Luminous Landscape Forum
Equipment & Techniques => Medium Format / Film / Digital Backs – and Large Sensor Photography => Topic started by: sperera on February 01, 2010, 06:07:25 am
-
So there it is....I found out....It's official....the rumours here were correct....a new Hasselblad H4D-40 is gonna be launched and there's a gonna be like an exclusive owners club web site where you can showcase your work to 1.4 million visitors (according to them) as well as being able to offer a host of professional services......thats what the countdown clock was for.....
-
heres the flyer:
(http://www.ulookfierce.com/hasselblad/h4d.jpg)
-
see it here:
http://www.ulookfierce.com/hasselblad/h4d.jpg (http://www.ulookfierce.com/hasselblad/h4d.jpg)
-
see it here:
http://www.ulookfierce.com/hasselblad/h4d.jpg (http://www.ulookfierce.com/hasselblad/h4d.jpg)
This is a forbidden page, and when you get into it (by going to ulookfierce, then home, then editing the web address) it is in spanish.
-
So there it is....I found out....It's official....the rumours here were correct....a new Hasselblad H4D-40 is gonna be launched and there's a gonna be like an exclusive owners club web site where you can showcase your work to 1.4 million visitors (according to them) as well as being able to offer a host of professional services......thats what the countdown clock was for.....
I don't think it is wise for HasselBlad to try and create a community in the way that Leica has it's user generated one. When you put everyone in the same room and shut the doors creating a club you generally grow old together and die without acquiring new blood. Plus I think it is ludicrous to attach oneself to a brand.
-
Well, it's live on the site. The countdown has ended and, as rumored, the countdown ended to reveal another countdown -- more details on both the H4D-40 and the Owner's Club will follow in 10 days. I think it would have had greater impact if they simply started the countdown 10 days later and ended 10 days from today, but perhaps I'm off-base.
http://www.hasselblad.com/countdown (http://www.hasselblad.com/countdown)
-
http://www.hasselblad.com/countdown (http://www.hasselblad.com/countdown)
The Hasselblad Owners’ Club
Give me a break... well now we know what this forum is going to be renamed to next...
-
H4D-40 for under 12000 euros including and 80 mm lens is not bad ... I like it and feel sorry for Leica with the rather overprices S2 ...
-
13995 euro ex VAT for the camera with 80mm to be exact.
-
13995 euro ex VAT for the camera with 80mm to be exact. You can buy my H3dII-39 with 3 lenses for that kind of money, and then you have a proven system that filtered out the problems and all lenses to start with...... but hey, we live in a trow-away society, so i will have to drop my camera to the floor and claim insurance.......
Yup, EUR 13995,--
Calumet NL: http://calumetphotographic.blogspot.com/20...denformaat.html (http://calumetphotographic.blogspot.com/2010/02/een-nieuwe-generatie-middenformaat.html)
Nothing earth shattering about that price: you basically get a 40mpx camera with updated AF for the price of current H3D-31.
IMHO this will not let Hasselblad tap into new segments of the market, I wonder what the marketing people were smoking :-) when they came up with that idea.
"O Lord why won't you give me a 55mm square sensor with 36mpx to attach to my current 501/CM paperweight, B&W only would be fine, I would donate 5000 silver pieces for that"
-
I am equally a little perplex at this. Lots of secrecy to reveal "just" another camera, which is basically not as revolutionary as presented and replaces the H3D-II 31 and 39 at about the same price point. So what is the deal all about or am I missing something?
For a while I had thought it was a new camera with the Leica S2 form factor (as this had been hinted at only a year ago) but it does not seem to be the case.
-
It does not replace the 39Mp. It is just another 40Mp camera next to the HXd39Mp. Phase also has a P40 and a P45. The H4d40 is small sensoe, pretty importand if you happen to like wide angle photography.
-
For a while I had thought it was a new camera with the Leica S2 form factor (as this had been hinted at only a year ago) but it does not seem to be the case.
... And still no mention of a Vertical Grip?
This was worthy of a 30-day Countdown?
-
BOOOOORRRRRIIIINNNNNGGGGG
-
BOOOOORRRRRIIIINNNNNGGGGG
+1
peter
-
... And still no mention of a Vertical Grip?
This was worthy of a 30-day Countdown?
Too bad. I think everyone was expecting something outside the box of current medium format offerings. A new sensor, with fewer mp than several existing medium format cameras no less, just seems so unexciting. Well, at least they timed the announcement for normal business hours so I did not have to get up early to catch it.
-
come on people....this thing will have a 3" screen! and can shoot up to 800! and you get hocuspocus thrown in for free....
but i think i might just get it for that exclusive club membership....
-
It does not replace the 39Mp. It is just another 40Mp camera next to the HXd39Mp. Phase also has a P40 and a P45. The H4d40 is small sensoe, pretty importand if you happen to like wide angle photography.
Does it have crop factor? Is it 33x48?
-
Definitely underwhelming. Hasselblad did an "iPad"!
It was even the more disappointing because I was told that it was an exciting new product that will interest the high-end D-SLR users. To me that means people who'd be using a 1Ds Mk III or a D3X - but the price differential and ergonomics are sooooooo far apart, I can't see how it would be more exciting than the existing H3DII-31 already was to that crowd. Just a few more megapixels and the same high price isn't going to do it for them, as far as I can tell...
-
Definitely underwhelming. Hasselblad did an "iPad"!
It was even the more disappointing because I was told that it was an exciting new product that will interest the high-end D-SLR users. To me that means people who'd be using a 1Ds Mk III or a D3X - but the price differential and ergonomics are sooooooo far apart, I can't see how it would be more exciting than the existing H3DII-31 already was to that crowd. Just a few more megapixels and the same high price isn't going to do it for them, as far as I can tell...
wow...that is THE worst insult to the ipad i have heard yet....and i have heard quite a few....that was WAY below the belt....
-
wow...that is THE worst insult to the ipad i have heard yet....and i have heard quite a few....that was WAY below the belt....
I guess this new Hasselblad H4 doesn't make phone calls either? What were they thinking...?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SxkuNZap_v4 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SxkuNZap_v4)
-
Definitely underwhelming. Hasselblad did an "iPad"!
*********
More like Geraldo Rivera and Al Capone's safe...
Steve
-
It was even the more disappointing because I was told that it was an exciting new product that will interest the high-end D-SLR users. To me that means people who'd be using a 1Ds Mk III or a D3X
In the Netherlands
a 1Ds + 24-70/2.8 is approx. EUR 5600,--
a D3x + 24-70/2.8 is approx. EUR 6200,--
a H4D-40 + HC 35-90mm is approx. 19000,--
(all excl. 19%VAT)
I'm not a pro who's earning his living with photography but can imagine that a H4D-40/50/60 would only come to mind to buy if I was in a market that demanded very very large prints with loads of detail and even more important: customers willing to pay accordingly.
-
interesting for 8000 euro maximum ...
-
Definitely underwhelming. Hasselblad did an "iPad"!
It was even the more disappointing because I was told that it was an exciting new product that will interest the high-end D-SLR users. To me that means people who'd be using a 1Ds Mk III or a D3X - but the price differential and ergonomics are sooooooo far apart, I can't see how it would be more exciting than the existing H3DII-31 already was to that crowd. Just a few more megapixels and the same high price isn't going to do it for them, as far as I can tell...
Hi Shutay,
The 40MP CCD is based on the Kodak TRUESENSE design which is shared by the 50MP model. The TRUESENSE design is quite different to the existing sensors. Users who have upgraded always report very favourable improvements on the 50... Color, tonality, noise.. the usual crowd!
The the 40MP gives you those benefits from the 50MP, plus the addition of microlenses for extra sensitivity (100 - 160). It is a really nice combination.
Therefore it is quite different to the 31.
Best,
David
-
extra sensitivity (100 - 160)
so less than one stop.
That's indeed something special
-
Hi Shutay,
The 40MP CCD is based on the Kodak TRUESENSE design which is shared by the 50MP model. The TRUESENSE design is quite different to the existing sensors. Users who have upgraded always report very favourable improvements on the 50... Color, tonality, noise.. the usual crowd!
The the 40MP gives you those benefits from the 50MP, plus the addition of microlenses for extra sensitivity (100 - 160). It is a really nice combination.
Therefore it is quite different to the 31.
Best,
David
Thanks, David
...now what about he H4D-60... what technology does that use, and what does (and does it not) have in common with the Phase P65+?
Do micro lenses only work with "ordinary" lenses, or do they also work with lenses whose rear element is more than a foot (m/3) from the camera?
-
Hi Shutay,
The 40MP CCD is based on the Kodak TRUESENSE design which is shared by the 50MP model. The TRUESENSE design is quite different to the existing sensors. Users who have upgraded always report very favourable improvements on the 50... Color, tonality, noise.. the usual crowd!
The the 40MP gives you those benefits from the 50MP, plus the addition of microlenses for extra sensitivity (100 - 160). It is a really nice combination.
Therefore it is quite different to the 31.
Best,
David
I see. Looking forward to seeing what it can do then.
BTW, did you mean ISO 100 - 1600?
I will be waiting for Philip from Shriro to let me know when and where the local H4D-40 event will be taking place. And then right after probably look for good H3DII-31 deals...
-
I see. Looking forward to seeing what it can do then.
BTW, did you mean ISO 100 - 1600?
I will be waiting for Philip from Shriro to let me know when and where the local H4D-40 event will be taking place. And then right after probably look for good H3DII-31 deals...
Yes, sorry - 100 - 1600
-
it will be a FF ?
-
Yes, sorry - 100 - 1600
ISO 100-1600. That IS indeed very good as far as I am concerned. Thnx
-
it will be a FF ?
David Grover of HB said it was based on a Kodak chip, good'ol'google dishes up the KAF-40000 on Kodak website.
Quickly looking at the spec's : 45.76mm x 35.34 mm so it is not near to 55mm wich would be more or less fullframe for 645/6x6
-
David Grover of HB said it was based on a Kodak chip, good'ol'google dishes up the KAF-40000 on Kodak website.
Quickly looking at the spec's : 45.76mm x 35.34 mm so it is not near to 55mm wich would be more or less fullframe for 645/6x6
Nope, Sensor dimensions: 33.1×44.2 mm
-
In all fairness, the new H4D-40 sounds like a great camera. It's easy to knock something down if it doesn't match up to a dream, fantasy, or expectation -- ISO 1600, better focus capabilities, and four minute exposure time -- it's an evoutionary camera.
-
David Grover of HB said it was based on a Kodak chip, good'ol'google dishes up the KAF-40000 on Kodak website.
Quickly looking at the spec's : 45.76mm x 35.34 mm so it is not near to 55mm wich would be more or less fullframe for 645/6x6
Those specs are garbled; they seem to have mixed effective region with total sensor size. The stated pixel counts and pixel pitch of 6.0 microns give very close to 44x33mm, and that would given about 55mm diagonal, very close to the stated 54.78mm.
So it is close enough to 44x33mm, diagonal of 55mm, as for the previous generation 31MP Kodak sensor. (So not "FF", but larger, since as we have been told many times in forums, "FF" can only mean 36x24mm!)
And with micro-lenses like that 31MP sensor, giving QE of 38% (blue) to 44% (green), so about one stop faster than all the larger MF CCD sensors.
-
In all fairness, the new H4D-40 sounds like a great camera. It's easy to knock something down if it doesn't match up to a dream, fantasy, or expectation -- ISO 1600, better focus capabilities, and four minute exposure time -- it's an evoutionary camera.
I agree. I don't doubt it'll make fantastic pictures, I personally am still shooting with an Ixpress back afterall and I love the image quality. I've also rented the H3D when I needed something more than my Ixpress and liked the camera. Specs wise, it makes my Ixpress even more obsolete than it already is. I guess people's imagination was escalating in proportion to the suspense and anticipation, what with the countdown clock and all.
-
In all fairness, the new H4D-40 sounds like a great camera. It's easy to knock something down if it doesn't match up to a dream, fantasy, or expectation -- ISO 1600, better focus capabilities, and four minute exposure time -- it's an evoutionary camera.
It is evolutionary but they kind of promised something revolutionary, counting clocks...newborn baby...
-
It is evolutionary but they kind of promised something revolutionary, counting clocks...newborn baby...
I agree. I would have loved to have seen a truly portable camera -- 22MP with fast-processing files; a vertical grip; a 3.5" LCD; and a great magnifying viewfinder.
If they blew their wad by using the whole Countdown thing with that camera, can we now all agree that the H body design is now in full maturity, and it's now peaked out? (And for me, it never quite hit the mark in terms of actual usability).
-
FWIW, just found the specs published on the German Calumet site- my post here:
http://www.h2hreviews.com/blog/Hasselblad-...-published.html (http://www.h2hreviews.com/blog/Hasselblad-H4D-40-specs-published.html)
-
And now, from the people who brought you the world's first full frame MF DSLR (a feat of viewfinder-shrinkage engineering where no crop mask would do), another first: A countdown time to another countdown! Only this new countdown is shorter. And it doesn't have a timer. And they're going to tell you, basically, what the product is. Only not everything! They're keeping secret all of the details that any potential buyer would actually find useful. What fun!
This has to be the best bit of hucksterism since "This one goes to eleven". Which opens new doors for Hasselblad, really. Can't boost ISO levels to satisfy users? Why not just introduce a new and improved MFDSLR ISO scale? Slide all the values over by 3 stops and now the new 3200 has the same noise signature of the old 400 without adding unwanted DOF! Shoot at ISO 800 and get files just as pristine as you formerly had at 100!
Some users want live view, do they? No problem!
"Hasselblad today announces another first in the world, sure to revolutionize the way every human being thinks about photography (our 3rd this fiscal quarter!). Pro photographers want to see what their cameras see, as if looking through the eyes of their camera's eyes, through their own eyes. But really pro photographers don't have time to waste looking at all the bad frames of traditional "live view" systems. For this level of professional pro, we offer a solution: the all new Hasselblad PhineView ™. With PhineView ™, pro-pros can professionally select the precise frame or frames they wish to preview by simply pressing the PhineView ™ trigger on our all new PhineView ™-enabled H4D grip. This single action launches into action the entire PhineView ™ preview acquisition system, which displays on the LCD or tethered display a full resolution live view preview, a mere 2-5 seconds later! Want more PhinePhrames to compare? The PhineView ™ trigger allows one Phrame every 1.6 seconds to satisfy even the most demanding pro. Hasselblad PhineView: Stop wasting precious time watching frames that aren't any good and put the selection of the good frames back in the hands of a pro."
Of course if Hasselblad did actually try to rebadge single frame previewing as a true live view solution, they would put the PhineView trigger right next to the standard trigger and make it a slightly different shade of gray. This would confuse users as to which was which. And six months after release a firmware patch would be pushed out that reverses the function of each trigger for technical reasons, making it impossible for anyone anywhere to ever remember which trigger did what. The crucial firmware fix for switching them back would come out three months later with a build number "x." followed by an 11 digit alpha-numeric string where the 3rd digit replaces an "m" for an "n", the 4th an "8" for the previous "h" and the 7th "O" to a "0". Unless you have an odd serial-numbered body, in which case the "O" stays an "O". And you'll have to remember to check the software serial number, which is now different from the machine stamped one on the body for security concerns. Further, Hasselblad would see fit to make the PhineView previews their own proprietary file format which can not be exported as JPEG or TIFF and requires a Phocus update to even view on a computer. This update is currently languishing in Hasselblad internal testing with no official release date. But to appease disgruntled users, they would make public their intent to implement a new feature with the update. Upon launch of the new Phocus, a new window would open with a Hasselblad-built web browser (relying heavily on lots of Flash content), connecting the user to the Hasselblad Users' Club log-in (which can not be remembered for technical security reasons). This will be a modal window with no close or cancel buttons. But the new-new feature will be a keyboard shortcut for sending it to the background where it will continue to load and display random images for inspiration. This shortcut will be the obvious shift+command+control+• (which updates the previous, more confusing command+option+shift+|).
-
what is UP with the "PH" thing, anyway?
PHooey.
-
DPReview has the press release up. Personally I find this notion of targeting high-end 35mm shooters with a camera that's priced at $20K (US) absurd. Even if dealers offer discounts, it's still likely to be more than twice as much as the D3x, which many DSLR shooters already consider overpriced. Who do they think they're kidding? (besides themselves maybe, if they think this product is actually going to convert DSLR shooters to medium format).
I found this tidbit pretty funny:
Most everyone in the photographic world is aware, for example, of the dramatic developments that have taken place in the 35mm in recent years,” he continues, “but there many of the younger generation of shooters are not aware of the fact that Medium Format DSLRs have evolved equally dramatically, maintaining – and even in some cases increasing – the quality gap that has historically existed between small format and larger format systems.”
Maybe that's true for just pixel count. But DSLR's have improved a lot more than just pixel count over the years, while the MF cameras have not shown much innovation at all in the same time.
-
what is UP with the "PH" thing, anyway?
PHooey.
They should Phire their entire marketing department. Smoke and Mirrors; Lose Weight Phast; Snake Oil. Here's a company that had the word Doubt already written on their Phorehead, and they unveil the utterly original Countdown Clock (that broke during the process), and it's merely a slightly altered camera model of something few people wanted previously. At least make it Darker Grey, to trick people into thinking that it's "revolutionary". It makes you wonder who they think they're marking to. Sad.
-
[quote name='JeffKohn' date='Feb 2 2010, 10:29 AM' post='344363'
Maybe that's true for just pixel count. But DSLR's have improved a lot more than just pixel count over the years, while the MF cameras have not shown much innovation at all in the same time.
[/quote]
I wouldn't agree with that as I think both formats have had lots of improvements. Definitely lots of improvements to the MF cameras and backs over the last couple years. MFDB went from being able to shoot up to ISO 200 usable to 1600 for one example, color rendering has improved, and the responsiveness of the cameras has gotten better as well. Many new lenses have been introduced for a number of the different platforms.
-
At least make it Darker Grey, to trick people into thinking that it's "revolutionary". It makes you wonder who they think they're marking to. Sad.
Have you some PH stocks ? lol
It's marketing as usual, "talk good, talk bad, but talk of me".
So, it an excellent marketing to announce a new camera. Do you imagine a well known brand as Hasselblad would launch a new camera without telling You ? You would be even more frustrated
-
So, it an excellent marketing to announce a new camera. Do you imagine a well known brand as Hasselblad would launch a new camera without telling You ? You would be even more frustrated
Well, they tried their Desperation Countdown Clock. Now they are known as The Company That Cried Wolf.
The next countdown, and everyone will just roll their eyes.
-
I wouldn't agree with that as I think both formats have had lots of improvements. Definitely lots of improvements to the MF cameras and backs over the last couple years. MFDB went from being able to shoot up to ISO 200 usable to 1600 for one example, color rendering has improved, and the responsiveness of the cameras has gotten better as well. Many new lenses have been introduced for a number of the different platforms.
and in this particular model the recompose AF. If it works flawlessly it's certainly a very helpful feature
-
it will be a FF ?
According to the official Hasselblad datasheet, it the H4D-60 will be
40.2×53.7mm
Which is not 6 * 4.5, but is is fairly close, and bigger than the image circle of their wide-angle zoom.
-
thanks
-
4.5 minute exposure. Well, there still is hope for Hasselblad.
Eduardo
-
$20,000 US is high, despite the wonderful advances in technology.
-
4.5 minute exposure. Well, there still is hope for Hasselblad.
Eduardo
I agree , I hope they have changed the batteries too
-
Canon, Nikon, Sony, JVC, Panasonic, RED are and will be the companies making what we NEED and WANT.
RED is not at all what I want
-
MF digital is destined for only wealthy hobbyists and landscapers (but the last time I checked that wasn't really a money making genre) in the next few years mainly because working photographers who shoot for clients will have to use cameras which shoot stills and video interchangeably and better than the hybrid muck my 5DII is now.
Oddly, I think the vast majority of the people now buying MF cameras made their money in other ways, and this is their playtime, to go on vacation, or on safari, with their new precision device that they saved for. Nothing wrong with that, other than it's just very bizarre. It's as though the paper specs of the camera is more important than how it actually performs in the field.
Would be like all the weekend warrior homeowners with new 24 ounce framing hammers, and all the 9-to-5 full time carpenters are out there driving nails with bricks and rocks.
Surreal.
-
that hd4 40 was pretty desperate at 13000$ but at 20000$ it is just ....strange....
i don't care how much they will push the file....shoot it at 1600, and just use the sliders for some more noise and gunk....none of these CCDs are usable over 400 does not matter if it is hasselblad, leaf, phase or sinar.....or leica!
the whole countdown thing is a little sad as well....everybody pretty much knew what was coming and the only surprise is the price.....
i don't get it: try and put out H4 30, 33x44 sensor, 30mpix, hokus, phocus, schnockus and locus, who cares about 1600, everybody already has a canon/nikon....make it shoot fast, easy and clean files at 100 and 200......under 10000$ incl. lens....i still would not buy it, but someone who needs that extra quality might.....but then again...they are better off with the top of the line hass/phase/whatever anyway....
totally unrelated...but not really...olympus comes out with their new pen.....they put in a flash, fix the focus (that would be called listening to what the market wants), still looks great and drop the price by 25%......unrelated because no DMF company seems to be able to do anything like that....
-
that hd4 40 was pretty desperate at 13000$ but at 20000$ it is just ....strange....
i don't care how much they will push the file....shoot it at 1600, and just use the sliders for some more noise and gunk....none of these CCDs are usable over 400 does not matter if it is hasselblad, leaf, phase or sinar.....or leica!
the whole countdown thing is a little sad as well....everybody pretty much knew what was coming and the only surprise is the price.....
i don't get it: try and put out H4 30, 33x44 sensor, 30mpix, hokus, phocus, schnockus and locus, who cares about 1600, everybody already has a canon/nikon....make it shoot fast, easy and clean files at 100 and 200......under 10000$ incl. lens....i still would not buy it, but someone who needs that extra quality might.....but then again...they are better off with the top of the line hass/phase/whatever anyway....
totally unrelated...but not really...olympus comes out with their new pen.....they put in a flash, fix the focus (that would be called listening to what the market wants), still looks great and drop the price by 25%......unrelated because no DMF company seems to be able to do anything like that....
Not everybody has or wants a Canon or Nikon. I certainly don't but I still have the need for higher ISO and speed. Might be a interesting read . I'm avoiding the 35mm like the plague, i don't want two systems. After this gig I gave up all thoughts of a 35mm system completely . If I need it than I will rent them.
http://forum.getdpi.com/forum/showthread.php?t=13379 (http://forum.getdpi.com/forum/showthread.php?t=13379)
-
After this gig I gave up all thoughts of a 35mm system completely .
You can live in the past, present, or future.
http://eu.wrangler.com/bluebell/ (http://eu.wrangler.com/bluebell/)
BC
-
You can live in the past, present, or future.
http://eu.wrangler.com/bluebell/ (http://eu.wrangler.com/bluebell/)
BC
dood. that rocks.
-
BC, That is Fantastic!
-
BC, That is Fantastic!
I didn't shoot it, It was sent to me by a client for a campaign in the works.
Still, this is just the beginning of where photography can go and it can go to more than just pixels, sharpness or a gimmick.
I don't care bout' cameras, don't care about selling cameras, I just don't want a camera to get in the way.
BC
-
I don't care bout' cameras, don't care about selling cameras, I just don't want a camera to get in the way.
Neither do I! If you care about cameras then your just a button pusher... the technology has arrived... it does not matter... when it does the client will let you know... we make images... moving or still... we are directors of color and of light and of message... not directors of tech... tech is a phone call away... look, talent, image that is what your for... don't get traped in the web (club) of camera logos and OCD pixel this and that...
-
Neither do I! If you care about cameras then your just a button pusher... the technology has arrived... it does not matter... when it does the client will let you know... we make images... moving or still... we are directors of color and of light and of message... not directors of tech... tech is a phone call away... look, talent, image that is what your for... don't get traped in the web (club) of camera logos and OCD pixel this and that...
That was pretty much my point. I don't want multiple systems and multiple crap all over the place to deal with it. One system that get's it all done for me is all I care about. The direction maybe moving and if that is the case and i want to go in that direction it would certainly be a system dedicated to it where it makes sense and I can charge accordingly for that type of work. I just want a system that works every time I pick it up and every time I go to process I don't have to play games with processing. To me C1 is the best in the business and what I have grown to use since the 1ds days. Makes it even better when the back is tuned to it and I really like the files from the P40+. I have absolutely no desire at all to shoot 35mm and that is MY preference. I would rather just shoot which is all I really care about anyway.
Not to say I don't like new gear and technology, I think it is important that we stay in tune with technology and aware of what it brings to your palette.
-
Some users want live view, do they? No problem!
"Hasselblad today announces another first in the world, sure to revolutionize the way every human being thinks about photography (our 3rd this fiscal quarter!). Pro photographers want to see what their cameras see, as if looking through the eyes of their camera's eyes, through their own eyes. But really pro photographers don't have time to waste looking at all the bad frames of traditional "live view" systems. For this level of professional pro, we offer a solution: the all new Hasselblad PhineView ™. With PhineView ™, pro-pros can professionally select the precise frame or frames they wish to preview by simply pressing the PhineView ™ trigger on our all new PhineView ™-enabled H4D grip. This single action launches into action the entire PhineView ™ preview acquisition system, which displays on the LCD or tethered display a full resolution live view preview, a mere 2-5 seconds later! Want more PhinePhrames to compare? The PhineView ™ trigger allows one Phrame every 1.6 seconds to satisfy even the most demanding pro. Hasselblad PhineView: Stop wasting precious time watching frames that aren't any good and put the selection of the good frames back in the hands of a pro."
lol
-
You can live in the past, present, or future.
http://eu.wrangler.com/bluebell/ (http://eu.wrangler.com/bluebell/)
BC
Hmm, this reminds me of a UK advert from a year or two ago.
http://www.sarahsstory.org.uk/ (http://www.sarahsstory.org.uk/)
Sorry if this is a bit off topic.
-
Hmm, this reminds me of a UK advert from a year or two ago.
hmm, I think you are confusing the blue tones with the content and the conceptual idea.
-
But having the tech be the "top billing" in presenting a photo business doesn't jibe with saying you agree with pcunite's comments:
"Specializing in
High Resolution
Digital Photography
Resourceful and
up-to-date, with the
latest in photographic
digital processes and
graphic design. Guy
and his portfolio reflect
what he does best -
deliver for his clients."
Nothing more than a reasonable observation. Selling ourselves on tech makes us a button pusher, no getting around that. Tech is dime a dozen. Tech is democratized now in the 35mm format and MFDB world as well. Whether a photographer, digital tech or assistant can handle the technology, a client doesn't care.
Old web site for sure but no matter how you slice it you have to market yourself as well as that you are in the know of the latest technology and clients do care about that. People fail to realize that many clients one shoots images on the weekend with there Canons, Nikons Oly's and such as well. How many art directors turn shooter, how many models turn shooter. That list is pretty good size. Obviously client buys what you do and some of this does not matter when it comes to gear when they are pouring over the images. But they do care you are up to date with the technology and such regardless if you have a team behind you or not WE still control that team of people that support us. On every set we are still the ring leaders that control the image. It has a lot to do with gear on everyones level on set. It needs to work , needs to produce and needs to be accurate.
I actually have clients that know exactly what cam i have in my hand and know the tech. specs as well. It's not all art directors out there driving this business . I have tons of corporate clients with REAL rocket science people. No shit they do build space stuff I kid you not. LOL
We all have different markets for sure and I don't shoot for the Gap, I work mostly in the tech business.
In this case Hassy comes out with a 40 mpx back that actually looks pretty darn good but end of the day we have to buy it or not so we ALL are dealing with some amount of decisions on what gear will work the best for us. Sorry guy's but we all have some geek in us or we would not be shooting digital to begin with. We hear it everyday why am i using this over this for this type of work. Regardless we as shooters still are deciding those purchases. No one is making those decisions for us.
I think the real button line here is making a purchase that makes our life's easier to work with and let's us get away from the technical stuff when we have the cam in our hand so we can concentrate on the art. Totally agree with that but bottom line we are the ones still making that BUY decision. Just can't say the technical part is up to your team, not all of use teams and camera choices are very personal to ones comfort level. I think people forget you still have to walk onto the set with something in your hands and that decision as to what you show up still rests with the photographer. No team is going to help you there. BTW last I looked it still is our bank account that gets that hit as well. Be it we move to movement or not there is a technology behind getting that image to clients eye's.
Anyway have fun I have to go visit a team of doctors at the hospital. Sure hope the hell they know what there doing and have the proper gear to get it done correctly. Ripping my 19 year old tonsils out , this should be a fun week.
-
Anyway this Hassy 40 looks pretty good and I been very impressed with the 6 micron sensors so far and these latest sensors from Kodak and Dalsa. This is basically the same sensor as the S2 with a Kodak 6 micron with micro lenses . The Phase P40+ is different as it is a Dalsa 6 micron without micro lenses. One thing I have noticed with the 6 microns is moire is better than the older 6.8 micron sensors. It still is there but it is a smaller pattern and easier to correct. Also the 6 micron sensors seem to work very well with our current lenses at least for me on the Phase side this seems to be true . I would expect the same on the Hassy side as well. Also noticed noise levels are just much better over the current crop of 31mpx sensors. Obviously no one has tried the Hassy 40 but I would expect these traits as well in the H40. The bottom line if no one noticed these new 6 microns will be pushing the older Kodak 6.8 sensors out the door and now 3 systems that share these 6 micron sensors. Anyway Jack and I did review the S2 and P40+ together and you can go read that to get some idea on the performance side of these new 40mpx sensors , the S2 is 37mpx but the same sensors as this H40 it seems. There maybe some Hassy tricks in this not sure and have to see what they have done but my bet Hassy did a nice job on this back. Frankly I like to see these types of choices out there. May not be what everybody wants or needs but hey what else is new in any system. Also one other note all of the system using this seem to be faster shooting as well. I know i picked up shooting speed of back with mine and I think this Hassy is 1.1 seconds but I will let the Hassy folks talk about that stuff since hassy is a little foreign to me with regards to the specs.
-
I just want a system that works every time I pick it up and every time I go to process I don't have to play games with processing.
Uh, weren't you the guy that posted the long story about his Mamiya 645 blowing a tire in the middle of a job, and you didn't even bother bringing a backup body, so you had to drive back home in the middle of the job to get the other one? Reliable, huh?
-
Uh, weren't you the guy that posted the long story about his Mamiya 645 blowing a tire in the middle of a job, and you didn't even bother bringing a backup body, so you had to drive back home in the middle of the job to get the other one? Reliable, huh?
Shit Happens with anything. It was not the back but a AFDIII and my fault left my backup body home. Sure and we all shot at a high ISO by accident. Point being where human.
-
Back to Hasselblad: This is what I had hoped to see after the Ball dropped on New Years Eve, below on the right -- larger viewfinder; larger LCD; 22 megapixels that would open in any software; Vertical Grip for advertising photographers. Who cares what is costs; if they made it right, it would sell. They have already covered the megapixel race, for those guys that want to walk up to the 30x40 sunset shot from three inches away, and say, "Wow, look at how sharp that tree branch is". What is needed now is a more portable, smaller-file, faster-to-process type camera, for commercial photographers. At least that's what I need. I'm sick of the awful CA in these Canon files. The other massive issue, to me, is autofocus, due to the miniscule tolerances now, with digital. Maybe this Hasselblad invention really does it; time will tell.
I am waiting for the excellent piece of retouching to make it into photoshopdisasters.blogspot.com. How 'bout that cloning technique?
(http://199.237.236.200/temp/HasselbladVG.jpg)
-
This is what I had hoped to see
I like that :-)
Maybe for Hasselblad a rotating sensor (like in the latest Leaf back) would be nicer and maybe even easier to produce.
Probably not for the Multishot backs (I've no idea) but for the single shot.
You still could use the waist level finder.
When the finder mask would change accordingly it would be even better...
-
Back to Hasselblad: Vertical Grip for advertising photographers. Maybe this Hasselblad invention really does it; time will tell.
The side-handle grip was a disaster in the first place...
¿remember the pistol grip they made in the '70s?
... with the centre of gravity above the hand?
... making singel-handed operation easy?
-
The side-handle grip was a disaster in the first place...
¿remember the pistol grip they made in the '70s?
The grip for the 503CW was awesome.
The goiter that sticks out of the side of the 203FE is the worst ever.
The grip for the H body is slightly behind the 203FE goiter.
-
I like that :-)
Maybe for Hasselblad a rotating sensor (like in the latest Leaf back) would be nicer and maybe even easier to produce.
Probably not for the Multishot backs (I've no idea) but for the single shot.
You still could use the waist level finder.
When the finder mask would change accordingly it would be even better...
If you wanted a rotating 6 * 4.5 sensor, you could not get it into the current 6*4.5 body... they would have to re-invent the 6* 6 body, and I cannot see them doing that.
-
IMHO, the best camera design for horizontal/vertical use:
[attachment=19958:LeafAFi_II.jpg]
The least kludgiest.
-
If you wanted a rotating 6 * 4.5 sensor, you could not get it into the current 6*4.5 body... they would have to re-invent the 6* 6 body, and I cannot see them doing that.
I'd be happy with a right-angle waist-level finder for the H* cameras.
-
If you wanted a rotating 6 * 4.5 sensor, you could not get it into the current 6*4.5 body... they would have to re-invent the 6* 6 body, and I cannot see them doing that.
true. not even the cropped backs... so for instance the new 40MP sensor?
-
The grip for the 503CW was awesome.
The goiter that sticks out of the side of the 203FE is the worst ever.
The grip for the H body is slightly behind the 203FE goiter.
[attachment=19957:__1_of_1_.jpg]
Steve
-
If you wanted a rotating 6 * 4.5 sensor, you could not get it into the current 6*4.5 body... they would have to re-invent the 6* 6 body, and I cannot see them doing that.
True so long as it needs a mirror for the VF. A mirrorless (CMOS, real LiveView) MF system could probably handle a rotating sensor more easily, if that ever comes.
-
Here's an idea, instead of beating up Hasselblad for not delivering a camera to your personal specifications why not beat up Canon for delivering sick files?
I have spoken to Hasselblad and they are going to employ a special team to make a camera to Mr Tucker's exact specifications.
As Mr Tucker's specifications change daily I'm sure they will be very busy.
Nick-T
-
Back to Hasselblad: This is what I had hoped to see after the Ball dropped on New Years Eve, below on the right -- larger viewfinder; larger LCD; 22 megapixels that would open in any software; Vertical Grip for advertising photographers. Who cares what is costs; if they made it right, it would sell. They have already covered the megapixel race, for those guys that want to walk up to the 30x40 sunset shot from three inches away, and say, "Wow, look at how sharp that tree branch is". What is needed now is a more portable, smaller-file, faster-to-process type camera, for commercial photographers. At least that's what I need. I'm sick of the awful CA in these Canon files. The other massive issue, to me, is autofocus, due to the miniscule tolerances now, with digital. Maybe this Hasselblad invention really does it; time will tell.
I am waiting for the excellent piece of retouching to make it into photoshopdisasters.blogspot.com. How 'bout that cloning technique?
(http://)
cameras always looked better black. i had a play with a gx645 when i was in tokyo recently, and it looked a lot more solid and professional, and all that was different was the color.
(http://www.pauljonesimages.com/HasselbladVG2.jpg)
-
I have spoken to Hasselblad and they are going to employ a special team to make a camera to Mr Tucker's exact specifications.
As Mr Tucker's specifications change daily I'm sure they will be very busy.
Admittedly the rants get a bit old (though funny to read mostly) but as far I followed it the specifications were always quite the same.
(Maybe with the expection of the finder features he asked for only once: red light warning at f16 and a fog machine at f22 )
-
cameras always looked better black. i had a play with a gx645 when i was in tokyo recently, and it looked a lot more solid and professional, and all that was different was the color.
Paul,
You don't have to buy a Fuji, just carry this screen shot around in your wallet and you can tell people this is the way the camera really looks.
[attachment=19969:Picture_3.png]
BC
-
I have spoken to Hasselblad and they are going to employ a special team to make a camera to Mr Tucker's exact specifications.
Nick,
You lost your sense of humor somewhere along the way. Shame about that. I guess you got too close to Hasselblad. And now, the truth hurts. And if you'll note the archives here, any time that the absense of a Vertical Grip gets brought up, there is a CHORUS of "I'd sure like that too" behind mine. I tried my best to get behind the H system, multiple times, but in the end, it's simply a tripod-based, clunky approach to mobile, fast-moving assignments. If you read the archives, you'll see that I was Medium Format's most ardent supporter, until it simply became apparent that Mega-Megapixels was all they really cared about. And so many of my friends -- all once Medium Format shooters, making big money, simply chucked it and moved to Nikon or Canon. So it's not just me. Shoot at me all you want -- I'll gladly take the arrows. But if you surveyed most demanding ad shooters these days, they've simply, (and sadly), abandoned Medium Format, due to the demands of the current marketplace.
-
Nick,
You lost your sense of humor somewhere along the way. Shame about that. I guess you got too close to Hasselblad. And now, the truth hurts. And if you'll note the archives here, any time that the absense of a Vertical Grip gets brought up, there is a CHORUS of "I'd sure like that too" behind mine. I tried my best to get behind the H system, multiple times, but in the end, it's simply a tripod-based, clunky approach to mobile, fast-moving assignments. If you read the archives, you'll see that I was Medium Format's most ardent supporter, until it simply became apparent that Mega-Megapixels was all they really cared about. And so many of my friends -- all once Medium Format shooters, making big money, simply chucked it and moved to Nikon or Canon. So it's not just me. Shoot at me all you want -- I'll gladly take the arrows. But if you surveyed most demanding ad shooters these days, they've simply, (and sadly), abandoned Medium Format, due to the demands of the current marketplace.
Whew! Nasty, nasty, nasty. Well, to each his own. From this diatribe I guess Hasselblad should be thankful that most pros aren't ad shooters! But really, why is it that negativity rules so loudly on this forum?? What ARE you trying to accomplish with this endless whinging? This is stuff that has been repeated endlessly here. Move on and tell us what you DO like. It's as if some people here have a never ending vendetta against particular MF mfrs., like they've been personally affronted by designs that don't happen meet their particular needs. To say the least, this latest chapter in the endless re-hashing of the perceived faults, flaws, and shortcomings of MF is beyond tiresome.
-
Nick,
You lost your sense of humor somewhere along the way. Shame about that. I guess you got too close to Hasselblad. And now, the truth hurts. And if you'll note the archives here, any time that the absense of a Vertical Grip gets brought up, there is a CHORUS of "I'd sure like that too" behind mine. I tried my best to get behind the H system, multiple times, but in the end, it's simply a tripod-based, clunky approach to mobile, fast-moving assignments. If you read the archives, you'll see that I was Medium Format's most ardent supporter, until it simply became apparent that Mega-Megapixels was all they really cared about. And so many of my friends -- all once Medium Format shooters, making big money, simply chucked it and moved to Nikon or Canon. So it's not just me. Shoot at me all you want -- I'll gladly take the arrows. But if you surveyed most demanding ad shooters these days, they've simply, (and sadly), abandoned Medium Format, due to the demands of the current marketplace.
Totally agree with the last line!
It has been painful to watch Hasselblad in particular loose user after user. They appear to have no actual development plan at all.
I started to list the ridiculous decisions they have made over the last few generations of H 'development' but really it would take all night.
Then you hear talk of how they are going to bring out a camera which will compete with the top 35mm, and what do you get? a $20,000 crop sensor!
This is suppost to win over the pros using the 1ds and D3x? I dont think so. The sad thing is they dont just need to win them over, they need to win them back, and you need to try a lot harder to do that. Medium Format owned the pro market, thats now history.
And whats the main selling point of the H4D- It might be able to focus better than your H3d. Do you think it will focus as well as a two grand nikon?
But hey, at least those expensive lenses you bought for your H3D will work properly on the H4D-40, pity about the H4D60 though, but you dont mind if they crop a little, right?
Who knows what they will come up with next. (really, i doubt even they do )
-
"why is it that negativity rules so loudly on this forum?? "
What utter rubbish. This forum shows a balanced view af far as I'm concerned. The fact that some posters tell it like it is, is a breath of fresh air in my opinion. If I'm about to shell out big bucks for a camera I want to hear about the shortcomings of the gear from people who use it in the professional world.
-
Whew! Nasty, nasty, nasty. Well, to each his own. From this diatribe I guess Hasselblad should be thankful that most pros aren't ad shooters! But really, why is it that negativity rules so loudly on this forum?? What ARE you trying to accomplish with this endless whinging? This is stuff that has been repeated endlessly here. Move on and tell us what you DO like. It's as if some people here have a never ending vendetta against particular MF mfrs., like they've been personally affronted by designs that don't happen meet their particular needs. To say the least, this latest chapter in the endless re-hashing of the perceived faults, flaws, and shortcomings of MF is beyond tiresome.
Probably because these companies used to make cameras for working pros, and still act as if they do, trading on their "pro" credentials from the past. The ones that whinge are the ones that shoot for a living. For the happy ones, many of them seem to be workshop leaders or otherwise associated with manufacturers/retailers.
-
Even with a vertical grip I would think it would feel all off balance, with the viewfinder sticking our of the left side and all.
I would think that you could get one of the almost full-frame 645 backs with too many megapixels (40? 60?) shoot horizontally for commerce, and simply crop for vertical. Fashion your own viewfinder mask, set up an auto crop thingy in C1, and it should work just fine. No?
Then you could take the mask out and shoot full-frame horizontal files for your 40x60 sunsets ;-)
I am not personally doing this, however. I have been shooting for major ad agencies in NY with my Canon and no one bats an eye. I use the 70-200 lenses with that nifty rotating tripod collar and go horiz to vert in a second, no problems.
-
Probably because these companies used to make cameras for working pros, and still act as if they do, trading on their "pro" credentials from the past. The ones that whine are the ones that shoot for a living.
I usually don't talk about this much because it dates me, but I remember little Victor when he was a small lad, back in the Old Country. I was on the Curling Team with his father. Even then, little "Square Viccie", as I called him endearingly, would sit in the snow and fashion snowmen in square blocks -- not at all like the other little tykes, that made the normal rounded snowmen. Not many people know this, but early in life, Victor actually invented the term "block of ice"; it was a perfect cube, and therefore, never needed to be tilted on its side, before it melted.
I've bookmarked this link about Victor, and it's ironic that it's a "Find A Grave" site, because surely, every month when Hasselblad mails out that slick magazine that touts this grey plastic-feeling 645 camera with the nameplate of "Victor", for sure he does a complete flip in his grave:
http://tinyurl.com/ykw2468 (http://tinyurl.com/ykw2468)
Please read the complete link above -- it gives thorough background on his vision for the system. Ironically, until very recently, there was no word for "closed" in the Swedish language; that is a recent development by the youngsters. His vision was interchangeability.
Later, at Inventors University, he met a schoolmate, Henry Ford, and they made a pact to come up with marketing slogans. Ford chose, "You can have it in any color, as long as it's black", and little Victor chose, "You can have it in any format, as long as it's 6x6 square, but in chrome or black".
Every month, when my issue arrives, I shed a tear for him, knowing that he meant for the Hasselblad to be one size only: 6x6 cm. And unlike a good pancake, it never needed flipping.
Victor was always a quiet man, very studious, and always focused on perfecting the square format. So quiet and scholarly that, in fact, the term "Being a Square" was coined after a very dull drinking party with Victor, where he sat quietly and tried to convert the cylindrical beer stein into a square mug.
So yes, sometimes the Old Timers, who know the history of Hasselblad, get a little impassioned when an absolutely perfect camera design gets distorted by the Younger Generation.
I apologize for my dedication and impassioned pleas, about the brand Hasselblad.
-
I'm not all that sure that camera makers, particularly MFDB ones but all of them, are building to the needs of pros any more than Ferrari or Porsche build for the needs of racers. They need stats like horsepower so that the bankers and real estate brokers can make a buying decision. Not that this is bad because without a certain volume of sales/production there would be no development at all. And maybe it's always been this way?
-
GW
always appreciate your humor!
-
I usually don't talk about this much because it dates me...
You really had me going there for awhile...
Now maybe from VH's grave I might have a reason why I had such a fetish for square sensors, influence from ghosts of Hasselblads past? When I saw my Ixpress' square CCD, I just had to have it. Maybe I'll get a CFV one day.
-
I'm not all that sure that camera makers, particularly MFDB ones but all of them, are building to the needs of pros any more than Ferrari or Porsche build for the needs of racers. They need stats like horsepower so that the bankers and real estate brokers can make a buying decision. Not that this is bad because without a certain volume of sales/production there would be no development at all. And maybe it's always been this way?
Ferrari and Porsche still make real race cars. No one who buys a street Ferrari or Porsche does so because they think it is a race car, or one built for the needs of race car drivers. And a camera like the d3s or 1d4 is very much aimed at the pro market.
-
Ferrari and Porsche still make real race cars. No one who buys a street Ferrari or Porsche does so because they think it is a race car, or one built for the needs of race car drivers. And a camera like the d3s or 1d4 is very much aimed at the pro market.
True but their race cars look nothing like the production cars and cost millions each. At least Hasselblad is still selling cameras, still coming up with new technology and products, but I'll bet that a significant percentage of their sales are to the amateurs and I'm saying that's okay. Look at the GetDPi forum - probably 90% amateurs and 10% pros quite possibly less. My point being that the companies may have more market selling points than just the needs of the pros. For example a pro racer would probably not want a 12 speaker sound system taking up space and weight in their car, but most of their customers would. It may be that MFDB manufacturers experience a significant percentage of customers thinking mega pixels or fast AF is the most important thing.
-
Let's not forget another thing. Nowadays too many pros make not enough money to remain a really interesting market. I would find it totally understandable that camera manufacturers don't dare to rely heavily anymore on pros as their major market.
Pointers to their pro equipment are in many cases to convince amateurs to buy it, so they can make a margin to sustain their business.
BTW, for my type of work the H is fine. for the 20% of other stuff I do I pick up the Nikon. What is the fuss about everything having to become the same shade of grey? (having said that I totally agree there is not much that has a better ergonomy than the D3).
-
What can I say?
I tend to stay away from negative threads like this as I will mostly only fuel the fire, regardless of my comments.
Its a very bleak picture that some choose to paint, and perhaps in individual markets this may well be the case. But ill leave you with some information which I hope will reverse some opinions.
In ROW (Rest of World, not including our subsidiaries of UK, Germany, USA) we had a sales growth in January from 2009.
Thats a growth, not a decline, not a flat result, a growth. January is often a typically difficult month as well.
Mark Tucker - I am truly sorry we don't build a product that you feel you can use, but who knows in the future. There are equal amounts of people who live and work by their H system, or any other MF system who find 35mm doesn't cut it for them for all situations.
Another example..
Today I will visit a photographer (Not a 'Dentist' which unfortunately has become the nickname for any photographer who is not a working pro) who has been flown from the other side of the world to do a three day magazine shoot and a top London studio and then another location which I wonder how they managed to ever get permission to use. He has been quietly using his H2 and CF39 back for years. Yes, I am sure we could offer additional features to him, but he still feels it serves his needs better than other platforms.
I understand the industry is going through rapid change and we still have more work to do, but we are in a better position than we have ever been to do this.
Best,
David
-
At least Hasselblad is still selling cameras, still coming up with new technology and products, but I'll bet that a significant percentage of their sales are to the amateurs and I'm saying that's okay.....
It may be that MFDB manufacturers experience a significant percentage of customers thinking mega pixels or fast AF is the most important thing.
Actually Eric it depends very much on the country.
UK - Very few amateur sales
China - Significantly more!
etc etc... So you could see a swing from Pro to Amateur as much as 80/20 to 20/80 depending on the country. It is SO different around the world.
What you also say about MP is very true. Whenever we release a new model with an increase in MP, it outstrips the sales of the lower mega pixel products regardless of photographer.
So at last count...
31/39 = 50% sales
50 = 50% sales
Again this also varies country to country. As I have said before it varies so much around the world. If we take Italy, there is a big MultiShot culture there for us.. some countries, much less.
I think the most successful photographers I know look to the globe for their work. It seems crazy to fly a guy from New York to London for a detergent shoot, as you could find several local guys who could do the same job, but it happens.
Best,
David
-
What can I say?
I tend to stay away from negative threads like this as I will mostly only fuel the fire, regardless of my comments.
David,
I think what you take as a negative thread could easily be turned around to positive criticism, or better yet, things your customer would like to see, especially at the price points medium format demands.
Let's be realistic about this Dave, you company started the ticking clock marketing effort with a promise of something to turn the dslr owner into a Hasselblad buyer, which fueled more hope than substance, because the only real thing the ticking clock offered was 10 more megapixels and maybe a half stop more iso sensitivity and regardless of phine phocus or whatever it's called, it's still mostly just more megapixels.
As far as growth, I'm glad Hasselblad is growing, but I think you're under a misconception that every US photographer is on his/her last legs and can only afford a 5d2 and a zoom. That is way far from the truth and many people I know had a decent year last year and are on the start of a good year today.
Still, most of them I know are not running out to replace their medium format backs for 10 or 20 more megapixels because no clients I know are asking for that.
I will agree that the professional photography market is going through changes but most of that is just current economics, not any cosmic change in the universe, or I-pad frenzy publishing. The average consumer is not buying like they did a few years ago, hence corporations are requiring much more from their marketing budget than they did two years ago
If you can take any message from gwitif, it would be here is a loyal hasselblad customer that on three occasions has tried to make the H system work for him and each time his successful business and client demands has put him back into the dslr mode, but I guess this is getting off point.
So with that in mind . . .
Obviously you're an intelligent good business person and like most good business people I'm sure you attempt to put yourself in your client's perspective so I suggest this.
Take two cameras. Your Hasselblad 4d and a Canon 1ds3. A macbook pro and 23" monitor for each and a schedule of twenty advertising sessions per day, with multiple talent, lighting from high lit flash, to lower light continuous.
Most sessions you shoot tethered, some you shoot to the lcd screen non tethered and after the talent has cleared hair and makeup you have exactly 5 3/4 hours a day to shoot.
At the end of each day you have exactly two hours to rename master files, backup files on multiple drives, process out and correct jpegs, build web galleries and upload to a server.
Now write out two checks. One for $100,000, the second for $200,000. If you complete these tasks on time you pocket the $200,000, if not you hand the client the $100,000 check.
Which of the two camera systems will you select? Remember this is your money.
BC
-
David,
...... but I think you're under a misconception that every US photographer is on his/her last legs and can only afford a 5d2 and a zoom....
......Take two cameras. Your Hasselblad 4d and a Canon 1ds3. A macbook pro and 23" monitor for each and a schedule of twenty advertising sessions per day, with multiple talent, lighting from high lit flash, to lower light continuous.
Most sessions you shoot tethered, some you shoot to the lcd screen non tethered and after the talent has cleared hair and makeup you have exactly 5 3/4 hours a day to shoot.
At the end of each day you have exactly two hours to rename master files, backup files on multiple drives, process out and correct jpegs, build web galleries and upload to a server.
Now write out two checks. One for $100,000, the second for $200,000. If you complete these tasks on time you pocket the $200,000, if not you hand the client the $100,000 check.
Which of the two camera systems will you select? Remember this is your money.
BC
This is definitely not my conception, as otherwise we would be dead in the water.
I don't know what you hope to achieve by your second puzzle? Naturally I would reach for the 1ds3 with a schedule like that.
-
Even with a vertical grip I would think it would feel all off balance, with the viewfinder sticking our of the left side and all.
I have not patented it, but I have designed a vertical grip... which would in a second, (without detaching) change from horizontal to vertical, with the centre of gravity above the hand. It would be possible to make it so that the camera could be used either side up, with the viewfinder left or right... for one-handed right eye, right hand or left eye, left hand operation. This would be extremely useful for those of us who like to use hand-held off camera flash.
I would think that you could get one of the almost full-frame 645 backs with too many megapixels (40? 60?) shoot horizontally for commerce, and simply crop for vertical. Fashion your own viewfinder mask, set up an auto crop thingy in C1, and it should work just fine. No?
Then you could take the mask out and shoot full-frame horizontal files for your 40x60 sunsets ;-)
I am not personally doing this, however. I have been shooting for major ad agencies in NY with my Canon and no one bats an eye. I use the 70-200 lenses with that nifty rotating tripod collar and go horiz to vert in a second, no problems.
If the sensor is horizontal 5:4 ratio, and you cropped to 1 to the square root of 4 (A4 or magazine shape) you would waste nearly half your pixels (4* 2.828 instead of 4*5).
One feature that would make MF cameras less hassle would be being able to turn off Bayer interpolation... so you would get a very hight quality file half the size... and this might enable the cameras to do more frames per second.
-
This is definitely not my conception, as otherwise we would be dead in the water.
I don't know what you hope to achieve by your second puzzle? Naturally I would reach for the 1ds3 with a schedule like that.
Hasselblads are for image makers who put quality before productivity... if your customers are not willing to pay for quality, then dump them or use a snapshot camera.
-
Hasselblads are for image makers who put quality before productivity.
For an investment of 20 or 30 grand in a camera, i would kind of expect it to give me both
-
The ones that whinge are the ones that shoot for a living. For the happy ones, many of them seem to be workshop leaders or otherwise associated with manufacturers/retailers.
That's pretty much the impression I get as an outsider. I'm listening to the former not the latter as I am a pro and therefore only their opinion is relevant.
I'd also like to state for the record that if I could afford to travel just to sit at the feet of BCooter and learn from his wisdom for a couple of months - I'd take the time off my business and do it. The man speaks straight to me...
-
That's pretty much the impression I get as an outsider. I'm listening to the former not the latter as I am a pro and therefore only their opinion is relevant.
What about the Pro's that don't visit forums?
-
Hasselblads are for image makers who put quality before productivity.
For an investment of 20 or 30 grand in a camera, i would kind of expect it to give me both
Most pros have more than one camera system... if you need a 40 tonne truck you would not expect it to do everything that a mini would do.
One of the aspects of MF that slows you down is the file size, and to some extent you cannot get quality from small files, but it would be nice to have the option to turn off Bayer interpolation and get smaller files. Buying a bigger computer can enable you to handle the larger files in the same time... but one of the time-saving aspects of MF is that, for most jobs, (if you can control the lighting) you get a usable or good file without having to do a great deal of post-processing.
It is odd that the 35mm DSLRs are not an order of magnitude smaller than MFDSLRs... but a vertical grip would make for easier handling.
What else makes a MFDSLR less productive than a CaNikon?
... of course, image makers that want High IQ put their Hasselblad digibacks on view cameras, and accept low productivity!
-
One feature that would make MF cameras less hassle would be being able to turn off Bayer interpolation... so you would get a very hight quality file half the size... and this might enable the cameras to do more frames per second.
One of the aspects of MF that slows you down is the file size, and to some extent you cannot get quality from small files, but it would be nice to have the option to turn off Bayer interpolation and get smaller files. Buying a bigger computer can enable you to handle the larger files in the same time... but one of the time-saving aspects of MF is that, for most jobs, (if you can control the lighting) you get a usable or good file without having to do a great deal of post-processing.
Phase One already does this on the 65+ and 40+. You can elect to shoot full resolution - it's faster than most people think (about a frame per second for the 60 megapixel 65+) and C1 handles the large files better than you'd think - BUT it's still slow relative to handling a dSLR file.
But put that same digital back in Sensor+ mode and the 65+ now shoots incredibly sharp 15 megapixel files at significantly faster speeds (1.4 fps) and the files are MUCH faster to work with. The 15 megapixel files are wickedly sharp because they are being interpolated down from a 60 megapixel sensor before the analog-to-digital conversion and compare very very well to a 22 megapixel dSLR. And as a side benefit the native ISO of the system jumps two stops so that ISO 1600 is remarkably clean.
Of course Phase One tells us that their implementation of this (whereby you get faster frame rates and a two stop gain in ISO) is under their patent. So it would be interesting to see if/how Hasselblad proceeds.
Doug Peterson ()
__________________
Head of Technical Services, Capture Integration
Phase One, Leaf, Cambo, 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/)
Buy Capture One at 10% off (http://www.captureintegration.com/phase-one/buy-capture-one/)
Personal Work (http://www.doug-peterson.com/)
-
Phase One already does this on the 65+ and 40+. You can elect to shoot full resolution - it's faster than most people think (about a frame per second for the 60 megapixel 65+) and C1 handles the large files better than you'd think - BUT it's still slow relative to handling a dSLR file.
But put that same digital back in Sensor+ mode and the 65+ now shoots incredibly sharp 15 megapixel files at significantly faster speeds (1.4 fps) and the files are MUCH faster to work with. The 15 megapixel files are wickedly sharp because they are being interpolated down from a 60 megapixel sensor before the analog-to-digital conversion and compare very very well to a 22 megapixel dSLR. And as a side benefit the native ISO of the system jumps two stops so that ISO 1600 is remarkably clean.
Of course Phase One tells us that their implementation of this (whereby you get faster frame rates and a two stop gain in ISO) is under their patent. So it would be interesting to see if/how Hasselblad proceeds.
Doug Peterson ()
__________________
Head of Technical Services, Capture Integration
Phase One, Leaf, Cambo, 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/)
Buy Capture One at 10% off (http://www.captureintegration.com/phase-one/buy-capture-one/)
Personal Work (http://www.doug-peterson.com/)
Exactly the reasons i bought the P40+ is Sensor plus . The system is faster, the files take seconds to process on a laptop and i can get a show or whatever I need ready for a client in very fast time. Besides all that the binned down files are incredible good not to mention nearly noise free high ISO . For me it's like shooting two different cams and even with the full res files the DF is very quick to shoot with. People criticizes this new DF body but with hardly any shutter lag now and faster to shoot in real world it is much more powerful than the specs. This back has hit a lot of check marks for me when it comes to shooting speed. Perfect maybe not but damn good. Seriously I highly recommend getting a demo on this combo . I think many would be quite surprised by it.
I still think Phase can get better at the body no question but this is far better than the previous models for sure. I think the Hassy 40 has picked up speed as well with 1.1 shooting times. These newer sensors seem to have been designed to work faster. I don't know enough about Hassy to make serious comments on facts but it seems to me this is a nice back.
-
Hasselblads are for image makers who put quality before productivity.
Most pros have more than one camera system... if you need a 40 tonne truck you would not expect it to do everything that a mini would do.
One of the aspects of MF that slows you down is the file size, and to some extent you cannot get quality from small files, but it would be nice to have the option to turn off Bayer interpolation and get smaller files. Buying a bigger computer can enable you to handle the larger files in the same time... but one of the time-saving aspects of MF is that, for most jobs, (if you can control the lighting) you get a usable or good file without having to do a great deal of post-processing.
It is odd that the 35mm DSLRs are not an order of magnitude smaller than MFDSLRs... but a vertical grip would make for easier handling.
What else makes a MFDSLR less productive than a CaNikon?
... of course, image makers that want High IQ put their Hasselblad digibacks on view cameras, and accept low productivity!
I agree with some of that but the thing is that most pros absolutely do not have more than one camera system, the vast majority of pros are now using 35mm digital. Thats not neccessarily by choice but by economics, MFD makers have priced them out of the market.
10 years ago, most pros did have more than one system but most of them essentially made their living with medium format cameras.
As to what makes a MFDSLR less productive? Well on most jobs i would need to have 3 cameras with different lenses etc.. $$$£££€€€........
The real question is what makes a MFD soooo much mre expensive than 35mm SLR?
Its certainly not the R&D that goes into them, so i guess that 33x44mm piece of wafer costs 15 or 16 grand?
I am a working pro, i shoot every day, i work in various fields of photography- whatever pays the mortgage... i come across other pros regularily but I dont remember the last time i met another pro carrying a mfd camera but they all have an old hassie or bronica in the back of the press...
Now the younger guys on the scene, totally different kettle of fish, they have no historic reference or fond memories of shooting 6x6film, they couldnt care less about them, its Nikon or Canon full stop. Tick Tock.
-
I don't know what you hope to achieve by your second puzzle? Naturally I would reach for the 1ds3 with a schedule like that.
David,
None of us switched from MediumFormat to 35 for money reasons. We switched because of error messages, clunky software, slow recycle, huge files, LCD issues, and overall slow workflow.
That's all we're asking for -- just one camera model that is more like a DSLR in its mindset. None of us need megapixels; 22 is just fine. Hell, most of those would even get thrown away. We want the fine Hasselblad lenses, and the large viewfinders, but with a production-minded mentality of smaller files, fast software, solid tethering, and something that does not require a Digital Tech and a Tower on a Kart, to pull off.
If there is money in the amateurs, then yes, give us an easy-to-use, fast, amateur Hasselblad. Not everyone wants to deal with 60MP every time they hit the shutter release.
My list, (and the list of others who have bolted MF):
* 22MP max.
* At least one frame per second, if not faster. See Phase P21+.
* Software that is fast on a laptop; not requiring tower.
* Separate tether software from process software. Need fast Previews.
* At least ASA 800 that's usable, at full rez.
* No mirror slap. Handholdable to a 30th.
* Long lasting batteries.
* Big, nice LCD.
* Trustable autofocus.
All we ask for is one model. The StillLifeGuys and TheSunsetGuys can have 39 and 50 and 60; just give us one model that's fast.
-
Hasselblads are for image makers who put quality before productivity... if your customers are not willing to pay for quality, then dump them or use a snapshot camera.
edited......nevermind
-
In ROW (Rest of World, not including our subsidiaries of UK, Germany, USA) we had a sales growth in January from 2009.
Wow, that means you sold 2!
Are you really bragging sales are up over last year?
Love to compare unit sales of mf(all brands) today to 2005 or 2006. I bet it's less than half.(Hassy may be up but thats only because they had an awful product/software in 2005-2006)
I have a mf in the closet(aptus-leaf) and it hasn't been used more than once or twice in the last year on a job. Yes, I am a dreaded commercial photographer and I agree with cooter and g-wtf that there is no way today I would buy another mf back. If I shot still life, maybe, but as a people shooter, the cameras have fallen too far behind and the asa on the backs isn't there. I will look again when someone releases a cmos chip.
As to hassy, I agree it's time for a new camera. Forget the vertical grip. Since all backs come with dedicated bodies anyway, just make them one piece. Leica broke thru but in true Leica fashion it has so many faults for MY work I can't use it. Take what they did Hassy and make it usable. Make it use the existing H lens, a dslr one piece, cmos chip, 2fps, multi point af, standardize on one file format and make it work in other programs as well as your own. Most photographers(commercial) that I know use multiple cameras. I need to have a workflow that allows me to process different camera types in one program.
To me, the only two companies that seem capable of making what would truly work for me are Nikon and Canon. Phase, Hassy, sinar, leaf don't really seem to listen to what I need, they only want to tell me why theirs is better for me.
(For the record, there are a lot of people out there who shoot really hi rez pictures of dirt that are perfectly happy now. God bless em. There are also a ton of people shooters who left MF and NOTHING out there today is close to tempting them to come back)
-
"10 years ago, most pros did have more than one system but most of them essentially made their living with medium format cameras"
********
Is the end-product better today than 10-15 years ago? Is a fashion shoot with the photographer shooting multiple frames a second ending up with better product than the 120/220 film shooter of old?
Steve
-
How extremely curious is to see what other working pros' requirements are... At that point I might also throw in my 2 cents, even if I generally never discuss anything equipment-related. I shoot fashion/beauty/advertising stuff only, I don't own a MFD system but I rent a Hassy quite often. The reasons I haven't bought it yet (and from the look of the H4D I won't be buying it anytime soon) are:
- speed - simple, it's tectonically slow. The H3DII-50 simply can't keep up, with it's low fps, general lack of speed and of quick response. On a recent beauty shoot I had to thrash lots of frames because of that - I need the camera to react in the split-second when I see the hair/dress floating as I want it, or the model is in that perfect phase of the movement. Come on, how many fps is the 21 MP 1 DS3 doing? I haven't done the math, but I would bet anything that the MB/sec flow is way bigger than that of a 50 MP / 1 fps camera.
- AF - if I'm going to fork out 50-60k USD for a camera system, is it too much to want it's AF to be at least equal to that of a mid-range DSLR? I hope at least that HUGE issue is going to be resolved by the H4D with it's funky new AF thingy. For that kind of money, "you can focus manually" is not something that should be even said.
- no RAW+JPG mode - is it really that hard to implement this??? With my Canons I always shoot RAW+JPG so the client's AD, CD or whatever gets the previews on a USB stick right at the end of the shoot; and it is extremely frustrating having to explain to people why the uber-camera that they are renting for me is so dumb that they have to wait another hour or two to get the previews. Totally unacceptable, and it has happened every single time I've rented the Hassy.
- 3FR - I can't shoot tethered, because I am constantly moving around; so what I get is 3FRs on my CF card that are completely useless (you can't even zoom the damn thing) before being imported in FFF. More time lost. I know why they have to do it, but again, if I am spending that kind of money, I can't justify that loss of time because of DAC, software corrections or whatever. Get the tech in-camera stuff right and make it shoot DNG!
- Phocus - has to be the worst piece of software ever written by a human being, really. I am a PC user, and it keeps crashing all the time, it's packed with bugs, it's slower even than the camera itself. I suppose it behaves better on a Mac, but on PC it's as painful to use as having your eyes poked out. With hot iron. And no other program ever does this on my computer, in case you want to blame the PC platform. That's the new, improved 2.0. My digital guy hates me every time we have to use it. Everybody I know that has ever worked with it, EVERYBODY, is saying the same thing, especially digi tech guys and retouchers.
- bugs - at least 2-3 times on every shoot the camera simply stops working and the Hassy guy has to fiddle around with it for some time to make it work again. The reasons are always different and mysterious. Never, ever has this happened with a Canon, not one single time.
- no WiFi option? WTF?
On the plus side: IQ is more than fantastic. File size is not a problem, the more - the better. 40-60 MP is perfect, ad agency guys love to crop when they change they mind on a layout post factum, urgh. The weight and size is not a problem, I love the solid feel of the whole thing. Add a ring flash for even more heavy lifting, that compensates for the times I can't go to the gym because of a shoot. Nice
Now, from where I stand, there two options. One - I could live with this slow/buggy/unfriendly system, because of the high IQ, but it should cost half of what it costs now, it's simply ridiculously expensive compared to film MF and DSLRs. When you shoot with it a couple of times, it seems even more overpriced compared to the overall experience quality you get, IQ is not everything. Two: OK, keep the price tag, I can live with it. BUT, get rid of all the bugs, improve the AF, speed, software. Christ, for what a 3-4 lenses + 50 mp body system costs, it should be able to make coffee and answer phone calls! I don't want to struggle with a camera, I want it to be a natural, hassle-free part of me.
I'm sorry if I sound too bitter, but last week's experience was simply too frustrating, way more than usual. I really love the IQ, and I WANT it badly, but the rest is just not coherent with the asking price. And this comes from a guy who was eagerly, cash-in-hand, expecting the H4D. Now I guess I will have to wait 3-4 years for the H5D. Again, I am the furthest possible from being a tech guy, I hate talking about equipment and never do it, but I am simply too disappointed this time and had to let it out...
Peace
-
Wow, that means you sold 2!
Are you really bragging sales are up over last year?
Love to compare unit sales of mf(all brands) today to 2005 or 2006. I bet it's less than half.(Hassy may be up but thats only because they had an awful product/software in 2005-2006)
I have a mf in the closet(aptus-leaf) and it hasn't been used more than once or twice in the last year on a job. Yes, I am a dreaded commercial photographer and I agree with cooter and g-wtf that there is no way today I would buy another mf back. If I shot still life, maybe, but as a people shooter, the cameras have fallen too far behind and the asa on the backs isn't there. I will look again when someone releases a cmos chip.
As to hassy, I agree it's time for a new camera. Forget the vertical grip. Since all backs come with dedicated bodies anyway, just make them one piece. Leica broke thru but in true Leica fashion it has so many faults for MY work I can't use it. Take what they did Hassy and make it usable. Make it use the existing H lens, a dslr one piece, cmos chip, 2fps, multi point af, standardize on one file format and make it work in other programs as well as your own. Most photographers(commercial) that I know use multiple cameras. I need to have a workflow that allows me to process different camera types in one program.
To me, the only two companies that seem capable of making what would truly work for me are Nikon and Canon. Phase, Hassy, sinar, leaf don't really seem to listen to what I need, they only want to tell me why theirs is better for me.
(For the record, there are a lot of people out there who shoot really hi rez pictures of dirt that are perfectly happy now. God bless em. There are also a ton of people shooters who left MF and NOTHING out there today is close to tempting them to come back)
Yes.
-
"10 years ago, most pros did have more than one system but most of them essentially made their living with medium format cameras"
********
Is the end-product better today than 10-15 years ago? Is a fashion shoot with the photographer shooting multiple frames a second ending up with better product than the 120/220 film shooter of old?
Steve
The photographer is able to get A LOT more accomplished in a day than 10 years ago. I know for me, seeing on a big screen exactly what has been captured, as opposed to shooting some film, sending assistant to lab, waiting for clips to come back, etc. Now THAT was slow. Is end product better? For me, yes. Becasue I am able to fine tune lighting like never before (again, this is because of the tethered-camera laptop/desktop LCD giving me very accurate information.) So yes, I believe I am getting better product, and faster. I don't know a lot of people who shoot multiple frames per second, - it's not the speed of the camera as much as it is the speed of the (LCD) feedback which counts the most in my experience. It's just way more productive.
-
Is the end-product better today than 10-15 years ago? Is a fashion shoot with the photographer shooting multiple frames a second ending up with better product than the 120/220 film shooter of old?
Steve
Uh, yes. Images for advertising are more professional and market targeted than ever before.
Are they better . . . I don't know . . . it's advertising so it's hard to judge with so many cooks in the kitchen. Some campaigns are outstanding in their creativity, some are just the old grin and bite advertising with a smile.
Some even produce an ironic message that is probably not intended.
such as these fellas "waiting" for their new camera.
http://www.hasselblad.com/countdown (http://www.hasselblad.com/countdown)
I doubt if medium format wants to enhance the idea of "waiting" for product to be delivered.
Funny thing is this still camera makers ad is shot in video in 16x9 format. I wonder if they used a 5d2?
BC
-
"10 years ago, most pros did have more than one system but most of them essentially made their living with medium format cameras"
********
Is the end-product better today than 10-15 years ago? Is a fashion shoot with the photographer shooting multiple frames a second ending up with better product than the 120/220 film shooter of old?
Steve
This is my gripe and why my Aptus 54s sits in the Peli case. I don't think for fashion or lifestyle the product is better. Its better for the clients in terms of turn around and pushing lab/post costs on to the shooter. Its more convenient, but for $20k - $40k for MF digital (new), you don't really improve on an RZ and Portra or TMax. I do think that the 35mm digital cams have finally improved on their film counterparts in every way.
On the positive side, if I shot buildings or still life, or landscapes, I'd shoot a back, probably the P65+ on a mini view camera. This is one area where MFD has advanced and made the cameras as usable as their film counter parts.
Edited to add: I'm mainly taliking about the usability of teh cameras themselves, which is why the H4D announcement was such a bummer.
-
I think this thread is getting a bit off-topic and became a beauty contest between 35mm and MF digital camera systems. I do not want to go into that. I am a keen hobby photographer and use both Leica 35mm (film-based) systems, a Hasselblad H1 film-based system, and Rolleiflex 6008 AF and Hy6 systems (both with film and digital backs). I am thus not making money with my stuff and thus the requirements are quite different from "pro" shooters. For me, it is also pleasure that counts and obtaining ultimate picture quality. It is quite obvious that MF is ahead of 35mm systems, even Leica systems. Size does make a difference. At the same time there are situations where you would prefer the 35mm over the MF systems because of size, weight etc. But all that is besides the point.
I think that the original point was that Hasselblad has led people to believe that something almost revolutionary was on its way with the count-down clock. Of course, it is not and that is when the pudding falls. The problem is not per se the qualities, or deficiencies, of the new H4D system. It is that something was announced with that much hype, way out of line with the reality. If the P.R. hype had not been such, this debate would not have been held or, at least, it would have been a different one. I believe that the hype was really out of place and not in relation to the announcement. Some marketing spin doctor must have had a bad day. But that does not diminish the inherent qualities of the H4D, of course.
Just my two cents ...
-
My list, (and the list of others who have bolted MF):
* 22MP max.
* At least one frame per second, if not faster. See Phase P21+.
* Software that is fast on a laptop; not requiring tower.
* Separate tether software from process software. Need fast Previews.
* At least ASA 800 that's usable, at full rez.
* No mirror slap. Handholdable to a 30th.
* Long lasting batteries.
* Big, nice LCD.
* Trustable autofocus.
All we ask for is one model. The StillLifeGuys and TheSunsetGuys can have 39 and 50 and 60; just give us one model that's fast.
I agree totally
pixels sucks when you don't need it , why they don't do H4d 22 ? 50 to 800 ISO for 7000 euro ?
and Long lasting batteries for long exposures ...
-
Hey togs, life is a compromise, and guess what, cameras are also a compromise.
Compromise, get over it and get a life.
Totally agree, but if I'm having to compromise, I won't pay $40,000 to do it when I can compromise for $5000.
-
Totally agree, but if I'm having to compromise, I won't pay $40,000 to do it when I can compromise for $5000.
Exactly Rogan.
Keith, if you want to pay mega bucks for a compromise then good for you I say, it's your money ! If I have to compromise I make sure it doesn't cost me too much. Life isn't a compromise for me neither are my cameras.
Pete
-
Funny to hear some people yelling doom & gloom while apparently the people at Hasselblad believe they are on the right track. Now certainly that might be going somewhere that not everybody likes but hey, there is always Canon or Nikon. Get one of those and be happy with it. The people at Hasselblad are taking the risk of their choices, the future will tell if they were right. It appears they are doing well for themselves sofar.
No problem venting your opinion but the bitterness and the aggression towards Hasselblad (or sometimes towards MF/Larger format in general) I find astonishing.
-
Funny to hear some people yelling doom & gloom while apparently the people at Hasselblad believe they are on the right track. Now certainly that might be going somewhere that not everybody likes but hey, there is always Canon or Nikon. Get one of those and be happy with it. The people at Hasselblad are taking the risk of their choices, the future will tell if they were right. It appears they are doing well for themselves sofar.
No problem venting your opinion but the bitterness and the aggression towards Hasselblad (or sometimes towards MF/Larger format in general) I find astonishing.
no bitterness here, just don't get what's holding them back. a smaller body, a 22 to 31mp cmos chip with big lcd, verticle grip and good iso 1600 and liveview with 10x magnification and i think everyone would jump on it.
a hasselblad that does half of what a 5dII does with a bigger chip would be a money tree imo.
-
Funny to hear some people yelling doom & gloom while apparently the people at Hasselblad believe they are on the right track.
... SKIP ...
The people at Hasselblad are taking the risk of their choices, the future will tell if they were right. It appears they are doing well for themselves sofar.
And we all know how one can trust Hasselblad's view of things...
-
no bitterness here, just don't get what's holding them back.
There is no bitterness, just disappointment, and that comes from people that have written the check(s) to Hasselblad, Phase and Leaf.
These aren't armchair photographers, or workshop givers that shoot 4 no pressured sessions a day. These are professionals that love photography but also have a huge responsiblity to deliver to their clients and to grow their business.
A lot of the people replying here have spent a lot of money buying medium format and the result is the dslrs caught up quickly, while medium format just kept on with the same dependency on more megapixels at the cost of slow workflows.
To make matters worse it's hard to have confidence in the medium format industry as a whole because there has been so many broken or late promises. I mean how'd you like to be the guy that bought two AFI's right before Phase "acquired" the Leaf "assets"?
In fact what does that phrase mean, other than Phase acquired the Leaf assets without the service liability?
Or the H1/H2 user that was promised complete compatibility with all digital backs only to find the newer H lenses would only work on a Hasselblad backed camera.
Or the guy that bough the AFD III thinking there would be leaf shutter lenses only to find the next generation DF is the one that will allow leaf shutters . . . the photographer that bought the new and improved Harteblei Tilt shift for the Mamiya only to see it quietly discontinued.
These are professionals that work damn hard for their money in a very trying and unforgiving industry, being asked by their equipment makers to keep upgrading for very little benefit.
I think we need new tools, though the more I think about it I doubt if larger frame formats is the real answer, at least at their current price point and usability.
Regardless of the tone of this and other threads, there is a series of long running circumstances with medium format that defies logic.
Kodak was an inch away from a modern digital back with a swing out lcd, multiple crops in the software, shooting to portable cf cards and once they seemed to get it almost right they exited. Leaf got close with the AFI which would allow a quick turn of the back to go from horizontal to vertical, but it required taking the back off the camera and losing connection. They almost were there with the rotating sensor but then got absorbed by Phase/Mamiya and Leaf's are now just another Phae/Mamiya bodied back with another Dalsa sensor.
Hasselblad probably has the most complete system of lenses and accessories but this last marketing move with a countdown to another countdown just amplified the fact that medium format really has nothing new to say, other than the phrase "superior image quality".
I could go on, but the fact is medium format has broken a lot of good will and confidence and I don't think they're going to get it back running the same business model, with the same message at the same high prices.
IMO
BC
-
What I want is a 5D Mark II that has:
A bigger brighter viewfinder
An autofocus system that allows me to lock focus anywhere I choose in the frame
An autofocus system that is more accurate with automatic focus shift correction
More resolution. I want to be able to print to a wide variety of sizes and crop in multiple ways.
No anti-aliasing filter that blurs fine detail. If they can’t give me more resolution, at least give me better resolution of what’s there.
Multi-shot option with full color information recorded for every pixel to eliminate color interpolation and produce sharper images
Leaf-shutter lenses
What’s holding them back? Maybe they’re just designing a product with a different feature set for a customer with preferences and priorities that are different than mine.
Of course, maybe they haven’t done it because I haven’t gone online repeatedly and made mocking sneering comments (which showcase my great wit and good natured humor) about their utter lack of integrity and interest in real photographers like me!
In any event, who could get tired of hearing why a tool that other people truly enjoy using to produce their vision is in reality utterly worthless (and produced by a bunch of brain dead and deaf engineers working for companies that are totally incompetent and manipulative) because they don't suit my usage? I know I don't... it's so insightful and inspiring to me and every other artist and professional. Such a breath of fresh air!
These people must just be brain washed by marketing...
http://www.hasselbladusa.com/user-showcase.aspx (http://www.hasselbladusa.com/user-showcase.aspx)
-
There is no bitterness, just disappointment, and that comes from people that have written the check(s) to Hasselblad, Phase and Leaf.
These aren't armchair photographers, or workshop givers that shoot 4 no pressured sessions a day. These are professionals that love photography but also have a huge responsiblity to deliver to their clients and to grow their business.
A lot of the people replying here have spent a lot of money buying medium format and the result is the dslrs caught up quickly, while medium format just kept on with the same dependency on more megapixels at the cost of slow workflows.
To make matters worse it's hard to have confidence in the medium format industry as a whole because there has been so many broken or late promises. I mean how'd you like to be the guy that bought two AFI's right before Phase "acquired" the Leaf "assets"?
In fact what does that phrase mean, other than Phase acquired the Leaf assets without the service liability?
Or the H1/H2 user that was promised complete compatibility with all digital backs only to find the newer H lenses would only work on a Hasselblad backed camera.
Or the guy that bough the AFD III thinking there would be leaf shutter lenses only to find the next generation DF is the one that will allow leaf shutters . . . the photographer that bought the new and improved Harteblei Tilt shift for the Mamiya only to see it quietly discontinued.
These are professionals that work damn hard for their money in a very trying and unforgiving industry, being asked by their equipment makers to keep upgrading for very little benefit.
I think we need new tools, though the more I think about it I doubt if larger frame formats is the real answer, at least at their current price point and usability.
Regardless of the tone of this and other threads, there is a series of long running circumstances with medium format that defies logic.
Kodak was an inch away from a modern digital back with a swing out lcd, multiple crops in the software, shooting to portable cf cards and once they seemed to get it almost right they exited. Leaf got close with the AFI which would allow a quick turn of the back to go from horizontal to vertical, but it required taking the back off the camera and losing connection. They almost were there with the rotating sensor but then got absorbed by Phase/Mamiya and Leaf's are now just another Phae/Mamiya bodied back with another Dalsa sensor.
Hasselblad probably has the most complete system of lenses and accessories but this last marketing move with a countdown to another countdown just amplified the fact that medium format really has nothing new to say, other than the phrase "superior image quality".
I could go on, but the fact is medium format has broken a lot of good will and confidence and I don't think they're going to get it back running the same business model, with the same message at the same high prices.
IMO
BC
You make it sound like the people you are talking about are the only ones that are not armchair photographers. I can assure you this is not the case. Yes, I have spend more than I would have liked on all sorts of systems (thank god I passed on the Afi). I totally understand the disappointment but get over it.
I am pretty sure I have lost more money than virtually everyone on this forum on stupid stuff (other than photography). The only one I can blame for that is myself. Nobody forced me to spend the money. I admit it has taken me quite a while to get to that state.
-
what i don't like about hasselblad is that every year or so a new "super" hyper" "countdown" thingy makes me hopeful that maybe there might be something to it....now we get the focus thing...i mean it makes sense, this is an age old problem with AF...center AF that is of course....wouldn't it be just easier to put in what every amateur dslr has? it is called multi zone AF....problem solved...and please make it at least as fast as a rebel if you charge so much for it.....
is it really so hard to do? and this question goes out to all remaining DMF makers....why is it that nikon/canon have left you in the dust...in every regard other then mpix and IQ (which is actually debatable because the 5DII compares pretty well to old 16mpix backs as well....)?
where is the innovation? i don't see it...all the advantages MF used to have....why is it so hard for mamiya to provide in lens shutters? they have been around for ages! what is the problem? what's with the small LCDs? there is no way someone can figure out how to put an itouch on there, or even better...make it a slide in/wifi solution....it cannot be that hard....if that costs 2000 extra....we would pay for it....we have paid much more for terrible non-solutions in the past.....and now we don't want to anymore...and don't HAVE to anymore.....
if this H5D was close to a camera a lot of people here have asked for (for a looong time...do a search...always the same result...).....the price would be the smallest obstacle....i have spent much more then the 20000 on a system....but i won't anymore...i don't have to anymore....
what has really changed about the H3D? screen is finally 3"...wow....focus thingy which is still no substitute for the AF of the 5DII (which is a joke compared to the ds3...)...and more pixels with "better color", "better better"....maybe somehow via software i can squeeze out another 1/2 stop or maybe a full stop? there is just nothing there to justify the "countdown" in any way....
if canon/nikon would do anything close to that they would be cruzified in every forum.....they have to: bring it up at least 2 stops, 2 frames/sec, 1 stop DR, new AF to catch bullets, weatherproof, warproof and waterproof...throw in HD video, live view....and if they don't charge LESS for it they get lynched...nikon d3x anyone?
we have been asking (from all dmf makers) for years now for the same thing, really....the problem is that canon and nikon have listened and it is just a matter of time before they blow the idiotic 35mm doors off and give us a truly new digital capture device....which btw....also does not have to be DSLR shape anymore either....no film to transport....i would prefer something like a box.....like a hass 500 actually.....
-
....now we get the focus thing...i mean it makes sense, this is an age old problem with AF...center AF that is of course....wouldn't it be just easier to put in what every amateur dslr has? it is called multi zone AF....problem solved...
The problem is that the AF sensors out there are just too small, even the outer sensors (which are not very accurate) are just too close to the centre. Believe me I've asked for this many many times.
Nick-T
-
By the way, in my humble opinion, the countdown promotion was not primarily aimed at bringing attention to the announcement of a new camera model or a new online service for owners. They were part of the announcements, but not the principle purpose.
I think they wanted to draw as much attention (and attendance) as possible to the 50 city worldwide events over 3-days designed to get H4D cameras into peoples hands instead of just reading about them online.
To quote from the promotion...
“We are launching the H4D-40 at special “hands-on” events in over 50 cities throughout the world starting February 10, 2010. To find a launch event near you click on the link to the right.”
“We look forward to seeing you on February 10th-12th!”
Just thought I’d mention it. Now... back to the regularly scheduled public ridiculing and chastisement of which a blessed few are so fond.
-
Just thought I’d mention it. Now... back to the regularly scheduled public ridiculing and chastisement of which a blessed few are so fond.
Indeed. The ranting is out of hand at times. I say vote with your credit card - don't buy it if you don't want one.
Anyway, it doesn't shoot video, so why bother
Have any of you had complaints about image quality lately???
I know I have not, not in years. Not even from picky high-end ad agency types. So i am not in the market for the latest and greatest in MF.
(There is some C.A. from lenses on occasion, but I use the CA removal tools, and they are gone. Everything gets retouched to death anyway.)
Even if they made this pie-in-the-sky Commerce Camera: 22mp, high ISO, large LCD, fast AF, etc. etc., what would we have? A Canon-type camera, but larger and heavier, more expensive and with 10% sharper files (which for the most part does not show in prints for commerce. And clearly is not going to show on a web site.) And?? Is this worth losing sleep over?
(on a side note: I don't care about the countdown (never looked at it) and I don't care what color the camera body is. My clients' eyes are either glued to my computer LCD, or their cell phone. I am quite sure they have no idea what color my camera is.)
-
There is no bitterness, just disappointment, and that comes from people that have written the check(s) to Hasselblad, Phase and Leaf.
These aren't armchair photographers, or workshop givers that shoot 4 no pressured sessions a day. These are professionals that love photography but also have a huge responsiblity to deliver to their clients and to grow their business.
A lot of the people replying here have spent a lot of money buying medium format and the result is the dslrs caught up quickly, while medium format just kept on with the same dependency on more megapixels at the cost of slow workflows.
To make matters worse it's hard to have confidence in the medium format industry as a whole because there has been so many broken or late promises. I mean how'd you like to be the guy that bought two AFI's right before Phase "acquired" the Leaf "assets"?
In fact what does that phrase mean, other than Phase acquired the Leaf assets without the service liability?
Or the H1/H2 user that was promised complete compatibility with all digital backs only to find the newer H lenses would only work on a Hasselblad backed camera.
Or the guy that bough the AFD III thinking there would be leaf shutter lenses only to find the next generation DF is the one that will allow leaf shutters . . . the photographer that bought the new and improved Harteblei Tilt shift for the Mamiya only to see it quietly discontinued.
These are professionals that work damn hard for their money in a very trying and unforgiving industry, being asked by their equipment makers to keep upgrading for very little benefit.
I think we need new tools, though the more I think about it I doubt if larger frame formats is the real answer, at least at their current price point and usability.
Regardless of the tone of this and other threads, there is a series of long running circumstances with medium format that defies logic.
Kodak was an inch away from a modern digital back with a swing out lcd, multiple crops in the software, shooting to portable cf cards and once they seemed to get it almost right they exited. Leaf got close with the AFI which would allow a quick turn of the back to go from horizontal to vertical, but it required taking the back off the camera and losing connection. They almost were there with the rotating sensor but then got absorbed by Phase/Mamiya and Leaf's are now just another Phae/Mamiya bodied back with another Dalsa sensor.
Hasselblad probably has the most complete system of lenses and accessories but this last marketing move with a countdown to another countdown just amplified the fact that medium format really has nothing new to say, other than the phrase "superior image quality".
I could go on, but the fact is medium format has broken a lot of good will and confidence and I don't think they're going to get it back running the same business model, with the same message at the same high prices.
IMO
BC
Not sure what workshop givers we are talking about but that part of my life is actually the easiest shooting it is the other 300 days a year I am busting my ass shooting for clients. Let's watch where we are directing these lame comments. I certainly don't appreciate them after being a working pro for 35 years. You know guys they are all types of photography that is done in this world it certainly does not all revolve around fashion . If you have a certain need that is great but when any company builds a camera they build it for the entire world and maybe why you will see a million functions on the Canons and Nikons because you may need only a handful of them but the guy down the street may need a completely different set of them. Could the MF folks make these faster , lighter and more nimble. To a certain degree they can but your still dealing with a sensor size that requires certain distances for focusing and guts of the cam. They are getting faster that part I already mentioned was damn good on the P40+ and my bet the H40 is faster than the previous sensors. Most of the stuff that is being asked for is a complete redesign and let's put that in perspective. For example you have a large studio and to make changes to that studio as in a complete overall of it when client lists are getting smaller the creative fees are decreasing and you losing employees but your taking a huge risk to redo that studio with the hope that all of that will come back and pay for itself. Just think what these MF manufactures are dealing with along with those same lines. Is it worth it. Now I don't want you to think I am remotely sticking up for them but guess what folks their Pro market is so freaking small to start with and guys bailing by the hour or closing shop do you really think it is worth it to them to make sure Mark and James are happy campers when Canon just keeps surviving off of the hobbyist by the truck load. They could gives a rats ass about our business, they build cameras for people to buy and take that risk if they made them wrong or not user friendly than they take a loss. Do they listen to your comments and desires sure they do and they are able to implement some of them but redesigns from scratch is a huge risk.
Look at the S2 35million invested, 2.5 years in development to streets and they have two lenses out today. RISK and I am not so sure they will even come close to pulling that off and the concept is great just what a lot of fashion guys want. But I certainly don't see Pro's beating down there door to get one. WHY , no need to even talk about it I already know the answers but you see my point. The Pro market is a huge risk for OEM's and none of them are basing their business on us. Frankly they would be pretty stupid if they did. Have to give Hassy, Sinar, Leaf, Phase , Leica some credit for even trying to begin with. We are that small a market. It's the advanced hobbyist driving the market so watch what group of people you step on.
-
BTW Mark and James you know I mean no disrespect either on this and these systems are far from perfect and that goes for all of them. I'm just not sure how much risk we are worth to these OEM's. I also know you guys face some serious challenges daily with this stuff and I don't want to side track that either.
-
what i don't like about hasselblad is that every year or so a new "super" hyper" "countdown" thingy makes me hopeful that maybe there might be something to it....now we get the focus thing... wouldn't it be just easier to put in what every amateur dslr has? it is called multi zone AF....problem solved
is it really so hard to do?
where is the innovation? i don't see it...
what has really changed about the H3D? screen is finally 3"...wow....focus thingy which is still no substitute for the AF of the 5DII (which is a joke compared to the ds3...)
I’m with you man. Who does Hasselblad think they are to invent a different approach to making autofocus flexible and accurate?! Just because they invented a way to make autofocus lock work accurately, allowing your focus point to be anywhere in the frame, doesn’t mean we shouldn’t make fun of it and them.
Sure, a 20-something megapixel Nikon or Canon limits you to a small area near the center with their multi-zone points--leaving a vast area of your frame without a focus point. Why should anyone care about that? Just compose within the limits of the autofocus system--Problem Solved, like you said.
Just take a look at this link to see autofocus the way it should be. The Canon EOS 1Ds Mark III.
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos1dsmarkiii/page4.asp (http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos1dsmarkiii/page4.asp)
Just remember though...
"The EOS-1Ds Mark III uses a new 45-point AF sensor (the same one as used in the EOS-1D Mark III) that increases the number of cross-type sensors to 19 (the Mark II had 7) - plus 26 'assist' points (which cannot be selected)."
So is that a 19-point AF system or 45-point system? I’m getting confused. Ah heck, never mind--it isn’t the way Hasselblad is doing it with their H4D thingy, so it must be better for everybody!
And regarding that image they used in the viewfinder illustration linked above... who would want to have an object in the corner of the frame focused? Recompose that baby.
Nuff said.
-
i don't really understand why constructive (and very repetitive) critizism is bashing....or even better: hasselblad bashing...afaik: the complaints are the same across the DMF board or what is left of it....which is only hasselblad and phase/mamiya at this point....
the point is....compare a nikon F4 to a 3dx....you have everything the F4 ever was....but on steroids....and then some and much more on top....
we can't even start to compare MF cameras because there still is nothing over 645 (and most isn't even that....) and might never be...because there seems to be no interest in actually providing us with a digital RZ or 680 or even 500....
-
this (http://www.pdngearguide.com/gearguide/content_display/news/e3i9ee4b481143e87d78d9f9f786b51744a) is much more exciting news....
-
this (http://www.pdngearguide.com/gearguide/content_display/news/e3i9ee4b481143e87d78d9f9f786b51744a) is much more exciting news....
I'd like one of those.
-
I think it's time for Michael R to put a hault to this topic.
-
I think it's time for Michael R to put a hault to this topic.
Why? It's been the best read on the entire forum for weeks....
-
this (http://www.pdngearguide.com/gearguide/content_display/news/e3i9ee4b481143e87d78d9f9f786b51744a) is much more exciting news....
Yea film... All this talk about the V series has me a bit homesick.
-
Yea film... All this talk about the V series has me a bit homesick.
This guy seems to feel the same way. He collects 203FE's like there's no tomorrow. He thinks it's probably the finest camera ever made, and is very loyal to the brand.
http://tinyurl.com/y8hy9ev (http://tinyurl.com/y8hy9ev)
-
this (http://www.pdngearguide.com/gearguide/content_display/news/e3i9ee4b481143e87d78d9f9f786b51744a) is much more exciting news....
Looks like a rebadged Voigtlander Bessa III.
Steve
-
This guy seems to feel the same way. He collects 203FE's like there's no tomorrow. He thinks it's probably the finest camera ever made, and is very loyal to the brand.
http://tinyurl.com/y8hy9ev (http://tinyurl.com/y8hy9ev)
The 203-FE with the 110mm Planar /F2 is a nice combination.
Steve
-
This guy seems to feel the same way. He collects 203FE's like there's no tomorrow. He thinks it's probably the finest camera ever made, and is very loyal to the brand.
http://tinyurl.com/y8hy9ev (http://tinyurl.com/y8hy9ev)
LOL
-
the point is....compare a nikon F4 to a 3dx....you have everything the F4 ever was....but on steroids....and then some and much more on top....
we can't even start to compare MF cameras because there still is nothing over 645 (and most isn't even that....) and might never be...because there seems to be no interest in actually providing us with a digital RZ or 680 or even 500....
This is the heart of my criticism of MF Digital.
-
this (http://www.pdngearguide.com/gearguide/content_display/news/e3i9ee4b481143e87d78d9f9f786b51744a) is much more exciting news....
This baby has been available for sales in Japan for nearly one year as a 5000 unit limited edition batch. It is getting excellent reviews and I believe that it is now sold out.
cheers,
Bernard
-
where is the innovation? i don't see it...all the advantages MF used to have....why is it so hard for mamiya to provide in lens shutters? they have been around for ages! what is the problem? what's with the small LCDs? there is no way someone can figure out how to put an itouch on there, or even better...make it a slide in/wifi solution....it cannot be that hard....if that costs 2000 extra....we would pay for it....we have paid much more for terrible non-solutions in the past.....and now we don't want to anymore...and don't HAVE to anymore.....
The problem is very simple: business model.
High price -> small volumes -> small R&D money.
The more high tech it is going to become, the less sense MF vendor's business model is going to make.
The challenge of mechatronics system lies in the mgt of the complex relationships between requirements, functions and physical/electronic/firmware implementations. That drives a huge level of difficulty in testing/validation and the resulting design changes. In other words, MF makers might target ambitious systems, but it is going to be increasingly harder for them to release systems that work per the specs accross a wide range of conditions.
This isn't MF bashing, it is basic engineering common sense.
There are 2 ways out of this:
1. The Leica syndrom: claim that measured engineering performance is in fact not important compared to subjective aspects like look,... The denial of the D3x DR superiority vs most backs is the most hilarious manifestation of this trend. It is only going to get worse,
2. Really change the business model by lowering prices to below 10.000 US$ for high end backs, convince large banks about the potential for ROI, and invest heavily in R&D, or more reasonnably get aquired by a large Japanese company able to commonalize technologies towards the high end.
Examples in other industries?
- Automotive: Jaguars became much better cars the day they were purchased by Ford...
- High end audio: Nuforce is trumping most other high end amplifiers costing 10 times more...
- High end graphic cards: Silicon graphics doesn't make graphic card for workstations anymore, those are based on gaming technologies,...
Cheers,
Bernard
-
Examples in other industries?
- Automotive: Jaguars became much better cars the day they were purchased by Ford...
Bernard
I'd argue against that...
Between Ford purchasing Jaguar in 1989 and selling it in 2008 it did not earn any profit at all.
Ford/Jaguar gave us the x-type based on the drab Mondeo platform and the X-Type never really sold as expected and was not well reviewed.
Jaguar proper gave us the E-Type and the mighty XJS.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/comm...ar.xj-s.arp.jpg (http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/27/1988.jaguar.xj-s.arp.jpg)
Under Indian ownership we have the XJ.. its a funny old world!
David
-
The XJS was one of the most badly built cars ever made, they couldn't even afford the shoestring it was built on. I assume that was the point. Under Ford they became one of the most reliable manufacturers in the business.
-
DPReview has the press release up. Personally I find this notion of targeting high-end 35mm shooters with a camera that's priced at $20K (US) absurd. Even if dealers offer discounts, it's still likely to be more than twice as much as the D3x, which many DSLR shooters already consider overpriced. Who do they think they're kidding? (besides themselves maybe, if they think this product is actually going to convert DSLR shooters to medium format).
I found this tidbit pretty funny:
Maybe that's true for just pixel count. But DSLR's have improved a lot more than just pixel count over the years, while the MF cameras have not shown much innovation at all in the same time.
The problem with targeting high end DSLR users of which I am one is that it is a different type of camera, the reason I use high end DSLR after evaluating changing to MF is for the things it does do that MF does not do. My clients are more than happy with the quality from my system. There might be a big difference between file quality of the two systems on screen, but by the time it's become a cmyk and printed A4 or A3 what use was all that extra quality?
If I decided to shoot MF it's the stuff I would have to give up that would make the difference to my images and not for the better. Poor high iso, not being able to handhold long lenses, speed of use, ease of use and portability have been MF issues for a long time now.
I come from a film MF background, there was a clear quality advantage between MF film and 35mm easily seen at quite small output sizes, now for the common reproduced sizes I just don't see it. The idea that top end DSLR users are all frustrated MF wannabees is wrong, if they seriously want me to look at their cameras it's not more pixels that will get me looking, there needs to be a big advantage in working with the equipment, at the moment it's seriously disadvantaged. Whipping up a lack lustre hysteria and starting a Gentleman's Club for the discerning user does not fix any real issues.
Kevin.
-
Jaguar proper gave us the E-Type and the mighty XJS.
David
The only good cars Jaguar eve made were the D type and the Mk2... and the only thing they got right on the E-type was the styling.
...but this is irrelevant.
Most of us here are camera users, not shareholders, and we want Hasselblad to make good cameras (and if that enables them to stay in business and invest in development, so well and good).
-
Jaguar never made a perfect car (apart from the Mark II, which was perfect for its looks), but Hasselblad did once make a perfect camera, the 500 C/M - perfect for its era, that is of course. And as many have noted, in those days there was clear blue water between any MF camera and even the best 35mm (yes, even Leica) in a 10 by 8 print. But Hasselblad dumped their perfect camera, even though in its 200 series incarnation it could, with some development, have incorporated auto-focus and auto-exposure and all the other stuff that everyone seems to want. And I strongly suspect that the real reason the 200 series got dumped was that it was simply too expensive to make. However, as many have also noted, it is becoming much harder for anyone, pro, amateur or manufacturer, to justify the existence of MF at all, unless your aim is to print huge pictures. In the fine art world, you might as well shoot large format and have the advantage of camera movements too. The fact that we now have only two players in the MF camera marketplace speaks for itself. And all this is not terribly good news for the makers of MF digital backs either.
Hasselblad is clinging on, it seems to me, to a very specialised but nonetheless lucrative area - the world of fashion, glamour and, to a lesser extent, product photography. All their publicity and advertising material emphasises these particular uses of the H-system camera. Ultra-real, ultra-glossy pretty much sums it up. Perhaps they can retain an advantage over the Canon-Nikon crowd in this niche market. But it is not an ideal situation for growth.
John
-
The only good cars Jaguar eve made were the D type and the Mk2... and the only thing they got right on the E-type was the styling.
...but this is irrelevant.
Most of us here are camera users, not shareholders, and we want Hasselblad to make good cameras (and if that enables them to stay in business and invest in development, so well and good).
Well I was never old enough to drive an XJS. I just used to admire one on my Paper Round. I guess the likely hood of being able to run a car that probably did 12mpg is becoming more unlikely!
-
The XJS was one of the most badly built cars ever made, they couldn't even afford the shoestring it was built on. I assume that was the point. Under Ford they became one of the most reliable manufacturers in the business.
That was indeed the point.
Not only are they reliable, but they have been able to embrace the latest technologies... and are arguably on the forefront of what luxury sport cars could be.
I believe that they would not be there had they remained an independant niche player.
Cheers,
Bernard
-
Hasselblad have a design and manufacturing partnership with Fuji, who are not exactly small players in the digital and lens field. Just like Jaguar and Ford, really. So I don't quite see the point.
-
Hasselblad have a design and manufacturing partnership with Fuji, who are not exactly small players in the digital and lens field. Just like Jaguar and Ford, really. So I don't quite see the point.
Fuji does the lenses, that's it.
Besides, Jaguar was probably the least relevant example of the bunch.
Cheers,
Bernard
-
Not only are they reliable, but they have been able to embrace the latest technologies... and are arguably on the forefront of what luxury sport cars could be.
Think I might argue with that as well!
-
Hasselblad have a design and manufacturing partnership with Fuji, who are not exactly small players in the digital and lens field.
I always wanted to cut the Imacon logo sticker off of my old Imacon Flextight Photo scanner, and tape it over the logo on the H bodies. Compared to the film Hasselblads, the H body always felt more Imacon than Hasselblad.
(And if anyone knows of a mint Flextight Photo, I'm sure looking).
- Barney Rubble
PS. If making money and staying alive is the goal of any large business, and Hasselblad sees the 5DMarkII absolutely flying off the shelves, hard to find even months after the ship date, someone tell me why Hasselblad wouldn't want to have at least one model that followed in the spirit of the 5DMarkII? Just one model? And I'm not talking video here at all; I'm just talking Fast and Nimble and somewhat Minimalist. Bad analogy -- but something easy, like a Camry or a RAV4 -- fast on its feet, and not overburdened with features that drive up the price. Hasselblad can still make the Lexus, in the 50-60MP range, but why not something to compete in this New World of incredibly fast turnaround and even a non-print world? Let's look to the real future here -- which does not include an argument between an 8x10 print and a 40x60 print -- were' talking about a New World of no print at all! Think 72dpi; think iPad. Everywhere I look, that is where the world is heading. My position is: This is not an argument between Hasselblad and Canon/Nikon -- this is an argument about Old World versus New World, which requires everyone to really step back and see how fast things are changing.
This about sums it up -- a hollow hardbound book that's designed to be a carrying case for the Apple Tablet: http://longlivebooks.com/index.html (http://longlivebooks.com/index.html)
I just can't help from feeling that, when I see Phase and Hasselblad marching forward (backward?) deeper into the Megapixel Cold War, the car analogy that I think of is the Hummer. Yes, it'll take on anything and everything, but running at an inefficient and expensive six miles per gallon, how long will the mass market want that?
-
Think I might argue with that as well!
That's just what the best selling US based car magazine was writing last month in their super high end performance article. Now, what do they know.
Cheers,
Bernard
-
I always wanted to cut the Imacon logo sticker off of my old Imacon Flextight Photo scanner, and tape it over the logo on the H bodies. Compared to the film Hasselblads, the H body always felt more Imacon than Hasselblad.
(And if anyone knows of a mint Flextight Photo, I'm sure looking).
- Barney Rubble
PS. If making money and staying alive is the goal of any large business, and Hasselblad sees the 5DMarkII absolutely flying off the shelves, hard to find even months after the ship date, someone tell me why Hasselblad wouldn't want to have at least one model that followed in the spirit of the 5DMarkII? Just one model? And I'm not talking video here at all; I'm just talking Fast and Nimble and somewhat Minimalist. Bad analogy -- but something easy, like a Camry or a RAV4 -- fast on its feet, and not overburdened with features that drive up the price. Hasselblad can still make the Lexus, in the 50-60MP range, but why not something to compete in this New World of incredibly fast turnaround and even a non-print world? Let's look to the real future here -- which does not include an argument between an 8x10 print and a 40x60 print -- were' talking about a New World of no print at all! Think 72dpi; think iPad. Everywhere I look, that is where the world is heading. My position is: This is not an argument between Hasselblad and Canon/Nikon -- this is an argument about Old World versus New World, which requires everyone to really step back and see how fast things are changing.
This about sums it up -- a hardbound book that's designed to be a carrying case for the Apple Tablet: http://longlivebooks.com/index.html (http://longlivebooks.com/index.html)
I just can't help from feeling that, when I see Phase and Hasselblad marching forward (backward?) deeper into the Megapixel Cold War, the car analogy that I think of is the Hummer. Yes, it'll take on anything and everything, but running at a non-efficient six miles per gallon, how long will the mass market want that?
All that quality is going to vanish when it's layered interlaced and spliced for the lenticular display and print everyone is going to be asking for only slightly down the road. Forget video everyone will be talking 3D, any quality just as long as it's got a third dimension.
Kevin.
-
Hasselblad was never about the mass market, or anything approximating to it, and it should not be now. And, good grief, a Canon 5D Mk II is hardly mass market either. Or perhaps it is is for you wealthy types in the US of A. The idea of a photographic world which no longer has the print as the end product is frankly horrifying, and if it does come about I should just want to quit altogether. For a 72 dpi screen display why would you want more than 4 MP anyway? But all of this is wandering a bit off-topic.
John
-
This guy seems to feel the same way. He collects 203FE's like there's no tomorrow. He thinks it's probably the finest camera ever made, and is very loyal to the brand.
http://tinyurl.com/y8hy9ev (http://tinyurl.com/y8hy9ev)
What a guy! Didn't he whack around with an 8x10 recently? (more homesickness)
-
Hasselblad was never about the mass market, or anything approximating to it, and it should not be now. And, good grief, a Canon 5D Mk II is hardly mass market either. Or perhaps it is is for you wealthy types in the US of A.
John
I can't tell you how many tourists I see walking around Manhattan with 5d2's around their necks (nearly always with 24-105). Not a day goes by I don't see at least 1. Most are European, most are young(ish), most don't look that wealthy ...
-
My Biggest Objection here is that this camera is aimed at the highend DSLR user
but it's still $20,000.00 Last I cheeked the D3x was just under $8,000.00
That's more than Half....
I own a bunch of canon gear, and rent Phase and Hasselblads per job bases, at these prices I will just keep doing the same, renting is easy and doesn't cost me anything, it's billed right to the job/client, plus I always end up getting a week or weekend deal and have the kit for a day or two extra for my own shooting.
But I though it was guys like me who these companies want to sell to.
Maybe they can push down the H3D2-31 down to $10,000.00 and sell a whole bunch?
Or better yet as said above how about a H4D-20 with CMOS, vertical grip and High ISO capable for $10,000.00 and I will be first in line with cash in hand !
(wow is there an echo in this thread?)
am
-
Hasselblad is clinging on, it seems to me, to a very specialised but nonetheless lucrative area - the world of fashion, glamour and, to a lesser extent, product photography. All their publicity and advertising material emphasises these particular uses of the H-system camera. Ultra-real, ultra-glossy pretty much sums it up. Perhaps they can retain an advantage over the Canon-Nikon crowd in this niche market. But it is not an ideal situation for growth.
John
One of the main advantages of MF is that you can detach the digiback and use it on a view camera or stitching back - and that is what make them another order of magnitude better than CaNikons, but do Hasselblad mention this in their publicity?
...with Phocus 2 and the 60Mpx back and a digital view camera we will have the best camera ever for high-end work.
-
One of the main advantages of MF is that you can detach the digiback and use it on a view camera or stitching back - and that is what make them another order of magnitude better than CaNikons, but do Hasselblad mention this in their publicity?
...with Phocus and the 60Mpx back and a digital view camera we will have the best camera ever for high-end work.
mmm, dont forget that H system backs have no power once removed from their dedicated body. I think you can attach an image bank to supply power but thats not quite as convenient as a back with an integral battery.
Hasselblad were showing a design for a sliding back which mounted both the H back and a separate battery grip for power, but i dont think it was ever manufactured?
-
One of the main advantages of MF is that you can detach the digiback and use it on a view camera or stitching back - and that is what make them another order of magnitude better than CaNikons, but do Hasselblad mention this in their publicity?
...with Phocus and the 60Mpx back and a digital view camera we will have the best camera ever for high-end work.
"but do Hasselblad mention this in their publicity?"
Yes.
-
Hasselblads are for image makers who put quality before productivity... if your customers are not willing to pay for quality, then dump them or use a snapshot camera.
Dick, do you have any customers? I'm just trying to put your comment in context.
-
...with Phocus and the 60Mpx back and a digital view camera we will have the best camera ever for high-end work.
You've already had this for more than a year with other backs...
-
a H4D 22 mp is missing in their line
-
You've already had this for more than a year with other backs...
I would disagree with the statement that a view camera with 60Mp back is the highest quality. I would consider the 50MS with the view camera over the 60. This is not available in any other brand than Hasselblad.
-
One of the main advantages of MF is that you can detach the digiback and use it on a view camera or stitching back - and that is what make them another order of magnitude better than CaNikons, but do Hasselblad mention this in their publicity?
...with Phocus and the 60Mpx back and a digital view camera we will have the best camera ever for high-end work.
"but do Hasselblad mention this in their publicity?"
Yes.
They mention it briefly in their spec sheets, but nowhere else that I have seen.
-
Dick, do you have any customers? I'm just trying to put your comment in context.
I am a retired engineer...
I had done quite a bit of part-time professional commercial photography for about 4 decades
I had accumulated 3 Sinars and 3 film Hasselblads before I bought the Digital Hasselblad in April,
but I have been too ill to do anything with it.
My health is now improving, and I hope to be doing some work soon.
I have the option to upgrade to the H4D-60.
...but this has nothing to do with the H4D-40
-
...with Phocus and the 60Mpx back and a digital view camera we will have the best camera ever for high-end work.
You've already had this for more than a year with other backs...
My mistake - I meant Phocus 2, which is a big improvement... and, of course the 39 or 50 multi-shot is excellent for static subjects.
I am thinking of getting a 39CF as a backup second system for my Sinar P2 and Hassy V-system, and the multi-shot might be worth the extra money
-
Yes, there is a brave new world of iPads and 100dpi max.
Also, IMHO, inkjet is actually 100dpi too.
So why doesn't someone make a still-video camera for this brave new world? This is the camera that NYT, TIME etc are going to be using for the 2012 Olympics.
Edmund
I always wanted to cut the Imacon logo sticker off of my old Imacon Flextight Photo scanner, and tape it over the logo on the H bodies. Compared to the film Hasselblads, the H body always felt more Imacon than Hasselblad.
(And if anyone knows of a mint Flextight Photo, I'm sure looking).
- Barney Rubble
PS. If making money and staying alive is the goal of any large business, and Hasselblad sees the 5DMarkII absolutely flying off the shelves, hard to find even months after the ship date, someone tell me why Hasselblad wouldn't want to have at least one model that followed in the spirit of the 5DMarkII? Just one model? And I'm not talking video here at all; I'm just talking Fast and Nimble and somewhat Minimalist. Bad analogy -- but something easy, like a Camry or a RAV4 -- fast on its feet, and not overburdened with features that drive up the price. Hasselblad can still make the Lexus, in the 50-60MP range, but why not something to compete in this New World of incredibly fast turnaround and even a non-print world? Let's look to the real future here -- which does not include an argument between an 8x10 print and a 40x60 print -- were' talking about a New World of no print at all! Think 72dpi; think iPad. Everywhere I look, that is where the world is heading. My position is: This is not an argument between Hasselblad and Canon/Nikon -- this is an argument about Old World versus New World, which requires everyone to really step back and see how fast things are changing.
This about sums it up -- a hollow hardbound book that's designed to be a carrying case for the Apple Tablet: http://longlivebooks.com/index.html (http://longlivebooks.com/index.html)
I just can't help from feeling that, when I see Phase and Hasselblad marching forward (backward?) deeper into the Megapixel Cold War, the car analogy that I think of is the Hummer. Yes, it'll take on anything and everything, but running at an inefficient and expensive six miles per gallon, how long will the mass market want that?
-
The biggest threat to any MF back is going to be image end use. Sure there will always be a need for big print somewhere, but it will get less and less. As more products like the iPad filter into everyday life as 3D takes off (Lenticular) etc resolution and DR will take a back seat, add in the ability to show moving images on things like iPad and end use for the MFDB starts to shrink. I can see only landscape shooters wanting those big pixel backs and to be honest I think the World already has enough hi-res images of Yosemite, mono lake, death valley ............ etc.
Kevin.
-
I can see only landscape shooters wanting those big pixel backs and to be honest I think the World already has enough hi-res images of Yosemite, mono lake, death valley ............
And... landscape is one domain where stitching is overall a better option for those interested in really high quality prints.
Cheers,
Bernard
-
And... landscape is one domain where stitching is overall a better option for those interested in really high quality prints.
so a well captured single shot of, say, a P65+ is not really "high quality"? That's new to me.
Stitching is far to often not an option if you really care about certain image details (i.e. a specific moment). This applies escpecially to changing light or moving objects due to wind and the like.
-
And... landscape is one domain where stitching is overall a better option for those interested in really high quality prints.
so a well captured single shot of, say, a P65+ is not really "high quality"? That's new to me.
Stitching is far to often not an option if you really care about certain image details (i.e. a specific moment). This applies escpecially to changing light or moving objects due to wind and the like.
A well captured single shot of, say, a P65+ is "high quality" enough for many purposes, and it is nice to have that much res for moving subjects, but for very large prints, especially murals e.g. 3m * 5m, I will shift and stitch with a 60Mpx, and Kapture Group say that they expect to produce a stitching back for 60Mpx sensors this Spring.
-
A well captured single shot of, say, a P65+ is "high quality" enough for many purposes, and it is nice to have that much res for moving subjects, but for very large prints, especially murals e.g. 3m * 5m, I will shift and stitch with a 60Mpx, and Kapture Group say that they expect to produce a stitching back for 60Mpx sensors this Spring.
Just wondered about the "high quality" term here...sounds like less resolution = less quality. Too, 40 or 60 MP is already loads of resolutuion.
Still... stitching is often not an option. And if it is not... with a highres back you can still get a highres capture with single shot.
As to flat stitching with your view camera: it is limited anyway as with large movements the edges go soft, of course (here nodal point stitching is clearly better but you have to take much more captures).
-
And... landscape is one domain where stitching is overall a better option for those interested in really high quality prints.
Cheers,
Bernard
Hi Bernard,
I've seen your images posted here and have to say I like them and I can't argue with the quality.
I also think stitching is only an option in some cases, I would not want to base getting the images on stitching as the only option for a high quality large print if I set out with the intention of making large prints.
60 mp would be a far better bet if there was a choice, besides composing the picture would be much better in camera rather than tweaking on a computer. Plus you are a bit limited on shape with stitching unless you shoot multi rows.
I can't think there is an argument for stitching when one frame can get it, sure on a budget, but no photographic reason what so ever.
Kevin.
-
Yes, there is a brave new world of iPads and 100dpi max.
Also, IMHO, inkjet is actually 100dpi too.
Edmund
Interesting comment on inkjet being 100dpi,
Can you elaborate on your thoughts Edmund?
Aaron.
-
Just wondered about the "high quality" term here...sounds like less resolution = less quality. Too, 40 or 60 MP is already loads of resolutuion.
Still... stitching is often not an option. And if it is not... with a highres back you can still get a highres capture with single shot.
As to flat stitching with your view camera: it is limited anyway as with large movements the edges go soft, of course (here nodal point stitching is clearly better but you have to take much more captures).
Using Apo-digitars the 100mm * 100mm P3 uses about all the usable image circle, giving about 250Mpx.
For higher res, the Schneider Fine Art Gold lenses, with the 100Mpx digiback with 9 or 10 micron pixels would be a better option for giga-pixel stitching... if weight and cost and bulk were not a problem!
Bernard's stitching system is, I suspect, lighter than any 60Mpx system... but an apo-digitar and the back are light enough... just need a good light camera.
-
Using Apo-digitars the 100mm * 100mm P3 uses about all the usable image circle, giving about 250Mpx.
I wasn't referring to the usable image circle - I was referring to the lens performance with large movements (in conjunction with wide angle lenses).
-
Yes, it is interesting in the context of the iPad and whatever else we will be reading off of by this time next year. 100 dpi or less. And Edmund's comment about inkjet being 100 dpi.
I have often wondered how much data actually sticks to the printed page. How many megapixels are actually visible on the Vogue glossy page?? In my experience even with a 12mp camera, you could not see a lot of the data in the file once it was printed on an inkjet. Mind you, the print looks great! Even close-up it looks great. But looking at the monitor at 100% reveals stuff that you can not see without a magnifying glass or loupe. And even then you re missing info. in the moderate sized print. My mind keeps going back to that article where Michael had his expert friends come to the gallery and they could not tell a Canon G9 from a high rez back, other than the DOF disparities.
I know that in one of my portfolios I have an image shot with a Sony something or other 707 snapshot camera, and this print is indistinguishable form the rest of the stuff in the 11x14 book (from Canon 1Ds, 5D, Hassy scans, 5D2, 1Ds3, etc.) They all print quite well IMO.
-
Hi, Lisa.
Yes, it is interesting in the context of the iPad and whatever else we will be reading off of by this time next year. 100 dpi or less. And Edmund's comment about inkjet being 100 dpi.
Generally it is considered that printing at more than 360ppi gives no visible improvement, the difference between 240 and 360 can be difficult to spot, and 70 looks awful... but this is not a limitation of inkjet prints, but of the human eye.
I have often wondered how much data actually sticks to the printed page. How many megapixels are actually visible on the Vogue glossy page?? In my experience even with a 12mp camera, you could not see a lot of the data in the file once it was printed on an inkjet. Mind you, the print looks great! Even close-up it looks great.
The way the press process and screen photographs they loose most of the res, and a professional inkjet with a good RIP makes a difference that is worth the £4,500.
But looking at the monitor at 100% reveals stuff that you can not see without a magnifying glass or loupe. And even then you re missing info. in the moderate sized print. My mind keeps going back to that article where Michael had his expert friends come to the gallery and they could not tell a Canon G9 from a high rez back, other than the DOF disparities.
I know that in one of my portfolios I have an image shot with a Sony something or other 707 snapshot camera, and this print is indistinguishable form the rest of the stuff in the 11x14 book (from Canon 1Ds, 5D, Hassy scans, 5D2, 1Ds3, etc.) They all print quite well IMO.
We are talking about high res files for big prints, so, unless your book is 11 * 14 feet, it is irrelevant.
Many photographers know the limitations of their equipment, and produce moody pictures of misty sunsets, as they know they have not got what it takes to capture much detail. To produce an acceptable landscape you need to capture the detail or texture in the scene.
By using a digiback on a view camera, you can often use the movements to compensate for the lack of DOF, or you can use focus merge.
Sharpening, fractals and ALCE can make prints look good at low original camera pixels per print inch, but it is difficult to reinvent lost detail.
I think we have what we could use to carry on where Constable and Canaletto left off, but we should not expect the machine to do all the work for us.
-
so a well captured single shot of, say, a P65+ is not really "high quality"? That's new to me.
Stitching is far to often not an option if you really care about certain image details (i.e. a specific moment). This applies escpecially to changing light or moving objects due to wind and the like.
There is no denying that the P65+ delivers excellent resolution, but considering that many housholds now have 50 inch TVs in their living room, the definition of a large print has IMHO changed a lot in the past 5 years.
For many of these large prints, 60Mp is very far from cutting it. It reallyt depends on the market you are trying to address.
To my eyes, anybody trying to address the best possible image quality in terms of details (knowing that there of course other aspects t image quality) shoudl do stitching, whatever the camera used.
Cheers,
Bernard
-
Hi Bernard,
I've seen your images posted here and have to say I like them and I can't argue with the quality.
I also think stitching is only an option in some cases, I would not want to base getting the images on stitching as the only option for a high quality large print if I set out with the intention of making large prints.
60 mp would be a far better bet if there was a choice, besides composing the picture would be much better in camera rather than tweaking on a computer. Plus you are a bit limited on shape with stitching unless you shoot multi rows.
I can't think there is an argument for stitching when one frame can get it, sure on a budget, but no photographic reason what so ever.
Kevin,
In therory you would be correct... now the question is not about comparing a 60MP perfect camera vs a 20MP perfect camera...
It is about a P65+ on a Mamiya platform vs a leading DSLR from one of the major vendors... which means that the usage of the 35mm option will offer:
- less weight,
- more options going long or going wide,
- mode DoF when needed, less DoF when needed,
- readily available back ups,
- more rugedness,
- less risk when evolving in dodgy environments,
- a lot more battery life,
- ...
Regardless of the price, I would stitck with my current setup for anything for day trips near the car.
That is the key value of stitching, it gives you the flexibility to track a charging bull at 10:45 AM and to shoot a 200 megapixel multi-row pano at 11:05 with a single camera.
Cheers,
Bernard
-
To my eyes, anybody trying to address the best possible image quality in terms of details (knowing that there of course other aspects t image quality) shoudl do stitching, whatever the camera used.
Stitching is boring and is not an everyday solution
Anyway, digital 35 mm IQ is not equivalent to IQ of a MF back (and you still need a tripod ...). So 3 good stitched photos of 20 MP are not as good as one native 60 MP.
3 nice girls don't make a top model
At the end, if you want large format and are courageous enough to stitch, 4 photos of 60MP will be so nice !
-
In that Hasselblad sales site, they feature Alec Soth. His 8x10 rocks. I'm trying to find the story that he tells, somewhere on the web, about him taking a cover assignment from the NYTimes, and time was short -- instant turnaround -- so he didn't have time to shoot the camera he knew well and was comfortable with (8x10), so he rented a digital back and a tech, and set off to shoot the job. I think I remember in the story, they had problems with the camera, either it locked up or they simply couldn't figure out how to use it, and in the end, the job was pretty much botched, and his pictures got killed. They ran an illustration on the Cover instead.
Point being: The best camera for the job is the one that you know well, and the that you're comfortable with, whether it be a T2 point and shoot, or film, or a P65 Megalopolis. Your style is your style, and it's a delicate dance to venture outside of that.
Also, oddly, it seems like on that Hasselblad site, they run some Hasselblad images, but also some 8x10 film images, but of course, don't bother to note that some of them are not Hasselblad digital.
Nothing wrong with selling, but there's always a true, real world backstory. Always.
(To their credit, at least they didn't strip in an overly hi-rez image, into the LCD of the camera. We're making progress!)
-
In that Hasselblad sales site, they feature Alec Soth. His 8x10 rocks. I'm trying to find the story that he tells, somewhere on the web, about him taking a cover assignment from the NYTimes, and time was short -- instant turnaround -- so he didn't have time to shoot the camera he knew well and was comfortable with (8x10), so he rented a digital back and a tech, and set off to shoot the job. I think I remember in the story, they had problems with the camera, either it locked up or they simply couldn't figure out how to use it, and in the end, the job was pretty much botched, and his pictures got killed. They ran an illustration on the Cover instead.
Point being: The best camera for the job is the one that you know well, and the that you're comfortable with, whether it be a T2 point and shoot, or film, or a P65 Megalopolis. Your style is your style, and it's a delicate dance to venture outside of that.
Also, oddly, it seems like on that Hasselblad site, they run some Hasselblad images, but also some 8x10 film images, but of course, don't bother to note that some of them are not Hasselblad digital.
Nothing wrong with selling, but there's always a true, real world backstory. Always.
Mark,
I assume you mean here...
http://www.hasselbladusa.com/user-showcase/alec-soth.aspx (http://www.hasselbladusa.com/user-showcase/alec-soth.aspx)
Note Alec says he shot with the H3D since 2008, only comments on the portrait and the Auckland house
The other photograph is labelled 2002.
David
-
I assume you mean here...
Yeah, David, that's the sales page, not the backstory page.
And to stay in the "ride on the coattails mentality" shown here by Hasselblad, I'm looking for that BMW webpage, where they show a Mercedes down in the bottom left corner. Yes, they're legally correct, I guess, that it shows a copyright of 2002, but in spirit, hmm, I'm not so sure.
Would a casual customer assume that that 8x10 was shot on a Hasselblad back? I'd think so. But I guess your lawyers went over it before it was uploaded.
As far as venturing outside his comfort zone, I just thought it was pretty cool, and forthcoming, for a guy at his stature, to freely tell that NYTimes story. I'd post the link, but I can't find it right now. Everything that I see about him, (and now helping publish a blog a Little Brown), seems to indicate that he's a great guy.
http://littlebrownmushroom.wordpress.com/ (http://littlebrownmushroom.wordpress.com/)
-
In that Hasselblad sales site, they feature Alec Soth. His 8x10 rocks. I'm trying to find the story that he tells, somewhere on the web, about him taking a cover assignment from the NYTimes, and time was short -- instant turnaround -- so he didn't have time to shoot the camera he knew well and was comfortable with (8x10), so he rented a digital back and a tech, and set off to shoot the job. I think I remember in the story, they had problems with the camera, either it locked up or they simply couldn't figure out how to use it, and in the end, the job was pretty much botched, and his pictures got killed. They ran an illustration on the Cover instead.
Point being: The best camera for the job is the one that you know well, and the that you're comfortable with, whether it be a T2 point and shoot, or film, or a P65 Megalopolis. Your style is your style, and it's a delicate dance to venture outside of that.
Also, oddly, it seems like on that Hasselblad site, they run some Hasselblad images, but also some 8x10 film images, but of course, don't bother to note that some of them are not Hasselblad digital.
Nothing wrong with selling, but there's always a true, real world backstory. Always.
Alec used a 1ds2 and couldn't make it work for him. The assignment was not one for him, he shouldn't have taken it.
-
Yeah, David, that's the sales page, not the backstory page.
And to stay in the "ride on the coattails mentality" shown here by Hasselblad, I'm looking for that BMW webpage, where they show a Mercedes down in the bottom left corner. Yes, they're legally correct, I guess, that it shows a copyright of 2002, but in spirit, hmm, I'm not so sure.
Would a casual customer assume that that 8x10 was shot on a Hasselblad back? I'd think so. But I guess your lawyers went over it before it was uploaded.
As far as venturing outside his comfort zone, I just thought it was pretty cool, and forthcoming, for a guy at his stature, to freely tell that NYTimes story. I'd post the link, but I can't find it right now. Everything that I see about him, (and now helping publish a blog a Little Brown), seems to indicate that he's a great guy.
http://littlebrownmushroom.wordpress.com/ (http://littlebrownmushroom.wordpress.com/)
I imagine Alec approved it himself.
Thanks for blog link.
-
In that Hasselblad sales site, they feature Alec Soth. His 8x10 rocks. I'm trying to find the story that he tells, somewhere on the web, about him taking a cover assignment from the NYTimes, and time was short -- instant turnaround -- so he didn't have time to shoot the camera he knew well and was comfortable with (8x10), so he rented a digital back and a tech, and set off to shoot the job. I think I remember in the story, they had problems with the camera, either it locked up or they simply couldn't figure out how to use it, and in the end, the job was pretty much botched, and his pictures got killed. They ran an illustration on the Cover instead.
Here is the story:
http://toomuchchocolate.org/?p=1067 (http://toomuchchocolate.org/?p=1067)
-
Stitching is boring and is not an everyday solution
Anyway, digital 35 mm IQ is not equivalent to IQ of a MF back (and you still need a tripod ...). So 3 good stitched photos of 20 MP are not as good as one native 60 MP.
3 nice girls don't make a top model
At the end, if you want large format and are courageous enough to stitch, 4 photos of 60MP will be so nice !
Stitching is "boring" you.
Cheers,
Bernard
-
Stitching is "boring" you.
Cheers,
Bernard
Of course, and 35 mm is boring me too
-
In that Hasselblad sales site, they feature Alec Soth. His 8x10 rocks.
What happens when he shoots with something else?
-
Also, oddly, it seems like on that Hasselblad site, they run some Hasselblad images, but also some 8x10 film images, but of course, don't bother to note that some of them are not Hasselblad digital.
Also, oddly, if you click on the link to the main "User Showcase" page you get just one statement plus the links to the individual photographers pages...
"On this new section of our website we will feature selected Hasselblad photographers and their work. All types of photography are welcome, but we will place special emphasis upon photographers who are doing unique or technically challenging things with their Hasselblad gear. To be considered for inclusion in this showcase, please contact your local Hasselblad representative."
http://www.hasselbladusa.com/user-showcase.aspx (http://www.hasselbladusa.com/user-showcase.aspx)
-
Of course, and 35 mm is boring me too
"Perhaps the world's second worst crime is boredom. The first is being a bore."
(Sir Cecil Beaton)
-
What happens when he shoots with something else?
I just find this topic interesting. Here is a guy who's made a name for himself shooting 8x10. Yet now, I guess he's bumping up into the commercial realities of deadlines and turnaround issues. Yet, it is the optical qualities and focus fall-off of 8x10 that many times make a Soth image a Soth image. (Plus the whole artiste story that you can tell, about "shooting 8x10 versus digital"). See the "girl on ice skates" image, and "preacher holding Bible" image, for what I think is the Soth signature look -- razor sharp focus on the subject, but the background falls away instantly.
http://alecsoth.com/Mississippi-new/pages/frameset.html (http://alecsoth.com/Mississippi-new/pages/frameset.html) (Trust me, the web does not do this image justice. I've seen the print).
There is no way to achieve that look with "almost 645 digital". People will argue that there is, but if you see one of his 30x40s on the wall, you'll never argue that you could. You're dealing with a tiny sensor, (compared to 8x10). It's just not the same. Try it.
I see that blue house image, and it looks like some Location Scouting image. Certainly not signature Alec Soth.
It's just interesting when someone has created their vibe from one camera, but then commercial realities begin to try to pry them away from what put them on the map. Do you turn the job down, because there's not enough production time, or, do you just try to fake your look with a digital solution? (Or, do you just walk away from your reputation, and try to create a new reputation -- one that's more achievable in this modern, we-want-it-yesterday mentality?)
Personally, I'm rooting for him to hold his own, and keep shooting 8x10. It separates him out, and keeps him "an artist" instead of just another modern editorial photographer. There are few 8x10 guys left, and the world needs to keep them. Would a Roversi session feel the same if it wasn't BW 8x10 Polaroid? God forbid that the succumbs to the pressure, and buys a teeny little 645.
http://paoloroversi.com/ (http://paoloroversi.com/)
(Imagine a bunch of battery chargers, and laptops, and CF cards, lying on this wooden floor in this Parisian studio. It's just not meant to be).
-
I think you have it 100% correct. Soth takes the long view and is hedging his bets by entering the commercial world. His 8x10 is great for the one shot editorial portrait, but he is now a Magnum member, which is all documentary editorial on a tight publication schedule and BAM: H3DII-50, and an HP sponsorship for inkjet prints. It was probably a shock to witness the jaded and depraved world of commercial photography for the first time, like when Joe Buck first gets to NYC and meets Ratzo Rizzo in Midnight Cowboy.
My favorite Soth book is Dog Days Columbia, shot on a Mamiya 6. It has the Soth vibe but it does not vibe 8x10. I'd like to see what he's been doing with the H, as the shots on the Blad site aren't that interesting.
As to Poalo Reversi, he shot a an editorial for W using a 500 series Blad and a Phase back. Its nice stuff, works, but its not 8x10 Type 55 magic. The video shows him on location and there is the cart and the tech and it brought a tear to my eye because it JUST ISN'T RIGHT. He looked a little lost holding that little camera with a wire coming out of it.
I just find this topic interesting. Here is a guy who's made a name for himself shooting 8x10. Yet now, I guess he's bumping up into the commercial realities of deadlines and turnaround issues. Yet, it is the optical qualities and focus fall-off of 8x10 that many times make a Soth image a Soth image. (Plus the whole artiste story that you can tell, about "shooting 8x10 versus digital"). See the "girl on ice skates" image, and "preacher holding Bible" image, for what I think is the Soth signature look -- razor sharp focus on the subject, but the background falls away instantly.
http://alecsoth.com/Mississippi-new/pages/frameset.html (http://alecsoth.com/Mississippi-new/pages/frameset.html) (Trust me, the web does not do this image justice. I've seen the print).
There is no way to achieve that look with "almost 645 digital". People will argue that there is, but if you see one of his 30x40s on the wall, you'll never argue that you could. You're dealing with a tiny sensor, (compared to 8x10). It's just not the same. Try it.
I see that blue house image, and it looks like some Location Scouting image. Certainly not signature Alec Soth.
It's just interesting when someone has created their vibe from one camera, but then commercial realities begin to try to pry them away from what put them on the map. Do you turn the job down, because there's not enough production time, or, do you just try to fake your look with a digital solution? (Or, do you just walk away from your reputation, and try to create a new reputation -- one that's more achievable in this modern, we-want-it-yesterday mentality?)
Personally, I'm rooting for him to hold his own, and keep shooting 8x10. It separates him out, and keeps him "an artist" instead of just another modern editorial photographer. There are few 8x10 guys left, and the world needs to keep them. Would a Roversi session feel the same if it wasn't BW 8x10 Polaroid? God forbid that the succumbs to the pressure, and buys a teeny little 645.
http://paoloroversi.com/ (http://paoloroversi.com/)
(Imagine a bunch of battery chargers, and laptops, and CF cards, lying on this wooden floor in this Parisian studio. It's just not meant to be).
-
I think you have it 100% correct. Soth takes the long view and is hedging his bets by entering the commercial world.
I think that Soth used an 8x10 not so much for it's final image qualities but how it made him feel when he used it. When he was discovered and received praise he shot a style based on how that made him feel. And when he started making bank he again like that feeling as well. He never spoke about his images and himself the way others have chosen to perceive him.
I have fully embraced the 35mm digital and work with its limitations but if I where to shoot according to some inner artistic desires it would with a 4x5 digital camera (which does not exist).
People still using 8x10 make me think of those persons who spend a year gluing toothpicks together or something... really driven slightly mad people. There is no way I am going to drag about an 8x10 setup and I choose not to care about whatever falloff they might provide. But then again I am not some OCD crazy nut.
-
Thankfully, artists ( and people in general) aren’t forced to live within the narrow confines of other peoples perceptions. We’d all go mad or die of boredom.
-
Stitching is boring and is not an everyday solution
Anyway, digital 35 mm IQ is not equivalent to IQ of a MF back ...
But "per pixel", the recent Sony 24MP and Canon 22MP 35mm format CMOS sensors are overall better than the lagging Kodak and Dalsa FF CCD technologies. (All are at about the same pixel size of 6 microns, by the way.) Stitching then switches the advantage in pixel count and total sensor area in favor of the Sony/Canon sensor option.
But only when stitching is possible of course; I agree that it is not "an everyday solution", in that for example even slight subject movement (clouds, branches) can be a problem.
-
But "per pixel", the recent Sony 24MP and Canon 22MP 35mm format CMOS sensors are overall better than the lagging Kodak and Dalsa FF CCD technologies. (All are at about the same pixel size of 6 microns, by the way.) Stitching then switches the advantage in pixel count and total sensor area in favor of the Sony/Canon sensor option.
But only when stitching is possible of course; I agree that it is not "an everyday solution", in that for example even slight subject movement (clouds, branches) can be a problem.
To be frank, I've a Nikon, as everybody else, and I like to use it when I need it. It's a different tool, different process, different result. I don't see the same image quality, but maybe I've not the last sensor, that's it.
If I want to stitch, I can do it with a 60MP and believe me or not, the result will be much better than with my Nikon. What's really boring me is when 35 mm is presented here as the overall solution to replace MF. It's different, I won't stitch a portrait, a long exposure landscape or a nude.
After all, this is a Medium and large format forum, not the Nikon stitching forum
-
I've made the odd 'natural world' image over a few more years than I care to remember and could count on the fingers of one hand those situations in which stitching would have been an option.
But what puzzles me is this obsession with big. Big country, big cars, big tits, big landscapes, big prints...
Yep Michael Kenna makes small print but great photos !
here : http://www.michaelkenna.net/ (http://www.michaelkenna.net/)
-
On the Hasselblad site the H4D40 has an ISO range of 100-1600. I wonder how the files look at 1600, if it is decent I may be getting one very soon.
-
On the Hasselblad site the H4D40 has an ISO range of 100-1600. I wonder how the files look at 1600, if it is decent I may be getting one very soon.
So what is so new and revolutionary about this system? Looks like the h3d but they took the p40+ sensor ....
-
So what is so new and revolutionary about this system? Looks like the h3d but they took the p40+ sensor ....
The P40+ is a Dalsa. This one is a Kodak.
Nick-T
-
The other photograph is labelled 2002.
I think this section of the forum is funny, because it really is more about selling cameras than actual photography. Actually it's more about selling niche cameras in a niche market, than it is about anything else.
I looked at the blad site briefly and though I just clicked on a few images the few I did click on were 35mm format. Maybe they have been cropped, but since some were dated in the early 2000's I doubt if they were shot with a digital hasselblad.
Don't get me wrong, I like the blad site and like to look at pretty pictures, but could really care less what digital capture device was used (that's my new term for cameras, "digital capture devices" which I've now coined since camera companies refer to photographers as end users and the media refers to photoraphers as content providers).
Anyway it never seems to bother a camera company what photograph they show as long as there is a photographer's quote that says something like "the best digital capture device on the planet". Or something silly. I know, I've said the same thing before.
It's not that anyone is intentionally fibbing it's just the way things are. Some camera company calls, ooohs and ahhhs over your work and it's flattering so in kind you ohhh and ahhh over their camera.
Anyway, I also know from past experience getting too close to a camera company skews your objectivity. It's just human nature because there you are just shooting away with your Canon or Nikon and you think, "oh shit, ________ features my work so I had better dust off the digital back and shoot a few frames so I can say I shot this with a ________.
Don't think this doesn't happen, actually it happens a lot. I know of photographs featured by camera company(s), shot by very good photographers that were reshot using brand _________, though originally they'd been shot with a another brand.
Now deep down I don't think there is anything wrong with this cause advertising has always featured semi celebs to sell product and anybody with any common sense knows that Hair Soap P is never really used on set for a hair ad or actually believe that Tiger Woods buys his shick razors at the local CVS.
The only downside about ohhing and ahhing about a camera make is some people actually believe that one brand will make their photographs a lot better than another brand and that's just not so. I get sporatic e-mails where someone asks me if buying a _________ is a good idea, cause they love the shot I did with the _________. It's obvious that they're starting out and really shouldn't spend money on $20,000 to $50,000 camera systems to make them a better photographer.
So you kind of have to be careful what you say, cause the last thing I want is points on my driver's license that say, "photographer mortages home for camera".
Still, with all of this "superior image quality stuff" and showing legacy photos shot before there were even digital cameras, I think most of the makers, especially the niche makers have missed the mark when it comes to selling the best of their product.
I've said this now 200 times, but follow a photographer on a real heavy production shoot from pre production to final delivery (including the 12 rounds of retouching) and document it showing how your camera works within the professional photography world system.
Now if I was Hasselblad and was writing the sales message (my ad roots are showing), I'd start every web page with the headline, "the only current medium format camera with a full lens line of leaf shutter lenses".
Then the second headline would read, "The only medium format camera (camera not digital back), that is in rental in 98% of the worlds major markets.
Then I'd throw in a touch of self regulation and only show images shot with Hasselblad cameras, digital or analog.'
Actually, I'd take it a step further and only show photographs shot with hasselblad cameras where the owner actually bought the camera at retail and used it.
IMO
BC
-
I've made the odd 'natural world' image over a few more years than I care to remember and could count on the fingers of one hand those situations in which stitching would have been an option.
Are those available online? I would be interested in checking them out.
But what puzzles me is this obsession with big. Big country, big cars, big tits, big landscapes, big prints...
How does that differ from the usage ogf 4x5 or 8x10 in the past?
Either way, you need high resolutions and then there is no reason to stop at 60PM, or you don't and 35mm does the job extremely well already.
Cheers,
Bernard
-
Getting back to the H4D-40...
...did anyone else get to use one today?
The auto-focus (even without Auto Phocus Lock) seems an order of magnitude better than the H3D, using the same (50-110 zoom) lens, with and without modelling lights.
There is a rumour that the H4D-60 will be available next month, when they have sorted problems that Phase are having with the same digiback.
-
Getting back to the H4D-40...
...did anyone else get to use one today?
The auto-focus (even without Auto Phocus Lock) seems an order of magnitude better than the H3D, using the same (50-110 zoom) lens, with and without modelling lights.
There is a rumour that the H4D-60 will be available next month, when they have sorted problems that Phase are having with the same digiback.
Any sample photos, and did you check low light capability?
-
There is a rumour that the H4D-60 will be available next month, when they have sorted problems that Phase are having with the same digiback.
What issues with the P65+ are you referring to??? It's been shipping for a year without problems.
Actually "without problems" is an understatement - it's the best back I've ever seen and there is something to be said for purchasing a product which is already been on the market long enough to have a proven real-world track record.
Doug Peterson ()
__________________
Head of Technical Services, Capture Integration
Phase One, Leaf, Cambo, 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/)
Buy Capture One at 10% off (http://www.captureintegration.com/phase-one/buy-capture-one/)
Personal Work (http://www.doug-peterson.com/)
-
Hi LL and Dick
Yes, I did try the H4D40 today in Stockholm Sweden!
The Hasselblad D40 seemed faster than my P30+ H2 body and the "True Focus button" did actually work. This function really helps better focusing throughout the image! I did not test the 4 mins long exposure, however the new 3" display is an improvement to the old one - now - for the first time - you can check your focusing on a MF digital back..
B.R
P.L
Getting back to the H4D-40...
...did anyone else get to use one today?
The auto-focus (even without Auto Phocus Lock) seems an order of magnitude better than the H3D, using the same (50-110 zoom) lens, with and without modelling lights.
There is a rumour that the H4D-60 will be available next month, when they have sorted problems that Phase are having with the same digiback.
-
now - for the first time - you can check your focusing on a MF digital back..
B.R
P.L
Add that to the next Hasselblad headlines. Seriously.
BC
-
H4D-40 event at Fotocare was snowed out today,
rescheduled for tomorrow Thursday.
-
it will be interesting how the h4D 40 will compare to the pentax 645D.....hey they have a countdown on their website as well! and looks like it will have a 40mpix sensor as well.....new rumored price...6500$....
either way....for whatever reason the MF world decided that the only way they could compete with DSLR is with 645...and no other option...
i guess i am so desperate for a "real mf" feel that i shoot manual lenses and an angle finder on my 5DII....
quality keeps coming up here as well: if any client would hire any shooter for pixel quality, it would be so easy to be successful....simply rig up 2 p65+ side by side for sync'd shooting....done...until the next guy does 4...and so on....people get hired for a vision, professionalism, experience, ability to deliver....everything before what they are shooting with....or it is simply their niece with a camera...
i have never seen a 4 or 5 meter print...all large prints i have seen so far have been shot with film....and when looking up close they look strangely soft and blotchy and noisy and so....non digital...but who looks at a klimt with his nose at the canvas? i guess more people then i would think! maybe it's just that the images suck so bad that instead of turning around at the door one has to find something to look for and finds...DETAIL! yeah...
so the h4d60/p65+ is for people who need super resolution...to really get everything out of the sensor the gear has to be on tripod and the mirror lifted....so why the focus thingy? why not a larger sensor? i really don't want to hear about price....if pentax can sell their kodak based thing for 6500.....a rig 4, 5 or 6x the price should be able to have a sensor that is larger? why not put 2 in one body/back? who cares how big the back is, who cares if i have to run it through some software to open it up?
red promised some crazy sensor (they are making a lot of promises but this one is really out there).....6x17?!
-
so the h4d60/p65+ is for people who need super resolution...to really get everything out of the sensor the gear has to be on tripod and the mirror lifted....so why the focus thingy? why not a larger sensor? i really don't want to hear about price....if pentax can sell their kodak based thing for 6500.....a rig 4, 5 or 6x the price should be able to have a sensor that is larger? why not put 2 in one body/back? who cares how big the back is, who cares if i have to run it through some software to open it up?
red promised some crazy sensor (they are making a lot of promises but this one is really out there).....6x17?!
Pentax and Red do not have shipping (let alone real-world-proven) MFD still systems. Until they do any comparisons are pure speculation.
[retracted to avoid taking the conversation to far off topic]
Doug Peterson ()
__________________
Head of Technical Services, Capture Integration
Phase One, Leaf, Cambo, 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/)
Buy Capture One at 10% off (http://www.captureintegration.com/phase-one/buy-capture-one/)
Personal Work (http://www.doug-peterson.com/)
-
Pentax and Red do not have shipping (let alone real-world-proven) MFD still systems. Until they do any comparisons are pure speculation.
And the idea that you MUST have any digital back on a tripod with the mirror lifted to get amazing image quality is not my experience. Granted I work for a company that sells DBs (as well as Canon) so my opinion will always be suspect - maybe others could jump in to give their conclusions or we could start a new thread as that's not really directly relevant to the H4D-40.
A shutter speed of 1/focal-length results (and good hold-technique) is fine for dSLRs - for digital backs you only need another stop or so (this is ignoring Image Stabalization since my personal use of the 5DII is limited almost exclusively to the 50mm/1.2 and 85mm/1.2 which do not have IS).
ISO response on a 5D Mark II is great, but I still wouldn't use it above ISO800 (maybe 1600) unless I was looking for that noisier/grungier image. A P65+ can shoot a very clean ISO1600 in Sensor Plus mode that will match or exceed that 5DII ISO1600 file.
By NO means could that 65+ go to ISO6400 and still produce a meaningful file, and you can't buy a f/1.2 lens for a 65+ so if you're trying to shoot reportage at night, or want to experiment with minimally lit evening/night fashion then obviously the 5DII will be a better tool.
However, any implication that modern digital backs like the 65+ must be locked to a tripod with mirror-up to produce stellar image quality does not jibe with my hands on experience.
Doug Peterson ()
__________________
Head of Technical Services, Capture Integration
Phase One, Leaf, Cambo, 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/)
Buy Capture One at 10% off (http://www.captureintegration.com/phase-one/buy-capture-one/)
Personal Work (http://www.doug-peterson.com/)
i actually got to compare some raw files from the P65+ in the binning mode (is that what you are talking about?) and they can't compare to files from the 5DII...not even close....not in noise levels and not in DR...and they are smaller files?
either way...i just saw a shot of mine published in a very nicely printed fashion mag...double page spread....the shot was cropped(!)...shot at 1200...with a 1.4 lens.....i actually added grain after post production (i always do and this had to match shots ranging from 100...to 1200)....
it really does not matter...i don't think MF has to compete on that level...i never did or tried to...that is the point....give me a camera/back that gives me a MF feel/look and lets me shoot with a MF feel (and weight and handling)....
i never touched SLR as long as i shot film....never had a problem....i WANT to shoot MF...not "slightly larger then SLR without any of the advantages of SLR but ridiculous high resolution i don't really need"....i never would have tought to pick up a 645 camera in my film days either...
i understand that until the pentax is released we don't need to talk about it...and actually i am not interested in it at 6500$ either....
the only thing that is remotely MF is the rollei 6008 with a P65+...this is a total custom solution with a dead camera system....and still 645....and about 60000$ for a smallish system....
-
I don't think soth shooting digital is so much a commercial thing as it is him trying new things. Maybe it's contributed a little bit but I would bet it's not the primary reason. Not that I know the inside scoop but having seen him lecture twice in the past few months it seems to just be the next step for him....he's been working with video a lot more lately so I would keep an eye for something from him soon in that medium. Also he showed a project he was doing on digital and it holds up I must say.
Have to agree about that blue house though.
-
Seriously pschefs, do you know what the title of this topic is? If you are so in love with your 5DII then good for you, maybe you should try harder to convince yourself because I could care less. Personally I have three systems (35mm digital, MF digital and MF film), and I think each has its place and time. The reason I'm reading in this particular thread is to get some up to date information on Hasselblads new camera. If you don't like it or are unimpressed I'm sure one post will about cover it. Otherwise try to stick to the topic or better yet go start your own thread (preferably somewhere else), about how above all this you are.
-
Seriously pschefs, do you know what the title of this topic is? If you are so in love with your 5DII then good for you, maybe you should try harder to convince yourself because I could care less. Personally I have three systems (35mm digital, MF digital and MF film), and I think each has its place and time. The reason I'm reading in this particular thread is to get some up to date information on Hasselblads new camera. If you don't like it or are unimpressed I'm sure one post will about cover it. Otherwise try to stick to the topic or better yet go start your own thread (preferably somewhere else), about how above all this you are.
wow...i have been here for years...and i had no clue you were moderating this forum....news to me...but i will let you get back to work now and please make sure you tell people what they should write about...and where....
just out of curiosity: what do you expect to find out about the hd4 40 here? there are demos all over the place and you will be much better off checking it out in person....i will try and do the same tomorrow.....
-
either way....for whatever reason the MF world decided that the only way they could compete with DSLR is with 645...and no other option...
i guess i am so desperate for a "real mf" feel that i shoot manual lenses and an angle finder on my 5DII....
then you should go with an MF back, and Alpa, Arca, Cambo... platform !
-
wow...i have been here for years...and i had no clue you were moderating this forum....news to me...but i will let you get back to work now and please make sure you tell people what they should write about...and where....
just out of curiosity: what do you expect to find out about the hd4 40 here? there are demos all over the place and you will be much better off checking it out in person....i will try and do the same tomorrow.....
You have failed utterly to make a point. I'm sure that happens a lot.
Now back to H4D40 discussion.
-
... for whatever reason the MF world decided that the only way they could compete with DSLR is with 645
It has little or nothing to do with digital: the MF world was moving away from square formats to oblong(*) formats like 645 and 6x7 well before the digital transition: Rollei and Hasselblad were losing market share to Japanese upstarts like Mamiya, Pentax and Bronica, all of which offered mostly or exclusively non-square formats. (The one exception: Bronica SQ, but the 645 format ETR series was Bronica's best seller.) And Hasselblad started its transition to 645 and AF back in the film era.
Digital merely adds a nail to the coffin, since sensors have to be made in a particular shape, whereas the same roll film can be used in a variety of format shapes. So it just becomes more manifest how few images taken on 120 film were being composed for or printed in square format.
Digital has been responsible for leaving behind 6x7 (and 6x8, 6x9, 6x17 ...), due to the vastly greater cost of such large sensors in exchange for IQ improvements that would only be noticeable in too small a portion of photography to make it economically viable. (RED claims otherwise, but let us see what RED actually achieves in any format larger than its current 30x15mm maximum.)
* Nitpick: a square is a kind of rectangle: if you mean "a rectangle other than a square", the best word is "oblong".
-
Personally I have three systems (35mm digital, MF digital and MF film), and I think each has its place and time.
I agree.
A cruise ship isn’t what you want to go fishing in a creek and a rowboat isn’t a very good way to cross the ocean. Still, some think that all boats should sail in their direction and believe the ones that don’t must have blind captains and fools for passengers.
-
Personally I have three systems (35mm digital, MF digital and MF film), and I think each has its place and time.
I agree.
A cruise ship isn’t what you want to go fishing in a creek and a rowboat isn’t a very good way to cross the ocean. Still, some think that all boats should sail in their direction and believe the ones that don’t must have blind captains and fools for passengers.
...Yes but the H4D is more versatile than any one boat, as you can use it as a point-and-shoot or, with a view camera, as a full-blown professional camera doing what you would have needed a 5*4 or 10*8 for.
-
...Yes but the H4D is more versatile than any one boat, as you can use it as a point-and-shoot ...
But it has been declared many times by forum gurus that a point-and-shoot must fit in your pants pocket! On that test, the H4D runs aground.
-
But it has been declared many times by forum gurus that a point-and-shoot must fit in your pants pocket! On that test, the H4D runs aground.
Depends how big your pants are.
-
...Yes but the H4D is more versatile than any one boat, as you can use it as a point-and-shoot or, with a view camera, as a full-blown professional camera doing what you would have needed a 5*4 or 10*8 for.
You're correct.
The few (holding the confident view that if it isn't right for their use because it's the wrong color or shape or format or resolution or lacking some sort of absolutely vital feature or function which they require, etc.--then it must be overblown marketing hype) have already come aboard to imply that it is only good as a boat anchor for wealthy amateurs and done so with the mockery and disdain such abhorrent acts of technological heresy deserve. The heresy may be an affront to tradition or the new revolution depending on the current outrage being expressed.
Just thought I would beat them to the boat anchor punch line. Of course, not to worry, every real professional they know already unanimously agrees with their keen and witty insight because their needs are all the same. So they will find another acerbic line of assault to illuminate those misled rich consumers and beginning pros that haven't yet acquired their war weary and battle scarred wisdom.
-
Depends how big your pants are.
....or how deep your pockets :>))
Mark
www.marktomalty.com
-
Depends how big your pants are.
That's why I'm wearing my MC Hammer pants again!
Hammer Pants Invasion Link! (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AwzN4633mpI)
-
You're correct.
The few (holding the confident view that if it isn't right for their use because it's the wrong color or shape or format or resolution or lacking some sort of absolutely vital feature or function which they require, etc.--then it must be overblown marketing hype) have already come aboard to imply that it is only good as a boat anchor for wealthy amateurs and done so with the mockery and disdain such abhorrent acts of technological heresy deserve. The heresy may be an affront to tradition or the new revolution depending on the current outrage being expressed.
Just thought I would beat them to the boat anchor punch line. Of course, not to worry, every real professional they know already unanimously agrees with their keen and witty insight because their needs are all the same. So they will find another acerbic line of assault to illuminate those misled rich consumers and beginning pros that haven't yet acquired their war weary and battle scarred wisdom.
(http://i116.photobucket.com/albums/o12/mookiemmm/Gifs/rofl.gif)
-
...Yes but the H4D is more versatile than any one boat, as you can use it as a point-and-shoot ...
But it has been declared many times by forum gurus that a point-and-shoot must fit in your pants pocket! On that test, the H4D runs aground.
I consider that anything with a full auto option (with which you can point and shoot) can be considered a point-and-shoot... but I could sew my think-tank holster on to my trouser thigh...
You can also use H3/4s as dumbbells, preferably as a pair with a 300 and 50 -110 lenses!
-
Of course, not to worry, every real professional they know already unanimously agrees with their keen and witty insight because their needs are all the same.
Now we have "real" professional with Canikon, and the others lol
So they will find another acerbic line of assault to illuminate those misled rich consumers and beginning pros that haven't yet acquired their war weary and battle scarred wisdom.
I suppose that on a typical car forum, we can read such stupid rant like that :
"I'm a taxi driver, and the new Mercedes Benz is overpriced to me (I can't afford it), and now, just those fucking wealthy dentists can buy this new model (it's well know car makers as camera makers have only "real" professionals as customers lol) !
What the hell ! This company is doing cars for riches and not for real professionals like us ! Everybody knows the needs of "real professionals" like us : 10 seats, not so powerful engine (we just drive in the city !) etc"
lol
-
Hey Hasselblad sales people: your snide tone is alienating people. I hope that's not part of your marketing strategy. I'm starting to associate the brand with a decidely negative emotional response. I've worked in advertising log enough to know that is not a good thing. In fact, this is the opposite to what you want to create. This from someone who thinks the new True Focus is a good idea, and sees a real benefit in the H as a camera integrated with a back.
I'm not being snide or critical, I'm just letting you know how things look from where I sit.
-
Hey Hasselblad sales people: your snide tone is alienating people.
David Grover is the only employee of Hasselblad here AFAIK and I can't see any comment he made which is snide. I've always found him to be strait forward, thick skinned, and have a good sense of humor.
Doug Peterson ()
__________________
Head of Technical Services, Capture Integration
Phase One, Leaf, Cambo, 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/)
Buy Capture One at 10% off (http://www.captureintegration.com/phase-one/buy-capture-one/)
Personal Work (http://www.doug-peterson.com/)
-
Hey Hasselblad sales people: your snide tone is alienating people. I hope that's not part of your marketing strategy. I'm starting to associate the brand with a decidely negative emotional response. I've worked in advertising log enough to know that is not a good thing. In fact, this is the opposite to what you want to create. This from someone who thinks the new True Focus is a good idea, and sees a real benefit in the H as a camera integrated with a back.
I'm not being snide or critical, I'm just letting you know how things look from where I sit.
If you want to know, I'm a rich dentist.
I buy P1, Hassselblad and all the expensive gear !
For a teeth cure, call my assistant ! But I analyze your mouth with a 120 mm macro, that a plus ! At the end, photographer don't get the snide thing
-
David Grover is the only employee of Hasselblad here AFAIK and I can't see any comment he made which is snide. I've always found him to be strait forward, thick skinned, and have a good sense of humor.
Doug Peterson ()
__________________
Head of Technical Services, Capture Integration
Phase One, Leaf, Cambo, 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/)
Buy Capture One at 10% off (http://www.captureintegration.com/phase-one/buy-capture-one/)
Personal Work (http://www.doug-peterson.com/)
I agree..David Grover is probably one of the least "offensive" people who is also a strong advocate for his product.
Steve
-
I agree..David Grover is probably one of the least "offensive" people who is also a strong advocate for his product.
Steve
I can't really determine who works for Blad or is a rabid fan. If my comment is undeserved as to Mr. Grover, I apologize.
I do stand by my comment, though. Perhaps its just the fanboys and not a certain unprofessionalism. I did appreciate the MC Hammer pants comment.
-
Hey Hasselblad sales people: your snide tone is alienating people. I hope that's not part of your marketing strategy. I'm starting to associate the brand with a decidely negative emotional response. I've worked in advertising log enough to know that is not a good thing. In fact, this is the opposite to what you want to create. This from someone who thinks the new True Focus is a good idea, and sees a real benefit in the H as a camera integrated with a back.
I'm not being snide or critical, I'm just letting you know how things look from where I sit.
I can't really determine who works for Blad or is a rabid fan. If my comment is undeserved as to Mr. Grover, I apologize.
I do stand by my comment, though. Perhaps its just the fanboys and not a certain unprofessionalism. I did appreciate the MC Hammer pants comment.
Hello TMark. I believe that I am the one that has made posts that you find objectionable. I do not work for Hasselblad and never have. I also do not consider myself a rabid fan or fanboy of any brand or product. My attitude is "You may love your stuff, but your stuff will never love you back". However, I do have a long standing appreciation of the tools and technology we use for making photographs. I also have a long standing respect and appreciation for the people that make the products that we use.
I've had the pleasure of using products from, and getting to know people from, a variety of manufacturers. These people have been interesting and intelligent folks with a passion for photography and a genuine interest in the people that use the tools they design, make and sell. So why have I posted comments that you find objectionable in tone and which lead to your characterization of me?
Well... I actually have little interest in internet forums of any kind. I'm old fashioned enough to prefer talking to people. I've observed the unending flame wars that have gone on for years between Mac and PC "fanboys" and don't waste much time reading them. They are unproductive, loaded with misinformation and misleading statements from both sides and I wouldn't consider wading into that kind of cesspool even with hip boots. But photography is nearer to my heart and with some reluctance I have waded in here on occasion.
From time to time I have posted to simply correct some bit of misinformation or comment on the financial aspects of the medium-format market. On other occasions, I have found the frequency or amount of vitriol, directed at Hasselblad by a few, rising to the level where I feel like responding. Where you find my posts objectionable I am likely responding with a tone that reflects that of the posts or posters that I am addressing. Sadly, I realize that I am not rising to their level of commentary but sinking to that level. However, having said that, companies are made up of real people and if in my opinion a company is being attacked in a manner that I find unfair, incorrect, misleading, mocking, condescending, unreasonable, uninformed or in some other way objectionable... I may respond in kind again. Hey, I'm human and have both reason and emotion as motivation.
I would like to be fair and reasonable. If I post a comment that you find objectionable, you can message me privately or post publicly your objection and I will at least extend you the courtesy of reviewing what I have written and either apologizing for or defending what I write. I can say, that I appreciate your concern over the rather nasty tone that can and does develop in any internet forum including this one. That I participate in such exchanges seems, at the time of writing them, more a matter of responding to the internet equivalent of a schoolyard bully and this is not a source of anything for which I take any pride or credit.
The manufacturers that are discussed here (Hasselblad, Phase One, Mamiya, Leaf, Sinar, Rollei and others) have two goals 1) make and sell great products and 2) stay in business. These companies are made up of some great people. They work within limitations both technological and financial that are often not well understood. Of course they are people and are imperfect and make mistakes. I have no objection to objective or subjective criticism of products or companies. But I do object to attacks of the type previously described, especially those that I feel are demeaning, misleading or unwarranted.
OK... I've got that out of my system... for now. Thanks for giving me the opportunity to vent a bit... it's good for the blood pressure.
-
Sadly, I realize that I am not rising to their level of commentary but sinking to that level. However, having said that, companies are made up of real people and if in my opinion a company is being attacked in a manner that I find unfair, incorrect, misleading, mocking, condescending, unreasonable, uninformed or in some other way objectionable... I may respond in kind again. Hey, I'm human and have both reason and emotion as motivation.
It's the dark side of the Force ! Fighting the Evil is a dangerous game
It's good to read about passion ! I think we have all a real passion for photography, but as we can see it, it seems that love is sometime exclusive and accompanied with a bit of jealousy.
For my part, I find that the rant against "rich dentist" is offensive and goes nowhere, as the more the people buy a certain type of product, the wider the market is, providing the manufacturers the ability to continue to invest and deliver new products at a better price for all. So, there are no competition between "so called real professionals" and passionate amateurs or artists.
I don't believe either that we can split groups of people by "those who knows better" or by "those who does the best photographs", as small minded people and lack of imagination and taste seem so well distributed in each groups
And I find, if it really works True Focus a great innovation, because focusing is a real issue that bothered me for years with MF.
Best regards
-
I've had the pleasure of using products from, and getting to know people from, a variety of manufacturers. These people have been interesting and intelligent folks with a passion for photography and a genuine interest in the people that use the tools they design, make and sell. So why have I posted comments that you find objectionable in tone and which lead to your characterization of me?
There is a distinction between the designers/manufacturers and their sales/PR/support organisations...
with most companies you get the impression that their Sales/PR budget is hundreds of times what they spend on Research and Development...
But Mercedes and Hasselblad seem to concentrate on getting the product right.
...but driving a Mercedes van is easier than getting the best out of a Hasselblad camera, and you cannot walk in to any photo shop in any town and expect to find someone familiar with the finer points of using electronic-shuttered apo-digitars on a Sinar view camera with Hasselblad digital backs.
When I asked Chris Russell-Fish (MD Hasselblad UK) a technical question at the H4D-40 launch in London, he told me that David Grover was the expert.
...and how does the IQ of the 39ms compare to that of the 60? ( I am thinking of getting a CF39¿MS? back as a 2nd and/or backup system for use with my ELD, P2, etc.)
... and if you use a 50MS in multi-shot mode, how do the results compare to using a 50 with a quad-stitch back? I think that one of the significant differences here is that the greater image size with the quad-stitch would give you less DOF.
-
Are what available online?
Those many images of yours that could not have been shot with panoramic techniques?
Cheers,
Bernard
-
Well, certainly, they are there to be seen. Of those natural world - landscape - captures on line, stitching techniques - I'm not interested in panoramas - could have been used successfully on only one occasion, or rather, used on only one occasion in order to meet my own needs.
As I've already said, over a period of many years, I could count on the fingers of one hand the occasions where conditions would have allowed for successful stitching i.e. conditions with absolutely no subject movement. Perhaps for your own subject matter and in your own part of the world subject movement is less of a problem? Experience has taught me that all too often it's difficult enough to make successful single captures, let alone multiple captures intended for use in creating a single image. Given the choice I'd choose single shot capture every time.
There is a tendency on this and other forums for contributors to imagine that their own choices of equipment/ software/technique are the Holy Grail and all other choices of equipment/software/technique are in some way inferior. I'm genuinely delighted that you've found the ideal equipment/software/technique for your own use, but respectfully suggest, as indeed we've seen from other contributors, that these choices of equipment/software/technique are not a panacea for all.
Fair enough, but I have never considered panorama techniques to be the panacea. I see them as a very valuable tool among others.
On the other hand, many of the images I shoot using panorama techniques have some form of movement in them (water, trees/leaves, clouds, people,...), it is often not a problem when the latest software developments are leveraged. I would just not want anybody to rule out these techniques based on a partial understanding of the value they can deliver.
The attached set contains some examples:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/bernardlangui...57600916381270/ (http://www.flickr.com/photos/bernardlanguillier/sets/72157600916381270/)
Cheers,
Bernard