Digital Medium Format

Philippos · 03-21-2009, 02:05 AM

It seems that even if Pentax makes it's move with the 645D, the competition will be much fiercer than expected.
Mamiya announced its new 33MPx DL33 at $20K, dropping theprice of it's 22MPx 645ZDb at $11K.

MAMIYA: News & Events | Press Releases | Success of Mamiya DL28 Spawns Bigger Brother

Amazing stuff.

ftpaddict · 03-21-2009, 02:10 AM

11k?

That's almost cheap enough to replace a Nikon D3x with. Mamiya is kicking it up a notch.
Here's hoping the price of FF drops even more.

fejker · 03-21-2009, 03:53 AM

I don't like the idea of a touch screen ... so inconvenient.

thibs · 03-21-2009, 04:05 AM

Originally posted by Philippos

It seems that even if Pentax makes it's move with the 645D, the competition will be much fiercer than expected.
Mamiya announced its new 33MPx DL33 at $20K, dropping theprice of it's 22MPx 645ZDb at $11K.

MAMIYA: News & Events | Press Releases | Success of Mamiya DL28 Spawns Bigger Brother

Amazing stuff.

But 33MP only (speaking MF of course)
Latest Kodak MF CCD is 51MP
http://www.kodak.com/global/en/business/ISS/Products/Fullframe/index.jhtml?pq-path=14425

fejker · 03-21-2009, 04:40 AM

For me MP doesn't matter that much. A 16MP 4096 x 4096 px sensor with 9 µm pixel size would be perfect. I'm all in for dynamic range and dof control.

ftpaddict · 03-21-2009, 04:44 AM

Originally posted by thibs

But 33MP only (speaking MF of course)
Latest Kodak MF CCD is 51MP
Kodak Image Sensor Solutions - Full Frame CCD

If it's affordable, I wouldn't mind a 15MP medium format sensor. I don't need the resolution, just the DOF control.

falconeye · 03-21-2009, 08:51 AM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by fejker

I'm all in for [...] and dof control.

Originally posted by ftpaddict

I don't need the resolution, just the DOF control.

Because this is stated so many times, let me make my comment on this once in while...

Available DoF (at a given FoV) is only determined by the physical lens aperture in mm. So, I had a look at the available Pentax 645 prime lens lineup [source: pentax.de]:

35/3.5 -> 10 mm -> 20/2.0 -> FA 20/2.8, FA24/2.0
45/2.8 -> 16 mm -> 26/1.6 -> A 28/2, Sigma 30/1.4
75/2.8 -> 27 mm -> 43/1.6 -> FA 43/1.9, A50/1.2
120/4.0 Makro -> 30 mm -> 69/2.3 Makro -> FA77/1.8, FA50/2.8 Macro, FA100/2.8 Macro
150/2.8 -> 54 mm -> 87/1.6 -> FA85/1.4
200/4.0 -> 50 mm -> 116/2.3 -> FA100/2.8 Macro
300/4.0 -> 75 mm -> 173/2.3 -> FA135/2.8, FA200/2.8, A135/1.8
300/5.6
400/5.6 -> 71 mm -> 231/3.3 -> FA300/2.8, FA200/2.8

How to read:
#. 645 lens focal/aperture -> physical diameter -> FF lens/aperture with same DoF -> closest FF lens in Dimitrov's lens archive (dropping '*'-designations).
(Here, I assumed that FF is a 1.73x crop from MF. Where I used a MF size of 60x45mm which is wrong. The correct value is 56x41.5mm. Fortunately, the argument doesn't depend on this.)

Where the corresponding FF glass actually has wider aperture, I've put it in boldface. I.e., the FA*85/1.4 or A50/1.2 offer DoF control unparalleled in the MF range.

Overall, medium format offers a slight advantage with respect to DoF control over FF. Much less significant than most people would believe w/o going through this exercise. And some lenses at the very short and very long end simply don't exist for MF. The advantages of MF are elsewhere (brighter VF, less noise, potentially much more headroom for digital crop, etc.). Therefore, I never would give up a "high-megapixel" option when going MF.

Last edited by falconeye; 04-01-2009 at 03:12 AM. Reason: added the A*135/1.8 and FA*24/2.0, added 56x41.5 comment

thibs · 03-21-2009, 09:30 AM

I should add that 645D sensor won't be as big as 645 film so FOV will not be the same (nor DOF).
Just to make things even a bit more difficult

**Pål Jensen** · 03-21-2009, 10:36 AM

Originally posted by falconeye

Overall, medium format offers a slight advantage with respect to DoF control over FF. .

The DOF control issue is absurd. The problem with MF is too little DOF; even at F:22. One in a million image is shot at 1.4 or 1.2, then in 99% of cases in spite of the shallow DOF - not because of it...

benjikan · 03-21-2009, 10:40 AM

I would NEVER purchase a MF DSLR. I would have the client rent it if need be or have the manufacturer give it to me...

Philippos · 03-21-2009, 10:57 AM

Originally posted by fejker

For me MP doesn't matter that much. A 16MP 4096 x 4096 px sensor with 9 µm pixel size would be perfect. I'm all in for dynamic range and dof control.

As far as dynamic range, it's saves in a 16-bit RAW format with a 12-stop range.
This is better than anything I have seen so far.
It should make the possible buyer of a Nikon D3x re-think it a little...

ftpaddict · 03-21-2009, 03:10 PM

Originally posted by Pål Jensen

The DOF control issue is absurd. The problem with MF is too little DOF; even at F:22. One in a million image is shot at 1.4 or 1.2, then in 99% of cases in spite of the shallow DOF - not because of it...

Depends on what you're shooting. I like my DOF nice and shallow.

Tom S. · 03-21-2009, 04:36 PM

Originally posted by benjikan

I would NEVER purchase a MF DSLR. I would have the client rent it if need be or have the manufacturer give it to me...

Not even a Holga?

Erasmo · 03-21-2009, 04:51 PM

Originally posted by Tom S.

Not even a Holga?

Ever considered that a Holga isn't a DSLR?

Tom S. · 03-22-2009, 05:27 AM

Originally posted by Erasmo

Ever considered that a Holga isn't a DSLR?

But they could be. I heard a rumor they were working on a deal with Atari for the electronics, and Etch-A-Sketch for screens.

03-21-2009, 02:05 AM	#1
Philippos Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Volos - Greece Posts: 178	Digital Medium Format It seems that even if Pentax makes it's move with the 645D, the competition will be much fiercer than expected. Mamiya announced its new 33MPx DL33 at $20K, dropping theprice of it's 22MPx 645ZDb at $11K. MAMIYA: News & Events \| Press Releases \| Success of Mamiya DL28 Spawns Bigger Brother Amazing stuff.

03-21-2009, 08:51 AM - 1 Like	#7
falconeye Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Munich, Alps, Germany Photos: Gallery Posts: 6,871	Originally posted by fejker I'm all in for [...] and dof control. Originally posted by ftpaddict I don't need the resolution, just the DOF control. Because this is stated so many times, let me make my comment on this once in while... Available DoF (at a given FoV) is only determined by the physical lens aperture in mm. So, I had a look at the available Pentax 645 prime lens lineup [source: pentax.de]: 35/3.5 -> 10 mm -> 20/2.0 -> FA 20/2.8, FA24/2.0 45/2.8 -> 16 mm -> 26/1.6 -> A 28/2, Sigma 30/1.4 75/2.8 -> 27 mm -> 43/1.6 -> FA 43/1.9, A50/1.2 120/4.0 Makro -> 30 mm -> 69/2.3 Makro -> FA77/1.8, FA50/2.8 Macro, FA100/2.8 Macro 150/2.8 -> 54 mm -> 87/1.6 -> FA85/1.4 200/4.0 -> 50 mm -> 116/2.3 -> FA100/2.8 Macro 300/4.0 -> 75 mm -> 173/2.3 -> FA135/2.8, FA200/2.8, A135/1.8 300/5.6 400/5.6 -> 71 mm -> 231/3.3 -> FA300/2.8, FA200/2.8 How to read: #. 645 lens focal/aperture -> physical diameter -> FF lens/aperture with same DoF -> closest FF lens in Dimitrov's lens archive (dropping ''-designations). (Here, I assumed that FF is a 1.73x crop from MF. Where I used a MF size of 60x45mm which is wrong. The correct value is 56x41.5mm. Fortunately, the argument doesn't depend on this.)* Where the corresponding FF glass actually has wider aperture, I've put it in boldface. I.e., the FA85/1.4 or A50/1.2 offer DoF control unparalleled in the MF range. Overall, medium format offers a slight* advantage with respect to DoF control over FF. Much less significant than most people would believe w/o going through this exercise. And some lenses at the very short and very long end simply don't exist for MF. The advantages of MF are elsewhere (brighter VF, less noise, potentially much more headroom for digital crop, etc.). Therefore, I never would give up a "high-megapixel" option when going MF. Last edited by falconeye; 04-01-2009 at 03:12 AM. Reason: added the A135/1.8 and FA24/2.0, added 56x41.5 comment

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
A copy of the atmosphere take place through a digital medium format 40 megapixel "645	gazonk	Pentax News and Rumors	7	06-14-2010 01:45 AM
Is full frame the medium format of the digital era ?	ghelary	Photographic Technique	2	05-28-2009 08:50 AM
Pentax to launch medium format digital camera, but only sell it in Japan?	Urkeldaedalus	Pentax News and Rumors	100	03-08-2009 07:01 PM
Digital medium format or film? Which way to go?	diveguru	Film SLRs and Compact Film Cameras	9	12-06-2008 01:45 PM
No Medium Format Digital	aritzo	Pentax News and Rumors	13	04-25-2008 10:38 AM

03-21-2009, 02:10 AM	#2
ftpaddict Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Yurp Photos: Gallery Posts: 4,666	11k? That's almost cheap enough to replace a Nikon D3x with. Mamiya is kicking it up a notch. Here's hoping the price of FF drops even more.

03-21-2009, 03:53 AM	#3
fejker Inactive Account Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Slovenia Photos: Gallery Posts: 258	I don't like the idea of a touch screen ... so inconvenient.

03-21-2009, 04:05 AM	#4
thibs Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Belgium Photos: Albums Posts: 7,001	Originally posted by Philippos It seems that even if Pentax makes it's move with the 645D, the competition will be much fiercer than expected. Mamiya announced its new 33MPx DL33 at $20K, dropping theprice of it's 22MPx 645ZDb at $11K. MAMIYA: News & Events \| Press Releases \| Success of Mamiya DL28 Spawns Bigger Brother Amazing stuff. But 33MP only (speaking MF of course) Latest Kodak MF CCD is 51MP http://www.kodak.com/global/en/business/ISS/Products/Fullframe/index.jhtml?pq-path=14425

03-21-2009, 04:40 AM	#5
fejker Inactive Account Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Slovenia Photos: Gallery Posts: 258	For me MP doesn't matter that much. A 16MP 4096 x 4096 px sensor with 9 µm pixel size would be perfect. I'm all in for dynamic range and dof control.

03-21-2009, 04:44 AM	#6
ftpaddict Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Yurp Photos: Gallery Posts: 4,666	Originally posted by thibs But 33MP only (speaking MF of course) Latest Kodak MF CCD is 51MP Kodak Image Sensor Solutions - Full Frame CCD If it's affordable, I wouldn't mind a 15MP medium format sensor. I don't need the resolution, just the DOF control.

03-21-2009, 09:30 AM	#8
thibs Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Belgium Photos: Albums Posts: 7,001	I should add that 645D sensor won't be as big as 645 film so FOV will not be the same (nor DOF). Just to make things even a bit more difficult

03-21-2009, 10:36 AM	#9
Pål Jensen Site Supporter Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Norway Photos: Albums Posts: 4,371	Originally posted by falconeye Overall, medium format offers a *slight* advantage with respect to DoF control over FF. . The DOF control issue is absurd. The problem with MF is too little DOF; even at F:22. One in a million image is shot at 1.4 or 1.2, then in 99% of cases in spite of the shallow DOF - not because of it...

03-21-2009, 10:40 AM	#10
benjikan Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Paris, France Photos: Gallery Posts: 4,308	I would NEVER purchase a MF DSLR. I would have the client rent it if need be or have the manufacturer give it to me...

03-21-2009, 10:57 AM	#11
Philippos Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Volos - Greece Posts: 178 Original Poster	Originally posted by fejker For me MP doesn't matter that much. A 16MP 4096 x 4096 px sensor with 9 µm pixel size would be perfect. I'm all in for dynamic range and dof control. As far as dynamic range, it's saves in a 16-bit RAW format with a 12-stop range. This is better than anything I have seen so far. It should make the possible buyer of a Nikon D3x re-think it a little...

03-21-2009, 03:10 PM	#12
ftpaddict Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Yurp Photos: Gallery Posts: 4,666	Originally posted by Pål Jensen The DOF control issue is absurd. The problem with MF is too little DOF; even at F:22. One in a million image is shot at 1.4 or 1.2, then in 99% of cases in spite of the shallow DOF - not because of it... Depends on what you're shooting. I like my DOF nice and shallow.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

03-21-2009, 04:36 PM	#13
Tom S. Veteran Member Join Date: May 2008 Location: S.E. Michigan Photos: Albums Posts: 4,317	Originally posted by benjikan I would NEVER purchase a MF DSLR. I would have the client rent it if need be or have the manufacturer give it to me... Not even a Holga?

03-21-2009, 04:51 PM	#14
Erasmo Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: The Netherlands Posts: 191	Originally posted by Tom S. Not even a Holga? Ever considered that a Holga isn't a DSLR?

03-22-2009, 05:27 AM	#15
Tom S. Veteran Member Join Date: May 2008 Location: S.E. Michigan Photos: Albums Posts: 4,317	Originally posted by Erasmo Ever considered that a Holga isn't a DSLR? But they could be. I heard a rumor they were working on a deal with Atari for the electronics, and Etch-A-Sketch for screens.