Luminous Landscape Forum
Equipment & Techniques => Medium Format / Film / Digital Backs – and Large Sensor Photography => Topic started by: Theodoros on April 07, 2016, 06:00:32 pm
-
I don't see how they can after H6D announcement... they ask for 50% more for a back only (compared to Hassy's complete camera offering) with no video....
What effect a (significant) price drop would have on their recent customers (no matter how few they are)?
How would it affect refurbished & S/H equipment pricing?
-
I don't think pricing is really something P1 care about. Let me give you an example: You are a nice young man, with an art history degree, good family connections, and some experience of photography, and a friend recommends you for a job overseeing photography of art objects at a major cultural institution. Now some cameras need to be acquired. Do you want the "best" and cheapest camera, or do you want the one which comes with the most comprehensive training courses from someone versed in cultural object reproduction, a product whose reps are always on call, and if necessary even come to your office to solve problems and help you and your staff in your new and very very complex job?
Edmund
I don't see how they can after H6D announcement... they ask for 50% more for a back only (compared to Hassy's complete camera offering) with no video....
What effect a (significant) price drop would have on their recent customers (no matter how few they are)?
How would it affect refurbished & S/H equipment pricing?
-
More than likely it will have no effect.
P1 is strong in Asia, and other non European/US countries. You might see a Credo 100, soon, for less, but it will still be more than the Hasselblad 100MP.
The video issue is not a big deal to me, as I don't see either platform ideal for a video shooter, and 4K can be had for a lot less than the Hasselblad offering. Soon the Canon 1dx MKII is shipping with 4K, sure it's not 100MP, but for video unless you want high end stills from the video 20MP is good. Plus Canon has a much more user friendly lineup for video shooters.
The main thing you hear from Video shooters, (at least the ones I know) is the LCD needs to move, not the need for 100MP for video.
Sooner than later Sony will have their own 50MP MF camera out there, and Fuji may also, so I agree the price pressure will continue for the 50MP point.
For the 1st time buyer the cost to get into a new 100MP P1 back is a lot more than Hasselblad (I totally agree and I would hate to considering that purchase), but for the current P1 users, of IQ1,2, backs, the cost is very reasonable (when you factor in the 5 year value add which is included). The photographers who made the leap to the IQ180 from the P65+ for 14K, years ago, now still have a very aggressive price point to get to the 100MP back from P1. So on that side Phase to me is very aggressive and has continued that for sometime now.
Hasselblad has a great new camera and back, and I am hoping to see a comparison soon between the 2 backs. It doesn't seem that Hasselblad has upgraded the optics, only the shutter, (I may have that wrong), but they have some very good glass on the market.
I totally applaud their decision to have 2 card slots (P1 missed that totally), and they have added a state of the art LCD, and you can capture Video with sound (P1 allows video capture, just no sound). But I am also surprised that Hasselblad did not allow for the back to be powered on a tech camera at announce. I am sure that will come sometime in the future.
The key to P1 purchase is your dealer and if you are not getting good support 100% of the time, not only for new purchases, but for your entire P1 portfolio, then something is wrong and you did pay too much.
Paul C
-
I don't think pricing is really something P1 care about. Let me give you an example: You are a nice young man, with some experience of photography, and a friend recommends you for a job as a photographer at a major cultural institution. Now some cameras need to be acquired. Do you want the "best" and cheapest camera, or do you want the one which comes with the most comprehensive training courses from someone versed in cultural object reproduction, a product whose reps are always on call, and if necessary even come to your office to solve problems and help you do your new and very very complex job?
Edmund
On a major cultural institution I want what I have... My Sinarback 54H & my CF-39MS along with my Zeiss micro APO 120mm f4... Nothing out of P1 would make the institution people jump (or even come close to) on the results I deliver them with what I have....
-
The main thing you hear from Video shooters, (at least the ones I know) is the LCD needs to move, not the need for 100MP for video.
Paul C
Canon rep told me the rental houses hate movable screens because they break, and this is why the *pro* Canon still cameras don't have them while the consumer models do.
However, anyway in this weight class you won't handhold, and in a static setup you just plug in an external mini HDMI screen/recorder. Also I'm willing to bet that Hassy have superb video tethering to any tablet running Phocus, with touch focus control, and a very good iPad app.
Edmund
-
Canon rep told me the rental houses hate movable screens because they break, and this is why the *pro* Canon still cameras don't have them while the consumer models do.
However, anyway in this weight class you won't handhold, and in a static setup you just plug in an external mini HDMI screen/recorder. Also I'm willing to bet that Hassy have superb video tethering to any tablet running Phocus, with touch focus control, and a very good iPad app.
Edmund
rental houses may love it, but the actual videograhers hate it. Typical.
Paul C
-
Canon rep told me the rental houses hate movable screens because they break, and this is why the *pro* Canon still cameras don't have them while the consumer models do.
However, anyway in this weight class you won't handhold, and in a static setup you just plug in an external mini HDMI screen/recorder. Also I'm willing to bet that Hassy have superb video tethering to any tablet running Phocus, with touch focus control, and a very good iPad app.
Edmund
If you remember... (I bet you do) I have foreseen that Hasselblad would enter Video repro at Hi-end level... It was obvious after the contract with Arri and the alignment with DJI... I've also foreseen that they will catch the competition (in the market) with their pants down...
It was last September when the (usual) trolls where posting "P1 buying Hassy"... and I was replying: "who is P1 to buy ...Hassy?" ...the opposite is more likely (but not to the interest -I guess- from Hassy's side....) ;) ;D
-
I guess the later H6D entries from Hassy, are keeping an eye more towards Leica's S 007 than looking to P1 at all... I don't think that in Hasselblad they consider P1 to be a competitor anymore... especially after P1's recent marketing mistakes to abandon all their market base but the IQ users (on which they can't justify the money they have invested)... I guess P1 is in very serious marketing trouble having fall in their.... own trap!
-
rental houses may love it, but the actual videograhers hate it. Typical.
Paul
And it assists segmentation, making everybody buy both still and video units.
The "obvious" tech solution would be a detachable user-interchangeable touch display that you just swap out and reconnect if you break. Treat it like a $1K eyecup :)
Actually a foldable display would also have some advantage in allowing heat dissipation.
Edmund
-
And it assists segmentation, making everybody buy both still and video units.
The "obvious" tech solution would be a detachable user-interchangeable touch display that you just swap out and reconnect if you break.
Edmund
That is a great idea, actually. I wish Nikon and Canon both would consider.
Paul C
-
That is a great idea, actually. I wish Nikon and Canon both would consider.
Paul C
Not least as it would give them a nice steady market in replacing broken displays if they make them sufficiently frangible :)
Edmund
-
I guess the later H6D entries from Hassy, are keeping an eye more towards Leica's S 007 than looking to P1 at all... I don't think that in Hasselblad they consider P1 to be a competitor anymore... especially after P1's recent marketing mistakes to abandon all their market base but the IQ users (on which they can't justify the money they have invested)... I guess P1 is in very serious marketing trouble having fall in their.... own trap!
Please, stop, Phase made a call, just like Hasselblad just did, (I think). Will this new 100c run on anything but the H6D? Kinda the same thing. For now it can't even run stand alone if I understand it correctly, so no tech camera use for now unless you tether, which ain't that great. And isn't it still firewire for power when tethered? USB 3.1 is needed to charge, the P1 100 has that so they did not miss everything. Life is short, man way too short.
Paul C
-
The interesting question is whether you can stick any old Phase or H back on the new H6D body.
We shouldn't forget that all the H shooters with ancient P+ backs may suddenly have got themselves a flash sync and focus system upgrade.
I mean, if your P65+ makes you happy, your workflow with C1 is locked down, the color is perfect, why not just go on using it?
Edmund
Please, stop, Phase made a call, just like Hasselblad just did, (I think). Will this new 100c run on anything but the H6D? Kinda the same thing. For now it can't even run stand alone if I understand it correctly, so no tech camera use for now unless you tether, which ain't that great. And isn't it still firewire for power when tethered? USB 3.1 is needed to charge, the P1 100 has that so they did not miss everything. Life is short, man way too short.
Paul C
-
Please, stop, Phase made a call, just like Hasselblad just did, (I think). Will this new 100c run on anything but the H6D? Kinda the same thing. For now it can't even run stand alone if I understand it correctly, so no tech camera use for now unless you tether, which ain't that great. And isn't it still firewire for power when tethered? USB 3.1 is needed to charge, the P1 100 has that so they did not miss everything. Life is short, man way too short.
Paul C
I guess you haven't noticed that the comment you replied on and the O/P as well is about ...pricing! Why you post irrelevant is still a mystery to me...
-
The interesting question is whether you can stick any old Phase or H back on the new H6D body.
We shouldn't forget that all the H shooters with ancient P+ backs may suddenly have got themselves a flash sync and focus system upgrade.
I mean, if your P65+ makes you happy, your workflow with C1 is locked down, the color is perfect, why not just go on using it?
Edmund
Yep! ...actually I made a specific thread for the matter... Sadly people are more interested on gear wars than if things work for them... http://forum.luminous-landscape.com/index.php?topic=109754.0 If Hasselblad has decided (correctly) that they have to be an "open" system, they better inform the rest of us on the matter... Clearly P1 has decided on the opposite...
-
I guess you haven't noticed that the comment you replied on and the O/P as well is about ...pricing! Why you post irrelevant is still a mystery to me...
Irrelevant, yes I agree, but I responded to your poke to P1 sorry.
Old news.
Paul C
-
Irrelevant, yes I agree, but I responded to your poke to P1 sorry.
Old news.
Paul C
No poke to P1... only on their insane pricing policy... (which will kill them (IMO) if they keep it up). It's strange with forums... One says that a firm is pricing their products insanely and thus is tearing their own eyes off... then funboys (not you) jump from nowhere claiming that one is "basing" the company... No basing I assure you... It's only that their pricing policy & marketing is addressing to fools...
Who is P1 (a new comer to photographic history) to price products that are no better to competition at insane prices after all?
EDIT: It reminds me of the DE LOREAN plan.... "much of nonsense addressing to those that can pay"... At least with tradition in photography, buying a nice product (Leica, Hassy, Rollei, Contax) did offer (traditionally) a quality advantage....
-
EDIT: It reminds me of the DE LOREAN plan.... "much of nonsense addressing to those that can pay"... At least with tradition in photography, buying a nice product (Leica, Hassy, Rollei, Contax) did offer (traditionally) a quality advantage....
Although I do see your argument, to a degree, I do not think the De Lorean is a good comparison. De Lorean's business was brought down because one of his partners was guilty of drug trafficking. Of course, De Lorean had no part of it, or even knew about it, but by the time that came to light the PR damage was already down, and that is what really killed the company.
There are many that feel if that did not happen, De Lorean would have done well.
I think his story, and to a part P1's story, is very similar to Tesla. Tesla does very well as the leader in electric cars. If you think about it, it does not make any sense since Tesla does not own any patents or intellectual property that puts it above competitors.
But they were first, and that is all the difference some times!
Read the "Art of War."
-
I disagree about Tesla in the sense that there was an Omerta' that prevented all major cars manufacturers from doing serious work on electric cars. It was an open secret in the engineering community that electric cars could be built, and battery technology would improve from year to year as soon as research money poured in. Tesla had the smarts to see that the Omerta' could be broken, that it would break due to a environmental constraints, and that a major new manufacturer could appear.
Edmund
Although I do see your argument, to a degree, I do not think the De Lorean is a good comparison. De Lorean's business was brought down because one of his partners was guilty of drug trafficking. Of course, De Lorean had no part of it, or even knew about it, but by the time that came to light the PR damage was already down, and that is what really killed the company.
There are many that feel if that did not happen, De Lorean would have done well.
I think his story, and to a part P1's story, is very similar to Tesla. Tesla does very well as the leader in electric cars. If you think about it, it does not make any sense since Tesla does not own any patents or intellectual property that puts it above competitors.
But they were first, and that is all the difference some times!
Read the "Art of War."
-
I really don't get it. The H6d without a Lens is 29k in Germany let's say 27k the Phase XF is around 37 k WITH a new BR none 80 lens. or 34k with the 80mm lens.
Honestly I don't get you all. I though we are talking about using the cameras for making money. If you really have trouble financing the difference perhaps you should reconsider the whole price as well and go with something significant cheaper. Because if not everything is going according to your plan even 27k can drew you.
I really don't see a huge difference with the 100MP backs. Either ones business can afford it or not. No reason to bitch about it.
Edit: on a site note. This will be the same when Pentax comes out with a 100Mp camera for 15k.
Christopher Hauser
ch@chauser.eu
-
Hi,
I would say that for 4K you need a sensor optimised for 4K with proper anti aliasing filtering for 4K. Film makers are more concerned about aliasing than still photographers.
Having good video is definitively an advantage with any camera, but for great video I guess you need a camera made for it.
Best regards
Erik
The video issue is not a big deal to me, as I don't see either platform ideal for a video shooter, and 4K can be had for a lot less than the Hasselblad offering. Soon the Canon 1dx MKII is shipping with 4K, sure it's not 100MP, but for video unless you want high end stills from the video 20MP is good. Plus Canon has a much more user friendly lineup for video shooters.
Paul C
-
Although I do see your argument, to a degree, I do not think the De Lorean is a good comparison. De Lorean's business was brought down because one of his partners was guilty of drug trafficking. Of course, De Lorean had no part of it, or even knew about it, but by the time that came to light the PR damage was already down, and that is what really killed the company.
Without wishing to sidetrack too far although the arrest of De Lorean was a trigger to failure, one the UK Government was quick to seize on, the real causes were that: the car was over priced, had poor, very poor, build quality and low power output after several engine options were tried, the rotary being dropped first for a Ford V6 and ultimately for a Peugeot V6 with 140 horsepower, 130 for the US market, all needing body redesign, Colin Chapman from Lotus did a lot of that work but couldn't get more power, not in his brief. Be in no doubt, after a BBC program interviewing the workforce who actually built the car, it was build quality that failed, totally. Almost all the cars built were re-built by small skilled teams after the production line, even the price couldn't recoup production costs despite the heavy Government subsidy to employ staff made in the hope of reducing unemployment and civil unrest in Northern Ireland but this had weak official monitoring of an initial master agreement that heavily favoured De Lorean at the expense of the taxpayer. The contract enabled him to hire ever more workers, unskilled and poorly trained, despite the growing commercial realisation that the project was never going to succeed.
DeLorean is a poor comparison indeed, none of the camera makers can be accused of allowing such poor quality products to reach the market.
-
I really don't get it. The H6d without a Lens is 29k in Germany let's say 27k the Phase XF is around 37 k WITH a new BR none 80 lens. or 34k with the 80mm lens.
Honestly I don't get you all. I though we are talking about using the cameras for making money. If you really have trouble financing the difference perhaps you should reconsider the whole price as well and go with something significant cheaper. Because if not everything is going according to your plan even 27k can drew you.
I really don't see a huge difference with the 100MP backs. Either ones business can afford it or not. No reason to bitch about it.
Edit: on a site note. This will be the same when Pentax comes out with a 100Mp camera for 15k.
Christopher Hauser
ch@chauser.eu
genau.
+1
-
I think there will be a long term effect but I can't be certain to say there will be an immediate effect.
For me, the Hasselblad is the better deal, not just in pricing, and this is certainly a shot fired across the bow of Phase One and some much need invigorating and re-energising of the market.
It will certainly be very interesting to see how the rest of the industry reacts and reshuffles its self, with the 135 formats too.
-
Without wishing to sidetrack too far although the arrest of De Lorean was a trigger to failure, one the UK Government was quick to seize on, the real causes were that: the car was over priced, had poor, very poor, build quality and low power output after several engine options were tried, the rotary being dropped first for a Ford V6 and ultimately for a Peugeot V6 with 140 horsepower, 130 for the US market, all needing body redesign, Colin Chapman from Lotus did a lot of that work but couldn't get more power, not in his brief. Be in no doubt, after a BBC program interviewing the workforce who actually built the car, it was build quality that failed, totally. Almost all the cars built were re-built by small skilled teams after the production line, even the price couldn't recoup production costs despite the heavy Government subsidy to employ staff made in the hope of reducing unemployment and civil unrest in Northern Ireland but this had weak official monitoring of an initial master agreement that heavily favoured De Lorean at the expense of the taxpayer. The contract enabled him to hire ever more workers, unskilled and poorly trained, despite the growing commercial realisation that the project was never going to succeed.
DeLorean is a poor comparison indeed, none of the camera makers can be accused of allowing such poor quality products to reach the market.
I mentioned the De Lorean purely because of the marketing approach behind it, the build quality or the rest of the issues was not in my mind at all... The DeLorean was meant to be an expensive product that had nothing to offer with respect to competition at the asking price... The XF doesn't do multishot, doesn't take film, doesn't work with older backs, doesn't do video and asks for more money than competition... To the contradict, Hasselblad offers all the above at a significantly lesser price... The compatibility of the H6D backs with the H5X is IMO a crucial factor for the level of (the marketing) appreciation of the H6D among pros and advanced photographers... I do suspect that the H6D backs are compatible with the H5X... It remains to be officially confirmed by Hasselblad though...
-
If I had the time and inclination, I would aggregate all the "Camera X is released, P1 is doomed with their current prices" threads in this forum over the past 10 years or so.
However, I have far more productive things to do with my time. Carry on.
-
I would never say that with this HS anouncement P1 was doomed but I'm sure somewhere in Denmark the land moved.
If I had the time and inclination, I would aggregate all the "Camera X is released, P1 is doomed with their current prices" threads in this forum over the past 10 years or so.
However, I have far more productive things to do with my time. Carry on.
-
genau.
+1
+1.
Those bitchin' aren't going to buy a Phase One camera system anyway. And most likely never will. Hell, they'll probably not buy the Hassey system either. Maybe if Bernie wins, he'll give them away... ;D :o
-
+1.
Those bitchin' aren't going to buy a Phase One camera system anyway. And most likely never will. Hell, they'll probably not buy the Hassey system either. Maybe if Bernie wins, he'll give them away... ;D :o
an h3d31 now retails at 1500. maybe we dont need Bernie, just Father Time.
-
an h3d31 now retails at 1500. maybe we dont need Bernie, just Father Time.
As long as it works for you----go for it!
-
I really don't get it. The H6d without a Lens is 29k in Germany let's say 27k the Phase XF is around 37 k WITH a new BR none 80 lens. or 34k with the 80mm lens.
I checked on the German site of calumet. Including VAT, they sell the H6D-100 for 34391,00€ (no lens) and the XF, and IQ3-100 and Schneider 80mm for 46398,10€. The Schneider 80mm sells for 2963,10 €, hence the P1 camera without lens would be 46395,00€.
Basically, Phase 1 is 12000€ more than Hasselblad for their respective top 100 Mpixels camera (10000€ without VAT).
Honestly I don't get you all. I though we are talking about using the cameras for making money. If you really have trouble financing the difference perhaps you should reconsider the whole price as well and go with something significant cheaper. Because if not everything is going according to your plan even 27k can drew you.
It still is a large price difference for a comparable camera. Hasselblad new pricing is obviously very agressive and it seems natural to wonder whether Phase One will need to adjust to what is, after all, their main competitor.
-
What was the price difference between both systems when the 60MP came out ? Pretty much the same. Did it change anything ? Not really.
If I really had to think hard on a 8-10k price difference I really would reconsider whether I shouldn't go with a cheaper solution in general or rent the equipment instead of buying it.
Christopher Hauser
ch@chauser.eu
-
It still is a large price difference for a comparable camera. Hasselblad new pricing is obviously very agressive and it seems natural to wonder whether Phase One will need to adjust to what is, after all, their main competitor.
More than the price difference, it's the spec difference to consider... Especially the 4k RAW video ability will be most welcomed by many large studios around the world... It was obvious after the contract with ARRI and the teaming up with DJI that in Hasselblad they found access to cinema quality video technology... The first video samples that have appeared around the web look really impressive... And it gets even more promising if one considers the fact that it is only their first attempt with video...
If one remembers Dr Oosten's promise in his Lula interview for "lots of new products during 2016", it seems unlikely that the H6D will be all... Doug said about two months ago that Hasselblad asked P1 for the communication interface between MFDBs and camera bodies of Mamiya/P1.... It seems that they prepare a series of stand alone MFDBs for third party cameras (other than the H or V series bodies) too... If they go back and re-introduce the CF series of backs (hopefully with user interchangeable adapter plates as they used to do) and given the pricing policy and especially the price of the CFV 50c, things will get even rougher for competition...
I really don't see how P1 can survive having underspecified products at significantly higher prices... Clearly the reasonable choice with P1 is to reduce prices significantly below the respective Hasselblad offerings (which would mean to near half pricing) and then try to catch up on specs... (which isn't the easiest thing to do - especially as far as Hi End video is concerned)...
-
What was the price difference between both systems when the 60MP came out ? Pretty much the same. Did it change anything ? Not really.
I can't predict the future, but I can ask questions.
If I really had to think hard on a 8-10k price difference I really would reconsider whether I shouldn't go with a cheaper solution in general or rent the equipment instead of buying it.
This is quite strange. You seem to dismiss the price difference as if it was insignificant. 12K on a 29K camera is more than 30%.
-
More good news on the H6D... A forum member just pointed out that in Hasselblad's site it is in the specifications that the camera will take a film back... I checked and it is so... This should also mean that the H6D backs are compatible with the H5X body and thus when the 100MS version of the H6D appears, the back will be able to be used on the H5X body... I remind to all that Hasselblad now sells the 50cMS & the 200cMS backs as stand alone backs (without one having to purchase a camera with them), so it makes sense that the MS versions of the 100MS back will also be offered as a stand alone back....
Hmmm.... 400MP of true colour, with excellent LV for dead accurate focusing on stills and all that combined with 4K RAW video in an MFDB .... Yes, I would buy into that!
-
J,
Long time since a camera changed the *quality* of my work. Cameras don't open new arteries in the brain :)
I also suspect that buying a new computer won't turn *you* into a better programmer. No disrespect intended.
I suspect H will in the near future go for short very hi-rez *real raw* video clips. Would that ability impact your workflow significantly?
Edmund
I don't think there is anything wrong with non-buyers commenting on cameras, any cameras.
It keeps it interesting and it's no different than comments on an autoblog with views on a Lambo vs. a McClaren and few will own one of those cars.
In fact it's more compelling than a site that is high 5 slap fest where everyone is like minded and has relationships with dealers or camera makers.
My take is for people that are already invested in one system in lenses will probably stay with that system, but buying in new, due to cost and availability of rentals, the Blad seems like an ok idea.
Especially if the motion capture is useable.
It all depends on what you shoot. If your doing a lot of compositing and effects 10,000 px across might be the answer for something like this http://www.welovead.com/en/works/details/9e3wfupzi
What always fascinates me about these forums is people that invest in a system, believe it's going to change their work 100% and this is not a knock on anyone, but sometimes when I view their work it's more tech than art centric, which is ok if tech is your deal.
A camera brand won't change that.
But anyone should use what they want to use because nearly all semi pro to professional digital cameras are very good today.
I shot this medium format (or I guess almost medium format) because I wanted the grit of a ccd with tungsten (at least that's what I told myself) but in reality, I had just bought a Leica and wanted to use it.
Go figure.
(http://www.russellrutherford.com/rock3.jpg)
IMO
BC
-
Long time since a camera changed the *quality* of my work. :)
Leaving aside the most important parts (content, story, location, light,...), and speaking about technical aspects:
- Lens look is by far #1, and this is where some MF systems and Olympus 4:3 do IMHO shine brighter than pretty much anybody else (leaving some Zeiss wonders aside),
- Shooting experience remains key (EVF vs OVF,...),
- AF is IMHO the last remaining pure "tech" spec that can still change something and enable photographers to achieve "new" things that may result in "better" photographs (I know nobody cares about those monster cameras any longer but the AF of the D5 is the closest thing to raw magic).
- More DR did change something for some years, but we are now at such a great level with the latest bodies from most brands that this is also pretty much a thing of the past,
- At this point of time, more pixels don't change anything, zero, nitch,
Cheers,
Bernard
-
I don't see how they can after H6D announcement... they ask for 50% more for a back only (compared to Hassy's complete camera offering) with no video....
What effect a (significant) price drop would have on their recent customers (no matter how few they are)?
How would it affect refurbished & S/H equipment pricing?
50% more is a bit of an exaggeration. Where I'm sitting, a Phase One IQ3 50mp kit is €27,990 and a 100mp kit is €38,990. That's €5,000 difference compared to Hasselblad for 50mp and €10,000 for 100mp. Keep in mind that the Phase One price includes a lens, a travel case full of goodies, and a 5 year warranty and uptime guarantee.
I think a lot of people are forgetting the main reason that Phase One can justify their price: Hasselblad isn't shipping yet. Until June, your only 100mp option is a Phase One.
I can probably spend hours listing all the other advantages but there's really no point until Hasselblad start shipping.
-
[edit: misinformation. It had been a long time I last looked at Phocus]
-
Focus processes any RAW file that is natively supported on Mac.
-
@Nick: my bad :-[ I definitely didn't look hard enough
-
i was thinking capturing gestures and microexpressions.
Hassy and Phase might manage to record bursts of v. hi rez.
Significantly is a pretty big word.
I dunno. I haven't seen footage, or graded it, or .....
For some, probably if they have a client that want's some quick footage of a still shoot.
Actually for me I don't need a 100mpx still camera with single point autofocus. I don't think I need more than 50mpx ever and at that it would be a 5dwhatever.
Motion footage is much different than a collection of stills.
There is not only bit depth but bytes or bits per second, shutter angle, alaising, moire, depending on how they downsample the sensor and motion cameras that shoot a high bit rate get real hot.
Pick up a medium format camera, then pick up an Epic with a evf, screen and vlock, and you'd think you lifted your sofa and the Epic is small in the cinema camera world.
That's why it's used for a lot of 3d.
I hope for some it works great and I think it's a good addition, but I've heard the line that Hasselblad works with Arri on lenses for Arri's larger format camera, so they have an inside track.
Maybe they do, but I doubt seriously if Arri opened their book and said this is how you do it.
But then again I'm not in the camera biz so I really don't know.
Could be wrong.
No the only additional camera I need now is something like the 1dxII and that's only if the footage is deep and moveable, because I could use a good autofocus motion lifestyle camera that works fast.
But as everything, the proof is in your own use and what your clients expect.
Right now we have a showing and I'm trying to make some large format prints. It seems if we leave a printer for an hour some head needs cleaning, or tank is overflowing so that's kind of where my head is today.
We're going to give it two more hours then probably it's off to a lab for prints.
IMO
BC
-
(I know nobody cares about those monster cameras any longer but the AF of the D5 is the closest thing to raw magic).
Cheers,
Bernard
The D500 isn't going to be a "monster" and has the D5 focus unit, the chip remains unknown but Nikon did some rather strange things with the D5 chip it is emerging, very niche market, is this the future? Sell several cameras highly specialised instead of a good enough all rounder? MFD is of course a niche already.
New Phocus download is not activated yet, I find it useful for tweaking B/W scans without going to one of the heavy lifting programs, I appreciate how open it is and the associated cost ;)
-
Significantly is a pretty big word.
I hope for some it works great and I think it's a good addition, but I've heard the line that Hasselblad works with Arri on lenses for Arri's larger format camera, so they have an inside track.
Maybe they do, but I doubt seriously if Arri opened their book and said this is how you do it.
But then again I'm not in the camera biz so I really don't know.
Hi, it is usual in industry two companies joining forces if they both have to benefit from it... Hassy didn't just agree to supply the lenses for (what is admittedly considered to be) the world's best motion system, but they signed an agreement with Arri the content of which was never published for us to know.... I also doubt that Arri "opened their book" to Hassy, but as you know, Arri's technology can't be harmed if they help a starter to catch (or even lead) up with the direct competition he has to deal with... (which is very different to Arri's). To the contradict, collaborations like that can be very beneficial for companies like Arri as they can profit further having an income from an "invisible to public door" as well as have provider for cheaper but TOP quality lenses, or even save from parts of software/hardware developments that need not be exclusive to them....
It is impressive that Hasselblad entered the video era with 4k RAW video and exclusive software dedicated to it... isn't it? I guess you know better than me that this is not at all an easy thing to do.... ;)
-
50% more is a bit of an exaggeration. Where I'm sitting, a Phase One IQ3 50mp kit is €27,990 and a 100mp kit is €38,990. That's €5,000 difference compared to Hasselblad for 50mp and €10,000 for 100mp. Keep in mind that the Phase One price includes a lens, a travel case full of goodies, and a 5 year warranty and uptime guarantee.
It is 50% difference... Nobody is stupid enough not to buy an 1.5K camera in the S/H market and then get a 45% discount on a new H6D-100....
I think a lot of people are forgetting the main reason that Phase One can justify their price: Hasselblad isn't shipping yet. Until June, your only 100mp option is a Phase One.
I can probably spend hours listing all the other advantages but there's really no point until Hasselblad start shipping.
Actually it works the other way around.... Announcements are a standard process in industry, as to cut off sales from competition and add pre-orders to a firm...
-
Hi BC,
I don't feel that choosing a certain camera brand will make you a better photographer…
On the other hand I think that there are enabling technologies that matter. For one thing, I like zooms, just as an example. Perhaps I give up quite a bit of image quality but I can choose point of view and crop when taking the image.
Another example is that I was longing for being able to use tilts for something like 28 years. The reason is that I want to shoot alpine flowers with the mountains as a backdrop. I have tried different solutions, like tilt adapter on DSLR and the Hasselblad Flexbody with my P45+. The Flexbody works well on tabletop settings but it is less usable in the field. You need to unmount the back, replace it with a focusing adapter to do your adjustments and focus and put the back into place. Not very practical in the field.
The solution I have now is a smart T&S adapter called HCam Master TSII. It can take almost any lens and do T&S. I have plenty of MF glass (Pentax 67 and Hasselblad) that can be used with it, but I wanted something more portable. So, I bought a Canon 24-105/4 as it allows for tilts. Problem with that platform is that it needs a Canon body to set the aperture. So, I decided to buy a Contax 35-135/3.3-4.5 as it has a manual aperture and lies in my intended focal range.
Hopefully, this will allow me to take some pictures I have planned since 1988. Can be it won't work out… Anyway, I don't think camera brands are enabling technology but lenses can be…
Best regards
Erik
Ps. That Contax 35-135/3.3-4.5 is pretty neat…
What always fascinates me about these forums is people that invest in a system, believe it's going to change their work 100% and this is not a knock on anyone, but sometimes when I view their work it's more tech than art centric, which is ok if tech is your deal.
A camera brand won't change that.
IMO
BC
-
I think Leaf 100mp back with Sony sensor will be out in the market sooner than expected... At a reasonable price too... It's also time for an IQ2-100 followed perhaps by an IQ1-100 a few weeks later...
-
I think Leaf 100mp back with Sony sensor will be out in the market sooner than expected... At a reasonable price too... It's also time for an IQ2-100 followed perhaps by an IQ1-100 a few weeks later...
Does the Credo focus better or have faster flash sync?
Edmund
-
Does the Credo focus better or have faster flash sync?
Edmund
No... it does't do 1hr exposures either... but they'll never learn that the rules of the game have changed by the time there's no Dalsa to deny the 80mp sensor from competition... They think they can repeat the damage (to MF in general - not only to Hassy) by replacing it with marketing... But if they created a good base of funboys, if they closed Rollei down (by refusing to support the HY-6 system - thus damaging MF further...) it doesn't matter now... It's payback time!
Guess what... MF market is expanding already after P1 is in real trouble!
-
Guess what... MF market is expanding already after P1 is in real trouble!
Do you really think that Phase One is reading this list and quaking in their boots over your predictions of doom and gloom? Just saying something time and time again, and louder and louder doesn't make it true.
Also your predictions of IQ2 & IQ1 versions of the 100mp back clearly demonstrates further that you have absolutely no idea at all what you are talking about.
-
It is 50% difference... Nobody is stupid enough not to buy an 1.5K camera in the S/H market and then get a 45% discount on a new H6D-100....
Actually it works the other way around.... Announcements are a standard process in industry, as to cut off sales from competition and add pre-orders to a firm...
I can take that same 1.5k camera and get a 45% discount on a Phase One. So it's still not 50%.
I don't think you're looking at this from a working professional's perspective. If a job comes up tomorrow that requires 100mp, no one's going to ask their client to wait until June in order to save a lousy 10k. Whether you rent or you buy, you can only use the tools available to you at the moment, and unless you're a very special Hasselblad ambassador, your only option is Phase One.
Announcing something and then making customers wait more than a month to get their hands on it might stop a few people from buying your competitors' products, but it'll definitely stop everyone from buying your own products until the new ones are out.
-
Since we haven't had any 100 megapixel options until just a few weeks ago, how can it be that a job could come up that requires 100 megapixels?
-
You got to feel the pain for the guy who has a job lined up but "needs" 200 megapixels and can't stitch.
-
You got to feel the pain for the guy who has a job lined up but "needs" 200 megapixels and can't stitch.
Exactly!
And even with stitching, there is still a benefit to using large megapixel sensors, because it will require fewer tiles to stitch and thus results in a reduced amount of postprocessing. That is in addition to the benefit of the better image quality one can achieve from any lens, by denser sampling of the optical image.
BTW as per the topic of the thread, if one cannot afford the more expensive solution (which includes the high level of support, trade-in pricing, and training one also pays for), then buy something cheaper, or use your existing equipment and stitch (if the subject allows).
Cheers,
Bart
-
I can take that same 1.5k camera and get a 45% discount on a Phase One. So it's still not 50%.
Can you? I am not aware of trade-in offers on the newer Phase One XF and IQ backs, while the Hasselblad offer has been made public.
I don't think you're looking at this from a working professional's perspective. If a job comes up tomorrow that requires 100mp, no one's going to ask their client to wait until June in order to save a lousy 10k. Whether you rent or you buy, you can only use the tools available to you at the moment, and unless you're a very special Hasselblad ambassador, your only option is Phase One.
Sure, but the question is in the future tense: will they insist on it? So, in the future, when both the XF and H6D will be available, will Phase One lower their price to adjust to the new competition? I don't know, I can't predict the future, but the question is perfectly reasonable nevertheless. It is quite simple really: two cameras, similar features, one is quite a bit cheaper. What will the more expensive manufacturer do? We don't know, but we may ask.
On a side note, I am quite surprised by the amount of "forum users" who feel like they need to defend Phase One pricing or policies. I am perfectly sure that Phase One does not need their help. They built amongst the best cameras on the market, they certainly have a marketing division able to take decisions on pricing, they don't need any help from forum users.
-
I don't think you're looking at this from a working professional's perspective. If a job comes up tomorrow that requires 100mp, no one's going to ask their client to wait until June in order to save a lousy 10k. Whether you rent or you buy, you can only use the tools available to you at the moment, and unless you're a very special Hasselblad ambassador, your only option is Phase One.
What job really requires 100 MP?
Aside from maybe working with an ill informed naive client, whom are usually not the best people to work with anyway, I can't think of any.
-
Well...
I posted in another thread that I have a couple of jobs coming up in May for which 100mp "would be useful" given the nature of the jobs. Do they "require" 100mp? In a strict sense, no: it's not like the client said "you must have a camera that shoots 100mp." But in a practical sense, it's entirely possible to have potential work (as I do) for which 100mp would be useful, even if not strictly required, and even though the 100mp options are new. *I* can get these jobs done faster and better with a 100mp option, given the subject matter. Someone else might be able to do them equally well and equally efficiently with 50mp files. Or 30mp files. Or an iPhone. And that's fair enough. But it's myopic to believe that there's no professional scenarios in which 100mp would be deemed "needed" by a photographer.
In a pinch, I could make do, of course, and might very well have to do so.
What job really requires 100 MP?
Aside from maybe working with an ill informed naive client, whom are usually not the best people to work with anyway, I can't think of any.
-
What job really requires 100 MP?
Aside from maybe working with an ill informed naive client, whom are usually not the best people to work with anyway, I can't think of any.
Depth of field will be smaller too... never giving you the 100MP sharpness on most of the image. And perfect focus is critical too.
Diminishing returns...
-
I keep hearing people say higher megapixel backs will result in less depth of field. No principle of physics with which I am familiar supports that.... Sensor size would affect DOF; megapixel count would not.
As to diffraction: that is also unaffected by megapixel count, as I understand it.
In sum: it has always been my understanding that the physics of lens aperture and capture surface size are unaffected by megapixel count.
Depth of field will be smaller too... never giving you the 100MP sharpness on most of the image. And perfect focus is critical too.
Diminishing returns...
-
I keep hearing people say higher megapixel backs will result in less depth of field. No principle of physics with which I am familiar supports that.... Sensor size would affect DOF; megapixel count would not.
As to diffraction: that is also unaffected by megapixel count, as I understand it.
In sum: it has always been my understanding that the physics of lens aperture and capture surface size are unaffected by megapixel count.
You are right, but; with more (smaller) pixels you see the depth of field that otherwise is hidden in the larger pixels...
the same with diffraction...
-
I keep hearing people say higher megapixel backs will result in less depth of field. No principle of physics with which I am familiar supports that.... Sensor size would affect DOF; megapixel count would not.
Depth of field, in part, is dependent on how small the circles of confusion are in relationship to the size of the pixels or the film grain.
A sensor with smaller pixels require smaller circles of confusion to register the same DoF as a sensor with larger pixels.
So yes, DoF will be effected as pixels get smaller.
-
Hi,
It depends of application. If you print the circle of confusion needed for a print is only dependent on print size and magnification. So if you use a 20 MP sensor or 100 MP sensor you would hav the same CoC for a given size of print viewed at a given distance.
Viewing the image at actual pixels, magnification increases proportionally to the square root of the MP. So, if you look at an 80 MP image at actual pixels it will have twice the size (in inches/centimeters) of the 20 MP image. So you need to stop down two stops for the same visual acuity at actual pixels.
Now, look at the same 80 MP image at 1:2 magnification and DoF will be the same as the 20 MP image viewed at 1:1 magnification. Simple, isn't it?
Best regards
Erik
Depth of field, in part, is dependent on how small the circles of confusion are in relationship to the size of the pixels or the film grain.
A sensor with smaller pixels require smaller circles of confusion to register the same DoF as a sensor with larger pixels.
So yes, DoF will be effect as pixels get smaller.
-
Well...
I posted in another thread that I have a couple of jobs coming up in May for which 100mp "would be useful" given the nature of the jobs. Do they "require" 100mp? In a strict sense, no: it's not like the client said "you must have a camera that shoots 100mp." But in a practical sense, it's entirely possible to have potential work (as I do) for which 100mp would be useful, even if not strictly required, and even though the 100mp options are new. *I* can get these jobs done faster and better with a 100mp option, given the subject matter. Someone else might be able to do them equally well and equally efficiently with 50mp files. Or 30mp files. Or an iPhone. And that's fair enough. But it's myopic to believe that there's no professional scenarios in which 100mp would be deemed "needed" by a photographer.
In a pinch, I could make do, of course, and might very well have to do so.
I have a issue with this statement.
I feel, that we as photographers, are always looking for excuses to use the next great thing or to purchase that better camera. In many cases, our excuses are reasonable and legitimate.
However, I think a good portion of the time we are fooling ourselves by insisting that that is what the client wants or needs, and create an elaborate self-fulling prophecy so we can explain to our other halves why we need to shell it out the dough.
Insofar as 100 MP, I just do not think you need it. I can not see any client even being thrilled that they are getting 100 MP instead of 80, or 60, or even 40, past the first few minutes. I think it is just that we as photographer find having 100 MP cool and sexier, so we convince ourselves that clients need it, and thus create an excuse to buy it.
Same thing has happened with the very high quality super wide lenses of late. I hear so many photographers talk about the Canon 17 t/s, or the Rodenstock 23mm and 28mm, and insist that their clients need those super wide images. (In reality, it is just that "we" want those lenses and made up an excuse to buy one.)
Meanwhile, I just smile and nod, thinking about the clients I have just taken on because their pervious photographer keep on giving them "images with obscure angles that should be (close to) 90 degrees but are not," or "images where the foreground looks stretched," etc.
-
Hi,
It depends of application. If you print the circle of confusion needed for a print is only dependent on print size and magnification. So if you use a 20 MP sensor or 100 MP sensor you would hav the same CoC for a given size of print viewed at a given distance.
Viewing the image at actual pixels, magnification increases proportionally to the square root of the MP. So, if you look at an 80 MP image at actual pixels it will have twice the size (in inches/centimeters) of the 20 MP image. So you need to stop down two stops for the same visual acuity at actual pixels.
Now, look at the same 80 MP image at 1:2 magnification and DoF will be the same as the 20 MP image viewed at 1:1 magnification. Simple, isn't it?
Best regards
Erik
Yes Erik, you are correct; viewing distance and (print) size will dictate the CoC you need. I wrote my response under the premise that since we were talking about 100 MP and the need for it, it would be understood that we are looking at the image at full res.
-
Insofar as 100 MP, I just do not think you need it.
Hi Joe,
It's not a question of needing 100 Mp, it's rather about allowing to produce better image quality.
A 100 MP sensor of a given size, will extract a higher MTF image out of the same lens that a lower MP sensor would. A higher Mp sensor will suffer less from aliasing artifacts. A higher Mp sensor will allow to down-sample and achieve higher (color) resolution at a given output size. A higher Mp sensor can be leveled/keystone/lens distortion corrected with less quality loss, especially when the image is subsequently down-sampled. A higher Mp sensor will allow larger output at a given/required resolution.
Do we need higher quality? Some do, some don't. Given the option, I'd take the opportunity.
I can not see any client even being thrilled that they are getting 100 MP instead of 80, or 60, or even 40, past the first few minutes.
It's not the Mpixels, it's the image quality. I've yet to meet a client who prefers lower quality for the same price.
Cheers,
Bart
-
Do you really think that Phase One is reading this list and quaking in their boots over your predictions of doom and gloom? Just saying something time and time again, and louder and louder doesn't make it true.
Also your predictions of IQ2 & IQ1 versions of the 100mp back clearly demonstrates further that you have absolutely no idea at all what you are talking about.
That the MF market is expanding (and is expected to keep doing so), is a fact... Mr. Oosten mentioned it in his interview at "e-photozine"... https://www.ephotozine.com/article/perry-oosting-on-the-hasselblad-h6d-29166 Obviously, the reasons for the market expansion is 1. The new technology and ergonomics that came with the Cmos backs (especially the quality of LV) and 2. The much better pricing policy of Hasselblad which made the new technology more accessible... Now there is really large sensor HQ Raw video too... Another reason for MF to boost.
The introduction of the Leaf Credo 100, IQ2-100 & IQ1-100 is common P1 practice as to offer the same products at better price... Remember what happened with the IQ250? After the market appreciation was lower than expected (because of the pricing of it), they removed Wi-Fi and offered the IQ-150 at several thousands less... In the mean time, Hassy asked for 1500 more for the WiFi version of the H5-50c and now they are charging only 500 more... So it's not "guessing" or "prediction"... It's the method P1 uses (good marketing too, as it (partly) "covers" their insane pricing to the funs of them) as to lower prices... Therefore, now that the H6D has been introduced both at significantly higher spec and significantly lower price, it is common sense that they'll follow the same practice as to lower prices down... That is unless they want to sit aside and look at Hassy dominating the market, while at the same time they'll try to convince some fun boys to spend more as to stay with the company (but that would be a very small fraction of the market).
Can you give me a good reason why one should buy P1 and have no access to film, no access to video, no multishot and pay significantly more at the moment? Heck, Hassy will even part exchange his DF & P back at higher prices than P1 will, bringing the cost of the investment to ...half or less and add to that the HQ video, access to multishot and to film for free!
-
Hi Joe,
It's not a question of needing 100 Mp, it's rather about allowing to produce better image quality.
A 100 MP sensor of a given size, will extract a higher MTF image out of the same lens that a lower MP sensor would. A higher Mp sensor will suffer less from aliasing artifacts. A higher Mp sensor will allow to down-sample and achieve higher (color) resolution at a given output size. A higher Mp sensor can be leveled/keystone/lens distortion corrected with less quality loss, especially when the image is subsequently down-sampled. A higher Mp sensor will allow larger output at a given/required resolution.
Do we need higher quality? Some do, some don't. Given the option, I'd take the opportunity.
It's not the Mpixels, it's the image quality. I've yet to meet a client who prefers lower quality for the same price.
Cheers,
Bart
Surely there are cases that very high resolution is needed, but in most of them, the requirement is for high optical resolution rather than presence of pixels as such... In most cases high (optical) resolution is need it is on still subjects and thus, a 12 years old Multishot back should be much preferred over an 100mp resolution single shot back... Other that that, I don't see how an 100mp single shot back can increase detail over an 80mp back... Is there more room on the Nyquist limit? Even if there is, it surely can't be all that much...
-
That the MF market is expanding (and is expected to keep doing so), is a fact... Mr. Oosten mentioned it in his interview at "e-photozine"...
Where does he say that?
Can you give me a good reason why one should buy P1 and have no access to film,
Film ? Who still needs that for quality output? Scanners are becoming rare as well, and a first generation sampling by a 100 Mp camera at 5522 PPI is hard to beat by 6000-8000 PPI drumscans of grain.
no access to video,
There are better tools for that. Or would a Master Chef prefer to use a Swiss Army knife instead of a dedicated High Carbon steel kitchen knife?
no multishot
The benefits of Multishot are becoming more marginal at 100 Mp sampling density. Maybe that's why Hasselblad didn't produce a 400Mp Multi-Scanning version (not yet anyway)?
and pay significantly more at the moment?
As always, it's not what you pay, but what you can earn with a tool that makes it an investment or not. Besides, there are other factors than purchase price alone that need to be factored in.
Cheers,
Bart
-
Hm. I think I understand where you're coming from. The predicate would be "viewing the image at actual pixels" (zoomed in to 100%), which isn't something I generally have reason to do...
Hi,
It depends of application. If you print the circle of confusion needed for a print is only dependent on print size and magnification. So if you use a 20 MP sensor or 100 MP sensor you would hav the same CoC for a given size of print viewed at a given distance.
Viewing the image at actual pixels, magnification increases proportionally to the square root of the MP. So, if you look at an 80 MP image at actual pixels it will have twice the size (in inches/centimeters) of the 20 MP image. So you need to stop down two stops for the same visual acuity at actual pixels.
Now, look at the same 80 MP image at 1:2 magnification and DoF will be the same as the 20 MP image viewed at 1:1 magnification. Simple, isn't it?
Best regards
Erik
-
Other that that, I don't see how an 100mp single shot back can increase detail over an 80mp back... Is there more room on the Nyquist limit? Even if there is, it surely can't be all that much...
Yes, there is some, especially when compared to similar technology CMOS 50Mp backs (4.6 micron pitch instead of 5.3 micron pitch, or 108.7 cy/mm versus 94.3 cy/mm at Nquist, or 15% higher) the resolution difference is significant (more than 1% becomes visible, more than 10% is significant), and overall MTF is higher, and aliasing is less. But resolution is not the only benefit, overall image quality benefits as well, and postprocessing results become more robust.
Cheers,
Bart
-
Can you give me a good reason why one should buy P1 and have no access to film, no access to video, no multishot and pay significantly more at the moment?
Because it's 2016. Most professional photographers stopped using film over 10 years ago, they use professional video cameras to shoot video, they realise that a decent singleshot system can, in most cases, give more detail than a half-assed multishot one, and can easily pay off the difference between a Hasselblad and a Phase One in a singe shoot.
-
Because it's 2016. Most professional photographers stopped using film over 10 years ago, they use professional video cameras to shoot video, they realise that a decent singleshot system can, in most cases, give more detail than a half-assed multishot one, and can easily pay off the difference between a Hasselblad and a Phase One in a singe shoot.
If you really have perfect such knowledge, you will be a desirable marketing consultant for the industry!
I pity Hasselblad for getting their market wrong, they should have thought of hiring you.
Edmund
-
Art over science and this is a very fast good read.
http://motion.kodak.com/us/en/motion/blog/blog_post?contentid=4294993681
In the midst of this digital a quote from the above link : "Film is very similar to how the human eye sees the world - realistic and elegant."
-
Hi Joe,
It's not a question of needing 100 Mp, it's rather about allowing to produce better image quality.
A 100 MP sensor of a given size, will extract a higher MTF image out of the same lens that a lower MP sensor would. A higher Mp sensor will suffer less from aliasing artifacts. A higher Mp sensor will allow to down-sample and achieve higher (color) resolution at a given output size. A higher Mp sensor can be leveled/keystone/lens distortion corrected with less quality loss, especially when the image is subsequently down-sampled. A higher Mp sensor will allow larger output at a given/required resolution.
Do we need higher quality? Some do, some don't. Given the option, I'd take the opportunity.
It's not the Mpixels, it's the image quality. I've yet to meet a client who prefers lower quality for the same price.
Cheers,
Bart
Although I contest that what you say is correct, I really think we are splitting hears here.
First, let me say that my main concern is use with wide angle tech camera lenses. It just appears that the Dalsa 60 MP sensor will be the last chip made that will work with those wides.
But beyond that, the IQ of the 260 is superb. I just can not see the reason for the IQ3 100 over the IQ 260, or 360.
Yes, there is the higher MP which will sample down to a better file, and the higher ISO, which can help with ambient light shooting. But in the end, ADs are more concerned about the feel of the image, not the per pixel noise. And if you are only using ambient light, I doubt you will be getting the jobs to afford the IQ3 100, since you look will be very similar to many others out there.
Going back to the point of ... well if the difference in price between the 360 and the 3 100 really makes a difference to you, then you really should not be considering either.
Well, $10K is still $10K, and that $10K can get you a lot further if put it into marketing then putting it into 40 more MP.
-
.......they realise that a decent singleshot system can, in most cases, give more detail than a half-assed multishot one.....
LOL.... You are real fun to talk with... Thanks, but I had all the jokes I could hear for the rest of the year....
-
Where does he say that?
Cheers,
Bart
Look at the paragraph where he speaks on the new entry level-portable Hasselblad coming soon and on the other paragraph where he speaks on the pricing policy that resulted on them selling 25% of the year capacity of production, only in December... I also remind you him saying "we are straggling to keep with demand - which of course is a good thing" in the Lula (video) review...
-
The introduction of the Leaf Credo 100, IQ2-100 & IQ1-100 is common P1 practice as to offer the same products at better price... Remember what happened with the IQ250? After the market appreciation was lower than expected (because of the pricing of it), they removed Wi-Fi and offered the IQ-150 at several thousands less...
I very much think that the IQ150 was the exception vs the rule. They didn't produce a replacement IQ180 or 280 using the newer CCD used in the IQ380. Also, I doubt that they'd want to produce IQ backs that aren't IQ3 series designed to work with the XF.
Maybe they will in which case I'd be pleasantly surprised but I'm not holding my breath.
-
I really must have missed something with my IQ180, because I would say it works very well with my Arca and my wide angle lenses. I much prefer it over my old P65
Christopher Hauser
ch@chauser.eu
-
Look at the paragraph where he speaks on the new entry level-portable Hasselblad coming soon and on the other paragraph where he speaks on the pricing policy that resulted on them selling 25% of the year capacity of production, only in December... I also remind you him saying "we are straggling to keep with demand - which of course is a good thing" in the Lula (video) review...
None of those is the same as an expanding MF market, and certainly not as a fact.
Cheers,
Bart
-
I very much think that the IQ150 was the exception vs the rule. They didn't produce a replacement IQ180 or 280 using the newer CCD used in the IQ380. Also, I doubt that they'd want to produce IQ backs that aren't IQ3 series designed to work with the XF.
Maybe they will in which case I'd be pleasantly surprised but I'm not holding my breath.
That's what I'm saying... To lower the price of the IQ3-100, they'll have to use the same trick as with the IQ-250 (i.e. remove a minor spec and price it significantly lower), there is no competition for the 80mp CCD sensor, is there? The competition is with the H6D on the Cmos 100mp sensor which is much better specified and at significantly lower price... Now what they'll come up with if Hasselblad decides to sell the 100mp sensor as a stand alone back (possibly for third party platforms too), or as an (even cheaper) H5D-100, this remains to be seen...
-
LOL.... You are real fun to talk with... Thanks, but I had all the jokes I could hear for the rest of the year....
Have you ever tried using a multishot back outside of a studio? Have you ever tried using one without a tripod? Even in the studio and with a tripod, have you tried using one to shoot food?
-
Have you ever tried using a multishot back outside of a studio?
Yes shot interiors (bed linen) on location for years. You do have to watch for movement.
Have you ever tried using one without a tripod?
I assume you are being humorous here?
Even in the studio and with a tripod, have you tried using one to shoot food?
Yes I've shot food with multi-shot, again you have to watch for movement. Food isn't something that benefits from multi-shot as much as other subjects because of it's soft organic nature.
Where multi-shot really shines is with fine detailed subjects like whiskey bottles.
-
If you really have perfect such knowledge, you will be a desirable marketing consultant for the industry!
I pity Hasselblad for getting their market wrong, they should have thought of hiring you.
Edmund
I don't think what I said is that ground breaking. If my goal was to shoot film and money was an issue, I wouldn't be buying an H6D. You can buy a significant amount of film cameras for €20,000 in 2016. Same can be said for video.
-
Yes shot interiors (bed linen) on location for years. You do have to watch for movement.
I assume you are being humorous here?
Yes I've shot food with multi-shot, again you have to watch for movement. Food isn't something that benefits from multi-shot as much as other subjects because of it's soft organic nature.
Where multi-shot really shines is with fine detailed subjects like whiskey bottles.
My point exactly. In most situations (in and out of product photography), you would benefit more using a 100mp single shot over a 200mp multishot.
I wasn't being humorous about the tripod. Multishot is for a very specific kind of photographer. Theodorus makes it seem like you'd be an idiot to pass on using one.
-
Multishot is for a very specific kind of photographer. Theodorus makes it seem like you'd be an idiot to pass on using one.
Agreed on both counts :)
-
J,
You know what, I agree with you. Digital is simply not as flexible a medium as film, especially for movie work. Digital could be as good, it really could, but it is not because the digital process has been underspecced. This has been done on purpose, so new equipment that is "better" can be marketed and sold. Planned obsolescence. The film process was designed as something that would justify a really heavy infrastructure investment -think Kodachrome manufacturing and development plant- , and would never never need a mod. It was designed to be good, not just good enough for a few years.
If I may be allowed an explanatory aside, the reason why the japanese firms and all photo firms loved 35mm still camera format so much was that the equipment could always be "improved". It was never never just good. I learnt that lesson when as a teenager I went from turn of the century plate cameras to a Leica -and then to an SLR - the old plate camera was always better. My 40-year-old design 500 series Hassy was always better than any of those top grade 35mm cameras too - because it was really good, designed from the beginning to never need an upgrade.
In still photography we are seeing some of this planned obsolescence thinking yet again. So called "full frame" cameras are now so good that ta any reasonable viewing size their images at 200 ISO are indistinguishable from each other and from generation to generation. So the manufacturers are pushing "Micro 4/3" etc where differences will still be apparent for at least 10 years.
Edmund
For motion footage there is a lot of requirements. It's more than downsampling, pixel count and frame rates.
Will the raw footage from this camera work in established workflows or have to be transcoded in proprietary software?
Is the footage read out global or rolling, because the rolling shutter from a ff 35mm sensor like the A7sII will skew if you breath hard on it?
Most importantly is what is the camera designed for? Quick takes from a still session, or a real motion production? (and that comes in about 400 flavors depending on brief and medium).
In the motion world I've personally never seen a small camera shoot as filmic and reliably as a small camera. Not sensor size, but just the size of the camera, because as i've mentioned rough and tumble cinema cameras make a lot of heat and if you pan slowly and the world turns into a funhouse mirror, then that's not going forward.
I'm positive if Arri or RED could make a camera the size of a hasselblad that shot as well as their physically large cameras they would, because there is a market for drones, hand held stabilizers and fast production. Both companies have smaller cameras for these uses, but they shoot smaller sensors but usually only for drones and special applications.
Last night we went to "Midnight Special", a movie from two young film makers, Nichols and Stone. It's seamless, except for some of the digital effects in the end, but overall it's just beautiful in look and story.
Intelligent and modern. This team with 4 features in their life, has always shot film, this movie on Kodak vision and Panavision cameras with as many practical effects as possible.
In other words If you walked on their set it would essentially be the same equipment from 15 years ago, not the latest.
I viewed it in a new sony 4k theatre and I don't know if they scanned 2k, 4k or a billion k but it wouldn't make any difference.
Art over science and this is a very fast good read.
http://motion.kodak.com/us/en/motion/blog/blog_post?contentid=4294993681
Theodoros,
The DCI (digital cinema initiative) is going for a standard. 4k cinema 4096 x 2160 1.91 to 1 aspect ration , uhd as you mentioned is 3840 x 2160 in a 16x9 aspect for TV viewing, though with TV the lines are blurred depending on what service you have and decoding boxes.
But overall 4k is still the wild west in adoption and is much a catch phrase as a real standard. Not that a lot of people don't produce 4k, though every maker get's there in a different manner and every client I shoot for has a different standard in delivery.
Sony is making the biggest push in viewing 4k as they really need to sell TVs.
Nick,
If your going to shoot some motion clips of your still life projects, (and excuse me if you've already done this), be sure to block out the video first as even a fat 16x9 ratio is much different than any still crop, 2 to 1 much more different.
Also be prepared to spend 8 grand on the computer because decent grading and even simple editing of 4k is a daunting process.
I know your a hasselblad guy, but honestly if motion creation is on your list, you'll save a lot of money just buying a Black Magic Ursa Mini 4.6 for 5 grand (U.S.) that shoots to prores. You'll also save a lot of time and angst.
-
Hi,
From what I have seen from Doug's library shots I would think that the microlenses on the IQ-250 increase thesampling area of the pixels, that also helps reducing aliasing. More area sampling and less point sampling.
Best regards
Erik
Yes, there is some, especially when compared to similar technology CMOS 50Mp backs (4.6 micron pitch instead of 5.3 micron pitch, or 108.7 cy/mm versus 94.3 cy/mm at Nquist, or 15% higher) the resolution difference is significant (more than 1% becomes visible, more than 10% is significant), and overall MTF is higher, and aliasing is less. But resolution is not the only benefit, overall image quality benefits as well, and postprocessing results become more robust.
Cheers,
Bart
-
No... it does't do 1hr exposures either...
Maybe you should learn a bit about the products you're trying to sling mud against before you mouth off in the forums.
The Credo 50 does long exposures just as much as every other CMOS back does. The CCD versions don't, but neither do any Hasselblads of similar spec and vintage. In fact, none of the CCD backs do, except the Phase Ones you despise.
it doesn't matter now... It's payback time!
I remember those old P1 videos where a P series back was run over by a car and still survived. Did they accidentally run over your puppy while shooting it? Sure sounds like it. Payback for what? making the better product for years when the competition decided to hibernate? Stop taaking these things so personally.
You keep going on and on about the virtues of this Hasselblad and insist that not a single person will touch Phase Ones after this. let's please do a reality check.
- Multishot : Doesn't exist for this back and is not an arguing point until it doe.s I know you like to talk about vaporware as real product (How's that Leica-Sinar tech camera with autofocus for SL lenses coming along? Still a figment of imagination? OK), but even if a 100MP multishot CMOS Hasselblad comes to be, multishot products will still remain a TINY segment within an already tiny market, like they have always been. No multishot back has ever outsold single shot backs and they never will. Even with several multishot products in their portfolio, Blad or Sinar has never outsold P1/ Leaf and they're not gonna start now. The multishot Hasselblads haven't even outsold the Single shot Hasselblads for that matter.
- Film compatibility : Are you really serious? For the price of a Hasselblad lens cap, one can have an entire Zenza Bronica kit with brilliant lenses. I have exactly that and I rarely use it. Film is expensive, all my favorite emulsions are either out of production or ridiculously hard to find and labs are closing left and right. Film shooters are again, a very niche market and no professional making a 5 figure purchase decision for his digital workflow is going to do so with film compatibility in mind. It's a nice to have feature, not a deal breaker.
- Price : This is a big one and yes, the Blad is cheaper. Like they have always been and that has changed nothing. For an enthusiast making a one time purchase decision, it sure is a big chunk of savings, but not for someone who has already invested a significant amount in the Phamiya platform. the only people jumping back and forth between systems to be on the next technology leap are the ones making a ton of noise online. Pros, the kind that can sink 40k into new gear, make up the difference in a couple of shoots. The 5year comprehensive warranty is worth more to them than a 10k price difference. but of course, as a high end pro, you already know this.
- 4K video : This has made me laugh a lot. Seriously. One can have REALLY GOOD 4K video on a €400 Panasonic. Which incidentally, is less than a Phase One lenscap. What do you think is more likely? A phase owner adding one of them cheap and good 4K cameras to his kit or selling tens of thousands of euros/ dollars worth of gear to shift to Hasselblad just because it offers 4K? (Which is still untested, no one knows how good the output is i.e. if it does line skipping, How bad the rolling shutter is, how fine one can focus pull on the blad lenses etc.)
I really like this new Blad. I really do. It's a MAJOR leap for them, offers a TON of new features to those who have been loyal to the Blad platform and finally brings some healthy competition to the top end of the market. However, I really could do without these asinine posts every time there is a new product launch.
Please use what you like and extend the same courtesy to those who have different tastes and requirements.
-
Couldn't have said it better. +1 @synn
Christopher Hauser
ch@chauser.eu
-
From what I have seen from Doug's library shots I would think that the microlenses on the IQ-250 increase thesampling area of the pixels, that also helps reducing aliasing. More area sampling and less point sampling.
Hi Erik,
That's correct. A higher apparent fill-factor, due to gap-less microlenses, creates a better cut-off (zero MTF response) at Nyquist. Aliasing should be reduced, as a result of the area sampling. The microlenses may cause issues for ultra wide-angle or shifted lenses though. But at 100Mp, lens shifts can be partially replaced by keystone corrections in post-processing.
I've also noticed that the H6D-50c is spec'ed as (almost) 14 bit DR, and the H6D-100c as 15 bit DR (similar to the Phase One in 16-bit mode). So the H6D-50c apparently only has a 14 bit ADC pipeline.
The extra stop of DR of the H6D-100c and the IQ3-100Mp allows slightly better deconvolution restoration from diffraction and lens blur, because there is less noise to complicate that restoration process.
Cheers,
Bart
-
Couldn't have said it better. +1 @synn
Christopher Hauser
ch@chauser.eu
There are two real innovations in this 100 Mp Hassy, and one key feature.
-1/2000 sync
- Raw video
- True Focus
Any pro who *needs* the sync or the focus WILL choose Hassy because focus and sync are hard to work around *if* you need them. Others won't care.
The jury is out on the video, it may be key for recording bursts from the main cam without a second setup, or it may be useless. Synn conveniently "forgets" that pros often use a moving model and multiple images per second motor-drive in 35mm fashion shoots, but maybe he doesn't have much experience here as he always uses medium format and a stiill-posed model.
Edmund
-
There are two real innovations in this 100 Mp Hassy, and one key feature.
-1/2000 sync
- Raw video
- True Focus
Any pro who *needs* the sync or the focus WILL choose Hassy because focus and sync are hard to work around *if* you need them. Others won't care.
The jury is out on the video, it may be key for recording bursts from the main cam without a second setup, or it may be useless. Synn conveniently "forgets" that pros often use a moving model and multiple images per second motor-drive in 35mm fashion shoots, but maybe he doesn't have much experience here as he always uses medium format and a stiill-posed model.
Edmund
lol.
Edmund "Conveniently" forgets that top fashion and glamour pros have survived and continue to survive with the 1 point Phase One focus and the "Mere" 1/1600 sync (Which is pointless in a studio and I fail to see any situation where 1/1600 sync is not good enough, but 1/2000 is. I also see the irony in Phase haters hiding behind the rocks when Phase's 1/1600 sync was twice as fast as the competition, but now that Hassy has 1/2000, they are out in full force to knock it a peg down). if it's good enough for Drew gardner, Joey L and Frank Doorhof, it's good enough for you and me. Do I wish Phamiya had Tru Focus? Yes. Do I NEED it to nail a shot? Not really. I can nail pretty much any shot that I want with my 1 point DF+ as I can with my 51 point D800.
Speaking of experience, I am doing a commisioned shoot this friday with the prehistoric Phamiya. When was the last time you touched something medium format, Edmund?
-
Actually you are right people who are happy will be happy; Phase won't lose the book-shooters and because of Hassy; and if Phase really syncs at 1/1600 then therebis little difference here. Also in the studio at F11 focus becomes irrelevant.
Edmund
lol.
Edmund "Conveniently" forgets that top fashion and glamour pros have survived and continue to survive with the 1 point Phase One focus and the "Mere" 1/1600 sync (Which is pointless in a studio and I fail to see any situation where 1/1600 sync is not good enough, but 1/2000 is). if it's good enough for Drew gardner, Joey L and Frank Doorhof, it's good enough for you and me. Do I wish Phamiya had Tru Focus? Yes. Do I NEED it to nail a shot? Not really. I can nail pretty much any shot that I want with my 1 point DF+ as I can with my 51 point D800.
Speaking of experience, I am doing a commisioned shoot this friday with the prehistoric Phamiya. When was the last time you touched something medium format, Edmund?
-
It's kind of weird that people like Richard Avedon were able to shoot without 1/2000s, video or even TrueFocus...
-
1/2000s or 1/1600s, the difference is irrelevant in practice, only means one thing: if you want to kill Sunlight, you will need half the strobe power. Considering the price of powerful studio lights running on batteries, that translates to real money. But indeed that won't make the pictures any better.
-
1/2000 vs 1/1600 means half the strobe power to kill sunlight?
Wouldn't that take 1/3200?
Besides that would require a pretty short flash duration, that's not really the specialty of many powerful studio lights, most of them won't have short flash durations than 1/500 at 1200Ws (t0.1)...
In fact with 1/1600 or 1/2000 you are forced to use very low power settings, higher power settings just won't do. If you want to freeze motion you're better served with using a short flash duration in a controlled environment anyway, if you can't capture it with 1/1600 you won't be able to get it with 1/2000 either.
In my opinion Hasselblad and PhaseOne are both equally expensive, especially when you consider the face that P1 is already available and has a head start with the new sensor and that PhaseOne has had modern leafshutter lenses with 1/1600s for a long time - so if you already have them you don't need to upgrade them. But if you have to (or rather if you _want_ to) upgrade your Hasselblad lenses it'll cost you.
If you're entering MF and you're looking for the 'cheaper' solution the Hasselblad might seem tempting though - but I think most of us here already have a certain system we're working on and which we're familiar with.
-
1/2000 vs 1/1600 means half the strobe power to kill sunlight?
Wouldn't that take 1/3200?
I meant: 1/2000 or 1/1600 will need half the power of the older solution (1/800). If you read carefully, I did not write "vs", but "or".
Besides that would require a pretty short flash duration, that's not really the specialty of many powerful studio lights, most of them won't have short flash durations than 1/500 at 1200Ws (t0.1)...
Indeed and that is another problem: only modern lights will have a flash duration short enough.
-
It's good to see so (few ;)) many ;) fun boys insisting that others (that can buy the stuff) should ...pay more and also have underspecified products to their needs... It's also good to see people being unable to get a decent value out of their older equipment, or unable to upgrade it because it isn't supported anymore and yet insist that those how can pay should fall into the same trap...
No -I agree- MFDBs shouldn't have 4K RAW video... Although there's convergence of technologies and although in a year or two, MFDBs will be used on (specially designed) view cameras for broadcast quality video...
No -I agree- MFDBs shouldn't have true colour quality with no interpolation... Interpolated colour full of artefacts is good enough... (tell that to a seriously run museum... go figure...)
I guess (sooner than later) there will be a reaction from P1... They are loosing ground day by the day and the more ground they loose, the more difficult it will be to catch up... They urgently need a redesign of their pricing policies, they need a collaboration with a (serious) motion video company that has the know how they (completely) luck on the technology... They need to find a way as to support back their P/P+ series customers and they do need to make true colour backs... The earlier they do, the better for them and for the MF market... If the MF market stays without competition and without a wide base of customers (like it happened in the recent past with the foolish marketing decisions of Hassy which left P1 alone into selling backs to third party platforms), it's bad for MF... Now that CMOS brought a (late) revolution to the MF market, it's a good chance for a restart...
Hassy, as the CEO of it confirmed in his interview, prepares a new - portable - entry level MF camera (one can conclude out of the interview that they plan to compete with Leica S -he mentions exactly the Leica S by name- but at a better price)... They also promised lots of new products (backs, cameras, lenses) during 2016... It is also known (Doug can confirm this) that they got access to the P1 communication interface between cameras and backs (means that they'll make backs for P1 & other third party cameras)... They hired 6x times (!!!!) as much personel in their R&D department than they used to have... One can either welcome the progress or think of it from the POV of the football fun, that watches the match with his team being 6-0 down by the first half and yet insist that nothing should be changed (because his "funboysm" prevents him to see that it is a worst team)...
-
I meant: 1/2000 or 1/1600 will need half the power of the older solution (1/800). If you read carefully, I did not write "vs", but "or".
Indeed and that is another problem: only modern lights will have a flash duration short enough.
Ah well then sorry, I misread your comment. Thought you meant ...the difference (...) only means one thing:
. My bad!
Anyway - I don't see any modern powerful studio lights with a short enough flash duration at a higher power setting. The Profoto Pro8a 2400 will have 1/1600 t0.5 = ±1/500 t0.1, the Broncolor Scoro are pretty much the same. Even with the smaller generators you're still well below 1/800-1000....so even the 'old' Hasselblad lenses were able to deliver that.
@ Theodoros: I think nobody wants to keep bad technology alive but everyone has to make decisions for his/her business based on real actual needs and usefulness. Better image quality is a good argument for a new camera - but stuff like videomode? Hmm not sure about that one. Would it be 'nice' to have it? Sure. Do I need it? No. Do most or any medium format shooters need it? Doubtful. New features are always nice unless they a. get in your way or b. are not worth the price of an upgrade or system change.
PhaseOne currently has a 100mp back for sale. Hasselblad does not. Not yet. And the price difference isn't humongous, it's like buying real estate on earth for a lot of money whilst being promised real estate on the moon for less but almost the same amount of money. If you need a camera now it doesn't help you that the HB will be a bit cheaper. If you already have a PhaseOne outfit it won't help that the HB is a bit cheaper, the cost for switching systems will be too high. It only makes a bit of a difference if you're new to the MF market but that does not mean you'll automatically but the latest and most expensive of the digital lineup from one company or the other. And if you're already a Hasselblad user then it wouldn't make a difference either, you wouldn't have bought the Phase back anyway, even if it was the same price or a few hundred bucks cheaper.
And if money doesn't matter to you (perhaps you have a few oil wells in your garden or you're a politician) then you will have already bought the 100MP PhaseOne and now you can look forward to the 100MP Hasselblad until the 120MP IQ4 is released with video and many other additional features.
-
@Theo
Everyone can bus what they want and I still believe some here won't even bye the Hasselblad options as it still to expensive.
And yes You are talking about production in the future but honestly nobody will need a S type camera from Hasselblad if there is a 70+ camera from Sony and Nikon which might even shoot 8k or at least REAL 4K and not the stupid Tv stuff.
When I listen to you it sounds like Phase one is doomed. And it sounds exactly the same as when back in the days Pentax released their first CMOS. Guess what ? Still doesn't look horrible for Phase.
Get back to me once there actually is a solution I could use on my Arca or Alpa which does not require stupid cables and extra stuff from Hasselblad. Get back to me when Hasselbald provides us with great features like focus stacking or a seismograph.
These all might be unimportant for fashion shooters, but I wouldn't trade them for a Hasselblad back if it would cost only 20k.
Christopher Hauser
ch@chauser.eu
-
Please Hasselblad.... When you release the stand alone backs for third party platforms, make them with user interchangeable adapter plates like it was with the CF backs... I'll be buying the first MS version CMOS back that comes out!
-
I really do not understand why peopler using the Hasselblad announcement to bash Phase.
Here are some thoughts in no particular order.
Phase make great cameras and charge plenty for them. If they can continue to do that then more power to them.
Multi-shot is great technology and back when I started the difference between multi and single was night and day. These days the difference is subtle and depends a great deal on subject matter. Multi-shot is never going to be mainstream and I cannot see why Phase would want to divert resources to it, even though in the right circumstances it produces stellar results.
No, the H6D will not be a fully featured video camera, but for some of us the ability shoot video with the same camera and glass would be a nice proposition and certainly a benefit commercially, not some prosumer add on.
-
I really do not understand why peopler using the Hasselblad announcement to bash Phase.
Here some thoughts in no particular order.
Phase make great cameras and charge plenty for them. If they can continue to do that then more power to them.
Multi-shot is great technology and back when I started the difference between multi and single was night and day, these days the difference is subtle and depends a great deal on subject matter. Multi-shot is never going to be mainstream and I cannot see why Phase would want to divert resources to it, even though in the right circumstances it produces stellar results.
No the H6D will not be a fully featured video camera, but for some of us the ability shoot video with the same camera and glass would be a nice proposition and certainly a benefit commercially, not some prosumer add on.
None is bashing Phase... Read the O/P title? To criticise the handicaps of a maker with respect to competition is not bashing... It's rather scepticism on what may harm MF generally (as it has happened in the past)... What is rather surprising is people trying to bash Hasselblad for being better and cheaper at the same time... For a healthy market (any market - MF in this discussion) you need a wide base... The wider the base, the healthier the market... What is needed for a wide base is three things...
1. Price that makes equipment as accessible (to those that want it) as possible.
2. A very wide S/H product market with offerings many times multiple to new (that's why it's called "wide base")
3. Compatibility with as many applications as possible of that same market...
Let me give you an example... Lets use car industry for that example...
First, prices drop by each newer line and yet the product improves... Second, there is a huge base width... Third, BMW doesn't say "what if Mercendes makes 4WD vehicles - our customers don't need them"... they instead say, "if they make them, we can make them better"... Understand? Funboys have the logic of a funboy... they have a very unique logic with marketing too... It's not a very helpful logic to the MF market though, It's rather a dangerous one!
-
The word is "fanboy."
-
Speaking of DeLorean and Tesla: I have seen P1 always as something like a mixture between Avon and Maybach ... its a pimped up Mercedes S, but with a nice "concierge service" (as someone called it) included. And, like Avon, there are "photographic" friends which meet in PODAS workshops and recommend the latest products to each other. This is an old, very effective, marketing technique ...
It goes without saying that this concierge service and extra marketing effort has its (high) cost and I would only pay it, if I would also like to use it (which I personally do certainly not).
Until now, especially with the XF platform, P1 had an obvious technological lead over Hasselblad, the only real competitor from a system point of view: 100mp "full frame" Sony sensor, state of the art electronic platform, nice lenses from Germany, modern touch UI, state of the art software, fast central shutters speeds). As I see it, nearly ALL of this advantages have gone away from one day to another: same sensors, new software generation Phocus 3.0, much better central shutter speeds of 1/2000, state of the art electronic platform, nice touch UI. Worse, Hasselblad has even some advantages (tilt/shift without need to buy a tech system, dual card slots, video, analog backs, etc.) which might or might not be important to some potential buyers. Sure, P1 has also some advantages like 1/4000 shutter speed, earthquake warning, focus stacking without using Helicon, which also might or might not be important to some potential buyers.
And then this aggressive price strategy from Hasselblad. As someone pointed out, it's the transparent UPGRADE proposal which is so attractive. If I would be interested in a 100mp sensor, I would buy tomorrow a used H3D or H4D for, say, 2.000-3000 USD/EUR and would trade it in. With that, the price difference between the H6D and IQ 100 is HUUUGHE. I could buy a bunch of 3-4 additional lenses and am all set with less money as for the P1 body alone. Somebody said, P1 also offers discounts when you trade in an old back. Problem is, you don't know as they make a big secret of it, …. and if you don't already have an old P1 back, its quite difficult to buy one on ebay (compared to Hasselblad at least).
Also I am not convinced that there is no price sensitivity in the MF market, the success of Pentax and the claimed Hasselblad sales increase with the "holiday discounts" tell another story. I would bet that Hasselblad, as soon as the upgrade program finishes, will lower the prices for the H6D in order to maintain the attractive price differential. If not, the price increase between the old H5D 50mp and the new H6D 50mp would be just too steep.
So, to answer the initial question, P1, in my opinion, THIS TIME has to and will lower their prices in order to not loose substantial market share.
The Maybach manufacture, at least, ceased to operate since 2012 ….. I understand because this business model was not profitable anymore.
-
As someone pointed out, it's the transparent UPGRADE proposal which is so attractive. If I would be interested in a 100mp sensor, I would buy tomorrow a used H3D or H4D for, say, 2.000-3000 USD/EUR and would trade it in. With that, the price difference between the H6D and IQ 100 is HUUUGHE.
Any idea how much an upgrade from a H3D-39 II to a H6D-100 would cost?
Thanks.
Cheers,
Bernard
-
ProShop Germany sells a used H3D31 for 2.000 EUR. The trade-in price for the 100mp Hasselbald would be 21.000 EUR without VAT and 24.990 including VAT, plus the investment for the second hand body a total of 26.990 EUR.
This is very attractive.
-
The Maybach manufacture, at least, ceased to operate since 2012 ….. I understand because this business model was not profitable anymore.
The Maybach was a luxury item. No real use for it. A PhaseOne and a Hasselblad are both cameras with which you (can) work to earn money. Big difference. And don't forget that Hasselblad were themselves in big trouble not too long ago.
Anyway I don't get why people get so excited by the price of something that's not even available right now and who knows what we'll see in two months time.
-
I really do not understand why peopler using the Hasselblad announcement to bash Phase.
Here are some thoughts in no particular order.
Phase make great cameras and charge plenty for them. If they can continue to do that then more power to them.
Multi-shot is great technology and back when I started the difference between multi and single was night and day. These days the difference is subtle and depends a great deal on subject matter. Multi-shot is never going to be mainstream and I cannot see why Phase would want to divert resources to it, even though in the right circumstances it produces stellar results.
No, the H6D will not be a fully featured video camera, but for some of us the ability shoot video with the same camera and glass would be a nice proposition and certainly a benefit commercially, not some prosumer add on.
Someone asked me today why they hadn't seen me on LuLa lately, especially with the Hasselblad announcement. The fact is I've been busy. But I cleared my table a bit to take a peek and not much has changed. Real debate and discussion is rare, instead, there's a treat for fans of incoherent shouters pushing an agenda (sometimes odd agendas). And some posters insult end users for their "foolish" decisions.
I like Nick T's perspective. He's right - Phase One produces amazing, envelope-pushing photographic solutions. And so does Hasselblad, as evidenced by this latest announcement. Hasselblad does seem to be trying to dampen pricing a bit (just a bit), but $33K is still many times the pricing most users think they can pay (whether they truly can or not). Phase lists a higher price. They want more, and so far, they have been getting it. If someone is on the fence about one or the other, with regard to price, I would recommend they sit down and get pricing from a dealer for each system, especially if they are purchasing with trade in equipment.
Having sold multi-shot systems from the time they were 4 megapixel, 24mm x 24mm square sensors (uh oh, I just aged myself, but hey, I was really young then!), those who espouse the quality differences are correct - up to a point. At 4/6/11/16/22 megapixels the difference between single and multi-shot ranges from pretty staggering to substantial. With recently increased single shot pixel counts, which positively impact some of the deficiencies that multi-shot addresses, the urgency for using multi-shot capture has diminished greatly in the mainstream. And many prominent high end reproduction facilities and institutions have adopted high megapixel count single shot capture. I don't think these professionals are "fools" and think it shows a lack of respect for anyone here to say so. For these uses, is multi-shot an option to consider? Absolutely. Is it the only option worth considering? No.
I don't know if Phase One will ever turn to multi-shot capture as an option, but for now, their focus appears to be on single shot, where they have been immensely effective.
Hasselblad has announced first with 4k video. It will be interesting to see what the future holds for Phase One, in that regard. In the meantime, it is great to see Hasselblad come out with a really strong announcement. Rest assured that most of what these two companies produce is not a secret or great surprise from the other.
Steve Hendrix
CI
-
I don't understand the argument of the availability in June.
Sure, P1 has an advantage until june, so what? Aren't we talking about the future move in pricing?
As I said, I could buy tomorrow an old H3D and make my preorder of the new H6D 100mp and will get it in June for the price announced. Leica users wait a whole year (S007) or more (M240) to get their cameras, Nikon D5 and D500 had to wait more than 2 months also.
And wasn't there the story of old P1 users who where not very amused as they had to wait longer for the new XF body than the so called "new customers"?
Also not all MF users are professionals, apparently the amateur group is increasing.
-
Speaking of MF pricing and price sensitivity. As the big three Hasselblad, Leica and P1 are European companies, I would be curious to know if they adjusted their US-pricing in line with the exchange rate alterations (nearly 25% during the last 12 or so months).
I know that Leica reduced their prices considerably in the US but don't know about P1 or Hassi. This also would say something about P1 and Hassis idea of the price sensitivity of US customers.
-
Steve Hendrix
Great Post thanks Steve.
-
None is bashing Phase... Read the O/P title? To criticise the handicaps of a maker with respect to competition is not bashing... It's rather scepticism on what may harm MF generally (as it has happened in the past)... What is rather surprising is people trying to bash Hasselblad for being better and cheaper at the same time... For a healthy market (any market - MF in this discussion) you need a wide base... The wider the base, the healthier the market... What is needed for a wide base is three things...
1. Price that makes equipment as accessible (to those that want it) as possible.
2. A very wide S/H product market with offerings many times multiple to new (that's why it's called "wide base")
3. Compatibility with as many applications as possible of that same market...
Let me give you an example... Lets use car industry for that example...
First, prices drop by each newer line and yet the product improves... Second, there is a huge base width... Third, BMW doesn't say "what if Mercendes makes 4WD vehicles - our customers don't need them"... they instead say, "if they make them, we can make them better"... Understand? Funboys have the logic of a funboy... they have a very unique logic with marketing too... It's not a very helpful logic to the MF market though, It's rather a dangerous one!
You keep saying Hasselblad is "better". Have you actually used both systems? Do you own either? Have you preordered an H6D yet?
-
Until now, especially with the XF platform, P1 had an obvious technological lead over Hasselblad, the only real competitor from a system point of view...As I see it, nearly ALL of this advantages have gone away from one day to another...Sure, P1 has also some advantages like.....earthquake warning....
He may be a fanboy (I sort of like funboy), but at least he has a sense of humor.
-
Personally I'm glad we have all this choice in camera systems and on every price range as well. To each his own, right?
-
Anyway I don't get why people get so excited by the price of something that's not even available right now and who knows what we'll see in two months time.
June is only a few weeks away. Why should this matter, except to someone from the "must have now" generation.
Are Hasselblad particularly known for changing specs between taking an order and delivering a few weeks later?
-
Yeah, about 10 weeks, that's a lot of jobs until then.
Who said anything about changing specs? I'm talking about how the camera and back will perform, reliability, stability, quirks, battery life,... All important aspects that you can't know beforehand. Even if you're a fanboy.
-
The word is "fanboy."
Thank you.
The grammarazi in me is now content.
-
Yeah, about 10 weeks, that's a lot of jobs until then.
Who said anything about changing specs? I'm talking about how the camera and back will perform, reliability, stability, quirks, battery life,... All important aspects that you can't know beforehand. Even if you're a fanboy.
Seven weeks away. (Although I'm not sure which day in June it might be.)
Do people really get themselves in to a situation where they can't cope without a new system for a few weeks?
There is plenty of information about the H6 to help people start the decision making process. As you can see by many of the posts here that is certainly happening.
Your argument seems to be that this shouldn't be happening until June. I disagree. That's all.
-
Seven weeks away. (Although I'm not sure which day in June it might be.)
Do people really get themselves in to a situation where they can't cope without a new system for a few weeks?
There is plenty of information about the H6 to help people start the decision making process. As you can see by many of the posts here that is certainly happening.
Your argument seems to be that this shouldn't be happening until June. I disagree. That's all.
I think those who have a lot invested in Phamiya will stick to phase and in Blad will wait for the H6D. Those on the fence will make their decision on what features are most important to them (Tru focus vs C1P etc.) and whether they can make up the additional cost of the P1 kit with enough work and so on.
Nobody is doomed and the world will go on, as always.
-
Seven weeks away. (Although I'm not sure which day in June it might be.)
Do people really get themselves in to a situation where they can't cope without a new system for a few weeks?
There is plenty of information about the H6 to help people start the decision making process. As you can see by many of the posts here that is certainly happening.
Your argument seems to be that this shouldn't be happening until June. I disagree. That's all.
In any case you've never laid hands on this camera/back so neither of us knows how well it will perform and what exactly to expect. I know you're pretty fond of the idea of this back and its price but let's try to stay a bit grounded for now, okay?
I'm pretty sure nobody here is going to switch systems because of a video feature that is completely unexplored and may very well be unusable for professional work.
The price isn't a reason for switching systems, as you're going to lose more money by selling your stuff than you'll be saving by buying only slightly cheaper equipment.
-
Multi-shot is great technology and back when I started the difference between multi and single was night and day. These days the difference is subtle and depends a great deal on subject matter. Multi-shot is never going to be mainstream and I cannot see why Phase would want to divert resources to it, even though in the right circumstances it produces stellar results.
I have been following this thread because I like to have some knowledge of what is available at the high end even though MF is not practical for me at the enthusiast rather than pro level. Sometimes the enthusiast would like to increase resolution with available equipment and there are ways to achieve this goal, although with limitations.
John Paul Caponigro discusses some of these options here (http://www.johnpaulcaponigro.com/blog/tag/photoacute/). Upsampling does not really add resolution, but with proper software such as PhotoZoom Pro, one can make best use of available resolution. One can also use stacking of multiple images with software such as PhotoAcute. Superresolution is discussed on Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Super-resolution_imaging). With this approach one can gain some of the advantages of multishot technology by taking advantage random shifts resulting from camera motion even with the camera on a tripod. Mirrorless cameras that have a high frame rate can use this technology. While taking photos at our local botanic garden, I encountered a photographer with a Sony mirrorless who claimed good results with this approach.
Cameras offering IBIS (in camera image stabilization) can use multishot technology as discussed here (http://www.sonyff.com/what-impact-would-multishot-have-a-36mp-sensor-would-produce-90mp-photos/). Finally, one can employ stitching as Bernard L often does.
Bill
-
The price isn't a reason for switching systems, as you're going to lose more money by selling your stuff than you'll be saving by buying only slightly cheaper equipment.
That's true if you happen to own a Phase/Mamiya body with a bunch of Phase/Mamiya lenses or a Hasselblad H3D,H4D or H5D with a bunch of H lenses. However, there is a large group of users out there who are already invested in MFD who do have the flexibility to make a choice without selling off all of their lenses: those who are using H mount Phase backs with an H body and Hasselblad lenses. The H6D 100 is a pretty compelling option compared to the upgrade price Phase One has offered to owners of Phase One backs against an H mount IQ3 100. I own an IQ 180. I could cross=grade to an H6D 100 for around $11K. An IQ 180 upgrade to an IQ3 100 is $25K. And you get a brand new camera to boot with the H6D option that is fully integrated. No matter what direction I go in, I am very happy to have options. We should all be happy that Hasselblad has jumped back in with what would appear to be great offerings. Real competition in the marketplace is highly desirable.
-
Multishot technologie's biggest disadvantage, is a marketing one rather than one of performance. If a pro can't improve further on the results he gets with an old Sinarback 54H + his view camera + a Sinar LC shutter (for dead accurate LV focusing), then why upgrade? It's not a sensible to do so...
Surely one can now "jump" to double the resolution up to 200mp from 88mp that was the limit until the Sinarback eXact was announced, but many pros think of the reduced size of pixel as more of a problem than an advantage they may benefit with and maybe they are correct too in thinking so... 9 μm pixels are 115% larger than 6μm ones and this makes the process easy and accurate even if the environmental circumstances are not ideal. OTOH, Hasselblad's 6x method does oversample as to add rows and columns of pixels, but it makes the quadrupled resolution result almost as easy and accurate as with 4X (but less trustful than 16x - still nothing to compare with single shot though).
Thus, the pros stick with their trustful Imacon 528c, Hasselblad CF-22MS and Sinarback 54H backs, the results they get have nothing to compare with respect to the ultra high res single shot backs, they rarely have to repeat a sequence that failed (because of the high experience they have gained over the years), the backs become rarer with the time to find in the S/H market (although the existing base is extremely wide) and makers have problems to convince the customers as to replace them because the newer offerings can be convincing only as far as the single shot part of the back is concerned...
There are some that think of resolution as the only advantage of the multishot process or others that think that the continuous improvement of single shot will equal the quality, well... let them think so... There are subjects that the difference won't be exposed to the full potential, this is true... but then again there are subjects that the difference between an i-phone and an MFDB won't be exposed to the full potential... As with all technologies the existing difference can only be appreciated to the most demanding of circumstances that do expose the maximum of difference...
In other words... if one thinks that he won't see the difference between a single shot 100mp shot with a Bayer pattern filter and the interpolated colour it is created (along with the shortcomings with the technology) and another (again) single shot capture, but on a 100x75mm sensor with true colour pixels of 9μm of size each (i.e. pixels that record colour - like foveon) and no interpolation or any artefacts involved... then I'm an astronaut... There is a tendency from marketing (inc.Hasselblad) to hide the benefits of true colour capturing and direct the marketing towards single shot capturing systems, this policy is enforced by the circumstances because, as I said before, multishot users are very slow to upgrade on modern equipment thus causing loss of sales, but truth is truth and marketing is marketing.
That said, I feel there is a real danger for MF future penetration in the studios that specialize with still life photography... What if Sony (or another maker) decides (which is very possible to happen) to introduce a multishot version of the mirrorles α7 camera? Which pro will be naive enough then as not to use a (multishot) a7 on the rear standard of his view camera, add a shutter and great LV and in addition have the image circle of his lenses widen considerably? Only the multishot back users will then retain their backs, but I'm sure that even them will add the mirrorless to have as a back up or for the projects that the MFDB will be an overkill... ;)
-
That's true if you happen to own a Phase/Mamiya body with a bunch of Phase/Mamiya lenses or a Hasselblad H3D,H4D or H5D with a bunch of H lenses. However, there is a large group of users out there who are already invested in MFD who do have the flexibility to make a choice without selling off all of their lenses: those who are using H mount Phase backs with an H body and Hasselblad lenses. The H6D 100 is a pretty compelling option compared to the upgrade price Phase One has offered to owners of Phase One backs against an H mount IQ3 100. I own an IQ 180. I could cross=grade to an H6D 100 for around $11K. An IQ 180 upgrade to an IQ3 100 is $25K. And you get a brand new camera to boot with the H6D option that is fully integrated. No matter what direction I go in, I am very happy to have options. We should all be happy that Hasselblad has jumped back in with what would appear to be great offerings. Real competition in the marketplace is highly desirable.
But then you're not switching systems after all.
-
But then you're not switching systems after all.
The past decision of Hasselblad to stop the production of the (stand alone) CF backs with interchangeable adapting plates, was the most disastrous one (marketing wise) they ever made... The backs had very low production cost as they where a parallel version of the ones already produced with the "complete" camera systems of the H3/H3II/H4 series... By stopping the CF backs, Hasselblad didn't only left P1/Leaf group to dominate the market for those customers that wanted to upgrade the back of their camera only, but they left the H2F, H4X & (now) H5X ...to stand as "orphans" in the market with no offering from the firm for an MFDB... It is surprising that this insane marketing decision (which along with the closed system proposals & the rebranded Sony offerings almost destroyed the company) lasts until today...
Hasselblad has to re-introduce the CF backs for third party cameras as soon as possible based on their newly introduced backs... There is absolutely no reason what so ever on to why they sell the CFV-50c for Hasselblad V mount only, while they could have many more backs sold if the same back was offered for Contax 645, Mamyia 645, Rollei HY-6, Rollei 6xxx and other cameras too... There is no reason what so ever either, on why one can't have an alternative offering to the H5-50c by using the H5X platform and a version for H mount of the CFV-50c back... It is expected to happen, but the sooner Hasselblad will offer the new series of Cmos backs (the multishot versions too please) as CF backs too, the sooner the MF market will regain its past glory...
I can't stop thinking how many customers they are loosing out of the hundrents of the better wedding photographers that are primarily using the Contax 645 system as platform... If they had an offering of the CFV-50 back for Contax 645 mount (especially at the price that it costs), I'm sure they would find it hard to keep with demand... Same would happen if they also offer the 100mp back to the same people... especially if they include a mode that would bin the pixels in fours for 25mp captures at the full 53.4 x 40mm area...
-
But then you're not switching systems after all.
Sure I am if I were to opt for an H6D. Different back, different body, different software to process files compared to an IQ 180 on the H2.
-
Sure I am if I were to opt for an H6D. Different back, different body, different software to process files compared to an IQ 180 on the H2.
Compatible body, compatible lenses,... only thing you're changing is the software.
-
Compatible body, compatible lenses,... only thing you're changing is the software.
Exactly what caused the (nearly) disaster for Hasselblad and may cause another one with Phase now... Changing only the parts that one feels that should be changed and keeping the parts that work for you is the common sense for photographers to do. The fault with Hasselblad was that one couldn't upgrade (or share) the back with the H3/H3II/H4... The fault with Phase now is that one who has invested on a P/P+ back can't upgrade his body.... All that for no reason and with "cheap" excuses used against the protestors of the policies... A photographer knows better what his needs are than any maker will ever do... "I KNOW BETTER THAN YOU WHAT YOU NEED" is a cheap excuse... not an answer!
Could Hasselblad have kept the H3/H3II/H4 cameras and offer dual interface with them so that third party and CF backs would be compatible? Of course they could! ...it would cost them nothing to do so!
Could Phase One have included dual interface in the XF body so that P/P+ series and third party backs would be compatible and one could only upgrade on the body? Of course they could!
Why makers take their own eyes off is still a mystery to me! Do they think that some fanboys are enough to keep the business running? Past history has proved the opposite and future is near to confirm the past....
-
Well I think after 7 years it's fair to move on and introduce a new line of products and if you want to introduce new features and make changes to the connection and the underlying firmware, that could cause problems with older products or maybe it would take an extra effort to support older backs and ensure compatibility, then I understand the decision of not including them.
The P/P+ backs are still amazing and deliver great quality that is on par with modern backs on low ISO settings. But they _are_old_. You should not forget the fact that there have been three camera bodies by PhaseOne alone that support the P/P+ backs and that's quite a lot (AF, DF, DF+) and then there are even more by Mamiya that also work with these backs. Keep in mind that we're not shooting with film any more where all backs are 'equal' and mainly mechanical and so only mechanical differences could matter. In the digital age everything evolves extremely fast including interfaces.
Think of it this way: between 2009 and 2016 there have been dozens of new CPU designs with numerous interfaces. Are they compatible? No. Would you want them to be? Maybe. It would certainly be convenient but they would not be as fast as they are and progress would be slow. Same goes for graphics cards, memory - or SSDs. Just compare current SSDs with modern interfaces to 2009 HDDs with their 3Gb/s sATA connection and you'll know what I'm talking about. Yes, they are somewhat backwards compatible but only because their basic job of only transmitting data has not changed a lot.
But in our case the features of the backs have expanded, so the interface and protocols have to expand likewise; liveview, focus stacking, battery sharing, better and more detailed communication between the back and the camera and the lens etc - all that demands more bandwidth and the old backs simply were not made for those things.
