Colours to die for - but please don't move

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

neilb

I've had the XiD for a few weeks now, and I love it, and I hate it.

On the one hand the images are rich, detailed and have a fabulous dynamic range. Long exposures are vibrant the camera is as easy to operate in the dark as any other I've used.

The ISO range is not up to the Nikon or Sony full-frame camera levels, but it is very usable up to 3200 and even 6400. So that's good.

So what's not to love?   The auto-focus!

Obviously no-one is going to buy this camera to cover the 100m at the next Olympics, but people have this habit of moving around (not just 100m runners) and the X1D doesn't like it. Tower Bridge was good enough to stay still and the X1D was very happy. Dancers have an annoying habit of dancing however and the X1D was not happy with them at all. The only real option is to manually focus - not great.

I don't expect the camera to react as fast as a D4, but it is a modern piece of kit, so there is no reason why the camera can't think fast and then get the lens to slowly makes it's way to the right place. Even a sluggish, non-hunting, accurate continuous auto-focus would fit the bill well. But a Single focus that has to come out of focus before it can check it was in focus (hunting) seems odd for any camera costing more than £100 these days. (and clearly the X1D is a lot more than £100!!)

I've not used other Hasselblad cameras, so I'm not sure if this is they way Hasselblad users like it, but coming from a Nikon D4 or even the consumer level Olympus Pen to the X1D is a strange and uncomfortable place for those used to using auto-focus on their cameras.

I can only hope that it is possible to make dramatic improvements in the firmware. At least the 'no card' bug is fixed, which should save some embarrassing pauses.

Happy shooting,  Neil

ndscali

Yes, I share your pain. Additionally there is an autofocus bug with the 90mm lens where it front focuses even on still subjects every 3-4 in 10 shots.
It seems like some fundamental requests for such an expensive kit. It will never focus as fast as a 35mm system but at least it should nail it accurately.
The MF images are addictive because they look so good.
I hope they are working on some firmware fixes!

PeterH

I don't own this thing yet, but I plan to. This strikes me as an unrealistic expectation for medium format digital. At least, it's one I won't have, and it's certainly something that wasn't applicable with my Pentax 645D either.

I think it's best to think of MF digital as MF film, only with more convenient and increased image quality. You still need to shoot in a more disciplined, rigorous manner to get the best results.
Things like AF are a bonus, but as with film, you could never totally rely on it. If you're going to shoot something that moves a lot (dancing is something I would relegate to dslr's still - personally I think even Sony or Fuji mirrorless would be a gamble) with MF you light it up in studio with a lot of light, you stop down to give you some room to work with and you manually focus. I wouldn't expect the X1d to be a lot different.

The bug with the front-focusing accuracy concerning the 90mm, however, sounds more concerning.

neilb

I would be very interested in hearing from other H5 or H6 owners to know if they use auto-focus.

I owned a Contax 645 medium format auto-focus camera 16 years ago where I felt the same as you do Peter. This is not 16 years ago though. Cameras of all types (in particular mirrorless ones) have moved on and they can accurately determine the focus. I'm pleased that you are already happy with the camera you are soon to own; It would appear that many of us who have paid the money and made our choices are less happy with some of these fundamentals.

Precise auto-focus on an autofocus camera is not an optional extra. I think I should expect at least the accuracy of other mirrorless cameras costing a tenth of the price, even if not as fast as they are.

jerome_m

Quote from: neilb on June 03, 2017, 08:57:08 PM
I would be very interested in hearing from other H5 or H6 owners to know if they use auto-focus.

H4D user here. I use the true focus function, which I find quite accurate. I can also focus by hand on the ground glass, so AF is only convenience.

neilb

Quote from: jerome_m on June 04, 2017, 12:03:28 AM
Quote from: neilb on June 03, 2017, 08:57:08 PM
I would be very interested in hearing from other H5 or H6 owners to know if they use auto-focus.

H4D user here. I use the true focus function, which I find quite accurate. I can also focus by hand on the ground glass, so AF is only convenience.

Thanks Jerome. Can I ask if you capture moving subjects such as dance, shows etc where you cannot control the movement of the subject? And if so, do you use the camera to help you (autofocus, focus peaking etc.). I've not used the H4D so I wonder if it has any continuous autofocus or just the single shot found on the X1D.

PeterH

#6
Hey, so I'm of course not happy with a camera I don't yet own - I've enjoyed the demos I've used, but there are plenty of issues of concern with the camera. And there are expectations I do and don't have for such a system.

However, AF speed isn't one - that's all I'm trying to say. As the way I've understand current mirrorless AF tech is harder to implement in the bigger sensors, and for movement such as dancing and the focus tracking required for it is an issue for most mirrorless systems. Sony's latest an exception, but in general, focusing on moving objects is the (maybe one of the few remaining) area where the dSLR is still the best tool.

Most that I've read and used in MFD - while tech has had a lot of advancement, AF speed hasn't tended to be something that has been touted, and I think the marketing has reflected that. I would, however, expect AF to be accurate - just not fast. I would expect it to perform adequately for something like an environmental portrait shoot like my Pentax did. If it can't even do that, then that would be concerning. From the information out there, the Fuji GFX50S is no AF star either and would likely be susceptible to similar issues with dynamic subjects.


neilb

First thing to say is that I do love the X1D more than I hate it  :)

As you say, Sony (and Olympus) cameras use only contrast to focus and operate quickly and accurately. Contrast determined focus with a medium format camera should be no different to any other. The sensor in the X1D should be amazing for this if the software and processing was up to the task. Maybe Hasselblad just need some help from one of these players to get the algorithms right? I hope the processing is up to it !!!

In the meantime for my next dance shoot I will try to revert to manual focus to see how that works. It is with good reason however that I was an early adopter of autofocus all those years ago!

I would let the Olympus rule the day, but with the extreme contrast in these sorts of events, the X1D can produce so much better end results; if I can catch the moment.

jerome_m

Quote from: neilb on June 04, 2017, 01:06:37 AM
Thanks Jerome. Can I ask if you capture moving subjects such as dance, shows etc where you cannot control the movement of the subject?

No. The few times I had to use that camera for that use, I reverted to manual focus with pre-focus on a zone where the subject will be at some point. The camera's AF is not adapted to moving subjects.

Quote from: neilb on June 04, 2017, 01:06:37 AMI've not used the H4D so I wonder if it has any continuous autofocus or just the single shot found on the X1D.

The H4D (and all cameras in that series since the H1) have a continuous AF mode. It is not very useful.

jerome_m

Quote from: neilb on June 04, 2017, 04:48:10 AMAs you say, Sony (and Olympus) cameras use only contrast to focus and operate quickly and accurately.

Recent Sony cameras have phase detect pixels on the sensor. That makes them faster.

Presumably, Sony and Olympus have more experience at predictive AF, which makes a world of difference. They may also have access to faster linear motors for the lens focus element and, needing smaller lens for the smaller sensor, the focus group can also be lighter. All these count.

So you are probably right: Hasselblad AF is not its strong point if you need to follow a moving subject. That's life.

Imagecrazy

Seems to be a lot of reviews out there from the 35mm camera performance perspective expecting the X1d to perform everything perfectly and with speed, besides giving them medium format on a large sensor.  To me this is a glass half empty view and criticism.  And I guess expected once you have reduced the size of medium format camera to a higher end DSLR physical size and reasonable price.  This was bound to happen and unfortunate.

On the other hand, to get medium format in this size and price is simply amazing, the glass half full, or full in my case.  Each day, after discovering what works best, blows me away.  Thankfully autofocus is something I normally don't need and have over the years never depended on it with cameras that had it.  It is sometimes a convenience, but rarely use.

pflower

It is a salutary lesson that no camera, however good, is going to solve all your problems.  If you want to make quick shots of dancers on stage under ambient lighting using autofocus then the X1D is probably not your weapon.  However if you take the time and trouble to learn how to use it to marry with your vision you may find it useful - or possibly not - and a Nikon or Canon may be what you need for those type of shots.  Just look at some of Barbara Morgan's photos of dancers (particularly Martha Graham) made with a Speed Graphic.  Of course she used flash which effectively determined the exposure time.  But with shutter speeds of 1/2000th and wonderful file quality up to 6400 (possibly more if you go the B&W route) the X1D could be wonderful for your moving shots, but you will have to tame it and become expert in manual focusing - anticipation of likely zones of focus etc.  But compared to the cost of a single sheet of 4x5 film the X1D offers wonderful opportunities.  The autofocus we now have on all cameras, including the X1D, seems to me to be almost magical - having grown up with pure manual focus film cameras.  But it isn't the answer to everything.



 
Quote from: neilb on June 03, 2017, 10:03:03 AM
I've had the XiD for a few weeks now, and I love it, and I hate it.

On the one hand the images are rich, detailed and have a fabulous dynamic range. Long exposures are vibrant the camera is as easy to operate in the dark as any other I've used.

The ISO range is not up to the Nikon or Sony full-frame camera levels, but it is very usable up to 3200 and even 6400. So that's good.

So what's not to love?   The auto-focus!

Obviously no-one is going to buy this camera to cover the 100m at the next Olympics, but people have this habit of moving around (not just 100m runners) and the X1D doesn't like it. Tower Bridge was good enough to stay still and the X1D was very happy. Dancers have an annoying habit of dancing however and the X1D was not happy with them at all. The only real option is to manually focus - not great.

I don't expect the camera to react as fast as a D4, but it is a modern piece of kit, so there is no reason why the camera can't think fast and then get the lens to slowly makes it's way to the right place. Even a sluggish, non-hunting, accurate continuous auto-focus would fit the bill well. But a Single focus that has to come out of focus before it can check it was in focus (hunting) seems odd for any camera costing more than £100 these days. (and clearly the X1D is a lot more than £100!!)

I've not used other Hasselblad cameras, so I'm not sure if this is they way Hasselblad users like it, but coming from a Nikon D4 or even the consumer level Olympus Pen to the X1D is a strange and uncomfortable place for those used to using auto-focus on their cameras.

I can only hope that it is possible to make dramatic improvements in the firmware. At least the 'no card' bug is fixed, which should save some embarrassing pauses.

Happy shooting,  Neil