A Photography forum. PhotoBanter.com

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » PhotoBanter.com forum » Photo Equipment » Medium Format Photography Equipment
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

once agin: medium vs. digital



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old November 11th 04, 10:31 PM
Steve Lefevre
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default once agin: medium vs. digital

Hey folks -

I'm looking at the medium format cameras at my local camera shop. The sales
guy went over medium format with me, and also showed me a 24"x whatever
print from an 8 MP digital camera. So now I don't know what to buy.

Here's the cons vs. pros:

digital cons:

- 1 year warranty: I work with computers, and I really don't trust a
digital device that's not warrantied for more than one year. It feels like a
very expensive disposable camera. I know that when ( and when I say 'when',
I do mean 'when' and also 'soon') it breaks after 1 year, it will be more
expensive to repair than to replace.

- low quality images?: I've tried to find authoritative informatino on
grain vs. pixels, but stuff is all over the map. These large digital prints
I saw at the photo shop were very impressive, though.

digital pros:

- No cost for picture taking: I can blow 1000 photos a day and not pay for
any developing or printing.

- Easy to share and upload images.

- 1 year same as cash financing: there is a Christmas special at my local
camera place.

Medium format pros:

- Higher quality lenses: lenses would be better *I guess* for a MF system.

- Value Retention. The MF cameras would hold value for a long time, while a
digital camera would wuickly degrade in value. I'm certain after 10 years a
digital won't work and will be too expensive to fix.

- Alternate films: I can load Infrared film, very fast film ( like star
film), and high saturation film.

- Digital backs: do they make digital backs?

MF cons:

- Film , printing and developing.

- Upfront costs: no financing for used equipment.

I feel like if I buy a digital camera, I will be on a plan for revolving
purchases every 2-3 years. I feel like the repairable MF will last a long
time... I guess if they made digital backs, I would go medium format.



  #2  
Old November 11th 04, 11:32 PM
Diluted
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

medium format camera
120 film scanner

sorted.

"Steve Lefevre" wrote in message
...
Hey folks -

I'm looking at the medium format cameras at my local camera shop. The
sales
guy went over medium format with me, and also showed me a 24"x whatever
print from an 8 MP digital camera. So now I don't know what to buy.

Here's the cons vs. pros:

digital cons:

- 1 year warranty: I work with computers, and I really don't trust a
digital device that's not warrantied for more than one year. It feels like
a
very expensive disposable camera. I know that when ( and when I say
'when',
I do mean 'when' and also 'soon') it breaks after 1 year, it will be more
expensive to repair than to replace.

- low quality images?: I've tried to find authoritative informatino on
grain vs. pixels, but stuff is all over the map. These large digital
prints
I saw at the photo shop were very impressive, though.

digital pros:

- No cost for picture taking: I can blow 1000 photos a day and not pay for
any developing or printing.

- Easy to share and upload images.

- 1 year same as cash financing: there is a Christmas special at my local
camera place.

Medium format pros:

- Higher quality lenses: lenses would be better *I guess* for a MF system.

- Value Retention. The MF cameras would hold value for a long time, while
a
digital camera would wuickly degrade in value. I'm certain after 10 years
a
digital won't work and will be too expensive to fix.

- Alternate films: I can load Infrared film, very fast film ( like star
film), and high saturation film.

- Digital backs: do they make digital backs?

MF cons:

- Film , printing and developing.

- Upfront costs: no financing for used equipment.

I feel like if I buy a digital camera, I will be on a plan for revolving
purchases every 2-3 years. I feel like the repairable MF will last a long
time... I guess if they made digital backs, I would go medium format.





  #3  
Old November 11th 04, 11:57 PM
Neil Gould
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Recently, Steve Lefevre posted:

I feel like if I buy a digital camera, I will be on a plan for
revolving purchases every 2-3 years. I feel like the repairable MF
will last a long time... I guess if they made digital backs, I would
go medium format.

Well, "they" *do* make digital backs for MF cameras. But, since you're
concerned about the financing for used MF gear, it's not likely that
you'll be in the market for one any time soon.

http://www.imacon.dk/sw2264.asp

http://www.sl66.com/slx/acc_digital.htm

http://www.eyelike.de/temp/index.php...umn=1&column=1

My advice to you is to do two things:
First, search the archives of this newsgroup for the *many* discussions of
MF vs. digital. You'll come across numerous viewpoints and pros and cons
that you may not have considered.

Second, disrgard all of it, and concentrate on making images. Only you
know what you want to accomplish with your photography. I'd be surprised
if it's based on clicking the shutter release without ever making an
image.

Regards,

Neil





  #4  
Old November 11th 04, 11:57 PM
Neil Gould
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Recently, Steve Lefevre posted:

I feel like if I buy a digital camera, I will be on a plan for
revolving purchases every 2-3 years. I feel like the repairable MF
will last a long time... I guess if they made digital backs, I would
go medium format.

Well, "they" *do* make digital backs for MF cameras. But, since you're
concerned about the financing for used MF gear, it's not likely that
you'll be in the market for one any time soon.

http://www.imacon.dk/sw2264.asp

http://www.sl66.com/slx/acc_digital.htm

http://www.eyelike.de/temp/index.php...umn=1&column=1

My advice to you is to do two things:
First, search the archives of this newsgroup for the *many* discussions of
MF vs. digital. You'll come across numerous viewpoints and pros and cons
that you may not have considered.

Second, disrgard all of it, and concentrate on making images. Only you
know what you want to accomplish with your photography. I'd be surprised
if it's based on clicking the shutter release without ever making an
image.

Regards,

Neil





  #5  
Old November 11th 04, 11:57 PM
Neil Gould
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Recently, Steve Lefevre posted:

I feel like if I buy a digital camera, I will be on a plan for
revolving purchases every 2-3 years. I feel like the repairable MF
will last a long time... I guess if they made digital backs, I would
go medium format.

Well, "they" *do* make digital backs for MF cameras. But, since you're
concerned about the financing for used MF gear, it's not likely that
you'll be in the market for one any time soon.

http://www.imacon.dk/sw2264.asp

http://www.sl66.com/slx/acc_digital.htm

http://www.eyelike.de/temp/index.php...umn=1&column=1

My advice to you is to do two things:
First, search the archives of this newsgroup for the *many* discussions of
MF vs. digital. You'll come across numerous viewpoints and pros and cons
that you may not have considered.

Second, disrgard all of it, and concentrate on making images. Only you
know what you want to accomplish with your photography. I'd be surprised
if it's based on clicking the shutter release without ever making an
image.

Regards,

Neil





  #6  
Old November 12th 04, 12:14 AM
Fernando
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Thu, 11 Nov 2004 22:32:02 GMT, "Diluted"
wrote:

medium format camera
120 film scanner


I second this.
Mo

digital cons:

- 1 year warranty: I work with computers, and I really don't trust a
digital device that's not warrantied for more than one year.


Well, it depends from the camera (there are a high number of different
8mp digital cameras, from small compact all-in-one digicams to hi-end
digital reflex ("DSLR") like the Canon 1D-mkII, or medium-range
digital reflex like the Canon 20D).
You can bet a 1D-mkII (a camera built like a tank, with a shutter
designed for at least 150'000 actuations) will last more than 1 year.
:-)
Here in EU, digital cameras have 2 years of warranty. But they are the
same than in the USA. :-)

- low quality images?: I've tried to find authoritative informatino on
grain vs. pixels, but stuff is all over the map.


I have a 6mp digital reflex (Canon 10D), a bunch of all-in-one
digicams, plus 35mm and MF film gear of various kind (and 3 scanners).
I used all those stuff for work for some time, and now mostly for
hobby. I know how to make them work.
Now, please have a look he



This is *35mm* vs. 6mp DSLR.
I know, it's a synthetic benchmark, but I think it's food for thought,
at least.

These large digital
prints
I saw at the photo shop were very impressive, though.


