Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 [2] 3 4 5 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Phase One P65+ vs Hasselblad 50MS test  (Read 25413 times)
ixpressraf
Guest
« Reply #20 on: December 29, 2009, 02:56:40 AM »
ReplyReply

Why is it so hard for people to understand any multishotcamera, even a Hasselblad 384 16Mp or an Eyelike22 precission will outperform any oneshot back even a P65+ when it comes to pure quality. Nowedays you can buy MS back's for ridiculous prices, and for non moving, still life, reproduction every MS back will beat any other back.
Logged
EricWHiss
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2427



WWW
« Reply #21 on: December 29, 2009, 03:20:43 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: ixpressraf
Why is it so hard for people to understand any multishotcamera, even a Hasselblad 384 16Mp or an Eyelike22 precission will outperform any oneshot back even a P65+ when it comes to pure quality. Nowedays you can buy MS back's for ridiculous prices, and for non moving, still life, reproduction every MS back will beat any other back.

Raf's right.  Multishot can be really impressive - even more so than the test shots posted here.   To me the crops of the phase p65 looked to be not taken at the apex of focus and probably that back/camera combo could look better, but also the multishot samples could also show better too.
Logged

Authorized Rolleiflex Dealer:
Find product information, download user manuals, or purchase online - Rolleiflex USA
carstenw
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 581



« Reply #22 on: December 29, 2009, 03:31:38 AM »
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.

Not necessarily. Lenses act very differently at small apertures. Since there are many confounding factors here, the only sensible thing to do would have been to find the sweet spot for both systems, probably f/8 or so, and then shoot them that way. That would have at least matched what people do in the real world.

The way it was done it is not known whether the apparent superior resolution of the Hasselblad is due to a lens or sensor issue. The only remaining valid conclusions are about noise and colour. The slight extra noise of the Phase at low ISO is not an issue, I would think, but the better ISO 800 of the Phase is a huge difference. ISO 1600 and up look useless, but I suppose there is Sensor+.

Speaking of colour, what is going on in the shadow of the orange on the Phase P65+? There is a strange red cast and some posterization there. I don't have Capture One to examine the raw.
Logged

design_freak
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1074



« Reply #23 on: December 29, 2009, 03:49:51 AM »
ReplyReply

I read this. And it's correct. Mamiya lenses are not so good. I use both P65+ and H3DII 50 but P65+ with hasselblad body. It's true Hasselblad is better in 50-200 iso range. But it was design to work in the studio where we use 50-100 ISO.
Ok Phase is better in 400-800 but when we use sensor plus. But in this situation we get only 15mpix files. In my opinion it;s better to buy Nikon d3s if you want use higher iso. It's cheap and more useable.
Multishot camera are always better then single shot.
In my opinion Hasselblad is much much better than Phase, Because they have whole system. Working system. Sorry to said that but Phase One camera  have still "children syndrom"

Best regards,
Design Freak

Logged

Best regards,
DF

-------------------------------------------
WORK HARD AND BE NICE TO PEOPLE
-------------------------------------------
happyman
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 56


« Reply #24 on: December 29, 2009, 04:44:43 AM »
ReplyReply

f22 isn´t useless. At least it is not for me.

It is much to often the only way to go with medium format studio photography.



Logged
carstenw
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 581



« Reply #25 on: December 29, 2009, 05:27:57 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: happyman
f22 isn´t useless. At least it is not for me.

It is much to often the only way to go with medium format studio photography.

Right, but it is not the right place to compare resolution, since lenses differ in their diffraction.
Logged

Dick Roadnight
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1730


« Reply #26 on: December 29, 2009, 05:34:03 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: Niels Van Iperen
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.

~Niels
One relevant question is ...

¿Will the H4D-60 be like the P65+ if it uses the same Dalsa sensor?
Logged

Hasselblad H4, Sinar P3 monorail view camera, Schneider Apo-digitar lenses
yaya
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1137



WWW
« Reply #27 on: December 29, 2009, 05:51:19 AM »
ReplyReply

When choosing between single-shot and multi-shot solutions, the workflow, for some, weighs more than the absolute result:

File size: For a given output size, a RAW file from multi-shot weighs 4-6 times more than a single-shot file, takes 4 times longer to capture and 2-3 times longer to process. If you do repro work and capture 20 originals per day, this typically means 100 GB extra storage space per month, only for the selected RAW files.

Shutters and lights wear: Not necessarily a big issue but is worth mentioning.

In the linked samples, I have to say that the multi-shot 50MP images ARE NOT 5 times better than the single shot 60MP ones, if at all...

Perhaps at f11 we would be able to see a bigger difference, perhaps not...
Logged

Yair Shahar | Product Manager | Mamiya Leaf |
e: ysh@mamiyaleaf.com | m: +44(0)77 8992 8199 | www.mamiyaleaf.com | yaya's blog
Michael HG
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 17


« Reply #28 on: December 29, 2009, 06:47:31 AM »
ReplyReply

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

+1
Logged
Dustbak
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2372


« Reply #29 on: December 29, 2009, 07:37:04 AM »
ReplyReply

To state it is totally useless at f22 is going to far IMO. It is a pity it was not done at f11 which would have made more sense (including making sure there is proper focus). It is nice to see a comparison, thank you for that!

Every comparison can be made just so that one of the contestants shines and stands out. In this situation the multishot back isn't even used where it would have totally wiped the floor with both single shots cameras. If you would have a lot of fabric, garments in the composition the difference would have been much more dramatic. The differences between single and multishot can be dramatic but used on certain materials it can also be much less. Honestly, when I shoot multishot for several days I feel single shot delivers blurry and shitty results. Fortunately this will fade away after days of single shot shooting.

Yair is right. Multishot doesn't always fit in someones workflow. It cannot be used always. If it can and you are willing to take the extra effort it will reward you with stunning results.

Comparing P1/Hasselblad (or Leaf for that matter) in single shot mode, for me that is becoming kind of futile at the moment. I am pretty sure I can get the results I want with either one. A bit like the Canon vs Nikon story. Yes one might be better in this and the other in that but all in all in general I would not give a damn.

I am happy sofar with Hasselblad. My only gripe is the dreaded dealer system which is something I have always  been complaining about, even when I was still working with Leaf. There are simply too many of them that underperform and are mere obstacles for which we even have to pay! I will applaud for the first of the manufacturers that comes with a factory delivered system and with all communications directly with the company.
« Last Edit: December 29, 2009, 07:46:40 AM by Dustbak » Logged
tho_mas
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1696


« Reply #30 on: December 29, 2009, 07:45:25 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: Dustbak
Every comparison can be made just so that one of the contestants shines and stands out.
yes, seems so: http://www.captureintegration.com/tests/comparisons/
Logged
RichA@FotoCare
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 38


WWW
« Reply #31 on: December 29, 2009, 08:04:22 AM »
ReplyReply

Nils - Thanks for the test and the post.

I can't tell you how many calls we get and have to tell people to open up, turn down their power packs or adjust their shutter speed.  It's good to see some people know this.  So he shot at 22, both were done at 22.  I'm sure you guys can do your own test at the parameters of your choosing, as dealers we would all be happy to help you do a test of your own.

I think the test with the supplied "kit" bodies is reasonable.  They each put their name on a body and sell systems as a "kit" so why not test as is.  Any differences might show why one system is better to choose over another for a individual user.  If the outcome shows that the Hasselblad H3D - H4D system is better then it might also show someone was right when they developed a new "system" where they could provide better quality. However you need to test and see for yourself and actually see what is the best "fit" for what you do.

Since we are providing full disclosure, I have worked for a dealer in NYC for the last 12 years and 7 years with Sinar Bron before that.  We sell Hasselblad, Leaf, Leica, Sinar, Canon, Nikon, and waiting the addition of Phase to our rental department.

Best,
Rich Andres
Foto Care
NY, NY
Logged
RichA@FotoCare
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 38


WWW
« Reply #32 on: December 29, 2009, 08:21:04 AM »
ReplyReply

"I am happy sofar with Hasselblad. My only gripe is the dreaded dealer system which is something I have always  been complaining about, even when I was still working with Leaf. There are simply too many of them that underperform and are mere obstacles for which we even have to pay! I will applaud for the first of the manufacturers that comes with a factory delivered system and with all communications directly with the company.
[/quote]"


Dustbak I'm sorry you had a bad experience with a dealer.

I guess you have never worked with Phase One or tried getting support from them directly?  It's all about the support you get from the dealer.

It's too bad you're not from the US, for here in the states there are many dealers who provide the local support and sometimes even a loaner system when you can't resolve the problem on set with your back.  Name a manufacture that can do that for you.  As an example John Williams at Hot Shots?in Atlanta for Hasselblad, Dave, Steve, & Doug at Capture Integration in Atlanta for Phase, John Popp at Dodds in Ohio/Chicago -supports all systems, Foto Care in NYC.  There's also Niels in Columbia who started this post, and Ben at Peartree in the UK.  I apologize to any dealer not mentioned who takes taking care of the customer their number one priority.

Rich Andres
« Last Edit: December 29, 2009, 08:34:03 AM by RichA@FotoCare » Logged
Dustbak
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2372


« Reply #33 on: December 29, 2009, 09:17:14 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: RichA@FotoCare
"I am happy sofar with Hasselblad. My only gripe is the dreaded dealer system which is something I have always  been complaining about, even when I was still working with Leaf. There are simply too many of them that underperform and are mere obstacles for which we even have to pay! I will applaud for the first of the manufacturers that comes with a factory delivered system and with all communications directly with the company.
"


Dustbak I'm sorry you had a bad experience with a dealer.

I guess you have never worked with Phase One or tried getting support from them directly?  It's all about the support you get from the dealer.

It's too bad you're not from the US, for here in the states there are many dealers who provide the local support and sometimes even a loaner system when you can't resolve the problem on set with your back.  Name a manufacture that can do that for you.  As an example John Williams at Hot Shots?in Atlanta for Hasselblad, Dave, Steve, & Doug at Capture Integration in Atlanta for Phase, John Popp at Dodds in Ohio/Chicago -supports all systems, Foto Care in NYC.  There's also Niels in Columbia who started this post, and Ben at Peartree in the UK.  I apologize to any dealer not mentioned who takes taking care of the customer their number one priority.

Rich Andres

Sure Rich,

I understand you. I have not had a bad experience with a dealer. I have had nothing but bad experiences, they have been utterly useless for me. The only dealer that was usefull went bankrupt last year. The others either never respond to the simplest of questions, feel too good to return requests for quotes, take forever to get stuff that you have ordered, don't even get back to you when you ask for their banking details to transfer money. Dealers only respond once you are in front of them in person which is not what I prefer because it takes up my time and in 90% of the cases they need to order what I want anyway. I never need a loaner since I own and use 2 of everything. Repairs go to the manufacturer directly if I cannot fix it. I know more about the software and many of the other things of the system I use than the dealer.

The only helpful dealers I have found besides DigiCare were located in the US.

My experience with the people at both Leaf as well as Hasselblad were totally different. I have never waited longer than a day for an answer on any question I placed at either one of these companies, in many cases I got problems resolved and answers received in a couple of hours.

I have to work very hard to make my living. My margins are thin, I get very frustrated when there is something in between the chain that is, at least in my experience, nothing but an obstacle and certainly of no use to me.
« Last Edit: December 29, 2009, 09:55:18 AM by Dustbak » Logged
Niels Van Iperen
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 17


WWW
« Reply #34 on: December 29, 2009, 09:26:41 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: filmcapture
I agree this test is useless at f22. The diffraction limit is around f8 for these digital backs with small pixel size.
IMHO a Multi Shot camera is not very useful for a portrait photographer. It is directed exclusively to product photographers. Product photographers will be shooting much more often in the 16-32 range than in the 5.6-11 range. So it is relevant that a system performs well at f/22.
« Last Edit: December 29, 2009, 09:30:07 AM by Niels Van Iperen » Logged
Niels Van Iperen
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 17


WWW
« Reply #35 on: December 29, 2009, 09:29:09 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: Henry Goh
I believe the P65+ shots were not in perfect focus, probably due to AF inaccuracy of the body.
Various photographers tried to get a better result, both in MF and AF modes. Nobody got a sharper picture. One of them actually checked whether I had smudged the lens or the sensor ;-)
Logged
ThierryH
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 409


« Reply #36 on: December 29, 2009, 11:25:00 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: Niels Van Iperen
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...

I am "killing myself" to repeat these since ages.

Even when taking "only" a 22 MPx sensor for the multi vs single shot comparison, still none of any available single shot back would come close to it. It doesn't need a 50 MPx back.

Thierry
Logged

ThierryH
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 409


« Reply #37 on: December 29, 2009, 11:31:29 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: tho_mas
but the advantage of mulit shot would be less obvious at f8, no?

Not so, in the contrary.

Thierry
Logged

tho_mas
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1696


« Reply #38 on: December 29, 2009, 11:35:43 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: ThierryH
Not so, in the contrary.
okay, thanks!
I only thought the difference from sharp to uber-sharp is less obvious than from soft to sharp (like in the samples above) ...
Logged
ThierryH
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 409


« Reply #39 on: December 29, 2009, 11:41:31 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: yaya
File size: For a given output size, a RAW file from multi-shot weighs 4-6 times more than a single-shot file, takes 4 times longer to capture and 2-3 times longer to process.

A Sinar multishot files takes (much) less to process (to open) than a single shot one, simply because ALL the information is there, true colour information and it therefore DOES NOT need to be extrapolated in the develop  process. It might be a 4 times heavier file, but that does only influence the capture process/time.

Thierry
Logged

Pages: « 1 [2] 3 4 5 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad