Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies. Read More.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Other Digital Cameras Medium Format Digital Cameras and Backs
Thread started 17 Dec 2015 (Thursday) 12:53
Prev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)

Medium Format - Sensor Sizes

 
kellmeister
Member
170 posts
Joined Mar 2005
Little Rock, Arkansas
Dec 17, 2015 12:53 |  #1

I'm looking at different medium format backs and was trying to understand the differences between a back with a smaller sensor versus a larger one.

Since I shoot only portraits, would there be much of a difference in the "medium format look" between the small 645 crop sensor of a Pentax 645z compared to a fullsize sensor that is in a phase one P65 or hasselblad H5D-60?

I've read a lot on getdpi and luminous-landscapes, but most of the conversations relating to sensor size have to do with tech cameras and landscape shooting, which I do not do. I would purchase a fullsize medium format sensor if it would make a difference with the tonality or look of the image. But I just can't get an idea if sensor size matters much within the medium format backs.


Canon 5d Mark II - 24-70 f2, 70-200 2.8 mk2, Sigma 50mm F1.4, 85mm f1.8, 35mm f2, 580exII, AB400 x 2, AB800 x 2
Rolleiflex 6003 - 80mm

LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)
CameraMan
Cream of the Crop
CameraMan's Avatar
12,999 posts
Gallery: 24 photos
Joined Dec 2010
In The Sticks
Dec 17, 2015 13:00 |  #2

If I had the money I'd get one of these

http://www.bhphotovide​o.com ...ital_back_50mp_blac​k.html (external link)

With this

http://www.bhphotovide​o.com ...O2388DI48kCFVE7gQod​z7ICIA (external link)


Photographer (external link) | The Toys! | Facebook (external link) | Video (external link) | Flickr (external link)
Shampoo sounds like an unfortunate name for a hair product.
You're a ghost driving a meat-coated skeleton made from stardust, riding a rock, hurtling through space. Fear Nothing!

LOG IN TO REPLY
Scatterbrained
Cream of the Crop
Scatterbrained's Avatar
Joined Jan 2010
Chula Vista, CA
Dec 17, 2015 13:25 |  #3

kellmeister wrote in post #17822552 (external link)
I'm looking at different medium format backs and was trying to understand the differences between a back with a smaller sensor versus a larger one.

Since I shoot only portraits, would there be much of a difference in the "medium format look" between the small 645 crop sensor of a Pentax 645z compared to a fullsize sensor that is in a phase one P65 or hasselblad H5D-60?

I've read a lot on getdpi and luminous-landscapes, but most of the conversations relating to sensor size have to do with tech cameras and landscape shooting, which I do not do. I would purchase a fullsize medium format sensor if it would make a difference with the tonality or look of the image. But I just can't get an idea if sensor size matters much within the medium format backs.

Well.....larger sensors require longer lenses to acquire a similarly narrow angle of view as a smaller sensor. Longer lenses have a more rapid DOF falloff than shorter lenses, so yeah, theoretically there could be some difference. I personally couldn't say for certain how significant it will be though.


VanillaImaging.com (external link)"Vacuous images for the Vapid consumer"
500px (external link)
flickr (external link)
1x (external link)
instagram (external link)

LOG IN TO REPLY
DisrupTer911
Goldmember
DisrupTer911's Avatar
Joined Jul 2008
NJ, USA
Dec 19, 2015 10:20 |  #4

Why do you think the pentax 645z sensor is smaller?

Pentax 645z
Sensor size Medium format (44 x 33 mm)

Hassleblad h5d 50
Sensor size (mm) 32.9 x 43.8


www.vividemotionphotograph​y.comexternal link

LOG IN TO REPLY
kellmeister
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
170 posts
Joined Mar 2005
Little Rock, Arkansas
Dec 19, 2015 14:08 as a reply to DisrupTer911's post |  #5

I mentioned the H5d-60 which is a little larger - 40 x 54mm. I was curious if it was that much difference in the "look" compared to the smaller 44x33mm sensor.


Canon 5d Mark II - 24-70 f2, 70-200 2.8 mk2, Sigma 50mm F1.4, 85mm f1.8, 35mm f2, 580exII, AB400 x 2, AB800 x 2
Rolleiflex 6003 - 80mm

LOG IN TO REPLY
chris_holtmeier
Goldmember
chris_holtmeier's Avatar
Joined Sep 2011
Omaha
Dec 20, 2015 10:00 |  #6

I shoot a P45+ back (1.1 crop), and have used a 645z on a couple of occasions. I find the P45+ renders the MFD "look" more than the 645z. Whether this comes down to sensor size, or that the Phase is CCD while the Pentax is CMOS, I don't know.

The 645Z looks more like my Canon 5DIII than my Phase. Color rendition and transition from in focus to OOF is just a whole different look with the Phase back.

This back comes with a new set of challenges and has a learning curve to it. You have to nail white balance in-camera to get the best color rendition, single focus point, very slow AF, usable ISO is 200 max. You have to take more care, it seems, with lighting setups, what looked good on my 5DIII just looks bad on the Phase back.



https://www.facebook.c​om/FotonFoto (external link)

LOG IN TO REPLY
Wilt
Reader's Digest Condensed version of War and Peace [POTN Vol 1]
Wilt's Avatar
39,156 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Joined Aug 2005
Belmont, CA
Post has been last edited over 1 year ago by Wilt. 7 edits done in total.
Dec 20, 2015 10:06 |  #7

'the look'...analogous to the difference between digital 35mm vs. digital APS-C vs. digital APS-H 'look'...the DOF is inversely proportionally to size of sensor (actually, proportional to the lens FL for comparable AOV in frame). For example,

APS-C : FF DOF is 1 : 1/1.6 at the same aperture, assuming 50mm vs. 80mm FL, both at same aperture.

