Nikkor

Personally I think it would be best to take a step back, and just organizize the whole thing. If you haven't shot a movie, why do it yourself if there are plenty of people better at it who will do it for you? Same thing goes for writing, cinematography, directing,editing, promotion,etc... It's much more fun to get people who know the thing together than drowning in a ego trip. You just show up with the gfx 100,the speedbooster and the old hasselblad lineup.

Are there any large sensor cameras with ccd chips that record video beside the f35?

I have a phase one p45+. This back is CCD but very old, it has a Kodak sensor and it's not that great in terms of DR, BUT compared to CMOS, I enjoy the shadows even if they are noisy. With modern CMOS there is a lot to recover from shadows, but it looks horrible, wrong, desaturated colors, with the p45+ it goes noisy but the color still look right. I guess if you pixel peep or do some measurments the DR will be better on the CMOS, but watched from a distance, the image as a whole looks better on the CCD to me. Not to speak about colors, but I believe this is because of the bayer filter strength. I think the reason to go for cmos was because it's cheaper and consumes less energy.

In stills cameras CCD cameras have much nicer noise. A shame they stopped developing CCD sensors.

That's bullshit. Set up your camera on a tripod with a hight DR scene. Set up your aperture and now braket through exposures. The lens image will not change. If this statement were true you just would see fill light in the shadows, no detail.

Lol that's the camera I always wanted

@Andrew ReidI'm still waiting for that speedbooster hasselblad gfx review 🙂

Yeah there is nothing special about medium format. Please if you happen to own a hasselblad or phase one system, put it on sale on ebay. Hurry before people notice how overpriced they are. I will happily buy your gear from you because I'm a very kind and generous idiot. I'm specially interested in outdated and primitve CCD backs like a IQ280 or a h5d60.

They will have to make a correction video explaining why they are wrong. When people in the comment section know more than the guys writing the articles, maybe it's time to look for alternatives.

Open Gate is also interesting for those of us who shoot a lot of vertical.

The iscorama 54 is a good canditate. Still waiting on the speedbooster + hasselblad lenses review. Btw, Hasselblad stuff has skyrocket in the last year... no more bargains...

Pretty impressive!

6000$ is the new 2500$. Central Banking doing it's job.

Remember the hype about the first Fullframe digital cameras? In 2004 you could buy a phase one p25 with a respectable 48x36sensor or leaf equivalents with colors that make canon cmos look amateur. The price difference wasn't that high in the beginning until the 5d came along, but if you compare the hype... Still today, if I have to choose shooting with a modern CMOS or an old MF I would only use the CMOS if I needed fast AF and/or Iso above 200. That's some value for a digital product.

For anything that demands high quality MF will be standard when cameras get good enough for video, the fuji is clearly almost there. This doesn't mean you can't shoot s35, m43 or FF, but when you want to go for the ultimate image it's the simplest thing to go with MF. If there were a 4x5 camera with good specs people would use that one for high quality. The larger the format, the larger the quaility, no matter how good your s35 lenses are they will never give the depth a large format camera can give.

Intelligent ways to tonemap highdynamic range.

Films that interest me have been rare latetly, I started to notice this specially since 2014.

This only shows that PC raw conversion softwares are getting old, generally speaking they suck at handling HDR, no matter if it's from a 16bit sensor or multiple exposures..

Hasselblad launched a speedbooster for their X1D system which helps to adapt existing H mount lenses to the X1D lens mount with incorporated optics to reduce the cropfactor 0.8x The result is a virtual sensor 1.5x bigger than fullframe, or as big as a 645 medium format frame. https://www.hasselblad.com/x-system-accessories/xh-converter-0-8/?utm_source=Instagram&utm_medium=Social&utm_campaign=XH Converter It costs €959.00 tax included.

Additional edit: The information itself has to be cognizable, the information needs some order, this is why thick images usually have a lot of element separation (closeups, thin dof, elaborate lighting,blocking, composition).

A thin negative can have a lot of contrast but the image tends to go mushy and the colors have a bias towards something that is not their own color. A thick negative is not an overexposed one, overexposed negatives lose contrast and colors go more pastel. A thick negative is a negative that uses the maximal potential of the emulsion, this involves correct exposure, a contrasty scene with good lighting, textures, colors ,etc... In film you can add in development to help pushing things into something closer to thick, in digital you can color correct. But one thing is clear, Nothing comes from nothing. In other words, you need a scene with a lot of information, a tool that is able to deliver a lot of information, and the technique to get out the most information from the scene through the tool onto the final presentation.

Yes the legend, I remember seeing a post of you with a picture of it on the gfx.

How does the nikkor 28 1.4 look on the fuji? I remember putting it infront of a groundglass and beeing suprised over the coverage.

Still no words on the hasselblad to fuji speedbooster. Keeping the impressive secret to himself. I don't get why this isn't the big thing right now. Since I have my medium format camera CCD back any picture I take looks impressive, it's the definitive magic bullet.

I don't understand why people still are so obsessed with canon, there are a thousand of other camera brands. Maybe it's time to let go.