Canon vs Phase

[Nick-T]

First I've heard about this firmware upgrade, regarding the mirror. Funny how they denied there was ever a problem, and then one day, there's a firmware fix for that problem that never existed.

This can only be great news for anyone shooting Hasselblad H.

And who says that complaining doesn't sometimes produce results?

Congratulations, fellas. Welcome to 1/60th of a second. Come on in, the water's fine, (now).
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=140292\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Hey Mark I posted about it on on this other forum where there were some guys complaining about mirror slap. I contacted Sweden and asked them to enable the mirror delay and they did... I think that's pretty cool that they reacted.

Nick-T

[AndreNapier]

1/15th of a second with 110mm on RZ/A75s produces very sharp results with HMI's. Is it my steel arm? or twenty year old technology still rules. Rotating back anybody? Lenses for under $300???
Andre

[Mark_Tucker]

I contacted Sweden and asked them to enable the mirror delay and they did... I think that's pretty cool that they reacted.

Nick-T
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=140300\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Nick,

Good to talk to you. I will say, honestly, yes, that is pretty cool that they implemented that fix. I'm being dead serious. Given that, and the new 3" LCD, and those software correction tools, you H guys ought to be pretty excited about now.

Compared to the Phase shooters, who when try to communicate with Phase, either get totally ignored, or lectured to. Quite a difference.

And Andre, yes, I've seen your abs, and if they're anything like your arms, you should be able to handhold that RZ at a full second. If I only had your discipline about going to the gym...

[pss]

Nick,

Good to talk to you. I will say, honestly, yes, that is pretty cool that they implemented that fix. I'm being dead serious. Given that, and the new 3" LCD, and those software correction tools, you H guys ought to be pretty excited about now.

Compared to the Phase shooters, who when try to communicate with Phase, either get totally ignored, or lectured to. Quite a difference.

And Andre, yes, I've seen your abs, and if they're anything like your arms, you should be able to handhold that RZ at a full second. If I only had your discipline about going to the gym...
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=0\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

i don't have andre's arms or the desire or time to go to the gym but handholding the RZ (or 6008) is a joy compared to the H...and the RZ mirror is a lot bigger...no firmware necessary....the H is the only system i simply can't shoot handheld...it is probably me...i get shaky when i hold such advanced technology....
does the new H3DIIXXX.7 have anti-shake built in? it does have a flash like any p&s should have....

there is no way to tell which one is which...webjpegs....it would be hard from a print...is one cropped? it could be very easy to make one look better then the other....the object is well lit, makes the canons sing.....
regardless if someone does not see the difference between a MF back and a canon....wonderful for them they just saved themselves a lot of cash......go drink to it...(and get some glasses while you have some money left....)

[RobertJ]

The Phase is outstanding.  There's a huge difference in these crops, and the Phase wins, hands down.  And yes, I want one.  Really bad.

But I have to say to the OP, this is a really terrible example of what a Canon can do (and perhaps what a Phase can do, as well?).  

The crispness/detail/sharpness of your PHASE crop looks like what I used to get from my 20D with a 135L at 1/250th, f/4, handheld and processed in C1 with standard sharpening, 0, 0, while your Canon crop looks like... well, it looks like crap.  

But I suppose these were pretty much snapshots, and this is interesting either way, but I'm sure I'm not the only one that's thinking that your crops DO NOT define what a Canon or Phase can do.

[vgogolak]

As much as I like the Phase (and I have a P45+) canon traditioanally has better noise control.
Putting aside the color, tone etc the main differences are going to be
1. resolution
2. bit depth (or dynamic range)

This seems clear in this example.

What I wonder is this; does the MF geometry have an influence on the image, in particular, the ability to create well defined edges right out of raw. THAT is what I see as the biggest difference. No sharpening artifacts. The ability to zoom in is also great.
What I mean by geometry is the fact that the incidence angle for MF is generally less (esp as Canon has one of the shortest flange to film distances, as well as FF) and the MF is not quite a full frame as 135. Thus less edge smear issues.

The lenses of course are also a big deal. I would like to see a comparison with the same lens (easy to adapt Hassey lenses to canon)

Regards
Victor

[KAP]

Just thought I'd shoot a quick comparison between Phase vs Canon as there has been so much talk about it as of late.  I wont say which Canon or Phase these shots are taken with (can you guess).  Phase was H2 100mm 2.2   Canon 85 1.2.  Both about the same exposure.  One was at F12 the other F13 at 1/160.  Processed in Phase One.    I wouldn't use either image as is, but wanted to leave them at mostly the same settings for comparison sake.   Resized down.   Not exacting in anyway, but you get the idea.  Is it clear what was shot with what?

[attachment=3289:attachment]
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=139996\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

If I had to pick my technical favourite it would be the one on the right, looks much sharper to me.

Kevin.

[KAP]

The image on the left has a bit higher exposure (the blacks are not as dark, and the highlights are brighter), slightly lower contrast, and just a hair less sharpness. The only difference I see between the images that cannot be equalized during RAW conversion or in Photoshop is the motion blurring (mirror slap?) of the highlights around the dose in the right image. The exposure and global contrast mismatch can be fixed with small tweaks to the RAW conversion settings, and the left image's slightly lower local contrast and sharpness can be easily made to match that of the right without causing artifacting or halos.

Lower contrast out-of-the-box is actually a good thing; it means the camera is capturing a wider range of subject tones without clipping. You can always increase global and local contrast in post, but reducing it when you've already clipped something is a real PITA.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=140145\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

As a Canon owner I wish I had your faith in the "Silk purse from pigs ear " theory, as it stands the to me the righthand image is miles better to my eye.

Kevin.

[H1/A75 Guy]

Is it my steel arm?
Andre
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=140316\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Hey Andre,
I think we are being strong armed here. I have it on good aurhority from Hasselblad, NJ, that all the Mamiya's in NYC are sitting on shelves being used as dust magnets.

[clayh]

I searched high and low on the Hasselblad site for information on installing the new firmware with the mirror/capture delay feature with no luck.

 How do you load it?

I have a P45 back. Is it as simple as loading the firmware on a CF card and plugging it into the phase back like you would on a Canon or Leica? This seems a little counter-intuitive to me considering the back and the camera are from two different manufacturers.

Hey Mark I posted about it on on this other forum where there were some guys complaining about mirror slap. I contacted Sweden and asked them to enable the mirror delay and they did... I think that's pretty cool that they reacted.

Nick-T
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=140300\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

[rob3rt5]

I searched high and low on the Hasselblad site for information on installing the new firmware with the mirror/capture delay feature with no luck.

 How do you load it?

I have a P45 back. Is it as simple as loading the firmware on a CF card and plugging it into the phase back like you would on a Canon or Leica? This seems a little counter-intuitive to me considering the back and the camera are from two different manufacturers.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=140552\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

You must log in, go to Flexcolor, download the update for your computer platform, install the update on your computer, firewire your camera to computer to download firmware upgrade to camera, go to menu on handgrip and wheel to Custom Settings until you find mirror delay and adjust accordingly.

[rob3rt5]

I was wondering if anyone has recieved information concerning an upgrade path for current H3D-39 owners to H3D II-39?  Is one available and, if so, how much does it cost?

[bart alexander]

Hey Mark I posted about it on on this other forum where there were some guys complaining about mirror slap. I contacted Sweden and asked them to enable the mirror delay and they did... I think that's pretty cool that they reacted.

Nick-T
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=140300\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I may be missing something here, but does mirror delay makes sense shooting portraits handheld? I mean the blackout of the viewfinder will be longer then? And isn't mirror delay in fact shutter delay? If it only makes senses using mirror delay shooting from a tripod, I guess one could have used a longer exposure to eliminate mirror slap blur?

[clayh]

40 milliseconds is not much time. 40/1000 of a second - 1/25 in fractional terms. I guess this is just enough time to make sure the mirror strike's vibration is over before turning on the sensor. It might make a difference for a fast moving subject, of course.

