Love the real world theme of this. The older lenses sure look nice for portraits, and with film, the resolution is close to doubled given the much larger frame. Best of both worlds!
Thanks for this comparison. The Digital with the native lens is a stunner in terms of detail, but I think everyone understands the 80mm on Portra is just a whole different ball game.
Been looking forward to seeing this video, thank you. It appears you maybe located in the Seattle area. I am actually over in Leavenworth. A few weeks ago I took my old Hasselblad equipment (500cm, 500elx, 80mm, 50mm & 150mm to Glazers Rental in Seattle and tested this older equipment with the 50c digital back. Currently they are not renting 100c. My first objective was to find out how my equipment was working since it hadn't been used for over 30 years. All went well. I only tested my lenses, and most exposures were f5.6 or f8 and the quality and sharpness was very good. My shutter speeds were slow 1/15 of sec on a tripod but no shutter release cable. I do think there was some camera movement. I also tested the electronic shutter and the quality was also good. Between our two tests, using the older lenses, the importance of being on a tripod, with a cable release and keeping the f stop at f8 + 11, 16, etc is important. In my 40 years of photography, all lenses are stressed (focus, exposure, color, etc) at their widest aperture. With all this said, I think we both came to the same conclusion these old lenses are outstanding for their age and what they were designed for, 2-1/4 film. As you stated, using these lenses along with a compliment of a couple new lenses makes for a wonderful and versatile photography tool. I am looking to purchase the 100c and so appreciate your videos and testing. I also want to send a huge THANK YOU out to Glazers in Seattle who allowed me to test at their rental store at no charge.
Very nice! The 500CM has been my main camera for almost 20years. It’s been through hell and came out the other side. Very much thinking about getting a 907x50c because I love the workflow, sound and feel of it. No it’s not fast but that’s kind of the point. Have owned Sonys, Nikons, Canons, Fujis etc but nothing comes close to the Blad in terms of fun, feel and overall mojo. Also I think Hasselblad has the best colours out of any digital camera by far
Just the comparison I was looking for. I have a bunch of old legacy glass and my desire has been to use it but I really wanted to know about the sharpness loss. Seems it is not terrible.
Benj, as I search for a 907x 100c to buy and add to my kit (Hasselblad SWC, Fuji, TLR), this video caught my attention with your use of the 907 for digitizing your film. Can you detail the equipment you used (mount, lens, backlight, etc?). It would be most helpful and appreciated.
Things I learned from this: 1. These Hasselblad digitals are insane. 2. Film just looks better. Difficult to explain, but just does. 3. At least in these situations, I really much preferred the square format. Guess I need to pick up a V Series. Oh Shit.
This camera shoots some amazing and crispy shots the biggest ding is the lack of IBIS and lack of weather proofing for the price that's inexcusable, however the very fact you took it out on a very cold/humid weather and still remains solid is also a good sign. Regardless i hope the next camera in 4 years will include IBIS and Weather proofing on the most critical parts. One of the most gorgeous cameras in the market with amazing picture quality for sure.
I very much doubt this type of camera will see IBIS or weather proofing. This isn’t a DSLR like machine like the X2D or Fujis. To me this is more akin to the workflow of using a 5x4 camera (think black cloth and fabric bellows). I’ve taken non sealed cameras into bad weather for decades and it’s fine as long as one is careful. A huge mistake would be to make all cameras the same, with the same functions. If you put in more stuff it means you sacrifice something else. It’s a balance. A camera with detachable back will never be sealed. So if a reporter camera is what you want, get a Canon R3 or Nikon Z9, or perhaps even an X2D. This is something different
I`ve been confused by the two camps, digital vs film. Some say film is more detailed with better shading of colors while the digital camp says otherwise. I`d like to know your assessment on whether film or digital does have the advantage...!
New full-frame digital cameras now have higher resolution than the finest grain 35mm film. The problem with film is extracting the resolution, given scanning technology hasn't progressed in the last 20 years. If you use a 33MP digital camera to scan a 6x6 negative like the original Hasselblad 500c/m shoots, you're using a sensor with less resolving power than the equivalent "megapixels" of a 6x6 negative. You'd either have to stitch multiple images of the negative together, or use something like a 100MP camera. Using an X2D/CFV100 or a Fujifilm GFX 100 (especially with pixel shift) would extract maximum resolution from the film. Either of these methods are expensive, in the case of the high-end medium format digital cameras, or time consuming, like stitching images together. Put a 6x6 negative in a drum scanner and you'll end up with an incredible file. The main difference between digital and film isn't resolution so much, since your phone, tablet, or computer are limited anyways, but rather the quality of the image. Film has its own unique qualities to it, the way it captures light, grain vs. pixellation, and the lack of digital noise one gets from a digital sensor.
Thanks , was wanting the comparison using the digital back on cm and cf lens , against the new lenses ! Want more . I think i will have to just rent the new camera and use it on my old system . I think i will just have to sell all my cm and cf Just to get the sharpness i have been looking for .
My 907x/CFVII has brought new interest in my 503CX. I'm now kitting out more V lenses to use with the CFVII back, since the XCD lens are so hard to find in stock.
Very interesting comparison, thank you. Could it be possible for you to share some RAW files ? What is strange to me is that the result on Portra film seems somehow sharper than when you put the 100MP digital back on the same 500C/M with same lens.
Film has more “depth” literally than a digital sensor, so it makes up for some of those inconsistencies. Then rescanning with the same incredibly detailed back sort of gives it that look. Plus the film also is a much larger negative than the sensor if that makes sense.
Beat me to it, I was just about to say, shooting film with the 500C/M and then scanning with the 907x would be really interesting. Thanks for reading my mind.
get your film drummed scanned for a real comparison .. are u showing the digital at 50mb or 100 ? its a 100mb right so why are you showing the film images at less than max especially for landscapes .. lets see a true comparison .
Damn, the film scanning results are really interesting. Last digital Hasselblad I tried was the original X1D, the new stuff looks fun.
I watched that video of yours multiple times over the years, my friend :)
Love the real world theme of this. The older lenses sure look nice for portraits, and with film, the resolution is close to doubled given the much larger frame. Best of both worlds!
Thanks for this comparison. The Digital with the native lens is a stunner in terms of detail, but I think everyone understands the 80mm on Portra is just a whole different ball game.
I just bought one. I’m a total camera nerd, but I also photograph for VFX elements. Nice videos. Keep showing us what you’re learning.
Been looking forward to seeing this video, thank you. It appears you maybe located in the Seattle area. I am actually over in Leavenworth. A few weeks ago I took my old Hasselblad equipment (500cm, 500elx, 80mm, 50mm & 150mm to Glazers Rental in Seattle and tested this older equipment with the 50c digital back. Currently they are not renting 100c. My first objective was to find out how my equipment was working since it hadn't been used for over 30 years. All went well. I only tested my lenses, and most exposures were f5.6 or f8 and the quality and sharpness was very good. My shutter speeds were slow 1/15 of sec on a tripod but no shutter release cable. I do think there was some camera movement. I also tested the electronic shutter and the quality was also good. Between our two tests, using the older lenses, the importance of being on a tripod, with a cable release and keeping the f stop at f8 + 11, 16, etc is important. In my 40 years of photography, all lenses are stressed (focus, exposure, color, etc) at their widest aperture. With all this said, I think we both came to the same conclusion these old lenses are outstanding for their age and what they were designed for, 2-1/4 film. As you stated, using these lenses along with a compliment of a couple new lenses makes for a wonderful and versatile photography tool. I am looking to purchase the 100c and so appreciate your videos and testing. I also want to send a huge THANK YOU out to Glazers in Seattle who allowed me to test at their rental store at no charge.
Love hearing that and yes! Glazers is fantastic.
Very nice! The 500CM has been my main camera for almost 20years. It’s been through hell and came out the other side. Very much thinking about getting a 907x50c because I love the workflow, sound and feel of it. No it’s not fast but that’s kind of the point. Have owned Sonys, Nikons, Canons, Fujis etc but nothing comes close to the Blad in terms of fun, feel and overall mojo. Also I think Hasselblad has the best colours out of any digital camera by far
Hi Benj! What macro lens did you use on the Hasselblad 907X to scan your film? The XCD 120 Macro? Results look great!
Just the comparison I was looking for. I have a bunch of old legacy glass and my desire has been to use it but I really wanted to know about the sharpness loss. Seems it is not terrible.
Benj, as I search for a 907x 100c to buy and add to my kit (Hasselblad SWC, Fuji, TLR), this video caught my attention with your use of the 907 for digitizing your film. Can you detail the equipment you used (mount, lens, backlight, etc?). It would be most helpful and appreciated.
Things I learned from this:
1. These Hasselblad digitals are insane.
2. Film just looks better. Difficult to explain, but just does.
3. At least in these situations, I really much preferred the square format.
Guess I need to pick up a V Series. Oh Shit.
Will this back fit the 553 ELX body and what is the cost?
This camera shoots some amazing and crispy shots the biggest ding is the lack of IBIS and lack of weather proofing for the price that's inexcusable, however the very fact you took it out on a very cold/humid weather and still remains solid is also a good sign. Regardless i hope the next camera in 4 years will include IBIS and Weather proofing on the most critical parts. One of the most gorgeous cameras in the market with amazing picture quality for sure.
I’ve taken this thing underneath a waterfall in the rain with no issues ;)
I very much doubt this type of camera will see IBIS or weather proofing. This isn’t a DSLR like machine like the X2D or Fujis. To me this is more akin to the workflow of using a 5x4 camera (think black cloth and fabric bellows). I’ve taken non sealed cameras into bad weather for decades and it’s fine as long as one is careful.
A huge mistake would be to make all cameras the same, with the same functions. If you put in more stuff it means you sacrifice something else. It’s a balance. A camera with detachable back will never be sealed. So if a reporter camera is what you want, get a Canon R3 or Nikon Z9, or perhaps even an X2D. This is something different
Question for another video, how do you meter with the digital back on legacy body and lens?
Tbh, guess and check is pretty easy with this. I’m usually within a stop anyway
I`ve been confused by the two camps, digital vs film. Some say film is more detailed with better shading of colors while the digital camp says otherwise. I`d like to know your assessment on whether film or digital does have the advantage...!
New full-frame digital cameras now have higher resolution than the finest grain 35mm film. The problem with film is extracting the resolution, given scanning technology hasn't progressed in the last 20 years. If you use a 33MP digital camera to scan a 6x6 negative like the original Hasselblad 500c/m shoots, you're using a sensor with less resolving power than the equivalent "megapixels" of a 6x6 negative. You'd either have to stitch multiple images of the negative together, or use something like a 100MP camera. Using an X2D/CFV100 or a Fujifilm GFX 100 (especially with pixel shift) would extract maximum resolution from the film. Either of these methods are expensive, in the case of the high-end medium format digital cameras, or time consuming, like stitching images together. Put a 6x6 negative in a drum scanner and you'll end up with an incredible file.
The main difference between digital and film isn't resolution so much, since your phone, tablet, or computer are limited anyways, but rather the quality of the image. Film has its own unique qualities to it, the way it captures light, grain vs. pixellation, and the lack of digital noise one gets from a digital sensor.
@@Alexius1Komnenos
I appreciate your explanation on this subject…!
there you have it, film just hits different.
We mastered film 30+ years ago. The new digital stuff is vastly superior, about 10 years ago. Now we color to match old film, for about 5 years.
Thanks , was wanting the comparison using the digital back on cm and cf lens , against the new lenses ! Want more .
I think i will have to just rent the new camera and use it on my old system . I think i will just have to sell all my cm and cf
Just to get the sharpness i have been looking for .
I did similar test and got similar results XCD lenses are superior vs hasselblad CFI lenses 👍🏻
My 907x/CFVII has brought new interest in my 503CX. I'm now kitting out more V lenses to use with the CFVII back, since the XCD lens are so hard to find in stock.
@@JuanRhodes B&H photo has all the XCD lenses in stock
@@rafibenatar2519 They don’t. All backordered.
Have you used a 6X9 lens on this camera?
I have not.
@@benjhaisch ok. Would be interesting…
The newer CF, CFi, FE lenses are nothing to scoff at
Very interesting comparison, thank you. Could it be possible for you to share some RAW files ? What is strange to me is that the result on Portra film seems somehow sharper than when you put the 100MP digital back on the same 500C/M with same lens.
Film has more “depth” literally than a digital sensor, so it makes up for some of those inconsistencies. Then rescanning with the same incredibly detailed back sort of gives it that look. Plus the film also is a much larger negative than the sensor if that makes sense.
Beat me to it, I was just about to say, shooting film with the 500C/M and then scanning with the 907x would be really interesting.
Thanks for reading my mind.
Very interesting, but that flickering white background is annoying af.
get your film drummed scanned for a real comparison .. are u showing the digital at 50mb or 100 ? its a 100mb right so why are you showing the film images at less than max especially for landscapes .. lets see a true comparison .
You don't have A SINGLE example of any of these lenses stopped down and not just wide open? were you high?