H5x or XF w/ IQ180...

[jeff_singer]

I’m currently using a IQ180 on a Contax 645.  I love the Contax 645 more than just about any camera I’ve ever had and hate to think about switching.  But I’m finding I need a higher sync speed than is possible with the Contax.  I’ve used the camera for years with no complaints but as I’m doing more with strobes outdoors I’m growing more and more frustrated with the limitations.

It seems like the only real options are the Hasselblad H5x or the new Phase One XF.  I’m not at all interested in the DF/DF+ as I didn't like that camera the times I’ve tried it.  I haven’t actually tried the H5x or XF so I’m looking to get the opinions of people who have tried them.

Also, is there an adaptor for Contax 645 lenses onto the H5x or XF?  I know that won't do anything for me regarding sync speed, but I can't afford to switch all my lenses at once so this would tied me over until I can switch them all.

[Doug Peterson]

I’m currently using a IQ180 on a Contax 645.  I love the Contax 645 more than just about any camera I’ve ever had and hate to think about switching.  But I’m finding I need a higher sync speed than is possible with the Contax.  I’ve used the camera for years with no complaints but as I’m doing more with strobes outdoors I’m growing more and more frustrated with the limitations.

It seems like the only real options are the Hasselblad H5x or the new Phase One XF.  I’m not at all interested in the DF/DF+ as I didn't like that camera the times I’ve tried it.  I haven’t actually tried the H5x or XF so I’m looking to get the opinions of people who have tried them.

Here are some XF reviews/thoughts: http://www.getdpi.com/forum/medium-format-systems-and-digital-backs/56860-phase-one-xf-impressions-reviews-so-far.html

Beyond that I don't think you'll get far without putting one of each in your hands to try. Fortunately we do everything we can to make that easy to do . I see you're already signed up for our free LA Phase One Tune Up Day. Just make sure Michelle knows you want to see an H5X body there and we'll make sure it's available.

Also, is there an adaptor for Contax 645 lenses onto the H5x or XF?  I know that won't do anything for me regarding sync speed, but I can't afford to switch all my lenses at once so this would tied me over until I can switch them all.

The H5X does not have a focal plane shutter. So it can only accept Hasselblad or Fuji leaf shutter lenses.

The XF has a focal plane shutter. But the flange distance of the Contax does not allow space for an adapter between a Contax lens and a Phase One body.

As it happens I am selling a Contax 80mm f/2 that I had mechanically remounted to an XF mount. The remounting process loses autofocus and aperture control, so for many applications this is useless. For me it is perfect because I only want that lens wide open anyway, and focusing with live view on a CMOS back or through the new (brighter) viewfinder of the XF is all I need for my uses of this lens. Unfortunately for me I need to raise some funds for an engagement ring.

If you want to have a few hold-over lenses while you slowly accumulate Schneider LS lenses, you can use Mamiya or Hasselblad 500 or 200 series lenses, many of which can be picked up for very low cost.

https://digitaltransitions.com/blog/news/lens-modification-for-older-lenses-on-the-xf
https://digitaltransitions.com/blog/dt-blog/fast-portrait-lens-phase-one
https://www.digitaltransitions.com/blog/dt-blog/fast-portrait-lens-phase-one-part-2

[Theodoros]

I’m currently using a IQ180 on a Contax 645.  I love the Contax 645 more than just about any camera I’ve ever had and hate to think about switching.  But I’m finding I need a higher sync speed than is possible with the Contax.  I’ve used the camera for years with no complaints but as I’m doing more with strobes outdoors I’m growing more and more frustrated with the limitations.

It seems like the only real options are the Hasselblad H5x or the new Phase One XF.  I’m not at all interested in the DF/DF+ as I didn't like that camera the times I’ve tried it.  I haven’t actually tried the H5x or XF so I’m looking to get the opinions of people who have tried them.

Also, is there an adaptor for Contax 645 lenses onto the H5x or XF?  I know that won't do anything for me regarding sync speed, but I can't afford to switch all my lenses at once so this would tied me over until I can switch them all.

HD5X hands down... It will allow you to use film whenever you like much like the C645 was, leaf shutter lenses are widely available in the S/H market, the lenses will be fully compatible with a Leica S if you ever decide to add one, you can use an HTS adapter on it and have extensive lens movements, you can add an H2F or H4X buck up body, you can use any P+ or other maker back on it, you can share the back of another H5D or a future H6D on it and even use a multishot back and have better quality for stills than any 80mp single shot back... you name it (the list of advantages with respect to XF is limitless)... Easy decision for you since you are coming from C645 and thus know the benefits of having an "open" platform... 

EDIT: You can't use C645 lenses on either bodies... it could be possible with a future Hasselblad H if it would have a focal plane shutter (and one would bother to adapt the interface CPU contacts) since there is 2.7mm difference in mounting distance between the two (highly unlike to happen with only 2.7mm of space even if there will be a focal plane H future body or not).

With P1, the lens mount is only about a mm difference so one can only convert the mount of a C645 lens as to adapt it on, but AF definitely won't work and also the conversion should be quite expensive since the motor of the lens that controls the aperture needs to be powered too...

[Steve Hendrix]

HD5X hands down... It will allow you to use film whenever you like, much like the C645 was, leaf shutter lenses are widely available, in the S/H market, the lenses will be fully compatible with a Leica S

Jeff - do you actually shoot film? If that is really important, then the H5X would be a very viable path, of course. If not, then I think you can make the argument that either camera system is a nice match. With the XF Camera now in play, we're seeing fewer hybrid system requests (Phase in back/Hassleblad in front). We still get them, but with the XF, it is now logical to value the benefits that having the digital back and camera come from the same maker, especially given that firmware updates will play such a large role, as we've already seen with just the first update.


Steve Hendrix
Capture Integration

[eronald]

If quick handheld focus wide open and off-center focus points are important, eg for focusing on the eyes in portraits, then the Hassy will have a huge advantage, and the XF simply cannot compete. Promises of future focus upgrades of the XF should be discounted. You may also wish to check out the workhorse lens in your focal length, for its rendering. Otherwise, each system has pluses and minuses but integration does weigh heavily in favor of all-Phase, and Doug and Pete have a rep of being honest, knowledgable and extraordinarily helpful, in spite of being dealers. I would believe every single thing they say, except when it comes to AF. 

Edmund

I’m currently using a IQ180 on a Contax 645.  I love the Contax 645 more than just about any camera I’ve ever had and hate to think about switching.  But I’m finding I need a higher sync speed than is possible with the Contax.  I’ve used the camera for years with no complaints but as I’m doing more with strobes outdoors I’m growing more and more frustrated with the limitations.

It seems like the only real options are the Hasselblad H5x or the new Phase One XF.  I’m not at all interested in the DF/DF+ as I didn't like that camera the times I’ve tried it.  I haven’t actually tried the H5x or XF so I’m looking to get the opinions of people who have tried them.

Also, is there an adaptor for Contax 645 lenses onto the H5x or XF?  I know that won't do anything for me regarding sync speed, but I can't afford to switch all my lenses at once so this would tied me over until I can switch them all.

[Joe Towner]

Before you go changing everything, have you attempted to light with via continuous lights - like you would with video?  Yes, it's a power drain, but you sync at any speed.

Would a Cambo/Alpa technical camera style work for you?  You can get your sync up to 1/250th even 1/500th with your current back.

Trying to think of other solutions to your issue rather than swapping out the gear you love.  Having used the H4 for a while, I can attest to the fun of TrueFocus.  Having shot the XF a bit, it's really a game changer for those making that big investment.  The 40-80mm LS lens is a beast, but f*cking amazing! 

Ignore the body question for a minute - which mount has the leaf lens focal lengths you need? Do you need to shoot faster than 1/800th?  Those two questions will answer the question for you.  You can get a used IQ180 in a H mount, and it doesn't matter if it's a H1, H4x or H5x body.  Because of the integration on the XF, you'll most likely want the IQ380, which has a price premium.

[Franzl]

Don't forget that Hasselblad H Lenses are not supported in Capture One. Don't know if this is important, but a friend with a H5x and an IQ180 is complaining about that.

[Steve Hendrix]

If quick handheld focus wide open and off-center focus points are important, eg for focusing on the eyes in portraits, then the Hassy will have a huge advantage, and the XF simply cannot compete. Promises of future focus upgrades of the XF should be discounted. You may also wish to check out the workhorse lens in your focal length, for its rendering. Otherwise, each system has pluses and minuses but integration does weigh heavily in favor of all-Phase, and Doug and Pete have a rep of being honest, knowledgable and extraordinarily helpful, in spite of being dealers. I would believe every single thing they say, except when it comes to AF. 

Edmund

Who is Pete?

And if Pete is Steve typed in Edmund code, then I would ask you why you say that someone would not believe me when I describe the auto focus comparative performance between the two cameras. Because that sounds an awful lot like you're saying I would not be honest or factual, and that would spoil the otherwise wonderful moment I am currently enjoying eating a piece of chocolate. Edmund, don't spoil my chocolate. And don't recklessly disparage the reputations of people who base their entire modus operandi on personal and professional integrity.


Steve Hendrix
CI

[Steve Hendrix]

Don't forget that Hasselblad H Lenses are not supported in Capture One. Don't know if this is important, but a friend with a H5x and an IQ180 is complaining about that.

By this, you mean that your friend prefers the corrections for the H lenses that Phocus performs? "Supported" may be too vague for some of the readers here. You can use any Hasselblad lens with an H5X and an IQ180, and all of those files will be read and most, but not all of the lenses have custom profiles (missing 24/50/210/300/30-90 zoom). For lenses without custom profiles, you do have manual correction capabilities (distortion, chromatic aberration, purple fringing, +/- vignetting).


Steve Hendrix
CI

[Ken Doo]

.... and Doug and Pete have a rep of being honest, knowledgable and extraordinarily helpful, in spite of being dealers. I would believe every single thing they say, except when it comes to AF. 

Edmund

Have you even used a Phase XF --and by that I mean more than handled it at a Phase open house?  The XF autofocus is substantially better. And yes, even handheld, I've noticed a substantial increase in AF performance and the number of keepers. 

Doug and Steve are great resources. Except for that Pete guy. No one likes Pete/. 

ken

[jeff_singer]

Thanks for all the replies.  Here are some answers to the questions.

- I do shoot film, but I use 6x7 cameras for that, so film isn't a concert (I've never ran a roll through my Contax 645).
- Continuous lights aren't really an option.  I like to use them on occasion, but since I'm using a CCD back, I don't like going below ISO 200 when possible so that typically will mean strobes.
- I like the Alpa cameras but I'm not a fan of Rangefinders.  Also, if I have to buy new lenses anyway I don't think it's much of a savings.  And, I don't really want to carry two kits.
- I'm not doing anything with super high speed photography, so I doubt I need more than 1/500th - 1/800th sync speed.  I just definitely need more than 1/90th.
- The lenses I use most:
80mm (80% of the time)
120mm Macro (10% of the time and I love the Contax 120mm)
55mm (5% of the time)
45mm (5% of the time)

Also, there has been a lot of mention of auto focus.  I never use AF.  I'm always manual.  BUT, if one (or both) has a great AF system that is more accurate than I've had with other systems (Contax and Canon) then I'd be open to start using it.  The main reason I've never used AF on the Contax is the center focus point.  I don't like to focus and recompose.  So the H5x having multiple focus points sounds appealing.

A big draw is the "all in one system" idea with a Phase camera and a Phase back.  I know the IQ180 isn't quite as "all in one" as the IQ380, but it's more of a "kit" than the H5x + IQ180.  But it's obviously not a deal breaker since I'm using what is far from a "all in one" system as it is now and have no problems.

This is a concern:
https://www.phaseone.com/en/Search/Article.aspx?articleid=2301&languageid=1
"Hasselblad has not offered any guarantee that the H4X/H5X will work well with the Phase One IQ or P+ digital backs, and it is therefore difficult for Phase One to recommend this as a viable solution."

Is this just Phase One spin or is it a real concern?

Thanks again!

[Steve Hendrix]

Thanks for all the replies.  Here are some answers to the questions.

- I do shoot film, but I use 6x7 cameras for that, so film isn't a concert (I've never ran a roll through my Contax 645).
- Continuous lights aren't really an option.  I like to use them on occasion, but since I'm using a CCD back, I don't like going below ISO 200 when possible so that typically will mean strobes.
- I like the Alpa cameras but I'm not a fan of Rangefinders.  Also, if I have to buy new lenses anyway I don't think it's much of a savings.  And, I don't really want to carry two kits.
- I'm not doing anything with super high speed photography, so I doubt I need more than 1/500th - 1/800th sync speed.  I just definitely need more than 1/90th.
- The lenses I use most:
80mm (80% of the time)
120mm Macro (10% of the time and I love the Contax 120mm)
55mm (5% of the time)
45mm (5% of the time)

Also, there has been a lot of mention of auto focus.  I never use AF.  I'm always manual.  BUT, if one (or both) has a great AF system that is more accurate than I've had with other systems (Contax and Canon) then I'd be open to start using it.  The main reason I've never used AF on the Contax is the center focus point.  I don't like to focus and recompose.  So the H5x having multiple focus points sounds appealing.

A big draw is the "all in one system" idea with a Phase camera and a Phase back.  I know the IQ180 isn't quite as "all in one" as the IQ380, but it's more of a "kit" than the H5x + IQ180.  But it's obviously not a deal breaker since I'm using what is far from a "all in one" system as it is now and have no problems.

This is a concern:
https://www.phaseone.com/en/Search/Article.aspx?articleid=2301&languageid=1
"Hasselblad has not offered any guarantee that the H4X/H5X will work well with the Phase One IQ or P+ digital backs, and it is therefore difficult for Phase One to recommend this as a viable solution."

Is this just Phase One spin or is it a real concern?

Thanks again!

Hi Jeff -

The H5X does not have multiple focus points, if what you mean by multiple focus points is focus points outside the center circle (neither does the XF camera).

Should you need auto focus, the H5X and XF cameras perform similarly, meaning there are some slight differences, but both focus very well, if used within the constraints that they operate in (center point only), and both substantially outperform the prior DF/DF+ bodies.

Pricing for both camera systems paired with an IQ180 won't differ too much either, so if you're approaching from the standpoint of no existing legacy lineup for either platform, and have no subjective prior preference, my inclination would be to lean toward the IQ180/XF. Regarding the H4X/H5X P1 KB article, after the firmware update, we haven't noticed any more issues with an IQ/H5X combo than we did with IQ/H2 combos (meaning relatively few, and also not significantly more or less than IQ/DF+ or dedicated H5D).

Contax lenses on either body is a non-starter (not to mention "future H bodies if they incorporate a focal plane shutter"!), since the H5X does not have a focal plane shutter, and the focal plane shutter of the XF maxes out at 1/125th of a second, which doesn't address your needs.

Nice to see you using the 80mm so much. I've always felt the "lit" lenses are under-appreciated and under-utilized.


Steve Hendrix
Capture Integration

[douglevy]

I've been shooting H5X for about a year (got it from CI, thanks Steve). Previous to that I had an H1/H2. I've never shot contax, but I can tell you the H5X is a wonderful body, the ergonomics of handholding the smaller lenses (the 50/80 for example) are outstanding and the True Focus works well. I probably went from 50% in focus wide open with the H2 to 90% with the H5X. Tough to go wrong with either body it sounds like, but as someone whose 10,000 frames into the H5X, I love it.


-Doug

[eronald]

Steve,

Yes the H5x does not have multiple focus points, but it does have True Focus which makes focus and recompose sing and is a working alternative to multiple points. Let's not get lost in sophism here, the XF is a solid body, with good center focus. And I certainly do not want to cast any aspersions on your honesty, competence or helpfulness - if you get irritable when I speak out of turn just close your eyes and the moment will pass.

There are two systems left. Do you think the world would be a better place with just one?

Edmund

Hi Jeff -

The H5X does not have multiple focus points, if what you mean by multiple focus points is focus points outside the center circle (neither does the XF camera).

Should you need auto focus, the H5X and XF cameras perform similarly, meaning there are some slight differences, but both focus very well, if used within the constraints that they operate in (center point only), and both substantially outperform the prior DF/DF+ bodies.

Pricing for both camera systems paired with an IQ180 won't differ too much either, so if you're approaching from the standpoint of no existing legacy lineup for either platform, and have no subjective prior preference, my inclination would be to lean toward the IQ180/XF. Regarding the H4X/H5X P1 KB article, after the firmware update, we haven't noticed any more issues with an IQ/H5X combo than we did with IQ/H2 combos (meaning relatively few, and also not significantly more or less than IQ/DF+ or dedicated H5D).

Contax lenses on either body is a non-starter (not to mention "future H bodies if they incorporate a focal plane shutter"!), since the H5X does not have a focal plane shutter, and the focal plane shutter of the XF maxes out at 1/125th of a second, which doesn't address your needs.

Nice to see you using the 80mm so much. I've always felt the "lit" lenses are under-appreciated and under-utilized.


Steve Hendrix
Capture Integration

[Steve Hendrix]

Steve,

Yes the H5x does not have multiple focus points, but it does have True Focus which makes focus and recompose sing and is a working alternative to multiple points. Let's not get lost in sophism here, the XF is a solid body, with good center focus. And I certainly do not want to cast any aspersions on your honesty, competence or helpfulness - if you get irritable when I speak out of turn just close your eyes and the moment will pass.

There are two systems left. Do you think the world would be a better place with just one?

Edmund

I feel so much better now, thank you Edmund.

No, I feel the world is a better place with two systems, or ideally three. If you're asking do I wish for Hasselblad's demise, the answer is a resounding no.

I think you're getting me confused with someone else.

But I will say that today it is worth questioning the need to mix and match, which prior to the XF, was a more viable, and in some cases, necessary path. Things have changed. Also, Jeff, who started the thread, did mention he never uses AF, but in the event he did, it doesn't seem it would be the most important aspect of his decision. And my point was not to sophisize, but I was addressing Jeff's perception that the H5X did have multiple focus points (which it does not). While True Focus is helpful in the absence of focus points, it is not an exact replacement for focus points. Jeff stated he doesn't like to focus and recompose, now that could be partly because it is difficult to do so accurately, but also he just may want to focus and fire, rather than focus, recompose and then fire - they are two different things.

Mostly, I am only concerned with helping readers of this forum (the vast majority of whom never post here) obtain factual and accurate information. If I read something that is inaccurate, and I have information that is more helpful to readers knowing the truth, I'll post it. To some participants here, it may be a kind of entertaining game, but I respect the readers of the forum.


Steve Hendrix
CI

[eronald]

I feel so much better now, thank you Edmund.

No, I feel the world is a better place with two systems, or ideally three. If you're asking do I wish for Hasselblad's demise, the answer is a resounding no.

I think you're getting me confused with someone else.

But I will say that today it is worth questioning the need to mix and match, which prior to the XF, was a more viable, and in some cases, necessary path. Things have changed. Also, Jeff, who started the thread, did mention he never uses AF, but in the event he did, it doesn't seem it would be the most important aspect of his decision. And my point was not to sophisize, but I was addressing Jeff's perception that the H5X did have multiple focus points (which it does not). While True Focus is helpful in the absence of focus points, it is not an exact replacement for focus points. Jeff stated he doesn't like to focus and recompose, now that could be partly because it is difficult to do so accurately, but also he just may want to focus and fire, rather than focus, recompose and then fire - they are two different things.

Mostly, I am only concerned with helping readers of this forum (the vast majority of whom never post here) obtain factual and accurate information. If I read something that is inaccurate, and I have information that is more helpful to readers knowing the truth, I'll post it. To some participants here, it may be a kind of entertaining game, but I respect the readers of the forum.


Steve Hendrix
CI

Steve,

 Audi and Mercedes are both great cars but they are not identical.

 Pointing out a difference is not a lack of respect towards either brand.

 As for hybrid H systems, I suspect there are a lot of "immortal" P-series Phase backs out there on H4x and H5x bodies.  Of course the fact that the backs last forever and that the image quality of say a P65 is really good by any standards doesn't exactly help dealers push upgrades, selling the same thing again and again to the same customers ...which may explain why the XF does not take P-series Mamiya mount backs.

 If Phase had wanted to terminate the competition once and for all, they had the opportunity to deal a real knockout blow with the release of the XF, but they elected to be solid and let's face it, conservative. Hassy is still in the competition with exactly the same basic design, which has been refined over time, a bit like another timeless classic, the Porsche 911.


Edmund

[Steve Hendrix]

Steve,

 Audi and Mercedes are both great cars but they are not identical.

 Pointing out a difference is not a lack of respect towards either brand.

 As for hybrid H systems, I suspect there are a lot of "immortal" P-series Phase backs out there on H4x and H5x bodies.  Of course the fact that the backs last forever and that the image quality of say a P65 is really good by any standards doesn't exactly help dealers push upgrades, selling the same thing again and again to the same customers ...which may explain why the XF does not take P-series Mamiya mount backs.

 If Phase had wanted to terminate the competition once and for all, they had the opportunity to deal a real knockout blow with the release of the XF, but they elected to be solid and let's face it, conservative. Hassy is still in the competition with exactly the same basic design, which has been refined over time, a bit like another timeless classic, the Porsche 911.


Edmund

Edmund it feels like you're trying to make a point that neither I nor anyone else is debating.


Steve Hendrix
Capture Integration

[eronald]

Edmund it feels like you're trying to make a point that neither I nor anyone else is debating.


Steve Hendrix
Capture Integration

Steve,

 Peace

Edmund

[BernardLanguillier]

Arnold only wants you to mention his name 7 times then he goes outside and lets the air out of his neighbor's car tires, does a little graffiti and signs it PHD, then writes thirty or so letters to the editor about how Steve Jobs stole a Xerox Machine from the companies loading dock.

I have to confess that you made me laugh with that sentence!

Cheers,
Bernard

[Theodoros]

BC, the Leica S indeed a system that can provide long term solutions & MF quality as well as future security for most (but modern P1) MF lens users... I guess there are two kinds of customers for MF systems:

A. Those who are planning their system build with long term functionality and adaptation to different tasks,
B. Those that have in mind what suits them for now and look for what they think is the absolute for the few tasks they are currently involved with...

My "side" (and I believe yours too) is with the first kind and Leica S seems to integrate well with future planning, it being compatible with a ton of different lenses, having a big sensor, excellent IQ, being superbly build and even expanding to HQ video lately... But one has to mention that it has a few drawbacks that may be crucial for some...

1. It is of 3:2 image ratio,
2. Its doesn't offer a detachable back...

From this POV, one might prefer to overlook the handling advantage and go for a Hasselblad H body & back solution instead as to retain the MF ratio and the detachable back...

As you know, I also use C645 with a ton (all but the 350) of lenses and have two MFDBs for the Contax both with multishot ability, I do also need a back for single shot though and thus I thought of adding a Leica S-007 (so that I can have high Iso too as I need that some times...), but although this is not an idea that has left my mind, I thought it's best for the moment to add a P-65+ back on the Contax (thus adding high Iso ability and expanding WA ability for my 35mm lens) and buy a JAS adapter for my Nikons so that the Contax lenses can be used on them with full dedication for whenever 3:2 image ratio and handling is of preference... I guess its all a matter of priorities...