Medium Format v 35mm
Photographed above are a Mamiya 645 medium format camera withe a 31MP Leaf digital back and a Canon 1DsII with a 24-105L zoom. Both cameras have their pros and cons and I think it’s worth looking at what they both have to offer.
Back in the days of film this decision would have been a no brainer for me. Although 35mm film was capable of producing excellent quality results at smaller sizes, medium format had a clear advantage when big enlargements or heavy cropping was necessary.
On most commercial jobs clients expected medium format and I did nearly all my work with the Hasselblad, though I’ve also used Bronica and Mamiya. My Canon equipment was pulled out the bag just once or twice a year in special circumstances when the speed advantage of working with 35mm became essential. I remember once shooting a nude model running on a beach that would have been just about impossible with a medium format camera either then or now.
For commercial work, film is ancient history as far as I am concerned. That doesn’t mean film is no longer able to produce good quality images, merely that I have moved on to a 100% digital workflow. In practice there is no commercial assignment that I cannot handle using a professional quality digital camera nowadays and I am not a pixel peeping maniac so all I care about is the end result and whether or not it is aesthetically pleasing.
The difference in size and weight between the two formats is not as notable as it was in the past, so on that score I could be happy with either option and I actually like the feel of a fairly big camera, though I always thought the Mamiya RZ and RB were overkill. Build quality with all the professional cameras is also very good in general, so I don’t think that is an issue unless you plan on shooting in extreme conditions.
One area where I feel medium format wins hands down is with the actual shape of the image. The vast majority of commercial applications such as magazines and catalogues are a far better fit for the 4:3 ratio of cameras like the Mamiya rather than the 2:3 ratio of 35mm cameras. In practice you have to allow more space to crop a 35mm image, so you end up having to step back and crop the image later on. It’s just an awkward and unwanted diversion from your work.
There will of course be cases where the 35mm format offers a better fit for certain jobs but I still prefer medium format when photographing models because I believe it looks so much more flattering to the shape of a body, whether shooting fashion or nudes, because 35mm images just look too long and narrow.
Medium format digital cameras have always scored well on shadow transitions and dynamic range compared to 35mm systems, which are often hard pressed in situations with less than optimal lighting and exposure, so in that sense I still don’t believe a modern 35mm digital camera can yet match a medium format camera whether using digital or film.
For low noise levels at faster ISO speeds 35mm wins easily and is capable of far better results in situations where a photographer is forced to work in less than ideal conditions outdoors. I know some people would consider me old fashioned for always trying to work at the lowest possible ISO, but the basic laws of photography haven’t changed. Properly exposed low ISO equals better quality.
The fact remains though that if you try to shoot outdoors with a medium format digital camera at 800 ISO you are likely to be disappointed with the results and the likes of Canon appear to have made greater progress in this area. Do the same thing with a 5DII and you’ll be surprised at how good it still looks with some careful noise reduction in post production. On days where you have to produce a lot of images in less than ideal weather conditions 35mm may well be the only logical choice.
It would be naive to write a blog post comparing 35mm to medium format without considering the question of cost, because the difference is considerable, though I am glad to see that the eye watering expense of medium format is creeping closer to the realms of 35mm and in a couple of years time I expect many more professionals to start using medium format cameras again after being forced to abandon ship for a few years because of clear cut problems of affordability. For most people reading this blog the prices of medium format are still too high and in that case you just have to work with the best 35mm camera and lenses you can afford.
In terms of absolute quality I find that images from my 1DsII or a 5DII are broadly comparable when printed in a magazine or poster with what I could do with film or for that matter a medium format camera with a digital back. That may seem strange to some but the actual medium of commercial print is a great leveller and strips out nearly all the perceived quality advantages that might have been seen on a screen at high magnification.
As I write this, I am reminded of the very first time I saw some digital images printed in a magazine as part of a fashion editorial shot by a friend. There was a double page spread and the images had a lovely smoothness about them but not quite as much gritty definition as I was used to with my Hasselblad’s drum scanned images. At the time I thought it was shot on a Mamiya 645 film camera, so my jaw nearly hit the floor when he told me the image was cropped and had been done with the original Fuji S1, which was actually a 3.4MP camera.
Another point worth considering is that while medium format cameras generally have more megapixels that will translate to greater image detail, especially given the lack of anti-moire filter, that doesn’t necessarily make the final image more flattering or aesthetically pleasing, so I think it’s a case of choosing the right tool for the job. I have seen some beauty images done with 38MP that were anything but flattering and no model will thank you for making her face look some Roman ruins. Remember that my interest extends to photographing models and not architecture.
To finish this post with some kind of summary conclusion, I can only say that in an ideal world a professional photographer would really want both systems at their disposal, just like in the past. The smaller format is still more versatile in tricky conditions but the traditional virtues of medium format still apply and I personally prefer the process of working with medium format. The top end medium format cameras are now able to produce the kind of quality for large exhibition prints that was once reserved for large format 5×4 or even 10×8 cameras. In other words nothing short of stunning.
For photographing nudes or glamour etc. and assuming you are able to work in ideal conditions, I think the sweet spot is probably a medium format camera with a full frame sensor around no more than 30MP. If you only produce images for the internet or make small prints though it’s complete overkill.
Related posts:
Thanks for explaining some of the pros and cons of medium format v 35mm. There were a few points there I haven’t considered before.
I’d be happy to own either camera shown above but the medium formats cameras are still way to expensive for me.
I agree completely that medium format offers better proportions for composition, especially with images of models. 35mm is great for journalism and snapshots but the 3:4 ratio is much more balanced for most purposes.
I have rented a digital medium format camera a couple of times for jobs and they really are harder to work with when shooting models. Everything just has to be so perfect or you end up with really bad results. It’s harder than most people realise…