Hasselblad 907x (the bad and the good)

[usm]

Hi!
I'm still thinking of selling my Leica M Setup and change to 907x. After reading all the threads about the camera I have still some questions. Most of the stories are about how good the camera is, this feels a little bit being in a bubble.
I have also checked the "HASSELBLAD 907x Major connection issues" thread, for me these things are normal in this range of cameras - Leica is the same - I had two M8 and two M (240). So I am asking for some criticism.

I compared the M10r (41MP) with the 907x. All the harshness from the M 240 is gone. The M10r is not as "soft" in tonality as the 907x but is more or less the same "quality".
What I am worrying about is the lowlight performance of the 45p lens - it starts at f4, my standard Leica M Summicron starts at f2. The optical quality is for me equally.
Why do most MF lenses start at such a low aperture?

Second problem is the autofocus, I don't like autofocus. With manual focus I am missing the peaking AND magnification. There is a useless peaking on the screen while showing the whole scene but no peaking when zoomed in to 50% or 100%.

Third: The size of the lenses is demanding. I can put my M lenses into a pocket. The 45p is the only handsome lens. I have to check the Planar CFE 80mm - looks small.

I also tried the XCD 30mm but compared with the 21mm Superelmar on the M10r I would never buy the XCD lens.

What I think is interesting for me is the waiste point of view, the different proportions of the MF and I really like the color (with the 45p). And most of all I want to get a Arca-Swiss factum and a Rodenstock HR 35mm, because the shift solutions for Leica M are more or less reduced to a 28mm Leica R/Schneider lens with 10mm shift.

Tell me your thoughts of changing from FF to MF and loosing the light way of shooting.

 

[Godfrey]

Medium format lenses tend to be slower than 35mm format lenses because in the balance of obtaining premium imaging quality over the full sized format vs lens weight and cost, a slower aperture is the tradeoff. Also, because the format is larger, a smaller aperture nets the same shallow DoF that a larger aperture does in FF; that f/4 45mm on 33x44 gives approximately the same DoF as f/2 on FF. But of course it's less light going to the sensor ... but the photo sites on the sensor are larger, so you push up the ISO 1-2 EV to compensate and get equivalent exposure times. The larger sensor produces such fine tonal gradation and low noise that you can do this with no loss.

I don't mind autofocus when it's apropos to the task, but I use manual focus most of the time. The peaking available with the 907x is a bit too coarse for me, so I rarely use it, but the magnification on the large LCD is so crisp and clean that I never miss the peaking.

The size of the lenses is what it is. Of course, you can always buy a mount adapter and use your Leica lenses on it with the electronic shutter enabled. There are plusses and minuses to this ... not least of which is a bit of corner/edge falloff ...

Overall, working with a larger format camera always has some advantages and some disadvantages compared with work with a smaller camera. The Hasselblad 907x is not a replacement for the style of shooting I do with a Leica M or CL ... It's a different camera and I see differently with it, they produce different kinds of photographs. That's why I have kept my Leica CL (I sold my digital M-D 262 to help fund the 907x) as the two cameras have very different use models. The Hassy is, to me, a much much more comfortable fit to working with a tripod, the Leica is much lighter and easier for hand held work. Both can do both, that that doesn't say they are equal. You are the only one who can choose what suits your uses best.

You will see differently with each of them. And you cannot know how differently until you have worked with either enough to be comfortable, where the camera is no longer obstructing your perceptions and vision. That's the difficult part that no one else can answer for you.

G

 

[Jamaicanpi]

The demands of leaf shutters also make it harder to design larger-aperture lenses.

That f/4 45mm on 33x44 gives approximately the same DoF as f/2 on FF.

I don't think depth-of-field equivalency is actually a major factor here, because the sensor sizes aren't THAT different. The X-system sensor is only about 30% longer along the diagonal than full frame (FF - 24 x 36mm), which makes the f/4 45mm similar to a f/3.1 36mm (maintaining diagonal field of view and depth of field). That relatively similar image circle is why a good number of SLR lenses can be adapted to Fuji/Blad.

I attribute the smaller apertures to a design intention to focus on offering a better-corrected lens than what you'll find in most FF (24x36mm) cameras. Glance at the MTF charts that Hasselblad provides and you'll see that they are amazing.
Equivalency pops up here too, as long as you are looking at the whole image, for a FF-MTF chart at 10 & 30 line pairs/mm (fairly standard) the X-system equivalent would be at 8 & 23 lp/mm. A lot of the XCD lenses are designed to be sharp (>50% MTF across the sensor) @ 40lp/mm, which is equivalent to 50lp/mm on FF.

As Godfrey mentioned, prior to selling your M lenses, you could try adapting them and seeing if you are content with the results... I recall coming across a few posts on this; for example: Ming Thein.

Your thoughts make it sound like you are pretty happy with your system as is (which is a good thing!)... I don't know of any competition to Leica for a compact system with pleasant manual focus. Could you add a waist-level viewfinder to your Leica? (I know nothing about such things)

 

[tcdeveau]

This is one of those things that is a matter of personal preference. Unless you're dead set on moving to a tech cam and need/wanthe versatility the 907x/CFVII offers (like using the back with a tech cam or M-mount lenses), it sounds to me like the M system may suit your needs more than the 907x.

I sold my 907x and got a M10 Monochrom because I only really like using MF for landscapes. I wasn't getting out of the house much, I already have an X1D, so I'm getting more use out of the M10M than I was the 907x. There are others here who have gone the other way and sold their Leica gear for MF, whether the 907x or tech cam setups.

The size of the XCD and other MF lenses is what it is. AFAIK there's never been a lens faster than f1.9-f2.0 for MF, and the XCD lenses are MUCH smaller than their H-mount counterparts. If you want small fast lenses, then MF may not be the best option for you, unless adapting your M-lenses suits your taste. I have decided to stick with FF35-based systems for faster lenses (currently Nikon Z and Leica M) and better autofocus personally.

Of course you can adapt your M-lenses to the 907x as others have mentioned. This has drawbacks though as not every lens will cover the sensor, and you are going to be limited to using the electronic shutter. If I remember correctly, as you point out, you can't do both magnification and peaking in live with manual focus on the 907x (or X1D/X1DII).

I know it's not the answer you're looking for but I'd just try out the 907x and see if it suits you and go from there.

 

[PSS]

Going by the numbers the sensor in the Leica M is just nowhere near the sensor in the 907, not just pixels but mostly DR and the larger pixels mean better high ISO....
but in general the 907 does not really compare to anything in the market....form or shooting style.....the M is smaller, lighter, has a viewfinder, made for eye level shooting,....totally different camera.....
I shoot the X1DI in manual focus and use the AF-D button to help out now and then.....peaking on both Hasselblads is more or less pointless IMO, my shooting does not give me enough time to use the zoom function, so I do hope that i will be able to map a button as AF-D with the 907 with future firmware....manual focus is more of a struggle for me then with the X1DII....but overall i prefer the 907....
I just shot with a friend, he handled both cameras for the first time and has several film cameras incl kamiya RZ, pentax 67 and leica, he could not warm up the 907 but loved the X1DII and will be getting one....
its always hard to recommend cameras like these (when the functions and handling seems to be so far out of the mainstream) but the 907 has a special place even there....definitely needs to be played with first....but awesome if you like it....

 

[Godfrey]

The control grip for the 907x allows you to map AF-D to a button on the grip. There aren't any spare buttons on the bare 907x camera to map anything to.

 

[Photon42]

I am not quite getting why you want to sell the Ms for funding a 907, other than for the funds alone. It is a so completely different shooting experience, that I would definitely rent one first, if you have the chance. if you like to photograph on eye level, the 907 is not really for you. If you already say the 30mm does not appeal to you, which is a fantastic lens btw, then I seriously have my doubts that you will be happy with the 907, or even the X1D for that matter. In case you just want to scratch an itch - go for one of the Leica M or SL offerings. The SL2 has the same price point, you can use all of your lenses and can even easily adapt other brands, as the camera does have a integrated shutter.
Adapting lenses with Hasselblad only works to this point with H lenses reasonably well. Everything else is E-Shutter only, and in my book has too many limitations for a general purpose set up (which you may not have ...).

 

[onasj]

Having extensively tested the Leica M10-R and M10-P sensors...

