Luminous Landscape Forum
Equipment & Techniques => Medium Format / Film / Digital Backs – and Large Sensor Photography => Topic started by: PeterJaay on July 19, 2019, 02:43:25 pm
-
HI everyone.
Looking for a little bit of advice/ input.
I shoot mainly commercial and fashion work, both in the studio and on location, I currently use nikon d810/850 cameras but am have been considering medium format. My main reason is the leaf shutter and I guess the over all look, which might help to give me a different and more unique look to my work. Big fan of MF film so used to the style of look.
I have looked so many systems and cameras my head is a little fired. Unfortunately i live some distance from a dealer so its difficult for me to try them out.
I have a budget of about 9K GBP,
So far I am considering the following gear,
IQ160/ IQ180 + 110mm, 80mm, DF+ body. Both backs work out similar at price, the 160 is in excellent condition with 5000 clicks, where the 180 is described by the dealer as being in good condition with 60k clicks. Not sure what would be best here, and can find little comparisons online. Is the MP the only difference?
My question with CCD is also, is buying on the the above backs in 2019 daft? Which leads me onto the next option.
IQ150, + 110mm, 80mm + XF body, all are in excellent condition. The 150 back is cheaper so i can afford an XF body. Or if i want the CCD back i can look at the credo 40 or IQ140.
Or for a similar amount I could get the new Hasselblad X1DII plus a couple of lenses. Ideal for location but not sure about the studio and how how good the EVF is for fashion.
I have kinda discounted the H hasselblads to the the UI on the older models, ie H4 etc.
Or if anyone has any suggestions?
Any input would be amazing.
Cheers
-
Hi Peter,
My Advice would be consider a Hasselblad H system camera body with a phase One Digital Back. It should be better value for money in my view.
You can find a good Hasselblad H body for a reasonably low price. While via XF body route - you need to be ready to spend significantly more on the camera body.
I had several Hasselblad H cameras and different Phase One Digital backs and apart from high ISO it covers all my photography needs.
Regards,
Konstantin.
HI everyone.
Looking for a little bit of advice/ input.
I shoot mainly commercial and fashion work, both in the studio and on location, I currently use nikon d810/850 cameras but am have been considering medium format. My main reason is the leaf shutter and I guess the over all look, which might help to give me a different and more unique look to my work. Big fan of MF film so used to the style of look.
I have looked so many systems and cameras my head is a little fired. Unfortunately i live some distance from a dealer so its difficult for me to try them out.
I have a budget of about 9K GBP,
So far I am considering the following gear,
IQ160/ IQ180 + 110mm, 80mm, DF+ body. Both backs work out similar at price, the 160 is in excellent condition with 5000 clicks, where the 180 is described by the dealer as being in good condition with 60k clicks. Not sure what would be best here, and can find little comparisons online. Is the MP the only difference?
My question with CCD is also, is buying on the the above backs in 2019 daft? Which leads me onto the next option.
IQ150, + 110mm, 80mm + XF body, all are in excellent condition. The 150 back is cheaper so i can afford an XF body. Or if i want the CCD back i can look at the credo 40 or IQ140.
Or for a similar amount I could get the new Hasselblad X1DII plus a couple of lenses. Ideal for location but not sure about the studio and how how good the EVF is for fashion.
I have kinda discounted the H hasselblads to the the UI on the older models, ie H4 etc.
Or if anyone has any suggestions?
Any input would be amazing.
Cheers
-
Well you lucked out.
Watch Zack Arias compare his Phase One XF100MP (long time Phase One user (8 years) and Fujifilm user) to the Fujifilm GFX100
For the down and dirty go to 1:24:36 in the YouTube video.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=3949&v=0ofRYTn5_ZI
But Zack's talk about medium format starts at 1:05:30 in the video, and he walks you through examples.
Dave
-
DO NOT buy a H system with a phase back...I own that system. I love it. But they just closed the system and I either can't ever upgrade or have to sell my whole kit to go Phase. The IQ3100 or 3100 Trichromatic is the last compatible back I can use on my system. Look at the fuji, or your XF option.
-
Hi guys,
Thanks for all your input so far.
I’ve definitely considered the Fuji gfx50 but it’s max sync speed is 125, which is worse than my Nikon’s at 250.
Again I looked at a h camera with a phase back but I can’t find a decent deal on a h fit phase back..
-
So you are happy to buy old, old technology with 60K clicks on it for 9K GBP?
My experience with medium format is that I started with Mamiya 645 and then went to a Hasselblad H1 with Phase back and then H2 before selling them for an H3DII and then H4D. The integrated H3 and H4 series cameras were far better than the H2 plus Phase back. I did not like the boxy style of the Mamiya and H series was much more enjoyable.
I have since sold my H4D and bought the X1D. This is a fabulous camera and you will buy a new or almost new kit with lenses for less money than you are planning on spending and probably get a warranty. Hasselblad warranties are transferable if the you have the original receipt.
Will you like the EVF? I don't know. I didn't like it at first but now I have no problem with it. It certainly helps in low light and focus peaking helps my ageing eyes.
-
""I’ve definitely considered the Fuji gfx50 but it’s max sync speed is 125, which is worse than my Nikon’s at 250.""
I use the Elinchrom Transmitter PRO for Fujifilm, on my Fuji cameras and Elinchrom packs to get much higher than the standard flash sync speed.
There are many flash systems, besides Elinchrom, that can do this...just do a little research on google. Profoto, lots of quality third party flash units, etc.
The issue of camera body max flash sync speeds have been gone for a while now. And no...you don't need leaf shutter lenses... Welcome to 2019.
Dave
-
How invested in lights are you currently? You can go with the X1D and get the sync speed, or go with the GFX & swap lights to something that does HSS or go with HMI's and don't worry about sync.
To get 'the look' you'll want to go with the larger CCD sensors or the 100mp CMOS.
-
Let's not pretend the high speed sync options are true sync - you really have to study the mechanics of it to see if it works for how you work. It's expensive to get into (you need very specific triggers and lights) and limits the distance, f stop and modifiers you can use (by limiting power, you're limiting the amount of diffusion you can push it through). I rarely use it above F/4 on my Nikons with the Elinchrom ELB1200 and high sync head. I use my leaf shutters all the time.
-
And no...you don't need leaf shutter lenses... Welcome to 2019.
Many would argue that you don't need photographers in 2019 either, but if you want high speed sync then leaf shutters craps all over HSS (:-)
-
If there is any way... I recommend living and shooting with a system for a week. Good dealers can arrange that. Or it’s worth renting. A systems specs and features are worthless if it doesn’t gel with you personally. Especially because medium format is a different working style than a typical slr. Sometimes slower, sometimes more cumbersome, but often more efficient depending on your work. Everyone’s needs are different. It’s worth the rental.
-
There is an entire H system with lenses for sale that would fit your needs perfectly on Craig’s list OC
Buy cheap buy twice, that why you need to buy previously experienced.
Zack works for Fuji!
Get a big sensor two lenses and crop the shit out of the images and you will still have tack sharp, great color, no noise and perfect gradations in all your images.
-
The CCD backs have a different look from CMOS cameras/backs. They're beautiful at base ISO (which is often around 50), but fall apart by ISO 400 (and aren't great at 200, either). I've looked at them occasionally, but size and weight has always ruled those systems out for me. The IQ180 in particular has stunning base ISO detail and dynamic range, even on very large prints.
I've considered the Fuji CMOS cameras much more seriously, which use the same sensor as the IQ x50 (and bought a Z7, which has the same image sensor as your D850, instead). I looked very closely at large prints from the Z7 and 50 MP medium format CMOS , and found that I mostly couldn't tell, staring at a big print from 6" away. If there was any advantage, it was in favor of the Fuji, but it was much smaller than, say the difference between a D800e (probably a D810, too - but I don't have a lot of D810 experience) and a D850/Z7. I was coming from Fuji APS-C most recently, and the difference between 24 MP and 46 MP (plus a sensor size) was night and day, while the difference between 46 and 50 plus another size was tiny. Remember that, to gain the 4 MP and the extra sensor size, you give up one significant sensor generation - it's the same technology as a D810, not a D850.
This does NOT apply to the GFX 100, which has a current-generation sensor, plus it has a radically higher resolution than anything below medium format. According to specs and early reviews, the detail and dynamic range are amazing (body may still be a little quirky, although Fuji's good at fixing such things in firmware)
I haven't had my hands on one yet - would love to try it, although it's too bulky for most of what I do (wish it was in the 50R body). Nobody's had their hands on a new Sony A7r IV yet, which uses a 24x36mm version of that same sensor at 61 MP. If the real performance is in line with the specs, it should perform slightly better than the older 50 MP medium format sensor (the 40-50 MP Sony 24x36mm sensors are extremely close, and this is a slight improvement - should be enough to kick it over).
Everything I talk about here except for the IQ180 and the GFX100 is in a very narrow (and superb) range of image quality. What'll it take to tell the difference between a D850, a GFX 50 or IQ150 and (presumably) an A7r IV? Put the IQ160 in there, too - except that it can't keep pace as ISO rises. A really close look at a very large print, or pixel-peeping at high magnifications... In most cases, "upgrading" from one to another will be invisible.
Upgrading from 24 MP to any of these will be very visible if you print big - I did it 8 months ago, and am amazed at the difference in my big prints. Upgrading from one of these to the GFX 100 will probably be very visible if you print big enough (what's "big enough"? - without experience with the GFX 100, I don't know). Do any of our lucky GFX 100 owners have a similar print from GFX 100 and anything in the next group down (GFX 50, X1D, D850, Z7, A7rII,III or IV, S1R)?
You have the additional consideration of flash sync... If you don't mind the AF, what about an X1D? There should be originals for sale at decent prices, as some photographers upgrade to the X1D II. It's a sidegrade from your D850 to the older 50 MP sensor, but it does have leaf shutters. Expensive lenses, but it just might be what you want?
The body and back systems are huge - the spec sheets don't do justice to just how big they are. They look like they're only a little bigger than something like a D5 or a 1Dx when you read the specs . When you handle them, they feel more like twice that - and the mirror slap is a real recoil. The X1D is a really nice camera to handle, although the interface is odd. The GFX 50S and R are also nice cameras to handle (the 50S feels quite a bit like a good-sized DSLR, while the 50R feels like a big rangefinder - unusual, but not bad at all, especially with the smaller lenses).
-
Dear BobShaw, thank you for your kind and thoughtful words above.
I personal don't have leaf shutter lenses, but Fujifilm makes an adapter for mounting various leaf shutter lenses on their GFX cameras, here is a link for compatible lenses.
https://www.fujifilm.com/support/digital_cameras/compatibility/mountadapter/
I also don't use HSS (high speed Sync), I use HS (hyper Sync) to get a powerful flash at shutter speeds above a cameras standard, but slow flash sync speed. Elinchrom has a very nice write-up showing in detail the differences between HSS vs HS.
https://www.elinchrom.com/learn/hss-hs.html
Here are some YouTube videos on using Elinchrom HS
Michael Clark Elinchrom HS
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vas4AyU2oZk
Michael Clark with GFX100 at 5 FPS sports with Elinchrom
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gobReogVbNM
General video on Studio and Elinchrom HS,
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s9O3CA28L2c
I also don't have the new fancy Elinchrom packs. All my Elinchrom flash gear I bought used off of Craigslist. I have the older Quadra pack with A head (A heads are not good for HS), but I picked-up a Quadra HS head which lets you do HS. I also don't have the new Ranger pack, I have the older Ranger RX Speed AS with S head which gets me to HS at 1/3000 shutter speed.
For ring flash I use the older Elinchrom Quadra with the RQ Ringflash ECO, which lets me get to 1/8000 shutter speed with full power flash sync.
Sincerely,
Dave
-
I personal don't have leaf shutter lenses, but Fujifilm makes an adapter for mounting various leaf shutter lenses on their GFX cameras, here is a link for compatible lenses.
......
For ring flash I use the older Elinchrom Quadra with the RQ Ringflash ECO, which lets me get to 1/8000 shutter speed with full power flash sync.
Thanks Dave.
