Pages: 1 ... 4 5 [6] 7 8   Go Down

Author Topic: Hasselblad H4D-60 and H4D-50  (Read 63266 times)

CurtisHight

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 10
Hasselblad H4D-60 and H4D-50
« Reply #100 on: September 29, 2009, 03:38:12 pm »

Quote from: James R Russell
Make a Hasselblad rangefinder like the Contax G2.

Autofocus, a few lenses, (make them Zeiss) and a Full Frame 35mm chip, better yet, give it some kind of auto crop or auto sensing device so when it is in horitzontal mode it goes to 2:3, Vertical it goes to 4:3.
Better yet, give it a square format image sensor and a flash situated directly over the sensor (so it doesn't need to be rotated and the on-camera flash is optimally located for most shots). Similarly, surely the market invites one good pocket camera (something like the Canon G11) built around a square sensor (but offering multiple ratios); and maybe Hasselblad could charge $50 for a copy of Phocus to these users. (Although my preference is for Hasselblad to build onto Aperture or Lightroom, taking advantage of all that one, or both, of these programs offer, and thereby averting the dichotomy of: (a) trying to compete against them and their larger customer and capital bases on features, or (b) leaving Hasselblad users to watch on wistfully.
Logged

CurtisHight

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 10
Hasselblad H4D-60 and H4D-50
« Reply #101 on: September 29, 2009, 03:51:53 pm »

Quote from: Willow Photography
#5 - rotating back, so we do not need a vertical grip :-)
Quote from: Paul_Claesson_HasselbladUS
Would you prefer a smaller sensor or a much larger camera? I say this tongue and cheek.
I humbly suggest a square format body that will accept and rotate 645 backs (with some type of adapter), and allow for 6x6 image sensors.
Logged

BJL

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6600
Hasselblad H4D-60 and H4D-50
« Reply #102 on: September 29, 2009, 05:02:45 pm »

Quote from: CurtisHight
I humbly suggest a square format body that will accept and rotate 645 backs (with some type of adapter), and allow for 6x6 image sensors.
It is fascinating: the medium format sector has been moving away from square 6x6 format towards oblong shapes (mostly 645, a bit of 6x7) since well before the digital transition, the smaller (35mm etc.) and larger (view camera) formats have never bothered with square, the rapid increase of sensor cost with sensor size has greatly accelerated the move away from 6x6 ... and yet in the forums there seems to be a great number of posters who believe that this has all been a horrible stupid mistake, and that the future is (or should be) a return to square formats.

When you find the entire industry and market place going in what you consider to be the wrong direction, you should always ask why the trend is what it is, and be open to an answer that involved the camera makers knowing something that you do not, rather than "collective stupidity" or "a vast conspiracy".

A few possible ingredients, beyond the very substantial increase in sensor cost:
- to avoid rotating by use of a square format of equal maximum side length requires a VF assembly including mirror enlarged to the 56x56mm square size, and so a deeper, heavier, slower moving mirror with even more mirror slap to deal with.
- that requires a lens mount which sits further from the focal plane to accommodate the deeper mirror box, and lenses whose rear elements stay further from the focal plane, so a complete new set of lenses in place of current 645 lens systems.

Paul Claesson of Hasselblad USA was not entirely joking when he said "Would you prefer a smaller sensor or a much larger camera?"
Logged

Willow Photography

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 279
    • http://www.willow.no
Hasselblad H4D-60 and H4D-50
« Reply #103 on: September 29, 2009, 05:14:44 pm »


 My understanding is the display (increased resolution) will change on the H4D60 and not on the 50.
I prefer to provide the participants on this or any forum accurate information. If I do not know, uncertain or seek additional information from the factory I will state so.


If this is true, and I hope not, it doesnt make any sense at all.
We have wanted a good LCD for years in a MFDB, and when Hasselblad
finally makes it. it will be in only the most expensive one.  

I have always defended Hasselblad when they have been atacked
because of closed systems, premature advertising of new products, "full format" etc.
But this make me both sad and angry!!!

Why not the best LCD for all the Hasselblads???

I was determined to upgrade from H3DII-31 to H4D50, but not anymore.

Logged
Willow Photography

smoody

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 23
Hasselblad H4D-60 and H4D-50
« Reply #104 on: September 29, 2009, 05:22:41 pm »

The release date on the H4D60 has already slipped???

