Site Sponsors
Results 1 to 20 of 20

Thread: H3D-22 (ii)

  1. #1
    JackieS
    Guest

    H3D-22 (ii)

    has anyone used the 22mp H3Dii ?

    I gather that its now been discontinued
    and also its slower and only iso 400

    are there any other drawbacks to it ... or is the image quality just as good as its brothers ?

    seems you can pick them up very cheap secondhand at present
    or would it be worth stretching for an 31mp ?


    any help appreciated

    cheers

    J

  2. #2
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    California/Thailand
    Posts
    1,206
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: H3D-22 (ii)

    I'll bet Marc (Fotografz) will chime in with some useful info. He has in-depth practical experience with the Hasselblad line.

  3. #3
    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: H3D-22 (ii)

    Yep, I do ... although not directly with a H3D-II/22 which is a relatively rare bird.

    I used a H2D/22 for a time, which was also a odd duck for it's time because it shot DNG files straight from the camera. One advantage of the H2 camera is that it could use film backs as well as many other backs from different manufacturers ... which the H3D-II cannot.

    The advantage of the H3D-II is more integrated abilities than any previous models. Any of the DAC corrections available to the H3D-II/31, 39, & 50 are available to the H3D-II/22. IMO, this is a significant advantage considering that many new products like the HC28 and HCT/S are designed using those software adjustments.

    All H cameras can use the HC lenses or all the C,CF,CFi and CFE Zeiss "Legacy" lenses from the Hasselblad 500 series. The CF Adapter allows full automatic aperture use.

    The differences between the 31 and 22 are: pixel count, pixel pitch, ISO range, use of micro-lenses, and crop factor.

    The 22 offers ISOs from 50 to 400, the 31 goes from 100 to 800. Both will jump 1 stop when Hasselblad finally delivers the promised software/firmware upgrade. ISO 50 is an advantage in bright conditions due to the H camera's top shutter speed of 1/800th. The 31's ISO 800 is an advantage in lower light (and is very good BTW.)

    The 31 has a 1.3X crop factor, the 22 has a 1.1X crop factor. Wide angles are wider on a 22.

    The 22 has a 9 micron pixel pitch, where the 31 pixels are the same as a 39 meg back and are smaller than the 22. The 31 offers a bit more resolution of detail. However, many people are advocates of larger pixel pitch verses more but smaller pixels. IMO, based on direct experience, I've found legacy Zeiss V lenses fair better with the 22 meg backs.

    The 31 uses micro-lenses on sensor to increase sensitivity, but that increase comes at a cost ... when using the back on a technical camera with tilts and shifts, it causes color cast issues. The 22 is the better choice if you intend using the back on a view camera.

    In case you are wondering if a MF 22 meg back might be challenged by recent 20+ meg 35mm DSLRs, I can assure that they are not even close ... anymore than 35mm Kodak Portra 160 film challenged 120 Porta 160 film.

    IMHO, GRAB that H3D-II/22 ... and if you don't ... tell me where it is

  4. #4
    JackieS
    Guest

    Re: H3D-22 (ii)

    ok thank you very much

    very interesting

    I can get the H3Dii-22 + lens for not much more than the cost of the new Nikon D3x (or the Canon EOS 1ds mkiii) body only. So I am really interested in your comment about 35mm DSLR's.

    If I spend that amount then I would fund it by selling a bit of my Leica gear but if i went for the 31mp I woudl have to sell quite a lot of my Leica M gear and ideally I want to keep both.

    The 22 should satisfy in terms of resolution as it is conveniently close to standard editorial DPS size. What excites me more is the greater dynamic range. I play around in photoshop quite a bit and I often find that I reach the limits of the M8 files quite quickly and have to degrain and sometimes repaint over certain areas to restore quality. Is the latitude afforded by the H3D that much greater ?

  5. #5
    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: H3D-22 (ii)

    Quote Originally Posted by JackieS View Post
    ok thank you very much

    very interesting

    I can get the H3Dii-22 + lens for not much more than the cost of the new Nikon D3x (or the Canon EOS 1ds mkiii) body only. So I am really interested in your comment about 35mm DSLR's.

    If I spend that amount then I would fund it by selling a bit of my Leica gear but if i went for the 31mp I woudl have to sell quite a lot of my Leica M gear and ideally I want to keep both.

    The 22 should satisfy in terms of resolution as it is conveniently close to standard editorial DPS size. What excites me more is the greater dynamic range. I play around in photoshop quite a bit and I often find that I reach the limits of the M8 files quite quickly and have to degrain and sometimes repaint over certain areas to restore quality. Is the latitude afforded by the H3D that much greater ?
    Well jackie, maybe one of the folks here that currently use a 22 meg back will speak up. Guy Mancuso, one of the forum owners and a Professional photographer uses a Phase One P25 which is a 25 meg back that uses the same Kodak sensor as the H3D-II/22 you are considering. Look at this thread PG 45 ... just click on the link ...

    http://forum.getdpi.com/forum/showth...t=2372&page=45

    My comparisons are between a 22 meg Canon 1DsMKIII that I used to use, as well as the current 24.5 meg. Sony A900 I now use for high resolution 35mm digital. My Hassey's beat them in IQ in every regard.

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

    Re: H3D-22 (ii)

    Almost all my posts in this thread are with the P25 Plus

    http://forum.getdpi.com/forum/showth...?t=3326&page=2

    And all of these

    http://forum.getdpi.com/forum/showthread.php?t=3856

    No lack of detail and DR in any of these and frankly will beat up anything in 35mm. It's a big jump up forget the numbers of pixels, there meaningless it is what comes off the sensor that counts. 22mpx is plenty for many folks and i can go easily to 30 x 40 prints without worry.
    Photography is all about experimentation and without it you will never learn art.

    www.guymancusophotography.com

  7. #7
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

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

    Re: H3D-22 (ii)

    Jackie,
    as someone who has just started to use MF gear (LV54 and Mamiya ZD both Dalsa 22MP) I have to say that - if you get everything right MF really makes a difference in IQ IMO (I only can compare to the M8 and the D3 but not the 22MP SLRs).
    I am talking about DR, tonality, neutral colors and detail.
    However I have also experienced that MF is also very limiting:
    only good at low ISO, shallow DOF -> need to step further down compared to smaller sensors to get same DOF, slowish AF etc etc.
    SO whatever you decide I would strongly recommend to choose a MF-option which lets you keep your M8 kit.
    Cheers, Tom

  8. #8
    Workshop Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Brooklyn
    Posts
    4,043
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1253

    Re: H3D-22 (ii)

    the CFV back I use (9 micron, 16 meg, 39 x39) is also 16 bit, something i don't believe you get with the D3

  9. #9
    JackieS
    Guest

    Re: H3D-22 (ii)

    thanks guys... I am thinking that the 22 could be a good move for me. I get the VAT off here so if it doesn't work out and I decide to sell it I shouldn't lose much (if any) money.

    If it goes well then a dealer will no doubt give me a good trade up if I want to go for the 31.

    The new Nikon is very tempting. It has so many bells and whistles and must be one hell of a versatile camera but I just don't like DSLR's and I don't like the Nikon glass that much. 99% of the fucntions on the Nikon body I would NEVER use either... I just want manual focus, aperture and shutter speed. That's all I need to take pictures. I am used to manual so don't even need stuff like EV compensation, auto bracket etc.. I shoot cars so don't need high FPS, don't really need high iso or zoom lenses. I just need maximum IQ.

  10. #10
    Administrator, Instructor Guy Mancuso's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    23,623
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2555

    Re: H3D-22 (ii)

    There are several 22mpx systems out there that maybe of interest. Not sure of all of them but the Phase 25 and 25 Plus, Hassy 22, The Mamiya ZD 22 which is a Dalsa sensor, Aptus 22. I know Sinar has or had one but not sure of the model numbers on them. Anyway lot to look at in the 22 mpx arena. Be it Dalsa or Kodak there both very good
    Photography is all about experimentation and without it you will never learn art.

    www.guymancusophotography.com

  11. #11
    JackieS
    Guest

    Re: H3D-22 (ii)

    Just a question about ISO

    is the H3dii 22 as noisy at iso400 as the 31 is at iso800 ?

    or put another way... for nice clean files, what is the 22 best limited to ? Is 200 perfectly acceptable for finished & published work ?

    thanks


    R

  12. #12
    Administrator, Instructor Guy Mancuso's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    23,623
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2555

    Re: H3D-22 (ii)

    I would think the 31 would be cleaner because of the micro lenses but someone that shoots Hassy will be better to answer. I can answer on the Phase side of the house the P25 Plus at ISO 800 is about equal to the P30 plus at ISO 1600 which has the micro lenses . Also these backs have the same Kodak sensors in each category the P25 and H 22 and the H31 and the P30 plus. Phase is rated though 1 stop higher on each. Phocus is supposed to improve the Hassy side 1 more stop up at some point but not sure when that will be available. Again Marc would better at answering on the Hassy side since he has or had both Hassy backs
    Photography is all about experimentation and without it you will never learn art.

    www.guymancusophotography.com

  13. #13
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    313
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: H3D-22 (ii)

    Quote Originally Posted by JackieS View Post
    Just a question about ISO

    is the H3dii 22 as noisy at iso400 as the 31 is at iso800 ?
    Yes exactly.

    [/quote]
    or put another way... for nice clean files, what is the 22 best limited to ? Is 200 perfectly acceptable for finished & published work ?
    [/QUOTE]

    It's subjective but I'd say yes. Hasselblad users are hanging out for a long overdue (but coming soon!) firmware release that will bump ISOs by a stop so the 22 would go up to 800.

    Nick-T

  14. #14
    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: H3D-22 (ii)

    IMO, the 31 is the better ISO performer at 400. I'd say at 100-200 it'd be pretty hard to detect.

  15. #15
    JackieS
    Guest

    Re: H3D-22 (ii)

    ok thank you very much for the info

    would you say 400 is useable on the 22 ? Or for professional purposes is it effectively a iso200 camera ?

  16. #16
    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: H3D-22 (ii)

    Quote Originally Posted by JackieS View Post
    ok thank you very much for the info

    would you say 400 is useable on the 22 ? Or for professional purposes is it effectively a iso200 camera ?
    That's too subjective to answer with a yes or no.

    The ISO 400 is most certainly usable, and actually pretty good. But as with all increases of ISO, it's less forgiving. Remember, the native ISO for the 22 meg back is 50. Very best performance is @ 50.

    I use my 16meg square sensor CFV at ISO 400 fairly frequently ... that's also a 9X9 micron sensor ... just smaller in size.
    When processed in Phocus, the 22 and 16 meg backs work well at 400 ... and when the ISO jumps a stop (soon?) with new software/firmware, I'd bet ISO 400 will be even better.

  17. #17
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Near Brussels, Belgium, Europe
    Posts
    541
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: H3D-22 (ii)

    From my experience, I try to use the ISO 200 on my H3DII-22 the least possible and forget about using ISO 400. My 1DsMKIII IQ is not that far from the Blad and, if not used in the best conditions, it's better to use the Canon. It's just my opinion - hope it's not hurting anyone's feeling saying that !

    I just hope Hasselblad won't forget the H3DII-22 users with the new firmware. Let's hope this firmware will also increase the dynamic range of the 22mp sensor.
    I'm still astonished by the DR coming from the current small pixel mega sensors, how do they do that ? if it's software for some part, the DR of the 22mp could also take benefit from these new algorythms, no?

    I personaly chose the 22mp because of my use of large format systems. Apart from that the H3DII-31 seems to me a really better system: newer sensor,better isos, more pixels, same DR, better color accuracy (very subjective but shared thought) and crop factor that does not seem to be a problem.

    Sheers

  18. #18
    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: H3D-22 (ii)

    Sheers, your Canon 1DsMKIII is evidently much, much, much better than the two I used before selling them ... plastic looking IQ to my eye ... but hey ...

    different strokes for different folks.

  19. #19
    JackieS
    Guest

    Re: H3D-22 (ii)

    Quote Originally Posted by anGy View Post
    My 1DsMKIII IQ is not that far from the Blad

    I have to say I am very surprised given:

    1. the smaller sensor size
    2. the limitations of the canon glass
    3. AA filters and anti noise filters which seem to blur DLSR pictures

  20. #20
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Near Brussels, Belgium, Europe
    Posts
    541
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: H3D-22 (ii)

    I don't want to re-re-re-launch an old IQ debate. I'm also aware that the eyes have to be educated and mines certainly does (I'm only using a MFDB since 3 'rainy' months).

    I was in heaven when I started to use the Hasselblad, so much better images out of the box.
    Then I realized that I was using it with far more care than with my Canon (means iso 50, tripod mount, mirror lock, remote shutter). I tried to give a better chance to the Canon using it in the same conditions. I've made a not really satisfying comparison so far. But what came to my eyes was that - even if the Blad still offer a obvious better IQ raw quality - the canon IQ files carefully cooked in LR and postprod in CS3 are not that far (mostly color saturation and local contrast from the Canon needed strong work). As a result the canon files were problematic in the very dark shadows, were a bit less fine in color and had less natural sharpness.
    But at iso 400 I slightly prefer the canon result - if deeply reworked in LR and CS3.

    I now understand I also have to spend more time in Phocus. Tweaking and stretching the Blad files should again create a gap between the canon and Hasselblad results.

    When I'm in a bad mood, I start to wonder why I made such an investment in the MFDB. The rest of the time I keep enjoy the unbeatable natural look of the Blad.
    And when I'm in a very good mood I think this unique natural and 3D look is priceless...

    (If I perform a good comparison (real life, not scientific), I'll publish it here with image samples raw and cooked, etc hoping you will comment.

    The canon is so easy to use, quick and able to cope with difficult conditions that I love it. The Blad has better color and natural effect and will (hopefully) certainly shine in a studio. It will also better show his potential when i'll be higher in the Blad/Phocus learning curve. So I'll have to be patient, and in the best mood possible ;-)

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
  •