H2F better than any VSYSTEM combination

jotloob

MFF-Patron
HASSELBLAD has anounced the H2F camera .

Can anyone please explain , what is the advantage of an H2F over any V-SYSTEM combination ? ? ?
Is it just a marketing stragegy . If this should be the case , I can not see any advantage at all .
Is this H2F meant to keep people away from the ROLLEIFLEX Hy6 ? ? ? which will still be 6x6 .

I believe the future of MF , digital or analog , lies still in 6x6 format .

Regards Jürgen
 

fotografz

Active Member
Autofocus. Sync speed to 1/800th. More frames per roll.

645s were popular film cameras before the H1 and digital came along.

Horses for courses.

IMO, the future of MF lies with both 645 and 6X6, just like it did with film. But there are no 6X6 digital camera backs, so we'll just have to wait and see.
 

evanjoe610

New Member
Has anyone visited the PhotoPus Expo in NYC this week?
I was able to visit it for the past 2 days. Saturday is the last day for the individuals who would like to visit the show for new equipment.

I visited the Hasselblad H Demo which took place outside of the Jacob Javitts Convention Center. It was kind of quiet with short spurts of people coming and going. It was a basic demo of the H3 system with live models. The scanners was also demo'ed. Not much was spoke of the V system, although they had an assortment on a the stage floor with no demo being conducted.

Onto the Expo at the Convention Center. I handled all 3 versions of the Hy6 (Rolleiflex, Sinar, and Leaf) It appeared that what all the vendors had were working prototype assigned to their respective company.
The Rolleiflex version is of course a film back version. It allowed the greatest entry point for future digital advancement without incurring the cost of a digital back up front.
Both the Sinar and Leaf version was bundled as digital ready with their digital backs. Sinar plans to introduced at a later time their film backs.

All 3 cameras handled very well. The only AF lens available was the 80mm Schneider. I was told that there are 2 versions of this lens. One is the AF (from Rollei 6008AF line) and the other AFD (newly developed Hy6 digital). No other new lenses were showcased but was promise to be available by delivery time. Listed as AFD lenses are 80m,m PQS, 50mm PQS, 150mm PQS, 180mm PQ, and 60-140mm PQS. All Schneider optics.

The older Zeiss and Schneider optics from the 6000 line can be used as manual focus line. The split image Hi D screen from the Rollei 6000 can be used in the Hy6.

The only other MF digital/film system beside Hasselblad and the Rolleiflex/Sinar/Leaf product, was Mamiya. Their showcase consisted of the the Mamiya 645AFDII, Mamiya 7 II, Mamiya RZ67ProII, and RB67SDPro.
The bundled package of the Mamiya 645AFDII kit with the ZD digital back is priced at $9,999. A hell of a deal with backwards compatibility with the older 645 optics.

Medium format scanners were also available from Microtek - ArtixScan M1 ($799), Hasselblad - Flextight X1 and X5 ($13,000 & $20,000), Nikon Coolscan 9000, Epson V750M, and Kodak with their IQ1 to IQ3 scanners ($10,000 to $$40,000). The Kodak scanners are the very best of the lot as they were formerly from Creo/Scitex Eversmart Pro development.
The IQ1 is the lowest priced scanner, but with similar functions as its higher priced brothers. It boils down to how much resolution you want.

Film was still available from Kodak (free film to all who waited on line), Fuji, and Ilford. As Marc stated, you can still shoot film and scan it as your digital workflow if the digital backs is out of reach for most of us here.

Coming back to Hy6 system, I founded it to be a nice well thoughtout system with many supporters. Schneider Optics of Gerany, Horseman of Japan, JenaOptiks, Sinar, and Leaf are some of the partners that made it happen. Zeiss was asked originally to be a partner, but they didn't response to the call.

I believe that most of the product line I spoke of are available on the respective manufacturers website. I manage to obtain some product CD from Hasselblad, The USA Rollei distributor (Direct Source Marketing), and Sinar. Not much paper brochure, most probably due to being Green and environmental concern.

Evan
 

jotloob

MFF-Patron
Evan

Thank you for your interesting report .
The HY6 words match very much with my experience from a HY6 roadshow here in Germany .

Jürgen
 

evanjoe610

New Member
Jürgen,

I guess that the HY6 is the talk of the Germany industry. German and Japanese representatives were all present at the Rolleiflex booth to give support to the product. It was refreshing to see a hybrid film/digital MF camera system being offered. Guess that was why Mamiya booth was all packed.

I will probably wait for the bugs to be worked out. Since these were all working prototypes, the one bug I saw happened at all the booths, where the camera simply stopped dead in its track if left only for a short duration on the table. It wasn't the battery as all of them were fully charged. It required a cokplete re-booting by shutting off and then turning on. One battery at the Lear booth did died after 4 hours. The Rolleiflex battery is a common video camcorder battery, not the propriety battery form previous. Leaf uses an one battery solution for the operation of the camera and digital back. The Sinar used separate batteries for the camera body and for the digital back.

At least for now, the choices for a new film/digital camera system is still alive with the Mamiya 645AFDII, Rolleiflex/Sinar/Leaf Hy6, and the Hasselblad H system and finally the CFV digital back.

At the Phase one booth, one of their personnel mentioned that Phase One went to Kyocera Japan to negotigate the purchase of the Contax 645 line. Apparently they couldn't come to terms with one of the partcipants. Too bad as many thought that the Contax 645 system woiuld still had been a good contender presently.
 

jotloob

MFF-Patron
Evan

>> LEAF uses a one battery solution for the operation of the camera and digital back <<

Not quite true !!

All three versions of the AFi , HY6 Sinar or HY6 Rolleiflex can use a battery which is placed in the handgrip , and an additional battery attached to the digital back . The ones I saw were HY6 with battery and LEAF APTUS 22 and 75 S with battery attached .

Regards Jürgen
 

uaiomex

New Member
Message to Phase One

It is fortunate if you failed to buy the Contax 645 line.
Do something a lot smarter:
Get on on a plane tonight and go buy the Bronica 6X6 line.

Bronica was one of the earliest casualties of the digital revolution. It was known for some to be "The poorman's Hasselblad". Not as tough as a 500CM but very much reliable, with some wonderful optics at less than half the price of their german similars.

Anyway, the 500CM never was trouble-free, neither Zeiss optics.

Eduardo
 

polypal

New Member
Eduardo,

That hurts badly!
The V series are trouble free when properly serviced.
The V series is one of the most reliable camera systems ever produced.
Like any mechanical instrument it needs to be serviced from time to time.

I have a 500C from 1958 in my collection that must have done over 500.000 exposures and is still going strong.
The same goes for CZ lenses.
They beat the new Fuji line for the H cameras by many miles.
Ever had an H series lens serviced or repaired?
For what that amounts to you can buy a nice CF lens now.

Gr.

Paul
 

fotografz

Active Member
The grass is always greener on the other side of the fence.

We are always comparing what we like, to what we don't own or use.

Phase One would have done well to buy an antiquated electronic camera line and dumping big bucks into updating it? I used that camera for many years. It was a power v&ire. You needed a pocket full of expensive batteries to make it through a day's shooting. The AF was good ... at noon ... in full sun. Let the sun go behind a cloud, and forget about it. While most of the Zeiss-Japan lenses were quite good, and the 120 Macro maybe the best ever, the Wide Angles like the 35 had so much barrel distortion that I strongly suspected that Zeiss-Japan outsourced them to Canon : -) Great camera ... for it's time.

500 series? Timeless. Keep a 500 series camera CLA'ed, and they can bury you with it ... "hey, St. Peter, say cheese".

Paul, the price tag on servicing my 203FE could've paid for a CF lens also. They stick you for any of these propritary factory manditory repairs, while 500s can be serviced all over the place.
 

qnu

Banned
Wouldn't that rather be about the grass being greener on this side of the fence?


I too don't think that the H2F is a bad idea, offering, as it does, AF AE A[etc.] to people who like to use film, and find the V-cameras a bit too 'spartan'.
It will cost a lot, compared to what V-System cameras go for nowadays (= mostly used, on eBay and the like).
But we are, of course, free to ignore it, should we think it too expensive or not be interested in it for any other reason.

And the H-lenses being so much less good than the Zeiss ones?
You can find many people on the web expressing their admiration/satisfaction/love for/with Zeiss lenses.
But where oh where are people complaining about the quality of the H-lenses?
 

fotografz

Active Member
They're busy making photographs.

I have no complaints about the H/C glass at all .... and I was prepared to not like them as much as my Zeiss optics ... to the point of getting the CF adapter, which just sits on the shelf now unless I need a specific focal length not available in the H series.
 

polypal

New Member
Q.G.

I was not referring to the optical results merely comparing reliability and longlivety of Fuji (H) lenses with CZ.

Fuji lenses have a right of their own as have CZ products.
That is not what this is about.
Yes I know of some people who had their V series camera breakdown at an important moment.
All these were second hand units where a good service was long overdue.

Look at photo.net to find at least one recently dissappointed user of an H series lens.
 

rcyoung

New Member
> I have 2 of the V series bodes and until recently , had an H1 > (which I ended up selling). The reason was simple....cost. I could > get "several" V series lenses (admittedly used these days) for the > price of a single H series lens . The $$$ differences were in > THOUSANDS of dollars, not just hundreds.,,and most of the lenses I > have for the V series I bought as "demo" lenses or at camera store > "fire sales" at 30-50% off prices.

With the recent swing in the exchange rates compared to the USD, I ended up selling the H1 for 90-95% of what I paid for it when it was NEW. Not to shabby.....

I am afraid I will probably never get (until it is much much cheaper, if then) a digital Hasselblad system or digital back. The Nikon & Canon cameras offer 12-20 megapixels at a fraction of the cost of getting a MF digital system. Once you are "digital" it matters very little whether you are shooting 35mm or MF equivalent ( unlike when you are shooting film and are going to enlarge). A digital image does not care...only the megapixels count .

I admit there is also something nice about scanning a 120 neg in my Nikon Coolscan 8000ED and getting a 81 Mpixel scan that dwarfs all the digital products. So when I need that "super scale" image, I'll use film and scan it. But for 99% of the other work, I'll use one of the previously named digital cams.
 

evanjoe610

New Member
Jürgen,


This info was related by the Leaf Team in their demo of their version of their Leaf AFi. With their digital camera, they introduced (3) New digital backs for it. He might had been referring strictly to these new digital backs. The new digital backs are Leaf AFi5, AFi6, and AFi7. Respectively, their resolution are 22MP,28MP, and 33MP.


I am just relating whatever information I gather from the PhotoPlus Expo. In short ofd NOT being PhotoKina, I figure that whatever News from the Medium Format Industry, IF ANY, will either be encouraging or just plain ugly.

I figure with all the discussion here about the problems of the closed system from Hasselblad, the new upcoming Mamiya 645AFDII, shot film and scanning it, whatever information I could get mirrors what this forum has been speaking aobut over the past several months.

If you want, I can try to scan in the Leaf AFi paperwork and post it here for all to read. I took a peek at the supplied CD rom from Hasselblad, Sinar, and Rolleiflex. Not much updated info, so that was why I posted what I observe in the MF world.



"Not quite true !!

All three versions of the AFi , HY6 Sinar or HY6 Rolleiflex can use a battery which is placed in the handgrip , and an additional battery attached to the digital back . The ones I saw were HY6 with battery and LEAF APTUS 22 and 75 S with battery attached .

Regards Jürgen"
 

afranklin

New Member
Hi Robert,

> Once you are "digital" it matters very > little whether you are shooting 35mm or MF equivalent ( unlike when > you are shooting film and are going to enlarge). A digital image does > not care...only the megapixels count .

That is incorrect. I'd like to know where you got this belief from.

The issue is not only number of "pixels" (which is a misnomer unto it self, but is another issue), but the physical size of the sensor elements (photosites) them selves. The larger the sensor elements are, typically the less noise they have. The smaller the sensor elements are, typically the more noise they have. Especially if they are both made from the same technology process.

So, comparing a sensor element that is, say, 3u square with a sensor element that is 9u or even 12u square, given all else equal, the larger cells will give you better image fidelity.

Regards,

Austin
 

evanjoe610

New Member
Marc,

I'm a V system user. Looking at what's out there doesn't mean I'm going to switch. It was refreshing to see some activity this year. The past several years all I heard was the moaning of the passing of Bronica, Contax, Fuji MF system (not the H), and the death of film.

Whats interesting was the comments heard from the many vendors there. The faces are all familar (meaning the associated individual who once represented the very best MF companies)

The revival in the MF C& of hybrid film/digital camera system was most encouraging. Had anyone been there, they would be very surprise to see the packed audiences at the MF booth. Especially the lines at Fuji and Kodak for the film and digital workflow solution they were proposing. Film, film development kits, scanners, photographic paper, and inkjet printers. An all in one solution. Oh, there were newer color calibration tools for monitors and profiling equipment.


The remark about the Contax 645 system came directly from a high level individual of Phase One Capture. They had all the popular 645 fiulm/digital cameras out ther with their digital backs. He was the one that mentioned their attempt to buy the Contax 645 line along with the 645 II development and tooling from Kyocera. Based on his remarks it sound like it was Zeiss that didn't responded.

The H system is a fantastic system, but cost-wise it's way over my head. Especially the cost of the lenses as Robert has pointed out. I do love the use of AF over manual focusing. That was why I bought into a dead system like the Contax 645. I could use all of my Hasselblad V lenses on it and the current level of repair support is still there till 2015. Beside Kyocera Japan has plenty of parts left in their inventory. One of my lens was lost in transit from repair. They outright replaced it with a brand new one.

Until the price of the digital backs come down into an affordable range, I would go with film and scanning for now. The full frame 35mm digital cameras such as the Canon and Nikon is more affordable in that sense.

Evan



"The grass is always greener on the other side of the fence.

We are always comparing what we like, to what we don't own or use.

Phase One would have done well to buy an antiquated electronic camera line and dumping big bucks into updating it? I used that camera for many years. ....."
 

rcyoung

New Member
> You are of course, correct. But I you the term "pixel" in a very > loose manner. It is easier for everyone to relate to thanks to the > mass marketing of all the camera manufacturers.

> The size of the photosites makes a BIG difference on noise as you > say. But look at their latest CFV back. I recent thread was > discussing that its "default" ISO rating was 50...and it only goes > to 400. I can do better than that with an old D70.

> On the other hard, noise is rapidly becoming less and less of an > issue. The new 12 Mp D3/D300 Nikons have a totally new (24x36mm in > the D3) CMOS sensor design that has reduced noise considerably.... > I saw that on the D3 the "extended" ISO range went up to over > 24,000! Oddly enough, one of their new "features" is that you can > go as LOW as ISO 100.....the sensors previously only went down to > the ISO 200 range.
 

afranklin

New Member
Hi Robert,

> > You are of course, correct. But I you the term "pixel" in a very > > loose manner. It is easier for everyone to relate to thanks to the > > mass marketing of all the camera manufacturers.

The misuse of the term "pixel" has nothing to do with you. It is, unfortunately, something that the camera manufacturers (or at least their marketing people, I'm sure it drove their engineers crazy) are entirely %100 guilty of, and there really is nothing we can do about it. A pixel, technically, contains all three (for R, G, B) colors (or simply one for grayscale) but the photosites only contain either R, G or B, each and in and of themselves, they are not pixels.

Also, another little known/understood digital camera "mis"...is that %50 of the green information you get from the cameras image data is simply "made up" (it's done algorithmically, but it still is derived data, not original data), and %75 of the red and blue is also "made up".

The issue with "pixel" is kind of like the misuse of the term resolution for the number of "pixels" a sensor has. That is not resolution. Resolution, technically, requires a dimensional (in this case) reference. A 2048 x 3280 sensor does not give a dimensional reference. 2048 DPI or 2048 PPI is a resolution. 2048 x 3280 is not.

But, these misuses have become such commonplace, that there is little to no chance of ever correcting them...and these new "definitions" are here to stay. Unfortunately.

> I can do better than that with an old D70.

But you won't get near the same image quality.

> On the other hard, noise is rapidly becoming less and less of an > > issue.

Well, I'm not sure about that. There are a lot of new techniques for noise reduction...but the problem with them is they also reduce the image fidelity. Whether it's significant or not has not really been analyzed. They may *appear* to look better, but they are not necessarily better. For ex&le, a cartoon is very sharp, but has little image detail. Sharpness, in general, is generally a false metric to image fidelity. It depends on how that sharpness is achieved.

The bottom line is, larger sensors elements, in general, have higher image fidelity. There is really no way that this can or will change, given an apples to apples comparison.

Regards,

Austin
 

rcyoung

New Member
> I would agree that all other things being equal, the larger the > photosite the better (lower noise, etc). However, it is still > (unfortunately) difficult to spend 2-3-4X as much for MF as opposed > to the DX/full frame cameras (Canon, Nikon). The MF may give a > better image, but I doubt it is 2-3-4X "bettter".

Now if I win the lottery this week, I'll be ordering a full digital kit (all backs, all lenses, all bodies, maybe in duplicate of every Hasselblad camera/lens digital currently made)......but then I won't have anything else to spend it on anyway....I almost have my house paid for (so I am NOT moving no matter what)..... I still drive my VW Vanagon from 1986 and I am DETERMINED to keep it going till it turns 25yrs old!...and the kids are ALL out of college......
 
Top