Видео

Mind blowing how many folks think the difference between medium and full is merely evident via large print. The difference between these two cameras is the color science. The photos aren’t close to one another - Sony (a great company) still needs to be worked on to get to what your eyes saw - meanwhile Hasselblad doesn’t. Most will buy Sony (cheaper, still great, etc, but comparing the two they aren’t close)

I see a lot of people always shoot in 3:2 when a simple change of aspect ratio could make such a huge improvement or solve a compositional problem. My main ratios are usually 4:3, 4:5, 5:7, 1:1, 16:9 but I'll occasionally use some others like 6:7 or 65:24. I don't generally like 3:2 but for street photography I think it's the best, not really sure why that is, maybe because so much of it is done in 3:2.

You don't need medium format camera if you don't make physical prints. I have GFX and X2D (GFX for 4 years and pretty new to Hassy) and came from A7R. Medium format files opened up the whole new world. If you don't make prints like 30"x40" or even larger, you don't need them at all. Sony can pull up to 40"x60", but the details you get in the prints are quite different.

People getting butthurt that he's comparing a Hasselblad to a Sony. Guess what guys, Dji owns Hasselblad and so y is the top sensor manufacturer that makes that Hasselblad sensor lol😅😂😢

I've read other people complaining about the vertical banding with the Hasselblad camera, so you're not alone.

That banding usualy apears from phasedetection în the sensors that have it

Hi Jonas can you not have different portfolios and personalities and different brands that are unique to that brand?

Hi Jonas, I'm the happy owner of the fujifilm gfx 100 s medium format camera, coming from canon 5d3 and 5d4. I have a bunch of great lenses for the canon that I would very much like to keep. I then got hold of the TechArt ef-gf converter that allow me to use my canon lenses on the fuji. Obviously I expected to run into heavy vignetting but there were huge differences between the lenses. Even my canon 11-24 mm performs very nice on the fuji from 14 mm onwards. I expect that TechArt has converters from Sony to Hasselblad mounts, so perhaps you could use your long sony lenses on a hassy? Just a suggestion🙂 Kind regards Birger

Once again, a top video and message Jonas. I enjoyed the musical inclusions and the examples of other artists. It’s going to be interesting seeing this play out . I’m already thinking about style, branding, what and why as I sort through my framed images I sell at a market in Australia. Great job on the video !

Came over from your branding video - very thought provoking . What - the things in my environment that catch my eye / why to celebrate and highlight those eye catching scenes or objects or living things .

Jonas, I didn’t think branding would be for me either, but it’s something I’m seriously considering now. Your work is really great, and while there can be some negative aspects to branding yourself, overall I think it’s a solid idea. Thanks for sharing your thoughts

Jonas, the timing of this video is like you were reading my mind and speaking just to me. Been struggling with what genre to concentrate on.

Since you’ve asked for it…or is it because I like to give my opinion 😂 I understand why you make this exact cut between landscape Photograhy with or without human or animal elements included. Because that proofs your opinion. However, I think that’s a too strict approach when talking about landscape photography. Again you’re mostly right when you talk about natural landscapes. But when for instance there was the result of a forest fire, a flooding, a strange tree growing out of place or anything like that it could still tell a story , making you ask questions like with the boathouse. You could use the light and shadows and make a landscape look creepy and play with people’s imagination. And besides that, roads, buildings, and other human build elements can be part of the landscape. Yes, not in the way the landscape was originally intended, but where I live for instance, the landscape is full of human build features. A landscape in my opinion can even be found in a city. You could argue and call it architecture, but I think architecture is part of the landscape people see around them all day. So I think your opinion is mostly true, when we talk about landscapes in a natural environment without any signs of human or animal activity. But when you see landscape photography in a broader perspective, which I think still is landscape photography, story telling is very well possible. The question should be what makes a story, not is it possible or not. It’s harder to tell that story in nature landscape photography due to the absence of human activity. But that’s like saying you can’t do football photography if the grass you’re shooting the photo at, isn’t an empty field. It’s true and everyone knows it. So why leave out those elements if you could add them, and it would still be landscape photography, just with a less narrow definition.

Hi Jonas, sorry this is a bit off-topic, but I was wondering if you could help me with something. I'm a beginner at photography, and I've noticed in many videos that people set their ISO to 100 when shooting in sunlight. However, when I set mine to 100, my photos come out all black. If I try adjusting my shutter speed to fix it, it causes motion blur. Do you have any tips for this? Thanks in advance!

I started talking to some friends of mine who are into filmmaking, and they brought to my attention that a horizontal frame lends itself to an expansive and free feeling; and diminishes the subject's importance in the narrative the frame is conveying. Vertical and square frames tend to create a more intimate experience, and draw you into a visual dialogue with the subject. I noticed that the pictures that you showed, which were expressing an expansiveness, followed that rule -- either by virtue of the photo's actual aspect ratio, or by a synthetic aspect ratio made with framing and negative space. The vertical and square aspect ratios, where the entire frame was used, were filled with objects that create an intimate portrait with their arrangement. I have to say I didn't like the pictures of the monkeys, because they feel like they should be very important subjects in their own portraits; but they have a sort of feeling like they don't matter in the context, and they're being swallowed up by the jungle -- which I think I'm getting from the 2:3 aspect ratio.

I really enjoyed this video. Nicely filmed and nicely edited 👍👍

I really love the B&W.

Wonderful - I enjoyed that . Thankyou Jonas .

Fantastic video, great images and interesting narrative!😀

One day I would also really like to visit Venice. The look of the city is amazing!

What a beautiful place to photograph! Wonderful images! Love the B&W!

👏👏👏

Great video, there's absolutely no logic reason to get the Hasselblad but it doesn't stop me really wanting one. Also sunglasses always 👍 but you knew that already.

Ok I give you $8k hassablad a wonderful camera

What's obvious is how hard the trained eye has to look to find benefits (adding up to thousands of dollars difference). There would be very few cases by this measure that an untrained eye would pick these things up in print. And yet there can be so many differences between photographers that are more telling and that's where the real value of photography lies.

I've been shooting manually since I started all the subject for about 20 years and I think it pays off

Will certainly try this approach next time when I am out!😀

I am SO very glad to hear your opinions. I got so damned tired of teachers talking about stories. They believe their own marketing.

Great tips… especially the tip regarding lens aperture ranges by sensor type (APSC, full frame & medium format) !

Great video! How about a video on shooting manual for wildlife? Would interesting to hear and view how you address all the variables associated with manual shooting in wildlife photography!

Another great video Jonas - well done .

Great video...thanks. What tripod head is this?

For me any IQ advantage of the Hasselblad is pretty irrelevant until they come up with a method to protect that huge sensor from dust. Changing lens in almost any conditions is like Russian Roulette with 1 empty chamber. And since the lenses are mainly primes, most landscape photographers are going to want to change them now & then. Or buy 1 body for each lens. Then again probably most landscape photographers could only afford 1 XCD lens 🤣

A beautiful area to sail, and to try the Hasselblad, what a combination 👏

Ive always had a dislike of sony since they came out with their first interchangable lens camera. Maybe because I've had such bad luck with their products since the early 90s. So I would quit photography before having a sony and definitely get a Hasselblad even if l had to get a loan.

After extensive testing with the A7R5, you will begin to see diffraction softening effects past f6.3. By f8 (if you're pixel peeping) diffraction softening is well underway. Diffraction effects on a medium format (the Phase One P45 in my case) is more forgiving and doesn't start till around f8.5 - f11. I don't shoot on the P45 anymore since the A7R4 and A7R5 came out. The 100mp Hassy X2D is a different animal, but If you're after the absolute optimum sharpness on the A7R5, don't go past f6.3. And if you really want to see the max resolution that the A7R5 can produce, lenses like the Zeiss Otus or Sigma 40mm ART will dig into details that many other lenses, including GM lenses will fail to deliver.

Try using Phocus not LRC when working on X2D RAW files.

Hassy color is better. A lot better. And the UI is best in business or equal with Leica. Sony UI is nasty. They have always been about best tech, usability be damned. But versatility and value are tippy top. If you shoot with high end clients in the room, Hasselblad definitely means something extra that Sony never will.

If I was going to get a medium format digital camera (at this point), it would likely be a FUJIFILM GFX 102MP (better value, and probably better lens selection with those as well). All else being equal, the higher megapixel image will essentially always have the advantage in sharpness, as long as the lens is capable enough... Though, I'd probably keep my 61MP Sony full frame body as well. As far as a comparison between the two, not sure the 24gm is really that impressive compared to some of the newer lenses. I think even the FE 20mm f/1.8 G might actually be sharper (on average).

👎 For comparing Hasselblad to Sony

Isn't Hasselblad a Chinese brand nowadays?

My grandpa sailed on the Great Lakes in North America for roughly 50 years and I can't help but think sailboats are one of the most beautiful artificial creations. A marina full of power boats is an eyesore to me, while a marina full of sailboats puts a smile on my face. Many parts of the Great Lakes look so similar to Sweden's rocky, rugged coast -- especially around Isle Royale National Park, Pukaskwa National Park, and the Georgian Bay on Lake Huron.

For most photographers - I would say: 97% - there is no rational reason for a medium format camera like the Hasselblad. Why? Because it is less versatile than a full frame camera, which gives you much more shooting opportunities for a much lower price. I also see no need to change horses - I love my workhorse which is the Canon R6 MkII which does everything I want in a very easy way and delivers an output of high quality.

Hasselblad and Fuji are still saving a 14bit file but inside a 16bit container. A file saved from the Hasselblad at 14 or 16bit are the same size in megabytes. It’s almost purely marketing BS as the data produced does not nearly fill up 16bit with usable data.

Wall of text warning, so before that I really enjoyed this video. I get not feeling compelled to switch from Sony. I, however, needed something with autofocus as my eyes' age is starting to come into play with focusing my rangefinder, and after playing with sample files, I decided to go with an X2D (though granted I was probably a bit more interested in an SL3 than an A7RV), so I had less switching costs since I'm not selling my Leica stuff. That said, when looking at resolution, wouldn't both of these lenses be noticeably diffraction limited at the apertures you used? And the 28P in the blad lineup is, and I know this is crazy given the price, kind of a cheap but cheerful option compared to say the 25V. From what I've seen, for the V lenses optimal center resolution is _typically_ at f4 or for the 38V I believe f5.6. At any rate, I appreciate you comparing at equivalent output sizes rather than magnification. At 18:08 when showing both side by side, that's kind of what sold me on the Hasselblad. I appreciate that colors are malleable and many full frame sensors have awesome dynamic range, but in the end I just always felt the Hasselblad won out. As an aside, youtube insists on serving me gear videos, I took a look and I appreciate that most of your channel is more focused on doing photography than the gear, happy to add another subscription with a more balanced focus.

when presenter calls product hassy....you know he is bought doesn't say it is commercial but what is it?

That table you showed is misleading. A 16 bit camera ( not sensor ) can display 65536 shades of gray, but neither the commercially vailable monitors nor the average human eye can distinguish that many tones. I think the average human eye can differentiate around 8 bits of tones. The difference between 12bit to 14 bit to 16 bit is almost non detectable. They all appear as smooth continous tones to the human eye. Is it good to have that much data, perhaps, but what is the use if it could not be viewed? Photography my friend is a hell a lot more than just pixel peeping. Time could be spent much more creatively elsewhere.

You would never get the Sony's resolution stacking function to work in a setup like yours. Simply too much vibrations (wind, shutter, "crappy" tripod). Essentially for that function to work you need a bloody cement block to surround your camera to stop ANY minuscule movement of the sensor. Another thing you seemed to miss completely was the increased tonality of the Hasselblad file. E.g. shadow "depth". If you look at the transitions of colors and/or highlights/shadows then there is a rather clear difference. Enough to spend more on a "worse" camera...depends on your needs. Personally, I own multiple Sonys (a7riv, 2x a7iv, a7s3, a6500) and I own the X2D...now... all in all the Hasselblad is a fu**ing pain for workflow. Phocus is garbage from a usability standpoint and performancewise (exporting images through it takes ages. E.g. exporting 10 files into JPGs took multiple minutes where as that would've been a few seconds in lightroom). But man...that camera makes photography for me feel special again. I pretty much NEVER took out my sony's for personal reasons. I pretty much always take my Hassy with me when going for a hike etc. Not to mention that there are the few special use cases where the image quality is just required for professional work (e.g. when I'm shooting artwork or in studio doing products/portraits). Essentially, everything in the workflow just takes longer with the Hasselblad.

Jonas, you can always rent the Hassy for a while to see if it’s suitable for your style of photography. Will it take better images than the Sony? It’s like buying a Porsche. Do you really need it, would you make use of it, or not. Or buy a second hand one, like Tom did - if you can’t sleep until you get one! My son in law bought a Porsche. It sits in the garage and in the market downturn, can’t sell it. So think carefully. Good things always cost a lot, and so do trips, family etc.

Pixel peeping at its finest! And so many pixels to peep at.