I Am SO Skewered On The Horns Of A Dilemma

Things happen so fast in the world of photography these days that just when you think

you have forged and hacked out a path to your goal everything starts to shift again and

you cannot easily go forward or even have confidence in the ground you are standing on.

 

I've been on a couple year intensive exploration of my photography and because I'm

semi-retired I devote a LOT of time to it. I aspire to create and show fine art landscape

photography. As some may know who hang here I have a 4x5 kit (gathering dust but

not much longer), Medium Format kit, EOS3 and a 10D.

 

I've somewhat come to rest on my Mamiya Pro TL as my fave. The 10D was great for

travel and family events where I am the 'official' photographer. I even got a flash

bracket and pulled off one large nightime event with some pinash. The viewcamera

could come out of retirement soon if I get out of this quagmire I'm stuck in and take

one of the roads contemplated. The 35mm film camera is the lonliest of all and likely

to stay that way.

 

Sub-intro out of the way ... here is the problem: I don't want to quit using film and go

all the way digital with a new 1Ds Mk II or whatever they name it because I don't want

to give up large prints. I struggle with the possibility of moving up to the new Contax

645 or the Hassy H1 knowing I would get a digital back within a couple years.

 

This path requires me to do something I have steadfastly resisted and do not relish the

idea of doing at all. Getting a scanner. Don't think I could live with anything less than

a Nikon 8000 and would probably have to go with one of the wet mounting after market

adaptations. (Yes I've read nearly everything on the net on this subject.)

 

For a while I was convinced I would get the new 1Ds when it came out but that camera

will never equal a full frame 6 x 4.5 digital back which will surely come down to $10k

within a couple years unless the crippled MF industry completely withers away. The

extremely expensive 1Ds would be relagated to a backup camera within 18 months.

That's a lot of scratch for a backup camera. I'm only a hobbiest at this point although

one willing to pay to play.

 

The flip side of this argument is that MF seems to be dying. It looks bad. I don't want to

buy into a world at the cost of $30k worth of equipment only to have that world disolve

before my eyes. This aspect greatly saddens me and alarms me as well. The world of

photography will be debased if 35mm takes over completely. Yes I know there will

always be film and there will always be MF cameras but if there ceases all new R&D and

new manufacture ... it will be just a hobbiest niche world.

 

I digress. So, what to do? What to do? What to do? Wait I guess. Maybe buy an

Epson 4870 to goof around with. Store my trannies carefully and see what develops.

 

Please no "Just take pictures and don't worry about it sorts of replies." My dilemma is not

stagnating my shooting. I'm still in my exploration phase of my photography. I'm

learning and I'm trying to gain the knowledge necessary to prosecute my goals most

successfully. If it was just about getting a dozen or so good images or so a year I'd

have stuck with the View Camera but lugging that thing around in hundred degree

weather just does not work for me. Especialy given my editing proclivities. I only like

about one out of a hundred images I make. I believe I will do the best photography

with either full frame 35mm digital, 6 x 4.5 transparency, or 6 x 4.5 full frame digital. I

just can't see which path to take clearly at this point.

 

What are you doing?

 

Good Light, *** Scott Fleming ***River Run Ranch *** Texas

My Mamiya 7ii 6x7's work well with the 4870. No grain in my EPSON 7600 2'x3' prints using VELVIA or Ilford Plus F Pan scanned out to about 400-500 meg's at 4800DPI. Relatively easy to use.

 

[but, the Mamiya AFD is now available with a 6 meg Leaf back for $6900 ... that might be surprisingly good. I've read positive things about it. Supposedly far and away better than 35mm digital, with fairly good lenses, and options for higher res backs (with lower prices in the future).]

Get yourself a Jobo processor, learn and do your own E-6 as E-6 labs are closing down, do your own wet photography until digital scanners/printers get better/cheaper.

 

No matter what digital stuff you may get now such as the Nikon 8000 scanner , Epson 7600 printer, etc, there will be something obviously superior in 2 years at same price.

Are you up to the challenge? :)

<P>

Here's your answer: Considering you are having such a tough time deciding the route you want to take, AND you have the resources to do either, AND you are assuming that 35mm digital won't cut it against MF... if I could convince you that the 1Ds beats the image quality of MF, that would make your decision, correct?

<P>

Of course, you say: "not possible" -and I am entirely inclined to agree with you; as would what is apparently the large majority of Photo.Net'ers.

<P>Here's the point: Read the following links, and it all becomes clear: You are The Man! Get your 1Ds, and run it (image-quality-wise) through the wringer for us and tell us what you find. From the info in these links, you gotta figure the 1Ds is -at worst- going to give you results comparable to what you are expecting from the Contax or Hassy that is your alternate option.

<P>That makes your decision easy (if I understood your dilemma correctly) and the rest of us would dearly love to see your results.

<P>You are in the unique position of having the resources to actually do what the rest of us only wish we could do, settle this question; we'll sing your praises for millenia to come.

<P>

Or at least debate, quibble, split hairs and argue over your results and mention your name a couple of times over the next few weeks. :)

<P>

 

<a href="http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/shootout.shtml">Shootout: Digital Vs. Film</a>

<BR><a href="http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/shootout-followup.shtml">"Shootout" follow-up</a>

<BR><a href="http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=004Sgo">Photo.Net'ers reactions</a>

<P>

Okay; so then besides that, what's the reluctance about the scanner? Maybe you should consider getting a flatbed, and scanning MF. Dust becomes much less of an issue; and your demands on the scanner are dramatically reduced.

<P>I have an Epson 3200 and I'm pretty happy with it -it will scan up to 4X5 negatives.

>>"This aspect greatly saddens me and alarms me as well. The world of photography will be debased if 35mm takes over completely."<<

 

well if that is the way you truly feel, then don't add to the problem by abandoning MF.

so much unnecessary gloom.

 

i think your biggest dilemma is not knowing what to spend your money on next.

 

think more clearly about the work you wish to produce, not so much on the equipment that will make you happy or equipment that will try to justify why you forked out 5k (or whatever) in the frst place...

<a href="http://www.keithlaban.co.uk">Keith Laban Photography</a><p>Your answer lies in your question.<p><i>�I aspire to create and show fine art landscape photography�</i><p>Then throw away your Mamiya Pro TL,

EOS3 and 10D.<p><i>�I only like about one out of a hundred images I make.�</i><p>I would question your approach to landscape photography. When you can get this figure down to liking one in three images then go out and blow your considerable resources. Many photographers who earn their living doing what you are merely dreaming of would not dream of spending the kind of money you are likely to waste.

Scott,

 

I to have the same dillema. I have a 645 bronica and a mamiya 7.

 

If I shot enough or worked professionally FULL TIME I would definitely have a digital camera and it would be the 1ds if I could justify the cost. From what I have read I think this camera would definitely beat 645 ( I've also seen some beautiful prints from the canon 10d and must admit I'm impressed though they do look awfully "digital" in nature and I prefer medium format to them).

 

For years I was jealous of friends who had 35mm film scanners because they were affordable. The epson series of scanners is not an option for me. The nikon 8000 or microtek are the type of quality I'm looking for. The epson is great for 4by5 but I am very picky and this is why I moved to medium format in the first place.

 

I also am quite sure that a digital back is never going to be an option unless I go pro full time. I find it amusing when I read all the "I got a contax because it has a digital upgrade path". Great if you generate the income from photography to be able to justify it or maybe you love Zeiss glass. Ultimately I dont care whether Bronica has a back or not ( I'm quite sure many of the leafs could be adapted easily if you are interested in spending 20 grand on a 22mp back ) since I dont see this as an option for me due to cost. A 6mp mf back sounds nice I geuss but why wouldnt I just buy a 1ds? I dont see any practical reason to keep ANY medium format camera ( in my position ) if I am interested in digital capture. Just dont shoot enough to justify the cost and at this point in time. If I were you I would think an H1 or Contax would be real waste of money unless your intent is film. These cameras as they currently stand are aimed at professionals who can afford digital backs. If you intend to use as film cameras then they are great ( the contax is great, the H1 is downright ridiculous to anyone except a BUSY professional or a rich dentist )

 

I probably will bite the bullet and get a scanner like the 9000ed. I have a backlog of stuff that needs to be scanned and it should last for a long time.

 

I sympathize with your dillema as its similiar to the one I am in.

I would say bite the bullet and get a medium format scanner like the 9000ed. If your volume increases to the point where it is profitable for you to shoot digital ( or your clients demand digital if you are making money with your camera ) then get an appropriate Canon.

 

I seriously doubt medium format is going to survive as a niche market but I wouldnt worry about whether its for hobbyists or not. If you are just shooting landscapes it shouldnt matter for years to come. The quality will be there with a good scanner.

 

Good luck.

Andre,

 

***No matter what digital stuff you may get now such as the Nikon 8000 scanner , Epson

7600 printer, etc, there will be something obviously superior in 2 years at same price.****

 

Yes that is a large factor in the equation. Always. My plan at this point, having

reached the place where I have a good idea of what I can and cannot do personally, is

to go with the system that will work for me for the longest time. Thus I lean toward the

645 and the eventual digital back. Even if MF goes away at least I'll be able to make the

images I want untill the back can no longer be serviced. Phase is making enough money

with software that perhaps even if they stop making backs they will support them for a

few years.

 

I've also realized I should never let go of the view camaera and lenses. It is the ultimate

weapon in reserve so to speak.

 

Thanks for your reply. Best Regards.

I recently bought a Toyo 45 CF. It's not built all that well, but it does make some wonderful images. They beat my 645 MF hands down before you even begin talking about movements (which are somewhat limited but not terribly on the CF). The camera can be had for $500 used in good condition. You can go with some of the lighter lenses. My bag, with three lenses, darkcloth, six filmholders, loupe, and light meter is just way way way lighter than my 645 bag.

 

You could spend more and get a sturdier field camera that is still light as a kit vs the medium format gear.

 

The large format has really helped me slow down and pay more attention to what I'm doing. My photography has definitely improved because of it.

 

The investment is minimal vs an H1 or 1Ds. It will weigh less. And give you time to consider your ultimate options. You can scan with an epson 3200 if you like, and have the very best stuff sent out for a drum scan.

 

That's my advice. And I own an H1 by the way. Not working right now. 50-110 gives an error message. Need to send the entire camera and all lenses to NJ per their instructions. It's covered by warranty, but it's probably only shot 100 rolls of film and it just feels like it's a problem waiting to happen. I'll continue to hope that in five years time it'll still be working and 22mp backs will cost three figures :)

 

Mac

Bryce,

 

Thanks for all that. Been there, the day it was published on the net. I think it is resolved

that the 1Ds and it's likely successor is THE camera for digital capture if you print no

larger than Reichmann. If I had unlimited rescources I would own one for the same reason

I have a 10D. Digital capture is the future. I just don't want that future restricted to 24

x 37 mm sensors. Unless something like Foveon can revolutionize the whole industry.

As shall no doubt, one day, come to pass.

 

I've been shooting more film of late after a year of dancing with digital and I'm glad I

returned. I guess scanning is in my future. Newton rings and dust/scratches had me at

bay but if I can wet mount a slide with a Nikon 8000 or the like and get the kind of

results I've seen than I shall be willing to face my fears. At least with MF one is not

locked into one .... or the other. Yes I could always shoot 35mm film but I just don't

care for 35mm film these days as what I shoot with it can be done digitally so much

easier. 35mm is sorta like point and shoot to me.

Scott,

 

If your primary interest is landscapes, bring your 4x5 out of retirement and start using it for the bulk of your shooting. When you absolutely can't use the LF due to fast changing light or when needing to pack long distances, take along your MF. Forget the 35mm and digital. Get yourself a Nikon 8000 or 9000 scanner (for MF) and an Epson flatbed (does an excellent job for LF and they're pretty cheap) and make prints as large as you want.

 

And don't worry about MF film going the way of the dinosaur anytime soon. You'll hear all kinds of stories like this but until someone actually produces some hard numbers from the film manufacturers, don't pay any attention; they're all just unsubstantiated claims.

Keith,

 

I didn't say I was MADE of money. :) Everything photographic that I own was purchased

second hand on ebay but for the 10D. Even my Canon lenses.

 

It's just that now I have reached the place where I know where I want to go with my

photography and am ready to purchase my first new camera and kit. I do a lot of fun

photography and some of the bodies I own will be relegated to that. The Mamiya was a

mistake in that I'll never get my money out of it. Probably can't even sell it at all even

though I have N glass and the Apo 200mm. I like shooting with it and will continue. It's

only if I go for a digital 645 that it becomes a doorstop.

 

As to my profligate ways. I have no other hobbies. All my expendable cash goes to

photography. No kids. No mortgage. Paid for truck.

Mac,

 

Interesting to hear of your H1 problems. I guess it is not all that uncommon. I have a

view camera. I was going to sell it but have since changed my mind. Here's a link:

 

http://www.pbase.com/sfleming/root

 

As well as some modest efforts at photography. The Israel pics are my latest.

 

Best Regards, Scott

I think it's fully justified for an amateur (in the true sense of the word) to spend this kind of money on camera gear so long as they understand it isn't the equipment that makes great photos. Doesn't sound like that is the case here at all.

 

I got in a discussion about this subject a while back with a guy who couldn't believe I'd spend a few thousand bucks on camera stuff. He sits in front of $5000 television and drives a $50,000 car. He wouldn't spend more than $300 bucks for a camera. It's all about priorities.

 

Lots of people can't afford this kind of gear and that's fine, because you don't need to spend anything like this much to take great photos. But if you feel like buying the best you can afford, and that happens to be a lot, don't feel bad. Just take a drive to any suburban mall and watch tricked out SUVs roll past on their way home to a paved driveway.

 

Mac

why do you have to upgrade to contax or h1 for 645? There are digital backs for the Pro TL

are there not?. seems like switching systems is unnecessary. you for sure don't need the

autofocus for landscape.

Rob,

 

Thanks. I think you are correct. My problem is that my field of endeavor is this river I

live on. It's the Pedernales River in the heart of The Hill Country of Texas. It's really all I

want to photograph right now. Hiking it is not really possible for an old (54) guy like me.

The landscape is rugged and lots of heavy brush. Canoe or kayaking it is doable but

very dangerous in that being alone in the middle of nowhere in this heat and at the

bottom of a steep river canyon is always dangerous. I need to find a shooting partner.

 

I gave the view camera about a six month effort. I like to shoot at sunset and after a lot

and could seldom get my exposures right given reciprocity failure. I think I will give it

another go round with Astia. Velvia never really looked right to me anyway.

 

Thanks for your help. Best Regards, Scott

Scott - you say "--- I know where I want to go with my photography ---". The question is will different equipment get you there? Consider something Brooks Jensen had to say about this subject - "The debate between enlarger cold light heads and condenser heads is a total waste of time. The debate between analog and digital media is a total waste of time. To think that one specific kind of equipment makes better photographs misses the point. Better photographers make better photographs. Equipment is never the answer to producing great work". So if you have the resources and enjoy using new equipment that is perfectly fine. But if your goal is more keepers then I suspect your present equipment will do quite nicely.

Hi,

I have been reading all of these dilemmas about MF,LF, 35mm & digital (i have all) but i decided to return to the old formats but incorporating the modern........big negative scanned/processed digitally & am having a blast. There is no joy than that of using the old with the new. ( I tell my wife that all the time !)

