Victor,
i for one have the H3D39 with some lenses (28/50-110/100/120/150). The lenses are outstanding. Coming from Hasselblad V and Contax 645 there is nothing i am missing. Instead i enjoy the ergonomics of the H system a lot.
You will find a lot of information here:
http://www.hasselbladusers.com/
and some impressive real world pictures here:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/mytripsmypics/tags/h3d/
jørn
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=191764\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I used both system and may be I can give a little feedback; I own H3D39 and 6 lenses for close to 18 months so I am more familiar with H3D, I have used Hy6/e75 for more than a month, so obviously my review of both may not perfect.
But anyway, image first, the difference between 39 an 33 million capture back is really so small I would not mind using either one for any assignment. As for the fine detail of file quality, I would have to say it is really too close to call. For skin tone, my preference will be Hy6/e75 because it looks more pleasing to me, although to this stage much of the file converted has lots to do with the conversion engine. But for what I shoot mostly, models, my preference will go to Hy6/e75, but again, the difference is so small I think it may not enough to justify a switch, but for the new buyers the Hy6 is highly considerable platform. For still and landscape, I have satisfied result from H3D39 but not have much opportunity to shoot with Hy6/e75, so this remained to be reported if I have more opportunity.
Image aside, the difference between the 2 systems becomes very visible;
Camera interface design - I would strongly favor Hy6 over H3D for a very simple reason - the Hy6 is to me designed like a real camera and H3D is to me more a small computer. Although both system offer extensive custom setting, with Hy6, thru the usual dial/bottom you can quickly get into what you need but with H3D it became a more time consuming process. Since I also use P45+ on Contax 645, which I also valued it over the H type system control, I think since the camera can really just shoot RAW, much of it may be just leave it to computer, especially when such a system becomes so complicate, sometimes you get the error message between the lens and body and the shutter won't react to your command that is sometimes quite annoying. With Hy6/e75, you can quickly go between auto mode or totally manual by just turning the aperture ring on the lens that is indeed convenient. For those who has fully accustomed to the H type of interface may disagree but as said, this is my own opinion using these systems.
The Hy6/e75 given its 6X6 size, can surely be categorized as compact, because it is not bigger than the H3D, except the e75 back is a tab bigger than the H back so it does make the Hy6 a little bigger, but not heavier. I found the particular shape of the Sinar back is good because when you switch the orientation of back often, the way the back attached to the camera will remind you the exact mode you are working on. However, the H3D system is very comfortable to shoot in either orientation, not a problem, except, the ergonomic of the H system design around the user to offer good comfort when shooting, but it is quite difficult to carry the camera around when not shooting, especially with the most often used lens 50-110mm attached.
Travel friendly - although I did not make a straight comparison, but I can easily estimate the system back or case require for a Hy6/e75 with 4-5 lenses will be a lot smaller than the H3D39 system, and a lot lighter. The only lens close in size is the standard 80mm lens, the HC lenses are a lot bigger than the Schneider/Zeiss lenses, a weight a lot more, such as the 50mm, the 120 makro, except however the zoom lens from Schnieder, which is as big. So for location, I might decided on Hy6/e75 simply because I can pack smaller and ligher. For studio, I guess this does not matter.
The software support - now the fff is viewable directly on Mac so it is indeed an advantage for quick reference of what you shoot. The new Phocus software is quite good and responsive, I still trying to get the most out of it, and I think it is somewhat still a little behind the Capture 4 - again - my own point of view. For Sinar, I have yet spent enough quality time on Xposure so I cannot comment.
Obviously, today the medium format DB are all very close and perhaps one has to make a lot of comparison to decide on one. If anyone has already settled into a platform, I think one has to think and think a lot before the switch, but for someone is looking for a new investment into this level of image capture, I think there is many to consider on the system compatibility, the H3D is a totally close system, although that also come with the digital correction. On the other hand, the e75 seemed to be of maximum flexibility, not only does it comes with an internal HD, but it can be converted to use on just about any system, except H3. On Contax 645, still one of my favorite system, will eventually run out its own life, and then the Mamiya/Phase One system. So interestingly to speak, the Hy6/Sinar will be the only true German/European breed optical/image capture medium format system today, and perhaps added the Alpa among other smaller ones. Although many may disagree German optics still hold much, if any, edge over Japanese made, but today the Japanese lenses are selling at price so similar to German optics, so it becomes a choice of originality, design, mechanical and all that, and for those factors, I think perhaps German optics still have slight edge over Japanese ones.