Site Sponsors
Results 1 to 46 of 46

Thread: If you had the choice

  1. #1
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Germany near FFM
    Posts
    93
    Post Thanks / Like

    If you had the choice

    Today I have a serious question:

    If you had the choice between a

    Hasselblad H3DII-50 and a Hasselblad H4D-31

    what camera would you take?

    I have an offer from my dealer for a used H3DII50 and a HC50-110 for all 10.500 Euro. It has around 15.000 clicks (both, camera and body). A second handgrip is included.

    A new H4D-31 would be at 8.999 Euro (special offer, body only), but I found an offer for a HC80/2,8 for about 700 Euro (pre owned).

    I have the H3DII50 for a few days and could bring it back to my dealer.

    What I think about most is the technical advantages at the H4D and that it comes with a guarantee and maximum 100 clicks.

    The H3DII has the "bigger" Digiback. I am not running for the MP, but in some situation size matters. I had some pictures taken with the H3DII already and the resolution is amazing. No moire issues or other problems.

    So to come to the main point: Is the H3DII50 the better offer or the H4D?

    Thank you for some information and your opts...

  2. #2
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Basel, Switzerland
    Posts
    265
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: If you had the choice

    Quote Originally Posted by fotom View Post
    Today I have a serious question:

    If you had the choice between a

    Hasselblad H3DII-50 and a Hasselblad H4D-31

    what camera would you take?

    I have an offer from my dealer for a used H3DII50 and a HC50-110 for all 10.500 Euro. It has around 15.000 clicks (both, camera and body). A second handgrip is included.

    A new H4D-31 would be at 8.999 Euro (special offer, body only), but I found an offer for a HC80/2,8 for about 700 Euro (pre owned).

    I have the H3DII50 for a few days and could bring it back to my dealer.

    What I think about most is the technical advantages at the H4D and that it comes with a guarantee and maximum 100 clicks.

    The H3DII has the "bigger" Digiback. I am not running for the MP, but in some situation size matters. I had some pictures taken with the H3DII already and the resolution is amazing. No moire issues or other problems.

    So to come to the main point: Is the H3DII50 the better offer or the H4D?

    Thank you for some information and your opts...
    Fotom,

    this is for sure a hard question. And there is for sure not an easy answer.

    The H4D has TrueFocus.
    If you need TrueFocus (and you'll love it for your People, Portrait, Lifestyle, work etc.) - you should go with the H4D.

    And you should definitely consider the BIG SIZE of 50 MPix. If you don't really NEED those big files, it may be much easier with the lower pixel count.

    Remember: You can not turn down to a lower pixel count as on a Canon or Nikon. You beautiful swedish gem will always deliver maximum quality.

    But I definitely have to emphasize about the TrueFocus. Maybe there are different opinions, but I would go with the newer H4D, the slightly smaller file sizes (except if you really need them).

    Maybe you want to download sample files from the Hasselblad Website to see the differences in File Size & Precision:

    Landscape Samples

    H4D-31: 65 MB TIFF
    H4D-50: 101 MB TIFF

    IF you are into long exposure, there may be a difference in the durantion these backs are able to capture.

    Hope this helps.

    Stan ROX
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  3. #3
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    1,387
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: If you had the choice

    Not shot the H3 but have used the H4D-50 and thought it was one great sensor. As far as I know it is the same chip and without even thinking about it I'd want the bigger (size) sensor.

    True focus supposedly works well but never felt I ever needed it and we've all gone for years shooting sharp pictures without it.

    Hard drive space is cheap, who cares any longer how big the RAW files are?

  4. #4
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Basel, Switzerland
    Posts
    265
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: If you had the choice

    Quote Originally Posted by gazwas View Post
    Not shot the H3 but have used the H4D-50 and thought it was one great sensor. As far as I know it is the same chip and without even thinking about it I'd want the bigger (size) sensor.

    True focus supposedly works well but never felt I ever needed it and we've all gone for years shooting sharp pictures without it.

    Hard drive space is cheap, who cares any longer how big the RAW files are?
    As long as ya have to load them into Photoshop, Lightroom or whatsoever.

    But I'm pretty sure, I'd opt for a H4D-50 also

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

    Re: If you had the choice

    As far as I know, the H4D-31 has "only" a 44x33 sensor as opposed to the 48x36 of the H3dII-50. Therefore I'd opt for the H3D. Sensor size regardless of pixel resolution is, at least to me, more important than true focus. This is just my personal preference and I'm not even a Hasselblad user. The benefits of the H3D are: Less crop in the viewfinder, better use of wide angles, more resolution and to phrase it extremely simple you can make use of shallower depth of field.

  6. #6
    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: If you had the choice

    Since I've owned and used them all ... except the H3D-II/50 which my best friend owns and uses, so I know that camera well also ... maybe I can help?

    It all comes down to what and how you shoot. Cliche' perhaps, but 100% true.

    The H4D/31 is a more spontaneous camera experience. With True Focus and an ISO range from 100 to 1600, it's great for hand-held, or mono-pod shooting especially of people. True Focus works, and is great for off-center subjects especially when shooting closer with the lens wide open for shallow DOF, or if using a wide-angle lens. The 31 meg sensor has been in the Hasselblad line-up since the H3D: Hasselblad launches the H3D-31). However, it is capable of excellent images, and I used a H3D-31 and H3D-II-31 successfully for many years, and it was one of my favorite cameras for what and how I shoot. The first 4 shots on my portrait site are examples of the H3D-II/31 sensor used spontaneously on a commercial shoot.

    Fotografz Portrait Photography - Franklin Michigan

    The H3D-II/50 is a bit more of a studied camera, and while it can most certainly also be used spontaneously, it excels at rock solid shooting on a tripod at ISO-50, and the Kodak sensor is one generation ahead of the Kodak sensor of the H4D/31. It is especially suited to studio work with strobes.

    If your comparison was between the H4D/40 and a H3D-II/50, it would be an easy recommendation to go with the H4D/40 which has the latest Kodak designed 40 meg sensor.

    Hope this helps,

    -Marc

    OH! One other thing to check ... not long ago Hasselblad instituted a firmware update that doubled the resolution of the LCD. I'd ask if this LCD firmware works on either of these cameras ... it may be one thing that's added in favor of one or the other.
    Last edited by fotografz; 3rd December 2012 at 16:08.

  7. #7
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    San Francisco
    Posts
    104
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: If you had the choice

    IMO, the only reason to use MFD SLR is horsepower (i.e. megapixels) and to a lesser extent perhaps, color fidelity and file depth (i.e. malleability). You give up a hell of a lot considering today's top end 35mm SLR equipment, for these. In just about every other category, 35mm will beat the socks off MFD SLR (high ISO, frame rates, lens selection, focusing systems, COST!, just to name just a few). So if 31 MP would be sufficient and a camera body with a sexy list of features is a desire, then if I where you I would look hard at Canon or Nikon. Just sayin'

  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: If you had the choice

    Quote Originally Posted by alan_w_george View Post
    IMO, the only reason to use MFD SLR is horsepower (i.e. megapixels) and to a lesser extent perhaps, color fidelity and file depth (i.e. malleability). You give up a hell of a lot considering today's top end 35mm SLR equipment, for these. In just about every other category, 35mm will beat the socks off MFD SLR (high ISO, frame rates, lens selection, focusing systems, COST!, just to name just a few). So if 31 MP would be sufficient and a camera body with a sexy list of features is a desire, then if I where you I would look hard at Canon or Nikon. Just sayin'
    That is all true IF you believe that 35mm looks the same as Medium Format. Which I do not.

    And if it IS true that there is no difference in look and feel from a smaller sensor, then the APSC high meg, high ISO cameras are even smaller, and even less expensive than 35mm ... so why not get one of those?

    -Marc
    Likes 6 Member(s) liked this post

  9. #9
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    461
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: If you had the choice

    I would get the H4D-31 hands down, unless you needed 50 mpx...I'm pretty sure the sensor in that is the same as my P30+. I think its a great size file. I shoot it on the H4x and love true focus. It's one of the best AF advances in a very long time. I have a D800E as well and it's great for what it is, but it's not the same as MF. You also might consider a used 100 2.2 rather than an 80mm. I use the 100 80% of the time with the other 15% only when I shoot wide with the 35mm and the 80 maybe 5%. The 50-110 lens was not made very well and i have heard of several that have fallen apart under normal shooting conditions. Having a warranty is very nice. You also may be able to find a used H4D-40 for not much more. Hope this helps.
    Likes 2 Member(s) liked this post

  10. #10
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    461
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: If you had the choice

    Marc,
    I do LOVE my Fuji X-E1!!! If it only had TF...Haha!

  11. #11
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    337
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: If you had the choice

    Buy H4D-40 with the 100/2.2 lens if you photograph people.

  12. #12
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    655
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: If you had the choice

    for the price you are looking at... buy a Phase One back... and a hasselblad body if you like the hasselblad bodies. I've compared hasselblad and Phase One backs with hasselblad lenses, and to me the Phase files were better in every aspect.

  13. #13
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Basel, Switzerland
    Posts
    265
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: If you had the choice

    The german dealer

    shop.fotopartner.de sells some demo equipment from the Photokina.

    H4D-50: 13'999 € inkl. VAT.

    Photokina Demoware - Foto-Partner ProShop

    Maybe this gives additional ideas about what to buy.

  14. #14
    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: If you had the choice

    The OP hasn't responded since posting the question. So, we may be debating amongst ourselves

    Tit for tat ...

    I also either tested, or used, or been on set with Phase One, Leaf, and Hasselblad backs on various cameras ... and other than the added functionality of the very expensive IQ DBs or use on a tech camera on location, I found the Hasselblad integrated body/back/lens solution from the H3D-II thru the H4 (H5) to be more reliable and better in every respect (whatever that lack of specificity actually means ). Personal opinion, "Eye of the Beholder" and all that I guess.

    Since the absent OP asked about Hasselblad, my recommendation is the H4D/40 if a demo or clean used one can be found ... IMO and experience, it strikes the perfect balance between that MFD look and feel, good higher ISO performance without binning, and superb file quality ... as such, it covers a lot of bases if you do not specialize in some application that would warrant 50+ meg, or a multi-shot camera/back.

    -Marc

  15. #15
    Senior Member malmac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Toowoomba, Queensland, Australia
    Posts
    538
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: If you had the choice

    This is obviously a subject quite a few of us are interested in. I guess we have chosen Hasselblad or Phase One or another option, or we are thinking of which way to go. I know I read this forum for some time before I bought into Phase One.

    Would I make the same decision if I was making the decision again?

    Maybe, maybe not, but for me it would not be any easier the second time round. I think the True Focus on H cameras, it seems to work well, would be a major consideration for me as I find the Phase One 645Df camera's auto focus very basic.

    It was suggested to me when I bought my Phase One camera system that a new camera was on the way and unlike Hasselblad, I would be able to upgrade the camera without upgrading the back (the expensive part and the part which suffers the high depreciation) well I am still waiting and while I love the image quality from my IQ back the 645DF is the weak link in the chain.

    Oh well back to work.


    Mal

  16. #16
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    1,083
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    6

    Re: If you had the choice

    Honestly speaking, i was using H3DII-39 then upgraded to H4D-60, if i neglect about mp or file size, i will say H4D is a significant improvement over H3D, True focus and high ISO, i can shoot with ISO 800 by H4D and it will look better than ISO 200/400 on H3D, that may help me sometimes for low light, so i will go with H4D31 over H3D models, try to see H4D40 if you can afford it.
    Tareq

  17. #17
    Senior Member johnnygoesdigital's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    1,579
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: If you had the choice

    MFD upgrade equals computer upgrade, not just hard drive space, but processing power too. TF is very cool, and unless you print really, really big photographs, you probably won't know the difference. Save the $ and get some glass with the H4.

  18. #18
    ashdown
    Guest

    Re: If you had the choice

    Did anybody ask the OP what he was going to use the camera for? I made a similar decision between an H4D-31 and H3DII-39. The 39 won because I shoot cars and products. If I shot people the 31 would have been better because of the TrueFocus.

  19. #19
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    San Francisco
    Posts
    104
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: If you had the choice

    Quote Originally Posted by alan_w_george View Post
    IMO, the only reason to use MFD SLR is horsepower (i.e. megapixels) and to a lesser extent perhaps, color fidelity and file depth (i.e. malleability). You give up a hell of a lot considering today's top end 35mm SLR equipment, for these. In just about every other category, 35mm will beat the socks off MFD SLR (high ISO, frame rates, lens selection, focusing systems, COST!, just to name just a few). So if 31 MP would be sufficient and a camera body with a sexy list of features is a desire, then if I where you I would look hard at Canon or Nikon. Just sayin'
    Quote Originally Posted by fotografz View Post
    That is all true IF you believe that 35mm looks the same as Medium Format. Which I do not.

    -Marc
    Ah, I forgot about the unquantifiable, undefendable Medium Format magic. "MF just looks better", right! BS.

    It just my opinion, but given the choice between a cropped 31 MP Hasselblad MF SLR for $12000 and an 36 MP Nikon D800E SLR for $3200, well lets just say that "magic" is pretty damn expensive both in terms of $$ and loss of features on the MF SLR compared to the 35mm. And not believing in magic, it's pretty hard to swallow.

    Anyway my original point was to go with the 50MP back. I could not understand why you would want sacrifice MF's only real advantage, resolution, for a few SLR features (Hasselblad H3DII-50 versus a Hasselblad H4D-31). Given that line of thinking, I thought the OP might be better served by a top end 35mm SLR. Again, just my opinion.

  20. #20
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Germany near FFM
    Posts
    93
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: If you had the choice

    Hello,

    I thank you all for sharing your opinion and try to help me to find a solution. You did a good work! I will stay with the H3DII-50.

    Well, what will I use it for most? I have done a lot of landscape and skyline in the last time, so I believe the 50MP back might be the better option because of the higher resolution and the better crop (due to the different sensor size). For the first shots I used ISO50 and did not miss higher speed at all.

    If I need more ISO for other things I will use my D3s anyway. That I still have with my two f2,8 zooms. But that camera I have for different usage and different jobs. I do like it for studio work as well, but only, if I need a fast result in low resolution.

    Maybe there will be a situation to use the H3D for studio work as well. But I think that will be only sometimes. And I believe, all the other guys not having True Focus can shoot all that studio stuff as well with good results. So I will have to learn how to do it, too.

    Today I talked to another Hasselblad photographer and he said, that at that prize the H3DII-50 with the HC50-110 is a pretty good offer and I should go for it.

    I found another offer for the H3DII- 50 without a lens and that was some 500 Euro more expensive than my one with the HC50-110. This photographer also told me, that the zoom is one of the best found on the marked. Is that so? In that case I would add the 120/4 Makro for stills and product work.

    Then I will save some money and try to get an H4D-31 next.

    Why Hasselblad anyway?

    I looked at the PhaseOne backs as well and I like them, too. But usually they are sold with Mamiya bodys. I went to Calumet and got one in my hand. A PhaseOne back (I do not remember the type) on a 645AFD Mamiya with battery grip and I believe a Profoto remote sync system integrated, a battery on the bottom of the back and a 80mm lens. It was a huge construction I could not even hold in my hands for a lot of money (more expensive than my Hassi or even an H4D-40). I tried to shoot some pictures on my own CF card but the results had been not worth to mention.

    Then I went to a local dealer and took a close look at Hasselblad. They had a H4D-40 and let me try it with a 100/2,2. That was a nice combination, easy to use and I could handle it very easy in my hands. Unfortunately my son was with me and he was very impatient that I took so long at that place.

    The dealer I usually buy my stuff had "my" H3DII-50 and he lend it to me for a weekend. The handling is like any H- Camera I believe and I like the results. I will post an example later.

    I used to have a Nikon D800. I traded it for a D3x. The D800 is nice. But I was disappointed about the results.

    The first impression of the results is great. Nice colored pictures with a good sharpness.

    For example take a look here.

    But the sharpness was fading when printed in large format (I did it in DIN A0 and couldn´t believe my eyes!). Same result in DINA2.

    I believe it was a focus problem with my lenses, but they all worked fine with my D3s and later on the D3x. I used the 14-24/2,8G, the 24-70/2,8G and the 70-200/2,8VRII. I then had the 85/1,4G, the 105/2,8VR Macro, but the worst results I had with my 50/1,4G. No sharp pictures at all from f1,4 to f3,5. All pictures were out of focus. But with the D3s the 85/1,4 was as sharp as a razor blade.

    I gave the D800 and the 50/1,4 to service and got it back well. But the 50 didn´t work with my D3s any more. So I didn´t want to take that risk that all lenses will not work with my D3s any more.

    After I had the D3x the situation improved. But it not got perfect. The results were a lot better even with less resolution. The sharpness was quite good in bigger prints. But still sometimes the focus problems occurred.

    Then I met the H3D.

    The D3x and all lenses except the two 2,8 Zooms (24-70-200) were sold.

    The difference between MF and FX Format is obviously. At least in my eyes.
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  21. #21
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Germany near FFM
    Posts
    93
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: If you had the choice

    Quote Originally Posted by Professional View Post
    Honestly speaking, i was using H3DII-39 then upgraded to H4D-60, if i neglect about mp or file size, i will say H4D is a significant improvement over H3D, True focus and high ISO, i can shoot with ISO 800 by H4D and it will look better than ISO 200/400 on H3D, that may help me sometimes for low light, so i will go with H4D31 over H3D models, try to see H4D40 if you can afford it.
    The 50MP Back is able to shoot with ISO800 but I recognized that all pictures get some "red" when used in ISO more than 100.

    How to get rid of that?

    I saw the same problem with the Mamiya/ PhaseOne Back at the pictures taken at Calumet. That is the main reason why I use ISO50.

  22. #22
    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: If you had the choice

    Quote Originally Posted by fotom View Post
    Hello,

    I thank you all for sharing your opinion and try to help me to find a solution. You did a good work! I will stay with the H3DII-50.

    ... This photographer also told me, that the 50-110 zoom is one of the best found on the marked. Is that so? In that case I would add the 120/4 Makro for stills and product work.

    The difference between MF and FX Format is obviously. At least in my eyes.
    Congratulations, and welcome to the Hasselblad club!

    Yes, the 50-110 zoom is very good, very early models had an issue, but that was corrected by Hasselblad. I have a friend that uses that lens almost exclusively, and has done so for many years now. I think the only other lens he has is the 120/4 Macro.

    Best of luck!

    -Marc

  23. #23
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Germany near FFM
    Posts
    93
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: If you had the choice

    Marc,

    thank you.

    Do you know what kind of issue they had?

    I can not find any problem so far and as it has been in use for 15.000 clicks I do not believe there will come up a serious problem in the next time.

    Shutter should stay alive for at least 100.000 clicks. To work with that camera is not like taking pictures in a similar speed as with the D3s.

  24. #24
    Senior Member Chris Giles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Brighton
    Posts
    342
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: If you had the choice

    TBH shoot primes, any MF zooms tend to be silly heavy. The 100mm is an excellent starting point.

  25. #25
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Germany near FFM
    Posts
    93
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: If you had the choice

    Stan,

    thank you for your input.

    I had taken some pictures similar to the shown at the Hasselblad website. It is fantastic to walk through the pictures and look in somebody else´s home. But therefore you need it big.

    I tried some shots. Maybe they are not perfect, but the details in crop is "wow".

    I like my son´s pictures most.

    Attachment 66276

    Attachment 66277

    Attachment 66278
    Last edited by fotom; 5th December 2012 at 13:58.

  26. #26
    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: If you had the choice

    Quote Originally Posted by fotom View Post
    Marc,

    thank you.

    Do you know what kind of issue they had?

    I can not find any problem so far and as it has been in use for 15.000 clicks I do not believe there will come up a serious problem in the next time.

    Shutter should stay alive for at least 100.000 clicks. To work with that camera is not like taking pictures in a similar speed as with the D3s.
    In some earlier models of the 50-110, when the lens was used straight downward the front element could come loose or even fall out. Hasselblad quickly corrected it, and fixed ones that it happened to. I seriously doubt there are any out there that still have the problem. I only mentioned it because someone here said something about it. It is old news and fixed long ago.

    Have fun, it is a great camera especially for what you want to shoot.

    -Marc

  27. #27
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Germany near FFM
    Posts
    93
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: If you had the choice

    Chris,

    you are right. The weight and the size is huge. That was the reason I was looking for some alternatives.

    I would go for:

    HC35 oder HC50 - HC100/2,2 - HC120/4 - HC180

    But this will be done step by step.

    I am not sure if I take a 35 or a 50. For huge pictures for big prints (I have the possibility to print in 900x4000mm) I usually take more than one picture and stitch it. I did so with the D3s (sometimes I needed more than 20 pictures) and with the D3x (around 10 for good results). With the H3D I need only 3 or 4 shots. That is a difference.

  28. #28
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Germany near FFM
    Posts
    93
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: If you had the choice

    Does anybody know if the 50MP back of the H3D can be used on an H4D body?

    The newer DBs seem to be different in tech spec. But as far as I can see there should be no problem to use different parts on different bodies as long as they belong to the H line.

  29. #29
    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: If you had the choice

    No. Each back and body are matched at the factory and calibrated together. You can special order a spare body for a back, but it has to be calibrated together with your back at Hasselblad ... at least I think they will still do this.

    As far as I know, the H3D/H3D-II have different protocols and features from the H4D and they do not mix.

    You can use any H back on a tech or studio view camera, but either need a Hasselblad Image Bank-II to provide power to the back (also allowing you to store up to 100Gig of images on both a CF cards and the Image bank), or tether the back to a computer.

    BTW, there is no HC-180 lens. There is a HC-150/3.2 or 150N, and a HC-210/4. The 150mm is smaller than the 210mm if that is what you are looking for.

    Here is a tip, get the super fast HC-100/2.2 and 1.7X ... it really works well and gives you 170mm f/3.8 ... stopped down a bit it is quite sharp, and wide open it is a very nice close focusing combination for head shots with beautiful Bokeh.

    -Marc

  30. #30
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Germany near FFM
    Posts
    93
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: If you had the choice

    Marc,

    thank you. I mixed something up and had a 180 on my mind but it seems it was a CF or CFi lens.

    The converter provides AF- function?

    Well, it seems that I will need to save some more money to get a H4D-xx as a backup...

  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: If you had the choice

    Quote Originally Posted by fotom View Post
    Marc,

    thank you. I mixed something up and had a 180 on my mind but it seems it was a CF or CFi lens.

    The converter provides AF- function?

    Well, it seems that I will need to save some more money to get a H4D-xx as a backup...
    Yes, the 1.7X extender is fully functional and AF is just as fast. BTW, I was wrong, the 100/2.2 becomes a 170/3.3 not 3.8. Unfortunately it cannot be used with the 50-110 lens, nor WA from 35mm and wider. Full info here:

    http://www.hasselbladusa.com/media/6...ter17%20v5.pdf

    You can use any leaf-shutter Zeiss V lens like the CFE-180/4, etc, but need the CF adapter which can be bought used for about $800 or so. The H camera automatically indexes any CFE lens, and has all of the CF and CFi lenses listed in the grip menu for manual selection when using those lenses. The Zeiss 40IF CFE is a particularly good wide angle. Of course none of the V lenses are AF.

    http://www.hasselbladusa.com/media/5...%20adapter.pdf

    BTW, Hasselblad now offers a new Macro Converter to use wider H lenses in Macro mode ... it also works on the HTS/1.5 ... which is very good news

    -Marc

  32. #32
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    461
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: If you had the choice

    That's what I use, the 100 2.2 with the 1.7x/extension tubes, depending on what I'm shooting. Good to hear that the 50-110 build quality issues were corrected.

    You should demo the new macro converter if you want to use it with lenses other than the wide angles. I tested it briefly last week and I think it's basically a 5mm extension tube for lenses other than wide angle. I only had it for 5 minutes though...

    Sorry Alan, it's not MF magic, just the way it is. That's the biggest mis-conception. Resolution isn't just megapixels. It's the quality/look(rendering) of the file. Can you take an image with a D800/E, etc. and get it to be really close to the MF cameras/backs, sure.
    But it's a lot more post production work to get there with a DSLR, than the MF setup. Plus it sill doesn't render the same depth.

    Josh
    Likes 2 Member(s) liked this post

  33. #33
    Senior Member Swissblad's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    1,204
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: If you had the choice

    Quote Originally Posted by alan_w_george View Post
    Ah, I forgot about the unquantifiable, undefendable Medium Format magic. "MF just looks better", right! BS.

    It just my opinion, but given the choice between a cropped 31 MP Hasselblad MF SLR for $12000 and an 36 MP Nikon D800E SLR for $3200, well lets just say that "magic" is pretty damn expensive both in terms of $$ and loss of features on the MF SLR compared to the 35mm. And not believing in magic, it's pretty hard to swallow.

    Anyway my original point was to go with the 50MP back. I could not understand why you would want sacrifice MF's only real advantage, resolution, for a few SLR features (Hasselblad H3DII-50 versus a Hasselblad H4D-31). Given that line of thinking, I thought the OP might be better served by a top end 35mm SLR. Again, just my opinion.
    In that case why don't pro DSLR users just buy a Sony NEX7 with 24mp etc rather than a D4 with 16mp.......

    There are lots of DX crop factor bodies with more MPs than FX bodies

    Your argument doesn't hold.

    Take a look at Dan's photo on the tech forum on this site - they were taken with a 22mp back!

  34. #34
    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: If you had the choice

    Josh, I think the new Macro converter is being specifically marketed as a 6.5mm WA "optical" extension tube ... I believe the lens elements inside are designed for that application.

    It is supposed to open up new areas of wide angle close up work to provide a different sort of look that can't be had with the 120 macro that foreshortens or compacts smaller objects, or WA lenses used with the standard extension tube like the H13.

    That it can be used with the HTS/1.5 means that in combination with a WA lens, greater DOF can be achieved with less stopping down thus avoiding potential de-fraction issues. The only question I have in that regard is how much tilt is possible before vignetting ... there isn't a tech sheet on this item yet to determine any of that.

    If it can be used with longer lenses, that would be a bonus ... a 6.5mm tube would be great on a 100/2.2 to get a bit closer for subject isolation ... where the H13 can be a bit much. However, for that application alone, it is just too expensive.

    We'll see ... I'm going to try to get one to test in studio.

    I'm also in negotiations with Hasselblad and my dealer regarding a move upstream to a H5D/200 Multi-Shot, since between 35mm and my Leica S2, most other applications are being adequately covered. This would effectively end any debate regarding file quality for any studio still life applications ... I previously used a 39 MS, and loved the files ... best color reproduction I've ever seen, and zero moiré ... this would be a big step up from that.

    Lots of stuff will have to be put into the F/S section if I pull the trigger on that big gun ...

    -Marc

  35. #35
    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: If you had the choice

    Quote Originally Posted by Swissblad View Post
    In that case why don't pro DSLR users just buy a Sony NEX7 with 24mp etc rather than a D4 with 16mp.......

    There are lots of DX crop factor bodies with more MPs than FX bodies

    Your argument doesn't hold.

    Take a look at Dan's photo on the tech forum on this site - they were taken with a 22mp back!
    Debating this is a waste of time, camaraderie and good will. Either you see it or you don't ... and dismissing either POV as being BS is discounting each individual's proclivity and studied visual opinion based on what and how they shoot.

    Never the twain shall meet ... and personally I'm inclined to leave it at that.

    More power to whatever cranks your clock

    -Marc
    Likes 2 Member(s) liked this post

  36. #36
    Senior Member Swissblad's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    1,204
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: If you had the choice

    Thanks Marc - I really shouldn't reply before I've had a 2nd cuppa coffee!

  37. #37
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Germany near FFM
    Posts
    93
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: If you had the choice

    Hi folks,

    I tested the new camera in my studio today and I believe it is possible to do people stuff with the H3DII-50.

    I also believe I know now what the TrueFocus is perfect for. It helps to do some stuff a little bit more elegant and without problems. But... with a little physics I can help me out. In any other case I can use the center AF, simply take the picture just "as seen" and after that I crop the hell out of it...

    The 50MP DB is great. I start loving it.

    I tried the 1/500 for studio work. It is great. I am "only" used to 1/125 with my D3s and 1/250 with my former D800. The H3D is outstanding. I could use it out of hand with the HC50-110. The heavy weight is stabilizing very well and the Profoto flashes had been very good in syncing. Somebody warned me that at least the Acute B600 AirS could make some trouble but it seems it hasn´t.

    I will take a close look on that tomorrow because I plan to use the mobile generator outdoor with the H3D and the "high speed" 1/500 is an advantage for different stuff.

    Here an example of todays work. My wife loves them.

    Attachment 66305

    Attachment 66306
    Likes 3 Member(s) liked this post

  38. #38
    Senior Member Swissblad's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    1,204
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: If you had the choice

    Enjoy your camera - look forward to more photos!

  39. #39
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Basel, Switzerland
    Posts
    265
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: If you had the choice

    Great! Welcome as a Hasselblad owner. Looking forward to see more examples of your work!

    S.
    stanROX.com

  40. #40
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Portugal
    Posts
    254
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: If you had the choice

    Quote Originally Posted by alan_w_george View Post
    Ah, I forgot about the unquantifiable, undefendable Medium Format magic. "MF just looks better", right! BS.

    (...) Again, just my opinion.
    Try out and see for yourself.

    The "magic" is there - even if you dont see it, the file flexibility is huge. humongus. I can now, with my S2, recover from highlights which are blown beyond recovery with a D800. I can pull stuff from shadows that I cant believe they are there.

    I tried to convinced myself that a D800E and a few lenses is all I needed. And truth to be told, they are. I tried it and then a Leica S2.

    The difference is abysmal. The Leica files are a natural "sucessor" to the M9 ( which I also own ). They require much, but much less post processing than a D800. If you get everything right, just a few moments in Lightroom to make a grand picture. Not so with the D800 - it can make a compeling competitor, but many hours have to be spent to get that "pop" in Photoshop with layers, masks and this and that.

    Magic ? Well, the S lens are just magical to me : their bokeh, their sharpness, they are great. Shoot my S2 side by side with a D800E with a 85 1.4 and you can't get there. Really cant. Close ? yes, Nikon it is close : but just not there.

    So after having the blessing of the wife, reading as much as I can, I plunged in a great deal for a Leica S2. Yes, I could have got a brand spanking new D800E with great Zeiss and Nikon less for less than half the money.

    But I see the magic Its there, trust me

    oh and try to pay attention to Marc ( fotografz ) ; apart from being a fantastic photographer, I think its the first person on internet forums I think of when I see a post "oh which Hasselblad XXX is better ??". He simply used them all. Experience first hands with a product is much different than reading stuff on the web and seeing scaled down jpegs
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  41. #41
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Portugal
    Posts
    254
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: If you had the choice

    oh and so sorry that I went a bit OT here ! fotom, welcome to Hassy club

  42. #42
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Germany near FFM
    Posts
    93
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: If you had the choice

    Thank you, proenca.

    I have seen the differences between D800, D3x and MF. I know what you want to express.

    With a D800E and the holy trinity (14-24-70-200/2,8) I could spend less money than for MF of whatever manufacturer. The results would be good and anybody could even sell the pictures for good money.

    But there were several reasons for me to take MF:

    - Great Viewfinder
    - Better Focus System on the H3
    - more resolution with a crisper sharpness
    - better portraits
    - more colors
    - more spare in postproduction
    - the possibilities to play with blur und sharpness
    - higher sync times with flashlights in use

    Yes, all that would be regardless if printed on 10x15 or used for the web.

    But I want to print in A1 and more. My biggest project was about 3,5 x 2,5 meters.

    So, thank you all for welcome me in the club of Hasselblad. For all small things I still have a Nikon with 12MP, fast AF and the same sharpness in the pictures like with the H3.
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  43. #43
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Portugal
    Posts
    254
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: If you had the choice

    Quote Originally Posted by fotom View Post
    Thank you, proenca.

    I have seen the differences between D800, D3x and MF. I know what you want to express.

    With a D800E and the holy trinity (14-24-70-200/2,8) I could spend less money than for MF of whatever manufacturer. The results would be good and anybody could even sell the pictures for good money.

    But there were several reasons for me to take MF:

    - Great Viewfinder
    - Better Focus System on the H3
    - more resolution with a crisper sharpness
    - better portraits
    - more colors
    - more spare in postproduction
    - the possibilities to play with blur und sharpness
    - higher sync times with flashlights in use

    Yes, all that would be regardless if printed on 10x15 or used for the web.

    But I want to print in A1 and more. My biggest project was about 3,5 x 2,5 meters.

    So, thank you all for welcome me in the club of Hasselblad. For all small things I still have a Nikon with 12MP, fast AF and the same sharpness in the pictures like with the H3.
    Indeed, its not just the megapixels. When I had a friend the other day babling why I didnt buy a D800 like him, I just borrowed the S2 to him and said "look through the viewfinder and just sush". He was mumbling, put the camera to his eye and then said "oh my......."

    For small things, sometimes small is better : quick example ; I run a quite sucessfull Wine website and I have a small studio setup with couple of flashes, tripod, diffusors and a trusty and old... Nikon D1x. 6mp and its full glory. Used only at base iso, on a tripod, for stricly web work. Works like a charm, never missed a beat in the last 2 years, taking almost daily pictures of bottle of wines and wine products. And I love the small files
    Leica M9 | 50mm Summilux ASPH | www.proenca.eu

  44. #44
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    461
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: If you had the choice

    Marc,
    Yeah for wide angle macro stuff would be great. That makes more sense as a product. It's weird that it doesn't af with a wide lens, but does with the longer ones. That's what I was told at least. It worked on the 80. Interested to hear your thoughts when you test it. Try it with the 100. It didn't seem to get much closer.

  45. #45
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Germany near FFM
    Posts
    93
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: If you had the choice

    The D1x has 6MP? I believed it had 2,7... but that was the originally D1 I guess.

    Yes, the small files are nice. For quick work they are fine.

  46. #46
    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: If you had the choice

    Quote Originally Posted by JoshMerwin View Post
    Marc,
    Yeah for wide angle macro stuff would be great. That makes more sense as a product. It's weird that it doesn't af with a wide lens, but does with the longer ones. That's what I was told at least. It worked on the 80. Interested to hear your thoughts when you test it. Try it with the 100. It didn't seem to get much closer.
    Will do Josh.

    I'll check if retains AF with W/A lenses. I wonder if there is an exposure factor like with the 1.7X which is 1.5X therefore doesn't AF with the 300/4.5? If so, it may be that the max aperture of the wide angles like 24mm and 28mm exceeds the AF light requirement ... where the 80mm and 100mm are faster max apertures.

    We'll see. I don't use AF when doing table top and macro anyway ... but AF would be cool for some more creative WA close focusing applications.

    -Marc

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
  •