Phase One P45+ with Alpa or Cambo technical camera vs Sony A7R with Canon tilt/shift

[jbourla]

Hi. I am toying with the idea of getting a digital camera to replace my large format film camera, but need some advice. My current cameras, both using film, are a Gandolfi 4x5 inch view camera, which I use nearly all the time; and a medium format Mamiya 7 which is used occasionally. I scan the negatives and print digitally. I expect sharp, detailed prints even when viewed close-up, and that they look nice tonally as well.

I am really ignorant when it comes to digital cameras. I saw some beautiful photos online recently that were taken with a 35mm Sony A7R and Canon tilt/shift lenses. Of course one can't really tell from a small online jpeg what medium or large prints will look like. But I was impressed. On the other hand are medium format digital backs. New ones are incredibly expensive, but I saw that there are Phase One P45+ backs available second hand for much better prices. I would use this with an Alpa or Cambo technical camera with Schneider digitar lenses.

How do these two digital systems compare? I like the idea of the more compact and cheaper Sony/Canon outfit, but if the Phase One back is really superior, despite having similar megapixels, then that would seem better. Can one see a difference between these two systems?

One thing I am really confused about is this: when I scan my 4x5 inch negatives with my (very good) scanner at 2500ppi, I create, as I understand it, a one hundred and twenty five MegaPixel file. Other photographers using drum scanners at higher resolutions would have even higher megapixels. I read about photographers using 4x5 inch cameras changing to medium format digital backs, and the numbers just don't add up. I know of one excellent photographer who purchased a P45+ back with 39 MegaPixels, and raved about the results and the similarity with his 4x5 images. How can the back producing 39 MegaPixels compare with a film scan producing in excess of one hundred and twenty five. Please can you explain. There is obviously something about digital that I am missing.

Another thing is "Live View". The Sony has it, but the P45+ only if tethered to a computer (which I couldn't see myself doing in the field). So without it, would I have to resort with the P45+ to guesstimating distances, or using a laser finder, or rangefinder, as I have read others doing?

Thank you in advance for your input - I appreciate it.

All the best

Jonathan Bourla

 

[RalphLambrecht]

I would start by borrowing a ful-frame digital DSLR for a week oor so and see if that satisfies your quality expectations. In y cas,a Nikon D800with 36 MP was all I needed to get quality ssiilar to a MF camerawith more flexibility for much less $after that week ,you can make a more knowldgeable decissionand remember that image sharpness is not just a matter of MPs. It's alsoa matter of havinglarge pixels not a large number of them and a good lens and proper lighting.

 

[lenny]

There is no digital camera that can compare with a 4x5 piece of film, especially in black and white. They are getting better, to be sure.

However, this sentiment must be qualified. I am someone who has an interest in making full-tonal-range black and white prints. If someone prints very contrasty, they won't see much of a difference. If one likes the commercial look, whether in b&w or in color, there isn't much difference...

Everyone spends all the time comparing resolution, but that is not the issue. The issue is tonal separation. The sense of atmosphere you might find in older prints made by great photographic printers is missing in digital. If one can't see the difference between ABW and a Cone inkset, or you don't care about the difference between summer light and winter light, then maybe digital is fine.

Lenny

 

[Pioneer]

If you are already scanning then a digital camera will probably work out for you. As Ralph mentioned the Nikon D800 is certainly a good option as is one of the Pentax 645 digital cameras. There are two of them now, the 645D with a 40mp CCD sensor, and a 645Z with a 50mp CMOS sensor.

I think your problems will come from the tonality. Resolution will provide the detail but as already mentioned, it is difficult to get the tonality of a 4x5 film negative with digital.

 

[aluncrockford]

To start live view is really not that helpful, what you will need is a magnified viewfinder adapter with a sliding back if you are tethered just shoot a frame. With regard to quality the P45 is indeed as good as if not better than 5x4 for detail and clean capture, one of the snags with film that after a certain point all you are doing is scanning more grain,and the inherent faults in the film base, this may be a good thing, in fact some people prefer it as its more "real". For me the P45 is a very good back and certainly preferred to any 35mm option, I have used it commercially since it came out and 150,000 frames later it is still working perfectly , I also have a cannon 5dmk111 which is a back up, we rarely use it, for my personal work I use a 5x4 gandolfi with B&W film then drum scan it, the reason being that the clean capture of a digital file can have a tendency to give images a plastic feel. for commerce this is fine for fine art can be a lot less engaging