What's new
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.

H3dii/50

Steve

Where can that information about the 40.4 x 54.9 mm sensor be found ? ? ?
If DALSA can produce a sensor of that size , they can also produce a 54.9 x 54.9 mm sensor . For SINAR Hy6 for example .

Jürgen
 
I am convinced Dalsa is a high tech company with many new products and an active R&D department.

Only their website is a little outdated.
The latest news about their products is from may 2007.
No news about a larger sensor for photography.
 
I found Marc's comments about the technical choices made in designing sensors (e.g. ISO speed etc) very interesting. For me, it is an eye-opener because I form criticisms of some MF digital backs based on my amateur photographer uses. But, Marc's pointing out the professional users' use/needs helps me understand how the specifications were arrived at.

Pros' needs are different to amateurs' needs and guess whose needs deserve / justify an investment of tens of thousands of dollars! :)

BUT, also in comments above, some are talking about Zeiss/Hasselblad lenses being better or worse than Fujinon/Hasselblad lens based on technical performance/attributes shown in the various testing charts.

However, I must say that "technical" performance such as MTF charts is only 1 part of any lenses' performance IMHO.

Personally, I have rarely looked at the technical specifications or charts. It is the LOOK that the CZ lenses deliver on top quality film that pleases me most. Then it is the actual optical behaviour in my hands that please me - resistance to flare; evenness of definition/resolution of fine details from axis to edges; colour attributes etc.. I certainly don't need charts to determine that I love the lenses I own.

Sure Fujinon lenses are excellent. But nothing makes me feel that I need to "upgrade" to any other system from my Hasselblad V series system and its CZ glass.

Equally some may prefer the "look" of Fujinon glass images on digital sensors just as i do prefer Zeiss on film. BUT, I really do not feel that at this very top end of the market one is "better" than another.
 
More info on Phase One 65+:

New P65+ digital back specs/features :
It features a Dalsa sensor that has been developed with close cooperation from Phase One and includes many Phase One patents. This chip is exclusive to Phase One.
The dimensions are 53.9mmx40.4mm @ 6x6 micron – 60.5 MP CCD.
Lens magnification is 1.0x ! 20% larger image area then the 36x49mm CCD.
180MB TIF file in 8-bit RGB
Raw IIQL file size – 60MB
Raw IIQS file size – 40MB
(keep in mind the H25 which was 22MP in RAW 3.0 format had a RAW file size of about 43MB)
Capture Rates as fast as 1 frame/sec
ISO range 50-800
12.5 f-stops DR
Optimized for T&S and Wide Angle (less lens cast calibration required)
Exposure range 1/4000 to 1 min
Available in P/M645AFD , V, H and Contax Mount

Steve
 
Thanks Steve ,

For that very interesting information . I am very curious , what eMOTION/SINAR will present . Will they also have a sensor for their own .

If I understand your information correct , there will be a cast correction done by CAPTURE ONE software , for images taken with a shift/tilt setting .

Jürgen
 
steve_hendrix said:
There is a very, very interesting article in the current edition of Victor Magazine (2/2008 edition) that compares the Zeiss CF and current HC lenses. It's a very technical, fair, and detailed article that surprised me with how well the CF lenses fared, but also noted how the HC lenses outperform in some areas of the lens and at variable distances, particularly with the DAC applied.
Click to expand...

Steve Hendrix

Yes , that article is very interesting , but it is published in VICTOR BY HASSELBLAD and must not neccessarily be a neutral report .
HASSELBLAD of course is trying hard to point out , that they have the best cameras , lenses and software .
But I am 100% convinced , that CZ could have supplied lenses as good as FUJI does , might be , even better .
So I read that article with some reserve .

Jürgen
 
jotloob said:
Steve Hendrix

Yes , that article is very interesting , but it is published in VICTOR BY HASSELBLAD and must not neccessarily be a neutral report .
HASSELBLAD of course is trying hard to point out , that they have the best cameras , lenses and software .
But I am 100% convinced , that CZ could have supplied lenses as good as FUJI does , might be , even better .
So I read that article with some reserve .

Jürgen
Click to expand...

"Could have" are the operative words. Could have isn't the same as did. To my knowledge, Zeiss only has point and shoot and 35mm lenses in AF and can't supply updated 645 Contax type versions because of Kyocera. However, Zeiss "could have" supplied the AF lenses for the 6X6 Hy6, but they didn't ... Schneider did. I wonder why?
 
This all has to do with ancient history; the troubled and not always smooth relationship between CZ and Hasselblad.

CZ politely answers questions why they did not make the lenses for the H series cameras by pointing at specific demands of Hasselblad which they were unable to fullfill.
In fact they had an exclusive deal with Kyocera to supply know how and lenses for the Contax 645 AF camera.

CZ committed itself to Kyocera after earlier AF prototypes for other
Hasselblad cameras were commented by Hasselblad employees as:
too expensive, the market is not ready for that, and technically too complicated.
CZ will design and build just about any lens for any camera as long as somebody pays the bill.
The tremendous 1700 mm lens they built for a V system camera on demand of an oil sheik is just one example of that capability.
 
polypal said:
This all has to do with ancient history; the troubled and not always smooth relationship between CZ and Hasselblad.

CZ politely answers questions why they did not make the lenses for the H series cameras by pointing at specific demands of Hasselblad which they were unable to fullfill.
In fact they had an exclusive deal with Kyocera to supply know how and lenses for the Contax 645 AF camera.

CZ committed itself to Kyocera after earlier AF prototypes for other
Hasselblad cameras were commented by Hasselblad employees as:
too expensive, the market is not ready for that, and technically too complicated.
CZ will design and build just about any lens for any camera as long as somebody pays the bill.
The tremendous 1700 mm lens they built for a V system camera on demand of an oil sheik is just one example of that capability.
Click to expand...

So, why didn't they make AF lenses for the Hy6? Zeiss has made lenses for the Rollei platform and still do as far as I know. Obviously, price wasn't a driving factor ... just look at the pricing for the Schneider AF lenses.

Hasselblad employees may have been right concerning "to expensive" and "the market is not ready for that" ... again, look at the price list for the Schnieder AF lenses for use with the Hy6. That put me off the Hy6 right away. I know a number of photographers that were put off by Hy6 system pricing also.

If they were obviously better, it would easier to swallow the huge price tag ... but I tested the Schneider 80mm on a Leaf AFi in my studio, and it wasn't any faster, or optically any better than the HC 80mm. No one likes to hear that because it doesn't support the subjective fairy tale of optical superiority ... since I have both sets of lenses ... Zeiss and Fuji ... I've seen the results from both ... and each has it's strong focal lengths and weak ones.

IMO, at these heady prices, this stuff has to translate into real world results not bragging rights on paper or the internet ... but that is admittedly a perspective of someone interested in making money with my photography ... which keeps me more focused on my profit margin than on some lens maker or digital camera company's profit margin. If Zeiss disappeared tomorrow, I'd shed a tear, and my photographic life would go on unchanged.

That just may be to practical of a perspective for theoretical arguments on the internet.

IMO, the best deal going is still the H3D-II/31 ... : -)
 
fotografz said:
If Zeiss disappeared tomorrow, I'd shed a tear, and my photographic life would go on unchanged.

That just may be to practical of a perspective for theoretical arguments on the internet.
Click to expand...

The disappearing of Carl Zeiss is highly theoretical.
CZ employs over 22.000 highly qualified people.
Only a small number are engaged in designing and producing photographic equipment.
CZ bought all major suppliers for their photographic division i.e. the Deckel and the Gaumont
factories that make shutters.
Less than 2% of CZ turnover comes from their photographic division.

Hasselblad employed about 400 people at the time when this incident about AF lenses occurred.
At this moment staff at Hasselblad is less than 100 people.

My guess is the licensing agreements between CZ, Sony and Nokia makes more money for CZ per year
than they made in 50 years supplying Hasselblad.
That may also explain why CZ is not interested in a new adventure with the makers of the Hy6 camera.
Apparently the makers of the Hy6 decided that lenses were not to be an exclusive right for one supplier.
 
polypal said:
The disappearing of Carl Zeiss is highly theoretical.
CZ employs over 22.000 highly qualified people.
Only a small number are engaged in designing and producing photographic equipment.
CZ bought all major suppliers for their photographic division i.e. the Deckel and the Gaumont
factories that make shutters.
Less than 2% of CZ turnover comes from their photographic division.

Hasselblad employed about 400 people at the time when this incident about AF lenses occurred.
At this moment staff at Hasselblad is less than 100 people.

My guess is the licensing agreements between CZ, Sony and Nokia makes more money for CZ per year
than they made in 50 years supplying Hasselblad.
That may also explain why CZ is not interested in a new adventure with the makers of the Hy6 camera.
Apparently the makers of the Hy6 decided that lenses were not to be an exclusive right for one supplier.
Click to expand...

Language problem.

I didn't say Zeiss was going to literally "disappear". It's a figure of speech related to the optic discussion ... meaning I could live without any lenses from Zeiss and not skip a beat in terms of making photographs.

Rambling on about Zeiss as a solid company, quoting employee counts, and comparing it to Hasselblad was a waste of bandwidth.
 
fotografz said:
Language problem.

I didn't say Zeiss was going to literally "disappear". It's a figure of speech related to the optic discussion ... meaning I could live without any lenses from Zeiss and not skip a beat in terms of making photographs.

Rambling on about Zeiss as a solid company, quoting employee counts, and comparing it to Hasselblad was a waste of bandwidth.
Click to expand...

In a way Hasselblad's decision to go for a one-stop-shopping deal with Fuji for both the electronics knowledge as well as for the optics makes perfect business sense. Whether some of us like that is another matter hardly worth arguing too much about.

Wilko
 
It was also meant to explain that the easy dismissal of a research project that did cost a serious amount of money and effort by Hasselblad staff was uncalled for.
This was one of a number of incidents that did not exactly improve the relationship between CZ and the Hasselblad company.

You asked why CZ does not make lenses for the Hy6 camera.
The postion of Carl Zeiss and the relative importance of photography for that company are other possible reasons not to get involved.
 
polypal said:
You asked why CZ does not make lenses for the Hy6 camera.
The postion of Carl Zeiss and the relative importance of photography for that company are other possible reasons not to get involved.
Click to expand...

Zeiss makes more money on every optical subsystem for a ASML waferstepper than they can make in a year on selling lenses for Hasselblad.

With some luck that waferstepper will be used to produce DALSA or Kodak sensors.
Which nicely closes the circle of life :z04_975:

Wilko
 
hallo to everyone,

just heard about the news from PHASE ONE:

the new DIGITAL BACK "P 65+" will have 60.5 megapixel and 40,4 x 53,9 mm.

http://www.phaseone.com/

have a look at the phase one homepage.

well, but what about the CPUs!
we need more powerful and "faster" computer systems!

best regards from vienna.

helmut
 
Hello Helmut,

We may be slow at Hasselbladforum but the news of the P65 from Phase One
was mentioned about a week ago at this forum. :confused:

Thanks any way!

Paul
 
Interestingly I saw sample Phase One digital back images (no, not from the 65MP back - just the "cheap" backs :) ) in a high quality magazine a few days ago. What I immediatley noticed was the "plasticity" or "smoothing" effect that I find unappealing in many digital images.

It also struck me that the CFV images posted here and published samples is mostly free of that attribute. While I am a digital "novice", I trust my eyes to tell me what I prefer. It still intrigues me that the CFV's comparatively low MP count stands out for its image quality.

I realise what it is about the CFV images I've seen that stands out so well to my eyes - I find its images very NATURAL . The "smoothiong" effect I often see in other digital images (in all formats) has a somewhat unnatural appearance - not always, but in various types of photography, such as fashion.

I've also seen a lot of Leica M8 images, which I feel have a more natural look in a similar way to the CFV images. Is it fair to say that this is an underlying characteristic of Kodak sensors, or simply coincidence?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top