better colors from medium and large format...why?
Why is it that the color produced by the medium and large format cameras are better than colors produced by 35mm (Nikon, Canon, Sony, etc. DSLR) cameras?
I don't think it is only that the digital back or the medium or large format film they are using. It also has to do with the size of the film and the digital back... Why are colors nicer, cleaner if they are recorded on a medium, large format media...? I am sure you know it better...Can anybody explain it briefly?
I don't think it is only that the digital back or the medium or large format film they are using. It also has to do with the size of the film and the digital back... Why are colors nicer, cleaner if they are recorded on a medium, large format media...? I am sure you know it better...Can anybody explain it briefly?
0
Comments
I've seen a handful of RAW files from MF digital backs, and I've seen plenty of RAW files from various dSLRs. I didn't notice color fidelity as being an issue.
Compare the latest FF 35mm images and the latest MF (medium format) images. The difference is huge.
All (TOP) fashion photographers use MF. There must be a reason why Hasselblad, Contax, etc. can charge $30-40.000 for a basic setup....:):):)
A larger format also allows better, as in more efficient, anti-alias (AA) filtration. The efficiency is not so much light efficiency but how the AA filter works, and it tends to work better in a larger format.
Unfortunately the larger formats tend not to be tuned for high-ISO work so they are not universally better. Factoring in the costs of ownership and the larger sensor backs tend to be more specialized and only really make economic sense for high-volume, or high-end markets in portraiture, glamour, fashion, etc.
Moderator of the Cameras and Accessories forums
And correction I was wrong.. MF backs are 14 bit (I thought there were some that shot with a 16 bit processor.) Still 12 bit = 4096 unique colors per pixel, 14 bit = 16,000 (something, I rounded.) so 4x the color range per pixel.
I thought full frame cameras such as the 5DII had 14bit Raw files. Even if they didn't, I don't believe that you could see a difference in the image unless you were doing some extreme post processing.
Part of the problem with "14 bit" files is that it is only part of the solution for enhanced color definition. Unless you have extremely capable imagers, LNA section, A/D converters, image processor, etc., the 14 bit files may not contain any more image data than 12 bit files.
Medium format and large format imagers/backs tend to have better "everything" in terms of image processing so they often do have better image data output, but not always and not under every situation.
Moderator of the Cameras and Accessories forums
I do think that the pixel quality matters. In full-frame DSLRs, as pixel density increases pixel quality is traded off in order to record more details. MF back can still maintain the pixel quality while with 40 up mega pixels for the details, that is, MF is with more details (mega pixels) and better per pixel quality.
I think ISO performance could be a problem because CCD sensor is usually used instead of CMOS sensor for digital backs. The CMOS technology is quite mature in terms of ISO performance while the CCD technology may still wait for a breakthrough to boost up its ISO capability. Or alternatively, CMOS fabrication technology might be boosted up for the producing of medium to large format backs. Or perhaps the fabrication technology is ready in Canon or Sony, they just don't want the medium and large format backs to impact their DSLR business for the time being, who knows.
The 5D2 does have 14 bits, at least according to the manual. Can't say if the 14 bits are as good as the 14 bits from other 14 bit cameras, but there are the same number of them.
I believe that the Nikon D700 will record RAW files in either 12 bit or 14 bit depth and the 12 bit files still process to very high quality images.
Moderator of the Cameras and Accessories forums
It does! And They do!
Let's see some side-by-side examples?
Portfolio • Workshops • Facebook • Twitter
In my experience, the value of 14 bit color depth comes into play when the dynamic range is expanded, and shallow gradients are increased. I see this as intensity contours that show up as what were once close values for intensity get pulled farther apart. With more bits of color depth, gradients are smoother.
I use digital MF since 2009 and started to shoot film by 2010, i always see there is something i can't tell with MF film or digital over 35mm, but when i just have normal shot of 35mm and normal shot of MF/LF and print them at 4x6 to A3 i really don't see any are really amazing or which is which, but looking at well done MF against well done 35mm and printed at say A3 minimum and up, MF/LF win always regarding of color/sharpness/DR/tones.