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!

CFV 100C?

TechTalk

Well-known member
That's a good thing, especially for V setups.

I think a lot of peeps are now holding their tech cam earmarked cash ready for this one ... makes X shutter lenses less attractive given their locked system status and lack of novelties and comms from P1.

Hassy can only do copal and or aperture unit.
Like Phase One, Hasselblad has been manufacturing their own electronic leaf shutter designs for use in their own lenses for many years. It's possible they could produce shutters for Rodenstock or other lenses as well, like Phase One has, but I don't know if there would be any desire to do that given the size of the potential market.

They've also had digital backs which were compatible with Schneider, Rollei, and Sinar/Rodenstock electronic leaf shutters — all of which are out of production. It's hard to say what we might see in the future or when, but for now it requires a flash sync connection to trigger a CFV back from a camera or lens shutter other than Hasselblad.

Meanwhile, everyone is hoping that global shutter sensors will improve to the point where it's no longer necessary to think about shutter compatibility. The sooner the better for the sake of versatility and interchangeability, but it still appears that's some distance away for now.
 

buildbot

Well-known member
Meanwhile, everyone is hoping that global shutter sensors will improve to the point where it's no longer necessary to think about shutter compatibility. The sooner the better for the sake of versatility and interchangeability, but it still appears that's some distance away for now.
Stacked global sensor shutters a possibility? So that the extra circuitry does not affect the fill-factor/SNR too much?
 

Paul Spinnler

Well-known member
With regard to larger sensors, Hasselblad has already been there and done that. The same is true of DSLR cameras. I wish Phase One future success for the XF medium format DSLR system and and IQ4 larger sensor digital backs, but a major reason they are the last manufacturer in those two categories is because consumer demand went elsewhere; to smaller, lighter, less expensive mirrorless systems. Hasselblad and Fuji recognized this shift and they both acted on it in 2016. They've both been building out their respective mirrorless systems in different ways ever since with each of them doing so successfully. Phase One has been investing in other areas to secure their future.

For those wanting mirrorless medium format, there are enough differences in their product offerings and design concepts that the Fuji GFX and Hasselblad X systems have each been successful in their own right. They've differentiated each of their systems enough that you will find some individuals simultaneously owning and using both GFX and X systems because they appreciate the advantages and capabilities each system offers them because of their differences. They've each attracted their own customer base and found their own space in the market where they can grow. I think we all benefit from differences in products and from the differences in the people who use them.

I expect Hasselblad's focus will continue to be on expanding their X System range of camera, lens, and accessory options — but the unexpected happens from time to time. The X System launch was unexpected, at least by me, in 2016. The introduction of a unique modular mirrorless design concept, with the 907X 50C in 2019, surprised me as well. I think Hasselblad has been successful in creating a unique system with connections, in both design and function, to their previous generations of camera systems; while at the same time not being limited or prevented by their past from offering new technology with new form factors. At least, that's how I see the X System evolution to date.

I have no idea what the future holds and we will likely see surprises from multiple manufacturers. I would personally like to see Hasselblad take the modularity of their current 907X 50C even further, including a new CFV 100C. Modular system design has been a key concept for Hasselblad from the start of their V System decades ago. They've also been very good at creating points of interconnection between each new system and the generations which came before it. Creating additional modular options, like the 907X + CFV combination, would be true to Hasselblad's long heritage and increase their differentiation from other products.

I could envision a variety of potential future products. I'd love to see something along the lines of the V1D, the modular square format concept camera displayed at Photokina 2016 for which they secured a 2018 design patent. There are any number of possibilities for repurposing the basic design concept of the ArcBody again, which supplied the basis for the HTS 1,5 tilt-shift adapter in the H system — both of which can be used with CFV backs. A new version for the X System could open up interesting possibilities including lenses designed for movements (like the ArcBody) or adapters for existing lenses like the HTS. I can imagine, but who knows? There may be better things ahead which I haven't imagined!
P1's problem in a way is that they are owned by private equity which essentially buys the company with a lot of debt to increase return on equity. In that context, ever investment is subject to a RoE calculation and then compared with other opportunities within the firm. So although there might have been resources and capital to fund a mirrorless project, if they internally drew up the numbers in a cold, harsh manner, they'd have the mirrorless project side-by-side against the aerial systems for industrial use projects.

In all likelihood the RoE of the industrial projects looked a lot more attractive and so no more capital than absolutely the minimum was allocated to the photo stuff. Photo competition is cuththroat and investing double digit millions in developing a new mirrorless system with intense competition from Canon, Nikon, Fuji, Leica, Hasselblad is not a riskless endeavor.

Taking existing tech like the medium format sensors, putting them in more rugged packaging, bundling them up into "solutions" for inspection use where the value is crystal clear to the end user seemed and seems a lot better proposal.

All aerial inspection systems have a clear value impact for the end user. In crop analysis you can predict the yield and time of harvest and have software optimize the management of the fields producing more yield and enabling the owner of the farm to take informed decisions if things aren't developing as they should. Essentially aerial inspection makes you money.

In the repair and meintenance of oil rigs, power lines, etc. a high res drone system is also invaluable in saving inspection costs. Sending a helicopter with two people is a lot more expensive for the first inspection thant a high res drone. Makes you money from day one.

So if one one hand you have a newly developing market like that where you can sell solutions for 300-500k a pop with margins of 50% plus, that's ofc a lot better than risking capital on a huge mirrorless project. Leica's S4 is expected in 2025 and development go was last year, so that's three years for a body. Add another X years until all lenses become fully available ...

PE also thinks in 5 year cycles to return capital so effectively there's never enough time to developed and commercialize a fully fledged mirrorless system which can take more than five years.

A more independent P1 could have developed very differently as a result. In a way PE killed the photo business by talking all the emotion out of the equation and looking at cold hard numbers which just pointed towards putting money in C1 software and industrial inspection projects. It makes sense, but it is sad for the end users.

0 communication is now a strategy to continue to sell products by keeping the optionality open to wind down the business in a year or two. Essentialy by not telling people that they might not produce further stuff they can still sell XT lenses for 13000. And before you know it you are stuck with an electronic shutter that's unuseable. That's why roadmap communication is key. Will there be an IQ5, will there be more product? Why can't one remount XT lenses, etc.

Lastly, the capital markets are effectively closed atm for leveraged debt - meaning if the current owner wants to sell P1 they'd probably aim for another PE to buy it, but the interests are a lot higher today than in 2019 - meaning only if the business is a lot more profitable and growing very fast they will be able to make enough money despite the profit multiples being down due to the rates increases. In 2019 you'd pay 15.5 x EBITDA for a business, today they might get offered 12x or less. That's a huge problem and I imagine the pressure within P1 is very palpable with cost cuts left and right and a lot of pressure to drive growth within the company. Clearly, in this context, no time for photo developments. It is all about converting people to subscribers with C1 and selling expensive solutions to industrial clients.

If you go full X shutter you run a huge brand clump risk in case private equity really lets the business bleed out given a lot more profitable investment areas.

IMHO better to go open system and with copal and aperture unit. Ie Alpa for example. Gives you the flexibility to mount a Hassy back in parallel to a P1 back.
 
Last edited:

Geoff

Well-known member
While there are always surprises possible, in some sense, it seems the lines are drawn. There is a sense that the days of big new ideas are more likely behind us, and that the focus is more on product line development (by each company) along turf lines that make sense both in market share and corporate identity.
In this regard, one could see Hassy expanding the X line, w/ the CFV 100, maybe a slimmer lighter update to the X1DII, more lenses, and some tilt/shift capability. Hard to know how many lens sales one needs for each one to be worthwhile, but it's possible the numbers are healthy and it's a supply problem.
P1 is harder to figure - IMHO the X shutter (and camera) is an odd duck - conceptually a decent idea, but the devil is in the details, and the cost of the X shutter, the closed envelope, and limited movements don't add up in this corner. It seems most benefits can be had from Cambo or Alpa with a lot more flexibility. I'd love to be wrong, but perhaps this system has a limited future.
That raises the question of where they go from here? Upgrades to the 54x40 sensor backs would be welcome, esp. if they could both upgrade performance (built in lens correction, better speed), and lower the cost, in order to remain a viable upper-tier player for the serious photographer. There has (to no one's surprise) been a lack of development of these backs.
In a comparison test of the CFV50II and the IQ3100, there was little noticeable performance difference. Preferred the larger area of the IQ, but the ease of the CFV back was significant, its software upgrades good, with their tweaking of an older sensor giving comparable results. Development is making big strides, and future emphasis may not be where older preferences would suggest - rather smaller, lighter, simpler that can give close to, or the same results is to be expected. Ah, If only the X system could use C1!
No mention above about Fuji and GFX, but that is a well integrated alternative in this mix. Add in an upcoming Leica, too...
 

ThdeDude

Well-known member
a new CFV 100C.... I'd love to see something along the lines of the V1D, the modular square format concept camera displayed at Photokina 2016 for which they secured a 2018 design patent.
A CFV 100C is on its way. I have been told that it will come with a new 907 camera body. Also HB released a new lens line, XCD V, allowing either auto or manual focus (907 not having auto-focus). Add the 907X Control Grip and I think we will have a very competent system, very much looking like the concept study V1D.
 

Paul Spinnler

Well-known member
Anyone got experience with the V system and the previous gen back – how's the experience? The older lenses should be pleasingly sharp / unsharp and perfect for portraits? Does the back automatically record when one presses a V shutter or is it more like pressing a display release butten on a phase back and one needs to have the mirror up for this, kind of like ES in livew view and one needs to look at the back rather than through the viewfinder?

Or simply speaking - can one, without calbles, focus through the optical mirror and then make a digital shot by pressing the analogue shutter release button?
 
Last edited:

Paul Spinnler

Well-known member
Absolutely, the integration is seamless. Except for LV, which is cumbersome like with every SLR type camera.
So the back is in waiting mode until you shoot and then in the moment of the shutter being open / mirror up does an electronic exposure? How does it know when this happens?
 

FloatingLens

Well-known member
There is a mechanical pin protruding from the camera body into the back. This signals the back how long the shutter was pressed.

Exposure time in the image metadata is therefore often not precise. If it is important, the back can measure the true exposure time when a sync cable is connected from lens to the back (which I find pretty awesome!). I don't think any P1 MFDB ever did this.
 

jduncan

Active member
Long overdue in view the X2D was released over a year ago! But at least it's on its way.
Hi,
"Long overdue" could be a nickname for modern-day Hassy, we still waiting for the 90mm f2.5. I was thinking it was an issue with the 1/4000 shutter, but the 28mm has it.
In any case, seems like a good addition to the system.

Best regards,
 

Paul Spinnler

Well-known member
There is a mechanical pin protruding from the camera body into the back. This signals the back how long the shutter was pressed.

Exposure time in the image metadata is therefore often not precise. If it is important, the back can measure the true exposure time when a sync cable is connected from lens to the back (which I find pretty awesome!). I don't think any P1 MFDB ever did this.
You mean from 500 series bodies like the 501, 503?
 

UlbabrabB

Active member
You mean from 500 series bodies like the 501, 503?
All the 500 series, 2000 and SWC: I personally used the cfv 50c II back with a 500cm, 503cw, ELD, SWC 903 and FCW 2003 and all work the same, you just have to select the camera body from the menu in the back.

I find most of the lenses spectacular for portraits and the sonnar 180 and superachromat 250 also for landscape…to the point I bought a chinese adapter that controls the leaf shutter to mount them on my alpas to overcome the lack of tele lenses :)
 

TechTalk

Well-known member
...Also HB released a new lens line, XCD V, allowing either auto or manual focus (907 not having auto-focus).
The 907X does include autofocus, as do all of the X System cameras. I expect a CFV 100C back will improve autofocus performance when attached to a 907X type body.

There is manual or autofocus capability with all of the XCD lenses. XCD-V lenses differ in manual focusing by including distance and depth of field scales and the manual focus mode can be activated by pulling forward on the focusing ring.

Add the 907X Control Grip and I think we will have a very competent system, very much looking like the concept study V1D.
It's in the eye of the beholder. The 907X appears to me to be designed like a digital version of the SWC series, but with interchangeable lenses.

As you pointed out, however, the optional control grip is very similar to the V1D concept's control grip. So it looks like that V1D concept has found good use.
 
Last edited:

darr

Well-known member
Autofocus does work when using XCD lenses, but not (of course) when shooting the CFV II via 500 series bodies and lenses.

Although I still have not used my 907x enough with the 45P, it does autofocus very well for my needs.
I am seriously considering getting the 28P, and that might trigger my use of the 907x more.

Here is a recent image made with a 503cx, cfe 80/2.8, and the cfv50c ii I posted in the MF Images:



--

If you enjoy shooting film with a Hasselblad 500 series camera and lenses, the CFV II is a joy to have.

It can come off a bit clunky if you are used to digital autofocus, but you can get used to it once you have established a shooting checklist for digital use, IMHO.
I have two bodies, a 501cm (film shooting) and a 503cx (digital setup). I wrote about it here.

Basically, getting to Live View quickly might be a hassle for some (a Flexbody is the easiest to use for this); that's why I use the 503cx.
It is unnecessary to have a specific 500 body for digital as I choose; instead, make sure you have a good locking shutter cable.
Some of the 500 bodies, like the 503cx, but not the 501cm, have the 'T' catch for keeping the lens open without a cable.

I engage the 'T' catch when I need to look at Live View for longer than 15 seconds; otherwise, I use a locking cable.
My 503cx has the cropping mask permanently installed, making shooting with the digital back easier for me. YMMV.
 
Top