Kudos to your macro explanation, Chris. 4:54 Your use of that specific stump as an example of the macro capabilities was helpful, since I can compare my intended macro subject to the size of that stump, mentally.
It's a classic, but I still laughed out loud when I saw Jordan waiting by the toilets !! 😂🤣 It's alwyas good when you ad your little fun in your videos. So good job guys, as always 🙂
Given that Hasselblad are pushing out new lenses at a decent rate, and are aggressively sending bodies and lenses to camera channels and influencers, I'd wager that they're doing just fine. They are, quite obviously, not trying to compete with Fuji on price. Or, indeed, on features for the most part. Their bodies and lenses are pitched, and priced, as luxury products. They don't need anywhere near the same sales volume as Fuji. Indeed, I wouldn't be surprised if DJI are happy to keep Hasselblad going at minimal profitability as a halo product line and to use their name and some of their engineering.
@@friendofarca6550 Perhaps sales are down. Perhaps they'll fold tomorrow. Perhaps they're not viable long-term and this is their last gasp. (Or perhaps they're thriving on their slice of the luxury market.) But my point is that they're very obviously targeting a different segment to Fuji for the most part. There probably are *some* people out there who see the pricetag of this lens and think "you know what, I was considering Hasselblad but I'll buy Fuji GFX instead". But, for the most part, the kind of person who would blink at the price of this lens, and the kind of person comparing its value to the Fuji 20-35, probably wasn't considering Hasselblad in the first place. There's no contest in the value comparison, and this lens does nothing to change that.
Yes, I agree. That the bodies are bit more expensive is one thing (they are excellent and beautifully made), but their lenses are really twice the price compared to Fuji GF making it a very expensive system to work with. And especially this lens, is one many Hassy-shooters will want to have in their arsenal, as the system is mainly suitable for portrait, studio and landscape photography. I think they could have better gone for a USD 3,500 price point, than USD 6,000.
I own an X1D II and a couple of lenses purchased used (45 and 90). I like the idea of this lens, and I can grab the 30mm and get a lot of what I want with a used price in the $2K range. Hasselblad lenses are expensive and the built quality is very high to the point that I know these lenses will last pretty much forever. I'd really like to own the 35 - 75 zoom, honestly; it's got a bit more range and hits a lot of what I like to shoot. Overall, a remarkable lens.
I really enjoy the X2D I'm shooting with, I have a range of lens the 25,38, 90mm. I enjoy the versatility of the 20-35, but honestly just started shooting with it. It doesn't provide the Macro capability of the Primes but when I travel I can't escape the fact that having a range without carrying a suitcase of lenses is a big plus, the 90 is my favorite. I really miss the adjustment options on the 20-35 lens, after being so use to the v-series of lenses.
I think it's a good point. instead of having 3 separate primes which will run about $13k you can get this for $6k and less lens swapping too. I wish they release 135mm soon. waiting for that one. I have the 38mm only. thank you
ehi Chris great review, to me it doesn't make much sense because of the 100 megapixel sensor. you can just get the 21mm f/4.0 and crop when you need it and still get a photo well over 50 mpx. if you don't need the 21mm you can also get the brighter 25mm f/2.5 and have an even smaller crop in order to get 35mm field of view.
@@peterfritzphoto I actually calculated, you would get 51 megapixel with the 25mm and 36 megapixel with the 21mm. I would get the 25mm then since it's wide enough.
Why introduce another series of lenses? E? Does it have the autofocus improvements from the V series? Is it much better than the existing standard zoom which isn't part of any series?
I think many of the comments comparing Hasselblad to Leica miss the fact that Leica's best selling line is a rangefinder system, which doesn't have any market equivalent at all besides the Pixii camera series. With the exception of the leaf shutter, this system is competing directly with GFX (which really isn't much cheaper) and is delivering a lot less much of the time. I cannot believe a lens from their premium sub-line would be variable aperture. That would be like if Leica's APO lenses were limited to the f/12.5 smallest aperture of my 50mm Summar from 1937.
Having no extra features on the lens is just a feature. Look at professional Leica lenses, for example the SL 14-24 2.8 or the 24-90 f2.8-4 don't have these features either. It is just the lens, the camera body and you. With that, you can get stunning results.
Yea, 6k for a lens that is equivalent in results to a 16-28 f/2.8 on FF, which costs $900. But you don't 'buy' a Hasselblad, you 'get' a Hasselblad. You put your credit card on the counter and they give you the camera. You guess they take some money from the card, but you never really asked how much, and you don't really care. If you have to ask what it costs, you can't afford it.
Criticising the price, especially compared to Fuji, I can understand - but what, specifically, is wrong with it being variable aperture? If it's capable of opening up more at the wider end while maintaining good performance, I'd rather have the option to do so. Keeping a consistent aperture for videography obviously isn't a concern when the bodies aren't capable of shooting video, and being variable aperture does not inherently harm the optical performance.
@@BlazeFirereign it was mostly a joke about the fact that variable aperture lenses tend to be cheaper kit lenses...But hey, feel free to buy it if you feel so strongly about it.
@@BlazeFirereign I 100% agree, but I feel people hate variable aperture lenses so much that they rather NOT have the option to open up more on the wide end. I remember the shit the Tamron 35-150 got because it was variable aperture. These people rather wanted it limited to f/2.8 on the wide end. Believe me, there are a lot of weirdos in this hobby, not all of them can afford a Hasselblad :P
Thanks for the intro. I own the X2D (I've H cameras since the h4) and love the camera but own only primes because with 102 MP you want sharpness. The widest prime I own is the 30mm which has always served me pretty well. I was considering the 25mm but with the intro of the wide zoom I'm wondering if maybe that's a better choice. Of course, with a $6k price tag, it's a bit hard to swallow and, as your video points out, the zoom is a little soft wide open. What do you think? Sell the 30mm and buy the zoom or keep what I have? ps I did a bit of pricing on eBay and looks like a used 30mm xcd is selling for about $2500US so that's a big differential.
Fuji is eating Hasselblad’s lunch at this point. I don’t know who would get a Hasselblad digital medium format at this point when Fuji’s recent MF cameras are more affordable, have more modern features and just objectively better lenses almost across the board that can resolve 100+mp. If you’re spending hasselblad money for a studio mf camera you might as well get a phase one, or get a Fuji gfx which seems like the only sane option for most people now.
Has Hasselblad ever been the 'sane option' though? :D You don't get one because it is the 'sane' thing to do, you get one because you think it is cool and you have more money than you can possibly spend in your life.
I can give you a little insight....In a few years' time, I'll be looking to drop big money on a new camera system. For a bit of perspective, I shoot a combination of Nikon film, Leica film and Sony digital. If I were to rate them technically, it'd be Sony first by a mile, followed by Nikon, then Leica. If I am to rate them based on joy, it's Nikon by a mile, then Leica and Sony a distant last. For my big money system, I have considered Fuji GFX, Leica M and Hasselblad. Leica is easily the most beautiful, but the image quality isn't on par with the other two (although it's still great). Also, I found out I'm not really a rangefinder guy. They're fine, but they're best described as suboptimal. The Fuji feels kind of like a big, slower Sony, but with great image quality. The Hasselblad feels almost Leica quality, but with better image quality. Weirdly enough, the Hasselblad reminds me of the original Sony A7r - beautiful camera, but very slow and great image quality. All in all, I'm going to want a different experience than I get with the Sony. With the leaf shutter lenses, giving an extra advantage, a 3 lens kit with the Hasselblad seems like the way to go.
Eating their lunch in what way, exactly? See, here's the thing: Hasselblad is, quite obviously, targeting a different segment of the market. They're not making any effort to compete on price, and I'd dare to wager that they're able to stay profitable with far fewer sales given their higher pricetags. It's a luxury product - that's how it's priced, that's how it's pitched, and it's bought by people who largely don't care about the spec sheet comparison. Who's buying it? People who make good money, enjoy photography, and want a Hasselblad more than they want a Fuji. The value proposition of Fuji is obvious for people who care mostly about the results, but some people care as much about subjective factors like ergonomics and how enjoyable they find their camera to use. They're rarer than the Fuji buyer, sure, but they also largely couldn't care less about how they compre in market share. Or the opinins of spec sheet enthusiasts. It's similar to Leica. Their cameras make no objective sense in the market. Especially not the M line. But the experience - and, yes, the brand name - appeals to enough people to comfortably keep Leica going. Anyone seriously considering an M11 obviously doesn't care about how its features or value compare to an A7RV.
@@BlazeFirereignis hasselblad succeeding in the luxury space like Leica though? I don’t think I’ve seen a digital Hasselblad in the wild in at least a year here in NYC but I see Leica m8, m9 m240, 10 and 11s almost every day in manhattan. Hasselblad used to actually be the most affordable medium format option for digital, insanely expensive but it was an option for working fashion photographers like myself, but now I don’t see it as an option at all because it’s objectively worse than the gfx system in just about every way and would hinder my work far more than a gfx100. If Hasselblad only targets the luxury market, they won’t last forever imo, they used to be the best medium format option for professionals (besides phase one which is an entirely different price bracket from even Hasselblad) and that’s where Fuji has basically eaten up their market share. There’s 0 reason to buy a Hasselblad in 2024 if you’re a professional working photographer, if you’re extremely wealthy and want to spend a lot more for a lesser camera, Hasselblad will definitely be there for that, but who knows for how long.
@@owRekssjfjxjxuurrpqpqss In truth, I have no idea how successful Hasselblad is. As long as it's successful enough for them to keep going, I don't really care if they're dwarfed by others, because it's the system I personally enjoy shooting with. My point is that they can likely succeed on far lower sales volume than other manufacturers, because the pricetags are so much higher (and, presumably, the margin). I don't think Hasselblad had a choice besides pivoting to the luxury market. There is zero chance that they can compete with Fuji on price. Fuji has a very large imaging division and is making lenses in-house. Hasselblad is small, they've never been large volume, and they contract others (including Fuji in the past!) to make their lenses, which necessarily means extra overhead. And, obviously, hand-making camera bodies in Sweden is going to result in a much higher baseline cost than Fuji can manage with their bodies. And here's the thing with professional working photographers: they're massively outnumbered by hobbyists and enthusiastic amateurs buying cameras and lenses. And there's more of the latter with fat pockets than the former. Photographers, on the whole, aren't well paid. Most couldn't dream of affording *any* medium format system - many are using old DSLR kit because it's cheap on the used market and, frankly, almost any digital ILC made in the last 15+ years is capable of producing excellent images.
I think people always are a little easy on Hasselblad AF. I mean its not mandatory and these cameras are gorgeous and inspiring and the files are amazingly beautiful. But the speed, its like we compare a lovely red Fiat 500, against a German Sedan mit sheep in wolf clothes engine(Fujifilm GFX100 Speed) and a HyperCar like all the Z8/9, A7/9 and R1 and R3. So just by saying the Hasselblad AF is slow is a brutal understatement about how slow it really is. Had the chance to test both Hasselblad X2D and GFX100S II in Japan while being there and yes, it‘s day and night. But it also day and night in built quality, not lense quality, but the X2D was a camera I wished would never leave my hand again, it just felt so good. But yes, AF was really really slow.
Five out of five stars - very helpful as I don't have a "bunch of Hasselblad primes" but would like to get my greasy hands on some - GOOD THOUGHT to buy this & cover off some! :)
Hi - thanks for this - what is disappointing about this E lens is the fact it does not have the MF/AF ring that slides to engage MF like the V lenses OR a lens control ring which can be assigned to aperture or Exposure bias -- as a result and given I already own a 4/21 and 2.5/38V it is a hard no from me.
Imagine paying $6000 for a lens that gives roughly equivalent results to the Sigma 16-28 f/2.8 on FF, that cost $900 :O I guess people that buy a Hasselblad won't care about money at all, but still, that is insane
Brand name, big sensor, its a camera in the same ballpark as Leica, nothing special about them, but that sweet sweet brand name, camera for the rich people basically.
Does the Sigma cover a MF sensor? Does it contain a separate shutter mechanism? You're trying to compare a mass produced consumer product with a niche production professional tool built to extremely high standards. Apples and oranges. Which is not to say it is not an expensive lens - it is - but buying the XCD25V and the XCD 38V would actually cost more (although both are faster lenses).
@@marcusnz232 Look those are valid points. But given that the crop factor between MF and FF is not that big and that most FF (including this one) actually offer quite dark apertures, you actually capture more light and get more depth of field on the full frame and generally for much lower cost. Obviously, in terms of dynamic range and sharpness MF is fantastic, but I honestly don't think it is worth it, mainly because of the lenses. Also, this lens is not mega sharp either if I have to trust this review, not the edge to edge sharpness of a 16-35 GM II, that still costs not even half of this lens....
Reading the comments I think it is worth remembering that every Hasselblad lens actually contains a separate shutter mechanism. The shutter is in each lens, not in the camera. This does not fully explain the difference in cost between, say, GFX and XCD, but it certainly goes some way to explaining it. If you think XCD lenses are expensive, do not ever buy a Leica. You could buy the 25V, 38V and 55V for the same price as one Leica M Noctilux 50mm!
The leaf shutter is a 300$ part. As Hasselblad does not make the lenses themselves (the current series are manufactured by Panasonic, the older XCD lines by Nittoh) you have two companies how needs to make a profit. That said the new “E” moniker for this lens is purely marketing BS.
Why do you guys used the Gh7 for your shoot in a world full of sonys and canons.. Whats special about panasonic. This might go a long way into informing my decision on my purchase. Kindly share your experience with it
With all due respect to your review-making expertise, I feel in this case the price should have been the very first piece of info given. Almost 3x the price of the other high quality lenses offering this (equivalent) focal length is absolutely bonkers pricing, and puts into context all of the other info in this review. Other than that, great job as always guys, and best wishes to Jordan!
I'd be inclined towards the 25. Save nearly half the price, lighter weight, and between zooming with feet and the immensely crop-able nature of 100mp, I don't necessarily see a point to a zoom.
still waiting for a fast super wide lens... So far they are releasing lenses that don't suit me. There's always a hope... 20mm f2.5 would make me very happy.
Well there is no jack of all trades device. Stopped down, the Hasselblad lenses need no focus stacking for landscape photography, if you want the best portrait lenses, no distortion, no CA, edge to edge sharp, you need the APO-Summicron-SL 2/75. The SL series also has the probably best sunstars of all mirrorless systems (1), it costs CHF 5050 in Switzerland and the APO-Summicron-SL 2/21 (for landscape) CHF 5300 and has no zoom. For that the SL "APO" primes are technically the best lenses on the planet and have the "Leica look". Im opposite, the X2D comes with the HNCS (Hasselblad Natural Colour Solution), shooting environmental portraits, it delivers the best results on skin tones and has 16 bit raw files whereas all other brands (except of Fuji G Series and PhaseOne) deliver only 14 bit raw, those 2 bits look tiny but make a HUGE difference if it comes to colour tones (has to do with exponential calculus). (1) The best sunstars still are made by DSLR, because the AF sensor is a seperate sensor in the bodys bottom and not on the sensor itself. Those ugly colour shiftings and CAs in the sunstars of mirrorless systems are caused because the AF system is on the image sensor.
I’ve been chasing sun star lenses for my a7cr. Currently trying voigtlander lenses and really like them. The 20-70 f4 g honestly isn’t that bad either for what it is.
Because the larger sensor is still capable of collecting more light, and producing a more detailed, lower noise shot, in scenarios where shutter speed is not the limiting factor? What's the point of a FF with an F2.8 zoom when you could go micro four thirds with F1.7 zooms?
@@BlazeFirereign Equivalence means the larger sensor doesn't even collect more light than the 16-28 f2.8. It's a 2.5 - 3.6 equivalence. So on the long end it's still effectively slower than FF. Same with M43 f1.7 zooms. The PL 10-25mm f1.7 is overshadowed by the superior Sony 20-70mm f/4. Trade off 1/3 stop of equivalence for extra reach, smaller, lighter, and cheaper.
@@jasontaycs7195 Equivalence of aperture only impacts exposure if you have insufficient light to permit a slower shutter speed. I don't really care about equivalent apertures if I'm shooting landscapes at F8, F11, etc. If I care about maximising low light performance, I'd be looking for an F1.2 prime on a suitable platform, not a zoom.
I don't get the point of 33x44mm sensors in Hasselblad. they had/have 53.4 x 40mm sensors why go to a place where GFX is so good and way more affordable, can't justify the price, it's impossible
Oh no, Chris is going with flip-flops in the mountains. Hope you are not going to follow Jordan's steps. About the lens, I don't know why they didn't make it constant f/4. The trade off will be a larger front element and probably a little bit heavier.
I really like the X2D and would absolutely love to own one at some point... But the Hasselblad attitude of leaving the cameras and lenses completely void of features for 'purity' (likely just no R&D), and let's be honest, being pretty poor in general focusing performance is really difficult to justify the purchase. You get beautiful images and next-level luxury industrial design but it's a tough sell over the Fuji for a working/serious photographer. Meh, still want one...
Well The Hassel-men have no interest in making low cost stuff. Like Leica. Premium brands. Premium pricing. As they say at the Ferrari Dealership: "If you have to ask the price, you can't afford it".
When will Fuji GFX and Hasselblad provide medium format lenes that compete with full frame equivalent lenses in terms of Aperture? I'd like to know why there aren't F1.2/f1.4 wide lenses or f2 zooms for ff equivalent on the medium format cameras.
o Nothing wrong with the hood. He has to criticise something to make it seem balanced. I have 3 of the new XCD primes and the hood is perfect. Love that it’s metal.
Really?? How so? I think their brand and lineup is actually getting stronger. Two cameras for clearly two different use cases (although inside they are basically same camera) and consistent series of lenses with strong optics, consistent design. I feel like this is first time in years they have a strong sense of brand and target market they are actually designing cameras for.
Another probably great lens that won't be available to purchase for months to come... I'd be surprised if photographers had one in their hands before summer 2025. Besides, it seems hugely over priced compared to the absolutely brilliant Fuji 20-35mm f4 G
this is not a really great lens but to my surprise one of the images I downloaded from their website shot by mr.voss, a library with a white staircase looks very much looks like a composition of at least 2 images . they scraped all meta data but the signs are telling. what a disgrace for hasselblad ! you just need to look at the borders to see a dilettantes work.
What sort of photographer invests in a system like this? Not asking that disparagingly. I’ve just never seen anyone use a Hasselblad in public before. Must be pretty specialized use cases.
Food, product, and fashion. I've heard of people using GFX because it's easier to get a single 100MP shot and crop/touch-up. Mostly studio/tripod exclusive work.
looking at the published mtf chart this is a OK but not really great lens like the gf 20-35 but it is almost 3x more expansive than the Fuji no wonder why Hasselblad does not play a roll in professional photography anymore.
Given that the market for professional photography is dwarfed by amateurs and hobbyists, I'd suggest they're better off targeting the luxury market niche over trying to compete with Fuji on price, something they're likely incapable of even if they tried, especially given Hasselblad does not manufacture its lenses in-house.
@@BlazeFirereign a lot of Fuji gfx are sold to professionals coming from phase1 or Hasselblad H systems the mirrorless mf market is very different than the old film mf market. Hasselblad does not sell well just ask a dealer and the boutique cameras world is already in the hand of leica…
@@friendofarca6550 Hasselblad don't need a large sales volume to be successful, given the higher margins on their products. They also prefer selling stock via their own web storefront compared to sending most of their stock to third-party dealers. Once again, I don't think it's *possible* for them to compete with Fuji on price. They're hand-building cameras in Sweden, and contracting the likes of Nittoh to manufacture their lenses, adding substantial extra overheads on top of a lower sales volume in the first place. I suspect Hasselblad's sales volume would not increase much if they dropped their prices substantially - because anyone value-conscious is *still* going to pick Fuji as long as they're cheaper.
@@BlazeFirereign yes hasselblad f..ked their loyal dealers, lets see how many professional are willing to spent this much money in a shopping center...
@@friendofarca6550 It's 2024. I'm happy to buy camera gear online, personally. It sucks for the dealers, sure, but players in the camera industry are far from the only ones moving towards direct sales. And most pros aren't buying gear in a store. They know what they need, and it's often older, used gear. Because, once again, they're dwarfed by the number of amateurs and enthusiasts, and most professional photographers aren't earning enough to consider new gear, let alone medium format. Indeed, it's standard for studios to *rent* most of the camera gear they need for a contracted shoot.
Oh look, I have more money than you. Can I get a 600mm lens so I can do wildlife. The Hassle is a lens for the pro who wants other people to know it. Was it Bailey who said he used an Olympus pen for weddings? 100mp, so how fast is your computer?
"It's Expensive" Well, it replaces 3 lenses worth $9K. So maybe $6K is a bargain. I would still get the 38mm as my wide angle and forget about the rest. The 25mm is great but it is huge, heavy and too wide for my taste.
Try being permanently disabled and trying to take pics where nobody cares to make places ADA compliant. You have a temporary leg issue that will heal Lots of us do not.. I spend hours calling aces and driving and wasting gas just to get out in nature to try to get pictures a few times a week. You can't get access to a lot from a wheelchair.
While not wheelchair assisted (but I am tempted, rather than using a walker on bad days), its one of the reasons I got a DJI Mini 2 drone to be able to take photos from places I'd struggle to reach... and at least once used it to scout out an exit from a park...
@@murbal7679 its only happened once, because it has auto recall function when it looses signal/has low power, but I didn't account for the wind speed preventing it from returning in time. My friend had to run grab it from the field. I am now a lot more wary of wind speed and acceptable distance. I also do have drone insurance.
@@GemmaHentsch Yes I get tired of wasting time and gas to these so called ADA compliant places for pictures, I have learned to use long lenses and shoot standing by the car or on a flat area or from the cat itself, I am able to walk short distances on flat ground where i can still get some motocross pics, haven't tried taking my scooter on the Mx track yet.. Just shot an airshow this weekend from standing next to the car in the parking lot, you make do but it is a challenge..
@@DAVE_WHITE I'm actually looking at getting an offroad wheelchair...they look remarkably capable, although still not the same as legged...but might give me more range/accessibility... I used to have a convertible which made doing astrophotography so much fun, but sadly wasn't good for my back to be thatlow down...
I don't see anything that would explain the price. It's a medicore bright super wide with surprisingly ugly sunstars. That absolutly don't represent the price.
I wonder how many sub-$1000 Canons, Nikons, or Sonys are sold for each of these cameras? Camera porn on the channel, I get it. These videos might just be showing Hasselblad gear for viewers' aspirational thrills, or to show your pull in the RUclips/camera industry nexus by getting this sort of gear for review, but don't forget the camera lives the vast majority of people are living.
This is a question about the Hasselblad XCD 20-35mm f/3.2-4.5 E lens review. The reviewer does a great job of explaining the lens's features and capabilities. But I'm wondering if any of the photographs in the review have been altered in any way, even just a little bit, using post-processing techniques. I'd like to know if the reviewer did any post-processing, and if so, what kind of post-processing was done.
![Felix "Unfair" | [Stray Kids : SKZ-PLAYER]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/Oswujxm2Ag0/mqdefault.jpg)
Ngl, my first thought of when I saw the box of magnums was: “leaving Chris unsupervised means a few jokes slip in.”
Wishing Jordan a speedy/complete recovery.
Glad to see Jordan is keeping humorous even while injured lol
Kudos to your macro explanation, Chris. 4:54 Your use of that specific stump as an example of the macro capabilities was helpful, since I can compare my intended macro subject to the size of that stump, mentally.
Chris in flip-flops working hard on making it 2 for 2 in the injured foot department.
It's a classic, but I still laughed out loud when I saw Jordan waiting by the toilets !! 😂🤣 It's alwyas good when you ad your little fun in your videos. So good job guys, as always 🙂
EYYY surprise morning PetaPixel video! This will be nice to watch while I eat breakfast! 🎉
Hasselblad just pushing people to Fuji Medium Format.. this is why the a Fuji G 20-35 stays sold out most weeks
Given that Hasselblad are pushing out new lenses at a decent rate, and are aggressively sending bodies and lenses to camera channels and influencers, I'd wager that they're doing just fine.
They are, quite obviously, not trying to compete with Fuji on price. Or, indeed, on features for the most part. Their bodies and lenses are pitched, and priced, as luxury products. They don't need anywhere near the same sales volume as Fuji.
Indeed, I wouldn't be surprised if DJI are happy to keep Hasselblad going at minimal profitability as a halo product line and to use their name and some of their engineering.
I wouldn’t want hasselblad to be anything like a Fuji 😂
@@BlazeFirereign hm, and I thought you invest in marketing when sales are down ?
@@friendofarca6550 Perhaps sales are down. Perhaps they'll fold tomorrow. Perhaps they're not viable long-term and this is their last gasp. (Or perhaps they're thriving on their slice of the luxury market.)
But my point is that they're very obviously targeting a different segment to Fuji for the most part.
There probably are *some* people out there who see the pricetag of this lens and think "you know what, I was considering Hasselblad but I'll buy Fuji GFX instead".
But, for the most part, the kind of person who would blink at the price of this lens, and the kind of person comparing its value to the Fuji 20-35, probably wasn't considering Hasselblad in the first place. There's no contest in the value comparison, and this lens does nothing to change that.
Yes, I agree. That the bodies are bit more expensive is one thing (they are excellent and beautifully made), but their lenses are really twice the price compared to Fuji GF making it a very expensive system to work with. And especially this lens, is one many Hassy-shooters will want to have in their arsenal, as the system is mainly suitable for portrait, studio and landscape photography. I think they could have better gone for a USD 3,500 price point, than USD 6,000.
I own an X1D II and a couple of lenses purchased used (45 and 90). I like the idea of this lens, and I can grab the 30mm and get a lot of what I want with a used price in the $2K range. Hasselblad lenses are expensive and the built quality is very high to the point that I know these lenses will last pretty much forever. I'd really like to own the 35 - 75 zoom, honestly; it's got a bit more range and hits a lot of what I like to shoot. Overall, a remarkable lens.
