907x 50c now available

[Godfrey]

Hah, I should've known you'd have answers!

Looks like the S2 is a slightly shorter (in the longest dimension) version of the L2, so I think this should work well. The L2 is 10 5/8" long, and my Ona Bowery, which I found too long (though it definitely could fit in a second lens if needed) was 10.0".. The S2 is only 8 1/4" so that should tighten things up a bit.

Thanks, G!

I took a look at the S2 on Billingham's site. Yes, it's shorter and tighter ... but I think you might find it too awkward to get the camera in and out of easily because of the way the bag opening zips closed. I have several bags with that style of closure (including the Domke F5XB) and that type of zippered closure under the overflap tends to get in the way a lot of the time with equipment the size and shape of the 907x+most lenses.

The beauty of the L2 is that the gusseted overflap keeps out water, the dual closure stays keep it closed securely, yet when you flip the top open there's no impediment to the camera or accessory compartments. It's one of the reasons this bag has survived as one of my top picks for most uses out of the ridiculously-high-number-of-high-end-bags in the closet. And yet the L2 remains trim and light to carry, and carries a lot when you need to carry something extra (for instance, my iPad Pro 11" with keyboard case can slide into the front pocket and leave space for spare batteries, remote release, etc.). That's a very small bag that can carry 907x, two lenses, iPad Pro 11, and all required accessories ...!

Good luck! Bags are a never ending battle... LOL!

G

 

[nameBrandon]

I took a look at the S2 on Billingham's site. Yes, it's shorter and tighter ... but I think you might find it too awkward to get the camera in and out of easily because of the way the bag opening zips closed. I have several bags with that style of closure (including the Domke F5XB) and that type of zippered closure under the overflap tends to get in the way a lot of the time with equipment the size and shape of the 907x+most lenses.

The beauty of the L2 is that the gusseted overflap keeps out water, the dual closure stays keep it closed securely, yet when you flip the top open there's no impediment to the camera or accessory compartments. It's one of the reasons this bag has survived as one of my top picks for most uses out of the ridiculously-high-number-of-high-end-bags in the closet. And yet the L2 remains trim and light to carry, and carries a lot when you need to carry something extra (for instance, my iPad Pro 11" with keyboard case can slide into the front pocket and leave space for spare batteries, remote release, etc.). That's a very small bag that can carry 907x, two lenses, iPad Pro 11, and all required accessories ...!

Good luck! Bags are a never ending battle... LOL!

G

Yep, I am in agreement with you, it is definitely a concern.. I have a few Billingham bags, and I know on my 107 the zipper closure is similar and can be a bit obtrusive. One of the things I really like about the Ona Bowery is as you describe with the S2.. you open the top and there you are, easy in and out. I don't even have to be looking at the bag to be able to get the camera out, it really gets out of your way.. I am concerned that even with leaving the S2 unzipped that it still may be a bit fussy with respect to ingress / egress.

I ordered from Amazon so it's an easy fix if it seems like it will drive me crazy.

 

[nameBrandon]

I don't have any experience with Ona or Billingham bags but I recently purchased a Peak Design Everyday Sling 6L and it has a bit of a clown car effect of holding more than you think it can, and is quite small and sleek (although perhaps not as "pretty" as the Ona and Billingham lines)... I am using it to carry either two Ms or a Q2 +M with and extra lens or two. I think it would hold the 907x + 45P with a little bit of room to spare on the lock dimension so you can carry it with a longer lens if needed. The depth of the bag is perhaps a little tight (.1 of an inch smaller than the 907x/50c's shortest dimension, but this is at the bottom of a wedge so unlikely to be a real problem.).

Thank you! I'll definitely check into this. I always appreciate the TARDIS effect in a bag..

 

[nameBrandon]

Yep, I am in agreement with you, it is definitely a concern.. I have a few Billingham bags, and I know on my 107 the zipper closure is similar and can be a bit obtrusive. One of the things I really like about the Ona Bowery is as you describe with the S2.. you open the top and there you are, easy in and out. I don't even have to be looking at the bag to be able to get the camera out, it really gets out of your way.. I am concerned that even with leaving the S2 unzipped that it still may be a bit fussy with respect to ingress / egress.

I ordered from Amazon so it's an easy fix if it seems like it will drive me crazy.

Godfrey was right. It fits, it's snug, no issues with room but ingress / egress causes some issue. The biggest thing I ran into was accidentally activating the button to separate the 907x / cfvii50c because I couldn't get enough clearance inside of the bag to pull the camera out unobstructed. Thankfully I felt it happen in the bag and just let go, but it's tight in there and causes a lot of wrist rotation and having to almost scoop under the camera to get a good grip.

Will stick to my Ona Bowery and look into modifying it with some additional padding.

 

[Godfrey]

I don't have any experience with Ona or Billingham bags but I recently purchased a Peak Design Everyday Sling 6L and it has a bit of a clown car effect of holding more than you think it can, and is quite small and sleek (although perhaps not as "pretty" as the Ona and Billingham lines)... I am using it to carry either two Ms or a Q2 +M with and extra lens or two. I think it would hold the 907x + 45P with a little bit of room to spare on the lock dimension so you can carry it with a longer lens if needed. The depth of the bag is perhaps a little tight (.1 of an inch smaller than the 907x/50c's shortest dimension, but this is at the bottom of a wedge so unlikely to be a real problem.).

I have the PD Everyday Sling bags, both 5L and 10L (version 1) ... I've not tried the 907x in them yet. The 5L is kind of the dedicated home for my Leica CL kit. It seems like it would be a little too slim for the 907x. The 10L should fit it just fine. I'll have to try them out: these PD bags are very nicely engineered.

I got into another sling bag kickstarter that delivered recently that might also work. It's shaped more like the PD v2 bags and has two additional features: a kind of "roll top" that can unfurl and allow carrying an iPad up to the Pro 11" and a chamber between the front and back of the bag that the PD Travel Tripod can slide into. I thought the design might have enough merit to be interesting and bought in on it. It just arrived a couple of weeks back and I haven't had a chance to try it out yet.

So many bags ...

G

 

[onasj]

The popularity of the 907x 50c bodes well for a CFV-iii-100c, hopefully in the not-too-distant future...

Well according to hasselblad, the first 2 shipments are sold out at their online store, next orders available in October....
I am not in a rush, and I am sure it can be had somewhere else but regardless that is a good sign IMO...
I do think that a lot of these are going to a slightly different market then the X1D/GFX and that market is probably smaller but it is the first fully contained top class digital back in this price range....

 

[Godfrey]

The popularity of the 907x 50c bodes well for a CFV-iii-100c, hopefully in the not-too-distant future...

I would presume that when Hasselblad offers the 100 Mpixel sensor for the X1D II follow-on offering, a CFV 100c back will follow since the two offerings share so much in terms of design and engineering.

It's a big step up in cost to that sensor at the present time, however; about $4500 separates the Fuji GFX 50S and the Fuji GFX 100. The 100 mpixel back for the H4 system is $27000 at the present time, but that's a larger sensor as well. No question that it will be interesting to see how this plays out.

I'm likely to remain quite content with the CFVII 50c myself. It's already more pixel resolution than I realistically need, but it's such a good sensor to work with... I've never really needed to be bleeding edge in camera technology.

G

 

[onasj]

More than the resolution bump—though that always seems nicer than expected once it actually is in hand—the best feature of the current-generation 100 MP (Sony IMX461) and 151 MP (Sony IMX411) chips is their BSI dual-gain architecture really helps with high-ISO performance and with minimal color shift even from wide-angle lenses, no LCC required. Having used and tested in detail the 54x40 mm versions of both the older and the newer generation chips—the Phase One IQ3 (Sony IMX211 sensor) and IQ4 (IMX411), I can say the IMX461/411 chips (GFX 100 and IQ4) are a major step forward over the older (2015!) FSI-architecture IMX161 (GFX 50, X1d, CFV II 50c) and IMX211 (IQ3) sensors. ISO performance is a full stop better, readout time is faster, and virtually no color shift even when using wide-angle tech cam lenses shifted quite a bit.

Of course all of these sensors are pretty darn good, but medium format has always been about prioritizing image quality so a no-compromises solution would be ideal. At least give us the BSI IMX461 (100 MP) chip in a CFV-iii-100c, please! Or even better, put in the BSI IMX411 54x40 chip into the next CFV and crop the image to a 40x40 mm sensor equivalent square, which would give a 110 MP modern analog of a beloved 6x6 format. Take that, Fuji! ��

[Note: Yes, current XCD lenses and of course all V lenses should be able to cover a 40x40 mm square crop from a 54x40 sensor, as the diagonal (56.6 mm) is virtually identical to that of a 33x44 mm sensor (55 mm).]

I would presume that when Hasselblad offers the 100 Mpixel sensor for the X1D II follow-on offering, a CFV 100c back will follow since the two offerings share so much in terms of design and engineering.

It's a big step up in cost to that sensor at the present time, however; about $4500 separates the Fuji GFX 50S and the Fuji GFX 100. The 100 mpixel back for the H4 system is $27000 at the present time, but that's a larger sensor as well. No question that it will be interesting to see how this plays out.

I'm likely to remain quite content with the CFVII 50c myself. It's already more pixel resolution than I realistically need, but it's such a good sensor to work with... I've never really needed to be bleeding edge in camera technology.

G

 

[elm]

Just in case any of you are interested on this webinar from Hasselblad:

"Introducing the 907X 50C and Phocus Mobile 2 for iPhone" on Wed, Aug 19, 2020 10:00 AM - 11:00 AM EDT

 

[Godfrey]

More than the resolution bump—though that always seems nicer than expected once it actually is in hand—the best feature of the current-generation 100 MP (Sony IMX461) and 151 MP (Sony IMX411) chips is their BSI dual-gain architecture really helps with high-ISO performance and with minimal color shift even from wide-angle lenses, no LCC required. Having used and tested in detail the 54x40 mm versions of both the older and the newer generation chips—the Phase One IQ3 (Sony IMX211 sensor) and IQ4 (IMX411), I can say the IMX461/411 chips (GFX 100 and IQ4) are a major step forward over the older (2015!) FSI-architecture IMX161 (GFX 50, X1d, CFV II 50c) and IMX211 (IQ3) sensors. ISO performance is a full stop better, readout time is faster, and virtually no color shift even when using wide-angle tech cam lenses shifted quite a bit.

Of course all of these sensors are pretty darn good, but medium format has always been about prioritizing image quality so a no-compromises solution would be ideal. At least give us the BSI IMX461 (100 MP) chip in a CFV-iii-100c, please! Or even better, put in the BSI IMX411 54x40 chip into the next CFV and crop the image to a 40x40 mm sensor equivalent square, which would give a 110 MP modern analog of a beloved 6x6 format. Take that, Fuji!

Sure, I'm with you. Mo's better ... options are always good. (Actually, doing the 40x40 dance would be great! That would be a 1.4x 'crop factor' when using V system bodies, a lot closer than the current 1.7x factor for square format crop on 33x33 format.)

Of course, whether I can actually afford such a back given the cost of those imager chips is a question mark!

Just in case any of you are interested on this webinar from Hasselblad:

"Introducing the 907X 50C and Phocus Mobile 2 for iPhone" on Wed, Aug 19, 2020 10:00 AM - 11:00 AM EDT

I caught a bit of it, but I'll see it on YouTube later. Hasselblad will have it on their YouTube channel in a few minutes.

G

 

[Godfrey]

From the webinar this morning...

Yes, as I expected. I suspect the primary driver on this is production volumes on the CFVII 50c back: It probably comes down to a simple equation of how many of the sensors they can get combined with potential profitability of selling the complete camera kit vs the back as a standalone component. It is far more likely that the purchaser of a 907x/CFVII 50c camera will purchase one or two more Hasselblad lenses and accessories than the purchaser of a CFVII 50c back alone will. After all, Hasselblad IS a business and needs to sustain profitability in order to survive...

I hope my Special Edition finish grip and optical viewfinder comes in soon!

G

 

[tcdeveau]

Yes, as I expected. I suspect the primary driver on this is production volumes on the CFVII 50c back: It probably comes down to a simple equation of how many of the sensors they can get combined with potential profitability of selling the complete camera kit vs the back as a standalone component. It is far more likely that the purchaser of a 907x/CFVII 50c camera will purchase one or two more Hasselblad lenses and accessories than the purchaser of a CFVII 50c back alone will. After all, Hasselblad IS a business and needs to sustain profitability in order to survive...

I hope my Special Edition finish grip and optical viewfinder comes in soon!

G

They probably want to sell a few more XCD lenses too....people are more likely to purchase XCD lenses if the 907x is thrown in with the package than without. People that would only purchase the CFVII back probably wouldn't purchase XCD lenses.

I wish they had a 100mp sensor in there, but I think they've done what they have with the X1DII and CFVII/907x (in particular the pricing and keeping the 50mp sensor) to get more people into the X-system and increase their current customer base. Increase customer base now and come out with a 100mp version down the line, when they could introduce it at a future date in time at a lower price than today (and let P1 and Fuji absorb some of the R&D/production costs of the most recent sensor generation first). At least that's what I'm telling myself A future 100mp CFV/X2D should cost less down the line that if introduced today.

Whatever their reasoning, the $6399 price point with the 907x is still a great value IMHO, especially given the versatility of the kit. AFAIK it's an unheard of entry point for a digital back. It's a great kit and hope everyone waiting on the chrome edition enjoys it when they receive it!

 

[nameBrandon]

They probably want to sell a few more XCD lenses too....people are more likely to purchase XCD lenses if the 907x is thrown in with the package than without. People that would only purchase the CFVII back probably wouldn't purchase XCD lenses.

I wish they had a 100mp sensor in there, but I think they've done what they have with the X1DII and CFVII/907x (in particular the pricing and keeping the 50mp sensor) to get more people into the X-system and increase their current customer base. Increase customer base now and come out with a 100mp version down the line, when they could introduce it at a future date in time at a lower price than today (and let P1 and Fuji absorb some of the R&D/production costs of the most recent sensor generation first). At least that's what I'm telling myself A future 100mp CFV/X2D should cost less down the line that if introduced today.

Whatever their reasoning, the $6399 price point with the 907x is still a great value IMHO, especially given the versatility of the kit. AFAIK it's an unheard of entry point for a digital back. It's a great kit and hope everyone waiting on the chrome edition enjoys it when they receive it!

Neat to see all the interest around 100MP.. I'm curious, what are the factors that would lead you all to consider a Hasselblad CFV 100MP vs IQ3 100? I'm guessing a CFV 100MP would close in on $10k, and while the IQ3100 is still a bit beyond that, we're getting in that zone where it's not out of reach for most willing to purchase the hypothetical CFV 100. I'm not sure I would stick with a CFV 100 vs an IQ3100 if the price came down closer to $14k range.. unless the CFV 100 had something like BSI to differentiate it, capability-wise.

 

[tcdeveau]

Neat to see all the interest around 100MP.. I'm curious, what are the factors that would lead you all to consider a Hasselblad CFV 100MP vs IQ3 100? I'm guessing a CFV 100MP would close in on $10k, and while the IQ3100 is still a bit beyond that, we're getting in that zone where it's not out of reach for most willing to purchase the hypothetical CFV 100. I'm not sure I would stick with a CFV 100 vs an IQ3100 if the price came down closer to $14k range.. unless the CFV 100 had something like BSI to differentiate it, capability-wise.

For me, a few features, some fanboying, and the fact that I already own a couple XCD lenses that could be used with the CFV.

A CFV 100mp would be probably be with the 33x44mm BSI sensor of the GFX 100 as opposed to a FSI sensor of the IQ3100, which would help with color cast on tech cams. The IQ3100 also doesn't allow one to skip the dark (i.e. LENR) frame with long exposures (there may be an aerial mode that allows this to be disabled?), whereas Hasselblads do not use dark frames.

Dark frame handling by the P1's has been a gripe of mine. They've made a lot of progress and did away with it on the IQ4 (and introduced frame-averaging, where you can sidestep the issue by combining multiple shorter exposures for a long-exposure)...but there's the price of the IQ4 to consider.

IQ3100's are also available today though, whereas a CFV100 is a hypothetical product at this point.

 

[Alan]

Neat to see all the interest around 100MP.. I'm curious, what are the factors that would lead you all to consider a Hasselblad CFV 100MP vs IQ3 100? I'm guessing a CFV 100MP would close in on $10k, and while the IQ3100 is still a bit beyond that, we're getting in that zone where it's not out of reach for most willing to purchase the hypothetical CFV 100. I'm not sure I would stick with a CFV 100 vs an IQ3100 if the price came down closer to $14k range.. unless the CFV 100 had something like BSI to differentiate it, capability-wise.

IQ3100s are already hitting $10k on the private market.

It's not so much the resolution, for me it's:
1. BSI sensor (minimizing color/saturation problems with wides).
2. (Much!) lower price than IQ4
3. Related to (2): ability to shift with Rodenstock 23/28. (Sure you can crop the IQ4, but why pay for the larger sensor then?).

Edited to add:
Equivalent FoV of a 23mm on a 33x44 back would be 28mm on a 40x53. The only thing out there is the discontinued Schneider Super Digitar XL, which is very hard to find, especially with it's center filter.

 

[nameBrandon]

IQ3100s are already hitting $10k on the private market.

It's not so much the resolution, for me it's:
1. BSI sensor (minimizing color/saturation problems with wides).
2. (Much!) lower price than IQ4
3. Related to (2): ability to shift with Rodenstock 23/28. (Sure you can crop the IQ4, but why pay for the larger sensor then?)

Ah, nice, I didn't realize the private pricing was down that far.. :: takes a look sideways at this CFVII 50c.. ::

Not sure I'd be comfortable without being able to fall back on dealer for a back like that, but that is encouraging. A few months back DT was quoting $20k for CPO IQ3100..

 

[Godfrey]

For my part, it will take a healthy bit of easily recognizable advantage for the work I want to do to convince me that I need to upgrade to a higher resolution back.

What would make me stick with a Hasselblad product? I'm unlikely to move away from Hasselblad because the investment I have already in Hasselblad V and X system gear is significant, and the integration of Hasselblad's color science in Phocus, the CFV back with my V system bodies and lenses, the same back with X system lenses through the 907x body, etc is, I feel, very hard for any third party product to compete with.

I'd like one more lens ... a native X system lens in the 80 to 120 mm range ... and with that I'll probably call it done and just work with what I have. I will likely add that lens sometime next year. We can spend a enormous amount of effort and money bolstering up our equipment: I'd prefer to spend that energy in other ways.

G

 

[onasj]

Neat to see all the interest around 100MP.. I'm curious, what are the factors that would lead you all to consider a Hasselblad CFV 100MP vs IQ3 100? I'm guessing a CFV 100MP would close in on $10k, and while the IQ3100 is still a bit beyond that, we're getting in that zone where it's not out of reach for most willing to purchase the hypothetical CFV 100. I'm not sure I would stick with a CFV 100 vs an IQ3100 if the price came down closer to $14k range.. unless the CFV 100 had something like BSI to differentiate it, capability-wise.

- BSI really offers a substantial improvement in noise, which helps at any ISO above about 800. It can make-or-break images above about 1600, depending on one's needs.

- No/minimal color cast

- Sensor read out time, lack of dark frame need, etc.—everything feels faster and more agile, which is traditionally a major weakness of digital medium format compared to 35 mm. The GFX100 does a good job showing that agile and medium format is a false choice—you can have them both!

The dream: CFV-iii-110c with the 54x40 Sony IMX411 sensor (IQ4's 151 MP sensor) cropped to 40x40. And with IBIS, because it's a dream after all.

More realistic, but still exciting: CFV-iii-100x with the 44x33 Sony IMX 461 sensor (same BSI sensor as the GFX100).

Disappointing: I can't see them running a third instance of the same FSI 50 MP sensor in the next CFV back, so I'm not worried about that

 

[scho]

Just in case any of you are interested on this webinar from Hasselblad:

"Introducing the 907X 50C and Phocus Mobile 2 for iPhone" on Wed, Aug 19, 2020 10:00 AM - 11:00 AM EDT

Link to recorded webinar for those that missed the presentation this morning.

 

[nameBrandon]

For me, a few features, some fanboying, and the fact that I already own a couple XCD lenses that could be used with the CFV.

A CFV 100mp would be probably be with the 33x44mm BSI sensor of the GFX 100 as opposed to a FSI sensor of the IQ3100, which would help with color cast on tech cams. The IQ3100 also doesn't allow one to skip the dark (i.e. LENR) frame with long exposures (there may be an aerial mode that allows this to be disabled?), whereas Hasselblads do not use dark frames.

Dark frame handling by the P1's has been a gripe of mine. They've made a lot of progress and did away with it on the IQ4 (and introduced frame-averaging, where you can sidestep the issue by combining multiple shorter exposures for a long-exposure)...but there's the price of the IQ4 to consider.

IQ3100's are also available today though, whereas a CFV100 is a hypothetical product at this point.

Just a head's up, your PM inbox is full..