Site Sponsors
Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 50 of 100

Thread: Hasselblad vs Phase One

  1. #1
    sadekkhalifa
    Guest

    Hasselblad vs Phase One

    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.

  2. #2
    jamie123
    Guest

    Re: Hasselblad vs Phase One

    I don't own any digital MF cameras but I've used a few before. I think you're asking a question that's impossible to answer. You shouldn't ask which camera brand is better but which brand offers a back that best suits your needs. And then, of course, you would have to tell us what your needs are. What's your preferred subject matter? What kind of lighting do you generally use? Do you need to do long exposures? etc. etc.

    And as for camera bodies I think that, again, it highly depends on personal preference. Only you can know which one you prefer to use, which one feels best in your hands with the buttons in the right places.

    Last but not least, if you're dropping that kind of money it would be foolish to base your decision on what you read on the internet. Contact your local Hasselblad and Phase One dealers and make an appointment to try out the cameras and backs. You wouldn't buy a car without a test drive, would you?

    Oh, and no, you can't use Phase One backs on a H4D and vice versa. You can only use them on H1 or H2 bodies.

  3. #3
    Workshop Member Woody Campbell's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    2,120
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    66

    Re: Hasselblad vs Phase One

    Probably a troll

  4. #4
    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

    Not a troll. Legitimate question
    Photography is all about experimentation and without it you will never learn art.

    www.guymancusophotography.com

  5. #5
    sadekkhalifa
    Guest

    Re: Hasselblad vs Phase One

    Thank you Mr. Guy Mancuso for your reaction. And Mr. Woody Campbell, I didn't mean to be a troll but as i told you i will switch from 35mm to MF so i didn't have any background about the MF and the money isn't a big issue for me.
    Back to Mr. jamie123, Thank you for your reply and your information about H4D didn't match with Phase One DB. Second thing, why do you think it is impossible to answer and you can see on my post that just i asked about your opinion. May you prefer to use Mamiya and other one also may prefer to use Phase One so this is just a discussion.
    Last but not least, i used camera for fashion and portrait and i think the handling and the buttons isn't a big issue to me.
    Eventually, why i post these discussion because i live in Saudi Arabia and there isn't any dealer near to me to test both brands and get final decision for what brand is better for me.

    Best Regards.

  6. #6
    Senior Member Graham Mitchell's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    London/Kiev
    Posts
    1,079
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Hasselblad vs Phase One

    The backs are all very similar compared to the cameras, and all are available for most cameras too, so pick your camera and go from there. Which camera system has the lenses you need? Do you need very fast shutter speeds? Fast flash synch? Fast autofocus? Tilt/shift? etc.

  7. #7
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Philly area, PA, US
    Posts
    354
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Hasselblad vs Phase One

    Quote Originally Posted by jamie123 View Post
    ....
    Last but not least, if you're dropping that kind of money it would be foolish to base your decision on what you read on the internet. Contact your local Hasselblad and Phase One dealers and make an appointment to try out the cameras and backs....

    This the same like asking which one is better: Canon or Nikon?

    There is no perfect system and as Jamie put it, this is a personal choice.

    MY choice was to go with the Phase system (don't have the digital back yet). My reasons:

    1. I liked the interface better (less menu interaction)
    2. I could use different backs from different manufacturers
    3. You can use focal and shutter lenses (depending on body and lens)

    That doesn't mean YOU will like the system. Also, if you would be more specific on your application of it, you might get more answers since there is no perfect system out there.

  8. #8
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

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

    Re: Hasselblad vs Phase One

    What, when, where, and how you shoot, plus what you do with the images afterwards, does have a direct bearing on how anyone here could advise you.

    None of the existing choices do everything well, some do certain things better than others.

    The Phase One backs are state of the art and include the best LCD available ... the camera is not state of the art. Prior to that, the Hasselblad H4D introduced True Focus APL which has remained unmatched for off-center AF, but now has the least capable LCD of any MFD choice.

    If you do not like the current choices, just wait ... it'll change soon.

    As to opinion:

    I do not care for the Mamiya/Phase One camera, and prefer the H system for ergonomics, control, and features.

    I also think that the 60 and 80 meg backs from anyone have challenged the existing systems, and have seen nothing to convince me that they all that much better for making photographs unless used with excruciating care. If spontaneity is even remotely of interest, take care.

    To further the opinion bias ...

    For the type of work you outline I'd select neither Phase One nor Hasselblad. In fact I didn't. Instead I chose the Leica S2P to replace some of my Hasselblad system (which is now used primarily in studio for product work).

    For fashion type work and portraits I wanted more spontaneity and fluidity like that of a 35mm DSLR type form camera over what the modular MFD cameras provide ... and the S2 delivers that for me and what, where, when and how I shoot a majority of my work. It is also a fully dual shutter camera to use with a focal plane shutter or as a leaf shutter at will with all lenses (once the CS versions become available). One of the downsides of the S2 is price ... which isn't apparently isn't an issue for you ... another is scarcity of stuff for the system so far. But I have the S2P and three lenses which fills my need.

    For what you shoot, it's worth a look.

    -Marc

  9. #9
    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 sadekkhalifa View Post
    Thank you Mr. Guy Mancuso for your reaction. And Mr. Woody Campbell, I didn't mean to be a troll but as i told you i will switch from 35mm to MF so i didn't have any background about the MF and the money isn't a big issue for me.
    Back to Mr. jamie123, Thank you for your reply and your information about H4D didn't match with Phase One DB. Second thing, why do you think it is impossible to answer and you can see on my post that just i asked about your opinion. May you prefer to use Mamiya and other one also may prefer to use Phase One so this is just a discussion.
    Last but not least, i used camera for fashion and portrait and i think the handling and the buttons isn't a big issue to me.
    Eventually, why i post these discussion because i live in Saudi Arabia and there isn't any dealer near to me to test both brands and get final decision for what brand is better for me.

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

  10. #10
    jamie123
    Guest

    Re: Hasselblad vs Phase One

    Quote Originally Posted by sadekkhalifa View Post
    Eventually, why i post these discussion because i live in Saudi Arabia and there isn't any dealer near to me to test both brands and get final decision for what brand is better for me.
    Both Phase One's and Hasselblad's website have a 'partner locator' and they both list "Ahmed Abdul Wahed Trading Co." as a partner in Saudi Arabia. Their website looks a bit sketchy, though.
    Also, since you are spending a lot of money you might aswell consider taking a trip out of the country to visit a good camera dealer. Maybe a trip to Dubai to Siebel's dealer?
    First hand experience is key when it comes to purchases such as these.

  11. #11
    Workshop Member Woody Campbell's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    2,120
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    66

    Re: Hasselblad vs Phase One

    Sorry for the "troll" post - I must be getting irritable.

  12. #12
    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

    Woody,

    You need to fly out and join us for another shoot, rare Porterhouse and a fine red to clear that East Coast weather irritability. It's sunny and clear today in CA.

    Best,
    Jack
    home: www.getdpi.com

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

  13. #13
    Workshop Member Woody Campbell's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    2,120
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    66

    Re: Hasselblad vs Phase One

    Quote Originally Posted by Jack Flesher View Post
    Woody, you need to fly out and join us for another shoot, steak and a fine red to clear that East Coast weather irritability. It's sunny and clear today in CA.

    ,
    We're getting heavy freezing rain here. The only advantage of this part of the world is that we're not about to run out of water.

  14. #14
    Senior Member David Schneider's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    New Jersey, USA
    Posts
    509
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Hasselblad vs Phase One

    I guess we see these kind of questions all the time, which is better.

    While it's reasonably easy to point out differences, it's harder to say which is better without knowing the type of photography the questioner does, the type of subjects, the conditions he/she photographs in, what the final product is, etc. etc. With that knowledge, those who have used both can give by far the best answers.

  15. #15
    Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    21
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Hasselblad vs Phase One

    Best would be Phase forget about their camerabodys, and hasselblad forget about there backs, and both merge to Phassel one inc.
    that would be a burner


    Joerg

  16. #16
    Senior Member Steve Hendrix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    420
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    4

    Re: Hasselblad vs Phase One

    Quote Originally Posted by joegl View Post
    Best would be Phase forget about their camerabodys, and hasselblad forget about there backs, and both merge to Phassel one inc.
    that would be a burner


    Joerg

    I prefer the idea of Phase One coming out with a better camera and Hasselblad coming out with a better back. I'm sure both companies are working hard at this as we speak.

    Let there be the possibility of Phase One developing a superior camera to the H4 and Hasselblad developing a superior back to the IQ.

    No mergers! Choice, brother, choice!


    Steve Hendrix
    Steve Hendrix, Sales Manager, www.captureintegration.com (e-mail Me)
    Digital Cam: • Phase One | Leaf | Leica | Sinar • Authorized Reseller
    TechCam: • Alpa | Cambo | Arca Swiss | Sinar • Authorized Reseller

  17. #17
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Philly area, PA, US
    Posts
    354
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Hasselblad vs Phase One

    Quote Originally Posted by Steve Hendrix View Post
    ...

    No mergers! Choice, brother, choice!


    Steve Hendrix

    I have to agree with this. Competition is good for consumers (prices) as well as advances in development.

  18. #18
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Massachusetts and Vermont
    Posts
    948
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Hasselblad vs Phase One

    Quote Originally Posted by Steve Hendrix View Post
    I prefer the idea of Phase One coming out with a better camera and Hasselblad coming out with a better back. I'm sure both companies are working hard at this as we speak.

    Let there be the possibility of Phase One developing a superior camera to the H4 and Hasselblad developing a superior back to the IQ.

    No mergers! Choice, brother, choice!


    Steve Hendrix
    Absolutely. Isn't it ironic how Hasselblad's decision to "close" the H3D did not lead to photographers having fewer choices, as the pundits lamented back in 2006, but instead is inexorably leading to photographers having more choices. Unclear on the timing and we don't know exactly what Phase's new camera will look like, but it appears that we are heading toward a future with two, modern and really first class MF digital camera systems. Had Hasselblad not closed the H3D, it is entirely possible that the only remaining manufacturer of backs would be Phase, and Hasselblad would be the only one still making MF cameras, probably as a subsidiary of Phase.

  19. #19
    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

    Man you guys are gulping the Kool-Aid by the barrel ...

    Cha-Ching!

  20. #20
    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

    LOL I'm being a good boy today. LOL

    I switched to crystal light
    Photography is all about experimentation and without it you will never learn art.

    www.guymancusophotography.com

  21. #21
    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 hcubell View Post
    Absolutely. Isn't it ironic how Hasselblad's decision to "close" the H3D did not lead to photographers having fewer choices, as the pundits lamented back in 2006, but instead is inexorably leading to photographers having more choices. Unclear on the timing and we don't know exactly what Phase's new camera will look like, but it appears that we are heading toward a future with two, modern and really first class MF digital camera systems. Had Hasselblad not closed the H3D, it is entirely possible that the only remaining manufacturer of backs would be Phase, and Hasselblad would be the only one still making MF cameras, probably as a subsidiary of Phase.
    You miss the point. Hasselblad reduced the choices for its OWN customers. I actually agree that the H4d is for many a better camera than the Phase 645DF (this hopefully will change with the arrival of the new Phase body). This meant that H3 and H4 buyers can ONLY mount Blad backs on their beloved cameras. This was all ok when they had product that was competitive with the standards being set by other manufacturers. Alas this has not been the case and with the launch of the Aptus 12 from Leaf and the IQ series from Phase the gap just opened up further. In practice, the back is the most important part of an MF system, so having choice here is more important. Who knows who is going to be the next champion back? If it isn't Blad, then H3 and H4 owners will not have the option to mount that back on their cameras either.
    As a business owner, buying into a platform that locks me into using only backs of that brand does not make any sense at all. Faced with this, I chose the Phase 645DF over the Blad, despite my concerns about it's limitations. Fortunately for me, one of those limitations was the lens range, which Phase has improved massively since I retired my Blad for the Phase DF. The Schneider LS lenses, the D-series and the announced and soon to me released new lenses now give us all abundant choice and superb quality.
    I can only speculate that Blads agreement with Fuji, who manufacture the H series cameras and lenses, is not commercially viable on price. Thus they do not make enough money from the sale of a camera system to a customer who is going to buy a back from someone else. Viola! the "closed" system is born.
    For me, the solution was simple - buy the best back, then choose the camera that I can live with. Sadly, Blad could not be part of that consideration.
    At the time, the P65+ was the king of the hill, so that's what I bought. I've since added the Aptus 12. Now that the IQ180 is out, I will sell my P65+ and order an IQ. Sadly, the H3/H4 cannot mount any of these backs. A shame, really, that the people who pay the highest price in reduced choice are Blads own customers.

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

  22. #22
    tetsrfun
    Guest

    Re: Hasselblad vs Phase One

    I can only speculate that Blads agreement with Fuji, who manufacture the H series cameras...
    *********
    IIRC, unless there has been a recent change, the H bodies are made in Sweden, the backs in Denmark and the lenses (except for the shutters) are made in Japan. The view finders are also made in Japan.

    David Grover will likely provide a correction if this is in error.

    Steve

  23. #23
    Senior Member Steve Hendrix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    420
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    4

    Re: Hasselblad vs Phase One

    Quote Originally Posted by tetsrfun View Post
    I can only speculate that Blads agreement with Fuji, who manufacture the H series cameras...
    *********
    IIRC, unless there has been a recent change, the H bodies are made in Sweden, the backs in Denmark and the lenses (except for the shutters) are made in Japan. The view finders are also made in Japan.

    David Grover will likely provide a correction if this is in error.

    Steve

    Indeed. It has been stated quite clearly so many times that I think David Grover is going to quietly go insane. Fuji certainly has a role (and I can't recall all the specific breakdowns) but the product is overwhelmingly a Hasselblad product, developmentally and technically.

    I think that has been stated enough times for everyone to understand. If one knows enough about the H camera that Fuji had some involvement, one should know enough about the extent of the involvement.


    Steve Hendrix
    Steve Hendrix, Sales Manager, www.captureintegration.com (e-mail Me)
    Digital Cam: • Phase One | Leaf | Leica | Sinar • Authorized Reseller
    TechCam: • Alpa | Cambo | Arca Swiss | Sinar • Authorized Reseller

  24. #24
    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 Steve Hendrix View Post
    Indeed. It has been stated quite clearly so many times that I think David Grover is going to quietly go insane. Fuji certainly has a role (and I can't recall all the specific breakdowns) but the product is overwhelmingly a Hasselblad product, developmentally and technically.

    I think that has been stated enough times for everyone to understand. If one knows enough about the H camera that Fuji had some involvement, one should know enough about the extent of the involvement.


    Steve Hendrix
    Ok, I'll stand corrected on this point. I do not imply that the product is inferior. On the contrary, I prefer the H to my DF. Still, it doesn't change the argument that I have put here. As a pro user, it makes very little sense to make the investment in the closed system. Typically a MF platform choice is a 10-20 year cycle. Hasselblad want photographers to buy into their system and give up the possibility that we will be able to mount someone else's back on their cameras. Who is to say whom the best backs over next 20 years will come from? Perhaps from a player who hasn't even entered the market yet. Platform choices go in 10-20 year cycles, backs serve typically 3 year cycles.
    Whatever camera platform I choose, I want to be able to hang the best back of it's generation off of it.
    As has already been suggested here, photography is about increasing choices, not narrowing them.

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

  25. #25
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Posts
    2,338
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    52

    Re: Hasselblad vs Phase One

    The problem with the idea that a digi back is just film and film should be able to be used on any platform one chooses is exactly that..

    On the one hand one wishes to embrace the digital age and on the other hand one wishes to limit the digital ages input into the camera and the lenses and the software connection throughout the whole work flow

    The Hasselblad in H series mode offers a complete lens through camera to back work flow - an integrated approach - which quite frankly is light years ahead of anyone else in terms of total integration.

    You see it in the lens corrections that actually work.
    You see it in the focus lock system which has been recently introduced.

    Hasselblad users are quieter than Phase One users. there are no elephants jumping on the digi backs - and other gimmicks. Consistently people have attacked Fuji as if Fuji is a dirty word in optics ..this is a very uneducated perspective - if no downright prejudiced

    I don't know how many in this forum have used Fuji studio cameras and their lenses - sorry if you haven't they are in a class of their own..if you have used an XPan and its lenses - again - a class of its own..

    However I don't think ANY camera and lens manufacturer could SURVIVE just being a camera and lens manufacturer - so the merger of back to camera and lenses was a symbiotic and forced industry phase ( sic)

    Hasselblad is clearly experiencing serious issues regarding development timetable and delivery - Phase One is developing an R&D leadership in backs - and if the new camera ( talk abotu vapourware) is true - potentially another move ahead - since everyone knows that that ex the S2 - all these legacy systems basically suck.

    it is hilarious to read back in history all the excuses users of the AFD11 /111 made for the body and the insistence that there was no shutter lag - gimme a break ,there should be penalties for bull**** ..

    Phase One has moved to a superior marketing position - especially in the US. Hasselblad has failed in the megapixel race...

    but we need a healthy competition in order to have choice. Phase One can offer better deals to its customers BECAUSE it clearly has a better industry positioning - ultimately not screwing your loyal customer base is a very good plan if you wish to survive - I don't think Hasselblad understood this very well when they halved the value of their backs and delivered NO COMPENSATION to customers - or even apologies.

    people have looooong and unforgiving memories - I know I do.

