And bad news for Leica! :shocked:
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!
X1D Discount
- Thread starter bcambern
- Start date
Hasselblad's hiring of Vincent Laine is very significant to me. I think it a strong statement that Hasselblad is in the process of gearing up to develop and bring to market much more than "just" an evolutionary update to the X1D. It also reinforces Hasselblad's approach to developing cameras that reject the Japanese DSLR syndrome of features, features, features and options, options and options that make my head spin and just get in the way of my use of a camera.
By full-frame I assume you mean 645.Imagine if an X1D-100c dropped instead. With the full frame sensor.
I think a compact mirrorless (say about Mamiya 6 sized) with the full-frame sensor would be lovely, but it wouldn't be an X-series camera. It would seem from the illumination falloff in the technical data that XCD lenses aren't designed to cover a sensor that large. I'm not sure how many camera lines a company the size of Hasselblad can sustain simultaneously. I agree it would be cool, though. ;-)
The company is similar in size to Leica. There would only be two lines, the H and X. The H uses two sized sensors and a couple of the lenses are more suited to the cropped sensors (24 and 28). The new roadmap lenses might (theoretically) be better suited, especially the 80mm which has a larger entrance pupil. That would also make sense why the 80 would come later, with the camera.
They could then leave the H7 to have the new 150MP sensor as the flag ship model. The X could stay one generation behind with the 100 sensor until the time that the X becomes the main camera (which I bet will eventually happen some day)
Dreams, but plausible.
glenerrolrd
Workshop Member
Leica is close to 10X the size of HB.
HB will surely follow the development of the Sony sensors ..so its a good bet that the X1D will eventually have the MF-C (cropped for lack of a better term)at 100MP . They should keep the 50 as a lower cost (and maybe faster ) alternative .
The H will follow to the 150MP sensor at some point . The limited R&D budget should go into adopting the new sensors to maintain pace with Phase and maybe some new high resolution lenses .
The wildcard is do they develop a new type of H similar to the prototypes they showed last year . That camera looked like it could be designed for aerial work . Or it could be a smaller ,lighter version of the H and build on the attractiveness of the original V line .
Could they recover the relationship with Zeiss ? That would be a game changer .
Of course they didn t here the Q designer to sit on his hands and refresh exiting designs with new technology . Not many talk about how great the design of the Q has been . It is fast everything ,has a intuitive menu and the AF is terrific .
My guess is that MING (whose background is Strategic Planning for an International Consulting Firm) has this figured out .
Lets not forget that Leica was in a very different place pre M8 days and even up to the M9 though. I don't think its unreasonable to call the X, Hasselblad's M9.
I think that VD prototype is certainly a taste of where the H is headed, at least to some degree. It looks really interesting.
I also agree on the Q. It's a brilliant camera and a loss for Leica that the designer has been snapped up by Hasselblad but a very good indication of what is install for the X.
Reconnecting with Zeiss would be a total game changer - i agree. I've always loved the Zeiss Hasselblad lenses. That is potentially more probable now that Fuji are now doing their own thing in Medium Format again. The Nittoh lenses have proved very successful though.
glenerrolrd
Workshop Member
MGrayson
Subscriber and Workshop Member
Which Leica? The camera company is much smaller than any other Leica company. (Medical imaging, Geosystems).
Matt
glenerrolrd
Workshop Member
Wow Matt You would think a Leica Fan Boy would know the difference between the Leica companies ? Leica Camera is several hundred million in annual sales and HB is less than 30M ... I could be off a little on each but Leica is many times larger than HB .
The issue in these discussions is that all camera companies are treated as if they have unlimited resources . From my experience you would not like to compete with Fuji in any market segment . Fuji is the only MF company that can pretty much invest whatever they want .
I expect that MING will do a good job making capital requests and that DJI will proceed favorably ...but within the constraints that MF is a pretty small market .
I got the x1d because it has a larger sensor than my SL, and a smaller body than my S.
Why would one want to buy a FF x1dc instead of a Leica SL, which has the better viewfinder, much faster AF and processing, more FF lens options etc.
And why would Hasselblad want to enter the FF market?
IMO the attractive thing of the Hassy X is a large sensor in a compact camera.
We have enough FF and dx options allready. IMO.
Why would one want to buy a FF x1dc instead of a Leica SL, which has the better viewfinder, much faster AF and processing, more FF lens options etc.
And why would Hasselblad want to enter the FF market?
IMO the attractive thing of the Hassy X is a large sensor in a compact camera.
We have enough FF and dx options allready. IMO.
The MF market as we know it is pretty small. However, the X1D and the GFX even more so have opened that market in ways that were not anticipated. Moreover, who knows where DJI will take Hasselblad in the future. Perhaps they are thinking of new products that are category defining and not even on our radar screen.
siddhaarta
Member
But would that not mean that Hasselblad had to develop a whole new lens lineup, as the bayonet diameter is not enough to cover the sensor diagonal of FF-MF (55mm vs 67mm). I doubt that Hasselblad has the investment capacity to do that (at least in short term), Fuji maybe.Imagine if an X1D-100c dropped instead. With the full frame sensor.
As far as I know, the GFX bayonet diameter is 65mm (internet spec) and the X1D diameter is 61mm (own measurements)/(or 58mm considering the inner metal parts).
But here is my question to optical experts: is it absolutely necessary that the bayonet diameter is bigger than the sensor diameter? Or the other way round: is it possible that the current XD lenses already cover a FF-MF sensor size and this could be realized with the same bayonet and a new body with the bigger sensor?
The same question holds also for Fuji GF lenses, seems even possible in that case (for some reason, it seems at least, Fuji made the bayonet and the whole system bigger than necessary).
Last edited:
I think it only needs to be as wide as the film at the film plane and it can be shaped by the rear element.
Here are some throat Diameters:
Mamiya RZ 6x7 - 60mm
Pentax 645 6x4.5 - 61.2mm
Bronica S2A - 6x6 - 57mm
Last edited:
Right. My comment about coverage and the XCD lenses wasn't based on bayonet size. It was strictly an in-my-head extrapolation of the illumination curves on the data sheet. Here, look at the 45mm: https://cdn.hasselblad.com/14ddcdfc-bb4b-44d3-ab14-257c2b8b76b2_xcd45+datasheet+uk+170227.pdf
If you do the naive, simple thing and just extend that illumination curve out to 33.6 mm (half the diagonal of the big Sony 100MP sensor), things start looking pretty dark. And, of course, we have no idea what might be happening to the MTF curves that far out, either.
That assumes there isn't some sort of sharp cutoff just outside the chart area (which there very well might be). My suspicion is that Hasselblad wanted a lens designed to give optimal results for the sensor in the X1D, which means the coverage was almost certainly restricted to that area.
Of course, the right thing to do would be to measure the actual image circle of the lens. We know the flange to sensor distance so it should be pretty easy to do. I don't have one handy, but several people here do
Generally a lens will have a larger image circle so to have better corners. This is why so many 35mm camera lenses work ok on these cropped sensors. But I agree the vignette on the 45mm is already apparent.Right. My comment about coverage and the XCD lenses wasn't based on bayonet size. It was strictly an in-my-head extrapolation of the illumination curves on the data sheet. Here, look at the 45mm: https://cdn.hasselblad.com/14ddcdfc-bb4b-44d3-ab14-257c2b8b76b2_xcd45+datasheet+uk+170227.pdf
If you do the naive, simple thing and just extend that illumination curve out to 33.6 mm (half the diagonal of the big Sony 100MP sensor), things start looking pretty dark. And, of course, we have no idea what might be happening to the MTF curves that far out, either.
That assumes there isn't some sort of sharp cutoff just outside the chart area (which there very well might be). My suspicion is that Hasselblad wanted a lens designed to give optimal results for the sensor in the X1D, which means the coverage was almost certainly restricted to that area.
Of course, the right thing to do would be to measure the actual image circle of the lens. We know the flange to sensor distance so it should be pretty easy to do. I don't have one handy, but several people here do
The fact that there will be a 65 (standard on 33x44) and an 80 (standard on 53.7x40.4) does make me wonder though. For the 33x44 sensor, and 80mm lens has 63mm equivalent in 35mm terms - it's an odd focal length.
It would be cool if someone here who owns it could measure the image circle.
I may be right off and it's just a dream but it would be amazing. I don't think it's out of the question to see some day. I bet the camera has been designed to adapt in this way eventually.
I think we're using different definitions of full-frame. Obviously, most people think of full frame as "full frame 35mm", i.e. 24x36mm, and we should probably use different terminology to avoid confusion.
Since I've been primarily an MF photographer for the last 30 years or so, I tend to think of full frame as 56x56mm, with a couple of V-shaped notches (of course). Under protest, I'll now think of it as 40.3 by 53.7 mm (since that's the biggest sensor I can get). By that definition, Hasselblad is already in the FF market - the only question is whether they would go mirrorless in that format.
I was under the impression the XCD lenses were designed for 33x44mm.
Nevertheless, I’d be surprised if we saw a 40x54mm X. They’ve stated they’re still committed to the H line, and I think 40x54mm would cannabilize the H line. I also imagine the next gen 100mp 33x44mm sensor (which we all assume will show up in the X2D) should be more than enough for most users.
Nevertheless, I’d be surprised if we saw a 40x54mm X. They’ve stated they’re still committed to the H line, and I think 40x54mm would cannabilize the H line. I also imagine the next gen 100mp 33x44mm sensor (which we all assume will show up in the X2D) should be more than enough for most users.
I agree for the X2D, but I do think all bets are off for what the next 40x54 H camera will look like and whether it will have its own new line of lenses. The existing H body is long in the tooth. The question is what would Hasselblad come up with if it started with a blank sheet of paper.
You are right in principle but I think the X and GFX is the the model of the future and it's only a matter of time before we see the 645 sensors in them.
I'm sure Fuji will do it. Hasselblad will have to make a decision at some point.
glenerrolrd
Workshop Member
Why do you think Fuji will do it . They have been very stubborn(?) in their continued support of their APS-C sensor . I think Fuji sees their market correctly as amateurs moving up to MF to gain improved IQ . The design to a price point like many consumer products . They bought market share early by discounting almost immediately .
Not sure that either Fuji or HB will be in a hurry to get to 100MPs .....rather stay at 50MP for $6500 and continue gaining customers from the high end of the DSLR market .
Fuji has also made a big deal about using Legacy glass of almost any variety ....but at 100MPs most of the legacy glass will be insufficient . In addition 100MP s normally means tripod territory for most users .
My guess is that both Fuji and Hb will be slower to 100MPs than we might anticipate ......but of course its only a guess. :facesmack::facesmack: