CFV50 on RZ...best bang for the buck?

[Martin Wouterlood]

Hello,
I am an amateur medium formatter into landscapes close and far, contre-jour and some portrait, all mostly with a slow, tripod-oriented style. I've been looking at various ways to add on a digital back and settle on an optimal mfslr for some time now...I have Contax 645 as well as Hasselblad 503CW systems with a good 250 tele to use on both.
In order to fund a digital back one of these setups will have to go but it's hard to decide which one as I like them both a lot, each for their own merits.      
Contax - easier to shoot handheld, TTL AE exposure, analogue layout, 120 AMP lens, focus confirmation (I don't use AF), but smaller dimmer viewfinder and geater vibration issue with focal plane shutter, short service future from manufacturer (deadline ?2015).
503 - bigger and brighter and waist level finder, mechanical simplicity, leaf shutter best for vibe control, still being made so longer service prospects, but rectangle sensor awkward for verticals (square crop partial solution), seperate meter not a big deal as I use it with a spottie for many years.
During the course of my "research" it came upon me that, aside from the integrated Pentax 645D, the best bang for the buck back is probably a CFV50 (new for 9900 euro), about on par with a used P45+. The best bftb system is probably the Mamiya RZ, which I also have used and like quite a lot. Selling the C and HV systems for a modest RZ setup, which is still in current production, would give me quite some extra loot.
Most of the posts I see here are from folks with a zillion times more knowledge and experience than I have, so I would like to know:
What do y'all think of the idea of putting these two together?
Would there be much, if any, performance differences on digital backs (realising that each makers' lenses have their own rendering style?
How to set it up...I think the adaptation is do-able but not quite sure of the specifics.
Many thanks for your considered replies.
Martin

[John R Smith]

The most economic and practical solution is to get a CFV-50 back, use it on your 503 and sell the Contax. You will have perfect system integration and continued service support.

PS I have just had a forty-year old SWC serviced by Hasselblad at Elstree with no problem at all. The camera feels like new 

John

[Martin Wouterlood]

John, I'm in accord with your view, except with what I have in blad can save me 6-7 thou if I go RZ...with a revolving back to boot.

[John R Smith]

Fair enough, provided that a CFV can be made to fit an RZ somehow. The CFV-50 is undoubtedly the best-priced 50MP back available (new) at the moment.

But you do lose a lot of flexibility. The RZ really is a tripod beast, which is OK as long as that is all you do. The 503 will do all of that and handheld work too.

John

[henrikfoto]

I am afraid you will be very disappointed when you see the effect the large mirror slap has on these small
pixels. It will be very hard to get really sharp images. Whith that camera I would considder a 22mp back.
It will save you a lot of irritation.
Both the classic Hasselblads and the RZ have a much too heavy mirror-movement for the high-res digital backs.
Of course it will work, but you will get movements all over the frame softening the image.
... unless you use a tripod and mirror lock up.

Henrik

[Chris Livsey]

I am afraid you will be very disappointed when you see the effect the large mirror slap has on these small
pixels.
Henrik

I will second that. I have enough trouble getting sharp images from a P20 on a V system handheld. Locked down on a Gitzo with mirror up et etc it is beautiful but take it off and it is so frustrating.

[AlDoori]

handheld in continuous light, it will be difficult to achieve a razor sharp photo with any medium format camera, even with film.
after a short test i think, the leica S2 might be the best option for that situation.

due to its weight, the RZ is best on a tripod. anyway, its mirror is well dampened. especially if you use the camera with the winder and maybe the prism, the sheer mass is an effective additional dampener.
in my opinion, since digital took over, the RZ is the most underrated medium format camera.
it is still very good for manual focus tripod based fashion and beauty shoots.
with the waist level finder, focus at any part of the screen is easy.
after reading about quite a few problems and user errors regarding the 645 DF in the mamiya/leaf/phase one forum, i am convinced, that my decision not to replace my trusty RZ by a 645 system was good.

there is a combination of the RZ and the leaf 80mpx back available at BH, any i do not see any reason, why the RZ/Vadopter/CFV 50 combination should not work.

[Steve Hendrix]

handheld in continuous light, it will be difficult to achieve a razor sharp photo with any medium format camera, even with film.
after a short test i think, the leica S2 might be the best option for that situation.

due to its weight, the RZ is best on a tripod. anyway, its mirror is well dampened. especially if you use the camera with the winder and maybe the prism, the sheer mass is an effective additional dampener.
in my opinion, since digital took over, the RZ is the most underrated medium format camera.
it is still very good for manual focus tripod based fashion and beauty shoots.
with the waist level finder, focus at any part of the screen is easy.
after reading about quite a few problems and user errors regarding the 645 DF in the mamiya/leaf/phase one forum, i am convinced, that my decision not to replace my trusty RZ by a 645 system was good.

there is a combination of the RZ and the leaf 80mpx back available at BH, any i do not see any reason, why the RZ/Vadopter/CFV 50 combination should not work.

Yes, depending on how you'd use the camera, an RZ can be a real joy. Generally, the majority of our clients shooting digital with RZ are employing 22/33/39 MP digital backs (and happy with them).

BTW - Any of the Leaf Aptus/Phase One current products are available in combination with an RZ. There are specially priced bundles we offer from Leaf/Mamiya (RZ-22/RZ-33/RZ80) that essentially give you a discount on the kit, compared to buying the digital back, camera, and adapter/accessories separately. These are promoted on larger, fuller size sensors as opposed to say, the Aptus-II 28/40, which are smaller. Any of the Leaf Aptus units would also work on older RZ/RZ Pro (non D) just with a simple sync cable, this is also possible with the Dalsa-based Phase One products.


Steve Hendrix

[EricWHiss]

handheld in continuous light, it will be difficult to achieve a razor sharp photo with any medium format camera, even with film.
after a short test i think, the leica S2 might be the best option for that situation.

That's not my experience.  I shoot with an AFi-ii 12 and get wonderfully sharp images handheld thanks to the leaf shutter lenses and very well damped mirror. I don't even think about it if I can shoot at 1/focal and I shoot at 1/50 all the time.   If I have to shoot at very low shutters like 1/8 or 1/15 I just take several frames of the same subject and one will be sharp. 

[Martin Wouterlood]

No doubt the crispest, highest quality images will always come from the tried and true solid tripod, mirror up, cable release method, but it is certainly great to hear some of you pipe in with satisfactory results from the hand as it gives me one less reason to buy into another system for handheld uses.