Luminous Landscape Forum

Equipment & Techniques => Medium Format / Film / Digital Backs – and Large Sensor Photography => Topic started by: AlexKoloskov on August 03, 2012, 04:06:25 pm

Title: Nikon D800E v.s Hasselblad H4D40: my in-studio test-review
Post by: AlexKoloskov on August 03, 2012, 04:06:25 pm
I've got this test-review posted, did it mostly for my own curiosity (I am in upgrade mode from an old H1 and P25+ DB), and i think it might be interesting here :-)
So, I've tested Nikon D800E v.s Hasselblad H4D40 in terms for details, shadows and highlight recovery. Selected H4D40 as the closest current MF camera to Nikon 36Mpx D800E

My "Rambo-style" shot with both cameras:
(http://www.photigy.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/Nkon-D800E-vs-Hasselblad-H4D40-alex-koloskov-art.jpg)

Part one: http://www.photigy.com/nikon-d800e-test-review-vs-hasselblad-h4d40-35mm-against-medium-format/

Part two:
http://www.photigy.com/nikon-d800e-v-s-hasselblad-h4d40-the-end-of-medium-format-superiority-round-two/

I know that F16 is not the sharpest aperture, but this  is what I use the most in a studio product photography, so I needed to see the difference at closed iris.
Enjoy the read and let me know what do you think.
Alex
Title: Re: Nikon D800E v.s Hasselblad H4D40: my in-studio test-review
Post by: PdF on August 03, 2012, 04:22:29 pm
Thank you for this confirmation: the difference between a digital MF and the Nikon D800E is very slight.

PdF
Title: Re: Nikon D800E v.s Hasselblad H4D40: my in-studio test-review
Post by: evgeny on August 03, 2012, 04:58:22 pm
Thank you for this confirmation.
Hasselblad images show reacher colors and better dynamic range, as expected.

Evgeny
Title: Re: Nikon D800E v.s Hasselblad H4D40: my in-studio test-review
Post by: Don Libby on August 03, 2012, 05:38:12 pm
Great write-up with good samples.  Thanks for the effort.

Don
Title: Re: Nikon D800E v.s Hasselblad H4D40: my in-studio test-review
Post by: bjanes on August 03, 2012, 05:57:47 pm
I know that F16 is not the sharpest aperture, but this  is what I use the most in a studio product photography, so I needed to see the difference at closed iris.
Enjoy the read and let me know what do you think.
Alex

Alex,

Thank you for an excellent comparison, but you have not taken into account how sensors scale with respect to pixel size and sensor size. With smaller pixels one has to use a larger aperture (smaller f/number) to prevent loss of MTF from diffraction. This is well demonstrated in Figure 8 of Roger Clark's post (http://www.clarkvision.com/articles//does.pixel.size.matter/#The_f_ratio_Myth). You should really use a larger aperture (perhaps one f/stop) with the D800e to offset the effects of diffraction. Since the smaller sensor has more depth of field for a given aperture, this would also tend to equalize differences in depth of field between the two sensor sizes. Roger also discusses this factor in his post.

Regards,

Bill
Title: Re: Nikon D800E v.s Hasselblad H4D40: my in-studio test-review
Post by: ErikKaffehr on August 03, 2012, 07:04:22 pm
Hi,

Thank you for publishing the images. I made a quick comparison. Opened both images in Lightroom 4.1, white balanced both images on one of the buttons  on the lady's shirt and sharpened as I would on landscape for f/11. A bit excessive for portrait, I know. Then I uprezzed the Nikon image to in height using straight bicubic.

What I note:

1) The Nikon image shows some staircase and interpolation artifacts. That may come from the enlargement.
2) DoF is much shorter in the Hasselblad image. The Nikon image could use f/8 or even f/5.6 for equiavlent DoF. That would give Nikon an advantage regarding diffraction.
3) Hasselblad image is cleaner and has little more detail.
4) Note hair crossing the pupil of the eye on the Hassy image. It has very artificial look. May it be a missing column of pixels in the image? Does Phocus software show same behavior?

Which image has more natural colors? Hard to say...

Best regards
Erik
Title: Re: Nikon D800E v.s Hasselblad H4D40: my in-studio test-review
Post by: ErikKaffehr on August 03, 2012, 07:42:57 pm
Update: Original posting had the wrong images, corrected!

Hi,

I tried to look at color accuracy. Note that this is about accuracy, not pleasantness.

I converted both images to 16 bits TIFF using Lightroom 4.1 (that is what I use). White balance was on the second grey patch from the left. Adjusted both image to similar exposure and analyzed the images using Imatest Color Check. According to Imatest the images were 0.7 step overexposed, so exposure was reduced for both images by 0.7 steps. The results are shown in the enclosed screen dumps.

First image shows the colors compared to color checker colors. The second one shows the position of the colors in lab space. The colors in the Nikon image, as processed, are significantly more accurate. In both cases the colors are probably more saturated than the reference colors, probably for better visual impression.

I would like to thank the OP for posting raw files of very adequate test images.

Best regards
Erik
Title: Re: Nikon D800E v.s Hasselblad H4D40: my in-studio test-review
Post by: ErikKaffehr on August 03, 2012, 08:04:46 pm
Hi,

I tried to reduce saturation in LR 4.1 to get better match with reference colors, I arrived at:

-13 for Hassy
-4 for Nikon

Color still has a better match on Nikon.

The next step is to build a DNG color profile for each and repeat the experiment.

Best regards
Erik
Title: Re: Nikon D800E v.s Hasselblad H4D40: my in-studio test-review
Post by: EricWHiss on August 03, 2012, 08:06:41 pm
Color accuracy vs pleasing colors is one thing which I won't get into, however to me the nikon has less color variation or tonality.  The tonality is what lends the image a more palpable feel or depth.  No question the nikon is capturing lots of detail, but not color detail, just detail in the luminosity sense. I've read different conjecture on why - color filter choice being one of them, but I don't know why for sure.  Anyhow another big difference between the DSLR and MF is the DOF which is shallower on the MF.  This is good and bad depending on what you are trying to shoot. You can see it in the portraits of the little girl.

I thank Alex for doing the test and sharing the results. 
Title: Re: Nikon D800E v.s Hasselblad H4D40: my in-studio test-review
Post by: ErikKaffehr on August 03, 2012, 08:23:51 pm
Hi,

According to Imatest Color Check it seems that LR 4.1 produces a bit more saturated colors on the Hassy. How do you think bumping up the saturation would affect the Nikon image?

The observation on DoF is absolutely correct. I actually think that would the Nikon lens be used at f/8 or f/5.6 would level the playing field. As pointed out by the OP, the Nikon lens is a "cheap one" a 105/2.8, but it would still probably work better at f/5.6 than at f/11. On the other hand, the only Nikon 105/2.8 I heard about is the Macro 105/2.8 and it is said to be very good.

In all a very good test, and a lot of thanks to Mr. Koloskov for sharing raw images. Obviously, my results may be different if Phocus was used.

Best regards
Erik

Color accuracy vs pleasing colors is one thing which I won't get into, however to me the nikon has less color variation or tonality.  The tonality is what lends the image a more palpable feel or depth.  No question the nikon is capturing lots of detail, but not color detail, just detail in the luminosity sense. I've read different conjecture on why - color filter choice being one of them, but I don't know why for sure.  Anyhow another big difference between the DSLR and MF is the DOF which is shallower on the MF.  This is good and bad depending on what you are trying to shoot. You can see it in the portraits of the little girl.

I thank Alex for doing the test and sharing the results.  
Title: Re: Nikon D800E v.s Hasselblad H4D40: my in-studio test-review
Post by: EricWHiss on August 03, 2012, 09:16:38 pm
Hi,

According to Imatest Color Check it seems that LR 4.1 produces a bit more saturated colors on the Hassy. How do you think bumping up the saturation would affect the Nikon image?


Best regards
Erik


I compared some figurative images shot in my studio by my friend with his D800E and my AFi-ii 12 last month using the same model and lighting.   I observed the same points.  Shallower DOF on the AFi (and in that case I shot at f/14 or f/16 while my friend shot at f/10 using the same cropping.   Color differences were very pronounced but I only used C1 for both files.  Nikon files looked flat both at fit to screen and at 100% compared to the AFi-ii 12.   I was impressed with the detail the D800E could capture, but again it seems to be all in the luminosity channel, not in the individual color.    The AFi images looked to have more depth and feel.  Overall I was impressed with the D800E but its not superior to MFDB at base ISO.   

RE: Dynamic range.    I did run the Stouf001.NEF shot that I think Bernhard posted to the forums through Imatest and compared it to a shot I took of my own Stouffer transmission wedge.  It seemed that the Aptus 12 (similar to the IQ180) had about .4 stops of DR over the D800 at all the levels Imatest presents in the chart.   I can't say its a conclusive test since one shot was taken by someone else with a different step wedge and lighting conditions as mine.  At this level of DR I am also wondering how much differences are introduced by different lenses.   I'm not going to post the results since I'm not sure they are fair. 

My overall impression of the D800 is that its a very good camera, but still does not match the quality capable of the current MFDB's.  The real advantage to that camera is the better autofocus and higher ISO capability - and of course cost. 

Title: Re: Nikon D800E v.s Hasselblad H4D40: my in-studio test-review
Post by: ErikKaffehr on August 03, 2012, 10:27:35 pm
Hi,

I have a hunch that DSLRs have less orthogonal CGAs, meaning that there is more overlap between the color channels. That would be beneficial to high ISO performance. The new monochrome version of the Leica M9 lacks CGA and has very high base ISO, as an example.

Some knowledgeable person claim that Sony Alphas have better color than Nikon/Canon, but they are also noisier at high ISO. Sony has some film heritage from the Konica Minolta days and that may show. Although using Sony I have no clear view on this. I see color as mostly depending on processing. That said I have compared images from Pentax 645D and Nikon D3X that Miles Hecker has made, and I couldn't get them to match. Which was more correct? I may guess the Nikon image, but I preferred the Pentax image.

Regarding DR and the Stouffer Wedge it is my understanding that it is not particularly easy to use, as lens flare affects the results. Arri (Arriflex) has developed a special target for DR measurements with ver small gray patches. I got the impression that DxO uses the Arri target for their measurements.

I played around a bit with Alex's raw images, bumped up saturation on the Nikon image a bit and increased exposure about 1/3 stop. I enclose a side by side screen dump from LR4.1. The amount of saturation increase was based on my Imatest analysis.

Best regards
Erik


I compared some figurative images shot in my studio by my friend with his D800E and my AFi-ii 12 last month using the same model and lighting.   I observed the same points.  Shallower DOF on the AFi (and in that case I shot at f/14 or f/16 while my friend shot at f/10 using the same cropping.   Color differences were very pronounced but I only used C1 for both files.  Nikon files looked flat both at fit to screen and at 100% compared to the AFi-ii 12.   I was impressed with the detail the D800E could capture, but again it seems to be all in the luminosity channel, not in the individual color.    The AFi images looked to have more depth and feel.  Overall I was impressed with the D800E but its not superior to MFDB at base ISO.   

RE: Dynamic range.    I did run the Stouf001.NEF shot that I think Bernhard posted to the forums through Imatest and compared it to a shot I took of my own Stouffer transmission wedge.  It seemed that the Aptus 12 (similar to the IQ180) had about .4 stops of DR over the D800 at all the levels Imatest presents in the chart.   I can't say its a conclusive test since one shot was taken by someone else with a different step wedge and lighting conditions as mine.  At this level of DR I am also wondering how much differences are introduced by different lenses.   I'm not going to post the results since I'm not sure they are fair. 

My overall impression of the D800 is that its a very good camera, but still does not match the quality capable of the current MFDB's.  The real advantage to that camera is the better autofocus and higher ISO capability - and of course cost. 


Title: Re: Nikon D800E v.s Hasselblad H4D40: my in-studio test-review
Post by: EricWHiss on August 03, 2012, 10:51:41 pm
Erik,
Look at your image set and compare the regions under the eyes near the nose, the eyes themselves, the top of the forehead where the hair is starting but you can still see the scalp, the lips, the stain on her shirt to the left and down from the button.  The spot on her skin near to the left of her mouth.  These all show you which camera has better tonality.  Now that you've equalized the saturation etc.  which image looks more real to you?
Title: Re: Nikon D800E v.s Hasselblad H4D40: my in-studio test-review
Post by: AlexKoloskov on August 03, 2012, 11:32:26 pm
Alex,

Thank you for an excellent comparison, but you have not taken into account how sensors scale with respect to pixel size and sensor size. With smaller pixels one has to use a larger aperture (smaller f/number) to prevent loss of MTF from diffraction. This is well demonstrated in Figure 8 of Roger Clark's post (http://www.clarkvision.com/articles//does.pixel.size.matter/#The_f_ratio_Myth). You should really use a larger aperture (perhaps one f/stop) with the D800e to offset the effects of diffraction. Since the smaller sensor has more depth of field for a given aperture, this would also tend to equalize differences in depth of field between the two sensor sizes. Roger also discusses this factor in his post.

Regards,

Bill

Yep, agree. did not think about it. I use F16 on my full frame canon, so following your advise I'd have to close down Hasselblad to F18-20 to match DOF and diffraction levels.
However, following this route would require to replace Nikon's lens to something closer to Hassy's as well:-)
Thank you everyone, I dig your comments :-)
Title: Re: Nikon D800E v.s Hasselblad H4D40: my in-studio test-review
Post by: MichaelEzra on August 04, 2012, 12:13:37 am
Alex, thank you for this review and its great presentation and providing the raw files. I'd like to add a few points.
I played with the portrait raw files using RawTherapee, without using custom DCP profiles, but using dcraw camera matrices, which seem to be the same as Adobe.
I'd like to point that due to composition differences D800E file is in inferior position as portrait is captured in a smaller scale (illustration 1)
Additionally, there are some differences in skintones due to movement in relation to the light.
Lenses on both cameras were set at F11 which leads to different rendering of the DOF and overall image look, also in favor for sharpness in critical focus for H4D.

Nevertheless, this illustration 2 (http://minus.com/m2aWArEH6 (http://minus.com/m2aWArEH6/)) can be used for comparing skintones from both cameras as well as resolution. I added identical sharpening to both images.
As owner of D800E I am very happy with this result!:)
Attached in the zip file are the pp3 sidecar files that can be re-used in RawTherapee (version 4.9.50+)
Title: Re: Nikon D800E v.s Hasselblad H4D40: my in-studio test-review
Post by: K.C. on August 04, 2012, 01:22:32 am
My overall impression of the D800 is that its a very good camera, but still does not match the quality capable of the current MFDB's.  The real advantage to that camera is the better autofocus and higher ISO capability - and of course cost. 

But the reality is in many markets the cheaper Nikon will allow new competition entry into your market, no matter what it is. There will be countless threads about how to give the Nikon images a look that comes close enough to move clients from studios that shoot MF to guys working cheap to gain clients. 

I love my Hasselblads and I'm buying the Nikon. My clients can decide which they want me to use,
Title: Re: Nikon D800E v.s Hasselblad H4D40: my in-studio test-review
Post by: EricWHiss on August 04, 2012, 01:39:52 am
Well really how much has changed?  Tons of work has been done with the 1Ds, 5D, 5D mk2, etc.     
Title: Re: Nikon D800E v.s Hasselblad H4D40: my in-studio test-review
Post by: FredBGG on August 04, 2012, 02:47:42 am
I think it is very important to point out the lenses used for this comparison and the aperture used.

A fair comparison would have been shooting at least on stop more open with the Nikon, because that is what would
give both images about the same depth of field.... thus comparing diffraction more fairly.

Second thing I want to point out is that the focal lengths are not equivalent either.
85mm vs 120mm would have been more equivalent.

Lastly the 105 2.8G macro is not the best Nikon lens.

Here is a comparison between the 85mm 1.4G and the 105mm 2.8G

85mm 1.4G
(http://media.the-digital-picture.com/Images/Lens-Tests/ISO-12233/Nikon-85mm-f-1.4G-AF-S-Lens/Crop3/2010-09-16_11-13-51.jpg)

105mm 2.8G
(http://media.the-digital-picture.com/Images/Lens-Tests/ISO-12233/Nikon-105mm-f-2.8G-AF-S-VR-Micro-Lens/Crop3/2009-11-03_16-09-24.jpg)

Clearly the 85mm 1.4G would make up for the difference in the D800 vs Hasselblad test

There are quite a few Nikon lenses that are better than the 105 2.8G

50mm 1.4G
(http://media.the-digital-picture.com/Images/Lens-Tests/ISO-12233/Nikon-50mm-f-1.4G-AF-S-Lens/Crop3/2009-10-23_15-38-42.jpg)

105mm f2D
(http://media.the-digital-picture.com/Images/Lens-Tests/ISO-12233/Nikon-105mm-f-2D-AF-DC-Lens/Crop3/2009-12-17_17-06-49.jpg)

even a zoom 70-200mm 2.8G
(http://media.the-digital-picture.com/Images/Lens-Tests/ISO-12233/Nikon-70-200mm-f-2.8G-AF-S-VR-Lens/Crop3/2010-04-08_09-11-35.jpg)
Title: Re: Nikon D800E v.s Hasselblad H4D40: my in-studio test-review
Post by: ErikKaffehr on August 04, 2012, 03:57:02 am
Hi,

To begin with, Nikonians may rejoice now they have a 3000$ 36MP camera instead of a 8000$ 24MP one. I guess that is without doubt a good thing.

The other impression I have is that the test images are quite close. An assumption may be that they would be even closer in print.

In my view, this is a very valid test. There are a few factors favoring the Hassy but there may be other factors favoring the D8000. I wouldn't call this a scientific test. In a scientific test we try to eliminate as many variables as possible. A scientific test also needs to be reproducible, therefore dollar bills and color checkers are used instead of young ladies. The tests that DPReview and ImagingResource do are more scientific, they ought to be for they do testing for living.

To me it seems that the Nikon D800/E is a very interesting alternative to low end MF. Little doubt that better image quality can be achieved with high end digital, like the IQ180, if that equipment is put to perfect use. In addition, digital backs have a lot of flexibility.

Best regards
Erik




Well really how much has changed?  Tons of work has been done with the 1Ds, 5D, 5D mk2, etc.     
Title: Re: Nikon D800E v.s Hasselblad H4D40: my in-studio test-review
Post by: ErikKaffehr on August 04, 2012, 04:17:53 am
Eric,

Thanks for hints where to look, I see some of your points. I don't know which looks most real to me. I'm essentially shooting landscapes.

My guess is that if you made prints from these images and sold to a customer the customer would buy the one with better facial expression, regardless of tonality.

