Site Sponsors
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2
Results 51 to 100 of 100

Thread: Hasselblad vs Phase One

  1. #51
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    561
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Hasselblad vs Phase One

    Quote Originally Posted by dougpetersonci View Post

    Phase's system of allowing the user to put any back on any body opens up the possibility for camera-back focus miscalibration. That is scary on paper. However, the reality is in three years, I've only had three cases I can remember where someone was dissatisfied with the registration of a body-back system. All three were addressed for free with a quick visit to the NY office - leading to the same outcome as hassy's system of requiring calibration/registration in order to use a particular back and body.
    Sorry Doug but it isn't the same at all.

    We don't sell separate backs and bodies. When you buy an H4D it is sent to you as a package, calibrated tested and ready.

    Its not a quick visit to the NY office if you live on the other side of the USA, or if you live in Australia and your nearest service centre for adjustment is where???

    Should an H4D owner think they would like a spare body then 9 times out of ten they order it when they order their H4D. The two bodies are then calibrated together.

  2. #52
    Senior Member atanabe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Napa Valley, CA
    Posts
    470
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2

    Re: Hasselblad vs Phase One

    I have to agree with Guy that any good photographer can produce great images given any tool. The argument that one camera is better than another is purely subjective in my opinion. Also my opinion, that the digital technology exceeds the capabilities of most of their owners.

    The most important thing to look for when buying in an environment where there is little support such as the Middle East, is who will help in an emergency? Is there any local dealer support? Is there a local importer that can expedite things? Those to me are the most important ones when making a gear choice. Phase, Hasselblad, Leica they are all capable platforms with individual plusses and minuses but all capable.
    Al Tanabe my website https://www.altanabe.com

  3. #53
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Posts
    2,338
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    52

    Re: Hasselblad vs Phase One

    Lets be clear here - there are only two companies who genuinely provide a back which can be switched between body types via adaptors at any time.
    These are the genuine open system backs.

    These back types are Sinar and Hasselblad CF. Both systems allow users to change adaptors and use ANY MF camera they wish to use when they wish to use it - ie at any time.

    This is a compelling value proposition for people who have multiple platforms of camera types and lenses.

    It is misleading for Phase One to say that they are an 'open' system - when the buyer is locked into one type of camera mount. If you wish to change camera mount you have to send the back in to have it changed. Ok you can change - but it is a hassle and then you are locked into the new one camera mount.

    Interestingly - the ONLY camera which Phase One doesn't support is the Hy6/Afi

    On numerous threads in numerous forums - the question has been asked - why not?

    The answer?- silence.

    I find this strange - especially since Leaf does support this mount.


    So all these comapnies play their games - which is fine - but it is rather tiresome to hear the same BS about open systems versus closed systems - it is a conscious strategy which uses the trick of say something often enough and loud enough - it must be true.

    Ok if the definition of open is any mount you choose - fine. But thisis a limited 'definition' and self serving. Still even this limited definition - doesn't answer the quesiton why not Hy6/Afi?

    Pete

  4. #54
    Administrator, Instructor Guy Mancuso's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    23,623
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2555

    Re: Hasselblad vs Phase One

    Pete the answer to that from anyone at Phase will be we do support the AFI in the Leaf back. Its a 3 product line company. Phase, Leaf and Mamiya and that is what they will tell you.

    I know I know but that is how they look at it. One line in there product inventory supports it .
    Photography is all about experimentation and without it you will never learn art.

    www.guymancusophotography.com

  5. #55
    Senior Member MaxKißler's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Berlin
    Posts
    387
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Hasselblad vs Phase One

    Hey guys,

    I know I'm somewhat new to this awesome forum, so don't club me to pieces if I may chime in here: Talk less and capture more!

    I mean look at the OP, he must be thinking have I done. They're drawing the poleaxes in this fiery debate...

    It's not like anybody was forced to buy any of those systems. I do understand that some people out there may feel betrayed by Hassy for closing their system but does this make it any less amazing?

    Since Phase is favouring Sensor+ over XPose+ in the new backs I don't see that much of a difference to the Hassy backs. (XPose+: one of those things that I think is soo cool about the Phase Backs).
    Of course the fancy new screen. I don't want to spoil the hype but Hassy could match up in app. a year I bet.

    Hey don't get me wrong, I do know I'm generalizing a lot here...
    What seems to be more important: a solid market seems to have established.

    So everybody be happy and have a couple of Becks!

  6. #56
    Administrator, Instructor Guy Mancuso's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    23,623
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2555

    Re: Hasselblad vs Phase One

    Actually Max this one is pretty friendly believe it or not. LOL
    Photography is all about experimentation and without it you will never learn art.

    www.guymancusophotography.com

  7. #57
    Senior Member MaxKißler's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Berlin
    Posts
    387
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Hasselblad vs Phase One

    Quote Originally Posted by Guy Mancuso View Post
    Actually Max this one is pretty friendly believe it or not. LOL
    Well then, I guess I overreacted a bit. Sorry my bad...
    Last edited by MaxKißler; 3rd February 2011 at 16:48.

  8. #58
    Workshop Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Brooklyn
    Posts
    4,043
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1253

    Re: Hasselblad vs Phase One

    no popcorn yet, only sipping a nice domaine du bagnol cassis blanc, preparing a salade Nicoise using some tuna i canned last summer...

    that after a few very stressful 14 hour wrk days

  9. #59
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Posts
    2,338
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    52

    Re: Hasselblad vs Phase One

    Quote Originally Posted by Guy Mancuso View Post
    Pete the answer to that from anyone at Phase will be we do support the AFI in the Leaf back. Its a 3 product line company. Phase, Leaf and Mamiya and that is what they will tell you.

    I know I know but that is how they look at it. One line in there product inventory supports it .
    yeah I know Guy - and I have nothing against Leaf at all - in fact I rate the backs very highly..I just dont like the hanging battery and I really like the look of the IQ system now...if Leaf has the same LCD etc - no problem - but it doesn't..

    perfect world for me is to keep the Hy6 and have an IQ back on it - and my Alpa stuff..

    *frustrated but hey I will get over it -

  10. #60
    Shelby Lewis
    Guest

    Re: Hasselblad vs Phase One

    Quote Originally Posted by PeterA View Post
    *frustrated but hey I will get over it -
    we all still like you anyway

    (i totally get what you are saying!)

  11. #61
    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: Hasselblad vs Phase One

    Quote Originally Posted by thomas View Post
    of course. But I wasn't refering to the open/closed system question... but to a "integrated" system.
    Of course Phase could provide an individual adjustemt of cameras/sensors as well... but they just don't do it.

    by design this is not possible. No company makes mechanical parts in a series within tolerances of 0.06mm... Mircoadjustment is required.

    edit:
    Actually I don't use AF on the Contax (at least very rarely). I use spilt image screens and the screens are adjusted carefully to match the sensor spacing of my DB (well... with shims, naturally).
    When I shot Contax 645 with a Kodak 645C Pro Back, I had to send the camera, back, and a few lenses to Kodak be calibrated together. After that the AF was much more accurate with some of the faster Zeiss lenses. Made me a believer in the Integration concept.

    Another aspect of Hasselblad's approach is True Focus ... which is NOT just Absolute Position Lock of the H4, it is also CPU micro adjust focus compensation as you stop down. In a silent room working tethered you can hear it make the tiny AF tweaks. The H system AF is the most accurate of any camera I've used to date.

    -Marc

  12. #62
    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: Hasselblad vs Phase One

    It may seem gruff Max, but in reality, it's a bunch of squeaky voiced Munchkins waving their fingers at each other while the real, big world keeps turning oblivious to it all

    -Marc

  13. #63
    Senior Member yaya's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    London, UK
    Posts
    1,168
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    38

    Re: Hasselblad vs Phase One

    Quote Originally Posted by Guy Mancuso View Post
    Pete the answer to that from anyone at Phase will be we do support the AFI in the Leaf back. Its a 3 product line company. Phase, Leaf and Mamiya and that is what they will tell you.

    I know I know but that is how they look at it. One line in there product inventory supports it .
    And that's exactly it; the number of Hy6/ AFi bodies sold is high enough to support sales of new Leaf Aptus-II 12 backs for it but not high enough to support developing a new Phase One back for it

    There's your answer Peter:-)

    Yair
    Yair Shahar | Product Manager | Phase One | Mamiya Leaf
    e: [email protected] | m: +44(0)77 8992 8199 | yaya's blog

  14. #64
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    1,347
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    12

    Re: Hasselblad vs Phase One

    Quote Originally Posted by fotografz View Post
    When I shot Contax 645 with a Kodak 645C Pro Back, I had to send the camera, back, and a few lenses to Kodak be calibrated together. After that the AF was much more accurate with some of the faster Zeiss lenses.
    actually the sensor spacing is within the tolerances of my Contax' AF... but the AF tolerances are simply not tight enough for a high res back. Manual fine adjustment with split image screens improves things when very precise focusing is required; especially near infinity where the AF doesn't work that reliable. Too, I simply feel good (i.e. safe) when there is a visual control over focusing in the finder.
    Downside of split image screens is they only work for center focusing, of course. And you have to guess focus shift compensation. But that's not that hard when you know your lenses... IMO. I still have to "learn" the zoom lens as focus shift on this one is heavy but with the fixed focal lenses it's really quite easy.

    ... Made me a believer in the Integration concept.
    yep, understandable. Actually as long as there is a way to fine adjust focus everything is fine (so something like Alpa's back shimming, Arca's offset focusing, manual adjustment of helical focus rings, screen shimming, AF micro adjustment and you name it). But if there is no option at all to fine adjust focusing you are actually screwed. I haven't used one... but I believe for SLR type cameras Hasselblads approach is the most mature (re focusing); possibly followed by the S2. If you don't really need AF screen shimming also works just fine (Contax, Hy6 ... not sure about the AFD/DF).

  15. #65
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Posts
    2,338
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    52

    Re: Hasselblad vs Phase One

    I was looking through some photography bo0ks as I was packing box number 24000 this evening ( we are moving house) - and I realised in looking at some of the great work of the past - a lot of it wouldn't pass the focus tests that many are obsessed about ..

    No disrespect to anyone ...

    just a thought.

    Pete

  16. #66
    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: Hasselblad vs Phase One

    Quote Originally Posted by thomas View Post
    actually the sensor spacing is within the tolerances of my Contax' AF... but the AF tolerances are simply not tight enough for a high res back. Manual fine adjustment with split image screens improves things when very precise focusing is required; especially near infinity where the AF doesn't work that reliable. Too, I simply feel good (i.e. safe) when there is a visual control over focusing in the finder.
    Downside of split image screens is they only work for center focusing, of course. And you have to guess focus shift compensation. But that's not that hard when you know your lenses... IMO. I still have to "learn" the zoom lens as focus shift on this one is heavy but with the fixed focal lenses it's really quite easy.

    yep, understandable. Actually as long as there is a way to fine adjust focus everything is fine (so something like Alpa's back shimming, Arca's offset focusing, manual adjustment of helical focus rings, screen shimming, AF micro adjustment and you name it). But if there is no option at all to fine adjust focusing you are actually screwed. I haven't used one... but I believe for SLR type cameras Hasselblads approach is the most mature (re focusing); possibly followed by the S2. If you don't really need AF screen shimming also works just fine (Contax, Hy6 ... not sure about the AFD/DF).
    Yeah, the bigger backs would most certainly magnify the AF issues. Mine was a 9 micron 16 meg back on the Contax way back then, so less critical. I sent it in to Kodak and it turned out that the back wasn't calibrated properly and the sensor unit had to be shimmed.

    I'm amazed that more attention isn't paid to this AF situation ... Sample variation of lens manufacture alone warrants some sort of adjustment ability ... especially as the backs get bigger and bigger and the DOF masking gets narrower and narrower.

    It'd be interesting to know how Hasselblad "integrates" the True Focus Micro Adjust given that existing user lenses aren't part of that process ... but somehow it seems to work. Maybe TF/MicroAdjust is just compensating for known focus shift when changing apertures, and that the integration calibration of each camera/back has to meet certain tight tolerances as a unit using average lens samples?

    -Marc

  17. #67
    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: Hasselblad vs Phase One

    Quote Originally Posted by PeterA View Post
    I was looking through some photography bo0ks as I was packing box number 24000 this evening ( we are moving house) - and I realised in looking at some of the great work of the past - a lot of it wouldn't pass the focus tests that many are obsessed about ..

    No disrespect to anyone ...

    just a thought.

    Pete
    No disagreement Peter ... it's just that WHEN you want critical focus, it should be there.

    I can always throw something out of focus, but if the AF won't provide critical focus when shooting a product or something, it isn't favorably looked upon by clients, especially eagle eyed Art Directors that may crop and enlarge that section for alternate use.

