Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 [2] 3 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Michael--3HD question  (Read 12033 times)
william
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 370


« Reply #20 on: December 27, 2006, 06:20:24 PM »
ReplyReply

In terms of everything but its presence in rental houses and dealer support in the US, people who've used a Rollei 6008 AF or Integral  (including me) for any length of time generally think it's one of the best MF cameras ever made.


Quote
As for the other criteria you mention, I will just say that the Hy6 is a blank slate today, but based upon the historical record of Rollei, those are not likely to be the Hy6's selling strengths.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=92539\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
« Last Edit: December 27, 2006, 06:21:16 PM by william » Logged
MarkKay
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 587


WWW
« Reply #21 on: December 27, 2006, 09:39:05 PM »
ReplyReply

I would like to add another point about why it is absurd to compare the Hasselblad and Canon  scenarios. The canon releases do not preclude one from using their new or older lenses on any of their EOS systems.  The one exception is the EF-S lenses made specifically for the 1.6x crop sensors.  This fills a niche for digital rebel users who do not have the appropriate  wide angle options. In the case of Hasselblad,  their new lenses(for which their is a general void-- 28mm and T/S) will likely not be supported by their H2 system even though Hassy claims they will still support this system. Mark

Quote
Emotional?

My comments are based on intervews conducted by me as well as others with Christian Poulsen, the CEO of Hasselblad at Photokina in September. I am simply reporting what we were told. Nothing emotional about the information, other of course than my response to it.

And as for the Canon 1Ds being a closed system, that's a complete non-sequitar. A Canon system doesn't have interchangable sensors (backs), which the H1 and H2 do. I would agree that the H3D is like a Canon in that you buy the camera and sensor as a system. The H1 and H2 are more like a film based system which allows the photographer to choose their recording medium.

The situation is simply this. Hasselblad has huge debt, and can't make enough money to service that debt by selling just cameras and lenses. Their margins on digital backs are much higher, but they have to share that market on the H1 and H2 with Phase One, Leaf and Sinar / Jenoptic.

By making the H3 incompable with any back other than their own they want to force photographers to buy H backs. By creating lenses which reply on software to correct for optical abberations they lower production costs as well as lock out the competition (through patent protection).

It's a marketing strategy, that's all. And based on reaction by photographers and dealers so far, a highly flawed one. It's also thrown off course by the F&H Hy6, which likely blindsided Hasselblad. Soon there will be an alternative medium format system backed by all of its digital back competators. Without the Hy6 Hasselblad "might" have been able to force their program down our throats. With it, it seems to me to be a doomed strategy.

As someone who owns an H1, H2 and four H lenses this is of more than academic interest. So, if my tone seems emotional – well, it is. On the other hands, I am simply stating the facts as I know them. If anyone has definitive information to the contrary I'll be pleased to hear it, and publish it.

In fact, if anyone from Hasselblad reads this, I would be happy to provide an online forum for a debate on the matter.

Michael
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=92499\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Logged
hcubell
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 730


WWW
« Reply #22 on: December 27, 2006, 10:02:22 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
What you seem to be overlooking is that many MFDB owners are tight to a brand (be it Leaf, Phase,...) because it makes it a lot cheaper for them to upgrade to the next generation back.

Hassy has chosen a path with some advantages, but also some clear drawbacks. It would seem that you are not realistic about these drawbacks, and about how many potential buyers see these drawbacks.

I have personnally taken the decision to "lock myself" in the Mamiya ZD system coming from a H1 + film back, but I was starting from scratch in the MFD world and the entry price was low. I have decided to leave the Hassy world for various reasons, but the closure of the system is a major one. It just doesn't appear to be a platform with enough options anymore, even if the image quality of the H3D is probably great.

Cheers,
Bernard
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=92559\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

1. I understand why legacy Phase and Leaf  owners are ticked about the H3D, but the original poster was asking about a the best option for a NEW owner of a MFDB.
2. Just what options do the other platforms available today offer that Hasselblad does not? What am I missing? Let's see, there is Contax and Mamiya. One has already been discontinued. Their roadmap looks quite cloudy. As between Hasselblad and Mamiya, who do you trust more to have a fulsome offering of new lenses and other capabilities in the future? Mamiya has had the ZD out for how long now and they are petrified to release it in the US. You want to place your faith in them?
3. Before you left the Hassy world, did you test the Hasselblad offerings to provide an objective basis for the decision? I can relate to someone testing the equipment and doing an informed assessment that concludes that the Hasselblad path---camera, lenses, back, and software--- does not meet their needs, but how does one reach that conclusion without any testing and in anticipation of a camera, the Hy6, that does not even exist yet?
Logged

BernardLanguillier
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8255



WWW
« Reply #23 on: December 27, 2006, 11:47:22 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
2. Just what options do the other platforms available today offer that Hasselblad does not? What am I missing? Let's see, there is Contax and Mamiya. One has already been discontinued. Their roadmap looks quite cloudy. As between Hasselblad and Mamiya, who do you trust more to have a fulsome offering of new lenses and other capabilities in the future? Mamiya has had the ZD out for how long now and they are petrified to release it in the US. You want to place your faith in them?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=92584\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Yep, I agree that Hassy has a better chance to still be alive in a few years than Mamiya has.

Quote
3. Before you left the Hassy world, did you test the Hasselblad offerings to provide an objective basis for the decision? I can relate to someone testing the equipment and doing an informed assessment that concludes that the Hasselblad path---camera, lenses, back, and software--- does not meet their needs, but how does one reach that conclusion without any testing and in anticipation of a camera, the Hy6, that does not even exist yet?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=92584\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

As far as I am concerned, I didn't do these tests, but have never really questionned the quality of the results delivered by the H3D, except perhaps at higher ISO where I suspect that Leaf has a significant lead.

One thing though is that I never really liked the H1 system. It was very buggy, was basically unusable handheld in portrait mode. The lenses are very expensive and way too heavy compared to the competition. I now find the Mamiya 35 mm to be basically as good as the Hassy, at about 1/2 the weight and 1/2 the price.

My decision to go the Mamiya route was financial first, but the idea of being able to keep using my set of Mamiya lenses in the future if I end up being in a position to upgrade later to a Leaf or Phase back on a 645 AF was also part of the equation.

If I had decided to invest in Hassy, and to buy one of their 3000+ US$ 28 mm for a H3D (price is unconfirmed as far as I know) only to find out 6 months later that the next generation Leaf trumps the H3D/H4D, that money would have been simply wasted.

This is purely theoretical as far as I am concerned since I didn't have the funds to buy into high end anyway.

If I were to start from scratch today and looking into a high end system, I would wait until at least PMA and/or the release of the first reviews of the new Rollei system before taking a decision. The situation is very confused today, and the positionning of Phase relative to the Rollei system is still unclear.

Regards,
Bernard
Logged

A few images online here!
DarkPenguin
Guest
« Reply #24 on: December 28, 2006, 12:09:00 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
1. I understand why legacy Phase and Leaf  owners are ticked about the H3D, but the original poster was asking about a the best option for a NEW owner of a MFDB.

When you upgrade that leaf back are you stuck with the same system?  Or can you switch from a foo camera company compatible back to a bar camera company compatible back?  In these uncertain times that might be a good thing.  Or not.  Depends on who's financials you trust.
Logged
BJL
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5164


« Reply #25 on: December 28, 2006, 09:55:06 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Hasselblad ... optical correction in firmware. This helps reduce the price of the lens and also helps keep the new system closed.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=92402\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
The last clause is one way to spin it. As a possible alternative,
"Optical correction in firmware has advantages such as reducing the price of the lens and perhaps allowing lower distortion that can be achieved by purely optical means in a wide angle lens at any price, and this is one inherent advantage of an "integrated" ("closed") system over a "mix and match" one.
Logged
michael
Administrator
Sr. Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 4903



« Reply #26 on: December 28, 2006, 10:01:28 AM »
ReplyReply

Yes, it's "spin", but it's also accurate.

Hasselblad has made it clear that they do not intend to license their interface, and therefore no other manufacturer will be able to make their backs able to work with these lenses.

Another aspect of this is that there is currently legal action being taken in Europe in the Competition courts (not sure of the right naming), as to whether this approach by Hasseblad could be considered, what is known in the US, as "restraint of trade". First round hearings went against Hasselblad, I am told.

Call it spin. Call it the public interest. We'll see.

