OPF forum blog - making the shift to MF...or not.

[Eric Hiss]

Hi All,
Since my guess is there are some others also considering a medium format camera with digital back (MFDB) , I thought I would post some of my experiences here.

I have a Rollei 6008 AF and Phase p20 back that I have been playing with for the last few days. I'm not new to photography or to digital, and consider myself to be an advanced photographer. Previously I have shot only 35mm format cameras - nikon film, canon film, Canon 1Ds, 1D, 5D and nikon d70. Currently my favorite 35mm camera is the Leica R8 with the 10mp digital back (DMR).

I have made extensive use of tilt/shift lenses adapted to my cameras and wanted to make the shift to MF since there are many more options here for T/S with MF plus the extras pixels won't hurt.


I may have mentioned why I chose the Rollei system over contax, mamiya or hasselblad. The Rollei 6008 uses the Schneider Kreuznach lenses which I think are superior. It has up to 1/1000 strobe sync and a 6x6 format. It also has AF and a nice big prism viewfinder. I think arguments can be made for any of the other systems. Mamiya has some great wide lenses which are really a good value, Hasselblad is probably the most common brand and bits and lenses can be rented nearly everywhere and service can be found in any big city.

Okay now on to my first experiences with the Rollei:

1) Its a big beast, but pretty easy to manage since it comes with an adjustable handgrip.
2) AF is butt slow compared to any modern DSLR. Only 3 points and they're all in the center ? - You've got to be kidding! Rollei must know you can't get good images with the focus and recompose technique? It's a joke really, but Contax isn't much better. I think the new H series wins here.
3) Fire the camera....WHOP! Wow this thing is really a beast, really loud and quite a lot of action. Good thing the mirror lockup button is very handy - just in reach of my left thumb. I'll be using that.
4) Really strange looking through a waist level finder - you move the camera but the scene through the finder moves differently - kind of hangs on to the part you were just looking at. Hard to explain that. I switched to the 45 degree prism and this is more familiar. It's much easier to see perspective distortion with the MF camera - I mean verticals converging or diverging as you tilt the camera up and down.
5) MF focusing is harder than on my canon or leica, but I don't know why as the viewfinder is brighter and bigger. Hmmm....

to be continued.

 

[Eric Hiss]

6) MF needs more light than 35mm
7) Harder to hand hold at slower shutter speeds than 35mm

8) Cool thing about the Rollei, I just discovered. I put my canon 580ex flash on the camera set to manual at 1/2 power and fired away with the rollei set to aperture priority mode and it metered the shutter speed correctly. How did it do this? Wow! I can set the speed to 1/1000 and still use my canon flash! The rollei is metering the shutter correctly until I run out of flash power. Wow!!!!

9) Look at files in computer.... P20 back is super noisy at ISO 200 ... don't think I'll try 400 or 800. Yuk!

10) set up simple test scene in studio. Rollei works perfectly with the pocket wizard to trigger strobes. Great. Didn't think I'd have a problem here but wanted to check. Great the Rollei will indeed do strobe sync at shutter speeds of 1/1000th. This is wonderful!

11) Using same set-up with tripod, compare Rollei / P20 to my Leica/DMR. I'll have to post images tomorrow

12) blind test - which images looks more real? I put up both on the computer to same size and ask my wife. She picks the Leica! Says that without question the one on the left (leica) is better. Hmmm... I have to agree - the leica has more accurate looking color.

stay tuned, I will post images and 100% crops tomorrow.

 

[Bart_van_der_Wolf]

stay tuned, I will post images and 100% crops tomorrow.

Thanks for sharing your findings, much appreciated.

Bart

 

[Ray West]

Hi Eric,

Thanks for posting. I'm sure you will sort the colour OK. I assume the lag in the waist level vf is because it's an lcd, not optical. Is that bright enough os in sunlight?

Best wishes,

Ray

 

[Marian Howell]

i'm following along eric..thanks for your explanations!
i'm curious as to how your opinion evolves over time...

