Site Sponsors
Results 1 to 49 of 49

Thread: DxO P45+ test: Let the Games Begin

  1. #1
    Administrator Bob's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Prescott, Arizona
    Posts
    4,492
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    367

    DxO P45+ test: Let the Games Begin

    OK, I really really know that there is more to a system than a sensor, but here is the latest log for the fire from DxO Labs

    http://news.cnet.com/8301-13580_3-10...g=2547-1_3-0-5

  2. #2
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    1,513
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: DxO P45+ test: Let the Games Begin

    Bob,
    Thanks for posting this link. I had just seen it myself and thought the same thing ("let the games begin").

    Maybe I am a bit slower on the uptake or something, but the data directly from the sensors that DxOMark uses surely seems to suggest the high cost MF sensors are not delivering more....at least in the parameters that are posted. Personally, I still have a hard time resolving some of this. It finally starts to hit home when one really looks at the 35mm DSLR units in their own comparison. Then it becomes clear that there are some measurable differences, with the D3X coming out on top. I still am having a hard time translating those differences to what one sees in many images, so this MF data is just going to add more twist to the knots.

    My personal take on this is that the data suggests MF is only producing a much larger image, which alone can be very important. The other point that seems to come back is that the glass really must be doing a lot in MF, and we know it trumps 35mm DSLR stuff already. From all of this, one could conclude that IF the 35mm DSLR folks could start fielding better optics, they would be matching or maybe even beating MF for all but overall image size. Trust me, I find it hard for me to even type that, hence my somewhat veiled concern over just what the DxOMark stuff really means by itself, and then just how much "system" stuff goes into the mix after that.

    I know this sounds all over the map (need another espresso or something today), but on the surface, it does not bode well for MF, except for maybe the very highest end new stuff (P65+ and others), which have not been tested. From other shots and discussions here, it suggests the newer, bigger sensors may have added a bit, but one has to start asking just how much extra is there and at what costs? For a handful of folks it surely will be important, but these data are suggesting that for most things, one will not see vastly superior image files from MF over DSLR....with the exception of size and maybe overall resolution with better glass.

    Am I the only one starting to have that sinking feeling?

    LJ

  3. #3
    Administrator Bob's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Prescott, Arizona
    Posts
    4,492
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    367

    Re: DxO P45+ test: Let the Games Begin

    I have peeped at a lot of files, and although the DxO tests might be "scientific", they don't show what I see in the files. Perhaps it is AA related, or perhaps it is related to lenses, or maybe to the relationship of pixel size to lens MTF, but despite their scores, A P45+ file looks a hell of a lot better (to me at least) than a Canon 1DsMIII. I haven't had the chance to look at the D3X yet, but the D3 was a terrible disappointment to me.
    So I shoot with what gives me the most pleasing results. That is one reason that an M8 is still in my bag along with the Phamiya/P45+
    -bob

  4. #4
    Sr. Administrator Jack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Los Altos, CA
    Posts
    10,486
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1031

    Re: DxO P45+ test: Let the Games Begin

    Shoot a two-dimensional high-contrast grayscale test target or a 7-degree tilted black and white Koran rectangle with a top end DSLR and lens outfit against a top MF back and lens and guess what? They won't look (or calculate out) all that different; the edges on those targets that define the differences will look and equate pretty darn similarly. Now shoot real three-dimensional subjects in real studio or available light situations and guess what? The difference between systems becomes immediately recognizable, and in most cases quite significant.

    Cheers,
    Jack
    home: www.getdpi.com

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

  5. #5
    Administrator, Instructor Guy Mancuso's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    23,623
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2555

    Re: DxO P45+ test: Let the Games Begin

    I will refrain from my usual comment on this stuff because it would not be pretty. LOL

    Not selling my MF system anytime soon.
    Photography is all about experimentation and without it you will never learn art.

    www.guymancusophotography.com

  6. #6
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    1,513
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: DxO P45+ test: Let the Games Begin

    Bob and Jack,
    I am not arguing with you guys on this at all. That is why I keep scratching my head over just what the DxO stuff means. They are only dealing with the sensor....no processing, no optics, etc. That remains my point about what the 35mm DSLRs are NOT providing (better glass), and that we know makes a huge difference in the final image.

    The question remains.....IF, and that is the big word, IF Nikon, Canon, Zeiss or whomever could produce truly stellar lenses for the 35mm format size to close that gap, would the images we look at really look better than what we tend to see now with MF?

    LJ

  7. #7
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

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

    Re: DxO P45+ test: Let the Games Begin

    Quote Originally Posted by LJL View Post
    Bob,
    Thanks for posting this link. I had just seen it myself and thought the same thing ("let the games begin").

    Maybe I am a bit slower on the uptake or something, but the data directly from the sensors that DxOMark uses surely seems to suggest the high cost MF sensors are not delivering more....at least in the parameters that are posted. Personally, I still have a hard time resolving some of this. It finally starts to hit home when one really looks at the 35mm DSLR units in their own comparison. Then it becomes clear that there are some measurable differences, with the D3X coming out on top. I still am having a hard time translating those differences to what one sees in many images, so this MF data is just going to add more twist to the knots.

    My personal take on this is that the data suggests MF is only producing a much larger image, which alone can be very important. The other point that seems to come back is that the glass really must be doing a lot in MF, and we know it trumps 35mm DSLR stuff already. From all of this, one could conclude that IF the 35mm DSLR folks could start fielding better optics, they would be matching or maybe even beating MF for all but overall image size. Trust me, I find it hard for me to even type that, hence my somewhat veiled concern over just what the DxOMark stuff really means by itself, and then just how much "system" stuff goes into the mix after that.

    I know this sounds all over the map (need another espresso or something today), but on the surface, it does not bode well for MF, except for maybe the very highest end new stuff (P65+ and others), which have not been tested. From other shots and discussions here, it suggests the newer, bigger sensors may have added a bit, but one has to start asking just how much extra is there and at what costs? For a handful of folks it surely will be important, but these data are suggesting that for most things, one will not see vastly superior image files from MF over DSLR....with the exception of size and maybe overall resolution with better glass.

    Am I the only one starting to have that sinking feeling?

    LJ
    Bob,
    I just spent 1 week vacation and brought a M8, D3x and Hy6 with Sinar back.
    Even though I dont really want to post comparison images, because there were small "faults" like changing light, slight missfocus, differences in converters etc. my overall opinion however is the following:

    1) Compared to the D3x the MF back seemed to show smoother tonal transitions, the images looks "deeper", clearer, more "3d" to me. If you pixel peep at 100% there might also be a small detail advantage, but not that much IMO. Its more the overall look of the MF image, and I believe that no AA filter and 16bit are still an advantage, however my personal feeling was that the differences are not as clear as shown in some other comparison threads. Maybe since I used high quality primes on the d3x like the 24PCE.
    I also think that there is a difference in the transition between sharp and unsharp areas of the image caused by the sensor size-which leads to a smoother transition for the bigger sensor.
    I am not sure about the dynamic range yet, there were some images were I though the DR from the d3x could even be a bit better than that from the SInar back-but I am really not sure at all here.

    2) A slight missfocus and the detail advantage of MF seems to be gone. Besides the fast and good AF the D3x has a very good metering, a nice AWB, great high ISO etc etc. There were some situations where I took images with the d3x which would have been very difficult if not impossible to take with the MF-camera. We went into a hole of the glacier, with dim light - not much room and time and light - the d3x worked great.

    3) My conclusion would be that:
    MF-digital: Image quality: 99% (if you get everything right), flexibility: 40%
    D3x: Image quality: 90%, flexibility 99%
    For landscape and slow pace I prefer the MF, not only the IQ but also the handling, the viewfinder, the feel of the camera and lenses.
    On the other side it is really hard to not nail focus, exposure etc with the d3x, in each and every situation and if you dont nail it, you can see on the display that you didnt nail it (in comparison to the display of the SInar back- they could have made it B&W and it wouldnt be much worse)

    4) Regarding price of the D3x: I see that it is expensive but if you allready own good Nikon glass and see that you can get more out of your glass I think it is

    5) If you dont have to print big I am stil surprized again and again by the IQ I get from the M8 - besides somewhat interesting colors sometimes.

  8. #8
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    1,513
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: DxO P45+ test: Let the Games Begin

    Guy,
    Not encouraging anybody to do that or not, nor throwing rocks at MF. Folks have nearly obsessed over the minute differences in the 35mm DSLR data, and will argue over that forever. This new MF data suggests that there is a lot of something else going into the final piece....lack of AA, better optics, etc., and that alone shows a big difference. I am simply wondering if the image quality gap between MF and the top end DSLRs could be closed more with really better glass and maybe tearing off the AA filter. I know folks have tested this before, but not with the newest sensors, and the question about is there any 35mm glass that can really deliver?

    Again, not trashing MF. Just taking a look at the sensor data, and having to ask the question about what accounts for the differences we see and prefer in MF. If it really boils down to just the glass......?

    LJ

  9. #9
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    337
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: DxO P45+ test: Let the Games Begin

    Yes, please say the MF does beat 35mm DSRL.

  10. #10
    Administrator Bob's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Prescott, Arizona
    Posts
    4,492
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    367

    Re: DxO P45+ test: Let the Games Begin

    Maybe they could close the gap in glass quality, but in order to do that on a smaller sensor they have to be better by the ratio of sensor size.
    The dslr makers are also selling to folks who have different goals than I do apparently.
    Not shooting weddings, Not shooting sports, Not shooting (much) macro, Not using AF (much), Not needing anything higher than iso 50 actually I would really like ISO 12 to save me from carrying ND filters), I guess for me, much of the big advantages that are touted for the dslrs are mostly don't-care or little-care. So I look at the images and unless I can get lost in them, they are not worth much to me.
    Oh I am positive that there are a whole lot of folks who need, or think they need, all that stuff, and maybe a lot of them just push the camera jpgs to their clients to save time in their work-flow. I just an sure that I am not a member of that set. On the other hand, once there exists something that tickles my retina, I will be all over it in a split-second.
    -bob

  11. #11
    Workshop Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    3,275
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    7

    Re: DxO P45+ test: Let the Games Begin

    Note that even two medium format systems based on the sensor are producing meaningfully different results: the H3DII-39 and Phase One P45+ both use the 6.8 micron 1.1X Kodak 39 megapixel sensor and the Phase beats the Hassy by half a stop of dynamic range and 17% better "low light ISO".

    These sorts of comparisons are always useful, but:
    1) There are dozens of variables other than sensor specs that make the print on the wall sing. Lenses, color fidelity, post-production flexibility, raw convertor, conversion settings, proper sharpening, etc etc etc
    2) In a tough spot a small difference in DR or Resolution can make a large difference. The difference between light puffy clouds at sunset and pure paper white can be a fraction of a stop of DR.
    3) You don't make prints of resolution charts and DR step-charts. Though they probably could qualify as modern art nowadays.

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

  12. #12
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    1,513
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: DxO P45+ test: Let the Games Begin

    Quote Originally Posted by evgeny View Post
    Yes, please say the MF does beat 35mm DSRL.
    I think there is little doubt that this is the case. All one has to do is look at the images to be convinced. My "devil's advocate" questioning in this thread is more for discussion. No panic needed. I think the DxOMark data is not truly representative of what the actual MF systems deliver, and should be taken with a lot more than a few grains of salt. I just do NOT see the data matching what folks produce and see from their MF systems every day.

    LJ

  13. #13
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    1,513
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: DxO P45+ test: Let the Games Begin

    Quote Originally Posted by Bob View Post
    Maybe they could close the gap in glass quality, but in order to do that on a smaller sensor they have to be better by the ratio of sensor size.
    The dslr makers are also selling to folks who have different goals than I do apparently.
    Not shooting weddings, Not shooting sports, Not shooting (much) macro, Not using AF (much), Not needing anything higher than iso 50 actually I would really like ISO 12 to save me from carrying ND filters), I guess for me, much of the big advantages that are touted for the dslrs are mostly don't-care or little-care. So I look at the images and unless I can get lost in them, they are not worth much to me.
    Oh I am positive that there are a whole lot of folks who need, or think they need, all that stuff, and maybe a lot of them just push the camera jpgs to their clients to save time in their work-flow. I just an sure that I am not a member of that set. On the other hand, once there exists something that tickles my retina, I will be all over it in a split-second.
    -bob
    All good points, Bob, and that is what I was trying to get at. As I mentioned in another reply, I just do NOT see the DxOMark data on MF sensors truly being able to characterize what is delivered. Not saying the data is not correct or accurate, but more that it does not take into account all the other very important components that go into creating a great image capture. The glass and sensor size interplay in a way that DxOMark is not measuring, and that also translates into things we find so wonderful in the MF images.

    Sorry if folks got nervous or defensive over my comments and questions, but it is good to wonder what is missing in 35mm DSLR that may or may not ever be done to "close the gap".

    LJ

  14. #14
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

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

    Re: DxO P45+ test: Let the Games Begin

    I wonder if MF glass is really better than a Leica 19mm or Leica50mm or Zeiss Macro100 or Nikon 24PCE or Nikon 200/2.0 or Canon 35/1.4 or Canon 135/2.0 or . . . . ?

  15. #15
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    1,513
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: DxO P45+ test: Let the Games Begin

    Quote Originally Posted by t_streng View Post
    I wonder if MF glass is really better than a Leica 19mm or Leica50mm or Zeiss Macro100 or Nikon 24PCE or Nikon 200/2.0 or Canon 35/1.4 or Canon 135/2.0 or . . . . ?
    Not sure it is, but there is something about how it works with the sensor sizes in MF, plus the lack of AA filter on MF sensors that is not quite the same on the 35mm DSLR side. The lenses you mention are all reputed to be among some of the best optics of the format. We already see some differences in images when used on cameras without the AA filter, such as the M8 or DMR, but for whatever reasons, the resulting images are still not the same as those taken with MF. Can somebody else help explain that part? We see it, but how does one measure it?

    LJ

  16. #16
    Administrator Bob's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Prescott, Arizona
    Posts
    4,492
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    367

    Re: DxO P45+ test: Let the Games Begin

    Until the sensors get larger in dslrs, then mf glass needs to be only a bit better than half as good as dslr glass to win. It is the resolved spatial frequency at mid-range contrast that tells the tale.
    -bob

  17. #17
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Atlanta, GA
    Posts
    214
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: DxO P45+ test: Let the Games Begin

    Quote Originally Posted by t_streng View Post
    I wonder if MF glass is really better than a Leica 19mm or Leica50mm or Zeiss Macro100 or Nikon 24PCE or Nikon 200/2.0 or Canon 35/1.4 or Canon 135/2.0 or . . . . ?
    Until I find a t/s option for 35mm that will compare to my Schnider and REodenstock glass, it's a mute point for me. I shoot architecture for a living, and I've tried the offerings from Canon. Believe you me, there is no comparison.

  18. #18
    Senior Member KeithL's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    832
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: DxO P45+ test: Let the Games Begin

    OK folks, you're just having a nightmare, you'll wake up in an hour or two and all will be well...

  19. #19
    Sr. Administrator Jack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Los Altos, CA
    Posts
    10,486
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1031

    Re: DxO P45+ test: Let the Games Begin

    Quote Originally Posted by Bob View Post
    Until the sensors get larger in dslrs, then mf glass needs to be only a bit better than half as good as dslr glass to win. It is the resolved spatial frequency at mid-range contrast that tells the tale.
    -bob
    Precisely.
    Jack
    home: www.getdpi.com

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

  20. #20
    Administrator, Instructor Guy Mancuso's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    23,623
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2555

    Re: DxO P45+ test: Let the Games Begin

    Exactly what we are finding out.
    Photography is all about experimentation and without it you will never learn art.

    www.guymancusophotography.com

  21. #21
    Senior Member yaya's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    London, UK
    Posts
    1,168
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    38

    Re: DxO P45+ test: Let the Games Begin

    http://"http://www.dxomark.com/index...ormat-ranking"

    Professional portrait and landscape photographers often use medium-format cameras because of their superb performance under controlled lighting conditions. However, as these cameras are definitely not designed for so-called “action photography” scenarios, they generally do not perform well with respect to DxO Labs’ Low-Light ISO metric. Because of this inherent low-light limitation, medium-format cameras do not receive top marks on the overall DxOMark Sensor scale, even though they may show outstanding performance with respect to Color Depth or Dynamic Range.
    The DxOMark Sensor scale is designed to weight equally three photographic scenarios that, taken together, cover nearly the entire photospace: Portrait, Landscape, and Action Photography. Each scenario represents use cases that stress a specific parameter of the camera—Color Depth, Dynamic Range, and Low-Light ISO, respectively. When looking at cameras with narrow or specialized uses, considering the specific ranking for the right metric or metrics is critically important.
    Medium-format cameras are designed to perform best in particular use cases—specifically, they are mostly used in a studio environment where light level is not a problem, and in landscape photography, where they are most often used with tripods to facilitate long exposure times. In light of their specific uses, medium-format cameras are optimized for low ISO performance, and so do not feature a wide “analog” ISO latitude, meaning that they show some limitations at high ISO speed. Consequently, medium-format cameras end up with lower Low-Light ISO rankings compared to DSLRs, and this affects their overall DxOMark Sensor score.


    I think there are some inherent conflicts between the purpose of these tests and the way they are being performed and analysed.

    Also, between Portrait, action and landscape, they seem to have dropped the still life/ product area, which takes about 70% of all commercial imagery produced today...

    I also think that what most people relate to as "better image quality" in MF is coming from greater colour sensitivity and tonal range, which are both actually demonstrated in these tests.

    This is not to diss DxO by no means, but perhaps their tests should be re-designed to accommodate new types of cameras and more realistic measures?
    Yair Shahar | Product Manager | Phase One | Mamiya Leaf
    e: [email protected] | m: +44(0)77 8992 8199 | yaya's blog

  22. #22
    Administrator, Instructor Guy Mancuso's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    23,623
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2555

    Re: DxO P45+ test: Let the Games Begin

    More like artistic measures as well.
    Photography is all about experimentation and without it you will never learn art.

    www.guymancusophotography.com

  23. #23
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Reykjavik, Iceland
    Posts
    2,310
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    9

    Re: DxO P45+ test: Let the Games Begin

    Yeah Guy, I am with you. I like to follow testing and even argue about it at times, but the real proof is in what the photos look like -- that is hugely dependent on lens and format, far more than just the sensor. This is something I think we have forgotten with digital. It's like everyone is only thinking of the film, and they forgot that the size of the format and the lens in front of it is a larger determinant on the resultant image. TechPan in 35mm and FP4 in 6x6 might have a similar level of grain and resolution, but the two photos will look very different.

    Medium format has a special look not only because of the high resolution and tonality, but also because of the fact that an 80mm is a standard lens, while it is a telephoto on 35mm. Same goes with large format. 4x5 looks different in many ways not just because of the fact that it has intense resolution, but because you generally have complete freedom of movement and a 150-210mm lens as a standard.

    These differences in format are not trivial unless you shoot every photo at f/22...
    My photos are here: http://www.stuartrichardson.com and more recent work here: http://stuartrichardson.tumblr.com/ Please have a look at my book!
    My lab is here: http://www.customphotolab.is and on facebook

  24. #24
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    760
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: DxO P45+ test: Let the Games Begin

    I think the article is interesting and was written to provoke discussion-- which is fine. I mean M.R. even states that --"are we going to find that there's more to how a sensor performs that can be can be told by instrument measurements alone? I believe so."
    There is clearly an artistic issue that cannot be measured as there is a subjective component to most things in life. Similar to Medicine-- geez even in hardcore science there is always debate about which parameters are most important to measure to come up with a conclusion and depending on how one does the measurements--do the study differently and can come up with different conclusions. THere is not always one right and wrong way either. That is why there is little full agreement on many things in the world. Anyway, I think his article is provocative and will stimulate lots of discussion --...

  25. #25
    Workshop Member glenerrolrd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Jupiter FL/Atlanta GA
    Posts
    2,279
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: DxO P45+ test: Let the Games Begin

    Why is this so surprising? It seems that the DxO tests only represent a single dimension and doesn t factor in size of the sensor in any meaningful way. Isn t it closer to comparing films .You could use the exact same film in both 35mm and 2 1/4.....and immediately see the difference . They really doesn t seems to be any way to compare different sensor sizes..but within a group it looks pretty accurate. Reminds me of the old lens tests ...didn t the original zeiss lens on the Hasselblad look weak compared to the Leica glass?

  26. #26
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

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

    Re: DxO P45+ test: Let the Games Begin

    Quote Originally Posted by jklotz View Post
    Until I find a t/s option for 35mm that will compare to my Schnider and REodenstock glass, it's a mute point for me. I shoot architecture for a living, and I've tried the offerings from Canon. Believe you me, there is no comparison.
    I think it would be a little unfait to compare a Schneider or Rodenstock - since those are not lenses for MF-Reflex-Cameras.

    I agree that a 35mm-DSLR-lens has to be better than a MF lens because of the smaller sensor/higher magnification.

    I wrote this because I am not totally sure if the "problem" of DSLRs are the lenses or if the problem might be the AA-filters and 12-bit color depth.

    Looking at DMR images I am again and again impressed and without direct comparison just from my impression I dont find the DMR images to stay behind MF images - of course this is limited to a certain print size due to the resolution limits.
    But then the DMR doesnt offer any real benefits over a mf-system (like higher ISO or fast AF)

  27. #27
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Chicago
    Posts
    551
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: DxO P45+ test: Let the Games Begin

    Quote Originally Posted by yaya View Post
    http://"http://www.dxomark.com/index...ormat-ranking"

    Professional portrait and landscape photographers often use medium-format cameras because of their superb performance under controlled lighting conditions. However, as these cameras are definitely not designed for so-called “action photography” scenarios, they generally do not perform well with respect to DxO Labs’ Low-Light ISO metric. Because of this inherent low-light limitation, medium-format cameras do not receive top marks on the overall DxOMark Sensor scale, even though they may show outstanding performance with respect to Color Depth or Dynamic Range.
    The DxOMark Sensor scale is designed to weight equally three photographic scenarios that, taken together, cover nearly the entire photospace: Portrait, Landscape, and Action Photography. Each scenario represents use cases that stress a specific parameter of the camera—Color Depth, Dynamic Range, and Low-Light ISO, respectively. When looking at cameras with narrow or specialized uses, considering the specific ranking for the right metric or metrics is critically important.
    Medium-format cameras are designed to perform best in particular use cases—specifically, they are mostly used in a studio environment where light level is not a problem, and in landscape photography, where they are most often used with tripods to facilitate long exposure times. In light of their specific uses, medium-format cameras are optimized for low ISO performance, and so do not feature a wide “analog” ISO latitude, meaning that they show some limitations at high ISO speed. Consequently, medium-format cameras end up with lower Low-Light ISO rankings compared to DSLRs, and this affects their overall DxOMark Sensor score.
    I remember now - some thirty years ago the magazines concluded that a normal car, used in a normal way, would give better results (value per $) than a Ferrari.

    Glad to see little has changed: if you take a niche product and average its results over a larger set of criteria, surprise: it won't do so well in the test.

    This isn't to take anything away from the wonderful quality of the dslr products now available, but rather to wonder why DxO didn't "de-couple" their test a bit more?

  28. #28
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    561
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: DxO P45+ test: Let the Games Begin

    Quote Originally Posted by dougpetersonci View Post
    Note that even two medium format systems based on the sensor are producing meaningfully different results: the H3DII-39 and Phase One P45+ both use the 6.8 micron 1.1X Kodak 39 megapixel sensor and the Phase beats the Hassy by half a stop of dynamic range and 17% better "low light ISO".

    Doug Peterson, Head of Technical Services
    Capture Integration, Phase One & Canon Dealer | Personal Portfolio
    Doug, you are toooo predictable. ;-)

    Anyone know if they analyze the RAW files? If so how? As they are missing out on each companies processing.

    If they are analyzing a TIF, what settings do they use?

    ...and so on.

    Best,



    David

  29. #29
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Posts
    2,338
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    52

    Re: DxO P45+ test: Let the Games Begin

    I cant connect a Nikon to an Alpa..is that in their 'test'?

    Chill David - no need to be defensive, Hasselblad owners know the difference between this that and the other thang -

  30. #30
    Senior Member yaya's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    London, UK
    Posts
    1,168
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    38

    Re: DxO P45+ test: Let the Games Begin

    You can read about their method here and here
    Yair Shahar | Product Manager | Phase One | Mamiya Leaf
    e: [email protected] | m: +44(0)77 8992 8199 | yaya's blog

  31. #31
    Subscriber Member tashley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    South of England
    Posts
    3,295
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: DxO P45+ test: Let the Games Begin

    Quote Originally Posted by t_streng View Post
    I wonder if MF glass is really better than a Leica 19mm or Leica50mm or Zeiss Macro100 or Nikon 24PCE or Nikon 200/2.0 or Canon 35/1.4 or Canon 135/2.0 or . . . . ?
    I agree with you. My experience so far, with four lenses for my Phamiya, two of which are 'D' lenses, is that they are not in the same league as Leica glass. The 28D has poor corner sharpness that Leica wouldn't let out of the door (OK that would be my imaginary Leica with the QC department!) and the 80D is brutally and clinically sharp to the corner but it is brutal and clinical. A look I like sometimes... the Leica genius is accuracy and poetry in the same frame. Aaahhhhh....

  32. #32
    Administrator, Instructor Guy Mancuso's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    23,623
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2555

    Re: DxO P45+ test: Let the Games Begin

    Tim, Leica has brutal and clinical lenses also. Also the Leica 19mm has poor corner sharpness on FF. Leica is far from perfect with some of there glass, I like the kool aid too but your talking 35mm lenses and comparing them against ANY MF lens is a different ball game.
    Photography is all about experimentation and without it you will never learn art.

    www.guymancusophotography.com

  33. #33
    Subscriber Member tashley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    South of England
    Posts
    3,295
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: DxO P45+ test: Let the Games Begin

    Quote Originally Posted by Guy Mancuso View Post
    Tim, Leica has brutal and clinical lenses also. Also the Leica 19mm has poor corner sharpness on FF. Leica is far from perfect with some of there glass, I like the kool aid too but your talking 35mm lenses and comparing them against ANY MF lens is a different ball game.
    Yup, I've had some Leica dogs and they've all been 35 lux or cron but aside from that all my Leica glass is amazing corner to corner and none of my Phase glass is that good, with the exception of the 80D but as I said there's no poetry to its accuracy. I stand by what I said: I can't trust most of my Phamiya glass to give me an edge to edge usable frame (I include the 28D here) and I can trust all of my Leica glass to do so. So I get all my Leica pixels and fewer of my Phamiyas, which makes my framing accuracy slightly more accurate on the Leica!

    Having said that, I have a Bicam arriving soon with some nice Schneider glass and I do expect that to be different.

  34. #34
    Administrator, Instructor Guy Mancuso's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    23,623
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2555

    Re: DxO P45+ test: Let the Games Begin

    Tim love to hear and the forum would also more info on the Silvestri and how that is working.
    Photography is all about experimentation and without it you will never learn art.

    www.guymancusophotography.com

  35. #35
    Subscriber robsteve's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    1,202
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    496

    Re: DxO P45+ test: Let the Games Begin

    Quote Originally Posted by Guy Mancuso View Post
    Tim, Leica has brutal and clinical lenses also. Also the Leica 19mm has poor corner sharpness on FF. Leica is far from perfect with some of there glass, I like the kool aid too but your talking 35mm lenses and comparing them against ANY MF lens is a different ball game.
    Guy:

    I would argue that the corner sharpness with the 19mm on full frame has more to do with the sensor than the lens. Has anybody shot it on a sensor with angled micro lenses in the corners? Is wasn't bad on film.

    I bet you could mount one to a technical camera and shoot it on a mfdb and get better results than it did on a Canon full frame sensor.

    Robert

  36. #36
    Administrator Bob's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Prescott, Arizona
    Posts
    4,492
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    367

    Re: DxO P45+ test: Let the Games Begin

    Sombody have a horseman plate with an m mount?
    -bob

  37. #37
    Workshop Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    3,275
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    7

    Re: DxO P45+ test: Let the Games Begin

    Bob - I thought you had a horseman with an M plate??

    We have at least one. If we look around the shelves I bet we have more.

    Technically called a "Flexadapter Plate for Mamiya mount digital backs". The moniker being important to note since it's the same plate as used in the Phase One Stitching FlexAdapter for traditional view cameras.

    Or am I missing something of irony??

  38. #38
    Administrator Bob's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Prescott, Arizona
    Posts
    4,492
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    367

    Re: DxO P45+ test: Let the Games Begin

    Sorry, Doug I was not clear.
    Yes, I have the flexadapter plate.
    I am looking to see fi I can find a horseman lens plate with a Leica M lens mount on it.
    thanks
    -bob

  39. #39
    Administrator, Instructor Guy Mancuso's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    23,623
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2555

    Re: DxO P45+ test: Let the Games Begin

    Robert you should not need micro lenses on the sensor to have corner sharpness.The canon does not have it nor does the Phase 25 Plus. We all know extreme wide angles can and most do have corner sharpness issue. The leica 15mm 3.5 and even the 2.8 are not exactly stellar in the corners. I owned all of them on the DMR with the crop not bad but on a FF canon it was there also. Very hard to make any extreme wide angle lens to begin with. Hassy corrects it in there software and i am waiting for Phase to do the same thing with there 28mm in the meantime i have a cheat going for it and it works pretty good. I shot a lot of very important interiors with it and they look great. Most of the issues with these lenses has more to do with the curvature of the front element and that seems to be more the case than anything else.
    Photography is all about experimentation and without it you will never learn art.

    www.guymancusophotography.com

  40. #40
    Subscriber robsteve's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    1,202
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    496

    Re: DxO P45+ test: Let the Games Begin

    Quote Originally Posted by Guy Mancuso View Post
    Robert you should not need micro lenses on the sensor to have corner sharpness.
    You need it with the really wide angles because the light hits the sensor at such an oblique angle it is not hitting the photo site square on, but from the side.

    A good example are lenses that looked like crap on the Epson RD1, look better on the M8.

    Robert

  41. #41
    Administrator, Instructor Guy Mancuso's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    23,623
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2555

    Re: DxO P45+ test: Let the Games Begin

    I think it really is for light gathering than corner sharpness. That has always been the intention of the micro lenses was to gather light. But has nothing to do with actually sharpness of lenses

    As the development of electronic products such as digital cameras and scanners progresses, the demand for image sensors increases accordingly. In general, image sensors in common usage nowadays are divided into two main categories: charge coupled device (CCD) sensors and CMOS image sensors (CIS). The use of micro-lenses significantly improves the photosensitivity of the image sensors by collecting light from a large light collecting area and focusing it onto a small photosensitive area such as a photodiode

    http://www.freepatentsonline.com/7473522.html
    Photography is all about experimentation and without it you will never learn art.

    www.guymancusophotography.com

  42. #42
    Workshop Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    3,275
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    7

    Re: DxO P45+ test: Let the Games Begin

    Quote Originally Posted by Guy Mancuso View Post
    I think it really is for light gathering than corner sharpness. That has always been the intention of the micro lenses was to gather light. But has nothing to do with actually sharpness of lenses

    As the development of electronic products such as digital cameras and scanners progresses, the demand for image sensors increases accordingly. In general, image sensors in common usage nowadays are divided into two main categories: charge coupled device (CCD) sensors and CMOS image sensors (CIS). The use of micro-lenses significantly improves the photosensitivity of the image sensors by collecting light from a large light collecting area and focusing it onto a small photosensitive area such as a photodiode

    http://www.freepatentsonline.com/7473522.html
    Basically micro lenses allow you to capture the light that otherwise would have fallen inbetween the photodiodes which are actually light-sensitive. Depending on the sensor the part of any given pixel's worth of area on the chip which was sensitive to light may only be 70% of the linear size (or half the area). By adding a micro lens the input size of which is the entire size of the "pixel" and funneling that into the the half of the area which is sensitive to light you maximize the number of photons you collect which means that for any given numerical ISO you have better signal-to-noise than you would have for the same sensor made without micro lenses.

    To summarize the technical blah blah the micro lenses on the P30+ mean that at ISO 100 you have the image quality as the P45+ at ISO50 (though the later has more resolution because of the larger chip).

    Even those getting down to the technical level of what micron size the "effective" pixels are can miss the fact that not the entire "effective" pixel gathers light. The jump from the P25+ to P45+ (both near-full-frame sensors at 22 and 39 megapixels respectively) was able to be made, in part because while the "effective" area of the pixel was reduced from 9 to 6.8 micron the are of the pixel which gathered light was kept roughly the same by shrinking (and modernizing) the electronics package which sits next to the pixel (and which is not sensitive to light). Throw in a superior path-to-Raw (the AD convertor, physical wiring, heat sinking, and black frame technology) and the dynamic range was actually increased (modestly but measurably) despite the decrease in "effective" pixel size.

    For this and many other reasons not all pixels are created equal. I really wish a lot of this was more strait forward and could be easily and quickly explained without significant background knowledge. DxO tests have two problems; 1) they try to reduce the very multi-faceted element of IQ/noise/ISO to a single number and 2) they ignore the very large number of elements outside of the sensor.

    Guys like Bob and I spend most of every day with this technical stuff and neither of us will claim to know half of what we need to to really, truly, fully understand why MFD handled correctly consistently outperforms dSLRs handled correctly.

    That's why the company I work for, Capture Integration, spends so much time and money getting gear into people's hands for them to actually shoot. As with when we brought a full suite of gear for the Moab workshop. You really have to shoot it yourself (aided by advice from someone with lots of MFD experience) to see why people regularly drop $10-50k on gear which may share numerical attributes with gear which is $2-9k. The 5DII and P25+ may share the same resolution number, and the 5DII may be the best camera ever produced at that price point, but they are not even remotely in the same league.

    *sigh* goes back to answering tech calls

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

  43. #43
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    561
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: DxO P45+ test: Let the Games Begin

    Quote Originally Posted by yaya View Post
    You can read about their method here and here
    Thanks Yair for the link.

    Still not 100% sure how they are doing their 'analyzing'.

    If they are working directly off the RAW file (Hasselblad, Leaf, Phase One etc) then they are not getting the whole picture as they do not know how we, the companies, work with that data.

    The 3F file in our case is not the be all and end all. Much is done in the software which would affect finite image quality.

    Best,


    David

  44. #44
    Subscriber robsteve's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    1,202
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    496

    Re: DxO P45+ test: Let the Games Begin

    Doug:

    Do the Phase backs that have micro lenses, angle them as they reach the edge of the sensor like Kodak did for Leica in the M8 and DMR sensors? I think that is the difference Guy is forgetting.

    Robert

  45. #45
    Subscriber robsteve's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    1,202
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    496

    Re: DxO P45+ test: Let the Games Begin

    Quote Originally Posted by Guy Mancuso View Post
    Robert you should not need micro lenses on the sensor to have corner sharpness.
    Guy:

    I meant angled micro lenses, where they are tilted to match the oblique angle of light coming in at the edges. I don't know if any of the other digital backs have them other than the DMR. The M8 has them too.

    Think of the photo site on the sensor like the head of a strike anywhere wooden match. The light coming out of a wide angle on the edges of the sensor would be hitting the side of the match head, where it is not so sensitive to lighting. A micro lens is then put on top of it but tilted towards the center of the sensor to gather this light coming in at an oblique angle and redirect it down onto the top of the match, where it is more sensitive.

    Robert

  46. #46
    Administrator, Instructor Guy Mancuso's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    23,623
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2555

    Re: DxO P45+ test: Let the Games Begin

    Quote Originally Posted by robsteve View Post
    Doug:

    Do the Phase backs that have micro lenses, angle them as they reach the edge of the sensor like Kodak did for Leica in the M8 and DMR sensors? I think that is the difference Guy is forgetting.

    Robert
    The P30 Plus has micro lenses as well as the P21 plus
    Photography is all about experimentation and without it you will never learn art.

    www.guymancusophotography.com

  47. #47
    Subscriber robsteve's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    1,202
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    496

    Re: DxO P45+ test: Let the Games Begin

    Quote Originally Posted by Guy Mancuso View Post
    The P30 Plus has micro lenses as well as the P21 plus
    Are they angled at the edges of the sensor?

    Robert

  48. #48
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Dallas, TX
    Posts
    819
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: DxO P45+ test: Let the Games Begin

    Quote Originally Posted by glenerrolrd View Post
    Why is this so surprising? It seems that the DxO tests only represent a single dimension and doesn t factor in size of the sensor in any meaningful way. Isn t it closer to comparing films .You could use the exact same film in both 35mm and 2 1/4.....and immediately see the difference . They really doesn t seems to be any way to compare different sensor sizes..but within a group it looks pretty accurate. Reminds me of the old lens tests ...didn t the original zeiss lens on the Hasselblad look weak compared to the Leica glass?
    Even if a dSLR matched or surpassed a medium format CCD, the MF sensor will always have this key advantage. For my needs the larger sensor (negative) is the only reason to shoot medium format. A 200mm lens on a 48x36mm sensor has a very different look and feel than the same lens mounted on a 1Ds3 (via adapter).

    I suspect CCD's capture more dynamic range if the measurement is bounded by saying all three channels must NOT clip. DxO's measurement doesn't care if two channels clipped, so long as 1 channel is still holding data - that's DR. That doesn't mean it's good (or useful) dynamic range. DxO's results would be more helpful if they showed the 3 RGB channels on chart similar to a C1 RGB histogram. Talking about dynamic range as a single, composite number is misleading.

  49. #49
    Senior Member Steve Hendrix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    420
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    4

    Re: DxO P45+ test: Let the Games Begin

    Quote Originally Posted by robsteve View Post
    Are they angled at the edges of the sensor?

    Robert
    Not sure about that Robert, but the primary purpose of their design is to enhance light gathering capability, which allows for cleaner high ISO, and coincidentally faster throuput because of the cleaner signal.


    Steve Hendrix
    Phase One

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
  •