503 CW with P30 or P45

[carlo_d]

<p>To me, looks are not of paramount importance. As I see it, the main failing of the CV backs is that they cannot be mounted in portrait mode. I ask myself, what was the Hassblad team smoking when they put form before function? QG's vote for the P65+ sounds good. It is available refurbished at a reasonable (for DBs) price from reputed dealers that extend warranty and support critical for such an investement. Now the question is, why Phase instead of Leaf? </p>

[jake_bryant]

<p>For me I couldn't give a F*** about the aesthetics of the look of the back... as far as the portrait mode goes, I guess the image could be cropped very effectively but its a square frame sensor for a square frame camera, 645 is just gravy. Of course, I've never wondered about my 503CW not being able to shoot in portrait mode.... because its a 6x6. The CFV back having the option to be square or 645 is great..... I don't think anyone was smoking when they designed it.. they thought it through.</p>

[q.g._de_bakker]

Well, yes and no.<br>The CFV shooting square is the same as any 645 back cropped to "superslide" format, except that the cropping is done in the back's firmware.<br>It makes tilting the camera unnecessary. But it also reduces the effective sensor size ('crop factor' comes into play again: about 1.5x compared to 'full frame' square) and output resolution. You can crop the output of any 645 DB and then equally not have to tilt the camera. So a big difference?

[carlo_d]

<p>Also, backs by Phase and Leaf can be mounted in portrait mode. As Q.G. rightly comments, there 's a crop factor and a loss of sensor size.</p>

[paul_loveteck]

<p>I join Marc and Jake to vote for the CFV-50.<br>

I used both a CFV-50 (still have one) and a P65+<br>

For me, a BIG advantage of the CFV is that it does not require an extra cable like the P65+<br>

Yes, you can turn the P65+, but it is no so easy because of the cable.<br>

In addition, believe me, the P65+ is heavy and each time you turn it you have a good chance to damage the sensor. I know by experience: when you remove it, you have to fiddle with the cable and the camera becomes unbalanced due to the removal of the heavy back. The camera's two small legs on which the bottom of the magazine rests suddenly move up as the camera tilts due to the imbalance and scratch the sensor which has no protection. It did happen to me and was a $1,600 repair, back needing to be sent to Denmark. It has happened to many people. So, yes, you can turn the back, but it is hard and potentially expensive.<br>

I also dislike that you have to remove a cable and put it back each time you want to change a lens. For me, this was a good enough reason to prefer the CFV-50.<br>

As far as quality of images, I found very difficult to see situations where the P65+ would show an advantage.</p>

[jake_bryant]

<p>Thanks Paul, very interesting to know! I'd hate to be stuck out on assignment in the Amazon with a scratched P65+ back! </p>

[q.g._de_bakker]

If you are going to avoid having to change orientation by cropping the sensor CFV-50 style, you can do that using any 645 DB. There is no difference, no deciding factor, there.

[carlo_d]

<p>Good responses. Thank you for your input. Paul has a point about scratching the sensor, but as QG says, you don't need to remove it because with the P65+ you get the same square format by cropping and without rotating the back. Price wise I can get a CFV-50 cheaper new than a refurbished P65+. The P65 has sensor plus that goes up to ISO 3200 (is the quality any good?). I read somewhere that the CFV works better when the synch cable is connected. LCD: any difference between the two? Battery: CFV hangs below, P65 fits internally. Any comments on this?</p>

[paul_loveteck]

<p>The only advantage of using a cable with a CFV is that you do not have to change the settings for long exposures on the menu. This only applies to long exposures, so, unless you use long exposures very frequently a cable is not needed. I never missed a pic with a CFV because I did not use a cable. I have also read some rumors, don't believe them.<br>

ISO 3200 sensor+ is a marketing trick not very different from the "digital" zooms in low cost point &shoots. In fact, you might as well carry in your pocket a good point&shoot, it will do better than your P65+ at ISO 3200.<br>

I personally think that using a multiple $10k back at any ISO higher than 400 makes no sense with today's technology. Even at 400, the P65+ has already lost most of its advantages over different solutions.<br>

LCD's are very similar, not really part of the decision.<br>

The battery of the CFV is easier to remove (the P's batteries are tight, you need both hands). Disadvantage of the CFV: if you plan to use a motorized camera like the 555ELD you need a special extender (were included with my CFV's).</p>

[carlo_d]

<p>Thanks Paul. Very important information you are sharing with me. Info that will help me make an informed decision; which I plan to make around March next year (I will be away for the winter). Other points of interest for me are the pros and cons of the different sensors: Kodak vs Dalsa, and the size. The P65+ sensor is larger by 5 mm both sides but I am wondering if that makes such a big difference in practice.</p>

[carlo_d]

<p>Two more questions on the CFV. The supposed bad circuitry/ rechargeable battery that causes the back to lose its Time/ Date. Was this ever fixed? The other is the battery connectors. I read some complaints that they are dodgy, sometimes causing the back to fail on power on etc.</p>

[fotografz]

<p>Carlo, none of the Dalsa sensors do long exposures. This includes the Dalsa sensor in the Hasselblad H4D/60 (which I use) and H5D/60. The P45 is the king of long exposures, but requires a dark subtraction shot of equal length after each long exposure ... i.e., 10minutes, then another ten minutes before you can shoot again ... which, depending on the conditions, builds up heat ... the enemy of IQ. The Kodak based sensors in the Hasselblad backs do a reasonably long exposure without a dark subtractive frame. The H4D/50 does something like 4 minutes, so I'd assume the CFV/50 does the same.</p>

<p>I never had an issue with the battery connector on my CFV ... not once ... including cold weather shooting and in some pretty hot climates.</p>

<p>IMO, using a sync cord to fire other backs is the weak link to be concerned with in terms of reliability while in the heat of shooting. It is a clumsy solution. I've been there, done that with other backs including older Imacon ones ... almost every issue I ever had was traced back to the sync cord while shooting, or a FW cord when shooting tethered. Cords, I hate them!</p>

<p>The issue of cropping or not is a personal one. When you get to 33 meg on up with MFD, you really have to be printing large for it to make much difference ... depending on the subject matter of course.</p>

<p>The only real solution to avoid cropping is to get one of the Leaf backs with the rotating sensor. <br>

<br>

BTW, the CFV backs are the only DB that can be fully used on a 200 series camera (with a slight modification). I used a CFV on a 203FE, and it was one of my favorite cameras of all time. </p>

<p>-Marc</p>