Luminous Landscape Forum
Equipment & Techniques => Medium Format / Film / Digital Backs – and Large Sensor Photography => Topic started by: landscapephoto on January 11, 2016, 05:11:53 pm
-
Here: https://www.facebook.com/KarlTaylorPhotography (https://www.facebook.com/KarlTaylorPhotography)
Citation: Just seen the specs for the new 100mp Hasselblad, this thing rocks and from what I understand it's going to be less expensive than the Phase. Can't wait till March to get my hands on one!
-
Great newmor! If true, the Pentax is on its way too.
Eduardo
Here: https://www.facebook.com/KarlTaylorPhotography (https://www.facebook.com/KarlTaylorPhotography)
Citation: Just seen the specs for the new 100mp Hasselblad, this thing rocks and from what I understand it's going to be less expensive than the Phase. Can't wait till March to get my hands on one!
-
Here: https://www.facebook.com/KarlTaylorPhotography (https://www.facebook.com/KarlTaylorPhotography)
Citation: Just seen the specs for the new 100mp Hasselblad, this thing rocks and from what I understand it's going to be less expensive than the Phase. Can't wait till March to get my hands on one!
At least the Hassy AF system works.
It's not going to be hard to be less expensive than the Phase :)
Edmund
-
"Just seen the specs for the new 100mp Hasselblad..."
Where? Or just trying to generate some traffic to his website???
Cheers,
Bart
-
Here: https://www.facebook.com/KarlTaylorPhotography (https://www.facebook.com/KarlTaylorPhotography)
Citation: Just seen the specs for the new 100mp Hasselblad, this thing rocks and from what I understand it's going to be less expensive than the Phase. Can't wait till March to get my hands on one!
Good news for Hassie shooters cheaper or not.
Rocks seem's a l little over enthusiastic, since it just lets Hassie shooters "catch" up. Maybe they're planning on a multi shot version of it ... that might rock ...
-
Considering the 49,000 US$ price tag of the P1, there is a lot of room for competition. ;)
A multi-shot Hassy back cheaper than the single shot P1 would be interesting.
All in all though, Pentax may be the best option for those who don't need leaf shutter lenses/tech cameras.
The P1 system does have unique attributes and arguably offers more options, but the price tag is hard to swallow.
cheers,
Bernard
-
Put me on the list not just for the 100mp but if the camera has higher usable ISO and a few other lacking features. EX integrated focus stepping!!!
-
Hi,
What a great idea!
Best regards
Erik
EX integrated focus stepping!!!
-
At least the Hassy AF system works.
It's not going to be hard to be less expensive than the Phase :)
Edmund
Edmund, Is there an A/F issue with Pentax??
-
At least the Hassy AF system works.
It's not going to be hard to be less expensive than the Phase :)
Edmund
Don't you get tired of being a jerk? Really, all you do is bad mouth Phase 1--Although you think you are cute, it gets old after a while and no longer funny, but maybe I'm the only one that finds you irritating. Hassy may in fact have a new camera coming--so what? Their lenses aren't up to par with the Schneider LS's IMHO. I've had the P1 645DF, DF+ and now the XF and have never had a problem with focus except that on the DF I always had to double tap. The XF is a superb camera, focus is great--fast, right on point and with the SN LS lenses, images tack sharp, so chip away all you want. Incidentally my tests on the Pentax show that it's also a high caliber camera/lens combination, so you don't have to belittle another camera system just to make yourself feel better about yours. Be happy with what you have man and let others do the same. Grow up!
-
Edmund, Is there an A/F issue with Pentax??
I have never seen a complaint about the Pentax body in this forum, apart from the fact that it is boxy, unsexy, and affordable :) Although some people may have said stuff about tethering, and lack of file support in C1 - Which is to be expected as the two companies are direct competitors.
As far as I know the AF is fully modern and decent as MF AF systems go, but I seem to remember that focus points are grouped centrally, roughly in an APS-sized area, as if it had been lifted from a standard Pentax crop dSLR. Am I wrong or do the current Sony MF sensors not yet implement focus pixels like the A7II series? When the manufacturers will want to go mirrorless that may be a sensor upgrade that will fall due. I think True Focus is the one single really standout feature of the Hassy body, the last real unmatched trump card they have left now that Phase have modernized their camera.
Edmund
-
Hi Edmund,
I don't think that Hasselblad has a very wide AF area either.
Adding phase detection AF points to the sensor would make a lot of sense, and I would believe that Sony would be selling the AF-technology to MFD makers.
The wide area AF is very helpful, especially when combined with contrast detection. It is most useful with the camera on tripod.
