Luminous Landscape Forum
Equipment & Techniques => Medium Format / Film / Digital Backs – and Large Sensor Photography => Topic started by: Gary Ferguson on September 30, 2006, 08:36:47 am
-
It seems like any medium format digital purchase is incredibly risky at the moment. After the news of the last year and from Photokina who knows what other shock announcements are possible?
-Kodak may decide MF sensors isn't a business with a future
-The new Hy6 may never reach production
-Even worse the Hy6 may be launched but then discontinued (in one or all of its guises) if it fails to reach viable sales levels, leaving owners high and dry.
-Phase One may get absorbed within Mamiya.
-As above, but Mamiya then goes bump and takes Phase One down with them.
-Canon's deeper R&D pockets may trump the MF quality advantage in the 35mm arena, finishing off the entire MF market.
-Pentax or Mamiya may uncercut MF digital prices to such an extent that Hasselblad and Sinar/Rollei/Leaf bail out.
If I sat down and scratched my head I'm sure I could come up with many more doomsday scenarios that would leave a photographer holding an expensive white elephant. Given all this uncertainty what's the smart photographer's strategy for digital medium format?
-
"Given all this uncertainty what's the smart photographer's strategy for digital medium format?"
-Buy an e-motion style back which takes many mounts ?
-Only buy if you can cover the costs over three years ?
-Remeber that V mount hassies, second hand Hs, contax, rolleis and Mams all take perfectly fine pictures and there are millions of them knocking around used
-
It seems like any medium format digital purchase is incredibly risky at the moment. After the news of the last year and from Photokina who knows what other shock announcements are possible?
-Kodak may decide MF sensors isn't a business with a future
-The new Hy6 may never reach production
-Even worse the Hy6 may be launched but then discontinued (in one or all of its guises) if it fails to reach viable sales levels, leaving owners high and dry.
-Phase One may get absorbed within Mamiya.
-As above, but Mamiya then goes bump and takes Phase One down with them.
-Canon's deeper R&D pockets may trump the MF quality advantage in the 35mm arena, finishing off the entire MF market.
-Pentax or Mamiya may uncercut MF digital prices to such an extent that Hasselblad and Sinar/Rollei/Leaf bail out.
If I sat down and scratched my head I'm sure I could come up with many more doomsday scenarios that would leave a photographer holding an expensive white elephant. Given all this uncertainty what's the smart photographer's strategy for digital medium format?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=78406\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I had a very similar reaction to the "news" at Photokina. The thought of buying into the HY6 camera system from a cobbled together group of companies , with the lead being taken on the camera front by a company---Rollei--- with little marketing capabilities, a marginal record of customer service in North America, and economic fortunes that seem to always be on the edge, does not engender in me a sense of confidence about plunking down $50K. And, it's not even around for probably another year.
-
-Remeber that V mount hassies, second hand Hs, contax, rolleis and Mams all take perfectly fine pictures and there are millions of them knocking around used
I went the Hasselblad V system route with a P25, and it's been fine for the past two years. But when and if the next generation of digital backs comes out I'd think about upgrading to the P57 or whatever it'll be called, and I'll no doubt review the available camera system options at the same time. Maybe there'll be something that meets my needs better than a V, maybe there won't. Maybe, at this rate, there won't be anything at all apart from Ebay's MF selection!
But good as the V system has been I'm sure the time will come when the rustic charm of lens to back cabling and no TTL flash control will start to wear a bit thin!
-
Is MF Digital Just Too Risky?
This has been my burning question for some months now. Many, if not most, of you commenting here are seasoned pros with stable client bases and reasonable liquidity and have probably weathered similar hiccups and false starts before. In my case the decision is make or break. To say I'm cautious is an understatement. I'm also greatly disappointed in what I've read and heard about both Rollei and Hasselblad, venerable brands that mean more to me historically than megapixels and marketing spew. I've been heartened by the dealer feedback I've received from some of the brands but am all too conscious of the lack of channel support available to them and the cannibalistic tendency of the likes of Hasselblad. Too invest on faith alone is a fool's bargain, no matter what the client wants to pay for high MP. With the possibility of losing $60-100k in an uncertain platform (H system/Sinar/Mam) I'm beginning to warm to the idea of investing with Alpa/Schneider and having the client pay for drum scans. I never thought I'd be considering this option when I began the migration. It's either that or renting the back to suit the project and writing off the expense. I've invested with moderate risk before but having to look over my shoulder all the time takes alot of the pleasure out of the work.
I really appreciate the insights you've all shared here.
JBM
-
"Given all this uncertainty what's the smart photographer's strategy for digital medium format?"
For working professionals this is not much of an issue. For enthusiasts or emerging professionals it is a real whopper.
I used to spend $15k per year on film, processing, and polaroids. This is small by some peoples standards. Many photographers are charging clients for digital equipment rental or digital capture. When I tell clients that the cost of replacing several computers, and all my digital cameras every 2-3 years costs as much as it did to buy and process all the film, they are very understanding. The amount of my expenses has not change, but the money now pays off a loan for a camera, or buys a hard drive.
My D2x was Crazy expensive compared to my previous cameras (ie: a $500.00 4x5). I had been charging clients $300.00 a day to rent the camera from a rental shop. Now that money was paying off my own investment instead of the camera stores. The camera was paid for in 3.5 months!
I just got into MF digital a few months ago. It will take 2 years to pay of the $45,000.00 camera system. If I sell it for $1.00 at the end of 2 years I will be in the same place I was after shooting film for 2 years, with just a bunch of pictures to show for it. And remember, the money that paid for the camera system used to go to the camera store and the photo lab. If I sell the system for $5K in 2 years it will be a $5K profit, not a $40K loss.
-
JBM,
Most people I know have rented the digital camera from stores on a per job/day basis until it becomes clear that they get enough work with the camera to justify buying it. This is a smart approach instead of hoping the work will grow.
I rented a 1Ds MkII for 15 days the year it came out... $5250.00!!!
As soon as I put that math together I bought the D2x. The income stream was already there.
-
Eric, yours is as succinct a summary of the financials as I've ever seen.
I'm one of those "enthusiasts" or "emerging professionals" mentioned above; you can imagine the teeth-gnashing at my house when I told the Finance Committee Chairperson that I was buying a used ProBack to hang on my Contax! I just got to the point where developing and scanning film was taking too much time at my volume of work. Still, it was a big expenditure with some risk involved: obsolescence (beyond its baseline obsolescence being a discontinued back) and an uncertain payback before it has to be retired.
It would have made more sense to opt for an Aptus 17 refurb since the price difference was not that huge over what I paid for my hard-to-find C645-mount ProBack, illustrating once again that there's always something over the horizon waiting to trash your spreadsheet calculations; and that the brain rather than the softer organs should be in charge when evaluating such a purchase.
-
It seems like any medium format digital purchase is incredibly risky at the moment. After the news of the last year and from Photokina who knows what other shock announcements are possible?
-Kodak may decide MF sensors isn't a business with a future
-The new Hy6 may never reach production
-Even worse the Hy6 may be launched but then discontinued (in one or all of its guises) if it fails to reach viable sales levels, leaving owners high and dry.
-Phase One may get absorbed within Mamiya.
-As above, but Mamiya then goes bump and takes Phase One down with them.
-Canon's deeper R&D pockets may trump the MF quality advantage in the 35mm arena, finishing off the entire MF market.
-Pentax or Mamiya may uncercut MF digital prices to such an extent that Hasselblad and Sinar/Rollei/Leaf bail out.
If I sat down and scratched my head I'm sure I could come up with many more doomsday scenarios that would leave a photographer holding an expensive white elephant. Given all this uncertainty what's the smart photographer's strategy for digital medium format?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=78406\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
the Hy6 was shown in several working variations at photokina, it is by far the safest product announcement i have heard in years....takes all lenses made for the entire 6000 system since 1974...even uses some of the same film backs as the 6000...it is a completely modular system...what more do you want?
mamiya did not buy phase or the other way around...
so if mamiya goes down it has nothng to do with phase....
i don't think canon even thinks about the MF market yet...they produce more rebels in a day then the entire MF industry produces backs in a year....but they will keep pushing upwards....but so will MF...
mamiya tried to "undercut" prices with the ZD...we see how that worked out....remember the kodak 14n? kodak treid to undercut canon with that one...we saw how that worked out....
MF has had the strongest signs of life in years...the backs are mature products, the mpix race has finally slowed down a bit, prices have come down....
a P20 will be offered at 7990 for any mount...that means a 16bit back producing files that are more then good enough for any commercial application is now the price of a 1DsmkII...with superiour imagequality...
if you look at film/processing expenses over 3 years, MF backs are a lot cheaper...even the absolut highest end....
the problem is that everybody thinks they need a P45...which is 4x5 sheet quality...nice to have but so not necessary...5 years ago people shot worldwide ad campaigns with 6mpix backs/cameras and now a P25 just does not cut it for weekend amateurs....the marketing machine has succeeded....
if you need the quality, it is more available now then ever in more mature products then ever...if this is a hobby...great for you that you can even think of spending 30000-50000 on a toy...but i guess you would ask questions like: is the Porsche just too risky? it will be worth half the price once you drive it off the lot....
a P45 will give you 4x5 quailty as long as you take good care of it adn it won't cost you a penny once paid off...no matter how many backs come after it, no matter how many pixels, how fast...
btw: kodak owns leaf (which uses dalsa chips)...just to add to your list...
-
Thank you Eric. Your points are well taken.
Renting gear and passing on the costs I've done, with 35mm. I own top 35mm kit and continue to expand it at rates matching demand and desire. I'm less prepared to do that with MF. It's a question of availability, perception and acculturation, so to speak. Reserving MF gear in my market is not as reliable as 35mm. Owning your own MF conveys the right stuff to clients - this is a contentious point but is not negligible where I work. In terms of acculturation I mean mastering the machine so it can get out of my way asap. Perhaps I've treated the MF gear I have rented too gingerly. I don't mind learning curves but find that I conquer them faster when the device is at my beck and call 24/7. I'm finished with renting and will make a tough choice before Christmas because I need to. The only speculation I'm having to perform relates to the messy MF sandbox where bs, rough trade and betrayal seem to be de rigueur. In the end my calculus isn't just monetary. It's about supporting the vendors that deserve your patronage, making principled buying decisions that will inspire your children, and sound sleep.
as per pss
the marketing machine has succeeded
I wish clients and agents were more immune to this machine.
I admire you work Eric, the Lautner case study shoot must have been a dream job!
JBM
-
as per pss
I wish clients and agents were more immune to this machine.
I admire you work Eric, the Lautner case study shoot must have been a dream job!
JBM
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=78444\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
i know...sadly it really is the only reason i will have to upgrade at one point...clients wondering if the P20 is good enough...funny thing is, nobody has ever comented after they receive the files....it is almost a way of letting me know that they "know" all the latest equipment....
btw: for architecture the coverage of the P20 is too limiting...without stiching, which gets to be a pain if it has to be done too often...
-
I have a Contax 645, almost all lenses, and a good crop of Hasselbled V lenses. I am now looking to upgrade my P25 to P45. Yes, I see the advantage,to this and NO I do not see the Contax lenses, even wide open (though one rarely uses that) to be limiting the system.
It may be I am at a plateau. With film we reached it likely 20 years ago. Improvement? Yes. Needed for normal work - not likely.
A Contax 645 P45 with many lenses and even likely back up grades (same can be said for H1/2 as well) can keep many of us going.
Maybe we are our worst enemy chasing new technology, but maybe, as someone pointed out above, with care and maintence we may not need to change for 10-20 years. We may be close to having all the tools we need.
Our imagination, and clients will be the limiting factor!
Now, PRINTERS are another story...
Regards
victor
-
Hi
I switched from the Hasselblad 500 cm to the Mamiya 645 AF in 1999. I also started shooting digital for the first time with MF. I have always rented digital backs and let the client pay fot it and this has worked for me. We are not big volume shooters and tend to do AD campaigns and it still works out better for me to rent. However since Mamiya is an affordable MF system to get into I have about 4 lenses and 2 bodies plus a ZD camera. I shoot mainly studio so the 125 flash X is fine. We have had supersites shot with this system so the quality is there. I now rent the Aptus 22 for jobs and I am confident with this set up. But this gives me the choice to use the PHASE backs if I wish to. I have a Canon 5D which I think is a classic however it just doesn't give me the quality I am getting with the Mamiya/LEAF or the ZD. If I want to shoot at iso 400-3200 I will use the Canon but most of my work is shot at iso 50 in the studio. When it comes to insurance I put a value of $5000.00 AUD for 645 AFD, 45mm,55-110 zoom.80mm & 150mm. My Canon 5D was insured for $4500.00 AUD. I find the Mamiya equipment on ebay a bargain! If something did happen to Mamiya I would not have big losses. So far I have been in this system for 7 years and am very happy. Plus they now have the 28mm & 75-150 zoom now. From what I read on the German Mamiya web site this 28mm will work with film and be an effective 32mm on the ZD,Aptus22,E motion22,and Phase. Even though I use Leaf backs I still think if Phase merged with Mamiya it would positive at least Mamiya would get some marketing & PR!!!
So I don't find MFD risky, shooting an AD campaign on 35 digital now thats risky!
Thanks Denis
-
So I don't find MFD risky, shooting an AD campaign on 35 digital now thats risky!
Thanks Denis
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=78492\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Hi Denis, just to play devil's advocate, can you look through Vogue or Martha Stewart Living or National Geographic and visually identify which ads (or editorial content) were shot with MF vs. which were shot with Canons and Nikons?
-
Hi Denis, just to play devil's advocate, can you look through Vogue or Martha Stewart Living or National Geographic and visually identify which ads (or editorial content) were shot with MF vs. which were shot with Canons and Nikons?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=78503\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
sorry to jump in on this one...you have a point with your question and i am sure a lot might have been. shot with DSLR...and often it is impossible to tell..but you can show me a mag and i can probably tell you which ads and editorials could NOT have been shot with DSLR....depending on the look or light you can get the very similar (especially in print) results, but there are some things you just can't do with DSLR...
-
sorry to jump in on this one...you have i can probably tell you which ads and editorials could NOT have been shot with DSLR....depending on the look or light you can get the very similar (especially in print) results, but there are some things you just can't do with DSLR...
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=78506\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I bet you'd be wrong more times than you were right :-)
-
I agree with you, Gary. Seems as if I will be hanging on to my non-fashionable V-mount system for a long time to come.
Takes a lickin' and keeps on tickin'.
-
"Hi Denis, just to play devil's advocate, can you look through Vogue or Martha Stewart Living or National Geographic and visually identify which ads (or editorial content) were shot with MF vs. which were shot with Canons and Nikons?"
Hi Ronno,
Medium format is not about lowest common denominator. I can drive to the mall and see countless 30"x40" posters of eyeware and fashion and tell you which ones where shot MF versus 135. The same is true when I visit the architects I shoot for. For every full page magazine shot I did there is a huge matching print in their office. I was on the phone today with a client who insisted 2 years ago that the D2x shots I made for a job were for web only. They now want 4 x6 foot prints of the 35mb files. I don't think they will look very good at 60 dpi. In this scenario the choice of Canon or Nikons LoRes files was too risky.
I had an important realization about shooting with the D2x..... the act of asking a client if they are O.K. with using the D2x is the same as telling them I'm O.K. with using the D2x (I would not be asking otherwise, right?). So it follows... if it's O.K. with me it should be O.K. with them. This is like the Heisenberg uncertainty principle. I cannot ask the question without changing their answer. The day before if they had been asked by someone about 135 digital and they might have said "well, my photographer doesn't use digital, so it must not be good enough".
So I have stopped asking if, or telling my clients that, going from a 4x5 film camera to a 135 digital is O.K., and instead offer to bring over some 16"x20" prints from my 33mp camera made without retrofocus lenses.
p.s. : photographers day rates have hardly gone up in more than 20 years. Shooting a job with the same camera the art director just bought sounds pretty risky to me.
-
p.s. : photographers day rates have hardly gone up in more than 20 years. Shooting a job with the same camera the art director just bought sounds pretty risky to me.
Hi
Thank You!!! THANK YOU!!!!!! Can I use that line ( with credit ) in our next talk to photography students in Perth!!! We shoot with AD that buy Canon 1DS or 5D's. I totally understand where you are coming from. Thank you again.
Denis
-
When I was photgraphing with a D2X the equipment cost me per year less than 5% of my total income from photography (cost spread out over 3.5 years) Now that I shoot with H2D39 that cost has gone up to about 9 % per year, At first I thought intuiatively, I would have to raise my prices by 20 or 30% to cover the cost and my clients would not like to see these prices go up that much.
When I did some simple arithmitics I came to the conclusion that a rise of more or less 5% cost is very do-able. Between a slight increase in my yearly price structure, and being able to sell the photos to new clients as 4x5 quality, I hope to not even see a change in end of the year profit.
So if you ask me should I go MFD? I would say; yes if you work a lot, no if you don't.
my other reasons for going MFD was
-shooting MF again
-better color
-sharper files
-crop-able
-large prints
and hopefully my clients will come to see these differences as well when they get published
and start paying accordingly
my 2 cents
Marc
-
I had a very similar reaction to the "news" at Photokina. The thought of buying into the HY6 camera system from a cobbled together group of companies , with the lead being taken on the camera front by a company---Rollei--- with little marketing capabilities, a marginal record of customer service in North America, and economic fortunes that seem to always be on the edge, does not engender in me a sense of confidence about plunking down $50K. And, it's not even around for probably another year.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=78409\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I agree. The presentation of the Hy6 has been a marketing disaster.
Rollei is nothing in the actual market. They must to explain what are the strong points of this new "open" platform and what are the compromises assumed with potential clients. What are you offering, why it is a good offer, what problems and demands of clients are you serving better, what are the new possibilities that this system brings and competitors cannot offer, how strong is the involvement of the different companies (and their future plans...).
The Hy6 present more unknowns than responses at this moment. To make things worse, Leica buys Sinar to Jenoptik. Why they did it? What is the role of Leica and Jenoptik in the MF market? Leaf camera was a last minute idea. It was not planned a Leaf clon of the Rollei camera.
This is not a open and public standard, like the 4/3 system is. This is a de facto semi-open platform based on internal (secret) agreements among several companies. We don't know the terms of those agreements. Rollei developed the camera based on the 6000 series, but we don't know if Sinar participated in it. We don't know who paid the bills. We don't know who is the owner of the patents. We don't know if Phase One will be invited or blocked. We know nothing about the "openess" of this "system". We don't know if Schneider and Zeiss are involved in the project, and if Leica will offer lenses or not (Sinar was involved in it before Leica purchased them... What is Leica thinking about the Hy6? Is it a mere collateral "accident" of the puchase?).
Hasselblad has a stronger position in the MF market, only challenged by Canon (from "outside"). Mamiya is in trouble. Pentax will try. They will offer "closed" MF solutions. Say bye-bye to the other contenders (digital backs manufacturers like Sinar, Leaf, Phase One...).
So... there is an opportunity for a new contender that offers a better solution than Hasselblad (more open, more friendly to photographers) and good (modern, full of features) enough to fight against Canon. Leaf, Phase One, Sinar, Rollei... should establish a new standard, open to all, under clear and public specifications, with a clear commitment from expressely involved companies, and make public all the information in a ordered and clear form. The 4/3 consortium is an acceptable model for one such "open platform". This new "open" and well defined standard is a must, absolutely. If these companies try to go to war separated, I give them a few months of life... Things are changing, competition is stronger and the camera manufacturers are closing their cameras and providing "in house" digital solutions... it is clear to me what will happen...
This is not a question of engineering, but marketing... simple and pure market strategy.
I wish and hope these German companies wake up...
-
Well said, Nemo. I agree with you. Too many uncertainties with the Rollei. Too many hastily jumping on the bandwagon. They could just as easily jump off.
Like them or hate them, at least Hasselblad were showing a real camera.
-
Hi, I understand your points about not wanting to have the same camera as the AD who is breathing down your neck. And I concur.
However, there are many, many ADs (at least here in Yew York) who do not care what camera you are using, even if it's a Canon.
I had a meeting with someone at Victoria's Secret (I know, it's not exactly architecture photography...) -- and they use some of the most high profile photographers and the highest paid models in the world -- some of whom command 6 figure day rates for advertising.
She told me she sees her photograhers use film cameras, Canons, Contax with $40K backs, etc. and Victoria's Secret are happy to let the photographes use whatever they are most comfortable using. For their catalogs, large in-store posters, etc. she has no complaints about the end results from any of the above systems.
While I agree that the MF setup looks more profesisonal, etc., I want to make the point that there is less and less resistance to using small format digital in the commercial marketplace, and that the end result of many projects do not take advantage of any increase in resolution or sharpness associated with a larger chip.
-
I had a meeting with someone at Victoria's Secret (I know, it's not exactly architecture photography...) -- and they use some of the most high profile photographers and the highest paid models in the world -- some of whom command 6 figure day rates for advertising.
She told me she sees her photograhers use film cameras, Canons, Contax with $40K backs, etc. and Victoria's Secret are happy to let the photographes use whatever they are most comfortable using. For their catalogs, large in-store posters, etc. she has no complaints about the end results from any of the above systems.
Actually, Russell James shot his "limited edition" book for VicSecret with an old 1Ds
Results seemed "adequate"
With all the post-processing that is done on most photos these days, its very difficult to see which are actually shot on DSLRs or MF.
I used to have the "not shoot on the same cam as the AD"-sickness before, but the last year or so things have changed. Now nobody cares about what you shoot with, as Canon 1-series have become a standard for most photographers.
I am now shooting on a H1+Leaf Aptus A75, as well as changed my 1DsMkII to a 5D (for even more portability). I also have the EcoDigital H1 to RZ adapter so i can shoot on my trusty old RZ. The RZ with huge lens shade, grip, motor, AE finder etc looks like a monster compared to my little 5D. I used it before to "show off" when I thought i needed it... now its not really used any more. I find myself just grabbing the H1 with 50-110 (which does not look much more advanced and impressive than the 1Ds+70-200mm) and shoot.
Personal slogan for 2006; "shut up and shoot" ;-)
What happens in front of the lens is a lot more important than what happens behind it...
Svein Erik
-
Actually, Russell James shot his "limited edition" book for VicSecret with an old 1Ds
Results seemed "adequate"
With all the post-processing that is done on most photos these days, its very difficult to see which are actually shot on DSLRs or MF.
Svein Erik
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=78576\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Hi Svein, do you know if and where that book can be purchased?
-
This is not a open and public standard, like the 4/3 system is. This is a de facto semi-open platform based on internal (secret) agreements among several companies. We don't know the terms of those agreements. Rollei developed the camera based on the 6000 series, but we don't know if Sinar participated in it. We don't know who paid the bills. We don't know who is the owner of the patents. We don't know if Phase One will be invited or blocked. We know nothing about the "openess" of this "system". We don't know if Schneider and Zeiss are involved in the project, and if Leica will offer lenses or not (Sinar was involved in it before Leica purchased them... What is Leica thinking about the Hy6? Is it a mere collateral "accident" of the puchase?).
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=78546\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
the camera is made by franke&heidecke (holds the patents) which builds it for leaf, sinar or whoever wants it...there are more lenses available for this camera then any other camera ever made..already available..with more coming...the open system that you are unsure about is called MF and has been around for quite some time, absolutely nothing new about a 6x6 with a rotating back...
-
the camera is made by franke&heidecke (holds the patents) which builds it for leaf, sinar or whoever wants it...there are more lenses available for this camera then any other camera ever made..already available..with more coming...the open system that you are unsure about is called MF and has been around for quite some time, absolutely nothing new about a 6x6 with a rotating back...
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=78613\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
It is still early days yet and nothing is set in concrete. Don't be too sanguine that between its showing at Photokina 2006 and its projected delivery in April 07, things won't change. Leaf jumped in at the last minute and F&H whipped one up for them.
It is my hunch that we won't ever see a Rolleiflex Hy6. F&H is turning itself into a contract manufacturer for anyone who wishes to re-brand its products. I see Sinar, Leaf and PhaseOne taking the Hasselblad approach in making their systems integrated, closed and proprietary. I suspect that the only things that are interchangeable will be the Rollei-manufactured lenses and accessories. I don't think the backs will be. That is to say, for example, you buy a Sinar Hy6, it will only take Sinar backs and not Leaf's nor PhaseOne's. At the request of the client, Rollei may even change the lens mount and make it proprietary to that client. You cannot discount it and say that it won't happen. Check out Franke & Heidecke's website; so far not a peep about the Rolleiflex Hy6 after Kina 06. What does that tell you?
This is about business and grabbing market share. It is not about altruism in making a platform as general as possible for the sake of photographers everywhere. As far as business decisions go, sometimes you're right and sometimes you're wrong. I don't think the participants of this forum represent the median profile of all photographers.
We are going to see more 'closed' integrated systems, not fewer. Sinar won't want you to consider switching over to Leaf once you have bought into its system and neither would Leaf and PhaseOne. The only way to do that is to lock you in as Hasselblad has done.
Will I be proved wrong? How will the market react? This is in the hands of the marketing men. Let us wait for April 07 to see how the plot unfolds.
-
So... there is an opportunity for a new contender that offers a better solution than Hasselblad (more open, more friendly to photographers) and good (modern, full of features) enough to fight against Canon. Leaf, Phase One, Sinar, Rollei... should establish a new standard, open to all, under clear and public specifications, with a clear commitment from expressely involved companies, and make public all the information in a ordered and clear form. The 4/3 consortium is an acceptable model for one such "open platform". This new "open" and well defined standard is a must, absolutely. If these companies try to go to war separated, I give them a few months of life... Things are changing, competition is stronger and the camera manufacturers are closing their cameras and providing "in house" digital solutions... it is clear to me what will happen...
This is not a question of engineering, but marketing... simple and pure market strategy.
I wish and hope these German companies wake up...
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=78546\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Good points made; I hope you are right here, I sure agree...
What the marketing people might miss is how uncomfortable many photographers feel about being forced into using a certain DB/ software, just because it is compatible with only one particular camera system.
Just imagine a camera system working only with a certain type of film, which can only be processed at a few selected labs. Who would buy into that, if there were alternatives ?
I think the Rollei concept, which is basically open platform - the recent announcments are just that, nothing written in stone yet - could be a lot more future-proof than Hasselblad's attempt to become 'king of the hill' .
-
Hi Svein, do you know if and where that book can be purchased?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=78579\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Its "limited edition" and only given away by VC to selected customers/dealers/whatever. I know Russell James, Raphael Mazzucco and Ellen von Unwerth each made a book, and its bundled together as "SEXY". Maybe you get lucky on eBay. There should also be a DVD in the kit.
-
Just imagine a camera system working only with a certain type of film, which can only be processed at a few selected labs. Who would buy into that, if there were alternatives ?
I would, if, for example, it offered certain capabilities that others did not, such a a T/S lens that had any optical aberrations automatically corrected in camera and the workflow and file quality were there.
-
hands on report with the Hy6:
here (http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00IErf&tag=)
-
It seems like any medium format digital purchase is incredibly risky at the moment. After the news of the last year and from Photokina who knows what other shock announcements are possible?
-Kodak may decide MF sensors isn't a business with a future
-The new Hy6 may never reach production
-Even worse the Hy6 may be launched but then discontinued (in one or all of its guises) if it fails to reach viable sales levels, leaving owners high and dry.
-Phase One may get absorbed within Mamiya.
-As above, but Mamiya then goes bump and takes Phase One down with them.
-Canon's deeper R&D pockets may trump the MF quality advantage in the 35mm arena, finishing off the entire MF market.
-Pentax or Mamiya may uncercut MF digital prices to such an extent that Hasselblad and Sinar/Rollei/Leaf bail out.
If I sat down and scratched my head I'm sure I could come up with many more doomsday scenarios that would leave a photographer holding an expensive white elephant. Given all this uncertainty what's the smart photographer's strategy for digital medium format?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=78406\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I agree with you, Gary.
The MF and the BF digital market is an old system, more of 15 years old, but never has matured, the first leaf DB, created in 1992, and the othes like sinar and but late, the hass and phase, they have maintained always an ascending price. I believe that all our doubts would go if a MFDB be to sold for 6000$, instead of for 30000$.
I believe also that the MF-makers take advantage of the photographers that we see us inevitably forced to acquire these equipment, by the evident one each time more, shortage of film of some types and, to the demands of our clients.
I believe, already firmly, that the MF-makers have a secret pact, and that is the same hand the one that moves Hass, Leaf, sinar... and that splits of that pact is the sale price, if not because the prices are identical among all the manufacturers by the same number of pixels, or product line? because Leaf (subsidiary of Kodak) buy to dalsa, and theoretically their competence Hass, purchase To Kodak their CMOS? .....
I think, that the strategy, was to eliminate the competence in MF, that already has been obtained, obtaining a total egemony in the market, being distributed to the owners between alone two options, they are the same, alone one that with a different color.
But I think that should not be the photographer who pay that immaturity, the not to have obtained a functional, low cost product, by the one that do not we have that be alert of an investment that can be lost, to remain obsolete, or to be stop manufacturing. Our work, or hobby, is something very serious, and of they are taking advantage of us and of our needs.
-
It seems like any medium format digital purchase is incredibly risky at the moment.
Given all this uncertainty what's the smart photographer's strategy for digital medium format?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=78406\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
This is a question that I faced recently. I recently dipped my toe in the DMF world. I’ve been shooting weddings for years. The largest I print is 16x20, so a DSLR is fine for that. I also have a massive investment in 35mm gear.
But I was looking for a way to change the way I look at my photography. My decision was less about what the MF file size could give me or bowing down to some useless art director’s requirements.
The problem with the American MBA influence is that everything comes down to ROI. For me it was less about ROI in the short term, but about vision. And in my business, vision separates the wheat from the chaff.
-
I've been told the Hy6 will only be a reality if Phase One will come on board!
The market is otherwise to small to cater only for Leaf and Sinar.
Think of it this way,all those Phase One owners would love to be able to use their backs on a new camera system like the Hy6!
Also with the new software from Phase,C4 coming out soon and their new + backs,
I feel there will be a lot of new Phase One users out there!
After reading M.Kravits problems I'm now switching camps towards the Phase again!
Please note that I don't have a MF system yet,but it will be the Hy6 when it will be released.
Cheers,
Willem
-
I've been told the Hy6 will only be a reality if Phase One will come on board!
Who told you this? Just curious.
The market is otherwise to small to cater only for Leaf and Sinar.
Think of it this way,all those Phase One owners would love to be able to use their backs on a new camera system like the Hy6!
I doubt it will make any difference. *If* the Hy6 comes out with optional rear mounts to cater for existing backs, then it won't matter if it's a Leaf or PhaseOne back using the mount. This would seem like a smart move.
If the Hy6 has it's own proprietary mount, and no adaptation then I agree that PhaseOne's participation will be important, but what choice do they have? If it's an open platform then they are free to design backs for the Hy6, and they have just been shut out of the Hass H market so they will welcome the extra market.
-
For most of my work the 5D has been more than adequate.
I find that in *some jobs I could use, want, more resolution and color depth. Specially when shooting clothing where i want the texture perfect and products up to cars where maximum detail is esential.
But since I dont work in a huge market I cant justify the back. I wouldnt get much more jobs with it than I do now if any just by having a better camera.
MF is still waaaay to risky. I mean look at some of the issues people rae having with $30,000 backs, just absurd.
Seems to me although it seems selfish and antagonistic at first, Hasselblads chose path might be the right one.
For some reason I havent seen many reviews on the H2D-22 or 39
-
After reading M.Kravits problems I'm now switching camps towards the Phase again!
Please note that I don't have a MF system yet,but it will be the Hy6 when it will be released.
Cheers,
Willem
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=79602\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
If you don't own a MF digital back and don't intend to get one until the Hy6 becomes available then what do you mean by switching camps? have you used a Leaf?, a Phase?, A Hasselblad CF-39?
I have used Phase and Leaf. I prefer the look of the Leaf file as JR has stated many times. The ONLY issue I have is that of teh centerfold issue and only when I am shooting my Alpa 12 with wide digitars using rise or shift.
Leaf is working on the problem. They call and write me weekly to let me know of their progress. I know I have been vocal, but in no way am I demeaning the product. I suggest that before you or anyone else "switch camps" you work with the back first.
On my H2 the Leaf Aptus 75 has been a wonderful tool. I am now using a loaner Aptus 22 and it has been perfect. I finished a 3 day shoot yesterday and have been doing post all day. The files shot with the Aptus 22 and the Alpa 12 SWA & Schneider Digitar 35/5.6 are friggen amazing!
-
Michael,
I will make sure I get to test all the relevant backs etc.
I just have this feeling when Capture One V4 comes out ,it will certainly rock!
It's clear now all backs have their issues,however what is clear is that the Dalsa and the Kodak sensors both need some kind of correction with tilt and shift and with the extreme wides.
The look of the files is a personal matter,therefore I'll try before I buy!
Cheers,
Willem.
-
I'd just like to add my name to those using the A75 who have NOT had the centerfold issue. I use it with 24, 35 + 47 digitars on a Cambo WDS. I see slight colour shifts with the 24 but thats all, and to be expected I think with such a wide lens on these large sensors.
I would also second Michaels, and others, comments that the A75 with 35xl Digitar produces some amazing results.
Matt