With the recent buzz on this and other forums related to recent announcements by Hasselblad and Kodak of larger capacity backs and discontinuing of the 9 micron chips in favor of the new 6 micron chips, I'm left wondering about whether or not there is something like a "best" or "most optimal" combination of lenses and digital backs for medium format cameras.
I've now read in a few places that simply having more pixels may not result in more detail because the lenses themselves may not resolve what the digital backs are capable of resolving (diffraction kicking in, the resolving power of the lens itself, the impact of technique/movement, impact of exposure, etc, etc.) There have been a number of posts on this forum and other forums by people trying out Rodenstock and Schneider lenses and other lenses that have been designed specifically for digital purposes.
So the question from me is, aside from the "character" or "drawing" of specific lenses, is there such a thing as an optimal match between lenses and MFDBs? For example, I have a Contax 645 camera and the 45, 80, 120, and 140 lenses (lenses with a very good reputation). A few years ago, a photographer sold off this camera and lens collection after placing a 22MP back on it and then finding that, to his eye, the back outresolved the lenses. So, as I look at MFDBs, I begin to think that the 18MP Phase P21+ and my Contax lenses might just be a "best fit" with one another. Why would I want to marry ever-higher capacity backs on lenses that really can't leverage the resolving power of my lenses. And, of course, the point of this is that I would guess I have lots of company with others who own these terrific lenses but whose resolving limitations are starting to emerge. I'd really like some help with this, what am I not understanding? Thank you.
I've now read in a few places that simply having more pixels may not result in more detail because the lenses themselves may not resolve what the digital backs are capable of resolving (diffraction kicking in, the resolving power of the lens itself, the impact of technique/movement, impact of exposure, etc, etc.) There have been a number of posts on this forum and other forums by people trying out Rodenstock and Schneider lenses and other lenses that have been designed specifically for digital purposes.
So the question from me is, aside from the "character" or "drawing" of specific lenses, is there such a thing as an optimal match between lenses and MFDBs? For example, I have a Contax 645 camera and the 45, 80, 120, and 140 lenses (lenses with a very good reputation). A few years ago, a photographer sold off this camera and lens collection after placing a 22MP back on it and then finding that, to his eye, the back outresolved the lenses. So, as I look at MFDBs, I begin to think that the 18MP Phase P21+ and my Contax lenses might just be a "best fit" with one another. Why would I want to marry ever-higher capacity backs on lenses that really can't leverage the resolving power of my lenses. And, of course, the point of this is that I would guess I have lots of company with others who own these terrific lenses but whose resolving limitations are starting to emerge. I'd really like some help with this, what am I not understanding? Thank you.
