NikonGear'23
Gear Talk => Camera Talk => Topic started by: Michael Erlewine on September 30, 2016, 13:41:50
-
Shakespeare said “Parting is such sweet sorrow,” and change comes in strange ways. It was a surprise for me to find the X1D, this harbinger of change, coming from the somewhat conservative Hasselblad, a small mirrorless Medium Format (MF) camera at an almost affordable price. As they say, “Who woulda’ thunk it.” But there it is, out there and almost delivered. More surprising yet was the fact that one day I found myself pushing the button to buy one! For me this took (and is taking) selling a LOT of equipment that I still might use, but probably can get along without.
Why I consider this as perhaps the tip of the iceberg of change in my camera world is something many may not agree with, but it can’t hurt to discuss it. And a lot of it stems from my basic ignorance of MF cameras. It is true that I once had a MF camera (Mamiya RZ67 with a 33 Mpx digital back), but I can’t say that I ever really learned (loved) the system or got that much out of it, aside from getting myself out of it. The interface of the digital back was too primitive at the time for me to put up with. And the lenses (I had eleven of them) were not THAT great, aside perhaps from a couple of them.
Anyway, I have been chomping at the bit for a year or so, waiting for Nikon to stop pussyfooting around and deliver me a high-end mirrorless camera or at least the successor to the D810, one with a 50 Mpx sensor, and preferably 75 Mpx. We all know that has not happened yet, with no hint of when it might take place. For my purposes, Nikon has gone AWOL, IMO.
I suppose I should have seen the writing on the wall when Sony came out with the A7s, a camera with a FF sensor, mostly of interest to video buffs, since each photosite gathers 2.8x more light than the Nikon D810 sensor. The A7s has a pixel pitch of something like 8.32 microns, 71% higher than the pixel pitch of the D810, which is 4.87 µm. However, the size of the Sony A7s sensor was only 12.2 Mpx, while I needed a much larger (in pixels) sensor for my work, so I did not keep it. However, what was beautiful about the A7s is that it had the larger pixel pitch like we find in Medium Format cameras and sensors. It was a sign of things to come for me, but I didn’t grasp it at the time.
Throwing these numbers around only goes so far, because newer sensor are more efficient and generally “better” overall, so a new sensor with a smaller pixel pitch may out perform an older sensor with a larger pixel pitch, etc.
As to why I consider the Hasselblad X1D so significant turns on a mistake that I apparently have been making, the idea that a 50 Mpx sensor on the Nikon system would equal a 50 Mpx sensor on a MF system, as far as the quality of the image. Of course, a 50 Mpx sensor on a 35 mm sensor would have to be squeezed into a smaller sensor than on a MF sensor, which are by nature larger, like 44 mm or higher.
Thus the 44 mm sensor of the Hasselblad X1D with 8300 px equals 5.3u (28.1um2), while the 35 mm FF sensor of the Nikon D810, with 8300 px equals 4.33u (18.7um2), meaning that the X1D has larger photosites, and thus greater light-gathering power. So, the same number of pixels in the X1D jammed into the smaller sensor of the D810 means 40% less light-gathering ability for the D810.
For a while I made the conceptual mistake of thinking I would wait for Nikon to pony-up with a D820 (or some number) camera with a 50 Mpx (or greater) sensor. And I assumed that 50 Mpx on a Nikon would somehow equal 50 Mpx on a Hasselblad, etc. Of course, for the Nikon to continue to be a 35 mm FF camera, a Nikon D820 FF sensor would always have less light-gathering power than an X1D sensor of an equal generation. This was a simple, but stupid mistake on my part.
The reason the X1D is so earth shaking for me is that if this is true, then I see my whole interest in FF DSLRs (not to mention scores of lenses) going out the window and I clearly see that the advent of Medium Format cameras (eventually affordable and small) is coming of age and the X1D is just the tip of the iceberg.
Thus, there is no reason whatsoever to wait for Nikon to respond with a larger FF 35mm with more pixels, because the light-gathering abilities will only continue to shrink as the FF sensor size increases. Unless Nikon issues their own medium-format camera to compete with Hasselblad, in some ways I am done with Nikon except as a way to feature my classic F-mount lenses.
Of course, since I have so many Nikon-mount lenses, I am not about to abandon the brand, but it will have to move to the back burner and be used to feature those particular lenses that I value which work on that mount. Which brings me to my point:
The Hasselblad X1D is not just an anomaly, but the tip of the top of a new wave of “affordable” medium-format cameras that will be compelling in their ability to take some of us forward into the future of our photography. Not everyone will care, but if I know the market, the virtues of the MF quality will gradually insert itself into the minds and hearts of FF photographers and we will be converted.
Providing that the X1D performs, you can count me among the already converted. Of course, I look to the day when I can use my Zeiss Oti lenses on a MF camera. Perhaps the new Fuji MF camera will have a solid adapter that will accomplish that. Meanwhile, to the best of my ability, I see this new generation of small MF cameras not only inevitable, but also compelling.
-
Pixel pitch is used for displays, not for sensors,,, for me it's impossible to follow your way of comparing the cameras you mention.
You will be very disappointed when you mount your Zeiss Oti lenses as you call them on a 33x44 sensor camera,,,
-
Pixel pitch is used for displays, not for sensors,,, for me it's impossible to follow your way of comparing the cameras you mention.
You will be very disappointed when you mount your Zeiss Oti lenses as you call them on a 33x44 sensor camera,,,
I hear you Eric. What term should I use instead of "Pixel Pitch" to make my post more coherent. I am not worried about the Otus series on a larger sensor. It may be great or not. The point of the post is that we have a new standard arising or, more accurately, an old standard descending (almost) to where we might afford it. I am going out on a limb to try the X1D out. It could be a dud, but chances are not likely that it will fail.
-
A side line comment: nearly all lenses will not be able to utilise a bigger image format than what they were designed for. Thus mounting an Otus on the 'blad, given an adapter exists, will just produce a circular image with black corners. Thus you have to cut away a lot of the image to end up at more or less the same sensor estate you started with, but probably would lose a lot of pixels in the cropping process.
The advantage is of course now the market will be flooded with exotic lenses for sale ...
-
The Hasselblad X1D is a sexy looking camera!
I would love to use it :)
Do let us know your initial impressions Michael...
-
The Hasselblad X1D is a sexy looking camera!
I would love to use it :)
Do let us know your initial impressions Michael...
I will, if I ever get a copy.
-
A side line comment: nearly all lenses will not be able to utilise a bigger image format than what they were designed for. Thus mounting an Otus on the 'blad, given an adapter exists, will just produce a circular image with black corners. Thus you have to cut away a lot of the image to end up at more or less the same sensor estate you started with, but probably would lose a lot of pixels in the cropping process.
The advantage is of course now the market will be flooded with exotic lenses for sale ...
I recognize that and probably won't buy any more Otus lenses, and may even sell some. The money concern is great and prices for lenses that fit these smaller MF cameras will eventually come down. But folks like me are always on the bleeding edge of technology, because we are impatient. Still, the X1D will allow me to really find out if I like the format. Plus, i have my D810 and a ton of lenses to play with, which I do. Here is one I took the other day with the D810 and the Noct Nikkor.
