It is Finally Here, 907x 100c

[jng]

Thank you for the heads up on the 100 Planar. It looks like there are two models and the MTF charts look identical.

• https://www.zeiss.com/content/dam/c...fe/en/datasheet-zeiss-planar-35100-cfi-en.pdf
• https://www.zeiss.com/content/dam/c...lad-cf/en/datasheet-zeiss-planar-35100-en.pdf

This made me wonder what the differences are between the models. With a quick Google search, I stumbled upon this thread on a website that strangely seems tailor-made for our camera and lens fascination

Focus on a special lens: Hasselblad Planar T* 3,5/100

In medium format photography, I am a big fan of the Hasselblad Planar T* 3,5/100. I've had two copies of the CF version so far. While both gave very good results at infinity, their performance at closer distances seemed lacking and did not reflect their general reputation as the jewel of the...

www.getdpi.com

Warren,

Glad that you found this old thread in your trip down the rabbit hole. The optical formulae for the CF and Cfi versions are identical. The main benefits of the Cfi/e versions are (allegedly) better light baffling and (definitely) butter-smooth focus helicals.

John

 

[ThdeDude]

I can feel the vibes of finally having good news in the technical camera field.

Not only we have a new and well-priced fairly up-to-date digital back, but also likely that the CFV-100c won't be the last or final digital back in the CFV line.

Even if the CFV-100c is not quite up to IQ4-150 standard in every regard, a Mark II version should.

 

[Whisp3r]

Good evening fellow photographers,

Long-time lurker here on GetDPI ;-)

I've been fascinated by tech cams (the 'pancake' ones) for a long time. Yet the cost associated for integrating such a setup into my daily workflow proved to outweigh the benefits. It was mostly a matter of 'overkill' as most of my clients would never be able to see the difference between my current setup (GFX + Canon/Fuji tilt-shift lenses) and an IQ4. However, that doesn't make tech cams less fascinating to me ;-) With the release of this new Hasselblad back, I have to admit that my desire to operate such a system has been sparked once again.

I've been following this thread and I've noticed something that is somewhat unclear to me, more specifically two statements that seem to contradict each other in a certain way, so I was hoping that the original posters could clarify this.

The first post is by mister Snipes, it links to an article on Capture Integration as part of a presentation for the new Hasselblad back, allow me to quote:
"...But every digital back would produce a magenta cast when shifting, due to the frontside architecture of the electronics that the incoming light had to pass through. This could be corrected with duplicate captures run through a software tool like Capture One’s LCC or the Scene Calibration tool in Phocus. But with light changing, who wants to adjust exposure and then have to capture 3 more images to use for correction of the original 3 captures for your 3 shot stitch? And then have to spend the time correcting that in post?
The Hasselblad CFV 100c comes with a BSI (backside illuminated) sensor, which places more of the electronics below the receiving photo wells. Now magenta casts are no longer produced, and the extra steps for removing them are not necessary."

The second post is by mister Diggles (page 7), allow me to quote:
"With Schneider APO Digitar lenses anything shorter than 60mm will require an LCC. For the times you do need a wider angle lens like the 43XL or 35XL then you will need to take a LCC reference image to compensate for color cast. Not a big deal really because Phocus has LCC functionality, it is called Scene Calibration. So this is easily fixable. "


Taking this information into account: does this mean I would, in specific scenarios (using a 43XL or 35XL), still need to perform LCC correction despite using a back with a BSI-sensor? The second post states this specifically, but the first post states that these extra steps (I assume it's a reference to LCC correction) are no longer necessary.

Would anybody please be willing to clarify? My apologies if this question has already been answered in another post. Many thanks in advance and have a nice day!

Kind regards,
Carlos

 

[ThdeDude]

"With Schneider APO Digitar lenses anything shorter than 60mm will require an LCC."

Apparently an exception to the general rule that a BSI sensor does not require LCC.

 

[Alkibiades]

Good evening fellow photographers,

Long-time lurker here on GetDPI ;-)

I've been fascinated by tech cams (the 'pancake' ones) for a long time. Yet the cost associated for integrating such a setup into my daily workflow proved to outweigh the benefits. It was mostly a matter of 'overkill' as most of my clients would never be able to see the difference between my current setup (GFX + Canon/Fuji tilt-shift lenses) and an IQ4. However, that doesn't make tech cams less fascinating to me ;-) With the release of this new Hasselblad back, I have to admit that my desire to operate such a system has been sparked once again.

I've been following this thread and I've noticed something that is somewhat unclear to me, more specifically two statements that seem to contradict each other in a certain way, so I was hoping that the original posters could clarify this.

The first post is by mister Snipes, it links to an article on Capture Integration as part of a presentation for the new Hasselblad back, allow me to quote:
"...But every digital back would produce a magenta cast when shifting, due to the frontside architecture of the electronics that the incoming light had to pass through. This could be corrected with duplicate captures run through a software tool like Capture One’s LCC or the Scene Calibration tool in Phocus. But with light changing, who wants to adjust exposure and then have to capture 3 more images to use for correction of the original 3 captures for your 3 shot stitch? And then have to spend the time correcting that in post?
The Hasselblad CFV 100c comes with a BSI (backside illuminated) sensor, which places more of the electronics below the receiving photo wells. Now magenta casts are no longer produced, and the extra steps for removing them are not necessary."

The second post is by mister Diggles (page 7), allow me to quote:
"With Schneider APO Digitar lenses anything shorter than 60mm will require an LCC. For the times you do need a wider angle lens like the 43XL or 35XL then you will need to take a LCC reference image to compensate for color cast. Not a big deal really because Phocus has LCC functionality, it is called Scene Calibration. So this is easily fixable. "


Taking this information into account: does this mean I would, in specific scenarios (using a 43XL or 35XL), still need to perform LCC correction despite using a back with a BSI-sensor? The second post states this specifically, but the first post states that these extra steps (I assume it's a reference to LCC correction) are no longer necessary.

Would anybody please be willing to clarify? My apologies if this question has already been answered in another post. Many thanks in advance and have a nice day!

Kind regards,
Carlos

Forget the advertisment,
it is exactly as Warren wrote: you will need LCC correction!!!!!
the color cast at BSI is much much better than on traditional chips- but is there. The correction will be always be needed to become perfect image quality, not only for Schneider lenses, also for wide rodenstocks. The correction is also for light fall of that will be very important when big stichig are made.
The BSi will allow the use of some wide lenses, because the LCC correction will work. At some point the LCC correction simply did not work any more- the color cast was too strong.
Now with BSI chip you will be able to use the whole image circle of some lenses like 28xl, 35xl, 43 xl or 23 HR, 28HR.... and the little color cast that will be there can be delated completely without any degradation of image quality.

 

[Hel]

......Taking this information into account: does this mean I would, in specific scenarios (using a 43XL or 35XL), still need to perform LCC correction despite using a back with a BSI-sensor? The second post states this specifically, but the first post states that these extra steps (I assume it's a reference to LCC correction) are no longer necessary.

Would anybody please be willing to clarify? My apologies if this question has already been answered in another post. Many thanks in advance and have a nice day!

Kind regards,
Carlos

Another piece of info comes from the manual, page 24:

"(....using CFV 100C with) any view camera: Shift settings are not recommended on cameras with wide-angle lenses and a short lens to image plane distance"

 

[corvus]

In addition to Warren's comment, BSI sensor really makes Schneider 35xl and 47xl a very practical starting point.

On tech cam, you can easily stitch two vertical frames to form a wider angle of view. For instance, two vertical frames from 35xl, 15mm each side would give you the look of 28xl, which is about the widest perspective beyond comfort. Currently 43xl on IQ3 is my go to lens for interior work, while 60xl for exteriors, they produces much more natural look. On the cfv 100c, I'd imagine 35xl would replace 43xl.

Composition plays a vital part in architectural photography, more so than any other genre. The unique ability of tech cam to allow combined x and y movements is truly an eye opener in practice. Plus you will have access to more lens choices that woudl help shape the way you see, longer view is way more pleasant to our eyes, and it gives viewer's mind space to imagine by showing less.

Thanks for these motivations Much appreciated!

Do you manage with a BSI with these lenses for larger shifts then completely without LCC?
On the other hand, an LCC is not too much effort if I incorporate it into my already slow workflow in a disciplined way ...

 

[Paul Spinnler]

Hi all

This is the same base sensor tech as in the IQ4 - just cut to a smaller size and produced by a manufacturer with a different cost base, margin targets and product strategy so prices are different (lower luckily).

The SK lenses will produce colour casts (especially 35 and 28, and the more extreme, the more you shift away from the centre) with BSI backs and you will need to correct it in a manual LCC process. For some this is ok, for som this is a workflow killer. If you shift too much especially with the 35 XL or 28 XL and forgot to make the LCC the colour cast will be difficult to get rid off.

If you want colourless wide angles you can resort to TSE lenses or use Rodenstock lenses (Rodie: which sitll have it to a subtle, but visually passable degree on the wide side without LCC need), but you can get by without LCC.

There's no magic that happened here - DJI is in the background producing this back which is why cots are so low. Its the same sensor tech across the M11, CFV100 and IQ4 with varying surrounding electronics at different sensor sizes. The pixel pitch is literally the same, just multiplied by different widths and lengths ... meaning there are differences in dynamic range and in camera processing features based on the electronics, but the sensor itself cannot magically handle the optical construction of SK lenses differently. They sit extremely close to the sensor due to being symmetric designs and therefore these color casts are created especially when shifting.

The colour casts remain with SK glass. The differnece between BSI and non BSI is that non-BSI is completely unuseable with SK on the new sensors while BSI sensors can handle it via careful LCC (you need to make sure you do properly exposed LCCs in the field).

That's where the Pico comes in, it wants to allow you to control SK blue ring wide angles which have no colour cast (but have distortion, so not sure how practical this is)

 

[AreBee]

One other comment on ES and artifacts. We have seen a few occurrences of ES artifacts or smearing of the image with Fuji GFX 100 cameras, it seems to get worse if a the longer lens is used...

An object travelling at a given speed will cross the field of view of a longer lens in a shorter time than it will a shorter lens, hence more 'artifacts/smearing' would be expected for the former than the latter.

Another piece of info comes from the manual, page 24: "(....using CFV 100C with) any view camera: Shift settings are not recommended on cameras with wide-angle lenses and a short lens to image plane distance"

I read this too but was not concerned given, as @Paul Spinnler notes, the CFV 100c sensor is dimensionally a trimmed IQ4 150 sensor, the latter of which is known to play well in terms of colour cast. I assume it's just Hasselblad covering itself commercially.

 

[Paul Spinnler]

Here's the 35mm XL shifted just below 10mm on my IQ4 with CF to give you a sense of magenta on BSI; if you don't LCC you will have some strong magenta at the top, subtle everywhere else, so IMHO it is a must to LCC if you go below 40mm. Even at the centre you have magenta color casts. Its everywhere because of the optics being so close to the sensor.

On non BSI this is deep magenta which you cannot remove anymore. Here you see at the bottom also discolorations, but they go away with LCC.

Color cast is stronger than on 43.

The CFV 100c will be smaller so it will take just more mm shift to get to the really strong cast levels at the top, so because of that they will seem more useable. But color cast remains everywhere with the sub 40mm SK UWAs due to the angle at which these lenses project onto the sensor plane and this as a result needs to be managed actively by the photographer.

For some this is a HUGE pain, espcially if they come from 35mm where this is an unknown problem, for some THIS IS NOT and just part of a slow way of shooting,.

So: You will need to LCC ... on BSI backs except if you want some subtle magenta all over the image. This means for best results in the field you need to bring the little white plate and make sure you capture correction shots for your specific shift and aperture scenario.

This is why Rodie won the tech cam lens wars, but for the discerning architectural photographers the LCC process is ok.

28 and 35 XL have stronger casts, 43, 60 XL much less so. Because the IC of the 43 is so large you can go from low cast to sensor tiling issues if you go full crazy with shifting, e.g. 20mm+ on a very wide angle lens ...

That's why also the 43 and 60 XL are so sought after - they balance huge ICs, manageable color cast and rectiniliearty for a natural look into a tiny package. 35 and 28 require more careful shooting. Also remember that 43, 60, 28 XL came years after the 35 XL and are therefore more advanced designs with larger useable ICs. The 28 XL, for those who have seen one, is extremely sharp at the centre, really pushing the limits of what's optically possible.

If you can, the lens to get is the 43 IMHO as it is very sharp, less colour cast than 35 XL and has the largest IC available for a very wide angle lens. On the CFV100c this one will be formidable (the others too, but just require LCCing). Except for the FoV, its literally a better featured lens on all levels. Hence one is 1.5k, the other one 7-10k.

The benefit of the CFV100c is that it ALLOWS you to use SK glass in the first place ... which you want for the IC, compactness and low distortion which leads to a natural look in architectural photography.

43, 60, done.

 

[Doppler9000]

DJI is in the background producing this back which is why costs are so low.

The pricing on the back is low compared to Phase One products, but that is a pretty easy bar to hit.

Is it low relative to manufacturing costs or the 33x44mm competition?

The CFV 100C and 907X combo is priced $3,800 (+86%) more than the current sale price on the GFX 100S. The latter uses the same sensor, has IBIS, and an EVF, and is made in Japan.

The superstructure of the 100 back seems to be the same as the CFV 50, yet it’s selling for the same amount as the X2D, which, again, has a lot more to it.

Fuji is setting a very high bar for value in the medium format segment - it will be interesting to see what they release next month - perhaps a GFX 100S II.

 

[Paul Spinnler]

The pricing on the back is low compared to Phase One products, but that is a pretty easy bar to hit.

Is it low relative to manufacturing costs or the competition?

The CFV 100C and 907X combo is priced $3,800 (+86%) more than the current sale price on the GFX 100S. The latter uses the same sensor, has IBIS, and an EVF, and is made in Japan.

The superstructure of the 100 back seems to be the same as the CFV 50, yet it’s selling for the same amount as the X2D, which, again, has a lot more to it.

Fuji is setting a very high bar for value in the medium format segment - it will be interesting to see what they release next month - perhaps a GFX 100S II.

Good point on the relative pricing vs. Fuji – I think the yields have also improved over the last years ... and now this specific crop sensor and its smaller 35mm variant are sold in large batches at a fair list price to many manufacturers.

When the IQ4 came out it was literally the newest tech, the best available stuff. You pay premium. And yields are not proprtional to sensor size - the bigger the sensor, the A LOT lower the yield ... I suppose this is still the case today. Wouldnt be surprised if the crop sensor is 700 bucks and the P1 one 4k list or so ...

Also: We are in 2024. Y5 of this design. Sony has in the last YEARS been able to surely improve yields and market this BSI sensor as a sort of best-seller base design so I am sure there's also a more advanced design available already which of course will cost premium given its new and if P1 wants it in big ... so that's why a better performance 200 megapixel sensor by 2025 is not too far from reality IMHO.

Kind of like Apple having first dibs at 3nm chip manufacturing capacities at TMSC; ... bleeding edge tech which they've now put into the M3 Max CPUS which, on a per watt basis, outclass everything else, and cost premium, ofc.

So when you pay 25k trad in for an IQ5 you are also paying a bit to be the first for something which may trickle down five years later to the 8k price point.

I have been in the P1 trade-in loop since 2009, so in a way I've always paid just 25k every seven-eight years. Never full retail as I got into the loop by buying a used P30+...

 

[guphotography]

Thanks for these motivations Much appreciated!

Do you manage with a BSI with these lenses for larger shifts then completely without LCC?
On the other hand, an LCC is not too much effort if I incorporate it into my already slow workflow in a disciplined way ...

LCC actually has its benefit, slooooow you down.

I can work very fast with tech cam when on shoots, usually capture 500 plus frames on a full day shoot with 50-80 different angles. I found LCC gives my eyes a break and allow me to scout the next angle.

Colour cast is one thing, light fall off is another. You are more likely to need LCC with modest movements regardless. With focal lengths 90 and longer, colour cast is hardly there, but you would still need that to address light fall off with large movements, especially when combining rise/fall and lateral shift.

I work with IQ3 trichromatic, so colour cast is definitely there, but they have never been a problem. Depsite the same sensor, trichormatic version handles colour cast much better than normal IQ1 and IQ3 100mp back.

Hope that helps.

 

[diggles]

Good evening fellow photographers,

Long-time lurker here on GetDPI ;-)

I've been fascinated by tech cams (the 'pancake' ones) for a long time. Yet the cost associated for integrating such a setup into my daily workflow proved to outweigh the benefits. It was mostly a matter of 'overkill' as most of my clients would never be able to see the difference between my current setup (GFX + Canon/Fuji tilt-shift lenses) and an IQ4. However, that doesn't make tech cams less fascinating to me ;-) With the release of this new Hasselblad back, I have to admit that my desire to operate such a system has been sparked once again.

I've been following this thread and I've noticed something that is somewhat unclear to me, more specifically two statements that seem to contradict each other in a certain way, so I was hoping that the original posters could clarify this.

The first post is by mister Snipes, it links to an article on Capture Integration as part of a presentation for the new Hasselblad back, allow me to quote:
"...But every digital back would produce a magenta cast when shifting, due to the frontside architecture of the electronics that the incoming light had to pass through. This could be corrected with duplicate captures run through a software tool like Capture One’s LCC or the Scene Calibration tool in Phocus. But with light changing, who wants to adjust exposure and then have to capture 3 more images to use for correction of the original 3 captures for your 3 shot stitch? And then have to spend the time correcting that in post?
The Hasselblad CFV 100c comes with a BSI (backside illuminated) sensor, which places more of the electronics below the receiving photo wells. Now magenta casts are no longer produced, and the extra steps for removing them are not necessary."

The second post is by mister Diggles (page 7), allow me to quote:
"With Schneider APO Digitar lenses anything shorter than 60mm will require an LCC. For the times you do need a wider angle lens like the 43XL or 35XL then you will need to take a LCC reference image to compensate for color cast. Not a big deal really because Phocus has LCC functionality, it is called Scene Calibration. So this is easily fixable. "


Taking this information into account: does this mean I would, in specific scenarios (using a 43XL or 35XL), still need to perform LCC correction despite using a back with a BSI-sensor? The second post states this specifically, but the first post states that these extra steps (I assume it's a reference to LCC correction) are no longer necessary.

Would anybody please be willing to clarify? My apologies if this question has already been answered in another post. Many thanks in advance and have a nice day!

Kind regards,
Carlos

Here's the 35mm XL shifted just below 10mm on my IQ4 with CF to give you a sense of magenta on BSI; if you don't LCC you will have some strong magenta at the top, subtle everywhere else, so IMHO it is a must to LCC if you go below 40mm. Even at the centre you have magenta color casts. Its everywhere because of the optics being so close to the sensor.

On non BSI this is deep magenta which you cannot remove anymore. Here you see at the bottom also discolorations, but they go away with LCC.

Color cast is stronger than on 43.

The CFV 100c will be smaller so it will take just more mm shift to get to the really strong cast levels at the top, so because of that they will seem more useable. But color cast remains everywhere with the sub 40mm SK UWAs due to the angle at which these lenses project onto the sensor plane and this as a result needs to be managed actively by the photographer.

For some this is a HUGE pain, espcially if they come from 35mm where this is an unknown problem, for some THIS IS NOT and just part of a slow way of shooting,.

So: You will need to LCC ... on BSI backs except if you want some subtle magenta all over the image. This means for best results in the field you need to bring the little white plate and make sure you capture correction shots for your specific shift and aperture scenario.

This is why Rodie won the tech cam lens wars, but for the discerning architectural photographers the LCC process is ok.

28 and 35 XL have stronger casts, 43, 60 XL much less so. Because the IC of the 43 is so large you can go from low cast to sensor tiling issues if you go full crazy with shifting, e.g. 20mm+ on a very wide angle lens ...

That's why also the 43 and 60 XL are so sought after - they balance huge ICs, manageable color cast and rectiniliearty for a natural look into a tiny package. 35 and 28 require more careful shooting. Also remember that 43, 60, 28 XL came years after the 35 XL and are therefore more advanced designs with larger useable ICs. The 28 XL, for those who have seen one, is extremely sharp at the centre, really pushing the limits of what's optically possible.

If you can, the lens to get is the 43 IMHO as it is very sharp, less colour cast than 35 XL and has the largest IC available for a very wide angle lens. On the CFV100c this one will be formidable (the others too, but just require LCCing). Except for the FoV, its literally a better featured lens on all levels. Hence one is 1.5k, the other one 7-10k.

The benefit of the CFV100c is that it ALLOWS you to use SK glass in the first place ... which you want for the IC, compactness and low distortion which leads to a natural look in architectural photography.

43, 60, done.

View attachment 210118

Paul you beat me to it

Here are some more LCC frames of wide SK lenses on the IQ4150. I also added a white box to show the size of the 100C 44x33 sensor so you can get a sense of what the LCC will look like on the 100C.

The 60XL example was taken without a center filter, the rest were taken with a center filter. The movement distances are by memory so they aren't 100% accurate, but they are in the ballpark.

Here is a vertical 28XL on center and with about 15mm of camera fall which is extreme for this lens.



Here is a horizontal 35XL on center and 10mm of camera fall.



Here is a horizontal 43XL with about 5mm fall and 3mm left shift



Here is a more extreme shift with the 43XL in vertical orientation, about 7mm fall and 15mm left.



Here is the 60XL in vertical orientation with 20mm fall. The colorcast is gone, but there is still vignetting. BSI sensor does not fix vignetting.



You can see how they get progressively better. Even the 60XL will benefit from LCC to even out the vignetting.

The wide Rodenstock lenses will still benefit from an LCC frame as well, but since the Rodenstock lenses sit further away from the sensor colorcast is less of an issue.

 

[Paul Spinnler]

Paul you beat me to it

Here are some more LCC frames of wide SK lenses on the IQ4150. I also added a white box to show the size of the 100C 44x33 sensor so you can get a sense of what the LCC will look like on the 100C.

The 60XL example was taken without a center filter, the rest were taken with a center filter. The movement distances are by memory so they aren't 100% accurate, but they are in the ballpark.

Here is a vertical 28XL on center and with about 15mm of camera fall which is extreme for this lens.

View attachment 210120View attachment 210119

Here is a horizontal 35XL on center and 10mm of camera fall.

View attachment 210121View attachment 210122

Here is a horizontal 43XL with about 5mm fall and 3mm left shift

View attachment 210123

Here is a more extreme shift with the 43XL in vertical orientation, about 7mm fall and 15mm left.

View attachment 210124

Here is the 60XL in vertical orientation with 20mm fall. The colorcast is gone, but there is still vignetting. BSI sensor does not fix vignetting.

View attachment 210125

You can see how they get progressively better. Even the 60XL will benefit from LCC to even out the vignetting.

The wide Rodenstock lenses will still benefit from an LCC frame as well, but since the Rodenstock lenses sit further away from the sensor colorcast is less of an issue.

Great post, Warren. That's it! The point is SK wide angles are something for the connaisseurs and there's something about how they draw rooms and buildings in their perfect rectinlinearity and the design also changes the look of objects at the far edges of the image. It looks more natural.

This alone is worth the hassle for the discerning architectural photogepy crowd ...

Just to be clear for those looking at these snips – the 28 XL CAN be fully corrected, but it requires a perfect LCC and perfect exposure so that C1 has the latitude to work with without creating banding and too much noise. Frame averaging helps too.

 

[Geoff]

Paul you beat me to it

Here are some more LCC frames of wide SK lenses on the IQ4150. I also added a white box to show the size of the 100C 44x33 sensor so you can get a sense of what the LCC will look like on the 100C.

The 60XL example was taken without a center filter, the rest were taken with a center filter. The movement distances are by memory so they aren't 100% accurate, but they are in the ballpark.

Here is a vertical 28XL on center and with about 15mm of camera fall which is extreme for this lens.

View attachment 210120View attachment 210119

Here is a horizontal 35XL on center and 10mm of camera fall.

View attachment 210121View attachment 210122

Here is a horizontal 43XL with about 5mm fall and 3mm left shift

View attachment 210123

Here is a more extreme shift with the 43XL in vertical orientation, about 7mm fall and 15mm left.

View attachment 210124

Here is the 60XL in vertical orientation with 20mm fall. The colorcast is gone, but there is still vignetting. BSI sensor does not fix vignetting.

View attachment 210125

You can see how they get progressively better. Even the 60XL will benefit from LCC to even out the vignetting.

The wide Rodenstock lenses will still benefit from an LCC frame as well, but since the Rodenstock lenses sit further away from the sensor colorcast is less of an issue.

Superb! Great post, very clear and informative.

 

[Doppler9000]

Also: We are in 2024. Y5 of this design.

Exactly - the chip dates to 2018. Probably not too far from end-of-life, but certainly at the tail of the price curve.

I wonder if Fuji will be the first with the next generation Sony tech in the above-full-frame space. At the pixel pitch consistent with a 200 MP Phase back, the 33x44mm sensor would be in the 130 MP range.

Exciting times in the bigger sensor world.

 

[bab]

As a current user of the CFV II 50C, I am excited to see that the new back appears to have a recessed power button. I hope that is true and that it will help avoid problems I have had with the old back accidentally turning on when carrying in a pack (and the fussing with positioning it so it didn't turn on).

I do wish the rear screen had been improved over the CFV II 50C but apparently it is the same?

Just like Sony cameras always dead when put in carrying bag loaded with battery (is it just my luck?)

 

[Paul Spinnler]

I am almost certain that this year or next we will see an IQ5 200 which also explains why Phase One now all of a sudden is breathing again on Insta and is realising all the new products. Two things happened behind the scenes: they’ve optimised the business so that, in conjunction with the Chinese sales of the XC, the investors see profitability at the end of the line again and on top Sony probably sent them working engineering samples.

Evidence is also that Sony already produced a 130 megapixel crop MF sensor:

http://thenewcamera.com/sony-120mp-medium-format-sensor-with-global-shutter/

Pixel pitch 3.45.

That’s 200 in full frame.

So if P1 probably is working under NDA on the implementation of the electronics and on a new SoC and if we will have a brand new line of XT tilt lenses and an IQ5, a large tech cam body, and advanced I/O … it becomes exciting again.

The CVF is the 2018 tech for the masses and P1 again offers bleeding tech at a premium.

Can’t wait. And let’s be honest. For most it’s not 45k - it’s 25-30k with trade in. 25k for the bleeding edge is ok and a nice segmentation. I hope the BSI for the masses invigorates Alpa and Arca and Cambo now …

 

[buildbot]

Just like Sony cameras always dead when put in carrying bag loaded with battery (is it just my luck?)

They had (have?) a battery drain issue, basically they are in standby when off not really off from what I havre gathered.