Upgrading to Medium Format - Key Questions that I have.

[The View]

I'm going to upgrade to medium format around the end of the year (this year would be better for tax purposes, but I'm not going to rush)

I am most likely going to buy a used camera.

I shoot fashion and landscape and have had a few fine art exhibitions and want to greatly expand this section. My shooting style is about heightening the power of the eye, showing great detail and light. I also do a lot of compositing.

I shoot almost exclusively on location.

Camera:

Which one do you recommend. I thought the Hasselblad H5D would be great with its True Focus II. What about the H4D by comparison (there are more around and at better prices). Is the H3Dii already too old to be a good choice? (I heard Hasselblad no longer services them - where would you get this camera serviced then?)

Back:

I would like to get a bigger than 33x44mm sensor, e.g. the size that's in the P45+ and Hasselblad H5D-50 (CCD)

a. Phase One:  I saw that the Phase One backs newer than the P45+ are too expensive -

b. Hasselblad back - much easier to get. question: How different is the 50 MP back of the H4D and the 50 MP back on the H5D?

c. Leaf (almost no information here - are they similar to Phase One backs, and if yes, in which way similar (they are not as expensive I saw)

How different are those older backs from the newer ones. I saw about 1 to 1,5 f-stops of dynamic range. But in color information and detail, how would a P45+ do in comparison to what's on a H4D or H5D?

Key is that I buy a camera and back that I will want to use for years and gives me satisfaction in colors depth and detail.

ISO is not very important. Even on my Canon 5Diii (soon up for sale) I rarely go over 800. On fashion shoots NEVER over 800. I usually try to stay at 100 as long as possible, and try to go no higher than 400.



Hasselblad X1D: when I first heard I thought this would be the absolute camera that could do everything (the perfect animal that could grow wool, lay eggs, give milk, and have great meat).

But then... the electronic viewfinder... if it has a lag it's the end for me. If it's cramped or strains the eye... I have to see one first-hand first.



My current state of emotion (not much backed up by facts)

1. Likely a full size Hasselblad because I want a good viewfinder for composition. Hasselblad because it's a great camera and its autofocus is good. I am also rather a tripod user for long term exposure instead of cranking up the ISO (which I never find attractive even in cameras that are good at it)

2. Back: key is great detail (showing light great!) and GREAT COLOR INFORMATION in the file. I do not want to buy an older model for price reasons and then be disappointed. So I would really appreciate some input in regard to this. I consider all three: key question is: how old can a back be and still produce high end results?

Thanks!

[zineevo]

I can't say much about the older Hasselblads. Sorry for that

But I've started with Mamiya and Leaf as my first digital medium format kit.
The backs a great - they are similar to the Phase-Backs and produce the same images (Credo 40 vs. IQ140). But they lack a few functions compared to the Phase One IQ1-3 Series, like:
- WiFi
- Focus mask
- Sensor Plus (higher ISO with smaller resolution)
- Power Sharing for the new XF Body

I've always looked at the Leaf-Backs as Phase One IQ-Lights
They are great, especially the Credo 60 and 80, and there is also a 50 (CMOS) Chip.

Leaf & Mamiya was bought by Phase One and the Credo backs are now a few years old. So keep that in mind.
I don't know if Leaf will create new backs in the future...

key question is: how old can a back be and still produce high end results?

I know a lot of Photographers who are using Phase One P-Backs, Leaf Aputs Backs and a couple with Hasselblad H3D's.
If you find a good one which is in great shape - I would go for it, even if it's a few years old.


Hope this helps a little bit

[ErikKaffehr]

Hi,

I have used a P45+ for three years but with the Hasselblad V-system.

Regarding the back, I would say that it delivers quite OK image quality, even today. A modern CMOS sensor can pull a lot of detail out of the darks, here lays the advantage of CMOS.

Regarding viewfinder and focusing, modern CMOS allows magnified live view, like instant 10X or so magnification. That is a great advantage in manual focus.

I have never touched Hasselblad H, but what I read is that AF-works well and that True Focus works well.

I would not discount EVF. The EVF lag is to some part at myth. Sure, the EVF lags optical view significantly and it matters when tracking birds in irregular flight, for instance. But, release lag can be very short with EVF, if used with Electronic First Shutter Curtain. Without EFSC the shutter needs to close before exposure. BTW, the same applies to a DSLR.

I don't think te X1D has EFSC, but I think they have a feature I would call "global reset", that combined with the leaf shutter can achieve 1/2000 second with sync. That should give response time on the order of a few ms. Much faster than any DSLR. If they would have a decent electrical cable release…

EVF-s have low resolution so you really need magnified view for manual focusing, in my humble opinion.

In dark conditions an EVF gives really bright viewing. Outdoors EVF does not really shine and needs a good eyecup to keep the sun light out of ones eyes.

In my view, the Fuji GFX presented at Photokina this week may be the best low end MFD solution. But, the X1D is probably a very good camera, too. If you need leaf shutter, the X1D may the way to go.

The P45+ has a Kodak sensor and Kodak sensors have a colour rendition of their own. Some folks like it some don't. Colour may be more about colour profiles than sensors, albeit I think that one of the issues with the P45+ may be a bit weak IR-filtering. Flowers and foliage often have very high IR-content and that may cause some issues when combined with weak IR filter.

Hasselblad is known to have carefully made profiles with the aim to have good match between different sensors.

Here is a bunch of P45+ shots: https://echophoto.smugmug.com/Other/Technical/P45/

Here are a lot of other images, mostly with raw files attached:
http://echophoto.dnsalias.net/ekr/Articles/Shoots/BernardSamples/
Best regards
Erik

I'm going to upgrade to medium format around the end of the year (this year would be better for tax purposes, but I'm not going to rush)

I am most likely going to buy a used camera.

I shoot fashion and landscape and have had a few fine art exhibitions and want to greatly expand this section. My shooting style is about heightening the power of the eye, showing great detail and light. I also do a lot of compositing.

I shoot almost exclusively on location.

Camera:

Which one do you recommend. I thought the Hasselblad H5D would be great with its True Focus II. What about the H4D by comparison (there are more around and at better prices). Is the H3Dii already too old to be a good choice? (I heard Hasselblad no longer services them - where would you get this camera serviced then?)

Back:

I would like to get a bigger than 33x44mm sensor, e.g. the size that's in the P45+ and Hasselblad H5D-50 (CCD)

a. Phase One:  I saw that the Phase One backs newer than the P45+ are too expensive -

b. Hasselblad back - much easier to get. question: How different is the 50 MP back of the H4D and the 50 MP back on the H5D?

c. Leaf (almost no information here - are they similar to Phase One backs, and if yes, in which way similar (they are not as expensive I saw)

How different are those older backs from the newer ones. I saw about 1 to 1,5 f-stops of dynamic range. But in color information and detail, how would a P45+ do in comparison to what's on a H4D or H5D?

Key is that I buy a camera and back that I will want to use for years and gives me satisfaction in colors depth and detail.

ISO is not very important. Even on my Canon 5Diii (soon up for sale) I rarely go over 800. On fashion shoots NEVER over 800. I usually try to stay at 100 as long as possible, and try to go no higher than 400.



Hasselblad X1D: when I first heard I thought this would be the absolute camera that could do everything (the perfect animal that could grow wool, lay eggs, give milk, and have great meat).

But then... the electronic viewfinder... if it has a lag it's the end for me. If it's cramped or strains the eye... I have to see one first-hand first.



My current state of emotion (not much backed up by facts)

1. Likely a full size Hasselblad because I want a good viewfinder for composition. Hasselblad because it's a great camera and its autofocus is good. I am also rather a tripod user for long term exposure instead of cranking up the ISO (which I never find attractive even in cameras that are good at it)

2. Back: key is great detail (showing light great!) and GREAT COLOR INFORMATION in the file. I do not want to buy an older model for price reasons and then be disappointed. So I would really appreciate some input in regard to this. I consider all three: key question is: how old can a back be and still produce high end results?

Thanks!

[Joe Towner]

Welcome,

Let's start with where you are located.  Generally speaking, you should put these cameras in your hands before making a decision.  The fit, function and how they work really comes down to personal decisions. 

As a H4D-50 shooter, I can tell you that ISO200 is as far as I ever go with something.  Any higher and you'll have noise issues, but that's just CCD's all around.  PhaseOne has Sensor+ mode that cuts your resolution in 1/4 but performs better at higher ISOs.

Color is huge, and how Hasselblad and Phase deal with it is different.  You really need to get files and work with them.

The differences between the H4 and H5 lineups for Hasselblad is mostly in the body - the fit and finish is better, but things like the screen on the back are the same.

Will you be parting with all your Canon gear, or just the one body?  About the only other thing I would consider looking at is lens selection, making sure you'll have the focal length you want, wide and super telephoto are areas that 35mm gear has more options.  Don't worry about the 33x44 v 36x48 sensor size difference - the view finder is just a bright.

I think the best thing for you to see is the files from a -50 and a -50c and see which one responds to your editing best.

[BobShaw]

I started with several Mamiyas and finished up with a Mamiya 645AFD and then agonised over a back. I sold all that picked up a Hasselblad H1 second hand with a Phase back. Much better camera. The back was good also but ate batteries and you needed separate batteries. I then upgraded to an H2 and the same back before getting an H3DII-31. This was a far better combination than the Phase back. I am firmly in the integrated Hasselblad camp. Mixed manufacturers between back and camera is a pain. I now have the H3DII-39 which has a larger sensor and ISO 50, which is usually what I use.

Outside low ISO and high shutter speed allows smaller flash and bigger aperture in bright sun.

I would love to get the H4 or H5 or better for True Focus.
The Phocus software is awesome as a raw converter and has built in colour correction.

[The View]

Thank you for your replies!

It looks to me that I will have to try out before I buy - which may be difficult as you can't rent older backs.

Just from what I read about it likely wouldn't work.

Joe, you are right: I have to see which back would give me the best files for the way I work.

In regard to lens selection, that I will also research. I will also have to know if I should get a CCD of a larger size or the newer CMOS - test shoot both and check the files.

Where would I be able to rent older backs, if at all?

[Doug Peterson]

Who said you can't rent older backs? We rent non current backs.

Let us know where you are located and board member from that country/area can let you know who rents in your area.

Thank you for your replies!

It looks to me that I will have to try out before I buy - which may be difficult as you can't rent older backs.

Just from what I read about it likely wouldn't work.

Joe, you are right: I have to see which back would give me the best files for the way I work.

In regard to lens selection, that I will also research. I will also have to know if I should get a CCD of a larger size or the newer CMOS - test shoot both and check the files.

Where would I be able to rent older backs, if at all?

[Don Libby]

Another thing to think about is software processing.  Phase One offers Capture One which makes all the files sing; likewise Hassy has their own software Phocus which in turn works well on their files.  I have no experience with Phocus however I've been using C1 for many years and like it.  Then again there's the need to evaluate your computing needs as medium format files tend to be larger.  I now shoot 80-megapixels landscape and in some instances my end results will exceed 3-GB.

Regarding new vs old backs - I've owned 5-backs over the years and only one (the very first) has been brand new.  All the rest have been used and have never given me an issue. 

Find a good/great dealer that you trust and will be there whenever you need them.

Don

[TonyVentourisPhotography]

Specs and comparison will matter very little until you get one of these beasts in your hands and try it out in an actual scenario typical of what you will be doing.  They are VERY different than other cameras. 

The H line of cameras are pretty much dinosaurs.  And they feel like it.  The H6 might be different... havent used it yet.  Phase one/Mamiya was no better, only with a smaller viewfinder. (with the exception of the XF)

If you don't need a separate back (for going to a tech cam) ... you might opt for the X1D or the Fuji.  Or potentially a used Leica S.  In terms of the 44mm sensors, I really enjoyed using the S.  It actually feels like it gets out of the way.  That was the first time a medium format camera "got out of my way" when shooting.

In my opinion the classic medium format modular cameras are studio workhorses.  I do not enjoy using them on location nearly as much as other gear.  Actually...let me rephrase...I do not enjoy them as much in situations where I do not have full control over lights, computers, and the subject. 

In terms of the CCD versus CMOS...the CCD backs have lovely look to them.  I have always preferred that.  In reality, the difference won't make a difference in the long run.  In fact, the modern CMOS has a lot more advantage including ISO.   

I really stress though, you need to get your hands on some of this gear to try before any decisions are made.    It would be well worth it, especially at this level of "investment."  (totally not an investment!)

[The View]

Another thing to think about is software processing.  Phase One offers Capture One which makes all the files sing; likewise Hassy has their own software Phocus which in turn works well on their files.  I have no experience with Phocus however I've been using C1 for many years and like it.  Then again there's the need to evaluate your computing needs as medium format files tend to be larger.  I now shoot 80-megapixels landscape and in some instances my end results will exceed 3-GB.

Regarding new vs old backs - I've owned 5-backs over the years and only one (the very first) has been brand new.  All the rest have been used and have never given me an issue. 

Find a good/great dealer that you trust and will be there whenever you need them.

Don

Thanks, Don

I will definitely rent before I buy.

Computer-wise, I'm on a MacBook Pro retina with a four-core processor and 16 Gb of RAM. I have created images consisting of up to 50 files and where the file size regularly goes over 3 GB and it worked on this computer.

[The View]

Who said you can't rent older backs? We rent non current backs.

Let us know where you are located and board member from that country/area can let you know who rents in your area.

I'm in the Los Angeles area, Doug.

[The View]

Specs and comparison will matter very little until you get one of these beasts in your hands and try it out in an actual scenario typical of what you will be doing.  They are VERY different than other cameras. 

The H line of cameras are pretty much dinosaurs.  And they feel like it.  The H6 might be different... havent used it yet.  Phase one/Mamiya was no better, only with a smaller viewfinder. (with the exception of the XF)

If you don't need a separate back (for going to a tech cam) ... you might opt for the X1D or the Fuji.  Or potentially a used Leica S.  In terms of the 44mm sensors, I really enjoyed using the S.  It actually feels like it gets out of the way.  That was the first time a medium format camera "got out of my way" when shooting.

In my opinion the classic medium format modular cameras are studio workhorses.  I do not enjoy using them on location nearly as much as other gear.  Actually...let me rephrase...I do not enjoy them as much in situations where I do not have full control over lights, computers, and the subject. 

In terms of the CCD versus CMOS...the CCD backs have lovely look to them.  I have always preferred that.  In reality, the difference won't make a difference in the long run.  In fact, the modern CMOS has a lot more advantage including ISO.   

I really stress though, you need to get your hands on some of this gear to try before any decisions are made.    It would be well worth it, especially at this level of "investment."  (totally not an investment!)

Yes, I have to see all this for the kind of work I do.

I was very excited when I read about the X1D - until I read about the EV viewfinder and that it is worse than the Leica EV.

But I definitely will take a look at it if the this EV is so middling as it appears.

The Fuji has exchangeable viewfinders - great idea. And it has an updated or altered sensor, which we need to know more about on what the difference is to a regular 33x44. The downside of the Fuji is that it has a focal plane shutter and you are bound to 1/125 of a second.

But then, I just read that they are working on a way to use leaf shutter lenses on this camera.

I just wonder why we can't get an optical viewfinder like on the old rangefinder cameras like the Plaubel Makina, a medium format rangefinder Wim Wenders too amazing images of the west with when he was researching and location scouting for "Paris, Texas".

Maybe an add-on for the Fuji, stuck on top (and we can always deal with the parallax problem, but at least we can see what we are shooting)

[voidshatter]

My suggestion would be to wait until you can afford the 54x40 CMOS if you don't like the 44x33 CMOS.

You could go for a CCD which is larger than 44x33, but you may regret it if you haven't tested it thoroughly and made side-by-side comparison against your 35mm format gear.

Compared against CMOS: CCD has significantly worse dynamic range in long exposure; CCD cannot disable darkframe NR for long exposure; CCD has tiling issues; CCD doesn't have true live view.

If you've been into the electronic world for years then it shouldn't be hard to understand that it's generally safer to buy into the newer technology. Every mainstream manufacturer is now focused more on CMOS.

[Doug Peterson]

I'm in the Los Angeles area, Doug.

We have an office/demo-studio in Culver City (LA area)

Phase One LA - Digital Transitions

Talk to Ken or Rudy. They'd be glad to help you get hands on or do whatever testing you'd like.

[Joe Towner]

LA makes this all easy, DT can take care of you on the Phase side and Hassy has local representation.  Plus a healthy market for one off rentals.

Only thing I'd highly recommend is sticking to the IQ series or Credo, the XF is SOOOO much nicer to work with over the DF/DF+.

When you look at lenses, there are some things to consider.  The 1/800th shutter speed is on all Hasselblad lenses, but with their new orange square shutters, we get 1/1000th on H1-H5 bodies, and 1/2000th on the H6 bodies.  In the Phase world, you'll have 1/800th with leaf lenses and up to 1/1600th with certain lenses when combined with wired sync or Profoto AIR (transmitter builtin to the XF, in the grip with the DF+).  Upside to the Phase body is you have a 1/4000th focal plane shutter.  Depending on your interest level, taking the Phase backs off and using them on other cameras is fun, so shooting a RZ67 or view camera setup ls a lot cleaner.

You can also match a Phase back to a Hasselblad body, to gain CaptureOne compatibility but lose automatic lens profiling.  Oddball things like the Hasselblad HTS turns their 24mm to 100mm lenses into tilt-shift (with a 1.5x tele-converter).  If you want to shoot waist level, the XF has it's light meter in the body, not the eye piece like Hasselblad.

In short, there is no wrong decisions, just personal decisions that make your camera selection a tool for you.  A good dealer will help you down this path.

[The View]

My suggestion would be to wait until you can afford the 54x40 CMOS if you don't like the 44x33 CMOS.

You could go for a CCD which is larger than 44x33, but you may regret it if you haven't tested it thoroughly and made side-by-side comparison against your 35mm format gear.

Compared against CMOS: CCD has significantly worse dynamic range in long exposure; CCD cannot disable darkframe NR for long exposure; CCD has tiling issues; CCD doesn't have true live view.

If you've been into the electronic world for years then it shouldn't be hard to understand that it's generally safer to buy into the newer technology. Every mainstream manufacturer is now focused more on CMOS.

Thank you, Yunli, for these great comments.

While I don't do long exposure now - you never now.

My key interest is great detail. I aim to provide a sensual perception with my images that is stronger than what the eyes see with a focus on detail and light.

The larger sensor is only being found on the Hasselblad 100c as far as I know, which retails at 36 000$.

You are also echoing my concern that a 44x33mm sensor might not be MF enough (which is why I was always interested in the larger sensors)

I can live without live view (never used it except for video shooting) - I really like a great, optical viewfinder.

[The View]

We have an office/demo-studio in Culver City (LA area)

Phase One LA - Digital Transitions

Talk to Ken or Rudy. They'd be glad to help you get hands on or do whatever testing you'd like.

Thank you, Doug, I will.

[BernardLanguillier]

Trying out these cameras is key if you intend to shoot them handheld.

I personally find the H6D a better match for my hand and eye.

True focus is also great, I would consider the XF to be mostly a manual focus camera unless you like you subjects dead centred (leaving aside any possible issue with the XF AF, I find these reports surprising). This may not be an issue if you have eyes still performing well.

Finally, the fact that the camera is twice cheaper in my geo is also a major factor. I can buy a H6D-100c and a car for the price of an XF + IQ3-100 in Tokyo.

Now, if you intend to use your back on a tech camera, then P1 may be the better option at the moment.

Cheers,
Bernard

[The View]

LA makes this all easy, DT can take care of you on the Phase side and Hassy has local representation.  Plus a healthy market for one off rentals.

Only thing I'd highly recommend is sticking to the IQ series or Credo, the XF is SOOOO much nicer to work with over the DF/DF+.

When you look at lenses, there are some things to consider.  The 1/800th shutter speed is on all Hasselblad lenses, but with their new orange square shutters, we get 1/1000th on H1-H5 bodies, and 1/2000th on the H6 bodies.  In the Phase world, you'll have 1/800th with leaf lenses and up to 1/1600th with certain lenses when combined with wired sync or Profoto AIR (transmitter builtin to the XF, in the grip with the DF+).  Upside to the Phase body is you have a 1/4000th focal plane shutter.  Depending on your interest level, taking the Phase backs off and using them on other cameras is fun, so shooting a RZ67 or view camera setup ls a lot cleaner.

You can also match a Phase back to a Hasselblad body, to gain CaptureOne compatibility but lose automatic lens profiling.  Oddball things like the Hasselblad HTS turns their 24mm to 100mm lenses into tilt-shift (with a 1.5x tele-converter).  If you want to shoot waist level, the XF has it's light meter in the body, not the eye piece like Hasselblad.

In short, there is no wrong decisions, just personal decisions that make your camera selection a tool for you.  A good dealer will help you down this path.

Thanks, Joe, for pointing out all those options!

One thing: I still have those old Profoto 7b battery powered generators. With a Canon I used Canon Pocketwizards. How would I trigger the flashes from a Hasselblad - the packs don't have anything fancy like Profoto Air.

Do Pocketwizards - the classic one - work with Hasselblad and would I get the fast sync times of the leaf shutter lenses?

[The View]

Trying out these cameras is key if you intend to shoot them handheld.

I personally find the H6D a better match for my hand and eye.

True focus is also great, I would consider the XF to be mostly a manual focus camera unless you like you subjects dead centered. This may not be an issue if you have eyes still performing well.

Finally, the fact that the camera is twice cheaper in my geo is also a major factor.

Now, if you intend to use your back on a tech camera, then P1 may be the better option at the moment.

Cheers,
Bernard

The XF is an insanely beautiful camera, almost in Bauhaus style design. But I have heard that honeycomb autofocus doesn't work too well.

I also heard that Truefocus really works well.

I'm in a way heavily leaning towards Hasselblad. Many years ago, my equipment was stolen on my way to Moscow (from where I took the Transsib to Beijing) Suddenly I had no gear. You couldn't, at that time, just go an buy a camera in Moscow. So I went on the black market and bought a Kiev, a Russian Hasselblad copy. It served me well on my trips through China, Japan, and Malaysia - but you couldn't get the lens off. It was  way heavier than the Hasselblad and a mirror slap like a Kalaschnikov - but I still loved the solid shooting experience.

But I keep my mind open.

What would you say is the key difference of Leaf, Phase One, and Hasselblad backs?