Thanks, Andy. Glad it helped with your buying decision.

Thank you so much.

Hi Robert. Agree with you. Not sure about the dial, felt plastic to me, but... It didn't pop up quite enough for me and, as you say, the chamfering (nice choice of word) is pointless, just Hassy trying to be clever with the design. If I was forced to buy into a digital medium format system I would go for the Hasselblad and although, being old school brought up on a 500cm and a Mamiya RZ67 Pro II, I could live without the IBS, but as I do a lot of portraiture the lack of Eye AF detect on the Hassy would drive me nuts, especially as I found during my weeks with it I could never get the focusing square to sit exactly where I wanted it to. You know why Hasselblad ditched the HDMI socket on the second version of the XD1? As you know, the XD1 had a HDMI socket, but they dropped it on the X1D II due to the fact that they changed a few things internally and fixed a few issues from the first version and the Hasselblad engineers needed a little more space in there so they dropped the HDMI socket and all that went with it to create more space for some internal modifications and updates. You're right, horses for courses of course and these are just my personal thoughts and feelings. Like I said, if I had to pick it would be the Hassy just for the build quality alone and the images Hasselblad cameras produce just have something special that is not in the files of other camera makers.

@@tecravenit is definitely metal, the blad has no plastic externals except the eye piece

@@tecraveneven the battery is metal

Hi Abdul. Agreed. I enjoy all Hasselblad cameras, dating back to 500cm I used to use 35 years ago. Agreed totally with your thoughts on Phocus. For me, it crashes all the damn time and if I apply too much of a slide on 'any' of the sliders it sticks loads of horizontal and vertical lines all over the image. According to Hasselblad in the UK this is because my 2013 3.2 GHz Quad-Core Intel Core i5 iMac running Catalina with a 1 TB SSD drive and 16 GB of RAM is not enough. Funny how this same iMac can run four 2K tracks of HD video in DaVinci Resolve and 20 tracks of 24 bit 48 kHz audio in Logic Pro, yet all I ask Phocus to do is deal with one piddly little 108mg stills image and it can't even do that. I've also found some of the sliders in Phocus, such as: recovery, clarity and detail, give off a metallic sheen to them if moved too far. I've found a ton of other glitches with Phocus too. I've heard (from somebody inside Hasselblad) that Hasselblad are not developing Phocus anymore and they might even drop the software altogether. Not sure where this would leave them given Capture One is not going to support Hasselblad files due to the pi**ing contest between Phase One and Hasselblad. Yes, Capture One is super stable and does just about everything better than Phocus, but I don't like Phase Ones pricing structure for Capture One. I think their software is a big fat rip off when you consider Adobe's 'Photographer Package' is half the price and includes: Photoshop, Lightroom, cloud storage space, web making app, and all sorts more, for £10 per month, compared to £20 per month for Capture One. I hate the fact that I paid £299 for Capture One and yet I'm forced to pay £199 per year to upgrade to their new yearly release - see my other video on this subject: kzfaq.info/get/bejne/pLKodJBnm5q8oZs.html

@@tecraven To get 1TB storage in Lr CC you've to pay £10 extra a month, and if you want 10 TB it's extremely expensive! I've just Lr CC with 1TB in the cloud, and Capture One for Sony on my laptop. All this is for £20 a month, the same as if I had the full Adobe plan with 1 TB in the cloud. But I prefer C1 to Photoshop, and I want cloud storage. So Lr CC 1 TB + Capture One Sony = Perfect Match!

Thank you, Astrost! - I agree with you regarding more grip height and it would not cost much to produce.

@@tecraven to be clear, I mean the one already produced: Really Right Stuff BX1D Base Plate for Hasselblad X1D. I have one on my X1D II 50C right now!

@@astrostl Ah, right. Sorry, I know what you mean now. Yes, the Hasselblad UK Sales Manager mentioned the RRS baseplate, looks good.

What new model? Is that why hassy is popping up in the tech news again

@@TimHunold its coming trust me

Hi Richard and thanks for posting. To be honest, if you have a 5DS R I would not really consider the GFX100 a worthy upgrade. The 5DS R is full frame and 50 megapixels and moving to the Fuji is going to give you just a 'trifle' more resolution that you won't notice on any computer screen on the planet (unless you pixel peep and zoom in to 200% or more) and you'll only see it if you print at sizes larger than 5 foot wide and even then you'd have to be printing to Hahnemühle Photo Rag 500 GSM paper with UltraChrome K3 ink (not your crap from PC world). I don't know many photographers who get into spending that amount of money just for one print as it don't come cheap. I have in my position the Canon EOS R5 and R6 with a Canon 85mm f1.2 lens at the moment and I have to tell you that the colours are even better than the Hasselblad X1D II, by a mile, so much nicer in just about every way: skin tones, clothing colours, landscape colours. As for resolution, well, we don't see most of those pixels anyway so I don't concern myself with manufacturers pixels counts. I do, however, like a larger sensor just because of the wow factor, but a 50 mp medium format sensor would be as much as I'd need, even for printing to 5 foot in size to the aforementioned Hahnemühle/UntraChome combo. Look at the stunning images Ansel Adams shot, and that was on a 70s Hasselblad with - by today's standards - way inferior Zeiss lenses. I rest my case ;) certainlyhaven't

@@tecraven Thank you. I am starting to think (may get some heat for this ) that the Fuji GFX line are Fuji's full frame thats folk were asking for. Want MF go for the larger Phase One or Hassleblad.

@@rickjbradbury Hasselblad H6D 100 is good, the best medium format camera out there (as of May 2021) but too darn expensive for what it is, no matter how good it is.

​@@tecraven Yup. For me MF will be an older body and back combo most likely.

The 503cw and Bronica Zenza were both manual focus cameras. I too had a Hassy 500cm and Mamiya RZ67 back in the day, again manual. If you're used to manual focus and you intend to use the X1D II in manual focus it will not be as good as the 503cw as the focus rings on auto-focus lenses don't have the same grippy and firm focusing feel, they just feel light and nowhere near as precise. If you use the X1D II in AF mode, it's fine, but it is just very slow compared to every other AF camera on the market. This is fine for landscapes and portrait work in a studio, but forget sports or anything that requires more rapid focus. Also, the X1D II had no eye-detect for photographing people so AF will never hit the eye and even when trying to move the green focusing square over the eye, you can never get it to land there with anything close to precision so you'll end up with a large 'miss' rate and not a high enough 'hit' rate when it comes to critical focusing, for sure. But, given dark focusing screens of old medium format manual focus cameras, the X1D II will be better than those, which is not saying much given the X1D II is 45 years newer in tech. Given a choice, I'd still prefer an X1D II over a 500cm all day long, lens quality is far superior than the old Carl Zeiss lenses, by a long way.

@@tecraven thank you for answering to me. Actually what photography style exactly opposite the sport photography. I've knew about digital lenses focus ring. I'm advertising and fashion photographer. Sometimes Hasselblad manufacturing policies surprised me. I hope the progress focusing system in next X1D. I enjoy watching your videos.

When you say my 'old Hassy' do you mean the 500cm I owned years back? if so, I just used the standard waist level finder that the 500cm came with. But I did buy the (then) Minolta Acute Matt Screen that they made for Hasselblad that made things a little less grim and dark in the viewfinder. Just split circle focus system on the matt screen.

Hi Rolando. I'm sure your 'math' is on the money, but looking at photographs this just does not pan out at all in my experience.

@@tecraven thanks for the reply, in fact it might also be the Fuji lens not resolving all the 102 MP.

@@rolandomunari588 Good point, this is absolutely true. And, even as you say, even if the lens could, if it were a slightly hazy day, no lens shade, angle, aperture and all sorts of other considerations the resolution could take a hit.

Thanks Savage. Also, sorry I had to remove the previous video and re-upload it. It happens occasionally when I upload a video here and notice a typo in an overlay or something. Anyway, sorted and re-uploaded ;) Well, I'm a huge fan of medium format cameras, and even 5x4. I loved shooting on my Hasselblad 500cm and Mamiya RZ67 Pro II film cameras back in the day. As you know, these are just my own thoughts and feelings and evaluations on this kit. Other people might think differently. Also, there are a lot of sycophantic reviews here on KZfaq where reviewers won't say anything bad about gear in case the manufacturer refuses to send them review/loan kit again, but, call me old fashioned, I don't care, I just believe in putting across what I see.

@@tecraven it shows. I appreciate your honest opinions.

Haha ;) Yeah, and this is coming from somebody who hates pixel peeping, but I've got to do it, reluctantly, for the purposes of showing those who like the pixel peeping stuff. I think you're right re models wanting to dig my heart out with a spoon ;)

Jean, I understand exactly what you mean. I just found the focus hunts all the time, even when there is moderate contrast. I found it had to be quite a harsh contrast before it locked on. I've been a photographer for 35 years and used most cameras and during the past three years I've used most mirrorless and DSLR cameras from: Nikon, Canon, Sony, Hasselblad, Fuji, you name it, and the X1D II is the only camera that struggles, constantly, with focus, regardless of strong or weak contrast. Yes, I know about precise AF point choice with thumb on back screen with eye up to viewfinder, I use that method on other cameras, though you did not see me do this in this particular video. I found that moving the so-called 'precise' AF point with right thumb with eye up to viewfinder yielded the same inaccurate results, the square still jumps to the nearest point on the grid, of which there are not enough - in my experience.

As of July 2022 I wouldn't take either of these cameras. Fuji has iffy build quality and would break to easily and the Hasselblad is way out of date: no eye AF detect, slowest AF on the planet and a whole host of other lacking features. We need a Hasselblad X2D that brings it right up to date.

@@tecraven I am looking at the X2D to replace my GFX100S. Will be interesting.

No, set manual to flash or outdoor.

Same. Their color is off. Not natural looking. It's a difficult choice and depends on your needs. For me the HB is worth the issues due to image quality. I come from medium and large format film so it's already faster in some ways. I learned photography in school and studio in the 90s where nobody would ever complain about hand holding RZ67 all day.

Haha. Yeah, I remember hand-holding my Mamiya RZ-67 Pro II with portrait lens in the studio for portrait shoots. Think of the wedding guys who worked on Hasselblad 500cm cameras and a waste level finder and a heavy lens too.

Hi Gordon. I didn't have the GFX100S while I had the Hasselblad, only the GFX100. But, it would have made no difference as both the GFX100 and GFX100s have the same sensor and use the same lenses and have the same colour science, the camera body itself is acting as nothing more than a box - a pin hole camera if you like - to simply house the sensor and hold the lens i.e. the both produce identical images. The only thing I would have mentioned, had I used the GFX100S in this comparison, is the form factor and that the GFX100S is similar to the Hasselblad in that there is no grip built in, that's about it.

@@tecraven And the GFX100S has ibis.

@@gordonbrown5901 Course, and Eye AF detect ;)

Hasselblad does have something doesn't it.

Thank you for your feedback, Gilles and you're more than welcome.

@@tecraven I own the Hasselblad X1D II with 45 P and 80 mm f1.9. For my needs as a 68 old photgraph this system is perfect. That does not mean this camera is perfect. I love to shoot slowly. Mostly for landscape and portraits.

It is a pleasure to slow down and take ones time isn’t it? I shoot sports of many sorts and some times have a deep need to return to just enjoy the process of using a camera that isn’t meant for speed. I’m also in my sixties past retirement age what ever that is

@@savagefrieze4675 Indded it is a real pleasure. It remind me the good old time when nothing was automatic in our cameras.

@@GillesQuennevilleGQ three words Gossen Luna Pro

There is no doubt that Fuji is warmer and a bit more ‘Disneyland’ with the colours (and I haven’t done anything except a basic raw conversion) while the Hasselblad has something of a hint of green and is generally flatter (less than natural I’d say) with the colours so while Fuji overcook somewhat Hasselblad undercook. I prefer the Fuji look personally, but hate the very poor build quality and corner-cutting to save pennies with the Fuji. Hasselblad build is amazing and in a different stratosphere to the Fuji.

Yes, it's strange that isn't it how modern cameras reveal too much. You can always soften images down in post using the 'clarity' slider, or a 'trifle' of Gaussian blur perhaps. The Clarity slider is always a good one just to reduce the definition and sharpness to a degree. But then I guess that would defy the point of buying a medium format high megapixel camera to start with.

Hi Keith. Thanks for posting. Thing is, I'm not really comparing 50mp cameras, I'm comparing the GFX100 to the X1D II. In the grand scheme of things, pixels have nothing to do with it. We don't need, nor can we see, 100MP, not even 50MP. Think about it, even if you have a 5K Retina Apple display, that's about 14 to 15 megapixels, so the computer dumps loads of megapixels from the Fuji and the Hassy, which you never get to see. Sure, if you zoom in and pixel peep you can see them, but pixel peeping is for geeks with too much time on their hands, not people who appreciate good photography. It's fine to pixel peep just to check the difference, but once you're over that and you just view the image, as intended (i.e. not zoomed in at 200%) on your computer screen you can't see the difference and I don't know of a computer screen that is Retina 50K, just Retina 5K so, really, what's the point. I know, what about printing out, you might ask. But there is an issue with that too. Given that most printers run at 300dpi (if you're lucky by the time the ink hits the paper) even a 50MP image would have to be printed at larger sizes than 5 by 3 feet to see it and that's if you print onto Hahnemühle Photo Rag 500 gsm paper printed with pigman tUltraChrome K3 ink (not your cheap crap you buy from PC World) and this little combination of paper and ink and that size will run into a few hundred dollars per print. I only know two photographers who print at these sizes ands on this quality paper and with these inks and I can tell you for nothing, they don't give a monkey's about pixel counts and they don't get caught up all the manufacturers bo••ocks about pixel counts either. It's all sales crap and retired people with more money than sense fall for it. If you have a decent Epson printer and use a decent domestic paper like Photospeed, you are still onto a hiding to nothing when it comes to seeing the difference between 50MP and 100MP. It makes me laugh how people brag about their iPhone X having a 12 megapixel camera in it while the silly Guppy's eye of a lens on the back can't even resolve a fraction of that and then they look at those images on the iPhone's screen that has a resolution of 2436 x 1125, that's a total of 2,740500 i.e. 2.7 megapixels so the iPhone X is 'binning' over 9MP just so they can view the photos and, guess what, they will never print any of them out and even if they did the little lens on the iPhone can't resolve 12MP anyway, just a fraction of that hence it's all marketing bo••ocks. Sorry to get on my soap box about this and this is not an attack on you, just pointing out a few things to justify my comparison between a 50MP camera and a 100MP camera and I also mention the lack of difference between the MP count on these and that you can only 'just' notice it zoomed in at 200% or more. Ansel Adams produced some of the most amazing landscape images in history and they were all shot on a Hasselblad 500c with old tech lenses and that camera/lens combo had the megapixel equivalent of about 10, on the very best day. People care less and less about the 'Art' of photography these days and get all caught up in inconsequential topics such as pixel counts. The Nikon D300, which was an APS-C camera from 2007 and only 12 megapixels was the first camera that surpassed the very best 100ASA slide film so pretty much every digital camera that has come out since then, by every manufacturer, beats 60s, 70s and 80s Hasselblads, Mamiyas, Bronicas, Leicas, Nikons, Canons and the like, hands down and just look at some of the amazing and iconic images that were captured by some of those amazing photographers: Ansel Adams, David Bailey, Donavon etc. They were artists, not boffins.

@@tecraven Just one correction. The 5K Retina display has a resolution of 5120 x 2880 which is 14-15 megapixels, not 5 megapixels. "K" refers to the amount of horizontal pixels and is in the thousands, not millions.

@@Ben-ok2xm You are quite right, Ben, duh to me. Thanks for pointing that one out. I've corrected my above post to reflect your accuracy ;)

Yes, agreed. I've used the X1D II on a few different occasions, months apart, and I found it to have a yellow tint to skin and a green tint in certain other images. Canon R5 is way better with regard to colours and especially skin tones and equals the Hasselblad even in resolution and, as you know, the Canon R5 is not even medium format, it's full frame. The R5 is proof that the best full frame cameras are as good as medium format as of 2021.

I think if you study colour a little and in particular 'the simultaneous colour affect' having them side by side can skew your brain a little. If the two portraits were shown separate I am sure the effect of the has looking so yellow wouldn't be so obvious and the fuji looking so magenta the same.

@@PROgaming-fm6yu Agreed. This is the same situation when comparing any two cameras, one will always look different and vice-versa when viewing side-by-side. I must admit, when using the X1D II about a year ago I felt the skin tones looked a tad yellow and I found tints of green in certain images also.

@@PROgaming-fm6yu i dont need to compare. I know how skin tones look in real life and the has does not look like real life

@@castielvargastv7931 you missed my point. But how do you know what her skin tones looked like in real life? lol Where you there?