Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Hasselblad H3D 30mp V Nikon D800E  (Read 12633 times)
ErikKaffehr
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7665


WWW
« Reply #80 on: January 27, 2013, 05:33:10 PM »
ReplyReply

Hi,

This is an interesting discussion but I don't really feel it belongs here. I think we need a new thread on the shooting gear forum.

Best regards
Erik

No, I am not saying that at all. It seems that you are mainly comparing lenses on a single criteria: sharpness. In the centre or at the corner, but still only sharpness. But you can have two equally "sharp" lenses, in the sense that you could see the same level of detail when peeping pixels, but which would still render the same scene very differently. Since you are apparently from a technical background, part of the explanation could come from contrast: what level of contrast is transmitted at various spacial frequencies. Another part of the explanation comes from subtle colour changes. Zeiss lenses, in particular, give the impression that the darker part of high contrast transitions have a slight blue cast. Think about the picture of a resolution test target where the edge of the dark lines would be a bit bluer, depending on their spacing. That could be explained by the multicoating of the lenses, since it has an effect on contrast and its effect depends (a bit) on colour. A third part of the explanation is the rendering of the out of focus parts of the image and the in-focus to out-focus transitions on tridimensional objects, what the Japanese call bokeh. There may be other effects, but I think that these three should be the most important.

All these effects are more notable at large to moderately large apertures. All these effects work together in producing a particular rendering of what is photographed. None of these effects is measured by imatest or even visible on resolution targets. What I was saying is that it is easier to perceive the differences in rendering between a lens from Zeiss and, for example, a lens made by Minolta when taking pictures outdoors on sunny days relatively wide open so that depth of field is reduced. Why? Because that in this situation you have a relatively harsh light (so that contrast is high) with perfect colour content (think about metamerism) and in-focus to out-focus transitions.
Logged

MrSmith
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 910



WWW
« Reply #81 on: January 27, 2013, 05:35:11 PM »
ReplyReply

I edited the comment your responded to, so as to better explain myself. But you are asking an interesting question. Remember: the post was about "scientist and mathematicians". Don't you think that a mathematician specialised in geometry or topology is "visually aware"?

Possibly but in my experience generally no. I just think their brains are wired up differently from photographers/artists/cinematographers


(that's also why I hang out more in this section of the forum, you are more likely to encounter the 'visually aware' and their imagery. Apart from the lawyers/dentists (sorry :-)  )  the higher entry costs of the equipment perhaps means more interesting imagery than the iPhone ephemera that pollutes the interweb)
« Last Edit: January 27, 2013, 05:40:05 PM by MrSmith » Logged
eronald
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 4122



« Reply #82 on: January 27, 2013, 08:30:16 PM »
ReplyReply

Interesting that you still choose to hang out with those greedy and dumb MF guys...

I didn't realize you owned an MF company. Sorry about that.

Now, regarding the original poster's question of H3D vs D800 E,  I own both Phase/Mamiya P45+, a Nikon D3x, and a D4.  I have done some testing with Phase cameras and models later than my P45+, and with Hasselblad, and think that if you want to go MF a current model Hassy (H4) is a good choice because it focuses well. Focus is much more critical with MF than with dSLRs because of the more shallow intrinsic depth of field which assists the "MF look". The older H3 models do not yet have the H4 TrueFocus system which is useful because MF systems do not have multiple AF sensors spread out across the field.

Regarding the question whether MF is worth it, well that depends on your work. The sensors are very good if you have enough light and then the files are astonishing, the viewfinders are superb, tethered shooting works, the lenses are very good if you like the look of your brand, but the  bodies themselves don't handle as quickly as dSLRs, focus is slower and not always foolproof, shot to shot is of the order of one shot per second rather than the 10 or so of a dSLR, mirror slap can be horrendous, camera ergonomics are disturbingly bad eg. try holding an H body in portrait format for an extended period of time, the carry weight of the camera and lenses is HEAVY, and your tripod and its head had better be solid.

If you have good light eg. full daylight or studio flash, a fairly slow moving subject eg. a building, a diamond ring or a model, a good tripod and a strong assistant/porter, and the money, I would recommend MF unreservedly because when the files are good they are very very good. However if you use big flash, then current dSLRs will allow you to work at ISO 800, easily saving you half the weight and cost of lighting equipment to lug around, and also the focus and available light abilities of the new dSLRs are impressive compared to MF, and this can have advantages even in the studio, as can the liveview abilities and the video recording.

Last not least, MF requires a good dealer to support you. SLRs are more of a known quantity and can be more easily bought, fixed and repaired.

