Luminous Landscape Forum

Equipment & Techniques => Medium Format / Film / Digital Backs – and Large Sensor Photography => Topic started by: Eddie van der Walt on September 20, 2014, 08:07:13 am

Title: Why I chose a Nikon D810 over a Hasselblad H5D 50 as a portrait photographer
Post by: Eddie van der Walt on September 20, 2014, 08:07:13 am
Ok, I fully expect this to be controversial.
And yes, I am sticking my neck pretty far out as a first-time poster on Luminous Landscape.
But I have been reading the site for months and months, and it was a key part of my research earlier this year when I decided to come back into photography and strated looking at gear.

Specifically, I spent about a decade working as a photojournalist. Then, three years ago, I branched out into pure written journalism, taking a complete break from photography. Then this year, with my journalism credentials ensured, I decided to revive my photography career, specialising in portrait photography while also doing the interviews for those pictures.

But my new role will be freelance, while all my previous roles were either in the employment of newspapers or news agencies. So, for the first time in about 15 years, I have to buy my own camera.

Now, I studied photography in the final days before film, and large and medium format cameras were a cornerstone of my training (we used Mamiya bodies for medium format, but I don't recall which brands we used for large format).

So when I decided to return to photography, I took a long hard look at medium format.  I read all of the arguments - that clients take you more seriously; the unarguable fact that larger sensors provide physics with a better canvas; that slow frame rates encourage better composition.

And I was on the very verge of ordering my first Hasselblad H5D (or perhaps a H4x) with three lenses. In fact, I went to the Birmingham (UK) Camera Show for a final check and a chat with the Hasselblad reps before ordering.

Now this would have been a massive capital outlay for an unproven business plan, but I really didn't mind. I was sure I could make it work.

But then, at that show, something made me stop and think. I'm not sure whether it was the crammed interest at the Nikon and Canon stands with the relative sparcely visited Hasselblad stand or the fact that Phase One was hardly even represented - but I started wondering about R&D money.

I don't think it is up for argument that fewer professionals today use medium format than back in the days when I trained. I know many bread and butter photographers - and almost none of them use this format. So where is the money going to come from to keep pushing lenses further? Few amateurs can afford these systems.

And then another seed of doubt was sown. If the market had shrunk so much, isn't it just possible that at least one of the producers will at some point have to look very hard at the bottom line and throw in the towel, leaving fewer feeders for a smaller stock of buyers?

Now, buying a brand new system is a pretty painful thing to do. I don't want to do it more than once in 15 years. And if I can't be relatively certain that the manufacturer will be able to provide me with ever improving glass and sensors over that period, well then that is just one question mark too many.

With all this in mind then, I just ordered my D810 and a handful or prime lenses. It has been a painful decision, and I want to thank the Luminous Landscape community for all the info you have posted that helped inform my decision.

I wrote a bit more about this in my blog here: Why I chose a Nikon D810 over a Hasselblad H5D (http://www.illustratedphotography.net/photography-blog/eddie-van-der-walt/medium-format-vs-35mm-why-i-chose-nikon-d810-over-h5d/4729)
Title: Re: Why I chose a Nikon D810 over a Hasselblad H5D 50 as a portrait photographer
Post by: kers on September 20, 2014, 08:34:08 am
On the one hand you were thinking of maybe buying a Hasselblad, on the other you choose very cheap lenses...
like the ridiculous cheap 50mm 1.4G Nikkor-
Cheap and a sheep... tlll 2.8 at least.  
The Sigma art 50mm is so much better...
I do not understand...


Title: Re: Why I chose a Nikon D810 over a Hasselblad H5D 50 as a portrait photographer
Post by: Paul2660 on September 20, 2014, 08:38:47 am
Hello:

Actually it shouldn't be controversial as both product sets are excellent.  You found a solution that worked for you, within your budget.  The D810 to me is a great camera and I use in my landscape workflow when I feel it's a better fit.  I still lead with a Phase One IQ260 and Arca rm3di, due to the fact that I feel there are benefits to that solution for me.  However I fully recognize that there are situations where I can't use that setup.  

Don't be ashamed that you did not choose Medium Format, but do continue to share your experiences with the camera solution you picked.

Congratulations on the new system

Paul
Title: Re: Why I chose a Nikon D810 over a Hasselblad H5D 50 as a portrait photographer
Post by: Theodoros on September 20, 2014, 08:45:10 am
Ok, I fully expect this to be controversial.
And yes, I am sticking my neck pretty far out as a first-time poster on Luminous Landscape.
But I have been reading the site for months and months, and it was a key part of my research earlier this year when I decided to come back into photography and strated looking at gear.

Specifically, I spent about a decade working as a photojournalist. Then, three years ago, I branched out into pure written journalism, taking a complete break from photography. Then this year, with my journalism credentials ensured, I decided to revive my photography career, specialising in portrait photography while also doing the interviews for those pictures.

But my new role will be freelance, while all my previous roles were either in the employment of newspapers or news agencies. So, for the first time in about 15 years, I have to buy my own camera.

Now, I studied photography in the final days before film, and large and medium format cameras were a cornerstone of my training (we used Mamiya bodies for medium format, but I don't recall which brands we used for large format).

So when I decided to return to photography, I took a long hard look at medium format.  I read all of the arguments - that clients take you more seriously; the unarguable fact that larger sensors provide physics with a better canvas; that slow frame rates encourage better composition.

And I was on the very verge of ordering my first Hasselblad H5D (or perhaps a H4x) with three lenses. In fact, I went to the Birmingham (UK) Camera Show for a final check and a chat with the Hasselblad reps before ordering.

Now this would have been a massive capital outlay for an unproven business plan, but I really didn't mind. I was sure I could make it work.

But then, at that show, something made me stop and think. I'm not sure whether it was the crammed interest at the Nikon and Canon stands with the relative sparcely visited Hasselblad stand or the fact that Phase One was hardly even represented - but I started wondering about R&D money.

I don't think it is up for argument that fewer professionals today use medium format than back in the days when I trained. I know many bread and butter photographers - and almost none of them use this format. So where is the money going to come from to keep pushing lenses further? Few amateurs can afford these systems.

And then another seed of doubt was sown. If the market had shrunk so much, isn't it just possible that at least one of the producers will at some point have to look very hard at the bottom line and throw in the towel, leaving fewer feeders for a smaller stock of buyers?

Now, buying a brand new system is a pretty painful thing to do. I don't want to do it more than once in 15 years. And if I can't be relatively certain that the manufacturer will be able to provide me with ever improving glass and sensors over that period, well then that is just one question mark too many.

With all this in mind then, I just ordered my D810 and a handful or prime lenses. It has been a painful decision, and I want to thank the Luminous Landscape community for all the info you have posted that helped inform my decision.

I wrote a bit more about this in my blog here: Why I chose a Nikon D810 over a Hasselblad H5D (http://www.illustratedphotography.net/photography-blog/eddie-van-der-walt/medium-format-vs-35mm-why-i-chose-nikon-d810-over-h5d/4729)
I think you should learn more and try more of both before you do such an ignorant and provocative post... I do have a D800E myself.... which is a piece of rubbish when compared to my (10 years old) 22mp MFDB on my Contax 645 if used for what my MFDB is designed to do... But this is own experience out of professional use... not just web trolling like your post...  ;)
Title: Re: Why I chose a Nikon D810 over a Hasselblad H5D 50 as a portrait photographer
Post by: eronald on September 20, 2014, 08:46:24 am
Thank you for sharing your thoughts here. The vendors will hopefully listen. An interesting fact is that for years Canon told us 35mm didn't "need" hi high pixel counts. And then the D800 became a bestseller.

Edmund
Title: Re: Why I chose a Nikon D810 over a Hasselblad H5D 50 as a portrait photographer
Post by: Doug Peterson on September 20, 2014, 08:49:06 am
If you're primary fear was financial stability of the manufacturer then you don't really need to wonder. The annual reports and financial disclosures of the major medium format vendors are fully public information.

Phase One for instance is up year-over-year for every year since 2008 (when the financial crises hurt nearly every global company). Increased revenue, increased profit, and increased spending on r+d.

Now if the d810 is a better camera for what you need/want that's one thing; there is no right or wrong answer to that question. But if you're worried about financial stability then some of the players in medium format can provide you very strong assurance of that.

Most interesting of all to me is to compare phase ones growth to the annual reports and industry-group reports from/on canon and nikon regarding their sales of mid and high-end dSLRs.
Title: Re: Why I chose a Nikon D810 over a Hasselblad H5D 50 as a portrait photographer
Post by: Eddie van der Walt on September 20, 2014, 08:51:34 am
Kers,
Cheap does not equal bad.
For instance, the Nikon 58mm f1.4 is ridiculously expensive - but the optical perfomance is poor.
I looked at one thing and one thing only - optical quality.
And yes, I know the Carl Zeiss lenses are better - but AF is a pretty basic requirement for portrait photography.
And yes, the Sigma delivers quality to match the Nikon 50 f1.4G, but it does not better it.
See the attached technical test.
Title: Re: Why I chose a Nikon D810 over a Hasselblad H5D 50 as a portrait photographer
Post by: Theodoros on September 20, 2014, 08:52:17 am
Thank you for sharing your thoughts here. The vendors will hopefully listen. An interesting fact is that for years Canon told us 35mm didn't "need" hi high pixel counts. And then the D800 became a bestseller.

Edmund
Since this is going to develop to another "mp-count" conversation (trolling in reality) ...I will excuse myself!

P.S: It has become the most boring "subject" on sites when people compare irrelevant products on Mp counting... Why don't you guys buy a 48mp cell phone and save us from your trolling?
Title: Re: Why I chose a Nikon D810 over a Hasselblad H5D 50 as a portrait photographer
Post by: Eddie van der Walt on September 20, 2014, 08:55:23 am
Well, yes, I think that pixel count is highly overated. Even for wall-mounted prints. The viewing distances tend to dictate that we have passed what we need.
That was not a point I cared much about.
But I DID care about colour depth, and this is something medium format still leads the way on, by quite a long way.
However, the 35mm-style bodies are catching up fast.
Title: Re: Why I chose a Nikon D810 over a Hasselblad H5D 50 as a portrait photographer
Post by: Eddie van der Walt on September 20, 2014, 08:56:58 am
Paul,

Thank you.

Am not ashamed, but part of me is disappointed. I would have loved to get back to medium format gear. Maybe I'll add a film medium format body...
Title: Re: Why I chose a Nikon D810 over a Hasselblad H5D 50 as a portrait photographer
Post by: Theodoros on September 20, 2014, 08:58:16 am
Well, yes, I think that pixel count is highly overated. Even for wall-mounted prints. The viewing distances tend to dictate that we have passed what we need.
That was not a point I cared much about.
But I DID care about colour depth, and this is something medium format still leads the way on, by quite a long way.
However, the 35mm-style bodies are catching up fast.
My favourite album of Billie Bragg... is called "Talking with the taxman about poetry"... Well.. you can't really, can you?
Title: Re: Why I chose a Nikon D810 over a Hasselblad H5D 50 as a portrait photographer
Post by: Eddie van der Walt on September 20, 2014, 08:59:00 am
Since this is going to develop to another "mp-count" conversation (trolling in reality) ...I will excuse myself!

P.S: It has become the most boring "subject" on sites when people compare irrelevant products on Mp counting... Why don't you guys buy a 48mp cell phone and save us from your trolling?


Hahaha, sorry, that was not the can of worms I was trying to open!
Title: Re: Why I chose a Nikon D810 over a Hasselblad H5D 50 as a portrait photographer
Post by: Theodoros on September 20, 2014, 09:06:33 am
Hahaha, sorry, that was not the can of worms I was trying to open!
What was it then? what is different of D810 than other DSLRs? ....and you choose THIS DSLR (the highest mp count one) against an MF system? (please mention the MF system you compared it with and the environment the two were compared...).  :-[
Title: Re: Why I chose a Nikon D810 over a Hasselblad H5D 50 as a portrait photographer
Post by: Paul2660 on September 20, 2014, 09:23:36 am
Paul,

Thank you.

Am not ashamed, but part of me is disappointed. I would have loved to get back to medium format gear. Maybe I'll add a film medium format body...

I agree ashamed was not a good pick of words.  But anyway, welcome to the forum.

Paul
Title: Re: Why I chose a Nikon D810 over a Hasselblad H5D 50 as a portrait photographer
Post by: eronald on September 20, 2014, 09:30:38 am
The 35mm guys knew what they wanted: More pixels, better lenses. Nikon gave them the D800, Zeiss and Sigma the Otus and Art, both became bestsellers.

I don't think we should argue with success, or patronize people who are probably as passionate as we are about their art, and who also look at the bottom line. Not everyone has access to the big city fashion and trade markets for their business.

Edmund
Title: Re:
Post by: Torbjörn Tapani on September 20, 2014, 09:36:00 am
Might I suggest you also look into the Sigma Art series 50mm. They also have a 35 mm Art.
Title: Re: Why I chose a Nikon D810 over a Hasselblad H5D 50 as a portrait photographer
Post by: Theodoros on September 20, 2014, 09:37:20 am
The 35mm guys knew what they wanted: More pixels, better lenses. Nikon gave them the D800, Zeiss and Sigma the Otus and Art, both became bestsellers.

I don't think we should argue with success, or patronize people who are probably as passionate as we are about their art, and who also look at the bottom line. Not everyone has access to the big city fashion and trade markets for their business.

Edmund

Access is different to "compare"... With "access" one doesn't have to write a page... he only says... "my budget...." ..."although I would like to try..." ...but "why did I choose THIS against THAT" ...is after one has compared, experienced, ...and came down to a conclusion... its down to simple logic actually (by definition) ...its a comparison!
Title: Re: Why I chose a Nikon D810 over a Hasselblad H5D 50 as a portrait photographer
Post by: Dustbak on September 20, 2014, 10:28:25 am
Well another dslr user that found it necessary to post x vs z on the large and medium format forum. Why not post stuff like this on the DSLR forum?

Each format has its place and the mine is better than yours or the I don't see the purpose of larger format over smaller rant is getting truly boring.

BTW, I use Nikon too and have actually been using the 58/1.4G for a while now. I find it a lens that absolutely draws lovely and everytime I use it I am stunned by the results. I kind of don't care what statistics or chart readers are trying to tell me but let my eyes be the judge.
Title: Re: Why I chose a Nikon D810 over a Hasselblad H5D 50 as a portrait photographer
Post by: Eddie van der Walt on September 20, 2014, 10:34:17 am
Ok, I have to say, I dismissed the Sigma lenses out of hand.
I have worked with other models professionally over a number of years, but have been sorely let down.
This 50 f1.4 Art was not on my radar though, and I want to thank the community for bringing it to my attention.
I am going to seriously investigate it and perhaps request returning the 50mm Nikon in favour of it.
Title: Re: Why I chose a Nikon D810 over a Hasselblad H5D 50 as a portrait photographer
Post by: Theodoros on September 20, 2014, 10:37:51 am
Well another dslr user that found it necessary to post x vs z on the large and medium format forum. Why not post stuff like this on the DSLR forum?

Each format has its place and the mine is better than yours or the I don't see the purpose of larger format over smaller rant is getting truly boring.

BTW, I use Nikon too and have actually been using the 58/1.4G for a while now. I find it a lens that absolutely draws lovely and everytime I use it I am stunned by the results. I kind of don't care what statistics or chart readers are trying to tell me but let my eyes be the judge.
People posting subjects under impression and not under experience may most certainly create the wrong kind of conversation... Such a conversation may be both misleading and dangerous...
Title: Re: Why I chose a Nikon D810 over a Hasselblad H5D 50 as a portrait photographer
Post by: Eddie van der Walt on September 20, 2014, 10:44:36 am
Well another dslr user that found it necessary to post x vs z on the large and medium format forum. Why not post stuff like this on the DSLR forum?

I am quite happy to move this across to the DSLR forum. I posted here because I did most of my medium format research here, but I did not mean to cause offence.
Title: Re: Why I chose a Nikon D810 over a Hasselblad H5D 50 as a portrait photographer
Post by: Eddie van der Walt on September 20, 2014, 10:52:17 am
Hi Theodoros,

Thank you very much for your input. You seem to have a lot of passion for and knowledge of the subject.
I can assure you that I have a very long history with medium format - as I said above, I trained for three years shooting much of my initial portfolio on Mamiya film bodies. I also made sure that I had at least some hands-on time with all the cameras I considered. I loved the Hasselblads, and I can't deny that the image quality - particularly because of the dynamic range still tops anything Nicanon has to offer - but that is not the argument I was making above.
Anyway, I look forward to receiving more input from you and the other forum users.
Title: Re: Why I chose a Nikon D810 over a Hasselblad H5D 50 as a portrait photographer
Post by: Theodoros on September 20, 2014, 11:02:51 am
I am quite happy to move this across to the DSLR forum. I posted here because I did most of my medium format research here, but I did not mean to cause offence.
Obviouly... but, don't you find that the title itself which says "why did you choose something"... while you've never compared it to another under some relevant circumstances, is offensive for experienced users of MF that have chosen this path... after putting a lot of testing and reasoning behind, as being offensive by definition? ...I mean "why did you choose it against..."? ..did you try the alternative and found it worst? ...did you find the alternative as "non worthing the difference" after comparison? ...or is it just that you considered the specs (and perhaps some "tests") of some brochures to come to a "conclusion" and post it like one? ....do you think that MF users are ignorant of those "reviews" of DXO and others?  ;) ...do you think that they (MF users) care of what those "tests" conclude?  ;D I can tell you from self experience that they "don't give a dime" against their SELF experience...
Title: Re: Why I chose a Nikon D810 over a Hasselblad H5D 50 as a portrait photographer
Post by: ErikKaffehr on September 20, 2014, 11:03:38 am
Hi,

Once you stop down to f/5.6 - f/11 diffraction will limit quality anyway. If you shoot f/1.4, with live view MF the Otus makes a lot of sense, but at f/8, I don't think so.

Best regards
Erik


Kers,
Cheap does not equal bad.
For instance, the Nikon 58mm f1.4 is ridiculously expensive - but the optical perfomance is poor.
I looked at one thing and one thing only - optical quality.
And yes, I know the Carl Zeiss lenses are better - but AF is a pretty basic requirement for portrait photography.
And yes, the Sigma delivers quality to match the Nikon 50 f1.4G, but it does not better it.
See the attached technical test.
Title: Re: Why I chose a Nikon D810 over a Hasselblad H5D 50 as a portrait photographer
Post by: Theodoros on September 20, 2014, 11:08:44 am
Hi Theodoros,

Thank you very much for your input. You seem to have a lot of passion for and knowledge of the subject.
I can assure you that I have a very long history with medium format - as I said above, I trained for three years shooting much of my initial portfolio on Mamiya film bodies. I also made sure that I had at least some hands-on time with all the cameras I considered. I loved the Hasselblads, and I can't deny that the image quality - particularly because of the dynamic range still tops anything Nicanon has to offer - but that is not the argument I was making above.
Anyway, I look forward to receiving more input from you and the other forum users.
OK... explain then what your MF (digital) experience has been as to have D810 preferred against... What was the actual comparison and under what circumstances? ...I am asking you right from the begging....
Title: Re: Why I chose a Nikon D810 over a Hasselblad H5D 50 as a portrait photographer
Post by: Eddie van der Walt on September 20, 2014, 11:16:36 am
Theodoros,

I hope my title is not inflamatory. And I never, not once, suggested that 35mm is better than MF. I have a lot of experience with MF, and I know that it is not the case.
I said I made my decision because I worry that R&D money is being diverted away from MF and to 35mm and that we may in future see fewer MF producers.
Have a look at this quote from a Leica exec in Forbes:
Quote
There are no industry-wide figures, but we think the core medium format market is roughly 6000 units per year – worldwide, for all brands. We are not yet the market leader (I estimate Phase One to have 40-45% market share), but we already have 20% share – and this is only after 3 years after introduction.
So the entire market is just 6,000 units per year.
And we have, what four/five brands I can think of off the top of my head (Phase One, Leaf, Pentax, Leica, Hasselblad).
Pushing lens and sensor tech forward costs a lot of money, and at 6,000 units a year, I really think we can see one or two of these guys drop out of the race. And I don't want to hold the bag when they do.
Title: Re: Why I chose a Nikon D810 over a Hasselblad H5D 50 as a portrait photographer
Post by: Theodoros on September 20, 2014, 11:22:41 am
Theodoros,

I hope my title is not inflamatory. And I never, not once, suggested that 35mm is better than MF. I have a lot of experience with MF, and I know that it is not the case.
I said I made my decision because I worry that R&D money is being diverted away from MF and to 35mm and that we may in future see fewer MF producers.
Have a look at this quote from a Leica exec in Forbes:So the entire market is just 6,000 units per year.
And we have, what four/five brands I can think of off the top of my head (Phase One, Leaf, Pentax, Leica, Hasselblad).
Pushing lens and sensor tech forward costs a lot of money, and at 6,000 units a year, I really think we can see one or two of these guys drop out of the race. And I don't want to hold the bag when they do.

