I had the chance to use the H3D 31MP last week, great! ISO 800 is CLEAN, no not
as clean as 100 iso, but VERY USUABLE.


http://www.stevecole.com/h3d31/index.htm

looks really good!

the difference between felxcolor and lightrooom is bad o_O

I saved the H3D file as an DNG then processed it in LightRoom, I also tried
processing the DNG in Adobe CS3 + Noise Ninji with "better" results than both Lightroom
& Flexcolor.

PS: If anyone wants to try the camera themselves I suggest contacting Steve Hindrix
at PPR in Atlanta. Snappy knows best.

Is that really ISO 800 with no noise reduction? Are you positive that there was no default noise reduction during the RAW processing? I ask because it looks much better than other high ISO MFDB samples I've seen. I'm not even sure my old Canon 5D could match that. (Too bad I don't have it any more or I could generate a quick sample).

Why did Hasselblad stop there? Why not give at least 1 stop more? It looks like ISO 1600 would still be very useable.

Other back manufacturers (Phase, Sinar) seem to be coming out with higher useable ISOs now. Would be interesting to compare.

On the downside, the image seemed a bit soft to me. Any idea why that might be?

Steve Thanks for posting these. I have a couple of questions. Which lenses and apertures were used? Also does Flexcolor have a default noise reduction algorithm. The one issue I see from your iso 400 image is that the flexcolor processed image while having little noise, seems to have reduced some of the detail. The best example I can see is the top of the animal carrier where the detail on the mesh between the two processing programs appears to be quite different. So the Flexcolor default seems to have a strong noise filter built into the processing algorithm.

Mark, my thoughts also. The softness in the ISO 800 image may be due to noise reduction. It looks very similar to what I get when I use noise reduction on my highest ISO setting. Perhaps Flexcolour is applying noise reduction based on the ISO setting?

[quote=foto-z,Mar 19 2007, 07:29 PM]
Mark, my thoughts also. The softness in the ISO 800 image may be due to noise reduction. It looks very similar to what I get when I use noise reduction on my highest ISO setting. Perhaps Flexcolour is applying noise reduction based on the ISO setting?

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

There was no noise reduction added to any of the images, noise turned off in Flexcolor
I did shoot these at either 2.8 or 4.0 though, 80mm.


Perhaps Flexcolor is applying noise reduction at 800iso. The softness does no bother me,
after adding a little sharpening in CS, not a problem.

Oh Yea Mark, Hasselblad IS planning on going to 1600iso with the 31MP back.

This 800 ISO is pretty impressive.

It would be good though to see also a sample shot at 800 ISO in low light, like a night shot for instance.

Regards,
Bernard

My thoughts too, I'm waiting on my H3D31 and this test shot bodes very well IMO.

I'm told to expect 1600 ISO soon. I'd be very interested to see any tests done with the P30.

There is of course noise reduction happening in Flexcolour behind the scenes and a higher ISO file will take longer to process as a result.

I think some of the patterns some are seeing are JPG artifacts (90MB>2MB).

Nick-T

Thanks for posting these,Steve.

Nick,from your extensive knowledge of 'all things' Flexcolor can the default noise
reduction being applied to high-ISO files behind the scenes be turned completely off
as can the USM that Flexcolor applies quietly by default when scanning film with Imacon/
Hasselblad scanners

Mark

P.S.-Steve,do you have any other samples from lower ISO settings that were shot with
the lens closed down to something like f8-f11?

Hey Mark
The behind the scenes stuff cannot be turned off. Blad just like Phase , Leaf et all take the RAW data and process it to what they think looks good, then giving the user access to more mundane controls like USM. I don't think any Manufacturer in their right mind would want to give the end user access to non-processed data on the off-chance that 0.001% of end users could do a better job than the clever chaps in R&D.

Actually the old Kodak 460 did allow you access to the RAW Linear data for the pupose of profiling the file, but I never got even close to the results that Kodak were getting.

Nick-T

hi Nick,

Absolutely right: all capture applications are producing some kind of "pre-processed" raws

Just as an information: the "RAWs" from the eMotion backs can be accessed by dowloading them with the Brumbaer "eMotion Reader". It helps to recover highlights (up to 2 stops), to apply "white shadings" automatically and in batch process, to apply special color matrices, get rid of any centerfold effect, etc ... But the real RAWs (.IA & .BR files = Image Data and Black Reference Data) files are kept and saved as.

Best regards,
Thierry

if i compare these samples with my P30 800....well i guess i should not...first i am known hass hater #1 here and second it is really hard to tell what is jpeg stuff and what is noise/grain....
the P30 shows more grain....but is much cleaner in terms of: no blotchiness, no smearing...especially in the shadows (this must be the jepg compression)...these files look like major noise reduction to me....blotchy and soft....and no grain.....i will provide some raw files if someone wants to put them on a server for download......so we can compare raw files....let me know if anyone wants to host....i can also do longer nightshots....whatever....
i never use any noise reduction, i much prefer seeing grain, the harder the better, reminds me of film....which is why i like 800 with the P30.....

I don't know anyting about the H31 and have only shot a few frames of any hasselblad back.

I do know that the P-30 is just mind blowing.

I NEVER do this, but this link is un retouiched, from the P-30, some Canon files and a few Aptus files (the black and whites).

The are non processed screen shots from lightroom and most of the P-30 images even look better and cleaner in C-1, but regarldess the P-30 just rocked me. I shot most of this with tungsten, mostly at 400 iso and I though like Paul says there is some noise but it's a little film like so not objecitonable.

http://www.russellrutherfordgroup.com/screen_shots/

http://www.russellrutherfordgroup.com/work_in_progress.mov

The P30 shots will have a 4:3 ratio and just for clairty, I shot the black and white withthe Aptus and purposely pushed up the shadows to show noise, so don't judge the Aptus by these images for typical pixel peeping as it was for effect. Actually I think quite a nice effect.



JR

These samples are very helpful for those of us seriously contemplating an upgrade to DB. Images
from Sinar and Leaf as well as testimonials would be welcome also.
Thank you.

Richard

Hi, pss,

Thanks for your offer to post files. I'm sure others will appreciate it too.

I'm willing to host the files and will post a link for folks in this thread. E-mail me, and I can provide you a location to post the files.

Kind regards,
-Brad

I quite like the pushed shadows too. It's funny to think that the pixel technical ones would complain about the noise on those photos, not realizing that they are destroying their art to be "technologically advanced". Or I might have had too much wine, but I think I have a point somewhere in this post.

Thanks for sharing the H3D31 files with us. I have an offer for a H3d31 in front of me and am doubting whether to pull the trigger on it.

The 400 but especially the 800 looks quite good. The softness in the 800 might be because focus appears to be just in front of the eyes, it appears to be more on the flowers she is holding.

The remainder of softness might be due to noise reduction? For my taste it is just a tad too much, I like it a bit more grainy with more detail, detail seems to be lost here.

Frankly, what strikes me most is the horrible OOF blur/Bokeh, this is one good example of truly distracting background blur.

I don't know what to say except it ROCKS!

Good Luck

Looks quite nice. I am using both P45 on Contax and H3D39 and never have the nerve to go beyond ISO 200, so may be I can try 400 now.

What version of Flexcolor came with the H3D-31?

Was it 4.6.7 or something higher?

-axel

You can reduce noise reduction in FlexColor.

In the TEXTURE window you can add a value of +10 or -10 in Noise Filter bias.

Jo S.x

Dear Richard,

there have been many Sinar eMotion images posted by users on this site (rehnniar, foto-z), as well as testimonials from these users and in different treads.

You can contact these users and ask them to send you some eMotion samples and explanations with it.

Best regards,
Thierry

I missed the focus on her eyes, but you can see the flowers are very sharp, as for grain I "still"
add grain to allmy images in PS after processing, but not in the highlights or blacks.

You are absolutely right, as I thought to see focus is on the flowers. Maybe you have one that is sharp on the eyes that you are willing to share?

Steve,

I have to say the files look very noise free for 800, but the first thing that struck me also was the ugly background blur/bokeh as noted above, which is definately something i have noticed with many 'H' lenses.

Gary.

That shot was made on a 35mm lens though, so I guess in 'normal' use it would more likely be used with a greater depth of field?

I think the noise is very good but I'm not impressed with the image quality. I supose it's the compression...
This crops shows color artifacts and chromatic aberration... Open the images in Photoshop and you will see it.
Click to view attachment
Click to view attachment
In general I think (am I the only one here?) that this images look very cold and soft.

/Samuel

Good point Samuel - I think it looks GREAT for 800iso! Good enough for 99% of clients.

I thought the bokeh on the 100 iso image was not bad at all. I thought this was taken with hte 80mm lens?

Hi Mark,

I was talking about the girl / flower shot.

But yes, the 100 iso image I think was with the 80mm and I can't see an issue with the bokeh.