Choosing between M8 or H'Blad digital back

No I was not kidding although my head is now pounding. Amazing you just echoed several more points I have been making here on RFf or thinking about regarding the M8 vs. R-D1s. Namely high ISO performance in regard to practical concerns of one system vs. the other. The fact that the R-D1 cannot focus anything over 2.0 with any great degree of accuracy (at least on a consistent basis) or that the R-D1 would be a nice camera as a backup for extreme low light situations or when the M8's shutter is to loud are a few. Heck I love my R-D1s so I'll not be getting rid of it but I cannot wait to start shooting with the M8 and compare prints.

If you get the chance take a look at some of my pictures on my flickr account- especially the Chung King Shopping Arcade series. Reason being? I want to get your take on weather or not the M8 will perform under such low light conditions where bare light bulbs are also visible- the fact is I tend to shoot in a torture test arena for any camera be it digital or loaded with E6.
 
Sunil, actually photography is about pictures not equipment; so I would buy neither the M8 nor the Hasselblad back but spend the money on a series of photography workshops by good or well-known photographers, including one by Chris Rainier in New Guinea. No, I'm not joking.

I was thinking about getting the M8 — before the spate of problems emerged — but decided against it after reading Sean Reid's excellent series of reviews on his pay site and finding that the picture quality is that of medium format film. But the trouble is that I like the "35mm aesthetic" and don't want the medium format film look. Therefore, I now use two small-sensor cameras: a Ricoh GR-D and a Leica D-Lux 3. I love the GR-D, which has an execellent prime 28mm-equivalent lens and a 21mm-adapter that is as good as my Leica M 21mm ASPH, but bought the D-Lux 3 a couple of weeks ago to use its zoom lens at 40-50mm-equivalent.

I've printed some of my GR-D files at 40x52 inches (100x133cm). You can see some of my pictures with these two cameras here:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/10268776@N00/

...or in a more organized way here:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/10268776@N00/sets/72157594271568487/

—Mitch/Bangkok
 
Last edited:
Mitch,
One question- what do you think would happen to the Medium format analogy if you cranked up the ISO a bit on the M8. Still valid?

Ted

PS. I just got finished going over your Bangkok stream- really excellent work. I’m striving to get there myself : )
 
Ted:

You're right, from what Sean writes and pictures I've seen on the web, at ISO 1250 and 2500 one should get a "35mm-look" with the M8. But those are awfully fast speeds to be shooting in Bangkok at noon, which I often do as I'm a firm believer in using whatever light is available rather than forever waiting for the best light.

The trouble is, when I got my GR-D in mid-July, I really got to like the camera and the way of shooting with it: at first I thought that I would use my external VC28 and Leica 21 external viewfinders in the GR-D's hotshoe, but I found that I like framing with the LCD monitor because it leads, or forces, me to a more "fluid" and "looser" shooting style than I had with my M6. In fact, during the few days I had an external viewfinder on the GR-D, I found that I always used the LCD monitor instead, something I never expected. Then, when I found out that the M8, like DSLRs, doesn't have a live LCD preview, I thought I would stay with small-sensor cameras for the time being.

The small-sensor thing is interesting: I like the sketchier way these cameras "draw". Sean Reid writes that the small-sensor cameras, rather than being toys, are a new type of format, with great depth-of-field and a grainy look, the same way that 35mm was a new format when the first Leicas were made. I agree with him.

Finally, after the recent bombing scare in London, and the resulting regulations for carry-on luggage in Europe, which now allow only one carry-on bag, making it impossible to take on a roll-aboard suitcase and a computer case as one could before, mean that taking an M6 or an M8 with two lenses becomes a problem for me; and I now travel so frequently and extensively that I cannot contemplate checking luggage, as I would spend an inordinate time at airports waiting for it to come off the plane.

These, then, are the main reasons I'm not thinking about an M8 at this time, particularly as I found that I can make huge prints with the GR-D (30x52 inches).

—Mitch/Bangkok
http://www.flickr.com/photos/10268776@N00/
 
Last edited:
It depends whether you want any wideangle shots. The widest Hassel lens is 40mm. The Phase One back isn't full frame. If you can live with standard to tele views only the Hassel back will certainly give you big enlargements. Ok so the M8 is also not full frame - but much wider lenses are available starting with the low cost VC going upto Leitz or Zeiss.

The Pase One back must be old generation if the price is the same as a new M8. I'd go for the M8.
I'm waiting on more portable full frame back for my 503Cx and will use M8 in meantime when my UK order finally gets delivered!

Enjoy making the choice and using whichever you pick!🙄
 
Last edited:
Regarding wide angle with a Hasselblad digital back, the 132C, 22CF and 39CF, allow full use of the wide angle capabilitie of the Hass SWC, the 30mm and the 40mm. If you use a 40mm IF CFE on the 203, you get full left to right wide angle... you are only cropped top and bottom... which is why I have had so much trouble parting with my 132C, but I still intend to do it. I just haven't gotten around to listing it yet. Whoever gets it will get a bargain and be able either to use it as is using the little portable HD or upgrade to the CF card 22CF. Either way, full Hasselblad lens wide angle capability is available.

Every time I talk about this, I see the damn thing back to myself . . .

But I wouldn't part with my M8 to have the Hass/Imacon. Get both. Life is short.
 
As you are asking on this forum, I expect you might actually want some thoughts on your quandry. As you, I'm only an amateur but have from time to time also made an income through photography. Taken pictures starting with a Petri RF in the 60's and gone through various Spotmatics, Nikormats, F2's, Bronica and Mamiya 645's, Leicas screwmounts, CL, Rollei 35, Rolleiflex and Hasselblads (500CM and SW). Of the film cameras only the F2, Rollei 35S and Nikonos are left. The medium formats simply became too heavy to lug around, and the F2 was used only for reproduction. Almost all else was taken with the lightest and most mobile camera possible.

Digital photography is something different. The preview, no worry about using film, instantaneous availability, portability and digital darkroom all make phptography fun again. So after the Canon D30came out, it was back to lugging heavy cameras and heavier lenses, but the R-D1 came to my rescue. I now use a 5D for reproduction, digitizing documents and special work. Everything else is done with the R-D1 even though it's almost half the resolution. Until I bought my R-D1 2 years ago, an Ixus-V had taken the place of the Rollei 35. They are about the same size. But now the R-D1 is used for that too. With the CV 21/4 it really is a compact camera. Heavy enough to be stable, versatile enough to take other lenses from 12 to 75mm if need be and with resolution and quality enough to make good digital negatives. Now I'm waiting for the M8 to be delivered.

Had your Hasselblad back been full frame and twice the resolution, I would have given it the edge and probably ended up treating my Leica lenses to an R-D1 before long, but with the Phase I giving you superslides at best, there is no doubt.
 
malland said:
Ted:

You're right, from what Sean writes and pictures I've seen on the web, at ISO 1250 and 2500 one should get a "35mm-look" with the M8. But those are awfully fast speeds to be shooting in Bangkok at noon, which I often do as I'm a firm believer in using whatever light is available rather than forever waiting for the best light.

The trouble is, when I got my GR-D in mid-July, I really got to like the camera and the way of shooting with it: at first I thought that I would use my external VC28 and Leica 21 external viewfinders in the GR-D's hotshoe, but I found that I like framing with the LCD monitor because it leads, or forces, me to a more "fluid" and "looser" shooting style than I had with my M6. In fact, during the few days I had an external viewfinder on the GR-D, I found that I always used the LCD monitor instead, something I never expected. Then, when I found out that the M8, like DSLRs, doesn't have a live LCD preview, I thought I would stay with small-sensor cameras for the time being.

The small-sensor thing is interesting: I like the sketchier way these cameras "draw". Sean Reid writes that the small-sensor cameras, rather than being toys, are a new type of format, with great depth-of-field and a grainy look, the same way that 35mm was a new format when the first Leicas were made. I agree with him.

Finally, after the recent bombing scare in London, and the resulting regulations for carry-on luggage in Europe, which now allow only one carry-on bag, making it impossible to take on a roll-aboard suitcase and a computer case as one could before, mean that taking an M6 or an M8 with two lenses becomes a problem for me; and I now travel so frequently and extensively that I cannot contemplate checking luggage, as I would spend an inordinate time at airports waiting for it to come off the plane.

These, then, are the main reasons I'm not thinking about an M8 at this time, particularly as I found that I can make huge prints with the GR-D (30x52 inches).

—Mitch/Bangkok
http://www.flickr.com/photos/10268776@N00/
Click to expand...

M8 + Tri-Elmar long? Nice alternative...🙂
 
The technical quality (resolution) will be better with the 16MB, but my advice is get the one that you will use the most.

Either camera will rock. A great camera in the closet will produce fewer quality images and less fun than the one in your pocket.

I have a Canon 16 MB DSLR and it is phenominal and big, I ordered an M8 to carry with me to shoot weekdays at lunch and before and after work.

Cheers
http://www.flickr.com/photos/85974234@N00/
 
pundit said:
The technical quality (resolution) will be better with the 16MB, but my advice is get the one that you will use the most.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/85974234@N00/
Click to expand...


Theoretically - yes. However most posts by experts suggest the the lack of filtering on the M8 sensor more than offsets the theoretical advantage oft the 1DsII. I'm looking forward to your experiences and comparison.
 
Pherdinand said:
Blad.
Don't be fool.
Click to expand...


I disagree, but I also believe if you already have a Hasseblad and some lenses you will probably get a better deal on that than on an M8 for a while and, as good as the M8 is, it still won't match the DR and detail you can get in the much larger pixels in the larger sensor.

Yes the lack of an AA filter makes the M8 deliver, in my opinion, better files than a 5D, but the 5D will leave the M8 in the dust for long tele and macro.

Horses/courses, as noted earlier.
 
Macro to follow when I have time....

vlieg.jpg
 
edlaurpic said:
I disagree, but I also believe if you already have a Hasseblad and some lenses you will probably get a better deal on that than on an M8 for a while and, as good as the M8 is, it still won't match the DR and detail you can get in the much larger pixels in the larger sensor.
Click to expand...

Hi I'm very interested in your comparison of the M8 and the CFV back, thanks for posting so far its really valuable information. Could you please give some more information on the DR, colour and resolution differences between the two. Is IR a factor with the CFV? I'm particularly interested also in how you find the CFV to use, and the files to process. Thanks a lot

Nik
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom