ChrisC Posted May 2, 2007 Share #41 Posted May 2, 2007 Advertisement (gone after registration) ........ When a client calls my immediate thought is can it handle it and so far i have yet run into a oh my what to do now issue. So i will keep plugging away until I get a MF system to compliment the M8 and maybe the more i wait the less need i will have........ Guy - With all due respect, and understanding your aquisitional weaknesses, what is it that your clients are asking for that is not already in the M8 files you are supplying? Are your clients actually requiring you to expend [i cannot bring myself to use the wretched word 'invest'] on MF-digital? Maybe what you have, and what you are doing, with all the working fun contained therein, is all you need? Please reply soon Guy cos I'm hammering the hell out of a cheap and cheeky bottle of Malbec/Bonarda; and lucidity is going the way of liquidity. ..................Chris Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted May 2, 2007 Posted May 2, 2007 Hi ChrisC, Take a look here M8 and the 28 cron and 35 lux sharpness and bokeh. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
Guest guy_mancuso Posted May 3, 2007 Share #42 Posted May 3, 2007 Actually it is not so much the file itself that i worry about but the limitations of the camera itself , long lens, shift tilt and stuff like that. To go MF I need clients hammering me for higher MPX files and honestly there not , reason i have been slow on that purchase. i really need to justify 40k for it and as much as maybe Guy wants to do it , I need my thinking cap on too. That is a chunk of change out there that i really have to get a return on. the M8 system is already paid for itself in ROA. if i put out 40k that means i need to make about 120k from it, you just can't work for gear there has to be profit in there. Now the M8 files are really good and as far as detail probably better than my DMR was and that alone kept me going for almost 2 years. That was a big issue for me on the M8 and that was, can it be equal too or better than the DMR if not than why bother per say. let's face it as much as I love the R lenses the M are just sinfully better and that is a big statement coming from a diehard DMR guy, i loved that system. To this day i still consider it the best image maker in the DSLR's. So logically to get better than MF needs to come into play , i am just being very slow to empty my pocket. I could get a H3 with the new 30 mpx back for 21 k and add 3 more lenses and keep it at 30 k if i really tried hard to keep the costs down, really that is not to bad. i don't even want to think about what i have in the M8 but it is a handsome figure. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JWW Posted May 3, 2007 Share #43 Posted May 3, 2007 I usually use the 28 cron with my M8 but just the other day decided to put on the 35 lux and take some beach pics here in Kihei, Maui. For some reason, the 35 seems to be wider than what I would expect a 50mm equiv to be. Maybe because M8 format doesn't crop as much as 35mm film format for standard 4x6 or my usual 13x19 in printouts. Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here… Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/22964-m8-and-the-28-cron-and-35-lux-sharpness-and-bokeh/?do=findComment&comment=244419'>More sharing options...
ChrisC Posted May 3, 2007 Share #44 Posted May 3, 2007 .... it is not so much the file itself that i worry about but the limitations of the camera itself , long lens, shift tilt and stuff like that. To go MF I need clients hammering me for higher MPX files and honestly there not ....... Guy - Thanks for replying, your answer is rather as I suspected. Whilst I am pleased for you that your regional economy is supportive enough to professional photography that you are even willing to do the MF-digital cost/benefit sums [where I am even good photographers are hurting badly], maybe MF is the wrong option for you. I don't wish to be presumptuous about your commercial practice, but as your clients aren't clamouring for more in your files, and the M8 is likely to be your main strike camera, why not cover that other way of working with [say] the next top line Canon? It's just a thought, but you could be covered with one body, a 24mm shift, and 70 [or is it 80?] to 200 lens, and everything else goes on the Leica. You will be acutely aware, of course, of the constant shifting amongst the client base, and my take on it is that clients are more accepting of DSLR files than they were, say, a year ago. I now know two photographers who offer MF shooting to clients but invariably shoot everything on a tethered D2x instead of their MF; their clients love the added productivity of that way of working. I am certain that with today's choices, neither photographer would opt to go the MF route again. Just trying to save you extra folding money for Yosemite cocktails Guy. ............Chris Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
eronald Posted May 3, 2007 Share #45 Posted May 3, 2007 The M8 is portable and very good at what it can do. The Canons tend to be decent at everything, and really spectacular in action and low light. MF is spectacular at what it can do (bit depth). At the end of the day the question is whether you are photographing for yourself or for the client, and whether you really need the camera to be that good, or whether you are better at putting things in front of the camera. In Guy's case he doesn't really get to choose what goes in front of the camera, so the gear matters more. Edmund Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamie Roberts Posted May 3, 2007 Share #46 Posted May 3, 2007 Edmund is right; if you don't have total control of what goes in front of the camera, you need to be really careful about what gear you've got. Anyway, Chris, you're right about MF right now; for a lot of people the $$ just don't make sense. But the mental temptation of MF is huge; I have good Canon dSLRs as well as a DMR, but a bigger better sensor and excellent optics is the draw, of course, as is bit-depth. But this is why Canon's next cameras have 14bpp depth. (There's one for you guy--a 1d3 that takes R glass and shoots--useably--at ISO 6400!) But for what I print, the DMR, the M8 and the 5d are enough. I can't imagine justifying an MF purchase right now; my actual studio use is minimal right now, even with some light commercial portrait and event work. That doesn't mean I wouldn't change if the feature set and price was right in future. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guy_mancuso Posted May 3, 2007 Share #47 Posted May 3, 2007 Advertisement (gone after registration) Chris , Edmund and Jamie all three of you make very good points and exactly what runs through my head on this subject. Really a tough call, Guy wants a MF but most clients don't need it and yes the 1dsMKIII at 22mpx certainly has my interest also. I was real close to buying a Fuji S5 but i really don't gain MPX there. My problem with Canon is if it is the same CMOS with AA filter than it is not worth it, there needs to be some real change in there armour for me. i wish leica had this R10 going here soon , if that was running at 18mpx with CCD and no AA and leica glass than i may not look no further. Just stretching this out but also real happy with the M8. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
etienne_werner Posted May 3, 2007 Share #48 Posted May 3, 2007 Chris , Edmund and Jamie all three of you make very good points and exactly what runs through my head on this subject. Really a tough call, Guy wants a MF but most clients don't need it and yes the 1dsMKIII at 22mpx certainly has my interest also. I was real close to buying a Fuji S5 but i really don't gain MPX there. My problem with Canon is if it is the same CMOS with AA filter than it is not worth it, there needs to be some real change in there armour for me. i wish leica had this R10 going here soon , if that was running at 18mpx with CCD and no AA and leica glass than i may not look no further. Just stretching this out but also real happy with the M8. Hi Guy, Interesting to hear you too have considered the S5. Before buying the M8, I was using only fuji cameras (with one D200 for action). The Fuji files are something I have grown very fond of. They are so plyable. The only drawback is that I sometimes need more MPX or detail. Most of my work lately is in studio where I love to use the S3. I will probably sell all the fuji cameras and buy the S5 (faster and better focusing) . Having said that, the M8 is certainly proving it self in studio too. Just dreaming here but wouldn't it be nice to have best of both worlds; an M camera with a Fuji CCD. Kind regards, Etienne Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guy_mancuso Posted May 3, 2007 Share #49 Posted May 3, 2007 I had the Nikon D200 for a short time and i really liked the setup on that camera , someone at Nikon was actually thinking from a shooters prespective , it was very comfortable to work with for a DSLR but what i did not like was the color from it, my skin tones just looked very pale and i tried several differnt raw processors. Now the Fuji looks like it has a very nice sensor and excellent color to boot so I was really thinking about it and i still may get it for short term , i do need a SLR in July for sure for a big convention with catwalk stuff so was thinking the S5 and the 70-200 2.8 zoom at least until the fall and see what hits the streets Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.