Hi folks,
I've asked a couple of camera-related questions on here before and gotten some excellent advice for which I am most grateful. (I've felt funny about having to choose a "best answer" when all of the answers I've received have been so helpful.)
Anyway, my latest dilemma is this: I have a Contax 645 film outfit which I'm VERY happy with, but I want to go digital. I am thinking about adding a PhaseOne digital back, which would give me 16 megapixels and Zeiss-quality images (my three Zeiss lenses are absolutely ridiculous in terms of sharpness and tonal range).
On the other hand, I'm also considering either a Nikon D2Xs or a Canon 5D, both of which would give me 12+ megapixels and more lens options (not exactly Zeiss quality, however). Other advantages would be faster autofocus, better portability, etc.
My question is: if money were no object, would you go for the PhaseOne/Contax setup or the Nikon or Canon? Which option would give me the best image?
Thanks very much! Btw: The DB I'd be looking at is a PhaseOne H20 and the capture software is Capture One 3.7.5. A friend of mine is willing to unload it on me for $2000...
Thanks again! I admit that this is speculation on my part, as I do not have personal experience with medium format digital backs. Perhaps some film experience will translate and perhaps comparing smaller sensors to larger sensors will also translate.
If image quality is your ultimate goal, I think the Contax digital back is the better way to go. As we see in smaller cameras, if you were to compare a 10 MP sensor in various sizes, we find 1/2.5" (5x4 mm), 1/1.8" (7x5 mm), 23 x 15 mm, and 29 x 19. (Approximate sizes; examples that I can actually find and verify) In general, the larger the sensor, the better the image quality. The more square millimeters you have to accomodate the sensor elements, the less digital artifact and noise you will get. I went to the Capture Integration site and looked around a bit. The 16 MP sensor is not a full 60x45 mm format, but "only" 36.9x36.9 mm. This makes sense, since the film take up nearly the full dimension of the film back and there is a lot of hardware involved in packaging the sensor. If money is no object, why not get the P45 back? It has 39 MP and it is 49.1x36.8 mm.
Let's look at pixel density for the various sensors:
1/2.5" (10 MP) = 500,000 per mm^2
1/1.8" (10 MP) = 262,000 per mm^2
D2Xs (12.2 MP) = 32,788 per mm^2
Phase One P45 (39 MP) = 21,585 per mm^2
5D (12.7 MP) = 14,699 per mm^2
Phase One P20 (16 MP) = 11,750 per mm^2
Of course, image processing software will account for some differences in the final image quality, but you can see quantum leaps of difference in pixel density as you go from the P&S sensors to the SLR sensors and then to the Phase One sensors. The 5D is right up there with the large format backs. I'm not an engineer and I only have a rudimentary understanding of these things, but it seem obvious that the P20 would have better image quality than the D2Xs or 5D. And, the raw dimensions would be larger than either camera, so you would not have that apples to oranges problem. (I don't know. It's 2 AM and I may not be thinking straight. AND I'm rambling.)
I checked out the sample images for 4x5 film (which is not identified and is obviously scanned and might be "less than optimal") and the P20 back. Personally, I'd choose the P20 images 7 days a week over the 4x5 images. I hope that they did not intentionally bias this test, but I like the definition and true colors of the P20 much better than the film. The image is a little smaller, which I assume is due to the smaller size of the sensor (compared to film) and not due to changing lenses, which was not disclosed in the test.
Anyhow, if image quality is your holy grail, I'd stick with the 645 camera with a digital back.
If real world considerations enter into the picture, of course, as we always say, it depends on what you are going to do with your camera and how it feels in your hands. If you are comfortable doing your job (whatever it is) with your Contax, surely you have no thirst for speed. If you need more than three lenses, buy more. Yeah, I know the back is $10,000 (+/-) and you could buy the Nikon or Canon plus 2-3 top quality lenses for that money, but you've already got 3 lenses that you love.
I see Capture Imagination has a rental program. Why not rent a back for a month and see how it feels?
http://www.captureintegration.com/rental...
As much as I love my D200, I think the Canon 5D is a very desirable camera for the money; even NOT for the money. It's a great camera. It's relatively easy to handle, compared to the larger dSLR's. The full format sensor is awesome, too. If I had $10,000 to spend and was not concerned with abandoning a nice Contax 645 setup, I'd buy the 5D and 3 or 4 L-series lenses in a heartbeat. The Contax 645 with the addition of the digital back gives you excellent options for versatility (120,220,Digital) but it is pricey. If you. Since price is no object for you then go for the Contax/Digital Back option. :) Report It
|
