I would be interested in people's views as to what is the better platform for a Phase back today, primarily for landscapes, an H1/H2 or a new Phase/Mamiya camera. There are still a number of photographers out there shooting with Phase backs on Hasselblad H1/H2 bodies. OTOH, Phase has come out with its own version of the Mamiya AFD and is offering very good deals on it. One area where I have concerns with the Phase/Mamiya camera is with longer lenses like the 210 and the 300. There have been reports that it is very problematic getting perfectly sharp images with a P65 even with the mirror locked up because of shutter vibration. True? With the Hasselblad, the lenses have leaf shutters and, from experience, I know that one can get perfectly sharp images with the Hasselblad 300mm lens. Also, the viewfinder on the Hasselblad is like looking at a High Def TV screen compared to the Phase. Not sure about other significant differences. Anyone switch from the Hasselblad to the Phase/Mamiya and regret it?
Thanks.

The main thing I don't like about Mamiya AFD is shutter lag I guess, but if you want it for stills / landscape architecture, it doesn't pose a big problem. As for shutter vibration- inquire what leaf lenses Schneider is going to release for new 645DF body, maybe the line up would be sufficient for your work. Despite the 2 lenses which will be available there are more scheduled to hit the market. I can tell that 35 AF is a terrible lens. At least my sample- I heard that there's huge variation in quality of these, but none are remarkably good. Everyone says that new Mamiya 28 mm lens is very good- didn't use it in person but samples seem to be nice. The new lineup of D lenses is also much better than older Mamiya AF lenses. If it comes to 210 and 300- you have an APO 300 lens and 210 ULD, both of these are good lenses. Even though I owned my AFDII for not a long time, I am dissapointed and I would go for H2 if I were you. I don't know if it would be handy for you, but HTS 1.5 is a nice addition. There's a similar adapter for Mamiya system, even though I haven't heard / seen anyone using it. I don't like the auto focus on AFD and the shutter lag- these are two biggest disadvantages of this system. 645DF should be much better in both of these fields, but for this money you could get a H2 with 28mm HC lens. In my humble opinion, go for H.

I use a Phase One back on an H series Hasselblad and I like the combination. Only thing is you can't use the 28 HC or the new 35-90 zoom, the firmware only allows them to be used on Hasselblad digital bodies.
Still a good selection of lenses with 35 on the wide end.

Not sure what your style of landscapes, but if I did this for a living, I'd for sure want the ability to use the HTS, and you can't with the H2/Phase. But I'd want to be able to shift, for long panoramas. But there are limitations with the HTS too, and you've also got the 1.5x thing, which is not good.

I wouldn't advise doing that with the Russian 45 either; soft.

I have done a few, and I like the way you can set up the User button on the H2 to be Mirror Up, and then the other button for quick autofocus. Mirror Up always for landscapes. Not sure if it's that easy with the Phase.

There's always that RRS pano bracket too, I guess that would work with H2, but I'm not a believer in that kind of panning/stitching; I'd almost rather use the 1ds3 with a real shift lens. Or one of those technical cameras like the cambo Wide RS.

I think you gotta clarify what style of landscape in order to get good feedback. I think the real guys use technical cameras, but that wasn't an option in your original question. Of the H or the Phase, I don't consider either one of them landscape cameras.

One opinion.

I messed up a bit, sorry for misinformation- Hasselblad's 28 mm is usable only on H2F, not H2. However I think that HTS 1.5 is compatible with all H bodies and using it with Phase One back shouldn't be a problem- correct me if I'm wrong. By the way, what gwhitf wrote about technical camera is true- why are technical cameras out of your consideration?

Hi, hcubell,

I have owned a P45+ on an H2 as well as a P45+ with a Phamiya AFD III for nature work (including wildlife/long tele work).

Shutter vibration in the "dead zone" 1/15s +/- a few stops is pretty bad for the AFD III, and every focal plane shutter system I have tried (Phamiya AFD III, Contax 645, Hasselblad 203FE). Each system was tested with 300 or 350mm lenses--given typical shooting times of day (ie dawn/dusk), I don't think the focal plane systems are really up to long lens work without extra gear (steadying arms, custom plates binding body to lenses, etc.) All of these solutions have their drawbacks, including additional weight, even slower working speed and inability to rotate from landscape to portrait.

I have used a Hasselblad central shutter 350mm as well as a Rollei 350mm central shutter and I can tell you the vibration is significantly less. Not zero, but manageable. For long tele work, I definitely recommend staying away from focal plane mechanical shutters.

As for the rest of it, the P45+ worked seamlessly with the H2. Aside from any shenanigans Hasselblad has played locking out certain lenses from being used with anything other than specific systems, my own opinion is that the Hasselblad system as a whole is more mature; much of the Phamiya's lens lineup is still awaiting an update to either the latest "D" or to leaf shutter glass. If you're like me, I assume you want to shoot now; I strongly recommend considering only what is available for general purpose purchase *today* as you make your decision. Far too many promises are made and far too few dates are kept for my liking.

Leaning toward the H2. I don't see any specific advantages to the Mamiya--I did not care for the shutter lag issue, or the lack of compatibility with rechargeable batteries. Neither has a vertical grip available today, so they're both missing the boat equally there. I think the HTS, along with a shipping leaf shutter 300 combined with no real drawbacks (HCD issues aside) with the system would lead me in that direction, if I were in your shoes.

P45+ itself is killer--no worries on that front.

HTH,
-Brad

Thanks. I am not a fan of technical cameras like the Alpa. I like to be able to focus accurately and compose through a viewfinder. I just don't find the marginal improvement in resolution with the digital lenses worth the tradeoffs. I am actually not aware of any "leading" landscape photographers who use technical cameras with digital backs.The HTS can be used with the H2 and is great in concept, but the practical reality is that it is very difficult to focus with it without tethering and live view. Your point about setting up the two buttons on the H2 for AF and mirror up is very well taken. It does make for a very smooth shooting experience.

Thanks, Brad. Very helpful. The inability to use the 28mm is not much of an issue for me. I use longer lenses more than wider lenses for the kind of work I do. The new 35-90 HCD zoom is also not an issue as the 50-110 is more suited to a full frame sensor.

I now shoot with a 65+ and H2...my longest lens being the H210. I use a medium weight tripod (Gitzo 2500 series) with a lightweight head--the RRS 40 (tho I do use my RRS 55 head at times also). I have no...zero...issues with difficulty getting sharp images if I use proper technique and am not dealing with huge amounts of wind. On the other hand I started out with a Contax and P25 years ago when the P25 first came out. I had a Contax 210 lens and always thought it was just a bad lens because getting a sharp image was challenging at best...even when using "proper technique". I retrospect I now realize I was probably having focal plane shutter vibration issues with my Contax with my 210. Just a thought. eleanor

The shutter vibrations on these systems is really quite astonishing. For studio work with strobes, you'd never need to worry about the 'dead zone', but for available light nature photography, these (unfortunately) are very common shutter speeds, and work poorly with high magnification lenses.

Yes, the 210 wasn't my favorite lens either (actually, it was probably my least favorite lens in the Contax lineup), but yes, I think it's very likely this is the issue you were running into.

Very smooth. You get into this "rocking horse" rhythm with it -- Compose; Autofocus; Mirror Up; Expose.

Rinse and repeat.

The buttons are in the perfect spot on that grip. It's all done by feel.

Now, if we could move on to that missing Vertical Grip for the H camera, for people who shoot "vertical landscapes", (aka Advertising).

Howard, I am with you on the technical camera. Doug Peterson has sent me several examples from tech cameras in the past, and yes, they're tack sharp, but still, the process of shooting is a very personal experience, and it would drive me nuts to not be looking thru the same lens that was taking the picture. But that's just a personal preference. Just like there's no way I could use an M Leica; no way I could deal with the viewfinder not matching the lens. If you like the H, keep shooting it. It's a free country.

Been shooting mostly Canon these days using C1 4 & now C1 5. We did a flash test using the new Mamiya DF body with the 65+ & that was back in June well before the release of this new body. I have heard that the latest DF body has a much improved shutter lag ( about the same as the H3D), I found it was much improved on the DF demo I used. The 75-150 lens was beautiful. I still have a few lenses & a ADFII body just need a back but that can wait.
Denis

Hee!-- If I could only tell-- ah well very Interesting thread this--

Chortle,

DesW

I am a landscape shooter - doing architecture as well. I am using the P65+ on both the Alpa SWA in combination with the Rodenstock HR 28 mm and the H1 with the whole bunch of lenses from the 35 to the 300 mm.
Hasselblad lenses are still quite good with the P65+ if not going further than f11 - but this was not different with the P45+. Shooting with long lenses such as the 210/300 mm ist always a problem of vibration and I guess that wind and other environmental factors are much more important than shutter problems at exposure times of 1/30 and less.

The Alpa is much more difficult for composing the image than the Hassy but if you are shooting within a forest or in a valley between the mountains you will be quite happy when being able to shift your lens. The HR lens is very sharp and gives you the details needed with this back - so I would never go for a "solution with a 28 mm lens with a "normal" MF body. Shooting wideangle the Alpa is not an issue - for sure not for landscape - and I am not the only one using the Alpa in this field.

As for the Hassy I still like its design and the viewfinder. So for the moment for me there is no motivation changing this combination - since the Phase system does not offer me the range of lenses I need and the features and handling of the camera I am used to - yet... And maybe, one day, Hasselblad will listen to their "lost" sons and open up their system again...