p.16 #1 · Official: Hasselblad X1D-50c Medium Format Mirrorless
Jman13 wrote:
This is true, but you can also just add an ND filter and get the same shutter speed and diffraction. In any case, seeing the specs and the true size, this is a very interesting camera...I do wonder about the relative IQ improvements, but it's still an interesting entry into the community.
I am often already at ND110
ND103 is fine, no color cast and easy to focus with the filter on. ND106 and up, even the highest quality, has color cast which is difficult to correct.
The difference between these two formats is not very big, but almost a stop is something. The larger MF sensors look more interesting, but so does the prospect of lower base ISO with future FF sensors. Canon's new sensor tech in the 80D has a measured base ISO of 64 and is among the best in class in that regard. I am also interested in increased resolution, so the in-development 120 MP FF camera from Canon might be interesting as well. Gotta save my pennies
p.16 #2 · Official: Hasselblad X1D-50c Medium Format Mirrorless
telyt wrote:
The side-by-side photos tell me nothing about low-ISO color, high-ISO noise, responsiveness or menu structure. Nor do they tell me anything about the relative effectiveness of each camera's anti-vibration strategies, artificial lighting capabilities or portability of the system as a whole. If none of these factors is important then comparing these side-by-side photos may be useful.
None of those factors are important to me I only need a tripod mount, a lens with a filter thread and remote shutter release, I assume those features will be available And it should be about the same size as my A7 since it needs to fit in the same small bag.
p.16 #3 · Official: Hasselblad X1D-50c Medium Format Mirrorless
I think this camera is an interesting data point for those who have been arguing that mirrorless cameras are far cheaper and faster to build than DSLRs and should not cost nearly as much. The price difference between the H6D-50c and X1D-50c is enormous.
At the same time I don't see any reason that the lens prices should also be enormously different so I'm concerned that they are.
p.16 #4 · Official: Hasselblad X1D-50c Medium Format Mirrorless
carlitos wrote:
Hi Guy,
Do you really think the 50Mp sensor is "better" than the 42Mp BSI sensor? Not trying to put you on the spot, but I think the 42Mp looks like a 6x6 transparency (especially images from the Sony RX1RII). From the limited examples I've seen of the 50Mp, it looks like a larger version of the 36Mp sensor in the Nikon D810, which to me does not look like a 6x6 transparency. Maybe that extra real estate in the 50Mp makes the difference.
If are able you get a copy of the Hasselblad, maybe you could put together some sort of comparison. I know different lenses, etc... but it could be informative. ...Show more →
Keep in mind that the current Sony 42MP BSI sensor is actually a generation BEHIND the Sony 36MP sensors which resutls in less DR by comparison. I suspect the 50MP Sony sensor here is also more advanced tech wise beyond BSI. You can see more here:
p.16 #5 · Official: Hasselblad X1D-50c Medium Format Mirrorless
timde wrote:
None of those factors are important to me I only need a tripod mount, a lens with a filter thread and remote shutter release, I assume those features will be available And it should be about the same size as my A7 since it needs to fit in the same small bag.
The new Hasselblad is larger than a Sony A7 and removing the hump in the center for the EVF, the Sony is much smaller.
p.16 #8 · Official: Hasselblad X1D-50c Medium Format Mirrorless
snapsy wrote:
I'm thinking this means a Canikon FF MILC can't be very far behind. Or at least I hope that's what it means.
You would think.... IMO, the 1DXII is a very capable MILC-like camera in live view for stills and video. For me it would be a near perfect camera (other than size) if it incorporated a hybrid OVF/EVF viewfinder. Canon just needs to put the live view DPAF guts into a dedicated mirrorless camera aimed at advanced photographers and IMO it would be very competitive in terms of usability/capability with established MILC systems. The 1DXII sensor also looks quite promising for low ISO DR improvements over past Canon offerings, to the point of being close enough to Sony. Sure, not 42MP, but not everyone needs or wants that much.
p.16 #11 · Official: Hasselblad X1D-50c Medium Format Mirrorless
carlitos wrote:
Hi Guy,
Do you really think the 50Mp sensor is "better" than the 42Mp BSI sensor? Not trying to put you on the spot, but I think the 42Mp looks like a 6x6 transparency (especially images from the Sony RX1RII). From the limited examples I've seen of the 50Mp, it looks like a larger version of the 36Mp sensor in the Nikon D810, which to me does not look like a 6x6 transparency. Maybe that extra real estate in the 50Mp makes the difference.
If are able you get a copy of the Hasselblad, maybe you could put together some sort of comparison. I know different lenses, etc... but it could be informative. ...Show more →
Its a tough question to answer as the pixel pitch is different they Hassy being slightly bigger. From shooting MF for a long time we keep getting asked for proof is it better than 35 and the answer really is a yes but than we could debate this all day long. I hate to be the guy that says it is but it is and if you have a good eye you can pick up on it. First the pixel pitch is bigger so given than the color fills the pitch more and it will be a subtle roll off when changing colors aka when we say it has nice color transition between colors. that really has to do with the bigger pixel pitch in my mind. From a science point of view i have no clue but from a shooters view that is what i think is happening. Its like the difference between a monitor that handles 32million colors verse one that handles 18,000 colors. there is more color data in the bigger pixel pitch and bigger sensor so the transitions in tone and palette are more stretched out. man this is a hard one to write down but hope you get the idea . The rule always has been bigger is better but not many define that rule. So I like to think of it more as more data that is collected gets dispersed more evenly in the file.
Now the real question does it freaking matter. Its really the question of the day. Yes , no and sometimes. If your a real pixel peeking whore than you will see it, if not you may overlook it, if your a client you could give a shit. To add to that should you give a damn. Depends on you and honestly I been through every phase of ultimate caring about to not caring about it at all. I love shooting MF and i loved the files an i really do like the format no question but in all honesty I really love my damn Sony A7rII and my RxrII. Bottom line until this 42mpx sensor i would say go buy a MF cam . I honestly can't give that advice anymore. we finally hit the MF threshold with 35 with this sensor. That day the A7rII was released and i had it in hand and brought some raw files in. i knew it immediately it was far different than the previous 36mpx. i even said it looks like MF images and i know I'm not wrong it does. The files have great DR and great tonal range like a MF files. Really the gap is so dang close now but there is still something about the 50 mpx sensor I like and it is a little bigger sensor so there is some DOF kind of looks there but I would really not buy it because of these different sensor except the Hassy can do very long exposure which why our 42mpx can't i still don't know why.Anyway i would not let either sensor stop you from buying one or both of them This Sony 42mpx is the best sensor in 35mm bar none. Never has it been this good, IMHO we are finally where we should be in 35mm
p.16 #12 · Official: Hasselblad X1D-50c Medium Format Mirrorless
timde wrote:
Bigger problem is the wife
Hey i have 5 baseball helmets to lend out to any member that needs one. They are slightly dented , beat up but they will still protect you from your wife and her baseball bat. Just send postage . ROTFLMAO
p.16 #14 · Official: Hasselblad X1D-50c Medium Format Mirrorless
Im keeping a very positive attitude on this Hassy more for what it is as a MF mirrorless system than the product itself. We really need this in the industry and glad to see Hassy step up and do it. Buy it or not does not matter its the acceptance to the end user as this is the kind of technology we want going forward. I been doing this so long its nice to see a simplistic approach to digital and i think any Sony owner can appreciate that. Im not sure what i am going to do , i do like the product but its not replacing my Sony either so I'm knitting my ski mask and downing my baseball helmets at some point in life after photokinia Ill make some either really smart decision or it will be the jackass of the day decision.
p.16 #15 · Official: Hasselblad X1D-50c Medium Format Mirrorless
GMPhotography wrote:
Its a tough question to answer as the pixel pitch is different they Hassy being slightly bigger. From shooting MF for a long time we keep getting asked for proof is it better than 35 and the answer really is a yes but than we could debate this all day long. I hate to be the guy that says it is but it is and if you have a good eye you can pick up on it. First the pixel pitch is bigger so given than the color fills the pitch more and it will be a subtle roll off when changing colors aka when we say it has nice color transition between colors. that really has to do with the bigger pixel pitch in my mind. From a science point of view i have no clue but from a shooters view that is what i think is happening. Its like the difference between a monitor that handles 32million colors verse one that handles 18,000 colors. there is more color data in the bigger pixel pitch and bigger sensor so the transitions in tone and palette are more stretched out. man this is a hard one to write down but hope you get the idea . The rule always has been bigger is better but not many define that rule. So I like to think of it more as more data that is collected gets dispersed more evenly in the file.
Now the real question does it freaking matter. Its really the question of the day. Yes , no and sometimes. If your a real pixel peeking whore than you will see it, if not you may overlook it, if your a client you could give a shit. To add to that should you give a damn. Depends on you and honestly I been through every phase of ultimate caring about to not caring about it at all. I love shooting MF and i loved the files an i really do like the format no question but in all honesty I really love my damn Sony A7rII and my RxrII. Bottom line until this 42mpx sensor i would say go buy a MF cam . I honestly can't give that advice anymore. we finally hit the MF threshold with 35 with this sensor. That day the A7rII was released and i had it in hand and brought some raw files in. i knew it immediately it was far different than the previous 36mpx. i even said it looks like MF images and i know I'm not wrong it does. The files have great DR and great tonal range like a MF files. Really the gap is so dang close now but there is still something about the 50 mpx sensor I like and it is a little bigger sensor so there is some DOF kind of looks there but I would really not buy it because of these different sensor except the Hassy can do very long exposure which why our 42mpx can't i still don't know why.Anyway i would not let either sensor stop you from buying one or both of them This Sony 42mpx is the best sensor in 35mm bar none. Never has it been this good, IMHO we are finally where we should be in 35mm...Show more →
Hi Guy,
I still have my A7rM V3 and my stock A7r. I would suspect that processing of the files of the A7r cameras and the A7rII have a lot of the affect. Yes the A7rII is 42MP but it is only a little more than the 36MP of the A7r,
Also, and maybe I am totally wrong, I wonder how much the glass used when we get to this level and also with the new Hasselblad will bring and have an affect on the final files (and most definitely the file processing).
We do know from the days of film (particularly transparencies) and even today for digital that diffent lenses, glass formulas, manufacturers, etc. have an affect. As you have mentioned previously your thoughts regarding Zeiss and Leica for their glass formulas.
p.16 #16 · Official: Hasselblad X1D-50c Medium Format Mirrorless
Rich I am a big proponent of how the glass formulas are made and what that glass does bring to our images and files. This is what I believe is a big reason for the look we talk about. Its a discussion that does not get a lot of play but certain raw materials I know Leica uses in the Noctiluxes for instance that helps create that look. From My old days with Hassy they used Zeiss than moved on to fuji which in large format 4x5 fuji made outstanding glass. Now they are using Nitto which I honestly don't know much about but there MTF charts look damn good. now the question is how is the look of these new lenses are they more lets say for argument more clinical in look to the Sony 55 or more loxia 50 kind of look. Going to be interesting to see this as there own H glass is very nice in many ways. One thing for sure though Hassy does know what the heck they are doing in certain ways maybe not there marketing stuff but they have a long history of making cameras too and we stood on the edge of the earth using those Hassys to much satisfaction. Im keeping a open mind and agin this maybe not exactly what you want but Im giving it credit for what it is be it I own it or not. Believe me i came from a long history of Phase One gear and Hassy was the evil twin. i don't feel that way though
p.16 #17 · Official: Hasselblad X1D-50c Medium Format Mirrorless
Anybody here pre-ordering it? I came very close pressing the button but what puts me off is lens selection. I would mainly use it for landscapes and need wider lenses (even wider than the 30mm promised in September).
Whenever they release a 24mm (19mm full frame equiv.), I would re-consider it.
p.16 #18 · Official: Hasselblad X1D-50c Medium Format Mirrorless
The X1 is a niche camera, not only due to cost, but also because very few photographers produce large prints. I know several photographers who have MFD cameras and never print photos. All their work remains on their computer. They would be better off using with a DLSR. The latest versions are quite amazing. I only use MFD cameras because my clients require that. I much prefer DSLRs. They're more intuitive and easier to use. The X1 is a step in the right direction.
p.16 #19 · Official: Hasselblad X1D-50c Medium Format Mirrorless
Fred Miranda wrote:
Anybody here pre-ordering it? I came very close pressing the button but what puts me off is lens selection. I would mainly use it for landscapes and need wider lenses (even wider than the 30mm promised in September).
Whenever they release a 24mm (19mm full frame equiv.), I would re-consider it.
You could use with adapter there 24mm H lens but you almost need a real job to buy one. 7k
The good news is you could very well use H glass and there are a lot on the used market too. You can buy than sell after native came out. Folks this is the A7r all over again. The good part is they have a lot of great H glass out there to hold you over even 300mm that are outstanding.
One of my good friends is a Hassy dealer so I could get one almost anytime to buy but Im going to get his demo first for a few days. Ill have to just twist his arm a little.
p.16 #20 · Official: Hasselblad X1D-50c Medium Format Mirrorless
GMPhotography wrote:
You could use with adapter there 24mm H lens but you almost need a real job to buy one. 7k
I saw their HCD 24mm last night and that's when I decided to pass on this camera for now. Not only it's an expensive 24mm, it's heavy, huge, slow, and would need a big adapter for the new X1D. Definitely now a lens for this body.
I only need a tripod mount, a lens with a filter thread and remote shutter release, I assume those features will be available 
And it should be about the same size as my A7 since it needs to fit in the same small bag. 
