Luminous Landscape Forum
Equipment & Techniques => Medium Format / Film / Digital Backs – and Large Sensor Photography => Topic started by: landscapephoto on July 17, 2015, 06:57:06 am
-
Are there people here using the Hasselblad HTS for architecture (correcting perspective)? How practical is it as a system?
-
Thank you for the quick answer. I have read that distortion is pretty high on the 28mm. Is it better on the 24mm?
-
Phocus corrects distortion even when the lens is shifted or tilted? Does it also corrects color casts?
-
Thank you for the info. Seems that the HTS is a real alternative to a technical cam!
-
Thank you for the info. Seems that the HTS is a real alternative to a technical cam!
When looking into medium format digital I looked into the Hasselblad HTS and ultimately decided on the tech cam route mainly due to the higher quality lenses, much smaller size and weight and much more lens movement capability. I also have a Hasselblad H1 for when I need an SLR (mainly for portraits).
The HTS however is a great solution for those invested in the Hasselblad system.
Remember that the HTS increases focal length by 1.5 so the widest lens available, the 24mm, turns into a 36mm and the 28 into a 42mm lens.
In that range, the (tech cam lens) Schneider 35mm digitar XL is very small and light and offers great performance on the 40mp and 50mp (ccd) backs and even works well on the 60mp backs. The Rodenstock 40mm HR-W works great with all backs. Even a simple platform like the Arca Swiss factum will offer nearly the same amount of movements as the HTS but in a much smaller and lighter package and of course the RM3Di offers even more movements (2 axis independently) for about a grand more $ or about the same price as the HTS.
-
When looking into medium format digital I looked into the Hasselblad HTS and ultimately decided on the tech cam route mainly due to the higher quality lenses
I would be interested in a direct comparison between tech cam lenses and the HTS system, but was never able to find one.
-
I would be interested in a direct comparison between tech cam lenses and the HTS system, but was never able to find one.
As a general rule tech camera wide angle lenses are much better than SLR camera lenses edge to edge (and beyond) in regard to distortion and sharpness due to them not having the design constrains of having to fit on a body with a set, and somewhat long, flange focal distance and having to clear a mirror like the SLR lenses need to do. As a bonus they are much smaller and lighter than SLR lenses.
That said I have seen good results from the 28mm H lens and the HTS combination. Someone here posted some nice samples (architecture) a while back. I don't recall who it was :(
-
As a general rule tech camera wide angle lenses are much better than SLR camera lenses
This is why I would be interested in a direct comparison between tech cam lenses and the HTS system. I have a preference for the HTS system but I could probably go either route. If I could see a direct comparison, that would help.
-
This is why I would be interested in a direct comparison between tech cam lenses and the HTS system. I have a preference for the HTS system but I could probably go either route. If I could see a direct comparison, that would help.
I would contact a dealer. They can provide raw files for comparison. I use Digital Transitions in New York. They have a bunch files made using a wide range of sensor/back and lens combinations.
Drop them a line (or your dealer of your choice) they will provide you with great info with no strings attached or cost to you. It's what they do.
-
If you want to see a truer representation of the HTS performance, I would suggest asking a dealer who actually deals in Hasselblad gear, like Pro Centre in London, for example, to refer you onto one of their professional customers. From talking to some pretty big name shooters, most rate the HTS highly, all be it admitting it has a more limited range of movements than available on a technical camera. Sean Conboy, for example, told me it's a brilliant product but not versatile enough in movements and wide angle options for a great proportion of his work. Hence he uses the Linhof Techno.
-
For clarity we sell Hasselblad bodies, lenses, and accessories. We do not sell Hassy digital backs.
We can't claim not to be biased. But at least in this case we are equally glad if someone buys a Hassy HTS or tech cam from us.
-
For clarity we sell Hasselblad bodies, lenses, and accessories.
Had a look at your website - can't see any mention of Hasselblad outside of the blog - not even a logo.
Since you sell HB, wouldn't it make sense to list it under - say - 'Camera Systems and Peripherals' > 'SLR Camera Systems' ?
You could also add HB to your LuLa signature. ;)
Jim
-
I would contact a dealer. They can provide raw files for comparison.
I will probably do that eventually, but I am probably not the only member of this forum to need that information. Ideally, some comparison should be posted here. We have had numerous articles about film versus medium format, we have a comparison between CCD and CMOS about every other week, why no decent comparison between lenses? ::)
-
why no decent comparison between lenses? ::)
Because test targets are boring, and hard to interpret with different mounts and cameras, as a sensor, which will be different, is needed never mind RAW conversions and processing. Do without those and use an optical bench or similar as lens rentals (http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2015/07/variation-measurements-for-wide-angle-lenses ) does and you get pages of nerdy graphs and numbers and, after discounting or averaging out the variability between lenses, you have "the best" which is immediately dished for having poor bokeh or low flare resistance or .... ::)
Don't try the makers either, their MTF graphs, when not computer generated, are from a production lens, well maybe not ;) much as a car can have its MPG figure "massaged" in test (within the EU rules) by taping over vent holes and running special thin oils and low rolling resistance tyres etc.
BTW I don't think you will find many film v digital MF here, many use film for personal work even if digital at work, now CCD v CMOS has occasionally been mentioned ::)
-
Because test targets are boring, and hard to interpret with different mounts and cameras
But that would be the same it the data was obtained from a dealer than if it was posted here.
And, quite frankly, I find that a few pictures of the same subject taken with two different lenses at a few apertures are quite informative of the differences in capabilities of these systems. After all, this is what lenses and cameras are for: taking pictures.
BTW I don't think you will find many film v digital MF here
Some time ago, the parent site for this forum got famous for these comparisons:
https://luminous-landscape.com/d30-vs-film/
https://luminous-landscape.com/shootout/
https://luminous-landscape.com/4x5-film-vs-digital/
https://luminous-landscape.com/pixels-vs-film/
https://luminous-landscape.com/like-it-is/
https://luminous-landscape.com/iq180-vs-8x10/
-
I will probably do that eventually, but I am probably not the only member of this forum to need that information. Ideally, some comparison should be posted here. We have had numerous articles about film versus medium format, we have a comparison between CCD and CMOS about every other week, why no decent comparison between lenses? ::)
Because most people who talk about medium format digital in this and other forums don't actually own medium format digital gear. Even for those who do its very expensive to have a large selection of lenses. Unlike with 35mm digital where there is a huge number of users with many, many lenses and even several digital bodies.
I myself own a Canon 5D3, 1DS3, 11 L lenses but "only" a Phase IQ160, Arca Swiss RM3di, Rodenstock 40mm HR-W and 70mm HR-W lenses and an H1 w/ 80mm f2.8 lens.
A dealer like DT has basically immediate access to a large selection of medium format digital gear. They have to, for sales and rental purposes. I know they have a large library of raw files made with a wide range of lens/body/back combinations and if what you ask for they do not have they can probably shoot it for you.
-
What I actually intended to say is that, on luminous-landscape, we have had articles comparing camera systems. One single user may not have all the equipment, but Michael Reichmann still could organise a few shootouts comparing different camera systems a few years ago. A similar article comparing tech cams and the HTS would be nice. Something like this:
https://luminous-landscape.com/measuring-megabytes/
-
What I actually intended to say is that, on luminous-landscape, we have had articles comparing camera systems. One single user may not have all the equipment, but Michael Reichmann still could organise a few shootouts comparing different camera systems a few years ago. A similar article comparing tech cams and the HTS would be nice. Something like this:
https://luminous-landscape.com/measuring-megabytes/
That would be great. If invited I would participate.
Unfortunately ever since the D800/E came out the perceived value of medium format digital has gone down like a rock although MFD is now better than ever. There are many many options in a wide range of prices. Most articles have concentrated in comparing the Nikon/Sony sensor 35mm cameras against a Medium Format Digital setup, and of course the 645Z against everything!
Now that the Sony A7R (II) and the Canon 5DS/R are out there they attract the most interest and people further question whether MFD is worth the cost.
So most of the hate against Medium Format Digital has to do with the cost, specially the higher end stuff and the performance of the CCD sensors in situations where the latest Sony EXMOR CMOS's are best.
-
I can't imagine a HTS can hold a candle to the image quality of a tech cam and lens. However, there is another issue here, which is workflow. The HTS allows camera control via Phocus and the iOS app (there may be an Android app too). For me, and the way that I work, this is the difference between needing an extra assistant to cock/fire the shutter or make adjustments to the scene/lighting. This becomes even bigger if you have lights that are adjustable via wifi (I don't, but wish I did). The HTS will provide sufficient quality for most clients and most projects. Don't under estimate the focal length multiplier, and remember that this come on top of an already small sensor. This may require stitching to get framing you require, which if that is the case, you might as well use a tech cam anyway.
So, yes, the HTS is for sure an alternative to a tech cam, albeit one that offers certain advantages (remote camera control, works with your existing system), and certain disadvantages (focal length multiplier, weight). It is certainly cheaper to buy or rent a HTS and see if it works for you that to buy/try/sell a tech cam. Personally, I think it comes down to available/disposable funds, intended use and how much you are going to use it. I do think the HTS can be a better option for architecture, but I think the tech cam wins for landscape. The big separation is the HTS is just an accessory for your Hassy system. The tech cam is an additional system that can use your Hassy back.
-
Yes however a 28 mm lens on a h5d 50 is 17mm that being said a 1.5x multiplier would give you a 25.5mm equvelient lens not bad plus as previously noted the phocus software makes all the corrections for you!
Also it's pretty much point and shoot where as tech camera requires much more effort.
Unfortunately the past and current marketing-trade-in efforts of certain Meduim format backs coupled with creative financing leaves the price of those high-end, high megapixel and functionaly newest backs at a nose bleed price only suited for buyers wanting monthly payments. If you want to pay the right price (half) and pay cash they don't want your business unless you don't mind paying twice as much!
If your buying for the short term and the latest paying thru the nose with trade-in possibilities is the way to go! You jump into a super deep hole you can never get out of but if your doing business so what. If you plan on keeping your equipment for a while and buy used lenses you can throw the back away after you do enough business with it or sell it cheap and your saving big money!
-
I can't imagine
Have you used an HTS?
-
Have you used an HTS?
Yes, and I am now looking into buying a H5D-50 because of it.
-
Yes, and I am now looking into buying a H5D-50 because of it.
Then, maybe, you should not have written: "I can't imagine a HTS can hold a candle to the image quality of a tech cam and lens." but something like I believe that the HTS image quality is not as high as the one of a technical cam, but it compensates by ease of use.
When you write "can't hold a candle", the casual reader believes that the difference is so high that nothing could possibly compensate for it.
This being said, I still would appreciate some samples of the quality.
-
Phocus corrects distortion even when the lens is shifted or tilted?
Yes.
I found that thread where members argue whether Phocus can correct distortion or not when the lens is tilted:
http://forum.luminous-landscape.com/index.php?topic=94245.20
I am not really sure who to believe any more...
-
As usual on a forum you have the choice between the opinion of folk who have never used the equipment under discussion and those that have.
Yes, you are probably right. Thank you.
-
I found that thread where members argue whether Phocus can correct distortion or not when the lens is tilted:
http://forum.luminous-landscape.com/index.php?topic=94245.20
I am not really sure who to believe any more...
You should note that the Phocus corrections do not apply if you use a third party back, this may be part of the confusion?
-
The HTS works best with
HCD24mm
HCD28mm
HC35mm
HC50mm II
HC80mm
HC100
Extension Tube 13, 26 & 52mm
Macro Converter
I have used it to stich with the HCD 28mm and to tilt and stich, as I'm looking back through my images after a shoot it's impossible for me to tell what corrections were made and really I need to make notes as I'm shooting because I forget even which images I used it on after a three day shoot!
Hasselblad give me integrated step focusing!!!
Regards
-
Question:
with my Linhof Techno I can combine tilt and swings and rise/fall and side shifts. With my Canon TS-E 24 II I can do the same as the tilt and shift mechanism operate independently and you can tilt and shift diagonally (stepless direction with clickstops).
Have I understood correctly that the HTS cannot do this, it's just tilt + rise/fall or you orient it as swing + left/right? It's not that big loss in landscape (although I use combinations sometimes), but I imagine that for macro and architecture it can be a quite noticeable limitation.
I have a Hasselblad H4D-50 camera and I've thought about the HTS as an alternative in the future as for each new sensor generation the tech cam wide angle supports seems to get worse. However I think that now when we're getting 100MP you could start cropping instead of using HTS, unless you need tilt.
-
torger,
Yes, you are correct about the tilt shift orientations. The HTS does have stepless rotation but the tilt and shift are not independent - where the shift goes, the tilt follows.
Generally, there is not much tilting going on in architectural photography. If DoF is the issue you can stop down to at least f22, no problem.
I didn't know about stepless rotation, it's a big plus as you then can combine rise/fall + left/right by shifting diagonally. I agree that tilt is not a big loss in architecture.
-
I own and have used the HTS for many years and it is still a viable tool for single shot images. That said, I no longer do still life, landscape, or architectural imaging with a single shot - software technology has passed the single shot imaging by, IMHO, and yes, there are some exceptions.
Most of my imaging involves travel, often by air which has an effect on the weight and volume I can carry. Specifically, I use a 36MP Nikon and the stitching/wide angle lens correction functionality in Photoshop. Stitching is not just for pano work but for other aspect ratio images as well where resolution and smoothness of tone are required. The quality of images done this way easily exceed 8x10 (which I have owned and shot) with all the needed perspective controls and no distortion. Here is but one example...