DPChallenge: A Digital Photography Contest You are not logged in. (log in or register
 

DPChallenge Forums >> Hardware and Software >> Medium Format Camera Users??
Pages:  
Showing posts 1 - 11 of 11, (reverse)
AuthorThread
07/01/2006 07:01:52 PM · #1
my girlfriend shoots with a medium format hasselblad. I LOVE the colors/light she gets with that camera!!

anyways, just wondering how many of you dp'rs use a medium format camera, film or digital? does anyone use a digital back on a traditional mf camera? is a digital back worth the money?

feeler questions before i seriously start looking to buy one myself.

btw her photography is here:
//www.lindsayschuling.com/
07/01/2006 07:08:48 PM · #2
What makes you think you can't get pictures like that with your camera?

June
07/01/2006 07:17:00 PM · #3
Last time I checked, a MF digital back was like $10,000 for a 16MP. For that, you could just buy a 1dsMarkII, and be on your merry way.

I have no idea why you think that light is any different on an MF camera. If you want to simulate velvia or provia or any other film, there are actions and plugins and techniques galore to simulate the same.
07/01/2006 07:24:33 PM · #4
Also, note the cost procesging each film if you were to buy a film hassy also. PLUS, even with a digital back, most of them give you about one frame for every 2 seconds. That's a far cry from the 4fps of the 1ds markII, and way off from the 8fps 1DmarkIIn.

If you're going to set up every single little thing in your shot and take 5 minutes between, then by all means go spend $20,000 on some hassy gear.

Course, you can buy used, but still.
07/01/2006 07:43:17 PM · #5
ive seen the filters the 'replicate' the film of mf. they are not the same. ... but point taken.

yikes. feels like i was just took 20 arrows from the natives.

i wasnt sugesting that i would go digiback. i would def stick with film. just wondering if anyone used one... maybe i should have thought twice before asking about film on a digi site...
07/01/2006 07:49:15 PM · #6
I dont own a hassy but I had mamiya 7 for awhile, and my school had a hassy. I love shooting film. Filters dont do the images justice to get the same effect. I would keep shooting film if I had the resources and time, but once I get myself a solid digital set up start to finish my investments will probably be in a hasselblad that I can use for fun, and the prices are dropping now.

Many of my best shots were taken with film, after I owned digital equipment.
07/01/2006 07:51:27 PM · #7
I used a loaned Hasselblad 503C film camera for a black and white project this last Spring. If I had $5,000 laying around, I would buy one.
07/01/2006 07:54:55 PM · #8
Originally posted by maryba:

I used a loaned Hasselblad 503C film camera for a black and white project this last Spring. If I had $5,000 laying around, I would buy one.


ive seen them used for under 700$ but new is around 2200$ for a decent kit.
07/01/2006 08:05:20 PM · #9
I think for me the thing is price right now. If I had a pro shop and was taking portraits for a living instead of a sideline, I could justify the expense of that whole system over digital.

Right now, with digital resolutions creeping out of the range of 35mm films to keep up, you'd have to go to a medium format, true. And they DO produce some fine, beautiful work.

But to get really into it, I think the cost is a bit prohibitive. I think that $5000 is pretty reasonable if you were to get a full range of lenses. Probably less for a fairly old used set. I've seen then on fredmiranda for about $3600 with a body, prism, 50mm, 85mm, and 120mm, and film backs.

Right now though, I think the world is going digital, and the more you learn that and how to process those, the more you're prepared for the future.

Now, if you have to make some VERY large prints, then I guess you need a MF or LF camera...
07/02/2006 10:36:11 AM · #10
Everyone here seems to be assuming that the only MF gear is Hasselblad. There are a number of other systems out there that can be gotten much cheaper.

I personally use a Koni/Rapid Omega system which shoots 6x7 and find it more than adequate. Being a rangefinder design and discontinued it's obviously more limited than the Hasselblad but it is significantly cheaper. For well under $1000 you could get a complete setup with a body, 58/60mm, 90mm, 180mm, and even the fairly rare 135mm lenses, and a couple extra backs. The optics, especially the 58/60mm, compare quite well to the Hasselblad and there are advantages to a rangefinder design. If you went to a wedding in the 1970's there is a very good chance that this is the system the photographer was using.

If you really want to look into MF do a little research on the web and you could get into it from as cheap as $50 depending on yours wants, needs, or expectations. This site, //medfmt.8k.com/mf/index.html, has a lot of good information on MF in general and many types/systems in particular.
07/02/2006 11:32:27 AM · #11
As I have commented in other posts- I love my Pentax 645- sick of hearing that yet. I have friends with everything from 5D's to 20D's a couple of D70's and lots of little point and shoots. Honestly up to about 11x14 I don't really see much beyond subtle differences from the better cameras (Rebels and D50 included in those better cameras), and even up to 16x20's from the 5D. My 5D friend just had a 30x40 run from one of his shots and a 30x40 of basically the same shot from my 645 (I'll admit it was a pretty nice scan of the negative), but the level of fine detail between the two was shocking.
I'd say the 5D produced a better image than 35mm and was impressive itself, but the there was an obvious difference between the two- if I can hijack some webspace I'll see if I can get the two files posted somewhere.

Digital has one huge advantage (and a number of smaller ones) over scanned film- RAW. I have a number of images that had they been shot in RAW the starting point would have been so much better than a scan its unbelievable.

So, I guess what I am saying is that there isn't an image on your GF's website that couldn't be done with a digital. The true advantage to MF is your negative size. Personally, I'm saving my pennies for the new Pentax 645D.


Pages:  
Current Server Time: 06/16/2019 07:05:36 PM

Please log in or register to post to the forums.


Home - Challenges - Community - League - Photos - Cameras - Lenses - Learn - Prints! - Help - Terms of Use - Privacy - Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2019 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Proudly hosted by Sargasso Networks. Current Server Time: 06/16/2019 07:05:36 PM EDT.