Site Sponsors
Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst ... 2 3 4 5 LastLast
Results 151 to 200 of 249

Thread: Hasselblad CFV ll 50c

  1. #151
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Massachusetts and Vermont
    Posts
    1,251
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Hasselblad CFV ll 50c

    Quote Originally Posted by sog1927 View Post
    Getting your body calibrated was always a good idea, particularly if you used ultra high-resolution films like Copex or Tech Pan (both of which exceed the resolution of any currently available digital back), as was using a focusing magnifier. I should think that would help a lot with the new CFV as well. There's still going to be a certain amount of unavoidable "slop" in the system, of course, but that's true of any SLR.
    Same price as an X1D Mark II, $5700? I don't see why it should cost more.

  2. #152
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Posts
    191
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Hasselblad CFV ll 50c

    The more I think about it, the more I think this was a really smart move on Hasselblad's part. I think the back (and probably the 907 as well) is going to sell like hotcakes.

  3. #153
    Subscriber and Workshop Member MGrayson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    2,050
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    4

    Re: Hasselblad CFV ll 50c

    Quote Originally Posted by hcubell View Post
    Same price as an X1D Mark II, $5700? I don't see why it should cost more.
    Quant: Here's the correct price for that bond.
    Trader: I don't need you to tell me the price. I can see the price right here on the broker screen.

    Or as someone else said, "I hate the word 'should'. It's the drunken Uncle of the English Language."

    Matt (who hopes you're right!)

  4. #154
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Posts
    402
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Hasselblad CFV ll 50c

    Quote Originally Posted by sog1927 View Post
    Getting your body calibrated was always a good idea, particularly if you used ultra high-resolution films like Copex or Tech Pan (both of which exceed the resolution of any currently available digital back), as was using a focusing magnifier. I should think that would help a lot with the new CFV as well. There's still going to be a certain amount of unavoidable "slop" in the system, of course, but that's true of any SLR.
    Quote Originally Posted by mristuccia View Post
    I fully second this.
    Even with a tripod, achieving precise focus by means of the Hasselblad V OVF is really hard.
    Firstly the full OVF chain (back + mirror + acutematt screen) must be precisely calibrated by a professional service. Without this, missing the focus is almost certain. Then, even if everything is well aligned, OVF is (IMHO) still not sufficient to notice slight focus deviations, especially when using large apertures and long focal lenses.
    When checking the image at 100% magnification even the smallest deviation from the exact focus plane is clearly visible as misfocus.

    On film it is a totally different story, in that case OVF works great!
    And I will add a third. Based on my experience using a V mount IQ160 (similar pixel pitch to the 50 Mp CMOS sensor IIRC), the resolution of the sensor allows for little if any tolerance for error in focus. The mirror and screen need to be accurately aligned, the body needs to be square, and the photographer must have keen eyes to hit focus reliably. And alignment of the mirror goes off with use, requiring regular calibration and adjustments. After futzing with a PME45 + view magnifier (total 6x magnification but only central portion of image area) I finally settled on the newer WLF (4.5x magnification and much brighter than any of the prisms) on a standard acute matte screen. Never mind shooting in low light but the hard infinity stop on most lenses was a lifesaver on more than one occasion. A brief foray with a split image + microprism ring resulted in inaccurate focus owing to the prisms being just a touch out of alignment with the actual screen. Considering the challenge of hitting focus with the optical viewfinder (one of the joys of using these old cameras) and the kludginess of using live view (requires opening the shutter on B to focus and compose, closing, cocking, resetting shutter, and firing), while I think it would be fun to use the new CFV II back on the old V system bodies for some uses (e.g., shooting portraits), for me at least this would be more a labor of love than anything else. YMMV, of course, but my tired old eyes just couldn't make this work with any reliability. All that said, the prospects of using a MFDB on my 501CM, with my XCD lenses, and tech cam have caused a major relapse in my ongoing case of GAS.

    John
    Last edited by jng; 28th June 2019 at 19:11.

  5. #155
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Godfrey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Near San Jose, California
    Posts
    8,726
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Hasselblad CFV ll 50c

    You folks all make using a digital back sound like a royal PITA rather than the joy of having a nice bit of photographic equipment to extend the use of my existing setup into digital capture. That's very de-motivating to me.

    What I'll do is what I always do: Once the back is available, I'll arrange a demo and test session, then maybe rent one for a week or two to put it through its paces on my own. I'll then know whether it works the way I hope, and whether I want to put up with the bother if it doesn't. Who knows? Perhaps I buy just the CVF50c II, 907x, and 21mm lens, shoot with it as a 33x33 square format digital SWC as my once and future Hassy, and sell the rest of the Hasselblad kit.

    I have never used microprism or split image focusing aids with my 500CM. I use the Acute Matte screen with grid and nothing else other than the WLF focusing magnifier or the higher-powered focusing chimney finder. And I have no problem focusing critically with it, given using an A12 film back or a Polaroid film back. I hope that this experience remains what I have when I try out the CFV50c II; it seemed to work fine with the CFV50c that I tested on the camera.

    Given all the other equipment I already have, I'm not really in need of anything at all ... and I'm certainly not in a hurry.

    Thanks!
    G
    Godfrey - GDGPhoto Flickr Stream
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  6. #156
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Posts
    402
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Hasselblad CFV ll 50c

    Apologies - didn't mean to be a buzz kill. I myself am quite enamoured by the possibility of using one back on three platforms. If you had a good experience with the CFV50C on your 500CM there's every reason to believe you'll be fine with the CFV50C II as well.

    John

  7. #157
    Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Posts
    25
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Hasselblad CFV ll 50c

    Quote Originally Posted by jng View Post
    Apologies - didn't mean to be a buzz kill. I myself am quite enamoured by the possibility of using one back on three platforms. If you had a good experience with the CFV50C on your 500CM there's every reason to believe you'll be fine with the CFV50C II as well.

    John
    For what it's worth when I purchased a Kodak Pro Back Plus I found it to be really strange to get an exposure initially. Since it was digital you expect the 500c/m with a back to operate like a digital camera, but it doesn't. You need to set everything. It's a really strange thing because with film I had no problem with it, but with digital I found it to be weird. So I sold the back and it wasn't until a couple years ago that I purchased a Phase One back because I just wanted a digital back for the 'blad. I ran into the same problem I had with the Kodak back, but I got used to it. Today I have no problem with it and now I'm looking forward to seeing the new CFV II. If the price is right I might pick it up.

  8. #158
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Posts
    321
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Hasselblad CFV ll 50c

    Quote Originally Posted by Godfrey View Post
    You folks all make using a digital back sound like a royal PITA rather than the joy of having a nice bit of photographic equipment to extend the use of my existing setup into digital capture. That's very de-motivating to me.

    What I'll do is what I always do: Once the back is available, I'll arrange a demo and test session, then maybe rent one for a week or two to put it through its paces on my own. I'll then know whether it works the way I hope, and whether I want to put up with the bother if it doesn't. Who knows? Perhaps I buy just the CVF50c II, 907x, and 21mm lens, shoot with it as a 33x33 square format digital SWC as my once and future Hassy, and sell the rest of the Hasselblad kit.

    I have never used microprism or split image focusing aids with my 500CM. I use the Acute Matte screen with grid and nothing else other than the WLF focusing magnifier or the higher-powered focusing chimney finder. And I have no problem focusing critically with it, given using an A12 film back or a Polaroid film back. I hope that this experience remains what I have when I try out the CFV50c II; it seemed to work fine with the CFV50c that I tested on the camera.

    Given all the other equipment I already have, I'm not really in need of anything at all ... and I'm certainly not in a hurry.

    Thanks!
    G

    Don't worry.

    A digital back or sensor cannot make anything less or more sharp than it is.

    To put in perspective, the sensor is the capture medium the resolution of the capture medium can be as high as you want it to be, and it WILL NOT make a difference as to what is projected on to the medium.

    It is the same issue when people talk about lenses and MP. "Oh this lens will not resolve 150 MP of resolution or 50mp or resolution etc. etc."

    While yes it may be the case that you cannot zoom in to 100% and see razor sharp edges, but at the native resolution of the sensor depending on the medium of output will always resolve to the capability of the lens or system.

    So for example if you had lens that say resolved to 50MP of usable data. Then that lens no matter the sensor will always give you that much data. So you could shoot it on a 150MP, 100MP, or even a 20000MP chip and it will give you 50MP of usable data.

    That translates to you will simply view your files at less than 100% magnification or you won't be able to enlarge as much as you would if you had a lens that could resolve more.

    Point being in real world use cases you will be very happy that you have a digital back that you can use your lenses with. And you get the added benefit of oversampling. Over sampling always helps.

  9. #159
    Member mristuccia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Location
    Berlin
    Posts
    88
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    8

    Re: Hasselblad CFV ll 50c

    Quote Originally Posted by Godfrey View Post
    You folks all make using a digital back sound like a royal PITA rather than the joy of having a nice bit of photographic equipment to extend the use of my existing setup into digital capture. That's very de-motivating to me.

    What I'll do is what I always do: Once the back is available, I'll arrange a demo and test session, then maybe rent one for a week or two to put it through its paces on my own. I'll then know whether it works the way I hope, and whether I want to put up with the bother if it doesn't. Who knows? Perhaps I buy just the CVF50c II, 907x, and 21mm lens, shoot with it as a 33x33 square format digital SWC as my once and future Hassy, and sell the rest of the Hasselblad kit.

    I have never used microprism or split image focusing aids with my 500CM. I use the Acute Matte screen with grid and nothing else other than the WLF focusing magnifier or the higher-powered focusing chimney finder. And I have no problem focusing critically with it, given using an A12 film back or a Polaroid film back. I hope that this experience remains what I have when I try out the CFV50c II; it seemed to work fine with the CFV50c that I tested on the camera.

    Given all the other equipment I already have, I'm not really in need of anything at all ... and I'm certainly not in a hurry.

    Thanks!
    G
    Quote Originally Posted by Boinger View Post
    Don't worry.

    A digital back or sensor cannot make anything less or more sharp than it is.

    To put in perspective, the sensor is the capture medium the resolution of the capture medium can be as high as you want it to be, and it WILL NOT make a difference as to what is projected on to the medium.

    It is the same issue when people talk about lenses and MP. "Oh this lens will not resolve 150 MP of resolution or 50mp or resolution etc. etc."

    While yes it may be the case that you cannot zoom in to 100% and see razor sharp edges, but at the native resolution of the sensor depending on the medium of output will always resolve to the capability of the lens or system.

    So for example if you had lens that say resolved to 50MP of usable data. Then that lens no matter the sensor will always give you that much data. So you could shoot it on a 150MP, 100MP, or even a 20000MP chip and it will give you 50MP of usable data.

    That translates to you will simply view your files at less than 100% magnification or you won't be able to enlarge as much as you would if you had a lens that could resolve more.

    Point being in real world use cases you will be very happy that you have a digital back that you can use your lenses with. And you get the added benefit of oversampling. Over sampling always helps.
    Please don't get me wrong. I personally enjoy using my CFV-50c a lot, and even when I miss the precise focus, I still get usable images till a certain print size limit, or for screen. And my hit rate is growing fast.
    I just tried to warn about the fact that it is not so easy to achieve the peak resolution from such a system, if that matters.
    I personally am not on the side of who is getting an autofocus alternative. For such kind of photography (street/reportage) I strongly prefer my Fuji X-T2.
    For landscape, architecture and portrait photography I want to be slow, it helps me finding the right framing, the right light, the right idea.
    I enjoy the V system too much to exchange it, and I still use film as well. instead I will continue exercising and growing my hit rate. I remain convinced that the weak side is always me, not the camera.
    Marco Ristuccia
    photography.marcoristuccia.com
    "Unconcerned but not indifferent."
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  10. #160
    New Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2019
    Location
    Switzerland
    Posts
    15
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Hasselblad CFV ll 50c

    Quote Originally Posted by Godfrey View Post
    You folks all make using a digital back sound like a royal PITA rather than the joy of having a nice bit of photographic equipment to extend the use of my existing setup into digital capture. That's very de-motivating to me.
    Not trying to be a buzz-kill, just being a realist sorry . I expect the new back to be a really good addition to a V setup.

    It's my experience that the V series screens aren't very good for critical focusing (this could be said of most screens, it's why I use a loupe when I shoot 4x5 even with zero movements) but you can sort of get away with this on film for the aforementioned reasons, and you don't see the minor issues unless you're getting them drum scanned. When you're shooting digital you're removing another dependent variable from the equation: the scanning, so any minor issues are quickly revealed.

    There's also the issue of continued calibration as mentioned by other posters and also myself, which can compound the issues - I'm itching to use this back, but I'm probably going to have to get my V bodies serviced again and will want to do that every two or three years and Hasselblad have to commit to that.

  11. #161
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    pegelli's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Belgium
    Posts
    3,239
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Hasselblad CFV ll 50c

    Quote Originally Posted by Boinger View Post
    Don't worry.
    A digital back or sensor cannot make anything less or more sharp than it is.
    +1, fully agree

    In my mind if you go to the same output size your pictures will be equally sharp or better than in the old film days.

    The fact you might see small focussing errors and/or camera shake due to the higher sensor resolution at 100% magnification might be interesting, but I don't think it makes a difference (vs. film at the same output size).

    But as is often the case "people suffer most from the suffering they fear", but YMMV.
    My Pics
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  12. #162
    Subscriber and Workshop Member MGrayson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    2,050
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    4

    Re: Hasselblad CFV ll 50c

    WRT achieving focus with film vs. digital, there is an interesting theoretical issue. I say theoretical, because I've been unable to find the actual thickness of film emulsion (everybody tells you how thick the film is, but that includes the nonsensitive base as well).

    Anyway, it is *possible* that a thick emulsion would be more tolerant of focusing errors. The interesting bit is the 3-dimensional plot of light intensity from a cone in a thick emulsion. Here is the result (angle of the cone greatly exaggerated for the purpose of illustration):



    So while the exposed region in the film is larger because of the misfocus and thickness, the brightness near the true plane of focus is so much greater that the result looks *almost* perfectly focused anyway. The digital sensor would just record the large circle at the bottom of the cone.




    I have no idea if this is a practical concern. I think our expectations of the two media differ, and that is more likely the issue.

    Disclaimer: I am a big fan of both film and digital, and if the dust problem were manageable, I would use film a lot more. I enjoy processing B&W at home.

    Matt
    Last edited by MGrayson; 29th June 2019 at 04:18.
    mattgraysonphoto.com
    Thanks 1 Member(s) thanked for this post
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  13. #163
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2018
    Posts
    121
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Hasselblad CFV ll 50c

    Quote Originally Posted by sog1927 View Post
    The more I think about it, the more I think this was a really smart move on Hasselblad's part. I think the back (and probably the 907 as well) is going to sell like hotcakes.
    I think so too. A IMX461 sensor version should therefore be just a question of time.

  14. #164
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Godfrey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Near San Jose, California
    Posts
    8,726
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Hasselblad CFV ll 50c

    Quote Originally Posted by MGrayson View Post
    ... I think our expectations of the two media differ, and that is more likely the issue.

    Disclaimer: I am a big fan of both film and digital, and if the dust problem were manageable, I would use film a lot more. I enjoy processing B&W at home.
    (bolded) I agree.

    My expectations are not based on the media type but on what I want in the end product. I know a lot of folks shooting technical cameras and medium format digital are hunting for an edge in very large images. I'm looking for tonal differentiation and nuance in relatively modest sized prints ... that's my end product ... I only very very rarely print larger than a 13x19 inch, most of what I print is smaller than that. A square image area on an 11x14 print is more common for me, as well as other products much smaller than that.

    I too still enjoy working with film, particularly B&W, and have no problem processing and scanning it myself. I don't have too many issues with dust, and whatever other defects are there I find to be part of the charm of working with film.

    It might be that buying my long-hoped-for "digital SWC" ... CVF50c II (constrained to square) + 907x + XCD21mm ... and then having the back for occasional use on the 500CM and learning how to get what I want out of it might be the right approach. One thing I feel is certain: Having had the Leica SL and then finding the form factor not really to my liking after I retired and was no longer taking assignments, I'm less inclined to buy into the X1D and more inclined to like the traditional Hasselblad "box with a lens on the end" form factor of the SWC and 500CM with WLF. Yeah, it's weird. AND then there's the fact that the Leica CL + Voigtländer 10mm seems to be clicking nicely with me, and might obviate any need to spend more money on the H kit.

    It's all good.

    G
    Godfrey - GDGPhoto Flickr Stream
    Likes 3 Member(s) liked this post

  15. #165
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    pegelli's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Belgium
    Posts
    3,239
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Hasselblad CFV ll 50c

    Quote Originally Posted by MGrayson View Post
    I have no idea if this is a practical concern.
    Interesting theory but my (also purely theoretical speculation) is that this is not a real concern for a few reasons

    - The emulsion layer is very thin, film is (incl. base) about 0,2 mm, so I guess the emulsion is less than 10% of that, so say max 0,02 mm and your theory only works if the perfect plane of focus is somewhere in that 0,02 mm. With the inaccuracy of foucssing and the film never being perfectly flat I think that's a stretch

    - I think one of the reasons films lose sharpness is by light scattering in the emulsion (it's not a completely transparent medium), so the more focussed "blob" in your first image will grow bigger and more diffuse due to this effect.

    Sorry for this off-topic bla-bla, and I also agree with you (and others) that there's so many more differences between film and digital that I think it's almost meaningless to compare. Neither are perfect and both are entirely usable, just use what ever suits your final image.

    For those interested, here's a nice reference on several effects what's happening when film gets hit by light and subsequently developed
    My Pics
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  16. #166
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2018
    Posts
    291
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Hasselblad CFV ll 50c

    I hope you guys get your wish that the CFV II 50c is the same price as the X1D, but I have a hunch it will be more expensive. How price sensitive are you? Is there a price beyond which you'll pass?

  17. #167
    Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2017
    Location
    West Yorkshire,United Kingdom
    Posts
    174
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Hasselblad CFV ll 50c

    Quote Originally Posted by faberryman View Post
    I hope you guys get your wish that the CFV II 50c is the same price as the X1D, but I have a hunch it will be more expensive. How price sensitive are you? Is there a price beyond which you'll pass?
    It must be lower than a body including sensor. ie X1D.X1D2 or even FUJI 50 S or R.

  18. #168
    Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    170
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Hasselblad CFV ll 50c

    Quote Originally Posted by Godfrey View Post
    You folks all make using a digital back sound like a royal PITA rather than the joy of having a nice bit of photographic equipment to extend the use of my existing setup into digital capture. That's very de-motivating to me.

    ...

    I have never used microprism or split image focusing aids with my 500CM. I use the Acute Matte screen with grid and nothing else other than the WLF focusing magnifier or the higher-powered focusing chimney finder. And I have no problem focusing critically with it, given using an A12 film back or a Polaroid film back. I hope that this experience remains what I have when I try out the CFV50c II; it seemed to work fine with the CFV50c that I tested on the camera.

    Given all the other equipment I already have, I'm not really in need of anything at all ... and I'm certainly not in a hurry.

    Thanks!
    G

    Maybe I missed it, but another major factor people are neglecting to mention is this (forgive me if it's obvious): Using a cropped sensor -- i.e., 44x33, even 48x36 -- on a V body means what you're focusing on in the viewfinder is smaller than it would be when shooting 6x6 film. You have to back up or use a wider lens to get the same view you want. Picture a lovely portrait of someone in the 6x6 viewfinder, waist at the bottom of the frame, top of head at the top of the frame. To get that image with a 44x33 sensor, you need to position your subject much smaller in the Acute Matte screen. It makes a huge difference.

    I loved using the old Aptus 54S (48x36 sensor) on my V system, but it wasn't always easy to nail focus. The lenses definitely have their own unique look.

  19. #169
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2018
    Posts
    291
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Hasselblad CFV ll 50c

    Quote Originally Posted by epforever View Post
    Maybe I missed it, but another major factor people are neglecting to mention is this (forgive me if it's obvious): Using a cropped sensor -- i.e., 44x33, even 48x36 -- on a V body means what you're focusing on in the viewfinder is smaller than it would be when shooting 6x6 film. You have to back up or use a wider lens to get the same view you want. Picture a lovely portrait of someone in the 6x6 viewfinder, waist at the bottom of the frame, top of head at the top of the frame. To get that image with a 44x33 sensor, you need to position your subject much smaller in the Acute Matte screen. It makes a huge difference.
    How did they mask the viewfinder with the A16 back? Presumably Hasselblad will offer something similar for 44x33. A new AccuMatte screen with grids? Hate to be practical.

  20. #170
    New Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2019
    Location
    Switzerland
    Posts
    15
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Hasselblad CFV ll 50c

    Quote Originally Posted by faberryman View Post
    I hope you guys get your wish that the CFV II 50c is the same price as the X1D, but I have a hunch it will be more expensive. How price sensitive are you? Is there a price beyond which you'll pass?
    The cost of an X1D II, or even the GFX 50R. Because why would I invest more into an EOL'd legacy system (the bodies and the lenses), with all the compromises of using this back on a V body, for the same or higher than the cost of the new system; when I could sell the legacy system and fund at least half of an X1D II or GFX 50R? Heck, the XV adaptor only costs $250, so this back is not really about using V lenses.

    Hasselblad are marketing this as working with practically every V body ever made, so it's clear they're looking at a different target market to those users who would drop 5 figures on a digital back. They want to tempt those users who aren't using their V system professionally, or those who have one sat on their shelf for occasional use, or those who never sold it but never use it, or those who might think to pick up a second (third, fourth, whatever) hand body for use with the back. Capturing that market to pull them into the X system through the slim body attachment is a key strategy.

  21. #171
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Posts
    402
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Hasselblad CFV ll 50c

    Quote Originally Posted by faberryman View Post
    How did they mask the viewfinder with the A16 back? Presumably Hasselblad will offer something similar for 44x33.
    There was a translucent plastic mask one could slide in, in between the screen and focusing hood. And the outer lines of some of the gridded screens corresponded to the 645 and Superslide (A16S) format.

  22. #172
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    136
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Hasselblad CFV ll 50c

    Quote Originally Posted by faberryman View Post
    How did they mask the viewfinder with the A16 back? Presumably Hasselblad will offer something similar for 44x33. A new AccuMatte screen with grids? Hate to be practical.
    The crop indeed is quite heavy, especially for wide-angles a limitation.

    Maybe they provide a screen as in the previous 50c back version.

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	33x44 screen.jpg 
Views:	8 
Size:	427.5 KB 
ID:	142675

  23. #173
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    350
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Hasselblad CFV ll 50c

    It appears that touch screen operations (perhaps even touch screen focus similar to the X1D) are one of the design goals for the new back. In the original back, Hasselblad did not attempt to iptimoize Live View Focus. As others have mentioned, it was a challenge. One of the problems that I experienced was the lack of control of screen brightness. Depending the ambient light and lens aperture, the Live View Image was often too bright (washed- out) ot to use for focus. I used a variable neutral density filter to adjust brightness of the screen image which was a great help because I could fine tune the screen to optimize shadow, midtone or highlight areas for critical focus. It will interesting to see how Hasselblad handles the Live View Function on the new back. The higher resolution LCD Screen and the tiling the screen to a horizontal position to permit the use of a hooded viewing device to block-out ambient light will help Live View Focusing. Hopefully there be some type of automatic screen brightness control. A $5700 price tag would be icing on the cake but I suspect it will be more. Perhaps there will be a bundle deal with the 907X Body? Has Hasselblad announced any schedule for delivery?

  24. #174
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2018
    Posts
    121
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Hasselblad CFV ll 50c

    Quote Originally Posted by fotophil View Post
    In the original back, ... the Live View Image was often too bright (washed- out) ot to use for focus. I used a variable neutral density filter to adjust brightness of the screen image ... Hopefully there be some type of automatic screen brightness control
    I also use a variable neutral density filter to adjust brightness of the screen image. Copal shutter is activated using the flash synch chord. Works well but is clunky and moving/changing images can be challenging. As quick (or slow) and fuzzy as sheet film.

    An automatic screen brightness control in combination with an electronic shutter would make the Mark II much more user-friendly.

    P.S. And please soon a Mark III with the back-illuminated 16bit, IMX411 sensor so that we can also forgo the color correction step at the exposure and post-exposure stage.

  25. #175
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Atlanta, GA
    Posts
    924
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Hasselblad CFV ll 50c

    Quote Originally Posted by TheDude View Post
    P.S. And please soon a Mark III with the back-illuminated 16bit, IMX411 sensor so that we can also forgo the color correction step at the exposure and post-exposure stage.
    Yes pretty please HB

  26. #176
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Shashin's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Missouri, USA
    Posts
    5,299
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    150

    Re: Hasselblad CFV ll 50c

    Quote Originally Posted by MGrayson View Post
    WRT achieving focus with film vs. digital, there is an interesting theoretical issue. I say theoretical, because I've been unable to find the actual thickness of film emulsion (everybody tells you how thick the film is, but that includes the nonsensitive base as well).

    Anyway, it is *possible* that a thick emulsion would be more tolerant of focusing errors. The interesting bit is the 3-dimensional plot of light intensity from a cone in a thick emulsion. Here is the result (angle of the cone greatly exaggerated for the purpose of illustration):



    So while the exposed region in the film is larger because of the misfocus and thickness, the brightness near the true plane of focus is so much greater that the result looks *almost* perfectly focused anyway. The digital sensor would just record the large circle at the bottom of the cone.




    I have no idea if this is a practical concern. I think our expectations of the two media differ, and that is more likely the issue.

    Disclaimer: I am a big fan of both film and digital, and if the dust problem were manageable, I would use film a lot more. I enjoy processing B&W at home.

    Matt
    Emulsion thickness was always a trade secret with film manufacturers. So the fact you cannot find a number is not surprising. However, having run a microscope lab, I attempted to answer this. This is color negative film with the emulsion to the bottom and the base above. The squares are 10um. The color is an artifact of the microscope technique; DIC (Differential Interference Contrast). The very sharp scissors used to section the film do not give a clean cut, but you can see the emulsion/base strata. I think the separation feature in the base is the integral mask--the yellow filter that separates the yellow (blue) emulsion layer from the cyan (red) and magenta (green) emulsion layers (film is a subtractive color process, hence the cyan, magenta, yellow emulsion/dye layers). The integral mask gives color negative film its distinctive orange cast and is used to control color contamination to the other layers as all are sensitive to blue (color transparency film removes the filter dye in the development process).



    Obviously, the emulsion is on the lens side. The base will also have an antihalation backing to absorb the light passing through the emulsion and base being reflected back through the film. I suspect black and white emulsions to be thinner as they only need one "channel." Also T-grain technology that increased the efficiency for the grains to cut out light would impact emulsion thickness: silver is the most expensive component to the emulsion and so any increase in efficiency to reduce silver was good. The chemistry for color film where the sliver image need to be then converted/developed into a color dye image might also make color emulsions thicker. Given that, I suspect the color emulsions would be the upper limit to emulsion thickness.

    I probably don't need to tell you this, but light would not focus to a point, but to an Airy disk. So the point spread function is a bit more complex than a geometric illustration where things like f-number impacting image formation. I am more putting this in for others that might not know the problematic dilemma of light having the properties of both a wave and particle just so they can follow. We had a previous conversation where folks got a little lost.
    Will

    http://www.hakusancreation.com
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  27. #177
    Subscriber and Workshop Member MGrayson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    2,050
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    4

    Re: Hasselblad CFV ll 50c

    Quote Originally Posted by Shashin View Post
    Emulsion thickness was always a trade secret with film manufacturers. So the fact you cannot find a number is not surprising. However, having run a microscope lab, I attempted to answer this. This is color negative film with the emulsion to the bottom and the base above. The squares are 10um. The color is an artifact of the microscope technique; DIC (Differential Interference Contrast). The very sharp scissors used to section the film do not give a clean cut, but you can see the emulsion/base strata. I think the separation feature in the base is the integral mask--the yellow filter that separates the yellow (blue) emulsion layer from the cyan (red) and magenta (green) emulsion layers (film is a subtractive color process, hence the cyan, magenta, yellow emulsion/dye layers). The integral mask gives color negative film its distinctive orange cast and is used to control color contamination to the other layers as all are sensitive to blue (color transparency film removes the filter dye in the development process).



    Obviously, the emulsion is on the lens side. The base will also have an antihalation backing to absorb the light passing through the emulsion and base being reflected back through the film. I suspect black and white emulsions to be thinner as they only need one "channel." Also T-grain technology that increased the efficiency for the grains to cut out light would impact emulsion thickness: silver is the most expensive component to the emulsion and so any increase in efficiency to reduce silver was good. The chemistry for color film where the sliver image need to be then converted/developed into a color dye image might also make color emulsions thicker. Given that, I suspect the color emulsions would be the upper limit to emulsion thickness.

    I probably don't need to tell you this, but light would not focus to a point, but to an Airy disk. So the point spread function is a bit more complex than a geometric illustration where things like f-number impacting image formation. I am more putting this in for others that might not know the problematic dilemma of light having the properties of both a wave and particle just so they can follow. We had a previous conversation where folks got a little lost.
    Will,

    Thank you for some real data! I did not expect my analysis to represent an actual effect, although there seem to be a few pixels worth to play with. I was just surprised when I did the calculation that a thicker emulsion could, in theory, produce a sharper image. One's first impulse would be that the light rays at different angles would smear the image as they traveled through the emulsion.

    As for the true properties of light, well, I'm a Mathematician and was, as the undergraduate physics texts would say, ignoring air friction, relativistic effects, and rust.

    Matt
    mattgraysonphoto.com
    Thanks 1 Member(s) thanked for this post
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  28. #178
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Godfrey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Near San Jose, California
    Posts
    8,726
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Hasselblad CFV ll 50c

    Quote Originally Posted by epforever View Post
    Maybe I missed it, but another major factor people are neglecting to mention is this (forgive me if it's obvious): Using a cropped sensor -- i.e., 44x33, even 48x36 -- on a V body means what you're focusing on in the viewfinder is smaller than it would be when shooting 6x6 film. You have to back up or use a wider lens to get the same view you want. Picture a lovely portrait of someone in the 6x6 viewfinder, waist at the bottom of the frame, top of head at the top of the frame. To get that image with a 44x33 sensor, you need to position your subject much smaller in the Acute Matte screen. It makes a huge difference.

    I loved using the old Aptus 54S (48x36 sensor) on my V system, but it wasn't always easy to nail focus. The lenses definitely have their own unique look.
    I talked about this up thread a ways. Essentially, for my lens kit, the difference is roughly one lens focal length. That is, instead of the 120mm, use the 80mm; instead of the 80mm, use the 50mm. I have four V system lenses now, moving to the 33x44 sensor (and cropping square for V system imaging format), I just drop down one focal length. Add the 907x and 21mm lens to replace the Distagon 50's position as my wide...

    Diagonal Angle of View Table

    f - 56^2 - 33^2
    ------------------
    21 - NA - 96
    50 - 77 - 50
    80 - 53 - 33
    120 - 37 - 22
    150 - 30 - 18
    250 - 11 - NA

    I don't think what I'm focusing on is going to be all that much different that I can't accommodate it with the WLF magnifier or the focusing chimney magnifier. After all, I'm able to critically focus all of my lenses now and I'll get the same central spot view of the focus point whether I use 33x33, 33x44, or 56x56 format. The sensor to film difference is shown nicely in this illustration:



    The sensor loses 6mm off each horizontal side and 11.5mm off the top and bottom. I've often cropped Hasselblad photos more than that!

    G

  29. #179
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Godfrey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Near San Jose, California
    Posts
    8,726
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Hasselblad CFV ll 50c

    Quote Originally Posted by jng View Post
    There was a translucent plastic mask one could slide in, in between the screen and focusing hood. And the outer lines of some of the gridded screens corresponded to the 645 and Superslide (A16S) format.
    It's certainly easy enough to cut a mask from a piece of thick black paper and slide it into the WLF. Or to scribe a set of format lines on my viewfinder screen. This isn't rocket science.

    G

  30. #180
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Godfrey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Near San Jose, California
    Posts
    8,726
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Hasselblad CFV ll 50c

    Quote Originally Posted by MGrayson View Post
    Will,

    Thank you for some real data! I did not expect my analysis to represent an actual effect, although there seem to be a few pixels worth to play with. I was just surprised when I did the calculation that a thicker emulsion could, in theory, produce a sharper image. One's first impulse would be that the light rays at different angles would smear the image as they traveled through the emulsion.

    As for the true properties of light, well, I'm a Mathematician and was, as the undergraduate physics texts would say, ignoring air friction, relativistic effects, and rust.

    Matt
    There's some data on actual Kodak film emulsion vs base thicknesses in the little book 'Making Kodak Film' by Robert L Shanebrook. For instance, one micrograph shows that Kodak T-Max 400 has two emulsion layers plus overcoat totaling 10.25 microns thick on a 125 micron thick acetate base. Another micrograph shows Kodak Ultra Max 400 has a 14 layer emulsion with a total thickness of 46.6 microns on a 125 micron thick acetate base.

    The bases are all fairly regularly 125 micron (non "Estar" base), but emulsion thicknesses vary quite a bit depending on the specific film.

    (This is a fantastically interesting little book if you are interested in how film is/was made. Robert Shanebrook is an ex-Kodak engineer and manager who documented Kodak's film manufacturing processes in elaborate detail after he retired, and self-published the book.)

    G
    Godfrey - GDGPhoto Flickr Stream
    Thanks 1 Member(s) thanked for this post
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  31. #181
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Location
    Neutral Zone
    Posts
    256
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Hasselblad CFV ll 50c

    Quote Originally Posted by Godfrey View Post
    It's certainly easy enough to cut a mask from a piece of thick black paper and slide it into the WLF. Or to scribe a set of format lines on my viewfinder screen. This isn't rocket science.

    G
    I would probably print something on thin transparent and if required cut the center part out. So you can still see what's around. Rangefinder style. I like the Hasselblad screen from the CFV50c because of that. Very useful. As long as one does not go below 30ish full-frame field of view, the 44x33 is fine. Stitching is also possible. I finally settled on something like 50/80, 50/100 or 50/110 (on a FP shutter body). as a two lens set. Versatile enough.

  32. #182
    Senior Member stephengilbert's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Santa Monica, CA
    Posts
    2,385
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2

    Re: Hasselblad CFV ll 50c

    ALPA used to have templates you could download and laser print on clear plastic to use on their ground glass. Things have changed a bit.

  33. #183
    New Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2019
    Location
    Switzerland
    Posts
    15
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Hasselblad CFV ll 50c

    Interesting interview that confirms some of my speculation: https://www.dpreview.com/interviews/...-of-hasselblad:

    ‘Everybody thinks that the V system Hasselblad were only for professionals. The camera was about £5000 at the time, and actually almost two thirds of users were amateurs. So, working in this market is not so new to us. But in between, when medium format went digital, things became so much more sophisticated, complicated and expensive that our whole market turned around to the point that over 90% was professional. The number of cameras we made dropped a lot and the price went up a lot - and we had a much smaller customer base.’

    ‘Now though we will be turning that situation back again. There are fewer professional photographers and it is getting harder and harder for professionals to make decent money. So Hasselblad needed to look to the future and ask if those customers would continue to use expensive medium format cameras, or would they look at full frame cameras? We decided that ‘no’ many wouldn’t continue to spend on high priced medium format systems and that we needed to take a different route. We will continue to develop our H system, which is very high-end and for pros, but the new X1D will open a new market for us. Maybe we can go back to [how things were in] the 80s and have a lot of amateur customers.'

    'The purpose of this new model and its lower price is to broaden our market, to put the company on solid ground. We can do this by having more products: this X series, the H series, having a new V series with the CFV attached and the new 907X – this will allow us to develop our position in the market. Looking back ten years we only had the H system. Now though we can attract a new customer group. £5500 is still a lot of money but it is a lot less than these cameras used to be, and you can have a camera and a lens for below £10,000. This is a much bigger market for us.’
    Doesn't say anything about the actual price of the CFV II 50c, but definitely hints something.

  34. #184
    New Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2019
    Location
    Switzerland
    Posts
    15
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Hasselblad CFV ll 50c

    My previous post has been eaten by the spam filter, so i'll try again without a link ...

    There's an interview on dpreview with Uwe Moebus who states that Hasselblad are going after the amateur market, as I speculated, and the reduction in prices reflect this. Although he does argue that the original CFV wasn’t expensive, which is a slight contradiction (if it's implied that the original back was aimed at the high end market then perhaps not a contradiction in that case). No news on the price of the CFV II 50c but I continue to believe, given what else is stated in the interview, that Hasselblad *know* they cannot sell this back for more than the X1D II because they want it to be a feeder into the X system for existing V system users.
    LJ

    https://leejo.github.io
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  35. #185
    Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2015
    Location
    Zurich, Switzerland
    Posts
    104
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Hasselblad CFV ll 50c

    Quote Originally Posted by stephengilbert View Post
    ALPA used to have templates you could download and laser print on clear plastic to use on their ground glass. Things have changed a bit.
    There are people who seel these printed masks on eBay as well. I got one of them a couple of years ago

  36. #186
    Senior Member dave.gt's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Atlanta, USA
    Posts
    1,698
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    14

    Re: Hasselblad CFV ll 50c

    Quote Originally Posted by Charles S View Post
    There are people who seel these printed masks on eBay as well. I got one of them a couple of years ago
    There are people like me who use a mask for square composition on the H5D-50c, thanks to Steve Hendrix at CI. It works so well I never take it off the camera! And yes it is transparent, so I have the option to shoot and crop later, or compose for the square initially.

    There are multiple ways to accomplish what you need, if 645 is an issue.
    Dave (GT)

    Best quote of the day: "Always be kind to others, behind every face is some kind of pain."

  37. #187
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Atlanta, GA
    Posts
    924
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Hasselblad CFV ll 50c

    Quote Originally Posted by stephengilbert View Post
    ALPA used to have templates you could download and laser print on clear plastic to use on their ground glass. Things have changed a bit.
    I think they're still available, see: http://www.alpa.ch/_files/ALPA_Stiching_Masks.pdf

  38. #188
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Godfrey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Near San Jose, California
    Posts
    8,726
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Hasselblad CFV ll 50c

    Quote Originally Posted by leejo View Post
    ...
    There's an interview on dpreview with Uwe Moebus who states that Hasselblad are going after the amateur market, as I speculated, and the reduction in prices reflect this. Although he does argue that the original CFV wasn’t expensive, which is a slight contradiction (if it's implied that the original back was aimed at the high end market then perhaps not a contradiction in that case). No news on the price of the CFV II 50c but I continue to believe, given what else is stated in the interview, that Hasselblad *know* they cannot sell this back for more than the X1D II because they want it to be a feeder into the X system for existing V system users.
    Makes perfect sense to me.

    I await the full spec, price, and feature list for the CFV50c II, as well as the availability of product to demo on my 500CM body. And the price of the 907x body. My plan at present is to prepare funding to purchase it, the XCD 21mm lens + 907x body (perhaps not all at once). And an X system mount adapter for Leica R lenses... presuming the CVF50cII back includes electronic shutter that enables their use. Same for the Hasselblad V to X lens mount adapter.

    Plans change all the time. This is a nice plan for the moment.

    G

  39. #189
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    262
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Hasselblad CFV ll 50c

    Any news on price for this new back?

  40. #190
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Atlanta, GA
    Posts
    924
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Hasselblad CFV ll 50c

    Quote Originally Posted by Ai_Print View Post
    Any news on price for this new back?
    Everything I've read suggests they'll announce pricing this fall?
    Thanks 1 Member(s) thanked for this post

  41. #191
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    350
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Hasselblad CFV ll 50c

    The pricing of the new back seems be a closely guarded secret held by the Hasselblad Marketing Department. Although the pricing of the X1D-2 is somewhat influenced by the Fuji 50S, the new back has no direct competition so i would expect the price to be considerably higher than $5700. The closest competition is the original CFV-50c and the Phase One IQ150 and IQ250 Backs which use the same SONY 50MP Chip The Phase One backs are very hard to find in the Hasselblad V Mount and usually sell for over 10K. Since the new back will probably have many new functions including AF, touch screen controls, maybe even an electronic shutter, I would not be surprised if the new back price is around the original CFV-50c price of 10K. We all just have to wait and see. I suppose it would be possible for Haaselblad to also offer the original CFV-50 Back for under 5K for the 500C Owners who don't need the new AF, electronic shutter, etc. features.

  42. #192
    Senior Member vieri's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    San Ginesio, Italy
    Posts
    1,295
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Hasselblad CFV ll 50c

    Quote Originally Posted by fotophil View Post
    The pricing of the new back seems be a closely guarded secret held by the Hasselblad Marketing Department. Although the pricing of the X1D-2 is somewhat influenced by the Fuji 50S, the new back has no direct competition so i would expect the price to be considerably higher than $5700. The closest competition is the original CFV-50c and the Phase One IQ150 and IQ250 Backs which use the same SONY 50MP Chip The Phase One backs are very hard to find in the Hasselblad V Mount and usually sell for over 10K. Since the new back will probably have many new functions including AF, touch screen controls, maybe even an electronic shutter, I would not be surprised if the new back price is around the original CFV-50c price of 10K. We all just have to wait and see. I suppose it would be possible for Haaselblad to also offer the original CFV-50 Back for under 5K for the 500C Owners who don't need the new AF, electronic shutter, etc. features.
    That's very true, on the other hand I think that:

    1. Hasselblad knows that if they price it too high they won't sell many, and
    2. All the technology in the CVF II is in fact X1D / X1D II technology, so there will be very little development costs involved;

    My speculation is that the CVF II will cost the same as the X1D II, give or take a little, and the 907x will cost around 1.500 US. Ideally, I think it would be a very smart move to offer the CVF + 907x together at equal price or just slightly above the X1D II, but I think Hasselblad will go a bit higher than that.

    Just my .02 of course.

    Best regards,

    Vieri
    Vieri Bottazzini
    Formatt-Hitech Signature Artist | ABIPP EP
    WORKSHOPS | FINE ART PRINTS | PORTFOLIO | THE BLOG
    Likes 4 Member(s) liked this post

  43. #193
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Location
    London, UK
    Posts
    304
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Hasselblad CFV ll 50c

    I'm with Vieri here. Let's be honest that the CVF2 is a little bit, just a tiny bit, gimmicky and they could easily price themselves out of the market here. The CVF2 is probably less useful to most photographers than a X1D 2 as well so the price cannot really be (much) more than the X1D 2.

    If they ask £6k for it with the 907x I will most likely buy one, but if they want £10k It's just too much for too little gain.

    Quote Originally Posted by vieri View Post
    That's very true, on the other hand I think that:

    1. Hasselblad knows that if they price it too high they won't sell many, and
    2. All the technology in the CVF II is in fact X1D / X1D II technology, so there will be very little development costs involved;

    My speculation is that the CVF II will cost the same as the X1D II, give or take a little, and the 907x will cost around 1.500 US. Ideally, I think it would be a very smart move to offer the CVF + 907x together at equal price or just slightly above the X1D II, but I think Hasselblad will go a bit higher than that.

    Just my .02 of course.

    Best regards,

    Vieri

  44. #194
    Senior Member Joe Colson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    North Carolina, USA
    Posts
    2,242
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    36

    Re: Hasselblad CFV ll 50c

    Quote Originally Posted by vieri View Post
    That's very true, on the other hand I think that:

    1. Hasselblad knows that if they price it too high they won't sell many, and
    2. All the technology in the CVF II is in fact X1D / X1D II technology, so there will be very little development costs involved;

    My speculation is that the CVF II will cost the same as the X1D II, give or take a little, and the 907x will cost around 1.500 US. Ideally, I think it would be a very smart move to offer the CVF + 907x together at equal price or just slightly above the X1D II, but I think Hasselblad will go a bit higher than that.

    Just my .02 of course.

    Best regards,

    Vieri
    I'd add that one of the pricier components - the EVF - is not in the CFV II + 907X, and there are fewer "control surfaces" - buttons, dials, wheels - that would add manufacturing cost. And with higher volume purchases of the 50MP 44x33mm sensor from Sony, that component's cost would go down. So it's conceivable that the CFV II + 907X will actually be priced lower than the X1D II. In fact, by pricing the combo at a lower price point than the X1D II, Hasselblad could perhaps attract owners of XCD lenses to buy both platforms. After all, once you've invested $10k+ in XCD lenses, what's another $5k among friends?

    Joe
    _________________________________
    Joe Colson Photography
    Likes 2 Member(s) liked this post

  45. #195
    New Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2019
    Location
    Switzerland
    Posts
    15
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Hasselblad CFV ll 50c

    Quote Originally Posted by fotophil View Post
    The pricing of the new back seems be a closely guarded secret held by the Hasselblad Marketing Department. Although the pricing of the X1D-2 is somewhat influenced by the Fuji 50S, the new back has no direct competition so i would expect the price to be considerably higher than $5700. The closest competition is the original CFV-50c and the Phase One IQ150 and IQ250 Backs which use the same SONY 50MP Chip The Phase One backs are very hard to find in the Hasselblad V Mount and usually sell for over 10K. Since the new back will probably have many new functions including AF, touch screen controls, maybe even an electronic shutter, I would not be surprised if the new back price is around the original CFV-50c price of 10K. We all just have to wait and see. I suppose it would be possible for Haaselblad to also offer the original CFV-50 Back for under 5K for the 500C Owners who don't need the new AF, electronic shutter, etc. features.
    The CFV II 50c doesn't make sense if the price is higher than an X1D II. I'm convinced that Hasselblad haven't announced the price to avoid an impact on sales of the X1D II. If you have an existing V/H/Xpan kit and the price of the CFV II 50c is say, 10%, more than the X1D II then you will just buy the X1D II and the lens adaptor to allow you to use the V (or H, or Xpan) lenses because the experience is going to be far better than with the CFV back on a legacy system.

    Make absolutely no mistake - the experience of using this back with a legacy system *will* be a compromise compared to the X1D II, Hasselblad know that, I know that, most experienced V system users know that. The price cannot be set at a point that means the compromise is too much to justify it because there are more options as an alternative now - as i've said, the medium format market is very different to how it was five years ago.

    *If* the CFV II 50c had a higher resolution sensor, or larger sensor area, then indeed it would make sense to charge more for it, but in the advertised form it does not. It is nothing but a stripped down X1D II. A large number of V system users now are not the type to drop $10k on a back, let alone $5k. I continue to believe that this back is a gateway drug to feed users into the X system, and Hasselblad will price it at that point and not at the pros who can write it off as a business expense.

  46. #196
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Godfrey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Near San Jose, California
    Posts
    8,726
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Hasselblad CFV ll 50c

    I sincerely hope that Vieri is right: The cost of a CFV50c II at about the same price as the X1D II would net my Hasselblad V system camera and lenses new useful life and give me an excuse to buy into a couple of XCD lenses as well as the 907x body. To me, that's a brilliant marketing strategy as it places value on existing users' current equipment and gives them a way forward to new Hasselblad equipment.

    I'm sorry, but saying the CFV50c II is comparable, better than, or less than the X1D II is completely beside the point. I want to make use of my existing Hasselblad V system with digital capture, and I'd like to extend my existing Hasselblad V system with new generation lenses. The X1D system is a nice way of replacing my V system equipment or moving into medium format digital equipment, but it isn't a way to extend and modernize the use of the equipment I already have.

    I also prefer the form factor of the traditional Hasselblad 500 series cameras to that of the X1D for many uses. Simply a personal preference...

    G
    Godfrey - GDGPhoto Flickr Stream
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  47. #197
    Member mristuccia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Location
    Berlin
    Posts
    88
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    8

    Re: Hasselblad CFV ll 50c

    Quote Originally Posted by Godfrey View Post
    I sincerely hope that Vieri is right: The cost of a CFV50c II at about the same price as the X1D II would net my Hasselblad V system camera and lenses new useful life and give me an excuse to buy into a couple of XCD lenses as well as the 907x body. To me, that's a brilliant marketing strategy as it places value on existing users' current equipment and gives them a way forward to new Hasselblad equipment.

    I'm sorry, but saying the CFV50c II is comparable, better than, or less than the X1D II is completely beside the point. I want to make use of my existing Hasselblad V system with digital capture, and I'd like to extend my existing Hasselblad V system with new generation lenses. The X1D system is a nice way of replacing my V system equipment or moving into medium format digital equipment, but it isn't a way to extend and modernize the use of the equipment I already have.

    I also prefer the form factor of the traditional Hasselblad 500 series cameras to that of the X1D for many uses. Simply a personal preference...

    G
    I was just thinking the same when I purchased my CFV-50c.
    Now I'm thinking: what is the difference between buying a CFV-50c II + 907x and getting an X1D II + V lens adapter? The only difference is the "replacement" of the the camera body itself. And the X1D II, or even the X1D I, looks to me more meaningful by keeping in mind a vision to move into medium format digital equipment.
    So do people care that much having a V camera body rather than an X1D II body in order to "modernise" and make use of all their V system lenses? Particularly when one plans to buy X lenses for the future?
    Marco Ristuccia
    photography.marcoristuccia.com
    "Unconcerned but not indifferent."

  48. #198
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Godfrey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Near San Jose, California
    Posts
    8,726
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Hasselblad CFV ll 50c

    Quote Originally Posted by mristuccia View Post
    I was just thinking the same when I purchased my CFV-50c.
    Now I'm thinking: what is the difference between buying a CFV-50c II + 907x and getting an X1D II + V lens adapter? The only difference is the "replacement" of the the camera body itself. And the X1D II, or even the X1D I, looks to me more meaningful by keeping in mind a vision to move into medium format digital equipment.
    So do people care that much having a V camera body rather than an X1D II body in order to "modernise" and make use of all their V system lenses? Particularly when one plans to buy X lenses for the future?
    Well, I like the way my 500CM works, feels in the hand and on the tripod. I have four lenses for it. Buying a CFV back for it gives me most of that same workflow and ergonomics, but takes away my wide angle lens. Presuming that what I want is achieved with the CFV back and my existing lenses, I need another, wider lens. That's where I buy the 907x and 21mm lens, and maybe in the future add more lens options.

    The V lens adapter on the X1D nets a completely different camera, with an Eshutter only, and a completely different use model. Is it better or worse? I don't know, but it for sure isn't the same. At this moment, I'd prefer the same...

    G
    Godfrey - GDGPhoto Flickr Stream
    Likes 2 Member(s) liked this post

  49. #199
    Senior Member dave.gt's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Atlanta, USA
    Posts
    1,698
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    14

    Re: Hasselblad CFV ll 50c

    Quote Originally Posted by Godfrey View Post
    Well, I like the way my 500CM works, feels in the hand and on the tripod. I have four lenses for it. Buying a CFV back for it gives me most of that same workflow and ergonomics, but takes away my wide angle lens. Presuming that what I want is achieved with the CFV back and my existing lenses, I need another, wider lens. That's where I buy the 907x and 21mm lens, and maybe in the future add more lens options.

    The V lens adapter on the X1D nets a completely different camera, with an Eshutter only, and a completely different use model. Is it better or worse? I don't know, but it for sure isn't the same. At this moment, I'd prefer the same...

    G
    I totally agree, Godfrey.

    As much as I love the design and quality of the X1D, the form of anything related to the V system ticks the right boxes for me. I have a lot of cameras with the general form of an X1D, and the X1D is awesome.

    But the V system is an entirely different experience. If I still had my 503cxi, I would love to pre-order the new back. It ... sigh... is just not meant to be.

    Name:  IMG_0009.JPG
Views: 358
Size:  180.3 KB

    I could probably get used to the 907, it is cool!... but I really miss the WLF. So I guess both the 907 AND a 503 would hit the sweet spot for me. LOL... so out of reach for me.

    Thanks, Dante.

    Back to my corner...
    Last edited by dave.gt; 15th July 2019 at 00:25.
    Dave (GT)

    Best quote of the day: "Always be kind to others, behind every face is some kind of pain."
    Likes 3 Member(s) liked this post

  50. #200
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    539
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Hasselblad CFV ll 50c

    Quote Originally Posted by dave.gt View Post
    But the V system is an entirely different experience. If I still had my 503cxi, I would love to pre-order the new back. It Sigh..,
    A 500C/M with lens is only about $1000, there are Leica lens caps that cost more than that, just saying ;-)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •