Love the Hasselblad Camera

[Kara]

Sorry if there's already a thread on this. Here are some of my first few pictures, loving Hasselblad's HNCS.

 

[Mordor]

Out of curiosity...any filter?
My daylight photos aren`t so great....but at night....uauu!

 

[Kara]

Looks like only one photo posted. I used a PolarPro ND/PL 16 filter for this late afternoon shoot.

 

[Kara]

Hopefully both of these attach.

 

[Mordor]

Thanks for the reply.
Looks something i must invest next. Nice photos by the way!

 

[Thomas B]

Love the pics!

 

[Scott81603]

Amazing photos!

 

[KS-6]

I have been using Hasselblad cameras in my career for the past three decades, spectacular equipment. I think the camera is *just* good enough which is why I finally got a drone for commercial work but darn, those corners need to be better to really deserve the Hasselblad moniker.

DXO lab cleans it up fairly well but I still end up stitching critical shots in panels of 4 or 6 in order to rid my self of the shite corners.

 

[RickinWaST]

Great images and thanks for sharing them. Best using a ND filter, did you do some post process, and if so, what software?

I ask because I have a great deal of landscape photography and PS background. Very curious as I get my first drone (M2Pro) Mobday.

Thanks!

 

[Orion33]

Great images and thanks for sharing them. Best using a ND filter, did you do some post process, and if so, what software?

Thanks!

When you shoot pictures you don't need a ND-filter. You you can use faster shutter times and choose a bigger f-stop. F8 for instance.
Ton

 

[Ewelling]

Where were these pics taken? I'd like to see more of your work.

 

[GGehret]

Sorry if there's already a thread on this. Here are some of my first few pictures, loving Hasselblad's HNCS.

I love it too...that's the main reason I bought the 2 pro over the zoom.

 

[WithTheBirds]

Great images and thanks for sharing them. Best using a ND filter, did you do some post process, and if so, what software?

I ask because I have a great deal of landscape photography and PS background. Very curious as I get my first drone (M2Pro) Mobday.

Thanks!

The ND filter did nothing to enhance these images- the fact that it is a combined ND/polariser almost certainly did.

I can't see any reason to expect that you might need to modify your land based photo post processing workflow for your drone shots. The same techniques are available- obviously. The only exceptions might be shooting and processing long exposures where the simple work around is to shoot multiple frames and stack-align-blend. As to the shooting early and lite in the day (but not exclusively) you might find more difficulty in managing dynamic range- the same tone mapping and blending of multiple exposures techniques that have likely served you well to date have the same application.

 

[sar104]

I have been using Hasselblad cameras in my career for the past three decades, spectacular equipment. I think the camera is *just* good enough which is why I finally got a drone for commercial work but darn, those corners need to be better to really deserve the Hasselblad moniker.

DXO lab cleans it up fairly well but I still end up stitching critical shots in panels of 4 or 6 in order to rid my self of the shite corners.

Are you talking about distortion or softness?

 

[gnirtS]

When you shoot pictures you don't need a ND-filter. You you can use faster shutter times and choose a bigger f-stop. F8 for instance.
Ton

While i agree an ND is the last thing you want for still images (i have no idea why people keep thinking they need one) you're better off going with a faster shutter.
On the mavic the sharpness starts to drop around f/5.6 and by f/8 its horrible due to diffraction. f/4 is about the sweet spot.
But still no need for an ND. iso100, f/4 and let the shutter speed be as fast as possible. That'll get the crispest image on stills.

A polariser is a little different, they do have still image uses *if* they're set up correctly before takeoff and images are taken from the exact angle set prior to takeoff.

And its not a Hasselblad camera as such - Hasselblad colour science is used and thats a different thing. Its still a compact camera that can fly and does have crap corner sharpness and other issues you'd expect from a small lens, small sensor combination.
Its a hell of a lot better than M1 but is still miles off professional cameras (as you'd expect).

 

[WithTheBirds]

While i agree an ND is the last thing you want for still images (i have no idea why people keep thinking they need one) you're better off going with a faster shutter.
On the mavic the sharpness starts to drop around f/5.6 and by f/8 its horrible due to diffraction. f/4 is about the sweet spot.
But still no need for an ND. iso100, f/4 and let the shutter speed be as fast as possible. That'll get the crispest image on stills.

A polariser is a little different, they do have still image uses *if* they're set up correctly before takeoff and images are taken from the exact angle set prior to takeoff.

And its not a Hasselblad camera as such - Hasselblad colour science is used and thats a different thing. Its still a compact camera that can fly and does have crap corner sharpness and other issues you'd expect from a small lens, small sensor combination.
Its a hell of a lot better than M1 but is still miles off professional cameras (as you'd expect).

It’s a glorified high end phone camera- the colour science implementation seems to be, as you have said, the best feature. In recent years Hasselblad has done little more than rebadge Sony cameras with stupid pricing for the name association. I don’t think they ever made their own sensors and used Sony when they did- like they are now with the M2P.

You make the obvious point that our expectations can’t be a lot more at present as the thing has to fly. Good glass isn’t light. Notwithstanding the performance is, I expect most would agree, very good for what it is. Subject, lighting, composition and post workflow feature higher on the list of important contributors to the outcome than any limitations in the equipment presents. We finally have that luxury with these lower end drones now. Exciting developments await no doubt.

 

[sar104]

It’s a glorified high end phone camera- the colour science implementation seems to be, as you have said, the best feature. In recent years Hasselblad has done little more than rebadge Sony cameras with stupid pricing for the name association. I don’t think they ever made their own sensors and used Sony when they did- like they are now with the M2P.

You make the obvious point that our expectations can’t be a lot more at present as the thing has to fly. Good glass isn’t light. Notwithstanding the performance is, I expect most would agree, very good for what it is. Subject, lighting, composition and post workflow feature higher on the list of important contributors to the outcome than any limitations in the equipment presents. We finally have that luxury with these lower end drones now. Exciting developments await no doubt.

There are phones with one inch sensors?

 

[WithTheBirds]

There are phones with one inch sensors?

Not that I know of- Samsung has developed a 100+mp 1/1.7” sensor going in phones though. We can imagine the camera bump we would need for a 1” sensor and associated optics so it is an obvious physical limitation. That wasn’t my point- at least I didn’t mean to suggest phones had 1” sensors. I was simply saying high end phones produce great images not far behind the M2P. The camera is now more than up to the task for producing great images- amazing given it can fly with a small drone.

 

[sar104]

Not that I know of- Samsung has developed a 100+mp 1/1.7” sensor going in phones though. We can imagine the camera bump we would need for a 1” sensor and associated optics so it is an obvious physical limitation. That wasn’t my point- at least I didn’t mean to suggest phones had 1” sensors. I was simply saying high end phones produce great images not far behind the M2P. The camera is now more than up to the task for producing great images- amazing given it can fly with a small drone.

Fair enough. A lot of the advances in phone images has come from the processing side, due to those hardware limitations, and I suspect that Apple and Samsung are significantly ahead of DJI currently in the sophistication of their image processing. The larger sensor really does produce significantly better raw images, and so it would be interesting to see what it might be capable of if the processing playing field were leveled.

 

[gnirtS]

Computational Photography is definitely where the next leap in quality is going to come from.
In that respect smart phone makers are cutting edge and conventional DSLR/Mirrorless makers are literally years behind and the gap is growing. Theres a huge resistance to change.

The mavic 2 has a decent camera (pro not zoom) and will produce more than acceptable commercial results BUT its a flying compact so expectations have to be realistic.