We have just tested the following cameras and backs - Canon 1Ds,
Kodak Proback 645, Leaf Valeo 11 & Phase One H20.
For what it is worth, here is what we came up with.
Firstly let me say that I am not a professional photographer. I own a
prepress graphic reproduction bureau that is part of a high quality
sheet fed printing group. This means I do know something about high
resolution images, color, noise, software etc but I do not shoot all
day every day.
We were looking for a camera setup to do copy work, photo archiving,
digitization projects, some fine art reproduction and basic product
shots for our more cheap and cheerful catalogue clients. We also
wanted teach ourselves more about digital photography to work in
better with the growing digital needs and support the real
professional photographers require that supply us images for printing.
One thing that became very clear to us is that it is true that there
is no one camera solution that is the best one for every one. It does
really depend on what type of photography you want to do and
therefore which of the different factors become most important to
you. Our "front runner" camera changed 5 times over the space or a
month worth of investigating and testing.
We found you have to do your own tests. We were surprised at the lack
of empirical evidence online. It almost felt like a conspiracy...
Even through inevitably your own tests are likely to be flawed in
places and far from complete - it was the only way to make a
confident real world decision. Doing research online could only
really point you in the right directions and maybe plug gaps in what
you found yourself.
*** Resolution, Square vs. 3x2, Price and why we bought the Kodak
Proback 645M ***
I really wanted to buy the Canon 1Ds. In our opinion it is an
absolute bargain. It is definitely in the league of the medium format
backs and far above the other lower megapixel DSLRs. We wanted to
save ourselves thousands of dollars buying the Canon 1Ds setup but in
the end the resolution was close but not close enough to the Kodak
Proback to allow us to save the money.
The Kodak Proback 645 on a Mamiya 645AFD was significantly sharper.
We are not sure but think that this is because there is not an anti
aliasing filter on the 645 and because the 645 has the reduced lens
coverage of the 4x4 chip in the 6x4.5 system, using the centre "sweet
spot" of the Mamiya lenses versus the Canon's full frame using all of
the lens. Maybe this made the difference even through the Canon "L"
lenses may be slightly technically better overall.
The image out of the Leaf Valeo 11 blew us away; it was beautiful
sharp with great color, on par maybe better than the Kodak. If you
could put up with the 3:2 ratio frame and were Mac literate, we are
confident that the Leaf camera and great workflow were up to pretty
much any task you wanted to give it.
However, when we added the resolution / sharpness factor to in our
case most of the objects or scenes we are shooting are more in a 5x4
ratio, or squarer that 3x2, shooting them through a 3x2 ratio chip of
the Canon 1Ds or the Leaf Valeo 11 heavily reduced the resolution of
what we could capture.
At a 5x4 ratio we get 1.5 times of the data (13 megapixels vs. 9
megapixels) with the square format Proback 645.
The Kodak's overall sharper resolution and Square clip was the
clincher that made us buy the Kodak Proback 645M over the "obvious
bargain" Canon 1Ds or the Valeo 11.
*** What about the Phase One H20??? ***
The Phase One H20 shots were saw were very good and the Capture One
software was very good but we could not justify one and half to two
times the price of the other systems for any marginal difference in
quality from the Kodak Proback that might of been there and the
tethering tradeoffs were not worth considering, for us anyway.
There was a configuration of the H20 with a flex adapter for a 5x4
view camera which allowed you to take 2 shots and automatically
stitch them together for large hi res images which was interesting
for art repro work but it still was too much money...
*** Color Rendition and Dynamic Range ***
Being prepress guys who see and do a lot of drum / hires scans coming
in from all over the place. We were surprised at how good the colors
straight out of the box the H20, Valeo 11 and the Proback were
through their best software options. Both the H20 and Valeo 11 make a
selling point on their color accuracy and transitions while the
Proback seems to sell more on their flesh tones. Honestly we could
not tell any significant distinguishing differences in the final
files between the 12, 14 and 16 bit backs color wise. All were going
to need to be tweaked for you to be confidently setup with the colors
the way you like it.
The Canon 1Ds was a slightly different story. The colors through
Capture One were far superior to those generated by the Canon
software but it was obvious that there was going to be definite color
failures along the line that were going to take work and compromises.
The usual suspect colors were where the work was reds, oranges and to
a lesser extent some purples and greens. That said it really depends
on how important color accuracy is to what you are shooting.
We can see how capturing and manipulating the files with the higher
bit depth in their corresponding Raw workflows is important. However,
as for the 16 bit making a difference over the 12 or 14 bit systems -
bottom line was we could not really see any corresponding difference
in the end product files. We don't think many people could be handed
printed output or a set of 8 bit files in Photoshop and tell you
which one came out 12, 14 or 16 bit as Raw.
The only thing that we could think of the larger bit depth making a
difference was if you were forced to do excessive amounts of
manipulation on a file to correct a severe problem or to get a
certain look. With these backs though that is becoming less and less
likely because the files out of any of them are impressive and we all
are shooting to limit the amount of time consuming and destructive
processing we have to do in post.
*** Noise, Moiré and Chromatic Aberrations ***
We only did tests at ISO's of 50 and 100 and the H20, Valeo 11 and
Proback were all clean as a whistle. The Canon 1Ds through the Canon
Software had noise that was definitely noticeable on the test shots
inspecting the blue channel in Lab color. This did pretty much
disappear when using the 1Ds with Capture One DSLR and brought it
closely into the range of the backs. The noise would have been
acceptable to us to buy a 1Ds.
There has been some talk about noise on the Proback and Canon 1Ds at
ISO 400 however we personally think this is really all crap from the
point of view that the other contenders, the H20 and the Valeo 11,
can't even do ISO 400. The noise at 400 is better on the Proback than
the Canon 1Ds. And as Michael Reichmann on Luminous Landscape says on
his review - Neat Image will fix any of them up.
There was some but not excessive chromatic aberration on the Canon
1Ds test shots but everything easily fixable.
Interestingly the Valeo 11 did give us a hint of a strange chromatic
aberration / moiré effect on one shot in a screen printed pattern on
a can, but another difficult fabric test shot done on the Valeo was
pretty damn excellent and had little to no moiré. Seeing fabric is
not something we will be shooting often and we had decided to buy the
Proback we did not look into this any further.
*** Software ***
Overall the Leaf Valeo 11 software was the best, having the best set
of features and workflow.
Leaf have been making digital backs for 10 years and Leaf software
gets great reports and at version 8 it is a very mature and refined
workflow. We also liked that fact that and has been developed with a
print focus. Leaf also had a second piece of software called oXYgen
with even more color, press and retouch control and 16 bit workflow
all the way through to output. We already use Creo prepress gear and
workflow and can vouch for it being efficient and their support
prompt and informative. The limiting factor with the Leaf software is
that it is only on the Macs. We run both PC's and Macs.
We have even read two reports where others have wanted PC workflow
but ended up buying a Mac to use the Valeo 11. That is a pretty big
step for some. We also have seen reports of studios liking the Valeo
workflow and consistent quality of shots over the Phase One H20 and
H25 shots at almost twice the price. We think it is definitely worth
investigating it or the new 22 megapixel version.
The two Capture One versions for the H20 and DSLR for the Canon 1Ds
and the Adobe Camera Raw plug-in used with the Kodak Proback were all
good and fairly close to each other. You would really need to try
them personally to work out which one works better for you.
In choosing the Proback we are using the Camera Raw plug-in and look
forward to see what Adobe pulls out of the bag in PShop 8 for the Pro
DSLR users.
With things moving quickly from film and scanning towards direct to
digital Adobe are bound to be spending serious time and money
building in a functionality wall to shoulder out any niche the likes
of Capture One etc will be trying to make themselves launching
software for a range of other digital cameras.
Kodak's Photodesk was not up to scratch and pretty basic. We found
ourselves in Photoshop pretty quick.
We were warned off Canon's own 1Ds software very early and our test
results through that software were enough to put you off the
camera... noise and colors were definitely a worry. Our 1Ds tests
through Capture One DSLR meant we ignored it and used Capture One
instead - there was no competition.
*** Neat solid equipment feel / Portability of system / Tethering ***
The Canon 1Ds being just a body was obviously the most neat and
portable of the systems we looked at. It is a big camera, as big as
the medium format Proback on the Mamiya 645AFD.
The Mamiya/Proback 645 combo looks and works like one camera with no
external wires and the LCD on the back.
The Valeo 11 on the Mamiya is not as neat with the "digital magazine"
storage / battery unit underneath, separate to the back and a small
Firewire cable between the two. It is probably no big deal and mainly
cosmetic but when you combine this with no LCD and the Palm pilot
viewing device solution it took a bit of getting your head around.
The Valeo 11 did not feel as simple or tight to us. We worked with
the Valeo 11 tethered when testing and that worked very well with the
software and would give you the best results. We weren't convinced
that the Valeo 11's portability solution wasn't really a bit of a
compromise and only suited to one specific type of shoot, namely high
end Professional catalogue work - it would be great at this.
The Phase One H20 was the only solution we looked at that had to be
tethered full time. The H20 is a high end, high priced bit of kit
that makes no excuses for being the most common choice for the
studio/location Mamiya RZ67 Pro II / H20 crowd. It has one proven
workflow - use it and love it. In the end we didn't want to spend the
extra bucks so we didn't have to choose.
*** Lens Choice Quality ***
I would have loved to have a play with the range of Canon lenses on
the 1Ds, especially the "L"s, but it was not to be. Their sharpness,
the macros, the white zooms... mmm white.
With the backs it obviously comes down to which MF camera system you
put it on.
We went with the Mamiya 645AFD and are confident the Mamiya Lenses
are on a par with the usual "big name" suspects. The range of lenses
offered was more the limiting factor here.
*** Dust ***
Sensor cleaning would be a breeze on any of the backs. There are many
posts on the net about dust in the Canon 1Ds. We didn't test it long
enough to make any informed opinion accept to say supposedly it is a
problem and PacPad are releasing a swab specifically designed to deal
with the problem.
*** Image Storage ***
The H20 deals with image storage by being always tethered.
The Canon 1Ds and Kodak Proback 645 use Compact Flash memory cards
and this system seems to be fairly simple and effective.
The Leaf Valeo 11 has a small "digital magazine" storage device
tucked under between the tripod and camera body. It seems to be a
type of Firewire hard disk and you can get them in 5 and 10 gig
sizes. This means you can shoot 200 - 400 shots before either
swapping magazines or downloading to a computer.
*** Why we almost bought the Leaf Valeo 11 ***
As we have already said the images out of the Leaf were fantastic
with great color, clean and smooth. We saw no negative reports about
noise or moiré on the Valeo 11. Its downfall for us was the 3x2 35mm
style ratio - simple as that.
We like the Mamiya 645 AFD and the fact that Mamiya chose the Leaf as
its promoted digital solution was a feather in their cap.
Locally the company supporting Leaf has a very good name and has been
very knowledgeable and professional so far. There is a deal to
directly upgrade for the difference in price to the Valeo 22 within 6
months if it proves to be good and you need the higher performance.
*** Why we almost bought the Canon 1Ds ***
The Canon 1Ds is a bargain. I would also love to save the money and
buy the Canon 1Ds but we had had several reports of it just not being
up to the task in the studio and this is what we found for us also.
The deeper we looked the more we are turned up mixed reviews by
professionals with questions about limits to the resolution, noise,
chromatic aberration, moiré, etc. We think a fair bit of this is
because the 1Ds is no longer "brand new" and there are more people
really using it in the real world rather than the number of medium
format backs there are out there.
*** Why we did buy the Kodak Proback 645 / Mamiya 645AFD / Adobe
Camera Raw Plug-in solution? ***
This combination gave us the best balance of the things we were after
and bang for our buck.
* The resolution is sharp as a tack.
* The square format gave us more options and one and half times the
megapixels to play with more often that not.
* The colors were good across the range with few potential failures
to contend with.
* The images were beautifully clean and free of noise, moiré and
chromatic aberrations.
* The hardware worked as one tight solid portable package that gave
us confidence that it would work consistently and reliably.
* The workflow / software seemed simple but with the functions we
needed to get the job done quickly and efficiently.
*** One final off-topic rant for those that got this far... ***
We had a few people comment that they thought that the Canon 1Ds
might kill off Medium Format and we can see how it could make a hefty
dent in things.
We have just invested serious money in a new medium format solution
but if the next logical jump was to something coming from the 35mm
camp we wouldn't hesitate.
"Killing off medium format" is not the way we would think about these
things. We think of it more that the fantastic advances in quality
digital technologies are making higher quality equipment much cheaper
and more widely available to everyone. In the long run that has to be
a very good thing. It is up to all manufacturers regardless of format
to try and bring something to the table and still be playing in one
way or another in the future.
The more things move into digital the less things will be about what
size film format a manufacture once made cameras for. It will be
about who is making the best gear for one job or another. The
Horseman DigiFlex II is already an example of this.
The Pollyanna in me says we will all be closer to having the best
optics on the best capture device etc... regardless of format.
I hope some of this info is of use to any poor souls that are going
through the decision making process and sorry if I have offended
anyones sensibilities.
cheers,
Jaryd
