New Hasselblad Mirrorless - 50MP, 44x33mm sensor
Discussion
http://resourcemagonline.com/2016/06/sample-images...
This looks pretty mega, almost the same size as Sony A7RII, but with a big 50mp sensor and a range of new hasselblad lenses.
This looks pretty mega, almost the same size as Sony A7RII, but with a big 50mp sensor and a range of new hasselblad lenses.
singlecoil said:
There's 35mm cameras that can do 50MP, with a huge choice of lenses including many fast ones. Does a larger sensor offer much advantage if there's no more pixels?
You bet. There are camera phones with 20mp... they are crap. Size + pixels create quality, not just pixels.ETA from WIKI
The main disadvantage of a smaller sensor, with a pixel count that matches a larger sensor, is the reduction in incoming light hitting the light sensitive part of each pixel of the sensor. This is true even if the Four Thirds camera and lens are properly designed to focus all captured light onto the smaller light circle circumscribing the smaller sensor. The reason is that a smaller pixel has a proportionately smaller light sensitive area because the pixel loses a larger proportion of its total area to secondary circuitry and edge shading than a larger pixel. With less captured light to work with each pixel output voltage requires additional amplification with associated higher signal noise, resulting in increased chromatic and color noise as well as reduced dynamic range. A telecentric lens design helps reduce this problem but still leaves a smaller sensor, with smaller pixels, more sensitive to the angle of incoming light, among other things producing a more pronounced image corner light fall off.
Edited by GetCarter on Friday 24th June 09:10
It depends.
The last really big jump we had was the D810, which offered more pixels and more dynamic range whilst keeping high iso performance.
The Canon 5DR was very disapointing, it was basically a crop sensor scaled up to 35mm size and didn't offer any more DR or iso performance, and it also ran into the limits of most canon lenses in the corners, so you are not really getting the full 50mpix promised performance.
The next big hope the Sony 42mpix backlit sensor was also not a big jump, it was better at very high iso's where it looked like crap already, but didn't offer much more.
So this showed that we are basically very near the limits of current sensor tech, and improvements are likely to be a few percentage points improved over the next few years.
So this *could* be the next big jump, taking current tech and instead increasing pixel size - it may offer 50mpix sharp corner to corner, with greater dynamic range, and better colour. As the lenses are leaf shutter it should also sync to studio flashes better than DLSR's High speed sync.
So this could be the ultimate studio tool/landscape camera. And as its mirrorless its just as portable/handholdable as the current DSLRs.
The last really big jump we had was the D810, which offered more pixels and more dynamic range whilst keeping high iso performance.
The Canon 5DR was very disapointing, it was basically a crop sensor scaled up to 35mm size and didn't offer any more DR or iso performance, and it also ran into the limits of most canon lenses in the corners, so you are not really getting the full 50mpix promised performance.
The next big hope the Sony 42mpix backlit sensor was also not a big jump, it was better at very high iso's where it looked like crap already, but didn't offer much more.
So this showed that we are basically very near the limits of current sensor tech, and improvements are likely to be a few percentage points improved over the next few years.
So this *could* be the next big jump, taking current tech and instead increasing pixel size - it may offer 50mpix sharp corner to corner, with greater dynamic range, and better colour. As the lenses are leaf shutter it should also sync to studio flashes better than DLSR's High speed sync.
So this could be the ultimate studio tool/landscape camera. And as its mirrorless its just as portable/handholdable as the current DSLRs.
Honestly , I found the 5Ds and 5Dsr to be amazing cameras.
Used with good lenses you can easily get massive resolution out of them, and I use an a7r/36mp most days.
Dynamic range is always worthwhile but you can work round limitations and I still have to do that with the sony too.
Dont buy into the cool aid, I love the 5dsr, just not going to pay for one at the moment. I cna shoot 3 shots and stitch with a 6d for the same file size/detail for 95% of possible shots.
Used with good lenses you can easily get massive resolution out of them, and I use an a7r/36mp most days.
Dynamic range is always worthwhile but you can work round limitations and I still have to do that with the sony too.
Dont buy into the cool aid, I love the 5dsr, just not going to pay for one at the moment. I cna shoot 3 shots and stitch with a 6d for the same file size/detail for 95% of possible shots.
Presumably DJI's investment in Hasselblad was encouraged by the idea of a relatively small MF format device (that would have no need of an optical finder) hanging under their drones?
I would imagine Hblad will need to sell a lot of these sets to make things pay.
Did I read correctly somewhere that it is a Sony sensor - as are most these days?
I would imagine Hblad will need to sell a lot of these sets to make things pay.
Did I read correctly somewhere that it is a Sony sensor - as are most these days?
RobDickinson said:
LongQ said:
Did I read correctly somewhere that it is a Sony sensor - as are most these days?
Sony make all the MF CMOS sensors at the moment.Kodak makes the CCD ones in the others afik
This report from the BBC a few weeks back:-
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-36598977
====
"Hasselblad is the closest to film I've come on any digital camera I've tried," said Jessica Klingelfuss from Wallpaper magazine, who has had hands-on time with a prototype X1D.
"The colours and tones of light are rendered differently. There's kind of a creaminess, a softness - things can look more dreamy."
====
Also described as "filmic".
oh wow more MF utter b
ks! So much they spout is so much bullst with mf gear..
The sony sensor is pretty much 1.7 d810 sensors glued together, though it probably has stronger filters in front of it and a lower base ISO (not dialled in as much for higher iso noise).
its going to be a decent system but the lenses will be big or slow, 2.8 is pretty fast for MF given thats 2 stops off 35mm system primes...
ks! So much they spout is so much bullst with mf gear..The sony sensor is pretty much 1.7 d810 sensors glued together, though it probably has stronger filters in front of it and a lower base ISO (not dialled in as much for higher iso noise).
its going to be a decent system but the lenses will be big or slow, 2.8 is pretty fast for MF given thats 2 stops off 35mm system primes...
singlecoil said:
There's 35mm cameras that can do 50MP, with a huge choice of lenses including many fast ones. Does a larger sensor offer much advantage if there's no more pixels?
Yes, it does. The size of the pixels has a huge impact. The effective limit of a 35mm sensor is about 35MP, after which there is no noticeable increase in quality. In addition, the properties of lenses change when you have a larger sensor/negative. Your depth of field reduces and the lens will tend not to be as fast.
Try looking for an F2 medium format lens - they have huge pieces of glass and when fully open the depth of field can be one inch. That is the difference between someone's eyes and their nose.
RobDickinson said:
oh wow more MF utter bks! So much they spout is so much bullst with mf gear..
The sony sensor is pretty much 1.7 d810 sensors glued together, though it probably has stronger filters in front of it and a lower base ISO (not dialled in as much for higher iso noise).
its going to be a decent system but the lenses will be big or slow, 2.8 is pretty fast for MF given thats 2 stops off 35mm system primes...
Have you ever used a medium format camera?ks! So much they spout is so much bullst with mf gear..The sony sensor is pretty much 1.7 d810 sensors glued together, though it probably has stronger filters in front of it and a lower base ISO (not dialled in as much for higher iso noise).
its going to be a decent system but the lenses will be big or slow, 2.8 is pretty fast for MF given thats 2 stops off 35mm system primes...
I use a Hasselblad H and really cannot get on with our Nikon D200. There is something magic and undefinable about the way certainly the H has been designed and operates - just as you expect and never gets in the way.
I cannot comment on the new camera here. But, personally, I have great reservations about not having a proper optical viewfinder.
Simpo Two said:
gck303 said:
I use a Hasselblad H and really cannot get on with our Nikon D200.
Different horse on a different course.Fair enough, they are different markets. But, which one would I give up? The Nikon in a heartbeat.
gck303 said:
Simpo Two said:
gck303 said:
I use a Hasselblad H and really cannot get on with our Nikon D200.
Different horse on a different course.Fair enough, they are different markets. But, which one would I give up? The Nikon in a heartbeat.
Gassing Station | Photography & Video | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff