Great comparison! When I shoot Portra 400 on my 645Pro w/80mm f1.9, I usually overexposed one stop (or expose to 200ISO) and when I try to mimic Portra con my X-T3 (not GFX yet) I follow the recipe from Fuji Weekly for Portra 400 for my Jpegs.
To be fair, this is a comparison of management of scene dynamic range with the medium you’re shooting on..which has everything to do with the photographer and nothing to do with the cameras. Not suggesting you did a bad job, just that the contrast could theoretically be very similar on both if the light was managed to do so. The main thing which would be of interest is to compare the film characteristic curve versus the linear digital response under equally controlled dynamic range settings.
The Fuji and mamiya seems like a very cool combo. Ive been wanting to buy a 645 1000s with the 1.9 BUT now that I’ve heard of/seen this Fuji/Mamiya combo I wouldn’t mind selling my XPro 3 and putting those funds toward that combo. Great vid. Thanks!
Interesting video and I can appreciate that you shot very nearly the same photo on each to make a good comparison. It’s surprising to me how many “comparisons” don’t take the trouble. I think you pointed out something important - film can react really differently under different conditions. It’s not as predictable. I’d be interested to see you take these same images and make a new comparison using various Portra 400 film sims. My guess is that the digital files still aren’t going to look all that close, but it would be cool to see.
The film has more depth. It feels more 3 dimensional, the way the light bounces around the face and each separated element in the photo just creates a much more immersive picture IMO
I always appreciate comparisons between film and digital but just picking your preference based on colors does not make a whole lot of sense to me when you basically can tweak the RAW file in post to your hearts desire. I would rather be interested in an analysis about possible factors in film that can not be replicated with digital. Though my guess would be you'd be hard pressed finding these differences when you compare both in medium formats.
That is a good point. I did mention in the video that I edited both sets of images around a week apart and my intention was not to make them look the same, just to edit them how I normally would. But I do appreciate you pointing it out, it helps a lot and gives me ideas on how I can further improve the writing process of this videos.
Much of what you're comparing here is just raw processing. You talk about the raw files as if they have some innate color or contrast qualities. They do not. You're seeing a default processing formula, which was created based on someone's arbitrary preferences. You can use any of a million others, or create your own. You can get any kind of color or "look" from that digital sensor within the abilities of its of dynamic range, resolution, signal-to-noise ratio, and color depth. Spoiler: it beats any film in all these criteria. If you want a different look from what you're seeing ... just make it happen.
I didn’t show the raw images. The images shown were the images that I edited to my standards. About a week after I had edited the digital files, I scanned the film and compared the images next to each other. I think both images are good, but like I said, I prefer the film images for many reasons. And yes, on paper, the digital beats the film in many ways, but photos aren’t made on paper by specifications. You can on replace the shooting experience of film. You cannot replace the development experience of film. I shoot film because I want and I enjoy the shooting experience as well as the final output. In my experience, digital images can come close to film, but I have yet to see an example of a side by side comparison where I couldn’t tell which was film and which was digital.
Great comparison! When I shoot Portra 400 on my 645Pro w/80mm f1.9, I usually overexposed one stop (or expose to 200ISO) and when I try to mimic Portra con my X-T3 (not GFX yet) I follow the recipe from Fuji Weekly for Portra 400 for my Jpegs.
Great photos and excellent video thanks man
Thank you Paul!
To be fair, this is a comparison of management of scene dynamic range with the medium you’re shooting on..which has everything to do with the photographer and nothing to do with the cameras. Not suggesting you did a bad job, just that the contrast could theoretically be very similar on both if the light was managed to do so. The main thing which would be of interest is to compare the film characteristic curve versus the linear digital response under equally controlled dynamic range settings.
Exactly this
The Fuji and mamiya seems like a very cool combo. Ive been wanting to buy a 645 1000s with the 1.9 BUT now that I’ve heard of/seen this Fuji/Mamiya combo I wouldn’t mind selling my XPro 3 and putting those funds toward that combo. Great vid. Thanks!
Thank you!!! They’re both amazing cameras!
Props to the guy doing the lighting
Yeah I guess he was good
Interesting video and I can appreciate that you shot very nearly the same photo on each to make a good comparison. It’s surprising to me how many “comparisons” don’t take the trouble. I think you pointed out something important - film can react really differently under different conditions. It’s not as predictable. I’d be interested to see you take these same images and make a new comparison using various Portra 400 film sims. My guess is that the digital files still aren’t going to look all that close, but it would be cool to see.
Great video bro👌🏽
Thank you!
The film has more depth. It feels more 3 dimensional, the way the light bounces around the face and each separated element in the photo just creates a much more immersive picture IMO
Great video! Which adapter did you use to mount the Mamiya lens onto your GFX 50s?
I used the fotodiox m645 to gfx mount
I love film! great video
I agree! Thank you!!
I always appreciate comparisons between film and digital but just picking your preference based on colors does not make a whole lot of sense to me when you basically can tweak the RAW file in post to your hearts desire. I would rather be interested in an analysis about possible factors in film that can not be replicated with digital. Though my guess would be you'd be hard pressed finding these differences when you compare both in medium formats.
That is a good point. I did mention in the video that I edited both sets of images around a week apart and my intention was not to make them look the same, just to edit them how I normally would. But I do appreciate you pointing it out, it helps a lot and gives me ideas on how I can further improve the writing process of this videos.
more content! I dig it!
Thank you!!
Much of what you're comparing here is just raw processing. You talk about the raw files as if they have some innate color or contrast qualities. They do not. You're seeing a default processing formula, which was created based on someone's arbitrary preferences. You can use any of a million others, or create your own. You can get any kind of color or "look" from that digital sensor within the abilities of its of dynamic range, resolution, signal-to-noise ratio, and color depth. Spoiler: it beats any film in all these criteria. If you want a different look from what you're seeing ... just make it happen.
I didn’t show the raw images. The images shown were the images that I edited to my standards. About a week after I had edited the digital files, I scanned the film and compared the images next to each other. I think both images are good, but like I said, I prefer the film images for many reasons. And yes, on paper, the digital beats the film in many ways, but photos aren’t made on paper by specifications. You can on replace the shooting experience of film. You cannot replace the development experience of film. I shoot film because I want and I enjoy the shooting experience as well as the final output. In my experience, digital images can come close to film, but I have yet to see an example of a side by side comparison where I couldn’t tell which was film and which was digital.
Awesome comparison, definitely the film won! What's your DSLR setup like?
I use a Sony a7rii with the 50mm f/2.8 macro lens.