Another "Is medium format worth it " article

[aztwang]

Interesting read....https://petapixel.com/2017/04/04/medium-format-worth-money-hassleblad-h6d-review-says-no/

 

[TsurTriger]

Re: Another Is medium format worth it " article

One of the most unprofessional "review" I ever read.

 

[Erik Lundqvist]

Re: Another Is medium format worth it " article

Summary of article: Instead of this ONE camera you can use these TWO cameras!

 

[ErikKaffehr]

Re: Another Is medium format worth it " article

Hi,

You want a professional review, read this one: https://www.dpreview.com/opinion/2341704755/thinking-about-buying-medium-format-read-this-first

What I would say about the "Sonder Creative" stuff is that:

• The camera does not work for him. That could be workflow related, camera related or just not reading the fine manuals.
• He does the mistake to compare sharpness at actual pixels, that ignores the fact that the camera has twice the pixels.
• It is pretty clear that Canon makes some very good lenses. The Hasselblad lens has pronounced axial chroma, seen as out of focus green fringing.

On some issues he is probably right, some things may be disputable and some are probably wrong. He didn't mention true focus. The 399 focusing points the a7RII has is a real world advantage, for accurate focus.

I would be a bit skeptical about shadow recovery being worse on the 100MP back as it is known to have excellent DR, but DR has two ends, to discuss shadow recovery we need to discuss the highlights part of the exposure.

Best regards
Erik

One of the most unprofessional "review" I ever read.

 

[beano_z]

Am I the only one here that thinks that article was meant as a joke?

All it says it's that it sucks in almost every way, but you'd still choose it over anything else on the market....:grin:

 

[ErikKaffehr]

Hi,

No, I feels he shares his opinion. He is entitled to it.

Best regards
Erik

Am I the only one here that thinks that article was meant as a joke?

All it says it's that it sucks in almost every way, but you'd still choose it over anything else on the market....:grin:

 

[kdphotography]

From the article: "After nearly 17 minutes of taking Hasselblad to task for everything..."

Emphasis added.

That says it all for me.

What's the term used nowadays? Click-bait? These types of articles or *ahem* reviews are plentiful and typically made by those without much experience with medium format digital camera systems, familiarity with the post-processing software, nor the financials to afford medium format digital. I guess taking one camera out for a seventeen minute test drive is better than simply reading about a Ferrari in Car & Driver and then deciding the Ford Mustang GT is easier to drive.

Ok, back for more french roast...:salute:

Ken

 

[Jan]

Hassleblad? Was that meant to be funny? It was the moment I stopped reading.

 

[ErikKaffehr]

Hi,

It says 17 minutes into the video. The poster of the video owns his camera. Quite possible he doesn't make best use of it. For instance he finds "focus recompose" causes a focusing error. True focus may correct for it, but it only detects rotation. But rotating the camera will also move it, unless it is rotated around the inlet pupil. (That is the reason I never really checked how well "focus recompose" works, camera movement is the great unknown.)

He also finds that the HC 150 lens he used has green out of focus fringing. Maybe, MFD users have learned not to care about hard to correct axial chroma, but the Canon 100/2.8 macro he compared with has none.

So, in this case it may be you who happen to be a bit ignorant. The guy tells about his real world experience, you may not like his conclusions, but that is another thing.

You may of course check out the video and you may of course disagree: https://youtu.be/PeMYi0pgOHw

Best regards
Erik

From the article: "After nearly 17 minutes of taking Hasselblad to task for everything..."

Emphasis added.

That says it all for me.

What's the term used nowadays? Click-bait? These types of articles or *ahem* reviews are plentiful and typically made by those without much experience with medium format digital camera systems, familiarity with the post-processing software, nor the financials to afford medium format digital. I guess taking one camera out for a seventeen minute test drive is better than simply reading about a Ferrari in Car & Driver and then deciding the Ford Mustang GT is easier to drive.

Ok, back for more french roast...:salute:

Ken

 

[Godfrey]

Neither article is worth wasting the time to read.

G

 

[kdphotography]

Sorry, Eric. I really don't care about his conclusions. And that's my point. It's still click-bait.

I've had a second cup of french roast and I still feel the same way.

:loco: :shocked:

I just don't find these types of articles to be helpful.

ken

 

[Jamgolf]

Personally, I don't quite get the concept of using other people's conclusions to guide one's choices or direction.

If it's something trivial, like finding a place for lunch, I'll look at Yelp and go to the nearest 4-star joint - its not that important. But for anything meaningful, which I actually care about, I do not give a rat's a$$ what someone else has to say about it. I myself must do my due diligence, try it, use it (by any means) and make my own conclusions. If I'm not doing that, it simply means I don't actually care too much about it.

 

[ErikKaffehr]

Hi Ken,

Sorry for my tone.

Best regards
Erik

Sorry, Eric. I really don't care about his conclusions. And that's my point. It's still click-bait.

I've had a second cup of french roast and I still feel the same way.

:loco: :shocked:

I just don't find these types of articles to be helpful.

ken

 

[jdphoto]

I'm not so sure. I think there's validity to the article. I've owned plenty of MFD cameras and still find that the Sony A7rII does most of what I did with MFD. The depreciation of MFD is enough to wait.

 

[jdphoto]

Personally, I don't quite get the concept of using other people's conclusions to guide one's choices or direction.

If it's something trivial, like finding a place for lunch, I'll look at Yelp and go to the nearest 4-star joint - its not that important. But for anything meaningful, which I actually care about, I do not give a rat's a$$ what someone else has to say about it. I myself must do my due diligence, try it, use it (by any means) and make my own conclusions. If I'm not doing that, it simply means I don't actually care too much about it.

I think they're called reviews. Would you still invest in the Leica S with known issues with the AF if it weren't for other peoples conclusions?

 

[jdphoto]

Sorry, Eric. I really don't care about his conclusions. And that's my point. It's still click-bait.

I've had a second cup of french roast and I still feel the same way.

:loco: :shocked:

I just don't find these types of articles to be helpful.

ken

Is it because you've already invested in MFD?

 

[Jamgolf]

I think they're called reviews. Would you still invest in the Leica S with known issues with the AF if it weren't for other peoples conclusions?

Actually, they're called opinions and everyone has one ...
Reviews are different - they are objective and devoid of opinions.

Although, a consensus of opinions can be an indication of substance. One has to respect that.

Individual opinions can be useful too, with weights depending on whose opinion it is. There can be certain people one listens to. A teacher, a parent, a friend, or a practitioner whom you respect and admire. You still make your own conclusions, but give more weight to such 'respected' opinions. Everyone else, I multiply it by ZERO.

If I thought Leica S offers what I am lokoing for, I'd try it and draw my own conclusions.

 

[algrove]

The best many expereince with the Leica S nowadays is downtime until their lenses are repaired.

 

[jdphoto]

Actually, they're called opinions and everyone has one ...
Reviews are different - they are objective and devoid of opinions.

Although, a consensus of opinions can be an indication of substance. One has to respect that.

Individual opinions can be useful too, with weights depending on whose opinion it is. There can be certain people one listens to. A teacher, a parent, a friend, or a practitioner whom you respect and admire. You still make your own conclusions, but give more weight to such 'respected' opinions. Everyone else, I multiply it by ZERO.

If I thought Leica S offers what I am lokoing for, I'd try it and draw my own conclusions.

A consensus of all who look at the example given in the resolution comparison will invariably agree...there's not that much difference -that's the point of the article. Is it worth investing that kind of money when you can achieve that look 90% of the time with a Sony A7rII or Nikon D810? For me, it is not, but the article still represents a valid opinion for anyone considering the choice of MFD vs FF. Those who have already invested in MFD will usually be the most offended by the apparent diss, but not so much about the gear itself as opposed to the emotional attachment such an investment can have, imo. Expectations are high when shooting with MFD because you expect the best and sometimes you don't always get what you paid for in photography. Today there's so many options at so many price points that high end photography is really not as exclusive as it once was. Just look at the wedding industry!

 

[Jamgolf]

Those who have already invested in MFD will usually be the most offended by the apparent diss, but not so much about the gear itself as opposed to the emotional attachment such an investment can have, imo.

I think we get this argument twice a month on this forum. It's an insulting argument.

Obviously, everyone is free to draw one's own conclusions. This guy concluded it's not worth it for him. Great !
My decisions are not based on other's opinions. They are based on my own usage and results.
Therefore, I do not care one bit what someone else thinks.

Also, any future prospective buyers should try to form their own opinions and read other's opinions, positive or negative, with many grains of salt.