I may be missing something here, but does mirror delay makes sense shooting portraits handheld? I mean the blackout of the viewfinder will be longer then? And isn't mirror delay in fact shutter delay? If it only makes senses using mirror delay shooting from a tripod, I guess one could have used a longer exposure to eliminate mirror slap blur?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=140655\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

[samuel_js]

You must log in, go to Flexcolor, download the update for your computer platform, install the update on your computer, firewire your camera to computer to download firmware upgrade to camera, go to menu on handgrip and wheel to Custom Settings until you find mirror delay and adjust accordingly.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=140628\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

You need a Hasselblad or Imacon back to install the update. The camera isn't recognized throught a PhaseOne back.  

[bart alexander]

40 milliseconds is not much time. 40/1000 of a second - 1/25 in fractional terms. I guess this is just enough time to make sure the mirror strike's vibration is over before turning on the sensor. It might make a difference for a fast moving subject, of course.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=140657\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Thanks, then I guess Hasselblad knows what it's doing. Don't know what 1/25s pre time means in real life. I have always found the pre mirror tricks of Nikon DSLR's too long for portrait work.

[Dinarius]

Why resize down?  You are eliminating one of the important advantages of the MFDB?  Why not process both to the 20"x30" at 300dpi and see which one holds up?  My D2x looks like crap when compared to the P45, a soft mushy mess.  If I size both images down to 5x7 inches at 300dpi, it is hard to see the difference though.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=140048\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Well said!

This is a key point in the argument. If you don't need the enlargement size, you don't need the MFDB. Period.

I shoot a combination of 4x5 film and Canon 5D, mostly for art catalogue. More often than not, the artwork is reproduced around A5 in size. At that size, you cannot tell the difference between the Canon and 4x5 if the original artwork is larger than A3.

As I see it, resolution is required in two circumstances:

1. When your going very big - obviously!

2. When the subject is being reproduced near to, or larger than, life-size. Thus, a pair of shoes shot near life-size for an A4 spread in a magazine on MFDB or 4x5 will blow my Canon 5D out of the water.

Obviously, in both of the above examples, it is assumed that razor sharp detail is required.

People really should compare like (usage) with like. With the greatest respect to the original poster, the comparison is fatuous.

D.

[free1000]

Don't forget that there is less of an impressive difference in sharpness comparing MF with SLR digital if you are using normal to long lenses.

The difference was obvious to me, but would be even more so if you compared a shot made with a Schneider 35 digitar against an equivalent Canon wide angle.

[ericstaud]

Don't forget that there is less of an impressive difference in sharpness comparing MF with SLR digital if you are using normal to long lenses.

The difference was obvious to me, but would be even more so if you compared a shot made with a Schneider 35 digitar against an equivalent Canon wide angle.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=140934\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

[ericstaud]

Don't forget that there is less of an impressive difference in sharpness comparing MF with SLR digital if you are using normal to long lenses.

The difference was obvious to me, but would be even more so if you compared a shot made with a Schneider 35 digitar against an equivalent Canon wide angle.
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I have been working with an Alpa system with several digitars the last 1.5 years.  The difference is huge with these wide lenses compared to Nikon or Canon.

Here is a test of the detail both cameras provide  on a 16"x24" file at 300 dpi.  I used C1 pro for both, default sharpening, and locked the output size to 24" wide at 300dpi.  I used the P45+ with the 35mm Schneider Digitar, and the D200 with the 12-24 zoom.  The Nikon is at F10, the Schneider at F16.  One pair is at the lowest ASA setting (50 for the Phase and 100 for the Nikon).  For the other pair both cameras are set to 400 ASA.

It is not every image that gets printed this size (especially not one so ugly as this), but I go to every architecture shoot knowing that any image can be printed very large.

[a href=\"http://www.ericstaudenmaier.com/Pixels/]http://www.ericstaudenmaier.com/Pixels/[/url]