What's new
Medium Format Forum

Register a free account now!

If you are registered, you get access to the members only section, can participate in the buy & sell second hand forum and last but not least you can reserve your preferred username before someone else takes it.

Digital back vs scanned film

F

fraiseap

New Member
I have recently moved from 35mm to MF and use a 500CM. I do not have the option of using film as all my clients and the publications I submit to require digital files. So I have 2 options

1. Shoot film and scan. Processing costs £5 per roll and the lab will do a high res scan for £20 (apologies for UK prices). So an average shoot will probably require 5-6 rolls and will cost £125- £150

2. Buy a digital back. A new CFV-39 in the UK costs over £9,000. Which means I need to do about 70 shoots to break even.

My fashion shoots happen about 2-3 times per month so I reach break even in about 2 years.

This is a pretty close call IMO and I am not sure which route is best. I would be interested in anyones opinions.
 
Not easy to answer, 2 years is a normal way to consider you digital gear lost 60% of the initial value.
The bad point for calculation is the fact that a CFV-39 is 2.5 years old now and new technology may arrive (CFV-50 is not a new technology but improvment) every 3 years.
You may nedd to buy some new lenses as the crop factor for wide angle is the trap when you go with a CFV.
Let say that during this time, on each shot you will save 1£ of film/ process and so and spare time for labs
Perhaps number of shots is more accurate for cash consideration: if you expect more than 8000 shots in 2012 go to digital.
 
Thanks, I will only be using the 80mm for the time being. Number of shots is difficult to calculate; when shooting digital with my Canon I can easily shoot 250 frmaes in a day - I wouldn't do that with film because I would spend a little more time getting each shot right (and no AF slows things down too - but slow can be good).

The point about CFV-39 being old technlology is interesting. Maybe used prices will become very cost effective soon.
 
I may well be incorrect, but I thought a CFV back does not have the facility to be rotated, therefore you are stuck with landscape format or using a 500CM in a manner for which it was never designed.
 
When you forget the financial part for a moment,
think about the pleasure of shooting more than 12 frames without the interruption, of changing films.
I can imagine that you are an old school photographer and have no need
to should hundreds at a time, but 12 is not a lot, when you're working hard
in a fashion shoot.
But I do agree it's quite an investment.
GEO
 
Well, yesterday I was shooting "Harcourt" style with one who has a Phaseone back tweested for vertical frames. He had only 30Mpix digital but with my horizontal cfv 39 perhaps I use only 20Mpix for all my shots.
 
I shot fashion / catalog work for retail department store chains for many years. Unfortunately this was before digital was good enough to consider for high quality work. I was shooting as many as 75+ rolls of MF chrome or B&W per day at that time and shooting as many as 3 days a week. The vaue of digital as a serious rofessional tool can't be measured in dollars alone. The convenience of previewing images to get approval from the client would have saved thousands or rolls of film and many hours of time. In addition the time in the lab and time at the prepress house getting scans would have given extra days for design, planning, propping and execution.

Rather than shoting polaroids and speculating whether the model / clothing looked right now we have the ability to instantly review images. I can do a quick JPG and my client can drop the image into the layout in Indesign to see if it fits and type will wrap properly. Also with the Hasselblad backs / phocus / phocus light my client can sit back and relax and view the images as I shoot on an Ipad. They can approve or disapprove as I shoot.

I'm old school having shot Hasselblads V cameras since 1972. I still love them and feel in my environment whan I shot them. I've V cameras and know them like the back of my hand. To me the comfort zone is an important part of effective execution of an assignment.

Now the kind of work I shoot is still very structured and I still shoot the V system with a CFV39 back. It's perfect for my style of shooting plus I still use a view camera and can remove my CFV39 back and snap it on the back of my Linhof Technikardan 23 and have all the advantages of the view cameras movements plus the quality and speed of digital.

I don't understand why folks have a bug up their A** about turning th camera on it's side. I use one of the 90 degree 70mm prisms and it works great. I use it with a combination of bodies, 500EL/M, 500 C/M and my main body a 501CM. The inability to turn the back verticle is a non issue for me.

It really doesn't mater that the CFV39 / 50 have been out for a couple of years. The images are so stunning it makes no difference if a new technology back comes out. the quality of my CFV39 back remains the same, EXCELLENT.

We won't argue the virtues of film vs digital but it's a no brainer for me. Almost everything I've shot over my career has been chrome. Chrome has a 5-7 stop dynamic range depending on the film and doesn't forgive over exposure or color balance issues. MF Digital has at least 12 stops range. Color corrections are so much easier on digital as well. Raw files give ultimate controll of the image.

If you are where you can rent a back give it a try. You'll never go back to film after you do.
 
The Phase One backs can be rotated as can my Imacon Ixpress 528C with the V system adapter (never got around to using it whilst I had my V system bodies) I don't know what Hasselblad were thinking when they did not keep the rotation facility on the later rectangular backs.
 
While I enjoy shooting film with my 501C and have no digital back, I do have a Canon 5D which I've used in the recent past for wedding and portrait work. It wasn't mentioned which digital Canon you have worked with, but have you considered the Canon 5D mk2? The digital images I get from my 5D are excellent and ones I have seen from the 5D mk2 were even more improved. The file image size would be smaller than a digital back for a Hasselblad, but possibly sufficient for the client(?) Presume you may already have Canon glass.
Shoot the Hasselblad with film and scan for it's particular look. Shoot a 5D mk2 for the economics and ability to review images quickly.
 
I am no expert in this field, but I sold my CFV on favor of shooting only film. But I do not make my living off photography.

I agree with getting a DSLR for fast work and having the Hasselblad for its own purposes. With the whole analog, retro, mid-century wave sweeping the world, I would not be surprised if you could charge extra for an analog shoot for certain customers.

I just started shipping all my BW and color neg film to Richard Photo Lab in the US, who were quite fast in processing an uploading my scans to an FTP. The scans are EXCELLENT compared to my local lab, and I didn't even go for the most expensive options. This is what I will be doing from now on, even though it is a bit expensive. It is a pity they don't do E6 as well.
 
Some great comments here, thanks.

@DDudenbostel - I agree with the advantages of shooting digital (especially tethered). I also think that shooting just 36 or 48 shots in a day will reduce the chance of getting that "wow" pose from a model.

I am intrigued about the use of a 90 degree prism, I thought they didn't fit over a CFV39.

@MarkF_48 I shoot with a Canon 5D markII and L glass, the image quality is superb. It is very fast to use (although the AF could be better). However I think the images from the 500CM should have a different quality.
 
I've used the old Hasselblad 45° finder on a CFV50: http://www.photoethnography.com/ClassicCameras/HasselbladFinders.html
The clunky one towards the bottom of the page.
The only isse is the release of the CFV back, which requires you to trigger 2 buttons rather than one.... nothing a little work with a Swiss army knife can't deal with.

That said, as noticed by others - focus with the CFV is crucial - and it may be useful to get camera and back optimzed for each other.

Seeing as dSLRs allow for micro-adjustment - it seems this amy also be the case for MFDB.
 
The PM 90 does not fitt when CFV is used. You need the old viewfinder for A-70 back if you realy want a 90° view. In this case the Hasselblad will be not easy to handle for vertical shots.Better to use a heavy tripod.
I have a 4x4 viefinder and a PM45 with diotry adjustment that help for foccusing. Since I got the CFV-39 2 years ago, I never use any film shot with Hasselblad.
 
film vs mf digital

The problem I had when shifting over to digital was that the clients paid for the film and processing plus a 100% markup but I couldn't get them to pay anything for me to provide digital images to them even though they saved on separations. So I made money from shooting film but was losing money shooting digital.

The Hasselblad film system gave me good service for 3 decades. But with digital I first went with Canon. In a few years I had a D60, 10D, 20D, 5D and now a 1DsmkII. The electronics have a built in obsolescence This last one is all I need since I'm now retired. But after retirement I saw that PhaseOne P25+ backs were going for $7000 on ebay, so I bit the bullet and revived my V system with buying 3 of the newest version lenses and a P25+ back. The difference between the P25+ images and the 1DsmkII are astronomical. The same goes for a comparison with a friend's 5DmkII. V system with the same MP is twice as sharp and much more saturated and that is using Capture One for processing of both the Hassey and Canon RAW shots. Also I wanted a back that would rotate so the Hassey back was out of the picture (no pun intended). I physically rotate the Phase and I think the Leaf rotates internally somehow. Phase has an external battery no fan, Leaf internal with a fan.

To sum up -- If you make money from shooting film and you should, and you can't get the client to pay a "digital" fee for their convenience, then you will miss that income PLUS having to pay for the expensive digital system. However you should be able to get into a used Phase One or Leaf back for V system at half the cost you suggest. Part of this is due to working pros moving to other systems like Mamiya and dumping the V backs. There is now I believe a Pentax out in MF. Phase One claims they've seen backs come in for routine service with over one million exposures logged. So seek and you will find what you want -- I did and I'm not sorry.

BC
 
^
Thanks so much, that is great advice. It looks like a PM45 plus a Phase One back is on the Christmas list!
 
Fighting your own Future?

I know I'm late to this discussion, and you may have already acted on this, not to mention there will be a howl and cry at this suggestion.

I would submit to you that it is time to move on.

For the type of work you do the H system is a better, more integrated fit. Like many V users, I was a die-hard advocate and worked with both a 500 system and 200 system for decades ... up to and including a CFV back (my review of the then new CFV was on the Hasselblad website under the "Word" section).

I left that behind, and for professional applications never looked back.

Consider this:

For the price of a CFV/39 or a Phase One P45 back you can get a mint H3D-II/39 complete. In terms of the sensor itself, there is no difference between the CFV/39 or P45 and the H3D-II/39. None. They are all 39 meg Kodak sensors.

If you prefer the Zeiss V lenses, you can secure a CF Adapter and use any C, CF, CFi, CFE lens you may already own, and it is all automatic stop-down aperture and shooting ... just like on the V camera.

The gain you get is focus confirmation in the viewfinder when manually focusing, a viewfinder that exactly matches the sensor capture area, very accurate TTL exposure metering, easy ergonomic ability to shoot in landscape or portrait orientation without removing and turning the back, a larger LCD preview, the ability to set a mirror delay in various m/s increments for hand-held shots at lower shutter speeds, and fully integrated back and camera body from the factory with no back shimming required for critical accuracy.

Plus the option to add key AF lenses that are highly tuned for accuracy, and quite fast focusing, plus sync to 1/800th instead of 1/500th.

All HC & HCD lenses are now fully profiled for distortion and CA corrections in both Phocus and Lightroom RAW processing software, you then have the option of a true W/A coverage with the HCD/28mm, the possible inclusion of two excellent AF zooms, AND the eventual option of securing the HT/S1.5 Tilt-Shift unit some-time in future which takes all lenses from the HCD/28 to the astounding HC100/2.2, plus extension tubes. In other words, growth is not limited.

There is a reason that the H kit is the number one tool of fashion and glamor shooters worldwide.

I would have advised against the Phase One back for two key reasons. It requires a sync cord from the V lens to the back (which from experience instantly become the weak link in the process of shooting and the product of misfires all to often) ... and to shoot in portrait requires removal of the back to turn it. This exposes the sensor to both electronically attracted dust like a magnet ... and more importantly, accidental damage to the IR cover glass ...which happens more times than you may think. That is an expensive repair that has to be sent back to the factory to be done which takes weeks and weeks.

I fact, I'd advise searching very hard for a nice H4D/40 ... I sold one without a lens but otherwise complete for $12,000. 7 months ago. Then a whole new world of possibilities would be in your hands.

My 2¢ on the subject.

-Marc
 
Thanks Marc,

I probably should clarify that this decision is a business based one. I am not a hobbyist, nor do I make so much money out of photography that $30,000 can be written off as an expense.

I need to generate income from my work to justify the cost. On that basis the decision to buy a used back (compared to using film and getting it scanned) fits in with my business plan. Paying more than 10K cannot be justified at present.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top