Best regards
Erik


Erik,
Look at your image set and compare the regions under the eyes near the nose, the eyes themselves, the top of the forehead where the hair is starting but you can still see the scalp, the lips, the stain on her shirt to the left and down from the button.  The spot on her skin near to the left of her mouth.  These all show you which camera has better tonality.  Now that you've equalized the saturation etc.  which image looks more real to you?

Title: Re: Nikon D800E v.s Hasselblad H4D40: my in-studio test-review
Post by: K.C. on August 04, 2012, 04:43:37 am
Well really how much has changed?  Tons of work has been done with the 1Ds, 5D, 5D mk2, etc.     

No doubt. But the point is that DSLR is getting closer and for many markets that's enough.

To me it seems that the Nikon D800/E is a very interesting alternative to low end MF.

That's the way I'll be working, offering both alternatives.
Title: Re: Nikon D800E v.s Hasselblad H4D40: my in-studio test-review
Post by: gazwas on August 04, 2012, 05:24:35 am
Interesting read Alex and very brave to post a review that swings opinion so much. I often feel the side a photographer usually takes has more to do with which of these cameras they own and justifying that decision more than anything else. That seems pretty much the case here reading the above replies.

Not wanting to take away anything from the D800, it is an amazing camera at an equally impressive price but I've not seen a single test at any aperture that would tempt me away from my Canons, never mind my MFD kit. A camera is not just the chip IMO and a 35mm based system will never be as flexible as a MFD back.
Title: Re: Nikon D800E v.s Hasselblad H4D40: my in-studio test-review
Post by: ErikKaffehr on August 04, 2012, 05:32:46 am
Hi,

I presume physics preclude a full frame 135 DSLR being lightyears ahead an MF camera with a larger sensor ;-)

Best regards
Erik



Damn, there I was hoping this test would prove that the D800 was light-years ahead of any MFD and would see an end to these comparison threads.

Some hope  ::)
Title: Re: Nikon D800E v.s Hasselblad H4D40: my in-studio test-review
Post by: ErikKaffehr on August 04, 2012, 05:53:58 am
Hi,

You make a very good point in case of Canon. I have downloaded test images from DPReview and really looked for issues with DR. I'm pretty sure that Nikon does have an advantage but it may matter little for many subjects. Resolution is the same. Nikon has a lead, for sure, but it may matter little. In real life we don't have dead on focus, we need to stop down beyond optimum aperture and so on. Also, today cameras may be good enough. Lot of folks claim that 12MP is good enough for almost any work.

The Nikon has some interesting features, however:

- It's the highest resolving FF DSLR
- At present it is cheaper than the competition
- It's essentially a champ regarding DR in the full frame DSLR camp
- The D800E is the only FF DSLR without and OLP filter

Technically speaking, I guess the optimum is using an IQ 180 och an Alpa shimmed to 0.01 mm precision used with an APO HR Digitar at f/5.6 and a laser rangefinder. Some photographers do that or use live view on the IQ180 for focusing. But I guess that even the IQ180 is mostly used under lesser conditions, for instance with focal plane shutter causing vibrations.

Best regards
Erik

Interesting read Alex and very brave to post a review that swings opinion so much. I often feel the side a photographer usually takes has more to do with which of these cameras they own and justifying that decision more than anything else. That seems pretty much the case here reading the above replies.

Not wanting to take away anything from the D800, it is an amazing camera at an equally impressive price but I've not seen a single test at any aperture that would tempt me away from my Canons, never mind my MFD kit. A camera is not just the chip IMO and a 35mm based system will never be as flexible as a MFD back.
Title: Re: Nikon D800E v.s Hasselblad H4D40: my in-studio test-review
Post by: bjanes on August 04, 2012, 08:00:50 am

I tried to look at color accuracy. Note that this is about accuracy, not pleasantness.

First image shows the colors compared to color checker colors. The second one shows the position of the colors in lab space. The colors in the Nikon image, as processed, are significantly more accurate. In both cases the colors are probably more saturated than the reference colors, probably for better visual impression.

Erik,

Thanks for posting the Imatest Colorcheck results. However, your statement that the Nikon colors are more accurate is puzzling to me. The Nikon colors are over-saturated, but this is not that serious since saturation can be adjusted in processing and increased saturation is often desired anyway. However, shifts in hue are not desirable and these are reflected in the DeltaC*ab chroma corrected results, which are less for the Hasselblad. On the color plots, hue shifts are indicated when the line connecting the camera color and the ideal color do not pass through the white point. This is most evident in patch 15 in the Nikon file.

Regards,

Bill
Title: Re: Nikon D800E v.s Hasselblad H4D40: my in-studio test-review
Post by: ErikKaffehr on August 04, 2012, 08:59:06 am
Bill,

It seems I posted the wrong screen dumps. Sorry! It is now corrected. Here are the correct images:

Thanks for pointing out my error!

Best regards
Erik


Erik,

Thanks for posting the Imatest Colorcheck results. However, your statement that the Nikon colors are more accurate is puzzling to me. The Nikon colors are over-saturated, but this is not that serious since saturation can be adjusted in processing and increased saturation is often desired anyway. However, shifts in hue are not desirable and these are reflected in the DeltaC*ab chroma corrected results, which are less for the Hasselblad. On the color plots, hue shifts are indicated when the line connecting the camera color and the ideal color do not pass through the white point. This is most evident in patch 15 in the Nikon file.

Regards,

Bill
Title: Re: Nikon D800E v.s Hasselblad H4D40: my in-studio test-review
Post by: MrSmith on August 04, 2012, 09:34:40 am
Quote
To me it seems that the Nikon D800/E is a very interesting alternative to low end MF. Little doubt that better image quality can be achieved with high end digital, like the IQ180, if that equipment is put to perfect use. In addition, digital backs have a lot of flexibility.

How is a 10k digital back "low end" not everyone is a lawyer/optician  ::)
From where I'm looking digital backs have less flexibility than a pro DSLR.
Title: Re: Nikon D800E v.s Hasselblad H4D40: my in-studio test-review
Post by: MichaelEzra on August 04, 2012, 10:00:36 am
Here is another comparison view that is easier to see via browser.
A custom made camera profile would likely equalize the tonal differences.
Resolution-wise this is splitting hairs, literally.
Both cameras are great:)
Title: Re: Nikon D800E v.s Hasselblad H4D40: my in-studio test-review
Post by: ErikKaffehr on August 04, 2012, 10:44:56 am
Hi,

I didn't want to be ignorant. MFDBs begin around 10 kUSD so that is the current low end. You can also get a used (or pre owned) back at lower price. The situation may be different if you happen to own a lot of equipment.

If you can buy a camera at one fifth the price doing the same job as the more expensive camera, it must be good news. A year ago the only 20+ MP alternative from Nikon was the D3X, at 8 kUSD. Canon and Sony owners had affordable 20+ MP alternatives for three years.

Best regards
Erik

How is a 10k digital back "low end" not everyone is a lawyer/optician  ::)
From where I'm looking digital backs have less flexibility than a pro DSLR.
Title: Re: Nikon D800E v.s Hasselblad H4D40: my in-studio test-review
Post by: ErikKaffehr on August 04, 2012, 10:49:49 am
Thanks for the sample image.

I printed the samples in A2 with a crop on the head. In my view the Hassy image is a bit sharper, probably due to different image scale, image format, lens, diffraction and other issues discussed but the images are pretty close. There are differences, I cannot say which I prefer.

Best regards
Erik

Here is another comparison view that is easier to see via browser.
A custom made camera profile would likely equalize the tonal differences.
Resolution-wise this is splitting hairs, literally.
Both cameras are great:)
Title: Re: Nikon D800E v.s Hasselblad H4D40: my in-studio test-review
Post by: gazwas on August 04, 2012, 11:07:21 am
From where I'm looking digital backs have less flexibility than a pro DSLR.

And there lies the problem with this type of comparison!  :-\

Its more about your personal view point than anything else. I value the extra money spent on a digital back as they are more than just IQ and Mpix count. To me, in my field of work, a digital has way, way more flexibility than any 35mm DSLR. People who don't use one as I do won't see the added value and only see the BIG difference in price tag vs Mpix count.
Title: Re: Nikon D800E v.s Hasselblad H4D40: my in-studio test-review
Post by: Don Libby on August 04, 2012, 11:46:00 am
And there lies the problem with this type of comparison!  :-\

Its more about your personal view point than anything else. I value the extra money spent on a digital back as they are more than just IQ and Mpix count. To me, in my field of work, a digital has way, way more flexibility than any 35mm DSLR. People who don't use one as I do won't see the added value and only see the BIG difference in price tag vs Mpix count.

Plus One!
Title: Re: Nikon D800E v.s Hasselblad H4D40: my in-studio test-review
Post by: Go Go on August 04, 2012, 12:14:06 pm
Plus One!

Plus Two!
Title: Re: Nikon D800E v.s Hasselblad H4D40: my in-studio test-review
Post by: EricWHiss on August 04, 2012, 12:14:57 pm
To begin with, Nikonians may rejoice now they have a 3000$ 36MP camera instead of a 8000$ 24MP one. I guess that is without doubt a good thing.

Well maybe but the price difference is more because its not in a pro body format.  The pro body has significantly better autofocus among other advantages. Surely there would be many who'd pay $8000 for the D800E sensor put into a pro body?  People are saying the 5Dmk3 and the H4 bodies have more accurate AF.  

And yes, the D800 is cheap enough that most MFDB users could also have one in their bag.


Title: Re: Nikon D800E v.s Hasselblad H4D40: my in-studio test-review
Post by: ErikKaffehr on August 04, 2012, 01:11:39 pm
Hi Eric,

According to DPReview the AF-system on the D800 is the same as on the D4, of course they may be wrong.

Anyway, there D800 is the resolution champ in the Nikon lineup.

Some photographers actually switched over from 1DsIII to 5DII, either to save weight or to have two identical bodies. I also got the impression that the new Canon 5DIII is much more robust than the old 5DII.

The impression I have is that the "pro" bodies are now intended mostly for sports, photojournalism and high ISO work.

Best regards
Erik


Well maybe but the price difference is more because its not in a pro body format.  The pro body has significantly better autofocus among other advantages. Surely there would be many who'd pay $8000 for the D800E sensor put into a pro body?  People are saying the 5Dmk3 and the H4 bodies have more accurate AF.  

And yes, the D800 is cheap enough that most MFDB users could also have one in their bag.



Title: Re: Nikon D800E v.s Hasselblad H4D40: my in-studio test-review
Post by: FredBGG on August 04, 2012, 01:56:28 pm
Hi,

To begin with, Nikonians may rejoice now they have a 3000$ 36MP camera instead of a 8000$ 24MP one. I guess that is without doubt a good thing.

The other impression I have is that the test images are quite close. An assumption may be that they would be even closer in print.

In my view, this is a very valid test. There are a few factors favoring the Hassy but there may be other factors favoring the D8000. I wouldn't call this a scientific test. In a scientific test we try to eliminate as many variables as possible. A scientific test also needs to be reproducible, therefore dollar bills and color checkers are used instead of young ladies. The tests that DPReview and ImagingResource do are more scientific, they ought to be for they do testing for living.

To me it seems that the Nikon D800/E is a very interesting alternative to low end MF. Little doubt that better image quality can be achieved with high end digital, like the IQ180, if that equipment is put to perfect use. In addition, digital backs have a lot of flexibility.

Best regards
Erik








The test was well done, but it is important that the test not be considered a comparison between the D800 and Hasselblad H4D40.
The lens is very important. As I posted before the 105mm 2.8G is not the best lens to use for this comparison.

(correction) ErikKaffehr examples processing both files the same way shows that the cameras are pretty much indistinguishable. If the test were re done with the Nikon 85mm 1.4G and using equivalent apertures the Nikon d800 would look better than with the 105 2.8G

Take a look again at how evident the difference between the 105mm 2.8G and the 85mm 1.4G is if you consider how close the test came out.

85mm 1.4G
(http://media.the-digital-picture.com/Images/Lens-Tests/ISO-12233/Nikon-85mm-f-1.4G-AF-S-Lens/Crop3/2010-09-16_11-13-51.jpg)

105mm 2.8G
(http://media.the-digital-picture.com/Images/Lens-Tests/ISO-12233/Nikon-105mm-f-2.8G-AF-S-VR-Micro-Lens/Crop3/2009-11-03_16-09-24.jpg)

I bring this up because the results of the test were so close.

But it's also important to keep in mind that the 85mm 1.4G will also give you bokeh and shallow depth of field that the Hasselblad (Fuji) lens cannot match.

Then on top of that there is the superior flexibility, reliability and handling of a top of the line DSLR system.
Reliability is just without comparison especially when you consider that you can buy a back up of each lens and camera and still come out
at less than half the expenditure.


I'm no "Nikonian" or gear fan. To me it's all about the image and when I want certain results I will still use 8x10 film or larger medium fornat film, even if it is impractical.

I have come to the conclusion that there is no advantage to using MF digital over a D800 and D800E combination.

The only time there would be a difference and only between an IQ180 and a D800 is for prints of 60x40 inches
AND YOU WILL BE VIEWING PARTS OF THE IMAGE CLOSE UP. By that I do not mean looking at a full composition from a normal viewing distance.

Also there will be some scientific applications where pixel peeping is done where the increase in resolution is needed.

But in conclusion let me say that if you love gear and like to romanticize about medium format there is nothing wrong with that.
I'm all for enthusiasts..... hey people buy Ferrari's in California where the speed limit is 65 mph and drive around in a cramped car with limited viability.... for fun.
Don't get me wrong.... the price of pro cameras... D800 or Hasselblad would cost way more to pros if it were not for the enthusiasts with deep pockets that keep sales higher.

It is just important that enthusiasts don't sway the decisions new photographers need to make.

Another important point is that companies like Nikon and Canon will invest more than Hasselblad or Phase One.
This is for two reasons. First of all the sheer size of the companies, but also because Canon and Nikon make so many other
lower end cameras and their sales are very influenced buy the prestige of their flagship cameras.
Title: Re: Nikon D800E v.s Hasselblad H4D40: my in-studio test-review
Post by: EricWHiss on August 04, 2012, 02:58:13 pm

ErikWHiss's examples processing both files the same way shows that the cameras are pretty much indistinguishable.

Fred, not me as I haven't posted samples, but in my tests I did find large differences between the D800E and the AFi-ii 12.  Sorry.  Please correct this.   Also I am Eric, not Erik.  There is an Erik posting to this thread however.
Title: Re: Nikon D800E v.s Hasselblad H4D40: my in-studio test-review
Post by: Gigi on August 04, 2012, 03:36:56 pm

ErikWHiss's examples processing both files the same way shows that the cameras are pretty much indistinguishable. If the test were re done with the Nikon 85mm 1.4G and using equivalent apertures the Nikon d800 would look better than with the 105 2.8G
....
I have come to the conclusion that there is no advantage to using MF digital over a D800 and D800E combination.

Eric has already noted that he doesn't agree with either your reading of his work or your conclusions.

That the d800 is a gamechanger goes without saying. We can all agree on that.

That it renders MFDB without purpose.... well, people find what they want. I'm not giving up mine. Must be for some reason.
Title: Re: Nikon D800E v.s Hasselblad H4D40: my in-studio test-review
Post by: FredBGG on August 04, 2012, 05:07:42 pm
Fred, not me as I haven't posted samples, but in my tests I did find large differences between the D800E and the AFi-ii 12.  Sorry.  Please correct this.   Also I am Eric, not Erik.  There is an Erik posting to this thread however.


Oops... corrected. Sorry I got the names confused.

Let me also clarify there is a difference between a 49MP back and an 80MP back.
Title: Re: Nikon D800E v.s Hasselblad H4D40: my in-studio test-review
Post by: FredBGG on August 04, 2012, 05:14:16 pm
Eric has already noted that he doesn't agree with either your reading of his work or your conclusions.

That the d800 is a gamechanger goes without saying. We can all agree on that.

That it renders MFDB without purpose.... well, people find what they want. I'm not giving up mine. Must be for some reason.

Not that Eric..... I got the two Eric(k)s confused.
Title: Re: Nikon D800E v.s Hasselblad H4D40: my in-studio test-review
Post by: FredBGG on August 04, 2012, 05:20:13 pm
Here is another comparison view that is easier to see via browser.
A custom made camera profile would likely equalize the tonal differences.
Resolution-wise this is splitting hairs, literally.
Both cameras are great:)

I could not agree more.

But as I mentioned before there are better lenses than the 105 2.8D
Also the color abberation of the 105 is sufficient to take some of the fine skin tonality away
at the pixel peeping levels of this test.
Title: Re: Nikon D800E v.s Hasselblad H4D40: my in-studio test-review
Post by: FredBGG on August 04, 2012, 05:25:13 pm
And there lies the problem with this type of comparison!  :-\

Its more about your personal view point than anything else. I value the extra money spent on a digital back as they are more than just IQ and Mpix count. To me, in my field of work, a digital has way, way more flexibility than any 35mm DSLR. People who don't use one as I do won't see the added value and only see the BIG difference in price tag vs Mpix count.

Can you elaborate on your field of work?
I think it would be interesting to see some examples.
Also in what ways do you find the DB more flexible?
Title: Re: Nikon D800E v.s Hasselblad H4D40: my in-studio test-review
Post by: gazwas on August 04, 2012, 05:55:13 pm
Can you elaborate on your field of work?
I think it would be interesting to see some examples.
Also in what ways do you find the DB more flexible?

Fred, I enjoy reading your posts and find you a very colourful guy (take that as a compliment). I always have a chuckle over your postings and one man crusade to continually put down of all things MFD and even funnier, your (almost) total obsession with the Fuji GX680 (we're due a GX680 plug from you soon its page3 already  :P) and now the Nikon D800.

However, I don't know why you're so fixated about the D800 having to be as good as MFD or why you are even that bothered. I don't shoot test cards for fun, and I often will use more than my best 85mm 1.4G lens to create pictures. I just don't think you get my point that we all see different things in our photography that make us use the kit we do and its not always just about pixel peeping IMO.
Title: Re: Nikon D800E v.s Hasselblad H4D40: my in-studio test-review
Post by: FredBGG on August 04, 2012, 09:13:37 pm
Fred, I enjoy reading your posts and find you a very colourful guy (take that as a compliment). I always have a chuckle over your postings and one man crusade to continually put down of all things MFD and even funnier, your (almost) total obsession with the Fuji GX680 (we're due a GX680 plug from you soon its page3 already  :P) and now the Nikon D800.

However, I don't know why you're so fixated about the D800 having to be as good as MFD or why you are even that bothered. I don't shoot test cards for fun, and I often will use more than my best 85mm 1.4G lens to create pictures. I just don't think you get my point that we all see different things in our photography that make us use the kit we do and its not always just about pixel peeping IMO.

Don't get me wrong...I am genuinely interested in your work..... and where you find MFD to be more flexible.

Regarding what you refered to as my "crusade".... well it's not about MFD, it's about young and new photographers buying the right gear.
Because of my online presence and the fact that I shoot  fashion and portraits with many different formats and shoot the A-List I get loads of emails
from new and young photograhers running their shopping lists by me. Far to often these guy and girls have been convinced that they have get Hasselblad or Phase One if they want to be taken seriously. I hate to see this because I loved teaching and I love to see the new up and coming photographers get going on the right footing. Lets call it balancing out things..... veteran photographer published in A list fashion mags with clients like L'Oreal, Wella, walter Thompson...yad yada bla bla ;)    countering over zealous marketing due to declining sales.

You mentioned with a bit of friendly sarcasm that you don't take photos of test cards for fun..... well I don't either.
I or my assistant does it for work. It is part of the pre production process. Making sure the gear is up
 to snuff. While my fees are quite 'healthy' the value of the time of many of my portrait subjects is very expensive.
Many make $20m per movie. With 3 or 4 a year that puts them into really large value per day.
Gear has to be spot on and checked regularly.

Going back to MFD .. I have owned it used it and rented all sorts. Also given it plenty of praise, still do if yo think about it.
I find the D800 to be a brilliant camera...... that produces brilliant images.... I have also said even right here in this thread that the Hasselbad produces just as brilliant images. That sounds like a compliment to me ;). It's the prices that are 'offensive' ;)


Time to go kitesufing down at my favorite spot.....
Here's a thought... you should here my discussions about bad safety record with kitesurfing companies and responsible marketing.....


Title: Re: Nikon D800E v.s Hasselblad H4D40: my in-studio test-review
Post by: BernardLanguillier on August 04, 2012, 09:20:46 pm
Well maybe but the price difference is more because its not in a pro body format.  The pro body has significantly better autofocus among other advantages. Surely there would be many who'd pay $8000 for the D800E sensor put into a pro body?  People are saying the 5Dmk3 and the H4 bodies have more accurate AF.  

I personally clearly see more AF keepers with my D800 compared to my previous D3x.

Cheers,
Bernard
Title: Re: Nikon D800E v.s Hasselblad H4D40: my in-studio test-review
Post by: FredBGG on August 04, 2012, 10:22:42 pm
I personally clearly see more AF keepers with my D800 compared to my previous D3x.

Cheers,
Bernard


I agree. The AF on the D800 is really good.

Just the fact that you don't have to focus and recompose is great.

It would be nice to have even 1Ds focusing from years ago in a MFD.
Pentax 645D is the best offering.

Talking about the H4... I real wonder who came up with true focus.
The engineer that made it work is a wizz, but my question is why a focus an recompose???

I really hate wiggling my camera around in front of someone I am photographing.
It's not conducive to concentrating on the subject and mood.
It also is not practical for shooting wide open. It's  easy to end up moving forward or backwards when
recomposing.
Seems to me that 20 or so focus points would have done the job better.
Title: Re: Nikon D800E v.s Hasselblad H4D40: my in-studio test-review
Post by: JV on August 04, 2012, 11:56:06 pm
...your postings and one man crusade to continually put down of all things MFD...

Even ModelMayhem.com does not escape...:
http://www.modelmayhem.com/po.php?thread_id=842224&page=1
Title: Re: Nikon D800E v.s Hasselblad H4D40: my in-studio test-review
Post by: David Eichler on August 05, 2012, 03:31:45 am
I agree. The AF on the D800 is really good.

Just the fact that you don't have to focus and recompose is great.

It would be nice to have even 1Ds focusing from years ago in a MFD.
Pentax 645D is the best offering.

Talking about the H4... I real wonder who came up with true focus.
The engineer that made it work is a wizz, but my question is why a focus an recompose???

I really hate wiggling my camera around in front of someone I am photographing.
It's not conducive to concentrating on the subject and mood.
It also is not practical for shooting wide open. It's  easy to end up moving forward or backwards when
recomposing.
Seems to me that 20 or so focus points would have done the job better.

Which of those 20 focus points is dedicated to focussing on the eyes?
Title: Re: Nikon D800E v.s Hasselblad H4D40: my in-studio test-review
Post by: kers on August 05, 2012, 04:44:23 am
Alex, thank you for the comparison…
Also i very much like the way you present the test and your Rambo-self-portrait showing it is not all about pixelpeeping but about photography.

Having worked with the d800E now for some time i think the images of the d800e could be even better if you:

use d8:    d16 is really losing detail and crispness ( d11 is also really good but d16…not to talk about d22)
use adobe raw (CS6) instead of Nikon software- the microcontrast and 3d feeling is much better.

(I am sure there are better lenses too but at d8 ( or even more d16) there is little difference)

I am doing architecture and came from 4x5. In the digital age it was clear to me that 35mm would be top in a few years and i always have found it the most versatile creative system:
So i invested in some good glass and now the day has come.

At present everyone who wants to be photographer is able to buy a professional camera for almost nothing and we a are back at square one:
The difference will be the skill and imagination of the photographer. I like that.
Title: Re: Nikon D800E v.s Hasselblad H4D40: my in-studio test-review
Post by: pedro39photo on August 05, 2012, 06:04:18 am
Super Alex !!! great review with great online tools for peep-pixels differences.
Thanks for big effort and to deliver this for Free and with no "Tabus"  (DMF VS 33mm WARS) !!!!

I am a newbie in the DMF, but after using a H3D 22MP for 3 months, it was a deep impact in me and the way i "feel the act" of making photography.

I think if in the future the technology can make a smartphone with the exact file quality of a Hasselblad H4D, no one here with really passion for photography choose the smartphone vs H4D for a beautiful golden hour landscape picture.
All user here have a passion for photography and they want the best quality file in the end, but the joy, the touch, the feeling of the tools (cameras) of course have great impact in this art.

Now my only wishes is that Sony produces the same D800 sensor on a Medium Format size, and the Hasselblad used in the H5D in the 10.000$ price range !!!
THAT ITS THE REALLY REVOLUTION IN THE MARKET THAT WE ARE WAITING!!!  

Pedro
Title: Re: Nikon D800E v.s Hasselblad H4D40: my in-studio test-review
Post by: BrendanStewart on August 05, 2012, 08:41:06 am
Even ModelMayhem.com does not escape...:
http://www.modelmayhem.com/po.php?thread_id=842224&page=1

1. Wow, a 'crowd' of speedlites behind a studio modifier?
2. 1/800th or 1/1600th real sync speed in useless? Could have fooled me.... i make use of that all the time.

That entire thread made my head hurt.
Title: Re: Nikon D800E v.s Hasselblad H4D40: my in-studio test-review
Post by: pedro39photo on August 05, 2012, 06:39:22 pm
I think that we are in a time of changes:

Many photographers never experience the joy of shooting and composing a frame with Medium Format, and don´t really understand the feeling and the joy of the big viewfinder, slow handling of the camera and even a hand lightmeter on a DMF workflow.

So its easy to compare files and say d800 vs H4d its the same, and maybe in the present its time to eat the grass and say " the d800 get the same quality of a 20.000$ H4D camera!" but in the end its not the same...

I think that Sony/Nikon achive to put the tecnology of Formula 1 engine inside of Ford Focus car, and that its great, but the Hasselblad its another car chassis! diferent wheels, drive wheel, suspension, even if both car now can achive que same top speed...

Now the challenge for the big ones ( hasselblad, phase one, leaf) its to deliver a marketing strategy/new products with the strenghts of the Medium Format cameras and no more " we have 40MP or 50MP".

In the 80´s in the age of film cameras, the medium format had a good market share even in the amateur photographers, because in that time the entry level of MF cameras was not 13.000 usd dollars...

I think that its time for the market of MFD to deliver a 7.000$ 30MP fat pixeis entry level camera system.

I am a Canon photographer and was in a waiting list for a d800 with 5.000$ in my pocket, but after tried the "old" H3D 22MP it was a game change for me! no more 500 or 700 pictures in a card for a day trip...just 50 ou 70 pictures of great time spend, challenge metering, and clumsy tripod tunning.

But in the end of the day, that few 50 ou 70 pictures of the " old " 22MP H3D are so special...

What its difficult to me its that MFD tools are almost forbiten because of prices...but i think that i can find a great deal in second hand in my price range of 5000usd.

Sorry my bad english
Pedro
Title: Re: Nikon D800E v.s Hasselblad H4D40: my in-studio test-review
Post by: henrikfoto on August 05, 2012, 07:05:24 pm
In the last 10 years we have gotten a lot of new digital backs. People jump to the newest models as soon as they come (me included).

But in real life photography the only important change the last 10 years is the screen on the back.
The old 22 mp backs produces fantastic pictures without all the problems with DOF and motion blur.
I think most of us never really need more than 22 mp?

Time to give us a 22 mp back with large CMOS -pixels with good high ISO for under 10.000??

Henrik
Title: Re: Nikon D800E v.s Hasselblad H4D40: my in-studio test-review
Post by: marcmccalmont on August 05, 2012, 08:45:16 pm
I'd actually like to see it go the other way say a 160 to 320 megapixel sensor so every pixel is small enough to be diffraction blurred at all apertures but with 4 photosites binned as one super pixel. BTW the IQ180 gives you exactly what you want in the binned mode 20 million large pixels and a big screen!
Marc
Title: Re: Nikon D800E v.s Hasselblad H4D40: my in-studio test-review
Post by: ErikKaffehr on August 05, 2012, 08:51:11 pm
Hi Marc,

But not CMOS and not under 10k ;-)

Best regards
Erik

I'd actually like to see it go the other way say a 160 to 320 megapixel sensor so every pixel is small enough to be diffraction blurred at all apertures but with 4 photosites binned as one super pixel. BTW the IQ180 gives you exactly what you want in the binned mode 20 million large pixels and a big screen!
Marc
Title: Re: Nikon D800E v.s Hasselblad H4D40: my in-studio test-review
Post by: marcmccalmont on August 05, 2012, 08:59:44 pm
Hi Marc,

But not CMOS and not under 10k ;-)

Best regards
Erik

Sorry next year, IQ180+ CMOS $9999.00 :)
Marc
Title: Re: Nikon D800E v.s Hasselblad H4D40: my in-studio test-review
Post by: uaiomex on August 05, 2012, 10:56:39 pm
At Canon Watch there is a rumor about Canon announcing a medium format body this Fotokina. The rumor says that it will mount "some" EF lenses. That would be impossible unless it is a mirrorless body or it is about a technical camera with a built-in sensor, of course, with LV. Most likely it is just garbage but just the idea of either coming true, gives me goose bumps.
Eduardo


Sorry next year, IQ180+ CMOS $9999.00 :)
Marc
Title: Re: Nikon D800E v.s Hasselblad H4D40: my in-studio test-review
Post by: ErikKaffehr on August 05, 2012, 11:34:09 pm
Hi Marc,

Nice that you can see in future! Started saving for the IQ 180+ CMOS...

Best regards
Erik


Sorry next year, IQ180+ CMOS $9999.00 :)
Marc
Title: Re: Nikon D800E v.s Hasselblad H4D40: my in-studio test-review
Post by: FredBGG on November 26, 2012, 06:05:43 pm
Alex, thank you for this review and its great presentation and providing the raw files. I'd like to add a few points.
I played with the portrait raw files using RawTherapee, without using custom DCP profiles, but using dcraw camera matrices, which seem to be the same as Adobe.
I'd like to point that due to composition differences D800E file is in inferior position as portrait is captured in a smaller scale (illustration 1)
Additionally, there are some differences in skintones due to movement in relation to the light.
Lenses on both cameras were set at F11 which leads to different rendering of the DOF and overall image look, also in favor for sharpness in critical focus for H4D.

Nevertheless, this illustration 2 (http://minus.com/m2aWArEH6 (http://minus.com/m2aWArEH6/)) can be used for comparing skintones from both cameras as well as resolution. I added identical sharpening to both images.
As owner of D800E I am very happy with this result!:)
Attached in the zip file are the pp3 sidecar files that can be re-used in RawTherapee (version 4.9.50+)


(http://www.luminous-landscape.com/forum/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=69391.0;attach=64237;image)

Being shot significantly closer the Hasselblad image is favored due to the Nikon image having to be blown up for the cropped comparison in the article.

IF both had been shot at the same size in frame the Nikon image would have been just as good if not better.

Here are Michaels un scaled crops:

(http://www.luminous-landscape.com/forum/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=69391.0;attach=64261;image)

and here are the comparisson scaled to match crops from the article:

(http://photigy.s3.amazonaws.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/NikonD800-face-crop1.jpg)


(http://photigy.s3.amazonaws.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/Hasselblad-h4d40-vs-face-crop-1.jpg)