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!

Nikon D800E v.s Hasselblad H4D40: the end of medium format superiority?

AKElstudio

New member
I've got this test-review posted, did it mostly for my own curiosity (I am in upgrade mode from an old H1 and P25+ DB), and i think it might be interesting here :)
So, I've tested Nikon D800E v.s Hasselblad H4D40 in terms for details, shadows and highlight recovery. Selected H4D40 as the closest current MF camera to Nikon 36Mpx D800E

My "Rambo-style" shot with both cameras:
:ROTFL:

Part one:
Nikon D800E v.s Hasselblad H4D40: the end of medium format superiority? Round One « Photigy: technically advanced photography

Part two:
Nikon D800E v.s Hasselblad H4D40: the end of medium format superiority? Round two « Photigy: technically advanced photography

I know that F16 is not the sharpest aperture, but this is what I use the most in a studio product photography, so I needed to see the difference at closed iris.
Enjoy the read and let me know what do you think.
 

eleanorbrown

New member
Thanks Alex... Very interesting tests ...I've used Phase backs for years...currently P65+on an H2 and H glass. Recently bought into the D800e system and made a point to get primes with only the finest glass, incl. the Zeiss 100 2 makro. Rarely go up to f11 because of defraction issues, but will if I really need to. The medium format was just too much to travel with and the Nikon will be more portable. I'm hoping to get as close to the pixel for pixel quality of my P65 as is possible. Your test show I can get very close..thanks again. Eleanor
 

Quentin_Bargate

Well-known member
Good test. Nikon have done a great job with the D800E to get that close to MF quality. My Hassy H4D-50 will still have an edge, unsurpringly. Much as I like the D800/E, it not a camera for me because

- Those Nikon colours are not quite right;

- I cannot easily see when I would use it. If I am not using the Hasselblad, I would probably use the NEX-7 as a travel camera (and the new RX100);

- I have a number of A mount lenses and I want to see what Sony come up with as their D800 equivalent.
 

Jack

Sr. Administrator
Staff member
Alex, f16 gives a pretty significant advantage to the Hassy for your micro-resolution comparisons. The MF backs start getting fouled by diffraction around f11.5, so 16 is only slightly on the downward side of it's optimal curve; by contrast, the D800E starts to foul from diffraction after f8, so it is severely compromised by f16. If you really want to see them compared equally, I would suggest shooting the D800E at f5.6 and the Hassy at f8.5...

After all that, I suspect your conclusion will be the same as Guy and I and then Peter Cox all found comparing the D800 to our Phase cameras: When optimally processed, there is a very slight detail advantage to MF, but it is virtually insignificant to most imaging needs even at extremely large print sizes; the D800 has more *usable* DR; the D800 is superior at high ISOs; and finally, the MF backs remain king of color fidelity and tonal smoothness. I will add that for myself, I find the MF files to more malleable in the raw processor -- specifically in C1 -- than the D800's, for whatever that's worth to potential end users of each.

All that said, my personal view is that the D800/800E are very clearly "incredible bargains" when entry costs for complete systems are compared to usable end results --- BUT they are not over-night "MF killers" by any definition. When comparing features and benefits of the systems in use as well as the subtleties in the file differences, MF is going to be around for a while, especially for pros working in studio, on location with elaborate lighting, or doing serious architecture...

Cheers,
 

adaml

Member
It's no surprise the Hassy produced better results with fine details and skin tones, however I think it's difficult to compare two uniquely different systems. Sure the Nikon has made some huge leaps in coming closer to medium format sensor quality, however your still going to be limited by the quality on Nikon glass vs Hasselblad glass to some degree.

For most of my work, I'd been a Nikon shooter and had considered Medium Format Digital for over a year. I looked at Phase, Leaf and Hasselblad. As appealing as the D800E seemed as an option, I decided not to just add another Nikon body to my gear and went for a Hasselblad. I picked up a super-low actuation H3DII-31 with 80mm f/2.8 for less than getting into a D800E plus 85mm f/1.4 G. I also picked up the guy's 120mm f/4 macro...

Having shot with a D800 and being a D3s owner, I can say that the difference for me in shooting the Hasselblad is stunning. I know that there are tons of folks that love to pixel peep but for me and other curious folks, the difference in shooting a D800 vs a Hasselblad is profound. I most definitely appreciate you taking the time to conduct this test and share your results, but at the end of the day I think there are so many more factors to consider. Workflow, aesthetics, quality of glass etc. And there's always showing up to a job with a D800 and having the art director say she just bought one for her husband at Best Buy :)

I should mention that when I shot the D800 at ISO100, the results were amazing. However those results degraded significantly at higher ISO - very much like the H3DII-31.

Cheers,
Adam

--
http://adamlerner.net
 
Last edited:

eleanorbrown

New member
And I would add one other thing... Use the Zeiss 100 2 makro in place of the Nikon 105 makro. Think that would also get the 800e closer to the hassy. I have also been using iso 64 as my base iso and that adds some subtle smoothness to tonal transitions on my D800e...you have to look closely but its getting closer to the creamy smoothness of med. format. Eleanor

Alex, f16 gives a pretty significant advantage to the Hassy for your micro-resolution comparisons. The MF backs start getting fouled by diffraction around f11.5, so 16 is only slightly on the downward side of it's optimal curve; by contrast, the D800E starts to foul from diffraction after f8, so it is severely compromised by f16. If you really want to see them compared equally, I would suggest shooting the D800E at f5.6 and the Hassy at f8.5...

Cheers,
 

fotografz

Well-known member
I think it is easy to see the attraction of the D800 for all the reasons that Jack clearly outlined ... and all at a fabulous price when comparing new-to-new pricing. I also agree that any tests should factor in the shallower DOF of MFD, and any 35 mm DSLR should be compared at the same DOF ratio, not the same f-stop. However, the OP stated that close work at deeper DOF is one objective, so in that case, each system should be tested at it's greatest ability, not to level the playing field.

Frankly, the Nikon D3X and Sony A900/850 @ 24 meg started the resolution challenge for many applications that people used the entry level MFD cameras for ... depending on the final size of use. I know this first hand because I shot at lot with both the D3X and A900 along with a H3D-II/31 and H3D-II/39. The D800 now improves on both the quality of pixels as well as the number ... but so did my move to the H4D/60 with its Dalsa sensor.

I also happen to agree with Adam, other factors come into play and are based on specific needs. some MFDs have a number of advantages over any current 35mm DSLR that some want or need, and some do not.

While I cannot speak to Phase One or the newer Leaf backs, I can outline some specifics for my continued use of Hasselblad MFD, with a continued demise of using 35mm DSLRs of any flavor as my work focus has changed and I slowly leave the wedding photography business to focus on other ventures:

In at least 75% of my applications, use of studio lighting plays a key role in the work I am now doing. High speed sync, full studio flash is of paramount importance to control the ambient. All of the Hasselblad lenses are leaf shutter, and now can be used on my other MFD camera the Leica S2 ... in leaf shutter or focal plane shutter mode ... which has further eroded the need for a 35mm DSLR in my case.

Like the OP, I sometimes use a full movement view camera, and in future will upgrade a few of my view lenses ... the issue of optical quality comparisons are a moot point in this regard ... there is no comparison. For less demanding T/S applications I use the Hasselblad HTS/1.5 with lenses from 28mm thru 100mm, which renders the DOF issue as a non-issue while eliminating the need for using any de-fraction f-stop. BTW, contrary to reports, using the H to S adapter the Hasselblad HT/S unit works fine on the S2 and all the software corrections also work. See demo pics below.

Color accuracy with Hasselblad's True Color feature and Phocus software has made color accurate product photography a no brainer ... something I struggled with when using the Nikon D3X (it could be done, but took to much time).

Malleable files have taken on more value as retouching and artistic applications have grown in importance.

The True Focus APL feature has freed me to place the focus point anywhere I want with lenses like the 100/2.2 when shooting close wide open.

I also use the Hasselblad waist level finder enough to mention it as an advantage.

The above are practical needs not emotionally fueled arguments for or against anything. Others have different needs and applications which drive their decisions ... not the least of which are system size and price.

-Marc

Here's a quick demo I did for a blog entry yet to be published ... the Hasselblad HTS/1.5 on a S2 using the HC100/2.2 (150mm on the HTS), The lenses were staggered and placed 14" deep. I used an optimal f/5.6 set manually on the S2 (could also have been f/8), then shot with and without horizontal tilt (the HTS rotates 360º). f/5.6 also lessened the strobe power needed and recycle was virtually instantaneous. The S2 focus confirmation worked with the HTS
 
Last edited:

pedro39photo

New member
Super Alex !!! great review with great online tools for peep-pixels differences.
Thanks for big effort and to deliver this for Free and with no "Tabus" (DMF VS 33mm WARS) !!!!

I am a newbie in the DMF, but after using a H3D 22MP for 3 months, it was a deep impact in me and the way i "feel the act" of making photography.

I think if in the future the technology can make a smartphone with the exact file quality of a Hasselblad H4D, no one here with really passion for photography choose the smartphone vs H4D for a beautiful golden hour landscape picture.
All user here love photography and they want the best quality file in the end, but the joy, the touch, the feeling of the tools (cameras) of course have great impact in this art.


Now my only wishes is that Sony produces the same D800 sensor on a Medium Format size, and the Hasselblad used in the H5D in the 10.000$ price range !!!
THAT ITS THE REALLY REVOLUTION IN THE MARKET THAT WE ARE WAITING!!!

Pedro
 

David Schneider

New member
Pedro,
I'd like to see a much larger version of the sensor Fuji has in it's X-Pro 1 in medium format and maybe that's what we'll see with a mirror less Hasselblad.
 

pedro39photo

New member
I think that we are in a time of changes:

Many photographers never experience the joy of shooting and composing a frame with Medium Format, and don´t really understand the feeling and the joy of the big viewfinder, slow handling of the camera and even a hand lightmeter on a DMF workflow.

So its easy to compare files and say d800 vs H4d its the same, and maybe in the present its time to eat the grass and say " the d800 get the same quality of a 20.000$ H4D camera!" but in the end its not the same...

I think that Sony/Nikon achive to put the tecnology of Formula 1 engine inside of Ford Focus car, and that its great, but the Hasselblad its another car chassis! diferent wheels, drive wheel, suspension, even if both car now can achive que same top speed...

Now the challenge for the big ones ( hasselblad, phase one, leaf) its to deliver a marketing strategy/new products with the strenghts of the Medium Format cameras and no more " we have 40MP or 50MP".

In the 80´s in the age of film cameras, the medium format had a good market share even in the amateur photographers, because in that time the entry level of MF cameras was not 13.000 usd dollars...

I think that its time for the market of MFD to deliver a 7.000$ 30MP fat pixeis entry level camera system.

I am a Canon photographer and was in a waiting list for a d800 with 5.000$ in my pocket, but after tried the "old" H3D 22MP it was a game change for me! no more 500 or 700 pictures in a card for a day trip...just 50 ou 70 pictures of great time spend, challenge metering, and clumsy tripod tunning.

But in the end of the day, that few 50 ou 70 pictures of the " old " 22MP H3D are so special...

What its difficult to me its that MFD tools are almost forbiten because of prices...but i think that i can find a great deal in second hand in my price range of 5000usd.

Sorry my bad english
Pedro
 
Last edited:

Paratom

Well-known member
IMO too many comparisons are reduced to mainly resolution and DR and maybe noise.
Color being one of them-
IMO there are so many more factors and some which I cant even understand.
For example how "real" skin tones look, how "deep" an image looks etc.
 

ptomsu

Workshop Member
IMO too many comparisons are reduced to mainly resolution and DR and maybe noise.
Color being one of them-
IMO there are so many more factors and some which I cant even understand.
For example how "real" skin tones look, how "deep" an image looks etc.
I fully agree.

This is again mixing apples and oranges! I am a H3D39 shooter myself and also have the D800E. While I really have to work hard to get similar results form the D800E (only using top primes) it is just much easier from the Hasselblad. Especially colors.

But the overall freedom from the D800E is much larger.

So what is the better tool? There is no such answer. There is only an answer which is pretty clear - PRICE!
 

Dustbak

Member
I have both the D800e as well as a H4D60. Yes, the Nikon gives much more freedom however I am really struggling with the colors. There is something about those that I find a bit repulsive especially compared to previous Nikon models.

The HB is so much more rewarding in the color and rendition area.

The D800 is really nice with video though... :)
 

Jack

Sr. Administrator
Staff member
Horses for courses. Like I said above, the D800's are not MF killers by any stretch of the imagination. They may, and most likely already have, eliminated a block of serious hobbyists that were on the MF purchase fence to begin with, but the MF systems offer too many advantages for a large sector of working pros.
 
C

CBronicki

Guest
Horses for courses. Like I said above, the D800's are not MF killers by any stretch of the imagination. They may, and most likely already have, eliminated a block of serious hobbyists that were on the MF purchase fence to begin with, but the MF systems offer too many advantages for a large sector of working pros.
Jack, can you summarise some of those advantages you speak of. From someone who is in the process of getting into MF for professional work, it would be great to get your thoughts. From my relatively inexperienced viewpoint, I consider the biggest advantages to MF over D800 are:

- FAR higher sync speed with LF lenses
- Greater resolution - more noticeable on larger prints
- Tilt shift lenses
- Professional support, i.e. Phase One (my local rep is awesome)!

Thanks.
 
C

CBronicki

Guest
p.s.
For what it's worth. I did a studio portrait comparison between the IQ140 w SKLS 80mm lens @ f11 vs D800 w Nikon 85mm 1.4 @f9.....I literally could see little-to-no difference between the two at 100%! Obviously, this was not a scientific/conclusive test by any stretch, but an intriguing comparison nonetheless. I am sure the IQ160 and IQ180 would prove another matter.
 

eleanorbrown

New member
Yes the 85 1.4 is the lens to use for comparison. I was shooting with my D800e and my 85 1.4g yesterday and it gives wonderful microcontrast. I also have the Phase P65+ with Hassy glass so will have to do a comparison too. Eleanor

p.s.
For what it's worth. I did a studio portrait comparison between the IQ140 w SKLS 80mm lens @ f11 vs D800 w Nikon 85mm 1.4 @f9.....I literally could see little-to-no difference between the two at 100%! Obviously, this was not a scientific/conclusive test by any stretch, but an intriguing comparison nonetheless. I am sure the IQ160 and IQ180 would prove another matter.
 

eleanorbrown

New member
Adobe standard profile is waayyy off for my D800e in Lightroom 4. I always use camera standard or camera portrait which helps a lot. Eleanor

I have both the D800e as well as a H4D60. Yes, the Nikon gives much more freedom however I am really struggling with the colors. There is something about those that I find a bit repulsive especially compared to previous Nikon models.

The HB is so much more rewarding in the color and rendition area.

The D800 is really nice with video though... :)
 

glenerrolrd

Workshop Member
I have both the D800e as well as a H4D60. Yes, the Nikon gives much more freedom however I am really struggling with the colors. There is something about those that I find a bit repulsive especially compared to previous Nikon models.

The HB is so much more rewarding in the color and rendition area.

The D800 is really nice with video though... :)
Color with the Nikon s is still an issue . You can see the bias in many of the images from the Olympics . I find the D800E a small improvement in color over the D3X and a very large improvement over the D3/d700 and the D3S . The older lenses have a distinctive yellow green cast which you can remove in post ..but its hard to profile out if you use a mix of old and new lenses.

I found the skin tones much improved and much easier to achieve ....maybe desaturate the red a small amount . The frustrating aspect of the color (to date for me ) is that it defies calibration ...so I typically have to adjust WB for a set (even with a grey card ) and this makes it all subject to my eye .

I know with my S2 ..once its calibrated ....I can bang out a good set of images all with the same WB ...the D800E requires an artist touch to get the best color .

Try shooting Jpegs and adjusting the rendering in the camera and you can see what the sensor can produce ..this just leads me to believe that the post processing (in Adobe) just isn t right .
 
Top