Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 5 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Phase One P65+ vs Hasselblad 50MS test  (Read 23154 times)
Niels Van Iperen
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 17


WWW
« on: December 28, 2009, 05:45:47 PM »
ReplyReply

After posting on one of the forums about this a while ago I finally got around to posting some of the results of the test for people interested.
Complete results of the test (with RAW files) can be found at http://niels.com/tests/phase-vs-hasselblad.html

A short summary:
We did a test setup where we put a Phase One P65+ and a Hasselblad 50MS side by side. Various medium format photographers were invited and their observations are noted below.

Cameras used:
Phase One P65+ on Phase One (Mamiya 645) body with Mamiya 80mm f/2.8 lens (Dalsa 60MP sensor)
Hasselblad H3DII-50MS with Hasselblad 80mm f/2.8 lens (Kodak 50MP sensor used in single and multishot mode)

Setup: (see attachment total.jpg)
Shots were taken at 1/125s - f/22. Phase One photos were processed with Capture One Pro 5.0.1, Hasselblad photos with Phocus 2.0.
Gray balance was applied to the neutral gray on the test chart in the photo, all other settings (sharpen, saturation, etc) were on zero or switched off in both programs.

Observations while shooting were that the viewfinder of the Phase One camera shows a very small picture compared to the Hasselblad H3DII, it feels like looking through a 35mm camera and it is difficult to focus. Also, autofocus on the Phase is slower and can't be intervened.
Flash sync on the Mamiya does not go up from 1/125s where Hasselblad goes to 1/800s. However Phase One has promised this will change.
The display on the Phase One back is tiny. As far as design goes, most people liked the Hasselblad better, although the MS is heavier because of the Multishot mechanism.

Observing the images there were quite a lot of differences:
Sharpness: The Hasselblad lens is a little sharper than the Mamiya, but the difference is not that big. There is however a huge difference from the Single Shot to the Multishot file, almost as big as when comparing 35mm to medium format.
Noise: The Dalsa (Phase) sensor produces quite a lot of noise compared to the Kodak (Hasselblad), especially in dark colors.
Dynamic range: Especially in the highlights the Phase loses detail before the HB does, even in single shot mode. Again, multishot makes a big difference.
Color: The Kodak sensor produces more saturated colors, although the difference is not so big. Color interpretation is quite different.
Tones: Gradients on the HB are much more subtle, Phase makes 'jumps' on gradients where HB tonality is more continuous.
Sensitivity: The Phase was about a third stop lighter than the Hasselblad, both at ISO 50 and f/22.
High ISO: Phase's ISO+ makes a huge improvement at ISO 800, where it leaves HB in the dust. Higher ISO speeds are such bad quality that they are basically obsolete. At speeds of ISO 50-200 Phase is noisier, at ISO 400 they are just about the same.

Our main conclusion was that the optical difference is not the bottleneck of the performance in medium format (as it is in 35mm), it is still the sensor. Not the number of pixels, but the way they are interpreted. The Multishot files show a degree of color accuracy and sharpness that a single shot sensor (any single shot sensor) does not even get close to. Too bad for those of us who like to shoot subjects that move...

~Niels
« Last Edit: December 28, 2009, 06:03:20 PM by Niels Van Iperen » Logged
tho_mas
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1692


« Reply #1 on: December 28, 2009, 08:01:19 PM »
ReplyReply

Thanks for sharing - quite interesting!
May I ask why you shot at f22 (diffraction...)?
Logged
Steve Hendrix
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1032


WWW
« Reply #2 on: December 28, 2009, 08:12:30 PM »
ReplyReply

Niels:

Can you please note which version Mamiya camera and which version Mamiya lens you used?

Will you have raw files available for download?

You are the Hasselblad distributor for Columbia, is this correct?


Thank you,
Steve Hendrix
« Last Edit: December 28, 2009, 08:14:56 PM by Steve Hendrix » Logged

Steve Hendrix
Sales Manager, www.captureintegration.com (e-mail Me)
MFDB: Phase One/Leaf-Mamiya/Hasselblad/Leica/Sinar
TechCam: Alpa/Cambo/Arca Swiss/Sinar
Direct: 404.543.8475
vgogolak
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 336


WWW
« Reply #3 on: December 28, 2009, 08:13:26 PM »
ReplyReply

Interesting test, but I question the conclusions.

At 1/125 unless you used sandbags, mirror lock and an optical bench, I would bet the P65+ vs Hassey 50 would swing in P65+ favor (say with Contax lenses, and mirror lock, or on Hassey V with a comparable lens)

I am NOT saying that Zeiss lenses are better than Mamyia older (but I'll bet they are!) but that you are at a range of size where ANY softness of lens and ANY movement will destroy sensor differences.

The multishot is also a 50-200MP (you pick it) Foveon claims 3x resolution (ludicrous) I would rather claim any Bayer sensor needs to be discounted by 20-40% depending on color.

So your P65+ is a 40MP? and the hassey is 30MP say? and the MS is a true 50MP?
The multishot advantage, seems clear, and even 4 shots gets you "coherent processing" that will
effectively look sharper and have more detail. No .argument there

However, at 100% I think what you have shown is that the Phamyia at 1/125 is not going to hack it with a 60MP back.

I doubt that the P65+ is less detailed than the 50MP Bayer Kodak on Hassey, which the images SEEM to show.

But,   I have been know to be wrong.

Just want to offer an alternative explanation for what you see.
regards
Victor
Logged
Niels Van Iperen
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 17


WWW
« Reply #4 on: December 28, 2009, 08:16:02 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: tho_mas
May I ask why you shot at f22 (diffraction...)?
Simply because we did not want the focus to be influenced by depth-of-field issues - we were not really testing lenses, and both have the same disadvantage at f/22.
Logged
tho_mas
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1692


« Reply #5 on: December 28, 2009, 08:19:29 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: Niels Van Iperen
Simply because we did not want the focus to be influenced by depth-of-field issues - we were not really testing lenses, and both have the same disadvantage at f/22.
but the advantage of mulit shot would be less obvious at f8, no?
Logged
Niels Van Iperen
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 17


WWW
« Reply #6 on: December 28, 2009, 08:26:11 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: Steve Hendrix
Can you please note which version Mamiya camera and which version Mamiya lens you used?

Will you have raw files available for download?

You are the Hasselblad distributor for Colombia, is this correct?

Hi Steve,
The test was performed with the 645AF with the standard 80mm f/2.8  Mamiya lens - as far as I am aware the 'standard package' of the P65+.
Raw files are available at http://niels.com/tests/phase-vs-hasselblad.html
And yes, you are correct, we distribute Hasselblad and Profoto in Colombia. The reason we had the opportunity to do the test was that we had a trade-in P65+ in the shop for a couple of days which gave us the opportunity to invite some local photo freaks and do some experimenting ;-)
Thanks,
Niels
Logged
Niels Van Iperen
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 17


WWW
« Reply #7 on: December 28, 2009, 08:27:21 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: tho_mas
but the advantage of mulit shot would be less obvious at f8, no?
No, it's same at any f/stop. The difference is that the Multishot makes 4 exposures (R/G/B/G), but it does so at the same diafragm.
« Last Edit: December 28, 2009, 08:31:39 PM by Niels Van Iperen » Logged
Niels Van Iperen
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 17


WWW
« Reply #8 on: December 28, 2009, 08:30:21 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: vgogolak
At 1/125 unless you used sandbags, mirror lock and an optical bench, I would bet the P65+ vs Hassey 50 would swing in P65+ favor
I doubt that the P65+ is less detailed than the 50MP Bayer Kodak on Hassey, which the images SEEM to show.
With both cameras at 1/125 they both would have the same disadvantage (camera shake). However the shortness of the duration of the flash eliminates this issue.
Logged
Steve Hendrix
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1032


WWW
« Reply #9 on: December 28, 2009, 08:31:57 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: Niels Van Iperen
Hi Steve,
The test was performed with the 645AF with the standard 80mm f/2.8  Mamiya lens - as far as I am aware the 'standard package' of the P65+.
Raw files are available at http://niels.com/tests/phase-vs-hasselblad.html
And yes, you are correct, we distribute Hasselblad and Profoto in Colombia. The reason we had the opportunity to do the test was that we had a trade-in P65+ in the shop for a couple of days which gave us the opportunity to invite some local photo freaks and do some experimenting ;-)
Thanks,
Niels


Niels:

Thank you for posting the raw files.


Steve Hendrix
« Last Edit: December 28, 2009, 08:32:24 PM by Steve Hendrix » Logged

Steve Hendrix
Sales Manager, www.captureintegration.com (e-mail Me)
MFDB: Phase One/Leaf-Mamiya/Hasselblad/Leica/Sinar
TechCam: Alpa/Cambo/Arca Swiss/Sinar
Direct: 404.543.8475
Steve Hendrix
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1032


WWW
« Reply #10 on: December 28, 2009, 08:36:45 PM »
ReplyReply

Niels:

I've tried downloading the Hasselblad single shot file and it only downloads a 9MB file that seems corrupted or will not unzip?


Steve Hendrix
Logged

Steve Hendrix
Sales Manager, www.captureintegration.com (e-mail Me)
MFDB: Phase One/Leaf-Mamiya/Hasselblad/Leica/Sinar
TechCam: Alpa/Cambo/Arca Swiss/Sinar
Direct: 404.543.8475
Niels Van Iperen
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 17


WWW
« Reply #11 on: December 28, 2009, 08:37:33 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: Steve Hendrix
Niels:
Thank you for posting the raw files.
Steve Hendrix
I'd like to hear any additional findings you might have. I am not trying to do a HB promo, just interested in a clear comparison...
« Last Edit: December 28, 2009, 08:38:31 PM by Niels Van Iperen » Logged
Mr. Rib
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 828


« Reply #12 on: December 28, 2009, 08:42:10 PM »
ReplyReply

Hmm, I don't quite get what is the purpose of such test? It's not a comparison of two digital backs since different bodies/lenses were used for both backs and it's not a comparison of cameras since different backs were used, so uhm.. what is the purpose? hasselblad kit vs phamiya P65+ kit? And if so, then why the topic is called "Phase one P65+ vs Hasselblad 50MS"? Shouldn't it be more like Phamiya P65+ vs Hasselblad 50MS? It's definitely not a digital back test. I'm confused.. And as someone smart once said- if you don't know what something is about, it's about money  In my humble opinion dealers and people associated in any way with producers of the equipment shouldn't be running such tests because it's always biased. There's always a catch, there's always a manipulation.. sigh
And it's quite interesting that your only 'observations' are related to mamiya's deficiencies and disadvantages.
I'm not biased, I want a system which delivers and is relevant to what I want to do so I don't care about the brand, but I don't like to read stuff like that from people related to any company about products of a different company. Even if you're connection to HB is insignificant.. Hopefully there are HB-related guys here which you can give credit.
« Last Edit: December 28, 2009, 08:49:07 PM by Mr. Rib » Logged
Niels Van Iperen
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 17


WWW
« Reply #13 on: December 28, 2009, 08:48:41 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: Mr. Rib
There's always a catch, there's always a manipulation.. sigh
The cameras were side-by-side, I posted the RAW files, about 15 photographers (many of whom are Phase users) did their own testing. It is very difficult for someone not in the industry to get their hands on these 2 cameras, that's why I thought it would be a valid thing to share...
« Last Edit: December 28, 2009, 08:49:58 PM by Niels Van Iperen » Logged
Yanick Dery
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 39



WWW
« Reply #14 on: December 28, 2009, 08:51:47 PM »
ReplyReply

It is very interesting to see what a multi shot back can do... even if I can't use it.

Looking at those file, I have hard time to understand Phase One price point for their P65+ compare to the H3DII-50.
Logged

Niels Van Iperen
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 17


WWW
« Reply #15 on: December 28, 2009, 08:56:07 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: Mr. Rib
what is the purpose? hasselblad kit vs phamiya P65+ kit? And if so, then why the topic is called "Phase one P65+ vs Hasselblad 50MS"? Shouldn't it be more like Phamiya P65+ vs Hasselblad 50MS?
I think it is merely a comparison between two top digital camera systems, both bundled as a set, the Hasselblad with the Hasselblad H3DII camera and the Phase One with the Phase One 645AF camera.
« Last Edit: December 28, 2009, 09:23:21 PM by Niels Van Iperen » Logged
Henry Goh
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 574


« Reply #16 on: December 28, 2009, 10:50:59 PM »
ReplyReply

Whilst I would expect a multi-shot back to yield better colors as well as being sharper, I believe the P65+ shots were not in perfect focus, probably due to AF inaccuracy of the body. Furthermore, at f/22 diffraction is a problem. Still, thanks for sharing your efforts.
« Last Edit: December 29, 2009, 12:30:17 AM by Henry Goh » Logged
arashm
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 142


« Reply #17 on: December 28, 2009, 11:44:09 PM »
ReplyReply

Thank you for posting this
BTW I also can't download/open the file for the single shot H3D2-50
thanks
am
Logged
rethmeier
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 772


WWW
« Reply #18 on: December 28, 2009, 11:50:56 PM »
ReplyReply

Useless test at F22.
There would be major diffraction happening.
Why not test at F11?
Logged

Willem Rethmeier
www.willemrethmeier.com
Sydney Australia
filmcapture
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 63


« Reply #19 on: December 29, 2009, 01:31:13 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: rethmeier
Useless test at F22.
There would be major diffraction happening.
Why not test at F11?

I agree this test is useless at f22. The diffraction limit is around f8 for these digital backs with small pixel size.
Logged
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 5 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad