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!

Hasselblad H3D 50 II Multishot Versus Phase One P65+ / 645AF

Status
Not open for further replies.

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
I'm a junior scientist/photographer this is why these test usually grab my attention,, however i'm relieved to read this statement from DXO lab regarding MF test on the DXO overall scale !!

"Related information
Medium-format camera ranking with respect to DxOMark Sensor scale

Professional portrait and landscape photographers often use medium-format cameras because of their superb performance under controlled lighting conditions. However, as these cameras are definitely not designed for so-called “action photography” scenarios, they generally do not perform well with respect to DxO Labs’ Low-Light ISO metric. Because of this inherent low-light limitation, medium-format cameras do not receive top marks on the overall DxOMark Sensor scale, even though they may show outstanding performance with respect to Color Depth or Dynamic Range.
Read more"

however now !! i'm on the edge of buying a totally new MF system, Hassy for it's legacy or P1 for the new performance !!
You may find this worth reading . It really stands up to that only studio theory

http://forum.getdpi.com/forum/showthread.php?t=13379
 
T

tokengirl

Guest


Is that freaking DXO mark true :((((( i'm so upset now !!! please tell it's not :( please any one !!
Yes it is. The Nikon D3X also farts rainbows and craps out golden eggs. It is also the only camera available that is capable of photographing unicorns. ;)
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
Yea the models my get you to the check out stand but don't buy because of them. LOL

It just proves these cams can make it outside the the brackets they get labeled at. Now the Hassy 40 has nice high ISO 800 so again the bar keeps going up on these. Obviously the D3's out there will kick our butt at 3200 and above and that type of work maybe still the domain of DSLR's but we are certainly not in the camp of you need 64k watts of strobe power to do anything at all either. So things certainly are getting better and I push admittedly MF beyond what most folks may actually use it for also but if you have a one horse pony it better be able to do a lot of things asked of it.
 

carstenw

Active member
Now Guy, I have been hanging around these forums for a while, but what the heck is a "one horse pony"? :ROTFL:
 
T

tetsrfun

Guest
Interesting to read the comments. One of the best things about this site, IMO, is the lack of "fanboy-ism." I don't have either system so I can't comment on Mark's conclusions but the one area that elicited a WTF were his comments about Phocus. I just have an entry level, older tech., CFV back, but a few weeks ago I shot a color chart and also underexposures for some non-scientific tests. Phocus 2.x did an amazing job of color rendition. The unadjusted colors, comparing prints vs. the chart were nearly dead-on with only a slight difference in red. Phocus also was able to "pull" detail out of very underexposed shadows with very acceptable noise levels. The same files converted using ACR/LR were terrible. Makes me wonder why Mark's results were so "off".
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
Most if not all digital camera's tend to underexpose and most manufacturers do that for a reason to protect blow outs. None of them are designed that I have come across go to the far right but more smack in the middle of the histo. BTW my Phase files are not worth salt in ACR or LR. They simply can't read the files properly.

BTW thanks for that comment on GetDPI it means a lot to Jack and I
 

EsbenHR

Member
Is that freaking DXO mark true :((((( i'm so upset now !!! please tell it's not :( please any one !!
No RAW-file truly contains the data that was read out directly from the sensor. For example: the dark-shot taken by a back is not actually stored in the RAW-file.

The amount of processing that takes place before the data hits the file is, generally, lighter in a back than a DSLR. This implies that a back is more dependent on the RAW converter than images from a DSLR.

What you see is not a direct apples to apples since DxO-mark is based on data after a different number of stages in the processing.

Unfortunately DxO has now given the vendors a reason to make the RAW-files look "nice". This also means that new technology in RAW-conversion will probably not be able to improve current DSLRs that much in the future. That is a crying shame :-(
 

tjv

Active member
I don't believe any review I read of Luminous Landscape. The last time I did that was during the M8 magenta issue "crisis." And anyway, didn't MR have a very public bust up with Hasselblad and as a result hasn't been sent anything by them to review since?
 

fotografz

Well-known member
Here's my take on this review:

I immediately had a credibility issue ... not from my bias from selecting a Hasselblad, but more from actually using a Hasselblad. Don't care what this person's credentials are, personal experience trumps credentials every time in my book.

The meter issue is pure nonsense ... actually it's ludicrous. Either Marc D has incredibly rotten luck and got 2 bad cameras that were defective in exactly the same way (odds of that?), or something else is up which I won't speculate on. If my Hassey gear was that much off, they would have heard my expletive-deleatives all the way to Denmark and Sweden ... because I sure am NOT shy about stuff like that.

The color issue was so blatantly a result of lack of knowledge on the use of Phocus as to render all following evaluations suspect. Especially true for the latest version of Phocus which has a bit of a learning curve even for experienced users of Phocus. I literally laughed out loud when I looked at the color of Hassey shot ... set up your defaults and preferences for crying out loud. I'd speculate that if I were to process the same images my relative lack of skill with C1 compared to Phocus would render opposite results to his.

If using these programs was a no-brainer and it was all rote learning, there would be no need for instructions or even seminars on the use of Phocus or C1 to get the most out of them.

I admit to not understanding the "plastic" comment ... H cameras are made using solid stainless steel housings and high-strength aluminum for the core ... not plastic. I'll leave it to a Phase One camera owner to comment on what their camera is made of ... which I doubt is all plastic. Not sure what he's asking for here ... a chrome plated camera?

What I did glean from the article is that for most practical purposes, the 60 meg sensor looks like a good compromise to the more limited use MS camera ... unless most of the work is in the studio shooting fabrics and minute detail.



If someone wants to bias a test, here's a hint ... make it more subtile and not laughably obvious. Winning by a nose is enough at these prices. :ROTFL:

Speaking of prices: I just got an e-mail from my Hassey dealer. Blow-Out special pricing on a new H3D-II/31 with full factory warranty:

$11,995. for the complete kit with 80 lens ... $9,995. without lens.

Glad I sold my H3D-II/31 some time ago.

What a rotten investment this stuff is unless you get off the upgrade merry-go-round and learn to love the one you're with ... or jump on the recent promos before the manufactures come to their senses again :D

Marc
 
Hey All,

It seems most of you have realised something was a miss with the test. Somebody asked me to comment on Lume Landscape, so ill x-post my reply here, just incase it is interesting...


As usual these kinds of tests are fraught with difficulties. The comparison has caused lots of debate here and also over on getdpi.

I don't know Mark personally or really have an insight into what he does, but his comments on Phocus applying multiple factors to an image even though defaults are set to zero, simply does not stack up.

Time and time again if you compare and H product to a Phase product normally our default rendering is slightly lower contrast and slightly lower saturation. No method is 'wrong' it is just the way we have decided to do things.

Therefore for Mark to find the opposite points that something was not quite right with the settings. Furthermore, stating that Reproduction mode needs to be found every time Phocus is started is also not the case which indicates perhaps Mark was not that comfortable in using Phocus and perhaps did not have everything set to default.

Actually describing the image as Velvia++ really does point to an error somewhere.

Reproduction mode was probably also not his best choice for the kind of images he was shooting. Secondly to say colours and contrast are even exaggerated in Repro mode really means something was a miss elsewhere! Mark is welcome to send me one of his files and I can happily look at it.

Nobody should EVER have to desaturate colours in Repro mode. So I really wonder what Mark did!!! There must have been all kinds of funky settings going against each other.

There is also a strange comment that Mark said he left Hasselblad because of the closed system argument... and then goes on to praise that aspect of the camera as being much better than Phase One?

I also just noticed that on some of the comparison shots the P65 is at 91.5%? I would prefer to see both at 100% regardless of any image size differences.

Anyway, I could go on but I am comforted by the fact that many institutions around the world (Tate London, National Gallery, London, Van Gogh Museum, EMMA, Australian Museums / Archives...multiples in the USA) chose Hasselblad Multi Shot systems for a) Color accuracy b) Repro mode and c) High resolution without artefacting / moire.

With these kinds of tests I would prefer that an experienced Capture One user handle the Phase side of things and an experienced Phocus user handled Hasselblad. They wouldn't even have to be in the same room - maybe a blind test would be better! ;)



Happy weekend to all - I am off out to enjoy the sunshine.
 
T

tetsrfun

Guest
"The color issue was so blatantly a result of lack of knowledge on the use of Phocus as to render all following evaluations suspect."
*******
Even with my lack of knowledge of Phocus, the colors and saturation were very close to my color chart at default settings. If, as Michael Reichman says: "Mark is familiar with the scientific method" then Mark, as a scientist will redo his testing because his conclusions about metering and Phocus don't seem to correlate with others experience.
 

ptomsu

Workshop Member
Folks,

why not just agree that this Mark Dubovoy is absolutely screwed with this test. Why care any longer?

Many testers screw up, testing is not easy, too many people feel well enough educated to do it but unfortunately have most time no glue. Mark belongs to this species obviously!
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top