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!

Questions on the new sensors quality

photographer

New member
I have been using a Phase One P65+ RZ67 PRO D combo for quite some time now. While I really like the quality of the files it renders I wish the system wouldn't be as big as it is. Even with the smallest 110mm lens the camera with the sensor mounted can only be used on a tripod (I use Gizmo 3 series to support it). Caring it around casually is beyond my physical abilities.
Looking for some other smaller camera, I've came across this new Hasselblad 907X medium format (mirrorless) camera:



What made me really surprised is the size of this camera as well as its price: $7,499.00 for the camera, a lens and 50MP 43.8 x 32.9mm sensor!
While at the same time, there is another 50MP Hasselblad H6D-50c Medium Format DSLR Camera that costs almost twice as much: 14,495.00 dollars and no lens included.

Do the sensors used by these cameras produce the similar image quality? Why are the prices for both 50MP sensors so different?
 
Last edited:

darr

Well-known member



Does not include a lens for $7,499 @ B&H Photo.

I have the Hasselblad CFV-50c digital back which has the same sensor. I cannot comment about the other Hasselblad camera you mention, but I have used my digital back on technical cameras since 2014 and it is a nice back with Live View. I do not like using it on my Hasselblad 501CM because the CF lenses are harder to focus via Live View.

Have you looked at the Fuji GFX 50S and 50R cameras? They are affordable if you are looking at spending 10k or less for a kit, and they also have the same sensor.
 

photographer

New member
Thanks for pointing this out! I haven't noticed that both of these Hasselblad cameras share the same sensor.
How does this CFV-50c digital back compares to the one manufactured by Phase One? (the Phase One sensors are still priced at 10K+ and 20K+).
The new Nikon D5 costs almost the same as Hasselblad 907. But Nikon D5 is not the medium format camera.
 

darr

Well-known member
Thanks for pointing this out! I haven't noticed that both of these Hasselblad cameras share the same sensor.
How does this CFV-50c digital back compares to the one manufactured by Phase One? (the Phase One sensors are still priced at 10K+ and 20K+).
The new Nikon D5 costs almost the same as Hasselblad 907. But Nikon D5 is not the medium format camera.
I cannot comment about the comparable Phase One back as I stopped buying Phase One after the CFV-50c came out. Their comparable back at the time had the same sensor, but was more expensive.
Wait and check back here as a Phase One salesman will probably jump in to help guide you as they sometimes read these threads.

Also, run a search in the medium format section for whatever model of digital back you are interested in, as there are bound to be photos and discussions about specific digital backs.
I have been tempted to rent a Fuji 50R to see if I want one, but I cannot complain about the back I own and so it keeps me from doing so.

The best advice I can give you is to talk with an owner/previous owner of the back you are interested in, look at work produced, and see what post-processing software is compatible with the back.
Phase One's Capture One software does not support Hasselblad, but does support Fuji. Phocus and Lightroom are your options for Hasselblad, and Lightroom & Photoshop supports them all.

Good luck to you!
Darr
 

photographer

New member
It seems that the mirrorless cameras and the new sensors are taking the previous generation systems by storm. This new Hasselblad 907 system is even more compact than Nikon D5. It delivers a mind blowing image quality you could only get from the medium format. It is priced below any Phase One DSLs camera or sensor making it more affordable and accessible by a much wider audience. Unless the image quality of CFV-50 system is worse than Phase One's I am convinced that the mirrorless technology and the new digital backs beat all the pre-existing digital photography gear, the same way Tesla beats the gasoline cars manufactures making them all look outdated or obsolete.
 

Mexecutioner

Well-known member
It seems that the mirrorless cameras and the new sensors are taking the previous generation systems by storm. This new Hasselblad 907 system is even more compact than Nikon D5. It delivers a mind blowing image quality you could only get from the medium format. It is priced below any Phase One DSLs camera or sensor making it more affordable and accessible by a much wider audience. Unless the image quality of CFV-50 system is worse than Phase One's I am convinced that the mirrorless technology and the new digital backs beat all the pre-existing digital photography gear, the same way Tesla beats the gasoline cars manufactures making them all outdated and obsolete.
I don’t see a Ferrari 812 Superfast as being obsolete, but OK.
 

Pelorus

Member
Hmmm,

I've got a 50R and a Leaf Credo 50 digital back which I use on a tech camera. Both have the same sensor. But they deliver different images. I deliberately left the word "quality" out of that sentence because it's simply not the defining variable.

There are two important distinctions; to follow Rodrigo's metaphor: If I was pulling a car out of a bog I'd take my tractor for that job. If I was seeking to go from A to B in comfort and speed I'd take another vehicle. So it's about tools for a job.

Secondly these are not simply cameras...they are systems. The chip interacts with the image processing system and the PP software. The lens is an important part of the system as is the body. and its capacity for rigidity, vibration damping and maintaining a satisfactory optical path - sensor parallel to lens plane...yadah, yadah.

Every system I own is capable of creating images that are better than my capability to use them. Each has their own strengths, limitations and uses.

Aesthetics also play an important role in camera choice.

I just think quality isn't the defining variable.

It seems that the mirrorless cameras and the new sensors are taking the previous generation systems by storm. This new Hasselblad 907 system is even more compact than Nikon D5. It delivers a mind blowing image quality you could only get from the medium format. It is priced below any Phase One DSLs camera or sensor making it more affordable and accessible by a much wider audience. Unless the image quality of CFV-50 system is worse than Phase One's I am convinced that the mirrorless technology and the new digital backs beat all the pre-existing digital photography gear, the same way Tesla beats the gasoline cars manufactures making them all look outdated or obsolete.
 

photographer

New member
I would like to clarify it for my self. Are these new mirrorless systems and the last generation sensors (priced at 20-50% of Phase One systems) able to deliver the same image QUALITY? Or is it simply a marketing trick to sell more products?
Leica has been manufacturing and selling the top of the line super expensive cameras and lenses. And at the same time Leica sold tons of consumer level products that appealed to a wider range of costumers (D-Lux, V-Lux, Digilux). We wouldn't argue that these entry level cameras produce the images that have a quite different image quality, comparing to the images produced by Leica M systems.
Or is it an advance in the new sensor/mirrorless technology that makes it now possible to manufacture a photo gear that can produce the images of the same quality that used to be only possible using a gear that costs twice, three times as much?

Both are 50MP digital backs. One at $20K and another at $7.5K



 
Last edited:

sog1927

Member
You might also want to consider the Hasselblad X1D , which also uses the same sensor (and the same lenses).

Note that the 907 you're looking out is the special "50 years on the moon" commemorative edition. The regular edition (whose price has not been announced yet) will probably be cheaper.
 

dchew

Well-known member
I would like to clarify it for my self. Are these new mirrorless systems and the last generation sensors (priced at 20-50% of Phase One systems) able to deliver the same image QUALITY? Or is it simply a marketing trick to sell more products?
The only marketing trick in your two screenshots is that word, “Preorder.”
:deadhorse:

Dave
 

Geoff

Well-known member
Re: same quality?

Let’s make this simple: No they aren’t the same. And the results differ.
 

kdphotography

Well-known member
....

Do the sensors used by these cameras produce the similar image quality? Why are the prices for both 50MP sensors so different?
Quite bluntly, you're not buying a "sensor." You are buying into a camera system.

The sensor is but just one part of the whole system, in which the sum of the parts (body, lenses, post processing, photographic experience, etc) all add in to the equation.

Medium format digital, even with the low price point of entry of the Fuji GFX, is still considered to be rarefied air by most. All produce exceptional quality image files.

The hard part is the subjective nature of selecting a system that is right for you. Visit a dealer and try before you buy is a good idea.

Dante does not care about the different "prices of sensors" or how if effects your pocketbook. If you purchase the wrong medium format camera system "for you"---it may end up being the most expensive medium format sensor that you've ever purchased.

Ken
 

tcdeveau

Well-known member
As others have said, this topic has been beaten to death and if you search around the forum there are plenty of threads about it.

The 50mp CMOS sensor you reference is the same Sony IMX161 sensor in all of the cameras.

That said, the final output can be different between the different models due to a number of variables from the how the data off the sensor is processed, to how the specific RAW converter handles it (i.e. Capture 1, Phocus, Adobe ACR, etc), to optimization of the microlenses on the sensor (I think Fuji may have optimized it slightly for their use), etc.

A choice of camera and why people go with P1 over Hasselblad over Fuji given the various models and price points is often personal based on a number of intangible aspects beyond the spec sheets. If you're interested in one of them, try to demo if you can, and make an informed choice based on your own personal preference, budget, etc. You're not likely to get a straight objective answer regarding your initial "quality" inquiry from the folks and dealers here.

Keep in mind another difference regarding price is the IMX 161 sensor is now 6 years old....which is why some of the older P1/Leaf/Hasselblad products are more expensive than the current mirrorless options (which are based on 6-year old sensor tech of a sensor still capable of producing great images). They were first on the scene (IQ2/IQ3/Credo/H5D/H6D), over time prices have come down and tech has evolved.

In today's world, the 907x/CFVII is a great bang-for-the-buck, as are the Fuji GFX 50 cameras and Hasselblad X1Ds. The IQ2/IQ3/Credo/H5D/H6D are also becoming reasonable on the second-hand market.
 

photographer

New member
I remember how much I was amazed by the quality of the first image I've made with my first medium format sensor (Leaf Aptus 7). The sharpness, the skin tone, the look and feel of the image was so much "better" than anything I have seen before. Prior to switching to Aptus I have been shooting with Nikon D1, D2 and other D# systems for more than 15 years. The difference between the 35mm digital and the medium format was mind blowing to me. Then I switched from Aptus to Phase One. But switching from one medium format digital back to another simply changed the "style" or a "character" of the images. The "medium format quality" or "a look" was there regardless of the back.
Now, with these new sensors that are priced at sub $10K level... would they be capable to deliver or support the same difference in quality that has been existing between 35mm digital and a medium format? Would you see the difference in the image quality between the Nikon D5 and Hasselblad 907X or Fuji GFX? Or may be these sub $5K priced sensors is a new category of sensors on its own, a medium-of-medium-format that simply sits between 35mm digital and the existing medium format represented today by the digital backs that are priced at $20K, $30K or $40K? What if these sensors are the equivalent of Lecia D-Lux series that was designed to be affordable Leica even without the ability to deliver the Leica's image quality?
The question is: Is this a new more efficient technology that replaces the obsolete one or is it the old saying you get what you paid for?
 

Shashin

Well-known member
The question is: Is this a new more efficient technology that replaces the obsolete one or is it the old saying you get what you paid for?
But what are you paying for? Is the cost related to low-volume production of specialized equipment or the final output? My Pentax 645D used the same 40MP sensor in Phase cameras, but the cost of the Pentax was lower and the performance was higher in terms of ISO/noise and maximum shutter speeds. The body at the time was far more sophisticated that the Phase equivalent. But Pentax was focused on higher volume sales and so could factor in lower prices to break even.

In terms of quality for the sensor and output, then any of these 50MP camera will deliver equivalent output. But as mentioned above, you are buying into a system. What lenses are available? What camera types? Do you like the choices in color management that a company makes, although you can always make your own profiles.

Yes, companies like Leica make excellent cameras, but their pricing reflects a low-volume production model as the customer base is small. Nor do they have a range of low- or mid-end consumer models with which to smooth out revenues. But where else can you buy an optical rangefinder?

So, to answer your question, price does still reflect what you are getting, but it is not not simply the quality of the file you are paying for. As far as the 50MP MF camera produced today, the quality is equivalent, the system is where they diverge.

As far as the medium-format "look," you would need to define that first. I have no idea what that actually means and I have been shooting medium-format for yonks. Does sensor size change the dynamics of the image, absolutely. But the photographer needs to change with that. I have always had to spend some time learning a new camera to learn how it "sees."
 
Top