Menu
What's new
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!

Sinar evolution 75 and Phase one P65+ for Contax 645

L

Linberg

New member
I think all Contax 645 owners know how difficult it is to find a digital back for this camera. :cry: Sinar 75 appeared in the used equipment store at an attractive price on Contax(y).
And I've been looking for Phase One p65+ for a long time. And I want to understand if I should look for 65+ or buy 75. If you have one of these backs, could you send me the source from this back? In cases with Sinar, for comparison, it would be good not to use DNG, but sources from a .IA and .BR flash drive. So that I could understand for myself what choice to make.
Nothing replaces a direct comparison. And if you have the opportunity to remove a brick wall by placing a flash a meter away from it, it would be great.
. Here is a frame from the film. (Fomapan CONTAX 645 80/2 and Epson V750 scan)
 

Attachments

L

Linberg

New member
buildbot

buildbot

Well-known member
Linberg said:
Thank you. (y) So far, alas, no one has written a comment with the file)
And I'm slowly leaning towards Sinar, since it is available and the price is acceptable.
I really hope the project with the IAtoDNG-0.2.1 program will move forward!🎞(y)(y)(y) https://www.getdpi.com/forum/index.php?threads/raw-files-from-sinar-emotion.73378/
Click to expand...
I assume you want files from a Contax body right? I only have Mamiya/Phase bodies and a Rollei Hy6 for my emotion back. And no P65 to compare with either, though I do have a IQ260. I think it is a different sensor than the P65+ however.

Very busy with my real job for now, submitting a research paper… after that though I will get back to working on IAtoDNG!
 
L

Linberg

New member
Thank you for your work on IAtoDNG, unfortunately I haven't had a chance to test the program yet.

I need any files / photos, the main thing is that they would be described to how they were made. So that I or other participants in the form could recreate this "test" and compare. My goal is to compare and understand.

For example -
Lens,
aperture,
distance to the subject,
distance to the background,

the exact position of the flash -
power
height,
tilt,
position of the stand relative to the camera and the background.


IQ260 has differences from 65+, but not so significant at short shutter speeds and minimum ISO. Because the comparison of the 260th and 75th is interesting.
 
O

OliverM

Member
I had a Sinar 54lv and a p65+ with my contax.
I am an amateur and my impressions are very subjective.
I overall prefer the image of the sinar, colors are more natural and even more beautiful.
Technically the p65 is much better, iso and usability. Also great images with the contax. Big advantage over the sinar is a lower weight and smaller size.
For portraits, I recommend the Sinar.
For very large prints the P65 makes sense.
Both are great.
KR
 
L

Linberg

New member
Thanks for your feedback.

For the sake of interest, I would also add "Leaf Credo 60" to the comparison, because it is also on the same sensor as the P65+ and IQ160.

Sinar has a 48 * 36 sensor, which still stops me, a 60MPx sensor has about 54 * 40.4(y), which for me is 1.09 (1.1) crop from Film🎞, and Sinar has 1.37 (1.4).
And if with crop 1.1 I can measure and not notice. That 1.4 will always tell me that he is 1.4, in every frame taken. 😰

By the way, in my opinion, sensors larger than 54 * 41 have not yet been installed in digital backs?
 
drevil

drevil

Well-known member
Staff member
just my two cents, for someone who wants to use the C645 with a digital back, there should be no other goal than an IQ180 or even better 280(never seen one for sale)

i deeply regret selling my IQ180, and even consider contacting the buyer to buy it back.
even though i am quite happy with my current P65+
 
FloatingLens

FloatingLens

Well-known member
Linberg said:
Sinar has a 48 * 36 sensor, which still stops me, a 60MPx sensor has about 54 * 40.4(y), which for me is 1.09 (1.1) crop from Film🎞, and Sinar has 1.37 (1.4).
And if with crop 1.1 I can measure and not notice. That 1.4 will always tell me that he is 1.4, in every frame taken. 😰
Click to expand...
Actually, the 54x40mm sensor dimensions match 645 film negative size. Ie. the 60Mpx have a 1.0 crop factor with regards to film.
 
L

Linberg

New member
drevil said:
just my two cents, for someone who wants to use the C645 with a digital back, there should be no other goal than an IQ180 or even better 280(never seen one for sale)

i deeply regret selling my IQ180, and even consider contacting the buyer to buy it back.
even though i am quite happy with my current P65+
Click to expand...
If you want to sell your P65+ on Contax 645, write to me. Perhaps I will be interested.
I also look closely at the Leaf Credo 60/80. Maybe I'm wrong, but it seemed to me that Phase has a warmer color rendition, while Leaf is closer to Nikon (colder). - alas, I have little experience and files to compare it.
 
L

Linberg

New member
FloatingLens said:
Actually, the 54x40mm sensor dimensions match 645 film negative size. Ie. the 60Mpx have a 1.0 crop factor with regards to film.
Click to expand...
This is an interesting question. If you measure my frame with a tool in Contax 56 * 42mm, which is 2352mm², the matrix at 60M is 53.9 * 40.4, which will be 2177mm². 2352/2177=1.08
Yes, the 1.08 crop is barely noticeable, and you probably don't need a screen for it. This magic of MAaarketing🤡 rounding is so good, especially in Lens apertures)🤥 marketing can’t cheat anymore in cinema lenses, it’s not F /, but T / - which accurately characterizes the Light Transmission of the lens.
(F / - characterizes the work of the depth of field).

Therefore, the aperture ratio of lenses with "F / 2.8" may not be "T / 2.8" at all, especially of different design schemes. But in Cinema optics, this is not acceptable, and T was introduced there, and F is not used. It became necessary that when changing the lens, in one scene of the film, the brightness and contrast would not change.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top