D3x vs. Hasselblad H3DII

Started Jun 18, 2010 | Discussions
Shop cameras & lenses ▾
John Miranda Regular Member • Posts: 147
D3x vs. Hasselblad H3DII

I noted Hasselblad has a 31MP medium format for

For landscape wide angle and architecture, wondering if anyone has had a chance to compare capabilities?

I have shot with medium format film and large format film about 10 years ago, and recall the unbelievable sharpness that MF/LF large glass provided. I was wondering how that stacks up today in the digital era.

While I like my D700, the lack of an intermediate priced upgrade path to higher resolution by Nikon is getting frustrating, and if the next stop is > $7k, makes me wonder about MF options...

-- hide signature --
power9999 New Member • Posts: 5
Re: D3x vs. Hasselblad H3DII

I would choose Hasselblad H3DII. This is a physics phenomenon that the larger the film or sensor base, the better the image quality. If the price is similar, I think H3DII is a better choose if you want a better image. In terms of weight, D3X is not light anyway, it is almost as heavy as H3DII.

Jarkko Haarla Jr Senior Member • Posts: 1,055
Re: D3x vs. Hasselblad H3DII

I would buy the Hasselblad only I would have afford buying both cameras.

The Nikon will allow you to shoot so many things, that once with just the Hasselblad, you´ll end up buying a more versatile camera too.

lifelibertyproperty Junior Member • Posts: 26
Re: D3x vs. Hasselblad H3DII

Have patience and you won't be sorry. I just looked through your website and you have a lot of great travel photos. I think the D3x would be perfect for your style (don't need high ISOs), but that $8K price! Why not consider switching to Canon (5DM2 and 16mm prime or 16-35mm)?

-- hide signature --

D700 | 16-35mm ƒ4 VR | 50mm ƒ1.4D | 85mm ƒ1.8 | 70-300mm ƒ4-5.6G | Aperture 3 | Drobo
http://www.flickr.com/photos/barronkerry/

Luke Kaven Veteran Member • Posts: 5,688
Re: D3x vs. Hasselblad H3DII

You can get a refurbished D3x these days for about $6500, new for about $7100. At $6500 it makes a little more sense, and then you have all your Nikon lenses. The D3x renders a lot like medium format, and at ISO 100 the files are unbelievably clean, even in the very darkest shadows, I mean amazing.

Well, and then there's the Pentax 645D at 40MP. You can get them now. I have a feeling pretty soon they will sell them in US. Now that would be a great camera when it hits $7500, but it's looking good already.

You might find it useful to give the D3x a try-out. It is more its own animal than any experience with the D3/D700 might suggest. It gives more of "that look" than most people think, and has the D3 mechanicals which work without any ifs, ands, or buts, all day every day. Autofocus works, without focus-recompose-and-lean-back. Then again, the Hasselblad will sync with flash at 1/800th. But in a minute, maybe the H3DII-39 will be under $10k. [For comparison, a Kodak 39MP sensor only costs $1k in qty now.]

John Miranda wrote:

I noted Hasselblad has a 31MP medium format for

For landscape wide angle and architecture, wondering if anyone has had a chance to compare capabilities?

I have shot with medium format film and large format film about 10 years ago, and recall the unbelievable sharpness that MF/LF large glass provided. I was wondering how that stacks up today in the digital era.

While I like my D700, the lack of an intermediate priced upgrade path to higher resolution by Nikon is getting frustrating, and if the next stop is > $7k, makes me wonder about MF options...

-- hide signature --
pandalee Veteran Member • Posts: 3,075
Re: D3x vs. Hasselblad H3DII

lifelibertyproperty wrote:

Have patience and you won't be sorry. I just looked through your website and you have a lot of great travel photos. I think the D3x would be perfect for your style (don't need high ISOs), but that $8K price! Why not consider switching to Canon (5DM2 and 16mm prime or 16-35mm)?

But you should know the Canon 16-35L2 is not a great lens , I much prefer my Nikon AFS16-35f4VR, the Canon is ok but lacks IS2 , this is a big deal.

And to the OP, the 5D2 will be a good camera but not a great one, the 1DS4 is coming in this Oct , so if Canon or any other brand is also your option , I 'd say just wait a bit since you already have the D700.

Or what about the PEntax 645D, which is even cheaper than the D3X?

-- hide signature --

D700 | 16-35mm ƒ4 VR | 50mm ƒ1.4D | 85mm ƒ1.8 | 70-300mm ƒ4-5.6G | Aperture 3 | Drobo
http://www.flickr.com/photos/barronkerry/

rayman 2 Veteran Member • Posts: 3,228
Something to look at !

I made that half a year ago and posted it here but you can get5 an idea of what the dirfferent systems can do .... see the D3x versus the H3 31.....
Peter

pandalee Veteran Member • Posts: 3,075
Re: Something to look at !

wow, it is kinda shocking to me, the H3D is this much better than the D3X?

well, I think I will save my money to get a MF some day , or just go for the Pentax 645d?

after seeing your crops here , I lost all my interest in high mp 135mm format cams but I think the D700+ MF make the best kit.

thank you for this extremely clear presentation.

rayman 2 wrote:

I made that half a year ago and posted it here but you can get5 an idea of what the dirfferent systems can do .... see the D3x versus the H3 31.....
Peter

DuckTape
DuckTape Regular Member • Posts: 296
Re: D3x vs. Hasselblad H3DII

If you really want high resolution you don't have a choice. Even if Hassel would be 24 mpx then resolution also wouldn't be equal. If you shoot with twice bigger sensor you get indeed more resolution even with the same quantity of pixels.

pandalee Veteran Member • Posts: 3,075
Re: D3x vs. Hasselblad H3DII

would you please elaborate on the last part?

