I’ve had the fortune of being let loose with a high-end Phase One medium format full frame digital camera; here is what I learned.
Currently, I am in the process of procuring some new camera equipment. It is a minefield out there with new bodies and lenses being released almost every month. The last time I purchased a camera was eight years ago, and it was a Canon 5D Mark II. There haven’t been any major leaps in Canon cameras since then, at least not any that benefit photographers who don't shoot weddings, wildlife, or sports. But my kit is a bit worn out (very worn out) and I am looking to buy into something new. There should also be a disclaimer here: I do not lust for nor care about camera gear. I am not techy in any way and reading a gear review is my idea of hell. So, be patient with me while I talk about these cameras in a very simple way.
My options are to either stay with Canon and buy into the 5DS R range with a few new lenses or to go into Phase One and keep my old Canon gear for smaller jobs. I don’t want to have to learn a new 35mm camera system and lenses at this stage in my career, so if I am going to change, it will be to a bigger format where everything is a major leap. After talking to my local camera shop, I decided to give the Phase One a go. The camera is about £15,000 with a few lenses, the full-frame digital back, and a few accessories. That would cover me for pretty much everything I need. The images it produces are amazing, but the biggest differences were not what I expected.
Bad Photos Are Still Bad Photos
This might sound obvious, but a bad photograph is still a bad photograph. When I sat the camera on my studio stand and fired off the first shot, I was quickly humbled. Simply adding £15K of kit in front of your face doesn't make any difference at all. Your work doesn't become any better by having a better camera. However, it does allow you to do a few new things. Creating larger prints, shooting subtle variations in color within a single shot without risking banding, and also using an 80mm lens to create a 50mm-ish field of view. This is the same principle as a crop sensor to 35mm. This also means that when shooting flat lays, you can have your 80mm lens on camera at about the same height as your 50mm lens on a 35mm sensor. It may sound like a small thing, but for someone who shoots flatly week in, week out, it’s a massive bonus.
More Resolution Does Not help
Having more megapixels means that you can print bigger. And in my world, that’s all it means. Sometimes, my clients like to make monster crops of my work, so I am sure they like this at times, but it’s not really a great selling point for me. I don't pixel-peep and I don't crop my work.
Higher Bit Depth
This, for me, is the moneymaker. I have no idea why camera companies harp on about megapixels, ISO, autofocus points, and a myriad of other measurements that in 2018 are pretty pointless. Any camera on the market has more than enough in terms of ISO performance and megapixels. Yet, bit rate is hidden deep inside the camera specs. The addition of millions of colors a few more bits add to your sensor is unbelievable. The colors from the Phase One back are by far the biggest selling point to me. Grading the raw files in Capture One was a breeze. I tried a few in Lightroom too and it was far easier to create a great color palette than it is with the Canon sensors.
It’s Not Film, but You Will shoot Slower
I used film for a long time, and the sayings are true. Film slows you down. It really does: even when I wasn't paying for my film, I still didn't want to waste the physical medium. For some unexplained reason, the Phase One system makes me feel the same. The only reason I can think of for this strange change of pace when shooting is the value of the camera. People say that medium format cameras are slow studio machines, but I found it pretty easy to use on location too, yet I still worked a lot slower. It wasn't the camera slowing me down, more a change in mindset.
It's Inspiring
Using a Phase One makes me feel like Johnny big guy. I felt like a “real pro” and I wanted to go out there and create with it. Having such a monster of a camera and knowing it’s the best you can get is very inspiring. It’s a bit like when you first make the leap to full frame, but a lot more expensive. In the time I had it, whenever I didn't have a client nearby, I shot test shoot after test shoot and I created a really cool body of work that I am now showing to art buyers.
Capture One
The tethering software for Phase One cameras is Capture One. Having tethered into Lightroom for eight years with a mix of frustration and outright anger, moving over to tether software that works seamlessly was very pleasing. Even if I end up going down the Canon 5DS R route, I will still invest in the Capture One Software. Over the time I had the camera, it didn't crash once. Today, I went back to Canon and Lightroom, and within 10 minutes, the tether had failed, files had been lost in transit, and I was closing it down and reopening it. Knowing that there is now another way is very useful.
Clients Do Not Care
During the time having the camera, I shot for a new client. It was a pretty big shoot where the images will more than likely be used worldwide. No one mentioned the camera, image quality, or anything related to having a monster of a camera on set. They talked about the composition, making sure the right elements were in the shot, and that the food looked tasty. I was actually a little bit disappointed that no one noticed my massive camera as I strutted around the studio. But it raised a valid point. Only photographers care about cameras.
What Will I Buy?
I am still undecided. There are very diminishing returns moving into medium format, but when shooting for large prints, especially in the food world, having the resolution, detail, and range of colors at your disposal is very important. It is also a far more future-proof system with the option to separate the body, sensor, lens, and viewfinders. I will more than likely make my purchase at the end of September and I will write an article about whichever way I decide to go.
The bottom line is, whichever camera system I invest in, my photographs won't get any better. I will have a slightly easier time making crops for prints and I might get a better color range, but I will still have the same subject, composition, and lighting that I have always had.
Given the choice, what would you go for?
You may well be right Matt. I have only ever shot with Canon. Not due to any brand loyalty, but because I know it inside out.
Ok dum dum.. if you are going to rent a high end MF camera.. make sure the client knows. If you are just waiting for them to notice, they never will. But if you tell them about it.. explain why you did it and what it adds to the end product you will look like a pro and they will feel like the price you charged was more then worth it. If you don’t do this then you are just a part of the race to the bottom. Just remember part of your job as a creative professional is to educate your clients on what you are doing and why.
Please please for the sake of everyone on this site stop being a barny and handel your clients properly before they start shooting there campaigns with cell phones.
.
I don't get involved in that end of the discussion. My agent deals with that side of things, by the time I speak to the client almost everything has been agreed, I could add it to the debrief, but I am not sure they would care. At my current price point per day, I doubt I am part of the race to the bottom nor do I worry about my clients starting to shoot their campaigns with cell phones.
As you pointed out, your clients don't care what camera you are using. Your already very successful producing what your clients want with the equipment you already have so does spending 15K really give a noticeable return on investment?. Have you tried using one of the more modern Canon DSLR's and seeing how that compares against the Phase One rather than comparing a 10 year old camera/technology against something more recent?.
When I tried the Phase One, yes!...it was different, but not by much, my DSLR is a couple of years old but has a dynamic range of 14 stops, against the current Phase Ones 15. I have 36MP against the Phase Ones 50/80 or 100. But I feel the difference I saw in the images was down to the quality of the lenses. Would 15K buy you a more modern Canon and some kick ass glass and still leave you with some change?. Then as Richard pointed out your butts still covered should something go wrong on the day of a shoot as you equipment is still interchangeable.
It is all very much diminishing returns. I think I will look at what Canon can offer too and look at returns on investment.
Hope to see you back at the studio again soon.
1 . Simple option : It is "just" a gear/tool. You can always sell it if you find it , after proper usage , that it is actually not for you. Ok you will lost a bit of money, but who cares, life goes on. It's big boy toy.
2. Only you knows your finances , clients and market. If you go with MF be aware that you should start charging more for your shots [renting gear from yourself which is more expensive than 35mm] . If there is no market/clients that will react positive on your upgrade in terms of accepting bigger invoices, than you will actually kind of lose money. If you don't care for that and just want to shoot with MF and enjoy in that, than just go, as I wrote under 1* and have fun :)
my case:
I had Hasselblad + p45...than sold it...after 2 years, went back to MF with Phase One. There's no room to charge more [ in my tiny country] for using MF but I use it mainly for my personal work, everything other is done with my Nikon gear.
Apologize for not so perfect english.
This is very true for point one.
I am not sure that I can charge more than my current day rate as it is already near the ceiling for what I do. I could get a small amount more, but not enough to make any real difference. The renting gear from yourself things have been mentioned a few times. I am UK based and I have only ever heard of this as a thing in the states. Is it more worldwide than I thought?
I don't add the camera cost whether rental or my own gear, to my rate. I add it as a line item. Some clients are rate/fee sensitive but are less sensitive about expenses. In the US at least.
I tried a Phase 1, and like any other digital camera, it will not photography a traditional Kodak Colour chart accurately.
I love digital, but you get better colour from film. Of course then you scan it and it becomes digital, and the colours change.
Have a look at the cyan and orange on the chart and compare it to what you get on the screen - way, way different
I was just loaned the Leica SL for 2 weeks and basically have the same thoughts. Lovely colours and made me want to shoot more.
Great article. I found the same when recently jumping from a 35mm system with the Fuji GFX 50s. I shoot 5dsr workhorse and GFX 50s studio or portrait. The GFX 50s vs Canon is no contest in the right environment. The GFX50s file is much better. They both have their time and place but if you are largely studio based I would definitely recommend as a budget option for MF and keep a 35mm setup too. I got by GFX50s for £5000 and lenses are around £2000 each so not much different to a 5dsr with set of L lenses set. I am yet to try the GFX to Canon adapter (which costs around £500) but this may also make all your lenses work over both systems if the quality of lens compatibility is good.