Getting my first digital back, or should I?

[mazza]

Hello,

 

Ive saved about $4300 to use on a digtal camera back, what will I get

for that if anything? Im prepared to buy used.

I have a 500 C/M right now, will that be a problem for a digital

back? Im planning on upgrading to a 503CW over the new year.

I like to shot outdoor's as well as indoor so I need a back that can

handle that. Also, Im very found with the square format, does the

digital back deliver that?

 

But Im not sure yet, I can get a great Digital SLR for those money

to, what should I do?Any help wold be great.

 

Thanks

[andre_noble4]

Congratulations on saving that amount of money. However if you buy anything digital with it, you will be kicking yourself in the ass three years from now because there will be something twice as nice at half the cost, and your $4300 digital item will fetch $500.

[yui_cheng]

If you have already invested very much into your MF and LF equipments, such as lenses, bodies, etc. then getting a digital back at a reasonable cost is probably a better choice. For your particular case, I would suggest getting a Hasselblad/Imacon back. However, 35mm DSLRs have a lot of benefits. They are very portable and quite capable, too.

[beepy]

Argh. I would look for a good used Medium Format scanner, and keep shooting film with

your fine Hasselblad. You can't buy any good medium format back for that money, and

for $4300 you can't buy a dSLR and lenses that will beat medium format scans.

<p>

I'm a little worried here. Have you factored in costs of PC and image processing software

if you have no digital capability today? Photoshop CS is way to go (for me).

<p>

What exactly do you do with your film today? Slides? Prints (how large)? What do you

shoot? Some more background would probably be useful to providing any reasonable

response.

[cg1]

I think that amount of money will get you a used 6MP digital back. You'll have to shoot tethered to a computer. It will be workable on location but it will slow you down.

 

Why are you thinking of switching to digital? Are your clients demanding it? What are you shooting? What size files do you need? The answers to these questions will help you determine what type of equipment will best suit your needs.

[bengt_rehn]

I dont know if you have a good scanner, but one way may be to get a better scanner and wait to see what happens on the market. High resolution backs are still expensive and the cropping makes wide angle shooting impossible, so far. The fast development i 35 mm DSLR will likely soon be good enough quality wise and problably more cost effective. I also love my Hasselblad gear and are waiting for a back with a close to full size sensor, at a reasonable price.

[johnmarkpainter]

Mazza,

 

I don't think you can use a Digital back with a 500 c/m Someone will chime in if I am

incorrect on this.

 

Unless you are shooting for Clients that pay you A LOT of money and DEMAND digital,

then I think you would be crazy to spend the money on a Digital Back.

 

You can buy a lot of Film with $4,300......

 

jmp

[q.g._de_bakker]

John,<br><br>You can indeed use digital backs on a 500 C or 503 CW, and all the 500 C(...) models that came between the two. No problem.<br>There is a good sized choice of different digital backs (approx. 30!) you could use too.

[johnmarkpainter]

QG,

 

While I am glad to know that one day I COULD use a Digital Back on my Hassy...I still don't

think it makes any sense.

 

You're not going to get full 6x6 coverage for $4,300. Wide lenses are Expensive on Hassy.

If I had full coverage on a 645 camera I would be happy with that...of course the Backs I

have seen like that are pushing $15k.

 

If I were doing $2,500 day rates 4 days a week and HAD to have Digital for my clients I

would think about it.

 

Getting an 8-11 megapixel DSLR and a couple of Primes makes a lot more sense for most

people.

 

jmp

[c4-contemporary-art]

Geez. You could get a PRETTY GREAT drum scanner at auction on line for

that much cake. More work perhaps - but less limiting in terms of actually

shooting - and the quality of the result would be WAAAYYYYY better

(provided you learn how to use the thing properly). You could probably milk

a good 100-110 Mpixels out of a hassy via the scanning route provided you

found yourself a decent lens. And how much could you get out of a back??

20? 30?

 

Just my 2 cents.

 

- Jonathan

[q.g._de_bakker]

John,<br.<br>I don't disagree. I just pointed out that there are digital backs for the 500 C/M and 503 CW too. ;-)<br><br>For the amount Mazza is talking about, i'd get a Nikon scanner.<br>You still have to spend money on film and processing, still have to wait until the film is dry. And scanning is a royal pain in the posterior bit; not a pleasant way to spend your mornings, afternoons or evenings (i trust we really know better ways to spend our nights. Come to think of it, and our mornings, etc. ;-)), eats up amazing lengths of time. But you can't beat a scanned neg. Yet.

[paul utkin]

Mazza, it`s not a question 'IF' - questions are WHAT and WHEN.

And FOR HOW MUCH.

$4300 will not give you much options. The least I would spend on right now is any square format 16mp back. Cheapest one will be Kodak`s pro plus but here we look at $6K+. Imacon, megavision etc backs go for more.

[kelly_flanigan1]

IF a business purchase; it is a return on investment problem.<BR><BR><BR>If a consumer purchase; there is the love factor; coolness factor; impress the friends factor. Folks buy autos that drop like a rock in worth each year; and It doesnt bother them at all.<BR><BR><BR>

[ken_mccallum1]

I also own a complete Hasselblad 500cm set up. Recently, I purchased a new Canon 20D to use with my Canon lenses and with my Hasselblad lenses using a high quality EOS to Hasselblad adapter. The system has worked out very well. Using the 20D with my Hasselbald lenses gives me a situation where I have a 8.2MP digital back with an automatic light meter. If I just want to shoot 35mm digital slr, I have that option too. Kind of the best of both worlds for only $1,800.00 including a basic zoom lens. The digital camera with a 2GB card can shoot 500 pictures at high resolution with no film cost... I'm having a blast and if the camera becomes obsolete in a couple of years... so what; It didn't cost a fortune anyway.

 

I'm not ready to give up the medium format lenses yet... they seem to be appreciating in value on ebay over the past few months.

 

Ken McCallum