From the BlogSubscribe Now
If you are interested in what you can gain with the X2D and (4) multi shot, take a few minutes to read this article. Very detailed image comparisons. The two images were taken at ISO1600 indoors, so no there were no subject movement concerns. The results from this photographic process can be very rewarding, however the process to get from capture to final image is a bit tedious. Here is a link to the article.
Please post any comments or feedback.
Written by Paul Caldwell for Photos of Arkansas
I have written a new comparison article showing why photographers need to consider using Phocus instead of Lightroom for the best color output from the X2D.
The Phocus image is always on the left side of the comparisons. You can find the full article here:
This is a series I am working on, to show how Phocus can still provide the overall best look to all X2D images. The downside being, you have to work with Phocus, which is by far the most out of date raw conversion software on the market. Sure it’s free to download, but I would no problem paying for a version that allows the photographer to work in much more modern interface and have a program which is much more responsive.
This post was written by Paul Caldwell on 02/10/25. Please contact him if you have any questions or would like to use the information contained in the article.
I have written about using Focus Bracketing with the X2D on my main site, www.photosofarkansas.com. You can find the article here: https://photosofarkansas.com/2025/02/03/02-03-25-focus-bracketing-example-hasselblad-x2d-and-21mm-lens/
This image was taken in the fall of 2024, with the Hasselblad 21mm and X2D. I ended up taking 14 exposures in two different focus brackets since I knew that the sky would be over exposed, if I only shot for the trees in the foreground. To create the brackets, I used Helican Focus which did an excellent job. In the Gallery below you can see some close up crops from the master image. Click on any image to load a Lightbox gallery which will allow a 100% view.
Written by Paul Caldwell
I have published my first color comparison of Lightroom and Phocus on an X2D file. The article has several side by side comparisons of the same image. You can clearly see the advantages of Phocus over Lightroom. Some of the differences are minor but in many cases, I fell that Phocus can produce a much better look to the image. You can find the article by following the link below.
I have no fondness for working with Phocus desktop software. It’s by far the worst raw conversion software I have used. This is coming from years of working with Capture One, Lightroom, ACR, ON1, and many others. Phocus produces the best color from Hasselblad HNCS but getting there has to be the most trying experience I have found in all of my digital photograph work.
Just a quick follow up on this “Wonderfull” new solution from Hasselblad. Note I am not sponsored by Hasselblad, thus I am going to net out the actual problems with this solution and not give you a blue sky, everything is great write up.
First the positive, the solution does work, and gives a very good result. From the images I have reviewed the noise reduction is very effective. It’s basically the same as Adobe’s Denoise. If you were able to work with this new tool on a desktop, then I would be most pleased.
The issues however are:
The problem is that Phocus Desktop software is not able to work with these files correctly. Phocus desktop apparently applies a certain amount of noise reduction to all raw files when they are imported into the application. I have always felt this to be the case and Hasselblad has confirmed it. So if you bring in a raw file that has HNNR applied to it, then Phocus desktop will apply more noise reduction to a file that already has had noise reduction applied. Thus you will get the painterly look to finer details. There is not a way to stop this and if you slide “noise reduction” sliders in Phocus desktop all the way to the left to -10, the effect is still there. The sliders DO NOT affect the “built in noise reduction” Phocus applied to the raw file when you imported it.
So now you are left with Adobe Lr or ACR to work on the file. Neither of these programs are applying “built in noise reduction” when you import the raw file. But now you are left with a problem. Lightroom/ACR cannot obtain the best color from Hasselblad raw files. I have worked many side by side examples of this and each time Hasselblad Phocus always give the best look to the files.
Phocus has a better color result and shadow recovery. Lightroom always seems to block out shadows and take blacks to a very dark range.
There is no word from Hasselblad as to if they are going to update Phocus so that it can use the HNNR raws without adding additional noise.
NET, Hasselblad brings a very effect AI based noise reduction tool out, however by using it you no longer can use Hasselblad’s Phocus Desktop software without over applying noise reduction, thus destroying finer details and possibly giving a plastic look to the images.
From reading other photographers reports on the use of this tool, I have gleaned a bit more information.
Issues that have apparently come up from users who have tried this feature HNNR.
Amazing to me that Phocus, which is the stock Hasselblad raw software tool for both raw conversion and tethering has issues with another Hasselblad software feature. It’s as if one side of development is working and not talking to the other. WE ALL KNOW THAT THERE IS A BETA VERSION OF THE DESKTOP PHOCUS THAT GIVES YOU 400MP OUTPUT, so I wonder if this beta is being held up due to this new feature HNNR.
From others reports, it seems that Adobe ACR and Lr will import the the 3FR files with HNNR applied with no problems, and the noise reduction IS applied still. This is unlike any other imports of .FFF files which have been worked on in Phocus desktop software and all the adjustments made in Phocus are stripped when the .FFF is imported to Lr or opened in ACR.
My only hope is that by using the mobile version of Phocus and applying HNNR, some of the issues I have had with Hot Pixel noise will be reduced or totally removed. I am hoping to try out the software over the next few days with some images I took in the fall which have excessive noise in the shadows due to hot pixels.
Not sure what “year of the Snake frame” is but besides that, Hasselblad a couple of days ago announced a new “AI” driven noise reduction feature for Phocus Mobile 2 software that runs on the iPhone. They are calling it “Hasselblad Natural Noise Reduction”. Touting that it’s the first AI noise reduction to run on Mobile. Sound great! Not so. Here is why.
So is the workflow, to bring the raw into Phocus Mobile from the camera, fix the noise then send it back to the camera? All of this being done in the field? On a phone? Using Wifi and draining battery life?
So you take 200 images in a shoot, 1/2 of them could benefit from this noise reduction. Are you going to manually import 100 image or more images into the phone, add this feature and then send the images back to the camera.
Surely no one is going to attempt to work on a 100MP file on a iPhone and do any serious work.
I see the clear advantage to the image quality, just can’t see working with Mobile to get there.
Sorry, I just don’t see any point in this. You are shooting a 100MP camera I hope for a reason. TO GET LARGE FILES THAT CAN BE USED IN PRINTED MEDIA OR OTHER LARGE FORMAT NEEDS. Are you seriously going to try to work on raw files on a iPhone, with a tiny screen, no color management, no keyboard, no ability to really see the entire image at 100%? Come on Hasselblad. Instead of working on the desktop version of Phocus and adding this feature, instead they bring it out to the iPhone. So I also assume that since it’s AI driven you have to have a mobile connection to the internet as most AI programs needs this. So working in the field this is another no go.