Are we talking marketing now or the Q.... which is "reasoning of the choice"? ....Are you trying to "drive my reasoning crazy"?  ...it is well known for IT being a "square" one!
Title: Re: Why I chose a Nikon D810 over a Hasselblad H5D 50 as a portrait photographer
Post by: ErikKaffehr on September 20, 2014, 11:25:21 am
Hi Eddie,

I don't know if I feel medium format leads in any way. If we have a larger sensor using same technology it will always have an advantage. The main advantage will be better resolution and less noise. So, if you take any of those 50 MP 44x33 mm CMOS sensors, they will have a small advantage over Nikon or Sony offering, something like shooting 100 ISO instead of 200ISO. The advantage of 16-bit depth was always a case of false marketing, the new CMOS MF backs are all 14-bits.

I would say that MF has a couple of advantages. One is more resolution. Lenses may be better. MFD can be used with technical cameras, but present generation CMOS MFD may not work well with large shifts/tilts on many lenses.

Clearly, if resolution is needed, MFD has an advantage. There may also a pleasure in using old style equipment, my experience is with Hasselblad V.

Your choice is a reasonable one. Other photographers have made other choices. Discussing the criteria for choosing between MFD and DSLR makes a lot of sense on the MF/LF forum, while discussing choices between say Canon/Nikon/Panasonic makes little sense here. That said BC (James Russel) does discuss all of these on this forum, but always in a relevant context.

Best regards
Erik


Well, yes, I think that pixel count is highly overated. Even for wall-mounted prints. The viewing distances tend to dictate that we have passed what we need.
That was not a point I cared much about.
But I DID care about colour depth, and this is something medium format still leads the way on, by quite a long way.
However, the 35mm-style bodies are catching up fast.
Title: Re: Why I chose a Nikon D810 over a Hasselblad H5D 50 as a portrait photographer
Post by: Theodoros on September 20, 2014, 11:33:32 am
Erik's ideas (of comparing his Sony against his P45+) are well known in this forum.... May be more than they should....
Title: Re: Why I chose a Nikon D810 over a Hasselblad H5D 50 as a portrait photographer
Post by: ErikKaffehr on September 20, 2014, 12:21:23 pm
Hi,

I guess that we are living in a society there ideas can be discussed openly?

Best regards
Erik


Erik's ideas (of comparing his Sony against his P45+) are well known in this forum.... May be more than they should....

Title: Re: Why I chose a Nikon D810 over a Hasselblad H5D 50 as a portrait photographer
Post by: MrSmith on September 20, 2014, 12:26:53 pm
"I guess that we are living in a society there ideas can be discussed openly?"

Or you can be shouted down and browbeaten? But the ignore function offers salvation.
 ;)
Title: Re: Why I chose a Nikon D810 over a Hasselblad H5D 50 as a portrait photographer
Post by: eronald on September 20, 2014, 02:43:42 pm
"I guess that we are living in a society there ideas can be discussed openly?"

But the ignore function offers salvation.
 ;)


Absolutely. Anyone who wants to ignore somebody ;)  may go to Profile -> Personal Message Options -> and add the username of your favorite ignoramus (pun intended). Solves a lot of aggravation issues because that way one cannot be baited.

On the other hand you get to miss all the fun and mudslinging when others get baited.

Edmund
Title: Re: Why I chose a Nikon D810 over a Hasselblad H5D 50 as a portrait photographer
Post by: ndevlin on September 20, 2014, 02:49:19 pm
If you're primary fear was financial stability of the manufacturer then you don't really need to wonder. The annual reports and financial disclosures of the major medium format vendors are fully public information.rom/on canon and nikon regarding their sales of mid and high-end dSLRs.

Sorry to thread-jack, but where could one find these? Thanks.

- N.
Title: Re: Why I chose a Nikon D810 over a Hasselblad H5D 50 as a portrait photographer
Post by: Manoli on September 20, 2014, 03:21:02 pm
Sorry to thread-jack, but where could one find these? Thanks.

I assume your interest is more regarding Phase One than Canon. This is a first step - link (http://www.proff.dk/firma/phase-one-as/frederiksberg/fremstilling-af-optiske-instrumenter-og-fotografisk-udstyr/13477705-2/) and this earlier thread (http://www.luminous-landscape.com/forum/index.php?topic=87363.msg711239#msg711239). Earlier links to both this information and P1 public filings seem to have have been removed from their Wikipedia page.

Pre SilverFleet buyout, Phase One 's Liquidity Ratio was about 70%, today it's showing as 104%.
Title: Re: Why I chose a Nikon D810 over a Hasselblad H5D 50 as a portrait photographer
Post by: torger on September 20, 2014, 03:35:36 pm
I think it's the first time I hear someone back out due to doubts about financial stability :-). But surely I can understand, 15 years is an extremely long perspective when it comes to largely electronic products which camera systems are these days. With a desire for that kind of stability I would surely go for either Nikon or Canon. For a shorter term Phase One seems good, while Hasselblad I don't really know, if only judging from released products Hasselblad looks in better shape now than a year ago for sure.

Image quality-wise when it comes to portrait applications I think we now have reached a level when differences between the best fullframe 135 and the best 645 are totally irrelevant to any layman and most photographers, but you will still hear some golden-eyed person claim huge differences, a little like some audiophiles can hear huge differences between cables. Image quality is not the issue.

Handling and creative options (large viewfiender, leaf shutters etc) are still different though, so one can still prefer MFD. That I myself use MFD is for the creative options foremost (I'm doing landscapes with a view camera though, not portraits). I think it's in that end one should approach MFD, if one is only there for the image quality but do not really like the handling I'm quite sure one will be out soon.
Title: Re: Why I chose a Nikon D810 over a Hasselblad H5D 50 as a portrait photographer
Post by: Manoli on September 20, 2014, 03:51:16 pm
Since this is going to develop to another "mp-count" conversation (trolling in reality) ... I will excuse myself!

8 posts on and counting ...

Title: Re: Why I chose a Nikon D810 over a Hasselblad H5D 50 as a portrait photographer
Post by: eronald on September 20, 2014, 04:14:18 pm

Image quality-wise when it comes to portrait applications I think we now have reached a level when differences between the best fullframe 135 and the best 645 are totally irrelevant to any layman and most photographers, but you will still hear some golden-eyed person claim huge differences, a little like some audiophiles can hear huge differences between cables. Image quality is not the issue.

Handling and creative options (large viewfiender, leaf shutters etc) are still different though, so one can still prefer MFD. That I myself use MFD is for the creative options foremost (I'm doing landscapes with a view camera though, not portraits). I think it's in that end one should approach MFD, if one is only there for the image quality but do not really like the handling I'm quite sure one will be out soon.

I think the image quality difference is as big one way as the handling difference the other way :)

BTW what does quite sure mean?

Edmund
Title: Re: Why I chose a Nikon D810 over a Hasselblad H5D 50 as a portrait photographer
Post by: Quentin on September 20, 2014, 05:39:20 pm
The differences are quite small. You can (as I currently have)  mix large D810, Sony A7R and Hasselblad H5D-50 prints around on your wall and you would not be able to tell which camera took which shot.  In absolute terms the Hasselblad is the best, but the point Eddie gets right is that the margins are now very small compared with the days of film.  The versatility / portability of a smaller camera is compelling.  
Title: Re: Why I chose a Nikon D810 over a Hasselblad H5D 50 as a portrait photographer
Post by: luxborealis on September 20, 2014, 06:28:35 pm
Ok, I fully expect this to be controversial.
And yes, I am sticking my neck pretty far out as a first-time poster on Luminous Landscape.
But I have been reading the site for months and months, and it was a key part of my research earlier this year when I decided to come back into photography and strated looking at gear.
.
.
.
With all this in mind then, I just ordered my D810 and a handful or prime lenses. It has been a painful decision, and I want to thank the Luminous Landscape community for all the info you have posted that helped inform my decision.


Congratulations and welcome to the forum. I don't need to tell you that you've made an excellent decision but you're right MP is not the top reason. More than any other system out there, the D810 has the greatest Dynamic Range. It's what I appreciate the most about my now dated D800E.

Don't worry about the trolls; they are trying to justify their own decision for another system. Funny how people are like that. One can find flaws in any system, (yes, even Leica and Hasselblad - ROI vs quality being one of them), so all we can do is make a decision and go with it based on what makes sense for us.
Title: Re: Why I chose a Nikon D810 over a Hasselblad H5D 50 as a portrait photographer
Post by: bcooter on September 20, 2014, 06:44:46 pm
You know this and so does everyone else.

The best camera is the one you have when something amazing is in front of the lens.

The rest really doesn't matter.

IMO

BC
Title: Re: Why I chose a Nikon D810 over a Hasselblad H5D 50 as a portrait photographer
Post by: eronald on September 20, 2014, 06:54:16 pm
You know this and so does everyone else.

The best camera is the one you have when something amazing is in front of the lens.

The rest really doesn't matter.

IMO

BC

+1

e.
Title: Re: Why I chose a Nikon D810 over a Hasselblad H5D 50 as a portrait photographer
Post by: BernardLanguillier on September 20, 2014, 07:12:04 pm
For instance, the Nikon 58mm f1.4 is ridiculously expensive - but the optical perfomance is poor.
I looked at one thing and one thing only - optical quality.

It is kind of funny you would select the D810 and reject a lens that is IMHO one of the most compelling reasons to use the Nikon system for portrait photography. ;)

Other cult lenses such as the Canon 50mm f1.2 L measure even much worse but this doesn't change the fact that they deliver a look to die for.

Cheers,
Bernard
Title: Re: Why I chose a Nikon D810 over a Hasselblad H5D 50 as a portrait photographer
Post by: John Koerner on September 20, 2014, 07:37:31 pm
Thank you for sharing your thoughts here. The vendors will hopefully listen. An interesting fact is that for years Canon told us 35mm didn't "need" hi high pixel counts. And then the D800 became a bestseller.
Edmund

If we're going to measure the success of a camera based on "sales," which Canon DSLR are you saying the D800 has "outsold" to be come "the best."

From all available data, if sales # = success, the both the Canon 7D and Canon 5-series are both, by far, more successful than the Nikon 8-series.

So you need to change your verbiage from "best" seller to "average" seller ...

Jack
Title: Re: Why I chose a Nikon D810 over a Hasselblad H5D 50 as a portrait photographer
Post by: BernardLanguillier on September 20, 2014, 07:47:47 pm
From all available data, if sales # = success, the both the Canon 7D and Canon 5-series are both, by far, more successful than the Nikon 8-series.

Care to share some links showing the sales figures of the D800+D800E+D810 vs 5DMkIII?

I am not saying you are right or wrong, but I have never seen these data anywhere myself, so I would like to understand what you base your comment on.

Thanks.

Cheers,
Bernard
Title: Re: Why I chose a Nikon D810 over a Hasselblad H5D 50 as a portrait photographer
Post by: eronald on September 20, 2014, 08:16:08 pm
Jack, there is a misunderstanding here. "Bestseller" is a technical word in the publishing industry.

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bestseller

Edmund.

If we're going to measure the success of a camera based on "sales," which Canon DSLR are you saying the D800 has "outsold" to be come "the best."

From all available data, if sales # = success, the both the Canon 7D and Canon 5-series are both, by far, more successful than the Nikon 8-series.

So you need to change your verbiage from "best" seller to "average" seller ...

Jack
Title: Re: Why I chose a Nikon D810 over a Hasselblad H5D 50 as a portrait photographer
Post by: Schewe on September 20, 2014, 11:06:40 pm
OK... explain then what your MF (digital) experience has been as to have D810 preferred against... What was the actual comparison and under what circumstances? ...I am asking you right from the begging....

For me it wasn't an either or situation, it was an "and" situation. I've been shooting for years with Canon...sadly, Canon has been lagging so I (and a few friends like Seth Resnick) are jumping ship from Canon to Nikon. I just got a Nikon D810 and a few lenses (while I sell off my Canons). I'll be using it for a 2 week photo trip through the SW.

But, I'll also be taking my P1 645 camera and my IQ 180 camera as well.

So, I'll let you know about a head to head comparison after I get back. But here's what I've already learned:

The D810 camera body is far faster to work with than the P1 645. For static shots, that's not a big deal but hand held, it will make a difference.

The D810 is superior in high ISO situations, hands down.

36 MP vs 80 MP is not going to matter too much except for the most demanding large print output...

The range of potential lenses for the D810 vastly outnumbers the lenses for the P1 645 and cost a lot less.

So, I'll test the two cameras and see what I think. I'll be selling my Canons (I was depressed that Canon didn't announce anything at Photokina). Depending on the results of this trip, I may be selling my P1 stuff (also depressed not to hear of P1 on their new camera). The one advantage the IQ 180 still has is the ability to mount the back on a tech/view camera...which I still see as important in the studio.

I think this thread is just fine here in this forum (assuming people behave themselves) because this issue is facing MFDBs these days. The OP though new has handled himself pretty well in the face of less than optimal behavior from some parties.
Title: Re: Why I chose a Nikon D810 over a Hasselblad H5D 50 as a portrait photographer
Post by: MichaelEzra on September 20, 2014, 11:59:55 pm
You know this and so does everyone else.

The best camera is the one you have when something amazing is in front of the lens.

The rest really doesn't matter.

IMO

BC

++1!
Title: Re: Why I chose a Nikon D810 over a Hasselblad H5D 50 as a portrait photographer
Post by: Garry Sarre on September 21, 2014, 12:18:47 am
Hi Eddie/forum.

Your experience sounds similar to mine. Coming from Hasselblad film days, moving into Dslr. Then missing MF. Followed by some tossing and turning about whether to bite the bullet and get back into it.

For a commercial/advertising type photographer, there is no question that MF is the way to go. However, being portrait photographers, as we both are, the reasonings are more esoteric.

The reasoning involving whether the company would have profits sufficient to sustain ongoing R&D is important but... R & D of what: cheaper manufacturing methods? More attractive consumer gimmickry?

R&D with companies is to improve one thing. The bottom line. And quite justifiably so. So when considering that question, I went more for the company's track record.

As far as I know, I am the only portrait photographer in my city using medium format, so if you go by the quantity of people crowding the nicanon stands as compared tho the Hasselblad one, then I am the foolish one.

Then again, my professional satisfaction comes from the craft itself, not the number of customers I get through the door. I am certainly not saying that this is the case with you Eddie as you appear to be a long time pro, and I am not saying that, trying to be elitist. I just don't like having a crazy studio with lots of staff dealing with lots of people causing lots of problems. I prefer slower and better.

From purely a portrait viewpoint, Practically speaking, what did I miss about shooting with the Medium Format (originally film)?

1/ Not being able to see subtle expression changes through the viewfinder. Nowadays, this is directly responsible for me getting the shot in 3 on the Blad as opposed to 10 on a dslr.

I discounted the new Blad H5D50-CMOS because of it's smaller sensor/viewfinder image size. The CCD version of the 50 being bigger and more viewable. Dslr is such a disappointment compared to the Blad when looking through the viewfinder.

2/ The overall 'real' detail that inherently comes from capturing more information.

I want to be able to look into someone's eyes in a portrait print and see real imagery, not software pixel filling.

3/ Of course, the lovely Bokeh has to be experienced, as you have yourself and that most of us love.

My choice to switch back to MF from dslr has probably made zero difference to my bottom line. The purchase of a H5D 50 and lenses will keep me having to work longer to pay for it, as well. So has the sacrifice been worth it?

Improvements for me, over DSLR.

I now get almost all my critically focused, wide aperture shots in focus. True focus helps with super critical ones.

I can crop and not look like a crop as much.

Huge amounts of 16 bit chunks of data to hold all the tones I want, even under heavy manipulation. Typically 270mb 16 bit tiffs. Yummy.

Yes, and it is nice for customers questioning me on the camera, and not saying that they have the next model after mine. I even ham it up by saying, 'There's six of 'em on the moon and one in orbit'.  :)

But, the decision that I had made the 'right' decision for me was confirmed when I had a shoot yesterday. I realised that over the last several shoots that whenever I had the luxury of a bit more time and wanted to come up with the best image, with the side benefit of also giving me the most personal satisfaction, which camera do I reach for.... That turned out to be 90% of my shoots! including web corporate headshots.

One unexpected side benefit has been, my sex life has improved. My wife finds me more 'hunky' from my improved shoulder and bicep tone...from lifting extra kilos of camera every which way, every day.

I'm sure you will turn out great imagery no matter what, so good luck to you Eddie.




Title: Re: Why I chose a Nikon D810 over a Hasselblad H5D 50 as a portrait photographer
Post by: BernardLanguillier on September 21, 2014, 12:54:43 am
Improvements for me, over DSLR.

What DSLR were you using before switching to the Hassy?

Cheers,
Bernard
Title: Re: Why I chose a Nikon D810 over a Hasselblad H5D 50 as a portrait photographer
Post by: Garry Sarre on September 21, 2014, 02:34:06 am
Bernard...And still do use. Canon 5D. Original Mark 1:) I'm not usually a gear freak.
Title: Re: Why I chose a Nikon D810 over a Hasselblad H5D 50 as a portrait photographer
Post by: ErikKaffehr on September 21, 2014, 03:02:37 am
Hi,

Thanks for sharing!

Best regards
Erik


For me it wasn't an either or situation, it was an "and" situation. I've been shooting for years with Canon...sadly, Canon has been lagging so I (and a few friends like Seth Resnick) are jumping ship from Canon to Nikon. I just got a Nikon D810 and a few lenses (while I sell off my Canons). I'll be using it for a 2 week photo trip through the SW.

But, I'll also be taking my P1 645 camera and my IQ 180 camera as well.

So, I'll let you know about a head to head comparison after I get back. But here's what I've already learned:

The D810 camera body is far faster to work with than the P1 645. For static shots, that's not a big deal but hand held, it will make a difference.

The D810 is superior in high ISO situations, hands down.

36 MP vs 80 MP is not going to matter too much except for the most demanding large print output...

The range of potential lenses for the D810 vastly outnumbers the lenses for the P1 645 and cost a lot less.

So, I'll test the two cameras and see what I think. I'll be selling my Canons (I was depressed that Canon didn't announce anything at Photokina). Depending on the results of this trip, I may be selling my P1 stuff (also depressed not to hear of P1 on their new camera). The one advantage the IQ 180 still has is the ability to mount the back on a tech/view camera...which I still see as important in the studio.

