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!

H6d-100c or xf iq3100 for camera and tech cam use?

Boinger

Active member
What do you think would be a better system ? I have a h6d on order but I am being enticed to the iq3100 by the dealers.

I can get the iq3100 now buthat the h6d is much cheaper.

And the true focus sounds like a great system. Any thoughts?
 
I'll let the others explain the battery or other things. I just wanted to mention one thing I heard from my friend:

The current version of Phocus from Hasselblad can (almost or completely) eliminate the vertical bandings (a kind of artifact mostly visible when you shift a tech cam lens to the extreme and push clarity of the sky) with their Scene Calibration function, while the current version of Capture One from Phase One still cannot cure this with their LCC function.

I have not confirmed this myself. Maybe someone else could help clarify this.

I've been using Phase One so I can't comment much on the Hasselblad offering. Keep in mind that Alpa and Phase One had collaborated the A-series with official support.

Spec-wise, they are very similar.
 

Nick-T

New member
Hasselblad are giving people H6D50s with a no penalty upgrade to the 100 when they become available just so you know.

True focus is indeed great and works as advertised.
 

Jamgolf

Member
I had been excited about the announcement of H6D-100 and as a price sensitive buyer I really thought that might be my upgrade path, unless the unlikely announcement of Credo 100 came out of no where.

Some of the reasons I pulled the trigger for IQ3 100 and did not wait for H6D-100 (very techcam centric):

  1. External Battery: H6D-100 will need an external battery pack for use with a technical camera. IQ3 does not need that.
    Such a battery solution is currently not even available from Hasselblad at this time. Some sort of after market contraption would be needed.
  2. Capture One: It is my preferred RAW conversion and image processing software and I value that - a lot.
    I feel I can get the best output when starting in C1.
  3. Lens Profiles: Capture One has built-in profiles for Rodenstock tech lenses.
  4. LCC Correction: Capture One has LCC creation and application streamlined which is a must for techcam.
  5. P1 5-year warranty: I feel that is important for a purchase of this value.
  6. Dealer Support: May not be important to some but I know Capture Integration (Steve Hendrix) has been and will be there for me if/when needed.
  7. P1 Upgrade Pricing: Upgrading terms from Credo are quite fair and handily beat the Hasselblad's trade-in program offer.
    In the end the perceived large price difference between H6D and IQ3 is not as large as it appears.
  8. Opportunity Cost: IQ3-100 is available now and I have been enjoying using it, whereas H6D-100 deliveries have still not started (to my knowledge)
  9. Known Entity: Both Capture Integration and Digital Transitions have provided extensive testing and have provided files that people have downloaded and tinkered with to form their opinions. On the other extreme, forget about any tests, no RAW files are even available for H6D-100. Yes, the sensor is same/similar as the IQ3-100 but there is a marked difference in the level of data availability. I want to reward the side that works for us. The H team guys made a few posts on the day H6D was announced and then have not been active again.
  10. Digital Back Alone: H6D-100 can not be purchased as a DB alone. If that was possible, it would've made the pricing much more attractive for me and could've tilted the decision in the other direction. I think that is a poor strategy on Hasselblad's part.

Post purchase, my impressions are super positive. I have had the chance to use it and am absolutely satisfied with my decision. I have used some amount of rise/fall + shift + tilt in almost every exposure and the LCC is cleaning up the color casts quite well. I am happy about essentially everything about it.

Hope this helps.
Cheers!
 
Last edited:

Boinger

Active member
Thanks for the honest answers fellas, I am actually receiving the h6d-50c body tomorrow. So I wanted to make sure I want to keep it before opening it up etc.

What do you think is a better software phocus or phase one? I am getting the MF mainly for the tech cam usage. Is the LCC process relatively easy to perform in phocus?

Does the mirror slap on the XF make images blurry? I would assume its not a problem with the leaf shutter lenses. I have had some problems on my 645z with mirror slap shaking the camera.
 

Nick-T

New member
Thanks for the honest answers fellas, I am actually receiving the h6d-50c body tomorrow. So I wanted to make sure I want to keep it before opening it up etc.

What do you think is a better software phocus or phase one? I am getting the MF mainly for the tech cam usage. Is the LCC process relatively easy to perform in phocus?

Does the mirror slap on the XF make images blurry? I would assume its not a problem with the leaf shutter lenses. I have had some problems on my 645z with mirror slap shaking the camera.

C1 is a much better featured piece of software. Phocus is really just a (very good) way to get your RAWs into Photoshop or Lightroom.

Yes LCC (aka scene calibration) is very easy to do in Phocus.

Xfs have a function to wait for the camera to settle after the mirror goes up, Hasselblad have a mirror delay and of course a mirror lockup so no difference between the two if you are using leaf shutters.
 

ErikKaffehr

Well-known member
Hi,

What you may consider is that you need a 16 bit TIFF file to hold most info from a raw file. Raw files are efficiently coded. Raw files have one colour for each pixel while TIFFs have three colours per pixel. So TIFFs are 3-6 times the size of RAW.

Capture One and for that part Lightroom allows for parametric workflow, so all work is done from the raw file.

If you work most of your files in Photoshop, it doesn't really matter as Photoshop also works with fully demosaiced files, basically 16-bit TIFFs.

Best regards
Erik




C1 is a much better featured piece of software. Phocus is really just a (very good) way to get your RAWs into Photoshop or Lightroom.

Yes LCC (aka scene calibration) is very easy to do in Phocus.

Xfs have a function to wait for the camera to settle after the mirror goes up, Hasselblad have a mirror delay and of course a mirror lockup so no difference between the two if you are using leaf shutters.
 

Paul2660

Well-known member
I'll let the others explain the battery or other things. I just wanted to mention one thing I heard from my friend:

The current version of Phocus from Hasselblad can (almost or completely) eliminate the vertical bandings (a kind of artifact mostly visible when you shift a tech cam lens to the extreme and push clarity of the sky) with their Scene Calibration function, while the current version of Capture One from Phase One still cannot cure this with their LCC function.

I have not confirmed this myself. Maybe someone else could help clarify this.

I've been using Phase One so I can't comment much on the Hasselblad offering. Keep in mind that Alpa and Phase One had collaborated the A-series with official support.

Spec-wise, they are very similar.

It's sad if Phocus can account for this and C1 after almost 3 years still can't. One of the reasons, I use tech less now as I use P1 CMOS.
I pointed this issue to my dealer when I tried the IQ150 as I saw it on shifts of 5mm or more immediately on a blue sky. I know that the dealer took the issue to Phase, and I have been told that the issue came up again with discussions on the IQ100, but still no fix from P1. The issue was very clear in the early shots provided by Alpa, (building and blue sky). The banding is not as ridge as micro lens ripple, but is there and as Void mentions, worsens with any contrast or clarity applied to the sky or if you make a B&W conversion.

The only fix I found that helps is using Topaz Defocus, as they have a debanding algorithm, that helps to remove some of the banding.

Paul C
 

lance_schad

Workshop Member
Thanks for the honest answers fellas, I am actually receiving the h6d-50c body tomorrow. So I wanted to make sure I want to keep it before opening it up etc.

What do you think is a better software phocus or phase one? I am getting the MF mainly for the tech cam usage. Is the LCC process relatively easy to perform in phocus?

Does the mirror slap on the XF make images blurry? I would assume its not a problem with the leaf shutter lenses. I have had some problems on my 645z with mirror slap shaking the camera.
Focal Plan lenses on the XF/IQ3-100 system take advantage of an Electronic First Curtain Shutter. Below is off of Phase One's website explaining it.
Continuing on our path to provide uncompromised image quality, we are pleased to provide EFCS technology with the Phase One 100MP Camera System. The addition of “Electronic First Curtain Shutter” to the XF 100MP Camera System means a further reduction in adverse vibration effects on high-resolution images. The benefit of EFCS is a significant reduction in camera vibration as it allows less mechanical dependency, which greatly improves sharpness when using shutter speeds that demand the steadiest conditions. The EFCS is worry free as it automatically activates when using Vibration Delay or activating Mirror Up. With such a significant increase in resolution, we’re proud to provide the tools and technologies that ensure the best image quality is delivered.



L
 

f8orbust

Active member
A big plus for HB is that they now have a mirrorless system that you can mount HC/D lenses to (via an adapter).
 

stephengilbert

Active member
Lens Profiles: Capture One has built-in profiles for Rodenstock and Schneider tech lenses?

I don't think so. It has profiles for Rodenstock tech lenses, but not Schneiders.
 

Jamgolf

Member
Lens Profiles: Capture One has built-in profiles for Rodenstock and Schneider tech lenses?

I don't think so. It has profiles for Rodenstock tech lenses, but not Schneiders.
In that case I stand corrected :)
It does have profiles for a lot of lenses from several different manufacturers.
Its surprizing that Schneider tech lenses are missing.
 

Jamgolf

Member
That's more to do with correcting distortion; since the Schneider's are virtually distortion free, profiles are not really needed.
May be thats why Schneider tech lens profiles are absent... (I was just reminded)
In any case, SK have exited the techcam lens market and Rodenstock lens profiles ARE present.
 

f8orbust

Active member
  1. External Battery: H6D-100 will need an external battery pack for use with a technical camera. IQ3 does not need that.
    Such a battery solution is currently not even available from Hasselblad at this time. Some sort of after market contraption would be needed.
    Can argue this either way. An external battery allows high capacity / oversize / cable-connected batteries to be used.
  2. Capture One: It is my preferred RAW conversion and image processing software and I value that - a lot.
    I feel I can get the best output when starting in C1.
    Sounds like on a tech cam, on a single image basis, Phocus now has the edge. Though overall, C1 has more feature (e.g. catalogues, sessions etc.)
  3. Lens Profiles: Capture One has built-in profiles for Rodenstock and Schneider tech lenses.
    S/K tech lenses don't need them.
  4. LCC Correction: Capture One has LCC creation and application streamlined which is a must for techcam.
    So does Phocus.
  5. P1 5-year warranty: I feel that is important for a purchase of this value.
    They took ~20 years to do this by default, but agree it's great to have (you could argue of course that you pay for it in the higher purchase price); HB is 36 months if you register by September, 24 otherwise.
  6. Dealer Support: May not be important to some but I know Capture Integration (Steve Hendrix) has been and will be there for me if/when needed.
    Don't know the differences here between the HB and P1 network. Plenty of pros use both, so I imagine it's not night and day. Granted, P1 dealers are more involved in fora such as this.
  7. P1 Upgrade Pricing: Upgrading terms from Credo are quite fair and handily beat the Hasselblad's trade-in program offer. In the end the perceived large price difference between H6D and IQ3 is not as large as it appears.
    I guess with the Credo you got a 60% discount (based on MP) ? So the IQ3100 was ~$17.5k ? The H/B would be ~$23.5k (which includes a body and lens). So, P1 is a smaller $ deal (if you got a 60% discount on the Credo...), but (arguably) the HB is a better deal given what you actually get.
  8. Opportunity Cost: IQ3-100 is available now and I have been enjoying using it, whereas H6D-100 deliveries have still not started (to my knowledge)
    Although the IQ3-100 is technically available now, you could be waiting 4 - 5 months to get one due to sensor fabrication issues in Japan (according to the CI website).
  9. Known Entity: Both Capture Integration and Digital Transitions have provided extensive testing and have provided files that people have downloaded and tinkered with to form their opinions. On the other extreme, forget about any tests, no RAW files are even available for H6D-100. Yes, the sensor is same/similar as the IQ3-100 but there is a marked difference in the level of data availability. I want to reward the side that works for us. The H team guys made a few posts on the day H6D was announced and then have not been active again.
    No contest, since the HB isn't yet available. But $1 says the sensor behaves - for all intents and purposes - almost identically.
  10. Digital Back Alone: H6D-100 can not be purchased as a DB alone. If that was possible, it would've made the pricing much more attractive for me and could've tilted the decision in the other direction. I think that is a poor strategy on Hasselblad's part. Why would they not sell the digital back alone.
    Agree, it would make sense to be able to buy the DB alone, but not a deal breaker; just sell the body.

Jim
 

vjbelle

Well-known member
That's more to do with correcting distortion; since the Schneider's are virtually distortion free, profiles are not really needed.
Absolutely correct in that the Schneider Wide's are virtually distortion free. That's the main reason I keep my 35XL. The use of lens profiles for lens distortion correction in ANY raw developer is very pixel destructive since a lot of resampling has to take place. This also holds true if the lens distortion is corrected in post. What's the sense of having all of those pixels just to throw a lot of them away to correct for lens distortion?

Victor
 

dougpeterson

Workshop Member
There is a vague reference in this thread to Phocus improving its handling of tech camera wides when combined with Sony sensors.

Does anyone have documentation, official references, or photos to show this? It does not match anything I'm aware of (which of course doesn't mean it's not true, only that the only reference I have seen anywhere is one comment in this thread).
 

Paul2660

Well-known member
Doug, that is a vague statement. Not sure if you are referring to my comment as vague or not, however I have plenty of images and evidence of this problem.

Are you not aware of the fact that if you shift past 5mm on any current Phase One CMOS back, you will see a faint banding, more like streaking? Or are you not aware if Hasselblad is aware of this issue and has addressed it something that Phase one has not done.

I know for a fact, that Phase One is aware of the issue of the streaking, as I personally work on this issue with Phase One last year of a period of over 1 month, via my dealer. Phase's never gave me a anything more than "yes we see it". No official answer was ever given back to me and thus I stayed away from the 50MP backs.

When the IQ100 was announced, Phase One's Part Alpa published several pictures, (you could download the full sized images, not the raw from their site) showing the IQ100 in use with an Alpa camera. One of these series of shots, showed a building with about 12 to 15mm of shift, with a pure blue sky. When I looked at the image, it was clear that the 100MP back has the same issue i.e. faint streaking in solid areas. It is not as noticeable as classic micro lens ripple, however it's clearly there. If you convert the same image to B&W, you can see the problem even better.

This can be easily reproduced with my IQ100, with the 40mm HR-W and shifting with a solid blue sky.

My point was that I was one of the photographers, who along with my dealer, CI, brought this issue to the attention of Phase One in April of 2015, net P1 is aware of this, and agreed at that time, it was not due to my equipment, as it could be replicated by them. It's clear that nothing was done to fix it with the current LCC process with the IQ100 as the problem is still there. I am also of the impression that this issue has again been brought to Phase One, but as of yet they have not made any formal statements as to if this process can be removed in the future. At the time of the case I had opened to P1, I mentioned to them that the only thing I found that would resolve it was using the Topaz tool Denoise after the file had been processed in C1 as it removed a lot of it in the demanding tool. If you like clarity and saturation in your work, as I do, it will make the issue much more noticeable.

You may see this as a nit, and that I am being picky, so be it. However it's real, not vague and unless newer backs that have again started shipping since the earthquake have been changed, you can replicate the issue with any wide tech lens shifted past 5mm.

Paul C
 
M

mjr

Guest
Paul, I'm not answering for Doug but I didn't read his comment the way you did, he just said that someone mentioned that Phocus does a better job in dealing with shifts than C1 does, and asked whether there was evidence anywhere of this. I honestly didn't read that he was dismissing any problems that Phase cmos owners face, just asking whether there was evidence that Phocus solved the issue for 'blad owners. I think it's a fair question to be honest, if the Hasselblad 50 can shift without issue because Phocus cleans it up then that's a big thing and would be a real advantage for tech cam owners wanting a cmos back who may feel limited by what Phase/C1 can do, nobody knows how the 'blad 100 handles shifts I don't think because I'm not sure anyone has one do they?

I could be wrong of course!

Mat
 
Top