Hasselblad H3D

[thomasyun]

I just did a demo with the 39 megapixel h3d. I currently use the 503cw with the v96c imacon back. The

sales rep was telling me that the lens for the h3d body was more capable of handling the increased

resolution vs the Zeis lenses that I have for my 503cw. It would be cheaper for me to just get the 39

megapixel back by itself and get an adapter plate for my 503. I wasn't too impressed with the h3d body

or the lens although it was more convenient not having to be tethered to a battery/hard drive. Does

anyone know if what he's telling me is true?

 

Thanks

[jeff.grant]

Most people seem to end up selling their Zeiss glass after a while and using the HC lenses. The HC adapter is a good way to use the Zeiss glass on the H3D. I am using both Zeiss and Fuji lenses on an H3D. So far, I'm happy with both and haven't ever thought that one was superior to the other.

[ellis_vener_photography]

It certainly is conceivable that the new lenses are every bit as good if not better than the older Zeiss designs.

[justinblack]

I would be willing to bet that the reason they developed a new lens line had to do more

with incorporating autofocus and electronic shutters. Fujinon was probably not selected

due to the superiority of their optics compared to Zeiss, but more because of the bigger

picture in terms of what was practical vis a vis modern, autofocus, electronic shutter

lenses. And, yeah, yeah, I know Fuji optics are superb. I use 'em and love 'em. It's

marketing folks.

 

By the way, who actually uses an H3D, and how do you justify the cost?

[wai_leong_lee]

He's telling you things to make you buy from him...

[gary_ferguson1]

I've used both the Hasselblad H and V systems with a representative selection of lenses from each system. The H lenses are certainly superior to some older V lenses such as the "C" 40mm and "C" 50mm, at longer distances the H macro lens is also superior to the V 120mm. I haven't used the H series 28mm but the MTF charts look outstanding and it has no equal within the V series (and I've digitally "straightened out" shots using the 30mm V series fisheye) something similar also applies to the H zoom.

 

However the H system doesn't have everything its own way. The 38mm Biogon, new 40mm IF, the 100mm, the 180mm, and both the 250mm and 350mm superachromats are equal or better to anything in the H line up. Furthermore most of the recent V series lenses, such as the 50mm or 150mm, are such solid performers that you'd be hard pressed to tell them apart from their H series equivilants. Plus there's additional flexibility from the V series in the shape of the Flexbody, which adds tilt and a reasonable degree of shift to many V series lenses.

 

Having used both systems extensively I'd say your choice between V or H systems should be mainly driven by practical system differences rather than lens evaluation. For most applications they're both equally superb performers with only minor image quality differences. Incidentally, Hasselblad use Zeiss MTF equipment and a standard Zeiss methodology to prepare their MTF charts, so you can make direct MTF comparisons between H lenses on the Hasselblad web site and V lenses on the Zeiss web site.

[jtk]

H3D is no more expensive than the smog certification equipment used by a typical full service gasoline station, which also has many thousands invested (or leased) in other electronics, as well as Snap-On tools.

 

If one was a relatively successful commercial photographer in a significant market (San Francisco, New York), one would find H3V crucial and affordable. It's a matter of utility and conventional, non-aggressive tax treatment for business purposes.

 

In 1977 a successful commercial photographer in his third year of business told me "Can you think of another business that allows you to create a big income with only $50,000 invested?"

[fotografz]

"By the way, who actually uses an H3D, and how do you justify the cost?"

 

By making money with them, plus charging a "day rate" digital capture fee. If you rented

one would you eat that cost, or pass it on as a line item in the quote? Same concept if you

own it.

 

Virtually every publication or collateral printing job is digital these days ... if you shoot

film, the client pays for the film, processing, proofs and final scans (which can be a

significant cost itself ) ... for use in those publications or collateral materials.

Comparitively, paying a digital capture fee is a bargain.

 

As to the lens question, I use both Zeiss V and H/C lenses on the H digital cameras ... they

have different characteristics and are a matter of personal preference as applied to your

application. AF has it's merits as does some of the software corrections possible when the

lens, camera and digital back are communicating in sync with one another ... The DAC

corrections in Flexcolor are pretty amazing.

[justinblack]

Forgive my nature/landscape bias and mindset... Of course commercial photographers can justify an H3D, but who is using one (or similar) primarily for landscape/nature and stock and/or gallery prints?