The GetDPI Photography Forum

Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!

CFV50c or not!

BANKER1

Member
The CFV50c back is one I would like to own. But, with a price almost twice that of an entire camera and back in the Pentax, I am going to pass. Evidently Hasselblad made a choice between selling many fewer backs and making a higher margin or selling many backs for less and making the same amount of profit. With all the legacy V systems in the hands of photographers, the market for this digital back is obviously very large. To me, it makes a lot of sense to get digital backs in as many hands as possible, hoping that they would eventually gain Hasselblad loyalty and later move on to an H system where the profit margin is high. Since the Pentax and CFV50c use the same chip, Hasselblad cannot argue that the chip cost makes the price necessarily high.

Hasselblad could argue that they do not want to devalue the CFV16, CFV39, and CFV50 digital backs, but they have held a high resale value compared to other comparable backs. And, thankfully, they kept the H5D50c at a reasonable price compared to the Phase version. So, that argument is only an excuse in my opinion.

Hasselblad could sell the CFV50c for $10,000.00-$12,000.00, that would be a compromise between the cost of a Pentax 645Z ($8,500.00) and the current price of $15,500.00. Hasselblad has shown more intelligent decisions lately, so I am hoping that the next version of the CFV system will arrive with a reasonable price with new innovations. And, obviously they can't lower the price now, since they'd have to refund a lot of money to the current owners of the CFV50c.

My CFV16 was built like a rock with the same build quality as the rest of my V system equipment. So, many (including myself) expect to pay more for Hasselblad quality. And selfishly, I want Hasselblad to have the revenue to continue in business. So, reasonable is the word I'd like to have Hasselblad hear. That was a word Hasselblad lost sight of when they introduced the Lunar and was my main complaint with it. Interestingly, Hasselblad was the only real innovator at this year's Photokina and was a welcome change from the last Photokina.

Greg
 

iiiNelson

Well-known member
There was a CFV-50 demo back listed on the Hasselblad site last night for a pretty significant discount. I don't think it's less than a 645z camera but if you already have the body and lenses it's a great deal.
 

fotografz

Well-known member
Perhaps the CFV50c is priced as it is because it is a stand alone item with no other source of revenue like V cameras, CFi/CFE lenses, or any accessories?

- Marc
 

tjv

Active member
Well, compared to the IQ250 / 150 / Credo, it's a bargain. Compared to the H 50c it's a bargain, too. It's a relative thing, I guess, especially if you want to use on a tech camera. Guys new review is proof that this is possible.
 

fotografz

Well-known member
I wonder how this back works on a V Super-Wide?

Now that is where live-view and mag focusing would make for a killer combination and make the whole thing worth the $.

- Marc
 

GrahamWelland

Subscriber & Workshop Member
I'm watching the CFV-50c very carefully when it comes to the live view option. Once I see that I may have an irresistible MFDB lust problem!!
 

vjbelle

Well-known member
I thought about the Hassy Cmos back and also was ready to bite..... but aside from the differences between it and say the Leaf (live view in particular) the main two drawbacks, for me, are V lens performance and potential resale. Any time I have compared the V lenses to anything I have from Zeiss 35mm glass to Digitar's they have lacked in performance. Then, down the road, its resale value. Not only do these backs depreciate quickly but with this one its limited to a V mount - and that's a real limitation. So, for me, what's the sense? YMMV

Victor
 

GrahamWelland

Subscriber & Workshop Member
Horses for courses. The V back option for some is a positive, not a negative. Shooting MF isn't always about optical perfection and the Hassy system and lenses may appeal because of the image look vs latest 2014 ultimate precision.

Also, you also have more options with tech cameras and various other non-Hassy platforms including even RZ67 and others too. In my own case shooting with my Alpa (or Cambo/Sinar/Arca) is just as possible with a V back as any other mount.

It would be a boring world if we all just wanted the same thing.
 

vjbelle

Well-known member
Don't disagree with anything you've said, Graham...... as I said YMMV. BUT..... down the road you will be selling to a smaller audience then if the mount were Mamiya. I'm not taking that chance.

Victor
 

fotografz

Well-known member
Don't disagree with anything you've said, Graham...... as I said YMMV. BUT..... down the road you will be selling to a smaller audience then if the mount were Mamiya. I'm not taking that chance.

Victor
Isn't the V camera and cameras that take V mount backs the most prolific in the world? Not to mention you can put this back on a 200 series camera with a slight camera modification so you can use FE or CF as focal plane or leaf shutter.

I think this is just a continuation of the venerated V system that is favored by many. The Zeiss lens performance depends on which ones. The 40IF, 50FLE, 60, 100, and 180 easily stand up to 50 meg.

Resale is a matter of opinion. All I know is that I got more % of price back from my V mount CFV back than I did from my M mount Leaf Aptus 7s.

- Marc
 

torger

Active member
CFV backs has good resale value, while say a V-mount Phase One back might not have that. The reason is obvious, the CFV is Hasselblad and looks Hasselblad, and the V system nostalgia out there is probably not going away soon. I would not worry about a CFV-50c resale value more than I would any other new back.
 

jlm

Workshop Member
part of the V nostalgia is the waist level finder, well suited to sq only format. with live view, you can rotate the camera and peep the LCD at arm's length ;) a blad sight yet to be seen, eh?
 

vjbelle

Well-known member
Isn't the V camera and cameras that take V mount backs the most prolific in the world? Not to mention you can put this back on a 200 series camera with a slight camera modification so you can use FE or CF as focal plane or leaf shutter.

I think this is just a continuation of the venerated V system that is favored by many. The Zeiss lens performance depends on which ones. The 40IF, 50FLE, 60, 100, and 180 easily stand up to 50 meg.

Resale is a matter of opinion. All I know is that I got more % of price back from my V mount CFV back than I did from my M mount Leaf Aptus 7s.

- Marc
I wish I could share your enthusiasm as I own a fair amount of V glass. But my experience has shown that they will not hold up to modern glass. It isn't like I haven't tried as I hate to have this stuff just sitting on a shelf but its a no go for me.

Victor
 

ErikKaffehr

Well-known member
Hi,

The mentioned lenses are pretty good, except possibly the 50/4 FLE and the 60/4. The 40/4 IF is a new generation, while the 100/3.5 is venerable but truly great. I own the 40/4 FLE (non IF), the 50/4 FLE, 80/2.8 CFE, Macro Planar 120/4 CFi and the 180/4 CFi. The 180/4 CFi stands out between these, but all do the job. I am not sure about the 80/2.8, though.

Sometimes the lenses fail, badly, sometimes they shine.

Best regards
Erik

I wish I could share your enthusiasm as I own a fair amount of V glass. But my experience has shown that they will not hold up to modern glass. It isn't like I haven't tried as I hate to have this stuff just sitting on a shelf but its a no go for me.

Victor
 

ErikKaffehr

Well-known member
Hi,

Personally, I find the WLF useless. What I use is a PM5 with a custom made ocular watching my vision, or standard ocular combined with a 3X monocular.

A great advantage of my P45+ is that it can be rotated 90 degrees. Don't know if it works with a CFV50c or not.

I like live view, so I wouldn't rule out that the CFV50c may go on my shopping list, but it is a lot of money for a small sensor. But, accurate focusing with live view, that is something I would love to have!

Best regards
Erik

part of the V nostalgia is the waist level finder, well suited to sq only format. with live view, you can rotate the camera and peep the LCD at arm's length ;) a blad sight yet to be seen, eh?
 

torger

Active member
I wish I could share your enthusiasm as I own a fair amount of V glass. But my experience has shown that they will not hold up to modern glass. It isn't like I haven't tried as I hate to have this stuff just sitting on a shelf but its a no go for me.
What does it not hold up? Resolution or look? I'm not an expert in portrait photography, but from what I've seen I get the sense that the older simpler (and indeed softer) lenses often have a nicer rendering for short DoF potography than modern lenses that are more optimized for sharpness.

That's actually one reason I prefer the simple symmetric Digitar lenses for my tech camera, nice foggy bokeh
 

Ken_R

New member
You can use Hasselblad V lenses on the Pentax 645z no problem. There are adapters available for under $100.

The Hasselblad CFV50c back looks very nice but it lacks live view and that is just unacceptable in a $15,000 CMOS back.

I would look into the Phase (or Leaf Credo) IQ160/260 and IQ180/280 backs. The sensor is large enough that a standard 80mm still feels like one instead of a tele lens (like it does with the smaller 50mp sensor).
 

tjv

Active member
They have announced and demoed the CFV50c live view firmware update. Is to be distributed this month, I believe. That makes it more than attractive Vs. a Phase / Leaf if you consider the price difference, even if the live view functionality is not quite as good.
 

BANKER1

Member
You can use Hasselblad V lenses on the Pentax 645z no problem. There are adapters available for under $100.

The Hasselblad CFV50c back looks very nice but it lacks live view and that is just unacceptable in a $15,000 CMOS back.

I would look into the Phase (or Leaf Credo) IQ160/260 and IQ180/280 backs. The sensor is large enough that a standard 80mm still feels like one instead of a tele lens (like it does with the smaller 50mp sensor).
Of course you would. I would look into Phase too. Hasselblad is bad, bad, bad!
 
Top