CFV II 50C on 907X, 503CW, and Linhof Techno (YT)

[SrMphoto]

Ian Atkinson tries out CFV II 50C on 907X, 503CW, and Linhof Techno.

Hasselblad 907X 50C: Three Camera Tests - Location to Print

I enjoyed the video.

 

[dchew]

Nice. I'm confused how he says he got less DoF with the 503 combo. Same physical location, f/16 on all shots and same sensor. That doesn't make any sense. I wonder if he was just front focused a bit more than the other shots.

Dave

 

[KeithDM]

Ian Atkinson tries out CFV II 50C on 907X, 503CW, and Linhof Techno.

Hasselblad 907X 50C: Three Camera Tests - Location to Print

I enjoyed the video.

Thanks for posting - a very helpful and instructive video. No glitz or gimmicks, just straightforward and informative. Good to see the sensor cleaning aspect addressed. As a 503CX user (albeit very intermittently over the past year), the 907X is a very tempting item purely for the CFV II 50C. Two things have saved my bank balance (and marriage!) from major harm - (1) the CFV II 50C is not available as a stand-alone item and (2) I have a freezer drawer packed full of rolls of FP4+, HP5+, Tri-X, Fomapan 100 and Portra 160 & 400!

 

[anyone]

I also enjoyed the video - beautifully done and I like the print comparison.

However, IMHO the category might be more "promotion" than "review", since a lot of the properties he mentions are of course common to all digital backs with V-mount (mounting it on Techno + 500-system - needless to say that the access to X-lenses is unique to the CFV50II).

He also uses the Hasselblad system where it shines (e.g. leaf shutter in lenses, enabling high speed flash sync) and leaves out the issues that might be more concerning (for example color cast on Schneider lenses and the crop factor).

Despite these few comments, a hands-on worth watching, thanks for sharing!

PS: Keith, the first part that saves you from unintended consequences is related to Hasselblad's business idea: to sell the back only bundled with the body since there is a good chance the user will figure out that wideangle is not really possible with legacy lenses due to the crop factor. Therefore, she buys the first X-lens, since she has everything that's needed for it anyways. Given the good performance and small form factor, others might follow...

 

[tcdeveau]

He also uses the Hasselblad system where it shines (e.g. leaf shutter in lenses, enabling high speed flash sync) and leaves out the issues that might be more concerning (for example color cast on Schneider lenses and the crop factor).

If only Hasselblad would move ahead with using the 100mp BSI sensor of the GFX100/100S.....

 

[Geoff]

Agree with the above - its both technical and yet a bit vague too.... still, enjoyable to see all this hands on. It has some useful information.

 

[jng]

Nice. I'm confused how he says he got less DoF with the 503 combo. Same physical location, f/16 on all shots and same sensor. That doesn't make any sense. I wonder if he was just front focused a bit more than the other shots.

Dave

Also wondering about the apparently more shallow DOF with the 503/50mm combination. In my experience the 50 FLE suffers from quite a bit of field curvature. However I'm not sure this would explain things as the subject was toward the edge of the frame of the crop sensor. It's possible that the steeper focus roll-off is a result the setting of the floating lens element, which may have been set for intermediate distances? Perhaps someone here with a 50 FLE might be interested in testing this (I sold mine years ago b/c of field curvature issues).

For me the biggest take-home message is that I want a Linhof Techno!

John

 

[onasj]

Quite a nice video; thanks for sharing. Highlights just how capable and compact the 907x + XCD lens combination is—comparable optical perfection as current Rodenstock technical camera lenses (which are truly superb), but much smaller and with AF.

 

[SrMphoto]

Thanks for posting - a very helpful and instructive video. No glitz or gimmicks, just straightforward and informative. Good to see the sensor cleaning aspect addressed. As a 503CX user (albeit very intermittently over the past year), the 907X is a very tempting item purely for the CFV II 50C. Two things have saved my bank balance (and marriage!) from major harm - (1) the CFV II 50C is not available as a stand-alone item and (2) I have a freezer drawer packed full of rolls of FP4+, HP5+, Tri-X, Fomapan 100 and Portra 160 & 400!

I am waiting on my 503CW and while researching the camera encountered that video. I am looking forward to shooting film again but also to try it CFV II 50C.

 

[FloatingLens]

Also wondering about the apparently more shallow DOF with the 503/50mm combination. In my experience the 50 FLE suffers from quite a bit of field curvature. However I'm not sure this would explain things as the subject was toward the edge of the frame of the crop sensor. It's possible that the steeper focus roll-off is a result the setting of the floating lens element, which may have been set for intermediate distances? Perhaps someone here with a 50 FLE might be interested in testing this (I sold mine years ago b/c of field curvature issues).

For me the biggest take-home message is that I want a Linhof Techno!

John

I have to say I can't complain about the Hasselblad 4/50 FLE in terms of performance. It certainly has an edge over the 4/40 FLE, but IMHO not worth the bulk over the XCD 4/45P. That is, of course, unless you plan to shift and stitch. The appeal of the X system is really high.

 

[budfox]

I also enjoyed the video - beautifully done and I like the print comparison.

However, IMHO the category might be more "promotion" than "review", since a lot of the properties he mentions are of course common to all digital backs with V-mount (mounting it on Techno + 500-system - needless to say that the access to X-lenses is unique to the CFV50II).

He also uses the Hasselblad system where it shines (e.g. leaf shutter in lenses, enabling high speed flash sync) and leaves out the issues that might be more concerning (for example color cast on Schneider lenses and the crop factor).

Despite these few comments, a hands-on worth watching, thanks for sharing!

PS: Keith, the first part that saves you from unintended consequences is related to Hasselblad's business idea: to sell the back only bundled with the body since there is a good chance the user will figure out that wideangle is not really possible with legacy lenses due to the crop factor. Therefore, she buys the first X-lens, since she has everything that's needed for it anyways. Given the good performance and small form factor, others might follow...

I have to disagree with that last comment. I got the 907X package purely for use with a 503 and SWC, and that's all.

OK - I did buy a 45P just to check that the X lenses and 907X worked.

OK - I did then buy a second hand 80mm, but that was because the price was irresistible.

OK - I had to then get the 30mm or else my collection was not properly balanced in terms of focal lengths.

No way I am buying any more however.

 

[Godfrey]

I have to disagree with that last comment. I got the 907X package purely for use with a 503 and SWC, and that's all.

OK - I did buy a 45P just to check that the X lenses and 907X worked.
OK - I did then buy a second hand 80mm, but that was because the price was irresistible.
OK - I had to then get the 30mm or else my collection was not properly balanced in terms of focal lengths.

No way I am buying any more however.

LOL ... So you bought a three lens X system. That's enough for most people, without the V system as well.

I bought the 21 and 45P with the 907x, and added the 90. That's fairly complete already, for me. I use adapted macro lenses (V system 120, Leica R 60 and 100mm) at present, but I'll likely add the XCD 120 as well at some point. No rush. I have 50/80/120/150 for the V system, and that's really as much as I need there too, even with the crop factor with the CFVII 50c back.

I ordered the 907x and 21mm first as my notion was to have the back for the V cameras and to have an all digital SWC for the ultra wide end. Adding the 45P and 90 makes it essentially two complete systems with a lot more versatility.

But darn it, now I want a Flexbody too. Sigh. LOL!

G

 

[jng]

I have to say I can't complain about the Hasselblad 4/50 FLE in terms of performance. It certainly has an edge over the 4/40 FLE, but IMHO not worth the bulk over the XCD 4/45P. That is, of course, unless you plan to shift and stitch. The appeal of the X system is really high.

Actually one of the last tests I did before selling my stellar 40 IF CFE was against the XCD 45/3.5. ‘Nuff said.

John

 

[anyone]

I have to disagree with that last comment. I got the 907X package purely for use with a 503 and SWC, and that's all.

No problem having a different viewpoint, but isn’t your case exactly what I meant?

OK - one inconsistency in my argumentation, there are two stellar wide angle options for the V system, the SWC and 40mm IF which are also with the crop factor still wide.

But my point was: the users buy the combo to use their legacy systems but eventually get new lenses for the X-system sooner or later. Hasselblad wants a low threshold for users to get into the X system lenses and therefore sells the back as ‘bundle only’ with the body. There is nothing wrong with that, it just explains Hasselblad’s bundling strategy.

 

[FloatingLens]

But my point was: the users buy the combo to use their legacy systems but eventually get new lenses for the X-system sooner or later. Hasselblad wants a low threshold for users to get into the X system lenses and therefore sells the back as ‘bundle only’ with the body. There is nothing wrong with that, it just explains Hasselblad’s bundling strategy.

Exactly! I wish I could justify to buy the XCD 21...

 

[Godfrey]

The XCD 21 with 907x body, cropped to square, is a near-perfect "all digital SWC" in my view. It ameliorates the fact that I needed to sell my SWC to raise part of the money and be able to afford it. The fact that the back expands use of my V system bodies and lenses so seamlessly, and that the XCD lenses are such superb performers as well, is a huge added plus factor that made the cost of admission much more palatable.

I have so much excess camera gear it's almost embarrassing, but I'm not at all embarrassed with having this outfit. It's done everything I dreamed it might, and more. On that basis, the cost seems almost inconsequential. Such it is...

G

 

[budfox]

Godfrey,
I have wondered about your XCD 21mm and 907 as a replacement for the SWC. I always thought the SWC was closer to a 24mm equivalent than a 17mm, and therefore the XCD 30mm would be more appropriate?
(BTW - I have a flexbody also!)
R

 

[budfox]

No problem having a different viewpoint, but isn’t your case exactly what I meant?

OK - one inconsistency in my argumentation, there are two stellar wide angle options for the V system, the SWC and 40mm IF which are also with the crop factor still wide.

But my point was: the users buy the combo to use their legacy systems but eventually get new lenses for the X-system sooner or later. Hasselblad wants a low threshold for users to get into the X system lenses and therefore sells the back as ‘bundle only’ with the body. There is nothing wrong with that, it just explains Hasselblad’s bundling strategy.

Agreed - that's very sneaky trying to get us to buy more stuff!

I don't think that the CVF 50C alone would have been much cheaper in any case - which might also be one reason. And selling the 907X as a stand alone package prob would not have been a big seller for HB when you think about it.

 

[Godfrey]

Godfrey,
I have wondered about your XCD 21mm and 907 as a replacement for the SWC. I always thought the SWC was closer to a 24mm equivalent than a 17mm, and therefore the XCD 30mm would be more appropriate?
(BTW - I have a flexbody also!)

It's hard to consider 'equivalence' between formats with different proportions, if you're trying to think of what it might be in 35mm terms since the SWC is a square format camera. Here is an angle of view analysis with a calculator tool (http://www.mat.uc.pt/~rps/photos/angles.html)...

Hasselblad SWC with Zeiss Biogon 38mm f/4.5 lens on 6x6cm film:
Format Width = 56 mm, Length = 56 mm, Diagonal = 79.196 mm
f - Hor - Vert - Diag
38mm - 72.8 - 72.8 - 92.4 degrees

Hasselblad 907x/CFVII-50c with XCD 21mm f/4 lens on square crop:
Format Width = 33 mm, Length = 33 mm, Diagonal = 46.669 mm
f - Hor - Vert - Diag
21mm - 76.3 - 76.3 - 96.0 degrees​

You can see from that that the angle of view between the two cameras is quite close, with the 907x being just a little wider. Of course, when you use the full frame with the 907x, you get an even wider look and feel, but I tend to prefer square crop for comparison purposes when talking about the SWC. The XCD 30mm provides a much narrower FoV when considered in square crop, with about a 76° diagonal angle of view, about 56° on the horizontal and vertical axes.

The most significant difference is that with the smaller 907x format (~1.65x crop factor) you have to open up the lens by one or two stops to get the same DoF feel as the SWC, so I use f/5.6 rather than f/8 to f/11 most of the time. When you do that, the notion of it being an "all digital SWC" is very close to reality.

Yeah, don't get me started on the Flexbody desire...

G

 

[glennedens]

I highly recommend the Flexbody I need to get some images posted. I've been doing limited testing with the 40FLE, 50FLE, 80, 100, 120, 135 (interesting combo), 180 and 250 indoors (weather is just turning). Haven't decided on the final lens selection yet, been lucky to borrow CF lenses that I didn't already have to try out. It 'seems' the best bets are the 50IF, 80, 100 and 180. Until I get outside it is too early to tell.

It is too bad the person modifying the Flexbody into the Bendyblad isn't doing mods any longer (he may have passed away?). With the CFV50IIc you only need the Flexbody and a cable release, none of the other items in the kit are necessary unless you want to shoot V-series film backs.

The Flexbody is compact and lightweight, there is definitely a sequence of operations that must be followed but it is already second nature to me.

As you all probably know there are two versions - the older Flexbody/CP and the newer Flexbody. The older version has the bubble level inset into the rise/fall knob and the newer version has the bubble level inset into the removable ground glass viewfinder frame (also that frame allows one to swap focusing screens - the older version is fixed). With the CFV50iic the older version is more useful in my opinion since the bubble level is on the body.

There is a caution - some of the older units will not fit the CFV50iic without removing a thin metal frame insert - easy to do but then some units exhibit light leaks when that is removed - so try it to be sure. Some of the older units won't fit even if the insert is removed (I had to return an earlier version). I've been told that units after serial number 2100 should be fine (take that with a grain of salt).

The cons are that there are no physical zero detents for tilt or rise/fall - the markings are corse but okay - an extra bubble level might be useful, just where to put it can be tricky, I've gotten better at eyeballing it.

With Live View for focusing the Flexbody is a dream to use. Ultimately I'd also like the Cambo WRS with the Hasselblad V-Series lens adaptor/shutter cocking mechanism - of course you lose tilt.

So Godfrey - resistance is futile - go for it, it would be a great addition to your Hasselblad kit

Kind regards, Glenn, NM