Luminous Landscape Forum
Equipment & Techniques => Medium Format / Film / Digital Backs – and Large Sensor Photography => Topic started by: Ethan Schoonover on March 30, 2007, 05:06:15 am
-
I know this has been speculated on a lot, but Phase seems conspicuously quiet about their body plans. I'd like to get some collective LL forum wisdom on where Phase is heading in this regard.
(My search in the forum may have missed the überthread where this all gets explained, feel free to throw links at me in that case.)
I'm not the first to speculate that, if I was Phase, I'd either be pairing up with Mamiya for an all new integrated body or keeping real quiet about a Phase Hy6 and then stealing the Hy6 thunder by announcing it right after everybody else launches.
Anyone else have a read on their pokerface?
-
Phase has to do something with Mamiya. The Hy6 is a Sinar camera with Leaf licenced to use it. Mamiya has a full lens range now including there new 28 & 75-150 zoom. They would have the advantage of the most affordable camera system.
Denis
-
Phase has to do something with Mamiya. The Hy6 is a Sinar camera with Leaf licenced to use it. Mamiya has a full lens range now including there new 28 & 75-150 zoom. They would have the advantage of the most affordable camera system.
Denis
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=109582\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I don't think Mamiya is going to be enough for Phase - most existing Phase users are using other platforms. Also, the ZD is competing directly with 'junior' Phase One backs already. I am just guessing but I think the 'co-operation' between the companies may not amount to a lot.
-
There is probably a good reason not to but... it seems to make sense they should design a body with 'interchangeable' lens mounts. No need to provide lenses. Would enhance their ability to sell backs.
My $.02 worth.
-
Depends how Phase One and Mamiya see the future. If Phase One see themselves being marginalised by Hassy, Mamiya would look like a good partner. On the other hand, if Mamiya, with their new digotal division, want to mimic Hassy (the ZD back is I think for mamiya bodies only) then Phase could have real problems as options begin the shut down for them.
For Formula 1 racing fans, think of the Williams F1 team, who once doiminated formula 1 but who have become increasingly marginalised now their recent partnership with BMW engines has expired and Cosworth are off the scene. Phase are like Williams, dependent on their "partners" for survival at the moment.
Quentin
-
Depends how Phase One and Mamiya see the future. If Phase One see themselves being marginalised by Hassy, Mamiya would look like a good partner. On the other hand, if Mamiya, with their new digotal division, want to mimic Hassy (the ZD back is I think for mamiya bodies only) then Phase could have real problems as options begin the shut down for them.
For Formula 1 racing fans, think of the Williams F1 team, who once doiminated formula 1 but who have become increasingly marginalised now their recent partnership with BMW engines has expired and Cosworth are off the scene. Phase are like Williams, dependent on their "partners" for survival at the moment.
Quentin
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=109602\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I suspect that the phase Mamiya thing is simply a new package deal for the high end. In other words buy a P30/45+ and get a AFDII and lens for free etc etc. this aviods any new pdoducts having to be released and avoids competition with the ZD and gets Hassleblad's backs up!
What ever happened to the stand alone ZD back... why not produce thsi in a Hassleblad mount for £5K and really see Hasselblad in pain ? Yes it would hurt Phase one sales a bit too... but not as much as it would hurt hte Ex-Sweede
Ed
-
Phase doesn't appear to have many options. The ZD, the ZD back, and the upcoming Pentax and 1DsIII will all put pressure on Phase's P25 and P30 backs, which will force them to cut margins and profitability. On the high end, they could reverse engineer the Hy6 interface and offer backs for it. They can contine to offer backs for Mamiya, Hassy H1 and H2 bodies, and Contax 645's. And they can continue to offer backs for the view camera market. It's hard to see what else they can do. I don't think they have deep enough pockets to design their own camera system. It'll certainly be interesting to see how it all plays out.
-
I don't think Mamiya is going to be enough for Phase - most existing Phase users are using other platforms. Also, the ZD is competing directly with 'junior' Phase One backs already. I am just guessing but I think the 'co-operation' between the companies may not amount to a lot.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=109587\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Yeah, if no ZD I would have said Mamiya was a no brainer for a body tie up.
Then again, the ZD was so long in coming, I wonder if Mamiya would be more inclined to work with Phase for a higher end unit rather than run that gauntlet again.
Plus, when Phase comes out with their 60 I bet they'll care less about the 20MP end of the market (which Canon will eat up anyhow). <wild speculation>
ZD ends up as prototype for the new Phasiya.</wild speculation>
-
Yeah, if no ZD I would have said Mamiya was a no brainer for a body tie up.
Then again, the ZD was so long in coming, I wonder if Mamiya would be more inclined to work with Phase for a higher end unit rather than run that gauntlet again.
Remember they have new ownership - a software company iirc - and I bet they have their sights set on a digital future for Mamiya, having that sort of background. So that excludes Phase. Also, the money is not in the camera bodies, especially with so many bodies on the used market at the moment. Really I don't see what Phase can offer Mamiya right now.
-
They should pick up the tooling for the discontinued Contax 645 from Kyocera and make a deal with Zeiss. Come out with an improved Phase One 645 tightly integrated to the Phase One backs. If they can't get the old Contax/Zeiss lens line which was manufactured in Asia up and running. Zeiss has all those orphaned Hasselblad FE lenses (though not autofocus) that could be put into a Contax mount.
There is already an installed base of Contax 645 users many of whom are Phase customers.
-
They should pick up the tooling for the discontinued Contax 645 from Kyocera and make a deal with Zeiss. Come out with an improved Phase One 645 tightly integrated to the Phase One backs.
There is already an installed base of Contax 645 users many of whom are Phase customers.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=109634\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Lovely post, I'd just replace the words "Contax 645 users" with "Contax 645 rabidly-loyal-you'll-have-to-pry-it-from-my-cold-dead-hands users".
Besides being a rock solid (and rock heavy) system, it would be a great story too... rising from the ashes. I fear it will remain merely a dream but would be a lovely turn of events.
-
They should pick up the tooling for the discontinued Contax 645 from Kyocera and make a deal with Zeiss. Come out with an improved Phase One 645 tightly integrated to the Phase One backs. If they can't get the old Contax/Zeiss lens line which was manufactured in Asia up and running. Zeiss has all those orphaned Hasselblad FE lenses (though not autofocus) that could be put into a Contax mount.
There is already an installed base of Contax 645 users many of whom are Phase customers.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=109634\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Many an attempt has been made to get Kyocera to give up the rights to the Contax name. The Carl Zeiss Trust owns the name, but it is licensed to Kyocera. Zeiss has tried everything including legal action to get it back with no real progress as of last year.
I also believe (personal observation) that Phase does not have the financial resources to make their own camera. It would have to be a partnership with an existing camera manufacturer or a merger.
Matt LaPointe
Sinar Bron Imaging
National Sales Support Specialist
(219) 670-9905
mlapointe@sinarbron.com
-
They would not use the Contax name, just the medium format tooling, mount and camera designs which as time passes will be worth less and less to Kyocera. The Contax brand is a can of worms Phase can't afford to touch. Maybe they can source the camera assembly to the original factory or another Asian source.
If they could just get the old Contax 645 body as is with new wiring and software out the door along with an improved MAM adapter -users would have plenty of cost effective choice in the used market between Contax and Hasselblad FE lenses. The lens range would instantly be broader and faster then the new Rollei/Sonar/Leaf and on a par (as well as cheaper) as anything else out there. New lenses could come latter.
Hell, give the body away with new backs to keep clients from bailing to other closed systems.
-
I for one am expecting (and hoping) that Phase will have a back interface for the Rollie Hy6 sometime later this year.
At the PMA show in Las Vegas a few weeks ago I looked at the Hy6 (seemed to be a functional prototype and not a production unit). The US distributor, Direct Source Marketing, indicated that the Hy6 would be available mid year in a Rollieflex branded configuration as a film camera and that there was nothing to prevent any digital back maker from building backs for the Hy6. This was music to my ears as I see the Hy6 as having the potential to be a versatile platform for many backs now and in the future. And all those wonderful lenses for the Rollie!
I asked about pricing and they indicated that it was not determined yet. I asked if the Hy6 would be in short supply initially they indicated that they felt they were designing the production levels to fully meet the expected demand. One should take that last bit with a grain of salt in my opinion but they should know by now that there is huge interest in the Hy6 by a lot of medium format photographers.
-
I for one am expecting (and hoping) that Phase will have a back interface for the Rollie Hy6 sometime later this year.
See this thread:
http://luminous-landscape.com/forum/index....=hy6+rolleiflex (http://luminous-landscape.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=14503&hl=hy6+rolleiflex)
- Franke & Heidecke has the rights to sell this camera in Japan, China and Russia ONLY, AND under the name "Rolleiflex" (and has not the rights to sell it to Phase One).
- Phase One is not part of this project, which means in clear that this camera will not be sold to Phase One.
Phase getting the Contax 645 resurrected and rebranded as a Phase One is a long shot but Phase looks to be facing an impossible situation. Without cooperation from the camera manufacturers they have got no business and there are lots of Contax users still out there. Its a much bigger installed base then the Hy6 installed base which is currently 0.
-
Yeah, I know about that posting, that is why I was glad to hear something to the contrary.
-
Phase does not have to be part of the "project" in order to make backs to fit a Hy6 just like they make backs to fit an H1/H2 or a Mamiya 645 or a Contax 645.
-
They would not use the Contax name, just the medium format tooling, mount and camera designs which as time passes will be worth less and less to Kyocera. The Contax brand is a can of worms Phase can't afford to touch. Maybe they can source the camera assembly to the original factory or another Asian source.
If they could just get the old Contax 645 body as is with new wiring and software out the door along with an improved MAM adapter -users would have plenty of cost effective choice in the used market between Contax and Hasselblad FE lenses. The lens range would instantly be broader and faster then the new Rollei/Sonar/Leaf and on a par (as well as cheaper) as anything else out there. New lenses could come latter.
Hell, give the body away with new backs to keep clients from bailing to other closed systems.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=109644\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
You seem to forget that Contax owns all the lens designs for that camera. They are all Carl Zeiss lenses.
It was my understanding (and I may very well be wrong) that Carl Zeiss was integral in the design of that camera and holds rights to it as well.
Sometimes some posters on this board over simplify the legal and ownership hurdles to what seem like great ideas.
Carl Zeiss would love to have ability to have that camera (or a successor) in production again. However it just doesn't seem to be in the cards anytime soon.
Matt LaPointe
Sinar Bron Imaging
National Sales Support Specialist
(219) 670-9905
mlapointe@sinarbron.com
-
I for one am expecting (and hoping) that Phase will have a back interface for the Rollie Hy6 sometime later this year.
At the PMA show in Las Vegas a few weeks ago I looked at the Hy6 (seemed to be a functional prototype and not a production unit). The US distributor, Direct Source Marketing, indicated that the Hy6 would be available mid year in a Rollieflex branded configuration as a film camera and that there was nothing to prevent any digital back maker from building backs for the Hy6. This was music to my ears as I see the Hy6 as having the potential to be a versatile platform for many backs now and in the future. And all those wonderful lenses for the Rollie!
I asked about pricing and they indicated that it was not determined yet. I asked if the Hy6 would be in short supply initially they indicated that they felt they were designing the production levels to fully meet the expected demand. One should take that last bit with a grain of salt in my opinion but they should know by now that there is huge interest in the Hy6 by a lot of medium format photographers.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=109646\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Direct Source Marketing is no longer the distributor of Rollei. The worldwide distributor is Sinar with the exception of the UK I believe. In the United States the distributor is Sinar Bron Imaging.
I do believe DSM has Rollei Stock they are still blowing out, but they should have no ability to get the Hy6.
Matt LaPointe
Sinar Bron Imaging
National Sales Support Specialist
(219) 670-9905
mlapointe@sinarbron.com
-
You seem to forget that Contax owns all the lens designs for that camera. They are all Carl Zeiss lenses.
It was my understanding (and I may very well be wrong) that Carl Zeiss was integral in the design of that camera and holds rights to it as well.
Sometimes some posters on this board over simplify the legal and ownership hurdles to what seem like great ideas.
Carl Zeiss would love to have ability to have that camera (or a successor) in production again. However it just doesn't seem to be in the cards anytime soon.
Of course everything I wrote is idle speculation, not based on anything Phase One is actually likely to do or consider doing and I have no idea of who has rights to what vis-a-vis the Contax camera design or whether Phase One has the capability or desire to pull off such a venture. But if it where a possibility (and it's impossible to know if it is or isn't possible) I bet there would be a lot of happy Contax 645/Phase One owners who are now considering switching, not by choice, but because their camera and or their camera back is a 'dead end'. And as you point out Zeiss would be happy to have another platform for it's lens line.
-
...and this whole time phase is outselling every other back maker.....and with the amount of business they seem to have grabbed from leaf and the performance of the P30, i would not be surprised if they would sell more backs this year then ever before....while some are worrying that phase does not have a body to sell to.....contax, mamiya, H1/2, hass V system, most 4x5 systems (and field systems)...i think that covers about 90% of the actual cameras in the actual hands of people?
and most important: most of those people are much more likely to upgrade their back (to another phase of course) then switch to some new system.....
oh...and there is also the small detail that phase also sells software for 150-500$ per licence.....and other companies are losing out on back sales because the software they are giving away for free just does not do a good job.....
yes i worry about phase too.....
i would also bet that there will be a way to put phase backs on the Hy6...no matter what anyone says....if the camera sells well enough, there will be an incentive for someone to come up with some adapter....this is DMF so price really is no problem.....i mean sinar charges 2300$ for the emotion adapter for 6008......i think for that much i can have something custom built.....
-
Have to agree with you Paul, when i hear speculation that Phase are somehow missing the boat i have to chuckle. My P30+ which is on order is in a very longggggg queue, and the factory are working flat out to fill back orders, they must be shitting themselves about the ZD!
Gary.
-
Have to agree with you Paul, when i hear speculation that Phase are somehow missing the boat i have to chuckle. My P30+ which is on order is in a very longggggg queue, and the factory are working flat out to fill back orders, they must be shitting themselves about the ZD!
Gary.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=109729\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Phase isn't missing any boats. They are in one of the best positions to be in as a back manufacturer. That's precisely why I'd expect them to make a body deal of some sort this year.
It's their leadership which allows them to sit back and watch everyone else pre-announce this and that while they lay plans to do some very interesting stuff.
I expect we'll hear something this year. Time will tell.
-
Absolutely right, Matt, except for the "UK" part:
Sinar is exclusive distributor of the professional Rolleiflex 6008 System as well as the Rollei x-Act 2, except in Japan, China and Russia This applies also to the Sinar Hy6.
Best regards,
Thierry
Direct Source Marketing is no longer the distributor of Rollei. The worldwide distributor is Sinar with the exception of the UK I believe. In the United States the distributor is Sinar Bron Imaging.
I do believe DSM has Rollei Stock they are still blowing out, but they should have no ability to get the Hy6.
Matt LaPointe
Sinar Bron Imaging
National Sales Support Specialist
(219) 670-9905
mlapointe@sinarbron.com
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=109656\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
-
Hi
The game in MFD all changed last Sept 2006. Hasselblad have gone there own way & they wanted to stop production of the H2. I think you know where Hasselblad is headed. The Hy6 project is Sinar & Leaf. Phase can continue to make backs for the H1,H2 & Contax but there is no 28mm or new RD. There is a great oppprtunity to build a strong relation ship with Mamiya. Regardless of the ZD, Phase has a more developed product.
Denis
-
...and this whole time phase is outselling every other back maker.....and with the amount of business they seem to have grabbed from leaf and the performance of the P30, i would not be surprised if they would sell more backs this year then ever before...
All true. But being the dominant player in the market today does not guarantee Phase One anything in the future. Ask Netscape, they owned 99% of the internet browser market, today the number is in the low single digits. If Phase One is to continue it's leadership position it will have to do more then produce an excellent digital back. It's competition is changing the playing field, making proprietary tightly integrated closed camera/back systems the future norm and they will need to respond.
-
Remember they have new ownership - a software company iirc - and I bet they have their sights set on a digital future for Mamiya, having that sort of background. So that excludes Phase. Also, the money is not in the camera bodies, especially with so many bodies on the used market at the moment. Really I don't see what Phase can offer Mamiya right now.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=109629\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Graham, I agree. I would not have seen the Phase One/Mamiya deal as optimal for either party. For Mamiya it is providing some sort of back-up plan in case their own development of the digital side (the ZD's) does not work out. For Phase One, Mamiya was the only hardware manufacturer left and isuppose they felt they needed to hook up with SOMEONE.
You seem to forget that Contax owns all the lens designs for that camera. They are all Carl Zeiss lenses.
It was my understanding (and I may very well be wrong) that Carl Zeiss was integral in the design of that camera and holds rights to it as well.
Sometimes some posters on this board over simplify the legal and ownership hurdles to what seem like great ideas.
Carl Zeiss would love to have ability to have that camera (or a successor) in production again. However it just doesn't seem to be in the cards anytime soon.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=109654\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Matt, I think that's right to some extent. First, let us be clear about a couple of things. "Contax" doesn't "own" anything. It is just a marketing name. The lenses for the Contax 645 were designed, manufactuered and marketed as "Zeiss" lenses. Look at the packaging and labeling, it doesn't say "Kyocera" anywhere. it doesn't even say "Contax" anywhere on the box. (Only on the lens information sheet does it say "Contax 645 mount"). Yes, the lenses are clearly ZEISS products, even if the OEM manufacturer for them was Kyocera, and their designs owned by Zeiss.
Now, that is not to say Kyocera had no role in the development of those lenses. Kyocera developed all the electronics in the lenses, and I believe OWN the intellectual property associated with the electronics AND lens mount. And that is the rub. It's not so much the Contax name that is the issue here. I believe that Zeiss could have done something with another name, if the license for the Contax name was the only issue. But it is the technology of the 645 -- the body-lens interface, lens mount and lens control that is the issue. This is what is owned by Kyocera and what Kyocera is apparently not giving up. Zeiss or anyone else, can not do anything with the Contax camera platforms without an agreement with Kyocera that would give them access to the technology. There are legal and ownership hurdles, just not the ones that many people think.
The Contax 645 would have been an IDEAL partner for Phase One -- and Phase one and Kyocera had gone very far down the road in licensing the Contax 645 technology (and perhaps tooling) to Phase. But my understanding is that the Phase One board of directors (in an act of extreme short-sightedness) rejected the deal. Especially, given the well known fact that Kyocera had a Contax 645 MkII model ready to go, this is a very distressing situation. Phase, without a body, had no place to go other than run over to Mamiya, which is a much less attactive proposition for them than Contax would have been.
Quite frankly, and hindsight here is especially valuable, if Kyocera management had their sh*t together when they were having problems sorting out the N Digital (an extremely promising, but flawed DSLR) they should have brought in a digital partner like Phase One. If they had done this then, Contax might still be with us, and might just have a very nice share of the professional market. The still-born Phase One-Contax deal ultimately might have been just too late.
It is my view that Kyocera is being exceptionally foolish by not licensing their Contax technology and not selling off the Contax license -- their shareholders should be very annoyed. The sense is that this is not about money to Kyocera (rumour has it that they even have destroyed all the Contax tooling). It is about, in some sense, sticking it to Zeiss. In the end, however, all Kyocera really ended up doing it is sticking it to their loyal customers.
-
But my understanding is that the Phase One board of directors (in an act of extreme short-sightedness) rejected the deal.
If this took place before Hasselblad's decision to close their system it would have been understandable. Not wanting to go into competition with the camera manufacturers that you want cooperation from. The more open environment that existed then was perfect for Phase One. Why upset the apple cart? Of course things are different now.
-
All true. But being the dominant player in the market today does not guarantee Phase One anything in the future. Ask Netscape, they owned 99% of the internet browser market, today the number is in the low single digits. If Phase One is to continue it's leadership position it will have to do more then produce an excellent digital back. It's competition is changing the playing field, making proprietary tightly integrated closed camera/back systems the future norm and they will need to respond.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=109848\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
you are assuming that people WANT an integrated solution....i don't think that is necessarily the case...there are some advantages and some disadvantages and for me the disadvantages by far outweigh the advantages....
everybody wants an open system...everyone....
the idea that in 5 years we will all have to buy the H7D is frightening and honestly ridiculous.....because my mamiyas will still be working (if not i can just buy new or used bodies) and i will have upgraded my phase back several times....and there will STILL be by far more contax, mamiya, H1/2 bodies floating around and you might be able to pick up a P45+ for 5000.....and who needs more then (almost) 4x5 quality every 1.5 sec? IT WILL STILL WORK!!!
or maybe i will have switched to Hy6 with a phase back or a sinar back.....
teaming up with one body maker might cut out others....and in phase's case they are selling to ALL cameras.....why get into a business that we all know is loosing money....everybody knows that making bodies is only profitable if you sell the lenses/accessories and Dbacks with it.....phase already does that....they already sell the items with the (arguably) highest margin...Dbacks and software...
the R&D for a new improved contax with lenses would be a major expense/risk and would they sell more backs because of it? do they sell less because they are NOT taking the risk?
i would be far more afraid (as a Dback maker) that the product is getting "too good"....the backs already never really get bad or need to be replaced and quality is getting ridiculous....
yes it will get better, but at this rate what will the top of the line be in 5 years? P80++? 25-6400asa? 16bit, 3frames/sec, 80mpix on a 6x4.5 chip? sounds great, i would like that.....do i need it, no....will my mom suddenly feel the urge to buy a camera like that? no...her cellphone cam will be just fine...
what i need is a camera/back/software combo that WORKS and delivers the quality i need....no lock-ups, hick-ups, software glitches, firmware updates,.....
phase delivers all that TODAY for all platforms (camera and computer) and really has no competition anymore....leaf was the competitor and they somehow blew it.....don't know why or how, but they did.....
hasselblad is trying to do all that and maybe they are trying too hard? maybe it is just too hard to do it ALL? and do it well? they are trying to muscle their way to the top....maybe it will work for them......and in a way it will keep phase on their toes....otherwise we will never see the P80++....which is actually fine with me as well.....
-
If this took place before Hasselblad's decision to close their system it would have been understandable. Not wanting to go into competition with the camera manufacturers that you want cooperation from. The more open environment that existed then was perfect for Phase One. Why upset the apple cart? Of course things are different now.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=109856\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
They should have seen it already when talks between HB+imacon or HB+phase for possible mergers/buyouts arose... not when the H3D entered the scene...
-
Remember right at the beginning when the Hy6 was touted as a totally open system?
-
And as you point out Zeiss would be happy to have another platform for it's lens line.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=109660\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Unfortunately Zeiss seems to be run by a generation of people who think releasing a new film camera range in 2006 is a great idea. That's how wide of the mark they are with their strategy at present. I wish to the heavens they could get on-message and tie up with Phase to release a killer MF package, but sadly the people at the Zeiss' helm are too busy re-inventing the steam engine as a means of transport.
-
Remember right at the beginning when the Hy6 was touted as a totally open system?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=109924\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
In what way is that Hy6 not open? It is not programmed to accept only specific digital backs. As has been said here many times, no-one is stopping Phase or anyone else from making a Hy6-compatible back, just as they make Contax-mount backs.
The Hass H3D body DOES limit the camera to using Hass backs. That's the difference.
-
In what way is that Hy6 not open? It is not programmed to accept only specific digital backs. As has been said here many times, no-one is stopping Phase or anyone else from making a Hy6-compatible back, just as they make Contax-mount backs.
The Hass H3D body DOES limit the camera to using Hass backs. That's the difference.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=109957\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Not exactly Graham,
What has been said is that neither Sinar nor Leaf is planning to manufacture adapterplates. Sinar is not helping out anyone that has plans to manufacture adapterplates.
Whether Phase is allowed to make a back that will fit Hy6/AFi has been left in the middle. It has been stated Phase is not a part of the Hy6/AFi project. It is unclear whether there is IP that needs to be addressed when building a back to fit the Hy6/AFi. It is unclear whether the IP holders are willing to license to parties like Phase.
An open system, in my vocabulary, welcomes everyone that is willing to develop upon it. For an open system the Hy6/AFi should have its communication protocols published or made available upon request, should provide a developerskit and be willing to help 3rd parties built products (if only by providing all necessary documentation and information).
At the moment, as far as I understood, when you want to built a back (if you are allowed IP wise) for the Hy6/AFi you are forced to reverse engineer the communication protocols. There is no knowledge how difficult that has been made or whether any proprietary technology or encryption has been used to make this particularly difficult.
The same applies for the H3D. When you want to built a back for that thing (again if you are allowed IP wise) you have to reverse engineer it as well.
The difference between Hy6/AFi and Hasselblad is that the first has more than one participant however this doesn't make the first an open system.
-
you are assuming that people WANT an integrated solution....i don't think that is necessarily the case...there are some advantages and some disadvantages and for me the disadvantages by far outweigh the advantages....
everybody wants an open system...everyone....
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=109894\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Well, 99% of photographers have been using the totally closed systems offered by Canon and Nikon and I don't remember hearing so many complaints about this.
I really don't think that most of the photographers out there really care. They want something whose ROI is good. Whether the system is opened or closed is in itself very far down the list.
the idea that in 5 years we will all have to buy the H7D is frightening and honestly ridiculous.....because my mamiyas will still be working (if not i can just buy new or used bodies) and i will have upgraded my phase back several times....and there will STILL be by far more contax, mamiya, H1/2 bodies floating around and you might be able to pick up a P45+ for 5000.....and who needs more then (almost) 4x5 quality every 1.5 sec? IT WILL STILL WORK!!!
or maybe i will have switched to Hy6 with a phase back or a sinar back.....
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=109894\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
As long as the prices of MFDB stay high, the need to buy a body with the back is irrelevant. The body is essentially free compared to the back.
Being able to speak to a single provider for a system has a clear value. Openess is nice as an idea, but the promoters of openess have IMHO so far failed to come up with a strong business case. The whole thing always end up looking more like Phase One PR instead of putting the photographer's business needs at the center of the discussion.
teaming up with one body maker might cut out others....and in phase's case they are selling to ALL cameras.....why get into a business that we all know is loosing money..../// would they sell more backs because of it? do they sell less because they are NOT taking the risk?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=109894\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Well, Phase is able to sell for Hassy today, but what about in one year from now? Can you be sure that the H3D/H4D will accept Phase backs? Few new people invest in Contax, the Sinar project might end up being closed to Phase... From a strategical standpoint, it would appear to be foolish not to try to secure a strong platform for Phase backs.
leaf was the competitor and they somehow blew it.....don't know why or how, but they did.....
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=109894\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Do you have figures to back that up? It appears to be that Leaf is doing pretty well out there both in terms of sales and technology. More than a few photographers think that have the best products on the market for many applications.
Phase is probably a clear leader, but, except for people working for Phase One, I really don't think that any of us would benefit from Leaf becoming too small a player.
