Updating my perspective on medium format film:

Over the summer I worked on a rather fun, surprise project.

The story starts with changing furniture in a room of our home. Afterwards there was a wall crying out for a large piece of art. Considering a few options, we settled on a metal photo print; Subject: beach, Photographer: me. Using painters tape as a guide, a 30" x 60" print looked to be the ideal size. Not having made a print larger than 24" x 36", I had a new challenge ahead.

The first decision was location. Fortunately we already had booked a trip to Puerto Rico. Plenty of gorgeous beaches there, so check off the location decision. The next question was how to acquire the high resolution image. Panoramic stitching or high resolution shot stacking was out because of wave motion in the beach scene. Safest bet was a single high-res photo, which made the next choice easy too. About a year prior I sold my Nikon D800e and f1.4 35mm Nikkor in favor of a Sony RX1R II with it's f2 35mm Zeiss. It was the best option in my kit for high resolution in a single, un-merged shot. And, the RX1R II's diminutive size meant it wouldn't be a bother to take along on all visits to any beach in Puerto Rico. The acquisition decision was settled, except...

Several weeks before our departure, Fujifilm discovered brand new and unopened GF670 medium format film cameras in their warehouse. The GF670 was introduced in 2008 and discontinued in 2014. Interesting ...the gears began to turn. I've never had the opportunity to shoot medium format film, it was fairly portable for a medium format camera, had a fixed 80mm lens (similar FOV as the fixed 35mm on the full-frame Sony), and we all know medium format is well suited for big enlargements. I gave in and purchased the camera with a few rolls of Provia 100F. I had a month to learn how to use the GF670 before our trip. On a sunny spring day, I set out on my first shooting test along the Point Reyes National Seashore.

Fujifilm GF670 and Provia 100fF Fujinon ECB 80mm, f8 @ 1/400th

Curious to see how the 42 Mpix Sony RX1R II compared to medium format film, I packed it in the bag with the GF670. In the field I captured a photo with the tripod mounted GF670 and then swapped it with the RX1R II. After I got the film back from the lab, I scanned it on my Epson V500 Photo. Opening the first film scan and the matching Sony RAW file, I was surprised. The 6x7 film was noticeably less sharp. Did I make a mistake labeling the files? I opened a few other scans up and saw the same. The Sony RAW files had more detail. This is when I learned something important about flatbed photo scanners. The specs may list the highest step resolution of the scanner, but does not tell the whole story when it comes to optical performance. For more information I highly recommend the German site ScanDig. It turns out my V500 Photo, rated as a 6400dpi scanner, effectively performs at much lower resolution on transparencies. Wow, this would not do. ScanDig rated the Imacon scanner as the highest performer. I found a local lab that had one and took the film there to be rescanned.

Again, I was surprised. The 9827 × 7992 Imacon scans were much better than the V500 Photo scanner output. But across all shots compared, the film scans were not demonstrably better than the RX1R II's 7072 × 5304 RAW files. Below is an example crop from the frame above, in monochrome.

Fujifilm GF670, 6x7 Provia 100F Imacon scan Sony RX1R II, 42mpix at 100 iso

Now, I realize there are a few factors to consider in this outcome. Provia 100F is an extremely fine grained color film and I could have chosen an even finer grained film like Velvia 50. I was looking for more faithful color response though and that made Provia 100F the better choice. Since I wanted to compare the two cameras and formats, there were shutter speed and depth of field differences to contend with. I selected an aperture that struck a balance between lens sharpness sweet spot and suitable DoF for the image, while keeping the digital camera out of diffraction, and letting the shutter speed fall at or below the 1/500th maximum on the GF670. On the example image above the aperture setting was f8. This meant the Sony's hyperfocal distance was 28ft with a DoF of 14ft. to infinity while the Fujifilm's hyperfocal distance was 44ft, giving a DoF of 22' to infinity. Setting the same distant focus point on both cameras insured that everything from the mid-ground to the background was indeed in focus. Finally, it's possible the optical quality of the Fujinon 80mm lens may not be quite as good as the Zeiss 35mm, but I have no way to effectively confirm that.

Certainly this is not a lab test. There may be ways to extract more detail from a 6x7 film frame. Still, more than reasonable care was taken in shooting and processing these images. A sturdy tripod and cable release was used on a calm day, exposure settings were carefully considered, focus was precisely set, and the film was digitized on a $25,000 scanner. Even if there was any more precision that could be added, it would add cost, bulk, or be cumbersome to the point of being impractical. Between these two small high resolution camera systems, for me it was clear. Given the goals/constraints of portability, image fidelity, and cost, the 42 Mpix Sony RX1R II beat out the medium format Fujifilm camera. Final decision rendered. It was time to pack.

The RX1R II worked out great on the trip. Having a very compact, high resolution camera always handy allowed me to take many photos at several beach locations. The volume of shots meant there were more selects from which to choose. After a few small test prints, the final 60" x 30" metal print was completed at Bay Photo Lab in late August. The wall is no longer blank and I'm very pleased with the results.

luquillo beach, puerto rico

sony rx1r II, zeiss sonar f2 35mm