File :-(, x, )
50 mpx Hassleblad HDIII Anonymous
Hey /P/. I've decided to buy this when it comes out and to hell with the price.
>> Anonymous
okay
>> Anonymous
cool story bro
>> Anonymous
does it support EF-S lenses?
>> Anonymous
im getting two so i can put a wide angle on one and a long tele on the other so i wont have to switch lenses
>> Anonymous
What about live view and video capabilities?
>> Anonymous
>>273953

and what about send-to-printer buttons? i need at least 3. also does it do exposure bracketing? i need my hdr, man
>> Anonymous
Is it a crop sensor?
>> Anonymous
Won't they only auto focus AF-S and AF-I lenses?
>> Anonymous
>>273952

Get 4.

-Ken
>> Anonymous
does it have live view?
>> Anonymous
i'll only use it if it has auto mode
>> Anonymous
what does it look like with a battery grip on?
>> Anonymous
50 megapickles is so pedestrian to me
>> Anonymous
Haffleblads are retarded they don't even have an Aurto Borkee mode!!!
>> Anonymous
Are you going to get the underwater housing like the picture?
>> Anonymous
where's the pop-up flash? garbage.
>> Anonymous
No video?
rofl fail camera
>> Anonyfag of Borneo !bHymOqU5YY
What do you mean, it doesn't accept SD cards?
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
Hey, how many x zoom does it have?
>> Anonymous
>>274482
depends on the lens.
>> Anonymous
if it doesn't have at least 1.6x crop then why bother with the lenses? if i buy a 100mm i want it to zoom to 160 at least.
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>>274205
here
>> Anonymous
>>273950
>>273952
>>273953
>>273957
>>273959
>>273960
>>274033
>>274037
>>274038
>>274064
>>274205
>>274473
>>274480
>>274482
>>274485

fuck, you guys are fags. it's a hasselblad, of course it won't have auto features or pop up flashes. try doing some research before making asses of yourselves. christ.
>> Anonymous
>>274490
fail

"The H3D 31 has a pop-up flash, the irony of which is not lost on Hasselblad sales and marketing staff."
>> Anonymous
does it come in any other colors?
>> Anonymous
>>274496

ugh, silver is so 'consumer'
>> Anonymous
I hope it only saves in JPEG.
>> Anonymous
it better have a touchscreen LCD for that price.
>> Anonymous
greatest pinhole camera ever\/
>> Anonymous
>>274490
/p/ - trolls trolling trolls
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
superior
>> Anonymous
I heard that the russian company Zenit is buying Hasselblad.
>> Anonymous
the fuck is that
>>274520
>> Anonymous
>>274538
superior camera
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>>274516
4chan - Trolls trollan trolls
>> Anonymous
>>274545
I peed myself a little I was laughing so hard.
>> SAGE
>>274520
seriously dude get your tongue out of ken's ass. we get it you foam at the mouth while pushing f5 f5 over and over on his website
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>>274556
>>274543
>>274520
this fag it is the same
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>>274556
lol troll'd

Camera-Specific Properties:Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop CS2 WindowsImage-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution1350 dpiVertical Resolution1350 dpiImage Created2008:09:20 21:30:47Color Space InformationUncalibratedImage Width1156Image Height1391
>> SAGE
     File :-(, x)
>>274566
no i just woke up

Camera-Specific Properties:Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop CS WindowsImage-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution72 dpiVertical Resolution72 dpiImage Created2008:02:06 00:47:01Color Space InformationUncalibratedImage Width512Image Height384
>> Anonymous
lol /p/, lol
>> Anonymous
i wouldn't buy it! look like shit and you don't need 50mp
>> Anonymous
The reponse of so many people in here to the high pixel counts shows that apparently megapixels are all that matters to the consumer.
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
>>274627
>megapixels are all that matters to the consumer.
Well sure. What else is there?
>> SAGE
>>274627
I WANT A DIGITAL WITH EXPOSURE LATUITUDE OF FILM
>> Anonymous
>>274485
I think it only zooms to 50mm
>> Anonymous
OP here.

The main reason to get it is because the sensor size. The dynamic range is amazing. Amazing camera can do amazing things, I plan on making money with it so it's worth it for me cuz I know I can.

And yes, there comes a point when the number of mpx doesn't count for shit.
>> Anonymous
>>274823
Post a picture of what you normally shoot
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
The greatest thing about hasselblads isn't taking the photos, it's showing everyone online that I did.
>> sage rage !3I4SJbCh8M
     File :-(, x)
>>274823
Everyone knows that MegaPixels translate directly into the quality of the camera and thus, the quality of photo that can be taken with that camera!

Camera-Specific Properties:Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop 7.0Image-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution72 dpiVertical Resolution72 dpiImage Created2008:09:16 01:45:29Color Space InformationUncalibratedImage Width368Image Height400
>> Anonymous
>>274567
That is beautiful. I haven't lol'd that hard in weeks.
>> Anonymous
>>274520
Srsly. You guys. Wtf is that.
>> Anonymous
>>274880
if I remember right, Its Ken Rockwell trying to argue that expensive cameras don't make good pictures.
So he goes and puts a $2000 lens on toy nikon camera to take some slides.
>> Anonymous
>>274652I WANT A DIGITAL WITH EXPOSURE LATUITUDE OF FILM

digital has more dynamic range than film
>> Kilz2latex !!3htj9hFDMA4
>>274883
..............
this thread is also awful
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>>274880

It's a Nikon. Now stop it, you're giving the adults a headache.

>>273933
What's the body made out of? It'd better be volvonium. Pic related.
>> Anonymous
>>274886

http://www.clarkvision.com/imagedetail/dynamicrange2/

>> All this points to the digital camera having a larger dynamic range than either print or slide film.

>> The digital camera images show more detail than either print or slide film.
>> Kilz2latex !!3htj9hFDMA4
>>274894
then why can people who use film over expose by a full stop or more and still not have blown highlights.
or is this something else entirely?
>> Project !dashI8UpO.
>>274898
Cause highlights don't exactly blow in film.
>> Anonymous !nzFagDPRLs
>>274965Isn't it because the exposure curve flattens out a heap, so it takes many stops over exposed to completely lose contrast with film, but CMOS and CCD is much more linear in its exposure curve.
>> Anonymous !nzFagDPRLs
>>274981

Actually disregard me, I'm pretty sure Im just regurgitating some KRockwell bullshit. :(

>>274894

Very interestiing.
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
lol
>> Anonymous !nzFagDPRLs
>>275078
That seems more realistic.
>> Anonymous
>>274990
Please see:
>>274567
>> Butterfly !xlgRMYva6s
>>275078
I've been after that graph for ages since I said "digital has 1/2 the dynamic range of film" and someone went crazy over it.
>> fence !!POey2hdozCZ
>>275078

i'm pretty sure that's exposure latitude and not dynamic range. two different things.
>> Anonymous
for the record in the history of /p/

digital has more dynamic range than film

film has more exposure latitude than digital

and butterfly is wrong all the time
>> Anonymous
>>275249

Oddly enough I think I can remember that last argument about that here.
>> Anonymous
>>275256
does not compute
>> Anonymous
>>275267

it computes perfectly, dumbass. You can under/overexpose film and get better results than if you under/overexpose digital.

e.g. you can pull/push film better than you can pull/push digital.
>> Anonymous
>>275269
Latitude depends on dynamic range. If the same scene can be recorded using less than the full brightness range available to the medium, the exposure can be shifted along the range without clipping data values in the shadows or highlights.
>> Anonymous
>>275269
So can digital capture both highlights and shadows in a high contrast scene like film can?
>> Anonymous
>>275284
that would be referring to the dynamic range in which case negative film pwns.
>> Anonymous
>>275290

On dpreview they seem to have a reasonbly realistic test on dynamic range and most camers seem to be around the 8.5-9 stop range, fairly interesting.

So latitude, means you can push/pull exposure and still have recognisable details?
>> Anonymous
Yes, film has excellent dynamic range. Prints on the other hand don't. You can see shadow details on Velvia you can't see in digital, but good luck printing that.

Tried the Hasselblad H3D-39 at Photokina together with the 200mm lens, and I was very very impressed. The dynamic range, detail and skin tone reproduction was impeccable. The price was set to match. Sigh.
>> Anonymous
>>275989Tried the Hasselblad H3D-39 at Photokina together with the 200mm lens

that's some awesome telephoto range, is it stabilized or does it have a fast aperture? like f/2?
>> Anonymous
My memory failed me: it wasn't the 200mm (apparently no such beast exists for the h3d), it was the 150mm/3.2 prime lens. I.e, no zoom. No, it was not stabilized. Yes, it was fast enough.

Medium-format cameras in general eschew zoom lenses. Medium-format cameras are not fast - they have a maximum frame rate of 3fps at best. Most only go up to ISO 400. Add to that the fact that each shutter click produces a quarter gig of raw data, it's not something you take to an event to snap away with.

It does, however, produce excellent images, and medium format cameras are used for fashion and commercial work everywhere. When a photo shoot costs beyond $50000, the cost of these systems is trivial.
>> Anonymous
what's the crop factor on hasselblad?

like 50mm is ultra wide or something?
>> Anonymous
The 35mm equivalent crop factor on a medium format camera depends on the film type. In general figures of 0.5x and 0.6x are quoted.

The hasselblad fisheye is 28mm. 80mm is considered normal.
>> Anonymous
>>276006

so a 200mm would be a short telephoto for portraits? what do they use for headshots/portraiture on digital hasselblads in studios?
>> Anonymous
>>276008

A 150mm would be a short telephoto for portraits. The 300mm would be a telephoto lens.

What's used in commercial work? I've seen both the 80mm and 150mm in use (in photokina, natch). These considerations are really dictated by the subject matter and the plan laid out in co-operation with the AD.
>> Anonymous
>>274894
bullshit test. uses digital processing on straight scan of film.
Woulda been better off getting someone who knows what they're doing to print from film then scan results.

Also note how stepped the grey ramps aer on the digital camera.
>> Anonymous
>>276013

Depressed Cheesecake used that link to prove digital has more dynamic range before.
>> Anonymous
>>276013

That is one problem to shooting film today. Processing film is expensive, and it's hard to find a competent lab.
>> Anonymous
true say. To get the full advantages of film you've really got to be printing it yourself and be pretty fucking good at it.
Which is why the images I'm happiest with aer digital despite me shooting loads of film.
Same old analogue vs digital conclusion. Better results are possible with analogue but good results easier to achieve with digital.
>> Anonymous
Add to that the other benefits of going digital like faster turn-around and it's easy to see why film is in dire straits.
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>>276045

Why not have your cake and eat it too?
>> Anonymous
>>276045

You've convinced me. I will make a bonfire of all my film gear today.