Luminous Landscape Forum
Equipment & Techniques => Medium Format / Film / Digital Backs – and Large Sensor Photography => Topic started by: johnE on August 05, 2007, 03:03:43 pm
-
I downloaded several P25+ and P45 files to play around with in an effort to figure out which MF back I want to purchase. I have never been happy with Canon DSLR images although I must admit I have considered waiting for the 1Ds M III to arrive due to the some obvious advantages to 35mm.
I am stunned at the quality of the Phase One images and of course stunned by the price. Like everyone else I would prefer the P45 if price was no object. I have been told by the dealer I have been talking to that they like the P25+ much better than the P30+ due to pixel size and crop factor. It is a 22mp vs 30mp and it a good bit more expensive. I see much discussion on the P30 and very little on the P25 which makes me wonder.
I would like to get opinions from those more experienced than myself regarding these backs. I typically do not make prints larger than 20x24.
I shoot a Contax 645 and would probably stay on that platform.
-
THe 30 seems recently to have been the back of the moment given the quality/price ratio.
Hence the density of chat - all the p25 chat was chatted a couple of years ago !
The 25 was getting a little long in the tooth - those 1st gen back were never easy with colour 'out of the box' and always needed some tweaking the + probably sorts it
(but still maybe an older sensor design)
IMO a 22mp is a very good file up to most uses so you shouldnt be scared of that
You understand the crop factor which can be an issue as the widest lens is a 35 on contax or blad
it is not that wide compared to say a 17 or a 14 on a DSLR
Also IMO a larger chip gives a smoother look but the differences may be marginal (less DOF for a given viewpoint and aperture covering the same field of view)
THere is now a market of used P25s to consider too
Basically it is up to you and your needs/wans surely
S
-
Not to add to your choices but I know a number of folks who use a contax and Leaf Aptus 65/75 back. I use the 65 with Hasselblad and never did a direct comparison with the Phase but I do know others who have. There are some used Aptus backs available because of the new S backs that were recently released. Mark
I downloaded several P25+ and P45 files to play around with in an effort to figure out which MF back I want to purchase. I have never been happy with Canon DSLR images although I must admit I have considered waiting for the 1Ds M III to arrive due to the some obvious advantages to 35mm.
I am stunned at the quality of the Phase One images and of course stunned by the price. Like everyone else I would prefer the P45 if price was no object. I have been told by the dealer I have been talking to that they like the P25+ much better than the P30+ due to pixel size and crop factor. It is a 22mp vs 30mp and it a good bit more expensive. I see much discussion on the P30 and very little on the P25 which makes me wonder.
I would like to get opinions from those more experienced than myself regarding these backs. I typically do not make prints larger than 20x24.
I shoot a Contax 645 and would probably stay on that platform.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=131636\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
-
The 25 was getting a little long in the tooth - those 1st gen back were never easy with colour 'out of the box' and always needed some tweaking the + probably sorts it
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=131641\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
26K for a Phase One 22MP back in the case of the P25+ seems very expensive given the 22MP back from ZD for 6900 (if you have a mamiya) and the Hasselblad H3D-39MP for about 28K or H3D-22 for 20K (both with back, camera and 80mm lens).
-
I think the best bang for the buck is the Hasselblad Anniversary. 503cw+CVF back+80mm lens for $10,995. It's only a 16mp back but in the square format, it equivalent to a 22mp cropped. The "kit" is the same price that I paid for the CFV alone six months ago. The prints with the Epson 3800 are quite acceptable.
-
26K for a Phase One 22MP back in the case of the P25+ seems very expensive given the 22MP back from ZD for 6900 (if you have a mamiya) and the Hasselblad H3D-39MP for about 28K or H3D-22 for 20K (both with back, camera and 80mm lens).
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=131650\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I cant comment on prices - you need to be actually talking to dealers - im not saying youre not(!) but I would be suprised if you paid more for a P with out a 'free' body than a blad with one (I got a 'free' H1 with my sinar)
I would suspect that the Mam back is at the same level as the early P25 needing a bit of care on colour moire etc and is probably a stop or two behind on ISO compared to the plus
In the UK a used P25 will compete with a mamiya on price (ish)
There is things like service to consider too - you dont want to be offline while your back goes off for a month if you are Pro
P25s are easy for loaners
Every digital tech and assistant knows how to do the files off a phase
And will the mam work with a view camera or high flash synch camera - i dont think so
But it (mam) does look like a bargain indeed
you must test yourself
Dependant on your location you could be considering Sinar too
-internal memory
-no buffer
-changeable plates for differnt systems
-live view
S
-
I think the best bang for the buck is the Hasselblad Anniversary. 503cw+CVF back+80mm lens for $10,995. It's only a 16mp back but in the square format, it equivalent to a 22mp cropped. The "kit" is the same price that I paid for the CFV alone six months ago. The prints with the Epson 3800 are quite acceptable.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=131653\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I have a Hasselblad 503CX and 4 lenses (CF i think). I love the format and the glass and shoot most of my film with it (yes, still shoot mostly film unfortunately). I think I can use my lenses with the CWD. That would be a great alternative and great cost savings but 1.5 multiplier is almost unworkable. I would have to buy a 30mm to get back to 45-50mm and that lens is not cheap or light.
-
bang for your buck....film quality output.....same sensor as the bigger brother without the mirror (or whatever you call it technology)....hands down the Leaf 65....see it (ask for a demo) to believe it!
Okay the Phase backs are great 2!!
Seriously it all depends on what you are shooting and you personal preference. All medium format backs output great quality files.
I liked the Leaf a bit better than the Phase backs...because of the back screen and the workflow (when I purchased the Leaf..Phase didn't allow processing in Photoshop RAW....but now it does..so you don't have to change your workflow. I also liked the Leaf rep better and remember you are buying into a system for a LONG time to come!! Unless you like waisting money.
About the Canon files.....still love them! The focussing super quick and you NEVER lose a moment (expression) and after post production I bet you can't even tell the difference between the ds1 and the MF file. File size doesn't really matter either.. I had huge billboards up in NY and LA all shot with my ds1.
-
and i like the workflow of the sinar e22/54 + 75 backs, which is i.m.o. the fastest and best of all.
aside the buffer free internal storage, no problems with centerfolds, low energy
consumption and goood readable lcd.
-
I have to agree with that as well!
Unless long exposures + 30 seconds is your game,the Sinar backs rocks.
And they fit the Hy6.
That combination is for me the ultimate solution.
To be able to tap into that lens selection is wonderful.
WR.
-
Has anybody ever compared image quality and especially color rendition of the Sinarback e22 to a Leaf Valeo or Aptus 22 and a Sinarback 75 to a Leaf Aptus 75? As far as I now both companies use the same chips.
-
oh go on then, can't resist, no-one ever talks about the p21, 18mpx (really plenty enough for all my apps at least) cheap, great files, can use wide angle lenses without color shifts (no micro lenses) and one of the fastest backs around. Same crop as the p30.
-
Your right .. I never hear any body talking about ther P21+ nor the P20+?
Why is that...?
I am just getting into the Back photography and also have Billboards all over my city with the 1DsMII. Never had a complaint.
But I see a little difference and feel the MFDB look more 3D'sh?
I have always hated the Canon's quality of lens and the Viewfinder is a joke for me.
I have also always shot the 1DsMII at 100 asa and full manual. even Focusing alot of times in studio.
I think medium format fit's my style more.
I think the P21+ would be plenty enough for me, But am thinking about the P30+.
Snook
-
I would like to get opinions from those more experienced than myself regarding these backs. I typically do not make prints larger than 20x24.
I shoot a Contax 645 and would probably stay on that platform.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=131636\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Dear John
I have shot the Kodak back, P25, and now P45. The P25 was a wonderful back and sometimes I hardly see the need for the estra resolution. Mostly I see almost NO need for shapening at the print sizes you mention.
That said, I almost switched to the P30+ for the extra stop and low noise. With the Contax 35mm and other Hassey glass WA should not be an issue; in fact tele is more an issue and the P30 solves. Also with adapter can use Leica LTM lenses up to 400mm Would stay 400mm with the P30+ (about)
In any case the Phase backs and Contax seem very happy together (AND the batteries of the contax last a lot longer!
regards
Victor
-
and i like the workflow of the sinar e22/54 + 75 backs, which is i.m.o. the fastest and best of all.
aside the buffer free internal storage, no problems with centerfolds, low energy
consumption and goood readable lcd.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=131722\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I have not looked at the Sinar back until your post. They look very nice but would force me to buy an Apple computer (which i want anyway). Being able to attach the back to whatever camera i want is very attractive as the HY6 looks quite interesting!
I think a 22MP back is just about where i want to be from a price standpoint. That would be a P21 or eMotion 22 and not sure of the Leaf model. I am going to a dealer to look at all of them except for the sinar on Friday. I am not sure who carries the sinar - i will have to do some research.
-
I have shot the Kodak back, P25, and now P45. The P25 was a wonderful back and sometimes I hardly see the need for the estra resolution. Mostly I see almost NO need for shapening at the print sizes you mention.
That said, I almost switched to the P30+ for the extra stop and low noise.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=131759\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I heard the p30 was not as good for wide angle because of the smaller pixel size and of course the crop factor. Looking at the article (measuring megabytes) comparing the Phase backs, it looks to me like the p30 image does not look as good as the p25.
-
The phase backs are the only ones (to my knowledge) that allow longer than a 30 second exposure. I can't confirm but others have said exposures longer than 20 seconds on other backs are not usable.
I chose the P30 simply because I couldn't swing the P45 price tag.
The pixel density of the P30 is the same as the P45 but cropped. After using the P30 for a couple of weeks the wide angle lens crop with the P30 is almost identical to the 35mm cropping in the Canon 1D which is an APS-H size sensor. A substantial difference from what is available with full frame 35mm.
Here are a couple of spreadsheets from another thread to help 35mm users with MF lens comparisons.
(http://ed-cooley.com/mfcropsin35mm.png)
(http://ed-cooley.com/mfcrops.png)
-
The phase backs are the only ones (to my knowledge) that allow longer than a 30 second exposure. I can't confirm but others have said exposures longer than 20 seconds on other backs are not usable.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=131776\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
A 30 second exposure on an Aptus 75 is usable - I do it all the time....
I develop in LR.
/Adam
-
I have done a lot of night shooting, exposing for for 2-8 minutes @100 ISO. The Phase has definitely got the advantage there for me.
-
I have done a lot of night shooting, exposing for for 2-8 minutes @100 ISO. The Phase has definitely got the advantage there for me.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=131781\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Once you make a long exposure on a Phase back...........how long does it take before the back is ready to make the next exposure?
Has Phase improved the time that it takes to perform a black reference file...........used to be a one to one relationship. If you make a one minute exposure the back will take another minute before it is available to shoot again.
If you make an 8 minute exposure does the back take an additional 8 minutes before it is available to take the next shot?
regards
-
Once you make a long exposure on a Phase back...........how long does it take before the back is ready to make the next exposure?
Has Phase improved the time that it takes to perform a black reference file...........used to be a one to one relationship. If you make a one minute exposure the back will take another minute before it is available to shoot again.
If you make an 8 minute exposure does the back take an additional 8 minutes before it is available to take the next shot?
regards
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=131790\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I'm pretty sure it has to be the same length as the exposure to make sure it has the right amount of noise.
-
Sounds like you do not want to do a lot of those in a row without a bed near by. Glad to know that up front.
-
Once you make a long exposure on a Phase back...........how long does it take before the back is ready to make the next exposure?
Has Phase improved the time that it takes to perform a black reference file...........used to be a one to one relationship. If you make a one minute exposure the back will take another minute before it is available to shoot again.
If you make an 8 minute exposure does the back take an additional 8 minutes before it is available to take the next shot?
regards
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=131790\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Prakash is correct. The Phase One backs needs the exact amount of time to make a black calibration as the exposure was. This is a little bit of bother, but it helps reduce the noise
in long exposures. On that note, the new P+ series backs can make exposures up to one
hour.
Chris Lawery
Sales Manager
Capture Integration
www.captureintegration.com
-
I agree with Awofinden, the smaller backs get too little exposure. For most work they are enough.
I use an Aptus17 and a CF39. The Aptus17 is an excellent back and in some areas easier to work with than the Imacon.
With the low (relatively speaking) price tags of refurbished models of the P21 and A17 I can imagine it very attractive for people to enter the MFDB area. They are cheaper than the 1DSMk1111111etc.. and will deliver better quality (if properly used).
17MP or 18MP of images in this quality are good enough to use for virtually every application. Besides that due to the smaller file size you can work faster with them as well.
-
I agree with Awofinden, the smaller backs get too little exposure. For most work they are enough.
I use an Aptus17 and a CF39. The Aptus17 is an excellent back and in some areas easier to work with than the Imacon.
With the low (relatively speaking) price tags of refurbished models of the P21 and A17 I can imagine it very attractive for people to enter the MFDB area. They are cheaper than the 1DSMk1111111etc.. and will deliver better quality (if properly used).
17MP or 18MP of images in this quality are good enough to use for virtually every application. Besides that due to the smaller file size you can work faster with them as well.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=132106\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Sign me up for a aptus 17 or P21 refurb, any dealers out there want to sell me one at an attractive price? pm me please!
-
Hi Snook,
last week I tried a P45+ on a Hasselblad V and a bit ago a H2D. The P45+ files where wonderful. I'm tempted very much into MF too.
But when I look what I get for the money, I'm a bit scared. In my experience you have to work a bit more/harder on the 1DsMkII files. But what you can achieve is great. And to have a 2nd 1DsMk II as a backup body gives me a good feeling. A 2nd MF back ...
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=132201\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I would love to be able to produce 20x24 size prints from a 1d or 1ds and I would not mind paying for the best glass. There are many benefits to that platform. I personally have not seen any thing that look like a really good file from a Phase Back - I must admit my experience is limited.
I got my hands on some test files from a P25+ and P45 and I was shocked at the detail. The conclusion I have come to is the MF glass is just way better, the files from a MF backs are a little better to much better depending on who you listen to. All of which must add up to a better print at any size. Dropping 15K-25k is a hard pill to swallow, especially in an emerging technology. A P45 will probably be good for nothing more than a bookend in 6 years. That being said, I will probably buy one in the next week or two once I find the right deal.
-
Hi johnE,
it depends how close you stand to a print and what is on the picture. For example: for an ad shown at bus stops (180 cm / 70" high) I photographed different champagne bottles. The resolution with the 1DsMkII/TS-E 90 was so high, that you could count the failures in the glass (I had a hard time to retouch that) and the print dots in the label. If I take a portrait (and much more than a tight head shot) of a model I can even with the 24-70@8 count the eyelashes and see every detail of the skin (again it's retouch time). I even produced a good looking banner (~70 cm / 28" high) from a hand held architectural shot (perspective correction in PS) @ 400 ASA where you are able to see all the structural details of the building and no noise.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=132218\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Hi Johannes,
I photograph landscapes, bridges... (fine art) so client pressure / impression is not an issue nor is speed. I am not sure workflow is that important either because I work on very few images. Much of the time my work looks like it was shot with a Holga (diffused, low contrast) so I question my obsession for detail. For me it is about composition and the feeling the image gives but detail, even when the final print is heavily diffused still impacts the final product. My LF negatives always gave me a better print in the end.
-
Sign me up for a aptus 17 or P21 refurb, any dealers out there want to sell me one at an attractive price? pm me please!
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=132132\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
still hoping for one of these backs, does anyone know if this exists in the real world? I had 2 dealers contact me with other backs