PhotoPlus impressions of the "big three" MF systems...

[Dan Wells]

I'm not going to do the tech camera first, because I sometimes end up having to shoot handheld, plus I have one hand, and, even tripod-mounted, the significant extra manipulations of a tech camera are an issue. One appeal to the Hassy is that the HTS, for little weight and much less cost than a tech camera with a second set of lenses, gives me a lot of the benefits (plus tilt, which few if any of the flat tech cameras offer - of course, any bellows-based view camera would, but that's a LOT of weight and even more complexity - I've not seen a 2x3 field camera with the geared movements which digital really requires - everything I've seen with geared movements is a monorail). The HTS is incredibly precise in its geared movements, and easy to handle one handed (I played with it quite a bit). I know the LF lenses are even better, but the camera is a lot less versatile...

                                 -Dan

[mtomalty]

I've not seen a 2x3 field camera with the geared movements which digital really requires - everything I've seen with geared movements is a monorail).

Dan

This camera might not meet your unique need but it looks like a solid field camera option.

http://www.linhof.de/download_e/linhof_news_08_brochure.pdf


Mark

[asf]

Dan

This camera might not meet your unique need but it looks like a solid field camera option.

http://www.linhof.de/download_e/linhof_news_08_brochure.pdf


Mark

when it comes out - there are only prototypes now (3 i think they said)

[BernardLanguillier]

Dan

This camera might not meet your unique need but it looks like a solid field camera option.

http://www.linhof.de/download_e/linhof_news_08_brochure.pdf

How much is this baby going to cost?

Thanks.

Regards,
Bernard

[Gigi]

what makes this puzzle interesting is the two competing agendas that play themselves out:

1) the optimal system, maximum flexibility, usually pricey, or....

2) a camera that meets a specific need, usually for a moderate cost, but not so flexible.

Too often the "system" approach, while great on paper, just ends up costing too much to make sense. Imagine what a full Sinar setup, view camera, Hy6, lenses, backs, etc. would really cost.

On the other hand, a bunch of different specific solutions (MFDB for one use, view camera for another, smaller solution for portability) seems like an excess amount of hardware, often not interchangeable and when all added up, is a bit much as well.

So we end up shifting through the all solutions available to get the best overall answer - opting either for system simplicity, least $, or max functionality. Toss in some concerns about  redundancy, and its a rather interesting cocktail (dilemma?).

Oh for the days of Hassy 500 C, a couple of film backs, a few rental lenses if necessary, and there you were. Same for the Leica M2 or the Nikon FTN. They seemed like full systems, very flexible. Have we lost something along the way? If so, how do we get it back?

Anyone have the same impressions, or is this just the morning ramble? (apologies....)

Geoff

[Ed Jack]

If you are buying from new, the leica S might be intriguing... if expensive. It all depends on if you are willign to wait... and wait.... and wait..

 Ed

[PeterA]

what makes this puzzle interesting is the two competing agendas that play themselves out:

1) the optimal system, maximum flexibility, usually pricey, or....

2) a camera that meets a specific need, usually for a moderate cost, but not so flexible.

Too often the "system" approach, while great on paper, just ends up costing too much to make sense. Imagine what a full Sinar setup, view camera, Hy6, lenses, backs, etc. would really cost.

On the other hand, a bunch of different specific solutions (MFDB for one use, view camera for another, smaller solution for portability) seems like an excess amount of hardware, often not interchangeable and when all added up, is a bit much as well.

So we end up shifting through the all solutions available to get the best overall answer - opting either for system simplicity, least $, or max functionality. Toss in some concerns about  redundancy, and its a rather interesting cocktail (dilemma?).

Oh for the days of Hassy 500 C, a couple of film backs, a few rental lenses if necessary, and there you were. Same for the Leica M2 or the Nikon FTN. They seemed like full systems, very flexible. Have we lost something along the way? If so, how do we get it back?

Anyone have the same impressions, or is this just the morning ramble? (apologies....)

Geoff

I am thinking everyone goes through the same learning / experience curve. You have to knwo what you are really into shooting before you can narrow your choices down easily. It is easy to get lost in the gear fetish thing - but what fun - can one really have enough special examples of glass?The cameras are the boxes you have to use to hang the good stuff off.

[jimgolden]

all boils down to what you need...the HTS will solve the problem of having a view camera or not for 75-90% of people maybe...

[FlashDB]

I'm not going to do the tech camera first, because I sometimes end up having to shoot handheld, plus I have one hand, and, even tripod-mounted, the significant extra manipulations of a tech camera are an issue. One appeal to the Hassy is that the HTS, for little weight and much less cost than a tech camera with a second set of lenses, gives me a lot of the benefits (plus tilt, which few if any of the flat tech cameras offer - of course, any bellows-based view camera would, but that's a LOT of weight and even more complexity - I've not seen a 2x3 field camera with the geared movements which digital really requires - everything I've seen with geared movements is a monorail). The HTS is incredibly precise in its geared movements, and easy to handle one handed (I played with it quite a bit). I know the LF lenses are even better, but the camera is a lot less versatile...

-Dan

Thanks for taking the time to do this report Dan, must have taken you some time!  
Why not use the Hasselblad HTS for stitching, it can slide sideways and images will as they promise be corrected for any distortion etc.
Pretty easy job with photo merge in PS!

/David

[asf]

How much is this baby going to cost?

Thanks.

Regards,
Bernard

4000 ish Euro is what i heard

[Gigi]

4000 ish Euro is what i heard

regardless of price, nice looking (and flexible) camera.

[gwhitf]

http://www.pdnpulse.com/2008/10/video-conn...ital-backs.html

Of course, what the guy fails to mention, is that the camera must be tethered to a computer in order for the iPhone feature to work.

So why would you show a client the image on the iPhone if you're forced to already have a 17" laptop, or even larger monitor, out there on location?

Small detail not mentioned by that Leaf guy, but that's par for the course.

[yaya]

So why would you show a client the image on the iPhone if you're forced to already have a 17" laptop, or even larger monitor, out there on location?

Cause the client might not be on site with you and there might even be a few of them in different locations.

Frankly speaking at this point we are only showing the first step in the development of this feature. Both Leaf and Apple are looking for ways to allow us to expand its capabilities.

Yair

[pixman63]

Interesting thread.

Has the OP considered putting a PhaseOne back (or other maker) on a Hassy H2 body? As MR himself does of course.

[Paul_Claesson_HasselbladUS]

This was from another thread, related to David at Hasselblad, but ironically, the new Sinar 65, and the older Sinar Emotion 75, will both mount onto the older Hasselblad 203FE body. The only downside, it requires a cable. But they promise it will work.

So, ironically, the Sinar back works with no modification to the Hasselblad body, whereas, if you buy the Hasselblad back, you've got to send off the Hasselblad body all the way to Sweden to have it modified. Try to figure that one out.

You do have the option to use a Kapture group one shot cable with 200 series and CF back with F/FE lenses. A modified 203FE will work with F/FE lenses with the CFVII backs.

A 200 series (202FA, 203FE, 205TCC, 205FCC) can be modified by Hasselblad USA service center:
Hasselblad USA
333 New Road, Suite 5
Parsippany, NJ 07054
973-227-7681

Paul Claesson
Hasselblad USA

[gwhitf]

You do have the option to use a Kapture group one shot cable with 200 series and CF back with F/FE lenses. A modified 203FE will work with F/FE lenses with the CFVII backs.

Thanks Paul. Is there any Hasselblad back that will work with the 203FE that is a rectangular proportion, ie "kinda 645"? Both of those backs listed above are square.

If not, is there any "magnifying viewfinder" available, so that you could magnify that center square that corresponds to the chip area?

When I've looked into the WL Finder before, with the square chip mask, it's like looking at a framed photograph with a giant mat around it. Kinda gives you that feeling of being cheated, in that, you only see that tiny center frame.

Thanks.

That Sinar 65 that's adaptable to 203 is at least crop-chip 645.

[David Grover / Capture One]

So, ironically, the Sinar back works with no modification to the Hasselblad body, whereas, if you buy the Hasselblad back, you've got to send off the Hasselblad body all the way to Sweden to have it modified. Try to figure that one out.

The difference being you do not need to then use a cable - simply the shutter release on the camera, which is a little more elegant, no?

Thanks to Paul for answering what I didn't!  

[David Grover / Capture One]

Thanks Paul. Is there any Hasselblad back that will work with the 203FE that is a rectangular proportion, ie "kinda 645"? Both of those backs listed above are square.

If not, is there any "magnifying viewfinder" available, so that you could magnify that center square that corresponds to the chip area?

When I've looked into the WL Finder before, with the square chip mask, it's like looking at a framed photograph with a giant mat around it. Kinda gives you that feeling of being cheated, in that, you only see that tiny center frame.

Thanks.

That Sinar 65 that's adaptable to 203 is at least crop-chip 645.

The CF back Paul mentions above is 39MP, 5x4 dimensions.

There 'was' the Magnifying hood 4x4 DPS designed to magnify any 4x4 sensor when fitted to a V system camera.  Quite possibly discontinued but I can find out tomorrow if you are interested?  Might be a few floating around on the second hand market.

[Dustbak]

Euh.... last time I checked it was 3:4 David  (37x49 which is less of a crop than the Esprit65 BTW).

I got my multishot today!!! Very happy here. Bigger screen (not much but every bit counts) and ms. Now you guys just need to upgrade my H2 to H2F and I can use the 28 (which is still in transit apparently).

[David Grover / Capture One]

Euh.... last time I checked it was 3:4 David  (37x49 which is less of a crop than the Esprit65 BTW).

I got my multishot today!!! Very happy here. Bigger screen (not much but every bit counts) and ms. Now you guys just need to upgrade my H2 to H2F and I can use the 28 (which is still in transit apparently).

Ok 4.9:3.7  

Glad you got the multishot - enjoy!