Digital back comparison

[Geoff]

Recently, I was able to compare three different digital backs at one time:

- Leaf Credo 60, 60mb back CCD sensor
- Phase One 3100, 100mb back, CMOS sensor
- Hasselblad CFV II 50C, 50mb back, CMOS sensor

The findings can be found here: Digital Back Comparison.

It's like three different eras, and its intriguing to see how they stack up. Like all tests, its not perfect, but hopefully there is something of interest.

 

[peterm1]

Thanks Geoff, very well done! I used to have the IQ3100 and now have the CFV II 50C / 907x and the results seem to match my experience as well. However, I have never used a LCC with my Hasselblad - maybe I am missing something. I gave up the IQ3100 since I found it cumbersome to shoot, with LCC frames, dark frames, etc. but the files were amazing when processed.

 

[Ray Harrison]

Thank you for the article! Nicely done.I'm currently working with an IQ4 back as well an IQ3 Achromatic and I love them. Truly. That said, I am still a bit wistful for my former Credo back. CCD produces very lovely files to me at base ISO. They do indeed hold up over time.

 

[Pieter 12]

My ancient Leaf AFi II 7 is slow, has no live view and makes incredible images. I just hope it holds up for another 10 years.

 

[JeffK]

While I'm tempted by the conveniences of the IQ4 Achromatic, I got into an older IQ260A just over 2yrs ago. I didn't mind the slower process of shooting with MF and 4x5, just got tired of processing and scanning film. So the 260A helped me get past the film inconvenience. For the price, that was enough. I'll see where the pricing for IQ4 Achromatic ends up in 3-5yrs.

 

[buildbot]

Great article! I have to echo everyone else and say that the 60MP CCDs are very awesome indeed.

 

[Ray Harrison]

While I'm tempted by the conveniences of the IQ4 Achromatic, I got into an older IQ260A just over 2yrs ago. I didn't mind the slower process of shooting with MF and 4x5, just got tired of processing and scanning film. So the 260A helped me get past the film inconvenience. For the price, that was enough. I'll see where the pricing for IQ4 Achromatic ends up in 5-10yrs.

I hear you. I was in the market for an IQ260A late last year and ended up with an IQ3100A from Capture Integration - the price Steve and Dave were able to offer was very, very good and it was "low mileage" (200-something shots). The conveniences it offered - electronic shutter, live view in particular for me - were worth the surprisingly moderate difference in price. I may end up with an IQ4150A at some point later but I'm very happy with the IQ3 and will be for quite some time.

 

[Geoff]

Thanks Geoff, very well done! I used to have the IQ3100 and now have the CFV II 50C / 907x and the results seem to match my experience as well. However, I have never used a LCC with my Hasselblad - maybe I am missing something. I gave up the IQ3100 since I found it cumbersome to shoot, with LCC frames, dark frames, etc. but the files were amazing when processed.

The LCC with the CFV was only to deal with the shifting and make all comparable. Looking back on the uncorrected (original) shot - the level one with the CFV, there is no light loss in the corners (no vignetting), so I would really doubt it’s needed for regular shooting with 907.

BTW, thanks for all the kind comments above. Its interesting to see how many others have had the split between CCD and CMOS to deal with, and the fact that the 3100 is a great back, but takes more steps than the simpler Credo. Lose the cable, get live view, but now have to shoot the dark frame, and LCC if shifting. But the images have remarkable flexibility.

 

[huyu]

TFS! That's really interesting! I've been always in love with 60mp range, will switch back one day...

 

[alistairsimmons]

Credo 60

 

[ShaunQ]

No offense to the Australian P1 dealer but he tried to talk me into an IQ3100 at the time, all I knew is that I wanted the best image rendering and didn't care for the bells and whistles. I ended up with a beautifully low count IQ360 and couldn't be happier, stunning files when shot at base ISO which is all I ever do anyway, cheers CI + P1.

 

[mccuskerj]

Great test! Wish there were more of these out there. Thanks for the effort and writeup.

The CVF has a noticeable magenta/purple cast in the shadows compared to the other two backs (something to do with the lens back/interaction?). I'm not so convinced by the default sharpening either – the details look smeared to me (particularly noticeable in the material of the windowsill on page 11 of the PDF).

Would be very curious though to see the original images –a PDF is using jpeg compression of course.

About to purchase my first DB for a tech camera – doing due diligence and this is super helpful.

 

[nazdravanul]

Well done, excellent and useful test, thank you!

 

[Geoff]

Great test! Wish there were more of these out there. Thanks for the effort and writeup.

The CVF has a noticeable magenta/purple cast in the shadows compared to the other two backs (something to do with the lens back/interaction?). I'm not so convinced by the default sharpening either – the details look smeared to me (particularly noticeable in the material of the windowsill on page 11 of the PDF).

Would be very curious though to see the original images –a PDF is using jpeg compression of course.

About to purchase my first DB for a tech camera – doing due diligence and this is super helpful.

Thanks for the kind thoughts. Yea, there isn't much of this info around. At the time this was done, it didn't get much attention - seems to be more helpful now. Not sure why.

The Credo 60 files really were something special at base ISO. But live view really is a game changer - you can use these newer backs on older steady view cameras with all sorts of lenses from different eras. I'm having fun with a $200 G Claron 240mm, which is sharp in its center. Even a Fujinon 75mm is surprisingly capable - not for huge prints, major stitching, but better than one might imagine for very low cost. Easy way to have some fun.

The CFV back has operational advantages over the 3100 - not needing the dark image, for example. But boy, you start working the images from the Phase back and they really come to life.

I see your point on pg. 11, don't recall the image looking quite that magenta and so grainy. Will go find it.... if you'd like, can try and load up some of the original shots.... any sense of which ones are of more interest? I think there were quite a few.
Geoff

 

[mccuskerj]

Thanks for the kind thoughts. Yea, there isn't much of this info around. At the time this was done, it didn't get much attention - seems to be more helpful now. Not sure why.

The Credo 60 files really were something special at base ISO. But live view really is a game changer - you can use these newer backs on older steady view cameras with all sorts of lenses from different eras. I'm having fun with a $200 G Claron 240mm, which is sharp in its center. Even a Fujinon 75mm is surprisingly capable - not for huge prints, major stitching, but better than one might imagine for very low cost. Easy way to have some fun.

The CFV back has operational advantages over the 3100 - not needing the dark image, for example. But boy, you start working the images from the Phase back and they really come to life.

I see your point on pg. 11, don't recall the image looking quite that magenta and so grainy. Will go find it.... if you'd like, can try and load up some of the original shots.... any sense of which ones are of more interest? I think there were quite a few.
Geoff

Would be very useful to download just a basic selection of the images at base ISO and no adjustments. The image on page 11 - I guess actually just a 100% crop? - so just the source images for that view. Would be most appreciated!

 

[Geoff]

see: digital back test images

Uploaded are two sets of files:
- uncorrected JPGS at base ISO for all three backs, typically level and also shifted images.
- corrected, stitched JPGS for the above, named "Pano ....". Not sure if these were sharpened, probably tho.

These were shot as the light was shifting, so the color temp in the uncorrected varies greatly. The Pano images have corrected color temp and are better to compare.

 

[mccuskerj]

see: digital back test images

Uploaded are two sets of files:
- uncorrected JPGS at base ISO for all three backs, typically level and also shifted images.
- corrected, stitched JPGS for the above, named "Pano ....". Not sure if these were sharpened, probably tho.

These were shot as the light was shifting, so the color temp in the uncorrected varies greatly. The Pano images have corrected color temp and are better to compare.

Thank you! It's prompting me to sign-up for Zenfolio... anyway to download these for free?

 

[Geoff]

Thought they were open to anyone. How about this:
digital back test files

 

[Wall-H]

Thought they were open to anyone. How about this:
digital back test files

Worked for me. Thank you Sir

 

[mccuskerj]

Thought they were open to anyone. How about this:
digital back test files

thank you! works