1. Reminder: Please use our affiliate links to get to your favorite stores for holiday shopping!

First Mirrorless Medium Format Camera

Discussion in 'Other Systems' started by serhan, Jun 21, 2016.

  1. serhan

    serhan TalkEmount All-Pro

    Aug 27, 2011
    NYC
    Hasselblad w/ Sony sensor:
    Hasselblad X1D First Mirrrorless Medium Format. Priced at $8995
    Hasselblad XCD 45 3.5 $2295
    Hasselblad XCD 90 3.2 $2695

    13450322_10153749033440642_3724893449631779158_n.
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Informative Informative x 1
  2. NickCyprus

    NickCyprus Super Moderator

    Oct 11, 2012
    Cyprus
    Nick
    I think I've read rumors that Sony was developing a medium format sensor to use to its A7XX platform...wasn't expecting to give it to someone else first though :)
     
  3. Jefenator

    Jefenator TalkEmount Top Veteran

    876
    Nov 23, 2012
    Oregon, USA
    Jeff
    It's about time someone did it. Nice to see Hasselblad back on the cutting edge and not just re-badging and pimping out slightly stale Sony products. ;)
    (I did notice, they had already won Ming Thein's endorsement even prior to this development.)
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  4. davect01

    davect01 Super Moderator

    Aug 20, 2011
    Fountain Hills, AZ
    Dave
    For those with too much $$$$
     
  5. MAubrey

    MAubrey TalkEmount Top Veteran

    I think it's the same sensor already in the Pentax 645z...
     
    • Informative Informative x 1
  6. Jefenator

    Jefenator TalkEmount Top Veteran

    876
    Nov 23, 2012
    Oregon, USA
    Jeff
    Looks like the form factor is pretty trim.
     
  7. Jefenator

    Jefenator TalkEmount Top Veteran

    876
    Nov 23, 2012
    Oregon, USA
    Jeff
    Now that Medium Format mirrorless lives, maybe that will take some of the pressure off for the A7 system to try and be some kind of Medium Format killer.
     
  8. robbie36

    robbie36 TalkEmount Veteran

    484
    Nov 21, 2014
    There is little point in Sony introducing a medium format ILC. Every MF camera produced today uses their sensor already.
     
  9. Lucille

    Lucille TalkEmount Veteran

    351
    May 22, 2013
    I like this one, cant wait to read some reviews and see some IQ. I might be in.
     
  10. addieleman

    addieleman Passionate amateur

    Nov 13, 2012
    Netherlands
    Ad Dieleman
    The funds needed for this Hassy system are way beyond my comfort zone, but if they weren't, I'm pretty sure I'd go for it. It looks like a small, serious camera with excellent lenses for (I guess) relatively static photography, which is just up my alley. The files will be gorgeous, no doubt.
     
  11. Jefenator

    Jefenator TalkEmount Top Veteran

    876
    Nov 23, 2012
    Oregon, USA
    Jeff
    What if Sony is developing a 6x6 cm sensor and keeping that for themselves? ;)
    (I know this 33x44mm has many practical benefits, but my old 6x6 TLR delivers a look all its own.)
     
    • Like Like x 2
  12. tomO2013

    tomO2013 TalkEmount Veteran

    375
    Dec 11, 2014
    This isn't very interesting to me at all to be honest.

    Unless you need 16bit color, why bother - there is faster glass available for FF which will yield more creative options.

    The sensor size difference going from FF to the mirrorless hassleblad/pentax doesn't offer a big enough jump as say going from APSC to FF.

    At some point mounting huge lenses out front of the x1d makes sense only in a studio scenario where there is a tripod etc... however in that situation size doesn't really matter anyway, as you will likely be tethered to a tripod to get maximum benefit anyway, especially without IBIS. If it is only for studio or to use the larger, faster medium format glass then give me a 645z or H6d50 studio camera with optical viewfinder, phase detection, weather sealing, etc.... and please, please, please camera manufacturers do not go the way of touch menu interfaces without considering the many of us who shoot in cold environments -20 -> -30 where you need to wear gloves in the winter! Physical tactile buttons that do not necessitate menu diving or gloveless operation is a must in addition to touch screens :)

    To make the x1d portable for out in the field usage, the x1d's native lens speed for native glass has necessitated a sacrifice for the sake of balance and size. 50mp is a very high resolution, however I don't think it would be significantly appreciable over say a 42mp a7rii with IBIS and fast glass out front. Battery drain for a larger sensor will also be interesting.

    I'll probably eat my words in a year or two - I tend to do that! But right now, I couldn't see any reason to pick this up over a 645z if you want a medium format camera.
     
  13. MAubrey

    MAubrey TalkEmount Top Veteran

    Unless you move all the way to 5x7 sheet film or are willing to spend an absurd amount of money on lenses for 4x5, there really aren't any creative advantages of MF at all. The fastest MF lenses are the 6x45 Mamiya 80mm f/1.9 (50mm f/1.1) and Zeiss 80mm f/2 (50mm f/1.2) and the 6x6 Zeiss 110mm f/2 (55mm f/1).

    At 4x5 there are only a handful of rare or expensive lenses that get you faster than f/1-equivalent, you need to be faster than f/3.5 (=f/1 for 35mm).

    So really, like you said, Tom, it's really all about 16bit and resolution.
     
    Last edited: Jun 28, 2016
  14. robbie36

    robbie36 TalkEmount Veteran

    484
    Nov 21, 2014
    I think a lot of people who buy this camera may well do so because of the leaf shutter lenses which can x-sync flash up to 1/2000th of a second. A combination of the x sync and small mf body gives you a camera and lighting set up outdoors that would be smaller than a full frame camera. For instance to shoot the A7rii in HSS at 1/2000 you need a flash 3 stops more powerful than the X1D (all other things being equal).
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  15. MAubrey

    MAubrey TalkEmount Top Veteran

    It's why an RX1rII is only my wish list for some point in the future!
     
  16. addieleman

    addieleman Passionate amateur

    Nov 13, 2012
    Netherlands
    Ad Dieleman
    I can see one reason: sensor-based focussing, which is the reason I firmly stay put in the mirrorless world. You'd have to drag me kicking and screaming to a DSLR with its focussing inaccuracies and inconsistenties.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  17. tomO2013

    tomO2013 TalkEmount Veteran

    375
    Dec 11, 2014
    That's an interesting point Ad.
    However , the hassleblad is not shipping with PDAF on sensor. Effectively it is contrast detect only and the only contrast detect only AF system that provides fast accurate real world performance is the Panasonic DFD or Olympus EM5/EM10 which have the benefit of smaller lenses (quicker to shift lighter glass) as well as additional DOF advantage for focusing. The Leica SL does ok focusing wide open with fast glass, however in low light and still leveraging Panasonic's DFD technology, the Leica forums suggest that it is neither accurate nor precise.

    The other thing to consider is the difference between precision and accuracy particularly with respect to focus shift on lenses that have an aggressive emphasis on lens size optimization. This looks to impact mirrorless more than DSLR's - possibly due to side effects of aggressive lens size/quality optimization?
    Jim Kasson had an interesting article stating that the Sony FE system is not immune to focus shift (perhaps more so) which presents to end users as front/back focus in actual output.
    The latest Sony A7rii on firmware 3.1 in his testing showed considerable shift with modern high quality lenses such as the Batis, FE90. I can attest that I have seen this phenomenon particularly on the A7rii with 24-70F4 , 70-200 F4, 55mm shooting at F8.
    I'm not saying that the DSLR is better and is not impacted by focus shift. The DSLR presents different focus challenges and certainly requires initial calibration which can be a headache, however DSLR's typically make extensive use of lookup tables so for first party native lenses focus shift should not be as big of an issue. Why the Sony does not look to utilize LUT's for lenses that are stopped down is baffling. One of the moderators over at dpreview was looking into this.
    Many traditional DSLR's are not as impacted as they focus wide open, stop down, take another reading, check look up table offsets and drive focus to a position - the key is for initial acquisition accuracy and precision which necessitates FocusTune or some other focus tuning mechanism. In practical terms, I've found most properly calibrated DSLR's to be as accurate as mirrorless and more precise from a moving subject perspective. From recent exposure to a D5, I'd argue that I've never experienced AF as accurate on any camera.
    Don't misunderstand me, I LOVE the EVF and mirrorless and there are many times I prefer an EVF over an OVF. A 645z or H6d50 would still provide live view manual focus tuning for studio work - best of both worlds?

