Kodak DCS Medium Format VS Sony a850

[Mike Sellers]

If I wanted to produce the highest quality and largest prints which one of these outfits would be best? Kodak-16mp at 1.5 inches square or the Sony at 35mm dimension and almost 25mp?

[BobDavid]

Go with the Sony. Under the "right" situations, the Kodak is capable of yielding superior results. But, that is a small percent of the time. The a850 is great in the studio and in the field. Couple it with the CZ zooms and you'll be astonished by the output.

[Wayne Fox]

I used one of those Kodak backs for a while.  Certainly ahead of its time and great back in the day, but I concur ... go with the Sony.

[Mike Sellers]

Sounds like I better forget the Kodak then. Thanks for the replies

[plinden]

Mike, I had the Kodak back on an H1, and I now have an A900. My other current camera is an H3D-39. I've only had the Sony a short time, but I may have some material from both cameras that is roughly comparable. If so, I can send examples, should I take the time to look (I'm quite busy at the moment)? Peter Linden

[Mike Sellers]

With the prices for the Kodak back below $2,000 I was just thinking about moving up to medium format. I already have a Sony a850 and Angenieux 35-70 zoom converted by Pete Ganzel. If I move up to medium format I should think about the Phase 39mp or Pentax 40mp and forget the low end medium format backs. I only do landscape photography. Maybe Sony or one of the other manufacturers will bring out a 35mp camera?

[BobDavid]

I would recommend that you do a test between the Sony a900 and a 39mp back. Unless you're going to be making prints bigger than 12" X 18" (from an uncropped file) I wouldn't spend the money. The Sony coupled with the best Zeiss glass is better than a lot of the images I've seen taken with 39mp cameras and mediocre lenses.

[ondebanks]

The Kodak DCS back made sense for me, because I was already heavily into a Mamiya 645 system with great lenses, and I also like the square format (I had 6x6 cameras as well some years ago).

But if you are starting a system from scratch and have no medium format ties already, then I think the Sony or a Canon 5DII would make more sense.

Ray

[Dennis Carbo]

I would recommend that you do a test between the Sony a900 and a 39mp back. Unless you're going to be making prints bigger than 12" X 18" (from an uncropped file) I wouldn't spend the money. The Sony coupled with the best Zeiss glass is better than a lot of the images I've seen taken with 39mp cameras and mediocre lenses.

Virtually any MFDB, even a 16 MP should smoke the A900 regardless of zeiss lenses as far as pure image quality- I would think it depends on subject matter and technique though....If it is a fast moving subject, handheld A900 all the way - Tripod with time to work the DCS...A900 is a better choice if you are looking for a less expensive, "one camera does it all"  rig IMO

[BobDavid]

Virtually any MFDB, even a 16 MP should smoke the A900 regardless of zeiss lenses as far as pure image quality- I would think it depends on subject matter and technique though....If it is a fast moving subject, handheld A900 all the way - Tripod with time to work the DCS...A900 is a better choice if you are looking for a less expensive, "one camera does it all"  rig IMO

The a850/900 handles fabrics very well -- no moire. I used to own an Imacon 96c. The 96c uses a 37mm X 37mm format chip. The files are clean (except for moire issues with clothing), but in all honesty, I think the Sony files are quite comparable and the advantages of an ultra hi-resolution back panel lcd, lack of mirror-slap vibration and better high ISO performance put the Sony ahead.