D800e VS 4x5 (v700)

[rustyair]

Hi all,

What do you think of Nikon D800E Prime lens VS 4x5, V700 with a well calibrated holder, Portra 160?
4x5 would be better but is it like so much better? I have owned 5d mark ii years ago and currently shooting with 4x5 field. Never owned D800E and I saw the smaple image for the first time today and it's quite impressive.

What's your opinion on

1. Large print size
2. Dynamic range
3. Pixels
4. Color
5. Cost

 

[brian steinberger]

I'd give the edge to scanning 4x5 in all areas but possibly color and maybe cost. These are two extremes in photography. Like apples and oranges.

BTW I do have the D800 (non-E) and it can certainly hold its own again MF but not 4x5.

 

[Eric Rose]

My D700 retired my Blad. IMHO this is a pointless comparison, the D800e vs LF. Apples and oranges.

 

[rustyair]

My D700 retired my Blad. IMHO this is a pointless comparison, the D800e vs LF. Apples and oranges.

I like oranges better than apples IMHO.

 

[chuck94022]

Of course the limiting performance item is the v700. When print size matters, I presume it is a great image, and perhaps you would be willing to invest in a well done drum scan for ultimate quality.

You forget the all important aspect of movements. A D800 of any flavor can't do full movements. Of course you could buy a PC (tilt/shift) lens but that alone will cost as much as a 4x5 *system*.

As others have said, this is an apples to oranges comparison. I own both a complete 4x5 system (Chamonix 045N2, 65, ,90, 135, and 300mm lenses) and a D800 with 17-35 zoom, 50 and 85mm primes, 90mm macro, and 80-200 zoom.

Oh, and a v750 for home scans.

I use every bit of both kits, for different purposes. I can't chase around moving targets with the Chamonix, and I like my landscapes and night photography better in 4x5 film.

Pixel count? Who cares? Color depth and quality? I'd have to hand it to 4x5. Pick the film that captures the color you seek (Portra and Ektar are both great films for their respective purposes, and scan very well).

Bottom line - your choice depends on what you intend to do, not on some pixel peeper's notion of "better".

But, frankly, if you are asking this question in this way, don't bother with 4x5 unless you really want to control every possible aspect of image capture, which includes a much, much longer list than what you posted.

 

[jd callow]

Scanning 4x5s on a epson makes the comparison easy: The d800 wins 4/5 hands down.

I can only add that 4x5's generally have movements (my sinar does) that extend well beyond what I'd get from a D800 with PC lenses and the D800 will allow me to shoot things and in places i could never imagine doing with the 4x5. When used at its best I'm likely to capture more detail with the 4x5, the D800 will give me greater input and output latitude.

Assume that a scanner built for sheet film is used and or you print traditionally:

1 & 2) Print size, dynamic range (depending upon film, output and technique -- see #4) are going to generally be better on the 4x5, but maybe not by that much.
3) My 4x5 has no pixels, but I could easily have some of the film scanned @4000 spi and get 320 megapixels (?). I think that most film will not benefit by such a high res scan, but its probably safe to say that any decent film will capture more information than the D800.
4) The color thing can be sliced too many ways. Shooting multiple exposures for HDR on the D800 might exceed anything any film could achieve (this could cover dynamic range as well). Additionally the tools available to manipulate color from digital capture makes the D800 very potent. If color fidelity is what your asking D800 might also exceed film. Color neg film will generally capture more colors at either end of the dynamic range and as much in the middle as Digital. The problem will be getting it off of the film and on to paper.
5) You can drop 6k on a D800 with 3-4 really nice lenses or similar and then some on 4x5 depending what whether or not you buy new and what type of lenses. Assuming that printing costs are the same the dust to dust cost of digital will probably be less in that there aren't any consumables like film and developer.

The reality for me is that some things are better w/ a 4x5 with a roll film back (I don't shoot much 4x5 anymore), a mf rangefinder or a wimpy d300. If I could find and afford, and some day I will, a camera
that operates like a rangefinder or the nex-7 with capture abilities of the d800 I would have that one camera for 70-80% of what I am interested in shooting. I don't see the view camera being replaced anytime soon (unless scan backs get bigger and far cheaper and film loses its allure).

You have your own criteria. If it is what you've stated above, buy the Nikon. If you use different cameras for different purposes, then you need to reevaluate your criteria.

 

[federico9001]

4x5" is definitely in another league.

You would need a drum scan of 1 Gb to extract every details from a good 4x5" shot.

Colors, dynamic range and 3dimensionality are much better too.

 

[rustyair]

4x5" is definitely in another league.

You would need a drum scan of 1 Gb to extract every details from a good 4x5" shot.

Colors, dynamic range and 3dimensionality are much better too.

I have done it. Sadly, There's no way I'm paying for drum scans over 200 good negatives.

 

[L Gebhardt]

I have both a D800E and a 4x5 system. Both are excellent for different things, as others have discussed.

The 4x5 has the edge in resolution, but at normal print sizes for me 16x20 to 20x24 I think it's a wash. The D800E has amazingly clean files, even when shadows are brought up significantly. This is the single best feature of the camera in my opinion. I'm not sure if drum scanned negative film is better, but if it is it's not by much.

I like shooting both cameras for different subject types. Macro type shots work best with the D800. So do action and telephoto shots. Static scenes are much nicer to compose with the 4x5. I also like shots I intend for black and white better with a film camera since I still like darkroom prints.

The Epson scanners aren't that great. But they do make OK prints at reasonable sizes. I only use mine for proofing however.

There is something nice about popping the memory card in the computer and having your images instantly available. So that's something else in favor of the D800.

 

[RalphLambrecht]

I'd give the edge to scanning 4x5 in all areas but possibly color and maybe cost. These are two extremes in photography. Like apples and oranges.

BTW I do have the D800 (non-E) and it can certainly hold its own again MF but not 4x5.

+1