Luminous Landscape Forum
Equipment & Techniques => Medium Format / Film / Digital Backs – and Large Sensor Photography => Topic started by: ronno on September 18, 2007, 04:23:51 pm
-
http://www.letsgodigital.org/en/16874/hasselblad-h3d-ii/ (http://www.letsgodigital.org/en/16874/hasselblad-h3d-ii/)
-
http://www.letsgodigital.org/en/16874/hasselblad-h3d-ii/ (http://www.letsgodigital.org/en/16874/hasselblad-h3d-ii/)
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=140257\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I assume ultra focus or whatever it is called still means single point in the middle AF ?
Which means the Hassy CEO statement..
".. we believe that the world’s best high-end DSLR camera has just got better"
is pushing it a bit IMO
Surely he should have said "Our OK camera is still basically the same - flawed for many purposes"
S
-
I assume ultra focus or whatever it is called still means single point in the middle AF ?
Which means the Hassy CEO statement..
".. we believe that the world’s best high-end DSLR camera has just got better"
is pushing it a bit IMO
Surely he should have said "Our OK camera is still basically the same - flawed for many purposes"
S
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a] (http://index.php?act=findpost&pid=140266\")
No need to assume, there's this thing called "Google" and the internet where you can find all kinds of information. Like...
Ultra-Focus on H3D.
The Ultra-Focus functionality, which covers special sensor positioning and correction for aperture dependent focus position, has now been expanded to correct for the optical effects of light passing through cover glass and filter glass in front of the CCD sensor. Calculating the improvements in sharpness are achieved by processing Hasselblad’s digital lens models with metadata on actual aperture and sensor. [a href=\"http://www.hasselblad.com/about-hasselblad/flexcolor-47-highlights]Hasselblad Ultra-focus[/url]
In other words, it corrects for lens focus shift (which is aperture dependent) and the refraction of the cover glass. Also, is there any camera that isn't excellent for some purposes and flawed for many others? There are many changes in the H3D-II. You can check it out for yourself with that "Google" thing.
Surely you should have said "don't post assumptions which are flawed for the purpose of reasoned discussion".
-
Ultra-Focus on H3D.
The Ultra-Focus functionality, which covers special sensor positioning and correction for aperture dependent focus position, has now been expanded to correct for the optical effects of light passing through cover glass and filter glass in front of the CCD sensor. Calculating the improvements in sharpness are achieved by processing Hasselblad’s digital lens models with metadata on actual aperture and sensor. Hasselblad Ultra-focus (http://www.hasselblad.com/about-hasselblad/flexcolor-47-highlights)
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=0\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
if hasselblad would spend as much time on camera develpoment as they do on insane marketing hype, they might actually have a great product.....
-
if hasselblad would spend as much time on camera develpoment as they do on insane marketing hype, they might actually have a great product.....
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=140322\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Hasselblad has done terrific development in many areas and they have several great products.
It seems the marketing department hasn't done a great job of explaining the technology and benefits of their research, development and products as evidenced by the earlier post regarding Ultra-focus.
Of course for some it's an emotional issue of some sort and there is no amount of explaining new technology advances, aimed at pushing the envelope of image qaulity and hardware capabilities, that will suffice.
-
Also, is there any camera that isn't excellent for some purposes and flawed for many others?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=140290\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Yes but the H is the only 'DSLR' (their word not mine), that is centre point only AF
Making far from the 'best' DSLR
I am sure talking to the lens technology is great - it is just that if I were a developer it would be well down on my development list compared to
'replace embarrassing 1980 style AF'
A nikon D100 image that is in focus out resolves a blad image that is out of focus...
S
-
Yes but the H is the only 'DSLR' (their word not mine), that is centre point only AF
Making far from the 'best' DSLR
I am sure talking to the lens technology is great - it is just that if I were a developer it would be well down on my development list compared to
'replace embarrassing 1980 style AF'
A nikon D100 image that is in focus out resolves a blad image that is out of focus...
S
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=140340\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
If the number of autofocus points is the only criteria for evaluating a DSLR–you are correct. I prefer to consider much more than that–but to each his or her own.
I remember "1980 style AF" well. No internal focus like all of the "H" lenses have. Cumbersome AF/Manual switches to override autofocus instead of just turning the focus ring like you do on the "H" lenses. The Hasselblad "H" autofocus is the best I've seen in a medium-format camera and far better than any autofocus in 1980.
-
if hasselblad would spend as much time on camera develpoment as they do on insane marketing hype, they might actually have a great product.....
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=140322\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Why don't you actually try it though before critiscising?????
-
If the number of autofocus points is the only criteria for evaluating a DSLR–you are correct. I prefer to consider much more than that–but to each his or her own.
I remember "1980 style AF" well. No internal focus like all of the "H" lenses have. Cumbersome AF/Manual switches to override autofocus instead of just turning the focus ring like you do on the "H" lenses. The Hasselblad "H" autofocus is the best I've seen in a medium-format camera and far better than any autofocus in 1980.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=140347\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Of course it is about priorities.
I would just put decent AF very near the top of the list
There are only three controls on a camera that really affect an image
speed
aperture
focus position
The first two generally change less than the third in most pricture taking environs and are therefore lower priority to automate IMO
I am baffled by the need for hundreds of shooting modes, user modes, or even a meter really!
I would change to any MF system that offered decent AF - none do - IMO the H is the best of a sorry bunch and it just got better -great.
S
ps do you know how when using the H and Aperture priority how to stop the shutter speed changing after you have chosen your focus point - without pressing any buttons - that is the automation I miss
-
True, the AF is not the greatest in the world, but at least Hasselblad is making steps to improve the system????
How many other MF systems are being developed today, except for the Hy6 which you can't even buy yet.
Rather than all of being negative why not think about the positive sides of the new H3DII.
3.0" display for one? This has been something we have all been whinging about for ages, and when it arrives... no comments.
-
In another recent thread, someone posted that they had tried the Hy6/AFi and the autofocus was significantly better than the Hass H. I hope that's true.
-
if hasselblad would spend as much time on camera develpoment as they do on insane marketing hype, they might actually have a great product.....
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=140322\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Hmmmm.....
Apparently they are getting sloppy in the marketing/communication area. The news is everywhere but on their website.
I am wondering when the new magical software is available for download and how much of a firmware upgrade the 'other' Hasselblad backs will get.
ISO800 (even if it is noisier than the new better cooled versions) would be nice. So would the option of getting the smaller raw files when shooting tethered. I am really jumping to get my hands on the anti-moire plug-in.
-
............3.0" display for one? This has been something we have all been whinging about for ages, and when it arrives... no comments.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=140370\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
There is "no comment" from Phase One crowd as Hasselblad seems to have gone ahead of Phase One in terms of 3" display. I am sure Phase One will come up with their 3" display & then watch out how many will exalt the virtues of Phase One's display & that will be even before anyone has seen it!!
-
Does anybody know prices for an upgrade from H3D 39 to H3D 39 II ??
/Frank
-
In another recent thread, someone posted that they had tried the Hy6/AFi and the autofocus was significantly better than the Hass H. I hope that's true.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=140380\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Then all they would need are some autofocus lenses.
-
if hasselblad would spend as much time on camera develpoment as they do on insane marketing hype, they might actually have a great product.....
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=140322\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Actually, Hasselbad is doing a terrible job of getting its message out and providing effective demonstrations of the significant features that they have implemented in their cameras and backs over the past 12-18 months, often through firmware and software updates. How much sarcasm has been expressed here over the failure of the MFDB makers to provide a high quality 3" screen comparable to what Nikon and Canon provide? Now, it appears that Hasselblad is doing it and you dismiss it as "insane marketing hype". Same with built-in GPS. I do a lot of landscape work in remote locations in the US and Europe that I often would like to revisit for more favorable lighting conditions. The built-in GPS is a BIG DEAL to me. Automatic software-based correction of lens distortion and light vignetting is also important. Where are Phase, Leaf and Sinar with these capabilities? Why are they not innovating? How much is Phase charging to move from a P45 to a P45+ in order to get a 2" screen that would have been acceptable 3 years ago?
(BTW, I still don't understand what the hell Ultra-Focus is all about)
-
Does anybody know prices for an upgrade from H3D 39 to H3D 39 II ??
/Frank
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=140455\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I'll have pricing information, including upgrade pricing after this Friday.
I'll also be looking at the new units - I'm most interested to see the quality of the screen. The size is nice, but if it's crap, that's another story.
Howard, I'll be sure to input the GPS coordinates so you can tell exactly where I was when I was testing it.
Steve Hendrix
www.ppratlanta.com/digital.php
-
Hasselblad is continuing to update their system. Leaf/Sinar/Rollei are still stuck at the vaporware stage where they claim their camera *will* be better , better, better. Phase continue to provide decent back hardware that can only be mounted on obsolescent bodies -
I'd say that it will be soon set game and match for Hasselblad although Mamiya stand a chance of survival as they seem to be able to sell lenses and bodies for 1/2 the price of Hassy.
Edmund
-
Actually, Hasselbad is doing a terrible job of getting its message out and providing effective demonstrations of the significant features that they have implemented in their cameras and backs over the past 12-18 months, often through firmware and software updates. How much sarcasm has been expressed here over the failure of the MFDB makers to provide a high quality 3" screen comparable to what Nikon and Canon provide? Now, it appears that Hasselblad is doing it and you dismiss it as "insane marketing hype". Same with built-in GPS. I do a lot of landscape work in remote locations in the US and Europe that I often would like to revisit for more favorable lighting conditions. The built-in GPS is a BIG DEAL to me. Automatic software-based correction of lens distortion and light vignetting is also important. Where are Phase, Leaf and Sinar with these capabilities? Why are they not innovating? How much is Phase charging to move from a P45 to a P45+ in order to get a 2" screen that would have been acceptable 3 years ago?
(BTW, I still don't understand what the hell Ultra-Focus is all about)
Hi Howard.
> (BTW, I still don't understand what the hell Ultra-Focus is all about)
Nobody does :-)
Kudos to Hassy for pushing their product forward. Phase One seems to be mired in the mode of making the minimal upgrades necessary to get by. A 3" screen with a very high pixel count, like we see on the new D3, would allow much more accurate focus checking and is something I wish my P45+ had (instead of the still poor tiny screen it has today). Live view on a 3" screen would be even better (it would be huge, actually). So hopefully Hassy will keep it up and hold Phase One's feet to the fire. Nothing improves a product faster than hard competition.
-
Leaf Has the gain utility to fix vignetting, I just wish they had it in the new V11 software. I am going to a all day Hasselblad event on sept 20 and hope to see the new camera. I am hoping I can shoot a few files against my Aptus 75.
Automatic software-based correction of lens distortion and light vignetting is also important. Where are Phase, Leaf and Sinar with these capabilities? Why are they not innovating?(BTW, I still don't
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=140464\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
-
(BTW, I still don't understand what the hell Ultra-Focus is all about)
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=140464\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Well I don't either so i asked a mate at 'blad and this is what he told me:
Part of the problem that was seen with adding digital backs to medium format bodies was an occasional discrepancy in focus calibration. Ie, the position where the photographer placed the focus (manually or otherwise) could then be seen to be different in the final image. The situation was worsened by capturing at maximum open apertures.
This could be cured by 'shimming' some digital backs (For example the Imacon Ixpress range) by the use of thin foils to bring the focus towards the correct position, albeit not always %100 accurately.
For many reasons accuracy of focus is much more critical on a CCD compared to film.
Therefore the first stage of Ultra Focus was to manufacture integrated units as 'one' as opposed to a production line of camera bodies and a line of digital units. Yes, the digital unit can be calibrated to a 'known' position but Hasselblad feels there is still an unacceptable tolerance with this method. Even a minimal difference in the thickness of the IR filter can change the focus position enough. (The optimum point of focus is on the surface of the IR filter, not on the CCD below).
Therefore the first stage of ultra focus was to assemble integrated DSLR's as 'one'. Therefore each camera was tested and calibrated as a single unit.
At the final stage the AF sensor in the H body can have an offset applied to be specifically calibrated to the digital unit. Therefore when working the camera in AF mode you can be assured of 100% focus accuracy. Equally using the camera in manual focus mode the AF sensor will also indicate when the subject is in perfect focus.
The next task to solve came with adjusting the AF depending on the working aperture used. Focussing is carried out with the lens (normally) fully open. Due to certain optical characteristics, the focus point can shift when the lens is stopped down to the working aperture. For example, the Zeiss CF 80mm lens showed this problem quite clearly at certain distances and apertures.
Therefore when working with an H3D the AF drive is again offset by the correct +/- amount based on the working aperture selected on the camera.
So Ultra Focus begins in the first stage of manufacture and ends in the way the AF drive is implemented.
How's that?
Nick-T
-
How's that?
Nick-T
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=140498\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
How's that ?
That's clear !
Edmund
-
Howard, I'll be sure to input the GPS coordinates so you can tell exactly where I was when I was testing it.
Steve Hendrix
www.ppratlanta.com/digital.php
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=140468\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
This is the service I have come to appreciate from you, Steve.
Not so long ago, I could remember exactly where I had been. Not anymore. Last year, I was in Tuscany for 10 days driving and hiking all over these dirt back roads trying to keep track of where I was shooting with a handheld GPS, a little P&S digicam and a notebook. I am seriously impressed that Hasselblad has addressed this so well.
-
Deleted.
-
In another forum, someone proposed a great use of "live view" from the sensor itself for calibration of the main phase detection AF system of a DSLR. Essentially, use contrast detection analysis of the image from the sensor to focus slowly but very accurately on a test subject, and compare that to what the phase detection AF system is giving. Contrast detection can be extremely accurate, and since it is measuring from the final image received from the sensor, it is immune to any of the calibration problems of PD AF.
This CD AF could be implemented only for calibration purposes and thus it would not matter if the implementation operated quite slowly. But I would actually like to see CD AF added to DSLR's for the cases where focus accuracy (and zoomable live video preview for a more detailed and accurate preview than any optical VF can give) are more important than speed.
The bottom line is the image output by the sensor, so in many ways using that output should eventually lead to the ultimate in accuracy of focus, composition, exposure levels and so on. (If done right, it is a bit like like Polaroid proofs at 24 per second!)
-
Well I don't either so i asked a mate at 'blad and this is what he told me:
Part of the problem that was seen with adding digital backs to medium format bodies was an occasional discrepancy in focus calibration. Ie, the position where the photographer placed the focus (manually or otherwise) could then be seen to be different in the final image. The situation was worsened by capturing at maximum open apertures.
This could be cured by 'shimming' some digital backs (For example the Imacon Ixpress range) by the use of thin foils to bring the focus towards the correct position, albeit not always %100 accurately.
For many reasons accuracy of focus is much more critical on a CCD compared to film.
Therefore the first stage of Ultra Focus was to manufacture integrated units as 'one' as opposed to a production line of camera bodies and a line of digital units. Yes, the digital unit can be calibrated to a 'known' position but Hasselblad feels there is still an unacceptable tolerance with this method. Even a minimal difference in the thickness of the IR filter can change the focus position enough. (The optimum point of focus is on the surface of the IR filter, not on the CCD below).
Therefore the first stage of ultra focus was to assemble integrated DSLR's as 'one'. Therefore each camera was tested and calibrated as a single unit.
At the final stage the AF sensor in the H body can have an offset applied to be specifically calibrated to the digital unit. Therefore when working the camera in AF mode you can be assured of 100% focus accuracy. Equally using the camera in manual focus mode the AF sensor will also indicate when the subject is in perfect focus.
The next task to solve came with adjusting the AF depending on the working aperture used. Focussing is carried out with the lens (normally) fully open. Due to certain optical characteristics, the focus point can shift when the lens is stopped down to the working aperture. For example, the Zeiss CF 80mm lens showed this problem quite clearly at certain distances and apertures.
Therefore when working with an H3D the AF drive is again offset by the correct +/- amount based on the working aperture selected on the camera.
So Ultra Focus begins in the first stage of manufacture and ends in the way the AF drive is implemented.
How's that?
Nick-T
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=140498\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
That's nice, but what I really need from Hasselblad is an "Ultra Depth of Field" feature(i.e., a T/S lens or two).
-
Well I don't either so i asked a mate at 'blad and this is what he told me................
So Ultra Focus begins in the first stage of manufacture and ends in the way the AF drive is implemented.
How's that?
Nick-T
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=140498\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Highly rational and very good.
I have always been convinced that this is quite a big issue hence my like of the sinar shimming system (also on imacon)
But with no multipoint AF the whole thing goes out the window when you recompose the image which is bound to create focus errors - especially if your subject is moving and even a person standing 'still' moves
Am I not correct in thinking that the only photo I have ever seen where the subject was right in the middle was a picture of a test chart or my uncles pictures of the the christmas turkey
S
-
Highly rational and very good.
I have always been convinced that this is quite a big issue hence my like of the sinar shimming system (also on imacon)
But with no multipoint AF the whole thing goes out the window when you recompose the image which is bound to create focus errors - especially if your subject is moving and even a person standing 'still' moves
Am I not correct in thinking that the only photo I have ever seen where the subject was right in the middle was a picture of a test chart or my uncles pictures of the the christmas turkey
S
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=140537\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Cameras and lenses are just tools, like a hammer or a screwdriver, that we use to make images. We survey the tools that are available and select the ones best suited to the task. We can then focus on the capabilities the tool has and how to best utilize them for our purpose or curse the tool for not being able to do what it was never designed to do.
For many photographers and their applications, the "H" autofocus works very well. The Ultra-focus program is designed to make it even better. But if what I was shooting and the way I prefer to work made multi-point autofocus a critical requirement–then I would choose a different tool.
Is it possible to design and build a multi-point autofocus system in a medium-format camera? Of course it's possible. It is all a question of money. How much would it cost to design and then sub-contract the manufacture of necessary components, spread across a low volume product market over a reasonable time frame?
The reason you haven't seen this feature on any medium-format cameras is NOT because the various camera makers are too stupid to consider it–it has been simply cost prohibitive to do. Maybe this will change in the future. For now, we look at what our tools can do and pick the best one for the job.
-
a couple of things:
leaf has had a larger then 3" display for some time now....hey maybe even phase will have one with their next backs? who cares? i can judge my exposure from my crappy P30 screen....i don't shoot 30mpix to totally depend on and do my fine tuning on 2 or 3 or even 7" displays....a nice addition but this really should be a no brainer anyway....
there is a full line of schneider AF lenses available for the Hy6....about the same (or even more?) as the H system....
funny..i can "ultra focus" with my RZ every shot....i know what is "in focus", "acceptable focus" or simply "soft"....adding something to this range via marketing does not work for me....i have never had any problems getting "ultra focus" with my 6008 or with the RZ....i like the fact that i can leave all sharpening off in any software i work in...
ultra focus is not even close to what multi sensor AF would be....i am still amazed by claims of the "best DSLR" (according to hasselblad i assume?)...please forget a moment about your space technology billion dollar market changing 3" display and "ultra focus" and give us multi zone AF....
i still have to see in which way hasselblad provides in any way a better image then leaf, phase or sinar at the end of the day.....there are some great things about lens correction but in the end.....i don't see the advantage in print....no disadvantage either but no step up in any way.....so much for best dslr.....
-
Cameras and lenses are just tools, like a hammer or a screwdriver, that we use to make images. We survey the tools that are available and select the ones best suited to the task. We can then focus on the capabilities the tool has and how to best utilize them for our purpose or curse the tool for not being able to do what it was never designed to do.
For many photographers and their applications, the "H" autofocus works very well. The Ultra-focus program is designed to make it even better. But if what I was shooting and the way I prefer to work made multi-point autofocus a critical requirement–then I would choose a different tool.
Is it possible to design and build a multi-point autofocus system in a medium-format camera? Of course it's possible. It is all a question of money. How much would it cost to design and then sub-contract the manufacture of necessary components, spread across a low volume product market over a reasonable time frame?
The reason you haven't seen this feature on any medium-format cameras is NOT because the various camera makers are too stupid to consider it–it has been simply cost prohibitive to do. Maybe this will change in the future. For now, we look at what our tools can do and pick the best one for the job.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=140561\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
We will obviously have to agree to disagree.
You talk absolute sense.
However
-I believe since blad started describing thier camera as a DSLR they kind of defined their 'mission' with this camera as a fast useable handheld device - something it is NOT (I would never slag a sinar P2 for not having AF)
- ths is a web forum proably read by the makers - so in some way acts as a feature requirement board - I am vocal about what I want.
-the forum is read by potential buyers who can quickly realise whether a tool has what they need from the comments of existing users
-the forum is a forum so dont take me too serious
-In terms of stupidity - I dont know - I think stupidity would be a gross accusation however I think they could be accused of cultural lag - The H1 was realeased at a time when MF digital backs where all tethered to a computer and operated at about 50ISO -studio tools - time has moved forward - wire free 400ISO backs mean a brave new world of portability, compact camera have face recognition AF now, the cost of microprocessing is probably 1/10th of when the H1 was concieved - roll on the H4
-
please forget a moment about your space technology billion dollar market changing 3" display and "ultra focus" and give us multi zone AF....
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=140605\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
-
a couple of things:
leaf has had a larger then 3" display for some time now....hey maybe even phase will have one with their next backs? who cares? i can judge my exposure from my crappy P30 screen....i don't shoot 30mpix to totally depend on and do my fine tuning on 2 or 3 or even 7" displays....a nice addition but this really should be a no brainer anyway....
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=140605\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
The Leaf Aptus is a fine product. I think all of the digital backs on the market are fine products–each with their own advantages and disadvantages. The screen is large, but the LCD they use has a narrow viewing angle compared to newer generation screens and, so the brightness falls off very quickly. Also, though the screen is large, the resolution is lower than the latest 3" LCD screens.
Hasselblad skipped that generation of LCD panel in the CF back series and H3D and used OLED technology instead. The screen is smaller, but there is an incredible viewing angle with no loss of brightness. Now that the LCD screens have imprroved, we can look forward to a bigger and better preview experience.
I'm glad that you "don't shoot 30mpix to totally depend on and do my fine tuning on 2 or 3 or even 7" displays". That's a wise choice. Then again, I don't know anyone that does that. It's just a preview/menu screen, but a better screen doesn't really do any harm either.
-
there is a full line of schneider AF lenses available for the Hy6....about the same (or even more?) as the H system....
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a] (http://index.php?act=findpost&pid=140605\")
Really?? Where?? I know of a 50mm, 80mm, 150mm, 180mm and 60-140mm zoom. They're listed in the 6008AF brochure. [a href=\"http://www.franke-heidecke.net/files/images/6008AF_i2_Salesguide_A.pdf]Rollei 6008AF PDF[/url]
Hy6 literature that I've seen never mention any lenses.
The "H" line is 35mm, 50mm, 80mm, 100mm, 120mm macro, 150mm, 210mm, 300mm, 50-110mm zoom and 1.7x converter–plus the 28mm for the H3D/H3D-II.
I must be missing something. I'd like to look at the rest of the autofocus Hy6 lens line, if you'd be kind enough to point me towards them.
-
funny..i can "ultra focus" with my RZ every shot....i know what is "in focus", "acceptable focus" or simply "soft"....adding something to this range via marketing does not work for me....i have never had any problems getting "ultra focus" with my 6008 or with the RZ....i like the fact that i can leave all sharpening off in any software i work in...
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=140605\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
When they can figure out a way of getting you inside all of our cameras–it will be nothing but bright sunshiney days for all of us. Until then, the rest of us will just have to hope for continued efforts by all of the camera makers to improve on the technology as best they are able within the limits of financial viability and constraints.
I congratulate you on your focusing skills!
-
Talking about the Hy6, has it Deep6-ed?
-
ultra focus is not even close to what multi sensor AF would be....i am still amazed by claims of the "best DSLR" (according to hasselblad i assume?)...please forget a moment about your space technology billion dollar market changing 3" display and "ultra focus" and give us multi zone AF....
i still have to see in which way hasselblad provides in any way a better image then leaf, phase or sinar at the end of the day.....there are some great things about lens correction but in the end.....i don't see the advantage in print....no disadvantage either but no step up in any way.....so much for best dslr.....
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=140605\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Nothing that I can add to that. You sure told them!
Now I guess Hasselblad will have to shrink away in shame or go back to designing and building the best products they can with the resources available–which will please some, not please others and leave a few really upset.
-
We will obviously have to agree to disagree.
You talk absolute sense.
However
-I believe since blad started describing thier camera as a DSLR they kind of defined their 'mission' with this camera as a fast useable handheld device - something it is NOT (I would never slag a sinar P2 for not having AF)
- ths is a web forum proably read by the makers - so in some way acts as a feature requirement board - I am vocal about what I want.
-the forum is read by potential buyers who can quickly realise whether a tool has what they need from the comments of existing users
-the forum is a forum so dont take me too serious
-In terms of stupidity - I dont know - I think stupidity would be a gross accusation however I think they could be accused of cultural lag - The H1 was realeased at a time when MF digital backs where all tethered to a computer and operated at about 50ISO -studio tools - time has moved forward - wire free 400ISO backs mean a brave new world of portability, compact camera have face recognition AF now, the cost of microprocessing is probably 1/10th of when the H1 was concieved - roll on the H4
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=140606\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Product design is, among many considerations, also a business decision. What the cost would be to develop and manufacture anyone's particular feature set in their dream camera, I have no way of knowing. If anyone can tell me what the cost would be for Hasselblad to add multi-point autofocus and how much return on the investment would be recovered and how quickly–it would be very interesting to know. Idle speculation about how viable that would be won't get us anywhere–money would. Perhaps someone with a lot of cash would like to offer to finance a prototype. I can't–sorry!
And I'm happy to agree to disagree and not take any of this too seriously. It's just a discussion about tools and technology for imaging, so I'm really not emotionally involved.
I don't have a problem with any manufacturer's decisions about their products. They make decisions based on a host of factors that I have no way of knowing about. I save my emotional energy for more important stuff. But it is fun to talk about.
-
Its now on the web with more info on the softare...
http://www.hasselblad.com/promotions/h3d-ii.aspx (http://www.hasselblad.com/promotions/h3d-ii.aspx)
Jo S.x
-
I see Phocus (new tool) can process 3FR files of previous generations (this also does imply 3FR files are different for the II).
That is nice. Still would like to know when the software is available, the camera is mentioned to be available right away.
Also whether it can be used with CF backs, if it carries a new firmware with added or improved capabilities as well (and which naturally).
-
Now I don't normally reply on the MF board but I do my fair share of lurking... I must say TechTalk, you come across as disingenuous. It's almost as if your being paid by HasselBlad to take up for them. I have never seen a poster/photographer take up for a maker with as much zest as you have. Your subtle/not-so-subtle attacks on those who disagree with your idolation is bringing the level of quality discussion down a notch.
Which is rather disheartening for us peeking over the MFDB fence. I think we all want the best out of our equipment and as such take time out of our schedules to congregate on these types of forums.
That said, guys keep up the conversation, as I will now recuse myself from this particular debate.
-
Maybe Hasselblad could license the AF system from Canon...
-
Now I don't normally reply on the MF board but I do my fair share of lurking... I must say TechTalk, you come across as disingenuous. It's almost as if your being paid by HasselBlad to take up for them. I have never seen a poster/photographer take up for a maker with as much zest as you have. Your subtle/not-so-subtle attacks on those who disagree with your idolation is bringing the level of quality discussion down a notch.
Which is rather disheartening for us peeking over the MFDB fence. I think we all want the best out of our equipment and as such take time out of our schedules to congregate on these types of forums.
That said, guys keep up the conversation, as I will now recuse myself from this particular debate.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=140766\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I'm sorry that you feel that way. I don't feel that any tools that we use to take images are worthy of being idolized or demonized. They're just tools and should be compared and discussed for their relative advantages and disadvantages in a fair, accurate and honest way. I admire Leaf, Phase One, Sinar, Rollei, Mamiya, Hasselblad and many other manufacturers for trying hard to give us a wide variety of tools to choose from and advance the technology that we use.
That said, I have seen Hasselblad as a company attacked with a good deal of contempt by some. If it were another brand or product being treated this way, I'd be happy to try to share my perspective on the relative merits of what I believe they are trying to achieve with their products and what the technological or business limitations are they face.
I have no problem with constructive criticism of products or their parent company. But the assumption by some that Hasselblad is a company run by people that don't care about the industry they're in, churning out second-rate products and attempting to deceive the buying public is in my opinion false and worth countering. If you think that I'm exaggerating the degree of hostlity displayed by some, I respect your right to that opinion. I'd be happy to counter similar attitudes toward any other company in this position.
I hope that we see in the future all kinds of new features and improvements from all of the current suppliers and new companies as well. I'll look forward to seeing what deveolps and not display any dismissive contempt for their efforts. A company or product that fails to do what I think they should in one area doesn't diminsh their efforts in every other area.
Hey, I love photography. I'd just like to see more light and less heat when discussing it.
-
Maybe Hasselblad could license the AF system from Canon...
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=140772\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
A great suggestion! It makes sense to buy existing components from a mass market product and apply that to low volume products. It makes economic sense.
The one limitation might be that the image area is so much larger in medium-format system. This might give you an array of multi-points, but all near the center of the field.
Still–it's a constructive idea to build on.
-
Maybe Hasselblad could license the AF system from Canon...
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=140772\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
No no no please not! Multiple focus points YES please, but the accuracy of the AF (H3D-31) blows me off every time when I come home and process my files. And recomposing is no longer a problem! Ever. I don't know how they do it or whats the case with other MF systems, but Canon AF (5D and 1Dsmk2) are soo unimpressive in comparison when it comes to actually checking the files and see if the focus is where I locked it. Im I really the only one who have lots of out of focus shots (among the tic-sharp ones yes ofcourse) after a days Canon/35mm shooting? Maybe I need to calibrate my whole system, it hits me now and then.... But when do I have the time to stay without all my 35mm gear for like a week or three ..?
I hate the slowness (that is: compared to the fast Canon AF) in the H3D when focusing, but when it's locked - it damn is there!
// Patrik
-
Just as an information:
Sinar s using the OLED technology for the eMotion since the begining (2 years).
Thierry
Hasselblad skipped that generation of LCD panel in the CF back series and H3D and used OLED technology instead.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=140615\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
-
That said, I have seen Hasselblad as a company attacked with a good deal of contempt by some. [a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=140789\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Well blad hinted at thier wide lense and then made it not available to sinar leaf or phase owners who had a big 'cross system investment'
At the same time on thier website they had a great speil about backward compatitbility
So we felt conned by that
Then they annouced a full frame camera - it turned out to be that they had shrunk the camera to fit 1.1 chips
We felt confused by that
One has to wonder who has contempt for who?
Like thier current claim - "the Best DSLR" - b*llocks - it a good slr in certain conditions (about 20% of conditions that DSLRs are regularly used in?)
Mainly it is thier information and language rather than thier products that annoys people.
Anyway IMO the H system - even with an indy back - is still the best MF solution
S
-
That's excatly the point!
Thierry
The one limitation might be that the image area is so much larger in medium-format system. This might give you an array of multi-points, but all near the center of the field.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=140798\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
-
Maybe Hasselblad could license the AF system from Canon...
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=140772\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
If I recall correctly, Minolta was/is involved in the H system for auto-focus technology. But as someone else has suggested, maybe anything except the center point requires more expensive upscaling of components.
[Editted] The Pentax 645N AF had three point AF at least; still less than what Pentax was doing in 35mm format SLR's I believe.
Do we want Pentax back in DMF for "200% more AF points"?
-
If I recall correctly, Minolta was/is involved in the H system for auto-focus technology.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=140881\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
You are correct it is a minolta AF unit. Canon or Nikon are not about to license their systems to Hasselblad and in any case the AF points are way to close together. I have suggested to Hasselblad that they put two "35mm" Af units in there to get a good spread and just de-activate half of them..
Nick-T
-
That's excatly the point!
Thierry
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=140828\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
The difference between 24x36 and 48x36 is not that big. I would settle for the Nikon or Canon AF points anyday even if it means that the sensors are more oriented towards the center. It'll be an improvement over the single point, indeed provided it is accurate. I have never had problems with my D200 and that hasn't got the most advanced AF system currently available.
Minolta is known for their antiquated slow AF. Why wouldn't Nikon license their AF technology to Hasselblad? They have also licensed the technology for their number one money-maker to Fuji (D200 to S5). The S5 is even a direct competitor for Nikons own D200.
-
I would settle for the Nikon or Canon AF points [a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=140902\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I disagree they need to be well spread - but five points will do
I always thought nikons were not wide enough even for thier own tiny chip until the D200 and D2X - they are OK now
Surely Blad could just use the thingy they have - even three times would help
But I am convinced the future is a pelicle mirror and analysis of live view leading to at least 22 million different focus points
Man they could just drill a few small holes in the mirror (say 50) and read the DATA hitting the chip
Ok the view would look a bit wierd but it would be a useable tool
S
-
Sure that would be ideal if they can make a spread of some (5 is enough to start) cross sensors.
I am talking about having either one center or a layout according to the Nikon/Canon (FF) spread because developing a proprietary MF multipoint AF would be too costly. In that case I still opt for the latter.
-
I played with the new H3D II today and asked the CEO of Hasselblad the very question about having only one focus zone. I was told the reason is licensing. They are trying to get licensing for the technology with very little luck. I have to say it might be a closed system but the new back and camera is very impressive.
I shot with the Leaf back and wanted to look into the Hassleblad, but the software only corrects lens falloff with the H camera not on a cambo wide. I am going to stay with what I have, but would really think about the switch if the software had the functiions I need.
You are correct it is a minolta AF unit. Canon or Nikon are not about to license their systems to Hasselblad and in any case the AF points are way to close together. I have suggested to Hasselblad that they put two "35mm" Af units in there to get a good spread and just de-activate half of them..
Nick-T
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=140886\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
-
Now that sounds weird to me. Fuji (effectively the builder of a large part of the H series I thought) has been able to license AF technology from Nikon (amongst others) for a product that is a direct contender with Nikons product.
They would not be able to license part of this technology for a product in a market segment that Nikon is appearing to stay away from?
Sure, I can't tell what everybodies agenda is, it just strikes me as odd.
BTW, I have not yet looked at that very closely because with my system it is less relevant however I thought there is the possibility of custom white shading in Flexcolor. This should perform the same function as the Leaf Custom Gain. That would mean you can also correct lens fall off of non-HC lenses but you have to do a bit more work. Sure people with more knowledge about this can correct me in this?
-
I can only quote what I was told about the licensing.
Now that sounds weird to me. Fuji (effectively the builder of a large part of the H series I thought) has been able to license AF technology from Nikon (amongst others) for a product that is a direct contender with Nikons product.
They would not be able to license part of this technology for a product in a market segment that Nikon is appearing to stay away from?
Sure, I can't tell what everybodies agenda is, it just strikes me as odd.
BTW, I have not yet looked at that very closely because with my system it is less relevant however I thought there is the possibility of custom white shading in Flexcolor. This should perform the same function as the Leaf Custom Gain. That would mean you can also correct lens fall off of non-HC lenses but you have to do a bit more work. Sure people with more knowledge about this can correct me in this?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=140912\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
-
Now I don't normally reply on the MF board but I do my fair share of lurking... I must say TechTalk, you come across as disingenuous. It's almost as if your being paid by HasselBlad to take up for them. I have never seen a poster/photographer take up for a maker with as much zest as you have. Your subtle/not-so-subtle attacks on those who disagree with your idolation is bringing the level of quality discussion down a notch.
Which is rather disheartening for us peeking over the MFDB fence. I think we all want the best out of our equipment and as such take time out of our schedules to congregate on these types of forums.
That said, guys keep up the conversation, as I will now recuse myself from this particular debate.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=140766\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I think he was responding to one particular person, rather than "pushing" Hasselblad. I won't name the person but he's pretty easy to spot. Simply look at almost any post about Hasselblad and he's there, almost the next post, saying something negative. Seems like a personal crusade by that guy rather than objective/constructive criticism. I must admit, it annoys me a lot too.
I'm all for having a go at manufacturers when they deserve it, in fact I had a go at H myself when they messed up a demo for me of the H3D, was about to buy with the cash arranged but was so annoyed I "politely declined". Posted here and got a huge, positive response and I know H were aware of it. Serves them right and hopefully they will tighten up in that area.
But IMO Hasselblad are trying, within the constraints of a narrow user base and high material costs, to be innovative. Their distortion correction software actually works, every time. Flexcolor, although its GUI is awful, also works well and has many good features. H were the first (I think) with a 28mm lens for MFDB and it's a good lens. They also seem to be responsive to user requests - unlike Phase. Michael was annoyed when they went for the closed system - I would have been too - but if they only do that once, and if the benefits are tangible, then maybe that's just about ok. Do it a second time and I imagine that would be curtains, deservedly so.
I'm not a Hasselblad owner though I might be fairly soon. Equally, I might go the Mamiya/Phase, or some other route. Because I'm still fence-sitting I also enjoy the conversation and hope they continue but I also hope personal crusades, for whatever product, are seen to be that and dismissed as worthless.
-
I think he was responding to one particular person, rather than "pushing" Hasselblad. I won't name the person but he's pretty easy to spot. Simply look at almost any post about Hasselblad and he's there, almost the next post, saying something negative. Seems like a personal crusade by that guy rather than objective/constructive criticism. I must admit, it annoys me a lot too.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=140917\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Who could that be ?
- you can choose to ignore a users posts.
I am pretty harsh on all the MF systems
At least I dont hide behind a anonmyouse cloak. I also have owned both Mamiaya and own an H and shoot a lot of pictures in varied situations because tha magazine I shoot for uses my for everything from horse racing to food so I think I have reasonble user experience
I also use Nikon and work in close co-operation with Canon shooters
In nailing on about the H AF and it has brought some quite interesting info to light IMO about the licensing situation
All the (MF) cameras I have to do battle with but unfortuanately the results are worth it because the images are so cool
I dont think there is anything wrong in teasing companies whos cameras have screens worse than $100 phones, worse AF than $200 P+S cameras and costs higher than decent cars
I am also baffled by the priotiies of camera makers; I never use..
TTL flash
Prgram Metering
etc
I do use
AF
high flash synch (which rules out mamiya nikon and canon)
wide lenses (which rules out rolei/hy6 at the mo)
And desire lens movements
Blad is two steps away from a great camera IMO and currently the best of the bunch
S
-
Who could that be ?
All the (MF) cameras I have to do battle with but unfortuanately the results are worth it because the images are so cool
I dont think there is anything wrong in teasing companies whos cameras have screens worse than $100 phones, worse AF than $200 P+S cameras and costs higher than decent cars
I am also baffled by the priotiies of camera makers; I never use..
TTL flash
Prgram Metering
etc
I do use
AF
high flash synch (which rules out mamiya nikon and canon)
wide lenses (which rules out rolei/hy6 at the mo)
And desire lens movements
Blad is two steps away from a great camera IMO and currently the best of the bunch
S
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=140922\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Well, Sam, it wasn't you! I always enjoy reading your posts. They're beautifully succinct, contain relevant points and I reckon at times they're downright eloquent!
And yes, we should complain about any camera maker who doesn't give us what we want. What else are they here for? I, probably like many of the people who use this great forum, have owned just about every system over the last 20 or so years: I started to list them but then realised I must look like a bit of an equipment nerd. And not only did I own each system, but changed them regularly, often going round in circles. Like, over time, 3 Mamiya RB systems, 2 RZ's, two H's, 3 Rollei's, couple of Bronicas... not to mention 35mm systems. What's all that about! How did I ever find time to take photos? Point is, I kept changing because for me there was always something that suited me a little better on the next system. And then something worthg going back to. The other point I want to make here is that I simply can't afford to do that anymore. I have hesitated more about my next MFD system than just about any other decision I have had to make - including buying houses, cars and asking women to marry me. (Yes, sadly, plural.)
But to keep changing MFD systems would bankrupt me, no question. So this forum, the people on it with their experience of good and bad aspects of whatever, is helping save my business. Which is another reason I don't want some person out for revenge clouding the view.
-
Well, Sam, it wasn't you! I always enjoy reading your posts. They're beautifully succinct, contain relevant points and I reckon at times they're downright eloquent!
And yes, we should complain about any camera maker who doesn't give us what we want. What else are they here for? I, probably like many of the people who use this great forum, have owned just about every system over the last 20 or so years: I started to list them but then realised I must look like a bit of an equipment nerd. And not only did I own each system, but changed them regularly, often going round in circles. Like, over time, 3 Mamiya RB systems, 2 RZ's, two H's, 3 Rollei's, couple of Bronicas... not to mention 35mm systems. What's all that about! How did I ever find time to take photos? Point is, I kept changing because for me there was always something that suited me a little better on the next system. And then something worthg going back to. The other point I want to make here is that I simply can't afford to do that anymore. I have hesitated more about my next MFD system than just about any other decision I have had to make - including buying houses, cars and asking women to marry me. (Yes, sadly, plural.)
But to keep changing MFD systems would bankrupt me, no question. So this forum, the people on it with their experience of good and bad aspects of whatever, is helping save my business. Which is another reason I don't want some person out for revenge clouding the view.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=140931\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Well like you, I'm hesitating and on the brink of buying a MFDB so I am always reading this part of the forum. Like you I've used most systems over the last twenty years and can tell you that a camera is a lot easier and cheaper to get rid of than an ex-wife !!!
Seriously though, I only give credence to any of the posters here, for and against any product, if they don't hide behind an alias. Lets see posters nail their colours to the mast by posting their web address or work samples to back up their accusations or praises. As a long time Hasselblad user I'm afraid the H system is one of those things that you either love or hate. I personally don't like it and I've really tried to find something in it to admire. I much prefer Zeiss lenses not the Fuji versions. For me resolution is only one part of the reason to use a lens not the deciding factor.
This is a great forum where people should give their opinions, that's what it's for. As long as we know where the posters are coming from.
My two cents.
Barrie Watts
-
I can only quote what I was told about the licensing.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=140916\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Sure, I understand.
-
Really?? Where?? I know of a 50mm, 80mm, 150mm, 180mm and 60-140mm zoom. They're listed in the 6008AF brochure. Rollei 6008AF PDF (http://www.franke-heidecke.net/files/images/6008AF_i2_Salesguide_A.pdf)
Hy6 literature that I've seen never mention any lenses.
I must be missing something. I'd like to look at the rest of the autofocus Hy6 lens line, if you'd be kind enough to point me towards them.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=140620\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
The Hy6 will take any lens, AF or MF, that works with the 6008AF. The lens mount is not new. Schneider is bringing out a range of improved AF 'digital' lenses too. Hard to imagine they will be much better than the existing models.
-
The new H3D was introduced yesterday at the Hasselblad Pro Tour in Santa Monica (L.A.). Very impressive ideas for using the GPS metadata with Google Earth. And the new 3 inch screen is very impressive.
Also there will be new RAW software now called "Phocus which was also demo'd.
-
Now I don't normally reply on the MF board but I do my fair share of lurking... I must say TechTalk, you come across as disingenuous. It's almost as if your being paid by HasselBlad to take up for them. I have never seen a poster/photographer take up for a maker with as much zest as you have. Your subtle/not-so-subtle attacks on those who disagree with your idolation is bringing the level of quality discussion down a notch.
Which is rather disheartening for us peeking over the MFDB fence. I think we all want the best out of our equipment and as such take time out of our schedules to congregate on these types of forums.
That said, guys keep up the conversation, as I will now recuse myself from this particular debate.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=140766\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I completely disagree. I think the guy, whoever he is, has been rational, balanced and FACTUAL in his comments. I don't see it as a defense of Hasselblad. He just rejects "opinions" about Hasselblad and its products that are rants disguised as factual observations and is calling out those who do it. In all candor, I think what is troubling you is that it is Hasselblad for whom he is setting the record straight. I am sure you have lots of company.
-
I think he was responding to one particular person, rather than "pushing" Hasselblad. I won't name the person but he's pretty easy to spot. Simply look at almost any post about Hasselblad and he's there, almost the next post, saying something negative. Seems like a personal crusade by that guy rather than objective/constructive criticism. I must admit, it annoys me a lot too.
I'm all for having a go at manufacturers when they deserve it, in fact I had a go at H myself when they messed up a demo for me of the H3D, was about to buy with the cash arranged but was so annoyed I "politely declined". Posted here and got a huge, positive response and I know H were aware of it. Serves them right and hopefully they will tighten up in that area.
But IMO Hasselblad are trying, within the constraints of a narrow user base and high material costs, to be innovative. Their distortion correction software actually works, every time. Flexcolor, although its GUI is awful, also works well and has many good features. H were the first (I think) with a 28mm lens for MFDB and it's a good lens. They also seem to be responsive to user requests - unlike Phase. Michael was annoyed when they went for the closed system - I would have been too - but if they only do that once, and if the benefits are tangible, then maybe that's just about ok. Do it a second time and I imagine that would be curtains, deservedly so.
I'm not a Hasselblad owner though I might be fairly soon. Equally, I might go the Mamiya/Phase, or some other route. Because I'm still fence-sitting I also enjoy the conversation and hope they continue but I also hope personal crusades, for whatever product, are seen to be that and dismissed as worthless.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=0\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
i am just assuming he was referring to me....
i don not have a personal crusade against hasselblad...i have owned and used my fair share of their product and i am sharing my opinions....
just like i don't have any stake in praising systems i like and like to work with at this moment....this is a forum for sharing experiences and opinions and i am sharing mine....
i have my name, website, even phone number next to my posts....and i have been attacked much more viciously here because of my opinions then i would attack one brand or another...we all have different ways of shooting and we all work differently....
one of the regulars here just posted that he is giving up DMF for DSLR...good for him...less weight to carry, much less hassle....and working AF.....
i just sold my M645 and use the RZ exclusively now, because that is what i like and that is how i work....personal opinion....
someone coming here and making his first posts under "techtalk" praising the latest hasselblad and going on to take the time to defend "ultra focus" seems to me like reading a brochure that sells you the "best dslr"...take it with a grain of salt....we are all sharing opinions and if you read mine, check out my work, and you can look at that opinion with that information and base your own opinion on that.....
-
I must be missing something here, Paul, but didn't you just form an opinion albeit negative by reading the same brochure? It certainly did not stop you from venturing an opinion seeing that you have not even handled it yet. So why take techtalk to task?
Just as you questioned how techtalk knew it to be 'good', how do you know that it is 'bad'? How can anybody venture an opinion on something that he has not handled?
Remember: Rational, Balanced, FACTUAL. If you cannot be all that, may I humbly suggest it is best not to venture anything.
-
I completely disagree. I think the guy, whoever he is, has been rational, balanced and FACTUAL in his comments. I don't see it as a defense of Hasselblad. He just rejects "opinions" about Hasselblad and its products that are rants disguised as factual observations and is calling out those who do it. In all candor, I think what is troubling you is that it is Hasselblad for whom he is setting the record straight. I am sure you have lots of company.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=140977\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I think people are getting rants mixed up with strong opinions. How can we know if people are giving us the facts when they hide behind an alias. Hasselblad themselves should come out of the closet and rebut any criticisms of their products or actions. Thierry and Yair do this on a regular basis on this forum for Sinar and Leaf, and win a great deal of admiration from me for taking much flak from all and sundry on occasions.
Once again I personally would much prefer to hear the strong opinion from a working pro at the top of his game. These guys shoot with this gear day in and day out. They are the ones that know if it functions as it should, as we are told it does when we buy the stuff in the first place.
Barrie Watts
-
I think people are getting rants mixed up with strong opinions. How can we know if people are giving us the facts when they hide behind an alias. Hasselblad themselves should come out of the closet and rebut any criticisms of their products or actions. Thierry and Yair do this on a regular basis on this forum for Sinar and Leaf, and win a great deal of admiration from me for taking much flak from all and sundry on occasions.
Once again I personally would much prefer to hear the strong opinion from a working pro at the top of his game. These guys shoot with this gear day in and day out. They are the ones that know if it functions as it should, as we are told it does when we buy the stuff in the first place.
Barrie Watts
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=141018\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Please, it's not that difficult to differentiate between a strong opinion and a rant. How about describing "Ultra-Focus" as pure marketing BS when you haven't spent 5 seconds to understand it and assess the merits of the concept on any sort of objective basis. I am not a mechanical engineer and had no idea what it was all about till Nick T explained it. If one take's the time to understand something and truly test out it's validity, or at least question its validity on some sort of objective basis, fine. You want to question whether the Digital APO Correction in Flexcolor is effective or marketing BS, good, go test it with the Hassy 28mm lens and let me know. While you are at it, please test the Mamiya 28mm lens and see how it compares at almost twice the price. OTOH, lobbing in gratuitous, sniping comments in a thread about the new features in the H3D-II is out-of-place and does not add one cent to the advancement of our collective knowledge. That it is coming from a working pro who has useful views about those things he does work with on a regular basis is no defense.
-
When Hasselblad realized they couldn't get a full frame sensor they decided to change the rules and came up with a new viewfinder. Wonderfull idea. It's like putting 20 inch alloys on a ride to make it into a much better car. Thus the slogan World's best DSLR.
Digital backs are professional product not iPods, and they need their serious marketing. But maybe we forumists are all wrong. We are obviously rather enlightened users not to buy into Hassie marketing bs. But maybe others aren't. Maybe most of their clients really believe what they say, meaning it's not so sure everybody nows how big the sensors are or even care. This makes me wondering that maybe the UltraFocus is their 22 inch alloys. It makes H3D2 look so much cooler. UltraFocus sounds so utterly cool that it makes me think of things like ultra clean... Tide!
But I do hope that Phase One wont enter the feature war. So do I hope for Sinar. The best thing in my Phase One P45+ is it's useability. It's UltraSimple design is amazing and the back works day in day out. Just a super tool for me. I don't care for bells and whistles all I need is simple userface both from camera and software and reliability. This ofcourse does not mean any other brand is not reliable.
Maybe the true innovation is to understand the user. Maybe they all understand their users thus giving us so many choices. But I must say that when Hassie pulled the rug underneath many of their H1 clients that was a nasty thing. Ofcourse H2 will be around and will work for years like Contax does but to close users out from future development who have invested in their expensive system is absolutely discusting.
Patrik
-
Hasselblad ... came up with a new viewfinder. Wonderfull idea. It's like putting 20 inch alloys on a ride to make it into a much better car.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=141035\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
No, it doing what every decent DSLR does: making the best use possible of the VF image size by not having irrelevant stuff around the edges that does not get recorded by the camera. As a result, the size of the relevant image is larger that of the corresponding crop within the VF that one has to deal with on every other DMF option except the Mamiya ZD.
Remember, the VF magnification is higher in the 48x36 VF than the 645 VF, to give the same total image size; it is not just masking off the rest of the frame.
-
Please, it's not that difficult to differentiate between a strong opinion and a rant. How about describing "Ultra-Focus" as pure marketing BS when you haven't spent 5 seconds to understand it and assess the merits of the concept on any sort of objective basis. I am not a mechanical engineer and had no idea what it was all about till Nick T explained it. If one take's the time to understand something and truly test out it's validity, or at least question its validity on some sort of objective basis, fine. You want to question whether the Digital APO Correction in Flexcolor is effective or marketing BS, good, go test it with the Hassy 28mm lens and let me know. While you are at it, please test the Mamiya 28mm lens and see how it compares at almost twice the price. OTOH, lobbing in gratuitous, sniping comments in a thread about the new features in the H3D-II is out-of-place and does not add one cent to the advancement of our collective knowledge. That it is coming from a working pro who has useful views about those things he does work with on a regular basis is no defense.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=141031\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Well it's his opinion and he's entitled to it. I personally want to hear the good and the bad so I can make an informed decision. At least he doesn't hide behind an alias!
Barrie Watts
-
I must be missing something here, Paul, but didn't you just form an opinion albeit negative by reading the same brochure? It certainly did not stop you from venturing an opinion seeing that you have not even handled it yet. So why take techtalk to task?
Just as you questioned how techtalk knew it to be 'good', how do you know that it is 'bad'? How can anybody venture an opinion on something that he has not handled?
Remember: Rational, Balanced, FACTUAL. If you cannot be all that, may I humbly suggest it is best not to venture anything.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=0\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
i am not venting about how good or bad the H3DII is, i am venting about hasselblad's marketing.....
someone here compared this to apple/ipod marketing....which really shows what's wrong with it....this is a 30000$, highly specialized tool, which has to turn to ipod style mass marketing tricks.....i find that very sad....
i have said it before....there is a lot of good in the H system, there is a lot of innovation...i don't need to have that coated in marketing hogwash to understand it...i prefer a different brand (for many reasons) and that most of the applaudable features are lost on me (because i do not need a corrected 28mm)......
the H3DII has shown up all over the web and it seems to be that very wealthy amateurs are the likeliest market for it....and for that crowd you need "ultra focus".....
as far as facts go: we have all been through this....the H3 is not full frame, the H3DII is not the first 3" DMFback, also not the first OLED..no matter what mr.techtalk says....
i would never say that the phase P30 is the best back out there....it might be the best FOR ME, but others look for different things....so if some company keeps calling their product the "best DSLR" it pisses me off.....
especially when (FACT) there is no way to prove that it is.....the FACT is that no test has in any way shown that any of the available backs have any serious advantages over a competitor.....different features, higher asa,...blablabla...but in the end it is a very personal choice....
i find it absolutely amazing that anytime i (or someone else) comes here to say anything negative about hasselblad, there is a whole army unleashed to defend....a COMPANY! for christ's sake this is nuts....
people go on and on about all kinds of products but forwhatever reason this seems like a mac vs PC issue......
i don't DEFEND mamiya if someone says that the RZ is heavy, old, outdated and a joke....it works for me....people write that the M645 is plastic and a toy....fine with me...phase sucks...but oh boy don't say anything against hasselblad.....because after years they came out with a SOFTWARE SOLUTION for mirror slap.....
i talked to a mamiya techguy...they are planning a software solution to make the RZ half the weight.....i can't wait....
-
So it seems you have a problem with the copywriter. Why turn it into a Hasselblad bash-fest?
I hope for your sake that you're not an advertising or commercial photographer. God help us. You must have a moral stance against Photoshop. Make-up artists? Who needs them? We want real looking mugs. No flashes, no artificial lights. In fact, sell your cameras, Paul, because, don't you know it, photography is one big lie.
I do not defend Hasselblad. I don't shill for the company. The trouble is not with criticising Hasselblad per se. It is criticising Hasselblad in an unfair, irrational, imbalanced manner without relying on an iota of facts.
Unless you are willing to stand up to the same scrutiny of being factual in your opinions and criticisms, you have no right imposing the same standard on Hasselblad or rather, its copywriter.
You have not answered my question about how you could possibly form a negative opinion about the H3D-II that you have not handled before. Or is that opinion based on copywriting that pissed you off? So much for facts, huh?
As for the whole army of Hasselblad 'defenders', honestly, I don't see any here. Tell me who they are and how they have 'defended' Hasselblad.
You seem to think it is all right to make irresponsible diatribes. If you have such high regard for facts, you wouldn't be saying the things that you did.
If you wish to jump on Hasselblad, good form dictates that you at least wait till the camera is available before slagging it. I would do the same for the Hy6 too.
-
Why wouldn't Nikon license their AF technology to Hasselblad? They have also licensed the technology for their number one money-maker to Fuji (D200 to S5). The S5 is even a direct competitor for Nikons own D200.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=140902\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Nikon does not license in that case; it sells bodies or components to Fuji.
And Fuji DSLR uses use Nikon (mount) lenses, whereas the H system used Fuji lenses! So Nikon effectively keeps both the body and the lens sales, with the main difference being some sensor sales moving from Sony to Fuji. If the alternative was Fuji going to another lens mount, Nikon is better off this way. (Maybe Fuji joined the Fourth Thirds consortium as a threat to leave Nikon mount, and negotiate better access to Nikon body components.)
-
i am not venting about how good or bad the H3DII is, i am venting about hasselblad's marketing.....
someone here compared this to apple/ipod marketing....which really shows what's wrong with it....this is a 30000$, highly specialized tool, which has to turn to ipod style mass marketing tricks.....i find that very sad....
i find it absolutely amazing that anytime i (or someone else) comes here to say anything negative about hasselblad, there is a whole army unleashed to defend....a COMPANY! for christ's sake this is nuts....
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=141047\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
The hypocrisy displayed here is just overwhelming. Please go the Phase One web page for P45+ backs and look at ITS marketing BS about "Opticolor" and "X-Pose Technology".
Is there anything to it? Who knows. But point me to one, one reference here to anyone who called Phase on the carpet about its gimmicky marketing slogans. A patent double standard.
Are people jumping in to "defend" Hasselblad? Hell no. They are jumping in because they want to have an intelligent, constructive exchange about the new features of the H3D-II. They also are put off by someone implicitly suggesting they are fools for buying Hasselblad digital products on the basis of empty advertising slogans.
-
Buying anything solely on the basis of marketing hype is kind of like marrying a woman based solely on her breast size. There's a certain wisdom in getting to know the actual product before making a long-term (and expensive) commitment.
-
Hasselblad marketing works. Yesterday I visited a Hasselblad/Alpa dealer and met a guy who was there to place an order for a new H3D-39. He had wads of cash on him. We talked and he explained that new camera is the best and the biggest camera in the world with the biggest screen and a must to own. He owns a Leica M8 as well. He was surprisesd that I have a Sinar MFcamera, he never heard of Leaf. Phase One is the back he had been planning to buy before he saw a new Hasselblad with the 3 inch screen.
-
The difference between 24x36 and 48x36 is not that big.[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=140902\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Its double the size, thats a pretty significant diff. I think its basically like going from a Canon EFS sensor (1.6x) to full frame, or even slightly more of a diff.
Anyway, Hasselblad stands alone in its market. It is the only one with a quasi integrated medium format digital solution that offers up to 39mp models. Also, it is the only one that syncs w/ flash up to 1/800 sec. It also basically has built in DXo correction for its lenses. The new lcd on the H3D II doesnt go unoticed either, looks awesome and finally a MFDB/DSLR has a lcd worthy of the format.
-
The hypocrisy displayed here is just overwhelming. Please go the Phase One web page for P45+ backs and look at ITS marketing BS about "Opticolor" and "X-Pose Technology".
Is there anything to it? Who knows. But point me to one, one reference here to anyone who called Phase on the carpet about its gimmicky marketing slogans. A patent double standard.
Are people jumping in to "defend" Hasselblad? Hell no. They are jumping in because they want to have an intelligent, constructive exchange about the new features of the H3D-II. They also are put off by someone implicitly suggesting they are fools for buying Hasselblad digital products on the basis of empty advertising slogans.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=141064\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
i actually was going to add that in...pisses me off just as much...opticolor and x-pose..what BS...i own a P30, will probably end up with a P+ back sometime, but there is just no proof that any of these "features" actually give me a better image...michael wrote about a slight increase in DR and there is obviously an extra stop to play with (and the better screen, which is imo not any more useful then the old one...)
besides i use LR anyway to process my files, so all the x-color and optipose probably are lost on me anyway....sorry i find it sad if DMF makers have to turn to marketing BS....let me know when the next generation chip comes out and i will be interested....
-
Its double the size, thats a pretty significant diff. I think its basically like going from a Canon EFS sensor (1.6x) to full frame, or even slightly more of a diff.
Anyway, Hasselblad stands alone in its market. It is the only one with a quasi integrated medium format digital solution that offers up to 39mp models. Also, it is the only one that syncs w/ flash up to 1/800 sec. It also basically has built in DXo correction for its lenses. The new lcd on the H3D II doesnt go unoticed either, looks awesome and finally a MFDB/DSLR has a lcd worthy of the format.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=141108\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
rollei has synced at 1/1000 for years...they just did not call it superduperspeedysync....
in which way is the P45 less integrated with a M645...other then the seperate batteries?
as for the DXo correction...i have said before if i needed a 28 (without movements, which kinda defeats the purpose) i might look at the hass for it's automatic correction....i have yet to see any shot from any other hass lens that is actually better because of that technology...i would take any schneider lens uncorrected via software over any H system lens....
do you actually own a DMF back? have you actually ever shot with one?have you ever shot with a MF system? i am sorry but a 3" screen is a very welcome addition (about time!) but hardly worthy of DMF....judge a 39mpix file on a 3" screen?
-
rollei has synced at 1/1000 for years...they just did not call it superduperspeedysync....
in which way is the P45 less integrated with a M645...other then the seperate batteries?
as for the DXo correction...i have said before if i needed a 28 (without movements, which kinda defeats the purpose) i might look at the hass for it's automatic correction....i have yet to see any shot from any other hass lens that is actually better because of that technology...i would take any schneider lens uncorrected via software over any H system lens....
do you actually own a DMF back? have you actually ever shot with one?have you ever shot with a MF system? i am sorry but a 3" screen is a very welcome addition (about time!) but hardly worthy of DMF....judge a 39mpix file on a 3" screen?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=141124\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I use the correction software with both my 35mm and my 50-110mm nearly everyday and have posted shots way back when that particulare feature of the flexcolor soft ware came out.
I do a lot of architectural and interior work and need to show the documented work without any distortion. This feature works 100% and it does it in the background without me doing anything.
All this aside I do agree there is a continuing Has bashing in this forum which I detest.
Maybe there is a tall poppy syndrome played out here?
I love my H3D and when I see the new Leaf system, I drewl over that as well.
Finally some competition in the intergrated system league.
Never quite understood why anyone wants to combine components of different manufacturers, especially if something goes wrong they start pointing fingers at each other.
Marc
-
Its double the size, thats a pretty significant diff. I think its basically like going from a Canon EFS sensor (1.6x) to full frame, or even slightly more of a diff.
Anyway, Hasselblad stands alone in its market. It is the only one with a quasi integrated medium format digital solution that offers up to 39mp models. Also, it is the only one that syncs w/ flash up to 1/800 sec. It also basically has built in DXo correction for its lenses. The new lcd on the H3D II doesnt go unoticed either, looks awesome and finally a MFDB/DSLR has a lcd worthy of the format.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=141108\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Have you ever seen the actual difference between the 2 (48x36 vs 24x36)?
Have a look at this image. It has been taken with a 37x49sensor on a 24x36 body. The black border is the part that is above 24x36 (actually a little bit more). Now imagine the AF sensors in this image the way it is set on lets say the F5 (the AF layout of a FF body that is very familiar to me).
(http://www.peperkamp.com/samples/A0664.jpg)
-
Rollei lenses are syncing at a 1/1000th since years, with their PQS lenses!
And the new Hy6 will as well.
Best regards,
Thierry
Anyway, Hasselblad stands alone in its market, it is the only one that syncs w/ flash up to 1/800 sec.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=141108\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
-
Actually, I checked the prices for both hasselblad and Mamiya gear, and in the 39mp range a H3d is cheaper than a mamiya+phase back.
Imagine my surprise :-)
Off course this doesn't fly in the 22mp range with the zd back...
I checked the prices at Calumet and B&H, don't shoot me if my research isn't exactly bullletproof :-)
I'd say that it will be soon set game and match for Hasselblad although Mamiya stand a chance of survival as they seem to be able to sell lenses and bodies for 1/2 the price of Hassy.
Edmund
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=140469\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
-
in which way is the P45 less integrated with a M645...other then the seperate batteries?
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a] (http://index.php?act=findpost&pid=141124\")
In no particular order:
1) Viewfinder matched to sensor size to provide higher viewing magnification and eliminate mask overlay.
2) Body optical system (mirror and groundglass) and sensor image plane individually calibrated and matched to provide more precise focus. (Refer to Nick-T's excellent post earleir in this thread for detailed explanation) (Refer to link [a href=\"http://www.phaseone.com/KBFiles/1674/1/Focuscheckprocedure.pdf]Phase/Body Focus Check Procedure[/url])
3) Automatic compensation in focusing system for lens focus shift (caused by spherical aberration and corrected based on focal length, distance & aperture) to improve focus accuracy (Again refer to Nick-T's post)
4) Control of back menus and settings from camera grip controls.
5) Option to display histogram on camera grip's LCD to allow viewing of image and histogram without obscuring preview image.
6) Capture data transferred from lens (focal length, distance, aperture) to body to image file for automatic correction of chromatic aberration, distortion and vignetting.
7) Control of manual and auto focus from software (not available yet, but included in new Phocus software)
8) Control of aperture and shutter speed from software (active feature for years)
9) Automatic Control of shutter, aperture and mirror operation in live video mode. Activate live video and shutter locks open, aperture opens fully and mirror locks up. Aperure can be closed down from software for depth of field preview. Close live video and aperture, shutter and mirror return to previous settings.
10) Dedictated ISO/WB button on camera grip.
11) And from the Steve Hendrix report on the H3D-II...
"GPS capability is now enabled with the GPS unit, which plugs into the left side of the camera body. While some may yawn at this feature (thinking aerial photography), there are actually quite a number of different applications for this feature. Scouting is an obvious one. The ability to GPS search for that street with the cool door you used as a background comes to mind, and I imagine users will find new uses for this feature. From the new Phocus software, Google Earth automatically launches from the software and the location can be mapped and all files shot with those coordinates can be brought up with a simple command. Very cool. The GPS unit is compatible with H3DII and backward compatible with the H3D, H2D and any Hasselblad CF or CFH on H2 camera. Pricing is not yet set but should be announced shortly." I can imagine there could be interest in this feature for landscape and architectural applications as well.
12) Automatic update of the body firmware (which has added a variety of features and improvements) via connection to the back and new software versions.
If I've overlooked something, others can fill in the gaps.
-
as far as facts go: we have all been through this....the H3 is not full frame, the H3DII is not the first 3" DMFback, also not the first OLED..no matter what mr.techtalk says....
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=141047\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
As far as facts go: I never said or even implied any of the three statements above in any post that I've made here. In fact, none of those things are of any importance to me.
I've never posted anything regarding "Full Frame" as that has always been a somewhat ambiguous term in medium-format. In 35mm cameras, we know that means 24x36mm. What does "full frame" mean in medium-format? You decide–it isn't something that I'm concerned about.
I never said that Hasselblad had the first 3" display or that they were the first to use OLED (interesting technology by the way). Again... these aren't matters that concern me.
What does concern me are the new technologies that we are all working at understanding and utilizing for our individual needs. I have no desire to pass judgement on any technology, feature or product. There are plenty of people ready and willing to do that!
Where I find a lack of understanding regarding what some technology is designed to do, how it functions, design challenges or the potential benefit–I may join in the fray. But as for the usefulness for any individual of a particular product or feature, decide for yourself and research the facts. The internet is full of great information and plenty of misinformation too!
-
Actually, I checked the prices for both hasselblad and Mamiya gear, and in the 39mp range a H3d is cheaper than a mamiya+phase back.
Imagine my surprise :-)
Off course this doesn't fly in the 22mp range with the zd back...
I checked the prices at Calumet and B&H, don't shoot me if my research isn't exactly bullletproof :-)
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=141282\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
You based this on new prices.
I just bought 645AFD2+P45 used (+ lenses etc) While I'm not divulging prices, I believe I bought this set of stuff a LOT cheaper than a Hasselblad based equivalent. I don't have any particular feeling about the quality of this, the 'blad, or a Leaf setup being much different in terms of image quality.
-
Rollei lenses are syncing at a 1/1000th since years, with their PQS lenses!
And the new Hy6 will as well.
Best regards,
Thierry
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=141208\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
The Rollei lenses actually sync at 1/760th of a second, ISO standards allow a 20% deviation from what they can claim and Rollei takes full advantage of this, as will the Hy6.
-
someone coming here and making his first posts under "techtalk" praising the latest hasselblad and going on to take the time to defend "ultra focus" seems to me like reading a brochure that sells you the "best dslr"...take it with a grain of salt....we are all sharing opinions and if you read mine, check out my work, and you can look at that opinion with that information and base your own opinion on that.....
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=141002\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I'm a little unclear why explaining, how "Ultra-focus" works and it's purpose, would be characterized as defending it. Is it under attack? If so, why? It is just an effort to further optomize critical focus ability. Why would anyone attack an effort to do that? Some may not feel that they need it, while others that have had body/back focus tolerance problems or occasional issues with certain lenses exhibiting focus-shift, might appreciate the effort. In any event, I can't think of a reason that anyone would attack an effort to tighten tolerances in a system.
Anyway, if explaining how something works is "defending" it... then I guess I'll plead guilty.
You have good advice to people reading any on-line forum to take what they read with a grain of salt. Otherwise, they might mistake as credible (because they've attached their name and a web-site to a post), statments like "there is a full line of schneider AF lenses available for the Hy6....about the same (or even more?) as the H system...."–when in fact there are twice as many AF lenses for the "H" system, as a little effort with Google will reveal.
Thanks for taking the time to help clarify for people, what is often confusing and difficult to understand technology and terminology. Now that we know it's all just "insane marketing hype" (your earlier post), I'll stop wishing that things could be improved in any subtle ways.
-
That will have to be checked! And I guess if this is the case, other manufacturer are also taking FULL advantage of this.
Fact is: the Sinar Hy6 will sync at 1/1000th with the lenses permitting it (PQS), and Sinar is not known in the market for giving un-reliable technical information or making even false claims.
I shall get back to you on this point, should I find more specific information.
Edited for ADDENDUM:
By the way, 20% deviation "authorized" by the ISO standards is 1/800th (not 1/760)
Thanks and best regards,
Thierry
The Rollei lenses actually sync at 1/760th of a second, ISO standards allow a 20% deviation from what they can claim and Rollei takes full advantage of this, as will the Hy6.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=142067\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
-
Dear Photomangreg,
I come back to your statement below. I have checked this carefully out. Although your basic information is right (sync at 1/760th) it is valid for the "older" PQ lenses and thus outdated information.
Here what had been informed and communicated by Rollei during the introduction of the Schneider PQS lenses (quote and translated from the German):
"When the Rolleiflex 6008 Professional was introduced in 1988 the available PQ lenses were able to sync at 1/500 sec. However, already at that time 1/750 sec could be reached. Behind the 1/500 sec mark on the PQ lens there was a further index mark that meant the 1/750 sec. Although the 1/750 sec. was not officially released the public was informed about this.
At that time the PQ lens shutter was further improved (new shutter leaves, new materials, new linear motors) and with this, the 1/750 sec were clearly surpassed and 1/900 sec reached. A good percentage of these lenses reached and surpassed even the 1/1000. With this, the PQS lens was born and the 1/1000 sec. could be published as the value is well within the ISO standard".
This means in clear that the Schneider PQS lenses do not only sync at 1/1000, but that some even sync faster than this.
AND: this 1/1000th is REAL 1/1000th
I hope this clarifies the point made about lens sync.
Thanks and best regards,
Thierry
The Rollei lenses actually sync at 1/760th of a second, ISO standards allow a 20% deviation from what they can claim and Rollei takes full advantage of this, as will the Hy6.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=142067\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]