I think this thread is just fine here in this forum (assuming people behave themselves) because this issue is facing MFDBs these days. The OP though new has handled himself pretty well in the face of less than optimal behavior from some parties.
Title: Re: Why I chose a Nikon D810 over a Hasselblad H5D 50 as a portrait photographer
Post by: BernardLanguillier on September 21, 2014, 03:04:32 am
Bernard...And still do use. Canon 5D. Original Mark 1:) I'm not usually a gear freak.

You like proven solutions.

Cheers,
Bernard
Title: Re: Why I chose a Nikon D810 over a Hasselblad H5D 50 as a portrait photographer
Post by: Eddie van der Walt on September 21, 2014, 04:11:23 am
Quote
If you're primary fear was financial stability of the manufacturer then you don't really need to wonder. The annual reports and financial disclosures of the major medium format vendors are fully public information.

Phase One for instance is up year-over-year for every year since 2008 (when the financial crises hurt nearly every global company). Increased revenue, increased profit, and increased spending on r+d.

Now if the d810 is a better camera for what you need/want that's one thing; there is no right or wrong answer to that question. But if you're worried about financial stability then some of the players in medium format can provide you very strong assurance of that.

Most interesting of all to me is to compare phase ones growth to the annual reports and industry-group reports from/on canon and nikon regarding their sales of mid and high-end dSLRs.

Hi Doug,

Yes, some of this discussion has drifted away from my original point, but I am very interested in what you said above.

And yes, R&D spending and financial stability has been my major concerns.

I am absolutely sure that some players will remain in the market - but to me, it really feels like this is a market in need of some rationalisation. I think you are right that Phase One is doing very well. But I could well see one or more of Pentax, Hasselblad or Leica falling out.

Also, pure share price and revenue are not particularly good indicators of the health of the MF market - these companies often have industrial imaging arms too, so the growth may be coming from there. And if they are not making money in one part of the business, and they are public owned, it is only a matter of time before they lob that part off.

And this is simply not something I would like to figure in an equation that I don't control and that runs 15 years forward.

I mentioned in my post that I went off to gain experience in financial journalism - what I did not say is that I am a financial journalist. I have been unable to find company reports (so far) for Phase One, and I know Hasselblad is privately owned, so there is no public records of their earnings. But if you have seen any articles that might enligthen me, that would be really helpful.

I refer back to my earlier reply which had a Leica exec putting the size of the MF market GLOBALLY at 6,000 units a year. Now that, to my mind, is tiny. I'd imagine Nikon sells 6,000 units a week easily. And if they outgun MF research by that much, then lens and sensor tech - physics notwithstanding - will match or overtake.

So while I seem to have offended some who thought I am making the point that a D810 is somehow better than a H5D, that was absolutely not my intent - I love MF, I would have loved to shoot MF on Monday when the camera arrives.

But to me, there was a financial gamble in terms of firm stability in my suppliers which lies beyond my control - and that is not something I much care for when making a long-term commitment when starting a new business.
Title: Re: Why I chose a Nikon D810 over a Hasselblad H5D 50 as a portrait photographer
Post by: Chris Livsey on September 21, 2014, 04:24:11 am
I am puzzled by the reliance on financial stability.
Seven years ago, less time than you want the company yo choose to be stable into an uncertain future, few would have given Leica much chance of survival in any meaningful way. I understand at the Photokina they had a hall just for themselves.
Expecting support in fifteen years time for a complex electronic product which is still developing/evolving/refreshing from any company is unrealistic. I doubt the spares inventory is there anywhere, Leica included as we know of M8 LCD problems, to support products that far down the line.
Nikon is more vulnerable than most, despite having the 8 series which in global terms is selling tiny volumes, they are buying into other technologies as unlike Canon they are not currently as diversified.
The thought that any published financial results are presenting an accurate and unbiased report on the company concerned is fanciful. We argue enough about "facts" as presented by DxO mark for example without adding financial analysis to the forum.

IMHO camera, and lens, choice should be based on what you see, and what you feel, for the result and the shooting process, I'm in the Cooter camp  ;D


Title: Re: Why I chose a Nikon D810 over a Hasselblad H5D 50 as a portrait photographer
Post by: torger on September 21, 2014, 06:18:52 am
From all IQ debates I have seen here I think a general conclusion is that landscape photographers care more about raw technical performance (DxOMark style), and portrait photographers more about subtle subjective things like lens look and skin tone and texture. This is logical when looking at the differences in subjects and post-processing workflow.

MF pros shoot portraits foremost where MF still has a strong position. With 645z MF landscape is richer though. One of the H4Ds I have been looking at is sold by a pro landscape photographer which has switched to 645z. In the blog the weather sealing and huge DR was emphasised features compared to the old CCD Hasselblad.
Title: Re: Why I chose a Nikon D810 over a Hasselblad H5D 50 as a portrait photographer
Post by: torger on September 21, 2014, 06:30:17 am
I think the image quality difference is as big one way as the handling difference the other way :)

BTW what does quite sure mean?

Edmund

"Quite sure" is a humble variant of "sure", showing a seed of doubt. I like to do that in discussions, as I am rarely 100 percent sure of things.
Title: Re: Why I chose a Nikon D810 over a Hasselblad H5D 50 as a portrait photographer
Post by: ErikKaffehr on September 21, 2014, 07:13:35 am
Hi,

Which blog do you refer to?

Regarding the 645Z, I would guess it is a very good camera, with some doubts regarding lenses.

Best regards
Erik

From all IQ debates I have seen here I think a general conclusion is that landscape photographers care more about raw technical performance (DxOMark style), and portrait photographers more about subtle subjective things like lens look and skin tone and texture. This is logical when looking at the differences in subjects and post-processing workflow.

MF pros shoot portraits foremost where MF still has a strong position. With 645z MF landscape is richer though. One of the H4Ds I have been looking at is sold by a pro landscape photographer which has switched to 645z. In the blog the weather sealing and huge DR was emphasised features compared to the old CCD Hasselblad.
Title: Re: Why I chose a Nikon D810 over a Hasselblad H5D 50 as a portrait photographer
Post by: kers on September 21, 2014, 07:39:20 am
Ok, I have to say, I dismissed the Sigma lenses out of hand.
I have worked with other models professionally over a number of years, but have been sorely let down.
This 50 f1.4 Art was not on my radar though, and I want to thank the community for bringing it to my attention.
I am going to seriously investigate it and perhaps request returning the 50mm Nikon in favour of it.

Well, what i said about the Sigma Art vs Nikon : i have had the Nikon 1.4 then i liked better the 1.8 ( faster autofocus and at 1.8 ) and and now have the Sigma.. al lot better again.  so it is my own experience.
But the 'numbers ' on the web also agree on that. Nikon just did not make a good 1.4...
The 58mm is soft but has a beautiful bokeh and very good coatings... a special lens.
Title: Re: Why I chose a Nikon D810 over a Hasselblad H5D 50 as a portrait photographer
Post by: torger on September 21, 2014, 07:41:48 am
Which blog do you refer to?

Off topic now; this guy, http://www.svenpersson.com his blog is not a techie blog or updated very often and is in Swedish, ie not for the general Lula public. He has his H4D-50 for sale and I'm interested :-). I'll wait a while though, hopefully for him he finds a buyer that wants the body too, I only want the back as I shoot tech cam.
Title: Re: Why I chose a Nikon D810 over a Hasselblad H5D 50 as a portrait photographer
Post by: JoeKitchen on September 21, 2014, 07:52:07 am
Personally, I find this topic to be nothing more than a slap in the face to all medium format users.  It was completely inappropriate for this to be posted here, amongst a community of MF users, who look to each other for support and technical issues.  I consider this to be nothing but trolling on the OPs part.  

The OP would, IMHO, be similar to a neighbor I have never spoken to.  I save up for a BMW 5 or 6 series, buy one, feel good about my purchase, only to have this neighbor one day knock on my door.  He explains to me how he just bought a VW, was thinking about a BMW, but ultimately felt it was not worth the money, and than going into detail as to why.  Essentially saying, "you're a jack ass for buying a BMW," not really a neighborly thing to do.    

Now if this OP came to this forum before making his purchase and asked for advice, then that would be different, even if he decided to go the D810 route.  That would have been appropriate.  

I could try and refute what he has said about MF and give my view as an experienced user in both MF and DSLRs, but why bother now? 
Title: Re: Why I chose a Nikon D810 over a Hasselblad H5D 50 as a portrait photographer
Post by: torger on September 21, 2014, 08:00:43 am
I'm not so emotional about cameras (or cars) so I don't feel it's controversial to share reasons why an individual chose to go one way or another. One individual's reasons may not apply to another. For example I don't consider financial stability to be that important, and have no issue to switch system when needed. So the OP's reasons don't apply to me, but I find it interesting to see how other users think. I'm sure dealers like to see that too so they can adapt and refine their market message.

The Op never said that people that didn't share his judgement or priorities must be dumb. There are indeed such people too, but not him.
Title: Re: Why I chose a Nikon D810 over a Hasselblad H5D 50 as a portrait photographer
Post by: Manoli on September 21, 2014, 08:14:49 am
I am puzzled by the reliance on financial stability.

You shouldn't be. It's an intelligent angle - one of many when evaluating a substantial camera investment.

Seven years ago, less time than you want the company yo choose to be stable into an uncertain future, few would have given Leica much chance of survival in any meaningful way.

That may be your 'take', but I have owned and used Leica's for a long time, much longer than 7 years, and I can assure you that thought never crossed my mind.

Nikon is more vulnerable than most, despite having the 8 series which in global terms is selling tiny volumes, they are buying into other technologies as unlike Canon they are not currently as diversified.

Zero chance of Nikon failing in the next 10 years.

The thought that any published financial results are presenting an accurate and unbiased report on the company concerned is fanciful.

Both accurate and particularly unbiased - that's what financial statements are , snapshots of the financial state of a company at any point in time. If they're not then that you're into the domain of fraudulent filings (such as Olympus) and all that that entails .. don't think we need to go there, yet.

We argue enough about "facts" as presented by DxO mark for example without adding financial analysis to the forum.
IMHO camera, and lens, choice should be based on what you see, and what you feel, for the result and the shooting process, I'm in the Cooter camp  ;D

If you'd read the Phase One financials before the SilverFleet announcement you would have seen clearly, in B&W, that Phase had less than a year to go before they would have been forced to declare the Danish equivalent of Chapter 11. Not relevant to a $40,000+ investment ?

Reality is that over the last few years, there has been consolidation and alliances in the photo industry - Leica/Blackstone, Phase One/SilverFleet, Hasselblad/VMC(Ventizz), Sony/Olympus;  alliances such as Sony/Zeiss, Panasonic/Leica and now, as of Photokina - Phase One/Sony/Alpa. So yes, judging the direction and trend of each alliance does have a bearing as to which camp you join.

Given that some, on this site, still confuse Private Equity with Venture Capital doesn't mean that financial analysis is inappropriate - far from it. As MR recently posted in another thread .. " One can either look at these things from a global business / economic perspective or as a fanboy of a particular brand. The latter approach won't get much sympathy from me here. "

Title: Re: Why I chose a Nikon D810 over a Hasselblad H5D 50 as a portrait photographer
Post by: Manoli on September 21, 2014, 08:21:56 am
I think this thread is just fine here in this forum (assuming people behave themselves) because this issue is facing MFDBs these days. The OP though new has handled himself pretty well in the face of less than optimal behavior from some parties.

+1
Title: Re: Why I chose a Nikon D810 over a Hasselblad H5D 50 as a portrait photographer
Post by: Chairman Bill on September 21, 2014, 08:26:57 am
+2
Title: Re: Why I chose a Nikon D810 over a Hasselblad H5D 50 as a portrait photographer
Post by: Pics2 on September 21, 2014, 09:22:06 am
+3
Title: Re: Why I chose a Nikon D810 over a Hasselblad H5D 50 as a portrait photographer
Post by: Eddie van der Walt on September 21, 2014, 11:20:00 am
I just want to say that I have been amazed (though having previously read much on Luminous Landscape, I suppose I shouldn't be) by the high level of debate.

Particularly, my eyes have been opened to quite a few things.

Firstly, I will look at the 58mm Nikon and Sigma Art lenses - making sure that I USE them and not rely on online testing so I can make a more informed decision.

Secondly, as I know have a bit of money left to play with, I will grab a second hand Mamiya or Hasselblad - I'm leaning towards a film setup here - so I can keep my eye in. I'll start my own research and then post to that end later.

Anyway, thanks everyone for your input, you have left me with a lot to think about.

Oh, nearly forgot, a special mention to Garry Sarre, a fellow newbie.

Quote
Yes, and it is nice for customers questioning me on the camera, and not saying that they have the next model after mine. I even ham it up by saying, 'There's six of 'em on the moon and one in orbit'.

and

Quote
One unexpected side benefit has been, my sex life has improved. My wife finds me more 'hunky' from my improved shoulder and bicep tone...from lifting extra kilos of camera every which way, every day.

Garry, you literally had me laughing out loud, which meant I had to explain this whole threat to Mrs v. (not an easy thing to do.) (Also, the twinkle in her eye made me think she now wishes I'd opted for the MF setup.)
Title: Re: Why I chose a Nikon D810 over a Hasselblad H5D 50 as a portrait photographer
Post by: Go Go on September 21, 2014, 12:14:26 pm
Too funny Eddie!
Great thread, thanks.
Title: Re: Why I chose a Nikon D810 over a Hasselblad H5D 50 as a portrait photographer
Post by: eronald on September 21, 2014, 12:16:38 pm
I find it interesting to see how other users think. I'm sure dealers like to see that too so they can adapt and refine their market message.

Maybe it would be better for MF if the manufacturers simply improved their product and their pricing, so the dealers don't have to do all the hard "marketing" work, and there are clear apparent advantages to buying MF.  The dSLR guys -Nikon, Sony- have certainly upped their game, and the same can be said of Zeiss and Sigma, while Canon and even Panasonic seem to have discovered dSLR video a few years ahead of Leica :)


Edmund
Title: Re: Why I chose a Nikon D810 over a Hasselblad H5D 50 as a portrait photographer
Post by: torger on September 21, 2014, 04:03:28 pm
Maybe it would be better for MF if the manufacturers simply improved their product and their pricing, so the dealers don't have to do all the hard "marketing" work, and there are clear apparent advantages to buying MF.  The dSLR guys -Nikon, Sony- have certainly upped their game, and the same can be said of Zeiss and Sigma, while Canon and even Panasonic seem to have discovered dSLR video a few years ahead of Leica :)

To be sellable without salesmen I think the camera needs to work like other cameras, new photographers start with a DSLR and it seems illogical that a camera would lack live view or not work well in available light. Having CMOS is thus a great start.

If the camera doesn't need salesmen it can be sold in volume and then prices can be lower. Pentax is doing this model right now. They can borrow tech for their body from their smaller cameras though which Hasselblad and Phase One cannot. As far as I understand the Hasselblad body is quite good as is though (maybe lacking in robustness for us that like the feel of a Canon or Nikon flagship DSLR, but I have heard that the H5D is a step up), so I guess the H5D-50c could be sold in the same way as a Pentax.
Title: Re: Why I chose a Nikon D810 over a Hasselblad H5D 50 as a portrait photographer
Post by: Paul2660 on September 21, 2014, 04:04:56 pm

If you'd read the Phase One financials before the SilverFleet announcement you would have seen clearly, in B&W, that Phase had less than a year to go before they would have been forced to declare the Danish equivalent of Chapter 11. Not relevant to a $40,000+ investment ?

Reality is that over the last few years, there has been consolidation and alliances in the photo industry - Leica/Blackstone, Phase One/SilverFleet, Hasselblad/VMC(Ventizz), Sony/Olympus;  alliances such as Sony/Zeiss, Panasonic/Leica and now, as of Photokina - Phase One/Sony/Alpa. So yes, judging the direction and trend of each alliance does have a bearing as to which camp you join.

 "[/i]



Manoli,

Can you shed more light on this?  I had always thought Phase One, before the Silverfleet move, had a very good debt position, and they held a lot of cash.  And this was one of the key reasons, the acquisition was made  Yes even more cash came to Phase One after the Silverfleet transaction, so it would be interesting to know more.  I also read in this post or another where the liquidity ratio after Silverfleet was over 104%

Personally, I believe that having both a better understanding of a companies financial position and direction are important.  As you mentioned at the cost of 1 back in the 35K to 40K range, and if the fact that many photographers including myself have a 5 year value add warranty, it's important to know if support and warranty will be around in 3 or 4 years.  To me this has quite a bit to do with the residual value of the back in question.  

I agree that Canon and Nikon, Sony, and probably Fuji will all be around, as most have other huge areas of manufacturing besides cameras, in fact the DSLR part of bottom line is probably not that much for them.  With Phase One, it's a bit more narrow much more camera/and camera software centric.

Thanks
Paul
Title: Re: Why I chose a Nikon D810 over a Hasselblad H5D 50 as a portrait photographer
Post by: BernardLanguillier on September 21, 2014, 06:34:30 pm
Personally, I find this topic to be nothing more than a slap in the face to all medium format users.

I would think that MF users are first and foremost talented photographers using MF because of they think that the qualities of MF for their needs are superior relative to other types of equipments (globally or for a given range of applications that could range for most of what they do to just that one image). The point being an expectation in terms of superior photographic outcome.

If that is the case I don't see any reason to refuse discussion with people thinking differently.

Btw, cars are totally different because a VW is 99% as good in real traffic as the BMW regarding the main function of a car which is to move people from point A to point B in a given amount of time.

Comparing MF with luxury cars does in fact cast some doubt about the motivation for using MF.

In other words, sorry but my view is that feeling attacked by this post sort of equates to treating MF as a luxury item instead of trearing it as a great photographic option.

Cheers,
Bernard
Title: Re: Why I chose a Nikon D810 over a Hasselblad H5D 50 as a portrait photographer
Post by: Manoli on September 21, 2014, 07:07:32 pm
Can you shed more light on this?  

Paul,

Slightly off topic, but briefly: both this previous thread (http://www.luminous-landscape.com/forum/index.php?topic=87363.20), this link (http://www.proff.dk/firma/phase-one-as/frederiksberg/fremstilling-af-optiske-instrumenter-og-fotografisk-udstyr/13477705-2/) and the Silverfleet release (http://www.silverfleetcapital.com/media-centre/news/silverfleet-capital-to-invest-in-phase-one-as/) are worth reading. The key point related to the liquidity ratio (cash plus receivables as a percentage of short-term debt). In 2012, it was about 75% and declining. Today, after the buy-out, it's at a much healthier 104%,  predictably. In other words, they're covered on a short-term annual basis for at least the next 12 months. With return on equity and profits up ( primarily due to the reduction in debt) the situation is much improved and changed - as is the ownership.

The dealers never missed an opportunity to regale you with the tired mantra of 'increasing sales, increasing profits' etc etc - was (and is) true. What they didn't say though (and possibly didn't know or suspect) was that these were not enough to cover the ever increasing short term debt, hence the crisis. Continuing to refer to it as  'aggressive expansion financing' coupled with claims that 'PhaseOne had been both profitable and growing since 2008' bordered on disinformation.

The Press release was suitably ambiguous, but was clear in one thing - the proceeds of the sale were to be reinvested in the company 'for a minority stake'. They were, the debt much reduced, hence the improved financial outlook today.

It was a straightforward 'buyout'. If anyone tries to tell you otherwise, just ask them one simple question : " In what way did selling a 60% stake (and ceding both control and ownership) benefit the company and it's shareholders as opposed to a simple capital increase - IPO or equivalent? "

M

ps
Liquidity Ratio in Danish is Likviditetsgrad.
Title: Re: Why I chose a Nikon D810 over a Hasselblad H5D 50 as a portrait photographer
Post by: eronald on September 21, 2014, 07:28:24 pm

The dealers never missed an opportunity to regale you with the tired mantra of 'increasing sales, increasing profits' etc etc - was (and is) true. What they didn't say though (and possibly didn't know or suspect) was that these were not enough to cover the ever increasing short term debt, hence the crisis.

Sounds like they were economical - with the truth :D
Why does everybody always naturally expect sales and profits to keep rising?  I look at Apple these days, selling record numbers of $1K phones and have a nagging suspicion that at some point the customers or the money will run out.

Edmund
Title: Re: Why I chose a Nikon D810 over a Hasselblad H5D 50 as a portrait photographer
Post by: synn on September 21, 2014, 10:27:50 pm
Went on a vacation trip with the woman. Took only the D800 and a couple of lenses as space was at a premium and I wanted a doitall solution.
Shot some "Nice vacation pics" that were absolutely not going to happen with the medium format rig. Then shot one portrait of her.

Came back home and started processing in C1P. Instantly regretted not packing the credo with me.

Too much text. Here's the picture.

(https://farm6.staticflickr.com/5587/15315939162_bf990af988_c.jpg)

Carry on...
Title: Re: Why I chose a Nikon D810 over a Hasselblad H5D 50 as a portrait photographer
Post by: ErikKaffehr on September 22, 2014, 12:34:35 am
Hi

I would say Schewe explains it well:

Quote
I think this thread is just fine here in this forum (assuming people behave themselves) because this issue is facing MFDBs these days. The OP though new has handled himself pretty well in the face of less than optimal behavior from some parties.

There are many good reasons to use MFD, especially on a technical camera, but the OP discusses his choice of system and I guess his needs are different.

Best regards
Erik
Personally, I find this topic to be nothing more than a slap in the face to all medium format users.  It was completely inappropriate for this to be posted here, amongst a community of MF users, who look to each other for support and technical issues.  I consider this to be nothing but trolling on the OPs part.  

The OP would, IMHO, be similar to a neighbor I have never spoken to.  I save up for a BMW 5 or 6 series, buy one, feel good about my purchase, only to have this neighbor one day knock on my door.  He explains to me how he just bought a VW, was thinking about a BMW, but ultimately felt it was not worth the money, and than going into detail as to why.  Essentially saying, "you're a jack ass for buying a BMW," not really a neighborly thing to do.    

Now if this OP came to this forum before making his purchase and asked for advice, then that would be different, even if he decided to go the D810 route.  That would have been appropriate.  

I could try and refute what he has said about MF and give my view as an experienced user in both MF and DSLRs, but why bother now? 
Title: Re: Why I chose a Nikon D810 over a Hasselblad H5D 50 as a portrait photographer
Post by: tnabbott on September 22, 2014, 01:39:22 am
Ok, I fully expect this to be controversial.
And yes, I am sticking my neck pretty far out as a first-time poster on Luminous Landscape.
But I have been reading the site for months and months, and it was a key part of my research earlier this year when I decided to come back into photography and strated looking at gear.

Specifically, I spent about a decade working as a photojournalist. Then, three years ago, I branched out into pure written journalism, taking a complete break from photography. Then this year, with my journalism credentials ensured, I decided to revive my photography career, specialising in portrait photography while also doing the interviews for those pictures.

But my new role will be freelance, while all my previous roles were either in the employment of newspapers or news agencies. So, for the first time in about 15 years, I have to buy my own camera.

Now, I studied photography in the final days before film, and large and medium format cameras were a cornerstone of my training (we used Mamiya bodies for medium format, but I don't recall which brands we used for large format).

So when I decided to return to photography, I took a long hard look at medium format.  I read all of the arguments - that clients take you more seriously; the unarguable fact that larger sensors provide physics with a better canvas; that slow frame rates encourage better composition.

And I was on the very verge of ordering my first Hasselblad H5D (or perhaps a H4x) with three lenses. In fact, I went to the Birmingham (UK) Camera Show for a final check and a chat with the Hasselblad reps before ordering.

Now this would have been a massive capital outlay for an unproven business plan, but I really didn't mind. I was sure I could make it work.

But then, at that show, something made me stop and think. I'm not sure whether it was the crammed interest at the Nikon and Canon stands with the relative sparcely visited Hasselblad stand or the fact that Phase One was hardly even represented - but I started wondering about R&D money.

I don't think it is up for argument that fewer professionals today use medium format than back in the days when I trained. I know many bread and butter photographers - and almost none of them use this format. So where is the money going to come from to keep pushing lenses further? Few amateurs can afford these systems.

And then another seed of doubt was sown. If the market had shrunk so much, isn't it just possible that at least one of the producers will at some point have to look very hard at the bottom line and throw in the towel, leaving fewer feeders for a smaller stock of buyers?

Now, buying a brand new system is a pretty painful thing to do. I don't want to do it more than once in 15 years. And if I can't be relatively certain that the manufacturer will be able to provide me with ever improving glass and sensors over that period, well then that is just one question mark too many.

With all this in mind then, I just ordered my D810 and a handful or prime lenses. It has been a painful decision, and I want to thank the Luminous Landscape community for all the info you have posted that helped inform my decision.

I wrote a bit more about this in my blog here: Why I chose a Nikon D810 over a Hasselblad H5D (http://www.illustratedphotography.net/photography-blog/eddie-van-der-walt/medium-format-vs-35mm-why-i-chose-nikon-d810-over-h5d/4729)

This is silly. A subjective choice clothed in objective prose.  Nonetheless, purely subjective.
Title: Re: Why I chose a Nikon D810 over a Hasselblad H5D 50 as a portrait photographer
Post by: torger on September 22, 2014, 04:44:06 am
Camera choice is of course always subjective. You can make a subjective choice of metrics, and then analyze those metrics objectively, but you're already made the subjective choice.

You can make the subjective choice that high flash sync speed is important, and then the objective analysis will show that MFD their leaf shutters are better. When it comes to "look" though, it's subjective all the way through. "Skin tones" is very subjective. It seems like MFD wins out those subjective shootouts more often. MFD is particularly strong in the portrait genre.

In landscape and architecture the strength is in resolution and camera movements, if any of those metrics are important to you MFD will come out really strong (tech camera). Now resolution is so high in the 135 systems that camera movements may be the more important aspect.
Title: Re: Why I chose a Nikon D810 over a Hasselblad H5D 50 as a portrait photographer
Post by: BernardLanguillier on September 22, 2014, 05:23:39 am
In landscape and architecture the strength is in resolution and camera movements, if any of those metrics are important to you MFD will come out really strong (tech camera). Now resolution is so high in the 135 systems that camera movements may be the more important aspect.

Or you stitch 8 frames with an Otus and correct perspective in post? ;)

Cheers,
Bernard
Title: Re: Why I chose a Nikon D810 over a Hasselblad H5D 50 as a portrait photographer
Post by: Eddie van der Walt on September 22, 2014, 05:26:48 am
Synn,

Nice frame.
Quote
Went on a vacation trip with the woman. Took only the D800 and a couple of lenses as space was at a premium and I wanted a doitall solution.
Shot some "Nice vacation pics" that were absolutely not going to happen with the medium format rig. Then shot one portrait of her.

Came back home and started processing in C1P. Instantly regretted not packing the credo with me.

Too much text. Here's the picture.

I find that no matter what gear I pack, I always instantly regret not having the stuff I left at home.

However, the OTHER controversial decision I took was to buy a tiny (well, by my standards) camera bag to force me to pack less gear and hopefully take my camera out more often. I sense that will be the subject of a future blog/forum post.
Title: Re: Why I chose a Nikon D810 over a Hasselblad H5D 50 as a portrait photographer
Post by: Eddie van der Walt on September 22, 2014, 05:29:56 am
Quote
Or you stitch 8 frames with an Otus and correct perspective in post?
I always thought there must be a market for a motorised tripod/camera trigger that can do this at the click of a button.
You know, if they can do it for telescopes, why can't they do it for us?
If any manufacturers are reading this and just had a light bulb moment, I WANT COMMISSION (or at least recognition).
Title: Re: Why I chose a Nikon D810 over a Hasselblad H5D 50 as a portrait photographer
Post by: BernardLanguillier on September 22, 2014, 05:33:30 am
I always thought there must be a market for a motorised tripod/camera trigger that can do this at the click of a button.
You know, if they can do it for telescopes, why can't they do it for us?
If any manufacturers are reading this and just had a light bulb moment, I WANT COMMISSION (or at least recognition).

The closest thing probably?

http://www.dr-clauss.de/en/foto-studiotechnik-3/rodeon-pix-series-eng-2

Cheers,
Bernard
Title: Re: Why I chose a Nikon D810 over a Hasselblad H5D 50 as a portrait photographer
Post by: torger on September 22, 2014, 05:58:45 am
There are a few motorized stitching solutions out there since a few years. Most have been focused at gigapixel spherical view kind of stuff, rather than stitching a normal architecture shot. But I guess it's more about marketing and software packaging than hardware, I think someone could make a stitch-based landscape/architecture solution based on already existing products. It would not be that portable though.

When I did stitching I used a manual head, easier to carry and you no worries about running out of battery. Personally I found stitching to be a too mechanical shooting process to be really enjoyable (again very subjective), but I do recognize it as a very good and cost effective method to achieve high resolution images or wide angle views. You can't beat the quality of spherical stitching, using only the center portion of a high resolution lens. Many use stitching on tech cams (moving the back and stitch within the image circle) which has some advantages compared to spherical stitching (you can usually cover the same view with fewer shots), but I have actually never done it other than for testing, I enjoy the one-shot process much more even if one have to compromise with quality at times. Had I been shooting more indoor architecture I think I would have used stitching more, because you tend to run into situations when you need extreme wide angle there for practical reasons (can't back out through the wall). The attached picture is such a stitch I made a few years ago with a Canon 7D (had no MF system at the time), I simply did not have a lens with wide enough wide angle to document the whole room in a single shot (not a super shoot with bad light etc, but worked well as documentation which was the purpose that day).

