H4D 40 @100 ISO 3 minutes plus

[fotografz]

what became of the Hasselblad H4D60? ether?

From what I can gather, the elves in Denmark found something they didn't like with the Dalsa sensor in relation to the Hasselblad imaging chain and are working on it. Haven't a clue what that might be or what they are doing ... but they seem to be taking their sweet time with it.

Phase will have their P80+, 3D-D™, Triple Sensor Plus™, in camera T/S: Sensor Tilt™, out before Hassey gets this pup to market ... :ROTFL:

-Marc

 

[thomas]

From what I can gather, the elves in Denmark found something they didn't like with the Dalsa sensor in relation to the Hasselblad imaging chain and are working on it. Haven't a clue what that might be or what they are doing ... but they seem to be taking their sweet time with it.

Phase will have their P80+, 3D-D™, Triple Sensor Plus™, in camera T/S: Sensor Tilt™, out before Hassey gets this pup to market ... :ROTFL:

-Marc

btw: also Leaf released the Aptus-II 10 at about the same time when Phase released the P65+... and the Aptus is also based on the same 6µm Dalsa sensor.
I think this dubious statement of the Hasselblad guy was a bit imprudent... and finally has a boomerang effect towards Hasselblad actually.

 

[fotografz]

btw: also Leaf released the Aptus-II 10 at about the same time when Phase released the P65+... and the Aptus is also based on the same 6µm Dalsa sensor.
I think this dubious statement of the Hasselblad guy was a bit imprudent... and finally has a boomerang effect towards Hasselblad actually.

It isn't any specific official statement, or any details, so don't jump to conclusions, other than it's slow getting to market. Rather have it that way then not.

Given Hasselblad's established imaging chain (in-camera firmware, Phocus software and things like HTS/1.5) they may have different tasks to complete to the reach the IQ they want. It has nothing to do with Phase or Leaf and their IQ.

-Marc

 

[Jeffg53]

Having suffered with the red cast on an early H3D, I would prefer that they get it right. I was heartily miffed when the H3D II came out in less than a year after the H3D.

 

[fotografz]

Got the H4D/40 ... WOW!

I started using the True Focus immediately ... it is simply amazing ... and waaaaaay faster than using multiple focus points. This will change how I think about shooting with MFD. Kudos to Hasselblad on this one.

-Marc

 

[tjv]

Is it just me or do the downloadable samples on the Hasselblad web site shot with the H4D40 look, well, bad? They are preconverted from 3FR files but they are nothing compared to the sample above or others that David posted in terms of noise and artifact free details. Why don't they put raw files up for people to really assess file quality?

 

[fotografz]

Is it just me or do the downloadable samples on the Hasselblad web site shot with the H4D40 look, well, bad? They are preconverted from 3FR files but they are nothing compared to the sample above or others that David posted in terms of noise and artifact free details. Why don't they put raw files up for people to really assess file quality?

All I get is "Page Not Found" when I try to download.

They do have a download area for RAW files, but images from the 40 or 50 aren't posted yet ... only the 31 and 39.

The 40 samples (that I can't get to) are ones processed by specific photographers, so who knows what they were after in terms of look and style?

I got my 40 yesterday, and so far, it looks good. Surprizingly good ISO 1600, especially for my applications. But I want to pull some prints.

=Marc

 

[tjv]

You can download the samples via the H4D40 info / spec page. They are the ones by Steve McCurry etc that you mention. You are right, and that was my point, that they have been processed by someone else so one can't really judge the quality of the files like from a RAW file. If I didn't know any better I'd have looked at them and thought what any ignorant high end 35mm user would, that excepting for maybe absolute resolution, "my D3X is just as good as that for a fraction of the cost." We all know that this is just not the case, so why Hasselblad would post such poorly processed files on their site considering they want to attract those same high end 35mm users, I have no idea. But I'm preaching to the converted. It's just I've been researching a lot about MFD lately because soon I intend to jump on the wagon. I've pretty much decided on a P30+ and DF combo but my easily swayed heart keeps nagging me to consider the (usually more pricy) equivalent Hasselblad options. I've always lusted after a 'Blad digital, especially since talking with a few Magnum guys who use them. Hey, maybe it's partly hero worship that nags at my practical side, but those guys did speak very highly of their H cameras and backs.

The sample files you posted in another thread do show more clearly how much better this new camera / sensor is to previous H generations, I just wonder why Hasselblad themselves can't properly illustrate this. Surely they want to shift more units and inspire people to upgrade?

All I get is "Page Not Found" when I try to download.

They do have a download area for RAW files, but images from the 40 or 50 aren't posted yet ... only the 31 and 39.

The 40 samples (that I can't get to) are ones processed by specific photographers, so who knows what they were after in terms of look and style?

I got my 40 yesterday, and so far, it looks good. Surprizingly good ISO 1600, especially for my applications. But I want to pull some prints.

=Marc

 

[fotografz]

You can download the samples via the H4D40 info / spec page. They are the ones by Steve McCurry etc that you mention. You are right, and that was my point, that they have been processed by someone else so one can't really judge the quality of the files like from a RAW file. If I didn't know any better I'd have looked at them and thought what any ignorant high end 35mm user would, that excepting for maybe absolute resolution, "my D3X is just as good as that for a fraction of the cost." We all know that this is just not the case, so why Hasselblad would post such poorly processed files on their site considering they want to attract those same high end 35mm users, I have no idea. But I'm preaching to the converted. It's just I've been researching a lot about MFD lately because soon I intend to jump on the wagon. I've pretty much decided on a P30+ and DF combo but my easily swayed heart keeps nagging me to consider the (usually more pricy) equivalent Hasselblad options. I've always lusted after a 'Blad digital, especially since talking with a few Magnum guys who use them. Hey, maybe it's partly hero worship that nags at my practical side, but those guys did speak very highly of their H cameras and backs.

The sample files you posted in another thread do show more clearly how much better this new camera / sensor is to previous H generations, I just wonder why Hasselblad themselves can't properly illustrate this. Surely they want to shift more units and inspire people to upgrade?

Yes, I know where the samples are ... I just cannot download them. I tried with Safari and Opera ... and got the same "Page Not Found".

It is hard to say what the photographers are after in terms of their pictorial style. But I think I understand what you mean since I had the same reaction to the images used to launch the Leica S2 ... just not my cup of tea. Processing is definitely a "creative" endeavor and will differ greatly from one person to the next.

Since I am a former D3X user, I can say most any of these MFD kits will be a leap forward in terms of IQ ... and in more ways than just oodles more resolution. I think it just comes down to CCD verses CMOS sensors with their AA filtration ... and the CCD's 16 bit. The tonal gradation and dynamic range is better from those big CCD sensors. Even though it's 35mm, I see that difference even with the CCD sensor in the Leica M9.

However, what one does with all the extra stuff you get is the subjective/creative part that can please some and not others.

If you get a moment, check the ISO 800 snap I grabbed of some deer with the H4D/40 yesterday, (maybe you'll like it, maybe you'll hate it :ROTFL:

http://forum.getdpi.com/forum/showthread.php?p=199722#post199722

-Marc

 

[tjv]

Thanks Marc,
your shot looks impressive compared to the Hasselblad samples, although these aren't 100% crops so it's hard to say definitively, but I take it as a give in. What shocked me about the samples on the Hassey site is they displayed very soft, over smoothing of details, sharpening artifacts and in many instances CA. yours look very crisp and seem indicative of the systems true stripes. The other hand held shot posted by David (?) in another thread was also miles better in terms of displaying the possible performance and benefits of the H4D40 under challenging light. I'm being pedantic, but I'd expect a brand like Hasselblad, one that has obviously invested tremendously in a sharp, well designed, modern web site, one that sells high end professional, not to mention technologically advanced tools, to post samples that actually illustrate why I'd pay through the nose for their product over another, and not make me scratch my head in confusion. Your pictures and comments give me a far better insight into that logic than all the tech specs, words and flash illustrations on the Hassey web site combined. End of rant...

Thanks again for posting your impressions. It does indeed look like a winner.