H5D-40 vs IQ140/Credo40

[synn]

I am just saying that the DF+ works in my professional applications. I have never managed to "Miss a shot because the body let me down", if you will.
I have used the AFD before and I would be very hesitant in using that as my main body. The DF+ is a lot, lot better than that. They look the same, but that's about all they have in common.

All moot points anyway because the OP is not interested in a Mamiya body.

That said, I am not very confident about finding an H4X in the used market though. People who buy H4Xs seem to be in it for the long haul (I am yet to see one on ebay). Maybe Doug/ Steve might have a different opinion. An H4X+ used Aptus II 7/8 might be around the price of a new Credo 40 bundle, so that's another possible option.

[JV]

An H4X+ used Aptus II 7/8 might be around the price of a new Credo 40 bundle, so that's another possible option.

Unfortunately the H4X does not work with the Aptus-II backs.

From the Hasselblad website:

*Due to Leaf Aptus S & Aptus II not communicating within the specified protocol the H4X currently does not function with these two digital back models. Our investigations have concluded that this is due to parts of the communication from the digital back not being within specification, causing a fault condition and a lock-up of the camera body and digital back. The H4X platform is more accurate and sensitive and therefore detects the signals from the digital back as outside of specification.
All technical information has been passed on to Leaf and we are at their disposal to help rectify the problem. At present time we have not had any response from Leaf and therefore are not in a position to say when this will work.

[eronald]

Unfortunately the H4X does not work with the Aptus-II backs.

From the Hasselblad website:

*Due to Leaf Aptus S & Aptus II not communicating within the specified protocol the H4X currently does not function with these two digital back models. Our investigations have concluded that this is due to parts of the communication from the digital back not being within specification, causing a fault condition and a lock-up of the camera body and digital back. The H4X platform is more accurate and sensitive and therefore detects the signals from the digital back as outside of specification.
All technical information has been passed on to Leaf and we are at their disposal to help rectify the problem. At present time we have not had any response from Leaf and therefore are not in a position to say when this will work.

I love the part of how it doesn't work because it is better

Edmund

[BobDavid]

I've used Phocus and its forefather, Flexcolor, extensively. Workflow has a lot to do with selecting a MFD system. For my style of shooting at that time, I used a Hasselblad multi-shot back mounted onto an H2F body (as far as I know, the H2F supports DAC for all HC lenses). Once I began using a laptop with a decent video card, Phocus operated fine--very few issues regarding stability. I never liked Firewire; it's finicky. My shooting style is and always has been minimalist. I kept my shoots to less than 50 captures. So I never dealt with huge batches. As far as color, I preferred Hasselblad.

I used Phocus for shooting tethered, optimizing files on a global level, and developing RAW files (loved the scene customization feature as well as the reproduction option). After developing RAWs and converting them to TIFFs, I did the heavy lifting in PS.  

I now mostly shoot with Oly MFT cameras and fast primes. If necessary, I'll pull out the D800. Medium format is really cool and it does serve a purpose. My business model simply evolved away from MFD. I guess my attitude is: A tool is a tool is a tool. For me, the Hassey was the right tool at the right time.

[sbernthal]

Everyone here will tell you how wonderful the Phase files are and C1. It is all true. But you'd better test very carefully to make sure you that the body handles the sort of work you do. The story "a better body is coming" is one we have heard year after year, and every time it really did come and was a warmed over Mamiya.

As for Phase One being the market leader - if that were the argument, everyone here would have a Canon. I for one have heard that Hassy is outselling Phase, and I know that the Hassy office in Paris is very accessible and helpful.

Which brings me to the last piece of advice: Buy whatever system has better dealer support in the town you live in, or talk to Doug and Steve who are present on this forum - they have a rep for helpfulness and honesty. Medium format with a good dealer is wonderful. Medium format with a bad dealer should be avoided at all costs.

Edmund

I don't understand how this evolved into an argument about bodies, when the OP specifically asked not to go there.
Edmund - you keep referencing your bad experiences with AFD II, but DF+ is three generations ahead, and while true every upgrade was a warm-over, the end result is pretty drastically better, and the AF is pretty hard to fault at this time.

Pretty much all the information I am getting tells me that Phase are doing much better business than H. You can't compare it to Canon any more than you can to iPhone - Phase and H are competing for the exact same segment. I do think it tells you something important if the market is leaning decidedly in one direction. Also we know H is a company with little regard for its customer base, who needed a court ruling to allow clients to use the backs they wanted, and still tries to block every possible connection to building blocks from other companies, now with the ridiculous 1-1 connection between back and body, even when both from H. A lot like Apple, they want you to use the system exactly how they designed it, and don't allow you to be modular and customize to your preference. The market didn't like it, and neither do I.

Your reference to the problems with Phase reps when there is a real problem with the equipment is very real. That is the worst thing about this company - sometimes things do go wrong, and they a terrible aversion to admitting a problem exist, even when you are both looking straight at it.

[Chris Livsey]

I know OT, apologies.

The market does speak. I am looking to "upgrade" my P20 and V legacy system. A P45 (not +) V fit will be around £5,000 (UK price) a reputable dealer has a H3D39 with 80mm lens for £3250. I'm thinking, is this a screaming deal ? Where did the £20,000 additional cost when new go?

[eronald]

Phase have in the past years made some updates to their AF, but so have Canon, Nikon, and yes, Hasselblad who have all moved substantially ahead themselves. I have no idea how good the Leica S autofocus is, although there are indications of improvements.

So, yes Phase has improved from where they were, but C and N moved light years ahead, while Hassy has added True Focus, which provides at least *some* of the functionality of multiple focus points.

Some of those early published real-world hi-ISO IQ250 shots clearly had decent shadows but also focus issues, confirming as always that a sensor alone does not -yet- a camera make. This was noticed in this forum, and blamed as usual on operator error,  I didn't do the remarking.

In case you've been living on a different planet, one of the known benefit of newer *consumer* cameras is the choice of focus points all over the field, and in fact this has become a major selling point with the new 7D sensor.  Someone else here can -if you are interested - show you the sums on how much "resolution" you lose on MF with "normal" focus and recompose. You may be surprised.

I expect that a "surprise feature" of the new Phase body will be touch-to-focus contrast-detection focus, combining the good screen, touch interface and the liveview of the IQ250. Such a modernisation will bring easy super-accurate focus to studio shooters-  and remote-control click-focusing for tethered use, and have the advantage of NOT requiring a new AF module in the body. Culturally Phase remain dedicated to the idea of the back imposing its will over the body, and who knows in the end they may be proven right.

Don't you love the idea of clicking your mouse on the computer while looking away from your model?

Of course an electronic clip-on viewfinder is now feasible thanks to CMOS, and makes manual focus potentially usable again, even on older bodies.

And the next sensors will probably enable Phase Contrast MF  -pun intended

Edmund

I don't understand how this evolved into an argument about bodies, when the OP specifically asked not to go there.
Edmund - you keep referencing your bad experiences with AFD II, but DF+ is three generations ahead, and while true every upgrade was a warm-over, the end result is pretty drastically better, and the AF is pretty hard to fault at this time.

[sbernthal]

Phase have in the past years made some updates to their AF, but so have Canon, Nikon, and yes, Hasselblad who have all moved substantially ahead themselves.

I've also used the AFD II, and it was a pretty terrible camera.
In normal light, normal distance, normal objects - you would still have a lot of hunting, slowness and errors.
That is what I call bad AF.
That does not happen anymore.
AF is now fast - not lightning fast - accurate, and no hunting.
That is all I need for my type of work.

In the past I did work that required optimal AF - so I used various 1D models.
Those have an absolutely spectacular AF with 45 points.
I don't know how they upgraded them since, but it doesn't really matter.
What Canon had 10 years ago is much better than any of the MFDs today.

I am now looking for a system with the consideration of 80% image quality and not even 20% AF.
DF+ gives me that, as the new AF gives me no trouble.
If I was looking for a system based on 80% AF and 20% IQ, or even 50-50, then 35mm wins.
I would be very surprised if any MF shop comes with an AF system that can rival any generation 1D.
That is not what most of their clients are looking for.

My understanding based on some conversation with H users, is that even the newest H bodies are much closer to Mamiya than to Canon.
No one is contesting that H AF is better than Mamiya.
We are just saying it's not so bad anymore, and good enough for tripod mounted kind of work.

[eronald]

Ok, now I get it. I *never* use a tripod except for technical imagery, and very rarely use studio flash. This is why we got different practical results. I'm sure the Phamiya focus is good enough for tripod & studio flash use.

As you say, Canon AF was already very good ten years ago. I just wish H and P could get that quality and speed of even single point AF.

Edmund

I've also used the AFD II, and it was a pretty terrible camera.
In normal light, normal distance, normal objects - you would still have a lot of hunting, slowness and errors.
That is what I call bad AF.
That does not happen anymore.
AF is now fast - not lightning fast - accurate, and no hunting.
That is all I need for my type of work.

In the past I did work that required optimal AF - so I used various 1D models.
Those have an absolutely spectacular AF with 45 points.
I don't know how they upgraded them since, but it doesn't really matter.
What Canon had 10 years ago is much better than any of the MFDs today.

I am now looking for a system with the consideration of 80% image quality and not even 20% AF.
DF+ gives me that, as the new AF gives me no trouble.
If I was looking for a system based on 80% AF and 20% IQ, or even 50-50, then 35mm wins.
I would be very surprised if any MF shop comes with an AF system that can rival any generation 1D.
That is not what most of their clients are looking for.

My understanding based on some conversation with H users, is that even the newest H bodies are much closer to Mamiya than to Canon.
No one is contesting that H AF is better than Mamiya.
We are just saying it's not so bad anymore, and good enough for tripod mounted kind of work.

[sbernthal]

All MFD manufacturers and some of their users, claim their systems are perfectly usable handheld, walking around and available light.
Based on my experience, I don't understand this claim at all, but it's one of those bottomless arguments.
If I had to do what you just said, I would use either 1Dx or D800.

[eronald]

All MFD manufacturers and some of their users, claim their systems are perfectly usable handheld, walking around and available light.
Based on my experience, I don't understand this claim at all, but it's one of those bottomless arguments.
If I had to do what you just said, I would use either 1Dx or D800.

Just wish I'd always have had your good sense.
In fact I've "downgraded" to 1Ds3 and am pretty happy.

Edmund

[synn]

Mamiya AF is fine for my work and I have the images to prove it. I am sure hadselblad AF would be fine for that purpose as well.

That said, none of this has anything to do with the op's question so can we please give  his thread back to him? It would be great if people with first hand experience of the equipment in question can give him some helpful feedback instead of the usual.

[gazwas]

It would be great if people with first hand experience of the equipment in question can give him some helpful feedback instead of the usual.

My first hand experience of using the Phase One (Mamiya) camera and lenses (backs are great) for many years is I'd buy the hasselblad.

The Mamiya gear was great back in 2002......

Not shot the 40 but have the 50 and I loved the file output. Even though up until recently I've owned Phase gear I've always felt Phase pimp the RAW files from the camera while Hasselblad don't.

[calindustries]

Thanks all for the input. In the end after playing with everything I really liked the H5 body, but just could not get over my apprehensions about phocus within my own workflow as well as my clients'. So I've gone with an h4x and credo back. I can't wait to get the gear and to start working with it. Both distributors I worked with were very professional and informative as well as being patient. I would feel super confident giving either of them my business but in the end went with the best price/closest location to me. I'll get back after I play a while...

[synn]

Thanks all for the input. In the end after playing with everything I really liked the H5 body, but just could not get over my apprehensions about phocus within my own workflow as well as my clients'. So I've gone with an h4x and credo back. I can't wait to get the gear and to start working with it. Both distributors I worked with were very professional and informative as well as being patient. I would feel super confident giving either of them my business but in the end went with the best price/closest location to me. I'll get back after I play a while...

Congrats! You have the best of both worlds now.  
Have fun playing around with your new kit. We would love to see some shots once you get the hang of it!

One question though: Is it true that you don't need to trade in an H1/ H2 body to get an H4X anymore?

[eronald]

Congrats on your purchase, and multiple chargers
Please report back !

Edmund

[JV]

One question though: Is it trues that you don't need to trade in an H1/ H2 body to get an H4X anymore?

True but according to the Hasselblad website it appears to be limited in time:

Can I buy the H4X body without a trade in?
Yes, for a limited time offer, you can now purchase the H4X without a trade-in.

[eronald]

True but according to the Hasselblad website it appears to be limited in time:

Can I buy the H4X body without a trade in?
Yes, for a limited time offer, you can now purchase the H4X without a trade-in.

probably because after the stock runs out they will only sell you the H5X

Edmund

[calindustries]

One question though: Is it true that you don't need to trade in an H1/ H2 body to get an H4X anymore?

I'm not sure about all the time but both the major dealers said they could bypass the trade in clause

[Steve Hendrix]

I'm not sure about all the time but both the major dealers said they could bypass the trade in clause

It is not a bypass, regardless of what any dealer says - it is an official policy by Hasselblad USA that the H4X is now a product that can be ordered stand-alone - there is no trade in required any longer.


Steve Hendrix
Capture Integration