Site Sponsors
Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 LastLast
Results 101 to 150 of 250

Thread: D800/D800E/IQ180 comparison

  1. #101
    Not Available
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    471
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: D800/D800E/IQ180 comparison

    24-36 Mp discussion here leaves out the fact that the new 36mp sensor also has the best shadows you can get and the broadest overall dynamic range. There is much more here than a jump of 12 MP.
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  2. #102
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    1,538
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: D800/D800E/IQ180 comparison

    Quote Originally Posted by FredBGG View Post
    24-36 Mp discussion here leaves out the fact that the new 36mp sensor also has the best shadows you can get and the broadest overall dynamic range. There is much more here than a jump of 12 MP.
    Shadows of the 24 megapixel D3x was pretty good too... but noone really cared about that camera due to the high price. Instead it was the Canon 5Dmk2 which was the previous "state of the art" of DSLR, and its dynamic range at base ISO is far from impressive. So in that sense the jump to 36 megapixels with almost no read noise in the pixels is an enormous improvement.

  3. #103
    Not Available
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    471
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: D800/D800E/IQ180 comparison

    Quote Originally Posted by Jack View Post
    Peter definitely knows how to use C1, so I would recommend he simply stick with that for both systems -- no sense adding un-necessary variables.

    I think that it would be useful to to do at least one comparison shot with the Nikon in both C1 and Nikons raw converter.

  4. #104
    Not Available
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    471
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: D800/D800E/IQ180 comparison

    Quote Originally Posted by D&A View Post
    I would assume these posted corner performances are from "unshifted lenses"? If so, I'd be interested in seeing 5 degree and full shift comparions with the Nikon and newer Canon.

    Dave (D&A)
    They are un-shifted. But also keep in mind that they are wide open, so you can expect them to be significantly better stopped down.

  5. #105
    Sr. Administrator Jack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Los Altos, CA
    Posts
    10,486
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1031

    Re: D800/D800E/IQ180 comparison

    Quote Originally Posted by vjbelle View Post
    ... I believe the MFDB model is completely broken and the beast is destined for extinction.
    Okay, we are not that far apart then

    I would hope that MF manufacturers realize their situation is tenuous at best now, and act before they do become extinct. But this infers there is such significant margins in MF that the prices could be cut by 50% immediately and still allow the companies a "reasonable" profit --- and I suspect that is not the case.
    Jack
    home: www.getdpi.com

    "Perfection is not attainable. But if we chase perfection, we can catch excellence."

  6. #106
    Administrator, Instructor Guy Mancuso's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    23,623
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2555

    Re: D800/D800E/IQ180 comparison

    One thing that is very obvious and we need to keep this in mind when we are at this level of mpx be it the D800 or MF you just simply need great glass in front of these sensors and honestly these Nikons prepare yourself to buy the best there is you will see it. I figured this out before anyone talked about it is search and find the best glass Nikon has and get the most you can off that sensor. I bought all there 1.4 G glass except for the 50 and I bought the 200mm F2 which is sucking up every mpx I can throw at it. So if your going to jump in do it with some real backbone buy the best glass you can get even if you can't get it all at once or else you won't be satisfied. Don't forget some of the Zeiss glass as well as a few of them are outstanding. Frankly the D800 is way underpriced and don't tell Nikon this but 4500 is what I would have paid for this cam given how good it is. So take that as a big discount and buy the best glass for it. That is my advice for the D800/E
    Photography is all about experimentation and without it you will never learn art.

    www.guymancusophotography.com

  7. #107
    Administrator, Instructor Guy Mancuso's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    23,623
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2555

    Re: D800/D800E/IQ180 comparison

    Oh and I should have left the stickers on the new sticks. Was a great day but the golf was mediocre on my end. LOL
    Photography is all about experimentation and without it you will never learn art.

    www.guymancusophotography.com

  8. #108
    Administrator, Instructor Guy Mancuso's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    23,623
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2555

    Re: D800/D800E/IQ180 comparison

    Quote Originally Posted by Jack View Post
    Okay, we are not that far apart then

    I would hope that MF manufacturers realize their situation is tenuous at best now, and act before they do become extinct. But this infers there is such significant margins in MF that the prices could be cut by 50% immediately and still allow the companies a "reasonable" profit --- and I suspect that is not the case.
    I still think and probaly always will feel MF is the ultimate in IQ until somebody stomps on it by a wide margin. Agreed the D800 is so darn close and also agree the adjustment bureau needs to take place in the MF market. Nikon just looked up the dear girls skirt and seen what's there and found out the secret. Oh I'm going to get in trouble for that one. ROTFLMAO
    Photography is all about experimentation and without it you will never learn art.

    www.guymancusophotography.com

  9. #109
    ssanacore
    Guest

    Re: D800/D800E/IQ180 comparison

    It reminds me of what went on with computer technology in the 80's. Anyone remember something called mini-computers? Brands like DEC, Wang, IBM etc etc.. IBM was smart enough to start building micros like the PC. But it was very painful for IBM to start building and selling a $3000 computer that was more powerful than their $50K mini which ceased to exist a few years later, along with many other companies that didn't adapt.

  10. #110
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    1,069
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    83

    Re: D800/D800E/IQ180 comparison

    Quote Originally Posted by Guy Mancuso View Post
    .....you just simply need great glass in front of these sensors and honestly these Nikons prepare yourself to buy the best ...D800/E
    Guy, how about a sticky in the Nikon forum for lens recommendations. With all the current Nikon lenses, classic nikkors, Zeiss, and Sigma, there are probably over 200 lenses to choose from.

    BTW, Luke did not appear during my round today either

  11. #111
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Reykjavik, Iceland
    Posts
    2,310
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    9

    Re: D800/D800E/IQ180 comparison

    I think there is an elephant in the room though...these cameras are not at all alike in most aspects. Resolution is not everything, and people are always very quick to brush aside the notion that it might not be the most important thing all the time. It's like choosing a car on top speed or its 0-60 time. There are other important criteria, not least of which is how you like to work! There are also handling, workflow, lens choice (not just a matter of how many are available, but also the availability of the type and quality of lenses you are after), price considerations, and any number of other reasons why someone might prefer 35mm over medium format, or the other way around.

    I think it is great that the D800 is such an incredibly capable camera for its price, but in the same way that the IQ180 might match 4x5 film in certain ways, there are still lots of people shooting 4x5 film because they prefer shooting that way, there are likely to be people sticking with medium format simply because it is a different medium than 35mm, with all that entails. Or to put it another way, if 4x5 film came out after the IQ180, would you all switch because it gave comparable resolution and is SO much cheaper?
    My photos are here: http://www.stuartrichardson.com and more recent work here: http://stuartrichardson.tumblr.com/ Please have a look at my book!
    My lab is here: http://www.customphotolab.is and on facebook
    Likes 9 Member(s) liked this post

  12. #112
    Senior Member Joe Colson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    North Carolina, USA
    Posts
    1,911
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    36

    Re: D800/D800E/IQ180 comparison

    Quote Originally Posted by Jack View Post
    However, I respectfully disagree with you 100% on this comment and stick by my original statement: You need to get your face in the prints side by side to see the differences. Sorry, and I know it's going to be an unpopular comment for many MFDB owners, but I have done the print comparisons myself with both processed and optimally printed, and found the difference is minor even on close inspection, advancing to undetectable at normal viewing distances. I will go further and state for most photographers printing 40 inches or smaller, the price-performance ratio only makes sense if you need absolute correct color and then have a client to bill appropriately for it... One of my oldest and most basic business axioms is, "Sometimes 'good enough' is."
    Jack, I respectfully agree with you 100%.

    I've got both the D800E and the IQ180 and have 20"x30" prints from each. At normal viewing distances, the differences are negligible. Indeed, "good enough" is.

    Joe
    _________________________________
    Joe Colson Photography

  13. #113
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    1,069
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    83

    Re: D800/D800E/IQ180 comparison

    Disclaimer/notes:

    1. I paid for my model with Gummie Worms
    2. Not meant to be scientific
    3. WB on greycard
    4. C1 defaults, Crop, resize
    5. IQ180 w/150LS, D800E w/70-200VRII
    6. Both base ISO, 1/250 and whatever the meter gave me for A.


    I have also compared large prints...and...hmmmmm...



    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  14. #114
    Administrator, Instructor Guy Mancuso's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    23,623
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2555

    Re: D800/D800E/IQ180 comparison

    180 bottom image and the loss of the gummie bears was well worth it. Lol

    she's a doll.
    Photography is all about experimentation and without it you will never learn art.

    www.guymancusophotography.com

  15. #115
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    1,069
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    83

    Re: D800/D800E/IQ180 comparison

    Thanks Guy, but she's not always a doll . Sorry, I did not mean this to be guessing game...yes, the top is D800E, bottom IQ180. Looking at them side by side, I think it's quite obvious, nonetheless, the D800 is pretty darn close. I guess this is the whole point of this discussion.

    The Dalsa sensor has a smoothness to the files, even with all that resolution. I see this especially in the greys/blues of skies in landscapes, and gives BW images a look I just love.
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  16. #116
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Hong Kong
    Posts
    691
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: D800/D800E/IQ180 comparison

    My problem with Nikon is the lens choice. That's why I got out. For me the lenses are everything. I almost bought into Sony because their Zeiss lenses are a. Gorgeous and b. have fast autofocus. In fact I haven't decided not to go with Sony, I am waiting to see if theres a full frame body. A full frame 36 MP alpha coupled with that T* planar 85/1.4, now that is something special. Waiting for a decent FF body to match with a bunch of newly developed gorgeous lenses is going to be much better than waiting for Nikon to get their act together.

  17. #117
    Administrator, Instructor Guy Mancuso's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    23,623
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2555

    Re: D800/D800E/IQ180 comparison

    The 35 and 85 1.4 G lenses outside the 200 have a really nice look for people .
    Photography is all about experimentation and without it you will never learn art.

    www.guymancusophotography.com

  18. #118
    Administrator, Instructor Guy Mancuso's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    23,623
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2555

    Re: D800/D800E/IQ180 comparison

    Quote Originally Posted by gerald.d View Post
    Guy - when you refer to speed here, do you mean optical speed, or speed of use/AF?

    I would have thought the Mamiya 300/2.8 would give a similar look to the Nikon. It and the Nikon 200/2 have very similar physical aperture sizes and fields of view on their respective sensors.
    Quote Originally Posted by jagsiva View Post
    Thanks Guy, but she's not always a doll . Sorry, I did not mean this to be guessing game...yes, the top is D800E, bottom IQ180. Looking at them side by side, I think it's quite obvious, nonetheless, the D800 is pretty darn close. I guess this is the whole point of this discussion.

    The Dalsa sensor has a smoothness to the files, even with all that resolution. I see this especially in the greys/blues of skies in landscapes, and gives BW images a look I just love.
    When you get right down to it it comes down to the Dalsa sensor and how C1 handles the Phase files which in my opinion makes the Phase backs what they are. It's the tonal range and color that makes the obvious difference between them. Now that can be worked on also from Nikon and the raw converters . The other trick we can do us profile our bodies as well . So we have some options to work on and that is what I want to do is concentrate on those improvements in my files. Sure there is resolution as well but that is less a concern for me.
    Photography is all about experimentation and without it you will never learn art.

    www.guymancusophotography.com

  19. #119
    Administrator, Instructor Guy Mancuso's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    23,623
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2555

    Re: D800/D800E/IQ180 comparison

    Actually just for grins try knocking contrast and saturation down a touch and maybe even a touch of clarity. Like to see that change
    Photography is all about experimentation and without it you will never learn art.

    www.guymancusophotography.com

  20. #120
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Hong Kong
    Posts
    691
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: D800/D800E/IQ180 comparison

    Maybe this will interest a few people too:

    24x36 @ 36 MP is ~4.8microns pixel size, requires > 100 lp/mm resolving power to achieve that. Min aperture is ~f5 not to rob that detail. Where can it go next? 4 microns, 54MP 125 lp/mm and min aperture of f4.2? Small format is close to practical usage limits.

    A 645 sensor (40x54) @ 4.8 microns would give 94 MP. CMOS is probably on the cards too. So that's all coming, the future of MF looks exciting. For a 645 sensor @ 36 MP, it only needs to resolve around 64 lp/mm and can go to f8

    MF systems being componentised, can go for a 6x7 sensor (which I could mount on my Alpa) @4.8 microns would give 174MP. For a 6x7 sensor to produce a good 60x40 print (assuming 36MP is sufficient for that print) would need to resolve only 48 lp/mm and f11 is max

    I don't think MF is in any danger. I think relatively speaking small format DSLRs are in more danger as their market is shrinking by a larger % than MF will (if MF shrinks at all).

    btw, I'm struggling with MF after coming in from 4x5, so I don't particularly support the MF format. I have said for years that all want is a 40MP 4x5 instantaneous capture sensor.

    Paul
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  21. #121
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    1,069
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    83

    Re: D800/D800E/IQ180 comparison

    Quote Originally Posted by Guy Mancuso View Post
    Actually just for grins try knocking contrast and saturation down a touch and maybe even a touch of clarity. Like to see that change
    Contrast -10, Saturation -10, Clarity +12

    more hmmm....



  22. #122
    Not Available
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    471
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: D800/D800E/IQ180 comparison

    Quote Originally Posted by jagsiva View Post
    Disclaimer/notes:

    1. I paid for my model with Gummie Worms
    2. Not meant to be scientific
    3. WB on greycard
    4. C1 defaults, Crop, resize
    5. IQ180 w/150LS, D800E w/70-200VRII
    6. Both base ISO, 1/250 and whatever the meter gave me for A.
    Hmm that Nikon Zoom holds up well up against the $4,990.00 Phase One Schneider.

    Now lets see how a Nikon prime looks compared to the Nikon Zoom...

    Nikon 70-200 2.8 VR II


    Nikon 85mm 1.4G


    Hmmmmm I wonder how a direct comparison between the Schneider LS 150 vs the Nikon 85mm 1.4G would have been....

    Add on top of that the minimum focusing distance:

    150cm for the Phase One Schneider 150mm
    85cm for the Nikon 85mm

    And than there is the look of the two lenses. The Nikon is hard to beat, wide open ....
    Last edited by FredBGG; 28th May 2012 at 22:11.

  23. #123
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    1,538
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: D800/D800E/IQ180 comparison

    Quote Originally Posted by FredBGG View Post
    Hmm that Nikon Zoom holds up well up against the $4,990.00 Phase One Schneider.
    Then look at the Canon 70-200/2.8 II, and Canon 300/2.8, 24 TS-E II etc. Nikon has some nice focal lengths, but really I think Canon has the better lenses overall and the newly produced lenses show the lead more. Just had to say as a Canon fanboy

    Now they just have to learn how to make sensors...

  24. #124
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    1,538
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: D800/D800E/IQ180 comparison

    It would be interesting to see a system comparison, what lenses do you pick if you chose D800 to replace a tech camera system?

    I guess we have the PC-E 24, PC-E 45 and PC-E 85, hartblei 40, 80, 120, and Schneider PC TS 50 and 90 to choose from.

    I suspect that as a tech camera system the D800 impresses less than when compared to an MF SLR type of camera. The problem I see with the PC-E lenses is inflexible movements and possibly not that good performance edge to edge. Digital correction evens that out somewhat though (reduces chromatic aberration, distortion).

    The problem I got when I was to choose between D800 and MF tech camera was that I felt that the tech camera was better matching the way I want to make pictures, but when the price difference is what it is one can start to make some compromises. I was prepared to buy second hand though which made the MF tech camera system feasible so I ended up with that and I'm happy so far .

    5 years ago a tech camera system felt like a long term investment which would hold its value well, but now I feel that the future of MFDB makers is so uncertain that my investment does not at all feel as safe. Digital tech cameras may very well go the 4x5" film way... suddenly most people stop using it and the second-hand market is overflowed with systems.
    Last edited by torger; 29th May 2012 at 00:25.

  25. #125
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    1,538
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: D800/D800E/IQ180 comparison

    Quote Originally Posted by Jack View Post
    I would hope that MF manufacturers realize their situation is tenuous at best now, and act before they do become extinct. But this infers there is such significant margins in MF that the prices could be cut by 50% immediately and still allow the companies a "reasonable" profit --- and I suspect that is not the case.
    I think a price cut is possible. Back in the days Kodak actually published sensor prices they were like $3,500 for a 36x48mm sensor to the manufacturers, which ended up in $20,000 backs.

    They would probably need some attractive entry level product that can sell in higher volumes than they do today. Remains to be seen if they can pull that off...

  26. #126
    Workshop Member Wayne Fox's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Draper, Utah
    Posts
    871
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    134

    Re: D800/D800E/IQ180 comparison

    I guess what puzzles me about all the discussion regarding the d800 being good enough is most of those same arguments could have been made about the p45 (or hassle equivalent) when the p65 (or hassle equivalent) came out. I see so many now "happy enough" with the d800, yet have been willing to payout about $30k to upgrade to the p65 then the IQ180 because they wanted the very best.

    Heck, a 30" print from a 5d Mark2 would be hard to tell from an IQ180 file "at normal viewing distance" (which I still do not think can really be defined and is completely theoretical). We didn't need the d800 to get to that point. I"ve seen a lot of 40" prints from the 5D mark 2 which looked pretty dang good. the new 24mp Sony's are pretty impressive as well - i've printed several 20x30's from my NEX 7 and I was surprised at how they held up - no problem going a little larger for some files.

    Not knocking the d800, I intend on buying one, but mostly because I want some reach with telephotos. I don't see it replacing my MFDB gear on many shoots, it may travel along when I've got room, but it'll probably be in the car most of the time while the Phase is on the tripod.

    Of course, I understand many of you do different kind of work, but that's what made me mention my original question. I guess it's mostly a rhetorical questions, as everyone has made very good points here in this thread and I"m not criticizing anyone for their point of view. If everyone had felt this way 3 or 4 years ago, Phase would have probably gone under then since hardly anyone would have upgraded ...
    wayne
    My gallery
    Likes 5 Member(s) liked this post

  27. #127
    Subscriber Member Jorgen Udvang's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Pratamnak
    Posts
    9,345
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2157

    Re: D800/D800E/IQ180 comparison

    Quote Originally Posted by torger View Post
    I think a price cut is possible. Back in the days Kodak actually published sensor prices they were like $3,500 for a 36x48mm sensor to the manufacturers, which ended up in $20,000 backs.

    They would probably need some attractive entry level product that can sell in higher volumes than they do today. Remains to be seen if they can pull that off...
    That's a classic dilemma. If a price reduction works, and the volume increases dramatically, they'll stay in business. If they aren't able to regain lost ground, they're out as a result of the lower profits. To make matters worse, they will have to increase sales to a level not previously seen to make up for that lower profit. Then the question will be if a market of that size is there at all.

    Another problematic side of this is that most MF sensors are too close in size to 35mm. Only very few are anything near 60 x 45 mm, not to speak about 60 x 60 or larger, which I believe is one of the reasons why the D800 can take parts of this market relatively easily.

    A different approach would be to become more advanced and more expensive, to make a 60 x 60 or 60 x 70 sensor, one that would fit in RB, RZ, Rolleiflex, Hy6 and GX680. Development costs and reduced yield would make it expensive, but it would distance medium format from 35mm with a large margin, even if the sensor doesn't have more resolution than 60-80MP.

    Apart from the technical and economical challenges, there's little or no money in this for other than the manufacturer of the back though, at least initially, since there's an enormous quantity of cameras and lenses available already for very modest prices. So I can't really see this happen. It sure would have been nice though
    Things I sell: https://www.shutterstock.com/g/epixx?language=en
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  28. #128
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    1,538
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: D800/D800E/IQ180 comparison

    Another possibility is that MFDB makers pull out of the SLR business, reduce drastically in size and concentrate on doing backs for tech cameras like Arca-Swiss, ALPA, Linhof. As long as "standard" CCDs are being used I think you don't need huge development resources, i e you could be as small as the scanning back companies.

    From my point of view the tech cameras with rodenstock and schneider "large format digital" lenses are attractive and provide something unique, while the digital MF SLRs are becoming too easy to replace with a 135 DSLR.

  29. #129
    Not Available
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    471
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: D800/D800E/IQ180 comparison

    Quote Originally Posted by torger View Post
    I think a price cut is possible. Back in the days Kodak actually published sensor prices they were like $3,500 for a 36x48mm sensor to the manufacturers, which ended up in $20,000 backs.

    They would probably need some attractive entry level product that can sell in higher volumes than they do today. Remains to be seen if they can pull that off...
    It's going to take more than that. Nikon has changed the game. It managed to substantially catch up with MFDB quality while maintaining or even improving on ergonomics, functionality and uncompressed video, not to mention reliability .

  30. #130
    Not Available
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    471
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: D800/D800E/IQ180 comparison

    Quote Originally Posted by torger View Post
    Another possibility is that MFDB makers pull out of the SLR business, reduce drastically in size and concentrate on doing backs for tech cameras like Arca-Swiss, ALPA, Linhof. As long as "standard" CCDs are being used I think you don't need huge development resources, i e you could be as small as the scanning back companies.

    From my point of view the tech cameras with rodenstock and schneider "large format digital" lenses are attractive and provide something unique, while the digital MF SLRs are becoming too easy to replace with a 135 DSLR.
    If Fuji were to scale up it's sensor in the X-Pro 1 to make a digital back with live view and maybe even a cropped video output It could take over the tech camera back market.

  31. #131
    Not Available
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    471
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: D800/D800E/IQ180 comparison

    Quote Originally Posted by torger View Post
    Then look at the Canon 70-200/2.8 II, and Canon 300/2.8, 24 TS-E II etc. Nikon has some nice focal lengths, but really I think Canon has the better lenses overall and the newly produced lenses show the lead more. Just had to say as a Canon fanboy

    Now they just have to learn how to make sensors...
    Both Nikon and Canon have their stand out lenses.

    You are right about the three you mentioned, but Nikon has a few unmatched gems of it's own.

    50mm 1.4G, 85mm 1.4G, 200mm f2

  32. #132
    Subscriber Member Jorgen Udvang's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Pratamnak
    Posts
    9,345
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2157

    Re: D800/D800E/IQ180 comparison

    Quote Originally Posted by FredBGG View Post
    If Fuji were to scale up it's sensor in the X-Pro 1 to make a digital back with live view and maybe even a cropped video output It could take over the tech camera back market.
    That would be something. Sized somewhere around 60 x 80mm? That would be roughly 200MP. Yes, please

  33. #133
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    1,538
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: D800/D800E/IQ180 comparison

    I don't think tech cameras need video, but live view would be nice of course. It seems like a decent live view would require CMOS though, and that may be troublesome due to the very very large investments required to manufacture one - it seems like CMOS require a high volume to be feasible.

    Having studied my Linhof ground glass quite extensively I have come to the conclusion that tech camera manufacturers don't seem to understand that making the best possible ground glass is important, and if they did the need of live view would not feel as urgent.

    Ground glass grain is already today actually fine enough to support 30x magnification which would make critical focusing (almost) as easy as experienced on a modern live view. But what do the manufacturers provide? 3x lupes, and at best 10x from third parties which may need to be patched to work (I had to cut off the skirt to be able to focus through fresnel down to the grain). Make a 30x pen microscope adapted for ground glass focusing!

    Fresnel adapted for wide angles would improve things too. Oh, Linhof thinks it is ok with light leaks onto the ground glass and fresnel greatly reducing contrast, so I had to patch with tape. Such design errors feels almost arrogant.

  34. #134
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Royal Oak, MI and Palm Harbor, FL
    Posts
    8,498
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    44

    Re: D800/D800E/IQ180 comparison

    Quote Originally Posted by torger View Post
    Another possibility is that MFDB makers pull out of the SLR business, reduce drastically in size and concentrate on doing backs for tech cameras like Arca-Swiss, ALPA, Linhof. As long as "standard" CCDs are being used I think you don't need huge development resources, i e you could be as small as the scanning back companies.

    From my point of view the tech cameras with rodenstock and schneider "large format digital" lenses are attractive and provide something unique, while the digital MF SLRs are becoming too easy to replace with a 135 DSLR.
    Now that would be a crying shame for those who do see a major difference between the 35mm DSLRs files (including the D800), and even the smaller MFD backs on a MF DSLR camera body, let alone a big meg back.

    While Phase One most certainly has to address their camera base, I truly hate to see the company take such a beating after so many innovations and new ideas to further the image quality for photographers that appreciate it. Note: I don't own a Phase One.

