Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1] 2 3 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Hy6 and a 28mm  (Read 15665 times)
Leonardo Barreto
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 379



WWW
« on: August 13, 2007, 02:11:48 PM »
ReplyReply

There is much discussion and interest in the new Hybrid y 6 --that is what the H stands for, but not a lot of the posters question the basic architecture of the system. For example, is this new platform attempting -- by being hybrid-- to be the system for the future while maintaining a foot in the past at the same time?. Or in other words, wanting to do too many things while condemning the performance of all ?

When the designers and architects decided to make this system a 6 x 6 format, -- when 100% of digital backs is 6 x 4.5 or smaller -- what where they thinking about?.

The disadvantage is very real: the mirror on a 6 x 6 format is larger than that of, say, H3, AFD or Contax 645, so the lens mount has to be placed further away from the film plane than all other platforms.

The practical complication of having a larger film-plane-to-lens-mount distance is that formulation of wideangle lenses gets more complicated.

The Hy6 will come to market with no 35mm (one will be produced later), and not even a planned 28mm.

With Hasselblad opting to market their 28mm as a closed architecture exclusive to the H3 owner club members, the importance of a 28mm is vital for a large majority of MF photographers -- not for all -- is clear.

Making wide angle lenses for MF is not an easy task. That is why the H3 28mm needs software correction, and Mamiyas 28mm costs five thousand dollars.

If making such lens is so hard for Hasselblad an Mamiya, that have the smaller format size, imagine how it will be to make one when the same lens has to also work for a film plane of 6 x 6 when you want to shoot film.

What you have here is a system that will work well in all applications  where the shot calls for zoom in, and not when the art director ask you to "zoom out"

As a photographer you will have to consider if shooting 6 x 6 transparencies is more important than to get the wide view while working with a digital back.



 
« Last Edit: August 13, 2007, 02:27:04 PM by Leonardo Barreto » Logged

The important thing is not to stop questioning---Albert Einstein.
My Webpage/LeonardoBarreto.com
Leonardo Barreto alamy
BernardLanguillier
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7854



WWW
« Reply #1 on: August 13, 2007, 05:28:53 PM »
ReplyReply

Well, the Mamiya 28 mm is supposed to be able to cover 645 film, which is probably not much larger than what 6x6 digital would probably be.

I don't know to what extend the lens flange-film distance differs between a Mamiya 645 and the new Hy6, nor do I know the exact impact of this distance on the possibility to design a really wide lens.

Cheers,
Bernard
Logged

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

Posts: 671


« Reply #2 on: August 13, 2007, 05:33:56 PM »
ReplyReply

I believe this was previously discussed. The reason for 6x6 is to have the ability to rotate a digital back vertical to horizontal and not have to rotate the camera.


Quote
When the designers and architects decided to make this system a 6 x 6 format, -- when 100% of digital backs is 6 x 4.5 or smaller -- what where they thinking about?.


[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=133032\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
« Last Edit: August 13, 2007, 05:34:51 PM by pixjohn » Logged
Graham Mitchell
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2282



WWW
« Reply #3 on: August 13, 2007, 06:27:40 PM »
ReplyReply

I can't answer your questions. 28mm on a 48mm wide sensor will give the same FOV as a 33mm on a 56mm wide sensor, pretty close to the upcoming 35mm. So *if* a larger sensor becomes available, the difference between the platforms will be insignificant. Yes, that's a big if, but...

everyone is free to stick their back on a view camera today and use 24mm and 28mm lenses with the important bonus of tilt/shift. Nothing beats that, and so that's what I plan to do as soon as I've robbed the local bank...
Logged

Graham Mitchell - www.graham-mitchell.com
Morgan_Moore
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2214


WWW
« Reply #4 on: August 14, 2007, 01:23:08 AM »
ReplyReply

I agree completly with the OP (and have questioned that architecture many times!)

Even a 35 covering 66 will be a new 'retrofucus world record' (38 being widest at this point??)

And that has not been constructed yet

(how long did it take mamya ?? four years from announcement to do thier 28)

So we dont even know when a 35 will be available - let alone a 28

Yes sinar offer view camera solutions that may (or may not - without a slow plate change) interface with a HY6 fitting back and wider lenses

But there is no hand held solution at the mo

I guess alpa will line something up but a manufacturer with sinars heritage should not need to rely on a third party to sort them out

The answer is comparitvely simple..

Mirror lock up.

Recessed lens (al la nikkor 8mm)

Replace the WLF with a  range finder style device and rely on the AF* or live view


S

* antiquated single point AF of course !
« Last Edit: August 14, 2007, 01:27:26 AM by Morgan_Moore » Logged

Sam Morgan Moore Cornwall
www.sammorganmoore.com -photography
pss
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 960


WWW
« Reply #5 on: August 15, 2007, 01:53:56 PM »
ReplyReply

a 35 on 6x6 is as extreme as it gets....the 28 mamiya is 645....the hass 28 is not  quite 645 (only covers the hass39 back)....
for 24 and 28 lenses there is always "large format cameras" but i don't think these lenses cover 6x6 either (forget about movements)...there are optical limits...of course they are pushed and i think we are already seeing this with the mamiya 28.....
i remember the 40mm for the hass V system was somewhere in the 7-8000$ range 15 years ago....
Logged

Leonardo Barreto
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 379



WWW
« Reply #6 on: September 01, 2007, 10:19:25 AM »
ReplyReply

Exactly my point. If you come up with a new system from a brand like SINAR you expect it to do as well and better than the other two leading ones, but what they say is: you don't really need a wide angle lens, but if you really need one, then our suggestion is to purchase --or rent-- an alternative solution (like an Alpa-Digitar 28mm) for $200/day. What kind of system is that?. Ok, you get the ability to turn the back instead of the camera when shooting portrait. Lets think about that. First of all I have my Mamiy 645 AFD/P25 inside a Hefty OneZip Gallon bag that goes in a Pelican case so that I get zero dust on my sensor. Do I want to deal with removing the back from the camera on the field? probably not. I think that this was a good solution for a Mamiya RB/RZ type of camera that was hard to hand held, but my 645 is as easy as a 35mm and being 645 makes it more compact and reliable (less moving and coupling parts).

So, the idea of rotating back as justification for the larger format and consequent lens mount to film plane extended distance is a dubious choice in my humble opinion.



Quote
I agree completly with the OP (and have questioned that architecture many times!)

Even a 35 covering 66 will be a new 'retrofucus world record' (38 being widest at this point??)

And that has not been constructed yet

(how long did it take mamya ?? four years from announcement to do thier 28)

So we dont even know when a 35 will be available - let alone a 28

Yes sinar offer view camera solutions that may (or may not - without a slow plate change) interface with a HY6 fitting back and wider lenses

But there is no hand held solution at the mo

I guess alpa will line something up but a manufacturer with sinars heritage should not need to rely on a third party to sort them out

The answer is comparitvely simple..

Mirror lock up.

Recessed lens (al la nikkor 8mm)

Replace the WLF with a  range finder style device and rely on the AF* or live view
S

* antiquated single point AF of course !
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=133125\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Logged

The important thing is not to stop questioning---Albert Einstein.
My Webpage/LeonardoBarreto.com
Leonardo Barreto alamy
thsinar
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2066


WWW
« Reply #7 on: September 01, 2007, 11:47:46 AM »
ReplyReply

Dear Leonardo,

Who says this? Certainly not Sinar.
We all wish a wide angle lens here, the question is to develop and manufacture it, among others.

Best regards,
thierry

Quote
If you come up with a new system from a brand like SINAR you expect it to do as well and better than the other two leading ones, but what they say is: you don't really need a wide angle lens, but if you really need one, then our suggestion is to purchase --or rent-- an alternative solution (like an Alpa-Digitar 28mm) for $200/day. What kind of system is that?.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=136740\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Logged

Thierry Hagenauer
thasia_cn@yahoo.com
jing q
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 594


WWW
« Reply #8 on: September 01, 2007, 12:23:32 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Exactly my point. If you come up with a new system from a brand like SINAR you expect it to do as well and better than the other two leading ones, but what they say is: you don't really need a wide angle lens, but if you really need one, then our suggestion is to purchase --or rent-- an alternative solution (like an Alpa-Digitar 28mm) for $200/day. What kind of system is that?. Ok, you get the ability to turn the back instead of the camera when shooting portrait. Lets think about that. First of all I have my Mamiy 645 AFD/P25 inside a Hefty OneZip Gallon bag that goes in a Pelican case so that I get zero dust on my sensor. Do I want to deal with removing the back from the camera on the field? probably not. I think that this was a good solution for a Mamiya RB/RZ type of camera that was hard to hand held, but my 645 is as easy as a 35mm and being 645 makes it more compact and reliable (less moving and coupling parts).

So, the idea of rotating back as justification for the larger format and consequent lens mount to film plane extended distance is a dubious choice in my humble opinion.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=136740\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

what's with all the animosity?
I know many photographers who've never needed even close to a 28mm lens.me included.
If you're looking at something like that perhaps you should consider a digital view camera
Logged
samuel_js
Guest
« Reply #9 on: September 01, 2007, 01:36:52 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
what's with all the animosity?
I know many photographers who've never needed even close to a 28mm lens.me included.
If you're looking at something like that perhaps you should consider a digital view camera
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=136761\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I think this is what Leonardo is pointing, none shooting wide will consider the Hy6. This, for me, means that the Hy6 is more intended for portraits, fashion, maybe nature. But honestly, with the H series and mamiya in the market, who is going to choose a camera that requires back rotation? And at this price, how many nature photographers are going to buy this?
Logged
jing q
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 594


WWW
« Reply #10 on: September 01, 2007, 01:39:46 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
I think this is what Leonardo is pointing, none shooting wide will consider the Hy6. This, for me, means that the Hy6 is more intended for portraits, fashion, maybe nature. But honestly, with the H series and mamiya in the market, who is going to choose a camera that requires back rotation? And at this price, how many nature photographers are going to buy this?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=136776\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

shrugs, I'll be surprised if they don't come out with a rotating back mechanism in the near future
and who's going to use this? If you've ever shot with the rollei lenses you will understand the allure of it.
Logged
rainer_v
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1129


WWW
« Reply #11 on: September 01, 2007, 02:59:58 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
shrugs, I'll be surprised if they don't come out with a rotating back mechanism in the near future
and who's going to use this? If you've ever shot with the rollei lenses you will understand the allure of it.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=136777\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

although using wider lenses for architecture with my gottschalt i never missed in my contax
a lens wider than the 35mm, which is available for the 645 .... and even that one i rarely use.
how long exist 28mm lenses in the market for mf ? i think a half year or so with the H3.
and now this 28mm capacity should be the onliest decision factor for a mf system.
doesnt sound reasonable for me. many more things to consider than that .....
Logged

rainer viertlböck
architecture photographer
munich / germany

www.tangential.de
Mort54
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 590


WWW
« Reply #12 on: September 01, 2007, 04:22:17 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Even a 35 covering 66 will be a new 'retrofucus world record' (38 being widest at this point??)
I believe the Rodenstock 35mm f/4 Sironar HR is a retrofocus design. However its image circle is only 70mm, so it won't quite cover a 6x6.
Logged

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

Posts: 379



WWW
« Reply #13 on: September 01, 2007, 05:00:25 PM »
ReplyReply

..."what's with all the animosity?"...

There is no intent of animosity on my side at all. The questions and opinions that I have posted here are honest attempts to understand this new system from the perspective of a digital back owner and a machine/gadget confessed addict (growing up I was constantly taking my toys apart, and only some times managing to assemble them back).

Pointing out that because of architecture choices the Hy6 will probably never have a 28mm is relevant to the discussion of the Hy6, I think.

Not using -- or owning -- a 28mm is one thing. I have a 35mm and could absolutely not survive with one. But investing in a system that has no plans to make one available is a different thing. It means that you have a system with a weak link, or with a handicap.

In an extremely competitive world of digital MF the Hy6 is a new comer, has to compete with all the cheap Mamiya gear out there on eBay, and with the aggressive marketing of the Hasselblad H system, so, as a photographer considering investing in digital backs, bodies and a fleet of lenses I would try to consider the market viability of the system. Remember Contax and Bronica?

If you come to market with a system that is excellent but only in normal to telephoto-aplication fields your potential customer base gets reduced. So, the chances for the entire system for survival in an already harsh environment don't get any better.

In other words, the fact that there is or there isn't a 28mm may affect you even if you don't ever plan to use one.

As photographers, I ask you this: what is it more important to more of you. To rotate the back or to have wide angle lenses?

leonardobarreto.com/
« Last Edit: September 01, 2007, 05:05:22 PM by Leonardo Barreto » Logged

The important thing is not to stop questioning---Albert Einstein.
My Webpage/LeonardoBarreto.com
Leonardo Barreto alamy
samuel_js
Guest
« Reply #14 on: September 01, 2007, 05:47:29 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
shrugs, I'll be surprised if they don't come out with a rotating back mechanism in the near future
and who's going to use this? If you've ever shot with the rollei lenses you will understand the allure of it.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=136777\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Yes, I know rollei lenses very well, but I cant't buy a system just for the lenses. There's other factors and H lenses, Zeiss and Mamiya are second to none.
Logged
Graham Mitchell
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2282



WWW
« Reply #15 on: September 01, 2007, 07:25:43 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Yes, I know rollei lenses very well, but I cant't buy a system just for the lenses. There's other factors and H lenses, Zeiss and Mamiya are second to none.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=136806\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Some would disagree
Logged

Graham Mitchell - www.graham-mitchell.com
Leonardo Barreto
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 379



WWW
« Reply #16 on: September 01, 2007, 08:08:32 PM »
ReplyReply

Someone i know in a MF distributor here in New York told me that "the new Mamiya 28mm is better than the Hasselblad" one. So that would make Mamiyas lens the best 28 for any reflex MF camera since there is no Rollei 28, or 35...

Probably the reasoning of the conceptual team that created the Hy6 was to give a body to the existing stock of excellent  Rollei lenses. And not solely the idea of a rotating back. (After that, the only other advantage is that you could shoot 6x6 transparencies from time to time... )

No matter how good Rollei optics are, -- and they may very well be superior than Fuji or Mamiya -- "saving" them with a body that has to expand the film plane to mount distance from that of the other two leading systems is not the best way. Probably the way to go would have been to drop the mirror and make the camera smart enough to shoot with old or new optics at different distances.





Quote
Some would disagree
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=136810\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Logged

The important thing is not to stop questioning---Albert Einstein.
My Webpage/LeonardoBarreto.com
Leonardo Barreto alamy
jing q
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 594


WWW
« Reply #17 on: September 01, 2007, 08:54:39 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Someone i know in a MF distributor here in New York told me that "the new Mamiya 28mm is better than the Hasselblad" one. So that would make Mamiyas lens the best 28 for any reflex MF camera since there is no Rollei 28, or 35...

Probably the reasoning of the conceptual team that created the Hy6 was to give a body to the existing stock of excellent  Rollei lenses. And not solely the idea of a rotating back. (After that, the only other advantage is that you could shoot 6x6 transparencies from time to time... )

No matter how good Rollei optics are, -- and they may very well be superior than Fuji or Mamiya -- "saving" them with a body that has to expand the film plane to mount distance from that of the other two leading systems is not the best way. Probably the way to go would have been to drop the mirror and make the camera smart enough to shoot with old or new optics at different distances.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=136818\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

leonardo...I think I'm amused at the strong finality in the way you pose your opening statement for this topic thread

I think you're also making some very strong assumptions about the design of the camera.

from personal experience, I've never needed to ask any of questions you posed.
Yesterday I just shot with a 45mm mamiya lens, and the distortion irritated me.The distortion isn't any better on a hassy 35mm.thus I've been looking into  silvestri flexicam....and don't tell me about in camera distortion correction because I wnt to minimise my photoshop time as much as possible
I don't care how good a 28mm mamiya or hassy has, for the kind of price they are asking I could easily get a wide angle rodenstock HR...or even 2.
and I really really question what percentage of medium format photographers actually shoot superwide. Large format, maybe.

I played with a Hy6 prototype last year. love love love it. I'm waiting for it to be released and I can buy it.(Leaf AFi version at least..)
any Leaf dealer here want to give me a heads up on when it's arriving?

and yes people who fall in love with rollei lenses swear by them.
Someone is offering me a 75-150mm zoom for the rollei. I'm just waiting to grab it.
Logged
RichardChang
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 28


WWW
« Reply #18 on: September 01, 2007, 09:29:28 PM »
ReplyReply

Leonardo:

I find your take on the new Hy6 to be an interesting one.  It would seem that you want to have it be wrong in name, wrong in conception, wrong in application of optics, and wrong in its approach.

It would seem that your glass is half full.  Fortunately, reality will prove the Hy6 to be a good thing or a not so good thing, after it can be acquired.  The market will dictate the success of the Hy6, based on whether it addresses the needs of the market.

Being an optimist, I'm pleased that anyone is entering the market with a new medium format solution, especially given the reality that we've had companies like Contax, Bronica, and Pentax fold  their cards and bow out of the market.  That's not good for professional photography in my opinion.  I have to tip my hat to Franke & Heideke for believing in the professional market enough to put up big bucks to make this gamble a reality.  I'll bet that if they had you for pre-market research we wouldn't have a Hy6 to talk about.

Rather than suggest that the Hy6 isn't going to make it because of all the reasons you've put forth, I'm going to wait to see what it turns out to be.  If it's a good thing, I'm going to want one.  I will not be pre-judging the product before it becomes reality.  But, perhaps you know a lot more than the rest of us...

Richard Chang
Logged
BJL
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5124


« Reply #19 on: September 01, 2007, 09:46:19 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
The reason for 6x6 is to have the ability to rotate a digital back vertical to horizontal and not have to rotate the camera.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=133061\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Rotating backs seems to be an after-the-fact rationalization for the Hy6's use of 6x6 (56x56mm) format.
The reason that the Hy6 is 6x6 is that it is based on the Rollei MF cameras and lenses designed for that format, despite the far smaller format of the sensors used with it. (A 1.5x crop vertically, but only 1.16x horizontally.)
The Rollei system in turn used the square 6x6 format to allow MF film cameras with "top down" ground glass viewfinders to take both horizontals and verticals despite the impracticality of rotating such a camera.

Aside: rotating a rectangular film frame or sensor of up to 645 size (56x42.5mm) from horizontal to vertical will still keep it within the image circle of 645 format, so long as the lenses do indeed produce an image circle rather than being baffled down to a rectangle.


I agree with the OP that so long as DMF us using sensors no larger than about 36x48, it makes sense to adapt cameras and lenses to that format, instead of using larger format components with a heavy crop.

Especially since there no evidence that larger sensors will ever be made for DMF, and in particular no sign of sensors ever getting larger than what DMF leaders Hasselblad and Mamiya have a use for, meaning the 56x42.5mm of their 645 based systems. (It seems sadly that I can now ignore Pentax and its 645 lens system.)

Accommodating a mirror about 56mm deep (for 6x6) requires about 13.5mm more distance between lens and focal plane that with the roughly 42.5mm mirror depth needed by 645. at would seem to be a good explanation of why the minimum focal length in 6x6 format are significantly longer than available in 645 format.
Logged
Pages: [1] 2 3 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad