interesting to see if it's increasingly used for sports as well. It's interesting how Fuji have focused on crop sensor and medium format but not full frame. It's like they are making their medium format offering increasingly a competitor of sorts with full frame, though full frame is still going to do better in certain areas at present. I found this article quite interesting on the increasing viability of medium format for wildlife and it includes some lovely images too with the GFX 100 II:

https://photographylife.com/medium-format-for-wildlife-photography

 

Yes, Fuji's taken an unusual path and it seems to be working very well for them. I briefly held my friend's camera and it felt great. Bigger than my XT-5, of course, but very manageable and it felt very high-quality. It think it's probably smaller and lighter than my old 35 mm Nikon DSLRs. 

 

Thanks so much for the article! Beautiful pictures and an interesting read. 

[MDM]

On 25/06/2024 at 15:33, Mark Scheuern said:

 

A motorsports photographer friend of mine uses a GFX for studio work (driver portraits) and he also really likes it for car-to-car shooting because of the ability to crop and the excellent image stabilization. 

 

I would guess that is the exception rather than a common usage. I doubt there are too many professional sports or wildlife photographers using medium format cameras. As the author of  Sally's Photography Life article says medium format is not deal wildlife photography but can now be considerd viable. He emphasises the lack of telephoto lenses among other things. Nikon, Canon and Sony remain dominant in these areas. You can still get one helluva crop from a 45MP sensor that shoots tens of frames per second in raw and into the hundreds in JPEG if desired. And the image stabilisation in the latest Nikons is superb. 

 

[MDM]

Here's a link to an amusing and insightful article by Thom Hogan basically about how photographers feel about their cameras. He talks about Fuji big megapixel cameras as the "Trophy Wife of cameras syndrome".

 

The paragraphs on the RX-100 series may strike some chords here. I am definitely in the falling out of love category. I sold mine last year (the RX-100 VA that is, not my wife). 

 

And then there is his one liner on Leica lovers "You have to love Leica, otherwise you can't explain why you paid so much money for something that isn't quite as good at some things than less expensive gear."

[Malcolm Park]

Going back to geogphotos original post, I sold Hasselblad V bodies, lenses and Phase I digital back (square format) around 5 years ago, just pre-Covid, having owned them for around 20 years. Great cameras, lenses and digital back particularly for studio work with studio flash. The mechanical Hasselblad V system, though, requires regular servicing to keep running smoothly. Not great for "stock" in my opinion and certainly not much good for news. The Phase One back could not cope above 100iso though it never disappointed in spite of its 20mp spec when the conditions were right. The combination demands more attention which is fine in a studio but I believe modern digital cameras perform as better all-rounders. I was also shooting Nikon dslr at the time (D5/D850) but now shoot with two Nikon Z8 bodies and a mix of Z and earlier Nikon AF lenses (often at 5000-8000 iso) and cannot fault them, I’m sure similar contemporary systems from other manufacturers are as good and as flexible. To my work mix digital medium format has no advantage.

 

Oh, and my Mamiya 7 medium format gave up the ghost after arriving near the summit of Kilimanjaro when the battery "froze" at 07.00am. Worked again when it got back down to 15,000ft.

Edited June 29 by Malcolm Park