    -Marc

  35. #135
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    1,538
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: D800/D800E/IQ180 comparison

    Quote Originally Posted by fotografz View Post
    Now that would be a crying shame for those who do see a major difference between the 35mm DSLRs files (including the D800), and even the smaller MFD backs on a MF DSLR camera body, let alone a big meg back.
    I'm sort of aware of the unique look of MF SLR lenses, seems to be in the mid-range DOFs where a more subtle 3D-look can be achieved. Have not seen any good side-by-side demonstrations of it though, that would be nice. 35mm digital style is more of either all sharp or extremely short DOF with just an undefined blur in the background, don't know if that is because it have to be that way or because most people just use those apertures.

    Overall I think it is much about the lenses and should be about the lenses, but the huge cost of digital backs and their relative lack of flexibility is an obstacle. When the price gap is just too large and the difference too small then suddenly "good enough" is just that.

  36. #136
    Subscriber Member Jorgen Udvang's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Pratamnak
    Posts
    9,345
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2157

    Re: D800/D800E/IQ180 comparison

    When I was a kid, it was very common in Norway to eat Kefir Milk with "Sukkerkavring", a dried, sweet bun that was crushed over the fermented milk. The best sukkerkavring came in yellow paper bags and were made by a factory in Buskerud in the eastern part of Norway. As years went by, the Swedish crisp bread manufacturer Wasa, a rather sizable company, found that they wanted to compete in the same market. Their sukkerkavring wasn't as sweet or as airy as the Norwegian variety, and they came in large plastic bags instead of the nice yellow paper ones.

    But they were good enough for most and they were cheaper, but most of all, they had a sales force and marketing that made it easy for them to get better placement in the supermarket shelves, and after a few years, the yellow paper bags were gone forever, at least around where I lived. I guess I can live with that... just
    Things I sell: https://www.shutterstock.com/g/epixx?language=en
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  37. #137
    ssanacore
    Guest

    Re: D800/D800E/IQ180 comparison

    Quote Originally Posted by Guy Mancuso View Post
    180 bottom image and the loss of the gummie bears was well worth it. Lol

    she's a doll.
    I wish I could see that difference as quickly as you can Guy. I see differences but can't quantify which looks better to me. But I really don't think using an IQ back is for the web :-)

  38. #138
    Administrator, Instructor Guy Mancuso's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    23,623
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2555

    Re: D800/D800E/IQ180 comparison

    Blue shirt was a dead giveaway. Phase is more neutral in color and this is where we need the Nikon to be. I can also see a little more detail in the Phase. What I'm trying to figure out though is why the Nikon shot looks darker at the bottom. Looks like vignetting in post
    Photography is all about experimentation and without it you will never learn art.

    www.guymancusophotography.com

  39. #139
    Senior Member darr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    North Florida
    Posts
    984
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: D800/D800E/IQ180 comparison

    Quote Originally Posted by Guy Mancuso View Post
    Blue shirt was a dead giveaway. Phase is more neutral in color and this is where we need the Nikon to be. I can also see a little more detail in the Phase. What I'm trying to figure out though is why the Nikon shot looks darker at the bottom. Looks like vignetting in post
    I noticed the vignetting as well, but also in the Phase file, her hair has a tint of a red henna in areas where the Nikon does not. Details, details ....
    "Creativity takes courage." ~ Henri Matisse
    Darlene Almeda, photoscapes.com

  40. #140
    Administrator, Instructor Guy Mancuso's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    23,623
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2555

    Re: D800/D800E/IQ180 comparison

    The thing is though in real world we are not comparing to another camera so whatever looks good we are pretty happy with. This is something we don't do is compare. We shoot process to the best of our abilities and enjoy the outcome. I'm seriously going to look into camera profiling today as right now I think it would benefit the Nikon. What I want to do is go shoot my IQ 140 and D800 and see in processing how close I can get to the 140. Than in C1 I can make a style and use that on import. I think Jack and I need a road trip to work on this together. Any excuse for a road trip works for me. LOL

    But seriously I really like to work on this. I think we could make the Nikon better.
    Photography is all about experimentation and without it you will never learn art.

    www.guymancusophotography.com
    Likes 2 Member(s) liked this post

  41. #141
    Shelby Lewis
    Guest

    Re: D800/D800E/IQ180 comparison

    Quote Originally Posted by Guy Mancuso View Post

    But seriously I really like to work on this. I think we could make the Nikon better.
    I agree... other than the glass having less character (IMO) than my previous MF set-up, color in the nikon is nice, but far less natural. Definitely better than the older bodies, but still "nikon-esque" so far for me.

    For me, making the Nikon really sing is going to be a situation where a good import profile can be used in combination with carefully selected glass. As it is, it's really good, but it ain't RZ as far as look. But, dang, it's close. Having to intensively process eery file individually just to get to a good starting place won't cut it... so far that's not happening, but there is some initial work needed.

  42. #142
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Royal Oak, MI and Palm Harbor, FL
    Posts
    8,498
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    44

    Re: D800/D800E/IQ180 comparison

    Quote Originally Posted by torger View Post
    I'm sort of aware of the unique look of MF SLR lenses, seems to be in the mid-range DOFs where a more subtle 3D-look can be achieved. Have not seen any good side-by-side demonstrations of it though, that would be nice. 35mm digital style is more of either all sharp or extremely short DOF with just an undefined blur in the background, don't know if that is because it have to be that way or because most people just use those apertures.

    Overall I think it is much about the lenses and should be about the lenses, but the huge cost of digital backs and their relative lack of flexibility is an obstacle. When the price gap is just too large and the difference too small then suddenly "good enough" is just that.
    Understood.

    However, that is the POV that accepts it. There are other perspectives.

    IMO, to narrow the application of an expensive digital back by relegating it to tech camera use doesn't make any sense. If anything, they should be made more diverse in use. This is how I feel about my S2 ... by allowing fully integrated use of all my Hasselblad HC/HCD lenses with sync speeds to 1/800 and up to 1/4000 with a flip of a switch ... OR, the Leica S lenses with their unmatched look and feel ... I've had less and less use for any 35mm DSLR.

    So, "lack of MFD flexibility" is a relative term, and depends heavily on application. The 35mm DSLRs are still as far away from specific MFD applications as they always were ... 36 meg didn't change that. On the other hand, MFD has made the need for 35mm DSLRs less critical for some applications then in past ... and I personally think the MFD makers should be applauded for that.

    In the end it is the look and feel, and as you say it may well be the lenses ... except for a few shots made with some adapted manual focus Leica R lenses, I've seen absolutely nothing from the D800, regardless of which Nikon lens, that even remotely approaches some of the beautiful images posted in the MFD and S2 image threads on Get Dpi, let alone other sites. It's like night and day, yet the comparison chatter drones on and on. In fact, I've yet to see any D800 image that can aesthetically equal my A900 and AF Zeiss glass. That a photographer can make a bigger print of a look and feel they don't like at all, doesn't change anything. Big ugly, is still ugly to some eyes. Which is why, even thought I could easily afford it, I'll keep trundling along with the Sonys until something changes my mind

    Let's cut to the chase, it is about money. Period.

    If I didn't have the money, I might be LOVING the D800 option and justifying it by discounting MFD as not worth it. But I DO have the money, and I DO see a substantial difference and think it is worth it ... I'd seriously hate having to step back after working my way up to the look and feel that finally pleased me.

    Like I said, not everyone is convinced ... besides, I hate Kool-Aid

    -Marc
    Likes 5 Member(s) liked this post

  43. #143
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    1,538
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: D800/D800E/IQ180 comparison

    A theory I've heard many times is that DSLR color filters are optimized as a tradeoff between natural color and low light loss to keep good high ISO performance, while MFDB sensor color filters are only optimized for best color reproduction. Not sure if it is true though, and even if it is if it has any meaning in practice. Shall be interesting to see what can be done with color profiling.
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  44. #144
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    1,538
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: D800/D800E/IQ180 comparison

    Quote Originally Posted by fotografz View Post
    It's like night and day, yet the comparison chatter drones on and on.
    The problem is that many people, myself included, don't have the ability to see a "night and day" difference, and by some reason it is never really demonstrated in side-by-side tests. Perhaps my eyes are bad, I don't know, that could be the case. I have no prestige in this. It is not only about spotting a difference, it also about thinking that the difference has any significant impact on image quality/look

    If it indeed is a night-and-day difference it would be a fantastic opportunity for MF marketing guys to show off this difference in their marketing material or on the web ("if you shoot with a DSLR it looks like this, but if you use our MF system it looks like this, tada see the night-and-day difference!").

    The D800 puts some more stress on this though so we're starting to see some interesting side-by-side tests. Perhaps we'll see something concentrated more on lens look further ahead.
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  45. #145
    Senior Member Nathan W. Lediard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Norway
    Posts
    790
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: D800/D800E/IQ180 comparison

    Quote Originally Posted by fotografz View Post
    Understood.

    However, that is the POV that accepts it. There are other perspectives.

    IMO, to narrow the application of an expensive digital back by relegating it to tech camera use doesn't make any sense. If anything, they should be made more diverse in use. This is how I feel about my S2 ... by allowing fully integrated use of all my Hasselblad HC/HCD lenses with sync speeds to 1/800 and up to 1/4000 with a flip of a switch ... OR, the Leica S lenses with their unmatched look and feel ... I've had less and less use for any 35mm DSLR.

    So, "lack of MFD flexibility" is a relative term, and depends heavily on application. The 35mm DSLRs are still as far away from specific MFD applications as they always were ... 36 meg didn't change that. On the other hand, MFD has made the need for 35mm DSLRs less critical for some applications then in past ... and I personally think the MFD makers should be applauded for that.

    In the end it is the look and feel, and as you say it may well be the lenses ... except for a few shots made with some adapted manual focus Leica R lenses, I've seen absolutely nothing from the D800, regardless of which Nikon lens, that even remotely approaches some of the beautiful images posted in the MFD and S2 image threads on Get Dpi, let alone other sites. It's like night and day, yet the comparison chatter drones on and on. In fact, I've yet to see any D800 image that can aesthetically equal my A900 and AF Zeiss glass. That a photographer can make a bigger print of a look and feel they don't like at all, doesn't change anything. Big ugly, is still ugly to some eyes. Which is why, even thought I could easily afford it, I'll keep trundling along with the Sonys until something changes my mind

    Let's cut to the chase, it is about money. Period.

