Luminous Landscape Forum
Equipment & Techniques => Medium Format / Film / Digital Backs – and Large Sensor Photography => Topic started by: alifatemi on August 22, 2010, 04:49:04 pm
-
I am thinking of shifting to MF around 40 Mb and spend around 20-25k $ for camera and back. I do mostly landscape and sometimes fashion. my choices are Hasselblad H4D40 or Phase one 45+. Assuming both have rather the same quality or very near, as Micheal mentioned in his review of phase one 45+, my concern is that I can easily upgrade phase one back in future without buynig new body but not the same with Hasselblad. what is your recommendations or any hint and suggestions please? I have not tryed any MF before just downloaded some files that were amazing and also reading some articles that says working with MF is not that easy.Thanks.
-
These two backs are very different. The Hasselblad is a 1.3 crop while the Phase is closer to full frame at 1.1 crop. The Hasselblad also has microlenses while the Phase does not. Since you shoot mostly landscapes, I think it's an easy choice for the P45+.
-
I traded my H3DII-39 for H4D-60 and paying the difference, doens't matter for me if i just replace the back only or the body completely, it will be almost same with Phase One as you replace the back only, but the advantage of Phase One from what i can see and i am not expert is that Phase One back you can use it on different bodies and Hasselblad H3D/H4D you can't, but at the end body is nothing much that i care much about as H4D body is enhanced a bit over H3D body, so i will replace even the body if i want new digital Hasselblad, but about the price it will be the same if you get another digital back regardless of the price because the most price either Hasselblad or Phase One is on the digital back not on the body i think, so i will pay the same if i have Phase One 45+ and to replace it for P65+ or if H3D39 to H4D60, i am sure Hasselblad/Phase One dealers or salesmen here will answer you better.
-
H3DII-39 is equivalent to P45+, so H4D40 is equivalent to P40+ not P45+, keep that in mind.
-
Working with MF can indeed be challenging. That said with the right partners (friends or colleagues you might have, forum participation, or a dealer that does more than just sell you a box) it's really not that challenge. If you're new to MF I would encourage you to find a dealer that can provide you the information, troubleshooting, teaching, and equipment you need to make this a fun, fluid, and technically beneficial transition rather than a frustrating, annoying, mistake-filled blunder.
All that said you should consider the long term investment you're about to make quite carefully. Digital back owners almost always keep their backs for longer than a dSLR owner keeps their dSLR and although nothing prevents you from switching platforms or brands it can be expensive (both in time and money) to switch brands once you've chosen (not much different than from switching from Canon to Nikon except often significantly more expensive).
With that in mind evaluate your long term technical needs.
Is a technical camera like a Cambo Wide RS or Alpa (etc etc) possibly in your future? Many serious landscape photographers on and off of this board use a technical camera as their main camera, switching to SLR bodies only for specific needs. If so all Phase One backs have their own battery which powers the back when on a non SLR body. Phase One's LCC system also allows the correction of both color and lens-vignetting when used with a tech camera with excellent quality results.
Phase One's processing software Capture One is world-class and is the choice of many SLR users. There is a free download available for the software, but like any high-end software there is a learning curve and the true power of the software, tools like the Color Editor, only become apparent once you've been instructed and spend time with them. LL has a set of instructional videos, phaseone.com has free online videos, and we (Capture Integration) run online and in-person workshops.
http://www.captureintegration.com/2010/08/20/online-training-5-1-2/ (http://www.captureintegration.com/2010/08/20/online-training-5-1-2/).
http://www.captureintegration.com/our-company/upcoming-events/ (http://www.captureintegration.com/our-company/upcoming-events/)
http://www.llvj.com/videos/download-videos.shtml (http://www.llvj.com/videos/download-videos.shtml)
http://www.phaseone.com/en/Software/Capture-One-5-Pro/Pro-Tutorials.aspx (http://www.phaseone.com/en/Software/Capture-One-5-Pro/Pro-Tutorials.aspx)
Also consider long exposure for which the P45+ is the undisputed king with high-quality exposures possible up to an hour (or even longer if it's cold outside). Medium format requires a higher f-stop to achieve the same DOF as 35mm so you'll often find yourself at f/11-16 and if you throw in a polarizing or other filter and then shoot before dawn or after dusk you'll find yourself in several minute exposures more often than dSLRs.
All that said, know that I work for a company that sells Phase One and not Hasselblad and would be the first one to say that all of the high-end solutions are good, and that the differences are in the details. You'll be hard pressed to find a solution you don't like, so get your hands on the ones that seem most likely to make you happy and start shooting.
Nothing can replace your own hands on testing.
Doug Peterson (e-mail Me) ("[email protected]")
__________________
Head of Technical Services, Capture Integration
Phase One, Leaf, Cambo, Canon, Apple, Profoto, Eizo & More
National: 877.217.9870 | Cell: 740.707.2183
Newsletter: Read Latest or Sign Up (http://"http://www.captureintegration.com/our-company/newsletters/")
RSS Feed: Subscribe (http://"http://www.captureintegration.com/2008/08/11/rss-feeds/")
Buy Capture One at 10% off (http://"http://www.captureintegration.com/phase-one/buy-capture-one/")
Personal Work (http://"http://www.doug-peterson.com/")
-
Ive had my H4D-40 for a week and a half now and I bought it Mainly for landscapes (upgraded from 5d mkII and bunch of L glass) and Im very happy with the results i'm getting and the way the camera controls are layed out etc, I think you should try out both cameras first and see which one you favour, also with the long exposures the H4D-40 can do 4 min 16 second max exposure which I find is long enough for pretty much anything I want to do.
-
Hi
I shifted totally to MF for my architectural and landscape work a few yeras ago and chose to use Hassleblad for no other reason than that I had previously used Hasselblad film cameras and like the system.
I now have two HD3-39 Mk 2 camera bodies and most of the Hasselbald lens range. I also use a Rollie Xact2 technical camera with the Hasselblad back and Schneider lenses. The Hasselblad lenses are very good indeed but the Schneider lenses are slightly better. Schneider lenses are available for the Phase One camera so that would be a big plus for me but there are only a few focal lengths available. Hasselblad has the brilliant HCD28mm, 210mm and 300mm which are all extremely good and very sharp lenses. I also like the fact that the Hasselblad system is totally integrated and works off one battery in the grip which is not necessarily true of Phase One when used with different camera bodies. There are also issues with camera shake with certain bodies due to the different shutters used and it is worth reading the thread on that subject in this forum.
Finally the HD3-39 has a 1:1 factor (unlike the HD4-40). Hasselblad owned Pro Centre in London always has slightly used HD3-39's available at a very good price or you can contact your local Hasselblad rep who will supply direct. Anything coming from Hasselblad as ex demo will have a full twelve month warranty and you can buy into the Hasselblad Care system which gives you a 24 hour replacement in most countries and FOC repair.
Starting again I would be very tempted by the Phase One P65 and the Schneider lenses but from a cost and practicality point of view would probably end up with what I have got.
Hope this in some way helps you.
Best wishes
David
-
I read this topic with interest as I too am pondering MFD after 2 years with the Canon 1DsIII.
My background is with Phase One backs and have used previous to the last 2 years Phase P20, P30 and P25 all of which seemed pretty straight forward to understand range wise. Now however, apart from the obvious top of the tree P65 I don't quite understand the range hierarchy.
I too have been looking at the P45 for its long exposure potential, no micro lenses so can be used with view cameras, large 1:1 sensor and large pix size but increasingly read the newer P40 is actually a better back than the P45. How does a back that offers less of the above be better? Same Goes with the HD3-39 and HD4-40......
Confused..... ???
-
I too have been looking at the P45 for its long exposure potential, no micro lenses so can be used with view cameras, large 1:1 sensor and large pix size but increasingly read the newer P40 is actually a better back than the P45. How does a back that offers less of the above be better? Same Goes with the HD3-39 and HD4-40......
Confused..... ???
There is no simple answer. The P45+ features a larger but older chip with better long exposures image quality. The P40+ is probably better along most other metrics due to its chip being a few years younger but it is smaller.
