If you are registered, you get access to the members only section, can participate in the buy & sell second hand forum and last but not least you can reserve your preferred username before someone else takes it.
All right it is a large sensor but it is still not even 6x4.5 or more exact 56x41 mm.
Just found a digital camera with a full 60x 60 mm sensor. Only thing is the company that built it went out of business.
Maybe it was not such a good idea after all.
With the exception of the 40 mm IF lens all lenses for the V series are older designs some going back even 50 years.
Fuji lenses for the H series were designed around the turn of the century.
They better be at least as good according to the MTF charts would not they?
Carl Zeiss showed it can improve many excellent designs with the new series of lenses they designed for the Contax 645 camera.
The 120 APO Makro Planar is an excellent example of those new designs.
Users of the V series will have to get used that no new lens designs are to be expected.
Hasselblad is obviously phasing out the V system with a smaller selection of lenses available for that camera.
That is not a real problem as there are many excellent used lenses available.
HCD lenses are not twice as sharp as Zeiss lenses.
40mm IF and 180mm 4.0 are in the same competition than the HCD lenses
The 50Mpix sensor is a stamps, the Zeiss lenses cover 56x56mm
50mpix for smal sensor is beyond raisonable goal. Such sensor is good to test lenses and to show difraction limites like the 21mpix for Canon. A wider sensor with true 800asa or more should have been more interesting.
No one, not Hasselblad, not Phase One, not Sinar or Leaf has access to a sensor larger than what is currently available from the two main sensor manufacturers: Kodak and Dalsa. So constantly harping on the digital back companies is a waste of time and energy. It will happen when Kodak or Dalsa make it happen.
50 meg will have its applications for some sectors of commercial photography, not just for testing lenses. Reduced moire especially for clothing catalog work, more minute capture of industrial product detail, scientific applications, archival recording, and to further enable the various multi-tasking size/cropping applications used by advertisers today.
ISO 800 is a novelty for most users of Medium Format digital backs. The native ISO 50 or 100 is the most used sensor speed in commercial studio photography using powerful studio lighting ... which in turn is the most frequent application of high meg equipment ... not shooting landscapes, frolicking pets or flowers in the backyard. For more energetic applications such as fashion and some high-end event work, ISOs are available up to 1600.
I am also of the opinion that the Fuji made lenses are optimized for specific types of critical commercial digital applications, and in most cases really do outperform their Zeiss counterparts in the commercial studio. This does not negate the fact that the Zeiss pictorial characteristics are highly desirable in certain shooting situations ... fortunately, we can use them on the H cameras with film (H1, H2, H3, H2F) or digital capture (all H cameras) via the CF Adapter.
That is quite odd!! Is Kodak releasing another "large" sensor for the consumer market, other than the 50MP? I suspect Kodak and Dalsa make "very nice" sensors for the military, CIA, etc..I wonder if there is a "trickle down" effect from those projects?
There is a very, very interesting article in the current edition of Victor Magazine (2/2008 edition) that compares the Zeiss CF and current HC lenses. It's a very technical, fair, and detailed article that surprised me with how well the CF lenses fared, but also noted how the HC lenses outperform in some areas of the lens and at variable distances, particularly with the DAC applied.
I don't know if it's posted in the online edition yet (I can't get anything to come up for Victo online with any of the 3 browsers I use), but for fans of either lens system, it's a must read.
Before the digital time, we use softar filters on lenses because the lenses were too sharp. Now we consider that lenses of this time are just good enought for fitness exercises.
I have a Leica M8 for more than one year now and any other users will tell you that old lenses are not so bad. At same time I had the new 135 apo-telyt and the tele-elmar form 1965. I made test and foud no visible differences after 5.6; at full operture (3.4 or 4.0) the diference was not so big anyway.
If you read the last Victor mag, I recieved 2 week ago, you will understand that old Zeiss lenses are not bad at all.
The goal to get sharp sensor is good for H system. The goal to get wide sensor is good for V system.
I like to use f 1/11 for close portraits to have eyes and nose in focus at same time for a 30x30 cm print. With a sharp sensor the quality is bad because of difraction. A wide sensor (with same number of pixels) will realy help me.
With my M8 Leica the quality drop after f 8.0 with difraction. So if I want all the portrait (head only) in focus in good quality I use my Hassy at 11 or 16 with film.
My point is/was: they better be a match for the Zeiss lenses which for the majority are quite old (as in decades old) designs. Designs made when nobody had any idea what was coming towards us in digibacks.