CFV 50c vs P65+

[wding109]

I am trying to make a decision between these two backs. I currently use Arca Swiss Rm3di and Hasselblad V cameras. Price-wise they are similar, P65+ is $2000 more expensive in my case, both are new conditions. I like larger sensor and have owned CFV50 before. But meanwhile, the I also prefer the better screen and live view on CFV 50c. It is really a hard call for me. Can anybody give me any suggestion?

Thanks a lot!

[Joe Towner]

The two things I would consider is if you'd want to rotate the back when used with the V body, and if you need the higher ISO.  I guess with Sensor+ if 15mp is fine, that takes care of it kinda.  How much do you shift with the Arca?  Are the microlenses on the 50c going to cause issue?  Is CaptureOne part of your workflow currently?  Why did you get rid of the CFV50?

Which camera puts a bigger smile on your face?

[torger]

I'd look at wide angle lens compatibility first. Your old CFV-50 had the KAF-51000 sensor which was the best wide-angle compatibility lens at that resolution, it's even usable with a shifted SK28. The P65+ is not as good, and many upgrade to the Rodenstock Digaron lenses to compensate (with the added bonus of some extra sharpness), and the CFV-50c is worse still but is usable if you don't go too wide, don't shift too much and use Digarons.

If your lens line and shooting style makes the CFV-50c feasible I'd probably go for that. I don't believe that much in sensor size, 44x33 is already quite large in the digital world and it's not that large difference up to 54x41. The biggest advantage of a larger-than-135 sensor in the digital world I think is that you can get more resolution with larger pixels meaning thath you lower the precision requirements on the camera and lenses, that is it's easier to get good optical performance out of the system.

I make my own camera profiles, use RawTherapee so "color" and raw converter is not a factor for me, but to most that is important. With P65+ you have Capture One, with CFV-50c you have Phocus. Phocus feels ancient in comparison, but say if you do post-processing in Photoshop anyway that's no problem. Concerning color my personal opinion is that Hasselblad makes better profiles than Phase One, but color is very personal.

The wide angle lens compatibility with the CFV-50c is a hard nut to crack. The core of the problem is that the degradation is mostly crosstalk-related and gradual and sometimes only visible on pixel-peep level on some colors. Some will accept more degradation that others, some are better at seeing the degradation than others. It also depends on how well the raw converter can hide the artifacts, C1 does a quite good job I know, but I don't know about Phocus.

If you could tell us a little about which wide angle lenses you are going to use and how large movements you want to be able to do we could maybe give some more detailed advice.

[torger]

This thread over at GetDPI shows movements with various Digaron lenses and the IQ250, same sensor as the CFV-50c

http://www.getdpi.com/forum/medium-format-systems-and-digital-backs/53466-iq250-movement-tests-23-32-40-70-90-desaturation-mazing-artifact.html

Note though that those files where processed with Capture One, I don't know about how well Phocus handles LCC with crosstalk in them.

[wding109]

Joe, thanks for your reply! I mostly use the rodenstock hr-sw 90 to do the stitching, and I have a 905 swc for occasional use. Although many people said the bad performance of Bigon on DB, I actually found it suits me very well. I currently don't have wide angle lens on RM3Di, and I don't think I will do lots of shifts even I have a R-line wide angle lens. I use PS and LR to do the post processing for the images from my CFV 50 back. But I may also give C1 a try in the future. Getting rid of the CFV 50 is just for the personal reason, there is nothing to do with its image quality.

"Which camera puts a bigger smile on your face?" it is the 905 swc!

The two things I would consider is if you'd want to rotate the back when used with the V body, and if you need the higher ISO.  I guess with Sensor+ if 15mp is fine, that takes care of it kinda.  How much do you shift with the Arca?  Are the microlenses on the 50c going to cause issue?  Is CaptureOne part of your workflow currently?  Why did you get rid of the CFV50?

Which camera puts a bigger smile on your face?

[wding109]

toeger, I really appreciate your reply! very helpful! Please see my reply to Joe for the similar questions you asked:) 
Do you know if the crosstalk-related problem will happen frequently on 905 SWC? That will be a deal breaker for me. On the CFV50 with 905 SWC, most of the time I got very pleased pictures, although some times color casts happened, but no frequently.

Thanks a lot!

I'd look at wide angle lens compatibility first. Your old CFV-50 had the KAF-51000 sensor which was the best wide-angle compatibility lens at that resolution, it's even usable with a shifted SK28. The P65+ is not as good, and many upgrade to the Rodenstock Digaron lenses to compensate (with the added bonus of some extra sharpness), and the CFV-50c is worse still but is usable if you don't go too wide, don't shift too much and use Digarons.

If your lens line and shooting style makes the CFV-50c feasible I'd probably go for that. I don't believe that much in sensor size, 44x33 is already quite large in the digital world and it's not that large difference up to 54x41. The biggest advantage of a larger-than-135 sensor in the digital world I think is that you can get more resolution with larger pixels meaning thath you lower the precision requirements on the camera and lenses, that is it's easier to get good optical performance out of the system.

I make my own camera profiles, use RawTherapee so "color" and raw converter is not a factor for me, but to most that is important. With P65+ you have Capture One, with CFV-50c you have Phocus. Phocus feels ancient in comparison, but say if you do post-processing in Photoshop anyway that's no problem. Concerning color my personal opinion is that Hasselblad makes better profiles than Phase One, but color is very personal.

The wide angle lens compatibility with the CFV-50c is a hard nut to crack. The core of the problem is that the degradation is mostly crosstalk-related and gradual and sometimes only visible on pixel-peep level on some colors. Some will accept more degradation that others, some are better at seeing the degradation than others. It also depends on how well the raw converter can hide the artifacts, C1 does a quite good job I know, but I don't know about Phocus.

If you could tell us a little about which wide angle lenses you are going to use and how large movements you want to be able to do we could maybe give some more detailed advice.

[torger]

toeger, I really appreciate your reply! very helpful! Please see my reply to Joe for the similar questions you asked:) 
Do you know if the crosstalk-related problem will happen frequently on 905 SWC? That will be a deal breaker for me. On the CFV50 with 905 SWC, most of the time I got very pleased pictures, although some times color casts happened, but no frequently.

Thanks a lot!

I don't know, but I think it's quite likely that it works well as you can't shift the SWC, and as the CFV-50c sensor has offset microlenses (which assumed a centered lens) it has some extra tolerance when the lens is unshifted. Don't forget that going from 49x37mm on the CFV-50 to 44x33mm on the CFV-50c will make some reduction in FoV, which may also be a deal-breaker? With the P65+ you get the opposite a wider field of view.

It seems from your use case that the CFV-50c can work out for you, but if I were you I'd try to get some indications from someone that has actually tried the SWC with the CFV-50c... maybe Hasselblad themselves have tested this combination?

[jng]

You will definitely lose some of the "super" wideness of the SWC by using the crop sensor 50c back, which may or may not matter so much to you. In terms of image quality on the larger Dalsa sensor as used in the P65+ and IQ160, it's quite good but in my experience if you're really picky requires LCC adjustments and also stopping down to f/16 to pull the edges in, for example for infinity-focused landscapes where across the field sharpness is desired (as shown in a previous Lula forum post). Perhaps someone with direct experience can comment on the 50c/SWC combination. In any case the SWC/MFDB makes for a nice point-and-shoot set-up!

John

[Bo Dez]

It depends what you are shooting.

I used P45 on the V with no issues. The P65 became far harder to focus. It's best with the WLF, the prism is a bit too dim. Then, all of a sudden, because you become more aware of focussing, you come very aware of the fresnel texture of the ground glass because you are looking so much more carefully and it just becomes more intensive and in some light, difficult. Even with a brightscreen sort of set up it is tricky.  I moved to the H and it is much easier to use, but never bonded with the camera like I did with my old 500 series V's. The H's build tolerances are better, but also, the viewfinder is so much more bright and super clear, and the modern designed lenses are better resolving for that sort of resolution.

It's not that it can't be done, and it's something you get used to in time I guess, but focussing a V with the P65 is quite laborious, to the point of it becoming a bit of a distraction from the actual photography. The pictures I made with it weren't diminished in any way, it's just the ease of use was not really there. You may or may not find the same with your type of working but I would suggesting trying to rent and try.

[JohnBrew]

+1 on what Bo said.

I shot a CFV-50c with a HR40 (equivalent to 28mm with the crop sensor) and it was fine, so if you're good with only 28mm for a wide that would work. Don't know about shifting as I did none, but I did stitch with it and the files were quite nice.

[Paul2660]

+1 on what Bo said.

I shot a CFV-50c with a HR40 (equivalent to 28mm with the crop sensor) and it was fine, so if you're good with only 28mm for a wide that would work. Don't know about shifting as I did none, but I did stitch with it and the files were quite nice.

Hi John:

By HR40 do you mean the Rodenstock 40mm? or a Hasselblad lens?  I don't know their lens line up well at all but do have the HR-W40 Rodenstock 40mm.  On the 50c or any of the 50MP back, it would be the same as a 56mm lens I believe.  1.3 x the lens focal length. 

Color cast on the 50mp with an HR-W 40mm:

Center no problems,  up to 10mm OK, 15MM the last 5mm will be almost pure red on the LCC and the red tint will be very visible on the images also.  I used the IQ150 not the 50c but they are the exact same chip.  CFA's are most likely different, the the color issues will be the same across all of them. 

Capture One actually did a very good job on correcting the massive amount of magenta color on the 12 to 15mm shifts.  I agree with Torger, if you dig really deep into the file you will still the mazing and effects of crosstalk, but in my landscape tests, these really did not show up in prints.  However where you can have trouble is solids, like pure white, off white interiors and blue sky.  The red tint will cause a solid blue, with no clouds to break up the image hard to get corrected, at least it was for me with C1.  Not sure if all of this is due to the 50MP Sony chip as I don't feel C1 does a great job period on the color cast issues from the HR-W 40mm on my 160 or 260 files either.  Shifts past 12mm always have a red tint in the blues even after the LCC has been applied. 

I noticed a slight faint vertical banding in the sky shots also, not the hard banding due to microlens ripple which you will see often on shifts with the Schneider lenses, but a much less distinct banding which was hard to fix in post.  I did get acknowledgement from Phase One that it existed, but was also told the IQ150 was never meant for movements much past 5mm by Phase.

I don't have any experience with Phocus, and how well it can correct the LCC problems with color shift, and cross talk on shifts.

Paul C

[wding109]

Thank you all, folks! I decide to go with CFV 50c!

[JohnBrew]

Paul, sorry for the confusion. I've seen the Rodenstock 40 printed as HR40, 40HR and several other ways. It was the Rodenstock, anyway. Damn fine lens.

[Paul2660]

Paul, sorry for the confusion. I've seen the Rodenstock 40 printed as HR40, 40HR and several other ways. It was the Rodenstock, anyway. Damn fine lens.

Hi John, I agree the nomenclature on the Rrodenstocks gets confusing.  I just did not know if Hasselblad had a lens with that name also as I know very little on their glass. 

I always try to remember them by the color bands, they actually help a lot.  Green, Pink, blue and Yellow.   I don't know much about the older green band lenses. 

Pink is the HR, and has the 23, 28, 35, 55, 105 in the family all except the 105mm and 55mm have the small 70mm IC.  But these are still the widest tech lenses in production I believe. 

Blue, HR-W, created for the IQ180 back, 32mm, 40mm, 50mm, 70mm, 90mm (90mm gone) These start with a 90mm IC and all are exceptional lenses are you pointed out. 
EDIT:  It seems now that Rodenstock has dropped the HR and just calls these the W series, in the 32, 40, 50 and 70mm range. 

Yellow, newest, and so far only a 90mm, HR-SW.  Again state of the art lens, Rodenstock claims it takes over a year for the glass to cure before they make the lens. 

I know there are some 120 and 150mm sized lenses in either the pink or blue lines, but I don't know the exact sizes.  I have stayed with the Schneiders for anything past 100mm as they are so much smaller in size and weight. 

Here is great link to the Rodenstock lens page, they have redone it and it's now very straight forward.

http://www.rodenstock-photo.com/en/products/professional-lenses-digital/hr-digaron-w

Paul C