Luminous Landscape Forum
Equipment & Techniques => Medium Format / Film / Digital Backs – and Large Sensor Photography => Topic started by: spassig on June 11, 2018, 01:19:50 am
-
Hello
I see in a brochure that PO offer seven different digibacks.
IQ1 two digibacks.
IQ1 100 MP
IQ1 50 MP
IQ3 five digibacks.
IQ3 100 MP Trichromatic
IQ3 100 MP
IQ3 100 MP Achromatic
IQ3 80 MP
IQ3 50 MP
I know the reason by Achromatic.
What's the reason for the other?
Jochen
-
My view:
- IQ1 are cheaper version from which some functions were removed to lower the price point to remain competitive with Hasselblad without madening too much existing IQ3 customers
- the 100mp versions are based on the true MF 54x41mm sensor
- the 50mp versions are using the same small MF 33x44mm sensor found in the X1D and GFX
- the IQ3 80 is an older CCD back
- the trichromatic version uses an improved color filter
Cheers,
Bernard
-
My view:
- IQ1 are cheaper version from which some functions were removed to lower the price point to remain competitive with Hasselblad without madening too much existing IQ3 customers
- the 100mp versions are based on the true MF 54x41mm sensor
- the 50mp versions are using the same small MF 33x44mm sensor found in the X1D and GFX
- the trichromatic version uses an improved color filter
Cheers,
Bernard
@Bernhard
Thanks for quick feedback.
Currently I use a Hasselblad 503CW with PO digiback P45.
In the last week I took same landscape pictures with my own Sony A7II and borrow Fuji GFX50S.
At moment I compare the pictures.
If I would buy a new camera (Fuji or PO) I will know the history of PO digibacks.
„Hmm. Must I buy a new camera?“ ;)
Jochen
-
No idea whether you "need" a new camera... ;)
I find the image quality of the 100mp backs (I own a H6D-100c but it is very similar) to be outstanding.
Frankly speaking, I would wait until September because odds are you are going to be able to buy an X2D/GFX 100s for a lot less than the current 100mp large MF backs.
One question is whether 24x26/33x44/36x48/41x54 make a difference and where MF really starts... ;)
There is a real difference of look btwn 24x36 and 41x54, that I know but I personnally find that the gap btwn 24x36 and 33x44 is too small to justify the huge difference of price and the significant loss of capability. But that's just me.
Cheers,
Bernard
-
Frankly speaking, I would wait until September because odds are you are going to be able to buy an X2D/GFX 100s for a lot less than the current 100mp large MF backs.
Cheers,
Bernard
September = Photokina 2018 Cologne or other reason?
Now I start comparing the RAW pictures from 503CW+P45/ Sony A7II/ Fuji GFX50S with wide-angle-lens and tele-lens.
All with f8, f11, f16.
All with good same distance settings.
All pictures with tripoid.
I use Adobe Raw Converter > Automatic and Photoshop CC without additional settings.
I use 100 % view.
I see disparities but what is the best?
I mean that 503CW+P45 is very good.
Jochen
-
Now I start comparing the RAW pictures from 503CW+P45/ Sony A7II/ Fuji GFX50S with wide-angle-lens and tele-lens.
All with f8, f11, f16.
All with good same distance settings.
All pictures with tripoid.
I use Adobe Raw Converter > Automatic and Photoshop CC without additional settings.
I use 100 % view.
I see disparities but what is the best?
I mean that 503CW+P45 is very good.
The P45+ is from 2007 based on a sensor from 2005.
In my (highly biased) opinion, the fact that you find it compares well for your needs to the current GFX is a testament to the longevity and image quality provided by investing in Phase One, and a strong argument to stay in the Phase One family.
Moreover, if you redid that comparison in Capture One instead of Adobe Camera Raw you will likely find the 45+ even stronger. There's a lot to be said for using software made specifically for the hardware you're using, especially for more subtle things like tonal smoothness and color rendering.
-
Yes, it becomes a bit soupy when trying to make sense of the model numbers, especially since some of them are relative to the mount. What are you looking to accomplish and how do you currently shoot with your P45? Are you hitting any limitations?
Since you're use to working with a CCD, you have the ability to stick in that space with the 60mp & 80mp backs that can be had at a discount. The 50mp CMOS is great, but the sensor is smaller than what you're use to (as seen in the GFX) so your focal lengths aren't quite the same.
The best one is the best for your application. The IQ series backs is much faster than the P backs, plus with the higher resolution of either the 60mp or 80mp, you're getting a bigger file than from the 50mp CMOS chip. If you're looking for higher ISO performance, the 50mp CMOS is a better fit.
-
Up until recently I was using the 60 Mp CCD IQ160 on my V system Hasselblad (I've recently migrated it to a tech cam). It's a great combination if (and it's a big "if") you can focus the bloody contraption. Let's just say that the higher resolution sensors are not at all forgiving of anything but perfect focus, which is a function of both the photographer and the focusing path being in proper alignment. I am not surprised that you like the rendering on the P45 - perhaps this is a combination of the larger format and old Zeiss lenses.
Advantages of staying with a V-mount full frame (i.e., 40x54) Phase back are that they can give stunning image quality, can be found relatively cheap on the used market, and allow you to use Capture One for RAW developing and post-processing. But the more modern CMOS backs and X1D/GFX are certainly easier to work with in the field. I recently started using the X1D to complement the IQ160. It's great for certain applications (e.g., low light/high ISO) and shows the legendary Hassy colors, but I still prefer the look of the IQ160 images.
John
-
@all
Thanks for helpfully feedback.
In the past I don't compare different RAWs from different camera systems.
Now I will compare this.
Is there a reference available in which way I should analyse the quality of the three systems?
Looking quality in shadows?
Looking quality in lights?
Some other analysing?
I have all three different RAW formats open in PS CC.
Is it sensefull to convert the RAWs from Sony A7II and Fuji GFX 50S (maybe the PO format) in DNG?
Than I can open the Sony A7II and Fuji GFX 50S RAWs (maybe the PO format) in Capture One.
(Discussion this I should generate a new topic?)
Jochen
-
Analyze them in how they fit into how you shoot and light, and work, and what your clients need and what you deliver. You can read internet boards all day, but the real value is if/how it fits for you.
-
Hello
I have post a new topic for discussion for analyse the quality of different RAWs
http://forum.luminous-landscape.com/index.php?topic=125294.0
Jochen
-
No idea whether you "need" a new camera... ;)
I find the image quality of the 100mp backs (I own a H6D-100c but it is very similar) to be outstanding.
Frankly speaking, I would wait until September because odds are you are going to be able to buy an X2D/GFX 100s for a lot less than the current 100mp large MF backs.
One question is whether 24x26/33x44/36x48/41x54 make a difference and where MF really starts... ;)
There is a real difference of look btwn 24x36 and 41x54, that I know but I personnally find that the gap btwn 24x36 and 33x44 is too small to justify the huge difference of price and the significant loss of capability. But that's just me.
Cheers,
Bernard
Bernard,
it is so nice that you answered all of my questions I was just going to ask in a short and simple post.
I have had Contax 35mm and Zenza Bronica MF in the past and use a Nikon D850 today.
I was wondering whether a 50MP sensor in the Hasselblad or Fuji would be a "real" improvement over the Nikon and whether the sensor size would qualify as MF at all (compared to 6x6 or 6x7 in the film era).
Jens
-
I was wondering whether a 50MP sensor in the Hasselblad or Fuji would be a "real" improvement over the Nikon and whether the sensor size would qualify as MF at all (compared to 6x6 or 6x7 in the film era).
I know others would disagree, but my personal view is that the difference between the 50mp 33x44mm sensor and the D850 is not worth the cost in itself. There may be other aspects of the system for specific applications that paint things in a different light (need for leaf shutter lenses, need for a specific lens such as the Hasselblad 21mm f4 that may be the best wide angle ever designed,...).
Things could be different after Sony releases their 100mp sensor because it is probably going to take a longer time for DSLRs to catch up from an image quality standpoint and the usability of the X2D/GFX should be closer to 35mm DSLRs.
Cheers,
Bernard
-
I know others would disagree, but my personal view is that the difference between the 50mp 33x44mm sensor and the D850 is not worth the cost in itself.
Cheers,
Bernard
I looked at all the options and as of today the H6D 100c seems to be the "cheapest" "real" MF camera.
Before one ( 8) ) would invest that amount of money, what are the chances that there is a
a) higher resolution Hasselblad or
b) significantly cheaper 100MP camera with the large sensor size either from Hasselbald or another manufacturer?
in the near future?
Cheers
Jens
-
I looked at all the options and as of today the H6D 100c seems to be the "cheapest" "real" MF camera.
Before one ( 8) ) would invest that amount of money, what are the chances that there is a
a) higher resolution Hasselblad or
b) significantly cheaper 100MP camera with the large sensor size either from Hasselbald or another manufacturer?
in the near future?
Cheers
Jens
Regarding a), Sony's sensor roadmap has long been published, which includes a 100mp 33x44mm sensor and a 150mp 40x54mm sensor. These are most certainly destined for the X2D and H7D, respectively, and could be announced as early as Photokina in September of 2018. When they actually be shipping to customers is a different question, but most of us are expecting them to be available this time next year.
Regarding b), that is unknown, however the prices of currently available 40x54mm 100mp systems will certainly go down on the used market once the 100mp 33x44mm cameras are out in force.
Hasselblad also has a trade-in program (https://www.hasselblad.com/trade-in/), and if you're looking into a new H6D-100c right now, that's probably the best route to go. You could easily buy an H4D-40 or H5D-40 and trade it in towards an H6D-100c and save a lot of $$. You could also find a used H6D-100c or IQ3100 for around $20-21k USD if you look.
I personally would hold off on purchasing a 100mp MF camera right now unless you absolutely need it. Yes, there's always something new around the corner, but the new 100mp 33x44mm sensor is going to shake things up quite a bit and is a pretty big leap forward IMHO. Digital cameras are also not great investments, and digital MF especially depreciates pretty steeply. There's a chance a new 100mp MF camera today may be worth half to 2/3 of what you paid for it this time next year given what we know about the next-gen sensors and speculate about the next-gen cameras. If you don't need CMOS and just want 40x54mm, there's always the H4D/H5D-60 and P65+,IQx60, and IQx80s you can find well under $10k USD.
All that said, there's also the consideration that the best camera is the one you have on you, and it might not make sense to wait if you need something to shoot with now.
-Todd
-
I looked at all the options and as of today the H6D 100c seems to be the "cheapest" "real" MF camera.
I don't know where you are located, and both currency and specials/bundles etc can change the math a bit here or there, but once you account for the fact the Phase One XF IQ kits come with a lens and the H6D does not the list prices here in the USA:
- $35,990 - Phase One IQ1 100mp with XF Body and Schneider 80mm LS Blue Ring Lens (https://digitaltransitions.com/product/phase-one-iq1-100mp-digital-back/)
- $36,100 - Hasselblad H6D-100c (https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1244709-REG/hasselblad_h_3013742_h6d_100c_medium_format_dslr.html) with HC80mm lens (https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1245041-REG/hasselblad_h_3026080_hc_80mm_f_2_8_lens.html)
Those prices are for new-condition kits. Notably there is a sale on Phsae One Certiified Pre-Owned kits (https://digitaltransitions.com/phase-one-summer-2018-promo/) (20% off the normal CPO pricing) with standard warranty.
Some of the features the XF has the H6 does not:
- Built-in Profoto Air transmitter
- Built-in Profoto TTL
- Built-in Profoto Air Manual Control
- Built-in Focus Trim tool for auto lens calibration
- Flash duration meter
- Vibration analysis during capture
- Vibration-drive for delaying capture until vibration has subsided
- Automatic Focus Stacking
- Icon control for putting only the tools on screen you need
- Bright, modern LCD
- Metering while using a Waist Level Finder
- Time lapse capture, including metadata tags integrated to C1
- Exposure bracketing, including metadata tags integrated to C1
- Upward-facing bulls-eye level
- Hyperfocal focus setting
- Touch screen interface (with optional hard buttons for when you're wearing non-touch gloves)
Some of the features the IQ has the H6D does not:
- 3-axis level that integrates with C1 for automatic control of horizon and perspective
- Adjustable highlight warning point
- IIQ-S slightly-lossy compressed format (the difference between this and lossless compression is extremely hard to see even when you push the file around and know where to look) in addition to the lossless IIQ-L format
- Histogram without blocking the view of the overall image
- blinkies in the thumbnail without obfiscating the main image
The Phase One system is also directly integrated with Capture One. The H6D is not and will not be supported in Capture One.