Cheers,
Bernard
-
If this took place before Hasselblad's decision to close their system it would have been understandable. Not wanting to go into competition with the camera manufacturers that you want cooperation from. The more open environment that existed then was perfect for Phase One. Why upset the apple cart? Of course things are different now.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=109856\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I don't think the decision of Hassy to close their system was the relevant point on the timeline. Rather it was the acquistion/merger of Hasselbald and Imacon (through the parent companym Shiro) that is relevant. It was the linkage that was important. Closing the system was easily anticipated and the logical intent and result of the merger. The Phase One - Contax deal was after this. Phase had the foresight to realize that the market was going in this direction, but unfortunately they could not convince the guys on their board (Lego Venture Capitalists and others). Quite frankly, I think that the industry realized that the evenual product in the industry would look more like the Mamiya ZD product than something with interchangeable backs. So to continue to participate in the market it would be essential for them to work with a manufacturer in some way (merger, alliance/JV, or become one). Hassy/Fuji was essentially taken, and out of the remaining makers (Contax, Mamiya and Pentax) Contax/Zeiss was clearly the most desirable partner. Phase management proposed the right move at the time, and their board should be smacked around (if not replaced) for being stupid.
-
So assuming that the Phase board has pulled their collective head out of their collective... darkroom... where does that lead them?
Contax – dead, kyocera not going to do anything with it, so a no go. No Phasetax.
Mamiya – ZD competes, but can they go it alone or will they also partner with Phase on the high end on a body? I am hearing the collective opinion that it's too much of a competitive situation for a full on body-phase tie up. No Phasiya, then...
Hy6 – Many official comments that Phase is not part of the project. I don't see them passing up a chance to get on board this and then spending time to reverse engineer it. So no Phy6
Is there anything else out there besides these options for a body tie up?
-
So assuming that the Phase board has pulled their collective head out of their collective... darkroom... where does that lead them?
Contax – dead, kyocera not going to do anything with it, so a no go. No Phasetax.
Mamiya – ZD competes, but can they go it alone or will they also partner with Phase on the high end on a body? I am hearing the collective opinion that it's too much of a competitive situation for a full on body-phase tie up. No Phasiya, then...
Hy6 – Many official comments that Phase is not part of the project. I don't see them passing up a chance to get on board this and then spending time to reverse engineer it. So no Phy6
Is there anything else out there besides these options for a body tie up?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=110045\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
This is the consequence of the lack of foresight.
It may be that Contax is the only option that still remains -- its but it is different than you suggest. Phase licenses the Contax designs and technology and get it made by an OEM. The only question is whether the parties can re-visit their agreement and whether Kyocera can get over their resolve to screw Zeiss. Otherwise, Phase will be left out in the cold in the MF market and be left to making backs for large format cameras (if they can survive on that alone).
-
Well, 99% of photographers have been using the totally closed systems offered by Canon and Nikon and I don't remember hearing so many complaints about this.
Actually many people have praised the Canon electronics but cursed the lenses. In effect, they would like an open mount to allow them to use better lenses.
The body is essentially free compared to the back.
That might be so but are people really selecting the back and then being stuck with whatever platform that backs mounts onto? Personally I'd always start building a system by looking at the lenses, then selecting the body and digital back accordingly. YMMV.
Can you be sure that the H3D/H4D will accept Phase backs?
We already know that it won't.
-
Well, 99% of photographers have been using the totally closed systems offered by Canon and Nikon and I don't remember hearing so many complaints about this.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=110032\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
we are talking about MF systems....
I really don't think that most of the photographers out there really care. They want something whose ROI is good. Whether the system is opened or closed is in itself very far down the list.
As long as the prices of MFDB stay high, the need to buy a body with the back is irrelevant. The body is essentially free compared to the back.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=110032\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
my point exactly.....there is no money in bodies and all i really care about is that the "box (or room/camera!)" works...flawlessly...
Well, Phase is able to sell for Hassy today, but what about in one year from now? Can you be sure that the H3D/H4D will accept Phase backs? Few new people invest in Contax, the Sinar project might end up being closed to Phase... From a strategical standpoint, it would appear to be foolish not to try to secure a strong platform for Phase backs.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=110032\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
there are still tons of H1/2 out there.....you are missing the point: i am not sure hass can win in the long run if a new customer has to decide between a camera or a back.....if i want THAT quality/look/speed that phase provides, i won't just buy a H3D because i want a hasselblad....i will just buy a phase and a H1/2 if i HAVE to have a hasselblad.....in other words: i won't shoot kodak because that's all i can shoot with (with a certain camera) if i really want to shoot velvia, because that is the look i like.....this is not necessarily about better or worse......it is a personal opinion/decision...what works better for me....and a camera is at the bottom of the list because it influences the look the least.....there are certain features everybody likes to see in their personal choice for a camera, but all in all they are similar and there are choices....
Do you have figures to back that up? It appears to be that Leaf is doing pretty well out there both in terms of sales and technology. More than a few photographers think that have the best products on the market for many applications.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=110032\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
of course i have no figures.....i only know that i switched to phase from leaf after being a very strong leaf/dalsa supporter, i have seen several people i know switch, several dealers have told me the same thing and here in this forum more people have switched.....i have yet to see or hear about a single person switching from a P30 to a aptus 65.....
Phase is probably a clear leader, but, except for people working for Phase One, I really don't think that any of us would benefit from Leaf becoming too small a player.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=110032\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
i don't want leaf to disapear at all, i am completely with you....the more players the better....especially with hasselblads relentless marketing....
-
Hy6 – Many official comments that Phase is not part of the project. I don't see them passing up a chance to get on board this and then spending time to reverse engineer it. So no Phy6
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=110045\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Maybe not. The whole Hy6/Phase issue might just be some business negotiations - imagine Sinar having linked up with Leaf (who may have their own agenda...) and Phase or Sinar just not ready then or willing to pony up at that time.
Given the complexities of the business relationships in this developing story, its not unreasonable to imagine Phase might join this party later.
-
xx
-
Dear Torben,
that's the wish of this ex-Rollei dealer, but that's not in accordance with the reality, as it is today.
Best regards,
Thierry
I talked to the Rollei dealer in Copenhagen today (Photografica.com) and he assured me that he will have the new Rollei as soon as it is released.
The Sinar dealer however (Hother.dk) will have the Sinar version.
In Denmark the Sinar dealer is not the Professional Rolleiflex 6008 / Rollei x-Act 2 dealer.
Best
Torben
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=110584\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
-
xx
-
Dear Torben,
if you go to this link and then to Rollei products, you will see there only Rollei 6000 and Rollei Twin Lens cameras sold by "Photographica". No Rollei 6008, no X-Act 2 listed there.
That is the current situation: Sinar is wordwide and exclusive distributor for the Rollei 6008 Integral 2, the 6008 AF and the X-Act 2, with all the corresponding accessories.
As for the Rolleiflex Hy6: I doubt this will be annouced and officially available/sold on this website.
Best regards,
Thierry
Dear Thierry
Photografica told me that they just had a meeting with the CEO from Franke & Heidecke and he personally assured them that they will have the Rollei when released.
Photografica are very respectable dealers (Rollei, Linhoff, Arca-Swiss, Alpa):
http://www.photografica.com/news/default.a...egory=42&id=483 (http://www.photografica.com/news/default.asp?mode=display&category=42&id=483)
I will ask them again when they open after Easter holiday - so until then happy holiday.
Best
Torben
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=110637\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
-
xx
-
xx
-
The scenario the way I see it: We will soon have LEAF, Sinar and phase backs on the Hasselblad H3D – AND Hasselblad and Phase backs on the Hy6. This is of cause if LEAF, Sinar, Hasselblad and Phase want this to happen and dare taking it to the EU court.
This is just my personal view but is just cant help thinking what EU did to Microsoft and their attempt to make closed system.
I am all for open systems and think in the long run everyone will benefit.
Best
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=110758\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
The MS case is completely different since they have a near monopoly in computer OS, which is one trade category in itself.
My guess is that MF cameras are a small nice in a given catgory called photographic gear, and nobody is even remotely close to having a monopoly there.
I am not a lawyer by any means, but my guess is that Leaf and Phase would have zero chance to win.
What if I start to make engine for cars. Do you think that I stand a chance to force BMW or Mercedes in court to design their chassis so that they can accept my engine. Never.
A H3D is a single camera, even if the back can be removed from the rest of the body. Nobody can force Hassy to make public an interface between 2 inner parts of a standalone product.
Regards,
Bernard
-
ENOUGH! can we stop this. 3475 replies & 47 views. After all that, nothing has changed Phase is on there own. Can we please put this one to bed.
-
ENOUGH! can we stop this. 3475 replies & 47 views. After all that, nothing has changed Phase is on there own. Can we please put this one to bed.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=110897\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
No!
Ever hear of Yogi Berra?
It ain't over till its over...
:-)
Miracles can happen. Afetr all, Leica came out with a quite respectable rangefinder digital when many NON LEICA people said it couldn't be done.
The promise of the Hy6 in the meantime is up for grabs. When was that first camera to be delivered?
ANd Phase One problem; could be short sighted board, or short funded. Maybe we 'rabid Contax fans " should pass the hat..
