M
MattPointZero
Guest
Fair enough, perhaps I misread the tone of your post, my bad if so. My best wishes to you too.
-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
Hasselblad X2D: no matrix metering?
- Thread starter as1mov
- Start date
Thanks. We're all human with different perceptions and reactions. Enjoy your summer and your photo opportunities.Fair enough, perhaps I misread the tone of your post, my bad if so. My best wishes to you too.
Last edited:
M
MattPointZero
Guest
Are you kidding? I am in the UK, we have had our 3 days of sunshine for this year. I have to now wait out another 362 days before I see any again.Thanks. We're all human with different perceptions and reactions. Enjoy your summer and your photo opportunities.Fair enough, perhaps I misread the tone of your post, my bad if so. My best wishes to you too.
Although on the upside the flat scenes mean I won't need matrix metering either!
The simple explanation is that Hasselblad metering is a continuation of the three options (Spot, Centre Weighted, and Centre Spot} which they've consistently employed with every camera since the H3D was introduced in 2006. They have added features over time, but have never placed a high-priority on automation and speed nor have their customers.
They've focused their attention on image quality, user control, modularity, and integration with previous generations of their systems. Staking out that position in the market offers a clear alternative for photographers looking for what Hasselblad offers and whose priorities align with that focus. That's in line with their history and it's how they've been profitable and choose to compete.
Last edited:
I'm sure you've become a photographer for all seasons!Are you kidding? I am in the UK, we have had our 3 days of sunshine for this year. I have to now wait out another 362 days before I see any again.Thanks. We're all human with different perceptions and reactions. Enjoy your summer and your photo opportunities.Fair enough, perhaps I misread the tone of your post, my bad if so. My best wishes to you too.
Although on the upside the flat scenes mean I won't need matrix metering either!
NAwlins Contrarian
Forum Pro
That's stating the obvious.
There are instances where different needs, priorities, and/or preferences can make different autofocus and metering systems better for different photographers.
But what the X2D offers in those areas cannot reasonably be described as better than those any other current digital ILC. When it was announced with PDAF, some people were surprised that Hasselblad had accomplished that; but as it turns out, the lack of other features that usually accompany PDAF, both at introduction and now two years later (e.g. no big firmware update), makes it reasonable to ask: why did they bother? For truly static subjects, modern CDAF is fine. For subjects that move even moderately (relative to the depth of field, like a portrait shot at a wide aperture), continuous AF can be quite helpful.
Sure. But the X2D was introduced with specifications that suggested it would have a reasonably wide performance envelope. Some small-print limitations and the lack of major improvements over the intervening two years leave it as a rather small-niche camera with a narrow envelope where it's the best, or even arguably the best, choice. IMO that's unfortunate because it seems to have a lot of potential, and it is appealing in some substantial ways. I'd like to see it and Hasselblad succeed, but in the eight years since Hasselblad announced the original X1D, IMO the medium format digital market has less and less vibrant competition, which is not good for photographers.
Last edited:
NAwlins Contrarian
Forum Pro
And yet here you are, constantly white-knighting* for Hasselblad (and to a lesser extent, other old-school high-end European brands like Leica).
You have a lot of technical and historical knowledge, and it's great when you share that. Please continue to do so.
But making several posts in the same thread to the effect of, 'Different people like different things and some of them like Hasselblad,' is unhelpful.
*See definition 3: https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/white_knight.
Last edited:
SrMi
Veteran Member
I prefer posts that are overly enthusiastic about equipment -- hello, Greg ;-) -- to those who are overly negative, with the only interest in that equipment being to mock it.
The former kind of posts make this forum a joy, the latter a cesspool.
The forums do attract misery, though, but we can try to fight against it.
Verb: "To unnecessarily defend someone, especially in an attempt to gain favour."
What kind of favor is TechTalk trying to gain? Free cameras? :-D
NAwlins Contrarian
Forum Pro
IMO a goal of posting should be some degree of reasonability and attempt at objectivity. The forum should encourage understanding and responding to others' questions and comments with relevant facts and helpful experience and opinions. Promoting in a reasonable way what you think would be best, or even good, for others is fine. Evident enthusiasm for gear (or software or whatever) you like is fine. Constant and/or unfair complaints aren't good for the forum and should be avoided.
If you're looking for me to give a good explanation for the psychology behind white-knighting, especially for commercial products, sorry, I'm unable!
as1mov
Senior Member
Hi,
I do not know whether it is related to the fact that there is no matrix metering, but after the first shootings with the X2D I am noticing that very oft the I get blinkies in the final picture, indicating that parts of the scene are overexposed. Sometime I have to compensate a lot to get rid of them in the final picture.
