Pages: 1 [2]   Go Down

Author Topic: Name the best medium format system for both film and digital  (Read 3851 times)

pschefz

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 586
Re: Name the best medium format system for both film and digital
« Reply #20 on: January 24, 2020, 04:41:39 pm »

Tried the new Fuji and hasselblad digital, personally I much more prefer the  lasso all Zeiss glass.
Cannot say the digital dedicated glasses are worse, but certainly they have different taste.

So Even if I am willing to take two different systems, the two systems you mentioned do not have the heat attraction.
if 50mpix is enough and you love the Hasselblad V system then this hasselblad is perfect for you....should be shipping in 02/2020
use with existing V cameras and lenses or with the new X lenses....all in one truly modern package (internal battery, SD cards, usb C,....) at a decent price....
Logged
schefz.com
artloch.com

BJL

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6600
Re: Name the best medium format system for both film and digital
« Reply #21 on: January 24, 2020, 09:00:12 pm »

if 50mpix is enough and you love the Hasselblad V system then this hasselblad is perfect for you....should be shipping in 02/2020
use with existing V cameras and lenses or with the new X lenses....all in one truly modern package (internal battery, SD cards, usb C,....) at a decent price....
The resemblance to the Hasselblad V system is solely cosmetic, so is that why you recommend the 907x with CVF II 50D over the functionally almost equivalent X1D II 50C? (V lenses via adaptor and with heavy crop either way.)
Logged

pschefz

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 586
Re: Name the best medium format system for both film and digital
« Reply #22 on: January 24, 2020, 10:50:03 pm »

The resemblance to the Hasselblad V system is solely cosmetic, so is that why you recommend the 907x with CVF II 50D over the functionally almost equivalent X1D II 50C? (V lenses via adaptor and with heavy crop either way.)
the 907x is the body, the CVF II50D is the back which can be used on V bodies...
I used to shoot phase backs on mamiya 645 and 67 and rollei 6008 so I am painfully aware of the crop in the actual chimney finder and how hard it is to focus...I think the flip up lcd of the CVF II will make things easier... although it is only 3inch compared to the 3.6 of the X1DII...
I still think it might be a fun solution....and the switch between film and digital back is just that....
Logged
schefz.com
artloch.com

EinstStein

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 501
Re: Name the best medium format system for both film and digital
« Reply #23 on: January 25, 2020, 02:03:05 am »

The best digital backs are still the CCD. Hasselblad CF39 are still easy to find which can fit many MF systems, including Contax, Hasselblad, etc., even Fujifilm GX680. The Contax 645 back adapter is harder find. If found the digital back with Contax mount, I would go for it without thinking.
Logged

EinstStein

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 501
Re: Name the best medium format system for both film and digital
« Reply #24 on: January 25, 2020, 02:08:11 am »

Hasselblad XCD lenses are made by Japanese company Nittos, not that it is an inferior maker , but it has never been a top list of preferred Known brand names.
Logged

BJL

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6600
Re: Name the best medium format system for both film and digital
« Reply #25 on: January 25, 2020, 12:17:38 pm »

the 907x is the body, the CVF II50D is the back which can be used on V bodies...
OK: so it’s mainly the back that interests you, for the sake using the same V body and lenses with either film or digital backs. It might be a better match to work with 645 film format and lenses, but those options seem to be dwindling
Logged

EinstStein

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 501
Re: Name the best medium format system for both film and digital
« Reply #26 on: January 25, 2020, 06:02:29 pm »

OK: so it’s mainly the back that interests you, for the sake using the same V body and lenses with either film or digital backs. It might be a better match to work with 645 film format and lenses, but those options seem to be dwindling

Personally I feel Hasselblad XCD format is too much cropped. It starts to be too close to the full frame 35mm. It is a waste to use the 645 or 6x6 format lens (use 6x7 format lens? OMG!)

I would expect the film/digital exchangeable to be 645. Cropping it to 49x37 is already evil but barely acceptable . Further reduced is criminal!
Logged

BJL

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6600
Re: Name the best medium format system for both film and digital
« Reply #27 on: January 25, 2020, 09:22:26 pm »

I would expect the film/digital exchangeable to be 645. Cropping it to 49x37 is already evil but barely acceptable.
I can accept that desire to avoid all but a slight crop. But it means that the first two responses in this thread state the only (in production) options; otherwise you are into the second hand market for Contax or Mamiya 645 gear and compatible digital backs; a super-abundance of pixels are an unavoidable side-effect.

And if as you suggest, 24MP is enough for you (and I can very much go along with that too), a far less bulk and costly option is separate kits; a 645 (or 6x6, or even 6x7) film system and whatever digital system inspires you.
Logged

EinstStein

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 501
Re: Name the best medium format system for both film and digital
« Reply #28 on: January 26, 2020, 07:56:32 am »

I can accept that desire to avoid all but a slight crop. But it means that the first two responses in this thread state the only (in production) options; otherwise you are into the second hand market for Contax or Mamiya 645 gear and compatible digital backs; a super-abundance of pixels are an unavoidable side-effect.

And if as you suggest, 24MP is enough for you (and I can very much go along with that too), a far less bulk and costly option is separate kits; a 645 (or 6x6, or even 6x7) film system and whatever digital system inspires you.

There are plenty of 22mP 645 digital back. There are also plenty of 39mp .
I do not reject high MP digital back, I just don’t see much benefit compare to good optical glass.
It is a shame Zeiss is no longer active in making MF glasses. That sweet classical image rendering lenses is hard to find in the high MP digital computing centric systems.


Logged

BJL

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6600
Contax 645 with second hand 49x37mm CCD back and Zeiss lenses?
« Reply #29 on: January 26, 2020, 11:30:00 am »

There are plenty of 22mP 645 digital back. There are also plenty of 39mp .
I do not reject high MP digital back, I just don’t see much benefit compare to good optical glass.
It is a shame Zeiss is no longer active in making MF glasses. That sweet classical image rendering lenses is hard to find in the high MP digital computing centric systems.
Indeed there are old 22MP and 39MP 49x37mm CCD backs around; that goes with my thought that "second-hand Contax 645 gear and compatible digital backs" is the best fit for you, now that you have stated all your preferences. (I now narrow it to Contax 645 system, for the sake of its Zeiss lenses that you apparently prefer.)

I am just skeptical that those older lens designs and obsolete CCD sensors with far more noise and less dynamic range (even per pixel, before the dithering benefit of being able to print at higher PPI with a higher pixel count sensor) still have an IQ advantage over more recent MF systems, or even over the best current 35mm format sensors and lenses.
Logged

EinstStein

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 501
Re: Name the best medium format system for both film and digital
« Reply #30 on: January 26, 2020, 12:41:23 pm »

You are right I am leaning toward Hasselblad V and Contax. I am also fond of Rollei but I think it an be covered by the first two . I am not so much interested in Hasselblad as it is basically Fuji glass.

The digital sensor noise you are concerned is not much of a problem to me. I am an electronic engineer, the physical law did not Chang much in the resent years . When the semiconductor technology moves into deeper and deeper sub micron, it is the software computing that helps the high ISO .In the base ISO I found the digital backs you mentioned are actual more pleasing to my taste, especially the CCD . If I may , I would call it classical . It is in line with the old Seiss glass.

I do not see much improvement in glasses except in dealing with the digital sensor. But even so I still prefer the half century old Leica M lenses than the modern ones in many cases. This is exactly what I feel comparing the Hasselblad Zeiss. And the Hasselblad Nittoh

I helieve many Leica M players may share the similar view.

If I were to compromise the deep cropped MF , I would SimplyCamino choose Leica S or 35mm FF. That is an easy choice.


Logged

UlfKrentz

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 530
    • http://www.shoots.de
Re: Name the best medium format system for both film and digital
« Reply #31 on: January 26, 2020, 03:57:54 pm »

You are right I am leaning toward Hasselblad V and Contax. I am also fond of Rollei but I think it an be covered by the first two . I am not so much interested in Hasselblad as it is basically Fuji glass.

I definitely second your opinion on the H glass. We came back to RZ after shooting the H for some time, never liked the look and hated the CA. Still love the RZ glass, what a pity Phase decided to kill the line.

BJL

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6600
Re: Name the best medium format system for both film and digital
« Reply #32 on: January 26, 2020, 06:19:53 pm »

The digital sensor noise you are concerned is not much of a problem to me. I am an electronic engineer, the physical law did not Chang much in the resent years . When the semiconductor technology moves into deeper and deeper sub micron, it is the software computing that helps the high ISO .In the base ISO I found the digital backs you mentioned are actual more pleasing to my taste, especially the CCD
My understanding is that one big factor is the way that active pixel sensor design (so-called CMOS sensors) greatly reduce the noise floor, from over 10e- 16e- in those Kodak CCDs to about 2e- or less; this in part by applying amplification early in a direct signal transfer from photosite to sensor edge, as opposed to the unamplified charge transfer by hopping through successive photosites en route to the corner of the CCD.
« Last Edit: January 26, 2020, 08:07:14 pm by BJL »
Logged

ErikKaffehr

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11311
    • Echophoto
Just a recent comparison
« Reply #33 on: February 05, 2020, 02:38:36 am »

Hi,

I happened to do an absolutely unscientific poll on a couple of images shot with a modern era mirrorless camera and a classical MFD.

  • Hasselblad 555/ELD with a P45+ back and Distagon 60/3.5, probably or f/11 or f/8. This is classical Zeiss with 39 MP CCD
  • Sony A7rII with a Sigma 24-105/4 lens at 46 mm and f/7.1. This is a modern CMOS camera with a modern zoom lens.

For best comparison f/8 would be needed on the Hasselblad, but I mostly use it at f/11. This case could be f/8. I don't know.

  • Processing was done in Lightroom, using color profiles made with LumaRiver Profile Designer.
  • WB was set on a darker part of the white clouds. That was the best compromise I could find.
  • Other processing parameters are the same

Analyzing exposure in post with RawDigger, the P45+ image is essentially exposed to the right, with highlights very close to clipping. The Sony image is around one EV from ETTR, so highlights are 1EV from saturation.

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/63578554

Here is a link to the images: http://echophoto.dnsalias.net/ekr/Articles/Shoots/WhichIs_MFD/

Just comparing two images doesn't tell a full story, but it may be interesting. Or it may not.

Best regards
Erik
Logged
Erik Kaffehr
 

ErikKaffehr

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11311
    • Echophoto
Re: Name the best medium format system for both film and digital
« Reply #34 on: February 05, 2020, 02:48:07 am »

You are right I am leaning toward Hasselblad V and Contax. I am also fond of Rollei but I think it an be covered by the first two . I am not so much interested in Hasselblad as it is basically Fuji glass.


Hi,

The H-lenses are in part designed by Hasselblad, with Hasselblad doing basic design and Fujifilm doing final design. Proportions between Hasselblad and Fujifilm efforts vary from lens to lens.

I wouldn't discount the H-lenses as 'Fuji glass', Fujifilm is know as a maker of excellent lenses.

I have used most of the Hasselblad Zeiss lenses on my Hasselblad 555/ELD, so I am bit familiar with them. I have also used Pentax 67 lenses, but only with film.

Best regards
Erik
Logged
Erik Kaffehr
 

EinstStein

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 501
Re: Name the best medium format system for both film and digital
« Reply #35 on: February 05, 2020, 07:07:20 am »

Hi,

The H-lenses are in part designed by Hasselblad, with Hasselblad doing basic design and Fujifilm doing final design. Proportions between Hasselblad and Fujifilm efforts vary from lens to lens.

I wouldn't discount the H-lenses as 'Fuji glass', Fujifilm is know as a maker of excellent lenses.

I have used most of the Hasselblad Zeiss lenses on my Hasselblad 555/ELD, so I am bit familiar with them. I have also used Pentax 67 lenses, but only with film.

Best regards
Erik

I actual like the Fuji GX680  It is fantastic with film, but not so with digital. I also had a GW690, but although it has 6x9 image size on film, I found Hasselblad 6x6 prints better on paper. Once adds the portability, 6x6 or 645 is the limit in size.

What you said about Hasselblad’s efforts in the H system and the relationship with Fujifilm may be better described by Hasselblad’s own words, they said the H system is produced by Fujifilm according to Hasselblad’s spec. I think what you mean that Hasselblad did the high level design may be just create the requirement. Of course there is nothing wrong. In the end of the day, in terms of competent , or the “DNA”,  H is still a Fujifilm. There is nothing wrong with it. It is just like that BMW is BMW, Hyundai is Hyundai, both are good, it is up to the user’s taste.



Logged

EinstStein

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 501
Re: Name the best medium format system for both film and digital
« Reply #36 on: February 05, 2020, 07:48:17 am »

My understanding is that one big factor is the way that active pixel sensor design (so-called CMOS sensors) greatly reduce the noise floor, from over 10e- 16e- in those Kodak CCDs to about 2e- or less; this in part by applying amplification early in a direct signal transfer from photosite to sensor edge, as opposed to the unamplified charge transfer by hopping through successive photosites en route to the corner of the CCD.

Noise is only one of the imaging factor. CMOS also has the advantages in speed, cost, power, and voltage mode image sensing.

As far as I know, CCD has wider and less distorted light spectrum response. This translate to color rendering, It is also change mode sensing. I think for those people strongly favor the CCD (over CMOS) are affected (but may not aware) by these factors.  Most notable are perhaps the Leica M9 vs. the newer Leica Ms.


Logged

ErikKaffehr

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11311
    • Echophoto
Re: Name the best medium format system for both film and digital
« Reply #37 on: February 05, 2020, 12:01:52 pm »

I actual like the Fuji GX680  It is fantastic with film, but not so with digital. I also had a GW690, but although it has 6x9 image size on film, I found Hasselblad 6x6 prints better on paper. Once adds the portability, 6x6 or 645 is the limit in size.

What you said about Hasselblad’s efforts in the H system and the relationship with Fujifilm may be better described by Hasselblad’s own words, they said the H system is produced by Fujifilm according to Hasselblad’s spec. I think what you mean that Hasselblad did the high level design may be just create the requirement. Of course there is nothing wrong. In the end of the day, in terms of competent , or the “DNA”,  H is still a Fujifilm. There is nothing wrong with it. It is just like that BMW is BMW, Hyundai is Hyundai, both are good, it is up to the user’s taste.

No,

I actually had contact with the guy doing the lens design, Per Nordlund. Hasselblad does part of the lens design, using lens design programs like Zemax. The Hasselblad 2X extender was fully designed by Per Nordlund. With the rest it varies. Sometimes they do a large part of the design and some times a smaller part of the design.



From this article: https://static.hasselblad.com/2015/02/the_evolution_of_lenses.pdf

Best regards
Erik

Logged
Erik Kaffehr
 

ErikKaffehr

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11311
    • Echophoto
Re: Name the best medium format system for both film and digital
« Reply #38 on: February 05, 2020, 12:08:22 pm »

Hasselblad XCD lenses are made by Japanese company Nittos, not that it is an inferior maker , but it has never been a top list of preferred Known brand names.

https://www.nittohkogaku.co.jp/en/

It is a manufacturer, not a lens brand.

Best regards
Erik
Logged
Erik Kaffehr
 

BJL

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6600
Re: Name the best medium format system for both film and digital
« Reply #39 on: February 05, 2020, 04:15:12 pm »

Noise is only one of the imaging factor. CMOS also has the advantages in speed, cost, power, and voltage mode image sensing.

As far as I know, CCD has wider and less distorted light spectrum response.
AFAIK, "light spectrum response" comes down to the choice of color filter array characteristics. It seemed that the large Kodak and Dalsa CCDs mostly highly prioritized color accuracy (at the cost of lower sensitivity; lower quantum efficiency) by having narrower spectral response in their color filters. Sensors for compact cameras went the opposite way, with substantially higher QE (60% vs 30-40% in some cases) but probably worse color accuracy. If I recall, CCDs for early DSLRs were in between on QE, and probably also in between on color accuracy. Of course, it could also have been related to Kodak and Dalsa having the best color science back then.

I have not kept up on how color accuracy and QE trends have gone since then.
Logged
Pages: 1 [2]   Go Up