Doug,
You are making a lot of assumptions on the HTS + 28mm combo without actually using a production unit. This is unfair and likely to sway people's decision either way.
I would say to any user to test it in their use / situation and make their own assumptions.
The HCD28 is an excellent lens with corner to corner sharpness and a solid startpoint for the HTS.
I would agree that a specific Rodenstock / Schneider lens will perform better on an Alpa-esque camera but for somebody like Tim he wishes to balance this with useability in the field.
Giving up a viewfinder / in-camera metering / single source battery / lens corrections based on meta data (not guesswork) / ease of use / composition may be too much to bare to gain that extra 10% in quality if it is that at all.
I think it should be clear to the board that I greatly respect David, and give Hasselblad credit where credit is due. The HTS is a really great idea and I think it will provide many photographers a very useful and high quality tool. The HTS is still a work-in-progress so none of us know how good it will be, though it seems likely Hasselblad will impress with a well made system.
However, I will eat my hat* if the HC28mm on the HTS when shot with shift or tilt can stand next to a Schneider/Rodenstock 47mm on final image quality.
Furthermore, 47mm (which is the widest the HTS system goes) is not all that wide, so the availability of 35mm, 28mm, 24mm, 23mm lenses is a not-so-minor difference between the platforms. Throw in the ability to shift the 23mm, 28mm, and 35mm and the wide-angle options clearly favor the tech body.
I'll be the first to caution that none of these solutions are that different at small print sizes. Even a double-truck in a magazine is unlikely to be night-and-day. However, interior and landscape shooters who are choosing a P1 or Hassy are not going for "good enough" they are going for the best. In this case there can be zero doubt that the best solution is large format glass on a tech body and will remain so for the foreseeable future.
Giving up a viewfinder / in-camera metering / single source battery / lens corrections based on meta data (not guesswork) / ease of use / composition may be too much to bare.
There is just as little doubt that the HTS or P1 45TS are more convenient and faster than a tech camera. You simply cannot have both the most convenient and the highest quality solutions. Let's look at these limitations though:
Viewfinder: Tech cameras require a rangefinder. You can confirm exact composition on the LCD immediately after capture.
In-Camera Metering: You have to use a light meter. You can confirm exposure via histogram on the LCD immediatly after capture.
Lens Corrections: You take an LCC at the time of capture. Not convenient, but really quite easy. Sharpness fall-off, light fall-off, and pincushion/barrel distortion are not
corrected because the lens is pristine to start off with.
Single Source of Battery: All modern Phase One backs work on a tech camera with the same one battery that they use on any body. The requirement of a separate module for power/storage when on a tech camera is a limitation of the Hasselblad H backs.
So David is right, if you are unable or unwilling to adapt to the slower workflow then a tech body is not for you. However, it IS higher quality and it is light years faster than a 4x5, so pick your poison.
*I received a really great Fedora from my girlfriend for Christmas.
Doug Peterson, Head of Technical Services
Capture Integration, Phase One & Canon Dealer |
Personal Portfolio