Personally I find this insulting. Hasselblad has a great camera in the X2D and the various lenses that you can purchase to work with the system. The camera does have an issue with noise mainly hot pixels when you are working in any ISO range from 800 and up. This comes into play when you are forced to push the exposure a bit as the camera can get very full of hot pixels. Phocus Desktop has no solution for this, forcing you to export out of focus and using a noise reduction tool like Topaz. I would much rather be removing the noise at the raw level. Lr allows this with their “Denoise” setting, however Lr doesn’t allow for the best overall color from the X2D.
Phocus is broken anyway, it’s old and slow. The interface is terrible and it’s extremely hard to work through 1 image without getting the Mac spinning wheel of death. Even with it’s current set of warts, Phocus is still the best way to get color from the X2D and it would be most fitting if Hasselblad was able to add an AI Noise reduction to the Phocus Desktop version
One of the many great bluff/overlook locations on the Buffalo National River is Red Bluff. Actually there are at least two different Red Bluffs. One is this one which is below Gilbert the other below Woolum, closer to Hwy 65.
I tried to find this spot for several years, before locating it in 2022. The spot where you actually stand to take the picture is literally right above the drop off. If you prefer to not have the old twisted Cedar tree trunk in your image, you have to be pretty brave and get to where your feet are hanging off. It pays to remember that the slope behind you is actually about 45 degrees and all loose gravel, so I do not go any lower towards the edge.
I took this shot with an Hasselblad X2D, and 21mm lens, on a tripod, and shot the image in a 3 shot exposure bracket. I have found that the X2D is very selective on exposing highlights correctly and it’s very easy to blow out skies. You do have considerable shadow push at base ISO of 64 but even so if I can, I will always shoot a bracket. The image was worked up in Phocus and then tweaking in Photoshop. As much as I hate Phocus, I have repeatedly found that it give the best color to a X2D file. Lightroom just can’t get the same look for me.
When you arrive at this location, be aware that it’s not going to allow very many photographers to be standing around so you might try to get there as early as possible and not attempt to go there on a weekend. For example, from where I was standing off to the left of center, if another person decided to come down and get below me by the tree, then they would have been in all the shots I attempted to take. This would have made post processing very difficult.
Fall in 2024 for Arkansas was another terrible year. As you can see in the image most of the color is brown. There was some nice color up by the river in many places, but when you went looking for an overlook most of the trees showed up with brown. We were lucky to get an amazing sky on this morning and it added immensely to the overall look of the shot.
Today, Hasselblad released firmware 4.0 for the X2D which included support for the new 75mm P lens, and added Multishot capability to the X2D.
At first I was enthusasitc as Multi-shot capability is a great asset for any digital camera. (see my notes below). What Hasselblad as added so far is a 4 shot mode which is supposed to allow for a better overall color capture since no colors should be interpolated due to the 4 different capture. HOWEVER, WHAT IS AMAZING, is that you can only use this feature when tethered to Phocus software. REALLY? All other cameras I know of (Nikon, Sony, Olympus, Fuji and now Canon) all offer a in camera version of their multi-shot capture mode.
You take the images in the field and then combine them later in post via the proprietary software provided by the camera company. Also you have more options that 4 shots (Fuji and Sony offer a 16 shot mode which allows for much greater overall resolution).
With Hasselblad you are tied to a laptop or desktop tethered via USB cable to the computer. This is great for studio work, but worthless for in the field. Please note, Multi-shot mode of any camera needs to have very little if any subject movement between the frames so working in the field can be limited if there is wind blowing or people walking by or cars moving by. However I have had plenty of opportunities to use Leica’s Multi-shot mode in the field and not have the images be effected by wind.
This is very short sighted by Hasselblad and instead they should have come out with a new version of Phocus that can combine in camera captures and not require the camera to be tethered at all times.
There are rumors that there is a “beta” version of Phocus in use by selected photographers, some of whom are already talking about it on YouTube, which allows for a 6 shot or more mode that gives 400MP output (similar to Fuji but they require 16 shots).
I can only hope that this “beta” version of Phocus is a vastly improved version of the software than the current 3.8.3 (for Mac) as this version basically is terrible due to performance issues. And maybe this beta version will allow you to take images in camera and import them into Phocus to be combined later on.
NOTES:
Leica has a in camera Mulit-shot mode (along with Panasonic) that takes 8 images and combines them in camera to give a 180MP output. No software is needed for the combination. The output is given both as a raw/DNG and jpg.
Nikon and Sony both now offer a Multi-shot mode, but require the photographer to take the images in camera and then combine them with proprietary software later on in post. Images can be raw.
Fuji offers a 4 and 16 Multi-shot mode. The 4 shot is designed similar I guess to what Hasselblad is offering (only effecting color) and the 16 shot mode creates a 400MP image. Camera stabilization is critical here and no movement is allowed with the subject, so the 16 shot mode is not very useable in the field.
The Pentax K1, has gotten some good and bad press lately, but one review on Dpreview over a month ago really started a negative chain reaction. This review has since been corrected, but as with many things, first impressions tend to be the most important.
I wanted to attach 3 images, from a test I was working on yesterday. Good lighting, and a bit of wind. The wind was not consistent and tended to hit different parts of my scene with more or less force. What is so impressive to me is just how bad the LR conversion is vs the one from Silkypix. If all you have is LR or ACR for the K1, you really need to look to Silkypix for now. I have no faith that Adobe will attempt to revisit their current conversion for Pixel Shift on the K1, and I base this on the fact that Adobe never has fixed their less than stellar conversion for the Fuji X-trans files. The problems with that conversion have been known about now for over 2 years.
There are three images attached, the first two are Silkypix conversions on image 724 and a follow on image 725. The third image is LR’s conversion of the same file. The point being that if you are only using LR for Pixel shift raw conversions, you are more than likely missing a lot. The LR image is totally blurred and basically worthless, where as the exact same raw file from Silkypix is very good, in fact amazing, when compare the two conversions. The other Silkypix conversion is from the next shot, 725. I included this to show how the shadow area to the left of center improves considerably. Both conversions have a bit of trouble on the same part of the file in image 724, however more than likely the Silkypix conversion of 724 would hold up.
These conversions were done only for the effect to show the differences in blur recovery. By default I feel Silkypix has too much sharpening applied and a bit too my saturation. But a small price to pay for recovery of the image. You can also see in first two files that the part of the tree just to the left of center, in the shade, is still having trouble, even with Silkypix, as it’s blurred. However I took several test files and in the very next frame you can see much more detail in this same part of the image.
So for now, if you are using pixel shift or testing it, outdoors make sure you work with Silkypix Developer’s Studio. You can download the software for a 30 free trial and it’s not inexpensive at $295.00. It’s a issue to take into consideration if you are looking at the K1 as the extra cost of this software takes the K1 into the $2,100.00 range. Still a margin compared to other cameras in this class.
I would like to see Pentax step and address this software issue, by at least giving a coupon or discount towards the full Silkypix software, as their version which ships with the camera might as well just be left out of the box.
Paul C
I have continued to be impressed with the Fuji GFX. I finally found a solution to my needs for a longer lens with the older Mamiya 200mm F 2.8 APO lens. I will be sharing more on that in the future.
What has been a bit disappointing is how some reviewers continue to spread “mis-information”about the GFX. This seems to have started with some early comments made in regards to the “inability” to not measure a Fuji GF lens for focus shift and now has moved into areas like magnified live view, and manual focus capabilities of the GFX. It also seems that many of the problems appear to be from users who have not taken the time to work with the Fuji menu system, which is very similar to the X series cameras from Fuji like the X-T2.
There have been a lot of comments on lack of quality of the Fuji Glass:
My comments are that the optics are excellent, and yes they are light weight but I am happy to have 1/4 the weight of a P1 Schneider LS lens if I can see the same optical quality, which I do with all three of the lenses I have. They are overall excellent to my findings. The 32-64 has a bit of rectinier distortion @ 32mm and on the far left side mine is a bit softer. So I can’t give that lens a 100% great overall review. But so far I have found it to interfere with any photography. The 120mm is amazing and so is the 63mm. The fact that Fuji did not use a LM on the 63mm is a BIG disappointment to me as it’s AF speed is much slower and it will hunt much more often. The AF in low light could use improvement as it will tend to hunt.
There have been a lot of comments on the issue of baked in sharpening on the Fuji Raw:
If you use non supported raw converters on the Fuji Files, which would have no way of reading anything baked in, the files appear fine and sharpen up just they do in LR. I personally don’t believe it’s possible to bake in a sharpening setting to any file but I will leave it at that. Yes, Fuji bakes in the optical corrections to the files that has always been the case with all Fuji cameras, and yes LR will see these and apply them, there do not include sharpening. Note to test this open any Fuji GFX raw which has been converted to a dng in Capture One. Even if the RAF to dng conversion by Adobe keeps the “baked”in sharpening for a raw file, Capture One would not use it period. Capture One DOES NOT support the GFX thus any form of raw sharpening would be dropped. To use a converted Fuji dng in C1 you have to totally drop both the company name and camera name so C1 will open the files with it’s information for a Phase IQ250, not a Fuji GFX.
There have been several comments on the fact that Fuji bakes in diffraction corrections to the raw:
If you use any Fuji camera and turn on “lens Optimization” yes, Fuji will bake in diffractions corrections to the jpg files. These corrections are not supported by raw converters like LR or ACR or even C1 (on the supported x-trans cameras). This has been published many times as these raw converter developers did not want to take the time to figure the algorithm that Fuji used. I have no reason to believe that for some reason, this now works on the RAW for the GFX. I have contacted Fuji US and they have told me the “Lens Optimization” only applies to jpg and “in camera raw” conversions where the Fuji optimization data can be read.
There have been many comments on the lack of ability to use Magnified Live View to manually focus:
Again, it’s possibly that users don’t have a good understanding of Fuji cameras. With Fuji you have two options for the EVF to display the file. As it is with exposure taken into account. And a more wide open max lighted view (display preview off). This 2nd option will give a fully lit view for live view display but you can easily over expose the image since you may forget to read the exposure meter on the far left. With the preview effect off, even in very low natural lighting I have no problems with manual focus in Live View.
There have been many comments on the lack of sharpness in magnified Live View:
Yes, if you zoom in all the way the details will be hard to see. Please understand if you are zoomed in all the way, you have zoomed way past a 100% view, more like 150%. This is similar to attempting to view an image on a D810 in live view with the magnification zoomed all the way in. Net you really can’t tell much. You have 3 zooming options for the Magnified live View, and I tend to use the one in the middle. If you are attempting this without peaking enabled, I believe you will have a lot more trouble determining good focus.
Also, please understand that in preview mode, if you hit the zoom button one time, the camera’s default zoom is WAYYY past a 100% view, and you can’t determine accurate focus. I no of no way currently to dial that one touch zoom down like you can with Nikon. But you can pinch the screen like with an iPhone to shrink the maxed out view back down. In my experience you need to zoom out close to 1/3 of the default view.
I can’t compare to the X1D as Hasselblad is still shipping these in a very limited amount. I also refuse to place a camera on order and then wait up to 8 months to receive it. That basically freezes a capital expenditure for my business that I can put to good use elsewhere. No doubt Hasselblad has totally failed on their ability to deliver this camera in any worthwhile amount. It’s my opinion that this will possibly have an effect on repairs also as if Hasselblad can’t even make enough cameras to cover orders from as far back as June of 2016, how can you expect to have them repair one. Also what is the current Hasselblad repair process on the X1D? Fuji has clearly stated their process of using the current US repair center and has trained current staff on the GFX system.
I just have issues with the fact that it appears that some reviews don’t understand anything about Fuji’s design, and dive in, and then start making claims that the camera is defective, when it’s clear they don’t have a full understanding of Fuji’s focus by wire setup. It’s not perfect but it works. I made a mistake on the Fuji focus by wire setup on the GFX as I assumed it worked the same as with the other X-series cameras, which is not true. With any X-series Fuji, if you are in S mode and switch to M for manual focus, you will receive the message “focus check” as many times the movement from S to M, will move the existing focus point throwing your image slightly out of focus. It is also true with an X-series camera, if you turn off the camera even with the camera in M mode, you will again be asked to “focus check” as the process of powering up the camera will cause you to lose the existing focus point. With the GFX, I have found that neither of these issues exist. You can switch from S to M and or turn off the camera and the current focus point is not lost. I have checked this out a multiple number of times.
If there is a fault for sure the way Fuji designed the neck strap lugs is a bit stupid? They make the use of any other type of strap hard to do and the lug will flip around and get in the way of the memory card door. I prefer to use the Peak Design straps.
I noticed this post in Fuji-Rumors today: Fuji Rumors and Fuji UK Sales Manager comments
On reading this post, I had to ask myself, is this the same person who told a group of UK photographers 1 week before the 02/28/17 release of the GFX that Capture One would support the GFX? A similar story was told to a group of photographers in Dubai also about 1 week before the UK Sales Manager made his comments. I had to write about this, as I feel that the situation between Fuji and Phase One (who makes Capture One) was very poorly handled.
I have to believe that Fuji was having conversations with Phase One on getting Phase to add support for the GFX in a future release of Capture One (C1). My assumptions are based on the following:
In the past Fuji has given users a scaled back version of Silkypix which is a very limited piece of software and no ability to upgrade to the full license of Silkypix for a discounted price. Now with the release of the Fuji GFX, it’s a clear fact that Phase One will not be supporting it with C1. In the past Phase has made a point of not supporting other medium format cameras as they see them as competition. However Phase currently has no mirrorless platform and their IQ150 (which is the lowest priced back using the 50MP Sony chip), is still close to two times the price point of the Fuji GFX. Long term this will effect sales for P1 but not immediately. Phase did agree to work with Sony to make a special pro version of C1 which supports the various Sony mirrorless 35mm cameras and provides a great tethering solution.
From reading various notes, blogs, and on-line reviews, I have no doubt that Fuji was having some conversations with Phase One in regards to getting support for the Fuji GFX. Fuji executives have mentioned that the conversations broke down and they did not see anything coming soon. I have to feel that all of the Fuji Sales Managers in the field who felt it was OK to state that the support would a done deal was a huge mistake and a poor example of how to handle a possible future deal. Once the fact that Fuji and Phase One were talking, local U.S. Phase One dealers became very adamant that NO THIS WOULD NOT HAPPEN, PHASE ONE WILL NEVER SUPPORT THE GFX. The fact that Fuji corporate executives and Phase executives may have been trying to work out a deal was not something that local U.S. dealers would possibly not been aware of. However after word leaked about possible Phase One support for the GFX U.S. dealers may have added pressure to Phase One to see that no deal between Phase One and Fuji could happen.
For Phase One, this is not a big deal. They will continue to sell their high end and very expensive digital backs to the photographers that can afford them. But for Fuji I see it as a huge loss. Fuji currently has a few software solutions for raw conversion; Iridient Developer, Lightroom/ACR, and Silkypix. None of these have a very good tethering solution and studio photographer want this. As a landscape photographer there are times prefer to work tethered also. Each of the raw converters I have references all have some issues.
Lightroom/ACR
Adobe tends to make one pass on a raw conversions and they either get it right the first time or you get a less than perfect conversion. Currently the Lightroom conversion has problems with high ISO images from the GFX. As you get past ISO 1600, you will start to see more noise, a red cast to the files and color/detail smearing. It’s possible that Adobe will never re-visit this conversion for years.
Iridient Developer
While Iridient has an excellent raw conversion, I did not find that their dng conversion was that good for the GFX files, unlike their similar conversion for the Fuji X-T2 which is excellent. Iridient’s conversion while good still is limited by the lack of image adjustment tools that both Lightroom and Capture One have. Both of which allow you to work on your image as a raw file not a tif. I doubt that Iridient will ever be able to approach the tools that Lightroom or Capture One offer.
Silkypix
Where do I start?, Silkypix is made in Japan, the English translation in the interface is less that stellar and their help is about the same. Silkypix is lightyears behind Lightroom or Capture One in how image adjustments can be used. Even with Silkypix Vr 8 the software leaves a lot on the table. The version of Silkypix that ships with the GFX is not even the full version of the software, and is dialed back, disabled version. Basically it will convert a raw file to a tif, and that is it. This has been the way the Fuji has handled raw conversion as long as I can remember.
With Lightroom Fuji has a start on a good process, but there is no reason to believe that Adobe will continue to improve the raw conversion demoacsic, which is the real key. If Fuji had been able to work out a deal with Capture One they would have had a wonderfully powerful solution and a huge competitive edge over Hasselblad and the X1D. For now Capture One has a vastly superior raw conversion of the Fuji GFX files especially if they are taken at ISO ranges past 1600. I still have to believe that some of the Fuji Worldwide Sales Manager should have kept quiet about the possibility of Fuji and Phase working out a deal.
Paul Caldwell Photography
It’s interesting to see the opinion of the GFX at Dpreview take such a 180 degree turnaround from their first posting. But if you take their points to task, there is not too much to complain about.
1. Low Light Performance, here Dpreview compares with the Sony
A7RII, which in their own side by side tests, does not hold up
well at ISO’s above 1600. The touted BSI design, did not really
do that much from my testing. I was not impressed with the
A7RII past 800 and in fact was surprised to see that many
times the D810 seemingly outperformed it up to ISO 3200. Also
the A7RII is pretty worthless for any long exposure work unless
you turn on LEN, as it has some of the worst noise I have ever
seen. If you use LEN, then you can’t stack without gapping.
AGAIN, I am sure that Dpreview is using Adobe for their raw
conversion, (I hope that they are testing raw not jpg) and not
using C1. YES, LR/ACR do not favor the GFX currently on high
ISO conversions, considerably more noise.
2. Base ISO Dynamic Range, comparing with the D810 @ ISO 64.
Sure the D810 has a lower range, but from shooting the both
cameras side by side, the shadow push on the GFX is amazing
at ISO 100 and 200. I would say equal to at 64 compared to 100
and the GFX will still perform better at ISO 200 over the D810 @
ISO 200.
3. Shallow DOF, this one surprised me. Not too many MF
photographers on Dpreview? MF has a shallower DOF out the
gate over 35mm, so you don’t need a F 1.2 lens, a F2 lens
should be acceptable. Only time will tell as Fuji has not given
an idea as to when the 110mm will ship. I have shot MF for
years and have spent thousands on tech cameras to allow for
tilt to counter act the inherently shallow DOF of MF film and
sensors.
4. Resolution Canon 5DS-R compared to the GFX. Totally
surprised me, based on my use of the Canon and especially
Dpreview’s own reviews of the 5DS-R. Even at it’s lowest ISO
range, I can’t see the Canon holding the same or better
resolution than the GFX, and past base ISO the noise and
banding will defeat the image quality.
Fuji has some warts with the GFX however.
1. No C1 support, they should have figured out a way to get
C1/P1 to write a Pro version for this camera. Current tethering
support is not that good and as I mentioned LR raw conversion
is not that good for higher ISO images, (could be better).
Fuji continues to push a scaled version of Silkypix. If you want
to make it in the pro world (where this camera will be the
most appreciated since the iPhone and similar devices have
now placated the masses, you have to come out with a better
software interface for your raw (NOT JPG) files.
2. Fuji totally missed the mark by not having all 6 lenses available
at first release. Why? Were they no 100% sure the camera
would be successful? Fuji needs to get the 23mm and 45mm
out now. As to the comments by Dpreview there is no way
Fuji will ever catch up the number of lenses available for 35mm
cameras, period. Moot point. However the lenses that have
shipped optically are stellar, and that can’t be said for many
35mm lenses.
3. MF Clutch on the lenses. Due to the focus by wire design
of Fuji, you really NEED to have a MF clutch on the lens.
Fuji incorporated this on many of their X series primes but so
far none of the GF lenses have this. Since you lose your focus
point (even in MF mode) when you either turn off the camera or
switch to playback mode, it would be nice to have a clutch that
over-rides this just like the X series primes.
Paul Caldwell03/22/17
The FujiFilm GFX 50S uses the same 50MP chip that has been used by several camera companies over the years. Phase One uses this chip in the IQ150,250 and 350, and Pentax used it in their 645Z. Recently Hasselblad used the chip in the 50c Medium Format back and the new X1D mirrorless camera.
In tests I had made with the Phase One IQ250 and IQ150, I saw that the Phase One implementation provided some excellent dynamic range in the ISO 100 to 800 range, but still seemed to be a bit noisy past this. Especially when shadows were pushed. I was hoping to see the same amount of push with the Fuji implementation in the GFX. I was able to test this on a recent shoot at Calico Rock. I worked as series of 5 part panos all hand held. My goal was to only shoot 1 shot for each segment and not have to bracket the exposures since I was hand holding the camera. The last segment on the far right was a classic shot where half of the image was in shadow and the other half in full shade. I was metering more to protect my highlights, so the shadows were exposed very dark. This can be seen in the side by side shot below.
In this side by side view you can see the original shot on the left and where I have pushed up the shadows on the right side. From this view it’s a bit hard to really tell just how much room there is in the file taken at ISO 200. So I have taken a few crops at a 100% view. In this view notice the amount of details that are present in the rock bluff and trees along the bluff. Also note how well the light green leaves show up.
Shadow push from the Fujifilm GFX 50S
In this shot, by far the most impressive, look at how much color and detail were still available. Look for the green pine needles and the brown fall leaves on the oak. Also you can see again a lot of finer branch details that were not visible before I pushed the image. The key here is the image before is basically black, so the amount of push is close to 3 stops total, between exposure push and shadow adjustment.
Comparison for Fujifilm GFX 50s on shadow push.
Not bad!! In fact excellent for ISO 200.
This type of push would easily hold up in a large print. So what I have learned so far:
Recently Phase One finally announced the “final solution” for a cable release for the XF camera. Not what I had hoped for but this is it as shown in the photo below.
New Phase One Cable Release Bob
Back in the June 2015 time frame, Phase One announced their new XF camera body, which replaced the aging DF/DF+ bodies. The only difference in the DF and DF+ was improved AF performance. But as all who follow Phase One know, the XF, was a big announcement and a all new camera body. The features of the XF are endless and since the announcement, Phase One has continued to add more features via firmware updates. But one little issue was either overlooked or just not important enough and that was the remote release.
In the past, the DF/DF+ and for that matter all previous modern camera bodies made by Mamiya all took a standard 8 pin coiled cable release. This was a basic simple design, that allowed the remote shutter button to fire once or lock down. Period. But it worked and was pretty darn hardy. I have dropped mine in the water several times, and once the pin outs were dry, it worked fine. Phase at the announcement of the XF did not make any statements about a remote, only that the camera could be fired remote via Capture Pilot/iPhone etc. But there are times that you don’t either want to carry the additional gear or just don’t want to mess with the wifi issues so a basic cable release is a nice feature. I have also heard from plenty of studio shooters who also prefer having a true cabled remote release.
Briefly during early 2016, Phase One did release some of the older Mamiya 8 pin cable releases, modified with the 12 pin connection. These were from what I have been told only made in limited numbers since Phase One had something else in mind for a cable release. My thoughts went to a modern intervalometer, so something with a digital readout like all modern cable releases, but instead Phase One came out with the Bob. See in the above picture the basic Bob. Note also the cost is $399.00 U.S. Yes, I said $399.00.
The basic Bob, is just what you see in the picture. Note that it has two addition ports towards the bottom. These can accept a older style cable release (Mamiya 8 pin) and the new and still not released XF external power supply. In the picture below you can see all of this put together.
Phase One remote Bob and various connections
Now you can see where all this was heading. Which is great for power users. There is no information on the XF Power supply that I can find, i.e. NiMh or Lithium battery. Hopefully the later. But you can now see the why Phase One put 12 pins on the XF for the remote connection, so that the power can be transmitted via the 4 additional pins. There is also no information as to if the IQ100, or IQ350, or IQ380 all of which have the Phase One Power Share feature, can also be powered when the XF Power supply is attached. This would be a nice feature.
So I guess when all is said and done, more than likely you will be out around 700.00 for the whole solution. Only you can state if this is all worth it.
Photographer’s Notes:
I am disappointed that this all that Phase One will now offer. And I would have much rather had the offering to just purchase the old style Mamiya DF cable release modified to the 12 pin layout. These were briefly available in the US, but not by my dealer and I waited too long to purchase this cable release as I was under the impression that “more were coming soon”. Live and learn, when you see it if you need it buy the damn thing. I find it very surprising still that nothing was available when the XF was announced. But even worse Phase One knew that they were not going to make many of the modified Mamiya remotes, (8 pin to 12 pin) and should have allowed those of us who know that they would have gained considerable use from this order one while the limited supply was out there.
This is overkill for a photographer working the field, outdoors as look at the total number of cables that will be hanging around if you use the XF power supply. And if you don’t you still have a lot of non weather sealed connections on the Bob as it appears that all three ports are just standard pin outs.
There may be some great new yet to be announced feature still coming, but it still can’t justify the $399.00 cost for this type of solution, when the basic Mamiya 12pin Phase One solution was $139.00.
In my work, I would still prefer to have a cable release, but one with the button style that the older Mamiya release had as it will be a lot easier to hold in the hand.
Old style Mamiya Cable Release
If there is any good news from this, at least you can add the old style remote to the Bob on the right side as the Bob also seems to have a shorter straight cable instead of the coiled one. But you are still out the $399.00 or so and there is still no date as to when any of this equipment will start to ship.
With the announcement of the A250, A260 and A280, Phase One has a new line of Phase One branded cameras. The cameras consist of a Alpa TC (travel compact) mated to one of three different Phase One IQ2 backs. There are 3 different lenses that can be purchased, all Rodenstock HR series of lenses. You can pick from the 23mm, 35mm or 70mm HR lenses (note, I believe this is the case since as of 12/15/14, there is no information on the Phase One A series on Phase One’s main site or any dealer in the US that I could find). I might be that the product was leaked a bit early, not sure. However when it was first leaked, quite a bit of information was put out in regards to the details and I have posted more information here: Phase One A series cameras.
Prices of the equipment has now been published:
All of these units ship with the 35mm HR lens standard. You can purchase the other lenses separately.
There is one brief post on the main Digital Transitions blog which shows some more pictures but very little actual information. However it’s more than Phase One’s site offers. Digital Transitions Blog on Phase One A Series
You can also read about these new cameras on www.dpreview.com of all places.
Sony A7r viewed from the front showing full sized sensor
When Sony Announced the A7r I was very impressed. In the past Sony has produced some very impressive camera solutions and I was almost moved enough by the A99 DSLR to purchase one. However my local dealer, Bedford Photo in Little Rock Arkansas, pointed me toward the fact that Sony was working on a full frame Nex style camera. A camera that was going to revolutionize the market. It was enough to make me wait a bit.
It’s now been about 4 months since the initial roll out of the A7 family of cameras. Sony ended up producing the A7r without a low pass filter at 36MP and the A7 with a low pass filter at 24MP. Both cameras are mirrorless and were put into a very compact mostly all metal body. I was in line at Bedford’s when they had their Sony day in late December 2013 and was able to work with an A7r. My reaction was different as I did not purchase one. Instead I backed off to evaluate the entire A7r solution and after giving it some consideration, I found for me it did not make much sense. Here are the main reasons:
Let me give a bit more detail behind each of these.
Sony FE lens support current and future:
With the new Nex A7r, Sony also announced a new line of Full Frame lenses, the FE lineup. Currently there are 4 lenses announced with more to come.
This is a start but only one of these four lenses has OSS (image stabilization). With a 36MP sensor in such a slim body, there are going to be situations where vibration may cause some overall sharpness issues. I used the Sony Nex-7 for over 2 years with many of the older E lenses before moving to the Fuji X cameras. The E mount lenses are mainly plastic bodies and on the Nex-7 they were not the best solution. Fine for video work, but detailed sharp landscape images, I was not impressed. It seems that Sony is moving up in overall quality with their newer FE glass, but however these lenses will only work in full mode on a Sony A7 family camera body. They won’t work on a Alpha body even though they are full frame. I also don’t see much movement in the ultra wide solution for this camera. In the field for my work, I most often lead off with a 14mm lens and so far I have not seen anything from Sony showing a platform with a 14mm in the native FE mount.
Concerns of current Sony Alpha (A) lens support for the A7r
With my Sony Nex-7 I used the Sony LA-EA2 adapter which allowed me to have the ability to mount standard Sony Alpha lenses. This adapter had the translucent mirror technology that Sony uses in the A99. Of course Sony puts OSS on the sensor on their DSLR bodies which is a great idea. So all of the Alpha lenses I used would not have any OSS (image stabilization). The AF with the Sony LA-EA2 adapter was good, a bit slow but most times accurate. The adapter added a lot of mass to the Nex-7 but with the Alpha 16-80mm lenses it was a good solution. When I demoed the A7r I used this same adapter and the Sony Alpha 16-80mm lens. I found that with AF on, almost all of the shots were just a bit out of focus, but when I switched to manual focus and peaking I was able to produce some very sharp images. AF is important in my work and many times I would prefer to lead with AF instead of a manual focusing option. My medium format solution is a Arca rm3di which is always manual focus so I when I work with cameras like the Sony A7r, I want a rock solid AF solution.
Sony also announced a new Alpha lens adapter when they brought the A7r to market, the LAE4. I was not able to try this adapter to see if it produced more consistent results with AF.
Nikon lens support issues on the A7r
I should have listed this closer to the top. With Nikon lenses, there is no current adapter that allows for AF or VR. This is a huge deal for me since most Nikon lenses really aren’t designed with precision manual focus in mind. This is especially true with the new G lenses. It’s possible the the manual focus rings are just not that well calibrated and just a tiny amount of movement can make a major change. Since Sony did not put any stabilization on the A7 cameras sensor, you will need to rely on the stabilization in the lens. Several of Sony’s new FE lenses will have OSS (Sony lens stabilization), however all the Nikon lenses I have with VR, the VR and AF will not work. This is only true with Nikon lenses, as Metabones makes an adapter for Canon that allows the use of both IS and AF on the Canon lenses. If I was still heavily invested in Canon lenses, the Sony A7r would make perfect sense especially since Canon has yet to announce any new full frame DSLR with any more than 21MP.
A view of the Sony A7r showing the tiltable LCD screen
No on Chip image stabilization on the A7r
Many users of the A7r are reports issues with vibration from the focal plane shutter on the A7r. It appears that the A7 has a different shutter design that does not cause this problem. However depending on the lens and selected shutter speed, the A7r can impart a slight blurring that may or may be able to be recovered in post. This oversight should have been expected with such a high megapixel count sensor in such a lightweight body. Some photographers are bothered by this worse than others, depending on the equipment they are using and shutter speed ranges selected. It’s a bit of a disappointment since Sony has such a good implementation of the sensor based image stabilization on their pro DSLR bodies, like the A99. I don’t see this being fixed via a firmware update.
Concerns with non-Sony lens adapters
Currently there any many different brands of adapters on the market to allow the use of non-Sony lenses on the A7 family of cameras. These range from exotic Lecia lenses to more common Canon and Nikon. The problem with many of these adapters is that they don’t seem to maintain the correct tolerances so that within a brand two of the same adapters may not reach the same degree of focus accuracy. Also it seems that some of the adapters can create either reflection issues or contrast issues when shift lenses are used. These issues may be worked out over time, but currently it poses just another problem that may or may not be correctable in post processing. For example the Metabones adapter for Canon lenses has shown definite problems contrast shifts when any of the Canon TS-E lenses are used, especially the excellent 17mm and 24mm TS-E2 lenses. Some people are fixing this by gluing a non reflective material inside the adapters, which is not an easy task due to the interior layout of the Metabones adapter.
Sony history of 1 and done firmware updates
Sony has a history of not releasing any major firmware updates to a camera once it ships, similar to how Nikon operates. This implies to me a pretty closed system and is unlike Fuji, Canon or Phase One. An example of this is the Sony Nex-7 which was shipped in early 2012. This camera had a huge issue for most shooter, myself included, where the video button was just too easy to engage while shooting stills. It took Sony at least 9 months to release a firmware to allow the user to change the button from always on. Sony seems not to release firmware updates that have any effect on image quality. The Nex-7 was a great camera in the ISO range of 100 to 400, however after than the amount of noise that developed became destructive to the image and by ISO 1600, the files were so noisy to make them only equivalent to 16MP images. I had hoped that Sony would add some firmware enhancements that would allow for some improvements on the higher ISO ranges for the Nex-7, but it never happened. Canon and Fuji both have had several major firmware enhancements to several of their camera lines that allowed for major improvements in image quality. I like to see a company continue to develop a camera’s capabilities after the initial announcement, and this is not a practice of Sony.
Weight of body with larger lenses
The body of the Sony A7r is so light that most modern 35mm lenses seem to unbalance it. If you are only using a older prime lens this might not pose much of a problem, but try placing the Nikon 14-24 on the A7r!. The weight of the lens totally outweighs the camera’s small mass and it makes it pretty much impossible to just shoot by holding the camera. So both hands are occupied in holding the lens/camera and you really don’t have a free hand to switch a setting once you are lined up for a shot. If you are using the camera/lens combination on a tripod, then most definitively the lens will need a tripod mount (which none of the current FE lenses do) or the lens adapter (like a Metabones or Novoflex) will also need a tripod foot. The lens mount flange on the Sony A7r cannot handle the sheer mass of many of the lenses you might want to use and long term you will either bend the flange or pull it out of alignment. Either way the fix will be out of warranty and depending on how the mount flange is installed may or may not require an entirely new A7r body.
Lack of intelligent intervalometer for A7r
As with all Sony DSLR’s and Nex cameras, there is no intervalometer for this camera. Sony once again is depending on a app called Timelaspe that will run on the iOS or Android OS. This tool limits you to the power left on your phone and since it requires the phone to be on for an extended period of time, it will drain the phone’s battery. The timelaspe app is designed to give the user the ability to create the actual video on the camera so for the night photographic use I would need it’s not a tool I could use. I much would prefer to use a cabled intervalometer that will let me set the time of the necessary exposure and the interval needed, removing all of this from the camera. I have also not found any built in timelaspe tool that will let you take a shot longer than 30 seconds since they all are dependent on the camera’s built in set shutter speed of 30 seconds. This is the longest shutter speed that most cameras will allow. Sony once again has used their proprietary port for a wired remote so that none of the third party intervalometers will work. This limits tremendously the use of the camera in night photographic applications and even limits it in the more traditional timelaspe applications. Personally I don’t want to be tied to my iPhone for any type of intervalometer use. The amount of heat that may build up in the Sony A7r may preclude it from night photographic operations anyway.
The Sony A7r is a great concept and for many photographers, it’s a great way to reach the 36MP threshold, especially a Canon shooter. In my situation, I already have the Nikon D800 and find it’s mass/weight are a benefit in keeping everything in sharp focus. I love the idea of a EVF that allows 100% magnification at the viewfinder level like Sony has along with the excellent focus peaking that Sony has had for several generations of DSLRs and Nex series cameras. However the inability to use my current lineup of Nikon lenses (with AF and VR) is a huge issue for me. This is a first round release for Sony and no doubt they will follow up with a more refined product either later this year or early 2015. I can also hope that Nikon improved their Nikon1 lineup of mirror-less camera to include either the Sony 24MP or 36MP sensors as then I should be able to use all of my excellent Nikkor lenses to their best capabilities.
Phase One IQ260 in Box
01/23/14–Just a bit more information.
Phase one obviously has a camera done as briefly yesterday they has some image posted on the main Denmark website from the IQ250. So at least the name is certain.
It will be interesting to see if this back is full frame or 1:1 like the old P45+ or even 1:3 like the IQ140. Hopefully Phase will be able to continue some development to the IQ260.
The latest rumor is that the Phase One sensor may be made by Canon. To me this would be even more shocking by far as Canon has yet to bring anything new to their 35mm lineup in about 4 years. I don’t count the 5dMKII as that was just a refreshed 21MP sensor that is also in the 5D MKII and 6D. Canon has yet to cross the 24MP barrier and as it’s taken them so long it’s very possible that they do it in great style by bringing a larger 35mm sensor out at the same time Phase One brings the IQ250 (name is a guess and more than likely it won’t be called this since photo rumors already leaked this). I would love to see Canon pull out such a rabbit from their hat and thus allow themselves to become a leader again. My only concern would be that Canon has made some form of revolutionary chip development that allows them to get the same DR at base ISO as Sony did for Nikon’s D800. The Nikon D800 at base ISO of 100 was a major game changer for me.
Original Post Begins Here:
If you believe in large scale rumors, and in reality most rumors are from leaked from fact, then Phase One is set to announce a 50MP CMOS back, the IQ250 soon. Hasselblad may have beaten them to the punch so Phase One may hold off the announcement for a while so that they won’t be seen as a “me too”.
Here is the Link to Photo Rumors.
It was always pretty clear that Phase One was headed this way and I had assumed since around late 2011 that a CMOS back was coming from Phase One, but I also did expect to see 50MP in a medium format chip for another year. Sony has been rumored for months now to be creating a 54MP 35mm chip for a new Sony DSLR and a version of this chip was going to the Nikon D4x. Neither of these have showed anything more than a distant rumor, but now with the Hasselblad, then Phase One news, it’s pretty clear the Sony has been busy.
As the owner of an IQ260, this news from Phase One is a bit disconcerting in that it followed so close on the heels of the IQ260. The main advantage the to the IQ260 was the fact that it would allow for exposures up to 1 hours in length, same as the older P45+. Still the only CCD Medium format backs that allow this. Most other backs in this range will only go to 60 seconds, IQ160 and 1:45 seconds IQ280. Now with a CMOS chip, Phase One or any camera company should be able to have 1 hours exposures or even longer than 1 hour exposures due to the nature of a CMOS chip.
Anyway, the IQ260 possibly took a considerable hit. It may turn out to the be the shortest lived back on the market, as if you have a Sony chip in the this upcoming Phase, then it’s fair to expect:
As the owner of a IQ260 purchased in August of 2013, am I concerned by this announcement? In two words, YOU BET!.
Financially, the value of the IQ260 just took a hit. If a 50MP CMOS back with the same features that all current IQ backs have is brought to the market, I dare say it will be the end of the IQ260. If this same technology had been brought out in a 40 to 45MP size, then that may to be as true. CMOS should actually work better for both types of shooters, tech camera and Phase One DSLR bodies in that you should expect to see these types of improvements:
I can’t blame Phase One for this announcement as a company they have to stay competitive. However I do tend to fault the lack of overall information that seems to be passed down to the average user. This can be pointed to both Phase One and the dealer channel.
I don’t understand why both Phase One and dealers can’t use a non-disclosure type of agreement, and they might but it seems only in limited offerings. This type of decision is a huge one for a company of my size and knowing that such a product would announced inside of 9 months from the delivery of my IQ260 would have been most helpful.
But more importantly what does this say for any more development to the IQ260 and image quality. In the past with the P45+ and P65/IQ160, Phase One made many firmware updates that provided better image quality from the first ship date. In fact Phase One has been one of the only camera companies I have seen that has continued to improve on a back/camera after the first ship. Nikon and Sony both are pretty much done at ship, I have never seen any firmware updates from them that improve image quality, where as Canon has made some impressive updates, notably on the 5D MKII, 7D, and 6D.
I bet with my purchase that Phase One would give at least one more firmware update to the IQ260 that allowed for a bit cleaner files at base ISO. So far nothing like this has occurred and now with the launch of the IQ250, it may never happen. Phase is a small company with limited resources and a new CMOS back will take a lot of their focus.
I would expect to see this 50MP CMOS out sooner than later as Hasselblad has taken a lead and there are only so many qualified customers at this price point.
With this announcement on Hasselblad’s main site, they have just rocked the world of Medium Format Digital. Yes, in one quick paragraph, Hasselblad has taken the possible lead and stolen the thunder from Phase One on this technology. Not much has been written so far on this on the Hasselblad site only that more information will come with pricing in March. It appears to be a 50MP CMOS medium format back, the first of it’s kind. There is mention of Live View, however it does seem that at first to gain Live View you have to be tethered and using phocus (the Hasselblad photo software). For Live View usage this will be a major step forward since for the first time maybe the photographer will have the ability to see the subject without the constant blooming and other issues that occur when using Live View with a CCD MF camera, tethered or non-tethered.
The other area that will interest me will be the higher iso range. Currently with any CCD Medium Format back, you have only a couple of true iso stops, beyond that you start to get into some issues. The exception to this is Phase One’s sensor plus technology, which allows pixel binning from 4 to 1. This cuts way down on the final resolution, but still gives the photographer a big advantage in situations where a fast shutter speed is required. This becomes an even greater issue when you are using a tech camera. Here in most cases the the optimum F stop is around F11 to F16 especially if you are using Schneider lenses. So many times the base iso of 50 or base iso plus one stop to 100 just won’t get it done. CCD technology doesn’t really keep giving increased gains as CMOS does so pushing a CCD chip much past max 2 iso stops from base begins to become a negative process. With CMOS chips, which add increasing processing power to the chip itself (very basic description), you can expect to get a much larger high iso range.
I am also very curious as to who makes this chip. Odd’s are favorite is that it came from Sony. This also means that Sony’s rumored 54MP chip for 35mm format may be closer to reality than some think. Sony has shown excellent leadership in CMOS chip technology the the necessary on board processors to work with such high MP output chips. Sony also has produced some very very clean chips recently for Nikon.
No mention was made about tethering cables. If Hasselblad is using a tethered solution via phocus for Live View, hopefully they will have a USB3 or thunderbolt connection. Thunderbolt is not the way Phase One went for a high speed connection, instead they moved to USB3 and they have given a successful implementation of USB3 across all their IQ series of backs the their latest firmware. I am also curious if there will be a Wi-Fi solution for this new back. Phase One has Wi-Fi on their latest IQ 2X backs and it’s gradually being to show some very real advantages, especially in the field where you need to be able to check your focus on a tech camera using a screen larger than the one provided by the IQ back.
Much is more to come on this for sure, however it’s exciting to see that CMOS technology has finally come into the world of Medium Format Digital.
02/15/14 News from the CP+ Show in Japan–Pentax 645DII CMOS 50MP Camera
A view of the Pentax 645D 2014 from the back showing new LCD design
CP+ the Japanese eqvilent to the U.S. CES (Consumer Electronics Show) is going on through tomorrow. and one of the highlights as far as larger camera systems goes, is the information about the upcoming Pentax (now Ricoh) 645D2014. Instead of calling it the 645DII, it seems for now that the camera will be just called the 645D 2014. Interesting name indeed.
From looking at the announcement literature by Ricoh, this will be a pretty significant camera system for Medium Format users. Here are some high points that I gleaned from the overview.
Side by side shot showing the original 645D and the new 645D 2014
Pentax first shook up the Market 5 years ago, when they first started listing a new 645D Digital camera, that would be based on the Film Pentax 645II. I was originally excited by this announcement but Pentax did little more than talk about it for several years and showed mock ups. I owned several good Pentax 645 lenses, that I was using on my Canon system with a Zork adapter, so the 645D would have been a perfect fit for me. However the long delay, pushed me to the Phase One camp and I purchased the P45+.
Pentax did finally ship the 645D about 1 year later, with a similar sensor to the one in the P45+ (it’s my understanding it’s not the exact same sensor) and they brought out basically the body with no new lenses. About 1 year before the actual ship date of the 645D, Pentax had a pretty good lineup in their primes and zooms for the 645II in the FA lenses. I had both the 35mm FA (excellent) and the 55mm FA, and had been thinking about the 35mm to 55mm zoom. Since Pentax still had a manual aperture ring on all the FA lenses, you could stop them down on other camera systems, like the Canon with a Zork adapter. However by the time the 645D shipped Pentax was no longer selling the 35mm FA in the U.S. (it’s my understanding that this lens is still sold in Japan). Also there was not much of a dealer network in the U.S. so anything that involved service would be possibly a bit of an issue. All repairs were still done in Japan, and there was only a 1 year warranty. Phase One at the time had their 3 year (now 5 year) value add warranty and I found that I preferred that type of warranty, even though the cost of the 645D was much less than the P45+.
Now with the 645D 2014, Pentax is showing that they have listened to the photography market and it seems that they are bring out this new camera with some much needed refinements. For studio photographers, the lack of a tethering solution on the 645D was a big issue. I am assuming that the 645D 2014 will have tethering since it’s shipping with USB3 support. The LCD on the camera is significantly larger, has more resolution and provides more information to the photographer, not to mention it has a tilt option which allows the camera to be used at waist level (a big plus to me). The CMOS sensor should be 50MP, not a huge jump over 39MP from the first 645D, but if it’s the same sensor that’s in the Phase One IQ250 or a similar Sony design, then I think you can expect some great things from this camera. The IQ250 (see this article I wrote on the IQ250) has shown to have an amazing dynamic range and this should cross over to the 645D 2014 when it ships.
What’s key here is that Pentax ship this camera on time i.e. April of 2014. If they miss their dates and push it back then they will loose momentum and photographers will look elsewhere. I don’t think they will have any problem showing good quality images, as I don’t think this chip can take a bad picture. I also hope that Pentax steps up with their dealer support in the U.S. and possibly offers a similar program to the Phase One Value add warranty. Time will tell on this. If the price does come out at under 10K U.S, I expect that it’s possible the flood gates may be opened in the U.S. since this chip is showing to be such an excellent performer and is definitely changing the game in the world of medium format digital. One thing that Pentax does not have here in the U.S. is a strong dealer channel pushing the product to the market, and allowing demo’s for both landscape and studio shooters.
Here are two translated links that give more detailed information from the press conference at the CP+ show in Japan.
Google translation for first information from CP+ show
Google translation for Ricoh imaging new from CP+ show
I have no idea how long these links will stay up, but hopefully they are kept in good order as they contain quite a bit of details on this new exciting MF camera.