DuckTape wrote:

If you really want high resolution you don't have a choice. Even if Hassel would be 24 mpx then resolution also wouldn't be equal. If you shoot with twice bigger sensor you get indeed more resolution even with the same quantity of pixels.

philip callaci Regular Member • Posts: 148
Depends on how large you print

I don't do landscapes but I had the pleasure of owning a mamiya with a Leaf Aptus 75s back for about 6 months. The detail is astonishing but.... My d3x is so much more versatile I sold the Leaf. I don't miss it.

I also own a D3 and the files from a D3x raw are so much better it has to be seen.
The d3x needs better light to excell.
That said I don't miss. My medium format system.

Greg Gebhardt
Greg Gebhardt Forum Pro • Posts: 25,429
I have had the honor

of using the Hassey Digital and was disappointed in the noise at higher ISO in comparison to my D3X.

The sharpness is stunning but the hardware seems slightly clumsy in comparison
--
Greg Gebhardt in
Jacksonville, Florida

 Greg Gebhardt's gear list:Greg Gebhardt's gear list
Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX10 Leica Q Leica M9 Nikon D4
RomanJohnston
RomanJohnston Forum Pro • Posts: 18,784
The D3X is starting to go down in price...

$7,400.00 now days....little closer to reality.

Just a heads up.

Roman
--

'To consult the rules of composition before making a picture is a little like consulting the law of gravitation before going for a walk'

  • Edward Weston

http://www.pbase.com/romansphotos/

pandalee Veteran Member • Posts: 3,075
Re: The D3X is starting to go down in price...

sorry for confusing comment , I was talking about used ones.

I cannot afford a new one.

RomanJohnston wrote:

$7,400.00 now days....little closer to reality.

Just a heads up.

Roman
--

'To consult the rules of composition before making a picture is a little like consulting the law of gravitation before going for a walk'

  • Edward Weston

http://www.pbase.com/romansphotos/

pandalee Veteran Member • Posts: 3,075
Re: Depends on how large you print

would you please compare the D3X to the Mamiya or Leaf ?

it would be very interesting.

philip callaci wrote:

I don't do landscapes but I had the pleasure of owning a mamiya with a Leaf Aptus 75s back for about 6 months. The detail is astonishing but.... My d3x is so much more versatile I sold the Leaf. I don't miss it.

I also own a D3 and the files from a D3x raw are so much better it has to be seen.
The d3x needs better light to excell.
That said I don't miss. My medium format system.

stawarz
stawarz Forum Member • Posts: 64
Re: Depends on how large you print

I guess the anti-aliasing filters employed in the D700/D3x are much stronger than the Hasselblad hence why the the D3x is not obtaining a resolution/sharpness that approaches the H3.

 stawarz's gear list:stawarz's gear list
Nikon D700 Nikon D800E Fujifilm X-T1 Fujifilm X-T10 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR +20 more
rayman 2 Veteran Member • Posts: 3,228
No anti aliasing filter !

There is no antialiasing filter in the Hasselblad ! same with the Leica S2 and most other MF systems. They do it in the software but that costs a lot of time so that
you dont end up with the same speed as the D3X.
I guess its also what makes the MF systems a lot more expensive.
Having both the 24 MP Dslr and an MF system is the best you can do .
You get the best of both worlds......even if you dont update for many years..
Peter

maljo@inreach.com Veteran Member • Posts: 7,035
Sticking with the D3X...

I happily used Hasselblads for many years back in
the film days, but, these days I'm going to stay with Nikon digital.

Having a medium format digital system is just too
expensive. Maintaining and traveling with
two systems is too much work.

The D700, D300, D3 and D3X all make terrific images.
I love using these cameras.

maljo

 maljo@inreach.com's gear list:maljo@inreach.com's gear list
Canon EOS 5D Mark III Nikon AF-S Nikkor 14-24mm f/2.8G ED
rayman 2 Veteran Member • Posts: 3,228
Re: Sticking with the D3X...

maljo@inreach.com wrote:

I happily used Hasselblads for many years back in
the film days, but, these days I'm going to stay with Nikon digital.

Having a medium format digital system is just too
expensive. Maintaining and traveling with
two systems is too much work.

The D700, D300, D3 and D3X all make terrific images.
I love using these cameras.

maljo

An MF system is not an alternative to a Dslr sytem mostly ... its a supplement.
Whenever you need the size you can take it. It makes pictures with resolution
the large format cameras had in a much smaller body and with much less
trouble and cost the LF film was.
Sometimes if you dont need it every day you can also rent it or get a back
for your MF (film ) body.....
Horses for courses.... ; )
Peter

rbmphoto Senior Member • Posts: 1,452
Wow! is right - thanks for reposting...

That clears it up - literally...

thanks!

Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads