bgbs: What's worse? Paying a criminal price for this camera, or taking off with one without paying for it?
Giklab.. While the Pentax uses the same sensor, it's more than that which comes into play such as (1) each manufacturer's own "recipe" so-to-speak that's baked into the raw files before you even start to do your processing. (2) the processing software available (e.g. Lightroom isn't going to give you the same options as Capture One, etc.) (3) lenses and accessories, etc., that help create a whole medium format "system".... which Pentax (which doesn't even offer modern-day leaf shutter lenses yet-- which is in itself utterly ridiculous) is dismal on.
Would I likely go for a 100mp Pentax? Yes; even knowing the glaring limitations. However, if Hasselblad got its pricing better in order, they could snatch market share *easily* from both Pentax and phase like taking candy from a baby.
Wild Light: I hope it sells well for Hasselblad. I can't help but feel Medium Format is doomed though.
It WAS doomed until the larger CMOS sensors, etc.. People started using Nikons and Canons instead of buying MF gear because for a few years or more, the good reasons to shoot a CCD MF camera, over a Nikon or Canon were starting to be few. Not so today with great colour range (DR) and high iso capability.
On location, early in the morning or in low light inside a warehouse or home, using a CCD back was crummy unless you could stand using super slow shutter speeds, etc.. unrealistic with many clients. Today, you can shoot a 50mp MF camera with a CMOS at 12,500 iso, wonderful hand-hold'able shutter speeds, convert to grayscale, and print on canvas without worry.
Shooting on an old staircase in a dim ambient light? I can shoot a client w/no flash or just a 1/128 or 1/256 worth of flash for a little bit of "pop", at 1600 iso where before I had to have a much higher % of flash to ambient ratio.
**The CMOS changed everything and will offer large format film performance soon! :) **
TareqPhoto: If i will have only $20000 then i will buy H6D-100C, i only need this amount and i can buy H6D-100C immediately, but i know i am not a pro and i won't use the camera so i have to wait and just hold my current gear.
(chuckle) ... and we haven't even started talking about lenses yet. 3-5 lenses and basically in for another $20,000 ;)
The Davinator: Or, just get the Pentax 645Z
The Pentax leaf shutter lenses are slower and older than dirt; what's the point? They just can't compare to modern leaf shutter lenses and Pentax should have its behind whipped for not having at lest 1 or 2 modern leaf shutter lenses available upon the debut of the 645D let alone by the time the 645z came out. Unforgivable! and utterly ridiculous, the omission of such lenses. The Pentax 645z is cropped by the pathetically slow sync speed.
abstractface: Alas this would be my camera for life if it costs $4000.. not $25,000 plus all the stuff advertised is surpassed by other cameras in every way.. the add should have emphasized the asthetic more so that non medium format folk would understand what it is about
I'm curious... How is syncing at 1/2000th "surpassed by other cameras in every way"? ;)
aris14: I really can't see the needs of 100 Mp, but it's professionals cup of cake.I really wonder who can see the difference of a 50 Mp image compared to an originally shot 100 Mp, no matter the final size to be printed.Anyway, pros problems and tastes.
aris14, I agree, pixel peeping and DXO, and going on about MTF charts are for those who love talking about equipment. However, when you shoot in order to eat, size matters just like HP, torque, or airspeed / lift matters when you're trying to haul a load in an airplane. You don't need it all the time, but it's so much more than just a 'nice-to-have'. It's not about pixel peeping, it's about detail being obviously more easier to discern in many situations.
marcio_napoli: Let's face it people, we play with small format because the big guns cost 40.000 bucks.
If one of those were only 6k or 7k (possible, if it were mass produced like 35mm cameras are), then ha!!! Canon / Nikon would be crushed, I mean, among enthusiasts too.
Besides action and fast AF, DMF reigns supreme on IQ.
Someone said weight? Hmm... then grow some biceps.
And this camera is really not that heavier than a FF DSLR. If you carry your D810 around, you can easily carry a Hasselblad.
"And this camera is really not that heavier than a FF DSLR. If you carry your D810 around, you can easily carry a Hasselblad."
... until you put a 120 macro or 300mm lens (basically a 5 pound lens) on it and it's heavier than the Pentax 645z mated to the 28-45 f/4.5, which alone weighs as much as a 70-200 f/2.8 lens... and remember... the 28-45 is just a *wide angle* lens.
I find most medium format lenses to be light, but there are a few that are especially "beefy", that usually surprise the heck out of non MF shooters. I agree with your sentiment... grow biceps!
... and a sturdier wrist! :)
aris14... I'd rather look at the anatomy-of-the-eye printed from a 100mp back, than from my 20mp Canon. I'd also rather view such on a 27" 2010 era computer monitor because the bottom line is that the *size* of the detail actually seen on screen is noticeably larger... and often, that's the point.
The detail on an old penny looks much better to me on a 2002 era ratty 17" monitor when taken with a 50mp camera, compared to a 20mp one. The difference in size alone can make all the difference in the world. You don't need a $15,000 monitor to see such obvious differences :)
MichaelK81.... "Smart, financially successful photographers" do the basic math to figure out at what point does renting become far more expensive and limiting compared to just purchasing and insuring the gear. Renting a medium format camera, lenses, etc., is like being smart and sending your work out to a service bureau to be printed... however, there comes a point where if you're printing (or photographing very often), it becomes cheaper to just buy the equipment and depreciate it over time on your tax matrix.
jonny1976: then pentax will come out with a 100 million camera 645z2 that will cost 8000 euro.
pk... I haven't tried the XF yet but would love to. I just can't in principle, get past the 'system' costs, though I love C1. I bet you're enjoying it!
I think utphoto is referring to you comparing somewhat recent cameras to the over 6-year-old (technology) Pentax 645D that you had, etc..
When it comes to pure image quality, there's hardly any practical advantage using the Phase or Hasselblad over a Pentax, that uses the same basic sensor. The difference in the 645D and 645Z is the difference between night and day in more than a few respects; is why the D isn't really relevant in this thread.I'd love for the site to start reviewing & comparing MF cameras and lenses regularly. My bet? the 50mp MF camera offerings from Phase/Hasselblad will be practically identical to a 100mp Pentax using the same basic sensor. Hopefully Pentax will get off its hands and get to work on refinements and leaf shutter lenses! :)
Best in photography to you pk and everyone!
NowHearThis: Meh. At that price I'll wait for the 200mp version.
50mp has never "cut it" for those who want 200mp worth of Large Format sheet film image quality with a bit of cropping room. We're not even "there" yet. It's not that 50mp is huge, it's that 12, 16, and 2'something mp was and still is incredibly small for those wanting Large Format "Oomph" in a digital form factor
50mp technically doesn't quite give 20x30in at 300ppi straight from the camera, but the technology is cruising right along. Kids today will have access to LF digital solutions made simple; no chemicals, no mailing film out, no attaching a digital back to a $10k system, no ground glass... just point, focus, shoot, and post process using layers, and an endless supply of actions/plugins, while listening to their favorite tunes on their favorite i-device. (chuckle)It'll be that easy. 200mp isn't far off. I think at that point, we'll be in the LF zone with solid digital footing. Today's tech is just wonderful! :)
pkcpga, kb2zuz ... it's all the other nuances and software that make the Phase/Hasselblad better overall "systems". It's up to each photographer to note what is/isn't important to their work, and how a cameras system will fit in their money-making pursuits and or pleasure shooting.
I'm very, very eager to see what Pentax/Ricoh has cooking. Hopefully we'll see a Pentax 645zII, 100mp, 16bit (14 is ok), lens refinements + better/modern coatings, better software, and for goodness sakes... 2 or 3 leaf shutter lenses.... all for less than $20k USD. I'd be very inclined to jump on that if such was offered.
I love Hasselblad, but the bottom line is that you're not typically *ever* going to see much of a *practical difference*, neither between 14 and 16 bit, nor between a 50mp Hasselblad and the 50mp Pentax 645Z.
While the Pentax sync speed is "unforgivable" (I'm being nice) as is the lack of leaf shutter lenses; the shutter speed offers a useful 1/4000th, vs. 1/800th on the 'Blad, which is an obvious benefit on a bright beach. You'll have to bust an eyeball to see the difference in image quality in a print, and on screen, often the 645Z is more pleasing, and punchy, to many photographers & viewers.
Depending on what you shoot, etc., either the Pentax or Hasselblad can be the better camera. Personally, I used/borrowed/rented Hasselblad (wonderful!) but purchased the 645Z. The Hasselblad just wouldn't give me the same ROI, by costing more as a system, and offering hardly anything more that translated into making me more money. That's the bottom line. ;)
Tariag: 15 stops.THIS is the important part of the news.Impressive.
Phase, Hassy and Pentax will likely have the same sensor; it's the electronic nuances and other offerings that will be different. I am very interested in how Pentax is going to play this round.
If Pentax grows a brain and brings forth leaf shutter lenses that it should've introduced with the 645D in the first place, then Pentax will become even more attractive to those buying MF gear.
If Pentax offers 100mp at $15,000 or less (and some decent software), then it would a wrap for a significant number of MF buyers/renters!.
Great to see Hasselblad increase that shutter speed and sync speed by a large margin! Bravo for that! The market is heating up.
raztec: Pardon my ignorance, but what can these cameras and lens combination do that a Nikon D810 with a pro lens can't for 1/4 the price?
How fast doezzzzzzzzzz one have to be to shoot a bee? Catch the thing in a jar holding a cotton ball dabbed with FlyNap and you're done. The Pentax 645Z is about as fast as my Canon 5d2; which is pretty darn quick for medium format :)
Teila Day: I've got the feeling that Hasselblad will be dropping the price of their cameras and lenses a lot more in the future. A 15% discount on a $8100 Hasselblad lens doesn't pass the "good business sense" test for me.
Hasselblad either needs to add a lot more to what the lens offers, or a lot more to what the camera offers at those prices. It was different when Hasselblad was about the only stable game in town, but times are a'changing and Hasselblad really, really needs to bring more to the table.
Overpriced? Heck no! ... if people are paying for it. The question is, are people paying for enough lenses/bodies to make it all worth while for Hasselblad, and I suspect not... and that would be a problem.
The cameras are already cut down to 60% of their usual price, and falling. If Pentax gets off its behind and offers 3-4 great leaf lenses + decent software and some refinement changes to the 645Z, Hasselblad will face a far greater challenge to say the least.
'Blad needs to regroup.
Not likely. If you ran a successful business and your production costs went down, you don't lower your prices, you keep your prices and reap the benefit of increased profit. Hasselblad is slashing prices as if they're struggling (or see impending doom) to my eyes.
To me, Hasselblad's actions are indicative of poor corporate performance in the "net profit" department.
(chuckle) yes, just like the "experts" (I'm not being a sass, I'm agreeing with you) used to proclaim that you could't hand hold a 12mp Nikon D2x without extreme care because of its great resolution.
80 or 100mp is hand hold-able when using common sense.
I recall Nikon "experts" swearing on high, that Nikon would never go 'full frame'.... (as if Nikon had a choice).
I've got the feeling that Hasselblad will be dropping the price of their cameras and lenses a lot more in the future. A 15% discount on a $8100 Hasselblad lens doesn't pass the "good business sense" test for me.
I'm just glad shooting cameras without that darn low-pass filter is an option today. Good riddance. Such was long a reality in medium format.
1. Sync at 1/800th shutter (Phase will sync at 1/1600th).
2. Offer a far more pleasing aspect ratio to a lot of photographers.
3. You can see and capture more of the "scene" using that aspect ratio and the same mm lens. Meaning, using a 100mm lens on a D810 and a Hasselblad, you'll see more of the total scene using the larger format camera.
4. Using the same focal length, you're able to get closer using the larger format camera, which, plays a role in manipulating the depth of field.
5. Depth of field falloff is slower, meaning the larger sensor camera will go from in focus to out of focus area via a smoother transition.
6. 50mp, things are a bit (not a whole lot) bigger with a bit more detail, which is nice for macros.
7. Whites will not blow out as quickly on the larger sensor camera. There's just more colour info to work with.
Shoot a macro of a bee's face using a D810/5Dsr vs. using a 100mp medium format back, and the benefit will be quickly obvious to you.