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!

Strengths and Weaknesses of Various Backs

Mitchell

New member
I don't want to start a war here, but being ignorant of the MFDB world, I wonder if there are any more or less agreed characteristics of Digital Backs. I think many could characterize Canon, Nikon, Leica, and Olympus. Can the same be done for MFDBs?

I'm especially interested in Phase, Sinar and Leaf.

Any help greatly appreciated.

Best,

Mitchell
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
It's actually a great question and newbies like myself and no freaking information out there worth a damn . I'm serious , been pounding the pavement just for something that says yes Guy buy this one. LOL
But really there are a lot of new folks wanting to jump in and there just is NOT enough data for a 20 K or more purchase. This is serious money and folks want answers and great opinions. i challenge the ones that have gone before us. Show us the way.

This is your chance to get me back after i have spent 10's of thousands of your money giving you all advice , my turn burn my 20 k.:D:D:D

Time for pay back. :ROTFL::ROTFL::ROTFL:
 
T

thsinar

Guest
Any time, any question you wish to be answered, Guy.

And I won't just tell you that "Yes, the Sinarbacks are great, buy one"!

Best regards,
Thierry

It's actually a great question and newbies like myself and no freaking information out there worth a damn . I'm serious , been pounding the pavement just for something that says yes Guy buy this one. LOL
But really there are a lot of new folks wanting to jump in and there just is NOT enough data for a 20 K or more purchase. This is serious money and folks want answers and great opinions. i challenge the ones that have gone before us. Show us the way.

This is your chance to get me back after i have spent 10's of thousands of your money giving you all advice , my turn burn my 20 k.:D:D:D

Time for pay back. :ROTFL::ROTFL::ROTFL:
 

gogopix

Subscriber
I think those who have multiple backs can help here. I have had only Kodak and Phase (25, 45 45+) I can tell you the Phase backs are excellent in resolution and the processing in C1 (free with the back) is one of the best. That said, there are not, from test samples I have seen, the highest IOSO.

But Let's remember, most p[ros use lighting, and do NOT rely on ambient. For most, high ISO (even 200) is a non issue. The 50 of Phase backs produces unbelievable quality.

Now, I HAVE played with a half dozen or so RAW files from both Leaf Aptus and Sinar.
Here is what I have found.

1. All three produce very good to excellent resulution (DUH, sort of :)
2. The APtus files are a bit more film-like and saturated out of raw, but do not have the detail of the Phase. Likely a DR and processing result. Some like others (like me) feel you can add 'looks' in post process. I want the sensor to get the detail and color right; I will add the 'look'
3. Sinar backs seem to have the high ISO edge. They have not the Phase reso;lution (P45+ vs 74LV is 39 vs 33 MP) BTW the extra resolution translates often to less need for sharpening.

The bottom line, is that I would likely STILL buy the P45+ for my COntax 645 but I am seriously considering the Sinar for areas (inside travel, churches, caves etc.) where no flash possible, but can photograph. The files are quite good at 800 even with pushing 3 stops. This is a net 4 stop advantage. However useful less than 10% of the time. On the other hand the resolution give up is small.

Hope this helps.

There are many threads here with Sinar raw files and I am sure a few Aptus (though I received mine from individuals and cannot post.)

regards
Victor

PS I would be happy to offer Phase 25, 45 or 45+ files (out takes) for you to play with. C1 4 beta or trial are free for 30 days so you can try. Otherwise, ACR will open all three. (Sinar is DNG)

PPS There are differences when using view cameras. The SInar is always on, the Phase requires a wake up. I have an Alpa with a cord that works fine. The 'wake up' in Phase alleviates the need for a fan, so helps battery life and noise.
 
Last edited:

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
Victor that was awesome thanks that gives some idea's to think about.


Thierry I kind of forced Davids hand to bring the Sinar to San Juan so Jack and I can get a good look at it and play with it also. Nothing like getting a feel for these to figure it out
 

Graham Mitchell

New member
I just tried the 54LV on a view camera for the first time. When running tethered, you get a whole image preview on the computer to compose the frame, then you can pick areas of the image to zoom into and view at 100% to get the focus perfect. Using this, you don't even need a focus screen on the camera or even to shift the back (which is nice for a couple of reasons).

I had made a simple adapter to fix the back to the camera, but I was waiting for Live View to make it useful.



 

gogopix

Subscriber
Graham

That would be fantastic. Now, for the Alpa, I assume there is no need for an adapter, since I can get a Contax adapter.

Good news on the LV (sounds better than the 'other guys' live view!)

I assume you just need to make sure the back is locked stable. Since you can focus, I also assume there is really no issue with shims etc. It is
WYSIWYG

Victor
 

Graham Mitchell

New member
Graham

I assume you just need to make sure the back is locked stable. Since you can focus, I also assume there is really no issue with shims etc. It is
WYSIWYG

Victor
Exactly, there is no concern about calibrating a focus screen to the back's sensor. When it is in focus in Live View, you are ready to capture and the focus will be identical.
 

Chuck Jones

Subscriber Member
I don't want to start a war here, but being ignorant of the MFDB world, I wonder if there are any more or less agreed characteristics of Digital Backs. I think many could characterize Canon, Nikon, Leica, and Olympus. Can the same be done for MFDBs?

I'm especially interested in Phase, Sinar and Leaf.

Any help greatly appreciated.

Best,

Mitchell
Mitchell, almost all of the MF backs you can work up the files using post processing to get just about the same end look, at least the three brands you mention specifically above. Each of the backs have particular features that lend themselves more to an individual shooting style, more so I feel than a final result. In other words, a Chevy and a Ferrari will both get you to grandmas house for dinner, just how many speeding tickets can you live with getting there ;)

Tonal range and smoothness are better from a Dalsa sensor, due to the full 14 bit analog to digital conversion. The Kodak chips are all 12 bit internal, or were just a couple years ago when I did the research. The Kodak chip also is a real power monger, and loves to eat batteries. That is why they turn the chip off with the Phase backs and use a "wake up" cable. Do NOT forget to buy a couple spare wake up cables if you go that direction. The Kodak sensor does give you a long exposure capability though, which depending upon what you shoot can be a real advantage. For architecture shooters, the P45+ is probably the first choice just for that reason alone. Also for view camera use, the P45+ does an excellent job. I've shot images with a friends back using over 20 degrees of movement without a problem. Do NOT try that same stunt with the P30+ though, due to the micro-lenses. I'm also going to toss the Hassy backs in here as well, since they also are a fine product that uses the Kodak chips. Nothing works better on a Hasselblad body than the Hasselblad backs, again just in my subjective opinion.

The differentiation between the Leaf Aptus and Sinar are more subtle. Both of these backs use the same Dalsa sensor, with it's internal 14 bit buss and Analog to digital converters. The way this chip is implemented though by the two manufacturers is very different. Leaf is concentrating on high throughput, and fast frame rates. Sinar (Jenoptik) was focused on flexibility and wide platform support, and had not implemented an ISO speed higher than 400 when I last evaluated their backs. This has changed though with their newer offering, so I clearly need to re-evaluate the Sinar product and give it another hard look. But knowing the Dalsa sensor well, and it's strengths and weaknesses, my likely conclusion would be that if you must have the best high ISO back, the Kodak chips should deliver this in a superior way to the Dalsa chipped backs. If you are fine with lower ISO, and what that baby smooth tonal range, then the Dalsa chip wins in my own opinion.

As far as resolution goes, don't get hung up on which is the larger sensor with more megapixels. You won't notice the difference between any of the top line products from any of these four manufacturers. They will all give you resolution that is mind blowing, using the right lenses with them. I should also say that megapixel count is also a very over rated topic. I have an Eyelike M11 back that shot in multi-shot mode will positively blow away ANY of these high megapixel single shot backs in the resolution department. And it is only 11 megapixels. Once you are over about 10 megapixels, more only gets you room for extreme crops, provided there isn't an AA filter in the image path.

So to boil it down as you asked Mitchell, look to the Kodak sensor products if you need higher ISO and longer exposure, but at the cost of higher power consumption and greater noise. Look to the Dalsa sensor backs if what you are after is smoother color transitions and a wider pallet, but knowing that you are going to give up something in shooting low light and long exposures.
 

fotografz

Well-known member
Here's what I've owned and used extensively:

Square Kodak Sensor, 36.7 X 36.7, 16.8 meg., 9X9 micron pixel Backs with 1.5X lens multiplication factor:

12 bit., Kodak ProBack for a Hasselblad 555 ELD and Mamiya RZ Pro-II using a Kapture Group V to Mamiya adapter. Files directly supported by Adobe Camera RAW. ISO 100. Needed to be tethered to a Quantum battery for mobile work.

12 bit, Kodak ProBack 645C on a Contax 645. Dedicated mount. (Same ACR support as above.) ISO 100 to 400. Self contained, underslung battery.

16 bit, Imacon 96C on Hasselblad 500 series V cameras. Dedicated V mount. Needed Flexcolor Software, but could convert to DNGs for Adobe use. ISO 100 to 400 (but 400 was not very good.) Needed to be tethered to a Image Bank for mobile capture.

16 bit, Hasselblad CFV on Hasselblad on both 200 and 500 series V cameras. (Same file support as above.) Firewire 800 connections. ISO 50 to 400 (soon to be 800)

Rectangle Sensor, 16 bit, 36.7 X 49.0, 22 meg., 9X9 Micron pixel backs with 1.1X lens factor on 645 cameras:

Leaf Aptus 22 Dalsa (slightly smaller sensor Valeo upgrade), CMOS RAW files Directly supported by Adobe Camera RAW. ISO 25 to 200. Underslung battery.

Hasselblad H2D/22, Kodak sensor (which produced DNG RAW files right from the camera with no conversion of propritary software needed.) No film back useage. ISO 50 to 400. Integrated Grip battery.

Hasselblad H2D/22, Kodak sensor. Later model that reverted to use of Hasselblad's 3F file format, still allowed DNG conversions, but now also allowed use of film backs. ISO 50 to 400 (soon to be 800), Integrated Grip battery.

Rectangle Dalsa sensor, 16 bit, 36 X 48, 33 meg, 7.2 X 7.2 Micron pixels. 1.13X lens factor on 645 camera:

Leaf Aptus 75 with dedicated Mamiya mount for AFD-II, and used on an RZ Pro-II with adapter. Underslung battery.

Leaf Aptus 75s same mount (differed from above in capture speed and now was Firewire 800.) ISO 50 to 800.

Rectangle Kodak sensor, 16 bit, 33.1X 44.2, 31 meg, 6.8 X 6.8 Micron pixels with micro-lenses. 1.3X lens factor on 645 cameras.

Hasselblad H3D/31 dedicated back on H3 camera, ISO 100 to 800 (soon to be 1600), accepts film backs. Grip battery.

Rectangle Kodak sensor, 16 bit, 36.7 X 49, 6.8 X 6.8 Micron pixels, lens factor of 1.1X on 645 camera:

Hasselblad H3D/39, active cooling via fan, 2.5" LCD, grip battery, Integrated camera system, no film back use.

Hasselblad H3D-II/39, my current camera/back. Differs from above with new button configurations, heat sink cooling, and 3" HD LCD.

In addition, I've hired professional photographers in my job as a Creative Director for ad agencies. The most used digital backs in that extensive experience were Phase One P25s and P45s, distantly followed by Hasselblad H2s with 39 meg backs, and a few Multishot Hasselblad CF backs on all kinds of cameras from Hasselblad Hs and V to Contax and Mamiya to view cameras.

Sadly I cannot lay claim to seeing any Sinar backs in action. It's a hole in my direct working experience, so any conclusions I make here are sans that input.

I'm not selling anything here. I made my choice based on experience and MY needs, no one else's.

IMO, they are all so similar it's mute to argue about it. The IQ is there on all of them ... in spades!

I think for a Contax 645 the way to go is Phase One. It's like the their backs were made for that camera.

I think for Mamiya, the Leaf Aptus Backs are a perfect match. Phase One is now in league with Mamiya, so that may change dramatically. But until that solidifies, I'll stick with my experiences.

Hasselblad has gone it's own way. Either you love it or hate it. I love it ... love it enough to drop mega bucks into it and an Xact system to use the back on. I will say that categorizing it as a "studio camera" is news to me, Hasselblad H users world wide, and to Hasselblad. Enough said.

HY6.

I'm a visual person. I think Sinar industrial design needs updating. The Leaf AFi Hy6 is beautifully integrated industrial design. I DO NOT know anything first hand about the functionality of a Sinar back or their Hy6 camera system. I DO know Leaf functionality, plus their service, durability and software is excellent. I have no doubt that Sinar's is also, but I have no direct experience with it.
 

Clawery

New member
Mitchell,

Just as Thierry stated, I along with Lance Schad, are always available for any of your questions. Feel free to call or e-mail either of us.

Chris Lawery
Sales Manager
[email protected]
Capture Integration, Phase One Dealer of the Year

877-217-9870 | National
404-234-5195 | Cell
404-522-7662 | Atlanta
305.534-5701 | Miami
Sign up for our Newsletter | Read Our Latest Newsletter


I don't want to start a war here, but being ignorant of the MFDB world, I wonder if there are any more or less agreed characteristics of Digital Backs. I think many could characterize Canon, Nikon, Leica, and Olympus. Can the same be done for MFDBs?

I'm especially interested in Phase, Sinar and Leaf.

Any help greatly appreciated.

Best,

Mitchell
 

mark1958

Member
One has to take this in context of the digital back, camera/lens, and software. Any results discussed will be dependent on all three. I have used the Hasselbald H system with the Leaf Aptus 65 and the Hasselblad H3DII-31. I had both systems for direct comparison for about a week. In my mind at low isos, the final IQ was not significantly different between the two but dependent on the software used to process. Resolution and dynamic range were close. The Hasselblad H3D sometimes gave some moire that I did not see with an equivalent Leaf shots. The H3DII-31 gives the best high, iso 400 or 800 images I have ever seen. Very little noise with tremendous detail. THis is one of the major selling points for me.

There are other issues as well. THe leaf/hasselblad requires two battery systems and all the problems having two independent systems have to be considered but clearly not the major issue.

IN the end, except for the iso issue, both gave extremely outstanding images and I feel you could not go wrong with either choice.
 

Dale Allyn

New member
This is a very helpful topic, Mitchell. Thank you for posting it.

I'm reading as much as I can on this topic and for those of us not engaged in an evolving process, such as one might experience as a commercial photographer moving to digital from film, I think that this is even more daunting. In my case, I'm trying to learn whether medium format is the next best step for the kind of photography I do, but I find little info regarding this. Perhaps someone can speak to MFDBs being used for non-commercial, non-studio work, i.e. "field work".

I do almost no studio work (even sold my Elinchroms) and now just enjoy field and street stuff. I love the detail and depth we see in the best MF files, but is there a system that might be most appropriate for one who wants to schlep around and do landscapes, field macros, street stuff (where a large camera won't mess up the situation)? I'm thinking of durability, dust, dirt, moisture, etc.

Most of the examples I see are in a commercial application. What cameras and backs might you suggest to one who is wanting to get closer to view camera results in the field without using a DB on a view camera?

Sorry for this rambling post. Not a great first post I guess. I hope the intended question is decipherable in there somewhere.
 

gogopix

Subscriber
Marc,
Can the HB H3dII back be used on an alpa? that is, does it operate as an "H" back?

thx
Victor
 
D

DougDolde

Guest
I am sure all the reps for Leaf, Hasselblad, Phase and Sinar will put in their $.02 in this thread. But might they all be biased?
 

Mitchell

New member
Thanks everybody. There are really helpful posts here. I hope the discussion keeps going.

I'm like Dale. I'll probably use whatever I get almost exclusively outside, landscape and nature.

Everybody seems to agree the IQ is great with all of them.

Most of the time, I will be shooting on a tripod. I wonder if that makes high ISO advantage of Phase a non-factor? Any thoughts on this.




Best,

Mitchell
 
D

ddk

Guest
The bottom line, is that I would likely STILL buy the P45+ for my COntax 645 but I am seriously considering the Sinar for areas (inside travel, churches, caves etc.) where no flash possible, but can photograph. The files are quite good at 800 even with pushing 3 stops. This is a net 4 stop advantage. However useful less than 10% of the time. On the other hand the resolution give up is small.

regards
Victor
Victor, I was under the impression that the long exposure capabilities of the Phase+ backs would make them ideal for this kind of photography. I'm asking because my experience is limited to the older P20 & P25.

david
 

gogopix

Subscriber
well, in you deliberations dont forget the camera
here's a comparison for you!

SOME MF cameras are REALLY protable LOL

Victor
 
Last edited:
J

JEM_DTG

Guest
Viktor,
The Hasselblad H3D/H3DII digital back can be used on any ALPA 12 camera with the appropriate H-Mount back adapter. It can also be used with other super-wide / technical cameras, and large format cameras (ie. ARCA-SWISS, Horseman, Silvestri, Linhof, etc.). Bear in mind, to do this, you will need to provide power via FireWire to the digital back. Once the back is removed from the H3D Body, it can no longer get power via the body's battery grip, and must be powered via FireWire. This can be accomplished by shooting tethered to a Mac / PC while running Phocus or FlexColor, or by using the ImageBank II with its snap-on battery.

Regards,

Jordan Miller
DTG
 
Top