D40 vs. D7000 vs. D800 vs. 5x4

Pookeyhead

Pookeyhead

Messages
11,756
Name
David
Edit My Images
No
I've been meaning to do this for some time. Just how good is the D800?

Well.. controlled test.

Copy lighting with 2x Bowens Esprit 500 heads 1:1 ratio.

CLICK FOR FULL RES


Nikon D40 with 18-55mm kit lens set to 35mm @ f8 ISO200



Nikon D7000 with Nikkor 35mm f1.8G@ f8, ISO100. Manual focusing using live view.



Nikon D800 with Nikkor 50mm f1.8G @ f8 ISO100. Manual Focusing using Live View.



Sinar P2 5x4 monorail. Schneider Apo-Symmar-L 180mm. Fuji Provia 100F. Imacon X5 Scanner @ 2400dpi optical (300MB TIFF).



Interesting. Not as much between the D800 and 5x4 as I thought there would be. Obviously the 5x4 tramples all over the D800, but I Was expecting total annihilation. Look at the texture in the offset printing on the woman's face to see just how good 5x4 is.


Still nothing out there that can touch 5x4 film IMO.

Discuss :)
 
Last edited:
The d7000 seems to be sharper than d800 in your test. Look at the FujiFilm box text.

I would check the focus of d800. Or maybe you just hit the limit of the 50/1.8G.

The 5x4 is just amazing. That's for sure.
 
How much do A4 prints differ? In a blind test, how does a non photographer see them - and which do they prefer?

Pixel peeping obviously shows up the differences between the sensor sizes, I'm just wondering which looks best in the real world! I could run off a set of prints myself but I'm not that bothered - I have none of the cameras you've tested (well, I do have a D70 which shares a sensor and more with the D50 IIRC) so apart from a natural curiosity, I don't need to know!
 
mpe said:
The d7000 seems to be sharper than d800 in your test. Look at the FujiFilm box text.

I would check the focus of d800. Or maybe you just hit the limit of the 50/1.8G.

The 5x4 is just amazing. That's for sure.
Click to expand...

The D800 has less depth of field, as it's a 50mm, but I wanted to shoot both at f8 to get the most from each lens. Focus was on the back wall charts, so compare those. I was going to focus hyperfocally, but thought better of it, and just went for maximum focus on the back wall.

Nod said:
How much do A4 prints differ? In a blind test, how does a non photographer see them - and which do they prefer?

Pixel peeping obviously shows up the differences between the sensor sizes, I'm just wondering which looks best in the real world! I could run off a set of prints myself but I'm not that bothered - I have none of the cameras you've tested (well, I do have a D70 which shares a sensor and more with the D50 IIRC) so apart from a natural curiosity, I don't need to know!
Click to expand...


I've also printed these out at A5, A4, A3, A2 and A1.

They all look the same at A5 and A4, but A3 shows the limits of the D40, and just begins to show softness in the D7000. At A2, both D40 and D7000 are obviously outclassed by the D800 and 5x4. A2 is fine for D800 and 5x4. A1 starts to show the limits of the D800. 5x4 is still perfectly fine at A1.
 
Last edited:
Surprised that there is so little difference apart from with the 5X4. The D7000 does surprisingly look sharper than the D800, possibly a focusing error.

p.s Looks like your camera's could do with a sensor clean.
 
Thanks for that David, kind of what I was guessing.

A3 is pushing it a bit for 6.1 MP, although a good shot can get away with it at normal viewing distances!

Very interesting experiment, thanks for taking the time to conduct it and post the results.
 
Soda Farl said:
. The D7000 does surprisingly look sharper than the D800, possibly a focusing error.
Click to expand...


Nope.. just that film box is running out of DOF on the 50mm. Look at the text and woman's face. All cams were focused manually, and the D7000 and D800 were done with live view, so AF doesn't enter the equation.

5x4
VGJLUDu.jpg


D800
QVSi1rc.jpg


D7000
CZxamZx.jpg


D40
qM8hSkj.jpg
 
Text...


5x4
awxMwSh.jpg


D800
eyEsmFl.jpg


D7000
4j1Yd3i.jpg


D40
ROyI4Zh.jpg



Nod said:
Thanks for that David, kind of what I was guessing.

A3 is pushing it a bit for 6.1 MP, although a good shot can get away with it at normal viewing distances!

Very interesting experiment, thanks for taking the time to conduct it and post the results.
Click to expand...


You're welcome. :)
 
Considering price comparisons the D7000 is no slouch!
 
Pookeyhead said:
Nope.. just that film box is running out of DOF on the 50mm.
Click to expand...

Well, clearly you managed to keep objects in the foreground in the focus on 5x4 camera despite of having much longer lens. You should be able to do that with 50mm on D800.

Also I don't know how far was the scene from the camera, but the DOF difference at f/8 should be pretty generous and shouldn't be that much different compared to D7000.
 
gramps said:
Considering price comparisons the D7000 is no slouch!
Click to expand...



Certainly not! It's a great camera. Shots like this start to really show the advantages of FF though. I've sized the D800 files to 16MP and they're still way sharper than the D7000 files.

5x4 is just out there on it's own. The only thing I've ued to rival it is the Phase One IQ180, but at £24k you'd expect it... and to be honest, 5x4 film still has the edge IMO. The PhaseOne has more resolution, but the detail seems lacking.

The IQ180 has been snaffled up by another staff member this half-term or I would have shot with that too. I also had no 120 film to do a medium format film comparison, but I think looking at these should put that argument to bed anyway. The D800 is, near as damn it, better than MF film in most cases. Absolute MTF figures will show higher resolution from slow MF film, but it's all muddled up in the grain whereas the D800 has the cleanliness. I actually prefer the D800 to MF film now.

I still prefer the "look" of film, but I'm seriously questioning whether I carry on shooting MF film.


mpe said:
Well, clearly you managed to keep objects in the foreground in the focus on 5x4 camera despite of having much longer lens. You should be able to do that with 50mm on D800.
Click to expand...


One word for you... Scheimpflug :)



mpe said:
Also I don't know how far was the scene from the camera, but the DOF difference at f/8 should be pretty generous and shouldn't be that much different compared to D7000.
Click to expand...

The film box is out of DOF.. just look at the rest of the image and the crops I've posted up :) Stop fixating on the film box :) In the interest of fairness, I shot all DSLR images at f8... the film box just drops off the front of focus as I focused on teh wall where the text, colour swatches and offset printed prospectus was.
 
Last edited:
Soda Farl said:
Seriously envious of your toys David.
Click to expand...


LOL.. I wish! They're not mine... I just get to play with them if I'm a good boy. :) I do have a 5x4 though... an old Linhoff Karden 45s, but it was easier to use the college's Sinars. It was my lens on the 5x4 though as the college's have been dropped by students more times than I care to recall. My only digital camera is the D800 now. I have a D600 on order as a second body, and that's it.

Phil Young said:
It would be interesting to see the same situation at a more everyday ISO of something like 800-1600.
Click to expand...

Difficult to do, as you can't get 1600 5x4 E6 film (that I know of anyway), and older cams like the D40 and D70 are obviously going to be a mess at those speeds compared to the D7000 and D800.

I thought it best to wring the last drop of detail from every camera.
 
Last edited:
Phil Young said:
You know David, I bet in 5 years time or so, you won't be able to buy a digital SLR that isn't better than 5x4.

I stand to be corrected...let's note this day in our diaries for 5 years time. Or so.

:)
Click to expand...


That's pushing it!! :) We'll need bigger sensors, or MUCH better lenses.


I think camera manufacturers stop arsing about with big MP numbers, and start making some better lenses, and some cameras with larger sensors.

It's scary how close the D800 is to 5x4 in terms of resolution though. The text tests are almost the same! Only when you look at really fine detail in the woman's face and the texture and tonality of the offset printing can you tell them apart.
 
Last edited:
Just for the hell of it, you could push a sheet of Velvia all the way there and back! Actually, that's not such a stoooooopid idea! Maybe not Velvia but it would be interesting to see the results from a sheet of that Provia 100F pushed to 1600 compared to a file from the D800 at the same ISO (Is the D800's native sensitivity 100?) to compare the grain and noise. I have to admit that I'm almost a fan of golfball grain but certainly not a fan of ISO noise!
 
Nod said:
Just for the hell of it, you could push a sheet of Velvia all the way there and back! Actually, that's not such a stoooooopid idea! Maybe not Velvia but it would be interesting to see the results from a sheet of that Provia 100F pushed to 1600 compared to a file from the D800 at the same ISO
Click to expand...

I think the D800 would win. It can do ISO1600 without breaking a sweat, whereas the film would suffer horribly with a 4 stop push.
 
Pookeyhead said:
I think the D800 would win. It can do ISO1600 without breaking a sweat, whereas the film would suffer horribly with a 4 stop push.
Click to expand...

At a guess, the D7000 would show well too.

Of course, the best advantage any of the digital options has over the 5x4 is convenience - It's possible to have a hard copy of the shot in the punter's hand in the time it would take to change the film in the 5x4 camera!
 
Ahh.. young Padawans :)
 
Even 400 ASA colour film used to be rather too grainy for most tastes until the advent of the smaller APS format pushed the manufacturers into developing better fast emulsions. Hell, Kodak Gold 400 prints were almost unviewable from 110 negs, even at enprint size!!!
 
Nod said:
Even 400 ASA colour film used to be rather too grainy for most tastes until the advent of the smaller APS format pushed the manufacturers into developing better fast emulsions. Hell, Kodak Gold 400 prints were almost unviewable from 110 negs, even at enprint size!!!
Click to expand...

35mm film was, and still is awful. I did like shooting it with Tri-X Pan though.. it had a rawness to it's grain. I was always a medium format guy.
 
Interesting, nothing too surprising though, but yeah the 5x4 does look very nice indeed. Not something you can just pick up and carry about with you though eh!
 
Cagey75 said:
Interesting, nothing too surprising though, but yeah the 5x4 does look very nice indeed. Not something you can just pick up and carry about with you though eh!
Click to expand...

LOL.. you'd be surprised how many times I've done just that :)

You're right though. That quality comes at a price.. literally. Film is £40 a box approx... the cameras, even the little foldaway Wolf cameras we use, are cumbersome and slow.

For landscape, architecture and still life though... nothing beats 5x4.
 
Thanks for posting this really interesting comparison. Does highlight how far sensor technology has come if it can compete with 5x4. Will not make me rush out and buy a 5x4, but putting a Cambo view camera on the front of a D800 could be an interesting exercise.
 
Go and price up a box of 10x8 :) Unless your name is Gregory Crewdson.... it's not really an option... not on my salary anyway. LOL

We do have a 10x8 camera at work though. I've no film holder for it though. Not used it in years.
 
Alot of medium format backs that are 30-40K are all well and good until you have to shoot over iso 400 lol. Watched some comparison videos on youtube of a commercial shooter look abit sick that his 40k camera was being kicked in the gonads by a 2K slr haha (hasselblad H4D vs D800)
 
This comparison has been a decider for me.

Was thinking of selling my medium format film camera and putting it towards a D800.

Still going to sell the MF, but stick to my D7000

For my amateur, hobbyist needs, this demonstrates for me the D7000 is all I need.

Cheers
 
TonyNI said:
Alot of medium format backs that are 30-40K are all well and good until you have to shoot over iso 400 lol. Watched some comparison videos on youtube of a commercial shooter look abit sick that his 40k camera was being kicked in the gonads by a 2K slr haha (hasselblad H4D vs D800)
Click to expand...

They will be shooting ISO 50 though, anything over even probably ISO 200 just isn't relevant. You can get DMFBs going up to ISO 3200 though.
 
Really interesting, I'd be interested to see a comparison between the D7000 and D40 using the same lens.
 
Pookeyhead said:
Go and price up a box of 10x8 :) Unless your name is Gregory Crewdson.... it's not really an option... not on my salary anyway.
Click to expand...

I can't afford it either but affordability doesn't affect potential quality. I can just about justify 5x4 for my own use. I do have a couple of 5x7 film holders so I am going to build something to use paper as negatives.

Even medium format can be expensive, especially when I'm using my 6x12 camera which only gives me six shots per roll!


Steve.
 
Very nice conmpairson.

I remember reading Tim Parkins comparison of LF/MF film vs FF/MF digital awhile ago and it was in the studio that the formers advanatage(at least LF) really became clearer. Outdoors the IQ180 seemed a bit ahead(if obviously very different) of 5x4 but indoors the latter still had a bit of a resolution advanatge.

I'v that and this has always tempted to give 5x4 a try dispite not having shot film for years(and never seriously) for the resolution and perspctive control. What holds me back I spose was the idea that stitching would provided a resolution boost with less trouble/expense and on the D800 without the need to use it on all but the shots I might want to print larger than A2.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top