World's First Mirrorless Medium Format Camera

[Mike Buckley]

No surprise it comes from Hasselblad. See this.

[russellsnr]

Love it I really do
$8,995 USD by itself
Now where did I put that lotto ticket

Russ

[davidedric]

You wouldn't want to drop it

[Manfred M]

Interesting - it uses the same size of sensor as the Pentax 645z (also a 50MP camera - 43.8 x 32.8 mm) and has about the same price point. So while it is larger than 24 x 36mm, it's not really into the "true' medium format range.

Get me a true medium format camera (40 x 50 mm sensor) in that price range and I might start saving up for one.

[ionian]

No art filters? I thought it was a mirrorless camera...

[Mike Buckley]

Pentax also calls their 645z a medium format camera. The Hasselblad is nearly 30% more expensive, so I wouldn't say they have about the same price point.

[Manfred M]

Pentax also calls their 645z a medium format camera. The Hasselblad is nearly 30% more expensive, so I wouldn't say they have about the same price point.

It looks like Pentax has had a major price drop since the last time I looked at one. It was running at $8499 when it first came out (so not that far off the Hasselblad intro price) and the 645d was selling at around $1500 less. I guess Pentax must have dropped the price after they moved out the first generation d model.

The 645D was listing at $9400 when it lauched.

Pentax was criticized for describing their offering as medium format too.

[Black Pearl]

No art filters? I thought it was a mirrorless camera...

My X-T1 doesn't have art filters - guess I'll have to look harder for the mirror

[xpatUSA]

It looks like Pentax has had a major price drop since the last time I looked at one. It was running at $8499 when it first came out (so not that far off the Hasselblad intro price) and the 645d was selling at around $1500 less. I guess Pentax must have dropped the price after they moved out the first generation d model.

The 645D was listing at $9400 when it launched.

Pentax was criticized for describing their offering as medium format too.

Which may have inspired this little Wikipedia gem:

"In digital photography, medium format refers either to cameras adapted from medium-format film photography uses, or to cameras making use of sensors larger than that of a 35 mm film frame."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medium_format_(film)

Elsewhere, it seems that "medium format" means whatever Chuck Norris says it does, LOL . . .

[Shadowman]

To anyone who owns or plans to buy one, I'm going to go out on a limb and say it's a mediocre camera; only so you'll let me borrow it to prove me wrong.

[Manfred M]

Which may have inspired this little Wikipedia gem:

"In digital photography, medium format refers either to cameras adapted from medium-format film photography uses, or to cameras making use of sensors larger than that of a 35 mm film frame."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medium_format_(film)

Elsewhere, it seems that "medium format" means whatever Chuck Norris says it does, LOL . . .

That's a bit of an updated definition.

In the film days medium format were camera that took 120 or 220 roll film (or 620 for that matter), i.e. nominal width of 56mm (the extra 4mm came from the film spool = 6 cm). There were a few odd film sizes like 127, which had a nominal width of 4cm (nominal film was 36mm), but this size was not used in "serious" cameras and were not considered medium format. This is really the sensor size that Pentax and the new Hasselblad uses.

The more traditional Hasselblad / Phase One / Mamiya digital backs are closer to the traditional 120 / 220 film sizes.

So you really had 35mm or medium format and all that other sizes really weren't considered as "serious photographers" wouldn't use them.

[Mike Buckley]

That's a bit of an updated definition.

Definitions change to benefit industries selling the product. Decades ago I bought shrimp at the grocery store labeled medium size. Today shrimp that are the same size are labeled extra large. Gotta love it!

[davidedric]

Mike, maybe you just got bigger

[Saorsa]

No surprise it comes from Hasselblad. See this.

You need to specify that as Digital mirrorless camera. I've owned any number of medium and large format cameras with interchangeable lenses that did not have mirrors.

[Mike Buckley]

Mike, maybe you just got bigger

To get at the facts, simply eliminate the word, maybe.

[Mike Buckley]

You need to specify that as Digital mirrorless camera.

Don't shoot the messenger. I'm simply passing along the information provided on the Internet. If it's on the Internet, I always assume it's true.

[Donald]

Hasn't got any more pixels than the Canon 5DS.

[Manfred M]

Hasn't got any more pixels than the Canon 5DS.

Yes, but all the advantages of a larger sensor (I understand this is a modern Sony sensor) - lower noise, less magnification for large prints. shallower DoF at equivalent apertures, better diffraction limit. Add to that the in-lens shutter and the magnificently high synch speeds. This is something that fashion photographers and some portrait photographers are going look at quite closely.

If I won the lottery, I'd seriously look at one of these, but then, I don't buy lottery tickets, so chance of winning are zero...

[Mike Buckley]

What are the advantages of the shutter being in the lens as opposed to being in the camera body?

[Manfred M]

What are the advantages of the shutter being in the lens as opposed to being in the camera body?

Very high flash synch speeds. Often the synch speed is the maximum shutter speed, which in this case is 1/2000th sec.