Leica SL or Hasselblad X1D

[Belle123]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

It’s hard to believe M lenses perform well covering the larger sensor of the X1D. It will be interesting to see examples.

Even if IQ is decent, the limited sensor readout speed (300 ms) and high ISO limit (3200) when using the electronic shutter would likely make use of M lenses something I would avoid.

Is surprising to many these lenses can cover the X1d sensor, but for certain will not be optimum outside the FF equivalent of the sensor. I have an adapter on order and more interested to compare the cropped equivalent to what my M can do. Anything outside FF is a bonus. Will it cause me to dump my M? I doubt it but sure am curious. Betting the color will be better.

[helged]

Is surprising to many these lenses can cover the X1d sensor, but for certain will not be optimum outside the FF equivalent of the sensor. I have an adapter on order and more interested to compare the cropped equivalent to what my M can do. Anything outside FF is a bonus. Will it cause me to dump my M? I doubt it but sure am curious. Betting the color will be better.

 

 

Please feel free to post your experience(s) with M optics on the X1D...

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[wellfleet]

Another thread, re: M lenses on the X1D, has been started here - https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/278537-hasselblad-x1d-with-leica-m-lenses/

[frame-it]

https://www.getdpi.com/forum/medium-format-systems-and-digital-backs/62804-x1d-3rd-party-lens.html

Another thread, re: M lenses on the X1D, has been started here - https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/278537-hasselblad-x1d-with-leica-m-lenses/

[PeterGA]

I've ordered the M adaptor and the Nikon G mount adaptor - so I can use my Zeiss Milvus and Otus lenses on the X1D. We should expect to see a useful 35-40 megapixel cropped image from lenses with heavier vignetting and slightly more from others. The issues related to the 300ms read time on the electronic shutter are generally overstated in natural light conditions but hold true depending on this and that in artificial lighting...

 

why the purchase? - for me only to be able to use 40 megapixels when required. Why not Hasselblad native ? - apart from expense and lack of availability of focal lengths no reason.

[IkarusJohn]

The challenge will surely be the edges.  Can the old Zeiss Hasselblad lenses be adapted?  There must be lots of beautiful Zeiss CF lenses floating about.

[scott kirkpatrick]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

What's wrong with heavily vignetted pictures?  Emmet Gowin used a 4x5 lens on an 8x10 camera when he was starting out -- that was just what he had available -- and the results were quite lovely.  It didn't occur to him to crop the black parts away.

[mmradman]

Can somebody provide clarification please:-  If use of Electronic Shutter requires 0.3 second [300 mili second] for the image to be scanned does it mean that shutter speed is limited to 0.3 seconds or slower?

[helged]

Can somebody provide clarification please:- If use of Electronic Shutter requires 0.3 second [300 mili second] for the image to be scanned does it mean that shutter speed is limited to 0.3 seconds or slower?

You can use all possible shutter speeds despite the 0.3 sec read out time of the ES. The problem with the ES is that info from the sensor is extracted (or scanned) from smaller parts of the sensor (typically row-by-row, another link here and here). Each part is exposed with the set shutter speed, e.g. 1/2000 sec, the 'problem' is it takes 0.3 sec to scan through, or to add together, all parts of the sensor, yielding your final image. This means that each part of the sensor looks identical to what we see from convential, mechanical shutter, but that the different parts may show movement if the subject or the camera moves during the 0.3 sec read out time, or if you shoot in artificial light.

Edited November 18, 2017 by helged

[Peter H]

Can somebody provide clarification please:-  If use of Electronic Shutter requires 0.3 second [300 mili second] for the image to be scanned does it mean that shutter speed is limited to 0.3 seconds or slower?

 

 

I never use the electronic shutter on my Fuji X Pro 2 in artificial light or when there's movement involved since the probability is a spoiled photo. That makes it quite limiting if it's your only shutter, but the Fuji has a mechanical shutter too, meaning you can use the ES only when circumstances are suitable, in which case it's nice to have. But relying on only an ES as you'd have to with the X1D and M lenses sounds like another reason why the combination is very far from ideal.

