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!

Would like to upgrade, which MDB?

Don Libby

Well-known member
But what is enough and what is budget minded.
How right you are! I bought Ken's Kodak keeping it less than 90 days before going with a P30+ for about 18-months before trading it for a P45+ and earlier last year a P65.

One of the best selling images I have was shot with the P30+ (I licensed it to Phase One and have just about sold out the edition). The P45+ was just as good but what really turned me on was the P65 and change of sensors.

Had I to do all over again I'd start looking at trying to pick up a good used IQ back. Mainly because as good as a Plus back is the IQ is that much better. I'm hoping to trade in my P65 for either an IQ160 or 180 sometime soon.
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
I can knit custom ski masks in all kinds of fabrics. Been working on a silk pattern that is just lovely for hot climates. LOL

In all seriousness and right now Its sounds like a sales pitch because i am in the middle of this and I don't want this to be at all. But looking back at the 5 backs I bought I wish I went from the ZD right to the P40+ but was not out than but If I had that chance now and after realizing the upgrade paths that Phase does that the best deal going is the IQ right now as it puts you inline on upgrades for the next wave of backs. My most costly and it was costly was going from the P series to the IQ series. If you can get in the IQ than your better off on the next upgrade path with mine or not its the best route to take. Also Im not so sure anyone sitting on a IQ series back is even going to upgrade to the next best thing. Its pretty dang good as it stands , okay live view i can see some folks jumping on that one but after that not much really. Live view I never use so for some its a non issue. Anyway do your homework and there are many threads on this alone.
 

shlomi

Member
But what is enough and what is budget minded. That varies by individual needs and desires. Your comfort level is not a general statement. I know what your saying but go talk to a guy with a S2 and 5 lenses for example. Some would say that price is right in there wheel house. Just a example.
You sell your IQ40 for 16000, an II8 will sell for 9000.

I was saying the the difference between II8 and P40+ and IQ40 is only in functionality, not image quality.
The OP said he is only interest in image quality.
It was my impression he does not want to pay for functionality.

Is there an image quality difference between these backs?
I've never shot with IQ40 or P40+, so I have no direct knowledge.
 

Oren Grad

Active member
Is there an image quality difference between these backs?
There can be an inherent image quality difference - and there can be a practical image quality difference, if the IQ user interface is so much more slick that you end up capturing pictures that you'd otherwise miss while fumbling with a Pxx. Perhaps less of an issue in the studio, more so in the field...

Afraid I haven't used either myself, so I don't have a useful opinion to share. But I think your question, a bit more broadly construed, is very much to the point: is an IQ just more pleasant to use, or actually more productive of usable pictures? If the latter, in what kinds of situations does it make a difference?
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
There is a LOT more difference between the 8 and IQ 140. But yes it is functionality but if you never shot them than you have to understand that functionality has a premium for it and that is up to a individual to decide but I can say with almost certainty every IQ owner will say it was worth that premium. It comes down to a I nailed it I know it and I can move on instead of well I'm not so sure have to wait to I get it on a computer. I owned them both and to me the IQ us worth the premium in a large way. It takes a lot of guess work out. Now if you go buy a P40 new compared to mine LNIB than your talking a 4 k difference than 10k buying a new 140. Sorry that's a freaking steal and I just have to say it. No offense to Leaf but I am not a fan of there LCD setup in that series. There is a huge difference visually to the shooter with the IQ and I mean a big difference.

With that I'm stepping out of this conversation , it sounds like a sales pitch. Was not my intention but the IQ back is the best thing going if not why did Leaf introduce the Credo. No one wants to guess. We want big LCDs that inform us not leaving you guessing
 

GrahamWelland

Subscriber & Workshop Member
Great value for money where you can actually see what you've shot and zoom to something other than a pixelated approximation:
Leaf Aptus II series

Sex on a stick Ferrari of a back - really - a couple of minutes with one and you're doomed:
IQ series (and I assume Credo too)

Great image quality but what the heck did I just capture beyond the histogram and low res rendering? :
P series.

I've enjoyed using all three and they're all going to smoke a ZD whichever one you decide on.

(Btw, I'm not being a shill for Guy but that really is going to be a sweet deal for someone ... Thankfully I don't need another one!)
 

shlomi

Member
It takes a lot of guess work out.
If I understand correctly, then this is your bottom line.
But for instance for a 100% tethered shooter - this means nothing.
If I was taking my II8 to the field, then there is no argument it is lacking.
In the studio I do not feel anything missing other that sensor size.

BTW Leaf introduced Credo because they had the R&D already done and paid for by Phase. The chassis and connectors are practically identical to IQ. Of course Leaf would like to appeal more to field shooters if they can.

The $7000 difference between used II8 and IQ40 - if you have a suitable laptop and no money then your consideration is $7000 vs. the inconvenience of tethering.
 

yaya

Active member
I think that you will find that any of the Leaf backs you've mentioned will run circles around your ZD when it comes to functionality and image quality

Specifically for landscape, the histogram and average + spot meter facilities on the Aptus, IMO, are the best on any camera. The large screen, while using a relatively low resolution LCD, is very accurate for judging focus since it creates the 100% preview directly out of the RAW data with/without sharpening applied, depending on how you set it.

The onboard operating system and the stylus allows us to implement many advanced functionality such as IPTC & copyright input, focal length input (for mechanical lenses) etc.

On the Aptus-II and the DM models you'll enjoy the improved GUI (search for Leaf GUI on YouTube there's a clip that I created about a year ago) and if you can stretch to buying new or refurb you'll also get factory warranty

Worth noting that all Aptus models are limited to 32 sec max exposure time. The new Credo can do longer than that

Please let me know if you'd like to see some RAW files and if you need any help worth finding a dealer

BR, yair
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
If I understand correctly, then this is your bottom line.
But for instance for a 100% tethered shooter - this means nothing.
If I was taking my II8 to the field, then there is no argument it is lacking.
In the studio I do not feel anything missing other that sensor size.

BTW Leaf introduced Credo because they had the R&D already done and paid for by Phase. The chassis and connectors are practically identical to IQ. Of course Leaf would like to appeal more to field shooters if they can.

The $7000 difference between used II8 and IQ40 - if you have a suitable laptop and no money then your consideration is $7000 vs. the inconvenience of tethering.
Need to read his question . The first line says


I'd like to upgrade from the ZD back because I'd like something that operates faster and allows proper review of exposure and sharpness.


That's a IQ or the new Credo. He is also a landscape shooter
 

shlomi

Member
Need to read his question . The first line says


I'd like to upgrade from the ZD back because I'd like something that operates faster and allows proper review of exposure and sharpness.


That's a IQ or the new Credo. He is also a landscape shooter

That is quite right, I forgot about that.

On the other hand, he is coming from ZD, and all the backs he asked about are under $8k.
$8k to $16k is a big jump.
 

Jack

Sr. Administrator
Staff member
IF you shoot in the field at all, the newer LCD screens are a must-have -- and here, the IQ takes the prize for sure, at least for right now -- insert hearty plug for Guy's like-new IQ140! ;). If you mainly shoot tethered in the studio, then any of the previous or other current generation backs are excellent.
 

Shashin

Well-known member
IF you shoot in the field at all, the newer LCD screens are a must-have --
I wonder how we managed shooting film? Or even the older backs?

Folks seem to think doubling a budget is the easiest thing in the world. The backs the OP are looking at suggests he does not have the funds to spring for the latest and greatest. He wants to get a better back than a ZD and he does not have children or a kidney to sell in order to achieve this. I sometimes think folks blessed with top-of-the-line equipment are really out of touch when it comes to the realities of some to purchase these things--no, it is not easy for me to stretch a budget by $7000. We have a member trying to move up, can't we give him some realistic and useful advice other than you need to buy the latest and most expensive back because of the bells and whistles?
 

gerald.d

Well-known member
IF you shoot in the field at all, the newer LCD screens are a must-have --
I don't get this kind of comment. How can they possibly be a "must have" when there are so many great images in the "Fun with MF images" thread all the way back to 2008, when the thread started?

Better, sure. "Nice to have", undoubtedly.

But "must have"?

I think that's doing a bit of an injustice to everyone who seemed (and presumably some who still seem) to be perfectly capable of shooting great images with these backs, regardless of how technology has improved in the latest generations.
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
I wonder how we managed shooting film? Or even the older backs?

Folks seem to think doubling a budget is the easiest thing in the world. The backs the OP are looking at suggests he does not have the funds to spring for the latest and greatest. He wants to get a better back than a ZD and he does not have children or a kidney to sell in order to achieve this. I sometimes think folks blessed with top-of-the-line equipment are really out of touch when it comes to the realities of some to purchase these things--no, it is not easy for me to stretch a budget by $7000. We have a member trying to move up, can't we give him some realistic and useful advice other than you need to buy the latest and most expensive back because of the bells and whistles?
I qualify more than anyone on this going through 5 upgraded backs. You have any clue how much this process cost to do this. Bottom line at some point your going to have to take a bite of the apple. Advice is do it once get to a level that any jump is small. Btw no ine mentioned price. Funny thing is here all the people making price comments are not back shooters. Welcome to our world. No one said it came cheap .
 
F

FabianB

Guest
Dear all,

So many responses. I don't know where to start to reply :D

Ok the reason I'm looking at the older backs is that when you come from a ZD it is a natural step forward and probably a big one. Thinking of an Aptus 75 is like a big wow for me :). It depends on the perspective from which you look at it. :bugeyes:
I'm ok with the image quality of the ZD, sometimes it's fantastic, sometimes it's weird, but generally ok. What I find difficult is that review of sharpness and exposure is pretty much impossible and I've missed several good shots because the back was locked up storing files. It is so slow I might take a book along next time I go for a shoot.
From all I read I understand that the image quality of the older Leafs at base ISO is pretty much as good as it gets. I'm happy to read this. This is my main criterion and it's also the main reason why I've opted for MF gear in the first place.
It was good to get some hints on alternative options, newer backs such as the P40+ and the IQ series. It got me thinking more of the long term. My idea is that the new back, whatever it will be, should do it for the coming 5 years. I don't think that I will print much larger 5 years down the road than I do today. 1m on the long side is the max for me, so I think a 30MP back can nicely fit the bill.
Of course I'd love the display and interface of the new generations and also understand that it will help at times to get a shot that I otherwise wouldn't. But hey I'm coming from a 2.5k$ back, how far should I jump?

Greetings, Fabian
 

shlomi

Member
Dear all,

So many responses. I don't know where to start to reply :D

Ok the reason I'm looking at the older backs is that when you come from a ZD it is a natural step forward and probably a big one. Thinking of an Aptus 75 is like a big wow for me :). It depends on the perspective from which you look at it. :bugeyes:
I'm ok with the image quality of the ZD, sometimes it's fantastic, sometimes it's weird, but generally ok. What I find difficult is that review of sharpness and exposure is pretty much impossible and I've missed several good shots because the back was locked up storing files. It is so slow I might take a book along next time I go for a shoot.
From all I read I understand that the image quality of the older Leafs at base ISO is pretty much as good as it gets. I'm happy to read this. This is my main criterion and it's also the main reason why I've opted for MF gear in the first place.
It was good to get some hints on alternative options, newer backs such as the P40+ and the IQ series. It got me thinking more of the long term. My idea is that the new back, whatever it will be, should do it for the coming 5 years. I don't think that I will print much larger 5 years down the road than I do today. 1m on the long side is the max for me, so I think a 30MP back can nicely fit the bill.
Of course I'd love the display and interface of the new generations and also understand that it will help at times to get a shot that I otherwise wouldn't. But hey I'm coming from a 2.5k$ back, how far should I jump?

Greetings, Fabian
Guy does have a point that one big jump is cheaper than many small jumps.
However, it is absolutely not necessary to get an IQ and no need to sell your house.

I would recommend you get one of these: 75, II7, II8.
22/54s/75s/II5 I would leave unless you can't afford the better ones.
22mp is OK, but noisy ISO 100 is not OK.
 
Top