The original press release read November 2009. Now it states January 2010. It's nearly impossible to find the November date anywhere, as all of the sites have been updated to reflect the new date, but there's still plenty of references to it in the google cache ( http://www.google.com/search?q=H4D+novembe...-8&oe=UTF-8 ). I swear I saw a November date on the official press release. Was I wrong?

I'm not in the market for a 60 megapixel camera so I have no right to care, but it seems to me that, given the ever sliding schedule of H3DII60, Hasselblad management would have done their best to get the release date right on the initial press release instead of quietly changing it. Was it a case of one hand not talking to the other? Did the Phase One announcement cause them to want to slip in a few more firmware features before letting it out the door? All just speculation of course. For all I know, it could have been a typo by their PR people.


Logged
.
. . . . . [url=http://www.fauxtography

smoody

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 23
Hasselblad H4D-60 and H4D-50
« Reply #105 on: September 29, 2009, 05:31:43 pm »

Quote from: Willow Photography
Why not the best LCD for all the Hasselblads???

I don't know if we can even be sure that their yaw-based focus lock will make it into the H4D50. I've asked about it a couple of times on the forum and have gotten no answer from Hasselblad reps, which could only mean one of two things: (1) I'm not important enough to deserve a reply and/or (2) The reps aren't sure if there will be feature parity between the two models. I'm hoping the reason is (2)  :-)

I guess there's a third option, which would be that it's a stupid question -- of course there will be feature parity as their the same model. Now that I know they'll have different LCDs, I'm a little less likely to believe that option.

I know the reps have very little information to work with, but I hope we can get some questions answered sooner rather than later.
« Last Edit: September 29, 2009, 05:32:48 pm by smoody »
Logged
.
. . . . . [url=http://www.fauxtography

Boris_Epix

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 101
Hasselblad H4D-60 and H4D-50
« Reply #106 on: September 29, 2009, 06:13:06 pm »

Quote from: BJL
It is fascinating: the medium format sector has been moving away from square 6x6 format towards oblong shapes (mostly 645, a bit of 6x7) since well before the digital transition, the smaller (35mm etc.) and larger (view camera) formats have never bothered with square, the rapid increase of sensor cost with sensor size has greatly accelerated the move away from 6x6 ... and yet in the forums there seems to be a great number of posters who believe that this has all been a horrible stupid mistake, and that the future is (or should be) a return to square formats.

I wouldn't ever ask for a square sensor but I guess the point is people are tired of rotating cameras and waist level finders would work for vertical/square pics (since you wouldn't need to turn the camera). Instead of a square sensor a 6x7 sensor for the RZ67 would be really nice (including the rotating mount).


Quote from: BJL
When you find the entire industry and market place going in what you consider to be the wrong direction, you should always ask why the trend is what it is, and be open to an answer that involved the camera makers knowing something that you do not, rather than "collective stupidity" or "a vast conspiracy".

Ok, now this is not the best argument. Check out the american car manufacturers. Big trucks, gasguzzlers, etc. All almost chapter11.

Usually manufacturers just give customers what they can get away with not what would be best for them. Oh yeah, and make max possible profits.

Quote from: BJL
A few possible ingredients, beyond the very substantial increase in sensor cost:
- to avoid rotating by use of a square format of equal maximum side length requires a VF assembly including mirror enlarged to the 56x56mm square size, and so a deeper, heavier, slower moving mirror with even more mirror slap to deal with.
- that requires a lens mount which sits further from the focal plane to accommodate the deeper mirror box, and lenses whose rear elements stay further from the focal plane, so a complete new set of lenses in place of current 645 lens systems.

I'm not sure that is accurate but I've read sensor yields and prices both improved a lot. And I think to recall that Dalsa assembled a sensor from several subpieces. How much more would a 6x7 sensor cost than a 6x45? A couple thousand USD? People would probably pay a 10k $ premium over the P65+ to get a P100+ (with 25 Megapixel Sensor+ mode).

The questions are probably not prices (Red.com is intending to deliver a DSMC 6x17cm sensor for 53k USD btw) but the requirement for a different body, possibly different electronics and the risk of serving a niche not big enough. Phase has no reason for a 6x6 since they only have 645 and 67 bodies, Hassy's current H bodies only supports 6x45 so a complete nogo too.

But it sure could be done. The Leaf AFI had a 6x6 box. My Mamiya RZ67 Pro2 has less mirror slap than a Hassy H1 and better focussig too.


Quote from: BJL
Paul Claesson of Hasselblad USA was not entirely joking when he said "Would you prefer a smaller sensor or a much larger camera?"

Well... Paul was maybe a bit conservative with his thoughts on this. Why not drop the mirror box altogether? An ARCA Swiss camera is not much of a camera but at the same time plenty of camera. With a HDMI 1080p output (liveview) from the back you wouldn't even need autofocus, mirrorbox, optical viewfinder, mechanical shutter, etc anymore. And the camera would be much smaller, lighter and more reliable.

And let's be honest... less and less fashion and people shooters will get backs when pixel counts are around 50-60 or more Megapixels just because it's too impractical to massage the HUGE files and store them. Everything much larger than 30 Megapixels needs a crazy ass computer and computing times go up like crazy. Seems like architecture, landscape, product, etc shooters will be the remaining MFDB user base at some point. All served very well with live-view when using tilt-shift.



Logged

gdwhalen

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 173
    • http://www.gdwhalen.com
Hasselblad H4D-60 and H4D-50
« Reply #107 on: September 29, 2009, 06:49:31 pm »

Why does it seem to me that, in a lot of cases, customers are smarter than manufacturers?  There is a message there.

BJL

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6600
Hasselblad H4D-60 and H4D-50
« Reply #108 on: September 29, 2009, 09:48:14 pm »

Quote from: Boris_Epix
I wouldn't ever ask for a square sensor but I guess the point is people are tired of rotating cameras and waist level finders would work for vertical/square pics (since you wouldn't need to turn the camera). Instead of a square sensor a 6x7 sensor for the RZ67 would be really nice (including the rotating mount).
Rotating mount still needs a mirror big enough to cover the vertical and horizontal back positions, so square (7x7) in that case, and all the same depth needs.


Quote
Usually manufacturers just give customers what they can get away with not what would be best for them. Oh yeah, and make max possible profits.
Indeed: making the square format cameras that some ask for is probably not done because it has little prospect of being profitable ... ask F&H, Rollei, Leaf, Sinar and Jenoptik. Camera makers are not charities serving poor suffering MF photographers, so addressing the profit motive is unavoidable.

Quote
I'm not sure that is accurate but I've read sensor yields and prices both improved a lot.
I hear that in forums; I have not seen any evidence of substantial price reductions on large sensors though, so for now I put it down to wishful thinking.
Quote
And I think to recall that Dalsa assembled a sensor from several subpieces.
No: that is another forum myth. Dalsa use stitching, etching different parts of the sensor successively because the fab. equipment cannot make a device that big all at once. The same for all chips over about 33x26mm, which is part of their persistently high cost.

Quote
But it sure could be done. The Leaf AFI had a 6x6 box.
Of course it can be done: the dominant question is cost, and whether enough customers would pay enough. Not enough bought the Afi/Hy6.

Quote
Well... Paul was maybe a bit conservative with his thoughts on this. Why not drop the mirror box altogether?
Maybe: RED is talking of doing that. But apart from from needing a change away from FF CCD sensors, for Hasselbald or Mamiya/Phase One it would still require a completely new lens system (to offer AF), and I seriously doubt that any MF maker is up to that in pursuit of a tiny market.

Quote
And let's be honest... less and less fashion and people shooters will get backs when pixel counts are around 50-60 or more Megapixels just because it's too impractical to massage the HUGE files and store them. ...
Yes: likewise, formats larger than 645 are less and less needed as sensors improve: historically technological progress usually drives format size choices down rather than up. (Getting sensor sizes up to match existing 35mm and 645 AF lens systems is the main recent exception.)
Logged

Barry Goyette

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 35
Hasselblad H4D-60 and H4D-50
« Reply #109 on: September 29, 2009, 10:19:37 pm »

Quote from: smoody
I don't know if we can even be sure that their yaw-based focus lock will make it into the H4D50. I've asked about it a couple of times on the forum and have gotten no answer

I spoke with my rep about the upgrade path and the information he gave me indicates the yaw sensors are in the body, not the back...thus it seems to follow that the focus lock will be in the 50, that in addition to Poulsen's comments about this being the biggest advancement at hasselblad in centuries (or something like that) and that such a big deal needed a new name (H4d)...I think you can count on all the new features being in both the 50 and the 60.


Logged

Paul_Claesson_HasselbladUS

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 130
    • http://www.hasselbladusa.com
Hasselblad H4D-60 and H4D-50
« Reply #110 on: September 30, 2009, 09:34:40 am »

Quote
I don't know if we can even be sure that their yaw-based focus lock will make it into the H4D50
.
Yes, True Focus with APL will be included on the H4D50.

Quote
I've asked about it a couple of times on the forum and have gotten no answer from Hasselblad reps, which could only mean one of two things: (1) I'm not important enough to deserve a reply and/or (2) The reps aren't sure if there will be feature parity between the two models. I'm hoping the reason is (2)  :-)
I may have missed the question as this is not the only forum that i look at or post to and viewing and posting to forums such as LL is in addition to my primary function which is provide support to Hasselblad users, that alone consumes a great deal of time.
#1: It is definitely not this, see above.
#2: The only feature that I am waiting for confirmation is regarding the display on the H4D50.

Paul Claesson
Hasselblad USA
Logged
Paul Claesson
Technical Support Manager
Hasselblad Hasselblad Bron Inc.
support@hasselbladbron.com or
pclaesson@hasselbladbron.com
800-367-6434 x303

The opinions expressed here are my own, and do not necessarily reflect those of Hasselblad.

Dick Roadnight

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1730
Hasselblad H4D-60 and H4D-50
« Reply #111 on: September 30, 2009, 10:56:09 am »

Quote from: CurtisHight
Please offer a level in the viewfinder, and add directional information to the GPS data. (I want to record which direction the camera is pointed when an image is captured, as well as where it is located.)
What would make me buy the GPS attachment is the ability to use it without the camera body - on a view camera... you can buy a (Linhof) view camera adaptor that allows you to connect the camera battery without the body... why not also the GPS?
Logged
Hasselblad H4, Sinar P3 monorail view camera, Schneider Apo-digitar lenses

Dick Roadnight

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1730
Hasselblad H4D-60 and H4D-50
« Reply #112 on: September 30, 2009, 11:09:05 am »

Quote from: CurtisHight
a flash situated directly over the sensor (so it doesn't need to be rotated and the on-camera flash is optimally located for most shots).
The optimal position for fill-flash is below the camera, so that you fill the shadows created by the sun, sky or hand-held flash. (especially when shooting people wearing hats).

What is required is a pistol grip below the camera for one-handed operation (horizontal or vertical) with the option of mounting a flash and/or a monopod on the pistol grip.
Logged
Hasselblad H4, Sinar P3 monorail view camera, Schneider Apo-digitar lenses

gdwhalen

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 173
    • http://www.gdwhalen.com
Hasselblad H4D-60 and H4D-50
« Reply #113 on: September 30, 2009, 12:55:45 pm »

Quote from: Dick Roadnight
What would make me buy the GPS attachment is the ability to use it without the camera body - on a view camera... you can buy a (Linhof) view camera adaptor that allows you to connect the camera battery without the body... why not also the GPS?


Why not just buy a stand alone GPS then.  They are cheap.

ali alriffai

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8
Hasselblad H4D-60 and H4D-50
« Reply #114 on: September 30, 2009, 02:45:21 pm »

Quote from: Willow Photography
My understanding is the display (increased resolution) will change on the H4D60 and not on the 50.
I prefer to provide the participants on this or any forum accurate information. If I do not know, uncertain or seek additional information from the factory I will state so.


If this is true, and I hope not, it doesnt make any sense at all.
We have wanted a good LCD for years in a MFDB, and when Hasselblad
finally makes it. it will be in only the most expensive one.  

I have always defended Hasselblad when they have been atacked
because of closed systems, premature advertising of new products, "full format" etc.
But this make me both sad and angry!!!

Why not the best LCD for all the Hasselblads???

I was determined to upgrade from H3DII-31 to H4D50, but not anymore.


I 2nd that

Way not the best LCD  

with problems tethering my 50mp with the new MBP 17" disconnecting issue & power issue from the laptop I can't do FW HUB in location without a power generator !


And my best Camera in the world I cannot judge the pictures with this LCD ! it's totally dark outdoor even indoor it has reddish tint color

I only can see histogram & it's not practical

my G10 has better LCD & I'm welling to pay G10 price for only the same LCD in my hassie    

please I'm not asking for more

Dick Roadnight

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1730
Hasselblad H4D-60 and H4D-50
« Reply #115 on: September 30, 2009, 05:07:11 pm »

Is there any indication that anyone is thinking about making a sensor bigger than 645?

I think no one currently makes a MFDSLR big enough ¿do they? so it would need a total camera re-design or upsizing.

... but a 69 digiback would be nice for my Sinar P3 - saving having to stitch!

Now we have live view (or soon anyway) can we send the mirror to history?
Logged
Hasselblad H4, Sinar P3 monorail view camera, Schneider Apo-digitar lenses

erick.boileau

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 468
    • http://
Hasselblad H4D-60 and H4D-50
« Reply #116 on: October 01, 2009, 01:25:38 am »

#1 a new H4D (FF)  with  21 or 24 MP  , like the H3DII 22

#2  exposures up to 5 or 6 minutes

#3  very good batteries

#4  50 ISO

#5 a very good screen


for me that's all , I don't need and I don't want 50 or 60 MP
« Last Edit: October 01, 2009, 01:27:29 am by erick.boileau »
Logged

O.Ricter

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 23
Hasselblad H4D-60 and H4D-50
« Reply #117 on: October 01, 2009, 04:14:29 am »

Quote from: Willow Photography
My understanding is the display (increased resolution) will change on the H4D60 and not on the 50.
I prefer to provide the participants on this or any forum accurate information. If I do not know, uncertain or seek additional information from the factory I will state so.


If this is true, and I hope not, it doesnt make any sense at all.
We have wanted a good LCD for years in a MFDB, and when Hasselblad
finally makes it. it will be in only the most expensive one.  

I have always defended Hasselblad when they have been atacked
because of closed systems, premature advertising of new products, "full format" etc.
But this make me both sad and angry!!!

Why not the best LCD for all the Hasselblads???

I was determined to upgrade from H3DII-31 to H4D50, but not anymore.


I am sure all H4D-II both 50 and 60 will have new LCD..




Logged

BJL

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6600
Hasselblad H4D-60 and H4D-50
« Reply #118 on: October 01, 2009, 12:27:16 pm »

Quote from: O.Ricter
I am sure all H4D-II both 50 and 60 will have new LCD..
Maybe not: in names like H4D-50 and H4D-60,
- The "H4D" refers to the body, with new AF system
- The "-50" and "-60" refer to the backs, with different sensors.
- The LCD is on the back, not the body, so it seems quite possible that the 50MP back will be unchanged, and only the new 60MP back will get the new LCD.
Logged

BJL

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6600
Hasselblad H4D-60 and H4D-50
« Reply #119 on: October 01, 2009, 12:40:37 pm »

Quote from: Dick Roadnight
Is there any indication that anyone is thinking about making a sensor bigger than 645?
RED is talking of a huge 6x17cm panoramic back. Apart from that, not a peep, certainly not from the usual suspects, Kodak and Dalsa.
Quote
I think no one currently makes a MFDSLR big enough ¿do they? so it would need a total camera re-design or upsizing.
Exactly. The overwhelming trend is that sensors only get upsized in order to get more out of existing, modern, high quality, AF lens systems, so 35mm and 645 are the main upsizing targets, nothing bigger.

Quote
Now we have live view (or soon anyway) can we send the mirror to history?
Maybe, but mirrorless (and so "full time") live view requires far higher frame refresh rates than Full Frame type CCD's can provide, so a change to CMOS or interline CCD would probably be needed. RED (again) is talking of a 645 format motion/still camera with CMOS sensor and no mirror, and at smaller sizes it seems that many companies are interested in "full time live view" systems: not just Panasonic and Olympus but also Samsung, Fuji and Nikon. (Thom Hogan has supported the Fuji and Nikon rumors.)
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 4 5 [6] 7 8   Go Up