-
Pixel pitch is used for displays, not for sensors...
Have you heard of Eric Fossum ?
http://ericfossum.com/Presentations/2008%20Jan%20CMOS%20Image%20Sensors%20Past%20Present%20and%20Future.pdf
-
My question is what term should I use, photosite?
-
Michael - I dont have a clue about your thought process - and it doesnt matter. What does matter is that you are doing what you think you should be doing - you have given it a lot of thought it seems - and right or wrong - if you dont do it - you will never know. Life is short - do what you have to do. Good luck :) I am looking forward to your feedback
-
Michael - I dont have a clue about your thought process - and it doesnt matter. What does matter is that you are doing what you think you should be doing - you have given it a lot of thought it seems - and right or wrong - if you dont do it - you will never know. Life is short - do what you have to do. Good luck :) I am looking forward to your feedback
Thank you Elsa!
-
Michael - I dont have a clue about your thought process - and it doesnt matter. What does matter is that you are doing what you think you should be doing - you have given it a lot of thought it seems - and right or wrong - if you dont do it - you will never know. Life is short - do what you have to do. Good luck :) I am looking forward to your feedback
+1 :)
-
... well, as long as you keep spoiling us with out-of-the-ordinary pictures and tutorials ...
I have stopped worrying about product lines about one year after having purchased the Df, but I am admittedly on a totally different "trip".
Maybe some day, after having tested most 50mm around, I'll end up with a used Leica Monochrome and a Summicron, and nothing else, who knows.
In any case, have an exciting trip and keep us informed (here) !
-
Rest assured your Schneider and Nikkor LF optics will shine on the X1D and the GFX.
Their Image circles are made for 5x7 qinch
-
Rest assured your Schneider and Nikkor LF optics will shine on the X1D and the GFX.
Their Image circles are made for 5x7 qinch
Maybe on the GFX, but the X1D does not have focal-plane shutter, which is fine. I am not looking for this camera to use all my favorite F-Mount lenses.
-
They have shutters in the lens. Have they not? Mine have
-
They have shutters in the lens. Have they not? Mine have
Exactly right. The concept of trying to marry everything from my Nikon stuff to the X1D does not appeal to me, probably because it basically is not easily possible.
-
Have you heard of Eric Fossum ?
http://ericfossum.com/Presentations/2008%20Jan%20CMOS%20Image%20Sensors%20Past%20Present%20and%20Future.pdf
thank you for this john!
-
to push MPs, sony has developed the bancklit sensor which (to my knowledge) basically means that they use both sides of the sensor to increase MPs and keep the pixel/photon/wharever size at acceptable levels. Fuji and Panasonic are working on an organic fnWXHNBVe4rkJ2. However, since fuji sil launch their own MF camera, an organic sensor based camera might not be on the horizon yet.
I am following these devdlopments with great interest but personally I would not invest yet in another system.
I am highly intrrested in your thoughts about the hasselblad. Keep us posted.
Thank you for sharing your thoughts.
I might be interested in a few of your lenses. ;-)
-
Anyway, I have been chomping at the bit for a year or so, waiting for Nikon to stop pussyfooting around and deliver me a high-end mirrorless camera or at least the successor to the D810, one with a 50 Mpx sensor, and preferably 75 Mpx. We all know that has not happened yet, with no hint of when it might take place. For my purposes, Nikon has gone AWOL, IMO.
You have lost me and you've done it right here.
Dave
-
Have you heard of Eric Fossum ?
http://ericfossum.com/Presentations/2008%20Jan%20CMOS%20Image%20Sensors%20Past%20Present%20and%20Future.pdf (http://ericfossum.com/Presentations/2008%20Jan%20CMOS%20Image%20Sensors%20Past%20Present%20and%20Future.pdf)
No,,,
-
Michael - I dont have a clue about your thought process - and it doesnt matter. What does matter is that you are doing what you think you should be doing - you have given it a lot of thought it seems - and right or wrong - if you dont do it - you will never know. Life is short - do what you have to do. Good luck :) I am looking forward to your feedback
I always like such, as approach!
Great, and first of all have fun!
-
PhaseOne, Michael?
8)
-
...
Anyway, I have been chomping at the bit for a year or so, waiting for Nikon to stop pussyfooting around and deliver me a high-end mirrorless camera or at least the successor to the D810, one with a 50 Mpx sensor, and preferably 75 Mpx. We all know that has not happened yet, with no hint of when it might take place. For my purposes, Nikon has gone AWOL, IMO.
...
What to say,,, I think you are out of line with those comments but what the heck it seems 'some people here' enjoy when someone stand up and trashes what others have worked hard on,,,
I continue to enjoy the D810 for what it is, I still see new possibilities with that camera and I'm still learning to use it better and better, still getting to know it, it does so many things like no other photographic tool I know of,,, I also still enjoy shooting my Leica M9 - 7 years old these days,,, Maybe I may ask what you think about that?
Please.
To me it's a complete mystery that you have to trash Nikon
-
What to say,,, I think you are out of line with those comments but what the heck it seems 'some people here' enjoy when someone stand up and trashes what others have worked hard on,,,
I continue to enjoy the D810 for what it is, I still see new possibilities with that camera and I'm still learning to use it better and better, still getting to know it, it does so many things like no other photographic tool I know of,,, I also still enjoy shooting my Leica M9 - 7 years old these days,,, Maybe I may ask what you think about that?
Please.
To me it's a complete mystery that you have to trash Nikon
How do you figure I am trashing Nikon, other than saying clearly that for my work they are taking too long to offer something to upgrade to? Why see that as so negative? Trashing? Not at all.
-
I did not just impulsively decide on the Hasselblad X1D system, although I did impulsively order it one day. Before making this decision, I spent about a year or more exploring all the avenues I could beyond the many Nikon systems I had used over the years. In terms of other cameras, I purchased and tested the Pentax K3 and then the K1, with a particular interest in their Pixel-Shift – super-resolution. I found that for my work there were few native Pentax lenses that I could appreciate. I ended up mostly using some Voigtlanders in Pentax mount, the 125mm APO-Lanthar, the 90mm APO Lanther (original and newer models), the Zeiss Pentax PK Distagon 28mm ZK, the Sigma 24mm ART lens, and others.
While the Pixel-Shift feature of the Pentax cameras was fascinating (if limited), ultimately the Pentax was IMO too unfriendly with non-Pentax lenses for my work and Pentax lenses were not that distinctive. In addition, I bought and used the Sony A7R II, both by itself and in conjunction with various bellows cameras and systems. This Sony system was interesting, and I was already familiar with the Sony A7R and the Sony A7s. The A7R II was useful with the bellows systems, in particular the Cambo Actus. Still, it had problems, so that after a while I sold it while it still had value and am waiting for a higher-end upgrade from Sony with perhaps a larger sensor.
Here is a shot with the Pentax K1 and the Voigtlander APO 90mm lens in Pixel-Shift mode. When all things are equal, the result rivals MF images IMO.
I also looked at Large Format, lenses and systems, working with the Rollei X-Act 2, the Novoflex CASTBAL, and the Novoflex BALPRO systems. I investigated a whole series of large-format lenses, including both Copal implementations and barrel-type lenses from Schneider, Rodenstock, Zeiss, and other lenses. I did find out that there are some incredible bargains among these lenses, in particular in barrel-lens format. I went through about ten different LF lenses, of which I kept a few that I could not part with. Some of my findings can be seen here, for those who are possible interested. Many more volumes not yet released.
http://traffic.libsyn.com/spiritgrooves/DSLR_Close-Up.pdf
http://traffic.libsyn.com/spiritgrooves/DSLR_Close-Up_Volume_Two_v3.pdf
Something I learned from all of this is the value of the medium and large-format lenses and systems. Still, I assumed I would never spring for one. Too much money for my budget. However, when most of the systems I was testing out showed various kinds of flaws for my particular work (close-up and stacked nature photos), by elimination I ended up face-to-face once again with medium format.
For me, all roads ended up at medium format, so when something relatively inexpensive appeared (the X1D), I decided, after studying the work of Ming Thein with Hasselblad, to take the plunge. So I did not go into this without some consideration.
-
To me it's a complete mystery that you have to trash Nikon
I think it's a part of a pattern of loose logic. Loose logic is a proper term. It means the logica steps or arguments presented do not support the [conclusion] or in this case multiple conclusions. This doesn't mean.the Hasselblad X1D won't serve Michael well. I would use caution if selling fine lenses at a loss.
Perhaps trshing Nikon seems to fill the gaps.
Dave
-
I think it's a part of a pattern of loose logic. Loose logic is a proper term. It means the logica steps or arguments presented do not support the condition or in this case multiple conclusions. This doesn't mean.the Hasselblad X1D won't serve Michael well.
I would use caution if selling fine lenses at a loss.
Dave
I don't feel that I am trashing Nikon. Maybe it looks that way to others. Few could be as loyal, especially to the Nikon D810. I do feel that Nikon has fiddled while we wait, and has not been able to lead us as at least I am used to having them do. It is a good question whether their lack of presence in the last year has led to my looking elsewhere (in addition to using their entire system as well) or are we are experiencing a perfect storm that has led to a crisis that (at least for my work) only some form of Medium Format system can satisfy. I am not the Lone Ranger here. Many others around the web, many posts, point to Nikon as having done very little to advance their position (and satisfy us) in the last year.
-
I am not the Lone Ranger here. Many others around the web, many posts, point to Nikon as having done very little to advance their position (and satisfy us) in the last year.
As Nikon only had action cams as really new announcements at Photokina, people seem to forget the D5/D500 release earlier this year that show serious advancements.
I don't understand your logic in system choices and think you may experience some lens challenges with your new system - as you have faced before with all your previous systems - but wish you all the best with the X1D which without a doubt is a nice camera.
-
As Nikon only had action cams as really new announcements at Photokina, people seem to forget the D5/D500 release earlier this year that show serious advancements.
I don't understand your logic in system choices and think you may experience some lens challenges with your new system - as you have faced before with all your previous systems - but wish you all the best with the X1D which without a doubt is a nice camera.
There is little choice with lenses on the X1D, unless you want to revisit the older, larger Hasselblad lenses, which I don't. By choosing to try the X1D i accept the limited lens choice. I have many fine lenses in Nikon F-mount and use the D810 daily.
-
I think the arguments do not really support the choice, but I'm still looking forward to the results. Sometimes one has to follow one's gut and try something. Good luck!
-
Michael, I love the image in #24.
-
I did not just impulsively decide on the Hasselblad X1D system, although I did impulsively order it one day. Before making this decision, I spent about a year or more exploring all the avenues I could beyond the many Nikon systems I had used over the years. In terms of other cameras, I purchased and tested the Pentax K3 and then the K1, with a particular interest in their Pixel-Shift – super-resolution. I found that for my work there were few native Pentax lenses that I could appreciate. I ended up mostly using some Voigtlanders in Pentax mount, the 125mm APO-Lanthar, the 90mm APO Lanther (original and newer models), the Zeiss Pentax PK Distagon 28mm ZK, the Sigma 24mm ART lens, and others.
While the Pixel-Shift feature of the Pentax cameras was fascinating (if limited), ultimately the Pentax was IMO too unfriendly with non-Pentax lenses for my work and Pentax lenses were not that distinctive. In addition, I bought and used the Sony A7R II, both by itself and in conjunction with various bellows cameras and systems. This Sony system was interesting, and I was already familiar with the Sony A7R and the Sony A7s. The A7R II was useful with the bellows systems, in particular the Cambo Actus. Still, it had problems, so that after a while I sold it while it still had value and am waiting for a higher-end upgrade from Sony with perhaps a larger sensor.
Here is a shot with the Pentax K1 and the Voigtlander APO 90mm lens in Pixel-Shift mode. When all things are equal, the result rivals MF images IMO.
I also looked at Large Format, lenses and systems, working with the Rollei X-Act 2, the Novoflex CASTBAL, and the Novoflex BALPRO systems. I investigated a whole series of large-format lenses, including both Copal implementations and barrel-type lenses from Schneider, Rodenstock, Zeiss, and other lenses. I did find out that there are some incredible bargains among these lenses, in particular in barrel-lens format. I went through about ten different LF lenses, of which I kept a few that I could not part with. Some of my findings can be seen here, for those who are possible interested. Many more volumes not yet released.
http://traffic.libsyn.com/spiritgrooves/DSLR_Close-Up.pdf
http://traffic.libsyn.com/spiritgrooves/DSLR_Close-Up_Volume_Two_v3.pdf
Something I learned from all of this is the value of the medium and large-format lenses and systems. Still, I assumed I would never spring for one. Too much money for my budget. However, when most of the systems I was testing out showed various kinds of flaws for my particular work (close-up and stacked nature photos), by elimination I ended up face-to-face once again with medium format.
For me, all roads ended up at medium format, so when something relatively inexpensive appeared (the X1D), I decided, after studying the work of Ming Thein with Hasselblad, to take the plunge. So I did not go into this without some consideration.
The most blatant question of all hasn't even been asked: does anyone really need a $9,000 camera to capture images of their potted plants and dew drops on their back lawn? ???
I mean, essentially, you're trying to make a silk purse out of a sow's ear. Nothing is going to raise the level of interest in such common, ho-hum subjects.
IMO, that money would be better spent on a trip to somewhere exotic, with truly interesting subject matter, where your existing Nikon equipment will take the more compelling images ...
There is no Hasselblad camera that could have captured these images ... taken at the long end of 900mm:
(http://www.thenaturephotographer.club/thumbnails/1/1_thumb_0000001914_large.jpg)
(http://www.thenaturephotographer.club/thumbnails/1/1_thumb_0000001913_large.jpg)
(http://www.thenaturephotographer.club/thumbnails/1/1_thumb_0000001915_large.jpg)
(http://www.thenaturephotographer.club/thumbnails/1/1_thumb_0000001910_large.jpg)
(http://www.thenaturephotographer.club/thumbnails/1/1_thumb_0000001934_large.jpg)
Bottom Line: Any photo that can be taken with a Hasselblad can be also taken with a Nikon ... but not any photo that can be taken with a Nikon can be taken with a Hasselblad :o
Jack
-
Jack, stunning images! Ironically the hobby of Victor Hasselblad was bird watching and shooting birds with the very camera he had developed...
-
Bottom Line: Any photo that can be taken with a Hasselblad can be also taken with a Nikon ... but not any photo that can be taken with a Nikon can be taken with a Hasselblad :o
Jack
I'm sure this is not true, still the Hasselblad X1D is not the camera for me. The price and electronic viewfinder will keep me away.
Dave
Maybe the X5D will be compelling.
---
Who here remembers the "Instant Blackout Mirror" of the Hasselblad 500 series? Who longs for that technology to return?
:)
Dave
-
Not sure if it is me or what? The star of the show hasn't shown up yet in this thread - where's the blad (or the Fuji MF)? Pictures taken by the blad?
Or is it all theoretical right now?
Or our TS is hoping one of us will give him sufficiently convincing reason not to part with Nikon and not get the blad?
Personally I think to each his own. So what it TS wants to be able to print billboard size photos of whatever he shoots? So what if I don't care?
But I second that all pictures that can be by the blad can be taken by Nikon, albeit differently given the format difference (resolution wise a 50 MP Nikon D850 or D900 is on the books, just be patient), a one-stop advantage to the blad but at a significant cost-size-weight penalty; but not all Nikon shots can be taken with a blad, especially at the exotic end of long telephoto, or inside an underwater housing photographing a pygmy seahorse, or hiking up some exotic mountains (ok this one maybe the blad can, with loads of gym workout or hiring a porter).
Should we perhaps go silent - until the star shows up and pictures paraded? Then we can extol the virtues of the blad and wow over the resolution of the MF.
-
I think I understand Michael's journey and why he is doing what he is doing for his type of photography.
Similarly I was waiting for the D500 so long for my type of photography that I ended loosing interest, and will most likely not buy one, the window of opportunity has passed, Nikons pricing in SA has gone ballistic anyway, and has put a damper on my hobby photography.
I now shoot what I can with my D2Xs in good light with long lenses, and the D800 in between, It will have to do for the unforeseen future.
-
Well, sell both I get yourself the D500... 8)
-
I find this thread incredible, a mix of wishes, opinions, fear, and loathing. It shows me how emotional this topic is for many of us. Have you ever been clear about the direction you are going? I am, very clear, and almost no one seems to understand, even though I keep repeating it in different ways.
I am not giving up FF and especially not giving up the D810. You don’t have to defend FF because I am not attacking it. What I am doing is augmenting it, where it is limited by sensor size. I am going beyond the limitations of FF toward a bigger sensor, one with larger photosites. At the same time, by augmenting with medium format, I am adding to my years of close-up photography, portrait and landscape photography. It is not that I have not already done this with FF. Of course I have because I had no choice. As MF comes down in price, now I have a choice.
I have also examined in detail the Pentax K3 and K1, the Sony A7R II, the Nikon V1, Sony RX100, Sony A7s, Sigma Merrill, and all kinds of technical and view cameras (Rollei X-Act 2, Cambo Actus, Novoflex CASTBAL, Novoflex BALPRO, and dozens of bellows and focus rails. This is not to mention everything Nikon, from the Nikon D1x on up to the D810, plus Coolpix before that. I won’t even mention lenses. I have done my homework. This is not just a knee-jerk reaction.
Also, I am not interested in MF for larger prints because I don’t print, never have. That’s not the only reason MF (larger photosites) is useful. And I clearly see that the Fuji GFX MF camera is basically what I have been looking for Nikon to offer me, but the Fuji is not here yet, and not yet in production, plus it will take a lot of fiddling and adapters for F-Mount lenses to appear before I would be interested. But yes, the Fuji type is probably my future and I am sure Nikon will get there too. So, why chose the Hasselblad X1D?
As I keep mentioning, I want to travel and travel light. I would like a small rather inconspicuous camera and a few basic (but good) smallish lenses to haul around. I also would like a 50 Mpx sensor with good color. I don’t care about the central lens-shutter or the 1/2000 second flash synch. I like the color and quality that the Sony 50 Mpx sensor offers in the various MF cameras, in particular in Hasselblad’s implementation. I like the look and size of the X1D, and will probably like the haptics, although I have yet to actually touch one.
As for money, I am not rich. I had to sell a lot of lenses to get the X1D, and am still doing so. This is the first real MF camera to come down in price to where I would even consider it. I had a Mamiya RZ67, but that was years ago. I certainly got a reaction to this thread, but I was looking for those like myself who would understand what I am doing, why, and like to discuss this advent of MF into our world as an adjunct to FF. Thank goodness, there were a few of you here.
But yes, I believe (at least for me) this is a watershed moment. I can see that in a few years, where today I use FF DSLRs, I will be using MF DSLRs, especially if I can adapt F-Mount lenses to them. As for those who feel compelled to claim that FF can do anything that MF can (and better), please... give me a break.
-
Who here remembers the "Instant Blackout Mirror" of the Hasselblad 500 series? Who longs for that technology to return?
A good example of how, once upon a time, cameras - especially expensive ones - could get away with quirks that these days would be regarded as intolerable defects.
For those who have never used one, a Hasselbald 500 series does not have instant mirror return: the mirror stays up until you wind the film on. So it is not just instant blackout but permanent blackout. (All - AFAIK - MF film cameras are the same, except the Mamiya 645).
The difference with the 500 series is that winding the film on activates a mechanism that cocks the shutter in the lens, and trips the shutter when you take the next picture. The lens can only be put on or taken off the body if both the shutter and the body are cocked. This is a terrible arrangement, because it is possible to get the body and the lens out of synch while the lens is on the body, and in that case the camera is jammed. You have to take off the back, and use a screwdriver - assuming you remembered to bring one, and your reading glasses - to turn the screw that resets the shutter. And as long as the screwdriver doesn't slip and scratch the rear lens element away you go.
Obviously, a nuisance if it happens when the light is just right. But it was never fixed, because it only happened now and again and people just swore and reached for the screwdriver.
Now people threaten to move to Canon because the sequence of items in Nikon's control menus is not right.
-
Michael, I think everybody wishes you results with the Hasselbald X1D you are hoping for, once it is there.
You may continue to use your D810, but by having a title "Goodbye Full-Frame Cameras" you certainly suggested something different, also in the way you were initially complaining on the shortcomings of the D810.
And there are some questionmarks on what the D810 cannot do for your current and future photography, also knowing now that you are not printing.
On another forum you get exactly the same questions https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/4060622 (https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/4060622) so maybe it is not only some of us here that are puzzled by your choices.
But again enjoy the Hassy !
-
On another forum you get exactly the same questions
Exactly. I find that the response was the same everywhere. As for the title, it was not so much me I was referring to, but a sea-change in cameras that I believe is now taking place. The MF DSLR is at hand was what I meant. I feel it will be coming more quickly than we imagine.
-
I find this thread incredible, a mix of wishes, opinions, fear, and loathing. It shows me how emotional this topic is for many of us. [...]
I am going beyond the limitations of FF toward a bigger sensor, one with larger photosites. [...]
As I keep mentioning, I want to travel and travel light. I would like a small rather inconspicuous camera and a few basic (but good) smallish lenses to haul around. I also would like a 50 Mpx sensor with good color. I don’t care about the central lens-shutter or the 1/2000 second flash synch. I like the color and quality that the Sony 50 Mpx sensor offers in the various MF cameras, in particular in Hasselblad’s implementation. I like the look and size of the X1D, and will probably like the haptics, although I have yet to actually touch one.
[...]
But yes, I believe (at least for me) this is a watershed moment. I can see that in a few years, where today I use FF DSLRs, I will be using MF DSLRs, especially if I can adapt F-Mount lenses to them. As for those who feel compelled to claim that FF can do anything that MF can (and better), please... give me a break.
You are right about the dominance of emotional reactions. The trouble is, they are on your side: you write "I like the look and size of the X1D, and will probably like the haptics, although I have yet to actually touch one" and then accuse other people of offering "wishes [and] opinions" and of being "emotional"?
You want larger photosites. You have not given any coherent reason why, but that is fine. However, the X1D has 5.3 micron photosites - bigger, it is true, than the D810, but smaller than the D5 (6.45 micros) or the D4/Df (7.3 microns). So saying that you have to go to a bigger sensor to get bigger photosites is just not true.
But you want the 50MP. You have not said why - and that is fine, too - except that you don't want 50MP to print bigger, because you never print. So what reason can there be to want 50MP? To crop heavily? Not for portraits, or for landscape when the widest lens you have is 24mm equivalent. All we have left are vague gestures towards "good colour" and "quality"; are they not "opinions"?
You say you want a light, compact camera for travel. Don't we all? Well, the X1D with the 45mm weighs just over 1100g - the same as any number of cameras with one lens, including, eg, the Df - with the larger photosites you want - plus the 35/1.8. Adding the 90mm and the 30mm adds a tick under 1200g, compared to just over 700g for the Nikon 24/1.8 plus the 85/1.8. And 50MP is an odd choice for a travel camera, because travel is when it is hardest to produce the meticulous focusing and hand-holding technique you need to justify 50MP.
It is absolutely and totally your business if you want to pay the asking price of the X1D. You do not have to give reasons. But you did give reasons, and you invited responses to them. It is just bullying to react to the responses by accusing people of being motivated by "fear and loathing", or of "feel[ing] compelled" to point out that these "limitations of FF" you talk about are imaginary, and just sneering to demand "give me a break".
-
Les Olson: To me it seems you look everywhere but where I point. No matter how clearly I put it, you insist that it is unclear. If we were just talking, I believe you would understand what I have stated here. If that is how you see what I write, so be it. I have done my best to communicate. More than that I cannot do.
-
Les Olson: To me it seems you look everywhere but where I point. No matter how clearly I put it, you insist that it is unclear. If we were just talking, I believe you would understand what I have stated here. If that is how you see what I write, so be it. I have done my best to communicate. More than that I cannot do.
On the contrary: it is perfectly clear, and I believe I understand it perfectly well. That, however, is your business. But it is everyone's business that on a site of record you are promoting your fancy that the X1D is the answer to the "limitations" of 36 x 24 sensor SLRs and the harbinger of a medium format mirrorless future for reasons that are in some cases wrong, in others irrelevant, and in others again mere emotional gesturing.
And you can do more: not accuse people who point out that your reasons are in some cases wrong, etc, of being emotional and driven by fear and loathing.
-
Michael, whatever you will be experimenting is worth sharing here and you'll get feedback. It does not matter if X, Y, Z or myself don't fully get the rationale.
-
I agree with both viewpoints: it is great to hear different perspectives and experiences on any given topic, but we should also be allowed to point out where we think the reasoning does not hold up. Simply asking for confirmation will not work in the long run, and is also self-deceiving. The community is valuable because no single person can see the full picture.
-
Just over a year ago, I finally gave up on Nikon ever offering a viable replacement for the D300S, and made the jump from Dx to Fx.
The improvement in image quality staggered me. A friend in the same position recently tested the D500, and prefers his D610. This despite the fact that his main photographic interest is birding, probably the field where "reach" is the most important, and thus the field where Dx should in theory be the best bet.
Looking at his test shots, I actually share his conclusion.
And (assuming everything else is equal, which of course it never is) I guess MF is probably a similar step up in exactly the same areas of performance.
So, while I am not myself about to make the swop to Mf, I think I can understand the reasons.
What worries me is that you have already rejected a number of different products because they were difficult to use or had bad menu structures. I do hope you find the Has to your taste.
I don't see that you have been trashing Nikon, but I also think it a bit weird that you were expecting Nikon to bring out a medium format camera (unless I misunderstand your comments). They never have before, even though these very same arguments have been raging for decades...
-
Just over a year ago, I finally gave up on Nikon ever offering a viable replacement for the D300S, and made the jump from Dx to Fx.
The improvement in image quality staggered me. A friend in the same position recently tested the D500, and prefers his D610. This despite the fact that his main photographic interest is birding, probably the field where "reach" is the most important, and thus the field where Dx should in theory be the best bet.
Looking at his test shots, I actually share his conclusion.
And (assuming everything else is equal, which of course it never is) I guess MF is probably a similar step up in exactly the same areas of performance.
So, while I am not myself about to make the swop to Mf, I think I can understand the reasons.
What worries me is that you have already rejected a number of different products because they were difficult to use or had bad menu structures. I do hope you find the Has to your taste.
I don't see that you have been trashing Nikon, but I also think it a bit weird that you were expecting Nikon to bring out a medium format camera (unless I misunderstand your comments). They never have before, even though these very same arguments have been raging for decades...
I only present MF as the next logical step for Nikon, IMO. MF has been hovering over my work for quite some time, so I finally am giving it the attention I feel it deserves. As for posting more on this topic here, it is time for me to find another place to talk about MF.
-
I fell into the 'MF obviously is much better then 35mm' hype more then 35 years ago when I started a pro level photography course at the Royal Academy of Arts in The Hague
I had saved hard and fallen into a fair amount of money, so decided to buy myself a twin body+ lenses Nikon 35 mm set (obvious choice back then, as in that era Nikon really was the only real pro choice, not so much for the 'better' equipment, but also for the wider availability of eg repair shops, 2nd hand gear and third party accesories).
And following the 'expert advise' at school I also bought a multilple lens and filmback Hasselblad 500C/M set, as well as a large format Sinar F (which, I was assured, was an absolute 'must have' long term investment for an aspiring pro photographer).
Well, I soon found out large format studio work was not my thing, and that despite the better technical IQ, the Hasselblad didn't help me shoot better pictures.
So I soon sold the Sinar set, and, although I didn't expect it would happen ( it didn't), in the hope that in future I would grow into it, kept the Hasselblad set in the back of my closet. It's been there for the last 30+ years gathering dust, never used it in earnest since.
It however was a nice marketing tool to have around though.
During some shoots I had it mounted on a tripod, which would prompt the client/art director look at it when they came in, and draw a comment ' Ah, Hasselblad, those are going to be great pictures'.
After which I would take some symbolic pictures with it, and continue my serious/the rest of the shooting with my Nikons.
Since the prints were the final product that were looked at, no one eventually cared what format they were shot with
(I used to mainly shoot people, fashion and at times a few events, so unlike technical studio work, the 'ultimate' sharpness, lines per mm etc. were not the prime concern)
Nowadays I 'm a great fan for shooters who eagerly drop their Nikon gear to upgrade for something new and, although unproven, better that hits the market.
It allowed me eg to get lenses like the 1.4/58mm AF, 1.4/85mm AF D, 125mm CC and 1.4/AF D for about 50% MSRP each, a admitted high mileage (120K clicks) but for the rest in excellent working condition D800 + grip for a mere Eur 850, a hardly used (under 10K clicks, including WiFi dongle) D7100 for Eur 375.
Sure, all 2nd hand, so I won't have the rush of unpacking something spanking new, or be able to draw bragging rights from having the latest and greatest gear/gadget. But I'm really not very much into that anyway.
As far as the X1D is concerned, I have handled and shot with it (and other Hasselblad H models) at a demo day of the Hasselblad distributor for Northern Europe.
Impressive weight and built quality, but coming from a D3/D800 I found the AF speed unimpressive
Also for me the 'gain' in IQ etc from the larger chip, and considering that e.g. the menu and UI were at that time still a 'work in progress, were not enough to justify/ a reason to avoid hasty decisions over the huge investment that switching/upgrading would come with.
I did however found a cheap 45 degree PME prism for my 501CM, so maybe I'll start playing more with it again (the look/presence of a - big - film - rather then digital - camera on a shoot, even if no pictures are actually taken with it in earnest, is/apparently is quite popular nowadays ::) .
-
Michael, whether Hasselblad X1D is the right camera for you, only you can say. But a camera system is more than just the camera body. What are the lens options? I know you love shooting closeups and focus stacking. Are there good options for the X1D which allow you to do this? So far only two lenses are announced - 45/3.5 and 90/3.2, both get to about 1:6 magnification which is about the same as any normal non-macro lens. The 90 might work well with a good close-up lens but image quality is likely to suffer a little, which may negate the advantage of the 50MP sensor. Also, is the manual focus ring sufficiently precise enough the enable focus stacking? Other H lenses can be used with an adaptor, but only lenses with a built-in leaf shutter can be used, so the lens choice may still be restricted.
Maybe the new medium format Fuji would be a better option as there is already a 120/4 macro lens in the roadmap...
-
The most blatant question of all hasn't even been asked: does anyone really need a $9,000 camera to capture images of their potted plants and dew drops on their back lawn? ???
I mean, essentially, you're trying to make a silk purse out of a sow's ear. Nothing is going to raise the level of interest in such common, ho-hum subjects.
IMO, that money would be better spent on a trip to somewhere exotic, with truly interesting subject matter, where your existing Nikon equipment will take the more compelling images ...
There is no Hasselblad camera that could have captured these images ... taken at the long end of 900mm:
(http://www.thenaturephotographer.club/thumbnails/1/1_thumb_0000001914_large.jpg)
(http://www.thenaturephotographer.club/thumbnails/1/1_thumb_0000001913_large.jpg)
(http://www.thenaturephotographer.club/thumbnails/1/1_thumb_0000001915_large.jpg)
(http://www.thenaturephotographer.club/thumbnails/1/1_thumb_0000001910_large.jpg)
(http://www.thenaturephotographer.club/thumbnails/1/1_thumb_0000001934_large.jpg)
Bottom Line: Any photo that can be taken with a Hasselblad can be also taken with a Nikon ... but not any photo that can be taken with a Nikon can be taken with a Hasselblad :o
Jack
To create an interesting photograph, you first have to photograph something interesting, I'm inclined to agree with your thoughts!
tony
-
May sound fundamental but surely photographing something in a different way or photographing something different would capture the imagination
more!
It's often been illustrated(by our host) that seeing things and capturing them differently is potentially more rewarding and perhaps more memorable!
cheers
tony
-
To create an interesting photograph, you first have to photograph something interesting, I'm inclined to agree with your thoughts!
tony
To quote Jim Zuckerman, right out of his book, Shooting & Selling Your Photos, he says:
"Many years ago when I tried to determine the difference between my work and that of the photographers I admired, I realized that they were shooting fantastic species in the animal kingdom, going to exotic places, and capturing breathtaking landscapes. I was only shooting around my home. As soon as I began traveling and seeking out new subjects, my images took a quantum leap forward in excitement and salability. Great photography often means a great subject. This shot of exotic butterfly from the Philippines requires the same technical and artistic skill is a photograph of a nondescript brown butterfly taken in Arkansas. The only difference is the choice of subject."
The point being here, if the OP "can't get excited" taking photographs of his backyard flowers, from ten-thousand different angles, stacked over and over and over again, using a Nikon D810 + the finest lenses made ... I seriously doubt buying a $9,000 MF camera is going to make his backyard flowers (or dewdrops on his front lawn) any more exciting ... for him or anyone else.
Spending that same money going to Costa Rica, or Thailand, or Malaysia ... and actually photographing exciting subjects with his already-excellent equipment would be money better spent IMO.
Jack
-
Jack, nothing wrong with photographing where you live.
Those purple butterflies in the Philipines might look amazing to you, but to the local Philipinos who see hundreds of them every day for years they are ho hum and boring. While these same Philipinos would view my backyard brown butterflies as unique and exceptionally beautiful.
This is a small planet, and just about everywhere has been fully explored and photographed. It's really hard to photograph something that's totally new or never seen before. I don't believe that's the object of photography (unless you're NASA and shooting space shots). Rather most of our photography is in fact shooting mundane stuff that has been photographed a million times, only you are attempting to put your own spin on it.
My favorite historical photographers all took most of their award winning photos that are now in museums in their own home areas.
Also, when you go to the Philipieans to shoot butterflies, please realize that there are hundreds of Philipino photographers who have equipment at least as good as yours, and skills as good as you too. But they have a giant advantage over you, they are there all of the time and can more fully explore the subject you are there to shoot than you can.
-
The point being here, if the OP "can't get excited" taking photographs of his backyard flowers, from ten-thousand different angles, stacked over and over and over again, using a Nikon D810 + the finest lenses made ... I seriously doubt buying a $9,000 MF camera is going to make his backyard flowers (or dewdrops on his front lawn) any more exciting ... for him or anyone else.
John Koerner:
Since I am the Original Poster, your comments are directed at me personally.
You have, both in this forum, and in others, belittled me for my interest in close-up photography in the studio, and also suggested that I don’t do field work or anything other than studio-type photos. I have been doing nature photos since 1956 and have done thousands of field-guide-like photos... in the field. I shoot outside (and not just in gardens) from spring to fall. When winter comes, I go inside.
You continue to look down on studio work and, in your post here today, you state that my work is not exciting to me or to anyone else. I am tired of this kind of attitude being directed at me personally. I like field photography also, but I enjoy what I do, outside, inside, studio, etc.