 

[Eric Hiss]

Here are some images from the Rollei/P20 and the Leica R8/DMR

Hi,
Okay let me first say this was not the most scientific test but a casual comparision of two of my camera setups. I tried to light a scene with enough contrast to use all or more of the Dynamic range available in the cameras and also have plenty of shadow and contain colors that have been problematic with digital cameras (blue and purple). I also wanted to include something that had a lot of detail - a pheasant feather in this case to check sharpness.

I only have the 80mm f/2.8 PQS lens for the Rollei so I used that at f/11 and because I had a choice of lenses for the Leica I used my 50mm summilux ROM since that's the 35mm equiv of the Rollei 80. Both cameras have crop factors. Profoto strobes with standard relector with a 10deg grid was used to light from the side. Same lighting on both cameras but I had to turn the power way down for the Leica.
Both images processed in Lightroom but I also checked RAW conversion in both Phaseone DB and Flexcolor software - pretty similar results - but easier to use the same program for both.

Now here are the images....

Rollei / P20 full image (resized)

Leica / DMR full image (resized)

 

[Eric Hiss]

and here are the crops and analysis

Rollei 100% crops

Leica 100% crops

I think the color on the Leica matches the actual scene better - It's particularly noticeable on the feather which is almost grey on the P20 (even more grey using C1 and their profiles than in lightroom) and the color is also better in the specular highlights and reflections on the blue glass in crop 2. The p20 is getting purple and stuff.

Clearly both cameras got some moire in the feathers. Considering that the Leica has only 2584 vert pixels, and the P20 has 4088 I'd say that the Leica combination lens+DMR is really resolving quite a lot of detail and holds up really well against the p20. Both cameras had about the same DR - I can see about 1 stop more DR or less advantage to the P20.

Sorry that I moved the feathers between shots and didn't size up the two frames better but hey its only a casual test.

Just out of curiousity, which image do you prefer and why? Which one looks more real to you?
Eric

 

[Asher Kelman]

Very interesting work Eric!

I studied all the images carefully and of course was impressed by the Leica. However, when asked which is more real, there's no question, the Rollei clearly is the winner. The glass is more dimensional and I feel I could grasp the objects if I wish.

The Leica seems 2 dimensional after the Rollei picture! Of course, some might say the images are not processed well from the Leica or else my computer screen is no good!

Asher

 

[Eric Hiss]

funny

Yeah Asher,
I need to do more tests but I am pretty amazed the Leica holds up as well as it does. I wonder how much the camera angle has to do with the Rollei generating more 3D and how much has to do with the larger format. Definitely from a distance the full image looks like it has depth, but when I look at the crops the leica stands out as the winner. Also my work set-up here I have two calibrated screens. I put up both images in 16bit on the full screen and last night my wife and I viewed them together and we both picked the leica hands down as the winner. Now in the images I posted I do agree the rollei has more depth but the color in the glass is totally fake on the p20 crop as is the feather. So its a real toss up.

I'll have to do more shooting side by side. I hope to have some model shoots next week and then we'll see. i know the leica well and am very comfortable. I started out thinking that I would sell off my leica without hesitation if the Rollei/P20 was good, but after spending a few days with it, there is no way you can take my leica away from me.

The Rollei 6008 I have seems real sloppy and loose. The prism wobbles, the film back and digital back wobbles. The shutter button is really hard to press. The 80mm f/2.8 PQS lens which costs more than $2k new is full of plastic and sound worse than a cheap $50 canon lens. I'm not thrilled with the build quality on the Rollei. Problem is I don't know if I just have a soft one or not. Never even seen one locally before buying this one on ebay.

I'm going to play with it some more and try and see what it can do. There are some good sides...
Eric

 

[Asher Kelman]

The Rollei 6008 I have seems real sloppy and loose. The prism wobbles, the film back and digital back wobbles. The shutter button is really hard to press. The 80mm f/2.8 PQS lens which costs more than $2k new is full of plastic and sound worse than a cheap $50 canon lens. I'm not thrilled with the build quality on the Rollei. Problem is I don't know if I just have a soft one or not. Never even seen one locally before buying this one on ebay.

I you would look at the cameras some of the greatest guys used you'd have remarked much the same! Still, I don't see why things should not just mate perfectly!!!!! My father in Laws 4-5 Hassys did, my Bronica is made perfectly and I remember the C-330 Mamiya twin lens relflex camera with interchangable lenses that fit exacly like parts of a Swiss watch!

I'm puzzled. Maybe I'll shuffle through some used cameras at Samys and see if the have a 6008 and check the fit of the back and lenses!

There is one bright part to this (besides the fact that your set up for $8000 produces beautiful files), you'll be able to use it as a trade in to get the Hy6. The lens will work with the new camera! :~)

In the meanwhile, the camera, I think is wonderful although you may need to profile it. That's, after all, something that you, especially, can easily do!

Asher

 

[Eric Hiss]

Hi All,

I've shot the Rollei / p20 more. The more I work with it the more I feel comfortable with the camera, but I'm still not sure its for me. It's clear that this camera can produce a very nice file - great colors and sharpness but still I am not sure about MF.

A while back I posted some sample images taken with the Leica 35-70 f/2.8 elmarit at the Golden Gate Park in SF. I was so impressed with the sharpness of that lens and the r8/DMR back. Well this week I returned to the same spot and took a similar picture with the Rollei 6008. You know what? I had a hard time repeating this picture because this camera needs so much more light. It was a brighter day but I could only shoot at 1/160 and f/4 with ISO 100. The phase p20 base ISO is 50, so I didn't want to go much higher than 100. I used mirror lockup on every shot and had some that where sharp in places but not in others. I don't think I could get a sharp image with less than 1/160 even with mirror lockup. That's a big disappointment. I may be doing something wrong or maybe I need to have my camera CLA'd. The shutter in the lens should not cause much shake.... Hmmm....

Well comparing bits of the files - there does seem to be more detail in the Rollei images but only in the sharp sections. Also some parts of the files have a wonderful 3d look.

Still weighing this....some pluses, some minuses.

Asher,
The p20 comes with some very excellent profiles in the phase DB capture program which is just like c1 except you can't use images from anything other than one of their backs. Lightroom files look very good too. It may be better with my own profiles but I have no way to do this myself. I think Edmund Roland is making camera profiles? Is he still posting here?
And finally I wish it only cost $8k, but the cost was higher.
Eric

 

[Ben Rubinstein]

Shooting at f4 (on MF!) will not give you much for a scenic view especially if you are battling a camera shake issue. Once you have got to the bottom of it it might well be worth going and trying it again with optimal DOF, no reason why you shouldn't be able to get an incredible file at f22, iso 50 and whatever shutter speed you want, just stick it on a tripod.

 

[Eric Hiss]

Ben,
You picked up on my point. I was able to use a smaller aperture with my leica and get the shot I wanted. I was NOT able to get the same shot with the Rollei (unless I was willing to carry a tripod and was allowed to use a tripod).

Eric

 

[Bart_van_der_Wolf]

Ben,
You picked up on my point. I was able to use a smaller aperture with my leica and get the shot I wanted. I was NOT able to get the same shot with the Rollei (unless I was willing to carry a tripod and was allowed to use a tripod).

And what's more, if you needed the same DOF then it would require an even smaller apterture on the MF camera. That's not a problem by itself, but it definitively would lead to a different style of photography (again, not a real problem, just different).

I also wonder how much of the so called 3D look can be attributed to DOF and sharpening differences?

Bart

 

[Eric Hiss]

I also wonder how much of the so called 3D look can be attributed to DOF and sharpening differences?

Bart

Hi Bart,
Lot's of debate over the 3D look, certainly this has a lot of contributing factors. Near as I can tell lenses have a lot to do with it but the magnification size (sensor/film plane size) does seem to make a difference. While I'm not an expert on optics, from what I have read, the larger the film plane, the steeper the gradient at which the sharpness drops off from the focus point in distance. There is a lot of discussion about DOF, but there really is only one distance at which subjects are truly sharp...we have DOF because we just can't see the difference due to constraints of the recording and printing.

So anyhow, I definitely see this with my tests with the Rollei. It does appear to have more 3D in some shots than my Leica DMR/ and much more 3D than my canon 5D.

I think you are much more knowledgeable than I on some of the technical points, but it appears that the 3D look depends on the following factors:

Lens sharpness/contrast (dunno if 5 lp/mm is more important than 40 lp/mm)
Magnification factor (sensor size/film size)
Dynamic range and smoothness of color transition
Lighting (out side the control of the camera gear)


Eric

 

[Ray West]

Hi Eric,

While I'm not an expert on optics, from what I have read, the larger the film plane, the steeper the gradient at which the sharpness drops off from the focus point in distance.

I think that is a major issue, one that is virtually impossible to correct. It is easy to spot in the 'movie' world. Whatever they do, wrt adding grain, changing fps, etc. on the relatively small size sensor area of a video camera, they can not get it to look like film. Film, being larger format, is easier to focus on the talking head, with video it is virtually impossible to achieve that effect. Looking at it in a another way, (except for macro, I guess), all cameras are a crop of reality. Size does matter. But, to get equal quality in the other areas, to be able to use the size feature, will be expensive.

Although it is not a direct comparison, your blue glass examples, there is a lot of detail differences in the images, but it is difficult to isolate them from differences in the shooting conditions/lens, etc. and resizing/jpg for showing here. You may well find that the surface textures are more defined on the larger format.

Generally speaking, foreground is the bottom of the image, background is the top, the sides can be anything. The 3d effect depends broadly on how those spaces are used. A larger format gives you more control over how thiose spaces are used, and generally allows larger prints. It is a whole different thing compared to putting images on a vdu. But we know all this, but still forget. ;-)

I like your explorations, Eric. It saves me a lot of money ;-)

Best wishes,

Ray

 

[Bart_van_der_Wolf]

The 3d effect depends broadly on how those spaces are used. A larger format gives you more control over how thiose spaces are used, and generally allows larger prints.

Which is why I suspect that DOF (and viewing distance) plays a large factor in the so-called 3D feeling. The lower need for output magnification also helps to reduce the effects of the AA-filter (if one is used) and demosaicing, and obviously output resolution.

I like your explorations, Eric. It saves me a lot of money ;-)

Yes, ditto. Given Eric's background with a very good smaller format DSLR it also allows for a less biased comparison, and although there always is a post-purchase-justification bias involved, Eric's evaluations seem to be not overly impacted.

Bart

 

[leonardobarreto.com]

*I see a bit more detail in shadows and high lights of the Medium Format image
*In PhaseOne there is sometimes difference in the way color gets interpreted with different profiles, in some cases to just balance the white point is not sufficient. It is easy to just go from one profile to the other to see what happens.

A medium format is a different beast altogether, it needs tripods, strobes, hot lights etc etc. The way to use it for street photography would be other than handheld and with low ISO and slow speed, same treatment as a view camera.

For people street photography I would go with the Leica.

AF I use it OFF, but the electronic confirmation aid is very useful it tells me in what direction I want to turn the focusing ring and when I have reached perfect focus.

What works for me is shooting tethered to my laptop, I can press "enter" and the Mamiya captures (not with the Leaf backs, you have to shoot the camera) using the power of the computer to run the Digital Back.

Clients love the 63MB file and the latitude is fantastic. Last time I had to shoot an sculpture that had white marble spheres and tested the new C1 high light and shadow tool... it works...

In other words, good is relative, and a Medium Format Digital System's advantage does exist, but is very narrow.

I am in similar situation: one day I decided that I had to get one so I went and maxedup my CC. I got what I asked for, no more no less...

 

[Asher Kelman]

Hi Leonardo,

So glad you add your experience to this. Maybe you could reproduce Eric's tests. I wonder to what extent differences are just due to different lenses?

Maybe shooting the same subject with different MF lens of the same focal length but different MFR would shed some light on this!

I was taken back by the reality you provide about using MF for street photography! I have been lusting after a DB and it never occured to me to think of such limitations!

Asher

 

[Eric Hiss]

Yes, MF is much harder to shoot than a DSLR! Getting sharp focus is a pain! I think it has a lot to do with what gives it the 3D effect - sharper transitions from focus to OOF. This requires much more accurate focus, and that condition is even more pronounced when you use the digital back.

I'm willing to do some more tests with my gear if anyone wants to see something. Asher if you have server space, I can also provide the RAW files.

I have 3 cameras that can be used, the Rollei/P20, Leica DMR, and Canon 5D. I will need to sell at least one of these systems and honestly, if I had any bias in the testing, I want to show myself that I don't need the Rollei because if I do like it then I have a lot of lenses, etc to buy and its the most expensive to start with. The Leica + DMR is really an amazing system. I realized right away after buying the Rollei, that I could not part with it no matter how nice the Rollei was.

You can easily carry the Rollei around and shoot with mirror lockup though. Certainly you are going to get a lot more attention than with something small like the M8.

 

[leonardobarreto.com]

Eric, Asher

It all depends on the subject matter and how you shoot it. In my case I don't take the DB out because it is my working system and things get stored in the "ready to use" order so that I don't have any problems the next day.

Having said that, I think that a DB could be used in the field... with a tripod, if you are going to put it on a large display and zoom to 100% and expect de detail to be there, then you need the tripod, but there are other elements besides that.

Remember the image by Robert Capa of the invation of Normandy? that had no detail at all, --by the way, there is a incredible article about photography in the NYT http://morris.blogs.nytimes.com/200...st-the-chicken-or-the-egg-part-one/index.html
but is extremely long and meticulous but reads like a detective novel ---

Yo can shoot with a large format system, or one that is the is the equivalent but digital, and take advantage of the rich graduation of grays, the large latitude from high light to shadow, the detail even in the out of focus parts, etc

Regarding the handling of cameras I remember when I was a photojournalist and where very suspicious of the new technology creeping in that was replacing the shutter mechanism from mechanic to electro activated.
I think the Leica 8 just did the move only from the 7... we use to say "no real photographer uses a camera that stops shooting when batteries die"

I had the Canon 1F, a fantastic metal clad tank of a camera and I used it in the jungles of Nicaragua where journalists where also issued AK 47 "for personal protection". That model was battery driven.

Cameras of today are FAT and have ugly looking lenses with even uglier hoods. What happened to the sleek motor drives and the non zoom lenses -- then the zoom was having two cameras, one with a wide and the other with a tele--?? people now are used to multi zone fast auto focus an fast "motor drives".

One time I was inbeded (the term was not invented yet) in the Nicaraguan's People's Army and the communications officer took all my film but 5 rolls so that he could control my the flow of my work in the trenches. That same week I was involved in a 3 day 2 night battle and managed to cover it with the 5 rolls.

http://leonardobarreto.com/AQUI/index.htm

here are two images from then, one of the shooting at night taken with the only lens I had, a Coano 50mm 1.4 (I also carried a teleconverter) and the other --same lens-- of the soldiers at sunset.

So, my point is that things are getting better, technologically, at the same time that they are also getting worse

http://leonardobarreto.com/AQUI/source/056.htm
http://leonardobarreto.com/AQUI/source/058.htm
sorry, I can't make the images mount here...

 

[Asher Kelman]

Leonardo,

How quiet was the shutter?

I once advanced the film in a bayonette driven camera. There was a metal click that broke the silence and attracted attention. Soldiers on roof tops and from windows swung their guns towards me accompanied by clicks of safety locks released. Lucky for me they were not too jittery and an were totally under the control of an officer who waved them to stand down!

Maybe we should have a thread devoted to "embedded" images of combat!

Asher

 

[Asher Kelman]

Leonardo,

You can do the tests in your studio!

Asher

 

[Eric Hiss]

Leonardo,
Thanks for sharing the images with us. The shot of the boy with the rifle with another younger boy is pretty amazing. Hard to imagine that. It must have been a very interesting experience for you to have been there.

I also liked the image you use on your main site to link to the personal work section. It has a kind of still quality that I like and reminded me of one of the early photographers named Karl Blossfeldt who did macro studies of plants.
Eric

 

[leonardobarreto.com]

Thank you all, the thing is from the Achiote or Bixa orellana, here is the wikipage http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Bixa_orellana.jpg,

It is a very interesting plant, I found some in a very desolate empty lot while doing architectural work in Ecuador and photographed it in the studio. It has an aggressive sexiness to it...

I miss not having a studio, here in New York, so I am considering to re-joint the Camera Club of New York, but I will tell you about it latter.

Regarding the stories of covering the war in Nicaragua, I promised Asher I was going to do it, so I will work on it, in other words, the promise is delayed but on going.

But I have one related to what Asher said, but not to the shutter -- that Canon F1 was a delight to trigger -- I, like the rest of the troop slept in the tropical rain forest with two things: one hammock and one black plastic "blanket" on top. The first we fixed in the first available pair of trees and the second went on top as cover for the rain of the night -- they don't call it rain forest for nothing -- so one night, after walking 12 hours non-stop I fall asleep fast and begin to dream almost instantly. I think that it was probably the exhaustion on one side and the absolute darkness of the jungle plus the black plastic covering me. So here I am in this very realistic dream going down in a slippery wet jungle slope and not being able to stop. So I screamed and push the blanket away so loud that all the soldiers got up and ready for combat. After I explained that I was ok and not being strangled by the Contras (remember Reagan's freedom fighters?) and I go back to sleep only to go back to the same dream, as if I had just put a movie on pause to go get some juice....

Now I want to read a story from Asher, I think there should be some...

 

[Eric Hiss]

Leonardo,
Thanks for the link to that Achiote.



Now waiting for a new focusing screen for the Rollei from Bill Maxwell (Maxwell Precision Optics) .... Hoping this will enable me to manual focus better. That's been part of my problem with the Rollei so far. I have Bill's focusing screens in my Leica and canon bodies and they did make a difference. I expect it sometime this week so hopefully more shots after that. I'll try and post more comparisons of the 3 cameras then.

 

[leonardobarreto.com]

Eric, I did a test with a friend that has a Canon 1DsMk2 and my PhaseOne. After reading your posts I went back to see the difference and it is definitively there, I will post the crops to 100% so you can see, (I have them on my other computer, so probably tomorrow)

I like the integration of my Mamiya that is a one piece with the view finder and grip. Makes the camera very solid and compact, but sometimes I wish someone made a mini hasselblad-design digital camera. I shot square format with a Bronica that my father gave to me and with the Mamiya twin lens reflex. It is good for portraits.

So, have fun with your new gear. I takes some time to get used to something new like this...

 

[Eric Hiss]

Eric, I did a test with a friend that has a Canon 1DsMk2 and my PhaseOne. After reading your posts I went back to see the difference and it is definitively there, I will post the crops to 100% so you can see, (I have them on my other computer, so probably tomorrow)

I like the integration of my Mamiya that is a one piece with the view finder and grip. Makes the camera very solid and compact, but sometimes I wish someone made a mini hasselblad-design digital camera. I shot square format with a Bronica that my father gave to me and with the Mamiya twin lens reflex. It is good for portraits.

So, have fun with your new gear. I takes some time to get used to something new like this...

Great! Looking forward to seeing the comparison. And you're right I do need to get used to shooting with the Rollei - not just the change to the square format but also just looking through the WLF. That's weird, especially with the pop up magnifier.

 

[Eric Hiss]

would I have been able to get this image with MF?

Here's a shot of my son, Finn from last week. His daycare is close to Sunset beach so we stopped by after I picked him up. I had my 5D with me so took some pictures....Trying to catch a moving target like a 3yr old boy is pretty hard, especially when the light is changing fast at sundown. Don't know if I could have gotten this image with my Rollei or not. The image would have been better with more DR of the MFDB, though if I could have.

 

[leonardobarreto.com]

Eric... fantastic image, ... talking about 3d effect, I think that this is very rich image. It may be the ff size of the sensor in the 5D... or, may be the quality of the artist behind the machine...