Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 8   Go Down

Author Topic: Hasselblad H4D-60 and H4D-50  (Read 63193 times)

David Grover / Phase One

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1319
    • Phase One
Hasselblad H4D-60 and H4D-50
« Reply #40 on: September 26, 2009, 12:37:04 pm »

Quote from: nikf
I would simply like to know if the screen on the back and zooming got any improvements. These are some basic and practical things for shooters like me who most of the time
take pictures un-tethered. I have 100% zooming in on the user button but there is no way to move around with the cursor buttons to check other parts of the frame than in
the middle. That's annoying and I have all my Nikons setup this way: one button press -> 100% view - moving around with the cursor. Why this is not possible on my H3DII-31 is
beyond me. Of course I mentioned this to my Hasselblad representative.
The display on the back is really not up to the task. Even in dim light recently, when I was shooting in Iceland, I could not see really what was going on with sharpness and I relied
on my technique to get sharp shots. I would prefer a way to double check in the field without schlepping a laptop around. With my Nikon D3 or even the lowly D90 I can see everything
even in brighter daylight.

The H4D60 has an improved higher resolution screen.

I am a little unsure of the exact spec so have not commented so far. I'll reply next week when I am back at base.

I agree the focus check function should also have scrolling capability. I shall bring that up.
Logged
David Grover
Business Support and Development Manager, Software.

gwhitf

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 855
Hasselblad H4D-60 and H4D-50
« Reply #41 on: September 26, 2009, 01:01:23 pm »

With advertising jobs, most of the time I'm locked down on a tripod, shooting to a layout. I would not want the camera body to be in a slightly different place each time that you brought it back after recomposing.

Also, in advertising, you're always planning on Head Swaps, so you want the frame pretty much locked down, frame to frame, so that everything stays in registration.

I cannot imagine, each and every frame, moving the camera body to the focus point, and then bringing it back to recompose. Frame after frame. What would you have to do -- unlock the camera position, go find the focus point, then hold down some button, and then recompose, make sure the horizon is level, and then relock the tripod, and then shoot? Each and every frame?

I guess it's a cool idea, if you're into NASA stuff, but if you're doing ad work, down in the trenches, you want the camera locked down. That's why I'd opt for Canon or Nikon, with multi point AF. Not that that is perfect either, but it's a pretty rare job where the focus point is dead center for me.

I've found that, with these digital cameras, the focus tolerance is next to nothing, and I cannot rely on Manual Focus any longer. The viewfinder is either too small, or what I'm seeing is not exactly what's being conveyed to the sensor. The AF point in the 5dII pretty much nails it every time. I've heard the same is true with Nikon, maybe even better than Canon.

It seems to me that the majority of the MF market share is now headed toward advanced amateurs, which is fine on some level, but a shame on another level.

Mr. Grover, are there plans at all for a Vertical Grip for the H body? For people who don't shoot landscapes and sunsets?
« Last Edit: September 26, 2009, 01:07:56 pm by gwhitf »
Logged

smoody

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 23
Hasselblad H4D-60 and H4D-50
« Reply #42 on: September 26, 2009, 01:01:53 pm »


Quote from: David Grover / Hasselblad
The H4D60 has an improved higher resolution screen.

I assume that all of the features in the H4D-60 will also come standard in the H4D-50 -- improved screen, True Focus with APL, etc. I've just noticed that on the Haselblad site and in the press releases, they really only mention those features in the context of the H4D-60. I'm assuming the two cameras have the exact same feature set and specs (sensor and sensor-related differences aside), but I just want to make sure.

Thanks,

   Scott

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

paul_jones

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 574
    • http://www.paulrossjones.com
Hasselblad H4D-60 and H4D-50
« Reply #43 on: September 26, 2009, 02:42:01 pm »

Quote from: David Grover / Hasselblad
Hi Paul,

In answer to your first question, the camera is fitted with hardware that is becoming more common now in products such as the iPhone, Wii, etc etc.

Therefore calculating the angle the camera is positioned at in relation to its focus point is quite easy - just a bit of Trigonometry.

I agree we need to get people excited about MF again.  But this is a step in the right direction.

The 'black' color argument is one that crops up from time to time.  Absolutely.  Well, all I can say is that we do listen to the users, so keep the voices high and lets see what happens.

David


thanks or the reply david. its good to have someone at least listening from hasselblad.

paul
Logged
check my new website
[url=http://www.pau

nikf

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 31
Hasselblad H4D-60 and H4D-50
« Reply #44 on: September 26, 2009, 03:46:30 pm »

Quote from: David Grover / Hasselblad
The H4D60 has an improved higher resolution screen.

I am a little unsure of the exact spec so have not commented so far. I'll reply next week when I am back at base.

I agree the focus check function should also have scrolling capability. I shall bring that up.

Thank you for the answer. Good to know that the screen is improved, hopefully in brightness too!
It would help a lot if you can find a way to suggest the scrolling capability I (and others) wish for a long time to the developers.
That's probably not too much hassle to realize because the scrolling function is already there, albeit in a different way.
Logged

markowich

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 119
    • http://www.peter-markowich.net
Hasselblad H4D-60 and H4D-50
« Reply #45 on: September 26, 2009, 03:51:24 pm »

david,
has the H3DII 60 been cancelled? will there be an upgrade path from the H3DII 50 to the H4DII 60? peter
Logged

paul_jones

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 574
    • http://www.paulrossjones.com
Hasselblad H4D-60 and H4D-50
« Reply #46 on: September 26, 2009, 04:31:08 pm »

Hi David, Just one more question, what are these contacts for? Did Hasselblad consider the vertical grip when they designed the body?

cheers paul
Logged
check my new website
[url=http://www.pau

Ben Rubinstein

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1782
Hasselblad H4D-60 and H4D-50
« Reply #47 on: September 26, 2009, 05:25:48 pm »

Given the fact that the guy was right, canon and nikon FF cameras have AF sensors that cover less than half the frame, there is probably a reason as to why multiple focus points over a large area is either difficult or at least very expensive to do. Port that over to 645 and it seems that 'blad have taken the only real option within a reasonable budget. I'd certainly love to see that technology on DSLR's, shooting wide open a slight tilt of the head even with the correct focus point can throw the focus back out. It is also probable that 'blad know what type of shooting most of their AF using customers are doing and I wouldn't be surprised if it wasn't mainly people photography, not locked down tripod stuff.

Would be nice to see a 30 megapixel version of the H4D wouldn't it, would certainly make me think...
« Last Edit: September 26, 2009, 05:26:45 pm by pom »
Logged

arashm

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 145
Hasselblad H4D-60 and H4D-50
« Reply #48 on: September 26, 2009, 05:36:20 pm »

Quote: Would be nice to see a 30 megapixel version of the H4D wouldn't it, would certainly make me think...


Actually I have to totally agree, I'm assuming that the 31 and 39 will eventually drop off the line up.
so this leaves the 50 as entry point to the H family !??
A H4D-31 priced properly would get people like me (frequent renters) to finally jump.
(or what about a H4D-40 with the ISO performance of the P40+

Note to David/Blad PLEASE... give us a vertical grip.
am
Logged

pcunite

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 205
Hasselblad H4D-60 and H4D-50
« Reply #49 on: September 26, 2009, 10:39:02 pm »

Quote from: David Grover / Hasselblad
Suffice to say that more than 50% of business so far this year has been to customers who had previously not bought any Medium Format digital gear.  So I take solace in that we are delivering something to those guys which offers something additional to 35mm.

I am under the impression that Rolexes are often sold to those with no prior mechanical watch ownership. It is the brand, the marketing message, the illusive of having the best, or at least what makes you appear the best, that causes some sales.

I love how that even though the Leica S2 is inferior in so many product checklist ways from what Hasselblad and Phase have sold others on (larger sensor / more MP / pixel pitch and so on) that it is yet more expensive. Again... it is not really what everyone says. It is the simple fact that because one has a large and very expensive camera that therefore the image will somehow be better.

Why not just say the obvious? With MFD you get even more DOF control from 35mm, you get really sharp looking onscreen 100% views, and you can print larger because by and large you get more pixels from MFD. For all other variables there is not a soul on the planet who could recognized the differences! Only someone emotionally attached to their equipment having just spent $30,000 is able to say that the final output is better! Why all the smoke and mirrors about everything?

The post is only my opinion and possibly very incorrect as some will no doubt state but not prove in a picture.
Logged

lisa_r

  • Guest
Hasselblad H4D-60 and H4D-50
« Reply #50 on: September 26, 2009, 11:44:33 pm »

Indeed even Canon, with all of their resources, have stated more than once that they are incapable (at the moment) of spreading the AF points any wider than they already are. Same with Nikon. Heaven knows why they can't, but I am sure if they could, they would.
Thanks David for braving the barracuda tank here.
And I agree with j.r., Hasselblad are looking more promising as they go. They are putting real thought into their cameras and software. And given the limited resources and tightening sales in this industry as a whole - I say bravo. (let's not forget their competitors are either a.) out of business or b.) doing jack shit like Mamiya seems to be doing in terms of innovation.)
Logged

jing q

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 596
    • we are super
Hasselblad H4D-60 and H4D-50
« Reply #51 on: September 26, 2009, 11:44:39 pm »

Quote from: pcunite
I am under the impression that Rolexes are often sold to those with no prior mechanical watch ownership. It is the brand, the marketing message, the illusive of having the best, or at least what makes you appear the best, that causes some sales.

I love how that even though the Leica S2 is inferior in so many product checklist ways from what Hasselblad and Phase have sold others on (larger sensor / more MP / pixel pitch and so on) that it is yet more expensive. Again... it is not really what everyone says. It is the simple fact that because one has a large and very expensive camera that therefore the image will somehow be better.

Why not just say the obvious? With MFD you get even more DOF control from 35mm, you get really sharp looking onscreen 100% views, and you can print larger because by and large you get more pixels from MFD. For all other variables there is not a soul on the planet who could recognized the differences! Only someone emotionally attached to their equipment having just spent $30,000 is able to say that the final output is better! Why all the smoke and mirrors about everything?

The post is only my opinion and possibly very incorrect as some will no doubt state but not prove in a picture.

urm I think you're making very broad assumptions by saying that no one else is able to see the final output is better.
Logged

photo570

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 189
    • http://www.shoot.co.nz
Hasselblad H4D-60 and H4D-50
« Reply #52 on: September 27, 2009, 12:52:05 am »

I know the point I was making in my earlier post was that this seems a more obtuse solution to improving the AF situation in MF than the blatantly obvious. I also don't know why they can't do it either.

Spacing the sensors out across the frame is the issue, is it not.

If it is not possible to build a larger "unit", why not just use three single point sensors units, which they already have, and actually physically space them apart??? What are we missing? I don't mean to be rude, because that just gets flamed, is this not possible, and why?

This solution in the H4 is ingenious, but overly complicated an impractical, an earlier poster gave the example of shooting to a layout, focus and recompose is not practical in some situations. That is the reason so many people "have their panties in a bunch", over this, they just want a better experience shooting with the H, and for some, this is the wrong answer to the question.

:-)
Jason


Quote from: lisa_r
Indeed even Canon, with all of their resources, have stated more than once that they are incapable (at the moment) of spreading the AF points any wider than they already are. Same with Nikon. Heaven knows why they can't, but I am sure if they could, they would.
Thanks David for braving the barracuda tank here.
And I agree with j.r., Hasselblad are looking more promising as they go. They are putting real thought into their cameras and software. And given the limited resources and tightening sales in this industry as a whole - I say bravo. (let's not forget their competitors are either a.) out of business or b.) doing jack shit like Mamiya seems to be doing in terms of innovation.)
Logged
Jason Berge
www.shoot.co.nz

smoody

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 23
Hasselblad H4D-60 and H4D-50
« Reply #53 on: September 27, 2009, 02:12:16 am »

Quote from: photo570
That is the reason so many people "have their panties in a bunch", over this...

Just curious what you mean by "so many people?" I've seen a few in a single thread say it's not for them -- clearly not enough to extrapolate that the majority of people will not like it, appreciate it, or use it. It definitely isn't the solution for everyone, but neither is user-selectable focus points. If you're doing a full body shot and need to do head substitutions, what are the odds that one of the focus points will fall on the eyes of your subject without having to let the focus points influence the framing?

As low-fi as it is, one almost needs something akin to what the iPhone does -- select a focus point with your finger or stylus and give any section of the sensor the potential to be a reference point for focus.
Logged
.
. . . . . [url=http://www.fauxtography

photo570

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 189
    • http://www.shoot.co.nz
Hasselblad H4D-60 and H4D-50
« Reply #54 on: September 27, 2009, 02:23:18 am »

This is not the first time this has been discussed, here and other boards as well. I never said anything about a majority of people either, I was eluding to the fact that I was not alone in my thoughts, that is all. I was mainly asking why they went this route, rather than what seemed a more straight way forward to me.

Jason.


Quote from: smoody
Just curious what you mean by "so many people?" I've seen a few in a single thread say it's not for them -- clearly not enough to extrapolate that the majority of people will not like it, appreciate it, or use it. It definitely isn't the solution for everyone, but neither is user-selectable focus points. If you're doing a full body shot and need to do head substitutions, what are the odds that one of the focus points will fall on the eyes of your subject without having to let the focus points influence the framing?

As low-fi as it is, one almost needs something akin to what the iPhone does -- select a focus point with your finger or stylus and give any section of the sensor the potential to be a reference point for focus.
Logged
Jason Berge
www.shoot.co.nz

Dustbak

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2430
    • Pepperanddust
Hasselblad H4D-60 and H4D-50
« Reply #55 on: September 27, 2009, 03:42:38 am »

I don't get the bickering about the extra focussing functionality of Hasselblad. If they really get this working properly, I am truly sceptical about it and will only believe it after having used it for a fairly extensive period of time, it would be awesome.

People asking for something like a 51-point AF for 645, get a very clear answer. Hasselblad cannot make that at this moment in time, for whatever reason. I assume if they could and were able to sell it at a profit, they would.

On the other hand, if I can have 1 focus point, focus recompose and get tack sharp focus where I want it? Personally I would favor that over having multiple focuspoints in most cases! Sure, it would not be useful in every application but what is?

Again. I am very sceptical about whether it will work. To me it seems so much precision needs to be excercised in such a short time lapse, to me it seems virtually impossible to get this functioning correctly everytime under all circumstances.

As someone else said, you are not being forced to buy one.

Logged

photo570

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 189
    • http://www.shoot.co.nz
Hasselblad H4D-60 and H4D-50
« Reply #56 on: September 27, 2009, 03:52:35 am »

Three would do.  ;-)


Quote from: Dustbak
People asking for something like a 51-point AF for 645, get a very clear answer. Hasselblad cannot make that at this moment in time, for whatever reason. I assume if they could and were able to sell it at a profit, they would.
Logged
Jason Berge
www.shoot.co.nz

Dustbak

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2430
    • Pepperanddust
Hasselblad H4D-60 and H4D-50
« Reply #57 on: September 27, 2009, 04:00:11 am »

In that case I would prefer the current new solution. I am pretty sure that I would still recompose with 3 focus points.
« Last Edit: September 27, 2009, 11:16:56 am by Dustbak »
Logged

georgl

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 140
Hasselblad H4D-60 and H4D-50
« Reply #58 on: September 27, 2009, 04:21:20 am »

Sounds like an ingenious solution - when it works as promised.

But at some point, isn't it simpler just to use manual focus? Why do we have those big, bright viewfinders? We talk about quite slow, very careful composition - not sports-photography...

@ pcunite
The MFDB-systems that incorporate larger sensors with more megapixels (except for the 4 year old 39MP-generation) are more expensive than the S2. When Leica finally publishes the first real images from this system, you will realize that IQ is simply a non-issue.
Rolex has a strong image, but it's also pristine quality-wise, one of the few companies worldwide that don't rely on cheap supplier-solutions. But many people (also Rolex-buyers) don't know that and just decide for the brand name. Oddly, that's exactly what scares people with more knowledge choosing a Rolex, they're afraid to be mixed-up with "brand-victims". It's a pretty similar siutation for Leica.
Logged

sperera

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 97
Hasselblad H4D-60 and H4D-50
« Reply #59 on: September 27, 2009, 05:44:29 am »

.......I am fascinated by Hasselblad's marketing......going on about the great new focusing system and how much better it is than multi-point focusing.......

...more fascinating even are comments in forums defending a single centre point focusing system claiming users are not sports shooters etc so why need multi-point.......two words....FASHION PHOTOGRAPHER.....how many of you out there shooting fashion are using Nikons and Canons over your H3D-39's now BECAUSE of the autofocusing systems in them amongst other things.........would be interesting to know.....

anyway, this all makes me think CEO Poulson thinks we're too reverential of the brand not to see the reality of the fact they'd love to have multi-point but they can't/won't bring it into their system.....

WILL BE GREAT TO READ THE MARKETING WHEN THEY DO BRING IN MULTI-POINT FOCUSING.....Hasselblad is a strange creature isn't it....they claim to be so advnced but the one thing people hate most about the system is the one thing they dont solve!
Logged
Stephen Perera
www.ulookfierce.com
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 8   Go Up