Q2/Q3 or Hasselblad X2D? Which do you choose?

[ravinj]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Might have stated this earlier in a post, but the "problem" with X2D is its droolworthy output and the elegant interface. It is a true GAS killer for me. I do have the Q3, but I question why bother if the X2D is in the collection.

However, it is apples to oranges: Q3 cannot be surpassed for its balance of size/weight/IQ. And the Q3 43 seems VERY interesting. 

For my own use, I stick to go big or go home - either X2D or just the smartphone. Q3 on rare occasions.

For anyone considering the X2D, make sure to handle it in person, with a lens mounted. While neither large nor heavy for MF, the difference in size/weight compared to Q3 is substantial. But again, this is apples to oranges.

My use case for the X2D is landscape and travel. Have walked, hiked with it for hours in Colorado, Athens, Paris, Santorini and other places. Weight with the 38V was not an issue for me. With the XCD 90 + 38V it makes for a very nice travel kit. I add XCD 135 if travelling by car.

[ravinj]

To add, a few real world operational considerations:

1) Worth calling out the 1TB SSD in X2D. Blazing fast read/write. Add in a CFexpress card from OWC and you have a robust backup. I just can't imagine going on that special trip and writing to just one card. 

2) Processing files: I use Phocus. At best it is a very clunky piece of software BUT with a lot of control and the results are worth the painfully outdated UI. GPU acceleration option helps a lot with processing speed, but it is a hit or a miss: on one of my machines it just disables by itself. You can convert to DNGs and process in Lightroom or Capture One, but that's a hack to me. 

3) I love the back button focus. 

4) The files have a lot of latitude. I mean a LOT.

5) Q2 / Q3: I am always surprised at the image quality holding up even with extreme crops. There is certainly some magic going on. Lightroom / Capture One support is a big plus.

Take your pick. First world problems. 

[FlashGordonPhotography]

I will be adding a Q3 43 to my kit, 100%. My *order* is already in. I see the X2D and Q3's as complimentary. I'll carry the Q3 43 like I might an M. A camera on a sling strap out for a day where *serious* shooting isn't planned. While I don't find the X2D with 55 to be a big camera there's no doubt the Q3 43 will be much smaller. Plus, I still have a strong use case for my SL3's. Longer lenses. Some moving subjects.

I don't see these as an either or. I'm keeping my Q3, X2D and SL3. My thing is what to do with my GFX and M kits. The SL3 has made a dent in my M usage and now there's a wide zoom for the X2D I have even less use for the Fuji. Currently thinking of only keeping my M11M and selling my M11. No idea what to do with the GFX. I've built a great kit but hardly use it. Maybe shrink it and just keep the longer lenses (250/500) and maybe the 100-200.

Gordon

[SrMi]

32 minutes ago, FlashGordonPhotography said:

I will be adding a Q3 43 to my kit, 100%. My *order* is already in. I see the X2D and Q3's as complimentary. I'll carry the Q3 43 like I might an M. A camera on a sling strap out for a day where *serious* shooting isn't planned. While I don't find the X2D with 55 to be a big camera there's no doubt the Q3 43 will be much smaller. Plus, I still have a strong use case for my SL3's. Longer lenses. Some moving subjects.

I don't see these as an either or. I'm keeping my Q3, X2D and SL3. My thing is what to do with my GFX and M kits. The SL3 has made a dent in my M usage and now there's a wide zoom for the X2D I have even less use for the Fuji. Currently thinking of only keeping my M11M and selling my M11. No idea what to do with the GFX. I've built a great kit but hardly use it. Maybe shrink it and just keep the longer lenses (250/500) and maybe the 100-200.

Gordon

With the Q3 43 you can get rid of a7cr 😉.

I am also unsure what to do with GFX. It is a very competent system, but I tend not to use it.

 

[PATB]

5 hours ago, ravinj said:

To add, a few real world operational considerations:

1) Worth calling out the 1TB SSD in X2D. Blazing fast read/write. Add in a CFexpress card from OWC and you have a robust backup. I just can't imagine going on that special trip and writing to just one card. 

2) Processing files: I use Phocus. At best it is a very clunky piece of software BUT with a lot of control and the results are worth the painfully outdated UI. GPU acceleration option helps a lot with processing speed, but it is a hit or a miss: on one of my machines it just disables by itself. You can convert to DNGs and process in Lightroom or Capture One, but that's a hack to me. 

3) I love the back button focus. 

4) The files have a lot of latitude. I mean a LOT.

5) Q2 / Q3: I am always surprised at the image quality holding up even with extreme crops. There is certainly some magic going on. Lightroom / Capture One support is a big plus.

Take your pick. First world problems. 

Thanks for the information on Phocus.  My original Q1 seems to be on the verge of death 😄, so I have been contemplating of replacing it with an X2D/45p for travel.  But I have never considered that the X2D may require abandoning Lightroom in favor of Phocus, which is a non-starter for me.  I may have to wait for the new Q3 instead.

[SrMi]

6 minutes ago, PATB said:

Thanks for the information on Phocus.  My original Q1 seems to be on the verge of death 😄, so I have been contemplating of replacing it with an X2D/45p for travel.  But I have never considered that the X2D may require abandoning Lightroom in favor of Phocus, which is a non-starter for me.  I may have to wait for the new Q3 instead.

There is little difference in Lightroom vs. Phocus processing of X2D files. Very rarely do I feel that I need to demosaic in Phocus before finishing the processing in LrC or PS.

[SrMi]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

5 hours ago, ravinj said:

You can convert to DNGs and process in Lightroom or Capture One, but that's a hack to me.

Adobe can read Hasselblad raw files without conversion to DNG.

[ravinj]

39 minutes ago, SrMi said:

There is little difference in Lightroom vs. Phocus processing of X2D files. Very rarely do I feel that I need to demosaic in Phocus before finishing the processing in LrC or PS.

I see the difference and that's why I tolerate Phocus as it gets me the results I like. Others may not and that's fine. One should use the tool that works for them.

[ravinj]

58 minutes ago, PATB said:

Thanks for the information on Phocus.  My original Q1 seems to be on the verge of death 😄, so I have been contemplating of replacing it with an X2D/45p for travel.  But I have never considered that the X2D may require abandoning Lightroom in favor of Phocus, which is a non-starter for me.  I may have to wait for the new Q3 instead.

X2D raw is 3FR format. Phocus converts them to 3fff which Lightroom can recognize. For me, Phocus is the way to go as it gives me the results I want much easier that any other tool. And it is free, so I shouldn't really complain. 

45p is a jewel.

Edited September 22, 2024 by ravinj

[jakontil]

1 hour ago, SrMi said:

There is little difference in Lightroom vs. Phocus processing of X2D files. Very rarely do I feel that I need to demosaic in Phocus before finishing the processing in LrC or PS.

I agree...

the only reason I would want to go through Phocus will be for it's smaller size and mobile, when transferred through wifi 

if there's a slight difference, it's the compromise im willing to bet on 

but dont' convert the 3FR into DNG, rather stay 3FR if I have to 

Edited September 22, 2024 by jakontil

[SrMi]

On 9/20/2024 at 2:56 PM, hdmesa said:

Is the infinity hard stop of the V lenses true infinity like an M lens? I'm assuming not due to them being AF lenses, but thought I'd ask anyway.

Note that you can customize a button to focus to infinity. I do not know how well it works.

[hdmesa]

1 minute ago, SrMi said:

Note that you can customize a button to focus to infinity. I do not know how well it works.

Interesting. That would be very helpful for infinity landscapes to save time from having to focus on the horizon, or when shooting only the sky/clouds, or in low contrast situations.

[Overgaard]

2 hours ago, ravinj said:

I see the difference and that's why I tolerate Phocus as it gets me the results I like. Others may not and that's fine. One should use the tool that works for them.

It used to be that the FlexColor software from Imacon/Hasselblad produced considerable better skin tones and colors than Lightroom. FlexColor only runs on older computers now, but is the grandfather of Phocus and the foundation for the "Hasselblad Natural Colour Solution" workflow.

Here is my updated measurements of Kelvin and Tint of all Leica digital models, as well now also Hasselblad 907x with CFV 100C, using Lightroom, Phocus and Capture One. The X2D sensor I would expect to have the same results, once I get that one tested. 

 

[Likaleica]

I look at the original question (Q3 vs. X2D) this way:  For certain activities (skiing, bicycling, mountaineering, water sports, etc.) I wouldn't dream of taking an X2D (and certainly not an M), but I would want the highest image quality I could get with a beautiful camera in a platform that is easy, fun and intuitive to use.  So, I guess that means I identify as "nonbinary."  Both.  😆

[FlashGordonPhotography]

20 hours ago, ravinj said:

X2D raw is 3FR format. Phocus converts them to 3fff which Lightroom can recognize. For me, Phocus is the way to go as it gives me the results I want much easier that any other tool. And it is free, so I shouldn't really complain. 

45p is a jewel.

You don't need to convert the files for Lightroom to read them. Lightroom reads 3FR files just fine.

I agree that Phocus can *sometimes* give slightly better colours. My workflow is to load everything in Ligthroom and if I get a file I think that Phocus will like, I'll round trip it from LRC. I read somewhere that HB did work with Adobe on the profiles so that's why LRC is pretty close most of the time.

The 45P is a fine lens but I never gelled with it. Mostly I preferred the 45mm 3.5. Now I use the 55V. If I want perfect corners for landscapes I use the zoom.

Gordon

[BWColor]

1 hour ago, FlashGordonPhotography said:

You don't need to convert the files for Lightroom to read them. Lightroom reads 3FR files just fine.

I agree that Phocus can *sometimes* give slightly better colours. My workflow is to load everything in Ligthroom and if I get a file I think that Phocus will like, I'll round trip it from LRC. I read somewhere that HB did work with Adobe on the profiles so that's why LRC is pretty close most of the time.

The 45P is a fine lens but I never gelled with it. Mostly I preferred the 45mm 3.5. Now I use the 55V. If I want perfect corners for landscapes I use the zoom.

Gordon

I use Phocus for every image.  I then import the images into Lightroom.  One of the reasons for this is that the fff raw files that are produced by Phocus are smaller than the original 3FR files.  The extra time involved is minimal.  After importation to Lightroom, I delete the original fff files.

Edited September 22, 2024 by BWColor
Brevity

[IkarusJohn]

On 9/21/2024 at 8:36 PM, Olaf_ZG said:

I will ask a moderator to forbid discussions about the x2d. It is too tempting…

However, to invest about 15k into another system is not what I want (or can afford without selling of the M or SL), and the SL system has the advantage of the (longer) zooms and the Lux.

But please stop praising the HB…

For choice of use, I don’t really feel the X2D is comparable to the SL system, for the simple reason that I think in terms of framing and field of view.  Being medium format, the X2D is slightly larger than 135 format and the lenses larger as well.  I have a loaner 80/1.9 while my 38V is being fixed, and compared to the 0.95 Noctilux, it’s a monster.  I can’t believe I lugged this lens around with me when I had one.

So, for me, the X2D is fabulous in the range 21mm to 135 (and extender) - that gives an equivalent field of view of 16.59mm to 180mm (with the extender).  But, in portable lenses, more like 25V to 90V (20mm to 70mm), which is exactly the focal range of my M lenses.  For telephoto (I have an APO Elmarit-R 180/2.8, which I will never part with, and 2x APO extender), the SL is the best option and it is useful for the Noctilux and 75 Summilux.

So, it’s a hard choice - I have film, monochrome and colour M cameras, with the 21mm to 75mm range covered in 10 lenses (and a 135, which I hardly ever use).  M camera or X2D can be a tough choice.  I’m not a fan of the electronic shutter (though it works well), so for the moment I will continue with the one, 38V, lens - and I’ve enjoyed it very much.  I don’t do detailed comparisons of EVF, lens performance or IQ and the like - if I like the camera and like the output, then I use it; it’s a case of working out what works for each system.  No point in wishing a camera was something else, or fretting about what it doesn’t have.  Plenty of systems have failed this simple test (Sonys and Nikons principle among them).

[SrMi]

4 minutes ago, BWColor said:

I use Phocus for every image.  I then import the images into Lightroom.  One of the reasons for this is that the fff raw files that are produced by Phocus are smaller than the original 3FR files.  The extra time involved is minimal.  After importation to Lightroom, I delete the original fff files.

However, that means that you are not applying any benefits for Phocus (color science, lens corrections) and are using Phocus only to compress the raw file. You could do this by importing to LrC and converting to DNG.

However, using Phocus to generate both FFF raw  and TIFF could make sense.

[BWColor]

1 hour ago, SrMi said:

However, that means that you are not applying any benefits for Phocus (color science, lens corrections) and are using Phocus only to compress the raw file. You could do this by importing to LrC and converting to DNG.

However, using Phocus to generate both FFF raw  and TIFF could make sense.

I’m certainly not leveraging the full resources that Phocus has to offer and that fault lies with my rush to use the camera vs the better approach of using to best advantage.  I fell back on the workflow that I’ve used for years.  I appreciate your comments..

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica Q

[FlashGordonPhotography]

21 hours ago, BWColor said:

I’m certainly not leveraging the full resources that Phocus has to offer and that fault lies with my rush to use the camera vs the better approach of using to best advantage.  I fell back on the workflow that I’ve used for years.  I appreciate your comments..

Everyone should do what works for them. I use LRC because all my cameras are supported and I shoot with multiple systems. LRC makes sense as a place to start as I can start the same way no matter what camera I use. Others have different and equally valid approaches. Options are good.

Gordon