Medium Format Forum

Register a free account now!

If you are registered, you get access to the members only section, can participate in the buy & sell second hand forum and last but not least you can reserve your preferred username before someone else takes it.

Going to MF



Next spring or early 2008 I must buy a MF camera with 39MP

I am very interrested by the new H3D II , but I have the opportunity to buy a second hand H1 + Phase one P45 + 3 lenses, for nearly the same price

what do you think ?
I am working in publicity (cars, ect ...)

thank you
This is the right place.

The H3D-II is a more integrated system ... meaning the system components and controls are more interactively working with each other. It's a product of Hasselblad's drive to make the H system more DSLR like in terms of handling and operation.

In addition, the H3D and H3D-II cameras will benefit from many software upgrades to further enhance this digital integration. This has already begun with the DAC correction feature of the current Flexcolor software ... and will continue with some major improvements early next year when Flexcolor is replaced with the new Phocus software.

When it comes to MF digital, it's my opinion that if you can do it, get the latest version of what you need to do the job, and be content with that for awhile.
and for the lenses ? what should be the best lenses for H3d II ?
that's a lot of money but I need 39 MP

thank you Marc
Lenses are a very personal choice and depend on application. I have and use all of the HC lenses except the 210 and the Zoom.

My applications vary widely, from event work, like weddings, to commercial table-top and lifestyle advertising.

So, the 120 Macro is an excellent choice for studio work, and the 100/2.2 is great for fast candid work in available light. I have never used the 80mm on either the H3D/39 or H3D/31.

IMO, if you don't need the Macro, the 3 lens set up I like best is the 50, 100 and 150. The 35 and 28 are quite wide, and I use them least.
Rufus it really depends on your personal style re: which system to choose. It's not just about the hardware, it's about the software as well. Capture One Pro for Phase and Flexcolor for Hasselblad are very different and offer different advantages and disadvantages. From my perspective Capture One might be stronger in terms of workflow, while Flexcolor gives more precise color control particularly for product.
For the amount of money you'll be spending I strongly suggest making the effort to test both systems- even if just shooting a few shots with each and trying out the software of each system.
I'll use in any case Capture One, I know and like it

for lenses I need something like 24 mm, 50mm, 100mm 24x36 equivalent
from landscape to portrait photography

I am working mostly in Automobile publicity

as you say for such a price I prefer to take my time to decide, but I am a bit afraid to buy an H1 or H2 that are not anymore in production

thank you for your help
Rufus if you buy an H3D you have to use Flexcolor, just to be clear. The H3D files cannot be read by Capture One.
The camera does play a role in this. I've used the Contax 645AF, Mamiya 654AFD-II (which I still use), and the Hasselblad H2 & H3 ... and prefer the speed and handling of the H3 by quite a bit.

Software is of course a key consideration. I have Capture One Pro which I use with other cameras, but personally have never liked it. For workflow speed I prefer Lightroom, and Flexcolor files can be converted to DNGs for this application. But for color, noise control, and shadow detail that a 39 meg back provides I still favor Flexcolor.

Phase backs are excellent. The Hasselblad backs are excellent, and the Leaf Backs are excellent. IMO there is very little difference between them.

Pick any one of them and the absolute most important decision you will make is WHO you buy it from and their support afterwards.
I dont know Flexcolor, then maybe you are right
is it impossible to use Camera RAW from CS3 ?

of course I shall ask a try, but what do you think of Hasselblad lenses for H3 ?

The new APTUS 22 , 54 S , 65 S and 75 S come with LEAF CAPTURE 11 .
This software is propagated to be an absolutely new design and to be better , than its predecessor LEAF CAPTURE 10 .
Can you say anything for capture 10 and 11 ? ? ?

Regards Jürgen
I am using Capture 11 right now Jurgen. It is better than the previous version, but not up to Capture One or Flexcolor standards. But to be fair, I am still exploring it, so perhaps I should reserve judgement.

Rufus, Flexcolor has a simple process to convert any 3F Hasselblad file into DNGs ( Adobe's universal Digital NeGative), which are supported by PSCS2 and PSCS3 RAW as well as Lightroom. You open the browser for Flexcolor, select all keeper images, and click the DNG button. The conversion is very fast ... and then you can process them in PSCS.

I also discovered that the new Aptus 75s files no longer open directly in PSCS like the 75 used to, but upon investigation found that a RAW converter also exists for the Leaf lossess compressed MOS files that allow processing in PSCS3 and Lightroom.

What questions do have about the H/C lenses Rufus?
I have heard than in DGN file a part of RAW (from Canon for exemple) is lost

for the lenses is it possible to use Zeiss ?
do you think the new Hasselblad lenses are top level ?

sorry to ask so many thing :)
Where did you hear that Rufus?

DNGs are conversions to a different lossless file format, the orginal is untouched.

Yes, you can use Zeiss CF,CFi and CFE lenses on the H2D and H3D. Hasselblad makes a CF adapter. It provides fully automatic stop down aperture metering and shooting. You need to manually cock the adapter to reset the shutter in the Zeiss lens.

When CFE lenses are used, they automatically communicate with the camera via the "E" data bus contacts. When CF and CFi lenses are used you must select the lens from a menu in the camera's LCD.

I have this CF adapter and a wide range of Zeiss optics. I rarely use them any more because the Hasselblad AF glass is optically stellar, and in some cases better practically because they are AF, have a higher sync speed, and in most cases offer slightly faster maximum apertures ... not to mention allow you to take advantage of the new DAC correction tools in Flexcolor.
then I can forget other lenses ! :)

Canon itself says that when converting RAW to DNG a few informations are lost, I dont know if it is the same for Hasselblad

anyway I have converted all my old RAW files ( > 3 years) into DNG

thank you Marc
What would be important is to know what information is lost according to Canon. If it is image data that one thing, if it's exif information that's another.

It is a common practice for commercial photographers to archive using the smaller DNGs after a certain period of time. I also keep my origianl Flexcolor 3Fs for about a year, then just maintain DNGs after that.

What cannot be maintained when using Flexcolor to convert to DNGs are any corrections done in Flexcolor. The DNG conversion engine is simply that ... a converter of the original file into a DNG.
Could be a number of things. For instance masked pixels, and the black level information derived from those. Or proprietary metadata, not included in the EXIF. Differences in colour encoding and colour space. Different compression algorithms may lead to different data. Etcetera.
Raw data too are not that 'raw', but already the result of conversion and processing. The question is whether a difference between Raw and DNG caused by further processing (the conversion) is a move away from what you would like the data to be. And if so, big enough to have anybody worry about it.
I dont know (for Canon) what is lost (or not) exactly
but I know that you can find this subject on many forum

as I said I convert allways my old RAWS