Michael
Logged
jecxz
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 377


WWW
« Reply #27 on: December 28, 2006, 06:31:43 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Just for clarity – if one is shooting film then upgrading to an H3 may well be worthwhile.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=92421\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Michael, I know there's a lot of back and forth on other issues, but if you could be specific on why it would be worthwhile for film shooters to move from an H2 to H3? Thanks.
Logged

michael
Administrator
Sr. Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 4903



« Reply #28 on: December 28, 2006, 07:18:03 PM »
ReplyReply

Simply that the new lenses may prove worthwhile. Since there's no issue regarding the digital back interface, there's no reason to not consider an updage or purchase of an H3 if it looks like it'll do the job. The only problem that I have is Hasselblad turning into a closed system when it comes to digital.

Michael
Logged
hcubell
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 730


WWW
« Reply #29 on: December 28, 2006, 07:36:08 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Simply that the new lenses may prove worthwhile. Since there's no issue regarding the digital back interface, there's no reason to not consider an updage or purchase of an H3 if it looks like it'll do the job. The only problem that I have is Hasselblad turning into a closed system when it comes to digital.

Michael
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=92700\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Actually, the new 28mm lens for the H3 is NOT compatible with the film back. It must be part of a plan to force owners of H1s and H2s to give up film and buy a Hasselblad digital back.
Logged

michael
Administrator
Sr. Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 4903



« Reply #30 on: December 28, 2006, 07:54:14 PM »
ReplyReply

You're right. I'd forgotten that. The lens correction is in the back, and obviously not in film backs.

Couple that with the price of film backs having been raised to $2,000 last year, and the writing is on the wall.

Michael
Logged
jecxz
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 377


WWW
« Reply #31 on: December 28, 2006, 08:22:14 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
You're right. I'd forgotten that. The lens correction is in the back, and obviously not in film backs.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=92707\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I got the impression there was more to it than the 28mm lens. I'll stick with the H2. Thanks.
Logged

pprdigital
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 422


WWW
« Reply #32 on: December 28, 2006, 10:13:49 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
I got the impression there was more to it than the 28mm lens. I'll stick with the H2. Thanks.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=92715\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

At any rate, there is no H3 camera anyway. There is only an H1 or H2 camera. The only H3 is an H3D, which in addition to the Hasselblad digital back, will accept the Hasselblad film back, and no other digital backs.

Steve Hendrix
PPR Digital
Logged

Steve Hendrix
Caracalla
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 156



WWW
« Reply #33 on: December 29, 2006, 01:41:20 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
At any rate, there is no H3 camera anyway. There is only an H1 or H2 camera. The only H3 is an H3D, which in addition to the Hasselblad digital back, will accept the Hasselblad film back, and no other digital backs.

Steve Hendrix
PPR Digital

If Hasselblad is to support film back on H3D, that brings another thought which leads me to believe that their non-software corrected lenses & software corrected lenses like 28mm etc. could be altered/corrected using their own processing FlexColor software `using computer of course`.

If this is possible, then the difference is pure choice of convenience shooting with digital back Including the auto-correction of course. I doubt that the correction feature will be absent in their present/future FlexColor software and only available in their DB with the correction applied auto-internally.

If that proves to be true, what is to stop any of us using film, scanned, processed and finally corrected in their FlexColor software regardless of camera choice,  H2/H3D. This will not be a promising solution/workflow for any of us using LEAF/PHASE/eMotion, but if available, it’s there, so why not use it?  I know 28mm does not cover the full frame but If scanned not a huge problem…..  However, still `sufficiently` CLOSED!!!

REGARDS
« Last Edit: December 29, 2006, 02:58:14 AM by Caracalla » Logged
jecxz
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 377


WWW
« Reply #34 on: December 29, 2006, 05:39:40 AM »
ReplyReply

I suspect the image correction is done by the digital back when the shutter is opened. Does anyone know, is this image perspective control similar to the technology offered in CS2?

Does anyone know if it is WYSIWYG through the viewfinder--meaning, when you look through the viewfinder, do you see what is captured digitally with the H3D?

Has anyone purchased an H3D yet? If so, can you please tell me the firmware version? I would not be surprised if is the same as my H2 firmware/software version--which has proven to be very stable and reliable.
Logged

BJL
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5164


« Reply #35 on: December 29, 2006, 09:32:53 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Another aspect of this is that there is currently legal action being taken in Europe in the Competition courts (not sure of the right naming), as to whether this approach by Hasseblad could be considered, what is known in the US, as "restraint of trade".
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=92631\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I take it that this legal claim is based on the idea that it would be possible for Imacon-Hasseblad and partner Fuji to share their body-back protocols with competitors, but they chose not to. On any other grounds, the H3D is less closed than physically integrated body-with-sensor systems like the Mamiya ZD and all those 35mm and smaller format DSLR's, which are not subject to any such legal action.

But if it is a matter of not sharing proprietary communication protocols, what about the common practice of SLR makers not sharing their body-lens communication protocols with third party lens makes, so that Sigma in particular has to reverse engineer those protocols, and so sometimes has to re-chip lenses to keep them working with newer SLR bodies?

I have seen little or no criticism of those attempts to keep SLR lens-body systems closed (never mind that the efforts are often defeated by reverse engineering) and in analogy to the current enthusiasm for the Rollei system, I do not see openness much used as an argument for adopting FourThirds, or restricting oneself to using the older out-of-patent "public domain" parts of other lens-body interfaces.

Thus I expect that the degree of openness of the various options (Rollei, Imacon-Hasselblad, Mamiya, the delayed Pentax integrated DMF body, or even the best of the smaller format systems) will often be outweighed by other factors when photographers choose systems.
Logged
jani
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1604



WWW
« Reply #36 on: December 29, 2006, 11:21:04 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
I have seen little or no criticism of those attempts to keep SLR lens-body systems closed (never mind that the efforts are often defeated by reverse engineering) and in analogy to the current enthusiasm for the Rollei system, I do not see openness much used as an argument for adopting FourThirds, or restricting oneself to using the older out-of-patent "public domain" parts of other lens-body interfaces.
That debate was certainly lively enough while it raged, but that is a few years ago now.

I don't see anything particularly new about the Hasselblad H3D debate that wasn't already raised in the debate of "chipped" lenses.

But rest assured, there was an argument then, too.
Logged

Jan
erikhillard
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 59


« Reply #37 on: December 30, 2006, 11:22:03 PM »
ReplyReply

In regards to the question about what the other backs have that Hasselblad does not..

SPEED.

I cannot speak for the H3D but I recently worked a job where the photographer had an H1D and hired me for an additional camera setup with a Phase P30 back.  The recycle time on for the H1D back was quite slow compared to the P30.

I tried to rent an Hasselblad back recent and Samy's Camera Rental Department in LA told me they stopped renting the H1D system because of so many complaints and problems from their client base.  They have been renting Leaf backs for a long time and now rent Phase too.
Logged


Erik Hillard

Running Pixels
http://www.runningpixels.net/
pprdigital
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 422


WWW
« Reply #38 on: December 31, 2006, 11:26:46 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
In regards to the question about what the other backs have that Hasselblad does not..

SPEED.

I cannot speak for the H3D but I recently worked a job where the photographer had an H1D and hired me for an additional camera setup with a Phase P30 back.  The recycle time on for the H1D back was quite slow compared to the P30.

I tried to rent an Hasselblad back recent and Samy's Camera Rental Department in LA told me they stopped renting the H1D system because of so many complaints and problems from their client base.  They have been renting Leaf backs for a long time and now rent Phase too.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=92994\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Eric:

How can you possibly promote an argument that the Hasselblad backs are slow compared to other backs when you are talking about comparing the very latest Phase One back (and one with a smaller chip) to a Hasselblad product 2 generations back (nearly 3 years ago)?

Of course Samy's stopped carrying H1D's - they're 3 years old, and were the very first attempt at an integrated solution (with all the inherent growing pains).

If you compare an H3D to a P45, the capture speed is very equivalent. The Plus series Phase backs will get a bit faster and so will the S series Aptus's. This will come at a cost. Hasselblad backs will also get faster, perhaps through FREE software upgrade enhancements - as they have with many other recent advancements. Dalsa chipped products (Leaf, Sinar) are a bit faster than Kodak chipped products (Hasselblad, Phase). But aside from that, there's no speed disadvantage with an H3D.

Steve Hendrix
PPR Digital
Logged

Steve Hendrix
erikhillard
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 59


« Reply #39 on: December 31, 2006, 05:36:42 PM »
ReplyReply

Steve,

I started out specifically saying I cannot speak about the H3D.  Sorry you got offended by my comparison.  It was not scientific, merely a comparison of equipment I had on set recently.

I do hope that the H3D is as fast as the P30 and Leaf Aptus.  That would be great.  Unfortuntately it is not for rent locally in Los Angeles.  I look forward to seeing it.  I can only presume that if it as great an improvement as everyone says then it will be in the rental department soon.
Logged


Erik Hillard

Running Pixels
http://www.runningpixels.net/
Pages: « 1 [2] 3 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad