Hasselblad V digital back history/options

[Hassasin]

I've joined the forum as it appears there is good knowledge base in MF digital realm.

While I'm going to take some time to pull the trigger, no pro use either, I'd appreciate a quick tally of digital options for the Hasselblad V bodies. On the one hand I do not have a need for latest and greatest, trying to stay cost effective on this, but once I learn of differences in output / processing requirements / convenience in use (both shooting and post processing), I might as well go as new as CFV 50c.

if it helps, I shoot with 503CW, 553ELX, SWC/M and Flexbody.

I surely could continue the search and dig this up one at a time, but a quick run down would help narrow my options, and then focus of details.

 

[Hasslebad]

From Phase One, you have the following options for Hasselblad V:

P20 Firewire
P21 Firewire
P30 Firewire
P30+ Firewire
P25 Firewire
P25+ Firewire
P45 Firewire
P45+ Firewire
P65+ Firewire
IQ140 USB + Firewire
IQ160 USB + Firewire
IQ180 USB + Firewire
IQ260 USB + Firewire + Wifi
IQ280 USB + Firewire + Wifi
IQ380 USB + Firewire + Wifi

All the above I listed are CCD.

I don't know if any of the Phase One CMOS backs such as the IQ1 50 (not IQ4 150) can be used on the V mount.

Someone more knowledgeable with Hasselblad or Imacon's backs can list the CFV backs. I'm out of my depth in that regard.

 

[Godfrey]

I have experience with just one digital back, the CFVII 50c, which I obtained by buying the Hasselblad 907x 50th Anniversary Moon Landing Edition in 2019.

Far as I'm concerned, it is perfect: an utterly seamless physical and working fit on my 500CM bodies (as well as the SWC/M when I had that one). I have four V system lenses (50, 80, 120, 150) and set the back to 1:1 (33x33 mm) format, drop down one focal length, and a 500CM feels like it then simply has an infinitely long roll of film in it. It just works. Obtain the CFV 50c focusing screen and framing becomes perfect too.

I replaced the SWC/M by buying the XCD21/4 lens to use on the 907x body. It works a little better than the Biogon 38 does on the digital sensor and restores the ultrawide FoV with the smaller square format.

A used 907x/CFVII 50c expands the future useability of the V system into the digital capture world nicely and with minimal fuss.

G

 

[Hassasin]

@Hasselbad & @Godfrey thanks, good start for me.

How does CCD compare to CMOS in output quality, including B&W conversion?

Quick check on PhaseOne options landed me in a P45+ area, but then CFV 50c is in similar (or maybe not) price point. Anyone can compare these two?

 

[Hassasin]

While at PhaseOne are their backs re-adaptable to different camera mount? For example get one for a Mamiya and convert mount to Hasselblad V? This would open up a lot of purchase options.

 

[Godfrey]

@Hasselbad & @Godfrey thanks, good start for me.

How does CCD compare to CMOS in output quality, including B&W conversion?

Quick check on PhaseOne options landed me in a P45+ area, but then CFV 50c is in similar (or maybe not) price point. Anyone can compare these two?

I hear a lot of comments about how one is better than the other, etc. etc. Personally, I've never actually seen any difference that matters to my Photography. Particularly with a sensor the quality of that in the Hasselblad CFVII 50c, what do you do with your eye and what you do with your processing is much more important than any difference between CMOS and CCD... imo, of course.

I suspect there is somewhere that can adapt backs made for one camera system to another camera system, but it's probably something that only a manufacturer can do, it will cost money and not really give the best results. The advantage of using something like the CFVII 50c back on the Hasselblad V system is that it is perfectly integrated and works well without workarounds and gotchas.

G

 

[jng]

@Hasselbad & @Godfrey thanks, good start for me.

How does CCD compare to CMOS in output quality, including B&W conversion?

Quick check on PhaseOne options landed me in a P45+ area, but then CFV 50c is in similar (or maybe not) price point. Anyone can compare these two?

CCD sensors do well at base ISO but not at higher ISO, where noise becomes excessive (although the IQ series allowed for pixel binning, at the expense of 4x resolution). Long exposure w/CCD sensors is also limited except for P45+ and IQ260/360 backs.

One advantage of the V mount Phase One backs (at least with the IQ series, I'm not sure about the P series) is that one can mount them in either landscape or portrait orientation.

While at PhaseOne are their backs re-adaptable to different camera mount? For example get one for a Mamiya and convert mount to Hasselblad V? This would open up a lot of purchase options.

No, mounts are not interchangeable as far as I know. When the IQ1/2 series were still being actively marketed, there was an exchange program - for example, you could swap your V mount back for an M mount back, provided one was available.

Hope this helps.

John

 

[Hassasin]

I hear a lot of comments about how one is better than the other, etc. etc. Personally, I've never actually seen any difference that matters to my Photography. Particularly with a sensor the quality of that in the Hasselblad CFVII 50c, what do you do with your eye and what you do with your processing is much more important than any difference between CMOS and CCD... imo, of course.

I suspect there is somewhere that can adapt backs made for one camera system to another camera system, but it's probably something that only a manufacturer can do, it will cost money and not really give the best results. The advantage of using something like the CFVII 50c back on the Hasselblad V system is that it is perfectly integrated and works well without workarounds and gotchas.

G

I've read about CFVII 50c (not sure about the non II one or any previous CFV) having some issues with focus plane. Meaning cases where there were focus issues and an adjustment was needed to get V body aligned with the back. Have you had such an experience ?

 

[Hassasin]

@jng Thanks, appreciated

 

[FloatingLens]

I've read about CFVII 50c (not sure about the non II one or any previous CFV) having some issues with focus plane. Meaning cases where there were focus issues and an adjustment was needed to get V body aligned with the back. Have you had such an experience ?

Yes, it happens eg. when the mirror inside the body is out of spec. You will notice pretty quickly that the body needs CLA, especially with high-res backs, open aperture and close-up.
That said, it has nothing to do with Hasselblad vs. Phase One backs. The camera body must be well maintained for best results.

 

[jng]

I've read about CFVII 50c (not sure about the non II one or any previous CFV) having some issues with focus plane. Meaning cases where there were focus issues and an adjustment was needed to get V body aligned with the back. Have you had such an experience ?

Yes, it happens eg. when the mirror inside the body is out of spec. You will notice pretty quickly that the body needs CLA, especially with high-res backs, open aperture and close-up.
That said, it has nothing to do with Hasselblad vs. Phase One backs. The camera body must be well maintained for best results.

Agree 100% - I learned the hard way and after multiple trips to the repair shop the importance of maintaining a properly spec'd focusing path (screen, mirror, body); unlike film, the digital sensors are entirely unforgiving when it comes to hitting focus. The tolerances of the focusing screens can vary (don't ask me how I know), the bushings/pads that the mirror rests on eventually compress with repeated exposure cycles and need to be replaced, and the bodies themselves, some of which saw some pretty heavy use and abuse, can be out of square and require realignment. You may be lucky with your current camera bodies but with use you should expect to do a service and re-calibration by a qualified technician (a diminishing breed, it seems).

John

 

[Godfrey]

I've read about CFVII 50c (not sure about the non II one or any previous CFV) having some issues with focus plane. Meaning cases where there were focus issues and an adjustment was needed to get V body aligned with the back. Have you had such an experience ?

I've seen no problems with my back/bodies that were not directly attributable to sloppy focusing technique on my part. Accurate focusing is critical... I find that for my eyes, the split image portion of the focus aids is most accurate, as is the matte field outside of the focusing aid. The microprism focusing aid doesn't do me very well.

G

 

[darr]

I've read about CFVII 50c (not sure about the non II one or any previous CFV) having some issues with focus plane. Meaning cases where there were focus issues and an adjustment was needed to get V body aligned with the back. Have you had such an experience ?

I have the CFV II and did have the CFV prior. These backs are excellent choices to pair with your Hasselblad, primarily due to their Live View feature and beautiful color palette. When I first ventured into medium-format digital photography, I began with a Phase One P45 with a CCD sensor. I still have it in my gear closet. I've noticed a difference in color rendition between CCD and CMOS sensors, with the CCD sensor producing a slightly warmer palette. However, using the P45 is inconvenient because it lacks Live View functionality. While it does have a Live View menu on the back, it doesn't offer actual Live View (don't fall for it on the used market). I did experiment with using the P45 on a Mamiya RZ DII, but achieving precise focus was always a challenge—too many moving parts in those old mechanical cameras to keep in check. But there is a solution: Live View. I strongly recommend investing in a digital back with Live View; it's a decision you won't regret.

I shoot my CFV 50c II with ALPA and Linhof technical cameras and Hasselblad 503cx and 501cm cameras.

Best to you!

 

[Hassasin]

I have the CFV II and did have the CFV prior. These backs are excellent choices to pair with your Hasselblad, primarily due to their Live View feature and beautiful color palette. When I first ventured into medium-format digital photography, I began with a Phase One P45 with a CCD sensor. I still have it in my gear closet. I've noticed a difference in color rendition between CCD and CMOS sensors, with the CCD sensor producing a slightly warmer palette. However, using the P45 is inconvenient because it lacks Live View functionality. While it does have a Live View menu on the back, it doesn't offer actual Live View (don't fall for it on the used market). I did experiment with using the P45 on a Mamiya RZ DII, but achieving precise focus was always a challenge—too many moving parts in those old mechanical cameras to keep in check. But there is a solution: Live View. I strongly recommend investing in a digital back with Live View; it's a decision you won't regret.

I shoot my CFV 50c II with ALPA and Linhof technical cameras and Hasselblad 503cx and 501cm cameras.

Best to you!

This is great point, thanks. While "live view" was one of those must haves for me, I might not have paid as much attention to this bit of spec, probably because assumption would be ... it should be there.

 

[Hasslebad]

I haven’t had any issues with focusing on my Hasselblad. I must have lucked out. I also have two backs and both are fine focus-wise. You may be fine.

As for live view, if you have time/opportunity you can fire a shot and check. I do that on tether. If I’m in the field then the IQ backs have a better screen and better ability to zoom in. The P backs have a poor screen to review photos.

 

[daz7]

@Hassasin You can use a live view of decent quality on CCD backs with Sinar backs only, when using their "LC shutter", however that is for their studio backs only, so tether only and no LCD screen at all. Not a great thing outdoors.
Sinar's live view is not so bad and perfectly usable, although it refreshes only at about 30fps I think.
Generally though, CMOS backs are newer, better at high iso and easier to work with.
The CCD colour may be a myth, I am not sure - I guess many Hassie CCD, Credo or Sinar users (me included) will tell you how they love the CCD colours - maybe you can tweak CMOS sensors in post to get a similar output but to my eyes CMOS colours render more artificially and are missing that magical 1% of richness, full body and nuance.

By the way, there was a great post by Geoff comparing an old CCD Credo back, Hassie CFV II 50C and Phase 3100 with sample images, too:

Digital back comparison

Recently, I was able to compare three different digital backs at one time: - Leaf Credo 60, 60mb back CCD sensor - Phase One 3100, 100mb back, CMOS sensor - Hasselblad CFV II 50C, 50mb back, CMOS sensor The findings can be found here: Digital Back Comparison. It's like three different eras...

www.getdpi.com

 

[Hassasin]

@daz7 thanks and interesting read in that linked post. Hard to beat convenience when that is needed, but sometimes saving a lot with some notable inconvenience might be a better way to go. If I were to make a living from using one, it might have been a different approach, but now I'm intrigued by those older CCD units again.