P45+ or P40+ for Mamiya RZ Pro IID

[Shirish1467]

Hi,

I'm a New Delhi (India) based photographer. My work mostly involves food & beverage, still life, and liquid photography. I'm occasionally required to photograph people, but only rarely. Almost all of my commercial work is done in controlled/artificial lighting situations.

I've been a Mamiya 6X7 user since almost as long back as I can remember -RB, RZ, and recently on an impulse I picked up the RZ Pro IID. I've been using rented Phase One backs for the past 4-5 years - mostly the P45 (non-plus) on a Mamiya RZ67 with my favourite 110mm f2.8 lens and ISOs ranging from 50 to 200.

I've finally decided to take the plunge and purchase a Digital Back. After weighing the pros and cons and keeping my preferences in mind, here's the thing:

1) I would like to stick with my Mamiya RZ67 Pro IID camera system. I prefer this system to any 645 system which I've tried.
2) I love the size of the P65+ sensor, but not only is it way beyond my budget, it's also way beyond my Megapixel requirements.
3) The P45+ is perfect for me in terms of Megapixels and sensor size.
4) I liked the P40+ as well, but am wondering if it's sensor is going to be too small for my camera system.

I'm oscillating between the P45+ and P40+, which leads me to my main questions:

1) Is there a significant difference in the crop factor of the P45+ and P40+ when used with the RZ system?
2) Is there actually a difference in image quality? I would have thought that since the P45+ sensor has larger pixels it would produce better images.
3) Is the Leaf Aptus II 7 an option I should also consider?
4) Are cameras like the D3X, 5D Mark II, 1D Mark III comparable to (22 Megapixel) digital backs in terms of image quality?

The Phase One team at Photokina were very helpful, but didn't have a Pro IID available, and I didn't have the foresight to carry mine with me to do all the necessary tests. The only Phase One distributor in India is based in Mumbai, so it's difficult to actually go through the whole 'try and buy' procedure. This is a big purchase for me, and I want to make sure that my final decision is based on thorough research and a complete knowledge of what I'm getting into, rather than impulsively pick up what I think is a better option, only to find I've made the 'wrong' choice.

Thanks for your time. I'm sorry if this is an extremely long question, but I felt I should give a little background so that it makes it easier for you to understand where I'm coming from.

Shirish

[Mr. Rib]

1. Since you are familiar with P45, you've probably already noticed that crop factor on RZ67 IS significant. It's 33 x 44 vs 36 x 48. Since crop factor is already significant, I wouldn't make it even worse. P65+  would give you almost no crop in one dimension and this would be nice, however, at least for me, it doesn't justify the expense at the moment. What would justify it, would be a real 6 x 7 sensor which changes the proportions of the image to the format I prefer but keep in mind that there's no 6x7 sensor on horizon and it's highly unlikely that we will see it. I think it's more probable that we'll see a 4x5 or something like that. Maybe when a 4x5 chip will be affordable, 6x7 will be produced as a by-product

2. P40+ is based on a different sensor (DALSA) and theoretically it gives a bit better results. As far as I remember, capture Integration has some head to head comparison between P65 / P40 / P45, although it was about sensor size, you might find something interesting there.

3. Can't tell since I haven't used it.

4. They definitely ARE comparable, I guess almost everyone despite the zealots will tell you the same, but if you reform your question to : "are they the same" you'll start a war here For small prints (magazines and so on) I don't think Athat NYONE would definitely distinguish images from MFDB and high-end DSLRs without Lab environment (calibrated Eizo's etc etc). Even in lab environment I'm not sure if a MFDB wouldnt be mistaken with a D3X..  If it is not fine art / repro, I think modern DSLRs would do just fine. And I suggest reading this:
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/forum/index.php?topic=47273.0

I can tell that RZ67 Pro IID + P45+ works like charm, I can route for this combo. Good luck with your job!

[TMARK]

I have several RZ bodies.  I like the RZ better than any of the 645 options as well.  I use two Leaf backs on them: a 54s and a 75s.  I use a rotating Leaf Hasselblad H to RZ adapter with a cable for triggering the back.  I recomend this combination.  I like the Leaf backs a bit better than the Phase backs, because the color response is closer to my final output. In any case, you want the biggest chip possible with the RZ.  You'll be using the magnifier all of the time, which covers the smaller chip very well. 

In short, I'd recomend the P45 over the P40, and actually the Aptus II 7 over both of the Phase offerings.  In the end they are all so close in image quality that the real differences are chip size (between the P45/Aptus versus the P40) and differences in usability, which are of course subjective.

As to whether the D3x et al are comparable to the backs, I think so.  Especially when they are stopped down in a studio.  The difference to me is under natural light at wider F stops, and the look of the images.  They look different, not better or worse, just different. This difference falls away as the lenses are stopped down and the lighting more controlled. 

[Doug Peterson]

Since the RZ is a 6x7 body having a larger chip sizes on an RZ would be a high priority for me when choosing between sensors. You're already having to crop the viewfinder, which you can live with, but having to crop down to a P40+ size rather than the larger 45+ size does not make sense to me. Leaf Aptus-II 7 or Phase One P45+ would be the natural choices. As stated the 65+ or Aptus-II 12 would give you even more sensor size if you can afford it.

Doug Peterson (e-mail Me)
__________________
Head of Technical Services, Capture Integration
Phase One, Leaf, Cambo, Canon, Apple, Profoto, Eizo & More
National: 877.217.9870  |  Cell: 740.707.2183
Newsletter: Read Latest or Sign Up
RSS Feed: Subscribe
Buy Capture One at 10% off
Personal Work

[MH]

i also like the mamiya rz system with its tack sharp lenses.
but p40 and p45 give you (correct me if i am wrong) a lens factor 1,65 and 1,45..
your rz lenses become pretty tele view.

[Doug Peterson]

I'd rather talk in terms of equivalent lenses...

http://www.captureintegration.com/2009/02/03/focal-length-equivalent-calculator/

[darr]

I'd rather talk in terms of equivalent lenses...

http://www.captureintegration.com/2009/02/03/focal-length-equivalent-calculator/

Thanks Doug for the link! Very useful!

Darr

[Shirish1467]

Thank you all for the responses.

I think (for me) the hands down winner is the P45+, although the Leaf Aptus II 7 comes really really close. The hesitation about P45+ vs P40+ is more to do with the fact that the 45 is an older model. With the P25+ being discontinued, there's always the concern that I may be investing in a back which may soon become 'obsolete' (for lack of a better word), although I know it'll continue to be an awesome piece of equipment.

@ Mr Rib and TMARK - I agree, the D3X produces stunning image quality. I've had the pleasure of using it on a couple of occasions and honestly haven't been able to tell the difference between images made with the D3X and MFDBs.

@ Doug - thanks for the input and the useful link. I would LOVE to get the P65+, but it's way over my budget and Megapixel requirements!

@ Michael - Having used the P45 with RZ for so many years, I'm pretty comfortable with the crop factor. Infact, I think if I switch back to a film-back it'll take me a while to figure out what to do with the extra space!

@ John-S - I'm going to try the RZ - 65mm combination as soon as I get my hands on the P45+ ... and the 65mm!

Shirish

[Policar]

Sharpness and cropping seem to be the big concerns, but so long as your work does not require ultra-wide lenses, I suppose the rz67 would be okay.  The crop is really substantial.  I don't know if the Mamiya lenses are sharp enough for digital, though...they seem less sharp to me than Nikkors are, per pixel.

I still think the 65mm is worth trying.  That's the sharpest lens I've used on my Mamiya.

[TMARK]

The RZ lenses are more than "sharp" enough for MF digital. They have less contrast than German glass or the newer Nikkors. They are smoother but still sharp. While all the lenses are good, I find the 110, 65, 140 and 150 to be stellar.

To the OP:  look into what cables you need yo fire a P45 on an RZ. You need a wakeup cable to use it on a plain vanilla RZ Pro or ProII. No cables needed with the ProIID, but you have to have a Mamiya 645 mount back.

Good luck!

[Mr. Rib]

You can add the 180 W-N to 'stellar' list as well as 180 SB (it's the same design as W-N). 140 Macro with floating element is sharper than regular macro.

[Policar]

I will be on the lookout for those lenses once they inevitably fall in price to like $20.

I have the 50mm ULD, 65mm M-LA, and 110mm Z.  I shoot film and they don't seem as sharp (when scanned) as even old Nikkors do.  Maybe it's because one needs to focus so precisely.  They're all good lenses for the money and I'm glad to learn there are other good Mamiya lenses but I just can't imagine they're sharp enough for digital.  Maybe it's film flatness or something.

