What is the medium format look?

[anonim]

1 hour ago, kye said:

The video I included looks absolutely gorgeous to me, but is that simply a combination of the lens resolution and characteristics, the colour science, the codec (IIRC that video was raw?), the source resolution, and the nice lighting and subject?

Yes, that combination  

But from experience I'd say - for subtle but crucial impact that touch quality of imposing "emotional" reaction, lens characteristics (power of discerning details, space plans and way of their rendering) are much more important than anything else (in approximately equal well lit circumstances). For unexpected result in famous Zacuto Shootout 2012 responsibility (besides skillful operator) lays in usage of Fujinon 18-85 Premium lens on GH2.

From some technical reasons that are far above my knowledge (quality of glasses etc), lens construction  (in case of superior quality lenses) overrides and tamed cameras differences, especially in today's so closely extremely capable cameras. Contrary, modestly constructed or too software dependent lenses simply exaggerate sensors/digital processing nature, codec and "color science" receipts. 

[wolf33d]

5 hours ago, Andrew Reid said:

It's full frame but 0.8x crop!

F1.2 = looks like F0.95 on full frame. But glass can be much cheaper (adapted). Canon FD 85mm F1.2L cost me 600 euro. It's a monster, no vignetting.

Bear in mind true medium format goes larger than the Fujifilm GFX 50S. My Hasselblad H3D-39II has a even larger sensor so adjust that 0.8x.

Medium format is also about resolution - both sensor and glass. You can still have a very shallow DOF stopped down at F4, with supreme sharpness compared to a fast lens wide open. On the sensor side, 100MP would be pretty noise on a full frame sensor, without some sort of technological breakthrough.

When the inevitable happens and we move to 8K, meanwhile medium format could have a significant dynamic range and high ISO advantage over full frame.

 

 

True. Especially keep in mind that the Pana MF is a rip off cause it uses a small medium format sensor. Sony is making way larger true MF ones. 
Too little difference between a D850 sensor and the fuji 50mpx sensor in my opinion. No gain in DR, no really gain in mpx, much more expensive and bigger so useless. 
But with 100mpx bigger MF sensor you start to have real advantages with twice de mpx, better DR and even thiner DoF for more 3D look. 

Once MF are at this standard of sensor size and mpx for $3000 which means in 5 years, I will happily switch. Right now the best of all words is FF for me. Real DR / mpx advantage over APSC and reasonable size (Sony A7,...). 

[kye]

5 hours ago, BrooklynDan said:

It must be said that video amplifies the difference between formats far more than in stills.

Thanks, that makes sense. The video I linked differentiated MF from FF more than still images seemed to and that explains why.

5 hours ago, anonim said:

Yes, that combination  

But from experience I'd say - for subtle but crucial impact that touch quality of imposing "emotional" reaction, lens characteristics (power of discerning details, space plans and way of their rendering) are much more important than anything else (in approximately equal well lit circumstances). For unexpected result in famous Zacuto Shootout 2012 responsibility (besides skillful operator) lays in usage of Fujinon 18-85 Premium lens on GH2.

From some technical reasons that are far above my knowledge (quality of glasses etc), lens construction  (in case of superior quality lenses) overrides and tamed cameras differences, especially in today's so closely extremely capable cameras. Contrary, modestly constructed or too software dependent lenses simply exaggerate sensors/digital processing nature, codec and "color science" receipts. 

That makes perfect sense considering that the lens essentially converts 3D to 2D and the sensor only captures the result. Combine that with flares and other effects that vary depending on the location of things in the frame, which is how our eyes work, and it's a really critical component of getting depth to an image.

I haven't seen the Zacuto shoot-out, do you have a link?

2 hours ago, wolf33d said:

Once MF are at this standard of sensor size and mpx for $3000 which means in 5 years, I will happily switch. Right now the best of all words is FF for me. Real DR / mpx advantage over APSC and reasonable size (Sony A7,...). 

I agree. If you skip FF mirrorless for MF video then you'll be waiting a decent time period.

Although, having said that, is it easier to make an 8K sensor FF or larger? If there are advantages to a larger sensor then maybe MF might be how some manufacturers do it? Although releasing yet another set of lens mounts for 8K would be beyond ridiculous, so chances are that they've factored in 8K into their FF mirrorless lens mounts already.

Gear up people... Choose your 8K video manufacturer now when you buy FF mirrorless!!

[noone]

8 hours ago, Andrew Reid said:

It's full frame but 0.8x crop!

F1.2 = looks like F0.95 on full frame. But glass can be much cheaper (adapted). Canon FD 85mm F1.2L cost me 600 euro. It's a monster, no vignetting.

Bear in mind true medium format goes larger than the Fujifilm GFX 50S. My Hasselblad H3D-39II has a even larger sensor so adjust that 0.8x.

Medium format is also about resolution - both sensor and glass. You can still have a very shallow DOF stopped down at F4, with supreme sharpness compared to a fast lens wide open. On the sensor side, 100MP would be pretty noise on a full frame sensor, without some sort of technological breakthrough.

When the inevitable happens and we move to 8K, meanwhile medium format could have a significant dynamic range and high ISO advantage over full frame.

 

Andrew, do many other FD (or other FF mount lenses) cover medium format digital without vignetting?      Certainly would make a big difference if they do as FF generally has lots more faster glass available.

I see Mitakon sells a MF mount version of their 85 1.2 as well.

Would be nice to use my old FD 24 1.4 L (along with my 85 1.2 L) on MF though just wishful thinking for me currently.

[anonim]

10 hours ago, kye said:

I haven't seen the Zacuto shoot-out, do you have a link?

https://www.zacuto.com/revenge-of-the-great-camera-shootout-2012 - than look further etc, even at EOSHD and Andrew Read comments...

Fact that in the blind test GH2 with 8000$ lens in similar controlled production may be chosen as best looking (let be even just equal in rivalry) not just by Copola - speaks for itself about importance of sensor size per se in actual film making results...

But here interfere our eternal compensating thirst for newer, bigger, just-once-spec-more - and endless passive theorizing. When ask for concrete distinctive traits in equalized PoV and lightened image examples side by side between enough capable (DR/resolution wise) cameras - there's no answer... Always just inexplicable "feeling", "look", repeating "physics" reason  etc. taken as fact or utter sage. 

Big boy cameras are mostly powerful production relief (versatile, durable, adjustable, theatrical presence orientated) tool - not so much (or, no more) incomparable image (brief sequence, HD) resulted tool. Big boy lenses make a difference... So, I'd say: if your pocket is not appropriate for jumping from system to system, from sensor to sensor, from manufacturer to manufacturer and vice versa... put (especially nowaday, 6 longway going years after above mentioned shootout) most of your efforts (and money) in carefully inspected lens possibilities - and, of course, to skill how to utilize them. 

[Mattias Burling]

In the shootout the result was that any camera can be made to look great. Its just a whole lot more money and work to get the GH2 to match the Arri. Listen when they list how many lights they had to use. $$$$$.

[anonim]

9 minutes ago, Mattias Burling said:

In the shootout the result was that any camera can be made to look great. Its just a whole lot more money and work to get the GH2 to match the Arri. Listen when they list how many lights they had to use. $$$$$.

Of course, that's the point... Fact that it could be matched is important, I'd say, for this topic and my commenting position: or, from recent example from XT3 thread - put Fujinon MK (not so astronomically priced)18-55 on XT3 and around it provide normal production accuracy, and your movie ("A Different Beyond") in HD monitor will look as good as RED's or Alexa's for any spectator. Put it on GH5s and you could make briliant "Ettore’s Stargate" promo video by Filippo Chiesa from corresponding thread. Give it also to, say, Oliver Daniel's GH5 and result will be similar. 

[jhnkng]

13 hours ago, wolf33d said:

True. Especially keep in mind that the Pana MF is a rip off cause it uses a small medium format sensor. Sony is making way larger true MF ones. 
Too little difference between a D850 sensor and the fuji 50mpx sensor in my opinion. No gain in DR, no really gain in mpx, much more expensive and bigger so useless. 
But with 100mpx bigger MF sensor you start to have real advantages with twice de mpx, better DR and even thiner DoF for more 3D look. 

Let's not forget that the sensor in the GFX50s/r made its debut in 2014 in Phase One and Hasselblad backs. Not to mention there's significantly more money and resources in the development of APS-C and Full Frame sensors, since they sell much much more of them.

Formats larger than 35mm has always been a niche market. You buy medium format because you like the look and you're willing to give up a lot of practicality for it. Also, less DoF isn't the reason you have a more three dimensional image -- it's the transition between focus and out of focus. It's the way you can get separation between subject and background but not reduce the background to a big blurry smear. 

[kye]

On 9/27/2018 at 1:47 PM, anonim said:

https://www.zacuto.com/revenge-of-the-great-camera-shootout-2012 - than look further etc, even at EOSHD and Andrew Read comments...

Finally watched this, and...... I'm in trouble!

I watched it blind like they said, and my picks fell into into three tiers, the top included the F3, the Epic, and the Alexa.  The mid tier was the F65, C300, FS100, and the 7D.  The last was the GH2 and the iPhone.

I swear I watched it blind!!