Luminous Landscape Forum
Equipment & Techniques => Medium Format / Film / Digital Backs – and Large Sensor Photography => Topic started by: david o on November 25, 2007, 04:36:19 pm
-
I just read it...
I think Thierry will have few questions to answer...
Hy6 (http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/sinar-hy6.shtml)
-
I think Thierry will have few questions to answer...
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=155888\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Like why couldn't they make it pretty? And why are all the pictures "exposure unknown", does the camera not record this data?
-
Just FYI, Thierry and his colleagues at Sinar were shown the review several days ago so that they could correct any factual errors or inaccuracies prior to publication. This they have done.
As for (why are all the pictures "exposure unknown") that was explained in the article. The camera does not transmit to the back the aperture and shutter speed so it can be recorded in the EXIF data fields, and therefore there is no way to tell what it is after the fact.
This is obviously a serious problem which needs to be addressed by Sinar ASAP.
Michael
-
I used to wonder whether Michael was anti-Hassy.
-
Michael,
I purchased the 6008 with the eMotion 75 LV. I have used it intensively since in difficult, high contrast situations mainly for architectural briefs.
I agree with you that the biggest problem is the lack of (even basic) exif data. this becomes a major issue when you forget to make a white shading file with with a wide angle lens (I pretty much only use wide angle lenses) and you want to correct.
Your review however left out one MAJOR aspect - a definite PRO - and that is the highlight recovery that occurs with Brumbaers DNG conversions. This pushes the dynamic range way out beyond all the other backs I tested and is a huge plus for those working out of the studio with more 'uncontrollable' situations.
Murray
-
As for (why are all the pictures "exposure unknown") that was explained in the article. The camera does not transmit to the back the aperture and shutter speed so it can be recorded in the EXIF data fields, and therefore there is no way to tell what it is after the fact.
This is obviously a serious problem which needs to be addressed by Sinar ASAP.
Michael
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=155895\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I think the question is not "why" the exposure are unknown but "why" the camera and back do not talk to eachother (expo, Iso) are they in bad relationship lately... I know that they did travel in a tight space and sometime it can create tension but to the point not to talk to eachother when it's time to do business that makes not too much sens.
-
Thanks for the post.
I think Michael makes a valid point about the dual charger. However, I have seen chargers for these batteries got for around $10 so it's not a big deal, just a one-time inconvenience. A supplied dual charger would be an improvement.
Nice to know the Hy6 uses a V290.
I think Michael missed a point when he referred to a hypothetical 56x56mm sensor. Any jump up in sensor size would leave the Hasselblad behind.
Michael also talks about putting this camera on an L bracket but I don't see why anyone would ever turn this camera on its side. Especially once the rotating adapter is supplied. This is one of the nice features of the 6x6 format camera, whether one uses a square or rectangular sensor.
I think Michael made a mistake when he discussed the mirror viewfinder too: "The last time I saw one of these on a medium format camera was on a Mamiya C330 TLR in the mid 1970s." The 6008 (which he used to own) uses a mirror-based viewfinder.
I hope the issue of setting the ISO on the camera not changing the setting on the back changes with a future upgrade, although once the user knows this, he would just use the back to makes any ISO changes.
I've never experienced the battery latch issue which Michael mentions. Was this a faulty unit? Or did Michael not push the battery in properly?
I have held an eMotion LCD next to a pre-plus series Phase One P30 LCD screen, and the Sinar's was definitely better. I found the comparison a bit inaccurate.
The lack of EXIF data is an issue. I look forward to finding out more about this. Firmware issue again?
Michael mentions an e54 back, but I believe he should have written '54LV'.
The two things I would like to see improved are 1) the EXIF data issue, and 2) it would be nice if the camera battery could power the back as well. I'd prefer to change batteries more often but only have to keep an eye on one battery level.
-
Hi
I had the opportunity of working with the same exact hy6 a week ago in the studio. We were shooting studio tethered. I am not going to talk about the back or software because Leaf will have there version soon. This is about the camera. My notes are battery life was excellent shot 700 images & there was still plenty of power. View finder is BRIGHT. So bright in fact I decided to use manual focus as the camera was locked off on a tripod. For not having a manual I found this to be a very easy camera to use. for vertical shots I just rotated the back not the camera, to me that is so user friendly! The lenses are not heavy & this is a very easy camera to hand hold. There is a need for a lock for the f stop dial as it is just below the shutter release. I can't wait to try this with the Emotion 22 or the Leaf 54s, 65s & 75s. The speed of these backs will vary from .87 > 1.1 f/s, excellent for people. As far as file quality from the Sinar 75 it was excellent with beautiful skin. This might sound silly but the camera has a nice sound.
-
I used to wonder whether Michael was anti-Hassy.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=155898\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I think that he has always been clear that he didn't think the closure of the H3D was the right thing to do both for purchasers of backs and for Hassy themselves.
On the other hand his soon to be published high end comparison will apparently include a H3D39 II, and I am fully confident that his conclusions will be objective and fair as far as the relative performance of the cameras/backs goes.
Beyond that, it is for each of us to decide whether we want to invest in a closed system (something we have been doing with Canon and Nikon for years) or whether we prefer to invest in a more open platform.
There are plus and minus for both directions.
Cheers,
Bernard
-
I think Michael makes a valid point about the dual charger.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=155905\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Firstly I have never had the battery latch thing either - Ive had two of those backs now - I think you had faulty product **
The battery /charger thing is a small issue and a big one
For $35000 just give us 12 batteries and three double chargers
one for the car and one for the office and one for home
While they may be video batteries available off the net life is too short to stop and think about that - we are trying to earn back that $35k
and I dont want to buy a battery from a third party - fried boards and void warranties spring to mind
I ordered another battery off my sinar uk rep and it took a week or so and cost $150 odd, I have two now and still have to rotate them during a days shooting and im knackered if I accidentally leave the back on all night
sometimes these people seem to forget that $35k or $36k is not a deal breaker - SERVICE IS
and chuck in Two FW cables and a bunch of those instantly lost connectors that go from the back to a viewcam and three copies of the CD that has the backs unique software and e-mail/phone us as new sofware/firmware updates become available
MR
does the AF work ?
Also you didnt mention the built in memory which creates and instant back up when used with a CF card and bufferless shooting without
**Edit - thinking on (about the dodgy latch) one has to wonder what it says about Sinars QC and general attitude that they let out a back to a globally watched player like MR without giving it a good shakedown first - poor show - 20% of the review is quibbling over minor details that shouldnt have come to light - it does matter because it affects perception of a fundamentally great product - and dumb things like dodgy latches, $10 batteries and $5 leads can stop a shoot in front of a client - stuff of my nightmares
S
-
I enjoyed reading the article. I like M.R.s writing style. I am anxious to see the comparison with the canon 1DsmkIII. I know the MF/digital back image quality will be better -- but i am anxious to see by how much. Mark
I just read it...
I think Thierry will have few questions to answer...
Hy6 (http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/sinar-hy6.shtml)
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=155888\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
-
I thought the review was thoughtful and well written. The only part that I have a differing perspective on is the "Postscript–Be careful what you wish for"
"No. Anticipating, or with actual knowledge that they would not longer be able to sell backs to fit on the market's leading platform, the H series Hasselblad, Sinar, Leaf and Phase One did what they had to – find alternative camera platforms. What should they have done? Said – Oh well, no more places to put our backs. Guess we'll just curl up in a corner and die."
Exactly right. All of the remaining companies in the medium-format business, both back and camera makers, have been doing what they have had to do. The few remaining camera makers couldn't go on losing buckets of money making camera systems without the revenue from digital backs to sustain them and the back makers need camera platforms. That camera makers and back makers would combine in some way was inevitable. Hasselblad was simply the first to take a step in that direction, but the combining of finances for back and camera makers had to happen eventually–even if Hasselblad did not exist!
"So in the end, and likely faster than they thought it would happen, Hasselblad found that while they no longer had to compete with Sinar, Leaf and Phase One in selling digital backs to go on their cameras, they now had two new camera to compete with AND no more third party backs to generate camera body and lens sales for them."
Based on conversations that I've had with various people at Hasselblad over the past few years, I can tell you that the partnerships and product developments from their competitors in the back and camera markets come as no surprise. It is exactly what they have expected to see develop for the simple reason that Hasselblad and their competitors are responding to the very same financial, technological and market pressures that have been building up for years in the medium-format market's transition from film to digital. The market and financial reality is what has forced Hasselblad and their competitors to change and adapt. It is NOT Hasselblad product announcements that are creating the necessary changes in the financial, product and marketing relationships between camera and back makers.
"I thought that this was a dumb move on Hasselblad management's part then, and said so, and believe this to be the case even more so now. So, as the saying goes – Be careful what you wish for. You might just get it."
Nobody, including Hasselblad, ever wished for a market where camera makers lost money at an alarming rate and digital back makers profited, but that is how things have developed over the years. It is where things have stood for too long of a period to remain static. You may wish for the good old days, but the party is now over and somebody has to start collecting to pay the tab. You may not like the price to be paid in the loss of unrestricted compatibility, but the continued trend in this direction would have happened regardless of any wishes–even if Hasselblad had just disappeared.
-
I shall certainly come back more in details about all the questions raised here in this tread, as soon I have some more time. But let me make a first remark:
It DOES amaze me how a review which is mainly very positive can be "downplayed" with such minor details. The camera was in excellent condition and complete: the dodgy latch is something which has to be checked what happened. Honestly, this is the first time I hear/see this happening and it shall be checked carefully. But please bear with me: don't use such to denigrate a product, that's unfair.
I shall be back soon with more answers.
Thierry
**Edit - thinking on (about the dodgy latch) one has to wonder what it says about Sinars QC and general attitude that they let out a back to a globally watched player like MR without giving it a good shakedown first - poor show - 20% of the review is quibbling over minor details that shouldnt have come to light - it does matter because it affects perception of a fundamentally great product - and dumb things like dodgy latches, $10 batteries and $5 leads can stop a shoot in front of a client - stuff of my nightmares
S
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=155913\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
-
Everything affects the usability of a camera; ergonomics, features and functions, and image quality. Some people find one aspect or another more important.
When I report on a camera I try and consider all aspects. I know which are my hot buttons, but I don't know what may be to others. So I cover them all.
Some things simply are there, and don't stand out. Autofocus is one of them. It works, and works competently, but is neither better nor worse in my experience that that on any other medium format camera. The same with autoexposure. Works fine. Therefore for the sake of not having a report that is so long that people nod off, I leave out the obvious, only mentioning those things that are either problematic or exceptional.
The latch was a real issue. I spent an afternoon with the camera on the back seat of my car, driving over washboard roads. On more than one occasion the battery latch popped. I checked it and it seemed to be functioning properly and I couldn't get it to spring by whacking the camera with the palm of my hand. But, that afternoon in the car it sprang 2 or 3 times. This makes it worth reporting. Is this a single camera flaw, or not? No way to know.
The lack of aperture and shutter speed data being communicated to the back is an example of something that could be a single unit flaw or simply a design error. On issues like this I was in constant communication with Sinar asking them if what I was seeing was general, or specific to my unit.
So in the end the reader has to make a decision as to what is relevant to them and what isn't. The reviewer's job is to comment on whatever he sees as honestly as possible.
I liked the Hy6 and the back. Yes, it has flaws (what product doesn't)? It's a brave to attempt to penetrate a niche market and should be commended. But its flaws should not be overlooked.
Michael
-
Everything affects the usability of a camera; ergonomics, features and functions, and image quality. Some people find one aspect or another more important.
When I report on a camera I try and consider all aspects. I know which are my hot buttons, but I don't know what may be to others. So I cover them all.
Some things simply are there, and don't stand out. Autofocus is one of them. It works, and works competently, but is neither better nor worse in my experience that that on any other medium format camera. The same with autoexposure. Works fine. Therefore for the sake of not having a report that is so long that people nod off, I leave out the obvious, only mentioning those things that are either problematic or exceptional.
The latch was a real issue. I spent an afternoon with the camera on the back seat of my car, driving over washboard roads. On more than one occasion the battery latch popped. I checked it and it seemed to be functioning properly and I couldn't get it to spring by whacking the camera with the palm of my hand. But, that afternoon in the car it sprang 2 or 3 times. This makes it worth reporting. Is this a single camera flaw, or not? No way to know.
The lack of aperture and shutter speed data being communicated to the back is an example of something that could be a single unit flaw or simply a design error. On issues like this I was in constant communication with Sinar asking them if what I was seeing was general, or specific to my unit.
So in the end the reader has to make a decision as to what is relevant to them and what isn't. The reviewer's job is to comment on whatever he sees as honestly as possible.
I liked the Hy6 and the back. Yes, it has flaws (what product doesn't)? It's a brave to attempt to penetrate a niche market and should be commended. But its flaws should not be overlooked.
Michael
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=156056\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Michael, about the pros of the camera you write; "Open system with back and supplier choices".
In which way is this camera an open system? It works only with Sinar backs. And the Afi will take Leaf backs only...
-
Michael, about the pros of the camera you write; "Open system with back and supplier choices".
In witch way is this camera an open system? It works only with Sinar backs. And the Afi will take Leaf backs only...
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=156061\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
This is not correct. Firstly, the lenses and finders are completely interchangeable.
Secondly, a Hy6 camera, regardless of whether it has a Sinar, Leaf, or Rolleiflex name plate on it will take any back from any back marker that has an adaptor plate. If you read my article you will see a side view of the e-Motion 75 with its adaptor plate. The camera itself doesn't accept a back directly, it only accepts a plate and the plate then attaches to a standardized fitting on the camera. These plates work on any Hy6. That's the whole point of open systems.
Michael
-
My Battery latch pops also all the time on the 75lv - and so does the latch on the one the store lent me.
It's not really a big problem as it only seems to happen when the camera is not being used. I guess it must need a stronger spring?
Murray
PS Michael,you really should review Brumbaer and test the extra dynamic range gained via its highlight recovery - it really can have a major impact on the what can be shot and the quality of the final image...
-
I think Michael made a mistake when he discussed the mirror viewfinder too: "The last time I saw one of these on a medium format camera was on a Mamiya C330 TLR in the mid 1970s." The 6008 (which he used to own) uses a mirror-based viewfinder.
AFAIK the Hasselblad H`s 90 degree finder works also with mirrors instead of a prism. I thought that was the reason why the finder of the Hasselblad H is so much better than the finder of the Mamiya AFD ?
So it seems to me there were neither financial reasons nor concerns about the weight but simply the intention to make the best finder available?
Bernd
-
This is not correct. Firstly, the lenses and finders are completely interchangeable.
Secondly, a Hy6 camera, regardless of whether it has a Sinar, Leaf, or Rolleiflex name plate on it will take any back from any back marker that has an adaptor plate. If you read my article you will see a side view of the e-Motion 75 with its adaptor plate. The camera itself doesn't accept a back directly, it only accepts a plate and the plate then attaches to a standardized fitting on the camera. These plates work on any Hy6. That's the whole point of open systems.
Michael
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=156063\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I too find this very confusing. I had thought that these systems (Sinar, Leaf) were closed - at least for DB's. Maybe Thierry can sort this out.
Victor
-
Will the lenses that are newly released and those appearing shortly for the Hy6 work on the 6008?
If so, this is commendable.
-axel
... the lenses and finders are completely interchangeable.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=156063\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
-
This is not correct. Firstly, the lenses and finders are completely interchangeable.
Secondly, a Hy6 camera, regardless of whether it has a Sinar, Leaf, or Rolleiflex name plate on it will take any back from any back marker that has an adaptor plate. If you read my article you will see a side view of the e-Motion 75 with its adaptor plate. The camera itself doesn't accept a back directly, it only accepts a plate and the plate then attaches to a standardized fitting on the camera. These plates work on any Hy6. That's the whole point of open systems.
Michael
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=156063\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Michael, we have been discussing this intensively the last weeks here. Do you mean i can put my phase one back on the Hy6 if an adapter is made? Or that Phase One can make their own back for the Hy6 if they want? Is that what you're saying? Because if this is true (I don't think so...) a lot of misinformation has been posted in this forum last year... I'd like to believe you...
-
Will the lenses that are newly released and those appearing shortly for the Hy6 work on the 6008?
If so, this is commendable.
-axel
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=156098\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Since the lens mount is said to be identical that should be the case, though you should check with F&H to be absolutely sure before making a purchase.
Michael
-
Michael, we have been discussing this intensively the last weeks here. Do you mean i can put my phase one back on the Hy6 if an adapter is made? Or that Phase One can make their own back for the Hy6 if they want?
It seems clear from all the posts on this subject that the following is true:
1. Jenoptic owns the rights to the Hy6 design.
2. Phase One could legally develop their own adapter and put a Phase One back on the Hy6 IF they license the interface from Jenoptic.
3. Phase One has apparently decided, as far as we know, not to license the interface design from Jenoptic.
4. Phase One could reverse engineer the interface design and design an adapter without paying the interface licensing fee, but whether that would withstand a legal challenge is the question.
5. Since we don't have such a reverse engineered interface design from Phase, we can assume that they've concluded either that they couldn't withstand a legal challenge, or that they just don't think it's worth the effort from a business point of view.
At this point, putting a Phase One back on a Hy6 is more of a legal and/or business issue than a technical issue.
-
Michael, we have been discussing this intensively the last weeks here. Do you mean i can put my phase one back on the Hy6 if an adapter is made? Or that Phase One can make their own back for the Hy6 if they want? Is that what you're saying? Because if this is true (I don't think so...) a lot of misinformation has been posted in this forum last year... I'd like to believe you...
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=156105\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
This is one of the problems with this industry, lot's of heat and little light. Maybe we need infrared gogglers to know what's really going on!
To my knowledge and experience the way the Hy6 system works is that a back is mated to an adaptor plate and then that plate attaches to the camera. A Leaf camera and a Sinar camera would seem to be essentially identical except for the name plate.
Sinar and Leaf have a contract with F&H to be the exclusive EOMs of the Hy6. But, F&H will be selling the Hy6 themselves with a Rolleiflex badge on it. This then begs the question, what do they expect people will put on it? Film backs? Maybe, but somehow I doubt that this is what they have in mind to maintain a solid marketing program.
As long as F&H make the interface specs available for the adaptor plate (and I don't know if they need to make the plate or if others will be able to) then in theory at least any digital back should be able to be mounted on any Hy6 camera if the right plate is available.
The issues here are not technical. The issues are ones of licensing and business relationships. Until someone (F&H or their partner Jenoptic, who own the rights to the camera) clarifies all of this it's just speculation. Remember though that Jenoptic owns Sinar.
Fun, huh?
Michael
-
Too much speculation by us and sidestepping by them.
I think the camera guys have been taking lessons from the politicos and have hired spin-managers in lieu of marketing personnel.
Edmund
This is one of the problems with this industry, lot's of heat and little light. Maybe we need infrared gogglers to know what's really going on!
The issues are ones of licensing and business relationships. Until someone (F&H or their partner Jenoptic, who own the rights to the camera) clarifies all of this it's just speculation.
Fun, huh?
Michael
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=156115\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
-
Sinar and Leaf have a contract with F&H to be the exclusive EOMs of the Hy6. But, F&H will be selling the Hy6 themselves with a Rolleiflex badge on it. This then begs the question, what do they expect people will put on it? Film backs? Maybe, but somehow I doubt that this is what they have in mind to maintain a solid marketing program.
The issues here are not technical. The issues are ones of licensing and business relationships. Until someone (F&H or their partner Jenoptic, who own the rights to the camera) clarifies all of this it's just speculation. Remember though that Jenoptic owns Sinar.
Fun, huh?
Michael
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=156115\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
This HAS been clarified by Jenoptic/Sinar. It's just that no one wants to take its statements at face value and believe them. Jenoptic/Sinar has stated repeatedly that the all of the Hy6 cameras are intended to work with Sinar and Leaf backs. Period. None of the parties to the Hy6 project will offer adapter plates for Phase or Hasselblad backs. Thierry, who works for Sinar, has stated on the record that Phase could theoretically make its own adapter for mounting Phase backs on a Hy6. What he has NOT addressed is (1)what kind of functionality would a Phase back have with a Hy6 camera if Jenoptic did not officially support it and permit the Phase back to interface with the Hy6 camera's firmware(i.e., would it be like attaching a Phase back to a view camera with a sync cable) and (2) what Jenoptic's legal response would be if Phase somehow tried to have its backs interface with the the firmware of the Hy6 cameras so as to achieve the same level of functionality as Sinar and Leaf backs. These are interesting questions to speculate about, but at the end of the day don't really seem to matter. Who is going to spend tens of thousands of dollars on a camera system and MFDB where the back is not "supported" by the camera maker(and the camera maker is downright opposed to the back being used on the camera)?
-
This is one of the problems with this industry, lot's of heat and little light. Maybe we need infrared gogglers to know what's really going on!
To my knowledge and experience the way the Hy6 system works is that a back is mated to an adaptor plate and then that plate attaches to the camera. A Leaf camera and a Sinar camera would seem to be essentially identical except for the name plate.
Sinar and Leaf have a contract with F&H to be the exclusive EOMs of the Hy6. But, F&H will be selling the Hy6 themselves with a Rolleiflex badge on it. This then begs the question, what do they expect people will put on it? Film backs? Maybe, but somehow I doubt that this is what they have in mind to maintain a solid marketing program.
As long as F&H make the interface specs available for the adaptor plate (and I don't know if they need to make the plate or if others will be able to) then in theory at least any digital back should be able to be mounted on any Hy6 camera if the right plate is available.
The issues here are not technical. The issues are ones of licensing and business relationships. Until someone (F&H or their partner Jenoptic, who own the rights to the camera) clarifies all of this it's just speculation. Remember though that Jenoptic owns Sinar.
Fun, huh?
Michael
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=156115\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Hmmmm... I always liked the idea of a back that could be used on any camera by means of an adapterplate.
I also like the idea of a camera that can be adapted to be used with any back by means of an adapterplate.
-
It would be nice to just put my H back on the Leaf AFi.
-
Maybe a nice F&H accessory, a H plate, should help boost sales of their bodies sold as Rolleiflex.
-
(i.e., would it be like attaching a Phase back to a view camera with a sync cable)
In reality, that's the only functionality the Sinar back has with the HY body. Shutter speed and aperture are not recorded. This is just like putting my P45 on my Alpa.....
Victor
-
"Shutter speed and aperture are not recorded"
I wonder if that's done on purpose or wether it's a design mistake.
However how important is it to that info?
You don't get that info when you mount any DB on an Alpa,Cambo etc.
-
Just FYI, Thierry and his colleagues at Sinar were shown the review several days ago so that they could correct any factual errors or inaccuracies prior to publication. This they have done.
As for (why are all the pictures "exposure unknown") that was explained in the article. The camera does not transmit to the back the aperture and shutter speed so it can be recorded in the EXIF data fields, and therefore there is no way to tell what it is after the fact.
This is obviously a serious problem which needs to be addressed by Sinar ASAP.
Michael
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=155895\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Yes, the omission of exp data in the communication betwixt back and camera is regrettable (understatement), yet you would think that this is something which can be addressed in the firmware ? I suppose this may not be trivial, otherwise why hasn't it been implemented from the get-go ?!!!
The fact it isn't there already might suggest a more fundamental problem, such as the physical pins or something not being able to transmit this sort of data, who knows ?> I mean the 6008AF transmitted exposure data to both film back and the Phase One P20 does it not, so there is a pathway to follow in this ?!
As for claims that Michael's report was loaded either for or against non-Hassie products.. well these are just the sort of comment that will drive him away from contributing in his own forums. if he thinks he is addressing a load of numbskulls ;-)
I for one sold my H1 a few months back, but would consider the Rollei film back version of the Hy 6 as a replacement which is "relatively future proof" and can take all future backs (apart from the Hassie back of course)... is that the case...can the Rollei Hy6 use both Leaf and Sinar backs etc, or do you have to buy the Hy6 in the Sinar configuration to get a Sinar back working for example. If so then even this system is not as "open" as we thought ?! I am in no rush to replace my MF kit, so may see what the new Mamiya One has to offer next year before parting with cash!
The new sinarbacks: Sinarback 54 MC digital back (small and presumably good value) and the multi-shot ("real colour") Sinarback eVolution 75H have been out for a bit now. The later in particular is genuinely a unique product - being I believe the first implementation of the 33MP sensor in Multishot. Yes they are tethered, but with the fast Mac computers with their great batteries, I wonder whether these can be used one theh move to some extent better than say the H25 could have been (power hungry tethered). Anyone know how quickly this back drains the high capacity battery of a New Mac Book Pro as it is I assuem "on all the time"? Sinar’s Thierry.. why not make an "image bank" style of accessory for this back like Hasselblad’s still does with its backs, which is a self-contained battery and storage running a basic operating system in a small self contained box ?
Any comments ?
-
While I can't respond to what is required, legally, in other countries, here in the US, Jenoptic can do nothing about third parties reverse engineering their equipment to work with these cameras.
That is specifically allowed. Even the DMCA allows this for the purpose of integrating one product with another. The DMCA only applies to DRM'd products, which is not even the case here.
If Phase 1 is serious about moving their backs to this camera system (assuming it does sell in large enough numbers, and enough purchasers are unhappy with the supplied backs), there are no legal problems here for them to be concerned about. This goes for mechanical, as well as electronic, and software, integration.
As an aside, My thoughts as to the shortcomings of this camera relates to the fact that it is an entirely new system. One year is a very short time to go from concept to working product with systems at this level of complexity. I would suspect that a generation II product, perhaps in another year, or less, will solve most of the problems seen here today. From my own experience as a designer, and manufacturer, I can see that this product is not "finished".
-
Michael is absolutely right, and I have never said anything different. What I have said, is that Sinar will not provide adapters for other back manufacturers. And what I have said as well is that PO (and Hasselblad) are not part of this project and as such do not have access to the protocols.
Best regards,
Thierry
I too find this very confusing. I had thought that these systems (Sinar, Leaf) were closed - at least for DB's. Maybe Thierry can sort this out.
Victor
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=156079\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
-
Thanks hcubell, for sparing me some time.
YES, it has been stated, it has been explained and it has been clarified officially by Jenoptik and the corresponding press release.
So once again, WE (Jenoptik/Sinar) do not provide any adaption for other backs. Leaf backs supported by Leaf on their AFi DO work on a Sinar Hy6, but Leaf provides/manufactures the adapter.
To your point 1): yes, it WOULD (with emphasis on "would") probably be a functionality with a cable and no communication.
To your point 2): I honestly don't know and am not interested in it, at this stage.
Best regards,
Thierry
This HAS been clarified by Jenoptic/Sinar. It's just that no one wants to take its statements at face value and believe them. Jenoptic/Sinar has stated repeatedly that the all of the Hy6 cameras are intended to work with Sinar and Leaf backs. Period. None of the parties to the Hy6 project will offer adapter plates for Phase or Hasselblad backs. Thierry, who works for Sinar, has stated on the record that Phase could theoretically make its own adapter for mounting Phase backs on a Hy6. What he has NOT addressed is (1)what kind of functionality would a Phase back have with a Hy6 camera if Jenoptic did not officially support it and permit the Phase back to interface with the Hy6 camera's firmware(i.e., would it be like attaching a Phase back to a view camera with a sync cable) and (2) what Jenoptic's legal response would be if Phase somehow tried to have its backs interface with the the firmware of the Hy6 cameras so as to achieve the same level of functionality as Sinar and Leaf backs. These are interesting questions to speculate about, but at the end of the day don't really seem to matter. Who is going to spend tens of thousands of dollars on a camera system and MFDB where the back is not "supported" by the camera maker(and the camera maker is downright opposed to the back being used on the camera)?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=156135\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
-
You don't get that info when you mount any DB on an Alpa,Cambo etc.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=156227\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I agree.... However I really like to see that kind of information. This type of information allows me to actually 'see' how an aperture influences dof. When I shoot my Alpa the only way to document this is in writing the data for that particular image. I expect lots more from any back connected to an HY.
Victor
-
that is not true, and I shall come back on this later and when I have detailed information. Michael's findings in his review concerning the communication camera/back are not complete, partly due to a misunderstanding.
I shall clarify this at the soonest.
best regards,
Thierry
In reality, that's the only functionality the Sinar back has with the HY body. Shutter speed and aperture are not recorded. This is just like putting my P45 on my Alpa.....
Victor
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=156225\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
-
Michael is absolutely right, and I have never said anything different. What I have said, is that Sinar will not provide adapters for other back manufacturers.
Best regards,
Thierry
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=156234\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Thank you for 'clarifying' this issue....
Victor
-
Dear Ed,
please read my remarks and answers below your questions.
Yes, the omission of exp data in the communication betwixt back and camera is regrettable (understatement), yet you would think that this is something which can be addressed in the firmware ? I suppose this may not be trivial, otherwise why hasn't it been implemented from the get-go ?!!!
The fact it isn't there already might suggest a more fundamental problem, such as the physical pins or something not being able to transmit this sort of data, who knows ?> I mean the 6008AF transmitted exposure data to both film back and the Phase One P20 does it not, so there is a pathway to follow in this ?!
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=156230\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
As said: there is communication camera/back/software and EXIF date being recorded/available. Let me some time to come back on it.
As for claims that Michael's report was loaded either for or against non-Hassie products.. well these are just the sort of comment that will drive him away from contributing in his own forums. if he thinks he is addressing a load of numbskulls ;-)
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=156230\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I do not find Michael's review to be anti-Hasselblad, nor anti-x or y. I do in fact appreciate his fairness in this Hy6 review, his professionalism in his approach and his feedback to Sinar to let us time to correct some mistakes: this has to be put on his credit.
I for one sold my H1 a few months back, but would consider the Rollei film back version of the Hy 6 as a replacement which is "relatively future proof" and can take all future backs (apart from the Hassie back of course)... is that the case...can the Rollei Hy6 use both Leaf and Sinar backs etc, or do you have to buy the Hy6 in the Sinar configuration to get a Sinar back working for example. If so then even this system is not as "open" as we thought ?! I am in no rush to replace my MF kit, so may see what the new Mamiya One has to offer next year before parting with cash!
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=156230\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
YES, any SB can be mounted on the HY6 AND Leaf AFi, with the corresponding adapter plate, and vice-versa, any back supported by Leaf to be mounted on an AFi can also be mounted on a Sinar Hy6. This has been communicated also many times.
The new sinarbacks: Sinarback 54 MC digital back (small and presumably good value) and the multi-shot ("real colour") Sinarback eVolution 75H have been out for a bit now. The later in particular is genuinely a unique product - being I believe the first implementation of the 33MP sensor in Multishot. Yes they are tethered, but with the fast Mac computers with their great batteries, I wonder whether these can be used one theh move to some extent better than say the H25 could have been (power hungry tethered). Anyone know how quickly this back drains the high capacity battery of a New Mac Book Pro as it is I assuem "on all the time"? Sinar’s Thierry.. why not make an "image bank" style of accessory for this back like Hasselblad’s still does with its backs, which is a self-contained battery and storage running a basic operating system in a small self contained box ?
Any comments ?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=156230\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I shall forward your suggestion about "image bank". Thanks!
Best regards,
Thierry
-
deleted
-
Dear Mel,
Let me first say that a product is never "finished", and can always be improved a step further.
This being said, and apart for the comments by Michael about the lack of communication (which I shall address and answer to show that this is not the case), there seems to me that there is not much having been criticized about this new camera, in the contrary.
And the feedback from our first users or people having tested it go all in the same directions: read on this forum some posts from those who had it in their hands.
Best regards,
Thierry
From my own experience as a designer, and manufacturer, I can see that this product is not "finished".
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=156232\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
-
Sinar Statement about camera/back/software communication & EXIF data
Currently, following EXIF Data are available from the Hy6 camera:
- Camera model
- Lens type
- Aperture
- Exposure time
- Focal lenght
- Distance to subject
- ISO
- Capturing mode (P. S, A, M)
- Light metering mode (spot, center weighted, matrix)
- TTL flash / no TTL flash
The above EXIF data are also available in Sinar EXPOSURE, (not in Captureshop).
Following EXIF Data are communicated directly from the back to the Sinar EXPOSURE software:
- Attached digital back
- Serial number of digital back
- Capturing date
- Image size in pixels (pixels x pixels)
- White balance (type of illumination)
All the above EXIF Data are currently not displayed on the screen of the eMotion backs, nor in Captureshop.
The eMotion backs currently display only rudimentary EXIF data like "ISO" and "White balance", etc ...
It needs a firmware update of the eMotion backs for the EXIF data delivered by the camera to be displayed on the eMotion backs,
We do not plan currently to make all these EXIF Data available in the Sinar Captureshop software.
I hope this clarifies this important point and issue and shows that there is no lack of communication between camera, back and software.
Sorry for the misunderstanding/miscommunication.
Best regards,
Thierry
-
Hi Theirry,
that's great the exif data IS there!!
But when will Exposure be there?
Murray
-
That's great news!
When will the firmware update be available for the eMotions?
Cheers,
Willem.
-
hi Murray,
we all expect Exposure to be available begin of 2008.
At the same time the eMotion FW update should be available of course as well (answer to Willem's question).
best regards,
Thierry
Hi Theirry,
that's great the exif data IS there!!
But when will Exposure be there?
Murray
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=156265\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
-
Thierry,
it would be a good idea,that Michael addresses these issues and solutions at his Hy6 review updates!
Cheers,
Willem.
-
Yes, indeed!
But the fault, mistake and blame cannot be put on him: there was simply a miscommunication and lack of time (weekend with nobody available at Sinar to answer properly) from our side.
When Michael asked me first about this last week (no display on the eMotion of aperture/shutter speed & no display of aperture/shutter speed in Captureshop), I answered him that yes, that this was not yet possible in Captureshop, without mentioning that it is (it will be) obviously the case in Exposure.
Best regards,
Thierry
Thierry,
it would be a good idea,that Michael addresses these issues and solutions at his Hy6 review updates!
Cheers,
Willem.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=156272\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
-
Hi Thierry
Having used the Hy6 in a job like condition shooting talent. Is there a separate dial/button for the auto focus. For example on the Canon it is custom function 4 or on the Mamiya AFDII it is either on the front or rear. What I am saying can you separate the focus from the shutter release. If you have not read my take on the Hy6 that view finder is BRIGHT!!!!!!
Denis
-
Thanks for posting that, Thierry. It's a relief. The information is probably also worthy of its own thread, because not so many people will see it on page 3 of this thread, and Michael's review is a little misleading.
As Willem suggests, it would be nice if Michael cost post an update.
I don't know why he hasn't responded to some of my points earlier in the thread. As far as I know, the 'e54' he mentions in the article does not exist, for example. There is only the e22, e75, 54LV and 75LV. Right?
-
hi Denis,
YES, this separate AF button is available: : if the camera is put on Manual focus (M), the flat button above the AF-mode selector serves to activate the Auto focus temporarily. If the camera is put on Single Auto focus or Continuous Auto focus the same button serves as AF Lock.
Best regards,
Thierry
edited for addendum: YES, the view finder is extremely bright! Thanks to mention it.
Hi Thierry
Having used the Hy6 in a job like condition shooting talent. Is there a separate dial/button for the auto focus. For example on the Canon it is custom function 4 or on the Mamiya AFDII it is either on the front or rear. What I am saying can you separate the focus from the shutter release. If you have not read my take on the Hy6 that view finder is BRIGHT!!!!!!
Denis
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=156281\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
-
Yes Graham, you are absolutely right:
- the e54 does not exist and is called "eMotion 54 LV" officially
- Yes, it would be nice if Michael could "correct", though he is absolutely not to be blamed on this, in the contrary.
Kind regards,
Thierry
Thanks for posting that, Thierry. It's a relief. The information is probably also worthy of its own thread, because not so many people will see it on page 3 of this thread, and Michael's review is a little misleading.
As Willem suggests, it would be nice if Michael cost post an update.
I don't know why he hasn't responded to some of my points earlier in the thread. As far as I know, the 'e54' he mentions in the article does not exist, for example. There is only the e22, e75, 54LV and 75LV. Right?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=156284\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
-
hi Denis,
YES, this separate AF button is available: : if the camera is put on Manual focus (M), the flat button above the AF-mode selector serves to activate the Auto focus temporarily. If the camera is put on Single Auto focus or Continuous Auto focus the same button serves as AF Lock.
Best regards,
Thierry
edited for addendum: YES, the view finder is extremely bright! Thanks to mention it.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=156285\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Hi
Thank you, I just told Niki @ Sun Studios. This is one hell of a camera.
-
From this review I noticed that it's a really nice working camera,
the back gives pretty nice results, but I never doubt of that myself,
it's no surprise that is a strong system,
the fact it's a 6x6 with rotating back ads to the quality,
the problem of communication is not a real one... and is already fixed.
It carries strong lens,
it can be fast...
So it seams that's nothing is wrong with it.
and a good photographer will have perfect result with it as with a snap shot.
I just mean that's a good tool by itself and what you can put in front and at the back is top line...
I would have no problem to use one.
The only thing and it's not yet a "but" is will it be strongly available (rental and sale) in North America.
and about who design it, how far, when, who hold the pen or watether is just something that won't make the camera any better nor my images or yours...
-
thanks for telling her, I was on my way to write to her!
My regards, if you still there.
Thierry
Hi
Thank you, I just told Niki @ Sun Studios. This is one hell of a camera.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=156291\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
-
Currently, following EXIF Data are available from the Hy6 camera:
- Camera model
- Lens type
- Aperture
- Exposure time
- Focal lenght
- Distance to subject
- ISO
- Capturing mode (P. S, A, M)
- Light metering mode (spot, center weighted, matrix)
- TTL flash / no TTL flash
The above EXIF data are also available in Sinar EXPOSURE, (not in Captureshop).
Thanks for this clarification, but an examination of the EXIF fields does not show this to be the case, at least with the back and body that I tested.
I also have to ask, if the exposure data is there, and Sinar has had over a year to refine the communication protocols between its camera and backs, why the display of this data on the back's screen hasn't been accomplished in all of this time? It would seem to be such a simple thing to do, assuming that the information is being passed between them, as you say it is. As someone that used to run a software development team, I would have to guess that this shouldn't be more than a few hours work, assuming of course that the data is there in the first place.
It's not my intention to make this issue a cause celebre but it is such an obvious omission that I have to wonder out loud how this was allowed to happen.
Michael
-
Thanks for this clarification, but an examination of the EXIF fields[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=156329\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Is it not clear from THs post that the launch of exposure software will happen hand in hand with an upgrade to the backs firmware (q1 2008)
At that point the back will be able to read the info the camera is chucking out
and that info will be passed to the software too
the back cant currently read the camera
the RGB thing is interesting ommission from TH list
S
-
I shall come back on this as soon as I have got the answer.
Thierry
the RGB thing is interesting ommission from TH list
S
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=156349\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
-
What I have said, is that Sinar will not provide adapters for other back manufacturers. And what I have said as well is that PO (and Hasselblad) are not part of this project and as such do not have access to the protocols.
Best regards,
Thierry
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=156234\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
The short answere is, then, that it's a closed system!
Victor
-
The short answere is, then, that it's a closed system!
Victor
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=156387\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
And Canon does not sell Hoya filters, therefore they won't work on Canon cameras. Right!
Michael
-
The short answere is, then, that it's a closed system!
Victor
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=156387\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
At the risk of covering old territory...
Did Contax publish the specifications of their back mount to help the MFDB manufacturers make backs, or did the back manufacturers work it out for themselves? If the latter, then in what way could you call the Contax (or Mamiya) an open system and the Hy6 a closed one?
Regardless, this project does not depend on the fortunes of one company. You can select between Zeiss and Schneider glass, between Sinar and Leaf backs, and three companies sell the camera body and accessories through their respective networks. This gives you a lot of choice, which is what we all want.
-
At the risk of covering old territory...
Did Contax publish the specifications of their back mount to help the MFDB manufacturers make backs, or did the back manufacturers work it out for themselves? If the latter, then in what way could you call the Contax (or Mamiya) an open system and the Hy6 a closed one?
Regardless, this project does not depend on the fortunes of one company. You can select between Zeiss and Schneider glass, between Sinar and Leaf backs, and three companies sell the camera body and accessories through their respective networks. This gives you a lot of choice, which is what we all want.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=156391\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
It isn't a lot of choice for me as I am (and want to be) phase one back user.
-
Poor of me! Do you really wish to return to and bring up again this old story?
It seems that it has been debated and explained more than enough.
BTW: another option/choice ---> 4.5x6 AND 6x6 film
Best regards,
Thierry
It isn't a lot of choice for me as I am (and want to be) phase one back user.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=156394\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
-
And Canon does not sell Hoya filters, therefore they won't work on Canon cameras. Right!
Michael
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=156389\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I don't understand what Hoya filters and Canon cameras have to do with whether or not the HY is an open platform. If protocols and mounting plate specifications are made available to other DB manufacturers then I would consider that an open platform. If not, then I would consider it a closed platform.
Victor
-
At the risk of covering old territory...
Did Contax publish the specifications of their back mount to help the MFDB manufacturers make backs, or did the back manufacturers work it out for themselves?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=156391\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I really don't know, but I would think that Contax would have provided the DB manufacturers with their specifications. Those were the days when camera makers wanted to sell cameras, and the best way to do that would be to make it as compatible as possible with DB manfacturers.
Victor
-
Victor,
Without offense, I think we should let it be like it is: for some it is an open platform (and the reasons have been explained many times), and for some it is a closed one (with the reasons being given as well).
There are too many very sensitive on this issue now.
Best regards,
Thierry
I don't understand what Hoya filters and Canon cameras have to do with whether or not the HY is an open platform. If protocols and mounting plate specifications are made available to other DB manufacturers then I would consider that an open platform. If not, then I would consider it a closed platform.
Victor
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=156400\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
-
Victor,
Without offense, I think we should let it be like it is: for some it is an open platform (and the reasons have been explained many times), and for some it is a closed one (with the reasons being given as well).
There are too many very sensitive on this issue now.
Best regards,
Thierry
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=156403\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
No offense, Thierry. I have only the best wishes for the Hy camera.
Victor
-
I don't understand what Hoya filters and Canon cameras have to do with whether or not the HY is an open platform. If protocols and mounting plate specifications are made available to other DB manufacturers then I would consider that an open platform. If not, then I would consider it a closed platform.
Victor
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=156400\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Why don't you wait a little while to see how things turn out? It is an open platform and various company's backs will work on various company's Hy6 bodies. This includes backs other than the ones that currently are available.
If you don't wish to believe this, in the face of all evidence, fine. Just don't make categorical statements on this forum about things that you don't know for a certainty.
Michael
-
Sinar eMotion75 is the best !
Dear readers, I am a professional photographer and ICT consultant, I 've worked many years for SONY and witnessed the birth of the first digital camera's.
Ever since then I stay tuned and follow all revolutions in this area from very close.
The last years I 've used several digital medium format backs, and currently own a P20 myself.
Last summer I had the opportunity to test an eMotion75 from my sinar dealer in belgium (Hotz).
It is an amazing piece of equipment ! And to my oppinion, gives the best results. I evaluate digital backs by the prints I get from of it, mostly printed on EPSON or Durst Lambda.
The e75 stands above any other MFDB at this moment, not for its ergonomy or flashy screens and menu's, but by image quality !
The whiteballance is very accurate, and although I shoot a grey card first, this was not realy needed with the e75. The whiteballance presets are very accurate.
The sinar software is a piece of "crap".
It crashes and gives poor results from your RAW files. and NOISE above 100 ISO !!!
However, I was very surprised using Brumbear, as this software is very easy to use and converts your RAW's into DNG.
In Photoshop, you can import them with the Adobe Raw Converter.
These files are amazing.
I even managed to make a file equivalent to 800 ISO.
Included I hereby post a file in jpg, created from an e75 RAW file.
It was made with a Hasselblad 503CW and 120 f4,0 CFE, wide open and handheld, shot at 400 ISO then pushed +1 in photoshop raw converter.
NO NOISE (that was not the case with the sinar software) and the highlight recovery, revealed a perfecty acceptable image out the white areas. The details are amazing.
Other PLUS was, skin colours are much more accurate with e75 compared with P20.
Especially for lips. In PhaseOne they look magenta, and one cannot correct this.
My PhaseOne dealer did not respond to this. Many other users correct lips colour by a separate layer in PS. . .
NOT needed with the e75, colours are like a transparency from KODAK E100. DEAD ON !
I probably buy one, as soon they are available. I can order one, but delivery times are not clear.
Then there is the pricetag also ...
With interchangeble adapters, it can be mounted on a Hy6 also.
Hy6 is another piece of art.
For me, a longtime Hasselblad user, this camera is closer to the V series than the current Hasselblad H series (which I do not like !)
One thing all MFDB 's have is a different look and feel in the files after print.
A different perception of depth in the image.
For Black and White, If the client allows me to ($ € )I 'll [attachment=4051:attachment]stick to Film and baryta paper in my darkroom, NO MATCH !
-
I tested the Afi 7, the Shutter speed, Aperture and ISO appear in the file when viewed in lightroom and V11. The one item that does not appear is the lens?
"Shutter speed and aperture are not recorded"
I wonder if that's done on purpose or wether it's a design mistake.
However how important is it to that info?
You don't get that info when you mount any DB on an Alpa,Cambo etc.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=156227\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
-
I also have to ask, if the exposure data is there, and Sinar has had over a year to refine the communication protocols between its camera and backs, why the display of this data on the back's screen hasn't been accomplished in all of this time? It would seem to be such a simple thing to do, assuming that the information is being passed between them, as you say it is. As someone that used to run a software development team, I would have to guess that this shouldn't be more than a few hours work, assuming of course that the data is there in the first place.
It's not my intention to make this issue a cause celebre but it is such an obvious omission that I have to wonder out loud how this was allowed to happen.
Michael
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=156329\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Almost every single digital system of the past few years has had some weird fault that winds up being discovered by photographers (and very quickly after release), that cause those photographers to wonder what the heck could have happened, because the fault seems so glaringly obvious. (All the Leica M8 faults, the Canon Mark III, etc.)
I think that the answer lies in the fact that most of these things are being developed by very different groups of engineers -- the glass and machine-tool guys in one area, electronics hardware people in another, and software teams -- and none of these people are required to be working photographers (most wouldn't even have the time.) And, since the camera doesn't work at all until all of the bits are done, there tends to be quite a short testing period of a full production-version camera. The result is, weird stuff like this. Sometimes, I think some bits are simply forgotten, or was third item on a list and there was only time to do two.
You're probably quite right, transferring the data via a firmware update shouldn't be a big deal, and probably isn't...but for some reason, these things just don't seem to get done. Leica people are still waiting for important firmware updates, even fairly simply things, months after they were expected...Canon took forever (in the eyes of users) to even admit that the Mark III had a focus problem.
As to Thiery's promise of a quick update on this...I'm sure he's sincere, but as a Leica user, I take it with a grain of salt. Last year, we ran into a crush of critical problems on the M8, which HAD top be fixed, and the future of the company seemed in doubt. But then came the European Christmas vacation, which essentially shuts down the month of December. Nothing got done. If something is promised right after the New Year, then it best be completed by the end of November, because if it isn't, well, work will resume in 30 days... 8-)
JC
-
Almost every single digital system of the past few years has had some weird fault that winds up being discovered by photographers (and very quickly after release), that cause those photographers to wonder what the heck could have happened, because the fault seems so glaringly obvious. (All the Leica M8 faults, the Canon Mark III, etc.)
Didn't someone (Thierry?) already explain that EXIF data will only work with the upcoming Exposure software, and not in Capture Shop? I believe Michael never tried Exposure, (probably because it is still in beta testing stage).
-
"Shutter speed and aperture are not recorded"
However how important is it to that info?
You don't get that info when you mount any DB on an Alpa,Cambo etc.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=156227\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
IMO that info is not currently important
but when software does calculations on correcting lens aberatations (for instance) the aperture and focus distance (and shift amount ) will become very important
(is this not DAC by blad)
There could even be a software that worked with the shutter speed info and cancelled out movement in the same way that CA is bashed in software !
S
-
Almost every single digital system of the past few years has had some weird fault that winds up being discovered by photographers (and very quickly after release), that cause those photographers to wonder what the heck could have happened, because the fault seems so glaringly obvious. (All the Leica M8 faults, the Canon Mark III, etc.)
JC
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=156506\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
In a way it's reassuring that Sinar are launching with the E75 back which is a known quantity and has interchangeable mounts. If the camera has a really weird fault, photographers can always mount the back on their old MF system and keep going - Leaf buyers won't be so fortunate
Edmund
-
Right Graham: thanks!
Thierry
Didn't someone (Thierry?) already explain that EXIF data will only work with the upcoming Exposure software, and not in Capture Shop? I believe Michael never tried Exposure, (probably because it is still in beta testing stage).
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=156510\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
-
Hello everybody,
as a long time reader, I thought know it might be about time to post something on these forums.
Yesterday there was a Sinar presentation of the Hy6 here in munich which I attended to see this hyped camera. I was able to hold it, play around a little and press the shutter release, while it was not possible to take away raws.
Attached to the body was a sinar back emotion 75 with the mamiya rz style rotating adaptor, a wlf and the AF 80 2.8.
The camer felt very good in my hands, i was surprised about the weight, very light. (but there was no prism attached, not even on at all to look at, or mirror viewfinder, whatever it will be...).
The handgrip is absolutley nice, the viewfinder very bright with an oldschool nikon F4 style display in it. AF worked very good, also the little red focus helping light came in handy in that dim studio. I couldn't really test it, but my feeling was at least, maybe better then Hasselblads AF.
The rotating adaptor is what I really dig on this camera ( i shot rz for quite a while), although one thing about it is strange. It doesn't really lock in its current position, which means you don't need to push a button or anything to rotate the back, there is just a little drag (?right word?) to overcome and I picture myself constantly turning the back accidentially by mistake by some degrees, causing the camera not to fire. But its a great feature, shooting portrait wihout turning the cam.
Mirrorslap seems to be a lot less then on the H really.
The back, I can't say anything about the quality of the files. There was a photographer doing a demo shoot with the emotion 75 attached to a macpro 2x2,66 running capture shop and the whole show hung up after 4 frames...
But the display on that back is so bad, I think even worse then the old non plus phase displays, a joke.
And some rumors for you as well: the local phase one dealer said that their backs will be availlable for the hy6. as for when and how, with cable or without and all those things, there where no answers (of course, i think they just don't really know themselves). And the Sinar Guy at the show yesterday said, yes it is an open system (whatever that means...)
But anyway, time will tell, this is a great camera already, although without a phase back it is only worth half of it.
cheers,
martin
ps: something about me, as this is my first post here: I am a fashion photographer, shooting H2 with phase P45+ and P30+, sometimes Canon 1ds MKII. I don't really like my cameras, thinking about switching back to V series Hasselblads, but I really like the Phase backs. Here in Germany Phase is definitley number one in the Pro market, you can rent them in every mayor city, which i think is absolutley necessary, and everyone i know is shooting the phase on a H2.
-
Hi,
Sorry if I missed a comment about it but the tomatoe in the ISO comparision does change it's color during the transfer to higher ISOs, the red becomes much different in look when the ISOs creep up.
Is this something you did wrong in post, or with the camera ?
-
I tested the Afi 7, the Shutter speed, Aperture and ISO appear in the file when viewed in lightroom and V11. The one item that does not appear is the lens?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=156484\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
The camera you handled was a pre-production unit. On the production AFi units that are now shipping the focal length is recorded along with every other EXIF and meta-data (aperture, speed, EV settings, AE mode, iso, copyright, description etc.) and can be viewed by LC11 and any software that supports the .mos file.
Yair
-
Yair,
How is the camera's RGB-sensor implemented with the functioning of the Leaf back?
EPd
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=156678\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Not yet (meaning there is no RGB reading being transferred as yet)
Yair
-
Yair,
Is this a matter of firmware updating, or are the current backs simply not able to use the information from the RGB-sensor?
EPd
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=156687\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Like I said the data is not being transferred yet. I believe this will be sorted in the future via a firmware upgrade to the body and back.
Yair
-
Like I said the data is not being transferred yet. I believe this will be sorted in the future via a firmware upgrade to the body and back.
Yair
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=156691\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
"I believe this will be sorted in the future via a firmware upgrade to the body and back."
Man, the number of times I've heard this and had to wait months if not years.
-
Like I said the data is not being transferred yet. I believe this will be sorted in the future via a firmware upgrade to the body and back.
Yair
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=156691\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Does this mean the data is not being transferred to the exif data or does this mean the data is not being used at all by the back?
-
as for the Sinar Hy6, the RGB data coming from the sensor IS used by the back (for color balance), but not transfered to the software currently.
Best regards,
Thierry
Does this mean the data is not being transferred to the exif data or does this mean the data is not being used at all by the back?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=156705\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
-
Dear EPd,
Those are the EXIF data transfered to the SW.
Of course, the RGB sensor's information is transfered to the back, for the color balance, but not (yet) to the SW.
Best regards,
Thierry
No colour temperature info from the camera to the back? What's the RGB sensor doing then?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=156298\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
-
Dear EPd,
Let me some time to answer this: I honestly don't know yet and it was not my real preoccupation until now.
Thanks for your patience,
Thierry
Thanks for that info, Thierry. Your answer puzzles me, though. So if the RGB-sensor info is transferred to the back, but the back will not transfer this info to the software, how is this info actually influencing the final image? I suppose RAW data itself will not be influenced (or it would no longer be RAW, would it?). The RGB-sensor info is needed to interprete the RAW data correctly for conversion to TIFF with the software. But if the software does not read the RGB-sensor info, how can the back use this info for the color balance, as you say? Does the back translate it into something that can be read by the software? Or is the RGB-sensor info transferred to the back where it ends up in hyperspace?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=156817\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
-
AFAIK the Hasselblad H`s 90 degree finder works also with mirrors instead of a prism. I thought that was the reason why the finder of the Hasselblad H is so much better than the finder of the Mamiya AFD ?
So it seems to me there were neither financial reasons nor concerns about the weight but simply the intention to make the best finder available?
Bernd
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=156073\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
The H 90° prism finder is just that–a prism finder.
-
"There will also be a reflex viewfinder available, which will obviate the need to mount the back in a different orientation. Just turn the camera sideways. But this is not without problems. Hand held is one thing, but when tripod mounted this can be awkward and limiting, making an L bracket highly desirable. If someone like Really Right Stuff gets around to making an L bracket for the Hy6 the way they do for the Hasselblad H that would be ideal."
Hi Michael,
Just a thought.. There currently is no Rollie SCA module similar to the Hassey SCA 3902 module that would support a Metz (off camera) flash on an L Bracket.
David
-
EPd,
Sorry for my late reply on this, but I wanted to make sure.
I should have written the RGB data "will be transfered", since it needs Exposure AND a FW update of the eMotion backs.
Currently, the EXIF data available are the one I have listed up previously: those data are transfered to Exposure, and are YET available (with the current Exposure Beta). Michael did not have Exposure for his testing and review.
Best regards,
Thierry
Thanks for that info, Thierry. Your answer puzzles me, though. So if the RGB-sensor info is transferred to the back, but the back will not transfer this info to the software, how is this info actually influencing the final image? I suppose RAW data itself will not be influenced (or it would no longer be RAW, would it?). The RGB-sensor info is needed to interprete the RAW data correctly for conversion to TIFF with the software. But if the software does not read the RGB-sensor info, how can the back use this info for the color balance, as you say? Does the back translate it into something that can be read by the software? Or is the RGB-sensor info transferred to the back where it ends up in hyperspace?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=156817\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
-
deleted
-
EPd,
why the hell are you always and each time looking for arguments! Who designed what has been said, many times, and released officially in a PR.
Now concerning the RGB information: I am SORRY, I try to give the information I have, and when I don't have it, I am looking to get it. I have corrected as soon as it was clear for me. So why make all this fuss?
Now, and to be clear, this is not my job to be here, I am not even here on request of my employer, solely by my own decision and "fun". I am here to inform and help whatever I can, since I enjoy to be here and speak/share/communicate with fellow photographers, but not to be attacked each time and over again. I have corrected as soon as it was clear for me. So why make all this fuss?
Best regards,
Thierry
Thierry,
Thanks for the correction. So basically the situation is the same as with the Leaf version, as described by Yair earlier in this thread? Since this RGB-sensor feature is described in Sinar's list of USP's would it not be better to be upfront clear about it not being a USP yet? (I feel I want to say a lot of unpleasant things now about who designed what about this camera, but we've been through that discussion already before. Let me conclude that this is a "great" sample of integrated design by Jenoptik.)
EPd
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=157922\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
-
Thierry,
Welcome to the wonderful world of online discourse.
Michael
-
Thanks Michael!
It's fun, but not always. Trying my best, even if it's little!
Thierry
Thierry,
Welcome to the wonderful world of online discourse.
Michael
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=158116\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
-
Don't worry about it , Thierry.
Your input is always valuable, and bitching is the name of the online game, I'm afraid.
Folks...If you don't like this version of the camera, don't buy it, or wait for the next release.
That is, if you can afford it anyways....I'm not targeting anyone specific, I'm just refering to Michaels Ferrari-Syndrome observation.
regards,
Mike
-
EPd,
same applies to you: "Why the hell do you always and everytime want to have the final word"!
It is certainly not you who shall stop me to write. You are actually wrong: when I am out of arguments I simply say it and am not afraid to say that I don't know, which seems not be the case for you.
Back to the facts:
You had asked a question (which was containing already negatives remarks and agressively written). I have answered this question with patience, honestly and with true information. Again you did then find it appropriate to "put" some dubious remarks about Jenoptik (great" sample of integrated design by Jenoptik).
I feel sorry for you, but when remarks like this are written, I shall always answer! And if my tunnel-minded vision does annoy you, then just skip my next posts, that's the most simple solution.
And finally, I do not need such comments as "respects anyway", after such posts from you: this is all but respect.
Best regards,
Thierry
Thierry,
Why the hell do you always and everytime want to have the final word, even if you are completely out of arguments? I would appreciate it if you would know when to stop reacting, now and then. (Especially when claiming that your info is based on facts and mine would be based on opinion.) Your effort is truly appreciated too, but your tunnel-minded vision is sometimes very annoying as well. (My personal view; I do not intend to speak for anyone else here.)
Respect anyway.
EPd
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=158185\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
-
EPd, Thierry, could you guys use your time more constructively ? Enough already !
Edmund
-
Thierry,
Thanks for the correction. So basically the situation is the same as with the Leaf version, as described by Yair earlier in this thread? Since this RGB-sensor feature is described in Sinar's list of USP's would it not be better to be upfront clear about it not being a USP yet? (I feel I want to say a lot of unpleasant things now about who designed what about this camera, but we've been through that discussion already before. Let me conclude that this is a "great" sample of integrated design by Jenoptik.)
EPd
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=157922\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
EPd,
Not sure what you are complaining about here:
- The camera is not there yet, but Thierry has given you a clear answer as to what would be needed to get there,
- It seems to me that with FW update and the latest software, the camera will have the capability you are requesting.
It is of course your prerogative not to buy until it gets there, but that all there is to it really.
Cheers,
Bernard
-
I'm going to close this topic. Lots of heat and not enough light any more.
Further discussions of the Hy6 and Sinar backs can be started in a new thread.
Michael