Which Digital Back for my Contax 645

[RayM]

Some help please.

I've now purchased a used Contax 645. After reading a bit and learning from all of you, I've decided to start looking for a "good starter" digital back. The Kodak Pro Back that some of you have already referenced looks like a reasonable first choice, but there may be others. Would you please give me your thoughts on what you would consider "must haves" as it relates to a first digital back (like many of you, I fully intend to trade-up eventually) for the Contax 645? Are there variations of the Kodak Pro Back to stay away from? Do other manufacturers such as Phase, Leaf, Sinar, etc. have 'starter' backs available for a good price? Thank you. Ray

 

[David Klepacki]

Some help please.

I've now purchased a used Contax 645. After reading a bit and learning from all of you, I've decided to start looking for a "good starter" digital back. The Kodak Pro Back that some of you have already referenced looks like a reasonable first choice, but there may be others. Would you please give me your thoughts on what you would consider "must haves" as it relates to a first digital back (like many of you, I fully intend to trade-up eventually) for the Contax 645? Are there variations of the Kodak Pro Back to stay away from? Do other manufacturers such as Phase, Leaf, Sinar, etc. have 'starter' backs available for a good price? Thank you. Ray

Hi Ray. Welcome to GetDPI!

Short answer: get the best back you can afford. Buy demo/used backs.

The Kodak C645 DCS Proback is a 16MP square back and is really the lowest entry point digital back worth buying. Those backs also have an optional AA filter that may come in handy. The larger pixel sizes are great, but the probability for moire is higher. These backs are in the $3K - $4K range.

The next step up from there is probably the Phase P20, which is also a 16MP square sensor like the Kodak. The used prices for these are around $5 - $6K.

After that is the Phase P21, which is 18MP and probably the lowest cost rectangular format sensor (4:3) for the Contax. Used/demo price is around $7K - $8K.

After that are the 22MP - 28MP backs: including Hasselblad CF22, Phase P25, Leaf Aptus 65, and Sinar eMotion 54. Used backs in this category will start at least $8K but typically closer to $10K or more. These backs are in still in high demand since they offer the largest pixel size (9um) across the largest sensor area (roughly 36 x 48, except for the Leaf which is 33 x 44 and does have smaller pixels).

You really do not want to know what comes after that, so examine the above backs and go for the best one you can afford. Any of the above will most likely knock your socks off coming from 35mm format.

 

[Graham Mitchell]

Good answer, David. I would just add that the Sinar e54LV is the newest 22MP model but there should be used/refurbished e22s out there.

 

[RayM]

David and Graham, thank you very much. I'm tempted to put in a bid on the current eBay listing for the kodak pro back just to get a start on this. The sinar 22 MP models look very interesting, I'll have to study them very quickly. And, unless I'm wrong, there seems to be fairly brisk "buy it - try it - keep it or sell it" activity without taking too much of a hit. thank you again, this is the info I was looking for. Ray

PS David, I think your images on a website I saw the other day are really good, landscapes/seascapes, ocean/coast shots. Really nice. And, Graham, just looked at your website. Very very nice shots.

 

[Graham Mitchell]

Ray, just be careful to ensure that you are aware of all the limitations of the Kodak back. Are you happy with the resolution? Colour? High ISO performance? Aspect ratio? Frame rate? Buffer limitations? Storage? Can it be operated untethered? If so, how is the screen and controls? Can it be operated tethered? What software is required to do this? How will you process the files? Is there any warranty? Can it be repaired if necessary? Any known issues such as bugs, battery life? etc

 

[gogopix]

Dear ray

Graham raises important points, but read the other C645 threads abd you will see a lot of discussion . The repair continues with Midwest and there is quite a float of parts.
The ISO and resolytion, color etc is quite good. I went Kodak>P25>P45>p45+ and I still am considering the Kodak c as a backup
Irakly has two and may be selling one. Then there is the one frpom Kelly Photo (Jim)

I am happy to send you raw files (they are .dcr and proprietary but the Photodesk SW is free and available. The "Looks" SW is also really good for portrait/product work.

Let me know, as I have a yousendit account
Just PM me and I will send you the SW and a few files (let me know type.

BTW 400 ISO is quite usable (I have an example somewhere here


regards
Victor

PS I can also send P25 files for comparison. That would be the upper end of a starter back 22 vs 16 MP and higher ISO later technology.

PPS the one downside of the Kodak, even though cheap, is no trade up. but find out the policies. I know Phase and SInar have good programs, but I have heard that Hasselblad and Leaf are a lot more expensive to change.


PPPS The phase and even Kodak backs (with Kapture gp stuff) can be used in view cameras like the Alpa, Cambo Kodak only in special cases.

 

[RayM]

Graham and Victor, thank you for your thoughtful and generous posts. While I've pretty much scoured the Internet over the last several days trying to learn everything I can learn to make an intelligent decision, the questions you're raising, and my inability to answer them easily tell me that I'm not ready to invest yet. 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. And, the Phase backs look great too, I think it's time for me to just take my time and save up and get what I want.

And, Victor, yes, I'll most definitely take you up soon on your offer to send over some files. Thank you. Ray

 

[irakly]

maybe for me it is a clear conflict of interest, as i have dcs proback 645c for sale, but in my opinion, this back delivers the best price/performance ratio. i do not see any advantages of, say, P20 compared to kodak. moreover, with my P25 i have yet to figure out how to get colour fidelity and punch that kodak delivers with no effort at all.

 

[gogopix]

well, Irakly and I both can show the P25 and Kodak c back examples. I would encourage you to also try for Leaf and Sinart back examples.

HOWEVER, they all have pluses and minuses, and you shopuld consider the areas of importance to you, including long term investment value (via trade up)

 

[fotografz]

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.

 

[RayM]

Irakly and Victor, have you found the "crop factor" of the Kodak Pro back to be a disappointment to you?

When you shoot with this back, what do you find irritating or disturbing, if anything?

When you think about "upgrading" from this Kodak back, what will you most look forward to?

 

[irakly]

in fact, it was the square frame that made me use contax 645 that was just sitting on a shelf for more than a year. i've always shot 6x6 before and because of that hated 645 frame.
i wish it was 49x49, but since it was not, i just lived with it and shot a few thousand images that now are in galleries of four countries, in books and magazines.
the only type of photography where i wish it were full frame is macro and small product, which i do commercially a lot. 4/120 macro is just too long for that crop.
now i have phase one p25 and one of my kodak backs as a backup. i bought p25 because it is ideally suited for tilt/shift work, yet files are not too huge.
as for the file size, i printed 180x180cm photos from the kodak back, and those were lightboxes, not for distant viewing.

 

[RayM]

Irakly, thank you for the clarification. When you shoot portraits, which lens do you use? I am getting the standard 80 that comes with the c645 and the 140. Do you find the nearst focusing ability of these lenses to hold you back in any way? (I've read that this is a shortcoming for some users of both of these lenses).

 

[irakly]

Ray, I am a Leica shooter, so close focusing in portraiture is not my thing Anyway, if you need to get closer, just mount a lens on an extension ring, what's the big deal.
With the kodak back i found that 140 is just too long for portraits, but 2/80 is ideal. i mean, waist portrait. Moreover, 2/80 is better for wide open portraits because of its unique way of rendering tonal gradations at full aperture.
For the picture above i actually used something completely out of line it's Schneider Componon-S 5.6/180 mounted on tilt/shift bellows. This is product photography, not portraiture

 

[RayM]

Thanks Irakly, I was indeed wondering about this photo you posted. After being in contact like this with you guys this evening I'm seriously thinking of going for the Kodak. I think I understood from your note the other day that you may have one for sale as we speak?

 

[DougDolde]

I'll add my $.02 as I have had two Kodak backs for the Contax 645. Mainly I am a landscape shooter and while I did get some very nice shots with this setup, I was too taken by 4x5 film in my Arca Swiss 4x5 Field to accept the lower resolution it gave.

A couple years later now I have acquired a basic Contax 645 kit again and am just about ready to acquire another digital back. But this time I think it will be a Leaf Aptus 22.

I really am tired of film in a way. Not that I don't like the look and the huge files/resolution but getting a good scan requires outsourcing for me since I am never happy with flatbed scans like from an Epson and don't want to invest in a high end scanner. So I either buy Imacon 949 scans or Tango drum scans. It's a slow process and expensive, though a high quality digital back isn't cheap either by any means.

While I do like the square format, I prefer the 4:5 aspect. Or 3:4 which the Aptus 36x48 mm sensor gives. Cropping the Kodak to this aspect reduces the effective resolution significantly.

I also want to be able to do shift stitching (possibly on a Horseman SW-D) to get ultra resolution files. You can effectively expand the sensor size to 70x82 mm with shifts and stitching. The Kodak as far as I know isn't capable of this at least in the C645 version because it doesn't have the X-Synch port to trigger the back with a copal shuttered lens.

Pan stitching does work fine on the Kodak but with wider lenses parallax can be tricky. Longer lenses work best for this.

I were you I'd start with a Kodak back. The price is right, and you won't lose much down the road if you decide to Ebay it and get something better. They are indeed built ultra strong and very high quality. Just don't buy a battered one. Paying a little more for a mint one will be much more satisfying.

That's my perspective today. Tomorrow it may change.

 

[irakly]

automatic photoshop cs3 panorama stitching with 35mm is piece of cake, just make sure you are overlapping. this picture is three kodak photos with 3.5/35

 

[RayM]

Thanks for weighing in Doug. Yes, ideally, I see myself going for a wider back, like a full 645 size....eventually. It's just not in the cards right now, but I do want to get something to get me going. Just minutes ago I did a googled a search that got me over to a site that had a jpg version of a kodak pro back shot, so I downloaded it and put it into photoshop and played with it for awhile. Most interesting how easily this jpg goes up to 300dpi in such a high quality manner. Reminds me of M8 files actually. My 1DsMarkII files don't do that with such ease, and I'm glad I'm not asked to print that large with my Canon files. My problem is living up here in a place where we don't have any access to equipment like this, so I make my choices by reading what folks like you have to say. I've learned so incredibly much. So, I have to buy sight unseen. And while I'm still afraid to make a bad decision on this, as bad decisions are really expensive, I'm beginning to think that maybe the Kodak is the best decision to make for now. Now, to find one at a good price, that's another issue. Thank you.

 

[RayM]

That stitched image is pretty impressive, Irakly, especially in such a tight space.

 

[DougDolde]

That is a nice stitch indeed Irakly. I never tried it with CS3, was older version when I had the Kodak back.