Deciding which digital back - how do you know?

[Valentin]

Hi,

The next step for me it's going to be to get a digital back for my new MF system.

I got the Mamiya AFD II. I needed a system that works with both film and digital and this camera gave me the best value for the money while working within my parameters and style.

I am mainly shooting people with this system (engagements, bridals, and some fashion shoots for my salon).

From what I've been reading, the most recommended brands are Phase and Leaf (although both are own by Phase now).

Is there another manufacturer you would recommend?

Out of the two that I mentioned above, I have in mind one of the following:

Phase: P25+, P30+
Leaf: Aptus II 6, Aptus II 7

I choose these because of price concerns. Since they are older models, obviously they can be had for less than a new model.

I know the P30+ has micro lenses and it could be a problem when using wide lenses. I don't think that would be a problem for me since I don't think I will shoot wider that 35-45mm. High ISO is desirable since I will be shooting indoors as well (on location). P25+ specs lists up to ISO 800 but the question is how good are the files at ISO 400-800 (if you could compare with the 5DII would be great).

I don't have much info about the Leaf backs. I know their interface is via a touch screen, but that's about it.

How do they compare (Phase vs Leaf)? Any issues that I should be aware of? Also, how does the file compare for the P25+/Aptus II 6 with the files from the 5DII? Normally, the bigger photosites will give a better file (and the lack of AA filter), but I don't know how would they compare.

I am trying basically to narrow down to the back that I would like to rent and try for myself. Renting all of them, it would get too expensive pretty fast.

Any input/opinion is much appreciated.

 

[Graham Mitchell]

Is there another manufacturer you would recommend?

You could also check out the Sinar eMotion 54LV, which I think you can still get new for around $10K with standard 2-year warranty. You'll need to add the Mamiya 645 adapter. Maybe you could ask the dealer to throw it in.

I believe Hasselblad also makes some backs which fit with an adapter. You'd have to check their website - I don't know them so well.

All 4 back makers will give great image quality. The main differences are other features like the adapter system offering flexibility (Sinar, Hasselblad), long exposures (Phase One +), live view, warranty, price, etc.

Btw, are you aware of the different crop factors between the P25 and P30? The P25 uses a larger sensor than the P30.

 

[SergeiR]

Actually cheapest entry point is older Leaf of ZD back. While II series are great and fresh and P+ technology is all spiffy and turny, but 22mp older backs arent all that crappy either.

Also you need to look into not just saving money but also considering physical sensor size. 1.6-1.7 crops arent all that bigger than regular FF and your biggest gain would be from just getting into MF world and having thin or none AA filter. And thats why detail-wise most of these will beat socks out of FF camera. Plus better tonal range , which transforms into more 3D-ness of the look (still have to watch light and such of course)

 

[Valentin]

...
Btw, are you aware of the different crop factors between the P25 and P30? The P25 uses a larger sensor than the P30.

Thanks Graham,

I'll check out the Sinar ones. What I like about the Phase though, is that you just mount them like a regular film back (no adapters, cables...).

I am aware of the crop factor between the two.

 

[Valentin]

Actually cheapest entry point is older Leaf of ZD back. While II series are great and fresh and P+ technology is all spiffy and turny, but 22mp older backs arent all that crappy either.

Also you need to look into not just saving money but also considering physical sensor size. 1.6-1.7 crops arent all that bigger than regular FF and your biggest gain would be from just getting into MF world and having thin or none AA filter. And thats why detail-wise most of these will beat socks out of FF camera. Plus better tonal range , which transforms into more 3D-ness of the look (still have to watch light and such of course)

I've read about some complaints about the ZD backs that they don't handle high ISO well (even 200 ISO).


On the highlighted part above, are you comparing 1.6 crop on MF with FF on DSRL? That part sounds like a negative for the MFD but then it's followed by a positive comment ... so, I'm a little confused .

 

[Graham Mitchell]

None of the 22MP backs are good at high ISO - apart from that they are great performers.

 

[Valentin]

None of the 22MP backs are good at high ISO - apart from that they are great performers.

That's a deal breaker. While I don't need ISO 3200, I need at least ISO 400.

Thanks.

 

[SergeiR]

If you need high iso - stick with dSLRs. Thats pretty much the answer that i normally give. Most of current backs and even older ones - perform at the level of film. But many people keep forgetting what high iso film looks like, after seeing artificially cleaned high ISO on dSLRs.

 

[Valentin]

If you need high iso - stick with dSLRs. Thats pretty much the answer that i normally give. Most of current backs and even older ones - perform at the level of film. But many people keep forgetting what high iso film looks like, after seeing artificially cleaned high ISO on dSLRs.

What's your definition of high ISO? To me, ISO 400 is not considered high. Even film at that speed doesn't show a lot of grain.

And I will keep my 5DII, that's for sure .

 

[dougpeterson]

Based on pretty broad personal experience and a lot of customers' experiences I can say very safely that ISO400 on a P30+ is perfectly fine for most applications, and ISO800 is often usable, ISO1600 would be reserved for the most extreme situations and will be associated with added post-processing effort like adding grain, reducing noise, increasing contrast (to sink shadow noise), converting to B+W etc.

While the 30+ is not as large a sensor as the 25+/45+ or 65+ I think it is much better suited to your needs than the 25+. "trouble with wide angles" regarding the 30+ only applies to technical camera / view camera bodies. You have no problems with any of the Mamiya or Phase One lenses - all the way down to the 28mm if you so desired.

Sergei said "Also you need to look into not just saving money but also considering physical sensor size. 1.6-1.7 crops arent all that bigger than regular FF and your biggest gain would be from just getting into MF world and having thin or none AA filter. And thats why detail-wise most of these will beat socks out of FF camera. Plus better tonal range , which transforms into more 3D-ness of the look (still have to watch light and such of course)"

Other aspects of medium format that are not related to sensor size:
Better Color (I can write a lot about the technical reasons but no one really cares - what matters is what you see)
Better tonal transitions
Better highlight/shadow handling (at low ISOs)
Bigger/Brighter viewfinder
Better lenses
Better long exposures**
More tactile shooting experience***

*generalized statement of course but I'll stand firmly behind it
**When talking about the P30+
***HIGHLY subjective

A 30+ is a very good selection for what you're looking for.

Doug Peterson (e-mail Me)
__________________

Head of Technical Services, Capture Integration
Phase One Partner of the Year
Leaf, Leica, Cambo, Arca Swiss, Canon, Apple, Profoto, Broncolor, Eizo & More

National: 877.217.9870 *| *Cell: 740.707.2183
Newsletter | RSS Feed
Buy Capture One at 10% off

 

[dougpeterson]

Also a quick visual of those sensor sizes. Sure the P30+ is smaller than the 25+ (or 65+) but it's a "full step up" from FF dSLRs (my own highly subjective wording - see the images below and make up your own mind).

 

[kdphotography]

That's a deal breaker. While I don't need ISO 3200, I need at least ISO 400.

Thanks.

This would be an easy decision for me--- P30+. I had the P30 for quite some time, and it was just a fantastic all-around MFDB. Nice files right out of the box.

I'd go harass Doug and see what CI has available....

 

[SergeiR]

What's your definition of high ISO? To me, ISO 400 is not considered high. Even film at that speed doesn't show a lot of grain.

And I will keep my 5DII, that's for sure .

400+ is high ISO for me . I grew up in days, when using 125/250 film for portraiture was considered to be suicidal

Doug is right - MFDB do have better colours nowdays, b/c almost all dSLR now using CMOS sensor, which is better for liveview and high iso (and less production costs ), but loosing to CCD sensor of similar size and totally loosing to CCD sensor of larger size.

If you pull out from shelf something like E-1 and compare it to any of 5Ds - you will see same difference as when you shooting with either one of digital backs - fantastic, creamy colour rendition , thanks to CCD based sensors.

 

[SergeiR]

btw , thanks for visual comparition chart, Doug. I kept thinking that difference for P40/30 is less vs FF sensor. Not sure why. My bad.

but "Better tonal transitions
Better highlight/shadow handling (at low ISOs)"

actually it does relate to sensor size a bit. As well as to bit depth reproduction, but i did some side to side comparition a bit ago for 14 bit D700 vs 14 bit on ZDb and while depth of processing is same - sheer sensor unit size helps to handle transitions of shadows a bit better - giving it a bit of 3Dness umph

But handling of shadows (thanks to extra bits to carry shadow details) is very notable when you doing 12bit vs 16 bit shooting... Sometime almost to point of "damn - i dont need reflectors anymore"

 

[Valentin]

....
While the 30+ is not as large a sensor as the 25+/45+ or 65+ I think it is much better suited to your needs than the 25+....

A 30+ is a very good selection for what you're looking for.

Doug Peterson (e-mail Me)
__________________

Head of Technical Services, Capture Integration
Phase One Partner of the Year
Leaf, Leica, Cambo, Arca Swiss, Canon, Apple, Profoto, Broncolor, Eizo & More

National: 877.217.9870 *| *Cell: 740.707.2183
Newsletter | RSS Feed
Buy Capture One at 10% off

Thanks for your input Doug.

Is the above statement because of the better performance at high ISO (curious minds want to know )?

 

[Valentin]

This would be an easy decision for me--- P30+. I had the P30 for quite some time, and it was just a fantastic all-around MFDB. Nice files right out of the box.

I'd go harass Doug and see what CI has available....

Thanks Ken. Doug said that he's the tech guy ... I need to harass somebody else over CI

 

[Valentin]

...
actually it does relate to sensor size a bit. As well as to bit depth reproduction, but i did some side to side comparition a bit ago for 14 bit D700 vs 14 bit on ZDb and while depth of processing is same - sheer sensor unit size helps to handle transitions of shadows a bit better - giving it a bit of 3Dness umph
...

This is one of the reasons I'm asking here: you can read all the specs all you want. While they are helpful, real world experience is much more valuable.

Thanks.

 

[dougpeterson]

btw , thanks for visual comparition chart, Doug. I kept thinking that difference for P40/30 is less vs FF sensor. Not sure why. My bad.

Not "your bad" at all. It matters a lot HOW you show or decide the difference in size. We obviously work with a lot of customers who want to know "how big is the cropped MF sensor" so we've had a lot of experience with how to compare them.

The difference feels larger if:
- You stack them with the top left corners aligned
- You are cropping both sensors to 4:3 aspect ratio
- You rotate the 35mm FF (e.g. visualizing stitching 35mm to get higher res)

The difference feels smaller if:
- You stack them centered
- You are cropping both sensors to 3:2 aspect ratio

It even matters whether you show the larger sensor as a lighter or darker color than the smaller sensor. (dear Stan, my Visual Communications Theory professor - thanks!).

Anyway figures lie and liars figure but hopefully it gives the OP some better idea than he had before.

but "Better tonal transitions
Better highlight/shadow handling (at low ISOs)"

actually it does relate to sensor size a bit. As well as to bit depth reproduction, but i did some side to side comparition a bit ago for 14 bit D700 vs 14 bit on ZDb and while depth of processing is same - sheer sensor unit size helps to handle transitions of shadows a bit better - giving it a bit of 3Dness umph

But handling of shadows (thanks to extra bits to carry shadow details) is very notable when you doing 12bit vs 16 bit shooting... Sometime almost to point of "damn - i dont need reflectors anymore"

Absolutely sensor size influences these two. My point was only that sensor size is not the ONLY factor.

The entire image chain matters:
Lens Hood / Flare > Lens coating > lens > aperture/shutter > body's blackness > IR filter > microlenses > AA filter (or lack thereof) > sensor size > sensor pixel type > readout speed > sensor-to-AD-convertor path, A/D convertor > heat sinking / cooling > raw file compression > black calibration > in camera raw data manipulation > characteristic curve > ICC profile > demosaic algorithm > deconvolution algorithm > noise reduction type > up-res or down-res algorithm > sharpening

For instance the generation of the P25+ had a lot of wasted space on each "pixel" - the electronics package for each pixel, which is not light sensitive. The wasted space was nearly eliminated when they moved to the 30+/45+ generation so in fact a 30+ has similar light-gathering area on the sensor as a 25+ despite smaller outside sensor dimensions.

Nothing is ever simple! That's one of the reasons we advocate so strongly that after initial research and opinions should come hands-on testing. There are simply too many factors to decide by theory/specifications/charts rather than on real world results. Every time someone (here or elsewhere) reads a few posts, compares a few charts, and then buys off eBay I cry a little.

Doug Peterson (e-mail Me)
__________________

Head of Technical Services, Capture Integration
Phase One Partner of the Year
Leaf, Leica, Cambo, Arca Swiss, Canon, Apple, Profoto, Broncolor, Eizo & More

National: 877.217.9870 *| *Cell: 740.707.2183
Newsletter | RSS Feed
Buy Capture One at 10% off

 

[dougpeterson]

Thanks for your input Doug.

Is the above statement because of the better performance at high ISO (curious minds want to know )?

Correct. The P30+ will provide 1-1.5 stops of usable ISO beyond the 25+. Put differently, whatever you find "usable" on a P25+ you could get another 1-1.5 stops out of a P30+.

The Leaf Aptus line is an excellent option, and Sinar and Hasselblad/Imacon also made/make backs which will mount to your body.

However, on net, for the style of shooting you describe and your general budget range the high ISO performance of the 30+ is the way to go.

Doug Peterson (e-mail Me)
__________________

Head of Technical Services, Capture Integration
Phase One Partner of the Year
Leaf, Leica, Cambo, Arca Swiss, Canon, Apple, Profoto, Broncolor, Eizo & More

National: 877.217.9870 *| *Cell: 740.707.2183
Newsletter | RSS Feed
Buy Capture One at 10% off

 

[Dan Santoso]

Halo,

Wait until Phase One announce their new product:
- New sensors (different technology)
- New Bodies, including one with anti shake!! n multi focus points
- New Software
- New Lens

A lot of new exciting thing is happening.