Thanks for a very comprehensive report, Kevin. Very interesting to read what to expect from a MedF digital over the current APS size offerings from Pentax. If the Pentax digital 645 materialises, this is probably what it has to match. At least in terms of noise characteristics, AF performance and interface. Even if the Pentax sensor size will be "only" 16 Mpix, it will be sufficient for most uses.
Do you have any idea about the battery performance of the H1 kit? Using triple-As sound like a short-lived solution...:-) Also, do you have any thoughts about the ruggedness of the H1 system? Would it be possible to expose a H1 to more hostile environments, like shorelines, deserts or wet conditions? Cheers, Jostein Quoting Kevin Waterson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > I took the H1 for a test drive today and I must say I was thoroughly > impressed. > >From the moment I first held it, the feeling of the camera let the operator > know > this was not a toy. Looking through the view finder I found it to be a vast > improvement from that offered by pentax. The view was light and bright, even > under low light it was easy to find an edge to work with. > > A change from the tradition backs of the blads, no darkslide is needed when > changing backs, very convenient when working in the dark. The digital back > offers a 22 megapixel 48.9mm x 36.7mm sensor and various backs have various > sizes available. > The Kodak back is 22 megapixel 36mm x 36mm. This is a welcome change from the > APS size as it allows > much better cropping. > > The first big hit comes with CF cards, each image is 96Meg but it does allow > saving in PS's DMG format. Also the ability to hook up firewire directly to a > > computer/laptop is something I believe all "pro" models should have. If you > have anything less than a 2 gig card, you need to start spending. This is a > real plus for the APS size images as it affords much cheaper and smaller CF > cards. > > Another plus in the Pentax camp was the use of AA batteries, the H1 uses > 3 CR-123 lithium batteries or an extension which carries 8 AAA batteries. > > There is not a large range of lenses available and I spent my time with the > 80mm f2.8 as this is something I am familiar with in low light. There is > nowhere > near the range of AF lenses available for Pentax. > > What impressed me instantly was the Auto Focus speed. This was a vast > improvement > on Pentax, although it did struggle with object coming directly at the > camera. > The AF in low light was impressive also. In situations where the *istD spent > its > time hunting, the H1 nailed it and had the image on disk. > > A great gain was the ISO rating which is available up to 6400. I have use the > *istD > at 3200 and the image is horribly noisy. The Blad was not totally clean at > 6400 but > gave a good result, and at 3200 was comparable with the 800 of the Pentax. > On using a strobe with the H1 flash was available at all speeds > > A pointless addition to the H1 is a pop-up flash with a guide number of 12. > Although I could see where this may be useful in triggering other flashes... > maybe. > Flash was available at all speeds. > > The button to stop down the lense is almost in-accessble for my fingers, I > hope this > changes at some time. When comparing the controls to the Pentax I find the > Pentax more > intuitive, perhaps that comes from years of use, but navigating the Blad menu > system > was not too difficult and with little effort I could access the settings I > needed. > > I guess the losses are in wieght, at about 2kg this is not something you > would wear > around your neck while hiking, although the design seems to invite that. I > found > myself constantly comparing with the 6x7 (something I will never part with). > > Other loses are in FPS at just under 2fps this is not a fast capture. The > loss > of AA batteries and the added cost of new AAA packs, and the added cost of > new > and larger CF cards, I would consider 4gig a reasonable size, make for some > additional costs to this not cheap camera. The kit I am looking at comes in > at $AUD40,000.00 although much of this cost is in the digital back. (film > backs are available). > The lenses are designed by Hasselblad and made by Fuji, Bokeh is BAD. Pentax > glass has it > all over these lenses if the 80mm 2.8 is anything to go by. I dont know why > they chose Fuji > as Contax usses Zeiss and they have a much better offering in lenses. > > On the plus side, the extra sensor size/mp is a welcome change and the > ultra-fast AF > is what I really was testing for. I passed this test easily, and could even > focus on > a fly on a black backdrop without hunting. > > In all I was impressed with the AF system in low light, which is what I was > looking for > but at $40k I will take look at the Contax before committing, unless of > course Pentax comes up with a > 645D with a new or improved AF system. > > Kind regards > Kevin > -- > "Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. > Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote." > > ---------------------------------------------------------------- This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program.
