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!

Strategy Advice

fotografz

Well-known member
I think my biggest mistake was selling my contax 645.. I got worried about it being an unsupported system..

I have appreciated the advice in this thread. Nonetheless, I am sitting tight at the moment.
Not sure what the big mystique is about the Contax 645. Nice camera system for it's time, even ahead of it's time ... but abandoned by Kyocera before they even backed out of the camera business. The promised leaf shutter lenses never materialized, The power issue was never fixed, and it was useless for AF in anything less than perfect conditions. If they had stuck around and the 645-II had made it to market, that would've been nice. But they didn't.

Not sure what this means "so went with the Hasselblad H2--- and look where that is now."
Hasselblad has gone on record concerning supporting that camera for a decade to come. It appears that those that want a 3rd party back will drive the value of the H2 nothing but up. I now wish I had kept my H2 ... but I didn't.

BTW, after all the hype I'm not impressed with the Hy6, at least not $50,000. worth that's for sure.

So, I think the concept of "sitting tight" and actually using what we have to make photos is a wise course of action in a very volatile market.
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
Marc reason i just not have jumped in yet. i would love to have that power for certain jobs but I'm a scared rabbit with MF on what shoe will drop next.
 

fotografz

Well-known member
Smart thinking actually Guy. But I wouldn't hesitate if you can make money with a MF back. That in truth, is what it's really all about. ROI. If you spend more money, can you make more money?

I could care less about the pissing contest of which MF system is better. They all work to deliver what the commercial market demands ... and that has become primarily digital. Whether it's MF digital depends on the work that needs to be done.

I guarantee more shoe's will drop. The problem, it seems, is that the top brand "shoes" are getting more expensive, not less ... making it more difficult to realize that ROI.

As far as I'm concerned, there is nothing in the current crop of the latest MF cameras/backs that represents any kind of true advancement that's worth the money ( and that includes the Hy6 at the price they're asking). Just incremental little improvements that anyone would be hard pressed to detect in the final product. The only thing that will change that is if sensor technology changes in a significant way. Like a 6X6 sensor of something like that.

So IMO, the real value is in the previous models which have the same damned sensor as the latest greatest ... I just saw a P-45 with a one year guarantee from a reputable re-seller for $17,800. ... That was a $30,000. back just a year or so ago. Bet that P-45 shoots just as good as it did a year ago : -)
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
And that is the big issue is the ROI, big money has just gone south in many ways. In my mind i would have to create 50 k in one year to justify it just for that system alone not counting other gear related ROI like the M8 system I currently use . I could probably do it but it still makes me gun shy to invest that much. Your examples says one guy got a bargain and the guy selling it lost his shirt . Now if I sold all my M8 gear today , i would lose almost nothing in that type of comparision. Maybe only 5 k would be the loss on my 30 k buy in on the M8 and a 13k loss on that MF system just on the back. The MF back is the biggest loser, the system itself lenses and such will hold up pretty good, so you than go okay what MF will hold there value and really none of them will hold. I agree from what i have seen between Leaf and Phase is marginally different, so that war or battle is really flipping a coin to see what works best for you. There will always be features better on one than the other but a compromise somewhere else
 

mark1958

Member
Marc let me explain what I meant... The contax system did not cost me a fortune compared to the Hasselblad H2 system. So what i meant is that I could have kept my Contax system and perhaps put more into the back or just saved the money. The point was that I went to the Hasselblad expecting that they were the most likely to develop this system with further technology --- better wide angle lens and a series of PC lenses as an example. So now the issue is that these new tools are coming out (e.g. 28mm wide angle) but for me to use it I have to spend another fortune, sell my existing system etc. So this is why I am not pleased with Hasselblad.

Not sure what the big mystique is about the Contax 645. Nice camera system for it's time, even ahead of it's time ... but abandoned by Kyocera before they even backed out of the camera business. The promised leaf shutter lenses never materialized, The power issue was never fixed, and it was useless for AF in anything less than perfect conditions. If they had stuck around and the 645-II had made it to market, that would've been nice. But they didn't.

Not sure what this means "so went with the Hasselblad H2--- and look where that is now."
Hasselblad has gone on record concerning supporting that camera for a decade to come. It appears that those that want a 3rd party back will drive the value of the H2 nothing but up. I now wish I had kept my H2 ... but I didn't.

BTW, after all the hype I'm not impressed with the Hy6, at least not $50,000. worth that's for sure.

So, I think the concept of "sitting tight" and actually using what we have to make photos is a wise course of action in a very volatile market.
 

fotografz

Well-known member
Mark, that's a valid point. Yet imagine if you were doing the same but with a Mamiya 645 AFD-II and wanted a 28mm ... it's $5,000 !!!! 5 grand for a Mamiya 645 lens? I didn't pay much more than that to upgrade my H2 to a H3 PLUS the H/C 28 bought on Hasselblad's loyality promotion last year.

Tilt/Shift is another matter. Contax never had one, and I never heard of plans to make one either. Rumors of one for the H camera continue, but that remains to be seen. I've yet to see a fully functional T/S lens that comes close to using a view camera anyway. Most everyday P/C applications can be accomplished with a 35 and today's software. I have a Mamiya RZ T/S adapter I've used for DOF control, and a buddy of mine uses a Buick big Fuji for the same reason ... but they are limited compared to my Rollei Xact with the 39 meg back.

I had a complete Contax system including 2 cameras and all the lenses. When I picked up the H camera at a demo and it focused in light I knew the Contax would struggle with ... that was it for me. They're all flawed in some way or another .... but AF was the one area I didn't want to compromise on. So, it comes down to what's more important to each shooter.
 

mark1958

Member
I do see your points and I do agree that none of these systems are perfect. What did you have to give hassy to go from an H2 to a H3D/28mm for 5K? Did that include the digital back.. ? That would be a fantastic deal. I would make that move in a minute if it were offered to me. I qualify for their HERO program too.

I have to say on my MF shooting, I almost always manually focus albeit there are times having accurate AF is critical. I agree that the contax sometimes fell short there. i guess I was spoiled by the speed and accuracy of the Canon AF system. I will just hold back and wait to see what the trade in offers are and then decide. I really want to compare the 1DsmkIII with my current MF. WHile i realize that the DR and overall IQ will be better with the medium format set up-- it is a matter of degree for me. I did some printing of similar shots i took with the canon 5D and Hassy H2 and at 16x24 prints-- the differences were very marginal at most. With pixel peeping can see bigger differences.
Hey next time i make it up to visit my grandmother, I will let you know.. You two are neighbors.. :)


Mark, that's a valid point. Yet imagine if you were doing the same but with a Mamiya 645 AFD-II and wanted a 28mm ... it's $5,000 !!!! 5 grand for a Mamiya 645 lens? I didn't pay much more than that to upgrade my H2 to a H3 PLUS the H/C 28 bought on Hasselblad's loyality promotion last year.

Tilt/Shift is another matter. Contax never had one, and I never heard of plans to make one either. Rumors of one for the H camera continue, but that remains to be seen. I've yet to see a fully functional T/S lens that comes close to using a view camera anyway. Most everyday P/C applications can be accomplished with a 35 and today's software. I have a Mamiya RZ T/S adapter I've used for DOF control, and a buddy of mine uses a Buick big Fuji for the same reason ... but they are limited compared to my Rollei Xact with the 39 meg back.

I had a complete Contax system including 2 cameras and all the lenses. When I picked up the H camera at a demo and it focused in light I knew the Contax would struggle with ... that was it for me. They're all flawed in some way or another .... but AF was the one area I didn't want to compromise on. So, it comes down to what's more important to each shooter.
 

Jan Brittenson

Senior Subscriber Member
Do you guys know if the Mamiya ZD back can be used with the Alpas? I've been eyeing the SWA and a 35. Looks like Camera, back, and lens can be had for about $13k, assuming they work together.
 

fotografz

Well-known member
Mark, my H2D was in the words of my re-seller "possessed by demons" so I got quite a deal on the H3D move ... plus Hasselblad upgraded the warranty to a 3 year hot swap for free. The 28mm was a one time "Loyalty" promotion and cost me something like $2,300. if I recall (my dealer also includes a quantity store discount for all the stuff I've bought, and the clients I've sent to him). Hey, we all gotta work the system : -)

I've run a number of controlled tests between my now sold Canon 1DsMKII and various MFD cameras, and it couldn't even match my old 16 meg Kodak Pro Back, let alone the H3D/39 ... I've ordered the 1DsMKIII for fast paced, low light wedding stuff, but in terms of image quality I'm not holding my breath hoping it'll perform anywhere near a 39 meg 645 sized sensor. It's just physics.
 

David Klepacki

New member
Hi Mark,

Along with DavidK, Son, Victor and others, I am one of the happy campers with a Contax 645. It is a mistake to fear buying/re-buying into this system just because it is no longer being manufactured. The manufacturing quantities were huge, and availability of parts or repair is not really an issue. I have experimented with all of the MF systems, including the Hasselblad H/V, Rollei 6008, X-Act and Hy6, Mamiya 645AFD/II, RB/RZ, Pentax 67, and Alpa TC. While all of these systems have their merits, I found the Contax 645 to cover almost all situations. In fact, the only real weakness (which is true for most other systems as well) is for wide angle under 40mm, in which either the Alpa or a camera with movements will give better results (... but I guess you went down that path already).

Actually, I am writing a series of articles on just how powerful this system really is, especially in comparison to the "newer" MF camera entries. Here are just a few of the reasons why I stick with the Contax system, and which other alternative systems have not been able to improve upon:

1) Unsurpassed portrait lenses (with Hasselblad V adapter). For portrait work, the IQ from the Hasselblad FE 110/2 and FE 300/2.8 lenses are unsurpassed by anyone. Rollei has a version of the 110/2, but it is huge to accommodate a leaf shutter (and leaf shutter lenses will have a limited future...more on that later). Ironically, the Hasselblad H cameras are unable to use these lenses.
2) Unsurpassed mirror damping. Although the Mamiya 645 can accept the Hasselblad FE lenses as well, its damping mechanism is absolutely horrible. Even the newest Hy6/AFi camera is nowhere near that of the Contax 645 in terms of vibration damping. The Contax 645 can be hand held with high resolution down to 1/15 before seeing any blur in 8x10 print, which is impossible with the other cameras. Of course, I guess this depends on how much coffee you drink. For me, the Contax 645 is like having a MF camera with Image Stabilization.
3) In-camera TTL flash meter. This is probably the least known advantage of the Contax 645. This produces "spot" on flash results, every time, with any lens.
4) Unsurpassed macro performance (APO 120). For genuine macro, 1:2 or smaller, the Contax APO 120 is the finest lens for use without bellows. However, this lens does flare at larger scales (like ALL other such lenses).
5) TTL Ring Flash (compact and affordable). The Sunpak DX-12R supports the Contax 645 in TTL mode for all lenses up to 77mm filter size. This is an incredible tool for the 120 macro and even lenses like the Hassy 110. There is no other portable and inexpensive TTL ring flash option for the other MF cameras.
6) Unsurpassed AF Zoom lens (45-90). The focal length range is just right, size and weight just right, etc. The IQ from this lens is same or better than primes. In fact, at 70mm (where distortion is basically non-existent), few primes can compete with it (see MTF charts). And, at 90mm, you can get 1:4 macro as well.
7) Tilt/Shift options. For cityscapes and general perspective control, the Hasselblad 40 CFE IF + PC-Mutar so far has yielded the best IQ. I am not an architectural photographer, so this suits most of my landscape/cityscape needs. (An interesting side effect of this setup is for close range, where the 40 IF lens uses floating elements to correct distortion; the PC-Mutar can be used at this close range and its shifting ability to stitch images.) If you need to go wider, or need more perspective control, then you need to go to LF...which does not seem to be your cup of tea, via your experience with the Rollei X-Act. From what I hear, you would be much happier with the Hassy 40 IF + (optional) PC-Mutar.
8) Waist level finder. I heard Hasselblad may now offer this on their H3 cameras, but this is still not an option for the Mamiya 645 cameras.
9) Vacuum Film back. When you need to use film, this option is the only one available for film flatness, to give you the best corner-corner resolution.

Regards,

David
 
Last edited:
T

thsinar

Guest
hi David,

I would like to give some real information on the "vibration" issue with the Sinar Hy6 raised here. I am not sure what Hy6 body you have had in your hands, but pre-production models and prototypes did not have the latest and final built and firmware updates like the production units.

The Hy6 has a completely new direct mirror drive concept allowing for vibration free releases.
The camera has been designed with the task in mind to be used with our multishot backs (4- or 16-shot modes) and assure a vibration-free shooting. This is the case with the Hy6.

On the other hand, I have a very good friend of mine owing a Contax and who used it for some reproduction work with a SB 54 multishot: he had problems with vibrations and had to modify it with some felt to damp down the vibrations. This photographer is also member on this and other forums and has reported this problem elsewhere.

So the Contax might be alright concerning vibrations in the single shot mode, but not with multishot. On the contrary, I can assure you that the current Hy6 with the newest FW are absolutely perfect for the use of a multishot back.

Best regards,
Thierry

2) Unsurpassed mirror damping. Although the Mamiya 645 can accept the Hasselblad FE lenses as well, its damping mechanism is absolutely horrible. Even the newest Hy6/AFi camera is nowhere near that of the Contax 645 in terms of vibration damping. The Contax 645 can be hand held with high resolution down to 1/15 before seeing any blur in 8x10 print, which is impossible with the other cameras. Of course, I guess this depends on how much coffee you drink. For me, the Contax 645 is like having a MF camera with Image Stabilization.

David
 
T

thsinar

Guest
Since this issue has not been answered and explained, I will try to shed some light on the color cast issue.

Basically any sensor, being it a Dalsa or Kodak, can have (or do have) this "problem". Color casts can have different causes:

1. CC due to the sensor's linear (or non-linear) response. In this respect the Kodak sensor seems to behave a little better than the Dalsa.

2. CC due to the type of sensor: some sensor like the 30 MPx have micro-lenses on the top of the pixels which make them un-adequate for tilt/swings and shifts and producing extrem color casts. Other sensors like the 22, the 33 and the 39 MPx sensors do not have such micro-lenses on the pixels and as such are more adequate to be used for T/S.

3. Extrem short focal length will (can) also produce color casts, due the way of the light rays which is longer at the edge of the image circle as compared to the center (fall-off).

All this combined can lead to some very serious CC problems.

The way to correct and avoid it is by correcting in the SW. The idea is to create (shoot) a so-called "White Shading" with an opal glass in front of the lens (by exposing about 2 f-stops more to compensate the light due to the glass) and to "subtract" this information from the image. This is very easy and simple to do and works very well, producing images without any CC and completely even (the lens fall-off is corrected this way as well).

The only "little" problem with it, is the workflow and how you handle this WHEN having hundreds of different shots, taken with different f-stops and/or taken with different lenses, and/or with different TS settings, and/or taken under different light situations. This is where the different systems in the market are very much different.

Basically it is possible to shoot some "default" white shadings for each lens and for each f-stop of this particular lens you are usually shooting with, combined with each shift (by increments of 5mm shifts in one direction or the other), to save these "default" shadings and to apply them on the images one by one! This is of course not ideal, to use "defaults", since each situation is different. And you can imagine the work and how organized you have to be to do this without mistake! Not speaking about the time involved.

There is a solution to this with Sinarbacks and by using a tool (freeware) called "Brumbaer eMotion DNG Converter" and written by Stefan Hess, Germany:

Beside converting your raws into DNGs, this application does apply AUTOMATICALLY the right white shading to the right file, on as many images you have to correct, in a batch process. All one has to do is to shoot a white shading just before the actual shot/image, with the opal glass, and save them later in your Mac as white shadings in a folder. The Brumbaer application will do the rest for you. This workflow saves hours of correcting color casts and lens fall-off.

This Brumbaer Freeware tool works only with Sinarbacks or Sinar files.

I hope this makes sense.

Information about the Brumbaer "eMotion DNG Converter and free download of the tool can be found under:

http://www.brumbaer.de/Tools/Brumbaer_Tools.html

Best regards,
Thierry

David.. I have been hearing about the cast problem as well and truthfully there is a magneta or red cast to some of my shots with the Leaf back. I noticed when i compared a shot from the 5D and leaf Hassy when i printed a comparison.
 

David K

Workshop Member
David Klepacki,
Good to see you posting here and I look forward to reading your articles on the Contax system. Please let me know when and where I can view them. I know how extensively you have tested the various systems and, as a fellow Contax 645 user, think your summary of it's advantages is one of the best I've read. Please post a few shots taken with your 300 2.8... there are so few of these in the world that you must share some images with us.
 

David K

Workshop Member
Thierry,
Thank you for your explanation regarding color casts. Are the Brumbaer tools incorporated in your upcoming Exposure software or will they no longer be necessary because that software handles the cast issues itself?
 
T

thsinar

Guest
David,

The Exposure will have parts of Stefan's tools incorporated from the beginning, like the automatic centerfold correction, highlight recovery, etc ... and as well "white shadings" for un-tethered workflow, though this shall not be already in the first released version.

Best regards,
Thierry

Thierry,
Thank you for your explanation regarding color casts. Are the Brumbaer tools incorporated in your upcoming Exposure software or will they no longer be necessary because that software handles the cast issues itself?
 

David Klepacki

New member
Hi Thierry,

Yes, you are correct regarding your comments on multishot capability. The Contax 645 is not the best camera for that kind of work, as the mirror does not lock up for successive shots and the delays between shots are not controlled well. In fact, the best camera for 4-shot copy work seems to be the Hasselblad H3DII. There is a nice recent report that investigates how well the best backs from Phase, Hasselblad, Sinar and Leaf compare for museum copy work. In short, the Phase P45+ produced the highest quality single-shot images, and the Hasselblad produced the highest quality multishot images. The fact that the cameras with the Kodak 6.8 micron pixels surpassed those of the slightly larger pixels of the Dalsa chips could be the reason, but this was not actually concluded by the author.

Basically, I am interested in the best single-shot camera, and I still find the Contax 645 to outweigh any of the other cameras out there by a large margin, and have listed the primary reasons earlier. I also like the option of being able to shoot at ISO 1600 with a Phase P30+ back. This is not even an option with Sinar or Leaf.

Regards,

David
 

David Klepacki

New member
David Klepacki,
Good to see you posting here and I look forward to reading your articles on the Contax system. Please let me know when and where I can view them. I know how extensively you have tested the various systems and, as a fellow Contax 645 user, think your summary of it's advantages is one of the best I've read. Please post a few shots taken with your 300 2.8... there are so few of these in the world that you must share some images with us.
Hi DavidK,

Yes, it is my New Year resolution to finally get my website up and running asap, where I will post my articles and experiences. Hopefully, it will be fun and useful to other Contax 645 users.

David
 
T

thsinar

Guest
hi David,

we wil certainly not start to "argue" on who has the best multishot. But just let me say that most of the museums, galleries, libraries and other institutions using the multishot use the SB 54 H, with its 16-shot capability. The 39 MPx has no 16-shot mode and I can assure you that you wn't come near the quality reached with 16-shot, even with a 39 MPx.

I have also seen myself comparison shots from a famous NY national museum, where they have clearly concluded after many tests of different backs, that the Sinar 54H and eV75 H produce the best files.

So I guess it is claim against claim, and I prefer to refer in this case to the users themselves. I don't know who did this test/report, but it seems to be biased: if you could link me to it, I would be glad to read it.

Again, I don't wish to enter a polemic here, but one has to be aware that tests are what they are, with there flaws and un-certainties concerning the exact use of each back and knowledge about the HD and SW when tested.

Thanks and best regards,
Thierry

Hi Thierry,

Yes, you are correct regarding your comments on multishot capability. The Contax 645 is not the best camera for that kind of work, as the mirror does not lock up for successive shots and the delays between shots are not controlled well. In fact, the best camera for 4-shot copy work seems to be the Hasselblad H3DII. There is a nice recent report that investigates how well the best backs from Phase, Hasselblad, Sinar and Leaf compare for museum copy work. In short, the Phase P45+ produced the highest quality single-shot images, and the Hasselblad produced the highest quality multishot images. The fact that the cameras with the Kodak 6.8 micron pixels surpassed those of the slightly larger pixels of the Dalsa chips could be the reason, but this was not actually concluded by the author.

Basically, I am interested in the best single-shot camera, and I still find the Contax 645 to outweigh any of the other cameras out there by a large margin, and have listed the primary reasons earlier. I also like the option of being able to shoot at ISO 1600 with a Phase P30+ back. This is not even an option with Sinar or Leaf.

Regards,

David
 

David Klepacki

New member
Hi Thierry,

No argument here. I also think the 16-shot backs (from both Sinar and Hasselblad) are unbeatable for absolute image quality of still images.

Here again, it may come down to the like/dislike of the software for each back. Right now, the new Phocus software from Hasselblad may have an edge, since it is capable of removing the moire on their single shot images, making the IQ a bit better in single shot mode.....but I will let someone like Steve Hendrix debate that further, if he chooses.

I do not mean my post to be an attack on anyone's products, so I will not post anything further along these lines. My initial intent was just to try and help Mark understand the benefits of the Contax 645, so I apologize for any antagonism that I may have inadvertantly caused.

For the record, let me say that I do have high regard for Sinar products.

David
 
T

thsinar

Guest
no harm at all, David.

We are here to debate: that's what a forum is for, isn't it?

As for me, I'm just here to give information, as accurate and true as possible, and let people know about Sinar and what we have already achieved in the past. We might not be the market leaders in terms of market share, but our products are unanimously known for their qualities.

Is Phocus available yet: last month in Singapore at the photo fair they informed me that it would be sometime next year. DO you know more about it?

Best regards,
Thierry

Hi Thierry,

No argument here. I also think the 16-shot backs (from both Sinar and Hasselblad) are unbeatable for absolute image quality of still images.

Here again, it may come down to the like/dislike of the software for each back. Right now, the new Phocus software from Hasselblad may have an edge, since it is capable of removing the moire on their single shot images, making the IQ a bit better in single shot mode.....but I will let someone like Steve Hendrix debate that further, if he chooses.

I do not mean my post to be an attack on anyone's products, so I will not post anything further along these lines. My initial intent was just to try and help Mark understand the benefits of the Contax 645, so I apologize for any antagonism that I may have inadvertantly caused.

For the record, let me say that I do have high regard for Sinar products.

David
 
Top