    -Marc

  18. #68
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Manchester/Jerusalem
    Posts
    2,652
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    290

    Re: Hasselblad vs Phase One

    I would add that most of those great photographs are reportage not commercial where it is important.
    I am not a painter, nor an artist. Therefore I can see straight, and that may be my undoing. - Alfred Stieglitz

    Website: http://www.timelessjewishart.com

  19. #69
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    1,347
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    12

    Re: Hasselblad vs Phase One

    Quote Originally Posted by fotografz View Post
    Yeah, the bigger backs would most certainly magnify the AF issues. Mine was a 9 micron 16 meg back on the Contax way back then, so less critical.
    makes sense. My p21+ almost acts like a "point and shoot" in comparision to the P45. It's also 9 microns and has a smaller crop than the p45, so it's much less of a hassle to focus it correctly...

  20. #70
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Posts
    2,338
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    52

    Re: Hasselblad vs Phase One

    Totally agree guys - when you need it it HAS to be there.. and yet wide open shooting in MF and high megapixels ( smaller pixels) doesn't make it easy...

    you really need what I call FAT light to give yourself half a chance..and probably a FAT tripod to match..

    I think the limits of hardware tolerances will be more and more tested by these high megapixel backs..

  21. #71
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    561
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Hasselblad vs Phase One

    Quote Originally Posted by fotografz View Post
    Yeah, the bigger backs would most certainly magnify the AF issues. Mine was a 9 micron 16 meg back on the Contax way back then, so less critical. I sent it in to Kodak and it turned out that the back wasn't calibrated properly and the sensor unit had to be shimmed.

    I'm amazed that more attention isn't paid to this AF situation ... Sample variation of lens manufacture alone warrants some sort of adjustment ability ... especially as the backs get bigger and bigger and the DOF masking gets narrower and narrower.

    It'd be interesting to know how Hasselblad "integrates" the True Focus Micro Adjust given that existing user lenses aren't part of that process ... but somehow it seems to work. Maybe TF/MicroAdjust is just compensating for known focus shift when changing apertures, and that the integration calibration of each camera/back has to meet certain tight tolerances as a unit using average lens samples?

    -Marc
    Hi Marc,

    Its the camera telling the lens when to rotate back and forth and then instructing it when to stop, when the subject is in focus. The lens actually doesn't know where it is focussed as finely as the camera.

    Does that make sense?

    The point it that the camera has to have a very tight hardware calibration (CCD) position, electronic (on board AF system) and clever stuff! (The compensation of aperture focus shift)

    This is why our efforts are mostly centred around body / electronics focussing.

    However, there are a few other (secret) things we could do in the lenses as well.

    D

  22. #72
    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: Hasselblad vs Phase One

    Quote Originally Posted by siebel View Post
    I am currently running a Phase One P65+ and also a LEAF Aptus 12, as well as a P45+ in my architectural photography business. I've been shooting MF digital since 1995.
    Firstly, lets deal with the backs. It is essential that you know what you want to shoot. I have a couple of friends who own H4D-60's and love them. They use a brand they are familiar with, the image quality meets their expectations and they do not anticipate wanting to use their back on a technical camera at any point in the future.
    I earn over 90% of my income shooting with a technical camera, so any back I use must have this capability (to be mounted on a technical cam)and in an uncompromised way. In this regard, my P65+ is by far my favourite. The durability of my back is a big factor for me - I spend a lot of time on industrial sites and in the mountains hiking. I've spent a bit of time with the Blad back and whilst it is a quality device, I don't trust its durability.
    The Leaf Aptus 12, with 80 Megapixels is the current image quality champion. The files have to be seen to be believed. Don't just fixate on the pixel count - the quality of the data and the combination with Capture One Pro are an unstoppable combo. I still prefer the Phase navigation but this could be because I'm very used to it. In any event, Leaf are launching a new interface soon.
    Alas, if money is no object, there is only one back to consider - the just announced Phase One IQ180. I had the pleasure of shooting with this back just a week ago and I am still speechless. It is fast, incredibly easy to use, has a totally user-friendly interface and is as tough as nails. I even have a photograph of Poul Husum, area sales manager for Phase One, standing on one. Ask your Hasselblad dealer to do that!
    The back I shot with was a prototype and still had some bugs but I would have bought it on the spot if I could. There are several threads about this back already, so I'll not prattle on more.
    Cameras- Hmmm. Tougher call. When I retired my much loved Hasselblad V system about a year ago, I tested both Blad and Mamiya/Phase before I decided on the 645DF camera. I think the viewfinder is a little brighter, the Af is definitely faster (H3d vs DF). I prefer the look of the Blad, it's power options appear more attractive (not an issue now that I have a V-grip air) and I prefer how it feels in the hand. Fit and finish are also better on the Blad. Most decry the lack of a removable prism on the DF but working here in the Middle East, I see this as plus due to there being one less place for dust to get in. In the end, I'd say try both and choose the one that suits you best.
    Be aware though, that Phase One are working on an all new camera that is their attempt to overcome the weaknesses of the DF, which like the Blad, is a new update of an old platform.
    At the time of making my decision, I had access to 28, 80, 120Macro and 150mm lenses from both players. I very much prefer the look of the Blad - Man, their industrial designers rock. Still, to my surprise, the Phase lenses focussed faster, and 2 of the 4 were noticeably sharper. Since the release of all the new lenses from Phase one in the last year or so, I'm pretty happy I made the decision I did.
    The reality is that the back is always the dearest part of the equation, so just buy the best. If I was to buy a Blad now (assuming I didn't like the DF, for whatever the reason), I'd still buy an IQ180 and put it on a H2 to avoid the firmware lockout nonsense of the H3 and H4. Several dealers are still selling H2's new but get in quick- now that the lawsuit between Phase and Blad is settled, H2 users know Phase can still support the mount........
    It's a tough dilemma you face. Good luck.
    Cheers,
    What I want to see is YOU standing on your $44,000. IQ180 when you get one ...

    Then I'll believe it ... however, what that means is lost on me other than a marketing circus act ... no back from anyone has ever had to carry a 170lb+ load on any job I've ever seen shot, nor have any of them failed due to its load bearing ability

    I once dropped a non-Phase One back down a complete fight of marble stairs from tripod height, and other than cosmetic marks it worked perfectly. IMO, that meant nothing either.

    -Marc

  23. #73
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Warks, UK
    Posts
    550
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Hasselblad vs Phase One

    Quote Originally Posted by David Grover / Hasselblad View Post
    H4D60, thankyou very much.
    Quote Originally Posted by yaya View Post
    I thought I saw somewhere that you said that it was in beta testing?
    Quote Originally Posted by David Grover / Hasselblad View Post
    Nope.
    I have an H4D-60... what is in beta test is the software that will enable us to use it with live view or with flash on a view camera.

  24. #74
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    274
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Hasselblad vs Phase One

    Phase one is an open system. Hasselblad is a closed one. I think it is a huge difference.

  25. #75
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    313
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Hasselblad vs Phase One

    I'd love to hear how a system being "open" or "closed" affects you...

  26. #76
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Zug/Zurich (Switzerland), Dubai, Sydney
    Posts
    334
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Hasselblad vs Phase One

    [

    Should an H4D owner think they would like a spare body then 9 times out of ten they order it when they order their H4D. The two bodies are then calibrated together.[/QUOTE]

    This is very trite.
    In many studios, the asset base runs to multiple backs and multiple bodies, all of which need to be interchangeable. I won't even start on the need to run backs on multiple camera types......
    I once ran a business which had 39 MF backs across our studios. No way I could consider Blad in that mix.
    I can't help but wonder what the major rental studios' equipment managers are thinking as H2 stocks dry up. If you have 20 backs sitting on your shelf and each one has to be paired to a single body, that's a pretty hairy logistical nightmare. Oh, that's right, you want them to order 2 bodies with each back....
    Even in a small single-photographer business like mine, there are 3 backs capable of running on the 5 camera platforms (Alpa, Arca, Fuji, Horseman and Phase) that populate my equipment cupboard.
    Yes, it's pretty cool what Blad is doing re: the fine focus adjustment where the camera/lens/back integration is essential.
    Meanwhile, back in the real world, tens of thousands of photographers are producing razor sharp images every day with cameras from Mamiya, Rollei, Contax, Phase One and lots more, all of which can mount their back of choice.
    No matter how you spin it, the loss of choice which is the price of buying into the Hasselblad closed system is too high for the purported benefits. In relation to the AF benefits so loudly touted, they are in the eyes of many, a fantastic solution to a non-existant problem.
    Siebel
    "In the end, it's all about the pictures"
    www.bryansiebel.com

  27. #77
    Senior Member yaya's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    London, UK
    Posts
    1,168
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    38

    Re: Hasselblad vs Phase One

    Me personally I just find "Open" as a much more positive term...Imagine running to the corner shop in the rain at 10pm to get some milk and biscuits...the kettle's on, DVD is warmed up with the latest RomCom and then the (switched off) sign on the door says "CLOSED"...

    YMMV...

  28. #78
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    314
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    3

    Re: Hasselblad vs Phase One

    I for sure never had any problems using my 31Mp back on my H3d-39 body or my 39 back on my 22Mp H3dII body. Also i can not get the point why backs need to be interchangeable between more camera bodies( 645AF bodies). I use my backs on a Sinar P2, a Hartbleicam, a Linhof 647cc, a H3dII and have used the 50Mp on a self made pinhole-alike camera.
    The Phase one system is in reality exact as closed as Hasselblad. A Phase back does the same thing as my Hassie H3dII backs. And yes, there are two lenses not available for the Phase users and Yes i cannot use the closed Leaf AFI system with my Hasselblad backs or lenses....
    But honestly, i have been in many, many studios that use Hasselblad equipment and never ever had anybody complaining about a system being closed or that they were not able to use other than Hasselblad backs on their cameras. I think it is a rather extreme small user group, that mostly does not use a digital back at all who is complaining about these things.
    IMHO.

  29. #79
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Zug/Zurich (Switzerland), Dubai, Sydney
    Posts
    334
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Hasselblad vs Phase One

    Quote Originally Posted by yaya View Post
    Me personally I just find "Open" as a much more positive term...Imagine running to the corner shop in the rain at 10pm to get some milk and biscuits...the kettle's on, DVD is warmed up with the latest RomCom and then the (switched off) sign on the door says "CLOSED"...

    YMMV...
    Tee Heee

    Or... imagine you are in the middle of a major shoot, your camera body fails (a bummer, but it happens), you think "it's ok, I have several other bodies in my cupboard".

    Then (cue bass drums), you remove your back, walk to the cupboard, look at the Fuji GX 680, Alpa, Arca and Horseman bodies that could have completed the job, then slowly, painfully, realise that the very expensive 60MP back in your hand just became a paper weight because it wears the badge of that closed platform.......
    Siebel
    "In the end, it's all about the pictures"
    www.bryansiebel.com

  30. #80
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    528
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Hasselblad vs Phase One

    The 60 currently aside, you can use any H back on the camera's you have mentioned provided they have an H-mount.

    Also, as H3dtogo mentioned, you apparently can use the backs on other 'non-calibrated' H3/4 bodies as well....

    Hasselblad does have a tendency to advertise everything as being not compatible when it delivers sub-standard results (in their eyes). The HC120macro is also not compatible with the HTS according to Hasselblad but it works...

    Same applies for the 1.7 converter + the HTS + the HC300 but it also works and the results are pretty good too but apparently below what Hasselblad likes to see.

    Funny that the term 'closed' has now become a badge applied apparently without carefully checking the content...

    BTW, I would love it when Hasselblad would open up the H4D series for other manufacturers. Personally I did not like it they closed the H system for backs made by other manufacturers. Maybe a wise decision at that time, not so sure if that still applies or if it ever did but it happened so no point in beating that dead horse. I think calibrating backs & bodies doesn't get in the way of keeping the platform open for others. I also wonder what would have happened if it was the other way around.....
    Last edited by Dustbak; 9th February 2011 at 00:30. Reason: Adding

  31. #81
    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: Hasselblad vs Phase One

    Quote Originally Posted by siebel View Post

    This is very trite.
    In many studios, the asset base runs to multiple backs and multiple bodies, all of which need to be interchangeable. I won't even start on the need to run backs on multiple camera types......
    I once ran a business which had 39 MF backs across our studios. No way I could consider Blad in that mix.
    I can't help but wonder what the major rental studios' equipment managers are thinking as H2 stocks dry up. If you have 20 backs sitting on your shelf and each one has to be paired to a single body, that's a pretty hairy logistical nightmare. Oh, that's right, you want them to order 2 bodies with each back....
    Even in a small single-photographer business like mine, there are 3 backs capable of running on the 5 camera platforms (Alpa, Arca, Fuji, Horseman and Phase) that populate my equipment cupboard.
    Yes, it's pretty cool what Blad is doing re: the fine focus adjustment where the camera/lens/back integration is essential.
    Meanwhile, back in the real world, tens of thousands of photographers are producing razor sharp images every day with cameras from Mamiya, Rollei, Contax, Phase One and lots more, all of which can mount their back of choice.
    No matter how you spin it, the loss of choice which is the price of buying into the Hasselblad closed system is too high for the purported benefits. In relation to the AF benefits so loudly touted, they are in the eyes of many, a fantastic solution to a non-existant problem.
    A different perspective:

    I think you missed the point, and perhaps then spun off into anecdotal triteness yourself. The 2nd matched body answer was intended for those individual photographers who have ONE MFD system in a versatile mix of various formats, and want a back-up body. IMO, nothing less or more implied other than it is available to those who feel the need for one tight system of camera/back/body/lenses, not 30 interchangeable MFD cameras.

    As to the commercial place MFD occupies, which in the isolation of forums like this seems to imply a growing need for such gear ... that is the opposite of the real world you are fond of quoting. With the enormous shift in media type and placements, and use of CGI, on a global scale, the general need for MFD in the general commercial world is shrinking exponentially.

    I can quote a number of major studios that no longer have multiple MF platforms and/or various MFD backs because it is a flat out waste of money for a majority of today's end use ... if any, they have one MFD for the times they need it, usually bought with a hot-swap warranty ... or they rent if located in a major metro area. NOT saying there are no studios running multiple MFD cameras/backs, just that they are swiftly going the way of the Dodo as the media shifts more and more each year. In my city, a city where major studios with multiple MFD systems were once on every street corner, NONE are here today. Zero. Large, high volume production studios still exist here, but the need/use of MFD is getting more and more rare.

    If today's studios or institutions need MFD it tends to be with an eye to highly specialized digital capture that, more often than not, is done on a specialized camera system, a view camera tethered to a computer, or a tethered MFD camera manually focused ... so in the case of view cameras, the MFD body isn't even part of the equation, and if a MFD camera, neither is AF and all the other amenities. Generally, for this application, ANY digital back works, whether it came with an integrated body or not.

    On the other hand, those looking for a more versatility, speed, and cross-over double duty compared to today's 35mm DSLRs, which does include AF abilities, the MFD makers have offered solutions ... and IMO, Hasselblad's is by far the best AF solution to date. Every poll, discussion of improvements we'd like to see, or question on forums related to expanding the versatile use of MFD, has brought up the poor AF performance of MFD choices ... so your implication that such an improvement delivers "a purported benefit" flies in the face of what the new breed of users seem to be demanding from a more versatile use MFD system.

    IMO, the only TRUE open system available today is offered by Hasselblad and Sinar. I can mount my CF/39MS on every MF camera platform made ... by myself in minutes. And the H2F camera I use with it offers most of the features and software corrections of a HD camera ... and I could buy 30 of them if I so choose, or 30 H1s or H2s ... or 30 Contax 645s or Mamiya 645s, or RZs. That these obvious Open Application backs are not more popular is testimony to the fact that more and more studios and individual users no longer desire to support multiple camera systems and all the expense of costly lens systems and accessories that go with it.

    My 2¢ about mega cost gear and the state of the real world now, not yesterday.

    -Marc

    BTW, as unpopular as I may be for saying it, but mark my words ... I'd speculate that should a maker such as Canon decide to enter the fray with a larger coverage 36 X 36 sensor, what is left of the general commercial application for MFD will evaporate overnight. MFD will be relegated to institutions with highly specialized needs, a few high-end studios, and well heeled iconoclastic enthusiasts such as those on this forum.

  32. #82
    Sr. Administrator Jack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Los Altos, CA
    Posts
    10,486
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1031

    Re: Hasselblad vs Phase One

    Quote Originally Posted by fotografz View Post
    A different perspective:

    MFD will be relegated to institutions with highly specialized needs, a few high-end studios, and well heeled iconoclastic enthusiasts such as those on this forum.[/I]
    Wow, surprised to hear this from you... As a landscape shooter and not particularly well-heeled -- certainly not as well heeled as you are with your operational PAIR of H backs and H bodies -- I think high-res MF capture does make a difference for MY type of landscape shooting. So I guess that makes me iconoclastic? I find that a somewhat petty point of view and offensive comment, especially coming from you. It almost sounds like sour grapes
    Jack
    home: www.getdpi.com

    "Perfection is not attainable. But if we chase perfection, we can catch excellence."

  33. #83
    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: Hasselblad vs Phase One

    Quote Originally Posted by Jack Flesher View Post
    Wow, surprised to hear this from you... As a landscape shooter and not particularly well-heeled -- certainly not as well heeled as you are with your operational PAIR of H backs and H bodies -- I think high-res MF capture does make a difference for MY type of landscape shooting. So I guess that makes me iconoclastic? I find that a somewhat petty point of view and offensive comment, especially coming from you. It almost sounds like sour grapes
    Well, Jack ... please don't take my words out of context ... the reference point was commercial studio photography in answer to Siebel's post ... not landscape work.

    I've repeatedly mentioned that this forum is somewhat landscape oriented as far as MFD is concerned, and tends to reflect the opinions and needs of shooters such as yourself and those who post here frequently. However, landscape work isn't production studio work, which has changed drastically. While this MFD forum and those similar to it, are highly visible to its membership, it represents a microcosm of photography at large. To the average photographer, working pro or enthusiast, a P65+ is the domain of those with the means, and not a practical choice for many, if not most ... nor even a need given the drastic change in the complexion of commercial photography. This fact is more real world, and I think the direction MFD has been moving as far as features and abilities to make MFD more versatile and appealing to a wider audience.

    BTW, you are incorrect ... I do not have a pair of H cameras and backs ... that time has passed. I now have one modular MFD kit that does the work I have left requiring it. It cost me $17K body and back, which is hardly a Phase One D camera with a P65+ back I already had the lenses.

    Admittedly, I am "well heeled" enough to get most anything I want at this stage of life, (short of justifiable homicide on the part of my wife ). So, I could, and did, get an entire Leica S2 kit that is far better suited to the work that now dominates my creative output. Personally, I think those sour grapes taste pretty good

    As to the term Iconoclastic being petty and offensive ... I apologize ... I meant it as a compliment since the word in context to a creative endeavor means to overthrow traditional ideas and institutions ... the very attitude and energy that fuels new ideas ... or, at the very least, to buck trends. I hope to be more iconclastic myself in future. That is simply a work in progress.

    -Marc

  34. #84
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Zug/Zurich (Switzerland), Dubai, Sydney
    Posts
    334
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Hasselblad vs Phase One

    Marc, we've had spirited disagreements before and I'm pretty sure your worldview is contrary to mine in regard to MFD and it's future.

    I would caution against using the level of discussions on forums to base your
    case against MFD. It is VERY rare to find a high-end pro populating these discussions. As such, the comment is very prone to biased sampling.

    If MFD is in it's death throes, why did Phase One have their best year ever last year? I'm guessing Hasselblad isn't doing too badly either. In fact, the market outlook is so bad that not one, but two brands have entered the fray, though admittedly Leica's and Pentax's offerings lack the product maturity to claim high-end status. In short, the pie is getting bigger, not smaller.

    It is folly to base predictions of what a marketplace is doing based on what the middle players are experiencing. I agree with you that the middle of the road shooters have no need to use MFD. That's a given. The shooters at the bleeding edge are not only buying this level of gear, they are demanding continued innovation. The argument that DSLR's will "catch up" is nonsensical as it assumes that MFD manufacturers are sitting around resting on their laurels.

    The cost of these systems is often raised as a major negative. It is only a problem if you are not entrepreneurial enough to find new business opportunities offered by the tech. Back in 1995 when I paid 50k for a Leaf DCB1 system running on a Fuji Gx680, there were ripples of laughter in my town and predictions of the demise of my business. We had a plan and we worked at evolving it. Over the next 3 years, that system earned our studio over 2 million dollars. Not a bad return on investment.

    This is the reason I am so harsh with my responses to the price whingers. If your business model can't sustain the investment, you can stay where you are or you can evolve your business.

    You are right that the traditional revenue streams in our industry are changing. I left advertising as an industry as I feel the current business model is broken. I didn't complain. I took my assets - my gear, my knowledge and the real value in my business, which is the wierd stuff that goes on in my head, and moved countries, industries and started from scratch. Now I don't work in advertising. I work in construction. And yes, I use MF gear.

    I'm certain my story is not unique. Business is about innovation. There are plenty enough photographic innovators out there to give me a lot of confidence in the future. I am not one of those who yearns for "how it used to be". I am excited by what the next innovation is going to allow me to do with my imagemaking. Thankfully, I am not alone.
    Siebel
    "In the end, it's all about the pictures"
    www.bryansiebel.com

  35. #85
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Ontario, Canada
    Posts
    446
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Hasselblad vs Phase One

    Sadly, I agree with Marc's "resistance is futile" view of pro requirements into the near future. However, I take hope in boards such as this one. There are enough WHIEs or PShAWs (poorly shod artistic workers) to create longer term markets for superior kit. Leica is all about that. Phase and Hassi know it is coming and we are seeing them respond with gear that has very little to do with shooting weddings or models or cars. Great stuff.

  36. #86
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    528
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Hasselblad vs Phase One

    Siebel,

    Various of your posts I totally (or partially) disagreed with but your last one I can only say I completely agree.

    Succeed in the combination of construction & photography in this moment in time? Kudos to you

  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: Hasselblad vs Phase One

    Quote Originally Posted by siebel View Post
    Marc, we've had spirited disagreements before and I'm pretty sure your worldview is contrary to mine in regard to MFD and it's future.

    I would caution against using the level of discussions on forums to base your
    case against MFD. It is VERY rare to find a high-end pro populating these discussions. As such, the comment is very prone to biased sampling.

    If MFD is in it's death throes, why did Phase One have their best year ever last year? I'm guessing Hasselblad isn't doing too badly either. In fact, the market outlook is so bad that not one, but two brands have entered the fray, though admittedly Leica's and Pentax's offerings lack the product maturity to claim high-end status. In short, the pie is getting bigger, not smaller.

    It is folly to base predictions of what a marketplace is doing based on what the middle players are experiencing. I agree with you that the middle of the road shooters have no need to use MFD. That's a given. The shooters at the bleeding edge are not only buying this level of gear, they are demanding continued innovation. The argument that DSLR's will "catch up" is nonsensical as it assumes that MFD manufacturers are sitting around resting on their laurels.

    The cost of these systems is often raised as a major negative. It is only a problem if you are not entrepreneurial enough to find new business opportunities offered by the tech. Back in 1995 when I paid 50k for a Leaf DCB1 system running on a Fuji Gx680, there were ripples of laughter in my town and predictions of the demise of my business. We had a plan and we worked at evolving it. Over the next 3 years, that system earned our studio over 2 million dollars. Not a bad return on investment.

    This is the reason I am so harsh with my responses to the price whingers. If your business model can't sustain the investment, you can stay where you are or you can evolve your business.

    You are right that the traditional revenue streams in our industry are changing. I left advertising as an industry as I feel the current business model is broken. I didn't complain. I took my assets - my gear, my knowledge and the real value in my business, which is the wierd stuff that goes on in my head, and moved countries, industries and started from scratch. Now I don't work in advertising. I work in construction. And yes, I use MF gear.

    I'm certain my story is not unique. Business is about innovation. There are plenty enough photographic innovators out there to give me a lot of confidence in the future. I am not one of those who yearns for "how it used to be". I am excited by what the next innovation is going to allow me to do with my imagemaking. Thankfully, I am not alone.
    Not sure how I came across as signaling the death of MFD ... I am and always have been an advocate, and probably responsible for getting people into MFD as much as anyone.

    My world view is based on buying photography and being in the advertising world not necessarily shooting it. And, I agree with you that the business model is broken and in a state of flux ... which is why I finally retireed from it. The handwriting was on the wall, and rather than going into all the boring statistics, just Google "The Death of Print" ... media dollars are what overwhelmingly funded still photography in the commercial world ... and the media ain't what it used to be. Paperless is the watchword, and Electronic media is where it is all going and it didn't take long either. Reminds me of the diehards who resisted computers in art studios or type setters and printers. Gone. History.

    I just met the studio head of the agency that snatched ALL the FORD collateral work from JWT some years ago, and now it is the lion's share of media other than TV. They have their own studio and it doesn't consist of 30 MFD kits ... it lives and dies on incredibly responsive and immediate ideas, not megapixels.

    Bleeding edge photographers may well keep the MFD industry alive, as well as institutions with incredibly refined needs, time will tell. A good dose of art photographers and Landscape artists doesn't hurt

    And, I agree with you, I do not believe that 35mm DSLRs will catch up ... ever ... and never said or implied they will ... however, as far as a vast majority of commercial work, they won't have to.

    I'm sure you are successful ... for every one of you there are a 100 that no longer exist. Congratulations on your talent, vision and perseverance However, how many jolts and lost demands does it take before it becomes very difficult to sustain momentum? Hats off to the MFD companies that have defied some of these evaporating MFD outlets ... and I actually do believe that it is the enthusiasts that played a decent role in keeping things moving.

    -Marc

  38. #88
    Workshop Member ptomsu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Austria, close to Vienna
    Posts
    3,866
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Hasselblad vs Phase One

    Already the title of this thread is something like odd.

    Both are absolutely great systems, delivering stunning results. While Phase in my eyes is kind of the technology leader, Hasselblad in my eyes has still the more complete system.

    So all these discussions are somehow ..... I am better out and shoot - sigh!

  39. #89
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Zug/Zurich (Switzerland), Dubai, Sydney
    Posts
    334
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Hasselblad vs Phase One

    Quote Originally Posted by Dustbak View Post
    Siebel,

    Various of your posts I totally (or partially) disagreed with but your last one I can only say I completely agree.

    Succeed in the combination of construction & photography in this moment in time? Kudos to you
    It's one of the things I love about this forum. We can express intensely opposite views in respectful ways without the flaming so common elsewhere.

    Cheers!
    Siebel
    "In the end, it's all about the pictures"
    www.bryansiebel.com

  40. #90
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    313
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Hasselblad vs Phase One

    Quote Originally Posted by yaya View Post
    Me personally I just find "Open" as a much more positive term...Imagine running to the corner shop in the rain at 10pm to get some milk and biscuits...the kettle's on, DVD is warmed up with the latest RomCom and then the (switched off) sign on the door says "CLOSED"...

    YMMV...
    You are right Yair, "closed" is such a negative word which is why Phase keep saying it about Hasselblad.

    I will never buy a Leaf AFi because it is a closed platform.

  41. #91
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    561
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Hasselblad vs Phase One

    Quote Originally Posted by siebel View Post

    This is very trite.
    In many studios, the asset base runs to multiple backs and multiple bodies,
    Trite? Charming.

    "Many Studios"?

    Absolutely not a majority in world wide market terms.

  42. #92
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Posts
    2,338
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    52

    Re: Hasselblad vs Phase One

    I have made a lot of money shorting companies associated with engineering and construction projects in Dubai - it is a nice place to visit and for sure the first class Emirates lounge is one of the better places to hangout whilst waiting for transfer flights.

    Last time I was there - about 6 months ago, I had a camera in my bag as usual - an M9. My travel kit is a 21/50 combination - wouldnt think of carrying all that bulk from Phase or Hasselblad on a carry on luggage business trip across three continents in a week. So 'real world' in this instance - means none of these dinasaurs get a ticket to the show.

    Point is 'real world' is relative to its inhabitants. I dont live in a pro photographers world. What pro photographers think is important may or may not be applicable to my world ( and vica verca of course)

    The truth is that both these companies are tiny and if forced to palce a bet - woudl say that one or both wont be around five years from now. However I cant place a bet - they aren't listed so shorting is out of the question.

    As soon as the world went digital - the world pretty much embraced constant change - people make up all sorts of fancy middle or dying market words for this process. the reality is that in the battle for eye ball time - photography is losing ground as technology allows moving images to replace still images.

    So companies should understand that the eccentric hobbyist will become more and more important (at the margin) to their business models and sexy pro shooters with entourages and all that stuff - will occupy a smalller and smaller space every year.

    Depreciation rates and schedules for pro shooters earnign income will provide no sustainable source of high pricing power for companies protected by imaginary moats.

    So lets all enjoy this stuff whilst the party lasts.

    You see when Phase says no IQ back for an Hy6 - it just reminds the eccentric who bought an Hy6 - that these companies run their own agendas - and their words - don't really mean much.

    Open platform? I dont think so...

    Pete

  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: Hasselblad vs Phase One

    Quote Originally Posted by siebel View Post
    Tee Heee

    Or... imagine you are in the middle of a major shoot, your camera body fails (a bummer, but it happens), you think "it's ok, I have several other bodies in my cupboard".

    Then (cue bass drums), you remove your back, walk to the cupboard, look at the Fuji GX 680, Alpa, Arca and Horseman bodies that could have completed the job, then slowly, painfully, realise that the very expensive 60MP back in your hand just became a paper weight because it wears the badge of that closed platform.......
    See, this is the overly dramatized misinformation that is so odd it is hard to not challenge it. Using the same scenario and back-up cameras that could have finished the job ...

    You walk to the cupboard with your Phase One Mamiya mount back from the Phamamiya camera that just failed in the middle of an important shoot with a client standing there ... it is a Mamiya mount so it doesn't fit that Fuji GX 680 because it is a closed mount back (unless there is an adapter for it, in which case it could be an H adapter) ... and you have a $44,000 paper weight in your hand. The view cameras are the misinformation part ...

    H backs of any flavor will fit any view camera equipped with an H mount. So the Alpa, Arca, Horseman, Sinar or Rollie Xact cameras in the cupboard will work.

    Now, my scenario:

    Should MY Hasselblad H2F fail while shooting my Hasselblad CF/39MS ... Unlike the closed mount Phase One back, I can mount my back on another H2F ... or my Mamiya RZ, any view camera with ANY mount, or a Contax 645, Mamiya 645, V mount, Fuji ... by swapping my iAdapter from the set I have. I can stock various cameras with different capabilities and versatility ... because my CF back is an OPEN systems digital back. Not everyone's cup of tea, but I like the choice.

    Hasselblad doesn't force you to buy an integrated system. Unlike Phase One or Leaf, you still have a choice ... including providing the current production H2F camera which includes all the current software/firmware enhancements and full use of the entire line of HC and HCD lenses ... or any CF, CFi, CFE Zeiss lens made ... with one button DAC corrections for those Zeiss lenses in Phocus.



    Marc

  44. #94
    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: Hasselblad vs Phase One

    Quote Originally Posted by H3dtogo View Post
    I for sure never had any problems using my 31Mp back on my H3d-39 body or my 39 back on my 22Mp H3dII body. Also i can not get the point why backs need to be interchangeable between more camera bodies( 645AF bodies). I use my backs on a Sinar P2, a Hartbleicam, a Linhof 647cc, a H3dII and have used the 50Mp on a self made pinhole-alike camera.
    The Phase one system is in reality exact as closed as Hasselblad. A Phase back does the same thing as my Hassie H3dII backs. And yes, there are two lenses not available for the Phase users and Yes i cannot use the closed Leaf AFI system with my Hasselblad backs or lenses....
    But honestly, i have been in many, many studios that use Hasselblad equipment and never ever had anybody complaining about a system being closed or that they were not able to use other than Hasselblad backs on their cameras. I think it is a rather extreme small user group, that mostly does not use a digital back at all who is complaining about these things.
    IMHO.
    I agree ... as an ad guy, I've been on shoots for hundreds of ads, billboards, catalog images, murals, etc. using both Phase One and Hasselblad ... and NO ONE uttered the word closed or open ... ever. It's marketing spin ... and I know marketing spin when I hear it ...

    =Marc

  45. #95
    Subscriber Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Washington, DC
    Posts
    222
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    116

    Re: Hasselblad vs Phase One

    I'm afraid the picture of Seibel standing on his camera---even though he has bins full of them to spare--has ruined my ability to follow this thread.

  46. #96
    Sr. Administrator Jack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Los Altos, CA
    Posts
    10,486
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1031

    Re: Hasselblad vs Phase One

    Quote Originally Posted by fotografz View Post
    Well, Jack ... please don't take my words out of context ... the reference point was commercial studio photography in answer to Siebel's post ... not landscape work.
    Apologies Marc, I misunderstood and thought it was a global comment -- which seemed totally out of character for you and why I expressed surprise.

    Cheers,
    Jack
    home: www.getdpi.com

    "Perfection is not attainable. But if we chase perfection, we can catch excellence."

  47. #97
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Delhi, India
    Posts
    44
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Hasselblad vs Phase One

    Quote Originally Posted by sadekkhalifa View Post
    Hi everyone,

    I am interested in upgrading my equipment to Medium Format (MF) also I have a good budget to buy any type of MF camera and I’m not sure which MF camera to go for.
    Can anyone tell me which is better camera of two above (camera body and lenses) overall, also I need to get a feedback whose have a good experience or someone who attended to workshops about Digital Back for (H4D vs P65+ vs IQ180) which is the best as I know I can put Phase One digital back into Hasselblad H4D camera or vice versa.
    If anyone know that there is a comparison through the forums or website please tell me because I didn’t found any clear comparison test.
    I know this may be a personal thing but anyone’s thoughts will be very welcome.
    First of all you should be aware of the differences
    1. With MFDB you have to work with the RAW processing software. I do not think that you will get ready to view image of the DB. Hence you will have to invest money (which in your case is no problem) and a lot of time in learning the software and processing images.
    2. For most of the time 40MP+ cameras require a tripod and FAT Light for optimum image. That means that point and shoot style in low light is out.
    3. With the cost of the back being so high, you can view the camera as "free" part of the system, it is the back followed by lenses that would be major investment.
    4. Dealer support is essential for most people venturing into MFDB. Be it training , adjustment (if and when required) or warranty support, MFDB demands more compared to DSLR.

    With that said, the best bet for you would be to
    1. Visit dealers in your area to evaluate the offerings
    2. Visit users who have the Phase and Hasselblad system and get their feedback of the feel and support
    3. If possible rent each system and use them for a week. That would clearly demonstrate what you like and what you do not.

    In case you do not need the high resolution, in my opinion a 40MP system is best as compromise between resolution, speed, and hand held shooting. The systems in this range are Leica S2, Hasselblad HD40, and Phase P40+. Each has its own advantages and disadvantages. Guy uses his P40+ for day to day shooting, and there are lot of photographers who use S2 in fashion. May be I am biased, but my personal choice is the Hasselblad HD40 with its true focus and leaf shutter lenses.

    I would have liked the Leaf AFi but its future is still uncertain, though Leaf has the 80MP back for it.

  48. #98
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Zug/Zurich (Switzerland), Dubai, Sydney
    Posts
    334
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Hasselblad vs Phase One

    Sadek, I thought it might be a good idea to go back and re-read the question you originally asked.
    I have been shooting MF digital professionally since '95 and have owned, tested and used so many I have lost count. My gear cupboard currently has a P40+,P45+, P65+ and Aptus 12. I have just ordered an IQ180.
    If I set aside the passionate views that this topic always ignites, my professional view is that for the person to whom the cost part of the decision is not so important, there is one back that is so far ahead of the current state of the art that it is the only real contender - The Phase One IQ180. On almost every criteria I can asses it on, it is the class leader. I have yet to see an opinion that disagrees with this from someone who has actually shot with it. It's not perfect. It's just so much better than everything else.

    On the cameras & lenses part of your question, in all honesty, you should buy the camera brand you like. If you prefer Blad, buy a H2 (I believe you can still get them new) and hang your IQ180 off that. Unless Blad decide (or are told by a court) that they have to let other companys' products fit their H3 and H4 cameras, these cameras remain a trap if you want to use the best backs available. A shame, but that seems to be where we sit.
    The thing is, whilst there is always passionate argument when the Phase vs Blad debate comes up, the real impact of the differences between these two systems on the camera & lens side of things is relatively small when you compare this to the differences between the respective backs. Whichever camera you choose, the quality of image delivered to the surface of your sensor is going to be very, very high.
    If you want the best beyond that point, then you have 3 choices - Phase One IQ180, Phase One IQ180, Phase One IQ180.
    Siebel
    "In the end, it's all about the pictures"
    www.bryansiebel.com

  49. #99
    Administrator, Instructor Guy Mancuso's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    23,623
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2555

    Re: Hasselblad vs Phase One



    You guys are just too funny.

    I do love the spirit around here.
    Photography is all about experimentation and without it you will never learn art.

    www.guymancusophotography.com

  50. #100
    Administrator, Instructor Guy Mancuso's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    23,623
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2555

    Re: Hasselblad vs Phase One

    Quote Originally Posted by ajoyroy View Post
    First of all you should be aware of the differences
    1. With MFDB you have to work with the RAW processing software. I do not think that you will get ready to view image of the DB. Hence you will have to invest money (which in your case is no problem) and a lot of time in learning the software and processing images.
    2. For most of the time 40MP+ cameras require a tripod and FAT Light for optimum image. That means that point and shoot style in low light is out.
    3. With the cost of the back being so high, you can view the camera as "free" part of the system, it is the back followed by lenses that would be major investment.
    4. Dealer support is essential for most people venturing into MFDB. Be it training , adjustment (if and when required) or warranty support, MFDB demands more compared to DSLR.

    With that said, the best bet for you would be to
    1. Visit dealers in your area to evaluate the offerings
    2. Visit users who have the Phase and Hasselblad system and get their feedback of the feel and support
    3. If possible rent each system and use them for a week. That would clearly demonstrate what you like and what you do not.

    In case you do not need the high resolution, in my opinion a 40MP system is best as compromise between resolution, speed, and hand held shooting. The systems in this range are Leica S2, Hasselblad HD40, and Phase P40+. Each has its own advantages and disadvantages. Guy uses his P40+ for day to day shooting, and there are lot of photographers who use S2 in fashion. May be I am biased, but my personal choice is the Hasselblad HD40 with its true focus and leaf shutter lenses.

    I would have liked the Leaf AFi but its future is still uncertain, though Leaf has the 80MP back for it.
    Well said
    I think it comes down to 4 main items and finding the best compromises on each system that work for you.
    Back
    Body
    Lenses
    Software

    If you can get that decision down to those four with the least amount of compromise than you found your system that works for you.

    This does take in function, workflow, form and support on all of them as well
    Photography is all about experimentation and without it you will never learn art.

    www.guymancusophotography.com

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
  •