[mmradman]

You can use all possible shutter speeds despite the 0.3 sec read out time of the ES. The problem with the ES is that info from the sensor is extracted (or scanned) from smaller parts of the sensor (typically row-by-row, another link here and here). Each part is exposed with the set shutter speed, e.g. 1/2000 sec, the 'problem' is it takes 0.3 sec to scan through, or to add together, all parts of the sensor, yielding your final image. This means that each part of the sensor looks identical to what we see from convential, mechanical shutter, but that the different parts may show movement if the subject or the camera moves during the 0.3 sec read out time, or if you shoot in artificial light.

Thanks, so exposure of the entire sensor takes 0.3 second only individual pixel rows can be exposed at much faster speeds. 

 

This is not something i had opportunity to try often as mechanical speeds of up to 1/8000 combined with ISO 50 are pretty good combination for daylight shooting and UK really needs more light.  As soon as latest firmware was made available I have set my SL to shoot all the way to 1/16000 but with mechanical shutter as default, used faster than 1/8000 only few times. 

[mmradman]

I never use the electronic shutter on my Fuji X Pro 2 in artificial light or when there's movement involved since the probability is a spoiled photo. That makes it quite limiting if it's your only shutter, but the Fuji has a mechanical shutter too, meaning you can use the ES only when circumstances are suitable, in which case it's nice to have. But relying on only an ES as you'd have to with the X1D and M lenses sounds like another reason why the combination is very far from ideal.

I have no interest in XD or any other medium format system and used ES only few times on SL601, i was really curious what fuss is all about.  If i shot people SL shutter noise is never a problem.

[ericborgstrom]

Here Hasselblad X1D with the Kipon adapter and Zeiss Sonnar CF 5,6/250 mm Superacromat and second, Leica SL with Leica Telyt-R 250 mm f4,0 Ver. II both at f 8,0. Just to show the difference – not great.

 

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

[helged]

Here Hasselblad X1D with the Kipon adapter and Zeiss Sonnar CF 5,6/250 mm Superacromat and second, Leica SL with Leica Telyt-R 250 mm f4,0 Ver. II both at f 8,0. Just to show the difference – not great.

 

 

"...not great": Please elaborate! (differences, similarities, what can be explained by the lenses, from the sensors/embedded body softwares, etc.; beyond the colour, it's hard to tell differences from the low-res uploaded images). Just curious...

[helged]

Thanks, so exposure of the entire sensor takes 0.3 second only individual pixel rows can be exposed at much faster speeds. 

 

This is not something i had opportunity to try often as mechanical speeds of up to 1/8000 combined with ISO 50 are pretty good combination for daylight shooting and UK really needs more light.  As soon as latest firmware was made available I have set my SL to shoot all the way to 1/16000 but with mechanical shutter as default, used faster than 1/8000 only few times. 

 

I think most users use the mechanical shutter most of the time. The ES is convenient when silence is wanted/required and/or to eliminate shutter vibrations. 

[ericborgstrom]

"...not great": Please elaborate! (differences, similarities, what can be explained by the lenses, from the sensors/embedded body softwares, etc.; beyond the colour, it's hard to tell differences from the low-res uploaded images). Just curious...

Sorry, the site does not accept much higher resolution. The SL holds up very well. Not much to be gained with the X1D. But both lenses are decades old. I have not the possibility to compare the HC 250 on the Hasselblad to the 90-280 on the SL. But I doubt I ”need” better equipment.

[FlashGordonPhotography]

My M adaptor is on it's way. I'm not expecting much but it'll be a bit of fun. It'll be like using a Sony. No microlenses. More resolution but not ideal with some lenses. I seem to have a dozen M adaptors. One for every system I shoot with. In the end I know M lenses will end up where they're supposed to be. On an M.

 

I do have the X1D>EF adaptor already so I can use my Canon TS lenses on both. The X1D beats the poor SL senseless in IQ, with lenses that actually cover the sensor area, as it should. It's sensor is larger, has double the pickles and more DR. The Sigma 85 Art is also pretty brilliant on the X1D. So far, I've not had issues with the ES. But I'll only use it when firmly mounted on a tripod. Architectural work and long exposure landscapes aren't an issue for an electronic shutter.

 

I think people need to stop trying to compare the SL to the X1D IQ wise. The SL gets thumped. Thumped. The same happens to the X1D if you compare it to the HCD100C. It's pointless. If the SL has the IQ you need for 99% of what we shoot why does it matter what whether the X1D is "better". It is if you need the extra sensor stuff and it isn't if you don't. Most of us don't need more than m43. But you can't get an AF 280mm lens for the X1D let alone the near 400mm you need for equivalence.

 

So will I drop my SL now. Not a chance! The SL is in a different place to the X1D. Not a better one or a worse one. Just a different one. If Leica bring out a "high res" version of the SL, I'll buy it and I won't be selling my X1D. The longer time goes on with both in the bag, the more I'm sure they're not related. The SL has speed, flexibility and adaptability on it's side. Long lenses will be impossibly huge on a miniMF camera. the X1D will always be slower and less flexible than the SL, regardless of what lenses you can strap on it.

 

If you shoot purely in a deliberate manor and 95% of the time between 24 and 90mm then the X1D. For everything else the SL is more satisfying. Compare anything you want. I certainly do. But IQ or lens adaptability needs to be kept in the context of the system as a whole. 

 

Gordon

[ericborgstrom]

...

I do have the X1D>EF adaptor already so I can use my Canon TS lenses on both. The X1D beats the poor SL senseless in IQ, with lenses that actually cover the sensor area, as it should.

....

 

Gordon

 

Sensless? Poor? That is a bit hard.

 

My point is that the SL holds up surprisingly well compared to the X1D when looking at the final output. That is a personal view of course.

 

Respectfully,

Eric

[FlashGordonPhotography]

Sensless? Poor? That is a bit hard.

 

My point is that the SL holds up surprisingly well compared to the X1D when looking at the final output. That is a personal view of course.

 

Respectfully,

Eric

 

"poor" as in "you poor old thing". Not as in poor performance.

 

Don't get me wrong. I love my SL's. Enough that I have two of them which I use everyday as my main working cameras.

 

However the simple reality is that when (in maybe 1%) you're really pushing the files in post the X1D (645Z/GFX/H5D) sensor holds up significantly better than any 35mm sensor. Not only are the files less noisy and with more DR, the colour holds up so much better at high ISO on the larger sensor.

 

When I'm in control and I can get my lights just right the SL files are as good as anything. In most situations we're just no stressing any current sensor, so the results look surprisingly similar. I've been sending soe files to a mate of mine who's considering one for architectural use with Canon TS lenses. he said the same thing. Files looked just like his Sony's. And they do. Most of the time. It's when I need to push hard that the difference is stark. Here's an X1D shot that's been pushed 4.3 stops (and processed to taste). There was no time to adjust ISO settings. I had about a second to get this shot. The raw file is just a black square.

 

Barber.jpg by Gordon Cahill, on Flickr

 

No way the SL would get close to this level of recovery. It is the way it is.

 

Gordon

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[caissa]

I had a hearty laugh when I saw the "sports" results for the X1D in the DXOmark. (X1D beats almost anybody else's camera senseless).

The X1D gets 4400 plus points, the typical sports cannons (CaNikon or anybody else) typically gets only 2000 to 3000. 

So obviously the X1D is by far the best camera for sports. Especially regarding it's shutter lag and the "fast" AF action (up to 1.7 shots pr second).

 

And probably for everything else as well.  (My god what is recovery - I did not even know it existed - poor me. I did not know I would ever need it because I am so far off.)

Too bad the SL is not up to it ....          

Edited January 2, 2018 by caissa