p.10 #1 · Official: Hasselblad X1D-50c Medium Format Mirrorless
GMPhotography wrote:
Agree we have to see what's next for sure. Oh Hassy has a 24mm today at 7 K but they did mention a 30mm native at Photokinia.
Funny thing is like the MF backs and this . Sony is sitting on this sensor it's there's and not sure what is stopping them from doing exactly the same thing. Really they have most of it in place today. They could maybe even use there A glass as it might cover the image circle for this sensor.
I would expect that most of my R glass will. Much of that would cover 645 film. The 560mm f6.8 Telyt could be modified and it even covered Pentax 6X7.
p.10 #2 · Official: Hasselblad X1D-50c Medium Format Mirrorless
Buy it or not it really does not matter it did open a big can of beans to spread out over the whole market. This was a natural move that needed to be made as for years many wanted a digital Mamiya 7 style camera. This just opened the flood gates for others to jump in. So I expect to see more of this and in camps like Sony would be perfect. This is great stuff even if you keep your wallet in your pocket. It's all about choices and OEMs to get a clue on what folks want. This has been certainly one of them.
p.10 #3 · Official: Hasselblad X1D-50c Medium Format Mirrorless
naturephoto1 wrote:
I would expect that most of my R glass will. Much of that would cover 645 film. The 560mm f6,8 could be modified and it even covered Pentax 6X7.
Rich
Agree a lot of R glass has some big image circles. Funny though it's hard to find that kind of data on spec sheets. We only really see them on tech cams. I wish OEMs included this data as it is useful to us.
p.10 #4 · Official: Hasselblad X1D-50c Medium Format Mirrorless
Besides the lack of a focal plane shutter, three things I would have liked to see from this camera:
1) State-of-the-art EVF like in the Leica SL. The resolution of the one they chose seems quite dated by now.
2) Articulated EVF. I thought (correct me if I'm wrong) that there was a chance the camera had one given the different color/ material and postion of the EVF.
3) CHROME. The body already looks a bit like a 500c cutoff, I think they should have gone all out and rounded the edges and made it chrome just like the 500. Maybe that will be a future $15,000-$20,000 limited edition option.
p.10 #5 · Official: Hasselblad X1D-50c Medium Format Mirrorless
Medium format was never about shallow depth of field, it was mainly about increased detail and increased print size from a larger negative.
naturephoto1 wrote:
I would still wait for the Sony A9 and A7rIII. If they really are 72 to 80MP cameras they would probably cut into the difference with the new Hasselblad.
That's the big issue for me. Given the cost of the body/lenses I would need to keep it for say 5 years before upgrading, in the same period I could maybe upgrade my A7RII twice. So on average I would be shooting higher resolution images staying with 35mm.
Now many will say there are other intangible benefits of medium format, I'll concede greater microcontrast but I've yet to see any blind testing that proves you can get different focus transitions or finer gradients compared than is possible on a smaller format...
p.10 #6 · Official: Hasselblad X1D-50c Medium Format Mirrorless
Tariq Gibran wrote:
Pretty much what I see as well. The release of this camera, imo, is not going to dramatically shake up the market given that it is a closed system. Sony was very smart (or just lucky if they did not plan it) as their system is, by nature, open. Once they get a customer hooked, that customer will likely buy into their lens system down the road. With this Blad, a buyer has to jump in the deep end, financially and philosophically, from the start. I don't think Ricoh/Pentax, for instance, is too worried given that the actual cost of entry turns out to be fairly high for this camera. I do believe that Hasselbald may run into some competiton from Ricoh/ Pentax down the road when they inevitably release a MF Mirroless that's based around an open platform. Still, I'm certainly glad to see this camera as I suspect it might save Hasselblad in the long run.
The one thing is and I mentioned this earlier is the prestige. The Hassy name is huge in this area. Like Leica there brand name has been around for decades. Here is a test , if I asked you what MF name comes to mind if we where standing next to each other what is the most popular MF brand . My guess is 95 percent of folks asked Hassy would be the answer. I owned Phase no one knew WTF I was talking about when I said I owned one. Lol
p.10 #7 · Official: Hasselblad X1D-50c Medium Format Mirrorless
Matt Grum wrote:
Medium format was never about shallow depth of field, it was mainly about increased detail and increased print size from a larger negative.
That's the big issue for me. Given the cost of the body/lenses I would need to keep it for say 5 years before upgrading, in the same period I could maybe upgrade my A7RII twice. So on average I would be shooting higher resolution images staying with 35mm.
Now many will say there are other intangible benefits of medium format, I'll concede greater microcontrast but I've yet to see any blind testing that proves you can get different focus transitions or finer gradients compared than is possible on a smaller format...
Matts it's there but it's also a strawman argument as most people can't see it anyway. Is it a huge difference no it is not , why I had no issue coming off of MF as my clients have no clue. We as shooters do but sometimes that's meaningless too.
p.10 #8 · Official: Hasselblad X1D-50c Medium Format Mirrorless
GMPhotography wrote:
The one thing is and I mentioned this earlier is the prestige. The Hassy name is huge in this area. Like Leica there brand name has been around for decades. Here is a test , if I asked you what MF name comes to mind if we where standing next to each other what is the most popular MF brand . My guess is 95 percent of folks asked Hassy would be the answer. I owned Phase no one knew WTF I was talking about when I said I owned one. Lol
Yes, I agree. I used a 500cm for a few decades pre-digital. It has such an iconic look (along with TLR Rolleiflex).
p.10 #11 · Official: Hasselblad X1D-50c Medium Format Mirrorless
Oh, I think it will shake up the market all right. I think this will be the start of where MF cameras will go. Fuji, Pentax and Sony might release their own versions. They might have to if they don't want H to get a market dominating lead, just like Sony did. If H release a 19, 24, 50 and 90mm as well then they have a very usable system at a price hard to beat. As much as I like the Leica SL (and still think it's a better idea) this will be a camera a lot of photographers will look at as an alternative to a top Canikon. Portable. Huge resolution. Nikon compatible TTL and leaf shutter lenses.
Just because I want lenses from 20-200mm (equiv) doesn't mean others won't be perfectly happy to stitch, etc. Make me a 24mm and 100mm equiv and I might consider it as a light weight travel it.
Luminous Landscape has some nice pictures showing the size of the camera in the hand.
p.10 #12 · Official: Hasselblad X1D-50c Medium Format Mirrorless
naturephoto1 wrote:
I would expect that most of my R glass will. Much of that would cover 645 film. The 560mm f6,8 could be modified and it even covered Pentax 6X7.
GMPhotography wrote:
Agree a lot of R glass has some big image circles. Funny though it's hard to find that kind of data on spec sheets. We only really see them on tech cams. I wish OEMs included this data as it is useful to us.
There's a difference between coverage and usable coverage. The Canon EF-S 10-22 will cover full frame from about 15mm upwards, but the corners are pure garbage as the lens was never designed to be sharp outside the APS-C frame.
I'm not surprised this sort of thing isn't listed for anything other than cameras with movements (where it really matters) - manufacturers generally don't like their products being used outside the intended design parameters as it makes them look bad if they fail.
p.10 #13 · Official: Hasselblad X1D-50c Medium Format Mirrorless
Matt Grum wrote:
There's a difference between coverage and usable coverage. The Canon EF-S 10-22 will cover full frame from about 15mm upwards, but the corners are pure garbage as the lens was never designed to be sharp outside the APS-C frame.
I'm not surprised this sort of thing isn't listed for anything other than cameras with movements (where it really matters) - manufacturers generally don't like their products being used outside the intended design parameters as it makes them look bad if they fail.
p.10 #14 · Official: Hasselblad X1D-50c Medium Format Mirrorless
Matt Grum wrote:
There's a difference between coverage and usable coverage. The Canon EF-S 10-22 will cover full frame from about 15mm upwards, but the corners are pure garbage as the lens was never designed to be sharp outside the APS-C frame.
I'm not surprised this sort of thing isn't listed for anything other than cameras with movements (where it really matters) - manufacturers generally don't like their products being used outside the intended design parameters as it makes them look bad if they fail.
Hi Matt,
I would not be surprised if much of the R Glass will have usable coverage for the new Hasselblad sensor size.
p.10 #17 · Official: Hasselblad X1D-50c Medium Format Mirrorless
GMPhotography wrote:
Matts it's there but it's also a strawman argument as most people can't see it anyway.
A straw man argument is where I pretend to be you, make up something that you haven't claimed and then argue against it. I haven't done that.
If there's a difference that is visible to some people it can be detected in the image data, and demonstrated in a controlled test. I have still to see this after many years of waiting - if it exists has please link to it!
There's been plenty of comparisons but all of them have been deeply flawed in some way - like one I saw which compared MF to the Canon GX and didn't stop down the MF camera to match the Canon's DOF so most of the image was out of focus
There will be some good opportunities for comparisons when the X1D is released as the 50MP image when cropped to 3:2 is only 44MP which is very close to the A7RII at 42MP.
p.10 #18 · Official: Hasselblad X1D-50c Medium Format Mirrorless
Honestly I stay out of those arguments as it becomes a war with people. It's also hard to test for and for some hard to see. It's really the color tonal range. But sonys 42 mpx sensor has basically done the same thing as the raw is very very similar so things have changed for the better. Now we are also talking same sensor producer so it's even closer now from my days with MF. Either real or perceived one has to question it more today. It's a battle I'm not remotely interested in as its just a time suck. Also I'm not a scientific or engineering type kind of guy so some of it is over my head.
Matt Grum wrote:
A straw man argument is where I pretend to be you, make up something that you haven't claimed and then argue against it. I haven't done that.
If there's a difference that is visible to some people it can be detected in the image data, and demonstrated in a controlled test. I have still to see this after many years of waiting - if it exists has please link to it!
There's been plenty of comparisons but all of them have been deeply flawed in some way - like one I saw which compared MF to the Canon GX and didn't stop down the MF camera to match the Canon's DOF so most of the image was out of focus
There will be some good opportunities for comparisons when the X1D is released as the 50MP image when cropped to 3:2 is only 44MP which is very close to the A7RII at 42MP.
p.10 #19 · Official: Hasselblad X1D-50c Medium Format Mirrorless
Matt Grum wrote:
There will be some good opportunities for comparisons when the X1D is released as the 50MP image when cropped to 3:2 is only 44MP which is very close to the A7RII at 42MP.
Something I have said before but the desired aspect ratio imo makes more of a differnce between current FF 35 and this smallish MF sensor size than anything else. If one desires 4:3 or even square, then the difference becomes greater with regard to MP's vs FF 35 but if it's 3:2 that is desired, this size MF makes less sense imo.
p.10 #20 · Official: Hasselblad X1D-50c Medium Format Mirrorless
GMPhotography wrote:
Honestly I stay out of those arguments as it becomes a war with people. It's also hard to test for and for some hard to see.
It's very easy to test - you chose the closest lenses / settings you can, point the cameras at the same subject, process the images as close as possible, then produce a series of [unlabeled] crops and ask people which they prefer.
For more confidence repeat with other scenes/lenses.
I'm not trying to start a war, or necessarily disagreeing - I only want to see evidence of what people are claiming, which in most places is not considered unreasonable.
The body already looks a bit like a 500c cutoff, I think they should have gone all out and rounded the edges and made it chrome just like the 500. Maybe that will be a future $15,000-$20,000 limited edition option.
