Go Back   Rangefinderforum.com > Cameras / Gear / Photography > Classic Film RangeFinders & Other Classics > SLRs - the unRF

SLRs - the unRF For those of you who must talk about SLRs, if only to confirm they are not RF.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes

YUM! Hassy 100MP Camera!
Old 04-14-2016   #1
CameraQuest
Head Bartender
 
CameraQuest is offline
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: over the hills from Malibu
Posts: 5,686
YUM! Hassy 100MP Camera!

Wonderful, a 100MP Hassy camera just introduced

How long until we get to 500MP or 1000MP or ??

How long until Sony or Canon or Nikon bests 100MP ?

We have a horse race, even if its not all that needed.
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-14-2016   #2
mfogiel
Registered User
 
mfogiel's Avatar
 
mfogiel is offline
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Monaco
Posts: 4,658
I want to see a Hassy V compatible 6x6 mono back good enough to get at least the resolution of my CS9000 from a medium format negative, then the race can stop... In terms of pixels, they are there already, but the sensor is not square.
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-14-2016   #3
Spanik
Registered User
 
Spanik is offline
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 1,425
Even then a 6x9 back would be nicer. And then someone will want a 4x5 one....
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-14-2016   #4
YYV_146
Registered User
 
YYV_146's Avatar
 
YYV_146 is offline
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Durham, NC
Age: 32
Posts: 1,297
The serious answer is that at 500MP and 56*41mm diffraction is going to kick in at before f4. Sensor pitch should still be fine (similar to 1-inch sensors today) but lens designs and DOF will be limited. I don't see too much of a point going there.

Canon has a 120MP FF sensor (I think?) in the works - which is probably pushing things pretty far. I doubt we'd see much more than that for 135.

But yes, a digital 6x6 will be intriguing...
__________________
Victor is too lazy for DSLRs

Sony A7rII Kolari mod

Noctilux ASPH, 35lux FLE, 50 APO ASPH, 75 APO cron, 21lux, Sony/Minolta 135mm STF

500px
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-14-2016   #5
Jamie Pillers
Skeptic
 
Jamie Pillers's Avatar
 
Jamie Pillers is offline
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Oakland, California
Posts: 4,014
I see there's also a 50Mp version. That must be the half-frame version.
__________________
Talk to a stranger today!

Fuji X-H1; X-Pro1; XF10; Polaroid 250 (waiting for an 'art' project)

Flickr: https://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-14-2016   #6
Corran
Registered User
 
Corran is offline
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: USA
Posts: 1,279
Quote:
Originally Posted by mfogiel View Post
I want to see a Hassy V compatible 6x6 mono back good enough to get at least the resolution of my CS9000 from a medium format negative, then the race can stop... In terms of pixels, they are there already, but the sensor is not square.
Pretty much any FF DSLR and a half-decent lens cropped square already exceeds what you could get from the 9000 and most 6x6 negatives.

With perhaps Pan F+ or similar, perfect technique, and a good drum scan, you might get the opposite result.

I invite anyone who disagrees to test it for themselves.
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-14-2016   #7
Huss
Registered User
 
Huss is offline
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Venice, CA
Posts: 7,257
Seeing that a Nokia smart phone is already offered with over 40mp camera sensor, I find this Hasselblad offering disappointing.
Sure the Nokia has about half the resolution, but I can swipe right with it.
Try and do that with a Hasselblad.
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-14-2016   #8
PhotoMat
Registered User
 
PhotoMat's Avatar
 
PhotoMat is offline
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 520
I'd have to trade in my MacBook for a Cray to process the files.
__________________
www.natural-light.com
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-14-2016   #9
icebear
Registered User
 
icebear's Avatar
 
icebear is offline
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: just west of the big apple
Posts: 2,972
Phase One launched their 100MP camera in January ... so indeed what's next?
__________________
Klaus
You have to see the light.
M9, MM & a bunch of glass, Q

my gallery:http://www.rangefinderforum.com/rffg...d=6650&showall
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-14-2016   #10
FrozenInTime
Registered User
 
FrozenInTime's Avatar
 
FrozenInTime is offline
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Here and there
Posts: 1,740
I lost faith in Hasselblad as they slowly let 6x6 and the V series die.
A retro square sensor camera aimed at the prosumer market might work well for them.
__________________
It's the weird colour scheme that freaks me. Every time you try to operate one of these weird black controls, which are labeled in black on a black background, a small black light lights up black to let you know you've done it.
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-14-2016   #11
Keith
On leave from Gallifrey
 
Keith's Avatar
 
Keith is offline
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 18,555
The original Nikon DSLR was a couple of megapixels and cost twenty grand or something stupid from memory. This is 100 megapixels and costs about fifteen grand more than that Nikon.

Bargain!
__________________
---------------------------
flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-14-2016   #12
sc_rufctr
Leica nuts
 
sc_rufctr is offline
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Australia
Age: 54
Posts: 1,202
Did you look at the larger version of the samples? Well worth the time. (33.8 MB)

Gorgeous and I want one already.
__________________
Peter

Adelaide, South Australia
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-15-2016   #13
mfogiel
Registered User
 
mfogiel's Avatar
 
mfogiel is offline
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Monaco
Posts: 4,658
@Corran
I get roughly a 9000x9000 pixels scan from a 6x6 frame, and in terms of optical resolution we are not much different. Where is this DSLR sensor that has 9000 pixels on the short side?
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-15-2016   #14
k__43
Registered Film User
 
k__43's Avatar
 
k__43 is offline
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 947
square sensor!! I'm in
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-15-2016   #15
Benjamin Marks
Registered User
 
Benjamin Marks is offline
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Vermont
Posts: 2,651
Quote:
Originally Posted by Corran View Post
Pretty much any FF DSLR and a half-decent lens cropped square already exceeds what you could get from the 9000 and most 6x6 negatives.

With perhaps Pan F+ or similar, perfect technique, and a good drum scan, you might get the opposite result.

I invite anyone who disagrees to test it for themselves.
Heh. Heh. Yes, "exceeds" . . . but can you do anything with the extra pixels? I feel like you have to be a card-carrying member of the "60-foot long L.A. Billboard Photographers' Club" to need this. Still, Hassy must have identified some market segment that was clamoring for images this size. Maybe they want to laser-etch images on the surface of the Moon . . .
__________________
Benjamin’s Gallery
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-15-2016   #16
Bill Clark
Registered User
 
Bill Clark's Avatar
 
Bill Clark is offline
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Minnetonka, Minnesota
Age: 71
Posts: 2,504
Hasselblad used to have a full page ad on the back cover of quite a few issues of Shutterbug.

Why did they quit?

For the vast majority of pros, Canon, Nikon and a few others have taken their business.

Maybe they want this for folks who can afford a Bentley.

Not many units sold but expensive.

Sorry, I'll pass on both.
__________________
I make photographs as a return ticket to a moment otherwise gone.
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-15-2016   #17
Rob-F
Likes Leicas
 
Rob-F's Avatar
 
Rob-F is offline
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: The Show Me state
Age: 78
Posts: 5,899
Quote:
Originally Posted by PhotoMat View Post
I'd have to trade in my MacBook for a Cray to process the files.
Yes that occurred to me too. I don't think I could store very many 100MP shots on my iMac hard drive. And I don't know what I would do with such a large file, either. Maybe produce 12 foot by 12 foot murals for Grand Central terminal. But no one has asked me to do that.

It might be good for arial reconnaissance work. Although with Google maps, I'm not sure if they do that any more.
__________________
May the light be with you.
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-15-2016   #18
Corran
Registered User
 
Corran is offline
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: USA
Posts: 1,279
Quote:
Originally Posted by mfogiel View Post
@Corran
I get roughly a 9000x9000 pixels scan from a 6x6 frame, and in terms of optical resolution we are not much different. Where is this DSLR sensor that has 9000 pixels on the short side?
Pixels ≠ resolution. I highly recommend you borrow or rent, say, a D800, and do a simple test. I have, and it was enlightening. I still shoot film for other reasons.
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-15-2016   #19
mfogiel
Registered User
 
mfogiel's Avatar
 
mfogiel is offline
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Monaco
Posts: 4,658
^^^ Well, I'm using Nikon CS 9000, and it resolves 3800 ppi, that still makes 8550 pixels on the short end, so unless your D800, which has 4900 pixels on the short end, uses a lens with an MTF=1,75, i.e. outresolves itself almost twice, this can't be done.
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-15-2016   #20
raid
Dad Photographer
 
raid's Avatar
 
raid is online now
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Florida
Posts: 30,370
If I were a professional photographer with lots of paying clients who want me to produce images that require a 100MP camera, then I would maybe buy such a camera. It would be for the profession.

As an amateur, I would need some cash to burn to get this camera.
__________________
- Raid

________________
Top 12 Images;

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/rffg...n.php?cid=7007

http://raid.smugmug.com/
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-15-2016   #21
13Promet
Registered User
 
13Promet's Avatar
 
13Promet is offline
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: Milano - Italy
Age: 47
Posts: 318
Quote:
Originally Posted by mfogiel View Post
^^^ Well, I'm using Nikon CS 9000, and it resolves 3800 ppi, that still makes 8550 pixels on the short end, so unless your D800, which has 4900 pixels on the short end, uses a lens with an MTF=1,75, i.e. outresolves itself almost twice, this can't be done.
According to my real life experience, those figures don't tell the whole truth.

I own and use an LS4000 for scanning, i.e. same resolution of your CS9000.
If I compare such scans with the 35mm film digitalizations which I perform by using a Fuji X-E2 and a Nikkor 60 AF-D, the latter definitely resolves more details.
In the edges/cornrers such difference gets dramatic.

In this case I'm comparing 5650 pixels of the LS4000 (@4000 dpi) on the long side to the 4900 from the Fuji, so of course less of a gap than your example.
Still, it says something I guess.

I'm not sure whether it depends on the lens sharpness, its DoF, aberrations, film flatness, focus accuracy, sensor quality or whatever, but the actual resolution difference in favour of the less Mpx solution is definitely there.

Unfortunately, film scanner technology hasn't moved nearly as much as digital camera sensors.
In fact, both you and I are using 10 years old scanners.
And I guess that an actual camera lens is not comparable with the tiny one you can find in our scanners.

And of course I'm referring to digitalization of film.
I expect that shooting the same exact pic with a 90mm lens on 100 ASA film then scanning it would result in even more actual resolution difference in favour of the equivalent natively digital solution (X-E2 + Nikon 60mm) due to the additional conversion step from the former solution.


This said, I keep shooting film and scanning because I like it more and don't need zillion of pixels in my files
__________________
The perfect traveller does not know his destination (Lao Tsu)

www.alessandrosaponaro.com

Instagram: a.saponaro.photography
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-15-2016   #22
Corran
Registered User
 
Corran is offline
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: USA
Posts: 1,279
Quote:
Originally Posted by mfogiel View Post
^^^ Well, I'm using Nikon CS 9000, and it resolves 3800 ppi, that still makes 8550 pixels on the short end, so unless your D800, which has 4900 pixels on the short end, uses a lens with an MTF=1,75, i.e. outresolves itself almost twice, this can't be done.
Again, pixels ≠ resolution.

Look, I've done the tests. My LS-8000 and 6x7 negatives could barely hold up to my 12mp D700. There's all kinds of technical gobbledygook with regard to pixels vs. film dye clouds / grain, SNR, etc. that is pointless to explain (not to mention the vast difference between say T-Max 100 and Tri-X, regardless of optical resolution) when you can just take a few photos and test it yourself. Your LS-9000 and most any film isn't outresolving a 24mp or higher camera, I guarantee it. But if you don't want to believe me, that's fine, just do the tests, that's all I can say.

By the way, I currently have a scanner that resolves closer to 5400 DPI optical, and I still say the above.
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-15-2016   #23
KM-25
Registered User
 
KM-25's Avatar
 
KM-25 is offline
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 1,669
First off, I own and use a big Hasselblad V system, including the fabulous CFV50C back for the V system bodies that is 50MP and 1.3 crop. I have no problem with the crop because frankly, not every lens is up to the task of even that sensor.

So all this throwing legendary Hasselblad under the bus for not coming up with a full frame 6x6 sensor is really silly. I mean...I want, I want and I want is what I hear but no one realizes just how much more expensive it is to produce large sensors with a low failure rate....the R&D required for this alone is astronomical.

Secondly, more pros than one may realize use MF digital for all the reasons a pro would use medium or large format VS 35mm. Bigger files to work from, more nuanced tonality, etc. I realize this is lost on the mainstream wedding and portrait crowd since most don't make a very good living but that does not mean high end pros can't and won't pony up for cutting edge tech that helps move the whole ball game forward. And yes, if you give me 100MP, I will show you how my clients use that...you would be amazed.

I think it is great Hasselblad is back in the game...and they are back in the game folks. I don't use the H system because I shoot a lot of square format film but I do use my V system a lot, have a shoot in 2 hours with it actually. So paying 10-15K for a digital back for it is just a no brainer.

If the new 100MP sensor comes in the form of the next CFV back I will strongly consider it. But I will do like I did with my current back and test it for a week before committing.

I applaud them for keeping it moving forward.

By the way...the scanning tests above, what ever man, I know what I see in my film work if I scan it with my 9000ED and what I see when I stitch DSLR scan it, Tmax 100 or better is flat out incredible. So to hell with tests...photographers who make photographs don't have time for that crap.
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-15-2016   #24
Corran
Registered User
 
Corran is offline
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: USA
Posts: 1,279
I shoot more film than most anyone. I did a quick test out of curiosity - and to make sure I wasn't wrong when I say what I said. T-Max 100 is indeed incredible, I love it, and it's my favorite b&w film. My statement still held true regardless, and yes there is more to film than resolution - hence me shooting 99% film for my own usage.

But go ahead and tell us how big your client list is or whatever, therefore proving whatever you think you are proving, that's fine. I am 100% sure you have a larger client list than me and you are probably a much better commercial photographer to boot. Doesn't mean you're always right. And most every photographer in history has tested their tools, btw.
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-15-2016   #25
KM-25
Registered User
 
KM-25's Avatar
 
KM-25 is offline
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 1,669
Quote:
Originally Posted by Corran View Post
I shoot more film than most anyone. I did a quick test out of curiosity - and to make sure I wasn't wrong when I say what I said. T-Max 100 is indeed incredible, I love it, and it's my favorite b&w film. My statement still held true regardless, and yes there is more to film than resolution - hence me shooting 99% film for my own usage.

But go ahead and tell us how big your client list is or whatever, therefore proving whatever you think you are proving, that's fine. I am 100% sure you have a larger client list than me and you are probably a much better commercial photographer to boot. Doesn't mean you're always right. And most every photographer in history has tested their tools, btw.
Look...this is a thread about the new Hasselblad back. And this is a forum that loves to shoot film. So now we have the same old battle of film VS digital VS scanned film and it just gets tiresome. Last night I did a three shot stitch scan using my D810 of a 6x6 Hasselblad Tmax image for a magazine article and it has *so* much information on it that it needed a more robust scan than my 9000ED could muster. So what I see is that MF film scanned still gives a 24MP sensor a run for its money. Wet printed, no contest, it is why I prefer it.

You are the one beating the other guy over the head with your scanning tests, not me. So keep on testing sir, I am well past that and believe me, I shoot at least as much film as you do.

And what does a client list have to do with anything? Is a view from another viewpoint not welcome when you have a whole legion of the usual suspects putting down a company who's latest product they do not understand?

It goes both ways and again, it gets tiresome.

By the way, in March I paid my mentor, a legendary Magnum photographer over 3 grand to rip my recent portfolio a new one during a week long workshop so I....with 28 years in business, can up my game. So yeah, I speak from a side of the road most people seem not have any concept of. And when they do not have a concept of it or understand it, well a lot of them hurl insults at it....or worse, throw out opinions based on what they read on the internet instead of actually having real practical day to day experience with it.

But alas, that is an aspect of these lovely forums that people seem to live on and live for.
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-15-2016   #26
Corran
Registered User
 
Corran is offline
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: USA
Posts: 1,279
I'm not arguing with you Dan, with regard to complaints or whatever. It was just a comment regarding an alternative which already can do more than most can even capitalize on if insisting on digital (and I would also note that I've seen more than one person wishing for some silly digital camera when they can't seem to even make the most basic camera take a sharp shot).

I was just responding to the comments back at me. I also realize that most people don't want to be told their precious film doesn't have 3457890mp of resolution stored in there.

And I don't particularly appreciate your implication that I am just one of those photographers that does nothing but test lenses and cameras with an Air Force resolution chart. Which yes, I am aware is a thing, but that's not me. Speaking of which, your comment regarding stitching from a D810, basically proves my point that the LS-9000 isn't giving you astronomical resolution.
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-15-2016   #27
Bill Clark
Registered User
 
Bill Clark's Avatar
 
Bill Clark is offline
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Minnetonka, Minnesota
Age: 71
Posts: 2,504
Week long workshops are wonderful, especially when you can take them from your mentor. I did the same wih my mentor and coach when he was alive. It's a time to have pretty stimulating discussions. And take back wih me a more enthusiased and better photographer.

I still don't see the value in the camera back. Maybe it's just me but my eyes probably wouldn't notice any difference and, to me, that's the real test. And, for sure, my base of clients, before I retired, wouldn't notice either.
__________________
I make photographs as a return ticket to a moment otherwise gone.
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-15-2016   #28
jsrockit
Moderator
 
jsrockit's Avatar
 
jsrockit is offline
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Santiago, Chile
Age: 45
Posts: 19,746
Quote:
Originally Posted by KM-25 View Post
And yes, if you give me 100MP, I will show you how my clients use that...you would be amazed.
I don't doubt it at all, but can you tell us (me) some ways? It would be cool to know.
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-15-2016   #29
KM-25
Registered User
 
KM-25's Avatar
 
KM-25 is offline
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 1,669
Quote:
Originally Posted by Corran View Post
And I don't particularly appreciate your implication that I am just one of those photographers that does nothing but test lenses and cameras with an Air Force resolution chart. Which yes, I am aware is a thing, but that's not me. Speaking of which, your comment regarding stitching from a D810, basically proves my point that the LS-9000 isn't giving you astronomical resolution.
Relax, I am not hammering on you, OK? I know you are not a tester-bater but you are reacting in a way to make me look bad and that makes both of us look bad, right? And the last bit is not chest beating, just perspective. I’m not better than anyone, just trying to do the best I can so even though I have it quite nice at the moment, I am not satisfied with that, want to do better. And you will have to forgive me, I have had three days in a row at getting up at 4:30 AM to do shoots, I am running on fumes.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill Clark View Post
I still don't see the value in the camera back. Maybe it's just me but my eyes probably wouldn't notice any difference and, to me, that's the real test. And, for sure, my base of clients, before I retired, wouldn't notice either.
Well, the back for me just makes a lot more sense since I prefer the system and it is easy-peasy to switch between the digital back and a A-12 back. I actually shoot a lot more film now that I have this back.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jsrockit View Post
I don't doubt it at all, but can you tell us (me) some ways? It would be cool to know.
Well one way is large interactive displays for my ski area clients. I pretty much created the idea of them in this use which are huge iPad-like touch screen displays. The viewer can expand an area and get more info for recreation, dining, points of interest and historical aspects of the scene depicted. Having super high res landscape like images that have unique light or a moment that would be spoiled by stitching is very helpful here, it makes the quality of the whole experience nothing short of top notch.

I also tend to get more mural requests these days as printing technology at the commercial level has gotten really interesting in terms of materials used, lighting, etc. So again, as high res of an image as possible is often desired.

Also, 100MP may sound huge but it is actually the same pixel density as my CFV50c back if it were to be a sensor that were close to if not full frame. So if one thinks in terms of 300dpi printing, yes, it is much bigger but it is not astronomically so. I have stitched images from the CFV50c back that are 15-20 feet wide at 300dpi…that is much, much bigger than 100MP.
  Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 09:00.


vBulletin skin developed by: eXtremepixels
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

All content on this site is Copyright Protected and owned by its respective owner. You may link to content on this site but you may not reproduce any of it in whole or part without written consent from its owner.