Phase One vs 40D vs Hasselblad

atp_image

atp_image

Suspended / Banned
Messages
115
Name
Adam
Edit My Images
No
Last week i was introduced to our gallery contract photographer for i had been questioning the gear he was using to get such sharp and crisp images.

I am proud of my Canon 40D and L series lens but when this photographer showed me his camera, a medium format Phase One with 120 digital back i was blown away in complete awe. Ever since this inspiring introduction to a real camera i have been looking into one and trying to find out some more information about one, only to find very very little.

I was hoping someone here could help me out with it and compare it to a Hasselblad ? Main reason, our gallery wants to purchase a similar camera for in house use. :help:
 
http://www.phaseone.com/

Just be aware the software Capture One Pro is going through many many teething problems sine they "upgraded" to V4 (upgraded meaning hey did away with lots of the features we all loved so much in V3:shrug:)
 
I had no idea they made a camera (just checked the website). Their digi backs for hasselblads are supposed to be really good.
 
For digital medium format back you have a few options, I would however (as you already have) narrow it down to Hasselblad or Phase One. Leaf are undergoing financial problems and other manufacturers don't have as wide a support base as Phase one or Hasselblad. If you go with Hasselblad you have 2 options; Going with a V-system or a H-System. A V-System will allow you to pick up older cameras and lenses, whereas a H system is newer and has more features. With Phase one you would be able to use Hasselblad bodies (Only V system I think) and other manufacturers bodies, such as a Mamiya RB67. Bare in mind though that any digital back will provide some level of crop factor as you can't get a full 6x6 or 6x7 sensor, so factor this in when working out what lenses to get. At work we are probably going with a Hasselblad H3DII-31MP camera as it provides us with a modern integrated system, and the back can be removed and fitted to a digital view camera setup such as a sinar P3. Hope this helps. :)
 
I've used all of the above... The 40D doesn't even compare.

Personally, I'd get a Phase One camera, which is actually a partnership with Mamiya, it's a Mamiya 645 AFD.

The sensor that Hasselblad use in their latest range is 36mmx48mm, Phase is 53.9mmx40.4mm.

645 format is abooout 56x42mm, so Phase are closest to a "full frame" medium format sensor.

What do you want to use the camera in house for? There may be better options, like the Betterlight scanning backs for Large Format cameras.

Bear in mind that this is similar to buying a car in price and in the fact that you can get a test drive. UK distributors will drive to your gallery to demo the products for you.
 
One thing about MF digital backs is the photosites that they have. pixel for pixel the Phase one and the Hasselblad will have much larger photosites than a 40D. These bigger sites mean more light is captured per pixel reducing noise and giving a clean image. The fact that their CCD's don't use microlenses may help as well.

If you are in the market to spend this amount of money you really need a serious demo. As said befor for a serious enquiery most dealers would be willing to come to you and show you what it can do. This has the advantage that you can see what results you really would get with the camera
 
Thanks all for the very helpful information.
We have been given a budget to purchase one of these cameras however we are unsure on whats the best - value for money, keeping in mind this camera needs to have support for many years to come.
The camera will be taking photographs of artworks, product designs etc and must be of high industry standard. We already have a light studio etc.
 
atp_image said:
Thanks all for the very helpful information.
We have been given a budget to purchase one of these cameras however we are unsure on whats the best - value for money, keeping in mind this camera needs to have support for many years to come.
The camera will be taking photographs of artworks, product designs etc and must be of high industry standard. We already have a light studio etc.
Click to expand...

well based on the idea of value for money and quality, according to two pros who I know (who have lots of friends who are pro too) who specialise in using MF, say that PhaseOne is the beez-kneez. Just as good quality as the hassleblad backs, if not better at a much lower cost.

leaf you stay away from, because as well as money troubles, apparently what they build is cheap bad quality stuff.

and hassleblad backs are very good. they are (most likley) to be the one that will have the support for the longest -in terms of years n years as companies like PhaseOne can go bust etc....(look at leaf!)

but I think phase one will stay to their word if you see what I mean.


the best idea really as others have said is to get demos by both hassy and phaseone to see which back is best.
 
If it's for copy/reproduction work I think you're better off spending the same money on a Large Format camera and a Better Light scanning back. The only advantage MF has is portability and quick set up, which you don't need for copy work.
 
EdinburghGary said:
These threads make baby jesus cry :(

It always scares me s***less, as I lusted for a year for a MF Digital Setup. Just as I get over it, you post this.

Death would be too kind for you.

Gary.
Click to expand...

I was just thinking that, blads are far too much, but the Phase One stuff is more in the realms of mortals :) As is the D3X, which is of exceptional quality!

Must... close... browser...
 
There is an article in the latest EOS magazine, in which they reported sensor test results by DxO labs on a number of sensors from different cameras including Mamiya ZD back, Hassy H3DII,

From the article' The EOS 1DS MKIII clearly outperformed all the medium format cameras in low light conditions, and matched them in other areas of image quality'

Not having read the full report, it could be Canon are 'cherry picking' parts of the test result that show them in a good light, it would be perhaps worth trying to find the full test report?
 
Les McLean said:
Not having read the full report, it could be Canon are 'cherry picking' parts of the test result that show them in a good light, it would be perhaps worth trying to find the full test report?
Click to expand...

Now that wouldn't be a first would it, its the soul and essence of marketing. :thumbs:
However, even if the results were 'cherry picked', if the camera performs to its desired purpose then its good enough for us.
 
Bear in mind the Better Light scanning backs aren't at all suitable for anything that moves, and that includes landscapes on windy days where you want detail in grass/foliage. Due to the way they scan, any change during the duration of the exposure will look rather odd, clouds and waves especially so.

As for the DxO Mark tests:
http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/en...rand)/Phase One/(brand2)/Canon/(brand3)/Nikon

The low score is explained by DxO themselves here:
http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/eng/Technologies/Medium-format-ranking

I take it EOS magazine, in the spirit of responsible journalism, pointed their readers towards that article?
 
UK distributors will drive to your gallery to demo the products for you.
Click to expand...

and im stressing about whether to buy a £150 film camera.

id be getting them out asap and getting my hands dirty, so much fun t be had!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top