Guess I'll hang on to my Hasselblad V

I can't get a decent price for my 500 C/M, even for my 120 Makro, so
I'll hang on to it ...

http://www.dpreview.com/news/0907/09...lbladcfv39.asp

Claims no cable is needed. (Many backs use the lens sync signal). Must
expose on detecting light? (brochure says sync cable is only needed for
long ( 1 s) exposures.

I can't locate a price, but I'm guessing about $25 - $30K.

On 07/07/09 21:16, Alan Browne wrote:
I can't get a decent price for my 500 C/M, even for my 120 Makro, so
I'll hang on to it ...

http://www.dpreview.com/news/0907/09...lbladcfv39.asp

Claims no cable is needed. (Many backs use the lens sync signal). Must
expose on detecting light? (brochure says sync cable is only needed for
long ( 1 s) exposures.

I can't locate a price, but I'm guessing about $25 - $30K.



That would be one toy I wouldn't even consider selling. Unless I
was in desperate need of a new liver, or penis transplant or I'd
booked a vacation getaway on Lauren Graham.

Alan Browne wrote:

Claims no cable is needed. (Many backs use the lens sync signal). Must
expose on detecting light? (brochure says sync cable is only needed for
long ( 1 s) exposures.

Nope.
The pusher rod, tripping the exposed signal in film magazines, is used to
tell the bakc an exposure is imminent.

I can't locate a price, but I'm guessing about $25 - $30K.

Much, much less.
US$ 14k.

On Wed, 08 Jul 2009 17:04:35 +0200, Q.G. de Bakker wrote:

Alan Browne wrote:

Claims no cable is needed. (Many backs use the lens sync signal).
Must expose on detecting light? (brochure says sync cable is only
needed for long ( 1 s) exposures.

Nope.
The pusher rod, tripping the exposed signal in film magazines, is used
to tell the bakc an exposure is imminent.

I can't locate a price, but I'm guessing about $25 - $30K.

Much, much less.
US$ 14k.

When they get the price down to about $1500US (or less) for a full-frame
6x6 back with an easily removable Bayer sensor for "true" b&w, I'll buy
one, but until then, guess I'm staying with film for the old 'Blad. Too
much wishful thinking?

But seriously, as far as I can tell the back only saves in Hasselbald 3F
RAW and TIFF. I'd like to see some JPEG options. At the very least, a
full resolution, high quality one embedded in the RAW file making the
images viewable in any file viewer for quick editing.


Stef

Stefan Patric wrote:
On Wed, 08 Jul 2009 17:04:35 +0200, Q.G. de Bakker wrote:

Alan Browne wrote:

Claims no cable is needed. (Many backs use the lens sync signal).
Must expose on detecting light? (brochure says sync cable is only
needed for long ( 1 s) exposures.
Nope.
The pusher rod, tripping the exposed signal in film magazines, is used
to tell the bakc an exposure is imminent.

I can't locate a price, but I'm guessing about $25 - $30K.
Much, much less.
US$ 14k.

This is a new, 39 Mpix back, not the CFV or CFV II.

The current CF 39 back is about $28K (multiple camera types, incl.
Mamiya, Hasselblad, etc.).


When they get the price down to about $1500US (or less) for a full-frame
6x6 back with an easily removable Bayer sensor for "true" b&w, I'll buy
one, but until then, guess I'm staying with film for the old 'Blad. Too
much wishful thinking?

Used 16 Mpix backs for the 'blad are going for $4 - $8K.


But seriously, as far as I can tell the back only saves in Hasselbald 3F
RAW and TIFF. I'd like to see some JPEG options. At the very least, a

DNG in the H2/H3 backs. This one too.

full resolution, high quality one embedded in the RAW file making the
images viewable in any file viewer for quick editing.

DNG is viewable in many viewers - embedded thumbnails are JPG (I believe).

Alan Browne wrote:

This is a new, 39 Mpix back, not the CFV or CFV II.

This is the 'CFV III', called CFV 39.
Same line, current generation.

The current CF 39 back is about $28K (multiple camera types, incl. Mamiya,
Hasselblad, etc.).

Yes.
But this one (Hasselblad V-System, hence the "V" in "CFV 39") only is $14K.

Hasselblad is lowering prices. Haven't you noticed?
Yet the price for this next-generationCFV is nearly double that of the
previous one.

Stefan Patric wrote:

But seriously, as far as I can tell the back only saves in Hasselbald 3F
RAW and TIFF. I'd like to see some JPEG options. At the very least, a
full resolution, high quality one embedded in the RAW file making the
images viewable in any file viewer for quick editing.

If you need a quick JPEG, it's easy enough to quickly batch
process your RAWs or TIFFs when you import them ...

-Wolfgang

On Fri, 10 Jul 2009 12:58:06 +0200, Wolfgang Weisselberg wrote:

Stefan Patric wrote:

But seriously, as far as I can tell the back only saves in Hasselbald
3F RAW and TIFF. I'd like to see some JPEG options. At the very
least, a full resolution, high quality one embedded in the RAW file
making the images viewable in any file viewer for quick editing.

If you need a quick JPEG, it's easy enough to quickly batch process your
RAWs or TIFFs when you import them ...

Yes, I could, but it's the convenience of it. And if you're editing a
thousand images waiting for the conversion is very time consuming
particularly stressful when you have the art director and client
impatiently waiting, too. Time is money.

However, my guess is there is an embedded JPEG in the RAW, if only a low
res one, for quick image viewing on the digital back's LCD. I have an
old Canon D30 (not 30D) that does that, even though it makes no mention
of such in any official Canon literature.


Stef

Stefan Patric wrote:
On Fri, 10 Jul 2009 12:58:06 +0200, Wolfgang Weisselberg wrote:

Stefan Patric wrote:

But seriously, as far as I can tell the back only saves in Hasselbald
3F RAW and TIFF. I'd like to see some JPEG options. At the very
least, a full resolution, high quality one embedded in the RAW file
making the images viewable in any file viewer for quick editing.
If you need a quick JPEG, it's easy enough to quickly batch process your
RAWs or TIFFs when you import them ...

Yes, I could, but it's the convenience of it. And if you're editing a
thousand images waiting for the conversion is very time consuming
particularly stressful when you have the art director and client
impatiently waiting, too. Time is money.

However, my guess is there is an embedded JPEG in the RAW, if only a low
res one, for quick image viewing on the digital back's LCD. I have an
old Canon D30 (not 30D) that does that, even though it makes no mention
of such in any official Canon literature.

Again, the output of the hassy CFV-39 back (as described here) is
optionally DNG. This opens in most OS' folder displays as a large
thumbnail and of course in many viewers and editors.

On Fri, 10 Jul 2009 15:26:18 -0400, Alan Browne wrote:

Stefan Patric wrote:
On Fri, 10 Jul 2009 12:58:06 +0200, Wolfgang Weisselberg wrote:

Stefan Patric wrote:

But seriously, as far as I can tell the back only saves in Hasselbald
3F RAW and TIFF. I'd like to see some JPEG options. At the very
least, a full resolution, high quality one embedded in the RAW file
making the images viewable in any file viewer for quick editing.
If you need a quick JPEG, it's easy enough to quickly batch process
your RAWs or TIFFs when you import them ...

Yes, I could, but it's the convenience of it. And if you're editing a
thousand images waiting for the conversion is very time consuming
particularly stressful when you have the art director and client
impatiently waiting, too. Time is money.

However, my guess is there is an embedded JPEG in the RAW, if only a
low res one, for quick image viewing on the digital back's LCD. I have
an old Canon D30 (not 30D) that does that, even though it makes no
mention of such in any official Canon literature.

Again, the output of the hassy CFV-39 back (as described here) is
optionally DNG. This opens in most OS' folder displays as a large
thumbnail and of course in many viewers and editors.

As understand it, the back only outputs in 3F RAW and TIFF, but Photoshop
can read the 3F files and CONVERT them to DNG. It's the time-wasting
converting I would want to avoid.

I don't know why Hasselblad didn't have embedded JPEGs as an option just
like all other pro digitals do. Although, I would like the option of
having the JPEGs--at whatever resolution and compression I choose--saved
separately at the time the image is created, too. It's just much more
convenient than having to do it separately.


Stef