[DandA]

So we are even three...

I use for my 645D and two or three lenses (35mm+90mm always, 150mm sometimes) an f-stop Kenti. But as you guys I have an eye on the Hassi because of its weight and form factor. So it's great to read some real world test - thanks a lot to you Carsten !

Great to hear Ristretto! Thats also the line of backpacks I use...f-stop brand! I use the slightly larger Guru bag with their removeable ICU inserts when biking and one size larger than the Guru when hiking.

Dave (D&A)

[BostonUKshooter]

Thanks for the insightful report Carsten. Another option for 300mm is the 67 300mm f/4 M*. The lens is universally regarded as excellent and is a different optical design than the 645 counterparts.
Shutter shake is a serious limiting factor with long lenses at slower shutter speeds; e.g., I've found better results using the 400mm mounted on a tripod at the body rather than at the lens mount. I also built a pretty elaborate lens stabilization system for the 600mm which suffers terribly from shutter shake at slow shutter speed. Image below, and I sometimes add a Manfrotto long lens support to this as well.

That's one heck of a setup on the 600mm!....home-made rear stabiliser attached to the camera??
I have just acquired the 67 300mm F4 M* with Fotodiox 645 adapter and IQ is stunning....although still have to be careful with shutter shock vibration at slow speeds on the 645Z , even on Manf. tripod/geared head etc , and all the requisite precautions....needs higher ISO's to get the 'best' results. Will also be trying with 1.4 extender - when it eventually arrives from the Christmas backlog!.

---------- Post added 01-03-17 at 05:20 PM ----------

For a couple of days I had the chance to test an X1D loaner (actual firmware) with the available XCD lenses 90 mm and 45 mm:

I own a 645z with the 28-45, 90 macro, 150/2.8 FA, and 300 mm *A lenses.
With the 645z body and 28-45 plus 90 macro you have to schlep 4120 grams, against 2444 grams with X1D body and 30, 45 and 90 XCD lenses…. Or, walking around with 645z body and 90 macro means 2590 grams against 1344 grams, strolling with X1D and 90 XCD lens. So it was really tempting to see what a change from Pentax to Hassy would imply for me.

First, I visited some of my favourite landscape locations around my home and shot 645z plus 45 mm (28-45 @45 mm) or 90 mm on tripod (RRS TVC-24L with RRS BH-40 ballhead/ B645D camera plate) and then repeated the shot with the X1D and 45 or 90 lens, same settings like 645z. The X1D was mounted on tripod with my second 645D camera plate (shooting vertically was therefore a PITA, as compared to the normal 645z working with two plates).
Then, I made some portrait shots in available light to see how X1D EVF and AF work in real life.
I set up three X1D custom modes, alike my 645z custom modes. The landscapes were done in manual mode (resp., Av @f:10 and exposure comp., as appropriate), ISO 100, manual focus, SR function on 645z lenses turned off, exposed “to the right”, and self-timer. ETTR was done with caution not to blow the highlights with the 645z, and the following X1D exposure was matched to give comparable preconditions for conversion and file comparison. For the same reasons I didn’t use Phocus for the X1D files conversion. This was done by LR6 was with identical develop settings for 645z / X1D files and PS work with same curves, filters etc.

Some examples (X1D variant)

Attachment 337384

Attachment 337385

Attachment 337386

Attachment 337387

Attachment 337388

In web size, you cannot evaluate high-end lenses´ performance, and conversion is always a matter of taste.
For a close look, you could check the original DNG / 3FR files here:

X1D versus 645z 3FR / DNG files
I hope, the link works



This is not a scientific test, more a field report.
Some practice-oriented remarks:

>>Working speed:

The interval from power on to shutter release is under a second for the 645z (live view off), and 13 to 14 ! seconds for my loaner X1D (inevitably you have live view on, obviously too much data for the processor). As a workaround, I tried standby mode on the X1D and closed the rear monitor (short-press the power button). Then, whilst you lift the X1D for a shot, half-press the shutter release and you can focus almost immediately.
Standby drains power, and my battery was empty after an overnight standby. But this should be the way to go when you want to be prepared for a spontaneous photo in the street, travelling etc.
This extremely slow startup could be in part be due to the fact that both XCD loaners were kind of preterm lenses (firmware 0.51, X1D body firmware was 1.14.2-5428, with 35 focus points etc).

AF speed is MUCH slower in the X1D than in 645z, and more than once I missed the perfect moment for a portrait. For landscape no problem but the X1D´s domain will be travel, photojournalism and handheld shooting.
Write speed is also slow (for me, not a big issue). Formatting a 16 GB Sandisk Extreme Pro 95 MB/sec took 21 seconds with the X1D as compared to 6 seconds with 645z.