I am pretty familiar with the Elinchrom system. I have used it for over 10 years.
It is nice and reliable kit. I have components that are over 20 years old and still work well.
One limitation of most Elinchrom gear though is that the flash duration is long compared to say Broncolor. The one exception is the A (Action) Head on a Quadra pack.
You need a high flash speed to photograph say water splashes.
So a huge plus for me is that all these guys are racing out and buying HS heads and selling their A Heads!
I sell a lot of Elinchrom gear on ebay if you ever need any.
Elinchrom did a great thing marketing wise and technically in introducing the HS system as it allows most photographers with focal plane shutters to get a faster sync speed, but it has limitations.
If you read the link you published and then read between the lines you pick up those limitations.
HSS works by dividing the flash power between the number of flashes required to cover the sliding window. The sliding window is linear but the flash power is peaked. So unless the timing is incredibly accurate there can be banding. Also they have to ensure that each pulse is actually the same power. Also difficult.
HS works by having a deliberately slow flash duration. Exactly the opposite of what most people want to freeze action. Also as you can see from the graph, the power decreases over time.
In both cases, you do not have the full flash power available and they say that the light needs to be near the subject. That may be OK for big soft boxes in portraits but not so good for full length moving subjects.
Fuji makes adapters to use other parties lenses, yes, but personally if I am spending thousands of dollars on a camera I expect a complete system with no finger pointing.
The biggest thing for me is that I can photograph anywhere in any studio or outside, using any begged, borrowed or hired flash system and get predictable results using standard flashes and leaf shutters at high sync speeds.
-
Hi,
There is a significant difference between FP shutters and leaf shutters. Leaf shutters are fully open at X-sync at any speed. On Focal Plane shutters the the shutter is only partly open above the sync speed. So, shooting shorter times, weather HS or HHS the shutter is partly closed. That means that a large part of the light (that is photons) are caught by the shutter you have loss of light. So if X-sync time is 1/60 s and you shoot 1/250 s, you loose two stops. Like going from 400Ws to 100Ws.
Many flash tubes have quite long duration at full power, so even leaf shutters may shade some of the light. But, there are short duration flashes that can put all light trough a leaf shutter also at short opening times.
This may have some interesting info. (https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/60622964).
Best regards
Erik
Thanks Dave.
I am pretty familiar with the Elinchrom system. I have used it for over 10 years.
It is nice and reliable kit. I have components that are over 20 years old and still work well.
One limitation of most Elinchrom gear though is that the flash duration is long compared to say Broncolor. The one exception is the A (Action) Head on a Quadra pack.
You need a high flash speed to photograph say water splashes.
So a huge plus for me is that all these guys are racing out and buying HS heads and selling their A Heads!
I sell a lot of Elinchrom gear on ebay if you ever need any.
Elinchrom did a great thing marketing wise and technically in introducing the HS system as it allows most photographers with focal plane shutters to get a faster sync speed, but it has limitations.
If you read the link you published and then read between the lines you pick up those limitations.
HSS works by dividing the flash power between the number of flashes required to cover the sliding window. The sliding window is linear but the flash power is peaked. So unless the timing is incredibly accurate there can be banding. Also they have to ensure that each pulse is actually the same power. Also difficult.
HS works by having a deliberately slow flash duration. Exactly the opposite of what most people want to freeze action. Also as you can see from the graph, the power decreases over time.
In both cases, you do not have the full flash power available and they say that the light needs to be near the subject. That may be OK for big soft boxes in portraits but not so good for full length moving subjects.
Fuji makes adapters to use other parties lenses, yes, but personally if I am spending thousands of dollars on a camera I expect a complete system with no finger pointing.
The biggest thing for me is that I can photograph anywhere in any studio or outside, using any begged, borrowed or hired flash system and get predictable results using standard flashes and leaf shutters at high sync speeds.
-
DO NOT buy a H system with a phase back...I own that system. I love it. But they just closed the system and I either can't ever upgrade or have to sell my whole kit to go Phase. The IQ3100 or 3100 Trichromatic is the last compatible back I can use on my system. Look at the fuji, or your XF option.
Who closed what system?
Please elaborate.
Roger
-
It means you can only use H cameras with H backs and Phase cameras with Phase backs. It used to be that you could put leaf and phase backs on H cameras (the H1/2/4x/5x (what I have) and 6x.) With the IQ 4 series, Phase is no longer making backs that will mount on Hassy cameras.
-
From my (highly biased) point of view: Hassy hasn’t kept their full-frame 645 lens line up to date as resolutions have increased (look up the release dates for Hassy HC lens (https://phaseoneiq4.com/lenses-for-150-megapixels/); you’ll be surprised), and hadn’t made many meaningful updates to the H body since the h4 (10 years ago). Hassy focus seems to be very heavily on their nice crop-medium-format X platform) so it didn’t make a lot of sense for Phase One (now an exclusively full-frame-645 company) to continue making new backs for the H platform.
We still sell a lot of Certified Pre-Owned Phase One backs (https://www.dtcommercialphoto.com/product-category/refurbished-backs-bodies-lenses/pre-owned-phase-one-digital-backs/) with Hassy mounts to people who have Hassy H bodies and lenses.
-
Doug, your'e not wrong. But it is frustrating as Phase promised "Open source forever" to us for years.
-
Doug, your'e not wrong. But it is frustrating as Phase promised "Open source forever" to us for years.
Agreed.
I doubt you’d find “forever” in any official P1 statements (forever is a very long time after all :D), but that’s just pedantry; there’s no question they played up their commitment to the “open platform” philosophy. Some of that survives in the form of 20 different Phase/Leaf backs being able to be used on the XF and many free updates to the XF that add really useful features. But that could also be called maximum-realistic forward/backward compatibility. As far as the “supporting other camera bodies” part of “open platform” - that’s just gone. Too bad too; they were the last company still providing it.
On a related note I have a soft spot for the Contax 645 and wish P1 had released the IQ3 100mp for that platform.
-
Yeah, I'm in that weird spot where I bought into the H system when the DF+ was the only phase choice, and the H was pretty clearly superior. Now it's switched. Being "stuck" with the IQ3100 isn't a bad place, but in 3-5 years I'm sure I'll be irritated.
-
Yeah, I'm in that weird spot where I bought into the H system when the DF+ was the only phase choice, and the H was pretty clearly superior. Now it's switched. Being "stuck" with the IQ3100 isn't a bad place, but in 3-5 years I'm sure I'll be irritated.
I feel for you. :-\
-
Thanks for your reply, Doug.
When I bought my 4-150, I was told it would never work on a H body because H bodies are not able to control or take advantage of the features of the 4-150. That is, the H bodies don't have the required smarts or connections for the features of the new back.
So, if that is the case, I think it's unfair to say PhaseOne has "closed the system" or broken a promise to keep an "open platform". It's not realistic to expect PhaseOne to limit the features of its backs so they can be used on H bodies, especially as, many of the H lenses are advertised as not suitable for full-frame sensors.
I agree it is a shame that we cannot use our 4-150s on H bodies but, as many have commented, Hasselblad doesn't seem committed to updating its products for full-frame sensors and some of its accessories are primitive. I refer to its WLF, for example. The WLF doesn't allow any of the auto exposure options! PhaseOne does offer cross-grade pricing so H users do have options.
It's not PhaseOne's fault that Hasselblad is not interested in professional photographers to the same extent as PhaseOne and that Hasselblad seems more interested in drone and cropped-sensor fashion accessory/toy cameras.
Roger (Hasselblad user for 40 years)
(putting on flame-proof suit now)
It means you can only use H cameras with H backs and Phase cameras with Phase backs. It used to be that you could put leaf and phase backs on H cameras (the H1/2/4x/5x (what I have) and 6x.) With the IQ 4 series, Phase is no longer making backs that will mount on Hassy cameras.
-
When I bought my 4-150, I was told it would never work on a H body because H bodies are not able to control or take advantage of the features of the 4-150. That is, the H bodies don't have the required smarts or connections for the features of the new back.
I'm assuming that a more detailed explanation wasn't offered due to the fact that this is complete nonsense. An IQ4 back will work on a purely mechanical view or technical camera. Where in the world are they hiding the brains that make an Alpa, Arca, or Cambo view or tech camera such a great conversationalist with an IQ4? What features does an IQ4 have, which an IQ3 lacks, which render it unusable on an H6x? I haven't seen any statement that IQ4 backs won't work on a tech camera because they would have to "limit the features of its backs so they can be used".
This sounds more like the kind of answer someone would give when they don't want to give you an honest explanation. An honest answer would have been, In order to deliver the optimum combination of image quality, features, and user experience, a camera maker needs to have control of the entire system. This is something that Hasselblad determined some years ago and which Phase One has come to realize as well (perhaps not by choice). In other words, when Hasselblad or Phase One or any other manufacturer has control over the design and integration of lenses, cameras, accessories, sensor system, and software an optimized system can be offered.
Of course, there could always be some financial considerations involved. Phase one now bears the full costs of keeping a camera factory operating in Japan to produce the XF and associated lenses. If a significant portion of IQ4 sales were for one or more cameras they don't manufacture, keeping what was Mamiya running might become more burdensome finacially due to the potential reduction in volume.
A Hasselblad H6 body seems to be plenty "smart" enough to run an H6D-400c MS with a full-frame 100 mp sensor in single-shot, 4-shot (full color resolution), or 6-shot (400 mp extended resolution) in addition to capturing 4k full sensor width RAW video. If you're using the HTS 1.5 adapter, it will display the precise amount of tilt, shift, and rotation on the camera body grip and transmit that data along with the lens focal length, aperture, and focus distance into the image file for automatic correction. It will automatically apply focus calibration information from the back combined with focal length, aperture, and distance data from the lens, and accelerometer data from the body to optimize focus calculations to account for sensor plane tolerances, aperture dependent focus shift (precisely calculated for distance and focal length), and degree of camera tilt or swing based on an enormous amount of stored lens data. Rather than go on, I'll just say that it seems to be reasonably smart and a pretty good communicator.
I'll end here. There is enough misinformation in your post that I think I'll take it in smaller bites.
-
some of its accessories are primitive. I refer to its WLF, for example. It doesn't even allow autofocus!
Not much to say here other than this is completely false. Hasselblad H camera autofocus has no connection to the viewfinder whatsoever.
https://store.hasselblad.com/products/hvm-waist-level-viewfinder-for-h-series-cameras (https://store.hasselblad.com/products/hvm-waist-level-viewfinder-for-h-series-cameras)
-
Sorry, I meant the WLF doesn't allow any of the auto exposure options. Now corrected. Thank you, TechTalk.
Roger
Not much to say here other than this is completely false. Hasselblad H camera autofocus has no connection to the viewfinder whatsoever.
https://store.hasselblad.com/products/hvm-waist-level-viewfinder-for-h-series-cameras (https://store.hasselblad.com/products/hvm-waist-level-viewfinder-for-h-series-cameras)
-
I don't think the reference to technical cameras is helpful. Tech cameras are so dumb, they don't connect with any of the smarts of any digital backs. They fire off the flash sync signal which is a physical connection without any smarts and they have to be woken up manually to even do that.
I'm not a technocrat but I think two smarts the XF and 4-150 combination has that wouldn't be available on the H bodies are frame averaging and automatic focus stacking. There may be a workaround for frame averaging but it won't be using any of the H's smarts (that is, the H would have to be set manually to keep the lens open for the 4-150 to do its work) but I doubt there is a workaround for focus stacking.
PhaseOne says it has plans to extend the capabilities of the 4-150. So who knows where the smarts of the 4-150 will take us.
In conclusion, I repeat my view that I don't think it is fair to expect PhaseOne to restrict the features on its backs to those that H bodies can cope with. I think this even if my analysis of the smarts is incorrect!
Roger
I'm assuming that a more detailed explanation wasn't offered due to the fact that this is complete nonsense. An IQ4 back will work on a purely mechanical view or technical camera. Where in the world are they hiding the brains that make an Alpa, Arca, or Cambo view or tech camera such a great conversationalist with an IQ4? What features does an IQ4 have, which an IQ3 lacks, which render it unusable on an H6x? I haven't seen any statement that IQ4 backs won't work on a tech camera because they would have to "limit the features of its backs so they can be used".
This sounds more like the kind of answer someone would give when they don't want to give you an honest explanation. An honest answer would have been, In order to deliver the optimum combination of image quality, features, and user experience, a camera maker needs to have control of the entire system. This is something that Hasselblad determined some years ago and which Phase One has come to realize as well (perhaps not by choice). In other words, when Hasselblad or Phase One or any other manufacturer has control over the design and integration of lenses, cameras, accessories, sensor system, and software an optimized system can be offered.
Of course, there could always be some financial considerations involved. Phase one now bears the full costs of keeping a camera factory operating in Japan to produce the XF and associated lenses. If a significant portion of IQ4 sales were for one or more cameras they don't manufacture, keeping what was Mamiya running might become more burdensome finacially due to the potential reduction in volume.
A Hasselblad H6 body seems to be plenty "smart" enough to run an H6D-400c MS with a full-frame 100 mp sensor in single-shot, 4-shot (full color resolution), or 6-shot (400 mp extended resolution) in addition to capturing 4k full sensor width RAW video. If you're using the HTS 1.5 adapter, it will display the precise amount of tilt, shift, and rotation on the camera body grip and transmit that data along with the lens focal length, aperture, and focus distance into the image file for automatic correction. It will automatically apply focus calibration information from the back combined with focal length, aperture, and distance data from the lens, and accelerometer data from the body to optimize focus calculations to account for sensor plane tolerances, aperture dependent focus shift (precisely calculated for distance and focal length), and degree of camera tilt or swing based on an enormous amount of stored lens data. Rather than go on, I'll just say that it seems to be reasonably smart and a pretty good communicator.
I'll end here. There is enough misinformation in your post that I think I'll take it in smaller bites.
-
I think this even if my analysis of the smarts is incorrect!
Roger
Now that I believe.
-
With the H back to body connection, the protocol was very old - it had to work with the H1 after all. The newer Orange Square H glass wasn't going to be supported on the non-Hasselblad digital backs, so the shutter speed was limited. The HC glass in some cases will work fine at the higher resolutions, but it's so hit & miss that it's not worth the dealer/PR issues to support a platform that isn't getting better. Yes, you can build a camera that'll take a HC lens & IQ4 back, but Phase isn't going to be on the hook for the IQ you get out of it.
-
many of the H lenses are advertised as not suitable for full-frame sensors.
Again you're misleading at best. I'll keep it as simple as possible.
HCD lenses were designed with two factors in mind that were not considered in the HC lens designs. 1) Hasselblad incorporated the fact that distortion, vignetting, and some chromatic aberration can be corrected digitally into the initial lens design. Why? Because designing a lens with some degree of under correction of these factors opens the potential for better correction of factors that must be corrected optically, as every lens design is a long series of trade-offs. This approach also allowed for potential reductions in size weight and complexity. 2) The largest digital sensors at the time of design were 36.7 x 49 mm (somewhat smaller that the 40.0 x 53.4 mm sensors that we now call full-frame even though that is still slightly smaller than the 42 x 56 mm film size). This 37 x 49 mm sensor size is what the HCD lens designs were optimized for, although the image circles extend well beyond just those sensor dimensions.
For the two reasons detailed above, Hasselblad does not recommend HCD lenses for use with FILM. The film cannot apply the DAC lens corrections and the film size is even larger than "full-frame" sensors.
Using HCD lenses with full-frame digital sensors is NOT a problem. Hasselblad does make users aware that there may be slightly more vignetting (fully compensated for by DAC lens correction) and slightly less resolution in the corners, but it in no way limits their use. They most certainly are NOT "advertised as not suitable for full-frame sensors" as you claim.
Hasselblad simply advises that they do not guarantee the highest performance in the extreme corners. Read up a little...
https://cdn.hasselblad.com/72678dc2-cb76-4fd5-aa5a-8bca7f8901b9_hcd+and+large+sensors.pdf (https://cdn.hasselblad.com/72678dc2-cb76-4fd5-aa5a-8bca7f8901b9_hcd+and+large+sensors.pdf)
-
Thank you, TechTalk, for your useful information.
I agree my statement that HCD lenses are "not suitable for full-frame sensors" is my interpretation of Hasselblad's statement that they "deliver optimal performance when used with the 48 x 36mm sensor of the H System digital cameras." and that your explanation and the Hasselblad bulletin you refer to show that, with Digital Auto Correction (I think that is what "DAC" stands for) turned on, Phocus can improve full-frame images. The bulletin also shows how little difference there is in size between the optimised sensor size and full-frame sensors.
So, for Phocus users, things are not as bad as I thought.
What about for PhaseOne and Capture One users? Will Phocus allow DAC to be applied to images made with PhaseOne backs? I know that Capture One offers manual lens correction generally and auto correction for the HCD 4/28 (only). So Capture One could be a workaround for correcting HCD images taken with PhaseOne backs.
Roger
Again you're misleading at best. I'll keep it as simple as possible.
HCD lenses were designed with two factors in mind that were not considered in the HC lens designs. 1) Hasselblad incorporated the fact that distortion, vignetting, and some chromatic aberration can be corrected digitally into the initial lens design. Why? Because designing a lens with some degree of under correction of these factors opens the potential for better correction of factors that must be corrected optically, as every lens design is a long series of trade-offs. This approach also allowed for potential reductions in size weight and complexity. 2) The largest digital sensors at the time of design were 36.7 x 49 mm (somewhat smaller that the 40.0 x 53.4 mm sensors that we now call full-frame even though that is still slightly smaller than the 42 x 56 mm film size). This 37 x 49 mm sensor size is what the HCD lens designs were optimized for, although the image circles extend well beyond just those sensor dimensions.
For the two reasons detailed above, Hasselblad does not recommend HCD lenses for use with FILM. The film cannot apply the DAC lens corrections and the film size is even larger than "full-frame" sensors.
Using HCD lenses with full-frame digital sensors is NOT a problem. Hasselblad does make users aware that there may be slightly more vignetting (fully compensated for by DAC lens correction) and slightly less resolution in the corners, but it in no way limits their use. They most certainly are NOT "advertised as not suitable for full-frame sensors" as you claim.
Hasselblad simply advises that they do not guarantee the highest performance in the extreme corners. Read up a little...
https://cdn.hasselblad.com/72678dc2-cb76-4fd5-aa5a-8bca7f8901b9_hcd+and+large+sensors.pdf (https://cdn.hasselblad.com/72678dc2-cb76-4fd5-aa5a-8bca7f8901b9_hcd+and+large+sensors.pdf)
-
So, for Phocus users, things are not as bad as I thought.
What about for PhaseOne and Capture One users? Will Phocus allow DAC to be applied to images made with PhaseOne backs? I know that Capture One offers manual lens correction generally and auto correction for the HCD 4/28 (only). So Capture One could be a workaround for correcting HCD images taken with PhaseOne backs.
Roger
Well, yes. For Phocus users they have Hasselblad backs so no problem.
As far as I know, Phocus does not support Phase files.
The Hasselblad H1 was released in 2002 as a film camera and Phase made digital backs for them. In about 2008 Hasselblad released the H3DII which did not support third party backs. So the writing was on the wall a decade ago. I guess they thought that those that wanted to use third party backs would go away, but they didn't. They probably thought that V series users would eventually go away too, but they supported them with a lens adaptor for the H series. Now they have bought out a new camera for V series users. The latest H5X and H6 support Phase. I can't see that continuing now that they have an X series as well. (Did Phase/Mamiya ever make a camera that allowed Hasselblad backs on it?)
Anyway, I guess that hybrid users need to make up their minds which camera they want. In my experience the integrated camera is far better anyway.
-
With the H back to body connection, the protocol was very old - it had to work with the H1 after all. The newer Orange Square H glass wasn't going to be supported on the non-Hasselblad digital backs, so the shutter speed was limited. The HC glass in some cases will work fine at the higher resolutions, but it's so hit & miss that it's not worth the dealer/PR issues to support a platform that isn't getting better. Yes, you can build a camera that'll take a HC lens & IQ4 back, but Phase isn't going to be on the hook for the IQ you get out of it.
OK. Your post is short enough to take all in one bite.
- Changing or updating communication protocols to enable new features and functionality is a fact of life. This is why a Phase One XF is not compatible with any Phase One/Leaf backs except the IQ or Credo series. It's why your IQ back may or may not work with your older Phase One camera body or may offer limited features (e.g. Phase One 645 DF+ and Mamiya DF+: Support for all P, P+ and IQ1, IQ2 and IQ3 backs. IQ3 back with limited features only available with XF camera). It's just not practical to try to make every back work with every camera anymore. Sorry! Phase One Camera and Back compatibilty Chart (https://www.phaseone.com/en/Search/Article?articleid=1451)
- It's also why not all Hasselblad backs work with all Hasselblad bodies. It's also why Hasselblad long ago started referring to models as "D" for Dedicated Bodies and Backs and tried to get the idea across to photographers that the concept of generic bodies and generic backs had run its course as it was too limiting in bringing new features and functions forward and a barrier to some improvements in image quality. Hasselblad lead the charge to stop thinking of cameras and digital backs as generic and was beaten and bloodied for it as a number of people freaked out!
- Meanwhile, back in Denmark... Phase One saw this as a huge marketing opportunity and proclaimed themselves the standard bearers of FREEDOM of Choice! They marketed the heck out of the generic camera and back concept as a noble company philosophy. To quote from the IQ2 user manual... "Open Platform – Freedom of Choice - Phase One’s Open Platform policy delivers maximum choice and compatibility with a wide range of different camera platforms."
- Across the way in Sweden, Hasselblad did what they said they would do. They focused on making each generation better (yes, better Joe) and more tightly integrated than the one before. At present, they are at the H6 generation which has what some consider to be the best user interface on any camera and a model for the industry. The H6 required a major overhaul of the electronics inside both the body and back to provide for a variety of changes which includes the 1/2,000 flash sync speed.
- So let's talk sync speed. You're absolutely right that the faster flash sync only works with H6D backs. How about the Phase One top sync speed? Does that require specific backs and sensors? Of course it does, as both Phase One and Hasselblad are using the same technique to accomplish the highest sync speed. I'll give Phase One credit for doing this much sooner. Each company improves and expands their system with their own priorities and timetables. https://captureintegration.com/definitive-guide-to-medium-format-high-speed-sync/#SyncSpeedTable (https://captureintegration.com/definitive-guide-to-medium-format-high-speed-sync/#SyncSpeedTable)
I changed my mind. Though your post was short, the disparagement was broad. So, I think I'll take a break. Mopping up messes was never my favorite thing to do.
-
Well, yes. For Phocus users they have Hasselblad backs so no problem.
As far as I know, Phocus does not support Phase files.
The Hasselblad H1 was released in 2002 as a film camera and Phase made digital backs for them. In about 2008 Hasselblad released the H3DII which did not support third party backs. So the writing was on the wall a decade ago. I guess they thought that those that wanted to use third party backs would go away, but they didn't. They probably thought that V series users would eventually go away too, but they supported them with a lens adaptor for the H series. Now they have bought out a new camera for V series users. The latest H5X and H6 support Phase. I can't see that continuing now that they have an X series as well. (Did Phase/Mamiya ever make a camera that allowed Hasselblad backs on it?)
Anyway, I guess that hybrid users need to make up their minds which camera they want. In my experience the integrated camera is far better anyway.
That's right Bob. In late October 2007, Hasselblad's former CEO announced they were discontinuing the H2 to focus on integrated DSLR cameras. https://www.adorama.com/alc/0009950/blogarticle/Hasselblad-drops-H2-launches-H2f-expands-H3 (https://www.adorama.com/alc/0009950/blogarticle/Hasselblad-drops-H2-launches-H2f-expands-H3)
This "closing" of the system lasted almost exactly 4 years. Then the H4x was announced in late October 2011 with support for third party backs and film. The H4x not only supported third party backs, but also the then new True Focus feature regardless of what was attached to the back of the camera. As True Focus only requires the lens and body to communicate, it was made available for everyone to use. This continued forward with the H5x and current H6x. https://www.photigy.com/school/hasselblad-h4x-camera-hands-on-review-back-to-open-architecture/ (https://www.photigy.com/school/hasselblad-h4x-camera-hands-on-review-back-to-open-architecture/)
Note: Some Leaf backs may not work. https://captureintegration.com/hasselblad/h5x/ (https://captureintegration.com/hasselblad/h5x/)
Another note: I admire the folks at Capture Integration for their serious and levelheaded approach. None of the marketing hype and hyperbole or constant shameless self-promotion. Have especially appreciated posts from Steve Hendrix over the years.
One more thing... When the H1 was introduced in 2002 it was introduced and designed as a platform for BOTH film and digital. You can still shoot film on your H6. There are some folks that like both film and digital precisely because they are different.
-
- Changing or updating communication protocols to enable new features and functionality is a fact of life. This is why a Phase One XF is not compatible any Phase One/Leaf backs except the IQ or Credo series.
The fact that man is mortal or that protocols will be changed at whim doesn't make us happier about hastened planned obsolescence.
Edmund
-
The fact that man is mortal or that protocols will be changed at whim doesn't make us happier about hastened planned obsolescence.
Edmund
or as we age, our own unplanned obsolescence.
-
Agreed.
I doubt you’d find “forever” in any official P1 statements (forever is a very long time after all :D), but that’s just pedantry; there’s no question they played up their commitment to the “open platform” philosophy.
Agreed Doug. I don't believe "forever" was ever a word that was used. Infinity maybe? No... that would be too over the top as well.
Oh well, in any event I agree.
-
For me as a hybrid system user what they’ve done is eliminate a viable upgrade path. I’m not buying an xf any time soon, the cost of switching is astronomical. I’m not buying a h back because my entire workflow is based on c1. When I bought in the 4x was a better system than the df+. I understand if have limited features but would still want the ability to mount on my h body. And even with the 100mp, the files are plenty sharp for me.
-
OK. Your post is short enough to take all in one bite.
....
I changed my mind. Though your post was short, the disparagement was broad. So, I think I'll take a break. Mopping up messes was never my favorite thing to do.
Not sure if you caught that I'm a Hass owner, who isn't trying to beat down a brand (they're doing a plenty good job of doing it themselves).
No disparagement - everything stated is true & well hashed here on LuLa. Hass made business decisions, Phase made business decisions. Phase doesn't want to be on the hook for Hass's decisions & lack of action. As I stated, some HC glass is up for the 150mp sensor, but a lot isn't. There are plenty of H mount IQ1/2/3 backs available to those who bought into the system, unfortunately there is an end to it. Yes, the H6D is better than the H5D & H4D platforms, but that wasn't part of this discussion.
I put my name on these statements, please do the same with yours.
-
Not sure if you caught that I'm a Hass owner, who isn't trying to beat down a brand (they're doing a plenty good job of doing it themselves).
No disparagement - everything stated is true & well hashed here on LuLa. Hass made business decisions, Phase made business decisions. Phase doesn't want to be on the hook for Hass's decisions & lack of action. As I stated, some HC glass is up for the 150mp sensor, but a lot isn't. There are plenty of H mount IQ1/2/3 backs available to those who bought into the system, unfortunately there is an end to it. Yes, the H6D is better than the H5D & H4D platforms, but that wasn't part of this discussion.
I put my name on these statements, please do the same with yours.
For a company beating itself down, it seems to be in amazing health! They've had a dramatic increase in sales volume since the release of the X1D.
If one were to go today to the B&H website and sort the list of medium format cameras by "Best Sellers" (please note that although Best Sellers shows in the drop down sort menu by default, you have to actually click on and select Best Sellers for it to then sort the list that way), you would find that their best sellers are:
B&H Medium Format Best Sellers (https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/search?setNs=p_POPULARITY%7c1&sortType=default&Ns=p_POPULARITY%7c1&ci=16734&srtclk=sort&N=4259332394)
#1 Hasselblad X1D II (which has a flag next to the product image on it's page which says #1 Seller) https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1487057-REG/hasselblad_x1d_ii_50c_medium.html (https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1487057-REG/hasselblad_x1d_ii_50c_medium.html)
#2 Fuji GFX 100 (Over the past week or so it has traded places with the X1D II for the #1 spot a couple of times. Prior to that the X1D II was at #1 for about a month solid)
#3 Hasselblad 907x Special Edition Mirrorless Camera (907x with CFV II 50c Package)
#4 Fuji GFX 50R
#5 Pentax 645Z
#6 Fuji GFX 50S
Now this is just one data point, so not too much should be made of it (though they are the largest photo retailer in the U.S.). And I bring it up only to illustrate a couple of things. 1) It indicates that Hasselblad is hardly a beaten down company. They are obviously making products that have some impact in the market. 2) They are all mirrorless except for the Pentax (which has no removable back).
Now you might say (and if you don't, Doug likely will) that Phase One doesn't compete in that space. And you'd be right. The question is... Why not? It is the direction that technology and the entire market is heading. And at a rapid pace! It's as if they've painted themselves into a corner, but don't realize it because they're facing the wall. Unfortunately, the wall keeps getting closer.
Today, Hasselblad is expanding the options for their customers while keeping as much modularity as is practical. An H6 user has a well integrated mirrorless option for their lenses. XF owners do not. H users can attach a film back. XF, not an option. Your H6D back can be adapted for professional 4k video. https://www.alpa.ch/en/site/moving-image (https://www.alpa.ch/en/site/moving-image) (check out the show reels at Alpa Platon) Hasselblad offers a great 100 mp single-shot camera along with an incredible 400 mp multi-shot option. XF, single-shot only. Go to see a block-buster big-budget movie on the big screen and there's a very good chance your seeing Hasselblad HC/HCD lenses being used with the Arri Alexa 65 digital cinema camera (Arri Prime 65 lenses are rehoused Hasselblad H lenses). https://arrirentalgroup.com/alexa65/ (https://arrirentalgroup.com/alexa65/)
The point I'm trying to make clear to you is that Phase One not offering the IQ4 in a Hasselblad H mount has nothing whatever to do with Hasselblad camera or lens capabilities or because they're some beaten down company. Absolutely zero.
It has been clear for over a decade, for any company paying attention, that in order for imaging technology to advance a complete integration of cameras, lenses, and electronics was a requirement. Phase One clung to the idea that all they needed to do was to make software and backs for way too long. Why would they want to make medium format cameras and lenses? Medium format SLR camera manufacturing has been a money losing proposition for way more than a decade (which is why Hasselblad and Imacon merged). The profit was in the software and backs. It wasn't until most of the camera platforms they were selling backs for disappeared that they began to wake up. They finally bought into the one remaining option left, Mamiya, before it was too late. But they still continued to promote the idea of generic cameras and backs even though the technology limitations were obvious. They even made their promotion of that idea to customers seem like it was somehow a virtue. Freedom of Choice! I'm wondering which customers have the most freedom of choice now.
The fact is DSLR camera sales are in steep decline. An ever increasing number of photographers, some of whom never thought they would want a mirrorless camera, are embracing mirrorless as the technology for these cameras advances at an ever increasing pace. If you really want to offer your customers a system with a future, the time to start transitioning was a few years ago. Will Phase One enter that space? Who knows? They have brand new ownership now. At the time of sale, the prior private equity firm which owned Phase One stated in their press release "Silverfleet has supported Phase One to undergo a significant transformation, from a hardware to software-centric business focus". https://www.privateequitywire.co.uk/2019/06/17/276569/silverfleet-sells-phase-one (https://www.privateequitywire.co.uk/2019/06/17/276569/silverfleet-sells-phase-one) So, who knows what the plan for the future is? I don't.
So maybe I need to make it very simple to be understood. Why does Phase One no longer offer digital backs for Hasselblad? 1) It was technological dead end concept years ago. Advancement required integration. 2) They now have a camera and lens factory of their own that needs to be supported financially and the lower the volume of sales from that endeavor, the more burdensome the cost. 3) They are a DSLR manufacturer in a market racing toward mirrorless and need to keep all the backs they sell on their newest camera platform in order to subsidize the cameras which are extremely costly to manufacture and to provide full integration. 4) "Hybrid" backs and cameras never made sense as anything more than a way to transition us from film to fully-integrated digital systems.
Of course it's a lot easier to say... well we really truly wanted to keep offering digital backs for Hasselblad and stay with the "open platform", but their cameras and lenses were just too old and out-of-date so we couldn't. Now Phase One of course would never say that. They don't need to. There are others that will go on the world-wide-web and do it. Some end-users because they're misinformed. Others imply it in a veiled way for their own reasons.
Internet forums... yuck! Enjoy the hash.
-
If there is any way... I recommend living and shooting with a system for a week. Good dealers can arrange that. Or it’s worth renting. A systems specs and features are worthless if it doesn’t gel with you personally. Especially because medium format is a different working style than a typical slr. Sometimes slower, sometimes more cumbersome, but often more efficient depending on your work. Everyone’s needs are different. It’s worth the rental.
To the original poster... Above is the best advice anyone has given. My advice is don't look to internet forums for advice or information. There are pearls of wisdom to be found, but you have to wade through a lot of oysters to find one.
-
It's probably fair to say that Hasselblad is overall in a much better spot than P1, would it only be because they are owned by DJI and already have a half baked mirrorless platform with excellent lenses. Half backed because it lacks the most important ability of mirrorless, that is on sensor phase detection AF.
But both are far behind Fuji in terms of technology and, most importantly, pace and quality of execution.
It's also a bit far fetched to argue that Hasselblad is a totally functioning camera manufacturer since they obviously don't have the capacity to both develop the X1D - again at a very slow pace - while releasing reasonably quickly updates to their historical platform, the H. As a H6D-100c user, I am really wondering whether I should write off my investment and shoot happily with my GFX-100 or whether I can still hope to get the 150 megapixel sensor to work with my Arcaswiss... the only motivation being that that chip is much better with camera movements.
So I appreciate your enthusiasm, but I don't think that Hass can be given a pass on their executions these past couple of years. Yes, the previous CEO put them on a very interesting track, but the current one has done absolutely nothing to convey the message that they still have a bright future. And I am sorry to say, the X1D II doesn't change that a bit IMHO. Releasing a point update has no strategic value.
Cheers,
Bernard
-
It's probably fair to say that Hasselblad is overall in a much better spot than P1, would it only be because they are owned by DJI and already have a half baked mirrorless platform with excellent lenses. Half backed because it lacks the most important ability of mirrorless, that is on sensor phase detection AF.
But both are far behind Fuji in terms of technology and, most importantly, pace and quality of execution.
It's also a bit far fetched to argue that Hasselblad is a totally functioning camera manufacturer since they obviously don't have the capacity to both develop the X1D - again at a very slow pace - while releasing reasonably quickly updates to their historical platform, the H. As a H6D-100c user, I am really wondering whether I should write off my investment and shoot happily with my GFX-100 or whether I can still hope to get the 150 megapixel sensor to work with my Arcaswiss... the only motivation being that that chip is much better with camera movements.
So I appreciate your enthusiasm, but I don't think that Hass can be given a pass on their executions these past couple of years. Yes, the previous CEO put them on a very interesting track, but the current one has done absolutely nothing to convey the message that they still have a bright future. And I am sorry to say, the X1D II doesn't change that a bit IMHO. Releasing a point update has no strategic value.
Cheers,
Bernard
I can only offer my own perspective on the current state of the medium-format camera market. As for myself, I am very satisfied with where we are at. Pentax, Leica, Phase One, Fuji, and Hasselblad are all offering products which exhibit many differences in design and approach. That makes me happy! The last thing that I would want to see is a market where the priority of medium-format manufacturers is to race each other to the finish line of the latest features or sensor resolution in order to declare momentary victory.
Each offers their own unique user experience, ergonomics, and interface. They have their own unique system options. They all move at their own speed in new product offerings and those products operate at their own speed when in use. They are all compromises in design as is every product made. They all naturally have inherent advantages and disadvantages. They have their own priorities which work for some users and may not for others. The same is true regarding feature sets.
The question as to which system is best is up to the user. Some users may find it hard to understand what drives each manufacturer's direction. They all have a history of products that precede their current offerings. All of their current products exhibit deep ties to that history. And I might add, I have great respect for all of them. I think that I have a reasonable understanding of how each has gotten to where they are today. They have all had to face and over come a variety of challenges in a very demanding marketplace. Hence my respect for them all. It may be a fault of my own personal makeup that I don't think in terms of any one of these companies being ahead or behind another. I view them as occupying different positions within the field offering well differentiated options. The more different they are and the broader the range of options they offer, the happier I will be personally. I most definitely consider each of them them to be a "totally functioning camera manufacturer".
I consider the "most important ability" of a camera, mirrorless or otherwise, to be making satisfying images for a photographer that enjoys the experience. I don't consider any of the current options half-baked, nor would I based on any particular feature or lack thereof.
-
I can only offer my own perspective on the current state of the medium-format camera market. As for myself, I am very satisfied with where we are at. Pentax, Leica, Phase One, Fuji, and Hasselblad are all offering products which exhibit many differences in design and approach. That makes me happy!...
How about sensors- doesn't it all boils down to what Sony has to offer at the moment?
An important part of the resulting photo.
-
It's probably fair to say that Hasselblad is overall in a much better spot than P1, would it only be because they are owned by DJI and already have a half baked mirrorless platform with excellent lenses. Half backed because it lacks the most important ability of mirrorless, that is on sensor phase detection AF.
But both are far behind Fuji in terms of technology and, most importantly, pace and quality of execution.
....
So I appreciate your enthusiasm, but I don't think that Hass can be given a pass on their executions these past couple of years. ....And I am sorry to say, the X1D II doesn't change that a bit IMHO. Releasing a point update has no strategic value.
Perhaps I am in the minority, but I care little about sensor phase detection AF. Most of my work is manual focus or if I am using AF I would override it anyway.
What I want is a system that works the way I want and lasts a very long time. These things aren't cheap.
My H3D/H4D was a great camera when I got it, even though it was nearly 8 years old. i did not have the work to afford to spend the price of a decent car on a camera. All of a sudden Hasselblad released the world's first medium format mirrorless camera in the X1D and we had a high quality medium format camera that we could carry up a mountain. After the first adopters had fixed it for us it was even affordable. So I bought one and paid for it in new work within the first two months. I sold my H4D for good money too but kept the lenses. So pretty happy. I don't think that the X1D is half baked at all. The X1DII is only minor changes. A faster camera with a built in GPS.
I would like one, but won't be rushing to buy one and sell the X1D. I expect that the subsequent firmware updates for the X1D will give me what I want. (I would love to be able to reverse the aperture and shutter wheels in manual mode and they keep saying it is in the next release.)
In 35mm cameras the major market is for new toys.
Sony is the master of new toys. They are a consumer electronics company, making Games, TVs, Audio gear and currently cameras.
Canon and Nikon will add 10 to a model number each year and newbies will go out and buy one, even though last years model is still in the box sitting on the Green Square. However their top end cameras like the 1D have hardly changed in forever.
The medium format market is not like 35mm.
I see most users of medium format cameras just wanting a platform that works well and will last many years. That is the market.
I do agree that Hasselblad and Fuji are in a much better space than Phase.
-
How about sensors- doesn't it all boils down to what Sony has to offer at the moment?
An important part of the resulting photo.
For some I suppose that the technology, including sensors, used to capture an image is an important part of the photo. I don't consider these things to be an important part of any photograph. The only exception might be images made for a very technical application like medical, scientific, industrial, or reproduction. The only important parts of a photograph for me are the subject matter and how I can use whatever skills I posses to interpret what I'm seeing with whatever equipment I have available at the time.
I've never blamed a camera for a bad image or given it credit for a good one. I am a mixed-up individual that loves technology but doesn't want to become overly dependent on it to make images (or life) better for me.
For instance, two of the methods that can be used for capturing fast action are tracking it or anticipating it and waiting for a moment. Both are perfectly valid methods to use. Having learned photography with ancient mechanical film cameras, I always find myself using the latter method even when I'm using equipment that would allow for the former. Some might say that I'm missing potential great moments by not using high-speed tracking. They'd be right, but I don't mind and will applaud great images captured regardless of how it was done or what was used to do it.
-
Today, Hasselblad is expanding the options for their customers while keeping as much modularity as is practical. An H6 user has a well integrated mirrorless option for their lenses. XF owners do not. H users can attach a film back. XF, not an option. Your H6D back can be adapted for professional 4k video. https://www.alpa.ch/en/site/moving-image (check out the show reels at Alpa Platon) Hasselblad offers a great 100 mp single-shot camera along with an incredible 400 mp multi-shot option. XF, single-shot only. Go to see a block-buster big-budget movie on the big screen and there's a very good chance your seeing Hasselblad HC/HCD lenses being used with the Arri Alexa 65 digital cinema camera (Arri Prime 65 lenses are rehoused Hasselblad H lenses). https://arrirentalgroup.com/alexa65/
Hasselblad doesn't make the HC/HCD lenses, that's Fuji glass. Yes, the Fuji glass is used with a wide range of cameras (Arri Prime 65 in this case, one of 4 lens lineups for the Arri 65), but Hasselblad doesn't see a dime of those sale.
I agree with Bernard about Hass not executing as they needed to these past few years. It impacts both current shooters, but also possible customers who wonder if their investment will last.
-
....
The medium format market is not like 35mm.
I see most users of medium format cameras just wanting a platform that works well and will last many years. That is the market.
I do agree that Hasselblad and Fuji are in a much better space than Phase.
Indeed this is the Medium Format part of the forum.... :)
I use a Nikon for 40 years and they always have been very reliable, precise and no nonsense... extreme wide lenschoice from budget to HQ, also thanks to third-parties like Sigma.
As much as you like your Hasselblad i like my Nikons... no toys... just well crafted tools for making a photograph. They last forever and you can still use very old nikkors on it, even on the Z.
Indeed my needs are different than yours- i need AF as much as i need MF- i need F1.4 - i need a camera i can break and buy another.
-
Hasselblad doesn't make the HC/HCD lenses, that's Fuji glass. Yes, the Fuji glass is used with a wide range of cameras (Arri Prime 65 in this case, one of 4 lens lineups for the Arri 65), but Hasselblad doesn't see a dime of those sale.
I agree with Bernard about Hass not executing as they needed to these past few years. It impacts both current shooters, but also possible customers who wonder if their investment will last.
Thanks for posting this. I'm sure others have misconceptions regarding the relationship between Hasselblad and Fujinon (the division at Fuji that manufactures lenses for Fuji as well as contract manufacturing for other companies that design lenses but contract manufacturing to an outside supplier). This is an opportunity to clear up any misconceptions that may exist for anyone that might see your comments.
Hasselblad is responsible for the design of all of the HC, HCD, and XCD lenses from origination to finalization. In addition, the lenses all use a unique shutter system designed and manufactured by Hasselblad. Hasselblad chooses a company to whom they contract manufacturing and assembly of the optics and mechanics including the shutter assembly which is shipped to them from Sweden by Hasselblad. In the case of HC/HCD lenses, the contracted manufacturer is Fujinon. For XCD lenses, it is Nittoh. In addition, Fujinon makes one other optical component of the H system which is the viewfinder. Fuji also makes the film magazines. The body (including back), is made by Hasselblad in Sweden as is the X series. One exception to this is the HTS 1.5 Tilt/Shift Adapter which is made by Hasselblad in Sweden. The HTS 1.5 is a very clever bit of design and engineering and was a difficult project according to Per Nordlund, Hasselblad Lead Optical Designer. Designed to work with six different focal lengths, extension tubes of various lengths, and a macro converter (made for the 50mm II lens) it required generating over 200,000 lens correction tables for the DAC automatic lens corrections in order to account for the huge number of variables involved. https://www.pdnonline.com/gear/cameras/brains-behind-camera-gear/ (https://www.pdnonline.com/gear/cameras/brains-behind-camera-gear/)
So, Per Nordlund, who I mentioned above, has been with Hasselblad for 30 years. Starting in the MTF measuring lab at Hasselblad, he worked his way up to become Lead Optical Designer. They are advertising for another optical engineer position in Sweden in case you know someone. Could be a great job. In addition to "Design of optical systems from concept to finished product", the job description also includes "Field testing". Sweet! You don't have to sit in front of a computer all day, you get paid to go take some images with the lenses you design. https://www.hasselblad.com/careers/optics-engineer--gothenburg-sweden/ (https://www.hasselblad.com/careers/optics-engineer--gothenburg-sweden/) Oh, before I forget... if you have a chance to use the HTS 1.5, the 24, 50 II, and 80mm are especially nice performers. http://static.hasselblad.com/2014/11/uk_hts_datasheet_v9.pdf (http://static.hasselblad.com/2014/11/uk_hts_datasheet_v9.pdf)
Per's name doesn't come up very often, but it pops up once in awhile. Like in the recent press release for the XCD 35-75mm where he was quoted as saying “This really is the best lens Hasselblad has developed – its performance is extremely high, competing with our prime lenses. I can even go as far to say that it’s probably the best zoom lens currently available on the market”. I'm sure that statement will be put to the test when it arrives in photographers hands. https://www.hasselblad.com/press/press-releases/hasselblad-expands-reach-of-medium-format/ (https://www.hasselblad.com/press/press-releases/hasselblad-expands-reach-of-medium-format/) In the meantime, check out the MTF curves on this beauty! https://cdn.hasselblad.com/datasheets/xcd-lenses/XCD35-75-Datasheet-en.pdf (https://cdn.hasselblad.com/datasheets/xcd-lenses/XCD35-75-Datasheet-en.pdf)
So anyway, Hasselblad starts with a lens design, sends it to the chosen contractor for review, comment, and estimates of cost to manufacture. Hasselblad will make any changes or refinements to the design in consultation with the contracted manufacturer and request prototypes for evaluation in their lab and with actual photographs. Once Hasselblad is satisfied that a lens is ready, they will authorize production (as the originator and owner of the design, they make that call). The contract manufacturer then produces and ships finished lenses to Hasselblad in Sweden who then tests each individual lens before it is sold to you or Arri or any other customer. If a lens doesn't meet the required standard, it is returned to the contracted supplier.
Hasselblad is the only company that sells the lenses they have designed and not the contract manufacturers. I mean you wouldn't think that Apple designs an iPhone, contracts it to Foxconn to manufacture, and then permits Foxconn to sell copies themselves while Apple "doesn't see a dime of those sales". Would you? How products are designed and manufactured changed last century. Contracting for parts, manufacturing, and assembly by companies that own the design and intellectual property rights for the products that they sell, market, and service is the way business has been done around the world for several decades now.
As to Arri, there is an interesting article interviewing an engineer from IB/E Optics to whom Arri contracts the lens assembly, which is done from complete HC/HCD lenses purchased from Hasselblad and which have to be disassembled and the optics removed for reassembly in a custom cine mount. They would like to buy just the optics, but Hasselblad will only sell them finished H mount lenses (I suspect it's because that's how they are set up to test the lenses before they are shipped to customers). The article quotes him to say "It started with a call from Manfred Jahn of ARRI Rentals. They had a choice of several candidates who had lenses for this big format. The well-known contenders in medium format lenses included Leica S, Schneider, Mamiya, Hasselblad, and others. Together, we tested lenses, did MTF tests and comparisons. We liked the Hasselblad lenses. When we looked at the MTF values; they were really great lenses." "Manfred and I spent a lot of time doing very critical optical testing of all the possible lenses that were out there." http://www.fdtimes.com/pdfs/issues/65FDTimes-ALEXA65v6.0-150.pdf (http://www.fdtimes.com/pdfs/issues/65FDTimes-ALEXA65v6.0-150.pdf) http://static.hasselblad.com/2016/03/2014-12-10_pr_hasselblad_arri_collaboration_en.pdf (http://static.hasselblad.com/2016/03/2014-12-10_pr_hasselblad_arri_collaboration_en.pdf) As you may know, the Arri Alexa 65 is an extremely expensive camera. You can't buy one. You can only rent it from Arri. It's so costly to rent, they are normally only used in productions with very large budgets.
If for some reason Fujinon didn't want the job any longer, Hasselblad could simply choose someone else. Maybe Nittoh would like to do more business with Hasselblad considering the success of the XCD line. Then again, when you've had a long and productive relationship between a customer and a supplier, you tend to want to keep it.
I think that might be enough for those that are under the misconception that Hasselblad is just putting their name on Fuji (or Nittoh) lenses, but probably not for some. You have to have hope in people though.
-
I think that might be enough for those that are under the misconception that Hasselblad is just putting their name on Fuji (or Nittoh) lenses, but probably not for some. You have to have hope in people though.
Optimism.
Thanks for the post.
-
The article above insinuates that Arri preferred Hasselblad H lenses to Leica S ones. But one reason that they didn't go with the latter must be that Leica themselves had already converted (with some modifications and one new 55mm design) the S lenses into the Thalia line of cine lenses.
-
The article above insinuates that Arri preferred Hasselblad H lenses to Leica S ones. But one reason that they didn't go with the latter must be that Leica themselves had already converted (with some modifications and one new 55mm design) the S lenses into the Thalia line of cine lenses.
No. Sorry. The article you referenced doesn't just insinuate that Arri preferred the Hasselblad lenses over the others available; it actually states it pretty clearly, along with the reasons why. Your post reads to me as if you may be a little defensive of Leica's reputation for lens quality. No need to be. Leica clearly makes fantastic lenses and I think you may be reading into the article (or my referral to it) something that was never said. They list multiple reasons as to why they chose the Hasselblad lenses. One of which is that they "they were really great lenses". No where does the article say that any of the lenses tested or the lens lines evaluated were better or worse than another and neither have I. If you read the article completely and carefully, it says that they really liked the image quality, the range of focal lengths, the size, and the availability of the Hasselblad lens line. It was meeting that combination of criteria that made Hasselblad lenses Arri's preferred choice among the medium format lenses available when the Alexa 65 hit the market and they needed a set of prime lenses to cover their new large sensor.
The assertion that one reason Arri did not choose Leica for their lens line "must be that Leica themselves had already converted (with some modifications and one new 55mm design) the S lenses into the Thalia line of cine lenses" doesn't make sense to me given that the Arri Alexa 65 was introduced in 2014 and the Leica Thalia lens line was introduced in 2017. And the Thalia lenses (which are undoubtedly great) while based on the Leica S lenses feature significant optical changes, including: increased image circle, new coatings, and are designed with deliberately under-corrected spherical aberrations to give them a softer look than the S lenses. Leica describes them as "smooth, forgiving, and clear without being overly sharp." Given that the Thalia line appeared 3 years later, I think the reason for not using Leica S lenses must have been one or more of the criteria quoted in the interview that they considered in making a selection.
In retrospect, I wish I hadn't brought up the Hasselblad-Arri connection in the first place as it only provides more rabbit holes for an online forum to descend into. I mentioned it only because a couple of people made broad and vague assertions regarding Hasselblad lens quality and their potential for use with another system and Arri was obviously an extremely quality conscious customer that adopted the H line of lenses as part of their highest end camera system, partially because they really liked the optical quality.
-
It's probably fair to say that Hasselblad is overall in a much better spot than P1, would it only be because they are owned by DJI and already have a half baked mirrorless platform with excellent lenses. Half backed because it lacks the most important ability of mirrorless, that is on sensor phase detection AF.
<snip>
OSPDAF is in a way both a curse and a blessing. Jim Kasson and Chamber Lloyds both report image quality degradation caused by on-sensor phase-detection of GFX 100. OSPDAF is probably the best solution for full frame cameras but I am not certain it should be a requirement for MF cameras.
I hope that Hasselblad refrains from adding OSPDAF or even better start using Panasonic's style of CDAF (DFD).
-
OSPDAF is in a way both a curse and a blessing. Jim Kasson and Chamber Lloyds both report image quality degradation caused by on-sensor phase-detection of GFX 100. OSPDAF is probably the best solution for full frame cameras but I am not certain it should be a requirement for MF cameras.
I hope that Hasselblad refrains from adding OSPDAF or even better start using Panasonic's style of CDAF (DFD).
For a really great overview and comparison of the advantages and disadvantages of the various autofocus options available today, I highly recommend this video. It's 18 minutes long, but worth the time. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yaJFOH_gmGM (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yaJFOH_gmGM)
-
OSPDAF is in a way both a curse and a blessing. Jim Kasson and Chamber Lloyds both report image quality degradation caused by on-sensor phase-detection of GFX 100. OSPDAF is probably the best solution for full frame cameras but I am not certain it should be a requirement for MF cameras.
I hope that Hasselblad refrains from adding OSPDAF or even better start using Panasonic's style of CDAF (DFD).
One has to work really hard to see any real image degradation from this. But I am sure to some it will matter. Capture One. 12.1 seems to have an excellent handle on the files I have been able to download and push the shadows over 2 stops.
Paul C
-
XF with leaf shutters is great, the caveat is the FP shutter in XF
Expected life in version one is a few as 25K exposure before replacement at $750 USD
HAP 11 versions may be good for 50K or much more.
Look for a HAP11 body, IQ180 is a great chip for studio and 35-200 ISO
CMOS for is required for higher ISO, Trichromatic is lovely, but does it transfer to CMYK better than the regular 1Q100 is the question as I expect some of the colour fidelity is out Gamut for press with the exception of 11 colour Heidelbergs with lots of specials.
my 2 cents
I own and use Phase one h20, P45, IQ180 CANON 6CD, AND 5DSR
XF and Hassie V series, Cambo Tech Cam, Fuji GX680
-
XF with leaf shutters is great, the caveat is the FP shutter in XF
Expected life in version one is a few as 25K exposure before replacement at $750 USD
HAP 11 versions may be good for 50K or much more.
Look for a HAP11 body, IQ180 is a great chip for studio and 35-200 ISO
CMOS for is required for higher ISO, Trichromatic is lovely, but does it transfer to CMYK better than the regular 1Q100 is the question as I expect some of the colour fidelity is out Gamut for press with the exception of 11 colour Heidelbergs with lots of specials.
my 2 cents
I own and use Phase one h20, P45, IQ180 CANON 6CD, AND 5DSR
XF and Hassie V series, Cambo Tech Cam, Fuji GX680
As with all shutters, YMMV.
It's nowhere near the reliability of say, a Canon 1DX, for example.
But the P1 focal plane shutters are rated for up to 100k actuations (which technically, would be what the "expected" life would be), anything past that is certainly a bonus. On the flip side, yes, you can encounter failures before that. We approach shutter failures case by case for our clients, and if you encounter a shutter failure at a count of 25k, I would recommend you take this up with your dealer.
Regarding HAP I and HAP II, to my knowledge this refers only to the replacement of the auto focus sensor and has absolutely nothing to do with the focal plane shutter. A focal plane shutter in a HAP II body would have no advantage over the focal plane shutter in a HAP I body - because they are identical (other than one may have more or less mileage than another).
Steve Hendrix/CI
-
I have been using a Hasselblad H5D-60 with two lenses, the HC150 N and the Hc 50 II for quite a while now. I print very large, using an Epson SC-P9000 and 44" rolls of "Museo Max" print media. The H5D-60 has a large CCD sensor with 60 MPix. The CCD sensor produces for ISO's up to 200 (ideally the native lowest which is 80) an incredible richness of details, extremely smooth color transitions and outstanding sharpness. The HC lenses - especially the HC-50 II - are both of outstanding optical quality. The HC-50 is even fully opened (3.5) extremely sharp, no stopping-down needed at all. I used the H5D in very harsh conditions in Iceland and it worked just perfectly fine - as I expect it from a professional tool.
The weak point of the Hasselblad H system is its raw converter "Phocus" - here comes the main advantage of Phase. Capture One is by far the best raw converter on the market. Fuji made an extremely smart (though probably VERY expensive) move to have their "small medium-format"-cameras accepted by PhaseOne to convert their raw files with Capture One). The best sensor, the greatest lenses and the most ergonomic body will NOT produce the highest quality files if the first and most important step - the raw conversion - is less than ideal.
I am really sad that Hasselblad is about to give up the H system (which is quite obvious - where is the H7D?) as these are great cameras for professionals requiring the highest possible (printable) quality. The "small medium format" of Fuji GF or the X1D or the Pentax 645z can never ever compete with the larger sensor of a PhaseOne or the Hasselblad H5D-60 ot H6D-100 although they are certainly fine cameras and by themselves much better than even the most advanced "Full Frame" DSLR.
I still prefer an optical viewfinder to even the highest resolution EVF (consuming lots of battery power) - photography is an emotional experience and I prefer looking through a real (clear of any information) window than through any kind of "electronic screen".
Also, I prefer a CCD sensor. It may be very limited when it comes to high ISO but at its native ISO (H5D-60 = 80) it is unmatched by ANY CMOS sensor when it comes to smoothest color transitions. The industry knows that very well - but CMOS sensors are much cheaper to produce …
Finally, have you ever changed a lense on a mirrorless camera body in a storm of wind and rain? I have and I must say that I largely prefer the protection of my sensor by the mirror in front of it - so even here "mirrorless" does not equal "better" in every respect.
I know, the highest-end market is very small. This is why I do not understand why Hasselblad and PhaseOne do not MERGE to one company! Together, they would be unbeatable. Hasselblads body and lenses, PhaseOnes backs and raw converter - "better do it quickly or you will both disappear" - that is what I am afraid of ...
-
The Internet. So many assertions. So little time.
assertion - noun: a positive statement or declaration, often without support or reason.
-
(enter stuff here)
The weak point of the Hasselblad H system is its raw converter "Phocus" - here comes the main advantage of Phase. Capture One is by far the best raw converter on the market. Fuji made an extremely smart (though probably VERY expensive) move to have their "small medium-format"-cameras accepted by PhaseOne to convert their raw files with Capture One). The best sensor, the greatest lenses and the most ergonomic body will NOT produce the highest quality files if the first and most important step - the raw conversion - is less than ideal.
I am really sad that Hasselblad is about to give up the H system (which is quite obvious - where is the H7D?)
(more stuff)
I know, the highest-end market is very small. This is why I do not understand why Hasselblad and PhaseOne do not MERGE to one company!
Have the moderators been sending drugs to the members?
There is someone asking what camera strap to use. Another wanting to pay $5K USD for a medium format camera to convert to IR. Someone saying that Nikon is about to go broke. Then of course there is the Coffee Corner.
Here we have a lot of bold unsupported statements from someone on their first post. Is it real?
In addition to what TechTalk said ..
Phocus is an excellent raw converter. Not only does it produce brilliant files, but it has Reproduction Mode, Scene Calibration and a History so that you can make changes to the raw files and at any time go back to any state, even to the original without loss. It supports the HNCS solution on export. It never promises to be anything other than a raw converter. At this it definitely gives the best results on Hasselblad files. it is however, not that intuitive and the User Guide does not help much. You need to read it end to end to pick up on things and then ask more questions. To get the best results you have to EXPORT out of it though to JPG or TIF. I have edited files in Phocus and then READ them in other programmes and some features like HNCS do not appear.
Capture One is by all accounts an excellent programme too. I don't use it though. I prefer the interface of other programmes and pray for a new Aperture. Phase choose for commercial reasons only not to READ Hasselblad files. Reading raw files is not difficult. It is like reading a foreign language. Understanding is more difficult. On a Mac even the Preview programme does read all raw files. Proper conversion is another story. Does Capture One do proper raw conversion on Sony and Fuji? Maybe, but could the manufacturer do a better one? Hassellblad believes it can and even though the files can be read in say Lightroom by all accounts Phocus gives a better result.
>I am really sad that Hasselblad is about to give up the H system (which is quite obvious - where is the H7D?
Possibly. I loved my H series but it is a steam engine. Currently it gives excellent results and will probably get minor upgrades. However great a product is though at some stage nobody wants it. The last company to make buggy whips probably made excellent ones. The good news is that most MF camera manufactures have seen the writing on the wall. Phase is the notable exception.
>I do not understand why Hasselblad and PhaseOne do not MERGE to one company!
Hasselblad is currently at the largest camera store in the world the number one and number three best selling MF cameras. It is also owned by a massive company that sells cameras. As Mark Twain would say, reports of its death are greatly exaggerated I think.
-
Hasselblad is currently at the largest camera store in the world the number one and number three best selling MF cameras. It is also owned by a massive company that sells cameras. As Mark Twain would say, reports of its death are greatly exaggerated I think.
I think the X1DII is a step in the right direction but probably too late at this point....either way, fuji is selling a ton more GFX and has much better tech...DJI is selling drones not cameras....phocus is a necessary evil for hasselblad owners....
if i had money to burn right now, i would take the X1DII over the GFX because of the central shutter....but files out of phocus or LR still would not be a real improvement over A7RIII with C1 ( i know because i have owned and/or used all systems) ....the A7RIV is the smarter investment although i doubt it will make a huge difference either.....they are all pretty amazing....
unless phase comes out with a mirrorless soon, i don't see them being able to sell their premium product much longer....
-
conjecture
noun: 1) the formation or expression of an opinion or theory without sufficient evidence for proof.
2) an opinion or theory so formed or expressed; guess; speculation.
verb: 3) (used with object), con·jec·tured, con·jec·tur·ing. to conclude or suppose from grounds or evidence insufficient to ensure reliability.
-
From my (highly biased) point of view: Hassy hasn’t kept their full-frame 645 lens line up to date as resolutions have increased (look up the release dates for Hassy HC lens (https://phaseoneiq4.com/lenses-for-150-megapixels/); you’ll be surprised), and hadn’t made many meaningful updates to the H body since the h4 (10 years ago). Hassy focus seems to be very heavily on their nice crop-medium-format X platform) so it didn’t make a lot of sense for Phase One (now an exclusively full-frame-645 company) to continue making new backs for the H platform.
We still sell a lot of Certified Pre-Owned Phase One backs (https://www.dtcommercialphoto.com/product-category/refurbished-backs-bodies-lenses/pre-owned-phase-one-digital-backs/) with Hassy mounts to people who have Hassy H bodies and lenses.
Hey Doug. You seem to have regular contact with Phase One. Perhaps you could convince them to stop being the only medium-format camera manufacturer that does not publish MTF charts for their lenses. That data is readily available online for Leica, Fuji, Pentax, Hasselblad, even old Zeiss medium-format lenses (some of which despite being decades old are still quite excellent lenses). Then we wouldn't be tempted to look to poorly written articles riddled with assertions (and nothing with an objective or technical basis) for comparisons. As many have correctly stated, MTF charts won't tell you everything about a lens, but they'll tell you quite a lot (particularly in regards to resolution and contrast). Really, I'd like to avoid anymore comparisons of lens resolution to car tires if possible.
While you're at it, maybe you could get us some clarification as to what role Schneider plays in the generational lineage of Mamiya/ Phase One/ Schneider/ Schneider Blue Ring lenses. Shutter supplier? Optical design? Consultant? Co-branding license? (a nice source of revenue for german lens makers) For instance, I can think of a 100mm macro lens that was co-developed by Pentax and Tokina which was sold as a Pentax lens for Pentax cameras, as a Tokina lens for Canon and Nikon, and as a Schneider Kreuznach lens (with a pretty blue ring) by Samsung. https://www.imaging-resource.com/lenses/samsung/100mm-f2.8-macro-schneider-d-xenon/review/ (https://www.imaging-resource.com/lenses/samsung/100mm-f2.8-macro-schneider-d-xenon/review/) https://lens-db.com/smc-pentax-d-fa-100mm-f28-macro-2004/ (https://lens-db.com/smc-pentax-d-fa-100mm-f28-macro-2004/) https://lens-db.com/tokina-at-x-pro-macro-m100-af-100mm-f28-d-2005/ (https://lens-db.com/tokina-at-x-pro-macro-m100-af-100mm-f28-d-2005/)
And how have the optical designs changed from one generation (or brand naming sequence) to another for the various Mamiya/ Phase One/ Schneider/ Schneider Blue Ring lenses? I ask because it all seems pretty transparent with the other manufacturers and so opaque with Phase One. Maybe you could get a definitive answer from Phase One as to "which lenses you should be buying for 150mp, and which you should be avoiding" as the link you provide purports to advise. Is a Best if Used by Date something we need for our lenses now?
I mean, we don't want to live in Fear, Uncertainty, or Doubt that our lenses are good enough for the next generation of sensors. Maybe you could get them to label lenses with the maximum sensor resolution that meets some agreed standard. Or at least get them to tell us what sensor resolution they have been designed for. I've never heard (or read) a designer of high-quality interchangeable lenses say that sensor (or film) resolution is considered a design parameter, but your linked article implies that they do. They do however provide MTF charts for people to see. (probably like showing everyone pictures of your kids for a lens designer)
Maybe a lens designer from Phase one could share with us what sensor resolution the lenses we're buying are designed for, so we will know in advance. Or perhaps they'll clarify that after considering a number of parameters (size, weight, cost, speed, image circle, focal length or zoom range, incorporation of autofocus motor(s) and/or shutter, manual focus ability, etc.) at the end of the process they're trying to get as much resolution and contrast out of their design as possible, so people will enjoy making images with them for many years, which seems more likely to me.
But most of all please, pretty please, get Phase One to release some MTF charts. Curious minds are well... curious. And I have no doubt they have much to be proud of with their lens designs, so show off a little. Show what they can do with an objective measure. Please forgive me if I don't get a tingle just by seeing the name Schneider with a blue ring around it. I love their heritage (and a lot of their past lenses), but I've seen enough blue rings not to assume too much either. https://www.pentaxforums.com/articles/site-news/samsung-schneider-kreuznach-lenses.html (https://www.pentaxforums.com/articles/site-news/samsung-schneider-kreuznach-lenses.html) I'm happy to see that Schneider has completed their 3-year restructuring plan and are on better footing now. https://schneiderkreuznach.com/en/company/news/press-releases/new-corporate-strategy (https://schneiderkreuznach.com/en/company/news/press-releases/new-corporate-strategy)
You know, Hasselblad used to sell a line of digital backs with interchangeable adapter plates to work with Mamiya and many other camera systems (now that was an open platform). http://www.dtgweb.com/dtg_pdfs/Hasselblad_ixpressBacks_spec.pdf (http://www.dtgweb.com/dtg_pdfs/Hasselblad_ixpressBacks_spec.pdf)
When they stopped, they announced that they wanted to focus their efforts on integrating their own system. They didn't go out and trash their competitors products as an excuse for stopping further development. Maybe they felt it was beneath their dignity or had respect for others competing in the same field. Likely it was both.
-
I have been using a Hasselblad H5D-60 with two lenses, the HC150 N and the Hc 50 II for quite a while now. I print very large, using an Epson SC-P9000 and 44" rolls of "Museo Max" print media. The H5D-60 has a large CCD sensor with 60 MPix. The CCD sensor produces for ISO's up to 200 (ideally the native lowest which is 80) an incredible richness of details, extremely smooth color transitions and outstanding sharpness. The HC lenses - especially the HC-50 II - are both of outstanding optical quality. The HC-50 is even fully opened (3.5) extremely sharp, no stopping-down needed at all. I used the H5D in very harsh conditions in Iceland and it worked just perfectly fine - as I expect it from a professional tool.
The weak point of the Hasselblad H system is its raw converter "Phocus" - here comes the main advantage of Phase. Capture One is by far the best raw converter on the market. ... The best sensor, the greatest lenses and the most ergonomic body will NOT produce the highest quality files if the first and most important step - the raw conversion - is less than ideal.
It's great to hear from you. I think everyone is pleased to hear that you're getting images from your Hasselblad that produce "an incredible richness of details, extremely smooth color transitions and outstanding sharpness" with which you create large prints from your Epson printer.
Since those RAW files need a converter to get from the camera to the printer, I'm curious as to which RAW converter you're using to get such "an incredible richness of details, extremely smooth color transitions and outstanding sharpness" in your prints. Obviously the RAW converter, along with your abilities in using it, play a big roll in getting the kind of quality you describe.
I wouldn't say that RAW conversion is "the first and most important step". The first and most important step is creating a great image with your camera. From there, it's up to you with your choice of RAW converter to create the kind of final image you find pleasing. You're clearly doing that. I'm just wondering what converter is assisting you in getting that final result.
I'm sure that Hasselblad appreciates your kind words regarding their camera and lens quality. Phase one would surely be happy with your strong endorsement and Epson as well. There are a variety of cameras, lenses, software, and printers to choose from and we all choose what works for us and makes us happy.
-
Finally, have you ever changed a lense on a mirrorless camera body in a storm of wind and rain? I have and I must say that I largely prefer the protection of my sensor by the mirror in front of it - so even here "mirrorless" does not equal "better" in every respect.
This is one of the easiest questions I've ever answered. Have I ever changed a lens "in a storm of wind and rain"? No! I am absolutely not changing lenses in a wind-driven rain storm! I have too much respect for my equipment and bank account to do that.
If you put a gun to my head and forced me to do that, I'd be hunched down, back to the wind, camera angled down and covering the equipment with my body and anything else handy. But I wouldn't do it voluntarily. Then again, I'm pretty fussy about protecting, as best I can, against ordinary dust getting in the camera when changing lenses.
As a final note, it isn't your mirror protecting your sensor. It's the "auxiliary shutter" in the back of your H5D body. On behalf of any interchangeable lens camera you may own, please protect the inside of the camera body. There's a lot of very sensitive stuff in there, including the mirror! (if it has a mirror)
Oh... one more thing... Don't ask to borrow my camera.
-
Also, I prefer a CCD sensor. It may be very limited when it comes to high ISO but at its native ISO (H5D-60 = 80) it is unmatched by ANY CMOS sensor when it comes to smoothest color transitions. The industry knows that very well - but CMOS sensors are much cheaper to produce …
Well, since you wrote "ANY" in all caps, I am very tempted to believe you. But do you have any evidence of that? A brief explanation of the technical issues that prevent a CMOS sensor from measuring light in a way that would allow it to produce color transitions that are as smooth as a CCD sensor would suffice.
-
I know, the highest-end market is very small. This is why I do not understand why Hasselblad and PhaseOne do not MERGE to one company! Together, they would be unbeatable. Hasselblads body and lenses, PhaseOnes backs and raw converter - "better do it quickly or you will both disappear" - that is what I am afraid of ...
You may be worrying too much. Both companies appear to be on solid footing.
Phase One's income is about 70% software sales. And given your ringing endorsement of their software, not much to worry about there. Adobe, of course, has substantial resources to put behind Lightroom as a competitor, but there seems to be plenty of room in the market for both, as well as the other free open-source and paid software options. The private equity firm, that recently aquired control of Phase One, paid 1.5 Billion Danish Kroner (about 220 million US Dollars) for the privilege, so I think they intend on keeping the doors open for a while. And I wouldn't worry about the fact that they've transitioned from being a hardware-centric to software-centric business. I don't see any indication that they want to exit their hardware business, despite however small the market may be. They've carved out their own niche in the market. Danish business magazine on Phase One sale via Google Translate (https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=da&u=https://www.a4nu.dk/artikel/dansk-firma-solgt-for-milliard-beloeb-vi-er-superstolte&prev=search)
Phase One is expecting to do almost 82 million US Dollars in worldwide sales this year and to earn about 22 million in profits. So don't lose any sleep.
Meanwhile, the DJI investment in Hasselblad seems to be paying dividends for both companies. In 2017, sales more than doubled for Hasselblad after the introduction of the X1D-50c. And the new X1D II-50c, as well as the new CFV II-50c / 907x combo, are generating a tremendous amount of pre-orders based on their sales ranking at B&H. They have rolled out steady firmware updates for the X1D making owners of that camera happier over time. H system users saw a major update in ease of use with a new interface in the H6 series along with 50, 100, and 400 MP single-shot or multi-shot versions. And now all the Hasselblad platforms H, X, and CFV share that same common user interface design, making moving from one system to another as seamless as possible.
I don't think there's ever been a better time to be a Hasselblad owner. Owners of legacy V system cameras will soon have a new digital back for their current cameras and lenses, plus the option to take that back and convert it into a unique compact mirrorless camera using new XCD lenses. If that wasn't enough choice, they can also mount their lenses from the V system on an H camera via the very nicely engineered CF adapter. The degree of integration between a V lens on an H body is impressive! Briefly, any H camera with CF adapter lets you mount vintage lenses with open aperture viewing, focusing, and metering. When you attach the CF adapter to any H body, it recognizes the adapter and automatically provides a list of lenses to select from to inform the camera which lens you're using for correct metering. Take a shot and it automatically stops down to your selected aperture. Push a lever on the adapter to reset the shutter and you're ready to go again. Film or digital capture, your choice. The adapter to allow V lenses to be used seamlessly on an H camera was part of the design process of the very first H1 camera. After decades of selling the V system, Hasselblad did not want loyal customers to have to buy all new lenses in order to use their new platform. Short term, maybe not a great business decision for a company that wants to sell new lenses. Long term, customers appreciate that kind of corporate philosophy. Years of planning and design went into developing the H1 before it was released. Hasselblad wanted the H platform to have a long life, just as the V system had that preceded it.
So basically if you have a V system, Hasselblad provides options to shoot film or digital and connect to either H cameras or XCD lenses. That's pretty good customer support for cameras and lenses made from 1957 to 2006. Oh, and you don't need any cables. Hasselblad's core philosophy has never changed. Design and build products that will provide customers with high-image quality, over many years, with as much modularity and as many options as possible. It explains a lot about brand loyalty when that loyalty from your customers is seen as being returned in kind.
OK, what about H system users? H system users have lots of options as well. Again film or digital, your choice. You can use vintage V lenses or H lenses. Your H lens options extend from 24mm to 300mm, two zoom lenses, 1.7x converter, macro converter, extension tubes, HTS 1.5 tilt/shift adapter to adapt any of 6 lenses from 24mm to 100mm into a tilt/shift lens with 1.5 x magnification (to enlarge the image circle) and giving a range of converted tilt/shift focal-lengths from 36mm to 150mm. Hasselblad offers the widest focal-length range of any medium-format DSLR camera maker as well as the broadest variety of lens accessories to extend the system capabilities. They also pioneered having automatic digital lens corrections integrated throughout a complete camera, lens, and software system to maximize image quality. Other companies have followed their leadership in total-system-integration over the years. It's also interesting to see that multi-shot capture is starting to appear in smaller format cameras now. What a difference that can make in image sharpness and quality, even in 4-shot mode. Eliminating interpolation can have quite a noticeable effect on image quality!
However, the H options don't end there. H system lens owners aren't limited to one platform. In addition to using HC/HCD lenses on an H camera, they can be mounted via the XH lens adapter to the X1D, X1D II, or even the new CFV-II / 907x combo. All with full lens shutter compatibility and autofocus (manual focus only with older H lenses). Leica S cameras have full autofocus and leaf shutter capability with your H lenses via their own H lens adapter. Even Alpa makes a lens adapter that allows full use of the H lens shutter, but with manual focus (the only medium-format lens adapter they make that allows for the built-in lens shutter to be used). If you own H lenses, you have lots of options! Of course, your H digital back can be used on a variety of view and technical cameras, including the multi-shot backs.
* Edit - I should also mention that there's an H6X body that accepts 3rd-party digital backs and film magazines. Also, the 100c or 400c MS backs can be utilized for full-sensor width large-format 4K video recording, whether mounted on camera or off camera with a cinema rig.
And for X system and 907x users, there is an ever expanding line of great XCD lenses from 21mm to 135mm f/2.8 (with a dedicated 1.7x converter to give you a 230mm f/4.8 ) and a new phenomenal quality zoom. https://cdn.hasselblad.com/datasheets/xcd-lenses/XCD35-75-Datasheet-en.pdf (https://cdn.hasselblad.com/datasheets/xcd-lenses/XCD35-75-Datasheet-en.pdf) Plus, the full range of H lenses as already mentioned. Plus the ability to use those XCD lenses in a different form factor with the upcoming CFV II / 907x. For tech camera use there's Alpa or view camera use with Cambo, but unlike all the other options discussed, the tech or view camera options with X1D models require using the sensor e-shutter. Oh, and X1D cameras are TTL compatible with flashes and triggers made for Nikon. https://www.alpa.ch/en/site/alpa-connects-to-hasselblad-x-cameras (https://www.alpa.ch/en/site/alpa-connects-to-hasselblad-x-cameras) https://www.cambo.com/en/actus-series/actus-xcd-view-camera/ (https://www.cambo.com/en/actus-series/actus-xcd-view-camera/) Wildlife Photoraphy Review with X1D II and HC 300mm Lens (http://austinmann.com/trek/hasselblad-x1d-ii-camera-review)
And what does DJI get from Hasselblad other than affiliation with a legendary brand? Well, they get access to Hasselblad lens and camera design expertise as well as their sensor and color science knowledge. Plus, the opportunity to integrate Hasselblad A6D aerial cameras with their drone technology or work with Hasselblad to co-develop products like their Mavic Pro 2. https://www.hasselblad.com/a6d/ (https://www.hasselblad.com/a6d/) https://www.dji.com/mavic-2 (https://www.dji.com/mavic-2)
The Metropolitan Museum of Art in New York City (The Met) has been using Hasselblad multi-shot cameras for several years to create a digital archive of their massive collection. Hasselblad has been collaborating with The Met's Advanced Imaging Center, The Rijksmuseum and Van Gogh Museum in Amsterdam, and many other of the world's most prestigious museums to advance the state-of-the art in cultural heritage digitization and set international standards for image quality since at least 2007. But here's an interesting use that The Met made of the DJI / Hasselblad A6D collaboration for cultural heritage preservation. https://dronedj.com/2018/10/12/dji-hasselblad-met-cloisters/ (https://dronedj.com/2018/10/12/dji-hasselblad-met-cloisters/)
To summarize this little essay, I don't think you need to worry about Hasselblad or Phase One. You know, interestingly enough, Phase One has never stopped marketing their camera and back systems as "Open Platform" even to this day. The marketing message didn't change. They just redefined what it meant. But after typing all of the above regarding the modularity, openness, and cross-platform compatibility that Hasselblad has achieved, maybe Hasselblad should be the one using that slogan. https://www.phaseone.com/en/Photography/Open-Platform-Philosophy (https://www.phaseone.com/en/Photography/Open-Platform-Philosophy)
-
DJI is selling drones not cameras
I've never flown a drone. But, I'm not completely unaware of what they are or what they can do.
A drone is either a model recreational aircraft that you fly around by remote control for fun or an aerial platform with a purpose. At DJI, a drone is a camera that you can fly.
Maybe I'll try one someday. It is a pretty cool way to capture stills and video.
-
The "small medium format" of Fuji GF or the X1D or the Pentax 645z can never ever compete with the larger sensor of a PhaseOne or the Hasselblad H5D-60 or H6D-100
Where could I find more information on this as well as sample images? (maybe X2D vs H6D 100c) I understand that 0.65x offers a larger viewfinder image, wider angles, and shallower DOF than 0.79x. But as far as image quality and DR, what is the difference if any? Lots of forum post imply that this topic has been covered extensively but I have searched with no luck. I must be using the wrong terms.
-
Where could I find more information on this as well as sample images? (maybe X2D vs H6D 100c) I understand that 0.65x offers a larger viewfinder image, wider angles, and shallower DOF than 0.79x. But as far as image quality and DR, what is the difference if any? Lots of forum post imply that this topic has been covered extensively but I have searched with no luck. I must be using the wrong terms.
There are lots of comparisons. for a comparison of H6D vs X2D this is one by Karl Taylor.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l5GjcpJeKUs
i once made a spreadsheet of every Hasselblad H series camera and sensor size to pick the biggest one. Since owning an X1D I realise it was a nostalgic waste of time. Even the X1D has a sensor 1.5 times the size of 35mm.
Technology improves in 20 years so why buy an old steam engine for the sake of a slightly larger sensor? The H6D has been discontinued anyway. The image quality on these new cameras is outstanding and EVF once you get used to it trumps a larger viewfinder every time as it has full brightness even in the dark light of a studio.
A medium format DSLR is like in the song, driving around in the V8 petrol pump with the whale skin hubcaps when everyone else is moving to less archaic things. Light weight, small, no moving parts and mirrorless. Some manufacturers have realised that and some haven't.
-
Where could I find more information on this as well as sample images? (maybe X2D vs H6D 100c) I understand that 0.65x offers a larger viewfinder image, wider angles, and shallower DOF than 0.79x. But as far as image quality and DR, what is the difference if any? Lots of forum post imply that this topic has been covered extensively but I have searched with no luck. I must be using the wrong terms.
This gear is sold by professional specialized dealers. The best ones have extensive raw file catalogs to exhibit the quality of various sensor+lens combinations. My company is a Phase One dealer in NYC, DC, and LA and are glad to help if Phase One is being considered (and it should be; I’m heavily biased but I think it’s pretty broadly accepted the IQ4 on an XF or XT is the highest quality most powerful camera available if you have the budget and it’s form factor and feature set fit your needs).
-
Many would argue that you don't need photographers in 2019 either, but if you want high speed sync then leaf shutters craps all over HSS (:-)
BRAVO! Touchée !! :) :)
-
There are lots of comparisons. for a comparison of H6D vs X2D this is one by Karl Taylor.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l5GjcpJeKUs
i once made a spreadsheet of every Hasselblad H series camera and sensor size to pick the biggest one. Since owning an X1D I realise it was a nostalgic waste of time. Even the X1D has a sensor 1.5 times the size of 35mm.
Technology improves in 20 years so why buy an old steam engine for the sake of a slightly larger sensor? The H6D has been discontinued anyway. The image quality on these new cameras is outstanding and EVF once you get used to it trumps a larger viewfinder every time as it has full brightness even in the dark light of a studio.
A medium format DSLR is like in the song, driving around in the V8 petrol pump with the whale skin hubcaps when everyone else is moving to less archaic things. Light weight, small, no moving parts and mirrorless. Some manufacturers have realised that and some haven't.
Although much of this may be true, at the end of the day, in my genre, you still can't beat independent x & y movements on a technical camera. Sure, the shift and twist lenses for DSLRs are nice, but cartesian coordinates are much easier to deal with than polar.
Not to mention, there are many more focal lengths to choose from as well.
Now for handheld work, mirrorless is the way to go bar none.
-
Although much of this may be true, at the end of the day, in my genre, you still can't beat independent x & y movements on a technical camera. Sure, the shift and twist lenses for DSLRs are nice, but cartesian coordinates are much easier to deal with than polar.
Not to mention, there are many more focal lengths to choose from as well.
Now for handheld work, mirrorless is the way to go bar none.
I agree!
-
I find it interesting that some here call the gap btw P1 MF and Fuji G/Hassy X not worth the pain but the gap from FF to those a jump to medium format quality.
Those 2 gaps are in fact the same.
This is coming from a Nikon/Fuji G/P1 user… in the end my view is that the only thing that makes sense is to use Nikon or Sony FF as a main system for great image quality (DR,…), speed, versatility and P1 of H MF for a clear jump in image quality.
The small MF systems are nice… but in comparison with the other 2 they end up being compromised in both usability and image quality. They are IMHO stuck in the middle. My Fuji G system is my least used one by far. And that is despite have the best lenses in the system. I only use it in some specific landscape situations where the P1 is too heavy (XF or Arca). But the truth is that I could stitch with the Nikon as I used to with very little, if any, impact on end result. Stitched Nikon is better than single frame Fuji and if I stitch with the Fuji I can also stitch with the Nikon with a slightly longer focal length. In other words the GFX pretty much only makes sense for lazzy landscape photographers. :-)
So there is only a very small niche where it makes sense vs other options.
IMHO.
Cheers,
Bernard