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 vs Credo 50/40?

darr

Well-known member
Contrary to many, I believe the V cameras are immensely handicapped with an only-horizontal sensor.

Can't help it. If I have to use a "vintage" WLF boxy camera in a dslr fashion, I'd rather get a totally modern, weather-proof 645Z. For the price of one back I can buy the Pentax with a couple of good lenses.
Hi Eduardo,

It goes back to the tools a photographer needs. The Pentax is a nice camera from what others have said about it, and some of the photos posted in the MF Image section produced by Pentax MFD photographers are absolutely beautiful IMO, but it is a closed system. A lot of the hoopla about the 50c is really about the versatility of the back with tech cameras.

It would be nice if the back was rotatable, but using a 90 degree prism finder or choosing to shoot square (with pixel loss) with a V series are tradeoffs some of us can live with because of the tech camera option.

Kind regards,
Darr
 

ErikKaffehr

Well-known member
Hi,

It is nice to have a MFDB I can mount vertically, but mounting/dismounting an expensive back in field is not really fun. A 90 degree finder combined with an L-bracket may be a reasonable option.

WLF and magnifier hood doesn't work for me. Makes the tripod top heavy and shooting downwards is a pain. It makes you stand bending over the camera.

Pentax got this right. They have mounting points below the camera but also on the left side. Obviously, they also have a 90 degree (or 180 degree) view finder.

Best regards
Erik


Hi Eduardo,

It goes back to the tools a photographer needs. The Pentax is a nice camera from what others have said about it, and some of the photos posted in the MF Image section produced by Pentax MFD photographers are absolutely beautiful IMO, but it is a closed system. A lot of the hoopla about the 50c is really about the versatility of the back with tech cameras.

It would be nice if the back was rotatable, but using a 90 degree prism finder or choosing to shoot square (with pixel loss) with a V series are tradeoffs some of us can live with because of the tech camera option.

Kind regards,
Darr
 
Last edited:

tjv

Active member
How hard would it be for Hasselblad to reincarnate the V system with a rotating sensor and updated lenses? Even just a rotating sensor, a la the old rotating Leaf backs would be great news for many. Surely they'd make a lot more money doing that?
 

jotloob

Subscriber Member
Hi,

It is nice to have a MFDB I can mount vertically, but mounting/dismounting an expensive back in field is not really fun. A 90 degree finder combined with an L-bracket may be a reasonable option.

WLF and magnifier hood doesn't work for me. Makes the tripod top heavy and shooting downwards is a pain. It makes you stand bending over the camera.

Pentax got this right. They have mounting points below the camera but also on the left side. Obviously, they also have a 90 degree (or 180 degree) view finder.

Best regards
Erik
How hard would it be for Hasselblad to reincarnate the V system with a rotating sensor and updated lenses? Even just a rotating sensor, a la the old rotating Leaf backs would be great news for many. Surely they'd make a lot more money doing that?

Have a look here . You should go through the whole thread and see all images .
http://www.getdpi.com/forum/medium-format-systems-digital-backs/44833-smart-flex-l-plate-2.html

The SMARTFLEX is just a great L-PLATE .
Small , light , stable and very practical . No need for an expensive rotating back . I have a SMARTFLEX myself and some other forum members too .
I have finished my Q-Plate rework for my SWC905 and can now use the SWC with the SMARTFLEX . Images of that combo will follow .
 

torger

Active member
Thanks for the clarification on live view on the V system.

Concerning the Pentax 645z and pricing, each time I've heard something from someone inside Hasselblad (or Leaf or Phase One) the story is that they've heard that the 645z don't sell that much, and that it's so cheap that they're either making very little money per unit or even losing money per unit. If it's true, if it's false but they believe it's true or if it's just marketing strategy towards customers I don't know.

As far as I can see the difference to a flagship 135 DSLR is the sensor, which should be more expensive, and the lower volumes. I think the sensor difference is widely exaggerated, sure they are expensive but it's like $1-2k extra, and if we just had to pay for the extra sensor cost MF cameras would be very affordable. Lower volumes must be the main reason for the high cost. To make a high volume product you need to commit at an early stage to make large volumes and that costs a lot of money, which I don't think Hassy have. You also need to take a large risk and assume that you can sell that large volume you intend to manufacture. I would guess that the current manufacturing facilities don't have the capacity to make large volumes so they would probably need to start manufacture in Thailand or similar countries too to be able to make volumes and keep down the cost, and starting up a new factory there is not a small thing, especially for a company that hasn't done it before.

The CFV-50c is some sort of special case, but I think one should see it as a spinoff product on the H5D-50c (ie the H5 sales pays the development costs), and Hassy wants to keep some maintenance of the V system for the sake of the brand.

Considering the state of the current products I think we can safely say that what Hasselblad wants to do in the MF space is to make money on what they already got with the least amount of new development. While there's nothing wrong with the backs and their software in terms of image quality, it's clear that not much development effort has been put into it to keep up with the latest popular features, they've had to prioritize heavily and arguably they have made better choice for photographers than Phase One which indeed have more modern backs and software, but instead a less capable body.

