What about Hasselblad

[Dick Roadnight]

The only vibration that counts is what happens during the exposure - if you get vibration after the exposure (when the mirror comes down), it does not blur the image.

Have you tested this phenomenon personally, both handheld and tripod mounted? I have. So what were your findings?

My opinion now is that the H2 and H1 are tripod-only, mirror-up cameras, or, with-studio-strobe cameras, to kill this "lunging effect" from the body.

Testing or no testing, my statement is obviously correct... the implication is that vibration felt (in operator's hands) might not occur during the exposure.

I do not have an H1 or H2, and I bought my H3 mainly for view camera/studio flash/Metz flash work, and if I do use the point-and-shoot adaptor for landscapes, I lock the mirror up and use a tripod.

What procedure did you use for your tests?

[gwhitf]

I would guess not hurt feelings, but more likely irritation.

Sometimes the truth hurts. So you pick up your blocks and go home.

I write all this to counter so many people's assertions here that "MF is better than Canon". Yes, in some circumstances, it is, if you're on a tripod, or if you've got 2400 W/S of Profoto behind you, in a dark studio. But if you think you can just grab that H2, throw it over your shoulder, and walk around handheld and shoot at 1/60th or 1/125th handheld in available light, you'll find that you have 31 or 39 or 50MP of glorious, blurred megapixels. Whereas with the Canon or Nikon or other CMOS camera, the ASAs are vastly different, the lenses are faster, and the mirror is smaller. And with low ASAs of a CCD camera, and slow lenses, there are many occasions when your meter tells you to shoot at 60th or 125th (or slower). So to that Hasselblad accessories page, I'd add a new flash, but also a new Carbon Fiber Tripod, 'cause you're going to need it, if you want sharp megapixels.

[JdeV]

Every time somebody says the H2 has mirror slap someone else says, "I routinely shoot my H2 at 1/4 of a second and everything is sharp".

Maybe, maybe not but I've shot a billion frames with the contax, especially using continuous light and it's much smoother than any camera I use including the Canons and Nikons.

Now I'll be the first to admit I'm not always  that overly concerned with uber over sharp, see every pore from 6 blocks away photography and I'll admit that I've only shot an H series camera twice for projects, but the difference in the way it feels as far as mirror slap or vibration or whatever it's called feels like it's double that on the H series, or half that on the contax.

Now the downside is the contax has a small view through the prism (though quite large in a waist level finder) and the view in a H series is much larger (though in my experience the H series prism seems to bend the image which is not exactly in relation to the final image, which kind of breaks my brain.

I've pretty much placed the Contax as a specialty camera, rather than a 2000 frame a day lifestyle advertising camera.  It will do 2000 frames a day, but you'll work hard at it compared to a dslr, less hard than most medium format cameras because it does have a 90 degree grip.

What I do love about the contax is the ability to put on a lot of different glass.  

This image is with the old Boris Tilt shift lens, at 1/30th of a second and it's sharp where I want it to be, smooth and soft where I want that.
[attachment=17787:copyrigh...new_york.jpg]

This image also with the Hareblei 45mm Tilt Shift at 1/30th using modeling lights and an old Aptus 22.
[attachment=17790:copyrigh..._york_lk.jpg]

This second image is shot with the Contax 80mm Zeiss with flash and obviously it's pin point sharp, so the Contax does have a lot of versatility when it comes to glass.
 [attachment=17788:copyrigh...arcelona.jpg]

I even have an adapter to use pentax 6x7 lenses which also have their own look and less bite than the standard Ziess lenses.
[attachment=17789:copyrigh...rk_divas.jpg]




JR

Everyone loves the Contax but shutter lag on it is terrible. I once did a whole shoot in the studio with people jumping and falling and it was hopeless for that. To be fair I'm not sure how much worse it is than any of the other medium format cameras because I've never done proper comparative tests but 35 mm or view cameras are way better.

[JdeV]

Have you tested this phenomenon personally, both handheld and tripod mounted? I have. So what were your findings?

My opinion now is that the H2 and H1 are tripod-only, mirror-up cameras, or, with-studio-strobe cameras, to kill this "lunging effect" from the body.

I have tests that show camera shake even on a giant Bogen tripod with that huge RRS Ballhead, shot with tungsten light, under controlled conditions. Maybe it's just my particular bod(ies), but others have reported this as well. It doesn't take a Lab Coat to feel a camera body lunging in your hands; only a working photographer who shoots regularly.

Nick's suggestion to introduce the mirror delay has certainly eased the problem, but it introduces new doubt when shooting people, when looking for fleeting facial expressions. You set it too high, and you're creeping uncomfortably close to Mamiya645 performance.

And again, I ain't "bashing" anybody. I'm just calling them as I see them. I'd complain about Canon or Nikon if it did the same thing, (but it doesn't). My advice: If you own an H, you ought to also own a solid tripod, and learn how to set up the User Button to raise the mirror. What was infuriating to me was: I realized I'd just laid out tens of thousands of dollars for a "medium format solution" that REQUIRED me shooting with a tripod. That's fine, if you're a studio photographer, but grim news if you're a location guy. I'd, in effect, spent big money on a view camera. Not good.

You can shoot with no mirror delay, 50-110mm monster lens, 100 ISO, F8, 1/250 in sunlight and get no problems with blur. Indeed exceptionally sharp pictures. I've done a few fashion shoots like this.
Not saying the mirror slap doesn't suck though and I wish you could go to even 1/125 reliably. As I've pointed out elsewhere you can hand-hold an RZ reliably at 1/60 with a 90mm lens so I don't quite know what went wrong when they designed the H.

[dbernaerdt]

[quote name='Nick-T' date='Nov 4 2009, 02:50 AM' post='322347']
>This has been resolved with current versions.

I'm away from the studio again for a few days, however once back I'll trying capturing some images without any adjustments. (levels, etc) Here's what I'm seeing currently - set a crop that causes the preview to end up around 20% to 24%. (After setting the crop, click on the crop tool to bring the preview up as large as possible within the preview window.) If I click on the "+" to zoom to 25%, it is noticeably sharper.

 
>I'm fairly sure this was a bug that has been fixed.

Excellent. Next time I see the "Phocus unexpectedly quit" window I'll know it's just an illusion. Seriously, though...Phocus 1.2.1 running on OS X 10.5.8 on a one year old dual quad core mac. I've fixed permissions, run maintenance scripts and have about 150GB free. Not sure what else to look at. There is not much besides CS4, Phocus, and C1 on this computer.


>How slow is slow? What times are you getting with "standard" setup (turning on the moire filter for example will slow processing right down)

I'm not saying Phocus is slow, just that if the original poster is thinking about using a laptop to process large quantities of files, they might be disappointed. I wouldn't put Phocus in the realms of Lightroom 1 or 2 for processing speed, but the quality is certainly much better with Phocus. This really comes back to testing the equipment in your own particular situation to see what the "fit" is like. If it matters, my laptop is about 1/3 the speed of my desktop tower.

The moire filter will slow things down, however when it is needed, it is definitely an excellent feature that seems to work quite well in many situations.

Darren Bernaerdt

[bcooter]

You can shoot with no mirror delay, 50-110mm monster lens, 100 ISO, F8, 1/250 in sunlight and get no problems with blur. Indeed exceptionally sharp pictures. I've done a few fashion shoots like this.
Not saying the mirror slap doesn't suck though and I wish you could go to even 1/125 reliably. As I've pointed out elsewhere you can hand-hold an RZ reliably at 1/60 with a 90mm lens so I don't quite know what went wrong when they designed the H.

If Gwitif really wants that medium format experience, how bout saving a few tens of thousands and sending a Canon to these guys to have the AA filter removed.

http://www.maxmax.com/hot_rod_visible.htm

You'll get that medium format uber sharp look of course sometimes some moire like a medium format back, but it doesn't cost much.

Now if you want more of the medium format loving feeling,  you'll need to stick a wad of bubble gum over the shutter release and glue down the iso so it won't go past 400.

That'll do it.

BC

[asf]

As I've pointed out elsewhere you can hand-hold an RZ reliably at 1/60 with a 90mm lens so I don't quite know what went wrong when they designed the H.

The RZ mirror doesn't flip back up.

[JdeV]

The RZ mirror doesn't flip back up.

Yes, but the mirror flipping back up necessarily happens after the exposure has been made so has no influence on image sharpness.

[gwhitf]

This has nothing to do with anything, (except for the rich history of the Hasselblad camera), but this book is just stunning. A good friend sent me this book for Christmas, and it's just so addicting. This photographer shot a handheld Hasselblad next to a Japanese temple, and pulled interesting people off the streets. Spent maybe ten minutes with each person. Just such an achievement. Years of work and dedication.

http://www.steidlville.com/books/709-Asaku...iroh-Kikai.html

Click thru the sample spreads. It's a shame they don't show up larger, to see the tonality and the captions.

EDIT: I found this interesting paragraph on page 26, as he describes his working process at this temple: "Once I enter the temple grounds, I walk along the crimson wall that forms the backdrop of my portraits, checking the light. My outdoor studio is a little dusty, so I take a tissue out of my pocket pack with the consumer credit ad on it that someone was handing to passersby at the station and dust off the wall a bit. Then I take out of my daybag the Hasselblad that I've been using for thirty-odd years, and sling it over my shoulder. With these simple preparations, I feel myself click into work mode."

Emphasis is mine.

[BrianSmith]

If Gwitif really wants that medium format experience, how bout saving a few tens of thousands and sending a Canon to these guys to have the AA filter removed.

Coot,

You know as well as anybody that "saving a few tens of thousands" is NOT a part of the medium format experience...

[Hywel]

I don't see so many, and I see more than a few assertions that Canon is better than MF.

But WTF, who cares, I'd ignore them all, they're all fools. The two formats are just different.

Exactly.

Buy the camera to do what you want it to do. It's only a tool. There isn't one perfect camera to rule them all, not even for a single photographer shooting several different subjects... and certainly not for many photographers shooting many different subjects. Find the one that feels like it is helping your way of working and whose shots you like to look at for your sort of work, and use that for the job. If you can't find one, find the one you hate the least... or build your own.

And by all means share your experiences, but bear in mind that other people's mileages may vary... and please avoid ad hominem attacks, or whatever the equivalent to ad hominem is when you are having a go at a company rather than a person. It is quite tiresome.

As I said earlier in the thread, I like my 'blad for my fetish photography, but if I was shooting a football match, I'd reach for my Canon kit. And if I were to go back into mountain photography professionally, I'd be in the market for one of those Fuji 6 x 17 cm monster cameras I think. And if I wanted to do unobtrusive reportage, you could probably do a lot worse than a compact in your pocket.

  Cheers, Hywel

[stevesanacore]

If Gwitif really wants that medium format experience, how bout saving a few tens of thousands and sending a Canon to these guys to have the AA filter removed.

http://www.maxmax.com/hot_rod_visible.htm

You'll get that medium format uber sharp look of course sometimes some moire like a medium format back, but it doesn't cost much.

Now if you want more of the medium format loving feeling,  you'll need to stick a wad of bubble gum over the shutter release and glue down the iso so it won't go past 400.

That'll do it.

BC

Has anyone you know tried this mod on their Canons? Sounds very interesting.

[jing q]

Has anyone you know tried this mod on their Canons? Sounds very interesting.

I've done it on my 5D MkII.
there's a very subtle difference, where edges used to blend (lightgrey-grey-black-grey-lightgrey) now it's more like (grey-black-grey)
most people don't see the difference but I've found it useful esp when uprezzing (where edges tend to start looking fuzzier...and no, sharpening does not do the exact same thing)

btw only one out of 2 AA filters get removed due to the way the glass inside is constructed.

[Doug Peterson]

]

[gwhitf]

David/Nick,

Just a loving, constructive thought about a feature for the H5D: What if, instead of the LCD display on the grip sloping forward, away from the photographer, what about redesigning that grip (when you add the vertical grip), and make that LCD panel slope/tilt backwards, toward the photographer's view? As it is right now, when I'm shooting people, at eye level, I have to break the camera from the tripod lock-down position, and tilt the whole camera backwards, toward me, in order to view the LCD, and then reposition it. If the LCD panel was tilted backwards slightly, kinda that that Hy6, all you'd have to do is glance down to see the LCD panel on the grip to confirm your settings. I know it wouldn't be as aerodynamic that way, but it would be much more functional for the photographer. Thanks.

[gdwhalen]

David/Nick,

Just a loving, constructive thought about a feature for the H5D: What if, instead of the LCD display on the grip sloping forward, away from the photographer, what about redesigning that grip (when you add the vertical grip), and make that LCD panel slope/tilt backwards, toward the photographer's view? As it is right now, when I'm shooting people, at eye level, I have to break the camera from the tripod lock-down position, and tilt the whole camera backwards, toward me, in order to view the LCD, and then reposition it. If the LCD panel was tilted backwards slightly, kinda that that Hy6, all you'd have to do is glance down to see the LCD panel on the grip to confirm your settings. I know it wouldn't be as aerodynamic that way, but it would be much more functional for the photographer. Thanks.

Why not just make that display a "flip up" display?  Shouldn't be too difficult to do.

[gwhitf]

Why not just make that display a "flip up" display?  Shouldn't be too difficult to do.

Personally, I would not want anything to flip up -- just another thing to get broken off. Just like those flip-out LCD screens on video cameras -- an accident waiting to happen. I'd just reform that grip, but switch the pitch of that LCD readout the other way, so the user could just look down to know what fstop he's on.

[bcooter]

Personally, I would not want anything to flip up -- just another thing to get broken off.

 

[bcooter]

hen you look through the viewfinder of the H body. It's a joy to look thru, each and every time.

I am working on the rendering of the new H vertical grip too. It'll be unveiled shortly.

I have never heard anyone mention the H series camera without mentioning the grip, usually not in that positive of a manner, so if I've heard it dozens of times I'm sure Hasselblad is also aware of it.

I don't think (just conjecture) that any medium format camera is going to change that much.  Maybe somebody like Leica will make a brand new one, but to change an existing one seems to take forever.

It did in the film days when it costs a lot less to make a change in a camera, but now that it's digital it seems everything gets much more expensive and very time delayed.

Even Canon with their 1 series body hasn't changed that in a dozen years so maybe it's just too expensive to make wholesale changes.

The funny thing is the cheap point and shoot cameras seem to change by the hour, but expensive professional cameras change by the decade.

But I'm not too sure if you or any professional photographer is the real market for expensive cameras anymore.

I think this is the market.



BC

[gdwhalen]

I must be in the minority because I love the way the Hasselblad fits in my hand.  I think it is tremendously easy to shoot and very well balanced.  I always felt that the DMR was lens heavy while the H3d-50 seems to be balanced tight to the front of the camera.  I love holding it while shooting it.