Luminous Landscape Forum
Equipment & Techniques => Medium Format / Film / Digital Backs – and Large Sensor Photography => Topic started by: calindustries on March 14, 2014, 10:09:46 am
-
I'm "this close" to getting an H5D-40 at a very good price. I had been originally triggered again into investing into MF by the LeafCredo40 deal right now, but after a lot and a lot and a lot of thought have been swayed to go with an H system simply because of the hole in the LS line up for Schneider lenses. If there were a 35 or 40mm I would have been a lot more interested. At this point please don't' try to convince me otherwise about the camera system. I would like feedback about any reason to try to find a H4X and IQ140 or Credo40 instead of the H5D.
I love C1 so this is my main reason for keeping this option in my head. But what should I expect the difference between the Kodak on the Hassy vs the Dalsa on the IQ/Credo? I rarely am not strobing so higher ISO isn't a big issue. I most likely won't be looking at any tech camera options as I mostly shoot portrait. I'd love to look into a bigger sensor, but $ is limited at this stage. I don't think I can use an H1/H2 because I have committed to a 35-90 as my first lens (I always used a 24-70 on my 5DMKII). I also can't afford to straight buy a new H4X and back as combined they would be too big of a difference to the H5D deal I have offered (which has maxed my budget), but a used/demo set up in the same price range would trigger my interest.
Thoughts?
-Craig
-
I am a strobe based shooter using the credo 40 for portraiture and am very happy with the results. I have no experience with an H5D, but the Hassy body itself is rather nice and you can't go wrong with an H4x and a Credo 40.
I tried phocus and C1 for a while to get a hang of both user experiences and image quality and preferred C1 in the end. That was one of the main reasons for going with the Credo.
Color-wise, I have worked on a few Hassy files in Phocus, but overall prefer the Leaf profiles very much. It's again a subjective thing.
Here's a sample shot:
(http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3767/12468627894_a9d2f81b2e_c.jpg)
-
Craig,
The H4X will work with the HCD 35-90 but you will not get the DAC lens corrections that you would get with the H5D-40 and Phocus.
Also last time I checked (about 6 months ago) C1 did not have a lens profile for the 35-90 lens.
I am not sure how bad all of the above is but if I bought a $8K lens I would want it to be optimally supported and that guarantee you will only get with a Hasselblad body and the Hasselblad software.
Obviously the Credo has other things going for it as well like a much better LCD screen.
Thanks, Joris.
-
C1 has profiles for the H lenses as well, pretty good profiles but not as good as the ones in Phocus. I use both C1 as well as Phocus. Phocus is pretty straight forward, by now it is pretty stable, it also has a lot less bells and whistles. Phocus still misses some functionality I would really like but that will probably come in time.
Either way, I have opted for the H5 (HB several years ago) but it might also have been H with P1 or Leaf.
-
C1 has profiles for the H lenses as well, pretty good profiles but not as good as the ones in Phocus.
Agreed, but not for all lenses, they have profiles for 7 out of 12 lenses.
-
wow I really like the skin tones from that shot!
The reason I went for Hasselbald h4d-40 over the P1 was the skin colors, which I was only able to test on a P40(which I did not like) and did not get my hands on a credo 40. Truefocus is a great advantage as well.
Other then that, yes Phocus is a pain and C1 a reason to choose leaf/p1 over Hasselblad.
-
Personally, I like the skintones from Leaf files more than the ones from P1 files.
I have tried working on files from an H4D 40 and they weren't too bad. But again, that was in Phocus, so I can't really give an A to B comparison vs the Leaf files.
-
Phocus is just barely usable, vs. C1 which is the best software on the market.
For me this was a deal breaker every time I've considered the H system.
I believe H4 backs were not quite as good as the previous generation of Aptus backs.
The current Credo backs are a big step ahead, which I believe leaves H far behind in terms of colors, image quality and usability.
The tethering is highly improved in Credo - it is not very good in any H backs to the best of my knowledge.
-
The Hass is a system. If you're getting that good of a deal on the H5D-40, run with it. If you've hit up every dealer that would have a used H4X or a used Phase 40mp back, then you really have to run with what options are on the market. I LOVE what the 35-90 gives me on a H4, and it is a lens that will keep me at least half in the Hass camp.
-
Phocus is just barely usable, vs. C1 which is the best software on the market.
For me this was a deal breaker every time I've considered the H system.
I believe H4 backs were not quite as good as the previous generation of Aptus backs.
The current Credo backs are a big step ahead, which I believe leaves H far behind in terms of colors, image quality and usability.
The tethering is highly improved in Credo - it is not very good in any H backs to the best of my knowledge.
This is my biggest fear. Are you saying this from a standpoint of you've REALLY used it and still hated it or you tried it once and hated it. I don't expect it to be better than C1, I think we all (mostly) agree that C1 is the best software, but give me a reason why you think it is barely usable please.
-
Does anyone have samples of H5D-40 raw files (preferably portrait shots) I could see and try with Phocus? I just downloaded it but it seems as the hasselblad site only has tiffs to download.
-
Isn't Hassy a Kodak sensor camera, while P1/Credo are with Dalsa? …There is a look difference then, …no? I don't see how one can compare image quality of two superb products that their look preference is a personal preference matter… As of software, I would agree that C1 has more capabilities, but Phocus is capable enough, I don't thing that buyers of those products like to mess with their Raws to the extend that the software would make the difference to them...
-
This is my biggest fear. Are you saying this from a standpoint of you've REALLY used it and still hated it or you tried it once and hated it. I don't expect it to be better than C1, I think we all (mostly) agree that C1 is the best software, but give me a reason why you think it is barely usable please.
I've used Phocus only a little bit, but I was very disappointed with everything.
At this point C1 is the golden standard, and even Lightroom is not really comparable.
BTW I believe you can use Lightroom rather than Phocus for H files.
There are just not that many options available in Phocus, and the UI is terrible.
Development software is an absolutely essential part of the workflow.
A lot of people think that the H body and lenses are better than P1, and I don't argue.
For me the body was not that important, and I preferred a system with the best support so all parts coming from the same company.
I think you should get H body and Credo back.
Even if it was Aptus it would be better, but with Credo there is no comparison.
-
I use Phocus virtually everyday and totally disagree with it being barely usable. It is very solid,provided you use recommended hardware setups. It is different compared to C1 and you do need a different workflow but it is a matter of getting used to it.
With Phocus I export earlier towards PS than with C1, with C1 I do more in the program itself.
Shooting tethered with Phocus is very nice, fast and (in most cases) very reliable and stable.
Again Phocus is pretty basic compared to C1 which I find just fine, I don't need my raw converter to do all sorts of stuff that PS is much better in. Having said that there are some things I would definitely like to have in Phocus (conditional backup, some forms of local adjustment, eg. Exposure).
Phocus used to be a little less stable with my H4 but with the H5 it is pretty rock solid.
Using LR for HB files is IMO not a good thing, LR has terrible color with the H, file quality is definitely less than from Phocus.
For UI it is a matter of what you are used to. I had to get used to the UI of C1 which I found too cluttere, too much options, too much symbols that were not self explanatory, etc.. With other words I had to get used to it. C1 simply has the best rendering for the D800 so I took the effort to get to know it. Now I am fine with it... Get the point?
-
Ditto,
I use Phocus every day and as long as it is installed in a computer with a robust video card it works very well.
I've been using it for over 6 years and the program seems to get better and better, the color especially the flesh tones are amazing.
The H camera with the 40 sensor is very capable, it focuses accurately and makes clean ISO 800 files.
But you should try to spend some time shooting it before you decide, IMO.
Good luck.
-
For studio work the Credo does a few things that make the workflow smooth and enjoyable, and also future proof:
Firewire 800 AND USB3 tethering, giving you all the options on different platforms. The on-board battery means that you are not relying on bus power which can be challenged at times.
The LCD stays active during tethered shooting and allows you to browse, zoom into, adjust (e.g. WB) and rate the last 10 shots.
If there is a CF card in the back, you can yank the FW/ USB cable and continue to shoot into the card.
In case you need a backup body, or wish to try a different body, or change platforms altogether, the same back can be used on similar bodies, some other bodies (e.g. RZ, Fuji 680, view cameras) or its mount can be changed to fit a different 645/ 6x6 platform. Note that if you buy the back with a Gold Package (extended warranty) you are entitled for 1 mount change at no extra charge, should you decide to switch from e.g. H4X to 645DF+
There is also Live View, not that relevant when shooting people but it's worth noting that when you shoot tethered, you can use it either on the LCD or the computer.
However as I always tell people, the best way to decide it to try, try and try some more. Only YOU can tell what works better for you, what annoys you and what will serve your creativity better.
Best
Yair
-
Credo is the better back I think. For skin it's fantastic!
I am also sure you will find the Phase one LS optics better than Hasselblad.
I have both systems and like the Phase/Leaf much better.
The only weekness is the body.. But I guess the new Phase one body is right around the corner..
Pluss Leaf/Phase is the marked leader and is making good money. From what the rumors says
Hasselblad has seen better times.
-
Credo is the better back I think. For skin it's fantastic!
I am also sure you will find the Phase one LS optics better than Hasselblad.
I have both systems and like the Phase/Leaf much better.
The only weekness is the body.. But I guess the new Phase one body is right around the corner..
Pluss Leaf/Phase is the marked leader and is making good money. From what the rumors says
Hasselblad has seen better times.
Everyone here will tell you how wonderful the Phase files are and C1. It is all true. But you'd better test very carefully to make sure you that the body handles the sort of work you do. The story "a better body is coming" is one we have heard year after year, and every time it really did come and was a warmed over Mamiya.
As for Phase One being the market leader - if that were the argument, everyone here would have a Canon. I for one have heard that Hassy is outselling Phase, and I know that the Hassy office in Paris is very accessible and helpful.
Which brings me to the last piece of advice: Buy whatever system has better dealer support in the town you live in, or talk to Doug and Steve who are present on this forum - they have a rep for helpfulness and honesty. Medium format with a good dealer is wonderful. Medium format with a bad dealer should be avoided at all costs.
Edmund
-
Everyone here will tell you how wonderful the Phase files are and C1. It is all true. But you'd better test very carefully to make sure you that the body handles the sort of work you do. The story "a better body is coming" is one we have heard year after year, and every time it really did come and was a warmed over Mamiya.
I agree with Edmund that one should do first hand testing before making their own decisions.
I disagree that the DF+ is just a warmed over Mamiya. It feels and works a lot better than the AFD series bodies. More than the on-paper changes would suggest. It has never locked up on me and focusing has been very accurate. The metering tends to be a tad hot for the Credo back, but when using strobes, that's not a concern.
-
I agree with Edmund that one should do first hand testing before making their own decisions.
I disagree that the DF+ is just a warmed over Mamiya. It feels and works a lot better than the AFD series bodies. More than the on-paper changes would suggest. It has never locked up on me and focusing has been very accurate. The metering tends to be a tad hot for the Credo back, but when using strobes, that's not a concern.
I don't know what the paper changes are. When I want a test for myself, I point the camera at a person and go click. Over the years, I repeatedly did tests of this sort with Mamiya and Hassy and regarding focus the Hassy won *every* time. Re. file quality, the Phase back won every time, in my opinion. I did several tests of this type over the years, including one with a member of this forum at his studio in New York, were we tested different bodies, both with Phase backs. Interestingly, Canon didn't always win on focus accuracy when compared.
If you have a different view, you are free to say so, you are a respected working photographer and are perfectly qualified to have an opinion, but don't confuse me with somebody else on this forum.
I can tell you a story. I had back issues. I was at an imaging conference and showed the images to one of Leaf's developers. He said if Phase sell you a $25K back they should at least sell you something that works -Phase and Leaf were not yet married. I went to see my dealer. He said the Phase images had no issues. I said they had black lines all over. His assistant came by, took one look, and said "yes there are black lines all over, and once you see them you see only them." The dealer would have killed her. Once you start being defensive about piece of equipment you stop seeing how it really works.
Edmund
-
I am just saying that the DF+ works in my professional applications. I have never managed to "Miss a shot because the body let me down", if you will.
I have used the AFD before and I would be very hesitant in using that as my main body. The DF+ is a lot, lot better than that. They look the same, but that's about all they have in common.
All moot points anyway because the OP is not interested in a Mamiya body.
That said, I am not very confident about finding an H4X in the used market though. People who buy H4Xs seem to be in it for the long haul (I am yet to see one on ebay). Maybe Doug/ Steve might have a different opinion. An H4X+ used Aptus II 7/8 might be around the price of a new Credo 40 bundle, so that's another possible option.
-
An H4X+ used Aptus II 7/8 might be around the price of a new Credo 40 bundle, so that's another possible option.
Unfortunately the H4X does not work with the Aptus-II backs.
