Luminous Landscape Forum
Equipment & Techniques => Medium Format / Film / Digital Backs – and Large Sensor Photography => Topic started by: kipdent on January 01, 2016, 01:04:07 am
-
I have been wanting to buy a digital back for my beloved Contax 645 for many years, but as a serious hobbyist, not a professional, the cost has kept me from taking the plunge. However, prices for used backs such as the Phase One P45+ do seem to be coming down to the mere mortal range. I have not been following the technology on newer MFDB, so I'm wondering is readers here could share their opinions and advice on whether in 2016, keeping the Contax 645 (with my 35mm, 80mm, 120mm Macro and 210mm lenses) and investing in a back like the P45+ is advisable, or if technology has passed all this by and investing in a newer camera like the Mamiya or P1 is a better idea--especially because of their leaf-shutter lenses? Is the Contax a less-appropriate camera now with its focal plane shutter for the use of digital backs when compared to these newer cameras and lenses? And is the P45+ simply too old, both because of its lower resolution and technology, compared to the newer IQ backs? I've always been astonished with the image quality of my Contax 645 and its lenses with film, so I'm guessing a digital back would be as impressive, but maybe it's time to put it out to pasture? Please chime in!
-
I have Leica M9 and Contax 645 + Hasselblad CF39 digital back. Now my wife just got her A7RII which is packed mainly with Contax N 17-35mm, 24-85mm, and it is capable of using Contax 645 lenses, the adapter is fully auto capable, including aperture and AF.
-- When I want the best image quality (a subjective matter, be aware), It is Contax 645. (frequent used lens: 35mm, 120mm, occasionally 45-90mm).
-- When I want to shoot under really dark, it is A7RII. (Contax N 17-35mm).
-- When I want the best compromise of convenience and image quality, it is M9. (ZM 25mm, M 35mm, M 50mm, M 90mm).
My wife ask me to keep only one system, which is a hard choice, but if I have to, I would keep M9, second Contax b645.
So, does it worth to get a MFDB now? absolutely. By the way, I don't see any need to get high pixel count, I found the 18MP of M9 more than enough, and for C645, P25 or P25+ is more than enough to me too. and I am talking about landscape.
-
So, does it worth to get a MFDB now? absolutely.
An excellent subjective summary.
Just two other things to bear in mind:
Cogent arguments for having more pixels, even if you "throw them away" to go smaller have been made on the forum.
Cost :) My fairly recent P45+ (H fitting) was the same cost ( I have a H body and lens already as you do for Contax) cost me the same as a new A7rII body. Of course older backs are even cheaper these days but chasing the cutting edge is expensive, especially for us amateurs, I still run a plain P20 in the V system and given the constraints of that mechanical system it only disappoints sometimes and that is because I push it outside its comfort envelope (hand held, at low speeds, without mirror lock, the V doesn't distribute all its energy as sound).
Summary: The give away is "beloved" why step outside that zone?
One caveat though, the Contax mount backs are less common so you will pay more.
-
One caveat though, the Contax mount backs are less common so you will pay more.
And if you plan to use it on a tech cam you may have a hard time finding adapters...
I too want for a P+ MFDB a few month ago - sure the technology is a bit dated but that doesn't diminish the quality of the results. The only thing I had to discover was the fact that digital medium 'forces' you to be very precise in every aspect because of its potential. Once you realise how accurate the colour rendition is you pay more attention to the white balance. Once you realise how detailed the pictures can be you pay more attention to camera shake, vibrations, motion blur etc.
-
Once you realise how detailed the pictures can be you pay more attention to camera shake, vibrations, motion blur etc.
I often ponder how many "casual" shooters get anything like the full potential out of the A7RII for example.
The other plus point I forgot was that by sticking with your Contax you do retain a film option by only carrying a film back in addition not another system.
BTW your point, OP, about the P45+ being "simply too old, both because of its lower resolution and technology," is precisely what the dealers, bless them all, would wish you to believe.
-
I'm also using C645 (professionally) for the later 11 years (before that it was Bronica ETRSi) and have all the lenses but the 350 for it, the 9 later years, I use it with MFDBs on it and have had 4 of them (started with Sinar E-motion, then Imacon 528c and now have Sinarback 54H & Hasselblad CF-39MS), but have also tried P-25+ & P-45+ on it, as well as Sinarback 75H & Sinarback 22m.... I've also have used Sinarback 75LV on HY6, P-45+ & P-25+ on Hasselblad H, P65+ on Mamiya 645 AFDIII & Aptus II 12 on DF... For leaf shutter and movements, I've added a Fuji GX-680 (five lenses) with Contax 645 MFDB adapter on it so that one can just unplug the MFDB from the Contax and plug it on the Fuji...
Out of all the backs I've used, the ones that impressed me most for single shot IQ were the Sinarback 75H and Sinarback Emotion 75LV as they where the most accurate (meaning natural) for color fidelity and the Kodak sensor 22mp backs that (although not as neutral on their color with respect to the Dalsa 33mp sensor) have a unique "look" on their presentation (different curve with more contrast on the mids) that many still find "magic" (the fat pixel magic) as it highly reminds of "filmish looks".
Speaking of color accuracy, Hasselblad have recently presented a (very simple to apply) new calibration method that should match the color accuracy of the Sinarbacks, but I have to mention that the P1 backs I've tried (P-25+, P-45+ & P-65+) had all a "strange opinion" about color presentation which was anything but accurate (clearly cooler in temperature with over saturated the colors that are related to cyan)...
My final suggestion to you, would be to go for a Kodak sensor 22mp back with interchangeable adapting plate or, (second) to look for a Dalsa sensor 33mp back again with interchangeable adapter plate.... I believe the last thing you'll ever miss with an MFDB is resolution and as others said above, those backs (along with the Kodak sensor 39mp backs) are the best to use with a view camera if you ever decide to add one in the future.
-
Hi,
Regarding "casual shooters", I would assume that folks consider their needs before investing 3000$+ into an A7rII + lenses.
But, the A7rII has a few provision making it easy to extract full benefits, name a vibration free shutter, no mirror vibration, image stabilisation and a pretty decent AF system. Good high ISO capability also helps. So, I think it is a pretty good system for folks who use a tripod but are less than religious about the mirror lock up.
Now regarding the P45+, I have one and it can make excellent images. Also, prices are going down, so it is an excellent time to buy into an MFD system. The P45+ is 1.1X crop, so it is quite a bit larger than the CMOS MFD sensors we have today. The reason size may be important that the crop factors can limit the availability of wide angle lenses.
Next model up from Phase One is the P65+ and I think it is full frame (645) but also uses a DALSA sensor which may offer better colour rendition.
I am pretty sure the Contax makes a very nice system with a Phase One back.
Central shutter is mostly of advantage if you shoot flash. It may also help reducing shutter related vibrations, but I don't know if that is a problem on the Contax 645.
Best regards
Erik
I often ponder how many "casual" shooters get anything like the full potential out of the A7RII for example.
The other plus point I forgot was that by sticking with your Contax you do retain a film option by only carrying a film back in addition not another system.
BTW your point, OP, about the P45+ being "simply too old, both because of its lower resolution and technology," is precisely what the dealers, bless them all, would wish you to believe.
-
.....about the P45+ being "simply too old, both because of its lower resolution and technology," is precisely what the dealers, bless them all, would wish you to believe....
Well said... I agree this is the most important factor that a new comer to MFDB must bear in mind... MFDBs have evolved very little (if any at all) for image quality through the years in all aspects but resolution and even on resolution, one may find that he can print significantly bigger with low res MFDBs than a respective pixel count FF sensor... Modern MFDBs have evolved in other than image quality that are related to functionality, but as long as one doesn't need or can overcome the functionality advancement, he may as well save the money and use a 10 years old MFDB which will allow him to enter the "magic" of the MF world.... I very much doubt if the O/P adds an old MFDB to his Contax if the M9 will still be his favorite system....
-
My fairly recent P45+ (H fitting) was the same cost ( I have a H body and lens already as you do for Contax) cost me the same as a new A7rII body. One caveat though, the Contax mount backs are less common so you will pay more.
My final suggestion to you, would be to go for a Kodak sensor 22mp back with interchangeable adapting plate or, (second) to look for a Dalsa sensor 33mp back again with interchangeable adapter plate...
Next model up from Phase One is the P65+ and I think it is full frame (645) but also uses a DALSA sensor which may offer better colour rendition.
I very much doubt if the O/P adds an old MFDB to his Contax if the M9 will still be his favorite system...
Thank you all for these helpful comments so far! I greatly appreciate it. I would like to comment on the few I have quoted above:
- It's breathtaking to me one could find a P45+ for the cost of a Sony A7rII... The rarity of the Contax mount must be the reason, and quite depressing. So the next comment about finding another brand back, that can use adapter plates, sounds appealing. Would such a back be less expensive, as well? And as Theodoros stated, are these competitor's backs even more color accurate? All this makes me wonder what the Phase One advantages may be, if any, other than more successful marketing. :)
- The discussion around perceived need of "higher" resolution is extremely interesting to me. I love the look of film, and it also sounds ike the older backs are more "filmic" compared to the latest CMOS technology. Is the P65+, then, even a "sweeter" spot, with both CCD technology, but also a bit more resolution? Or is this unnecessary with the P45+ back hitting all the right IQ buttons? (I own an Epson 4900, so I can't currently print larger than 17 inches wide, but that may change.) Of course, a P65+ back in Contax mount is probably rarer than hen's teeth anyway.
- As the original poster, I was not the one who stated the M9 was my favorite system, though coincidentally, I do own an M9 and absolutely love it. But the Contax has always pulled at my heartstrings, and images with the 35mm Distagon make me weep. ;)
Thanks again for all these responses, and I hope to read more before pulling the trigger on an MFDB.
-
Thank you all for these helpful comments so far! I greatly appreciate it. I would like to comment on the few I have quoted above:
- It's breathtaking to me one could find a P45+ for the cost of a Sony A7rII... The rarity of the Contax mount must be the reason, and quite depressing. So the next comment about finding another brand back, that can use adapter plates, sounds appealing. Would such a back be less expensive, as well? And as Theodoros stated, are these competitor's backs even more color accurate? All this makes me wonder what the Phase One advantages may be, if any, other than more successful marketing. :)
As I said before, I use a CF-39MS & I have good experience with P45+... The two backs share the same sensor and one will find share the same detail, DR and ISO performance.... Many will argue that P45+ is about a stop better, but if one tests for the same exposure, he may find that it's the sensitivity numbering on the two backs that is different... not noise as such. That said, one better underexpose the CF-39 by 2/3rds of a stop with respect to P45+ as to match the exposure, the P-45+ is considered (and probably is) the "king of long exposure" which is a thing that may be important to some, or not to some others... For color neutrality, it's probably not CF-39 that is better than P45+, but rather P1's idea of "color processing" which (as they claim) aims to "pleasing color"... Other than color accuracy being far more accurate with the other makers (and with a more accurate calibration method), I find that it is a false logic for a maker to decide what "pleasing color" is... I would rather prefer it if P1 would offer neutral color as the rest do and process that for my pleasing color if I so desire to do... (which I believe is the only logic that makes sense).
Other than that, it's not only P1's good marketing that resulted to P1's success in the market, it is mainly Hasselblad's continuous mistakes that helped since they closed the H-system, stopped making the CF backs and left P1 to make backs for everyone else that wanted to buy a back only for his camera (and keep his body). Strangely, they didn't even make stand alone backs for the H system either... only CF-V ones for the V system!
- The discussion around perceived need of "higher" resolution is extremely interesting to me. I love the look of film, and it also sounds ike the older backs are more "filmic" compared to the latest CMOS technology. Is the P65+, then, even a "sweeter" spot, with both CCD technology, but also a bit more resolution? Or is this unnecessary with the P45+ back hitting all the right IQ buttons? (I own an Epson 4900, so I can't currently print larger than 17 inches wide, but that may change.) Of course, a P65+ back in Contax mount is probably rarer than hen's teeth anyway.
- As the original poster, I was not the one who stated the M9 was my favorite system, though coincidentally, I do own an M9 and absolutely love it. But the Contax has always pulled at my heartstrings, and images with the 35mm Distagon make me weep. ;)
Thanks again for all these responses, and I hope to read more before pulling the trigger on an MFDB.
Resolution won't be a problem with MFDbs... you can safely print larger than 40 inch at the smaller size with any 22mp MFDB (let alone 33-39mp ones...) As for higher Iso, you'll find that MFDBs should be exposed for the HLs (and then some of them different to each other) leading to better ISO performance than the usual 200 ISO suggests... Usually MFDBs would easily cope with a lighting situation that one would use 400 ISO with a DSLR even if rated by the user to 160 ISO... Above that, one should use a DSLR anyway since the IQ would be inferior to both an MFDB or a DSLR used at lower ISO...
-
On price:
http://www.teamworkphoto.com/used-phase-contax-fitting-digital-back-p-20137.html
P30+ Contax fit £3118 (including VAT UK sales Tax)
https://www.calphoto.co.uk/product/Sony-Alpha-A7R-II-Compact-Mirrorless-Digital-Camera-Body/993-790A
A7rII body only Calumet (still viable in the UK) £2599 (VAT included)
-
To the OP:
Background: I'm a long-time Contax 645 user, both film and digital. Did a review here of the Phase One P30 on Contax combo many years ago: https://luminous-landscape.com/phase-one-p30/ (since this is now a subscription site, you may or may not be able to view it, unfortunately).
Two questions:
(1) What kind of work do you shoot?
(2) In essence, why do you want to have the ability to shoot digitally with the Contax: in order to use the lenses *and* body digitally, or to be able to use the lenses digitally and still get that sweet Contax look?
I ask because the answer to these questions would shape my advice. Thus, if the answer to #1 was "nothing routinely requiring extreme wide angle" and the answer to #2 was "to be able to use my Contax lenses with a digital system because I love the way they look," then I would suggest you look seriously at the Leica S (006 or 007, depending on your needs) plus a Contax adapter, rather than a digital back for the Contax 645. And you can still keep your Contax and use it for film. That's where I am currently.
Here's why I'm making this suggestion:
(1) You can get a 37 megapixel Leica S 006 there days for about $5500: http://leicastoremiami.com/collections/used-s-cameras/products/used-leica-s-typ-006-extra-battery-3
(2) The Contax adapter costs roughly $1700 new, $1300 preowned, $900 used. (There was a preowned one here recently: http://leicastoremiami.com/products/certified-pre-owned-leica-s-adapter-c-for-contax-lenses-1. I bought mine used from Leica Store Soho for $800)
(3) Even using the higher-end figures above for a used 006 (say $6000) and a new Contax adapter (say $1800), you're at $7800 for a digital platform on which you can use your existing Contax lenses (and, of course, the Leica lenses if you decide to get some in future).
(4) I don't know the precise going rate on used or new P45s and P65s in Contax mount, but I believe they're quite a bit higher than $7800:
http://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_odkw=phase+one+p65&_sop=16&_osacat=0&_from=R40&_trksid=p2045573.m570.l1313.TR0.TRC0.H0.Xphase+one+p45.TRS0&_nkw=phase+one+p45&_sacat=0.
EDIT: Actually, looks like one could get a used/refurbished P45+ for about the same price as a used Leica S plus Contax adapter: https://www.digitalback.com/product-category/0-pre-owned-digital-backs/4-contax-mount/
The P45 is 39 megs while the Leica is 37.5 megs, so that's a wash. Now granted, the P65 is 60 megs versus the Leica's 37.5 megs, so that may be a deal breaker depending on what you shoot (and how big you print).
The other thing that may be a deal-breaker is whether you need extreme wide-angle capability from your Contax lenses. If so, then you need one of the near-full frame digital backs in order to preserve the existing angle of view of your 35mm when used with 645 film. If I recall correctly, the Contax 645 35mm lens has an angle of view approximately the same as a 21mm lens would have on a 35mm camera. That same lens on a Leica S via Contax adapter would "only" have the angle of view of a moderately wide wide-angle of roughly 28mm lens in 35mm terms, due to the sensor's crop factor as compared to full frame 645. (Math: The Contax 35mm lens is exactly half the length of the native Leica S 70mm lens. The 70mm lens is roughly a "normal" angle of view, comparable to 56mm on a 35mm camera. Half of 56mm in 35mm terms = 28mm in 35mm terms).
Even if you never wanted to buy a Leica lens, and provided that you could live with your widest Contax lens being the equivalent of a moderate wide angle, then I'd strongly suggest you consider this route. Or, you could just eventually buy the Leica 30-90 zoom, the Leica 30mm, or the Leica 24mm.
Note: Having shot the Contax with Phase backs previously, I might not have been been entirely convinced in the abstract that I could replicate that same quality with the Contax lenses on the Leica S body. Having now shot the Leica S with Contax (and Leica) lenses for some time, any doubts I may have had have disappeared. The file depth and "feel" is equally as good (and in some ways better). Admittedly, I have never shot with the newer CMOS Phase backs nor the extremely high resolution (80 megapixel) CCD Phase backs.
-
Hi,
Having both P45+ and Sony A7rII I would be very hard pressed to find any advantage with the P45+, at least on the rational side. But, a camera doesn't make any pictures. To me it seems that the OP has a Contax 645 system and wants to take it into the digital age. The P45+ back seems to be a good tool for that.
A couple of points:
A camera needs a lens kit. Sony's lenses are a bit overpriced and I am not so sure quality is that good. Personally I feel I go with Canon lenses, the 16-35/4 zoom I just bought is incredibly good. But for Contax 645 owner with a good lens kit a P45+ back is a very good entry into digital.
Just to keep in mind, repairs on MFD can be messy and expensive. On the other hand the Phase One backs are dry ice, oven and jeep proof according to Phase One advertisement. Just keep in mind that they are not elephant proof… There will be very little wear on a digital back.
As I said, I have both P45+ (in V-mount) and A7rII. I am pretty sure the Hasselblad/P45+ combo will see little use, as I cannot come up with any use where the Hasselblad/P45 would be beneficial. But I enjoy shooting with the Hassy kit, too. Also, the Hasselblad lenses work fine with A7rII, allowing generous tilt and swing on the Sony A7rII with my HCam Master TSII. So the Hassy is a keeper and so is the P45+.
So, what I see right now is that buying low end CCD based MFD right now makes little sense, unless you have a great MFD equipment that you want to enable for digital. In that case a P45+ (or something like it) makes a lot of sense, at the prices we seem to have right now.
Just to say, high en MFD makes a lot of sense if we strive for maximum image quality. But than we talk about 40000€ not 4000€.
Best regards
Erik
On price:
http://www.teamworkphoto.com/used-phase-contax-fitting-digital-back-p-20137.html
P30+ Contax fit £3118 (including VAT UK sales Tax)
https://www.calphoto.co.uk/product/Sony-Alpha-A7R-II-Compact-Mirrorless-Digital-Camera-Body/993-790A
A7rII body only Calumet (still viable in the UK) £2599 (VAT included)
-
I often ponder how many "casual" shooters get anything like the full potential out of the A7RII for example.
The other plus point I forgot was that by sticking with your Contax you do retain a film option by only carrying a film back in addition not another system.
BTW your point, OP, about the P45+ being "simply too old, both because of its lower resolution and technology," is precisely what the dealers, bless them all, would wish you to believe.
Well the A7RII is definitely easier to handle - no mirror slap, live view, focus isn't that critical and the camera setup is much lighter.
We should not forget the fact that the big sensor of a MFDB also has a big influence on the image quality - that's why I would not recommend getting a smaller MFDB sensor like the P30+. Although you can still get nice files from it, the smaller sensor just makes it less interesting as a MF chip - at last to me.
-
To the OP:
Even if you never wanted to buy a Leica lens, and provided that you could live with your widest Contax lens being the equivalent of a moderate wide angle, then I'd strongly suggest you consider this route. Or, you could just eventually buy the Leica 30-90 zoom, the Leica 30mm, or the Leica 24mm.
William--
Thank you very much for these insights. I enjoy mostly architectural and landscape photography, and overall find myself shooting wide more often than not. As a result, though I love Leica and have handled the Leica S, but I must admit that with an even smaller field of view with my Contax Distagon 35mm lens on the Leica S, I think I would be disappointed. The P45+ sensor size is a bit larger (49.1mm x 36.8mm versus 45.0mm x 30.0mm for the Leica S), so I'm guessing the wide angle appearance would be better with the P45+ on the Contax 645 without having to buy any additional lenses.
Again, all the responses so far have been very helpful, so thanks very much to this community--
-
Very interesting to read this thread about whether to jump to a legacy digital back with your Contax system as I am exploring going in the opposite direction after many years working with a Contax 645 and Sinarback eMotion 75 (not Emotion 75H) that is still working as good as it did when I first got it but does not get used as much since I started playing around with a Sony A7II and a different style of photography.
I reckon the answer to your question depends a lot on what kind of photography you want to do?
If you mostly work off a tripod either with lights or a decent amount of daylight and want superb IQ then I would say the old eMotion 75 is hard to beat and the Contax 645 system with its superb lenses and basic but nonetheless useable modern touches like AF etc. is easier to use and gives more help to a working photographer than most other cameras that work with this old digital back. Heck it can even be used hand held if you quit smoking, practice yoga and don´t drink too much coffee.
So I would consider keeping your Contax 645 IF you want to use a legacy digital back; rather than consider buying a legacy digital back if you want to keep using your Contax 645, though others may see this differently.
But if you want to point and shoot then you are probably better off with a little Sony mirrorless camera like the A7II that works best, at least in my limited experience, with native FE lenses like the Batis rather than old MF lenses.
Unlike many others I find it difficult to tackle more than one system at a time, which is why my Contax eMotion system is not getting as much use as it used to get since the arrival of the Sony A7II, though maybe I will eventually get tired of pointing and shooting with the Sony A7II like this (https://youtu.be/LnpZFsjtANU) and go back to doing more precise work with the digital MF system like this (https://sites.google.com/site/peterlowefoto/Mexico), who knows?
n.b. exact model name corrected after error was pointed out by Theodorus below
-
I have to post this as people might get confused by the above post... There is no Sinar E-motion 75H back... There are Sinarback E-motion 75, Sinarback E-motion 75LV & Sinarback 75H.... All the above backs share the same sensor, (the Dalsa 33mp 36x48mm chip) which is also used on Leaf's 75/75S/7 &7II backs... The Sinarback 75H is a tethered only back that is able to do multishot 4x and is currently in production, there is no adapter plate for it in production for Contax 645 cameras, but one may use the Contax adapter of the Sinarback 22M which is fully compatible. The Sinarback 75H has an ISO range of 50-400ISO and the quality of images (in single shot mode) is among the best one can get... It is also usable on all its ISO settings with some moderate noise only visible at 400 ISO... The Sinarback E-motion 75LV is a replacement of the first E-motion 75 adding a 2.5" screen and LV to it... One could upgrade the old back to LV but only as far as the LV function retaining the 2.2 screen for it.
The original sensitivity of the E-motion was set to 50-400 Iso range, but this was leading to overexposure so Sinar offered a (free) firmware update where the Sensitivity was changed to 100-800 Iso range... Again, the back is usable on all its ISO settings with only some moderate noise present at the 800 Iso setting... Practically, one can use the back up to what would be right for a DSLR to be used on 1600 ISO by underexposing the back and correct things up when post processing. All in all, the E-motion 75 is among the very best backs ever made for ISO performance... It's color performance (for neutrality) is also second to none and its DR performance is very hard to beat... The back is also "a dream to use" on a view camera because of its "shallow depth" pixels and absence of microlences, as well as its "huge" 7.2μm pixel size. For a reason that is hard to be explained technically, the back is also less prone to artifacts presence (moire) than Kodak's 6.8μm pixel size 39mp sensor backs....
Other than the above, the back doesn't have any fans to extract heat (it uses a very effective Peltier cooling system), nor there are any "holes" on its casing that would allow dust or moisture to access the back's electronics, in addition, the battery chamber is inside the casing and thus, there is no battery extending out when the back is in use. Even more, it fits the Contax 645 (physically) like ...a dream as its sides coincide with the Contax outer lines perfectly both in height as well as on the left side of the camera... There is only a few mm extension of the adapter plate behind the grip, which doesn't affect at all gripping the camera, nor a bit its ergonomics, neither its aesthetics.... All in all, if one doesn't need multishot (as I do) as to choose the CF-39MS instead and doesn't mind the poor screen (a common with all older backs), the Sinarback Emotion 75LV is among the best backs ever made among all self contained backs and offers more resolution than one will ever need for any size print....
P.S. The Sinarback 75LV was offered as standard with most HY-6 cameras sold around the world and is partly the reason (the other being the Schneider lenses of course) why HY-6 users "rave" for the IQ of their cameras... Contax-Zeiss lenses are not second to the Schneider lenses of the HY-6...
-
I've used Valeo, Aptus 22, P30, p30+, p21+ on the Contax and love the camera, though in the digital world it comes with some issues.
At the time I believe the Aptus produced the prettiest file, though mine being an early version had it's quirks.
I believe Leaf worked most of them out, before being absorbed by Phase One.
Hmmm... If I'm not mistaken, Leaf backs where developed in parallel to Sinarbacks by Jenoptik before P1 invested on Leaf and took control of it... I believe Aptus 22 is a "parallel" back to Emotion 22, Aptus 54 parallel back to E-motion 54LV and then, the same as with Aptus 75S and Emotion 75LV..., even the common use of the Rollei HY-6 cameras suggests the relation... Yet, E-motion backs seem to have a better casing and color calibration method (with Sinar being involved into multishot and the color accuracy needed in art reproduction) and Leaf having a better screen which would suit other kinds of photography where color accuracy is less crucial... As I've said before, I'm not very familiar with Leaf backs, (other than having "tested" the DF & Aptus 12II back combination of a (now) passed out friend)... but it wouldn't surprise me if Aptus 75 shares a similar to Sinarback E-motion's 75 almost perfect behavior on Contax 645 camera... That said, the Sinarback Emotion 75LV I 've tried, was a significant improvement on my first MFDB (the E-motion 22) with even better color neutrality, significantly better in ISO performance, visibly more DR extension (comparable with any modern best out there) and (of course) much more resistant to moire issues.... In fact, I haven't tried the Sinarback 75LV on Contax either, (it was on an HY-6 that I have as I mention before), the compatibility with Contax 645 body that I mention, is all experience out of the years I used the E-motion -22 on Contax, since the two Sinarbacks E-motion's (as well as the 54LV) share exactly the same casing...
-
William--
Thank you very much for these insights. I enjoy mostly architectural and landscape photography, and overall find myself shooting wide more often than not. As a result, though I love Leica and have handled the Leica S, but I must admit that with an even smaller field of view with my Contax Distagon 35mm lens on the Leica S, I think I would be disappointed. The P45+ sensor size is a bit larger (49.1mm x 36.8mm versus 45.0mm x 30.0mm for the Leica S), so I'm guessing the wide angle appearance would be better with the P45+ on the Contax 645 without having to buy any additional lenses.
Again, all the responses so far have been very helpful, so thanks very much to this community--
Understood. Take into account though that Contax glass on the Leica is not a dead end whereas Phase One backs for the Contax are.
The newer Phase One IQ3 backs do no longer support the Contax 645.
That being said, Phase One backs P+ are virtually indestructible and will probably continue to be serviced for another 5 or 10 years.
-
Quote from: bcooter on Today at 08:46:36 AM
I've used Valeo, Aptus 22, P30, p30+, p21+ on the Contax and love the camera, though in the digital world it comes with some issues.
At the time I believe the Aptus produced the prettiest file, though mine being an early version had it's quirks.
I believe Leaf worked most of them out, before being absorbed by Phase One.
Hmmm... If I'm not mistaken, Leaf backs where developed in parallel to Sinarbacks by Jenoptik before P1 invested on Leaf and took control of it... I believe Aptus 22 is a "parallel" back to Emotion 22, Aptus 54 parallel back to E-motion 54LV and then, the same as with Aptus 75S and Emotion 75LV..., even the common use of the Rollei HY-6 cameras suggests the relation... Yet, E-motion backs seem to have a better casing and color calibration method (with Sinar being involved into multishot and the color accuracy needed in art reproduction) and Leaf having a better screen which would suit other kinds of photography where color accuracy is less crucial... As I've said before, I'm not very familiar with Leaf backs, (other than having "tested" the DF & Aptus 12II back combination of a (now) passed out friend)... but it wouldn't surprise me if Aptus 75 shares a similar to Sinarback E-motion's 75 almost perfect behavior on Contax 645 camera... That said, the Sinarback Emotion 75LV I 've tried, was a significant improvement on my first MFDB (the E-motion 22) with even better color neutrality, significantly better in ISO performance, visibly more DR extension (comparable with any modern best out there) and (of course) much more resistant to moire issues.... In fact, I haven't tried the Sinarback 75LV on Contax either, (it was on an HY-6 that I have as I mention before), the compatibility with Contax 645 body that I mention, is all experience out of the years I used the E-motion -22 on Contax, since the two Sinarbacks E-motion's (as well as the 54LV) share exactly the same casing...
I thought that the Sinar backs, the early ones were simply made by Jenoptic. Later on, Jenoptic simply disappeared out of the digital back making business. Leaf backs have always been developed and made in Israel ( and maybe some development by Creo in Canada).
-
I thought that the Sinar backs, the early ones were simply made by Jenoptic. Later on, Jenoptic simply disappeared out of the digital back making business. Leaf backs have always been developed and made in Israel ( and maybe some development by Creo in Canada).
Actually that's not exactly what happened... Jenoptik was a share holder of Sinar until after the Sinarback 75LV was developed... They retired the share holdership later on, but did sign a contract that they will continue to make the backs for Sinar... None ever claimed that Jenoptik also made Leaf backs... The relevance between early Leaf and Sinarbacks though is obvious (as well as the naming 22, 54, 74 etc... the timing and the sensor used), where Leaf backs where assembled is rather irrelevant.
Never the less, no matter what history is, it can't change the fact that Sinarback E-motion 75LV is an excellent MFDB judged by any standard among modern backs.
EDIT: In fact the current MFDB line of Sinar (75H, 86H & e-Xact) are still made by Jenoptik... The whole e-motion line of self contained backs (along with 75LV) was stopped after HY-6 production was seized...
-
Thanks for the info :-)
-
Comparing a Contax to the A7R2 is like comparing a 2001 BMW M3 vs a Toyota Prius.
How about a C645 lens mounted on a Sony A7?
-
How about a C645 lens mounted on a Sony A7?
I do that on my Nikons (thanks to the JAS adapter I bought last year) and it caused me to sell all my Nikon glass other than the 17-35/2,8 (to have for WAs), the old 35-70/2,8 (to have as a walk around lens) and the 85/2.8 micro PC (which I need professionally with or without the Kenko DGX 1,4X TC)... I suspect that there will be more need to do it on a Sony α7 body, as the glass of it seems to be more of a problem than it ever was for Nikon...but this is saving even more money to spend on a good MFDB...
-
Eventually they will release a speedbooster with electronics for the contax glass, amazing combination with the a7rii.
-
Eventually they will release a speedbooster with electronics for the contax glass, amazing combination with the a7rii.
Yep, like this (http://i.telegraph.co.uk/multimedia/archive/02905/The_best_tow_car_2905314b.jpg)
-
... These two were shot with the Leica Zeiss lenses and a P30+ (HMI lighting)...
(http://www.russellrutherford.com/julia_2_up_p30plus.jpg)...
Fabulous shots, especially the second one.
-
Before the new Phase One 100MP (good grief!) back announcement usurps every other thread this week, I wanted to thank everyone again for their input so far on my quest for choosing a MFDB for my Contax 645. As a result, I have narrowed my choice down to three backs: The Phase One P45+, the Leaf 75, or the Sinar 75LV. The sensor dimensions, pixel size and likely overall image results are, I think, most likely fairly competitive on these three. I also very much appreciate the Leica S suggestion with a Contax lens adapter--that idea is haunting me more each day, though I know to get the wide angle field of view that I'm used to with my Contax 35mm lens, I would have to invest in Leica glass--which in this case would be twice as much as the camera! Still, it's amazing to me that a Leica S (006) can be had in the $4,000 range now.
My heart, so vulnerable to marketing, says get the P45+ and be done with it; my common-sense mind says get the Sinar at a far-less cost and get to know MFDB photography. Any more feedback would be welcome, and thanks again--
-
My heart, so vulnerable to marketing, says get the P45+ and be done with it; my common-sense mind says get the Sinar at a far-less cost and get to know MFDB photography. Any more feedback would be welcome, and thanks again--
I was mulling this same question earlier this year. You should read this thread: http://forum.luminous-landscape.com/index.php?topic=101101.0 a lot of good stuff.
It's a little more money, but you might also look at the P65+. I ended up there. Three reasons:
1. Color. I tested the P45+ and the P65+ and I just liked the colors produced by the 65 better. Especially skin tones and reds, but people talk about greens as well.
2. 60Mp resolution. It's not 100Mp, but it sure has got a lot of detail.
3. Wide angle lenses. I love the Contax 35mm. The P65+ delivers it without cropping.
It's a completely useable system with the Contax. (This is also true for the P45+.) Contax doesn't do live view easily, because it has to be set to bulb to do it, so that's kind of a non-issue. But the P65 lets me use the camera just as I've always used it, but with the added ability to shoot tethered, even firing the camera from the computer. That's wonderful in the studio, or for architecture. But most often, I'm using it in the non-tethered mode. I love it.
FWIW, I also own lots of Nikon gear, which Is my primary commercial still system, and a Sony a7s, which i want to like more than I do. (And a Red Epic Dragon, which is the camera with which I make most of my living.) So I use the Contax where I want to and other cameras when they are the right choices.)
-
Hi,
P45+ backs and other older P1 backs use Kodak sensors. With the P65+ Phase One switched over to Dalsa. It seems that quite a lot of folks think Dalsa based sensors yield better colour. Also the P45+ has 1.1x crop factor while the P65+ is full frame.
Dalsa based sensors usually are not very good at very long exposures (IQ-260 being an exception), in that area the P45+ is king of the older generation sensors.
I bought my P45+ two and a half years ago, at that time it cost me 10k$, but it seem prices are much lower now. If you can afford it, why not try? You can probably sell it without a big loss.
Folks suggesting to switch to Leica, and that may make some sense. On the other hand the Leica has a somewhat smaller sensor, more like 1.3x crop. The S (Typ 006) uses a kodak sensor, similar to the P45+ in many ways, while the S (Typ 007) uses a CMOS sensor.
Best regards
Erik
I was mulling this same question earlier this year. You should read this thread: http://forum.luminous-landscape.com/index.php?topic=101101.0 a lot of good stuff.
It's a little more money, but you might also look at the P65+. I ended up there. Three reasons:
1. Color. I tested the P45+ and the P65+ and I just liked the colors produced by the 65 better. Especially skin tones and reds, but people talk about greens as well.
2. 60Mp resolution. It's not 100Mp, but it sure has got a lot of detail.
3. Wide angle lenses. I love the Contax 35mm. The P65+ delivers it without cropping.
It's a completely useable system with the Contax. (This is also true for the P45+.) Contax doesn't do live view easily, because it has to be set to bulb to do it, so that's kind of a non-issue. But the P65 lets me use the camera just as I've always used it, but with the added ability to shoot tethered, even firing the camera from the computer. That's wonderful in the studio, or for architecture. But most often, I'm using it in the non-tethered mode. I love it.
FWIW, I also own lots of Nikon gear, which Is my primary commercial still system, and a Sony a7s, which i want to like more than I do. (And a Red Epic Dragon, which is the camera with which I make most of my living.) So I use the Contax where I want to and other cameras when they are the right choices.)
-
P45+ backs and other older P1 backs use Kodak sensors. With the P65+ Phase One switched over to Dalsa. It seems that quite a lot of folks think Dalsa based sensors yield better colour.
A comment on color Kodak vs Dalsa color. Kodak color is more saturated and subjective, although you can control it with a profile it's much harder to make truly neutral color with the Kodak. On the other hand if you have the same taste on subjective look like the Kodak color scientists you probably like their color. One advantage with having saturated response on the sensor is that you can achieve more saturated color with less noise increase in the final image (which is good for Kodak, as the sensor is quite noisy...).
Modern DLSR sensors and the Dalsa all have a bit less saturated response (more filter overlap) and have the ability to make more neutral color with just a matrix, making it easier to bend their color response with a profile in the direction you want. They're certainly easier to work with when making camera profiles.
I'm using a Kodak now and had a Dalsa before. I'd prefer to have the color response of the Dalsa, but I chose the Kodak for other reasons and I'm satisfied with the color.
-
A comment on color Kodak vs Dalsa color. Kodak color is more saturated and subjective, although you can control it with a profile it's much harder to make truly neutral color with the Kodak. On the other hand if you have the same taste on subjective look like the Kodak color scientists you probably like their color. One advantage with having saturated response on the sensor is that you can achieve more saturated color with less noise increase in the final image (which is good for Kodak, as the sensor is quite noisy...).
This is true only with P1 backs, it's rather an impression people have with respect to Dalsa sensor based P1 backs being more color accurate than the (earlier) Kodak sensor ones... The truth however is that its P1's "tuning" that differs, not the Kodak sensor itself... One can easily notice the difference if he compares a P25+ to a CF-22 or a P45+ to a CF-39MS... The fact that the Sinarback 75LV is almost "dead accurate" (Dalsa sensor), it rather has to do with Sinar's tunning (and probably related with the fact that the back is among the most "quite" ones for noise) of the back (IMO) as Sinar is famous for color accuracy and calibration method... Lets not forget that the Sinarback 54H which I use and is the most used back for painting reproduction is a Kodak sensor back...
Modern DLSR sensors and the Dalsa all have a bit less saturated response (more filter overlap) and have the ability to make more neutral color with just a matrix, making it easier to bend their color response with a profile in the direction you want. They're certainly easier to work with when making camera profiles.
I'm using a Kodak now and had a Dalsa before. I'd prefer to have the color response of the Dalsa, but I chose the Kodak for other reasons and I'm satisfied with the color.
First paragraph I agree and confirm, the second paragraph - although it's a personal matter - one must take in mind that MFDBs are anyway way better than DSLRs for color (even early P1 backs)... It's a comparison between backs I refer to... not a "general" comparison that one can compare with his DSLR experience... I say this because the O/P might get the wrong impression (as all of us before we actually got involved with MF) out of our (correct) posts...
-
Having used both the P45 and 65 extensively my vote is save for a little longer and go with the 65. That is if you can find one for that is Contax fit.
-
Having used both the P45 and 65 extensively my vote is save for a little longer and go with the 65. That is if you can find one for that is Contax fit.
As I said before, I've tried the P65+ on a Mamyia camera, what I found positive about about it if compared to the P-45+ is the more neutral color, the wider AOV but mainly it was the exposure+ mode of it... (15.5mp resolution but with quadrabled sensitivity and no noise increase or DR drop). The negatives (compared to P45+) where the luck of longer exposure, the drop of quality for some lenses at wider apertures near the edges and (of course) the unnecessary size of files... Also, the compatibility with view and tech cameras is considerably worst than the Kodak sensor 39mp backs.
I recently thought of trading one of my backs (the CF-39MS) for a P-65+ (as to add WA access to the 35mm lens) and add another Sinarback (tethered only) as to replace the MS ability of the CF-39MS... But I did change my mind after I found a solution as to add a ...24mm f3.5 lens on my Contax!!! That way, I'll go even (much) wider than using the 35mm lens with the P65+ and also keep better (respective to 35mm) AOV will all my lenses (and avoid introducing issues at wider apertures too).
I think the 36/37x48/49 sensors are perfect for the Contax lenses as they use the best part of the lens image circle, but also use ALL of that best part, wider sensors may cause some issues with some lenses and enforce to make the system slower too, narrower sensors OTOH, won't improve the performance further at all (than 37x49)... As to Leica S, I think it's a great camera, but it's 3:2 ratio and one can't detouch the back of it (nor use two MFDBs on it). I would consider the Leica only if I was to replace my FF DSLRs altogether with one...
-
I recently thought of trading one of my backs (the CF-39MS) for a P-65+ (as to add WA access to the 35mm lens) and add another Sinarback (tethered only) as to replace the MS ability of the CF-39MS... But I did change my mind after I found a solution as to add a ...24mm f3.5 lens on my Contax!!!
What lens are you referring to? I'm guessing it would require some sort of adapter to use on the Contax 645, yes? And might you have any images captured with this 24mm lens you could share here?
Thanks!
-
What lens are you referring to? I'm guessing it would require some sort of adapter to use on the Contax 645, yes? And might you have any images captured with this 24mm lens you could share here?
Thanks!
There are two UWA lenses that can be used on a Contax 645, one is the Pentax 25mm f4 (both I & II versions) where one has to make a 6.7mm adapter with an aperture ring on it (the Pentax aperture is mechanical coupling much like the Nikkor lenses, one has to link the the aperture ring on the adapter internally so that he can control the lever in the back of the Pentax lens that mechanically controls the aperture). The other is a 74 degs image circle 35mm TS lens (the Samyang 24mm f3.5) of which the rear group of elements is recessed by more than an inch, one has to remove the tilt and shift mechanisms of it and machine a tube that will shorten the lens by 19mm from its mounting side... I am working on the later and will post pictures of the conversion as well as images after it will be finished... The aperture ring is mechanically linked to the aperture blades on this lens and it is positioned mid frame... So, there is no need for one to bother with aperture control on the Samyang... Tried the lens with 10mm side shifts on a FF Nikon and it seems fine from f5.6 to f11, I expect it to improve further on the borders with (the much wider) Contax 645 mount, as it seems that the image circle is wider than the Nikon mount at the mount's plane and some of the edge performance (when unconverted) is affected because of that...
-
Well, it's decision time for me, the original poster. I have identified two backs for the Contax, and I am anguishing over the decision--or whether to take the advice of an early poster who suggested the Leica S with a Contax lens adapter. Here is what I have narrowed the filed down to:
1) Phase One 45: I realize finding a P65+ would be ideal, but they are rarer than hen's teeth in the Contax mount
2) Sinar eMotion 75LV: Has the Dalsa sensor, built-in white balance, and reputedly better color than the Phase One. However, the cost of a Sinar adapter plate (still available) for the Contax is breathtaking at nearly $2K! Is that good money chasing after bad when it comes time to sell or upgrade?
3) Leica S (006): Same ballpark price with a Contax lens adapter, and I'd have two wonderful cameras, though the Contax would not be digital. Also, with its higher crop factor, the beautiful panoramic look of the Contax 35mm lens would be lost.
Please just, tell me where to spend this money! ;-)
-
P45 :)
-
Are S006 Leicas really $4k now? where?
Edmund
-
$4k seems quite low... Leica Store Miami has one at $5,495.
Be aware that used lenses remain pretty scarce though... and expensive...
-
Leica S.
-
Leica S006 and shoot film with the Contax
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
-
Well, it's decision time for me, the original poster. I have identified two backs for the Contax, and I am anguishing over the decision--or whether to take the advice of an early poster who suggested the Leica S with a Contax lens adapter. Here is what I have narrowed the filed down to:
1) Phase One 45: I realize finding a P65+ would be ideal, but they are rarer than hen's teeth in the Contax mount
2) Sinar eMotion 75LV: Has the Dalsa sensor, built-in white balance, and reputedly better color than the Phase One. However, the cost of a Sinar adapter plate (still available) for the Contax is breathtaking at nearly $2K! Is that good money chasing after bad when it comes time to sell or upgrade?
3) Leica S (006): Same ballpark price with a Contax lens adapter, and I'd have two wonderful cameras, though the Contax would not be digital. Also, with its higher crop factor, the beautiful panoramic look of the Contax 35mm lens would be lost.
Please just, tell me where to spend this money! ;-)
Well, IMO to trust a third person's opinion on what to do is a very risky way to spent your money... What one can do (IMO) is to collect individual information depending on the different needs for the different use one would do if he was facing your dilemma and then compensate the different suggestions to your own needs! IMO, all suggestions that have been made are reliable but one must take in mind that they are based on third persons needs...
What I would do if I was in your place, is first to decide if I would ever use a view camera or not... If I would, I would first reject the Leica S out of my choices as I can always decide on it later on and replace my DSLRs altogether with one... If you are sure that you won't be ever using a view camera, do consider the Leica by all means... It's wrong to think that the lesser image area of the Leica will degrade your lens performance... The sensors you are considering are all between 45 & 48.7mm of width... They will all take the best out of the Contax lenses leaving out the part of the image circle that could be an issue with only some lenses if the sensor was wider than 48.7mm...
About the cost of the C645 adapter on a 75LV, I must say that it shouldn't be more difficult for one to find a C645 fit 75LV back than it is to find a C645 fit P45 back... If you do find a 75LV however that it is for different fit than C645, do contact me as I know that the man I sold my E-motion 22 Contax fit back some 6 years ago, he sells his back at a silly price and there is a C645 adapter (the same as the one needed for the 75LV) already fitted on the back... (note that he is asking 1.6K euros - 1.7$ for the back with the C645 adapter).
The P-45+ would be my choice only if I would need its 60' long exposure capability... Otherwise I think I would be better off with the same sensor Hasselblad CF-39 back which would be more accurate for color and additionally wouldn't need a "one-shot" cable as to use it on a view camera... But then again, the 75LV is a better image quality back than both and doesn't need an "one shot" cable either...
Mind you that Hasselblad's new calibration method for the Phocus Raw processor should bring a CF-39 close (if not equal) to a 75LV for color accuracy, but still the Dalsa 33mp sensor should be (slightly) better for noise and DR...
-
Well, IMO to trust a third person's opinion on what to do is a very risky way to spent your money... What one can do (IMO) is to collect individual information depending on the different needs for the different use one would do if he was facing your dilemma and then compensate the different suggestions to your own needs! IMO, all suggestions that have been made are reliable but one must take in mind that they are based on third persons needs...
What I would do if I was in your place, is first to decide if I would ever use a view camera or not... If I would, I would first reject the Leica S out of my choices as I can always decide on it later on and replace my DSLRs altogether with one... If you are sure that you won't be ever using a view camera, do consider the Leica by all means...
This advice is, of course, very true--and in fact, when I asked how I should spend the money, it was partly tongue-in-cheek since I know only I can make this decision. Nonetheless, all of the responses have been have been extremely helpful because so many here have so much experience. Thank you very much. Because the idea of using a view or tech camera some day is more easily accomplished with a digital back, the Leica S is, I think, out for me. The decision between the Sinar or Phase One back is tougher, but my gut tells me the refinement of CaptureOne and the Phase One workflow will make choosing the P45+ right for me.
Again, a big thank you to everyone who contributed to this thread.
-
Sent you a PM Kipdent.
-
Photography is not my sole income source but I do monochrome portraits professionally and do landscape, wildlife and some astro photography for fun. Although I've had digital cameras for years, for professional use, I only made the jump from film to digital in 2015 when I bought a Phase Achromatic+ back last year.
The Contax 645 is my favorite system, period, bar none. I have the a7r and a7rii and like most of us here, piles of other gear, including the Monochrom version of the M9. For the OP, I would consider a leaf aptus back--they can be had for a song (about the price of an a7r) and I used one for fun years ago. They are 28MP, can be found with a Contax mount, and have amazing IQ. Today I use a phase IQ250 for the Contax today. It cost 10x more money than the leaf aptus back but it is not 10x "better" than the leaf aptus. I think bear images in Palo Alto may have my old leaf aptus 65s I traded in last March to get my achromatic+ (no it wasn't a straight across trade :) )
A shot with the leaf aptus back on the Contax 645:
(http://flic.kr/p/qXfTY2)
Some other thoughts for the OP:
1. Phase one no longer makes digital backs with a Contax 645 mount. There is no adapter plate or modification possible the IQ2 generation is the last phase made that has a Contax mount available.
2. Cambo tech cameras take a Contax 645 mount--I use the same digital backs on the C645 on my Cambo - cambo makes a plate that goes on any cambo tech camera that accepts a Contax back. It's really nice to be able to swap the same back around.
3. For the money, the Sony a7r (even the old one) with adapters for whatever glass you like, is the best bang do your buck. The 36MP sensor is plenty for your 4990 (I have the same printer).
4. Flash sync - although I loved flash sync at 1/500 in the olden days on my Mamiya LS glass, syncing at 1/125 with the Contax is plenty. With the right strobes I can freeze water or hummingbird wings or whatever I need to do. I love leaf shutters--don't get me wrong. But the C645 does just fine without it.
-
http://flic.kr/p/qXfTY2
Welcome to the forum!
Fixed the image link for you:
(https://farm9.staticflickr.com/8752/16377876093_11307449c7_c.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/qXfTY2)
Macro Hummingbird - 8000 pixels wide - 120mm Zeiss Macro lens (https://flic.kr/p/qXfTY2) by SandHill Photo (https://www.flickr.com/photos/sandhillphoto/), on Flickr
-
Great info and a beautiful shot with the exquisite Contax 120mm Macro, Sam. I, too, love the Contax 645, and am happy to report that I have my new-to-me P45+ back in hand, thanks to all the advice I received from this thread. I will post an image as soon as I feel I understand its use and Capture One 9 enough to share a worthy image.
My first test images are simply jaw-dropping to me. There is something about the richness, depth and feel to the images a sensor of this size makes, which is, of course, old news to everyone here. But for me it is thrilling. It reminds me of the difference between listening to a CD and a safety master tape. Just shocking.
Thanks again to everyone--now to start saving for a P65+ so my Contax 35mm lens draws as the intended 21mm, not a 24mm lens!
The Contax 645 is my favorite system, period, bar none. I have the a7r and a7rii and like most of us here, piles of other gear, including the Monochrom version of the M9.
A shot with the leaf aptus back on the Contax 645:
(https://farm9.staticflickr.com/8752/16377876093_11307449c7_c.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/qXfTY2)
Macro Hummingbird - 8000 pixels wide - 120mm Zeiss Macro lens (https://flic.kr/p/qXfTY2) by SandHill Photo (https://www.flickr.com/photos/sandhillphoto/), on Flickr