Digital Medium Format (Macro Four Thirds) doesn't make any sense as a format.>most lenses for MFT hover around f/4, with some fast primes around f/1.7. With a crop factor of only x0.79, means you get an equivalent DOF of f/3.16 and f/1.34 respectively . Meaning that full frame actually has shallower dof in most cases.Another drawback of the f/4 average is that the aperture opening is the same meaning that the iso on MFT needs to be higher (or shutter speed slower) in order to match the exposure on an equivalent FF lens.>there is no consistent dynamic range advantage. This was the second best dynamic range MFT camera I could find on photonstophotos (besides a Phase One IQ4 ($62,000)As you can see the Hassleblad HD6 is only 1(one) stop better than an a7riii at base iso, at iso 100 there is only about 1/2 a stop difference. At 400 ISO the Sigma FP-L actually surpasses the DR from the Hassleblad. Also remember you're iso on the MTF camera will need to be higher throughout to match the exposure of the FF camera.So what are we left with? Medium format is slower, vastly more expensive, has a deeper DOF and doesn't even have a significant dynamic range advantage past the base iso under a nearly best case scenario. The older MTF cameras often have WORSE dynamic range than a modern FF camera.There quite simply is no performance-oriented reason to buy a medium format camera except where maximum resolution is required. Having more physical space for the pixels. Digital medium format is simply a luxury buy and if it wasn't for the social signaling and rarity, it would be going extinct like it's micro cousin.*drops mic*
>>4384748you're just mad because bitcoin is UP and soon I'll be having my /M43/ general L O L[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeNIKON CORPORATIONCamera ModelNIKON Z 6_2Camera SoftwareCapture One 23 MacintoshSensing MethodOne-Chip Color AreaFocal Length (35mm Equiv)40 mmImage-Specific Properties:Horizontal Resolution300 dpiVertical Resolution300 dpiExposure Time1/500 secF-Numberf/8.0Exposure ProgramAperture PriorityISO Speed Rating1000Lens Aperturef/8.0Exposure Bias0 EVMetering ModePatternLight SourceUnknownFlashNo FlashFocal Length40.00 mmImage Width2012Image Height3024RenderingCustomExposure ModeAutoWhite BalanceAutoScene Capture TypeStandardGain ControlLow Gain UpContrastNormalSaturationNormalSharpnessNormalSubject Distance RangeUnknown
>>4384751>bitcoin is going to the moon! Wait until I get my lambo moneygo back to /biz/, retard
>>4384753it's 50R money for the medium format range finder experience
>>4384754Bro you have a z6ii, lower your voice when you talk to me.
>>4384748ISO-invariance is based
>>4384748"Macro Four Thirds" is retarded. I get the attempt at humor but literally thought you were confusing mft and MF for a moment.The reason for going MF today is for incredibly detailed prints at 60" and larger with 80mp and higher sensors, and for extreme high ISO (sensor tech has to be roughly equal though). DR is there but FF DR is already so good that it really doesn't matter any more. DR is such an overrated spec, the average neg film was 10-11 stops which even the first digital sensors hit, and it's relatively rare to have a scene where you need to ETTR in RAW and squeeze every ounce of 14 stops of DR out of the file. (It happens with sun in frame.) DR does not affect every photo you take, you can always blend two frames for more, and even "shit" sensors are incredibly flexible compared to most films.If you can afford it and need it, 80-150mp MF is pretty incredible. But FF is where the lenses are at and already capable of 60" prints on the higher res sensors. FF is the new MF, MFD is the new LF.
>>4384755a z6ii with a broken IBIS
>>4384790>"Macro Four Thirds" is retarded. I get the attempt at humor but literally thought you were confusing mft and MF for a moment.how new are you, summerfag?
