Digital Medium Format Thread

Mr Perceptive said:
This thread needs more contributors!
Click to expand...
I keep forgetting to post on here when I've been out with my GFX. Here's a couple from a recent photowalk on Dartmoor.

East Okement River.

001 East Okement below Scarey Tor 01-0408 PS Adj.JPG

The Logan Stone on Belstone Tor beside The Irishman's Wall.

023 Belstone Tors (Logan Stone) 14-0448 PS Adj.JPG

A couple of panoramas shot on the 24x65 aspect ratio.

004 Scarey Tor 03-0411 PS Adj.JPG

008 Nine Stones Circle 03-0421 PS Adj.JPG
 
gman said:
I can never fully tell if it's the MF or the processing that creates that lovely depth (or both).
Click to expand...

With the larger sensor, there is often more 'depth' to the images (even at smaller apertures (ie F11/F16), but with most things photography its more (or less) obvious depending on light and composition. There is surprisingly little processing in that image, it was imported into LR, then RAW converted using DXO PureRAW2, and following adjustments made. I only desaturated the blue as sometimes PureRAW (IMO) oversaturates blues and greens

1683019427017.png
 
gman said:
I can never fully tell if it's the MF or the processing that creates that lovely depth (or both).
Click to expand...

It's worth saying that not everyone perceives this 'depth' in an image. It seems to often be a combination of lens and format size: zooms generally give a flatter image than the right primes, and a bigger sensor helps. Full frame can get part way there.
 
There are some images I see that have been taken with the D850 and at first I would wonder if it's MF (although because it is SFTPhotography's photos and I know he has (or had) MF maybe there's some influence there?). But in a lot of cases I can see something, well, magical about MF images when the scene and conditions compliment each other.

The wife wants artificial grass in the back garden because despite my best efforts (and preference for real grass) football and the dog have won. But I'm wondering if I could get away with a box of Miracle Grow...
 
Last edited:
gman said:
There are some images I see that have been taken with the D850 and at first I would wonder if it's MF (although because it is SFTPhotography's photos and I know he has (or had) MF maybe there's some influence there?). But in a lot of cases I can see something, well, magical about MF images when the scene and conditions compliment each other.

The wife wants artificial grass in the back garden because despite my best efforts (and preference for real grass) football and the dog have won. But I'm wondering if I could get away with a box of Miracle Grow...
Click to expand...

Sadly had, I sent the thing off for sensor cleaning, and the courier lost it. Thankfully I had the insurance etc cover the loss but there's two 645z's in the ether and lenses. I thought about replacing but moving house so the money was put aside and put down on that instead.

The D850 gets pretty close, and at medium to long FLs there isn't much in it - but nothing really matched the 645z and 28-45. Which also was lost in the process.

I cannot name the courier, there was a big stink and NDA etc due to the value of the claim
 
Last edited:
SFTPhotography said:
Sadly had, I sent the thing off for sensor cleaning, and the courier lost it. Thankfully I had the insurance etc cover the loss but there's two 645z's in the ether and lenses. I thought about replacing but moving house so the money was put aside and put down on that instead.

The D850 gets pretty close, and at medium to long FLs there isn't much in it - but nothing really matched the 645z and 28-45. Which also was lost in the process.

I cannot name the courier, there was a big stink and NDA etc due to the value of the claim
Click to expand...

What is it about MF Digital cameras, the loss rate amongst teh samll TP sample is very high - thats my first GFX and nowboth your 645x's that 3 cameras out of less than 10 (thats including the multiple ones @trevorbray has bought!!)
 
Mr Perceptive said:
What is it about MF Digital cameras, the loss rate amongst teh samll TP sample is very high - thats my first GFX and nowboth your 645x's that 3 cameras out of less than 10 (thats including the multiple ones @trevorbray has bought!!)
Click to expand...

Yours was a good old fall - I believe a quick release that didn't quite attach, mine was a courier. It can happen.

I will return to the MF fold at some stage, but got a dooer upper place to sort out first.
 
Mr Perceptive said:
What is it about MF Digital cameras, the loss rate amongst teh samll TP sample is very high - thats my first GFX and nowboth your 645x's that 3 cameras out of less than 10 (thats including the multiple ones @trevorbray has bought!!)
Click to expand...
Yep. I’ve had 3. Currently zero. And looking like quite a bit more gear to liquidise. Probably gonna need funds elsewhere…..b****r..
 
SFTPhotography said:
Sadly had, I sent the thing off for sensor cleaning, and the courier lost it. Thankfully I had the insurance etc cover the loss but there's two 645z's in the ether and lenses. I thought about replacing but moving house so the money was put aside and put down on that instead.

The D850 gets pretty close, and at medium to long FLs there isn't much in it - but nothing really matched the 645z and 28-45. Which also was lost in the process.

I cannot name the courier, there was a big stink and NDA etc due to the value of the claim
Click to expand...

Crickey! Well at least you still have the D850. I'm kind of thinking, if it's that close in IQ then when taking into account the AF of the D850 it could be worth a closer look.
 
gman said:
Crickey! Well at least you still have the D850. I'm kind of thinking, if it's that close in IQ then when taking into account the AF of the D850 it could be worth a closer look.
Click to expand...
I bought another one - they're under £1800 off the grey places. At that money, you won't do better. As an all round camera they're pretty much up there.

The lenses though aren't as good. That 28-45 Pentax was witch craft. The samples from the 100-200 Fuji looked great, I suspect the one is the 45-100 and 20-35. I do worry about the longevity of the focus by wire and I'm not a mirrorless chassis fan either but it's the way of things. The D850s are very pleasant to use, and work very well. Bit small mind you but anything is bar a phase one after a 645z.

The 70-200 2.8 FL ED nikon is OK- the wider zooms are just laughable crap on the D850 - the pixel density is quite unforgiving on the older lens designs and the long register distance (rear element to sensor distance) doesn’t lend itself well to designing short lenses with good corner sharpness.

So I've got Sigma ART primes (28, 40 and 50) and they're OK- but the MF is just that bit less brittle but also crisper yet more life like. There is an undeniable quality to MF - but like all these things you have to be on top of your game to get the most out of it.
 
Last edited:
@gman - we are in the world of dimishing returns here, the digital MF sensor although bigger than FF is still someway short in size compared to the benchmark of MF film, and this shows in the way the pictures 'look'.

There is 'something' about the digital MF over FF, it doesn't always show but when it does you can't go back! Even at lower resolution on a monitor display you can see it. I expected the benefits of higher resolution but I wasn't ready for the tonality and the depth to the images that I now get. As someone said, you look at a FF image, but you look into that from a GFX.

I'm fortunate that my lens focal length requirements are not large, in fact if push came to shove I could live happily with a supersized X100 and just have the GF45mm. Not needing a vast range of focal lengths keeps the costs down and the weight. In fact on the subject of cost original GFX50S and 50R bodies are now surprisingly affordable, and by buying clever some decent good value glass can be had.

The range of lenses may be limiting for some, and there is no real long focal length lenses, and the primes are not that 'fast'. In the GFX system we seem to be getting 2/3 new lenss a year, this year is likely to see a GF55mm F1.7 and GF30mm Tilt Shift. There is also a world of adapted glass, and as surprising amount of FF l;enses cover the full image circle on the GFX, but of course you are operating outside the design parameters of the lens. There is also a world of film era MF glass, but although this may render pleasingly, it is unlike to support the resolution requirements.

I would struggle if the GFX was my only system, which is why I've kept my X100 series cameras, I somethimes need a lighter weight compact solution. Its taken me a long time to work out the kit that I really want, and for the foreseeable future I can't see myself changing anything (unless i break it!)

@SFTPhotography - you'll be back, using the once seen never unseen rule means that its only a matter of time. I can see a GFX on the horizon.
 
Last edited:
Well I am hopefully going join the ranks of Digital MF soon, looking to pick up a machine next week.

Having looked around and around I am going for the original Fujifilm GFX 50s.

Yes I know there is a new one out and yes there is also a 100Mb one as well, plus Hasselblad, Phase, Pentax and Mamiya but for me and what I do and what I want to possible experiment with the 50s is the one I have set my heart on for many reason.

Also keep seeing @Mr Perceptive images from Oulton (which I really like) and all the blinking time I spend there I'm surprised I have not bumped into him :LOL: and that sensor is very nice.
 
Knikki said:
Well I am hopefully going join the ranks of Digital MF soon, looking to pick up a machine next week.

Having looked around and around I am going for the original Fujifilm GFX 50s.

Yes I know there is a new one out and yes there is also a 100Mb one as well, plus Hasselblad, Phase, Pentax and Mamiya but for me and what I do and what I want to possible experiment with the 50s is the one I have set my heart on for many reason.

Also keep seeing @Mr Perceptive images from Oulton (which I really like) and all the blinking time I spend there I'm surprised I have not bumped into him :LOL: and that sensor is very nice.
Click to expand...

I should be easy to spot, being the only one there with a GFX :ROFLMAO: - I'll almost certainly be back for the Gold Cup.

I re-bought an original GFX50S following my incident with the first one (a long way back in teh thread), its a great camera, and I would recommend the Tilt-EVF adapter, it really makes the shooting experience much more immersive, especially if you don't shoot at normal head height.
 
Last edited:
Mr Perceptive said:
I re-bought an original GFX50S following my incident with the first one (a long way back in teh thread), its a great camera, and I would recommend the Tilt-EVF adapter, it really makes the shooting experience much more immersive, especially if you don't shoot at normal head height.
Click to expand...
I agree with David on the EVF Tilt Adapter I wouldn't be without mine.
 
SFTPhotography said:
I bought another one - they're under £1800 off the grey places. At that money, you won't do better. As an all round camera they're pretty much up there.

The lenses though aren't as good. That 28-45 Pentax was witch craft. The samples from the 100-200 Fuji looked great, I suspect the one is the 45-100 and 20-35. I do worry about the longevity of the focus by wire and I'm not a mirrorless chassis fan either but it's the way of things. The D850s are very pleasant to use, and work very well. Bit small mind you but anything is bar a phase one after a 645z.

The 70-200 2.8 FL ED nikon is OK- the wider zooms are just laughable crap on the D850 - the pixel density is quite unforgiving on the older lens designs and the long register distance (rear element to sensor distance) doesn’t lend itself well to designing short lenses with good corner sharpness.

So I've got Sigma ART primes (28, 40 and 50) and they're OK- but the MF is just that bit less brittle but also crisper yet more life like. There is an undeniable quality to MF - but like all these things you have to be on top of your game to get the most out of it.
Click to expand...

At £1,800 I would probably be looking at the Sony A7Riv as well. although glass is expensive. But another camera has caught my eye, which is the D810 with its lovely 36MP sensor. At base ISO the dynamic range is pretty tasty - comparable to the 645z (but not once the ISO goes up). They can be had for under £500 which would allow me to get a 70-200 f/2.8 all for under a grand (or some other lens) and this is appealing because I just need a stop gap just now. I'll need to research this camera.

Apologies for the hijack in the MF thread.
 
gman said:
At £1,800 I would probably be looking at the Sony A7Riv as well. although glass is expensive. But another camera has caught my eye, which is the D810 with its lovely 36MP sensor. At base ISO the dynamic range is pretty tasty - comparable to the 645z (but not once the ISO goes up). They can be had for under £500 which would allow me to get a 70-200 f/2.8 all for under a grand (or some other lens) and this is appealing because I just need a stop gap just now. I'll need to research this camera.

Apologies for the hijack in the MF thread.
Click to expand...
I used a D810 for years. They're great and at that price point, incredible
 
SFTPhotography said:
I used a D810 for years. They're great and at that price point, incredible
Click to expand...

Nice one, just a quick last question before I fully tarnish the MF thread, is the 70-200mm 2.8 good enough for the resolution? I loved the old AF-S 80-200mm I once had, but it's perhaps a little too old now.
 
gman said:
Nice one, just a quick last question before I fully tarnish the MF thread, is the 70-200mm 2.8 good enough for the resolution? I loved the old AF-S 80-200mm I once had, but it's perhaps a little too old now.
Click to expand...

Only the FL ED version. Don't consider anything other than the last F mount version of that lens.

They're still quite dear but ideal for them. Really viceless lens and very little between it and the latest greatest mirrorless S version. It's a very similar optically formula and easily the best 70-200 2.8 lens for a SLR camera. I've seen samples from the Canon one and it s***'s all over it.


None of the Nikkor made 24-70's are really upto the job btw and some of the longer short/medium zooms are just beastly piles of plastic crap.

I'd think prime for the shorter FLs. I quite liked the 20 1.8 Nikkor on my D810, not so much on the 850. Sigma 24,28, 35, 40 and 50 ARTs all fine. Over the years I've had them all. the 35 is the weakest, then the 24, the 40 is the best, then the 28 and 50 is a nice lens. The pixel denisty of a D810 is more than a 50mp MF digital, so the lenses have to be pretty tip top. It's a bigger worry on the D850 again.

On the theme of MF digital, I would be very confident using the 100-200 on the 50mp, and probably the 45-100. The 32-64 didn't impress me, and I suspect the 20-35 will be ok. On the 100mp it is a very high-density sensor, more than a D850 so I'd really have to try the zooms on a trial basis before committing, as I suspect the primes probably will be needed to really resolve 100mp worth. It's a problem I will revisit in a few years.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top