p.25 #1 · Official: Hasselblad X1D-50c Medium Format Mirrorless
gdanmitchell wrote:
About the comparisons to full frame...
The larger sensor provides higher system resolution, which can affect things like corner resolution, etc. A lens with equal lp/mm performance will provide greater system resolution on the larger sensor system.
The Hasselblad system, as I understand it, produces 16-bit files. I don't know precisely how Hasselblad makes use of the additional bits, but they have the potential to allow greater dynamic range (perhaps possible with the larger photo sites, but probably not two bits worth) and/or a greater number of luminosity values. The latter can potentially provide smoother gradients and more color/tonal subtly, at least at the theoretical level.
Given the very high quality of current high MP full frame systems, while the improvements will be measurable, they will not be visible in any but some rather specialized situations, mostly about very large prints. (I sort of chuckle at the images of the 50MP mini MF system that try to make it look like a fine handheld camera. Well, yes, but you are going to be wasting the resolution potential.)
There are downsides. One particular issue relates to lenses, and to long lenses in particular. We hardly bat an eyelash at the idea of shooting at 400mm and above with full frame, and relatively inexpensive and high quality lenses are available to use for this purpose. That isn't going to be the case with any MF format, even the 33mmx 44mm mini MF system. The cameras a likely to be focal length limited, and lenses providing a given reach are likely to be huge and very expensive.
I'm personally very interested in the potentials of the mini MF systems for parts of my photography, but I think that the percentage of photographers who will benefit from such things is going to be quite small.
Hassy and Phase shooters shoot 300mm and longer. The only issue I ran into was a dead spot from the FP shutter at around 1/30 on my Phase body. I shot MF for almost 7 years and owned 5 backs. Your comments are really fishing in the wrong direction. Until you own one for awhile than your just guessing. Sorry Dan I don't guess, I owned it and I would still own it if not for a personal issue with my wife's health. MF is awesome but you need to have a attitude that your going to work at it. I think you keep relating things to sports and wildlife. Really that a specialized area and you can't mix it in general topic or use on systems that are not intended for it. Not every system does everything well, sometimes it's just not the right tool. But don't try to tell me that , I shot runway, golf , football and wildlife with it. Not the perfect tool but it can be done
Tariq yes you will get benefit from it over 35 how much I still think is a good chunk.
p.25 #2 · Official: Hasselblad X1D-50c Medium Format Mirrorless
Pentax also has lenses to 600mm available. Not that I intend to carry one. I have up to 200mm and that's perfect for the 645Z *for my uses*. Longer than that I'm probably going to be shooting with a system that has a faster workflow, AF and is more nimble. I'm actually thinking of the Fuji 100-400 with my XPro might be nice when i need long. then I can sell my Sony 70-400.
p.25 #3 · Official: Hasselblad X1D-50c Medium Format Mirrorless
GMPhotography wrote:
Hassy and Phase shooters shoot 300mm and longer. The only issue I ran into was a dead spot from the FP shutter at around 1/30 on my Phase body. I shot MF for almost 7 years and owned 5 backs. Your comments are really fishing in the wrong direction. Until you own one for awhile than your just guessing. Sorry Dan I don't guess, I owned it and I would still own it if not for a personal issue with my wife's health. MF is awesome but you need to have a attitude that your going to work at it. I think you keep relating things to sports and wildlife. Really that a specialized area and you can't mix it in general topic or use on systems that are not intended for it. Not every system does everything well, sometimes it's just not the right tool. But don't try to tell me that , I shot runway, golf , football and wildlife with it. Not the perfect tool but it can be done
Tariq yes you will get benefit from it over 35 how much I still think is a good chunk. ...Show more →
Did you read my post before replying? :-(
I listed a bunch of positive things about MF and pointed out that I'm interested. Then I simply pointed out that those who rely on long focal lengths (I mentioned the common use of 400mm) will find that they have to deal with extra cost and weight/bulk (and limited selection) if they move to MF. There's nothing remotely controversial about that — it is a simple fact, and something to be considered by those who find the cameras interesting.
I was considering a move to the Pentax 645z myself recently — though I may still "go there" at some point — but decided against it primarily because I rely on the 100-400mm zoom a lot in my work. On the other hand, a few colleagues of mine are using such cameras/backs (including Pentax, Mamiya, Phase One, and one fellow making use of the Seitz 7 x 17) and this gear suits their work well.
I have nothing against mini MF or any other format. It is important to consider both the pluses and minuses of any format choice.
And, for the record, back in my "film days" I did shoot MF cameras, including the old twin lens reflex Rollei and Yashica (which autocorrect hilariously insists on "correcting" to Yeshiva) cameras, a Speed Graphic, and others.
p.25 #4 · Official: Hasselblad X1D-50c Medium Format Mirrorless
Tariq Gibran wrote:
We can all wish for a square sensor all day long but until/ unless Sony or another sensor manufacturer offers one, it's just not going to happen (and, at this point, I don't think it will).
Although not cost effective, the sensor doesn't have to be square. It could be a multi-aspect sensor larger than the mount. The 53.4 x 40 mm sensor cropped to 40 x 40 mm would be illuminated through the X1D mount, and yield 75 MP. This is offering a real benefit over cropping a normal sensor to square, and could be marketed as a square aspect ratio camera.
It would also allow 48x27 mm at 16:9 aspect ratio.
p.25 #5 · Official: Hasselblad X1D-50c Medium Format Mirrorless
GMPhotography wrote:
Hassy and Phase shooters shoot 300mm and longer.
I shoot landscapes and seascapes with long exposures up to 400 mm and even 560 mm with FF. What Medium Format lenses longer than 300 mm would you recommend? Does any of them have a leaf shutter so it can be used with the X1D?
p.25 #6 · Official: Hasselblad X1D-50c Medium Format Mirrorless
killersnowman wrote:
so i have been using a Phase One P45+ on an Alpa 12 TC for a few months now and can say that resolution is not the be all end all of image sensors. The true 16bit workflow and color response is very noticeable even when comparing to a Modern DSLR like a 5dsr.
Although the 5Ds is a very nice camera overall, its sensor is anything but modern in terms of DR and file flexibility. It is pretty far behind even an APS-C D7200.
If you are going to speak about the supperiority of backs against DSLRs, I would at least based that on the best ones such as the D810 or the a7rII (or wait a bit longer and see what is coming at the Kina since the D810 is already 2 years old).
I am not denying the value of backs, but Canon should really not be used as a baseline for comparison if you are trying to assess whether spending 10,000+ US$ in a X1D is a sound investement in terms of better file torturing ability.
p.25 #8 · Official: Hasselblad X1D-50c Medium Format Mirrorless
alundeb wrote:
I shoot landscapes and seascapes with long exposures up to 400 mm and even 560 mm with FF. What Medium Format lenses longer than 300 mm would you recommend? Does any of them have a leaf shutter so it can be used with the X1D?
What camera system are you using or planning to use? Though it is a 35mm lens, I know that the old Leica 560mm f6.8 Telyt was supposed to cover the Pentax 6 X 7 film cameras. I know that the mount or the rear tube needed work to do this. If you want I can check with my friend Jim Lager, the author of 8 Leica Books and ask if he remembers what needed to be done with the lens. Of course this lens would need a focal plane shutter since it has no leaf shutter. Also, it takes some practice to use for focus, but for Landscape work it should be doable. The biggest issue is the field curvature so that the edges would not be as sharp as the center. But, the lens is a follow focus design and quite light.
p.25 #9 · Official: Hasselblad X1D-50c Medium Format Mirrorless
This is the new H 300mm with improved flash sync to 1/2000. The older one used is about 3300.00 and said to be very good syncs to 1/800. For a lens like this sync speed may not matter much.
Now I don't know the math but smaller sensor in the X1D over there full frame I believe would be a longer than 300. I never shot Hassy as I owned a lot of Phase gear and even Phases 300 was quite good.
p.25 #10 · Official: Hasselblad X1D-50c Medium Format Mirrorless
GMPhotography wrote:
This is the new H 300mm with improved flash sync to 1/2000. The older one used is about 3300.00 and said to be very good syncs to 1/800. For a lens like this sync speed may not matter much.
Now I don't know the math but smaller sensor in the X1D over there full frame I believe would be a longer than 300. I never shot Hassy as I owned a lot of Phase gear and even Phases 300 was quite good.
p.25 #11 · Official: Hasselblad X1D-50c Medium Format Mirrorless
naturephoto1 wrote:
What camera system are you using or planning to use? Though it is a 35mm lens, I know that the old Leica 560mm f6.8 Telyt was supposed to cover the Pentax 6 X 7 film cameras. I know that the mount or the rear tube needed to do this. If you want I can check with my friend Jim Lager, the author of 8 Leica Books and ask if he remembers what needed to be done with the lens. Of course this lens would need a focal plane shutter since it has no leaf shutter. Also, it takes some practice to use for focus, but for Landscape work it should be doable. The biggest issue is the field curvature so that the edges would not be as sharp as the center. But, the lens is a follow focus design and quite light.
Thanks, I have no immediate plans, just checking for possibilities. I am afraid the old Telyt lenses (not APO-Telyt) just won't cut it regarding optical quality and especially CA. Aren't they also very long physically? something I try to avoid, as it is disastrous to long exposures with the slightest wind.
p.25 #12 · Official: Hasselblad X1D-50c Medium Format Mirrorless
alundeb wrote:
Thanks, I have no immediate plans, just checking for possibilities. I am afraid the old Telyt lenses (not APO-Telyt) just won't cut it regarding optical quality and especially CA. Aren't they also very long physically? something I try to avoid, as it is disastrous to long exposures with the slightest wind.
Yes the old Telyt lenses are quite long. I am not sure regarding CA they are quite sharp in the center. Doug Herr (telyt) and I have switched over to the Canon new 500mm f4.5L FD lens for our Sony A7 series cameras because of the ease of operation and performance. I have no idea if they will cover larger than FF 35mm. But, back to the Leica Telyt, I totally rebalanced mine for work on a tripod and as I remember it is about 4 pounds and balances exceeedingly well on the tripod since I designed and had a bracket made to rebalance the whole assembly.
p.25 #13 · Official: Hasselblad X1D-50c Medium Format Mirrorless
GMPhotography wrote:
...Now I don't know the math but smaller sensor in the X1D over there full frame I believe would be a longer than 300.
Using the 645Z sensor dimensions (43.8 mm x 32.8 mm) for the X1D, and using 56mm x 56mm for the Hasselblad film body image dimensions, a 300mm lens on the X1D has the same horizontal AoV as a 250mm lens on a FF sensor (36 mm x 24 mm), while the original Hassy 6x6 film has an equivalent horizontal AoV of a focal length of about 195 mm on FF.
Looking at it in a different way, the horizontal AoV of a 300mm lens on the 6x6 film body is about the same as a 225mm lens on the X1D. Alternatively, the 300mm lens on an X1D has the same horizontal AoV as a 380mm lens on 6x6.
p.25 #14 · Official: Hasselblad X1D-50c Medium Format Mirrorless
alundeb wrote:
I shoot landscapes and seascapes with long exposures up to 400 mm and even 560 mm with FF. What Medium Format lenses longer than 300 mm would you recommend? Does any of them have a leaf shutter so it can be used with the X1D?
More or less exactly my point...
On another topic — the "crop factor" for the medium format cameras compared to full frame — things can be a bit complicated. One way to measure this is sensor area; another is diagonal measurement. The tricky thing is that they have a 4:3 aspect ratio instead of the 3:2 we are accustomed to from full frame. How you regard the different sensor sizes is affected by how you feel about aspect ratio.
If you love 3:2, you'll lose a bit off the top/bottom of the MF 4:3 ratio frame, thus making the difference between the two seem smaller and producing a smaller difference in effective crop factor. On the other hand, if you are like me and you prefer the 4:3 aspect ratio you are currently losing the right/left sides of the 3:2 full frame images in order to get that and you would get the whole frame with MF. From this perspective the crop factor difference seems larger.
(From my perspective, I'm comparing a usable 33mm x 44mm image area to a 24mm x 32mm area used for 4:3 on full frame. This makes the mini MF seem almost twice as large as the way I use FF.)
Something to consider. For anyone stumbling on all those comparisons, my point is that for me and others who like 4:3, the image area advantage of mini MF is slightly larger than it would be for those who like 3:2, and the way we look at the crop factor the difference in focal length required to achieve the same image on the 4:3 area of the frame is larger.
p.25 #16 · Official: Hasselblad X1D-50c Medium Format Mirrorless
jcolwell wrote:
Using the 645Z sensor dimensions (43.8 mm x 32.8 mm) for the X1D, and using 56mm x 56mm for the Hasselblad film body image dimensions, a 300mm lens on the X1D has the same horizontal AoV as a 250mm lens on a FF sensor (36 mm x 24 mm), while the original Hassy 6x6 film has an equivalent horizontal AoV of a focal length of about 195 mm on FF.
Looking at it in a different way, the horizontal AoV of a 300mm lens on the 6x6 film body is about the same as a 225mm lens on the X1D. Alternatively, the 300mm lens on an X1D has the same horizontal AoV as a 380mm lens on 6x6....Show more →
hmm if you look at the horizontal AoV you don't take into account the different ratio of the sensor. If you cropped the X1D image to 2:3 I would agree but normally the diagonal is used to calculate the crop factor:
(24^2+36^2)^0.5 = 43.27 (Diagonal of FF sensor)
(32.8^2+43.8^2)^0.5 = 54.7 (Diagonal of X1D sensor)
54.7/43.27= 1.26 (Crop factor)
So a 300m on the X1D is equivalent to a 238mm on FF.
p.25 #17 · Official: Hasselblad X1D-50c Medium Format Mirrorless
Ive used a sony a7r for over a year and much prefered the color and tones from the canon files over that camera, even though the sony has "a superior, modern sensor"
To each his own, its not even worth arguing about.
Have a nice day
Thanks, Tyler
bernardl wrote:
Although the 5Ds is a very nice camera overall, its sensor is anything but modern in terms of DR and file flexibility. It is pretty far behind even an APS-C D7200.
If you are going to speak about the supperiority of backs against DSLRs, I would at least based that on the best ones such as the D810 or the a7rII (or wait a bit longer and see what is coming at the Kina since the D810 is already 2 years old).
I am not denying the value of backs, but Canon should really not be used as a baseline for comparison if you are trying to assess whether spending 10,000+ US$ in a X1D is a sound investement in terms of better file torturing ability.
p.25 #18 · Official: Hasselblad X1D-50c Medium Format Mirrorless
On my Phase IQ 160 back a 300mm I believe we figured to be a 210. That's a bigger sensor obviously. Now Hassy does have a very good 1.7 tele converter you can use on there 300. Between the two Hassy has the better long option. It's possible at this point you maybe pushing the system as really that was not the intent of Hassy here on the X1d but I'm sure down the road they will make a native 300 for this sensor. Not saying with adapter and such it won't work it will just might not be the optimum setup. You want long or really long stay with your 35 gear. MF is not about that to begin with . Honestly this was brought up just for argument sake and nothing more.
p.25 #19 · Official: Hasselblad X1D-50c Medium Format Mirrorless
GMPhotography wrote:
You want long or really long stay with your 35 gear. MF is not about that to begin with . Honestly this was brought up just for argument sake and nothing more.
Exactly.... If you all the flexibility of a DSLR system then for heaven's sake stay with a DSLR system. Leave the argumentive whining out of these discussions.
p.25 #20 · Official: Hasselblad X1D-50c Medium Format Mirrorless
killersnowman wrote:
Ive used a sony a7r for over a year and much prefered the color and tones from the canon files over that camera, even though the sony has "a superior, modern sensor"
With which lens? With the Batis 25 I find the colors and subtle shading to be to my liking over some of the other prime/non-prime native lenses.