  26. #26
    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 PeterA View Post
    The problem with the idea that a digi back is just film and film should be able to be used on any platform one chooses is exactly that..

    On the one hand one wishes to embrace the digital age and on the other hand one wishes to limit the digital ages input into the camera and the lenses and the software connection throughout the whole work flow

    The Hasselblad in H series mode offers a complete lens through camera to back work flow - an integrated approach - which quite frankly is light years ahead of anyone else in terms of total integration.

    You see it in the lens corrections that actually work.
    You see it in the focus lock system which has been recently introduced.

    Hasselblad users are quieter than Phase One users. there are no elephants jumping on the digi backs - and other gimmicks. Consistently people have attacked Fuji as if Fuji is a dirty word in optics ..this is a very uneducated perspective - if no downright prejudiced

    I don't know how many in this forum have used Fuji studio cameras and their lenses - sorry if you haven't they are in a class of their own..if you have used an XPan and its lenses - again - a class of its own..

    However I don't think ANY camera and lens manufacturer could SURVIVE just being a camera and lens manufacturer - so the merger of back to camera and lenses was a symbiotic and forced industry phase ( sic)

    Hasselblad is clearly experiencing serious issues regarding development timetable and delivery - Phase One is developing an R&D leadership in backs - and if the new camera ( talk abotu vapourware) is true - potentially another move ahead - since everyone knows that that ex the S2 - all these legacy systems basically suck.

    it is hilarious to read back in history all the excuses users of the AFD11 /111 made for the body and the insistence that there was no shutter lag - gimme a break ,there should be penalties for bull**** ..

    Phase One has moved to a superior marketing position - especially in the US. Hasselblad has failed in the megapixel race...

    but we need a healthy competition in order to have choice. Phase One can offer better deals to its customers BECAUSE it clearly has a better industry positioning - ultimately not screwing your loyal customer base is a very good plan if you wish to survive - I don't think Hasselblad understood this very well when they halved the value of their backs and delivered NO COMPENSATION to customers - or even apologies.

    people have looooong and unforgiving memories - I know I do.
    While integration is good and is preferred by many, there are big chunks of the market in different areas and segments that require the digital back to work seamlessly with technical or industrial cameras.
    On this forum I think there are quite a few people who use their back on tech cameras especially for landscape work.
    So if your product supports this sort of work and offers interesting features such as Live View, rotating sensors or even just a simple power solution, it will most likely be the choice for more people over an integrated one.

    Just my 2¢

    Yair

  27. #27
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Posts
    2,338
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    52

    Re: Hasselblad vs Phase One

    I agree Yair -



    you mean like this type of thing ?

    The back as film on a tech camera has ALWAYS been the outstanding 'drawcard' and real (for me) reason to use a MFD digital ( film) back ...on this forum it is a relatively new phenomenon - in other places ...perhaps not so new.

    the new Phase GUI - is a boon to tech camera users...if the LCD is as sharp as suggested - a real breakthrough - I want one and I will get one - the 80 megapixels ?- I never print larger than a few meters by a meter - so I don't need them.

    Pete

  28. #28
    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

    Siebel, you owned a Hasselblad and don't have a clue where or how the thing was made? Such strong opinions based on error? Really?

    I think most photographers that are truly involved in expressing themselves are quite capable of determining which camera or back is best for their creative purposes. Blanket statements of superiority based on marketing speak is just personal opinion artificially extended to be some sort of universal fact ... no matter what company and/or owner body is doing the exaggerations at any given time.

    That is a veiled insult to those who use any given system to express themselves well, regardless of make or model. Thus the tired old, but still true, bromide ... the camera doesn't make superior images, the photographer does.

    For you, your work, and your business ... you DO have a choice and you made it. For me, what is so important to you is much less unimportant to me, my work and my business. Closed or open system means zero to me. With the H4 I don't care a wit about choosing a different back for it ... the variety of ones available are more than enough, and if not, I need only wait awhile ... and IMO the H camera more than meets my requirements. Personally, I don't feel the compulsion to "Exceed The Need", even though I can afford it. I know am not alone in this opinion.

    My investment and choice of photo gear has paid off nicely, both creatively and financially. While I do like advancements, frankly I couldn't care less about protracted arguments from Hasselblad, Phase One, Leaf, Pentax, or Leica primarily designed to part me from my money, nor the generous dosage of marketing kool-aid they all have to serve up to sell product, nor the endless comparative justifications from any owner body. What's important is how they may impact my application ... therefore, True Focus is far more important to me than another 10 or 20 meg., and the Leica S2 better meets some my applications than any of the modular MFD choices.

    The whole thing has become sort of asylum like, with users battling it out which is empirically better without any relationship to actual work being produced, and has become more about who has what first ... I began questioning a lot of it even before the latest round of product improvements was announced ... and have seen nothing to date to alter that perception. IMO, no one has gotten any better, but I'm fairly sure they have become poorer.

    I've said this before, one minute, you have the latest greatest, the ultimate tool of expression, your baby, your path to better image quality ... which some folks proclaim loudly to the Heavens ... the next minute you have a piece of crap not worthy of your talent and vision. How insane does that sound?

    This forum is a microcosm with a skew toward Landscape work, and is somewhat Phase One centric. It's NOT the world at large, nor necessarily expressive of the thousands of photographers that use something else to shoot different type work, and do it quite well I might add.

    -Marc

  29. #29
    Workshop Member Woody Campbell's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    2,120
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    66

    Re: Hasselblad vs Phase One

    Quote Originally Posted by fotografz View Post
    Siebel, you owned a Hasselblad and don't have a clue where or how the thing was made? Such strong opinions based on error? Really?