    If I didn't have the money, I might be LOVING the D800 option and justifying it by discounting MFD as not worth it. But I DO have the money, and I DO see a substantial difference and think it is worth it ... I'd seriously hate having to step back after working my way up to the look and feel that finally pleased me.


    Like I said, not everyone is convinced ... besides, I hate Kool-Aid

    -Marc
    Marc, You have a knack of putting into words how I feel about this and I dont seem to be able to come up with the words...
    Well said.. Its great to be shooting medium format again after years of 35mm digital, it took me many years to get my business where I can justify it, and to be honest no 35mm camera is going to replace my Hasselblad for sheer quality, look and colour. and I only have the lowly H4D-40.

    All this talk of top glass on the nikon bla bla bla... I have owned and still own som eof the best glass canon make, including the 300mm f2.8L and the 200mm f2.0L In my quest for ever better IQ I sold most of my zooms and went all prime some years ago... 24 1.4L 35 1.4L 50 1.2L 85 1.2L 135 f2L 200 f2.0L and th e300 f2.8L and trust me.. none of those lenses come close to the look from my hasselblad, sharp lenses do not medium format make!!! (and yes they are sharp the 200 f2 is just an amazing lens RAZOR sharp at f2.0 and peaking at f2.8) , but the hasselblad is just in another league... no I am rambling now.. basically Fotografz summed up my thoughts for me. in the red text I highlighted above...
    Likes 5 Member(s) liked this post

  46. #146
    Shelby Lewis
    Guest

    Re: D800/D800E/IQ180 comparison

    Quote Originally Posted by Nathan W. Lediard View Post
    All this talk of top glass on the nikon bla bla bla... sharp lenses do not medium format make!!!
    No, it's about lens characteristic in combo with sensor technology... and there is still a noticeable gap between 35mm and MF in terms of synergy between sensors and lenses. And it is about money to a certain standpoint.

    But it's also about application.

    I'm not sure my d800 will ever put out files as nice as my RZ/Aptus did (and it was 28mp)... they certainly won't be the same. But that doesn't mean that the D800 doesn't have it's place. I shot a wedding with it this weekend and found the camera performed admirably... definitely better than my previous stint with Canon (including most of the L primes), Sony, and the older Nikons. Color, for Nikon, is still a bit unnatural to my eyes, but with a good profile I think it'll be great. After 1 week with the camera, I'm getting a feel for it. Sony a900 still is the best out of the can, IMO.

    Tim has already posted some nice files using R glass that show, IMO, that the camera is capable of some VERY nice things. But, it's not necessarily an MF replacement... i think its a tweener cam for the photographer who knows how to use it smartly as well as a camera for the working pro that needs a single system that can straddle a bunch of markets. That doesn't make it "better" than MF (or anything for that matter).

    I find the idea of MF going to bigger sensors appealing... I'll probably be back on low-end MF camera (alongside the Nikon) for my art photography in the future when my financial/work situation can dictate owning multiple systems, but I'd save up and drop some major money on a 6x7 ccd sensor!
    Likes 4 Member(s) liked this post

  47. #147
    Contributing Editor ustein's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    3,658
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: D800/D800E/IQ180 comparison

    >Let's cut to the chase, it is about money. Period.

    Yes and handling. I am a 35mm shooter all my life. So I get with the D800 what I never expected. Shooting with MF is just not for me personally and I can live with any D800, 5D2 and alike.
    Uwe Steinmueller
    -------------------

    Editor&Owner of Digital Outback Photo
    http://www.outbackphoto.com

  48. #148
    Administrator, Instructor Guy Mancuso's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    23,623
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2555

    Re: D800/D800E/IQ180 comparison

    Photography is all about experimentation and without it you will never learn art.

    www.guymancusophotography.com

  49. #149
    Administrator, Instructor Guy Mancuso's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    23,623
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2555

    Re: D800/D800E/IQ180 comparison

    BTW just a FYI I just got a BRAND NEW IQ 140 so I am not saying it is a replacement for MF but it is a supplement to it. I would not be stupid enough o go buy a back if I thought the D800 could kick its butt. That would be a serious waste of money. What we all have been saying the folks that OWN them and are testing them AGAINST OUR backs is it is damn close.
    Photography is all about experimentation and without it you will never learn art.

    www.guymancusophotography.com

  50. #150
    Sr. Administrator Jack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Los Altos, CA
    Posts
    10,486
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1031

    Re: D800/D800E/IQ180 comparison

    Quote Originally Posted by fotografz View Post

    Let's cut to the chase, it is about money. Period.

    If I didn't have the money, I might be LOVING the D800 option and justifying it by discounting MFD as not worth it. But I DO have the money, and I DO see a substantial difference and think it is worth it ...
    Marc,

    A bit of semantics: As one who's been in sales my entire life, I can assure you it isn't usually about money itself, it's almost always about the perceived VALUE. And we all have differing sets of values and differing weights we place on said values which form our individual perceptions...

    Cheers,
    Jack
    home: www.getdpi.com

    "Perfection is not attainable. But if we chase perfection, we can catch excellence."
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •