I've read the test, and the purpose was to look at what popular second hand alternatives can perform compared to a D800. An H3D-39 can be had second hand at a similar price point as a new D800 system with pro lenses. The test was aimed at price-sensitive amateur users, such as myself.
I think it's a really great initiative, usually MFD reviews is about looking at $50K systems which very few landscape amateurs will afford. There's a growing amateur interest in MFD and it's actually a quite good market today for getting into MFD second hand, you can get great image quality for reasonable prices. This tests is a brief look into how good it is.
The article also looks into possibilities of using the digital back on a tech camera, which I personally think is the way to go. I would never have bought my digital back if I was going to use it on a H or 645DF camera and it was about image quality alone, but with my tech camera I would enjoy a 22 megapixel back more than a D800, just because the tech camera is so different and fun to shoot.
For me it was not important that the digital back would deliver better image quality than the best DSLR, just adequate quality to a reasonable price. This test certainly shows that the H3D-39 despite its age still delivers competitive image quality. It's about showing amateurs that the MFD is today not necessarily only reserved for working professionals and the super-rich, but at the same time not bring inflated expectations (the format wars tend to exaggerate the capabilities of a particular format). I think the articles succeed quite well in being neutral, ie neither being a DSLR or an MFD fanboy, which is kind of refreshing...
When I help out with gear recommendations to other amateurs I generally focus on the camera, how fun it is to work with and how well it fits the desired shooting style. If you just want a DSLR with better image quality you're generally in for disappointment, or a very big hole in your pocket...
I think it's a really great initiative, usually MFD reviews is about looking at $50K systems which very few landscape amateurs will afford. There's a growing amateur interest in MFD and it's actually a quite good market today for getting into MFD second hand, you can get great image quality for reasonable prices. This tests is a brief look into how good it is.
The article also looks into possibilities of using the digital back on a tech camera, which I personally think is the way to go. I would never have bought my digital back if I was going to use it on a H or 645DF camera and it was about image quality alone, but with my tech camera I would enjoy a 22 megapixel back more than a D800, just because the tech camera is so different and fun to shoot.
For me it was not important that the digital back would deliver better image quality than the best DSLR, just adequate quality to a reasonable price. This test certainly shows that the H3D-39 despite its age still delivers competitive image quality. It's about showing amateurs that the MFD is today not necessarily only reserved for working professionals and the super-rich, but at the same time not bring inflated expectations (the format wars tend to exaggerate the capabilities of a particular format). I think the articles succeed quite well in being neutral, ie neither being a DSLR or an MFD fanboy, which is kind of refreshing...
When I help out with gear recommendations to other amateurs I generally focus on the camera, how fun it is to work with and how well it fits the desired shooting style. If you just want a DSLR with better image quality you're generally in for disappointment, or a very big hole in your pocket...
Last edited: