Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 [2] 3 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Question regarding Hasselblad Sensors  (Read 7702 times)
Ed Foster, Jr.
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 218


WWW
« Reply #20 on: March 24, 2013, 05:35:25 PM »
ReplyReply

First of all you are the one in the thread to bring up the comparison:
Ken R. made a comment about a "film" look to the Hasselblad files that he observed. I stated that I felt the same way and believed it to be the difference between CCD and CMOS, so read the entire post and don't mispresent what I wrote.


I also find it interesting while MF manufacturers repeatedly claim superiority over 35mm DSLR they don't publish comparisons.

What does that have to do with the OP's question. This statement is just your way of diverting the topic. You don't do your own tests, but keep linking to one person's images over and over again.

C'mon, Fred, stay on topic.

Ed
Logged

Ed Foster, Jr.
www.edfoster.net
Ed Foster, Jr.
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 218


WWW
« Reply #21 on: March 24, 2013, 05:46:25 PM »
ReplyReply

It is amazing how much mis information is on this thread
The poster wrote that he was impressed with true focus-1st reply was regarding HTS that does not allow true focus
The next reply regarded mis info on the time exposure range of the HD50-it is 124 seconds
The fourth poster claimed the sensor for the HD40 and HD 50 are the same-I don't think that is correct
stanley

Well, not quite, Stanley. The maximum exposure range for the H4D-50 is 128 seconds according to Hasselblad. (I have a 31 and 40, but not a 50 so I am relying on Hasselblad for the time) And what I said about the sensors was this, "the H4D-40 and 50 sensors are the same as the corresponding sensors of the H5D". I was referring to the 40 and 50 being the same on both the H4D series as the H5D series, not that the 40 is the same size as the 50.

Ed

Logged

Ed Foster, Jr.
www.edfoster.net
kdphotography
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 707


WWW
« Reply #22 on: March 24, 2013, 08:04:44 PM »
ReplyReply

Wide angles.
Both Hasselblad and and Phase one wide angles are excellent (with the exception of the Phase One 55mm LS... good but not as good as the others)
....



Is this from your own personal experience with the Phase SK 55mm LS?  I mean really owning and shooting this lens---not just a few test shots.  And, "good but not as good as the others"??  Is this your own experience with the 55mm LS against "the others" as in the 45mm D, 35mm D, or 28mm D/LS?  Sorry but I've had this lens for quite a while and my experience seems to echo that of other 55mm LS owners that this is an excellent lens.  45mm D better?  I don't think so.  35mm D better?  I don't think so.  28mm>, eh, okay, I might give the edge to the 28mm D except on the edges; dunno about the LS version.  Yeah, I know, you'll probably have all these graphs to post again, but that's really not what actual experience is about...   And no, that wouldn't be a fair comparison to the tech cam wides.

I think this is another one for the mis-information pile.
Logged

Ken R
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 426


WWW
« Reply #23 on: March 24, 2013, 09:43:57 PM »
ReplyReply

Hi, I downloaded a few Raw files from the Pentax 645D, the Hasselblad H4D-40 and the IQ160. So far I have been VERY impressed with the Pentax at higher iso and also on a 20sec exposure (200 iso). All the 645D files I got were made using the 55mm Pentax lens (the new one). It is tack sharp. Some of the H4D files were really nice also but at high Iso I think the Pentax is better. The IQ160 files have lots of detail but the I dont think the shadows were as clean on the higher iso and longer exposures. I am looking for more samples. I really liked how the Hasselblad renders the ski tones. Don't know how the others stack up.

I am very tempted by the Pentax and what the future holds for that system. It seems not to get much buzz around here but at least from the files ive been able to get its a more than worthy contender. At least on the lower end of the MFD market.

I know its a closed system but if the next body is $10k and has nice improvements I wouldnt mind the expense. Even with an open system like Phase One the body is the cheap part. Upgrading from one of their backs to another is usually way more than $10k anyway.
Logged
JV
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 550


« Reply #24 on: March 24, 2013, 09:55:11 PM »
ReplyReply

...I am very tempted by the Pentax and what the future holds for that system. It seems not to get much buzz around here...

Ken, I believe that is mostly due to the fact that B&H only lists 2 lenses for the system. 

If there were more lenses available in US stores (like in the rest of the world) I am sure it would be more popular.

It sounds like it is every bit as good as other MF solutions and significantly cheaper.



Logged
ErikKaffehr
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 7262


WWW
« Reply #25 on: March 25, 2013, 12:19:00 AM »
ReplyReply

Hi,

Fred's assumption is what I understand based on MTF data published by Schneider. It has a drop of MTF at 60 lp/mm around 22 mm of axis.

Optical behavior like that was quite common on older "Distagon type" lenses. Modern designs seem to have much less of a drop off.

The problem with the 55 LS is probably that the field is not flat, it is wavy. My guess is that the field curvature corresponds to 7.5 cm shift of focal plane at 2m (judged on the MTF curves). If you are shooting in studio, I would assume that only small part of the image would be in exact focus. If important detail would fall on the 22mm radius it would be possible to achieve optimal focus in that area.

The effect would probably be visible mostly on distant landscape, where often everything is in focus.

I don't think the loss of sharpness would be very visible. If you made two large prints (say 54"x72") side by side I'm not sure the difference would be noticeable.

MTF curves don't lie, but you need to interpret what they say. Also, lens designers probably evaluate 100s of MTF curves for a lens but publish just a few. At short distances there will be a very short DoF with "absolute sharpness", so how the lens draws on slightly out of focus detail matters a lot.

The LS55 is said to be intended for studio work.

This article by Hubert Nasse of Zeiss may give some insight: http://www.zeiss.com/C12567A8003B8B6F/EmbedTitelIntern/CLN_35_Bokeh_EN/$File/CLN35_Bokeh_en.pdf


Best regards
Erik


Is this from your own personal experience with the Phase SK 55mm LS?  I mean really owning and shooting this lens---not just a few test shots.  And, "good but not as good as the others"??  Is this your own experience with the 55mm LS against "the others" as in the 45mm D, 35mm D, or 28mm D/LS?  Sorry but I've had this lens for quite a while and my experience seems to echo that of other 55mm LS owners that this is an excellent lens.  45mm D better?  I don't think so.  35mm D better?  I don't think so.  28mm>, eh, okay, I might give the edge to the 28mm D except on the edges; dunno about the LS version.  Yeah, I know, you'll probably have all these graphs to post again, but that's really not what actual experience is about...   And no, that wouldn't be a fair comparison to the tech cam wides.

I think this is another one for the mis-information pile.
« Last Edit: March 25, 2013, 12:34:03 AM by ErikKaffehr » Logged

Dustbak
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2359


« Reply #26 on: March 25, 2013, 12:00:32 PM »
ReplyReply

Tilt shift with the HTS has some significant limitations. In trying it out I fount it particularly tricky to focus with.
This is due to the 1.3 stop brightness reduction and the light from the lens hitting the focusing screen at a different angle.

Another thing to be considered is that it significantly reduces the angle of view. For example it turns a 4.8 24mm into a 7.5 36mm.
A 35mm becomes a 52mm.
This is a significant limitation for indoor architectural photography.

Also close focus is reduced somewhat limiting the use of tilt shift for small object photography where tilt shift is so useful.
The reduction is more with wider angle lenses.

It is called HTS1.5 meaning it also acts like a converter with a factor 1.5. So yes, your angle of view is reduced.

I have a HTS which I did not try out once but I use it several times a week for the last 3 years.  The reduction of close focus is not something I have noticed in which case it probably is no biggie for me. On the contrary, my HC100 becomes a HC150 with the close focussing capabilities of the HC100 (well almost, If you would be right). In that case I can focus closer with the HTS than with the corresponding single lens... I use the HTS + HC100 and now the macro adapter (or the 13/26mm ring) quite often for small object and find it ideal.

Yes, it is tricky to focus (initially), but than again I am able to focus it even handheld and get it right most of the time. A matter of getting the hang of it, as it is with all tools that you use seriously. You have to get familiar with it to get the best out of it, IMO. Trying out is nice but it doesn't make you sufficient on using something and getting the best results let alone become an authority on its usage.
Logged
FredBGG
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1651


« Reply #27 on: March 25, 2013, 04:09:42 PM »
ReplyReply

Hi,
.......

The problem with the 55 LS is probably that the field is not flat, it is wavy. My guess is that the field curvature corresponds to 7.5 cm shift of focal plane at 2m (judged on the MTF curves). If you are shooting in studio, I would assume that only small part of the image would be in exact focus. If important detail would fall on the 22mm radius it would be possible to achieve optimal focus in that area.....

The LS55 is said to be intended for studio work.

Best regards
Erik


[/quote]

Quote from the Phase One website:

Quote
55mm LS f/2.8
A preferred choice for on location fashion photographers using fill-in flash.
With its extreme fast flash sync capabilities this lens makes it easy to balance flash and daylight and let's you create stunning images.


Quote from the Mamiya Leaf website

Quote
MAMIYA SEKOR AF 55MM F2.8 LS D

Flash sync up to 1/1600th of a second.*
Minimal distortion wide angle design, provides a normal look,
great for editorial portraits and on location lifestyle photography.

Fast aperture, shallow depth of field.
Wide viewing angle.
Easily balance daylight and flash.

If the problem of the 55LS is due to it not having a flat field but wavy that would be quite a problem for what it is recommended for.
Shallow depth of field combined with focus and recompose and a non flat field would be a nasty thing to deal with.
« Last Edit: March 25, 2013, 05:25:24 PM by FredBGG » Logged
Doug Peterson
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2759


WWW
« Reply #28 on: March 25, 2013, 04:39:29 PM »
ReplyReply

Remember the far-too-long thread where Fred gave an analysis of the 55LS based only on charts? You know, the one where everyone who has used the 55LS lens to take pictures chimed in that it's an excellent lens. The thread where I posted sample images showing it's excellent performance?

Apparently Fred doesn't.

Fred, can you please post a photo that you have taken with the 55LS to show us what you are referring to when you say it is anything less than excellent?
« Last Edit: March 25, 2013, 04:47:41 PM by Doug Peterson » Logged

DOUG PETERSON (dep@digitaltransitions.com), Digital Transitions
Dealer for Phase One, Mamiya Leaf, Arca-Swiss, Cambo, Profoto
Office: 877.367.8537
Cell: 740.707.2183
Phase One IQ250 FAQ
Nick-T
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 462


« Reply #29 on: March 25, 2013, 05:21:14 PM »
ReplyReply

While you're at it Fred show us some of the stuff you've done with the HTS. How long have you owned it for? I've had mine for a few years now...
Logged

FredBGG
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1651


« Reply #30 on: March 25, 2013, 05:49:34 PM »
ReplyReply

It is called HTS1.5 meaning it also acts like a converter with a factor 1.5. So yes, your angle of view is reduced.

I have a HTS which I did not try out once but I use it several times a week for the last 3 years.  The reduction of close focus is not something I have noticed in which case it probably is no biggie for me. On the contrary, my HC100 becomes a HC150 with the close focussing capabilities of the HC100 (well almost, If you would be right). In that case I can focus closer with the HTS than with the corresponding single lens... I use the HTS + HC100 and now the macro adapter (or the 13/26mm ring) quite often for small object and find it ideal.

Yes, it is tricky to focus (initially), but than again I am able to focus it even handheld and get it right most of the time. A matter of getting the hang of it, as it is with all tools that you use seriously. You have to get familiar with it to get the best out of it, IMO. Trying out is nice but it doesn't make you sufficient on using something and getting the best results let alone become an authority on its usage.


Don't get me wrong... The HTS is a very handy tool. I have shot for years with the Fuji gx680 that has system wide tilt shift and it know how useful tilt shift is.
The HTS is also a relatively compact device that adds TS to quite a few lenses. I just wanted to point out to the OP that while it is a good tool it has some limitations
that are good to know about. Another is that if I recall correctly tilt and shift are rotatable, but not independently. Same limitation of Nikon compared to Canon.
However one really nice feature is that it records the tilt and shift data and software correction can be made using that info. This is very useful as tilt shift
always introduces some optical limitations.
Logged
FredBGG
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1651


« Reply #31 on: March 25, 2013, 05:57:09 PM »
ReplyReply

While you're at it Fred show us some of the stuff you've done with the HTS. How long have you owned it for? I've had mine for a few years now...

I tried it out and preferred to stick with my Fuji gx680 as it has independent rise/fall. tilt, swing and shift on all lenses from 50mm to 500mm
and a high magnification waist level finder for easier focusing.





Here is an example with a digital back



Crop


And an couple of examples with film


with tilt+swing  both heads in focus and shot wide open


with no tilt or swing only lady in focus shot wide open



with tilt+swing  both heads in focus and shot wide open


with no tilt or swing only lady in front in focus shot wide open

There were shot on location in New Orleans and with only two lights at ISO 800
so focusing is a bit of a challenge. Big waist level finder makes a big difference and being a rotating back waist level finder
is usable for vertical and horizontal.

However I did like the micro adjustments with the Hasselblad HTS.
The Fuji has to be adjusted directly by hand. IT has locks, but adjustment is not geared.
Many times I've used @#&*@ language when making a small adjustment I slip and wasn't even close anymore.

Also I use vertical shift very very often with portraits. It's very nice to shoot slightly from below with a relatively short lens
It gives a very nice perspective and intimate feel with nice proportions.






« Last Edit: March 25, 2013, 08:09:30 PM by FredBGG » Logged
Nick-T
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 462


« Reply #32 on: March 25, 2013, 06:28:33 PM »
ReplyReply

Thanks for the clarification Fred.
I was confused because you made it sound like you had used an HTS extensively just like you have with medium format digital.
Logged

kdphotography
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 707


WWW
« Reply #33 on: March 25, 2013, 07:33:30 PM »
ReplyReply

Well I've certainly seen all those pictures before.

Does this mean no photos with the HTS?

Does this mean no photos taken with the Phase SK 55mm LS?

(And of course, I mean your own photographic work with the HTS or 55LS)

 Wink
Logged

Ed Foster, Jr.
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 218


WWW
« Reply #34 on: March 25, 2013, 07:53:00 PM »
ReplyReply

Why is it that every MFD thread over the last eight or nine months gets hijacked with the same old set of images under the guise of being helpful? It would seem to me that if someone wants to rave about, well say, Nikon's D800, then start a new thread. Or, perhaps the benefits of the tilt and shift capabilities of a Fuji GX680 could be touted in a thread by that title.

Wouldn't that be the intelligent thing to do and truly helpful?

Ed
Logged

Ed Foster, Jr.
www.edfoster.net
RomanN.
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 305


« Reply #35 on: March 25, 2013, 07:58:03 PM »
ReplyReply

to the sensors:
Hasselblad-Imacon dont produce sensors, only Kodak and Dalsa. The kamera update has nothing to do with the sensor, it does no matter if you get H3d50, H4d50 or H5d 50- you will allways get the same sensor and the same picture quality. Only same camera functions are added,
if you really need it is allways the question.
Logged
FredBGG
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1651


« Reply #36 on: March 25, 2013, 08:19:05 PM »
ReplyReply

Why is it that every MFD thread over the last eight or nine months gets hijacked with the same old set of images under the guise of being helpful? It would seem to me that if someone wants to rave about, well say, Nikon's D800, then start a new thread. Or, perhaps the benefits of the tilt and shift capabilities of a Fuji GX680 could be touted in a thread by that title.

Wouldn't that be the intelligent thing to do and truly helpful?

Ed

Ed .... I'm not sure what your problem is, I brought up the Fuji to say why in some ways I find the HTS a bit limiting, but in some ways better.
No one else mentioned that tilt and shift on the HTS are locked together or that it changes aperture and focal length.
I think it's useful to the OP to know that. I don't see why that should upset anyone.
If anything I wrote about the HTS is technically wrong feel free to point it out.
« Last Edit: March 25, 2013, 08:38:27 PM by FredBGG » Logged
Ed Foster, Jr.
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 218


WWW
« Reply #37 on: March 25, 2013, 08:52:00 PM »
ReplyReply

Ed .... I'm not sure what your problem is, I brought up the Fuji to say why in some ways I find the HTS a bit limiting, but in some ways better.
No one else mentioned that tilt and shift on the HTS are locked together or that it changes aperture and focal length.
I think it's useful to the OP to know that. I don't see why that should upset anyone.
Gees, Fred, what do you mean, my problem? Gosh, there no need to attack me!

I just made what I thought was a useful comment for the betterment of the forum. I guess I was just thinking that when someone asks a question about certain equipment, the best responses come from those with extensive, hands-on experience with that type of equipment or process.

For example, if someone queried the forum about a Fuji GX680, I'd be the last one to speak up because I've only read about it and watched a fellow pro use one twice. Any comment from me on that subject would not be well informed and could only be thought of as self serving. However, your comments in a thread on that camera would be valuable and particularly useful.

Ed
Logged

Ed Foster, Jr.
www.edfoster.net
BJL
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5121


« Reply #38 on: March 25, 2013, 09:03:54 PM »
ReplyReply

Gees, Fred, what do you mean, my problem? Gosh, there no need to attack me!
Ed, even though FredBGG can be, let us say "very persistent" in stating and arguing for certain opinions, it is a bit hypocritical to complain about being attacked after making what was clearly an attack on him. Words like "hijacked", "guise" and "rave" are not quite neutral, helpful language.
Logged
Jeffery Salter
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 68



WWW
« Reply #39 on: March 25, 2013, 10:00:59 PM »
ReplyReply

Perhaps it would be simply better if someone who never uses the gear not to post as if he does.  It's actually an attack on the visitors who come to Lula for good, sound information.

And I hardly think Ed is "attacking" Fred. 

Thank you,
Jeffery
Logged

Jeffery Salter
___________________________________________________________________________________
www.jefferysalter.com

Loving life one frame at a time.
Pages: « 1 [2] 3 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad