Hasselblad CFV-50c costs less than $10k in Japan

[eronald]

I think that there is a lot more to the rendering delivered by a camera+lens than the name of the company manufacturing the sensor base.

My interest in the CFV-50c remains, I just don't see anything special in those Flickr samples. Them being not available as full size images may be part of it.

Cheers,
Bernard

Bernard,

 The difference between the old and new tech is that the modern tech is much more digital - there is less space for secret sauce.
 Not none, just considerably less.

Edmund

[ErikKaffehr]

Hi Bernard,

I don't know about those images, but I have some observations after shooting my 555ELD for  15 months (or so).

1) The pixels are no sharper but there are more of them. Upres to a common resolution, sharpen properly and compare the images. You may or may not see an advantage.

2) Manually focusing the Hasselblad is hard

3) The lenses are sharp in the middle, but the corners may be different. If you check the MTF-curves, the Sonnars are great and so is the Macro Planar 100/3.5 and the 40/4 IF (latest version, hard to find). The curves seem to indicate a lot field curvature and some astigmatism. You find all MTF curves here: http://www.hasselbladhistorical.eu/HW/HWLds.aspx

My experience is that I am warming up the stuff. Using the equipment for 15 months I get better images. My comparison is a Sony A99 with 24 MP and OLP filter. You are comparing with a 36 MP camera without an OLP filter and some of the best lenses ever made for 135 format.

Best regards
Erik

Thanks, ok images but nothing too impressive to be honnest. Rendering is clean but nothing my current equipment doesn't do just as well.

Cheers,
Bernard

[BernardLanguillier]

Bernard, if I was seriously considering spending that kind of money I wouldn't be relying on undersized 3rd party jpegs or for that matter full size 3rd party Raws.

I would have thought a demo, loan or rental in Tokyo would be easy enough to arrange.

Yes, I will of course do that if I am convinced of the potential. Righ now I am in the stage before that.

Cheers,
Bernard

[Ken R]

Yes, I will of course do that if I am convinced of the potential. Right now I am in the stage before that.

Cheers,
Bernard

The Hasselblad V system is really obviously not a good choice if you want to get the most resolution out of a digital back (the 50MP Sony CMOS sensor included). The V lenses have a nice look to them and you will get that obviously (+ the large files, DR and Color) but the system as a whole is obviously not suitable to achieve the most out of those lenses on a consistent basis (with digital). So if you care about that (some don't and really just like working with the system and like the look of the images) then look elsewhere, even at $10k (a good deal) it is not the right choice. Like you said, better served by a D810 / A7R or a 645z (maybe, because the choice of lenses for the Nikon and Sony is much more extensive).

To get the best out of any sensor you need awesome lenses and right now to get great glass combined with the new Sony 50MP CMOS medium format sensor you basically need a PhaseOne IQ150/250 (or a Credo 50) or a Hasselblad H5D-50C.

[BernardLanguillier]

Ken,

You are probably right, now the CFV-50c can be used on a tech camera too and has live view. So my thinking is that it could be a "cheap" way to get the best MF sensor tech with the look of the V lenses on some subjects where resolution isn't that critical, such as portrait, while also getting access to the best Roddy lenses on a light Cambo for very high end spherical stitching...

Cheers,
Bernard

[Ken R]

Ken,

You are probably right, now the CFV-50c can be used on a tech camera too and has live view. So my thinking is that it could be a "cheap" way to get the best MF sensor tech with the look of the V lenses on some subjects where resolution isn't that critical, such as portrait, while also getting access to the best Roddy lenses on a light Cambo for very high end spherical stitching...

Cheers,
Bernard

Oh yeah. I was talking SLR lenses. Tech lenses are another story. The 50mp CMOS sensor does not play well with wide angle tech lenses with lot's of movement but straight on from say 40mm (Rodenstock HR-W) up they should work well with even a little movement. Check out the digital transitions website. They tested a bunch of combinations with the new CMOS back.

For work on a tripod with live view then that back might be an alternative if it works with tech camera setups and if live view works untethered and the lcd screen is acceptable.

If you dont intend on doing very long exposure or high iso work I would check out the Leaf Credo 40. They can be had at low prices used and it is a superb back. Works amazingly well with tech cameras. The lcd screen is superb. I love the way the Dalsa sensors handle the highlights. They have a very very nice look to them. With tech lenses per pixel sharpness is awesome and allow lots of movement (even with the IQ160 I have). The Credo and IQ backs are really nice to work with. Yes, the live view in them is pretty crude but it's usable in a lot of cases and the high quality lcd screen makes checking image sharpness untethered really easy. I would at least check it out.

[EricWHiss]

Most of the lenses for the V are really quite old designs now.  Some of these old lenses have a very nice rendering to them however - great for people shooting, not great for people who want the last detail.  $10k seems like a great deal.   Why is it so much cheaper there?

[BernardLanguillier]

Most of the lenses for the V are really quite old designs now.  Some of these old lenses have a very nice rendering to them however - great for people shooting, not great for people who want the last detail.  $10k seems like a great deal.   Why is it so much cheaper there?

No idea why it's cheaper in Japan. But photographer's population is older here, the V system has a mythical status  and 1 million yen is an amount many of those photographers can easily afford and would probably be willing to spend. 1.5 million is just too much for a camera.

My guess is that the mgt of Hassy Japan identified this market potential and managed to convince Sweden that it would be good business?

Cheers,
Bernard

[ErikKaffehr]

Hi,

I would say that some of the lenses are very good, the ones I would mention are:

- Both Sonnars 150/4 and 180/4 (i have used both)
- The Planar 100/3.5 (is said to be legendary)
- The Distagon 40/4 IF
- The Tele Superachromat T* 2.8/300

This evaluation is based on MTF curves, available here: http://www.hasselbladhistorical.eu/

The ones I own are 40/4, 50/4, 80/2.8, 120/4 and the 180/4, I have made good images with all of them. Manual focusing is not easy, and some sharpness is lost at f/11, but my give results across the frame.

So compared to high end DSLRs, I don't know.

Best regards
Erik

The Hasselblad V system is really obviously not a good choice if you want to get the most resolution out of a digital back (the 50MP Sony CMOS sensor included). The V lenses have a nice look to them and you will get that obviously (+ the large files, DR and Color) but the system as a whole is obviously not suitable to achieve the most out of those lenses on a consistent basis (with digital). So if you care about that (some don't and really just like working with the system and like the look of the images) then look elsewhere, even at $10k (a good deal) it is not the right choice. Like you said, better served by a D810 / A7R or a 645z (maybe, because the choice of lenses for the Nikon and Sony is much more extensive).

To get the best out of any sensor you need awesome lenses and right now to get great glass combined with the new Sony 50MP CMOS medium format sensor you basically need a PhaseOne IQ150/250 (or a Credo 50) or a Hasselblad H5D-50C.

[torger]

A Credo 40 second hand seems to be about $10-12k or so, ie about the same as a CFV-50c new. Remarkable value.

Despite the tech wide angle issues with the Sony CMOS the real-world results was better than I expected, I recommend looking at Guy's Credo 50 test (same sensor).

The only real-world test I had seen before Guy's test was Digital Transitions' IQ250 test. The problem with that test however is that they over-shift the sensor which causes sudden breakdown and make it look worse than it is. The thing is that just like the 135-format Sony sensors the MF sensor has offset microlenses. This means that if you shift over a certain limit the offset microlenses becomes contra-productive and introduce more crosstalk rather than reduce it. The DT stitched example images contains some sections where the sensor has been over-shifted and thus it looks worse than if the same segment had been shot with the sensor less shifted.

Guy's test show that even with quite large amount of crosstalk the real-world result is good. On the HR-40 12-15mm shift can be had. Extrapolating from LCC shots I've seen the HR-35 seems to take about 12mm shift and the HR-23 7-8mm with good real-world results. I'm sure the good real-world results can be had thanks to the extreme DR and good color separation in the center which means that you can have quite some degradation of it before it becomes obvious.

I think the performance with wide angles is good enough for some to choose that as a tech cam back, even when working with wides, and then the CFV-50c has an almost revolutionary good value. I'm not sure how well Phocus LCC algorithm is at handling crosstalk artifacts though, I know Capture One is pretty good. If you don't have an algorithm that is robust against crosstalk you get demosaicing failures at quite low levels of crosstalk, which can be seen in for example RawTherapee if you use the Amaze or even worse the DCB demosaicer (use VNG4 to suppress the artifacts). How good Phocus is matters too of course of how usable it will be with tech wides.

[synn]

Being the owner of a Credo 40, I would take that over a CFv-50c any day. Apart from high ISOs, I don't see a single area where the CFV is better than the Credo 40.


Incidentally, it is also 12K BRAND NEW, not used: http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/871231-REG/Mamiya_010_13008a_Leaf_Credo_40MP_Digital.html


Anyway, I found some samples for the Hassy back. Bernard might be interested: http://dc.watch.impress.co.jp/docs/review/newproduct/20141003_669691.html

[BernardLanguillier]

Being the owner of a Credo 40, I would take that over a CFv-50c any day. Apart from high ISOs, I don't see a single area where the CFV is better than the Credo 40.

Incidentally, it is also 12K BRAND NEW, not used: http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/871231-REG/Mamiya_010_13008a_Leaf_Credo_40MP_Digital.html

Anyway, I found some samples for the Hassy back. Bernard might be interested: http://dc.watch.impress.co.jp/docs/review/newproduct/20141003_669691.html

Thanks for the link.

As far as the comparison with the Credo 40, what makes you say so if I may ask?

To my eyes it is pretty much the opposite. I don't see many reasons to pick the Leaf:
- same sensor size,
- usable live view on the Hassy,
- higher DR CMOS on the Hassy,
- 25% higher res on the Hassy,
- better high ISO on the Hassy.

The only two plus in favour of the Leaf that I can think of are the support in C1 Pro and the behaviour on tech cameras when heavily shifted on some lenses but then again Torger has just shown us that it isn't that bad with the Sony sensor. What I am missing?

Cheers,
Bernard

[ErikKaffehr]

Bernard,

Have you seen the samples Guy Mancuso posted from the Leaf Credo 50? Same sensor the Hasselblad uses and Guy also posted raws, what a nice guy!

Best regards
Erik

Thanks for the link.

As far as the comparison with the Credo 40, what makes you say so if I may ask?

To my eyes it is pretty much the opposite. I don't see many reasons to pick the Leaf:
- same sensor size,
- usable live view on the Hassy,
- higher DR CMOS on the Hassy,
- 25% higher res on the Hassy,
- better high ISO on the Hassy.

The only two plus in favour of the Leaf that I can think of are the support in C1 Pro and the behaviour on tech cameras when heavily shifted on some lenses but then again Torger has just shown us that it isn't that bad with the Sony sensor. What I am missing?

Cheers,
Bernard

[synn]

Thanks for the link.

As far as the comparison with the Credo 40, what makes you say so if I may ask?

To my eyes it is pretty much the opposite. I don't see many reasons to pick the Leaf:
- same sensor size,
- usable live view on the Hassy,
- higher DR CMOS on the Hassy,
- 25% higher res on the Hassy,
- better high ISO on the Hassy.

The only two plus in favour of the Leaf that I can think of are the support in C1 Pro and the behaviour on tech cameras when heavily shifted on some lenses but then again Torger has just shown us that it isn't that bad with the Sony sensor. What I am missing?

Cheers,
Bernard

I could think of several reasons why I rank the Credo higher, actually.

In the short term:

- Ability to use the back on a modern (By MF standards) Autofocus platform with modern lenses and also tech cameras. Older Mamiya lenses are also cheaper than equivalent Hassy V lenses.
- A display that's actually useful in the field along with other niceties such as electronic spirit level and a much nicer UI.
- The ability to tether via USB and not antiquated Firewire, which means tablets such as the Surface Pro can be used on location
- A sensor that's kinder to large format lenses when movement is involved

In the long term:

- The possibility to do a mount swap in case you're switching platforms
- Better upgrade and sidegrade opportunities

Subjective:

- Better color rendition and highlight behavior
- Better long term prospects of the manufacturer
- The resolution advantage isn't significant enough to make a huge difference, not is the on-paper dynamic range. (Shadow recovery is indeed a plus for the CMOS back though.)
- Do not have to touch Phocus

Now, if the CMOS sensor was larger than 44x33, I'd see a case for the Hassy. As it stands, I don't see it. If one puts high ISO and very long exposures on top of the wishlist, above everything else, they are better off with a 35mm kit, IMO.

[BernardLanguillier]

I could think of several reasons why I rank the Credo higher, actually.

In the short term:

- Ability to use the back on a modern (By MF standards) Autofocus platform with modern lenses and also tech cameras. Older Mamiya lenses are also cheaper than equivalent Hassy V lenses.
- A display that's actually useful in the field along with other niceties such as electronic spirit level and a much nicer UI.
- The ability to tether via USB and not antiquated Firewire, which means tablets such as the Surface Pro can be used on location
- A sensor that's kinder to large format lenses when movement is involved

In the long term:

- The possibility to do a mount swap in case you're switching platforms
- Better upgrade and sidegrade opportunities

Subjective:

- Better color rendition and highlight behavior
- Better long term prospects of the manufacturer
- The resolution advantage isn't significant enough to make a huge difference, not is the on-paper dynamic range. (Shadow recovery is indeed a plus for the CMOS back though.)
- Do not have to touch Phocus

Now, if the CMOS sensor was larger than 44x33, I'd see a case for the Hassy. As it stands, I don't see it. If one puts high ISO and very long exposures on top of the wishlist, above everything else, they are better off with a 35mm kit, IMO.

All good points, but the colour rendition. I am not sure how you can write that having never used the CFV-50c, especially a few days after you described the new Sony based Leaf colours as excellent.

Cheers,
Bernard

[synn]

Sure, I haven't, but I've played around with the files from the IQ 250 enough to get a feel of what the sensor is capable of. Now Hasselblad might very well add some "Secret sauce" to make it better, but so far, all the Sony sensor equipped cameras (IQ 250, H5D 50c, 645Z) except the Credo 50 display very similar color output; at least to my eye.

Corollary to the above, the Credo 50 indeed looks to be the exception to the rule and also, let's not discount Frank Doorhof's post processing skills. So yeah, if they offer the Credo 50 at 10K, my answer will change. But that's not gonna happen now, is it?

[BernardLanguillier]

Sure, I haven't, but I've played around with the files from the IQ 250 enough to get a feel of what the sensor is capable of. Now Hasselblad might very well add some "Secret sauce" to make it better, but so far, all the Sony sensor equipped cameras (IQ 250, H5D 50c, 645Z) except the Credo 50 display very similar color output; at least to my eye.

Corollary to the above, the Credo 50 indeed looks to be the exception to the rule and also, let's not discount Frank Doorhof's post processing skills. So yeah, if they offer the Credo 50 at 10K, my answer will change. But that's not gonna happen now, is it?

OK, so I guess that the main problem with the colours of the CFV-50c is that the box doesn't carry a Leaf logo.

Cheers,
Bernard

[synn]

Read it any way as you will.

I got myself something with a Leaf logo because I liked what it delivered, not the other way around. I don't expect you to agree with my inferences or opinions, but I do expect you to be a bit less snarky about it.

Cheers.

[BernardLanguillier]

Read it any way as you will.

I got myself something with a Leaf logo because I liked what it delivered, not the other way around. I don't expect you to agree with my inferences or opinions, but I do expect you to be a bit less snarky about it.

I appreciate your feedback.

No negative comments about Leaf from me, I have never used one and have all the reasons in the world to think they are excellent.

Cheers,
Bernard

[torger]

Wow, $12k new for a Credo 40, then I guess it will be hard to sell $12k second hand these days. I was checking a second hand sale from earlier this year.

Anyways, we haven't seen the usability of the Hassy CFV-50c screen and live view yet, I don't think it's that bad, it's just not as good as it should be. That doesn't make it unusable though. Working with less-than-top-notch technical features is what any MF user should be used to anyway . I don't even have live view, I use ground glass successfully and it ain't particularly good but good enough if you have reasonably fresh eyes and some training.

As a tech cam alternative I think the old Hassy CFV-50 is great, with its Kodak CCD (which actually has proper shielding between pixels unlike the Dalsa, which while a lot better than the Sony CMOS still isn't near to the Kodak) even the SK28 is usable to it's edge and the 49x37mm sensor size is very well balanced for the lens range. I'd personally pick that rather than a Credo 40, although the Credo has a bit lower noise. I don't think Bernard would be pleased with it though, if you've got used to the low noise Sony CMOS and make use of it in your shooting style going back to a in comparison noisy CCD is going to be a bit of a shock.

You don't have to work with Phocus, you can use Lightroom or like myself RawTherapee . Portrait photographers tend to want to use the native software as there usually is more skin-tone magic there, but if you work with landscape that's less of an issue. I use a custom color profile myself with my Leaf as I don't like the Leaf originals for landscape (except perhaps the ProPhoto profile but that's looking exactly like matrix-only) and I'm quite sure it would be the same with Hasselblad.