Pages: [1] 2 3   Go Down

Author Topic: Interesting discussion with Hasselbald's product manager Ove Bengtsson  (Read 9453 times)

torger

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3267

It's always interesting when Ove talks, as he's not the marketing type of guy. He talks like an engineer, so you get to know what tradeoffs they've done, what they would have liked to have but couldn't have etc.

There are a few things we already sort of knew but it's interesting to hear directly, for example that the sensor is extremely central to what cameras they can make, and as a small company they have only limited control over what they can get. All those fantasies of strange sensor formats floating around in the forums are just that, fantasies. If you want the best sensors, which is Sony these days, the format and features are decided by the collective need of many manufacturers. So phase detect will not happen until Sony produces a medium format sensor that has phase detect, and that will probably not happen until more than one manufacturer needs it. I'm pretty sure the next sensor generation in 44x33 will have it, less likely that the next 54x41mm sensor will.

The current mirrorless format is locked to 44x33, a tradeoff to keep the size compact, and it's a wise tradeoff. Full-frame mirrorless will happen sooner or later, but probably not until it feels so mature that it can replace the SLRs also for the conservative studio shooters.
Logged

BernardLanguillier

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 13983
    • http://www.flickr.com/photos/bernardlanguillier/sets/

The current mirrorless format is locked to 44x33, a tradeoff to keep the size compact, and it's a wise tradeoff.

Makes total sense to me.

I don't believe that 41x54mm mirrorless makes much sense, reasonnably bright lenses would just be too big.

This is the old dream of the silver bullet speaking, 50mp is more than enough for 99.9% of all applications, and 200 % of the applications for which you want to use a camera like the X1D.

Cheers,
Bernard

torger

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3267

50mp is more than enough for 99.9% of all applications, and 200 % of the applications for which you want to use a camera like the X1D.

I agree. In the longer term the standard will be that the sensor always outresolves the optical system, so megapixels becomes irrelevant. Today we still care about things like filesize and getting actual use for the expensive pixel counts so we get worried when lenses don't cope, but in the future I think we will take for granted that the sensor resolution is not the limit, and that it shouldn't be.
Logged

eronald

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6642
    • My gallery on Instagram

Torger,

 We know sensors are at the center of the design. However:

 - Leica have managed in the past to get a custom size made just for them (Leica S2 and maybe M), and they now have a perfectly usable range of cameras made with a sensor that is not Sony.
 -  The Phase One sensors that Sensor +are another  such custom design, in fact more custom in a way because the cells are different, not just the size.

 So while THIS camera design is built around the sensor, another company could have a camera design AND THEN a sensor, if MF went a bit more mainstream, or if the company makes so much money from a camera's custom features that they can afford a custom sensor - which in fact is exactly what was the case with Phase One, and exactly is happening with RED - and maybe ARRI?

 What is implicit in this interview is that the current generation of Sony sensors do not really support tech lenses anymore. Or else the lenses for the X1D could have been much more compact. Which is why I believe we will see some competition pop up with some different sensor, and I think Sony will in the end adopt a different architecture because a wish for compact lenses is shared across its camera sensor customer base now that mirrors are disappearing.

 I think it is nice to see european manufacturers cooperating with the japanese industry - eg. Phase One, Leica, Zeiss, giving the customer the best combination of functional tech, product design, and user ergonomics ... and quality-controlled  production.

 Last not least, I wish Hassy had kept Zeiss as a lens manufacturer because the old Hassy lenses had a really nice look to them. Image look is as important as camera body look.

Edmund


It's always interesting when Ove talks, as he's not the marketing type of guy. He talks like an engineer, so you get to know what tradeoffs they've done, what they would have liked to have but couldn't have etc.

There are a few things we already sort of knew but it's interesting to hear directly, for example that the sensor is extremely central to what cameras they can make, and as a small company they have only limited control over what they can get. All those fantasies of strange sensor formats floating around in the forums are just that, fantasies. If you want the best sensors, which is Sony these days, the format and features are decided by the collective need of many manufacturers. So phase detect will not happen until Sony produces a medium format sensor that has phase detect, and that will probably not happen until more than one manufacturer needs it. I'm pretty sure the next sensor generation in 44x33 will have it, less likely that the next 54x41mm sensor will.

The current mirrorless format is locked to 44x33, a tradeoff to keep the size compact, and it's a wise tradeoff. Full-frame mirrorless will happen sooner or later, but probably not until it feels so mature that it can replace the SLRs also for the conservative studio shooters.
« Last Edit: June 28, 2016, 07:15:31 am by eronald »
Logged
If you appreciate my blog posts help me by following on https://instagram.com/edmundronald

torger

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3267

Good points, there are indeed examples of custom sensors being made.

I think though that Hasselblad has been too financially weak to have custom sensor stuff made for them, and I also guess that Sony is a little bit tougher to get custom deals from than Dalsa/CMOSIS etc where providing custom solutions is more central to their business model. I also guess (not sure) that CMOS is tougher to get customized that CCDs due to the higher complexity on chip.

It's an interesting observation the crosstalk thing which is mentioned in the interview. Indeed we could get very compact lenses if the sensor had better angular response. However as far as I understand you also need to reduce maximum aperture and allow for very high vignetting in order to get down the optics size (which is done in traditional large format designs, as in that genre you can live with both), and I don't think those trade-offs suits the typical X1D use cases.

Unfortunately I think the family of trade-offs made in the tech camera camp is gone and will not return, unless I become a billionaire and start my own (unprofitable) camera brand just for fun.
Logged

jvpictures

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 65

I don't understand the saying in the interview that current HC/HCD lenses shall not be designed for contrast detection AF systems and thus need software upgrades. I thought that  the AF system of current H5D/H6D is based on contrast detection as well ?

Can someone?
Logged

torger

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3267

I don't understand the saying in the interview that current HC/HCD lenses shall not be designed for contrast detection AF systems and thus need software upgrades. I thought that  the AF system of current H5D/H6D is based on contrast detection as well ?

Can someone?

It's designed for phase detection with a dedicated auto-focus sensor active when you look through the viewfinder. The advantage of phase detect is that the auto-focus system doesn't need to search for the focus, it directly knows where it should move the lens. With contrast detection you need to search backwards and forwards with interval-halving algorithm or similar, which stresses the focus motor more and you need to bombard the lens with many more focusing commands than you need with phase detect, which I guess is the reason for the software upgrade required.

(Dedicated auto-focus sensors can directly find focus in larger out-of-focus situations than phase detect on a sensor too, which means that SLRs may live for a longer time than we would think, at least for super-telephoto photography in the 135 format.)
« Last Edit: June 28, 2016, 07:42:06 am by torger »
Logged

eronald

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6642
    • My gallery on Instagram

Torger,

 The X1D is a quick design thrown together around a sensor by a company that already had a UI etc. We might see another actor eg. Sinar go for a custom sensor in order to preserve their own "goodwill" which is an existing range of lenses and mechanical devices. There is  a large market out there for various types of museum and in-situ repro photography for which I'd say retrofocus lens designs are really not a good fit as shift is essential - at some point I believe someone will cook up a sensor which allows these people to work with their existing repertoire of optics and shift mechanics.

Edmund

Good points, there are indeed examples of custom sensors being made.

I think though that Hasselblad has been too financially weak to have custom sensor stuff made for them, and I also guess that Sony is a little bit tougher to get custom deals from than Dalsa/CMOSIS etc where providing custom solutions is more central to their business model. I also guess (not sure) that CMOS is tougher to get customized that CCDs due to the higher complexity on chip.

It's an interesting observation the crosstalk thing which is mentioned in the interview. Indeed we could get very compact lenses if the sensor had better angular response. However as far as I understand you also need to reduce maximum aperture and allow for very high vignetting in order to get down the optics size (which is done in traditional large format designs, as in that genre you can live with both), and I don't think those trade-offs suits the typical X1D use cases.

Unfortunately I think the family of trade-offs made in the tech camera camp is gone and will not return, unless I become a billionaire and start my own (unprofitable) camera brand just for fun.
Logged
If you appreciate my blog posts help me by following on https://instagram.com/edmundronald

Ken R

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 849

Makes total sense to me.

I don't believe that 41x54mm mirrorless makes much sense, reasonnably bright lenses would just be too big.

This is the old dream of the silver bullet speaking, 50mp is more than enough for 99.9% of all applications, and 200 % of the applications for which you want to use a camera like the X1D.

Cheers,
Bernard

I agree, the smaller medium format digital format is perfect for a mirrorless camera. 50mp is certainly more than enough for most commercial and even fine art applications. Over the years my commercial work has seen quite a significant increase in the volume of images made and delivered.

I would prefer that in the next X1D Hasselblad puts a much better EVF on it (they can do that today so im sure the X2D is already in development), make some faster lenses available (f2 or f2.8) and improve the sensor including adding on chip phase AF (out their hands since they depend on Sony for it).

I still see the Medium Format SLR's still being available for quite a few more years. The Phase One XF is an amazing camera and the H6D is excellent as well. At some point they will be replaced by mirrorless but current tech still needs to advance a bit further. Maybe in 10 years. Still, it will be sad to see OVFs go.
Logged

BernardLanguillier

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 13983
    • http://www.flickr.com/photos/bernardlanguillier/sets/

I would prefer that in the next X1D Hasselblad puts a much better EVF on it (they can do that today so im sure the X2D is already in development), make some faster lenses available (f2 or f2.8) and improve the sensor including adding on chip phase AF (out their hands since they depend on Sony for it).

Yes, that sounds like a perfect description of what the X2D should be!

If they could add also a global shutter capability, this would make this camera a great platform to use various MF lenses. This point is a bit less obvious though because Hasselblad may consider it a risk for the sales of their native lenses. It would IMHO be a pity because customer always end up buying native lenses if they are good, which seems to be the case.

But that's in 2 years at the earliest, I believe that X1D is already a solid offering that will deliver good value for the photographers who will invest in the platform.

Cheers,
Bernard

ErikKaffehr

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11311
    • Echophoto

Hi,

OVF will stay around as long as there are enough customers paying for it.

I am pretty sure we will see higher resolution sensors in the 44x33 sensor format.

Best regards
Erik




I still see the Medium Format SLR's still being available for quite a few more years. The Phase One XF is an amazing camera and the H6D is excellent as well. At some point they will be replaced by mirrorless but current tech still needs to advance a bit further. Maybe in 10 years. Still, it will be sad to see OVFs go.
Logged
Erik Kaffehr
 

hasselbladfan

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 576

Another quote from Ove :

Not all H lenses have firmware that can be upgraded as early H lenses in 2002 were fixed, but all more recent lenses will be able to be used.'

How can you find out when your HC / HCD lens was produced? Is there a list with serial numbers?
« Last Edit: June 28, 2016, 09:55:42 am by hasselbladfan »
Logged

jduncan

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 434

I don't understand the saying in the interview that current HC/HCD lenses shall not be designed for contrast detection AF systems and thus need software upgrades. I thought that  the AF system of current H5D/H6D is based on contrast detection as well ?

Can someone?

It's not. And my the way he say so in an interview. Maybe even this one.

Best regards,
Logged
english is not my first language, an I k

bjanes

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3387
Re: Full frame 135 vs Crop Frame Medium Format
« Reply #15 on: June 28, 2016, 10:58:34 am »

I agree, the smaller medium format digital format is perfect for a mirrorless camera. 50mp is certainly more than enough for most commercial and even fine art applications.

If that is the case, the next generation of 135 style mirrorless cameras with a 50 MP Sony back side illuminated CMOS sensor could compete with crop frame medium format cameras. Lenses could be smaller and this is significant, since the lens often dwarfs the mirrorless camera. On chip phase detect focusing is already available in 135 format. With a smaller chip, in camera image stabilization would be easier to implement, and is already available with the Pentax k1 along with pixel shift technology.

Bill
Logged

E.J. Peiker

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 891
    • http://www.ejphoto.com

Scaling the a7R Mk II sensor gets you 72mp on a 44x33 format with very competent on-sensor Phase Detect.  Getting the data off of that sensor is a bit lethargic though even at 42mp so an upgrade in that circuitry would help although you should still be able to do the same 2 FPS as the X1D even without an upgrade on that circuitry.  Seems like a logical upgrade path...
Logged

mi-fu

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 50

It's always interesting when Ove talks, as he's not the marketing type of guy. He talks like an engineer, so you get to know what tradeoffs they've done, what they would have liked to have but couldn't have etc.

There are a few things we already sort of knew but it's interesting to hear directly, for example that the sensor is extremely central to what cameras they can make, and as a small company they have only limited control over what they can get. All those fantasies of strange sensor formats floating around in the forums are just that, fantasies. If you want the best sensors, which is Sony these days, the format and features are decided by the collective need of many manufacturers. So phase detect will not happen until Sony produces a medium format sensor that has phase detect, and that will probably not happen until more than one manufacturer needs it. I'm pretty sure the next sensor generation in 44x33 will have it, less likely that the next 54x41mm sensor will.

The current mirrorless format is locked to 44x33, a tradeoff to keep the size compact, and it's a wise tradeoff. Full-frame mirrorless will happen sooner or later, but probably not until it feels so mature that it can replace the SLRs also for the conservative studio shooters.

Yes. i just talked to Ove extensively today. He is a no BS guy.

While many of us might see that the lack of FPS is a big miss, I think it is sensible for Hasselblad. Not only having the FPS will make the camera much heavier and bigger, most importantly, Hasselblad will need a lot more time to develop a camera with a shutter (i.e. many movable parts) inside. The result will be a much more expensive product with much later delivery time. Everything is a compromise.

Logged

E.J. Peiker

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 891
    • http://www.ejphoto.com

For me the lack of a focal plane shutter is a plus!  Lots less movement in the whole system at time of exposure without one.
Logged

scyth

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 584

Hasselblad will need a lot more time to develop a camera with a shutter (i.e. many movable parts) inside.
shutter is a drop in part procured from 3rd party...
Logged
Pages: [1] 2 3   Go Up