Hasselblad introduces the 50 megapixel H3DII-50
By Nilay Patel 
posted July 7th 2008 11:17PM
posted July 7th 2008 11:17PM
[Thanks, Douglas]
posted July 7th 2008 11:17PM
A look back on popular stories from today in a specific year.
Now that we've thrown 'em off the trail, use the form below to get in touch with the people at Engadget. Please fill in all of the required fields because they're required.
With 50 megapixels, you don't need a rover for space exploration... Just point this beast of a camera upwards and Martians will be complaining their privacy has been invaded.
Yeah, because it's easy to take physical film out of a satellite/rover and process it.
I can totally see that working
haha KipHT, you do realise that DSLR means Digital SLR, i can only assume that you dont, oh and since when are film cameras rated by megapixels, maybe in some alternate universe or something, but not this one as far as i know.
want.
It all comes down to the reality that you can buy the expensive Nike sneakers, but it will not make you Micheal Jordan.
I wonder if there are any insane gearheads that buy digital backs like this. I always assumed that they dare not venture out from their full-auto Canons and Nikons.
id just like to point out that 50k for a body and lens is cheap compared to say motion picture cameras.
Red camera 20k body which is cheap
how about, the theoretical price of the panavision 35 mil cameras being around 350k for a body...and thats the old ones
the panavision genisis is quoted at more like 5-6 hundred K
oh and 70mil or imax cameras cost close to a mil a peice.
and thats body only.
with tripods that cost more than your high end dslr...a matte box that costs the same price as the kia your drive,
what about glass. I laugh at your dslr glass, and point you to say Zeiss god like lenses with the Etek sensors that monitor your focal length/zoom length and aperture at around 100 times a second.
each lens costs close to the price of this large format camera...
now talk about say...imax glass, or a custom stereo parascope to shoot proper 3d optics...and that damned tube with glass in it costs more than the hasselblad camera and it doesn't even work by it self..you still need a lense anda camera..
If motion picture gear has a focusing mechanism that's so good, why was it that when they were filming the final Lord of the Rings scene the entire shot was out of focus? The actors gave it their all when Froto was leaving for the death ship and it turned out to be out of focus. They had to reshoot the entire scene over again and the actors had to do it all over again. That's just one example. There are other examples of out of focus shots even ones made today. One of the blockbuster movies out today has an out of focus shot.
I guess all of them use the ol' tried and true tape measure instead of the expensive autofocus mechanism.
AFAIK, all Cine cameras/lenses are manual focus.
For all the people saying "id rather buy a car" and etc... you are clearly not anywhere near the target market.
These cameras are for big name studios to use (aka users dont buy them) in shoots that will likely end up on billboards, high dpi glossy mags, and etc... more pixel data also allows for more precise and sophisticated editing.
I'm 100% aware of the target market... I'd (emphasis on ME, not the target market) still rather buy a car with my money than this.
How many cars do you actually need? There comes a time when you might want to buy something other than a car.
Did you guys who don't 'get' 50 MP have a problem with Kodachrome 25? Fact is, screen technology will be good enough at an acceptable price point that you'll want still more in a decade or two... and how long do you want your shots to last anyway?
When you get 10' or 12' OLED screens running at somewhere from 96-300 ppi, just figure out how many pixels you'll want, rather than extrapolating. Back in 2002, BusinessWeek ran a story on OLED, suggesting wall-sized screens within 20 years for not much more than paint. I'd say their prediction seems not that far off, given how far we've come from the 1200-1500 dpi micro-displays the story was based on.
50 MP is a no-brainer.
Could you buy insurance on this? what if you dropped it/accidentally crushed it. do you think that you could get it insured just in case something happens?
if not i would be so fucking scared to even touch it, even if i did work for a multi million photography studio that does big billboards, i would be petrified.
I'd be so excited to use one.
Yes, there is a problem with Kodachrome 25 -- namely that only one lab in the US develops it now and that lab sucks huge. Now, Velvia 50 on the other hand...
And really, 50mp isn't that huge a file for photos. If you scan 4x5 sheet film at even 300dpi you're getting files that big. And 4x5 is small in art -- 8x10 is where the big boys play.
Jason, as to insurance, yeah. If you were to buy one, it'd be like any other $35,000 business tool/machine/whatever. You'd have to insure it or you'd be completely insane.
One thing people haven't mentioned is that Hasselblads require a pretty steady stream of maintenance and care and that's not cheap at all. And that no studio that buys one of these and relies on it is only going to buy one. Failure rates may be low, but on a shoot any failure is a catastrophic failure if you don't have a backup body.
Maybe now someone will finally get a clear picture of a UFO, Yeti, Sasquatch, ghosts, etc.
In related news, I'm still happy shooting sexy shots with my Sony Mavica... I just wish I could find more 3.5" floppy disks for it.
@ Temple
Really $500-$700 for rental? We rent the 39 kit for $250 everyday.
The program from the big H says we get a new one every six month from them for dirt, rent it out at that price, and sell it for 20k and the end of that six months.
We just sold one of the rentals last week. I guess it was to make room for the new model. I can't wait to play with it!
@ Temple
Really $500-$700 for rental? We rent the 39 kit for $250 everyday.
The program from the big H says we get a new one every six month from them for dirt, rent it out at that price, and sell it for 20k and the end of that six months.
We just sold one of the rentals last week. I guess it was to make room for the new model. I can't wait to play with it!
I rather get this rather than see people saying they should rather buy something instead of this.
Oh wait..
Price in Europe: 30 kilo-euro
OMG 50 MEG! !@#$%
omg 50 meg!
50megapixel isn't very much compared to large format cameras. I would say that when the digital backs reach 400 megapixel then we might have the same resolution and maybe tonality as a 8x10 large format camera can give us. We are far from there today and we will need full 16 bits or maybe more.
I hope this comment shows up like the two I made last night didn't!
TEST!
About time my comments started showing up!
I shot a vegetable/fruit spread that covers 3/4 sides of major brand foods national tractor trailer truck distribution fleet with 4x5 sheet film, 100 ISO and legendary Schneider optics. The cherries were basketball sized and spectacular color fidelity and sharpness viewed inches away. Twenty feet away to take in full image filling tractor trailer spanning such dimensions grabs the eye in way only finest reproduction printer specializing with state-of-art ultra-fidelity can.
The tech who actually achieved that output assured me that 10-20MP DSLR RAW files equally well-shot can process upscaled nearly as well as my gigantic 4x5 reproduced.
Most billboards are shockingly blurry viewed closer than intended fixed viewing distance of hundreds feet away. But tractor trailer huge images have to resolve sharply also three feet viewing distance from surface passing drivers see. The minimum acceptable fidelity standards are achieved today expertly post-processing for over-sized reproduction. Originals far below 50MP become billboards. 10MP images routinely make 4x8 foot trade show panels that sparkle, done right. The 4 foot wide specialists get gradations unpixelated with RAW originals.
50MP captures are vastly more common reproduced magazine sizes. Just like 4x5 film, often printed even smaller. Reproductions really large are tiny percentage of commercial photography. 1/10th of 1% numbers.
50MP is about ultra-high quality images with bandwidth tolerant enough of manipulation smoothly and sizes secondary benefit.
8x10 film sounds impressive, but the reality is it virtually went extinct. I have 3 8x10 cameras, full lens array from 160mm Super-Angulon to 16" tele and haven't shot one sheet in a decade. Finding film and getting processed still today an odyssey. I'm hoping someday breakthrough digital back makes them relevant again.
Even 4x5 film processed is no longer scheduled in my city. All four major labs shuttered with a single one-man lab left that closes early most days with none to run. Ten years ago there were +50 commercial photographers, today a fraction.
Is this typical trend elsewhere in medium cities or just bad location? I wonder because here film isn't even practical option.
I'd give right arm for simple Sony 35mm chip digital back for old 2 1/4 SLR's ripe market. Nothing fancy, just 100 ISO, thethered USB2 capture to laptop, limited to normal 90mm lens pixel well match for 1.5X tele. RAW process ten seconds, AC power. Basic. That would cover 95% studio shots, with DSLR for the rest. 25MP for $1,500 basic module and adaptor plates for all the old 2 1/4's. Who needs $50,000 fashion systems for bread-and-butter still-life jobs? How many hundreds-thousands unused 2 1/4's sales market? 35mm chips will become commodities once Sony's Alpha mass produces.
Tons of people shoot 8x10 on APUG. Look into glazer's camera, they do ULF orders. http://www.glazerscamera.com/kodak-ulf-film.html
thanks BC - I've been panicking about all this and it was good to read someone experienced and with common sense. I trained in photography at college with 35mm and 120film, studio lighting and stuff. It was ten years ago and the college were still telling us that digital would never be as good. I've got got 2 Bronica bodies, lenses, 3 nikons with 5 lenses and a D200 and it is all obsolete now. I just compared some studio tests - one on my D200 (10.5mp) with shots on 160asa 120film scanned in. The digital shots won hands down. Now, the 10.5 seems too small to be considered a professional camera - do I buy a Canon 21mp and ditch all my Nikon stuff? Or do I grit my teeth, take out a loan and get the 50mp Hasselblad? In my town it seems that it's the boys who have the biggest equipment that get the work. The pictures suck but the cllient starts panting when he hears 28mp then 39mp then wow, 50mp! Everything else goes out the window. How can anyone keep up? It's not like in the old days of film when you investing in some great gear and that was it for years. How long will it be before 50mp seems tiny?
But..... will it blend?
Why even bother?
"Meh" nothing, this is a damn impressive piece of equipment.