Again, these are first impressions, nothing scientific, I did not have yet a chance to look at the raw files, but I think with Leica and especially with Nikon it does not happen that often. It might also have to do with the fact that they are calculated based on the JPEG file rather than the raw data?
What is your take on this?
Thanks.
--
https://www.flickr.com/photos/149089857@N03/
I do not know whether it is related to the fact that there is no matrix metering, but after the first shootings with the X2D I am noticing that very oft the I get blinkies in the final picture, indicating that parts of the scene are overexposed. Sometime I have to compensate a lot to get rid of them in the final picture.
Again, these are first impressions, nothing scientific, I did not have yet a chance to look at the raw files, but I think with Leica and especially with Nikon it does not happen that often. It might also have to do with the fact that they are calculated based on the JPEG file rather than the raw data?
What is your take on this?
Thanks.
--
https://www.flickr.com/photos/149089857@N03/
Last edited:
SrMi
Veteran Member
Shoot more
and use live histogram to set exposure Once you get experience with the camera’s metering, or center weighted metering (film and RF experience helps) you will be able to estimate needed EC amount based on the scene.
No metering will be able to prevent highlight clipping.
In Leica M land, many are sticking with center weighted metering because they are used to it.
Use RawDigger to evaluate raw files. I find the blinkies in the review relatively good indication of clipping.
as1mov
Senior Member
Sure, I'll shoot more. I am very happy with the new system. I am selling my Leica M11 
Latest firmware has continuous eye AF. Its not great so I turn it off form my style of shooting but its there.
I shoot 99% of my shots Tethered into focus as I suspect quite a few X2D owners or longtime Hasselblad shooters do. All the warnings are there and there is a value in seeing the image on a 20+" screen over the 3" screen.
As I suspect true to your username, your contrarian attitude would mean this camera isnt for you. And thats fine too. I My other $8000 camera doesnt have great AF either, but I didnt buy it for its AF. And in the X2Ds case its limitations dont stop me from getting proper exposures. Maybe its a skill thing?
Historically HB's main competitor PhaseOne didnt offer continuous AF. My question to you is, who would be the benefactor of these perceived benefits? Its clearly not you because you're not part of the userbase? Or are you taking the liberty to speak for the OP? Again while your points are surely valid to you, as a user I dont find this camera performs poorly inside my intended use window for it.
NAwlins Contrarian
Forum Pro
This is the first I've heard of any continuous autofocus on the X2D. Just a week ago, SrMi posted that the X2D does not have continuous autofocus. X2D firmware update 3.1.0 "Added face detection in Autofocus mode," but does not appear to claim even eye detection much less any sort of continuous autofocus. The firmware 3.2.0 notes don't appear to claim any focus changes. The latest version appears to be (as of August 22, 2024) 3.2.1, which only claims, "Fixed stability related issues." What have SrMi and I missed?
Everyone has different needs, preferences, and ideas, but to me the X2D's main appeal is the antithesis of tethered studio shooting. When Hasselblad announced the X1D, my reaction was, 'Awesome! Now there will finally be a digital counterpart to the Mamiya M7.' The compactness and portability relative to the sensor size and implied lens quality seemed to be the whole point of the X-series--to me.
I wish Hasselblad success, but today the relevant question seems to me to be, 'In what use-cases is an X2D (at $8200 + lenses, FWIW) even as good as, much less better than, a GFX 100S II (at $5000 + lenses)?' To me, the envelope where the X2D is the most useful tool, even regardless of price, is rather small.
I'd really like to see vibrant competition in this sector. Not that many years ago, Hasselblad, Fuji, Pentax, and Leica all offered medium format digital options that were more broadly competitive with each others. Currently Leica and Pentax are not making medium format digital cameras, and my sense is that Hasselblad is less competitive with Fuji than it was. That's not good for photographers.
My sense of the world is that Hasselblad doesn't really compete with Phase One much these days. I can't imagine too many people really see anything Hasselblad currently offers and anything Phase One currently offers as being competitors with each other / approaching equally-viable competitors for any use-case.
And historically serious cameras didn't offer any AF. I'm old enough to remember the buzz about the first practical autofocus system on a 'serious' camera, the Minolta Maxxum 7000 in 1985. For as much as the Contax 645 was touted as a modern medium format camera, it's autofocus (at least with its 80mm f/2, the only lens I used) was pretty slow and basic even by the standards of the day.
But when the GFX 100S II offers, by most accounts here, pretty usable continuous autofocus and even continuous eye autofocus, it seems reasonable to ask the X2D for similar.
Anyone who shoots subjects that are not totally static. Whether that's fashion models moving and posing, or portrait subjects shot at very large apertures, or whatever, reliable continuous AF can be helpful.
Although I've owned / still own some medium (and large) format film cameras, I cannot justify the expense of any current medium format digital. If money were no object, I'd add it to my kit, although the question of which one is unsettled.
I'm not speaking for the OP; I'm trying to explain my sense of the situation that the OP raised. My answer to the OP's, 'Why doesn't the X2D have evaluative matrix metering?' is in part, 'For the same reason(s) it doesn't have continuous AF.'
That's great. You've found a tool that performs well for you, and that you evidently like. Use it and be happy.
But it seems reasonable to me for others to discuss that tool's limits, the reasons for them, and the prospects for improvement / new capability. No?
SrMi
Veteran Member
There is no C-AF and no eye detection. There is face detection, and it tracks the position of the face, but you trigger AF-S either with a shutter button or BBF. I assume the face tracking (without AF) is what LordWixx meant with "continuous."
I do not use tethering, but I have read that tethered shooting with Phocus is very reliable and valuable.
Many own both GFX and X2D and prefer shooting with X2D. How much experience did you have shooting with X2D to understand the envelope from a practical experience?
I think it is essential that Leica and Hasselblad differentiate themselves from the mass-production models.
I believe that GFX and X2D compete with PhaseOne insofar that PhaseOne users switch to one of the 44x33 sensor cameras.
For a long time, the H6D series was the standard for shooting models in studios: it did not have AF-C or eye detection. However, technology is progressing, and photographers with no experience can now make sharp images.
If you care about proper exposure, you do not care about the type of metering used (histograms and clipping). AF-C in X2D would be nice.
I apoligize and stand corrected. It added face detection which for me is of dubious use regarding what I shoot. As you have said all along Continuous AF is not in the latest firmware.
As a previous GFX 100s owner there are few objective benefits to side grading (or downgrading as the general consensus in this chat) to the X2D. The SSD is nice, the menus are superior, Phocus is a competent app. But kinda like choosing to carry my Leica M11 over my Sony A1 ( the latter of which objectively is a better camera and arguably more useful) isn't always decided by performance metrics.
By your logic we should ask why the X2D doesn't record video as well? I dont use price or feature parity as the be all end all in my purchase decisions. But why are you asking for something for a camera you by your own admission is overpriced? In that case you aren't the targeted consumer, and those who are may not have this complaint. It's not one of the things that I'd want to change in the next version.
As an owner I dont ask it to do those things. And I shoot at very large apertures. If I want to shoot the blue supermoon or a powerboat races then I'd use the proper tool for the job.
Yeah that's the nature of the forum: discussion. As I'm having this civil discourse with you; I appreciate that and for you being here to keep me honest. (a lesson that could be useful in our current political climate...but I digress)
But back to your point. Asking why the X2D can't shoot 10fps burst, or continuous AF, how it needs a global shutter and doesn't record 12k RAW video is like asking why doesn't the Lamborghini Revuelto not come with snow tires. Why can't we enjoy it for what it is...after all comparison is the thief of joy.
I suspect in support of your chosen moniker you'll reply with some contrary opinion...looking forward to seeing that.
NAwlins Contrarian
Forum Pro
No worries for me. Perhaps some disappointment for some X2D owners who've been wanting and expecting it for approaching two years.
Rather than going point-by-point over the reasonable issues you and SrMi raised, maybe stepping back one level of abstraction would help shine light on the issues. To be clear, I'd like Hasselblad to succeed, I'd like the X2D to be all it reasonably can be, and I'd like it to have an even better successor. What I'm suggesting is that IMO Hasselblad's financial wellbeing may well depend on its finding a way to do some basic things to make the X2D a more viable tool for a broader set of uses.
With the clear disclaimer that I've never used one, my sense of things is that Hasselblad generally / the X2D specifically seems to provide real benefits on color rendition (at least through Phocus), tethering (for those who need or want to shoot tethered), user interface, and leaf-shutter lenses (for those who find them beneficial). Some people love the X2D for these sorts of reasons, and that's great. Hasselblad generally / the X2D specifically does not need to be a jack of all trades. It probably doesn't need more than rudimentary, if any, video capability. It probably doesn't need more than modest burst shooting. It's fine to say that some uses are simply A9 III or Z9 territory or whatever, not something the X2D can or should try to be.
But my sense of the world, maybe wrong, is that whatever the merits and joys of the X2D as a camera for you and SrMi and some others, Hasselblad's long-term survival may depend on its cameras being viable choices for say 80% of the uses / users where a GFX is the most conspicuous choice, so that maybe in actual purchases, say 30% of the buyers accept the higher prices and limitations and choose Hasselblad. And to get there, I tend to suspect that Hasselblad needs to close certain gaps. The X2D arrived with some big advances like IBIS and PDAF, but so far has failed to deliver on some of the expected capabilities, like using PDAF to provide fast and reliable continuous eye focus. I hope Hasselblad can deliver and thrive.
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum