Yes, I didn’t expect this. On paper or for fun , it is actually reasonably priced.
But after owning X1Dii, even it is at 5k, I won’t get it. For V users, the crop factor is huge, especially if you treat it as a square format machine. Other than Huge lens, slow speed, The most V glasses may have hard time resolve the sensor based on my contax 645 glasses on S, SL GFX experience. Then, for adapt FF lens, the platform simply unusable most of time.
Ergo make me scratch my head, how to shoot in portrait orientation? Sure, for fun and lots of money, you can get a set of X glasses and use it for landscape on tripod only.
For tool, after fun period, I’d expect lots of 2nd hand or open box later sorry that I sound negative, let’s just say it is not for me.
freaklikeme wrote:
$6399 for the chrome-and-black, $7499 for the man-on-the-moon SE. They wanted to surprise you.
zhangyue wrote:
Yes, I didn’t expect this. On paper or for fun , it is actually reasonably priced.
But after owning X1Dii, even it is at 5k, I won’t get it. For V users, the crop factor is huge, especially if you treat it as a square format machine. Other than Huge lens, slow speed, The most V glasses may have hard time resolve the sensor based on my contax 645 glasses on S, SL GFX experience. Then, for adapt FF lens, the platform simply unusable most of time.
Ergo make me scratch my head, how to shoot in portrait orientation? Sure, for fun and lots of money, you can get a set of X glasses and use it for landscape on tripod only.
For tool, after fun period, I’d expect lots of 2nd hand or open box later sorry that I sound negative, let’s just say it is not for me.
Yeah, right there with you as far as it not being the camera for me. I certainly see the possibilities, and there is a grip for it that allows a bit more flexibility in use (for only $729 more), and I thought the images shot on my 500 with the vI back were generally beautiful, even with the lesser lenses like the 60 and 100. My disappoint isn't really with the concept or execution, it's with the sensor. Having used it in four different cameras (Pentax 654Z, CFV-50c, X1D, and GFX-50s) with a selection of system lenses, I just don't see enough difference between it and my 135-format 42MP sensor and the nearly endless supply of lenses for that format to make it worth the trouble anymore.
I also agree the sensor difference is not big enough for most stuff you want resolution or DR unless you want adapt glass to get almost one stop advantage in DOF which this hassy fail miserably.
Having own both GFX and X1DII, I personally prefer GFX by a wide margin in term of usability. The more I use GFX, the more I enjoy the system, actually, not a system, as a platform for adapt my FF glasses. This is my dream camera for daily use, sure with lots of personal preference that I hope there are still few FM alt members remembered
As for Hasselblad, I will wait for next or the one after next generation body. X1D2 is the most comfortable body in hand I ever used with great ergo and menu.
freaklikeme wrote:
Yeah, right there with you as far as it not being the camera for me. I certainly see the possibilities, and there is a grip for it that allows a bit more flexibility in use (for only $729 more), and I thought the images shot on my 500 with the vI back were generally beautiful, even with the lesser lenses like the 60 and 100. My disappoint isn't really with the concept or execution, it's with the sensor. Having used it in four different cameras (Pentax 654Z, CFV-50c, X1D, and GFX-50s) with a selection of system lenses, I just don't see enough difference between it and my 135-format 42MP sensor and the nearly endless supply of lenses for that format to make it worth the trouble anymore. ...Show more →
Still really tempted by the X1DII and 907x CFV II 50C. The latter with a 500-series would be so nice from a haptics point of view... but also a much more expensive investment given I don’t own a 500-series body (but an H)
Also have some question marks regarding workflow with the old bodies - metering / live view / exposure preview etc. - all a bit unclear to me and I suspect it’s somewhat complicated..
fjablo wrote:
Still really tempted by the X1DII and 907x CFV II 50C. The latter with a 500-series would be so nice from a haptics point of view... but also a much more expensive investment given I don’t own a 500-series body (but an H)
Also have some question marks regarding workflow with the old bodies - metering / live view / exposure preview etc. - all a bit unclear to me and I suspect it’s somewhat complicated..
I have followed some discussions on getdpi and the conclusion I draw is that there is no point in buying a 500-series body to use with the CFV II 50C, then it is better to buy the 907x and a V lens adapter instead. Actually, even if you own a 500-series body the 907x + adapter is a better solution for V glas.
If you are really interested in investing in this product I would recommend you to head over to the GetDpi medium format forum
From a practical standpoint you may be right about adapting V lenses to the 907x, BUT from a practical standpoint MF doesn’t make sense anyway and esp the 50mp sensor, as mentioned above
For me this would be more about the joy of handling a 500-type body without the downsides of film.
joakim wrote:
I have followed some discussions on getdpi and the conclusion I draw is that there is no point in buying a 500-series body to use with the CFV II 50C, then it is better to buy the 907x and a V lens adapter instead. Actually, even if you own a 500-series body the 907x + adapter is a better solution for V glas.
If you are really interested in investing in this product I would recommend you to head over to the GetDpi medium format forum
I'd be surprised if the CFV II inspires a lot of 500 bodies and V lens purchases. The original made sense because it was the least expensive digital back with a V interface you could purchase if you occasionally wanted to use a digital back on the system you were already using (and as a gateway drug to tech cameras). These days, you can find used V-interface backs with FF 60 and 80MP sensors that, once properly culminated with your 500 body, will give you a much better overall experience for not a lot more cash.
Still, if you're just going to use the dumb adapter for V lenses on the X cameras, my feeling is you'd be better off going with the GFX's. At least you wouldn't have to rely on a slow electronic shutter.
freaklikeme wrote:
I'd be surprised if the CFV II inspires a lot of 500 bodies and V lens purchases.
I personally would not be surprised.
I believe it is a very smart business move from Hasselblad at a very reasonable cost and once V-owners have bought the 907X they can additionally pick up the cheap 45mm f4 which would give them AF as well.
freaklikeme wrote:
I'd be surprised if the CFV II inspires a lot of 500 bodies and V lens purchases. The original made sense because it was the least expensive digital back with a V interface you could purchase if you occasionally wanted to use a digital back on the system you were already using (and as a gateway drug to tech cameras). These days, you can find used V-interface backs with FF 60 and 80MP sensors that, once properly culminated with your 500 body, will give you a much better overall experience for not a lot more cash.
Still, if you're just going to use the dumb adapter for V lenses on the X cameras, my feeling is you'd be better off going with the GFX's. At least you wouldn't have to rely on a slow electronic shutter....Show more →
I assume there is an adapter for Hasselblad lenses to GFX, but is there any good reason to use a Hasselblad lens on the GFX? Are they sharp enough, or would one be trying to capture a look.
carlitos wrote:
I assume there is an adapter for Hasselblad lenses to GFX, but is there any good reason to use a Hasselblad lens on the GFX? Are they sharp enough, or would one be trying to capture a look.
On the whole, I'd say they're up to task so far as resolution, but, I'd say, with any older lens, the choice would be based on liking specific things about the draw. If you want the highest resolution with the best modern coatings and lowest aberrations, Fuji and Hasselblad are pretty much killing it. If you're willing to carry around a heavy V lens with an IC and a shutter you won't use, there must be something about the draw you like. Personally, if I had a GFX, the only Hassy lens I'd want would be the shutterless Sonnar 150/2.8. It's a great portrait lens for the format, and relatively light and small.
For owners of the CFV 50c II (or any digital back), Cambo now has an adapter for the WRS (and Phase One XT) system that allows you to cock and utilize the V lenses' central shutters. It can also be used on an Actus DB with the WRS lens plate adapter. More info here...
freaklikeme wrote:
On the whole, I'd say they're up to task so far as resolution, but, I'd say, with any older lens, the choice would be based on liking specific things about the draw. If you want the highest resolution with the best modern coatings and lowest aberrations, Fuji and Hasselblad are pretty much killing it. If you're willing to carry around a heavy V lens with an IC and a shutter you won't use, there must be something about the draw you like. Personally, if I had a GFX, the only Hassy lens I'd want would be the shutterless Sonnar 150/2.8. It's a great portrait lens for the format, and relatively light and small.
For owners of the CFV 50c II (or any digital back), Cambo now has an adapter for the WRS (and Phase One XT) system that allows you to cock and utilize the V lenses' central shutters. It can also be used on an Actus DB with the WRS lens plate adapter. More info here...
I've invested heavily into the V system as a result of purchasing the 907x/CFVii50C. I love that I can use the V series lenses with my Cambo WRS. Although I picked up my adapter from South Korea via eBay before the Cambo adapter existed, it has been fantastic to work with. The V series lenses, being designed for 6x6, provide large enough image circles for full +-20mm shift. I'm down to just a single Rodenstock lens (40HR T/S), all the rest of the lenses I use with the technical setup are now V series lenses.
The quality of the recent V series lenses is still more than enough to out-resolve the current 50MP 'crop' MF sensors. The only downside is having to use the electronic shutter if you want to use the 907x + XV adapter. One can get around that and use the leaf shutter in the lenses if you swap out the 907x for a V series body (I used a 500C/M), but the tradeoff is focusing via chimney or a very clunky live view process.
It's a really flexible system that provides outstanding IQ. I like it enough that I've put my X1D II on the classifieds! I just don't use that camera at all now.
Not sure why anyone would want to have this. The disadvantages compared to Fujifilm GFX are just staggering. Output, build quality, UI, functionality reliability, price, whatever you ask, GFX is ahead, if not far ahead.
DougDolde wrote:
Seems very unergonomic and old fashioned, klunky even
Not to mentioned overpriced. Get a GFX-50R same sensor very small and easy to handle Plus you can use Cspture One instead of the awful Phocus
That sums it about up, though you missed the part that this has no proper shutter either and relies on either a central shutter in the lens, or an electronic shutter.
freaklikeme wrote:
[...] You can't get all that with a 50R. [...]
The only one of these things you might actually not be able to do with Fujifilm G is adapting Hasselblad X lenses, because there might not be enough space for an adapter and even if there is, I wouldnt be surprised if nobody has bothered to make one, because demand for such a product would probably be miniscule. Fujinon GF lenses are simply superior in every way, just like with the cameras[1]. Cheaper, offering more aperture, and they are optically as perfect as it gets and theres no complaints about build quality either.
Fujifilm produces Hasselblad V lenses, and Fujifilm G has fully supported central shutters from day one on, all you need for that is an adapter that supports it as well, and you can always use the focal plane shutter instead, too. Otherwise yes theres an adapter for Hasselblad V, and you can use either the focal plane shutter or the central shutter.
And of course you can use Fujifilm GFX with large format setups if you want to. And I'm failing to understand why you believe that Fujifilm G wouldnt support large format. It supports it better than Hasselblad X, because you can use the focal plane shutter instead, as the cleanest variant. For the same reason you can adapt any lens, including those that have no central shutter, easily and without reduced functionality
[1]: Though I was recently really shocked to learn that the GFX100 camera apparently has poor weather sealing; I still have a hard time actually believing that.
Sauseschritt wrote:
Not sure why anyone would want to have this. The disadvantages compared to Fujifilm GFX are just staggering. Output, build quality, UI, functionality reliability, price, whatever you ask, GFX is ahead, if not far ahead.
That sums it about up, though you missed the part that this has no proper shutter either and relies on either a central shutter in the lens, or an electronic shutter.
The only one of these things you might actually not be able to do with Fujifilm G is adapting Hasselblad X lenses, because there might not be enough space for an adapter and even if there is, I wouldnt be surprised if nobody has bothered to make one, because demand for such a product would probably be miniscule. Fujinon GF lenses are simply superior in every way, just like with the cameras[1]. Cheaper, offering more aperture, and they are optically as perfect as it gets and theres no complaints about build quality either.
Fujifilm produces Hasselblad V lenses, and Fujifilm G has fully supported central shutters from day one on, all you need for that is an adapter that supports it as well, and you can always use the focal plane shutter instead, too. Otherwise yes theres an adapter for Hasselblad V, and you can use either the focal plane shutter or the central shutter.
And of course you can use Fujifilm GFX with large format setups if you want to. And I'm failing to understand why you believe that Fujifilm G wouldnt support large format. It supports it better than Hasselblad X, because you can use the focal plane shutter instead, as the cleanest variant. For the same reason you can adapt any lens, including those that have no central shutter, easily and without reduced functionality
[1]: Though I was recently really shocked to learn that the GFX100 camera apparently has poor weather sealing; I still have a hard time actually believing that....Show more →
You certainly can''t mount a 50R on the back of a 500 series camera. And use on a tech camera would be limited by the flange distance + the depth of your adapter. For a system like the Actus, that means no lenses wider than 60mm or so. For a true LF solution, with an adapter slotted in to the rear standard, then it's no lenses wider than 90mm or so, and you'd need the 90 mounted on a lens board for wide angles to get much use out of the movements. DB's are still the best solution for some things.
sorry that I sound negative, let’s just say it is not for me. 
