Hasselblad CMOS 50 announced

[RVB]

Totally agree.
Hasselblad will be putting the sensor in multi shot digital cameras, this will allow them to compite in rational terms even if Pentax and Leica enter the market (cmos medium format) . Now multi shot capabilities are not for all situations. The questions are:

1. Are bigger sensors coming ? (I was hopping a 48 x 36 mm )
2. Will the next generation High resolution cameras from Nikon, Canon and Sony compite?

Best regards,
J. Duncan

Will Sony release a really small body with this chip ands Zeiss glass in the future..??

 

[peterv]

Will Sony release a really small body with this chip ands Zeiss glass in the future..??

That would be a logical next step for them, I agree. The thing is that they will probably be quite busy developing the 15 FF E-mount lenses they have on their roadmap. And then there's A-mount, which they said they were not going to abandon, and I guess there'll be new RX cameras coming.

So adding an MF line might be a bit too much, but then again, it's Sony and they've been known the last couple of years to come up with quite a few surprises.

 

[douglasf13]

That would be a logical next step for them, I agree. The thing is that they will probably be quite busy developing the 15 FF E-mount lenses they have on their roadmap. And then there's A-mount, which they said they were not going to abandon, and I guess there'll be new RX cameras coming.

So adding an MF line might be a bit too much, but then again, it's Sony and they've been known the last couple of years to come up with quite a few surprises.

I was just wondering about this and mentioned it on another forum. Since the common sensor steppers can do 26mmx33mm (I believe that is still the case,) and it already takes a stitch to make a 24x36 sensor, would it really be THAT much more to make a 33x44 chip, since it is still only a single stitch?

It should be interesting if Sony decided to take this 33x44 sensor and throw it into a simple camera body with a highly adaptable mount that allows just about any medium format lens (using manual focus.)

 

[peterv]

Great question, Douglas. The guys over at LuLa are wondering about that too. Especially why they (Sony, Phase) didn't go straight for a stitched D800E/A7R sensor. Perhaps fabrication difficulties, but then again maybe it's just marketing. Make 'm buy the 33 x 44 mm 50 MP now, have 'm upgrade to a 'FF' 75 MP next year.

A super sized A7 that would, with adapters, take Contax, Leica, Phamiya, Pentax, Hasselblad and all forms of medium format lenses would be nice, preferably with AF and fully functional aperture, etc. If Leica can reverse engineer the protocols, surely Sony can too.

 

[Jorgen Udvang]

A super sized A7 that would, with adapters, take Contax, Leica, Phamiya, Pentax, Hasselblad and all forms of medium format lenses would be nice, preferably with AF and fully functional aperture, etc. If Leica can reverse engineer the protocols, surely Sony can too.

Sony isn't exactly famous for adapting standards from others. Rather the opposite, actually: They often create their own, hoping that others will follow, something that others have been reluctant to do.

 

[douglasf13]

Sony isn't exactly famous for adapting standards from others. Rather the opposite, actually: They often create their own, hoping that others will follow, something that others have been reluctant to do.

Yeah, I could see it going either way. They definitely promote the heck out of the e-mount adaptability. I thinking Sony Australia was even giving away Novoflex adapters with A7/R cameras, in the beginning.

 

[tjv]

I just hope that Hasselblad implements the sensor in a different way to Phase, so that it is optimised to work with Tech cameras or forgoes higher ISOs for better base ISO performance. I guess that could mean getting rid of micro lenses and speccing a different CFA? I don't know and I can't afford either, but it's fun to watch from the sidelines!

 

[GrahamWelland]

I just hope that Hasselblad implements the sensor in a different way to Phase, so that it is optimised to work with Tech cameras or forgoes higher ISOs for better base ISO performance. I guess that could mean getting rid of micro lenses and speccing a different CFA? I don't know and I can't afford either, but it's fun to watch from the sidelines!

To be honest, this sounds like the exact opposite of how Hasselblad normally optimize their digital backs. They are designed and optimized for use with the H body and I would wager that it is HIGHLY unlikely they'd compromise that by optimizing the back for technical cameras (which let's face it, they don't sell or historically have cared too much about).

 

[kdphotography]

Integrated H camera body.

If venerable H really wants to make a difference, offer live view through the viewfinder too.

ken

p.s. I sense that the most innovative products are where the back maker is more vested in the design of the chip (e.g., Phase with Dalsa and P65+). I just don't see this with the current round of Sony chips sold to Phase and Hasselblad. It's like there is a bit of disconnect going on. Good, but could be better in the implementation (at least on paper).

 

[tjv]

It might not be Hasselblad's historic take, and I'm not really suggesting they design their back for tech cameras specifically, I guess I'm just holding out hope they have chosen cover glass or CFA options that optimise performance at base ISO. Like Leica who invested in the development of special cover glass and filter arrays for the S and M cameras, I'd love to think Hasselblad had the means to do the same.

I live in hope, is all!

 

[torger]

To be honest, this sounds like the exact opposite of how Hasselblad normally optimize their digital backs. They are designed and optimized for use with the H body and I would wager that it is HIGHLY unlikely they'd compromise that by optimizing the back for technical cameras (which let's face it, they don't sell or historically have cared too much about).

Phase is *almost* as bad as Hasselblad when it comes to ignoring tech cameras. I mean they release this "well-tested" IQ250 and they don't have ready answers for how it works on tech cams. Despite that live view can be a real game changer in tech cam space by making view cameras usable again for ground glass allergics

 

[bab]

I would venture to say the tech camera part will be offered...if not well disappointing. But more importantly a way to see what the back sees on a very large monitor would be fine with me. I don't care about 800 iso or FPS. Now 1/1600 of a sec sync is another story as is a tilting screen and other improvement to make shooting easier.

 

[Shashin]

Hasselblad does not make tech cameras. Why would they care if their back is optimized for products they don't sell nor support?

 

[mbn]

IMO, a digiback is the piece of kit with the biggest margin for the manufacturer, isn't it? That's pretty much why Hasselblad closed it's system, because there were way more H bodies and lenses selling w/o their backs, than w/ their backs.
Well, their plan didn't work out, IMO. Phase/Mamiya are still alive.

If they would open up their system again, well...
What do you guys think, will happen?

 

[Shashin]

Hasselblad did not close their system to eliminate their competitions. They did it so they can support their business. If the closed system is making them more money than when it was open, then there is no point in changing. This is simple economics.

 

[mbn]

Exactly!

 

[Shashin]

Generally speaking, a company that makes money can support their customers better than one that goes bankrupt. A reason to "close" their system (it was always closed, BTW) could simply be a better way to make better products.

 

[mbn]

What do you mean with, it was always closed?
They didn't even had a digiback at their H1 launch, just film.
After they were able to offer their own backs, they came up with the closed H3.

That's already a few years back, and i could just be wrong.
But i'm pretty sure that i'm not!

 

[GrahamWelland]

Pretty sure that they closed their H3 to help protect their MFDB business and not for real technical reasons. The shame is that some of us would have bought in to the H system at that time but instead were basically left to either go with an older version or system with questionable support or go Phamiya.

Obviously this was all for commercial reasons and Will may be correct that Hasselblad felt that this would keep them viable but I'd wager that they'd have been better served selling more bodies and lenses and not encouraging Phase One to buy in to Mamiya and teaming with Schneider to assist with lenses.

My $0.02 as a thwarted H buyer a few years back.

 

[tjv]

Why should Hasselblad think about improving support for cameras they don't sell, i.e. tech cameras? Well, they did after all implement an external battery option with the H5D for shooting with one. Also, wouldn't it be a good selling point? A back that can be used on arguably the best MF platform (H) and is tweaked for great results with technical movements would surely put it ahead of the competition, who is clearly not thinking about this niche segment that finds a home at GetDPI!

Again, all I'm saying is that I live in hope. As a technical camera shooter, I live in hope...