Pro digital backs - What do you use?

[dick roadnight cotswolds]

I am thinking about buying an eyelike digital back.

 

In single shot (6 Megapixels) this gives pin sharp hair in a bust of

a gent with a beard, and 25 Megapixel in multishot.

 

I the Sinar 54 gives 22 Megapixels.

 

What digital backs do you use, for what, and what are your

impressions?

[light-zone]

I had a demonstration of the EyeLike done in my studio and my first impressions were positive. Then I had my first real-world experience with the Phase One H digital back on a Sinar, and the thought of investing in an Eye Like was gone. The software for the Phase one is powerful yet simple to use, and with just a few basic commands, you can get to work. The back brings about 45mb (RGB) in a one shot, and the data is very clean. The one negative is that you cannot do multiple flashes to either allow for a higher F-Stop, or to increase the file size. But with 45mb, just about every possible application is covered.

[dan_smith]

I use carbon/graphite core (enclosed in a cellulose media carrying sheath) digital recording device that is as accurate as I can make it.

[garry edwards]

I use a Phase 1 and I'm very happy with it. I did consider buying others but was told that the chips are all made by the same people and the only real differences are the software and the badge.<p>The single-shot image may be only 6 Mp but the data is very clean and file sizes can be increased by interpolation if required - there must be a limit to this but I haven't reached it yet!<p>I think it could be a mistake to get carried away by the race to produce more and more megapixels - that's strictly for the amateur gadget collectors - it's clean data that counts, not pixels.<p>I agree that there can be situations where, because the back can't be used with multiple flash 'pops' in single shot and the low 'speed' of the back, you can run out of power - but surely people who can justify this level of capital investment can also justify investment in flash power?<br>Sometimes though you just have to accept that <b>much</b) more flash power is needed, for example in a factory setting, and when that happens I usually end up with 400ISO film.

[garry edwards]

<i>Continued from (cut off) last posting...</i><p>Sometimes you just have to accept that <b>much</b> more flash power is needed, for example in a factory setting, and when this happens I simply use film.

[light-zone]

You're right Garry, but even with 30,000WS of power from Bron Power Packs, that is still not enough for some studio situations.

 

And another thing, if you buy the Phase One, get the Loupe viewing device, otherwise composing and focusing is a real pain. Looking at a nice big 8X10" GG sure spoils you...

[www.graemehird.com]

Naughty html! </b>

[www.graemehird.com]

Testing - is that better?

[nathan_congdon]

Dan:

 

How is your sharpness with that system? I've heard of some users having to take those back in regularly for a highly specialized grinding procedure to keep a fine tip, though now they apparently have an automatic desktop system that will accomplish the same thing. And the latest models of these are so miniaturized you can literally walk around with one behind your ear! It's incredible what the world is coming to...

 

Nathan

[dick roadnight cotswolds]

Thank you for your responses so far:

 

For multi-flash, can you not take several pics and then add them in photoshop?

 

Alternatively, if you can expose up to 30 seconds, use two shutters, one on B ot T and one to fire the flashes and cut out excess ambient.

 

This technique should also work for mixed lighting, wouldn't it?