Cheers,
Bernard
-
but what about architectural photography; whitch one is better Hassy or phase one? which one has better tilt and shift accessories?
-
If you're buying a P45 you might want to check the used market. There is a lot of available P45+ cameras. For instance a friend is selling his mint P45+ with the Mamiya AFD2 and 80mm lens for 6500 euros. Not bad!
P45+ is still excellent. Mine is over 3 years old and 0 problems and absolutely no need to upgrade.
And since you're into landscapes the original P45 can do infrared with opaque filter while the P45+ can't. Mamiya 645AFD has a nice 28mm lens which is pretty commonly used wide angle lens for architecture. If you need wide angle with movements you need another type of camera like the Sinar Artec or Horseman SWD or Cambo...
-
but what about architectural photography; whitch one is better Hassy or phase one? which one has better tilt and shift accessories?
Hasselblad has the HTS tilt/shift adapter (maginification factor 1.5 ... so wide angle is limited). So with a SLR type body this might be very interessting.
However for architecture, i.e. wide angle photography with movements (shift/tilt), a tech camera with digital large format lenses makes more sense.
On tech cameras I'd say Phase, Leaf and Sinar backs are easier to use as they don't need external power supply (the Hassy-backs need one).
As to H40 vs. P45(+) - referring to the 645 image format the H40 has a crop factor of 1.3, the P45 a crop factor of 1.1.
So if you need wide angle, the larger sensor is more usefull.
The H40's sensor is microlensed. This is why its use on a tech camera is very limited with regard to lens- resp. back-movements.
However this is not an issue with Hasselblads HTS adapter. But if you consider the H40 & HTS the crop factor is 1.3 for the sensor and 1.5 for the HTS so the widest lens, i.e. the 28mm, translates to a 55mm lens...
-
... if you need wide angle, the larger sensor is more usefull.
The H40's sensor is microlensed. This is why its use on a tech camera is very limited with regard to lens- resp. back-movements.
However this is not an issue with Hasselblads HTS adapter. But if you consider the H40 & HTS the crop factor is 1.3 for the sensor and 1.5 for the HTS so the widest lens, i.e. the 28mm, translates to a 55mm lens...
The Hasselblad 39, 50 and 60Mpx backs are, I believe mirco-lens free, and suitable for use with large movements.
-
And since you're into landscapes the original P45 can do infrared with opaque filter while the P45+ can't.
Really? That certainly got my attention!
But how is this possible? I thought that there were no filtration differences between P and P+ backs. I'd love to know more about this.
-
P+ has a stronger filter against IR than P.
IR photography is possible, but not ideal. Better to buy an Achromatic+ from us which has a fully monochromatic sensor with a sensitivity range from far-IR all the way to medium UV and thereby can do any level/range/type of IR photography.
We also do take backs like P45 in on trade frequently and sell those with warranties and dealer support :-).
;)
[font="Arial"]Doug Peterson (e-mail Me) ("[email protected]")
__________________
Head of Technical Services, Capture Integration
Phase One, Leaf, Cambo, Canon, Apple, Profoto, Eizo & More
National: 877.217.9870 | Cell: 740.707.2183
Newsletter: Read Latest or Sign Up (http://"http://www.captureintegration.com/our-company/newsletters/")
RSS Feed: Subscribe (http://"http://www.captureintegration.com/2008/08/11/rss-feeds/")
Buy Capture One at 10% off (http://"http://www.captureintegration.com/phase-one/buy-capture-one/")
Personal Work (http://"http://www.doug-peterson.com/")
[/font]
-
IR photography is possible
I thought the bulit in IR filter has to be removed first...?
How can I shoot IR with the P45 with the regular IR filter?
-
Like I said - "not ideal".
The filter in the P45 is strong, it's just not as strong as in the P45+.
So if you filter visible light more than the IR filter filters the IR light then you can take IR images.
I did the same thing with an Olympus E-10 (unmodified) many years ago. Exposure times ended up being in the 20-30 second range for f/11 ISO80.
Think of it this way: if the IR filter removes 8 stops of IR light then to shoot IR images you'd need 10+ stops of filtration on the visible light (without any significant filtration of visible light) to insure that most of the light hitting the sensor is IR light.
I've not done this myself, but I've also had the luxury of using the AChromatic+, P45+ IR-modified, and P21 IR-modified digital backs so I've had my "fix" and don't need any more IR-drugs.
http://www.captureintegration.com/2009/02/12/moab-black-and-white/ (http://www.captureintegration.com/2009/02/12/moab-black-and-white/)
http://www.captureintegration.com/2010/02/09/oregon-panoramics/ (http://www.captureintegration.com/2010/02/09/oregon-panoramics/)
http://www.captureintegration.com/2008/06/09/p45-ir/ (http://www.captureintegration.com/2008/06/09/p45-ir/)
-
many thanks!
-
there is a friend here in DPR that believes MF is nonsense somehow. any reply?! check it for yourself:
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/readflat.asp?forum=1000&message=36134748
-
There is a lot of inaccurate information on all photography forums, but dpreview is by far the worst forum for photographers. Mostly because so many uneducated picture-takers post on it.
-
That's why Jonathon I think you better take part in that discussion by sharing yours and help.
-
Honestly, I think 20-25k is too much to spend if you are just getting into MF digital. There are plenty of great options out there in the 22mp range. Usually people tend to jump into this too quickly before truly understanding their needs and what fits those needs. Myself included.
-
There is a lot of inaccurate information on all photography forums, but dpreview is by far the worst forum for photographers. Mostly because so many uneducated picture-takers post on it.
While you are right in general about DPReview forums, the thread linked to above includes much of the critique which has been put forward here by many working pros who have tried MFDBs, and some have even moved to DSLRs after getting sick of MFDB limitations and seeing that some FF DSLRs offer on-par IQ for their purposes in a much more manageable form factor along with other perks of the format.
-
P+ has a stronger filter against IR than P.
Doug, as always, thank you for your informative post. Love the IR photos in your link, BTW!
But you know me - one answer often spurs another question. Can I get hold of the spectral response curves of the P and P+ filters? Not the CCD response curves, which I already have (in the various Kodak datasheets). I'm talking about either the filters alone, or the net combination of filter and CCD. I especially want to see what happens around 656 nanometres...
-
All I have is the CCD response curves and the spectral filtration charts for several filters (all public info - though sometimes obscure).
Of course you can create your own just by renting one of the AChromatic Plus from us for $600/day or a standard 45+ for $400/day. Sometimes we have 45 non plus units in stock and if so rental would be $350/day :-).
-
I try to chime in when I hear of people wanting to go into MF digital backs.
If you are doing it for fun - give it a go
If you are doing it for business - give it a rest
Unless you need to challenge people like Tim Griffith in architectural photography, any other camera will do just as well and your clients probably don't care nor
willing to pay top dollar for your work. (DSLR vs digitalback wise)
Buying a digital back for business is like deciding what car to drive to a shoot. You may look nicer arriving in a Maybach but your client isn't going to pay for that.
BUT if you happen to be a super star coming out from that Maybach, they will pay you top dollar no matter which car you arrive in.
-
I try to chime in when I hear of people wanting to go into MF digital backs.
If you are doing it for fun - give it a go
If you are doing it for business - give it a rest
Unless you need to challenge people like Tim Griffith in architectural photography, any other camera will do just as well and your clients probably don't care nor
willing to pay top dollar for your work. (DSLR vs digitalback wise)
Buying a digital back for business is like deciding what car to drive to a shoot. You may look nicer arriving in a Maybach but your client isn't going to pay for that.
BUT if you happen to be a super star coming out from that Maybach, they will pay you top dollar no matter which car you arrive in.
There are plenty of digital back options (new and used) around the same price as top end dslr. We aren't talking much difference. Your argument about clients not paying top dollar doesn't make sense. Does owning a digital back make a photographer's fees higher? I would hope their photography and the market would set their prices.
Who's Tim Griffith? I'm sure he will be glad he has a fanboy.
-
All I have is the CCD response curves and the spectral filtration charts for several filters (all public info - though sometimes obscure).
Of course you can create your own just by renting one of the AChromatic Plus from us for $600/day or a standard 45+ for $400/day. Sometimes we have 45 non plus units in stock and if so rental would be $350/day :-).
