The GetDPI Photography Forum

Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!

Advice needed: Why would I buy a 50 MP back instead if 39 MP?

Paul Spinnler

Well-known member
Hi there!

My name is Paul and I'm a student interested in all kinds of photography. I live in Switzerland. I stumbled upon your website because of the wealth of medium format information here ... which is amazing to read!

I've been lurking around here for a long time ... and I am humbled by all the great photos shown around here!

I decided to finally post something because I'm in dire need of advice! I'm considering getting a new Hasselblad camera (I've been saving for ages) and saw that there are some amazing deals around specifically those pre-owned CPO cams. Here too, in Europe.

On the other hand I already got a P30 system and am annoyed a little by the crop factor.

So I have two options now: a) trade in for a h4d-50 which will cost me about 22k $ or get a pre-owned 39MP for about 12k $ and still sell my p30. I guess there's a 15k $ difference in money here. I could use some of it to get a few lenses. On the other hand I would like to own new gear that is cutting edge.

So, from functional point of view ... do you think it is worth it going for the h3d-50?

Is this a huge difference between these two systems (excepting the h4d body improvements such as true focus) ?

Phase one is even more crazy, it have to lay down about 24k for a p45+ set.

To me something seems terribly chaotic about the price landscape in MF world ...

Regards and thanks for your thoughts!

Paul
 

carstenw

Active member
If I read you right, you are prepared to spend $15-25k on being "a little annoyed" with the crop factor? That is an awful lot of money. Is there something else you hope to get from it?

Hasselblad lenses are generally much more expensive than Mamiya lenses second-hand. Take a look around to get an idea of what the total system-change would cost, not just the back and camera.
 

Don Libby

Well-known member
Paul – The P30 is capable of stunning images regardless of the crop. I shot landscape with a P30+ using as wide as 28mm and as long as 300mm and was very pleased. The sole reason I no longer have the P30+ is that I moved to a technical camera and needed a back that could accommodate it. While I shoot solely landscape, there are others here who have made a decent living shooting fashion, portrait and life style with a P30/P30+ and who just recently moved to the P40/P65.

Carsten also has a valid point in his response.

Best of luck and welcome to the forum.

Don
 

fotografz

Well-known member
You didn't mention how many lenses you currently already have for your existing system, nor what camera your P30 is mounted on ... assuming it is a Mamiya body, which one? Lenses? If Mamiya, what quality level are they (older versions verses the new D type from Phase One)? If minimal, or just the 80/2.8, then swapping systems is no big deal ... if they are D type and you have a decent lens collection, then swapping can become a bit more of financial concern.

The Hassey H4D/50 will improve resolution over the H3D-II/39 (that currently is selling for about $18,000 new with lens from Hasselblad ... at least per Hassey's current USA H3D-II Promotion ... as existing stock is purged for the new H4D versions). But the IQ improvement between the 39 and 50 will not be great ... slightly finer detail and less Moiré will be the benefit over the 39. The difference between the H4D and H3D-II camera is also evolutionary except maybe for the two new main benefits: the True Focus innovation and a 3" LCD with double the resolution of the 3" H3D-II LCD.

-Marc
 

pcunite

New member
Paul,
If your a true artist and purchase based on feelings, emotions and you love cameras then it is the H4D-50 for you and nothing else. If you are a business man then I recommend you sell that p30 and get out of MFD and come back in about two years when MFD switches over to CMOS. The prices on current MFD tech is going to tank then and lots of perfectionists like you are going to get creamed (unless your independently wealthy).

MFD is for working professionals who need the resolution and for perfectionists with money. If you don't fit that description you are always going to be second guessing yourself and feeling like your never going to be as good as the forum people you look up to. All the romance with MFD that gets posted is posted at web resolutions which is a real waste of the format. Your falling in love with a Bugatti Veyron that can only do its top speed for 30 minutes then it runs out of fuel.

If my post is offensive to you please forgive. On your journey it is always nice to run across a critical post as it helps to bring the best out in you. Good luck on finding your ideal camera.
 

Paul Spinnler

Well-known member
Carsten, Don, thank you for your advice. Among other things, I would like to own a "full frame" back so that I have all options available - such as shooting with a technical camera. Also, I'm not so happy with the Mamiya body. I find it horrible still having to use old-fashioned batteries for the AFD II body. Even when I recharge them fully - just one or two days later they are discharged. From what I gather, the Hasselblad cameras have li-ion batteries that are more practical.

Regarding the lenses: You're right, mamiya is cheaper. What is the consensus, are both manufacturer's lenses in the same ballpark in terms of quality?

Yes, I know, it's crazy. It's not rational anymore. But practically speaking - the difference between a h3d-39 and h4d-50 is almost not visible, am I right? I mean doesn't it just come down to a few more inches I would be able to print using those 10 more megapixels?

Or said differently: If I owned a 39 MP back now, would there be any good reason to upgrade to a 50 megapixel back? If there was a 39 MP back and an 80 MP back the difference would be clear - but in this case?

Thank you for your thoughts,

regards

Paul
 

Paul Spinnler

Well-known member
PCunite, I just saw your post. It's not offensive at all. Maybe I need such clear-cut analysis to see what it is all about. Thinking of it, I well may be the irrational perfectionist. Irrational, because I'm not wealthy ...
 

Jack

Sr. Administrator
Staff member
Hi Paul, and welcome to GetDPI!

Here's my take...

I understand the crop factor issue --- if you are a "wide" style shooter then the crop can be somewhat limiting if the available selection of lenses isn't wide enough for you.

That moves you to a full-frame solution, and your question now becomes which one. The 39MP choice you indicate is going to be a 6.8 micron sensor back, the 50MP option a 6 micron sensor. Two issues here as I see it. First is absolute file size -- the big difference between these files is going to be enlarge-ability to same net detail in the print, and then secondly, crop-ability of the file after the fact and still maintaining adequate image quality for the desired print size. Second issue is technical advantages in the newer back. The 39MP back is "older" technology, and depending on which back can be 1 or 2 generations older, so may not have some features that the newer 39MP back or the newest 50MP back does.

Let's deal with the second issue first since it's relatively easy --- Does the 39MP solution you're considering limit you in any way technically compared to what the newer back does? (Only you can answer this for the type of shooting you intend to do, so study the spec sheets and ask specific questions as they arise ;).)

Now back to pixel pitch and total file size. Having owned both a 39MP 6.8 micron back and a 60MP 6 micron back, I can tell you there is a difference in net file detail assuming your lenses are up to capturing it. Let me explain more what it is though. If I take a 39MP file and print it native -- meaning no resizing -- at 360PPI, I get a 15x20 inch print. If I do the same with a 50MP file, I get a 17x23.5 inch print -- not a lot of difference, not a "full" jump in print size, but 15% or so of crop-ability to tune the final composition and maintain the same net image quality. If I print both out to 24x32 inch prints, I'll need to put a loupe on the print to see the detail advantage in the 50MP print. OR, if I take both up to 36x48 inch prints, I'll have visibly superior fine detail in the 50MP print using my unaided eyes. So the real question here becomes one of convenience in the crop-ability, and one of desired maximum print size.

Oh, and I should make clear that unless you have the 50MP 36x48 print next to the 39MP 36x48 print to compare them directly, you won't see the differences!

Hope this helps,
 

Jack

Sr. Administrator
Staff member
PS: I assumed you already owned Hassy H given your initial comments, but now that you've clarified that, I will add some comments on the Mamiya.

The AFD2 body is a good body, but a leap behind the newest DF body in performance. I would say that right now, the DF body can compete head-to-head with the Hassy H body on most relevant levels, Hassy's new focus features not withstanding.

Glass -- Virtually all of the Mamiya glass I own performs as well or better than my current sensor, which is another way of saying it is excellent glass.

Note here I am not bashing or claiming superiority for either platform. It is my honest opinion they both offer state-of-the-art performance with each having their own sets of benefits and deficits and are capable of producing the best images possible. Again, I view this as personal choice based on features and breadth of lens choices. Moreover, if a hassy H shooter with an H60 back mounted were standing next to me with my DF body and P65+ back and we shot the same image with the same focal length lens, then printed them up to 36x48 for you to compare, I suspect only the two photographers could pick with certainty their own prints, and only then because they worked up the raw file for the final print ;)

Cheers,
 

Paul Spinnler

Well-known member
Wow, Jack, you must be a scientist from the way you break it down! Where nice. Thank you. Then, if I may ask, what was your primary motivation to upgrade?

With regard to technical aspects: Are there any documented improvements in sensor quality? From what I know the 50MP sensor in the h4d-50 is just the same technology as the 39 MP sensor but with a smaller pixel pitch. Both are Kodak sensors. Phase One at least incorporated new technologies in every new sensor generation. First there were the +backs with longer exposure capabilities and then the sensor plus technology.

But Hasselblad is only innovating with the True Focus technology considering their previous product, the H3d-39, am I right?

...

Regards
 

Jack

Sr. Administrator
Staff member
Paul:

First off, my primary reason for upgrading is because I am a gear whore, plain and simple! :ROTFL: Seriously, there were two main reasons I upgraded. First was I preferred the "look" from the P65+ file. It is Dalsa chip and has a smoother appearance than the Kodak sensor. Mind you this is a very subtle difference, so subtle it's difficult to explain or demonstrate, but basically anybody who's shoot a lot of MF can see it and will agree. Second reason I upgraded was for enhanced features in the newer back, mainly superior battery life and pixel binning -- the latter gives me a very usable 15MP of ISO 1600 or 3200. Third reason was crop-ability convenience in manipulating the larger file. Forth and not insignificant reason was Phase had an incredible upgrade deal at the end of the year that was just too good to pass up -- and by taking advantage of the incentives, I ended up recapturing a lot of the depreciation hit I took on the older system, and hence a far better residual value on my gear balance sheet!

DF body. Yes, the power consumption is GREATLY improved -- like batteries last two or even three times as long as they did in the AFD2 or 3 body. Serious improvement here. Other improvement is AF speed -- maybe 2x as fast -- and accuracy, as well as much shorter shutter lag.

And these latter two enhancements combined with the pixel binning/high ISO on the newer back gave me the ultimate incentive to upgrade --- with them, at least for my style of shooting, meant I had little need for my DSLR kit anymore and was able to sell it. (And I just did that after confirming the new MF combo would indeed perform adequately in that arena for my needs.) Thus, at the end of the day, my cost to "upgrade" to the bigger back and newer body was covered by the DSLR gear I was able to sell.

Re sensor technology -- I did not mean to imply the base Kodak 6 micron sensors had some superior technology over the base Kodak 6.8 sensors. What I meant was the newer BACKS that incorporate them have some onboard technical improvements that may or may not be important to you, like improved noise handling, better high ISO, faster write speeds, larger buffers, better battery life, etc. In my case the Dalsa sensor did offer up the ability to pixel-bin, which the Kodak sensor does not. In the case of Phase (not sure on Hassy), the Kodak sensor offers up the ability to do a 60 MINUTE exposure, longer if it's cold out, while the Dalsa is limited to 2 minutes under ideal conditions, 1 minute under normal conditions.
 

Don Libby

Well-known member
Paul – While Mamiya’s lenses are less expensive however their image quality is just as good. If I were buying Mamiya lenses today I would only buy the newer “D” lenses as they are what I had been while using the Phase One AFDIII and they proved themselves to me.

My suggestion is to listen very carefully to what Jack said as I doubt anyone could have said it better.

Don
 

Paul Spinnler

Well-known member
Yes, Jack really said it very well. I take from it that if money is an important factor the price differential isn't really worth it. This is a great insight.

Still there are some huge differences withing the Mamiye lens lineup with regard to price. Are the D lenses new optical formulas or is there also some marketing hype to it with the corollary that I will fare as well buying older lenses on ebay? I read a post from Guy where he lauds the new 150 mm; it's also a faster lens, and apparently it is sharper wide open. But what about the 45 D for example, is it any better? I'm asking, since the going price for one of those old designs in this focal length seems to be around 500$ ... whereas the D version costs at least 4 times as much ...

Finally, do you all shoot with 6 rechargeable batteries? Why doesn't produce Mamiya a li-ion pack just as all 35mm dslrs? I find this really awful.

Regards

Paul
 

kdphotography

Well-known member
Paul,

This is a dangerous forum to be asking for guidance on how to spend your money.... :D

The P30/P30+ really is in a sweet spot as a MFDB---very capable, nice files right out of the box. Not too taxing on the computer. Btw, my old computer handled P30 and P45+ files with no issues---it had a cow when it saw the P65+ files....and I had to spend much more on a new computer. The second thing to consider is that P30 crop factor can also be a blessing in disguise. The slight crop effectively gets rid of softness in the corners that you may experience with earlier Mamiya lenses, and even a new D series lens such as the wide angle 28mm. Buying into a higher resolution sensor may also mean limiting yourself more to the newer D series Mamiya/Phase lenses at a much higher cost. And, there is no cheap entry to the D series glass, except maybe for the 80 D that comes with the Phase 645AF/AFDIII body. No marketing hype---the D series lenses are that good.

Carsten's advice is probably the most rational---but when spending large amounts of money on toys, er tools, being rational has no place in the medium format forum... :ROTFL:

Seriously, though, at the MF Digital level----all of the backs produce stunning quality images. Asking the right questions will steer you into the right platform and MFDB for your needs. Jack and I were just talking yesterday, there just aren't that many options in the MF realm.

ken

p.s. I have found that the *trick* to long battery life in the Mamiya/Phase camera bodies is to use the Energizer Ultimate Lithuim AA batteries. Lighter weight too.
 

kdphotography

Well-known member
Finally, do you all shoot with 6 rechargeable batteries? Why doesn't produce Mamiya a li-ion pack just as all 35mm dslrs? I find this really awful.

Regards

Paul
Rumor has it a "grip" for the DF body is coming that will use the same Phase Li-ion batteries, to power the body.... I won't believe anything until it is released, but adding a grip has got to make the body that much more of a heavy monster....

I'll stick the to Energizer Ultimate Lithiums AAs.....
 

T.Karma

New member
If there is not a commercial reasononing behind it, then it is for happiness with the result, right?

My take on it is, that if you are not 100% certain that you really need this upgrade you will end up frustrated afterwards. With this amount of money you can so many things.

After all, these decisions you should not do with your mind -do them with your heart. The mind is easily fooled believing in numbers. 50 MP only look great in comparison to 30 MP or lesser. However, they look miserable in comparison to 100 MP.


good luck and be easy with it, otherwise it is not worth it.

Tranquil
 

Jack

Sr. Administrator
Staff member
Paul,

Yes, the "D" lenses are superior, at least in the case of the 45 and 80 -- most notable is corner performance and wide-open performance are vastly improved. As for the other D lenses, the 150/2.8 and 75-150 are new designs and "D" only. The only lens I'm not sure the "D" means a lot is on the 120 Macro -- it was an excellent lens before, except showed some weirdness wide open, so perhaps the 120 D is better wide open, just not sure there.

The 150D is totally usable wide open at f2.8, but DoF is so paper thin that in a normal head-and-shoulders portrait you'll have your model's eyeball in sharp focus and her eyelashes will be out. The 75-150 D is quite good at f5.6 and excellent by f8. The 45D is the biggest improvement -- I never found a 45 I was happy with as they had horrible corners -- until the latest D model, which only loses it at the very extreme corners on my P65+ back. 28D is very good, but needs to be stopped down to f16 to really shine on the full-frame backs.

Batteries: I am using NiMh rechargeables in my DF body. To put it in perspective, I would usually get a day of shooting per charge with my AFD3 body. I have had the DF for 2 weeks now and taken it on 6 shoots. I am still running on the second set of rechargeables, and the first set was the partially used set I pulled from the AFD3 body! So yes, I repeat, battery life out of the new DF body is EXCELLENT!
 

kdphotography

Well-known member
The most I could find on the 120mm D is that it has the "extra pins" to allow better/faster cpu communication. I could find nothing on any differences on the glass itself over the previous generation. The D series 120mm might be the better choice if you have the P40+ or P65+ to take advantage of the electronic connections...
 

carstenw

Active member
Paul, one piece of advice I have heard a few times elsewhere is that since you already have a really capable kit, perhaps upgrade to the DF, and then spend the rest of the money on a huge trip, or studio equipment and a few top models, or whatever in that vein. You will see a much bigger difference to your photos and your career than from a small step up in resolution.

Unless you print absolutely massive prints all the time, and the P30 come up short :)

One other minor point that I didn't see anyone address, when you say "full frame", I presume you mean "Hasselblad Full Frame v1.0", i.e. 48x36mm sensor, right? This isn't full frame 645. Only the Hasselblad H4D-60, Phase One P65+ and Leaf AFi-II 10 come close to 645 full frame, yet none of them quite reach it (differences on the order of a couple of percentage points, so I am being pedantic, yes). Meanwhile, even Hasselblad doesn't call 48x36mm full frame, so "Hasselblad Full Frame v2.0" is now 645 (or is it 40,2×53,7mm?").
 
Top