Site Sponsors
Results 1 to 41 of 41

Thread: Hasselblad H1-P30 vs Sony A900

  1. #1
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    jonoslack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    East Anglia & Cornwall (UK)
    Posts
    11,778
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Hasselblad H1-P30 vs Sony A900

    Hi There
    at the risk of being slung out on my ear I thought that I might post this here. It might be more appropriate on the 'other cameras' forum, and I will post it there too, but I rather doubt if any of the MF crew hang out in 'other cameras'!

    Like Douglas, I don't think any other comments are really required - and of course resolution isn't anything, I was intrigued that a 35mm camera with a decent sensor could come so close . . .

    HD3/A900 test

    Just this guy you know

  2. #2
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    3,623
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Hasselblad H1-P30 vs Sony A900

    Quote Originally Posted by jonoslack View Post
    Hi There
    at the risk of being slung out on my ear I thought that I might post this here. It might be more appropriate on the 'other cameras' forum, and I will post it there too, but I rather doubt if any of the MF crew hang out in 'other cameras'!

    Like Douglas, I don't think any other comments are really required - and of course resolution isn't anything, I was intrigued that a 35mm camera with a decent sensor could come so close . . .

    HD3/A900 test
    I agree with other answers in the original thread: I think there is something wring with the Hassy-shot. Either shake or focus or something else.
    Shots from my ZD at 100% allready look sharper than this Hassy shots- so I would expect a propper Hassy shot to look at least as sharp.
    Last edited by Paratom; 30th October 2008 at 04:36.

  3. #3
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    California/Thailand
    Posts
    1,206
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Hasselblad H1-P30 vs Sony A900

    I did not read the comment thread, but as a P25+ shooter with Mamiya glass, I do not think that the Hasselblad P30 sample (ISO 100) is particularly accurate as an example. I have not shot Hasselblad in many years, and then only with film, but based on my P25+ experience I suspect that the sample is less than perfect.

    I'm not saying that the Sony A900 is not a terrific camera for those who are drawn to it. I really have no idea. And for me, ability to push and pull the files made from a large sensor around is appealing and features like that don't often get factored into pixel peeping comparisons.

    It sounds like Douglas found something that he wants to work with for awhile and that's a good thing.

  4. #4
    luant16
    Guest

    Re: Hasselblad H1-P30 vs Sony A900

    at f5.6, MF just lack of DOF. It showed in comparison that LL did as well, even at f/11, the DOF in MF still cannot match G10 at f/3.5

  5. #5
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    280
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    62

    Re: Hasselblad H1-P30 vs Sony A900

    Hi Jono,

    I was also intrigued by the comparison. I took the raw files and equalized them in terms of exposure and tone and came up with the following crops.

    Unfortunately the exposure of the originals did not match up (the P30 was about 1/2 to 2/3 of a stop brighter) so I wasn't able to get a complete sense of the ability to push the files around but even there I see very little difference with the Sony being noisier in the shadows but able to recover as much or more highlights. Certainly nowhere near what I've heard in the past as to the dramatic differences one would have expected.

    Regarding sharpness, hard to say if the test was flawed or not but the results certainly speak for themselves. I'd love to see more data points with other comparisons from those that have both...

    Greg




  6. #6
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    jonoslack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    East Anglia & Cornwall (UK)
    Posts
    11,778
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: Hasselblad H1-P30 vs Sony A900

    Excellent Greg . . . but which is which! Maybe if I'm asking . . . . . .

    My impression of the A900 files is that you have infinite headroom with overexposure, but that noise appears faster in the shadows.

    Just this guy you know

  7. #7
    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: Hasselblad H1-P30 vs Sony A900

    Something is wrong with this test. The P30 is a great back, and performs quite well even at higher ISOs ... and, trust me, the Hassey resolves much better than what is being demonstrated here @ 100%.

    I did the same test Between a Canon 1DsMK-III with Leica optics and a H3D-II/31 (which uses the same 31 meg Kodak sensor as Phase), and as a result sold the Canon.

    The Sony looks like a winner, but get real man

  8. #8
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    carstenw's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Berlin, Germany
    Posts
    2,530
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Hasselblad H1-P30 vs Sony A900

    Quote Originally Posted by Greg Seitz View Post
    Regarding sharpness, hard to say if the test was flawed or not but the results certainly speak for themselves.
    Well, no, they don't! Not until we find out what went wrong with those Hassie shots.

    The A900 results look good, and if someone needs nothing more than what they see here, then I guess they can buy one. But this was not a comparison between anything, just good shots from the A900 and nothing else.
    Carsten - Website

  9. #9
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    jonoslack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    East Anglia & Cornwall (UK)
    Posts
    11,778
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: Hasselblad H1-P30 vs Sony A900

    Quote Originally Posted by fotografz View Post
    Something is wrong with this test. The P30 is a great back, and performs quite well even at higher ISOs ... and, trust me, the Hassey resolves much better than what is being demonstrated here @ 100%.

    I did the same test Between a Canon 1DsMK-III with Leica optics and a H3D-II/31 (which uses the same 31 meg Kodak sensor as Phase), and as a result sold the Canon.

    The Sony looks like a winner, but get real man
    Hi Marc
    Fair enough - bad test . . . but it's hard to see what he did wrong - have you any ideas? He doesn't seem to have an axe to grind, he owns both cameras (and if you look at previous threads it's clear he only bought the Sony as a decent lightweight backup, not as a replacement). The setup looks pretty okay as well.

    As for your test between the 1DsMkIII - well, that isn't the A900, which, as far as I can see has considerably better 'per pixel' sharpness (possibly a lighter AA filter).

    Quote Originally Posted by carstenw View Post
    The A900 results look good, and if someone needs nothing more than what they see here, then I guess they can buy one.
    Hmm - scathing stuff my friend. But nobody was suggesting that the A900 was a replacement for medium format (at least, nobody here).
    However, if you want something which shoots 5 frames a second at that kind of resolution, which is small and light, which costs less than 2,000, which uses some excellent Zeiss glass, which has a battery life of around 600 shots, which has moisture sealing and spectacularly good ergonomics . . . then I guess they can buy one!

    I'm absolutely willing to believe the test was flawed (although I can't see where) - did you look at the RAW files?

    Just this guy you know

  10. #10
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    3,623
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Hasselblad H1-P30 vs Sony A900

    Jono,
    dpreview writes that the pixel sharpness of the 1dsIII was better than that of the A900 , because he thinks the A900 had a stronger AA-filter.
    I dont know if this is true though.
    Regards, Thomas

  11. #11
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    carstenw's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Berlin, Germany
    Posts
    2,530
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Hasselblad H1-P30 vs Sony A900

    Quote Originally Posted by jonoslack View Post
    Hmm - scathing stuff my friend. But nobody was suggesting that the A900 was a replacement for medium format (at least, nobody here).
    No, no, I meant that only in the best possible way Really, if the very nice results of the A900 are sufficient, then why wouldn't someone get it? If the results are good enough, there is no reason to go for a more expensive, less convenient camera. I wish the A900 and all its fans all the best.

    did you look at the RAW files?
    To be honest, no. The sharpness in the Hassie pics was so far off that I didn't think there would be any point. These sensors don't use AA filters and the sharpness wouldn't be that bad unless someone did it on purpose. Perhaps the guy left his Softar on after a portrait session? I have no idea, but the shots need to be redone, and if the same thing happens, the camera and lens (and maybe back) need to be sent in for adjustment.
    Carsten - Website

  12. #12
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    280
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    62

    Re: Hasselblad H1-P30 vs Sony A900

    Quote Originally Posted by jonoslack View Post
    Excellent Greg . . . but which is which! Maybe if I'm asking . . . . . .

    My impression of the A900 files is that you have infinite headroom with overexposure, but that noise appears faster in the shadows.

    Forgot that little detail... The first is the P30 and the second is the Sony.

  13. #13
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    jonoslack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    East Anglia & Cornwall (UK)
    Posts
    11,778
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: Hasselblad H1-P30 vs Sony A900

    Quote Originally Posted by t_streng View Post
    Jono,
    dpreview writes that the pixel sharpness of the 1dsIII was better than that of the A900 , because he thinks the A900 had a stronger AA-filter.
    I dont know if this is true though.
    Regards, Thomas
    HI Thomas
    The results they got are really odd - much softer than I'm seeing. I think it's probably because they checked by either:
    1. using jpg (euch)
    2. using ACR - which does a really bad job on the A900 files - both in terms of noise and sharpness.

