Digital Medium Format Thread

SFTPhotography said:
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.
Click to expand...

Thanks for that, lots to think about. That 70-200mm is probably more than I want to spend on a stop gap, but I need to weigh up if going for something of lesser quality would be false economy. This is just home use though.
 
gman said:
Thanks for that, lots to think about. That 70-200mm is probably more than I want to spend on a stop gap, but I need to weigh up if going for something of lesser quality would be false economy. This is just home use though.
Click to expand...

You could do a 70-200 2.8 cheaply if you wanted. Sigma used version on here.


It won't be as good, but it depends what you are using it for. I am a big fan of pixel peeping and center to edge sharpness. This is the FL ED's strong point.

If it's for potraits/events it really doesn't matter so much.
 
Got a wee question for the medium format users. I quite like the crushed black look, depending on the scene, but would you worry that you are wasting the lovely wide dynamic range that MF has if doing this?
 
gman said:
Got a wee question for the medium format users. I quite like the crushed black look, depending on the scene, but would you worry that you are wasting the lovely wide dynamic range that MF has if doing this?
Click to expand...

If you are crushing blacks, then worrying about DR loss is hardly of a concern. The DR is one of the benefits of MF, there are others in image depth and tonality, etc, etc. Personally I wouldn't overthink it, if you try to buy a GFX (or similar) using head logic you'll soon come unstuck, there is a lot more to it than that :)
 
Evening all,

GAS has got the better of me and I have joined the ranks of MF with a Hasselblad X1D....

Quick question for anyone else in this thread - how are you finding Lightroom to edit these images. Last night, my LR was extremely laggy when editing these images, especially using brushes etc. Is this normal - my laptop has an above average spec imo, this leads onto the next question, is anyone using a Macbook Air (M1/M2) for editing MF and if you are, how is the performance?

A few quick snaps of my buddy who wanted to see the camera:

Yegeun Ji by Hawaii Photos, on Flickr

Yegeun Ji by Hawaii Photos, on Flickr
 
toohuge said:
Evening all,

GAS has got the better of me and I have joined the ranks of MF with a Hasselblad X1D....

Quick question for anyone else in this thread - how are you finding Lightroom to edit these images. Last night, my LR was extremely laggy when editing these images, especially using brushes etc. Is this normal - my laptop has an above average spec imo, this leads onto the next question, is anyone using a Macbook Air (M1/M2) for editing MF and if you are, how is the performance?

A few quick snaps of my buddy who wanted to see the camera:

Yegeun Ji by Hawaii Photos, on Flickr

Yegeun Ji by Hawaii Photos, on Flickr
Click to expand...
When I edited MF, I used DXO PL4, and that was on a 32c 64thread machine with 128gb ram and RTX4000 GPU. It didn't lag.

Above average spec doesn't say too much but I hope you have 64gb ram, good I7/i9 processor and dedicated GPU on it
 
SFTPhotography said:
When I edited MF, I used DXO PL4, and that was on a 32c 64thread machine with 128gb ram and RTX4000 GPU. It didn't lag.

Above average spec doesn't say too much but I hope you have 64gb ram, good I7/i9 processor and dedicated GPU on it
Click to expand...
Thanks @SFTPhotography .... no, it's an I7, 32 gb ram, with a gtx 3050 ... this is an expensive hobby haha

I'm curious how the M1/M2 chips perform. I'll try DXO and see how the performance is, shame Hasselbald / Capture One aren't compatible.
 
toohuge said:
Thanks @SFTPhotography .... no, it's an I7, 32 gb ram, with a gtx 3050 ... this is an expensive hobby haha

I'm curious how the M1/M2 chips perform. I'll try DXO and see how the performance is, shame Hasselbald / Capture One aren't compatible.
Click to expand...

Indeed. An app like DXO can fully utilise multi threaded machines, you might find it runs better. As a general tool DXO photolab is vastly superior to LR in every demonstrable way.
 
SFTPhotography said:
Indeed. An app like DXO can fully utilise multi threaded machines, you might find it runs better. As a general tool DXO photolab is vastly superior to LR in every demonstrable way.
Click to expand...
Thanks for the insights! I see Hasselblad is supported on DXO too - ill give it a try!
 
toohuge said:
Thanks @SFTPhotography .... no, it's an I7, 32 gb ram, with a gtx 3050 ... this is an expensive hobby haha

I'm curious how the M1/M2 chips perform. I'll try DXO and see how the performance is, shame Hasselbald / Capture One aren't compatible.
Click to expand...
I have a 2021 16gb Macbook pro running on the M1 pro chip and it runs flawlessly with LR when I'm editing 50mp GFX50ii files. There's no beachball or long pauses when applying the brush or clone tools.

My 5 year old iMac is a different story and freezes for 10 or so secs every time I apply the brush tool or even apply a small healing dot - it's basically impossible to edit with.

I reckon the M1 pro chip could easily handle much bigger files as I've recently stitched a few 7 shot panoramas on LR and it still doesn't get laggy when applying any of the brush/heal tools on the massive stitched file.
 
Last edited:
stuartm1 said:
I have a 2021 16gb Macbook pro running on the M1 pro chip and it runs flawlessly with LR when I'm editing 50mp GFX50ii files. There's no beachball or long pauses when applying the brush or clone tools.

My 5 year old iMac is a different story and freezes for 10 or so secs every time I apply the brush tool or even apply a small healing dot - it's basically impossible to edit with.

I reckon the M1 pro chip could easily handle much bigger files as I've recently stitched a few 7 shot panoramas on LR and it still doesn't get laggy when applying any of the brush/heal tools on the massive stitched file.
Click to expand...
Thanks @stuartm1 really useful insight! I'm going to give DXO a spin too - I found Capture One to be excellent, offering a lot more finess but it doesn't support Hasselblad. I'll be sure to report back.

Not that I need further convincing to get a Macbook, love the dark grey M2 air!
 
Afternoon all,

I finally used my (new to me) X1D for some portraits... annoyingly, I only have the 45mm 3.5 - wow lenses are expensive. However, the camera is simply a joy to use, it's very different to my other cameras, but I love the output.

Greta Sidlauskiene by Hawaii Photos, on Flickr

Greta Sidlauskiene by Hawaii Photos, on Flickr

Greta Sidlauskiene by Hawaii Photos, on Flickr

Greta Sidlauskiene by Hawaii Photos, on Flickr

I keep telling myself I don't need the 80 1.9 Vs. the 90 3.2, however both are telephone numbers expensive haha. But I'm delighted with these images.
 
toohuge said:
Afternoon all,

I finally used my (new to me) X1D for some portraits... annoyingly, I only have the 45mm 3.5 - wow lenses are expensive. However, the camera is simply a joy to use, it's very different to my other cameras, but I love the output.

Greta Sidlauskiene by Hawaii Photos, on Flickr

Greta Sidlauskiene by Hawaii Photos, on Flickr

Greta Sidlauskiene by Hawaii Photos, on Flickr

Greta Sidlauskiene by Hawaii Photos, on Flickr

I keep telling myself I don't need the 80 1.9 Vs. the 90 3.2, however both are telephone numbers expensive haha. But I'm delighted with these images.
Click to expand...

I really must unwatch this thread before I end up selling my D810 that I've only just bought. Damn you Medium Format!

But on a serious note, I had a peek at your Flickr stream and really like the full length one where she's walking towards the camera holding her hat. Lots of excellent photos in there, I particularly like the surfer one.
 
toohuge said:
Afternoon all,

I finally used my (new to me) X1D for some portraits... annoyingly, I only have the 45mm 3.5 - wow lenses are expensive. However, the camera is simply a joy to use, it's very different to my other cameras, but I love the output.

I keep telling myself I don't need the 80 1.9 Vs. the 90 3.2, however both are telephone numbers expensive haha. But I'm delighted with these images.
Click to expand...

The Blad lenses incorporate a leaf shutter, hence the premium.
 
In my film days I had an RB 67 and Pentax 645 aand a Yashica 635 twin lens. Wouldn't have much use for them today as I don't develope and print my own film and hard to find a place to get it done. Still have my Yashica 635 and take it out and pet it now and then. Loveable old camera. The other two I gave to a nephew that was getting into photography for a living. Problem with doing photography for a living is I don't have a clue how to sell stuff!
 
Last edited:
gman said:
I really must unwatch this thread before I end up selling my D810 that I've only just bought. Damn you Medium Format!

But on a serious note, I had a peek at your Flickr stream and really like the full length one where she's walking towards the camera holding her hat. Lots of excellent photos in there, I particularly like the surfer one.
Click to expand...
@gman I don't what it is exactly, but I love shooting medium format. There's something about it that is beyond the relative tech specs. Most likely that we are more invested in the results and spend more time planning and preparing the shoots.
 
TimHughes said:
@gman I don't what it is exactly, but I love shooting medium format. There's something about it that is beyond the relative tech specs. Most likely that we are more invested in the results and spend more time planning and preparing the shoots.
Click to expand...
I just wonder if today a med format is worth the money. Have seen some DSLR's with really high MP's that I'd think will make a much larger photo than I could use. ya might find out to print something you want from med format you need to get a 24" printer! Not saying that is bad but where do you stop?
 
TimHughes said:
@gman I don't what it is exactly, but I love shooting medium format. There's something about it that is beyond the relative tech specs. Most likely that we are more invested in the results and spend more time planning and preparing the shoots.
Click to expand...

It does appear so, especially in here, that MF isn't a point and shoot but a far more carefully crafted photograph. I'm sure this must help contribute towards the high level of quality, but some of the photographs you see have definitely got that magic MF look about them!
 
gman said:
I really must unwatch this thread before I end up selling my D810 that I've only just bought. Damn you Medium Format!

But on a serious note, I had a peek at your Flickr stream and really like the full length one where she's walking towards the camera holding her hat. Lots of excellent photos in there, I particularly like the surfer one.
Click to expand...
Thank you @gman - I forgot about my Flickr but thank you for the kind feedback. The surfing shots were bucket list item for me, I can't describe how exhilarating that experience was.
 
Don Fischer said:
I just wonder if today a med format is worth the money. Have seen some DSLR's with really high MP's that I'd think will make a much larger photo than I could use. ya might find out to print something you want from med format you need to get a 24" printer! Not saying that is bad but where do you stop?
Click to expand...

For sure, I think this is why I ended up with the D810 after reading an article on it that noted the MF levels of colour and dynamic range at base ISO 64 (although only at this ISO :() and I thought that would be a perfect temporary camera, whilst also having a decent autofocus system for those faster subjects.

It's just supposed to be an inexpensive stop-gap with the intent to delve into MF a little later, although the AF of MF is a sticking point for me and it's making we wonder if perhaps the D850 would be a better option seeing as I need the AF and I'll just have to compromise on that MF magic look, I definitely get that feeling of extra depth with MF photos.

It's a tough one, especially considering that used D850's currently go for not a huge amount over a grand and there's a big range of reasonably inexpensive high quality used lenses as well, compared to the hefty investment required for MF.
 
Don Fischer said:
I just wonder if today a med format is worth the money. Have seen some DSLR's with really high MP's that I'd think will make a much larger photo than I could use. ya might find out to print something you want from med format you need to get a 24" printer! Not saying that is bad but where do you stop?
Click to expand...

It's nothing at all to do with print size and not much to do with resolution (which is different). Remember the other thread where I mentioned it was about how the photo looks? You won't get a look like this with a compact or even a crop camera.

There is a lot more to this than is obvious.
 
ancient_mariner said:
It's nothing at all to do with print size and not much to do with resolution (which is different). Remember the other thread where I mentioned it was about how the photo looks? You won't get a look like this with a compact or even a crop camera.

There is a lot more to this than is obvious.
Click to expand...
More than is obvious? Of that I'm sure!
 
ancient_mariner said:
It's nothing at all to do with print size and not much to do with resolution (which is different). Remember the other thread where I mentioned it was about how the photo looks? You won't get a look like this with a compact or even a crop camera.

There is a lot more to this than is obvious.
Click to expand...
I have to agree - there is definitely something about the look of the images in this thread. I really shouldn't keep dropping in here :ROFLMAO:
 
toohuge said:
Afternoon all,

I finally used my (new to me) X1D for some portraits... annoyingly, I only have the 45mm 3.5 - wow lenses are expensive. However, the camera is simply a joy to use, it's very different to my other cameras, but I love the output.

Greta Sidlauskiene by Hawaii Photos, on Flickr

Greta Sidlauskiene by Hawaii Photos, on Flickr

Greta Sidlauskiene by Hawaii Photos, on Flickr

Greta Sidlauskiene by Hawaii Photos, on Flickr

I keep telling myself I don't need the 80 1.9 Vs. the 90 3.2, however both are telephone numbers expensive haha. But I'm delighted with these images.
Click to expand...
Must say, exquisite photography......stunning body of photographic work. wOOw

Respect.


Regards;
Peter
Scotland
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top