new hasselblad camera at photokina

[yaya]

yes but if you have Hasselblad lenses you do what ?  you keep your body 20 years if you don't need or don't want 50 or 60 mp ?

You buy that 22MP back and keep it for as long as your camera/ lenses will last...

[Erick Boileau]

You buy that 22MP back and keep it for as long as your camera/ lenses will last...

thanks  Hasselblad ....

[bcooter]

There you go Yair.  You get it.

Overall, I've never really understood the marketing of medium format.

It's always been about more detail, or sharper images, sometimes more film like, but all of this if very subjective, subject/light/photographer's style  dependent and with that in mind I can show 6 images that prove one format is better, show 6 more that prove the opposite.

Charts and brick walls might prove the detail is there, but none of that testing will prove one camera shoots more unique.  That is a much different circumstance to shoot something unique.

For every photographer that is positive their A or P or H 31 is more film like compared to a canon or nikon or sony, there are an equal number of clients/photographers that believe the opposite.

What medium format offers compared to any of the smaller framed dslrs is a DIFFERENT look.  Not always better, sometimes better, but always different.

Different is important.

Also what medium format offers compared to any of the smaller dslrs is you tend to own the mf cameras for a much longer time.  Partially because the buy in is higher, mostly because medium format features run glacier slow.

I doubt seriously if the next photokina sees any announcement of a 90 mpx full frame, 900,000 pixel 4" lcd camera that shoots 2000 iso clean, shoots video and stills, has mutli point autofocus and a series of f2 lenses.

If this came about i think we'd all be shocked, but in the smaller format world you kind of expect a lot of  this to happen, almost all of it.

Now that still doesn't mean medium format doesn't have a place, in fact I'm surprised that most photographers speak in these all or nothing terms, like one camera must be everything.  It never was like that in the film days where every photographer used multiple formats, it's not like that in the digital world.

As I said, I'm shooting my contax more and more and mostly because for some of the styles I'm working in I like the look because it is a little different and I like using a waist level finder.

As long as it doesn't break, or shut down whether clients notice the difference or not is irrelevant. It matters if it makes me happy and I only get happy if I get the image I want.

Medium format development moves glacier slow and that's not really a bad thing, because instead of running to the bank every time someone announces an extra 10 megapixels, I can concentrate on my photography and my business.  The camera becomes a given, something I just use, something I expect to use without having to learn a new menu system, buy new chargers, find a different workflow.

Now if you want clients (paying commercial clients not classes or seminar clients) to notice the difference on set, it obviously should be the image they're looking at, though the only  camera currently in production  that looks physically different is the hasselblad.

It's funny, a lot of us begged blad to make it in black, but keeping it grey kind of makes it different, makes it a Hasselblad.  If you put a Canon and Mamiya on set, side by side, no client will notice the difference, at least not setting on a tripod with that built in prism finder.

So maybe at Photokina, Mamiya should come out with a medium grey camera with a waist level finder.

IMO

BC

[Dick Roadnight]

For every photographer that is positive their A or P or H 31 is more film like compared to a canon or nikon or sony, there are an equal number of clients/photographers that believe the opposite.
BC

¿What was ever special about film?

I mean apart from in comparison to glass plates.

¿Do you like grain?

[BJL]

¿What was ever special about film?

Agreed.
If someone can make a case for something giving images that are more life-like, I am interested.
When someone talks about seeking images that are more film-like, it strikes me as irrelevant nostalgia. (Except if a professional is forced to cater to some such nostalgic demand from a customer, sort of like asking for sepia toning.)

But I never wanted my CDs to be "more LP-like" (with pops and clicks and rolled off high frequencies except with fantastically expensive gear) either, so I must be a hopeless modernist.

[Dick Roadnight]

yes but if you have Hasselblad lenses you do what ?  you keep your body 20 years if you don't need or don't want 50 or 60 mp ?

Buy a CF39 and keep your V system as a back-up... and for the situations in which you would not want to risk using your H4D-60.

[Erick Boileau]

and for the situations in which you would not want to risk using your H4D-60.

I dont need 60mp , who really need it ?

[Erick Boileau]

What medium format offers compared to any of the smaller framed dslrs is a DIFFERENT look.  Not always better, sometimes better, but always different.

Different is important.

Exactly

[archivue]

Or a brand new Leaf Aptus-II 5 or Mamiya DM22 kit with a still-in-production Dalsa 22MP chip for 6-7K EUR with warranty and full support in Capture One and Leaf Capture
Just sayin'

Y

that's the best deal around for whom who can deal with low iso !

is there any difference between this two ?
except the label ?

[Steve Hendrix]

that's the best deal around for whom who can deal with low iso !

is there any difference between this two ?
except the label ?

Functionally, there is not. There may be some differences in packaging, miscellaneous included accessories, etc. In the USA, the price is virtually the same. If you work with abundant light, it's a great solution at a reasonable price for shooting medium format digital. Comparatively large sensor, excellent tonality, fast capture. Also, since both are based on the Aptus II model, Live Video (to computer) is included without any $1,600 dongle. Beware of long exposure though, as the Aptus II-5/DM 22 won't compare well to others.

So, for 22MP medium format, the $7K-ish pricing already exists.


Steve Hendrix

[bcooter]

Functionally, there is not. There may be some differences in packaging, miscellaneous included accessories, etc. In the USA, the price is virtually the same. If you work with abundant light, it's a great solution at a reasonable price for shooting medium format digital. Comparatively large sensor, excellent tonality, fast capture. Also, since both are based on the Aptus II model, Live Video (to computer) is included without any $1,600 dongle. Beware of long exposure though, as the Aptus II-5/DM 22 won't compare well to others.

So, for 22MP medium format, the $7K-ish pricing already exists.


Steve Hendrix

But that 7ish price is with an older model body . . . like the afdIII right?

Whether it be Hasselblad or Phase, to get the newest body and even a cropped 1.26 sensor back puts you at about 14k.

Personally I'd place more emphasis on the camera and lenses first,  the digital back second.  An H-1 or a Contax kit can be had for 3.5 thousand and most used backs in the 22 mpx range are going for another 3.5k which really is 7ish.

The only issue with used is the warranty and repair thing, but when you think about it, insurance will cover more than most warranties and usually for less, especially since some of the makers have a minimum $2,500 repair, though most medium format backs are pretty reliable.  Same with the cameras.


BC

[Steve Hendrix]

But that 7ish price is with an older model body . . . like the afdIII right?

Whether it be Hasselblad or Phase, to get the newest body and even a cropped 1.26 sensor back puts you at about 14k.

Personally I'd place more emphasis on the camera and lenses first,  the digital back second.  An H-1 or a Contax kit can be had for 3.5 thousand and most used backs in the 22 mpx range are going for another 3.5k which really is 7ish.

BC

I meant $7K-ish just for the back. Recently promoted (in August) with a DF (body-only) for $9,995.

Second that on the camera/lenses. Contax mounts are still available with all the digital back offerings, as far as I know. H2 also, for that matter. For the Phase One/Mamiya platform I would emphasize investing in the camera more than the lenses, if a near-term compromise is necessary. I'd rather shoot an older Mamiya 80/2.8 AF Lens on a DF body than a newer Phase One 80/2.8 D Lens on the AF body any day. But naturally, it depends on the type of work.


Steve Hendrix

[JV]

One small remark regarding Contax 645 versus Hasselblad H2.  I had a Hasselblad H1 and a Contax 645.  I ended up buying a digital back for the Hasselblad and sold my Contax 645.   One of the reasons for doing so was that I found it a lot harder to find used or refurbished backs for the Contax 645.  They also tended to be slightly more expensive.  That being said, nothing but praise for the Contax 645, excellent camera.