siddhaarta
Member
Sure, but Ming says: "rear curtain remains mechanical", this would only make sense if he refers to "curtain" when he actually means the leaf shutter blades.
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 X1D
- Thread starter cerett
- Start date
Godfrey
Well-known member
I went to the X1D road show demo in Palo Alto during my lunch break today, and handled two prototypes (both early functioning hardware and near final hardware) with the 45 and 90 mm lenses. Many details of the firmware were not yet solidified in either of these prototypes, but there was enough to get a sense of the camera. My impressions:
- very solid, well-balanced feel and balance with both lenses
- button placements are excellent
- shutter sound is solid, light and crisp, similar volume level to my SL as a first impression. Very restrained overall.
- EVF is very good; I found it easy to manually focus either lens even without magnification (I didn't find the control for that, if it was implemented). This also says that the lenses are contrasty and clean-imaging wide open.
- at least one of the tech reps said that the X1D supports wired tethering as well as wireless control. This means a wired remote could be made using the USB port; there is no separate port for a wired remote. No wired remote exists at present.
- AF seemed fine on speed and accuracy to me, but given how early the fw in both of these prototypes is and how little I use AF there's little else credible I could say about it.
- We talked a little bit about future lenses. The 30mm we've all heard about was mentioned, what to follow that depends (most likely) on what customer feedback highlights.
- The touch screen control seems pretty easy to learn and reasonably quick in use.
My overall impression is that this is a camera that will do Hasselblad very well and be appealing to a broad audience of users. It's not a replacement for my other cameras, for which I have a substantial lens portfolio, but presuming that the ultra-wide lens I would like is produced, I would have no reservations about owning/using one. The design, feel, and balance of the camera as a package is outstanding. I can take it on faith at this point that the sensor is excellent and the lenses' quality is par for their price.
The local store sales contact gave me his card and said he expects production demo units to arrive within a few weeks, when I'll be able to experiment with it on a longer basis and take some exposures home to work with.
G
- very solid, well-balanced feel and balance with both lenses
- button placements are excellent
- shutter sound is solid, light and crisp, similar volume level to my SL as a first impression. Very restrained overall.
- EVF is very good; I found it easy to manually focus either lens even without magnification (I didn't find the control for that, if it was implemented). This also says that the lenses are contrasty and clean-imaging wide open.
- at least one of the tech reps said that the X1D supports wired tethering as well as wireless control. This means a wired remote could be made using the USB port; there is no separate port for a wired remote. No wired remote exists at present.
- AF seemed fine on speed and accuracy to me, but given how early the fw in both of these prototypes is and how little I use AF there's little else credible I could say about it.
- We talked a little bit about future lenses. The 30mm we've all heard about was mentioned, what to follow that depends (most likely) on what customer feedback highlights.
- The touch screen control seems pretty easy to learn and reasonably quick in use.
My overall impression is that this is a camera that will do Hasselblad very well and be appealing to a broad audience of users. It's not a replacement for my other cameras, for which I have a substantial lens portfolio, but presuming that the ultra-wide lens I would like is produced, I would have no reservations about owning/using one. The design, feel, and balance of the camera as a package is outstanding. I can take it on faith at this point that the sensor is excellent and the lenses' quality is par for their price.
The local store sales contact gave me his card and said he expects production demo units to arrive within a few weeks, when I'll be able to experiment with it on a longer basis and take some exposures home to work with.
G
Last edited:
Mr.Gale
Member
I went to the demo in Palo alto today and all I can say is WOW! I want one. The camera is smaller than I thought, maybe half the size of my D810. The user interface looks good with buttons you can program. The one thing I was not impressed with is the EVF, very high contrast (but the demo was inside), but what I did like is when you move the camera to your eye it automatically switches from back view to the viewfinder. What I didn't check is what info is displayed in the viewfinder. No shutter release port but you can control the camera with you smartphone to tablet, kind of like the Cam Ranger.
I think they are going to sell a lot of these!
Mr.Gale
I think they are going to sell a lot of these!
Mr.Gale
Godfrey
Well-known member
I don't think all the EVF/LCD display options were implemented yet. A "rule of thirds" grid was available, the viewfinder display had all the essentials (ISO, shutter setting, aperture setting, manual metering readout, and EV compensation setting in auto modes). Like the rest of the camera, it seemed a clean and spare display design.
etrigan63
Active member
ErikKaffehr
Well-known member
Hi,
As I have posted in my original posting, it may be possible to shorten exposure time and response time by resetting the sensor instead of closing the leaf shutter.
If the 44x33 mm CMOS sensor has an EFCS option it may be used for that, but it would be much more optimal to just reset the sensor and start the exposure and close the leaf shutter to end the exposure.
Talking about an electronic first curtain indicates a sweeping reset, because that is what EFCS does. Ming Thein also clearly talks about a mechanical second curtain, which the X1D clearly lacks.
So, that leaves me with a clear impression of sloppy writing.
Best regards
Erik
As I have posted in my original posting, it may be possible to shorten exposure time and response time by resetting the sensor instead of closing the leaf shutter.
If the 44x33 mm CMOS sensor has an EFCS option it may be used for that, but it would be much more optimal to just reset the sensor and start the exposure and close the leaf shutter to end the exposure.
Talking about an electronic first curtain indicates a sweeping reset, because that is what EFCS does. Ming Thein also clearly talks about a mechanical second curtain, which the X1D clearly lacks.
So, that leaves me with a clear impression of sloppy writing.
Best regards
Erik
etrigan63
Active member
Maybe Ming was averse to coining a new phrase. To my knowledge, this is the first interchangeable lens mirrorless camera with leaf shutters. Therefore someone has to come up with appropriate terminology. Yes, the Sony RX1 & Fuji X100 (and their descendants) had leaf shutters, but those are fixed mount cameras. Perhaps when the manual is published, we will see what the Swedish engineers call it.
Miller
Member
Erik,
I think that Ming Thein merely adheres to terminology any photographer will understand.
E.g., the H series have a rear sync flash mode, as is described in the manuals, although they don't have a focal plane shutter.
It may not be technically accurate, but we all can understand the principle.
I suppose the techniques to implement 1/2000 shutter speed is the same as on the H6D. Which makes me wonder if the same shutters are used in both lens series. If not, the new shutters for both platforms may well have been developed in conjunction.
I very much admire the way in which Hasselblad have adapted H platform techniques into the X1D.
I think that Ming Thein merely adheres to terminology any photographer will understand.
E.g., the H series have a rear sync flash mode, as is described in the manuals, although they don't have a focal plane shutter.
It may not be technically accurate, but we all can understand the principle.
I suppose the techniques to implement 1/2000 shutter speed is the same as on the H6D. Which makes me wonder if the same shutters are used in both lens series. If not, the new shutters for both platforms may well have been developed in conjunction.
I very much admire the way in which Hasselblad have adapted H platform techniques into the X1D.
Christopher
Active member
Regards to EFCS, couldn't that someone with a XF + IQ x50 Test. ( or the same sensor. )
I only have my 100 here and there it is easy to "see" hear the EFCS at work. Just use vibration delay mode on the XF and you will hear shutter opening st the beginning at the count down and no sound at the beginning of the exposure. The shutter is only closing after it's done.
For comparison one can use the timer delay instead of the vibration delay. In this mode EFCS is not used (WHY PHASE ?!?) and you can hear the difference quit easily.
I only have my 100 here and there it is easy to "see" hear the EFCS at work. Just use vibration delay mode on the XF and you will hear shutter opening st the beginning at the count down and no sound at the beginning of the exposure. The shutter is only closing after it's done.
For comparison one can use the timer delay instead of the vibration delay. In this mode EFCS is not used (WHY PHASE ?!?) and you can hear the difference quit easily.
Yes same shutters in both to the best of my knowledge.
ErikKaffehr
Well-known member
Hi Rob,
Unfortunately I have noted some inaccuracies in another Hasselblad oriented article by Ming Thein.
Take this article: https://blog.mingthein.com/2013/01/26/intro-to-hasselblad-v-series/
Let's look at this statement: "Bodies
Generally, for a shooter, you want to look at buy the 500-series (also known as the V series; includes 500, 500C, 500C/M, 501, 501C, 501C/M, 503CW, 503CX etc). The C means that it uses C-mount lenses which have built in Copal leaf shutters; anything with /M means upgraded/ modified"
What is the issue with that? Well, no Hasselblad V-series camera ever had a Copal shutter. The original C-series had Synchro-Compur while the later CF models all use Prontor shutters. What may be of a certain importance that the Prontor shutters are regarded to be much more reliable than the Synchro-Compurs. But, that may be an urban myth.
So, let's check this statement: "CF lenses are the best bang for the buck. They have coupled aperture/shutter speed rings (with the exception of the 80/2.8 CF T*) and upgraded shutter mechanisms; CFE and CFI lenses are later models with electronic coupling and are several times more expensive than CF, often for no particularly good reason. "
The CF lenses have normally decoupled aperture/shutter speed rings. There is a button you can press to couple the rings. The C-series have continuously coupled rings. As said before CF-lenses have Prontor shutters. CFi lenses don't have electronic couplings. Hasselblad claims that the CFi lenses are significantly improved regarding light shielding, even if I have my doubts. The CFE lenses allow for aperture coupled metering on F-series bodies. With CFi and older you need to manually set aperture the metering prism and manually set the EV value on the exposure scale.
So, Ming Thein says: "The good lenses – all CF or higher – are the 40/4 Distagon FLE, the 50/4 Distagon FLE, the 80/2.8 Planar, 120/4 Makro-Planar, 150/4 Planar and 180/4 Planar. These are roughly 24, 28, 45-50, 85, 100 and 120 equivalents. The FLE lenses have a separate correction ring for optimising close-range performance."
A small issue with that statement is that two of those lenses don't actually exist. The 150/4 and the 180/4 are not Planars but Sonnars. Saying that the 40/4 Distagon FLE is a good lens may be over the edge, it suffers from severe astigmatism and probably quite extensive field curvature. More importantly, Hasselblad actually has a truly excellent 40/4 Distagon, the Distagon® T* 4/40 IF CFE. The later lens is clearly superior to the older versions. I clearly feel the new lens deserve a mention…
The Planar 100/3.5 CF (in all vesions) is know to be a superior lens at long distances. Zeiss recommends the Planar 100/3.5 CF if the subject area is above 1 square meter and the Planar 120/4 CF below that. The Planar 120/4 CF has good performance at macro distances, but has a lot of field curvature at long distances. Worth mentioning, is it not?
The Distagon 60/3.5 is a decent lens, in the same league as the 50/4.
I own or have owned most of those lenses.
Distagon 40/4 CF FLE, (Distagon 50/4 CF FLE), Distagon 60/3.5 CF, Planar 80/2.8 CFE, Planar 100/3.5 CF, (Planar 120/4 CF), Planar 120/4 CFi, (Sonnar 150/4 C T*), (Sonnar 150/4 CF) and the Sonnar 180/4 CFi. The lenses in parenthesis are the ones I no longer have. I have been shooting those lenses with a 555/ELD combined with a Phase One P45+ back. So, I feel I have some experience with the system and with the lenses.
Just to say, I don't think the information from Ming Thein is bad, just that his writing is not accurate, with quite a few factual errors. I perhaps also feel some bias.
Just to complement, here are MTF data for a few lenses, first the two 40/4 Distagons:
Followed by the Planars 120/4 and 100/3.5 at infinity:
Just to say, the Makro Planar 120/4 is pretty good at close up range, so claiming it is a good lens is not far fetched, assuming that you intend to shoot close up:
Best regards
Erik
Unfortunately I have noted some inaccuracies in another Hasselblad oriented article by Ming Thein.
Take this article: https://blog.mingthein.com/2013/01/26/intro-to-hasselblad-v-series/
Let's look at this statement: "Bodies
Generally, for a shooter, you want to look at buy the 500-series (also known as the V series; includes 500, 500C, 500C/M, 501, 501C, 501C/M, 503CW, 503CX etc). The C means that it uses C-mount lenses which have built in Copal leaf shutters; anything with /M means upgraded/ modified"
What is the issue with that? Well, no Hasselblad V-series camera ever had a Copal shutter. The original C-series had Synchro-Compur while the later CF models all use Prontor shutters. What may be of a certain importance that the Prontor shutters are regarded to be much more reliable than the Synchro-Compurs. But, that may be an urban myth.
So, let's check this statement: "CF lenses are the best bang for the buck. They have coupled aperture/shutter speed rings (with the exception of the 80/2.8 CF T*) and upgraded shutter mechanisms; CFE and CFI lenses are later models with electronic coupling and are several times more expensive than CF, often for no particularly good reason. "
The CF lenses have normally decoupled aperture/shutter speed rings. There is a button you can press to couple the rings. The C-series have continuously coupled rings. As said before CF-lenses have Prontor shutters. CFi lenses don't have electronic couplings. Hasselblad claims that the CFi lenses are significantly improved regarding light shielding, even if I have my doubts. The CFE lenses allow for aperture coupled metering on F-series bodies. With CFi and older you need to manually set aperture the metering prism and manually set the EV value on the exposure scale.
So, Ming Thein says: "The good lenses – all CF or higher – are the 40/4 Distagon FLE, the 50/4 Distagon FLE, the 80/2.8 Planar, 120/4 Makro-Planar, 150/4 Planar and 180/4 Planar. These are roughly 24, 28, 45-50, 85, 100 and 120 equivalents. The FLE lenses have a separate correction ring for optimising close-range performance."
A small issue with that statement is that two of those lenses don't actually exist. The 150/4 and the 180/4 are not Planars but Sonnars. Saying that the 40/4 Distagon FLE is a good lens may be over the edge, it suffers from severe astigmatism and probably quite extensive field curvature. More importantly, Hasselblad actually has a truly excellent 40/4 Distagon, the Distagon® T* 4/40 IF CFE. The later lens is clearly superior to the older versions. I clearly feel the new lens deserve a mention…
The Planar 100/3.5 CF (in all vesions) is know to be a superior lens at long distances. Zeiss recommends the Planar 100/3.5 CF if the subject area is above 1 square meter and the Planar 120/4 CF below that. The Planar 120/4 CF has good performance at macro distances, but has a lot of field curvature at long distances. Worth mentioning, is it not?
The Distagon 60/3.5 is a decent lens, in the same league as the 50/4.
I own or have owned most of those lenses.
Distagon 40/4 CF FLE, (Distagon 50/4 CF FLE), Distagon 60/3.5 CF, Planar 80/2.8 CFE, Planar 100/3.5 CF, (Planar 120/4 CF), Planar 120/4 CFi, (Sonnar 150/4 C T*), (Sonnar 150/4 CF) and the Sonnar 180/4 CFi. The lenses in parenthesis are the ones I no longer have. I have been shooting those lenses with a 555/ELD combined with a Phase One P45+ back. So, I feel I have some experience with the system and with the lenses.
Just to say, I don't think the information from Ming Thein is bad, just that his writing is not accurate, with quite a few factual errors. I perhaps also feel some bias.
Just to complement, here are MTF data for a few lenses, first the two 40/4 Distagons:
Followed by the Planars 120/4 and 100/3.5 at infinity:
Just to say, the Makro Planar 120/4 is pretty good at close up range, so claiming it is a good lens is not far fetched, assuming that you intend to shoot close up:
Best regards
Erik
stephengilbert
Active member
So what.
Thanks Erik for pointing that out and for providing info re: the V-system. I don't think slight inacurracies really matter though in the context of the X1D. MT is currently shooting with the H5D-50c, H6D-50c, the CFV-50c, and now the X1D and AFAIK has all of them in hand. As he's shooting with and in possession of 4 different Hasselblads using the same sensor, he's probably more qualified than anyone else out there (save Hasselblad themselves) to comment on the performance of the X1D (especially in comparison to other similar Hasselblad models, the 645z he owned, D810 + Otus, etc) despite some potential bias and potential inaccuracies.
ErikKaffehr
Well-known member
Hi,
May be.
On the other hand I feel quite strongly that if you are publishing info you should care about providing accurate info.
Best regards
Erik
May be.
On the other hand I feel quite strongly that if you are publishing info you should care about providing accurate info.
Best regards
Erik
AreBee
Member
We all make mistakes, Erik, and for what it's worth, Ming Thein strikes me as someone who would welcome factually incorrect information being brought to his attention so that it can be corrected.
However, there is no argument from me that your rebuttal is fair and well made. I'm not sure I consider Ming Thein to be biased to the extent that you do, but unlike your argument, that is a matter of difference in opinion.
I am sure he cares. Compared to 95% of the so-called reviews out there by bloggers, Ming Thein strikes me as a pretty thoughtful guy. To be fair, you make literally hundreds of statements that are passed off as fact but are really anecdotal recollections of others from the internet that are not based upon direct, personal experience or testing. Nobody knows everything. And nobody here is going to make a decision on buying the X1D based upon Ming Thein's observations. You need to take EVERYTHING on the internet with a grain of salt, but it is interesting to read about his experience as he is one of the first photographers out in the wild to have access to the X1D who is sharing that experience and some files. BTW, I don't pay too much attention to the files at this point. If there is one thing about the X1D I have confidence about is that the files will be the equal of the files from the H5D-50c and the H6D-50c. If you have actually worked with those cameras and are happy with the files, that box is checked.
Well said, Howard. I agree with most everything you say.
The internet is a place where everybody has an opinion and it is up to the reader to accept it or not. There is no doubt in my mind that the X1D is going to take great pictures. Whether the process is going to be easy or user friendly and how it would compare with the existing systems etc are the great unknowns. These are things nobody can answer fully right now but we are all so used to instant gratification that it fuels all the speculation that is going on.
I am sure there are many, many well qualified photographers with the experience and knowledge of Hasselblad systems to rival MT who are silent and do not visit this or other forums and do not write blogs. The only people who currently have access to the X1D are those who are affiliated with the company in some fashion or the other. That by the very nature of things makes them biased towards the product. Heck, we are all biased in so many ways. This is just another aspect of human behavior. So while I do appreciate the information coming from MT's blog, it would be foolish of me to believe that it is 100% accurate and impartial.
Nevertheless, it is still worth reading and still worth discussing.
siddhaarta
Member
In the meantime Ming made it clear that the second "curtain" are the blades of the leaf shutter closing.
etrigan63
Active member
That's what I said. Anyway this is a bit of a trivial thing, isn't it?