>>4384790>go onto /p/ for the first time>decide that your the expert on the boardmany such cases
>Photons to photosHis charts are inaccurate and can not be used to compare cameras. He uses an objectively incorrect definition of dynamic range, an objectively incorrect method for measuring it (SNR of a pink square lmao), and then fucks it even harder by charting against labeled ISO (marketing number) instead of measured sensitivity (actual exposure).Step wedge and shadow/highlight recovery tests done with ev step wedges are the ONLY way to measure dynamic range. DR is also a subjective measurement. Noise floor cutoffs mean less than viewer discrimination - circles of confusion etc.>EquivalenceEquivalence does not actually even out formats performance IRL. Very, very rarely, ie: in DOF critical closeups in low light, do you actually HAVE to shoot equivalently. In all other situations you have something to give to lower the ISO. Micro four thirds wildlife photography is a great example. Whether its a 100-400 f4-5.6 or a "50-200 f4-5.6" the background is going to be blurry, the MFT is just going to be less blurry and look like noisy phone tier dogshit. Hence nobody fucking uses it, <1% market share. The mft faggot will then say "BUT U DIDNT TAKE THE SAME PHOTO, U HAD TO STOP DOWN!!!!!" - correct, the full frame user took a better photo. A blurrier background is preferable to a blurrier subject. Micro four thirds sucks no matter how much equivalence you theorize about and anyone capable of holding it level has out-skilled their gear and would benefit from upgrading. Likewise, full frame is worse than fuji GFX.Now remember medium format is meant for studio use, where base ISO is the only ISO anyone uses.Furthermore, differences in sensor tech and pixel pitch break equivalence. A GFX100S is ***OVER A STOP*** cleaner than 24mp FF when downscaled to 24mp and impervious to aliasing. A 45mp ff is better than a 25mp mft even at equiv ISOs when scaled to 25mp. Meanwhile a GFX50R is only "a little better than" full frame and basically looks the fucking same.
>>4384790>neg film is 10-11 stopsThe 10-11 stop cutoff is very subjective. You can achieve 14-16 with color shifts, just like you can achieve 16-17 on FF digital with good noise reduction and color shifts.
>>43849786x7 film has a (scientifically proven) resolution of at LEAST 80mp
>>4384978why is the canon r6ii blurrier and noisier than the z6ii? i thought it was digital night vision?
>>4384989Yes, sure, at least 80mp if you use a mamiya 7 on a tripod, shoot a totally still object at f8 (so f4 dof), and then buy a 80mp+ digital camera to do the scan, which you could have just replaced the mamiya 7 with in the first place and gotten the same result with less bullshit and significantly less grain. The mamiya 7 would only offer that resolution at ISO 50 to 160. A GFX100SII would offer that resolution well into the 4 digit ISO settings.
>>4384990Because you eat cum and believe everything Canon and their shills say
>>4384994Careful, you’re talking to someone that would actually buy a mamiya 7, blind their dog with flash, and brag about the detail after renting a phase one xt to scan the negative.
>>4385011That's not me, turd. I have a mamiya 6 I got for 700 bucks 8 years ago, and I would rent a phase one for the exif data on snapshits of my dog to troll p. Please get it right next time.
>>4385011I didn't blind him with flash either. He can see very well.
>>4384978Straight facts. No amount of equivalence scenarios can change how uncommon equivalence scenarios are, and even then the gfx100 breaks them.>Fool framers are applying micro fool turd logic to try and get out of fuji mogging their babby street photography cameras lol
>>4384981>You can achieve 14-16 with color shiftsCool, can you show us a 16 stop film shot?
>>4384748>most lenses for MFT hover around f/4, with some fast primes around f/1.7. With a crop factor of only x0.79, means you get an equivalent DOF of f/3.16 and f/1.34 respectively . Meaning that full frame actually has shallower dof in most cases.Sort of, but it doesn't really work like that, as aperture and focal length don't affect your DOF in a linear way and their curves are not the same. It's sort of pointless to say "50mm f2 has the same dof as 100mm f3.5" because they will only have the DOF at one specific distance where their curves cross over.
>>4384989Cool, can you show us an 80mp equivalent 6x7 shot? Would love to see your favorite personal 6x7 landscape.