Errr...thanks for the offer Doug, but it would be ludicrous for me to spend that sort of money just to acquire straightforward information that really should be in the public domain anyway. I could tell by your grin that you feel the same way about it too.
The spectral response of an imaging system is a fundamental specification, that should be provided freely to prospective customers, or the technically interested.
Film and sensor manufacturers understand this - all their product datasheets provide the response curve. Why can't sensor integrators like MFDB manufacturers do it?
OK...looks like I'll have to open a support case with P1. I have found their online documentation to be excellent, but the lack of these response curves is one big omission. I know they're not alone in this, but they could lead the way in putting it right.
Am I making too big a deal of this? I don't think so. Here's an analogy:
A man walks into a hifi store. He sees an impressive set of speakers and asks the shop assistant about their frequency response, impedance and power output.
The shop assistant hands him a brochure or product flyer, detailing these specifications. Or perhaps he points to where they are printed on the packaging.
The shop assistant does not say "Well sir, if you rent or buy the speakers, you can go measure it yourself"! ::)
-
my main concern, shifting to MF is mostly large size printing at 44"*66"(110cm*165cm); How many Megapixel (what digital back) for printing real size without upres does it need?
-
my main concern, shifting to MF is mostly large size printing at 44"*66"(110cm*165cm); How many Megapixel (what digital back) for printing real size without upres does it need?
at 300dpi?
250MPx
-
at 300dpi?
250MPx
So I need 250MPx digital back!?
-
So I need 250MPx digital back!?
if you find someone who produces one for you...
The hightest resolution is somthing around 140MPx as far as I know. But that is a Scanning Back.
But no... you need to re-think the workflow. I am printing around your desired size. I use "only" a P45.
-
my main concern, shifting to MF is mostly large size printing at 44"*66"(110cm*165cm); How many Megapixel (what digital back) for printing real size without upres does it need?
60Mpx (Hasselblad H4D-60, Phase P65+) @ 150/180ppi would come close... or stitch 6 or 8 60 Mpx @ 360 ppi.
-
So I need 250MPx digital back!?
Only if you need to print it at 300 dpi without interpolation (261.4 MPx to be a bit more precise). If you need to print it at 300 ppi then it depends on a lot of circumstances you've not yet mentioned.
You did mention "mostly landscape and sometimes fashion", and later you mentioned "mostly large size printing at 44"*66"(110cm*165cm)".
Please also tell us what the intended output and viewing requirements are for both, IF you want some reasonably useful advice. That's not to say that the advice so far wasn't, but there's missing guidance for a more specific/to-the-point answer.
Cheers,
Bart
-
I am thinking of shifting to MF around 40 Mb and spend around 20-25k $ for camera and back. I do mostly landscape and sometimes fashion. my choices are Hasselblad H4D40 or Phase one 45+. Assuming both have rather the same quality or very near, as Micheal mentioned in his review of phase one 45+, my concern is that I can easily upgrade phase one back in future without buynig new body but not the same with Hasselblad. what is your recommendations or any hint and suggestions please? I have not tryed any MF before just downloaded some files that were amazing and also reading some articles that says working with MF is not that easy.Thanks.
Joseph Holmes has a couple of very good articles on his website detailing the technical problems he encountered migrating to MFDB from large format. He describes numerous incidents of faulty lenses and backs. His conclusion was that spending tens of thousands of dollars does not guarantee you will be getting a system that works correctly. He recommends testing everything, no matter how good the reputation of the brand.
-
Having spent a few hours with a Pentax 645D this weekend, I think you owe it to yourself to give it a look before leaping to the tune of $20K. For landscape work it may end up offering some real advantages (like weather sealing) for about the price of a top-end 35mm camera. If you need to shoot tethered in-studio, forget it, but otherwise he 645D may be a game-changer when it comes ashore.
btw: a 40-60MP back will do a very nice 40x60 print. Even apart from the physics of viewing distance, the information in a well-exposed and processed file at that size will suit your purposes.
- N.
-
how did you find Pentax 645D? is it available in US?