Victor
-
PhaseOne has an interesting article up on their website (.pdf) format:
http://www.phaseone.com/upload/mediumformatchallenge.pdf (http://www.phaseone.com/upload/mediumformatchallenge.pdf)
Seems they are pretty upset about being locked out of different systems.
-axel
-
PhaseOne has an interesting article up on their website (.pdf) format:
http://www.phaseone.com/upload/mediumformatchallenge.pdf (http://www.phaseone.com/upload/mediumformatchallenge.pdf)
Hi
I am pleased that there seems to be some sort of cooperation with Phase & Mamiya. That there new Capture 4.0 will have something to do with the new 28 & 75-150 mm lens? In the coming months I hope there will be more details.
Denis
-
Thanks, Axel for posting this.
I read the paper with great interest--I share much of their opinion of the current situation in MF. But other than "take another look at Mamiya", I didn't get much from it in the way of a call to action.
Perhaps some clarity from them on their intents to support which platforms would help some people with planning hardware purchases. Put another way, I wonder how many Hassy H3 or Hy 6 purchasers would have the luxury of deferring their purchases if they knew that Phase was planning support for their camera of choice?
-Brad
-
Thanks, Axel for posting this.
I read the paper with great interest--I share much of their opinion of the current situation in MF. But other than "take another look at Mamiya", I didn't get much from it in the way of a call to action.
Perhaps some clarity from them on their intents to support which platforms would help some people with planning hardware purchases. Put another way, I wonder how many Hassy H3 or Hy 6 purchasers would have the luxury of deferring their purchases if they knew that Phase was planning support for their camera of choice?
-Brad
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a] (http://index.php?act=findpost&pid=111394\")
I briefly skimmed over that PDF and though I respect some form of bringing current information to light, I don't really see this as any kind of statement that is that relevent to photographers.
Yes, it does look like Leaf, Sinar and Hasselblad are investing in proprietary systems and without knowing the behind the scenes facts it seems the intention is to lock Phase out of camera platforms.
From one standpoint it seems if the rival manaufacturer's can't beat Phase by producinga a better digital back or software they will push them out of the market through other means, but in the world of commmerce there really isn't nothing new about that.
Don't think Ford wouldn't wrap up a deal to be the only supplier of automobile tires if they could financially and legally do it.
I could see this coming the moment Imacon and Hasselblad got together so I moved to the Contax because other than the quality of the camera and the ability to add different lenses to a focal plane body, the biggest motivator for buying a Contax was they had no agenda, since they were closing down shop.
The Contax is well built and should last a long time, the Zeiss lenses legandary, the prices were good and nobody at Contax was going to write a new firmware to make my camera only work with a Contax digital back.
For me as a photographer this all seems like a non issue. As long as I can continue to produce this with a P-30 and a Contax then there is not much out there that would move me to invest tens of thousands of dollars more to make a change.
[a href=\"http://russellrutherfordgroup.com/fea_fin_.jpg]http://russellrutherfordgroup.com/fea_fin_.jpg[/url]
http://russellrutherfordgroup.com/final_%203.jpg (http://russellrutherfordgroup.com/final_%203.jpg)
Still, if I was Phase and I was publishing an advertising vehicle, I wouldn't mentioned the competion, I would just make points of the positives of the product because IMO they have a lot of positives to mention.
I would also make note of while the other manufacturer's now have a vested interest to move you to one of their complete camera and body systems, Phase will still provide the option of going with virutally any camera you want.
I know I was suprised then I when I ordered my P-30 in a Contax mount I got it in a day, where the Leaf A-22 and later A-65 took many weeks and even months to get a contax mounted back.
If you step back and think about it for a moment, does anyone really believe that if the HY6 and the H3D disappeared tomorrow there are not more than enough supply of Mamiyas, Contax, H1's and H2's in the market place to keep you working for another 10 years?
And those are just cameras with dedicated digital interfaces, when you add in the Hasselblad V's the RZ non digital versions, Bronicas, etc., there are enough cameras to keep us working for a century.
Personally, I'm more concerned with the quality of the "film" the workflow, the stability of a camera back and the look and color it can produce than I am if I can't buy a new camera body in 12 months.
During the film days, few people invested in a medium format camera and lenses thining it was just an 18 month solution. Those were decade long purchases and looking at digital capture in the same light there is no reason that any medium format camera for sale today, used of new, cannot or should not also last another 10 years.
IMO
JR
-
All these companies are now in a holding pattern waiting for the new One Delta Sigma to land. When it has they will go back to fighting each other for the scraps of the market.
They should rather be cooperating to grow the market.
Phase One made the mistake of believeing that its competitors wanted win-win. They didn't - win-win needs intelligence to understand, win-lose is simple enough for a kindergarten kid.
Edmund
-
I spoke to a few of the Ziess reps at the Photoexpo show in NY a few months back. I am a dedicated Contax user, and like the others, would like nothing more than to see it's resurection. The problem, as I was told, is not lack of interested buyers, or Koycera (sp?) not willing to sell, but rather the anti-competition laws imposed by the Japanese government. Aparently, in order to buy and manufacture any part of the Contax line, be it branded as Contax or otherwise, it would be necessary to keep production in Japan and hire some percentage of Japenese employees that worked in the original organazation for a certian period of time. I didn't get the exact details, but the jist of it was that it would be cost prohibitive for anybody to go to the expenses and legal hurdles required given the limited demand for MF cameras.
-
It would seem from the Phase One opinion piece, Phase One is more then a little concerned about the actions of Hasselblad and perhaps less so, Sinar and Leaf. I think the only thing Hasselblad and the Hy6 consortium will acomplish is to convince photographers to stick with product from the used market rather then get locked in to an expensive one vendor solution. I think James and Edmund have got it right.
-
I would just like to clarify something which seems important in my eyes, independentely of any supposed exclusion from the Sinar Hy 6 system (we have excluded nobody).
You ARE NOT stick to one brand of camera platform, when investing in a Sinarback, not at all!
Please keep in mind that Sinar offers all its digital backs with an adapter system: adapters can be changed any time and thus the use of the same back with anyther camera brand. In consequence of this, all current Sinarbacks can be used on any current existing MF brands, incl. Contax, Mamiya, Hasselblad V and H (with exception of the H3D!), etc...
That has been our philosophy since the start we have manufactured digital backs.
Best regards,
Thierry
It would seem from the Phase One opinion piece, Phase One is more then a little concerned about the actions of Hasselblad and perhaps less so, Sinar and Leaf. I think the only thing Hasselblad and the Hy6 consortium will acomplish is to convince photographers to stick with product from the used market rather then get locked in to an expensive one vendor solution. I think James and Edmund have got it right.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=111488\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
-
What do people think about the forthcoming 1Ds (or D3x) incarnation actually matching even a 22mp MFDB? That (as Edmund brings up) is the elephant in the living room for the back manufacturers - it has the same effect on those of us contemplating buying our first back. I posted a long (and speculative) piece in the MFDB vs. Canon thread looking at the physics (to the best of my knowledge). I guessed that 21-22 mp is about the limit on a FF35 sensor before you start losing other aspects of image quality, and that such a sensor would have the dynamic range and tonality of a good DSLR, not a back (we've had the same pixel sizes since late 2004, and any attempt to go smaller has compromised range and tonality). The wild cards there are some type of Foveonesque sensor or Fuji's Super CCD. What do others think - I'm not a physicist! Any physicists or engineers out there who actually know what pixel size does to affect tonality, noise and dynamic range? Are these limits in the physics of the silicon, or in what we know how to do with it right now?
-Dan
-
Hank,
I don't think you have read many of Edmunds postings. Edmund getting anything right is a far cry.
A lot of rhetoric, conjecture and personal speculation trying to get people wound up.
RHETORIC:
the undue use of exaggeration or display; bombast
CONJECTURE:
the formation or expression of an opinion or theory without sufficient evidence for proof.
SPECULATION:
conjectural consideration of a matter; conjecture or surmise: a report based on speculation rather than facts.
a conclusion or opinion reached by such contemplation: These speculations are impossible to verify.
THERE I SAID IT!
NO ONE IS WAITING ON SIGMA. MAYBE THE RESEARCH OF THE FOVEN CHIP, BUT NO ONE IS WAITING ON SIGMA.
It would seem from the Phase One opinion piece, Phase One is more then a little concerned about the actions of Hasselblad and perhaps less so, Sinar and Leaf. I think the only thing Hasselblad and the Hy6 consortium will acomplish is to convince photographers to stick with product from the used market rather then get locked in to an expensive one vendor solution. I think James and Edmund have got it right.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=111488\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
-
What do people think about the forthcoming 1Ds (or D3x) incarnation actually matching even a 22mp MFDB?
Well, I never underestimate Canon. If they bump up the bit depth to 14-bits (which I'm sure they will, since the 1DIII did), then that will gain them some (and maybe most) of the tonality benefits currently enjoyed by MFDBs. I would think noise will be better than MFDBs. Resolution probably won't be quite as good as 22 MP backs, assuming Canon sticks with an A/A filter, and of course, because of the lenses. If they make the A/A filter optional, then I think it'll come close enough to the resolution of 22 MP backs to give the back makers trouble at the low end.
I agree that the 1DsIII is causing uncertainty. I know for a fact this is true because I'm in the market for a MFDB, and the 1DsIII is certainly weighing on my decision process (or it at least adds lots of uncertainty to the process). I have to believe that almost everybody else who is considering their first MFDB is also wondering what Canon will do.
-
I assume Edmund was referring to One Delta Sigma = Canon 1ds. Canon can stick as many megapixels and bits into a 35mm chip as they like but they'll never get the 'look' of a MFDB. So if you want that 'look' then you've got to get a back to stick on your medium format camera body. There's no point in waiting for the Canon to appear. Unless they come up with a new format of course.
Pete
-
the canon will laways be a step behind in quality...it is made for a different market anyway.....the canons produce amazing quality...the 5D IMO is maybe the best digicam ever....simply amazing, but it is not fair to compare to a P30....and why would you? the next canon will be great but no DMFback...
james is completly right and i wrote this earlier....there are more camerabodies out there now, by far that accept phase backs then ones that don't......every 4x5!, contax, bronica, mamiya and all the H1&2s accept phase backs.....all these cameras will still work for the next 10-20 years....no problem....no reason to switch to some all inclusive system that forces me to use this lens or that back....that does not mean that i would not buy into such a system if i thought that the advantages would save me time/money or that the final product is superiour then everything else....but hasselblad is far from that right now anyway....same will go for the Hy6....neither one will give me a better file, faster, cheaper, more relyable.....so why let myself be locked into a promise?
-
the canon will laways be a step behind in quality...it is made for a different market anyway.....the canons produce amazing quality...the 5D IMO is maybe the best digicam ever....simply amazing, but it is not fair to compare to a P30....and why would you? the next canon will be great but no DMFback...
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=111525\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Let's face, it a 22MP camera with good 1600 ISO and good skin tone and no blown out highlights (14bit conversion) would do a lot of collateral damage to the back industry, especially when it costs 1/4 of a 30MP back.
I can already describe the scenario: A brilliant innovative fashion photographer, call him James, buys a 1DsIII, and shoots some quick handheld stuff on set next to the P30. He likes what he sees. Then he sells his backup 22MP back for $10K and takes his wife on a short trip to mount Aptus with the proceeds
When he gets back, James feels really great and playful, so while doing a national ad campaign shoots a few comparison images with the Canon, and notices that the client cannot tell the difference, even if it's clear to him. Soon the back doesn't even come out of the Pelican case anymore, and stays in studio, while James buys a spare 1DsIII and starts shooting handheld a lot more ...
Two years later we find our hero James pioneering the use of cellphones for fashion photography - but that's another story
Edmund
PS. all names and persons in this post are purely imaginary. This poster would never insinuate that any pro photographer would ever dare to be seen on set by an AD with a 35mm SLR in hand
-
-
Hi, Thierry,
(we have excluded nobody).
Am I right in assuming that Jenoptik requires some form of a license agreement in order to brand the Hy6? And if I just wish to make backs for the Hy6 that technical information enabling me to do so is not available?
If these statements are true, then it's pretty hard for me to understand the "openness" statement that is cllaimed about the Hy6. Making barriers to being included does count as a form of exclusion IMHO.
You ARE NOT stick to one brand of camera platform, when investing in a Sinarback, not at all!
This is true. And I think this is a great thing--I wish everyone did this. But I think the 'choice' that was being referred to was more about putting any back on a particular camera, not about putting a particular back on any camera.
As the lenses are essentially tied to the camera system (via proprietary mounts) I've really got a choice between picking a camera/lens combo and then choosing from available backs, or vice versa. Given this choice, what's most important to me as a photographer is my camera/lens combination. They're the things I physically interact with to photograph--they're literally my interface to my creative vision. (It's true that the back is the single most expensive piece of equipment, but that's more a financial consideration and not necessarily as much a creative one.)
It's for these reasons that I'd like to select my camera/lens system and marry the back of my choice to it. The MF industry (as far as I can see by looking at the Hasselblad H3, Rollei/Sinar/Leaf Hy6) is moving the other way. (Yes, I can understand why, but I'm not happy about it.)
Anyway, I just thought I'd throw in my 2 cents, as the Hy6 (as wonderful as it sounds) just doesn't appear to be "open" by any definition I'm aware of.
Best regards,
Brad
-
Well, I never underestimate Canon. If they bump up the bit depth to 14-bits (which I'm sure they will, since the 1DIII did), then that will gain them some (and maybe most) of the tonality benefits currently enjoyed by MFDBs.
There are a few problems with that statement, imo.
Firstly, anyone can increase the quantization of their sensors to 16, 18 or more bits, but once past the noise floor, the extra bits become useless. I wouldn't put it past a manufacturer to increase the bit depth just for the bragging rights, even though the added RAW file size would do the user a disservice!
Secondly, there is a lot more to a medium format digital system v 35mm DSLR than a few more pixels. For example, they have larger viewfinders, better lenses (on the whole), and the sensor can be used on other cameras such as a view camera.
I have a feeling that Canon's heyday might be nearly over. Its competitors are starting to threaten Canon's core products.
-
Let's face, it a 22MP camera with good 1600 ISO and good skin tone and no blown out highlights (14bit conversion) would do a lot of collateral damage to the back industry, especially when it costs 1/4 of a 30MP back.
I can already describe the scenario: A brilliant innovative fashion photographer, call him James, buys a 1DsIII, and shoots some quick handheld stuff on set next to the P30. He likes what he sees. Then he sells his backup 22MP back for $10K and takes his wife on a short trip to mount Aptus with the proceeds
When he gets back, James feels really great and playful, so while doing a national ad campaign shoots a few comparison images with the Canon, and notices that the client cannot tell the difference, even if it's clear to him. Soon the back doesn't even come out of the Pelican case anymore, and stays in studio, while James buys a spare 1DsIII and starts shooting handheld a lot more ...
Two years later we find our hero James pioneering the use of cellphones for fashion photography - but that's another story
Edmund
PS. all names and persons in this post are purely imaginary. This poster would never insinuate that any pro photographer would ever dare to be seen on set by an AD with a 35mm SLR in hand
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=111572\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
edmund...the scenario you are describing is already in full swing....annie leibowitz uses canon, greg gorman uses canon....no problem at all...yes they have xxxxx$/day retouchers working on their files....the guys who can take a cellphone pic and make it look like it came out of a P45....
1D was used many times to shoot double spread editorials and national ad campaigns...
either way: does not matter, there will always be people who want the extra quality (which will always be there) or the ones who can't imagine showing up with a DSLR (and the AD on the shoot just bought the same one for his wife for christmas) or the hobby guys who just want the damn thing to take it out on the weekends to polish it and take a snap....
the 5D is good enough for 99% of all photography produced today...does that mean that everybody wants it or that development should stop? no....
if all descisions were based on rational thinking and actual necessity, i would not see that many guys sitting in traffic next to me on the 101 in their convertible porsche's in 110F heat with the sun frying the last hairs off their heads and the smog slowly getting them high.....
and yes it is mostly guys...women are by far not that stupid.....
-
I have a feeling that Canon's heyday might be nearly over. Its competitors are starting to threaten Canon's core products.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=111586\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
+1
As far out as this may seem to some diehard canon DSLR fans (and I count myself one of them), I think your above statement hits it on the nail.
Id trade my MF back for another brand MF back any day, if i had to (they are all good in my opinion.) But id turn and run with the back clutched in my hands if anyone tried to make me lose it over a DSLR.
-
I actually wonder about this as well, more because of Nikon & others (especially at the lower end) than because of back makers hitting them at the extreme high end (although the ZD may be an interesting competitor to the 1Ds Mk II if its US price is close enough and the lenses are better.)
Nikon has many of Canon's products beat right now, in a real turnaround from a few years ago. For those without large lens systems, Pentax and Sony offer interesting alternatives (the Alpha and especially the K10D have some nice features). Canon's only unchallenged products are the 5D (the half as expensive D200 arguably provides a challenge, coming closer than it should given the price difference) and the 1Ds MkII. Canon has a three year old camera with only minor updates (the 30D) in a midrange segment where they have traditionally been a leader. If the ZD or the new Pentax integrated 645 start knocking at the top end (under $10,000), the 1Ds MkII is no longer unchallenged. They've got to counter the D200 with a 40D that blows the year-old D200 away, and they have to put the 1Ds out of Nikon's reach with a Mk III upgrade that may have to break free of conventional Bayer sensors to get the image quality it would need (even then, Nikon and Fuji could release a full frame Super CCD model). Didn't Canon have a Foveon type project going at some point?
In addition to that, they have to worry about more reasonably priced digital MF options hitting the high end. While still incredibly expensive, the latest generation of backs appear to have dropped by about 30% from the last generation, and the integrated bodies may be in 1Ds territory. Mamiya lenses are actually cheaper than Canon L lenses, although less versatile.
All in all, not a good time to be Canon (although, as a previous poster said, I wouldn't count them out - they DO have a habit of shocking people).
-Dan
-
Canon is an abysmally bone-headed company (and I say that as a heavily-invested user whom they have just managed to piss-off mightily). But they are still King of the Hill.
The argument that Canon is in danger suffers two fatal flaws:
1. It ignores the install-base. The professional and serious-amateur ranks are overwhlemigly dominated by Canon users nowadays (45 of 50 on the LL Antarctic trip, and look at the phalanxes of white lenses at the sidelines the next time you watch a major sporting event on tv....). Almost all of those users switched to Canon when Canon offered truly large qualitative advantages over its competitors (in AF, then in digital quality).
Those users will not switch systems again without a VERY good reason. What Canon's competitors are doing is closing the gap, coming out with equivalent, but not markedly superior, products. No one is pushing the technology foward in quantum leaps the way the 1ds and 5D did.
Users will not switch systems just because Pentax or Nikon has a camera that it comparable to a Canon offering. The inertia of investment now heavily favours the Canon hegemony.
2. MF digital backs are a low-volume market. The R&D required to make one work well is no less than what goes into a 35mm DSLR, but the number of units across which the maker can amortize this investment is far smaller. Therefore, MF back will remain significantly more expensive than small-format DSLRS. Consequently, they have to offer a significant gain in quality to justify their ownership for most photographers.
3. Canon is the 1000lb Gorilla of the industry. No other company can rival Canon's mix of technical know-how, ability to produce and capital to fund. Unless Canon mysteriously loses interest, the digital camera game will be theirs for a long, long time.
The only thing that would threaten to dislodge Canon from their place of power is if Nikon licensed Foveon (or similar) technology, and was able to produce a true 35mm, full-res, 3 colour sensor.
We live in interesting times.
- N.
-
The only thing that would threaten to dislodge Canon from their place of power is if Nikon licensed Foveon (or similar) technology, and was able to produce a true 35mm, full-res, 3 colour sensor.
We live in interesting times.
- N.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=111613\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I don't care about Canon. But I think the day the 1DsIII is announced is the day we will hear some very interesting noises coming out of the MF back crowd.
Edmund
-
The argument that Canon is in danger suffers two fatal flaws:
1. It ignores the install-base. The professional and serious-amateur ranks are overwhlemigly dominated by Canon users nowadays (45 of 50 on the LL Antarctic trip, and look at the phalanxes of white lenses at the sidelines the next time you watch a major sporting event on tv....). Almost all of those users switched to Canon when Canon offered truly large qualitative advantages over its competitors (in AF, then in digital quality).
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=111613\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
This is probalby the case in the US, but less so in Japan for instance.
2. MF digital backs are a low-volume market. The R&D required to make one work well is no less than what goes into a 35mm DSLR, but the number of units
across which the maker can amortize this investment is far smaller. Therefore, MF back will remain significantly more expensive than small-format DSLRS. Consequently, they have to offer a significant gain in quality to justify their ownership for most photographers.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=111613\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Yep, prices will probably remain high in the very high end, but Mamiya has clearly shown that it is possible to produce cheaper MFDB. Whether their are making money is unclear, but it looks like Pentax is targetting the same market now.
3. Canon is the 1000lb Gorilla of the industry. No other company can rival Canon's mix of technical know-how, ability to produce and capital to fund. Unless Canon mysteriously loses interest, the digital camera game will be theirs for a long, long time.
The only thing that would threaten to dislodge Canon from their place of power is if Nikon licensed Foveon (or similar) technology, and was able to produce a true 35mm, full-res, 3 colour sensor.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=111613\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Canon isn't larger than Sony for instance.
Besides, although Canon is huge, the camera division is fairly small, and it is doubtful that the HQ would let them waste money for long.
A company the size of Nikon is credible and healthy enough a business to get any kind of money they might need of they can come up with a business plan showing good potential for returns.
From this standpoint, I don't think that the size of Canon plays any role in their actual capability to invest in new technologies.
My point of view has always been that the lack of Nikon FF camera is the result of a wrong business decision, and not the consequence of a lack of technological capability on their side.
Cheers,
Bernard
-
I have a feeling that Canon's heyday might be nearly over. Its competitors are starting to threaten Canon's core products.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=111586\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
This February it was announced that Canon has surpassed Kodak as the leader in digital camera sales in the U.S., edging out Kodak for the first time. Canon has 20% of the market, Sony 17% and Kodak 16%. 29.8 million cameras were shipped in 2006 and the market is "cooling down". (Source: Wall St. Journal & IDC Research).
I know this pertains to all cameras, including consumer models, but this is where the money comes from that funds R&D. Canon has installed dual Digic III chips in the latest DSLR (hello, parallel processing), they've begun modifying (i.e., improving) their lens line, and offer v2 of their wireless transmitter. They know who their competition is.
I think Canon is just getting started.
-
This February it was announced that Canon has surpassed Kodak as the leader in digital camera sales in the U.S., edging out Kodak for the first time. Canon has 20% of the market, Sony 17% and Kodak 16%. 29.8 million cameras were shipped in 2006 and the market is "cooling down". (Source: Wall St. Journal & IDC Research).
I know this pertains to all cameras, including consumer models, but this is where the money comes from that funds R&D.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=111630\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
It could be argued that money comes mostly from consumer DSLRs and the associated lenses.
In that segment Canon and Nikon are close #1 and #2, and both are way ahead of all their competitors.
Regards,
Bernard
-
These charts are volume, consumer segment primarily (based off the flickr market, clearly majority of which are pure consumer), but that volume is where the money is:
http://www.flickr.com/cameras/ (http://www.flickr.com/cameras/)
FWWI, no sign of Canon slowing down yet.
-
The only thing that would threaten to dislodge Canon from their place of power is if Nikon licensed Foveon (or similar) technology, and was able to produce a true 35mm, full-res, 3 colour sensor.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=111613\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I see more and more of the top shooters in my country in the professional (not press/documentary, but all others) going for top quality MFDB's. And whats started recently is the lower level professionals (social/high-street) are buying into MFDB's like the P20 and CFV instead of going the 1Ds route. I'm amazed at this as I personally dont see the cost/customer satisfaction ratio being there to support MFDB purchases in this segment, but it seems some people are doing it anyways.
The top range Canons will be threatened from MFDB's as long as the back makers will move towards lower priced/higher specd. models. Its a dream for many professionals to move into MF again, and I think many would pay premium for this in todays good photography market (at least where I live...)
The place Canon has with press, documentary, wildlife and sports shooters is undoubtedly there, and is not threatened by anyone but Nikon at the moment, ant the threat is more like [span style=\'font-size:8pt;line-height:100%\']"hey you, can i join!"[/span], but Nikon and others are playing catch up.
In the lower end of both DSLR's and consumer cam's, Canon is in the same massively competitive race as everyone else, and wont win or lose without a breakthrough and protected technology, as the market is so healthy at this point.
Also the installed top end user base for 1Ds cameras, may not quickly change out what works at the moment. But sit back with the current model and lens line they own, and build up a new MF system over time (i see guys buying the H or AFD models with only the 80, and wait long periods of time before buying their next glass, slowly building up what they need while keeping their canons warm.)
So the way I see it is that Canon won't disappear and will stay at the top end, but they are threatened in some core high-end areas where they currently are the market leaders, and things may change. The same goes for Phase in my eyes, but that was on the topic of the original poster
-
This is a much broader topic that one can explore in a brief forum message (and maybe it deserves an article), but here are a couple of more points to ponder....
– there is the pro/prestige factor. I've been told by many wedding photographers at the high end of their market that when Uncle Harry shows up at the reception while the group portraits are being taken, and has a 1Ds MKII or similar top DSLR, the family often asks themselves and the photographer) what is it that differentiates him from Uncle Harry. Lot's. obviously, but to the man-in-the-street, it's the gear that takes the shot, not the photographer.
– the same thing applies in fashion, advertising and such. When the photographer is using similar gear to the camera that the art director or client may have at home and use for their personal work, a similar question arises. Using an MF system with high-end back changes that equation and seperates the pro from the rest of the pack. Perception often IS reality.
– The viewfinder. There simply is no comparison between the viewfinder on an H1/H2, for example, and that of any DSLR, including a 1Ds MKII. Size matters.
– No matter how many pixels Canon or anyone else crams into a 35mm format sensor, a MF back will always have more. It's the same equation that has always existed with film. Canon may move to 22MP or even a bit more, but with MF at 39MP, and going to 50-60MP within the next 9-12 months the gap will always be there. And for anyone that thinks that XX megapixels is "enough", well if you haven't seen what a 30+ MP 16 bit sensor can do, you owe it to yourself to find out.
Finally, this isn't a win/lose equation. Canon will continue to make more DSLRs an hour that the entire medium format industry makes backs in a year. (This is not hyperbole). Canon also knows that most pros shooting with MF also have 35mm DSLRs for those situations where it's more appropriate. It's not as if it's an either or for most pros.
Michael
-
Dear Brad,
for the first part of your comments/replies I won't make any more comments anymore and here at this stage: most has been said by me and since long. I really think that you should ask here the other competitor(s) in question, since they should give you these answers you are still sicking for. We definitively cannot speak for them. Anyway, the (near) future will tell us more about "openess" and what and how it will happen.
For your second part of comments: yes, sure, I fully agree the way you see it, and I would most probably do it this way as well.
Best regards,
Thierry
Hi, Thierry,
Am I right in assuming that Jenoptik requires some form of a license agreement in order to brand the Hy6? And if I just wish to make backs for the Hy6 that technical information enabling me to do so is not available?
If these statements are true, then it's pretty hard for me to understand the "openness" statement that is cllaimed about the Hy6. Making barriers to being included does count as a form of exclusion IMHO.
This is true. And I think this is a great thing--I wish everyone did this. But I think the 'choice' that was being referred to was more about putting any back on a particular camera, not about putting a particular back on any camera.
As the lenses are essentially tied to the camera system (via proprietary mounts) I've really got a choice between picking a camera/lens combo and then choosing from available backs, or vice versa. Given this choice, what's most important to me as a photographer is my camera/lens combination. They're the things I physically interact with to photograph--they're literally my interface to my creative vision. (It's true that the back is the single most expensive piece of equipment, but that's more a financial consideration and not necessarily as much a creative one.)
It's for these reasons that I'd like to select my camera/lens system and marry the back of my choice to it. The MF industry (as far as I can see by looking at the Hasselblad H3, Rollei/Sinar/Leaf Hy6) is moving the other way. (Yes, I can understand why, but I'm not happy about it.)
Anyway, I just thought I'd throw in my 2 cents, as the Hy6 (as wonderful as it sounds) just doesn't appear to be "open" by any definition I'm aware of.
Best regards,
Brad
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=111583\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
-
the (near) future will tell us more about "openess" and what and how it will happen.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=111705\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Hi, Thierry,
Thank you, as always, for your reply.
I very much hope that I am wrong on the openness question (it's just how things appear to someone on the outside like me at this moment in time).
I look forward to any announcements clarifying the Jenoptik/Sinar position on this and will try to be as patient as I can.
Kind regards,
-Brad
-
– the same thing applies in fashion, advertising and such. When the photographer is using similar gear to the camera that the art director or client may have at home and use for their personal work, a similar question arises. Using an MF system with high-end back changes that equation and seperates the pro from the rest of the pack. Perception often IS reality.
Michael
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=111688\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I've heard this a lot, usually from the sellers of medium format and I have very few instances where a client or AD would know the physical difference between shooting with a medium format camera or a Canon 1ds.
Maybe they would notice an RZ or a Fuji 680 but from an H series, a Contax or any 645 camera, physically they are not much different in size and look to the Canons.
After all, when you have 22 people on set and 3,000 lbs of lightinng and grip few people are looking at the camera, (or should be for that matter).
Actually what most clients are now riveted to is the computer screen and this is where the dslr's fall down in comparison to medium format and in my case especially the Phase.
Fast stable software, large accurate previews, the ability to edit on set and even process out jpegs while we contiue to shoot has become more of the norm than the exception.
Canon's 4 pin fw cable is problematic, regardless of the different tricks in mounting it and though C-1 is good with the Canon's it's obviously better with the Phase products.
Digital capture has now changed client expectations. They want to see the images in correct color and tone the moment they are captured and they want to see them large enough to make informed decisions.
Nothing is more costly or more of a buzz kill than to have the software crash or the camera disconnect.
One of my next projects one of the key clients will not be able to attend so we have worked with a system that allows them to see an html image of the session almost in real time, so attempting to do this with any system that is not rock solid would be a nightmare.
I know few photographers that enjoy being tethered to a cable and fewer still that thought that someday our "capture device equipment" would come in 3 or 4 cases, but that is now the reality and now the level of expectations of commercial clients.
If medium format makers want to distinguish their product from the dslrs, then most of them really need to up thier game in software, speed and camera to computer capture, viewing, adjustments and processing. C-1 is the gold standard but it also needs improvement and though V4 is suppose to offer all of this, in the world of digital I've learned until it's proven on set, it really doesn't matter.
The digital back makers also need to find a way to get more useable iso out of thier backs. Right now Canon is the high iso king and though the my P-30 works very well up to 800 iso, for real low light or using continuous sources the dslrs have abouit 2 to more useable stops beyond most medium format backs.
I agree it is not always an eithe or situation and thier is a place for two or maybe even three type of camera backs/systems.
Given that it is almost imperative that software, workflow and file acceptability be exactly the same from the dslrs to medium format.
Nothing iadds more post production time than taking files from two cameras and trying to match them in color, tone and rank, if your forced into using multuple processors and different types of workflow.
I know as I have gone through the process of owning and using a lot of different digital backs and cameras at the end of the day workflow is of equal importance to the actual capture and if the system is not stable or requries workaround just processing out jpegs from a shoot can take longer than the actual shoot.
In this repsect Lightroom is very good as it accepts most files, though until it allows for easy "fast" tehtering and previews C-1 is the most effecient solution.
JR
-
In this repsect Lightroom is very good as it accepts most files, though until it allows for easy "fast" tehtering and previews C-1 is the most effecient solution.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=112360\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
i was a little worried about lightroom tethered as well...i don't like the whole "watched folder" thing....and i am with you 100%, there is nothing worse then software/computer/cable issues during a shoot, with everybody glued to the screen......
shooting tethered works really well with LR, of course C1 has to run as well and the previews pop up slower.....but the advantage of being able to make all the adjustments and attach them right away and have the previews pop up is pure gold...capture is not slower, the previews just pop up slower, because they have to go through C1 and come into LR which automatically attaches the settings......and the most important thing: it works.......i would not try it combined with a ftp/instant upload action/script, but it is superstable.....
-
James, your practical commentary in the last couple posts have been some of the most useful in this thread/MFDB forum. No BS, no whining, and good pro business sense.
Canon's 4 pin fw cable is problematic, regardless of the different tricks in mounting it and though C-1 is good with the Canon's it's obviously better with the Phase products.
Canon's USB connectivity on Mac OSX 10.4 is also a huge headache.
As an aside, I know Leaf at least was playing with bluetooth to dump jpeg previews to a paired computer, but I don't know where they ended up with that. I like the idea of cutting cables where possible, but for now, as you say, solid wired connectivity is critical. I'm sick of having to relink my Canon's in the middle of a shoot with a CD staring at the monitor.
If medium format makers want to distinguish their product from the dslrs, then most of them really need to up thier game in software, speed and camera to computer capture, viewing, adjustments and processing. C-1 is the gold standard but it also needs improvement and though V4 is suppose to offer all of this, in the world of digital I've learned until it's proven on set, it really doesn't matter.
Nikon has started to figure this out and thus outsourced the development of the relatively decent Capture NX. Canon's current software suite is complete garbage. Capture One is the only game for now (for those of us that want a single, stable capture app that will work with multiple camera platforms), but I expect Lightroom and eventually Aperture will soon enough be full competition to Capture 1 for both DSLR and MFDB. My G5, aging though it may be, can pull in images to Lightroom and Aperture fast enough for most of my tethered needs (though I have set up special scripts to do this and configured my system to use a RAM disk to tether to, so it's not exactly out of the box like C1).
What it boils down to for me currently (perhaps oversimplified):
- The camera system determines the quality ceiling for my work.
- The capture software determines my capture speed and quality of the client feedback loop on site
- The workflow software (ideally the same as capture, but not always yet) and my skill with it and my ability to do custom scripting determine my turnaround time and, ultimately, my profitability
-
if you are having problems with the canon software, why don't you use C1? as a capture and workflow software? the conversions are much better as well...
-
if you are having problems with the canon software, why don't you use C1? as a capture and workflow software? the conversions are much better as well...
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a] (http://index.php?act=findpost&pid=112506\")
Sorry, I wasn't clear on that. Actually I did switch to Capture One, but not because of this issue directly. Full agreement that it's superior. The USB connectivity issues existed regardless of the capture app (it was an OS issue). I haven't seen clear information on who was responsible for fixing it (apple or canon).
There was some kernel extension "fix" for the problem that was discussed here, in case anyone is still having similar issues.
[a href=\"http://photography-on-the.net/forum/archive/index.php/t-84642.html]http://photography-on-the.net/forum/archiv...hp/t-84642.html[/url]
The other useful thing about C1 is that most assistants and rental studios in Asia seem to be up to speed with it as the standard capture app. I'm assuming the same is true elsewhere?
-
i was a little worried about lightroom tethered as well...i don't like the whole "watched folder" thing....
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=112415\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Just curious, Paul. Do you have LR copy/move files or just import them in place? I'm guessing the latter, but thought I'd inquire.
-
I just wish that someone would build a LR script for making a color preset for Phase files similar to those in ACR. Most people are just running the script in ACR and transposing the numbers to LR, but this doesn't work for Phase files, since ACR doesn't open them.
I think the default balances look pretty good in LR and are easily enough cleaned up, but I can see a benefit to some users to have a quality preset making script or method.
-
Most people are just running the script in ACR and transposing the numbers to LR, but this doesn't work for Phase files, since ACR doesn't open them.[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=112523\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Duh. I was being dumb before. I must not have the current ACR on my machine at work. It's a public machine, so often upgrades get interrupted. Couldn't figure out how ACR and LR could differ so...