Jumping from Canon 5D II to H4D-31

[John Godwin]

Hi there.

I'm a commercial photographer, and as my clients have got a little bit better this year, I'm thinking it might be time to jump to medium format. I think I need the quality, but I'm not kidding myself either, I also want the kudos of being in the Hasselblad club. I'm looking at purchasing the H4D-31

I really have zero understanding of MF, and wondered if you guys could help me decide if this is the right purchase for me.

The 31 seems reasonably priced with the 80mm lens, but I'm wondering if I should save a bit more money and go straight for the 40? My work is almost entirely studio or location portraiture, but with a bit of product photography as well.

I have a few very specific questions, and if anyone can help, I'd really appreciate it:

1) People on MF forums talk about "clean files" in terms of noise. Does this mean MF cameras produce inherently noisy shots? I've never heard this in regards to 35mm digital cameras.

2) Does the h4D-31 come with the H4 body, and can I, somewhen down the line, just upgrade the back to a 40mp or 50mp?

3) At 100iso, how different is the image quality between the 31 and 40?

4) How much better is the image quality over my 5d2?

5) How does focusing and image sharpness compare to my 5d2?


Finally, my main question is really how much of a difference can I expect when I upgrade to this camera? Is it a true Hasselblad? When I hear of the differences spoken between the H4D-40 and a 35mm digital, it seems like they're in different dimensions, is this also the case with the H4D-31?

I'm wondering that laying 10 grand down on a camera system isn't going to blow me away like I hope it will.

I shoot almost entirely in a studio at ISO100, and very occasionally I will shoot a natural light portrait at 800. How does 800 compare between MF and 35MM?

I think that's it. If anyone can answer these questions, I'd really appreciate it.

Thanks in advance.

 

[Ed Bray]

I've had both a 1DsMk3 and a 5DMk2 and they are both blown away by the images from my H1D and that is only with a Imacon Ixpress 528C 22MP back, the downsides are that I have to shoot tethered to the Image Bank and that the highest ISO is 400, but at the base ISO 50 the results are very good, but when I use the backs multishot feature they are simply stunning if not that the files are a little large.

The best thing over 35mm sized sensors is the increased dynamic range and the capturing of fine detail.

The H4D series are a more than a couple of steps above my H1D and so I can only assume that you would be even more pleased with the results.

16x Multishot image

16x Multishot 100% crop.

 

[fotografz]

H4D-31, 40 or 50?

Hi John,

There are a few different things to take into consideration when moving to Medium Format Digital ...and some aspects that are specific to Hasselblad MFD cameras.

The difference in image quality between 35mm and MFD is visible. This is not dependent on meg count as much as it is the size of the sensor. So a 24 meg 35mm camera will NOT out-perform or equal a 22 meg MFD in terms of Image Quality. This will remain true should 35mm cameras move to 35 or 36 meg as rumored ... a 31, 33, 39, or 40 meg MFD will still produce a visibly higher quality image.

The ratio of MFD images is more useful than 35mm ... where one throws away a considerable part of a 35mm image for standard sized prints or use in publications, there is far less waste with a MFD file. In effect, this increases the image quality of MFD even more.

Many 35mm DSLRs are either 12 bit color or some are 14 bit. ALL current MFD backs are 16 bit. This translates into better color separation and fidelity,

On the other hand, 35mm DSLRs tend to be better suited for higher ISO work. The chief difference between MFD and 35mm DSLRs is that MFD uses CCD sensors, and 35mm uses CMOS (currently, the sole exception to this is the Leica M9 35mm FF camera). By adding an AA filter to a 35mm CMOS sensor in addition to other in-camera firmware adjustments, they can push the usable ISOs higher ... the downside of this is some loss of pixel level quality. With MFD cameras there is no AA filter with the consequence that the these backs do not perform as well at higher ISOs.

The ISO performance of MFD has markedly improved in the past few years through better firmware/software solutions ... and most importantly through the use of micro-lenses at the pixel level on the sensor. These increase the light gathering properties of certain MFD sensors. For this reason the Hasselblad 31 and 40 meg backs do produce better IQ at ISO 400, 800 ... and even 1,600 if exposed with care. If used in "fat" light outdoors or with strobes, all of the more current MFD backs perform quite well at ISO 400 and 800.

If noise is apparent in a MFD file, it is mitigated by the fact that the base file is so much larger than that of a 35mm file. An 11" X 14" print will require less enlargement compared to a 35mm file.

It should be noted that MFD really requires care in shooting technique to realize the benefits, and in effect all lenses have less DOF compared to 35mm. So a HC100/2.2 shot wide open is visually similar to a 85/1.4 on a 35mm camera. Camera movement is also magnified with MFD, and is less forgiving when shooting ambient light at lower shutter speeds hand-held. A monopod/tripod is highly recommended in these cases.

Now, the differences between the H4D/31 and H4D/40 (which are both the same sized crop frame sensor with a 1.3X lens factor and ISO range from 100 to 1600). Basically, the H4D/40 is the newer digital back and offers a few advantages. The H4D/40 is about 1 stop better ISO performance ... so an ISO 800 file from the H4D/40 will look like an ISO 400 file from the H4D/31. The H4D/40 benefits from newer technology implemented via firmware releases ... such as, a double resolution LCD, spirit level in the viewfinder, and a few other nifty aids for shooting. These are not available for the H4D/31 nor will they be available.

Because Hasselblad HD cameras are highly integrated (back, body,lens, viewfinder), you cannot just buy a separate back ... to upgrade from say a H4D/40 to a H4D/50 or 60 is not possible. On the other hand, Hasselblad makes it quite easy to upgrade the whole camera and back through periodic promotions.

Which brings me to a final consideration, whether you would be better served with a H4D/50 or even H4D/60. Where the 31 and 40 are 1.3X crop frame, the 50 is 1.1X and the 60 is virtually FF 645. The 50 and 60 allow ISOs from 50 to 800 ... 50 is very useful for both studio and brighter ambient applications. Neither the 50 or 60 use microlenses and are far better suited for use on a technical camera with movements should that be a future consideration.

In balance, I'd say at least a H4D/40 would be the best over-all camera for your applications ... and for the reasons I mentioned, would be the better choice over the H4D/31.

-Marc

 

[503CW]

Cfv50

Hi Marc, when you say; The 50 and 60 allow ISOs from 50 to 800,
does that also count for the cfv50 back for the V system?
I am still considering getting this back for my 503.
GEO

 

[fotografz]

Hi Marc, when you say; The 50 and 60 allow ISOs from 50 to 800,
does that also count for the cfv50 back for the V system?
I am still considering getting this back for my 503.
GEO

Yes, the CFV/50 is the same exact sensor as in the H3D/H4D/50 backs ISO 50, 100, 200, 400, and 800. Longest shutter speed is 64 seconds. You can shoot 50 meg rectangles and 38 meg square images.

Battery driven so unlike the H3 and H4 cameras, this back can be mounted on a technical field camera ... big plus!

What I doubt is that the CFV will get the firmware update that allows the double resolution LCD like all of the H4D camera are getting.

-Marc