Big players like Leaf and Hasselblad had better do something soon, or Nikon and Canon will be doing more than nipping at their heels. Tests done by analysis firm DxO Labs seems to confirm what many of us understand intuitively: that the pro DSLR is fast closing the image quality gap with medium format digitals. You can set up your own comparison here; it’s not the last word, of course, but benchmarks are valuable in some ways.
While rumors of sub-$1000 cameras outperforming medium formats are to be taken as total nonsense, things like 1Ds and D3Xs appear to be approaching or outperforming cameras four times their price. Frustratingly, the newest offerings from Hasselblad and company weren’t tested, so the conclusions to be drawn are few and vague, but the general impression is that if medium format companies don’t innovate the way the DSLR guys have been, there’s going to be a reckoning.
It really isn’t that big a surprise. It reminds me quite a bit of the professional graphics market back before GPUs were common place for gaming systems. One day you had a $40,000 system that could do amazing things no PC could ever touch, and a year or two later, you were buying basically a gaming PC for a few grand that was better than your $40,000 dedicated graphics workstation.
The same thing is happening with digital video cameras right now too. I know plenty of people still trying to make their money back on $40,000 cameras, who are already looking at another camera, which costs less than half as much, but is more than twice as good.
The problem with any dedicated professional piece of digital equipment, is that you have a limited market, and while you can sell the item for a lot of money, you just don’t do the volume to put in the R&D the consumer products people can.
Yes, the 1ds and d3x score well in this test. I have a d3x I use for field work–its great when I don’t want to lug around a medium format setup or don’t need 40 mp. However, neither camera has the resolveing power of the medium format system. Nor can they compete when it comes to the quality of the lens. Nikon and Canon make some good lenses. But, Zeiss’s (hasselblad) lenses are far better in resolveing power, sharpness, etc. This chart does not really compaire apples to apples.
True enough. When you’re dealing with poster-size glossies, museum prints and stuff, you really need to make sure you’re not getting the slightest aberration or softness.
If there really were a way to compare apples to apples, I’d do it – unfortunately I don’t have a Hasselblad here with me :)