    I sent Amin some raw files, and he agreed with me about the lighter AA filter - i.e. quite the opposite to the dpreview results.

    Just this guy you know

  14. #14
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    jonoslack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    East Anglia & Cornwall (UK)
    Posts
    11,778
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: Hasselblad H1-P30 vs Sony A900

    Quote Originally Posted by carstenw View Post
    To be honest, no. The sharpness in the Hassie pics was so far off that I didn't think there would be any point. These sensors don't use AA filters and the sharpness wouldn't be that bad unless someone did it on purpose. Perhaps the guy left his Softar on after a portrait session? I have no idea, but the shots need to be redone, and if the same thing happens, the camera and lens (and maybe back) need to be sent in for adjustment.
    Hi Carsten
    No worries. He had actually done the test 3 times on different occasions with different lenses and settings . . . . so maybe there's something wrong with it.

    Just this guy you know

  15. #15
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    280
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    62

    Re: Hasselblad H1-P30 vs Sony A900

    Quote Originally Posted by carstenw View Post
    No, no, I meant that only in the best possible way Really, if the very nice results of the A900 are sufficient, then why wouldn't someone get it? If the results are good enough, there is no reason to go for a more expensive, less convenient camera. I wish the A900 and all its fans all the best.



    To be honest, no. The sharpness in the Hassie pics was so far off that I didn't think there would be any point. These sensors don't use AA filters and the sharpness wouldn't be that bad unless someone did it on purpose. Perhaps the guy left his Softar on after a portrait session? I have no idea, but the shots need to be redone, and if the same thing happens, the camera and lens (and maybe back) need to be sent in for adjustment.

    Really... I'm seeing single pixel wide level detail in both shots. The Sony definitely had the advantage as he tried to match the width of the shot and not the height giving the nod to the 2x3 format of the Sony. Even there he was off a bit. But, it just so happened that the two shots line up almost perfectly at the pixel level and frankly I see very little advantage in the P30 shot.

    Here's an 800% crop of the P30 showing details down to the pixel level.


  16. #16
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    3,623
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Hasselblad H1-P30 vs Sony A900

    Quote Originally Posted by jonoslack View Post
    HI Thomas
    The results they got are really odd - much softer than I'm seeing. I think it's probably because they checked by either:
    1. using jpg (euch)
    2. using ACR - which does a really bad job on the A900 files - both in terms of noise and sharpness.

    I sent Amin some raw files, and he agreed with me about the lighter AA filter - i.e. quite the opposite to the dpreview results.
    Well,
    if this is the case and with the great DR, and the Zeiss glass the A900 sounds really appealing.

  17. #17
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    carstenw's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Berlin, Germany
    Posts
    2,530
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Hasselblad H1-P30 vs Sony A900

    Ah, this is a different shot! Right, they could look equivalent here, detail-wise. Perhaps the famous H1 apparently earthquake-like mirror slap was at fault in the original image.

    Perhaps there isn't much point in the P30 over the A900 (one would have to do a much more rigorous test to really determine that). For test shots like this, the battle is probably already lost...

    However, this is only a comparison of pixel-level detail, and the P30 is far from the most impressive back you can get. Compare to a P65+ if you just want raw resolution. I doubt that DSLRs will ever reach that resolution. Even the A900 has very visible noise starting at around ISO 400, probably significantly worse than the P30+, so there is a limitation to consider.

    But there are many other reasons to go to MF, not just resolution. Sure, if you stick to around 24MP backs, the A900 may be compelling to some. But there is the option of putting the back on a view camera, the at least one stop greater dynamic range, the possibility of more subtlety in tones (16 bits instead of 12), especially under significant editing which could yield posterization with the A900, etc.

    If the guy is not impressed with his P30, he should sell it. However, this does not mean that we should all suddenly sell our MF equipment and buy A900s. Not that anyone is saying that outright, but it is being implied as a real option here. That is just silly.
    Carsten - Website

  18. #18
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    jonoslack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    East Anglia & Cornwall (UK)
    Posts
    11,778
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: Hasselblad H1-P30 vs Sony A900

    Quote Originally Posted by t_streng View Post
    Well,
    if this is the case and with the great DR, and the Zeiss glass the A900 sounds really appealing.
    That was what caught me - Unfortunately I can no longer do the comparison, but I was lent an A900 by the dealer, and I did lots of comparisons with the D700 - the pixel level detail was much better on the A900 (mind you, the D3/D700 does have quite a heavy AA filter). Of course, that leads to much larger prints being possible with the A900 as there are more pixels . The per-pixel sharpness is obviously not quite as good as the M8 (with no AA filter), but it is close.

    I also thought that at the 200 base ISO the Dynamic range and colour were better on the A900 (bit subjective of course). The Nikon files take more bashing about in post processing without getting noisy, and of course it's in a different league at high ISO.

    Just this guy you know

  19. #19
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    3,623
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Hasselblad H1-P30 vs Sony A900

    Quote Originally Posted by jonoslack View Post
    That was what caught me - Unfortunately I can no longer do the comparison, but I was lent an A900 by the dealer, and I did lots of comparisons with the D700 - the pixel level detail was much better on the A900 (mind you, the D3/D700 does have quite a heavy AA filter). Of course, that leads to much larger prints being possible with the A900 as there are more pixels . The per-pixel sharpness is obviously not quite as good as the M8 (with no AA filter), but it is close.

    I also thought that at the 200 base ISO the Dynamic range and colour were better on the A900 (bit subjective of course). The Nikon files take more bashing about in post processing without getting noisy, and of course it's in a different league at high ISO.
    Jono,
    did you also compare prints between D700 and A900?
    Do you feel that the stronger AA-filter of the Nikon also leads to a visible loss in detail in smaller prints?
    Cheers, Tom

  20. #20
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    jonoslack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    East Anglia & Cornwall (UK)
    Posts
    11,778
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: Hasselblad H1-P30 vs Sony A900

    Quote Originally Posted by carstenw View Post
    But there are many other reasons to go to MF, not just resolution. Sure, if you stick to around 24MP backs, the A900 may be compelling to some. But there is the option of putting the back on a view camera, the one stop great dynamic range, the possibility of more subtlety in tones (16 bit instead of 12), especially under significant editing which could yield posterization with the A900, etc.

    If the guy is not impressed with his P30, he should sell it. However, this does not mean that we should all suddenly sell our MF equipment and buy A900s. That is just silly.
    Hi Carsten
    Of course - nobody is suggesting it. But if there is an equivalence at that level, then it's certainly worth knowing about.

    Just this guy you know

  21. #21
    asabet
    Guest

    Re: Hasselblad H1-P30 vs Sony A900

    Quote Originally Posted by t_streng View Post
    Jono,
    did you also compare prints between D700 and A900?
    Do you feel that the stronger AA-filter of the Nikon also leads to a visible loss in detail in smaller prints?
    Cheers, Tom
    I'd guess that using Raw Developer with the D700 gives me better per pixel sharpness with that camera than I'd get with the Sony and some of the more popular Raw processing applications. I believe that Adobe Camera Raw and Aperture are both throwing away some of the detail. When I opened Jono's files in Raw Developer, the A900 per pixel sharpness was striking and obviously higher than my D700. I am certain that the difference would be visible in a print. I personally wouldn't trade my D700 kit for an A900 kit, but if I were shooting mostly landscapes, I'd make that swap without hesitation.

    Given the A900 megapixel count, per pixel sharpness, and the quality of available glass, I have a hard time believing that a sub-30MP medium format camera could offer significantly more resolution. That said, I don't think the P30 could be as low resolution as shown here. That's just hard for me to believe.

    Dynamic range and color should be better with a good medium format sensor than for any 35mm sensor, but I think it'll be hard to see that in these relatively casual comparisons.

    Btw - The DPReview assessment of the A900 AA filter is way off base IMO. Over the past several years, I've read countless DPReview reviews for cameras that I've owned and tried. I've come to the simple conclusion that their assessments of image quality have no correlation whatsoever with my own. Since they are "professionals", I guess that means that I am off in la la land. Still, I want to be happy with my own purchases, even if that means living with delusion, so I simply ignore whatever they have to say about image quality when I'm out to make a purchase.

    Quote Originally Posted by jonoslack View Post
    I also thought that at the 200 base ISO the Dynamic range and colour were better on the A900 (bit subjective of course).
    I felt exactly the opposite way, but who knows, that may just be pure bias on my part .
    Last edited by asabet; 31st October 2008 at 08:49.

  22. #22
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    jonoslack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    East Anglia & Cornwall (UK)
    Posts
    11,778
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: Hasselblad H1-P30 vs Sony A900

    Quote Originally Posted by t_streng View Post
    Jono,
    did you also compare prints between D700 and A900?
    Do you feel that the stronger AA-filter of the Nikon also leads to a visible loss in detail in smaller prints?
    Cheers, Tom
    Hi There
    I didn't do any serious comparison of prints with the Nikon . . . . but I have done some comparisons between the A900 / M8 and E3, and the answer is that yes - there is a visible difference, even at A4 size, and I'm quite sure there would have been with the D700 as well. - mind you, whether it 'matters' is something different again . . . do you think this discussion would be better carried on in the 'other cameras' section?

    Just this guy you know

  23. #23
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    carstenw's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Berlin, Germany
    Posts
    2,530
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Hasselblad H1-P30 vs Sony A900

    Right, it is always prudent to check one's real requirements before laying out massive amounts of money. For the guy in question, clearly the A900 is as good at taking pictures of his neighbour's driveway...

    I don't know if I am alone here, but I would find the whole argument a lot more compelling if he would post actual, real, art shots or something. He should take both cameras to Yosemite or something.

    I am slowly developing an allergy to test shots.

    I sound grumpy, so here:
    Carsten - Website

  24. #24
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    3,623
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Hasselblad H1-P30 vs Sony A900

    I dont see how comparison images need to be art.
    I find the comparison quite interesting (even though I also think that the Hasselblad images seems not right)
    cheers, tom

    Quote Originally Posted by carstenw View Post
    Right, it is always prudent to check one's real requirements before laying out massive amounts of money. For the guy in question, clearly the A900 is as good at taking pictures of his neighbour's driveway...

    I don't know if I am alone here, but I would find the whole argument a lot more compelling if he would post actual, real, art shots or something. He should take both cameras to Yosemite or something.

    I am slowly developing an allergy to test shots.

    I sound grumpy, so here:

  25. #25
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    jonoslack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    East Anglia & Cornwall (UK)
    Posts
    11,778
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: Hasselblad H1-P30 vs Sony A900

    Quote Originally Posted by t_streng View Post
    I dont see how comparison images need to be art.
    I find the comparison quite interesting (even though I also think that the Hasselblad images seems not right)
    cheers, tom
    I actually agree with you both - not too keen on test shots (especially those indoor ones taken at 10 feet with a teddy bear a bowl of fruit a bottle of booze and a test card!).

    I also think that they're dangerous - especially if they're indicating something bad!

    But I thought this was interesting because of the similarity rather than because of the differences.

    Just this guy you know

  26. #26
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    carstenw's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Berlin, Germany
    Posts
    2,530
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Hasselblad H1-P30 vs Sony A900

    Quote Originally Posted by jonoslack View Post
    But I thought this was interesting because of the similarity rather than because of the differences.
    True, as long as the original poster was wanting to make a keep/sell decision based only on resolution in harsh sunlight...

    There is so much missing in that "test scene" that I still have a hard time believing that he is considering selling (unless he thinks the softness of the one image is always present in the Hasselblad images).

    For us, I guess it is just another data point. Interesting, in a limited way.
    Carsten - Website

  27. #27
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    jonoslack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    East Anglia & Cornwall (UK)
    Posts
    11,778
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: Hasselblad H1-P30 vs Sony A900

    Quote Originally Posted by carstenw View Post
    True, as long as the original poster was wanting to make a keep/sell decision based only on resolution in harsh sunlight...
    Absolutely
    Quote Originally Posted by carstenw View Post
    For us, I guess it is just another data point. Interesting, in a limited way.
    Well - Limited if you have no interest/intention of buying a camera with the new Sony chip (which will be used in the high resolution Nikon too). If you are interested, then it does suggest the the chip isn't too dreadful

    Just this guy you know

  28. #28
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    3,623
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Hasselblad H1-P30 vs Sony A900

    Quote Originally Posted by carstenw View Post
    True, as long as the original poster was wanting to make a keep/sell decision based only on resolution in harsh sunlight...

    There is so much missing in that "test scene" that I still have a hard time believing that he is considering selling (unless he thinks the softness of the one image is always present in the Hasselblad images).

    For us, I guess it is just another data point. Interesting, in a limited way.

    Shooting in harsh sunlight is more demanding regarding DR for example than cloudy light.
    I think - compared to us - he shows images. we just exchange opinions without showing anything here.

  29. #29
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    jonoslack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    East Anglia & Cornwall (UK)
    Posts
    11,778
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: Hasselblad H1-P30 vs Sony A900

    Quote Originally Posted by t_streng View Post
    Shooting in harsh sunlight is more demanding regarding DR for example than cloudy light.
    I think - compared to us - he shows images. we just exchange opinions without showing anything here.
    . . . . and when questioned, rather than bridling; he says he'll do it again with different lenses.
    Long suffering and interested, I'm impressed.

    Just this guy you know

  30. #30
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    280
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    62

    Re: Hasselblad H1-P30 vs Sony A900

    Carsten,

    Now it makes sense... You are right about the crops I've shown being different from the ones Jono linked to. They are based on raw files from a prior thread and I didn't realize Doug had re shot them until I actually followed the link Jono posted.

    Interestingly comparing the previous P30 shot (the one I showed in this thread) to the current one from the link Jono posted I have to agree that the latter P30 shot is either misfocused or suffering from mirror slap. Considering that Doug stated he used mirror lockup and assuming he used a cable release though he didn't state that explicitly I'd guess the focus was simply off on the latter shot vs the first one I showed.

    Greg

  31. #31
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    carstenw's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Berlin, Germany
    Posts
    2,530
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Hasselblad H1-P30 vs Sony A900

    Haha, this is a text book example of talking right past each other. I am talking about one set of images, and you are talking about another Anyway, that guy needs to figure out if he should brush up on skills or send the Hassie away before making any decisions about the A900.

    Btw, the A900's images were very soft in the dpreview test (the proper test, not the user tests), before being sharpened. Possibly even softer than Canon images. I didn't think it was possible. Sure, sharpening brings it back, but there is always something lost, and I think it should be possible to find a scene where the detail brought back looks all wrong compared to an image which never lost it in the first place, ie. MF digital.
    Carsten - Website

  32. #32
    Senior Member Steve Hendrix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    420
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    4

    Re: Hasselblad H1-P30 vs Sony A900

    Just to clarify - there are two Sony A900 comparison links being shared on the forums. In neither one of them is the Phase One P30 or any Phase One back a participant.

    On one of the comparisons, a Mamiya AFDIII is indicated and the file actually comes from the Mamiya ZD, not a P30.


    Steve Hendrix
    Phase One

  33. #33
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    28
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Hasselblad H1-P30 vs Sony A900

    Quote Originally Posted by carstenw View Post
    there is always something lost, and I think it should be possible to find a scene where the detail brought back looks all wrong compared to an image which never lost it in the first place, ie. MF digital.
    Well, but one can hardly look past the fact that one of those systems in question costs roughly 10% of the other one. It would have to be verified how much of that presumed difference in detail resolution (I don't doubt is is there) will show up in well exectuted prints, made with a RIP or a Lightjet or similar machine, and at what printing size...

    My guess would be, for anyone but "high profile pros" (is that what those people are called?) who will get back the high cost of a MF back in a reasonable time the Sony is looking like an extremely interesting solution! Much more than I would have thought at the time of the announcement.

    I had started to think about a data back as well, but the cost for a non pro with limited amounts of free money (like myself) is prohibitive, except a few "entry level" MF solutions, but then I am not sure how much better they are than the Sony. And they are still more expensive by at least factor 2 - 3

    Regards
    Bernie

  34. #34
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    280
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    62

    Re: Hasselblad H1-P30 vs Sony A900

    Quote Originally Posted by Steve Hendrix/Phase One View Post
    Just to clarify - there are two Sony A900 comparison links being shared on the forums. In neither one of them is the Phase One P30 or any Phase One back a participant.

    On one of the comparisons, a Mamiya AFDIII is indicated and the file actually comes from the Mamiya ZD, not a P30.


    Steve Hendrix
    Phase One
    Steve,

    Actually the one we are discussing here is a Hassy H1 with a Phase P30 back.

    Greg

  35. #35
    Senior Member Steve Hendrix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    420
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    4

    Re: Hasselblad H1-P30 vs Sony A900

    Quote Originally Posted by Greg Seitz View Post
    Steve,

    Actually the one we are discussing here is a Hassy H1 with a Phase P30 back.

    Greg
    Oh - yes, I stand corrected, I just glanced at the title.

    Never mind -


    Steve Hendrix
    Phase One

  36. #36
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Manchester/Jerusalem
    Posts
    2,652
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    290

    Re: Hasselblad H1-P30 vs Sony A900

    There was a comparison between a P30 and a 1Ds mkIII somewhere, you could download the RAW files. Can't remember where they are on my computer or what my conclusion was re pure resolved detail. However there is a huge amount more to a MF file than pure resolution and that was very apparent in the files.
    I am not a painter, nor an artist. Therefore I can see straight, and that may be my undoing. - Alfred Stieglitz

    Website: http://www.timelessjewishart.com

  37. #37
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    carstenw's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Berlin, Germany
    Posts
    2,530
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Hasselblad H1-P30 vs Sony A900

    Sorry for the long post, I am a bit behind, and just discovered multi-quote


    Quote Originally Posted by jonoslack View Post
    Well - Limited if you have no interest/intention of buying a camera with the new Sony chip (which will be used in the high resolution Nikon too). If you are interested, then it does suggest the the chip isn't too dreadful
    True, I meant that more in the sense of his thread, ie. basing a keep/sell decision of the H1/P30 on these results. The A900 does seem like an impressive camera, I just don't happen to be looking for such a camera.

    By the way, here is a similar thread. I don't come to the same conclusion as him, but I fully respect his approach, which is rigorous and fair, unlike the H1+P30/A900 thread (so far):

    http://www.pebbleplace.com/Personal/...rmat_Blog.html


    Quote Originally Posted by t_streng View Post
    Shooting in harsh sunlight is more demanding regarding DR for example than cloudy light.
    I think - compared to us - he shows images. we just exchange opinions without showing anything here.
    Well, we have neither P30 nor A900 At least, I don't. I just read through my comments and I do sound rather caustic. I guess I was supremely frustrated at someone wanting to sell a very, very pricy piece of superior equipment based on just one flawed test.


    Quote Originally Posted by jonoslack View Post
    . . . . and when questioned, rather than bridling; he says he'll do it again with different lenses.
    Long suffering and interested, I'm impressed.
    Well, let's head over and give him some feedback for the next iteration. I think I still have a dpreview account somewhere...


    Quote Originally Posted by alba63 View Post
    Well, but one can hardly look past the fact that one of those systems in question costs roughly 10% of the other one.
    Very true! An impressive piece of equipment, and I am personally also quite impressed by it, and very happy that Canon is finally getting some serious competition for the rather stale 1Ds-series. People have wanted improvements to that series for so long, and Canon has largely done nothing, just tweaked here and there. There is colour, noise, pixel-sharpness, interface, weight, size, and other work to be done to that camera to address owner complaints.


    Quote Originally Posted by Ben Rubinstein View Post
    There was a comparison between a P30 and a 1Ds mkIII somewhere, you could download the RAW files. Can't remember where they are on my computer or what my conclusion was re pure resolved detail. However there is a huge amount more to a MF file than pure resolution and that was very apparent in the files.
    Your comments from that comparison might prove very interesting here. Can you find it? What other aspects are thinking of, specifically?
    Carsten - Website

  38. #38
    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: Hasselblad H1-P30 vs Sony A900

    Quote Originally Posted by jonoslack View Post
    Hi Marc
    Fair enough - bad test . . . but it's hard to see what he did wrong - have you any ideas? He doesn't seem to have an axe to grind, he owns both cameras (and if you look at previous threads it's clear he only bought the Sony as a decent lightweight backup, not as a replacement). The setup looks pretty okay as well.

    As for your test between the 1DsMkIII - well, that isn't the A900, which, as far as I can see has considerably better 'per pixel' sharpness (possibly a lighter AA filter).
    Not saying anything was done wrong ... could be the gear is defective, out of calibration, not focusing correctly ... or whatever. This is a first iteration H camera with a 3rd party back that may or may not be shimmed correctly. Who knows ... but what is apparent to me is that the Phase One files do not look like any I've seen before @100%.

    As to my test with the Canon 1DsMKIII ... yes it is not the Sony, but other tests from the Sony I've seen so far aren't convincing, much poorer at higher ISOs than the Canon, or anywhere near the pure resolution I currently get from the H3D-II/31 ... with more pixel count and bigger pixels with no AA filter issue.

    From what I can tell so far, what level AA filter is on the Sony is pure speculation.

  39. #39
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Manchester/Jerusalem
    Posts
    2,652
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    290

    Re: Hasselblad H1-P30 vs Sony A900

    Quote Originally Posted by carstenw View Post
    Your comments from that comparison might prove very interesting here. Can you find it? What other aspects are thinking of, specifically?

    It was done by one of the P1 dealers, caused a big furor at the time on the LL forum!

    After trawling through 35 pages on the LL forum I finally found it, my apologies, the files are not RAW.

    http://luminous-landscape.com/forum/...howtopic=21794

    As for my conclusions, it was a long time ago, this is just what I remember, if I have time and can be bothered I'll look at the files again.
    I am not a painter, nor an artist. Therefore I can see straight, and that may be my undoing. - Alfred Stieglitz

    Website: http://www.timelessjewishart.com

  40. #40
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    jonoslack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    East Anglia & Cornwall (UK)
    Posts
    11,778
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: Hasselblad H1-P30 vs Sony A900

    HI Carsten
    Quote Originally Posted by carstenw View Post

    Btw, the A900's images were very soft in the dpreview test (the proper test, not the user tests), before being sharpened. Possibly even softer than Canon images. I didn't think it was possible. Sure, sharpening brings it back, but there is always something lost, and I think it should be possible to find a scene where the detail brought back looks all wrong compared to an image which never lost it in the first place, ie. MF digital.
    The one think that everyone who has an A900 agrees about is that :
    1. the current ACR conversion is dreadful, introducting a lot of noise and producing a pretty poor level of detail. I actually think there is a real issue here in that Adobe put a lot of work into getting the best from Nikon and Canon files, but really don't do justice to the 'lesser' makes (Pentax, Olympus, Sony etc.)
    2. the jpg engine is not good. (but who wants jpgs with a camera like this?)



    Dpreview used . . . yes, you got it - jpg's and ACR to do their testing.
    I'm using Aperture (because it works with my workflow). I sent Amin some RAW files and he converted in RAW developer - he agreed with me that what dpreview was showing was not in the same league.

    Which is all rather ironic really - here's you saying that this guy screwed up with the Hassy files . . . and I'm telling you that Dpreview screwed up with the Sony!



    Hi Marc
    Quote Originally Posted by fotografz View Post
    N
    As to my test with the Canon 1DsMKIII ... yes it is not the Sony, but other tests from the Sony I've seen so far aren't convincing, much poorer at higher ISOs than the Canon, or anywhere near the pure resolution I currently get from the H3D-II/31 ... with more pixel count and bigger pixels with no AA filter issue.

    From what I can tell so far, what level AA filter is on the Sony is pure speculation.
    Well, as far as the AA filter is concerned, I'm sure you're right (it's speculation) - the dpreview tests don't reflect what I'm seeing (see above about ACR).
    From where I stand; Looking at the A900 at 100% and comparing with the D3 at 100% is hugely different, with the proper glass they look much more like the M8 files (and of course, that's not taking into account the pixel count).

    See Amin's post no 21 above with respect to this

    High ISO - well, I agree, not in the same league as the D3/D700, but quite useable up to 3200 as long as you keep the exposure to the right.

    Just this guy you know

  41. #41
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    carstenw's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Berlin, Germany
    Posts
    2,530
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Hasselblad H1-P30 vs Sony A900

    Quote Originally Posted by jonoslack View Post
    1. the current ACR conversion is dreadful, introducting a lot of noise and producing a pretty poor level of detail. I actually think there is a real issue here in that Adobe put a lot of work into getting the best from Nikon and Canon files, but really don't do justice to the 'lesser' makes (Pentax, Olympus, Sony etc.)

    (...)

    Dpreview used . . . yes, you got it - jpg's and ACR to do their testing.
    This just gets curiouser and curiouser... Now my interest is really piqued. In fact, the RAW that I downloaded from Doug's site looked quite good. Not quite in the same league as the P30, but as Bernie says, for 1/10th the price, quite close.
    Carsten - Website

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
  •