Cheers, Larry

Scott,

 

there will always be bigger better faster no matter what. so quit trying to beat it.

 

You said you aspire to show fine art landscape photography. So why can't you do that with your 4x5 kit or your Mamiya? Also, how big of a print do you plan to make (this is the most important question)?

 

Are you just a gear head (like me) who loves to have the latest stuff?

 

I would suggest something that hasn't been suggested already. Buy a great scanner that can do medium and large format, take a photoshop class and travel with the money you would have spent on the 1DS.

 

Film is going to be around for a very long time. The choices might diminish but you will always have film.

 

So stop worrying. Order the 4870 and an Epson 2200 and register for a class.

 

Also, if weight is such an issue, get a Mamiya 7II with a 43mm, 65,, and 150mm lens and love life. The negs will scan beautifully.

You can get very good big prints from any of your systems.

Good enough to hang/exhibit/sell. Your real issues are.

 

1. Do you enjoy the process of photography better shooting

digital or film and if the latter then on what scale? Ignore the

results for the moment, measure the enjoyment.

 

2. Do you want to be fully involved in a post-exposure processes

leading to prints or not? You can scan yourself or get it done by

a lab. You can prepare your own digital file or get it done by a

lab. You can make your own inkjet/giclee prints or get them (

and a wider range of print-type options) made by a lab. Big

prints by great labs aren't cheap but only you know how many

you might want .

 

3. Do you want to do your editing on a monitor or on a

lightbox/loupe?

 

I hope that if you can answer these it will make your decision

easier.

David B,

 

You are just about right. I'm nearly sure of it. I'm going to use the MF and LF gear I

have, buy a multi format scanner, an Epson 4000 and hire a tutor. Anybody want the job?

Central Texas Area.

 

I need the tutor first of all to consult with on the scanner purchase and to get me up

and running. Then Photoshop and printing with RIPs.

We all get hung up in the "latest new camera dilema"...no doubt the new digital stuff is impressive.....but when it's all said (or seen) and done...what can the new cameras do that your old faithful camera stuff can't do?...not much...only they do it somewhat faster.....I just came out of the darkroom printing some prom pix for my daughter and her friends... 2 1/4 rollei tlr negatives to 8 x 10 prints w/hp5 400 asa on yo Ilford multigrade....photos were well received by the prom crowd......they wanted to know what program I used to take out the color.....I told them it was printed in dektol.com!!!!!!!

Hi Scott, I can sympathize. I too have a 4X5, a Hassie, and a 10D, as well as a very nice Canon 1V that I barely use anymore. For me, the 10D is king for portraits. I can print them up nicely to 13X19" on my 2200 (as long as I'm printing color; B&W is another matter with that printer) I've come to the conclusion that if you want Ansel Adams, don't use the 10D or 35mm. Use your view camera, or at the least, MF to get as much detail as possible. I don't think you mentioned printing, which if you're going to take the trouble to scan, I would think you'd want to tackle. There's not much point in getting an expensive scanner if you just print 8X10's - and your definition of a "big print" might be different from other's. Back to the 2200 and B&W, this past weekend I bought the new HP 7960 and I'm quite impressed by the B&W prints I'm getting with it - absolutely neutral and to my eye, finally as good as a decent lab's B&W prints. The downside is it'll only print to 8.5X11 inch paper. So if you'll be printing at home, I'd match you capture capabilities - either scanned, or digital camera - to the size of the output you intend to produce. The bigger the print, the bigger the negative, slide or sensor you'll want to use, and to me, film is still cheaper than a 20 grand digital back or a 1Ds. Good luck!

"Maybe buy an Epson 4870 to goof around with."

 

If you are inclined to do that and have not already looked at <a

href="http://www.photo-i.co.uk/">this site,</a> have a look.

Vincent provides a very useful review I think. I bought the 3200

based on his review and couldn't be happier. Perhaps I am

more easily pleased than some, but I've read of quite a few other

happy Epson owners.