As mentioned, since Pentax 645z Sensor size (33 x 44 mm) and Hassleblad H5D-50 Sensor size (mm) 32.9 x 43.8m, using 90mm lens on both provides same DOF on both, and 'the look' is identical.

As for the H5D-60 which is a little larger - 40 x 54mm (actually 40.2 x 53.7 mm), if one compared 90mm FL on the 44mm wide sensor vs. 110mm FL on the 54mm wide sensor, at comparable AOV with both the DOF, at the same aperture would be about 20% shallower on the larger sensor and would account for the 'more medium format' appearance, but not as significant a difference as the difference of 35mm film vs. medium format film.


You need to give me OK to edit your image and repost! Keep POTN alive and well with member support http://photography-on-the.net/forum/donate.p​hp
Canon dSLR system, Olympus OM 35mm system, Bronica ETRSi 645 system, Horseman LS 4x5 system, Metz flashes, Dynalite studio lighting, and too many accessories to mention

LOG IN TO REPLY
Kolor-Pikker
Goldmember
2,790 posts
Joined Aug 2009
Moscow
Dec 21, 2015 06:41 |  #8

kellmeister wrote in post #17822552 (external link)
I'm looking at different medium format backs and was trying to understand the differences between a back with a smaller sensor versus a larger one.

Since I shoot only portraits, would there be much of a difference in the "medium format look" between the small 645 crop sensor of a Pentax 645z compared to a fullsize sensor that is in a phase one P65 or hasselblad H5D-60?

I've read a lot on getdpi and luminous-landscapes, but most of the conversations relating to sensor size have to do with tech cameras and landscape shooting, which I do not do. I would purchase a fullsize medium format sensor if it would make a difference with the tonality or look of the image. But I just can't get an idea if sensor size matters much within the medium format backs.

33x44 already looks quite different to 24x36. I've only used an IQ180 for a very short time so I didn't really get a good impression of the differences, but it's not as great I guess, the Leica S I used next to it arguably had better rendering qualities overall, despite the smaller sensor, but that's no doubt due to the S lenses.

One thing I want to throw out here is that MF lenses generally don't perform as well wide open as highly-optimized 35mm lenses like Sigma's ART series and Zeiss Otus and FE series. You really need to shell out for the top-end glass for any of these cameras to have sharp wide-open results. The SK series on Phase cameras, the new 35mm/28-45mm/90mm Pentax lenses and all of the S lenses are incredible wide open, as are the Zeiss V-mount lenses for Hasselblad that can be adapted to most of these cameras.


5DmkII | 24-70 f/2.8L II | Pentax 645Z | 55/2.8 SDM | 120/4 Macro | 150/2.8 IF
I acquired an expensive camera so I can hang out in forums, annoy wedding photographers during formals and look down on P&S users... all the while telling people it's the photographer, not the camera.

LOG IN TO REPLY
chris_holtmeier
Goldmember
chris_holtmeier's Avatar
Joined Sep 2011
Omaha
Dec 21, 2015 12:48 |  #9

The older 55 AF is a good lens. So is the 120 MF Macro, and 200mm APO.

I have an 80/1.9 N, which is great at times, but its not really good for everything.



https://www.facebook.c​om/FotonFoto (external link)

LOG IN TO REPLY
Go ­ Go
Member
Go Go's Avatar
147 posts
Joined Aug 2007
Post has been edited over 1 year ago by Go Go.
Jan 28, 2016 12:46 |  #10

Yes, to the OP.

I have shot both sensor sizes in Hasselblad. Specifically the H4D 40 and the larger sensor H4D 60.

There are several differences, first the image from the 60 camera is larger in physical size. From the HB website, 40 Megapixels (5478 x 7304)
Sensor Dimensions 32.9 x 43.8mm versus 60 Megapixels (6708 x 8956) Sensor Dimensions 40.2 x 53.7mm.

The biggest difference for me and my shooting style is the versatility of the 40 sensor over the 60. I can use the 40 sensor at ISO 100 to ISO 400 with no real loss of IQ. The 60 sensor really wants to be shot at base 50 ISO and starts to loose IQ at 100 ISO.

There are a lot of other differences between the two, if you shoot landscape or studio where you can control the light the the 60 is a good bet. If you want a camera to shoot in uncontrolled lighting situations then the 40 or a DSLR is probably more adaptable.

The new 100MP CMOS sensors will eliminate the necessity of shooting at base ISO for optimum quality. This will be a real breakthrough for MF cameras and make them much more adaptable.




LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)

3,079 views & 8 likes for this thread
Medium Format - Sensor Sizes
FORUMS Other Digital Cameras Medium Format Digital Cameras and Backs


Not a member yet? Click here to register to the forums.
Registered members get all the features: search, following threads, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, settings, view hosted photos, own reviews and more...


AAA

Send feedback to staff    •   Jump to forum...    •   Rules    •   Index    •   New posts    •   RTAT    •   'Best of'    •   Gallery    •   Gear    •   Reviews    •   Polls

COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies. Privacy policy and cookie usage info.

POWERED BY AMASS 1.4version 1.4
made in Finland
by Pekka Saarinen
for photography-on-the.net
Spent 0.00117 for 4 database queries.
PAGE COMPLETED IN 0.02s
Latest registered member is KiwiSean
774 guests, 273 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 6106, that happened on Jun 09, 2016