Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 ... 6 7 [8] 9 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Hasselblad 50 MP announced  (Read 43703 times)
BJL
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5085


« Reply #140 on: July 09, 2008, 09:34:04 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
I'm hoping the old 22MP chip is being replaced by another sensor of similar resolution but using the newest technology to improve noise and speed.
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Please face the facts. Kodak is phasing out its 9 micron sensor technology except for special applications like X-rays, and its direction is more sensors using its new [a href=\"http://www.kodak.com/global/en/business/ISS/News/pressReleases/archive/2008/pr6.jhtml?pq-path=12991/13227]TRUESENSE 6.0 micron Full Frame CCD Technology Platform[/url].
(Edit: Could this include the rumored larger sensor with those 6 micron pixels, along with a 40MP one at 44x33mm?)


P.S. Though a great many of us feel no need for 50MP (I am happy with about 10MP or even less, after cropping!), how do experienced users of film in 6x7 and larger format film feel that 39MP sensors compare for final image resolution? Was there any point to all those whose used low speed, low DR, high res. transparency films like Velvia in those large formats?
« Last Edit: July 09, 2008, 10:12:13 AM by BJL » Logged
BJL
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5085


« Reply #141 on: July 09, 2008, 10:09:49 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
... binning will slightly improve DR, but the extent depends on the nature of the noise.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=206655\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Agreed. With shadow noise from sources that scale up as photosite size increases like dark current, downsampling can help. On the other hand, with noise that is more or less fixed per pixel, such as pre-amp noise might be, down-sampling might not improve DR.

Comparing Kodak FF CCD sensors of different pixel sizes, even ones of the same generation, RMS read noise in e- increases with pixel size with a trend fairly close to square root of pixel area (linear in pixel width). Some examples are
21e- @ 9 microns, ratio 2.33 for the 22MP sensor
17e- @ 6.8 microns, ratio 2.5 for the Olympus E-1 sensor
16e- @ 6.8 microns, ratio 2.35 for the 31MP and 39MP sensors and the "Leica" 10MP sensor
15e- @ 6.8 microns, ratio 2.2 for the 10MP "Leica" sensor
12.5e- @ 6 microns, ratio 2.08 for the 50MP sensor

(Note: these figures might be pessimistic, in that they are at maximum operating temperature, and dark current is lower at lower temperatures.)

If it were exactly a square root trend (equal ratios above) and noise at adjacent sites is uncorrelated, then downsampling from smaller photosites would exactly reproduce the read noise from larger photosites. The shift for 6.8 microns from 17 to 16 to 15 measures technological progress: not much it seems; most per pixel noise reduction is from pixel downsizing.

Maybe the relatively high read noise of FF CCD sensors makes downsampling particularly useful for reducing the noise floor and increasing DR. CMOS sensors might have quite different trends, as the main noise sources seems instead to be the on-pixel processing (charge to voltage conversion and amplification), and/or the on-chip A/D convertors.

By the way, dark current might be relatively bad partly because the signal sits in the photosites for about 1 second in the MF sensors, and dark current accumulates the whole time, not just while the shutter is open. Maybe faster read-out with more parallel read channels can help; the 50MP sensor makes a small move in this direction with its shift from two to four channels, which allows a lower data rate per channel and thus less "1/f" read noise.
« Last Edit: July 09, 2008, 10:13:45 AM by BJL » Logged
BJL
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5085


« Reply #142 on: July 09, 2008, 10:32:26 AM »
ReplyReply

Actually, my last post is a bit confusing, being focussed on comparing different sensors. It buries this basic fact:

Downsampling from samples with uncorrelated noise will improve the DR, in proportion to the square root of the downsampling factor, N.


This is because when N samples are added, the summed signal is larger in proportion to the number of samples, but the level of uncorrelated noise combines in root-mean-square fashion, and so increases only in proportion to square root of  of the number of samples combined, sqrt(N).

When the result is rescaled to the same maximum signal strength (divide signal sums by N, also reducing RMS noise by factor N) the RMS noise level is smaller than before downsampling by a factor sqrt(N).

Dynamic range is the ratio of maximum signal to RMS noise level, and this ratio is increased by factor sqrt(N).

For this, the nature of the noise does not matter, except being uncorrelated or close enough.
Logged
James R Russell
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 984



WWW
« Reply #143 on: July 09, 2008, 10:44:38 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Please face the facts. Kodak is phasing out its 9 micron sensor technology except for special applications like X-rays, and its direction is more sensors using its new
TRUESENSE 6.0 micron Full Frame CCD Technology Platform.
P.S. Though a great many of us feel no need for 50MP (I am happy with about 10MP or even less, after cropping!), how do experienced users of film in 6x7 and larger format film feel that 39MP sensors compare for final image resolution? Was there any point to all those whose used low speed, low DR, high res. transparency films like Velvia in those large formats?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=206658\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I know I've shot about every film made in about every format and except on rare instances a film was selected more for the look than the actual ability to render detail.

I think the look of photography is changing and uber sharp amazing detail is kind of strange looking for a lot of photography, especially people.  It seems the sharper and more detailed we get the more video looking the images get.

There is obviously going to be talk about who needs 50mpx and if the new 50mpx backs only gives more detail then I don't see the point.  If it really does remove moire, have better color as advertised then it might have some use.

From a marketing standpoint 50mpx makes great sense because the back makers can say it's more than twice the camera of a Canon or the upcoming Nikon.

For some situations it will be better but for nearly all situations the 50mpx camera will not be twice the camera, regardless of the marketing spin.

Not that there is anything wrong with marketing or selling new product.  I sell, everyone sells, but in this instance 50mpx vs. 39 or even 31 is more spin than substance, unless the 50mpx back really does something different than what we have today.

A better look, better previews, easier to manage post production, something that is different than where we are at the moment will get more professionals attention than just more megas something.

I will admit that of the 4 back makers Hasselblad is right now at the top of their game at selling and marketing their product, especially in making good use of the Hasselblad name and heritage.

It doesn't  exactly translate to the modern era, but most people won't or dont know that, any more than they care if a chevrolet is made in Australia,  Michigan, or Poland.

In fact I was very surprised that Sinar and Leaf did not brand the HY6 a Rolleiflex rather than Sinar and Leaf.  Not that there is anything wrong with those names, but a Rollei carries more weight at the country club than HY6 or AFI.  

Though those perceptions can change and change quickly.  Look at the Red digital cinema camera and to take those lessons  to the HY6 and the Phase cameras   If they really do offer a better system than the blad with more options, more lenses, a better price, AND market it correctly then the standards of the industry will change quickly.

Michael wrote that there is reluctance on forums for people to accept  50mpx for a varity of reasons.

I agree with some of his assement, but on the whole I think it's easy to grow weary of a lot of digital updates because putting resource to just more megapixels can  get in the way of making photographs and doing business.

In fact what would move me to purchase is not megapixels but better systems to make my photographs and my way of doing business easier and faster.  The problem with that is it's much easier to soundbite 50mpx than to mention workflow or lens systems.

Once again, to compare all of this to the Red, there is real substance to a product that wasn't offered before regardless of  the price, the name, the heritage or the time in market.   If you offer a product that an artist simply can't do without, then that is the product that will be purchased.

JR
Logged

jecxz
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 377


WWW
« Reply #144 on: July 09, 2008, 10:56:23 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
...The problem with that is it's much easier to soundbite 50mpx than to mention workflow or lens systems.[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=206673\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
What most of you don't realize is that Hasselblad's biggest competitor is Canon, not Phase or Leaf or Sinar. I can't take credit for saying this either, it was told to me by either someone at Hasselblad or my dealer or Steve at PR -- just can't remember which now.

Hasselblad is losing business left and right to people who find a 21mp Canon good enough and affordable.

Claiming a 50mp back is pure marketing, as I've said. Soundbite 100%!
Logged

James R Russell
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 984



WWW
« Reply #145 on: July 09, 2008, 11:12:36 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
What most of you don't realize is that Hasselblad's biggest competitor is Canon, not Phase or Leaf or Sinar. I can't take credit for saying this either, it was told to me by either someone at Hasselblad or my dealer or Steve at PR -- just can't remember which now.

Hasselblad is losing business left and right to people who find a 21mp Canon good enough and affordable.

Claiming a 50mp back is pure marketing, as I've said. Soundbite 100%!
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

It's easy for all of us (myself included) to make broad black and white statements but in reality photography in the digtial era has changed.

I don't believe everyone that uses a Canon does so because it is just good enough, but I do know that for a huge volume of photographers price is a big part of the equation.

The price of moving to medium format over the dlsrs doesn't stop at twice or three times for the body, it continues on through the lens line, the accessoires, the computer power needed, drive space and the simple convenience of higher iso, better previews, more detailed lcds.

For a long time medium format has lived off the statement that their cameras and backs produce superior images and in most "controlled" instances they do produce a better image next to a dslr.

Still, for medium format to command a much higher price they really need to offer twice the lcd, twice the previews, twice the software, twice the file compatibility and more moveable iso.

Once again, compared to the Red it just doesn't hold water that most medium format lcd's are so diffiuclt to read.  It pretty much blows the theory that it's not possible to find detailed lcd's in small quantaties.

This is just $2,500

[a href=\"http://www.red.com/image/path/normal/302002.png?1208187356]http://www.red.com/image/path/normal/302002.png?1208187356[/url]

I'd glady pay $2,500 for this detailed a preview device, much more if it was wirless.



JR
Logged

Quentin
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1081



WWW
« Reply #146 on: July 09, 2008, 11:23:59 AM »
ReplyReply

Is it just me, or do I smell a hint of the dinosaur here?

These prices just seem out of kilter and uncompetititve given "35mm" dslr's will soon offer (Sony and Nikon) near 25mp resolution, much greater versatility, and 14bit low-noise (I assume) capture for a fraction of the price.

I accept even 22mp medium format should better the Canon, Nikon and Sony offerings at low ISO, but somehow the move to 50mp leaves me underwhelmed.  Its still fundamentally reheated old film technology.  For a real difference, a 6x7 chip with 100mp would be nice.

Quentin
« Last Edit: July 09, 2008, 11:25:29 AM by Quentin » Logged

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

Posts: 2307



WWW
« Reply #147 on: July 09, 2008, 11:48:36 AM »
ReplyReply

I don't get it - they built a sensor that is going to be diffraction limited at f/8, that has less DR than its predecessors, and isn't significantly faster in frame rate.   Why?  Where do the Kodak product managers and engineers get their input from?      If you buy this and shoot at f/16 then you paid too much because you won't be getting 50mp worth of detail.
Logged

Authorized Rolleiflex Dealer:
Find product information, download user manuals, or purchase online - Rolleiflex USA
Graham Mitchell
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2282



WWW
« Reply #148 on: July 09, 2008, 11:54:14 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
I don't get it - they built a sensor that is going to be diffraction limited at f/8, that has less DR than its predecessors, and isn't significantly faster in frame rate.   Why?  Where do the Kodak product managers and engineers get their input from? 
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=206694\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I wonder the same thing.
Logged

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

Posts: 405


WWW
« Reply #149 on: July 09, 2008, 12:14:07 PM »
ReplyReply

who cares?? - from the sound of it NO ONE is going to buy one from this forum anyhow...
Logged
EricWHiss
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2307



WWW
« Reply #150 on: July 09, 2008, 12:52:57 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
If you make two 40x50" prints, one from 22MP and one from 50MP, same physical sensor size, both shot at f/16, I believe there will be no visible difference in diffraction in the prints. 

Depending on who's looking, viewers may notice a difference in tonality & detail however.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=206703\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


Well I guess we will find out - however the p25 is going to have more DR so it will be the one with better tonality.  If the new red filters over the red sensor wells does give better color then maybe the  50mp new sensor will have an edge there?
Logged

Authorized Rolleiflex Dealer:
Find product information, download user manuals, or purchase online - Rolleiflex USA
eronald
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3645



WWW
« Reply #151 on: July 09, 2008, 12:54:49 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
If you make two 40x50" prints, one from 22MP and one from 50MP, same physical sensor size, both shot at f/16, I believe there will be no visible difference in diffraction in the prints. 

Depending on who's looking, viewers may notice a difference in tonality & detail however.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=206703\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Does anybody here really think there is a difference in detail between 39 and 50 MP ? Was there a difference between 30 (Dalsa) and 39 (Kodak) ?

On the other hand, 1s/image, now that is useful ...

Edmund
Logged

Edmund Ronald, Ph.D. 
Streetshooter
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 131


« Reply #152 on: July 09, 2008, 01:03:30 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
If you make two 40x50" prints, one from 22MP and one from 50MP, same physical sensor size, both shot at f/16, I believe there will be no visible difference in diffraction in the prints. 

Depending on who's looking, viewers may notice a difference in tonality & detail however.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=206703\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I bet those that notice the difference are the ones that have just bought the new 50mp back/camera.

Man this is all getting so crazy. New sensors each year and they still can't put a really good screen on these thirty grand instruments !  I was going to get a MFDB, but all this craziness has put me off. I'll stick to my D3 and maybe D3x now, and I'll bet I'm not the only one to do so.  At least Nikon listens to what their customers want...

