Medium format film vs Digital comparison

[ozimax]

A comparison here from last week's wedding. My photo mate was using 35mm and medium format. We were shooting in a magnificent forest, in dappled light, which is hard to meter, and I think the D70 (or most probably any reputable digital for that matter) does a wonderful job of figuring out difficult light. I also think the SB600 has a lot to do with it too.

Anyway, here's a comparison of two shots, taken within 5 minutes of each other.

D70 with kit lens manual mode + SB600


Scanned medium format

[gstark]

Max,

Nice images, but both of them are showing an imbalance in the colour. You need to pull some of the cyan from both of these images. The key here is to look at the shadow details in the bride's dress, where it should be a more neutral shade, rather than the cyan cast that is currently being thrown.

If you're trying to compare the quality of the two images, I'd also like to have seen a couple of images that were more similar in their posing of the subject as well.

[Sheetshooter]

Max,

This is a subject I have been hoping to investigate further for some time. Not so much to decide which has better image forming capabilitis so much as to identify the strengths and weaknesses of each.

I know and prove to myself each day just how good the images from my EOS 5D are in comparison to the MF film I used on commercial gigs since antiquity - I am now also keen to compare the EOS 5D to my 4x5 (just waiting to get the film processor souped up and running).

But, once I get through with my dynamic range and exposure experiments I hope to do some rigidly set-up side-by-side comparisons.

Cheers,

[Oneputt]

Ozi that is hardly a fair comparison, as I am sure that you will agree, but you have raised an interesting point for some experimentation.

[Hlop]

Max,

As been said above, it's unfair comparison. First of all these scenes' light is different. Secondly, MF shot looks overexposed. And last but not least is it a scan of a printed photo or film-scan? What scanner was used? What resolution? Was it calibrated?

I've started playing with MF recently ( http://www.dslrusers.net/viewtopic.php?t=12539) and I'm sure there are advantages before digital. I can tell that MF handles dynamic range much better than digital. Disadvantage - it's uneasy to set reallistic colours. At least for unexperienced person like me Another disadvantage - you have to mess with chemical stuff or develop film in the lab

[birddog114]

ozimax,
The #1 from D70 is still the best under my eyes.
The # 2 from MF is just an ordinary, nothing special and look blurring or OOF to me. No cut
Just my view and perhaps it's just me.

[Sheetshooter]

Frankly, as Gary has indicated, there are so many variables present in these two images that any comaprison - or, even more so, expressing any judgement on a comparison - is little short of an exercise in banality and expressed ignorance especially in circumstances without the solid foundation of the parameters of scientific investigation.

Beyond the variations in technique, equipment, materials and processes there is also the ever-present and distracting element of personal bias.

Given the vastly different process from 'observed reality' to 'viewed image' a very tightly controlled series of procedures is essential in order to maximise the potential of each medium and to minimise the intrusion of potential for generational decay into the images.

We then face the limitations of screen resolution and calibration where the assessment is made on the internet.

Cheers,

[ozimax]

Thankyou all, I will try and reduce cyan Gary, and yes, I will "try" and find a pose more similar in nature, it's just that we weren't always (digital & MF) photographing the same subject at the same time.

Also, alas, viewing images on my iBook screen doesn't mean much, it isn't calibrated and is totally different to my NEC lcd monitor which seems to project more realistic colours.

We'll keep trying though!

Max

[ozimax]

Have searched thru files and come up with these shots taken at same time with same light. I'm not saying these shots are any good but just included for more realistic comparison.

Digital format (D70, kit lens & SB600)


Mamiya J645 (not sure of scan resolution etc)


Comments welcomed with thanks, Max

[Sheetshooter]

Max,

In some senses a better comparison on a more level playing field.

Neither appears correct at this end and each could deliver the goods with appropriate adjustment it would seem.

The issue then comes down to output size. Would the files from the D70 and the Mamiya be as similar blown up to say 20x26 inches or bigger.

Mind you, it has to be said that the 645 format is in many minds just a bit bigger version of a 35mm. Medium format covers a range of sizes and aspect ratios that far exceed this.

The rendering of the distant trees is more appealing (aestheitcally) in the Mamiya shot to my eye but that is a function of f/stop and magnification rather than image processing.

My considererd opinion at this time is that the jury is out and the only question in my head is whether or not a jury is really called for. Either format and medium will produce more than acceptable results for most applications and the only significant difference is possibly operator skill. An expert using 35mm will possibly produce a higher quality image than a buffoon using even Large Format.

At the end of the day, for me, it boils down to doing the best you can with what you've got and to work with thanks for what you CAN do rather than angst for what you can't do.

Cheers,

[gstark]

Max,

These two shots are much better from which to make a comparison.

Clearly the ambient light wasn't good, and a Metz needed to be used in order to negate the mottling effect of the light here.

The MF image looks to be a tad underexposed whereas the D70 image is a tad over, both are difficult exposure scenes however because of the poor light quality.

That said, let's look at the bride, and only at the bride, because there are two issues in evidence here that we need to address before we can go any further, and both issues relate to the colour balance that's presented to us.

The MF image looks, to me, on my (calibrated) monitor, to be correct, apart from being a little underexposed. We can determine this initially from the shaded areas of the bride's dress and the similarly shaded area of her train, where this is seen - to me - to be a very neutral colour. It's not white, as it's in shade, but there is no colour cast impinging upon this area of the bride either.

Compare this with the same areras in the D70's image, and to me there is a clear cyan cast. If anything, the D70 image is slightly blown as well, but I digress ...

Staying with the bride, I need to ask you what is the correct colour for the roses in the bouquet? In the D70 images they appear to be red, but the MF images present them as a richer burgundy colour, which I feel is the more correct coloring for these.

Which brings us to your target.

You need to play, in your PP, with the D70's colour balances, not just removing the cyan cast, but also seeking to obtain a match between the colours in the bouquets, and then also matching the bridesmaids'.

This needs to be done across the whole gamut of these images, so that your shots' colour matches that presented in the shots from the Mamiya.

When we have the colours matching, and good exposure presented in both images, we can then look more closely.

[dooda]

It looks to me like the D70 was exposing for the rose, and teh MF was exposing for her face.

I'd have to say that the only really good way to compare these would be to print them at their most optimal qualities at over 10 inches on the long end and then peep. Otherwise there's too much computer stuff that gets in the way.

[ozimax]

Gary,

You have given me, a rank amateur (not sure which rank) a heap to do, but I will try!

Max

[Matt. K]

This is old ground guys and it has been much walked over. There are many tightly controlled comparisons between medium format and digital SLR on the internet...for what they are worth. In the end it comes down to what you prefer most..music from your CD player or vinyl on a classic turntable.

[Hlop]

In the end it comes down to what you prefer most..music from your CD player or vinyl on a classic turntable.

Aw, Matt, don't start me on it!!! Vinyl is much better! But it's such a pain in the ... neck to keep it in proper condition!!!

[gstark]

And just try playing your vinyl in your car.

Max, it's all good (fun).

[Matt. K]

Hlop
I have to agree with you, and absolutely for voice and jazz. Piano and violin I think sound better on digital.

[ozimax]

Vinyl for sure, only my record player is kaput, actually not quite correct, record player is fine but I don't own a stereo system at present!

[Hlop]

And just try playing your vinyl in your car.

Isn't easy to play CDs either when I'm riding my bike