Hello,
I thank you all for sharing your opinion and try to help me to find a solution. You did a good work! I will stay with the H3DII-50.
Well, what will I use it for most? I have done a lot of landscape and skyline in the last time, so I believe the 50MP back might be the better option because of the higher resolution and the better crop (due to the different sensor size). For the first shots I used ISO50 and did not miss higher speed at all.
If I need more ISO for other things I will use my D3s anyway. That I still have with my two f2,8 zooms. But that camera I have for different usage and different jobs. I do like it for studio work as well, but only, if I need a fast result in low resolution.
Maybe there will be a situation to use the H3D for studio work as well. But I think that will be only sometimes. And I believe, all the other guys not having True Focus can shoot all that studio stuff as well with good results. So I will have to learn how to do it, too.
Today I talked to another Hasselblad photographer and he said, that at that prize the H3DII-50 with the HC50-110 is a pretty good offer and I should go for it.
I found another offer for the H3DII- 50 without a lens and that was some 500 Euro more expensive than my one with the HC50-110. This photographer also told me, that the zoom is one of the best found on the marked. Is that so? In that case I would add the 120/4 Makro for stills and product work.
Then I will save some money and try to get an H4D-31 next.
Why Hasselblad anyway?
I looked at the PhaseOne backs as well and I like them, too. But usually they are sold with Mamiya bodys. I went to Calumet and got one in my hand. A PhaseOne back (I do not remember the type) on a 645AFD Mamiya with battery grip and I believe a Profoto remote sync system integrated, a battery on the bottom of the back and a 80mm lens. It was a huge construction I could not even hold in my hands for a lot of money (more expensive than my Hassi or even an H4D-40). I tried to shoot some pictures on my own CF card but the results had been not worth to mention.
Then I went to a local dealer and took a close look at Hasselblad. They had a H4D-40 and let me try it with a 100/2,2. That was a nice combination, easy to use and I could handle it very easy in my hands. Unfortunately my son was with me and he was very impatient that I took so long at that place.
The dealer I usually buy my stuff had "my" H3DII-50 and he lend it to me for a weekend. The handling is like any H- Camera I believe and I like the results. I will post an example later.
I used to have a Nikon D800. I traded it for a D3x. The D800 is nice. But I was disappointed about the results.
The first impression of the results is great. Nice colored pictures with a good sharpness.
For example take a look
here.
But the sharpness was fading when printed in large format (I did it in DIN A0 and couldn´t believe my eyes!). Same result in DINA2.
I believe it was a focus problem with my lenses, but they all worked fine with my D3s and later on the D3x. I used the 14-24/2,8G, the 24-70/2,8G and the 70-200/2,8VRII. I then had the 85/1,4G, the 105/2,8VR Macro, but the worst results I had with my 50/1,4G. No sharp pictures at all from f1,4 to f3,5. All pictures were out of focus. But with the D3s the 85/1,4 was as sharp as a razor blade.
I gave the D800 and the 50/1,4 to service and got it back well. But the 50 didn´t work with my D3s any more. So I didn´t want to take that risk that all lenses will not work with my D3s any more.
After I had the D3x the situation improved. But it not got perfect. The results were a lot better even with less resolution. The sharpness was quite good in bigger prints. But still sometimes the focus problems occurred.
Then I met the H3D.
The D3x and all lenses except the two 2,8 Zooms (24-70-200) were sold.
The difference between MF and FX Format is obviously. At least in my eyes.