Luminous Landscape Forum
Equipment & Techniques => Medium Format / Film / Digital Backs – and Large Sensor Photography => Topic started by: NikolaBorissov on March 02, 2010, 03:43:23 am
-
Oh, joy! I just became the proud owner of a H4D-40 - after being unable to sleep for a week, I bit the bullet and decided that the IQ alone is worth it having to live with the shortcomings in terms of speed of the H system, besides I feel that I need to slow down the pace and change my approach to photography, so it's ok. The good news is that the camera feels somewhat faster than the H3DII-50 that I used to rent (just a tiny bit), true phocus AF seems to be working (albeit tectonically slow, of course), and the IQ is exactly what it's expected to be, impressive . Quick note to Hasselblad: the display is rubbish, why only the H4D-60 gets the new display? How much does the upgraded new LCD cost, 5 bucks? Extremely disappointed - I will have to live with the rubbish LCD, but it leaves a bad taste....
Anyhow, I love the camera and the IQ it's capable of :-)
CLICK (http://www.nikolaborissov.com/temp/test.zip) for the FFF, 57 MB (80/2.8, f2.8, 1/160 handheld, 800 asa). I just woke up and snapped the view from my window. I focused on the fountain and then recomposed (I should have used an object closer to me for the true phocus effect to be more visible, but had nothing handy). Tomorrow I have a location shoot (of a fast moving model, sigh...) on which I plan to use the camera, so I could upload more samples.
Actually, am I the first guy to get it delivered?
-
Nikola:
Congrats, enjoy the new camera
also maybe you can share a few thoughts on why you chose/settled on the H4D-40
Seeing that you shoot fashion I would also be interested to see how the TF function works out on set.
Thanks for posting the file
am
-
Tomorrow I have a location shoot (of a fast moving model, sigh...) on which I plan to use the camera, so I could upload more samples.
Thanks for sharing the experience. I would love to see more samples very soon.
-
Quick note to Hasselblad: the display is rubbish, why only the H4D-60 gets the new display? How much does the upgraded new LCD cost, 5 bucks? Extremely disappointed - I will have to live with the rubbish LCD, but it leaves a bad taste....
The thing that concerns me about this is: I think you *do* have the new LCD.
Everyone's wanting to see a side by side test of these cameras, but I'm wanting to see a side by side test done of the LCDs. Put them all on a tripod, one after the other, in a blackened studio, shooting the exact same scene, and then have another camera copy the LCD images. I'm kidding of course, but not really.
All I want to do is see my picture. Pure and simple. And without the ball and chain of a forced laptop. Some jobs are fine for tethering, but with Polaroid a thing of the past, you shouldn't be *forced* to tether, in order to see how your foamcore fill, or your fill flash, might be balancing to the ambient in the room.
For me, trying to move backwards, away from gear, away from cords, away from forced crew, and a quality LCD allows that. Right now, best LCD i've ever seen: the Canon 5D2 -- Tight and bright.
-
I am pretty sure only the H4D60 has the better screen.
Quite frankly I think all camera screens kind of suck. I don't even trust my D700 screen. These screens are simply too small to really judge what you are doing and zooming in I find too much hassle and time-consuming. There is no screen currently out there that I trust for more than the histogram (and that cannot even be trusted always, I am not sure every camera is basing its histogram on the actual raw file) and a general overview on what I have. If accuracy is truly important you work tethered...
I would love the day my preview comes in on something like an A4 or maybe I would prefer a smaller A5 Ipad via wireless.. (actually anything that is at least twice the size of the largest current screen, fits inside a large pocket and doesn't need a wire). Working stable and without connection issues that is.
BTW, keep coughing up those H4D40 shots and experiences, I am really curious to the effectiveness of TF. Especially when things are moving.
-
There is no screen currently out there that I trust for more than the histogram (and that cannot even be trusted always, I am not sure every camera is basing its histogram on the actual raw file)
slightly off topic...
DSLRs show the histogram of the sRGB/AdobeRGB JPG. DBs don't process JPGs so the histogram is based on the actual RAW file... but it's not necessarily the (linear) RAW data you're seeing in the histogram. As to Phase One backs they show the RAW histogram but with a Gamma 1.8 profile assigned (in Capture One you'll see exactly the same histogram as on the camera display when you set the input profile to "no color correction" - which is Gamma 1.8 based - and the film curve to "linear"). I assume it's similar on all DBs.
-
Hello guys!
I just came back from my shoot, I'm very tired (woke up at 6am, extremely unusual for me...), so just a couple of quick impressions:
- it's official, the LCD is the good old crappy one. I had never rented the H3DII for an outdoor shoot, only in studio/indoor location, so I had no idea how completely useless the display is outdoors. Even with the contrast maxed out, it's still rubbish in daylight. My Canons' displays are light years ahead, which kinda p****s me off in a 18k camera. I usually use it only for composition evaluation and basic focus check, but still. Huge disappointment for someone who never has the option of shooting tethered. And yes, I too would literally KILL a human being for a A5/A4 wireless device...
Which reminds me - is it so hard to implement some kind of a Wi-Fi option? I suppose that with a big integrated buffer (4-8GB?) and the current WiFi speeds of transfer, it should be pretty usable. In a better parallel universe, the best thing would be writing RAWs on the CF and sending out JPGs over WiFi.... Ah, a guy can dream.
- True Phocus seems to be working! I am downloading the images now, so I'm still not 100% certain as to how efficient it is, but on the field it seemed to do it's job. I've enabled the "true focus in af-s mode" option, so I don't have to press the dedicated True Phocus button for every shot, and it's pretty comfy. More on that when I check the files. I'm actually kinda worried right now, because I used recomposing at f4-f5.6 for all the frames, and if it doesn't work, the guys over at "Glamour" will not be very happy How very unprofessional of me.
- I don't know if it's just me, but the camera as a whole seems faster than the H3DII-50. Not by much, but it's palpable.
- Had no issues whatsoever, no strange messages, nothing. The thing worked like a charm for all the 290 captures.
- I was forced to slow down the pace because of the recharging time of the 1200 W/S battery packs (had to use them at 100% power), so the camera had no problems keeping up, at all. The bottleneck were the flashes.
- What else.... Gotta get some sleep, will post some FFFs when I wake up :-)))
-
@arashm: well, I chose it because I think Hasselblad is pretty much the only MF brand that makes sense for my kind of work right now - in terms of speed, reliability, choice of modern lenses, system features as a whole. Love the "closed system" thing, it really helps for a trouble-free workflow, which is my n2 priority - n1 being IQ. But at the end what really got me was the True Phocus thingy and the usable 800 ASA (I work mainly on location, outdoors).
Off to bed
-
I would love to see one of the location fashion shots...an outtake, or even a lighting test with an assistant would do.
-
Hello guys!
- I was forced to slow down the pace because of the recharging time of the 1200 W/S battery packs (had to use them at 100% power), so the camera had no problems keeping up, at all. The bottleneck were the flashes.
Using my 4 1,500 w/s Elinchromes I found the recharge time not a problem, but I was in a small set and using 1/16th power @ 50 iso. What were you using?
-
@arashm: well, I chose it because I think Hasselblad is pretty much the only MF brand that makes sense for my kind of work right now - in terms of speed, reliability, choice of modern lenses, system features as a whole. Love the "closed system" thing, it really helps for a trouble-free workflow, which is my n2 priority - n1 being IQ. But at the end what really got me was the True Phocus thingy and the usable 800 ASA (I work mainly on location, outdoors).
Off to bed
Hi
Thanks for your feedback, I guess we're all very interested to see what the feedback on the True focus is.
please keep sharing your thoughts with us.
and files would be a bonus.
thanks
am
-
Hi
Thanks for your feedback, I guess we're all very interested to see what the feedback on the True focus is.
My (biased as I have a very close relationship with Hasselblad) feedback:
http://www.nick-t.com/blog/?p=3 (http://www.nick-t.com/blog/?p=3)
(scroll down a wee bit)
-
Hi Nick-T
Great blog!
Peter.L
My (biased as I have a very close relationship with Hasselblad) feedback:
http://www.nick-t.com/blog/?p=3 (http://www.nick-t.com/blog/?p=3)
(scroll down a wee bit)
-
Absolutely. True un-tethered live view via that high definition zoom enabled A5 wireless screen.
Here is something, by some company in Poland. Transmits the signal from LiveView, to some other device. I can't figure it out, but anything that I see on the market, related to this topic, gets me excited, (to think of not having to drag laptop around).
http://www.pixelhk.com/en/proview.asp?P_ID=1543 (http://www.pixelhk.com/en/proview.asp?P_ID=1543)
But in this case, if the in-camera LCD is 3inch, (and damn good), and the external device is 3inch, what are you gaining?
-
Thanks for the link. In this case I suspect you'd gain little if anything.
All that time invested, and all that money, to design that thing, and all I can hear, inside my head is the designer realizing what he'd done, and a Homer Simpson voice saying, "DOH!"
-
Thanks for the link. In this case I suspect you'd gain little if anything.
I perhaps should have added that I'd want that true un-tethered live view via that high definition zoom enabled A5 wireless screen to work with MFD.
Got a feeling I won't be seeing it any time soon.
Could you not mount a mini-mac on the camera, and have wireless LAN to another mac?
-
Nick:
it's been awhile, but isn't that formula the Lorentz transformation?
-
Nick:
it's been awhile, but isn't that formula the Lorentz transformation?
John it's something to do with the speed of light which seemed appropriate, the rest of the article where I found it was substantially beyond me
Nick-T
-
My (biased as I have a very close relationship with Hasselblad) feedback:
http://www.nick-t.com/blog/?p=3 (http://www.nick-t.com/blog/?p=3)
One comment: it has often been suggested, and again in that blog, that developing a multi-point AF module for 645 format would be prohibitively expensive ... but the very first MF camera with AF, the Pentax 645N, had three point AF, and the extra two should already help in a number of off-center subject situations. Maybe Pentax should sell that AF module to other 645 makers, at a suitably profitable "Hassleblad/Phase One" price point.
-
One comment: it has often been suggested, and again in that blog, that developing a multi-point AF module for 645 format would be prohibitively expensive ... but the very first MF camera with AF, the Pentax 645N, had three point AF, and the extra two should already help in a number of off-center subject situations. Maybe Pentax should sell that AF module to other 645 makers, at a suitably profitable "Hassleblad/Phase One" price point.
I did not know that Billy I shall see what I can find out.
-
it is from albert E's theory of special relativity, allows one to to calculate length change as speeds approach the speed of light. pretty non-intuitive stuff, had me pulling hairs out back in grad school
-
One comment: it has often been suggested, and again in that blog, that developing a multi-point AF module for 645 format would be prohibitively expensive ... but the very first MF camera with AF, the Pentax 645N, had three point AF, and the extra two should already help in a number of off-center subject situations. Maybe Pentax should sell that AF module to other 645 makers, at a suitably profitable "Hassleblad/Phase One" price point.
AFAIK the 645N used an off-the-shelf 35mm module (Minolta?) and the 3 points were clustered in the centre. The Phase One AF/ DF and Mamiya 645AFDIII and 645DF have a similar feature.
Yair
-
The issue is not really expense.
The problem lies with the size of MF viewfinders and sensors.
The further you move AF points outwards the less accurate they become.
Not so much of an issue if you have the DOF to compensate, but very much an issue if you are using the HC100 wide open for example.
Have them usably far enough apart would simply result in inconsistent results.
Then you are no better off than single point AF.
True Focus at least compensates for a recomposition error.
David
-
The issue is not really expense.
The problem lies with the size of MF viewfinders and sensors.
The further you move AF points outwards the less accurate they become.
Not so much of an issue if you have the DOF to compensate, but very much an issue if you are using the HC100 wide open for example.
Have them usably far enough apart would simply result in inconsistent results.
Then you are no better off than single point AF.
True Focus at least compensates for a recomposition error.
David
-
One comment: it has often been suggested, and again in that blog, that developing a multi-point AF module for 645 format would be prohibitively expensive ... but the very first MF camera with AF, the Pentax 645N, had three point AF, and the extra two should already help in a number of off-center subject situations. Maybe Pentax should sell that AF module to other 645 makers, at a suitably profitable "Hassleblad/Phase One" price point.
Well I talked to a guy who knows about this stuff and here's his response:
The Pentax was the first MF camera with AF and it together with the Mamiya and the H camera use a very similar AF sensor with three main areas for focusing. I attach a drawing for the H camera where you can see that we do actually have three (four if you count the central cross as two) areas. You can also see that the two extra sensors make a little more sense if used on the 35-mm format which the sensor was designed for in the first place.
We think that the two vertical sensors are too close to the centre to make any difference. Both the Pentax and the Mamiya has exactly the same situation but they obviously decided to use all sensors. We also felt that if you should have more than one area, you need a very good way of indicating which area that is beeing used and also a good way to manually select area. Both these problems was very hard to solve (neither Pentax nor Mamiya have done that). As a result we felt that having just a central area was the best for the H camera. We didn't want a situation where the camera would make its own judgements of which area to use and not beeing able to indicate that. We always think the photographer should be 100% in control. These are the reasons why we don't use the extra two vertical sensors in the H camera.
[attachment=20761:Picture_5.png]
HTH
Nick-T
-
Hi again, guys!
Today I finally had some time to shoot some sample images with the H4D, this time with the HCD 35-90 (it finally arrived yesterday). Sorry for the delay, but I had a really busy week Unfortunately none of the jobs I've shot since last week is out yet, so can't show any fashion photographs until they are published! In the time being, my backyard will have to do the job
The .rar file contains 12 FFF files, with settings ranging from f4 to f11, 100 to 800 ASA, at both 35 & 90mm. Again, I am not the testing kinda guy, so I just snapped some pics in my backyard, handheld (managed to stay out for 5 mins, it's freezing cold out here!), of course without any artistic intentions. I was choosing situations which would give me an idea of what the camera is capable of in terms of DR, detail and noise in real-life use on location.
Some quick first impressions on the 35-90: the AF is WAY, and I mean WAY faster than the other Hasselblad lenses that I've used (50-110, 80, 120, 150). Much more comfy than the old zoom. Completely handheldable, it's shorter than the 70-200/2.8 IS, a little bit fatter and a little bit heavier (or maybe it feels so because of the all-metal construction, I haven't compared the specs on paper). I would have no problems in shooting handheld with it all day, but on the other hand I'm not very petite, your mileage may vary. I was just checking the samples, the IQ at both the wide and the tele ends is amazing, I guess it's worth all the bulk and weight.
A propos, did I mention that TruePhocus is brilliant???? It works flawlessly, my worries from last week were in vain. All the 290 shots I took during the first shoot with the H4D last week were tack sharp, and all of them were shot at a close distance and shallow DOF, with recomposing. I love the guy who invented it, really. Finally a usable AF on a MF system, yey. I take back everything that I've said in the past about the lousy AF in the H3DII - this solution is much better than the multi-point AF systems, you can literally focus anywhere in the frame. For my kind of work it's simply the best I could possibly want. It doesn't even need any time to get used to - I simply enabled the "true phocus in af-s" option, et voilà - no additional button pushing required.
While waiting for the files to upload, I'm randomly browsing them and just noticed the huge difference in the file size - from 58 to 78 MB (Hasselblad having specified around 50?). Well, the more-the better
I am utterly impressed with the noise level at 800 ASA. I had to double-check the noise reduction sliders to make sure they are at 0. Fantastic! I wouldn't hesitate to use it for commercial shoots.
After having spent a week and a half with the H4D, I can safely say that I've found my perfect camera, exactly what I needed and wanted. H3DII wasn't it, but TruePhocus and the usable high ISO filled the gap :-) If it only could shoot raw+jpg and have a wifi option... aaaah....
CLICK HERE (http://www.nikolaborissov.com/temp/test3.rar) for the FFFs , 700 mb:-)
-
CLICK HERE (http://www.nikolaborissov.com/temp/test3.rar) for the FFFs , 700 mb:-)
No offense, but I'm more impressed by the H4D40 at 800 iso and how Phocus handles it than by your garden photos
-
None taken! I'm also never impressed by the chords produced by musicians when they are tuning their instruments :-)
-
These are pretty nice - thanks for sharing. The files have a lot of detail at ISO 800 and that's impressive. Some small purple and green splotches in the dark areas at ISO 800 but its minor. Overall very nice! I wonder if you have tried shooting underexposed files at say ISO 200 or 400 and moving them up in phocus? I find that ISO 200 on my Ixpress adjusted up by 1 stop look better than ISO 400 and ISO 200 pushed up 2 stops to ISO 800 looks better than ISO 400 pushed up 1 stop. I don't know why or if this has more to do with the ixpress than phocus. Overall the noise control is really nice.
-
If Phocus handles the H4D-40 anything like the way it handles CFV-39 files, the software applies specific high ISO noise reduction automatically (you can't disable or control it).
This is not a bad thing, as the results are spectacular for medium format, but when pushing low ISO images, I would expect a much noisier result, as I assume Phocus' high-ISO noise reduction algorithms wouldn't be kicking in to improve the result.
I find that ISO 200 on my Ixpress adjusted up by 1 stop look better than ISO 400 and ISO 200 pushed up 2 stops to ISO 800 looks better than ISO 400 pushed up 1 stop. I don't know why or if this has more to do with the ixpress than phocus. Overall the noise control is really nice.
-
If Phocus handles the H4D-40 anything like the way it handles CFV-39 files, the software applies specific high ISO noise reduction automatically (you can't disable or control it).
This is not a bad thing, as the results are spectacular for medium format, but when pushing low ISO images, I would expect a much noisier result, as I assume Phocus' high-ISO noise reduction algorithms wouldn't be kicking in to improve the result.
Have you compared the first Phocus release to 2.x?? I recently intentionally underexposed, by several stops, several images that had deep shadows and high lights. The ability of Phocus 2.x to pull detail out of shadows with more than acceptable noise was amazing. My only comparison was ACR which produced a worthless result. From my early experience with my entry level CFV, I had considered ISO 400 to be essentially unusable, now with Phocus 2.x things might have changed.
Steve
-
If Phocus handles the H4D-40 anything like the way it handles CFV-39 files, the software applies specific high ISO noise reduction automatically (you can't disable or control it).
This is not a bad thing, as the results are spectacular for medium format, but when pushing low ISO images, I would expect a much noisier result, as I assume Phocus' high-ISO noise reduction algorithms wouldn't be kicking in to improve the result.
This seems to be true - the luminance slider defaults to zero but there is a negative range which presumably can be used to lessen the NR but they do look nice at the default settings so I think they must have been optimized. As I've only recently made the switch from flexcolor to phocus I'm not so knowledgeable. Perhaps Nick-T or David Grover can step in and explain how the NR works.
-
Hi again, guys!
, so I just snapped some pics in my backyard, handheld (managed to stay out for 5 mins, it's freezing cold out here!), of course without any artistic intentions. I was choosing situations which would give me an idea of what the camera is capable of in terms of DR, detail and noise in real-life use on location.
I would be more interested to see "what the camera is capable of in terms of DR, detail and noise in real-life use on location" on a tripod with the mirror locked up.
I was hoping to clearly see the texture of the (in focus) snow in your pictures, but I could not... are you really getting the most out of the camera hand-held?
With a view camera I would hope to be able to see the texture in all the snow in pictures like yours, as all the snow is more or less in the same plane.
Pushing the contrast up to maximum and then using fill & recovery seems to work well on the pictures, even without clarity.