Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1]   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: My experience with the Hassy CFH39 / H2 on safari  (Read 5616 times)
abiggs
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 555



WWW
« on: April 20, 2007, 10:18:35 AM »
ReplyReply

I recently spent three weeks out on safari with an H2 / CFH39 combination. I shot the Hassy gear along with my Canon setup, and chose the camera that best fit each shooting situation. I only had 3 lenses with me for the Hassy:


50-110mm
80mm
300mm
1.7x teleconverter

I am writing up my full experience of what it is like to photograph out on safari with a MF digital camera system, as well as my specific impressions of the CFH39 digital back.

As I am writing up the article, feel free to reply to this thread, asking for specifics on what you are interested in hearing about.

More to come......
Logged

Andy Biggs
http://www.andybiggs.com
Africa Photo Safaris | Workshops | Fine Art Prints
MarkKay
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 587


WWW
« Reply #1 on: April 20, 2007, 11:18:29 AM »
ReplyReply

IT has been my dream to go on a safari... I have both MF (hassy H2/leaf)  and a canon 1Dsmk2/5D.   I just cannot imagine using the former except for the landscapes.  I am curious how the H2 MF combo worked for shooting animals and wildlife. I just imagine that with all the stuff one would need to bring, it might be more reasonable to bring additional lenses for the canon system than a MF setup.  Mark
Quote
I recently spent three weeks out on safari with an H2 / CFH39 combination. I shot the Hassy gear along with my Canon setup, and chose the camera that best fit each shooting situation. I only had 3 lenses with me for the Hassy:
50-110mm
80mm
300mm
1.7x teleconverter

I am writing up my full experience of what it is like to photograph out on safari with a MF digital camera system, as well as my specific impressions of the CFH39 digital back.

As I am writing up the article, feel free to reply to this thread, asking for specifics on what you are interested in hearing about.

More to come......
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=113412\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Logged
Wim van Velzen
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 355



WWW
« Reply #2 on: April 20, 2007, 11:38:38 AM »
ReplyReply

How did you handle all the files you shot - on the trip and back home?
I am looking forward to reading your article!
Logged

I don't have a signature.
mtomalty
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 536


WWW
« Reply #3 on: April 20, 2007, 11:54:44 AM »
ReplyReply

Hi Andy

I'd be interesting in hearing a very objective opinion on how the two systems
performed,day in,day out.
What were the comparative downsides of one vs. the other.

I find many of the reviews or opinions coming from people who have moved up to a
MFDB for outdoor use have taken almost a defensive position of trying to justify
their purchase.

My personal take (bear in mind I don't actually own a DB but have logged outdoor
time with most of the current 22-39 options) is that while the files are exceptional the
process,very often,is an aggravation that intrudes on the 'outdoor' experience-warnings,
beeps,fan noise,lockups,colorcast considerations,etc.

I'm not interested in a pixel peeping comparison of the two systems because it is quite
evident from firsthand experience that MFDB files are significantly better than a DSLR file
providing one could capture the same/similar image with both.
I would be more interested in hearing your 'gut' reaction to MFDB use in your daily
environment along the lines of, "the files were great,but..." or "the MFDB system was
far simpler to  adopt than expected...."

Do you,as an outdoor photographer who is selling prints as part of your revenue stream,
expect tangible benefits from a MFDB file over a DSLR file when selling to your clients?

Anyhow,apologies for rambling but i hope you get my drift.

Mark
Logged
Mort54
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 590


WWW
« Reply #4 on: April 20, 2007, 12:03:57 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
I recently spent three weeks out on safari with an H2 / CFH39 combination. I shot the Hassy gear along with my Canon setup, and chose the camera that best fit each shooting situation. I only had 3 lenses with me for the Hassy:
50-110mm
80mm
300mm
1.7x teleconverter

I am writing up my full experience of what it is like to photograph out on safari with a MF digital camera system, as well as my specific impressions of the CFH39 digital back.

As I am writing up the article, feel free to reply to this thread, asking for specifics on what you are interested in hearing about.

More to come......
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=113412\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Hi Andy. Looking forward to your article. Some specifics I'm sure everyone will be interested in hearing about are general reliability in the field, and whether dust was a problem, i.e. is a removable back more susceptible to dust than something like your 1DsII, especially in Africa's extremely dusty environment? Also, if you could comment on the reasons for choosing a CFH back (pros and cons vs others you looked at), I'm sure a lot of folks here would find that useful.

A couple of other specific questions - does the 1.7x extender work with the 50-110? I'm looking very hard at an H3D-39 and I'm trying to decide on the lenses to go with it. The 1.7x would certainly allow a wider range to be covered with fewer lenses. And regarding lenses, did you feel constrained not having anything wider than the 50-110 (I realize that's roughly 35-75 in 35mm terms)?

Regards,
Hans.
Logged

I Reject Your Reality And Substitute My Own
MarkKay
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 587


WWW
« Reply #5 on: April 20, 2007, 12:06:48 PM »
ReplyReply

I do not believe the 1.7x works on the zoom.  I have them but told they do not work together although i have never tried it

Quote
Hi Andy. Looking forward to your article. Some specifics I'm sure everyone will be interested in hearing about are general reliability in the field, and whether dust was a problem, i.e. is a removable back more susceptible to dust than something like your 1DsII, especially in Africa's extremely dusty environment? Also, if you could comment on the reasons for choosing a CFH back (pros and cons vs others you looked at), I'm sure a lot of folks here would find that useful.

A couple of other specific questions - does the 1.7x extender work with the 50-110? I'm looking very hard at an H3D-39 and I'm trying to decide on the lenses to go with it. The 1.7x would certainly allow a wider range to be covered with fewer lenses. And regarding lenses, did you feel constrained not having anything wider than the 50-110 (I realize that's roughly 35-75 in 35mm terms)?

Regards,
Hans.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=113432\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Logged
Mort54
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 590


WWW
« Reply #6 on: April 20, 2007, 12:09:28 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Do you,as an outdoor photographer who is selling prints as part of your revenue stream,
expect tangible benefits from a MFDB file over a DSLR file when selling to your clients?
Excellent question Mark. Andy, I think many of us who are still sitting on the sidelines would be interested in your take on this.

Hans.
Logged

I Reject Your Reality And Substitute My Own
jecxz
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 377


WWW
« Reply #7 on: April 20, 2007, 12:21:22 PM »
ReplyReply

Never tried the 1.7x with the 50-110 zoom because Hasselblad says they are not compatible.

http://www.hasselbladusa.com/products/h-sy.../converter-h17x

Now that I think about it, this statement shouldn't stop me.

The 300mm plus 1.7x is really not enough for wildlife photography (unless you are very close) but they are a great combination together.
« Last Edit: April 20, 2007, 12:28:16 PM by jecxz » Logged

abiggs
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 555



WWW
« Reply #8 on: April 20, 2007, 12:57:04 PM »
ReplyReply

These are all great thoughts, everybody. I will be sure to include more information than I had originally planned!
Logged

Andy Biggs
http://www.andybiggs.com
Africa Photo Safaris | Workshops | Fine Art Prints
hcubell
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 731


WWW
« Reply #9 on: April 20, 2007, 02:50:40 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
I recently spent three weeks out on safari with an H2 / CFH39 combination. I shot the Hassy gear along with my Canon setup, and chose the camera that best fit each shooting situation. I only had 3 lenses with me for the Hassy:
50-110mm
80mm
300mm
1.7x teleconverter

I am writing up my full experience of what it is like to photograph out on safari with a MF digital camera system, as well as my specific impressions of the CFH39 digital back.

As I am writing up the article, feel free to reply to this thread, asking for specifics on what you are interested in hearing about.

More to come......
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=113412\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I look forward to your experiences with a MFDB in a "challenging" environment, and what type of workflow you used out in the field. For another perspective by a fine art landscape photographer who is backpacking with an H3D-39 in a very different environment, Elizabeth Carmel's blog is worth a look(http://ecarmel.typepad.com/).
Logged

Jeff-Grant
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 231


WWW
« Reply #10 on: April 20, 2007, 05:42:27 PM »
ReplyReply

Excellent timing, I'm toying with the idea of getting rid of my Canon gear completely and just using an H3D. I look forward to the review.

I would also love to hear how you handle WB in the field. I have given up and just adjust in Flexcolor after the event.
Logged

Fred Ragland
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 155


WWW
« Reply #11 on: April 20, 2007, 11:34:18 PM »
ReplyReply

How do you pack your gear for travel?

Fred Ragland
Logged
MarkKay
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 587


WWW
« Reply #12 on: April 21, 2007, 11:58:46 AM »
ReplyReply

I just cannot envision the trade off--- better ultimate image quality but a number of missed shots --inability to get the telephoto distances for wildlife.  Moreover, to really get the improved sharpness and resolution that the MF system will allow, would expect the use of a tripod. Also for faster shutter speeds, higher isos are needed and the advantage here goes to Canon.  So i am very interested in the article and results.


Quote
Excellent timing, I'm toying with the idea of getting rid of my Canon gear completely and just using an H3D. I look forward to the review.

I would also love to hear how you handle WB in the field. I have given up and just adjust in Flexcolor after the event.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=113475\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Logged
Don Libby
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 729


Iron Creek Photography


WWW
« Reply #13 on: April 21, 2007, 02:07:30 PM »
ReplyReply

I'm getting ready for a trip from Arizona to Alaska via the ALCAN highway.  I too am very interested in hearing different options for image storage along the way.

I too have a Canon 1Ds Mk II but have no thoughts of parting with it as I believe it will allow me a better platform to capture wildlife with.  The Mamiya will be hands down the "go to" camera for landscape and panos.  

Just an example of two fine (and different) platforms that each (IMHO) offer the best of all worlds.

I must add that the more involved I get with LL and this forum the more wealth of information there is.
Logged

paul_jones
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 565


WWW
« Reply #14 on: April 21, 2007, 02:35:58 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Never tried the 1.7x with the 50-110 zoom because Hasselblad says they are not compatible.

http://www.hasselbladusa.com/products/h-sy.../converter-h17x

Now that I think about it, this statement shouldn't stop me.

The 300mm plus 1.7x is really not enough for wildlife photography (unless you are very close) but they are a great combination together.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=113438\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

it dosnt fit, the glass gets in the way.

paul
Logged

check my new website
http://www.paulrossjones.com
MarkKay
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 587


WWW
« Reply #15 on: April 21, 2007, 07:49:44 PM »
ReplyReply

I went to Alaska. It was a family vacation so i was limited in the time I had for shooting. I ended up with my canon 1Dsmk2 and 5D.   I took my 400DO and my TSE lenses, the 24-105, and 70-200/4. I did get a few wildlife shots and those would not have been possible without a long tele, rapid AF and recycle time.

Quote
I'm getting ready for a trip from Arizona to Alaska via the ALCAN highway.  I too am very interested in hearing different options for image storage along the way.

I too have a Canon 1Ds Mk II but have no thoughts of parting with it as I believe it will allow me a better platform to capture wildlife with.  The Mamiya will be hands down the "go to" camera for landscape and panos. 

Just an example of two fine (and different) platforms that each (IMHO) offer the best of all worlds.

I must add that the more involved I get with LL and this forum the more wealth of information there is.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=113567\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Logged
Mort54
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 590


WWW
« Reply #16 on: April 21, 2007, 08:24:05 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
I went to Alaska. It was a family vacation so i was limited in the time I had for shooting. I ended up with my canon 1Dsmk2 and 5D.   I took my 400DO and my TSE lenses, the 24-105, and 70-200/4. I did get a few wildlife shots and those would not have been possible without a long tele, rapid AF and recycle time.
I don't think anyone is suggesting that MF is the ideal platform for wildlife and sports (although MF would be ideal for wildlife in the landscape shots). On the other hand, MF runs rings around the 1DsII for landscapes. Different tools for different jobs.
Logged

I Reject Your Reality And Substitute My Own
Pages: [1]   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad