Luminous Landscape Forum
Equipment & Techniques => Medium Format / Film / Digital Backs – and Large Sensor Photography => Topic started by: gwhitf on October 07, 2009, 11:11:55 am
-
For shooting people/lifestyle, and environmental portraits, on the run, loose and free, untethered, can anyone tell me the fastest, most responsive MF fullish-frame back that's out there right now, shipping, for the Hasselblad H? Something like two frames a second recycle, or so? I'm wanting the most Viewfinder real estate, so the cropping backs are out, ie P30+ etc, P40+ etc. Trying to find a balance between large large viewfinder image and fast recycle. Secondary wish list would be 3" LCD, but that would probably narrow it down to Hasselblad-brand backs, which could be fine I guess.
In short, I'm wanting to keep the optical qualities from my H lenses, but shoot relatively fast, like the 5D2 feeling, but also be able to trust the LCD rendering pretty well.
Does this back exist? It's a last-ditch effort to justify keeping the H system. Leaf A75s? Hasselblad something? Megapixels do not matter; the main thing is the speed/recycle of the back, and the LCD quality. Thanks.
-
For shooting people/lifestyle, and environmental portraits, on the run, loose and free, untethered, can anyone tell me the fastest, most responsive MF fullish-frame back that's out there right now, shipping, for the Hasselblad H? Something like two frames a second recycle, or so? I'm wanting the most Viewfinder real estate, so the cropping backs are out, ie P30+ etc, P40+ etc. Trying to find a balance between large large viewfinder image and fast recycle. Secondary wish list would be 3" LCD, but that would probably narrow it down to Hasselblad-brand backs, which could be fine I guess.
In short, I'm wanting to keep the optical qualities from my H lenses, but shoot relatively fast, like the 5D2 feeling, but also be able to trust the LCD rendering pretty well.
Does this back exist? It's a last-ditch effort to justify keeping the H system. Leaf A75s? Hasselblad something? Megapixels do not matter; the main thing is the speed/recycle of the back, and the LCD quality. Thanks.
The Hasselblad 50mp shoots at 1.1 seconds per frame, As important is the fact that it shoots this consistently. There is no pause after the first frame for a black calibration, and with the new Sandisk cards there is no buffer!
-
None will shoot like a DSLR with 9fps.
HOWEVER, if you use the correct cards there is no buffer and to be honest I like that more than 4-5 fps.
-
GW,
Leaf Aptus 54s is fast, 22mpx
BJ
-
GW,
Leaf Aptus 54s is fast, 22mpx
BJ
Thanks, Billy. But I think that back is a Cropping Back, isn't it? Lots of viewfinder lost. But 22MP is more than enough, and slightly less than a frame per second would be fine. I remember the responsiveness of the P21+ -- very fast and you never felt like you were going to miss the expression. But it too was a Cropping Back.
Kinda makes you wonder why Hasselblad wouldn't make various models of their H Viewfinder, and each one would magnify an amount, depending on the back that you had mounted, so that you never were penalized for using a Cropping Back. There'd be a 1.3 factor Viewfinder, and a Damn Near FF Viewfinder, etc etc. But let's not start in on them about their "Full Frame" marketing approaching, shall we? We're playing nice now.
-
Thanks, Billy. But I think that back is a Cropping Back, isn't it? Lots of viewfinder lost. But 22MP is more than enough, and slightly less than a frame per second would be fine. I remember the responsiveness of the P21+ -- very fast and you never felt like you were going to miss the expression. But it too was a Cropping Back.
The Aptus 54-S is a 48mm x 36mm sensor, equivalent to what you are currently using. You'll need lots of light, though.
Steve Hendrix
-
Thanks, Billy. But I think that back is a Cropping Back, isn't it? Lots of viewfinder lost. But 22MP is more than enough, and slightly less than a frame per second would be fine. I remember the responsiveness of the P21+ -- very fast and you never felt like you were going to miss the expression. But it too was a Cropping Back.
Kinda makes you wonder why Hasselblad wouldn't make various models of their H Viewfinder, and each one would magnify an amount, depending on the back that you had mounted, so that you never were penalized for using a Cropping Back. There'd be a 1.3 factor Viewfinder, and a Damn Near FF Viewfinder, etc etc. But let's not start in on them about their "Full Frame" marketing approaching, shall we? We're playing nice now.
Hasselblad makes 3 viewfinders:
HV90 - Full Frame viewfinder for film
HVD90 - Full Frame viewfinder for the H3D and H3DII 22, 39, and 50mp sensors - the is a magnified viewfinder
HVM - Full frame waist level viewfinder for film.
Greg
-
I'd second the Aptus 54s. I have one on my RZ. The LCD is big and low res, and is unusable above 100.
I was impressed with teh speed when I shot this back on an H2.
-
is unusable above 100.
Whoa.
Cross that one off the list...
Wonder how many upset owners there are, of that back...? Yikes.
I'd be happy with this mystery back that produced clean ASA 400, (800 ideally, but I know I'm crowding the edge here with that request).
-
HV90 - Full Frame viewfinder for film
HVD90 - Full Frame viewfinder for the H3D and H3DII 22, 39, and 50mp sensors - the is a magnified viewfinder
HVM - Full frame waist level viewfinder for film.
Thank you , Greg. Mine appears to be a HV90x, matched up (with a mask) with my P45+.
-
Thank you , Greg. Mine appears to be a HV90x, matched up (with a mask) with my P45+.
GW,
Not sure where you are located, but if you're near NYC or coming in for Photo East, stop by Milk Studios and check out our system. We will have a fashion setup where you can shoot with the H3DII-50, I think you'll be happy with the viewfinder, speed/consistency, as well as the image quality at 400 ISO.
Where:
Milk Studios
Penthouse
450 West 15th Street
New York, NY
When
October 22nd
10am - 5pm
Greg
-
I'm really happy with my Leaf Aptus 22. It shoots at around a frame a sec. I've never had to wait for it. Shooting MF is just a slower process than shooting small format. Usually, I'm popping 7b's when I shoot with it so it's the strobe recycle that holds me up.
In talking to Steve at Capture Integration yesterday, he informed me that the 54s is not going to be serviced by the new Leaf company nor are there likely to be software upgrades and such. The Aptus 22 however, which is older, looks like it will be serviced by Leaf and will hopefully be supported by Capture 1 when they update it for Leaf.
If you're expecting MF to behave like small format, you'll be disappointed. Best just to stick with Canon or Nikon if that's the case.
John
-
Isn't the P65+ fast in sensor plus mode? Double the speed or so?
Would mean better high ISO and full frame... and if megapixles are not an issue the 15MP would be fine?
-
Isn't the P65+ fast in sensor plus mode? Double the speed or so?
Would mean better high ISO and full frame... and if megapixles are not an issue the 15MP would be fine?
I would HIGHLY recommend looking at raw high ISO files from this back. Not at all what i hoped to see!
-
I'm sure your eyes would explode out of your head in dealing with learning and implementing a new piece of software into your workflow such as Phocus or something else. It's never as easy as any of them claim.
Most ignorant quote of the day!!!
-
I would HIGHLY recommend looking at raw high ISO files from this back. Not at all what i hoped to see!
might be true. But gwihtf(ysdfgharf) is talking about ISO400-800... is the P65+ that bad in sensor plus mode?
-
Hey douchebag
Most obscene quote of the day
-
I would HIGHLY recommend looking at raw high ISO files from this back. Not at all what i hoped to see!
Interesting view on it... I actually saw the opposite in the high iso files I worked on... They looked better than anything else I had seen from other backs.
GW, P65+ is probably best, but I think the LCD rules it out for you. Aptus II 10 might be worth a look though.
-
Back to the topic at hand.
I think a Canon or Nikon 21-24mp camera would be better in focusing quality and accuracy, lens lineup, screen quality and so much more that a P65+ in the sensor plus setup at 15mp. It's just not always about this pixel is better than that. It's also about usability, speed of shooting, speed of judging frames on the camera LCD for mixed lighting, etc..
It's always the landscape shooters who seem most content with the MFDBs. They have the least needs to be quite honest. When you ask shooters of other content, the level of satisfaction of the entire shooting process with MFD drops.
certainly very true. But we all - especially g.wtf as the spearhead of this point of view - knew that before. There must be a reason that he asked for a way to shoot his H other than pointing out again that there is no solution, no?
-
I would HIGHLY recommend looking at raw high ISO files from this back. Not at all what i hoped to see!
I would too because I think you'll find them to be really very good.
Bear in mind that using Capture One to view/adjust/process very high ISO images is a must. IMO that also applies to Canon files (e.g. the 5DII); C1 just does a better job of handling the high ISOs.
No back handles like a fast dSLR. The P65+ however is fast in full resolution and even faster at 15 megapixels. Shooting at 15 megapixels produces a VERY good file which could be easily compared to (or even beats) a 22 megapixel dSLR. At 15 megapixels the base ISO of the camera is upgraded to ISO200 with ISO 400 and ISO 800 being very good and 1600 and 3200 producing a slightly grained look that I find to be film like (if you want baby-butt smooth files then you never want the last two ISOs on a camera, but the "noise" on the 65+ IMO is a very pleasing grain).
It also has zero viewfinder crop; what you see is what you get.
Doug Peterson ()
__________________
Head of Technical Services, Capture Integration
Phase One, Leaf, Canon, Apple, Profoto, Eizo & More
National: 877.217.9870 | Cell: 740.707.2183
Newsletter: Read Latest or Sign Up (http://www.captureintegration.com/our-company/newsletters/)
RSS Feed: Subscribe (http://www.captureintegration.com/2008/08/11/rss-feeds/)
-
Is this true? 54s not supported? Including repairs out of warranty? No C1? Was this done to spite me for selling my P30+?
I'm really happy with my Leaf Aptus 22. It shoots at around a frame a sec. I've never had to wait for it. Shooting MF is just a slower process than shooting small format. Usually, I'm popping 7b's when I shoot with it so it's the strobe recycle that holds me up.
In talking to Steve at Capture Integration yesterday, he informed me that the 54s is not going to be serviced by the new Leaf company nor are there likely to be software upgrades and such. The Aptus 22 however, which is older, looks like it will be serviced by Leaf and will hopefully be supported by Capture 1 when they update it for Leaf.
If you're expecting MF to behave like small format, you'll be disappointed. Best just to stick with Canon or Nikon if that's the case.
John
-
The 54s will be supported by Kodak - not the new Leaf. You can ask the Capture Integration folks for more details although I got the sense that it's still foggy at this point.
John
-
Sorry, should have called you Kanye West instead. Perhaps that would be more sophisticated for you.
Most racist quote of the day.
So you're:
Ignorant
Obscene
Racist
AND you think you're friend is too stupid to learn a simple software such as Phocus????
I wish we hadn't gotten off on the wrong foot...I'm sure you're someone I'd want to hang out with
-
Most racist quote of the day.
So you're:
Ignorant
Obscene
Racist
What's race have to do with Kanye West being a douche bag or a jackass?
-
What's race have to do with Kanye West being a douche bag or a jackass?
Okay, maybe racist wasn't the right call, glad you agreed with the other 2!
-
Okay, maybe racist wasn't the right call, glad you agreed with the other 2!
LOL! I think putting words in peoples mouth is ignorant and obscene!
-
I understand the rolling of eyes about learning *yet another software* but it appears to most observers that current RAW processor workflow is very similar in scope - not like the days of "Read the Manual" for independent methods of color balance, batch changes, etc.
Seriously, take a look at Phocus. If you are familiar with RAW capture and processing, you may discover that it is not a stretch to master.
Don't believe what I say here - download it yourself and try it. If you have questions, I will help.
It's the only way to really know.
John
-
I understand the rolling of eyes about learning *yet another software* but it appears to most observers that current RAW processor workflow is very similar in scope - not like the days of "Read the Manual" for independent methods of color balance, batch changes, etc.
John's friend is certainly "challenged". Not so much in intelligence, but moreso in patience. I would have no issue switching to Hasselblad workflow, if I felt the calling, and if it proved efficient. I think it's a good thing that you're out there, put out the challenge, to come and watch and view and learn. You don't see much of that from Hasselblad.
And you don't see much of Hasselblad in the rental market and the Tech areas. I remember last summer, having a job to shoot in New York City, and after several calls, could not find one digital tech that was well-versed in Phocus, for tethering a job. The Hasselblad market seems geared more toward wealthy amateurs and and weekend warriors. Although I have heard that Hasselblad is entrenched more in the LA market than NYC. I think NYC is more Phase and Leaf.
I used FlexColor back when I owned the Imacon scanner, and when I briefly owned an H1D, (before returning it). Hopefully, Phocus has come a long way since FlexColor. FlexColor won the Emmy for "Most Tiny Windows Opened At Once, Yet You Never Know Which Ones Were Active".
Honestly, I think all of MF's days are numbered, so I think it's good that you or Hasselblad is out there, taking an active stake in keeping it all alive, and fighting the good fight. I know the old saying is: "Just wait for the next generation of Nikon and Canon to hit the streets", but in this case, I really do feel that. Time is ticking; now is the time to fight.
-
but moreso in patience.
Gwitif knows his cameras. Obviously it seems it knows his cameras and probably has owned or tested every medium format back out there and it seems what he wants is a 5D2 in a medium format back.
Nobody makes that, probably never will because right now medium format is the Fuji 680 of the digital world, or better put the fuji 680 that shoots with a 35mm polaroid back for previews.
When it's right it right, but in todays world the versatility is limited and the client expectations so intense it's just hard to justify the time required.
Right now we've been casting all week. Stills and Video, 150 to 180 people per day, running two sets, all web galleries must be edited and online every night.
This is Canon territory and not because it doesn't matter in a casting, actually the casting is where this project lives or dies it is just with medium format, even if it shot video and stills, it wouldn't matter because it would take another
two hours per night to process out jpegs for the galleries and right now we've working 7:30 am to 3:30 am to stay on deadline.
Now in a week we start shooting and a year or two ago this would have been a medium format job. The props are stylized but minimized, the lighting is high wattage and crafted, the location is the studio, but the shot list is off the scale.
Now here is the rub, I would love to shoot this job medium format and for 65% I could but for 35%, (the 35% that is make it or break it) I can't shoot slower, I can't work only in low iso, I can't always rely on being tethered and I can't keep changing out batteries every 3 1/2 hours.
Medium format has gotten incrementally better, but here's the rub #2. Working all week with the clients, they look at the previews coming off the camera and into the computer and say, "wow that looks beautiful" and this is just the no make up, non styled, semi lit casting and they love the quality of images they are seeing, so as much as I "want" to shoot this job a different format, even don't mind beating myself up a little I have to think is it really worth the time, the risk, the extra effort when I hear "wow that looks beautiful"?
Now on to rub #3. Medium format knows what we need, knows the price points, knows the flexibility that's required today, knows that backups are imperative and I think is try to get there, though the movement is glacial compared to 35mm. I think Hasselblad gets closest, just because they have a more detailed lcd and is trying to do something about autofocus, though it is still difficult to understand why a digital back can't produce a detailed jpeg along with a raw file, or why they are stuck in 100, to 200 iso ccd land and why a frame rate of 1.2 frames a second seems monumental compared to the previous .9 fps.
The dealers on this forum talk about superior image quality and in "some" conditions they are correct, but not getting the shot, going behind schedule, making our life more difficult is not an option for a lot of paying work that is coming our way.
Now to me the biggest part of all this is Gwitif, me and a lot of people own or have owned medium format so we are predisposed to continue with it, but give the conditions we now work under, it's difficult to go that direction, even more difficult to spend may tens of thousands of dollars just to get an incremental improvement from the previous camera or digital back.
Still, this is almost a mute discussion, because medium format knows what the working professional requires . . . today, though just giving us more megapixels, taking comparison photos of brick walls, or charts doesn't do it, but as I've said before, don't ask a photographer what they want, ask the client.
BC
-
GW,
Jackie R. can tech Hasselblad / Phocus for you.
I'm considering H3dii-50ms so I attended Hasselblad training at Foto-Care earlier this week.
Phocus v1.2 and 2.0beta seemed solid.
BJ
-
Obviously it seems it knows his cameras and probably has owned or tested every medium format back out there and it seems what he wants is a 5D2 in a medium format back.
I growed up shooting medium format. My entire life. I do not want to give it up. But Cooter makes some good points -- at some point, the job requirements are make (force) to me to choose a certain camera to work with. Everything you do now is expensive -- more shots in one day; more options crammed into a tighter time frame.
I'd love nothing more than a H body that fit in my hand like an old 203 Hasselblad did, or even my old Fuji 680III. But there's no vertical grip for that H2 body, and there's simply nothing more unnatural than shooting that H2 body in vertical formal all day, handheld. The old Contax fit much better with the vertical grip. It just "clicked" when you held it, felt right. You never see any design considerations with these MF companies about how things FEEL; everything is just about numbers and resolution and clinical issues. Photographers, for the most part, are not computers -- they are living, breathing, romantic, sensitive creatures -- you can't hand them a bar of soap and expect them to embrace it.
I think so many people are now in a fight between what they WANT to shoot, versus what they're FORCED to shoot. There's a good two-part interview with Sam Jones, over on A Photo Editor. But his rub is still Film versus Digital; not so much H2 versus 5D2, (although he's using the 5D2 for expermimental film projects). If you want a good read, go check it out. Very real world.
http://www.aphotoeditor.com/2009/10/08/sam...terview-part-1/ (http://www.aphotoeditor.com/2009/10/08/sam-jones-interview-part-1/)
There's a Part One and a Part Two. Don't miss Part Two either. Look at how that RZ renders a lot of his frames. That's why people WANT to make MediumFormat continue to work for them.
I open up my bag at the start of the job and still feel slight embarrassment at shooting Canon. I think to myself, "Wow, what a pussy I am; wimping out with this toy camera". But at the end of the day, no glitches in software, an awesome bright accurate LCD on the 5D2, and I shoot very fast and rarely miss a facial expression. I just set the Sharpness to 3, run the files in DPP, and never have a resolution problem. Absolutely stunning files, for CMYK application.
With the P45+, I'm squinting at that shitty LCD, trying to figure out what the highlights are doing, and still using 3.79 because of the crashes with version 4 of Capture One, and ironically, got an email today from Phase wanting me to beta test version 5. I thought to myself, "Hell, you never got version 4 right; so is that the solution -- just bring out version 5?"
With Canon, it just WORKS. You shoot pictures, you get a check. You can train ANY assistant to run EOS Utility and DPP coupled. No need for a Digital Tech, with his demands, and his Kart, and his Excess Baggage charges. And no bullshit with tethering, like with CaptureOne 4. (No idea with Phocus).
I really think that MF should concentrate on landscape guys, because their demands are so less. Less complaints from the Brick Walls and MTF Lab Coat crowd.
Again, I *want* to stick with MF, but man, after such a struggle, you just think, "Is it worth it?" Years and years gone by with MF, and all we've got is more resolution and the same awful LCD. At some point, it's time to cut rope, wish them well, but move on.
PS: I just think that a camera should rest in your hand the same if it's vertical than when it's in horizontal. In the old days, you'd just rotate the back, (680), or with Hasselblad, it was square, so non-issue. I don't see why vertical format should be treated as second-class citizen.
-
I really think that MF should concentrate on landscape guys, because their demands are so less. Less complaints from the Brick Walls and MTF Lab Coat crowd.
Should? That decision was made long ago.
-
@Gwhitf,
Why not use Capture One ?
One program for both cameras, I can't wait for the Leaf support myself.
Only have to learn your assistant one program and you can switch cameras in seconds.
To be honest I hardly shoot without a laptop on location when it really matters, but since the 5DmkII I have to add that I finally have a camera I like that much that I don't have a doubt in my mind to switch when needed. But one program for both solutions would be heaven. Even the display of the 5DmkII doesn't show me exactly what I want to see, but I have to add it's 100% better than what I see on MF cameras, and that REALLY puzzles me, it should be that expensive.
Maybe it's that's why I'm so used to using a laptop on location now that even with the DSLR I'm using it whenever possible.
The perfect camera will never be released, but maybe someday there is a MF camera that is actually a 5D with a larger sensor, add leaf shutter lenses and we're pretty close.
Will it happen ?
Maybe, maybe not.
-
Gwhitf,
ive been forced into using c1 4.5 for a while now. initially its got some parts that are a pain in the ass, ie, its useless importing and file renaming. but now i have my head around it (that takes a bit) i am finding it quite a bit nicer than c1 3. the last few versions haven't crashed on me at all. it runs fast, and has really good speed, even with a laptop. the previews are really nice as well.
if you can tolerate canons bloody awful software, then you really should try and learn c1 4.5, its 10x better.
are you missing your contax? besides the dark finder and slower focus, isnt that a lot of what you want in a medium format camera?
i really like the p45s file, but you must doing you head in with shooting at 1 frame per 2 seconds. im hoping c1 4.5 will work with an aptus 75s, then there will a good file sixe and good speed, at a affordable price.
paul
-
Hi Paul,
I know that it's cool to slam the Canon software, but I absolutely love it. Again, once you get your head around it, its simplicity is even elegant in a way. It doesn't bog you down with a bunch of unnecessary features -- its only job is to tether quickly.
(It's almost like there should be separate applications for Tethering/Capturing, apart from Processing. There should be a stripped-down, bare-bones, Ford Pinto version of every software, and the only features are for FAST tethering. Everything else is disabled. The only goal of this tethering software is to capture the file, see the preview, and get it backed up. And then once you get back home, and the pressure is off, you could transfer the files to your big computer, from the laptop, and that have the big Processing Application on the big G5 tower).
That's why I avoid CaptureOne 4, it just seems so bloated for laptop tethering. Even on my souped-up MacBook Pro.
The Canon software is just braindead easy. And I love how the tags that you set in the camera body are picked up in the software. Not sure that any non-Canon software would pick up the tags. I have started setting my White Balance using the Color Temperature in the camera body; I am now very quick to go there, change the color temp, in the same way that I'd add CC filters to the ProShade, in the old days. The Canon DPP software picks up that Color Temperature tag.
I know I'm a hard customer to please, but I just refuse to get overburdened with some stupid Tethering Kart, and some Attitude Digital Tech. I just won't have it. Period. I use Photo Assistants that I train, to run EOS Utility. I bring them in on off days and train them on how to run DPP and EOS Util. That way, I'm not dependent on any one digital tech. The whole Dog and Pony Show is just increasingly tiresome; I just won't do it any more. Read that Sam Jones interview on APhotoEditor -- it's now gotten so bad that they run TWO digital tech karts -- a main one, and then a Client Kart. No f'ing way will I ever do that. It's gotten out of control.
Gwhitf,
ive been forced into using c1 4.5 for a while now. initially its got some parts that are a pain in the ass, ie, its useless importing and file renaming. but now i have my head around it (that takes a bit) i am finding it quite a bit nicer than c1 3. the last few versions haven't crashed on me at all. it runs fast, and has really good speed, even with a laptop. the previews are really nice as well.
if you can tolerate canons bloody awful software, then you really should try and learn c1 4.5, its 10x better.
are you missing your contax? besides the dark finder and slower focus, isnt that a lot of what you want in a medium format camera?
i really like the p45s file, but you must doing you head in with shooting at 1 frame per 2 seconds. im hoping c1 4.5 will work with an aptus 75s, then there will a good file sixe and good speed, at a affordable price.
paul
-
Hi Paul,
I know that it's cool to slam the Canon software, but I absolutely love it. Again, once you get your head around it, its simplicity is even elegant in a way. It doesn't bog you down with a bunch of unnecessary features -- its only job is to tether quickly.
(It's almost like there should be separate applications for Tethering/Capturing, apart from Processing. There should be a stripped-down, bare-bones, Ford Pinto version of every software, and the only features are for FAST tethering. Everything else is disabled. The only goal of this tethering software is to capture the file, see the preview, and get it backed up. And then once you get back home, and the pressure is off, you could transfer the files to your big computer, from the laptop, and that have the big Processing Application on the big G5 tower).
That's why I avoid CaptureOne 4, it just seems so bloated for laptop tethering. Even on my souped-up MacBook Pro.
The Canon software is just braindead easy. And I love how the tags that you set in the camera body are picked up in the software. Not sure that any non-Canon software would pick up the tags. I have started setting my White Balance using the Color Temperature in the camera body; I am now very quick to go there, change the color temp, in the same way that I'd add CC filters to the ProShade, in the old days. The Canon DPP software picks up that Color Temperature tag.
I know I'm a hard customer to please, but I just refuse to get overburdened with some stupid Tethering Kart, and some Attitude Digital Tech. I just won't have it. Period. I use Photo Assistants that I train, to run EOS Utility. I bring them in on off days and train them on how to run DPP and EOS Util. That way, I'm not dependent on any one digital tech. The whole Dog and Pony Show is just increasingly tiresome; I just won't do it any more. Read that Sam Jones interview on APhotoEditor -- it's now gotten so bad that they run TWO digital tech karts -- a main one, and then a Client Kart. No f'ing way will I ever do that. It's gotten out of control.
hi, i was forced into using canon software for months until phase supported it, then i had to use it for the super fast tethering that you told me about- the sending jpegs instead of raws to the computer, saving raws on card. that worked so well, i used that for a few months as well.
i tried so hard to understand and like canon software, i might be dumb, but i just found it un-intuitive, and awkward. i also found it quite unstable, especially when using live view (although thats the only software for that). i counted four crashes when i had my new macbook pro in day.
as soon as apple sped up usb, i moved back to c1 4, but that was a hassle until version 4.5 something. but now it really is ok. not perfect, but its really worth trying, even if you never end up shooting a phase back with it, its worth it for the canon alone.
but, you cant shoot jpegs and store raws with c1 4.5, canon wont let you in the camera. so if you are sold on the lightning quick jepg transfers, then canon software is the only way to go.
paul
-
but, you cant shoot jpegs and store raws with c1 4.5, canon wont let you in the camera. so if you are sold on the lightning quick jepg transfers, then canon software is the only way to go.
Paul:
Another benefit of the 5D2 over the 1ds3, (and the updated driver for USB), is that the file size is smaller, and there's less to cram thru that pipe. As a result, we've gone back to shooting RAW ONLY, and sending the RAW to EOS Utility.
Also, there's no way with the 5D2 to send the JPG separately. I guess they kill that, to force you to buy the 1ds3 (or 1ds4).
Still, the 5d2 RAW gets sent VERY fast now, with EOS Utility.
I am selling both of my 1ds3's, and probably my entire H2/P45+ system. I just couldn't be much happier than with the 5d2, for commerce. I keep trying to find a reason to keep the H, but it gets harder to find each day. It just stays in the bag, unused, when the pressure is on. It's not so much a limitation with the H system; it's more of a frustration with the P45+ speed, or lack of, and of course, the untrustable LCD.
-
I am selling both of my 1ds3's, and probably my entire H2/P45+ system. I just couldn't be much happier than with the 5d2, for commerce. I keep trying to find a reason to keep the H, but it gets harder to find each day. It just stays in the bag, unused, when the pressure is on. It's not so much a limitation with the H system; it's more of a frustration with the P45+ speed, or lack of, and of course, the untrustable LCD.
(i almost never post here... but love the read)
Gw... do you really find the 5DmkII that enthralling? I'm NOT being a smart ass. I've shot canon for years. Stepped into the sony system for a bit last year and the IQ was heads and toes above my 5dmkII.
It is a great camera, the 5dmkII. I does what it does... and does it well... as long as it's not moving much (and even still subjects are prone to unbelievable feats of AF nothingness). I just find the IQ sorely lacking. No "zing", No life.
I guess you're right. What the client wants is what we shoot... I just hope the mkII isn't what they all want. I hate it. I hold hopes that the MF makers do end up with a responsive camera one of these days, but I'll not bet on it. The backs are the bottleneck. I'm lucky, my client lets me shoot what I want (I'm the in-house photog/designer for an up-and-coming clothing brand). Guess I got lucky.
I think I'm going to shoot the next catalog on 4x5 fuji instant fp100c, lol.
Talk about responsive...
-
I just find the IQ sorely lacking. No "zing", No life.
Honestly, in terms of file quality, it doesn't matter what camera you put in my hand, because I'm going to work it to death, to get my thumbprint on it anyway. So hand me a Sony, a Nikon, a Canon, a Fuji point/shoot, whatever.
But the goal is to get the shot, and nail the exposure, and know that you lit it right, ideally without being forced to use a laptop, tethered, on every single frame. The goal is freedom; the goal is trust, with the LCD quality feedback.
It amazes me, these Lab Coat Guys on this board, (over)analyzing one camera to the next -- it's as if, if they ever take an actual photograph, that there's some law in their state that says, "You've got to deliver this image normal, untouched, unmanipulated". So, as a result, they feel compelled to find the best dynamic range out there. Or whatever else kind of Spec.
For me, the RAW file is the very rough starting point, and that's when the zillions of Adjustment Layers and burning/dodging begin. So, in a way, who cares what camera you use, as long as you nail the facial expression and the exposure? And for me, the camera that gives the highest percentage of "nailing it" is the 5D2. (Given, if I was a landscape guy, and I really sold prints for a living, and they were 40x60 or so, maybe the P65 or so would be the choice). But with H2 or most anything MF, the mirror slap is scary enough that it requires a tripod, so that begins to really slow you down. And the LCD is not trustable. And the ASA limits are very low. Those factors pretty much require you to shoot landscape, still life, interiors, architecture, or dead people. You'd think, after this many years, if they were going to get high ASA out of a CCD chip, they'd have done it by now. So everything else that you see, like that Sensor Plus marketing stuff, is just Smoke and Mirrors. Who's actually going to write a $45,000 check for a back that shoots a 15MP file? Please.
Still, given the choice, I'd reach for the H2 every single day, due to the optical quality and the way it renders a scene, but in the end, the other limitations just force it to stay in the camera bag.
-
Those factors pretty much require you to shoot (...) dead people.
-
"I just set the Sharpness to 3"
I have the canon 1dsmk3 and even though I know the files are soft due to the AA filter I thought it was bad to sharpen the files before they get resized for final output, is this correct? Typically I process out the high res tiffs and low res jpgs, deliver to client with a note saying "unsharpened" and hope for the best although I know that 50% of the time the client has no clue what "unsharpened" means and send their final files in for output unsharpened.
Should I be sharpening my canon files at full size? I use C1 Pro V4 by the way.
-
If your not printing large it does not make good economic sense to purchase MFD. Look at what the H3DII-39 ($35,000 new) are going for now used... $12,000 ... not more than two years old! I assume that anyone using MFD is forced to use them so that they can keep up with that invisible customer crying out for more... well your now outdone and need the H4D-60. This is getting absurd.
-
If your not printing large it does not make good economic sense to purchase MFD. Look at what the H3DII-39 ($35,000 new) are going for now used... $12,000 ... not more than two years old! I assume that anyone using MFD is forced to use them so that they can keep up with that invisible customer crying out for more... well your now outdone and need the H4D-60. This is getting absurd.
I understand what you're saying, but...
I still maintain that there is a place in the market for a "people-shooter MF back". These, to me, would be the Specs. No idea if it's buildable or marketable:
1. 22 MP, max. Anything larger than that, most of the data is thrown away.
2. Two frames per second, recycle.
3. Price point: $9000-12,000 USD, for the digital back.
4. Usable ASA up to 800.
5. Largish chip, similar in size to p45, to keep large viewfinder image, and to maximize wideangle lens use.
6. Hi-resolution LCD, similar to Nikon or 5D2.
Even though Canon/Nikon is fine, there are still many people that simply prefer the look and feel of medium format cameras. However, it seems that the Megapixel Race is on, and the Retail Prices are headed thru the roof, at a time when the economy couldn't be in a worse condition. There's nothing wrong with letting the P65+ (or whatever the Hassie equivalent) be your Lexus, but there's also a need for a Camry too.
-
It amazes me, these Lab Coat Guys on this board, (over)analyzing one camera to the next -- it's as if, if they ever take an actual photograph, that there's some law in their state that says, "You've got to deliver this image normal, untouched, unmanipulated". So, as a result, they feel compelled to find the best dynamic range out there. Or whatever else kind of Spec.
I hope this wasn't pointed at me... I do make a living with my cameras (mostly 5dmkII's).
I get what your saying and I definitely understand that getting the shot is foremost. But, I could honestly care less if you get your thumbprint on any camera you work to death. Any of us working FT in photography are going to put our thumbprint on our work, regardless of the camera. Some may have a pretty inelegant thumbprint, but it's there.
My remarks were actually just about the 5Dii. As someone that shoots them, they just don't light my fire.
... no matter how artistic i am or how sensitively I light my subjects. I was genuinely interested in why you find them meaningful for your work.
Guess it's just different strokes for different folks... and I guess this is getting off topic. I wasn't asking for a rant or to be called a Lab Coat Guy... just wondering why you liked the 5dii in such high stress conditions. I honestly think it's ill suited and quite frustrating most of the time for high paced work. That's a technical issue (which is what I was addressing), not an artistic one (iphones and all, John, )
I'll let you guys get back on-topic. Sorry for the simple question.
-
For shooting people/lifestyle, and environmental portraits, on the run, loose and free, untethered, can anyone tell me the fastest, most responsive MF fullish-frame back that's out there right now, shipping, for the Hasselblad H? Something like two frames a second recycle, or so? I'm wanting the most Viewfinder real estate, so the cropping backs are out, ie P30+ etc, P40+ etc. Trying to find a balance between large large viewfinder image and fast recycle. Secondary wish list would be 3" LCD, but that would probably narrow it down to Hasselblad-brand backs, which could be fine I guess.
In short, I'm wanting to keep the optical qualities from my H lenses, but shoot relatively fast, like the 5D2 feeling, but also be able to trust the LCD rendering pretty well.
Does this back exist? It's a last-ditch effort to justify keeping the H system. Leaf A75s? Hasselblad something? Megapixels do not matter; the main thing is the speed/recycle of the back, and the LCD quality. Thanks.
You should check out the new Leaf Aptus-II 5, that will come out in a week or two. It´s not as fast as the 54s (for some silly reason), but at 0.9 s/f its better than most. Download spec pdf here: http://sn.im/s8ite (http://sn.im/s8ite) .
Still cant understand why they didn´t make it as fast as the 54s (they managed 0,65 s/f on a 22mp back several years ago...) and why the iso don´t go up to 800. This back has the biggest pixels in the whole Leaf lineup!?
-
I still maintain that there is a place in the market for a "people-shooter MF back". These, to me, would be the Specs. No idea if it's buildable or marketable:
1. 22 MP, max. Anything larger than that, most of the data is thrown away.
2. Two frames per second, recycle.
3. Price point: $9000-12,000 USD, for the digital back.
4. Usable ASA up to 800.
5. Largish chip, similar in size to p45, to keep large viewfinder image, and to maximize wideangle lens use.
6. Hi-resolution LCD, similar to Nikon or 5D2.
oh my, actually, if you read these specs you'll wonder why it is not possible.
These specs are very, very modest IMO. You even didn't mention live view and in camera processing (which is maybe more important to you as the actual LCD size?)
This undemanding list clearly shows the dilemma of MFD.
-
1. 22 MP, max. Anything larger than that, most of the data is thrown away.
2. Two frames per second, recycle.
3. Price point: $9000-12,000 USD, for the digital back.
4. Usable ASA up to 800.
5. Largish chip, similar in size to p45, to keep large viewfinder image, and to maximize wideangle lens use.
6. Hi-resolution LCD, similar to Nikon or 5D2.
I'll echo most of that. The only thing I don't need is faster FPS. When I was investing in MFDB, it was a big concern, but now that I'm using it, I realize that even my 1 frame per 1.2 sec is as fast as I ever shoot.
Yesterday, I had a shoot with five sets spread out over a large property. We never knew what set we'd be using from minute to minute since it was up to the subjects to decide. I had between 4 and 6 strobes at each setup and we were constantly tweaking things. I'd intended to use my Hasselblad with Leaf back for the shoot and shoot tethered.
I think I used it for one setup and then I switched to my 5D MII. The hi res LCD made all the difference in allowing me to work quickly while still getting the look that I wanted. There was just no time for me to try to set up my laptop and shoot tethered for all the shots. The LCD on my Leaf back sucks and really can't be used to judge anything other than global adjustments.
On the other hand, the 5D really shone. The files look great. The client doesn't care what I use and resolution isn't an issue. More pixels definitely isn't the answer for me. I'll take ease of use and flexibility any day.
John
-
Yesterday, I had a shoot with five sets spread out over a large property. We never knew what set we'd be using from minute to minute since it was up to the subjects to decide. I had between 4 and 6 strobes at each setup and we were constantly tweaking things. I'd intended to use my Hasselblad with Leaf back for the shoot and shoot tethered. I think I used it for one setup and then I switched to my 5D MII. The hi res LCD made all the difference in allowing me to work quickly while still getting the look that I wanted. There was just no time for me to try to set up my laptop and shoot tethered for all the shots. The LCD on my Leaf back sucks and really can't be used to judge anything other than global adjustments. On the other hand, the 5D really shone. The files look great. The client doesn't care what I use and resolution isn't an issue. More pixels definitely isn't the answer for me. I'll take ease of use and flexibility any day.
There you have it. I wonder how many other commercial photographers could sing that same exact song?
When you've got Engineers designing cameras, apprarently without taking feedback from their customers, you end up with an unusable LCD. And I'm betting these Engineers think that photographers can actually learn anything from looking at a Histogram, instead of the actual photograph.
The train is leaving the station, and the entire MF industry is getting left at the gate. Very sad, but they dug their own grave.
-
The train is leaving the station, and the entire MF industry is getting left at the gate. Very sad, but they dug their own grave.
Phase One profit 2009 > Phase One profit 2008
From any one vantage point it's often very hard to judge the success or failure of an entire industry.
-
I still maintain that there is a place in the market for a "people-shooter MF back". These, to me, would be the Specs. No idea if it's buildable or marketable:
1. 22 MP, max. Anything larger than that, most of the data is thrown away.
2. Two frames per second, recycle.
3. Price point: $9000-12,000 USD, for the digital back.
4. Usable ASA up to 800.
5. Largish chip, similar in size to p45, to keep large viewfinder image, and to maximize wideangle lens use.
6. Hi-resolution LCD, similar to Nikon or 5D2.
Point taken and I would even like such a camera. 22mp of the finest pixels the company knows how to make in the most enjoyable body available. The tech seems to all be here now. What is the problem? (I ask rhetorically)
-
I still maintain that there is a place in the market for a "people-shooter MF back". These, to me, would be the Specs. No idea if it's buildable or marketable:
I doubt seriously if you will get what you want because you and a few hundred thousand others have been asking for the same thing for a long time.
OK I take that back, you have what you want and Canon makes it for a lot less than $12,000 and has a waiting list of 15,000 buyers.
The only thing is it's a 2:3 crop instead of a 4:5 but that's why God made gaffer tape.
Let's be realistic. If any of the specialty camera companies could make the camera you want at the price you suggest they would.
That doesn't mean that medium format is dead it just means that the cameras have become more of a specicalty item.
This also doesn't mean that quality photography is dead it just means that digital has come full circle and after a point a few dozen extra megapixels really isn't that noticeable anymore.
The equipment we need today should be to be ready for the future, not the past.
BC
-
1. Shooting at 15 megapixels produces a VERY good file which could be easily compared to (or even beats) a 22 megapixel dSLR.
2. At 15 megapixels the base ISO of the camera is upgraded to ISO200 with ISO 400 and ISO 800 being very good and 1600 and 3200 producing a slightly grained look that I find to be film like (if you want baby-butt smooth files then you never want the last two ISOs on a camera, but the "noise" on the 65+ IMO is a very pleasing grain).
[font="Arial"]Doug Peterson
Hi Doug
Do you have images to back up your claims?
I hear from more and more people that the P65+ even at ISO 400 delivers a lot of noise and that exposures above 10 sec. at high ISO is a no-go?
What happened to their quality, my four year old P25 can do nice exposures at ISO800 ?
/David
-
Phase One profit 2009 > Phase One profit 2008
That mass volume purchase of display screens in year 2001 has really finally started to payoff! Can't wait until they use those up and purchase a newer batch!
-
That mass volume purchase of display screens in year 2001 has really finally started to payoff! Can't wait until they use those up and purchase a newer batch!
It will also be nice when Hasselblad finally runs out of crappy silver/grey plastic.
I'm not going to go back and find the text to quote, but I also see a real need for a MF back that shoots 2+ FPS at 800+ ASA for more than 10 frames in a burst. The other specs listed seemed reasonable, even boring.
Most likely it will come from a new player in the market, out of the blue. And (suddenly) 6 months later, Hasselblad and Phase One will announce identical systems. Phase One will talk about how they worked tirelessly with "real pros" to develop such a ground breaking tool and Hasselblad will market their "revolutionary" vision.
-c