Site Sponsors
Results 1 to 11 of 11

Thread: H2F

  1. #1
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    1,587
    Post Thanks / Like

    H2F

    Just to be clear: The Hasselblad H2F does accept the CF range of Hasselblad digital backs, doesn't it? If one wants to shoot film AND Hasselblad digital, the H2F will fit the bill?

  2. #2
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    561
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: H2F

    Yep.

  3. #3
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    carstenw's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Berlin, Germany
    Posts
    2,530
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: H2F

    Are there advantages of an H3DII-39 over the H2F/CF-39?
    Carsten - Website

  4. #4
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Royal Oak, MI and Palm Harbor, FL
    Posts
    8,498
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    44

    Re: H2F

    Quote Originally Posted by carstenw View Post
    Are there advantages of an H3DII-39 over the H2F/CF-39?
    The integrated aspects of the H3D-II/39 are more fully realized, especially when using Phocus. However, the H2F can take a film back and the H3D-II cannot.

    Unlike the H1 and H2 which also can use film backs ... the H2F does provide for most of the advantages of a H3D-II (like DAC, Ultra Focus technology or use of the HCD 28 not possible with a H2). David can probably be more specific about all of the advantages.

    The advantage of using a CF back are that it can be used on any number of cameras besides a H through the use of Hasselblad's iAdapter system ... and it can be used on another back-up H camera body. A H3D back can only be used on the body is is matched to ... or on a tech/viewcamera.

    A CFH back is not the same as a CF back. The CFH is for H cameras only (H1, H2, H2F). So be careful to understand which is which.

    BTW, I have both. The H2F I use strictly to shoot film and have 3 film backs for it. I may get a CF or CFH back for it some day.

    -Marc

  5. #5
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    1,587
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: H2F

    Great, thanks. I'm guessing the trade off is a lower level of integration of parts? Can anyone list a succinct list of other disadvantages or trade offs other than only being able to use CF backs? I understand some lenses won't work with the H2f but aren't aware of all the other quirks.

  6. #6
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    1,587
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: H2F

    Great, thanks. You posted just before I did but seem to have answered most of my questions.
    If you were buying new now and needed both film and digital in one unit, would you have any hesitation buying an H2F system or do you think the H3DII level of integration is a must?

    Quote Originally Posted by fotografz View Post
    The integrated aspects of the H3D-II/39 are more fully realized, especially when using Phocus. However, the H2F can take a film back and the H3D-II cannot.

    Unlike the H1 and H2 which also can use film backs ... the H2F does provide for most of the advantages of a H3D-II (like DAC, Ultra Focus technology or use of the HCD 28 not possible with a H2). David can probably be more specific about all of the advantages.

    The advantage of using a CF back are that it can be used on any number of cameras besides a H through the use of Hasselblad's iAdapter system ... and it can be used on another back-up H camera body. A H3D back can only be used on the body is is matched to ... or on a tech/viewcamera.

    A CFH back is not the same as a CF back. The CFH is for H cameras only (H1, H2, H2F). So be careful to understand which is which.

    BTW, I have both. The H2F I use strictly to shoot film and have 3 film backs for it. I may get a CF or CFH back for it some day.

    -Marc

  7. #7
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Royal Oak, MI and Palm Harbor, FL
    Posts
    8,498
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    44

    Re: H2F

    Quote Originally Posted by tjv View Post
    Great, thanks. I'm guessing the trade off is a lower level of integration of parts? Can anyone list a succinct list of other disadvantages or trade offs other than only being able to use CF backs? I understand some lenses won't work with the H2f but aren't aware of all the other quirks.
    Which lenses don't work with the H2F?

    ... do you mean when it is used as a film camera? If so, then be aware the HCD lenses (HCD 28 and the HCD wide zoom) crop frame a bit and do not cover the full 645 film format.

    But the HCD lenses DO have full coverage when a CF or CFH back is attached. The CF/CFH 22 and 39 backs are 1.1X crop factor, work with the H2F, and you can use all H/C lenses for digital capture.



    -Marc

  8. #8
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Royal Oak, MI and Palm Harbor, FL
    Posts
    8,498
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    44

    Re: H2F

    Quote Originally Posted by tjv View Post
    Great, thanks. You posted just before I did but seem to have answered most of my questions.
    If you were buying new now and needed both film and digital in one unit, would you have any hesitation buying an H2F system or do you think the H3DII level of integration is a must?
    Depends on how important shooting film is to you.

    Other than the cost of a digital back, the money is in the lenses. I opted to get the fully integrated H3D-II/39 which I am in the process of upgrading to a H4D/60 ... and added a H3F for film.

    For just film, I could have just as easily got a H1 or H2 body ... but I like some of the features on the H2F ... like better AF.

    One advantage of the H2 over the H2F, is that you can mount other digital backs on it ... like a H mount Phase One back.

  9. #9
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    1,587
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: H2F

    Does anyone know what Hasselblad's plans are for CF backs? Are they likely to keep releasing them in conjunction with their other backs, eg offer a 50/60mpx version for those with older H2s etc? 39mpx is enough for me but I'd like to know there is a future with the CF backs. Also, the CFV39 back looks appealing in price for what it is except for the whole landscape / portrait orientation problem because of the non rotating back.

  10. #10
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Royal Oak, MI and Palm Harbor, FL
    Posts
    8,498
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    44

    Re: H2F

    Quote Originally Posted by tjv View Post
    Does anyone know what Hasselblad's plans are for CF backs? Are they likely to keep releasing them in conjunction with their other backs, eg offer a 50/60mpx version for those with older H2s etc? 39mpx is enough for me but I'd like to know there is a future with the CF backs. Also, the CFV39 back looks appealing in price for what it is except for the whole landscape / portrait orientation problem because of the non rotating back.
    Hate to be the only one answering some of these questions, but there aren't many long time Hassey shooters posting on this forum ... so here is my take on it:

    It seems to me that Hasselblad has placed most of its efforts on the integration of the H system ... but has continued to more slowly update the CFs. I would suspect (but have no real info) that the CFs also lag in sales significantly compared to H integrated systems cameras ... the exception to that may be the CFV backs to some degree.

    While the CF backs did get some improvements such as a new slightly larger LCD and a new sensor filter, the LCD was not increased in size to the degree that the H3D-II LCD was increased ... and now the integrated H4D has doubled the LCD resolution which I doubt will be realized on a CF.

    Whether CFs take on a 50 or 60 meg sensor is anyone's guess, in my experience Hasselblad has been tight lipped about future releases of any non-H system product ... no one had a clue that the CFV/39 was coming until it was announced. So, you never know.

    Hasselblad continues to produce Multi-Shot digital backs which are favored by some studio still life shooters, which can be used as a single shot camera also.

    As integrated H systems continue to evolve and improve, it is strictly my opinion that the CFs may just fade away as pros slowly upgrade aging H1s and H2s which are no longer in production. Again, the exception to this may be the CFV as long as legacy V camera users continue to add digital capture to their film cameras.

    IMO, other than the CF Multi-Shot backs, Phase One offers a more versatile selection of digital backs. The caveat to that is Phase One backs have proprietary camera mounts which have to be changed by the factory to use on another camera ... where the Hasselblad CFs has the iAdapter system that allows the user to change the mount to most any camera. Sinar is the only other back that allows this.

    I agree, the CFV/39 is a very appealing back ... and has also caused me some conflict as to what direction to move myself. One of my favorite cameras of all time is the 203FE focal plane shutter V camera. I still have an entire 203FE system and love every lens Zeiss made for that camera because of the fast apertures and unique character of optics. But because the F type lenses cannot be used on any H camera, the CFV back is the only option for the 203FE.

    The landscape/portrait issue is probably the only drawback of the new CFV/39, and because of the nature of how the back is triggered, probably will never be a rotatable back. However, many people forget that the CFV/39 offers the user option to also shoot a 29 meg square which almost doubles the resolution of the CFV-16 meg square format back. Plus, a CFV can be used on any camera with a V adapter by using a sync cord to fire it. I used my CFV-16 on a Mamiya RZ Pro-II in this manner (the V adapter for it was $275. used). The Mamiya RZ does have a rotating back.

    -Marc

  11. #11
    Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    171
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: H2F

    Mac's comments are spot on - bulls-eye. So hopefully I won't muddy the water further with my added comments.

    I am a user of CF39 w/ H2F (previous H3D-39 and V96c with my 503 of many sentiment years, and Imacon units) so I sharing with 1st hand experiences and facts! There are many others with CF-MS and are producing brilliant images w/ $$$ returns.

    If you shoot predominantly on a technical/wide angle camera, there are better system out there than the CF. I have a CF because of the i-adapter flexibility over Phase BUT at the end of the day, I now ONLY own ONE system - the H system BUT I only shoot on a technical/wide angle camera. So my H i-adapter is all I need.

    Phase has offered a good trade-in which even on the current market for my brand new CF-39 which is very good.

    Furthermore, H2F/H2D FW upgrade can ONLY be performed with a Hasselblad digital unit. I only discovered this very recently when my Phase friend asked for my CF unit so he can upgrade his camera - H2D FW!?!

    So from Hasselblad R&Ds and latest releases, (ie proto types eg sliding backs), it is anyone's guess as to what will become of the CF... true. BUT interpretation can only be a "possibility" rather than a "probability" from their latest releases and what they have been doing in the past (hindsight is the best foresight not forthsight). As per an angry chap from Flexframe group discussion board in early 2009 that s/he was left in the cold as Hasselblad ceased FW upgrades for CF-22 without telling him! Although Hasselblad was willing to upgrade for him/her but at a customised fee.

    cheers

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •