Hasselblad X1D

[ErikKaffehr]

Hi Marc,

I appreciate your posting, as always.

When some interesting thing arrives I always check it again my needs. What benefits it offers and what limitations it has. So when I say that it does not match my needs it is not a negative. Very few cameras match my needs. I think it is a honest way to say that I am no potential buyer.

Yes, the leaf shutter is an advantage. Hasselblad started with an FP shutter (in the F1600 model) but the classical Hasselblad was the 500C. There was also 200F series with FP shutters and focal plane lenses. The H-models are leaf shutter.

I don't really see what is so bad about the Sony A7rII skipping the PC connector. Most photographers use strobes with remotes. Incidentally, the X1D also skips the PC connector and has Nikon compatible flash shoe, as far as I know.

I am not so enthusiastic about the Sony, except it fulfils my perceived needs. Mostly I just use custom buttons for things (pretty much any function can be put on any button) and assign some functions to the (Fn) menu. That said, sometimes miss shots while struggling with unwanted features. In which case I just say "Sony Engineering!"

From the Ove Bengtsson interview I gather that he sees the X1D as a base for the future. I would not be that surprised if they added an FP shutter on some future model.

I am pretty sure that Hasselblad is quite happy about the way the X1D has been received and considers all feedback from the market.

Regarding the positives, I am quite enthusiastic about Hasselblad making an EVF mirrorless design, and a real Hasselblad at that, keeping much of the Hasselblad DNA.

Something I like is that they designed a few really nice and compact lenses for the X1D. Those lenses are small, but have quite moderate maximum apertures. The moderate maximum aperture is not an issue for me, as I am not that much in that bookeh thing. So that is a "Positive" for me.

How well do the older HC lenses work with the X1D? Anyone tried? Conventional wisdom says that CDAF needs very fast focusing movements. They should work well with magnified live view. Have you tested magnified live view on the X1D?

Peaking may be interesting, too. Personally, I don't trust peaking based on the Sonys I have(*). But someone may develop peaking that works well.

A small reflection… There used to be a guy at a company called Steve Jobs, that guy had a good nose for things that sell and more or less create a market of their own. The X1D may be a product like that or be the future platform for Hasselblad.

Best regards
Erik

(*) I actually use peaking a lot when using tilts. Focus at center and tilt until "everything peaks". After that I go back with magnified LV.

Erik, you have been excruciatingly comprehensive in detailing why this camera is not for you. "Not for you" doesn't necessarily translate in to "Negatives" for everyone, and things you see as lacking others may see as "Positives". ...

 

[Erik Lundqvist]

I'd really like one of them, just for the fun factor. :clap:

Speaking of fun factor, my head is leaning to the "buy a CFV-50c digital back" tune lately, rather than buying an X1D. I've got the SWC, the 500CM and 50, 80, 120, and 150 lenses, and three A12 backs, three finders, ground glass back for the SWC, etc etc. A digital back would make all that lovely gear MUCH more useful, and more likely to be used.

Sigh.

G

Thought you were my X1D buddy. Why don't you sell all that stuff and join me on the forefront of camera innovation!

Yesterday I attended my second X1D demo. Obviously not much to add. I only really went there to try out using the ergonomics of using the AF-D button to unlock the focus point and then move it with the control wheels. This is not implemented yet of course, but I still wanted to try it out. I'd say it is certainly doable, but at the same time it is pretty much the worst implementation of moving the focus point on any modern camera with a joystick being the best. Pretty sure I will get used to it and it won't slow me down too much though. For still-life, architecture and landscape it is not a concern of course, but with portraits it would be. A tiny one.

 

[jerome_m]

Erik, you have been excruciatingly comprehensive in detailing why this camera is not for you. "Not for you" doesn't necessarily translate in to "Negatives" for everyone, and things you see as lacking others may see as "Positives".

Indeed people have different needs. I already said that Erik's list of criteria is not the same as mine, maybe I should explain a bit more.

The listed criteria were: "Better DR, Better resolution, Can use Tilt&Shift lenses, Long telephoto and zooms, Ultrawides, Can use older lenses with tilt (and shift), Can use Otus lenses and other speciality glass". To me, the list looks aligned with what sites like dpreview or dxo test. I think it is what the majority of the market wants and catered for by offers in 24x36 format.

I don't care for extra DR, I do need high resolution (I want to print very big), I am satisfied with the HTS for tilt and shift, I am satisfied by the HCD28 as far as ultrawides go, I rarely use long telephotos or zooms. I don't want specialty glass and doubt that Otus lenses would give better results on 24x36 than my HC50 does on a larger sensor.

On the other hand, I value consistency across the optical presence (as you do). I want a large, bright viewfinder, preferably optical. I want accurate focus where I want but do not need it to be fast, the true focus system is perfect for me. I use very few functions in my camera, so any menu system is good (I can tolerate a poor menu system for the few occasions where I need a special function). I like the colours of Hasselblad cameras very much.

With there criteria, my old H4D-50 is better than the new X1D. I would like the X1D, of course, because it is smaller and haptics are quite good (I tested a pre-production model), but reason tells me that it is less adapted to my needs than what I have. If I were to change, I would probably get a H6D-100 and the only reason for me would be the higher resolution.

 

[fotografz]

Erik,

The reason I was disappointed that the A7 cameras did not have a simple PC connection is because many social/event/corporate photographers, including myself, use radio triggered off-camera strobes as key ... and an on-camera TTL speed-light in the hot-shoe for fill ... this provides maximum roaming ability at functions or weddings. If the hot-shoe is occupied by a radio sender then the option of a TTL speed-light for fill is eliminated. The PC connection allows placement of the radio sender on a grip bracket hard-wired to the camera. Every Nikon, Canon I've owned, and even the Sony A900 and A99 SLT, allowed me to work this way. (See example attached using this "Directional Strobe Key/TTL Speed-Light Fill" technique with a Sony A99).

Not until just recently have some 3rd party speed-lights been made with the newer multi-function Sony foot ... and a few, like the big assed Nissan Di700A, have a off-camera PC terminal built-into the speed-light (which finally solved my problem). However, A7 camera compatibly sized speed-lights have no PC terminal, nor do any of the Sony speed-lights.

Since the X1D uses Nikon flash protocols, it remains to be seen whether their proprietary off-camera terminal can be used to trigger strobes. The good thing about Nikon is the vast range of choices when solving lighting configuration problems. Nikon and Canon always get all the cool innovations. For one example, the Profoto AIR Nikon Transceiver provides TTL options when using Profoto AIR lighting (which I use). To date there is no Sony version.

Also, as a last resort, when all else fails (i.e., radio senders), if you have a PC terminal you can hard-wire to the strobe ... which is why strobes come with long PC cords. I never leave for a job without one. With the A7 cameras I have to also remember to take a PC terminal for the hot-shoe.

In my experience, 3.2 and 3.5 max apertures for MFD are pretty decent. The XCD-90/3.2 focuses down to 2.3', which at f/3.2 will be pretty shallow DOF and should provide nice bokeh depending on distance to background. Same for the XCD-45/3.5 which focuses as close as 1.3' which isn't too bad.

When you say that you have missed shots due to Sony's mind-boggling mess of an interface, I can only say I agree. So have I, and I cannot afford to miss when shooting events or weddings:banghead: For the way I work, Sony A7s have turned out to be a mistake, and Nikon/Canon DSLRs out-perform them in every way that matters to me. The Sony A99 was also a lot better camera IMHO. I bought the A7 hype, and now am stuck with it. Fortunately I'm phase out of weddings and events, so it is less of an issue than it was a while ago.

- Marc

 

[ErikKaffehr]

Hi Marc,

Thanks for explaining… always learning from your postings!

I have learned that Minolta/Sony always calls their top model something with 9. I had Minolta 900, 9Xi and there was a Dynax 9. With Sony there was the Alpha 900 and the Alpha 99. The niner models have PC-connectors the model below do not. The niners are "pro models" but I don't think any Sony is a pro system, really. They are high end amateur cameras that often are adequate for the job.

The main force causing me to switch models was live view for focusing. The other reason I switched to the A7#? is that I feel that the future belongs to mirrorless.

Being able to use tilts was essential for me, wanted to have that capability since 25-30 years. I actually have a Flexbody for Hasselblad, and it worked fine in the living room, that sometimes serves as studio, but was not workable outdoors.

Just to say, I don't know if you have considered this, but on a camera using EFSC (Electronic First Shutter Curtain) the shutter doesn't close before exposure, it is just doing a sweeping reset on the sensor. The sweep is adjusted to the speed of the second curtain, so at short shutter times the reset and the second curtain travel in sync.

So, the shutter is never opened physically before exposure but needs to be rewound after exposure.

The menu system between the A7?# and the Alpha 99 are very similar, but the A7?# has more options. My major issue is "You can't do that in this mode". Why can't I do it and what mode am I in? It is like my favourite operating system, UNIX. You can ask your Unix 'who am I' or 'whoami' and get two different answers.

But, I don't think I would go back to the Alpha 99, it feels old or clumsy.

I know Hans Kruse, a Landscape photographer arranging workshops in Italy and Scotland, on the latest workshop he had his Canon 5DsR and I had my A7rII. So he tried my A7rII with his Canon gear and I checked out his Canon. We sort of discussed about the system and I think we pretty much agreed that there was little reason for Canon users to switch to Sony.

On the other hand, the A7rII works for me and does everything I ask from it pretty well. I use it with Canon lenses, mostly, I am not sure I like Sony's lens programme. The three Canon lenses I have (1-35/4L, 24/3.5 TSE LII, and 24-105/4L) are excellent at best and quite OK mostly, and they give me some shift and full tilt between 16 and 105 mm. Canon would not give me that capability, replacing the mirror box with a T&S adapter is what is making the Sony so flexible.

Best regards
Erik

Erik,

The reason I was disappointed that the A7 cameras did not have a simple PC connection is because many social/event/corporate photographers, including myself, use radio triggered off-camera strobes as key ... and an on-camera TTL speed-light in the hot-shoe for fill ... this provides maximum roaming ability at functions or weddings. If the hot-shoe is occupied by a radio sender then the option of a TTL speed-light for fill is eliminated. The PC connection allows placement of the radio sender on a grip bracket hard-wired to the camera. Every Nikon, Canon I've owned, and even the Sony A900 and A99 SLT, allowed me to work this way. (See example attached using this "Directional Strobe Key/TTL Speed-Light Fill" technique with a Sony A99).

Not until just recently have some 3rd party speed-lights been made with the newer multi-function Sony foot ... and a few, like the big assed Nissan Di700A, have a off-camera PC terminal built-into the speed-light (which finally solved my problem). However, A7 camera compatibly sized speed-lights have no PC terminal, nor do any of the Sony speed-lights.

Since the X1D uses Nikon flash protocols, it remains to be seen whether their proprietary off-camera terminal can be used to trigger strobes. The good thing about Nikon is the vast range of choices when solving lighting configuration problems. Nikon and Canon always get all the cool innovations. For one example, the Profoto AIR Nikon Transceiver provides TTL options when using Profoto AIR lighting (which I use). To date there is no Sony version.

Also, as a last resort, when all else fails (i.e., radio senders), if you have a PC terminal you can hard-wire to the strobe ... which is why strobes come with long PC cords. I never leave for a job without one. With the A7 cameras I have to also remember to take a PC terminal for the hot-shoe.

In my experience, 3.2 and 3.5 max apertures for MFD are pretty decent. The XCD-90/3.2 focuses down to 2.3', which at f/3.2 will be pretty shallow DOF and should provide nice bokeh depending on distance to background. Same for the XCD-45/3.5 which focuses as close as 1.3' which isn't too bad.

When you say that you have missed shots due to Sony's mind-boggling mess of an interface, I can only say I agree. So have I, and I cannot afford to miss when shooting events or weddings:banghead: For the way I work, Sony A7s have turned out to be a mistake, and Nikon/Canon DSLRs out-perform them in every way that matters to me. The Sony A99 was also a lot better camera IMHO. I bought the A7 hype, and now am stuck with it. Fortunately I'm phase out of weddings and events, so it is less of an issue than it was a while ago.

- Marc

View attachment 121058

 

[Godfrey]

Thought you were my X1D buddy. Why don't you sell all that stuff and join me on the forefront of camera innovation!

Yesterday I attended my second X1D demo. Obviously not much to add. I only really went there to try out using the ergonomics of using the AF-D button to unlock the focus point and then move it with the control wheels. This is not implemented yet of course, but I still wanted to try it out. I'd say it is certainly doable, but at the same time it is pretty much the worst implementation of moving the focus point on any modern camera with a joystick being the best. Pretty sure I will get used to it and it won't slow me down too much though. For still-life, architecture and landscape it is not a concern of course, but with portraits it would be. A tiny one.

The fat lady hasn't sung yet.

But ... The X1D is rather close to the Leica SL in overall ergonomics, feel, and usage model. My SL kit is pretty extensive already and I like the camera a great deal, so I'm not letting that go. The big sensor and a short enough lens could tip the balance, but that will take a while to surface. Meanwhile, I will not sell the SWC nor the 500CM—I just like them too much, have a bunch of lenses that I like for the 500CM, and I'd lose too much money in the transition. Putting a digital back on them, even if its format is different and thus creates a different camera entirely, expands the value of my 'investment' and makes it more useful. And I only have so much money to spend...

We shall see. I don't need camera innovation so much as I need to make photographs.

I suspect that the focus point targeting on the X1D would be fine for me. I only rarely move the focus point anyway, just like I only rarely use autofocus. These things are amongst my least important criteria in assessing a camera's suitability for my use. They're nice conveniences that I occasionally take advantage of, nothing more.

G

 

[ErikKaffehr]

Hi Godfrey,

Have you checked magnified live view? How do you choose the point to magnify? Double click? How does it work?

You will need it for manual focus…

Best regards
Erik

The fat lady hasn't sung yet.

But ... The X1D is rather close to the Leica SL in overall ergonomics, feel, and usage model. My SL kit is pretty extensive already and I like the camera a great deal, so I'm not letting that go. The big sensor and a short enough lens could tip the balance, but that will take a while to surface. Meanwhile, I will not sell the SWC nor the 500CM—I just like them too much, have a bunch of lenses that I like for the 500CM, and I'd lose too much money in the transition. Putting a digital back on them, even if its format is different and thus creates a different camera entirely, expands the value of my 'investment' and makes it more useful. And I only have so much money to spend...

We shall see. I don't need camera innovation so much as I need to make photographs.

I suspect that the focus point targeting on the X1D would be fine for me. I only rarely move the focus point anyway, just like I only rarely use autofocus. These things are amongst my least important criteria in assessing a camera's suitability for my use. They're nice conveniences that I occasionally take advantage of, nothing more.

G

 

[Godfrey]

Have you checked magnified live view? How do you choose the point to magnify? Double click? How does it work?
You will need it for manual focus…

I don't know why that would be. I've been focusing the Hasselblad 500CM for years with no aids other than a magnifier, and the SWC works fine setting the focus by scale.
The CFV-50c allows you to open the shutter, magnify, set a focus point for critical focus accuracy, etc. Pretty easy stuff. It's not quick to do so ... but it works fine.

Oh, you mean the X1D. I didn't see the magnify function at all when I saw it. I found it quite easy to focus with no aids turned on at all.

G

 

[BANKER1]

deleted

 

[ErikKaffehr]

Hi,

My experience is that I would give up a lot of detail if I would not use the best focusing methods available. Check the image below:

It shows an actual pixels shot of a US test target, the red, blue and yellow markings show what I could resolve visually with:

• The PM5 (3X) viewfinder, unaided (red)
• The Hartblei view finder loupe (4X) (blue)
• The PM5 (3X) combined with the Zeiss Victory 3X monocular, yielding 9X magnification (yellow)

I was looking at the viewfinder image with different options and see which groups I could resolve. Very clearly, none of the tools came close to sensor resolution.

Another way to see it. DoF markings on the lens are calculated for CoC of 1/15 of a millimeter, that is around 67 microns. The area of that CoC is 3500 square microns. The area of a pixel is 6.8 x 6.8, that is around 46 microns on my P45+. So 76 pixels fit within the area that DoF scale finds sharp. The X1D has smaller pixels, so it needs even more accurate focusing.

If you consider technical cameras like the Alpa, they have calibrated focusing rings that turn several revolutions. That kind of precision may be needed for ultimate focus accuracy. With AF on the X1D, no problem, AF is using contrast detection and that technique is essentially 100% accurate unless it misses.

Check out this essay: Joseph Holmes - News: Medium Format Methods for Sharpness

Best regards
Erik

I don't know why that would be. I've been focusing the Hasselblad 500CM for years with no aids other than a magnifier, and the SWC works fine setting the focus by scale.
The CFV-50c allows you to open the shutter, magnify, set a focus point for critical focus accuracy, etc. Pretty easy stuff. It's not quick to do so ... but it works fine.

Oh, you mean the X1D. I didn't see the magnify function at all when I saw it. I found it quite easy to focus with no aids turned on at all.

G

 

[dennishuang]

Thought you were my X1D buddy. Why don't you sell all that stuff and join me on the forefront of camera innovation!

Yesterday I attended my second X1D demo. Obviously not much to add. I only really went there to try out using the ergonomics of using the AF-D button to unlock the focus point and then move it with the control wheels. This is not implemented yet of course, but I still wanted to try it out. I'd say it is certainly doable, but at the same time it is pretty much the worst implementation of moving the focus point on any modern camera with a joystick being the best. Pretty sure I will get used to it and it won't slow me down too much though. For still-life, architecture and landscape it is not a concern of course, but with portraits it would be. A tiny one.

Erik,

I appreciate that insight. I was interested in the X1D but was concerned about the implementation for moving the focus point. I shoot primarily people. I don't think the X1D would be a good fit for me.

 

[jerome_m]

Hi,

My experience is that I would give up a lot of detail if I would not use the best focusing methods available. Check the image below:

It shows an actual pixels shot of a US test target, the red, blue and yellow markings show what I could resolve visually

But then, most people do not photography exclusively test charts. If you took a photograph of, say, a beautiful model, you may just find out that the difference between the three focussing methods may just be that for one, one eye is in focus and for the other, the other eye is in focus.

 

[Erik Lundqvist]

Erik,

I appreciate that insight. I was interested in the X1D but was concerned about the implementation for moving the focus point. I shoot primarily people. I don't think the X1D would be a good fit for me.

I primarily shoot people as well, but I don't think it is a show stopper. Will it be as fast as a joystick as on the X-Pro2 and most DSLRs of course not, but I don't think it will be unworkable. My advice is to try it out yourself.

 

[Godfrey]

Hi,

My experience is that I would give up a lot of detail if I would not use the best focusing methods available. Check the image below:

...

I spend very very little of my photographic time shooting pictures of resolution test charts.

G

 

[Godfrey]

I appreciate that insight. I was interested in the X1D but was concerned about the implementation for moving the focus point. I shoot primarily people. I don't think the X1D would be a good fit for me.

I've never moved the focusing point around on my cameras, AF or MF, when shooting photos of people. At all.

I focus, set the aperture to accommodate the necessary depth of field to get eyes in focus along with nose and near-side ear, then look for the expressions I want, making an exposure each time I think there's an reasonable picture to be had. The notion is to fuss with the camera as little as possible in order to engage with the person/persons being photographed.

G

 

[hcubell]

I spend very very little of my photographic time shooting pictures of resolution test charts.

G

You also don't issue spreadsheets announcing all of the reasons why a newly released camera that you were never going to buy doesn't meet your needs.

 

[PeterA]

Any feedback on the camera's viewfinder gents? How does it compare to the Sony A7 series or better still the SL finder?

 

[Erik Lundqvist]

You also don't issue spreadsheets announcing all of the reasons why a newly released camera that you were never going to buy doesn't meet your needs.

Because who has the time to do that?

Amazing portfolio by the way Howard. Tuscany is very high up on my list of places to visit and photograph.

 

[hcubell]

Because who has the time to do that?

Amazing portfolio by the way Howard. Tuscany is very high up on my list of places to visit and photograph.

Thanks, Erik. Tuscany is highly recommended. Just an exquisite landscape. As are the food and wine.

 

[jerome_m]

Any feedback on the camera's viewfinder gents? How does it compare to the Sony A7 series or better still the SL finder?

It is quite similar to the A7 and a bit less good than the SL (tried a demo model a month ago).