- This topic is empty.
Mamiya RB67 vs Canon 1ds2..Thoughts? Opinions?
-
Hi All,
The scenario….
I have a Canon 1Ds2, and an assortment of lenses, including some primes, and I’m happy with the image quality I’m getting.
However…
I also have a Mamiya RB67 and lenses.
I love using the Mamiya, and film.
The problem is that when I develop and scan those lovely big negs, the quality I’m getting, compared to the 1Ds2 isn’t great. Admittedly, I’m using a Canon 2400f flatbed scanner which is about seven years old.My questions are….
Looking at the scanner options, the best flatbed seems to be the Epson v700 or v750 at around the €800 mark. If I bought this, would I get scans from the 6×7 that would be at or near the quality of the 1Ds2?Another option would be the Nikon Coolscan 9000, but at about four and a half grand the quality would have to be superior to, or at least match, my current digital setup.
Does anyone know, or know of a site, that would compare the 1Ds2 vs scans from an RB67 done on either of these scanners? Or are there any other options?
Any thoughts?
Rog
I own an Epson V700 and a Mamiya RZ67II which produces 6×7 negs.
The quality of flatbed scans from 6×7 with the Epson depends on the film used. For best results I found the modern 100iso colour negative films from Kodak or Fuji work best, those films have been made with scanning in mind…
I have not used or know anything about the 1Ds2. Compared to a Nikon D200 If using the above films the scans from the V700 with good scanning software are about equal. Would think the 1Ds2 would produce better digital image files …
6×7 scan from a Nikon 9000 would be far superior though to a 1Ds2, The quality of those scanners are amazing …
Another flatbed scanner is the Imacon, think there is one for sale on this site, it would produce better scans that the Epsons, another option
Another option of course is to darkroom print your 6×7 negs:-)
MIf I were you (and I don’t know what your modus operandi is (both cameras are VERY different beasts; pic quality aside):
Option a):
LISTEN TO Martin, he’s pretty much on the money.
Option b):
I’d keep doing what your doing (or get a V750) for run-of-the-mill stuff, and get exceptional images that you need to seriously enlarge (e.g. beyond, say, 8x) drum-scanned.
Option c):
Sell the Mamiya and get into large format :) at 5×7″ or 8×10″ it almost doesn’t matter anymore what scanner you’re using….forget even megapixels (although your computer might start to get upset): Supreme tonality becomes the name of the game (I’m getting teary-eyed just talking about it…give me a minute….. there now, I’m better, thanks….) even more so that in MF :oHi Rog,
I recall seeing from online scanner tests that the V700 & V750 are top of the pile, with regard to currently produced flatbeds. That said, resolution according to these tests is supposed to top out at around 2300dpi. For the sake of argument, lets call it 2400dpi, at which resolution a scan will yield you an image of 5760 x 6720 pixels approximately.
Hypothetically, that’s a 38 megapixel scan, but at this stage lens quality differences, and the film stock used, will make material differences to ultimate achievable quality.
One other point worth considering, is the curl of medium format negatives, which often require scanning holders such as those from betterscanning.com to keep your 120 negatives flat, so as to get the best sharpness possible.
Bear in mind, all the above is merely extrapolated thinking on my part, with the ultimate judge for image quality being your own eyes.
The Nikon coolscans will net you better resolution yet, with the Imacons being a step up again, and drum scanners a step up even from that.
Of course, this does not factor into account, the entirely different workflows of a digital slr versus a medium format slr, not to mention the cost and/or time involved in developing and scanning..
At the end of the day, it will all boil down to what you’re happy with, and having seen some of Steve McCurry’s large (3 feet+ on the long side) images recently, I was quite impressed with what he gleaned from his Kodachrome and digital images. I believe he shoots with a Nikon D3s these days, which he’s casually mentioned on his blog is good for his prints up to 30″ x 40″.
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
