Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 8 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: To leave Hasselblad H4D 50?  (Read 18497 times)
bcooter
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1159


Bang The Drum All Day


WWW
« Reply #60 on: May 07, 2013, 12:57:20 PM »
ReplyReply

I
No, my photography days are not over - I just have to adjust and work on finding my issue "entertaining" rather than limiting.



Sorry to here about your health issues, but great your continuing.

Nobody can tell you the camera to use, because it's al so personal, but I was at Samy's and they have this Leica Boutique and man those cameras are so, so pretty.

They are hard to resist.

I keep my old m8 and a small manfroto tripod in the boot of our cars and can't tell you how many times I've stopped and shot a background plate of something just interesting.

I think the tripod and the camera, lenses weighs just a few pounds.

Just a thought.

IMO

BC
« Last Edit: May 07, 2013, 01:12:53 PM by bcooter » Logged

TMARK
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1843


« Reply #61 on: May 07, 2013, 01:55:10 PM »
ReplyReply

Sorry to here about your health issues, but great your continuing.

Nobody can tell you the camera to use, because it's al so personal, but I was at Samy's and they have this Leica Boutique and man those cameras are so, so pretty.

They are hard to resist.

I keep my old m8 and a small manfroto tripod in the boot of our cars and can't tell you how many times I've stopped and shot a background plate of something just interesting.

I think the tripod and the camera, lenses weighs just a few pounds.

Just a thought.

IMO

BC

I'm with Cooter.  A Leica M and a lens or two + a carbon tripod weigh almost nothing.
Logged
FredBGG
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1651


« Reply #62 on: May 07, 2013, 02:32:40 PM »
ReplyReply

I'm with Cooter.  A Leica M and a lens or two + a carbon tripod weigh almost nothing.

Leica's are wonderful cameras, but with a muscular ailment having the option of image stabilization
could be an important factor. None with Leica. Plenty of options with Nikon and Canon. Canon is even adding it to it's newer wide angles.

The D800e the OP is gravitating too also has more dynamic range more color depth and higher MP count as well as no anti alias filter.
Logged
FredBGG
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1651


« Reply #63 on: May 07, 2013, 02:35:54 PM »
ReplyReply

Jack...

I saw it was nice and cloudy today so I took a camera out with the dogs and shot some clouds for you.
I thought I'd do so with the lightest general purpose lens.. 24-85mm and D800 (Sorry did not have a d800E handy)
Very light lens with IS, but not as sharp as the 24-70 2.8 or the better primes, but for an all round compact zoom from 24-85
it's a nifty little lens.



« Last Edit: May 07, 2013, 09:54:08 PM by FredBGG » Logged
FredBGG
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1651


« Reply #64 on: May 07, 2013, 04:38:12 PM »
ReplyReply

Here is another shot underexposed to show what the D800 is capable of in the shadows.
Having such good shadow recovery allows you to shoot coud and land scenes that have very strong extremes in lighting.

original file:



After processing

Logged
FredBGG
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1651


« Reply #65 on: May 07, 2013, 09:56:32 PM »
ReplyReply

One more:

« Last Edit: May 07, 2013, 10:02:51 PM by FredBGG » Logged
RVB
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 56


« Reply #66 on: May 08, 2013, 02:52:37 AM »
ReplyReply

One more:



The D800 has a fantastic sensor,no doubt about it.I think the DR is more concentrated in the shadow's and I think that Phase one and Hasselblad/Leica S sensor's are stronger in the highlight's.
Logged
FredBGG
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1651


« Reply #67 on: May 08, 2013, 03:06:59 AM »
ReplyReply

The Sony/Nikon sensor preforms well in both highlights and shadows.
It has the largest dynamic range for now and has more room for making ones own profiles.

Shadows and highlights have plenty of data in them.

Shadows:
original and recovered. ACR



Highlights:
original and recovered. Shadow highlights correction in PS. ACR would be better.



The dynamic range is there from shadows to highlights. Different defaults of the raw converters may make it look like
Phase/Hasselblad sensors have more strength in the highlights. I have found both shadows and highlights are both good.
The d800 slightly better but also faster and more versatile.. not to mention the whole motion image side of things...
Phase/Hasselblad/Nikon all good sensors.
« Last Edit: May 08, 2013, 03:20:34 AM by FredBGG » Logged
RVB
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 56


« Reply #68 on: May 08, 2013, 06:43:31 AM »
ReplyReply

The strength of the Exmor sensor is undeniable,and as you say different raw converter's will alter the result's,I still have a slight preference for CCD highlight's but it could be subjective,color response is also subjective,phase and Leica S are a little more neutral and Hassy more saturated,this will be about personal perference's,http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/i_will_not_buy_that_camera_i_promise.shtml this link discuss's the color vs the new M...  the biggest challenge of the D800 and even more the D800E is to get the glass that can extract the best of the sensor,everything Ihave seen falls short of good medium format glass,the new Leica 135APO looks decent,I have the Zeiss 15mm and it's not bad but not a match for the HCD-28 or Leica S24mm and Schneider or rodie's would also be mush better...

But if we think of it as a value proposition then the Nikon is a fabulous package,great performance for a very good price,it's like high end Audio,you pay a lot more to get the extra last drop of quality..  Smiley
Logged
jerome_m
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 621


« Reply #69 on: May 08, 2013, 06:44:22 AM »
ReplyReply

This appears to have turned into another "the D800e is the best thing that came to photography after Nicéphore Niépce", but in the particular case of the o.p. there is a catch: he mainly uses the HCD 28 and there is simply no lens of the same IQ giving the same angle of view that one can mount on the Nikon.

It's not the camera, it's the lens.
Logged
Lust4Life
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 430


WWW
« Reply #70 on: May 08, 2013, 06:57:35 AM »
ReplyReply

Fred,

What a kind gesture!!
Thank you!

I'm studying your images and appreciating the D800 even more.

Just said to my wife/AKA "Serpa of High Priced Camera Gear" that I must get out and test the
concept of my carrying the H4D with the 80 and she carrying the 28, HTS and Tripod.

I'm hoping to get a few more walks in with this configuration but this weekends test will tell.

Again, a big Thank You for the kindness and time you spent to share.

Jack
Logged

RVB
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 56


« Reply #71 on: May 08, 2013, 07:33:20 AM »
ReplyReply

This appears to have turned into another "the D800e is the best thing that came to photography after Nicéphore Niépce", but in the particular case of the o.p. there is a catch: he mainly uses the HCD 28 and there is simply no lens of the same IQ giving the same angle of view that one can mount on the Nikon.

It's not the camera, it's the lens.

Not really,we can acknowledge that its a great sensor but we know that as a system it is not as good as Hasselblad ,Leica S or phase as the glass is not up to the same standard.. so it is as the glass that makes the final difference,if it was me looking for a lightweight system with high quality I would choose the Leica M
Logged
Lust4Life
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 430


WWW
« Reply #72 on: May 08, 2013, 07:52:30 AM »
ReplyReply

I agree with your observation that "it's the glass".

When I first started having neuromuscular problems a couple of years ago I purchase the Canon 5DMkII and an array of the TSE lenses plus a couple of primes that were top rated for Canon.  Hope was to get away from the heavy, expensive and rapidly depreciating Hasselblad gear.

What a dramatic degradation of the Canon from the Hassie images I was used to looking at.  Couple that with the delta in quality between 14 bit and 16 bit resulted in my promptly selling the whole system.

Now I have to admit that there is a vast array of beautiful work being done by many photographers using Canon and pre-D800 Nikon equipment.
My hat is off to all of them and many of their works I personally admire.  Now with the advent of the D800, WOW, what a great cost effective way to advance the image quality of all photographers choosing to shoot SLR, and what a challenge to Canon to step up their game.

Time now has forced me to have to learn how to get the results so many others have beautifully demonstrated on SLR gear.

Jack

  
« Last Edit: May 08, 2013, 08:08:17 AM by Lust4Life » Logged

ErikKaffehr
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7638


WWW
« Reply #73 on: May 08, 2013, 08:15:02 AM »
ReplyReply

Hi,

Regarding the advantage of 16 bit over 14 bit I am pretty sure it is myth, as the signal from the CCD-s used on MFDBs has about four bits of noise. Maximum signal is about 60000 electrons and readout noise is around 16 electrons that is about 12 bits of signal bandwidth.

Obviously, MF has an advantage of size. A smaller sensor need much better technology to keep up with a larger sensor.

On the lens front some Nikon lenses are very good, and Zeiss seems to develop some leading edge designs, but good lenses for DSLRs tend to be big and heavy.

Best regards
Erik

Couple that with the delta in quality between 14 bit and 16 bit resulted in my promptly selling the whole system.

 
Logged

jerome_m
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 621


« Reply #74 on: May 08, 2013, 08:27:46 AM »
ReplyReply

My point is that we should not be not discussing the cameras in a vacuum. Taken alone, the D800 and H4D-50 may be similar. But Jack is not using his camera without a lens. His line of business appears to be dependent on delivering very high resolution prints of landscape and architecture taken with a wide-angle lens, the HCD 28.

We can discuss dynamic range or shadows till the end of time, but the limiting factor here is that there is no 20mm lens to be put in front of the D800 which will give the same level of IQ across the frame than the HCD 28mm on the H4D. And the best 20mm for the D800 weight a ton, so the objective of saving on weight would not be met.
Logged
Doug Peterson
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2836


WWW
« Reply #75 on: May 08, 2013, 09:26:47 AM »
ReplyReply

I always love reading about reading about an evaluation of "Phase One" image quality based on a few months with a P25+ from six years ago which was based on a sensor released ten years ago. 

This is like making comments today about "Nikon quality" based on using a Nikon D70s for a few months.

Even so I'd still take a P25+ on a tech camera vs. a D800 except where very high ISO, video, or fast shooting speed is preferred. The quality of lenses cannot be matched and with a Schneider wide the kit size/weight is comparable to a nikon kit.

To the OP: I don't think you could possibly do better than an M8 or M9 (budget dependent). Wonderful image quality, incredibly small pack size/weight, enjoyable to use. A tech camera kit would be a good alternative but it's additional weight would be hard to recommend based on your specific situation, and you'd probably want to switch to a digital back that has it's own battery which would stretch your budget.
Logged

DOUG PETERSON (dep@digitaltransitions.com), Digital Transitions
Dealer for Phase One, Mamiya Leaf, Arca-Swiss, Cambo, Profoto
Office: 877.367.8537
Cell: 740.707.2183
Phase One IQ250 FAQ
Doug Peterson
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2836


WWW
« Reply #76 on: May 08, 2013, 09:29:42 AM »
ReplyReply

Regarding the advantage of 16 bit over 14 bit I am pretty sure it is myth, as the signal from the CCD-s used on MFDBs has about four bits of noise. Maximum signal is about 60000 electrons and readout noise is around 16 electrons that is about 12 bits of signal bandwidth.

Numbers and electronics terms aside the poster is saying he has found an advantage in the color and tonal rendering; the specific technological underpinnings of this are relatively unimportant (except to engineers looking to improve them).
Logged

DOUG PETERSON (dep@digitaltransitions.com), Digital Transitions
Dealer for Phase One, Mamiya Leaf, Arca-Swiss, Cambo, Profoto
Office: 877.367.8537
Cell: 740.707.2183
Phase One IQ250 FAQ
Guy Mancuso
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1116


WWW
« Reply #77 on: May 08, 2013, 11:17:55 AM »
ReplyReply

My point is that we should not be not discussing the cameras in a vacuum. Taken alone, the D800 and H4D-50 may be similar. But Jack is not using his camera without a lens. His line of business appears to be dependent on delivering very high resolution prints of landscape and architecture taken with a wide-angle lens, the HCD 28.

We can discuss dynamic range or shadows till the end of time, but the limiting factor here is that there is no 20mm lens to be put in front of the D800 which will give the same level of IQ across the frame than the HCD 28mm on the H4D. And the best 20mm for the D800 weight a ton, so the objective of saving on weight would not be met.

+1 I have done a lot of testing between my IQ 160 and IQ 140 with a tech cam and the Rodie 28 and Schneider 60mm XL against the Nikons and the tech cam wins on every level. Bottom line if you want to meet or exceed what your getting today with your Hassy 50 and 28mm than keep your back get a small Alpa TC or Cambo compact and a Rodie 28mm. It's still a small system that will punch holes into anything. I shoot the Nikon daily and its a nice system but if you want the best glass for it it will be big and heavy and still will not beat your Hassy 28 with that back. If your trying to save money sure the Nikon is a nice choice but you get what you pay for not the quality of a tech cam and 28 Rodie nor your setup today. Again its your money and you need to decide if its worth the extra costs or not but don't expect a cheaper system will meet what you have today, it will not and one should not expect it too either. If I had life my way I would still have a tech cam and back and a Leica M system but I'm a working Pro and my choices don't always match my clients needs to get there job done. If I was ONLY a landscape shooter than tech cam all the way. They just rock and are fun to shoot.

You need real help contact me offline. I no longer participate here but always willing to help someone make the right choices on there needs.
Logged

RVB
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 56


« Reply #78 on: May 08, 2013, 01:14:11 PM »
ReplyReply

I figured this would help,I shot these just half an hour ago,the intention to give an idea of the different quality of each system.. the focus may not be perfect but it looks ok to my eyes (FWIW),the light was falling fast so exposures vary a little..

https://www.yousendit.com/download/UVJoK2VzNnlTSUExZXNUQw
Logged
TMARK
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1843


« Reply #79 on: May 08, 2013, 01:46:12 PM »
ReplyReply


Has anyone contrasted the Leica M9 or Leica S2 with with the Nikon D800-E?

I've done the M9/M/MM comparo with the D800e.  They all look different. 

The M9 versus D800e:  The Nikon has more depth to the file, almost like negative film.  More resolution than I need.  Weighs nothing but is bulky.  No complaints with resolution.  Took me a while to find a workflow I like for color.  Brilliant B&W camera.  Really chaulky blacks and grays.  A maliable file.  The raws are "thick", like a negative with lots of density.

The M9 has a more fragile file, meaning less headroom, limited shadow recovery.  Beautiful color from LR4 and C1-7.  It is so small and light, I can fit an entire kit in jacket pockets (35 summicron, 28 elmarit, two batteries, charger, and a body).  Resolution is much better than one would expect from 18mpx, and in fact enlarges rather well.  The raws aren't TOO sharp but the acuity is there. 

New M:  See comments for the D800.  Very similar file.  Color is different than the 800e.

MM:  better than the D800 for B&W, maybe.  Really an amazing file.  You can mimic almost any emulsion with the MM in post.  I am shocked at how close (or identical, almost) to TMax it can get.

S2:  I've handled one a few times, looked at lots of files.  The files are, to my eye, very similar to D800 files, but have a different look to them.  Lenses are better.  handles better than a D800.  GREAT viewfinder.

I'm sure you will try them all out to find what works for you, in terms of weight.  I think they all make quality images. 

Logged
Pages: « 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 8 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad