Home · Register · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
Username  

  New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site
  New Feature: SMS Notification alert
  New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist
  

FM Forums | Leica & Alternative Gear | Join Upload & Sell

1              3       4       end
  

Hasselblad CFV 100C Announced

  
 
RustyBug
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #1 · p.2 #1 · Hasselblad CFV 100C Announced


LBJ2 wrote:
Initially, I'm not concerned about lack of IBIS, but I've never hand held shot a 100MP Medium Format camera before, so I am paying close attention to comments from those that have.


One thing that I've learned about shooting my X1D II ... is the files are so good, that I can easily bump exposure in post (nothing too radical, but cleanly do so). The takeaway, is that I can keep my shutter speed a bit higher, even if it means a certain amount of underexposure at capture. Then, when I get below a certain threshold ... it's either raise the ISO or break out the sticks. Mostly, I shoot base ISO.

So far, I generally know when / where I'm going to use the different approach. IBIS would be nice, but I had to learn to live without IBIS / OIS when I moved off DSLR > Rangefinder ... and to adapt to life without it. Fortunately, I learned to get friendly with a tripod way back when (chromes), so it's not been a major issue to do so again. Mostly, there are some angles / locations that a tripod isn't an option ... that's when it would really be nice to have some IBIS.






Jan 28, 2024 at 09:42 AM
RustyBug
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #2 · p.2 #2 · Hasselblad CFV 100C Announced


rdeloe wrote:
For people who want Hasselblad, 100 MP, and hand holding, the X2D body seems like a better choice.


Mostly, I want the waist level / flip screen. I'd gladly take an angle finder (if it existed). Some of my shooting positions / angles don't offer a good viewing option. For me, 100MP isn't the attraction ... the shooting position is. That includes BOTH handheld and on the tripod.

Like so many things ... it's tough to know, until you get your hands on it, how it'll fit your needs. Improving my shooting position / viewing options, looks like this with the Hassy.

X2D
907X / 50C
907X / 100C

Although, that makes me consider if the Visoflex and the M10R is still the way to go for some things, and just stand pat on the X1D II.



Jan 28, 2024 at 10:06 AM
LBJ2
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #3 · p.2 #3 · Hasselblad CFV 100C Announced


RustyBug wrote:
One thing that I've learned about shooting my X1D II ... is the files are so good, that I can easily bump exposure in post (nothing too radical, but cleanly do so). The takeaway, is that I can keep my shutter speed a bit higher, even if it means a certain amount of underexposure at capture. Then, when I get below a certain threshold ... it's either raise the ISO or break out the sticks. Mostly, I shoot base ISO.

So far, I generally know when / where I'm going to use the different approach. IBIS would be nice, but I
...Show more

"The takeaway, is that I can keep my shutter speed a bit higher, even if it means a certain amount of underexposure at capture. Then, when I get below a certain threshold ... it's either raise the ISO or break out the sticks. Mostly, I shoot base ISO."

Very similar approach to what I was thinking. In photography always more than one way get from point A to point B. Thanks for posting your experience.

On another topic. What are your thoughts about XCD lens MTFs and real world. I'm a bit spoilt with a few Full Frame excellent optics, so when I review the XCD MTF's I'm not pleasantly surprised. In my imagination, I associate Hasselblad to world class optics with that sensor, but maybe there is a priority on small size with the XCD series? OTOH, I read somewhere Medium Frame MTFs results should not be compared to Full Frame MTFs results...🤷🏽‍♂️

I'm thinking the XCD 55 would make a good one lens try-out kit with the 907x 100c. Just day-dreaming at the moment.



Jan 28, 2024 at 10:12 AM
rdeloe
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #4 · p.2 #4 · Hasselblad CFV 100C Announced


I use the MTF charts, but with a grain of salt. As I'm sure we all know, how they're created matters enormously (modelled versus empirical, magnification, test setup where empirical, etc.). How they are reported matters enormously too.

I have some confidence in what I can learn from comparing apples to apples (e.g., Schneider-Kreuznach to Schneider-Kreuznach using their data), and almost non compare apples to walnuts (e.g. Mamiya to Nikon).

There are also weird exceptions. For instance, people who use the Schneider-Kreuznach APO-Digitar 60mm f/5.6 XL rave and speaking in tongues about the image quality. The price tag seems to support their claims. But if the only information I had was the MTF chart, I wouldn't look at it twice.

Even within the same family there are oddities. Mamiya's MTF chart says my Mamiya N 80mm f/4 L should be a bit dodgy shifted on my GFX 100S, but it's unbelievably good all the way out to 20mm in landscape. The same data say my Mamiya N 65mm f/4 L should be much better than my 80mm, but it's not; maybe it's a bad copy? I don't know.

Long story short, who am I going to believe? Test charts, or my lying eyes?



Jan 28, 2024 at 10:30 AM
RustyBug
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #5 · p.2 #5 · Hasselblad CFV 100C Announced


LBJ2 wrote:
"The takeaway, is that I can keep my shutter speed a bit higher, even if it means a certain amount of underexposure at capture. Then, when I get below a certain threshold ... it's either raise the ISO or break out the sticks. Mostly, I shoot base ISO."

Very similar approach to what I was thinking. In photography always more than one way get from point A to point B. Thanks for posting your experience.

On another topic. What are your thoughts about XCD lens MTFs and real world. I'm a bit spoilt with a few Full Frame excellent optics, so when
...Show more

Well ... I owe myself a "test" comparison of my Leica FF glass vs. my Hassy glass, but haven't got around to it yet. In some regard, it's meaningless. By that, I simply mean ... I like what I'm getting out of my Hassy glass. So, what does it matter how it compares to my Leica glass? (Although, our minds do still want to know the diff's.)

Here's the thing though, the more collimated the optical projection, the more acute the resolution. Look at super-tele lenses vs. wide angle lenses to bear this out on a "same format" somewhat. You can't compare MTF's of teles vs. UWA's in an absolute manner. You can compare a pair of UWA's in a relative manner to one another, etc.

So ... having had my M645 glass (35/3.5 N, 45/2.8, 80/4 N, 150/2.8 A) on my SLR/C (et al), I know that the projection of the larger image circle, compared to a similar optic, designed for a smaller (FF) image circle, the smoothness of transitions are a bit different. That "smoother" transition is going to "read" on an mtf chart differently than an optic with a "tighter" image circle. Point being ... you can't compare the charts directly.

When I wanted a smoother transition, I'd pick up my M645 glass. When I wanted a more acute transition, I'd pick up my C/Y glass (FF image circle).

So, yeah ... don't get hung up on the MTF's of MF, not being "as good" as FF MTF's. It's like saying the top end horsepower of engine A isn't as much as the top end horsepower of engine B ... and yet, the torque band on engine A comes in immediately, down low and really pulls where you want it. Meanwhile you have to "wind out" engine B to get into it's torque band.

Going by horsepower metrics alone will "trick" you into not experiencing the joy of low end / full range torque. MF may not spank the MTF charts the same way that FF glass might, but it is the experience of how it handles things throughout the entire range that can be different. Some folks will prefer that high end, wind it out HP. Others, appreciate the torque coming in sooner, rather than HP later (count me in that group). Some folks want that last % of MTF resolution (which can be achieved at the expense of certain quid pro quo optical designs), while others want an optic that has fewer "quid pro quo's" and still produces a great image, never mind that last % of MTF.

Different animals, so yeah ... different benchmarks. Mountain Lion vs. Bobcat. Which one is quicker, which one is more powerful?

Gotta ask the right question, to get the right answer.



Jan 28, 2024 at 11:00 AM
LBJ2
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #6 · p.2 #6 · Hasselblad CFV 100C Announced


rdeloe wrote:
I use the MTF charts, but with a grain of salt. As I'm sure we all know, how they're created matters enormously (modelled versus empirical, magnification, test setup where empirical, etc.). How they are reported matters enormously too.

I have some confidence in what I can learn from comparing apples to apples (e.g., Schneider-Kreuznach to Schneider-Kreuznach using their data), and almost non compare apples to walnuts (e.g. Mamiya to Nikon).

There are also weird exceptions. For instance, people who use the Schneider-Kreuznach APO-Digitar 60mm f/5.6 XL rave and speaking in tongues about the image quality. The price tag seems to support
...Show more

I agree with many of your points. But I probably didn't do a very good job of stating my brief question clearly.



Jan 28, 2024 at 11:26 AM
LBJ2
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #7 · p.2 #7 · Hasselblad CFV 100C Announced


RustyBug wrote:
Well ... I owe myself a "test" comparison of my Leica FF glass vs. my Hassy glass, but haven't got around to it yet. In some regard, it's meaningless. By that, I simply mean ... I like what I'm getting out of my Hassy glass. So, what does it matter how it compares to my Leica glass? (Although, our minds do still want to know the diff's.)

Here's the thing though, the more collimated the optical projection, the more acute the resolution. Look at super-tele lenses vs. wide angle lenses to bear this out on a "same format" somewhat. You
...Show more

Yes. I'm thinking about understanding the technical explanation as to why MF MTFs might be interpreted differently than FF MTFs using the same MTF measurement/standards. Maybe there is none. But I think I read there is. I just can't find that data at the moment. I'll continue to search for the article/source.

Using your animal analogy, I don't want to poke the forum MTF bear 😎



Jan 28, 2024 at 11:43 AM
riverview
Offline

Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #8 · p.2 #8 · Hasselblad CFV 100C Announced



Saw your WTB for Leica S 3....

Had S2, 006, 007 and many lenses...sold/traded when too many lens failures with AF on early cameras....liked the 007 and recently thought about the S 3. Had the SL with the adaptor and the 007... used S lenses, 70 CS, 120 CS, 180 CS a few years ago....for some uses, the SL/S lenses might have been the best combination.

Now I am all Hasselblad, both film and digital...will be interested in your experiences if the acquire S3.

I am in Vermont town of Putney.

John



Jan 28, 2024 at 02:41 PM
Ai_Print
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #9 · p.2 #9 · Hasselblad CFV 100C Announced


LBJ2 wrote:
"The takeaway, is that I can keep my shutter speed a bit higher, even if it means a certain amount of underexposure at capture. Then, when I get below a certain threshold ... it's either raise the ISO or break out the sticks. Mostly, I shoot base ISO."

On another topic. What are your thoughts about XCD lens MTFs and real world. I'm a bit spoilt with a few Full Frame excellent optics, so when I review the XCD MTF's I'm not pleasantly surprised. In my imagination, I associate Hasselblad to world class optics with that sensor, but maybe there is
...Show more

Many of the XCD lenses in actual use are well up to the task of the 102MP sensor in the X2D and 907X 100C, they certainly outdo the V system lenses wider than the 100mm 3.5. But a word of caution in regards to the newer 38V and 55V. They are compromise lens designs in that maintaining a F2.5 max aperture in a small package, they likely produce smaller image circles so they are not exactly great at everything. So they suffer from extreme field curvature and for a landscape, aerial or other full frame critical image use case, they are not the best choice.

I had the 38V and 55V for ten days and in comparing them to my XCD 45P and XCD 65 2.8, they just did not hold up at all in the corners like the 45 and 65 do. I found that no matter what I did in terms of focus settings, post processing or aperture setting, they just fell apart in the corners when doing whole of image critical work like landscapes or architecture. They are great for portraits and the types of images in which corner sharpness is not an issue, but that is not why I use a 102MP sensor camera. So in the end, I returned them for a full refund and stuck with my excellent existing XCD lenses.



Jan 28, 2024 at 02:41 PM
LBJ2
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #10 · p.2 #10 · Hasselblad CFV 100C Announced


Ai_Print wrote:
Many of the XCD lenses in actual use are well up to the task of the 102MP sensor in the X2D and 907X 100C, they certainly outdo the V system lenses wider than the 100mm 3.5. But a word of caution in regards to the newer 38V and 55V. They are compromise lens designs in that maintaining a F2.5 max aperture in a small package, they likely produce smaller image circles so they are not exactly great at everything. So they suffer from extreme field curvature and for a landscape, aerial or other full frame critical image use case, they
...Show more

Interesting. Very helpful. Thank you.



Jan 28, 2024 at 02:47 PM
 


Search in Used Dept. 

Sam_W
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #11 · p.2 #11 · Hasselblad CFV 100C Announced


One comment I'd like to add that's tangential to the MTF discussion is to pay attention to the Y axis, or the modulation scale, because sometimes you'll be surprised about what's actually shown.

The best example, which kinda floored me, was looking at the MTFs for the Rodenstock lenses (a copy can be found here: https://www.rodenstock-photo.com/sites/default/files/2020-04/Objektive%20digitale%20Fotografie%20e.pdf). I was looking at it and comparing with the MTFs from Leica R lenses, and thinking that the R glass is notably better, especially wide-open.

Until I paid attention to the legend for the Y axis, and realized that the Leica R MTFs show the results at 5, 10, 20, and 40 lp/mm, while the Rodenstock MTFs show the results at 10, 20, 40, and 80(!!) lp/mm. All of a sudden I'm far, far more impressed with and tempted by Rodenstock glass.

(Even if just to go meet up with other technical camera/LF photographers and refer to the lenses as "Digimons" instead of "Digarons".)



Jan 28, 2024 at 02:51 PM
rdeloe
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #12 · p.2 #12 · Hasselblad CFV 100C Announced


Sam_W wrote:
One comment I'd like to add that's tangential to the MTF discussion is to pay attention to the Y axis, or the modulation scale, because sometimes you'll be surprised about what's actually shown.

The best example, which kinda floored me, was looking at the MTFs for the Rodenstock lenses (a copy can be found here: https://www.rodenstock-photo.com/sites/default/files/2020-04/Objektive%20digitale%20Fotografie%20e.pdf). I was looking at it and comparing with the MTFs from Leica R lenses, and thinking that the R glass is notably better, especially wide-open.

Until I paid attention to the legend for the Y axis, and realized that the Leica R MTFs show the results
...Show more

Indeed. You can enjoy the same shock if you look at the MTF plots for film-era large format lenses. At least you found data that had labels. I especially enjoy the MTF charts that don't explain what they're showing. "Look, here are some lines on a graph. now buy our lens!"

Just in case not everyone knows about these resources, Zeiss published some reasonably understandable reference guides for "How to read MTF curves". There are two:
Part 1: https://lenspire.zeiss.com/photo/app/uploads/2022/02/technical-article-how-to-read-mtf-curves-01.pdf
Part 2: https://lenspire.zeiss.com/photo/app/uploads/2018/04/CLN_MTF_Kurven_2_en.pdf




Jan 28, 2024 at 03:12 PM
johnvanr
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #13 · p.2 #13 · Hasselblad CFV 100C Announced


Iím I the only one who thinks the price is too high for a camera without EVF, IBIS, weather-sealing and with a small so-called MF sensor?

I think 100mp without IBIS is asking for trouble, or at least the constant need for a tripod.



Jan 28, 2024 at 04:03 PM
rdeloe
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #14 · p.2 #14 · Hasselblad CFV 100C Announced


johnvanr wrote:
Iím I the only one who thinks the price is too high for a camera without EVF, IBIS, weather-sealing and with a small so-called MF sensor?

I think 100mp without IBIS is asking for trouble, or at least the constant need for a tripod.


It depends on what the alternative is for your situation.

A medium format back would make a lot of sense on my digital view camera setup, but a Phase One IQ4 150 is out of the question. As a reference point, here's someone selling a used IQ4 150, and looking to get EUR 22,000. If you need a medium format back, can't afford an IQ4 150, and and older generation Phase One back won't do, then this Hasselblad is a total bargain.

I'm happily trucking along with a GFX 100S instead of a medium format back, but that means the wide angle technical camera lenses are unusable. I'd need a medium format back of some kind to be able to use them. The Hasselblad would be ideal in that case.



Jan 28, 2024 at 04:27 PM
flash
Online
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #15 · p.2 #15 · Hasselblad CFV 100C Announced


I'm not having the *issues* that some are with the new lenses, with a few caveats.

1. I can only test the lenses I own and in that situation my 38 and 55 are so close to the 45P as to it not being a thing, except I don't enjoy shooting with the 45P. I'm more likely to pull out the original 45. Wide open the 38 and 55 don't quite keep up to the 45P but if I stop down to the same aperture..... If I'm shooting landscapes I'm using the zoom anyway, not the 38, 45, 55 or 65. I really like the new lenses and my main kit is the 28, 55 and new 90. A0 prints are not an issue. The biggest *flaw* is the vignetting.
2. My criteria is generally, *is the SYSTEM better than I can get in a small format?*. The answer to that is always yes. Even against the Leica APO Summicron SL lenses I get more from the 38 and 55 on and X2D. Further testing when the SL3 arrives. But the X2D with the 55 our resolves my M11 with APO 50mm. Again, if I wanted near perfection in the corners it's be the zoom at f9 rather than the 45P or 65.
3. The 38 and 55 are better further away than they are close in.
4. The 65 is really really good but mostly I'm not prepared to carry it.
5. The XCDV lenses on the 907x are a joy to use. There's a couple of firmware tweaks I'd like but overall they're fab. The user experience is what makes the 907x worth buying. Much much better than the XCD glass.
6. There seems to be a bit of copy variation. People either love the new glass or despise tham. Not sure why unless there's a few bad ones out there.
7. Because of the way you hold the camera, if you use a neck strap, I've found the 907x to be pretty good to shoot with the 50MP back. At least as stable as my M11. Maybe even a bit better. So it's not ideal. But it is doable. Still think they built in an upgrade path in 18 months by not having IBIS.

If I were a tripod wielding landscape photographer, I'd be all over this camera. I'd grab a hoodman loupe and be off into the field with the zoom, 135 and 28mm. But I'm mostly a travel photographer so I suit the X2D body style. As I think most will. I'm really glad this camera exists for those it suits and I think we need more cameras like this one. Cameras that aren't afraid to just go after the niche market.

Gordon

p.s. medium format has always been anything larger than small format (24x36 and smaller). Only for about the last 100 years.



Jan 28, 2024 at 04:36 PM
Fred Miranda
Offline
Admin
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #16 · p.2 #16 · Hasselblad CFV 100C Announced


Update:

The Hasselblad 907X 100C Medium Format Mirrorless Camera is now in stock at B&H Photo:
https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1803225-REG/hasselblad_cphb0000086601_hasselblad_907x_cfv_100c.html







Jan 28, 2024 at 05:15 PM
RustyBug
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #17 · p.2 #17 · Hasselblad CFV 100C Announced


flash wrote:
I'm not having the *issues* that some are with the new lenses, with a few caveats.

1. I can only test the lenses I own and in that situation my 38 and 55 are so close to the 45P as to it not being a thing, except I don't enjoy shooting with the 45P. I'm more likely to pull out the original 45. Wide open the 38 and 55 don't quite keep up to the 45P but if I stop down to the same aperture..... If I'm shooting landscapes I'm using the zoom anyway, not the 38, 45, 55 or 65.
...Show more

Gordon, you mentioned the Hoodman loupe for use with the 907x ... any use with if for the X1D / X2D

Particularly wondering if there is an angled version anywhere to be found.



Jan 28, 2024 at 06:29 PM
Ai_Print
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #18 · p.2 #18 · Hasselblad CFV 100C Announced


flash wrote:
6. There seems to be a bit of copy variation. People either love the new glass or despise tham. Not sure why unless there's a few bad ones out there.


It could be sample variation but for me, it simply came down to what I overwhelmingly sawÖ

I went though two copies of the 38V on my own, borrowed a friendís 55V to directly compare to the one I had and had two people independent of one another send me raw files of their 38V and 55V. While there was some variation in terms of left to right centering, the overwhelming results of the comparisons were that my 45P and 65 2.8 blew them all away at nearly every aperture as far as consistency of sharpness and retention of detail in the outer 25% of the image area.

Itís possible I have exceptional copies of the 45 and 65, they are perfectly centered but regardless, I would say for an actual income earning professional landscape, aerial landscape or commercial photographer who wants absolute consistency in the use of that 102MP sensor, avoid the 38V and 55V if corner sharpness matters.

I do have a five figure fine art commission coming up that will involve the periphery of a world famous ski race. This client is looking to fill walls in a vacation home in my town with 4x5í foot prints. I am going to rent the XCD 35-75 and see how it does. It will never replace the smaller form factor of the 45 and 65 for me, the latter being quite possibly the best high resolution lens for aerials I have ever used. But it could make sense for other uses, especially because I frame very precisely in order to achieve what I want with the X2D.

Of course, oneís needs, experiences and perception of acceptable image quality may varyÖ



Jan 28, 2024 at 07:08 PM
SlowDriver
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #19 · p.2 #19 · Hasselblad CFV 100C Announced


Everybody's use case seems to be different. Personally I love the 38V and I never ever use the 45P or the original 45 anymore... I guess it's good to have choices...


Jan 28, 2024 at 07:35 PM
speedgraphic
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #20 · p.2 #20 · Hasselblad CFV 100C Announced


This camera kind of desperately needs an accessory EVF. It should be possible to do via the USB-C to a little finder on the shoe. Not exactly elegant but pretty useful.

I want to believe that little optical finder would work but I read a review that stated it's pretty inaccurate in any condition but infinity.



Jan 28, 2024 at 09:56 PM
1              3       4       end






FM Forums | Leica & Alternative Gear | Join Upload & Sell

1              3       4       end
    
 

You are not logged in. Login or Register

Username       Or Reset password



This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.