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!

Nikon D800E v.s Hasselblad H4D40: the end of medium format superiority?

etrump

Well-known member
Why not just enjoy the really stunning quality of the D800 / D800E with proper lenses and leave all that MFDB comparisons alone?
I think that is the point people are making. The facts are the same reason most of us shoot mfd is the nuances of the file that are hard to pinpoint technically. It is an artistic aesthetic of iq, dr, micro contrast, and flexible file characteristics that makes a huge difference in the "look". The d800 does NOT give you those characteristics.

Nothing negative about the d800 which fills other needs extremely well (like video, high ISO, vibration reduction, high resolution, some weather protection and a rock solid body).
 

fotografz

Well-known member
Why not just enjoy the really stunning quality of the D800 / D800E with proper lenses and leave all that MFDB comparisons alone?

I could not be happier with my D800E and some selected lenses as I am now! I have not touched the Hassi since I have the D800E as this one is so much more fun and easiness to shoot and deliver. This does not mean that the Hassi could not produce better, but for my usage in 98% the D800E delivers.

And I bet not many people could tell the difference between a shot taken with D800 / D800E or any MFDB out there :cool:
We are all so happy that you are happy ... however, using the viewing criteria most use to do these assessments, not many people could tell the difference between a shot taken with my A900 and Zeiss glass from a D800 shot ... currently at 1/2 the price of the D800 ;) And, BTW, I STILL like the A900 look/feel and color better than any Nikon shot from any Nikon, which is why I sold all my Nikon gear and never regretted it.

RE:MFD ... It is not anyone's fault if one can't tell the difference between format characteristics and someone else can. It is just the way it is. So debating it in declarative terms is a waste of time. It's just dueling opinions. However, I do appreciate those posting very nice images from their D800 because it removed any doubt I may have had about wanting one ... I don't.

But hey, this IS the medium format forum, so what did you expect? :ROTFL:

BTW: The new motto for the MFD forum should be ... "Enjoy the Toy" :) I know I am.

-Marc
 

fotografz

Well-known member
In these comparisons, it's never mentioned that the D800 shoots broadcast quality video! What's to compare? The D800 is a game changer for many photographers, and the only thing to compare is the entry price of MFD. I also agree that the D800 gets you very close to MFD, and with certain technique, the perceived DOF too.
If I want or need "Broadcast Quality" for broadcast applications (which I do), I'll hire a RED camera and a DP that knows how to use it ... otherwise it'll be over-kill high quality video of birthday parties for the most part.

Still waiting for the game to change ... haven't seen anything that shows this camera has changed anyone's photography so far. In some cases I think a few folks have taken a step back in their photographic aesthetic ...

But, this IS the Medium Format forum, so what did you expect? :)

-Marc
 

Paratom

Well-known member
Why not just enjoy the really stunning quality of the D800 / D800E with proper lenses and leave all that MFDB comparisons alone?

I could not be happier with my D800E and some selected lenses as I am now! I have not touched the Hassi since I have the D800E as this one is so much more fun and easiness to shoot and deliver. This does not mean that the Hassi could not produce better, but for my usage in 98% the D800E delivers.

And I bet not many people could tell the difference between a shot taken with D800 / D800E or any MFDB out there :cool:
Peter,
I agree with you that many of those comparisons get to a point which is useless to me.
You enjoy shooting the D800E and your Hassy is in the shelve, I enjoy the S2 and my Nikon (D700 since this is the Nikon of my choice at the moment) is in the shelve.
Want speed, convenience, zooms and long tele, economical good price/value -> use Nikon.
Want large viewfinder, "ultimate" IQ, ability to use shutter in the lens -> use MF
want both use both or whatever works for you
I find as soon as those discussion go into a direction "one is better than the other" it gets boaring.
 

Shashin

Well-known member
I hate to point out the obvious, but sensors with the same pixel resolution working at Nyquist will resolve the same detail in a target regardless of the size of the sensor. Yet, the Nex7 is not a 5D killer and the 5D is not a p25+ killer. If the only thing that matter in an image is pixel resolution, boy do I have a cell phone for you.
 

dougpeterson

Workshop Member
I hate to point out the obvious, but sensors with the same pixel resolution working at Nyquist will resolve the same detail in a target regardless of the size of the sensor. Yet, the Nex7 is not a 5D killer and the 5D is not a p25+ killer. If the only thing that matter in an image is pixel resolution, boy do I have a cell phone for you.
This of course assuming the strength of the AA filter (if present) is similar and the algorithms used to extract the photographically useful detail are similar and the noise of the sensor does not interfere with the proper rendition of detail, and if detail includes "accurate color detail" also assume the color array is similar in color coverage (e.g. color filters optimized for effective ISO vs accurate color) and a debayer algorithm formed with intimate knowledge (and effort/expertise) of the color pattern used as well as the response of the pixel wells.

But anyway it's almost losing the forest for the trees. There are dozens of technical factors that determine image quality (which itself is only the lesser half of the picture, the greater half being the artistic/aesthetic side). You don't shoot pixels, you shoot cameras. I feel strongly that cameras should be compared to cameras, not pixels compared to pixels.
 

Anders_HK

Member
The d800e is a wonderful camera that blows away any other 35mm currently available but it's files still have a 35mm look to them. I don't understand the math as well as others on this thread but the difference in print and even on screen is obvious. Just as MF film had a unique look, so does MFD IMHO. When MFD fits and is competently executed it blows away the ambiance of any 35mm system.
Exactly. Well said! :clap:



I trust my IQ 160 in C1 to be deadly accurate. Pretty damn close with Nikon







If anything the Nikon has a touch more saturation which is a easy correction
IQ160 has a very good sensor, come on Guy, are you really not able to tell more difference??? :D


Attaching a file from my AFi-II 12. Processing that file simply led me to a quality that is a sheer pleasure from the Leaf. It is something about the colors, the character of the file and how I can push and bring it towards the end result that I experience as a good image. Check out the eyes in the file at 100%, here http://www.yousendit.com/download/TEhVb242bEpqY3FwSHNUQw. I should say that the picture is a mere a 4.7 MP crop simply because I did not like the rest of the pose of the model in that shot. Thus, it is not mere about pixels... :facesmack: (of course)

Did a number of amateur shoots in Shanghai late last year through the spring. See my Chinese blog Anders_HK and click on the images for more pictures from each shoot. I was very content with my images which I found had a character consistent higher than other shooters, though quality of shooters varied from novice to guys that spent tons of hours in PS for a single image using layers and masks etc etc. I simply did mine in Capture One. I love Capture One, it is so photographic to my mind of working and yields great results. I do not use PS and do not see a point in it. :p

It is not only the image quality and what is related. It is also about different cameras. Medium format slows you down to think, which is a good thing and results in better images. With hy6 it is also a complete different shooting experience than Mamiya 645. Hy6 is awesome (at least to me). I pre-visualize on a large 6x6cm focus screen and post visualize on a 6x7cm tilting display. Rotating sensor works really really great, not to mention that with waist level finder I can cradle the camera without lifting it to head standing. That is so much easier to hold steady and result in more sharp pictures.

A DSLR have a myriad of functions and buttons and would make me complete lost and not able to same way control the image. Too complicated with DSLR. I like simple. Yet... our preferences may well differ. Fine. But... to argue D800E or other DSLR is like medium format is plain silly! :facesmack:

If you do not see it, be happy. You save alot of $$$ :thumbs:

To OP: Great work with the comparison, for your specific needs. :salute:

Cheers,
Anders
 

ptomsu

Workshop Member
We are all so happy that you are happy ... however, using the viewing criteria most use to do these assessments, not many people could tell the difference between a shot taken with my A900 and Zeiss glass from a D800 shot ... currently at 1/2 the price of the D800 ;) And, BTW, I STILL like the A900 look/feel and color better than any Nikon shot from any Nikon, which is why I sold all my Nikon gear and never regretted it.

RE:MFD ... It is not anyone's fault if one can't tell the difference between format characteristics and someone else can. It is just the way it is. So debating it in declarative terms is a waste of time. It's just dueling opinions. However, I do appreciate those posting very nice images from their D800 because it removed any doubt I may have had about wanting one ... I don't.

But hey, this IS the medium format forum, so what did you expect? :ROTFL:

BTW: The new motto for the MFD forum should be ... "Enjoy the Toy" :) I know I am.

-Marc
Marc,

I do appreciate your point of view and maybe you are one of the handful people who can tell the difference between MFD and a D800E with a proper lens. But I still would not bet my life on that :D

As I said - if you read my post carefully - I know that the Hasselblad can produce "better" images than the D800E as can do the S2. But we had this discussion already several times and nothing changes the fact that the difference in many cases is not so big, at least so big that it justifies the much higher price of any current MFD. Add to that the convenience of 35 FF and it gets pretty hard to continue this discussion. And then we still did not even talk about the price ;)

And BTW I also think you for sure can tell the difference between MFD and m43 - can you? I am sure you can as you also cam do the same between MFD and FF. But I would even bet you could not if m43 is used with the appropriate lenses and you have to compare images with same MP count.

So what is the point of all that insisting?
 

eleanorbrown

New member
You make such a good point (below)...I agree with you. I have used Phase backs with a H2 system since 2005, now have the P65+ and much of my best work has been done with these backs. I shot medium and large format in film days so high quality is important to me. I've carted my Phase equipment to Antarctica, and to the Alaskan wilderness and to very high elevations (on foot) and lots of places in-between and I've decided it's getting really heavy and bulky to take to these places (and I'm not getting any younger!). Also I always have taken a back up system...in the past it's been Canon which had added extra bulk and weight. With my new Nikon D800e I've found an alternative to travel with that's easier to cart around. I'll probably do some comparisons with my Phase back to see what I have to do with my 800e to get as close to the P65+ as possible...ie: shoot at iso 64 or whatever.... use the best RAW processing, use only the highest rated Nikon and Zeiss glass, good shooting technique, etc etc. I think I can get very close to my P65+ quality making the right choices with my D800e. Yes P65+ files are larger, but my days of making really large prints are for the most part over, so print size shouldn't be that much of an issue. I'm going to enjoy my D800e. Eleanor

Why not just enjoy the really stunning quality of the D800 / D800E with proper lenses and leave all that MFDB comparisons alone?

I could not be happier with my D800E and some selected lenses as I am now! I have not touched the Hassi since I have the D800E as this one is so much more fun and easiness to shoot and deliver. This does not mean that the Hassi could not produce better, but for my usage in 98% the D800E delivers.

And I bet not many people could tell the difference between a shot taken with D800 / D800E or any MFDB out there :cool:
 
P

photohagen

Guest
exactly! since getting a d800e, i haven't picked up my alpa/phase kit. alpa cameras are nice but can be a pita to lug around. the 800e is a pleasure to use and totally liberating. i've taken out the 800e on some of the most hot and humid days this summer and found it a total pleasure to use. who knows - if this keeps up - maybe i'll sell my alpa/phase gear.

rh

You make such a good point (below)...I agree with you. I have used Phase backs with a H2 system since 2005, now have the P65+ and much of my best work has been done with these backs. I shot medium and large format in film days so high quality is important to me. I've carted my Phase equipment to Antarctica, and to the Alaskan wilderness and to very high elevations (on foot) and lots of places in-between and I've decided it's getting really heavy and bulky to take to these places (and I'm not getting any younger!). Also I always have taken a back up system...in the past it's been Canon which had added extra bulk and weight. With my new Nikon D800e I've found an alternative to travel with that's easier to cart around. I'll probably do some comparisons with my Phase back to see what I have to do with my 800e to get as close to the P65+ as possible...ie: shoot at iso 64 or whatever.... use the best RAW processing, use only the highest rated Nikon and Zeiss glass, good shooting technique, etc etc. I think I can get very close to my P65+ quality making the right choices with my D800e. Yes P65+ files are larger, but my days of making really large prints are for the most part over, so print size shouldn't be that much of an issue. I'm going to enjoy my D800e. Eleanor
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
I've done a lot of tests between the IQ 160 and IQ 140 vs the Nikon beast and yes there are differences but there not so vast as one would think either . Sure it comes in areas like color tonal range, micro contrast and some imaging look as well. MF looks a little less digital over the Nikon D800 but honestly the differences are there but its damn close and given the functionality factor of the Nikon system it can and is a viable tool. What I can't really understand is some folks just can't accept it as a viable image maker and these threads go on like its a religion and someone has to be right. They have certainly big differences within the systems and MF has special tools that the Nikon will NEVER have like a tech cam and its abilities. Im not sure any Nikon owner is saying hey MF we can kick your *** on any given day even on Sunday. No one is saying that but what we are saying is holy cow Nikon did damn good here and this is a viable tool that we enjoy shooting. At least I am and I like both systems and what they can do but what I will say and no one has brought this up anywhere on the planet at least yet . Nikon does need to go back in and work on there bodies algorythms. It is a little saturated and the color profile in the cam needs a little bit of a tweak. Basically get it in a more neutral state. Its a little punchy.

I just got the E version yesterday and i am going out in the morning and run some tests on it. I will say its hot as hell here and my motivation to go shoot in 112 heat is zilch. But i played golf in it this morning so I really have no good excuse either. LOL

BTW this comes from someone that has not had a lot of love for 35mm digital for a lot of years in either Nikon/Canon/Sony. Okay I loved my DMR just needed and extra 26 mpx for it. LOL
 

johnnygoesdigital

New member
If I want or need "Broadcast Quality" for broadcast applications (which I do), I'll hire a RED camera and a DP that knows how to use it ... otherwise it'll be over-kill high quality video of birthday parties for the most part.

Still waiting for the game to change ... haven't seen anything that shows this camera has changed anyone's photography so far. In some cases I think a few folks have taken a step back in their photographic aesthetic ...

But, this IS the Medium Format forum, so what did you expect? :)

-Marc
That's pretty much what I expected. I am also a DP, so having this available in the D800 is quite amazing. It's a good thing you put those smiley faces in your comment or I would have thought your being a littlle arrogant.
 
Last edited:

fotografz

Well-known member
I've done a lot of tests between the IQ 160 and IQ 140 vs the Nikon beast and yes there are differences but there not so vast as one would think either . Sure it comes in areas like color tonal range, micro contrast and some imaging look as well. MF looks a little less digital over the Nikon D800 but honestly the differences are there but its damn close and given the functionality factor of the Nikon system it can and is a viable tool. What I can't really understand is some folks just can't accept it as a viable image maker and these threads go on like its a religion and someone has to be right. They have certainly big differences within the systems and MF has special tools that the Nikon will NEVER have like a tech cam and its abilities. Im not sure any Nikon owner is saying hey MF we can kick your *** on any given day even on Sunday. No one is saying that but what we are saying is holy cow Nikon did damn good here and this is a viable tool that we enjoy shooting. At least I am and I like both systems and what they can do but what I will say and no one has brought this up anywhere on the planet at least yet . Nikon does need to go back in and work on there bodies algorythms. It is a little saturated and the color profile in the cam needs a little bit of a tweak. Basically get it in a more neutral state. Its a little punchy.

I just got the E version yesterday and i am going out in the morning and run some tests on it. I will say its hot as hell here and my motivation to go shoot in 112 heat is zilch. But i played golf in it this morning so I really have no good excuse either. LOL

BTW this comes from someone that has not had a lot of love for 35mm digital for a lot of years in either Nikon/Canon/Sony. Okay I loved my DMR just needed and extra 26 mpx for it. LOL
Guy, I really don't get the vibe that people aren't accepting it as a viable image maker ... of course it is. There is no right or wrong only aesthetic opinion ... often an opinion forged over many years of selective efforts. These are creative eyes looking at this stuff, not just science eyes.

So the question back is why does everyone have to agree that the D800 is so great? The religious fervor seems to be coming from those bound and determined to convince everyone that this camera is the end all or close to it ... and those not convinced are luddites or not accepting it as viable for others. That simply is not true ... more power to all D800 users and be may they be happy.

Personally, I aesthetically do NOT like the Nikon look and feel, (not that I didn't try) ... and that is also a viable opinion is it not? I also feel that nothing has outstripped the DMR in that regard, and had it continued and modernized, it's what I'd still be shooting most likely. Funny, in a way those additional 26 megs is why I now use a S2, which I admit didn't seem the same until I lived with it for a pretty long time. It is just now getting there for me. ... which is reasonable, since I used R gear for well over 20 years, so giving the S2 some time is only fair.

