The GetDPI Photography Forum

Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!

Which Digital Back for my Contax 645

irakly

New member
you don't say... the place is actually much smaller than it looks thanks to 35mm :) that's how i pay my bills, well, some of them.
 

irakly

New member
That is a nice stitch indeed Irakly. I never tried it with CS3, was older version when I had the Kodak back.
all you have to do (among other obvious things) is to keep exposure consistent. actually, it even tries to even out the exposure, but falls short to adjust colour saturation properly if the difference between shots is more than 0.5EV.
 
T

thsinar

Guest
Ray,

My advice here is the same as many others: take your time and don't let pressure make you taking wrong decisions. Have in mind and do balance all the factors raised (e.g.) by Graham: they are very important factors to consider. What seems at the first hand to be a cheap way to make the jump can later become the opposite, "a wallet burner".

As always, I am at your disposal for any question you might have about Sinarbacks, anytime, except for the financial/price ones.

Best regards,
Thierry

I felt a bit of pressure because of the current eBay auction on the Kodak unit, but you're helping me make a better decision by holding off until I'm fully ready to make a smart choice.

All in all, from what I've seen, that Sinar e22 sure looks like a winner, but that's only with sketchy information that I've been able to gather.
 

gogopix

Subscriber
well
no one is bidding on Tim Kelly's kadak back/. maybe scared off. If it doesnt sell, someone might want to call tomorrow and negotiate for the back.
does anyone know him? (or is it just a front?}

BTW you are not going to go wrong with the kodak anywhere under 4k. I used happily for several years.

on the other hand there are some VERY attractive prices for the Phase backs as seen here, and they would be upgradable. I cannot comment on the Sinar, since price info seems a little more scarce. However they too are upgradable. Perhaps Graham can share his e22 to e54 upgrade experince. (both 22MP I believe.)
 

irakly

New member
it's kinda weird what has has happened to this back in the previous auction. he claims that some scam artist bid on it, so he had to void the auction. how come he did not sell to the runner-up? i guess, that's what scares people off.
although, knowing habits of ebay buyers, i can say that things start happening like five minutes before the auction close, especially on big ticket items. so, hold your breath :)
 

gogopix

Subscriber
im sure if the runner up was pushed way high, he may have just refused. But unless it is a total scam, Tim is known and was quoted in shutterbug, in 2003, so maybe this is really his camera (though I doubt it with only 9k actuations.
 

irakly

New member
so what? my working back has something like 65000 actuation, but a backup that i am selling is only around a thousand. it is still mine :)
or maybe he figured out a way how to reset the odometer :) :) :)
 

RayM

Member
Thierry, thank you, yes, eventually I will ask you a number of questions about the sinars.

For now, my short term strategy is to get the kodak pro back for the contax (it seems to make the most sense for what I want to do with the camera for the immediate next few years), then, sometime later, I will pursue a "full frame" 645 option.

Thank you.
 

woodyspedden

New member
The Kodak ProBack 645C is a no brainer decision. It was over engineered and built like a tank. I does shoot tethered and the files are supported by Adobe Camera RAW.

The thing to watch out for on the Contax is that some backs need to be calibrated to the camera in some cases. Mine needed that. The fast aperture lenses make precise calibration important. Actually many of the non dedicated older backs often require "shims" to calibrate the back to the camera. I do not know if Kodak still provides that service for the Probacks.

The Kodak is a crop frame camera that shoots to a square ... if you are a huge fan of wide angle shots, then a 22 meg. rectangular back may be more to your liking.

I'm not sure of the prices being quoted. If the Kodak truly can be had for that small of an amount , then the decision is even more of a no-brainer. :rolleyes:
Marc

Do you have a sense of how the Kodak back compares to the Hassy CFE back? I know both are 16Mpx but i can't find any data as to which sensor the hassy is using

Thanks

Woody
 
T

thsinar

Guest
Woody,

there was only one 16 MPx CCD produced at that time, from Kodak. Other than that, the backs certainly produce different raw files, inherent to every back maker.

Best regards,
Thierry

Marc

Do you have a sense of how the Kodak back compares to the Hassy CFE back? I know both are 16Mpx but i can't find any data as to which sensor the hassy is using

Thanks

Woody
 

Jack

Sr. Administrator
Staff member
I'll add my .02...

Like Doug, I have owned a few Kodak DCS backs back when I shot with the C645. The net was just like Doug: I preferred using my 4x5. (I am also primarily a landscape shooter.) I also prefer a full digital workflow, even considering the superior file a good, quality 4x5 scan can render.

Enter the ZD. (FWIW, it essentially the same file as the Leaf 22, uses the same sensor, has the same look as the Leaf which you can get for your Contax.) It was (is) at a pricepoint I could justify for landscape work. (A superior 4x5 drum scan from a professional service can cost upwards of $100 each. Add the roughly $15 per shot film and processing cost and the buy-back on the ZD doesn't take long with 4x5.)

Bottom line is I find the files from the ZD significantly superior to the Kodak DCS from a detail and smoothness standpoint, both qualities beneficial in landscape. However, the Kodak has a sort of edgy look I really liked too -- kind of like ISO 400 color neg film shot on MF. Also the square crop lent itself to some really interesting compositions.

If indeed the DCS backs are at the sub-$4K price, then I'd also agree with Marc that is a no-brainer starting point. LOTS of great images to be made with that back, and IMO it is still better than any DSLR option out there from a file quality standpoint. At sub $4K, I'd like to find one for my M645 just for the look...

Again, my .02 only,
 

RayM

Member
Thanks Jack, decisions, decisions! As I've been participating here at getdpi for the last week or so based on your recommendations a couple of weeks ago (thanks for that, by the way, just a terrific site with generous people), I've learned lots and I'm beginning to develop a "mental map" of how things fit together, albeit a very rough map. I have, as of this moment, anyway, little appreciation for the finer points of performance that different manufacturers bring to the table. So, lots of learning to do. Thanks again, Jack. Ray
 

Jack

Sr. Administrator
Staff member
PS re stitching in CS3: Yes, it rocks ;) Bottom line is you don't even need to use a tripod to make the captures since this version also transforms each frame as needed to more perfectly align at the pixel level -- and yes, it works very well. It generates masks to blend the images at adjacent, similar tone pixels with no feathering...

Here is a shot I took this summer, 5 frames hand-held. Tough to see the total quality in this relatively small jpeg, but you cannot find seams even at 100% view:

 

fotografz

Well-known member
Marc

Do you have a sense of how the Kodak back compares to the Hassy CFE back? I know both are 16Mpx but i can't find any data as to which sensor the hassy is using

Thanks

Woody
Yes, the Hasselblad CFV back is better. It has benefited from many industry improvements and firmware upgrades. Go to the Hasselblad site: Planet V and click on "Word" ... I'm in there with other photographers ... and talk about the CFV back. It just hooks right up with no sync cords or anything.

Frankly, I'm sorry I sold my CFV.
 

fotografz

Well-known member
PS re stitching in CS3: Yes, it rocks ;) Bottom line is you don't even need to use a tripod to make the captures since this version also transforms each frame as needed to more perfectly align at the pixel level -- and yes, it works very well. It generates masks to blend the images at adjacent, similar tone pixels with no feathering...

Here is a shot I took this summer, 5 frames hand-held. Tough to see the total quality in this relatively small jpeg, but you cannot find seams even at 100% view:

I love that shot Jack.
 

fotografz

Well-known member
Thanks Jack, decisions, decisions! As I've been participating here at getdpi for the last week or so based on your recommendations a couple of weeks ago (thanks for that, by the way, just a terrific site with generous people), I've learned lots and I'm beginning to develop a "mental map" of how things fit together, albeit a very rough map. I have, as of this moment, anyway, little appreciation for the finer points of performance that different manufacturers bring to the table. So, lots of learning to do. Thanks again, Jack. Ray
Yes Ray... on this forum, you become richer in information ... and instantly poorer in cash :)
 

RayM

Member
Hi, yes, truth be told, I've been, uh, "influenced," in some other forums that some of you guys have been part of, and I need to tell you that I've been corrupted but good when it comes to quality optics and equipment. However, a community of addicts is still a community(!) and I'm proud to be a part of it! Gosh it's good to have so many friends who want to help me with my investments!
 
Top