The wide angle lens advantage with wide angle lenses does make sense. I guess the medium format camera does fill a niche or two. I still don't think I would spend those extra thousands of dollars on a medium format camera even if I did have money to burn. That being said I am still the equivalent of a hacker in the photographic world. I still won't appreciate whatever advantages the big camera brings. If someone gave me one for free I would probably wave it around and brag to anyone who would listen about what an expensive camera I own. I can be shameless that way.

Robert capa used Leica SM cameras, also expensive camera.

His name was Capa.

Well, cr@p, my FZ1000 does 15 fps, has a tilty-flippy screen and has a flash sync at all speeds, shoots 4K video and has a built-in 25-400mm lens so there...

Pets of new York, there's so much wrong with your post I don't know where to start. You bring up things that hardly matter to most shooting MF. You want to compare a 1/8000 dry shutter speed to a 1/2000 actual *sync* speed, at least 1/1600th of which can easily be used on location shooting in ambient w/strobes? 4k video? (no comment)... You can't be serious.

There are reasons why photographers who shoot FF, still buy MF.

@Teila Day.
Don't feed the troll! ;)

I am neither pretentious nor undisciplined. I am merely fatigued listening to tech talk instead of discussing art and imagery. I am a working professional. If I am going to switch from my Mamiya Leaf rig to a mirrorless medium format I would hope to see files that would mimic real life scenarios where the need for an expensive medium format replacement makes sense, i.e. location advertising shoots, fashion, daring reportage, etc. I am sorry but dimly lighted boats at sunset don't do it for me, that's all. And unless DP review has changed its name to Digital Camera Review, I would certainly love to see some inspired images. An expensive camera doesn't make you a pro photographer just as my Big Bertha in the closet doesn't make me Tiger Woods. It's just a tool. When my present tools break, maybe I will look into something newer. But if it isn't broken...

Martin:

These are beautiful photographs, and they well demonstrate the capacities of this body, sensor and lens. (Okay, I know there's no ISO 6400 raw, and the raws weren't also shot in 1/3 EV steps.)

I look forward to more well shot examples done with the other two lenses.

Martin, if you can't see enough to whet your appetite in those pictures, you don't need medium format. And you still come over as pretentious, fatigued or otherwise.

i agree with martin, the photos are boring as hell, a child with a point and shoot could better

Preferably an heiress that loves photography, although you might have to beg her to use the camera.

I bet it was a styling decision. There's room for a socket in one of the corners.

You can sync through the hotshoe, no problem

@lancet -- Yes, with a dongle. But why? A flash sync socket should be a standard feature on any pro camera body. There's a limit to minimalist design.

Or else on the lenses -- how about that alternative, since the leaf shutters are inside the lenses?

film is a joke, don't even go there.

Who needs a Mamiya 7 II? I paid under $100 for my Koni Omega Rapid 200 6x7. The normal lens compares favourably with Hasselblads of the era.

(to answer my own question, I would love a Mamiya 7 II. But it definitely not the best bang for buck solution, not by a long shot).

Film is brilliant, don't scan it print it.
But it's two different types of media, you choose one over the other depending on the goal you have in mind. I shoot both, digii for clients film for fun.
The Hassy is a different end product that film, no matter which film or how you scan it.

First, just let me say that the joke is on osv and his ridiculous comment. I used the Mamiya as a comparison because of its mirrorless design and the fact that its considered the pinnacle of medium format rangefinders. Its obvious that its closer to the Hasselblad in shape and size. I've never used the Koni, but I suspect its much easier to hand hold than my Pentax 67. In the rangefinder/mirrorless line, I actually prefer the Mamiya 6 simply because of its 6X6 format. I use my Kowa Six more often than any of my other film bodies. Always B&W, always processed in caffenol (coffee), and always scanned on an Epson. (currently the V800)

@PamlicoKid: fyi, the film train left the station over 10 years ago, see the scientific testing that norman koren, the inventor of imatest, did way back in the day: "The Canon EOS-1Ds Mark II, announced in September 2004, challenges medium format film... 24x36 mm sensors with 16+ megapixels (7.4 �m or less pixel spacing) have performance approaching medium format... Michael Reichmann's article, Ultimate Shoot-out, compares his 11 Megapixel EOS-1Ds to the medium format Pentax 67II. Although I agree with his conclusion that the EOS-1Ds has better overall image quality..." http://www.normankoren.com/Tutorials/MTF7.html

trying to compare any size film to this hasselblad is just plain silly.

@osv -- That was a questionable blanket statement. I do think the 50MP sensor is capable of more resolution than the vast majority of film formats & cameras, but I seriously doubt that it could beat the IQ of an 8x10" neg/chrome that has been drum scanned. I see a tonal gradation problem in this particular Hassy model -- deep shadows look like charcoal has been smudged in them -- nowhere near as good as the shadow gradation in a properly exposed color negative.

@obsolescence: i posted a link to scientific test results, that were done by established experts in the field... people stopped bothering to compare film to digital years ago, because film loses in every parameter: "There seems to be an urban legend that says digital cameras have less dynamic range than film. The legend is wrong. The above plot shows the comparison of a DSLR with print and slide film. The slide film records only about 5 photographic stops of information (a stop is a factor of 2, so 5 stops is 32). The print film shows about 7 stops of information. The digital camera shows at least 10 stops of information (this test was limited to 10 stops). Other tests show the Canon 1D Mark II camera has about 11.6 stops of information (a range of 3100 in intensity). Other DSLR cameras, like the Canon 10D have around 11 stops." http://www.clarkvision.com/imagedetail/film.vs.digital.summary1.html/

Photography is just as much art as it is science. Our eyes viewing a print or screen are the final arbiter of image quality, not some measurements done by scientists (no matter how "established expert" they purport to be).

Technology does not always bring improvements of artistic media in terms of their expressive potential. Even though technical advances theoretically are superior, how they are used to make images is more significant toward producing high quality images. The digital process, as easy as it may seem to be, is fraught with pitfalls that don't exist with film processes.

The print or screen has a limited brightness range, so the subject brightness range has to be interpreted or "translated" by the photographer based on experience with the capture device and the subsequent processing and output. Dynamic Range of capture is not meaningful unless there is also adequate tonal separation.

I like to use film because the look is absolutely beautiful. The way good glass renders on such a large surface is gorgeous. For a train that left the station ten years ago its funny that there is still so much to choose from and new emulsions showing up every year. In fact, only a handful have been discontinued since the train left.

It's the other stuff that makes a difference not the mp count. 50mp would be nice to have but not essential most of the time.
I would hope Hassy quality has been passed on to this little camera and accessories to make it a complete pro package.

Lens rendering is different than in 35mm designs. If you are unable to see this difference, then simply don't spend the money. Those of us with experience in MF systems know better.

I see. Still, as I said, is it too much to quickly mention the basics for those unfamiliar?

amazing how everyone wants to say NO to simply listing a few basic specs. This is the article that caught my attention; I'm not really interested enough to pursue it further, and I shouldn't have to. I don't think a couple of lines of specs would kill anyone and it might be helpful to the casual reader.

I love Hasselblad's menu's, as well. I caught a glimpse of them about a year ago and couldn't help but wonder why every menu couldn't be so uncluttered, clear and easy to read.

I wouldn't say that everything larger than full frame, up to 4x5, is the traditional definition of medium format. The term medium format was used for cameras using 6cm wide roll film. Depending on the orientation of the film in the camera and the lens/camera build, the resulting images on film range from the small 6x4.5 format up to 6x17 ( and I think some went even wider), with other formats like 6x6,6x7,6x8,6x9 in between. The aspect ratios varied but it was always based on the 6cm wide film, called medium format roll film. That sensors smaller than 6x4.5 (but larger than full frame) are now called medium format has something to do that they were first introduced on cameras that were originally designed for medium format film, but had to crop to the smaller sensor size. It is not a traditional definition, just something that happened when medium format cameras started to go digital. Is it now medium format or full frame XL?

Just wait when a FF fans hear that 35mm format was called as "crop / tiny format"....

That is my upgrade path. I never saw a reason to go from M4/3's up to FF, but I've been waiting for a MF mirrorless for a couple of years now. This looks like the one.

Plus the design is gorgeous. If a camera can actually be gorgeous...

It is the best looking camera on the market.

Fiat needs one badly as well and they should have priority. Actually what they need is one from VW :-)

@Frank C. - Certainly not.

Italian designers ? Like the ones who "design" the Hasselblad Lunar ?
http://photorumors.com/2012/10/10/hasselblad-opens-new-design-centre-in-italy/