It is very well possible that the new sensor has PD AF pixels, but it may be that current MFD bodies are not able to use it.
Best regards
Erik
As far as I know it is decent as MF AF systems go, but I seem to remember that focus points are grouped centrally, roughly in an APS-sized area. Am I wrong or do the current Sony MF sensors not yet implement focus pixels like the A7II series? When the manufacturers will want to go mirrorless that may be a sensor upgrade wish.
Edmund
-
Considering the 49,000 US$ price tag of the P1, there is a lot of room for competition. ;)
The IQ3 100 is $43,990 (https://www.digitalback.com/product/iq3-100mp/) U.S.$.
yeah, I know, still pricey but I keep seeing the wrong price quoted. Basically it replaces the IQ380 as the top back at the same price point.
Since Hasselblad doesn't have a 80mp back to compare with the IQ3 80 difficult to compare price points. Also, Hasselblad started deep discounting of the CCD backs a few months ago ... I think they knew this was coming, maybe their plan is to move out of CCD and have just a 50 and 100mp Cmos backs.
As far as Pentax, we all know their challenge to design an entire new body and redesign a bunch of glass. We'll see if they have the desire and funds, and if they can come up with glass that would hold up to the sensor.
Maybe Pentax will pull a Sony, and design a mirrorless MF camera that can match up to any lens with an adaptor while they revamp their lens line. That would rock ...
-
Hi Wayne,
Your analysis is spot on I would think.
Quite possible that Hasselblad could take a different approach to pricing. It is a question of volume, margins, production capability, customer base etc.
If you put an MFD on a technical camera it is essentially a mirrorless system. Now, integrate camera with back. The Alpa FPS is a good starting point, just as an example.
Best regards
Erik
The IQ3 100 is $43,990 (https://www.digitalback.com/product/iq3-100mp/) U.S.$.
yeah, I know, still pricey but I keep seeing the wrong price quoted. Basically it replaces the IQ380 as the top back at the same price point.
Since Hasselblad doesn't have a 80mp back to compare with the IQ3 80 difficult to compare price points. Also, Hasselblad started deep discounting of the CCD backs a few months ago ... I think they knew this was coming, maybe their plan is to move out of CCD and have just a 50 and 100mp Cmos backs.
As far as Pentax, we all know their challenge to design an entire new body and redesign a bunch of glass. We'll see if they have the desire and funds, and if they can come up with glass that would hold up to the sensor.
Maybe Pentax will pull a Sony, and design a mirrorless MF camera that can match up to any lens with an adaptor while they revamp their lens line. That would rock ...
-
Maybe Pentax will pull a Sony, and design a mirrorless MF camera that can match up to any lens with an adaptor while they revamp their lens line. That would rock ...
That would be interesting.
-h
-
Don't you get tired of being a jerk? Really, all you do is bad mouth Phase 1--Although you think you are cute, it gets old after a while and no longer funny, but maybe I'm the only one that finds you irritating. Hassy may in fact have a new camera coming--so what? Their lenses aren't up to par with the Schneider LS's IMHO. I've had the P1 645DF, DF+ and now the XF and have never had a problem with focus except that on the DF I always had to double tap. The XF is a superb camera, focus is great--fast, right on point and with the SN LS lenses, images tack sharp, so chip away all you want. Incidentally my tests on the Pentax show that it's also a high caliber camera/lens combination, so you don't have to belittle another camera system just to make yourself feel better about yours. Be happy with what you have man and let others do the same. Grow up!
(https://media.licdn.com/mpr/mpr/p/2/005/078/212/3c36c7f.jpg)
https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/20140730175026-5723090-don-t-feed-the-trolls-research-reveals-psychopathy
-
Hassy is usually not that much cheaper than Phase One. The big value has been in the CFV back.
If Phase One hasn't got exclusivity for the Sony sensor (anyone who knows?) it's almost 100% certain Hassy will make an H back with it, probably quite soon as they're already used to working with Sony sensors.
If they will make a CFV back with an attractive price I see as less certain though, but I do hope that it happens.
-
On a serious note, I hope that all 3 brands launch full sized CMOS models so that the crop sensor CMOS and all the CCD models slide down to more affordable price levels.
p.s. I am also so sick of the never ending comparison of Phase prices with Hasselblad. Phase will always have premium prices. Deal with it. They have the Leaf brand to provide almost all the same features at a price point closer to that of Hasselblad (Sometimes less, sometimes more, but in the same ballpark). This has always been the case and it will continue to be so, irrespective of how many tears are shed on Lula.
-
On a serious note, I hope that all 3 brands launch full sized CMOS models so that the crop sensor CMOS and all the CCD models slide down to more affordable price levels.
This. ^
-
It think CCD models will be discontinued before becoming cheap. But there's a pre-owned and second hand market too, and I imagine we'll see some movement there now when there's a CMOS alternative also for full-frame.
-
Karl Taylor is a very well respected high end commercial photographer who uses (and promotes) Hasselblad cameras. If he says he has seen the specs of a new 100MP Hasselblad camera, you can bet your house it's real.
-
Karl Taylor is a very well respected high end commercial photographer who uses (and promotes) Hasselblad cameras. If he says he has seen the specs of a new 100MP Hasselblad camera, you can bet your house it's real.
Yea. Just a quick glance at his site told me he isn't the type who would throw some rumor like that as bait to generate web traffic.
Anyway, I think the Phase IQ backs are nicer. Money no object of course but the Hasselblad would need to be a heck of a lot cheaper to sway a lot of people. The H system itself is really good in regards to body and lenses. The backs could use a much better lcd screen (seems an easy enough fix but has not happened yet) and the software could use some improvements (C1pro is way ahead) but overall solid system.
Now, how much cheaper? $12-15k should do it.
-
The IQ3 100 is $43,990 (https://www.digitalback.com/product/iq3-100mp/) U.S.$.
yeah, I know, still pricey but I keep seeing the wrong price quoted. Basically it replaces the IQ380 as the top back at the same price point.
Thanks for the correction, I guess I had quoted the price with the 80mm lens included.
Cheers,
Bernard
-
That Hasselblad's backs and software feels a bit old is simply because their poor economy, they haven't had the economy to put in the manpower required to get up to date. Although changing a screen is "simple", they've been forced to prioritize more important things. Plus that I think they don't really like the iPhone-like touch concept on a professional camera, which is a matter of taste.
I don't think the old-school feel of their backs and software is a huge problem though as long as the camera body is good, and it had at least up to the XF a distinct lead.
We'll see what this 100MP back will be, but the most likely is that it's almost exactly like the H5D-50c but with the new larger sensor, and pricing will be about the same as historical high end backs. For tech cam users it will sell ~0 especially as you can't buy the back alone... but if they make a CFV with CFV-like pricing it would be an interesting alternative to tech cam users.
-
Carl Taylor is a guy who never uses one light where five will do, ;D Very good studio photographer, though.
I have invested in several H series lenses and like the H-system generally; their bodies are generally better, in my opinion, than the Phase equivalents. the bigger issue for me with medium format is weight and size. The latest 42/50mp full frame 35mm digital cameras are so good, how often is a MFD setup needed? Not often was my conclusion when I almost ceased using my H5D.
Yea. Just a quick glance at his site told me he isn't the type who would throw some rumor like that as bait to generate web traffic.
Anyway, I think the Phase IQ backs are nicer. Money no object of course but the Hasselblad would need to be a heck of a lot cheaper to sway a lot of people. The H system itself is really good in regards to body and lenses. The backs could use a much better lcd screen (seems an easy enough fix but has not happened yet) and the software could use some improvements (C1pro is way ahead) but overall solid system.
Now, how much cheaper? $12-15k should do it.
-
Carl Taylor is a guy who never uses one light where five will do, ;D Very good studio photographer, though.
I have invested in several H series lenses and like the H-system generally; their bodies are generally better, in my opinion, than the Phase equivalents. the bigger issue for me with medium format is weight and size. The latest 42/50mp full frame 35mm digital cameras are so good, how often is a MFD setup needed? Not often was my conclusion when I almost ceased using my H5D.
I do most of my work with the Canon 5D3. Just boringly easy to use, carry, reliable, solid lens line. My work is quite wide ranging. I might spend weeks on a film set as a stills photographer where my 5D3 lives inside a Blimp with the 70-200 and the 1Ds3 on my shoulder with with a zoom. OTOH I might be booked for some architecture shots where I have little access time at the locations and need to work fast and provide lots of shots, I use the Canon again. In the studio though (and when jobs require MUCH less number of shots and much more time per shot) I use the IQ160 back on the H1 with the 80mm or even on the ARCA RM3Di with the HR-W lenses.
I have yet to find one camera that works for all my needs hence I own several.
For those whose work has a more limited scope making commitment to a single system might be much more feasible.
Honestly I like the Hasselblad H body and AF. It has worked well for me even on location doing portraits of a kid. Wide open. I mean yes, its slower than the AF in any DSLR pretty much but its not a surprise so I know what to expect and work accordingly.
The XF body though seems like a HUGE leap ahead of the DF+ (a remnant from the Mamiya 645 days). The XF seems to only share the lens and back mount thats it. I can't comment on the XF performance because I have never used it but just looking at the comments and photos/videos about it it seems very impressive.
-
If you put an MFD on a technical camera it is essentially a mirrorless system. Now, integrate camera with back.
“integrate with camera back” ... that’s the key. That’s what Pentax could do that would rock ... digital back/body combo with AF, AE etc, that can use other lens brands like the sony can ...
-
Hi Wayne,
Pentax or someone else. Why not Phase One, who already cooperates with Alpa? Or some startup in Shanghai.
Here is my short list of features I would like to see:
- Electronic control of shutter and a aperture, with shutter being far more important
- Electronic first shutter curtain on FP-shutter based systems
- Functional live view, with freely selectable enlarged view(s)
- Advanced intervalometer function
- Peaking and zebras, both need to be tog-able
- Electronic cropping enabling different aspect ratios
- Shift and tilt on the back, record tilt and shift data in EXIF
- Possible to attach an electronic viewfinder
- Opportunities are almost unlimited
Most of those things could be easily implemented. Some of those features are available on some cameras. Noticed that EXIF from the IQ-3 100 MP has fields for shift and tilt, some promise for the future?
Best regard
Erik
“integrate with camera back” ... that’s the key. That’s what Pentax could do that would rock ... digital back/body combo with AF, AE etc, that can use other lens brands like the sony can ...
-
Alpa are precise but minimalist: No electric shutter cocking, no powered shift or tilt or AF (focus stacking)
Someone else will reinvent the tech/view cam.
Note that eg. a Sony A7R2 could do some tilt, shift, multishot and focus stacking, with a standard or a tech lens, with the right firmware or a hack and external computer control of the sensor antishake frame. Time for a new Magic Lantern project ...
Edmund
Hi Wayne,
Pentax or someone else. Why not Phase One, who already cooperates with Alpa? Or some startup in Shanghai.
Here is my short list of features I would like to see:
- Electronic control of shutter and a aperture, with shutter being far more important
- Electronic first shutter curtain on FP-shutter based systems
- Functional live view, with freely selectable enlarged view(s)
- Advanced intervalometer function
- Peaking and zebras, both need to be tog-able
- Electronic cropping enabling different aspect ratios
- Shift and tilt on the back, record tilt and shift data in EXIF
- Possible to attach an electronic viewfinder
- Opportunities are almost unlimited
Most of those things could be easily implemented. Some of those features are available on some cameras. Noticed that EXIF from the IQ-3 100 MP has fields for shift and tilt, some promise for the future?
Best regard
Erik
-
if Sony will make something, it will be for a major market I assume. So if they bring out something like that, it won't be only pro orientated. and of course Hasselblad will bring out a new camera, so will Pentax and PhaseOne. As long as the companys won't die, there will be a new camera. At one point you got to invest in 5 years down the road you will think about reinvesting...never ending story :-)
no matter what, the current tools we have to make photos is awesome. if you think back what happened in the last 5 years. For me, everything what comes now is just Bonus. There isn't anything that is missing to make great photos, imho. with a 100MP back, I got the feeling that even 8x10 is obsolete. For me though, a 100MP back would be a too big workflow (storage, computer power, processing time, etc)...if I need something like that, I will rent it.
-
Hi Edmund,
Ever heard about Alpa FPS? https://www.alpa.ch/en/article/alpa-12-fps
Focus stacking in camera is a feature I'd like to see! You can do it on Canon using Magic Lantern or CamRanger, AFAIK.
Best regards
Erik
Alpa are precise but minimalist: No electric shutter cocking, no powered shift or tilt or AF (focus stacking)
Someone else will reinvent the tech/view cam.
Note that eg. a Sony A7R2 could do some tilt, shift, multishot and focus stacking, with a standard or a tech lens, with the right firmware or a hack and external computer control of the sensor antishake frame. Time for a new Magic Lantern project ...
Edmund
-
If Hasselblad is prototyping the 100mp Sony chip, we'll quickly see where they see their V series lenses. Yes, the H series will be built with what ever sensors they can get a hold of, but to do a CFV-100c would either validate the Phase opinion on the V mount, or give folks an option.
-
Hi,
My take is that if Hasselblad has access to the Sony sensor and if they really build an MFD around it they may offer a CVF version of it, if they can find a business case.
A full frame sensor would obviously be attractive to V-system users, the question is weather enough V-system users would buy the back.
Personally, I would be interested if I would have the money to spend, but it may be that I don't think the benefits are worth the costs. I feel the P45+ I have is good enough for my needs.
Best regards
Erik
If Hasselblad is prototyping the 100mp Sony chip, we'll quickly see where they see their V series lenses. Yes, the H series will be built with what ever sensors they can get a hold of, but to do a CFV-100c would either validate the Phase opinion on the V mount, or give folks an option.
-
Hasselblad has the same access to Sony sensors as Phase One and from what I understand they are working as closely with Sony as Phase One does.
I'm not saying they would release the same 100mp sensor as mentioned by another poster since they don't yet have an 80mp out. (But who knows) I do believe though we may be pleasantly surprised in the not to distant future!!!
That being said advancements in software that can bring more creativity with less effort or better IQ with less knowledge and/or experience is the key to a better selling product.
EX. Sensor measures all areas of light and thru software you can have a solution for a perfectly bracketed set of exposures giving you say 16 stops of DR not only that but the user is able to select the in-focus range and the program goes into action firing the shutter and creating the images.
-
Hi,
My take is that if Hasselblad has access to the Sony sensor and if they really build an MFD around it they may offer a CVF version of it, if they can find a business case.
A full frame sensor would obviously be attractive to V-system users, the question is weather enough V-system users would buy the back.
Personally, I would be interested if I would have the money to spend, but it may be that I don't think the benefits are worth the costs. I feel the P45+ I have is good enough for my needs.
Best regards
Erik
Doug mentioned in another conversation with me that Hassy asked for m645 interface as to make compatible backs for Mamiya (he also mentioned that there are two interfaces for M645 and that they consider more the older one)... This means that Hasselblad will be making (again) their backs for third party platforms as they used to do in the past with the CF backs (fingers crossed with user interchangeable plates too)... Of course V mount is a major part of Hassy's interest... It was about time!
-
I too think that the rumor under discussion is pure web trolling with no base behind it at alll... This doesn't mean that Hasselblad won't be using the FF Sony sensor, it simply means that the "rumor" is an "attention attract" simple fiction creation... Hasselblad will certainly be releasing new backs higher in the line from the 50c... This is obvious since they practically sell products only based on one sensor at the moment and also moved it in a price point that suggests that it will be their "entry level" product from now on... The timing of the pricing policy also suggests that these higher in the line backs are to be released soon... For the moment, Hasselblad is selling very well indeed due to their pricing policy and also makes more profit that ever selling a cheaper to make than the H5-40 product, at much larger quantities and at 25% higher price at the same time... I believe that the soon coming higher up in the line new back will be very well marketing calculated too... Now whether it will be Sony's sensor or other (or both) remains to be seen....
My opinion is that they should be after an exclusive to them sensor that (like Leica with the S007) would "turn its back" to the megapixel war that some suggest, would be friendly to cameras with movements, would be able to support HQ video, would have optimum size pixels for multishot so that it would ease further multishot mechanical process and that would address to professional needs...
My "dream back" is a 37x49 Cmos one with 6μm size pixels (50mp resolution) with MS ability and great LV... I don't want (mf) "FF size" as a 24mm lens can solve the WA problem for good and a FF sensor can stress significantly lens performance, I don't want more than 50 mps as it is more than enough to print billboards and I don't want smaller than 6μm pixels or larger files to store or develop... and I certainly don't want a FF ...100mp back!
-
What about a 100MP Leaf back? I've always liked Leaf files better.
-
Auto ETTR. The problem is the speculars.
Don't tell Synn that a competitor could add a feature which Phase one does not have :)
Edmund
Hasselblad has the same access to Sony sensors as Phase One and from what I understand they are working as closely with Sony as Phase One does.
I'm not saying they would release the same 100mp sensor as mentioned by another poster since they don't yet have an 80mp out. (But who knows) I do believe though we may be pleasantly surprised in the not to distant future!!!
That being said advancements in software that can bring more creativity with less effort or better IQ with less knowledge and/or experience is the key to a better selling product.
EX. Sensor measures all areas of light and thru software you can have a solution for a perfectly bracketed set of exposures giving you say 16 stops of DR not only that but the user is able to select the in-focus range and the program goes into action firing the shutter and creating the images.
-
Another rumor of the new arrival of the Hasselblad 100c is arrived from my dealer,
They said the developement of the new camera is at advanced stage.
As per the 50c CMOS despite it's resolution the chip is different from the others 50Mp from Phase and Pentax, also the resolution is different, this because hasselblad have a different aproach on color filters and a different blind pixel mask that permit a more precision in noise cancelling / long exposure.
They are waiting the new 100Mp CMOS Made with their specs to switch between prototype Phase to the market.
There is no other news, they said the new camera would be annunced and presented on Photokina'16
That's all.
-
Auto ETTR. The problem is the speculars.
Don't tell Synn that a competitor could add a feature which Phase one does not have :)
Edmund
As someone who is actually using a medium format camera, I think I am a bit more informed on which platforms offer which features than you do.
You may crawl back under your bridge now.
-
What about a 100MP Leaf back? I've always liked Leaf files better.
I am sure that's coming. Wasn't that long after the IQ 250 that the Credo 50 was released, right?
-
As per the 50c CMOS despite it's resolution the chip is different from the others 50Mp from Phase and Pentax, also the resolution is different, this because hasselblad have a different aproach on color filters and a different blind pixel mask that permit a more precision in noise cancelling / long exposure.
This sounds very interesting. It would be interesting to know what chip customizations Sony offers. Different blind masks (that is the frame around that contains dark pixels used for calibration of black level) seems like a very basic thing, IR filter glass is basic too of course, but if they're really customizing the CFA response that would be most interesting.
I've never had the opportunity to compare side by side shots with colorcheckers of the different 50MP cameras, if I had I could report something about the hardware color differences. For now I have just assumed that they are small or even equal.
Anyway as stated before, Leaf and Hasselblad 100MP backs are almost 100% certain so any rumors/leaks are not really necessary :-). Less certain but quite likely is that there will be a CFV 100MP back, and unlikely but most interesting would be if Pentax would make a body with this sensor.
-
I've never had the opportunity to compare side by side shots with colorcheckers of the different 50MP cameras, if I had I could report something about the hardware color differences. For now I have just assumed that they are small or even equal.
Anders, EIZO monitors are all automatically calibrated (there is a written agreement/colaboration between the two firms) as to accurately present the color of Hasselblad sensors (despite the technology -CMOS or CCD- of the sensor) and Hasselblad developed further as well as simplified the color calibration method of (again all) their backs as to be 100% in line with the (famous for color accuracy) EIZO monitors... http://www.hasselblad.com/products/phocus-2-9-colour-calibration/ the result is amazing... One doesn't have to use Cmos or CCD to see it, color of Hasselblad backs is really TOP quality for accuracy and neutrality and its the same with all their backs despite technology, age or sensor size... One could claim during the past years that Hasselblad (or Imacon) backs where (close) second to Sinarbacks for color accuracy... It's not the case any more... they now are at least on par if not on (close) top.
That said, if one have compared a CF-39 to a P-45+ in the past, the difference for color accuracy and neutrality (in favor to Hasselblad) was both clear and obvious, the P-45+ in comparison was "translating" color in a manner that maybe pleasing or not to ones taste, but it certainly was not neutral or accurate. Clearly, color accuracy or neutrality was never P1's leading field despite being to the likes of customers.
-
Another rumor of the new arrival of the Hasselblad 100c is arrived from my dealer,
They said the developement of the new camera is at advanced stage.
As per the 50c CMOS despite it's resolution the chip is different from the others 50Mp from Phase and Pentax, also the resolution is different, this because hasselblad have a different aproach on color filters and a different blind pixel mask that permit a more precision in noise cancelling / long exposure.
They are waiting the new 100Mp CMOS Made with their specs to switch between prototype Phase to the market.
There is no other news, they said the new camera would be annunced and presented on Photokina'16
That's all.
I was right with you until you mentioned Photokina '16 this date would certainly be 6 months to late for a meaningful release of a new product, going against all reasoning. After an ambious campaign selling all remains backs in stock to clear they way for a new inventory of a competitive product line why would any company then wait 6 months to release a new offering?
-
I also believe this rumor is true.
The problem of the new 100MP sensor to Hasselblad is: LENS.
The more modern HCD line, I believe, is not quite enough to cover the 100MP sensor's size. With the HC series, only the 50 and 120 got new designs. the 150N seems to be a coating improvement only. I have the 50II, absolutely fantastic. But Hass will need to improve their well-acclaimed 100mm. Color fringe is serious.
Like Torger said, I think Hass at least needs to improve the screen. True focus actually is still very fine. I like the ergonomics of Hass. It is solid, professional, proven-technology. Touch screen or not, I don't really care. (maybe it is more useful for tech cam users).
If there would be a 100MP CFV, like the double of the current 50C price, many people will be happy. But I doubt it would happen.
All in all, the 100MP H won't be that cheap either. Probably not as pricy as Phase. I can hardly believe it will be lower than 30k USD. (still much lower than Phase though).
-
Another rumor of the new arrival of the Hasselblad 100c is arrived from my dealer,
They said the developement of the new camera is at advanced stage.
As per the 50c CMOS despite it's resolution the chip is different from the others 50Mp from Phase and Pentax, also the resolution is different, this because hasselblad have a different aproach on color filters and a different blind pixel mask that permit a more precision in noise cancelling / long exposure.
They are waiting the new 100Mp CMOS Made with their specs to switch between prototype Phase to the market.
There is no other news, they said the new camera would be annunced and presented on Photokina'16
That's all.
Interesting statements. any sources to back it up?
-
Hi,
I would suggest that almost all HC lenses are very good. Much better than the older Zeiss lenses.
But, to make use of those lenses a very careful workflow is needed, including optimal apertures, mirror lock up and dead accurate focusing.
I have shot a few of my Hasselblad V lenses on a 4.5 micron sensor and they work just fine. Perhaps they don't deliver the crispness of the HR digitars, but they can definitively produce a very decent image on a 100 MP MF sensor.
Best regards
Erik
I also believe this rumor is true.
The problem of the new 100MP sensor to Hasselblad is: LENS.
The more modern HCD line, I believe, is not quite enough to cover the 100MP sensor's size. With the HC series, only the 50 and 120 got new designs. the 150N seems to be a coating improvement only. I have the 50II, absolutely fantastic. But Hass will need to improve their well-acclaimed 100mm. Color fringe is serious.
Like Torger said, I think Hass at least needs to improve the screen. True focus actually is still very fine. I like the ergonomics of Hass. It is solid, professional, proven-technology. Touch screen or not, I don't really care. (maybe it is more useful for tech cam users).
If there would be a 100MP CFV, like the double of the current 50C price, many people will be happy. But I doubt it would happen.
All in all, the 100MP H won't be that cheap either. Probably not as pricy as Phase. I can hardly believe it will be lower than 30k USD. (still much lower than Phase though).
-
It would be interesting to know what chip customizations Sony offers. Different blind masks (that is the frame around that contains dark pixels used for calibration of black level) seems like a very basic thing, IR filter glass is basic too of course, but if they're really customizing the CFA response that would be most interesting.
All sensor manufacturers can customise the CFA response. You will find that the primaries are different between the same chip used in different brands.
-
All sensor manufacturers can customise the CFA response. You will find that the primaries are different between the same chip used in different brands.
Data, please :)
-
All sensor manufacturers can customise the CFA response. You will find that the primaries are different between the same chip used in different brands.
Even a low volume run like these MF chips? seems customizing for each manufacturer would make it hard to produce any kind of a volume that would make it attractive for Sony to produce.
I could see sony doing it for Canon or Nikon or themselves, but not sure MF makers are moving enough product.
-
Hi,
Sensors don't have primaries, but they do have a spectral response. Monitors and colour spaces have primaries.
My guess is that sensor makers use a limited number of compounds but can choose the balance between the channels.
Best regards
Erik
All sensor manufacturers can customise the CFA response. You will find that the primaries are different between the same chip used in different brands.
-
All sensor manufacturers can customise the CFA response. You will find that the primaries are different between the same chip used in different brands.
An example of data (old, but it is the only one about MF I could find fast):
P 45+ (http://www.dxomark.com/Cameras/Phase-One/P45-Plus---Measurements)
R raw 3.19 -1.76 -0.43
G raw -0.15 1.5 -0.35
B raw 0.18 -0.98 1.8
H3DII-39 (http://www.dxomark.com/Cameras/Hasselblad/H3DII-39---Measurements)
R raw 3.19 -1.83 -0.37
G raw -0.21 1.64 -0.43
B raw 0.18 -0.98 1.8
-
Hi,
That is the compromise matrix that converts from RGB channels to internal colour space.
The two backs you mention use the both Kodak sensors and the compromise matrices are pretty similar.
Best regards
Erik
An example of data (old, but it is the only one about MF I could find fast):
P 45+ (http://www.dxomark.com/Cameras/Phase-One/P45-Plus---Measurements)
R raw 3.19 -1.76 -0.43
G raw -0.15 1.5 -0.35
B raw 0.18 -0.98 1.8
H3DII-39 (http://www.dxomark.com/Cameras/Hasselblad/H3DII-39---Measurements)
R raw 3.19 -1.83 -0.37
G raw -0.21 1.64 -0.43
B raw 0.18 -0.98 1.8
-
The two backs you mention use the both Kodak sensors and the compromise matrices are pretty similar.
The matrix is different, which means the color filters are different, although the two cameras use the same sensor.
-
The matrix is different, which means the color filters are different, although the two cameras use the same sensor.
That is not necessarily correct. For a non Luther-Ives sensor, creating of a matrix is a compromise to minimize metameric error. Optimizing for one color can adversely affect the coefficients for another color. Also the matrix for different illuminants is different. See Jim Kasson (http://blog.kasson.com/?p=12489) for a discussion.
Bill
-
That is not necessarily correct. For a non Luther-Ives sensor, creating of a matrix is a compromise to minimize metameric error. Optimizing for one color can adversely affect the coefficients for another color. Also the matrix for different illuminants is different. See Jim Kasson (http://blog.kasson.com/?p=12489) for a discussion.
ISO standard 17321 defines relatively strictly how the matrix is derived from the illuminants. I don't see how the same filters fed through the same ISO 17321 procedure would give different values for the matrix.
-
Hi Bill,
The article you refer to is a pretty good one!
To me the compromise matrices for the P45+ and Hasselblad back are pretty similar, no really large differences. It used to be my understanding that Phase One backs are individually calibrated. If you compare matrices they may convert to a different colour space. There are many unknowns.
It is my understanding that Phase One mounts their own IR-filters. IR-filters obviously affect the compromise matrices.
So, I don't think conclusions can be drawn by just looking at the compromise matrices. To many unknowns…
Best regards
Erik
That is not necessarily correct. For a non Luther-Ives sensor, creating of a matrix is a compromise to minimize metameric error. Optimizing for one color can adversely affect the coefficients for another color. Also the matrix for different illuminants is different. See Jim Kasson (http://blog.kasson.com/?p=12489) for a discussion.
Bill
-
To me the compromise matrices for the P45+ and Hasselblad back are pretty similar, no really large differences. It used to be my understanding that Phase One backs are individually calibrated. If you compare matrices they may convert to a different colour space. There are many unknowns.
There aren't any unknown in the links I have cited. Everything is defined in ISO standard 17321. The output colour space is defined and the same for the two matrices. The illuminants are defined. The procedure to measure the data and estimate the matrix is defined. I don't understand what you are talking about.
-
ISO standard 17321 defines relatively strictly how the matrix is derived from the illuminants. I don't see how the same filters fed through the same ISO 17321 procedure would give different values for the matrix.
What causes you to think that the matrices you quote were made to ISO 17321 specs. Whoever made the profiles could derive their matrices.
Bill
-
What causes you to think that the matrices you quote were made to ISO 17321 specs.
The text in front of them in the links I gave is "Color matrix as defined in ISO standard 17321".
-
What causes you to think that the matrices you quote were made to ISO 17321 specs. Whoever made the profiles could derive their matrices.
Bill
I would really like to read the spec ...
my email is edmundronald at gmail
-
Hi,
OK, so you used data from DxO-mark.
Now, let's look at DxO-mark data comparing two same generation Sony Cameras. The Sony A900 and the Sony A850. So, you would expect them to have identical sensors, but the DxO-measurements vary.
If we look at color conversion matrix in the EXIF file for each camera, they are identical. So, Sony obviously regards the sensors the same. So, I would guess that this is just sample variation.
The DxO-mark ratings are almost identical between the A-900 and the A850, so it doesn't seems that the A850 would have a more permissive CFA either.
Best regards
Erik
The text in front of them in the links I gave is "Color matrix as defined in ISO standard 17321".
-
I would really like to read the spec ...
my email is edmundronald at gmail
Each downloaded copy of the ISO standards is marked with the reference of the downloader. If you had a copy, would you infringe the ISO copyright and send your traceable copy to an anonymous gmail mailbox?
-
If we look at color conversion matrix in the EXIF file for each camera, they are identical. So, Sony obviously regards the sensors the same.
You obviously have no idea of the difference between RGB filter values and camera native color space. Exif tags 0xc621 to 0xc626 do not correspond to RGB filter values.
Further, let me cite the two matrixes again for reference:
P 45+ (http://www.dxomark.com/Cameras/Phase-One/P45-Plus---Measurements)
R raw 3.19 -1.76 -0.43
G raw -0.15 1.5 -0.35
B raw 0.18 -0.98 1.8
H3DII-39 (http://www.dxomark.com/Cameras/Hasselblad/H3DII-39---Measurements)
R raw 3.19 -1.83 -0.37
G raw -0.21 1.64 -0.43
B raw 0.18 -0.98 1.8
Some of the coefficients are more than 20% apart, particularly the green line. Dismissing these differences as "sample variations" is outrageous, particularly for a person who will normally find significance in differences which are less than a feather apart.
After a good night sleep, I reread the complete discussion. I am not interested in pursuing the discussion any further, enough has been said.