Cheers,

Pete
Logged
mcfoto
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 938


WWW
« Reply #153 on: July 09, 2008, 01:11:25 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
What most of you don't realize is that Hasselblad's biggest competitor is Canon, not Phase or Leaf or Sinar. I can't take credit for saying this either, it was told to me by either someone at Hasselblad or my dealer or Steve at PR -- just can't remember which now.

Hasselblad is losing business left and right to people who find a 21mp Canon good enough and affordable.

Claiming a 50mp back is pure marketing, as I've said. Soundbite 100%!
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=206678\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Hi
We met last year at this time with two people from Hasselblad & they said the same thing about Canon. They also mentioned that Canon in Australia had a very large market penetration compared to the rest of the world. We both still feel that 35D & MFD have a place in our work.
When it comes to marketing when Canon announces a camera or product it is ready for release. This new 50 mp camera will be ready in the first Q of 2009, that is 6-9 months away.
Denis
Logged

Denis Montalbetti
Montalbetti+Campbell
www.montalbetticampbell.com
James R Russell
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 984



WWW
« Reply #154 on: July 09, 2008, 01:31:39 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Hi
We met last year at this time with two people from Hasselblad & they said the same thing about Canon. They also mentioned that Canon in Australia had a very large market penetration compared to the rest of the world. We both still feel that 35D & MFD have a place in our work.
When it comes to marketing when Canon announces a camera or product it is ready for release. This new 50 mp camera will be ready in the first Q of 2009, that is 6-9 months away.
Denis
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=206717\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


I've heard Hasselblad say this also, and though I know they "want" part of Canon's market share, I don't believe for a moment that medium format doesn't spend a whole lot of time looking at thier medium format competitors first.

I am relatively sure that's why this annoucement is rushed out before photokina ahead of Phase, becuase I think we all can assume that Phase will probably match what blad does, given that they use the same sensors.

If anyone on medium format want's to match or exceed Canon one on one, it's going to take more than just upping the megapixels.

In fact I will give you an exact example of this.  I just finsihed a conference call on a new fashion introduction.  We will shoot a studio look and an envrionmental lifestyle look, going from window light to lit studio all within the same time frame, models, product.

Now for a lot of this medium format will be the choice, but and this is a big issue, for a lot of this shooting it with a 1ds3 will be faster, easier and at the end of the day probably get a better result, just because when the light falls through the windows, I can go to 800 iso clean on a Canon, medium format gets challanged.  For those moments I have to pull away from the computer, I can review the images on a detailed lcd and know if I exactly have the shot, on medium format I must stay tethered to get a proper view.

For this shoot, they want images sent out to marketers virtually as we shoot.  For the Canon the jpegs are more than detailed and close enough for review, for medium format we have to start processing.

Now as I mentioned I will shot a lot of this medium format, because I choose to,  but if I wanted I could shoot both sessions, studio and lifestyle with a 1ds3 and I know that the client's would not have an issue.

This doesn't reflect what most still life photographers or landscape photographers need or want and in that case a 50mpx back might be the right option, but the annoucement I would have loved to see is the one that addressed iso, previews, speed, faster lenses, file compatibility and processing speed.

JR
Logged

TMARK
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1834


« Reply #155 on: July 09, 2008, 01:40:26 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
I bet those that notice the difference are the ones that have just bought the new 50mp back/camera.

Man this is all getting so crazy. New sensors each year and they still can't put a really good screen on these thirty grand instruments !  I was going to get a MFDB, but all this craziness has put me off. I'll stick to my D3 and maybe D3x now, and I'll bet I'm not the only one to do so.  At least Nikon listens to what their customers want...

Cheers,

Pete
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=206711\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I hope no manufacturer acts like Nikon! If Nikon listened to what customers, and more to the point, what I was telling NPS in 2005, which was get a full frame sensor that doesn't suck into an F5 body, I wouldn't have started shooting MFDB and a 1ds, 1ds2, and 5D.  Really. It took Nikon how long to give me a camera as good as the F5?  I'll probably get the D3X when it comes out, but really.

As to telling the difference, who knows.  As far as I know, no one here has seen a file from this chip, so who's to tell.  Maybe 50 megapix is useful to someone (not me), but whatevs.
Logged
uaiomex
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 934


WWW
« Reply #156 on: July 09, 2008, 01:59:00 PM »
ReplyReply

I do to believe Hasselblad's ahead with the 50mp back is more of a promotional and PR trick, even out of little fear too. If Hass got them, Sinar and Phase will get them too.
If this new larger 645 sensor is true, in a way or two, it will put hasselblad in a discomfort zone. How will they market their flagship already full frame camera fit with a bigger sensor?
A real FF 645 sensor will make the Hy6/Afi with revolving backs truly shine. This sensor will catapult the Hy6/Afi to to state that Hasselblad enjoyed in the golden years of the V system, which they stupidly neglected.

I too believe that Hasselblad's main competitor is been Canon, and now Nikon too. Look at myself: I'm a pro who always prefered to use MF for its quality. Digital mf came with horrendous prices. So pros like me, went digital and embraced tightly to full frame 35. Digital MF is full of issues. Prices still in orbit. So pros lile me have been collecting expensive glass for our Canon and Nikons to get the best quality of our cameras. Thing is, the more expensive the glass we get, the farhter we are to save money to jump to digital medium format. An this is a repetitive cycle.

My 2 centavos

Eduardo
Logged
Streetshooter
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 131


« Reply #157 on: July 09, 2008, 02:42:19 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
I hope no manufacturer acts like Nikon! If Nikon listened to what customers, and more to the point, what I was telling NPS in 2005, which was get a full frame sensor that doesn't suck into an F5 body, I wouldn't have started shooting MFDB and a 1ds, 1ds2, and 5D.  Really. It took Nikon how long to give me a camera as good as the F5?  I'll probably get the D3X when it comes out, but really.

As to telling the difference, who knows.  As far as I know, no one here has seen a file from this chip, so who's to tell.  Maybe 50 megapix is useful to someone (not me), but whatevs.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=206724\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Well you're right, Nikon did take a long time to listen, that I can't deny. But eventually the penny did drop with them, and they are listening now. How many more times does everybody have to ask for better screens on the MFDB's before it's done. Forget about the pixel race,  just improve the product as James has repeatedly said.

 If they did that as well as making them cheaper then more photographers would make the switch. The MFDB makers need to win over more 35mm shooters and they're going the wrong way about it. It's survival time for them especially with Photokina approaching and all the new DSLR cameras about to hit the market.

Cheers

Pete
Logged
hcubell
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 727


WWW
« Reply #158 on: July 09, 2008, 02:54:54 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
I do to believe Hasselblad's ahead with the 50mp back is more of a promotional and PR trick, even out of little fear too. If Hass got them, Sinar and Phase will get them too.
If this new larger 645 sensor is true, in a way or two, it will put hasselblad in a discomfort zone. How will they market their flagship already full frame camera fit with a bigger sensor?
A real FF 645 sensor will make the Hy6/Afi with revolving backs truly shine. This sensor will catapult the Hy6/Afi to to state that Hasselblad enjoyed in the golden years of the V system, which they stupidly neglected.


My 2 centavos

Eduardo
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=206729\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

In the grand scheme of things, how Hasselblad is going to spin its adoption of a new true full frame 645 chip into an H4D when it has been hyping its H3D as a full frame DSLR is the least of Hasselblad's issues. The real issues are (1) price and (2) enhancements in image quality. If the new 645 chip requires Hasselblad to sell the camera alone for $50K when the H3D39 is $30K, this all becomes an exercise in futility. Even if the price is constrained, if there are no demonsratable enhancements in IQ, it's still seems a marginal proposition at best.
BTW, why is the Hy6 better equipped to accomadate a  true 645 chip that the H series?
Logged

dustblue
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 225


WWW
« Reply #159 on: July 09, 2008, 03:05:09 PM »
ReplyReply

I am also thinking about this. The HDMI output looks great, in studio a big 48' plasma or lcd should be much more attractive to the clients. A 24mp FF sensor should fulfill all the editorial needs and most of advertisement needs. Not mention great high iso performance and speed, and most important, the cost. Maybe rent a DB when I really need one is somehow a good choise.

Dustblue
 
Quote
I bet those that notice the difference are the ones that have just bought the new 50mp back/camera.

Man this is all getting so crazy. New sensors each year and they still can't put a really good screen on these thirty grand instruments !  I was going to get a MFDB, but all this craziness has put me off. I'll stick to my D3 and maybe D3x now, and I'll bet I'm not the only one to do so.  At least Nikon listens to what their customers want...

Cheers,

Pete
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=206711\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Logged

Pages: « 1 ... 6 7 [8] 9 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad