Luminous Landscape Forum
Equipment & Techniques => Medium Format / Film / Digital Backs – and Large Sensor Photography => Topic started by: tomob on December 05, 2006, 02:37:55 pm
-
Hi,
first of all I would like to thank everyone who helped me with suggestions regarding my confusion with the difference between 1DsMk2 and digital backs.
As it looks I'm going towards buying a back. While I don't have any experience with them again I'm getting confused. I was offered these deals:
1. Secondhand H2 with CF 22 Imacon back with prism finder , 80mm, 2 batteries, 6 months old for 15.000 Euro
2. P30+ new for 18.000 Euro, they can take in my 1DsMk2 body for 4.000 Euro - which is great. I'm getting P30 now, and they exchange it for P30+ when it will came out in February. They can offer me Mamiya 645 with 35mm, 80mm and 120mm macro for 5.000 Euro. So altogether for 23.000 Euro.
3. Demo P30 for Hasselblad for 11.000 Euro
4. Laef Aptus 75 (Mamiya or H) special offer for 18.000 Euro
5. Secondhand P20 - as new - few months old for 4.000 Euros
and last,
5. H3D-22m for 20.000 Euro, but they take in any film medium camera for 3000 Euro and give 3% off when paying with cash so the price would be 16.400 Euro, or 17.800 Euro with 80mm.
I'm thinking most about secondhand H2 with CF22 or P30+ with Mamiya (It's a lot cheaper)
While I have to go on a trip (5 hours by car) to buy these things I can only try them at the shop.
I would be very greatfull for any suggestions.
Thanks,
Tomo
-
Hi
I would go for demo P30 for 11.000€.
H2 + 35, 80 and 150 for 9.000€.
Total 20.000€
Sell your MkII ( if you must) for 5.000€
And maybe upgrade P30 to P30+ for 5.000€
I have tried both the H2D and the P30 and it was a nobrainer
for me to pick the P30.
Willow
-
If I am not wrong the 22 chips are physically bigger the the p30/+
(and less cropping in the view finder so nicer to look through)
This give wider angle and potential for narrower depth of field - two of the major advantages of MF over DSLR in my opinion
Personally I would steer clear of the Mam for low flash synch - many others disagree about whether this is a major drawback
In terms of the overall cost the Hassy lenses will widen the gap as 2X the price of Mam lenses
I would still go for the blad - others wouldnt
(well actually I would have a Sinar22/rollei bundle on my list too or an Early Bird HY6)
With the CF back will most likely be tied to blad not that this is nessesaryily a bad thing
I would not consider cost as a factor - getting the wrong solution is more costly in the long run - you'll put your head in a nasty space of wondering 'what if' and being interested in upgrades all the time
If you dont have cash for the system you want borrow the difference - the cost per month is small over the life of a correctly chosen system
I also wouldnt let the Canon go - MF is not versatile enough for general shooting - again if cost is that much of an issue - dont bother with the whole operation it will end in tears
And think about needing a faster computer too....
SMM
-
Morgan and Willow thanks for your thoughts.
Willow can you tell me what you didn't liked with imacon back? Intuitively I'm closer to second hand H2+CF22 or new H3D22 (Have to see what in the end is better price). But my reason tells me to go with P30+ or Aptus 75. Yes I agree with you Morgan that the money difference shouldn't be an issue here while anyway it cost so much that I would really not be happy if I discover something is bothering me.
Yes, this is the kind of feel I'm having now with 1DsMk2. It's really a nice camera to work with and it served me well during 1 year. Also when the light is good crisp direct light (I always try to push the production to organize as much hmi + flash lights as possible) the files it produced were really nice. I can send you some images I did with canon and film simultaneously, would like to see if you would tell where are they from, while it's hard for me I'm not objective and lately really hard on canon. Yes it does not deserve this kind of treatment...hmm
But Morgan I'm quite afraid by your advise to be so careful with going into the digital back. Do you have some unpleasant experience? I shot mostly fashion and advertising, no still-lives but I prefer to work tethered to MacbookPro, so I can't see the problem in speed so much? Would like to hear what do you think about other option - upgrading new canon next year?
-
Do you have some unpleasant experience?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=88899\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I do have an unpleasant experience - yes !
That was buying a Mam 645 and a Kodak Pro Back (three years ago??)
Basically I new about the wideangle restriction and the flash synch restriction
But I had the cash to pay for this system
So I bought it - cash
All along I new I wanted a bigger chip and decent synch speed
Within 6 months I sold the Mam/PB rig AT A BIG LOSS and got what I wanted a 22mp(eyelike)/H1 system (a mix of cash and finance)
This system is beautiful and does everything I wanted and expected I should have had the financial balls to pay for it in the begining
Even though faster/bigger chips are available I dont care - I am happy with 22mp because it equals 645 film and is accepted by all major stock agencies and that was (and is) my quality mission
Of course I am slightly smarting that I cant get the 28mm lense for my H1 but it was never in my picture - I knew then and know now that to go wide with movements I will need a sceond non mirror based system cambo alpa etc
I am happy too that I went with eyelike (adapter plates) because I can effortly change to HY6 if I decide to jump the Hassy ship
I wont do this until there are second hand Hy6s around because the hassy still does eveything I knew it would do and will do probably for 10 years
Incedentally I do DSLR too where I struggle with an unhappyness with the nikon system - I probably should have had the balls to go canon - but that would have mean swapping 10 lenses from 14 to 600 - my balls arent big enough
My overall is that canon is excellent value for money and if money is an issue you should probably stick with the canon
I wouldnt be too excited abouth a 'new' canon though - I dont think the lenses will resolve enough to show the quality of the chip - and 35mm still looks like 35mm
Get your head around chip sizes and thier effect on depth of field because once you do you will want the biggest chip over the biggest file
Hope this ramble helps
SMM
-
"Get your head around chip sizes and their effect on depth of field because once you do you will want the biggest chip over the biggest file"
Thanks, Morgan. So as it looks you would suggest me to go with let say h2 with imacon CF 22, than with P30? Mamiya is so much cheaper 4.000 Euro less than H2 (sistem with 35, 80, 120 macro) but yes I'm taking your recommendation about mamiya sinch speed seriously, though I was always used to use RZ II and Linhof, I didn't find canon lover sinch speed too limitating. Perhaps there just weren't this kind of locations jobs that would require more than 125 s around in the last year.
Thanks,
Tomo
-
Rember it is YOUR choice and YOUR money.
So much depends on your own shooting style
I love narrow depth of field and use a lot of flash often outside in full sun
A lot of my images are 50ISO F4 1/800 - with heaps of flash kind of my trade mark lurid color look with no depth of field and an underexposed/rich background
Another poster here does flash outside a lot on his Mamiya and I beleive is very happy with his rig
Others never use flash or always shoot around f16 or in a studio
But I still like high flash sysnch because it gives your chosen tool more versatitlity and can therefore please a broader set of clients also I beleive that the use of flash to control contrast is more critical in digital shooting over film which whatever people say I beleive has a higher dynamic range - you need, in my opinion to use subtle flash to raise shadows into the DR of a digicam to create the best files
You must test very carefully in similar situations to those you shoot in
Also remember that none of these products are duffers - they are all great tools - in thier correct environment
But dont be blown away by the file that looks best straight off the camera - at least my eyelike took a lot of tweaking to build a 'look'
People say things like hassys are yellow - this is BS when most of the software allows conversions from a grey to be simply pasted to every image shot - all of the backs can quickly create whatever feel you are after - if you have a grip on the software
One thing about Mamiya that is very appealing to me is the the 'old' manual lenses that work in stop down mode with those bodies - the 24 fish and the 55 rise and I think 70 1.8 or 2 - more head scratching for you
SMM
-
if you compare the CF22 to the P30, the decision shouldl be easy..the P30 wins hands down...much faster shooting, 1/3 more resolution, cheaper, iso 800, much cleaner high iso, much cleaner long exposures...drawbacks of the P30 (compared to the CF22): probably more problems with lenscast when using movements, very slightly smaller image area....on paper teh difference is much bigger then through the finder...phase has a pfd on the new +backs where the different sizes are shown....if the finder in masked off, it is hard to tell the difference between the backs...i did this with the P25 and the P30 and after switching back and forth and back and forth...5 more times and i had to check on the back which one i am looking at....it will make a difference when using ultra wides...
the other thing to consider is that the CF22 really is a 2 year old back/chip...a refurb P25 is the same chip and might be even cheaper....
my recommendation: go with the P30+, get a mamiya with a P30 now, get the P30+ when it comes out and switch to a Hy6 when that comes out....if you need movements or superwide, go with a refurb P25
in general, from my experience stay away from hasselblad cameras and backs....
-
Hi Tomo
On major factor why I pick P30 before H2+CF22, is the software.
C1 is IMO a much faster and better software than FlexColor.
And the coloreditor in C1 is one of my favourites.
And when I tried the H2D, it failed all the time. I was not sure it was the camera or the back.
It justed locked up and I got a lot of error msg.
I actually bought the H2D, but after getting two replacments because it failed all the time,
I gave up and cansled the whole deal.
Now that I have H2 and P30, I understand it was the back and not the camera.
I have had no problems with H2.
I also liked the files better from P30 and I get a larger file to work with.
The chip size is smaller, but I get the shallow depth I need and want with it.
The flash sync was also a major factor choosing H2.
I had a very, very good offer on a new Contax kit, but flashsync is to slow for me outdoors.
Higher ISO and noise is way better with the P30 and the P30 is very robust.
So far ( after 2 months ) I am very happy with my pick.
Good luck with yours.
Willow
Morgan and Willow thanks for your thoughts.
Willow can you tell me what you didn't liked with imacon back? Intuitively I'm closer to second hand H2+CF22 or new H3D22 (Have to see what in the end is better price). But my reason tells me to go with P30+ or Aptus 75. Yes I agree with you Morgan that the money difference shouldn't be an issue here while anyway it cost so much that I would really not be happy if I discover something is bothering me.
Yes, this is the kind of feel I'm having now with 1DsMk2. It's really a nice camera to work with and it served me well during 1 year. Also when the light is good crisp direct light (I always try to push the production to organize as much hmi + flash lights as possible) the files it produced were really nice. I can send you some images I did with canon and film simultaneously, would like to see if you would tell where are they from, while it's hard for me I'm not objective and lately really hard on canon. Yes it does not deserve this kind of treatment...hmm
But Morgan I'm quite afraid by your advise to be so careful with going into the digital back. Do you have some unpleasant experience? I shot mostly fashion and advertising, no still-lives but I prefer to work tethered to MacbookPro, so I can't see the problem in speed so much? Would like to hear what do you think about other option - upgrading new canon next year?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=88899\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
-
i strongly agree with willow...if C1 was the only difference it would be wrth going with the phase...not sure if you are using it already with your canon (if not you really should give it a try)....
the phase backs with C1 are absolutely bulletproof in terms of function and capture....there simply aren't any problems....shooting tethered, shooting to card, or switching back and forth....i shoot mostly tethered to a macbook pro and it just works great...this is a consideration in a fashion, advertising environment where glitches are no really well received and there is enough to worry about....the phase back and software just works...
i wonder how much depth of field is lost/gained with the larger sensor....we are talking about a very small difference and i wonder if taking a half step forward would not solve that problem anyway...i know, sometimes that is not an option....i pretty much shoot f8 and up, so i am not the right person to talk to, but i still have to throw backgrounds out of focus....
-
if you compare the CF22 to the P30, the decision shouldl be easy..the P30 wins hands down...much faster shooting, 1/3 more resolution, cheaper, iso 800, much cleaner high iso, much cleaner long exposures...drawbacks of the P30 (compared to the CF22): probably more problems with lenscast when using movements, very slightly smaller image area....on paper teh difference is much bigger then through the finder...phase has a pfd on the new +backs where the different sizes are shown....if the finder in masked off, it is hard to tell the difference between the backs...i did this with the P25 and the P30 and after switching back and forth and back and forth...5 more times and i had to check on the back which one i am looking at....it will make a difference when using ultra wides...
the other thing to consider is that the CF22 really is a 2 year old back/chip...a refurb P25 is the same chip and might be even cheaper....
my recommendation: go with the P30+, get a mamiya with a P30 now, get the P30+ when it comes out and switch to a Hy6 when that comes out....if you need movements or superwide, go with a refurb P25
in general, from my experience stay away from hasselblad cameras and backs....
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=89016\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Tomo:
While some here post about less than wonderful experience with the Hasselblad, others are thrilled. Paul makes some good points. However, IMO Flexcolor is an underrated piece of software, with many extraordinary features, and it works reliably. Flexcolor is rarely demonstrated properly, if you do look at the CFH/H2, make sure it's shown to you by someone who knows what they're doing.
The P30 captures about a quarter second faster than the CFH-22 - that's faster, not much faster. It's not cheaper. As you stated, you had an offer of $11,000 Euro for a demo P30, and the CFH-H2 offer you have is $15,000 Euro. If you added an H2 to the P30, the cost would be higher. The ISO and long exposure may be better, but if so, it's slightly better. And Hasselblad is working on 1600 ISO for their backs, which should be available very soon. Plus, they do not charge the extra $$$ for this as Phase One is doing. It will be a free firmware update. They are also working on longer exposure times (in the minutes).
You have to keep in mind that ISO performance and long exposure performance can be moving targets. 6 months ago, ISO 200 was barely usable with Hasselblad backs. Since then, the quality has been improved dramatically, and as noted, will improve even more shortly with the free extension to 1600 ISO.
Regardless of opinions - mine or Paul's - (Hi Paul!) I think you're on the right path, meaning the products you've targeted are both worthy, and you should give both a try and make your own mind up which one you feel is best for you.
Steve Hendrix
PPR Digital
-
Check out the chip size for yourself
I am sure it is quite a lot smaller - giving useless wides (ltest face it 35 is not exactly wide even full frame) and no character to portraits
My opinion as someone who actually prefers the look of 67 so even 645 full frame is a compromise
Ask your self why is a P25 so expensive compared to a P30 wich apparent worse performance - its because many rate chip size as the one inportant spec
SMM
-
Check out the chip size for yourself
I am sure it is quite a lot smaller - giving useless wides (ltest face it 35 is not exactly wide even full frame) and no character to portraits
My opinion as someone who actually prefers the look of 67 so even 645 full frame is a compromise
Ask your self why is a P25 so expensive compared to a P30 wich apparent worse performance - its because many rate chip size as the one inportant spec
SMM
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=89157\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Well, I think it is because it is more expensive to manufactor a larger chip that it is more expensive.
Not because anyone rate it as more important.
On a P25 , 35mm equ a 39mm and on a P30 it equ a 45mm.
It is a difference, but not that much.
And often you need more depth of field than narrow.
I also have heard that it is not very good to stop down to 22 or 32 any longer.
Then a smaller chip gives you an advantage.
Difficult to get all in one package.
Just have to think about what you shoot and pick the tool that
fits the bill.
Wilow
-
Well, I think it is because it is more expensive to manufactor a larger chip that it is more expensive.
Not because anyone rate it as more important.
On a P25 , 35mm equ a 39mm and on a P30 it equ a 45mm.
It is a difference, but not that much.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=89170\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
The P25/45 have a "lens factor" of 1.1, the P30 and P21 have a "lens factor" of 1.3, and the P20 has a "lens factor" of 1.4.
This makes the P21 and 30 actually closer to the square format of the P20, than to the P25/45... And was a deciding factor for me when I chose my back (Of course, square vs. rectangular is a bit like comparing apples and oranges. And I ended up with hasselblad anyways, but that's a different story.)
Also the P21 and P30 don't have Iso 50, and some might consider it an equal advantage to the iso 800 (but not as many as the opposite I suspect... natural gray filters are easier than "creating" iso 800 )
PS: (addendum) The "lens factor" numbers are from Phase Ones brochure on the new "plus" backs...
-
The P25/45 have a "lens factor" of 1.1, the P30 and P21 have a "lens factor" of 1.3, and the P20 has a "lens factor" of 1.4.
This makes the P21 and 30 actually closer to the square format of the P20, than to the P25/45... And was a deciding factor for me when I chose my back (Of course, square vs. rectangular is a bit like comparing apples and oranges. And I ended up with hasselblad anyways, but that's a different story.)
Also the P21 and P30 don't have Iso 50, and some might consider it an equal advantage to the iso 800 (but not as many as the opposite I suspect... natural gray filters are easier than "creating" iso 800 )
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=89172\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
(http://russellrutherfordgroup.com/formats.jpg)
-
Not because anyone rate it as more important.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=89170\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
If that were the case then the P25 would surely be withdrawn
A bigger chip gives natural perspective with the lenses, brighter or larger in camera view
What backs/chips do you guys own??
I have 645/22, SLRn35mm Fullframe and D200 Cropped frame and have owned a Square Proback all look good in publication resolution wise but the smaller cameras fail to make any images 'sing'
To me it is important especially on systems where the choise of lenses is fairly limited especially at the wide end
If chip size is of no consequense people should just buy D200s or 350Ds - the file is pretty good for most sizes of reproduction and the cost of the kit is minimal
SMM
-
Nice illustration James - what is you opinion
S
-
Nice illustration James - what is you opinion
S
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=89191\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Beautiful atmosphere. Unfortunately or fortunately it also shows how little the camera has to do with the image. James could probably have shot this with a Lomo.
Edmund
-
Beautiful atmosphere. Unfortunately or fortunately it also shows how little the camera has to do with the image. James could probably have shot this with a Lomo.
Edmund
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=89207\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
No. a lomo has a smaller recording area and therefore more DOF for a given angle of view and aperture
Doesnt mean he couldnt have taken a nice picture - but it would have been a different picture
-
THANK YOU JAMES!!! this should be posted by itself...somewhere where everyone will see it...
i tested the H2D (which is the same as the CF22?) about a year ago and the shooting speed was nowhere near the P30...it also had pretty bad noise at the top asa (200 at the time?)...i am amazed that they brought up the iso, noise just by firmware upgrades, fixed the color AND made it shoot about 30% faster....all within a year without any changes to the hardware? this is the same chip as in the P25, correct? how come phase can't do that (one stop slower and shoots slower)?
-
Thanks, for everything,
here just one of my photo, would like to hear from you what format is it from?
Regards,
Tomo
-
No. a lomo has a smaller recording area and therefore more DOF for a given angle of view and aperture
Doesnt mean he couldnt have taken a nice picture - but it would have been a different picture
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=89239\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I meant theHolga (6x6). Sorry
Edmund
-
Nice illustration James - what is you opinion
S
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a] (http://index.php?act=findpost&pid=89191\")
My personal opinion is between the A-22/75/P45/CFwhatever sized frame to the A-65, P-30 sized frame I don't see that much of a difference in the Contax. Maybe when I go side by side, but I never shoot that way so I find I just adjust, the same way as when I put those crop screens in the Canons . . . I just adjust.
What I do see a difference between the DB and the Canons is the the file quality, whether that is size, or bit depth, I don't know why there is a difference, but I do know if I work a file hard the digital backs usually allow me to move the file around with more depth and a better result.
The Canon's are good though, but they're different cameras than the digital backs.
I do a lot of thethering to a powerbook and the Aptus 22 with V-8 which is the world champ at speed and stability.
I also do a lot of post processing and C-1 wins hands down as it's stable and what you set in the software while shooting, directly translates to the final output.
For the Leaf files the best processing I've seen is through lightroom, but unfortunatley as of today, only the expsoure really translates to the deafult settings of Lightroom, so whatever I set up in V-8 and shoot to, I have to redo when I get to the third party software.
Right now for me and my business a professional on set workflow is as important as the file quality, because all of these files can be moved around.
IMO with Leaf, V-8 is rock stable and fast and LC10 is still a work in progress.
The second most important function of any of these cameras to me is time in post production and workflow.
In my limited thesting the P-30 is good right out of the camera, the A-22 can be made good in lightroom or pscs as long as I essentially home brew my own looks, but once again this only applies to my style of photography.
It seems to me these back manaufacturer's products seems to move back and forth as to who is the best. Last year it seemed Leaf was dominant and now it seems to me that Phase has caught up with the other backs from Hasselblad and Sinar getting better.*
All can be made good, it just depends on how much post work you are capable or willing to do.
Leaf has gone a step backwards mostly because of software, Phase a step forward, but once again, that is as of today.
*(well I assume Sinar has because I've never even seen their back, much less shot with it).
IMO
JR
[a href=\"http://www.russellrutherford.com/]http://www.russellrutherford.com/[/url]
-
here just one of my photo, would like to hear from you what format is it from?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=89291\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
To be honest. I cant tell
It has pretty good depth of field but the background shows a wide iris and is kind of not sharp but not smooth
So that woud lead me to a beleive it was a 60 or 80 mm on a canon or A17
Yet it retains a kind of MF intimacy
I give up
----------------
James I am suprised you are more concerned with file quality - I think the 16 bit nature and phisical size of the files means you can kick them around more with out breaking them
I think it would be hard to do this with a canon or nikon..
-
Thanks, for everything,
here just one of my photo, would like to hear from you what format is it from?
Regards,
Tomo
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=89291\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Hehe I'll bite as I already have a reputation as an idiot:
35mm wide lens (maybe Canon 35/1.4) or Leica 35/2. The lens looks like it's fun, and the depth of filed isn't that big so I don't think it's a compact (unless you photoshopped it).
Edmund
-
It looks like the Canon EF 135 - one of the best lenses ever.
Why don´t you use it wide open?
jørn
-
James I am suprised you are more concerned with file quality - I think the 16 bit nature and phisical size of the files means you can kick them around more with out breaking them
I think it would be hard to do this with a canon or nikon..
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=89337\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I guess I'm always concerned with file quality, as well as the overall look.
Still, commercial work is 50% professionalism, 50% inspiration and if the system or camera won't keep up, or run stable, then the inspiration gets buried in fixes and reboots, etc. etc.
Think back to film. You would never have used a film that required you to change all the backs, all the rolls every 10 rolls and you would have probably never used a film that would require a week to process, even if the costs were equal or the look was 5% better.
You would also never use a film camera that would jam every 10 rolls.
Stability and the utmost faith in your cameras, computers allows you to be free of worry and get on with the job.
Software that allows you to process quickly allows you to finish the job and get on to more important things.
As I suggested before, when someone decides on a system, test them as you work from setup to final delivery, not just shoot a few frames and process a few frames.
Few of us work that way.
JR
-
James,
Thus far with MFDB, have a you found a truly reliable camera system and back combo? If not, do you think we are near to that point yet?
Thanks James.
Henry
-
Thanks, for everything,
here just one of my photo, would like to hear from you what format is it from?
Regards,
Tomo
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=89291\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Well, to me it looks as if it was taken with a Canon 1Ds mk II, with a 135mm lens at about, say, f/7.1, at ISO 100.
Oops! Wasn't I supposed to see the exif data? And processed in CS2 on a Mac.
-
I'm really impressed how clearly some of you see it. Well done! This image was shot by 1DsMk2, 135mm L lens at around F/8. I'm tempted to try with another image but, don't want to be to boring...
After what I have read from you I'm not so enthusiastic about P30 as I was before. While I still find the C1 really good software to work with and would miss it a lot going with another system.
I don't know why somethings calls me to H2 CF22 or H3D22. It's not about the brand while in the film days I was never fan of Hasselblad and have had 555ELM just for a short amount of time.
It's a hard decision the chip is as some of you said 2 years old. Also if I decide to go withh H3D22 I't make sense to do it soon while they still give you 3000 Euro off for old film medium format sistem.
T
-
The thing about your image it that at F8 the image is replacatable with different chip sizes ecausethe apertures are available
The one I posted has a lack of DOF that is hard to get from a 35mm chip size as you would need a very wide aperture
I think you are right to go for the chip with the largest area
BUT
My main concern is forward and backward compatability ie what happens if you want to change camera system
I think both of these backs can be used with a view camera alpa etc so you can get super wide or rise fal tilt shift
THe phase needs a factory mod if you went from Mamiya to BLad and the blad - I dont know if it can be used on another 645 system
Eyelike/sinar can easily be changed with plates although this change is not practical on a day to day basis as you need to calibrate using shims which are 'one time use'
Good luck
SMM
-
I'm really impressed how clearly some of you see it. Well done! This image was shot by 1DsMk2, 135mm L lens at around F/8. I'm tempted to try with another image but, don't want to be to boring...
After what I have read from you I'm not so enthusiastic about P30 as I was before. While I still find the C1 really good software to work with and would miss it a lot going with another system.
I don't know why somethings calls me to H2 CF22 or H3D22. It's not about the brand while in the film days I was never fan of Hasselblad and have had 555ELM just for a short amount of time.
It's a hard decision the chip is as some of you said 2 years old. Also if I decide to go withh H3D22 I't make sense to do it soon while they still give you 3000 Euro off for old film medium format sistem.
T
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=89475\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
After 9 frustrating months with numerous Leaf Aptus 75's I returned everything and purchased a Hasselblad H3D. I have had it for about a month now and the camera and back have been flawless. I have shot over 1000 frames and not a single error message.
Comparing the images side by side with the Aptus 75 images I find that I no longer have to add 21 units of magenta to get the color to something useable, I do not have centerfolds, color shift lines or obscure lockups and crashes when procesisng the files in LC10.
The lens distortion and chromatic abberration software is simply amazing. No color fringing in any of my images.
Color out of the H3D is excellent, 400ASA is as good as the leaf with 1600 and 800 ASA coming soon. Hasselblad is also working on extending the length of exposure.
As James said, Leaf has taken a step backward, Phase software a step up and Hasselblad IMO has solved all of the early issues. This of you who have NOT worked with the new H3D owe it to yourselves to take a look.
-
James,
Thus far with MFDB, have a you found a truly reliable camera system and back combo? If not, do you think we are near to that point yet?
Thanks James.
Henry
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a] (http://index.php?act=findpost&pid=89391\")
The first time DB buyer is much different than the second round buyer.
First time it's somewhat of a shock to realize most of these backs are a lot harder to work with than the DSLR's, actually harder to work with than film.
They require a lot of computer to get things right and I almost think all the manufacturer's or dealers shoud sell the backs in bundles with laptops and desktops.
All of the db's require some sort of training, whether it be with the manufactuer's software, or 3rd party.
But, back to the question, I find my A-22 stable and with 3rd party software it produces a file that I think is superior to the dslrs and at least it's more consitent than the Canon 1ds MK2.
I will probably use the A-22 until the paint falls off.
Now the A-65 is another matter and I'm not going to go into detail, other than after about 5 frames I knew it just wasn't right for what I inteneded it for. Eventually it may be, but I have work to do and I coiuldn't invest 6 weeks trying to find another series workarounds like I did with the A-22.
As I've mentioned before I briefly tested a P-30 and the blad H3D and found them both quite good, though quite different.
My second or added digital back I wanted for higher ISO and easier, faster out of the camera/computer color response and the P-30 was more appealing to me, but most of that comes from the fact that C-1 is a much more mature and stable software suite.
Still, changing complete systems is difficult and much like changing film labs. In the film days, you got use to the people you dealt with and learned thier personalitiesto the point going there was second nature.
Changing digital back brands is changing dealers, manfactuer's even computers and everything becomes a completely different learning experience and a new learning curve.
Like a film lab I am comfortable with the A-22 and if it went to a real 400 iso that was useable for me , I would have just bought a second one. But it doesn't so, it's time to look at a new lab.
JR
[a href=\"http://www.russellrutherfordgroup.com/]http://www.russellrutherfordgroup.com/[/url]
-
The first time DB buyer is much different than the second round buyer.
First time it's somewhat of a shock to realize most of these backs are a lot harder to work with than the DSLR's, actually harder to work with than film.
They require a lot of computer to get things right and I almost think all the manufacturer's or dealers shoud sell the backs in bundles with laptops and desktops.
All of the db's require some sort of training, whether it be with the manufactuer's software, or 3rd party.
But, back to the question, I find my A-22 stable and with 3rd party software it produces a file that I think is superior to the dslrs and at least it's more consitent than the Canon 1ds MK2.
I will probably use the A-22 until the paint falls off.
Now the A-65 is another matter and I'm not going to go into detail, other than after about 5 frames I knew it just wasn't right for what I inteneded it for. Eventually it may be, but I have work to do and I coiuldn't invest 6 weeks trying to find another series workarounds like I did with the A-22.
As I've mentioned before I briefly tested a P-30 and the blad H3D and found them both quite good, though quite different.
My second or added digital back I wanted for higher ISO and easier, faster out of the camera/computer color response and the P-30 was more appealing to me, but most of that comes from the fact that C-1 is a much more mature and stable software suite.
Still, changing complete systems is difficult and much like changing film labs. In the film days, you got use to the people you dealt with and learned thier personalitiesto the point going there was second nature.
Changing digital back brands is changing dealers, manfactuer's even computers and everything becomes a completely different learning experience and a new learning curve.
Like a film lab I am comfortable with the A-22 and if it went to a real 400 iso that was useable for me , I would have just bought a second one. But it doesn't so, it's time to look at a new lab.
JR
http://www.russellrutherfordgroup.com/ (http://www.russellrutherfordgroup.com/)
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=89550\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Interesting, what will the new lab be eh?
-
Hi,
after I spend a long time thinking, comparing technical aspects and prices. I finally decided to go with new H3D22, until they still have the trade in old medium format camera for 3000 Euro promotion. While the price is similar to P30 I still hope my decision is right. At some point of my decision making I was more decided to buy P30, mostly because the softvare, higher iso (in + version), speed. But I also liked that with Imacon I can upgrade to 39 for 4.000 Euro. Which made it more stable investment. Also as much as I don't agree with Hasselblad new policies, it seems a good idea to have everything from one company so you always know who is responsible for what.
While I'm new to H sisitem I would like to ask you which lenses you suggest. I'll put on order 50-100mm zoom. I've heard it's the same quality as are the primes. Although it's hard to believe I still hope it should be very good. The next one will be 150 mm, it feels kind of more logical combination with zoom than 120mm macro. Later I'll by 35mm while I don't need wides so much.
My other selection of lenses would be: 35mm, 100mm and 150mm, it's more expensive but also feels right.
Would like to hear what you think. And please I would like to hear your answers soon while tomorrow I can still modify my order, regarding lenses.
Many thanks,
T
-
i hope you also looked at some files and worked with them in the different softwares....as much as money is always an issue, saving a little can cost in the long run....either way i am sure you have made a god desicion....about the 55-110: have you handled it on the H1? it is HUGE and HEAVY..very nice lens...but make sure you have handled it....
-
Hi, PSS. No I haven't had a chance to handled the 50-100mm. What is your main concern? I newer used zooms a lot. My first was 55-110mm for Pentax67 also quite big I haven't had any problems. And my last was 24-70mm L for 1dsMk2, which I didn't like particularly.
At this moment again it seems like a practic, compact and economic solution.
I would be thankful for a more precise problems that my occur with this lens.
Thanks,
T
-
I think you probably have it about right . I use the V series 40 , 80, 100 and 180 and think I could probably use a 150 instead of the 180. I don't use wide angles a lot but if i did I would probably invest in an Alpa or something, otherwise the 40 is plenty on the larger chip size.
I also think you made the right choice re back . Flexcolor is getting very good as far as workflow and I can't see it lacks anything to Capture one , with better speed, sharpness and noise control.
I am using the 132c Imacon back - a few software niggles ( more stable than the software supplied with my Canon) but mostly it is pretty good and a definite major step up from the 1ds2 - more in colour and tone than anything but the sharpness is another world from a dslr - even with my older lenses ( I actually think they are far sharper than they ever were with film ). The advantage of more mega pixels will be less moire, something to get used to if you have been using a Canon but at 39mp's it less of an issue than 22.
One thing is the resolution of the MF backs is that much more and tripod and mirror up seems to be the only way to go if you don't use studio flash to avoid mirror/camera shake. The Canon suffers from this too but it only gets worse along with the optimum point of sharpness and DOF as the mp's go up.
Hi,
after I spend a long time thinking, comparing technical aspects and prices. I finally decided to go with new H3D22, until they still have the trade in old medium format camera for 3000 Euro promotion. While the price is similar to P30 I still hope my decision is right. At some point of my decision making I was more decided to buy P30, mostly because the softvare, higher iso (in + version), speed. But I also liked that with Imacon I can upgrade to 39 for 4.000 Euro. Which made it more stable investment. Also as much as I don't agree with Hasselblad new policies, it seems a good idea to have everything from one company so you always know who is responsible for what.
While I'm new to H sisitem I would like to ask you which lenses you suggest. I'll put on order 50-100mm zoom. I've heard it's the same quality as are the primes. Although it's hard to believe I still hope it should be very good. The next one will be 150 mm, it feels kind of more logical combination with zoom than 120mm macro. Later I'll by 35mm while I don't need wides so much.
My other selection of lenses would be: 35mm, 100mm and 150mm, it's more expensive but also feels right.
Would like to hear what you think. And please I would like to hear your answers soon while tomorrow I can still modify my order, regarding lenses.
Many thanks,
T
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=90146\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
-
I think you probably have it about right . I use the V series 40 , 80, 100 and 180 and think I could probably use a 150 instead of the 180. I don't use wide angles a lot but if i did I would probably invest in an Alpa or something, otherwise the 40 is plenty on the larger chip size.
I also think you made the right choice re back . Flexcolor is getting very good as far as workflow and I can't see it lacks anything to Capture one , with better speed, sharpness and noise control.
I am using the 132c Imacon back - a few software niggles ( more stable than the software supplied with my Canon) but mostly it is pretty good and a definite major step up from the 1ds2 - more in colour and tone than anything but the sharpness is another world from a dslr - even with my older lenses ( I actually think they are far sharper than they ever were with film ). The advantage of more mega pixels will be less moire, something to get used to if you have been using a Canon but at 39mp's it less of an issue than 22.
One thing is the resolution of the MF backs is that much more and tripod and mirror up seems to be the only way to go if you don't use studio flash to avoid mirror/camera shake. The Canon suffers from this too but it only gets worse along with the optimum point of sharpness and DOF as the mp's go up.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=90159\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I've never seen moire with the 1ds mark 2. The camera has issues but moire is never one I had.
-
The 50-110 is an absolutely stellar lens. Surprised the hell out of me as I i hated zoom on 35mm and only used primes. I never use the 80mm but I have the 120 and 150 and the 120 BLOWS AWAY the 150. I have not been able to find the right spot on the 150.
I have rented the 35 a couple of times and it really looks amazing. Make sure you test the 150 a bit or if you dealer lets you ( actually he has to do this if he is worth a shit ). You're buying close to $30k in gear. Buy the ones you know you want. Then test the two that your are debating about on a few gigs. MAke the decision from there before commiting to the $3+K for the lens of your choice.
You will be very happy with the 50 to 110 and I am sure Hassy will continue to do great things their digibacks.
-
The 55-110 is a great lens, optical!
But it is so big and heavy, you have to see it and use it to understand if
you can live with it. I couldnt. And I am not a tiny guy
If you shoot a lot freehand, I think it is too big. On a tripod - terrific.
The same goes for the 120 - BIG.
And much slower AF than the 150.
I whent for 35, 80 and 150, and are very happy with that.
I do not think the 150 is any less good than the 120.
And the AF is much quicker.
My two cents.
Willow
-
i am 6'4, 190pounds, have shot gx680 and RZs handheld, rollei 6000 with 180, no problem.....the H1/2 with the 55-110 is in a completely different league.....it is just too heavy....had a discussion with someone on this forum about this, the outcome was that the lens should be used on a tripod...to me the best thing (and really only reason) to have a mid range zoom is to shoot people, fast and handheld....not sure how strong you are, but with this lens it is a challenge...i can't do it....
i am generally not a big fan of zooms, never liked the 24-70 on the canon, which everybody loooves, for me it is soft and too big and heavy....the hasselblad is a very good lens, crisp with great contrast, i would say the first zoom lens i would use without any hesitation for the most critical work, BUT the main advantage of a zoom for me is the ease of use and this one just does not have it for me if i have to be glued to a tripod....
do yourself a favor, go somewhere and pick it up, hold it up and try and focus manually in the store and the salesperson....i can tell you right now, it will be very hard...now imagine doing that running after someone....for 10 minutes straight...or even shooting in a backroom, or outside in the sun....
i have the 55-110 zoom for my mamiya 645...a very good performer, the fixed lenses are all better, but it is the first zoom i like to use, because it gives me the option to really use a zoom the way it is supposed to be used, quick adjusting to the shooting situation, constantly changing the framing,....
i also use a lot of ringflash for fill, so my distance has to stay consistent, the zoom is perfect for that...by the way; the haselblad would not fit through my hensel ringlight...i have the octabox mounted on it and maybe i could have fit the lens through the front (now that i think about it) but i probably owuld not have been able to turn the zoom ring, which defeats the purpose....
to make a long story short....please check it out for yourself....
ps: i am thinking of making that my signature for the forum here....why would i order a lens for 3?4?5000?$ without even having seen it? because the salesperson said it was a great lens? because everybody has it?