Hasselblad H3D II: Megapixel madness



The Hasselblad H3D II digital SLR is a 39-megapixel behemoth.


http://crave.cnet.co.uk/digitalcameras/0,39029429,49292969,00.htm

i wonder what the purpose of this thread is...

I could never spend that kind of dough on a crop camera

Pixel pitch must be *tiny* on that thing:

5D sensor size: 35.8 x 23.9 millimeters for 12.8 MP

Hasselblad H3D II sensor size: 36 x 28mm for 39 MP !

That link above is incorrect
http://www.hasselblad.com/products/h-system/h3d.aspx

Sensors for all types of shooting

The H3D-22 and its nearly double-resolution H3D-39 counterpart are both Full-Frame 48mm DSLR's using the sensor format 36×48mm. These cameras operate up to ISO400 with a capture speed of up to 1.4 seconds per capture. The H3D-22 and H3D-39 are the preferred choice of professional commercial photographers.

Edited by mcbroomf on Nov 06, 2007 at 08:17 PM GMT

cogitech wrote:
I could never spend that kind of dough on a crop camera

You said it. I would never pay that kind of dough on a crap camera!

At the very least, they should have put some real Zeiss glass on the thing that does not fall apart if you look at it wrong.

Come on! plastic works great for a lot of things

The funny thing is that Imafujiblad charges as much for those plastic lenses as the previous Zeiss lenses. They look like the cheapest 3rd party plastic 35mm lenses. Don't get me wrong, Fuji optics are great, but come on!

Have any of you actually shot with this camera? I can assure you that the Fuji optics are stellar and the build quality of the whole system is excellent.

Most people that buy a tool of this caliber aren't terribly concerned that it costs what it does, they need or want the best and will gladly pay the price.

Also, the Hassy sensor is 36x48mm, not 36x28mm as someone stated previously.

Yes, I have used it a few times.

cdTzabcan wrote:
Have any of you actually shot with this camera? I can assure you that the Fuji optics are stellar and the build quality of the whole system is excellent.

Most people that buy a tool of this caliber aren't terribly concerned that it costs what it does, they need or want the best and will gladly pay the price.

Also, the Hassy sensor is 36x48mm, not 36x28mm as someone stated previously.

I have not but do shoot with the V system, you know, the REAL Hasselblad. Just kidding. But seriously, the H system does not have the best reputation as far as reliability is concerned. Perhaps the most recent versions have fixed all the electronic issues which plagued it for the first 4 years. Then there was that infamous H series Zoom lens which had a tendency to just fall apart while being used. Even Michael Reichmann had this happen so it was not an isolated case.

I'm sure its great tool and very capable but it just does not seem like the kind of camera one can really bond and fall in love with if you know what I mean. For the kind of money this thing goes for, that really needs to be the case.

You know, I still want to get a V system, knowing it's gonna "almost" be out there supported forever by the digital back manufacturers. I just wish Hasselblad did offer a 22Mp back for it. It does offer a 16Mp one, but I'd like them to get a 22Mp.

Still, yesterday I had my first real contact with a MF back, and being used to 35mm DSLRs, I was shocked by the size of files, and processing power needed, plus transfer speeds. Am still trying to sort out the smoothest way of working, and I it was a 22Mp back. I can't imagine someone buying a 39Mp one, without a real need to. The needs you have with this kind of equipment will make you get your 12Mp 35mm 9 out of 10 times if you don't have a need for MF quality at that job.

H3D is ancient news.

Jessica, if you want a 22MP Hassy back, the Hasselblad CF-22 with a V adapter plate will work just fine. This back is an open-interface back, meaning it uses adapter plates for different cameras, just like the Sinar backs.

JessicaLuchesi wrote:
You know, I still want to get a V system, knowing it's gonna "almost" be out there supported forever by the digital back manufacturers. I just wish Hasselblad did offer a 22Mp back for it. It does offer a 16Mp one, but I'd like them to get a 22Mp.

Still, yesterday I had my first real contact with a MF back, and being used to 35mm DSLRs, I was shocked by the size of files, and processing power needed, plus transfer speeds. Am still trying to sort out the smoothest way of working, and I it was a 22Mp back. I can't imagine someone buying a 39Mp one, without a real need to. The needs you have with this kind of equipment will make you get your 12Mp 35mm 9 out of 10 times if you don't have a need for MF quality at that job.

The thing is, the 5D already fills the niche that MF film used to, so what I wonder is "what the hell *requires* MF digital?"

Another question: Do the pros find this MF crop camera as boring as I find 35mm crop cameras? After owning the 5D for a while, I really appreciate seeing *all* that my lenses have to offer. Don't MF shooters miss that with these crop cameras, or are they happy with that boring "sweet spot". I guess it doesn't matter when you can say "39 megapixels" to your client...

thing 1: B&H shows $29,999

thing 2: Hasselblad says 36.7x49mm (http://www.hasselblad.com/media/914459/h3dii_datasheet_uk.pdf)

thing 3: that yields a pixel pitch of ~6.8 um (compared to 5D's 8.2, 1DmkIII 7.2, or 40D's 5.7 um)

It's barely a crop camera.

I think the factor is 1.1x, depending on whether it's 36x48 (Dalsa), or 36.7x49 (Kodak).

cdTzabcan wrote:
Have any of you actually shot with this camera? I can assure you that the Fuji optics are stellar and the build quality of the whole system is excellent.

Most people that buy a tool of this caliber aren't terribly concerned that it costs what it does, they need or want the best and will gladly pay the price.

Also, the Hassy sensor is 36x48mm, not 36x28mm as someone stated previously.

Yes, I have.
I hated their lenses. Harsh. I bought Mamiya and use it with a Phase back.
One of the results is that used MF Mamiya lenses are available in the $200 ballpark, leaving me some room to experiment without going broke. The AF versions are of course more expensive, but nowhere near half the prices of Hasselblad.

Edmund

RobertP wrote:
It's barely a crop camera.

I think the factor is 1.1x, depending on whether it's 36x48 (Dalsa), or 36.7x49 (Kodak).

Hmm. I based my "crop" insinuations on the original sensor dimensions in the thread. Shame on me. The numbers you list here make much more sense!

Hasselblad touts both the -39 and -22 models as "full frame". A 1.1 conversion factor is apparently close enough as far as they are concerned.

Indeed, but despite the 1.1 crop factor, it is certainly NOT a full-frame camera, and Hasselblad is very WRONG in calling it that, but that's the way they're doing business now.

Hasselblad is like the annoying car salesman that spits out enthusiastic BS, or those guys from Verizon that just came to my door a few hours ago...

Full-frame 645 = 41.5mm x 56mm.

Sorry lads im not getting this.I had this on loan for a week to try it out with its new 28mm lens,a stronger tripod and an 8gig card.Coming from 5d im ready to shag it in the bin after using this.I even smiled when i handed over the €32,000 euros for it.Dont get me wrong the 5d is great but after a week with this ,what can i say.

RobertP thanks I meant tho, a square 22Mp sensor, since other manufacturers won't do it. But again, the 6x4.5 is the norm on MF sensors. I am just a sucker for 6x6 cropping

Well, Digital MF quality has it's place and there are real requirements for that. But the 5D will do great for most things, I don't even think there's need to debate it. I just mean that, I was shocked to see the ammount of time, work and processing needed for working with a MF Back compared to the world of 35mm DSLRs I'm used to. You won't want to take out the big guns unless you need to. If most of your work can be done just nicely with a 5D or 1DsMk2 ( or the correlated Nikon camera ), why put 5 times more stress on all points of your processing workflow ( regarding bandwidth, file sizes, storage, processing power, etc )? All I say is, if your need for MF quality is something for every now and then, it's better to rent when a client requires.

JessicaLuchesi wrote:
I was shocked to see the ammount of time, work and processing needed for working with a MF Back compared to the world of 35mm DSLRs I'm used to. You won't want to take out the big guns unless you need to.

Since switching to MF from a 5D I have not once wished I had the 5D. The quality is addictive. The extra workload is not nearly as bad as you make out either.

It's funny when wannabe-know-it-all's spit out crap about crop.

foto-z wrote:
JessicaLuchesi wrote:
I was shocked to see the ammount of time, work and processing needed for working with a MF Back compared to the world of 35mm DSLRs I'm used to. You won't want to take out the big guns unless you need to.

Since switching to MF from a 5D I have not once wished I had the 5D. The quality is addictive. The extra workload is not nearly as bad as you make out either.


About the quality being addictive, I'll second that. And the camera itself, and how it handles. There's no arguing there. For now, it's just a different reality for me, one I'll maybe have to get used to.