HASSELBLAD USERS GROUP - The Second episode.

[madabouthass]

BTW , selling my H4D50 body to upgrade to th H5D 60 when it comes .
Mint condition , only a few shutter count - $ 25 k nett.
Left it with Boonz at Shriro .
Still with 3 months Shriro warranty .
Can also let go 80mm at $ 1500.

 

[DOFoto]

Hi all, I'm Azmir and I've been a clubsnap member for sometime now, but mostly just a lurker, reading posts and viewing images.

I was wondering if any of you use the Hasselblad H1?

I am seriously considering getting one. I currently use the Nikon D300s and for the longest time have been wanting to upgrade to full frame. I actually have the Nikon D800 in my sights but recently did some research and now I'm considering the H1 instead. I know they are completely different cameras and a different ball game altogether plus it will be film which to be honest I am thrilled to try. I am trying to add some depth and variety into my work as a part time wedding photographer. The autofocus of the H1 would help too.

Only thing is I will most likely have to sell off my Hasselblad 500CM to fund the H1. I might miss the square frame...it's kinda timeless.

I would like to know your thoughts on the H1 if there are ny users out there.

Appreciate the feedback guys,

Best regards,

Azmir

 

[knight84]

Hi all, I'm Azmir and I've been a clubsnap member for sometime now, but mostly just a lurker, reading posts and viewing images.

I was wondering if any of you use the Hasselblad H1?

I am seriously considering getting one. I currently use the Nikon D300s and for the longest time have been wanting to upgrade to full frame. I actually have the Nikon D800 in my sights but recently did some research and now I'm considering the H1 instead. I know they are completely different cameras and a different ball game altogether plus it will be film which to be honest I am thrilled to try. I am trying to add some depth and variety into my work as a part time wedding photographer. The autofocus of the H1 would help too.

Only thing is I will most likely have to sell off my Hasselblad 500CM to fund the H1. I might miss the square frame...it's kinda timeless.

I would like to know your thoughts on the H1 if there are ny users out there.

Appreciate the feedback guys,

Best regards,

Azmir

Any reason ud want to go for a h1 over a d800? Esp since ur doing weddings?

Have u tried the H1 or any other mf camera with auto focus? Its very slow! Not to mention shooting at 2.8 means high iso which is something mf is not designed for unless ur shooting bw film only at 1600 or so iso!

 

[DOFoto]

Any reason ud want to go for a h1 over a d800? Esp since ur doing weddings?

Have u tried the H1 or any other mf camera with auto focus? Its very slow! Not to mention shooting at 2.8 means high iso which is something mf is not designed for unless ur shooting bw film only at 1600 or so iso!

Hi Knight,

Appreciate your feedback. One of the reasons for me considering the H1 is that I 've been wanting to incorporate film into my wedding photography as to add something extra for my clients. It would be mostly used for outdoor couple portraiture and not so much when I'm running up and down the aisle indoors. I've tried using my 500CM but I find it more suited to still life photography. So I figured the autofocus of the H1 would be a great help here.

The reason I was considering the D800 was more because of the whopping 36MP which after careful thought I realised that I probably don't need file sizes that big. The D300s is adequate for most of the album sizes I do. And the D300s would be used mostly for the fast paced shots indoors.

The H1 would be used mostly for couple portraiture, groomsmen shots, bridesmaids shots all done outdoors.

Anyone else used the H1?

 

[Megahook]

Hi Knight,

Appreciate your feedback. One of the reasons for me considering the H1 is that I 've been wanting to incorporate film into my wedding photography as to add something extra for my clients. It would be mostly used for outdoor couple portraiture and not so much when I'm running up and down the aisle indoors. I've tried using my 500CM but I find it more suited to still life photography. So I figured the autofocus of the H1 would be a great help here.

The reason I was considering the D800 was more because of the whopping 36MP which after careful thought I realised that I probably don't need file sizes that big. The D300s is adequate for most of the album sizes I do. And the D300s would be used mostly for the fast paced shots indoors.

The H1 would be used mostly for couple portraiture, groomsmen shots, bridesmaids shots all done outdoors.

Anyone else used the H1?

Had a H1 many years ago . :thumbsup:
More or less the same as the H4D 40 I have now .

Remember the CR 123 batteries it runs on were not easy to find.
A much loved camera ( thats why you dont see many in the second hand market , i think )
Reliable , as most of the pros with H1 H2 are still using them .
And , there is a H4X upgrade at $ 7,500 for this subsequently ( another reason for the scarcity perhaps? ).
Anyway , it beats the trial and error focus of the 500 series.
( H1 at single mode locks in the center before shutter release so i would say focus is 95% accurate.)

I think Fotografix still have an unused H1 set in the box.

Anyway , the feel and prestige of a medium format Hassy is just different .
When I carry a 35mm DSLR , friends think that I am being like the paparazzi - so they shy away .
With a Hassy , they think I am an accomplished photographer and would pose for me.

 

[mamypoko]

I use my 500C for street photography, manual focus is just fine.

Even for sports on my DSLR I prefer to use manual focus.

 

[DOFoto]

Had a H1 many years ago . :thumbsup:
More or less the same as the H4D 40 I have now .

Remember the CR 123 batteries it runs on were not easy to find.
A much loved camera ( thats why you dont see many in the second hand market , i think )
Reliable , as most of the pros with H1 H2 are still using them .
And , there is a H4X upgrade at $ 7,500 for this subsequently ( another reason for the scarcity perhaps? ).
Anyway , it beats the trial and error focus of the 500 series.
( H1 at single mode locks in the center before shutter release so i would say focus is 95% accurate.)

I think Fotografix still have an unused H1 set in the box.

Anyway , the feel and prestige of a medium format Hassy is just different .
When I carry a 35mm DSLR , friends think that I am being like the paparazzi - so they shy away .
With a Hassy , they think I am an accomplished photographer and would pose for me.

Thanks for the reply, very much appreciated. I did not know about the batteries, I better check on where I can purchase them easily incase I need to have some on reserve. I think I read somewhere they have the re-chargeable battery grip too? When you used yours back then, was the 1/800 max shutter speed a limiting factor? Seeing that I intend to mostly use it outdoors and wide open at 2.8, that means film ISO of about 100? Is the 1/800 shutter speed enough for outdoor shots? In fact, I intend to use it either early morning or late afternoon/evening where I can get more dramatic light for portraiture. It would be sort of a low light situation but still outdoors. I hear the Contax 645's max is 1/4000 and might be better suited for outdoor work. But after having used the 500CM, I'm not sure I want to change systems.

I use my 500C for street photography, manual focus is just fine.

Even for sports on my DSLR I prefer to use manual focus.

Appreciate your reply as well. Personally, when I shoot out in the field with my 500CM, I find the focus is kinda slow and cumbersome. I love it for still life as I can take my time in framing and focusing right. But that's just me. The in camera metering is also a pull factor for me rather than having to keep taking exposure readings.

You must have hawk eyes to focus manually with your DSLR for sports!! That's amazing. In fact, I do use some AIS lenses for my wedding work too such as the 50 f1.2 and 85 f1.4 but those are for make-up/getting ready and candid shots respectively. I do have a sigma 24-70 for the fast paced stuff.

Thanks for the replies guys. If there are any other uses of the H1, I don't mind listening to your experiences either. I'm trying not to get sucked in to the whole 36MP megapixel craze...and going back to film and making every shot count is good therapy.

 

[Megahook]

just checked with Shriro , the new rechargeable ones can be used with the H1 ,H2 .
Only thing is , have to buy charger as well .
Never had a problem with the 1/800 in sunlight because the equivalent to 135mm's f2.8 is medium formats f 5.6.
A 135mm lens Optimum performance is around f5.6 /8 and medium format is f 11/16.
Thats why a MF is normally on a tripod.

 

[recap]

Hi all, I'm Azmir and I've been a clubsnap member for sometime now, but mostly just a lurker, reading posts and viewing images.

I was wondering if any of you use the Hasselblad H1?

I am seriously considering getting one. I currently use the Nikon D300s and for the longest time have been wanting to upgrade to full frame. I actually have the Nikon D800 in my sights but recently did some research and now I'm considering the H1 instead. I know they are completely different cameras and a different ball game altogether plus it will be film which to be honest I am thrilled to try. I am trying to add some depth and variety into my work as a part time wedding photographer. The autofocus of the H1 would help too.

Only thing is I will most likely have to sell off my Hasselblad 500CM to fund the H1. I might miss the square frame...it's kinda timeless.

I would like to know your thoughts on the H1 if there are ny users out there.

Appreciate the feedback guys,

Best regards,

Azmir

short of having the couple come into the shade outdoors, it will be very difficult to gain the sufficient light to get the shot. couple of things to take note of:

- its a slightly heavier camera, different ergonomics, you'll need a slightly faster shutter speed to get gainfully sharp images with hand holding. so bear this in mind. the fastest lens on the hasselblad H system is the 100/2.2, which is my standard lens for medium format digital wedding photography. i shoot with the H4D-50 @ ISO 50 whenever possible, boosting to 200 or 400 where necessary. Previously I owned the H4D-31, which could do up to 1600 ISO. I speak from some experience.

- you can boost the iso to 800 or 1600, but compared to 35mm digital of today. its very noisy. these systems were engineered to work ideally at base iso, in place where you can feed sufficient light into the sensor. For me at least on the 50, the ISO is only "true" up to 200, anything beyond that - 400/800, is merely a signal boost within the parameters of the digital back. For black and white, its acceptable - gives the grain like feel of film. For color, while skin tones are spot on, 35mm digital may be better.

- autofocus is slow. its very accurate when it has enough time to nail the moment, though i have to say that as a person shooting with the 100/2.2, the "true focus" feature is exceptionally helpful for getting faces sharp at maximum aperture. sometimes you can't realize the full image quality outcome of medium format if your focus is off. especially with couples, shooting with a faster aperture to compensate for slower ISO and higher shutter speed naturally means the depth of field is much more shallow.

i will not recommend it. Personally, I sold my Nikon D800E in favor of the D4 when it came to wedding work - at least for Singapore, where most weddings are indoors, the benefits of a strong sensor with high color fidelity at high ISO cannot be under estimated. Shot a D3S prior to this and owned a D3X as well. The D3X could barely make it as a wedding camera at 1600/Hi-1 or Hi-2. Medium format restricts you further and the lenses are slower too.

the only place I could use a digital medium format hand held was when the couple were under spotlights - especially in the more modern churches that have all the glitz and glam. There I get roughly 1/90s, f/2.2 at ISO 200. Of course, skin tones are great, highlight retention is amazing, shadow density is stunning and that 16 bit color and image dimensionality means that most folks can immediately pick out a particular "difference" in the picture over 35mm film. I get mistaken far too often as a videographer, because most folks haven't had much exposure to the looks of a Hasselblad system.

 

[recap]

also, my experience with the latest digital cameras - D3S/D4, indicates that their color fidelity is substantially better than previous systems under low light. Not being biased, as I shot canon for just under 7 years, but yeah. if you are able to shoot an outdoor california type wedding on the grass with blue skies, medium format all the way. But if you are imprisoned to the darkness indoors. better shoot 35mm instead.

of course, you do get a lot of attention when you whip out a blad at a wedding.

 

[recap]

1/800s is plenty sufficient. the metering i find is a little bit too conservative in outdoor bright light, so my typical style was to dial in +1 on exposure compensation. Its a brilliant raw file anyway, so you can pull back virtually anything on the 16 bit files. AF is slow though, Hassy AF faster than Contax 645 in my experience. Battery life is a disaster though ~ 100-150 shots, maybe 200 max. I own 5 batteries. Trust me on this. Takes forever to charge, drains so fast. One D4 battery can last 3000+ shots without trying, one D3S - 4000+ shots without trying, 1 Series canon - 4000+ shots. Puts everything into perspective.

The plus about the 1/800s sync speed is that you can link it up to an old school flash (I use a Metz CL 45 + Metz 60 CT-4) and you can kill the ambient background and brighten up the subject, giving very "fashion" like dynamic exposures. But horses for courses, for me, most of my work today is done with a D4. If the couple requests it and there's enough light, I'll fill in with either an M9 or a H4D. I consider it - "pragmatic vs artistic"

 

[DOFoto]

just checked with Shriro , the new rechargeable ones can be used with the H1 ,H2 .
Only thing is , have to buy charger as well .
Never had a problem with the 1/800 in sunlight because the equivalent to 135mm's f2.8 is medium formats f 5.6.
A 135mm lens Optimum performance is around f5.6 /8 and medium format is f 11/16.
Thats why a MF is normally on a tripod.

Thanks again for the reply man. Appreciate the input

 

[DOFoto]

short of having the couple come into the shade outdoors, it will be very difficult to gain the sufficient light to get the shot. couple of things to take note of:

- its a slightly heavier camera, different ergonomics, you'll need a slightly faster shutter speed to get gainfully sharp images with hand holding. so bear this in mind. the fastest lens on the hasselblad H system is the 100/2.2, which is my standard lens for medium format digital wedding photography. i shoot with the H4D-50 @ ISO 50 whenever possible, boosting to 200 or 400 where necessary. Previously I owned the H4D-31, which could do up to 1600 ISO. I speak from some experience.

- you can boost the iso to 800 or 1600, but compared to 35mm digital of today. its very noisy. these systems were engineered to work ideally at base iso, in place where you can feed sufficient light into the sensor. For me at least on the 50, the ISO is only "true" up to 200, anything beyond that - 400/800, is merely a signal boost within the parameters of the digital back. For black and white, its acceptable - gives the grain like feel of film. For color, while skin tones are spot on, 35mm digital may be better.

- autofocus is slow. its very accurate when it has enough time to nail the moment, though i have to say that as a person shooting with the 100/2.2, the "true focus" feature is exceptionally helpful for getting faces sharp at maximum aperture. sometimes you can't realize the full image quality outcome of medium format if your focus is off. especially with couples, shooting with a faster aperture to compensate for slower ISO and higher shutter speed naturally means the depth of field is much more shallow.

i will not recommend it. Personally, I sold my Nikon D800E in favor of the D4 when it came to wedding work - at least for Singapore, where most weddings are indoors, the benefits of a strong sensor with high color fidelity at high ISO cannot be under estimated. Shot a D3S prior to this and owned a D3X as well. The D3X could barely make it as a wedding camera at 1600/Hi-1 or Hi-2. Medium format restricts you further and the lenses are slower too.

the only place I could use a digital medium format hand held was when the couple were under spotlights - especially in the more modern churches that have all the glitz and glam. There I get roughly 1/90s, f/2.2 at ISO 200. Of course, skin tones are great, highlight retention is amazing, shadow density is stunning and that 16 bit color and image dimensionality means that most folks can immediately pick out a particular "difference" in the picture over 35mm film. I get mistaken far too often as a videographer, because most folks haven't had much exposure to the looks of a Hasselblad system.

Hi Recap,

Many thanks for the 3 in depth posts/replies on my questions about the H1. They are very much appreciated.

All this input is going into my pros/cons and things to consider list...which is growing everyday. It seems like I'm gonna have to probably rent one of these bad boys and shoot it under different conditions and different types of film, experimenting with exposure, shutter speed and just getting used to the general feel of the camera. Looks like there are a lot of things I have to consider and will be a while till I decide.

Just curious, what was the reason for selling you D800E? I haven't used it but I would have thought it would've been a good enough system for indoor weddings. The D800 was one of the cameras I had in mind when I was thinking of upgrading to fullframe actually.

 

[Sylvestri]

Got this offer from Shriro :-

Order a H5D 40 camera body now and get a H4D 40 to use until its delivered next year .
ie . use a H4D 40 for about say 6 months from now and get a new H5D 40 later.
Just pay $ 28,800 nett now .

Not bad , accept I already have a H4D40 now .

So they say , there will be upgrades available for me when the H5D come into full production.

 

[recap]

Hi Recap,

Many thanks for the 3 in depth posts/replies on my questions about the H1. They are very much appreciated.

All this input is going into my pros/cons and things to consider list...which is growing everyday. It seems like I'm gonna have to probably rent one of these bad boys and shoot it under different conditions and different types of film, experimenting with exposure, shutter speed and just getting used to the general feel of the camera. Looks like there are a lot of things I have to consider and will be a while till I decide.

Just curious, what was the reason for selling you D800E? I haven't used it but I would have thought it would've been a good enough system for indoor weddings. The D800 was one of the cameras I had in mind when I was thinking of upgrading to fullframe actually.

oh looks like i lost track of time. sorry for the super ultra late reply. i sold the d800e simply because it outresolved half of my prime lens kit. and these are good lenses. i sold it off because if i needed resolution, I already had the H4D-50 to work with. if i wanted to travel. I already have an M9. And I switched out to a D4 instead for events/low light - where 16 megapixels is honest to goodness, manifestly enough for my needs. and all my lenses old and new play well with this guy - even the classic 28/1.4 AF-D from 1997!

 

[DOFoto]

oh looks like i lost track of time. sorry for the super ultra late reply. i sold the d800e simply because it outresolved half of my prime lens kit. and these are good lenses. i sold it off because if i needed resolution, I already had the H4D-50 to work with. if i wanted to travel. I already have an M9. And I switched out to a D4 instead for events/low light - where 16 megapixels is honest to goodness, manifestly enough for my needs. and all my lenses old and new play well with this guy - even the classic 28/1.4 AF-D from 1997!

Hey recap not to worry.

I have heard about the D800/E being too much for some of Nikon's prime lenses, the older ones I mean. I actually kinda find that baffling, I had no idea the resolution offered by a camera could do such a thing to lenses. So what happened exactly? What were the results of the photos with your primes coupled with the D800E? I'm quite interested to know.

 

[madabouthass]

Hey recap not to worry.