From the Hasselblad website:
*Due to Leaf Aptus S & Aptus II not communicating within the specified protocol the H4X currently does not function with these two digital back models. Our investigations have concluded that this is due to parts of the communication from the digital back not being within specification, causing a fault condition and a lock-up of the camera body and digital back. The H4X platform is more accurate and sensitive and therefore detects the signals from the digital back as outside of specification.
All technical information has been passed on to Leaf and we are at their disposal to help rectify the problem. At present time we have not had any response from Leaf and therefore are not in a position to say when this will work.
-
Unfortunately the H4X does not work with the Aptus-II backs.
From the Hasselblad website:
*Due to Leaf Aptus S & Aptus II not communicating within the specified protocol the H4X currently does not function with these two digital back models. Our investigations have concluded that this is due to parts of the communication from the digital back not being within specification, causing a fault condition and a lock-up of the camera body and digital back. The H4X platform is more accurate and sensitive and therefore detects the signals from the digital back as outside of specification.
All technical information has been passed on to Leaf and we are at their disposal to help rectify the problem. At present time we have not had any response from Leaf and therefore are not in a position to say when this will work.
I love the part of how it doesn't work because it is better :)
Edmund
-
I've used Phocus and its forefather, Flexcolor, extensively. Workflow has a lot to do with selecting a MFD system. For my style of shooting at that time, I used a Hasselblad multi-shot back mounted onto an H2F body (as far as I know, the H2F supports DAC for all HC lenses). Once I began using a laptop with a decent video card, Phocus operated fine--very few issues regarding stability. I never liked Firewire; it's finicky. My shooting style is and always has been minimalist. I kept my shoots to less than 50 captures. So I never dealt with huge batches. As far as color, I preferred Hasselblad.
I used Phocus for shooting tethered, optimizing files on a global level, and developing RAW files (loved the scene customization feature as well as the reproduction option). After developing RAWs and converting them to TIFFs, I did the heavy lifting in PS.
I now mostly shoot with Oly MFT cameras and fast primes. If necessary, I'll pull out the D800. Medium format is really cool and it does serve a purpose. My business model simply evolved away from MFD. I guess my attitude is: A tool is a tool is a tool. For me, the Hassey was the right tool at the right time.
-
Everyone here will tell you how wonderful the Phase files are and C1. It is all true. But you'd better test very carefully to make sure you that the body handles the sort of work you do. The story "a better body is coming" is one we have heard year after year, and every time it really did come and was a warmed over Mamiya.
As for Phase One being the market leader - if that were the argument, everyone here would have a Canon. I for one have heard that Hassy is outselling Phase, and I know that the Hassy office in Paris is very accessible and helpful.
Which brings me to the last piece of advice: Buy whatever system has better dealer support in the town you live in, or talk to Doug and Steve who are present on this forum - they have a rep for helpfulness and honesty. Medium format with a good dealer is wonderful. Medium format with a bad dealer should be avoided at all costs.
Edmund
I don't understand how this evolved into an argument about bodies, when the OP specifically asked not to go there.
Edmund - you keep referencing your bad experiences with AFD II, but DF+ is three generations ahead, and while true every upgrade was a warm-over, the end result is pretty drastically better, and the AF is pretty hard to fault at this time.
Pretty much all the information I am getting tells me that Phase are doing much better business than H. You can't compare it to Canon any more than you can to iPhone - Phase and H are competing for the exact same segment. I do think it tells you something important if the market is leaning decidedly in one direction. Also we know H is a company with little regard for its customer base, who needed a court ruling to allow clients to use the backs they wanted, and still tries to block every possible connection to building blocks from other companies, now with the ridiculous 1-1 connection between back and body, even when both from H. A lot like Apple, they want you to use the system exactly how they designed it, and don't allow you to be modular and customize to your preference. The market didn't like it, and neither do I.
Your reference to the problems with Phase reps when there is a real problem with the equipment is very real. That is the worst thing about this company - sometimes things do go wrong, and they a terrible aversion to admitting a problem exist, even when you are both looking straight at it.
-
I know OT, apologies.
The market does speak. I am looking to "upgrade" my P20 and V legacy system. A P45 (not +) V fit will be around £5,000 (UK price) a reputable dealer has a H3D39 with 80mm lens for £3250. I'm thinking, is this a screaming deal ? Where did the £20,000 additional cost when new go?
-
Phase have in the past years made some updates to their AF, but so have Canon, Nikon, and yes, Hasselblad who have all moved substantially ahead themselves. I have no idea how good the Leica S autofocus is, although there are indications of improvements.
So, yes Phase has improved from where they were, but C and N moved light years ahead, while Hassy has added True Focus, which provides at least *some* of the functionality of multiple focus points.
Some of those early published real-world hi-ISO IQ250 shots clearly had decent shadows but also focus issues, confirming as always that a sensor alone does not -yet- a camera make. This was noticed in this forum, and blamed as usual on operator error, I didn't do the remarking.
In case you've been living on a different planet, one of the known benefit of newer *consumer* cameras is the choice of focus points all over the field, and in fact this has become a major selling point with the new 7D sensor. Someone else here can -if you are interested - show you the sums on how much "resolution" you lose on MF with "normal" focus and recompose. You may be surprised.
I expect that a "surprise feature" of the new Phase body will be touch-to-focus contrast-detection focus, combining the good screen, touch interface and the liveview of the IQ250. Such a modernisation will bring easy super-accurate focus to studio shooters- and remote-control click-focusing for tethered use, and have the advantage of NOT requiring a new AF module in the body. Culturally Phase remain dedicated to the idea of the back imposing its will over the body, and who knows in the end they may be proven right.
Don't you love the idea of clicking your mouse on the computer while looking away from your model?
Of course an electronic clip-on viewfinder is now feasible thanks to CMOS, and makes manual focus potentially usable again, even on older bodies.
And the next sensors will probably enable Phase Contrast MF -pun intended :)
Edmund
I don't understand how this evolved into an argument about bodies, when the OP specifically asked not to go there.
Edmund - you keep referencing your bad experiences with AFD II, but DF+ is three generations ahead, and while true every upgrade was a warm-over, the end result is pretty drastically better, and the AF is pretty hard to fault at this time.
-
Phase have in the past years made some updates to their AF, but so have Canon, Nikon, and yes, Hasselblad who have all moved substantially ahead themselves.
I've also used the AFD II, and it was a pretty terrible camera.
In normal light, normal distance, normal objects - you would still have a lot of hunting, slowness and errors.
That is what I call bad AF.
That does not happen anymore.
AF is now fast - not lightning fast - accurate, and no hunting.
That is all I need for my type of work.
In the past I did work that required optimal AF - so I used various 1D models.
Those have an absolutely spectacular AF with 45 points.
I don't know how they upgraded them since, but it doesn't really matter.
What Canon had 10 years ago is much better than any of the MFDs today.
I am now looking for a system with the consideration of 80% image quality and not even 20% AF.
DF+ gives me that, as the new AF gives me no trouble.
If I was looking for a system based on 80% AF and 20% IQ, or even 50-50, then 35mm wins.
I would be very surprised if any MF shop comes with an AF system that can rival any generation 1D.
That is not what most of their clients are looking for.
My understanding based on some conversation with H users, is that even the newest H bodies are much closer to Mamiya than to Canon.
No one is contesting that H AF is better than Mamiya.
We are just saying it's not so bad anymore, and good enough for tripod mounted kind of work.
-
Ok, now I get it. I *never* use a tripod except for technical imagery, and very rarely use studio flash. This is why we got different practical results. I'm sure the Phamiya focus is good enough for tripod & studio flash use.
As you say, Canon AF was already very good ten years ago. I just wish H and P could get that quality and speed of even single point AF.
Edmund
I've also used the AFD II, and it was a pretty terrible camera.
In normal light, normal distance, normal objects - you would still have a lot of hunting, slowness and errors.
That is what I call bad AF.
That does not happen anymore.
AF is now fast - not lightning fast - accurate, and no hunting.
That is all I need for my type of work.
In the past I did work that required optimal AF - so I used various 1D models.
Those have an absolutely spectacular AF with 45 points.
I don't know how they upgraded them since, but it doesn't really matter.
What Canon had 10 years ago is much better than any of the MFDs today.
I am now looking for a system with the consideration of 80% image quality and not even 20% AF.
DF+ gives me that, as the new AF gives me no trouble.
If I was looking for a system based on 80% AF and 20% IQ, or even 50-50, then 35mm wins.
I would be very surprised if any MF shop comes with an AF system that can rival any generation 1D.
That is not what most of their clients are looking for.
My understanding based on some conversation with H users, is that even the newest H bodies are much closer to Mamiya than to Canon.
No one is contesting that H AF is better than Mamiya.
We are just saying it's not so bad anymore, and good enough for tripod mounted kind of work.
-
All MFD manufacturers and some of their users, claim their systems are perfectly usable handheld, walking around and available light.
Based on my experience, I don't understand this claim at all, but it's one of those bottomless arguments.
If I had to do what you just said, I would use either 1Dx or D800.
-
All MFD manufacturers and some of their users, claim their systems are perfectly usable handheld, walking around and available light.
Based on my experience, I don't understand this claim at all, but it's one of those bottomless arguments.
If I had to do what you just said, I would use either 1Dx or D800.
Just wish I'd always have had your good sense.
In fact I've "downgraded" to 1Ds3 and am pretty happy.
Edmund
-
Mamiya AF is fine for my work and I have the images to prove it. I am sure hadselblad AF would be fine for that purpose as well.
That said, none of this has anything to do with the op's question so can we please give his thread back to him? It would be great if people with first hand experience of the equipment in question can give him some helpful feedback instead of the usual.
-
It would be great if people with first hand experience of the equipment in question can give him some helpful feedback instead of the usual.
My first hand experience of using the Phase One (Mamiya) camera and lenses (backs are great) for many years is I'd buy the hasselblad.
The Mamiya gear was great back in 2002......
Not shot the 40 but have the 50 and I loved the file output. Even though up until recently I've owned Phase gear I've always felt Phase pimp the RAW files from the camera while Hasselblad don't.
-
Thanks all for the input. In the end after playing with everything I really liked the H5 body, but just could not get over my apprehensions about phocus within my own workflow as well as my clients'. So I've gone with an h4x and credo back. I can't wait to get the gear and to start working with it. Both distributors I worked with were very professional and informative as well as being patient. I would feel super confident giving either of them my business but in the end went with the best price/closest location to me. I'll get back after I play a while...
-
Thanks all for the input. In the end after playing with everything I really liked the H5 body, but just could not get over my apprehensions about phocus within my own workflow as well as my clients'. So I've gone with an h4x and credo back. I can't wait to get the gear and to start working with it. Both distributors I worked with were very professional and informative as well as being patient. I would feel super confident giving either of them my business but in the end went with the best price/closest location to me. I'll get back after I play a while...
Congrats! You have the best of both worlds now. :)
Have fun playing around with your new kit. We would love to see some shots once you get the hang of it!
One question though: Is it true that you don't need to trade in an H1/ H2 body to get an H4X anymore?
-
Congrats on your purchase, and multiple chargers ;)
Please report back !
Edmund
-
One question though: Is it trues that you don't need to trade in an H1/ H2 body to get an H4X anymore?
True but according to the Hasselblad website it appears to be limited in time:
Can I buy the H4X body without a trade in?
Yes, for a limited time offer, you can now purchase the H4X without a trade-in.
-
True but according to the Hasselblad website it appears to be limited in time:
Can I buy the H4X body without a trade in?
Yes, for a limited time offer, you can now purchase the H4X without a trade-in.
probably because after the stock runs out they will only sell you the H5X :)
Edmund
-
One question though: Is it true that you don't need to trade in an H1/ H2 body to get an H4X anymore?
I'm not sure about all the time but both the major dealers said they could bypass the trade in clause
-
I'm not sure about all the time but both the major dealers said they could bypass the trade in clause
It is not a bypass, regardless of what any dealer says - it is an official policy by Hasselblad USA that the H4X is now a product that can be ordered stand-alone - there is no trade in required any longer.
Steve Hendrix
Capture Integration
-
It is not a bypass, regardless of what any dealer says - it is an official policy by Hasselblad USA that the H4X is now a product that can be ordered stand-alone - there is no trade in required any longer.
Steve Hendrix
Capture Integration
Steve,
Is it indeed limited in time as mentioned on the Hasselblad website?
Thanks, Joris.
-
It is good to see that Hasselblad has made the right call on the H4X.
There are lots of people out there who love the H system's ergonomics and features, but would love some more choice for the backs. Hell, if I know my choices would have been a lot harder if this were possible back when I was in the market for an MF system!
-
Steve,
Is it indeed limited in time as mentioned on the Hasselblad website?
Thanks, Joris.
In the USA at least - I have only been told this is standard. Whether they put an expiration at some point is not known to me.
Joris, can you show me the link where you see this?
-
UK site: only under "promotions" tab NOT under "products" tab.
Time Limited Special Offer:
Purchase the H4X now WITHOUT the trade-in.
Offer is valid while stocks last. All prices exclude VAT.
http://www.hasselblad.co.uk/promotions/h4x-.aspx
-
Thanks all for the input. In the end after playing with everything I really liked the H5 body, but just could not get over my apprehensions about phocus within my own workflow as well as my clients'. So I've gone with an h4x and credo back. I can't wait to get the gear and to start working with it. Both distributors I worked with were very professional and informative as well as being patient. I would feel super confident giving either of them my business but in the end went with the best price/closest location to me. I'll get back after I play a while...
Craig,
Congratulations! Please keep us posted.
I am very interested to know how that HCD 35-90mm works without Phocus DAC lens corrections using Capture One.
Thanks, Joris.
-
I am very interested to know how that HCD 35-90mm works without Phocus DAC lens corrections
You can turn lens corrections off in Phocus if you want to test.
-
It is good to see that Hasselblad has made the right call on the H4X.
There are lots of people out there who love the H system's ergonomics and features, but would love some more choice for the backs. Hell, if I know my choices would have been a lot harder if this were possible back when I was in the market for an MF system!
I for one really like my "lowly" H1 w/ the 80mm lens. Works awesome with my IQ160. If the H4X body were less $ I would consider the upgrade right away. Honestly Hasselblad should sell them for cheap. It makes a lot of business sense since the more bodies are in the hands of photographers the more lenses they would most likely sell. Much rather have a camera in the hands of customers than in a box in a warehouse.
-
In the USA at least - I have only been told this is standard. Whether they put an expiration at some point is not known to me.
Joris, can you show me the link where you see this?
Steve,
You can read it on both these pages:
http://www.hasselbladusa.com/promotions/h4x-questions-and-answers.aspx
http://www.hasselbladusa.com/105466.aspx
Thanks, Joris.
-
You can turn lens corrections off in Phocus if you want to test.
True. I just don't have any HCD lenses. I would need to rent one to try it out.
The lenses I have cover most my needs. Perhaps the 24mm or the 28mm would be useful. The latter does have a lens profile in C1 however so that is fully supported.
-
True. I just don't have any HCD lenses. I would need to rent one to try it out.
Phocus corrects HC and HCD lenses.
The lenses I have cover most my needs. Perhaps the 24mm or the 28mm would be useful. The latter does have a lens profile in C1 however so that is fully supported.
I have the HCD 28. It was one of the first lenses developed with software corrections in mind. It is already excellent before corrections, Phocus mainly corrects distortion on that lens.
-
Thanks all for the input. In the end after playing with everything I really liked the H5 body, but just could not get over my apprehensions about phocus within my own workflow as well as my clients'. So I've gone with an h4x and credo back. I can't wait to get the gear and to start working with it. Both distributors I worked with were very professional and informative as well as being patient. I would feel super confident giving either of them my business but in the end went with the best price/closest location to me. I'll get back after I play a while...
Congrats Craig and welcome to the family ;)
Looking forward to seeing some new images soon!
BR
Yair
-
Steve,
You can read it on both these pages:
http://www.hasselbladusa.com/promotions/h4x-questions-and-answers.aspx
http://www.hasselbladusa.com/105466.aspx
Thanks, Joris.
Thanks Joris - yeah, I couldn't get any of the promotion links to show up until today for some reason.
So, anyway, for now - no trade in.
Phocus corrects HC and HCD lenses.
I have the HCD 28. It was one of the first lenses developed with software corrections in mind. It is already excellent before corrections, Phocus mainly corrects distortion on that lens.
But it is a critical correction, because there is a significant amount of distortion and Phocus does an excellent job correcting it.
Steve Hendrix
Capture Integration
-
Thanks all for the input. In the end after playing with everything I really liked the H5 body, but just could not get over my apprehensions about phocus within my own workflow as well as my clients'. So I've gone with an h4x and credo back. I can't wait to get the gear and to start working with it. Both distributors I worked with were very professional and informative as well as being patient. I would feel super confident giving either of them my business but in the end went with the best price/closest location to me. I'll get back after I play a while...
You are going to love that setup. Congrats.