MF and macro

xkaes · Jan 7, 2023

The greater the magnification, the more important stability is -- just like with long lenses that magnify any motion -- but I've taken lots of high magnification shots from 35mm to 4x5" in the field on a Gitzo Reporter Performance without movement being an enormous problem. And most of the time I don't use flash.

And, as mentioned, if you want the same image on the film as the format increases, the magnification must be increased, but you won't have to enlarge nearly as much either to get the same print.

neilt3 · Jan 7, 2023

wiltw said:
What you say is true, for the modern photographer who does not adhere to the conventional definition of 'macro' as referring to a SCALED image, usually 1:2 or greater magnification. I will not presume to know what OP has in mind, in the selection of different format for 'macro' work, so I present the assumption of a scaled image, and the trade-off is size of object that fits at same scale (and same DOF in both formats) NO 'right', no 'wrong', simply factual information.

I do agree with you .
However when you look at the two images the O.P shows that he wants to do I get the impression it's not 1:1 he wants to achieve as such or any other specific ratio . He just wants to fill the frame .
So using different formats requires different magnification ratios , which changes things .

xkaes · Jan 7, 2023

In post #18 Red clarifies the objective which in my mind means a macro lens (5:1 - 1:5) with some appropriate of extension.

wiltw · Jan 7, 2023

wiltw said:
What you say is true, for the modern photographer who does not adhere to the conventional definition of 'macro' as referring to a SCALED image, usually 1:2 or greater magnification. I will not presume to know what OP has in mind, in the selection of different format for 'macro' work, so I present the assumption of a scaled image, and the trade-off is size of object that fits at same scale (and same DOF in both formats) NO 'right', no 'wrong', simply factual information.

To the OP question about better IQ...
Even if OP is intending to simply 'fill the frame' with the same subject in both formats, and not shoot a scaled image
and we assume a 24 x 24mm subject which fits within the smaller 24 x 36mm frame area

a 24 x 24mm subject fills 24x24mm on 135 frame or fills 56 x 56mm on MF format frame (assuming 6x6).
So the subject fills 2.3x more film in each direction, or 5.44x more film area shooting MF.
IOW there are much more grains or color clouds to better portray better tonality or hue variations across the subject shot on MF,
and the apparent grain size is 1/2.33 the size on the same size final print, from the MF film image.

Slixtiesix · Jan 8, 2023

redbandit said:
have an idea of an affordable heavy duty tripod that would work with a mamiya 645 1000s?

Basically any sturdy tripod will do, as long as it is still portable. What is also convenient is a tripod head that allows for fine movements, because at high magnification, setting the frame can be tricky.

Paul Manuell · Jan 8, 2023

Pentax 645NII user, and love my 120 macro. Not just for macro though, it makes a lovely portrait lens too

MF and macro

xkaes

neilt3

xkaes

wiltw

Slixtiesix

Paul Manuell

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency