Hy6 and a 28mm

[rljones]

The Hy6 does not have to solve all one's photographic challenges. Be a little flexible. I would suggest the right tool for the job.

I shoot with an Alpa and a 24XL for wide, using calibrated hyperfocal settings. This makes for a rapid and simple set-up. At f11, set at 3m as I recall, things are in focus from about 1.5m to infinity. The 24XL is excellent.

I would leave the Hy6 for longer lenses (50, 90macro, 300).

So, 2 different tools; same back. If a 28 were made for the Hy6, I do not think it would be much less than the cost of the Alpa body and 24XL.

-Robert

[rethmeier]

Robert!
I couldn't agree more!
That's the route that I'm taking.
A Hy6 with 40+55 TCS+ 60+80/2+ 90 Macro +180.
All beautiful manual Schneider lenses that can be purchased 2nd hand for a decent(  ) price.

I'm not even going to purchase the upcoming 35.

I'll use the Alpa with a 24 + 35 Apo Digitars.
Nice and small and no distortion!

Cheers,
Willem.

[Morgan_Moore]

But does ALPA take a Rollei fit back ??

S

[rethmeier]

Alpa has a eMotion-75LV adapter!

[Morgan_Moore]

Alpa has a eMotion-75LV adapter!
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=137005\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Indeed. but that involves undoing the plate - fine for buildings - rubbish on a speedboat etc

S

[rethmeier]

For the speedboat the 5D will be fine.

[Morgan_Moore]

For the speedboat the 5D will be fine.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=137014\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Well either we want the look/feel/quality of MF or we dont

My general point is that the HY6 is only half a system right now (for handheld shooters which is surely a large aprt of the market)

Maybe sinar arnt interested in competiting with hasselblad - whic h is of course fine - horses for courses

S

[Carl Glover]

Alpas can also take all Rollei 6000 series lenses.

Carl Zeiss made a 30mm lens (the F-Distagon f3.5) which is no longer in production but is known to turn up here and there which is made for the 6000 family too.

I'd rather have a rotatable back than rotate the camera - it's more confortable that way.

[rethmeier]

I've been rotating my RZ and Fuji GX680 filmholders(film what's that?) for years!
The only way to go!
 

[hankg]

I think HY6 went the 6x6 route because they expect a square format chip in the near future. I suspect there are many more photographers that would like to return to the square format way of working (or the manner in which they used their RZ's with rotating backs) with either waist level or 45 degree finders then there are photographers that require ultra-wide lenses. That is not to say an ultra-wide won't eventually be developed for the HY6. Handheld in the manner of the Hassy V, RZ or Rollei 6000 is a more stable way to hold the camera for many MF photographers. Not everyone prefers the 35mm SLR way of working which the 645 camera's try and emulate.

There is no perfect system that is best for everyone.

[Leonardo Barreto]

I also had a RZ and think that rotating the back was fantastic, but with my 645 things are different. It would be like a rotating-back Nikormat ! I rather rotate the camera.

But the point is that you are trading this for wide angle lenses like the 28mm.

The Hy6 is like an SUV with instructions to "bring along a Jeep for the "rare" moments when you need to use 4x4".

I remember when my wife and I where looking to rent here in NY. A broker was showing us an apartment that had a dark and small kitchen. She said "nobody really kooks here in New York, with so many good restaurants"... well, we do.

If you have to complement your MF with an Alpa and two view camera lenses, then you don't have an entire system, but half, as was said before.

I've been rotating my RZ and Fuji GX680 filmholders(film what's that?) for years!
The only way to go!
 
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=137033\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

[jing q]

I also had a RZ and think that rotating the back was fantastic, but with my 645 things are different. It would be like a rotating-back Nikormat ! I rather rotate the camera.

But the point is that you are trading this for wide angle lenses like the 28mm.

The Hy6 is like an SUV with instructions to "bring along a Jeep for the "rare" moments when you need to use 4x4".

I remember when my wife and I where looking to rent here in NY. A broker was showing us an apartment that had a dark and small kitchen. She said "nobody really kooks here in New York, with so many good restaurants"... well, we do.

If you have to complement your MF with an Alpa and two view camera lenses, then you don't have an entire system, but half, as was said before.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=137049\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

there's no pleasing everyone I guess.

I had a H2 mounted sideways off my tripod with the zoom lens. trust me I was this close to a heart attack when the camera suddenly loosened from the ballhead and dropped.thank god for my fast reflexes though

Will be very happy to see a rotating back soon I hope.

[Leonardo Barreto]

I dropped my RZ all the way to the hard floor, and that was a rotating back camera. With my 645 I use an 8x10 tripod most of the time (on location I have a carbon fiber one, but I pay extra attention to what I do).

Again, rotating backs are fine, but you have to check the price you pay for them, is this a rotation like the RZ or do you have to remove the back and put it back in? Is the exposure to dust in the sensor an accepted trade in for you? as you say, there's no pleasing everyone I guess. I would not be pleased to find out that half way in to my shoot the sensor got compromised with dust.

The 645afd has an integrated viewfinder and a very firm lock on the digital back so the moving and coupling parts are limited, as a result the system's reliability is maximized -- size and costs reduced -- If I shot most of the time portrait I would get an L shape adapter and problem solved.

there's no pleasing everyone I guess.

I had a H2 mounted sideways off my tripod with the zoom lens. trust me I was this close to a heart attack when the camera suddenly loosened from the ballhead and dropped.thank god for my fast reflexes though

Will be very happy to see a rotating back soon I hope.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=137053\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

[BJL]

I think HY6 went the 6x6 route because they expect a square format chip in the near future.There is no perfect system that is best for everyone.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=137044\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

You are dreaming: the historic reasons for staying with the existence 6x6 format of Rollei camera and lenses are obvious, as is the fact that medium format has been moving away from square to oblong formats like 645 and 6x7 for a long time, starting well before the change to digital. The likelihood of any sensor maker making a new square sensor bigger than 42.5x56mm are miniscule.

I suspect there are many more photographers that would like to return to the square format way of working ... then there are photographers that require ultra-wide lenses.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=137044\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Again I have to disagree, especially since 28mm is not "ultra-wide" with 36x48 format sensors; it is comparable to 19-21mm in 35mm format or 33mm in 645. Every 35mm system offers considerably wider lenses than 19mm, and every medium format system offers a lens about that wide, like 35mm for 645. (In fact every one of the new smaller format DSLR systems like EF-S, DX and 4/3 offer considerably wider angular FOV options that that, and they still get accused of suffering from a wide angle crop!)

This degree of wide angle coverage is clearly far more in demand overall than square formats, in MF and in SLRs as a whole.

[Geoffrey]

Curiously, just before every new launch there is a spate of "why did they do it this way? it should have been...."

The interesting thing about the Hy6 is that it is a return to the Hassy 500C in size: good lenses up front, good back and the smallest "box" in between. It makes sense that they "off loaded" as much as they could to the side into handle, to lessen the box size. Just like a 500C. While I never cared for the ergonomics of the 500C, the size (with a digital back) is pretty nice.

I for one prefer the viewing style of "top down" and cannot work with the large size of the 645 DSLR's. Too much weight on the wrist, and they are pretty big to hold up to your eye. So welcome is the Hy6.

Regarding the size of the camera -  the lenses are about as big as the box, so there isn't a lot to be gained vertically or horizontally in size with a change to the 645 format. Yes, the depth would be less, and the mirror smaller. To address this, they have also concentrated on smoothing that action, successfully according to those who have handled it. So perhaps thats a moot point.

So at the end - we have a new smaller MF camera, open back architecture (to a point), lots of lens compatibility, and sized around the 6x6 - which is a bit odd from the digital viewpoint, but all in all, not a bad thing. Perhaps excessive, and unnecessary - but think of it perhaps as a 645 digital, with the quick option of 6x6 film if needed. Not shabby. Perhaps not "Canon" like thinking - but not terrible either.

And if anyone were to make a 6x6 digital back, well, they'd be in the catbird seat, wouldn't they? I wonder if someone like Sinar is just waiting to see what the demand might be before introducing one. That would be a cute trick. And even if the demand isn't high, how many do you have to sell if you are the only one?

Geoff G

[canmiya]

Curiously, just before every new launch there is a spate of "why did they do it this way? it should have been...."

The interesting thing about the Hy6 is that it is a return to the Hassy 500C in size: good lenses up front, good back and the smallest "box" in between. It makes sense that they "off loaded" as much as they could to the side into handle, to lessen the box size. Just like a 500C. While I never cared for the ergonomics of the 500C, the size (with a digital back) is pretty nice.

I for one prefer the viewing style of "top down" and cannot work with the large size of the 645 DSLR's. Too much weight on the wrist, and they are pretty big to hold up to your eye. So welcome is the Hy6.

Regarding the size of the camera -  the lenses are about as big as the box, so there isn't a lot to be gained vertically or horizontally in size with a change to the 645 format. Yes, the depth would be less, and the mirror smaller. To address this, they have also concentrated on smoothing that action, successfully according to those who have handled it. So perhaps thats a moot point.

So at the end - we have a new smaller MF camera, open back architecture (to a point), lots of lens compatibility, and sized around the 6x6 - which is a bit odd from the digital viewpoint, but all in all, not a bad thing. Perhaps excessive, and unnecessary - but think of it perhaps as a 645 digital, with the quick option of 6x6 film if needed. Not shabby. Perhaps not "Canon" like thinking - but not terrible either.

And if anyone were to make a 6x6 digital back, well, they'd be in the catbird seat, wouldn't they? I wonder if someone like Sinar is just waiting to see what the demand might be before introducing one. That would be a cute trick. And even if the demand isn't high, how many do you have to sell if you are the only one?

Geoff G
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=137089\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Only Sinar would not be the only one as the Leaf Afi and Rollei 6008 are all akin...

[BJL]

And if anyone were to make a 6x6 digital back, well, they'd be in the catbird seat, wouldn't they? I wonder if someone like Sinar is just waiting to see what the demand might be before introducing one. That would be a cute trick.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=137089\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Sinar cannot do that because it does not makes sensors and the two companies that do make MF sensors, Kodak and Dalsa, have shown no sign of making the size or shape of sensors that you speculate about.

Look at the actual trends: in their most recent new models
1. both MF sensor makers stayed with exactly the same maximum sensor size as they were offering in the previous generation (about 48x36mm),
2.  both MF sensor makers have abandoned older square models of about 37x37mm in favor of 4:3 shape models of 44x33mm, so that all models are now 4:3 shape
3. even the smaller models are 4:3 (44x33) even square sensors of comparable size could be compatible with 645 and 6x6 gear.

[hankg]

It's all speculation and I don't think you will see a 6x6 sensor but perhaps a 44x44 or 48x48 or some step up from the current 36x36. There is a lot of flexibility in being able to crop a landscape or portrait image from the same original. And I certainly find the looking down stance more stable and less fatiguing then a 90 degree finder with MF sized cameras.

[jing q]

Leonardo, I do recommend that you try handling the camera as soon as you get the chance, you may be pleasantly surprised...I found it easier to handle than the hassy

as it has been pointed out before, more options in the MF world are always welcome.
I for one never liked using the 645 cameras in the film day (always seemed like mediocre SLRs...), so a different working style of a camera in the market is welcome

plus...once again...THE INCREDIBLE RANGE OF LENSES (apart from a superwide...no big loss for me)

[pixjohn]

I disagree regarding having 1 system for everything, before digital I had more then 1 system. I shot with 35mm 6x6 hasselblad and 4x5. Now I shoot 2 systems, 1 cambo wide ds with 24xl, 25, 47 and 58. I am looking forward to  purchasing the hy6 or H camera.   With the cambo I can correct the perspective can you do that with a H camera?