Pages: [1] 2   Go Down

Author Topic: Some comparisons between my Sony Alpha A7rII and my Hasselblad V and P45+ back  (Read 8283 times)

ErikKaffehr

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11310
    • Echophoto

Hi,

Some interesting things going in recent times. Both Canon and Sony has released new cameras in 2015 which move in the low end MFD territory in resolution.

On the other hand used MFD backs may be much more affordable today than two and a half years ago when I bought mine. Old Hasselblad lenses are available at very affordable prices.

I have made a few comparison shots with my best lenses on both systems, I think they are pretty close. On the Hasselblad I used the Planar 100/3.5, which is known as a very good lens, when used at long distances. The other lens I used was the Macro Planar 120/4 that is corrected for the close up range. From each image I have a "focus crop" and a "bokeh crop".

Doug Peterson, over at Digital Transitions published a studio shot with modern Phase One backs and lenses but also including a Pentax 645Z, Canon 5DsR and Sony A7rII. That test demonstrates the superiority of modern MFD when it works best. Doug's test used a very good setup and a fair comparison. I was much impressed with the Schneider lens used on the Phase One XF. Quite a bit better than what I would have expected. https://digitaltransitions.com/massive-still-life-shootout/

P45+ Planar 100/3.5 - f/8A7rII + Sony 90/2.8G - f/5.6

P45+ Macro Planar 120/4 - f/11Sony A7rII + Sony 90/2.8G - f/8

Just to say, these images are not intended as artistic samples, although I actually like the 20151225 images.

Raw files are here: http://echophoto.dnsalias.net/ekr/Articles/P45+_vs_a7rII/

Best regards
Erik
« Last Edit: January 24, 2016, 04:54:05 am by ErikKaffehr »
Logged
Erik Kaffehr
 

Zorki5

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 486
    • AOLib

Just to say, these images are not intended as artistic samples, although I actually like the 20151225 images.

Not sure what you meant by "20151225 images", but IMHO A7RII images are very noticeably better.
Logged

ErikKaffehr

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11310
    • Echophoto

Hi Zorki5,

The image would look something like below.

In a sense, the idea is not to say which image is better but to give some kind of idea about the image quality from each system.

Best regards
Erik

Not sure what you meant by "20151225 images", but IMHO A7RII images are very noticeably better.
Logged
Erik Kaffehr
 

Zorki5

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 486
    • AOLib

In a sense, the idea is not to say which image is better but to give some kind of idea about the image quality from each system.

I understand   :D  What I'm saying is that, to me, image quality from A7RII is better.
Logged

ErikKaffehr

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11310
    • Echophoto

Hi,

Your opinion is much appreciated! Thank you very much!

Best regards
Erik

I understand   :D  What I'm saying is that, to me, image quality from A7RII is better.
Logged
Erik Kaffehr
 

uaiomex

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1209
    • http://www.eduardocervantes.com

I agree with Zorki.
I think it is unfortunate for the sensor size hierarchy but the Sony combo is visibly sharper.
Eduardo


Hi,

Your opinion is much appreciated! Thank you very much!

Best regards
Erik
Logged

Colorado David

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1178

I agree with the others regarding sharpness, but I also prefer the Sony for color and contrast.

ErikKaffehr

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11310
    • Echophoto

Hi,

Some of that depends on processing, I tried to make them similar, without favouring any of them. Foremost I had no WB reference when shooting. The first pair where white balanced on snow behind the subject.

Thanks for your findings.

Best regards
Erik

I agree with the others regarding sharpness, but I also prefer the Sony for color and contrast.
Logged
Erik Kaffehr
 

Phil Indeblanc

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2017

the sharpness on the P45+ is softer than on the Sony, and I also think color contrast maybe better...if you look at the 3rd and fourth frames with spiky grass.

here is another compare...

https://youtu.be/Ku8xRf72xFA
« Last Edit: January 25, 2016, 12:31:42 am by Phil Indeblanc »
Logged
If you buy a camera, you're a photographer...

ErikKaffehr

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11310
    • Echophoto

Hi Phil,

Thanks for that video.

Something no one seems to have discussed is the "bokeh", which is most obvious in the forth row of images. These shots were at "equivalent" apertures f/11 on the P45 and f/8 on the Sony.

To me, the amount of bokeh looks very similar. I don't know about the "look" of the bokeh, though. Neither is truly horrible, but these are medium aperture shots.

Best regards
Erik

the sharpness on the P45+ is softer than on the Sony, and I also think color contrast maybe better...if you look at the 3rd and fourth frames with spiky grass.

here is another compare...

https://youtu.be/Ku8xRf72xFA
Logged
Erik Kaffehr
 

John Lytton

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 14

Hi Erik,

I went through a similar exercise when I acquired my Canon 5DsR and comparing to my Contax 645 IQ160.  Adjusting distance for equivalent lens focal lengths and format differences as much as practical, I used a Sigma 70mm F/2.8 macro on the 5DsR and a  Zeiss 120mm F/4 Apo Makro Planar on the Contax.

I was shocked how close the Canon system came to the Contax in terms of resolution.  So much so that I was "forced" to upgrade to a IQ180 to maintain a more clear resolution advantage. ;-)

Maybe a 60MP XF system might show a bit more resolution advantage than the Contax, but it's clear to me that The Sony and the Canon are defintely in what was exclusively 39-60 MP MFD territory, resolution-wise.

The attached jpegs are 100% crops of my test.  (Grayscale just save on space)  Looking at the images at 200% is really the only way to see any differences, and others may even disagree with me on which is actually sharper.

Regards,

John
Logged

ErikKaffehr

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11310
    • Echophoto

Hi John,

Thanks for posting your comparison. Nice to have affordable alternatives at 40-50 MP. It seems that Sigma makes quite a few really good lenses.

Best regards
Erik

Hi Erik,

I went through a similar exercise when I acquired my Canon 5DsR and comparing to my Contax 645 IQ160.  Adjusting distance for equivalent lens focal lengths and format differences as much as practical, I used a Sigma 70mm F/2.8 macro on the 5DsR and a  Zeiss 120mm F/4 Apo Makro Planar on the Contax.

I was shocked how close the Canon system came to the Contax in terms of resolution.  So much so that I was "forced" to upgrade to a IQ180 to maintain a more clear resolution advantage. ;-)

Maybe a 60MP XF system might show a bit more resolution advantage than the Contax, but it's clear to me that The Sony and the Canon are defintely in what was exclusively 39-60 MP MFD territory, resolution-wise.

The attached jpegs are 100% crops of my test.  (Grayscale just save on space)  Looking at the images at 200% is really the only way to see any differences, and others may even disagree with me on which is actually sharper.

Regards,

John
Logged
Erik Kaffehr
 

ErikKaffehr

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11310
    • Echophoto

Hi,

Just want to say thanks for all postings.

Best regards
Erik
Logged
Erik Kaffehr
 

Alan Klein

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 13823
    • Flicker photos

Clyde Butcher is now shooting digital with the A7R.  I've seem some really impressive digital large prints from them in his Florida gallery. 

Phil Indeblanc

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2017

Great samples to look at...thanks Erik, and John.

The Contax does look sharper/ flat, and I hope with a Zeiss120 it better.
Logged
If you buy a camera, you're a photographer...

uaiomex

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1209
    • http://www.eduardocervantes.com

Is he shooting stitches with Actus?


Clyde Butcher is now shooting digital with the A7R.  I've seem some really impressive digital large prints from them in his Florida gallery.
Logged

ErikKaffehr

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11310
    • Echophoto

Hi,

It seems both lenses "outresolve" the sensor, very clearly the Contax 645/120/IQ-160 combo has a bit higher resolution, corresponding to the 60MP vs 50MP advantage.

But as John says it is close. The Sigma 70/2.8 macro John used in his test is a very good lens, may be on my shopping list.

Best regards
Erik

Great samples to look at...thanks Erik, and John.

The Contax does look sharper/ flat, and I hope with a Zeiss120 it better.
Logged
Erik Kaffehr
 

ErikKaffehr

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11310
    • Echophoto

Hi,

A small reflection. The differences I see are very small. When pixel peeping on the screen we scrutinise an image that would be around 50"x70" on the wall (assuming a pixel pitch 100 PPI on the monitor).

Best regards
Erik
Logged
Erik Kaffehr
 

Alan Klein

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 13823
    • Flicker photos

Is he shooting stitches with Actus?


I believe he does.   But not sure if all of them are stitched.

uaiomex

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1209
    • http://www.eduardocervantes.com

Thanks Alan. It is kind of fantastic to think that a great landscape photographer familiar to shoot bigger than 8X10 and to print verrry large is now using digital 35.
I'd love to hear whatever Clyde can say about his experiences with the Sony.
Eduardo


I believe he does.   But not sure if all of them are stitched.
« Last Edit: February 22, 2016, 11:02:14 pm by uaiomex »
Logged
Pages: [1] 2   Go Up