We are all different and, as they say, ”Different Strokes for Different Folks.” Let’s honor that and not get personal.
-
Michael, I apologize for that negative comment (and some others) slipping past the admin crew.
Apparently Mr. Koener is not able to recognize that others may not share his particular set of photographic values.
We all here at NG value your beautiful work and your creative explorations. We admire your generosity in making your guides freely available to everyone.
-
Contributors, in general, are given the benefit of doubt if any comment is off the mark. It can happen to the best of us and often will be the result of nuances lost in translation.
However, once they make a habit of submitting bad derogatory comments, they have crossed the line of no return.
-
Michael, I apologize for that negative comment slipping past the admin crew.
Apparently Mr. Koener is not able to recognize that others may not share his particular set of photographic values.
We all here at NG value your beautiful work and your creative explorations. We admire your generosity in making your guides freely available to everyone.
This is not Koener's first abuse. He has done it on other forums (and here) as well, and I was told he was kicked out of some for his personal attacks on other photographers. It is hard to understand why he could not be tolerant of other approaches to photography. When I told him on LULA (or somewhere), where I was talking about Focus Stacking, that I had done hundreds of thousands of photos (which I have, because of focus-stacking), he called me a liar and all kinds of other stuff. I am tired of his being allowed to treat others this way.
-
We are discussing this further right now.
-
As for staying on topic, my thinking has shifted some, given the fact that Hasselblad continues to slip all delivery dates, and without the courtesy of a clear explanation for the delay.
The latest I have heard is the Hasselblad X1D will be shipping in February. Well, Fuji, who has a pretty fair record on delivery, originally said that their GFX mirrorless MF camera would appear early in 2017. It is possible Fuji might even beat Hasselblad out of the starting gate.
While I love the haptics and the whole gestalt of a small MF system like the X1D, I don’t have to have it. The Fuji GFX is bound to be an exceptional camera, because they already have proven their ability to make lenses for themselves, and they did a lot of work with Hasselblad, etc. Plus the Fuji GFX, with an adapter, will be able to take all of my Nikon F-Mount glass, of which I have a lot. It is not as attractively designed as the X1D, but at some point, I could care less.
The X1d weights about 71 grams more than the GFX. If you remove the OVF from the Fuji (which you can), its weight is either similar to the X1D or perhaps even less. I will be using LiveView on whatever camera I get, so I would probably not have the viewfinder on the camera; however, it would be close by in the car or bag.
So, as mentioned, I regret that Hasselblad has not been totally transparent on what the holdup is; I would be more understanding if I could be part of being informed. Does anyone out there have the X1D? If so, I would like to know what is good, bad, or indifferent about it, please.
-
I think it would be worth waiting for the Hasselblad and the Fuji to appear, and then to make a decision.
I, for one, look forward to the results.
-
I think it would be worth waiting for the Hasselblad and the Fuji to appear, and then to make a decision.
I, for one, look forward to the results.
Maybe so. Or, get the X1D, use it, and if I like the GFX better, sell the X1D and get the GFX. Have to see which one arrives first.
-
What I read over at getdpi, is that Hasselblad has actually commenced shipping. The problem kow is that they are not able to fill all the pre-orders yet, only some. That's a difference. The X1D is successful beyond Hasselblads imagination.
-
Most of the Nikkors will not be able to light the whole 33x44 sqmm because most Nikkors are made for a smaller image circle fit for 24x36
The Schneider APO Digitar series I recommended and you liked and the AM ED LF Nikkors will do a great job on your Cambo setup
-
Maybe so. Or, get the X1D, use it, and if I like the GFX better, sell the X1D and get the GFX. Have to see which one arrives first.
That is an expensive route!
-
IMHO: More cameras are better... and i like toys.
I would love to have a Hasselblad and set of lenses.
-
The X1D does not have focal-plan shutter, so not sure how it would be triggered on the Cambo Actus, plus Cambo would have to make an adapter, which might be hard to get them to do. As a close-up photographer, I could use the center portion of the various Nikon F-Mount lenses, if that lens did not cover the whoie frame.
I probably will sit and wait for the X1D, knowing that I can try it and return it. By then, perhaps Fuji will have a time table and more details. The Fuji GFX will do more of what I want, but I like the idea of the neat, compact, and powerful Hasselblad X1D.
No choice but to wait and wonder... I don't like the fact that Hasselblad has left us hanging with no clear information as to what is going on.
-
LuLa just posted that the X1D will start to ship to end users next week. And, there will be an interview with the Hasselblad CEO on LuLa tomorrow to address the shipping delays and the state of the firmware. The Black Special Edition will ship in Fenruary.
-
Good news! The whole photography community is looking forward to this launch!
-
Here's a very timely review article.
https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/hasselblad-x1d-50c-pre-production-shooting-experience
-
The recent update of Adobe Camera Raw now includes the Hasselblad X1D.
-
Here's a very timely review article.
https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/hasselblad-x1d-50c-pre-production-shooting-experience
I think the images in the article are a sober statement to what you could expect from that camera. Absolutely nothing else, than you would get from any other modern camera. It is so liberating that they present the camera with ordinary snapshots, taken by an average photographer in mundane lighting. Kudos to Dpreview!! What you are left with are huge files of to fill your computer to the brim. In the hands of professional this must be a fantastic tool, but for me, thanks ,but no thanks. I`m sorry I don't shear your enthusiasm :-\
-
“No X1D for those who don’t want one,” of course. I never saw it as a replacement for my Nikon D810, but always as an add-on, but one that could perhaps open up new possibilities for my work. I am still wondering (those of you reading this that know the answer, please share here) whether when the replacement for the D810 comes out, hopefully with more pixels, whether there will have been enough progress in sensor design/implementation in the interval so that a full-frame DSLR sensor can (perhaps) more closely approximate what we gain by going to this smallish MF sensor (50 Mpx) of the X1D or Fuji GFX.
Certainly my investment is in Nikon cameras and F-Mount lenses, so the X1D is a hedge against being told we may have reached the end of the line for leap-frog advance with the current FF sensor size. I can always return the X1D if I can’t do much with it or it is otherwise disappointing. And I have had to sell a LOT of equipment to afford the Hasselblad. So... while I hope for a home-run with the X1D, I am hedging my bet by not getting rid of what I know really works well, my current equipment.
Didn’t expect I would have to wait this long to find out, but hopefully we all can soon see for ourselves. I never thought of the X1D as anything other than, perhaps, an extension beyond what I have. And I feel I have the experience to use if well.
-
I think the images in the article are a sober statement to what you could expect from that camera. Absolutely nothing else, than you would get from any other modern camera. It is so liberating that they present the camera with ordinary snapshots, taken by an average photographer in mundane lighting. Kudos to Dpreview!! What you are left with are huge files of to fill your computer to the brim. In the hands of professional this must be a fantastic tool, but for me, thanks ,but no thanks. I`m sorry I don't shear your enthusiasm :-\
Børge that is a bit harsh,,, Not really your style ;) Anyway
The carpenters tools show a great deal of detail and how the sensor does with tone graduations an overall very nice image with huge amount of details, f/16 and only two centimeters or inch of dof,,,
The landscape image, it seems the 45mm is struggling with the back ground rendering
Boat washing Purple fringing galore
Pineapple very slim dof, but on the other hand very smooth transition from in focus to out of focus,,, a stack of many images are needed to get this sharp and this is f/16
Church at f/8, detail galore when you see the text but bg is struggling even at ISO 400,,, Ouch,,,
Sorry I was just as harsh as Børge,,, ::)
-
I am still wondering (those of you reading this that know the answer, please share here) whether when the replacement for the D810 comes out, hopefully with more pixels, whether there will have been enough progress in sensor design/implementation in the interval so that a full-frame DSLR sensor can (perhaps) more closely approximate what we gain by going to this smallish MF sensor (50 Mpx) of the X1D or Fuji GFX.
You will have generally more DoF and less background blurring when moving from a larger format to a smaller one. You will generally have less dynamic range also. The larger format surface area allows the capture of more light, more photons. Beyond this much depends on the lenses, focal length, aperture, polishing of the glass and for the camera the more pixels means finder detail provided the lenses can deliver. If the lens can deliver more pixels will mean more fine detail. As I understand the engineers are pushing the limits of what is possible in sensor end electronics. I think you'll have to wait and see what can be done.
Dave Hartman
-
Please have a look at the image, Winged Bull in the church almost at the end, focus slowly starts at left somewhere then increase ever so subtle then at the end of the relief it washes out and disappears before the corner,,, where is it sharp? This is at f/16,,,, I don't understand,,, ?
The windows show several strange blue hues in the came strips,,, ?
The highlights in the leaves outside seems to have airy disks,,, ?
-
You will have generally more DoF and less background blurring when moving from a larger format to a smaller one. You will generally have less dynamic range also. The larger format surface area allows the capture of more light, more photons. Beyond this much depends on the lenses, focal length, aperture, polishing of the glass and for the camera the more pixels means finder detail provided the lenses can deliver. If the lens can deliver more pixels will mean more fine detail. As I understand the engineers are pushing the limits of what is possible in sensor end electronics. I think you'll have to wait and see what can be done.
Dave Hartman
These generalisations always have an underlying complex set of conditions that might or might not be obvious.
It is trivially true a large sensor collects more photons. however, it also covers a larger area, thus light intensity is the same. People tend to overlook this pretty obvious fact. Thus it boils down to other factors whether the larger format generates a higher dynamic range.
Generating the same resolution per area becomes harder when the image circle grows and keeping up the aperture (lens "speed") becomes quite difficult. Probably there is an optimum area size for resolution and that can be a moving target depending on whether the lens is a wide angle, [format] normal, or long focal length.
-
Michael,
After stacking an image do you save all the individual shots: for a few days, weeks, months or indefinitely? This is probably a dumb question but the megabytes must be staggering even at 36MP.
Dave
I have to put this somewhere. This is what I think every time I see the title to this thread...
So goodbye yellow brick road
Where the dogs of society howl
You can't plant me in your penthouse
I'm going back to my plough
...no deep meaning here, just an association.
-
DoF at 100% pixels is going to be in short supply. What matters is DoF at presentation magnification and normal viewing distance to something maybe half again closer than normal. For me if I like a photograph I generally want to examine details from a closer distance.
Dave
-
Michael,
After stacking an image do you save all the individual shots: for a few days, weeks, months or indefinitely? This is probably a dumb question but the megabytes must be staggering even at 36MP.
Dave
Yes, I save them all, many hundreds of thousands of them. It is a problem. I was hoping that with MF I can get by with short stacks, fewer layers. We will see.
-
Børge that is a bit harsh,,, Not really your style ;) Anyway
The carpenters tools show a great deal of detail and how the sensor does with tone graduations an overall very nice image with huge amount of details, f/16 and only two centimeters or inch of dof,,,
The landscape image, it seems the 45mm is struggling with the back ground rendering
Boat washing Purple fringing galore
Pineapple very slim dof, but on the other hand very smooth transition from in focus to out of focus,,, a stack of many images are needed to get this sharp and this is f/16
Church at f/8, detail galore when you see the text but bg is struggling even at ISO 400,,, Ouch,,,
Sorry I was just as harsh as Børge,,, ::)
Maybe I was a bit harsh, but I am getting rather tired of the way camera manufacturers present their newest toys. As if everyone would be able to get the end results that leading artist with a menageri of assistants could? Rant end :)
-
Maybe I was a bit harsh, but I am getting rather tired of the way camera manufacturers present their newest toys. As if everyone would be able to get the end results that leading artist with a menageri of assistants could? Rant end :)
Buying a soccer ball doesn't make you Pelé.
-
Buying a soccer ball doesn't make you Pelé.
Pelé never played soccer, but I agree that a camera doesn't make a photographer.
-
Buying a soccer ball doesn't make you Pelé.
But I can pretend to be ;D
-
Maybe I was a bit harsh, but I am getting rather tired of the way camera manufacturers present their newest toys. As if everyone would be able to get the end results that leading artist with a menageri of assistants could? Rant end :)
This isn't new. I was reading this kind of line back in 1970.
The Nikon F lead to better opportunities compared to my father's Mamiya XXX with a fixed 50/2.8 lens. The F2 solved the problem of where to put the back when I changed film, etc. I'd like to shoot a little Tri-X (if something like it is made) and print in the darkroom once in a while. I'll never go back to film generally and never, never for color.
Dave
-
But I can pretend to be ;D
I think that describes many of us. ;)
-
or Bjør Rørslett
Most of the Nikkors will not be able to light the whole 33x44 sqmm because most Nikkors are made for a smaller image circle fit for 24x36
What about the tilt shift Nikkors, will they give a larger image on a MF camera with an adapter?
I'm just curious......
-
What about the tilt shift Nikkors, will they give a larger image on a MF camera with an adapter?
I'm just curious......
Yes, but not excessively so. The problem is the lens mount cuts off some of the peripheral rays. This is no problem on a 24x36/FX camera as the entire frame is well illuminated as long as the lens is moved within its operational limits. However, on a larger format you will run into problems unless the lens mount is modified. Furthermore, the register distance (lens rear to film plane) will be too short on an MF camera, unless this is one of the newer mirrorless model.
-
Bjørn and I had the chance to get hands on with the New Hasselblad X1D in a shop in Amsterdam,,,
The camera feels very solid and sturdy, nice feel of button action, didn't see how to adjust the diopter, so viewfinder was not sharp and highlights where blown not in the same league as the Leica SL that I can compare it to re mirror less,,, the lenses are bland,,,
What surprised me the most was that the movement of the optics while focusing made the image in the viewfinder zoom erratically as it was hunting for focus, similar to an old point and shoot is the best way I can describe it,,, click klack
-
Yes, I save them all, many hundreds of thousands of them. It is a problem. I was hoping that with MF I can get by with short stacks, fewer layers. We will see.
The apparent DOF of a medium format image is usually less than an equivalent image in a smaller format (because you need higher magnification to frame the same subject), I'd expect you would need more layers to achieve a "sharp" image...