Topic: upgrade from eyelike m6 (Read 7945 times)

andybuk99 · « **on:** November 21, 2006, 07:00:33 am »

Hi everyone.

Im looking to upgrade from my eyelike m6 (on mamiya 645) which I bought used last year to get into digital photography. My question is that although I don't want to spend £25k on a new back I do want to upgrade to the next level. What are the options available to me? Will a single shot back like the sinar 54m yield a better file than the eyelike in multishot? I like the multishot capabilities to give true colour and am not sure if the 1 shot backs will match the quality. Any help really appreciated.

khwanaon · « **Reply #1 on:** November 21, 2006, 08:23:49 am »

Quote

Hi everyone.

Im looking to upgrade from my eyelike m6 (on mamiya 645) which I bought used last year to get into digital photography. My question is that although I don't want to spend £25k on a new back I do want to upgrade to the next level. What are the options available to me? Will a single shot back like the sinar 54m yield a better file than the eyelike in multishot? I like the multishot capabilities to give true colour and am not sure if the 1 shot backs will match the quality. Any help really appreciated.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=86333\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Andy,

depending in which country you are and which back you want to buy: Sinar is offering trade-ins of ANY digital back, Sinar, but also Eyelike, Leaf, Phase, Imacon, etc ... the amount probably depending on the distributor. I know that the Sinar dist in the US gives 12k for a eMotion 75 purchase, for any back traded-in, any sensor size!

I would contact my distributor and ask him.

Aon

Morgan_Moore · « **Reply #2 on:** November 21, 2006, 09:31:37 am »

Quote

Will a single shot back like the sinar 54m yield a better file than the eyelike in multishot? I like the multishot capabilities to give true colour and am not sure if the 1 shot backs will match the quality. [a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=86333\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I beleive the M6 has an equivilanet res to 6 times four ie 24 mp

So a 22mp back will not giva a quality improvement

It will of course be more convenient, allow wider lenses etc

For value if you can shoot tethered an H25 or and eyelike M22 suchlike may be the thing

SMM

Dustbak · « **Reply #3 on:** November 21, 2006, 09:42:14 am »

Not entirely true, it does 4 shots, multishot to get true colors without interpolation but the file remains a 6MP file.

A microstep back will do another 4 shots to get 4 times the resolution which makes a total of 16 shots when combined with multishot. Only in that case you will have 24MP with true un-interpolated colors.

If the eyelike only does multishot, it will be only for the color quality. Any larger back will give more detail. The color issue is open for debate but in most instances it will be more a perceptional issue than anything else however there are applications thinkable where it really counts.

But IMO far fewer than most people think.

Dustbak · « **Reply #4 on:** November 21, 2006, 09:42:44 am »

double post

khwanaon · « **Reply #5 on:** November 21, 2006, 10:00:01 am »

Quote

I beleive the M6 has an equivilanet res to 6 times four ie 24 mp

So a 22mp back will not giva a quality improvement

It will of course be more convenient, allow wider lenses etc

For value if you can shoot tethered an H25 or and eyelike M22 suchlike may be the thing

SMM
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=86370\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

the M6 is a 6 MPx back, with 6 MPx res. Even in 4 shot mode, the resolution is not increased. The only difference in 4-shot mode is that the colors are true colors and not interpolated. Only in the 16-shot more is the resolution increasing (x 4).

The first question to ask oneself, when deciding is to know if one needs single or mulitshot. This depends highly on the kind of work. Obviously, multishot is exclusively for studio work (stills). Multishot (4 or 16) is always giving the ultimate possible quality (provided the right lenses are used). It is a queston of choice and possibility to use it or not.

The second issue is the size of the sensor: in a M6 the sensor has the size of nearly 35mm. The physical size of a 22 Mpx (or 33 MPx) sensor is 48x36 mm, 4 times larger, being it a single or multishot back.

When speaking about quality in digital: it is not only resolution which gives the quality. Resolution is only a very small part of the whole chain of quality factors, all as important for quality as the resolution. Among these: A/D conversion, dynamic range/color depth, cooling system, antiblooming, etc ... etc ...

The M6 generation of sensors is a older generation. Since the production of the 6 MPs sensors a lot of improvements and changes in digital technoly has been made, at all levels: resolution, but also A/D conversion, dynamic range, pixel size, cooling systems, etc ...

The improvements in quality from a 6 MPx to a 22/33 MPx sensor is evident, being it a single or a multishot back, independently from the size of the sensor or its resolution.

Aon

andybuk99 · « **Reply #6 on:** November 21, 2006, 10:09:41 am »

Thanks for the responses so far. I was interested to hear that a newer 1 shot back would give a better quality file (obviously its going to be larger) than a 4 shot back.

I was very impressed after getting into digital from film with the quality of the eyelike files in 4 shot mode compared to stuff from dslr's (at the time I had an s2), so perhaps a newer used single shot back would be the answer. The only thing is here in the uk used stuff is not really widely available at decent prices, I see an aptus 17 in the states for $7395 but in the uk it would be a 1/3 more expensive.

Paul Barker · « **Reply #7 on:** November 21, 2006, 10:40:38 am »

Hi Andy

Where abouts are you?

If it's any use, you are welcome to come over and test your eyelike against my P25. That would give you some idea of the difference.

I'm in north east Essex.

Cheers
Paul
(aka Bacardi on Pistonheads ;-)

Dustbak · « **Reply #8 on:** November 21, 2006, 10:59:40 am »

Quote

Thanks for the responses so far. I was interested to hear that a newer 1 shot back would give a better quality file (obviously its going to be larger) than a 4 shot back.

