phase and leaf chauvinism

[E_Edwards]

Here is my experience with both Leaf and Hasselblad:

About two months ago I was ready to buy into either make. I was currently using two Imacon 4040s.

I called the rep from Hass in the UK and at the same time I called one of the reps for Leaf.

Both reps came to the studio within a week knowing that I had called their ribal and may the best system win.

The Leaf guy came first, there were some problems with the software or connection or both. The lens on a Rollei ControlS wouldn't stop down through the software, it had to be done manually, then half way through the demo it started to work. No-one knew why. The file was very good, but I was left thinking that the system wasn't reliable enough, so I waited for the Hass demo.

The Hasselblad demo was the biggest disaster I've ever experienced. I felt sorry for the rep, he is a nice guy, very helpful and so on, but the camera, which he had just opened brand new from the box, didn't fire properly, the 4-shots weren't implemented yet, the Life picture wasn't implemented, everything was embarrassingly not working at all. Tell you what, much as I like the rep, I was angry that Hasselblad would allow their cameras go on demos with the knowledge that they are not ready for customer consumption.

I wasted a day, I got really impatient and Hasselblad, (I had been using two Imacons 4040 for three years, which I really liked, as I like the Flexcolor software) was suddenly out of favour, they lost my faith and my custom. If they had told me, sorry, but the camera is not ready yet, so we can't demo it, fine, I would've understood, but how can anyone buy such expensive item on the premise that it will work one day, sure it will!

So, although my natural impulse was to go Hasselblad (the Imacon 4040 was at the time, and even now, quite difficult to beat in 4-shot mode), I had to see if the Leaf guy had updated the latest firmware which he assured me was the cause of the initial erratic behaviour.

So the Leaf rep came for a second demo. This time everything worked, the camera fired, the aperture stopped down from within the software, the files were great, the image was on the screen quickly enough and so on.

I went for Leaf, and I bought two Aptus 65 actually, which are incredibly good value, as the chip is only a couple of milimetres smaller than the A75, and I always crop anyway.

I still have some nostalgia for Hasselblad, but it's only by default, as I find the Leaf software completely behind times, it does the job, though (V8). I wish the Leaf software were as practical as Flexcolor (though Flexcolor updates have removed its simplicity much to its detriment, I think)

I am willing  to give Leaf the benefit of the doubt and see if they come up with the promised software update (10.1). So far I am a bit disappointed that they have announced a delay (we were expecting something by Photokina) but my patience is not exhausted yet.

I have no loyalty to any make, they are all far from perfect, I feel that us photographers are being short changed, but we have no alternative but to chose from the small choice and make the best we can out of it.


Edward

[PhaqueName]

I have no loyalty to any make, they are all far from perfect, I feel that us photographers are being short changed, but we have no alternative but to chose from the small choice and make the best we can out of it.
Edward
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=81633\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

all three companies get failing grades in overall communication to their customers, in my opinion. look at how badly hasselblad/imacon/fuji have handled this mess since photokina -- everyone is confused, wondering what will be made, what will fit the older cameras, and no one from hasselcon will step forward to issue some kind of FAQ to clear up the murkiness. i'm sure it has already cost them dearly, since photokina. no one like murkiness, when thirty to fifty grand, plus your business reputation, is on the table. and phase and leaf are no better, with continued delayed software and hardware issues, and no one stepping forward to be a clear public spokesperson for the companies. the only winner here is canon, as a result of all this jive.

i am surprised that no magazine, or website, or even reichmann has not gone out and rented an H1, and rented all three leading digital 39mp backs, and done a side-by-side test. no asking for favors -- just go out and rent the stuff and write a review. test it on skin-tone, and full-bodies, on texture, or even on rocks-and-roots, and then also process 200 or 300 files to also see how the associated software stands up to the test. the backs are important but if the software is a mess, then buyer should know that as well. maybe even set a time limit and see if JPGs can be produced for a fictious client, and 16bit files batched from 300 files. i guess a magazine won't do it, because they jeopardize potential advertising dollars from the two losers. so that leaves either private individuals, or some group like an apa or asmp, to get together on their own, and see the results. to my knowledge, no one has tested all three, side by side, shot with the exact same camera body and exact same lens.

smoke and mirrors? yes, i'd say so. yet it would appear by the number of photographers sitting on the sidelines, waiting for some real answers to some of these pressing questions, instead of hype and conjecture, the only losers are the three medium-format companies. you would think that they'd see that, but as we all know, they don't have a great track record in being very perceptive to photographer's needs.

[Graham Mitchell]

i am surprised that no magazine, or website, or even reichmann has not gone out and rented an H1, and rented all three leading digital 39mp backs, and done a side-by-side test. no asking for favors

I'd love to do that but there are no rental backs in this country. I would have to catch a ferry over to Helsinki where the backs cost $750 each, per day, and that's assuming I can find 3 different backs for the same mount. Basically a $2500 day. Ouch.

[eronald]

PhaqueMe,

There are few pro reviewers who wish to waste their time on a product with so few potential buyers.

That is the obvious explanation because otherwise some magazine would already have gone to a rental shop, forked out a couple of days rental fees and done the job.

And the back makers are not encouraging reviews. Really not or else Michael would be drowning in review  backs.

Another problem is that in fact the backs only show their true strength and weaknesses after you have invested a couple of months work in them.

Edmund

[SeanFS]

Thanks Mark,
Great shot and nice house!
I had a good look. I have an Imacon 132c on a V system. I  am always curious as to how the next level is.

Its funny, I didn't want to buy the H1 or 2 D cameras despite the free camera and lens ( and in this market priced nz$10,000 below the 132c back as well ) as I didn't want to get hooked in to a "closed" system and wanted the opportunity to mount the back on a view camera or other system if I needed to . I'm not sure if I worried too much about this.

 I was about to buy the H2D when a lightly used second hand back came up at almost half the price of the H2D option. Reeling from having to make a recent change from Nikon to Canon , I took the opportunity ( and it meant I could resurrect my Hasselblad gear ) Great decision as it works very well for me indeed.


I'm very happy with the Imacon although it did take a while to learn the software properly and I still have a little bit of work to do with the shim kit to get the focus zeroed in completely ( I found without it  at a range of fifteen feet it focussed about four feet behind the intended target , I have that down to about six inches or less now). It vastly improved the sharpness of the CF 40mm I have. I was always able to check shrpness in the computer inthe meantime and have been a bit lazy sorting it out. i wonder if that alone doesn't prejudice some against Imacon.

I can see how Hasselcon might get a reputation as the documentation of all this is poor to non existent and the Flexframe group is essential if you own one.

When I made enquiries  , I got the info pack in the mail direct from Europe, and attended one of the seminar's run here by Hasselblad for a bit of hands on. I have to confess to not being so serious at the time and not being so impressed by some of the samples I saw bu tyou really do need some time with a back in your own familiar conditions.

One thing about your shot is I'm not impressed by the 35mm lens, possibly 39mp's are too much for it, or maybe at f19 the diffraction distortion is starting to affect the potential of the back. I guess it is resolving twice my 132 though , so its not an entirely reasonable observation.

Perhaps a closed system will eventually mean issues like that are able to be resolved through software.

Even at 22mp I find I don't get the potential resolution of of the lenses unless the mirror is locked up and the camera is tripoded or studio flash used, and the depth of focus is tiny ( even at f16!)as there is no grain to hide the unsharp bits and wonder if that is behind the current and probably future size of MF Chips and why the move to a "Full - Frame" camera by hasselblad.

I have a feeling that when america wakes up I might get a few more requests so download to your hearts content

fff file
http://www.yousendit.com/transfer.php?acti...35520D309C584C0

dng file
http://www.yousendit.com/transfer.php?acti...BF8246702282AE6
marc
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=81605\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

[marc gerritsen]

I send a file to Hasselblad that they have put through the new software and it came back
abolutely dead straight. So, yes a closed system including good software is a good option, especially if they finally (nudge nudge wink wink)  would release the new software. Without the software I am relegated to antiquated photoshop procedures.
cheers
Marc