Related Local Links:
Contax 645 AF
Hasselblad Lenses
Hasselblad Notes

Related Links:
Photonet H1 Reviews
Photonet Q&A

The above street pricing tables (9/25/02) from Badger Graphics Inc. in USA give some idea of the pricing to be expected for the new Hasselblad H1 line. Note that the H1 kit includes the HV90X viewfinder and a HM magazine (with HC80 lens shade) as well as the HC80mm lens and the H1 body. Since the 80mm HC lens alone is $1,584 and the body is $2,213, the math suggests the viewfinder and the magazine are circa $1,898 together. The standard A12 magazines are circa $800-900 US$ (cf. B&H Photovideo). My suspicion is that the pricing on the new H series items will be rather close to the current prices for similar Hasselblad items in the V or 6x6cm lineup.

How competitive are these prices against other 645 autofocus competitors. B&H Photovideo lists the Pentax 645 AF NII kit with 80mm lens for under $2,500, while even the Contax 645 AF kit with zeiss 80mm AF lens costs under $4,000 US$. By comparison, the Hasselblad H1 kit at $5,600+ street price is 40% more than the Contax 645 AF. You could buy two of the Pentax 645 AF kits, with $600 to spare. A pentax 645 AF kit with multiple lenses would be even more cost effective.

Who is going to pay twice as much for a Hasselblad H1 versus Pentax 645 AF, or 40% more than a Contax 645 AF? Who is going to pay 85% of Zeiss 6x6cm lens prices for Fuji made 6x4.5cm lenses? Hasselblad evidently believes that wedding photographers and others needing synchro-sunlight or fill-flash synch at any speed (up to 1/800th) will pay the premiums for these new H1 systems.

From Michael H. Reichmann's H1 Review on photonet.com:

Misc. factoids
• Speed of autofocus is rated at 400 milliseconds max.
• shutter speed range is 1/800th second to 18 hours(!)
• pop-up flash has GN 12
• 2 fps film advance
• built-in intervalometer, 1 second to 24 hours, 2 to 32 shots settings

Current lenses:
• HC 35mm f/3.5
• HC 80mm f/2.8
• HC 150mm f/3.2
• HC 50-110mm f/3.5-f/4.5 zoom
• 1.7X teleconverter

Planned lenses (for mid-2003 AD)
• HC 50mm f/3.5
• HC 120mm f/4
• HC 210mm f/4

Those of us who are worried about the switch to Fuji from Zeiss for lenses may have some cause for concern. Check out the bokeh (background out-of-focus highlights) of this photo taken by Michael Reichmann in his article reviewing the H1. Yikes! See why I'm worried? ;-)

Related Postings

rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
From: [email protected] (Niklas Granhage)
[1] H1 questions
Date: Tue Oct 01 2002

Hi

My name is Niklas Granhage and I work at Hasselblad, in the H1
software development team. I have joined this newsgroup to try to
answers some questions regarding the H-system (there seems to be
many!).

If you have any questions regarding the V-system (200, 500 and 900), I
am NOT the right person to ask.

Best regards

Niklas



Date: Tue, 24 Sep 2002 
From: "Nelson L. Mark, SC001" [email protected]
To: [email protected]
Subject: [HUG] New HB "H1" 645AF w/ Fuji!

In case you haven't got it yet, this just came in from HB:


9/24/2002 Hasselblad Releases New H1

Hasselblad Releases Groundbreaking New

Auto-Focus Camera System

Swedish camera manufacturer Victor Hasselblad AB announced today
the release of a new 645-format camera system featuring an advanced
auto-focus and metering system and a host of other cutting edge features.
The new Hasselblad H1, designed to combine maximum features and maximum
ease of use, is the centerpiece of the company's first new medium format
system in 45 years. The H1 is a joint venture with Fuji Film Group.

Hasselblad cameras have been the tools of choice for discerning
photographers around the world for over half a century. The company's
founder Victor Hasselblad worked closely with such photographers as Ansel
Adams to perfect the design of the early Hasselblad cameras. This
tradition has resurfaced during the development of the new H1 camera,
says G�ran Bernhoff, President and CEO of Victor Hasselblad AB.

"The new H1, perhaps more than any other camera on the market today,
was designed to integrate seamlessly with today's professional
photographers and the way they work. We took great pains at every stage
of the camera's design to ensure that the H1 would be a creative tool,
not a hindrance to the photographer's creativity," states Bernhoff.
"We used working professionals as test photographers during the
prototype stage, incorporating their ideas and feedback into our thinking
around this new product. The result, the H1, is truly a photographer's
camera."

"This marks Hasselblad�s first foray into the 645 world," adds
Lars Pappila, Vice President, R&D, "and it's a strong one. The
H1 features an incredibly fast and accurate auto-focus system, a
precision metering system, and true cross-platform capability, using
either digital backs or film. In addition," continues Pappila,
"the H1's unique operating system and interface allow the
photographer to customize a great number of the camera's advanced
features, tailoring the controls and settings to suit specific work
methods or situations."

While working equally well for both film and digital imaging, the H1's
central shutter lenses are specially designed and manufactured to meet
the exact standards required by advanced digital photography. The camera
features a single magazine system that recognizes and uses either 120 or
220 film and is capable of automatic recognition of film Bar Code system.
In addition to the standard film backs, several manufacturers are
producing advanced, dedicated digital backs especially for the H1. This
will allow the new camera to function equally at home in the film or
digital world. Like the standard Hasselblad system, the H1 system will
offer interchangeable viewfinders, magazines, and lenses.

"It's almost as if each photographer can create their own
camera," explains Ove Bengtson, Product Manager for the new H
System. "These highly customizable features mean that the camera
will adapt to the photographer, not the other way around. In addition, we
have taken great pains to ensure that the camera is as easy to use as
possible. The H1 combines all of the professional features needed for
demanding photography and the renowned Hasselblad medium format image
quality with an ease of use that is more like that of an advanced 35mm
camera."

A previous joint venture between Victor Hasselblad AB and Fuji Film Group
resulted in the unique dual-format Hasselblad XPan, a 35mm camera with
interchangeable lenses capable of taking full, unmasked panorama or
standard 35mm shots on the same roll of 35mm film.

The new H1 System will be available for purchase in November 2002.

About Victor Hasselblad AB

Founded by nature photographer Victor Hasselblad, Victor Hasselblad
AB has been an innovative, world-leader in the manufacture of medium
format camera systems since the release of its first camera system in
1948. Hasselblad cameras were the first cameras in space and are renowned
for their image quality, long-life and rugged durability. Victor
Hasselblad AB is a privately owned company based in Gothenburg, Sweden
with offices, distributors, service outlets, and representatives
worldwide.

About Hasselblad USA

Hasselblad USA Inc is a wholly owned subsidiary of Victor Hasselblad
AB, Sweden and the exclusive U.S. distributor of Hasselblad products and
Visatec Solo monolights and the Litepac battery pack from Bron
Elektronik. Sales and Service are available through Authorized Dealers
and Service Centers around the country. 

For further information or digital files of this copy and/or images,
please contact your Hasselblad sales representative or Richard
Schleuning, VP Marketing & Advertising Hasselblad USA Inc.










Date: Tue, 24 Sep 2002 
From: "[email protected]" [email protected]
To: [email protected]
Subject: RE: [HUG] Haselblad H1

http://www.dpreview.com/news/0209/02092408kodak645h.asp

Not a coincidence..

digital back for the H1

Cheers,
Dave

Original Message:
-----------------
From: Dr. Ulrik Neupert [email protected]
Date: Tue, 24 Sep 2002 
To: [email protected]
Subject: [HUG] Haselblad H1


Hasselblad has introduced it's new 6x4,5 AF Reflex camera. See
www.hasselblad.se. The web site does not contain news for the 6x6 system
(now called V-series).

Ulrik


From Hasselblad mailing list:
Date: Tue, 24 Sep 2002 
From: Jim Brick [email protected]
Subject: [HUG] H1 info

I just looked at the official H1 sales book from Hasselblad. There are
several things of note:

All of the lenses are electronic leaf shuttered. The shutter/focus board in
the lens has several IC's/ASICS and numerous discrete  components on it. It
is a circular circuit board right behind the shutter which controls both
the shutter and focus.

The camera has ONLY leaf shutters and synch up to 1/800th sec. The shutter
goes from 16 hours (I think I remember that right) to 1/800 with full flash
synch all the way. This is a boon to those who do flash photography
(wedding and fashion) as all of the other 645 AF cameras synch to only
1/125th with their focal plane shutter. And, of course, the leaf shutter is
vibrationless at all speeds, unlike the FP shutter.

The camera has a pop-up flash on the prism. Yes, that's correct. A built-in
pop-up flash.

There is ONLY focus control on the lens, and only if you select manual
focusing. Both the f/stop and shutter speed is selected on the camera. In
manual mode by selecting them on the LCD or in the various auto modes via
LCD and internal computer. No manual shutter or f/stop selection on the
lens. The zoom lens has two rings, one zoom and the other manual focus. The
rest have one manual focus ring.

Jim



From Hasselblad mailing list:
Date: Wed, 25 Sep 2002 
From: "Q.G. de Bakker" [email protected]
Subject: Re: [HUG] Hasselblad H1

- 6 x 4.5 format is "bowing to demands in the market"
- Why AF?: U.S. wedding photographers main target market for H1. They don't
work in studios, and therefore need AF.
- Built-in flash really is a usefull professional tool
- Autofocus mechanism is made by Minolta
- Lenses made by Fuji
- Hasselblad builds body and viewfinder, and all assembly
- There will be an adapter allowing use of Zeiss/Hasselblad lenses on the H1
- development costs were 35 million Euro (= just a little more in US$),
costs shared with partner Fuji (lenses)
- Hasselblad has at present 25% share of the 60,000 - 80,000 cameras per
annum MF market, and (surprise ;-) is hoping for more, 30% to be precise
(though i don't expect they will object to gaining a larger share)

Source: Hasselblad's CEO Bernhoff and Bengt Ahlgren in G�teborgs Posten, 24
september 2002
http://www2.gp.se/gp/jsp/Crosslink.jsp?d=118&a=102687


From hasselblad mailing list:
Date: Tue, 24 Sep 2002 
From: Jim Brick [email protected]
Subject: Re: [HUG] Hasselblad H1

Jenny Morgan wrote:
>Maybe tomorrow the Zeiss will be an option in the aftermarket.

I don't believe there will be any "aftermarket" lenses. The lens internals
(computers) and the camera body internals (computers) are heavily
intertwined (joined at the hip.) It's like you don't find many Hasselblad V
aftermarket lenses. Certainly nothing that works seamlessly with the camera
bodies.

Jim



Date: Wed, 25 Sep 2002 
From: "Q.G. de Bakker" [email protected]
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [HUG] Hasselblad H1

Philippe Tempel wrote:

>  Or Contax has a deal with Zeiss that they are the
> sole ones to have Zeiss for the 6x4.5 format?  Nah, I
> doubt it...

The Contax trademark is still owned and exploited by no other but Carl Zeiss
Oberkochen...



Date: Wed, 25 Sep 2002 
From: "Q.G. de Bakker" [email protected]
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [HUG] Hasselblad H1

Q.G. de Bakker wrote:

> - development costs were 35 million Euro (= just a little more in US$),

A bit less (!), of course. Sorry!



Date: Wed, 25 Sep 2002 
From: Jim Brick [email protected]
To: [email protected]
Subject: RE: [HUG] H1 Bokeh

 Austin Franklin wrote:
>It's not only about lp/mm, it's also about bokeh, rendering of the out of
>focus areas.  The many Fuji MF cameras I've had and used have HORRIBLE
>bokeh.  They ARE sharp, but "sharp" is only one aspect of image quality.


To you and me, Austin, Bokeh has some meaning. And many folks on this and
the Leica list as well.

But does anyone think that the sales of this camera (the H1) will be
impacted by "Bokeh?"

No.

99.9999999999999% of the camera buyers don't even know such a thing exists.
And to the other .000000000001%, it probably doesn't matter either.

I sold my old 35/1.4 Summilux for a 35/1.4 ASPH Summilux. I knew ahead of
time that the 35/1.4 ASPH had somewhat bad Bokeh vs the g-r-e-a-t Bokeh on
the old 35/1.4 . But that didn't stop me. I wanted corner-to-corner sharp
images at f/1.4 . And I got it.

I saw the dealers book on the H1 and they had photographs from famous
photographers (fashion, nature, fine art, wedding, etc.) from around the
world. Photographers who have been using the H1 for many months. Many of
these photographs were drop dead gorgeous. Bokeh city. Crisp and sharp. Etc...

Jim



Date: Wed, 25 Sep 2002 
From: "Q.G. de Bakker" [email protected]
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [HUG] H1 Bokeh

Simon Lamb wrote:
> Did the dealer book have any pricing information?

Up to now i have heard mention of prices ranging from US$ 6000 to 7000 for
the camera, film back and standard lens.
Still rumours, though.


From hasselblad mailing list:
Date: Wed, 25 Sep 2002 
From: Jim Brick [email protected]
Subject: Re: [HUG] Hasselblad H1 AF

 Tom Just Olsen wrote:
>I see not the big advantage in AF anymore (after
>having switched from Canon FD to EOS).  And certainly not on any MF
>equipment.  It makes it all to heavy.  Nor is AF reliable, - a very
>little talked of issue. With AF; still you have to check thoroughly that
>the AF has focused on the right thing.
>
>Tom Just Olsen


AF lenses, when used in AF mode always have less resolution (lp/mm) than
the same lenses manually focused. This is because AF cannot achieve
critical focus. If it does, it is just luck.

Focus is typically achieved by digitizing the analog signal from a CCD
sensor and creating a histogram from the digitized result based on contrast
differences. As the focus gets closer, the histogram center spike gets
larger. When it passes through and starts to get smaller, then the AF
system backs up the number of steps it went past the high point. The
problem is that there is considerable slop in the focusing that produces
the high point. A range + and - from the critical focus point that allows
electronic focus to think it is there.

There is no solution for this. Other than using your eye and brain to do
manual critical focusing.

And... AF frequently cannot focus on the very thing that you want to focus
on. It cannot see it. There has to be a contrast line between what you want
to focus on and the surrounding area. But if this line runs in the opposite
direction of the how the CCD focus sensor is positioned, you are out of
luck again.

Many of the latest AF systems have attempted to fix these problems.
Orientation is the easiest to fix. Having little or no contrast between the
focus point and the surrounding area is almost impossible to fix.

I played with a Contax MF AF camera a while back. I tried to focus on a
Plexiglas magazine holder, from the side, on the counter at KSP. It was
holding View Camera magazine. The AF hunted forever. We all had a good
laugh. It took about 1/2 second to manually focus on the edge of the
magazine holder.

I believe that the H1 will sell very well. It has all of the features that
wedding (and similar) photographers really want. Auto everything. Auto
exposure, auto flash and auto flash fill, auto focus, 32 frames per roll,
interchangeable backs with an LCD that tells what's in the back and how
much is left, among other things, motor, hand grip, remote, seamless
integration of digital, etc, etc, etc...

My dealer, who sells more Hasselblad equipment west of the Rockies than
anyone except Samy's, say that they can sell the h*** out of these things.
And I believe them.

Me... Im a square. I have enough trouble dealing with my rectangular 35mm &
4x5!

Jim



Date: Tue, 24 Sep 2002 
From: Godfrey DiGiorgi [email protected]
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [HUG] Haselblad H1

I can't imagine what y'all were expecting. If 645 system cameras
constitutes the arena in which the pros are working and in which all
the movement towards medium format digital is happening, Hasselblad
must have a competitive offering there or the brand will ultimately
fail. My reading of the various newsgroups seem to indicate that this
is so, and this is Hasselblad's response. I like many others prefer the
6x6cm film format, but for the vast majority of people making prints a
6x6 camera is effectively a 645 anyway ... 90% of the time the
additional 1.5 x 6 portion of the film format is lost in cropping to
standard sized output. Effectively, there's no loss in quality, and the
traditional Hasselblads remain available, at least for those who prefer
them.

I think we should be enthused that Hasselblad is a vital company
capable of change to meet the demands of the market place.

Godfrey

>> Just too conservative? Or do we really not need another 645 AF, no
>> matter if
>> it is made by Fuji or Hasselblad? I think the latter



Date: Tue, 24 Sep 2002 
From: Austin Franklin [email protected]
To: [email protected]
Subject: RE: [HUG] Haselblad H1 - talking out of both sides of their mouth...

Well, Hasselblad is now talking out of both sides of their mouth:

Quoted from the H1 lenses page:

"The HC lens use metal, not plastic, wherever possible, in order to ensure
their reliability and durability year after year."

But for the lenses they've been producing over the past so many years have
been using polycarbonate (plastic) and said that it was a better lense
because of it.  Now, they changed their mind, and we all have less reliable
and less durable lenses in our CFE and CFi lenses?

A quote from the CFE-CFi lenses page:

"A new front bayonet in a durable non-metallic material, which withstands
wear substantially better than previous designs."

So, is it more durable or less durable?  Is my 80/2.8 CFE a less reliable
and less durable lense?

Austin



Date: Fri, 27 Sep 2002 
From: "[email protected]" [email protected]
To: [email protected]
Subject: [HUG] H1/Kodak Pro back Sample Posted

For your perusal:
http://www.dpreview.com/news/0209/02092701kodakdcs645hsamp.asp

File size of the full sample is over 3MB so be prepared if you're still on
dial-up vs cable/adsl

Cheers,
Dave



Date: Fri, 27 Sep 2002 
From: Andre Oldani [email protected]
To: "hasselblad kelvin.net" 
Subject: Re: [HUG] New HB "H1" 645AF w/ Fuji!

Mehrdad,

"Mehrdad Sadat" under [email protected] wrote:

> it was only in us the 203fe was grossly overpriced, just saw a picture of
> the H1 at dpreview.com held by a woman. this is one big camera. i think it
> is the biggest 645 by all means

Maybe the girl is so tiny ;-)

Have you seen the picture taken with the back in detail? OK, maybe a
preproduction model but noise is heavy. The pictures from the tiny
Sigma/Foveon on the same side are much more impressive to me (apart from a
strange chromatic aberration in the edges I noticed here and in earlier
pictures, look at the dome picture, left upper corner).

Andr�d
My Websites
  Serious work on www.six-by-six.com



Date: Fri, 27 Sep 2002 
From: Jim Brick [email protected]
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [HUG] New HB "H1" 645AF w/ Fuji!

>Mehrdad Sadat wrote:
>
> > it was only in us the 203fe was grossly overpriced

 Q.G. de Bakker wrote:

>Hmm... I don't think many will agree. I certainly will not, and i'm not in
>the U.S.
>
>The projected price (or is that still very much just a rumour) of the H1
>looks dangerously high too. Over US$ 5000 for a kit? Wow!

I bought a 203FE 1.5 years before the price drop. While it would have been
nice to save the extra money, I am in no way sorry that I bought the 203FE
when I did. To me, it is worth every dollar I paid for it. An incredible
camera!

It is possible that the H1 kit is priced high. But I suspect that it has
the capability of saving wedding photographers a lot of time and will
prevent a plethora of shooting errors. Time = money and errors = a lot of
money.

The H1 may pay for itself, in appropriate industries, in short order.

Jim



Date: Fri, 27 Sep 2002 
From: Godfrey DiGiorgi [email protected]
Subject: Re: [HUG] H1 : any backwards compatibility????

It's been discussed almost to death already, but there is no
interchangeability of backs or other accessories. There is supposedly a
C-CFE lens adapter with limited functionality (no auto-aperture stop
down or shutter cocking with wind) planned for release.

The H1 is a new system from Hasselblad. It's challenge is cut out for
it already, but if it meets the traditional Hasselblad values in
craftsmanship and quality, produces pictures like it ought, it will be
a success.

Godfrey


[email protected] wrote:

> Is there any backwards compatibility on Blad's new venture? Film
> backs, cf lenses, etc?� Or is film the only thing they have in common
> with the stuff we have sitting on our tripods?
>
> Art


From: Godfrey DiGiorgi [email protected]
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: Saiyonana, Hasselblad!
Date: Fri, 27 Sep 2002 


Ya know, it might be well to actually see the camera in question before
you pass judgement on it. This report from a Photokina visitor and
Hasselblad user who actually had a chance to touch and play with the
H1:

> 6.) Hasselblad - another show stopper was this booth. The Hasselblad H1
> auto focus 645 AF camera gets nothing but praise from my brief
> encounter.
>
> Mr. Bob Nunn of Hasselblad was gracious enough to give a quick tour of
> this new marvel. The camera is stainless steel and feels and looks much
> better than any competitor on the market. The autofocus is fast and
> positive and the balance of the camera with grip is unmatched in this
> arena. The lenses are Fuji as with the Xpan, however it was stressed
> that this is a Hassy system with the same (if not better) components
> that one would find in a 500-200 series camera.
>
> The LCD screen on the H1 tells you everything but the
> weather...including showing a histogram of the image just
> taken...something that will go well with the Phase 1 Back made for this
> camera. I think we are seeing the birth of a great new system!!!

I'm keeping an open mind, and am very eager to see this camera when
they are available in the stores. Judging it, sight unseen, from a spec
sheet is meaningless.

Godfrey



From: Lourens Smak [email protected]
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: Saiyonana, Hasselblad!
Date: Sat, 28 Sep 2002

Godfrey DiGiorgi  wrote:

> > Mr. Bob Nunn of Hasselblad was gracious enough to give a quick tour of
> > this new marvel. The camera is stainless steel and feels and looks much
> > better than any competitor on the market. The autofocus is fast and
> > positive and the balance of the camera with grip is unmatched in this
> > arena. The lenses are Fuji as with the Xpan, however it was stressed
> > that this is a Hassy system with the same (if not better) components
> > that one would find in a 500-200 series camera.

I actually found it a bit "plasticky", maybe because of the finish and
color, but I suspect it's also because of the super-tiny plastic
pushbuttons and scrollwheels. The tiny buttons are everywhere, and the
feel of these controls is what gives this "plastic" feel. "stainless
steel" sure sounds nice, but it's nowhere to be seen; what you do see is
plastic. The lenses almost look "cheap" because of this, and because
they have no aperture ring...they look "simple". I liked the
viewfinder-info, a dot-matrix display that shows everything.
Illumination was a bit bright though.

What disappointed me the most was the feel of the shutter-release; it
doesn't have a clear pressure-point, and it's 2-step of course, so you
need to be able to press it halfway. Room for improvement here.

Also, the "looks much better than any competitor on the market" part is,
well, subjective maybe. I personally think the Contax 645 looks 10 times
better and much more elegant, and the H1 looks very Japanese.


Autofocus speed was OK and it was very silent, but my Nikon F4 focuses
faster with most lenses I think, and that camera is considered slow.
(The H1 had the 50-110 zoom mounted) Of course I haven't compared them
directly...It just felt (a bit) slower than my F4 in speed.

Balance was OK, but the weight of the huge zoom did make the combination
less than perfect, and quite heavy. Range of the zoom is small, much
like a 35-70 which I personally consider almost useless in 35mm. not
wide, not tele, just a slow and big normal lens. Wedding photographers
may like it very much, on the other hand... a missed opportunity is that
the 80mm is only 2.8; it could have been a F2 lens. (like the Contax has)

In short: a great camera with some unique -mostly electronic- features,
but also with minor things that could be improved. The system is too
small at the moment, with only 4 lenses, but 3 more are scheduled for
mid-2003. It needs CR-123 lithium batteries which sounds to me like a
stupid mistake. The rechargeable battery is an accessory. Let's hope it
turns out to be reliable; otherwise, Hasselblad is probably gone, as
they seem to have gambled heavily on the success of this system.

your reporter from cologne, germany:
Lourens



From: Lourens Smak [email protected]
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: Saiyonana, Hasselblad!
Date: Sat, 28 Sep 2002 

 "Jeremy" [email protected] wrote:
> The lingering question in my mind is this: are they building the camera in
> the far east so they can maximize their profits by cutting costs?  Could
> they have built it in their own factories, using their own people?

I don't think they build the camera in the far east to cut cost; I think
Hasselblad alone could *never* design and manufacture this camera. They
just don't have the know-how for it. I got the chance yesterday in
Cologne to handle one, and it's like a 6x4,5 EOS...  The contrast with a
500cm couldn't be bigger.

> Only time will tell, but there is the possibility that they mey end up
> diluting their own brand name.

It's funny, a while ago there was this rollei<>hasselblad discussion,
and the mentioned strong points of the Blad were: battery independance,
small size+low weight, and the Zeiss optics. All of these are gone with
the H1, even the size... both complete with 80mm, it weighs more than a
Rollei 6008. (6008 with hood, and H1 with prism, which probably makes
all the difference)

Time will tell, but I think long-time hasselblad users will maybe not
all like this new camera, (for reasons above, and also because nothing
they own fits...) and MF starters may not like the price. (and the small
system, at the moment) It could either be a huge success or the
beginning of the end of Hasselblad...

;-)
Lourens.


From: John Halliwell [email protected]
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: Saiyonana, Hasselblad!
Date: Fri, 27 Sep 2002


Jeremy [email protected] writes
>It seems to me that this new camera system is going to sell to advanced
>amateurs, that want automation along with the Hasselblad trademark (even if
>the camera is not actually manufactured by Hasselblad), rather than
>Hasselblad's core professional market.

You have to make that 'very wealthy advanced amateurs' (possibly adding
the rider 'with a screw loose'). Most advanced amateurs would find a
used 645 outfit hard enough to reach price wise, never mind a top dollar
state of the art 645 AF. If they wanted a Hasselblad system, why not go
for a used 6x6 instead? Unless they make a living from photography, 645
shooters probably can't afford H'blad prices.

I imagine anyone who already wanted a 645 AF SLR with excellent lenses
would already have bought the Contax. If they can see beyond the lenses,
they'd probably have bought the Mamiya or Pentax. Adding another largely
gives Contax a competitor (but H'blads obsession with Zeiss lenses and
their quality will work against them).
--
John
Preston, Lancs, UK.
Photos at http://www.photopia.demon.co.uk



Date: Thu, 26 Sep 2002 
From: Stuart Phillips [email protected]
To: [email protected]
Subject: [HUG] Hasselblad H1- News from New Jersey

Spoke to someone at Hasselblad NJ today on a different topic but we got
talking about the H1. This is what I recall from the conversation:

1. A major potential audience is wedding photographers, or as they put it "a
lot of these will be in the hands of wedding photographers".
2. They don't have a price  yet, but the intention is to bring it in around
the price of a similarly equipped 503cw.
3. An adapter for the 6x6 lenses will not be released soon ie with the H1
but is definitely planned for later release.
4. There is real excitement at NJ about the product which they haven't seen
yet.
5. We talked a little about the battery consumption - it's going to have a
9.something volt rechargeable battery pack . On the other hand he mentioned
very finely balanced lenses so as to minimize power consumption.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Christopher Williams" [email protected]
To: [email protected]
Sent: Wednesday, September 25, 2002 
Subject: Re: [HUG] Hasselblad H1

> Looks like you can with a adapter, maybe.
>
> Chris
> New Orleans



Date: Thu, 26 Sep 2002 
From: "Dr. Ulrik Neupert" [email protected]
To: [email protected]
Subject: [HUG] Hasselblad H1 first impressions

Hi,

I have been at the Photokina and had a look at the new Hasselblad H1. This
is a very advanced camera with all features one might hope for. It fits
perfectly in my hands, AF is very fast, the Highpoint-Viewfinder is perfect
for wearers of glasses.

Why did they make it 6x4,5? Because this way they could design a camera that
is not too big and heavy for handholding and action shots. And because this
is the format that will benefit from digital backs more than 6x6 in the near
term.

What about compatibility? You can't use older magazines. They plan to
provide an adaptor for older lenses. Keep in mind that this is not an easy
task. BTW, adapting F- and FE-lenses makes no sense as the camera has no
internal shutter. Adapting central shutter lenses requires some work as the
Haselblad V-lenses require a mechanical linkage for release and shutter
cocking while the H1 only has electrical contacts. But they said that there
will be an adapter in the future, but do not expect it to be cheap.

You can't use older viewfinders. The viewfinder of the H1 is exchangable. As
yet no other finders are available. One problem comes to my mind: the
metering is incorporated in the prism.

The camera has Fujinon lenses. Overriding the AF manually is no problem (but
also not necessary?).

Some parts of the cameras are made in Sweden, I expect at least the camera
shell and the internal structure will be made by Hasselblad.

The shutter release will need some practice. It's easy to fire a shot when
you only wanted to focus.

The price of the kit (body, viewfinder, magazine, standard lens) is about
5900 Euro/US$

The camera made a very good impression, if somebody is looking for a perfect
and fast 6x4,5 SLR (I am not), that's the camera.

Ulrik


From contax mailing list:
Date: Wed, 25 Sep 2002 
From: [email protected]
Subject: [Contax] non-Zeiss lenses on Hassy 645AF

My understanding was that Zeiss partnered with only one manufacturer per format
or market segment. Since they're already working with Contax on their 645, that
would mean no Zeiss lenses for use on anyone else's 645.

-Steve


From contax mailing list:
Date: Wed, 25 Sep 2002
From: Bernard Cousineau [email protected]
Subject: Re: [Contax] non-Zeiss lenses on Hassy 645AF

> My understanding was that Zeiss partnered with only one manufacturer per format
> or market segment. Since they're already working with Contax on their 645, that
> would mean no Zeiss lenses for use on anyone else's 645.

Between Contax, Hasselblad, Rollei and Alpa, there is a lot of competition
between different brands that use Zeiss lenses in the same market
segment/format:

35mm p/s: Rollei, Contax/Kyocera
35mm slr: Contax, Rollei
6x6 slr: Hasselblad, Rollei
6x6 non-slr: Rollei, Alpa

...and these are just current products. Historically, Zeiss has partnered with
even more firms (Linhoff, Leica and Graflex come to mind).
I am sure that Hasselblad's decision to go with Fuji for this new project is
due to other factors. If Fuji did indeed put up half the cash, they would
certainly want to make the lenses...

Bernard




Date: Thu, 26 Sep 2002 
From: [email protected]
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [HUG] CFE for H1

Sharookh

> I would have thought that with the continuous upgradation (read - not
> necessarily quality) to CFE lenses which are compatible with C and F
> bodies, Hasselblad would have adapted the CFE range for the H1as well.

The C(F)(E/i) type of lenses need to be cocked manually. That is done while
you are advancing the film. The H1's leaf shutter is operated
electrically/electronically. Building a mechanism that could cock Victor's lenses would have
an enormous impact on the H1. My guesses what you would have to pay for it:

- much larger body because of additional gearing and motors
- much higher noise level because of mechanical parts
- much more energy consuming

> >From what I understand this is not the case - unfortunate.... Just
> imagine the potential sales if these lenses were made available for all
> three system ranges!!!

HB seems to have a very clear picture of their target group for the H1. If I
would earn my living with weddings etc. maybe I would invest 25K+ USD (H1
some 6 to 7K, Kodak back some 11K, each additional lens some 2-3K, I guess...),
but just maybe...

I gave up my Contax 645 for the sake of the square and more manual
operation. I wouldn't trade in my 203FE for a H1 nor buy an additional system. If they
would bring a 6x6 range finder with Zeiss lenses...OK that's something
completely differen :-)

Andr�



From: "Q.G. de Bakker" [email protected]
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: New Hasselblad
Date: Tue, 24 Sep 2002


Jeff wrote:

> Is it really a rebadged Fuji?

No. It's a new product. There's mention of a joint venture with Fuji Film
Group. Who did/does what is not known. Most likely scenario: Hasselblad
initiated the project and did the research (they were awarded a U.S. patent
for a thingy used in electronic shutters, like the one in the H1), and Fuji
did the optics. They probably share building the thing: again Hasselblad
(most of) the hardware, Fuji the optics and electronics.



From: [email protected] (BandHPhoto)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com
Subject: Hasselblad 645 AF announced


The Hasselblad H1 is a new 6x4.5 autofocus camera with (apparently) a leaf
shutter, permitting x-sync to 1/800 sec.

Lenses include 50~110/3.5-4.5, 80/2.8, 150/3.2, 35/3.5, 210/4, 120/4 & 50/3.5
plus a 1.7x teleconverter.

Two magazines -- 120/220 or Polaroid.

Fully compatible with the new Kodak 16 MP, ISO 100-400, DCS Pro Back 645H.

More at http://www.hasselbladusa.com/.
===

regards,
Henry Posner/B&H Photo-Video
http://www.bhphotovideo.com
[email protected]




Date: Thu, 26 Sep 2002 
From: Tom Christiansen [email protected]
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [HUG] CFE for H1

Andre,

>The C(F)(E/i) type of lenses need to be cocked manually. That is done while
>you are advancing the film. The H1's leaf shutter is operated
>electrically/electronically. Building a mechanism that could cock Victor's
>lenses would have
>an enormous impact on the H1. My guesses what you would have to pay for it:

Well. If I remember correctly, there is an adaptor that can fit a
Hasselblad on a Contax 645 body. NAH-1, I believe is the name/number of it.
Unless the adaptor requires that you use the F-mode of the Hassy lens, that
adaptor would need to have a motor in it - which isn't that big of a deal.
Motors are pretty small these days - your cell phone contains one!! It's
used for the vibrating "ring".

>- much higher noise level because of mechanical parts

Yes.

>- much more energy consuming

Indeed. However, Contax didn't seem to think that was a problem on the 645.

Tom



Date: Fri, 27 Sep 2002 
From: "Dr. Ulrik Neupert" [email protected]
Subject: AW: [HUG] CFE for H1 and Service Clinic

Moin,
I was at the Photokina again yesterday and a Hasselblad representative
suggested that an adapter for C(F,Fi,FE,B)-lenses would allow to cock the
lens manually. At least this is more advanced than using a hat.

If anybody of you is going to the Photokina, take all your Hasselblad gear
with you. They have the Hasselblad Service Clinic there where they check
your equipment (including shutters) for free. Funny enough all my 4 old
C-lenses were within specifications while the 15th of a second was too long
on my two CF-lenses.

Ulrik

> >The C(F)(E/i) type of lenses need to be cocked manually. That is
> done while
> >you are advancing the film. The H1's leaf shutter is operated
> >electrically/electronically. Building a mechanism that could
> cock Victor's
> >lenses would have
> >an enormous impact on the H1. My guesses what you would have to
> pay for it:



Date: Sun, 29 Sep 2002 \
From: [email protected]
To: [email protected]
Subject: [HUG] Impression on H1 from Photokina

Hi All,

I spoke today with a regional Hasselblad distribution representative who was
in Photokina for the H1 revealing. He was sent there by Hasselblad, so he got
the full presentation on the new camera. The following are some of the things
he said to me about the new product.

First of all, this camera has been 5 years in development. This isn't
something that was rushed to market, nor would you expect such a conservative
company as Hasselblad to develop an entirely new camera line in haste. This
camera is truly the most advanced ever concieved. It is capable of anything,
short of making a cup of coffee. The interface between lens, camera and
film/digital back is completely digital...no analog signals. In otherwords,
any and all internal functions can be improved via firmware or software
upgrades. I asked him how it compared to the Mamiya AF-D, and he said that
camera doesn't have near the potential. The Kodak representatives said the H1
was the first camera that had more capabilities than they could think of to
use with the interface to the digital back they make for it. An example that
was mentioned in coversation was the posibility of embedding GPS location
information within a digital file, or even imprinted between frames or along
the edge of the image on film! My friend said that one of the exercises the
company did with the representatives there was to try and think of any
function they could imagine a camera doing, anything...and there was nothing
that could be thought of (that had to do with camera functionality) that
wasn't possible. This is truly a super advanced camera. In addition it's
performance will be on par with any other camera, or better, that includes
35mm camera handling! The autofocus and ergonomics is as good as any, and the
build quality thoroughly Hasselblad.

I did ask him why they worked with Fuji instead of Carl Zeiss on the lenses,
and he said a couple of factors is that Fuji helped with some of the
development of the camera in addition to the lenses, and that the lenses would
have been more expensive with Carl Zeiss stamped on them. He also said, that
the success they had with the Xpan camera development was a factor in the
partnership. He claimed that the MTF figures on these lenses are impressive
and show no loss in quality compaired to any Carl Zeiss counterparts. In
addition, I asked him about the Foveon partnership, and why that hasn't
manifested a product, and he said that at this point Hasselblad has decided
not to get into the business of making digital backs, but is instead
cooperating with other manufacturers in providing development support and
interface information so that they (i.e. Kodak, Phase one, etc.) can compete
in making constantly improved digital backs.

This last point I feel is a very wise move from Hasselblad, as the ever
changing technology of digital capturing equipment is a fickle beast for
manufacturers, as witnessed by the current announcements by both Kodak and
Canon. I'll bet Canon was expecting to blow the doors open with the EOS-1Ds,
but were left looking like a "me too" offering next to Kodak's cheaper, higher
resolution product (not that I'm saying one of these cameras is better than
the other, just making the point that the professional digital SLR market is
in such a state that the camera companies are scrambling like computer chip
manufacturers to stay ahead of each other). Hasselblad has wisely stayed out
of this race by doing what they do best, designing and making a top quality
camera product that will not be left obsolete within months of being purchased
by the consumer. They see the longterm advantage of making a product that is
so advanced, it incorporates all the features that will be needed in any known
circumstance, and can be adapted to any configuration that may not even be yet
anticipated. Personally, I think this is brilliant.

In terms of the 6x6 question, well that is a legitimate quibble. I'm sure
Hasselblad looked long and hard at that question, and made thier decisions
very carefully. The fact is, the V line of cameras and (C)Fx lenses are as far
developed as they can be in practical terms (I'm sure many will protest this,
but come on...I mean what else can they do? These cameras are damn near
perfect for being totally mechanical in nature!). The H camera is a complete
departure, and as such takes advantage of every opportunity that is inherent
in designing a camera from the ground up. I'm sure the V line will be around
for a long time, as will film, I know I'll keep using mine with film for a
long time...but digital is the eventual future, and the H camera, along with
any future incarnations (i.e. a 6x6 model??? who knows!), is the heir
apparent.

I say well done Hasselblad, this old dog showed it still knows a few tricks!

Robert Welch
http://www.rwphotography.com


From hasselblad mailing list:
Date: Tue, 1 Oct 2002 
From: [email protected]
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Re: [HUG] H1 questions

Date:   10/01/2002  
From:  Niklas Granhage
To:  "[email protected]".TFS.GOT84
Subject:  Re: Re: [HUG] H1 questions

Hi Simon

Since I just joined the group I have no idea about previos questions. Please
ask again.

Here are some size specification on the H1:

Camera body:
144x110x88 (mm)
800 g (including battery)

Viewfinder:
78x47x132 (mm)
330 g

Magasine:
97x83x56 (mm)
475 g (including film)

80 mm Lens:
Diameter: 84 mm
Length: 69 mm
450 g

I do not have any numbers on the Contax but I am sure that you will find them.
I think that the size is more or less equal.

Since I work for Hasselblad I will not do any comparisions between Hasselblad
and any other camera brands. I will only tell what the H1 is capable of. I am
sure that this will be tested soon by a more indepentent tester.

Niklas


 "[email protected]" 02-10-01 
Niklas

A warm welcome and encouraging to see Hasselblad, and you in particular,
joining us to lend your expertise and knowledge.  I am sure there will be
many questions about the H1, some already raised.  You may have seen the
comments regarding the use of Fuji lenses instead of Zeiss and the various
opinions about the reasons for getting onto the 645 arena rather than
progressing the existing 6X6 format systems.

I was tempted to buy the Contax 645 a while back as I saw it as a very
usable larger format (than 35mm) system that could be used in the same way
as I was using my Contax N1 system.  The size and weight were similar and
the AF, metering and handling were comparable, but I would get better image
quality.

The H1 looks enourmous in the hands of the young lady in one of the
Photokina images.  How does its size compare to the Contax 645, and how
would you rate the Fuji lenses compared to the Contax 645 Zeiss ones?

Simon


From hasselblad mailing list:
Date: Tue, 1 Oct 2002 
From: [email protected]
Subject: Ang: Re: [HUG] H1 questions

Date:   10/01/2002 
From:  Niklas Granhage
To:  "[email protected]".TFS.GOT84
Subject:  Ang: Re: [HUG] H1 questions

Hi again

The TTL light metering is located in the viewfinder and has the following modes:

* Average (70%)
* Center weigted (20%)
* Spot (2%)

Right now the only availible viewfinder is the 90 degree viewfinder..........

When using continous drive, the speed with the film magasine will be more than
2 frames per second.

Right now there are two possible power supplies for the camera. The normal
battery pack takes three lithum CR-123 cells. This will give you more than 2000
exposures with normal use of the camera. Also avaible is a rechargable battery
pack in the same housing. This has about half the capacity as the normal pack.

The camera will not work at all without batteries.

Each magasine has its own setting of film speed and film type. The magasine has
barcode detection of film speed and film type and automatically adjust the
pressure plate. If no barcode is present, the user has to enter the filmspeed
and type manually (of course). It is possible to see the current setting and
the frame number (up- or down-counting) even when the magasine is not attached
to the camera.

I am not sure what you mean with "Is it more the fill in type as with the
2xx/50x series?". The TTL Flash system measures an area of app. 20% of the film
area. A separate Flash adjustment can be set from -3 to +3 EV. It is possible
to sync the flash both normal and rear (like first or second curtain, but we do
not have a curtain sutter :)

If you use studio flash it is also possible to use the Flash TTL system as a
flash meter. The exposure is done on the auxilary shutter (the film is not
exposure, nor winded). The camera makes a measurement and the error is
presented between +2 and -2 EV. Best regards

Niklas

 "[email protected]" 02-10-01

Hello Niklas

Welcome to the list. Thanks for joining and helping us understanding this
quite remarable move HB did.

As a Contax 645 convert (to a 203FE) I have some initial questions:

* H1 comes with a prism that allows TTL metering.
** What characterisic the metering has the H1? Integral, matrix, spot, many?

*A  waist level finder (WLF) may come up as it is sometimes the best
solution for stealth picture taking (it's not like aiming with a gun to
somebody).

** Once we see a WLF, is the whole metering stuff in de prism and gone
detaching it? The C645 remains with spot, only integral metering is in the prism.
** Using the WLF on the C645 was sometimes a pain as the hand grip is
optimised for 90degree viewing. Have you thought about that problem?

*Motor speed and film flatness
** As the H1 is targeted also to the "quicker shooters" what is the film
advancing speed of the back/whole system and what have you forseen to optimise
film flatness?

* Energy consumption

** With a conventional load of batteries what is the average number of films
(in terms of 120 or 220) we can expect?

** As there are minimal mechanical interfaces: Is the camera without battery
power completely inoperable?

* Flash system and ISO
** I expect the film speed to be preset on each back individually. Am I right?
** How would you caracterise the TTL flash system? Is it more the fill in
type as with the 2xx/50x series?.

Well, that's a quick list for the moment :-)

Greetings from Switzerland and best regards,
Andr�


From hasselblad mailing list:
Date: Wed, 2 Oct 2002
From: [email protected]
Subject: Ang: RE: Re: [HUG] H1 questions

Date:   10/02/2002  
From:  Niklas Granhage
To:  tfs:"[email protected]"
Subject:  Ang: RE: Re: [HUG] H1 questions

Hi

To support both 120 and 220 film type the pressure plate has to be adjusted (of
course). If the film has a barcode this is done automatically. Otherwise the
film type (120/220) has to be selected manually (on the magazine). The pressure
plate is then moved by the magazine motor.

The only availble viewfinder today is the 90 degree viewfinder. All light
metering (average, center weigted and spot) is in the viewfinder. I can not
comment on any future products.

Niklas

 "[email protected]" 02-10-01 wrote:
Hi Niklas,

> The magasine has barcode detection of film speed and film type
> and automatically adjust the pressure plate.

Why does it need to do that?  My understanding is, for the V camera backs,
the pressure plates are exactly the same...  Also, is the pressure plate
manually adjustable for 120/220?


> *A  waist level finder (WLF) may come up as it is sometimes the best
> solution for stealth picture taking (it's not like aiming with a
> gun to somebody).
> ** Once we see a WLF, is the whole metering stuff in de prism and gone
> detaching it? The C645 remains with spot, only integral metering
> is in the prism.
> ** Using the WLF on the C645 was sometimes a pain as the hand grip is
> optimised for 90degree viewing. Have you thought about that problem?

I'd like to hear a response to this too...

Regards,

Austin


From: [email protected] (Niklas Granhage)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: H1 questions
Date: 2 Oct 2002

...

> Hello Niklas,
>
> Don't take this the wrong way, the last thing i want to do is offend you,
> but it must be asked: were you perhaps urged by your employer to counter
> the..., well..., not 100% welcoming reception the H1 got in this and other
> discussion groups? Are you free to share your personal views opinions, or
> are you the "voice" of Hasselblad AB?
>
> However, it's great to have someone participating in these discussion who,
> unlike the rest of us, really knows the stuff being discussed. I look
> forward to your input.
>
> One H1 related question: this built-in flash thingy. What's that all about?
> ;-)

Hi

When I returned from Photokina I found that there are many incorrect
rumours regarding the H-system of Hasselblad (such as Fuji builds the
whole camera). All I want to do is to inform all of you who were not
able to see the camera at Photokina about its features and functions.
I will NOT do any comparisions with other camera systems. I will NOT
tell you anything about furure products, except those that have
already been officially announced (like the second launch of lenses).

The built-in flash in the viewfinder is for fill-in flash purposes. It
is TTL-controlled and has guide number 12.

Also availible on the viewfinder is a hot-shoe for a Metz SCA-adapter
(TTL-controlled). All flashes compatible with the Metz SCA3002 system
can be used with the adapter SCA3902.

On the left side of the camera there is a connector for normal flash
sync as well.

Niklas



From: Per Nordlund [email protected]
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: H1 questions
Date: Wed, 02 Oct 2002 


Robert Monaghan wrote:

> Greetings Niklas!
>
> I've heard very good reports on the speed of the AF in the H1 against
> older 645 competitors (and the rollei 6008AF) - can you provide any
> metrics or comparison info on how the new H1 relates to its competitors
> (and against some 35mm types, understanding the huge format differences)?
> How does the accuracy of the new AF focusing system compare against other
> 645 AF systems?
>
> a related question is on the qualities of the new lenses for the H1; are
> there any preliminary MTF or even resolution charts for these lenses?
> Looking at the contax 645AF lens tests, it appears that their center
> resolution was optimized (perhaps to assist the AF function?) while the
> edge resolutions are not nearly as "hot". Was there a philosophy or goal
> in the new H1 lenses?
>
> to what extent do the leaf shutters in the new lenses restrict the range
> of potential lens speeds? Are there plans for new lenses in the future?
>
> finally, any pointers to resources online on the new system, at VHB or
> Fuji or Minolta (subassemblies/lenses..) or other sites, which could
> provide info to those of us not lucky enough to make it to Photokina? ;-)
>
> thanks for your help and interest!  bobm


Hi Robert,
My name is Per Nordlund, and I'm another guy working at Hasselblad; with
optical design for H1, to be precise. I'll try to answer at least a few
of your questions.

1) Like Niklas, I will not do any comparisons. That will probably be
done by camera magazines quite soon.

2) Preliminary data sheet showing calculated MTF performance was shown
at our demo stand at Photokina. They will be at our web site soon, with
measured performance.

I will not speculate about the lens design decisions made by Zeiss for
the Contax 645 lenses.

One goal with the H1 lenses was that they should have even performance
over the entire focusing range. In some cases this will mean that top
performance is reached at a non-infinite distance. Another goal was that
out-of-focus background areas should be rendered pleasantly (some of you
might refer to this as "bokeh").


3) To some extent lens shutters do limit the lens speed range, but I
don't think it has been a problem for the H1 lenses so far.
Aside from the seven lenses announced, we do not yet comment on the lens
developments.

4) I have no better recommendations than our own web site.

BR, Per



Date: Tue, 01 Oct 2002 
From: Gordon Moat [email protected]
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: H1 questions


Good day to you Niklas,

I think those considering the H1 would also be looking at two other
cameras quite seriously. While the lower cost Bronica ETRSi, Mamiya 645
variations, and Pentax 645 could be considered competing products, I
think the Contax and Rollei are more likely considerations.

Contax has the 645 AF, with many similar features, and a similar look and
feel. I have rented one of these, and I was very impressed with the
handling, and ease of use. The other camera I would like to try, but is
unfortunately not on local rental lists, is the Rollei 6008i with 645
back. I tried a friends 6008i, and found the hand held shooting
experience comfortable and easy. They have recently introduced an AF
version, though I am more concerned with manual focus capabilities.

If I (or someone else) were to purchase either of these systems, the
Hasselblad may be a third choice. With that in mind, what advantages does
the Hasselblad H1 offer over the Contax 645 or the Rollei 6000 series
with 645 rotating back?

Also, is there a waist level finder planned for the future? Your site
states that manual focus activates just by moving the lens focus ring,
but is there a way to just shut AF off?

Thanks.

Ciao!

Gordon Moat
Alliance Graphique Studio
http://www.allgstudio.com/gallery.html

Niklas Granhage wrote:

> Hi
>
> My name is Niklas Granhage and I work at Hasselblad, in the H1
> software development team. I have joined this newsgroup to try to
> answers some questions regarding the H-system (there seems to be
> many!).
>
> If you have any questions regarding the V-system (200, 500 and 900), I
> am NOT the right person to ask.
>
> Best regards
>
> Niklas


From: [email protected] (Niklas Granhage)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: H1 questions
Date: 2 Oct 2002


"mp" [email protected] wrote...
> > My name is Niklas Granhage and I work at Hasselblad, in the H1
> > software development team. I have joined this newsgroup to try to
> > answers some questions regarding the H-system (there seems to be
> > many!).
>
> Hi Niklas,
>
> A few quick questions for now, if you don't mind:
>
> 1) Why the decision to go with CR123 Lithium batteries? Standard AA cells
> are much easier to get, and one can also choose from standard alkaline,
> nicad, nimh, as well as Lithium.
>
> 2) The photo of the HM 16-32 magazine on your web page looks to be square
> format. The text mentions the ability to change formats. What other formats
> are/will be available? What information is shown on the magazine LCD, and
> what kind of battery does it use. Can the magazine function without the
> battery?
>
> 3) How do the new lenses compare with equivalent 500 series Zeiss lenses?
>
> 4) Is information from digital backs (such as exposure mode, available
> memory, etc.) available in the viewfinder display?
>
> 5) Is data imprinting available in non-image areas, such as between the
> frames?

1) CR-123 batteries has better capasity compared to there size. Thay
are also better in cold conditions.

2) The magazine only supports the 645 format, but both 120 and 220
film. In the magazine LCD information about film type (120/220), film
speed, number of frames (up count or down count). When attached to the
camera the camera battery is used. When detached from the camera a
small coin battery CR2032 (located in the magazine) is used. If there
is no battery in the magazine it will work anyway, but you can not see
any information when the magazine is detached from the camera.

3) At least as good. Detailed information (such as MTF curves) will be
availble on the Hasselblad homepage quite soon.

4) Yes. Exposure mode is not something specific for the digital back.
A frame number is shown (0-999) and then it is up to the digital back
vendor to do the calculation. The viewfinder display is a dot-matrix
display and can also show warnings from the digital back such as
"Storage media full", "Storage media missing". In the Grip display
there is information about the selected White balance and selcet
format when a digital back is attached.

5) The data imprinting is made on the side of the film. Of course on a
non-image area.



From: John Halliwell [email protected]
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: $5.6k for kit.. Re: New Hasselblad H1
Date: Wed, 2 Oct 2002 

Struan Gray [email protected] writes
>It will be interesting to see if the H1 is a commercial success.  I
>have been surprised at just how many owners of 500-series cameras have
>indulged in public breast-beating because the company that made their
>camera twenty or more years ago has had the gall to make something else.
> I have also been surprised at how many people who a short while ago
>would have been insisting that snob appeal had nothing to do with their
>purchase are now wailing and gnashing their teeth because the lenses are
>made by Japanese elves instead of German ones.  Personally, I hope
>anyone who feels strongly enough to want to dump their gear for pennies
>in pique will have the decency to give me first option.

It's a bold move, especially given H'blads advertising through the
years. My impression of it is that they spent a lot of time isolating
themselves from the 645 format, by jumping in with everybody else,
they're opening themselves up to a tough fight.

Are they suggesting that only now is the right time to produce a
practical 645 camera? That modern technology finally permits such a
camera to be an effective tool? Pentax and Mamiya have been building
them for decades, Contax is a newbie to current medium format production
(so could possibly excused). Or are they aiming for high end 35mm users
(that built in flash might help there)?

The XPAN was a pretty much unique camera and managed to find a market
for itself, the H1 is being dropped right into perhaps the hardest
fought area of medium format at the moment, amongst several established
models:

Pentax - first on the scene, excellent metering and AF technology
brought from 35mm, compatibility with a huge range of earlier lenses,
good glass and reasonable prices.

Mamiya - probably the best current digital back interface, kind of
compatible with a large range of previous lenses, reasonably priced.

Contax - excellent lenses, removable backs and finder, although
expensive (but possibly cheaper than a H1). Lenses can fit the 35mm
bodies (including full 24x36 frame digital).

Rollei 6008AF - (assuming it makes it) revolving 645 format, excellent
lenses.

Perhaps the biggest advantage of the H1 is going to be 1/800th x-sync
(although the 6008AF probably gives up to 1/1000th with PQS lenses?). I
think the Contax goes to 1/250th which may be enough, Pentax and Mamiya
offer some leaf shutter lenses, but old manual focus types I guess.

--
John
Preston, Lancs, UK.
Photos at http://www.photopia.demon.co.uk


From hasselblad mailing list:
Date: Wed, 02 Oct 2002 
From: [email protected]
Subject: RE: [HUG] Impression on H1 from Photokina

Hi Austin,

Your responses to my last email clarifed one point to me, we have very
different photographic styles, and thus we differ in what we value in camera
functionality. Me, I'd have no use for a 200(x) series Hasselblad. Though I'm
sure the 110mm f/2.0 lens is magnificent, without a high shutter speed flash
sync it is too limited for me. My most common usage for the Hasselblad is
posed portraits outdoors in daylight. I'll use NPS or NPC film at ISO 160,
which gives me exposure ratings of 1/500-250th at f/4.0-8.0 with fill flash. I
like to keep my lens at f/5.6 or bigger if possible to get a nice blurred
background. With the H1 I would be able to open the lens up another 1/2 stop
which would give an even softer background. This is my bread and butter shot,
pays the rent as it were. For most of my other photography I'm using 35mm
Canon EOS gear, primarily because of it's handling ease and quickness of
operation. I shoot weddings in a largly photojournalistic manner, but do pay
careful attention to the formal photos which are very important around here as
my customers do have a traditional sensibility for photography (I live in
Louisiana, near New Orleans). All this is to say that I'm hoping the H1 might
prove to be the best of both worlds for me, the quality and flash sync
features of my CX503 with the speed and automation of my Canon EOS gear. The
next logical step for me would be to upgrade my Canon film cameras to digital,
and keep using the Hasselblad for the formal shots. However, if I could just
carry one camera system I would be very pleased and my back would be much
relieved as well!

As for the digital, there are many issues besides quality that are stearing me
in that direction. I've been using an Olympus E-10 for some studio
work--mainly headshots for business cards, etc.--and it has given me a sense
of the possitilities and limitations of digital. The main thing I notice is
that you have to learn how to use digital and control the shooting situation,
it's not like using film. In addition you have to manage your work flow
differently. If you do these things properly the quality, even from such a low
end camera as the E-10, can rival that of 35mm film (and with such backs as
the Kodak or Phase One, it's starting to rival medium format IF used
properly). In use though, digital's not as simple to handle as a film camera,
you have to be more mindful of what you're doing. Exposure has to be dead
balls on, more so than even with E-6 film. Backlighting and highlighting has
to be handled with skill. The entire workflow has to be calibrated and
profiled. White balance and other controls need to be properly set.

This is where the camera functionality comes into play. You asked what can the
H1 with a digital back can do that a 200/500 series camera with a digital back
can't do. One thing that comes to mind is image processing status information
readouts inside the viewfinder. If you are taking candid photos with the
camera up to your eye, and shoot a series of shots digitally in quick
succesion, the buffer may become full and not allow you to take another shot
until the images are processed. A counter inside the viewfinder may indicate
how many photos the buffer is currently able to handle, thus giving you an
idea of how quickly you might want to take concecutive shots. A similiar
feature in my Canon EOS-3 is a frame counter in the viewfinder. I'm always
looking to see how close I am to the end of the roll so that I know if I might
want to change film before I keep shooting. This may seem like a small thing
to you, but in my work it's very big. Having to take the camera away from my
eye, and look at the digital back (or film back) so see where it's at takes my
focus away from my subject, and at a wedding that can mean a missed photo
opportunity, which can mean less $ at the end of the day for me.

Other things that might be displayed in the viewfinder could include current
resolution settings, white balance setting,  error msgs, etc. As for the WLF
comments, I was reffering to using one with a 645 format, where it is much
less practical than the 6x6 format. Ever try to hold one sideways to get a
vertical photo? Believe me, it's not convient. Same goes for a 45 degree
finder, Unless all you ever take are horizontal photos, the 90 degree finder
is the only one that makes real sense with a 645 format camera. This is the
only reason I really like 6x6 format, I don't have to rotate the camera. As
for square photos, I always crop my photos to a standard rectangular size
except for proof prints.

These are the types of things that concern me, and are some of the issues that
make me very interested in the H1. As for you, well it doesn't seem that we
have similiar needs, and the H1 looks less likely to meet your needs. That's
why I'm sure they will continue making the 200/500 series cameras, those
cameras are supurb at what they do...but for autofocus and digital I think the
H1 is better.

Just my 2 cents,
Robert
http://www.rwphotography.com



Date: Thu, 3 Oct 2002 
From: "Q.G. de Bakker" [email protected]
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [HUG] H1 questions

[email protected] wrote:

 A 120 film has paper behind the film. Therefore the pressure plate needs
another position compared to 220 film, in order to put the film plane in the
correct position. For the V-system there are no magazines availible that
handles both 120 and 220 film. The A12 magazine handles 120 film and A24
handles 220 film. In these two magazines, the pressure plate has different
positions. 

Why?

The film position in the film gate is determined by the edges and rollers in
the film gate. The pressure plate is pushing the film against those. Does it
matter where the pressure plate is?
The absence of backing paper will affect the thickness of the 'pack' that
needs to be pushed into the correct position, and i can understand that one
would adjust pressure accordingly, but only (!) if the pressure supplied by
the plate is either too weak to push the thinner film into the right
position, or too strong to allow the thicker film-paper pack to pass
through.

But that's all about pressure. How about position?
We have all pushed against pressure plates in 120 and 220 magazines (we need
to to load film) and we know that they can be pushed back quite a long way
(the film catch in the V-System inserts does that too), well out of the
correct position. So how would such a system have a precisely set position
for either 120 or 220 film? All that is moving the film back again to where
it should be is spring pressure. So what else is determining position but
the film gate and plate pressure? How can the plate even be positioned
differently but by the actual thickness of the film c.q. film-paper pack
itself?

And looking at parts listings of V-System 120 and 220 backs, there does not
appear to be a difference between the pressure plate assemblies in both
items (no apparent difference between 120 and 220 inserts at all). Is there?



Date: Thu, 3 Oct 2002 
From: Peter Rosenthal [email protected]
To: Hasselblad forum [email protected]
Subject: Re: [HUG] H1 questions

Howdy All!

In regards to pressure-plate issues...  There seems to be a lot of
confusion (for good reason) about why there needs to be a moveable
(read: adjustable) pressure plate in the new cameras. I believe it's
strictly a matter of style and drag. Why would the pressure plate in a
Pentax 6x7, for example, be adjustable when for decades the
Hasselblad's isn't?! Niklas stated it has something to do with the fact
that both 120 and 220 film are not put through the same back (not the
same serial # anyway). In fact both ARE put through the same back (as
stated by Q.G. and others). Have been for a long time.

The only functional difference between the A24 and A12 is with the
winding mechanism. Since the film is PUSHED against the same rails in
both, the emulsion is in exactly the same place. By pushing the film
against these rails, there is a lot of drag created. Because of the
gearing and quality in these backs and the bodies as well, the drag
isn't a problem. The confusion arises when we assume that in the H1
cameras it is doing the same thing or should be. It isn't! In the
Pentax 6x7 and 35mm and H1 cameras (I assume it is in the H1, I've
never held one in my hands) the film IS NOT pushed against the rails.
There are two sets of rails not one. The pressure plate sits against
the outer, raised rails (no, they are not on the same plane) and the
film moves in the space created between the "pressure plate" and the
inner rails. Drag free. The only problem with this is the emulsion is
free to move the distance of the additional thousandths of an inch
created by the drag-free space. Not quite as accurate IMHO. When the
pressure plate is moved to the 220 position in a 6x7 and the H1's, a
larger space is created to accommodate the extra space needed. The
critical inner rails (they define the film plane) stay where they are.


As we can see (in spite of so many words), in 35mm cameras and the 6x7
and H1 it is not really a "pressure plate" as it is in the V cameras.
It merely confines the film and limits it's fore and aft movement. In
the V cameras it is a true pressure plate in every way.

Why did they do it this way? I believe it's because of the extra drag
created. In the 6x7, if they didn't do it this way, the already weak
main film drive gear/cog would snap the first and every time you wound
the film.

I hope this helps. Or at least makes sense.

Peter

Peter Rosenthal
PR Camera Repair
111 E. Aspen  #1
Flagstaff, AZ  86001
(928) 779-5263



Date: Thu, 3 Oct 2002 
From: Austin Franklin [email protected]
To: [email protected]
Subject: RE: [HUG] H1 questions


Hi Peter,

That is exactly what I was asking...and I believe your answer is probably
correct...I'm waiting for some confirmation.  It probably has to do with
that the H1 is a motorized film advance, and uses as small a motor as they
could get away with, and reducing drag reduces that requirement. Also, Fuji
and/or Minolta may have had some influence on that design/decision.

As an interesting note, the Contax RTS III, which has a vacuum back, has the
film registration point off of the pressure plate, not on the film gate, at
least as far as my discussions on this topic with Contax revealed.  Which,
for that camera, makes perfect sense...though different films have different
thicknesses, but my understanding is they optimized it such that it's in the
"middle" of the thicknesses of commonly used films available at the time it
was designed.

My Plaubel Makina 670 and Fuji GS645 both use this "film channel" instead of
pressing the film against the front rails...and they both has adjustable
pressure plates.  The Rollei TLR that uses both 120 and 220 does NOT adjust
the pressure plate for 120 vs 220 film, it's clearly stated in the 120/220
instructions to use the same pressure plate setting.  For the Rolleikin,
though, it does use the different pressure plate setting, as it uses a "film
channel" for 35mm film.

Regards,

Austin
...



Date: Thu, 3 Oct 2002 
From: Godfrey DiGiorgi [email protected]
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [HUG] H1 questions (pressure plates)

The pressure plate spacing from the emulsion side frame rails should
not be the same for 120 and 220 due to the different thicknesses of the
film. The pressure plate should NOT be pressing the emulsion against
the rails, it should be capturing the film between the rails and the
pressure plate stop, guiding the film's natural curl to be within the
predictable range designed for backfocus without putting stresses on
the film. See "Camera Technology, The Dark Side of the Lens" by Norman
Goldberg for more basic info on this subject.

I have no idea whether Hasselblad does this in the A12 and A24 backs.
If they do not, it is a sign of archaic design where I would expect a
more modern, more sophisticated design to do a better job.

I know Rollei did not with the Rolleiflex TLRs, but their design
predated 220 film capability by some years, 220 film was always a kluge
in those cameras (yeah, when you get to frame twelve, flip the lever
and watch the frames go from 1-12 again); the likelihood is that 220
film in a late model Rolleiflex was never positioned as accurately as
120 film. They did do this for use with the Rolleikin 35mm accessory
because it was obvious that precise positioning of the 35mm film plane
was needed for good performance with the smaller format.

Austin, you say your obdurate distrust of this new camera is not
emotional, is functionally based. The evidence of your continued
responses on this subject would indicate otherwise. Just because
Hasselblad has done something one way for X number of years does not
mean that it is without flaw and should not be updated with an
improved, better design in a new camera series.

Godfrey



Date: Thu, 3 Oct 2002 
From: Austin Franklin [email protected]
To: [email protected]
Subject: RE: [HUG] H1 questions (pressure plates)

Godfrey,

> The pressure plate spacing from the emulsion side frame rails should
> not be the same for 120 and 220 due to the different thicknesses of the
> film.

But on the H series backs, the pressure plate is the same.  Peter has
confirmed that.  There is no "spacing" (film channel), on the H series
backs, it's simply pressure...

> The pressure plate should NOT be pressing the emulsion against
> the rails, it should be capturing the film between the rails and the
> pressure plate stop, guiding the film's natural curl to be within the
> predictable range designed for backfocus without putting stresses on
> the film.

But that's not how the H series backs work...

> See "Camera Technology, The Dark Side of the Lens" by Norman
> Goldberg for more basic info on this subject.

Well, if that's all he says, then he's incomplete in his description of the
use of different methodologies...toss it out ;-)

> I have no idea whether Hasselblad does this in the A12 and A24 backs.

No, they do not "do this", and that's the point!

> If they do not, it is a sign of archaic design where I would expect a
> more modern, more sophisticated design to do a better job.


Why, does it not work fine?  Is there a particular problem you see that
needs solving?

> I know Rollei did not with the Rolleiflex TLRs, but their design
> predated 220 film capability by some years, 220 film was always a kluge
> in those cameras (yeah, when you get to frame twelve, flip the lever
> and watch the frames go from 1-12 again); the likelihood is that 220
> film in a late model Rolleiflex was never positioned as accurately as
> 120 film. They did do this for use with the Rolleikin 35mm accessory
> because it was obvious that precise positioning of the 35mm film plane
> was needed for good performance with the smaller format.

I disagree.  It was done because that is how 35mm film works, in a film
channel.  If it was necessary, Rollei had the movable pressure plate right
there, and they could have simply suggested using the "other" position, but
they did not.  Rollei was obsessed with film flatness, more so, I believe
than most other manufacturers, and didn't use two different positions.

> Austin, you say your obdurate distrust of this new camera is not
> emotional, is functionally based. The evidence of your continued
> responses on this subject would indicate otherwise.

I believe your arm chair analysis is mistaken.  I've only questioned
specific things, and given reasonable question to them, as have other
people.  How is that "emotional"?  I think you want to claim it's emotional,
so you can dismiss it, instead of having to actual get an answer to these
merely technical/operational questions.

> Just because
> Hasselblad has done something one way for X number of years does not
> mean that it is without flaw and should not be updated with an
> improved, better design in a new camera series.

But unless you can show the "flaws" your statement has no basis or reason.
Is there a problem with the results you get from your V series backs?  I
don't have any sharpness issues that are back related, that I am aware of,
except as noted with film sitting on the rollers.  I shoot mostly using the
110/2, full open...so I'd believe I'd see them before most.

Anyone can always create problems (or the perception of problems/issues)
simply so they can provide endless solutions to these "problems".  Not
saying that some aren't real, or that improvements aren't/can't be made, but
come on, just because they say something is an improvement, doesn't mean it
is, and it is certainly my place to ask for an explanation for the basis of
such claims.  I merely want to separate fact from fiction.

Austin


From: [email protected] (Niklas Granhage)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: H1 questions
Date: 3 Oct 2002


"Q.G. de Bakker" [email protected] wrote
> Lassi Hippel�inen wrote:
>
> > ...and does the frame have the Two Notches, without which no Good
> > Photographs can be taken. It would be unpleasant to have one's images
> > rejected, since they have obviously been taken with a Mamiya 645J...
>
> Of course it does have the Notches!

Yes! Of course it does have the Notches!

/Niklas


From: [email protected] (Niklas Granhage)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: H1 questions
Date: 3 Oct 2002


"David J. Littleboy" [email protected] wrote 
> "Niklas Granhage" [email protected] wrote:
> >
> > 2) The magazine only supports the 645 format, but both 120 and 220
> > film.
>
> Speaking of backs, how does film flatness compare with 6x6 Hassy backs?
>
> How much does it weigh with the 35mm lens attached?
>
> David J. Littleboy
> Tokyo, Japan

Hi

I will have to do some research to give you a good answer on film
flatness. I will come back to you.


Following is the size and weight (preliminary data) on all availble
modules:

Camera body:
Size: 144x110x88 (mm)
Weight: 800 g (including battery)

Viewfinder:
Size: 78x47x132 (mm)
Weight: 330 g

Magasine:
Size: 97x83x56 (mm)
Weight: 475 g (including film)

HC 50-110mm f3.5-4.5
Length: 152 mm
Dia: 103 mm
Weight: 1650 g

HC 80mm f2.8
Length: 69 mm
Dia: 84 mm
Weight: 450 g

HC 150mm f 3.2
Length:  124 mm
Dia: 86 mm
Weight: 970 g

HC 35mm f3.5
Length: 124 mm
Dia: 100 m
Weight: 975 g

The whole camera with a 35 mm should be around 2600g. [Ed. note: approx 5 lbs+]

Best regards

Niklas


From: [email protected] (BandHPhoto)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Date: 04 Oct 2002 
Subject: Re: New Hasselblad

If you crop 6x6 into a rectangle you are then using 645 anyway.

OTOH, I know MANY wedding shooters who sell 8x10 albums, shoot 6x6 and then
upsell to a 10x10 album. The retail markup is a good bit, but the photog's
expenses aren't, so the 8x10->10x10 upsell is very worthwhile.

It'll be darn hard to do with the H1 though.
===

regards,
Henry Posner/B&H Photo-Video
http://www.bhphotovideo.com
[email protected]



From: Struan Gray [email protected]
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: $5.6k for kit.. Re: New Hasselblad H1
Date: 4 Oct 2002


John Halliwell, [email protected] writes:

> It's a bold move, especially given H'blads advertising through the
> years. My impression of it is that they spent a lot of time isolating
> themselves from the 645 format, by jumping in with everybody else,
> they're opening themselves up to a tough fight.

        I agree.  But since they are routinely lambasted for complacency and
indolent laurel-sitting I think a spot of bare-knuckle competition will
probably be good for them, and maybe also their image.


> Are they suggesting that only now is the right time to produce a
> practical 645 camera? That modern technology finally permits such a
> camera to be an effective tool? Pentax and Mamiya have been building
> them for decades, Contax is a newbie to current medium format production
> (so could possibly excused). Or are they aiming for high end 35mm users
> (that built in flash might help there)?
       I think they are saying that now is the right time to migrate the
automation common in 35 mm systems upwards.  That is, this is the right
time for autofocus, and this is the right time to make cameras which
work easily and well with digital backs.

    The choice of format looks strange from the outside, but we are not
privvy to the production engineering data which would help make the
decision, particularly once price points are set.  One thing is clear -
the makers of image sensors are not rushing to produce chips which fill
the entire 6x6 frame, so why waste the image circle and deal with the
extra volume and mass of the square format?

        I am sure that luring 35 mm users is part of the mix, as indeed it
always has been.  If you own a mid or medium-high level 35 mm SLR kit,
moving up to the flagship model doesn't get you much that you actually
need, and usually adds a significant penalty in weight and bulk.  If
you're going to spend and carry that much, why not go MF?  The H1 will
seem much more familiar to a 35 mm auto-everything user than a V-series
model.


Struan



Date: Fri, 4 Oct 2002 
From: Stuart Phillips [email protected]
To: [email protected]
Subject: [HUG] H1 in Japan- It's a Fuji!

>From the British Journal of Photography (online):

 "An equivalent Fujifilm branded camera [to the H1] will be sold and
supported in Japan only."



From: Per Nordlund [email protected]
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: H1 questions
Date: Mon, 07 Oct 2002


Aloha!

1) Fujinon, in Japan.

2) Fujinon Super-EBC.

3) DC.

4) Double turn.

Best regards,

Per Nordlund\H1 Optical Design

[email protected] wrote:

> Aloha Niklas, and thank you for being a direct contact for questions, I
> live in Hawaii so good info is only availible online.
>
> My questions are:
>
> 1. Who makes the lenses for the H1, and where are they made?
>
> 2. What is the Multi-coating, I'm quite sure that it is more than OK,
> but is it HFT, T*, or EBC.
>
> 3. What is the motor driving the lens, ultrasonic?
>
> 4. What is the loading path of the film in the back? Straight like
> Rollei or double turn like Mamiya 645?
>
> Again, many thanks for the service of answering.
>
> Aloha.


From: [email protected] (Evanjoe610)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Date: 07 Oct 2002 
Subject: Re: H1 questions


Hi Per,

Robert Monaghan and Q.G. de Bakker had pretty much spoken what every V system
owner has been asking for.  I had to resort to buying into a 2000FCM system to
have some lenses adapted for the Hasselblad 200/2000 series.  To fill in for
some specialize function, such as the shift PCS lens, I bought a Hartblei 65mm
F3.5 PCS lens. I recently bought a CZJ 180mm Pre-Set Sonnar adapted  for thre
hasseblald. The 180mm was mainly for the F2.8 aperature.

Eventually I would perfer to buy some fast lens and a new German short zoom
focal lens. (45 to 100mm range??) A longer zoom from 110 to 250mm, similar to
the Schnieder-Kreuznach 140-280mm. The optics could be either a Zeiss,
Schnieder, or Rodenstock.  Please give my regards to Herr Kornelius Flesicher
and I do hope to see anyone from Zeiss at the PhotoPlus Expo in NYC.

Evan


From: "Q.G. de Bakker" [email protected]
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: H1 questions
Date: Thu, 10 Oct 2002


Per Nordlund wrote:

> when we have major partnerships or co-operations with other
> manufacturers we tell. Otherwise we don't. Some co-operations you might
> not consider "major" are also public due to traditions.

Lens quality is a major thing when trying to sell a camera system, wouldn't
you agree? Zeiss lenses in particular have helped make Hasselblad what it is
today, in a major way. So introducing a lens of unknown origin, but which
without doubt is not one of those revered Zeiss lenses, is indeed a "major"
concern to us, your customers.

And before some misunderstanding arises let me add that i, for one, and i'm
sure many others too, are quite willing to accept lenses that are not made
by Zeiss: all we want to know (!) is whether or not they are good enough.
We do know Zeiss (and now we also know that they can make less good lenses
too, viz. the CB line. But those only appeared, as Kornelius Fleischer has
let on, against the advice of Zeiss, on persistance by Hasselblad AB. ;-)),
and Schneider. But we do not know designer and manufacturer 'X'. Shrouding
such a thing in a veil of secrecy does not help. That's all.

> And no, the truth isn't at all dreadful:-) Quite the reverse in my mind.

Aha! So it must be a Per Nordlund design made by Kyocera!


From: [email protected] (Evanjoe610)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Date: 08 Oct 2002 
Subject: Re: H1 questions


Q.G. de Bakker,

Basically, that was what was told to me by Mike Fourman.  I will be seeing him
at PhotoPlus Exo. I will present the same question to him.

For everyone who is interested in the Hartblei solution to PCS lenses, please
take note that there are 3 options that I know of from them.

45mmF3.5 PCS
45mmF3.5 PS-T-S
65mmF3.5 PCS

There is also another option, the Arsat 55mF4.5 PCS from Zavod Arsenal OR Kiev
Arsenal. Unfortunately, this lens is out of production.

In order for Hartblei to manufacture any lens for the Hasselblad 200/2000
series mount, they will need a minimum order of at least 10 lens to built
before they go forward.

Now, granted that the majority market of Hasselblad
camera lenses are the 500 series. meaning a shutter lenses.  Hartblei would
need to secure a reliable source of shutters before they start to produce any
lenses.

If there is enough of an order to take for the shutterless lenses such as the
PCS lenses AND also a Hasselblad mount 30mm Fisheye, Hartblei will produce it.
The best person to deal with Hartblei , is Mike Fourman. I have spoken with him
numerous times on this subject. The bottom line is a secure order that will
warrant manufacturing the lenses in quantity.

For this to happen, there must be enough of a demand and commitment to go
forth. So if anyone is interested, tel Mike Fourman that you are interested in
a 3rd Party option for Hasselblad mount lenses.

By the way, I have a Hartblei 65mmF3.5 PCS in Hasselblad 200/2000 mount. It is
sharp andwill give me the shift that I need.

Evan


From: [email protected] (Steve Gombosi)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: H1 questions
Date: 9 Oct 2002

Q.G. de Bakker [email protected] wrote:

>It's a shame though. A camera system that allows you to do everything,
>except urban landscape and architectural photography.
>Yes, i know about the PC Mutar, but come on... So, dear people at
>Hasselblad, please come up with a real (i.e. not just one that works, but
>one that is affordable too) alternative to the Mamiya's and (sigh...) Kiev
>shift solutions!

It would almost certainly have to be an F lens (or else it would require
a double cable release like the PC-Mutar). Getting the shutter coupling
for a C type lens to work through a shifting mount would be a mechanical
engineer's worst nightmare.

If they made it an F series lens, there's no reason
not to add a tilt capability, too.

Now *that* would be an interesting product. In fact, it might even be
enough to persuade me to trade my 500 C/M in on a 203.

As long as we're compiling a wish list, here's what I'd like to see:

1) A 500-series body with a built-in coupled meter (I can almost hear
   Q.G. gagging from 20,000 kilometers away). There are lots of subjects
   for which I prefer to use a waist-level finder rather than my PME-5.
   It'd be nice to have TTL metering in that mode. Not essential, mind you,
   but nice.

2) As long as Hassy is building C series lenses with databus contacts, how
   about running a sync line from the lens shutter to a connector on the body.
   That way, you could put a PC socket on the body which would sync with the
   *lens* shutter (rather than the rear flaps like the old C bodies).
   It's just a wire, after all. It'd probably cost you about $10.00 per lens
   and you could raise the price by $100 or $200. This (along with that
   nifty CW winder) might be enough to persuade a lot of wedding photographers
   to upgrade their aging C series bodies and lenses.

   Why would this be so? Well, one of the most annoying things about
   using a Hasselblad for candid shooting with flash is the necessity
   for unplugging and replugging the sync cord every time you change
   lenses. It increases the potential for user error significantly - I
   don't know a single wedding photographer who hasn't blown a shot
   under pressure because of this (i.e., failing to reconnect the sync
   when doing a fast lens switch).

   You'd have to keep the sync socket on the lens for compatibility
   with older bodies, of course.

3) As I edge ever closer to the age of 50 (yikes!), I do sometimes long for
   a prism finder that offers focus confirmation for low light (and I
   thought Q.G. was gagging before ;-) ).

4) A new 500mm would be nice ;-). I've been saving my pennies for one of those
   suckers (I'm an occasional wildlife photographer), but since it's been
   discontinued I guess I'll have to get it on Ebay. ;-) I understand that
   this may not be an economically viable thing to do. It'd be even nicer if
   it were f/5.6, but you probably can't get a shutter that big.

Steve



From: Per Nordlund [email protected]
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: H1 questions
Date: Tue, 08 Oct 2002


Struan,

please remember that f/2 is a very large aperture for a medium format
lens. A 50/3.5 645 lens will have about the same depth of field
properties as a 28 or 35 mm f/2 lens for 35 mm film.

Per Nordlund\H1 Optical Design

Struan Gray wrote:

> Q.G. de Bakker, [email protected] writes:
>
>>Per Nordlund wrote:
>>>Which lenses would you like
>>>to see?
>>>
>>i would very much want a proper shift lens. A real
>>hiatus in the Hasselblad program.
>>
>
>     One of the few things that might persuade me to fork out for an H1
> over competing brands would be a bright medium wide angle, like a 35 mm f2
> in 35 mm format.  A 55-60 mm f2 would be a wonderful thing to have on a
> fast-handling MF camera.
>
>     Other niceties would be the above mentioned shift lenses, and I am
> partial to long lenses too, so a 300 or longer would be good to have
> soon.  That said, at the probable price point, you could buy a body and
> lens in another system like Pentax or Mamiya, so for me at least such
> doodahs would be less attractive than the fast wide.
>
> Struan




From: Per Nordlund [email protected]
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: H1 questions
Date: Tue, 08 Oct 2002

Q.G. de Bakker,

the H1 lens designs are mainly done by Fujinon. We did some pre-studies
and suggested some design types (that's part of "H1 Optical Design")
but, again, most of the work is by Fujinon.
Sorry, I won't provide the answer to the 60-120 zoom mystery! As for the
teleconverters, I've designed two of them, but the final touch-up is
(and always has to be) done by the manufacturer.

Per Nordlund\H1 Optical Design

Q.G. de Bakker wrote:

> [email protected] wrote:
>
>
>>Thank you very much for your very precise answers.
>>Since you are very much in the knowledge of this cameras optics, could
>>you perhaps enlighten me as to why Hasselblad chose the excellent Fuji
>>optics over the also excellent Zeiss glass, and if there will be any
>>Zeiss offerings for this camera in the future.
>>
>
> And, mr.Nordlund, may i add one more question?
> The design of these Fujinons, was it done entirely by Fuji? Or were
> you/Hasselblad involved (viz. "Per Nordlund\H1 Optical Design")?
> And (also still a bit of a mystery; perhaps you can provide the answer) who
> did design the "Hasselblad" 60-120mm zoom lens? And the "Hasselblad"
> teleconverters?


From: John Halliwell [email protected]
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: H1 questions
Date: Wed, 9 Oct 2002

Struan Gray [email protected] writes
>   The traditional arguments I have seen against the practicality of
>such a lens are the need to fit the light through a given size of
>shutter, and the need for large front elements to avoid vignetting.  I'm
>sure, for example, a 40 mm f2 is a practical impossibility, but
>Scheneider make a leaf-shuttered 80 mm f2 for 6x6 so I dream of a
>slightly wider view in a slightly smaller format.


This weeks BJP has some details about the shutters. Apparently a 20mm
diameter shutter will be used in the first lenses, but a 28mm shutter
will be available later to allow faster lenses.

--
John
Preston, Lancs, UK.
Photos at http://www.photopia.demon.co.uk



From: Per Nordlund [email protected]
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: H1 questions
Date: Wed, 09 Oct 2002 


We have both sizes from the start: 20 mm for the 2.8/80 and the 3.5/35;
28 mm for the 3.2/150 and the zoom.

Per Nordlund\H1 Optical Design

John Halliwell wrote:
...
> This weeks BJP has some details about the shutters. Apparently a 20mm
> diameter shutter will be used in the first lenses, but a 28mm shutter
> will be available later to allow faster lenses.



From: Per Nordlund [email protected]
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: H1 questions
Date: Wed, 09 Oct 2002


I sent a reply on this issue this morning, probably doing something
wrong. It basically said that Q.G. was right, I said "won't" on the zoom
manufacturer. Company policy.

So, your guess is Sigma:-?

Per Nordlund\H1 Optical Design


Q.G. de Bakker wrote:
> -= H.=- wrote:
>
>
>>He just don't think "SIGMA" fits very well next to "Hasselblad"
>>in the same sentence... :-)
>>
>
> Possible. Yet, if a Sigma lens is good enough, why ever not? ;-)




From: "-= H.=-" [email protected]
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: H1 questions
Date: 9 Oct 2002


Per Nordlund [email protected] wrote:
> I sent a reply on this issue this morning, probably doing something
> wrong. It basically said that Q.G. was right, I said "won't" on the zoom
> manufacturer. Company policy.
> So, your guess is Sigma:-?
>
> Per Nordlund\H1 Optical Design

We respect that of course. Certainly this thread has
proved that Swedish company policy is relaxed; I've
never seen anything like it: The actual developers
in dialogue with the actual users on the Usenet.

It's great...
--
H�kan
...


From: "Q.G. de Bakker" [email protected]
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: H1 questions
Date: Wed, 9 Oct 2002


Per Nordlund wrote:

> I sent a reply on this issue this morning, probably doing something
> wrong. It basically said that Q.G. was right, I said "won't" on the zoom
> manufacturer. Company policy.

"Company policy", 'ey? Hmm... Now that's part of the apprehension that is so
apparent in the reception the Hasselblad H1 got (you know, the thing that
made you, as one of the responsible persons, feel impelled to respond in
public ;-)).

It has apparently always been "company policy" to tell us who made the
"Hasselblad" lenses. The new V-System (can't get used to that name...)
brochure even proudly sports the Zeiss company logo on many pages. And it
well should, since Zeiss is well and truly part of the "potential in the
Hasselblad trademark".  There never was a secret about the origin of the
Schneider and Rodenstock lenses either. But all of the sudden it is company
policy to keep things like this a secret?

Why? Is the truth really that dreadful...?


[Ed. note: hopefully, the AF glitches are confined to early production or prototypes?]

Date: Wed, 23 Oct 2002 
From: Manu Schnetzler [email protected]
To: Hasselblad Users Group list [email protected]
Subject: [HUG] H1 sighting!

All,

well as I mentioned earlier I'm not likely to buy a H1 anytime soon so I
wasn't even thinking of looking at the camera. But I happened to drop by
the Calumet store in San Francisco to drop off some rental stuff, and
Peter Power, our friendly Hasselblad rep, happened to be there. I met
him a couple of weeks ago at a Hasselblad workshop. And what did he have
with him? Yes, a brand new H1.

So for those of you in the area, Peter is touring stores with the camera
and I'd like to clear out any misunderstanding: this camera is fully
functional. Peter knows it already quite well, and demoed it to me.  He
mentioned some glitches with the autofocus but nothing happened while I
was playing with it. He has a 80mm and a 35mm.

This is indeed a very nice camera, it fits nicely in the hands.
Autofocus is very fast and seems precise. Focus can be forced even in
autofocus mode, that's cool. Lots of menus and submenus and features,
quite a complex camera. I don't know how powerful the flash is, but it
looks really tiny.

The Kodak digital back will be at Calumet with the camera on Friday.
I'll probably drop by, if someone is interested in going too, let me
know so we can hook up!

Manu
Manu Schnetzler
http://www.schnetzler.com


From: "Q.G. de Bakker" [email protected]
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: Hasselblad dumping!!
Date: Thu, 24 Oct 200


[email protected] wrote:

> Just got my new KEH paper catalog today, I usually just use the website
> but the paper one is easier on the loo, and I noticed with some
> amazement at the Hasselblad section, with over 50 bodies and too many
> lenses to count. Quite a dump.
> My guess is that quite a few wedding studios went A. to digital B. to
> Mamiya or Contax C. Getting rid of the old V system for the new H1 for
> next wedding season.
> Anybody care to state a blatant opinion?

If what was said by Hasselblad CEO Bernhoff in the October 17th edition of
Dagens Industri (i.e. in the first two weeks after introduction orders for
the new H1 already amounted to 20% of next year's production) was correct
(and why wouldn't it be?), your option C would make a lot of sense.



Date: Fri, 25 Oct 2002 23:12:32 +0200
From: Tom Just Olsen 
To: [email protected]
Subject: [HUG] HASSELBLAD H1

Fellas,

Eventually, no 3 of Hasselblad's 'Forum' reached my adress here in Oslo.

I drove through Gothernburg on another business trip yesterday and
thought of driving up to their door, screaming breaks, - two wheels on
the sidewalk/yellow blinkers on, - storm into the foyer and shout; 'When
the f..... h.... am I to get my latest Forum! Even this uncle down
bellow has got his, - whenever is your pony-express-sort-of-distribution
ever going to reach the 350 km up the fjord to Oslo!?'

- But I didn't.  The weather was nice and the trafic in Gothenburg
looked like 'Kairo'.  I wanted to go home. So I spun along in my dog
hair infested Toyota Corolla.  To my astonishment; - I was so supprised
I had to sit down, 3/2002 of Hasselblad Forum had arrived in the post
when I got home.

Great presentation of the 'H1'.  A few comments.

This 'steel finish'.  Ever seen a XPan? It's the same thing. Steel, -
well, it's more like sheet metal/tin can sort of a thing.  With a paint
that is scratched only by the faintest mechanical disturbance. If it was
one thing that the XPan was criticized for it was the finish.

Pick up your beloved Hasselblad cameras, boys.  Now they are called 'the
V-series'.  (I presume that you all have your cameras in your hands now)
Look closely at the finish.  Those of you with 30 - 40 year old cameras
as well as more recent models can confirm that 'they look practically
the same' after 30 - 40 years of hefty use.

Impressive, hey?

We could discuss untill we get blue in our faces; 'what is the magic
behind the enormous success of the Hasselblad'?

- 'The finish', would be one of the answers.  Why have they given up a
winning consept; alumimium body, chromed edges and leather-look PVC?
Why? Why? Why?

- Another answer would be; an elegant design! Let's not forget it;
Victor Hasselblad was a genious.  OK. it is a design out of the 'late
40'.  Still, it will go down in history as 'One of the World's Best
Industrial Designs Ever'.  Like the Viking ships or the Winchester
rifle.

And the H1?  Well, none of the 645 on the market looks particularly
'sexy', if you ask me. Possibly something inherent in the format.  The
Contax 645 is the closest, to my view.

And the Price?   Take a good grip around you wallets, fellows: 57.000
SEK excl. sales tax! (that should be something like US$ 6,150)  Well,
that sounds familiar for an old Hasselblad fan.

Tom of Oslo


From: I. N. Cognito [email protected]
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: Hasselblad dumping!!
Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2002

"Doug Dolde" [email protected] wrote:
>The H1 could be the perfect 645.  Contax comes close but the bad autofocus
>holds it back.


The auto focus isn't particularly bad, its just slower than people are
used to on 35mm SLRs. But then you're moving a lot more glass then you
are with 35mm lenses. Zeiss made one condition in designing the AF
lenses for the Contax 645. Accuracy would take priority over speed.
They take their reputation for quality quite seriously.



From: I. N. Cognito [email protected]
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: Hasselblad dumping!!
Date: Fri, 25 Oct 2002

>Looks like Blad has struck again making everything in its category obsolete in
>one stroke. Class tells.

Right, a Minolta AF system and Fuji lenses. LOL!  Yep, thats
Hasselblad greatness all right.



From: "Q.G. de Bakker" [email protected]
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: Hasselblad dumping!!
Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2002


I. N. Cognito wrote:
> >Quite true.
> >But how does that affect Rollei as an example of Zeiss manufacturing lenses
> >for Hasselblad's competitors?
>
> In general, it doesn't. But with regard to auto focus, it must. Simply
> by deductive reasoning, one might conclude that.

Nope. That would be assuming a lot. From what premise do you deduce that
Zeiss is bound by contract that they can not supply AF lenses to anyone but
Contax?


> Why would Hasselblad
> abandon Zeiss for any other reason? I doubt its driven by costs.

I, however, do think, no, i'm almost convinced that their 'abandoning' Zeiss
is driven by costs. ;-)

> >Contax = Zeiss...
>
> Right, but in medium format, only Contax has Zeiss auto focus lenses.
> Should start to make sense about now :)

Indeed. So let's summize: Hasselblad must have been sick to the stomach to
have to pay those horrendous sums to have Zeiss lenses. They can't add
enough on those high prices to make a decent profit themselves.
So they figured they could do better (i.e. get cheaper lenses) cooperating
with Fuji (wasn't the XPan cooperation a success too?). That way they could
add even more mark-ups on the lenses, helping them to get out of the current
slump that would eventually lead to their demise.

"What!?" you must scream in disbelief, "those already huge mark-ups aren't
enough to keep Hasselblad happy!?". Apparently not. ;-)
And amazingly (and i'm truly amazed), even though the H1 is quite a bit more
expensive than any of its competitors, it appears to sell pretty well!

> >Yes.
> >Why must Minolta have lenses with integral motors to be able to provide AF
> >technology to others?
>
> They don't, one would assume they would integrate such desirable
> technology into their own products before they would manufacturer or
> license it to some one else.

Maybe they needed someone to come along and kick their rear ends to get them going?
r maybe they just have given up on competing with the other big boys in AF
land, but were quite happy to produce something for those silly Europeans
who came along waving a bag full of money?
Or maybe...
;-)

> You wouldn't happen to be an Attorney
> would you ? :)

Please excuse me, but i will have to consult with my sollicitors before i
can answer that. ;-)


From: I. N. Cognito [email protected]
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: Hasselblad dumping!!
Date: Fri, 25 Oct 2002

"UrbanVoyeur" [email protected] wrote:

>not disclose at this time who it was licensed from. But he did say that
>yes,in fact it did bear a striking resemblance to the Canon AF technology.

Its definitely Minolta. There is a write on Amateur Photographer with
this information.



From: "P�l Jensen" [email protected]
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: Hasselblad dumping!!
Date: Sat, 26 Oct 2002 

"Q.G. de Bakker" [email protected] skrev 
> If what was said by Hasselblad CEO Bernhoff in the October 17th edition of
> Dagens Industri (i.e. in the first two weeks after introduction orders for
> the new H1 already amounted to 20% of next year's production) was correct
> (and why wouldn't it be?), your option C would make a lot of sense.

What does these numbers mean? Are there any camera released that haven't
sold 20% of the first years production when released. That figure is barely
adequate to fill the stock of the distributors world-wide plus the larger
camera stores. All MF cameras released the last few years, due to their
relatively low volumes, have had problems meeting demand the first marketing
year.




From: [email protected] (RICK5347)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Date: 27 Oct 2002 
Subject: Re: Hasselblad dumping!!

> >if they have 20% orders, that implies a lot of folks have ordered without
> >seeing anything about the camera, handling it, or reading any lens tests
> >or evaluations, just on the basis of the specs and costs and name? ;-)


The orders Hasselblad is referring to are orders from their authorized
distributors in various countries and are a result of the introduction of the
camera system at Photokina.  Whenever a new product is introduced by a camera
manufacturer they try to presell their production to their distributors.  If
the distributor wants product he has to place those orders before the initial
production run is allocated elsewhere.  In most countries worldwide the
authorized distributor is also the retail dealer selling directly to the
photographer.  I was directly involved in the startup of Sinar Bron in the US.
I still remember Sinar's original plan to have only three representatives
traveling the country visiting photographers to sell their products.  Initially
they had no plans to establish a dealer network.  They wanted to follow their
business model throughout Europe and, believe it or not, they had no idea how
big the US was and planned on having three representatives travel the country
by car.  I took a drive with their president from Dallas to Houston and
educated him.

Best regards,
Rick Rosen
Newport Beach, CA
www.rickrosen.com



From: [email protected] (RICK5347)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Date: 27 Oct 2002
Subject: Re: Hasselblad dumping!!

Why would Fuji need to sell cameras under the Hasselblad name?  Logic says
that there is only one reason: even after Hasselblad takes their cut, Fuji
will sell more units (and make more profit) as a Hasselblad subcontractor
than they would if they tried marketing the camera under their own name. 

Fuji already has experience with that arrangement with Hasselblad and their
35mm rangefinder.  They also have experience marketing their medium format
rangefinders and 680 direct.  I suspect that you are correct and also that Fuji
wants to put their energy and capital into digital, minilabs (their Frontier is
the hottest machine in the busienss) and even film.

Hasselblad, OTOH, has a real problem.  Their European business model carries
with it a high R&D and factory manufacturing cost.  Combine that with the
decline in interest in medium format due to most wedding photographers going
all 35mm and digital and they have a real problem selling product.  This is
especially true due to the glut of Hasselblad on the used market at very low
prices.

Hasselblad needs a competitive product at a competitive price and if it is a
hit they could not produce it in house at that low price and in high volume.
Fuji needs a distributor for their factory capable of volume production and
wants to put their efforts into other areas of their busuiness.  It's a perfect
match.

Best regards,
Rick Rosen
Newport Beach, CA
www.rickrosen.com


From: [email protected] (FLEXARET2)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Date: 02 Nov 2002 
Subject: Photo Plus Expo - short show review

from: [email protected] (Sam Sherman) - Friday 11-1-02

PHOTO PLUS EXPO - New York -   A Quick Review
I attended the Photo PLus Expo in New York today and here are some of my comments about the Medium Format world-

I saw the New Hasselblad H1 camera and while it looks nice on the surface there is a great delay between the time
you push the release button, the auto focus is done and the photo taken. Enough time passes to loose that fleeting
moment of a kid's pose or a bird flying away. I then checked the Contax 645 and in my opinion the shutter releases faster
the camera is more comfortable to hold and easier to use. I think Hassy loses to Contax on this go round and Contax also
Has Zeiss lenses which the new Hassy does not.


At the Hasselblad booth they had several cameras on mounts you could use/examine/look through. I examined
the Hasselblad 203FE with an incredible 300MM Zeiss (I think f2.8) lens mounted on it. The lens is uncommon
low production and the cost of lens and camera together is about $25,000 and I would love to have a superb outfit like this.

I saw several medium format digital backs and some require being connected to a computer or battery pack
during use - okay in the studio but inconvenient in the field. The new Kodak
medium format digital back looks like the best yet, seems the smallest and does
not have to be connected to a computer, but might need an external battery back.

The Kodak man was not too savy. More info on this on the Kodak website - still a pricey item.

I met Bob Shell of Shutterbug Magazine who told me he is having great use from a purely mechanical camera
The Kiev 88CM. He also mentioned that his friend Zork is coming out with a spectacular lens - 1000MM - f7 -
Zeiss - image stabilized MIlitary lens - adapted by him to take medium format and other camera mounts.
This is not a mirror lens but a compact folded optical path more normal design. Cost will be about $2000 and
I am saving up starting now for this beauty. Bob Shell will be reviewing it shortly.

Agfa told me that are not going out of the film business, contrary to all of the internet gossip I have heard.

Digital was everywhere - mainly small cameras competing with 35MM.

The show was packed and attendees and  camera company reps were generally
friendly and having a good time.



Date: Sat, 2 Nov 2002 
From: Tristan Tom [email protected]
To: [email protected]
Subject: [HUG] New review of the H1 on photo.net:

New review of the H1 on photo.net:

http://www.photo.net/equipment/hasselblad/h1/
--
Tristan Tom Photography
http://www.tristantom.com/



Date: Sat, 02 Nov 2002 
From: Dan Cardish [email protected]
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [HUG] New review of the H1 on photo.net:

Check out the bokeh in figure 3 from that review.

Dan C.

 Jim Brick wrote:
>Tristan Tom wrote:
>>New review of the H1 on photo.net:
>>
>>http://www.photo.net/equipment/hasselblad/h1/



Date: Sun, 3 Nov 2002 
From: Austin Franklin [email protected]
To: [email protected]
Subject: RE: [HUG] New review of the H1 on photo.net:

Hi Jim,

> >BLECK!!!!  This was an EXACT concern of mine when they decided to use Fuji
> >lenses!  That is one of the most horrible bokeh I have ever seen.
>
>
> The one thing that I know for sure is that you CANNOT evaluate a photograph
> on the web. After scanning, re-sizing, futzing around with it, it is a
> wonder that it even looks like a photograph.

To a degree, you are right, and certain aspects of an image are "distorted"
to a degree, but bokeh is really not.  That bokeh shown is typical Fuji MF
bokeh, and no surprise.

Austin


From: Douglas A. [email protected]
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: Hassy H1 review
Date: Sun, 03 Nov 2002

"Mike D"[email protected] wrote:

>Pop Up Flash at $6000. Why would you want that?

No one in their right mind uses a pop up flash, period. Its an amateur
toy. I can't believe Hasselblad built one into this camera.



Date: Sun, 3 Nov 2002 
From: Austin Franklin [email protected]
To: [email protected]
Subject: RE: [HUG] New review of the H1 on photo.net:

Some interesting comment from the reviewer, Michael Reichmann about the
comments to his review on photo.net:

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/essays/photoexpo-02.shtml

and I quote:

"So too at the bottom of that page are comments by some of the
self-appointed guardians of the Zeiss faith, who are miffed almost (but not
quite) beyond words at the move by Hasselblad to Fuji manufactured lenses.
There's little point in conversing (let alone debating) with this crew."

If I was a manufacturer, I wouldn't want this guy reviewing my equipment, if
he finds it necessary to belittle and dismiss the comments by people to his
review.

Austin



Date: Sun, 03 Nov 2002 
From: Jim Brick [email protected]
To: HUG [email protected]
Subject: [HUG] H1 list mania

Regardless of what we, the HUG, think about the H1, it is going to sell
like hotcakes!

They won't be able to make enough of them.

The purchasers will not make a decision based upon who designed what parts,
who made what parts, or what the Bokeh looks like.

They will make a decision based upon their business need. This camera fits
perfectly into a particular photographic business segment. It is basically
a professional film/digital point-and-shoot.

Wedding, fashion, etc, photographers will embrace this camera. They can
concentrate on their artistic endeavor and forget about camera
technicalities. 12 back? 24 back? Meter prism? No meter prism? 90� prism?
45� prism? Digital? 503? 203? EL? Shuttered lens? No shutter lens? Auto
exposure (203)? Manual exposure (203/503/EL)? etc, etc, etc...

The H1 takes away all of these dilemma's and allows these photographers to
set-up the camera, shoot fast, produce outstanding results, get paid, and
repeat.

Hasselblad will continue to lead the pack. Others will scramble to emulate
this product.

Mark my word!
:-)

Jim



Date: Mon, 4 Nov 2002 
From: Austin Franklin [email protected]
To: [email protected]
Subject: RE: [HUG] Re: H1 list mania

>  you wrote:
> >And to play devil's advocate, traditionally, the Zeiss name
> added a certain
> >"prestige" factor to the marquee, and this is now gone, as far
> as the H1 is
> >concerned.    Think about how Leica users would react if Leica Solms were
> >to announce that henceforth, all Leica lenses would now be made to Leica
> >specifications by Fuji in Japan.
>
> Or by Minolta or by some gang of Canadians.

Henry,

I believe in the case of Canadians/Leica, you are off base.  Leica/Leitz
still designed the lenses, they are merely manufactured in Canada.  As far
as the "Hasselblad specified Fuji lenses", Zeiss has been designing lenses
for many decades.  Hasselblad has never designed a lense, that I am aware
of.  Fuji designed the optics for these lenses, plain and simple.

Austin



Date: Mon, 04 Nov 2002 
From: Tom Just Olsen [email protected]
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [HUG] H1 list mania

Ken,

I am very much in-line with your views on this.  But don't forget that
Hasselblad made this camera to suit certain pro photographers needs;
thos now converting to 'digital'.  And particularly the wedding
photographers of USA.

When a 24 million pixles 645 digital back is available for 2,500 US$
(that day just might be right around the bend) then the H1 just might
look very smart!

Tom of Oslo


From hasselblad mailing list:

Date: Mon, 4 Nov 2002 
From: Godfrey DiGiorgi [email protected]
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [HUG] H1 list mania

>> Au contraire, the background includes a very nice taper-off softness
>> and pleasing image degradation as it moves out of the principle zone of
>> focus.
>
> Yes, but that isnt really indicative of what one normally considers bokeh
> , and THAT IS hard to tell how good/bad that may be from a small web image.
>> Not all BOKey is at f/2 only, ya know?
>
> No, sorry...f/2 or better, everything else is merely out of focus ;-)

Bokeh (gawds I hate that word, deep breath) ... ok ...  bokey isn't
just wide open aperture focus degradation of point light sources. The
japanese concept that the word stands for has been made stupid. It
stands for "out of focus rendering" not just point light at max
aperture, f/2 or greater.

Here's a renderer which allows you to see four characteristic bokeh
curves at four different apertures from large to small:
http://www.flarg.com/bokeh.html. All are important, not just the wide
open one, unless you never shoot at anything but wide open apertures.

>> #3 is harsh and crappy even in the in-focus elements, probably a result
>> of poor scanning, over-sharpening, aliasing from resizing, etc.
>
> How could that BE?  Michael IS a world renowned digital imaging expert,
> though self proclaimed, anointed and appointed as well as unfounded about a
> lot of his claims, but NEVER THE LESS, how could such an esteemed expert get
> a simple scan wrong, prey tell? ;-)

I didn't know you knew him personally and admired him so much.

>> The histogram ...
>> ... will give you
>> a feel for whether a particular film or digital capture devices is
>> within range or out of range for a given exposure, once you learn how
>> to interpret it correctly.

> Is the meter in the camera that bad, that this is really needed? Realize
> the histogram is typically used, in scanning that is, for tonal curve
> adjustments, NOT for exposure latitude, and if it is used for exposure
> latitude, you do not need a histogram, only the endpoints, and those would
> be only used for setpoints.  Can you select the setpoints on the histogram
> and have the exposure compensated for via your choice?  How do you know what
> point in the histogram points to what point in the scene?  How on earth
> could you even do any accurate setpoint work on that little display?  I
> think you are misunderstanding the useful/less-ness of this feature.
>> It's like having a meter readout with
>> multi-point readings on a chart so you can say evaluate what you just
>> accomplished is on-target or not.
>
> It is not the same.  A histogram is nothing but a bar graph, typically with
> an X axis of the light values, 0-255 and the Y values the count of the light
> value of each pixel in the image.  In no way can you relate the histogram
> display to any specific point in the image.  A multi-spot reading shows the
> (average possibly, if they are simply combined) light value at N specific
> points, a histogram does not, it shows the count of each of the
> different values.
>
>> ... I had the chance to experiment with one the other day and the
>> display really adds a lot to my understanding of how good a particular
>> exposure might have captured the image I was after.
>
> I find that entirely hard to believe, as you have absolutely NO
> control over
> the middle of the histogram by exposure, period.  The ONLY thing you have
> control of is the endpoints, so what good is the middle of the histogram?
> And, as I said above, even if you did have control over the endpoints, on
> that little display, that would be highly inaccurate.

It's obvious that you have no ability to conceive of how a histogram
display of value vs count might be used interpretively beyond what you
have used it for.


- it can tell you if the scene contains all tonal values, endpoint
analysis essentially
- it can tell you where you have a preponderance of values between peak
and minimum, or whether the distribution is unimodal, bimodal, or flat
- modifying the exposure will raise or lower the total curve between
the endpoints..

If you ever actually use a camera so equipped and let yourself see the
readout with other than a closed mind, you might see why it is a useful
tool. It's JUST a useful tool, not an end in and of itself. I found it
quite useful to adjusting exposures once I understood what it was
telling me.

Godfrey



Date: Mon, 4 Nov 2002 
From: Beau [email protected]
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [HUG] Re: H1 list mania - flogging the horse

It sounds like Hasselblad might have just a wee bit of convincing to do in
order to sway Austin over to the H1!! I respect Austin's opinion and I'm
sure he's more experienced than I in these matters. But I can't help making
just a couple of uncalled for observations!!

>As far as the "Hasselblad specified Fuji lenses", Zeiss has been designing
lenses for many decades.

That's true - but am I correct that Hasselblad's quite successful X-Pan uses
Fuji lenses and has been since the X-Pan's inception?? One of the most
remarkable images I've ever seen was taken with an X-Pan and it's
bokeh-impaired Fuji lens. Maybe the moral should be: If it ain't bokeh,
don't fix it. I'm curious since I'm a newbie: Was there this much outrage
over the X-Pan's use of the Fuji lens a few years ago?

> Hasselblad has never designed a lense, that I am aware of.

I'm not aware of that either. But aren't these alledgedly sub-par lenses of
the leaf-shutter type? The apparently offensive Photo.net review says:

"The H1 uses a totally new electronic shutter of Hasselblad's own design.
These are leaf shutters in each lens and offer timing from an impressive
1/800 seconds down to 18 hours! Flash sync is available at all speeds"

Isn't the Hasselblad-designed leaf shutter housed *in* the lens? Granted,
that's not the optics and has less to do with the elusive bokeh, but it
would seem to imply a rather high degree of collaboration between Hasselblad
and Fuji to make these two most critical parts of a lens work together
harmoniously. I have a hard time picturing a company like Hasselblad
accepting lenses with mediocre performance. ("Ya, Sven, zees lenses are
awwful . . . but vee vill zell zem anyvay!! Ha!! Ha!!") And speaking of
performance, that 800th of a second is 300 faster than my beloved 503CW,
with flash sync to boot. Furthermore, there's this:

"Hasselblad conceived the H1 camera system and lenses and  was responsible
for their design, including the specification of the lenses."

>Fuji designed the optics for these lenses, plain and simple.

Austin very passionately disagrees and perhaps he's privvy to information
about the H1 that I'm not - or perhaps he feels the review is innacurate.
I'm sure we'll soon know - I sure don't right now.

The review goes on to say:

> The unique new shutters that are in the lenses, and the camera body itself
are also built by Hasselblad in Sweden, while the lenses, meter prism and
film backs are built by Fuji.

Interesting - the *film backs* are being made by Fuji!?!? To me, that's
weirder than them making the lenses! But again, if the review is correct,
then I'm certainly left with the impression that Hasselblad has been very
involved indeed with these new lenses. And I think most would agree -
especially those Nikon users out there -  that the Japanese can make a
pretty good lens when they want to; and it's not like they have some
disastrous history of f***-ups at Juji to my knowledge.

And here's yet another thing I don't get about the folks complaining about
the Fuji lenses, and again I quote the reviewer:

"There is a partial solution on the way, and this will also make owners of
current Hasselblad lens systems happy. There will be an adapter made
available that allows earlier Hasselblad "V" system lenses to be mounted on
H1 bodies. "

Again, assuming this news is accurate, then what's the problem since we'll
all soon be able to use our Zeiss lenses with the H1 anyway??

As far as the 2-3 images shown as examples in the review of the H1, maybe
I'm just ignorant about bokeh, but . . . :

"This frame was taken with the 80mm f/2.8 lens. The scan represents about
50% of the full frame. Film used was Provia 400F."

Wouldn't a frame that's been cropped that dramtically chop off all of the
periphery of the image, thus leaving any conclusions about the lens's bokeh
rather inconclusive??

As an ex musician, I'm often struck by the parallels between photographers
and musicians. You'll find guitar players who'll swear by Fender
Stratocasters and say anyone who doesn't sound like Jimi Hendrix is a wimp.
Then there'll be the other guy who says "Jimmy Page played a Gibson Les Paul
and Led Zeppelin is the best band, ever!" Who's right? Both - and it depends
on the music you play and/or the sound you want. If every lens's bokeh was
identical, wouldn't things get a bit boring?? And what if I like a certain
lens's bokeh but someone else doesn't? Is it a wave or a particle??

I think it's sounding more and more like a moot point. But then again, I
could be wrong! And one last thing: I have no intention of buying an H1
unless I win the lottery. And then it would be about number 10 on the list.

Best wishes,

beau :)



Date: Tue, 5 Nov 2002 
From: Austin Franklin [email protected]
To: [email protected]
Subject: RE: [HUG] H1 list mania

Godfrey,

> The
> japanese concept that the word stands for has been made stupid. It
> stands for "out of focus rendering" not just point light at max
> aperture, f/2 or greater.

Yes, and in fact, if you read a lot of what I write, you will see that is
exactly what I typically call it.

> Here's a renderer which allows you to see four characteristic bokeh
> curves at four different apertures from large to small:
> . All are important, not just the wide
> open one, unless you never shoot at anything but wide open apertures.

Actually, for me, thats pretty much correct, I do mostly shoot wide open.
And if I stop down, bokeh isnt what Im specifically interested in for that
image, but I would like it to be pleasant as opposed to annoying.

> It's obvious that you have no ability to conceive of how a histogram
> display of value vs count might be used interpretively beyond what you
> have used it for.

Er, thats wrong.  Being that I design digital imaging equipment for a
living, and have been for some 25 years, I have done this probably more than
a few thousand times, as well as written the software and designed the
hardware to do exactly this (histograms of images, and the usefulness of
said information).  I have conceived of its use well beyond this and many
other discussions, but the extent to which you believe it has value in
providing useful exposure information, I disagree with.

> - it can tell you if the scene contains all tonal values, endpoint
> analysis essentially

Huh?  The tonal values and endpoints are entirely different.  all tonal
values which you actually have no control over anyway, are between the
endpoints, and the endpoints have nothing to do with all tonal values, so
I dont understand your point.

> - it can tell you where you have a preponderance of values between peak
> and minimum, or whether the distribution is unimodal, bimodal, or flat

Again, so what, you cant do anything about it while taking the picture.
There are NO tonal curve adjustments during image capture.  This is useful
for postprocessing ONLY.

> - modifying the exposure will raise or lower the total curve between
> the endpoints..

Yes, but can you select your endpoints, and have it give YOU the exposure,
instead of playing a guessing game, and having to check it again...and
again?

> If you ever actually use a camera so equipped and let yourself see the
> readout with other than a closed mind, you might see why it is a useful
> tool.

The information is pretty much useless, except for the endpoints...and that
depends on what you can do with the endpoints.  I actually dont see how you
could be arguing as you are if you understood what the information in the
histogram represents, and how its derived.

> It's JUST a useful tool, not an end in and of itself. I found it
> quite useful to adjusting exposures once I understood what it was
> telling me.

Yes, you can adjust your exposure based on the endpoints of the histogram,
irrespective of the Y axis, but there is a tremendous amount of superfluous
information there that does you absolutely no good, and is not relevant to
exposure at all.  The only thing that is relevant are the endpoints, and the
ability to select them.

The histogram in that little LCD is pretty much useless for accurate
setpoint setting (selecting the setpoints, if you even can with that
camera), and the data between the setpoints can not be used for exposure.

If the camera has a spot meter, you are better off using it to set your
endpoints, than the histogram, as the there is NO ability to relate the
information in the histogram to any scene/image part.  As I said, the
information between the endpoints is useless for exposure, as you can not
change it, or adjust your exposure based on it at all...and you can get the
information for exposure from a simple bar graph, as available on a Gossen
LunaPro F Digital, where you wave it around the scene, and it shows the
range of exposure values for where ever you pointed it...on a simple bar
graph.

Histograms are useful for postprocessing tonal adjustments more so than for
exposure, and people dont do post processing tonal adjustments in this
camera, nor should they be doing it with an itty bitty LCD.  Youve not
shown anything that you can do with the histogram that can not be done with
a simple bar graph, as far as graphical display of information, and the
usefulness thereof, for exposure setting.

The lack of coupling the histogram information with the image is what gets
in the way of it being at all useful for exposure.  Being that I do this
stuff for a living, Ive even developed the ability to display a histograms
information back to the original image, such that you can select areas or
points on the histogram, and it highlights them in the image.  Though neat,
it really isnt that useful, and really only in a studio, but it is time
consuming.

Austin



Date: Tue, 5 Nov 2002 
From: [email protected]
To: [email protected], [email protected]
Subject: Ang: RE: [HUG] H1 list mania

Date:   11/05/2002   (Tuesday)  
From:  Per Nordlund
To:  "[email protected]"
Subject:  Ang: RE: [HUG] H1 list mania

Nice to see so many people interested in a "deep" aspect of lenses as "bokeh".
Perhaps I should take the opportunity to add some comments on the flarg site
(which is really interesting).

First, as noted by the poster below, not only wide open aperture is important.
The stop-down simulation of the "flarg" rendering tool is, however, not very
realistic. Start, for example, by choosing the V-shaped distribution and full
aperture. If you stop down one step the bright "halo" should basically
disappear. It doesn't on "flarg", it seems more like they just shrink the
distribution. When a lens is stopped down you come closer and closer to a flat
line respons, as the abberations disappear.

Secondly, the distribution used for mirror lenses looks strange.

About the "famous" #3 picture in the photo.net review. Some (most?) of the
effects discussed here seem to be due to superposition of defocus patterns from
multiple background highlights. Judging lens performance from one picture of
(for natural reasons) low quality is not easy.

Best regards,

Per Nordlund\H1 Optical Design

> Here's a renderer which allows you to see four characteristic bokeh
> curves at four different apertures from large to small:
> http://www.flarg.com/bokeh.html. All are important, not just the wide
> open one, unless you never shoot at anything but wide open apertures.


From minolta mailing list:
Date: Thu, 07 Nov 2002 
From: "Joe Moore" [email protected]
Subject: Hasseblad H1 camera with Minolta AF?

I don't know if this has been discussed yet, but I'm hearing the the
AF on the new Hassebland H1 645 MF camera is designed and/or made by
Minolta.

Here's some commments I've found on some other photography forums...

"Autofocus- and here's the clincher- out of ALL the autofocus camera
brands...who do you think they have manufacturing their high tech
parts? huh, huh? Not Canon, not Nikon... Minolta. I've always liked
Minolta...guess they can't be all that bad, even Hasselblad thinks
they're all right. Fuji is manufacturing something else, don't recall
what it was. Some of the camera is made in Sweden, the other parts,
Japan. "


"Well, as long as everyone knows that it's not a real Hassy. It is
true, Minolta did the focusing/lens system and Fuji designed and
built the rest to Hassy specs. The new system has NO Zeiss glass
available to it. In all but Japan does the camera have Hassy on it.
In Japan, the camera has FUJI's name plastered on it. I was really
suprised Minolta did the focusing as well.. maybe they are
expanding.  Now, where is my Digital Maxxum 9? lol"

"The (Minolta made) autofocus seemed fast and accurate, quickly
locking onto the subject and the time for the lens to focus was very
impressive. "

Even noted wedding photographer Bambi Cantrell had nice things to say
about the AF...

"I had the opportunity of testing the camera preproduction this
summer... What a wonderful camera. The optics may not be Carl Z's but
the glass is the sharpest I've ever seen. The focus is incredibly
fast, even in low light situations, and I love the fact that you can
put a digital back on it. (Phase one) for me. I am delighted that
Hasselblad has a camera that can handle film and can handle digital
too. It is very balanced, and the 50-110 zoom will be my first lens
of choice. They are making an adapter so we can use existing line of
Hasselblad lenses."

Bambi Cantrell


Maybe now we know what Minolta's R&D people have been working on.

joe moore
www.josephmoore.com


From: Douglas A. [email protected]
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: Hassy H1 review
Date: Fri, 08 Nov 2002

[email protected] (ArtKramr) wrote:

>It is very useful for fill flash. And both Weegee and Diane Arbus both worked
>with flash on camera.  Live and learn.


Hey Art, it is not useful for fill flash in most cases because it
lacks sufficient power, is often obstructed by hoods or large lens
barrels, and causes red eye and ugly shadows. On camera flash is for
Uncle Ted with his EOS Rebel. It isn't how most professionals work.
You can argue it until you're blue in the face, but then you get
slapped by reality.


From: Douglas A. [email protected]
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: Hassy H1 review
Date: Fri, 08 Nov 2002 

Andrew Koenig [email protected] wrote:

>Well... it might be useful for triggering slave flash units,
>and also for putting catchlights in subjects' eyes.

The only thing its going to put in a subjects eye is red eye. The best
way to put catch lights in the eye is a reflector or natural sunlight.
Next best way is a diffused flash off camera. You're far better off
triggering slaves with a radio remote like the Pocket Wizard or
Quantum.  I don't know any wedding photographers who  use optical
slaves because guests cameras (the ones with pop up flashes) trigger
the strobes.



From: "Doug Dolde" [email protected]
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: H1 overpriced?
Date: Sat, 16 Nov 2002


Badger Graphics is listing the kit at $5695.  http://www.badgergraphic.com/

I'd watch Ebay when they become available.  Likely less from a Singapore
seller.  And why not buy the Fuji GX645AF instead?  It's the same camera for
much less.


"Douglas A." [email protected] wrote...
> I just got a flyer from Calumet, and the H1 is listed in it for
> 5999.00. Wow, are they kidding? 6000.00!!


From: "David J. Littleboy" [email protected]
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: new Fuji 645 camera
Date: Thu, 14 Nov 2002


"Fred" [email protected] wrote:
> Gee doesn't this look so much like the new Hasselblad H1??  :- )
>
> >http://www.fujifilm.co.jp/news_r/nrj1000.html

Couldn't possibly be {g}: the list price for the kit is US$4,500. Figure a
sticker price of US$4,000 plus an in-store credit of 10% for a cash
purchase, and you're well under $4,000 including tax.

(This assumes the camera kit comes with the 80mm/2.8 lens, which is US$1,650
list as a separate purchase, which looks to be a correct assumption.)

Body = 369,000 Yen
Kit = 540,000
80/2.8 = 185,000
(The last four entries in the table are lens hoods.)

David J. Littleboy
Tokyo, Japan


From: "David J. Littleboy" [email protected]
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: new Fuji 645 camera
Date: Thu, 14 Nov 2002


"Shmoo" [email protected] wrote:
> "David J. Littleboy"
> >the list price for the kit is US$4,500. Figure a
> >sticker price of US$4,000 plus an in-store credit of 10% for a cash
> >purchase, and you're well under $4,000 including tax.

> Well well well. I wonder if they will import the camera to the US? I
> would bet not.

The page explicitly says that the camera will be marketed under the
FUJIFILM/HASSELBLAD (caps theirs) in Japan and under the HASSELBLAD name
outside Japan. (Which we already knew.)

My guess is that the price will have to come down outside Japan, unless the
lenses simply blow the Kyocera-Zeiss Contax lenses out of the water, which
is not impossible...

> I also wonder if the Fuji will have the ability for
> English menus.

For that difference in price, it's worth learning Japanese.
Unfortunately, you'd also have to live in Japan to get that price. (Remember
that Mamiya 645 (and other 645 also???) prices are much lower in Japan, as
well. That means Fuji can't gouge their customers quite as badly.)

David J. Littleboy
Tokyo, Japan


From: Lourens Smak [email protected]
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: new Fuji 645 camera
Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2002

...
> >What do you find lacking in the Contax 645?
>
> Other than the complaints I have heard about battery usage and a short
> power down delay, I was not very happy with the speed of the AF when I
> tried one in the shop. It worked fine outdoors in sunlight, but I want
> to use it under lower light levels. For some of the style of shoots I
> do I don't think it would be up to the level I would like.

heh heh... at the Photokina, they were swapping H1 batteries almost
every minute... I don't think it will have a much better battery life
than the Contax. (probably even worse) It focused reasonably fast, but
certainly not very fast. I had one with the zoom on it, other lenses may
be faster.

The contax does have a vertical grip though, with larger battery
capacity, and the 80mm is F2, which could be very important in low-light
shooting.

;-)
Lourens


From: Struan Gray [email protected]
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: H1 overpriced?
Date: 18 Nov 2002


Godfrey DiGiorgi, [email protected] writes:

> I'm wondering when the nonsensical spewage about
> this camera will stop and real information from
> users will begin. It looks like quite a nice
> design to me.

    Here are a few tidbits from a Photokina-based short preview piece
that appeared in "Fotografiskt Tidskrift", the magazine obstensibly of
the Swedish Professional Photographers' Association, but which is also
sold quite widely on newstands.  It has the same info as a most other
'reviews', plus some interesting extras.

    - The shutter is designed so that it doesn't get faster with small
apertures.  The article doesn't say is this is down to the blade shape
or (more likely) the controlling motor, but it is touted as an
advantage.


    - No mechanical linkage to the lens at all, "so it is possible to
make a lens with tilt and shift capabilities".

    - The shutter has a relatively wide opening, so fast lenses are
possible.

    - The picture used to illustrate the piece was taken on a V-series
model :-)

    - The fact that the lenses are made by Fuji is reckoned only to be
of consequence in the German market :-) :-)

    In general, this magazine doesn't get sneak previews (or if it does,
it doesn't let on) but does slant its reviews towards the hardnosed
pragmatic professional user.  They are not biased towards Hasselblad as
far as I can see (Mamiya are at least a big a presence here in Sweden)
but hope that the H1 will be a success, if only because it offers
something a little different.

Struan




Date: Wed, 6 Nov 2002 
From: "Q.G. de Bakker" [email protected]
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [HUG] H1 fig #3 and bad bokeh - recognizing it when I see it? ;-)

Robert Monaghan wrote:

> > The money *did* go into developing a product competing with Rollei's AF
> > machine, didn't it?
>
> well, it didn't go into "V" lineup development to compete head to head
> with Rolleiflex's position, which seems to be secure with the only zeiss
> lensed 6x6cm AF, and the only AF 6x6cm at that ;-) Is there an AF model in
> the V line future to compete with 6008AF? And whose optics? when?

Hmm... We really should know where Rollei's (and Hasselblad's) competition
is coming from. We traditionalist perhaps have grown too comfortable in our
thinking that MF is the square format, plus the larger Mamiya and Pentax
thingies, and that all competition in the 'serious' MF market is is between
these, more or less ignoring the "in between" 645 format.
However, most (if not all) new developments/products in MF have been in the
645 segment (Pentax, Mamiya, Contax, now Hasselblad too). Maybe Rollei vs
Hasselblad, or Hasselblad vs Rollei (and the 'big' Pentax and ditto Mamiya
are contenders too) isn't the fight where the big price can be won, and
while we 'traditionalists' keep ignoring it, 645 is winning all bouts?
Let's see how Rollei's AF fares.

> good point; but more worrisome, since it suggests that the re-evaluation of
> support for the V line is by hasselblad, and not by zeiss. So if VHB isn't
> willing to invest modest $$ in keeping existing lens offerings in V line,
> but put $25+ mil into H1 development, what does that say about the future
> level of support and commitment to the V line?  Yikes? ;-)

Fuji lenses for the V-line to begin with...

I think (and i have said so before) the V-system can be made a bit slimmer.
In the days of old, the Hasselblad way was not to come up with a plethora of
products, just differing in the amount of gadgets/'features' they offer, but
concentrate on the essentials: build only a few products, but make them the
best possible of their kind. The Incentive period put an end to that
philosophy (though it was what had made Hasselblad great, it was what put
the potential in the trademark in the first place). I think a return to it
would not be a bad idea at all.

So why not just one 200 series camera, combining 205's spot metering with
203's center weighed metering? Why not drop all 500-series cameras but the
503 CW (and keep the SWC too; i consider that thing to be a lens more than a
camera)? And a slimming down of the lens line (as has already happened) is
not necessarily bad either.

> yes, and I'm for them simplifying their marketing which is now overly complex
> and differentiated by marketing committee style features splits, rather than
> on the ease and low cost of providing various metering options etc. Ditto
> the lenses, as you point out. They had a lot of strength in the simple lineup
> of choices in the past - SWC, 500 C/M, and 500 EL/M - simple clear message...

I should have read on before writing what i have written above... But i'm
not going to delete it now i've read this! ;-)

I see we agree!

> re: dropping hassy backs
> since hasselblad makes their backs with the same basic shells, how costly
> can it be to make the few gears and parts that are different for the A32
> backs? Doesn't the $895 from B&H (more at retail) cover those costs? ;-)
> I mean, you can buy a Kiev NT back in hasselblad mount for $99. Right?

I think that again it is a market thing. Finding 220 film is not easy at all
over here. Why is that?

So maybe even though it would not be very costly to produce a 220 gearing as
well, when costs are set against sales it would? I really don't know.
The Kiev example points towards another possible reason though.

> And how come it is so hard to get a 120/220 back option - after all, Bronica
> has been doing it for 35 years?


That would be a good, 'slimming down', option, yes: scrap A12 and A24 (and
their 645 counterparts) backs and produce backs that can take both types of
film instead.

> If hasselblad can't make money on a back
> that costs $895, how can Mamiya make an entire 645E SLR camera for $150
> less (in USA)? Just how much are they "saving" by dropping this stuff from
> the line? How can this NOT be a profitable item, given they're already making
> all but a handful of parts, and have the tooling to make those too obviously?
> Don't tell me they've worn out the tooling? ;-) ;-)

Yes, costs...
Show of hands: how many do not believe that Hasselblad can significantly
boost sales by significantly lowering costs, and still make a profit, not
significantly less (if at all) than their low volume-high price policy
produces now?
But then again, maybe they have missed the boat, and it's too late for that
now?

> So new buyers are expected to know all about the gear, and what they want?
> They are supposed to pay thousands of dollars to buy into the line,
> without ever seeing if they like the ergonomics? or results? How long does
> this dealer think he can stay in business against mail order houses, who
> can also take orders from clients who know what they want, at rather lower
> markups/cost? Have they heard of the internet? overseas discounters? ;-)

They have. That's why they don't stock costly, slow moving products anymore. ;-)
This particular dealer (family firm) has been selling photographic apparatus
and supplies for some 80 years now. They have survived many difficult times,
and not stocking Hasselblad but inkjet printers (and other things that *do*
sell) instead will help them survive into the future. It's a pitty, but what
can you do?

> [...]
> it would probably be a good thing for them to "leak" some of this to us
;-)

Indeed. However it is still very much possible that my 'source' was being,
well..., let's say 'not quite truthfull'... You know: dispell doubts and
fears until you know how well the new product does, and only then decide on
the future of the old system. You don't want to scare away potential
V-system clients until you do know that you don't need them...

> I cited a number of "signs" of reduced support for V system products from
> dropping (telephoto) lenses to backs, replacement parts to lens elements
> for repairs. My impression is they are supporting the V system until they
> run out of parts or stock, then not re-ordering, but putting the $$
> elsewhere (e.g., H1 development and factory production lines?). And that
> VHB is now exploiting its name/logo, as the Fuji relabeled Xpan shows,
> rather than focusing on their existing user base support in new products,
> or even maintaining the existing lineups. This looks like a sunset process
> to me, milking the cash cow to finance the future. Not good, if you're a
cow

That may well be the scenario they want to follow. Yes. :-(
Though some of the "signs" can be explained differently too (for instance:
the 500 Tele-Apotessar did disappear, but at the same time the CF 350 mm was
"promoted" to CFE Superachromat design, there was an Apo teleconverter, and
for focal plane cameras the 300 mm TPP appeared. So were they dropping a
lens from the V-line, or replacing it?).
We just don't know yet.

> I suspect that VHB must have gotten some feedback causing them to promise
> the lens adapter to use zeiss lenses for V line on the H1, so this reaction
> can't be entirely news, though I'll be danged if I'd take that engineering
> job ;-)

Why? Would that be so difficult? Or do you think that (in view of the V
contra H attitude demonstrated by some people here and elsewhere) noone will
want that thing after all?

> my major worry, as it appears to be yours, is that this rig is just
> priced too high for the current (depressed) market, and that wedding photogs
> are going digital rather than 645 AF. Switching from V to H line will
> involve huge $$ losses in today's depressed hassy lens price etc. used
> market. Good for those of us who are still buying V line stuff though ;-)

Indeed.
And 'yes'! ;-)




Date: Sat, 2 Nov 2002 
From: Godfrey DiGiorgi [email protected]
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [HUG] New review of the H1 on photo.net:

> http://www.photo.net/equipment/hasselblad/h1/

The evaluation written by Mr Reichman is quite complimentary, the
pictures he posts are less than exemplary.  I have owned several Fuji
medium format cameras. All of them have returned better results than
what I see in this review, so I remain unconvinced that this is a
representative example of the kind of imaging qualities deliverable
with the H1.

I'll wait until I see a few more reviews by other folks with a greater
credibility before I pass any judgements. And then I'll rent an H1 and
make my own comparisons.

Godfrey


From: "David J. Littleboy" [email protected]
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: Hasselblad H1 price
Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2003


"Robert Monaghan" [email protected] wrote:
> the fuji H1 version seems rather cheaper in japan than USA H1 models...

That was my estimate, but the latest is that the list prices in Japan are
going to be very close to each other.

> we don't have good lens test reviews for the H1 lenses yet, nor reports.

Early reports in the Japanese press are that they like the lenses very much.
Despite the photo.net image with the dizzy bokeh, the Japanese press reports
that they liked the bokeh. Go figure...

David J. Littleboy
Tokyo, Japan


From: "Q.G. de Bakker" [email protected]
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: Hasselblad H1 price
Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2003 

Robert Monaghan wrote:

> we don't have good lens test reviews for the H1 lenses yet, nor reports.

H1 "Lens Data Sheets" are available on the Hasselblad website. They are
measured results, not calculated. Look quite impressive.
True, they are not quite real-life test results (no AF performance), yet
give a good and reliable impression of what these lenses are capable of.


From: "ajacobs2" [email protected]
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Handled the Fuji-Blad Last Night
Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2003


Went to a demo with the FujiBlad and the Digital Back..
Sell the house Momma I want one....

They also had the Canon IDs there in force...and some nice 20x30 and 30x40's

But the Hasselblad with the Digital Back blew everything away including some
400 speed NP conventional prints..............

--
Al Jacobson
Website:    www.aljacobs.com



From: [email protected] (Largformat)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Date: 26 Jan 2003 
Subject: Re: Handled the Fuji-Blad Last Night

...

an on-the-job review of this camera will be in the Feb/March issue of
CameraArts and will be on our web site in a few days.

www.cameraarts.com

steve simmons


Date: Thu, 10 Oct 2002
From: Per Nordlund [email protected]
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: H1 questions


Hello Q.G,
are you this triggerhappy with your cameras too:-?

No, I didn't design the FE zoom (would have been a nice assignment, though).
Yes, my lips are still sealed.

Nobody could agree more with you on the importance of lens quality when
trying to sell a camera system than I do, I can promise you.
But I also - honestly - think there is a difference between a situation
where we go directly to a manufacturer and pay them to design, develop
and produce a lens to our specifications, and longtime and/or deep
co-operations as we have with Zeiss (and now with Fujinon).

Per Nordlund\H1 Optical Design

Q.G. de Bakker wrote:

> Per Nordlund wrote:
>
>
>>when we have major partnerships or co-operations with other
>>manufacturers we tell. Otherwise we don't. Some co-operations you might
>>not consider "major" are also public due to traditions.
>>
>
> Lens quality is a major thing when trying to sell a camera system, wouldn't
> you agree? Zeiss lenses in particular have helped make Hasselblad what it is
> today, in a major way. So introducing a lens of unknown origin, but which
> without doubt is not one of those revered Zeiss lenses, is indeed a "major"
> concern to us, your customers.
>
> And before some misunderstanding arises let me add that i, for one, and i'm
> sure many others too, are quite willing to accept lenses that are not made
> by Zeiss: all we want to know (!) is whether or not they are good enough.
> We do know Zeiss (and now we also know that they can make less good lenses
> too, viz. the CB line. But those only appeared, as Kornelius Fleischer has
> let on, against the advice of Zeiss, on persistance by Hasselblad AB. ;-)),
> and Schneider. But we do not know designer and manufacturer 'X'. Shrouding
> such a thing in a veil of secrecy does not help. That's all.
>
>
>>And no, the truth isn't at all dreadful:-) Quite the reverse in my mind.
>>
>
> Aha! So it must be a Per Nordlund design made by Kyocera!


From: "David J. Littleboy" [email protected]
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: H1 overpriced?
Date: Wed, 20 Nov 2002

"Douglas A." [email protected] wrote:
> "mp" [email protected] wrote:
>
> >If Hasselblad ever releases a square-format 6x6 with autofocus, built-in
> >metering, integrated digital interface, etc., I'll buy one. Especially if
> >the body and lenses are made in Japan.
>
> Why not buy a Rollei?

In Tokyo, they're having a fire sale on 50/80/150 6008 kits prior to the
arrival of the AF 6008: only US$8,750. I'll take two.

David J. Littleboy
Tokyo, Japan


From: "David J. Littleboy" [email protected]
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: H1 overpriced?
Date: Wed, 20 Nov 2002


"Douglas A." [email protected] wrote 
> "David J. Littleboy [email protected] wrote:
> >In Tokyo, they're having a fire sale on 50/80/150 6008 kits prior to the
> >arrival of the AF 6008: only US$8,750. I'll take two.
>
> Thats only 1700.00 more than the H1 with an 80 lens alone.
> Quite a deal.

In Tokyo, it's $4,750 more than the Fuji-labeled H1.

David J. Littleboy
Tokyo, Japan


From contax mailing list:
From: "Ben" [email protected]
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [Contax] Contax 645 vs. Hasselblad H1
Date: Tue, 8 Oct 2002 

Hi all,
Kaisern I did try the H1 and it looks very well build but feels not as good as my C 645.
But this will be a personal pref.
Difference with the C 645 is the handling of the camera as you have to
controle everything via the panel on top of the camera and not via
buttons.( speed, apparture, programm, etc )

How the lenses perform I don't know compared to the zeiss optics.

As members of the zeiss staf told me it will not compete to the zeiss optics (FWIIW)
It seems that the autofocus speed does not differ much with contax but hardly to tell.
Lenses are not as heavy so there will be less glass movement. But not possible to compare directly.
The integration to digital is ahead of contax as the camera can control the digital back.
The H1 is also louder as the contax, a sneering (?) sound is heard when shutter pressed.
And one advantige is the centralshutter build in the lenses, still waiting
for the zeiss counterparts.

regards

Ben


From contax mailing list:
Date: Tue, 08 Oct 2002 
Subject: Re: [Contax] Contax 645 vs. Hasselblad H1
From: Kaisern [email protected]

Thanks, I suspect the Fuji will produce the lens and I don't think it will
be as good as Zeiss.  I rely more on MF so I am not very concerned about the
AF speed but just curious how fast the lens can be per Hasselblad claimed.
I think the design of the camera is not attractive, I am much more preferred
the way the 645 is and the similarity cross the RTS and N lines.
I will be more interested at the Rollei 6008AF, have you also got the chance
to try one?  A friend of mine just came back from Fotokina told me Rollei
did not provide test sample for visitor to try.
So far I am very pleased with C 645 and also looking for a 645 mark II that
will provide better integration to digital back and also add one feature
that Mamiya 645 has - the shutter blind on the camera will automatically
open whenever you remove the magazine which reduce the risk of damaging
them.

Brgds/kaisern

 "Ben"  wrote:

> Hi all,
> Kaisern I did try the H1 and it looks very well build but feels not as good
> as my C 645.
> But this will be a personal pref.
> Difference with the C 645 is the handling of the camera as you have to
> controle everything via the panel on top of the camera and not via
> buttons.( speed, apparture, programm, etc )
> How the lenses perform I don't know compared to the zeiss optics.
> As members of the zeiss staf told me it will not compete to the zeiss optics
> (FWIIW)
> It seems that the autofocus speed does not differ much with contax but
> hardly to tell.
> Lenses are not as heavy so there will be less glass movement. But not
> possible to compare directly.
> The integration to digital is ahead of contax as the camera can control the
> digital back.
> The H1 is also louder as the contax, a sneering (?) sound is heard when
> shutter pressed.
> And one advantige is the centralshutter build in the lenses, still waiting
> for the zeiss counterparts.
>
> regards
>
> Ben
...



From: "BW" [email protected]
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: Hasselblad H1 price
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2003


Yep,

You don't like the option then just don't use it, like the man said.

I for one like the feature. As a wedding photographer I don't always want to
have the flash on a bracket. For daylight fill it should just do the trick
and I think during those situation red-eye will not be to big of a problem
either. Minolta have them on their pro 35mm bodies and I think they're great
for the intended purposes. It's not ment as a replacement for a bracket
flash set-up, nor do I intend to use it that way. But it will be a great
help during situtations that require a bit of fill. I will reduce the use of
a flash bracket to the times when it's clearly needed.

The only reason people don't like this feature is because it has an AMATEUR
stigma attached to it. So what?

Photography is different in the sense that most advances come to the pro
models last and start with the amateur models.

AF, started in 35mm compacts many many moons ago and are no making their
entry into MF.
Multi segment metering same thing
Zooms

Again, just get over it. My car has options I never use, my TV has options I
never use and the list of appliances that have features goes on and on.

So far I've been very impressed with the H1, although I've only been able to
handle it a couple of times in the shop driving owner crazy. I'm looking for
actual reports from the field, including the performance of the build-in
flash.

Br
Bas
...


From: Thorbj�rn T. Lied [[email protected]] 
Sent: Tue 3/11/2003 
To: [email protected]  
Subject: Re: [HUG] H1 Vs Contax


I got my H1 two weeks ago, and I have started using it. All I can say
for now is that it's great fun to work with, and I'm amazed by some
of the features. I love the Zone-mode, integral TTL flash-meter, the
fast autofocus on my 80/2,8. The meter seems extremely precise (1/12
EV) and gives very nice negatives.

When it comes to bokeh, well that's another story. I tried this last
night, pointing at a distant streetlight and focusing near at maximum
aperture. The result was a bright doughnut, or what is considered to
be bad bokeh. I guess I have to look out for those bright out of
focus objects for now. Don't know if this is repeated with the other
lenses.

Why they didn't use Zeiss lenses? Would be too expensive they say on
their FAQ. The AF lenses for the H1 is about same price as the Zeiss
V-lenses, at least here in Norway, that is.

TTL.


>Pardon me if I'm rehashing old posts...but has anyone on the list
>actually
>USED an H1 yet? I've been poring over brochures and lusting after the
>H1's
>new features but how does the thing handle, and most of all does it
>take good
>pictures?
>
>Jim


From: Austin Franklin [[email protected]] 
Sent: Tue 3/11/2003 
To: [email protected] 
Subject: RE: [HUG] H1 and Non Zeiss Lenses?


Godfrey,

> Fuji makes very good lenses.

What do you mean by "good"? Let's just talk about MF lenses. The Fuji MF
lenses I have used are very sharp, and reasonably well constructed (though
not as good as the Zeiss lenses IMO), no doubt, but for what ever reason,
the results that I have had was quite poor. The images had horrible out of
focus rendering...there is ghosting and high contrast, where with a Zeiss
lense, there is no ghosting, and the tonal transitions are very very smooth.
To me, that is not a good lense.

> I like Zeiss glass but I've had several Fuji medium format cameras over
> the years too and they all had superb glass on them.

What cameras, and what do you mean by "superb"?

> They do have a
> different character than Zeiss glass ... You might prefer one over the
> other but, fer gosh sakes, experience them yourself first.

I have used a Fuji GS645, Fuji GA645, Fuji GSW690 and all of them produced
the most unpleasant "bokeh" I have ever seen. Now, the Fuji glass for the
H1 may be different, but from the pictures I've seen claimed to have been
produced by this camera, that does not appear to be the case.

Austin
 


From: Peter Linden [[email protected]] 
Sent: Tue 3/11/2003 
To: [email protected] 
Subject: [HUG] H1 vs. Contax


I can't speak for the Contax (other than looking at one when making my
purchase decision) but I have an H1 with both 80mm and 35mm Fujiblad lenses.

I use the camera with Kodak back so I am back to the square format!

I am thrilled with the image/lens quality. Prior to deciding on the Kodak
back I rented a H555eld and Proback and used 40, 80 and 150mm Zeiss lenses.
I am getting much sharper/more detailed images now (I do landscape and still
life imaging). Bare branch detail is nothing short of stunning.

The availability of the histogram on the grip is a great idea and saves on
battery drain on the back.

Peter Linden


From: Henry Posner [[email protected]] 
Sent: Wed 3/12/2003 
To: [email protected] 
Subject: [HUG] Re: H1 Vs Contax

In response to the Contax's battery issue, I received this from a Contax
tech rep:

The 645 was developed to be small and portable. This dictated a small
battery. If battery usage is a concern, then Contax has the MP-1 available as
an add-on option. This supply holds 4 AA and 1 2CR-5 lithium battery, more
than doubling the rolls.

Stories of 3-4 rolls per battery indicate either a short in the electronics
- please send the camera to Contax for service - or a whole lot of dry
shooting like
with a new camera.
-- -

regards,
Henry Posner
B&H Photo-Video, and Pro-Audio Inc.
http://www.bhphotovideo.com


From: Jim Brick [[email protected]] 
Sent: Wed 3/12/2003 
To: HUG 
Subject: Re: [HUG] H1 Vs Contax


One of the great features of the H1, other than super bright viewfinder,
super fast AF, flash sync up to 1/800th, built-in fill flash, vibrationless
BTL shutters, interchangeable battery packs (this is cool - check it out on
an H1), actually interchangeable everything, oh yeah... back to the
point... is complete and total electronic/microprocessor connectablity with
the best digital backs. The interface is flawless

Keeble & Shuchat here locally has been sold out of H1's since its
inception. Virtually all of them have been sold WITH a digital back. Some
customers actually didn't want the film back, but got it anyway.

The H1 is the consummate film/digital camera. Its design and execution is
nearly faultless.

IMHO,

Jim



from hasselblad mailing list:
From: Ulrich Funkenberg [[email protected]] 
Sent: Mon 5/19/2003
To: Hasselblad 
Subject: [HUG] H1 - Test now in english

Hi Folks,

The Test i have founded on Stefan Heymanns website is now available in
English.

http://www.stefanheymann.de/foto/h1test/h1test-en.htm

Regards

Ulrich Funkenberg


From hasselblad mailing list:
From: Stefan Heymann [[email protected]] 
Sent: Sat 5/17/2003
To: [email protected] 
Subject: [HUG] H1 experience report


Hi,

I had the opportunity to test an H1 for about a week. I have put
together a little report about my experiences. You can read this on my
homepage at http://www.stefanheymann.de/foto/h1test/h1test-en.htm

Have fun,

Stefan


From: "David J. Littleboy" [email protected]
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: Hasselblad H1 users feedback wanted please!
Date: Sun, 8 Jun 2003 

"Chris Fynn" [email protected] wrote:
> "David J. Littleboy" [email protected] wrote 
> >> You can get the same camera with the original designer/mfr's name on
> > it(and with a much nicer color) for about US$200 cheaper in Japan.
>
> Did Fuji really do all the design? I knew they were responsible for the
> lenses and manufacture.

To a certain extent, I'm being obnoxious on purpose to irritate the Hassy
fans for the fun of it. But an interview in a Japanese camera rag with the
Fuji team made it sound to me that it's a Fuji camera.

Me: 
My opinion on the GX645AF vs. the H1 is different from most Hassy fans. In
the Japanese press, Fuji claims that Fuji took a handful of designs to Hassy
(including a 6x6 version!), Hassy vetoed the 6x6, picked the 645, and tossed
in a few requirements. IMHO, the camera's a Fuji camera from start to
finish.


David J. Littleboy
Tokyo, Japan


From: "David J. Littleboy" [email protected]
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: Hasselblad H1 users feedback wanted please!
Date: Sun, 8 Jun 2003 

[email protected] wrote 
> I'm still itching for the Hassy H1 I handled a few weeks ago. Loved the
> autofocus!!!!Oh, and did I mention the AUTOFOCUS!! Anyone here have any
> problems with it? Complaints? Pro? Cons?
> Other than price that is!

You can get the same camera with the original designer/mfr's name on it (and
with a much nicer color) for about US$200 cheaper in Japan.

David J. Littleboy
[email protected]
Tokyo, Japan



From: "David J. Littleboy" [email protected]
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: Hasselblad H1 users feedback wanted please!
Date: Sun, 8 Jun 2003

"Fernando"  wrote in message
> "David J. Littleboy" [email protected] wrote 
> > You can get the same camera with the original designer/mfr's name on
> > it (and with a much nicer color) for about US$200 cheaper in Japan.
>
> And the name is...? :)

GX645AF. http://www.fujifilm.co.jp/gx645af/

David J. Littleboy
Tokyo, Japan



Subject: Re: Hasselblad H1 users feedback wanted please!
From: Peter Linden [email protected]
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Date: Sat, 07 Jun 2003

[email protected] at [email protected] wrote
> I'm still itching for the Hassy H1 I handled a few weeks ago. Loved the
> autofocus!!!!Oh, and did I mention the AUTOFOCUS!! Anyone here have any
> problems with it? Complaints? Pro? Cons?
> Other than price that is!
> Joseph Burke

I've had an H1 for a couple of months now and accumulated the 35mm and 150mm
lenses along the way. I've been very pleased with the handling/operation and
lens quality. Especially the fantastically large/bright viewfinder. While
I've occasionally used the autofocus, most of my landscape and still life
work is done with manual focus.

My interest in this camera centers around its operation with Kodak's
ProBack. I'm exceedingly pleased with the output. I recently did some
side-by-side film-digital shooting using Kodak 100GX positive film which I
scanned with an Imacon. There was no comparison in image quality...tonal
range, color, detail were noticeable better with the Kodak sensor.

Peter Linden




End of Page