Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 2 [3] 4 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: H3D Concerns  (Read 27474 times)
Quentin
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1094



WWW
« Reply #40 on: October 02, 2006, 12:06:38 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
If I buy a phantom Mamiya ZD system, is my investment safe? Will I bhe able to use a third party back on it? Can I use other lenses? Other software? How is the risk in buying a brand new, unproven system a lower risk? They announced this camera over two years ago, I've lost a little confidence in them!
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=78644\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

If its not safe, you've lost a heck of a lot less money for starters, which is why I invested in a Mamiya ZD (camera, not seperate back - they are available from stock in the UK).  The cost of eventually completely replacing the body is likely to be less than buying just a new back.  The lenses are a lot less expnsive but just as good, in my opinion.  I can treat it like any other dslr investment but with much better image quality.  As for the ZD back, well, who knows, frankly, but that reflects the current evolutionary state of the industry.  

Quentin
« Last Edit: October 02, 2006, 12:09:07 PM by Quentin » Logged

Quentin Bargate, ARPS, Author, photographer entrepreneur and senior partner of Bargate Murray, Law Firm of the Year 2013
Nick Rains
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 700



WWW
« Reply #41 on: October 02, 2006, 03:39:29 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
As far as Nikon goes, I see zero evidence that there is a relationship between the supposed demised of Nikon and their willingness to stick to the F mount. Some people have said that the F mount isn't compatible with FF sensors, but the Kodak SLR/n has clearly proven otherwise (I know, I used to own one).

Cheers,
Bernard
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=78677\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

The Nikon F mount caused quite a few problems with autofocus in the early 90s because it was hard to incorporate a focus motor into the lens and keep the old mount - Nikon had to put the focus motor in the body. The autofocus of the early Nikons was very slow compared to the equiv. Canons and the brand suffered as a consequence. The EOS mount, with its fully electronic coupling, allowed Canon to push the autofocus concept futher and faster than Nikon.

Nikon have now caught up but it took a while.

That is all I meant, I have no idea whether the legacy Nikon F mount has any bearing on digital sensor design...
Logged

Nick Rains
Australian Landscape Photographer
www.nickrains.com
iPad Publishing
www.photique.com.au
grandguru
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 4



WWW
« Reply #42 on: October 03, 2006, 03:46:12 AM »
ReplyReply

Am I alone in seeing the potential that is offered with the H3D? I first heard of the digital correction for optics in a speech given by Christian Poulsen last year and was literally blown away by the concept. This is one of the most fundamental improvements to imaging ever made and to be able to apply it on the fly to images as they are taken is an amazing step forward.
Why does the introduction of this camera mean that the other models will be discontinued, of course they will be offered for sale while there is a demand as is the case for the V system. Hasselbad have proved again and again that they do not kill old cameras, they have one of the best reputations of all manufacturers for support for older equipment.
I understand the reactions of people to the expression 'full frame' when applied to the H3D but in truth the camera is designed to utilise the frame of the digital chip, no more no less.
The H3D will not be end of the story, if a chip is made that just happens to coincide with a format that was dreamed up over a century ago and it offers a real advantage then Hasselblad would be foolish not to take advantage of it.
I believe that this step is a very positive one and I look forward to seeing what can be delivered with this system, after all what else matters.
Logged
michael
Administrator
Sr. Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 4788



« Reply #43 on: October 03, 2006, 04:36:54 AM »
ReplyReply

The problem is not that the H3D allows for new technology that provides digital lens correction and other capabilties. That's to be applauded, and few doubt that it's a worthwhile advance.

The issue is that Hasselblad has decided to do this in a prioprietry manner. It's only software, which means that other back makers could be licenced to handle this capability as well, but the company has deceided to restrict it to themselves.

This leads to the situation described in my essay, which I believe hurts existing H1 and H2 owners, as well as potential buyers. Ultimately, I fear, Hasselblad themselves.

This is not about technology. It's about business practices.

Michael
Logged
BernardLanguillier
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7855



WWW
« Reply #44 on: October 03, 2006, 04:53:07 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
The Nikon F mount caused quite a few problems with autofocus in the early 90s because it was hard to incorporate a focus motor into the lens and keep the old mount - Nikon had to put the focus motor in the body. The autofocus of the early Nikons was very slow compared to the equiv. Canons and the brand suffered as a consequence. The EOS mount, with its fully electronic coupling, allowed Canon to push the autofocus concept futher and faster than Nikon.

[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=78812\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Nick,

I see your point. On the hand, as far as I recall, the problem was also pretty much coming from Nikon not having mastered the AF-I/AF-S technology yet.

It is true that they had to increase the number of electrical contacts in their mount, but that didn't really seem to be a major problem.

Cheers,
Bernard
Logged

A few images online here!
grandguru
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 4



WWW
« Reply #45 on: October 03, 2006, 06:14:06 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
The issue is that Hasselblad has decided to do this in a prioprietry manner. It's only software, which means that other back makers could be licenced to handle this capability as well, but the company has deceided to restrict it to themselves.

[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=78877\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I seem to recall that when autofocus was first introduced Minolta had the field to themselves until competitors bought the license from them. This is the advancement of technology and it will not work unless the developer can recoup their investment. But no one will rush to buy a license until they are satisfied  the technology works so lets all sit back just as the lens makers and digital back makers are doing to see how good this is. All the H1 and H2 cameras and backs out there are just as good today as they were last week, who has lost anything? The future will be very interesting.
Logged
eleanorbrown
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 612


WWW
« Reply #46 on: October 03, 2006, 10:14:23 AM »
ReplyReply

I obtained the names of the US Hasselblad reps from my Phase One dealer (Global) and yesterday wrote an email letter to both of them about their upcoming "closed" system.  I let them know that I have been a long time Hasselblad customer (V and H systems) and how disappointed I am that I will not have the opportunity to purchase new equipment in the future because I can't hang my P45 on the new cameras and lenses.  I also let them know that the Hasselblad equipment will go before I give up my Phase back in favor of the Hasselblad back.

Please if any of you are dissappointed in any way about Hasselblad's marketing decision, get the names of the reps and let them know.  In the end everyone will loose, including hasselblad, if they don't reconsider their marketing strategies.  Eleanor
Logged

MarkKay
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 587


WWW
« Reply #47 on: October 03, 2006, 12:02:51 PM »
ReplyReply

I wrote and emailed my letter

Quote
I obtained the names of the US Hasselblad reps from my Phase One dealer (Global) and yesterday wrote an email letter to both of them about their upcoming "closed" system.  I let them know that I have been a long time Hasselblad customer (V and H systems) and how disappointed I am that I will not have the opportunity to purchase new equipment in the future because I can't hang my P45 on the new cameras and lenses.  I also let them know that the Hasselblad equipment will go before I give up my Phase back in favor of the Hasselblad back.

Please if any of you are dissappointed in any way about Hasselblad's marketing decision, get the names of the reps and let them know.  In the end everyone will loose, including hasselblad, if they don't reconsider their marketing strategies.  Eleanor
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=78917\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Logged
David Mantripp
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 687


WWW
« Reply #48 on: October 03, 2006, 01:35:16 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Am I alone in seeing the potential that is offered with the H3D? I first heard of the digital correction for optics in a speech given by Christian Poulsen last year and was literally blown away by the concept. This is one of the most fundamental improvements to imaging ever made and to be able to apply it on the fly to images as they are taken is an amazing step forward. [a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=78872\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Huh ? Surely Olympus does this with 4/3rds cameras and lenses ?

I can't help but wonder why digital correction is needed - I mean, are the lenses crap or something ? Will we get to the point where you can stick any old rubbish in front of sensor and have the electronivs sort it out in the mix ? And in that case, does that mean that lens prices will plummet ? After all, if you can fix it electronically, why bother designing and building good lenses ?
Logged

--
David Mantripp
http://www.snowhenge.net
eleanorbrown
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 612


WWW
« Reply #49 on: October 03, 2006, 01:35:23 PM »
ReplyReply

On case anyone is interested: Here are the email addresses of two Hassy reps:
jpayne@hasselbladusa.com
bwiseman@hasselbladusa.com
(Jeff Payne and Bruce Wiseman)
Eleanor
Logged

grandguru
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 4



WWW
« Reply #50 on: October 04, 2006, 02:32:31 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Huh ? Surely Olympus does this with 4/3rds cameras and lenses ?

I can't help but wonder why digital correction is needed - I mean, are the lenses crap or something ? Will we get to the point where you can stick any old rubbish in front of sensor and have the electronivs sort it out in the mix ? And in that case, does that mean that lens prices will plummet ? After all, if you can fix it electronically, why bother designing and building good lenses ?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=78951\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I am not a lens designer but I dont think it is possible to make a perfect lens, a designer will balance some properties  against others to get the best performance they can (at a price of course). For photography I guess chromatic aberation must be one of the most important considerations with flat field following closely behind (when did you last see a curved CCD). If the designer knew that fall off, distortion and chromatic aberation were all definable and correctable with software he could concentrate on optics that people could only dream about. I promise you that this has nothing to do with correcting poor quality optics, how pointless that would be! Correction will make the current optics even better than they are now. The genie is out of the bottle and you are granted wishes (optically at least). The argument about open or closed systems is clouding the issue and will wither away and camera makers everywhere will now raise their game, that was the point that I was making about autofocus, there will be no going back from here.
Logged
pprdigital
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 422


WWW
« Reply #51 on: October 04, 2006, 12:14:22 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
The issue is that Hasselblad has decided to do this in a prioprietry manner. It's only software, which means that other back makers could be licenced to handle this capability as well, but the company has deceided to restrict it to themselves.


Michael
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=78877\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

If it's only software, I suppose they might consider licensing or sharing their software technology to other back makers - like Phase One and Capture One software - when they decide to license or share theirs.

Steve Hendrix
PPR Digital
Logged

Steve Hendrix
Photomangreg
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 65


« Reply #52 on: October 04, 2006, 02:25:42 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
If it's only software, I suppose they might consider licensing or sharing their software technology to other back makers - like Phase One and Capture One software - when they decide to license or share theirs.

Steve Hendrix
PPR Digital
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=79075\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


Why doesn't Phase give away Capture One software?  I hope they're not trying to make a profit!  Every year or so I have to pay or an upgrade, wouldn't it be better if they shared their software technology openly with Canon and Adobe?  No, instead they are locking other software manufacturers out!  I think there should be some sort of legal investigation into their practices....
Logged
DarkPenguin
Guest
« Reply #53 on: October 04, 2006, 02:29:47 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Every year or so I have to pay or an upgrade, wouldn't it be better if they shared their software technology openly with Canon and Adobe?

Sure would.
Logged
BernardLanguillier
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7855



WWW
« Reply #54 on: October 04, 2006, 06:03:22 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Why doesn't Phase give away Capture One software?  I hope they're not trying to make a profit!  Every year or so I have to pay or an upgrade, wouldn't it be better if they shared their software technology openly with Canon and Adobe?  No, instead they are locking other software manufacturers out!  I think there should be some sort of legal investigation into their practices....
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=79087\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

That's a little bit unfair. Noone requested Hassy to license their lens/back software interface for free.

If you are speaking about the opening of the Phaseone backs "color callibration" information to third parties, then I agree with you, but I also don't think that it should be done for free.

Regards,
Bernard
Logged

A few images online here!
Photomangreg
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 65


« Reply #55 on: October 04, 2006, 06:27:03 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
That's a little bit unfair. Noone requested Hassy to license their lens/back software interface for free.

If you are speaking about the opening of the Phaseone backs "color callibration" information to third parties, then I agree with you, but I also don't think that it should be done for free.

Regards,
Bernard
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=79117\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I am under the impression that hassy has tried to get license agreements from both Phase and Leaf
Logged
BernardLanguillier
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7855



WWW
« Reply #56 on: October 04, 2006, 06:43:46 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
I am under the impression that hassy has tried to get license agreements from both Phase and Leaf
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=79121\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

So you do have some insider relationship with Hassy, don't you?

Cheers,
Bernard
Logged

A few images online here!
eleanorbrown
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 612


WWW
« Reply #57 on: October 10, 2006, 10:58:21 PM »
ReplyReply

Here's an email I recieved from Hasselblad CEO's office today . eleanor

"Thank you for your mail.
Yes, there has been a lot of confusion, but let me try to give you my personal view.

The H3D camera is our attempt to challenge, in a serious way, the dominance of the Nikon and Canon DSLR cameras in the high end market.
There are things in both the optical system, the image quality, functionality and the ease of use that simply is not possible to achieve unless we create a true DSLR camera, which the H3D is.
The 35 mm DSLR camera vendors chose to make 2 different product lines, one analog and one digital years ago, instead of creating a hybrid solution. I think everybody agree that the gap between these cameras and a film camera with a camera back is smaller now than ever. Hasselblad need to change this. In my opinion Hasselblad lost most of its market position to 35 mm SLR cameras years ago by not making important changes in due time, and it is my job to secure that this doesn't happen again.
In industries where technology and markets become more mature, products and solutions often become more and more integrated. This is the trend we are seeing.
I hope you agree that Hasselblad need to make the best cameras possible, to allow the best photographers to shoot the best possible images in the future.
Next time when you get a chance check out an H3D, and I am sure you will see the difference.
The new DSLR strategy does not mean that we will not continue to support our existing product lines. We will continue to supply H2 cameras and lenses etc. as well as 503 CW cameras along with a line of camera backs. "


Best Regards

Christian Poulsen
CEO, Hasselblad
+45 70 26 08 00
christian.poulsen@hasselblad.com
Logged

MarkKay
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 587


WWW
« Reply #58 on: October 10, 2006, 07:44:04 PM »
ReplyReply

I got a similar email from a Hasselblad higher up in the USA. He has been very responsive to my needs when I had problems.  The difference in his email vs the one you list below was that he did not mention any thing about Canon or Nikon.  To state that Hassy lost out on sales based on the Canon/Nikon more rapid  move to digital is ludicrous.  IT is only in the two or three years that the digital sensors have been cost effective, big enough, and good enough to compete with MF film images.   Even when Canon came out with the D30 it was so inferior to 35mm film, and some might argure that their 1Ds or 1Dsmk2 is the first DSLR that is as least as good as film.    In addition, the consumers and pros that shoot with 35 vs MF are different.  I do not think I would ever see a sports or birder using MF (at least extremely rare) shooting with MF.  I think the markets are different albeit with a very slim overlap.  

When i got my letter,  I stated that I was disappointed that there would be no new H2 compatible lenses.  I have been waiting for a shift or tilt/shift option.  Perhaps I should not have gone with Hasselblad based on rumors that they would make such a lens for the H2. I decided to go with Hassy and even  paid extra for an H2 sliding back mount for my view camera figuring that this would be the dominant MF system out there.  If I would have known their plans, I would have waited instead of spending all that money.  Mark

Quote
Here's an email I recieved from Hasselblad CEO's office today . eleanor

"Thank you for your mail.
Yes, there has been a lot of confusion, but let me try to give you my personal view.

The H3D camera is our attempt to challenge, in a serious way, the dominance of the Nikon and Canon DSLR cameras in the high end market.
There are things in both the optical system, the image quality, functionality and the ease of use that simply is not possible to achieve unless we create a true DSLR camera, which the H3D is.
The 35 mm DSLR camera vendors chose to make 2 different product lines, one analog and one digital years ago, instead of creating a hybrid solution. I think everybody agree that the gap between these cameras and a film camera with a camera back is smaller now than ever. Hasselblad need to change this. In my opinion Hasselblad lost most of its market position to 35 mm SLR cameras years ago by not making important changes in due time, and it is my job to secure that this doesn't happen again.
In industries where technology and markets become more mature, products and solutions often become more and more integrated. This is the trend we are seeing.
I hope you agree that Hasselblad need to make the best cameras possible, to allow the best photographers to shoot the best possible images in the future.
Next time when you get a chance check out an H3D, and I am sure you will see the difference.
The new DSLR strategy does not mean that we will not continue to support our existing product lines. We will continue to supply H2 cameras and lenses etc. as well as 503 CW cameras along with a line of camera backs. "
Best Regards

Christian Poulsen
CEO, Hasselblad
+45 70 26 08 00
christian.poulsen@hasselblad.com
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=79811\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Logged
John Camp
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1258


« Reply #59 on: October 10, 2006, 09:52:41 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
To state that Hassy lost out on sales based on the Canon/Nikon more rapid  move to digital is ludicrous.  IT is only in the two or three years that the digital sensors have been cost effective, big enough, and good enough to compete with MF film images.   Even when Canon came out with the D30 it was so inferior to 35mm film, and some might argure that their 1Ds or 1Dsmk2 is the first DSLR that is as least as good as film.    In addition, the consumers and pros that shoot with 35 vs MF are different.  I do not think I would ever see a sports or birder using MF (at least extremely rare) shooting with MF.  I think the markets are different albeit with a very slim overlap. 
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=79863\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I think (but I'm not sure) that you misinterpreted what he said, or at least what he meant. I think he meant that Hasselblad got squeezed at the high end **in film cameras** years ago, because Nikon and Canon cameras became so good that MF in general began to lose out. That's what he doesn't want to happen again, with digital.

Most people would now tell you that film was more or less matched at ~ 6mp; or at about the Nikon D1x level, and that the top-end Canons and Nikons now challenge MF. When he says he doesn't want it to happen again, he doesn't want Canon and Nikon, expected to move up to the ~22mp arena in the next step, to again squeeze Hasselblad out of the market.

He may have an argument, but I suspect MF is a long-term loser and a niche product anyway. In four to six years, I doubt there will be any big commercial application for which Nikons, Canons, etc., will not be adequate. MF, IMHO, will pretty much become the preserve of art shooters and people who need to make super-sized prints.

JC
Logged
Pages: « 1 2 [3] 4 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad