« Hard Day in the UK (OT) | Main | Cameron's Folly and Other News of the Morning After »

Thursday, 23 June 2016


Something I've been noticing on mirrorless bodies shows in that photo—look where the focal-plane mark is on the side there! Less than half-way into the depth. Which makes sense of course, but it's so different from SLRs.

Very nice! Out of my budget, but I'm sure it's going an awesome tool for a lot of photographers/studios. I know it's economic to use an existing sensor, but my fantastically unreasonable mind would have loved to see an actual 2 1/4" square sensor!*

I've also never understood why more mainstream digital cameras do not implement 16 bit ADC and RAW workflows. I'll always trade dynamic range over resolution any day of the week.

* I hesitate to use the phrase "full frame" as isn't every sensor full frame for it's given format size? I must of missed the memo where the 35mm stills film frame dimensions became the gold standard, definitive reference.

I wonder why they don't offer a standard lens (50mm equivalent ). Not that I can currently afford one, but it is one deal breaker for me. The other is a square mask. Let's hope this is the start of some fantastic new Mirrorless options.

I recommend reading Kirk Tuck's take on this:

Now THAT'S what I'm talkin' about...!!!

I was originally disappointed that this isn't using the 53mm X 40mm sensor used in some of the other Hasselblads, and is acquiescing to that 44mm X 33mm chip; BUT, unlike the Pentax, it's supposed to have 16 bit color, so I'm mollified.

When I saw a video of it in action, I gave up and want to sell everything to get one! Now someone is thinking correctly via size and ergonomics.

As an exercise in rationalization; I found a web site where you can check how much something cost in the past extrapolated for modern money, and was interested to know that the 1500 dollars each I spent on the my Hasselblad 150mm and 50mm in 1985, would use up about 3300 dollars today! Both the lenses built for this are under 2900 dollars, so there's a win right there! Of course, I only paid about 500 bucks for the body back in 1985; and I don't even know a professional photographer today that is grossing what I was grossing in 1985, much less extrapolated for 2016!

It's not that the equipment is more money than the past, it's that it's a greater percentage of profit and harder to afford!

I've never used MF. I can see what the interest was in the film era, but I really can't see the objective advantage of this camera over a Canon 5Ds, even without taking into account the huge range of available lenses for the latter. There is the high speed flash sync, yes, but that's a niche interest to justify twice the price.
Emotional interest, in terms of it having a famous name, being beautifully made, yes I can see it. Can we call it man jewellery?

Looks interesting but 50 mp is a lot more than most people need and the sensor size seems not that big compared to FF, so factor in a new more powerful computer and fast large SD cards.

Now you're talking! With the 35mm-e and that huge sensor giving the ability to crop, this would make a great walk around camera. If it was only a little smaller so I could put it in my jeans.
Seriously, this demonstrates just how bloated conventional dslrs are, and what Canikon could do if they put their minds to it. Way to go Hasselblad!

Great quick review Mike. I sort of liked this thing you used (35mm-e) in the lens description. Is it a TOPism or did you see it somewhere and use it ?

GAS Attack!

This is (or will be) really cool. And it proves that a camera with a large sensor does not need to be a big ponderous clunky thing (DSLR manufacturers: hint hint). One wish: if the screen flipped up, you could hold it at waist level like a modern-day Rolleiflex, especially if you set it to 1:1 ratio.

This is the closest thing we have at the moment to a digital Mamiya 7...Even the "standard" lens (the 45mm f/3.5) is close enough to the FOV and aperture of the Mamiya's two standard-ish lens (80mm and 65mm, both f/4). Not to mention a leaf shutter!

Praise to the engineers and designers who have confidence in simple camera controls and faith in the photographers to make the very most of them.

I can see this new line of cameras becoming quite popular among well-heeled or professional documentary photographs of a certain breed, many of which I know use or have used the Hasselblad H series and Leica S series extensively.

I had felt (thought) that the point of mirror less was for small compact portable camera's. Do we need those features in a MF camera?

Hasselblad lost a lot of us when they went digital and downsized to 645. Now they are going smaller.
What is wrong with these guys that they can't make a 6x6 square digital back?

Hi Mike,
Like you, I'm pretty insulated from the appeal of this one due to price. But I'm really encouraged by the presence of a 4:3 ratio sensor. I've always thought if someone made a full-frame mirrorless camera with a 4:3 ratio I'd have to give it serious consideration.(That's a 36x27 sensor.) I like that ratio, I get a little more wideness to work with when cropping to a square, and it opens up potential lens adaptation choices a bit. It also helps distinguish full frame from APS-C a little more by those measures, particularly from the every so slightly smaller Canon sensors.

I'm also hoping that Fuji borrows the same sensor, and makes a fixed lens rangefinder with a leaf shutter from it, in the tradition of their great 6x7 folders, or even better yet, a leaf-shuttered TLR-alike.

And yes, for the record, I'm disappointed that there are no superfast lenses on the horizon for extra-special-double-shallow depth of field for such a big sensor ;) Can't have everything, I guess.*

*Is ending a sentence with an emoticon an acceptable adaptation? Or should I have re-written that sentence for a full stop?

Yes, a very interesting camera that will probably sell well (comparatively speaking), but missing some stuff that would have made it better: several buttons, an articulating screen, and IBIS----apparently left off so as not to degrade IQ, which I don't buy at all, given that its reduced size invites off-tripod shooting.

I still prefer my 645Z, even with the size/bulk and weight, which I've gotten used to. What I mainly hope is that this is the first of several of these, from other manufacturers.

Real cameras aren't dead after all.

Is it me or is that shockingly inexpensive for what amounts to a medium format back with a lens mount, and more? And one that's hand built in Sweden, no less (where labor isn't cheap, as far as I know). I would have expected them to aim somewhere midway between Pentax and Leica. Or will the chimney finder add another $8K? It's not a true Hassy without one.

The body of this camera reminds me of a Hassy SWC without its film back. +1 to them for keeping the name alive with an original design. Didn't you link to a photo essay a while ago showing the empty Hasselblad factory in Sweden?

Would love to see a 55mm f2 for this, which should be in DOF terms equivalent to the 80mm f2.8 on my old 500cm. IMO this comes closer to being a true successor to the 500 series cameras than any of the H series stuff they've made, film or digital. I can't help but wonder if there will be a Fuji version of this after some kind of embargo, and perhaps they're making the lenses, the two have a history of partnership in the past. As a Hasselblad lover glad to see them making an actual and innovative camera and not just wasting their well deserved brand equity on the worst kind of pointless luxury products. Phase One better step up their game.

To supplement my previous post. Don't know where this Thein fellow got his info, but I asked Hasselblad, and what they told me basically boils down to "Sorry mate, no cigar. Want our camera, use our lenses".

(this was re the electronic shutter. Don't know about the 3re party adapters, though there will be Hasselblad's own adapter with built in shutter, so I guess everything's possible)

*3rd :-)

Good for Hassy! It's a strangely attractive body design, kinda like a smashed 500c body, eh?

I'll be eager to take it for a drive but I seriously doubt it will displace my existing digital mf system (into which I'm deeply invested). But if I was a working pro who used mf every day this might seem a fabulous opportunity to have an affordable 2-body kit.

Of course we've yet to see/hear how this X1D performs.

Just a thing about "hand made in Sweden." The pieces will pop out of a CNC machine which costs the same to run anywhere. the assembly will then possibly be done by hand using jigs that ensure everything lines up perfectly... or some might be done by robots. The workers who do the remaining tasks will likely not be paid much differently if they were in Japan or Sweden: minimum rates in Japan are around US$7-9/hr in Japan, there is no general minimum in Sweden.
Do people really still cling to the idea that Japan is a cheap place to manufacture?

Hasselblad CEO Perry Oosting states in the X1D's intro video here , Nittoh (formerly “Nitto Kogaku K.K.”) is making the lenses. He states in the video and in the official press release here , the X1D body is handmade in Sweden. No need to piss them off again. :=)

It's a nice example of neat industrial design, though I prefer more knobs to a touch screen...

But the camera-size/sensor-size ratio must be about the best yet achieved in the camera market.

The comments to this entry are closed.