Hi Marc, thanks for the welcome.
That's exactly what I thought - that only a few really worked with the H-System. And that they will argue that none comes even close to the Zeiss lenses. I can't find that it's delusional to equate the optical qualities of Zeiss and Fuji, what besides I haven't done I just ask if nobody likes a lens of the H-system best. And their is not only MP3, what about SACD,... someone who owns a Bowers & Wilkens Nautilus speaker system will certainly not listen to MP3-files. That's only where the masses go as they do with those tiny point and shoot cameras. But Hasselblad is in no way where the masses go, they build state of the art equipment in every aspect.
I don't bother if their is any digital postprocessing as long as the result is what I want and if this can fix problems that fall into every lens design I'm fine with that. I use a flextight 343 and get remarkable results and if I finally can aford to switch to a fully digital workflow, I will have the best system too do so and can benefit from those technologies.
I'm quite new to photography, as I just startet about 2-3 years ago with a 35mm camera, but went straight to medium format after a few, very few month. But since then I've had the opportunity to work with a little range of different system, although I mainly took along my 503cw and since a short while an H2. I like both system a lot and find them to be the best around on the market, each for their own purpose, but i have to say that I almost only use the H2 since I got it. Not only because of the greater flexibilty that comes along with this kind of camera, but also because I really like the output of the lenses. The only thing I really miss is a 45º finder, like my PME45. And I have to admit that I favour the square, but I get along with this.
And I have to say: I like the bokeh of the Fuji glasses. I wouldn't judge the bokeh of a lens by only taking one frame into count. Yes the bokeh differs and it might trully be more harsh than that from a Zeiss lens, but as I wrote in my first post they have a more "modern" look(I don't know how to explain it better), and in that way they are more harsh, but not necessarily in a negative way that depends on your own likes but it is certainly not horrible.
That's exactly what I thought - that only a few really worked with the H-System. And that they will argue that none comes even close to the Zeiss lenses. I can't find that it's delusional to equate the optical qualities of Zeiss and Fuji, what besides I haven't done I just ask if nobody likes a lens of the H-system best. And their is not only MP3, what about SACD,... someone who owns a Bowers & Wilkens Nautilus speaker system will certainly not listen to MP3-files. That's only where the masses go as they do with those tiny point and shoot cameras. But Hasselblad is in no way where the masses go, they build state of the art equipment in every aspect.
I don't bother if their is any digital postprocessing as long as the result is what I want and if this can fix problems that fall into every lens design I'm fine with that. I use a flextight 343 and get remarkable results and if I finally can aford to switch to a fully digital workflow, I will have the best system too do so and can benefit from those technologies.
I'm quite new to photography, as I just startet about 2-3 years ago with a 35mm camera, but went straight to medium format after a few, very few month. But since then I've had the opportunity to work with a little range of different system, although I mainly took along my 503cw and since a short while an H2. I like both system a lot and find them to be the best around on the market, each for their own purpose, but i have to say that I almost only use the H2 since I got it. Not only because of the greater flexibilty that comes along with this kind of camera, but also because I really like the output of the lenses. The only thing I really miss is a 45º finder, like my PME45. And I have to admit that I favour the square, but I get along with this.
And I have to say: I like the bokeh of the Fuji glasses. I wouldn't judge the bokeh of a lens by only taking one frame into count. Yes the bokeh differs and it might trully be more harsh than that from a Zeiss lens, but as I wrote in my first post they have a more "modern" look(I don't know how to explain it better), and in that way they are more harsh, but not necessarily in a negative way that depends on your own likes but it is certainly not horrible.
But if you shoot on film, maybe we could together sweet-talk Marc into Imacon-ing some of the best shots? 