    @robbie36@robbie36 : shutter sync speed is a fair point. Consider that cactus V6ii were announced yesterday supporting HSS and cross brand off camera compatible flash.
    Godox do a nice series V860ii and AD360ii for canon or Nikon that could in theory now be used with your A7rii for even higher sync speeds than 1/2000 and greater power output. For the price differential you can be very creative!
     
  18. WestOkid

    WestOkid TalkEmount All-Pro

    Jan 25, 2014
    New Jersey, USA
    Gary
    I don't think that Ad was referring to lens focus shift. I think we all agree that is lens design. If I recall Jim was discussing the effect of this shift across the aperture range and how big of a shift it is on modern glass like the Batis 85mm and 90mm macro. This only matters if you focus at a different aperture than you take the shot. This is very different from the front/back focus needed for individual DSLR calibration. If you shoot with "setting effect" on the camera will focus using the chosen aperture and focus shift isn't even in play. I know some people don't like this, but it has never been a problem for me because I have always shot this way.
     
  19. tomO2013

    tomO2013 TalkEmount Veteran

    375
    Dec 11, 2014
    For sure, the root cause is very different from front back focus issues, I 100% agree. However the effect as it presents to the end user can look somewhat as if the resulting image was front focused/back focused...
    Misfocus with A7 and native lens, what gives?
    There are a few other threads here with similar opinions. I have to also say that this can vary wildly depending on glass.
    My buddy had a copy of the 24-70 which was brutal if you stopped down past 5.6. My own copy wasn't so bad.
    The intention isn't to rail on mirrorless, I feel it provides a valuable workaround in DMF mode for glass that you need absolute precision.
    Maybe the lack of shallow DOF in native lenses will allow hassleblad to focus quick in CDAF only mode...
     
  20. addieleman

    addieleman Passionate amateur

    Nov 13, 2012
    Netherlands
    Ad Dieleman
    • The points about AF speed are probably valid, I have little experience with that because I usually shoot static objects. One of my big frustrations at the time was that I could do an AF fine-tune on the Nikon D300s but that wouldn't be appropriate for all focal length of the zoom lenses. I imagine that there's been progress in the DSLR field as well since I left it in 2008, possibly improving on focus consistency but I heard someone mention that the same problem was still there with a top-flight DSLR (was it Kai on DigitalRev about the D500? Not sure). Anyway, I have zero desire to explore the DSLR field once again.
    • What I love about mirrorless is that I can focus as precisely as I want to, with MF in magnified view as needed, in a viewfinder and on a display. The added bonus is the accurate AF that the A7R2 offers which is great. The consistency improvement over the A7's autofocus is very significant in my experience with the FE 4/16-35 and FE 4/24-70; the FE 4/70-200 is always spot-on on both the A7 and A7R2. My post that @tomO2013@tomO2013 refers to, is about the A7's AF inconsistencies. I fully understand that someone to whom AF performance is essential, will judge cameras very differently from what I do.
    • The effects of focus shift can be nasty indeed, depending very much on lens characteristics and the implementation of the focussing process in the camera/lens combo. As @WestOkid@WestOkid says, switching Live View Settings to ON makes the A7 focus at shooting aperture which does away with focus shift effects at the expense of slower focussing. The A7R2 behaves very differently in this respect: Live View Display doesn't impact the aperture used for focussing from firmware V3.1 onwards. With the 3 native F4 zooms the camera focusses at shooting aperture up to around a fairly small aperture (f/8 for the 24-70) and staying there when stopping down further; with the FE 2.8/35 the A7R2 focusses wide-open no matter what, you have to switch to MF and Live View Display ON to focus at shooting aperture. A number of others on dpreview noted this behaviour as well. It looks like Sony optimizes the process for the specific lenses. I have tested if focus shift is a problem with the FE 2.8/35mm and that opened a box of Pandora where the effects of focus shift, decentering and field curvature at various distances make up a complex mix. I'll save you the details, in the end the lens does what I need it for and not every defect in a 42 MP raw file is an immediate problem.
    I hope this is a unintentional typo. :D
     
    • Informative Informative x 1