Questions on the new sensors quality

[photographer]

I believe my current system (Rz67+Phase One) a result of what being referred to as a low-volume production of specialized equipment able to produce the image quality unreachable for 35mm digital sensors. Would it be safe to consider that Hasselblad 907X or Fuji GFX systems are able to produce the equal results? Or are they just another mid-end consumer models making their owners believe they use a medium format for the fraction of cost?

 

[bab]

Cost twice as much new but previously experienced its only $7700.00 and the right HCD lenses are really cheap used.

https://www.mpb.com/en-us/used-equi...format-cameras/hasselblad-h6d-50c/sku-895912/ (it will come down in price if not sold in a week or so)

You may want to buy it and experience the portability of the system its really the same as carrying a Nikon D5. You can shoot it handheld with a double grip at 1/30sec or with the single battery grip @250sec. Depending on your lens choice its files are unreal.

Best lenses for schlepping around and sharpness would be the 28mm 50mmii, 80mm, 100mm, 210mm. With all the internet hype this system still rocks and its hard to beat.

 

[Shashin]

I believe my current system (Rz67+Phase One) a result of what being referred to as a low-volume production of specialized equipment able to produce the image quality unreachable for 35mm digital sensors. Would it be safe to consider that Hasselblad 907X or Fuji GFX systems are able to produce the equal results? Or are they just another mid-end consumer models making their owners believe they use a medium format for the fraction of cost?

Equal based on what criteria? Noise, DR, and maximum shutter speed will be better than your p65+, sensor size is not, but if you are a landscape shooter that maximizes depth of field, that might not be an issue. Lenses could also be better than your Mamiya lenses.

I would suggest renting some of these system so you can assess if they will meet your needs.

Given the number of talented professional and amateur photographer on this forum that produce exceptional work with these 50MP sensors, I would say they do in fact deliver high-quality images. And yes, an RZ67 with a p65+ back is a low-volume, specialized camera. You seem to be offended by that and I am unsure why. But the 50MP cameras are not mid-end consumer models either. Since some of these photographers that use those cameras (and have used Phase backs as well) are trying to help by answering your questions, I would be more open to their experience.

 

[Steve Hendrix]

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

Please note - Leaf Credo 50 digital backs are discontinued. All Leaf products are discontinued.

BH often is very slow to remove website store listings when things change. This is one of those times.

Second hand, Leaf 50mp digital backs (as well as Phase One 50mp solutions) can be purchased, even from trustworthy, knowledgeable and supportive dealers, for around the same price as the CFV II kit you referenced.

The image quality is different between all of these 50mp solutions, but the quality level is generally in the same ballpark, considering they are all working from the same base sensor.


Steve Hendrix/CI

 

[algrove]

I've got it now. My mobile phone camera delivers different from Phase One or Hasselblad system images.

Click bait newbie here

 

[Mexecutioner]

Click bait newbie here

I think enough time has been wasted on this. Wait, what am I even doing here?

 

[sog1927]

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?

As others have noted, this sensor is *not* a "new sensor". It is the very *same* 6 year-old sensor that is in the H5d-50c, H6d-50c, and the 50MP CMOS backs from Leaf and Phase, as well as the Pentax 645z, Hasselblad X1d (I *and* II), and the 50MP GFX and GFR cameras from Fuji. As others have also pointed out, there's more here than just the sensor.

So, let's compare this to what you're using *now*: a P65+ mounted on an RZ67.

The sensor technology is *different* here: the P65+ is a CCD (charge-coupled device) sensor, and the current 50MP, 100MP, and 150MP sensors are all CMOS-based.

Many people feel that the color rendition from CCD sensors is more pleasing than CMOS sensors, however I think these differences have largely been eradicated over the years. Phase and Hasselblad have both put a huge amount of effort into getting the color from CMOS sensors to match the results from their older backs through the supporting circuitry and firmware in their backs. Overall, they've both done an excellent job. However, this is a judgement call - you should look at files from these cameras and compare them.

The CMOS sensors offer better dynamic range (14-16 stops) than CCD. This makes it easier to handle high-contrast subjects and to recover shadow detail. They offer better performance with less noise at high ISO. They offer better long-exposure performance. None of those features may matter to the way you shoot.

As others have noted, you're not just buying a sensor here: you're buying a camera *system*. Bodies, lenses, etc., etc.

On lenses: thanks in part to the plummeting cost of computation, modern medium format lenses are simply superb. You basically can't go wrong here. This site is full of real-world test results you can look at. The 907x uses the same lens mount and lenses as the X1D, and all the native X lenses are fantastic. I haven't used the Fuji system, but their results are comparable, judging from test results. Because these are all mirrorless systems with very short flange-to-sensor distances, it is easy to adapt lenses from other cameras to them. Because of differences in the camera bodies, however, you may have less functionality with adapted lenses (except Hasselblad H-series lenses) on the X1D/907x than you would on the Fuji.

On bodies: The Hasselblad X1D cameras are smaller and lighter than the corresponding Fuji bodies. They're actually not a lot bigger than a Leica M-series range finder (and they're actually thinner than Leica M). The actual *body* of the 907x is even smaller, since it's just an interface between the back and the lens mount, but of course it does have that CFV50c-ii hanging off the back of it. You won't be able to put a 907x+CFV in your jacket pocket, but you can do that with an X1D.

One of the major reasons the Fuji bodies are larger is that they have a fully-functional focal-plane shutter in the body. Like Hasselblad H-series SLRs, neither the X1D nor the 907x have this - they mostly depend on leaf shutters in the lenses. Leaf shutters are generally quieter and produce much less vibration than focal plane shutters, however they do entail the added cost of including a shutter with each and every lens. They also permit full flash sync up to their maximum speed (1/2000 sec on the X1D), but that may not matter to you. The lack of a focal plane shutter also means that you'll have less flexibility when using adapted third-party lenses on the X1D and the 907x. You *can* use such lenses, but you'll be stuck relying on the electronic shutter in the sensor itself - which can be very limiting (0.3 second scan time pretty much restricts you to static subjects and usually a tripod and you generally can't use flash). The Fuji, on the other hand, retains full shutter capability with such lenses. This may or may not matter to you. The Fuji is a bit more modular than the X1D, as well.

Here's a front view of the Fuji, Hasselblad, and Pentax 50MP bodies so you can compare width and height:

And here's the view from the top so you can see the relative thickness:

I can't find a side-by-side image of an x1d and an RZ-67 ;-)

I don't really think it's possible to make a mistake here - we're living in the Golden Age of medium format digital. A lot of this stuff comes down to personal taste.

 

[kdphotography]

That profile of the X1D is just sexy.

And that's coming from a Phase One photographer. :loco:

 

[sog1927]

That profile of the X1D is just sexy.

And that's coming from a Phase One photographer. :loco:

Yeah, when I ordered the X1D, I ordered the hefty, regular-sized Peak Design strap for it (being used to toting around a 503CW with prism and winder, I figured I needed a big strap). It honestly looks kind of ridiculous on that little, tiny body. I think the strap may actually outweigh the camera.

 

[kdphotography]

Off-topic, but probably more beneficial now anyway

See, https://lancecamerastraps.com/ look at the quick release non-adjust neck strap for that X1D. That's what I'd get if Phase One made something with a profile like the X1D. Now about that Leica M10 Monochrome...

 

[ErikKaffehr]

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?

Hi,

Sensors made by Sony are probably created equal. I would be pretty sure that all the Sony CMOS 33x44 mm sensors yield raw files of the exactly same quality.

The rest depends on what you have in front of the sensor and if the photographer can make best use of it.

In this area the mirrorless systems have at least four benefits:

• The lens is optimized for the sensor size. That alone makes the lenses a bit sharper, assuming all other things being equal.
• Viewing and focusing is based on the image projected on the sensor, essentially eliminating most alignment errors.
• Having the sensor built in eliminates one possible alignment issue.
• EVF solutions can focus over a large part of the sensor area.

With a DSLR we have the mirror, that has some tolerances, the AF mirror sitting behind the mirror that also has tolerances and the AF sensor itself. With just a central AF point there is a need to 'focus recompose' which introduces a systematic error. With mirrorless you can simply put the AF point on the nearest eye.

There are essentially two ways to make profit. Sell a few copies at a high price or sell many copies at an affordable price. Doing the latter doesn't come free, there is a need to employ personnel and make production efficient.

It seems that Phase One doesn't plan on competing in the 33x44 photography market. Aerial photography may be different.

It is hard to know how much advantage 54x41 mm may hold over 44x33 mm. The sensor size difference is not huge. It seems that both Fujifilm and Hasselblad use quite advanced lens design. Would be no great surprise if optical engineering would compensate for the smaller image size. Hard to know.

With Fujifilm, being a part of large technology maker probably has some advantages, for instance, they can reuse existing in camera ASICs and camera firmware.

Hasselblad may be in a worse shape. But, with DJI ownership things are a bit different to predict.

It is a bit interesting, Michael Clark, who used to be Hasselblad shooter did a shoot in cooperation with Fujifilm with the GFX 100 before it was released, and decided to go with the system. Initially he planned to keep the HC lenses to shoot with studio flash in the field, but I have seen that he sold of all the lenses. Seems that Elinchrome's HyperSync technology works good enough for his needs.

I would guess that Phase One is going high end. A bit like high end audio. Work with specialized solution with high end prices. It seems that they are making Capture One into a separate product, Capture One is no longer on Phase One home page: https://www.captureone.com/

Difficult to predict the future is...

Best regards
Erik

 

[photographer]

The medium format traditionally refers to the cameras that expose the film with one side being 56mm long (approx.). We know there are multiple implementations of this medium format exist: 6×4.5, 6x6, 6x7, 6x8, 6x9 and all the way to 6x24.
The largest digital sensor produced by Phase One is 53.7×40.4mm which is just a few mm shorter than a film. Other digital backs while had the smaller sensors have been at least designed to work with the medium format cameras and theirs medium format lenses.

Since now the manufacturers redesigned the medium format lenses "to work better" with the new 44x33mm sensors they should end up with a new term for this format, such as large full frame format (44x33mm is 8mm closer to the 36x24mm full size format and 11mm further from the 56x56 medium format).

If the new cameras are designed to work with the lenses that only support 44x33mm sensors then there will be no other sensor sizes available for these systems. The design and the manufacture of the cameras and lenses dedicated solely to 44x33mm size sensors yields a new digital camera format yet to be named.

 

[B L]

.... The design and the manufacture of the cameras and lenses dedicated solely to 44x33mm size sensors yields a new digital camera format yet to be named.

That is why I like the Hasselblad V more and more. The lenses cover 56X56 and is ready to accept any back under 56X56 sensor size.

 

[Abstraction]

That is why I like the Hasselblad V more and more. The lenses cover 56X56 and is ready to accept any back under 56X56 sensor size.

The problem with using Hasselblad V cameras with digital backs is that since they were designed for the square format, they're awkward to hand hold in portrait mode. Additionally, AFAIK, the widest lens in existence for the V system is 40mm, which is fairly wide for a 6x6 format, but not very wide for the 33x44

 

[dougpeterson]

The problem with using Hasselblad V cameras with digital backs is that since they were designed for the square format, they're awkward to hand hold in portrait mode. Additionally, AFAIK, the widest lens in existence for the V system is 40mm, which is fairly wide for a 6x6 format, but not very wide for the 33x44

Notably, Phase One and Leaf digital hacks for the Hassy V can rotate between horizontal and vertical orientation. Many of those backs are also essentially the same size as 6x6 film (the actual exposed area) on the long axis.

Older backs: https://dt-outlet.com/product-category/digital-backs/
Newer backs: https://www.dtcommercialphoto.com/p...ies-lenses/pre-owned-phase-one-digital-backs/

 

[mristuccia]

digital hacks for the Hassy V

Please tell me more...

 

[jng]

Please tell me more...

Not so much a hack as thoughtful and clever design solutions to help meet the needs of the photographer in the field. The Leaf backs (well, some of them, at least) incorporate a rotating sensor that allows positioning the sensor in either landscape or portrait orientation without removing the back from the camera. The Phase One solution for the V system-compatible IQ backs was to have two sets of mounting hardware placed at 90 degrees relative to each other. Switching from one orientation to the other therefore requires removing and remounting the back, which I view as only a minor inconvenience given the added flexibility, especially when shooting locked down on a tripod.

John

 

[mristuccia]

Not so much a hack as thoughtful and clever design solutions to help meet the needs of the photographer in the field. The Leaf backs (well, some of them, at least) incorporate a rotating sensor that allows positioning the sensor in either landscape or portrait orientation without removing the back from the camera. The Phase One solution for the V system-compatible IQ backs was to have two sets of mounting hardware placed at 90 degrees relative to each other. Switching from one orientation to the other therefore requires removing and remounting the back, which I view as only a minor inconvenience given the added flexibility, especially when shooting locked down on a tripod.

John

Hi John,

thanks for your time and the explanation.
I already know about this, I just wanted to make a joke because I've thought "hacks" was a typo for "backs". And I'm always more interested in hacks than in backs.

 

[jng]

Hi John,

thanks for your time and the explanation.
I already know about this, I just wanted to make a joke because I've thought "hacks" was a typo for "backs". And I'm always more interested in hacks than in backs.

Doh! :facesmack: We're only one month into the year and already I need a vacation!