I would not expect any revolutionary product coming in the MF segment, other than what can be provided through third-party sensors, the Sony CMOS backs are pretty revolutionary in some senses. Considering the luxury products I think/hope it will continue as before as side projects to the main MF line, although they will probably try harder to sell some H and V units to enthusiasts, the odd product placement shown in another recent thread could be credited to that.

Photo enthusiasts and professionals don't necessarily need all the latest features, it's more important what result you can get. As a tech cam shooter always shooting from a tripod I certainly don't need much features from the back, and I can live with a CCD. The resulting image quality is what counts. However, to make that huge selling hit I think CMOS feature set is necessary, to be popular among the masses it needs to work close to a DSLR, as that is what people are used to today, today potential MF photographers rarely come from film like they did 10 years ago. The 645z is in the best position for this, but lags on studio pro features still. As a tech cam shooter I think it's unfortunate that they discontinued the CFV-50 rather than running in parallel (like H5D-50 and H5D-50c), but I guess they thought that the CCD version won't sell to enthusiasts due to lack of high ISO and live view, and maybe they're right.
 

ErikKaffehr

Well-known member
Hi,

My reflection is that the CFV 50c is an excellent choise if:

- You don't mind the 1.3X crop factor
- Don't need rotation on the back
- Can afford the price

It seems that the CFV 50c has decent quality live view. I want live view for focusing, so that is an important factor for me.

For me, the 1.1X crop factor of the P45+ I have now is OK, the 40/4 Distagon I have is quite OK. But I guess that I would not be happy with the Distagon 40 on 1.3X crop.

Regarding the cost, I would say that the P45+ strains my economy. I would really suggest considering needs and investments before jumping on the MFDB train.

CF lenses are quite OK and they are dirt cheap. Newer lenses may be better and focusing those old lenses without live view is not easy.

With Hasselblad H and Phase One bodies there is AF, don't know how accurate.

Another way to see is that you can buy a modern DSLR and a couple of outstanding lenses. Unfortunately, that choice is Nikon D800/D800E/D810 and the Sony A7r. The Sony Alpha 7r can take almost any lens but has some issues with shutter related vibration.

You can probably buy a Ninon D810 with both Otus lenses and a fine Zeiss ultra wide for the costs of the CFV 50c back, that may be a consideration, too.

Best regards
Erik



Hi all,

First off, I'm not a professional photographer. I take pictures for pleasure, and a substantial part of that is spending the time setting up and framing shots. That's why life never was better than when I had my CFV 16MP back, I was very happy with it, apart from the crappy low light performance. Then it died. That's two years ago now, and I've started shooting film again with my Hasselblad, developing my own C41/E6/B&W. Other than the latter type, this is messy, and expensive, and messy. And the results are not immediate.

So I bought what my budget allowed, and I got a Canon 5D MkIII with a few nice lenses. But that's just not working for me. I can't shoot with a tiny viewfinder.

Thus my decision to sell all of that gear, and bite the bullet, spend the money on a new digital back for my wonderful collection of V system Hasselblad lenses and bodies.

I've thus far essentially whittled it down to the CFV 50c (which is my preferred choice given my past history with their backs, and the negative experiences I've had with a PhaseOne that the salespeople so desperately were trying to push on me), then there's the Credo 50 which is almost twice the price, and the Credo 40, which 2/3rds the price, but also is just 40MP.

My quest for hands on reviews thus far has been met with mostly no results, in other forums (e.g. LL) there appears to be mostly a sales spiel being played by PhaseOne proponents, but nobody ever really seems to have first hand experience. To quote from a personal message I got on LL: the 50c makes wonderful pictures (as do all Sony chips - at least that was the inference), but the workflow is slow and outdated. That comes from someone who by their own admission has never held one or tried one.

Can anyone here with first hand experience of a comparative nature comment on my predicament?

Cheers

- Balt
 

arionelli

Member
Not only a suggestion because I am cogitating on this myself but if what you're after is the quality of the lenses you already have, wedded to the 50mp Sony CMOS sensor, what would the downsides be to adapting them to the 645Z Pentax? That is, assuming you can live with the optical viewfinder and not miss the higher flash sync, (theoretically) better shutter vibrations of the leaf shutters and 40mm wide angle limit (unless you can de-distort the 30mm fisheye). **By all accounts** the best of the V's are = or better than the native P's. Any more upsides?
 
Last edited:

arionelli

Member
To answer my own query, cost, I guess, a great vertical solution, live view/tilt screen, better handhold ability with fast shutter speeds...
 

Egor

Member
Go Credo40 kit, and don't look back!

I mean if you were willing to go all-in for Canon 5D sys, I think you will really reaalllly like the Credo40/DF+/SK lenses/C1 etc. Great bang for the buck!
No, you don't get the kine Live View like the Canon, but I don't gather that LiveView is what you value most (otherwise you'd stick with Canon LV, which is awesome and even better than IQ250/Credo50, which are great backs, btw, but pricey)
40MP is plenty of resolution.

Just my 2cents ;)
 
Top