The 907x Has Landed ...

I wouldn't know what the point of doing that might be...

Anyway, while I'm waiting for the outdoor temperatures to warm up a little before heading out on my bicycle for today's isolation exercise ride, I was thinking of the question: "How will I carry the 907x with one lens on a bicycle ride?"

My most secure and smallest bicycling-friendly bag suitable for carrying a bulky camera in is a Wotancraft Mini Rider. I pulled it out, set it on the kitchen counter, and collected the minimum set of stuff that I'd need to carry in it. And all of it went in:

49705155991_700c219edc_o.jpg

The bag, its harness, and the entire kit all fits .. even without expanding the bag to its full capacity! .. and weighs 7 kilograms.

49705474122_2a81a13724_o.jpg

In the front zippered pocket, there's just enough room to fit my wallet, AirPod power case, and the spare Hasselblad battery.

49704625028_76828a86b9_o.jpg

In the main zippered compartment, my eyeglasses case (for sunglasses) lays on the bottom, the camera with XCD 21mm lens fits on top of it, and my iPhone slides into the rear zippered and padded pocket.

In actual cycling practice, I'll likely slide the glasses case as well as my small bottle of water and my small bicycle lock into the saddlebag instead. And when the 45P lens arrives, there will be more space in the main compartment of the bag (and it will be a bit lighter too). More space means more convenient to carry and to get things in and out of.

But at least I now know that I can carry a minimum kit of this camera in a secure and not overly intrusive way, safely and with some options for actually using it. I have a couple of larger sling bags (the regular sized Wotancraft Easy Rider and the Peak Design Everyday Sling 10L) that will handle a larger kit when I'm willing to carry the additional load, but the goal today was to see whether this bag would address the minimum kit. It does, I'm happy: Another bag NOT to buy is always good news to me...

:D

It's too gray and on the edge of rainy today, I'll just go without today and ride for an hour and some. But the next day that looks worth it, I'll take the 907x out for a ride.

G
 
Experimentation day... Using the 907x plus an adapted Leica Macro-Elmarit-R 60mm f/2.8 for film scanning.


Juice Shop - San Francisco 2019
Hasselblad 500CM + A12 + Distagon 50mm
Ilford XP2 Super - Kodak HC-110 1:49, 8 min, continuous agitation
Scanned: Hasselblad 907x + Leica Macro-Elmarit-R 60mm f/2.8​

So yes, it works. It works very well!

The full resolution upload I made to Flickr is a half resolution, 3000x3000 pixel image, if you want to look at that just click on the image above.

enjoy!
G
 
Leaving SF on CalTrain...


Riding Trains - San Francisco 2019
Hasselblad 500CM + A12 + Distagon 50mm
Ilford XP2 Super - Kodak HC-110 1:49, 8 min, continuous agitation
Scanned: Hasselblad 907x + Leica Macro-Elmarit-R 60mm f/2.8​

enjoy!
G
 
No explanation needed...


Waiting - San Francisco 2019
Hasselblad 500CM + A12 + Distagon 50mm
Ilford XP2 Super - Kodak HC-110 1:49, 8 min, continuous agitation
Scanned: Hasselblad 907x + Leica Macro-Elmarit-R 60mm f/2.8​

BTW, just noticed that it wasn't HP5 but Ilford XP2 Super that I used in the camera for the past three photos I've posted. Oops! :)

enjoy!
G
 
raid said:
Does this back work with the old style SWC with the chrome lens?
Click to expand...

In the "CFVII 50c Instruction Manual" Hasselblad lists it as compatible with the SWC/M (I think that's ca 1978 and later), the 903SWC, and the 905SWC.

I seem to recall some folks on another forum saying there were some issues with the back mounting part of earlier SWC bodies that could cause a problem with most digital backs, not just the CFV line.

G
 
I'm still in the "play and learn" phase of ownership with the Hasselblad 907x. One amusing thought that came to me the other day was "What if I fit the Leica M to Hasselblad X adapter, and then stick the Skink Pinhole with Zone Plate f/71 disk on it?" I wondered how the Live View and electronic shutter would work.

I set the camera up and looked at the LCD. Hmm. ISO 3200 and I can only see things if I'm out in sunlight. Eshutter limited to 1 second exposures … Oh well, I'll just use Bulb. And, eh?, all the exposures are going to be several if not tens of seconds, let's just try hand-held… LOL!

