Looking For Sample 39mp RAW

[john_r_smith]

Folks

I am the owner of a quite extensive V-system kit, and I have got quite interested in the idea of purchasing the new CFV-39 digital back. At present I shoot B/W film, which is then scanned after development and I print the results on an Epson 2400. However, if the CFV back was good enough, and if I could be persuaded that producing B/W from a colour original was in fact a sensible way to do things, I might just be tempted to give up my beloved Tri-X and HP5.

But this (for me) is serious money, so in order to evaluate the issues a bit further, I downloaded Phocus from the Hasselblad site and the four sample RAW images as well. Lots of computer hours later, I am not too much the wiser, as the sample pictures really are nothing like the sort of pictures I take. I do mostly landscape and architecture (here in Cornwall UK) not glamour and night shots. I did my best to treat the shot of the very nice young lady in the bikini as if she was a view of Mevagissy Harbour, but somehow the technical challenges are not quite the same.

So I wondered - does anyone here have, or know of a source, for some sample landscape (particularly with clouds) or architecture RAW shots from a Hasselblad 39mp back (H-series would be fine) which I could access and evaluate?

Best wishes

John

 

[john_r_smith]

Just posting an update to this -

Following an enquiry yesterday to Hasselblad regarding their sample files, a very nice chap from Hasselblad UK just phoned me up and offered to call tomorrow to demo the CFV-39 and let me take a few sample shots for myself. Well, this seems jolly decent of them, so I will let you know how it all turns out. Let's just hope the weather relents for once

John

 

[miyagi1218]

i switched!

I hope you find what you need. I got rid of my V system for the H3DII-31 recently and couldn't be happier....

 

[saad]

That's great John, I hope you like it because I love the CFV-39. I took these shots 3 weeks ago in Switzerland. The first with the CFE40 IF, and the second with the CF250sa. The third was also taken with the CF250sa 2 days ago.

Of course I am looking at it on a 30" NEC monitor, and it kind of looks different to how you are seeing it



Saad

 

[polypal]

Please keep in mind it takes quite a bit of training to get results with postprocessing image files.

It is the same as with conventional photography:
The better the original image is the easier it is to process it.

Images from Saad look excellent to me sitting behind a modest monitor.
The 40 IF and the 250 SA are probably the best lenses to be used with 39 MP digital backs.
The 100mm Planar can be counted in too.

 

[wbulte]

Please keep in mind it takes quite a bit of training to get results with postprocessing image files.

It is the same as with conventional photography:
The better the original image is the easier it is to process it.

Images from Saad look excellent to me sitting behind a modest monitor.
The 40 IF and the 250 SA are probably the best lenses to be used with 39 MP digital backs.
The 100mm Planar can be counted in too.

And I'd be curious to see how the Biogon 38mm of the SWC fares on the CFV39.

Wilko

 

[saad]

Biogon 38 will not fare well at all either with the CFV-16 or CFV-39. At least for the 903SWC I have, there are magenta and green color casts which can be removed in Phocus to a large extent. It's sharpness also suffers noticeably. Of course Hasselblad does warn us of this given the proximity of the lens to the sensor.

Saad

 

[polypal]

Color cast is likely to happen with larger sensors.
The CFV 16 is absolutely no problem.
Please note 60 MP sensors are barely sufficient to register what details the Biogon lens from the SWC offers.

 

[saad]

Honestly Polypal I had so much trouble with color cast on the CFV16 that I thought there was something wrong with my SWC, so I sent it to Hasselblad who kept the camera for a month or more and then Mr. Jan Petterssen wrote me a long email explaining that this was due to the lens being so close to sensor. Here is an example at f8, which I saturated a bit so that it is very clear.

 

[polypal]

This does not look good indeed.
On the other hand many users have had excellent results with the CFV16 and even older SWC cameras.

Some are now using the CFV39 which is likely to cause problems due to the size of the sensor.
Lets see wait for the results from the CFV39 or even the Phase One 60 MP digital back.

 

[saad]

The pictures below were taken of a blank white projector screen at full aperture, indoors with the 903, and the second one with the FE50, please note that the lighting was not very even. Of course I did all this just to demonstrate the problem to Hasselblad, convinced that there is something wrong with my camera, and maybe there is.






I have also tried it with the CFV-39 and the color cast is similar. I would like to say again that Phocus can remove this cast, and with a bit of sharpening the SWC will produce good images, but not as good as the CFE 40IF.

Given how much I like the 903SWC this issue made me a bit sad.

 

[lorenz]

erm ... I don't understand the problem exactly ... the only fault is the color cast, which is normally for all this kind of camera: swc, horseman, alpa, arca swiss usw. Just remove it with the color cast tool in phocus. You know how?

Did you send it in because the color cast and Hasselblad needed to answer 1 month for that????

CFV16 and CFV39 should work on the 903SWC. I use CFV16 on a Horseman SWC ProII .. no problems with color cast, its removeable, BUT in the images the lenses produce a kind of moire (not a moire because of clothes or so) ... some other kind of moire all over the images. Does anybody know this effect? So it's not really useful.

lg lorri

 

[john_r_smith]

Well, I promised I would update you on this, so here is the latest. David Summerfield, from Hasselblad UK, visited me yesterday morning and spent a good three hours explaining how the CFV back works, running me through the use of the Phocus software, and going out with me for a walkabout to take some test shots on my own cameras out in a very cold Cornish landscape. David is a really nice chap, and was extremely patient and thorough. A fine ambassador for the company, in fact.

I used a 500C/M with a standard 80mm C lens, and shot just as if I was using film at 200 and 100 ASA using my Weston meter as I always do. I didn't get any great shots (you never do under these circumstances) but I got enough typical chapel/tree/landscape frames to tell me something. Last night I processed the images through Phocus into TIFFS and started playing around. It's early days yet, but here are my first thoughts -

· The ergonomics of the back are just fine. It does not upset the balance of the camera, it looks just like a bit bigger film magazine (which is really important, because the aesthetics of the old 500s are part of the pleasure of using them), and you can just shoot away as if you had a film back on once you have the basic settings dialled in.

· The resultant files will stand a lot of processing without any obvious degradation in quality. It would be possible to enlarge a final print quite a long way beyond the native 24x18 ins at 300 dpi resolution.

· The DR is very good indeed, exceptional I would say for digital. Control over the highlight areas, the usual problem, is tremendously good. Almost as good as B/W film, in fact.

· However, it undoubtedly takes quite a bit of work to make the end product look like film B/W. It can be done, but for each image there is a lot of extra work involved compared to shooting in mono at the outset, and then printing from scans. This is not a criticism of the CFV as such, of course, but will stand until somebody produces a digital B/W camera! Mixing the RGB channels is just a start, and then you will usually need quite a bit of work on levels and curves to mimic the punchy response of something like HP5. Colour (in my view) is not necessarily the best place to start from.

· Obviously, there is no, zero, grain. So in a way this is equivalent to shooting with an 8x10 view camera and Pan F. It would take some getting used to when I tend to use the texture of the grain as part of the finished print. But perhaps I could learn to love it.

· It’s not exactly a criticism of the CFV, but I was really shocked by the abrupt way in which the sensor renders the transition between in-focus and out of focus areas. It’s like falling off a cliff, compared with the much more forgiving way in which B/W film deals with the issue. Consequently, because the sensor is so much more forensic in the way in which it deals with focus, you effectively lose quite a lot of perceived depth of field. I would say at least a stop, subjectively. As I shoot a lot hand-held, this is quite an issue.

So I have quite a lot to think about! If one shot primarily in colour, then a digital back like this would be, as they say, a no-brainer. But B/W film and printing have become, over a very long period of time, just as much about the medium as the image. In other words, a good B/W print is as much about the nature of the film and the printing paper as it is about the subject. Therefore I have to decide whether I actually like this new medium (the CFV "film") enough to make the transition. That I will consider very carefully over the next few weeks.

John

 

[astan]

Color cast swc images

... the only fault is the color cast, which is normally for all this kind of camera: swc, horseman, alpa, arca swiss usw. Just remove it with the color cast tool in phocus. You know how?


lg lorri

I bought an old Hasselblad SWC a few months ago, and was disappointed to see the pictures taken with the CFV back with the described color cast. If there is an easy solution to remove it in Phocus, I would be very happy to find out how to.

Anders

 

[cs_foto]

If one shot primarily in colour, then a digital back like this would be, as they say, a no-brainer. But B/W film and printing have become, over a very long period of time, just as much about the medium as the image.

John

Not necessarily, for me colour film is as 'about the medium' as black and white can be.

Thanks for the report!

 

[Birger]

colour cast

Sorry for my ignorance. Could you explaine color cast and tell me where to see it in Saads picture?

 

[john_r_smith]

Not necessarily, for me colour film is as 'about the medium' as black and white can be.

Yes, of course you are absolutely right. I really love Portra 160 NC for its 'look', for example. Without wishing to offend anyone here, I suppose I was thinking that the digital back would be absolutely ideal for those who want what I call the "National Geographic" look - that is, a kind of grainless hyper-reality with very saturated colours (sort of Kodachrome or MF Ektachrome shot half a stop under), which we see in a lot of fashion and glamour work too. With the CFV, given the right light and subject, you will get this straight out of the box.

Trouble is, for my own work, that's the last thing I want. Think Bill Brandt, Fay Godwin, James Ravillious. Sort of traditional B/W English landscape, architecture and portraiture, I suppose.

John

 

[polypal]

Color Cast

Sorry for my ignorance. Could you explaine color cast and tell me where to see it in Saads picture?

Color cast is a shift from the original color due to pixels receiving the image under an angle.
See post nine, picture of the shore line.

This problem is more present when a Super Wide camera is used.
These cameras do not have a mirror to keep the rear element from the lens close to the film or digital sensor.
This means pixels near the outside of the sensor are hit under an angle.
With larger sensors this problem becomes more serious.

 

[john_r_smith]

Further update, for those of you who might still be interested -

Last night I did some more test printing from the CFV 'negs', using an architecture shot I did on Wednesday which has a lot of detail. Resolution from the 80mm C lens was quite astonishing - without the grain from film 'getting in the way' you can see just what the optics are capable of. I used the V lens correction in Phocus when I exported to TIFF, so that may have done some good I suppose. After a great deal of messing about and printing tests at A6 size, I found that I got the best B/W result by converting to Lab Color and just using the luminance layer as a basis for editing. After a little work on levels and a little bit of dodging for the vegetation highlights, a rather good-looking print rolled out of the 2400. This is quite encouraging, because if it works for the other sample pictures I took then I have a pretty simple workflow for my landscape stuff.

More testing to follow over the wekkend.

John

 

[Swissblad]

Those are very impressive photos - especially the apartment building - stunning!