I miss a lot from the 21-35mm. So for me this in combination with the 35-75 it is perfect. Can´t wait to get my hans on it.
I was aware of this release and still opted for the 25mm f/2.5 instead. My feet can do the zooming.
Or crop… we are playing with 100mp
I really enjoy the X2D I'm shooting with, I have a range of lens the 25,38, 90mm. I enjoy the versatility of the 20-35, but honestly just started shooting with it. It doesn't provide the Macro capability of the Primes but when I travel I can't escape the fact that having a range without carrying a suitcase of lenses is a big plus, the 90 is my favorite. I really miss the adjustment options on the 20-35 lens, after being so use to the v-series of lenses.
I think it's a good point. instead of having 3 separate primes which will run about $13k you can get this for $6k and less lens swapping too. I wish they release 135mm soon. waiting for that one. I have the 38mm only. thank you
ehi Chris great review, to me it doesn't make much sense because of the 100 megapixel sensor. you can just get the 21mm f/4.0 and crop when you need it and still get a photo well over 50 mpx. if you don't need the 21mm you can also get the brighter 25mm f/2.5 and have an even smaller crop in order to get 35mm field of view.
That makes a lot of sense.
@@peterfritzphoto I actually calculated, you would get 51 megapixel with the 25mm and 36 megapixel with the 21mm. I would get the 25mm then since it's wide enough.
Why introduce another series of lenses? E? Does it have the autofocus improvements from the V series? Is it much better than the existing standard zoom which isn't part of any series?
@3:00 Great bit, laughed aloud.
I think many of the comments comparing Hasselblad to Leica miss the fact that Leica's best selling line is a rangefinder system, which doesn't have any market equivalent at all besides the Pixii camera series. With the exception of the leaf shutter, this system is competing directly with GFX (which really isn't much cheaper) and is delivering a lot less much of the time. I cannot believe a lens from their premium sub-line would be variable aperture. That would be like if Leica's APO lenses were limited to the f/12.5 smallest aperture of my 50mm Summar from 1937.
I've just sold my GFX 100s and 4 lenses for the 907 100c and one lense 55 2.5. What to keep thing simple going forward
This would be my one lens don’t all for fashion and environmental portraiture shoots.
What's that lanyard? Can it carry the weight?
Having no extra features on the lens is just a feature. Look at professional Leica lenses, for example the SL 14-24 2.8 or the 24-90 f2.8-4 don't have these features either. It is just the lens, the camera body and you. With that, you can get stunning results.
Very true
6K for a variable aperture lens. What is having Hasselblad money like?
Ask Leica owners.
Yea, 6k for a lens that is equivalent in results to a 16-28 f/2.8 on FF, which costs $900.
But you don't 'buy' a Hasselblad, you 'get' a Hasselblad. You put your credit card on the counter and they give you the camera. You guess they take some money from the card, but you never really asked how much, and you don't really care. If you have to ask what it costs, you can't afford it.
Criticising the price, especially compared to Fuji, I can understand - but what, specifically, is wrong with it being variable aperture? If it's capable of opening up more at the wider end while maintaining good performance, I'd rather have the option to do so. Keeping a consistent aperture for videography obviously isn't a concern when the bodies aren't capable of shooting video, and being variable aperture does not inherently harm the optical performance.
@@BlazeFirereign it was mostly a joke about the fact that variable aperture lenses tend to be cheaper kit lenses...But hey, feel free to buy it if you feel so strongly about it.
@@BlazeFirereign I 100% agree, but I feel people hate variable aperture lenses so much that they rather NOT have the option to open up more on the wide end. I remember the shit the Tamron 35-150 got because it was variable aperture. These people rather wanted it limited to f/2.8 on the wide end. Believe me, there are a lot of weirdos in this hobby, not all of them can afford a Hasselblad :P
Variable aperture? Is this a 6k kit lens?
Leica has done the same with the SL zooms, with the exception of the 24-70 2.8 and that is because it is a rebranded Sigma lens.
Love your came bag. Can you share anything about it?
Thanks for the intro. I own the X2D (I've H cameras since the h4) and love the camera but own only primes because with 102 MP you want sharpness. The widest prime I own is the 30mm which has always served me pretty well. I was considering the 25mm but with the intro of the wide zoom I'm wondering if maybe that's a better choice. Of course, with a $6k price tag, it's a bit hard to swallow and, as your video points out, the zoom is a little soft wide open. What do you think? Sell the 30mm and buy the zoom or keep what I have? ps I did a bit of pricing on eBay and looks like a used 30mm xcd is selling for about $2500US so that's a big differential.
Go find the 21mm used. Best of both worlds and still cheaper than the zoom
@@cbphoto87 I've been on ebay & KEH looking at XCD 21mm already. Thx!
@@Bob4golf1 it’s a fantastic lens. My most used since I bought the X2D
Any comparison of image quality compared to the GF20-35? 😅
You won't see smudgy corners like that on it, I can tell you that much.
Fuji is eating Hasselblad’s lunch at this point. I don’t know who would get a Hasselblad digital medium format at this point when Fuji’s recent MF cameras are more affordable, have more modern features and just objectively better lenses almost across the board that can resolve 100+mp. If you’re spending hasselblad money for a studio mf camera you might as well get a phase one, or get a Fuji gfx which seems like the only sane option for most people now.
Has Hasselblad ever been the 'sane option' though? :D You don't get one because it is the 'sane' thing to do, you get one because you think it is cool and you have more money than you can possibly spend in your life.
I can give you a little insight....In a few years' time, I'll be looking to drop big money on a new camera system. For a bit of perspective, I shoot a combination of Nikon film, Leica film and Sony digital. If I were to rate them technically, it'd be Sony first by a mile, followed by Nikon, then Leica. If I am to rate them based on joy, it's Nikon by a mile, then Leica and Sony a distant last.
For my big money system, I have considered Fuji GFX, Leica M and Hasselblad. Leica is easily the most beautiful, but the image quality isn't on par with the other two (although it's still great). Also, I found out I'm not really a rangefinder guy. They're fine, but they're best described as suboptimal. The Fuji feels kind of like a big, slower Sony, but with great image quality. The Hasselblad feels almost Leica quality, but with better image quality. Weirdly enough, the Hasselblad reminds me of the original Sony A7r - beautiful camera, but very slow and great image quality.
All in all, I'm going to want a different experience than I get with the Sony. With the leaf shutter lenses, giving an extra advantage, a 3 lens kit with the Hasselblad seems like the way to go.
Eating their lunch in what way, exactly?
See, here's the thing: Hasselblad is, quite obviously, targeting a different segment of the market. They're not making any effort to compete on price, and I'd dare to wager that they're able to stay profitable with far fewer sales given their higher pricetags. It's a luxury product - that's how it's priced, that's how it's pitched, and it's bought by people who largely don't care about the spec sheet comparison.
Who's buying it? People who make good money, enjoy photography, and want a Hasselblad more than they want a Fuji. The value proposition of Fuji is obvious for people who care mostly about the results, but some people care as much about subjective factors like ergonomics and how enjoyable they find their camera to use. They're rarer than the Fuji buyer, sure, but they also largely couldn't care less about how they compre in market share. Or the opinins of spec sheet enthusiasts.
It's similar to Leica. Their cameras make no objective sense in the market. Especially not the M line. But the experience - and, yes, the brand name - appeals to enough people to comfortably keep Leica going. Anyone seriously considering an M11 obviously doesn't care about how its features or value compare to an A7RV.
@@BlazeFirereignis hasselblad succeeding in the luxury space like Leica though? I don’t think I’ve seen a digital Hasselblad in the wild in at least a year here in NYC but I see Leica m8, m9 m240, 10 and 11s almost every day in manhattan. Hasselblad used to actually be the most affordable medium format option for digital, insanely expensive but it was an option for working fashion photographers like myself, but now I don’t see it as an option at all because it’s objectively worse than the gfx system in just about every way and would hinder my work far more than a gfx100.
If Hasselblad only targets the luxury market, they won’t last forever imo, they used to be the best medium format option for professionals (besides phase one which is an entirely different price bracket from even Hasselblad) and that’s where Fuji has basically eaten up their market share.
There’s 0 reason to buy a Hasselblad in 2024 if you’re a professional working photographer, if you’re extremely wealthy and want to spend a lot more for a lesser camera, Hasselblad will definitely be there for that, but who knows for how long.
@@owRekssjfjxjxuurrpqpqss In truth, I have no idea how successful Hasselblad is. As long as it's successful enough for them to keep going, I don't really care if they're dwarfed by others, because it's the system I personally enjoy shooting with.
My point is that they can likely succeed on far lower sales volume than other manufacturers, because the pricetags are so much higher (and, presumably, the margin).
I don't think Hasselblad had a choice besides pivoting to the luxury market. There is zero chance that they can compete with Fuji on price. Fuji has a very large imaging division and is making lenses in-house. Hasselblad is small, they've never been large volume, and they contract others (including Fuji in the past!) to make their lenses, which necessarily means extra overhead. And, obviously, hand-making camera bodies in Sweden is going to result in a much higher baseline cost than Fuji can manage with their bodies.
And here's the thing with professional working photographers: they're massively outnumbered by hobbyists and enthusiastic amateurs buying cameras and lenses. And there's more of the latter with fat pockets than the former. Photographers, on the whole, aren't well paid. Most couldn't dream of affording *any* medium format system - many are using old DSLR kit because it's cheap on the used market and, frankly, almost any digital ILC made in the last 15+ years is capable of producing excellent images.
I think people always are a little easy on Hasselblad AF.
I mean its not mandatory and these cameras are gorgeous and inspiring and the files are amazingly beautiful.
But the speed, its like we compare a lovely red Fiat 500, against a German Sedan mit sheep in wolf clothes engine(Fujifilm GFX100 Speed) and a HyperCar like all the Z8/9, A7/9 and R1 and R3.
So just by saying the Hasselblad AF is slow is a brutal understatement about how slow it really is.
Had the chance to test both Hasselblad X2D and GFX100S II in Japan while being there and yes, it‘s day and night.
But it also day and night in built quality, not lense quality, but the X2D was a camera I wished would never leave my hand again, it just felt so good.
But yes, AF was really really slow.
Five out of five stars - very helpful as I don't have a "bunch of Hasselblad primes" but would like to get my greasy hands on some - GOOD THOUGHT to buy this & cover off some! :)
Chris should've bought an ice cream for Jordan while he waited for him.
2:50 Chris channeling his inner Thomas Heaton.
Hi - thanks for this - what is disappointing about this E lens is the fact it does not have the MF/AF ring that slides to engage MF like the V lenses OR a lens control ring which can be assigned to aperture or Exposure bias -- as a result and given I already own a 4/21 and 2.5/38V it is a hard no from me.
What about the coma ? The most important for astro photo...
Imagine paying $6000 for a lens that gives roughly equivalent results to the Sigma 16-28 f/2.8 on FF, that cost $900 :O I guess people that buy a Hasselblad won't care about money at all, but still, that is insane
Brand name, big sensor, its a camera in the same ballpark as Leica, nothing special about them, but that sweet sweet brand name, camera for the rich people basically.
Does the Sigma cover a MF sensor? Does it contain a separate shutter mechanism?
You're trying to compare a mass produced consumer product with a niche production professional tool built to extremely high standards. Apples and oranges.
Which is not to say it is not an expensive lens - it is - but buying the XCD25V and the XCD 38V would actually cost more (although both are faster lenses).
My 35mm Summilux 1.4 was that price i use it on my MP and possibly M11. I can't imagine comparing the 2. I've never tried a Hassey.
@@SMGJohnThat would be me..l Hasselblad, Leica M and Rolex…😅
@@marcusnz232 Look those are valid points. But given that the crop factor between MF and FF is not that big and that most FF (including this one) actually offer quite dark apertures, you actually capture more light and get more depth of field on the full frame and generally for much lower cost. Obviously, in terms of dynamic range and sharpness MF is fantastic, but I honestly don't think it is worth it, mainly because of the lenses.
Also, this lens is not mega sharp either if I have to trust this review, not the edge to edge sharpness of a 16-35 GM II, that still costs not even half of this lens....
Reading the comments I think it is worth remembering that every Hasselblad lens actually contains a separate shutter mechanism. The shutter is in each lens, not in the camera.
This does not fully explain the difference in cost between, say, GFX and XCD, but it certainly goes some way to explaining it.
If you think XCD lenses are expensive, do not ever buy a Leica. You could buy the 25V, 38V and 55V for the same price as one Leica M Noctilux 50mm!
The leaf shutter is a 300$ part. As Hasselblad does not make the lenses themselves (the current series are manufactured by Panasonic, the older XCD lines by Nittoh) you have two companies how needs to make a profit. That said the new “E” moniker for this lens is purely marketing BS.
Would it be nice for milky way or northern lights ?
Why do you guys used the Gh7 for your shoot in a world full of sonys and canons.. Whats special about panasonic. This might go a long way into informing my decision on my purchase. Kindly share your experience with it
We have a whole podcast about it!
ruclips.net/video/VJ7b9h6O2Uc/видео.htmlfeature=shared
- Jordan
@@PetaPixelthanks
oh it's fricking good alright ... but if you want the best HB lens, get ahold of the 80mm f1.9
If you have the text on from start, it is Christus from pedop pixel
This video reminds me of my years in Alberta being absolutely decimated by mosquitoes.
Mmm the mythical medium format look.
We definitely need Jordan more on the screen ;) Even if he's sitting in front a washroom
primes still way to go, if you want the max performance of that body,
With all due respect to your review-making expertise, I feel in this case the price should have been the very first piece of info given. Almost 3x the price of the other high quality lenses offering this (equivalent) focal length is absolutely bonkers pricing, and puts into context all of the other info in this review. Other than that, great job as always guys, and best wishes to Jordan!
I’m sorry what? A $6k lens with variable aperture? I thought that Leicia was deluded but this is next level.
I'd be inclined towards the 25. Save nearly half the price, lighter weight, and between zooming with feet and the immensely crop-able nature of 100mp, I don't necessarily see a point to a zoom.
I have zero interest in medium format, but still enjoyed this video.
still waiting for a fast super wide lens... So far they are releasing lenses that don't suit me. There's always a hope... 20mm f2.5 would make me very happy.
Well there is no jack of all trades device. Stopped down, the Hasselblad lenses need no focus stacking for landscape photography, if you want the best portrait lenses, no distortion, no CA, edge to edge sharp, you need the APO-Summicron-SL 2/75. The SL series also has the probably best sunstars of all mirrorless systems (1), it costs CHF 5050 in Switzerland and the APO-Summicron-SL 2/21 (for landscape) CHF 5300 and has no zoom. For that the SL "APO" primes are technically the best lenses on the planet and have the "Leica look". Im opposite, the X2D comes with the HNCS (Hasselblad Natural Colour Solution), shooting environmental portraits, it delivers the best results on skin tones and has 16 bit raw files whereas all other brands (except of Fuji G Series and PhaseOne) deliver only 14 bit raw, those 2 bits look tiny but make a HUGE difference if it comes to colour tones (has to do with exponential calculus).
(1) The best sunstars still are made by DSLR, because the AF sensor is a seperate sensor in the bodys bottom and not on the sensor itself. Those ugly colour shiftings and CAs in the sunstars of mirrorless systems are caused because the AF system is on the image sensor.
I’ve been chasing sun star lenses for my a7cr. Currently trying voigtlander lenses and really like them. The 20-70 f4 g honestly isn’t that bad either for what it is.
I’ve been looking at Leica sl3, but I didn’t even think to check out there lenses for sunstars. I mainly shoot landscapes
"turns out its actually not that big, I mean the story of my life" :D
For that money forget a clutch this thing should do my dishes
Chris is asking to wind up like Jordan, hiking in flip flops.
The release of this lens is the best advertisement for the GFX system.
I know you want to slow down the shutter. But F/22? Get some ND filters, bro.
What's the point of larger sensors if they're sticking with smaller apertures? Just take an FF with a 16-28 f/2.8...
Because the larger sensor is still capable of collecting more light, and producing a more detailed, lower noise shot, in scenarios where shutter speed is not the limiting factor?
What's the point of a FF with an F2.8 zoom when you could go micro four thirds with F1.7 zooms?
@@BlazeFirereign Equivalence means the larger sensor doesn't even collect more light than the 16-28 f2.8. It's a 2.5 - 3.6 equivalence. So on the long end it's still effectively slower than FF. Same with M43 f1.7 zooms. The PL 10-25mm f1.7 is overshadowed by the superior Sony 20-70mm f/4. Trade off 1/3 stop of equivalence for extra reach, smaller, lighter, and cheaper.
@@jasontaycs7195 Equivalence of aperture only impacts exposure if you have insufficient light to permit a slower shutter speed.
I don't really care about equivalent apertures if I'm shooting landscapes at F8, F11, etc.
If I care about maximising low light performance, I'd be looking for an F1.2 prime on a suitable platform, not a zoom.
I don't get the point of 33x44mm sensors in Hasselblad. they had/have 53.4 x 40mm sensors why go to a place where GFX is so good and way more affordable, can't justify the price, it's impossible
Oh no, Chris is going with flip-flops in the mountains. Hope you are not going to follow Jordan's steps.
About the lens, I don't know why they didn't make it constant f/4. The trade off will be a larger front element and probably a little bit heavier.
Lens review with a condom joke. this is the review we need!
I really like the X2D and would absolutely love to own one at some point... But the Hasselblad attitude of leaving the cameras and lenses completely void of features for 'purity' (likely just no R&D), and let's be honest, being pretty poor in general focusing performance is really difficult to justify the purchase. You get beautiful images and next-level luxury industrial design but it's a tough sell over the Fuji for a working/serious photographer. Meh, still want one...
Maybe one day...
Well The Hassel-men have no interest in making low cost stuff. Like Leica. Premium brands. Premium pricing. As they say at the Ferrari Dealership: "If you have to ask the price, you can't afford it".
When will Fuji GFX and Hasselblad provide medium format lenes that compete with full frame equivalent lenses in terms of Aperture?
I'd like to know why there aren't F1.2/f1.4 wide lenses or f2 zooms for ff equivalent on the medium format cameras.
this hood is inexcusable at this price point
o Nothing wrong with the hood. He has to criticise something to make it seem balanced.
I have 3 of the new XCD primes and the hood is perfect. Love that it’s metal.
@@SavedbybGrace gonna try it myself then when I have a chance ^^
PentaxPixel
It looks bigger in my wife’s hands
1st?
But dang thats expensive.
@7:48 why you have to do bro's bald spot like that ...
952 Hessel Ports
There is a serious argument to be had with brand dilution at Hasselblad in recent times
I think it’s less awful than the dismal reskinned Sony bodies.
Really?? How so? I think their brand and lineup is actually getting stronger. Two cameras for clearly two different use cases (although inside they are basically same camera) and consistent series of lenses with strong optics, consistent design. I feel like this is first time in years they have a strong sense of brand and target market they are actually designing cameras for.
Now if they release another zoom lens 35-90 or 35-135…
Primes > Zoomies.
Keep your zooms in your shoes where they belong :)
75395 Savion Pike
Daniel Bridge
Everytime they put a camera on a rock, I die a little inside.
It is better to compare it with fuji gfx system
Ok... 6 grand for a f3.5 28mm seems like a Hasselblad thing to do
Bro can’t read 😂
You know you're supposed to apply the negative crop factor to the aperture as well. It's basically a 16-28 f2.8
Another probably great lens that won't be available to purchase for months to come... I'd be surprised if photographers had one in their hands before summer 2025. Besides, it seems hugely over priced compared to the absolutely brilliant Fuji 20-35mm f4 G
My local camera store had 1 within a month of release.
Graham Square
I will stick to my smart ph
Why there's an exclusive magnum original packet 😭😂
Hello
❤❤❤❤
this is not a really great lens but to my surprise one of the images I downloaded from their website shot by mr.voss, a library with a white staircase looks very much looks like a composition of at least 2 images . they scraped all meta data but the signs are telling. what a disgrace for hasselblad ! you just need to look at the borders to see a dilettantes work.
Jakubowski Lock
What sort of photographer invests in a system like this? Not asking that disparagingly. I’ve just never seen anyone use a Hasselblad in public before. Must be pretty specialized use cases.
Food, product, and fashion. I've heard of people using GFX because it's easier to get a single 100MP shot and crop/touch-up. Mostly studio/tripod exclusive work.
All that money and not even constant aperture
Ok I tought this thing was 3000, how tf is this thing almost 7000€?? For what?
Kory Flats
looking at the published mtf chart this is a OK but not really great lens like the gf 20-35 but it is almost 3x more expansive than the Fuji no wonder why Hasselblad does not play a roll in professional photography anymore.
Given that the market for professional photography is dwarfed by amateurs and hobbyists, I'd suggest they're better off targeting the luxury market niche over trying to compete with Fuji on price, something they're likely incapable of even if they tried, especially given Hasselblad does not manufacture its lenses in-house.
@@BlazeFirereign a lot of Fuji gfx are sold to professionals coming from phase1 or Hasselblad H systems the mirrorless mf market is very different than the old film mf market. Hasselblad does not sell well just ask a dealer and the boutique cameras world is already in the hand of leica…
@@friendofarca6550 Hasselblad don't need a large sales volume to be successful, given the higher margins on their products. They also prefer selling stock via their own web storefront compared to sending most of their stock to third-party dealers.
Once again, I don't think it's *possible* for them to compete with Fuji on price. They're hand-building cameras in Sweden, and contracting the likes of Nittoh to manufacture their lenses, adding substantial extra overheads on top of a lower sales volume in the first place.
I suspect Hasselblad's sales volume would not increase much if they dropped their prices substantially - because anyone value-conscious is *still* going to pick Fuji as long as they're cheaper.
@@BlazeFirereign yes hasselblad f..ked their loyal dealers, lets see how many professional are willing to spent this much money in a shopping center...
@@friendofarca6550 It's 2024. I'm happy to buy camera gear online, personally.
It sucks for the dealers, sure, but players in the camera industry are far from the only ones moving towards direct sales.
And most pros aren't buying gear in a store. They know what they need, and it's often older, used gear. Because, once again, they're dwarfed by the number of amateurs and enthusiasts, and most professional photographers aren't earning enough to consider new gear, let alone medium format.
Indeed, it's standard for studios to *rent* most of the camera gear they need for a contracted shoot.
second. who can afford to buy this gear in twentytwentyfour?
Enough people to make it viable. Not everyone is feeling the pinch 😊
I know for sure that you’re not one of them
The leeches who are price gouging...
Some people make $1000... Some people make $10,000 and so on.
Oh look, I have more money than you. Can I get a 600mm lens so I can do wildlife. The Hassle is a lens for the pro who wants other people to know it. Was it Bailey who said he used an Olympus pen for weddings? 100mp, so how fast is your computer?
"It's Expensive"
Well, it replaces 3 lenses worth $9K. So maybe $6K is a bargain.
I would still get the 38mm as my wide angle and forget about the rest. The 25mm is great but it is huge, heavy and too wide for my taste.
Try being permanently disabled and trying to take pics where nobody cares to make places ADA compliant. You have a temporary leg issue that will heal Lots of us do not.. I spend hours calling aces and driving and wasting gas just to get out in nature to try to get pictures a few times a week. You can't get access to a lot from a wheelchair.
While not wheelchair assisted (but I am tempted, rather than using a walker on bad days), its one of the reasons I got a DJI Mini 2 drone to be able to take photos from places I'd struggle to reach... and at least once used it to scout out an exit from a park...
@@GemmaHentschDo you have a plan what happens when the drone loses connection or crashes in a place that you are unable to access?
@@murbal7679 its only happened once, because it has auto recall function when it looses signal/has low power, but I didn't account for the wind speed preventing it from returning in time. My friend had to run grab it from the field.
I am now a lot more wary of wind speed and acceptable distance.
I also do have drone insurance.
@@GemmaHentsch Yes I get tired of wasting time and gas to these so called ADA compliant places for pictures, I have learned to use long lenses and shoot standing by the car or on a flat area or from the cat itself, I am able to walk short distances on flat ground where i can still get some motocross pics, haven't tried taking my scooter on the Mx track yet.. Just shot an airshow this weekend from standing next to the car in the parking lot, you make do but it is a challenge..
@@DAVE_WHITE I'm actually looking at getting an offroad wheelchair...they look remarkably capable, although still not the same as legged...but might give me more range/accessibility...
I used to have a convertible which made doing astrophotography so much fun, but sadly wasn't good for my back to be thatlow down...
I don't see anything that would explain the price. It's a medicore bright super wide with surprisingly ugly sunstars. That absolutly don't represent the price.
I wonder how many sub-$1000 Canons, Nikons, or Sonys are sold for each of these cameras?
Camera porn on the channel, I get it. These videos might just be showing Hasselblad gear for viewers' aspirational thrills, or to show your pull in the RUclips/camera industry nexus by getting this sort of gear for review, but don't forget the camera lives the vast majority of people are living.
In much the same way that the market for economic A-to-B vehicles dwarfs the market for supercars, and yet car reviewers still cover supercars.
Nothing special about it apart from the price really LOL, probably buy it to show that you can afford it that's all
I hate Hasselblad hood .
C'mon man kids watch these channels 🤦🏾♂️
LOL NO SHITTY LENS IS WORTH THAT STUPID MONEY LOL
1 word;
Over priced
This is a question about the Hasselblad XCD 20-35mm f/3.2-4.5 E lens review. The reviewer does a great job of explaining the lens's features and capabilities. But I'm wondering if any of the photographs in the review have been altered in any way, even just a little bit, using post-processing techniques. I'd like to know if the reviewer did any post-processing, and if so, what kind of post-processing was done.
See more Hassy pictures in the net and I you will recognice Hasselblad look.
@@P_Waldo There's no "look" to any digital platform. It all comes down to the processing done later.