Hasselblad or Phase One?

[Rdmax]

Hi there,
Looking at medium format options... anyone used both the H6 and XF? Thoughts?

[landscapephoto]

Each one is a very, very capable camera and you would have to test them to see which one better suits your needs.

A few remarks from a casual test, in no particular order:
-the XF is heavier and bulkier
-I prefer the H lenses, you should check
-the AF of the H system is very good, I am less sure about the AF system of the XF (really, I don't know)
-the XF has more gadgets (seismometer, focus stack), check whether you need them
-the XF has an integrated flash remote (useful)
-the XF has a far better waist level viewfinder
-capture one versus Phocus / Lightroom.

There is more to it, but these should get the thread started.

[BobShaw]

Ask the professionals that you admire that are using them.
Why are they using them?
Did they buy them or were they given them is another question.


I can only speak of the predecessors and my path in MF.

Started with Mamiya AFD which become Phase One DF. Unimpressed by the camera or lenses. A digital back was a silly price.

Bought an H1 with Phase back and sold all the Mamiya. A much better camera and better lenses with leaf shutters for high flash sync. Large range of lenses. Didn't like the battery situation and the Phase seemed hard on batteries. Did not like Capture One compared to Aperture.

Bought an H3D (and then another) and would not look back.
Software wise the Phocus software is brilliant with the built in camera profiling in Reproduction mode.
I use an Elinchrom trigger. Triggers and flash units evolve so I can't see benefit of an internal one.

Would love to own any of H4,5,6 or X1D.

[Steve Hendrix]

Hi there,
Looking at medium format options... anyone used both the H6 and XF? Thoughts?

I would highly recommend getting impressions from those who shoot similar subject matter and conditions as you (if possible). Any feedback on models that have been replaced with newer, better products is not really worth much, unless you're considering purchasing those legacy products. Try and find users from each side that own the latest and did a comparison.  If you find a person for one system who knows it really well, try to balance that out with a person for the other who also knows that system well. It's rare that you will find one person who qualifies as an expert on the very latest from both systems.

Keep in mind that no one is not biased (end users, dealers, etc). It's an expensive proposition either way, so make sure you get accurate and complete information. Obviously, if you can get your hands on the systems, this is the best - just make sure anyone who is arranging this for you knows 100% what they are doing.

Be cognizant of your gut, and don't forget to take your own advice, not just the recommendations of others.



Steve Hendrix/CI

[tim wolcott]

Absolutely no contest.  Phase One on every level.  I don't make any money from this choice but I've tested both.
Lenses are better, body is better and the software is amazing.

I wouldn't leave home without it.  T

[Joe Towner]

No, this isn't a valid question.

Phase and Hass both make great cameras, and the decisions that lead you to one or the other are completely personal.  Everything from focal lengths and workflow, to technical camera use or software tools, everyone has a different way.

Things like the HTS, or doing a H5X with the IQ1 100mp all give you options that don't fit in the 'Hass or Phase' cut and dried method.  Both are 100mp, and are the absolute best tools available.

How do you decide which one is for you?  You have to hold it in your hand and make a picture or a few hundred, and I highly recommend trying both systems, looking back thru your existing portfolio of images to determine focal lengths.  If you're a speedlight or studio light kind of person, knowing what you need matters.  If you don't have a dealer in town, try attending a workshop or reaching out to other local shooters to see if they'd be willing to show you what they're working with.

-Joe

[jacsin]

What Joe said. And I would add a quality local reseller or distributor to the equation.

[BernardLanguillier]

I would say that today it depends on the target usage.

- view camera -> no doubt P1
- other usages -> as far as I am concerned pretty clearly Hasselblad

In terms of software, yes C1 Pro can do a lot more than Phocus, but Phocus delivers very nice conversions... and the level of support of LR for Hasselblad is great with colors very close to those delivered by the native Phocus application. So it does feel that Hasselblad is working very closely with Adobe while P1 is apparently willing to differentiate the quality of the conversions of C1 Pro at the cost of a lower level of collaboration with Adobe.

But... if you consider 33x44 sensors to be MF, then I would look very seriously at the Fuji GFX also. A sharply focused 50mp image will always be much better in terms of image quality than a softly focused 100mp one.

Cheers,
Bernard

[douglevy]

You have to use the cameras and the software to test, that's the bottom line. I've shot H1/H2/H5X with Credo backs for 3 years and love the combo, and haven't used the XF...but that's irrelevant. You need to see how each fits in with your workflow and how you shoot/work, especially considering the immense cost.

-Doug

[DrakeJ]

I agree with those in the thread that you need to test yourself to see which you prefer.

Those that say X is better than Y clearly has a bias because of their style and workflow. I tested both back to back and chose P1 in the end, but I cannot tell you that it's the best because both have strengths and weaknesses.

I'm sure your dealers will accommodate you testing their systems. I was able to test both over a weekend for free and spent a good deal of time afterwards doing raw conversion to make sure I chose what was right for me.