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!

MFDB Performance at higher ISOs

Ed Hurst

Well-known member
Hello all,

Many thanks to all of you who have helped with my questions so far.

If comparing MF digital (e.g. the latest Phase backs and the latest H series bodies) with 35mm-style DSLRs such as Nikon D3 and Canon 1DSmkiii, how do they perform at ISO 200, 400 and 800 in terms of noise, detail and dynamic range? I know the resolution will be higher, but what about these other parameters?

For my purposes, being able to shoot at 200 and 400 (and preferably up to 800) with confidence is important - and I wouldn't want to lose out on overall quality by stepping up to MF digital. My fear is that MF digital might only be worth it at very low ISOs...

Any feedback very welcome!

Best wishes and thanks in advance for your help.

Ed
 

mark1958

Member
Ed the H3DII-31 does incredibly well at iso 800. It is as good if not better than my 1DsmkIII in the noise dept. The overall image quality is much better with the MF as has been discussed. There will be a Phocus release soon allowing one to go to iso 1600. Obviously cannot comment on the noise issue at this iso. There are a number of examples posted on this board.

Hello all,

Many thanks to all of you who have helped with my questions so far.

If comparing MF digital (e.g. the latest Phase backs and the latest H series bodies) with 35mm-style DSLRs such as Nikon D3 and Canon 1DSmkiii, how do they perform at ISO 200, 400 and 800 in terms of noise, detail and dynamic range? I know the resolution will be higher, but what about these other parameters?

For my purposes, being able to shoot at 200 and 400 (and preferably up to 800) with confidence is important - and I wouldn't want to lose out on overall quality by stepping up to MF digital. My fear is that MF digital might only be worth it at very low ISOs...

Any feedback very welcome!

Best wishes and thanks in advance for your help.

Ed
 

Graham Mitchell

New member
There was a large thread showing the iso800 performance of the Sinar eMotion75LV, but I think it's been deleted. Anyway, I haven't seen better from any other back.
 

dougpeterson

Workshop Member
Nothing will touch a Nikon D3 right now for high iso performance at 100% resolution. For the best high-ISO low light performance possible dSLRs are simply a better tool.

But keep in mind though that the D3 is *only* 12 megapixels, so to compare it fairly (i.e. what amount of grain/noise appears in a equally sized print) to a digital back you would need to either upsize the D3 file to e.g. 32 megapixels or downsize the digital back to 12 megapixels. Comparing in this way the performance gap is greatly closed.

Obviously I'm biased as hell towards Phase One (see my signature), but I will be happy to bet anyone on the board that Phase One will ship a P65+ with good ISO 1600 before the Hasselblad will go to ISO 1600, something they've promised now for a long time. Find some creative terms for it; something that causes embarrassment.

I'd also bet that the ISO 1600 that comes out of the Hassy won't be as good as the ISO 1600 already present on the P30+, but that would be subjective to bet on.

Doug Peterson, Head of Technical Services
Capture Integration, Phase One Dealer
Personal Portfolio
 
J

jmvdigital

Guest
Theirry's posts about the 800 ISO on the eMotion can be found at Luminous Landscape still I believe.

In any case, Ed, I can post any number of 400, 800, and 1600 images if you're interested in seeing crops. I have a P30+. The P30 and the H3DII-31 and the Sinar Hy6 65 all have micolenses, which improves their light gathering abilities (at the small sacrifice of detail and ability to use the back on a TC). The P30+ has a range of ISO 100-1600, whereas I believe most all other backs max out at 800.
 

Jack

Sr. Administrator
Staff member
There was a large thread showing the iso800 performance of the Sinar eMotion75LV, but I think it's been deleted. Anyway, I haven't seen better from any other back.
Graham, no threads have been deleted here. Old threads do die off after a period of inactivity and go into a dormant folder ---- these should however remain accessible via the search function. However, you may be thinking about a large thread where Thierry posted significantly --- that particular one was not debated here, but over on Luminous Landscape...

Cheers,
 

Steve Hendrix

Well-known member
The best medium format products for high ISO utilize the 31MP Kodak sensor. That includes for Phase One the P30+. I've compared this sensor to all other sensors at high ISO extensively and it is the best in my very firm opinion.

The thing to remember about high ISO is that the shutter speed and the exposure itself are critical. Subjects not in motion that are exposed with plenty of light fare very well. Subjects in shadow, or with slower shutter speeds, not so well.

I've attached an example from a Canon 5D. This shot was taken at 1000 ISO, but you can see looking left to right as the light changes how the noise and texture also change. This is much more apparent at the full size image. What I have seen from the 31MP sensors is very equivalent to Canon performance at 800 ISO or so.




Steve Hendrix
Phase One
 

mark1958

Member
Steve I remember you had some really nice iso 800 cat images taken with the Hasselblad H3DII-31 :)

The best medium format products for high ISO utilize the 31MP Kodak sensor. That includes for Phase One the P30+. I've compared this sensor to all other sensors at high ISO extensively and it is the best in my very firm opinion.

The thing to remember about high ISO is that the shutter speed and the exposure itself are critical. Subjects not in motion that are exposed with plenty of light fare very well. Subjects in shadow, or with slower shutter speeds, not so well.

I've attached an example from a Canon 5D. This shot was taken at 1000 ISO, but you can see looking left to right as the light changes how the noise and texture also change. This is much more apparent at the full size image. What I have seen from the 31MP sensors is very equivalent to Canon performance at 800 ISO or so.




Steve Hendrix
Phase One
 

bdp

Member
I would strongly recommend you conduct your own tests. take a CF card along to a dealer and pop off some images you can process at your leisure. Sometimes when you shoot to avoid overexposed highlights the shadows and contrast need to be bumped up considerably which can really affect the noise created.
 

Steve Hendrix

Well-known member
Steve I remember you had some really nice iso 800 cat images taken with the Hasselblad H3DII-31 :)
Mark, I knew you were going to get me on that.

Unfortunately, I have lost all of those images....:angel:


When I competed against the P30+, the high ISO results appeared to my eye to be at the same level.....and now, even better! :toocool:

The unit that I carry with me currently is a P45+, so I have not had an opportunity to shoot P30+ test samples at 800/1600 ISO, although I'm sure some of the participating dealers here could provide some.


Steve Hendrix
Phase One
 

mark1958

Member
Well you showed me that photo in your office when I was in Atlanta for a meeting. I should have kept a copy to send back to you.



Mark, I knew you were going to get me on that.

Unfortunately, I have lost all of those images....:angel:


When I competed against the P30+, the high ISO results appeared to my eye to be at the same level.....and now, even better! :toocool:

The unit that I carry with me currently is a P45+, so I have not had an opportunity to shoot P30+ test samples at 800/1600 ISO, although I'm sure some of the participating dealers here could provide some.


Steve Hendrix
Phase One
 

Steve Hendrix

Well-known member
Well you showed me that photo in your office when I was in Atlanta for a meeting. I should have kept a copy to send back to you.

Of course I still have it. But it's not my job to showcase products that I compete against. When I sold Hasselblad, I didn't show Phase One files and now selling Phase One I'm not here to show Hasselblad files.

I hope to have some good examples soon, perhaps this weekend from the P30+.

But the point to my post is that anyone looking for the best MFDB high ISO needs to center their search around products that utilize the Kodak 31MP sensor.



Steve Hendrix
Phase One
 

Stuart Richardson

Active member
I would also say that high ISO performance can differ greatly based on subject matter. Some can look great when the high ISO is used in reasonably good light -- i.e. the shadows aren't completely black. This I think is where cameras like the D3 really blow away the competition in medium format digital -- their algorithms are much better at giving you a high ISO file that looks natural out of the camera. Minor shadow noise, black blacks, not much color noise or banding etc.
To give you a more concrete example, I went out to shoot the northern lights last night, and I brought a D3 and the 54LV. The results from the D3 are fantastic, those from the 54LV were unusable. I know that the 54LV can make nice 400 iso files in moderate light, such as interiors or in brightly lit cityscapes, but at least for photographing true night it did not look good. I would bet that the 31mp backs will be much better, but I doubt they would be able to keep up with the D3 when it comes to real darkness.
 

carstenw

Active member
Stuart, out of curiousity (I am strongly considering the 54 LV), could you give a little more detail on what you were doing with it that didn't work out?
 

dougpeterson

Workshop Member
To give you a more concrete example, I went out to shoot the northern lights last night, and I brought a D3 and the 54LV. The results from the D3 are fantastic, those from the 54LV were unusable. I know that the 54LV can make nice 400 iso files in moderate light, such as interiors or in brightly lit cityscapes, but at least for photographing true night it did not look good. I would bet that the 31mp backs will be much better, but I doubt they would be able to keep up with the D3 when it comes to real darkness.
That of course would depend on the ISO. I openly admit that nothing touches a D3 for high ISO performance. But if you're shooting the northern lights at night then you're on a tripod. In that scenario, nothing beats a P30+ or P45+ which can go to an hour long exposure (at base ISO) and remain clean.

Every tool has its advantages and disadvantages :).

Doug Peterson, Head of Technical Services
Capture Integration, Phase One Dealer
Personal Portfolio
 

Stuart Richardson

Active member
ISO 50, 30 seconds at f/2. I have been told to shoot at base ISO with as much light as possible for long exposures with medium format digital (I believe Thierry said this). I shot the D3 at ISO 400-800 at f/4 for 6-30 seconds and got much better results. I was not really expecting the 54LV to shine here, and it didn't, so I am not disappointed. It was not the right tool for the job. The D3 obviously is.

 

Stuart Richardson

Active member
Actually Doug, a 1 hour exposure would look boring for the northern lights. They move constantly and if you don't have reasonably short exposures, you are just going to have a completely green sky with no apparent movement or streaking, as well as stars that are lines, not points. In this case, performance at high ISO matters, because you need to keep the exposures fairly short. Also, if you have an hour long exposure and an hour long black frame, you might get one shot on the night, maybe two. I shot 35 images in a fairly short period of time -- about an hour and a half. At 25 degrees and windy, that is another real consideration. But anyway, I don't want to derail the thread. Your point is VERY valid, and the same that I am trying to make -- the right tool for the right job. If you are looking for high ISO performance for keeping your shutter speeds up in interior work and conventional photography, I think there are MFDB that will serve you very well. If you are doing nighttime street work or astronomical work etc, you are probably better off with a DSLR.
 
Last edited:

carstenw

Active member
Stuart, stunning shot. I wonder what ISO 100 would have done. In what way did the D3 shot look better?
 
Top