Luminous Landscape Forum
Equipment & Techniques => Medium Format / Film / Digital Backs – and Large Sensor Photography => Topic started by: Sareesh Sudhakaran on May 30, 2011, 12:14:14 am
-
Read a post on Engadget regarding the new 200 mega pixel H4D for $45,000. Here's the link: http://www.engadget.com/2011/05/26/hasselblads-200-megapixel-h4d-200ms-camera-now-shipping-breaks/
Does this camera really exist?
-
why not?
-
My wife has been testing one in Melbourne so I know at least 1 exists
-
Hi,
Multishot, that is making four exposures with small movements at sensor in between. Works in studio...
Best regards
Erik
Read a post on Engadget regarding the new 200 mega pixel H4D for $45,000. Here's the link: http://www.engadget.com/2011/05/26/hasselblads-200-megapixel-h4d-200ms-camera-now-shipping-breaks/
Does this camera really exist?
-
You only got that right for a part. In this case you can do 4-shot multishot for non-interpolated colors, you can do 6-shot multishot for non-interpolated colors and 4times resolution of 200MP. Naturally you can always do single shot as well.
You also got the part wrong stating you can only use it in studio (or implying it is solely for studio usage). I have pretty often used multishot outside of the studio environment, even with moving items and people (where you would use the multishot part solely for the stuff that doesn't move)!
Furthermore, very few people own & use multishot backs. I think even fewer will use the 200MS. This will also account for not spotting it very often in 'the Wild'..
Oh... I would love to be able to send in my CF39MS to get it converted to 6shots.. not going to happen :(
-
You only got that right for a part. In this case you can do 4-shot multishot for non-interpolated colors, you can do 6-shot multishot for non-interpolated colors and 4times resolution of 200MP. Naturally you can always do single shot as well.
You also got the part wrong stating you can only use it in studio (or implying it is solely for studio usage). I have pretty often used multishot outside of the studio environment, even with moving items and people (where you would use the multishot part solely for the stuff that doesn't move)!
Furthermore, very few people own & use multishot backs. I think even fewer will use the 200MS. This will also account for not spotting it very often in 'the Wild'..
Oh... I would love to be able to send in my CF39MS to get it converted to 6shots.. not going to happen :(
Yes, you have 100% right. It is a single shot camera as well. But I think even the creators themselves have forgotten about it...
Let's see in the viewfinder. Viewfinder is too short. It is not very ergonomic. Anyone who tried to take pictures with this camera knows what I say. Of course, when you're shooting product is not so important, but taking pictures of people, which you can use this camera is very important. It is a pity that so many years in the factory Hasselblad nobody thought about it. So I calls for a few sensible people who still work there: Do something with this!!!
Peter Stig-Nielsen: You have built a great camera, do not let such a minor detail that ruined the entire work. Rebuilding Viewfinder probably will not be that expensive, and that makes this camera will be even more thoughtful (perfect).
I keep my fingers crossed
-
Yes! The multishot module has always made the backs thicker than their single shot brethren. This means you have to press your face harder on the body to see properly through the viewfinder. This is definitely something that lessens usability. Especially for left-eye'd people this can be annoying however you learn to live with it (I am a left-eye'd owner of a MS back).
-
Does this camera make a single 200MP image in one shot, as against the 80MP IQ180?
-
Does this camera make a single 200MP image in one shot...
No.
-
Does this camera make a single 200MP image in one shot, as against the 80MP IQ180?
My understanding is that it has a hardware-based super-resolution (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Super-resolution) system which requires several shots. I've seen such software - similar to stitching but you only move the camera very slightly between shots -, but can't find it with quick googling.
-
http://news.cnet.com/8301-30685_3-20066021-264.html
-
Do we have information about the amount of vibration below which you have to stay to be able to full tap into the resolution potential?
I would think that the absolute movement of the camera between the 6 frames should be less that 1/3 the pixel pitch, right?
This means about 2 microns.
What reasons do we have to think that such total lack of movement can really be achieved outside the studio environment? The slighest breeze is likely to induce more movement between the 6 frames.
Cheers,
Bernard
-
To be honest, Hasselblad 200ms DOES NOT EXIST!!!
Sure, there is a 50ms, shooting 50MP one shot and 200mp multishot. What's the big difference then between 50ms and 200ms?
This product might have appeal to product photographer (at least) but made no mistake, you cannot multi-shoot a glass of beer (the foam will "move") or a cone of ice cream.
So no 200MP for you!
-
The problem with the 200MP multishot is basically the same as it was for the 16-shot microstep. You cannot shoot a single frame to use as a 'blend-in' for the parts that have moved!. A lot of people that are speaking about the impossibility to use multishot outside the studio have actually never used it themselves and do not realize that most people that have work flows that incorporate multishot also take a single shot for every multishot image they are going to use. If you are able to use a sturdy setup it is very possible to prevent the camera system of moving in which case there is only a potential problem with things in the frame moving. Now, the foam of a beer can move but the glass itself and most of the content will remain still. You can do that part multishot and blend in from the single shot parts that are affected by movement. I have done stuff with people in it that way.
Problem with extended resolution is that you cannot make a single shot with the same resolution as the MS to use as a 'blend-in'. Hard to do 200MS with a glass of beer.
Furthermore it is amazing with how much you can get away with doing multishot. Much more things outside the studio than people here obviously realize. I might just try one of these days to shoot a glass of beer multishot if only to see how much is really affected by movement. OTOH, there have been reports of people that saw multishot takes go haywire because of heated air by air condition and heaters. Yes, the main usage is obviously for studio still shooters but multishot is much more versatile than some people here give it credit for.
Not sure what you mean with there is no 200MS? You can do 50MS with 4 shots (actually 5) and 200MS with 6 shots (my guess is that that will be actually 7).
-
Of course there is, but naming it mentioning 200 instead of 50 is a bit too much (marketing).
In the end there's still is 50Mpx one shot, 200Mpx multishot, just as the previous 50MS.
-
What's the big difference then between 50ms and 200ms?
150 (200 million pixels - 50 million pixels = 150 million pixels)
-
;)))
yeah, that's right!
-
Yes! The multishot module has always made the backs thicker than their single shot brethren. This means you have to press your face harder on the body to see properly through the viewfinder. This is definitely something that lessens usability. Especially for left-eye'd people this can be annoying however you learn to live with it (I am a left-eye'd owner of a MS back).
We can even learn to live without a leg ... But it's not the point ...
Like a small thing, but it makes the camera seems to be underdeveloped. It is a pity, because it's really cool equipment.
-
We can even learn to live without a leg ... But it's not the point ...
Like a small thing, but it makes the camera seems to be underdeveloped. It is a pity, because it's really cool equipment.
Hmmm..... choosing between a viewfinder being slightly too short to be completely comfortable or loosing a leg....?! Yeah. That is a really tough one...
-
Hmmm..... choosing between a viewfinder being slightly too short to be completely comfortable or loosing a leg....?! Yeah. That is a really tough one...
OK, you have right :-) Maybe it was not the best comparison. But you know what I mean.
These two centimeters, in this case really makes significant difference.
I believe that the refinement of detail is not difficult. And easy to fix. This will facilitate the lives of many photographers, also all users of the left ocular.
-
Problem with extended resolution is that you cannot make a single shot with the same resolution as the MS to use as a 'blend-in'. Hard to do 200MS with a glass of beer
This isn't such a a problem, when I had my 528c i would just double size a single shot and overlay to touch the few areas if something moved like a bird in the sky or a plant blowing in the wind. Those areas were such small parts of the image anyhow.
And yeah you can really do a lot more with the multishot than you'd believe from reading all the posts. I've been able to just sit the camera down on my desk - no tripod, no lockdown - and successfully shoot multishot.
-
I'm also left eye'd and shoot with a MS back. Hasn't been a problem since I use the 45 degree prism or the chimney style finder most of the time and occasionally the WLF. Never used the 90 degree finder.
Of course I have the Rollei and not the H. ::) But I'll be sad not to be able to upgrade to this new back.
-
I'm also left eye'd and shoot with a MS back. Hasn't been a problem since I use the 45 degree prism or the chimney style finder most of the time and occasionally the WLF. Never used the 90 degree finder.
Of course I have the Rollei and not the H. ::) But I'll be sad not to be able to upgrade to this new back.
I also do not see a problem when I use:
Angle finder H
Item No.: S100A12359A00
or
HVM viewfinder
Item No.: 3053328
I understand that you would like to have created the CF-200ms. I'm afraid that they will not do. I know that they have withdrawn all CF digital backs.
Too bad,these digital backs were really good.
-
I heard something like that they were considering the future of the CF product line. Would be a huge loss if they did.
-
Of course there is, but naming it mentioning 200 instead of 50 is a bit too much (marketing).
In the end there's still is 50Mpx one shot, 200Mpx multishot, just as the previous 50MS.
No
The current 50MS will do 50 MP single shot and 50MP multishot. In a 4 shot the resolution remains the same but the colours are sampled four times increasing detail, colour fidelity and almost completely eliminating moires. The new back does all of that PLUS increases the resolution.
I should also echo what Dustbak said in that it is perfectly possible to shoot multi-shot on location, I did it for years.
Nick-T
-
No
The new back does all of that PLUS increases the resolution.
Ah, ok.
Now I see. Thanks for pointing out.
Tough, I still regard the 200Mp label a bit far-fetched.
(IMHO)
-
I'm glad you put "IMHO" after that :)
I haven't seen the system in action yet but I've heard the Tate gallery in London were very impressed and they really know their stuff.
When you test one and you find it doesn't work then by all means come back here to assure us that it is far-fetched :)
I don't think it was far-fetched to call my old multi shot a "384" even though it is only 16MP, as it does in fact capture a 384MB file (16 bit) in 16 shot mode. I'm told that the the tech boys have managed to achieve the same quality as a 16shot capture in 6 (or 7) shots which is pretty incredible.
IMHO :)
Nick-T
-
Hi Nick-T,
Nick I'm glad that you use a MS on a daily basis. Are you using it with the Body H1 or H2? If yes - Do not annoy you that you have a face in the camera?
-
So, 200mp-
but are the lenses capable of even 50MP ?
-
So, 200mp-
but are the lenses capable of even 50MP ?
good point.
-
This new Blad is a great camera for fine art repro. Museums, galleries, and repro houses will have a heyday with it. I've been using a CF39 MS for years - both in single shot and multi-shot mode. It is a very versatile back; it easily clips onto a technical camera without hassle. I'd love to see Hassey continue with the CF line, although it is doubtful that it will. 90% of my multi-shot work is for fine art repro and restoration work. Once in awhile, I use multi-shot for product shots. The difference between single shot and multi-shot is dramatic. I wouldn't entertain the idea of shooting multi-shot in the field. I wouldn't use a Betterlight in the field either, although some do.
-
Some more information:
The new camera is also compatible with all 11 Hasselblad H System lenses.
The new H4D-200MS is available now for a cool EUR 32,000 (US$45,717).
Owners of the H4D-50MS can send off the unit to Hasselblad's factory in Copenhagen, Denmark for an upgrade at a cost of EUR 7,000 (US$10,000), where the engineers will also bring the firmware and hardware up to spec if needed to ensure everything needed for the new multi-shot system is in place.
http://www.gizmag.com/hasselblad-ships-h4d200ms-200-megapixel-camera/18747/
-
So, 200mp-
but are the lenses capable of even 50MP ?
*sigh*
Yes.
-
This isn't such a a problem, when I had my 528c i would just double size a single shot and overlay to touch the few areas if something moved like a bird in the sky or a plant blowing in the wind. Those areas were such small parts of the image anyhow.
And yeah you can really do a lot more with the multishot than you'd believe from reading all the posts. I've been able to just sit the camera down on my desk - no tripod, no lockdown - and successfully shoot multishot.
Yes, this is indeed the case. A lot depends on the camera - with the right camera, it is more versatile than one would think. While most of my multi-shot sales have been to product photographers, quite a few of them shoot a lot of food, and several are dedicated food photographers.
Steve Hendrix
-
Ah, ok.
Now I see. Thanks for pointing out.
Tough, I still regard the 200Mp label a bit far-fetched.
(IMHO)
It's just marketing :-) As much as you want to say - straight from Kodak ;-P
Of course, misleads many people. But who cares ...
-
It's just marketing :-) As much as you want to say - straight from Kodak ;-P
Of course, misleads many people. But who cares ...
Did you even read the thread?
It's a real technology and shows real resolution improvement.
-
Did you even read the thread?
It's a real technology and shows real resolution improvement.
I've read, I know this wonderful technology. Even I use it every day. Do not change the fact that I disagree with this naming ...
It's like an energy-efficient light bulb called the 100W. When it really is a 36W (100W equivalent)
-
Do not change the fact that I disagree with this naming ...
It's like an energy-efficient light bulb called the 100W. When it really is a 36W (100W equivalent)
Good comparison!
-
Bad comparison since the 200MS actually delivers 200MP.
If it were like, 50MP upscaled to 200MP it would have been a different thing but this is not the case. I wonder why both of you think this is a good comparison?
-
Bad comparison since the 200MS actually delivers 200MP.
If it were like, 50MP upscaled to 200MP it would have been a different thing but this is not the case. I wonder why both of you think this is a good comparison?
I see a conspiracy here ... ::)
Maybe because the energy-saving 36W bulb provides as much light as 100W. But it still has a 36W ...
I know it's just the name
-
Bad comparison since the 200MS actually delivers 200MP.
200MS actually delivers 200MP asterisk.
Nevermind.
-
I've read, I know this wonderful technology. Even I use it every day. Do not change the fact that I disagree with this naming ...
It's like an energy-efficient light bulb called the 100W. When it really is a 36W (100W equivalent)
For light-bulbs, the power label tells you how much power is drawed from the mains. A small percentage of that is converted into light, the remaining is heat. As long as most light-bulbs were based on the same technology, the label worked, because one would know that a "100W" lightbulb actually created 10 Watts (or something) of light.
When technology changed, and much more efficient light-bulbs appeared, what should one use to inform the public? I actually think that it makes sense to label it as consuming 8 Watts, but producing light comparable to e.g. a "60W light bulb". Over time, candela or some other light measure should be used.
A properly multisampled image sensor can create an image consisting of e.g. 200MP of discrete image points. Therefore, I think that 200MP-ms makes sense. Over time, I would like to see best-case lp/ph MTF50 used instead.
-h
-
For light-bulbs, the power label tells you how much power is drawed from the mains. A small percentage of that is converted into light, the remaining is heat. As long as most light-bulbs were based on the same technology, the label worked, because one would know that a "100W" lightbulb actually created 10 Watts (or something) of light.
When technology changed, and much more efficient light-bulbs appeared, what should one use to inform the public? I actually think that it makes sense to label it as consuming 8 Watts, but producing light comparable to e.g. a "60W light bulb". Over time, candela or some other light measure should be used.
The better brands mentioned the output stream in Lumen (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lumen_(unit)), which is much more informative for the purpose of a light generating device than the power consumption (which is interesting from a standpoint of running cost). Together, Watt and lumen are interesting to get an idea about the efficiency. Nowadays, lumen indications on packaging are demanded by law.
A properly multisampled image sensor can create an image consisting of e.g. 200MP of discrete image points. Therefore, I think that 200MP-ms makes sense. Over time, I would like to see best-case lp/ph MTF50 used instead.
I agree, although with an added bit of information if used on a discrete sampling device such as a CCD or CMOS device, i.e. the response % at Nyquist. That would avoid lensmakers designing just for MTF50-ish performance, and it tells something about the aliasing risk involved with a particular system.
Cheers,
Bart