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.

The classic mechanical digital Hasselblad 503CWD

Hello Franc.

Your question is not an easy one, and I can see why you would ask it.

The problem with the Kodak DCS ProBack Plus is that it was a very good back, and was as they say, before it's time.

The differences between the 16 meg Proback and the 16 meg CFV are: ProBack is 12 bit - CFV is 16 bit; ProBack requires a sync cord from lens to back - CFV does not; ProBack software/firmware is no longer being "upgraded" - CFV benefits every-time the Flex-color software/firmware is upgraded (which is often). Flex-color is the better software. The CFV Images are incrementally better right from the camera and made incrementally better via the software. ISO 400 is better for the CFV than from the ProBack. There is a gain in quality,
but it is not a dramatic, "eye popping" difference.

File format: Both backs produce a proprietary RAW file, the ProBack DCS RAW files can be opened directly in PhotoShop Adobe Camera RAW (assuming that Adobe has retained support of the DCS files in PSCS3), the CFV files cannot be directly opened in Adobe Camera RAW - Flex-color must be used - however Flex-color provides for a quick conversion to Adobe's Universal DNG file format which ACR does support.

The added benefit is that the CFV cosmetically matches the chrome versions of the V cameras.

Given that you can get $3,800. to $4,800. (maybe more) for your ProBack, the cost to move to the CFV at current pricing would be around $4,500. Only you can determine if the incremental improvements are worth it.

RE: The H system and near 645 sensor using a CF Adapter for your Zeiss lenses ... going this route will provide access to a wider field of view, so your 50mm will be closer to a 50mm FOV on the long side of 645 format. I believe the pixel size of the 22 meg back is the same as the 16 meg CFV back, so if you cropped a 22 meg file to a square, the file would be the same as one from the CFV.

Obviously this is the more expensive solution. The CF lens adapter alone is $850 to $1,050.

My opinion:

If you need to sell the Kodak ProBack to finance your next back, then I'd get the CFV now. As the CFV, and Phase One 16 meg backs become more available on the used market, the desirability and price of the Proback will began declining.

I think the CFV will relatively retain it's value even in the face of advancing H technology because it matches the V cameras, is a very good digital back ... and requires no sync cord. Plus it may be the ONLY CFV Hasselblad makes.

One other solution to consider is a stand alone 22 meg back for your 503CW. Were I to do this, I'd also look at Phase One and maybe Leaf.
 
Would Mamiya ZD a good option ?

With an adaptor, it can be fitted to all Hasselblad V lenses. Its sensor size is the same as the Hasselblad H3.
 
Joseph, thanks for the tip on the ZD but I think it's an unknown entity right now, I've seen it on the web but how well is it supported and will it become a white elephant in a year or two.
 
Hi Andrew,
Some Great points, I don't need AF, I'd like to have a flex body and cost is an issue. All these things considered I will look into backs for my 503CW. Is it true that the leaf software only works on a MAC. I only have PC's so if it means a new computer and software, Leaf would not be an option.

Franc
 
Hi Marc,

Thanks for the advice, it is well taken and really adds to my knowledge on this but, do you know where the Imacon V96C and the 132C backs fit into the mix. I know they use the image bank but do they benifit from the same software and upgrades as the CFV. I've looked at the phase one P25 back on line and the back alone is almost twice the price of the CFV. Right now the CFV is looking like the best option.

Franc
 
Franc, I had a V96C prior to the CFV. You mentioned the Image Bank, which I found to limit my use a little. It also requires the sync cord from lens to back, which caused me some intermittent problems from time to time.

As far as the images, I believe both use the same sensor. The CFV has upgraded firmware, and I cannot answer whether those upgrades are applicable to the V96C ... I would assume so, but am not sure.

I think the difference in price for the CFV is worth it.
 
Hello again Franc.
Yes. At the moment there is only Leaf software for the Mac.
Leaf have been promising for a while now that they will bring it out for Windows as well... but going on the delivery and reliability of other software promises I would not hold my breath too tightly.

The good news is that you do not need the Leaf software for developing the files.
You only need it if you are shooting tethered to the computer.
You can shoot images to CF cards in the compressed RAW or un-compressed RAW format.
If it is un-compressed you can then open that file in a few different converters -
for eg. Aperture, Lightroom/Photoshop ACR, Raw Developer and maybe some more...
I have found Lightroom to be quite good to use.
But, if you shoot in the compressed format then I believe only the Leaf software can open it.
You then can choose to save it as uncompressed and continue to open it in another program.

But as said. For now it only runs on a Mac.

If you were to consider a Leaf back... or a Phase back as well, you could also look into a re-manufactured one.
I did. It comes with a 1 year warranty and is as new.
It could save you quite a few thousand compared to a new one.

All the best with your decisions and purchases.
Andrew
 
Hi Marc,
again thanks for the input, it's muchly appreciated. At this point I've decided to go shopping for the CFV and find out what I can get for the Proback trade-in/selling private so I can figure out what the economics are. I'm just getting rolling with a few commercial MF jobs for which I'll use the Proback for but by mid summer I hope to have the CFV, I'll keep you posted. Have you seen the CF backs in the 22 or 39 MP versions. Has anyone tried one on a V camera?

Andrew,
thanks for the tip on the re-man's I'll check it out and if the price is right, I'd like a 22MP back but this may be wishful thinking on my part, so in that case I'll go for the CFV.
I have been using lightroom for about 4 months now and just love it, I've got a couple of corporate clients that I shoot events for and I can whack out 200 corrected proofs to CD in no time flat.

Thanks again guys for your time and input.

Franc
 
"Thanks again guys for your time and input."

We all have to band together to assist one another when it comes to this MF digital subject. It is changing so quickly, and is so competitive for such a small segment of the market, that
sharing real world experiences is of paramount importance. Of course it comes down to opinion at times, but as long as we're frank with those opinions it can be of help.

Here are a few opinions of mine, which I'm sure will parallel some of those of other forum members:

Unless you absolutely need AF, the mechanical wonder Victor Hasselblad invented is the way to go. It eliminates a level of complexity in the already complex subject of MF Digital. Everything about the whole V system is a known entity, and quite frankly there is far less to go wrong with such a mature technology compared to any other MF set up. The less electronic dependence the better IMO, and none is even better.

The V system has been with us for so long, and they hold up so well, that some of the finest MF lenses ever made can be had at 35mm lens prices.

Virtually every MF digital back has versions for the V system. They are all pretty comparable with slight differences being magnified for competitive marketing purposes.

Franc, your desire for a 22 meg back is a good desire. The punishment is price. I recently agonized over that very subject for use on my 503CWs. I did not get one only because I ended up stumbling on a H2D/CFH/22 kit with 120 macro & spare film back for $15,500.
Since I already have the H/C lenses the decision was easy.

But this still leaves me with wanting a wider "commercial" solution for the 503CW V system ... which I refuse to abandon.

Andrew's suggestion of a factory referb back is a good idea to investigate. That Leaf doesn't have a PC software solution is a crime. The Aptus backs are very good (I have a Aptus 75 I use on Mamiya cameras).

When it came to a "universal" back for the 503CW, Leaf and Phase One 22 meg backs were leading contenders on my shopping list, followed by Sinar ... the Hasselblad back was also there, but not at the top of the list because being grey, they cosmetically do not match the 503CW camera ... stupid reason maybe, but a pet peeve of mine.

The absolute hope for me is a CFV with a larger sensor. The CFV does one thing that the other backs do not ... it eliminates the one exterior electronic link that can cause issues while shooting: the sync cord between lens and back. No matter how sophisticated the back may be, it is reduced to this "Flintstone" link.
 
Thanks Marc, The support on the form here is fantastic. The Flintstone link is what keeps me coming back to the CFV. Clean, seamless and no wires. My original thought was an H system body with a 22MP back but maybe the CFV will be the first step and wait for a larger job before investing in the H system, who knows maybe a 31MP version of the CFV will be the next step for hasselblad. Now that the CFV has been the "HGH" for the V system maybe a 31MP back will be the fountain of youth for it, We can only hope!! As for my situation, On Friday I was short listed for a large Government project for the department of education and if I win that contract the wider sensor will be a must(or a 30mm lens)but cash won't be such an issue either. Anyway I'm going to make some calls this week and I'll post what I find out.
 
Hi Guys,

As I said in my last post I would post what I find out. I talked to Victor my Hasselblad rep today and he explained the Hasselblad options to me. As you said Marc the CFV back is priced at $9000 until the end of April. A 22MP CF back with a V adapter is $20,000, This option would give me a crop factor of 1.3x. He recommended that if I wanted a 22MP back to really consider the H3D22. I can get a complete kit for $23,000. He also mentioned that there are a number of pros that have done this to keep using their tack sharp Zeiss lenses, this solution also gives me a crop factor of 1.1x using the CF lenses I have. If I want to trade my Proback on a H3, Hasselblad will give me $5000 trade-in credit for it. So at this point it's still the CFV but tomorrow it's off to call the Phase One dealer.

Franc
 
A couple of tips Franc:

The CF back is usable on a number of different MF systems through the system of iAdapters. Each back comes with a choice of one iAdapter, and additional ones can be purchased. So If you got a H1/2/3 or a Mamiya 645 later, the CF back can also be used on those cameras.

So, just be sure you compare apples-to-apples while shopping. Ask if a back you are considering for your 503CW can be used on another camera system ... and how much $ and what is involved if you wanted to do that that.

For ex&le, I have an Aptus 75 with a Mamiya 645AFD mount, I can use it on the 645 without the sync cord ... and with a special (expensive) adapter, on a Mamiya RZ Pro-IID. However, I cannot use it on any other MF camera without a major factory modification and considerable cost ... and then it will no longer work on the Mamiya 645 without another adapter. I would have had to buy the "Universal" mount Aptus back to accomplish that kind of versatility.

Also ask if there is any loyality program. In the USA, previous owners get 10% discount off of Hasselblad digital gear (can't be mixed with other special promotions). Ask about the "upgrade" path if you enter a system from anyone. Once you commit to a system, it is often upgrades that keeps it more economical to stay abreast of technological improvements later ... rather than switching systems.
 
Sorry to put oil on fire, but the 39Mpix with 38x49mm sensor should just be the ultimate goal for a new "X-Pan III digital".
The X-pan lenses cann do it
Leica salles of M8 is a succes perhaps a digital evolution of the X-pan has his place too ?
 
Hi there, quick test with CFV IS0 100, f5.6 at 1/8th available light. Impressed with the original file, very sharp which may not be reflected in this shot in reducing to 8 bits, jpeg, especially as there were no studio lights or any other reflectors used. Trust this picture uploads will send decnt shots when progressed in studio. Did manipulate with unsharp mask in photoshop. All the best Carl.

26770.jpg
 
One day I sold my CF 150 because the pantagons in the bokeh drove me crasy with portraits. I baught the new CF180mm but I got the same !
See detail

26773.jpg
 
Leica salles of M8 is a succes perhaps a digital evolution of the X-pan has his place too ?

One can only hope Isidor!
happy.gif


Good ex&le Carl, thanks!
happy.gif
What was the lens?

Yes Isidor, unfortunately various ex&les of these come through - but, I'm not all that convinced that it is the iris shape doing this to the bokeh; or rather, some astigmatism?

Last year I saw the same from a 1960s Leica Summilux lens at about f8 and the iris was quite round and the cause was definitely astigmatism - can't correct for everything
sad.gif
The 1960s Canon f1.2 LTM I ended up buying has not shown any similar astigmatism - maybe the Japanese better correct any aberration that adversely affects bokeh, since culturally the Japanese see bokeh as a very important feature of a lens.
 
Simon,

The pentagons are indeed a direct result of the pentagonal aperture.
It is not a lens fault either, i.e. cannot be corrected: the diffraction pattern takes the shape of the aperture, and that is what shows in the out of focus bits. So only the shape of the aperture can make a difference.

Astigmatism can show up in 'blotches' too, but the shape is different: a more or less elongated blotch.
It shows itself most often as a directional difference in sharpness, a blurring in one direction not present in a direction at (more or less) right angles to it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top