I was very impressed after getting into digital from film with the quality of the eyelike files in 4 shot mode compared to stuff from dslr's (at the time I had an s2), so perhaps a newer used single shot back would be the answer. The only thing is here in the uk used stuff is not really widely available at decent prices, I see an aptus 17 in the states for $7395 but in the uk it would be a 1/3 more expensive.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=86383\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I bought the same Aptus you are looking at. When you would buy one of these you will only get charged the VAT when the thing enters the UK which is deductible if you buy it professionally.

The fact that I do not have the local dealer in a very high regard over here also actually helped me cross the line to be honest.

awofinden · « **Reply #9 on:** November 21, 2006, 11:04:07 am »

Quote

I bought the same Aptus you are looking at. When you would buy one of these you will only get charged the VAT when the thing enters the UK which is deductible if you buy it professionally.

The fact that I do not have the local dealer in a very high regard over here also actually helped me cross the line to be honest.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=86396\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Where are you getting the aptus for that price?

Dustbak · « **Reply #10 on:** November 21, 2006, 11:08:28 am »

These have been offered by several US dealers over the last couple of months. I believe they are refurbed from a big trade-in by the Hallmark institute (some people more in the know please correct me when I am wrong).

I got mine from Midwest Photo Exchange. They still have several of them so do some other US dealers.

Prices are around 7.500USD.

Morgan_Moore · « **Reply #11 on:** November 21, 2006, 12:51:45 pm »

Quote

Not entirely true[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

144 MB (16-shot 48 bit) is better than single shot 22mp - and WAY less convenient

( [a href=\"http://www.eyelike.de/temp/produkte_detail.php?language=2&primaercolumn=2&column=1070970706]http://www.eyelike.de/temp/produkte_detail...lumn=1070970706[/url] )

Dustbak · « **Reply #12 on:** November 21, 2006, 02:01:15 pm »

Quote

144 MB (16-shot 48 bit) is better than single shot 22mp - and WAY less convenient

( http://www.eyelike.de/temp/produkte_detail...lumn=1070970706 )
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=86417\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Allright so this one also does microstep. The 16 shot capability. Indeed way less convenient than single shot

khwanaon · « **Reply #13 on:** November 21, 2006, 09:58:37 pm »

Quote

Hi - new poster here... sorry for crashing the thread.

Can anyone comment or point me to some reference on using a back in 16-shot mode? I'm interested specifically in architectural use.

Does the shutter need to fire 16 times? If so, are there motion problems using Copal manual shutters? How about movement of background trees/clouds in a shot? Sam Morgan Moore's musings on Nikon lenses, miniwides, etc. have me thinking...

Thanks!
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=86489\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Alan,

forget it doing 16-shot outside! It needs an absolutely motionless situations. Not only does it need the scene to be absolutely still, but also your camera should be able to trigger without any vibration and your tripod to be the best stable possible. The shutter has to release 16 times, moving each time the CCD by 1/2 a pixel size. Needless to say that this is quite impossible with a MF body on a tripod in external conditions.
Even the 4-shot mode will prove to be tricky to realize, though not impossible.
In any case, if you wish to give it a try, then use one of the camera with movements, fitted with an electromagnetic shutter controlled by the software, which are absolutely vibration free.

Aon

pprdigital · « **Reply #14 on:** November 21, 2006, 11:55:42 pm »

Choosing single shot versus multi-shot is again - my theme - a very subjective decision, assuming that the subject matter would work for either. The disadvantage of older multi-shot backs like the M6 is that when you do want to shoot single shot, the quality from a newer chip will easily surpass it.

But, the advantage of multi-shot - even in older backs - is the following (never mind resolution):

*no moire (or almost never)
*no color artifacts (little christmas colors)
*no aliasing (jaggies on edge detail, bike spokes, etc)
*much better rendition of detail and gradations, especially in shadow
*more accurate color

This is unequivacally true. But with the exception of some nasty moire patterns, the above single shot negatives have become very subtle. Most users have trouble distinguishing between a single shot capture and a multi-shot capture. But if you look close, and especially if you know what to look for, you will see it for sure, regardless of the resolution.

This is where the subjectiveness comes in. I have some multi-shot customers who just cannot bear to go to a single shot back - P45, Aptus 75, Hasselblad CFH-39 - doesn't matter, they can see the difference. I have others who rarely use the multi-shot function.

But, back to the answer to the original question - will a Sinar 54M single shot yield a superior file than a multi-shot? For still life, no. Nor will a P45, Aptus 75, H3D-39, resolution aside. For moving subjects, yes it will.

Steve Hendrix
PPR Digital

andybuk99 · « **Reply #15 on:** November 22, 2006, 09:27:13 am »

Great responses guys, thanks.

The way it is looking now is to try and get a larger chip multi-shot back, maybe a eyelike m11 or 22 will fit the bill, or is there any other alternatives?

David WM · « **Reply #16 on:** November 22, 2006, 09:31:55 am »

I think to make a decision to stay with multishot when the quality of the currently avaiable 22 mp backs is there for a reasonable price (not buying new) would mean that you have a well defined range of subjects you are shooting. I found that even "still" life moves, which can be frustrating. Fabrics (one of the subjects you might like to use multishot with to avoid moire) may sag and relax to some extent. That diamond ring with a thin band balanced on a tiny bit of bluetac seems to be still, but then you find it moved forward by 1 pixel during each of the multi -shots makes it look more creative than needed. If the studio is warm even ice cream can show movement over a 30 second interval.
It is a bit of a subjective balancing act but if you do any location work at all, then it does make the decision a lot easier. You could keep an older multishot back for certain subjects without breaking the bank.
Hope this helps
David

Author Topic: upgrade from eyelike m6 (Read 7945 times)