not only are the hassy backs non-rotating, they are in landscape mode when the camera is in it's normal position. makes a vertical orientation, a' la Woody, uncomfortable. as far i know, the only rotating backs are Leaf; does phase make a fixed vertical orientation mounting plate?
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!
CFV-50c !!
- Thread starter Iskander
- Start date
dougpeterson
Workshop Member
You can take any V mount phase one back off, turn it 90 degrees, and put it back on. With Aptus II V mounts you can rotate the sensor without removing the back. With all other Leaf backs you can take the back off, turn it, and put it back on.
In other words, through various means, you can take any Leaf or Phase back and make a vertical picture or a horizontal picture on any 500 series body.
(exception made for the square-sensor backs. They don't allow rotation on the mount, but there would be no point in rotating a square)
Woody Campbell
Workshop Member
KeithL
Well-known member
I don't really get why people are so excited over this and applauding Hasselblad. Many wanted a true 6x6 sensor for years now and what you get instead is a quick rework of an existing back so it can be used on a V-series camera. Not only is it not a square sensor it is not even close to a 645 sensor in size.
It's at least a step, better than just discontinuing the whole thing. It also is an interesting budget alternative to the IQ250 for tech cameras (excluding wide angles which this sensor is not good at). Hopefully we'll see a full-frame 645 CMOS sensor in the future and then we could get a CFV back with that too, but the sensor needs to come first.
There are larger than 645 sensors out there, but none that have suitable properties for traditional photography. Hasselblad is in no situation to have Dalsa or anyone else to make an exclusive 56x56mm sensor that would be used by only them for a camera system that is already discontinued. Only Hy6 and tech cameras would benefit from 56x56mm of the current systems, and the manufacturers of those systems don't do digital backs, except Sinar, but they're into narrow tethered-only multi-shot solutions these days.
6x6 is what Hasselblad used to be all about before digital came along. I think it would be a very good step for Hasselblad to go back to it. The MFDB market is getting flooded with alternatives to a Hassy and they have kind of given up their leading role. Being the only manufacturer that makes a 6x6 could bring it all back, I think. Demand will be plenty once the camera is there.
Making the back not super high-end is a good step, I think. So it will be in reach of mere mortals and businesses (think wedding photographers and other commercial photographers), but it needs to have a bigger sensor.
been a square format fan for a long time, and love the 500's. and for some reason, could never seem to mask and crop the rectangular format of the CV-39 in the gg. no reason except guilt ridden about wasting pixels.
stupid.
just put in a sq crop mask, there are plenty of 'em, that is back to the future. and i have an SWC; could also carry the film back if i really needed the wider fov in that one direction
stupid.
just put in a sq crop mask, there are plenty of 'em, that is back to the future. and i have an SWC; could also carry the film back if i really needed the wider fov in that one direction
Perhaps it is a clever attempt of saying that they woke up from the nightmare of their own creation when they blatantly tried exploiting their storied band name?
Maybe they now see their future as more connected to that storied past … only for real this time rather than stuff like the "Lunar" trying to parasitically gain prestige from past glories?
One can only hope.
- Marc
It seems you are presenting us with a non sequitur.
On one hand, wishing for an exclusive 6X6 Hasselblad digital back …
On the other hand, wishing it were so affordable as to make it attainable for mere morals and businesses.
Hasselblad does not make sensors. It depends on sensors from companies that do.
No one makes a production 6X6 sensor. Hasselblad would have to commission one. Care to guess what that would cost, (especially in the relatively small quantities MFD would command)?
There is a reason that the MFD camera makers (Hasselblad, Phase One and Pentax) all selected the Sony 50 meg crop-frame CMOS sensor … it is because Sony made one.
Longing for a 6X6 sensor would be better aimed at the companies that make sensors, not the camera companies that can only use what those sensor companies choose to R&D and produce.
- Marc
Jorgen Udvang
Subscriber Member
There's another challenge for Hasselblad should a larger, square sensor actually become available:
As things stand at the moment, the Hasselblad 6x6 cameras are discontinued. Their 6x6 competitor, Rolleiflex, which also offers AF and a camera that is currently being manufactured, would obviously be all over such a sensor. While Hasselblad's sales potential is limited to the digital backs, DHW is able to deliver modern cameras and lenses for such a back. There's enough room for both in the market, but I'm quite sure that DHW would be the company getting the most profit from this.
Somewhat repeating what Jörgen says;
Hasselblad H system does not cover 6x6. Except for this digital back the Hasselblad V system is already discontinued (and virtually dead in the pro market), and the resolution of the V lenses is not up to what digital MF users has come to expect.
Hy6 is the only digital platform out there for which a 6x6 (=56x56mm effective area on film) seems logical.
I'm also a bit skeptical about how popular a square format would actually be among modern photographers though. If you're going to crop it to rectangular 99% of the time, who wants to pay the extra for a custom 56x56mm sensor when you can get 56x41mm for a much lower price? Some artists surely would like the square format, but for general professional photography where the bulk sales need to be, is square format any good?
Hasselblad H system does not cover 6x6. Except for this digital back the Hasselblad V system is already discontinued (and virtually dead in the pro market), and the resolution of the V lenses is not up to what digital MF users has come to expect.
Hy6 is the only digital platform out there for which a 6x6 (=56x56mm effective area on film) seems logical.
I'm also a bit skeptical about how popular a square format would actually be among modern photographers though. If you're going to crop it to rectangular 99% of the time, who wants to pay the extra for a custom 56x56mm sensor when you can get 56x41mm for a much lower price? Some artists surely would like the square format, but for general professional photography where the bulk sales need to be, is square format any good?
That the V camera is currently discontinued hasn't stopped Hasselblad from making digital backs for them, including this new one.
I think most people looking for a 6X6 back are intent on using it for an existing Hasselblad V kit. The V user base is enormous compared to Rollie.
The problem is cost/price, not that there aren't plenty of potential CFV digital back buyers.
For V users, it would have to be a "custom" larger square sensor and be modestly priced. Thus, the non sequitur.
However, as they say … "Never Say Never" … but I sure wouldn't even bet a penny on it ever happening.
- Marc
Square seemed pretty good for many, many decades.
I commercially used a V for 40 years and frankly it was a delight to work with. You develop an eye for square composition, yet still could crop a rectangle either way without turning the camera or flipping the back or anything. Just shoot and crop … or not. Very nice work flow.
I shot all my wedding stuff as a square, and all the album makers made a square slip in mat. Commercially, the square allowed the Art Director to select the image format at will to fit all the various magazine and collaterial aspect ratios and still allow for bleed or gutter drop.
There is a reason the V was so popular, and why there is still a trillion of them out there. IMO, that's partially why Hasselblad discontinued the V, who would pay for new when there so many working Vs to be had at a fraction of new prices?
As to lenses, yes some may not hold up to excruciating 200% corner examination, but some do … and many others have a character that is still highly desirable. The 40IF is quite good, as is the 100/3.5 and the 180/4 … not to mention some of the APOs. I used some V lenses on 39 and 50 meg H cameras, and they brought a lot to the party on their own. There is a look and feel that is less antiseptic than many modern lenses deliver.
My 2¢
- Marc
Jorgen Udvang
Subscriber Member
But that's exactly my point, Marc; Hasselblad won't invest a penny in a purpose made sensor that won't help them sell a single camera body or lens. The CFV backs (except the first square one) all use off-the-shelf sensors and must generate a very healthy profit when you look at what Pentax can sell the same sensors for and include a complete camera body for free.
The fact that there are much fewer Rollei bodies out there is only an advantage for DHW. That increases the potential for selling new bodies should such a sensor appear.
The fact that there are much fewer Rollei bodies out there is only an advantage for DHW. That increases the potential for selling new bodies should such a sensor appear.