I'd suggest as part of your purchase research to look at the last 5-8 years of product releases and feature improvements and take note of what both Hasselblad and Phase One have been up to in that period. When were the lenses in the current lineup released? What new investments have they shown in their respective 645-sized bodies? What new features have they released on their bodies, backs, and software? Where is their focus and attention?
Of course, I'm wildly biased (we choose to sell P1 and choose not to sell Hassy) so you should consult with a Hasselblad dealer on the unique features and arguments in favor of the H6 platform. My main point is only that you should definitely include checking out a P1 while you're checking out a Hassy. Even if you were leaning toward the Hassy I'd tell you the same thing. Either way it's going to be a large investment, so it's only sensible to put your hands on both before you go with either.
-
Doug,
Many good points here, but the H6D has a best in class touch UI that I personnally find superior to that of the IQ.
Pricewise I believe that you should compare both top ends with tech camera capabilities and the H6D should therefore be compared to the IQ3.
Finally, the XF is an excellent tripod camera but I find the H6D superior for handheld shooting thanks to its more compact, lighter body and superior mirror damping.
Cheers,
Bernard
-
Thank you to all of you for your valuable input.
I have taken the hint not go ahead and get a 100MP camera before Photokina 18 respectively in the next months to come.
I have decided to go for a X1D 50c set with three lenses that is currently sold at a great price here. So I will get a feeling of 50MP MF compared to the D850 with Zeiss lenses.
Either this is great or not. If not, we might see a X1D 100c or I can sell the set without loosing 10k.
Now I am excited to see whether it will arrive before the weekend!
-
Just a bit of clarification on Doug's pricing comments:
An IQ3 series 100mp back, not a 2nd tier IQ1 series back is "a little bit" more expensive than the IQ1
From the DT website-
Phase One IQ3 100mp Kit with XF camera body and 80mm LS lens “Blue Ring”.
$46,990.00
https://digitaltransitions.com/product/phase-one-iq3-100mp-system/
-
Just a bit of clarification on Doug's pricing comments:
An IQ3 series 100mp back, not a 2nd tier IQ1 series back is "a little bit" more expensive than the IQ1
From the DT website-
Phase One IQ3 100mp Kit with XF camera body and 80mm LS lens “Blue Ring”.
$46,990.00
https://digitaltransitions.com/product/phase-one-iq3-100mp-system/
"2nd tier" is, I guess, meant to be a derogatory comment? The penultimate Bugatti is still a pretty freaking amazing car, even if it has a handful fewer bells and whistles than the top-of-the-line Bugatti.
The list of technical features and advantages I provided, compared to an H6D-100c was for an XF IQ1 kit, as was the price. I don't think the H6D-100c really compares to an IQ1, but it's the closest Hasselblad has, so it's what I compared to.
If we were comparing to an XF IQ3 we would add the following additional advantages compared to the H6D-100c:
- 5 year warranty on all components with loaner provided during any service of any component
- Zone System exposure heat map
- Long Exposure Calculator
- Sensor temperature monitor readout
Notably the IQ3 price is with your choice of Blue Ring lens so using the 80mm as your choice would be quite silly since it's the least expensive lens. This is a great example of why you should be working with a professional, dedicated, experienced dealer. It makes me sad to think of someone buying an IQ3 kit with an 80mm lens.
-
the H6D has a best in class touch UI...
Thanks for catching my error. That was meant to be under the XF not the IQ.
The XF touch screen is quite handy especially for accessing advanced settings. For example to set the max-slowest shutter speed for Aperture Priority mode you tap on the shutter speed.
Finally, the XF is an excellent tripod camera but I find the H6D superior for handheld shooting thanks to its more compact, lighter body and superior mirror damping.
I'd say 2/3rds of our clients are using the XF handheld all or most of the time. Personally I use it handheld 90+ percent of the time. A lot of our tripod shooters are actually using a technical camera, thanks to the excellent workflow ease and hardware integration P1 maintains with technical cameras.
The H6D-100C is 2130g with an HC 80mm lens and batteries and card.
The XF IQ1 100 is 2638g with an 80mm Schneider LS Blue Ring and batteries and card.
So the H6D is ~80% the weight of the XF IQ1.
Most of the difference is because of the larger/brighter viewfinder of the XF and the use of more metal in the body.
If you're looking to shed a few ounces from the IQ and don't need fast flash sync with strobe then you could change the standard Viewfinder to a Waist Level Viewfinder and 80mm LS BR for an 80mm D which drops ~350g respectively and ~200g to a total of 2088g (you could also switch the hassy viewfinder to make it ~200g lighter for a total of 1930g).
Size wise the two systems are extremely similar. The XF is about ~0.5 inches wider and they are within a few mm of the same height and depth.
Of course, everyone is welcome to their own opinion as to which fits their hand better, which user interface they find more intuitive, and how much priority to assign the difference in weight/size.
-
"2nd tier" is, I guess, meant to be a derogatory comment? The penultimate Bugatti is still a pretty freaking amazing car, even if it has a handful fewer bells and whistles than the top-of-the-line Bugatti.
The list of technical features and advantages I provided, compared to an H6D-100c was for an XF IQ1 kit, as was the price. I don't think the H6D-100c really compares to an IQ1, but it's the closest Hasselblad has, so it's what I compared to.
If we were comparing to an XF IQ3 we would add the following additional advantages compared to the H6D-100c:
- 5 year warranty on all components with loaner provided during any service of any component
- Zone System exposure heat map
- Long Exposure Calculator
- Sensor temperature monitor readout
Notably the IQ3 price is with your choice of Blue Ring lens so using the 80mm as your choice would be quite silly since it's the least expensive lens. This is a great example of why you should be working with a professional, dedicated, experienced dealer. It makes me sad to think of someone buying an IQ3 kit with an 80mm lens.
Doug, you forgot to mention the Electronic Shutter, which, combined with the Vibration Delay Mode of the XF Camera, virtually removes all internal as well as external vibration factors. Or if you didn't, I missed seeing it.
Bernard, for a technical camera shooter, having an electronic shutter is a huge advantage.
My take on the comparative UI for the H6D and IQ/XF systems is that with the H6D, Hasselblad has created an extremely easy and intuitive interface. Seemingly more so than the IQ/XF. However, I feel that perception is colored by the fact there are more features and capabilities with an IQ/XF system than an H6D system. Just for image review alone, there are many more options and capabilities (2 step highlight warning, complete zone system readout, focus mask, etc.). The H6D UI seems simple because it is simple (relative to an IQ/XF). If you want more capability, you may have to sacrifice some simplicity. But I still find the IQ/XF UI is very easily navigateable - even 7+ years after the initial IQ interface was first revealed - and have no complaints from users (some suggestions, to be sure). I think it is safe to say that the respective UI for both Hasselblad and Phase One systems is outstanding.
Steve Hendrix/CI
-
Most of the difference is because of the larger/brighter viewfinder of the XF and the use of more metal in the body.
Plus a built in radio transmitter for flash and a body ruggedly designed to take a V-grip. And the 2 batteries that allow the body and back to work independently and add longevity...
-
Slightly off topic: are there any Hasselblad dealers active in the LuLa forums?
(See the three previous posts.)
-
Slightly off topic: are there any Hasselblad dealers active in the LuLa forums?
(See the three previous posts.)
On Lula, none that I'm aware of. Occasionally you will see contributions from Steve Goldsmith, the great Paul Claessen, and my long time friend Eric Peterson (all of whom are employed by Hasselblad USA), but I don't know of any active dealers who contribute, at least not regularly. On GetDPI, there have been some posts from Denny at Dodd Camera, an excellent resource for Hasselblad products.
Steve Hendrix/CI
-
It makes me sad to think of someone buying an IQ3 kit with just an 80mm lens.
Fixed it for ya Doug ;D
There is nothing 2nd tier about an IQ1, It's just what fits you as a photographer, between the price, the feel in hand, and the feature set. We live in an amazing time, and having PhaseOne and Hasselblad push back and forth against each other really does benefit us all. I will say the Phase dealers have more stuff going on as to product education & information.
As to Hass people on this forum, there are a few Hass techs that pop up every once in a while or chime in as they see fit. This thread isn't a great example thread, and I question my stepping back into it.
-
Doug,
I was not using 2nd tier as a derogatory term, I was simply stating that Phase One offers different tiers of backs with different feature sets, ie IQ1, IQ2, IQ3.
Since all 3 lines of backs are still availalble I was simply trying to clarify the Phase One offerings and price structure.
Please do not put words into my mouth or make assumptions as to my intentions.
As far as the lens, do you consider the 80mm Blue Ring lens to be inferior, you picked it for the IQ1 comparison pricing, I was only following your lead.
-
As far as the lens, do you consider the 80mm Blue Ring lens to be "inferior", you picked it for the IQ1 comparison pricing, I was only following your lead.
No, Steve, I do not consider the 80mm Blue Ring to be inferior.
The IQ1 series kit comes with a Schneider 80mm LS Blue Ring lens.
The IQ3 series kit comes with your choice of lens.
The Schneider 80mm LS Blue Ring lens is the least expensive lens in the lineup.
Therefore most IQ3 clients are better off selecting some lens other than the Schneider 80mm LS Blue Ring.
-
Doug,
I was not using 2nd tier as a derogatory term, I was simply stating that Phase One offers different tiers of backs with different feature sets, ie IQ1, IQ2, IQ3.
Since all 3 lines of backs are still availalble I was simply trying to clarify the Phase One offerings and price structure.
Please do not put words into my mouth or make assumptions as to my intentions.
As far as the lens, do you consider the 80mm Blue Ring lens to be inferior, you picked it for the IQ1 comparison pricing, I was only following your lead.
Steve -
The 80mm lens has 2 strikes against it.
A) It is the proverbial kit lens.
B) It is a normal view prime lens.
Kit lenses have a reputation as the weakest lens (think consumer level ultra wide to super tele plastic zooms). This is not fair as some kit lenses are actually quite good.
Normal view primes are often the least expensive lenses in any lineup. Further, on a crop sensor, the 80mm becomes a long normal (63mm equivalent). Personally I much prefer a wide-ish normal to a long-ish normal.
As a result of all of this, 80mm lenses are common on the 2nd hand market, and the price is often 30% (or thereabouts) of new. What Doug is alluding to is that if you're able to swap out an 80mm for another prime lens, you'll get much greater value swapping the lens, considering how cheaply you can pick up an 80mm lens 2nd hand.
This is the case for Hasselblad and Phase One both, as well you should know. I've sold CPO Hasselblad 80mm HC Lenses for as low as $900, and we currently have a batch of Phase One/Schneider 80mm lenses in that same price range. It's a shame (or an opportunity, depending how you look at it) because in both cases, I find the 80mm lenses from Hasselblad and Phase One to be optically excellent, fast, and compact.
Steve Hendrix/CI
-
Steve & Doug,
I am not sure how this got into a discussion of merits or lack of on 80mm lenses.
I simply used the same configuration for the IQ3 system that Doug had put forth for both the H6D-100c & IQ150 system.
I wanted an apples to apples comparison, nothing more.
Really shocked at how this has taken such a crazy turn on what is really just a very simple comparison of 3 different excellent camera systems.
-Steve
-
Steve & Doug,
I am not sure how this got into a discussion of merits or lack of on 80mm lenses.
I simply used the same configuration for the IQ3 system that Doug had put forth for both the H6D-100c & IQ150 system.
I wanted an apples to apples comparison, nothing more.
Really shocked at how this has taken such a crazy turn on what is really just a very simple comparison of 3 different excellent camera systems.
-Steve
Steve -
You asked if the 80mm lens is inferior. I answered you with full information on the nature of that lens and the topic of kit lenses in general (for both Phase and Hasselblad). Hopefully this information is helpful to others as well.
What’s the problem?
Steve Hendrix/CI
-
My view:
- IQ1 are cheaper version from which some functions were removed to lower the price point to remain competitive with Hasselblad without madening too much existing IQ3 customers
- the 100mp versions are based on the true MF 54x41mm sensor
Cheers,
Bernard
Hi,
Just to clarify and avoid misunderstandings"
The 54x41mm chip is not "a true medium format more than the other chip, it's just bigger. Medium format is a catch category": Bigger than 35mm smaller than 4 by 5 inches.
For a very long time, the most popular MF cameras used 56 x 56mm and the 6 x7 cm film format.
But it's true that the H6D-100c and the IQ3-100 have bigger sensors than the X1D and the Fuji.
By the way, the bigger sensor is more advanced and is in general better, even without taking into account the size.
Best regards,
-
Doug,
Many good points here, but the H6D has a best in class touch UI that I personally find superior to that of the IQ.
Pricewise I believe that you should compare both top ends with tech camera capabilities and the H6D should, therefore, be compared to the IQ3.
Finally, the XF is an excellent tripod camera but I find the H6D superior for handheld shooting thanks to its more compact, lighter body and superior mirror damping.
Cheers,
Bernard
I fully agree, and it's easy to compile a list of missing features of the other platform, at least in MF were more cameras are basically Science projects. Tha will include 1/2000 sync, true focus, Ultra focus, Capture from live view, USB-C, Video, Integrated WiFI etc.
So be aware of vendors with lists :) The IQ3 has many of the features I listed, just of the top of my mind, but the price is quite different.
Best regards,
-
Steve,
My question about the 80mm lens was soley based on the following comment from Doug
“It makes me sad to think of someone buying an IQ3 kit with an 80mm lens.
« Last Edit: June 28, 2018, 03:55:07 PM by Doug Peterson »”
Again, I will ask you to not put words into my mouth or make assumtions as to my statements
-Steve
-
Steve,
My question about the 80mm lens was soley based on the following comment from Doug
“It makes me sad to think of someone buying an IQ3 kit with an 80mm lens.
« Last Edit: June 28, 2018, 03:55:07 PM by Doug Peterson »”
Again, I will ask you to not put words into my mouth or make assumtions as to my statements
-Steve
As far as the lens, do you consider the 80mm Blue Ring lens to be inferior, you picked it for the IQ1 comparison pricing, I was only following your lead.
You asked if the Schneider 80mm lens was inferior. I gave you an objective answer detailing the nature of that lens. How is that putting words in your mouth?
Steve Hendrix/CI
-
The 54x41mm chip is not "a true medium format more than the other chip, it's just bigger. Medium format is a catch category": Bigger than 35mm smaller than 4 by 5 inches.
For a very long time, the most popular MF cameras used 56 x 56mm and the 6 x7 cm film format.
True, but at least the 54x41 is very close to one of the sizes that used to be called MF in the film days (645). The 33x44 is somewhere below that.
But more importantly, I just don't see enough look difference between 33x44 and 24x36 when a given lens is used.
Words do matter because I feel that a large part of buyers of system using the 33x44 chip invest in it because it is called MF digital and by that a jump of quality "into a different league" is implied that I personally find a bit misguiding.
Cheers,
Bernard
-
True, but at least the 54x41 is very close to one of the sizes that used to be called MF in the film days (645). The 33x44 is somewhere below that.
But more importantly, I just don't see enough look difference between 33x44 and 24x36 when a given lens is used.
Words do matter because I feel that a large part of buyers of system using the 33x44 chip invest in it because it is called MF digital and by that a jump of quality "into a different league" is implied that I personally find a bit misguiding.
Cheers,
Bernard
When I was younger MF meant to me either 6x6 or 6x7. 645 was already kind of smaller MF and it took the square format out of MF. For me always a square 6x6 slide or negative was impressive as it differed in format and size from the 24x36 films.