And, again, this is the Medium Format Forum, so what does everyone expect? :)

-Marc
 

fotografz

Well-known member
That's pretty much what I expected. I am also a DP, so having this available in the D800 is quite amazing. It's a good thing you put those smiley faces in your comment or iI would have thought your being a littlle arrogant.
Yes on the smiley faces.

I am not a DP ... so will differ to your expertise as to capabilities of this camera.

I have however created and produced a lot of commercial motion work ... including many multi-million dollar productions, and in fact just completed four :30 spots. and will be editing the last one soon. I stand by the notion that even if I had a D800, I'd still hire a RED unit or some other fully fleshed out system, and a DP/cameraman/crew that knew how to use it. Point is that not many people know the complexities, talent, and expertise involved in of doing motion work.

However. I admit to a preference for film when it comes to motion work and used it whenever the budget allowed. Yet, people are using all sorts of capture devices for motion work these days ... including the iPhone 4 ...

mymuesli2go, a tv commercial - filmed and edited on an iPhone 4 on Vimeo

-Marc
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
Than why do we have 50 thousand threads on the D800 Vs MF not to mention every forum out there. Its got to a religion level. Marc you have not tried the D800 lets be honest here you stopped at the last model D3X which personally I thought was not very good. Its a completely different beast and you keep going back and making that comparison. I think its not a fair comment and you just said it again. People need to move on from what was in the past here. I sat here worked my tail off between the Phase and the D800. It completely blows away any 35mm cam to date. Sure its not the same and it needs some work but seriously I dropped two prints side by side on a table anyone would have a hard time telling the difference. Aesthetically I gave up very little and that point keeps coming up which a lot of it is extra post work which many folks dont understand or do. What I gave up was my tech cam which yes i still want back in my hands. Honestly it comes down to post and I have seen some good stuff and seen a lot of bad stuff. Nikon takes more work in post and thats a given. Also like I said Nikon does need to tweak this more. Marc I hated 35mm for so long its actually scary my bias towards it. Now the tide has changed I still love MF and that will never change but this aint so freaking bad either now and that is the point I think a lot of Nikon folks are saying. If people accepted that than why do we have this many threads on it? Sure there will always be the my cam is better than your cam people but they dont come to this forum on a regular basis. You should read the stuff out there makes me want to rollup and hide.

BTW public comment on the S2 i was never impressed on that cam until it was out about a year and the files actually started to look a lot better and that came with changes to LR. So its not always the cam either. The same with my P40+ i did not like it for about a year either until they fixed the profile/firmware.

A friend e-mailed me this morning with the ongoing question or comment. I still recommended the IQ 140 to him.
 
S

Shelby Lewis

Guest
My "fed up" thread started a very similar discussion to the one going on here... although there were some really great comments on gear/systems, the underlying theme in a lot of comments was this same "x is better than y" thinking that has gotten out of control.

Funny thing, my questions were intended to get people to share their thoughts about technology and art... but it turned into a gearfest.

Guy, you were one of the small minority that addressed the underlying funk... thanks.

But here we are again talkin' about gear.

Although I haven't cared much for the D800 personally, I think it's a fantastic camera for those who like the nikon system/aesthetic. It punches hard in a lot of different "boxing rings". It certainly does some pretty unbelievable things for a 35mm format system. What is problematic is that, in the end, there are no rules for which camera should be used on a particular job/locale, yet many imply that there are... and then pigeonhole certain cameras (that fit within those narrow visions of what gear is "supposed" to do). Reality is that MOST of the cams around can do most of the jobs put in front of them.

If I'm going to address the OP... I'd say that both cameras look remarkably good. Personally (ahem), I think the Nikon makes the features of the face look less dimensional... more uni-planar. This isn't good or bad, just different. From a resolution standpoint, both are mighty impressive. I know I like the Hassy color better... but that's a personal call. Without the A/B comparison, I'd be happy with both. The H4D "sings" for me a bit more. I've yet to get my D800 images to sing, but damn I'm trying!

Mostly, I'm ready for people to be happy with other people's gear decisions... and to just let well enough alone. All this gear-centric chest thumping is getting old.

Hell... I might go buy p25 or a ZD just to spite everyone. :D
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
I agree diffrent cams regardless of format size will produce diffrent looks and files. I totally also agree nothing does everything well either. If they were all the same I think none of us would even bother to shoot at all. In this case the D800 is NOT for everyone and certainly we all know MF in any flavor is NOT for everyone. I happen to really like a tech cam some folks just flat out hate them. Difference is a good thing. What's more important is finding your art in anything you happen to buy and if it don't fit you well than sell it or return it. No brand is better and no format is better than anything in your hands that HELPS you obtain amazing images. I think this gets lost sometimes. Maybe a new slogan for this forum is " Get your ART on".
 

hcubell

Well-known member
Funny thing, my questions were intended to get people to share their thoughts about technology and art... but it turned into a gearfest.
I don't know why you would be surprised. It's a LOT easier to obsess about gear than it is to make a truly compelling photograph.
 

fotografz

Well-known member
My "fed up" thread started a very similar discussion to the one going on here... although there were some really great comments on gear/systems, the underlying theme in a lot of comments was this same "x is better than y" thinking that has gotten out of control.

Funny thing, my questions were intended to get people to share their thoughts about technology and art... but it turned into a gearfest.

Guy, you were one of the small minority that addressed the underlying funk... thanks.

But here we are again talkin' about gear.

Although I haven't cared much for the D800 personally, I think it's a fantastic camera for those who like the nikon system/aesthetic. It punches hard in a lot of different "boxing rings". It certainly does some pretty unbelievable things for a 35mm format system. What is problematic is that, in the end, there are no rules for which camera should be used on a particular job/locale, yet many imply that there are... and then pigeonhole certain cameras (that fit within those narrow visions of what gear is "supposed" to do). Reality is that MOST of the cams around can do most of the jobs put in front of them.

If I'm going to address the OP... I'd say that both cameras look remarkably good. Personally (ahem), I think the Nikon makes the features of the face look less dimensional... more uni-planar. This isn't good or bad, just different. From a resolution standpoint, both are mighty impressive. I know I like the Hassy color better... but that's a personal call. Without the A/B comparison, I'd be happy with both. The H4D "sings" for me a bit more. I've yet to get my D800 images to sing, but damn I'm trying!

Mostly, I'm ready for people to be happy with other people's gear decisions... and to just let well enough alone. All this gear-centric chest thumping is getting old.

Hell... I might go buy p25 or a ZD just to spite everyone. :D
"Here we are again talking about gear" ... which you follow up by ... talking about gear. :)

Let's be honest here ... you didn't post with a "how do I get out of my creative funk"? You asked about the frustrations with working digital tools and lack of precision.

People primarily talk specific gear here when the title leads that way, or when someone posts headings like "the end of MF superiority?" with this test or that test ... on a MFD forum no less ... what does anyone expect? Debate and opinions will ensue.

To me, it sounds like everyone is supposed to shut up about what they believe or feel regarding the tools that effect their photographic art when an opinion they do not believe in is touted to the rafters. The tools DO affect the art, and many have found what suits them and will say so and why.

Shelby, if you really believed that most cameras can do any job you put in front of them and shouldn't be pidgeholed, then why didn't you shoot the weddings with the RZ/Aptus you already had and was producing your art with?

BTW Guy, yes the last Nikon I used was the D3X ... but the AF lenses I would need are the same ... I DO NOT like the Nikon optical look and do not want manual focus lenses (been there, done that: Contax/Leica R/Zeiss) ... and the D800 could have 100 meg, and still look like 35mm to my eye for certain types of work, especially people work.

I do my art in private and for specific clients ... I don't come to a public internet forum for creative advice, I go to my mentor or others in my field for one-on-one discussions ... heck, I have never even met anyone on this forum in person, so how would they be able to discuss my creative needs, when they do not know me? I also learn a lot teaching my private students, which is very rewarding. Personally, I tend to only post images here to demonstrate something I may have learned or show a new technique to share ... especially lighting these days, unfortunately the lighting forum isn't participated in all that much.

In the end I agree, I really don't care what anyone uses ... just stop trying to tell me, or strongly implying, that I should use it too.

-Marc
 
Top