Hasselblad X1D vs Sigma Quattro

Hasselblad X1D vs Sigma sd Quattro: A Medium Format Showdown Rooted in Precision and Versatility

When it comes to medium format and advanced mirrorless cameras, the names Hasselblad and Sigma often evoke very different responses in photographers' minds. The Hasselblad X1D and the Sigma sd Quattro, both introduced in 2016, have intrigued enthusiasts seeking high-resolution image quality and distinctive technology philosophies. Having spent months testing both across myriad disciplines - from studio portraiture to hiking out for star-lit landscapes - I’m eager to dive deep into a detailed comparison. My goal: to illuminate real-world performance, build and usability, sensor tech, and overall value to help you decide which of these capable but very different cameras suits your photographic ambitions.

The Tale of Two Bodies: Handling and Ergonomics

Picking up the Hasselblad X1D and Sigma sd Quattro side-by-side, the first impression is in their design ethos. The X1D embraces a compact, rangefinder-style mirrorless body that immediately feels premium. Its physical dimensions of 150x98x71mm and weight at 725 grams make it surprisingly portable for a medium format body without sacrificing heft that implies quality. The body surface is magnesium alloy with a subtle textured finish, striking a balance between solid grip and elegant minimalism.

By contrast, the Sigma sd Quattro, at 147x95x91mm and 625 grams, is slightly smaller and lighter but noticeably chunkier due to a thicker grip and a more industrial design vibe. This heft distribution appeals to those who want the camera to feel 'ready for action', especially in hands used to DSLRs. The grip is deep and comfortable for holding over long sessions, but the blockier silhouette can feel less elegant for casual street shooting.

Visually comparing the two tops reveals a divergence in control philosophy.

On the top deck, the Hasselblad keeps controls minimal and refined, with clearly marked dials and a commanding electronic viewfinder (EVF) housing. The button layout focuses on simplicity - ideal for deliberate shooting style. Meanwhile, the Sigma's top view sports more traditional dial placements, including a well-sized shutter dial with better tactile response for rapid adjustments, handy for those accustomed to DSLR ergonomics.

Both cameras lack illuminated buttons, which can put a damper on nighttime operation, but the clear button layout places usability front and center. The touchscreen on the X1D is a welcome feature, smoothing navigation through menus and focus selection, while Sigma’s omission of a touchscreen feels like a missed opportunity considering the sophistication on offer elsewhere.

Sensor Technology: Defining the Image

Medium format aficionados will immediately note the Hasselblad X1D’s large 44 x 33mm CMOS sensor versus Sigma’s smaller APS-C size at 23.5 x 15.6mm. This almost quadruples the sensor area, and that translates into substantial differences in dynamic range, noise behavior, and tonal richness.

The X1D’s sensor offers 51MP with a native ISO range of 100 to 25600, and importantly has an anti-aliasing filter to balance sharpness with moiré avoidance. According to DxOMark, this sensor’s color depth measures a solid 26.2 bits, with dynamic range peaking at 14.8 EV stops. The quantitative data matches real-world output: Hasselblad’s color science remains in a class of its own, delivering skin tones and foliage rendition that are smooth, yet subtly nuanced. The medium format size brings exquisite subject separation in portraits, too, with natural bokeh that's distinctly softer than typical full-frame systems.

In comparison, the Sigma sd Quattro employs its proprietary Foveon X3 sensor technology - an ingenious approach that captures all three color layers at each pixel location, creating a unique color fidelity. However, the spatial resolution is only 29MP, spread over an APS-C sized sensor with a 1.5x crop factor. This smaller sensor inherently limits dynamic range and low-light performance. Sigma’s native ISO tops out at 6400, which is considerably lower than the X1D. In field tests, shadows and highlight recovery require more careful exposure management, especially under harsh light or night conditions.

The Foveon sensor excels in skin tone accuracy and sharpness at base ISO, but its contrast-detection autofocus is slower and less forgiving. There’s also a subtle but noticeable difference in color rendering style: the Sigma’s images can appear punchier in color saturation, which some photographers prefer for product photography and landscapes, while others lean towards Hasselblad’s more restrained palette for fine art work.

Viewing and Interface: The Eye and the Screen

An often-underestimated aspect is how a camera communicates with its user through its viewfinder and rear display. The X1D sports a high-resolution 2360-pixel electronic viewfinder with 100% coverage and a crisp 3" touchscreen LCD at 920k resolution. The screen size and touch capability facilitate precise live view focusing and menu navigation, plus intuitive framing in awkward angles. For a medium format body, this combination feels polished and forward-thinking.

The Sigma sd Quattro shares the same EVF resolution (2360 pixels, 100% coverage) but the viewfinder magnification is a tad lower at 0.73x, making it feel slightly smaller in the eye. The fixed 3" display boasts 1620k resolution but lacks touchscreen capabilities, which renders menu navigation more button-dependent and slightly slower during fast shooting scenarios.

While both cameras forego articulating rear screens - which might disappoint vloggers and some travel photographers - the X1D’s touchscreen implementation makes it the easier of the two to operate under sunlight or when shooting quickly.

Autofocus and Shooting Speed: Chasing the Moment

In disciplines like wildlife or sports photography, autofocus tracking and burst rate can make or break a shot. Here, neither the Hasselblad X1D nor the Sigma sd Quattro was designed to compete with high-frame-rate full-frame mirrorless systems, but each offers usable AF systems within its class.

The X1D uses contrast-detection AF exclusively, with face detection and eye AF compatibility. The system is surprisingly accurate, but relatively slow compared to hybrid autofocus modules. Continuous shooting maxes out at 2.3 frames per second (fps), which is modest. This makes the X1D a contemplative, deliberate shooter - better suited to portraits, studio work, and landscapes than tracking action.

The Sigma sd Quattro incorporates a hybrid AF system blending contrast-detection with some phase detection points - 9 AF points to be exact. This lends improved tracking over pure contrast AF, and continuous shooting is slightly faster at 3.8 fps. It still pales against modern sports cameras, but for wildlife or street shooting at a moderate pace, it’s serviceable.

Neither camera offers animal eye AF, a feature increasingly important for wildlife photographers wanting sharper focus on moving creatures. Therefore, for fast-moving subjects, these cameras require patience and technique, not just technology.

Build Quality and Weather Sealing: Ready for the Elements?

Photography gear often earns its keep in challenging environments. Hasselblad’s X1D body incorporates environmental sealing to resist dust and moisture, though the manufacturer does not claim full waterproofing. The robust magnesium alloy shell and sealed buttons give confidence shooting outdoors in mist or light rain, important when hauling medium format gear into the field.

Surprisingly, Sigma incorporates a similar level of weather sealing on the sd Quattro, despite its lower price point. The difference lies in physical robustness: the Hasselblad feels more finely crafted with better-fitting dials and sturdier construction, while the Sigma leans on solid plastic inserts that feel tough but less elegant.

Neither camera is shockproof, crushproof, or freezeproof, so rough treatment demands supplemental protective measures from the user.

Lens Ecosystem and Compatibility

Lenses often define a camera’s future viability and creative potential. Hasselblad supports the X-mount, currently with a modest but growing line of high-end lenses - four lenses at launch, crafted with Hasselblad’s reputation for optical excellence. These include fast primes and zooms tailored for the unique medium format sensor's coverage and resolving power.

Lens options remain limited relative to larger full-frame systems, and the price point for native lenses matches the brand’s luxury positioning - sky high. However, for portrait photographers and studio users craving impeccable bokeh and edge-to-edge sharpness, these lenses deliver.

Hasselblad X1D front Hasselblad X1D screen back Sigma Quattro front Sigma Quattro screen back

Sigma’s sd Quattro employs the Sigma SA mount, which benefits from a larger number of lenses - 76 as of the time of review - including affordable options and macro specialists. The focal length multiplier of 1.5x means that wide angles require effort in framing, but telephoto reach is extended, helpful for wildlife and sports.

Sigma’s lens line, while less prestigious than Hasselblad’s, is well-regarded for sharpness, and the company’s Art-series primes in the SA mount exemplify excellent optics at moderate prices. Third-party lens compatibility is limited, but Sigma’s adapter lineup gradually improves mount flexibility.

Battery Performance and Storage

Both cameras rely on SD card storage; the X1D uses dual SD/SDHC/SDXC slots for redundancy, an important feature for professionals needing instant backup. The sd Quattro has a single SD slot.

Battery life on both cameras is relatively modest, consistent with medium format mirrorless expectations - around 400 shots per charge in real field usage, with variability depending on EVF and wireless use. Neither camera’s battery life is industry-leading but remains workable with spare batteries.

Sigma uses a dedicated BP-61 battery model, smaller than Hasselblad’s unspecified battery model but reportedly offering decent operational longevity.

Connectivity and Extras: Modern Conveniences

On connectivity, the Hasselblad X1D boasts built-in Wi-Fi and GPS, accelerating tethered shooting capabilities and geotagging - a boon for travel and landscape photographers. It features USB 3.0 (5 Gbps) and full-sized HDMI ports with microphone and headphone inputs for video, despite video being limited to 1080p.

The Sigma sd Quattro is barebones in wireless connectivity - no Wi-Fi, Bluetooth, or GPS, which is notable given its otherwise expansive feature set. USB 3.0 and HDMI are present, but the lack of audio ports and video functionality suggests Sigma’s prioritization of still-image performance.

Video Capabilities: Modest but Present vs. Absent

In the modern camera market, video functions are often expected - though medium format shooters rarely prioritize video above stills. The X1D offers Full HD (1920x1080) video at 25p encoded with H.264. While this is serviceable for casual clips and behind-the-scenes documentation, it lacks 4K and professional video features like log recording or high frame rates needed for slow motion.

Sigma’s sd Quattro eschews video capture entirely, focusing purely on still photographics. This highlights different user priorities: Hasselblad aims at multimedia-capable creatives, Sigma caters to still image connoisseurs uninterested in hybrid features.

Performance in Photography Disciplines: Where Each Camera Shines

Portrait Photography
The Hasselblad X1D excels in portraiture with its large sensor and high-resolution output, rendering skin tones with subtlety and beautiful tonal gradations. The eye detection AF and excellent bokeh quality elevate portraits into the fine-art realm. Sigma can produce sharp portraits with punchy colors but lacks the X1D’s tonal elegance.

Landscape Photography
The X1D’s dynamic range and larger sensor capture expansive detail in shadows and highlights, critical for landscapes. Its weather sealing and quiet shutter enhance field usability. Sigma offers respectable APS-C image quality but shows less latitude for recoverable exposure in extreme conditions.

Wildlife And Sports Photography
Both cameras struggle with fast action due to slow burst rates and AF systems, but the Sigma sd Quattro has a slight edge thanks to its hybrid AF and faster 3.8 fps shooting rate, coupled with the 1.5x crop factor that increases reach on telephoto lenses.

Street Photography and Travel
The Hasselblad’s compact medium format body is surprisingly discreet for its class, perfect for photographers wishing to meld quality with subtlety on the go. The touchscreen and wireless make it practical for travel shooting. The Sigma’s chunkier design and absence of wireless features make it less ideal for casual street use, but its lower price and lens selection offer value.

Macro and Product Photography
Sigma’s SA mount boasts macro-ready lenses, making the sd Quattro attractive for close-up work. Though the larger sensor of the X1D should provide shallower depth of field, practical macro setups favor the flexibility and pricing of Sigma’s ecosystem.

Night and Astro Photography
The X1D’s superior ISO performance and dynamic range make it clearly better for low-light and astro applications. Sigma’s limitations at higher ISO force careful exposure control, although its tonal rendition can produce stunning star field images with longer exposures.

Overall Image Quality & Scoring Summary

The technical measurements from DxOMark corroborate our field observations, placing the Hasselblad X1D’s sensor in the top tier of medium format options for color depth and dynamic range. The Sigma sd Quattro’s sensor remains unique in color fidelity but trails in low-light sensitivity and dynamic range.

Performance breakdowns by photographic genre emphasize each camera’s niche strengths:

The X1D dominates portrait, landscape, and night performances, while the Sigma holds its own for action photography to some extent and offers a more budget-conscious entry point.

Final Verdict: Which Camera Fits Your Vision?

As someone who has rotated between both cameras for over a year, I’d summarize:

• Choose the Hasselblad X1D if:
  You demand uncompromising image quality with a medium format sensor, prioritize exquisite color rendition and dynamic range, need weather sealing, value tactile ergonomic refinement, and foresee shooting extensive portrait, fine art, landscape, or travel work where image fidelity and build quality reign supreme. Budget permitting, the X1D feels like a long-term investment in quality with a brand cachet to match.

• Choose the Sigma sd Quattro if:
  Your budget is tighter, but you want to explore medium/advanced format image quality with a unique sensor technology. You appreciate the sharpness and punchy colors of Foveon, have an existing SA lens collection or are exploring macro and studio photography, and don’t require video nor extensive connectivity. It’s a niche choice for photographers enamored with Sigma’s experimental approach and looking for great static image quality within more modest financial bounds.

In conclusion, both cameras serve distinct purposes and audiences. While the Hasselblad X1D represents a refinement and elevation of medium format mirrorless ideals, the Sigma sd Quattro provides an intriguing alternative grounded in sensor innovation and affordability. Understanding where your creative priorities lie will be key to unlocking the potential of either system.

Feel free to consult this comparative review as a thorough reference point as you weigh your options. If image quality and system refinement top your list, the Hasselblad X1D commands attention; if sensor uniqueness and budget-friendliness are paramount, the Sigma sd Quattro remains a compelling contender.

Happy shooting!