Hasselblad vs GFX system

[marchaers]

Hey guys!

I've recently started a thread asking for buying advice and that led me to an important choice that I'll have to make this weekend.

I have the opportunity to buy the Hasselblad H6D-100C at an insanely good value which would be worth the money. The biggest reason for wanting this one is the 'true' MF sensor. Though as we're all aware, Fujifilm has disrupted the MF market. I can get the GFX-100S + lens for about the same price as the H6D-100C body without lens.

Now to me there are a couple of reasons to go either way and this is how I'm thinking about it. I work in the high end creative/commercial industry that needs the highest possible image quality - main reason is that I've built a career around my style which is one of the reasons I've always looked at the sensor I'm buying - not so much the system.

For commercial work accurate color rendition and an overal high quality feel to the images I deliver to my clients is important. Till now I've always rented Phase One or Hasselblad for when it's necessary. Though one thing that has been a theme is the quirks of each system. For my art work the leverage I have with the files is extremely important, I need a smooth image to work with. Light fall-off in my studio is so essential and I feel like the Hasselblad is leagues ahead of Fuji. Don't ask me why but I just see it when I compare images.

On the other hand, Fujifilm is a better suited system as a whole for quick and reliable work. The scale of the company and availability is very good. The 'modern tech' that's in it like IBIS and phase detect autofocus are great. I shoot Sony now (which I'll keep doing) but I mostly manual focus (with focus assist) on that camera. Hit rate is super high because of it, and that also says I'm used to slower paced and higher efficiency shooting.

Now here's the thing I can't see without having both cameras side by side. It's the pure image quality. To my eyes the Fuji files look 'harsh' and quite a bit more digital. That's the exact thing I'd like to avoid from the ground up. I don't want to edit down to a 'film' look. I just want a good clean image with beautiful skin rendering.

I have rented the GFX-100S and am taking it with me when I'm going to test the Hasselblad so that will most probably help. Though that will only be for an hour or two when I truly have them side by side.

One last weird thing that somehow still also feels important is the overal 'perceived quality' a Hasselblad brings with the name. I know it doesn't make sense and I've built the largest sum of my career with cheaper full frame cameras. But I guess it does factor in when it's high end work.

My question to you is whether or not you have experience with full frame MF sensors vs the cropped ones. IF you have both, what you would consider the big +es and -es between the two.

Sorry for the long story haha I hope I can find some clarity here.

Thanks,

Marc
www.marc-haers.nl

 

[SylB]

Hi

I have a Pentax 645Z since 2014, and a Hasselblad H6D-100c since 2017.
The 645Z provided incredibly good quality files coming from 24x36, and I thought it would be enough forever, I couldn't imagine what could be better.
Still, I decided to buy a H6D-100C in 2017, but mostly to get wider angle lenses, and access to the HTS.
The file quality from the H6 is absolutely better, there is no doubt. It is not only the added megapixels, it is more visibly the colors and the transitions. It looks smoother, but all the information and the details are here. When I occasionally get back to the Pentax, it is always surprising. I suspect the difference is not only coming from the sensor, but from the lenses too.
I use both cameras for landscape mostly, so AF is not really important, I wouldn't have any useful comment on that...
I have no experience with the GFX100 (I am reluctant to EVF), but I am ready to bet that the files will look a little harsher than those of the H6D-100c you are considering, and again the lenses will have an effect in this. Maybe visually sharper, more appealing at first sight, but I am not sure this is what you are looking for.

Anyway, I'm sure some of the members have an experience closer to what you are asking, and I will be interested in your own experience after your comparison, knowing what you are looking for.

 

[marchaers]

Thank you so much for the response! Appreciate it.

You're kind of confirming my thoughts. I was sitting with my girlfriend recently trying to explain to her what that difference was that I could always instantly tell that something was shot on a larger sensor. It's what you explained, the colors and the transitions and the lack of harshness. There's something that always irks me and that is when photos are too sharp and that too definitely starts in how the glass performs. Technically perfect on the charts when it comes to details is doesn't translate into a pleasing look (IMO).

I personally love working with my EVF on my Sony bodies. Especially manually focusing with focus assist is wonderful. I also really want to see what it looks like to manually focus the h6d on Sunday. I'd still prefer that and only will use AF when it's not as critical. Though I read many good things about true focus as well.

Is there anything you've experienced with the Hasselblad when it comes to overall reliability? One thing I'm reluctant about is the fail rate or communication errors when on set. We don't have a service center here in The Netherlands so that means it'll be shipped off to be repaired/maintained. Not a dealbreaker - but the (rumours of) the high pricing for 'simple' repair doesn't sound so great.

Curious to hear your thoughts about that .

Hi

I have a Pentax 645Z since 2014, and a Hasselblad H6D-100c since 2017.
The 645Z provided incredibly good quality files coming from 24x36, and I thought it would be enough forever, I couldn't imagine what could be better.
Still, I decided to buy a H6D-100C in 2017, but mostly to get wider angle lenses, and access to the HTS.
The file quality from the H6 is absolutely better, there is no doubt. It is not only the added megapixels, it is more visibly the colors and the transitions. It looks smoother, but all the information and the details are here. When I occasionally get back to the Pentax, it is always surprising. I suspect the difference is not only coming from the sensor, but from the lenses too.
I use both cameras for landscape mostly, so AF is not really important, I wouldn't have any useful comment on that...
I have no experience with the GFX100 (I am reluctant to EVF), but I am ready to bet that the files will look a little harsher than those of the H6D-100c you are considering, and again the lenses will have an effect in this. Maybe visually sharper, more appealing at first sight, but I am not sure this is what you are looking for.

Anyway, I'm sure some of the members have an experience closer to what you are asking, and I will be interested in your own experience after your comparison, knowing what you are looking for.

 

[JeRuFo]

Anything can be a Hasselblad. Whenever I'm shooting with a tech cam people come up to me and ask if it is one. People taking you and your camera serious can be helpful in certain situations, but I don't think it is about the actual camera. I tend to go more the other way and try to be as unobtrusive as possible, but that is hard to do with a tech cam with some cables attached on a big tripod.

I agree that the picture of the 100C looks a bit more relaxed than the Fuji, which can look a little crisp, especially for portraits. That said, you can avoid making the files extra crispy quite easily and it would be offset by the practicality of the Fuji easily.

 

[marchaers]

Yeah I agree with you. I usually shoot super low key though this camera would be used for the occasion when I need the best of the best quality. The 'bragging' rights are super useless and unimportant to me but yeah, commercialism lol.

I'm going to really look if I can get the fuji eased down into the hasselblad territory and I know about making custom profiles.

That's the only thing I can't confirm just yet until ive shot them side by side and was looking for some experiences here.

 

[robmac]

We use the H5D-40 and GFX50S. Not a direct comparison to what you're looking at, but our 'findings' have been interesting.

I do tend to agree on the impact of the lenses on images - the GF lens are very, very sharp and Images can look 'crisp'. BUT, you have the added benefit with Fuji of using all the Hassy lenses on it with manual focus. We use the GFX most of the time with Hassy glass via the adapter.

We acquired the GFX as a backup because it could use the same glass as the Hassy, but the H5D has now become the backup, even though I prefer the Hassy ergos.

We get a high-iso sensor, focus peaking & WYSIWYG via the tilting EVF, access to a 1/800 sync at the push of a button (or body shutter and 1/125 sync to spare wear on the lens), etc. There's also the benefit that 1/800 sync Hassy glass is very inexpensive - but also harder to sell.

You may want to have a Fuji H adapter on hand during your tests to help in any decision making.

 

[marchaers]

Thanks so much that helps alot. I'll see if they have one to rent out. The sync speed is very nice.

I also recently found out the pixel density of the 100s is the same as the a7r 4 which might explain that I can 'feel' the difference between the hassy and the 100s when I look at the images.

Thanks so much for your comparison though. Good to know you do prefer the hassy ergos. I'm going to see if I can manual focus it easily in the studio setting as well. With the fuji it's going to be way easier due to MF assist. But if I can do it optically and just as efficient that would eliminate the difference.

 

[lookbook]

... I am completely unqualified to answer your questions Marc.

But what difference does it make to you which hand tool you work with?
I was also very interested in the great Fuji for a while, until I had it in my hand.
To me it felt bad - like plastic.

I myself would have no desire to shoot with that camera, but I don't know,
but I don't know what the Hasselblad feels like.

You can certainly take technically very good pictures with both systems.
If you enjoy working with one system more than the other, you might get better pictures with it?

Best regards

Uwe

 

[marchaers]

Hey Uwe!

Thanks for your reply. For me it's more about the sensor rather than the tool. In my work I am looking for the best possible quality and it's very visible (if applied correctly) that a sensor has a size difference. The H6D has a 53x40mm sensor against the 44x33mm on the Fuji. That's quite a big difference when it comes to pixel density and tonal range. That's why I'm looking for a bit of 'real comparison' advice. My only true memory of shooting a 'cropped medium format' was years ago on an IQ250 back and I was very underwhelmed by the quality compared to my (then) a7r. But that was an older CCD sensor, so a bit of a dated opinion by now.

I'll for sure be able to make good photos with any system. Though there's this consideration - Do I go for the larger sensor (will I really notice the difference) and if I do is the potential higher cost worth the step up. Till now my feeling 100% still says go for the Hasselblad, but I'm really looking forward to testing it next to the 100S.

Thanks again for your reply, your question was very qualified actually. Very good to talk about the philosophical angle .

 

[SylB]

Regarding pleasure to use one or the other, I think like Uwe, but didn't want to write it, because this is personal, and not what you asked for.

Regarding reliability... well... a bit mixed opinion on my side.
When it was released, it would often freeze and needed a battery removal to be unlocked. It quickly changed with firmware updates, and since the last versions, no problem on my side. I don't shoot tethered, so no experience on that, nevertheless I read that Phocus is OK on that feature, and the H6D is up to the task and more stable than previous bodies, but I would prefer if other users could confirm.
Concerning the body itself, I had a sensor problem, and it had to be changed. It was done promptly (I live in Europe like you, so Hasselblad is "not far away"), and the cost of the change was taken by Hasselblad, even if the camera was out of warranty at that time. It is fair, and I hoped for that. So overall I don't complain, really. This is the only problem I had, but it is quite noticeable, even with the happy ending.
My conclusion would be that Hasselblad knows how to handle such a problem and to take care of their customers, for a product aimed at professionals (which I am not)

 

[PSS]

I am not a big fan of the H system, I do right now own a X1DII and 907 and love hasselblad files and color and come to this system from GFX 50
I much , much prefer to hasselblad colors and workflow, the gfx 100 files don't change that, just more pixels.
the H 100 is a completely different animal, slow, mirror, huge, heavy, slow, slow.....but the best files available (other then the top phase backs but again, color comes into play and is a personal preference)
the gfx 100 is the closest a MF system comes to FF mirrorless in terms of speed and handling but IMO the files aren't that different from high end Nikon, sony because the overall look is pretty similar. but of course all those systems run circles around the GFX with AF, speed,....
if it was my choice, and I would get the H 100 for the same price as the gfx, I might go for the H only because I really, really like the X system, which to me brings the best (same) color along with amazing files and still ok speed (much closer to GFX then to H) and it still complements the H, making the X a great back up, overall shooter. but you would probably still want/need some FF for commercial jobs requiring higher ISO, faster AF,....

 

[ThdeDude]

About two years ago, I looked at both, H system and P1, for use on a technical camera.

At that point in time I could not find a used H-100c on offer, but there were quite a few P1 IQ3's for just above $10K.

There seems to be a general consensus that Hasselblad's H system is going the way of the dodo.

P1's longterm hardware future may be uncertain too but at least likely that they stay in business for the duration of the 5-year IQ3 warranty.

 

[marchaers]

Thanks guys for your responses. It's true what they say about this forum. It truly is nice.

@SylB I agree with you and Uwe. It is very personal. I guess that's why I wanted to test out both cameras side by side. It'll be that instant 'aha' moment I'm sure. As I usually have lol. Your story sounds good enough to me though. What I need is a bit of service and I understood from the guys where I'd go for repair that indeed the main difference is the wait. You still have the service of getting a temporary replacement body. But it also comes from Sweden so only wait there is shipping. No problem though. Worst case IF I needed it for a big job, the client would pay for the 'rent' anyway. I'd then instead of use my own actually have to rent one which is no big loss.

@PSS Yeah the slow process from shooting to editing the big files is a very conscious choice one has to make. Though I have shot with the system before and I know what I'm getting into. You're actually confirming what I've seen and am expecting. The GFX is comparable to a FF mirrorless body. But I have (and will keep) my Sony A7R III camera for anything that doesn't require the H6D. I love it's sensor for my basic needs and that camera has been everywhere with me. I wouldn't even let it go because of sentimental reasons lol. It's the reason I still keep my busted up A7R (I) in my bag lol. Thanks so much for the advice though, you've confirmed what I've been expecting.

@ThdeDude You're right, though the fear of it fading isn't as great as I was even considering Leaf Credo backs lol. Nothing to lean on in that department. In a worst case scenario I could someday in the future upgrade to an IQ back that's been released with more modern features as they usually are produced with H mounts as well.

Guys thanks again. I'm loving the feedback and opinions.

 

[schuster]

From an audio perspective, this reminds me of the differences between a CD and a vinyl record of the same master. My first digital back was a Hasselblad branded Imacon. With Hasselblad's proprietary software, the color was like Ektachrome 100 Plus which was gorgeous when processed by only one of the four labs that I used. The art directors loved it because the separations (4-color printing) were always spot-on. My next back was the Phase One IQ-160. It didn't "feel" like Ektachrome 100 Plus, but after several days of nudging Capture One adjustments, along with old fashion over-under exposures, the images got to were where I wanted them. So... If the camera fits your shooting style, you might be able to find a formula that produces images with the right feel.

 

[marchaers]

@schuster Yeah very true. I think the 'look' of the images can always be adjusted as you said. It's the main reason why I've always mainly stuck around in digital and didn't do a full transition to film. I could always replicate the look at a much faster and easier pace. At a very young age I was always looking at my uncle's analog photos and my then cool digital camera didn't look the same. So I at a young age I learned how to replicate that 'timeless' look that his photographs had hence one of the main reasons I built a career - I was doing this before it became so popular to imitate film. It already developed into my own personal look with the main focus being timelessness, so I was discovered for the feel of the images, because it's digital with a hint of that film/timeless-feel.

I think what ultimately will make the difference this Sunday is whether or not the tonal range, overal quality and the editing works right. I wouldn't call my images 'over-edited' but I do tend to push the limits of the images to get the most out of them. That's where the decisions will be made. When I import the files (Hasselblad into Phocus/Fujifilm into Capture one) is when I can see what happens. I will definitely share my findings here for you guys to see and for the 0.001% of the photographers that might wonder the same lol.

 

[ThdeDude]

someday in the future upgrade to an IQ back that's been released with more modern features as they usually are produced with H mounts as well.

Let's hope that there will be a new P1 digital back. (IQ5)! My understanding is that P1 stopped offering different mounts.

 

[marchaers]

@ThdeDude You're actually right. That's too bad! In that case I'll just hope that with the right care and maintenance the H6D and the 100C back will go as long as most digital backs do. Fingers crossed. Can't wait to actually try it.

 

[ThdeDude]

One important factor in my P1 IQ3 purchase decision was that there were still some years left on the factory warranty.

If no factory warranty anymore on the 100C you may want to consider this when negotiating the purchase price or return policy.

 

[marchaers]

Yeah I'll double check that. The price is already really (I mean really) low for the full body. Well maintained and first owner for under 10K... Comparable to an IQ180 back only price. So yeah, but I'll double check what the warranty's looking like for sure. Thanks for the tip.

 

[Steve Hendrix]

Let's hope that there will be a new P1 digital back. (IQ5)! My understanding is that P1 stopped offering different mounts.

This is correct.

The last digital back offered in a Contax mount was IQ1 80/IQ2 60.
The last digitla back offered in a Hasselblad V mount was IQ3 80.
The last digital back offered in a Hasselblad H mount was IQ3 100.

All future Phase One development is XF/XT platform based (in addition to their industrial systems, which are experiencing significant sales growth).


Steve Hendrix/CI