M10-R vs M10-P acuity and noise:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/1e0xkm41s...ise side-by-side comparison results.docx?dl=0

M10-R vs M10-P shadow and highlight recovery:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/1ejrrg4xg...ery side-by-side comparison results.docx?dl=0

M10-P vs M10-M acuity and noise:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/eox9u670b...ise side-by-side comparison results.docx?dl=0

...I think you'll find the older but larger CFV-II-50c sensor that is paired with the 907x to be a bit better in overall dynamic range and noise level than the M10-Ron a per-image-width basis, consistent with Bill Claff's sensor measurements (https://photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR.htm#Hasselblad X1D-50c,Leica M10-R )...

...but very similar on a per-PIXEL basis. It's just hard to beat the math of the CFV-11-50c having a sensor that is 56% larger in area than that of the M10-R.

The bigger differences than the sensor size, in my opinion, are:
1) AF vs MF. Both have their strengths and niche uses. The XCD lenses offer ok MF, mostly by wire, but are not as agile or easy to manually focus as Leica M lenses. However, their AF is quite accurate, though slow by current 35-mm standards (Nikon, Sony, etc.).

2) Lens size and weight across the focal length range. If you want to carry a camera + lens(es) in a small bag or just around your neck or wrist, the Leica M system offers many options and focal lengths that are small and optically superb from 16 mm to 90 mm. The 907x-50c system offers one truly compact option: the 45P/4 lens. Everything else will be about the size of a medium-large DSLR lens. Hopefully Hesselblad will make additional smaller lenses in the future, as the 45P is excellent.

 

[0luke1]

I switched from an M10 to X1DII and carry the body attached to the 45p and the 90 in a very small bag. The ergonomic of the X1DII are better than the M10 IMO. The 907x/50c has completely different ergonomics, but the software is the same. I really like them both and haven touched the M10 in months.

 

[Jared]

They are really aimed at different styles of photography and have, frankly, not a lot of overlap. The M10 (whatever flavor) excels at street photography, travel, and anything that works well from 28mm to 50mm as long as “action” isn’t involved and flash isn’t required. Obviously, you can extend that envelope to wider angles with an external viewfinder or to longer focal lengths and macro with live view, but the sweet spot is definitely 28mm to 50mm with fairly static subjects.

The Hasselblad is also a niche camera, but a very different niche. It’s great for landscape photography and studio work. The strobe capabilities are vastly better than the Leica. The dynamic range is better. Image stacking is semi automated. The overall image quality is better, but it’s not like the Leica is poor in this area, and virtually every current camera is pretty good. The Hasselblad will generally hold image quality into the corners better than a Leica M at the most typical focal ratios for each. On a tripod, I’d take the Hasselblad any day of the week (and I spent years shooting M’s from the 8.2 to the 10). The Hasselblad is extremely compact and light for a medium format camera, but it’s still a medium format camera. For low light (nightscapes and the like) the Hasselblad will noticeably outperform the Leica.

Which is the better choice will depend entirely on what you need. Do you shoot street or landscape? Architecture? Sports? Avoid both for that last use case. Product photography or studio? Available light portraits?

As to your questions... What are the flaws of the 907X? First, no viewfinder. Using the EVF at waist level is no problem at all indoors or in shade, but it can be less satisfying (though still perfectly manageable) in bright sun. If you are using a tripod (which you often would with this camera) you can tether it to an iPhone or iPad for improved visibility in sunlight. Much more reliable wireless tethering than the Leica.

Second, it isn’t weather sealed. Neither is the Leica, of course, but that’s definitely a flaw in what is otherwise a really good landscape camera.

Third, the AF is extremely slow. It is very accurate—you can trust it if you get a green “success” square—but it is not suitable for anything but static subjects. The magnified view is perfectly usable for manual focus, but focus-by-wire is not at all satisfying. If memory serves, though, the Leica in LiveView mode will not show you a magnified view anywhere but the center of the field which can be a problem on lenses that have any field curvature. Focus and re-compose doesn’t always achieve critical focus with the Leica. I can definitely recall running into issues with the 35mm Summilux in particular which has a particularly oddly shaped plane of focus. With the Hasselblad you can manually focus anywhere in the field of view, so you can compose then focus rather than the other way around. That’s really nice, depending on the subject and f-stop.

Fourth, the 907X and the X1D II are expensive compared to the Fuji 50 megapixel cameras. I still prefer them because of the controls, but they aren’t the greatest bang for the buck. Probably not a concern coming from Leica, bust still.

Fifth, for product photographers, there is no hot shoe. You will have to find a way to mount a cold shoe and run a short cable to your wireless transmitter, and even then you can forget TTL (though few people doing product photography use TTL anyway, so not much of an issue with that) The work arounds to this are perfectly fine, but it is one more expense and hassle in setting up your system.

Sixth is the form factor. A box camera like the 907X makes the Leica feel comfortable and secure in the hand, and that’s pretty hard to do! Neither is great in terms of just holding the camera, though both have excellent, if different, controls.

Eight goes back to speed. There is no AF-C mode at all and the frames per second rating is abysmal. Of course, the Leica has no AF of any kind and it’s not exactly a speed demon either in terms of drive rate, but if you are comparing the camera to most other mirrorless designs this will come across as a flaw.

Ninth is shutter lag. There is a lot. With the Leica you get almost none. With the Hasselblad it’s more like 200 ms. If you don’t mind losing the viewfinder entirely (on a tripod, for example), there is a mode that allows instantaneous shutter releases, but you have to have composed and preset the exposure. Again, it’s a landscape/studio camera so this is pretty minor, but if you try to use it for anything dynamic, again this will come across as a flaw.

I would not worry about the speed of the lenses—any of them. They are amply fast for how you will use the lenses in the real world. Truly. Also, the lens quality is excellent with one notable exception. I hated the 45mm f/3.2 lens. OK, hated is too strong. Let’s just say it isn’t up to the same level as the other lenses. All the rest of the lenses are really excellent. The 45 3.2 is merely good. The rest are significantly better than most M lenses especially in the corners. That’s not a knock against Leica. They are physically much larger and heavier than (most) M lenses and they don’t need to be as fast. This allows them to have better performance. Also, keep in mind the difference in aspect ratio. I generally much prefer the 4:3 aspect ratio of the Hasselblad just because it’s a better match to the most common print sizes and I do print all of my better photos. A reasonable person might prefer either aspect ratio.

OK, that’s every flaw/weakness I can think of for the 907X as a stills camera. You can increase the flexibility a little bit by considering the X1DII instead—it adds a decent viewfinder as well as weather sealing and some additional buttons and controls, but you lose the tilt screen. Same lenses, same chip, same image quality. If you are looking to do landscape work or studio work the 907X is a huge improvement on the Leica. For street or most forms of travel photography or family pictures, though, I’d say it is a downgrade. Neither is anywhere near as flexible or well rounded as a Sony Alpha or a Leica SL2. Horses for courses.

 

[spb]

Jared some interesting stuff in your longish comment. I agree completely with this "They are really aimed at different styles of photography and have, frankly, not a lot of overlap"

I prefer my 907X over the M10 or even the Fuji GFX. This could be down to the way Phocus deals with the files on import. I am definitely liking the end results of my images more and with much less post processing. I do miss having a grip built into the 907X, as that is what I am used to, but I dare say I will get used to it with or without the Control Grip.

On a purely aesthetic basis, I have never owned such a beautifully designed camera as the 907X.

It is a great pity that the screen on the 907X, does not have a 'barn-door' type of inbuilt hood, or at least one that could be easily slipped into place when needed. that would be my only bug-bear of this otherwise incredible camera.

 

[fmueller]

I'm still thinking of selling my Leica M Setup and change to 907x

You needn’t abandon Leica for the 907x, except for reasons of cost or the dilemma of having too much to choose from when its time to actually take/make photographs!

The 50mp sensor in the 907x and the X1DII and the Fuji GFX 50 series is quite special. I’ve owned the Fuji and now I have the Hasselblad 907. I probably wouldn’t have made the leap from Fuji if not for the ability to fit the CVFII 50C back to my Cambo tech cam as well. All that being said, I far prefer the Hasselblad over the Fuji for many reasons, the interface being the primary reason, color is also great, but Fuji is pretty darn good too. No complaints about Fuji lenses either.

I am a little put off by not being able to use Capture One directly on the Hasselblad raw files (Fuji 44x33 cameras were locked out for a long time also, but now supported). I’m back to Lightroom which I had always run in parallel to C1 for its superior file management.

All that being said, you probably still want to have a small camera to toss in a rucksack or shoulder bag for less photo-centric outings. See below

Tell me your thoughts of changing from FF to MF and loosing the light way of shooting.

A Leica Q or Q2 satisfies most needs if you tend to like shooting wide. The Q2 has 47 mpix so cropping to a 35mm or even a 50mm FoV can be done quite well. You’ll have autofocus and still have an outstanding manual focus option.

 

[spb]

I am a little put off by not being able to use Capture One directly on the Hasselblad raw files (Fuji 44x33 cameras were locked out for a long time also, but now supported). I’m back to Lightroom which I had always run in parallel to C1 for its superior file management.

When I had a GFX 50R, C1 20 did not open the RAW files from the Fujifim either which annoyed the heck out of me. At least Affinity Photo, Luminar and a few others do that.

 

[Jared]

Jared some interesting stuff in your longish comment. I agree completely with this "They are really aimed at different styles of photography and have, frankly, not a lot of overlap"

I prefer my 907X over the M10 or even the Fuji GFX. This could be down to the way Phocus deals with the files on import. I am definitely liking the end results of my images more and with much less post processing. I do miss having a grip built into the 907X, as that is what I am used to, but I dare say I will get used to it with or without the Control Grip.

On a purely aesthetic basis, I have never owned such a beautifully designed camera as the 907X.

It is a great pity that the screen on the 907X, does not have a 'barn-door' type of inbuilt hood, or at least one that could be easily slipped into place when needed. that would be my only bug-bear of this otherwise incredible camera.

It is a really nice camera. I love mine. I was just listing all the negatives I could think of to “get them out there” so to speak. Most of them are either intrinsic to the design (lack of viewfinder) or make little difference for the intended uses (slow speed of operation). I didn’t really list any of the positives just because they are well known and understood.

If the negatives in my list don’t bother you, you’re going to be extremely happy with the camera.

 

[usm]

Hi again, a lot of interesting answers.

First I have to say, I have rented a 907x for a weekend. I walked around with my current Leica M 240 cross the left shoulder and the 907x cross the right shoulder. Why it came up to me trying the 907x was because of the waist level. I don’t liketo view through the lens while shouting. I want to see what’s around. The rangefinder is like that, but no DSLR or mirrorless camera (x1d, sl2,...) can do this. The 907x was interesting because of the continuous changes between the waist level screen and looking at the scene.
I know that every flip screen camera can do this but they are not designed for that, it’s a feature. Looking at a Sony flip screen and using all the knobs that are made for using them from the back of the camera is not my thing. Also holding a DSLR in front of my face and looking at the screen is not an option.
I also tried the Fuji gfx, the smaller “rangefinder” one - no.
So for me the two concepts are similar but the approach and the solution are different.

You will see differently with each of them. And you cannot know how differently until you have worked with either enough to be comfortable, where the camera is no longer obstructing your perceptions and vision. That's the difficult part that no one else can answer for you.

You are absolutely right!


What kind of photography I’m doing: Landscape (mountains), Architecture. That’s what I am printing. Walking around and searching for situations, geometry but most of them are without people.
I am not a street photographer, walking around and hunting people or doing portraits.
Family photos: I do, but this not important. No products. Maybe some art repros in the near future.
Lenses I use: Mostly the M 35 2.0, second the M 50 1.4, third the 21 3.4 and last the R 28 pc lens. The last months I often used the 50 1.4 because of the nicer out of focus rendering but I definitely prefer the 35mm view.

This is also a reason why I checked out the 907x with the 45p.
My setup would be: 45p, Arca Swiss Factum or Cambo WRC 400 with Rodenstock 35mm HR. Maybe an older Planar 80mm.
The HR 35mm with shift would serve the missing 21mm view and will also replace the 28 pc lens.

I started with a Digilux 2, next was M8 and current is M 240. Next logical and easy decision would be the M10r. Keeping the M is not possible because of funds. Also does not make sense, I always try to have just one.

Thanks.
M

 

[spb]

I identify with this sentiment: " I always try to have just one" - because of funds.

 

[Photon42]

Good thing you rented the 907. Great if it matches what you require. Family photos these days can also be catered for with the phone. I enjoy the 45p (on my X1D2) very much. Small, light, wonderful manual focussing, sharp, nice rendering, comparably cheap. Only downside sometimes is f4. But well.

 

[usm]

Only downside sometimes is f4. But well.

That’s also something I fight with. My Summicron is f2.