So off I went around the condo looking at Things In Place… Most exposures were between 3 and 8 seconds, many were simply discarded, but I found six out of the bunch that I thought were amusing enough to show. And then I thought, "These are way too low-fi to present in a big image … they kinda look like Polaroid shots in a way … Hmm, I can use the Shake-It Photo app on the iPhone to work them into a Polaroid SX-70 frame …" So I did.


Click on photo to see the rest of the gallery - Six photos total.​


Don't laugh at me too much. :)

enjoy!
G
 
Thank you both! I'm so enjoying this beastie, and enjoying doing wacky experiments with it—it's a wonderful piece to work with!

Hopefully I'll get an opportunity to do more "serious" work with it soon.

best,
G
 
Do you have a FF DSLR? My Pentax K1 has a 35.9 x 24 sensor do you see a huge difference? I'm finding that the K1 DNG file size is just a little recondite for me. To send anything (which I do a lot) I have to do a perusal of my personal workflow to downsize. Also, my K1 is just too much for me to carry around. I've had some APS-C sensor cameras and I can't really tell an incongruousness, but then I'm not blowing up to a large finished photo.
 
charjohncarter said:
Do you have a FF DSLR? My Pentax K1 has a 35.9 x 24 sensor do you see a huge difference? I'm finding that the K1 DNG file size is just a little recondite for me. To send anything (which I do a lot) I have to do a perusal of my personal workflow to downsize. Also, my K1 is just too much for me to carry around. I've had some APS-C sensor cameras and I can't really tell an incongruousness, but then I'm not blowing up to a large finished photo.
Click to expand...

I've had a few FF digital cameras ... Leica M9, M-P240, M-D262, Leica SL, Nikon D750. The imaging difference is linked to the quality of the 33x44mm sensor used in the CFVII 50c back, not so much in the number of pixels. I can work photos with dynamic range and editability that I couldn't get to with any of the above. As a practical matter as a hand held camera, the much smaller and lighter APS-C format Leica CL does just as good a job on imaging as those FF cameras did and is much handier and lighter. The 907x I don't worry about too much for its size and weight: It works fine in the way of film medium format cameras hand-held, and I tend to use it with a tripod most of the time anyway like I do with the Hasselblad 500CM and (my now sold) 500SWC. That's how you get the most out of these big pixel image files anyway.

I certainly don't really need 50 mpixel files as a matter of course because I don't print to such big sizes that it's needed but for once in a blue moon, but the editing overhead it provides is very useful. The file size isn't a big deal ... the Hasselblad .3fr raw files run about 105 Mbytes apiece and from them I usually output 3000x3000 pixel JPEG files that run about .75 to 1.75 Mbytes each ... because storage is pretty inexpensive nowadays and I don't tend to shoot huge numbers of exposures anyway. What I post here are generally downsized by half again (through Flickr) to about 1600x1600 pixel JPEGs.

But again, it's nice to have all the pixels when you're making a nice print. I've made two/three 13x13 inch prints out of the 907x as an experiment and the quality is just fantastic.

G
 
Some more photos...

I've been putzing about the condo today, experimenting with the XCD 21mm lens.


Dining Table - Santa Clara 2020
Hasselblad 907x + XCD 21mm f/4
ISO 200 @ f/8 @ 1/6


Red Sofa - Santa Clara 2020
Hasselblad 907x + XCD 21mm f/4
ISO 200 @ f/8 @ 3/4


Mexican Bear - Santa Clara 2020
Hasselblad 907x + XCD 21mm f/4
ISO 200 @ f/8 @ 1/2


Kitchen Sink - Santa Clara 2020
Hasselblad 907x + XCD 21mm f/4
ISO 200 @ f/8 @ 1/10​

Great art...? LOL! But it's fun and I'm getting to know the camera pretty well now. :D

enjoy,
G
 
Godfrey said:
I've had a few FF digital cameras ... Leica M9, M-P240, M-D262, Leica SL, Nikon D750. The imaging difference is linked to the quality of the 33x44mm sensor used in the CFVII 50c back, not so much in the number of pixels. I can work photos with dynamic range and editability that I couldn't get to with any of the above. As a practical matter as a hand held camera, the much smaller and lighter APS-C format Leica CL does just as good a job on imaging as those FF cameras did and is much handier and lighter. The 907x I don't worry about too much for its size and weight: It works fine in the way of film medium format cameras hand-held, and I tend to use it with a tripod most of the time anyway like I do with the Hasselblad 500CM and (my now sold) 500SWC. That's how you get the most out of these big pixel image files anyway.

I certainly don't really need 50 mpixel files as a matter of course because I don't print to such big sizes that it's needed but for once in a blue moon, but the editing overhead it provides is very useful. The file size isn't a big deal ... the Hasselblad .3fr raw files run about 105 Mbytes apiece and from them I usually output 3000x3000 pixel JPEG files that run about .75 to 1.75 Mbytes each ... because storage is pretty inexpensive nowadays and I don't tend to shoot huge numbers of exposures anyway. What I post here are generally downsized by half again (through Flickr) to about 1600x1600 pixel JPEGs.

But again, it's nice to have all the pixels when you're making a nice print. I've made two/three 13x13 inch prints out of the 907x as an experiment and the quality is just fantastic.

G
Click to expand...

Thanks for answering my query. I hadn't really thought of the DR possibilities of the MF sensor. That certainly is something that I would welcome. I don't think I'll ever be an aggressive digital user, but the lack of DF is one of my complaints. I guess I do notice a slight increase of DR between FF and APS-C. I think I will have to get over my inchoate suspicions of digital someday.

I like the photos (thanks for posting), too bad we all can't get out and push the shutter release. I, living in the same area as you, find rainy days a treat photographically.
 
The XCD 21mm lens and the sensor are both wonderful performers.

I don't rate photos on the basis of their "film like" qualities. I rate photos on the basis of what the qualities they express are. This lens, used in the context of this sensor, is terrific and produces superb quality, very close to the qualities I used to see out of the SWC's Biogon 38mm f/4.5 T*. And note that I haven't used Hasselblad's dedicated Phocus software for processing yet ... I suspect it adds even a bit more to the rendering than the disputably "more generic" image processing engine in Lightroom Classic.

Re: charjohncarter's comment about the DR between FF and APS-C ...
Yes, at the limit, same resolution sensors with the same quality image processing engine around them should give a small nod to the larger sensor on DR. I see this on comparing the Leica CL and SL. BUT that small nod is vanishingly difficult to see if you're operating down near base ISO and setting up for proper exposure. What I find a lot of folks doing somewhat mistakenly is comparing DR at elevated ISO settings ... 1600, 3200, etc ... and there the differences are much greater because as ISO goes up, DR and resolution go down ... on any sensor. They go down faster on smaller sensors.

I've been working with digital capture and digital imaging now for a good half my lifetime (started when working at NASA/JPL in 1984) so I have no suspicions about it. Film photographic processes are all about chemistry; digital photographic processes are all about mathematics. I'm a mathematician by degree training, not a chemist ... Perhaps that's why I'm so comfortable mucking around with digital capture. ;D

G
 
Godfrey, as you can guess I'm not really 'into' digital, but your superior knowledge and gracious selflessness is really great for everyone at RFF. And even though I'm not necessarily going to use your imparted knowledge a great deal. Every little bit helps with the little digital I do. Thanks.
 
You're welcome, John! :)

---
I was feeling a little under the weather yesterday—up too early, not enough sleep, couldn't get back to sleep, etc—but after a nap in the late afternoon I felt a lot better and went for a good long walk. I decided to carry the 907x plus XCD21 lens on a first walk outing.

For this purpose, I fitted a set of Peak Design anchors and a PD Leash. Set up like this, the 907x hangs nose down compactly and comfortably, just like the 500CM does, with the strap worn in a cross body configuration and adjusted to the right length. It's easy to grasp the camera by the lens with the left hand and flip it up to make an exposure, and (just like with the 500CM) the only slow down is to flip the screen out for waist-level viewing. I was wearing a set of bicycle gloves for the walk with smartphone-enabling pads in the two index fingers: working the camera's controls through the touch screen or with the button and control dial was no problem at all, and I never found a situation where I couldn't see adequately well enough to frame and select a focus point (although I did miss the focus point setting on a few photos ... my fault!). I walked briskly for about 2.5 miles/an hour or so, stopping occasionally to make a photograph: the 907x never became too heavy or "in the way".

Very pleasing! And I imagine that, when the 45P arrives, it will be even nicer since that lens is a quarter the size and weight of the 21mm. :D

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