I have heard about the D800/E being too much for some of Nikon's prime lenses, the older ones I mean. I actually kinda find that baffling, I had no idea the resolution offered by a camera could do such a thing to lenses. So what happened exactly? What were the results of the photos with your primes coupled with the D800E? I'm quite interested to know.

Let me try to answer this .

In 135mm format , the normal lenses resolve only around 12 million pixels .
They will require higher qualility lenses Like Zeiss , around 100 lines /mm , for the 16 to 24 million pixel devices .
This quality probably can only be achieved perhaps one perfect one in out of every five manufactured lenses.

The D800 is not good because a lense better than that is not able to be manufactured economically .
It is selling because it's 30 plus million pixels specs appeal to some .
While people are probably seeing only 12 million pixels.

Or else , a D800 will cost much more than a D4 .

In 16 bit medium format digital like Hasselblad , the digital lenses covering a bigger sensor , can resolve around 40 to 60 million pixels.
This is ideal for large enlargements and high quality reproductions , smooth tonality and grain free .
This why medium format digital buyers dont ask for high ISO !

Of course , this has to be viewed on a high res screen to be fully appreciated .
Some people say they dont see any difference becauese they are seeing it on a normal PC screen !

Its like watching a 1280 x 1900 HD movie on a low res 320x 480 screen .
Just looks like a low res movie right ?


Hope this helps.

 

[JacePhoto]

Let me try to answer this .

In 135mm format , the normal lenses resolve only around 12 million pixels .
They will require higher qualility lenses Like Zeiss , around 100 lines /mm , for the 16 to 24 million pixel devices .
This quality probably can only be achieved perhaps one perfect one in out of every five manufactured lenses.

The D800 is not good because a lense better than that is not able to be manufactured economically .
It is selling because it's 30 plus million pixels specs appeal to some .
While people are probably seeing only 12 million pixels.

Or else , a D800 will cost much more than a D4 .

In 16 bit medium format digital like Hasselblad , the digital lenses covering a bigger sensor , can resolve around 40 to 60 million pixels.
This is ideal for large enlargements and high quality reproductions , smooth tonality and grain free .
This why medium format digital buyers dont ask for high ISO !

Of course , this has to be viewed on a high res screen to be fully appreciated .
Some people say they dont see any difference becauese they are seeing it on a normal PC screen !

Its like watching a 1280 x 1900 HD movie on a low res 320x 480 screen .
Just looks like a low res movie right ?


Hope this helps.

Base on this reasoning, Hasselblad and other MF is introducing 60 - 80 megapixels or more. Do you think their lines per mm on their lens can fit their sensor? Isn't they doing what Nikon and Canon are doing as well?

 

[DOFoto]

Let me try to answer this .

In 135mm format , the normal lenses resolve only around 12 million pixels .
They will require higher qualility lenses Like Zeiss , around 100 lines /mm , for the 16 to 24 million pixel devices .
This quality probably can only be achieved perhaps one perfect one in out of every five manufactured lenses.

The D800 is not good because a lense better than that is not able to be manufactured economically .
It is selling because it's 30 plus million pixels specs appeal to some .
While people are probably seeing only 12 million pixels.

Or else , a D800 will cost much more than a D4 .

In 16 bit medium format digital like Hasselblad , the digital lenses covering a bigger sensor , can resolve around 40 to 60 million pixels.
This is ideal for large enlargements and high quality reproductions , smooth tonality and grain free .
This why medium format digital buyers dont ask for high ISO !

Of course , this has to be viewed on a high res screen to be fully appreciated .
Some people say they dont see any difference becauese they are seeing it on a normal PC screen !

Its like watching a 1280 x 1900 HD movie on a low res 320x 480 screen .
Just looks like a low res movie right ?


Hope this helps.

Hi,

With my limited technical knowledge, I think that makes sense. What do you mean by lines/mm?

If I did get the D800 I was intending to use my Ais lenses with them, I guess I won't be getting the best of the D800 with those lenses now would I?

 

[madabouthass]

Base on this reasoning, Hasselblad and other MF is introducing 60 - 80 megapixels or more. Do you think their lines per mm on their lens can fit their sensor? Isn't they doing what Nikon and Canon are doing as well?

135 mm lenses optimise to fall on a 24x 36 mm format ( 24x36 = 864 sq mm )
The larger medium format lenses calculate to fall on 64.5x 60mm format ( 64.5x 60 = 3870 sq mm )
Difference between formats , 3870 divide by 864 = 4.479 factor.
And , if we accept 12 million is max for 135 format , then , 4.479 x 12 million equals 53.75 million pixels for medium format .
Makes sense ?