E22 the next step..

[Morgan_Moore]

THE BACKGROUND

I purchased a Sinar/Eyelike E22 in a different digital era :  before the existance of many cameras the 1ds2, the 5d,  p30+ etc

Basically I find it to be a superb unit in bright or flash lit situations at 50 ISO and never do super long exposures

I have no mega pixel envy - 22mp is good 16 is probably good too

I love the chip size and resultant perspective and field of view with 645 lenses

It is the perfect medium format camera for 'traditional' medium format uses

It can do far more than I used to do with a mamiya and film

I never considered this a camera for shooting 'from the hip' - I used my nikons for that

So time has moved on and nikons are still a heap of cr*p with thier dinky file size and poxy cropped sensors

Time has also moved on in that  I believe cameras such as the p30+ with thier higher ISOs are actually extending what medium format can be used for - a fast fluid shooting natural light shooting style that was innapropriate to MF in the film era

---

Now the E22 can be upgraded for lets say $5000 to the 54LV

So lets say I have given my self a budget of around $5000 to improve my 400 ISO capability

Do I

-get the upgrade or..

-Switch to a P30+ (dont know the cost)

-Switch to a H3d (dont know the cost)

-buy a 5d and a couple of canon lenses (under$5000)

-buy a 1ds2 and a couple of canon lenses (over $5000)

-buy TWO 5d s and a couple of canon lenses (not much over $5000)

I am a lens minimalist and could go a long way with a 20 a 50 primes

Introducing a canon would of course give me a quality back up and the ability to change lenses less - a camera on each shoulder - and I wouldnt LOSE the 25 ISO of the E22

Maybe this question cannot be answererd until users buy the 54LV and really try it at 400

SMM

[Morgan_Moore]

Some costs..

Canon 1DS2 an 50 and 20..

$ 7,684.85 (BandH cart price)

TWO Canon 5d  and 50 and 20

$ 5,944.80 (BandH cart price)

Upgrade

$7,866.94 USD (actual quote)

----

It looks like a no brainer to go with a canon BUT would I end up just using my E22 anyway on hero shots meaning that those canons would just stay in the box !!

Maybe ther is a different digiback say a used p21 or A17 and another H body

Probably I dream of two 800ISO MF rigs - one with a standard and one with a wide !

Or a p45+ and the blad zoom lens which I dont own

S

[Morgan_Moore]

double

[kariylit]

I am using now 54LV and 5D. I am using quick, fast and hi ISO-works canon, and everything else im doing with e54LV. (before e22)
Canon is really not very nice after you have been using digital backs, i think the main problem with canon is lenses and somehow throughout not so hi-fi image quality of chips compared to MFDB.

[Morgan_Moore]

I am using now 54LV and 5D. I am using quick, fast and hi ISO-works canon, and everything else im doing with e54LV. (before e22)
Canon is really not very nice after you have been using digital backs, i think the main problem with canon is lenses and somehow throughout not so hi-fi image quality of chips compared to MFDB.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=127961\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I really love the MF look too.

So should I upgrade so I can shoot handheld and fast with the 54LV or get two 5Ds?

Will the upgrade make your canons just stay in the box

(I have a D200 too for really horrible conditions)

SMM

[Morgan_Moore]

Another option !

I could probably trade in my E22 add in the budget and get

TWO IDSmk2 one for the 50 and one for the 20 AND a H25 tethered for formal/studio lit shoots

my concern is the 5d is a 'nearly' camera that I wouldnt actually use exept in dire emergency whereas the 1DS2 is an 'actual' camera that I wouldnt have reservations about using

I do really like shooting two bodies

Oh for the days of 2 film nikons for street and a mamiya for formall - so easy

S

[sundstei]

my concern is the 5d is a 'nearly' camera that I wouldnt actually use exept in dire emergency whereas the 1DS2 is an 'actual' camera that I wouldnt have reservations about using
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=127964\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I think you are selling the 5D short. I have a 5D, 1DsmkII and a H1 + A75. The 5D files and 1DsMkII files are in detail close to identical. 5D has better ISO performance at 800+. Feels a bit cheap, but does the job  The 1DsMkII usually sits on the shelf as backup if my 5D breaks down.

Svein Erik

[Morgan_Moore]

I think you are selling the 5D short. I have a 5D, 1DsmkII and a H1 + A75. The 5D files and 1DsMkII files are in detail close to identical. 5D has better ISO performance at 800+. Feels a bit cheap, but does the job  The 1DsMkII usually sits on the shelf as backup if my 5D breaks down.

Svein Erik
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=127991\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Why doesnt the 1DS2 come off the shelf ?? too good for chaep clients not good enough for posh or what ?? Just old technology compared to the 5d ??

I am not selling the 5d short - I am canvassing for opinion

I am of course suspect of 12.4 MP or whatever it is compared with 22mp

My D200 just looks to me to be a pile of Sh*t compared with my eyelike - maybe I am rubbish at getting the best from a nikon file

it is beleivable to me as an ex proback owner that a nice 16mp is pretty simlar to a 22mp

I have a habit of only using my best camera even in situations where really I should use something else

So I will gamble as the light goes to handhold my Blad at 15th rather than swapping to the D200 or SLRn

I think I could do the same with a 5d and not with a 1DS2 ??

Maybe I am wrong but the camera I would need to be really close to the Blad to me to break this poor habit

I also like shooting 'news features' with two bodies with a wide and a prime like I used to do with two nikons (fm2s)

The idea would be to shoot with the 80 on the blad and a wide prime 20 or 16-35 on the DSLR

(or maybe the BLad with the 35 and the DSLR with a 50)

Right now I just keep using the Blad and swapping lenses all the time making the D200 with a wide just bagage and missing pics while I fiddle with my gear and get in a tangle

A lot of it is in the mind - I suppose my ultimate aim is never to take a lens off a body !

Thinking like that it would be 1ds2 and 16-35 and Blad with 80

Incedentally I love the D200 and 300 2.8 as a telephoto package  at the longer end

S

[rainer_v]

i sold my 1dsmk2 after having bought the 5d. i did not look back.....
the 5d has i.m.o. exactly the same details, at least i never was able to make images where my 1ds2 showed more than the 5d under identical circumstances. i like to have less weight....  i carry the canon around for long tele shots and superwide shots as well as for hi iso shots.
for all other stuff i use my emotion backs, file quaity is much better although  its often hard to see the difference in printed form, if the canon files are postprod well.
but there remains one very important factor: the sinar/rodenstock lenses which i can use on my shift camera.no comparation to alt  the 35mm lenses. so i dont expect much improvements from 35mm system, even if they will create soon 22mp.
1. i want to see if there will be not just a bigger file, i want to see if there is also visible more detail in it,
2. i want better dynamic for shadows and highlights, and here the canons are far away from the emotion backs.
3. i NEED better lenses, but seems so that this wil not happen cause too difficult and expansive to make unsymmetric wides with lo distortion.

[Morgan_Moore]

i sold my 1dsmk2 after having bought the 5d. i did not look back.....
the 5d has i.m.o. exactly the same details, at least i never was able to make images where my 1ds2 showed more than the 5d under identical circumstances. i like to have less weight....  i carry the canon around for long tele shots and superwide shots as well as for hi iso shots.
for all other stuff i use my emotion backs, file quaity is much better although  its often hard to see the difference in printed form, if the canon files are postprod well.
but there remains one very important factor: the sinar/rodenstock lenses which i can use on my shift camera.no comparation to alt  the 35mm lenses. so i dont expect much improvements from 35mm system, even if they will create soon 22mp.
1. i want to see if there will be not just a bigger file, i want to see if there is also visible more detail in it,
2. i want better dynamic for shadows and highlights, and here the canons are far away from the emotion backs.
3. i NEED better lenses, but seems so that this wil not happen cause too difficult and expansive to make unsymmetric wides with lo distortion.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=127996\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Do you see an upgrade to the E22 to the 54LV or a second 75LV or a P30 plus as a way of rendering the canon obsolete or do you just feel the ANY MF doesnt have the speed/lenses yet??

For tripod shooting I am happy with the E22 even though your 75LV is better - the E22 is good enough for me !

Especially if I could be bothered to stich - which I cant

Lastly everyone is singing the 5D

Why dont we ALL just sell ALL of the MF stuff ??

Of course I understand it is for details not the big panoramics and hero shots !

But what if a client wants to use a detail as a hero shot...

its either up to it or it aint

S

[sundstei]

Why doesnt the 1DS2 come off the shelf ?? too good for chaep clients not good enough for posh or what ?? Just old technology compared to the 5d ??

I am not selling the 5d short - I am canvassing for opinion

I am of course suspect of 12.4 MP or whatever it is compared with 22mp

I think I could do the same with a 5d and not with a 1DS2 ??

Maybe I am wrong but the camera I would need to be really close to the Blad to me to break this poor habit

Incedentally I love the D200 and 300 2.8 as a telephoto package  at the longer end

S
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=127994\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Ok, if you are not selling the 5D short, I think you might be overestimating the quality of the 1Ds2

The 5D is simply light, fast, good high ISO and cheap / expendable. I use mine in all kinds of situations. The only thing i have to complain about is the Auto-focus. Anything else it does at least as good as the 1Ds2.

The reason the 1Ds2 is on my shelf is because whenever I can drag along the big 1Ds2 I can usually take the H1 instead. If i need light and easy I end up with the 5D. The 5D + H1 makes a really complete package for me. The 1Ds2 just falls between them, kind of.

The most usable combination i have is the 5d + 70-200 f4. Its light, fast and never makes any problems for me  The whole kit cost almost nothing, so mentally you are not focused on "taking care of your equipment" in all situations. You just use it

For people shooting i think you could actually get away with such a kit and your customers would be quite happy.... of course.. usually we have higher standards then our customers (and better taste)

Svein Erik

[Morgan_Moore]

I think you might be overestimating the quality of the 1Ds2
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=128007\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

That is probably it - but good AF is a temptaion

So $5000 for an extra stop of MFDB could indeed be it the winner - however clinically insane it seems

Each stop has an implication

50 ISO = ely rangers = assistant = money per day

100 ISO = QFlash = hassle but no assistant requred

400 ISO = no hassle natural light hand held

taking an extreme point of view! (the famous 'dog and pony show' see RG Passim)

S

[David WM]

I've been quoted $5,600 AUD for the 45LV upgrade.
 A friend who is a Canon user suggested I might get more bang for my buck by getting the new 1D Mk3  to use in low light location situations may be a more worthwhle investment for my overall kit than the difference the 45LV would make. I don't know much about Canons, but then again for less money I could get the HC100mm f2.2 which would get me more light too.
What is it that the 45LV offers that I did not think the e22 had when purchasing the e22? Live video might be handy, but I've become accustomed to using a sliding back in the studio and that feature alone doesn't do it for me. It seems to have become a selling feature that a lot of manufacturers are getting into, but there seem to be doubtfull reports of the quality and convenience of the video images.  I do not think that I will be rushing in to upgrade until I hear some credible reports of just how much better it is.  If anyone who has done the upgrade would care to comment I'd appreciate it.
 I'd be interested in the technical reasons for the upgrade to see if the reason is advancing technology or is it fixing a design issue. If motor cars have design issues the fix is usually a recall, not an upgrade (is that a fair coment?).
When buying a MFDB I need to get a few years out of it and look forward to the next one being a new level of technology with the next generation chip, and plan  finances accordingly, upgrades along the way aren't in the budget.  The e22 does produce fine images and gives access to medium format optics. Higher iso usability would be great, but I'd like to know how much improvement there is.
David

[rainer_v]

Do you see an upgrade to the E22 to the 54LV or a second 75LV or a P30 plus as a way of rendering the canon obsolete or do you just feel the ANY MF doesnt have the speed/lenses yet??

For tripod shooting I am happy with the E22 even though your 75LV is better - the E22 is good enough for me !

Especially if I could be bothered to stich - which I cant

Lastly everyone is singing the 5D

Why dont we ALL just sell ALL of the MF stuff ??

Of course I understand it is for details not the big panoramics and hero shots !

But what if a client wants to use a detail as a hero shot...

its either up to it or it aint

S
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=128001\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

i dont think the canon is obsolete with any mf backs .... its just a very different tool for different needs. for me its practical to have it, and there will never be a lens as the sigma 12-24 for mf.

i agree about the e22. its a very good back and often i dont care which i use.....

we ( I ) dont sell my mf stuff because for hiend purposes the mf stuff is simply much better.
just had an exhibiton with 18 images of 200 - 220 cm size. i never could have done this with canon files ( not for architecture motifs as it have been ).
all images have been sold........

[rgmoore]

i dont think the canon is obsolete with any mf backs .... its just a very different tool for different needs. for me its practical to have it, and there will never be a lens as the sigma 12-24 for mf.

i agree about the e22. its a very good back and often i dont care which i use.....

we ( I ) dont sell my mf stuff because for hiend purposes the mf stuff is simply much better.
just had an exhibiton with 18 images of 200 - 220 cm size. i never could have done this with canon files ( not for architecture motifs as it have been ).
all images have been sold........
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=128066\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Rainer,

In addition to the above comment, earlier in this thread you touched upon file quality and the printed form: "for all other stuff i use my emotion backs, file quality is much better although its often hard to see the difference in printed form, if canon files are postprod well."

Having read the MFDB part of the forum for almost a year, I've come across numerous statements about higher quality of files from DBs compared to DSLRs, yet I have found little mentioned about how that quality translates into printed form. I am happy with my 5D and
usually don't print bigger than 13" x 19" (329mm x 483mm). While I plan to keep my 5D for
moving targets and high ISO, I've been on the search for MFDB as I miss the look of MF that I
had with film years ago.  

I realize that there is more to DBs than pixels and resolution and that there are other factors involved - DR, DOF, etc. If you are looking for high quality exhibition prints, at what enlargement size do you generally prefer your eMotion back over 5D? That is assuming you are shooting in
a controlled studio environment with strobe and the subject is feasable with DB.

Any information from anyone who has compared various print sizes from MFDBs vs 5D would be
greatly appreciated.

Richard

[kariylit]

I think everyones needs are different and you really cannot compare 5D and e22 or other mfdb:s.
They make very different file quality, and colors and sharpness of file is really different when you compare canon to mf. I have used e22 a lot shooting outside and locations with out strobes, and it have never really been problem to shoot at ISO25 or 50 even if you shoot people in daylight. When you need to shoot at very low lighting situations somenthing moving object without tripod, Canon takes of course win with 400 and 800 asa and IS lenses.

[rainer_v]

Rainer,

In addition to the above comment, earlier in this thread you touched upon file quality and the printed form: "for all other stuff i use my emotion backs, file quality is much better although its often hard to see the difference in printed form, if canon files are postprod well."

Having read the MFDB part of the forum for almost a year, I've come across numerous statements about higher quality of files from DBs compared to DSLRs, yet I have found little mentioned about how that quality translates into printed form. I am happy with my 5D and
usually don't print bigger than 13" x 19" (329mm x 483mm). While I plan to keep my 5D for
moving targets and high ISO, I've been on the search for MFDB as I miss the look of MF that I
had with film years ago. 

I realize that there is more to DBs than pixels and resolution and that there are other factors involved - DR, DOF, etc. If you are looking for high quality exhibition prints, at what enlargement size do you generally prefer your eMotion back over 5D? That is assuming you are shooting in
a controlled studio environment with strobe and the subject is feasable with DB.

Any information from anyone who has compared various print sizes from MFDBs vs 5D would be
greatly appreciated.

Richard
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=128181\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

i think it is not so much a qestion of the size where are the differences.
ofcourse prints which are to big to reach 150-200 DPI effective resolution will appear sharper if taken with higher pixel cameras than with less.
also there is a diference if you print with wide gammut inkjet printers as in cmyk.
but much more it depends on the motif and in the lens you use. so an image which is taken with a 35HR lense and a 22/33/39 back will look probably significant better than an software corrected 24 or 28mm image, taken with a 5d,- or a optical corrected image with one of that more or less horrible 35mm shift lenses.
but often i had situations where i took with the canon shots using longer lenses or superwides ( most here the sigma 12- 24 ) for situaton which i could not take with the mf lenses i have, or i used the canon for some details.
this images sometimes have been published in books or magazins aside images i took with my mf hiend equipement and here i saw rarely a quality difference, otherwise i would not have mixed these images.
but you have to have in count that i know which camera+ lens i have to take for which motif and that i also know to postpro my canon files for several 10000 images of experience.
i could not replace my mf gear with 35mm stuff, although for what it is god the canonmakes its job very  good and it is still usable even in direct context.
main problem with 35mm still are the lenses, but probably i would think different if here not would exist the sinar/rodenstock or schneider lenses,- which are so much better than any retrofocal lens constructions, mf or 35mm.