The P45+ and DR. And noise. And...

[Guy Mancuso]

All I know every new back i have seen the higher ISO's look great even at 400 so if you can squeeze more than so much the better but I am really happy so far and this is becoming out of my dead cold hands. Okay have to get back to work , keep cheating and looking over on the site, habit

 

[Samuel Axelsson]

Well, if I have to choose I prefer the Phase file. much more natural and detailed than the sinar back.
Jack, you're gonna have a good time with this new toy I think... Congrats!

 

[woodyspedden]

If you want to see what the P45 can do in the hands of a real expert you may want to visit Charles Cramer's site. www.charlescramer.com

Images from 2007 are almost all certain to be from the P45/Mamiya 645. I don't recall what lenses Charlie uses but I personally feel the results he gets from this equipment is just exemplary.

Woody

 

[Jack]

Charlie uses the 55-110 zoom pretty extensively for his landscape shooting. He also does NOT show 100% crops of files on his site! (And I know why ) Anyway, I was visiting Charlie and Bill Atkinson right after they got their P45's, and we were comparing their files directly to scanned 4x5, among others. (These files later made it into the Luminous Landscape file comparison DVD -- still available on the LL site I think if you want a copy.) The common comment from each of us was that the scanned 4x5 showed a bit more detail, but we all agreed you'd never see that tiny difference in a print. Even the differences we show in the side-by-sides in this thread would be difficult to detect in a print viewed normally...

More to the point, this was almost two years ago and the raw converters have only improved -- back then, the P45 files did NOT show as much detail as what we're seeing now. Thus I am confident in claiming that this P45+ file is equal to or better than drum-scanned 4x5 from a detail rendering standpoint, which was pretty much my gold-standard target. Suffice it to say, I am really happy with my decision

Cheers,

 

[mark1958]

I am posting some shots i just took with the Hasselblad 31 at iso 100 and 800. The first is the scene followed by the two center crops. 100mm HC lens f8. +1E.V. I took some which were underexposed to various degrees as well at both iso settings. Most importantly, I turned all the software adjustment settings off in Phocus prior to processing. Sharpening, NR, DAC etc.. all NADA-off. Converted to 16-bit tiff, and then to jpg. Again no other manipulations in CS3 either.

 

[David K]

Mark,
It would be interesting to me to see how much better you can get the ISO 100 image to look with the proper settings, sharpening, etc.

 

[Jack]

I have not played with the H31, but did spend a little time with the P30+ in Puerto Rico. One thing I noticed right away is they needed more capture sharpening to crisp up -- I think those micro-lenses act like a weak AA filter...

 

[mark1958]

Here are two crops that I left the default Phocus filters on. The sharpening is rather mild so after conversion to tiff, I added a bit of USM. I tend to have a habit of over sharpening. I would also state that Phocus basically allows you to set sharpening to "zero" as far as I know.

 

[fotografz]

I have not played with the H31, but did spend a little time with the P30+ in Puerto Rico. One thing I noticed right away is they needed more capture sharpening to crisp up -- I think those micro-lenses act like a weak AA filter...

Never found that to be true with the H3D/31 Jack. No apparent difference between my 31 and 39 that I can ever recall ... and that's shooting on the same job with both cameras.

 

[fotografz]

I am posting some shots i just took with the Hasselblad 31 at iso 100 and 800. The first is the scene followed by the two center crops. 100mm HC lens f8. +1E.V. I took some which were underexposed to various degrees as well at both iso settings. Most importantly, I turned all the software adjustment settings off in Phocus prior to processing. Sharpening, NR, DAC etc.. all NADA-off. Converted to 16-bit tiff, and then to jpg. Again no other manipulations in CS3 either.

Will you guys please stop shooting in such horrible light ... and overexposing the crap out of the files ... we'll never suck in more MFD victims with shots like this :ROTFL:

 

[mark1958]

I have some that are more appropriately exposed but I posted this one on purpose to get some of the detail of the wood in the shaded part of the image. I cannot help it the sun is really shinning here and it is mid afternoon.

Here are two crops that are somewhat oversharpened.

 

[fotografz]

To much gear bickering ... time for some straight up humor!

How can you tell if a Tomato is really a guy?

 

[mark1958]

I take it chromosomal analysis is not the correct answer LOL

To much gear bickering ... time for some straight up humor!

How can you tell if a Tomato is really a guy?

 

[David K]

Mark,
Thanks for posting those... They process up very nicely.

 

[Jack]

Mark: Agreed, the second round look better.

Cheers,

 

[mark1958]

Well Jack if you ever want to do some side by sides let me know.

 

[Jack]

Sure Mark -- maybe the Stanford church after I get back from vacation?

 

[fotografz]

Okay, you guys are dead serious here, so I'll take my "Tomato", and put it on the "Fun with MF" thread :salute:

 

[Guy Mancuso]

I like your tomato, but can I twist it. LOL

 

[Jack]

Okay, you guys are dead serious here, so I'll take my "Tomato", and put it on the "Fun with MF" thread :salute:

:ROTFL: Nope, we just know how to give you a proper hard time! :ROTFL:

(BTW, was I the only one who noted your tomato was complete with requisite pubic hair?)

,