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!

Hasselblad Teaser and Upcoming Announcement

pegelli

Well-known member
No, sorry, you are not only playing with words but twisting my words too. My post is there for all to read.
The Fuji GFX 100 is technologically speaking a marvel, but it feels more like an exercise than a camera with a clear photographic purpose to me.
Vieri, I can understand you're done, but I did not twist your words, see your own words above.

I value your photographs and insights in making great pictures, but that doesn't allow you to accuse me of things I never did. So I'm done too, I have no beef in this discussion other than trying to show irrelevant claims like saying a camera has no clear photographic purpose because it doesn't meet your personal needs. If you're not willing to retract those words fine, but everybody will make up his own mind about what you said there.
 

hcubell

Well-known member
You're playing with words Vieri, you originally said it was a camera designed without a purpose. Now you say something else (which I still don't agree with)

But maybe to be more specific at showing your argument is not correct: Which sub 10 k€ camera is better at landscapes if you need (want/desire) 100 MP, if the GFX 100 is not the absolute best which camera is it?
If you frame the issue that narrowly, you answered your own question the way you want to have it answered. However, Vieri's point is about whether the GFX 100 is the ideal camera for landscape as HE, a professional landscape photographer, sees it. In his view, the ideal landscape camera is not JUST about the number of megapixels. The sheer number of MP is just one consideration. The portability of the system is important to any landscape photographer that hikes with his camera. Size and weight. Nobody WANTS to carry a big, heavy camera. The GFX 100 is likely as big as it is because it has IBIS. Well, virtually every serious landscape photographer shoots off a tripod. Who wants the IBIS if there is a major size/weight penalty? Same with the specific lenses available for the system. The User Interface is also of critical importance to some landscape photographers, who want a clean, simple interface that isn't cluttered up with a multitude of extraneous "features." So, it all comes down to a cost/benefit analysis. Is 100MP so important to you that you are willing to sacrifice the other things that are also very important to you? I am sure that others will run the cost/benefit analysis differently from the way Vieri runs it in his own mind.
 

pegelli

Well-known member
If you frame the issue that narrowly, you answered your own question the way you want to have it answered. However, Vieri's point is about whether the GFX 100 is the ideal camera for landscape as HE, a professional landscape photographer, sees it. In his view, the ideal landscape camera is not JUST about the number of megapixels. The sheer number of MP is just one consideration. The portability of the system is important to any landscape photographer that hikes with his camera. Size and weight. Nobody WANTS to carry a big, heavy camera. Same with the specific lenses available for the system. The User Interface is also of critical importance to some landscape photographers, who want a clean, simple interface that isn't cluttered up with a multitude of extraneous "features." So, it all comes down to a cost/benefit analysis. Is 100MP so important to you that you are willing to sacrifice the other things that are also very important to you? I am sure that others will run the cost/benefit analysis differently from the way Vieri runs it in his own mind.
Howard, I couldn't care less if it's the ideal camera for him or not. I'm only reacting to the fact he said it's a camera "without a clear photographic purpose", which in my mind is absolute bollocks.
 

MGrayson

Subscriber and Workshop Member
Howard, I couldn't care less if it's the ideal camera for him or not. I'm only reacting to the fact he said it's a camera "without a clear photographic purpose", which in my mind is absolute bollocks.
Oh, we're playing the Misquote Vieri game!

Here's my entry: "The new X1D mark II is ... technically inferior to any of the 50 MP Fujis, ... IMHO the Fuji GFX 100 is a great technological achievement ... and [the] best no matter what."
 

vieri

Well-known member
Vieri, I can understand you're done, but I did not twist your words, see your own words above.

I value your photographs and insights in making great pictures, but that doesn't allow you to accuse me of things I never did. So I'm done too, I have no beef in this discussion other than trying to show irrelevant claims like saying a camera has no clear photographic purpose because it doesn't meet your personal needs. If you're not willing to retract those words fine, but everybody will make up his own mind about what you said there.
Thank you for your kind words about my work, much appreciated. Much less appreciated, unfortunately, is you twisting my words.

You said: "you originally said it was a camera designed without a purpose". I never said that. I said, as you quoted, that "The Fuji GFX 100 is technologically speaking a marvel, but it feels more like an exercise than a camera with a clear photographic purpose to me", and I went on explaining at length why, IMHO, it's a camera not designed to excel at any one particular photographic genre, for one reason or another. I also explained why, IMHO, that is the case. You condensed all that in "you originally said it was a camera designed without a purpose" which, no matter your latest nice try at fixing it, is twisting my words in my book.

Best regards,

Vieri
 

vjbelle

Well-known member
I don't think I have read a more interesting thread. I've always appreciated Veri's posts but, to me, in this thread he has taken on an elitist tone that I have not seen before followed by some form of apology or explanation.

As for the value of existing Phase DB's I think that Gerald has a valid point but for me not important. My 3100 is not for sale at discount prices as it's more than the equal to and for sure more beneficial to me than anything Hassy has released so far. For me the Fuji 100 replaces my 3100 for all lenses 72mm and longer on my Actus and my 3100 takes care of any wide angle needs. So I get 100MP in all situations with both systems along with the benefits of using the native Fuji lenses on the 100 with the added camera features.

All of this, of course, only applies to me......

Cheers......

Victor
 

pegelli

Well-known member
Thank you for your kind words about my work, much appreciated. Much less appreciated, unfortunately, is you twisting my words.
You're right I added the word "designed", sorry for twisting your words with that. It was unintended in the heat of the discussion.

But I still wholeheartedly disagree with your original statement. Depending on the exact wishes and needs of the landscape photographer he or she will find the GFX 100 as purposefull (and best) for landscape work as another will find that about the X1D (mk 1 or 2). I can see why you like the X1D better but fail to see why everybody should find the same, despite your lengthy explanation, because nothing in there is an absolute. In my opinion they're just personal preferences, there's no way you can objectively compare a weigh saving of 828 grams, pavement tile form factor and a "better" UI (very personal as well) vs. doubling the megapixels, IBIS, brick form factor and a "different" UI.
 

vieri

Well-known member
You're right I added the word "designed", sorry for twisting your words with that. It was unintended in the heat of the discussion.

But I still wholeheartedly disagree with your original statement. Depending on the exact wishes and needs of the landscape photographer he or she will find the GFX 100 as purposefull (and best) for landscape work as another will find that about the X1D (mk 1 or 2). I can see why you like the X1D better but fail to see why everybody should find the same, despite your lengthy explanation, because nothing in there is an absolute. In my opinion they're just personal preferences, there's no way you can objectively compare a weigh saving of 828 grams, pavement tile form factor and a "better" UI (very personal as well) vs. doubling the megapixels, IBIS, brick form factor and a "different" UI.
You are free to disagree of course. However, again you implied that I offered my ideas as absolute, when I never did anything of the sort. Re-read my post and you'll see that is all IMHO and personal preferences. On the other hand, you clearly state that you "couldn't care less if it's the ideal camera for him or not" and you also clearly stated that what I say in your mind "is absolute bollocks": how is that for absolutes?

It seems that it is not possible to have different opinions from yours. I guess we'll have to agree to disagree, and with this I am truly done - unless of course you'll insult me again, in which case I am afraid I'll have to step in to defend my integrity.

Best regards,

Vieri
 

Boinger

Active member
It is funny because the camera designed without a purpose is one I am going to buy, and my X1d kit is going to be up for sale very soon.

I was waiting for HB to hopefully surprise me and release a camera with better AF, but alas I can't wait for the next version.

The GFX100 IBIS 4k video PDAF are all very enticing features for me.
 

vieri

Well-known member
I don't think I have read a more interesting thread. I've always appreciated Veri's posts but, to me, in this thread he has taken on an elitist tone that I have not seen before followed by some form of apology or explanation.

...

Victor
Hello Victor,

thank you for your kind words, and I am sorry if my post sounded elitist to you, that definitely wasn't my intention.

Best regards,

Vieri
 

Abstraction

Well-known member
I have a theory as to why they have pre-announced it so far in advance, and that’s that it is an attempt to take the wind out of an impending Fuji digital back.

But time will tell.
There is an impending Fuji digital back? I don't remember seeing that on the roadmap
 

Sebben

Member
The GFX100 IBIS 4k video PDAF are all very enticing features for me.
The GFX100 uses line skipping to downsample so it introduces moire into the footage, it also has noticeable rolling shutter, it’s not what I would use for anything professional.
 

Jorgen Udvang

Subscriber Member
Why do we get this rather hostile comparison with the GFX 100? It's a camera that is nearly twice the size, twice the price and clearly aimed at a totally different target group with a different product philosophy behind it.

Hasselblad is creating a very interesting ecosystem here, with a reasonably priced "walk everywhere" X1D II and a cool "connect to anything" CFV 50 II, both of which can use the same lenses when one involves the 907X. I'm sure there will be other accessories available later that improves the flexibility of the system further, but for now, with the help of the 500 system, it is possible to combine a number of shooting styles plus legacy lenses and film with a relatively small number of components and great compatibility all over. Nobody else offers this.

For those who need 100MP, IBIS and cinema quality video, this won't cut it of course, and I'm sure the Fuji will steamroll Hasseblad in triathlon, but... let's enjoy this release, see the possibilities rather than the limitations and the fact that medium format still has four quality suppliers that do their utmost to innovate and satisfy the needs of photographers.
 

Massive Si

Active member
is the sensor in the X1D the same as in the IQ3 50?

if it is, how come Hasselblad could get an electronic shutter and P1 couldnt?

(lack of electronic shutter is the most disappointing thing for me about buying my IQ3 50)
 

Boinger

Active member
is the sensor in the X1D the same as in the IQ3 50?

if it is, how come Hasselblad could get an electronic shutter and P1 couldnt?

(lack of electronic shutter is the most disappointing thing for me about buying my IQ3 50)

The Iq150 is deliberately feature locked out of an electronic shutter. I think you need to buy the Iq350 if you want the electronic shutter.

Someone correct me if I am wrong?
 

Steve Hendrix

Well-known member
The Iq150 is deliberately feature locked out of an electronic shutter. I think you need to buy the Iq350 if you want the electronic shutter.

Someone correct me if I am wrong?
There is no electronic shutter capability for either of those models.

Phase One models with electronic shutter:

- IQ3 100
- IQ3 100 Trichromatic
- IQ3 100 Achromatic
- IQ4 100 Trichromatic
- IQ4 150
- IQ4 150 Achromatic


Steve Hendrix/CI
 
Last edited:

Massive Si

Active member
Steve is correct - and I have the 350

like I said - its disappointing P1 did that, but that's the most my budget would stretch too - but now there are other (non P1) options out there, I could be tempted to jump ship from phase ecosystem altogether

(tiny bit of buyers remorse)
 

hcubell

Well-known member
Why do we get this rather hostile comparison with the GFX 100? It's a camera that is nearly twice the size, twice the price and clearly aimed at a totally different target group with a different product philosophy behind it.

Hasselblad is creating a very interesting ecosystem here, with a reasonably priced "walk everywhere" X1D II and a cool "connect to anything" CFV 50 II, both of which can use the same lenses when one involves the 907X. I'm sure there will be other accessories available later that improves the flexibility of the system further, but for now, with the help of the 500 system, it is possible to combine a number of shooting styles plus legacy lenses and film with a relatively small number of components and great compatibility all over. Nobody else offers this.

For those who need 100MP, IBIS and cinema quality video, this won't cut it of course, and I'm sure the Fuji will steamroll Hasseblad in triathlon, but... let's enjoy this release, see the possibilities rather than the limitations and the fact that medium format still has four quality suppliers that do their utmost to innovate and satisfy the needs of photographers.
This is an unacceptably mature and constructive response.
 
Top