You should see the 20"x25" digital print hanging from my wall,
obtained by a 645 slide (scanned by myself with a medium format
filmscanner). Loads of tiny details even when examined from 2 inches,
and magnificient tonal range. Now *that's* impressive. :-)

- No cost for picture taking: I can blow 1000 photos a day and not pay for
any developing or printing.


Spare rechargeable batteries, memory cards, memory card readers, spare
battery charger, sensor cleaning kits, ... you name it.

Medium format pros:

- Higher quality lenses: lenses would be better *I guess* for a MF system.

- Value Retention. The MF cameras would hold value for a long time, while


I won't bet on it. Many MF gear loosed value like nothing else during
the last two years. Many people is switching to digital for various
reasons, and some MF mfgers are running out of business, and leaving
MF scenes (Bronica, Fuji).
I'd even suggest to go for 2nd hand MF gear. Much less expensive, and
as you guessed, much of this stuff is built to last. Hardly weared off
after many years (I still use a lot a '86 Pentax 645).

digital camera would wuickly degrade in value.


That's sure. Digital technology is running very fast. Standards come,
standards go. New models supercede last year's models, in a fast-paced
game.

- Digital backs: do they make digital backs?


Yes. Not exactly cheap. :-)
A really good digital back is in the $15'000-$20'000 area (was $30'000
not long ago, but the introduction of two digital monsters like the
Canon 1Ds-mkII and Mamiya ZD, at around $9'000 and $15'000 price tag,
suggested a dramatic price cut), though you could find older ones for
half that price.

MF cons:

- Film , printing and developing.


If you buy a medium format filmscanner, you just have to shoot slides
and have them processed. Than you handle your files to a good
Lightjet-equipped digital printing lab, and you're OK. Large digital
prints costs so much less than large Cibachromes. :-)
Of course you'll have to really learn Photoshop or whatever. But
you'll have to do that even if you buy a digital camera. :-)

Fernando
  #7  
Old November 12th 04, 12:14 AM
Fernando
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Thu, 11 Nov 2004 22:32:02 GMT, "Diluted"
wrote:

medium format camera
120 film scanner


I second this.
Mo

digital cons:

- 1 year warranty: I work with computers, and I really don't trust a
digital device that's not warrantied for more than one year.


Well, it depends from the camera (there are a high number of different
8mp digital cameras, from small compact all-in-one digicams to hi-end
digital reflex ("DSLR") like the Canon 1D-mkII, or medium-range
digital reflex like the Canon 20D).
You can bet a 1D-mkII (a camera built like a tank, with a shutter
designed for at least 150'000 actuations) will last more than 1 year.
:-)
Here in EU, digital cameras have 2 years of warranty. But they are the
same than in the USA. :-)

- low quality images?: I've tried to find authoritative informatino on
grain vs. pixels, but stuff is all over the map.


I have a 6mp digital reflex (Canon 10D), a bunch of all-in-one
digicams, plus 35mm and MF film gear of various kind (and 3 scanners).
I used all those stuff for work for some time, and now mostly for
hobby. I know how to make them work.
Now, please have a look he



This is *35mm* vs. 6mp DSLR.
I know, it's a synthetic benchmark, but I think it's food for thought,
at least.

These large digital
prints
I saw at the photo shop were very impressive, though.


You should see the 20"x25" digital print hanging from my wall,
obtained by a 645 slide (scanned by myself with a medium format
filmscanner). Loads of tiny details even when examined from 2 inches,
and magnificient tonal range. Now *that's* impressive. :-)

- No cost for picture taking: I can blow 1000 photos a day and not pay for
any developing or printing.


Spare rechargeable batteries, memory cards, memory card readers, spare
battery charger, sensor cleaning kits, ... you name it.

Medium format pros:

- Higher quality lenses: lenses would be better *I guess* for a MF system.

- Value Retention. The MF cameras would hold value for a long time, while


I won't bet on it. Many MF gear loosed value like nothing else during
the last two years. Many people is switching to digital for various
reasons, and some MF mfgers are running out of business, and leaving
MF scenes (Bronica, Fuji).
I'd even suggest to go for 2nd hand MF gear. Much less expensive, and
as you guessed, much of this stuff is built to last. Hardly weared off
after many years (I still use a lot a '86 Pentax 645).

digital camera would wuickly degrade in value.


That's sure. Digital technology is running very fast. Standards come,
standards go. New models supercede last year's models, in a fast-paced
game.

- Digital backs: do they make digital backs?


Yes. Not exactly cheap. :-)
A really good digital back is in the $15'000-$20'000 area (was $30'000
not long ago, but the introduction of two digital monsters like the
Canon 1Ds-mkII and Mamiya ZD, at around $9'000 and $15'000 price tag,
suggested a dramatic price cut), though you could find older ones for
half that price.

MF cons:

- Film , printing and developing.


If you buy a medium format filmscanner, you just have to shoot slides
and have them processed. Than you handle your files to a good
Lightjet-equipped digital printing lab, and you're OK. Large digital
prints costs so much less than large Cibachromes. :-)
Of course you'll have to really learn Photoshop or whatever. But
you'll have to do that even if you buy a digital camera. :-)

Fernando
  #8  
Old November 12th 04, 01:34 AM
rafe bustin
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Thu, 11 Nov 2004 16:31:57 -0500, "Steve Lefevre"
wrote:

Hey folks -

I'm looking at the medium format cameras at my local camera shop. The sales
guy went over medium format with me, and also showed me a 24"x whatever
print from an 8 MP digital camera. So now I don't know what to buy.

Here's the cons vs. pros:



If image quality is a serious concern, or
if you intend to make very large prints,
forget the digicam, unless it's something
in the Canon 1Ds class. And even then,
the comparison would be to 645, which
some folks refer to as "half-frame" MF.

MF is quite a bit more fuss and bother,
and you *will* want a good MF scanner.
The cost of the scanner should be
considered in your calculations.

I've got a 10D and two 645 cameras.
I use 'em all, but where image quality
is paramount, the 10D isn't my first
choice.

I do think the 10D gives my Nikons a
run for the money, but MF is in a
different league.


rafe b.
http://www.terrapinphoto.com
  #9  
Old November 12th 04, 03:02 AM
David J. Littleboy
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Steve Lefevre" wrote:
Hey folks -

Here's the cons vs. pros:

digital cons:

- 1 year warranty: I work with computers, and I really don't trust a
digital device that's not warrantied for more than one year. It feels like

a
very expensive disposable camera. I know that when ( and when I say

'when',
I do mean 'when' and also 'soon') it breaks after 1 year, it will be more
expensive to repair than to replace.


You need to relate the price of the digital _camera_ to the price of the
film you would have shot. The digital body _is_ disposable. It's a new game.
In some sense, the electronic film cameras are similar in that the
electronics won't be repairable. But older cameras are only repairable if
you can find someone competent and can afford to pay for their time. Playing
with old cameras isn't as easy as some make it out to be.

- low quality images?: I've tried to find authoritative informatino on
grain vs. pixels, but stuff is all over the map. These large digital

prints
I saw at the photo shop were very impressive, though.


IMHO, it's clear that 6MP isn't as good as 35mm, but 8MP is pretty close.
645 and 16.7 MP are probably very close, but 6x7 and 6x9 with ISO 100 film
and 4000 dpi scans will more than edge out 16.7MP.

digital pros:

- No cost for picture taking: I can blow 1000 photos a day and not pay

for
any developing or printing.


At ISO 1600, dSLRs are way ahead of 35mm film.

Medium format pros:

- Higher quality lenses: lenses would be better *I guess* for a MF

system.

Actually, MF lenses are generally worse than their 35mm counterparts in
terms of MTF and limiting resolution performance. They are a _lot_ better in
lines-per-height terms, though.

- Value Retention. The MF cameras would hold value for a long time, while

a
digital camera would wuickly degrade in value. I'm certain after 10 years

a
digital won't work and will be too expensive to fix.


Note that the MF camera has lost the money you spent on film and processing.
If you make your own prints, you need a darkroom or a scanner. The
darkroom's cheaper and makes better B&W, but the scanner + inkjet is a lot
less painful than doing color yourself.

Note, however, that scanning and darkroom work are increadible sinks of
time. Both Adams and Winogrand (sp?) died with multiple tens of thousands of
images taken that they never got around to printing. My experience with
scanned MF is that I get out to the countryside twice a year, shoot 5 to 10
rolls of 120/220, and spend six months scanning. If you go out with your
dSLR and shoot, say, spring flowers, you can come home evaluate the images
in much more detail (and zero cost) than you could with 1-hour test prints
and go out and reshoot the next day. With MF, you really don't know what
you've got till you've scanned or printed, and your next shot at those
images is a year away.

So digital the first day, 6x7 the next is one way to go.

- Alternate films: I can load Infrared film, very fast film ( like star
film), and high saturation film.


With digital, you can change the "film type" with a dSLR at every shot. IR
sensitivity is pretty low, but it's there. If you capture in RAW, you can
change the (daylight/tungsten) type of the film _for the same shot_ after
the fact.

- Digital backs: do they make digital backs?


You can't afford a digital back, and the largest one is 38x48mm, so no wide
angle.

MF cons:

- Film , printing and developing.

- Upfront costs: no financing for used equipment.

I feel like if I buy a digital camera, I will be on a plan for revolving
purchases every 2-3 years.


Exactly. Some people enjoy thatg.

I feel like the repairable MF will last a long
time... I guess if they made digital backs, I would go medium format.


They do. They start at US$10,000.

David J. Littleboy
Tokyo, Japan



  #10  
Old November 12th 04, 05:21 AM
rafe bustin
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Fri, 12 Nov 2004 11:02:50 +0900, "David J. Littleboy"
wrote:



Note, however, that scanning and darkroom work are increadible sinks of
time. Both Adams and Winogrand (sp?) died with multiple tens of thousands of
images taken that they never got around to printing. My experience with
scanned MF is that I get out to the countryside twice a year, shoot 5 to 10
rolls of 120/220, and spend six months scanning. If you go out with your
dSLR and shoot, say, spring flowers, you can come home evaluate the images
in much more detail (and zero cost) than you could with 1-hour test prints
and go out and reshoot the next day. With MF, you really don't know what
you've got till you've scanned or printed, and your next shot at those
images is a year away.

So digital the first day, 6x7 the next is one way to go.



IMO, Dave overstates the pain of film scanning.

It takes me two or three evenings to scan a roll
of MF on my LS-8000, and that's only if I choose
to scan each frame. Figure 15 minutes per frame,
all told - which includes setup, focus, scan,
and saving/reviewing the file.

Dave's right on with the benefits of digital
capture, it's meaningful and makes me productive
in surprising ways. There's really no excuse for
coming home with bad pix from a decent, working
digicam. (Always bring an extra battery and
memory card...)

So it's like Dave says -- the 10D comes out with
me on the first visit to a new locale. It gives
me lots of mobility and the freedom to snap
away and experiment with views and perspectives.

If the place is good enough to warrant a return
trip, I'll most likely bring the MF or LF kit,
working more slowly, to capture a few of the
angles that worked well the first time.



rafe b.
http://www.terrapinphoto.com
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Sad news for film-based photography Ronald Shu Medium Format Photography Equipment 199 October 6th 04 01:34 AM
Sad news for film-based photography Ronald Shu 35mm Photo Equipment 200 October 6th 04 12:07 AM
Anti-digital backlash continues ... Bill Hilton Medium Format Photography Equipment 284 July 5th 04 05:40 PM
Which is better? digital cameras or older crappy cameras thatuse film? Michael Weinstein, M.D. In The Darkroom 13 January 24th 04 10:51 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:03 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 PhotoBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.