[davidmullis]

Hey guys,

Considering making the jump to some sort of digital MF system. Aside from the price and other obvious limitations, has anyone that has switched from a full frame DSLR had any regrets?

[M_Six]

There was a user here named rodi who did some really nice medium format film work, but we haven't seen him post in ages and most of his past posts no longer have pics. Otherwise I don't know of any medium format folks here.

[allachie9]

Hi David,
Sorry I can't help you as I certainly don't use MF Digital. For me it would be a cost versus convenience / usability / IQ improvement choice.
I was recently reading an interesting article on the subject -

http://www.techradar.com/news/photog...amera--1246587

[Caspita]

Have not been in OT in a while. I assure you if you are seriously contemplating switching from a DSLR to a medium format digital camera you will not be disappointed. Depending on which system you are looking at you may be slightly limited given your portfolio. For portrait style work it will blow your mind, but for the concert style photography you have....high ISO is usually not a friend for medium format, unless you are looking at a CMOS based sensor. I would say 99% of what I shoot the camera is on a tripod, unless it is strobed based.

Let me know if I can answer any questions for you.

[dcstep]

How large will you be printing? Large prints (50" and above) are where MF bodies/backs have a clear advantage; however, even that is slipping with high resolution, FF bodies, like the 5DS with 52mp. Lens availability is limited, in comparison, and tend to be very expensive.

IMO, unless you're printing large, there's no advantage to a MF body. I haven't found the subject and taken the shot yet, but I plan to print something from my 5DS R at 72" within the next year. Looking at my images, so far, at 400%, I think that the results can be stunning.

[Caspita]

Originally Posted by dcstep

How large will you be printing? Large prints (50" and above) are where MF bodies/backs have a clear advantage; however, even that is slipping with high resolution, FF bodies, like the 5DS with 52mp. Lens availability is limited, in comparison, and tend to be very expensive.

IMO, unless you're printing large, there's no advantage to a MF body. I haven't found the subject and taken the shot yet, but I plan to print something from my 5DS R at 72" within the next year. Looking at my images, so far, at 400%, I think that the results can be stunning.

It's so much more than just large prints. Certainly it's an added benefit if you are printing large, but the overall IQ is leaps and bounds ahead. I've rented cameras just to compare to my Phase One, including the 5Ds and the a7rII, and there really is no comparison. The gap between DSLR and Medium Format may have been minimized a little over the last couple years, but hardly as close as you think it is. I recommend testing out a Medium Format setup, if you haven't already done so....I assure you that you will not be disappointed.

[Diver]

Try looking at a D810.

[dcstep]

Originally Posted by Caspita

It's so much more than just large prints. Certainly it's an added benefit if you are printing large, but the overall IQ is leaps and bounds ahead. I've rented cameras just to compare to my Phase One, including the 5Ds and the a7rII, and there really is no comparison. The gap between DSLR and Medium Format may have been minimized a little over the last couple years, but hardly as close as you think it is. I recommend testing out a Medium Format setup, if you haven't already done so....I assure you that you will not be disappointed.

A picture is worth one-thousand words.

[GeorgeR]

Originally Posted by davidmullis

Hey guys,

Considering making the jump to some sort of digital MF system. Aside from the price and other obvious limitations, has anyone that has switched from a full frame DSLR had any regrets?

I considered picking up a medium format film system after the digital conversion dropped the used market resale value to bargain prices but never really had a need so let the impulse pass.

A good film MF kit with a digital back used to be an option but I haven’t looked into it in years.

While the larger sensor and bigger pixels should prove to have significant advantages for studio work, portability, low light performance, fast action shooting and focus speed are all compromised based on what I’ve heard compared to the top Nikon and Canon pro bodies.

Building a MF lens kit would also expand the budget significantly.

The Canon Shooters are excited about the EOS-1D X Mark II. As a Nikon shooter I am looking forward to the D5. The specifications for both bodies are impressive and the photographer can still use existing lenses, strobes and accessories’ while getting blazingly fast operation and superb image quality.

[dcstep]

Canon and Nikon shooters can also consider the latest Sony full-frame mirrorless options. The newest Sony sensors have pushed dynamic range into new territory, while lowering noise with really high pixel-density to push resolution beyond what the 1DX II and the D5 will offer, with their relatively low density sensors (designed for speed and high-ISO, but not resolution). I'm told, that new adapters allow current Canon and Nikon lenses to AF and be fully functional on the new bodies.

[GeorgeR]

Sony mirrorless has been interesting to follow but as a sports shooter, the speed isn’t there yet. For studio and stationary subjects I wouldn’t have the same concerns. 42MP is way more than I need but could come in handy for product photos and studio.

5 fps vs 12 to 14. While I understand a lens adapter supports AF on canon lenses, I don’t think the Nikon adapter supports AF. Battery drain is much higher resulting in shorter battery life resulting in fewer shots. Sony doesn’t have the high ISO range of the big two.

The Nikon and Cannon Pro bodies are just so good and after years of use, become a subconscious extension of your hand. Making the change would take some time. In the competitive field of sports shooting though, many are willing to make a change if it helps them get the shot that editors select and therefore gets them paid.

Promising for sure but not quite there for me. I haven’t seen one on the sideline yet but the way technology advances it won’t be long. Having a silent shutter when shooting golf has certainly intrigued me.

[dcstep]

It's hard to keep up with Sony, given they put out a new product every few weeks. They've made huge improvements in the EVF, fps and sensor DR in the last few months. Metabones is out with a new series of adapters for latest generation Canon and Nikon lenses, preserving AF and communication, such that sport and wildlife photographers can seriously consider a switch. It's a crop sensor, but the Alpha a6300 has 24mp, a super-fast and accurate AF at 8-fps and handles Nikon and Canon lenses with the latest Metabones adapter. Sony's full-frames sensors compete directly with Nikon's, since they provide sensors to Nikon.

When you talk about fast Canon and Sony, full-frame DSLRs, then it's the 1D X and the D5. Both have very course pixel-density and can't be considered as challengers to MF. They're designed for fast, accurate AF, with high fps, not high resolution. Sports usage is really entirely different than how most would use a MF camera. Better comparables are the D810 and the 5DsR, with very high pixel-density with good dynamic range and average fps.

[Caspita]

Originally Posted by dcstep

A picture is worth one-thousand words.

I'll do some side by side comparisons with my a7rII and Phase One over the next couple days to give you a better idea of the differences.

[dcstep]

Originally Posted by Caspita

I'll do some side by side comparisons with my a7rII and Phase One over the next couple days to give you a better idea of the differences.

I'll be interested to see what you can show. Maybe if you can link us to full resolution files, we can see. I know the Raw conversion will not be exactly equivalent, but we should be able to see past that.

Thanks for the effort.

[davidmullis]

Originally Posted by Caspita

Have not been in OT in a while. I assure you if you are seriously contemplating switching from a DSLR to a medium format digital camera you will not be disappointed. Depending on which system you are looking at you may be slightly limited given your portfolio. For portrait style work it will blow your mind, but for the concert style photography you have....high ISO is usually not a friend for medium format, unless you are looking at a CMOS based sensor. I would say 99% of what I shoot the camera is on a tripod, unless it is strobed based.

Let me know if I can answer any questions for you.

I completely forgot about this thread!

All of the stuff on my personal site is old side work. I shoot people & product for a sports nutrition company full time. Cars and music freelance jobs are minimal for the past few years aside from very basic inventory work at a few dealerships with some advert jobs when budget allows. Not too much need for crazy print capabilities but that's not what draws me to MF to begin with. I'd say on average I'm shooting about 60% strobed medium-high production static work, and about 40% "action" imagery.

EDIT: The other option if I had to pick at the moment would likely be a 1dx

EDIT 2: Your landscape port is absolutely incredible

[Cryptoshane]

just joined so I might have missed the chat here, but I shoot MF and have done for most of my career. I use a Hasselblad H4D40 and it is amazing. The biggest advantage is of course this size of the sensor and the photocells. I use a D800e to shoot pics of my kid and general day to day stuff and find the compromise with shutter speed and focus to be really challenging! The number of times an image is 'soft' by my eyes has me wanting to pick up my 'blad more and more. This is also why I'm not so sure about the massive Phase One backs that are coming out... Tripod, studio lights, flash and a still subject and they totally rock.

Anyway, happy to keep the conversation going. Have yet to take delivery of my X1 so I no pics as yet.