Cameras: Coming Full Circle

[Les Olson]

The main application for leaf shutters is to allow outdoor portraiture with fill flash using less flash energy to light the subjects while in bright sunlight. 1/2000s flash synchronization means that the photographer needs three stops less flash energy than they would with a camera that can be used only at a top speed of 1/250s or 1/200s.  This is a massive benefit. It basically mean the lights will weigh a fraction of what would be needed for similar results using cameras that support only slow sync speeds.

Right, so it's a camera you can use with lighter artificial lights when you do outdoor portraits in bright light.  I am struggling to think of an important portrait taken under those conditions, but OK.  If you have artificial lights, whether the pictures are physically within the studio or outside is really not relevant, they are still studio pictures.  The question remains the same: why is it important what the camera weighs if you have artificial lights, because whatever they weigh, they weigh vastly more than the camera?   

But sure, if outdoor-portraits-in-bright-light as a supplement to naked women being splashed with milk is your business, you need a lens with a leaf shutter.  And you needed one several years ago, and if you didn't buy it then why would you buy it now?  Because the second-hand market does not lie, and the second-hand market says leaf shutter lenses are not as much use as people thought they were.

[simsurace]

The first is the cost: as sensors get bigger, performance increases linearly with the sensor diagonal (http://www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR.htm#Ideal%204/3,Ideal%20CX,Ideal%20DX,Ideal%20FX), but the cost is proportional to the square of the sensor diagonal. 

If you measure "sensor performance" on a log scale, as in that link, "sensor performance" scales linearly with any power of the sensor diagonal (the nice thing about logs).

[Les Olson]

Ming Thein has only recently become a representative for Hasselblad. I have followed his Hasselblad work way before that, so I consider your comment not balanced.

He has taken their money.  End of story.

This is a research area of mine (or was, since I am retired, but I keep up).  Most of the research in this area has been done on doctors, and we know that if doctors take even nominal gifts from drug companies - pens and coffee cups - that influences the doctor's prescribing decisions.  The opinions of doctors who have taken actual money from a drug company are consistently and markedly biased in favour of the drug company's products.  Maybe photographers have special intellectual qualities doctors don't have, but I take leave to doubt it. 

As for his having been favourable to Hasselblad previously, why else would they give him money?  The same thing happens with doctors. The drug companies don't choose doctors at random to give the big dollars to: they identify the ones who are already inclined to their position, and support them.  That is why the doctors believe they have not been influenced - but they have. 

[Michael Erlewine]

He has taken their money.  End of story.

This is a research area of mine (or was, since I am retired, but I keep up).  Most of the research in this area has been done on doctors, and we know that if doctors take even nominal gifts from drug companies - pens and coffee cups - that influences the doctor's prescribing decisions.  The opinions of doctors who have taken actual money from a drug company are consistently and markedly biased in favour of the drug company's products.  Maybe photographers have special intellectual qualities doctors don't have, but I take leave to doubt it. 

As for his having been favourable to Hasselblad previously, why else would they give him money?  The same thing happens with doctors. The drug companies don't choose doctors at random to give the big dollars to: they identify the ones who are already inclined to their position, and support them.  That is why the doctors believe they have not been influenced - but they have.

I respectfully disagree with you. Just because he has become a representative for Hasselblad does not mean he has sold out or is not reliable. IMO, Ming Thein is a very hard worker and a very fine photographer, willing to share an enormous amount of information with others. I trust his judgement to be able to work with Hasselblad and still be fair-minded and have seen no signs of any problems. Perhaps they gave him a discount on cameras, etc. More power to him.

[BW]

He has taken their money.  End of story.

This is a research area of mine (or was, since I am retired, but I keep up).  Most of the research in this area has been done on doctors, and we know that if doctors take even nominal gifts from drug companies - pens and coffee cups - that influences the doctor's prescribing decisions.  The opinions of doctors who have taken actual money from a drug company are consistently and markedly biased in favour of the drug company's products.  Maybe photographers have special intellectual qualities doctors don't have, but I take leave to doubt it. 

As for his having been favourable to Hasselblad previously, why else would they give him money?  The same thing happens with doctors. The drug companies don't choose doctors at random to give the big dollars to: they identify the ones who are already inclined to their position, and support them.  That is why the doctors believe they have not been influenced - but they have.

I would favor anyone who brings bread to the table, especially if my life depended on it.

[Les Olson]

If you measure "sensor performance" on a log scale, as in that link, "sensor performance" scales linearly with any power of the sensor diagonal (the nice thing about logs).

But each step in sensor size gives (roughly) one stop in dynamic range, and the same will be true of the steps up to "medium format".  The same will be true of noise.  But the first two steps cost nothing and the third step, from 24 x 18 to 36 x 24, costs about $1000.  The step from 36 x 24 to 44 x 33 costs of the order of $5000, and the step from 44 x 33 to 54 x 40 costs $10,000. 

Of course, cameras are not priced on a cost-plus basis, but a stop at the big end costs a lot more than a stop at the small end. 

[bjornthun]

Any judgement of Ming Thein's review of the Hasselblad X1D will not tell us, if it is a good or bad camera.

[Erik Lund]

Looking forward to your findings of the quality of the new Hasselblad and their lens series!

Yes the X1D could be interesting! As well as the Leica S range!

[Erik Lund]

Since we are quoting "MT";

The crown jewel of the system, however, has to be the lenses. The S system lenses are hands down the most impressive optics I’ve ever used; they’re almost flawless wide open, even in the corners, and even more perfect than the best M system lenses. And they focus themselves!

[JohnBrew]

One thing I found interesting on Ming's blog was when he wrote a little op piece about digital Hasselblad lenses. Apparently there are not many which are stellar. More than adequate certainly, but only one which could put up a fight with an Otus.
The MTF's for the X1D are quite good - better than the HC lenses. So, like many, while I'm waiting for actual tests of the X1D just for curiosities sake I remain very happy with my Leica S.

[Michael Erlewine]

One thing I found interesting on Ming's blog was when he wrote a little op piece about digital Hasselblad lenses. Apparently there are not many which are stellar. More than adequate certainly, but only one which could put up a fight with an Otus.
The MTF's for the X1D are quite good - better than the HC lenses. So, like many, while I'm waiting for actual tests of the X1D just for curiosities sake I remain very happy with my Leica S.

The three lenses for the X1D are supposed to be very good. I don't need them at Otus level. I have the Otus lenses on the D810 for that. Ming Thein feels that at least the two (45mm and 90mm) X1D lenses are a cut about the HC lenses. I trust his judgment.

I am surprised that more folks here are not enthused about the X1D. I am.

[JohnBrew]

Michael, I was excited at first because I've shot Hasselblad H series in the past. At the moment, the firmware is not firm, the sensor has heating issues and the EVF is a bit of a mystery. Let's see what happens...

[Frank Fremerey]

The 8x10 square inch chip is great fun.
Thank you Almass, old pal!

PS. The P3 is not the camera you want to work with.

[Michael Erlewine]

Michael, I was excited at first because I've shot Hasselblad H series in the past. At the moment, the firmware is not firm, the sensor has heating issues and the EVF is a bit of a mystery. Let's see what happens...

Where can I read more about the sensor-heat issue. How serious is it?

[David H. Hartman]

Michael,

I hope the X1D works well for you. I assume you don't feel a need for ultra wide angle lenses or longish telephotos (300mm) for landscape.

I don't feel a technical bellows with a dSLR is the same as a light weight 6x9cm technical view camera with full movements of both front and rear standards.

The X1D maybe just what you are looking for. I'm guessing many responding don't feel it would be ideal for them.

Long ago I traded a 6x9 Century Graphic on a Linhof Super Technical IV. I always missed the small size and weight of that folding press camera. It was so practical for hiking. The X1D will probably offer similar advantages to you.

Dave