The GetDPI Photography Forum

Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!

Hasselblad news

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
Yes I agree. Hassy seems to do all there own stuff. I do think though lenses are being made for them by Fuji and same with Sinar with Rollie. None of these folks make lenses themselves they all have partners there. But Hassy does make there own camera's and backs as well as Sinar and I guess Leaf also. But I would not be surprised if Phase did not actually own Mamiya and just keep the branding name. There have been a lot of mergers in the MF world so not sure who owns who.
 

harmsr

Workshop Member
LJ,

I personally think that the 31 plus a 39 or 50 back is a great combo. I currently have the H3DII39 for high resolution, studio work, and high sync speed strobe work. The camera SYSTEM is great. I really love the integration in the camera to the back. It has great ergonomics, a very bright and clear viewfinder, one battery (advantage & disadvantage, but more advantage to me at the moment), and VERY EASY to use custom settings.

For my second system, I went with the Phase/Mamiya combo using the 31MP - P30+ back. In the more general purpose camera, I thought this was a better combo for me. Admitting, I do not like the Mamiya AFDII loaner body when compared to my H3DII camera at all. I'm hoping that the new AFDIII body will take away some of my complaints, but I know that not all will be solved in this iteration. However there are several advantages in this system for my general use (non high speed sync strobe work). The files from the P30+ are very good, it has 1600 ISO, is fast, the system is lighter weight which is a great advantage for this camera, the focal plane shutter does not allow high speed sync but does allow 1/4000 shutter speeds. The real interesting thing about this body is that in the future, it will also be able to use leaf shutter lenses.

Phocus at first was not a nice work flow for me, but I am getting used to it and it is becoming much easier to use and is very powerful. Hassy also seems to listen to suggestions (so does Phase) on what to incorporate or fix in the software. (Look on Nick T's forum and alot of information gets passed back to Hassy for inclusion/fix in Phocus.) Capture One is a workflow that I know from the Leica and is very easy to use for me also. It is also still waiting for needed features that it is missing, which we will hopefully see in a Pro version soon.

Basically, my point is that I really do see a use for a 31MP back and a higher resolution back 39/50 in the same kit. My decision also divided that need into two systems for a focal plane shutter and a leaf shutter.

I am really excited about the T/S adaptor, as that would solve alot of problems for me.

One thing that Hassy should really think about (IMHO) is a focal plane body that works with your existing back and HC lenses. They will be at something of a disadvantage, when Phase/Mamiya has both in one body system.

Best,

Ray
 

LJL

New member
Ray,
Thanks for your thoughts and input. I understand your two-system approach for your needs. That is partly why I am still a bit on the fence. I see the advantages of both focal plan and leaf shutters.

The idea of Hasselblad introducing a focal plane body that would accept all the present H3D stuff would be outstanding, as that could complete a system to meet most needs. The Phase/Mamiya offerings are also very good, but they (Mamiya?) have still not put out those leaf shutter lenses that have been promised for some time, so essentially, it is still a focal plane system, and why your needs are for both right now.

I am just looking a bit forward and wondering/wishing aloud for somebody (ies) in this mix to come up with a complete, fully integrated, collection of things to build a versatile, compact, interchangeable kit. Hasssleblad is looking very good, but all on the leaf shutter platform right now. Phase/Mamiya is looking good for both, but they have yet to put out the lenses, and there still may be some integration issues at that point. Really do not know how that is going to work.

At this point, I think your "solution" is an excellent way to go. I would rather do it all without having to support two very different systems, but just cannot do so yet. Your comments about the H3D versus AFDII ergonomics and use are appreciated. I feel much the same way. The Hassy, though heavier, just seems to fit me better in my limited playing, and I just could not get comfortable with the Mamiya. The Hy6 is also very nice, and I do like many of its offerings, but the Hassy still seems to work better for me. All of that could change, and may. So, I keep cheering Hasselblad on, as I like what that have offered, and are doing, but still keep hoping for them to integrate a focal plane body that could be used as part of their H3D system. That would seal the deal in my thinking.

LJ
 

KeithL

Well-known member
So, if Hasselblad have adapted the ArcBody and produced the HTS, could they be considering re-introducing the ArcBody and this time supplying it with adapted Rodenstock Apo Sironar Digital Lenses?
 

mtomalty

New member
Would it be safe to assume that use of the coming Tilt Shift adapter will introduce
some color shift into captures when shift and/or tilt is applied?

As I am more familiar with how Phase handles corrective files to deal with LCC (lens
cast correction) and the ability to work untethered I would also like to know if the
Blad backs can apply their corrective files in post foollowing shoot or does the corrective
capture need to be handled in a tethered workflow.


Thx,
Mark
 

Graham Mitchell

New member
Guy,
I was just noting that Hasselblad is able to move forward or in whatever direction they want rather quickly, and are not as dependent upon partners to make and deliver things.
Of course they are. They depend on Fuji for the lenses, and I don't know where the camera bodies are made but all the sources I found said "some parts" were made in Sweden, so I assume that Fuji contributes there also (according to LL, Fuji makes the prisms). Do you know for a fact that the Hasselblad software was written inhouse and not contracted out to a software house (as some other maufacturers do)? And we all know that they rely on Kodak for their sensors.
 

LJL

New member
Of course they are. They depend on Fuji for the lenses, and I don't know where the camera bodies are made but all the sources I found said "some parts" were made in Sweden, so I assume that Fuji contributes there also (according to LL, Fuji makes the prisms). Do you know for a fact that the Hasselblad software was written inhouse and not contracted out to a software house (as some other maufacturers do)? And we all know that they rely on Kodak for their sensors.
Graham,
You are correct, they are dependent upon suppliers to get stuff fabricated, and for parts. What I was referring to is that whatever arrangements Hasselblad has with Fuji, Kodak and others for components, they seem able to pull things together as they need, and when they want/need, for the most part. That is a bit different than having some sort of shared partnership as Mamiya/Phase or Sinar/Leaf/Aptus, where they are trying to coordinate parts, announcements and delivery against the schedules of the other partners, and not just suppliers. Not saying that is how things work, but it seems to me that Hasselblad, with its "go it alone" approach, does appear able to keep things a bit tighter knit.

While I appreciate the more open approach of the others, Phase may have to wait on Mamiya for lenses and bodies, or Sinar must make sure that a 45 degree finder from Rollei gets retrofitted or built to work the way they want it for their version of the Hy6, as examples. Hasselblad, on the other hand only has to worry about what works within their system. They still need things fabbed to their specs, but they have more vertical integration for what they produce, it appears.

This may not matter much at all, but it just appears as though some of these things are working better for some than others. (I am sure Phase feels some heat from not being able to push the promised Mamiya leaf shutter lenses, as a thought....I know I would be more anxious about things like that if I were Phase and banking on that development that has been very publicly announced for some time.)

In any event, we may see more surprises from various fronts soon enough, and all of this will become idyl chatter :thumbup:

LJ
 

Mammy645

New member
Yes I agree. Hassy seems to do all there own stuff. I do think though lenses are being made for them by Fuji and same with Sinar with Rollie. None of these folks make lenses themselves they all have partners there. But Hassy does make there own camera's and backs as well as Sinar and I guess Leaf also. But I would not be surprised if Phase did not actually own Mamiya and just keep the branding name. There have been a lot of mergers in the MF world so not sure who owns who.
Mamiya is owned by a Japanese software company, there is no merger with PhaseOne, just a strategic cooperation between the two.
 

Mammy645

New member
Ray,
The Phase/Mamiya offerings are also very good, but they (Mamiya?) have still not put out those leaf shutter lenses that have been promised for some time, so essentially, it is still a focal plane system...

LJ
PhaseOne has already said they will unveil the first leaf shutter lens (80mm) at Photokina and that it will be available for purchase in Q4.
 
T

thsinar

Guest
Dear LJ,

Sinar is modifying the 45° in-house, to allow the revolving adapter to revolve.

Best regards,
Thierry

... or Sinar must make sure that a 45 degree finder from Rollei gets retrofitted or built to work the way they want it for their version of the Hy6, as examples.
LJ
 

LJL

New member
Dear LJ,

Sinar is modifying the 45° in-house, to allow the revolving adapter to revolve.

Best regards,
Thierry
Thierry,
Thanks for that point. I believe you had mentioned it before. My comments are not to incite anyone. I was merely making an observational comparison. In this particular case, Sinar has taken it upon themselves to make the modifications to an existing piece of Rollei equipment, meaning they have to secure those pieces from Rollei, make the mods, etc., versus having designed the pieces or needed modifications from the start. While Sinar may be able to do this quickly, and to their specs, it is yet another piece that has to be fit into the bigger puzzle after the design. It may not take that much effort, but it is a retrofit, not an originally designed component. Are there more things like this? Do not really know, nor is it all that important. Sinar will do the great job they need for the products they are selling under the partnership, but they are having to work with somebody else's designs and limitations from the start. Just an observation. Again, not making disparaging comments about other makers.....just seeing some differences in how a more "closed" company is able to deliver things. It is not perfect, but it seems to be working for Hasselblad at this point.

LJ
 
T

thsinar

Guest
Yes, right LJ, basically. I did not take it negatively, but you know me: I like everything to be straight, when mentioning Sinar. No harm taken, though.

And no, there are no other pieces like this. We do manufacture the adapters ourselves. As for the rest, a partnership must not be necessarily a hinder to being fast and reactive: it is most of the time a question of right communication and priorities with the partner. If one can get a clear communication and if things are clearly defined, a great part of the hurdle is behind.

Best regards,
Thierry

Thierry,
Thanks for that point. I believe you had mentioned it before. My comments are not to incite anyone. I was merely making an observational comparison. In this particular case, Sinar has taken it upon themselves to make the modifications to an existing piece of Rollei equipment, meaning they have to secure those pieces from Rollei, make the mods, etc., versus having designed the pieces or needed modifications from the start. While Sinar may be able to do this quickly, and to their specs, it is yet another piece that has to be fit into the bigger puzzle after the design. It may not take that much effort, but it is a retrofit, not an originally designed component. Are there more things like this? Do not really know, nor is it all that important. Sinar will do the great job they need for the products they are selling under the partnership, but they are having to work with somebody else's designs and limitations from the start. Just an observation. Again, not making disparaging comments about other makers.....just seeing some differences in how a more "closed" company is able to deliver things. It is not perfect, but it seems to be working for Hasselblad at this point.

LJ
 
Top