I see post-processing as a necessary evil, but I don't particularly like it. The less time I can spend with it the happier I am. Even if there are effective stitching software I'm convinced the one shot images does reduce the time you sit at the computer. This has also been a major sales point for MFD in portrait applications, that the default result in terms of color and look is closer to the end result than a typical 135 system will deliver. As far as I understand despite the advances of 135 it's still the general consensus that this is the case.
Title: Re: Why I chose a Nikon D810 over a Hasselblad H5D 50 as a portrait photographer
Post by: Petrus on September 22, 2014, 08:31:13 am
I would say that for journalistic portraiture the slight resolution difference between 36 and 50 MPix is much more than compensated by the fast and nimble handling and better DR and high ISO from Nikon D810 and right selection of lenses. Simply more and better selection of keepers, less DOF if that is wanted and at a fraction of the price.

Three lenses to consider: first replace 50mm Nikkor with Sigma Art 50mm (like already suggested). Second: Sigma 35mm f/1.4 Art is also great and relatively cheap as medium WA, sharpest AF 35mm on the planet. Last but not least: Nikkor DC 135mm f/2 is the often overlooked and almost forgotten portrait lens, almost 20 years old, yes, but well ahead of it's time what comes to sharpness. It also has the special DOF control thingy if one wants to get artsy. It is my favorite face lens by far.

New 58mm Nikkor is good for swirling bokeh effects, but I prefer the 50mm Sigma.
Title: Re: Why I chose a Nikon D810 over a Hasselblad H5D 50 as a portrait photographer
Post by: Atina on September 22, 2014, 08:43:44 am
I could try and refute what he has said about MF and give my view as an experienced user in both MF and DSLRs, but why bother now? 

Because some people are interested in your opinion and would like to learn something new.

Title: Re: Why I chose a Nikon D810 over a Hasselblad H5D 50 as a portrait photographer
Post by: Eddie van der Walt on September 22, 2014, 09:06:23 am
Quote
Last but not least: Nikkor DC 135mm f/2 is the often overlooked and almost forgotten portrait lens, almost 20 years old, yes, but well ahead of it's time what comes to sharpness. It also has the special DOF control thingy if one wants to get artsy. It is my favorite face lens by far.

Petrus,

You have said the magic word. I love that 135 f2 DC lens. It is absolutely the next on my buy list. I do wonder if its aged optics is capable of resolving the detail a 36MP camera needs, and I was quietly hoping that Nikon would update it at Photokina.

Do you have a portfolio anywhere where I may see some full-res shots?
Title: Re: Why I chose a Nikon D810 over a Hasselblad H5D 50 as a portrait photographer
Post by: Petrus on September 22, 2014, 11:54:14 am
Do you have a portfolio anywhere where I may see some full-res shots?

As I do not own the rights to my professional work I can not spread the pictures around freely. I'll have to ask if I can place a few in my dropbox.

135 DC is not perfectly sharp at full open (bit like the new 58mm), but already at f/2.8 it shines. It used to be one of the best Nikkors until the newest crop of lenses came to market like both 85mm, new 50mm etc, so it is still perfectly usable, and the focal length is perfect.
Title: Re: Why I chose a Nikon D810 over a Hasselblad H5D 50 as a portrait photographer
Post by: Paul2660 on September 22, 2014, 12:02:35 pm
Went on a vacation trip with the woman. Took only the D800 and a couple of lenses as space was at a premium and I wanted a doitall solution.
Shot some "Nice vacation pics" that were absolutely not going to happen with the medium format rig. Then shot one portrait of her.

Came back home and started processing in C1P. Instantly regretted not packing the credo with me.

Too much text. Here's the picture.

(https://farm6.staticflickr.com/5587/15315939162_bf990af988_c.jpg)

Carry on...

Something about that shot, just love the expression on her face.  You have nothing to worry about with the use of Nikon. 

Great shot, thanks for sharing.
Paul
Title: Re: Why I chose a Nikon D810 over a Hasselblad H5D 50 as a portrait photographer
Post by: Conner999 on September 22, 2014, 01:41:58 pm
+1 (and then some)

....

The dealers never missed an opportunity to regale you with the tired mantra of 'increasing sales, increasing profits' etc etc - was (and is) true. What they didn't say though (and possibly didn't know or suspect) was that these were not enough to cover the ever increasing short term debt, hence the crisis. Continuing to refer to it as  'aggressive expansion financing' coupled with claims that 'PhaseOne had been both profitable and growing since 2008' bordered on disinformation.

The Press release was suitably ambiguous, but was clear in one thing - the proceeds of the sale were to be reinvested in the company 'for a minority stake'. They were, the debt much reduced, hence the improved financial outlook today.

It was a straightforward 'buyout'. If anyone tries to tell you otherwise, just ask them one simple question : " In what way did selling a 60% stake (and ceding both control and ownership) benefit the company and it's shareholders as opposed to a simple capital increase - IPO or equivalent? "

M
....

Title: Re: Why I chose a Nikon D810 over a Hasselblad H5D 50 as a portrait photographer
Post by: synn on September 22, 2014, 05:58:35 pm
Something about that shot, just love the expression on her face.  You have nothing to worry about with the use of Nikon. 

Great shot, thanks for sharing.
Paul

Thank you, Paul. All credits to her, I was just pushing the buttons. :)
Title: Re: Why I chose a Nikon D810 over a Hasselblad H5D 50 as a portrait photographer
Post by: BernardLanguillier on September 22, 2014, 06:52:00 pm
Thank you, Paul. All credits to her, I was just pushing the buttons. :)

I am sure she'll love the spit analogy! ;)

Cheers,
Bernard
Title: Re: Why I chose a Nikon D810 over a Hasselblad H5D 50 as a portrait photographer
Post by: sbernthal on September 23, 2014, 04:39:36 pm
Very late to the discussion, I'll give my contrition nevertheless.


The question itself is worthy to discuss, as it does interest everybody, even if it keeps coming back relentlessly. Moreover, new considerations are always entering the equation, so I don't think it's a waste of everyone's time. I am not offended by hearing opinions from people who didn't buy MFD.


I've had 35mm and MFD system for years, and I have a pretty informed opinion.
I don't believe there's much point in technical comparisons, as they are terribly boring and can be construed every way the poster wants, as there's no faculty of image quality in any university.


Here is what I think is relevant:

1. What camera do I pick up? 100% of the time (when both are possible to the assignment) I pick up the Mamiya Leaf. The Canon is gathering dust.

2. In some rare cases I use both on the same assignment just to see what happens. Which one gives me better images? 100% of the time Mamiya Leaf. Why? At this point I don't really care.


As far a as financial stability - I consider this a very valid and important purchase decision making point.
As long as global income inequality continues to increase, Phase One's numbers will continue to improve, and I don't see the Koch brothers or Goldman Sachs handing over their money or their control of the three US government branches any time soon. Phase makes most of it's sales (in my uninformed opinion) from the 1%. The guy who buys golden toilets will also buy P1/Hasselblad/Leica and not Nikon, unless the Nikon is encrusted with diamonds.
Title: Re: Why I chose a Nikon D810 over a Hasselblad H5D 50 as a portrait photographer
Post by: eronald on September 23, 2014, 05:40:58 pm
Very late to the discussion, I'll give my contrition nevertheless.

As long as global income inequality continues to increase, Phase One's numbers will continue to improve, and I don't see the Koch brothers or Goldman Sachs handing over their money or their control of the three US government branches any time soon. Phase makes most of it's sales (in my uninformed opinion) from the 1%. The guy who buys golden toilets will also buy P1/Hasselblad/Leica and not Nikon, unless the Nikon is encrusted with diamonds.

The farce brings us your words - so humble, so funny they are, so true they may be.

Edmund
Title: Re: Why I chose a Nikon D810 over a Hasselblad H5D 50 as a portrait photographer
Post by: leeonmaui on September 23, 2014, 06:39:41 pm
Aloha,

And the coolest thing is I can read all this s@$t
While I'm on the beach waiting for the light to change and the tide to go out...
Title: Re: Why I chose a Nikon D810 over a Hasselblad H5D 50 as a portrait photographer
Post by: eronald on September 23, 2014, 07:22:34 pm
Aloha,

And the coolest thing is I can read all this s@$t
While I'm on the beach waiting for the light to change and the tide to go out...


Wish I was there :(


Edmund
Title: Re: Why I chose a Nikon D810 over a Hasselblad H5D 50 as a portrait photographer
Post by: leeonmaui on September 23, 2014, 07:34:39 pm
Aloha,

Simple Edmund,
Fly to Honolulu, fly to Kauai, drive to Princeville, park at the small lot near the end of the point,
The path is between the parking lot and a condo complex,
It's pretty steep for about three hundred feet (100 meters)
And your there!
Hideaway Beach, Princeville, Hawaii
Not a bad working environment.....
Title: Re: Why I chose a Nikon D810 over a Hasselblad H5D 50 as a portrait photographer
Post by: BobShaw on September 23, 2014, 07:53:34 pm
The great thing about everyone selling their MF gear to buy 35mm is how cheap you pick up a Blad for these days. ;D
I have a 5D2 and was looking for a 5D3 and 85 f1.2 and instead bought a Blad cheaper.

You probably don't need the latest and greatest Blad if budget is the issue. Start with a H3 or H4 and start to build a lens collection.

I know a lot of pros using Canon and Nikon also, but when they are shooting for Professional Photographer of the Year they were usually on the Phase or Blad.
Title: Re: Why I chose a Nikon D810 over a Hasselblad H5D 50 as a portrait photographer
Post by: leeonmaui on September 23, 2014, 08:28:17 pm
Aloha,

I have found the opposite is true with the pentax 655 system
While there are some good deals if you bide your time,
In general since the release of the new Z prices are climbing on the lenses.
But you can pick up a rocking body for $3000-$4000