    I think most photographers that are truly involved in expressing themselves are quite capable of determining which camera or back is best for their creative purposes. Blanket statements of superiority based on marketing speak is just personal opinion artificially extended to be some sort of universal fact ... no matter what company and/or owner body is doing the exaggerations at any given time.

    That is a veiled insult to those who use any given system to express themselves well, regardless of make or model. Thus the tired old, but still true, bromide ... the camera doesn't make superior images, the photographer does.

    For you, your work, and your business ... you DO have a choice and you made it. For me, what is so important to you is much less unimportant to me, my work and my business. Closed or open system means zero to me. With the H4 I don't care a wit about choosing a different back for it ... the variety of ones available are more than enough, and if not, I need only wait awhile ... and IMO the H camera more than meets my requirements. Personally, I don't feel the compulsion to "Exceed The Need", even though I can afford it. I know am not alone in this opinion.

    My investment and choice of photo gear has paid off nicely, both creatively and financially. While I do like advancements, frankly I couldn't care less about protracted arguments from Hasselblad, Phase One, Leaf, Pentax, or Leica primarily designed to part me from my money, nor the generous dosage of marketing kool-aid they all have to serve up to sell product, nor the endless comparative justifications from any owner body. What's important is how they may impact my application ... therefore, True Focus is far more important to me than another 10 or 20 meg., and the Leica S2 better meets some my applications than any of the modular MFD choices.

    The whole thing has become sort of asylum like, with users battling it out which is empirically better without any relationship to actual work being produced, and has become more about who has what first ... I began questioning a lot of it even before the latest round of product improvements was announced ... and have seen nothing to date to alter that perception. IMO, no one has gotten any better, but I'm fairly sure they have become poorer.

    I've said this before, one minute, you have the latest greatest, the ultimate tool of expression, your baby, your path to better image quality ... which some folks proclaim loudly to the Heavens ... the next minute you have a piece of crap not worthy of your talent and vision. How insane does that sound?

    This forum is a microcosm with a skew toward Landscape work, and is somewhat Phase One centric. It's NOT the world at large, nor necessarily expressive of the thousands of photographers that use something else to shoot different type work, and do it quite well I might add.

    -Marc
    Call security. Someone let a sane guy into the asylum!

  30. #30
    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

    Coming with a fire truck too. LOL
    Photography is all about experimentation and without it you will never learn art.

    www.guymancusophotography.com

  31. #31
    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 yaya View Post
    While integration is good and is preferred by many, there are big chunks of the market in different areas and segments that require the digital back to work seamlessly with technical or industrial cameras.
    On this forum I think there are quite a few people who use their back on tech cameras especially for landscape work.
    So if your product supports this sort of work and offers interesting features such as Live View, rotating sensors or even just a simple power solution, it will most likely be the choice for more people over an integrated one.

    Just my 2¢

    Yair
    As I said, this forum is skewed to landscape work, and some % use tech cameras ... so of course they'll come here to discuss gear with features condusive to that application. However, where are the globally significant statistics that say landscape field work with tech cameras and mega backs are a "Big Chunk" of anything?

    Integration is highly valuable to other shooters who like the system's feature advantages and versatility because of their application needs. Fashion, portrait, commercial product, food, people, event, corporate ... etc. ... or all of the above in today's more challenging photographic marketplace.

    In studio, with or without view cameras, most backs are shot tethered ... which most any modular digital back can do. Seemless work is a meaningless term when tethered ... they all are seemlessly equal on a view camera. Heck, for a majority of the studio work I have done or commissioned to be done, no one even touches the camera ... it's all done at the computer with software control of every setting.

    FYI, I can use my Hasselblad CF/39MS on any tech camera without power issues since it is self-powered ... and then change the iAdapter in 2 minutes and use it on my Mamiya RZ, or H2F with full integration, or any other camera I want ... including my Rollie Xact-II ... can't use all the cool stuff of the new backs on different cameras at will ... so I consider that the true definition of a closed system.

    People are just seem to be pissed because they can't put a newly minted innovation on a H camera ... where others just don't care.

    My 2¢

    -Marc

  32. #32
    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 fotografz View Post
    As I said, this forum is skewed to landscape work, and some % use tech cameras ... so of course they'll come here to discuss gear with features condusive to that application. However, where are the globally significant statistics that say landscape field work with tech cameras and mega backs are a "Big Chunk" of anything?

    Integration is highly valuable to other shooters who like the system's feature advantages and versatility because of their application needs. Fashion, portrait, commercial product, food, people, event, corporate ... etc. ... or all of the above in today's more challenging photographic marketplace.

    In studio, with or without view cameras, most backs are shot tethered ... which most any modular digital back can do. Seemless work is a meaningless term when tethered ... they all are seemlessly equal on a view camera. Heck, for a majority of the studio work I have done or commissioned to be done, no one even touches the camera ... it's all done at the computer with software control of every setting.

    FYI, I can use my Hasselblad CF/39MS on any tech camera without power issues since it is self-powered ... and then change the iAdapter in 2 minutes and use it on my Mamiya RZ, or H2F with full integration, or any other camera I want ... including my Rollie Xact-II ... can't use all the cool stuff of the new backs on different cameras at will ... so I consider that the true definition of a closed system.

    People are just seem to be pissed because they can't put a newly minted innovation on a H camera ... where others just don't care.

    My 2¢

    -Marc
    Marc I don't think we're in disagreement and it is obvious that this forum is skewed towards landscape work (with MF, LF or whatever cameras).

    By "different segments" I refer to applications that will probably never be present on any forum. There are many applications where backs are fitted onto custom made cameras/ lenses and then used for aerial/ industrial and military-type imaging. They require high resolution and seamless integration with THEIR systems.
    The number of units going into these areas is not insignificant. The same goes for reproduction and archiving; often these customers use bespoke solutions for various reasons.

    Today's reality is that anyone who requires >50MP raw capture on a non-SLR platform has only two brands to choose from and these two happen to belong to the same company...Maybe that's what pisses people off?

    Regarding using the latest and greatest on H cameras this has already been discussed I think. You can buy an 80MP TODAY and use it on an H1/ H2 and you can have all the lens corrections done in Capture One. No you will not be able to use 2 out of 11 lenses but this isn't different to what you had 2-3 years ago with those cameras...

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

  33. #33
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Ontario, Canada
    Posts
    446
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Hasselblad vs Phase One

    The camera development cycle is compressing. That is, technology development that took 10 years in the past decade will take 5 in the next. Think of telephones, stereo equipment, even automobiles. They all commoditize and high-end manufacturers adapt or fall by the wayside.

    Compression is intuitively obvious to most pros who simply shift to a DSLR. It's good enough for 90% of the available business. They have been liberated from needing complex kit and the extensive training/infrastructure to use it at the pro level. This is not an encouraging group for MFD suppliers.

    The top-end jobs still want top end kit so that small niche is relatively stable. A-list pros (defined by revenue) tend to have the full slew of equipment including MFD, film, and quality video. Great customers, but there are too few A-listers for the current MFD manufacturing base.

    If trends continue, more and more pros will just shift to the next generation of DSLR unless high end suppliers can provide added value. Hassy has taken a heritage-based and up-market approach (just compare the product literature and designer cameras). Phase is using technology. Both are after the only growing segment - the well-off amateur.

    So, this is no more or less insane than any other aspect of consumerism. People buy things for different reasons (e.g. return on investment or because it makes you feel good using it). All consumer categories are critical to H & P and, to give them credit, they are doing the best they can to broaden their markets. They know the biggest threat is not each other. It is a rapid and continuing change in the public's view of what commercial photography is.

    A perspective from someone who is very much outside the industry.

  34. #34
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    561
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Hasselblad vs Phase One

    Quote Originally Posted by tetsrfun View Post
    I can only speculate that Blads agreement with Fuji, who manufacture the H series cameras...
    *********
    IIRC, unless there has been a recent change, the H bodies are made in Sweden, the backs in Denmark and the lenses (except for the shutters) are made in Japan. The view finders are also made in Japan.

    David Grover will likely provide a correction if this is in error.

    Steve
    Thanks you beat me to it.

    I would also argue that neither the "back" or "body" is more important than the other. The whole way the "camera" works is the most important.

    Isn't that what the photographer is buying?

    Without integration these products would not have come to market easily..

    HTS
    HCD28
    HCD35-90
    GIL (GPS)
    Integrated menu systems (same on 645DF, through communication from body to back)
    Remote camera control from Phocus of all functions, including Focussing in Live View.
    Lens corrections on all lenses (requiring no user input)

    Calibrated cameras, digital unit to camera body..

    And on this point I would like to state that no such thing as an H3 or H4 ever existed.

    H3D and H4D was sold as a complete unit. Each one with its own AF calibration to ensure accuracy and no back or forward focussing. Each body with aperture dependant focus correction, again for more accuracy on high resolution systems.

    Hasselblad and Phase One make great products. Competition is good.

  35. #35
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    561
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Hasselblad vs Phase One

    Quote Originally Posted by yaya View Post

    Today's reality is that anyone who requires >50MP raw capture on a non-SLR platform has only two brands to choose from and these two happen to belong to the same company...Maybe that's what pisses people off?
    H4D60, thankyou very much.

    It also depends if you measure greatness on megapixels?

    What about ISO range? Colour handling? Speed? Price!!!? Value for money?

    Software features?

    And so on.

  36. #36
    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

    Folks I fundamentality disagree with this system is for that or this for this style of shooting. Any shooter worth his salt can shoot any system in any situation be it fashion, portrait, landscape and such. I think that is all BS IMHO because I know I can. Just give me any cam and I will get it done. Thats my job is too figure it out. Sure some maybe easier and some system maybe harder no question. But throw a Hassy at me or a Phase and i will bring home the bacon just like any other good shooter out there. The difference are really outside the shooting box and how the kits are setup. Hassy i can't take one back and stick it on another body unless it is calibrated for that back for example . It's more about the restrictions, switching up and backup solutions are where these systems are apart. Be it closed / open or whatever that will never stop a shooter from getting images on any shoot of any style. Somehow they will figure it out how to get it done and if they don't someone else will.

    I'm on my get out there and work it roll this morning. I'm banning myself . LOL
    Photography is all about experimentation and without it you will never learn art.

    www.guymancusophotography.com

  37. #37
    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 David Grover / Hasselblad View Post
    H4D60, thankyou very much.
    I thought I saw somewhere that you said that it was in beta testing?

  38. #38
    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 yaya View Post
    Marc I don't think we're in disagreement and it is obvious that this forum is skewed towards landscape work (with MF, LF or whatever cameras).

    By "different segments" I refer to applications that will probably never be present on any forum. There are many applications where backs are fitted onto custom made cameras/ lenses and then used for aerial/ industrial and military-type imaging. They require high resolution and seamless integration with THEIR systems.
    The number of units going into these areas is not insignificant. The same goes for reproduction and archiving; often these customers use bespoke solutions for various reasons.

    Today's reality is that anyone who requires >50MP raw capture on a non-SLR platform has only two brands to choose from and these two happen to belong to the same company...Maybe that's what pisses people off?

    Regarding using the latest and greatest on H cameras this has already been discussed I think. You can buy an 80MP TODAY and use it on an H1/ H2 and you can have all the lens corrections done in Capture One. No you will not be able to use 2 out of 11 lenses but this isn't different to what you had 2-3 years ago with those cameras...

    Yair
    Again, for clarification of errors of omission ... the reality is ... the Hasselblad CFV is self powered, is a universal V mount found on many specialty cameras, and it is available in 50 meg.

    All H backs can be, and are mounted on non-slr cameras all the time ... the only draw back (for now) is that they require a separate power source for the back if used in a non-powered location ... which narrows the application field considerably. Just saying that the number is significant doesn't make it so. And implying that a H1 or H2 is only slightly handicapped indicates a lack of knowledge of what the H4 is actually capable of doing over a now long discontinued camera platform.

    The implication that other product resources are not capable of certain applications, when they are, is just more marketing Kool-Aid to be sipped or gulped.

    BTW, I don't buy the marketing speak Kool Aid from any of these companies, nor do I have any sense of loyalty to any of them either. My loyalty is to my work, my clients and my company ... as long as the gear does what I need from it then fine. If it can't there is always something else that can.

    -Marc

  39. #39
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    561
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Hasselblad vs Phase One

    Quote Originally Posted by yaya View Post
    I thought I saw somewhere that you said that it was in beta testing?
    Nope.

  40. #40
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Massachusetts and Vermont
    Posts
    948
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Hasselblad vs Phase One

    Quote Originally Posted by siebel View Post
    You miss the point. Hasselblad reduced the choices for its OWN customers. I actually agree that the H4d is for many a better camera than the Phase 645DF (this hopefully will change with the arrival of the new Phase body). This meant that H3 and H4 buyers can ONLY mount Blad backs on their beloved cameras. This was all ok when they had product that was competitive with the standards being set by other manufacturers. Alas this has not been the case and with the launch of the Aptus 12 from Leaf and the IQ series from Phase the gap just opened up further. In practice, the back is the most important part of an MF system, so having choice here is more important. Who knows who is going to be the next champion back? If it isn't Blad, then H3 and H4 owners will not have the option to mount that back on their cameras either.
    As a business owner, buying into a platform that locks me into using only backs of that brand does not make any sense at all. Faced with this, I chose the Phase 645DF over the Blad, despite my concerns about it's limitations. Fortunately for me, one of those limitations was the lens range, which Phase has improved massively since I retired my Blad for the Phase DF. The Schneider LS lenses, the D-series and the announced and soon to me released new lenses now give us all abundant choice and superb quality.
    I can only speculate that Blads agreement with Fuji, who manufacture the H series cameras and lenses, is not commercially viable on price. Thus they do not make enough money from the sale of a camera system to a customer who is going to buy a back from someone else. Viola! the "closed" system is born.
    For me, the solution was simple - buy the best back, then choose the camera that I can live with. Sadly, Blad could not be part of that consideration.
    At the time, the P65+ was the king of the hill, so that's what I bought. I've since added the Aptus 12. Now that the IQ180 is out, I will sell my P65+ and order an IQ. Sadly, the H3/H4 cannot mount any of these backs. A shame, really, that the people who pay the highest price in reduced choice are Blads own customers.

    Cheers,
    I don't think you understood my point. You seem to think that the world as it existed back in 2005 where phase sold large numbers of digital backs and Hasselblad sold somewhat large numbers of H cameras but relatively few Imacon/Hasselblad digital backs could somehow continue into the future indefinitely. I just do not believe that was a long-term tenable business model for Hasselblad, and if Hasselblad did NOT "close" the H3D and achieve a more significant level of market penetration with its digital backs, Hasselblad would have folded up just like Contax, Mamiya and Bronica. I do not use an H4D, but there are substantial numbers of people who do and love the camera. Without the funds for the R&D derived from sales of H3Ds, the H4D(and the HTS, the 35-90 zoom, etc.)would probably never exist. So, the concept of an ideal world where everybody can mix and match cameras and backs, they all work seamlessly together and the economic pie is equitably distributed so that everyone makes enough money to stay at was and still is a photographer's fantasy. It just was not happening. If the choice is between a world with Phase and Hasselblad both prospering with their own medium format systems with new and improved high end cameras and backs and lenses, or a world in which Phase makes (and prices)all the backs and the only camera dealer is ebay selling 2005 vintage H1s, Contaxes and Mamiya AFDs, I think I know what I prefer.

  41. #41
    Senior Member Quentin_Bargate's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Saffron Walden, UK
    Posts
    1,983
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    58

    Re: Hasselblad vs Phase One

    Quote Originally Posted by siebel View Post
    ... This was all ok when they had product that was competitive with the standards being set by other manufacturers. Alas this has not been the case and with the launch of the Aptus 12 from Leaf and the IQ series from Phase the gap just opened up further.

    Cheers,

    A comment of such palpable nonesense as above is surely better suited to dpreview than a serious forum like this, unless of course the only measure of quality is the absolute number of pixels on offer. Life and the available choices are a little more complex than this.
    Quentin Bargate
    Director of Bargate Murray, Law Firm of the Year 2012 - 2017, ”leading individual”, Chambers HNW guide, 2017, Photographer

  42. #42
    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 Guy Mancuso View Post
    Folks I fundamentality disagree with this system is for that or this for this style of shooting. Any shooter worth his salt can shoot any system in any situation be it fashion, portrait, landscape and such. I think that is all BS IMHO because I know I can. Just give me any cam and I will get it done. Thats my job is too figure it out. Sure some maybe easier and some system maybe harder no question. But throw a Hassy at me or a Phase and i will bring home the bacon just like any other good shooter out there. The difference are really outside the shooting box and how the kits are setup. Hassy i can't take one back and stick it on another body unless it is calibrated for that back for example . It's more about the restrictions, switching up and backup solutions are where these systems are apart. Be it closed / open or whatever that will never stop a shooter from getting images on any shoot of any style. Somehow they will figure it out how to get it done and if they don't someone else will.

    I'm on my get out there and work it roll this morning. I'm banning myself . LOL
    FYI, I just asked this question ... and as far as I was told, I can order a H4DXX, and a second H4D body and have it calibrated/integrated exactly the same as the first one for a seamless back-up.

    -Marc

  43. #43
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    313
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Hasselblad vs Phase One

    I'm bookmarking this thread. When phase come out with their new body in say 18 months I'll eat my hat if you are able to put any other back on it. This whole open closed thing is nonsense. Since when could you put a Canon chip in a Nikon. Hey wait a minute, that Afi camera, that was open right? Right?
    Nick-T

  44. #44
    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

    I know you can. There is a fee if I am not mistaken 500. David can you confirm but my real point was each system has some restrictions, limitations and such. Being closed does not always mean better nor does being open does it. Phase gives you some extra options on mount and such. We all know the differences but this integrated is better is not always true. I have no issues at all with switching backs, bodies, and or lenses around and 3 lens companies are supported for corrections actually 4. So I know the argument goes around several hundred times but let's put the petal to the metal for real work it does not matter. For marketing, sales and out of the shooting box is really the debate ( I should add forum chatter). But I am really not in the mood too and honestly don't care , we buy what we buy because that is what we think will work best for each of us. You know i hate these kinds of debates. Kind of pointless if you think about it.
    Photography is all about experimentation and without it you will never learn art.

    www.guymancusophotography.com

  45. #45
    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 Nick-T View Post
    I'm bookmarking this thread. When phase come out with their new body in say 18 months I'll eat my hat if you are able to put any other back on it. This whole open closed thing is nonsense. Since when could you put a Canon chip in a Nikon. Hey wait a minute, that Afi camera, that was open right? Right?
    Nick-T
    Nick you can put a Leaf on it which BTW is a Phase product. LOL

    Sorry I am a little feisty today.
    Photography is all about experimentation and without it you will never learn art.

    www.guymancusophotography.com

  46. #46
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    1,347
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    12

    Re: Hasselblad vs Phase One

    Quote Originally Posted by Guy Mancuso View Post
    We all know the differences but this integrated is better is not always true. I have no issues at all with switching backs, bodies, and or lenses around and 3 lens companies are supported for corrections actually 4. So I know the argument goes around several hundred times but let's put the petal to the metal for real work it does not matter. For marketing, sales and out of the shooting box is really the debate ( I should add forum chatter).
    I do not agree. "integrated" goes hand in hand with adjustment of lens/body/sensor which is essential to meet the extremely tight tolerances with regard to accurate focusing. For the very same reason Alpa designed a shimmed interface, Arca designed its highrez focussing mechanism and current DSLRs allow AF micro adjustment. To my knowledge Phase doesn't provide such a feature in the DF camera; not even focus shift compensation (AFAIK).

  47. #47
    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

    Thomas Alpa requires that with any BACK regardless of brand.

    My Point is my DF no matter what back I put on it Leaf or Phase in different flavors does not require that and it does not seem to matter everything seems to work as any other integrated system. Would a AF focus adjustment be helpful. Sure love to have it like my Sony but I don't seem to be off with any lens I have used either. Your Contax does not have that either and no one complains from the Contax camp on that.
    Photography is all about experimentation and without it you will never learn art.

    www.guymancusophotography.com

  48. #48
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    1,347
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    12

    Re: Hasselblad vs Phase One

    Quote Originally Posted by Guy Mancuso View Post
    Thomas Alpa requires that with any BACK regardless of brand.
    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.

    My Point is my DF no matter what back I put on it Leaf or Phase in different flavors does not require that and it does not seem to matter everything seems to work as any other integrated system.
    by design this is not possible. No company makes mechanical parts in a series within tolerances of 0.06mm... Mircoadjustment is required.

    edit:
    Quote Originally Posted by Guy Mancuso View Post
    Your Contax does not have that either and no one complains from the Contax camp on that.
    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).

  49. #49
    Workshop Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    3,275
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    7

    Re: Hasselblad vs Phase One

    Quote Originally Posted by fotografz View Post
    FYI, I just asked this question ... and as far as I was told, I can order a H4DXX, and a second H4D body and have it calibrated/integrated exactly the same as the first one for a seamless back-up.
    Hassy's system of requiring calibration/integration to be able to use a body has it's benefits. Indeed it should more or less guarentee you never have an issue with focus calibration between a given camera-back and back.

    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.

    With a Phase One back you can use any body with any back (of the same mount of course) without "calibration/integration" from the factory. This means that in a crises you can use any body from a rental house or have your dealer overnight you a body and you can stick your back on it and go.

    The cost of having a backup is also very low with Phase's system since you can also use older bodies such as the AFD1, AFD2, and AFD3 without "calibration/integration". An AFD1 ($399) is a slow and mediocre body - but as a backup for a day while you get another DF rented/shipped in it would be perfectly fine.

    The difference of having to rent a body only rather than a body and back kit is not minor. A body is often around $60/day and a back around $400-$600/day. Insurance requirements to rent a body is around $1-3k rather than $10k-$40k for a digital back.

    In three years I've seen only a handful of back failures (no moving parts) while I've seen a dozen or more camera body failures (shutter/mirror are moving parts). So a backup body to me is much more important than a backup back.


    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.
    Yaya was referring to the thread linked below which I took to mean the H4D-60 could not be presently used on a tech camera, and that the firmware for doing such was in beta. Did yaya and I missread that?

    http://forum.getdpi.com/forum/showpo...90&postcount=7

    Doug Peterson (e-mail Me)
    __________________

    Head of Technical Services, Capture Integration
    Phase One Partner of the Year
    Leaf, Leica, Cambo, Arca Swiss, Canon, Apple, Profoto, Broncolor, Eizo & More

    National: 877.217.9870 *| *Cell: 740.707.2183
    Newsletter | RSS Feed
    Buy Capture One 6 at 10% off

  50. #50
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    1,347
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    12

    Re: Hasselblad vs Phase One

    Quote Originally Posted by dougpetersonci View Post
    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.
    you can double that rate ... the 4 (actually 5) backs I used in the last 3 years were all a bit different. Totally usable! But still slightly different if you are anal about focusing (and I have to admit: I am).

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
  •