In any case the P/P+ backs are not abandoned, they are still serviced and the DF+ cameras are still available and they're working really well with those backs.
I think I already mentioned it somewhere else: Nobody owes you anything. PhaseOne does not owe your a compatible camerabody 7 or 8 years after your purchase - though if I remember correctly you own a 45+ and that was released in 2007. So actually your back was compatible with the lastest cameras for nearly 9 years. That's a lot and more than enough.
-
Isn't the h6d s completely closed new system?
What I heard, please don't take it for granted, is that there won't be any h6dx or similar.
Will the new back work on the h5/4 ? Will any other backs than the h6 work on the new camera ?
Christopher Hauser
ch@chauser.eu
-
So I held one of the new systems in my sweaty little hands today.
The style is nice. Really nice.
The shutter button really is gold rather than Agfa orange.
I miss the hard positive on/off switch of my Canon.
I'd say the whole package feels less "solid" than the XF but way more ergonomic.
It would seem that deliveries at least for the 50 are going to be fairly immediate; however we are also going to see a lot of firmware releases.
The 100 doesn't seem to be fully ready for customer release yet.
Edmund
-
Isn't the h6d s completely closed new system?
What I heard, please don't take it for granted, is that there won't be any h6dx or similar.
Will the new back work on the h5/4 ? Will any other backs than the h6 work on the new camera ?
Christopher Hauser
ch@chauser.eu
The H6D works with film backs, this should mean that the backs are compatible with the H5X... I guess that an H6X is also coming, but usually Hassy releases the X version after they first introduce the complete camera systems. That said, I would expect an H5-100 too as to replace the H5-60 which now looks a bit out of date. Of course, if they move to introduce an H6X, I would expect them not to continue making the H-5X...
-
So just to get a few thinks in my head straight.
-->a phase back will work on a h5x
-->a phase back will not work on the h6d / or might ?
--> what about "older" h5 backs? They will not work on the h6d? Or the other way around the new/updated lenses won't work on a h5d/x ?
I'm so not want to start any discussion again, just under stand what does and doesn't work. As I want to get a feeling of what upgrade ideas might be possible.
Christopher Hauser
ch@chauser.eu
-
So just to get a few thinks in my head straight.
-->a phase back will work on a h5x
-->a phase back will not work on the h6d / or might ?
--> what about "older" h5 backs? They will not work on the h6d? Or the other way around the new/updated lenses won't work on a h5d/x ?
I'm so not want to start any discussion again, just under stand what does and doesn't work. As I want to get a feeling of what upgrade ideas might be possible.
Christopher Hauser
ch@chauser.eu
I'm pretty sure that the new policy of Hasselblad is that complete camera systems work with their own back only, one can't swap backs between bodies of the same family (i.e. use the 50 back on the 100 camera and vice versa) but there is an additional "X" version of body that can be used as a back up for H5 and later cameras and will work with all backs (Hassy or third party) that can be used on the H1, H2, H2F, H4X... The only (new) body currently that can take a P1 back is the H5x... if there is an H6X coming, the backs that can work on H5X (or on the other H previously mentioned) will work on the H6X too... Obviously the complete camera systems have dedicated firmware as to maximise the result for each different H lens with the specific back, but the "X" version has adaptable firmware which is automatically activated (or not) for each different back.
-
There was a time you could get a H5 kit (back and body) and upgrade to the H5x body. I loved the options this opened up (film, Phase, even old fat pixel backs), and I hope they drop the 'x' and just do all bodies that way.
-Joe
-
-->a phase back will work on a h5x
Yes. It is official.
-->a phase back will not work on the h6d / or might ?
Might. It is not official. The only thing which is official is that the H6D will accept film backs.
--> what about "older" h5 backs? They will not work on the h6d? Or the other way around the new/updated lenses won't work on a h5d/x ?
Lenses will certainly work. Backs will probably work, you'll have to try. I have tried to use an older H3D backs on my H4D and even if it should not officially work in practice it does. I suppose that such mixing is also possible between other series. One word of caution, however: I do not think that the H5D and H6D backs will work on H4D or H3D cameras, the latter backs need more power than the earlier ones.
-
One word of caution, however: the H5D and H6D backs will not work on H4D or H3D cameras, the latter backs need more power than the earlier ones.
True? The H4D, H3D and even my lowly H1 will accept the higher power battery grip with current firmware, is there another factor at play?
-
True? The H4D, H3D and even my lowly H1 will accept the higher power battery grip with current firmware, is there another factor at play?
Well: I don't think it will work, because the electronics in the camera are not designed for the higher power consumption, but I have not tried. I edited my message accordingly.
-
Well: I don't think it will work, because the electronics in the camera are not designed for the higher power consumption, but I have not tried. I edited my message accordingly.
Perhaps someone can contribute the definitive answer.
-
There was a time you could get a H5 kit (back and body) and upgrade to the H5x body. I loved the options this opened up (film, Phase, even old fat pixel backs), and I hope they drop the 'x' and just do all bodies that way.
-Joe
Yes... H5 bodies and H5X are exactly the same camera mechanically and on electronics, the only difference is with the firmware... I suppose that one can convert an H5 to H5X even today... By the way... film backs work with the H5 anyway... One doesn't need to convert it to H5X for that... The ability to use a film back on an H camera (other than the H3) is an indication that third party backs (or Hasselblad compatible with the H1,H2,H2F,H4X, H5X) will work with the H camera too... (either directly or via a firmware update).
-
Perhaps someone can contribute the definitive answer.
About a year ago, I decided to compile the compatibility data and came up with the attached chart (with IQ250 also for reference).
Steve Hendrix
CI
-
About a year ago, I decided to compile the compatibility data and came up with the attached chart (with IQ250 also for reference).
Steve Hendrix
CI
But Steven... you state in your chart exactly the opposite than what Hasselblad officially states!!!??? ...Hasselblad claims that H5D backs are usable on the H5X... (in fact Haasy promotes the H5X as a "back-up" body for H5 cameras). Are you sure you are not mistaken?
-
Steve,
That is a very interesting document.
Thank you very much for posting it.
Do you have info about compatibility of the "original" H3d backs - the ones which I believe still have fans?
Edmund
About a year ago, I decided to compile the compatibility data and came up with the attached chart (with IQ250 also for reference).
Steve Hendrix
CI
-
One of the real main reasons the pro bodies don't have moveable screens (or in the case of a C300 / C500 the screen is optional) is most of these bodies are rigged up and use a 3rd party EVF or they are using an external recorder like an Odyssey or Atoms or other much larger / higher quality screen where they can see scopes, LUT's, etc.
The moveable screens may break but I don't think is a big factor in why they aren't on the pro bodies (there is one on the C100 MkII and that is every bit a pro Cinema Camera)
Canon rep told me the rental houses hate movable screens because they break, and this is why the *pro* Canon still cameras don't have them while the consumer models do.
However, anyway in this weight class you won't handhold, and in a static setup you just plug in an external mini HDMI screen/recorder. Also I'm willing to bet that Hassy have superb video tethering to any tablet running Phocus, with touch focus control, and a very good iPad app.
Edmund
-
My Ursa has a fold out screen and it's pretty damn good, certainly good enough to see scopes, zebras etc. Maybe its a BM thing?
Oh and way off topic sorry.
-
One of the real main reasons the pro bodies don't have moveable screens (or in the case of a C300 / C500 the screen is optional) is most of these bodies are rigged up and use a 3rd party EVF or they are using an external recorder like an Odyssey or Atoms or other much larger / higher quality screen where they can see scopes, LUT's, etc.
The moveable screens may break but I don't think is a big factor in why they aren't on the pro bodies (there is one on the C100 MkII and that is every bit a pro Cinema Camera)
Well... One can be sure that in the near future MFDBs will be used for broadcast quality productions with external recorders and screens or other peripherals... In my mind, the use of the front standard of a view camera for the lens and an MFDB for recording, will allow much room for creativity to pro users... Convergence of technology is inevitable, IMO, in the (very) near future, there will be less equipment used by pros, yet the ability for more tasks will increase and so will the quality.
For example, if a pro bases his system around an MF camera platform (say Hasselblad H for instance), he will be able to use the same lenses on his DSLR and then use the back part only on a (small size) view camera but still with the same lenses. Many makers will have to redesign some lenses in their line as to increase the image circle to 6x6 film image circle size... But the benefit will be worthwhile.
-
But Steven... you state in your chart exactly the opposite than what Hasselblad officially states!!!??? ...Hasselblad claims that H5D backs are usable on the H5X... (in fact Haasy promotes the H5X as a "back-up" body for H5 cameras). Are you sure you are not mistaken?
Generally speaking, we're inclined to do our own research, rather than rely on manufacturer's stated information. Now, this does not mean we can't be in error. But the results of the data were produced by manually taking each digital back in the X column and mounting it to each camera in the Y column. A Yes meant a capture, a No meant an error stating "incompatible".
I'd be happy to attempt to reproduce the findings.
Steve Hendrix
CI
-
Generally speaking, we're inclined to do our own research, rather than rely on manufacturer's stated information. Now, this does not mean we can't be in error. But the results of the data were produced by manually taking each digital back in the X column and mounting it to each camera in the Y column. A Yes meant a capture, a No meant an error stating "incompatible".
I'd be happy to attempt to reproduce the findings.
Steve Hendrix
CI
Thx Steve. BTW, is there some sort of tape trick where one can tape up some contacts to lift an incompatibility?
Edmund
-
Generally speaking, we're inclined to do our own research, rather than rely on manufacturer's stated information. Now, this does not mean we can't be in error. But the results of the data were produced by manually taking each digital back in the X column and mounting it to each camera in the Y column. A Yes meant a capture, a No meant an error stating "incompatible".
I'd be happy to attempt to reproduce the findings.
Steve Hendrix
CI
So this page is wrong then?
https://captureintegration.com/hasselblad-h5x-compatibility-and-usage/
and this one ?
http://www.hasselblad.com/medium-format/h5x
-
Generally speaking, we're inclined to do our own research, rather than rely on manufacturer's stated information. Now, this does not mean we can't be in error. But the results of the data were produced by manually taking each digital back in the X column and mounting it to each camera in the Y column. A Yes meant a capture, a No meant an error stating "incompatible".
I'd be happy to attempt to reproduce the findings.
Steve Hendrix
CI
Please do! (reproduce the findings) as it is opposite to manufacturer's claiming... It is (obviously) important for customers to know what is compatible and what is not when they are asked to invest a fortune on equipment... By the way... It would also be important for one to check if the cross-exchange complicity of H3/H3II & H4 backs, applies for different sizes of backs (which I doubt) rather than just checking if an H3D31 also works on an H4-40 body (which I suspect it should). You see... there is a strong possibility that the body can recognise a same image area size back (and thus correct for it for lens issues) but it could be that it doesn't recognise a different image area size back because it is "tuned" to only recognise (and apply corrections for) a specific image area size...
-
Never the less, Hasselblad claims officially that the H5X is compatible with all H5 backs and this should mean that the camera has a multiple firmware build in it and then chooses the part of the firmware it's gonna use depending on the back attached (which it automatically recognises). ;)
-
I'm pretty sure that means it's compatible with Hasselblads H backs. Not 3rd party.
-
I'm pretty sure that means it's compatible with Hasselblads H backs. Not 3rd party.
The H4x and H5x are compatible with third party digital backs. It is sold to replace the old H1 that people still used with the P1 and Leaf backs.
It does not need adaptable firmware, just as the H1 does not need adaptable firmware.
-
The H4x and H5x are compatible with third party digital backs. It is sold to replace the old H1 that people still used with the P1 and Leaf backs.
It does not need adaptable firmware, just as the H1 does not need adaptable firmware.
At this point the old Hassy systems are selling below 2K; we should see a lively used market develop.
-
At this point the old Hassy systems are selling below 2K
It's more like twice that sum for the more interesting offers, but yes.
we should see a lively used market develop.
This lively used marked has already been active in Sweden or Germany for a few years. Maybe less in France where you live.
-
It's more like twice that sum for the more interesting offers, but yes.
This lively used marked has already been active in Sweden or Germany for a few years. Maybe less in France where you live.
Could you provide some links?
Edmund
-
You see... there is a strong possibility that the body can recognise a same image area size back (and thus correct for it for lens issues) but it could be that it doesn't recognise a different image area size back because it is "tuned" to only recognise (and apply corrections for) a specific image area size...
This in incorrect.
-
It's more like twice that sum for the more interesting offers, but yes.
1500 Euro is now the standard price for the H3D31.
At around 4K you are in H4D territory, but I assume that when the H6Ds hit the street everything will go down by another notch.
Edmund
-
This in incorrect.
There is no such thing as "being incorrect" when one doesn't post a fact, Using phrases like "there is a possibility..." and "it could be..." it automatically means that one posts a ...possibility. So, please be careful on how you refer to people... ;)
EDIT: Hence, I have to repeat the question (on which the possibility refers in the same statement - because you cropped it off):
"Please do! (reproduce the findings) as it is opposite to manufacturer's claiming... It is (obviously) important for customers to know what is compatible and what is not when they are asked to invest a fortune on equipment... By the WAY... It would also be important for one to check if the cross-exchange complicity of H3/H3II & H4 backs, applies for different sizes of backs (which I doubt) rather than just checking if an H3D31 also works on an H4-40 body (which I suspect it should). You see... there is a strong possibility that the body can recognise a same image area size back (and thus correct for it for lens issues) but it could be that it doesn't recognise a different image area size back because it is "tuned" to only recognise (and apply corrections for) a specific image area size...
-
is there even such a thing as an h4d60 body or an h4d40 body?
There is no such thing as "being incorrect" when one doesn't post a fact, Using phrases like "there is a possibility..." and "it could be..." it automatically means that one posts a ...possibility. So, please be careful on how you refer to people... ;)
EDIT: Hence, I have to repeat the question (on which the possibility refers in the same statement - because you cropped it off):
"Please do! (reproduce the findings) as it is opposite to manufacturer's claiming... It is (obviously) important for customers to know what is compatible and what is not when they are asked to invest a fortune on equipment... By the WAY... It would also be important for one to check if the cross-exchange complicity of H3/H3II & H4 backs, applies for different sizes of backs (which I doubt) rather than just checking if an H3D31 also works on an H4-40 body (which I suspect it should). You see... there is a strong possibility that the body can recognise a same image area size back (and thus correct for it for lens issues) but it could be that it doesn't recognise a different image area size back because it is "tuned" to only recognise (and apply corrections for) a specific image area size...
-
So this page is wrong then?
https://captureintegration.com/hasselblad-h5x-compatibility-and-usage/
and this one ?
http://www.hasselblad.com/medium-format/h5x
Well, like I said, it doesn't mean we never make an error. And that may be the case here. The actual basis for this compatibility testing was that we found ourselves in a position of owning numerous orphaned H3D/H4D camera bodies. And we wanted to be sure if someone wanted to purchase them, of what would work on them and what would not. The H4X and H5X bodies were added to the mix just to cover all Hasselblad bodies. But I do definitely know that I tried every combination as stated in my chart with the results shown. Perhaps there is a firmware required for either the digital back or body - or perhaps not. At any rate, I'll double check this, since you reminded me of the stated function of the H5X also being a backup for an H5D (and advertised as such by Hasselblad with their product release also published on our website). Thanks for going the extra mile to find not just Hasselblad's publishing, but also for finding that same publishing on our website. I'm close to assuming I'm wrong on that particular combination, but again, I'll double check it, so there is some proof in the pudding one way or the other.
Steve Hendrix/CI
-
Could you provide some links?
That is difficult. I simply check Ebay regularly, but Ebay does not keep old transactions.
1500 Euro is now the standard price for the H3D31.
That is a bit less than what I see on Ebay.
But generally we agree: used H are quite affordable, even if I think they are a bit less affordable than you think.
-
Well, like I said, it doesn't mean we never make an error. I'm close to assuming I'm wrong on that particular combination, but again, I'll double check it, so there is some proof in the pudding one way or the other.
Steve Hendrix/CI
Thank you, please be assured I am not point scoring here just interested in the facts, still on H1 so if a bargain pops up the P45+ may get a new home. I referenced your own site as I do find it a useful resource as I am sure others do.
Unlike Edmund though I wonder if only a small "correction" in prices will occur as Hasselblad have a generous floor for trade up. It will be the rental fleet I suppose but how large is that these days and will they just add the "new" lenses or swop those out, that could be more interesting?
-
That is difficult. I simply check Ebay regularly, but Ebay does not keep old transactions.
That is a bit less than what I see on Ebay.
But generally we agree: used H are quite affordable, even if I think they are a bit less affordable than you think.
I don't know how long for but E-bay does hold completed transactions but you have to be registered and logged in to see them.
ProCentre UK has H3D31 @ 1395 and 1495 Uk pounds = 1750 Euros Ex VAT, but you are getting some dealer benefit such as a warranty.
http://www.procentre.co.uk/sales-secondhand-medium-format-digital.php
A near equivalent in price and an interesting choice is a H5D40 = price(ish) H4D50 but beyond my league.
And while we are price it is interesting how low the CFV back have gone I would have thought given the market size of bodies the floor would have been higher, does this show how limited the digital MF market is or did they sell so many it is supply and demand?
-
The H4x and H5x are compatible with third party digital backs. It is sold to replace the old H1 that people still used with the P1 and Leaf backs.
It does not need adaptable firmware, just as the H1 does not need adaptable firmware.
Yes, they are compatible, but if I don't think Hasselblad was talking about 3rd party backs. To me they were talking about their own backs, which are all compatible. Hasselblad could hardly claim that all 3rd party backs are compatible without checking each and every one of them. And I doubt very much that they did that...
-
And I doubt very much that they did that...
\
"Digital Compatibility All Hasselblad H5D, ixpress, CF and CFH digital backs. 3rd party backs that were compatible with the H1/H2 cameras"
Seems comprehensive to me as I am not aware of any 3rd party back H fit that did not work on a H1, but of course I could be wrong, although it would be illogical for a 3rd party back maker to produce a H fit that didn't work on a body it was made for?
-
Not according to Steve Hendrix from CI - on page 7 he attached a compatibility list of DB and H-cameras.
Also your quote is not from Hasselblad and a few lines below it says: This is the big one: The H5X is compatible with the H5D backs, as well as all Ixpress, CF, CFH, and all digital backs compatible with the H1 and H2 cameras. Specifically, this means all Phase One P and P+ backs are compatible, as well as all IQ1 and IQ2 backs. The Leaf Credo 40, 50, 60, and 80 backs are all compatible, but only original Leaf Aptus backs will work with the H5X. The Leaf Aptus S and Leaf Aptus-II backs will not work with the H5X due to “parts of the communication from the digital back not being within specification, causing a fault condition and a lock-up of the camera body and digital back” according to Hasselblad. We do not expect this to be resolved by Leaf, as this issue existed with the H4X as well. As an aside, all film backs (such as the HM 16-32 and HMi-100) will work with the H5X.
( https://captureintegration.com/hasselblad-h5x-compatibility-and-usage/ )
To me there's still a lot of confusion out there and some quite contradictory messages from various sources. But most of the backs are compatible.
-
Not according to Steve Hendrix from CI - on page 7 he attached a compatibility list of DB and H-cameras.
Also your quote is not from Hasselblad and a few lines below it says: ( https://captureintegration.com/hasselblad-h5x-compatibility-and-usage/ )
To me there's still a lot of confusion out there and some quite contradictory messages from various sources. But most of the backs are compatible.
Yes... The official position of Hasselblad is that all backs that would work with H1/H2/H2F (no matter if they are Hasselblad/Imacon or third party) as well as film backs, will work on the H4X and H5X. The difference (according to Hasselblad) is that with the H5X, H5 and later backs (meaning the new H6D swell) of the Hasselblad cameras will also work on it, while they couldn't with the H4X... The problem with earlier Leaf backs (other than the Credo series that will also work) is -according to Hassy- with Leaf, as they are given the interface but they don't apply it on their earlier backs.
Other than that, I've seen reports from users that H3II & H4 backs are interchangeable between the respective cameras, but Hasselblad has never confirmed that officially... Note that according to Hasselblad, no H camera back will work with the H4X, the H5 and later H backs will work with the H5X only (but not the H3/H3II/H4 backs).
-
Not according to Steve Hendrix from CI - on page 7 he attached a compatibility list of DB and H-cameras.
Also your quote is not from Hasselblad and a few lines below it says: ( https://captureintegration.com/hasselblad-h5x-compatibility-and-usage/ )
My quote is taken directly from Hasselblad:
http://www.hasselblad.com/medium-format/h5x
Under the drop down Specs. Tab.
I'm sorry but Hasselblad make the cameras and I suspect Steve Hendrix will be back soon reporting the error, maybe the back/body combination tested had poor contacts for example.
-
May I suggest a corrected version of the pdf? I added the H3D backs and used bold for what the info one can find directly on the Hasselblad site. The information should still be verified, but the pdf is a start...
-
Theodoros,
There is no such thing as "being incorrect" when one doesn't post a fact, Using phrases like "there is a possibility..." and "it could be..." it automatically means that one posts a ...possibility.
You did not simply post a possibility - you posted a probability:
...there is a strong possibility (http://forum.luminous-landscape.com/index.php?topic=109753.msg904022#msg904022) that...
If the likelihood of an outcome is small then asserting that there is a "strong possibility" of the outcome is incorrect.
-
Theodoros,
You did not simply post a possibility - you posted a probability:
That there is no "this is incorrect" when one doesn't post a fact, stays... whether a possibility or a probability... "there is a strong possibility that..." is both a possibility and a probability as one would mean exactly the same if it was "it is probable that"...
If the likelihood of an outcome is small then asserting that there is a "strong possibility" of the outcome is incorrect.
Sorry... it doesn't work like that with the logic science (according to Aristoteles), it simply means that one that doesn't use the system and thus has no way to confirm the fact, he addresses to others that do, as to ask them if that is the case (the statement "it might be that same size sensors are interchangeable between them, but the ones that are of different size are not" (different words used but exactly the same statement) does make perfect sense and it is still a wonder)...
Back to the subject though... Having read reports from users that H3II backs are interchangeable with H4D ones (i.e. one can swap the backs between the camera bodies and still have them both working) , I would like to know if:
1. The same would apply with H3D backs,
2. If people have checked with different size sensors backs or only assumed that it is so by checking for backs that have same image size sensors.
There is a strong possibility that the bodies have a build in interface that can correct for lens aberrations for a specific size of sensor and thus, the interface would work the same for another back (of the same "family") that has the same image area size... However, there is a probability that it also possible that all H3/H3II/H4 camera bodies have build in multiple interface as to correct for aberrations on different size sensors and then automatically recognise as of which interface to use depending on the back (of the same family) attached.
-
There is a strong possibility that the bodies have a build in interface that can correct for lens aberrations for a specific size of sensor and thus, the interface would work the same for another back (of the same "family") that has the same image area size... However, there is a probability that it also possible that all H3/H3II/H4 camera bodies have build in multiple interface as to correct for aberrations on different size sensors and then automatically recognise as of which interface to use depending on the back (of the same family) attached.
Whilst I agree it is highly probable that the details of the sensor are added to the file by the back and the exposure and lens details written to the same file by the body communicating with the back it is unlikely, IMHO, that any corrections are made to the file by either the back or the body based on those details these are performed by the Phocus software. It is always possible that Hasselblad "cook" the file as is done as we understand it by many DSLR makers but surely this is not going to the sole factor that prevents a body/back combination working?
Do I really need to post the link BTW ;)
Hasselblad’s modern lens design has been optimised for digital perfection, including full automatic correction of colour aberration, distortion and light fall off. Phocus makes use of its detailed knowledge of the lens design and calculates the optical corrections for every shot at the given distance and aperture setting, providing perfect images, and an ideal basis for optimal image rendering and further processing. Hasselblad digital lens correction technology works automatically with all Hasselblad H System lenses, even with tilt/shift movements and it works with all the Carl Zeiss lenses from the classic V System, using manual settings.
My bold.
-
Theodoras,
..."there is a strong possibility that..." is both a possibility and a probability as one would mean exactly the same if it was "it is probable that"...
"A strong possibility" is a possibility and a probability. "There is a strong possibility" is an assertion. If the likelihood of an outcome is small then the assertion is incorrect.
-
Theodoras,
"A strong possibility" is a possibility and a probability. "There is a strong possibility" is an assertion. If the likelihood of an outcome is small then the assertion is incorrect.
No... it is not an assertion... It would be one if it was "I'm sure that"... "There is a strong possibility" simply means that "it is possible" and the word "strong" is used there, because it makes sense (from tech POV) for the maker to do so... (meaning that it would surely work if the possibility is proved to be a fact).
-
Of course, your average Sony RX100 compact does this too for the Jpegs, in camera, which is why it costs so much. And why the images look so good. And it can probably do it for video too.
;
Hasselblad’s modern lens design has been optimised for digital perfection, including full automatic correction of colour aberration, distortion and light fall off. Phocus makes use of its detailed knowledge of the lens design and calculates the optical corrections for every shot at the given distance and aperture setting, providing perfect images, and an ideal basis for optimal image rendering and further processing. Hasselblad digital lens correction technology works automatically with all Hasselblad H System lenses, even with tilt/shift movements and it works with all the Carl Zeiss lenses from the classic V System, using manual settings.
My bold.
-
Of course, your average Sony RX100 compact does this too for the Jpegs, in camera, which is why it costs so much. And why the images look so good. And it can probably do it for video too.
I wonder how "corrected" the H5 jpeg out of camera files are then, I could be wrong, there could be a mini Phocus under the hood.
-
IMO, all that "automatic correction BS" was an excuse for Hasselblad (and other makers - even now) as to close the system... My CF-39MS claims the same in its specification if (and only if) it will be used on an H body, but I use it on a Contax 645 instead and it performs like a dream... (in single shot - in multishot there are no aberrations anyway)... With my lenses being all able to cover the full 6X4.5 film size, whatever flaw of them is usually cropped out of the sensor size (37x49mm) and then, whatever is left with some of the lenses, I'm happy to correct it myself in post... A high end stuff maker shouldn't treat customers like main stream makers do... It shows no respect to his customers if he does so... >:(
-
Theodoros,
...it is not an assertion... It would be one if it was "I'm sure that"...
This is also incorrect. Surety is not a requirement of assertion.
"There is a strong possibility" simply means that "it is possible" and the word "strong" is used there...
It may be what you mean, but it is not what 'it' means.
-
Theodoros,
This is also incorrect. Surety is not a requirement of assertion.
It may be what you mean, but it is not what 'it' means.
To your mind... Anyway, I'm sure you understand that all this is irrelevant to the subject and the reason why I got upset... If Nick knows the answer, he may as well post it for us to know too (and then we could thank him for it as some of us need to know what the case is) instead of posting "this is incorrect" which is by definition an insulting reply to somebody that has posted a false fact (although not the case)...
-
OK... Talking about P1 pricing, one can't help to mention Leica S (007) pricing too... It seems that the camera was introduced with a reduced price because of the new Hasselblad pricing policy, but now, even with the reduction in price that it started with, it still sounds expensive doesn't it? IT is almost similar price with the H5-50c and the later is modular, it is 4:3 image area, takes film and it's even got the prestige that the Red Dot carries (and P1 or Mamiya lucks)...
-
Whilst I agree it is highly probable that the details of the sensor are added to the file by the back and the exposure and lens details written to the same file by the body communicating with the back it is unlikely, IMHO, that any corrections are made to the file by either the back or the body based on those details these are performed by the Phocus software. It is always possible that Hasselblad "cook" the file as is done as we understand it by many DSLR makers but surely this is not going to the sole factor that prevents a body/back combination working?
Do I really need to post the link BTW ;)
Hasselblad’s modern lens design has been optimised for digital perfection, including full automatic correction of colour aberration, distortion and light fall off. Phocus makes use of its detailed knowledge of the lens design and calculates the optical corrections for every shot at the given distance and aperture setting, providing perfect images, and an ideal basis for optimal image rendering and further processing. Hasselblad digital lens correction technology works automatically with all Hasselblad H System lenses, even with tilt/shift movements and it works with all the Carl Zeiss lenses from the classic V System, using manual settings.
My bold.
What Chris said.
I was in a rush as I'm shooting but I just wanted to point out that what Theodorus suggested was incorrect.
-
What Chris said.
I was in a rush as I'm shooting but I just wanted to point out that what Theodorus suggested was incorrect.
Do you care to enlighten us on what is correct then? ...and what I suggest that is incorrect also... because I can't remember suggesting anything other than ...suggesting (LOL ;) !!!) for those who use the system (I don't) to also check if it applies for other image sensor sizes... I don't know why you insist in provoking... obviously it goes with your character... ;)
-
Leica has always been more expensive - even more expensive than P1 considering the capabilities of the Leica cameras vs the P1 system - but that's mainly because Leica is a brand that has created a myth of super slow devaluation because of collectors who'll pay 'top dollar' for used stuff.
However this isn't really the case any more with digital cameras and apart from the analog "M" series the value quickly drops after your purchase (special collectors items and prototypes excluded). It's kind of like a Ferrari, as soon as you drive the car out of the dealers garage it looses half its value. I think Leica already went pretty low for their standards with an initial price point of 17.000$ - but the Pentax 645Z is much cheaper and imho also' better' and much more innovative especially for its "age" (except for the 4K video of the Leica - but that's pretty useless for professional means anyway). Sure the Leica is faster but at a lower resolution and keep in mind that it was released in 2015 - whereas the Pentax was released in 2014.
-
Theodoros I had no interest in provoking and I resent the ad hominem attacks. I was simply wishing to correct your assertion that the chip size is taken into account when calculating lens corrections.
And no I do not intend on providing any additional information (which would probably violate my NDA) nor do I intend on participating in any further discussions with you.
-
Theodoros I had no interest in provoking and I resent the ad hominem attacks. I was simply wishing to correct your assertion that the chip size is taken into account when calculating lens corrections.
And no I do not intend on providing any additional information (which would probably violate my NDA) nor do I intend on participating in any further discussions with you.
Still... never assumed anything... never posted an assumption either... A possibility that I want for it to be checked out (and still do - as it seems that it has never being checked out), doesn't make an assumption to any other than you... (who keeps ruining a discussion). Thanks for promising that you won't repeat the same behaviour again in one of my O/Ps... I surely can survive without your logic and practice.... As I'm sure all others will do as well... Thanks for spending so much time as to post nothing (or say something) valuable too... I'm sure none will miss that either... Bye...
-
For what it's worth I find NickT to be one of the most valuable contributor's in this forum, especially as regards anything Hasselblad related.
It's hard to fin forum posters that are well informed, intelligent, and fair.
I greatly respect him.
-
Doug,
We are lucky to have you, since you fit the two first here, and only two out of those three are attainable by any human:)
Frankly, bias is expected, and needs no excuse :)
Edmund
For what it's worth I find NickT to be one of the most valuable contributor's in this forum, especially as regards anything Hasselblad related.
It's hard to fin forum posters that are well informed, intelligent, and fair.
I greatly respect him.
-
Give him a broomstick and enough time and Theodoros will pick a fight with it.
What's new?
-
There is no such thing as "being incorrect" when one doesn't post a fact, Using phrases like "there is a possibility..." and "it could be..." it automatically means that one posts a ...possibility. So, please be careful on how you refer to people... ;)
EDIT: Hence, I have to repeat the question (on which the possibility refers in the same statement - because you cropped it off):
"Please do! (reproduce the findings) as it is opposite to manufacturer's claiming... It is (obviously) important for customers to know what is compatible and what is not when they are asked to invest a fortune on equipment... By the WAY... It would also be important for one to check if the cross-exchange complicity of H3/H3II & H4 backs, applies for different sizes of backs (which I doubt) rather than just checking if an H3D31 also works on an H4-40 body (which I suspect it should). You see... there is a strong possibility that the body can recognise a same image area size back (and thus correct for it for lens issues) but it could be that it doesn't recognise a different image area size back because it is "tuned" to only recognise (and apply corrections for) a specific image area size...
I have tried to exchange backs and bodies between an H3D-31 (x1.3 sensor size) and an H4D-50 (x1.1 sensor size). Either combination works perfectly: the H3D-31 back on the H4D-50 body and the H4D-50 back on the H3D-31 body. Therefore your assertion is indeed incorrect, as pointed out by NickT.
-
I have tried to exchange backs and bodies between an H3D-31 (x1.3 sensor size) and an H4D-50 (x1.1 sensor size). Either combination works perfectly: the H3D-31 back on the H4D-50 body and the H4D-50 back on the H3D-31 body. Therefore your assertion is indeed incorrect, as pointed out by NickT.
Thanks for posting this... It means that the H3DII & H4D bodies all have multiple interface written in the EPROM and they automatically activate the right interface after the back is attached on them, rather than have an interface only dedicated to the back that accompanies them... I never made an assertion that the second of the above is what happens... I did make a question on the matter as there was a good possibility that it could be different... It's good for possible Hasselblad customers to know that they are not restricted into using the dedicated body with a specific back only... Can you (or other) please also check if the H3 bodies & backs share the same ability? Also, can one please check if the same applies for the bodies with multishot ability? (meaning that if one buys a S/H H4D 50MS or 200MS, can he then use the back -in multishot mode- on an H3II-31 body?)
-
Thanks for posting this... It means that the H3DII & H4D bodies all have multiple interface written in the EPROM and they automatically activate the right interface after the back is attached on them, rather than have an interface only dedicated to the back that accompanies them...
I believe it is more likely that all backs use the same protocol and that the body only needs one single firmware to communicate with all of them.
Can you (or other) please also check if the H3 bodies & backs share the same ability?
I already did that: in my post above I tested a H3D (first version, not a H3DII) and a H4D.
The H3D still supports the film backs, BTW (but not necessarily third-party digital backs). The H3DII and H4D do not (the H4X does). Then, the H5D supports the film backs again and this is also true for the multishot versions (see page 4 of the H5D manual here: http://www.hasselblad.com/support/manuals/h-system-manuals/).
-
I believe it is more likely that all backs use the same protocol and that the body only needs one single firmware to communicate with all of them.
I already did that: in my post above I tested a H3D (first version, not a H3DII) and a H4D.
The H3D still supports the film backs, BTW (but not necessarily third-party digital backs). The H3DII and H4D do not (the H4X does). Then, the H5D supports the film backs again and this is also true for the multishot versions (see page 4 of the H5D manual here: http://www.hasselblad.com/support/manuals/h-system-manuals/).
Can you (or another in case you don't have access) check one more thing please? If one uses his CF-39MS (like the one I use) on an H3/H3II/H4 camera, will it work (in multishot mode too)? I specifically ask for the CF-39MS as it states in the manual that if used on an H camera body it will perform automatically corrections for aberrations (like it happens with the H3/H3II/H4 dedicated backs...) so there might be that the CF-39/22/MS series of backs (if fitted with a Hasselbla H plate) might be able to work.... This is of particular importance for me to know... Thanks.
-
Can you (or another in case you don't have access) check one more thing please? If one uses his CF-39MS (like the one I use) on an H3/H3II/H4 camera, will it work (in multishot mode too)? I specifically ask for the CF-39MS as it states in the manual that if used on an H camera body it will perform automatically corrections for aberrations (like it happens with the H3/H3II/H4 dedicated backs...) so there might be that the CF-39/22/MS series of backs (if fitted with a Hasselbla H plate) might be able to work.... This is of particular importance for me to know... Thanks.
I don't have a CF-39MS to test, sorry. But why use an H3D to mount your CF-39MS when an H1 can be had for considerably less money?
-
I have tried to exchange backs and bodies between an H3D-31 (x1.3 sensor size) and an H4D-50 (x1.1 sensor size). Either combination works perfectly: the H3D-31 back on the H4D-50 body and the H4D-50 back on the H3D-31 body. Therefore your assertion is indeed incorrect, as pointed out by NickT.
Thanks for this point of information. Can it be added to the PDF?
It would seem that more combinations work than not, at least with digital backs, so it might be faster to summarize the failures in words, or state "rules".
BTW does anyone know how to "calibrate" a body for a given back, or is there simply a fine focus adjustment setting that can be set by the user?
BTW
-
I can confirm at least one thing for sure - the chart that I posted earlier did in fact have an error with regard to the possibility of H5D digital back compatibility with H5X. And it is in fact compatible, which makes complete sense as it is indicated by Hasselblad as a feature. I did also try H4D-40 and H4D-60 digital backs on H5X which resulted in "Back not compatible" error messages. I also tried 40/50/60 digital backs on an H4X body, and received "Error ID 1212".
Updated chart has been shared with our team and is attached. We don't have a multi-shot body on hand at the moment, so cannot confirm any body compatibility with those models.
(Thanks Chris for letting me know!)
Steve Hendrix/CI
-
Thanks for this point of information. Can it be added to the PDF?
It was already in the pdf I posted yesterday (previous page).
It would seem that more combinations work than not, at least with digital backs, so it might be faster to summarize the failures in words, or state "rules".
Yes, but what is the point of all this? Hasselblad backs are normally sold with a body, so people simply use that. Few people actually need to mix unmatched H backs and bodies. I am not ready (or equipped, actually) to test all what has been sold by Hasselblad in the past 10 years.
BTW does anyone know how to "calibrate" a body for a given back, or is there simply a fine focus adjustment setting that can be set by the user?
No calibration can be done outside of the factory, but my experience has been that calibration is already ok.
-
(Thanks Chris for letting me know!)
Steve Hendrix/CI
Thank you for checking, without protest, rare here at the moment ;)
-
Thank you for checking, without protest, rare here at the moment ;)
I think we ought to mention that Steve is a dealer of cameras who does his homework, and that no one on this forum has ever complained about him, which is also astonishing when you think of it :)
Edmund
-
I can confirm at least one thing for sure - the chart that I posted earlier did in fact have an error with regard to the possibility of H5D digital back compatibility with H5X. And it is in fact compatible, which makes complete sense as it is indicated by Hasselblad as a feature. I did also try H4D-40 and H4D-60 digital backs on H5X which resulted in "Back not compatible" error messages. I also tried 40/50/60 digital backs on an H4X body, and received "Error ID 1212".
Updated chart has been shared with our team and is attached. We don't have a multi-shot body on hand at the moment, so cannot confirm any body compatibility with those models.
(Thanks Chris for letting me know!)
Steve Hendrix/CI
Hi Steve, So H4D-40/60 also do not work on H4x? I always thought otherwise.
Is it safe to assume that H6D backs definitely won't work on H5x?
-
Hi Steve, So H4D-40/60 also do not work on H4x? I always thought otherwise.
Is it safe to assume that H6D backs definitely won't work on H5x?
As far as I know - at least the digital backs off our H4D-40 and H4D-60 did not work today...
I think your second question is answered best by not assuming. It's rarely safe to assume anything ! ;)
It would not surprise me if an H6D digital back did work on an H5X, but it also would not surprise me if it did not. Possibly if it did, since the electronics have been updated, perhaps there might be some limited functionality. Don't know. I think it is best to await delivery of the final product to verify, unless someone from Hasselblad would like to officially state sooner.
Steve Hendrix/CI
-
is there any physical difference between an x and a D body?
Edmund
As far as I know - at least the digital backs off our H4D-40 and H4D-60 did not work today...
I think your second question is answered best by not assuming. It's rarely safe to assume anything ! ;)
It would not surprise me if an H6D digital back did work on an H5X, but it also would not surprise me if it did not. Possibly if it did, since the electronics have been updated, perhaps there might be some limited functionality. Don't know. I think it is best to await delivery of the final product to verify, unless someone from Hasselblad would like to officially state sooner.
Steve Hendrix/CI
-
I would definitively second that! Always liked Steve's postings!
Best regards
Erik
I think we ought to mention that Steve is a dealer of cameras who does his homework, and that no one on this forum has ever complained about him, which is also astonishing when you think of it :)
Edmund
-
It's kind of like a Ferrari, as soon as you drive the car out of the dealers garage it looses half its value.
As someone who can talk to this one definitively I can assure you that this analogy is 100% incorrect. I've made money on Ferraris and I've broken even on Ferraris but I've never truly lost money on one. (Well, OK, other than the cost of OWNING/RUNNING a Ferrari which is another issue in itself but not related to buy/sell generally).
Wrt to cameras, I always expect a loss and put it down to my own rental for the privilege of using it. For lenses it is a much safer 'investment' and I use the quotes deliberately.
-
For what it's worth I find NickT to be one of the most valuable contributor's in this forum, especially as regards anything Hasselblad related.
It's hard to fin forum posters that are well informed, intelligent, and fair.
I greatly respect him.
Agreed and I'd also include yourself and Steve Hendrix here too.
I know some believe that you are all biased but in my experience over what are now many years I have to say that this is NOT my experience at all. You say what you mean and based on experience, be it commercial or personal and there really isn't a branded bias IMHO.
-
is there any physical difference between an x and a D body?
Edmund
Nope!
-
As someone who can talk to this one definitively I can assure you that this analogy is 100% incorrect. I've made money on Ferraris and I've broken even on Ferraris but I've never truly lost money on one. (Well, OK, other than the cost of OWNING/RUNNING a Ferrari which is another issue in itself but not related to buy/sell generally).
Wrt to cameras, I always expect a loss and put it down to my own rental for the privilege of using it. For lenses it is a much safer 'investment' and I use the quotes deliberately.
So a used Ferrari sells for the same amount of money as you bought it new from the dealer? Sounds very implausible..no, actually unbelievable. I get it that some very rare and limited edition cars will keep their value or become even more valuable over time, but the same goes for Leicas.
However if you're buying a new Ferrari and you're selling it a few years afterwards as a used car I don't believe you'll be able to sell it for the same amount as you paid for it.
-
It is usual on the high tech market for the "early consumers" to be asked to pay a bit more... With the H6D one can't help notice, that Hasselblad is offering quite a discount if one trades off his older equipment, now given that the trade off value is much less than the discount offered and additionally that Hasselblad can't have any profit what so ever from the equipment that will be traded, One can't help to notice that the price of the H6D-50 comes very close to the current price of the H-5Dc... IMO this is explainable since there shouldn't be any serious manufacturing cost difference between the two products....
However, given that the new entry level Hassy coming this year (which Perry Oosten said that will be portable and will aim to compete with the Leica S market wise) will be an even cheaper ("entry level") product, it would be reasonable for one to expect (all shines and Perry Oosten's statements lead that way) a DSLR-like shape, specified competitively to Leica S (video, leaf shutter ability, high frame rate, similar size) but with 33x44mm sensor (which should mean a couple of millimetres longer lens mounting distance than Leica S) at a price of around 10K... In other words a reframed H6D, with a mirror box designed exactly for 44x33mm sensors and much shorter mounting distance than the H series...
Now that would be something! Especially if they'll take their time with the new lens line and they provide an adapter instead (which is the reasonable thing to do - like Leica does) as for one to use the existing line of Hasselblad H lenses on the new body and thus retain an up-grade path too...
-
Hi,
Regarding the new Hasselblad, my guess would be no mirror box. Simply a mirrorless MFD that can use all existing lenses with an adapter. Think Sony A7 on steroids.
Best regards
Erik
It is usual on the high tech market for the "early consumers" to be asked to pay a bit more... With the H6D one can't help notice, that Hasselblad is offering quite a discount if one trades off his older equipment, now given that the trade off value is much less than the discount offered and additionally that Hasselblad can't have any profit what so ever from the equipment that will be traded, One can't help to notice that the price of the H6D-50 comes very close to the current price of the H-5Dc... IMO this is explainable since there shouldn't be any serious manufacturing cost difference between the two products....
However, given that the new entry level Hassy coming this year (which Perry Oosten said that will be portable and will aim to compete with the Leica S market wise) will be an even cheaper ("entry level") product, it would be reasonable for one to expect (all shines and Perry Oosten's statements lead that way) a DSLR-like shape, specified competitively to Leica S (video, leaf shutter ability, high frame rate, similar size) but with 33x44mm sensor (which should mean a couple of millimetres longer lens mounting distance than Leica S) at a price of around 10K... In other words a reframed H6D, with a mirror box designed exactly for 44x33mm sensors and much shorter mounting distance than the H series...
Now that would be something! Especially if they'll take their time with the new lens line and they provide an adapter instead (which is the reasonable thing to do - like Leica does) as for one to use the existing line of Hasselblad H lenses on the new body and thus retain an up-grade path too...
-
Hi,
Regarding the new Hasselblad, my guess would be no mirror box. Simply a mirrorless MFD that can use all existing lenses with an adapter. Think Sony A7 on steroids.
Best regards
Erik
Obviously a mirrorless camera can be built around the Sony sensor. With a reduced flange distance, it could take Canon TSE shift lenses, and old V series lenses, but there might be an AF adapter for Canon and Sony 35mm lenses. Shooters might get the best of both worlds, choosing the lens for the image circle they want.
Edmund
-
Hi,
Regarding the new Hasselblad, my guess would be no mirror box. Simply a mirrorless MFD that can use all existing lenses with an adapter. Think Sony A7 on steroids.
Best regards
Erik
It could be the case... However, P.Oosten specifically mentioned the Leica S and he was very clear on his LuLa interview on how MF is related with huge, clear, optical viewfinders that "let they eye in direct contact with the scene"... Hence... ;)
IMO, Hasselblad knows that in the near future there will be mirrorless MF proposals by mainstream makers anyway... They wouldn't like to be compared with them in the near future... They'd rather compete with a nice product maker (as they also are) that addresses to the same market section (and sells well)... If they would choose mirrorless instead, the negative results are inevitable and multiple as:
1. They will shortly be accused that they use rebranded products (imagine if there is a Sony release (or other) of MF mirrorless using the same sensor as Hasselblad...),
2. They let Leica S without competition to continue attracting their customers...
A mirrorless (or more than one) MF is to be expected... But not by Hasselblad (or P1, or Leica) IMO... I see all the "prediction" discussions that happen in forums, it sometimes makes you think if the CEO's own words are understood from the readers of a CEO's interview or not...
Never the less, when the new camera from Hasselblad appears in a few months and is priced as "entry level"... Competition can't continue its current pricing policy... ;)
-
So a used Ferrari sells for the same amount of money as you bought it new from the dealer? Sounds very implausible..no, actually unbelievable. I get it that some very rare and limited edition cars will keep their value or become even more valuable over time, but the same goes for Leicas.
However if you're buying a new Ferrari and you're selling it a few years afterwards as a used car I don't believe you'll be able to sell it for the same amount as you paid for it.
I didn't say that. If I had a new Ferrari 458 delivered to me today, I could sell it for more than I paid immediately. Supply and demand and no they don't ever lose 50% out of the showroom.
For more collectible Ferraris it definitely is an appreciating market just like Leica editions.
If you buy and use a mainstream car for a few years then sure they'll depreciate. That's the nature of supply and demand unless they are rare or collectible.
-
I think it's best to let Ferrarri for other forums and better talk about the (very exiting) entry level MF announcement by Hasselblad's CEO... Mr. Ooosten claimed that the new announcement coming, will attract more people to MF, which means that the marketing research for the new product showed a market expansion coming...
-
Agreed here :)
-
I think it's best to let Ferrarri for other forums and better talk about the (very exiting) entry level MF announcement by Hasselblad's CEO... Mr. Ooosten claimed that the new announcement coming, will attract more people to MF, which means that the marketing research for the new product showed a market expansion coming...
It's Perry Oosting, actually. As to what new product he is planning, it is very unlikely to be what people imagine on this particular forum. Generally speaking, this forum and forums like it have a dismal record at predicting future products. The action does not happen here.
-
It's Perry Oosting, actually. As to what new product he is planning, it is very unlikely to be what people imagine on this particular forum. Generally speaking, this forum and forums like it have a dismal record at predicting future products. The action does not happen here.
Thank you for that correction. You are correct there are a great many people here who are simply not planning on buying anything that Hasselblad or Phase One make but enjoy speculation.
I had a long chat with Perry the other day and what I can say is that he gets it. He has surrounded himself with clever people and he is listening to those people, in my opinion Hasselblad is back!
-
Hi,
Nice to hear! That was my impression from the LuLa interview, too.
Best regards
Erik
Thank you for that correction. You are correct there are a great many people here who are simply not planning on buying anything that Hasselblad or Phase One make but enjoy speculation.
I had a long chat with Perry the other day and what I can say is that he gets it. He has surrounded himself with clever people and he is listening to those people, in my opinion Hasselblad is back!
-
It's Perry Oosting, actually. As to what new product he is planning, it is very unlikely to be what people imagine on this particular forum. Generally speaking, this forum and forums like it have a dismal record at predicting future products. The action does not happen here.
er, yes, I think forum consensus did a good job on "predicting" ie. pretty accurate specs ahead of time on the H7D 100, and the Pentax 645Z.
One problem *I* used to have when I was an industry insider was that I saw a lot of prototypes, but it was really hard to know what a company would actually launch commercially. The Pentax 645D was a notorious example of this, the prototype was a zombie that floated around from show to show, and nobody knew what would happen, then one day bang! someone at Pentax/Ricoh had a brainwave and greenlighted the product. Much gets passed around in whispers, but often people who "predict" something that doesn't materialize weren't making up stories, it's just that some choice happened after they saw whatever they saw.
On a sidenote, I used to be paid quite well to publish a rumors column on the computer industry. It's amazing what you can find out, because there is one rule in the tech business: You get in trouble if you leak, but you never get in trouble for gossiping about your competitors. Walk up to any rep, and they will clam up if you ask them about next month's product, but they will tell you every detail about the stuff their competitors are threatening to ship. And also, they'll tell you what the production issues and the bugs are. Often the bugs they found out about by using the same components :)
Edmund
-
er, yes, I think forum consensus did a good job on "predicting" ie. pretty accurate specs ahead of time on the H7D 100, and the Pentax 645Z.
You mean the H6D-100c and Pentax 645z? These "predictions" was pretty easy at the time.
Generally speaking this forum and forums like it have a dismal record at predicting future products for two simple reasons:
- people like to predict what they would like, not what would bring revenue to the manufacturer
- people on this forum and forums like it are not the main market as they think they are.
-
Only that this time there are no predictions... There's an interview of the CEO... https://www.ephotozine.com/article/perry-oosting-on-the-hasselblad-h6d-29166
And then there is a specific answer (from a CEO), to a specific question... Here is the exact question and the exact answer:
Q: You spoke about broadening the appeal of Hasselblad and as the new H6D product sits at the top of the market, what will you do to broaden the appeal and do you plan to release something lower down in the market?
A: What would fit is something aimed at the prosumer - which we see as the dedicated amateur, passionate enthusiast, semi-professional etc. - already shooting with a DSLR. Part of this audience already buys into Leica and our first step would be to look at this area, prices and portability. The new H6Ds we are launching has the best in class ergonomics in terms of handling but they aren't the most portable.
-
And then...
Q: You have other companies such as Pentax in the medium format market, with the 645Z, that are quite competitively priced and quite portable for a medium format camera. Is this area something that Hasselblad will be looking at?
A: Portability will be key but how and which way it will be portable is yet to be announced. It's better to scream about something when you have something to say and our ambition towards that direction is there. The good thing is that more people will come to medium format and people are much more interested in quality.
People are interested in upgrading to medium format because they want to take their photography to the next level. If we can widen the usage, it will be a more interesting space.
-
I guess there are still people that read mirrorless to where he says DSLR, they read "whatever", where he says "Leica", they read "other format", where he says "medium format" and they read "EVF" when he clearly speaks (on the LuLa interview) about the superiority of "huge OVF" and the relations of it with medium format and Hassy's tradition... Go figure... 8)
-
You mean the H6D-100c and Pentax 645z? These "predictions" was pretty easy at the time.
Generally speaking this forum and forums like it have a dismal record at predicting future products for two simple reasons:
- people like to predict what they would like, not what would bring revenue to the manufacturer
- people on this forum and forums like it are not the main market as they think they are.
I don't see what that has to do with prediction.
Say -hypothetically- someone planned to launch a mirrorless product based on a back-thinned MF sensor, gaining compacity with a small flange distance and symmetric-wide lens designs. Now the only plant making these sensors may be in Kyushu, which is what the big southmost island of Japan is called. Kyushu is a shambles, there will be no sensors made there for 9 months. Welcome to the wonderful world of just-in-time. I'm not saying this is the prediction here, I'm saying that the person who feeds us with inside knowledge may be both right and wrong.
People who make a prediction can be"right", except the real world has nixed their knowledge.
Edmund
-
I guess there are still people that read mirrorless to where he says DSLR, they read "whatever", where he says "Leica", they read "other format", where he says "medium format" and they read "EVF" when he clearly speaks (on the LuLa interview) about the superiority of "huge OVF" and the relations of it with medium format and Hassy's tradition... Go figure... 8)
Go figure... :o
-
Only that this time there are no predictions... There's an interview of the CEO... https://www.ephotozine.com/article/perry-oosting-on-the-hasselblad-h6d-29166
And then there is a specific answer (from a CEO), to a specific question... Here is the exact question and the exact answer:
Q: You spoke about broadening the appeal of Hasselblad and as the new H6D product sits at the top of the market, what will you do to broaden the appeal and do you plan to release something lower down in the market?
A: What would fit is something aimed at the prosumer - which we see as the dedicated amateur, passionate enthusiast, semi-professional etc. - already shooting with a DSLR. Part of this audience already buys into Leica and our first step would be to look at this area, prices and portability. The new H6Ds we are launching has the best in class ergonomics in terms of handling but they aren't the most portable.
And then...
Q: You have other companies such as Pentax in the medium format market, with the 645Z, that are quite competitively priced and quite portable for a medium format camera. Is this area something that Hasselblad will be looking at?
A: Portability will be key but how and which way it will be portable is yet to be announced. It's better to scream about something when you have something to say and our ambition towards that direction is there. The good thing is that more people will come to medium format and people are much more interested in quality.
People are interested in upgrading to medium format because they want to take their photography to the next level. If we can widen the usage, it will be a more interesting space.
I guess there are still people that read mirrorless to where he says DSLR, they read "whatever", where he says "Leica", they read "other format", where he says "medium format" and they read "EVF" when he clearly speaks (on the LuLa interview) about the superiority of "huge OVF" and the relations of it with medium format and Hassy's tradition... Go figure... 8)
I have not idea whether Perry Oosting is planing a copy of the Leica S with a huge OVF or not, but I know that his target market is nothing like you, eronald or me. Yet, by reading the interview, citing individual sentences out of context and filling the blanks with your own desires, you manage to convince yourself that the camera Perry Oosting has in mind is just the one you long for at the price you are prepared to pay. That is not going to happen.
-
Generally speaking this forum and forums like it have a dismal record at predicting future products for two simple reasons:
- people like to predict what they would like, not what would bring revenue to the manufacturer
- people on this forum and forums like it are not the main market as they think they are.
I don't see what that has to do with prediction.
Say -hypothetically- someone planned to launch a mirrorless product based on a back-thinned MF sensor, gaining compacity with a small flange distance and symmetric-wide lens designs.
This is exactly what I am talking about: nobody planned to launch a "mirrorless product based on a back-thinned MF sensor, gaining compacity with a small flange distance and symmetric-wide lens designs". You are not predicting what Hasselblad may do, you are simply channeling the collective wishes expressed in this forum. But the "mirrorless MF based on a back-thinned MF sensor for symmetric-wide lens designs" is not going to happen, because there is no sufficient market to sustain its development.
As I said, I have no idea about the details of what Perry Oosting is planning. All I know is that he comes from companies marketing luxury products. To develop a new luxury product, one has to have it adopted by trendsetters, in that case new hip people who will impersonate a new trend in photography. These are not going to be the typical portly white male taking landscape pictures with a tech cam during an antarctic cruise. From a few hints in Perry Oosting's interview, the market is more likely to be hip young asian street and fashion photographers. And make no mistake: I am not talking the kind of fashion photography taken in a studio setting like people on this forum imagine fashion photography to be, I am talking what one sees in Vogue and Instagram.
So, whatever Hasselblad is planning, it will be small, look a bit like the 500C that Perry Oosting is carrying on about each press photograph of him published after he became Hasselblad CEO and be used to photograph hip Asian models.
-
I have not idea whether Perry Oosting is planing a copy of the Leica S with a huge OVF or not, but I know that his target market is nothing like you, eronald or me. Yet, by reading the interview, citing individual sentences out of context and filling the blanks with your own desires, you manage to convince yourself that the camera Perry Oosting has in mind is just the one you long for at the price you are prepared to pay. That is not going to happen.
IMO, the saying... "Part of this audience already buys into Leica and our first step would be to look at this area" is clear enough (and quite honest too) as to what he means as it can only have one translation from English, to ...English!
OTOH, I don't know if this kind of market interests you or Eronald... But is certainly interests me! Let me explain, on to this... I am a big fan of working with the minimum of equipment, but I want to be able to perform all different tasks with the best possible quality out of the equipment I use... I'm also extremely slow into upgrading as I believe in long term solutions and familiarisation with my equipment... So... I don't see why I have to use a different series of lenses with my DSLRs if I already have my MF lenses... and I don't see why I should have an extra series of lenses as to use with a tech camera... IMO, An MF system where one could add just another body to do what DSLRs do best and then a view camera body (only) as to adapt his MF lenses and backs on it (as well as an FF mirrorless, would be a ...dream system! Now with a MF modern DSLR, half of the problem is solved, as if one has a camera like that, he could use his existing MF lenses on it and ...get rid of his DSLR system altogether!
Now, if Hasselblad comes with a modern 44x33 size sensor DSLR, one will be able to use his existing backs on an H5X body (especially if they are multishot backs), add just the portable body for single shot and LL photography and then just add an HTS adapter and replace (well.. almost) his view camera too... This is quite tempting, don't you agree? It may not be perfect (yet) as far as the view camera is concerned, but it will be (by far) the most "complete" (and thus economical too) offering in the market.... ;)
-
IMO, the saying... "Part of this audience already buys into Leica and our first step would be to look at this area" is clear enough (and quite honest too) as to what he means as it can only have one translation from English, to ...English!
You are taking that sentence out of context.
OTOH, I don't know if this kind of market interests you or Eronald... But is certainly interests me! Let me explain, on to this... I am a big fan of working with the minimum of equipment, but I want to be able to perform all different tasks with the best possible quality out of the equipment I use... I'm also extremely slow into upgrading as I believe in long term solutions and familiarisation with my equipment... So... I don't see why I have to use a different series of lenses with my DSLRs if I already have my MF lenses... and I don't see why I should have an extra series of lenses as to use with a tech camera...
Here you explain why a manufacturer should not be interested in you as a customer: manufacturers want customers who buy cameras and lenses, not people who are "extremely slow into upgrading".
Now, if Hasselblad comes with a modern 44x33 size sensor DSLR, one will be able to use his existing backs on an H5X body (especially if they are multishot backs), add just the portable body for single shot and LL photography and then just add an HTS adapter and replace (well.. almost) his view camera too... This is quite tempting, don't you agree? It may not be perfect (yet) as far as the view camera is concerned, but it will be (by far) the most "complete" (and thus economical too) offering in the market.... ;)
I have been following your theories on various forums for years and I should say that you are really a remarkable person. Let me tell you something: Perry Oosting has not been brought from Vertu to Hasselblad to build the "economical" camera you are thinking about.
-
Oosting's análisis is quite logical. All 3 other MFD brands follow the "big box principle". Only Leica has designed from scratch a compact new SRL-like system which attracted a certain kind of customer. Sure EVF would be an option, but he did not sound like that.
But to copy this idea, they would also have to design a whole family of new compact, tailor-made lenses which took Leica 5 years. I am curious what is Hasselblad's strategy for the lenses. Again partnership with Fuji? New/old partnership with Zeiss?
If they went again with Zeiss (I fear, it won't happen) this would be a really strong argument to steal some clients from Leica.
-
You are taking that sentence out of context.
Exactly.... I can read English... some others seem to have a difficulty doing so... ;)
Here you explain why a manufacturer should not be interested in you as a customer: manufacturers want customers who buy cameras and lenses, not people who are "extremely slow into upgrading".
To the contradict... manufacturers are creating reasons for one to upgrade (if they do things right)... Makers that are addressing their stuff to fanboys that "just buy" stuff for no reason are the "easy come -easy go" of type... Within a few years they are "history"... Noticed Perry curing the 500 with him all the time? Look at the H6D promotion video... ;)
I have been following your theories on various forums for years and I should say that you are really a remarkable person. Let me tell you something: Perry Oosting has not been brought from Vertu to Hasselblad to build the "economical" camera you are thinking about.
You seem to know very little about marketing... Marketeers aren't of the selling expensive or cheap type... They are signed to create profits whether from an expensive or a cheaper product... Noticed the reduced Hassy prices from the past? Well, the past CEOs where not coming from Vertu... (yet they where selling at much higher prices than Hassy does now)... Go figure "logic".... ???
-
Oosting's análisis is quite logical. All 3 other MFD brands follow the "big box principle". Only Leica has designed from scratch a compact new SRL-like system which attracted a certain kind of customer. Sure EVF would be an option, but he did not sound like that.
But to copy this idea, they would also have to design a whole family of new compact, tailor-made lenses which took Leica 5 years. I am curious what is Hasselblad's strategy for the lenses. Again partnership with Fuji? New/old partnership with Zeiss?
If they went again with Zeiss (I fear, it won't happen) this would be a really strong argument to steal some clients from Leica.
+1... I also like the name... "siddhaarta"? Inspired by Hesse's story I suppose?
EDIT: Never the less, if they go 4:3 there will be a good reason for much more appeal than Leica.... It's the only (serious) aspect I often hear for Leica-S to be criticised and I agree on this...
-
Sure it is inspired by Hesse .. maybe I will change my avatar to "buddha" as soon as I manage to enter into the MF/LF-Nirvana :)
as regards to 2:3/3:4 I recently analyzed my Olympus 3:4 photos and compared with my other Nikon/Leica 2:3 photos and found that I have the tendency to crop more towards 2:3.
But it seems, I am in the minority here. … and sure I love my Hasselblad V for the square
-
Sure it is inspired by Hesse .. maybe I will change my avatar to "buddha" as soon as I manage to enter into the MF/LF-Nirvana :)
as regards to 2:3/3:4 I recently analyzed my Olympus 3:4 photos and compared with my other Nikon/Leica 2:3 photos and found that I have the tendency to crop more towards 2:3.
But it seems, I am in the minority here.
I guess then it won't be difficult to change your avatar soon... Quite worthwhile MF/LF equipment one can access for less than FF Dslrs these days and the Lula forum has enough people with past experience as to help you out... One only has to be careful with the "go figure opinions" that are (unfortunately) inevitable to avoid with forums... I'm sure you can manage around them though... ;) ...welcome.
-
thanks …. I already have a Leica S equipment and I am quite happy with it. As somebody said, the most important factor for a good photo is the part before the sensor (the lens) and the part behind it (the photographer). As regards the lenses, I am all set, the Leica S lenses have a rendering which I have not seen anywhere else yet (ok some old V lenses, e.g. Biogon 38mm or Planar 110mm are not bad either).
But Siddhaarta is about a mental and spiritual process, in this case as a photographer .. there is where the way is still far to the nirvana. ;)
-
Exactly.... I can read English... some others seem to have a difficulty doing so... ;)
To the contradict... manufacturers are creating reasons for one to upgrade (if they do things right)... Makers that are addressing their stuff to fanboys that "just buy" stuff for no reason are the "easy come -easy go" of type... Within a few years they are "history"... Noticed Perry curing the 500 with him all the time? Look at the H6D promotion video... ;)
You seem to know very little about marketing... Marketeers aren't of the selling expensive or cheap type... They are signed to create profits whether from an expensive or a cheaper product... Noticed the reduced Hassy prices from the past? Well, the past CEOs where not coming from Vertu... (yet they where selling at much higher prices than Hassy does now)... Go figure "logic".... ???
I think I'll leave the discussion at that. Since I understand neither English nor marketing, I am probably not the best person for you to exercise your superior knowledge.
-
I think I'll leave the discussion at that. Since I understand neither English nor marketing, I am probably not the best person for you to exercise your superior knowledge.
As a marketeer who understands English, I can assure you that you made the right decision in not bothering to reason with good ol' Theo.
-
I wish there was a "like button"…
As a marketeer who understands English, I can assure you that you made the right decision in not bothering to reason with good ol' Theo.
-
There is so much unpleasantness on these forums these days.
It does make one less inclined to post.
-
There is so much unpleasantness on these forums these days.
It does make one less inclined to post.
That appears to be a general problem on all forums, not only photography. The more interesting posters started to slowly leave 10 years ago and were not replaced by new members who would also post interesting stuff. I wonder where they went.
In any case, the activity on forums suffered a more or less steady decline in the past 10 years. Sometimes, on less frequented forums, the number of messages did not suffer as much decline, but only because one or two members compensated by increasing their message count accordingly. I think that on dpreview, about a quarter of messages per day come from a handful of hyperactive posters.
Basically, forums are dead. At least, if I believe my children, they are not what young users do on the Internet these days.
-
Basically, forums are dead. At least, if I believe my children, they are not what young users do on the Internet these days.
Agree, I'm a dinosaur when I text one of mine and their e-mail accounts, I am an admin, are dead ( and it's not because I'm admin :) )
Photography related Blogs have moved in a different direction as well, generating clicks ( at whatever cost to content quality and accuracy) and ad revenue, although that is under threat or diminishing.
We're all doomed:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w7RIgs3eygo
-
Agree, I'm a dinosaur when I text one of mine and their e-mail accounts, I am an admin, are dead ( and it's not because I'm admin :) )
Photography related Blogs have moved in a different direction as well, generating clicks ( at whatever cost to content quality and accuracy) and ad revenue, although that is under threat or diminishing.
We're all doomed:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w7RIgs3eygo
Facebook is also "dead", I am told.
More relevantly, the village where I spend my vacations had 1000 inhabitants and 5 coffee/bars 20 years ago, now it has 2000 inhabitants -overspill from the local town- and 1 cigarette-shop/coffee/bar which closes most weekends, and at 7:30 every evening. The french have found a solution to public drinking.
Edmund
-
landscapephoto,
Basically, forums are dead. At least, if I believe my children, they are not what young users do on the Internet these days.
Have photography forums ever been what "young users do on the Internet"?
-
Have photography forums ever been what "young users do on the Internet"?
Well 10 years ago I was, well, 10 years younger ;)
-
Chris,
10 years ago I was, well, 10 years younger
Me too.
-
landscapephoto,
Have photography forums ever been what "young users do on the Internet"?
Of course you are right, forums never attracted the younger Internet users.
All I wanted to say was that the unpleasantness is not specific of this forum and happens to a stronger degree in other forums and made a large part of the users leave over the past 10 years. I really wonder where they have gone, though.
-
Of course you are right, forums never attracted the younger Internet users.
All I wanted to say was that the unpleasantness is not specific of this forum and happens to a stronger degree in other forums and made a large part of the users leave over the past 10 years. I really wonder where they have gone, though.
As I know quite a number of the veterans who used to participate even back to the Galbraith days, my impression is that most I know have simply stopped. Participating in online photography forums, that is. At least in any significant way.
Steve Hendrix/CI
-
As I know quite a number of the veterans who used to participate even back to the Galbraith days, my impression is that most I know have simply stopped. Participating in online photography forums, that is. At least in any significant way.
Steve Hendrix/CI
Tell us more about what you see. Age of buyers, camera usage etc.
-
As I know quite a number of the veterans who used to participate even back to the Galbraith days, my impression is that most I know have simply stopped. Participating in online photography forums, that is. At least in any significant way.
So what are they doing now? I mean forums fill a need: it is the only place where one can find like minded individuals to discuss a hobby, when one does not have a collection of friends having the same hobby, which is often the case for MF photography because it is not popular enough.
Where do these people who left go when they want to discuss new MF gear, using MF gear or even more general photographic subjects like post-processing, new trends in aesthetics, etc...?
-
IMO it is explainable that many old posters have left... At the "old days" it was different... People where not "upgrading" with the same frequency they are now and what they where trying to do instead was to maximise their skills with what they have... When digital MF (really - dated by the size of the sensors) arrived with the 37x49 sensors (some12 years ago), it was offered to all MF users, no matter what camera they where using... It was natural to attract many people in MF forums as they had to decide on how to turn their systems into digital... Then the MF makers of digital equipment decided to deny them retain their freedom of choice and the traditional habits they have developed over the years and the same makers (to support all this), they developed an "army" of new posters aimed to promote their own policies (what we call fanboys today)...
Old posters (IMO) have left because they can't be heart anymore... There is always a batch of fanboys covering their voice (many times showing no respect at all or by using illogical ...logic) which has turned them off... Just my two cents...
-
I'll say one more thing... If something comes up back to the market that will give the opportunity to old posters as to reactivate their older (very capable) equipment (Bronicas, RZs, Rolleis, Contax ...etc), one will be surprised of how liveness will return to MF forums... Especially as it will allow the skills to show back... Just my (other) two cents...
-
they don't discuss, they photograph.
professionals who sell their customers a service often don't care about customer or job.
there are some exceptions who come here, but most just get the job done, and go home or party.
i am sure there are some lawyers who care about justice and politicians about the welfare of the citizens, but I think Hillary Clinton cares more about $220K/hour and getting elected :)
and i think most hobbyists have been priced out of MF.
Edmund
So what are they doing now? I mean forums fill a need: it is the only place where one can find like minded individuals to discuss a hobby, when one does not have a collection of friends having the same hobby, which is often the case for MF photography because it is not popular enough.
Where do these people who left go when they want to discuss new MF gear, using MF gear or even more general photographic subjects like post-processing, new trends in aesthetics, etc...?
-
So what are they doing now? I mean forums fill a need: it is the only place where one can find like minded individuals to discuss a hobby, when one does not have a collection of friends having the same hobby, which is often the case for MF photography because it is not popular enough.
Where do these people who left go when they want to discuss new MF gear, using MF gear or even more general photographic subjects like post-processing, new trends in aesthetics, etc...?
If any wish to discuss photographic topics, medium format or otherwise, they certainly don't need a forum to do so. They don't need to check into an online forum to "learn". Since they're veterans they have plenty of "like-minded" compatriots and resources they have regular contact with.
Steve Hendrix/CI
-
......professionals who sell their customers a service often don't care about customer or job....
True, but forums are about photographers, not pros... Pro photographers are (like every other job) rare to find and they do care (a lot).... OTOH, one has to define "photography" too, because the way I see it, when I hear a man saying: "I shoot with a Sony FF and an MFDB on an MF platform and 99% of the (printed) images that made to the wall are from the Sony..." I'm not sure that he knows what photography is, or what his criteria are, or what he judges as "quality", or if he knows the use of the equipment he uses.... Especially if additionally the same man "jumps" in each and every thread even if it is totell people what "multishot" (which he never ever used) capabilities are, or how "pictures of the moon" have been taken, or "how wrong engineers of companies are to not make small pixels"... Never talked about lighting though, or directing a scene, or how to work around photo-graphic tasks...
-
If any wish to discuss photographic topics, medium format or otherwise, they certainly don't need a forum to do so.
There are places where pros congregate but they tend to keep them private because of the many trolls out there.
-
I never participated in a "science" forum when doing that stuff. I published, went to conferences and listened and presented, even chaired conferences, visited labs, talked a lot to people in person and took a plane to visit guys, but never a forum or newsgroup. I don't know why. Or rather I do know why - for the serious stuff every written word is weighed carefully.
Edmund
Some do, but even privately you have to be careful.
Don't pop open the robe Nick.
IMO
BC
-
Why is suddenly everyone talking about "professionals"? I am pretty sure I never used that word myself.
Actually, I think that forums are less useful for professionals than for amateurs, tinkerers and artists. These are the people more likely to be practicing photography alone, to lack real-life contacts to discuss their hobby and to look for an online way to compensate. Heck, if I new 10-20 people who had interest in photography around me (for example who visited exhibitions regularly), I certainly would not be active on photography forums myself.
One other thing: it is not only photography. All forums have seen their participation decline in the past 10 years with the consequence that the quality of the discussions decreased markedly. For example, I used to participate in woodworking and metalworking forums at some point. I checked them a few months ago, they are only a shade of their former self.
-
The people I know that are good and are still up and running can take any camera and software and in an hour or so be with it as tight as nuts on a bridge.
IMO
BC
I recently watched, or re-watched saw it first time around, a documentary on David Bailey, it runs over an hour.
Many cameras/formats shown none talked about, all about the image. Here is a photographer who totally has the eye, the image is all whatever the genre and he switches seamlessly. Despite the output editing is easy he says if you get six good shots a year you are doing well ( and he had 14 pages from one shoot in Vogue).
Could you ever see Bailey or someone similar coming on a forum to discuss DR and why he, and you, only need an 810 or why CCD is dead in the water?
Respect to BC for visiting from the deep end to share with those of us splashing about in the shallows. I think elsewhere looking at a sheaf of prints the interviewer says these are art you are an art photographer, he rants about all the prefixes, including pro, I am a photographer that is all.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S678bcdXsag#t=127.097483
-
I recently watched, or re-watched saw it first time around, a documentary on David Bailey, it runs over an hour.
Many cameras/formats shown none talked about, all about the image. Here is a photographer who totally has the eye, the image is all whatever the genre and he switches seamlessly. Despite the output editing is easy he says if you get six good shots a year you are doing well ( and he had 14 pages from one shoot in Vogue).
Could you ever see Bailey or someone similar coming on a forum to discuss DR and why he, and you, only need an 810 or why CCD is dead in the water?
Respect to BC for visiting from the deep end to share with those of us splashing about in the shallows. I think elsewhere looking at a sheaf of prints the interviewer says these are art you are an art photographer, he rants about all the prefixes, including pro, I am a photographer that is all.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S678bcdXsag#t=127.097483
I know what you're saying but just because back then forums didn't exist and it wasn't mentioned in the documentary that does NOT mean photographers weren't interested in their gear or discussing it at length.
Black and white or color and which film exactly? Small format or large format or large format? Hasselblad or Rollei? I'm pretty sure those questions were still asked but only in smaller groups and not in international forums like this. CCD vs CMOS is quite reminiscent of the slide film vs colour negative discussion (and both CCD and slide film are in decline but still very usable).
Another aspect that many people tend to forget it that back then a lot of photographers didn't develop their photos themselves, especially not when they were high volume fashion photographers, so they simply didn't care. H.C. Bresson was no fashion photographer but he didn't develop or edit his own photos, he had other do that and those people were often shocked by the horrible negatives he provided and worked hours to get a usable print (if that was possible).
These days you're forced to do just about everything yourself if you're a small to medium sized fish in the photography world - and if you're a big fish you can afford to have someone else edit your RAWs - but even then that doesn't mean that you can't or won't be concerned with your equipment. Annie Leibovitz for example has used just about every brand and type of camera and still switches a lot.
The only thing I noticed about this forum is that people don't really discuss images - at least not in the Medium/Large Format section, that's why I stopped posting them here, it's absolutely useless and there are better forums for that. After all LL was never really focused on discussing images but more interested in reviewing and presenting gear - and that shows in its forum.
-
The only thing I noticed about this forum is that people don't really discuss images - at least not in the Medium/Large Format section, that's why I stopped posting them here, it's absolutely useless and there are better forums for that. After all LL was never really focused on discussing images but more interested in reviewing and presenting gear - and that shows in its forum.
As I said earlier, for people to discuss images, they have first to agree on what photo-graphy is... I've many times seen nice pictures been presented, but I'm not sure at all they are photo-graphs too...
-
As I said earlier, for people to discuss images, they have first to agree on what photo-graphy is... I've many times seen nice pictures been presented, but I'm not sure at all they are photo-graphs too...
Actually (as I think it's about time to return back in the subject), it is important to know that David Bailey wasn't promoting Olympus (at the days) only because he made the contract to promote the firm, but he actually did really like it a lot (because of it being more portable) than the rest of the DSLRs... The matter of portability was the same with other famous photographers too and partly the reason why Leica m became so successful among them... Hence I think that Perry Oosting is quite right when he insists that Hasselblad has to stick with the photographic tradition and additionally introduce a portable, entry level, Leica S MF competitor... Obviously there is a new Hasselblad mount coming within the year that will be dedicated on a smaller image area (but still MF) like Leica S is...
-
We did do a print exchange at one point.
Problem is a lot of the guys here think they are "professional" so they are afraid to "give something away for free", and don't want to participate. I don't know why, because I was selling my prints quite well, at one time, and exchanging your own work for someone els's is not dishonourable - it's how the world used to work before hedge funds were invented.
If anyone is interested in doing a new print exchange ...
Edmund
I know what you're saying but just because back then forums didn't exist and it wasn't mentioned in the documentary that does NOT mean photographers weren't interested in their gear or discussing it at length.
Black and white or color and which film exactly? Small format or large format or large format? Hasselblad or Rollei? I'm pretty sure those questions were still asked but only in smaller groups and not in international forums like this. CCD vs CMOS is quite reminiscent of the slide film vs colour negative discussion (and both CCD and slide film are in decline but still very usable).
Another aspect that many people tend to forget it that back then a lot of photographers didn't develop their photos themselves, especially not when they were high volume fashion photographers, so they simply didn't care. H.C. Bresson was no fashion photographer but he didn't develop or edit his own photos, he had other do that and those people were often shocked by the horrible negatives he provided and worked hours to get a usable print (if that was possible).
These days you're forced to do just about everything yourself if you're a small to medium sized fish in the photography world - and if you're a big fish you can afford to have someone else edit your RAWs - but even then that doesn't mean that you can't or won't be concerned with your equipment. Annie Leibovitz for example has used just about every brand and type of camera and still switches a lot.
The only thing I noticed about this forum is that people don't really discuss images - at least not in the Medium/Large Format section, that's why I stopped posting them here, it's absolutely useless and there are better forums for that. After all LL was never really focused on discussing images but more interested in reviewing and presenting gear - and that shows in its forum.
-
We did do a print exchange at one point.
Problem is a lot of the guys here think they are "professional" so they are afraid to "give something away for free", and don't want to participate. I don't know why, because I was selling my prints quite well, at one time, and exchanging your own work for someone els's is not dishonourable - it's how the world used to work before hedge funds were invented.
If anyone is interested in doing a new print exchange ...
Edmund
A print exchange is a nice idea but (!) I'm talking about constructive criticism from a larger group. Meaning that a lot of people get to enter a discussion instead of 'just' two people.
-
A print exchange is a nice idea but (!) I'm talking about constructive criticism from a larger group. Meaning that a lot of people get to enter a discussion instead of 'just' two people.
I think we simply swapped prints between about ten of us members. One of the forum members received multiples from each participant, made up packs with one of each print, and sent them out. This very generous individual did not request money for shipping (!).
Of note, I think I qualify as a master printer, on inkjet, I'm one of the rare people who do their own profiles and then retouch directly in the printer gamut to optimise colors, so my prints are sometimes very different from what one would get by just giving a file to a lab to run off. I expect some other people here have a similar dedication to the print, so exchanging prints is different from just showing files.
And yes - I do understand such a printing workflow is not portable and suitable for commercial jobs where colors need to match from print to print in a batch, but when you sell single art prints you aren't doing commercial jobs and so you're not bound to the conventional rules of color management. And yes, as an ex-member of the ICC I do know what color management means.
Edmund
-
I think we simply swapped prints between about ten of us members. One of the forum members received multiples from each participant, made up packs with one of each print, and sent them out. This very generous individual did not request money for shipping (!).
Of note, I think I qualify as a master printer, on inkjet, I'm one of the rare people who do their own profiles and then retouch directly in the printer gamut to optimise colors, so my prints are sometimes very different from what one would get by just giving a file to a lab to run off. I expect some other people here have a similar dedication to the print, so exchanging prints is different from just showing files.
And yes - I do understand such a printing workflow is not portable and suitable for commercial jobs where colors need to match from print to print in a batch, but when you sell single art prints you aren't doing commercial jobs and so you're not bound to the conventional rules of color management. And yes, as an ex-member of the ICC I do know what color management means.
Edmund
Both print exchanging and the technical part (for all avoiding artefacts, maximising optical resolution and achieving colour accuracy) of printing, are very interesting subjects (master of printing is IMO part of the photographic process of visualisation)... but... don't you friends think that it should be part of a different conversation?
I think it hasn't much to do with P1 pricing policies, nor with the way that the new Hasselblad products affect the MF camera market appeal... does it?
-
Well, Edmund's idea is great and has probably more todo with the problem we are having then your numer x post on how Phase One is doomed. We got that and don't really need to continue on that path.
On a site note perhaps we should start a new topic and let Theo discuss pricing, the doom of phase one and his soon coming new wonder SL camera.
Christopher Hauser
ch@chauser.eu
-
Well, Edmund's idea is great and has probably more todo with the problem we are having then your numer x post on how Phase One is doomed. We got that and don't really need to continue on that path.
On a site note perhaps we should start a new topic and let Theo discuss pricing, the doom of phase one and his soon coming new wonder SL camera.
Christopher Hauser
ch@chauser.eu
Like in music, one can have several voices doing their thing, and weaving in and out.
Edmund
-
Since there is a continuation of the conversation going on here: http://forum.luminous-landscape.com/index.php?topic=110135.0, & here: http://forum.luminous-landscape.com/index.php?topic=110154.0 I don't mind at all the insist of some to divert this thread (deliberately) as to cease it... ;)
So... there was an earthquake that affected P1 after all... ;)
-
Since there is a continuation of the conversation going on here: http://forum.luminous-landscape.com/index.php?topic=110135.0, & here: http://forum.luminous-landscape.com/index.php?topic=110154.0 I don't mind at all the insist of some to divert this thread (deliberately) as to cease it... ;)
So... there was an earthquake that affected P1 after all... ;)
And, Nikon, Sony, Pentax, Hasselblad ............. the list is much longer than P1.
Paul C
-
And, Nikon, Sony, Pentax, Hasselblad ............. the list is much longer than P1.
Paul C
I am sorry that people in Kysushu got hit by an earthquake, but when it comes to new cameras I believe we can all survive for another 6 months on what we already own.
It used to be that every semiconductor manufacturer would license a second source - this rule has now been broken and we see the consequences.
Edmund
-
Similar to the issues that happened during the last one, when Western Digital was no longer able to ship many of their hard drives, for months. It also had some effect on the Nikon product line as I remember.
Paul C
-
Similar to the issues that happened during the last one, when Western Digital was no longer able to ship many of their hard drives, for months. It also had some effect on the Nikon product line as I remember.
Paul C
What I don't understand, is why P1 made an announcement as if the earthquake affects the IQ 380 only... and not the Credo 50, the IQ-150, the IQ-250, the IQ-350 at all... and then there is that part of the announcement that tries to promote the "other FF sensor backs" from Phase One instead.... As I said in another discussion, it will be interesting to see if Hasselblad will make a similar announcement for the H6D-100 or not....
-
I agree the 50mp CMOS might also be affected. However odds are there are more of these chips in the current pipeline as the chip has been around since 2012.
From the day of announcement the delivery of the P1 100MP back has been constrained. By far the worst I have seen since my first Phase One purchase in 2008.
Now the delivery seems like it will be more in the 5 to 6 month lag for new orders based on the anno by Sony.
I the post from CI it seems like they are willing to work towards a temp solution and or push P1 to figure out something for an interim solution. At least that how I read that.
Paul C
-
...Or it can be a good excuse as to "get rid" of the FF CCD backs that are with low demand... ;) As I said before, it all depends on if Hasselblad will come up with a similar announcement for the H6D-100... If they do, then there is some reasoning to back up P1's statement... If they don't, it means that it is a new "marketing trick" from P1's side as to promote "difficult" products... One has to admit that they've been very good with marketing up to now as to find people that "bite"... My guess would be that there will be no similar announcement from Hasselblad about the H6D-100 and that they will proceed with deliveries in June as it is scheduled... I hope (honestly) I'm wrong...
-
I'm sure in your world this really real earthquake did not actually happen and it's all only a P1 marketing... Please I can't hear that bs any more.
Hasselblad should better be able to deliver the first 100MP on time as they had PLENTY of time to stock palm a good amount.
We could speculate on, if hassi has to push back they aren't even rdy ;)
Christopher Hauser
ch@chauser.eu
-
From the day of announcement the delivery of the P1 100MP back has been constrained. By far the worst I have seen since my first Phase One purchase in 2008.
The unfortunate side effect of having the most successful product launch in company history. The earthquake will not help this.
-
Or it can be a good excuse as to "get rid" of the FF CCD backs that are with low demand...
Phase One's full frame CCD backs are still selling well. They offer a large sensor, high resolution, and excellent interface for a price lower than the IQ3 100mp. For those who do not need high ISO or live view they are excellent options.
The fact Phase One has several current generation CCD backs (with sensors that are not made by Sony) will, I think, be quite a competitive boon going into a period where availability of Sony CMOS sensors will be very strained.
-
...Or it can be a good excuse as to "get rid" of the FF CCD backs that are with low demand... ;) As I said before, it all depends on if Hasselblad will come up with a similar announcement for the H6D-100... If they do, then there is some reasoning to back up P1's statement... If they don't, it means that it is a new "marketing trick" from P1's side as to promote "difficult" products... One has to admit that they've been very good with marketing up to now as to find people that "bite"... My guess would be that there will be no similar announcement from Hasselblad about the H6D-100 and that they will proceed with deliveries in June as it is scheduled... I hope (honestly) I'm wrong...
Theo -
Let me just make sure I'm understanding you.
You're saying that Phase One is using an environmental disaster that has killed over 50 people and left hundreds of thousands stranded in evacuation centers to lie about delivery of their 100mp sensor, as a strategy for reducing ccd inventory?
This is what you are saying?
Steve Hendrix/ CI
-
Phase One's full frame CCD backs are still selling well. They offer a large sensor, high resolution, and excellent interface for a price lower than the IQ3 100mp. For those who do not need high ISO or live view they are excellent options.
The fact Phase One has several current generation CCD backs (with sensors that are not made by Sony) will, I think, be quite a competitive boon going into a period where availability of Sony CMOS sensors will be very strained.
emmm, are you ready to go on the record and state that there is still a running CCD fab somewhere for these CCD sensors?
Edmund
-
Doug, no matter how good the sales of P1 FF backs are, the production of sensors is limited with respect to other, smaller size imaging sensors... I'm sure that Sony can make the year's needs for that market in nearly no time after the damages have been fully restored (if they haven't done it already back in January).... Companies in Japan have learned to live with Erthquake presence and they build their business plans accordingly as to cope with even the most extreme cases (like now). So... It remains to be seen if Hassy will make a similar announcement for delay in production of the H6D-100... If they don't and they keep with the timing they have announced before the happening, it would mean that P1 can do the same... OTOH, I have a question for you...
"Why you (meaning P1 dealers) refer to IQ3-100 only and not the other Sony sensor products from Leaf or P1?" Aren't the 50mp Sony sensor products equally (in proportion - which should be much larger) affected by the disaster in Japan?
EDIT: Obvioulsly I made a mistake and called the IQ 3-100 an ...IQ-380 (correct it now)
-
IQ380 is CCD, it would be the IQ100 or IQ3100, which ever as it's shown both ways in various articles and write ups.
Paul C
-
Doug, no matter how good the sales of P1 FF backs are, the production of sensors is limited with respect to other, smaller size imaging sensors... I'm sure that Sony can make the year's needs for that market in nearly no time after the damages have been fully restored (if they haven't done it already back in January).... Companies in Japan have learned to live with Erthquake presence and they build their business plans accordingly as to cope with even the most extreme cases (like now). So... It remains to be seen if Hassy will make a similar announcement for delay in production of the H6D-100... If they don't and they keep with the timing they have announced before the happening, it would mean that P1 can do the same... OTOH, I have a question for you...
"Why you (meaning P1 dealers) refer to IQ-380 only and not the other Sony sensor products from Leaf or P1?" Aren't the 50mp Sony sensor products equally (in proportion - which should be much larger) affected by the disaster in Japan?
We stated that "all Sony sensor products are affected".
What are you referring to with regard to IQ380 and no mention of 50mp?
Steve Hendrix/CI
-
We stated that "all Sony sensor products are affected".
What are you referring to with regard to IQ380 and no mention of 50mp?
Steve Hendrix/CI
Well... aren't there going to be delays on Sony sensor product deliveries from Leaf or P1? I saw no reference on this... Only for the IQ-3-100...
EDIT: Obvioulsly I made a mistake and called the IQ 3-100 an ...IQ-380.... I'm sure you understood what I mean though...
-
emmm, are you ready to go on the record and state that there is still a running CCD fab somewhere for these CCD sensors?
Edmund
Isn't there? ...you surprise me! ;D Perhaps P1 dealers are referring to refurb & S/H sales of these backs as "still going strong"... ;)
-
Well... aren't there going to be delays on Sony sensor product deliveries from Leaf or P1? I saw no reference on this... Only for the IQ-3-100...
EDIT: Obvioulsly I made a mistake and called the IQ 3-100 an ...IQ-380.... I'm sure you understood what I mean though...
Theo - please re-read our statement regarding the situation, where we inform that "This affects all manufacturers who utilize Sony sensors.", which would include of course, Leaf, Phase One, Hasselblad, both 50 and 100 megapixels.
https://captureintegration.com/sony-pauses-cmos-sensor-operation/
Steve Hendrix/CI
-
Theo - please re-read our statement regarding the situation, where we inform that "This affects all manufacturers who utilize Sony sensors.", which would include of course, Leaf, Phase One, Hasselblad, both 50 and 100 megapixels.
https://captureintegration.com/sony-pauses-cmos-sensor-operation/
Steve Hendrix/CI
I've read it many times already Steve, it refers to the IQ-100 back only stating a 4-5 months delay for delivery... There is no comment in it what so ever on how the delivery of 50mp backs is affected... Is there going to be a 4-5 months delay for the 50mp backs too then? ...is that what you are saying? All I can conclude in the CI statement's end is that you can "cover" the customers that are in urgent need to have their IQ-100 delivered, by offering them S/H or refurbished CCD sensor FF backs instead... There is nothing there (no information or solution proposed) for the orders of 50mp sensors from P1/Leaf, or for the Hasselblad orders of CMos sensors....
The later (about the Hasselblad orders) is rather surprising, because as far as I know, Hasselblad orders are over the roof here in Europe... Is it different with CI customers in the US?
-
I've read it many times already Steve, it refers to the IQ-100 back only stating a 4-5 months delay for delivery... There is no comment in it what so ever on how the delivery of 50mp backs is affected... Is there going to be a 4-5 months delay for the 50mp backs too then? ...is that what you are saying? All I can conclude in the CI statement's end is that you can "cover" the customers that are in urgent need to have their IQ-100 delivered, by offering them S/H or refurbished CCD sensor FF backs instead... There is nothing there (no information or solution proposed) for the orders of 50mp sensors from P1/Leaf, or for the Hasselblad orders of CMos sensors....
The later (about the Hasselblad orders) is rather surprising, because as far as I know, Hasselblad orders are over the roof here in Europe... Is it different with CI customers in the US?
Theo -
We emphasized the 100mp product only because there already existed a backorder situation prior to the earthquake. But we also did state that this affects all manufacturers who utilize Sony sensors, (naturally).
If it is not clearly written, I apologize. But I hope my explanation resolves any confusion for you.
Steve Hendrix/CI
.
-
Theo - please re-read our statement regarding the situation, where we inform that "This affects all manufacturers who utilize Sony sensors.", which would include of course, Leaf, Phase One, Hasselblad, both 50 and 100 megapixels.
https://captureintegration.com/sony-pauses-cmos-sensor-operation/
Steve Hendrix/CI
Sony had major financial issues in the last year die to a production issue; now they get bitten again. I wonder whether at some point they won't set up a redundant manufacturing subsidiary.
Of interest as well whether the iPhone release will be affected by this - we are talking about hundreds of millions of sensors there.
Edmund
-
Yes, it is millions of sensors which also means that the number of MF FF sensors are "a water drop in the Ocean" when compared... Further more, the 44x33 number of sensors doesn't change the "drop in the Ocean" magnitude either... The later reports from Sony, predict that production will go back to full capacity by the end of May (that is in four weeks time). As usual with similar situations in the past, the product delays that are affected more are the "massive" production ones (meaning the smaller the sensor, the more it is affected), simply because partial recovery of production can't satisfy the product demand.
It is therefore logical to conclude that the maker gives priority as to fully recover the production of the smaller demand first (simply because the supply issues are far easier to solve) and then works his way up as to recover production for the customers that need massive supplies. It is common practice in industry to first eliminate the number of supply problems as to have less customers with a production problem and then concentrate to the major customers by putting all your power into satisfy them the best you can. The less problems a producer may have to deal with, the better he can solve them...
I guess then, the 100Mp MF Sony sensor is the smallest problem out of all for Sony to solve and perhaps the 33x44 sensor is the next smallest one... IMO, MF sensor supplies from Sony will hardly be affected at all and if they do, the issue will be solved in a few weeks time... No big deal for MF then as for P1 customers to rush and consume all the (out of production) CCD sensors that are in stock, if the issue was that huge, Hasselblad that hardly sells any CCD sensor at all (and is almost entirely depended on Sony for production) should have ceased production by now...
-
Yes, it is millions of sensors which also means that the number of MF FF sensors are "a water drop in the Ocean" when compared... Further more, the 44x33 number of sensors doesn't change the "drop in the Ocean" magnitude either... The later reports from Sony, predict that production will go back to full capacity by the end of May (that is in four weeks time). As usual with similar situations in the past, the product delays that are affected more are the "massive" production ones (meaning the smaller the sensor, the more it is affected), simply because partial recovery of production can't satisfy the product demand.
It is therefore logical to conclude that the maker gives priority as to fully recover the production of the smaller demand first (simply because the supply issues are far easier to solve) and then works his way up as to recover production for the customers that need massive supplies. It is common practice in industry to first eliminate the number of supply problems as to have less customers with a production problem and then concentrate to the major customers by putting all your power into satisfy them the best you can. The less problems a producer may have to deal with, the better he can solve them...
I guess then, the 100Mp MF Sony sensor is the smallest problem out of all for Sony to solve and perhaps the 33x44 sensor is the next smallest one... IMO, MF sensor supplies from Sony will hardly be affected at all and if they do, the issue will be solved in a few weeks time... No big deal for MF then as for P1 customers to rush and consume all the (out of production) CCD sensors that are in stock, if the issue was that huge, Hasselblad that hardly sells any CCD sensor at all (and is almost entirely depended on Sony for production) should have ceased production by now...
Theo -
I hope that your opinion regarding the effect on MF Sensor supplies turns out to be correct.
The fact is that it's an unpredictable and fluid situation that can change. We've presented a potential worse case scenario in order to not sell false optimism (or keeping it real, as one might say). But certainly our hopes are that the production recovery process will begin sooner rather than later.
Steve Hendrix/CI
-
I guess then, the 100Mp MF Sony sensor is the smallest problem out of all for Sony to solve and perhaps the 33x44 sensor is the next smallest one...
At least the contracts for general photographic use of these sensors, yes, they will be the lowest priority. They may also be some of the hardest problems they face because these sensors can only be manufactured on a line with a very high yield.
Edmund
-
At least the contracts for general photographic use of these sensors, yes, they will be the lowest priority. They may also be some of the hardest problems they face because these sensors can only be manufactured on a line with a very high yield.
Edmund
Yes, but don't forget that the entire MF market depends on them... They are the only sensor supplier left (at the moment) for the entire market... remember? ...and we are talking about what? ...20-30 sensors (both 50 & 100mp) per day of production/sales for all Pentax, Hassy & P1/Leaf?
EDIT: The water drop in the Ocean - if not in all Oceans and seas included - I stated earlier...