... and they compared to one another: Hasselblad H3, Mamiya AFDIII, Sony Alpha 900 - comparative test

Ever since Sony Alpha 900 hit the stores, discussions about the quality of pictures captured by that camera?s sensor have not subsided. Extreme opinions ? from euphoria to criticism ? emerged. The verdict is frequently served by persons who did not work very much with the camera or ? what is interesting ? did not shoot a single picture with it. They express their opinions on the basis of reading tea leaves or after analyzing some samples. It is fascinating that the photographical society, which is gripped by an eternal conspiracy theory, is more eager to believe in the negative rather than in the positive or even objective opinions. And you cannot blame it. For many years the mass media has been bombarding us with the negative content due to the fact that the positive content amounts to despised propaganda or the sponsors? blah-blah-blah. And as everybody knows, the worse the news is the better it is for the media, therefore, they drown us in terror as though we lived on the dark side. OK, enough about bad and good news.

Most photography enthusiasts see professionals as photojournalists with super AF and super frames/second performance. It is known that photojournalists display unintentional ?thrust against the broken glass? behavior because all camera manufacturers eagerly take advantage of them by being shown in the TV reports. However, the percentage of photojournalists among all photographers is just the tip of the iceberg. The load of Polish professional photography is carried mostly by photo studio owners, the craftsmen and the professionals who use the camera for just about anything, i.e. the artists. Unfortunately, this entire population has to purchase its equipment with its own means because they do not have the editor?s sponsorship. Therefore, price is very important to them. And they frequently cannot afford the most expensive equipment or they will have to depreciate it for many years, i.e. they will never do so because modern digital cameras are outdated very quickly. The purpose of professional photography is frequently forgotten. But the matter comes down to the quality of pictures.

Professional cameras have not seen any spectacular new solutions for a long time. For many years they defended themselves against AF and even exposure automation. They were to be reliable and guarantee the highest quality of pictures. On the other hand, many Polish people are convinced that the professional equipment must have everything that the engineers were able to build, including triggering a shutter with a burp. But they are completely forgetting about the target recipient who fits a very clear profile. It is as though we had a spear with an engine, a radar, a GPS and a TNT barrel, but at this point it is no longer a spear but an ICBM.

In those deliberations, Sony Alpha 900 is somewhere in the middle. Supposedly it has everything: effective AF, full automation, but it is not overloaded with gadgets. Instead of this, it has a high-resolution sensor, great viewfinder and all the characteristics that are necessary for easy work. On the other hand, quick AF and the possibility to make 5 frames per second make Sony Alpha 900 a very universal camera that can be used in any area of photography, not just studio photography.

I resolved to test Sony Alpha 900 during a professional session. I decided to compare the new Sony SLR camera with professional medium format cameras, i.e. Hasselblad H3 and Mamiya AFDIII. I did not want to prove that Sony Alpha 900 was better because the medium format should be better, even from a theoretical point of view. The small camera is considerably less expensive, but its sensor is also physically smaller. I wanted to see how inferior the quality of pictures taken by a small digital camera is to the quality of pictures taken by professional digital cameras.

Introduction

About test

I wanted to verify the empirically visible differences. Because being human, I don?t understand the digits. Hence, I completely disregard the MTFs, numbers of pixels, seconds, kilograms, lines, centimeters and bits. I rely only on practice and assessment with my OWN and reliable (at least for now) eyes. I invited experts to work with me during the photo session.

One of them is a skeptic ? Leonard Karpiłowski, author of many books with which I polished up my knowledge. He is an undisputed authority in the area of lighting and medium format cameras. The other one is Tomasz Maciejewski who is a large-format prints specialist. He knows a lot about preparing digital files for printing. In this text he was a very moderate optimist. I was an optimist because my knowledge of the subject of Sony Alpha 900, which I acquired during the few days I used the camera, gave me the reasons to do so. This was even more the case due to the fact that I also had the opportunity to take pictures with Hasselblad and Mamiya on several occasions.

Hasselblad H3D is a 39 MP sensor camera that is very well known to the professionals. As every camera in the H series, it is fitted with AF and several automatic functions. In our comparison it will represent a class of its own and a reference point for the evaluation of other cameras. HC 50-110/3.5-4.5 variable focal length photo lens was used in the test.
Mamiya AFDIII with the ZD adapter is also an AF medium format camera. Despite the fact that the sensor is physically larger than in Sony Alpha 900, the effective number of pixels is smaller at 21.5 MP. AF 50-110/4.5 variable focal length photo lens and macro MF 120/4 manual photo lens were used in the test.
Sony Alpha 900 does not have to be introduced. In the test, I used many fixed focal length photo lenses and zooms. This will be very good demonstrative material for subsequent articles. I would like to add that Sony Alpha 700 and Sony Alpha 350 were also tested under similar conditions.


Test

Test

For comparison, I selected the cameras mentioned above and the five picture scenarios.
They involved five studio sessions because the professionals work mainly in the studio.

The test methodology is simple. We take pictures in the same scenario under identical conditions: the same light, the same aperture, the same exposure time and the same color temperature setting. All pictures were saved in RAW and then developed using the same Camera RAW settings. No PS manipulations were involved and the raw file was prepared for further work. In other words, we had a clear situation. Of course, it should be added that this was not art games or an art show. Those were the demonstrative pictures taken for the needs of a session. During the test, we worked from very early in the morning until late at night. The comparison will be evaluated not only on the basis of the quality of the captured image, but also on the basis of general impressions of working with the camera. Professional photo sessions sometimes last for several hours and several hundred pictures have to be taken. In such situation, it is important whether the camera makes our work easier or turns it into a chore. It is because of the dark focusing screen or the camera?s structure that at the end of the workday our eyes are breaking down and the spinal cord is screaming ?I quit!?. Mobility, simplicity of handling and the number of persons necessary for efficient handling of the equipment are also very important. It?s like in the army, where at one point in time the Universal Machine Gun (UKM) replaced the Heavy Machine Gun (CKM) exactly for the above mentioned reasons. The costs will also be evaluated. What is important is what and how much we get in return. Of course, without sacrificing the quality.
In the studio, we use Fomei lights. We use flash and artificial lighting. Leonard Karpiłowski verifies with the colorimeter and the light meter whether the lighting conditions are the same.

Photo sessions.

1. Portrait of a seasoned man in large contrast: wrinkles, skin texture, beard in various shades and blue eyes will tell more than several focus tests. This photograph will also tell me how the image is rendered plastically. Color temperature of light is 5000K and the same figure was set in the cameras. The speed is ISO 100. Aperture of 5.6 was set for the key light. Strip light on the left, large soft box on the right, honeycomb grid as a reflector. It?s a classic or ? I would say ? a textbook setup. All pictures were taken under the same parameters.

See the sample:

Sony Alpha 900

Hasselblad H3

Mamiya AFDIII

fot. Jacek Bonecki - Sony Alpha 900

fot. Jacek Bonecki - Hasselblad H3

fot. Jacek Bonecki - Mamiya AFDIII

2. Portrait of a seasoned man in artificial light. Contrast is much smaller so as to allow more gray color into the image. This time Leonard is wearing a hat so that we can also evaluate reproduction of details in the lights and in the straw design. ISO 400 is set, which is the maximum value the tested medium format sensors allow. Exposure is 1/30 and aperture is 5.6. To make things more interesting, Hasselblad and Mamiya were on the tripod and Sony was held in hand and stabilization was engaged. Flash lights plus a light with a Fresnel lens were used so as to obtain a light net effect on the model?s face. The temperature checked on the colorimeter was 2800K and the same figure was set in the camera. Medium format sensors recorded considerable noises and Mamiya totally failed the test. A strange dominant light appeared on the image and this was not attributable to halation from the light.

See the sample:

Sony Alpha 900

Hasselblad H3

Mamiya AFDIII

fot. Jacek Bonecki - Sony Alpha 900

fot. Jacek Bonecki - Hasselblad H3

fot. Jacek Bonecki - Mamiya AFDIII

3. Typical uninspired medium-key portrait. In other words ? the most popular method of taking pictures. The model is a young female with a smooth complexion and without makeup and powder. We did it this way so that we could evaluate how the human face without any embellishments is reproduced. Nothing but color and texture. In the background, there are transitive halftones and a red element. As we know, in digital photography, red color can behave in unexpected ways, especially when light is reflected from it. On the face, gentle and smooth halftones with small contrast. The model is holding a hat. It allows to evaluate focus in the case of soft light, and also evaluate the focus depth depending on the camera?s sensor size or focal length. 5000K flash lighting, 5.6 exposure.

See the sample:

Sony Alpha 900

Hasselblad H3

Mamiya AFDIII

fot. Jacek Bonecki - Sony Alpha 900

fot. Jacek Bonecki - Hasselblad H3

fot. Jacek Bonecki - Mamiya AFDIII

4. Large scale studio product photograph: a picture of a car. Why? Because on the car one can see how focus transitions into depth. One can see how the light and halftones spread on the car?s body and how stably is the color reproduced depending on the light intensity. In addition, we can see how the black elements on one side and chrome elements on the other side are reproduced, and how the light reflections appear. In the case of such a large object, we can evaluate differences in the focus depth. I used a flash light mixed with artificial lighting. Again, the aperture was 5.6 and the color temperature ? 4800K. Two shots were taken. One shows the car in the full ground and the other is a close-up of the car?s body.

5. Classic shooting table picture. On the shooting table, there are colorful vegetables and fruits. It?s unoriginal, but it?s a daily bread of many photographers. Typical simplest lighting without being overly artistic. Color temperature ? 5000K. The speed ? ISO 100, aperture ? 16.

Pictures for the latter two scenarios will be posted soon so that I have a chance to catch my breath.


Summary: Jacek Bonecki

It?s as plain as the nose on your face. On my part, I believe that the comments are unnecessary because the pictures defend themselves. I will not say who is the winner of this test. I believe that none of the pictures ? besides Mamiya ? deviates from the standard that was set very high. With regard to focus, all cameras hold a very high standard. However, focus or size of the file is not the only parameter. For me, the image?s plasticity, color and clarity are important. And in my subjective assessment Sony Alpha 900 has the advantage here. On the other hand, when it comes to ease of work, quickness, capabilities, availability and the purchase price, Sony crushes its competitors.

Optical lenses are an important matter. Insufficient product range of photo lenses is frequently mentioned as the primary defect of the Sony Alpha system. It is said that the small image competitors offer 60 or more photo lenses. Such criticism is unjustified because not may people can afford sophisticated photo lenses, practically one photo lens occurs in several versions and most of the time only a few photo lenses are used. What influences the imagination is marketing pictures of stacks of photo lenses. Its relation to the reality of a photographer?s life can be compared to the relation between the idealistic images of women in Vogue magazine and the picture of an average Polish woman laboring to carry her groceries home. In this respect, the availability of Hasselblad?s optical lenses must be shocking. It is as little as ten lenses. In this respect, Mamiya also does not rank very high because it has ?only? twelve lenses, but for the professionals it is enough. Perhaps this is due to the fact that such photographers precisely know how and what they want to do. We know that it is not the lens and the camera that takes a picture.
When it comes to the Sony Alpha system, the availability of high-end optical lenses fully satisfies the photographers? needs. In my opinion, the only lenses that are missing are a shift photo lens and an extremely expensive telephoto lens. However, I believe that this is just a matter of time. But let?s not mesmerize ourselves: such photo lenses will not be available to the average photographer. Their price will correspond to demand and quality. On the other hand, the professional optical lenses for the Sony Alpha system beat the aforementioned competitors from the standpoint of clarity, universality (minimum focal length, available zooms), convenience and price. Because from the standpoint of optical quality they are no worse than FUJI?s or Mamiya?s products.

This is all that I have to say. Now I would like to quote the experts? opinions because I?m afraid that my positive opinion will be received in the wrong way, i.e. as marketing propaganda.



Summary: Tomasz Maciejewski

Tomasz Maciejewski:

All files were processed in Adobe Photoshop CS3 Camera RAW and the same parameters were used. My intervention in the program?s default settings was limited only to providing the color temperature parameters depending on the performed exercise.

After I reviewed and compared the files, I was very surprised: the differences between the digital ?medium format? and the digital full frame (24 x 36 mm) did not in any way resemble the differences that we familiar with from our previous work with their analog ?grandparents?. Basically, the difference is in the size of the reproductions. The file obtained from H3 and reproduced with 250 dpi resolution gives us the 54.99 x 73.31 cm reproduction, Mamiya can deliver 40.72 x 54.21 cm, and Alfa 900 ? 40.97 x 61.45 cm. The difference for their analog counterparts would be 112.5 x 150 cm for the 6 x 4.5 format and 60 x 90 cm for 35 mm, respectively.

The analog medium format previously gave us smaller grain as compared to the small frame, which in turn made it possible to work with higher speeds and larger apertures. This was significant if one wanted to obtain greater depth of focus which, as we know, is small in the medium format. When working with the digital adapter in the medium format, we are dealing with an opposite situation: the useful speeds cannot be greater than ISO 200 because if that value is greater, the noises are generated which prevent blown up pictures of more than 30 x 40cm ? which may be obtained in most of the simplest digital SLR cameras with APS-C sensors.

The focus is very good in all cameras, however, I was surprised with the fact that Sony Alpha 900 had the best focus. I expected that it would rank third with regard to focus. After all, it is just a small camera made by the company that is just making baby steps in the production of cameras for professional photographers, and which is confronted with the medium format legends that set the standards in professional photography. We know that one of the basic disadvantages of photosensitive sensors is their lower tonal capacity in comparison with the analog photosensitive material, which is very important in our reception of image plasticity. Before the test, it seemed obvious that the tonal range of Hasselblad?s and Mamiya?s sensors would be greater than Sony A900?s sensor (I think that this resulted from the fact that we were accustomed to the quality of a medium format analog picture being greater than that of a small picture). And here we have another surprise because Sony A900 is able to capture a much broader tonal range of the image than Mamiya and Hasselblad.

Whenever the lights in the image burn out, Sony A900 clearly shows the details. Similar holds true in the shades. This is very important to the final processing of the reproduction. When one compares the pictures blown up to the same dimensions, the printout from Sony A900 is the most impressive. It has the best focus, it gives the greatest amount of ?information? and is the clearest. Colors are natural without visible dominant colors. Hasselblad gives a slightly less focused image, with smaller amounts of ?information? and with slight magenta dominance. Mamiya stands out from the pack ? it generates images with a very visible dominance of green and larger noise. When it comes to the pictures? susceptibility to interference, I believe that Sony A900 is the winner. It is true that its files are smaller than those that we obtained from Hasselblad from the standpoint of ?weight? (139.5 MB to 223.5 MB) as well as size of potential reproductions/printouts (14 cm of difference), which I mentioned before, but they contain more information and are more focused. Mamiya ranks the lowest.

The comfort of work with the medium format was always lower than with the SLR camera, but the camera?s greater dimensions and weight, the need to frequently change the film and no auto focus were compensated by an unmatched picture quality. I believe that this is no longer the case. It is difficult to say that working with Hasselblad is easy. The camera ranks the lowest when it comes to ease of holding it; Mamiya is much better in this respect.

Hasselblad H3?s multi-control back has quite a large LCD screen, however, its resolution and color imaging are unsatisfactory. The camera has a large shutter delay, therefore, models should be told to remain in their position even after they hear the click. Otherwise the picture will be spoiled. It is not possible to take pictures of moving objects, and I don?t mean car races or soccer players, but, e.g. children or our four-legged pets. A very annoying thing in this camera is the fact that it notoriously freezes when connected to the computer, and the dedicated software which allows viewing pictures on the computer monitor and uploading them onto the hard drive. During the session, the camera displays the message that the multi-control back has no power (in such case the camera should be turned off, the batteries removed, put back in, and the camera switched back on) or that the lens should be removed and reinstalled. This does not facilitate our work on obtaining the best possible take. Besides ease of holding, Mamiya does not provide anything else with regard to ease of work. The display on the multi-control back is smaller than in first generation digital compact cameras. Its auto focus is confusing: it works only when there is a large amount of light falling on the photographed object. The length of time needed to record data on the memory card makes dynamic work impossible.

Sony A900 ensures ease of work and functionality which we were familiar with when working with excellent SLR cameras. It is quick, precise, and it handles intuitively. It has a broad range of effective sensitivities, the display accurately depicts the colors and makes it possible to accurately determine whether the picture is focused.
Tomasz Maciejewski?s description is very aloof. You should have seen the look on his face when he saw the session?s results on the 1:1 scale printouts. He made a very radical statement that we were just witnessing the death of the medium format. I believe that this will not happen. After all Hasselblad and Mamiya are not giving up yet ? the launch of the new H3 model with the 60MP sensor was announced. I?m sure that there will be photographers who will need such large files, but how many of them are there?


Summary: Leonard Karpiłowski

Leonard Karpiłowski, medium format expert

It is common knowledge that camera selection is one of the primary issues for a professional photographer. In the age of rapid development of digital recording, selection of a specified system poses even greater challenges. It was not that long ago that the sensor of the size of the small picture frame was a great accomplishment. At the present time, the performance of this format is so great that it begs the question whether the medium format adapters should still be used in the practice of professional photography.

In an attempt to answer that question, three photographers conducted the test of the following cameras: Sony A900 with the sensor of the size of the small picture frame, Mamiya AFDIII with the ZD adapter and Hasselblad H3. The test results confirmed A900?s medium format attributes and excellent performance. On 30x40 cm printouts, the quality of the image received from those cameras is very high and comparable. A900?s result is easy to recognize thanks to greater focus depth resulting from a smaller reproduction scale. In case of Mamiya and Hasselblad, the differences are very small and the result can be decided to a greater extent by the viewer?s personal preferences rather than actual image differences.

The test results do not give an unequivocal answer to the ?small or medium image? dilemma. Taking into account the comparable picture quality, the selection of the picture system for professional practice is also based on economic factors and the clients? requirements. One also cannot underestimate many years of experience and habits of a professional photographer who, due to his many years of practice in the medium and large formats, will rather choose the medium format that corresponds to his habits and work style rather than the small image format that is not very impressive to the client.

 

Summary: numbers

In the end, I would like to make a numerical summary. For many people the numbers are the indicators of everything. We had an evaluation estimate, and now I would like to discuss the price.

Sony Alpha 900 costs ca. PLN 8,500 ? 9,000. Renting Hasselblad H3 for one day with the standard zoom without an assistant amounts to ca. PLN 2,000. H3 costs a dozen or so thousand euros, depending on the sensor type. Mamiya AFDIII with the ZD adapter costs ca. PLN 40 thousand. If the quality is close and comparable (and I don?t want to stir up a hornets? nest anymore), it gives many photographers something to consider.