Site Sponsors
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3 LastLast
Results 51 to 100 of 148

Thread: H2 or Hy6???

  1. #51
    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: H2 or Hy6???

    Quote Originally Posted by David Klepacki View Post
    This is an interesting point, but counter to my experience. Holding a heavy camera via a wrist strap, no matter how tight it is to the body, puts a torque on the right hand wrist, that became very tiring. When I switched to using a waist level finder, my left hand was UNDERNEATH the weight of it all, and I found much less fatigue shooting in this position, even for long periods.

    I also found that I was able to stabilize the camera better when supporting it form underneath. If it were more stable to support a camera from the side, then monopods would be an inferior way to support a camera, or at least have a much different design that would accommodate supporting them from the side.

    The other issue I had with a 645 when rotating from landscape to portrait was the flash system. If you use a flash that is mounted to either the prism finder or an attached flash bracket, it is a lot of extra fumbling when physically rotating the camera, since the head almost always needs to be repositioned (and often requires removing your eye from the viewfinder). With a waist level finder and a revolving back, I don't need to mess with the flash orientation.

    Lastly, as far as using 645 or 66 for weddings, I guess that is a personal preference. To date, I think more weddings have been shot via Hasselblad square cameras (since the 1960's at least), without any major disasters.

    I also do not like pissing contests, so this is just my experience, and should be balanced with other opinions from people willing to share here.
    Different experiences. I have my right palm partially under the camera with my elbow in and it's comfortable for hours of shooting. 8 Hours of looking down into a Hasselblad V with a waist level finder used to kill my back and neck ... glad that's history.

    The wedding Hasselblad is/was shooting to a square, and back rotation was never necessary .. so if using a grip winder you didn't have to remove the camera from your eye.

    This will change when and if there is a 56X58 square sensor for the Hy6.

    I still shoot my Hassey Vs at wedding from time to time ... it's mondo slower than the H even though I've used the V system for 30 years and have it down pat. Hardly anyone uses a V camera, or any 6X6 camera at weddings anymore ... and not many use MF at all.

  2. #52
    Subscriber gogopix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    1,383
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: H2 or Hy6???

    well, the future is , well, the future. right now 90% of my work is landscape. THe prospect of rotating camera has never bother me (I dont worry anymore- I have bionic shoulders! LOL)

    This is going to be tough. But the hands on I'm sure will do it.

    A short story. About 10 years ago I was to trade into an S class mercedes (we had kids, big, at home then) and I was traveling 500miles a week. The MB was delayed a year.

    I never really cared for the BMW but had never tried (well, I did like a stick 325 my daughter had). I tried the 740il

    WOW, it drove like a sports car. I leased it and I REALLY enjoyed those three years, and put over miles on the lease :-)

    The next time around however, I went back to the MB.

    I don't know what that means for this decision. If you can figure it , tell me.

  3. #53
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    492
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: H2 or Hy6???

    Quote Originally Posted by thsinar View Post
    I have no idea, and if I would, then only under NDA.


    Thierry
    Thierry, 48x48 will be to little too late. People with the 33MP revolving backs will be very reluctant to trade up to 48x48, unless the cost was very reasonable. If the costs for square sensor are going to be significant, then they must jump to 56x56. I believe more people will be able to achieve their ROI with this size, than with the 48x48.

    And, while I am dreaming....adding a focal plane shutter to the Hy6 would be such a phenomenal camera (...not only would the 110/2 sync at 1/500 like today, but be able to shoot at 1/2000+...).

  4. #54
    Subscriber gogopix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    1,383
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: H2 or Hy6???

    As much as this is valuable, we all better get back to work

  5. #55
    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: H2 or Hy6???

    Quote Originally Posted by gogopix View Post
    well, the future is , well, the future. right now 90% of my work is landscape. THe prospect of rotating camera has never bother me (I dont worry anymore- I have bionic shoulders! LOL)

    This is going to be tough. But the hands on I'm sure will do it.

    A short story. About 10 years ago I was to trade into an S class mercedes (we had kids, big, at home then) and I was traveling 500miles a week. The MB was delayed a year.

    I never really cared for the BMW but had never tried (well, I did like a stick 325 my daughter had). I tried the 740il

    WOW, it drove like a sports car. I leased it and I REALLY enjoyed those three years, and put over miles on the lease :-)

    The next time around however, I went back to the MB.

    I don't know what that means for this decision. If you can figure it , tell me.
    Actually, I'm glad I don't have to make a decision right now. What I have fully covers my needs as they stand, and I can afford to wait to see (as you say) ... what the future is.

    What's the next big step? If they're baby steps I can wait until they add up to something of real substance.

    In the meantime, I keep eyeballing the Sinar back for my trusty 203FE and full range of lovely FE and CFE optics that I already own ... thank goodness ... another set of $5,000.+ ea. Hy6 lenses is a daunting deterent to any impulse buying.

  6. #56
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    492
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: H2 or Hy6???

    Quote Originally Posted by BJNY View Post
    How many MP if 56x56 is 9micron instead of 7.2
    to keep cost reasonable
    and for better high ISO performance.

    Also wouldn't strain lenses, and allow for F22
    38.7MP

  7. #57
    Administrator, Instructor Guy Mancuso's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    23,623
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2555

    Re: H2 or Hy6???

    Man starting to feel weak with only 22mpx better hit the gym and beef up. LOL

    Good info guys and no pissing match I see. We all have different priorities and that leads to good discussion.
    Photography is all about experimentation and without it you will never learn art.

    www.guymancusophotography.com

  8. #58
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    314
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: H2 or Hy6???

    Quote Originally Posted by BJNY View Post
    How many MP if 56x56 is 9micron instead of 7.2
    to keep cost reasonable
    and for better high ISO performance.

    Also wouldn't strain lenses, and allow for F22
    Quote Originally Posted by David Klepacki View Post
    38.7MP
    Maybe a "DX" mode (48x36=22MP) at faster frame rate
    would be a nice option

    Just dreamin'

  9. #59
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    1,513
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: H2 or Hy6???

    Quote Originally Posted by fotografz View Post
    Actually, I'm glad I don't have to make a decision right now. What I have fully covers my needs as they stand, and I can afford to wait to see (as you say) ... what the future is.

    What's the next big step? If they're baby steps I can wait until they add up to something of real substance.

    In the meantime, I keep eyeballing the Sinar back for my trusty 203FE and full range of lovely FE and CFE optics that I already own ... thank goodness ... another set of $5,000.+ ea. Hy6 lenses is a daunting deterent to any impulse buying.
    Marc,
    What you are saying is exactly why I had started that other thread a couple weeks ago, or whenever. If a person is coming to the game with pretty much a blank slate/empty gear closet, then the choices for delving into MF are both daunting and somewhat easy. O.K., that sounds crazy, but my logic for that statement is simple: daunting in that costs are going to be fairly high, unless entering with something used, or like the ZD; easy from the perspective that almost any system one chooses can deliver outstanding results. So it does come back to how somebody will be using the gear most to aid the selection process. Your choices for the Hasselblad system make a ton of sense to me, at least, and moving to something else might require more than some incremental improvement or option....has to be a pretty significant thing, or swapping stuff out would not be worth it, regardless if you have your clients paying stuff off one way or another.

    David Klepacki (along with Thierry and others) makes a strong argument for the Hy6 system and all of its flexibility. Again, that really matters if one has needs for lots of back swapping and stuff. The rotatable back on the Hy6 is very nice, but it really matters more for folks using a WLF, or setting up for studio shooting. Not saying it is not valuable to others, as it is, but flipping the H3D II on its side, or even the Hy6 when using the prism finder, is not all that hard to do. Anybody that has shot with the bigger DSLRs gets very used to this. (I shoot the Canon 1-series bodies, and even though they have the "vertical grip" controls and stuff, I may have used that only a few times at most. The rest of the shooting with with a handstrap and just rotating the camera to the new position. It is probably totally second nature for most shooters, except those that only shoot WLF.)

    The entire issue about "closed" versus open systems is an interesting discussion, but upon further reflection, it may not really matter all that much, except if one really wanted to shoot a specific back, and they are now locked out of doing the swapping with the H3DII. What does seem to matter, as was just starting to be discussed before, is readily available repair/replacement should something go haywire. Folks can argue which is best or better, but it really only matters for the shooter in their location when they need the service, and then rentals or something may come to the rescue in a pinch. For most enthusiasts or casual shooters, they would probably just grab their DSLR or M8 or something and continue their casual shooting, or come back another day. The working pro would need the replacement in hand ASAP to finish the job. As it stands, Hasselblad seems in very good position to meet those needs right now. I would guess Sinar will be also, and Mamiya is gearing up there too for the camera and lens stuff. So again, maybe not too big an issue.

    The only other area that may or may not matter to some is the digital file stuff. Hasselblad clearly has a dedicated system approach, but it can and does deliver. The Sinar backs may provide the least adjusted files that can then be processed through one's choice of workflow. For Phase, they are closer to Hasselblad in how they are looking at processing, in a way, I think, but still open to options. I think this really matters most depending upon what is to be delivered. If one is shooting for personal pleasure, then processing a lot of files may not be as much an issue. If one has to hand off the processing to somebody else, either the more flexible system or the more dedicated system will work, as long as the process person is capable with it. If the shooting pro is doing all his/her own processing, it comes down to preferred workflows. Shooting the Hasselblad and using Phocus will deliver results rapidly. Shooting anything else and incorporating into some other workflow will also serve, but may require a bit more profiling, adjusting, etc. Once done, they are done and ready to rock.

    So the decision process does come down to how much one needs and can spend, both in costs and time to learn the operations. At first, I was having my own reservations about the Hasselblad closed system, but am not sure I do anymore. From a professional trying to shoot for a living, there is a lot to be said for stuff that gets out of your way and just works quickly and predictably, without having to switch things (gear, software, workflow, etc.) constantly. Not saying the Hy6 or others are not great, as they are, and once somebody has their personal preferences and adjustments for processing figured out, they are just as good to go.

    Back to Victor's questions.....best thing is exactly what you are planning to do.....hold them, shoot them, play with some files, all in the way you prefer to work and for your needs. You will probably not make any bad choices on which system to go with, as both seem more than capable of delivering. For my own choices, I am still torn. I can readily identify with Marc's work and use, and I can also appreciate David's arguments. Both are extremely valid to my way of thinking. Just comes down to how one works and what they need to take along and use. I could easily live with either, and make both do what I would need. As for the future and where things are headed.....since nobody really knows, it does not seem like something to make a decision on at this point. Buy and use what you need today. If something changes dramatically in a year or three, there will be plenty of time to re-evaluate. I would not buy a system based on some of the unknowns that folks are talking about, such as 48x48 or 56x56 sensors that do NOT exist at this time, and are not going to be cheap no matter what. Heck, the 22MP backs are still doing some incredible stuff, so would a 60MP change all that much except your bank account initially? If you are a shooting pro that could take advantage of that, you will, and most of this discussion is not as relevant.

    Sorry for the long discourse. These are big ticket items for sure and nobody really wants to make a "mistake" in purchase. My point being that I do not really think there would be a mistake made either way. Just go handle and shoot them all to get comfortable with what realistically will fill your needs.

    LJ

  10. #60
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    760
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: H2 or Hy6???

    For one that has used the large canon DSLRs for years now, I have to say that after using the Hasselblad H system, I can really appreciate the ergonomic balance of the system as Marc pointed out earlier. I actually have trouble going back to the 1DsmkIII.

    In regards to end to end integration as was mentioned by Woody earlier in this thread, it is my belief that over time this will become a more prominent advantage than it is now. THe ability of the software to automatically correct for specific types of inherent flaws including distortion at the wide focal lengths or via a any tilt-shift options that might become available are worth mentioning. So while I still have mixed feelings about a closed vs open system, I can clearly appreciate why we will see more closure if you will over time.

  11. #61
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    492
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: H2 or Hy6???

    I think I have beaten to death the flexibility of the open (non-fixed mount) capability of the Hy6. So, I will not repeat those arguments.

    The other part of the story is LONGEVITY of your images, which some people care about. The ONLY open standard that guarantees the longevity of your images is DNG. It is a clearly defined specification that is non-proprietary, open and available to anyone. With such a specification, there is always guaranteed a DNG converter for ANY computer platform, now or in the future.

    As an example of its importance, let's say Hasselblad unexpectedly goes out of business some day (maybe like Contax). And, let's say that Windows or MacOS evolves to the point where it no longer supports "old" applications. (like today where applications that ran on Mac Classic no longer can work with the advent of Mac Leopard). Eventually, this kind of thing will happen, as backward compatibility cannot be maintained indefinitely, especially with computing systems.

    Where would this leave such Hasselblad users? Only two choices: never being able to go back to the raw data, or reverting back to DNG. In the first case, for whatever reason (maybe newer and better ways of interpolating the raw data), there may be a need or preference to work with the raw data. In the second case, the DNG file would lose all of the
    (DAC) lens correction information and the images would be left with CA and vignetting issues that the Hasselblad DAC otherwise removed.

    Basing your workflow on DNG from the beginning, will never cause you to face such a dilemma. The entire industry is indeed supporting the DNG standard, for longevity and archival purposes. For more information on long term archival issues, take a look at "The DAM Book", by Peter Krogh. It is a bit dated, but the concepts are still valid.

  12. #62
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    1,513
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: H2 or Hy6???

    Quote Originally Posted by David Klepacki View Post
    I think I have beaten to death the flexibility of the open (non-fixed mount) capability of the Hy6. So, I will not repeat those arguments.

    The other part of the story is LONGEVITY of your images, which some people care about. The ONLY open standard that guarantees the longevity of your images is DNG. It is a clearly defined specification that is non-proprietary, open and available to anyone. With such a specification, there is always guaranteed a DNG converter for ANY computer platform, now or in the future.

    As an example of its importance, let's say Hasselblad unexpectedly goes out of business some day (maybe like Contax). And, let's say that Windows or MacOS evolves to the point where it no longer supports "old" applications. (like today where applications that ran on Mac Classic no longer can work with the advent of Mac Leopard). Eventually, this kind of thing will happen, as backward compatibility cannot be maintained indefinitely, especially with computing systems.

    Where would this leave such Hasselblad users? Only two choices: never being able to go back to the raw data, or reverting back to DNG. In the first case, for whatever reason (maybe newer and better ways of interpolating the raw data), there may be a need or preference to work with the raw data. In the second case, the DNG file would lose all of the
    (DAC) lens correction information and the images would be left with CA and vignetting issues that the Hasselblad DAC otherwise removed.

    Basing your workflow on DNG from the beginning, will never cause you to face such a dilemma. The entire industry is indeed supporting the DNG standard, for longevity and archival purposes. For more information on long term archival issues, take a look at "The DAM Book", by Peter Krogh. It is a bit dated, but the concepts are still valid.
    David,
    All valid points. However, DNG is not being universally accepted and used at this point. Would be great if it was, but it is not. And that is not just Hasselblad...Nikon, Canon, and many others are spending a lot to keep their image conversions proprietary. They see this as having some sort of competitive advantage, and in the case of Hasselblad, they are doing a lot of correction and adjustment with tools designed specifically to get the most from their gear. You really cannot fault them for doing that. Would it be nice if all of those adjustments and corrections were delivered as a DNG file also? Absolutely, but it is not the case right now. One of my bigger "gripes" has been around how much R&D is spent on the software side of things at many of these companies. Why does Hasselblad need a special app called Phocus? Why does Sinar need eXposure, or Phase One needing their app? If the competitive landscape is such that there are algorithms being used with specific data that yields an image that other conversions cannot, is that really a bad thing? It is the way it is right now. What option do any of us have.....just not buy the products? Not going to happen. While the "universal format" is supposed to be open and last "forever", what happens if Adobe goes under or gets bought out by Apple or something? What happens to that open source app that still needs lots of folks supporting it?

    Like everybody else, I worry about the hundreds of thousands of image files I now have stored in both RAW and completed files (PSD). With all of the changes that are being made so quickly to so many apps today, it is hard to expect anything to be compatible for very far into the future. Some folks are storing old OSs and apps just in case support stops, thinking there will be some emulator or virtualization tool that will allow them to run the old OS and old apps on whatever system is out there in the future.

    Does that make Sinar "better" for delivering a DNG file out of the gate? For some folks, maybe so. On the other hand, if one has to buy lots of other apps to do many of the corrections needed on various lenses after the RAW conversion is made, is that really a better way? What happens to those apps in the future? So you have a plain vanilla DNG file with all of the data. Somebody still has to create an app to extract and use that data to its fullest, and right now, the only folks doing that are those that built the equipment and know how that data was intended to be used. That does put us at their hands, but until the entire industry gives up on proprietary algorithms and secret sauces, we are going to be stuck.

    Not wanting to turn this into a different kind of argument/discussion, but the DNG thing, though noble and possibly a viable option, is not being embraced to the levels that will really create a universal RAW file. Adobe even gave into that side of things by allowing proprietary date to reside in the files. So, until that whole thing changes, we will be looking upon software much the same way we look upon lenses and backs now. Not everything works with everything else, so you pick and choose the system and software that best meets your individual needs, and hope to hell it remains in play

    LJ

  13. #63
    Senior Member Graham Mitchell's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    London/Kiev
    Posts
    1,079
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: H2 or Hy6???

    LJL, the DNG format is not perfect - no-one is arguing to the contrary. However, it is by far the best option to date, by an order of magnitude. Unlike the other formats, it will continue to be suported even if one or two supporting manufacturers were to go out of business.

    DNG is already in use by Casio, Hasselblad, Leica, Megavision, Nucore, Pentax, Ricoh, Samsung, Sea&Sea, Seitz, Silicon Imaging and Sinar, and can be opened by every raw developer I know of.

  14. #64
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    1,513
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: H2 or Hy6???

    Quote Originally Posted by foto-z View Post
    LJL, the DNG format is not perfect - no-one is arguing to the contrary. However, it is by far the best option to date, by an order of magnitude. Unlike the other formats, it will continue to be suported even if one or two supporting manufacturers were to go out of business.

    DNG is already in use by Casio, Hasselblad, Leica, Megavision, Nucore, Pentax, Ricoh, Samsung, Sea&Sea, Seitz, Silicon Imaging and Sinar, and can be opened by every raw developer I know of.
    Graham,
    Not disagreeing with you on this at all. I never said it was perfect, and there still are some issues with some RAW developers being unable to read the files. We just are not yet there as a universal RAW file. It is the best thing going in that respect right now, but there are a number of folks just not adopting it and using it yet, and that will most likely remain an issue for some time. Does not mean we should abandon it, or anything like that, but as long as manufacturers see some competitive advantage to produce their own proprietary codes and conversions, they will. Most of the player in the DNG realm today are those that do see it as a somewhat future-proof tool, or they are not in a position to be able to support their own in-house IT group. In some sense, I applaud that approach.....let coder folks do what they do best, and let the camera folks spend their R&D dollars on new developments, not new proprietary software. But your list does not include many of the really heavy hitters that are steering large portions of the digital photography market today. Is that important? So far, that seems to be the case. While Hasselblad does support DNG, they also maintain their own closed system for reasons they have chosen.

    I am a supporter of the entire DNG concept and want to see it succeed. I am also looking at the reality of where things are today. Would lack of total data incorporation into a DNG file keep me from going with Hasselblad if what Hassy delivered met my needs? Not likely, and I am sure I am not alone. On the flip side, does the Sinar back file offer me something more than just RAW data, thus requiring me to use other tools (DxO, etc.) to best extract the most from the gear being used? Not really. Neither is all that big a deal to me right now, but may become more an issue in a few years. We just do not know, and I see little point waiting on the sidelines for the final tally on that part. If/when DNG conquers all, there will be an ability to convert files and extract that secret sauce data, unless those companies have gone away. And I would bet that there still will be some folks writing apps to do that if it becomes needed.

    So, I agree with the DNG concept and ambition. I would love to see it universally embraced and fully supported and further developed. Until it is, I will just have to live with the other stuff to get the results I want or need. Not that big a deal.

    LJ

  15. #65
    thsinar
    Guest

    Re: H2 or Hy6???

    Just for your information:

    Sinar eXposure does create DNG files, yes, BUT ....

    the real RAWs are saved and kept AS WELL, assuring that you are ready for any situation in the future.

    Best regards,
    Thierry

    Quote Originally Posted by LJL View Post
    David,
    Why does Sinar need eXposure, or Phase One needing their app? If the competitive landscape is such that there are algorithms being used with specific data that yields an image that other conversions cannot, is that really a bad thing? It is the way it is right now. What option do any of us have.....just not buy the products? Not going to happen. While the "universal format" is supposed to be open and last "forever", what happens if Adobe goes under or gets bought out by Apple or something? What happens to that open source app that still needs lots of folks supporting it?

    Does that make Sinar "better" for delivering a DNG file out of the gate? For some folks, maybe so. On the other hand, if one has to buy lots of other apps to do many of the corrections needed on various lenses after the RAW conversion is made, is that really a better way? What happens to those apps in the future? So you have a plain vanilla DNG file with all of the data. Somebody still has to create an app to extract and use that data to its fullest, and right now, the only folks doing that are those that built the equipment and know how that data was intended to be used. That does put us at their hands, but until the entire industry gives up on proprietary algorithms and secret sauces, we are going to be stuck.

    Not wanting to turn this into a different kind of argument/discussion, but the DNG thing, though noble and possibly a viable option, is not being embraced to the levels that will really create a universal RAW file. Adobe even gave into that side of things by allowing proprietary date to reside in the files. So, until that whole thing changes, we will be looking upon software much the same way we look upon lenses and backs now. Not everything works with everything else, so you pick and choose the system and software that best meets your individual needs, and hope to hell it remains in play

    LJ

  16. #66
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    492
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: H2 or Hy6???

    LJ,

    I think you misunderstood. It is not that all of the camera vendors who are adopting DNG as their raw format, but rather many photographers in the industry. Of course, the camera vendors invest some money into software processing in order to control the look of their images. It is a necessity for them. Otherwise, software not under their control could make their images look bad, and hence their camera would not sell.

    Many photographers who are conscious of longevity and archival are converting and storing their raw images as DNG (yes, especially Nikon and Canon users). They do not RELY on any proprietary software, although they may choose to use one converter over another at any given time. This way, they are always assured of having access to their raw data in the future.

    In other words, it is less risk for a photographer to work with a system that needs less lens correction and uses a known open standard format (DNG), so that they will always have access to their raw data, now and in the future.

    It is more risk to the photographer to use a proprietary system that corrects their lenses with software, since that software may cease to function or be unavailable in the future.

  17. #67
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    1,513
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: H2 or Hy6???

    Quote Originally Posted by thsinar View Post
    Just for your information:

    Sinar eXposure does create DNG files, yes, BUT ....

    the real RAWs are saved and kept AS WELL, assuring that you are ready for any situation in the future.

    Best regards,
    Thierry
    Thierry,
    That should be true for all DNG files, as an option is to create a file that embeds the original RAW data in its native format, just for that purpose. (That was Adobe's concession, or hedging its bet to get more widespread adoption, just in case it does not make it.) There may still be code in that native RAW file that is not brought into the DNG file for use. I started to store my Canon .CR2 files within the DNG file for later use at one point, figuring I could extract the file and convert it with whatever tool did what I needed.

    That is a wonderful "safeguard", but I think the better approach is to not generate a .3FR, .CR2, .FFF, or whatever file at all. Instead, the "native" file should be a DNG, as it is for the Leica M8 for example. Eliminate all that other stuff completely. We are not at that point yet.

    LJ

  18. #68
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    1,513
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: H2 or Hy6???

    Quote Originally Posted by David Klepacki View Post
    LJ,

    I think you misunderstood. It is not that all of the camera vendors who are adopting DNG as their raw format, but rather many photographers in the industry. Of course, the camera vendors invest some money into software processing in order to control the look of their images. It is a necessity for them. Otherwise, software not under their control could make their images look bad, and hence their camera would not sell.

    Many photographers who are conscious of longevity and archival are converting and storing their raw images as DNG (yes, especially Nikon and Canon users). They do not RELY on any proprietary software, although they may choose to use one converter over another at any given time. This way, they are always assured of having access to their raw data in the future.

    In other words, it is less risk for a photographer to work with a system that needs less lens correction and uses a known open standard format (DNG), so that they will always have access to their raw data, now and in the future.

    It is more risk to the photographer to use a proprietary system that corrects their lenses with software, since that software may cease to function or be unavailable in the future.
    David,
    I understood what you said, and I am one of those Canon shooters that is headed to DNG myself. My point made to Thierry is the bigger issue. I have no problem with Hasselblad using all sorts of correction tools to deliver the best image it can. That is essentially what you are suggesting is being done to some degree when a manufacturer includes its own software to best display its planned image conversion. However, what would really be nice is for that DNG file to hold the corrections that are being used so that the file opened at some later date with some other software, has the best display of the image capture as the manufacturer designed their system to deliver. I do not see that as a bad thing. What is more problematic is opening a file of RAW data that lacks any interpretation direction or optimization for specific hardware that may need that sort of correction. My expectations from a system are for it to deliver and get out my way. I do not want to have to spend huge amounts of time correcting image files to best display what the design was supposed to deliver. Maybe I am very different in that respect. Using the M8, this has become an issue for lots of folks. If I fail to use a UV/IR filter, or do not have a coded lens to tell the camera's built-in generator how to correct things, I get a lousy file. Yes, I can "fix" that with several different tools, but what is that point? The rest of the IQ is unchanged, but the workload has gone way up.

    Not trying to be difficult here at all. My comments were more about not letting the software/file issues dissuade someone from using a system that may do everything they want/need and more.

    LJ

  19. #69
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    492
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: H2 or Hy6???

    Quote Originally Posted by LJL View Post
    That is a wonderful "safeguard", but I think the better approach is to not generate a .3FR, .CR2, .FFF, or whatever file at all. Instead, the "native" file should be a DNG, as it is for the Leica M8 for example. Eliminate all that other stuff completely. We are not at that point yet.

    LJ
    In principle, this would be great. Unfortunately, it puts too much constraint on the back makers who have to manage the signals and dataflow within the back. Sometimes, allowing the back makers a little flexibility in the internal format of the raw data can yield vast improvements in speed and efficiency. The later conversion of this internal data to DNG is just fine.

  20. #70
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    492
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: H2 or Hy6???

    Quote Originally Posted by LJL View Post
    ...However, what would really be nice is for that DNG file to hold the corrections that are being used so that the file opened at some later date with some other software, has the best display of the image capture as the manufacturer designed their system to deliver. I do not see that as a bad thing. What is more problematic is opening a file of RAW data that lacks any interpretation direction or optimization for specific hardware that may need that sort of correction. My expectations from a system are for it to deliver and get out my way. I do not want to have to spend huge amounts of time correcting image files to best display what the design was supposed to deliver...
    LJ
    LJ,

    First, you are not being difficult at all, so please do not feel that way. It is an important discussion to have.

    Actually, I agree with your above comment 100%. I also think that lens corrections can done to the raw data and embedded in the DNG. That would certainly benefit everyone. Nobody wants to spend inordinate amounts of time correcting images.

  21. #71
    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: H2 or Hy6???

    Quote Originally Posted by David Klepacki View Post
    LJ,

    I think you misunderstood. It is not that all of the camera vendors who are adopting DNG as their raw format, but rather many photographers in the industry. Of course, the camera vendors invest some money into software processing in order to control the look of their images. It is a necessity for them. Otherwise, software not under their control could make their images look bad, and hence their camera would not sell.

    Many photographers who are conscious of longevity and archival are converting and storing their raw images as DNG (yes, especially Nikon and Canon users). They do not RELY on any proprietary software, although they may choose to use one converter over another at any given time. This way, they are always assured of having access to their raw data in the future.

    In other words, it is less risk for a photographer to work with a system that needs less lens correction and uses a known open standard format (DNG), so that they will always have access to their raw data, now and in the future.

    It is more risk to the photographer to use a proprietary system that corrects their lenses with software, since that software may cease to function or be unavailable in the future.
    Flexcolor and Phocus DAC corrections are OPTIONAL. They are simply time savers. As anyone who uses PS knows, Distortion and Aberration Corrections (DAC) can be performed manually in LR and/or PS. Hasselblad simply maps these corrections for each lens and allows one touch auto corrections. Just one bonus of an integrated system designed primarily for working pros where time is money.

    Any Hasselblad 3F RAW file can simply be converted to DNG by selecting files, individually, or all, as desired. DNG is not manditory, it is an optional choice. I know few if any Hasselblad digital users who think DNG conversions produce better files than the propritary software. Haven't heard that from any Phase One users either.

    I use both. For things like a wedding where I have 100-200 shots, and another 200 from a Canon, I convert to DNGs and drop all of them in a single file to be sorted by time shot. But for critical color control, etc. of commercial work I use Phocus.

    Now, I would like to see Hasselblad offer the option of migrating the Phocus corrections with DNG conversions ... if that isn't already in the works ... since Phocus is only Beta right now and has yet to be completed or optimized.

  22. #72
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    492
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: H2 or Hy6???

    Quote Originally Posted by fotografz View Post
    Flexcolor and Phocus DAC corrections are OPTIONAL. They are simply time savers. As anyone who uses PS knows, Distortion and Aberration Corrections (DAC) can be performed manually in LR and/or PS. Hasselblad simply maps these corrections for each lens and allows one touch auto corrections. Just one bonus of an integrated system designed primarily for working pros where time is money.

    Any Hasselblad 3F RAW file can simply be converted to DNG by selecting files, individually, or all, as desired. DNG is not manditory, it is an optional choice. I know few if any Hasselblad digital users who think DNG conversions produce better files than the propritary software. Haven't heard that from any Phase One users either.

    I use both. For things like a wedding where I have 100-200 shots, and another 200 from a Canon, I convert to DNGs and drop all of them in a single file to be sorted by time shot. But for critical color control, etc. of commercial work I use Phocus.

    Now, I would like to see Hasselblad offer the option of migrating the Phocus corrections with DNG conversions ... if that isn't already in the works ... since Phocus is only Beta right now and has yet to be completed or optimized.
    Yes, I also hope Phocus will provide its corrections to the DNG file. That would give the images the longevity that I mentioned above.

    In the meantime, I try to use optically corrected lenses as much as possible, so that I do not have to rely on software corrections. It is a nice alternative to the software solution, and works great, at least for me.

    Hey, no pissing contest. The important thing is that we have systems that can take great pictures and can deal with image corrections, whether optically or with software.

  23. #73
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Posts
    2,338
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    52

    Re: H2 or Hy6???

    Quote Originally Posted by David Klepacki View Post
    Yes, I also hope Phocus will provide its corrections to the DNG file. That would give the images the longevity that I mentioned above.

    In the meantime, I try to use optically corrected lenses as much as possible, so that I do not have to rely on software corrections. It is a nice alternative to the software solution, and works great, at least for me.

    Hey, no pissing contest. The important thing is that we have systems that can take great pictures and can deal with image corrections, whether optically or with software.
    Hi David - could you please explain what you mean by the phrase 'optically corrected lenses'?

  24. #74
    Workshop Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Jupiter, Fla.
    Posts
    1,967
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2

    Re: H2 or Hy6???

    Well tomorrow I get to shoot with my friend's H3DII-39 and my friend gets to shoot with my Sinar e75. Should be interesting.

    @ Thierry,

    Is there a user manual for the e75 somewhere ?

  25. #75
    Member Arjuna's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Calgary, Alberta
    Posts
    203
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: H2 or Hy6???

    Peter, I believe that he means lenses that are so good optically (e.g. apo-chromatic, with very low distortion) that one does not feel the need to do any digital corrections. The counter-example would be the new Hasselblad H 28 mm lens, which I think pretty much demands digital correction (by design).

  26. #76
    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: H2 or Hy6???

    Quote Originally Posted by David Klepacki View Post
    Yes, I also hope Phocus will provide its corrections to the DNG file. That would give the images the longevity that I mentioned above.

    In the meantime, I try to use optically corrected lenses as much as possible, so that I do not have to rely on software corrections. It is a nice alternative to the software solution, and works great, at least for me.

    Hey, no pissing contest. The important thing is that we have systems that can take great pictures and can deal with image corrections, whether optically or with software.
    Sorry David, but it sounds like some sort of patonizing slight towards the H/C lenses again ... like they were not well corrected and need the software.

    This is patiently untrue, the H/C lens line up is already highly corrected and well thought of amongst one heck of lot of demanding professional photographers doing one heck of a lot of highly visable commercial and artistic work ... work done prior to the advent of DAC corrections being recently added to the software BTW.

    I've run controlled tests between H/C lenses and their Zeiss CFi or CFE counterparts, and as often as not, the H/C outperformed the Zeiss. But no lens is ever perfect, there is always some compromise ... especially at the wide angle end. The thought behind the DAC corrections is to map the compromises and aid in getting them closer to being perfect in terms of Distortion and CA especially as it applies to the current state and limitations of digital capture.

    This is not a unique nor exclusive idea. For example firmware and software solutions are used to correct vignetting inherent in even the very best wide-angle optics which usually required very expensive center filters to correct the issue ... Leica being one of them.

    Now it IS true that there are optics that are super highly corrected right from the get go, but they don't reside in any MF lens line-up I've seen yet. They are Digital APO view camera lenses from Schneider and Rodenstock. No moving elements and bellows focusing helps eliminate many compromises in lens design.

    The net result is that a $1,500. lens outperforms a $6,000. MF equvilant lens by a mile. There are mobile cameras that allow use of these optics without the bulk of a view camera ... as Peter A and others have aptly demonstrated with their ALPAs ... or other less expensive mobile cameras sporting Digitar view lenses.

    Horses for courses.

  27. #77
    Subscriber gogopix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    1,383
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: H2 or Hy6???

    Quote Originally Posted by David K View Post
    Well tomorrow I get to shoot with my friend's H3DII-39 and my friend gets to shoot with my Sinar e75. Should be interesting.

    @ Thierry,

    Is there a user manual for the e75 somewhere ?
    Ok, based on the weight discussion here, and the fact that the H3D has an adapter for the Alpa (I think ) The H3D II has taken over top position. Yet to be handled of course!

    There is one other advantage, the MS version. This provide the potentioal for incredible resolution in long range landscape and Architecture. Better than rotating for me.

    I see no downside (except $$$) for the MS. I believe same form factor. It is not likely to be much heavier (though that will depend on the technology used for the 4 cell shift)

    From an IQ factor also a few more MP (since the 74LV is what I would put on the Hy6, oh maybe I am really talking the SINAR Hy6 set)

    Of course, there is the live view issue-HB doesn't have it. Yet I dont even use a ground glass with alpa, I use range est and lens is well calibrated (for WA anyway)

    SOOOOO...what about the LV guys?

    1. Will Hb have it?
    2 Does it matter?
    3. Is MS THAT much better (example are quite impressive MUCH more improvement than 25MP to 39MP)
    4. Will an upgrade to 60MP sinar blow that away?