>>Viewfinder/ Screen:

I have to wear glasses, and was very curious whether I could get as close to the eyepiece with my glasses on the X1D as on my 645z. Here, the large rubber eyecup can be removed so that I can really see the COMPLETE viewfinder on the whole. This is really nice, together with the excellent optical quality of the viewfinder, and I prefer to compose through the 645z viewfinder most of the time.
The X1D viewfinder is kind of deep seated and not modifiable due to the eye sensor for display switching.
My viewfinder experience was better than expected, but about 1/8 was not visible for me and I had to round-trip with my eyes for a look into the corners (depends on individual eye-glass distance, of course. But even my spectacles with the shortest cornea-glass distance did not improve my field of view noticeably).

The EVF of the X1D takes some getting used to, to say the least. It is ok for framing and focus placement, but not the smooth WYSIWYG experience, what it should be. Contrast and colour are more or less off, and in low light you don’t see enough details. Frame rate is low, and together with the slow start-up time you realise the gap between massive image data and too low processing power.
The X1D rear display looks better, but I would not use a MF camera like a smartphone or compact…
The EVF blacks out for 1,2 sec after exposure, I find this annoying, probably a bit spoilt by working with Leica RF for many years and 645z for the last two years :-)
Here a short video of the EVF experience (hope, the link works):

X1D EVF exposure

Shooting landscape with X1D on tripod is a case for the excellent display. A double tap on the screen switches to a 100% view of the tapped focus area. Nice feature, and by swiping you can move the enlarged subject in focus. With gloves, you could do this also with hardware buttons but the X1D touch-sensitive display is really great for manual focus as compared to the somewhat sluggish motion of the 645z focus square. I missed a tilting screen on the X1D sometimes, but this would admittedly add bulk.

Low light scenes can be hard to focus with the X1D, depending on contrast (lower AF limit was about 1,3 EV(100) without AF assist). My lowest landscape light was about EV(100) 2.7, but I focused manually with X1D and 645z. The 645z AF is much more sensitive with phase detection, down to -3EV. Manual focus sensitivity with X1D is comparable to the 645z limits, same sensor. But the X1D has no focus peaking, I missed this sometimes.

>>Lenses/ image quality:

The new XCD lenses are really excellent performers. I would suggest that you compare the uploaded original files for yourself.

Sometimes, the Pentax 90Macro files have more bite, when captured under optimal circumstances. Several of my shots from tripod didn´t come out critically sharp, both 645z and X1D files, under breezy conditions. In the wood, under calm conditions, I got the sharpest results.
You need a REALLY sturdy tripod or still air to benefit from the potentially possible outstanding IQ.
The Pentax 28-45 zoom @45 mm was equal or possibly a wee bit softer than the 45 XCD (in the centre), and a bit softer in the corners. However, it’s a zoom against a prime, and the differences were small.

Attachment 337391
(left 28-45 mm Pentex @ 45 mm, right XCD 45 mm)

Attachment 337392
(28-45 Pentax @45 and XCD 45. Center and LR corner)

Attachment 337393

90Macro against XCD 90, crop from this image
Attachment 337394


Because of the excellent optical performance from a relatively small, lightweight kit I would still consider the X1D, but ONLY with better handling/ viewfinder experience. My lens line-up would be XCD 30 plus 90 mm and a long HC lens (hard to say whether Hasselblad will ever make such an XCD lens).
It would be exciting to try the HC 300/4.5 on the X1D with the (not yet available) XH lens adapter. But X1D plus XH adapter and 300/4.5 lens would be 2985 g, more weight than my 645z with 300*A lens…

Vignetting is more pronounced in the X1D, @ f:3.2 the XCD 90 had 1,25 stops, the 645Z with 90 Macro 0,35 stops in the corner probably due to the longer flange distance.

>>Other

I was surprised that the X1D doesn´t offer exposure bracketing. Not a big issue for me, this could be added in a later firmware. And I missed the self-timer option programmable in custom-mode, also on my wish list for a future firmware.
The X1D power-on button is levelled out and tiny: when shooting under cold conditions you have to take off your gloves to switch the X1D on - whereas the 645z can be operated with gloves on.

Sensor dust: this was not a big deal for me with the 645z, maybe the dust removal system is effective, and/ or the more deep-seated sensor is better protected. In two years now, I didn’t have the need for a sensor cleaning. But the X1D I got was already spangled with dust !

Carsten
Flickr

Very interesting review and the only one I've seen with direct hands-on comparison - Hassy still has the 'brand' name, but your nitty-gritty comparison on specifics is very illuminating! Excellent piece of work. (FYI- the only Hassy which I have seen recently which really impressed me was the older H5D with the larger 39mmx50mm sensor , but that was in a very controlled studio environment with strobes, not field landscape work.)
I concur with many others that the IQ from the 28-45mm on the 645Z is excellent, as is the 90mm macro , especially in the cost/benefit/IQ calculation , despite the weight/bulk issues....higher ISO's to compensate don't degrade IQ that much in my experience, and I'm printing to 24"x36" on my Epson 7900. Experience with my used (Ebay Japan sourced) 300mm F4 M* (67) is a bit limited, but I really like what I've seen so far....IQ is amazing for such a 'legacy' lens, although there is some evidence of the shutter shock issues others have mentioned despite all the usual hardware and technique precautions. BTW- I also like the 165 F4LS (67) lens which also delivers excellent IQ on the 645Z.

Love it when I hear about another hiker and cyclist taking their kit . Maybe we need to get together sometime in each others respective location for a ride and shooting. Of course I will let you ride with my Pentax *A 600 f5.6 645 lens....thanks! . By the way, Mt. Bike or road bike? We have great rides (trails and roads) of each here as well as vistas on hiking trails. I am familar with that Lowepro backpack having owned one but found two other brand backpacks that are even better when cycling with gear and at same time protect the gear even more with rock aolid support on the back but still light weight.

Each camera system has pluses and minuses depending on application and uses and thats why when comparing the X1D to the 645z system, a case can be made for each one.

Dave (D&A)

Dave, when you visit Germany, we should make a MB bike tour in the Black Forest, great region for MB and landscape :-) Meanwhile, I will make some more gym for the *A600...

Carsten

---------- Post added 01-04-17 at 09:49 AM ----------

So we are even three...

I use for my 645D and two or three lenses (35mm+90mm always, 150mm sometimes) an f-stop Kenti. But as you guys I have an eye on the Hassi because of its weight and form factor. So it's great to read some real world test - thanks a lot to you Carsten !

Enrico and Dave, thanks for the hint to f-stop backpacks. Also quick-access, very interesting for a more all-round bike/ hike solution.

Carsten

[BostonUKshooter]

Which Manfrotto geared head do you use? The 405 or the junior 410 head? Thanks.

I have both - the heavier 405 is better, but I also have it mounted on the hefty Manfrotto 058B tripod, which is excellent for stability , but not portability!

That's one heck of a setup on the 600mm!....home-made rear stabiliser attached to the camera??
I have just acquired the 67 300mm F4 M* with Fotodiox 645 adapter and IQ is stunning....although still have to be careful with shutter shock vibration at slow speeds on the 645Z , even on Manf. tripod/geared head etc , and all the requisite precautions....needs higher ISO's to get the 'best' results. Will also be trying with 1.4 extender - when it eventually arrives from the Christmas backlog!.

---------- Post added 01-03-17 at 05:20 PM ----------


Very interesting review and the only one I've seen with direct hands-on comparison - Hassy still has the 'brand' name, but your nitty-gritty comparison on specifics is very illuminating! Excellent piece of work. (FYI- the only Hassy which I have seen recently which really impressed me was the older H5D with the larger 39mmx50mm sensor , but that was in a very controlled studio environment with strobes, not field landscape work.)
I concur with many others that the IQ from the 28-45mm on the 645Z is excellent, as is the 90mm macro , especially in the cost/benefit/IQ calculation , despite the weight/bulk issues....higher ISO's to compensate don't degrade IQ that much in my experience, and I'm printing to 24"x36" on my Epson 7900. Experience with my used (Ebay Japan sourced) 300mm F4 M* (67) is a bit limited, but I really like what I've seen so far....IQ is amazing for such a 'legacy' lens, although there is some evidence of the shutter shock issues others have mentioned despite all the usual hardware and technique precautions. BTW- I also like the 165 F4LS (67) lens which also delivers excellent IQ on the 645Z.

Ian, why did you chose the 67 300 mm F4 M instead of one of the 645 lenses ? Did you compare with other 300 mm lenses ? Shutter shock seems to be a bigger issue than I thought. I will make some higher ISO shots, and/or wider aperture plus focus stacking as a workaround next time when I work with my *A300 F4 and the Z.

Carsten

[DandA]

Carsten wrote--->>>"Dave, when you visit Germany, we should make a MB bike tour in the Black Forest, great region for MB and landscape"<<<

Carsten sounds great!. I've heard and read so much about the black forest...quite magical.

When you get to the States of course Colorado (Moab) is home to some.of the greatest mountain.biking but here on the east coast where I am, we can ride/hike in the beautiful Blue Ridge Mts in the Shennendoah Valley for those activities and scenic photopgraphy and an hr away is Washingtom D.C. Maybe we'll leave our A*600's at home...LOL.

As for f-stop backpacks, only thr smaller Kenti doesn' use the removeable internal ICU's system and is arranged differently. They hug your body when biking/hiking and thats their advantage. Another brand that also is a good fit for those activitirs is Clik Elite but they are not as well built and often hold less with a so-so internal design. F-stop is the choice of many when engaged in mobile activities combined with photograhy.

As a compact high performance MFD system when biking/hiking/traveling light, its hard not to like the X1D but for most other photographic endeavors, there still are many advantages to the 645Z at the moment.

Dave (D&A)

Since we talk of f-stop... Only now, I noticed a strange thing on my loaner XCD 90 mm lens. See the picture: it is labeled f:3.3, although the EXIFs indicate f:3.2 and this is also the official Hasselblad F-number. Obviously, they were in a hurry in Japan to produce enough lenses in short time, and neglected the final check ;-) Not that I find the f-stop difference significant but this confirms that many observations now are still preliminary.

Carsten

[Ed Hurst]

Ian, why did you chose the 67 300 mm F4 M instead of one of the 645 lenses ? Did you compare with other 300 mm lenses ? Shutter shock seems to be a bigger issue than I thought. I will make some higher ISO shots, and/or wider aperture plus focus stacking as a workaround next time when I work with my *A300 F4 and the Z.

Carsten

Despite not being Ian, let me reply by saying that I too have the 6x7 300mm f4 EDIF and, having made the comparison, it is superior optically to the 645 300's. Being heavier, it may also be slightly less susceptible to shutter flutter...

Despite not being Ian, let me reply by saying that I too have the 6x7 300mm f4 EDIF and, having made the comparison, it is superior optically to the 645 300's. Being heavier, it may also be slightly less susceptible to shutter flutter...

Ed, thanks a lot for this information ! The 67 is still less weight than a HC 4.5/300...I will try to get one, because I like the 300 mm FL very much for landscape.

Carsten

[BostonUKshooter]

Ian, why did you chose the 67 300 mm F4 M instead of one of the 645 lenses ? Did you compare with other 300 mm lenses ? Shutter shock seems to be a bigger issue than I thought. I will make some higher ISO shots, and/or wider aperture plus focus stacking as a workaround next time when I work with my *A300 F4 and the Z.

Carsten

Carsten/Ed - I chose the 67 300mm M* as I like the perspective and image rendering that I'd seen in images from other photographers....it's a highly subjective view I know , but there is something 'different' about the final result that I have not yet been able to explain (not being a lens 'scientist'). Obviously the 67 300mm is close to a 35mm equiv of 155mm , whereas the 645 300mm is close to a 35mm equiv of 240mm, which may be part of the answer? I have also noticed a significant difference in image colour between my 645 (150mm , 90mm, and 28-45mm) and 67 lenses (300mm and 165mm), with the 67 lenses consistently recording 'thinner', flatter, bluer images. The 67 lenses IQ is still excellent, but not as sharp and contrasty as the new 645 DFA lenses, in RAW form. However after LR processing the microcontrast and edge definition of the 67 images can be brought fairly close to the 645 results, and certainly good enough for my large scale prints.

Carsten/Ed - I chose the 67 300mm M* as I like the perspective and image rendering that I'd seen in images from other photographers....it's a highly subjective view I know , but there is something 'different' about the final result that I have not yet been able to explain (not being a lens 'scientist'). Obviously the 67 300mm is close to a 35mm equiv of 155mm , whereas the 645 300mm is close to a 35mm equiv of 240mm, which may be part of the answer? I have also noticed a significant difference in image colour between my 645 (150mm , 90mm, and 28-45mm) and 67 lenses (300mm and 165mm), with the 67 lenses consistently recording 'thinner', flatter, bluer images. The 67 lenses IQ is still excellent, but not as sharp and contrasty as the new 645 DFA lenses, in RAW form. However after LR processing the microcontrast and edge definition of the 67 images can be brought fairly close to the 645 results, and certainly good enough for my large scale prints.

Thanks a lot ! A 67 M* 300 is already under way, together with an adapter. You piqued my curiosity, I will compare it with my 645 *A 300 and then sell one or the other. However, a 300 mm lens is 300 mm (240 mm in 24/36 terms), for 67 as well as 645, only the image circle is larger (so the lens) in 67. Therefore, the look must be different for other reasons, maybe the apochromatic correction. And I like the fact that this lens has a tripod mount. High detail and not so high microcontrast sounds good !

Carsten

[Ed Hurst]

The 6x7 300mm f4 EDIF is truly my favourite lens (focal length considerations aside). Amazing technically and just to my taste aesthetically... if you can handle the size, I am quite sure you will not be disappointed. Care is certainly needed with any lens of that length to avoid vibration, wind and troublesome shutter speeds, but boy does it deliver!