top range dSLR v. Medium format cameras

isadub

Firstly, let me point out that I don't have €5k to spend on a camera body!

Nikon and Canon have recently released their top of the range cameras that cost €5k or more (D3, 5D, 1Ds MkIII). I don't know if it's true but it's often said that medium/large format cameras are 'better' than dSLR's. A 'basic' medium format camera can be bought for around €7k.

If you had the money, would you buy a medium format camera? How practical are they? Can you walk around town with one? Can anyone point to a link(s) that lists the adv/disadv of both camera formats at this price point?

FWIW, I've a Nikon D80 and I've printed the odd photo on canvas on 30"x24" quite happily.

mathias

Ive got one to play with at the moment , a Contax 645 , it produces great stuff , as to whether the quality is better than a 1ds mk II or III , I wouldnt know , a lot of people say no , but its certainly better than my 5d or 20d in terms of picture quality , no doubt about it .

But its definitely not a carry around camera , its a formal portrait or studio job ,great for weddings , working with it is slow unless you are really used to it , it would be hopeless for a street photography kind of thing.

Contax are out of business since 2005 , given the price of the body on these cameras alone when they were in business (3500 up to 7000 ) , I would be more inclined to spend the money on a pro full frame digital.

I know wedding photographers who use nothing but contax , but then , they are used to these , they are definitely not as easy to use as a digital camera , and these days the film is expensive to buy and have developed.

So at a push , Id go with the digital , this thing can take a digital back , but that alone is 7K and the camera would be nowhere near as easy to use as a pro digital.

magicbastarder

i've a hasselblad, bought for €600. that's the beauty - pro level DSLRs will cost a hell of a lot more.

the hasselblad is not much good for candid work, but other than that, it's fine.

if you want the sort of results on screen which will beat DSLRs though, you're looking at spending thousands on a digital back, or a nikon super coolscan 8000 or equivalent.

Spyral

shoot 35mm velvia 50--- will get you about 20megapixels.

problem solved

Fajitas!

Have a Mamyia, Hassy (& Holga :rolleyes: ), but would prefer my 5D any day.

magicbastarder

Spyral wrote:

shoot 35mm velvia 50--- will get you about 20megapixels.

problem solved

again, only with pro or semi-pro scanners. the nikon is over €3000 at retail prices in ireland.
and it weighs over two stone.

Roen

I had a medium format camera but was quite happy to get shot of it once I went digital with the 20D, now I have a 5D as well there's no way I'd go back.

I wouldn't buy a new medium format, and they can be got quite cheaply second hand these days.

Practical or impractical will be a function of what you are using the camera for, not the camera itself.

As for large format, that still rocks the big one. But imo it is actually impractical no matter where you are with it.

elven

Do you think that the equipment you're using, and so the nature of using it (slow, cumbersome, heavy etc) has an effect on how you shoot, and how you look at things?

Rojo

elven wrote:

Do you think that the equipment you're using, and so the nature of using it (slow, cumbersome, heavy etc) has an effect on how you shoot, and how you look at things?

yes, yes and yes!!!! When i first got my digital i was snap happy, but I think film slows you down a lot and you compose shots much better!

magicbastarder

elven wrote:

Do you think that the equipment you're using, and so the nature of using it (slow, cumbersome, heavy etc) has an effect on how you shoot, and how you look at things?

the viewfinder of the hasselblad makes everything look better than it actually is.

thefizz

isadub wrote:

A 'basic' medium format camera can be bought for around €7k.

You could actually get a second-hand one in very good condition for as little as 10% of that price.

isadub wrote:

If you had the money, would you buy a medium format camera? How practical are they? Can you walk around town with one? Can anyone point to a link(s) that lists the adv/disadv of both camera formats at this price point?

If its for walking around town, get a medium format rangefinder, its only about the size of your digital slr.

Peter

Dara Robinson

magicbastarder wrote:

the viewfinder of the hasselblad makes everything look better than it actually is.

I've had the pleasure of using a hasselblad for an hour or so. Looking through that viewfinder is incredible. There is no comparison to my E1, its like looking through your own eyes. With every other camera I have used you are very aware that you are using a camera.

I'd be interested in knowing though how they compare. Also how would a hasselblad with a digital back hold upto the top end dlsr's of today?

magicbastarder

Dara Robinson wrote:

Also how would a hasselblad with a digital back hold upto the top end dlsr's of today?

given that you can get (last time i checked) 39 megapixel digital backs for the hasselblad V series, pretty well.

Dara Robinson

http://www.adorama.com/HSCF39H2K.html

off I go to get myself one. The new yacht will just have to wait