    This is a VERY rich compendium on top MF; this thread has people who actually use and know about these systems

    say, where's PeterA?

    regards
    Victor

  28. #78
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    492
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: H2 or Hy6???

    Quote Originally Posted by Arjuna View Post
    Peter, I believe that he means lenses that are so good optically (e.g. apo-chromatic, with very low distortion) that one does not feel the need to do any digital corrections. The counter-example would be the new Hasselblad H 28 mm lens, which I think pretty much demands digital correction (by design).
    Yes, this is exactly what I mean. Thanks.

  29. #79
    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: H2 or Hy6???

    Quote Originally Posted by gogopix View Post
    Ok, based on the weight discussion here, and the fact that the H3D has an adapter for the Alpa (I think ) The H3D II has taken over top position. Yet to be handled of course!

    There is one other advantage, the MS version. This provide the potentioal for incredible resolution in long range landscape and Architecture. Better than rotating for me.

    I see no downside (except $$$) for the MS. I believe same form factor. It is not likely to be much heavier (though that will depend on the technology used for the 4 cell shift)

    From an IQ factor also a few more MP (since the 74LV is what I would put on the Hy6, oh maybe I am really talking the SINAR Hy6 set)

    Of course, there is the live view issue-HB doesn't have it. Yet I dont even use a ground glass with alpa, I use range est and lens is well calibrated (for WA anyway)

    SOOOOO...what about the LV guys?

    1. Will Hb have it?
    2 Does it matter?
    3. Is MS THAT much better (example are quite impressive MUCH more improvement than 25MP to 39MP)
    4. Will an upgrade to 60MP sinar blow that away?


    This is a VERY rich compendium on top MF; this thread has people who actually use and know about these systems

    say, where's PeterA?

    regards
    Victor
    Hasselblad has live view. It's current in Flexcolor V 4.8.5. It hasn't been implimented in Phocus Beta yet. Here's the quote from Hasselblad Product Managment:

    " RE: Public Beta of Phocus: This is considered function complete except for the Live Video, Custom White features and Ixpress hardware connectivity. These features will be included in the final version of Phocus 1.0, expected to be ready by mid May."

    In addition:

    Phocus highlights include:

    Improved Image Quality
    The new Phocus RAW processor provides the ultimate in processing quality for Hasselblad digital images, including:
    • Digital lens corrections for color aberration, distortion and vignetting
    • Hasselblad Natural Color Solution for perfect colors
    • Moiré removal based upon filtering of raw data which preserves image detail

    Perfect Viewing Quality
    The Phocus Viewer uses all the advanced features contained in Phocus to deliver image viewing quality that matches every detail of what you will see later in Photoshop.

    New Camera Controls
    Phocus provides special extended controls with which to drive your Hasselblad camera. These features, include the ability to control the lens drive for focusing when the camera is in a remote position.

    Flexible Workflow
    The GUI includes straightforward options for customizing your set-up to suit a number of different workflow situations, such as choice of import source, browsing/comparison functions, file management, image export in a number of file formats, pre-setting of options for upcoming shoots, and much, much more.

    New Metadata (GPS, etc)
    Phocus images follows the IPTC Core standard with XMP. GPS data functionality in order to allow a range of new functions. Phocus links GPS data directly to Google Earth, for example, making geographic reference a snap and image storage and retrieval much easier.

    Leading Edge Moiré Removal Technology
    Even extremely high resolution images can exhibit moiré under certain circumstances. With the new Phocus software, moiré is effectively removed from your images without the need to carry out special mask selections or other manual procedures. Moiré removal is performed directly on the raw data.

    Peter A is on his farm for their long weekend holiday.... maybe supervising the planting of those 20,000 trees on his land ... LOL.

    Yes, H3D-II backs can and are mounted on ALPAs.

    Yes, Live View matters, it's VERY helpful in composing and focusing when the camera is in an awkward position, or when the back is mounted to a a View Camera. BTW, there is also an audio focusing feature that provides feed back to zero in the focus.

    M/S is only for studio work where there is no subject movement. It's used for super demanding work with fine detail, etc., and for fabrics
    Last edited by fotografz; 26th April 2008 at 07:53.

  30. #80
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    314
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: H2 or Hy6???

    Quote Originally Posted by gogopix View Post
    1. Will Hb have it?
    2 Does it matter?
    3. Is MS THAT much better (example are quite impressive MUCH more improvement than 25MP to 39MP)
    4. Will an upgrade to 60MP sinar blow that away?
    http://www.alpa.ch/index.php?path=pr...detailpage=257

    See WDS-618
    http://www.cambo.com/Html/products_p.../Group502.html

    http://luminous-landscape.com/forum/...dpost&p=184895

    I read somewhere Linhof and Silvestri are working on their plates to attach Hy6/AFi digital backs.

    Yes, multi-shot is THAT much better for static subjects.

  31. #81
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    492
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: H2 or Hy6???

    Quote Originally Posted by fotografz View Post
    Sorry David, but it sounds like some sort of patonizing slight towards the H/C lenses again ... like they were not well corrected and need the software.

    This is patiently untrue, the H/C lens line up is already highly corrected and well thought of amongst one heck of lot of demanding professional photographers doing one heck of a lot of highly visable commercial and artistic work ... work done prior to the advent of DAC corrections being recently added to the software BTW.

    I've run controlled tests between H/C lenses and their Zeiss CFi or CFE counterparts, and as often as not, the H/C outperformed the Zeiss. But no lens is ever perfect, there is always some compromise ... especially at the wide angle end. The thought behind the DAC corrections is to map the compromises and aid in getting them closer to being perfect in terms of Distortion and CA especially as it applies to the current state and limitations of digital capture.

    This is not a unique nor exclusive idea. For example firmware and software solutions are used to correct vignetting inherent in even the very best wide-angle optics which usually required very expensive center filters to correct the issue ... Leica being one of them.

    Now it IS true that there are optics that are super highly corrected right from the get go, but they don't reside in any MF lens line-up I've seen yet. They are Digital APO view camera lenses from Schneider and Rodenstock. No moving elements and bellows focusing helps eliminate many compromises in lens design.

    The net result is that a $1,500. lens outperforms a $6,000. MF equvilant lens by a mile. There are mobile cameras that allow use of these optics without the bulk of a view camera ... as Peter A and others have aptly demonstrated with their ALPAs ... or other less expensive mobile cameras sporting Digitar view lenses.

    Horses for courses.
    Marc, I am trying my hardest to be objective, but as you can see we both are biased from our independent experiences. I sincerely do not mean to be patronizing to anyone. In fact, one of the posts above summed up the situation beautifully with the example of the wide angle 28mm HC lens. Such a lens would be impossible to design with optical correction only. So, indeed software correction has tremendous value, especially for the wides.

    I was only trying to clarify my preference for lens corrections in the lenses themselves, whenever possible. Contrary to your claim, there are many MF lenses that are super highly corrected from the get go:

    Rollei Schneider APO-Symar 90/4
    Rollei Schneider APO-Symar 150/4.6
    Rollei Schneider APO-Tele-Xenar 300/4
    Contax Zeiss Vario-Sonnar 45-90/4.5 (at 65-75, no distortion, no CA, no vign.)
    Contax Zeiss APO-Makro-Planar 120/4
    Contax Zeiss Tele-Apo-Tessar 350/4
    Sinar Zeiss Digital AF Planar 120/4
    Mamiya 645 APO 300/2.8
    Mamiya 645 APO 300/4.5
    Mamiya RZ APO 210/4.5
    Mamiya RZ APO 250/4.5
    Mamiya RZ APO 350/5.6
    Mamiya RZ APO 500/6
    Hasselblad Sonnar Superachromat 250/5.6
    Hasselblad Tele-Superachromat 350/5.6 (and APO-Mutar 1.4x)
    Hasselblad Tele-Apotessar 500/8
    Hasselblad Tele-Superachromat 300/2.8 with APO-Mutar 1.7x

    In addition, several of the excellent Digital APO lenses from Rodenstock and Schneider can indeed be used on MF cameras with focal plane shutters like Mamiya and Contax (not possible with H3D/II or Hy6). Rodenstock will even provide the helicoids to do this. Of course, the flange focal distance must be within the range of the camera to get infinity focus. For example, the following lenses can be used easily on the Contax 645 (or Mamiya):

    Rodenstock APO-Sironar Digital HR 100/4
    Rodenstock APO-Sironar Digital HR 180/5.6
    Most Schneider APO-Digitar lenses at 100mm or longer

    Again, this all ties into why my system is based on a single Sinar back (to enjoy such lenses on multiple camera systems), so that I can use a focal plane shutter camera in addition to my Hy6 with the same DNG workflow.

    BTW, except for the Superachromat lenses, these lenses do not cost $6000. Many of the lenses listed above can be found for much less on the used market. In fact, one of the most corrected lenses from the list above is the Rodenstock APO-Sironar Digital HR 100/4 which sells brand new for only $1700.

  32. #82
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    492
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: H2 or Hy6???

    Quote Originally Posted by gogopix View Post
    Ok, based on the weight discussion here, and the fact that the H3D has an adapter for the Alpa (I think ) The H3D II has taken over top position. Yet to be handled of course!

    There is one other advantage, the MS version. This provide the potentioal for incredible resolution in long range landscape and Architecture. Better than rotating for me.

    I see no downside (except $$$) for the MS. I believe same form factor. It is not likely to be much heavier (though that will depend on the technology used for the 4 cell shift)

    From an IQ factor also a few more MP (since the 74LV is what I would put on the Hy6, oh maybe I am really talking the SINAR Hy6 set)

    Of course, there is the live view issue-HB doesn't have it. Yet I dont even use a ground glass with alpa, I use range est and lens is well calibrated (for WA anyway)

    SOOOOO...what about the LV guys?

    1. Will Hb have it?
    2 Does it matter?
    3. Is MS THAT much better (example are quite impressive MUCH more improvement than 25MP to 39MP)
    4. Will an upgrade to 60MP sinar blow that away?


    This is a VERY rich compendium on top MF; this thread has people who actually use and know about these systems

    say, where's PeterA?

    regards
    Victor
    I also have a MS back (but Sinar, of course). I can tell you that a MS image beats a SS image from any single shot back in terms of image quality. There are no interpolation artifacts to deal with, no false colors, and all edges are highly defined.

    The downside is that it is not that appropriate for outdoor shooting. Even the slightest vibration during exposure (like someone curious walking behind you) can be enough to disturb the entire image. There is always some wind, which is enough to destroy the fine details in many cases. I am not saying that it is impossible, but you will need a heavy/stable rig, combined with a completely still environment. For studio product or copy work, or indoor architecture, it is pretty much unbeatable.

  33. #83
    Subscriber gogopix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    1,383
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: H2 or Hy6???

    So, I learn HB has live preview, but also sinar has MS but that's am old back, yes? does the 74LV have a MS capability or are you talking about the 54 that Son has?

    Getting tight again;

    lets review the bidding

    Glass: Hy6 has is cold with Rollei glass, but IQ from what I see of HC is really impressive (though not comparable. NEED MORE How about a HB RAW from somebody?? Marc, are you willing to semd an out take? half mark to H6

    Sensor; a wash. HB has a little adv with 39 vs 33 MP but not significant. Half mark to H3

    Capture; sinar had LV, noew seems HB has as well. HB had MS, now seems Sinar has as well, but not sure its the 33MP untethered. no marks

    Processing; Sinar has RAW RAW, and HB has supercalifragalisticwhoopieDACandapoinsilicowhatch amacallits!! I give it a tie no marks

    Handling; open, but HB is 645 and H6 is 6x6. half mark (tentaive) to H3.

    So, only the handling separates,, and if we gave full marks it would be half mark out of 5-10 score total so REALLY close. (with one switch in dominance thinking already.

    This thread may go down as a real rival to the monster at the "TBUS" (to be unnamed site; Imgetting tired of saying that. Can I just abbreviate FM as in 'former monster' the second word applying , as you wish, to sites, threads,..... or ownres )

    But I am amazed as the breath of knowledge an detail here; this far exceeds an thread I have seen over the years at Photonet, Galbraith, LL and a few select sites) (though I am sure there are several 'secreet societies I havent even heard of, much less been invited to.

    so, hope everyone else is learning as much as I, but then I do have 30-40k riding on it!

    regards
    Victor

  34. #84
    Subscriber gogopix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    1,383
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: H2 or Hy6???

    Dear DavidK
    just noticed the Hb lenses for Hy6. How is done? a synch cord to the lens? or is there an adapter? on HB bodies, triggering these lenses was a PITA, and if you didnt cock right, and didnt have the special widget to fix the body....

  35. #85
    thsinar
    Guest

    Re: H2 or Hy6???

    Hi David,

    Sorry for my late reply: I have been traveling.

    yes, there is a user manual for the eMotion 54 V / 75 & 75 LV: you can download all from our webpage (www.sinarcameras.com), unter "Downloads" ---> "User Instructions". But you need to be registered in the "Sinar Owners' Group", which takes a few minutes and provides you automatically a "User Name" and "Password" to access.

    Anyway, I'll try to attach this manual here, as a .pdf file

    Best regards,
    Thierry

    Quote Originally Posted by David K View Post
    Well tomorrow I get to shoot with my friend's H3DII-39 and my friend gets to shoot with my Sinar e75. Should be interesting.

    @ Thierry,

    Is there a user manual for the e75 somewhere ?

  36. #86
    thsinar
    Guest

    Re: H2 or Hy6???

    Dear Victor,

    see my answers/remarks below your text.

    best regards,
    Thierry

    Quote Originally Posted by gogopix View Post
    ... but also sinar has MS but that's am old back, yes? does the 74LV have a MS capability or are you talking about the 54 that Son has?
    Sinar has 2 Multishot backs: the Sinarback 54 H (22 MPx with 1-, 4- and 16-shot modes) and the Sinarback eVolution 75 H (33 MPx with 1- and 4-shot modes).

    Quote Originally Posted by gogopix View Post
    Sensor; a wash. HB has a little adv with 39 vs 33 MP but not significant. Half mark to H3
    A 33 MPx or 39 MPx does not make a difference in multi-shot mode: already when shooting with a 33 Mpx sensor with the 4-shot, one reaches the limits of the lenses' resolution. Going from 33 to 39 MPx will not improve anything, but simply give you larger files.

    Quote Originally Posted by gogopix View Post
    Capture; sinar had LV, noew seems HB has as well. HB had MS, now seems Sinar has as well, but not sure its the 33MP untethered. no marks
    Sinar has Live Video with ANY digital back, included the eMotion backs (54 LV and 75 LV, where LV stands for Live Video), so yes, also untethered.

    Quote Originally Posted by gogopix View Post
    Processing; Sinar has RAW RAW,
    With Sinar you have the possibility to save the RAWs (absolute raws) as well as DNGs (then export TIF or JPG or continue with DNG, of course).

  37. #87
    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: H2 or Hy6???

    Quote Originally Posted by gogopix View Post
    So, I learn HB has live preview, but also sinar has MS but that's am old back, yes? does the 74LV have a MS capability or are you talking about the 54 that Son has?

    Getting tight again;

    lets review the bidding

    Glass: Hy6 has is cold with Rollei glass, but IQ from what I see of HC is really impressive (though not comparable. NEED MORE How about a HB RAW from somebody?? Marc, are you willing to semd an out take? half mark to H6

    Sensor; a wash. HB has a little adv with 39 vs 33 MP but not significant. Half mark to H3

    Capture; sinar had LV, noew seems HB has as well. HB had MS, now seems Sinar has as well, but not sure its the 33MP untethered. no marks

    Processing; Sinar has RAW RAW, and HB has supercalifragalisticwhoopieDACandapoinsilicowhatch amacallits!! I give it a tie no marks

    Handling; open, but HB is 645 and H6 is 6x6. half mark (tentaive) to H3.

    So, only the handling separates,, and if we gave full marks it would be half mark out of 5-10 score total so REALLY close. (with one switch in dominance thinking already.

    This thread may go down as a real rival to the monster at the "TBUS" (to be unnamed site; Imgetting tired of saying that. Can I just abbreviate FM as in 'former monster' the second word applying , as you wish, to sites, threads,..... or ownres )

    But I am amazed as the breath of knowledge an detail here; this far exceeds an thread I have seen over the years at Photonet, Galbraith, LL and a few select sites) (though I am sure there are several 'secreet societies I havent even heard of, much less been invited to.

    so, hope everyone else is learning as much as I, but then I do have 30-40k riding on it!

    regards
    Victor
    Victor, I think you will have more than $30-40K riding on any MF decision in the areas you are contemplating.

    Assuming you are building from ground zero, and are looking at a system approach, $50-60K+ is more likely.

    IMO, the comparisons and criteria that have been debated here have left out much of what is important to the decision making process most photographers apply ... intended use & application, plus where they are now with existing gear.

    Many shooters come to the point of decision with baggage in tow. Some have multiple camera systems with a range of prefered optics across multiple camera platforms. Others come with a full system from a prefered MF camera platform plus a few other format needs (i.e., view camera.)

    From what I can tell, David is in the former camp, and I am now in the latter... (prior to committing more to the H system, I was in David's camp so I understand his preferences.)

    My more recent history was one of a slow build. An Imacon 96C on a Leaf Shutter Hasselblad V system I already owned, and a Kodak back on a focal plane shutter Contax 645. Kodak abandoned MF backs, and Kyocera abandoned the Contax 645, so I sold both.

    Hasselblad provided a generous policy of upgrades, so it was an easier decision to go to the H which IMO was very similar in handling to the Contax 645 except is was faster. At the same time they also provided the means to utilize the extensive collection of Zeiss CFi & CFE glass I already owned via the ingenious CF adapter ... which was also fully integrated into the H system and operated in full auto aperture metering.

    With Manual or Aperture preferred metering, the H with Zeiss lenses is the same as a 203FE with Zeiss CF leaf shutter lenses mounted. So I had a single system that provided 9 autofocus H/C lenses (I have 8), and full use of the 10 Zeiss manual focus optics from Fisheye to 350mm that I already owned.

    For my intended use and real world applications the Contax 645 and the Hasselbald 500 systems were effectively replaced with one camera. So, I could have either bought one Sinar back to work on multiple cameras, or one Camera/Back that took all the glass I actually need, and already owned. I had grown sick of maintaining 4 or 5 MF systems and chose the latter route ... but have NO quibbles with those who chose the former.

    Along the way I made some mistakes that flies in the face of this philosophy, like doing a slow build of a Leaf Aptus trade-up to a Mamiya mount 75s thinking I wanted/needed a focal plane shutter camera. In reality, based on real world Medium Format applications, I don't ... it'd be nice, but not necessary. Fortunately, I built this system wisely and basically broke even when selling it all off.

    The anomaly to this well reasoned and practical approach is my dogged death grip on my 203FE system with FE lenses from 50/2.8FE to 350/4FE ... and it's ability to use all the 500 series C lenses in Leaf Shutter mode or F Mode. For this pure indulgence on my part, I HAVE to get a Sinar back ... it's the only game in town for the 200 camera. With that, I will have a 6X6 Focal Plane digital camera, a Leaf Shutter digital camera, and a 6X6 film camera ... all in one ... with a fast handling AF 645 H camera for the type application that 645 cameras were invented for ... both providing access to all my Zeiss CFi & CFE optics.

    IMO, the single dumbest thing Hasselblad has done in their history is abandon the 200 series system. If they had collaborated with Zeiss for a few AF lenses, and kept the compatibility with all the leaf shutter Zeiss V optics that flood the world, I would only need one camera and one digital back.

    IMO, the single smartest thing Hasselblad could do now is bring forth a Focal Plane H body with a modern shutter to 1/6000th or higher and a simple e-adapter for all Zeiss V lenses ...which given the design of the camera, and the fact that other 645s are all focal plane cameras ... plus there already is a baffle shutter in the camera ... it should not be that daunting an engineering task for the wizards at Hasselblad.

    ARE YOU LISTENING HASSELBLAD?

    A thought on overkill.

    Multi-shot for most people is overkill. Great for bragging rights, but unless it's an actual application that's needed with frequency, it an expensive option that is a permanent addition to the back and may effect the handling aspects as a one shot camera. According to the Sinar web site they do not offer the mobile backs in a MS version (please correct this if the site is wrong) ... Hasselblad does. I haven't had a H3D-II/39 MS in hand yet, so I cannot comment on the effect that the M/S module has on the handling when used as a one shot camera.

    33 and 39 meg. is great, and provides those bragging rights ... but in many real world applications is also overkill. 22 meg 645 backs with 9X9 micron pixels provides fantastic resolution and absolutely beautiful tonal renditions.

    Here's an AF snap of Irakly done with an H2D/22 with a detail inset ... I cannot locate the full sized rendition, only a web shot ... but I think you'll get the idea.
    Last edited by fotografz; 19th July 2008 at 20:29.

  38. #88
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Posts
    2,338
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    52

    Re: H2 or Hy6???

    ....

  39. #89
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Posts
    2,338
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    52

    Re: H2 or Hy6???

    Victor in the end it all gets down to your individual idiosyncratic preference - this is not a criticism of you, it is merely how anyone ends up making a decision. Decision 'rationalisations' are most passionately presented - AFTER teh fact and far less so BEFORE the fact

    I am sure you know this - given your summary progress score tables ..I would be very much surprised if in fact , you hadn't already made up your mind - before you asked the question.

    For me it has become a no brainer what to do.

    I must say though that you should thank a number of people for their very generous time and effort in presenting a lot of information and very interesting accounts of their personal experiences and understandings - Marc in particular, but others as well.

    Regards
    Pete

  40. #90
    Administrator, Instructor Guy Mancuso's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    23,623
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2555

    Re: H2 or Hy6???

    Frankly this is a awesome thread and one of the best i have seen on GetDPI and certainly a major reference point of data . My head is spinning a little but i am soaking it all in. i know we are talking about the 33 and 39 meg backs and right now my interest is still on the 22mpx thinking that is enough until I get a chance to work these myself but I think I will start a 22 mpx back thread . One because that is maybe where more folks on this forum see some entry point and can also get in the door a little easier. Please keep this discussion going but maybe help out a 22mpx thread with your thoughts. Great job guys and the forum thanks you all very much for your great input
    Photography is all about experimentation and without it you will never learn art.

    www.guymancusophotography.com

  41. #91
    Workshop Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Jupiter, Fla.
    Posts
    1,967
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2

    Re: H2 or Hy6???

    I'm taking bets that Victor goes Hasselblad... Jimmy the Greek has the odds at 8-5 in Vegas BTW, having shot with the H kit yesterday, tethered thru Phocus, I can tell you that is one great system. You can't go wrong with either one.

  42. #92
    Workshop Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Jupiter, Fla.
    Posts
    1,967
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2

    Re: H2 or Hy6???

    Here's one taken with the Zeiss 110 f/2 somewhere around f/11 I think. Converted with Brumbaer and resized for web, together with a crop. No post at all.

  43. #93
    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: H2 or Hy6???

    Quote Originally Posted by Guy Mancuso View Post
    Frankly this is a awesome thread and one of the best i have seen on GetDPI and certainly a major reference point of data . My head is spinning a little but i am soaking it all in. i know we are talking about the 33 and 39 meg backs and right now my interest is still on the 22mpx thinking that is enough until I get a chance to work these myself but I think I will start a 22 mpx back thread . One because that is maybe where more folks on this forum see some entry point and can also get in the door a little easier. Please keep this discussion going but maybe help out a 22mpx thread with your thoughts. Great job guys and the forum thanks you all very much for your great input
    Guy, that is why I posted the snap shot of Irakly from my previous H2D/22 ... which really performed with it 9X9 micron photosites. It's like the Hasselblad CFV back, only a near 645 sized sensor instead of the 16 meg 36.7X36.7 sensor of the CFV.

    Here it is again: Inset is the full frame, then a severe crop detail of the eye ... if I run across the original full sized one I'll post it ... all I have is this smaller web upload on my hard drive ... but it still shows 22 meg is no slouch ... and frankly, in many cases more isn't better.
    Last edited by fotografz; 7th June 2008 at 05:01.

  44. #94
    Administrator, Instructor Guy Mancuso's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    23,623
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2555

    Re: H2 or Hy6???

    Thanks Marc I know i can maybe get a P25 which I believe is the 9 microns for about 12k which i can actually almost pull off. But i need to see what Sinar , Aptus and anyone else have also in this. I think from all the reading and posting you guys have done it seems to me the sweet spot is the 9 micron sensor compared to the 6.5 of the P30 which i can get for even less.
    Photography is all about experimentation and without it you will never learn art.

    www.guymancusophotography.com

  45. #95
    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: H2 or Hy6???

    Quote Originally Posted by David Klepacki View Post
    Marc, I am trying my hardest to be objective, but as you can see we both are biased from our independent experiences. I sincerely do not mean to be patronizing to anyone. In fact, one of the posts above summed up the situation beautifully with the example of the wide angle 28mm HC lens. Such a lens would be impossible to design with optical correction only. So, indeed software correction has tremendous value, especially for the wides.

    I was only trying to clarify my preference for lens corrections in the lenses themselves, whenever possible. Contrary to your claim, there are many MF lenses that are super highly corrected from the get go:

    Rollei Schneider APO-Symar 90/4
    Rollei Schneider APO-Symar 150/4.6
    Rollei Schneider APO-Tele-Xenar 300/4
    Contax Zeiss Vario-Sonnar 45-90/4.5 (at 65-75, no distortion, no CA, no vign.)
    Contax Zeiss APO-Makro-Planar 120/4
    Contax Zeiss Tele-Apo-Tessar 350/4
    Sinar Zeiss Digital AF Planar 120/4
    Mamiya 645 APO 300/2.8
    Mamiya 645 APO 300/4.5
    Mamiya RZ APO 210/4.5
    Mamiya RZ APO 250/4.5
    Mamiya RZ APO 350/5.6
    Mamiya RZ APO 500/6
    Hasselblad Sonnar Superachromat 250/5.6
    Hasselblad Tele-Superachromat 350/5.6 (and APO-Mutar 1.4x)
    Hasselblad Tele-Apotessar 500/8
    Hasselblad Tele-Superachromat 300/2.8 with APO-Mutar 1.7x

    In addition, several of the excellent Digital APO lenses from Rodenstock and Schneider can indeed be used on MF cameras with focal plane shutters like Mamiya and Contax (not possible with H3D/II or Hy6). Rodenstock will even provide the helicoids to do this. Of course, the flange focal distance must be within the range of the camera to get infinity focus. For example, the following lenses can be used easily on the Contax 645 (or Mamiya):

    Rodenstock APO-Sironar Digital HR 100/4
    Rodenstock APO-Sironar Digital HR 180/5.6
    Most Schneider APO-Digitar lenses at 100mm or longer

    Again, this all ties into why my system is based on a single Sinar back (to enjoy such lenses on multiple camera systems), so that I can use a focal plane shutter camera in addition to my Hy6 with the same DNG workflow.

    BTW, except for the Superachromat lenses, these lenses do not cost $6000. Many of the lenses listed above can be found for much less on the used market. In fact, one of the most corrected lenses from the list above is the Rodenstock APO-Sironar Digital HR 100/4 which sells brand new for only $1700.
    Nice collection !

    David, as well corrected those lenses are, they are not perfect. All lenses have to make compromises in some area ... some more than others. Even Zeiss and Leica openly admit this.

    The prices I've been quoted for the new AF Schneider lenses range in the neighborhood of $5,000. for the 50mm to almost $6,000. for the 180.

    I have had and have used some of the Mamiya APOs with a Leaf 75s Back, and the corresponding H/C lenses are every bit as good or better ... even without the DAC corrections.

    I'm sure the Rollei Schneider optics are stellar.

    I just plain do not want to maintain a bunch of dispert MF systems, and all the accessories, batteries & chargers, filters, cords and all that stuff any more. Been there, done that. It's enough just to stay on top of a rangefinder system, a DSLR system AND one MF system ... horses for courses.

    Consolidation is my mantra.

  46. #96
    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: H2 or Hy6???

    Quote Originally Posted by Guy Mancuso View Post
    Thanks Marc I know i can maybe get a P25 which I believe is the 9 microns for about 12k which i can actually almost pull off. But i need to see what Sinar , Aptus and anyone else have also in this. I think from all the reading and posting you guys have done it seems to me the sweet spot is the 9 micron sensor compared to the 6.5 of the P30 which i can get for even less.
    e-mail Irakly. He secured a P25 for his Contax ... he is convinced that 22 meg is perfect for his applications and the ability of the lenses he uses.

    I've handled it and it's a really nice digital back. He is "relearning" his work flow in terms of getting the IQ he got from his Kodak back ... but that's just a matter of time as each back is different.

  47. #97
    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: H2 or Hy6???

    A final clarification:

    The H system provides a wide choice of Hasselblad spec'ed, Fuji built AF lenses, but is not restricted to just that. The full C, CF, CFi and CFE range of Zeiss MF lenses have been nicely integrated into the system via the CF adapter. I requires cocking the lens shutter after each shot, but the placement of the cocking lever makes that easy and swift ... with practice pushing up with your left thumb, it can be done without removing the camera from your eye. Everything else is auto-aperture metering and shooting with in-view finder displays, and you can utilize focus confirmation for manual focussing.

    (See attached of H3D-II/39 with Zeiss 180/4).

    I've also attached a dual shot image in my studio showing the use of a Zeiss 30mm fisheye (top) and a H/C 35mm (bottom) where the DAC corrections were applied in Phocus to correct distortion and vignetting ... then a snap of the 30mm on the H3D-II/39.

    (This horse is now dead ... I'm off now to do some shooting : -)
    Last edited by fotografz; 7th June 2008 at 05:01.

  48. #98
    Subscriber gogopix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    1,383
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: H2 or Hy6???

    Well, if I haven't thanked you all yet (I believe I have) but obviously not expressed strongly enough. The depth of discussion and time I hope are not just limited to my use, but, well, I'll take it.

    As far as the 'line on what Victor will buy' I will keep checking. Who knows, the spread may pay for the system?

    I WAS on Hy6 switched largely to H3 on 645 basis. Sure, 6x6 is nice, but I am on the move 4-5 times a year on travel/hike/trek/skiing. If I can't use a system easily, it doesnt fly. (and I carry it! and BTW I used to take a Betacam on the slopes for some action.)
    However there is alimit, and the H6 may just go over ('cube' is more important than weight.)

    also likely pass on MS if it means bigger system.

    I have two op's for testing but not for two weeks. Keep those 'enlightened' opinions coming!

    regards and thx
    Victor

  49. #99
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    492
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: H2 or Hy6???

    Quote Originally Posted by fotografz View Post
    Nice collection !

    David, as well corrected those lenses are, they are not perfect. All lenses have to make compromises in some area ... some more than others. Even Zeiss and Leica openly admit this.

    The prices I've been quoted for the new AF Schneider lenses range in the neighborhood of $5,000. for the 50mm to almost $6,000. for the 180.

    I have had and have used some of the Mamiya APOs with a Leaf 75s Back, and the corresponding H/C lenses are every bit as good or better ... even without the DAC corrections.

    I'm sure the Rollei Schneider optics are stellar.

    I just plain do not want to maintain a bunch of dispert MF systems, and all the accessories, batteries & chargers, filters, cords and all that stuff any more. Been there, done that. It's enough just to stay on top of a rangefinder system, a DSLR system AND one MF system ... horses for courses.

    Consolidation is my mantra.
    Marc,

    First, I do not have all these lenses. It was only to demonstrate that there were indeed a lot of MF lenses out there that have been highly corrected, since you said that you never came across any. Of course, no lens can be 100% perfect, but some lenses have more corrections than others.

    As for consolidation, I couldn't agree with you more. It sounds like you had maintained quite a mess of systems, so I now better understand your decision with the Hasselblad H. I never put myself in that situation. My MF kits are very slim, but I can take advantage of the best from each camera with only one digital back system. For example, with only two/three bodies and seven lenses, I can pretty much cover anything:

    1. Hy6: WLF or 90-VF, fast AF, revolving back, leaf shutters, high speed flash kit
    - Rollei Schneider PQS 50/2.8
    - Rollei Schneider PQS 80/2.8
    - Rollei Schnieder PQ 180/2.8 2 (+ optional 1.4x)

    2. Contax: WLF or 90-VF, high speed focal plane shutter, especially for shooting Hasselblad V glass up to 1/4000 (not possible with the H system and CF adapter)
    - Hasselblad Zeiss CFE 40/4 IF (PC-Mutar when +/- 16mm shift needed)
    - Hasselblad Zeiss FE 110/2
    - Hasselblad Zeiss SA 300/2.8 (+ optional 1.7x APO-Mutar)
    - Contax Zeiss 45-90/4.5 (all around convenience and light travel)

    2b. (optional) Hasselblad: if I do not feel like manually stopping down the above HB lenses on the Contax.

    It is not that I came with a lot of "baggage". I specifically planned these kits from scratch based on the Sinar philosophy of open systems. I do not have any such problems that you mention, concerning messy cables, batteries, filters, ..., etc. It is quite a simple system that gives me a wide range of tools and capabilities. Of course, if I need ultra-wide (rangefinder) or view camera movements, I then take my back to those systems as well. And, if I have any future need for a different focal length, from any system (like a Mamiya 28mm, or possibly their future leaf shutter lenses, as examples), I can easily add that at any time.

    In fact, I did consider the Hasselblad H system. It just did not give me the same capabilities nor the flexibility as the Sinar solution that I developed above. Everything fits nicely into two packs and is easily portable, no mess, no fuss.

  50. #100
    Senior Member Steve Hendrix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    420
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    4

    Re: H2 or Hy6???

    I think it's really important that you handle both cameras. One of the biggest differences is in how they handle, as they have very different grip stylings and body shapes. When you're trying to capture the ultimate image, sometimes it's about comfort and the camera being an extension of your hands more than anything else.

    The Hy6 has the advantage of a better waist level, and the choice of 45 degree and 90 degree finders. It also has the advantage of (with the Sinar) a revolving or (with the Leaf) rotating back.

    The image quality from the H3DII/AFi/Hy6 systems is as good as anything available, and not worth the debate, unless 400/800 ISO is of importance. If so, then the 31MP sensors have a significant advantage over any of the others.

    Much has been made of the falloff quality of the H lenses and the high degree of sharpness. Certainly the glass for the Hy6 is going to be amply sharp. The falloff quality of the HC lenses might be an issue for some, but that depends what you're looking for. They don't look like a Canon 85mm/1.2 if that's the level of creamy you're looking for. You'll have to decide if the look of the lenses satisfies you - certainly the selection will (28mm - 300mm with more coming this fall).

    And one final thing. While some refer to being "locked" into a closed system, you still have the option of trading in/selling the system if/when you desire a change. The only difference is that you may also need to find a home for camera/lenses instead of back only. But these are all modern, cutting edge systems, so their saleable viability is going to be pretty secure for quite some time going forward. I've had customers change digital backs and camera/lens systems in the past. You still have choice - even with a "closed" system.

    Steve Hendrix
    www.ppratlanta.com/digital.php

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
  •