If Mamiya made a "crop" lens at like 30mm or something for wide angle on digital sensors I think they might spark some life into this apparently dying system, though...

[Mr. Rib]

Mamiya lenses are razor sharp. I owned a Rollei 6008AF with Schneider lenses earlier and my Mamiya seems to be at the same level in terms of sharpness in certain situations. I would even risk to say that they are on almost the same level (comparing Mamiya + P45 with well-scanned transparencies from 6008AF). To me, the difference is negligible, I wouldn't bother myself with it and rather focus on shooting
Probably top of the line Nikkors are on par with Mamiya.
Policar: I'd rather search the reason of mamiya lenses 'softness' in a not-so-perfect film back or inaccurate focusing.

[Steve Hendrix]

Thank you all for the responses.

I think (for me) the hands down winner is the P45+, although the Leaf Aptus II 7 comes really really close. The hesitation about P45+ vs P40+ is more to do with the fact that the 45 is an older model. With the P25+ being discontinued, there's always the concern that I may be investing in a back which may soon become 'obsolete' (for lack of a better word), although I know it'll continue to be an awesome piece of equipment.
Shirish

The P25+ was discontinued quite some time after production ceased on the sensor. I can't recall exactly when it was announced that Kodak had discontinued the KAF-22000 (late 2008, 2009?). But the P25+ wasn't discontinued until this past March. I think (and hope) the P45+ still has quite a bit of life remaining. It remains a unique product.

And remember that Phase One service and support continues even for the 6MP LightPhase, released in 1998, and that includes compatibility with the very latest version of Capture One. In an era where support for legacy products runs ever shorter, I find this commendable.


Steve Hendrix

[Professional]

The P25+ was discontinued quite some time after production ceased on the sensor. I can't recall exactly when it was announced that Kodak had discontinued the KAF-22000 (late 2008, 2009?). But the P25+ wasn't discontinued until this past March. I think (and hope) the P45+ still has quite a bit of life remaining. It remains a unique product.

And remember that Phase One service and support continues even for the 6MP LightPhase, released in 1998, and that includes compatibility with the very latest version of Capture One. In an era where support for legacy products runs ever shorter, I find this commendable.


Steve Hendrix

What is the prices of Phase One backs and Leaf backs nowadays?
I asked because i will try to see if i should start to save for next year maybe, i have Hasselblad already, but i may think to add a digital back to either my RZ [not D version] or Hasselblad V [501CM], and i don't look for the most expensive, something between 28 up to 39mp will do the job if the price is reasonable.

[paul_jones]

Thank you all for the responses.

I think (for me) the hands down winner is the P45+, although the Leaf Aptus II 7 comes really really close. The hesitation about P45+ vs P40+ is more to do with the fact that the 45 is an older model. With the P25+ being discontinued, there's always the concern that I may be investing in a back which may soon become 'obsolete' (for lack of a better word), although I know it'll continue to be an awesome piece of equipment.

@ Mr Rib and TMARK - I agree, the D3X produces stunning image quality. I've had the pleasure of using it on a couple of occasions and honestly haven't been able to tell the difference between images made with the D3X and MFDBs.

@ Doug - thanks for the input and the useful link. I would LOVE to get the P65+, but it's way over my budget and Megapixel requirements!

@ Michael - Having used the P45 with RZ for so many years, I'm pretty comfortable with the crop factor. Infact, I think if I switch back to a film-back it'll take me a while to figure out what to do with the extra space!

@ John-S - I'm going to try the RZ - 65mm combination as soon as I get my hands on the P45+ ... and the 65mm!

Shirish

i own a p40+, and i have shot a lot on a p45 and p45+. i don't see a lot of differences between the different backs when used at low isos. but my p40+ does do as good long exposures as the p45 plus and non plus. the p40+ frame is tiny on a RZ, so i wouldnt go there. but it shoots amazingly fast. great for shooting people.
if speed is not an issue, then why dont you save some money and buy a used p45 (non plus). its a very similar back to the p45+. the only difference ive noticed between the two is the slightly fast capture rate of the plus. but otherwise they are close. used p45 go for under 10k, and sometimes a lot less. you dont need to worry about obsolescence when the backs are that price.

i have also used an A75s The older version of the aptus 7, and that is a nice back as well. fast shooting.  it should be even better if it works with C1 software, but im not sure if it does yet.

paul