As far as I'm concerned, always good enough beats sometimes very good.  An insight which I reached, I guess, after my son was born.

I hope this helps the OP, and wish all of you a very good day Smiley

Edmund

PS. None of the disadvantages of the MF, apart from weight are really intrinsic to the format, they are the effect of a slow moving industry which is investing more in marketing than in engineering. There are in particular no reasons why modern CMOS sensors cannot be incorporated into current MF cameras.
« Last Edit: January 27, 2013, 09:05:53 PM by eronald » Logged
Willow Photography
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 255


WWW
« Reply #83 on: January 28, 2013, 12:36:32 AM »
ReplyReply

"Regarding sensor size, I shoot both APS-C and full frame DSLR"

So why are you here in Digital Backs - and Large Sensor Photography? :-)

Of course everybody can post where everybody wants, but whats the point?
You do not own or shoot with gears you write hundred of posts about.

I see no value of reading post by people who do not have practical experiences
of the gear they are writing about.
And that includes people who shoots brick walls or other test objects once in a while.
Or had an older MFDB years ago.

Its like reading a movie critic from a person who has heard about a film and then write a critic about it.

Why not just write in the DSLR threads where you can write about your practical experiences ?

Want you and some other persons do not understand is:
most of us MFDB users do not care if D800 is a better camera than a MFDB or
if we can save a lot of money by just buying a D800 and a couple of Zeiss lenses.

Stop trying to save us from our "stupidity".
Just let us waste time and money on these hopeless over prized gadgets.
If we can see the difference between a D800 and a MFDB picture, its
because we are blind and gadget freaks and think that if it cost a lot more,
it must be a lot better.

I wish it was an option here on LuLa where you could just
supress some posters posts. :-)


Logged

Willow Photography
K.C.
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 654


« Reply #84 on: January 28, 2013, 03:11:55 AM »
ReplyReply

I wish it was an option here on LuLa where you could just
supress some posters posts. :-)

Some threads, like this one, become too much work to read as they digress into pointless diatribes. I just stop clicking on it. That option is always available.

Besides, I'm busy. I'm running from that same bear that's chasing bcooter and he's clearly further ahead of the bear than I am.



Logged
Rob C
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 12213


« Reply #85 on: January 28, 2013, 03:39:54 AM »
ReplyReply

Insanity is doing the same thing over and over hoping for a different result.IMO

BC



How can this be? Am I nuts? I have been using the same lottery numbers for as long as the Euromilliones has been running, and in that time I have won several cups of coffee at retail prices and so why would I give up a system that works?

Anyway, that would be impossible: imagine giving up on those unforgettable birthday numerals and then finding they have arrived?

Now that would lead to instant insanity!

Rob C
Logged

hjulenissen
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1683


« Reply #86 on: January 28, 2013, 03:54:47 AM »
ReplyReply

Its not only the MFDB haters thats hijacking the MFDB treads, but also the scientists and mathematicians
are posting more than the creative people.
In my humble experience: there tends to be a lot of creativity in good science, and there tends to be a lot of science in good art. Attempts to label people into either camp with the goal of excluding "the others" is not a good approach imho.

Would Ansel Adams be dismissed as "pixel-peeping wannabe scientist" had he posted here today?

-h

 
« Last Edit: January 28, 2013, 03:59:18 AM by hjulenissen » Logged
Mike Sellers
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 435


WWW
« Reply #87 on: January 28, 2013, 06:23:24 AM »
ReplyReply

Thanks to Jerome,Erik and anyone else who stayed on point to my original question. I was merely wondering about the technical merits and capabilities of each system.
Logged
bjanes
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2825



« Reply #88 on: January 28, 2013, 06:56:51 AM »
ReplyReply

Its not only the MFDB haters thats hijacking the MFDB treads, but also the scientists and mathematicians
are posting more than the creative people.

IMO, that is a big step back from how it was some years ago.

You don't think scientists and mathematicians are creative? I would suggest that they are far more creative than most photographers. Without them (the scientists and mathematicians) the photographers would have no tools with which to ply their trade.

Regards,

Bill

« Last Edit: January 28, 2013, 07:05:35 AM by bjanes » Logged
Gel
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 159


Excuse me while I bust a cap


« Reply #89 on: January 28, 2013, 07:34:16 AM »
ReplyReply

H4D50 - 150mm Mk1 lens with the 1.7x TC shot wide open - Handheld, from 7 metres away at 1/125 of a second (despite the focal length being 250mm)

No sharpening.

Why did I post this? No reason.


Logged

Chris Giles Photography
eronald
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 4122



« Reply #90 on: January 28, 2013, 08:28:17 AM »
ReplyReply



How can this be? Am I nuts?

Now that would lead to instant insanity!

Rob C

Rob,

 Stop running! You're there! Smiley

Edmund
Logged
bcooter
Guest
« Reply #91 on: January 28, 2013, 10:42:54 AM »
ReplyReply


PS. None of the disadvantages of the MF, apart from weight are really intrinsic to the format, they are the effect of a slow moving industry which is investing more in marketing than in engineering. There are in particular no reasons why modern CMOS sensors cannot be incorporated into current MF cameras.


Ronald,

You know that you can't sell anything on a worldwide stage without heavy marketing.  It's not unusual to spend 1/2 as much on marketing as you do in production on a product like a movie, or a consumer electronic device.  Finally Phase stepped up at least to the 20th century and started marketing.  

It seems to me there is a lot of pent up anger towards some of the medium format companies and they can be frustrating, especially when your heavy in production and they make a change in firmware or software, or your staring down the price of a $4,000 lens.  Then again you don't have to change firmwares or softwares and lenses can be had second hand.  I didn't update my Phase backs for 3 years because everything worked.

Also in the world of professional cinema, a $4,000 lens is just scratching the surface, so in a way, still photographers are spoiled.

The thing is we have such a small diversity in cameras.  No more x-pans, widelux, Mamiya 7's, fuji 680s, contax, (all three) so for professional use it's either look alike Canon, Nikon dslrs with that look alike cmos chips, or Leica, or medium format.  That's mostly it and that's kind sad and strange that in a world of electronics you'd think we'd have cameras that worked on a professional level that were 22nd century stuff.

Maybe the real next camera is a 22mp ipad.  We all think the millenium generation only cars about touch screens, though every assistant I work with owns a contax g2, a mamiya 7 or some kind of legacy film camera that is different.  They'd love nothing more than if those cameras came in digital but they don't, or if they did I doubt if that generation would/could pay $24,000 to buy one.

I believe with all my heart, if specialty cameras are too survive they first need to get their cameras in the hands of young photographers and find some type of financing, leasing that really works for their income level.  I also believe they need to ramp up with a consumer company like Samsung where they can produce different style cameras in a faster cycle.  

Maybe this just isn't possible.

Anyway, I DON'T want to see the specialty cameras go away, anymore than I want to see Mole Richardson or Arri disappear.  I think real professional equipment is important and reflects the health of our industry.



IMO

Bc
Logged
Rob C
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 12213


« Reply #92 on: January 28, 2013, 11:27:33 AM »
ReplyReply

Rob,

 Stop running! You're there! Smiley

Edmund


Well that's a relief; no more need to work on it and refine the technique in hope!

;-)

Rob C
Logged

eronald
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 4122



« Reply #93 on: January 28, 2013, 05:38:07 PM »
ReplyReply

James,

 I think we both want to see novel equipment. For us to use, for the young crowd to astonish us with and push us.
 In a way, I guess we thought the 5D2 etc would do it, but it's just seems to have led to more TV serials being shot with dSLRs.
 And 80MP MF hans't seemed to improve web images one iota Smiley
 I'm sure we're going to get something new, in a few dog-years.
 There is no reason to think that new formats will be linked to print; it's an electronic world out there now.
 And we shouldn't forget that for most of us, digital itself was a revolution that came late in our life.

Edmund



Ronald,


The thing is we have such a small diversity in cameras.  No more x-pans, widelux, Mamiya 7's, fuji 680s, contax, (all three) so for professional use it's either look alike Canon, Nikon dslrs with that look alike cmos chips, or Leica, or medium format.  That's mostly it and that's kind sad and strange that in a world of electronics you'd think we'd have cameras that worked on a professional level that were 22nd century stuff.

Maybe the real next camera is a 22mp ipad.  We all think the millenium generation only cars about touch screens, though every assistant I work with owns a contax g2, a mamiya 7 or some kind of legacy film camera that is different.  They'd love nothing more than if those cameras came in digital but they don't, or if they did I doubt if that generation would/could pay $24,000 to buy one.

I believe with all my heart, if specialty cameras are too survive they first need to get their cameras in the hands of young photographers and find some type of financing, leasing that really works for their income level.  I also believe they need to ramp up with a consumer company like Samsung where they can produce different style cameras in a faster cycle.  

Maybe this just isn't possible.

Anyway, I DON'T want to see the specialty cameras go away, anymore than I want to see Mole Richardson or Arri disappear.  I think real professional equipment is important and reflects the health of our industry.



IMO

Bc

Logged
Jeffery Salter
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 68



WWW
« Reply #94 on: January 28, 2013, 06:20:15 PM »
ReplyReply

On my desk right now is Super D Graflex.  Back in the day it was "The 4 X 5 SLR".  One of my missions this week is to find some super techie guy to tell me how to marry graflex to a phase one back.   Not sure what I would get.  But damn it would be fun to play with.

In my sphere of photography I've seen photographers who carry an old film camera such as a Mamiya 7ii along with a DSLR.  To be more specific I saw two photojos who were on the Mitch Romey campaign trail.  And as far as other contemporary photographers, Martin Schoeller still brings along his 8 x 10 on his digital shoots as well.  So you say print is dead, long live print.  Shooting for a print magazine is only an ends to a means.  Your pictures can be used in books, photo exhibitions and fine art sales. 

If one wants to shoot an 80 MP MF for web.  I say go for it.  That web image is only one usage.  Who wants to limit their creative vision.

Thank you,
Jeffery
Logged

Jeffery Salter
___________________________________________________________________________________
www.jefferysalter.com

Loving life one frame at a time.
kdphotography
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 731


WWW
« Reply #95 on: January 28, 2013, 06:27:10 PM »
ReplyReply

Jeffery,

I believe a graflok adapter is available for your Phase Back.  Unfortunately, I think it runs in the neighborhood of $800 (yeah, I know---I asked).  But I think it could be a lot of fun in a holga-ish sort of way...   Smiley

ken
Logged

eronald
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 4122



« Reply #96 on: January 28, 2013, 07:11:38 PM »
ReplyReply

This adapted Mamiya looks kinda cute
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Modified-Mamiya-6-camera-for-Hasselblad-V-mount-digital-back-with-75mm-Lens-/261096296055?pt=Digital_Cameras&hash=item3cca8d4e77

Jeffery,

I believe a graflok adapter is available for your Phase Back.  Unfortunately, I think it runs in the neighborhood of $800 (yeah, I know---I asked).  But I think it could be a lot of fun in a holga-ish sort of way...   Smiley

ken
Logged
esox
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 117


« Reply #97 on: January 28, 2013, 07:55:20 PM »
ReplyReply

You don't think scientists and mathematicians are creative? I would suggest that they are far more creative than most photographers. Without them (the scientists and mathematicians) the photographers would have no tools with which to ply their trade.

Regards,

Bill



There are very few creative scientist that make science progress and there are very few creaative photographs that make photography progress. There are many middle and lower level scientists that think they are scientists because they have the degree nailed on their wall. And there are many middle and lower level photogtaphers that think they are professional because they can find a "weakness" in others works and viewpoint and find a sharoness default in anotheŕs picture.
Logged
esox
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 117


« Reply #98 on: January 28, 2013, 08:00:01 PM »
ReplyReply

"Regarding sensor size, I shoot both APS-C and full frame DSLR"

So why are you here in Digital Backs - and Large Sensor Photography? :-)

Of course everybody can post where everybody wants, but whats the point?
You do not own or shoot with gears you write hundred of posts about.

I see no value of reading post by people who do not have practical experiences
of the gear they are writing about.
And that includes people who shoots brick walls or other test objects once in a while.
Or had an older MFDB years ago.

Its like reading a movie critic from a person who has heard about a film and then write a critic about it.

Why not just write in the DSLR threads where you can write about your practical experiences ?

Want you and some other persons do not understand is:
most of us MFDB users do not care if D800 is a better camera than a MFDB or
if we can save a lot of money by just buying a D800 and a couple of Zeiss lenses.

Stop trying to save us from our "stupidity".
Just let us waste time and money on these hopeless over prized gadgets.
If we can see the difference between a D800 and a MFDB picture, its
because we are blind and gadget freaks and think that if it cost a lot more,
it must be a lot better.

I wish it was an option here on LuLa where you could just
supress some posters posts. :-)




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

Posts: 1651


« Reply #99 on: January 28, 2013, 09:42:08 PM »
ReplyReply

A little D800 landscape I shot Saturday on a walk up the trail behind my house.




Higher res here.
http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8044/8424931951_b5e0b5ae19_o.jpg

I love the little bird in the bottom right corner... perched right on the top if a tall stem.
« Last Edit: January 28, 2013, 09:47:26 PM by FredBGG » Logged
Pages: « 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad