Page 1 of 1

Credo 50 or Credo 40

PostPosted: Wed Mar 28, 2018 5:18 am
by tuckys
Hi guys!
Need some advice. I have 2 offers for an almost brand new credo 50 and a heavily used credo 40. The price difference is almost twice the price on credo 50. I am currently using aptus 65 with 645afd2.

Is the credo 50’s new cmos sensor really worth the price difference ( around $6k difference)? I am mainly shooting portraits, interior and landscape.
The useable iso range for aptus 65 is only 50-100. At 200 artifacts n noise sets in. How will credo 40 n 50 compare in turn of higher iso n noise ?

Thank you!

Re: Credo 50 or Credo 40

PostPosted: Wed Mar 28, 2018 8:17 pm
by Sa'd Tilghman
Hello Tuckys,

In my honest and humble opinion, it all has to do with your technical setup and as equal importance your shooting 'style'. As an owner of an XF and Credo 40 'rig' it suits me just fine as a studio and outdoor (natural bright light) portraiture photographer. I am a big fan of the 'fat/larger pixel pitch' CCD sensors. That being said, if low light (high iso) and for some, more importantly LIVE VIEW for lens trimming, focus calibration with Capture One and/or just that extra (1 stop/1.5 stop) dynamic range is important then Credo 50 offers some flexibility.

These stats seem to be the main three other than MPs, of course. :D

Credo 40 (16 Bit) vs Credo 50 (14 Bit)
Credo 40 (12.5 stops DR) vs Credo 50 (14 stops DR)
Credo 40 (50 to 800 iso) vs Credo 50 (100 to 6400 iso)

www.mamiyaleaf.com/credo.html

I have provided a link to Mamiya's website for comparison. Happy hunting!

Re: Credo 50 or Credo 40

PostPosted: Thu Mar 29, 2018 3:24 am
by tuckys
hi Sa'd,

thanx for the reply. what bothers me most was the Credo40's 16 bit ccd vs Credo50's 14 bit cmos and the usable iso range.

how high is the usuable iso for credo 40? i tried credo 50. at iso 800 the iso is usable, but at 1600, the patchiness and artifacts sets in and the raw image doesn't look so clean.

is 16 bit ccd img better than 14 bit cmos?

thanx!

Re: Credo 50 or Credo 40

PostPosted: Thu Mar 29, 2018 4:12 pm
by Sa'd Tilghman
Hello Tuckys,

In an effort to not sound generic, I will have to emphasize it all comes down to your shooting style. I rarely use my Credo 40 higher than iso 200, that is my preference. I am a big fan of slow speed iso. Along with my HAP-2 upgrade (low light performance sensitivity has been increased by 2.5 stops; and secondly, the dynamic range of the sensor has also been improved by 1stop in low contrast scenes) for my P1 XF, I work around low light issues using sound technique.

For those who have to have a solution other than grabbing their 'dslr'; Phase One/Mamiya Leaf addressed this by creating the 50MP & 100MP backs with a CMOS sensor, so you can (for the most part, other than weight) shoot like like a small format camera (low light/street style photography, etc.). I believe this can be achieved through: solid technique, ND Filters, and portable strobes.

Which is better CCD or CMOS is a matter of opinion. I personally like the CCD sensors (40, 60 & 80MP) in my humble opinion it has a certain tonality to the image.

The 16-Bit file size is what separates the winner from the loser in this scenario. If this was a comparison of two different 16-Bit backs, the argument would be much different.

Hope this helps.

Re: Credo 50 or Credo 40

PostPosted: Fri Mar 30, 2018 11:04 am
by tuckys
hi Sa'd,

thanx for the reply! now the only research is to find out about the tonality difference between at 16 bit file and a 14 bit file. this will be the main reason for me to choose betweeen the 40 and the 50.

will a credo 50 image looks like a sony A7rii image?

hope some owners with credo 50 can help shed some light to this! thanx!

Re: Credo 50 or Credo 40

PostPosted: Thu Nov 05, 2020 4:17 pm
by NNN637401895089520364
Hi...I am right now utilizing the 501CM with a 150mm focal point for likeness, and don't anticipate utilizing the Hasselblad outside of picture, that is the thing that my ALPA cameras are for. I am extremely content with the 50c coordinated with my 501CM. The main thing I would change on the off chance that I could is make the back rotatable for the vertical arrangement, however that isn't sufficient for me to trade the 50c for another back. The alternative of shooting square is there, though with the loss of pixels.

I am a newcomer to Phocus and utilize it for LCC handling, a smidgen of tweaking and afterward as the entirety of my documents go, into Lightroom (LR) and in the event that further tweaking is required, at that point Photoshop (PS). To the extent Phocus being an issue, from my experience it isn't, and it doesn't cause any PC troubles, for example, Sigma's SPP program has while I measure Foveon documents.

Re: Credo 50 or Credo 40

PostPosted: Fri Nov 06, 2020 4:40 pm
by Ulf
HI
This thread is about Leaf Credo backs.
It sounds like you are using a Hasselblad back and not a Leaf or Phase One backs.
Are you sure you are in the right forum?

Re: Credo 50 or Credo 40

PostPosted: Mon Dec 14, 2020 6:54 pm
by NNN637435631244178672
Credo 50 adds the ability to shoot at high iso of up to 6400 and long exposure times of up to 1 hour, allowing for more flexibility when choosing lighting or when there is no lighting!

Re: Credo 50 or Credo 40

PostPosted: Wed Feb 03, 2021 4:08 pm
by NNN637479650537448215
You guys can't even imagine how long I've been searching for such a thread!