Luminous Landscape Forum
Equipment & Techniques => Medium Format / Film / Digital Backs – and Large Sensor Photography => Topic started by: SCQ on September 23, 2009, 12:30:58 am
-
I know that MF backs is pretty much the epitome of digital still photography right now, with insane products like the P65 commanding $40k+ and producing what no film smaller than an 8x10 can do. However, this is entirely out of reach for 99.999% of amateurs and it certainly is not aimed at such a market.
I've got quite an interest in digital MF - maybe because I like the way an old Hasselblad V handles, or because I just like being different from all the Canikon shooters out there. Looking at the options, it seems like older 16MP backs (often only usable tethered) still command $4-5000 despite being 4-5 years old. While I do not doubt their quality, probably producing files with dynamic range and sharpness that can easily rival a $7000 1Ds or D3x, do you think the cost of these things will ever depreciate to a level more people can afford?
As a student, the idea of a $10000 camera is ridiculous, and while digital MF is certainly above my league, I still would like one. Technology should keep advancing, and it would only make sense that these monsters come down in price over time. I suppose I'm only waiting/hoping for a back to drop to around $2k. I can deal with 16MP and having to tether it. I don't need 65mpx and ISO 3200 on the field with autofocus.
Just wondering if you forsee the cost of MF coming down anytime soon.
-
nope - b/c there is a whole slew of computer junk that you need too. and dont forget backups - in triplicate. the actual back is just the tip of the iceberg. again, just my humble opinion from someone who uses a back to make money every week...
-
You can find such older backs for less than this, usually the price for a 6/11/16 MPx back is around 2-3000.
Best regards,
Thierry
... it seems like older 16MP backs (often only usable tethered) still command $4-5000 despite being 4-5 years old.
-
You can find such older backs for less than this, usually the price for a 6/11/16 MPx back is around 2-3000.
Best regards,
Thierry
Which in my opinion are no match for newer DSLRs, like a a850, 5dII, d700.
-
It depends, Christopher, you cannot generalize and put it this way.
It all depends the kind of work you are doing.
A 16 or 11 and even a 6 MPx multishot back is something MUCH different than any DSLR.
Best regards,
Thierry
Which in my opinion are no match for newer DSLRs, like a a850, 5dII, d700.
-
It depends, Christopher, you cannot generalize and put it this way.
It all depends the kind of work you are doing.
A 16 or 11 and even a 6 MPx multishot back is something MUCH different than any DSLR.
Best regards,
Thierry
Well it certainly depends, but I really don't think that these old backs can compare when it comes to DR and noise. Detail and resolution might be fine.
I mean I love working with MF and LF, but I would if I had 3k-4k to spend never invest in such a low end MF system. I think a Canon 7D, d700 or a850, would be a lot better choice. If you have the camera and some lenses, we could start again. But starting from scratch, does not make sense in my eyes.
-
You should test it, what it means to shoot with a 6 MPx sensor in multishot mode, you would be surprised: There is no match, and not only details and resolution.
Again, IMO it makes sense for some and depending on what they shoot.
Best regards,
Thierry
Well it certainly depends, but I really don't think that these old backs can compare when it comes to DR and noise. Detail and resolution might be fine.
I mean I love working with MF and LF, but I would if I had 3k-4k to spend never invest in such a low end MF system. I think a Canon 7D, d700 or a850, would be a lot better choice. If you have the camera and some lenses, we could start again. But starting from scratch, does not make sense in my eyes.
-
I've just bought a D5000 which uses the same sensor and processor as the D300s (half the sensor of the D3X/ A900). The camera is a joy to use and the flip LCD is a nice feature.
At 12.3MP it is quite impressive in terms of DR, sharpness and detail and 800 iso or even 1600 iso are quite pretty (noisy but pretty).
But comparing these files at low iso to some old files from a Valeo 11 from 2003 (single shot, 24X36mm, 11 MP), they are inferior in every way.
If you spend 2-3K on an old back and slap it onto an old Blad. 1 Month later if you find it is not for you, you just sell it on...no loss and no harm done...
-
You should test it, what it means to shoot with a 6 MPx sensor in multishot mode, you would be surprised: There is no match, and not only details and resolution.
Again, IMO it makes sense for some and depending on what they shoot.
Best regards,
Thierry
You are quite right, Thierry, I used to have a multishot 4040 Imacon, for still life, on a view camera, I would take this back today instead of any of the DSLRs (for still life). The quality was as good as any of the backs today, if used at it's 50 ISO setting. Admittedly fewer pixels and a little bit more cumbersome to use, but still very good.
Edward
-
You are quite right, Thierry, I used to have a multishot 4040 Imacon, for still life, on a view camera, I would take this back today instead of any of the DSLRs (for still life). The quality was as good as any of the backs today, if used at it's 50 ISO setting. Admittedly fewer pixels and a little bit more cumbersome to use, but still very good.
Edward
I wanted to resist, but just couldn't. Especially after enjoying the other topic about DR.
So if a 6 year old back is still better than current top DSLRs, what went wrong with MFDBs ? Did kodak, Delsa, Phase, Leaf, Sinar and Hassi, really sleep and missed to improof their backs ? Or is Nikon, Sony and canon just so much better and faster, because if we take the other topic, with it's 7 pages it is quite clear that current top backs are not any better than current DSLRs, except for resolution :-P
-
What you are missing, Christopher, is that LL is certainly a place to get ideas how and with what photographers work, but certainly doesn't give an entire picture of the reality: there are literally thousands of photographers working with MFDBs and who will continue to work with, even though they might have a DSLR as well.
As for your statement that current digital backs are not any better than current DSLRs, I prefer to live it to live tests rather than pages of theoretical blabla: for me it is not that clear at all. But it makes no sense to debate this any longer.
Best regards,
Thierry
I wanted to resist, but just couldn't. Especially after enjoying the other topic about DR.
So if a 6 year old back is still better than current top DSLRs, what went wrong with MFDBs ? Did kodak, Delsa, Phase, Leaf, Sinar and Hassi, really sleep and missed to improof their backs ? Or is Nikon, Sony and canon just so much better and faster, because if we take the other topic, with it's 7 pages it is quite clear that current top backs are not any better than current DSLRs, except for resolution :-P
-
While a comparison of current DSLRs and backs (new and old) is certainly valid, I am more interested in older backs in terms of price. While a D3X sensor is certainly one of the best - perhaps beating out a 5 year old back - it's really saying that a young man can beat out an old man in a race. However, my interest in a digital MF back is not merely sensor quality - in terms of price, I don't think anything offers a better value than a second hand 5D which can be had for around $1100. That said, there's a reason why I would like to use a digital MF back.
I quite like the handling of Hasselblad V's from my limited experience with them, and from my understanding, their glass is almost second to none.
I would be quite happy if I could put together a digital Hassie V for the price of a mid-range dSLR system. Of course, part of this is wishful thinking as backs are ridiculously expensive - but back to the original intent of the article - how long do you think I would have to wait before I could get an old V body and an under 20 mpx back for the price of a 5D and an L prime?
-
- perhaps beating out a 5 year old back -
Not necessarily true, by far not, depending on what you are doing.
how long do you think I would have to wait before I could get an old V body and an under 20 mpx back for the price of a 5D and an L prime?
You can already find a 6, 11 or even 16 MPx back for this price (without camera body).
Thierry
-
You can buy a Sinar eMotion 75LV used now for $8K Aussie.
2 years ago that was listed @ $47 K Aussie.
A bargain at $8K as it still is one of the best backs on the market.
-
You can buy a Sinarback 54M for a $4500 today. It must be tethered to a macbook, but I always shot tethered in my studio, ever models and children.
-
I wanted to resist, but just couldn't. Especially after enjoying the other topic about DR.
So if a 6 year old back is still better than current top DSLRs, what went wrong with MFDBs ? Did kodak, Delsa, Phase, Leaf, Sinar and Hassi, really sleep and missed to improof their backs ? Or is Nikon, Sony and canon just so much better and faster, because if we take the other topic, with it's 7 pages it is quite clear that current top backs are not any better than current DSLRs, except for resolution :-P
Dynamic range and sensor information is the only thing that you really can compare medium format to small format (or Large format for that matter). The optical qualities in the different systems are totally different and that is something that has 0 to do with anything digital.
To call a 35mm sized system the same as a 6x7 (or 6x45) sized system is like trying to call a fiat a ferrari because they are both cars
Each system has its place and in the end its only different tools. You choose the tools for the image you wish to create, not the image after the tools (hopefully).
Just my $0.2 and i do shoot all 3 formats both digital and analog still.
-
Hasselblad V96C 16mp Digital Back + ImageBank
1795.00
Very Good Condition (CPH) #IX04281043 C
Hasselblad V96C 16mp Digital Back + ImageBank
1795.00
Very Good Condition (MM) #IX05311013 SOLD
The prices are british pounds.
Found at http://www.procentre.co.uk/secondhand_Equi...ml#hasselblad_h (http://www.procentre.co.uk/secondhand_Equipment.html#hasselblad_h)
These are tethered 36*36 backs.
-
Because if we take the other topic, with it's 7 pages it is quite clear that current top backs are not any better than current DSLRs, except for resolution :-P
You must be referring to the other topic where those who own or use digital backs are trying to convince those who only look at numeric readouts to actually go shoot a digital back in order to evaluate it.
-
... And guess what? Those silly little 24x36 mm sensors were (STILL are) even used on a technical view camera like the Sinar p2 or p3, with the same lens limitations, producing wonderful image quality, STILL TODAY.
All I am trying to say is: if one looks for a digital back around a 1'000 dollars, it is possible to get one, and the quality one gets out of it is STILL superior to any CURRENT DSLR, in multishot mode.
Best regards,
Thierry
I don't understand why anyone would try to defend the 6 and 11MP digital backs. These sensors are 24x36mm, so please someone explain what advantage are you gaining on a medium format camera system, none. You won't get the lens draw that larger formats exhibit.
-
Sorry, off topic.
A question for Thierry:
Is there anywhere (youtube, vimeo, etc) some demo video of Sinar Live View function.
I might be interested in Sinar 75LV but no chance of testing it in my country.
Thanks,
Ctz
-
15 to 20% of professional photographers, actually, and according to my statistic.
I said it clearly: "depending what you are shooting ..."
Best regards,
Thierry
Mulitshot mode - needed by maybe 0.01% of users. Fact is table top product shooters, art repro are about it.
-
Well, Sinar is STILL doing and selling multishot backs.
I don't think it is "poor taste", when the OP is asking if and what backs are available for this low price, to mention that these 6, 11 and 16 MPx backs still exist and still produce wonderful images. All depends WHAT the OP wants to shoot. If I was today to buy a digital back, it would for sure be an 11 MPx multishot back, I know what it is capable of, but that's for my use. Period.
Best regards,
Thierry
Sorry Thierry but that "statistic" must be only in some bubble and not the real world.
If I remember correctly, Phase has never made a multishot back, Leaf hasn't made one in 8-9 years (Cantare or Volare), Hasselblad/Imacon easily made fewer multishots than single shots, but yes, Sinar made some. Then lets add all those Canon and Nikon and other brands, oh yes and film shooters to the "professional photographers" of the world and 15-20% is not the case.
I am done with these discussions. I think it's poor taste to give advice to buy a 6-11mp digiback to someone who has never owned MFDB regardless of cheap cost.
-
Hasselblad V96C 16mp Digital Back + ImageBank
1795.00
Very Good Condition (CPH) #IX04281043 C
Hasselblad V96C 16mp Digital Back + ImageBank
1795.00
Very Good Condition (MM) #IX05311013 SOLD
The prices are british pounds.
Found at http://www.procentre.co.uk/secondhand_Equi...ml#hasselblad_h (http://www.procentre.co.uk/secondhand_Equipment.html#hasselblad_h)
These are tethered 36*36 backs.
Christian - assuming you are referring to the fact that the Ixpress backs are tethered only to their ImageBanks. Otherwise you can use them with or without tethering to a computer as you feel appropriate.
I think that's an amazing price for the Ixpress V96C.
-
Well, Sinar is STILL doing and selling multishot backs.
I don't think it is "poor taste", when the OP is asking if and what backs are available for this low price, to mention that these 6, 11 and 16 MPx backs still exist and still produce wonderful images. All depends WHAT the OP wants to shoot. If I was today to buy a digital back, it would for sure be an 11 MPx multishot back, I know what it is capable of, but that's for my use. Period.
Best regards,
Thierry
Have to chime in for Thierry here. Before I got an Ixpress V96C 16mp back, the grand plan I had worked out was that I wanted to get an Eyelike M11 back. I don't know about anyone else, but I had a bit of a tough time finding one, and even when I was finally approached by a guy wanting to sell his 6mp multishot back, I accepted, but then he never got back in touch again! Maybe he changed his mind...
Not too long ago, I saw a guy shooting a Phase one H5 on a Fuji GX680 on a product shoot. I think he also had a Kapture Group OneShot release. I was pretty amazed. 6x8cm down to 2.4cm x 3.6cm? Talk about a major crop factor. But it works for him? Still, I would also not be surprised if he had a newer Phase One back as well as that H5. I didn't ask, but maybe his newer back had been sent in for service so he was using his venerable H5 as backup? Who knows, just speculation.
-
Is a 16 MPX square format back for $1600-$2000 unrealistic? It's still a bit out of my price range since a good condition 500C/M would still cost me $7-800 with a lense - but in the short term, if I can forsee getting a back for that price in a year or two - that would definitely be a realistic goal for me. I was considering shooting 120 with an A12 magazine, so any back would work for me as long as it larger than 24x36.
-
It's very interesting how those who criticize the focus on megapixels don't understand that someone may have other reasons for shooting medium format. Obviously many photographers have migrated to 35mm from medium format. But there is still a sizable population that shoots or desires to shoot medium format. What is the big deal? Who says just because you like your Canon or Nikon that everyone else has to use that? Producing a photographic image is a process and whatever tools stir the pot of a photographer attempting that process are completely justified in my opinion.
Steve Hendrix
-
Oh Steve, you brought me back into this because I know your intent is always thought out very well and respectful.
My only contention with part of this discussion is that a 24x36mm sensor shoved into a digital back case for medium format cameras is not medium format, it's just shooting a 35mm sensor in a grossly oversized system. If people want that, then by all means. But outside of multishot 35mm sensor digibacks (you really have to or want to shoot with one of these in this day), there is little to no benefit, really lets be honest, there's no benefit to shooting these over a full frame DSLR. I get tired of hearing oh this pixel is higher quality to that pixel. I think what should be said is, it's a pain in the ass to shoot this pixel over shooting that pixel to get the same or marginally better quality in print.
36x36mm sensors, to me, are the smallest sensors in the medium format world that are worth the possible hassle, pitfalls, older gear crux. Each 16mp square back has it's own good and bad. I would tell someone get a (self contained) P20 maybe the Ixpress 16mp backs if they have never experienced using any of this stuff. I actually feel for shooters who have not had hands-on use of some gear and they should be told honestly what they're getting into, it ain't always a bowl of cherries in medium format land as so often reported.
Thanks John. And you know how I feel about you - always have enjoyed our time together.
I only commented because SCQ specifically mentioned that he liked the handling of the V series and doing something different than shooting Canon. He hasn't mentioned the sensor or pixel quality - that came from everyone else. So I just saw someone saying the camera is what they're interested in (for a change). For my part, I do believe files from 11 and 16 megapixel backs hold up very well compared to any 35mm. I think 6 megapixels is a stretch unless using multi-shot. The biggest issue with the low resolution legacy sensors will be colored artifacts and moire. Higher resolution backs (and naturally 35mm) handle those issues much better. But from a color, detail, sharpness, and dynamic range standpoint, they still hold up quite well up to a certain print size. Yes, an 11 or 16 mp sensor is a small sensor in a big camera body, but - wide angle coverage aside - that doesn't appear to matter in this case.
I think what I'm trying to say is that creative photographers are individuals who follow the course that feels best to them when it comes to producing an image. I just communicated with a photographer who shoots with Canon, a 6 megapixel multi shot digital back, a 22mp digital back and a 17mp digital back. And finds uses for all of them. When I asked him why he uses the 6mp digital back, his answer was completely plausible. Which didn't mean it had to be. It could have made no sense to me whatsoever. But one thing I have always tried to do is respect the gear and choices photographers have and make, at least if they are satisfied with it. The most important thing is that the photographer is satisfied and happy with what they're using - it works for them and allows them to do what they need/want to do. This doesn't mean I will not make them aware of new technology or workflows which they may appreciate. But if it works for them, great. So someone wants to shoot medium format because they like this camera (the way it handles), and they don't feel like shooting with a mainstream product. Well I think....good for them! Go your own way. As long as it's a choice made with (their) eyes wide open, go for it.
Steve Hendrix
-
Well, Thierry did qualify his answer with "depending on what you are shooting"
When you read a forum such as this one, you don't get the representation and variety of photographers that people like Steve, Yaya, or Thierry have had to deal with. This includes a hell of a lot of still life studios who shoot with view cameras every single day. I'm a still life photographer and I don't use DSLRs or Medium format. I use Sinar view cameras with a digital back attached. I would not use anything else, too many compromises.
I like to use movements to control focus, perspective, alignment, etc. You simply can't do this properly and effectively with the same flexibility of a view camera/back. And don't tell me you can correct with Photoshop, you can't and I don't want to, I want to shoot like a photographer, not spend time afterwards trying to create something that just happens so naturally (and for real) when you know how to use a view camera.
From my own experience, an older square multi-shot back attached to a view camera will give you a better working solution than a DSLR or medium format in most cases if you are a still life photographer. And not all still life photographers shoot food photography.
However, if shooting people, I personally prefer to use my 5dMKII, and I don't like medium format for this. I've never really liked medium format much anyway.
Maybe still life photographers are a misrepresented minority here, but there are still a lot of us around for whom a DSLR is not a viable solution.
Edward
-
Well, Thierry did qualify his answer with "depending on what you are shooting"
When you read a forum such as this one, you don't get the representation and variety of photographers that people like Steve, Yaya, or Thierry have had to deal with. This includes a hell of a lot of still life studios who shoot with view cameras every single day. I'm a still life photographer and I don't use DSLRs or Medium format. I use Sinar view cameras with a digital back attached. I would not use anything else, too many compromises.
I like to use movements to control focus, perspective, alignment, etc. You simply can't do this properly and effectively with the same flexibility of a view camera/back. And don't tell me you can correct with Photoshop, you can't and I don't want to, I want to shoot like a photographer, not spend time afterwards trying to create something that just happens so naturally (and for real) when you know how to use a view camera.
From my own experience, an older square multi-shot back attached to a view camera will give you a better working solution than a DSLR or medium format in most cases if you are a still life photographer. And not all still life photographers shoot food photography.
However, if shooting people, I personally prefer to use my 5dMKII, and I don't like medium format for this. I've never really liked medium format much anyway.
Maybe still life photographers are a misrepresented minority here, but there are still a lot of us around for whom a DSLR is not a viable solution.
Edward
Yes indeed, I do feel like a bit this way sometimes, I am the guy Steve refers to in the post above, I live camped behind my p2 shooting on an old single/multi shot back, breaking out the canon for people and the H1(Valeo22) for ad jobs. Old MFDB's never die, they just keep on keeping on, finding uses. Just a case of using the right tool for the job.
Cheers,
Jason.
:-)
-
It would seem that all the backs on eBay are newer and more expensive. If I was looking for an older 6-16 MPX back - just something that can make a Hasselblad V digital to speed up the workflow, where could I find these things? I know some are them are almost a decade old, but certainly, they must be floating around somewhere as people move up to newer backs.
-
How can do comparisons tests between systems [digital 35mm, MF, LF,...] on let's say: still life, portraits, macro,.... whatever?
I really would like to do comparisons so i can see by myself, it is not an issue of "Depends on what you shoot" because with those comparisons tests i can decide which i should use for what i shoot because simply all cameras can do a great perfect job for what we do but must choose one or 2 not 10 cameras, so this 1 or 2 cameras should last for long time, and to make this more easier, i want camera capable of so large prints with high quality.