Medium format film vs digital

PhotoFreak

4

15 Mar 2009 - 5:56 PM

• Options
  • Report Error / Abuse

0

Hi everyone.

I have recently looked at some pictures I took years ago with a medium format camera and gotta tell ya, despite my inadequate skills they looked amazing.
So I was wondering, how good and worth is it to use medium format film alongside digital? I absolutely love film but will always use digital.

So I would be very grateful if people could tell me their opinions on using medium format film opposed to digital SLRs and what would be envolved in digitising film.

Kind regards,
Hilmar

Snapper

7

15 Mar 2009 - 6:36 PM

• Options
  • Report Error / Abuse

0

You'll need a scanner, and probably one of Epson's flatbeds would be best. After that, you're off and running.

Edit: the Epson V500 does medium format.

Nigeyboy

4

15 Mar 2009 - 8:55 PM

• Options
  • Report Error / Abuse

0

I am looking into this very topic myself. Dusted off the Bronica, and intend to purchase a Canon 8800F scanner to scan the developed films.

ljesmith

7

15 Mar 2009 - 10:43 PM

• Options
  • Report Error / Abuse

0

I currently shoot on Hasselblad and scan using an Epson V700. The results are on my profile.

Krakman

5

16 Mar 2009 - 12:37 PM

• Options
  • Report Error / Abuse

0

Quote: I really wonder about the grain of the film. When scanned is it very prominent with lets say films of 50 or 100 ISO?

In short, no.

joolsb (e2 Member)

7

17 Mar 2009 - 8:12 AM

• Options
  • Report Error / Abuse

0

Quote: In short, no.

In slightly longer, it depends on the scanner.

A consumer flatbed doesn't have the resolution to see down to the grain so it never becomes an issue in the first place. Film-scanners do have the resolution but can suffer from 'grain aliasing' where the grid of the sensor-array interferes with the grain-pattern and thereby has a magnifying effect on grain. However, you can use a special diffuser to soften the light-source and reduce this effect.

A drum scanner doesn't suffer from either of these problems and therefore offers the highest attainable scan quality.

ZenTog

10

17 Mar 2009 - 8:38 AM

• Options
  • Report Error / Abuse

0

Quote: I tested my digital MF against normal 35mm digital DSLR, the MF was the winner no doubt, film MF is incredible, that's why i am looking to get one.

I have a full set up a mamiya rb pros 67 setup with everything for sale

Krakman

5

17 Mar 2009 - 12:09 PM

• Options
  • Report Error / Abuse

0

Quote: In slightly longer, it depends on the scanner.

I couldn't agree more. My, 'in short, 'no'' was on the premise that the OP was really asking to what extent grain was intrusively visible, compared to, say, digital.

On the issue of scanning, my experience is that Epson-type photo scanners, while being amazing things in any ways, are barely good enough for scanning MF film.

Here's one I prepared earlier, which also shows the amount of grain and detail you might expect from 400 ISO film on 6x7cm film. Note, you would of course get significanly less grain using slower film:-

Original

Detail from scan on Hasselblad/Imacon flm scanner

Detail from scan on Epson Photo scanner

None of the above have been sharpened/unsharpened - all fresh out of the scanner with no unsharp mask set.