h2k: I like a small built-in second flash spreading light directly onto my subject (not directing light against ceiling, wall or umbrella).
I don't know why a "top-shelf flash" like this doesn't offer a smaller second built-in flash for additional direct lighting.
Metz flash have that feature
_sem_: Is the CP-E4N Li-ion, finally?
It is not dumb to use AA batteries.
The best thing is to use AA batts as standard and then have an external lithium or even internal lithium option.
Running out of power or losing a battery is a pain if you need to replace with a special purpose battery. Much easier in an emergency to just pop into local supermarket and pick up some AA batts.
Canon have done the right thing sticking to AA. I only wish their pro bodies could also use AA batts.
User3787089555: Godox/Cheetahstand has a series of Li-ion powered speedlights, the latest model also has built in 2.4G transceiver. Really disappointed to see Canon still using AA.
Rick Knepper: "A Leica rep expressed that anything over 24MP seemed excessive, and that the company put priority on the images and the experience, rather than the sensor resolution."
Tragically ignorant or dishonest, can't decide which.
The Nikon D810 Is that camera with the high megapixel count, great image quality and nice (for some, not me) shooting experience.
sean lee: Wow... 100MP.... Unbelievable...But with that price, I can buy BMW or Audi...I thought Leica was the most expensive camera...Wow...
But unless you are a cab driver, courier or some such your car ain't gonna earn you any money plus thet car depreciates at an insane rate and attracts additional costs month on month year on year no matter how little you use it.
WesPerry: This thing looks like a cheap children's toy compared to the PhaseOne XF. I'm sure performance will be comparable.Also, even though I'm a Sony fanboy, it's a little sad to see that Sony is supplying all the medium format sensors. Is there no one capable of competing with them??
The problem is right there in what you say. One was using 135 format because of a basic flaw in MF. In film days you simply changed the roll of film to shoot high ISO/ASA but now ya gotta change to an entirely different format kit ( body and lenses ) to make up for the deficit in MF ISO performance.
Now with the Phase XF and Hassy H6D you don't HAVE TO as you can now CHOOSE TO and that to me is a paradigm shift in the use of MF and I think now a lot more photogs will choose to use MF whereas previously MF, especially if using those horrid Phase Mamiya DF bodies ( which often had silly glitches ), was a pain in the but ( compared to a very reliable Nikon D810 ).
......contd from above
when you compare the old Hassy V series film cameras with small format film cameras of the same generation, the Hassy had the same disadvantages as those cameras but with the added benefit of vastly superior image quality and superior viewfinders.
Now, at least until the recent Phase XF system and Hassy H6D, shooting MF is nothing but a list of pains in the backside; and one couldnt keep a straight face and claim that there is a convincing case to be made for entry level MF in the face of the existence of the Nikon D810.
Now, with the Phase XF and Hassy H6D systems it seems that clear blue water has opened up again between 135 format and MF.
........contd from above
And now we have MF fit for more modern photographers I can assure none of those lame excuses will persist; no need for high powered lights coz ya can now happily shoot at ISO3200 ( hey, perish the thought, we might even see MF shooters using Speedlights); no need to lug a laptop around because now we have decent LCDs and dual memory car slots; no more shoot and guess and chimp when shooting macro or tilt-and-shift work coz now we have useable live view; and no longer the need to have models hold a pose for eons as if constipated coz we can now shoot at 3 fps.
The reality is CMOS took over because CCD gave up and the justification for continuing to use CCD got less and less credible to the point of ridiculousness ( when the differecnce is only visible by a select few, and even then having to stare at a screen, then the difference isn't really there in practical terms ).
.........contd from above
As for the notion that MF is meant to be used at base ISO, utter rubbish!
The real truth is MF has been LIMITED TO base ISO coz the sensors are crrap.
It's a bit like the silly justifications used by MF users when challenged about the rubbish LCD screens on their cams. They would nearly always say that "pros work tethered". Utter BULL!!! The truth is they HAD TO work that way coz the LCDs were so crrap; so they spent $€30K on a cam and then have to buy a laptop to see anything. Poor, very poor!
Then there is the lame excuse about top pros needing big Broncolor and Profoto lights. They did NOT need them, rather they had to make allowances for primitive cams that can't get much beyond ISO50 or ISO 100.
.....contd from above
So now we have CMOS chips able to provide excellent colour and dynamic range etc due to more light gathering power and the inherent low noise interference of CMOS architecture with the added advantage of PRACTICAL live view.
In the meantime CCD development has been ......erm.... not worth talking about, one could say ZERO.
Even if CMOS had continued to offer better live view and higher ISO settings, if CCD chips had been developed at a level of improvement we were seeing from CMOS year on year, there would have been no need for Phase and Hassy to jump ship and join the CMOS crowd.
I for one would prefer medium format to remain CCD and 16 bit with global shutter.
Unfortunately, comparatively speaking, CCD sensors are now rubbish and MF photography is not about using rubbish.
I think your take is rather simplistic, and dare I say it, a little fanboy blinkered.
The fact of the matter is CCD chips, are comparatively a pile of sh!t
Let's say in the era around the time of the Canon 1Ds Mark II (16Mpx CMOS), where that cam was king of the hill and was limited to ISO 1600 ( before silly expansion settings ) medium format offered a CLEAR advantage ( anyone saying otherwise would be an idiot).
Part of the clear advantage was this. Firstly, CCD can do global shuttering EASILY and still can (CMOS electronic shutters to this day are crap because they don't turn off the entire sensor at once). The second BIG advantage is that on a CCD sensor the ENTIRE pixel area is used for light gathering (but yes, things get noisy fast at ISO 400 and above).
Fast forward to say two years ago and we have both Panasonic and Sony getting the light gathering area of each pixel on a CMOS chip to be over 80% of surface area
Rusk: That was well made advertising video that creates dreams.
And this just should remind everyone, that the gamefield is that few megapixels is enough for most photographers (and with few I mean like 5-8Mpix) and then you just need to jump to these crazy megapixels on largest sensor and skip the FF totally between.
Sweden.... Land of legends in photography!
I was hoping that you'd come clean about Fuji's major involvement.
Not bashing. I just like a bit more transparency especially if you are going to brag about built in Sweden.
By the way, other than a Hassy 503 or 200FCC this is the only release by Hassy that has made me pay attention. A truly modern feature set worthy of the name Hasselblad (even though I don't like the H Series body design)
By the way, are these cams and the new lenses weather sealed yet?
But your lenses are not made in Sweden are they??? For completeness you should have mentioned that too.
SwedishPhoto: Love the photos! Great video :-)But, I see that you've taped the camera brand on your camera. I know some pros etc do this. But personally I've never really understood why..
If it's to cover it up for thieves, I still don't get it. The tape itself make any experienced thief wanting it even more. And most often you can see that the camera and lens looks big and expensive.I'm curious to what your reason is :-)
Is it to not be branded as a "Canon/Nikon guy" etc?Is it for some legal reason (I can't see what though)?
I'm just curious to your reason :-)
Taping up camera brands.
For me (and some others) there are a number of reasons:
1. To avoid snobbery in either direction
Some will view you as a brilliant or more serious photog depending on the camera brand in your hand ( which is as silly as judging a chef by the brand of utensils they use). And the reverse to that is mockery and general hostility because of your brand of choice.
2. Free Marketing
Some folk don't want to act as a free mobile advertiser.
3. Principled Stance
Some believe the camera model and/or brand shouldn't matter too much. So they take a principled stand by covering brand and model markings.
4. Avoiding Gear and Tribe Talk
Some folk simply don't wanna engage in gear or tribe talk.
In some places certain brands of electronic goods attract theives and muggers
6. The Tease
Some folk enjoy the tease; watching people stare and wonder at what it is exactly they are using.
I fall, to some degree, in all the above camps.
I hope my post answers the question for some.
dprived prev: to those amateur photographers (here or anywhere) who start bragging about the !!! superiority !!! of a mirrorless camera over an SLR first, but then quit doing so once they receive their proper answers from the pros or other knowledgeable and more experienced advanced amateurs; no offense, but:
Mirror, mirror on the wall,Who's the dumbest of all?Must be the girlie photog,Who can't handle a large cam?!Or maybe it is that obese m`am!?
It wasn't long ago that some diehards were saying that live view is for noobs and wouldn't make it's way to pro cams. Then the Canon 1D Mark III came along with..........................live view!
Then we had the disparaging remarks about face detection being needed only by soccer mums with their point-and-shoots. And we now have, and have had for some time now, face detection on the flagship pro cams ( even though Nikon were too scared at first to call it what it was so gave it some smarty pants techie sounding name).
Leica, probably the industry's most primitive minded company, now has a pro camera with an electronic viewfinder.
So it won't be long before Canon and Nikon both have electronic viewfinders in their flagship cameras ( I reckon, no longer than three more body updates and more likely just two )
RPJG: "However, the +/- exposure compensation button on the top plate doesn't work in M mode"
How does something like that get past the QA and "common sense check" processes? Seems ludicrous.
@RPJGYes they did, I have both cams. In fact I have three 1D series models and each one has something the other doesn't, which pi**es me off considering that there is no good reason why for example the 1D X couldn't have kept the features of the other two given that the features are not driven by a particular button having to be in a particular spot; they are firmware features.
And the stupidly of it is, the much older 1Ds Mark II isn't that great beyond ISO 1600 yet it is able to bracket exposure by way of ISO setting. Yet the 1D X, which has a far more capable ISO range, is devoid of that feature. Nuts!
The EC button issue is the one thing that SERIOUSLY pi**es me off about the 1D X. It is stupid beyond belief.
Another thing that annoys me is that they have removed the useful option, an option found in the old 1Ds Mark II, of setting Exposure Bracketing by varying ISO instead of shutter speed.
PhotoKhan: I can't understand how these fidgety, tiny AF point selections joysticks keep flying with pros.
I know AF point selection may alternatively be controlled with the quick dial but why does Canon keep including a dedicated control that is so difficult to...well...control.
I wonder how many more 1D/5D interactions we must have before it is finally realized that a track-ball with a "click-in-to-select" is the obvious way to go.
(Eye-tracking, of course, would be better still but I am not holding my breath over it.)
A Trackball might be a disaster.
Remember, those things were all the rage at one point for keyboard "mouse/cursor" navigation and they have been mostly abandoned ( mainly due, I think, to them being dust magnets that then transfer that crud to the innards of the Trackball assembly and cause problems)
LJ - Eljot: 1.: No, you must be wrong with that. "The speed of the Ethernet port has been increased from 100Mbps to 330Mbps" That makes no sense. There is no 330Mbps ethernet standard. And also the 1D X has gigabit ethernet.
2.:"the +/- exposure compensation button on the top plate doesn't work in M mode" congratulations Canon! That is wtf, even with a prototype model. This will be fixed in production hopefully.
3.:"reverting to the older packs will see the maximum continuous shooting rate from from 14 fps (with 16 fps in live view) back to the 12/14 fps rate offered by the original 1D X" Because the older battery does not have enough power for the motor to advance the film fast enough? I don't get it.
Your point number 2 regarding the "+/-" compensation button is also an issue with the original 1D X, and drives me mad; and the Canon solution for this problem ( to use the SET button and top scroll wheel ) is even more stupid.
Scottelly: Well it's about time! They wait until Canon introduces a 50 MP camera to push the limits like this? Seriously, the type of photography medium format cameras are used for called for this a long time ago. Finally there's something that has twice the horizontal and vertical resolution vs. what was available ten years ago. It took long enough! (I think it should have taken only about 3 or 4 years, considering the chips have still been doubling in speed every 18 months or so, to handle the data.) It's not like medium format cameras have been getting a lot cheaper or something (except that new line from Pentax).
From a user perspective you are right but from a manufacturing perspective wrong.
This, as far as I am aware, is only the second Sony tech medium format sensor. Prior to that medium format cams were relying on CCD sensors which are FAR more expensive to produce.
Second, it is only recently that Panasonic and Sony have been able to do electronic (first curtain) shutters reasonably well for their CMOS sensors ( it's far easier and usually more effective when done on CCD sensors).
Phase One have had an 80 Mpx sensor digital back for a good while now.
Finally, producing at such low volumes makes it extremely difficult for the medium format companies to introduce new tech at reasonable prices.
So it seems that ith all that in mind this 100 Mpx cam has come at about the right time.