Luminous Landscape Forum
Equipment & Techniques => Medium Format / Film / Digital Backs – and Large Sensor Photography => Topic started by: pprdigital on June 24, 2008, 10:28:35 pm
-
It is now official - Leaf is promoting the Aptus 65 now through July 31, 2008 for $13,995. As some remember, I had posted this earlier in the month, but had to pull it back as Leaf was not quite as ready to go as they thought. But it's now official.
What is behind it is hard to say - an answer to Hasselblad? A response to 35mm digital? Benevolence? Open for discussion. But one thing is for sure - it's a benefit to end users who are starting to see more affordable alternatives to 35mm than had previously been available.
Steve Hendrix
www.ppratlanta.com/digital.php
-
Hasselblad, now Leaf, isn't it Sinar's turn?
Things are shaking up! I wonder if cheaper top of the line Mega Pixel Backs will follow?
This is good for everybody. The manufacturers I believe are reacting to the same surge we're seeing in the forum. A lot of people want to get into MFDB, and if they lower their prices they can sell a lot of backs and cameras. And Phase/Mamiya made them do it.
My 2, not knowing what I'm talking about, cents.
Best,
Mitchell
-
Hasselblad, now Leaf, isn't it Sinar's turn?
Things are shaking up! I wonder if cheaper top of the line Mega Pixel Backs will follow?
This is good for everybody. The manufacturers I believe are reacting to the same surge we're seeing in the forum. A lot of people want to get into MFDB, and if they lower their prices they can sell a lot of backs and cameras. And Phase/Mamiya made them do it.
My 2, not knowing what I'm talking about, cents.
Best,
Mitchell
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=203490\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Mitchell:
I believe there will always be a premium priced product category ($25K - $35K) that subsists along with the very capable, but limited in some way sub-$20K segment.
I don't see the Phase/Mamiya connection though, the P30 product has been priced in between the Leaf/Hasselblad equivalent product. I don't see that Phase/Mamiya had anything to do with it. I don't even credit the ZD, I feel it has too many compromises to offer an obvious alternative to high end 35mm systems, and as a result, only costs a small premium above them.
I believe 35mm has had more of an effect. Clearly if medium format doesn't offer a product that provides another level above 35mm, yet is priced at a reasonable delta above 35mm, unit growth will be difficult.
Steve Hendrix
www.ppratlanta.com/digital.php
-
It is now official - Leaf is promoting the Aptus 65 now through July 31, 2008 for $13,995. As some remember, I had posted this earlier in the month, but had to pull it back as Leaf was not quite as ready to go as they thought. But it's now official.
What is behind it is hard to say - an answer to Hasselblad? A response to 35mm digital? Benevolence? Open for discussion. But one thing is for sure - it's a benefit to end users who are starting to see more affordable alternatives to 35mm than had previously been available.
Steve Hendrix
www.ppratlanta.com/digital.php
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=203487\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Are these prices just a pre Photokina discount to get people to buy into a system, hoping a percentage of them will upgrade to the next, must have back?
After all, once the makers announce whatever it is they will announce, they'll offer even more specials like buy the 65S today, receive a new 65Super S when they are produced?
Basically, I'm curious on how the prices are set. Is the recent Hasselblad discount of the 31mpx camera because they weren't selling, or was it just originally priced high to see if it would sell at that price point?
Somewhere from the transition from Analog to digital it seemed all of this changed and now were into an endless upgrade cycle. Obviously film cameras evolved and so did film, but the buy in was much less when you changed a camera body and film prices pretty much were stable from year to year.
JR
-
Are these prices just a pre Photokina discount to get people to buy into a system, hoping a percentage of them will upgrade to the next, must have back?
After all, once the makers announce whatever it is they will announce, they'll offer even more specials like buy the 65S today, receive a new 65Super S when they are produced?
Basically, I'm curious on how the prices are set. Is the recent Hasselblad discount of the 31mpx camera because they weren't selling, or was it just originally priced high to see if it would sell at that price point?
Somewhere from the transition from Analog to digital it seemed all of this changed and now were into an endless upgrade cycle. Obviously film cameras evolved and so did film, but the buy in was much less when you changed a camera body and film prices pretty much were stable from year to year.
JR
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=203503\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I'm really not sure what is behind the Leaf Aptus price drop. I believe the H3DII-31 was priced too close to the H3DII-39 initially. The overwhelming majority of my H3DII sales had been H3DII-39, not H3DII-31. There was a $7,000 delta between H3DII-39 and H3DII-31 pricing originally, compared to Leaf Aptus 75 at $29,999 and Leaf Aptus 65 at $17,995, a $12,000 difference. The majority of my Leaf sales have been Aptus 65.
It's easier to think of spending $33k, when you're looking at $27K, than it is thinking of spending $30K, when you're looking at $18K. That's why I see the H3DII-31 price drop as more of a correction with a little bit of sweetener tossed in. I don't know what is behind the Aptus 65 price drop.
What I do believe is that this establishes that there will be a consistent high quality medium format presence in the mid to upper teen market from all of the manufacturers going forward.
Steve Hendrix
www.ppratlanta.com/digital.php
-
I'm really not sure what is behind the Leaf Aptus price drop. I believe the H3DII-31 was priced too close to the H3DII-39 initially. The overwhelming majority of my H3DII sales had been H3DII-39, not H3DII-31. There was a $7,000 delta between H3DII-39 and H3DII-31 pricing originally, compared to Leaf Aptus 75 at $29,999 and Leaf Aptus 65 at $17,995, a $12,000 difference. The majority of my Leaf sales have been Aptus 65.
It's easier to think of spending $33k, when you're looking at $27K, than it is thinking of spending $30K, when you're looking at $18K. That's why I see the H3DII-31 price drop as more of a correction with a little bit of sweetener tossed in. I don't know what is behind the Aptus 65 price drop.
What I do believe is that this establishes that there will be a consistent high quality medium format presence in the mid to upper teen market from all of the manufacturers going forward.
Steve Hendrix
www.ppratlanta.com/digital.php
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=203567\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Medium format needs to do something that shocks the market. Not these small incremental little changes of 20% more megapixels or a 7% better lcd. and 21% less costs.
The Red is a good business model because that is a camera that stunned the industry.
Once again, if medium format is to go forward it has to be a no excuse offer, not a semi readable lcd, not a almost high iso, not a almost available lens line, etc. etc.
When new cameras are introduced they need to look professional, the lens line available and extensive, the accessories off the scale. It amazes me that not one new medium format camera has a right angle grip.
If I spend twice the price of the dslr, I want it to look like twice the price.
When a client comes to the set you want them to go wow, not say oh yea, my father-in-law has one of those.
(http://ishotit.com/red_thumb.jpg)
Regardless, every medium format maker should go on the Red website and look at how they've come from zero to now and what they are offering.
JR
-
Everyone is talking about the MF manufacturers not delivering enough but afaik they are partly at the mercy of the chips produced by Kodak and Dalsa.
I'm not sure it is fair to compare with Red because they use a small cheap sensor which apparently is very fast to read and refresh. Could be an off-the-shelf chip. Does anyone know?
What I'd like to see is either Kodak or Dalsa producing a new ground-breaking 645 30MP chip at a price which assumes much higher volumes, and I think it would be a great success.
-
Everyone is talking about the MF manufacturers not delivering enough but afaik they are partly at the mercy of the chips produced by Kodak and Dalsa.
I'm not sure it is fair to compare with Red because they use a small cheap sensor which apparently is very fast to read and refresh. Could be an off-the-shelf chip. Does anyone know?
What I'd like to see is either Kodak or Dalsa producing a new ground-breaking 645 30MP chip at a price which assumes much higher volumes, and I think it would be a great success.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=203613\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
+1
-
hi James,
do you need an actual and sharp image of the Sinar Hy6?
This is the one which is delivered to customers:
[attachment=7219:attachment]
Best regards,
Thierry
(http://ishotit.com/red_thumb.jpg)
JR
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=203595\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
-
Everyone is talking about the MF manufacturers not delivering enough but afaik they are partly at the mercy of the chips produced by Kodak and Dalsa.
I'm not sure it is fair to compare with Red because they use a small cheap sensor which apparently is very fast to read and refresh. Could be an off-the-shelf chip. Does anyone know?
What I'd like to see is either Kodak or Dalsa producing a new ground-breaking 645 30MP chip at a price which assumes much higher volumes, and I think it would be a great success.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=203613\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
This isn't about the chip, it's about the complete thought behind the Red system.
They've covered entry level autofocus to high end 5k files.
They have thier own lens line, cf cards, monitors, storage banks and accessories.
They built a system that will integrate with the standard PL mount lenses, Nikon and Canon and did it from scratch, not left overs from the past.
I don't know why medium format is where it is today, but they seem to be content on keeping their market marginal rather than step way up and increasing their share. Somebody needs to walk in with a 1ds Mark III, drop it on the engineers lap and say make it 50% better in every respect, not just better file quality for a lot harder process. (Also make it look professional, not cute).
Now I can write a long list of what my medium format backs will do that a dslr won't but I've yet to see any manufacturer say that in their advertising.
They always want to feature some guy who says, "I can send the images to my client overnight", like he just discovered the fact that digital photography exists.
(Overnight, hell I can send them when I'm shooting, of course I have to be hooked to 55 lbs of computer to do it.)
Once again, don't give me what I presently have at 10% better use for 15% less price. Offer me something I can't live without.
I like the fact that there are professional camera makers whose thought is for me, not the 99.999% of the flicker photogrpahers, but I do know that medium format seems to be in the perpetual wait and see what's next process.
I also don't want it to be an all Canon world because those files and thier glass is making a lot of photography look the same.
And Graham, BTW, life ain't fair.
JR
-
Everyone is talking about the MF manufacturers not delivering enough but afaik they are partly at the mercy of the chips produced by Kodak and Dalsa.
I'm not sure it is fair to compare with Red because they use a small cheap sensor which apparently is very fast to read and refresh. Could be an off-the-shelf chip. Does anyone know?
What I'd like to see is either Kodak or Dalsa producing a new ground-breaking 645 30MP chip at a price which assumes much higher volumes, and I think it would be a great success.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=203613\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Edited to add that James beat me to it.
True, but its more than the chips, its the electrics surrounding the chips, the lcd, and most importantly the cameras themselves need to be improved, perhaps redesigned for digital imaging rather than shooting legacy formats.
-
I'm not sure it is fair to compare with Red because they use a small cheap sensor which apparently is very fast to read and refresh. Could be an off-the-shelf chip. Does anyone know?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=203613\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
That must be why there are so many competitors to Red.
Edmund
-
This isn't about the chip, it's about the complete thought behind the Red system.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=203621\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I totally agree that the Red system is impressive. Must have been a very large investment, and more importantly they priced it to shake up the marketplace and did a good job first time around.
However, I still expect that the unit production cost of a MFDB is higher than a Red camera. The MF sensor chip prices are (at least a few years ago when I contacted Kodak) quite ridiculous. The 22MP chips were starting at $15K for one chip and getting down to about $6K for large quantities. So let's say a manufacturer committed to producing 1,000 22 MP MFDBs - they might be paying about $8K per sensor alone. This immediately pushes the retail price very high.
I'll bet the Red's sensor costs a max $2K, probably under $1K. So at $30K for the camera they can pay for a LOT more R&D. And they don't have any close competition, so the new product category is their for the taking (this won't last).
(Yes there is more to these things than the sensor but it is by far the most expensive single component).
If it were as easy as you guys are making out, you'd think that at least one of the MF players would have leapt ahead to grab market share.
-
That must be why there are so many competitors to Red.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=203629\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Let's see how things look in a few years.
-
I totally agree that the Red system is impressive. Must have been a very large investment, and more importantly they priced it to shake up the marketplace and did a good job first time around.
However, I still expect that the unit production cost of a MFDB is higher than a Red camera. The MF sensor chip prices are (at least a few years ago when I contacted Kodak) quite ridiculous. The 22MP chips were starting at $15K for one chip and getting down to about $6K for large quantities. So let's say a manufacturer committed to producing 1,000 22 MP MFDBs - they might be paying about $8K per sensor alone. This immediately pushes the retail price very high.
I'll bet the Red's sensor costs a max $2K, probably under $1K. So at $30K for the camera they can pay for a LOT more R&D. And they don't have any close competition, so the new product category is their for the taking (this won't last).
(Yes there is more to these things than the sensor but it is by far the most expensive single component).
If it were as easy as you guys are making out, you'd think that at least one of the MF players would have leapt ahead to grab market share.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=203641\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
PhotoZ. You have more brand loyalty than a NASCAR fan.
Nobody is saying they don't appreciate or even use these medium format backs.
In fact most of the people that contriubte here have proved it by dropping a lot of money.
Then again, when's your next purchase? Better still how much are you willing to spend on a HY6 and a full set of new lenses? Even more important if you move from whatever you have now to the very latest camera back and lens will it improve your art or your bottom line?
The only reason anybody brings up the Red as this is a compelte new system that came about in about 1/4 of the time medium format backs have existed and they seemed, by early reports, to have hit the market dead on and don't think for a second they don't have competition now, they just don't have competition in thier price range.
Arri, Viper and others have digital cinema cameras and all the Japanese manufacturers have some form of prosumer or ENG camera that covers some of the Red's territory.
Now why hasn't someone done with still cameras what Red is doing? You got me.
I honestly think medium format is where it is today because of the historical mindset. They based their business model around high margins in the backs, a lot of dealer service and pretty much used other camera makers to sell thier profitable digital backs. When Hasselblad closed the door, rather than start from scratch, they all just went looking for somebody else to make a camera and stick their logo on it and regardless of how good or bad the mamiy or HY6 is, they are still historical film camera systems with modifications.
The Red isn't based on anything from the film days, except maybe a matte box.
Then again I don't really care, because I'm probably set for the next 5 years with my coffin cased contaxs.
JR
-
It's the lack of competition that curses us.
If the likes of Canon or Nikon (or any other) came up with something similar or better quality than today's backs , but with crystal clear pictures at high ISO, fast frame rate, fantastic live view, portability in both weight and size and uniquely fast tethering to something like Lightroom, detachable to fit other cameras and view cameras, and all at half the price of today's backs, our current manufacturers would either get their act together or they would go out of business.
What if they went out of business and we were only left with one big dominant brand. Would you mind? Is this a possible scenario?
Edward
-
PhotoZ. You have more brand loyalty than a NASCAR fan.
JR
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=203655\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
That's one for the books :-)
I honestly think medium format is where it is today because of the historical mindset. They based their business model around high margins in the backs, a lot of dealer service and pretty much used other camera makers to sell thier profitable digital backs. When Hasselblad closed the door, rather than start from scratch, they all just went looking for somebody else to make a camera and stick their logo on it and regardless of how good or bad the mamiy or HY6 is, they are still historical film camera systems with modifications.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=203655\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Very true, i've been waiting for some camera maker to shake things up for years.
A miniature 16mpx Mamiya ZD-style camera would be the coolest thing. Or something the size of a Mamiya 7 rangefinder. I've done some shoots with a H3D, and I was surprised at how much the thing weighed by the end of the day :-).
So yeah, maybe they should have reinvented the MF camera the day hasselblad closed the doors.
-
Someone better be working on it.
We need some game changing thinking.
-
Someone better be working on it.
We need some game changing thinking.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=203662\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Morning all,
Noting with interest how this thread swung to the RED influence--
You had better believe the influence the RED juggernaut is going to have on our working future.
We have the Camera inhouse and it is indeed impressive with Major US networks switching to the
their setup for their top tier programs.
With the projected facility to be established in Las Vegas and Jim's passion to take on the BIG
boys with chip sizes nearly double the existing current ones --an all in one still / Vid product to
rival MF is not far away.
Kudos to them
Des W
-
That's one for the books :-)
Very true, i've been waiting for some camera maker to shake things up for years.
A miniature 16mpx Mamiya ZD-style camera would be the coolest thing. Or something the size of a Mamiya 7 rangefinder. I've done some shoots with a H3D, and I was surprised at how much the thing weighed by the end of the day :-).
So yeah, maybe they should have reinvented the MF camera the day hasselblad closed the doors.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=203661\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Hi
On the subject of the ZD camera,when I was talking to the Phase rep from Denmark I mentioned why not put the Phase know how into this camera & come out with a new model. I said the camera is already built. The two companies ae working together more closely these days. Somehow I don't think this will happen.
Denis
-
PhotoZ. You have more brand loyalty than a NASCAR fan.
Whatever you say, James. I'm not all pro MFDBs. I believe that we should have MUCH better LCD screens, and faster frame rates.
-
Whatever you say, James. I'm not all pro MFDBs. I believe that we should have MUCH better LCD screens, and faster frame rates.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=203681\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I'm not being critical of you as I know you like your Sinars, but telling these people that it's all ok doesn't move them or us up one single notch.
Manufacturers spend way too much time looking for the good PR and not enough time addressing what they might think is the negative.
They love to hear I love my Sheepskin 12 with it's 3 second frame rate and posterized lcd because it makes me a more "thoughtful" photographer, but in reality they are rarely standing there next to you, when your knee deep in water and shove the back of the camera into a clients face and say "looks good . . eh?" and the client says "I don't know, I really can't see that much".
Now since you love Sinars I think maybe you should write them a suggestion and that is to fire whoever does the Sinar Bron site and put something up that looks a lot better and has real information on it. That is almost impossible to look at it and think it's intent is to sell one of the most expensive cameras on the planet.
Secondly for all the makers, stop producing the real info on a pdf. I hate downloading pdf's just to see a single piece of information like lens options. I probably have 2 billion pdfs on my laptop and I don't want to open them much less find a way to catagorize them.
If I can build a website page in 30 minutes for a client to review then they can also.
Also, how about posting prices around the world, then we wouldn't have threads that start with sales messages about price specials.
JR
-
The RED company and the camera itself have been successful because RED is NOT Canon, Sony, JVC, or Panasonic.
A camera like RED could've been created YEARS ago by Canon, Sony, whoever, and could've been in a consumer type video camcorder body, for a decent price, but did anyone actually do it? Nope. Why? Because Canon, Sony, JVC, and Panasonic can make more money by offering little to no improvements and sticking to their current line of cameras, and this weird HD thing we've come up with (the biggest blunder in history, we could've made HD MUCH higher resolution, but we ended up with 1920x1080, a whopping 2 megapixel image.. wow).
The RED company had an idea to say "F$%& YOU" to all of these companies, and they were successful.
A company like RED does not exist in the still photography world, let alone, the Medium Format Digital world.
-
the high price of DMF backs was alway justified by the high cost of the chips....but the chips we are seeing in the backs these days are already a couple of years old and so far nothing is on the horizon afaik...
kodak or dalsa can't tell me that the chip they had to sell for 15000 3 years ago still has to carry the same price? canon/nikon have advanced at a much faster pace and they pretty much give away their last generation chips...
i honestly don't care about the whole thing anymore...i am glad to see the prices for the 30mpix backs come down where they really should be....and really those are the backs that can do ANYTHING...no excuses...still does not make anyone a better photographer...
when someone comes out with a 6x4.5 or 6x7 back with 30mpix at 2frames/sec no buffer, i will be interested again....hopefully by then the whole screen joke is in the past as well....
-
I'm not being critical of you as I know you like your Sinars, but telling these people that it's all ok doesn't move them or us up one single notch.
Agreed. I have already been posting here about improvements I'd like to see.
but in reality they are rarely standing there next to you, when your knee deep in water and shove the back of the camera into a clients face and say "looks good . . eh?" and the client says "I don't know, I really can't see that much".
Agreed again. Clients can only understand what they see, and the LCDs don't impress. Luckily most of us shooting with ADs shoot tethered, and that is much more client-friendly.
Now since you love Sinars I think maybe you should write them a suggestion and that is to fire whoever does the Sinar Bron site and put something up that looks a lot better and has real information on it. That is almost impossible to look at it and think it's intent is to sell one of the most expensive cameras on the planet.
I'm not in that region so I never look at that site. However I have stated before that most dealers sites leave a lot to be desired (this is across all brands) and I have written the same thing directly to Sinar.
Secondly for all the makers, stop producing the real info on a pdf.
Can't disagree with this either. PDFs should be an option, but the info should always be on the site.
Also, how about posting prices around the world, then we wouldn't have threads that start with sales messages about price specials.
Again, a dealer issue, not the manufacturer. I'd also like to see clearer pricing but the prices are up to the individual dealers. The manufacturers should probably require minimum standards from dealers concerning price and information availability on the websites. I have also suggested this in the past. I can only assume that some dealers don't want to be seen as box movers and resist.
Seems we actually agree on a few things today
-
The RED company and the camera itself have been successful because RED is NOT Canon, Sony, JVC, or Panasonic.
A camera like RED could've been created YEARS ago by Canon, Sony, whoever, and could've been in a consumer type video camcorder body, for a decent price, but did anyone actually do it? Nope. Why? Because Canon, Sony, JVC, and Panasonic can make more money by offering little to no improvements and sticking to their current line of cameras, and this weird HD thing we've come up with (the biggest blunder in history, we could've made HD MUCH higher resolution, but we ended up with 1920x1080, a whopping 2 megapixel image.. wow).
The RED company had an idea to say "F$%& YOU" to all of these companies, and they were successful.
A company like RED does not exist in the still photography world, let alone, the Medium Format Digital world.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=203687\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Well yes but the Red doesn't have dealers, so I'm sure there is some savings there.
This whole thing is silly and video (up until the red) was the same as stills. Small incremental changes to keep moving you forward, just not enough changes to let you stay in one place for a while.
Personally, I'm set also and though my next purchase will probably be a RED, for stills it would take something pretty wild to get my attention.
I also don't mind contributing to these forums as long as they don't become one long sales message.
After all, starting this thread with a for sale price on an Aptus is pretty damn bold. I wonder how it would be received if one of us started a thread For Sale, Aptus 22, $8,000?.
JR
-
After all, starting this thread with a for sale price on an Aptus is pretty damn bold. I wonder how it would be received if one of us started a thread For Sale, Aptus 22, $8,000?.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=203699\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
It would be received well by me if it were in the "for sale" section.
I would personnally be in favour of including the promotional messages about new MFDB in the "for sale" section rather than in the MFDB section.
I guess that the reason why it is sort of tolerated in the MFDB section is that these backs have been suffering a certain lack of clarity in terms of pricing etc... until now, and that prices being clearly set and announced is therefore sort of a relevant "news" in itself the MFDB world?
Once this becomes comon practise (and I clearly hope that this trend will continue), it goes back to plain advertising, the kind that we would not want to see in the other forums of LL IMHO.
Cheers,
Bernard
-
You are dead right, Bernard.
I have myself avoided to publish prices here, and even on the for sale section (am actually a 100% active in this MF digital section only).
But there were so many criticizing about prices and the lack of information, James being the first. And now those publishing and informing are criticized.
As I said it, one can never do it right.
I guess that all manufacturers and dealers here are ready to follow rules, if there are rules set. But don't put us at the point of your gun if we are open with prices now.
Best regards,
Thierry
It would be received well by me if it were in the "for sale" section.
I would personnally be in favour of including the promotional messages about new MFDB in the "for sale" section rather than in the MFDB section.
I guess that the reason why it is sort of tolerated in the MFDB section is that these backs have been suffering a certain lack of clarity in terms of pricing etc... until now, and that prices being clearly set and announced is therefore sort of a relevant "news" in itself the MFDB world?
Once this becomes comon practise (and I clearly hope that this trend will continue), it goes back to plain advertising, the kind that we would not want to see in the other forums of LL IMHO.
Cheers,
Bernard
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=203700\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
-
You are dead right, Bernard.
I have myself avoided to publish prices here, and even on the for sale section (am actually a 100% active in this MF digital section only).
But there were so many criticizing about prices and the lack of information, James being the first. And now those publishing and informing are criticized.
As I said it, one can never do it right.
I guess that all manufacturers and dealers here are ready to follow rules, if there are rules set. But don't put us at the point of your gun if we are open with prices now.
Best regards,
Thierry
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=203714\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Man, you know that I meant the makers should have published clarity of their base prices on their own websites. Same with the dealers.
There is a big difference to that than the dealers putting the latest time stamped special on this section.
It just runs off any conversation, but feel free, go ahead publish all you want because it's not my site, but don't think anyone that clicks on here looking to have any form a meaninful dialog and seeing dealer headlines listing prices won't just click right off.
I personally know and have purchased from two of the dealers that are the most prolific (not because of this site btw) and I know it's just tit for tat.
One does it, the next one does it, one does it again. Michael should charge them banner ad rates and quite honestly since Michael is kind enough to keep a hands off approach, it just continues.
Then someone asks what camera they should buy and it just starts back up.
One says the blad goes to 800 iso, the next one says the phase does 1600, the next one says the blad will soon go to 1600, then next one says Leaf has a buy a back get a free body offer, the next one says trade in any camera and get 5 grand off.
If this was a secret I guess you could call it "information", but I get about 4 spams a day from dealers and camera makers that list all of these specials. Funny thing is I normally read them here first.
Once again, that's fine, but you know as well as I if any individual starts pushing equipment for sale here is going to be a lot of requests to move it down the page.
Personally I don't think it puts medium format in the best light to have all of these time stamped specials, but then again I don't sell cameras.
JR
-
I also don't mind contributing to these forums as long as they don't become one long sales message.
After all, starting this thread with a for sale price on an Aptus is pretty damn bold. I wonder how it would be received if one of us started a thread For Sale, Aptus 22, $8,000?.
JR
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=203699\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I don't really have the time to actually go through all my posts and the posts of others like me to see the ratio of sales messages vs actual usable information, but I believe it is actually quite small in comparison.
I only listed the Aptus 65 promo because A] it was such a steep drop and B] it furthers the adjusting of entry level medium format in the downward direction, which I believe is significant. It's true - medium format has obstacles for unit growth, but the price is one of them.
I have no problem following whatever guidelines are applied for this site as well as any preferences of the contributing membership. I don't think there's anything wrong with starting a thread For Sale, Aptus 22, $8,000 as you say James, but that thread would likely be in the For Sale category. Perhpas promotions, anouncements (the few that you are inundated with), etc should be moved to the For Sale section.
I'd have no problem with that if that is what is decided best suits the needs of this forum.
Steve Hendrix
www.ppratlanta.com/digital.php
-
FYI James,
- I am well aware of the difference of publishing here and on a website. I am just saying that one can never have it right.
- I have also informed you, after you complained about the lack of any prices on the websites of the distributors, that there ACTUALLY was a price list on SBI's site. That concerns Sinar, of course. And I have given the link to it. But you seem not to have heard or noticed it. It is sometimes good to give credit when it is deserved, not always criticizing.
- I am personally AGAINST publishing any prices here, but have done it a few times, mea culpa, since one has done it, then another, and so on, BUT ONLY WHEN ASKED.
Frankly spoken, James, it is very difficult to please and get it right with you. I say it how I feel it.
This being said, I think it is Michael's place. He is a generous person and has shown this in many occasions. I am sure that he has seen prices posted here, and I am sure that he will step in to stop it, if he feels it necessary. And I believe everybody here will agree with his decision and follow rules.
Best regards,
Thierry
Man, you know that I meant the makers should have published clarity of their base prices on their own websites. Same with the dealers.
There is a big difference to that than the dealers putting the latest time stamped special on this section.
It just runs off any conversation, but feel free, go ahead publish all you want because it's not my site, but don't think anyone that clicks on here looking to have any form a meaninful dialog and seeing dealer headlines listing prices won't just click right off.
I personally know and have purchased from two of the dealers that are the most prolific (not because of this site btw) and I know it's just tit for tat.
One does it, the next one does it, one does it again. Michael should charge them banner ad rates and quite honestly since Michael is kind enough to keep a hands off approach, it just continues.
Then someone asks what camera they should buy and it just starts back up.
One says the blad goes to 800 iso, the next one says the phase does 1600, the next one says the blad will soon go to 1600, then next one says Leaf has a buy a back get a free body offer, the next one says trade in any camera and get 5 grand off.
If this was a secret I guess you could call it "information", but I get about 4 spams a day from dealers and camera makers that list all of these specials. Funny thing is I normally read them here first.
Ebay has less commerce going on than this section.
Once again, that's fine, but you know as well as I if any individual starts pushing equipment for sale here is going to be a lot of requests to move it down the page.
Personally I think all of this just makes medium format look desperate and doesn't add to any real information about the equipment.
JR
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=203725\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
-
I think at a minimum, under the posters name, it should say 'DEALER,' instead of 'regular' like it does now, just so people know who they are talking to. Or maybe the dealers could have a different color or type or something. I think it's nice that there are dealers/vendors who at times come on to clarify specs, prices, etc., but I have been contacted off-line due to my posting on this site too, and it feels a little creepy.
To be clear, I do think the presence of vendors (& maybe dealers) ads value to this site, and it's far better than just having end users here speculating about whats to come.
-
I think at a minimum, under the posters name, it should say 'DEALER,' instead of 'regular' like it does now, just so people know who they are talking to. Or maybe the dealers could have a different color or type or something. I think it's nice that there are dealers/vendors who at times come on to clarify specs, prices, etc., but I have been contacted off-line due to my posting on this site too, and it feels a little creepy.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=203730\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I agree, having it say dealer or something would be a benefit. From the start, I have always wanted more disclosure here. At least first names or something. 203, if I sign dealer, will you at least sign your first name? I realize 203 could actually be your first name....yes I had that happen once, someone emailed me and I asked their real name, and it was in fact their real name. This is an international, world-wide forum, after all.
I also agree about the creepiness of un-solicited off-line dealer contact. I'm not saying I'm an angel, but I believe when someone posts and says they're thinking about a medium format back, and dealers fall over themselves contacting that person off-line, it's presumptuous. I feel response to requests are acceptable, or if some pertinent information is volunteered.
I actually began posting to on-line forums back with the Rob Galbraith forum. I had visited and seen many posts that were not accurate about the equipment. So, I began posting just to correct the information or lend an opinion. It is true that I and I'm sure other dealers have benefitted by members who have contacted us in trying to find a reputable source for these products. I have to admit I had no idea at first that would happen, and for sure it is appreciated. I have always and still do feel very much like a guest here - it is a place for photographers and I do want to contribute, but I don't want to be an unwelcome presence by any means.
Steve Hendrix/Dealer
www.ppratlanta.com/digital.php
-
Man, you know that I meant the makers should have published clarity of their base prices on their own websites. Same with the dealers.
There is a big difference to that than the dealers putting the latest time stamped special on this section.
It just runs off any conversation, but feel free, go ahead publish all you want because it's not my site, but don't think anyone that clicks on here looking to have any form a meaninful dialog and seeing dealer headlines listing prices won't just click right off.
I personally know and have purchased from two of the dealers that are the most prolific (not because of this site btw) and I know it's just tit for tat.
One does it, the next one does it, one does it again. Michael should charge them banner ad rates and quite honestly since Michael is kind enough to keep a hands off approach, it just continues.
Then someone asks what camera they should buy and it just starts back up.
One says the blad goes to 800 iso, the next one says the phase does 1600, the next one says the blad will soon go to 1600, then next one says Leaf has a buy a back get a free body offer, the next one says trade in any camera and get 5 grand off.
If this was a secret I guess you could call it "information", but I get about 4 spams a day from dealers and camera makers that list all of these specials. Funny thing is I normally read them here first.
Ebay has less commerce going on than this section.
Once again, that's fine, but you know as well as I if any individual starts pushing equipment for sale here is going to be a lot of requests to move it down the page.
Personally I think all of this just makes medium format look desperate and doesn't add to any real information about the equipment.
JR
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=203725\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I realize that you are only speaking for yourself, but then the forum is viewed by lots of people who have interests in information that may not always be the same as yours. Some people might be interested in learning about promotional offers or price changes from manufacturers. They might even be interested in learning what that new camera system or back series, which has been discussed on the forum for months before any production model has shipped, is officially priced at when it actually has started to ship. Some folks that come here to discuss what these tools are and are not capable of doing, might also be curious about how much they cost.
Sure, sure, sure... they could find the pricing somewhere else, but then a great deal of information exchanged here could be found somewhere else. Michael has provided a forum here in which the atmosphere is pretty free and conversational and largely self-regulated and respectful. By and large, it works very well and when it doesn't he will step in to set it right. Now given that it is a conversational atmosphere, I'm not surprised that in a conversation about high-tech gear the subject of price comes up in the discussion. This has certainly been my experience, especially when new products hit or major price changes occur. The posters that have begun a conversation by starting a thread regarding a new promotion or prices for new products have generally been selective, reasonable, judicious and tactful, but that's just my opinion.
-
I realize that you are only speaking for yourself, but then the forum is viewed by lots of people who have interests in information that may not always be the same as yours. Some people might be interested in learning about promotional offers or price changes from manufacturers. They might even be interested in learning what that new camera system or back series, which has been discussed on the forum for months before any production model has shipped, is officially priced at when it actually has started to ship. Some folks that come here to discuss what these tools are and are not capable of doing, might also be curious about how much they cost.
Sure, sure, sure... they could find the pricing somewhere else, but then a great deal of information exchanged here could be found somewhere else. Michael has provided a forum here in which the atmosphere is pretty free and conversational and largely self-regulated and respectful. By and large, it works very well and when it doesn't he will step in to set it right. Now given that it is a conversational atmosphere, I'm not surprised that in a conversation about high-tech gear the subject of price comes up in the discussion. This has certainly been my experience, especially when new products hit or major price changes occur. The posters that have begun a conversation by starting a thread regarding a new promotion or prices for new products have generally been selective, reasonable, judicious and tactful, but that's just my opinion.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=203735\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Tech,
I agree with you, most of the dealers are cool about the way they give info, but some of the info is selling, maybe that's ok with most, actually it's ok with me, except we all know it will eventually get out of hand. It always does when there's money involved.
Theirry,
I agree, I'm hard to please and want to see a lot from all of my resources. I'm a photographer so that pretty much goes with the job description, but then again for you that should be a good thing because if I was easy to please I'd never buy but one camera in my life.
In regards to Steve, who I know pretty well, I think a lot of him, have purchased some smaller items from him and if I ever went to one of the camera brands he sells he'd be my first call.
So in a way I stand corrected, but in another way, I also stand by my original thoughts that you can't have it both ways, you can't sell cameras and then get your feelings hurt if someone says, hey man I think your selling cameras today. You can't make your living off a brand or even multiple brands and not have some form of bias. That's just logical.
I think it would be good if these forums could be more about the art of photography and how we produce that art, than just about how much a camera back costs of if there are special offers today.
Once again, it is Michael's forum and I appreciate that it's here and respect that it's his to moderate or run in any way he choses, so any opinion I have pretty much starts and stops with me, it goes nowhere else and shouldn't.
Still, if I was given my choice I would love to see everyone's real name. Not especially to add photographic validity, or to prove they're a good artist, business person, brick layer, or dentist, but just so we have some idea of the intent.
Tech, you especially have a lot of very pro things to say about hasselblad and it's probably just that you are a straight up knowledgable photographer that uses hasselblads, but then again you could be their Public Relations manager. None of us know.
JR
-
That sums it well up, James.
Agreed.
Thierry
Tech,
I agree with you, most of the dealers are cool about the way they give info, but some of the info is selling, maybe that's ok with most, actually it's ok with me, except we all know it will eventually get out of hand. It always does when there's money involved.
Theirry,
I agree, I'm hard to please and want to see a lot from all of my resources. I'm a photographer so that pretty much goes with the job description, but then again for you that should be a good thing because if I was easy to please I'd never buy but one camera in my life.
In regards to Steve, who I know pretty well, I think a lot of him, have purchased some smaller items from him and if I ever went to one of the camera brands he sells he'd be my first call.
So in a way I stand corrected, but in another way, I also stand by my original thoughts that you can't have it both ways, you can't sell cameras and then get your feelings hurt if someone says, hey man I think your selling cameras today. You can't make your living off a brand or even multiple brands and not have some form of bias. That's just logical.
I think it would be good if these forums could be more about the art of photography and how we produce that art, than just about how much a camera back costs of if there are special offers today.
Once again, it is Michael's forum and I appreciate that it's here and respect that it's his to moderate or run in any way he choses, so any opinion I have pretty much starts and stops with me, it goes nowhere else and shouldn't.
Still, if I was given my choice I would love to see everyone's real name. Not especially to add photographic validity, or to prove they're a good artist, business person, brick layer, or dentist, but just so we have some idea of the intent.
Tech, you especially have a lot of very pro things to say about hasselblad and it's probably just that you are a straight up knowledgable photographer that uses hasselblads, but then again you could be their Public Relations manager. None of us know.
JR
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=203738\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
-
That sums it well up, James.
Agreed.
Thierry
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=203739\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Well, thanks but there is a flip side to this.
Right now I think it's obvious that medium format digital capture is in a fight for it's life.
The market doesn't seem to be increasing that much (I have no figures that is just a guess) but the complexity, costs, of the systems don't seem to reflect the real world use in a lot of situations.
Now before someone shows me a 200% crop of a nose, or a bean can to prove a point, let me be really clear that I will probably use a medium format camera as long as they are made.
the value in a large file, the ability to tether professionally, rename, sort, batch correct, shoot on large multiple monitors from 30' away, the depth of the file, the sharpness of no aa filter, the ability to work deep in post production, far surpass the costs and the slowness of working with a medium format back.
Regardless of my preferrences and this is rarely mentioned here in this forum, professional photography is probably also in a fight for it's life.
Today there are more very good professional photographers than ever before and many come from schools with $200,000 educations and some form of personal finance that allows them to take a deep breath and mold their career in planned steps.
Starting photographers have the ability to instantly see what their peers and compeitors are doing weeks after the shoot, so the ability to learn, keep abreast of current trends, emulate, even copy is there for the looking and that changes the whole process. It now doesn't take 2 years to see what the best in the world are doing, it only takes a few minutes.
My website gets a million hits in a few months and I don't know (or care who's looking) but i'll bet the majority are aspiring photographers.
Right now there are more magazines on the stands than ever before, but the flip side is editorial rates and fees haven't risen for nearly two decades. Wedding photographers in marginal markets can make more profit in a day than someone that shoots the cover of an international fashion magazine. (Not in all cases, but in some).
There are also more shifting asthetics than ever before. The flicker Generation is among us and has pretty much thumbed their nose at crafted lighting and posed imagery. They are the free spirit run and gun types. Using a Canon 5D and on camera flash and this level of investment does not make for a growing professional photography equipment industry and don't think that this is not becoming part of our new visual base.
Still, and I mean this will all of the best intentions, I hope medium format raises their game.
I would love to hear a maker answer the lcd question with yes, in two weeks we'll have one that surpasses even the best of the dslrs. I would love to have someone really rock my camera world with a multiple format camera. turn in on it's side and it crops 2x3, turn it the other way and it's 4x3, set your color look and film in the computer and lock it into the camera, tethered or un tethered. Better yet, set the exact film look "in" the camera and wifi the preview to every type of hand held device sold.
I would just be all over myself for fast F2 lenses and leaf shutters, throughout the range and most importantly get a look from digital that really emulates film regardless of the lighting or the ambient color conditions without spending 45 minutes an image in photoshop, before we begin to retouch.
I could go on, but I'd probably just bore myself and everyone else in the room, but if one thing is clear about the professional photography business, is it's not easy and probably won't get any easier. Be realistic, print is slowly losing viewership and the web is gaining and if you've ever tried Apple TV you can see how close real convergence could be.
For medium format to continue in an ever tightening market it's going to take more than a price cut.
Yes, I'm glad to see the 30 something megapixel backs coming down in price but would be happier still, if someone offered something that I absolutely had to buy to make my final product better.
We all talk about price, but I don't want to see all of these backs come down to fire sale prices.
That's the business model for the stock industry and we all can witness how well that works.
So, if it seems like some of us are asking for the moon, well we are, but it's not just the moon, it's also the stars and everything in between, because as of today that's what our clients are asking us for.
JR
-
Hi James
We were just at the APPA's, AIPP annual photography awards up in Brisbane this month. The AIPP has mostly wedding photographers along with commercial & advertising ones as well. Besides Gay & myself I only knew of one other photographer that uses MFD. Everyone else is shooting with 35 digital. At the awards night one photographer won an award using a Canon point & shoot! Go back 15-20 years, all these wedding photographers had a MF kit. Now they are excited to shoot @ iso 12,000 with the new D3! At the show the big stands were from Canon, Nikon, Sony, Adobe, Epson, Apple, while only three MFD makers were represented at this show. For example @ the Canon stand they had a huge range of cameras & lenses that you can hold, focus, touch ect so anyone can play with them.
Denis
-
I just realised:
10 years ago, 8"x10" was the highest quality available.
5 years ago most were shooting on 4"x5", the image quality was "close enough" to the former.
I guess around the same time, a lot of photographers were going DMF,
saying: the quality is equal to 4"x5" and film-based medium format.
Now digital 35mm is so close to DMF, that we see 35mm vs. DMF discussions every week.
Maybe DMF is going the same route as 10"x8" and 4"x5"? Photographers seem to disregard the additional IQ for a lighter, cheaper tool while deeming the other factors beneficial but (economically?) irrelevant.
Like James said, DMF-makers are really in the fight of their lives. Give us something revolutionary and relevant or see your company reduced to a footnote in photographic history.
That's about the size of it.
regards,
Mike
-
I agree that it's nice to know people's names too. And I was at one time registered here under my own name. Problem arises when potential clients, agents, friends, etc. Google my name, and they get thousands of inane posts about shadow noise showing up. What I want when people Google me is my web site, and maybe some other relevant information, some photos maybe.
You know how people pay Google to have their site show up on the first page of results? Well, I am making en effort to ensure that my personal web site does not come up on page 37, while the first 36 pages are artful discussions about '3-D' cameras between pixelsurgeon, pixelpeeper, madcamerguru, and me.
So I am not trying to hide my identity from you all, but I am trying to hide my posts, and replies which quote my posts, etc., from Google. If someone knows way to prevent that form happening, let me know.
(as a side note, I do try to post images here on occasion so that people can see that I am a real live photographer, with at least a minimum of skill. And many here know who I am due to the images I have posted, which are also on my site...in any case, you want ot know who I am , ask me and I'll tell you off line.)
If you look at the bottom of the main LL page right now and check the current active users, there's a good chance that one of then is Google.
-
James,
that was a really thought-provoking piece you wrote (I didn't want to copy the whole post below). I think that many of the points you make seem logical...and it portends a future that's somewhat disturbing and, perhaps, exciting at the same time. We are seeing so much change in our lifetimes and the pace seems to be accelerating in many scientific fields, and now also in photography.
I hope that other thoughtful and knowledgeable members comment.
Thanks,
Sean
Well, thanks but there is a flip side to this.
Right now I think it's obvious that medium format digital capture is in a fight for it's life.
JR
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=203741\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
-
James,
that was a really thought-provoking piece you wrote (I didn't want to copy the whole post below). I think that many of the points you make seem logical...and it portends a future that's somewhat disturbing and, perhaps, exciting at the same time. We are seeing so much change in our lifetimes and the pace seems to be accelerating in many scientific fields, and now also in photography.
I hope that other thoughtful and knowledgeable members comment.
Thanks,
Sean
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=203787\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I agree with everything in here and wanted to add that I feel that the new revolutionary new Mamiya/Phase camera falls quite short of anything "new"
Is it going to be a giant Flop for them...?
After all what did they really change? If any changes they are slight.
For crying out loud how can you make a new camera and still have it syncing at 125/th in 2008?
Canon stinks also but at least it is 250/th with flash.
Just when I was getting all excited about my P30 and RZII combo...:+}
Also I do not know what all the hype is about dealers in here.. I do believe they should be marked "dealer" like james says but I do not find them Pushy or anything...
We all new they would start squirming when the D3 and Canon 1DsMIII came out.
I personally did not ever like canons and do not think the 1DsMIII is that much of an upgrade when the 1DsMII was fine..?
I do think Phase should get their act together and work on their software and LCD screen instead of making stupid commercials with Jeeps parked on top of their MFDB's!!
Digital photography has become the double edged sword...
Sure is welcome but has Flooded the market with less than professional photographers.
Every retoucher I know has suddenly switched to Photographer and trying to cut out the middle man..:+}
Really quite disappointing.
Luckily it seems the trend is coming back to Clean and untouched photography!!
Sure would be a breathe of fresh air compared to all the David Hill wanna bees going around these days...:+}
Snook
-
I too appreciate James posts. They are a breath of fresh air - sometimes a bit particular, but usually right on the mark.
In shopping for a digital back (serious amateur) the cost of MFDB is clearly going through some changes. Not just the hassy price on the 31 MP, and the Leaf, but also just learned Hassy is now promoting a 503 CWD II, for $13k (educ. discount to $11.5).
What is interesting is that 'till the end of July its avail with a swap out of the 40 mm FLE lens instead of the 80 mm for the same price. Nice.
Whatever one thinks of the camera/back/price, the fact is that the deal has clearly the trace of some marketing savvy in place. Someone's thinking....
-
I do think Phase should get their act together and work on their software and LCD screen instead of making stupid commercials with Jeeps parked on top of their MFDB's!!
Snook
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=203795\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
That is exactly how I feel, they should put their effort against their shortcomings and stop singing or shouting how strong or good they are. I say that as a very happy Phase P45+/P30+ owner and hope too se the new bigger LCD, better ISO (better than just good quallity 400 ISO), better capture rate!!!
Luckily it seems the trend is coming back to Clean and untouched photography!!
Sure would be a breathe of fresh air compared to all the David Hill wanna bees going around these days...:+}
Snook
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=203795\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I know David personally and he couldn't care less about David Hill, Jill Greenberg, Andrzej Dragan or Douglas Fisher (implementing +3D Architecture) wanna bees...
He learned his formula by mistake.... it happened that his client liked it... so he liked it... and that is how it became David Hills look!
James opinion is ROCK SOLID!!! Now imagine if Phase, Leaf, Sinar or Hasselblad would pay (part time at least) James/others to advise on future platforms, do you think in future we'll be going backwards? Most probably not!
-
I agree with everything in here and wanted to add that I feel that the new revolutionary new Mamiya/Phase camera falls quite short of anything "new"
Is it going to be a giant Flop for them...?
After all what did they really change? If any changes they are slight.
For crying out loud how can you make a new camera and still have it syncing at 125/th in 2008?
Canon stinks also but at least it is 250/th with flash.
Just when I was getting all excited about my P30 and RZII combo...:+}
Also I do not know what all the hype is about dealers in here.. I do believe they should be marked "dealer" like james says but I do not find them Pushy or anything...
We all new they would start squirming when the D3 and Canon 1DsMIII came out.
I personally did not ever like canons and do not think the 1DsMIII is that much of an upgrade when the 1DsMII was fine..?
I do think Phase should get their act together and work on their software and LCD screen instead of making stupid commercials with Jeeps parked on top of their MFDB's!!
Digital photography has become the double edged sword...
Sure is welcome but has Flooded the market with less than professional photographers.
Every retoucher I know has suddenly switched to Photographer and trying to cut out the middle man..:+}
Really quite disappointing.
Luckily it seems the trend is coming back to Clean and untouched photography!!
Sure would be a breathe of fresh air compared to all the David Hill wanna bees going around these days...:+}
Snook
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=203795\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Once they get the leaf shutter lenses and hopefully a fast 110 (this is a magic lens for medium format), this camera should do anything that the blad and the hy6 will do other than have a waist level finder, which is limited on the blad, somewhat limited on the leaf since you have to remove the back and only really fully functional on the Sinar.
Regardless of what the others offere, I wouldn't consider it a flop it's just because it's not ground breaking.
Then again I guess the Canon 1ds3 from the 2 isn't really ground breaking either.
As we keep illustrating the only real ground breaking system is in video with the Red.
Now if I was Phase, I'd be all over Mamiya to make the RZ with a more magnified finder for focusing and crop marks that moved when rotated and exactly refelected the digital sensor.
Then the two cameras for one back idea makes a lot of sense, or an improved RZ would be a less expensive HY6 with manual focus.
There is a lot of value in the thought of two compatiable systems for one back, since the RZ is more a studio type of camera and it's not a platform I would give up on just yet.
There is also the thought that there is a big user installed base of RZ owners with a closet full for glass so maybe that's a new market just ready for the taking.
JR
-
Once they get the leaf shutter lenses and hopefully a fast 110 (this is a magic lens for medium format), this camera should do anything that the blad and the hy6 will do other than have a waist level finder, which is limited on the blad, somewhat limited on the leaf since you have to remove the back and only really fully functional on the Sinar.
Regardless of what the others offere, I wouldn't consider it a flop it's just because it's not ground breaking.
Then again I guess the Canon 1ds3 from the 2 isn't really ground breaking either.
As we keep illustrating the only real ground breaking system is in video with the Red.
Now if I was Phase, I'd be all over Mamiya to make the RZ with a more magnified finder for focusing and crop marks that moved when rotated and exactly refelected the digital sensor.
Then the two cameras for one back idea makes a lot of sense, or an improved RZ would be a less expensive HY6 with manual focus.
There is a lot of value in the thought of two compatiable systems for one back, since the RZ is more a studio type of camera and it's not a platform I would give up on just yet.
There is also the thought that there is a big user installed base of RZ owners with a closet full for glass so maybe that's a new market just ready for the taking.
JR
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a] (http://index.php?act=findpost&pid=203846\")
i really like the rz. i dont know if its possible, but having a back mount on the rz that had shifts (is that right term?) so that you could stitch if you wanted would be way cool.
then you get advantage of that very large viewing area, as long as you are shooting static things.
like the gx680/kapture group system-
[a href=\"http://www.kapturegroup.com/fuji_stitch/fuji_examples.html]http://www.kapturegroup.com/fuji_stitch/fuji_examples.html[/url]
i also think the option of leaf lenses with high sync and the option of focal plane for really high ambient shots is far more usefull than just one system with 800/1000 flash sync. so mamiya 645 option could be really great.
paul
-
There is also the thought that there is a big user installed base of RZ owners with a [span style=\'font-size:14pt;line-height:100%\']closet full for glass[/span] so maybe that's a new market just ready for the taking.
JR
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=203846\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
James, are you sure you don't have Nostradamus somewhere hiding in your Family tree???
[span style=\'font-size:11pt;line-height:100%\']You my friend are razor sharp & scary perceptive!!!![/span]
Now, was I wrong.... these companies should listen to you/others?
I usually don't bother posting pictures, but this time I had to
-
James, are you sure you don't have Nostradamus somewhere hiding in your Family tree???
[span style=\'font-size:11pt;line-height:100%\']You my friend are razor sharp & scary perceptive!!!![/span]
Now, was I wrong.... these companies should listen to you/others?
I usually don't bother posting pictures, but this time I had to
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=203877\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
The strangest thing about medium format is if you asked why and RZ can't have new cropping blades to match the sensors, or a more magnified viewfinder, somebody connected with the medium format world will explain why it can't be done, then point you over to an HY6, an H3d2 (is that correct?) or a Phase/Mamiya 645.
Earlier I illustrated how my friend in LA went into the biggest store in the city to buy a P-30+ for his contax and was told it would take weeks to get one, they tried to sell him a blad.
I sent him my p30+ to try.
If you ask somebody in the medium format digital world why, they will tell you it's too expensive to keep a lot of stock. If you ask them why all the backs don't have interchangeable mounts they will tell you there is no market for it.
If you ask somebody connected with the 35mm digital world, well they just won't tell you anything.
Once again I find it a very unique business the making and selling of professional cameras in the digital world.
Medium format has lost a huge part of their market, especially the makers of cameras and once again somebody from the medium format world will tell you why, but the real reason is medium format gave a huge chunk of the professional market to Canon for the reasons that the Canons cost less, they are easier to use, the lenses are cheaper and you can buy one on any corner on any day of the week without waiting.
It's a heartbreaker to look at that closet of RZ equipment, knowing it wouldn't take much to put it back in service and to also know that nobody seems to be listening.
I think Mamiya more than anyone is missing a large ready and waiting market, not updating the RZ.
JR
-
I think Mamiya more than anyone is missing a large ready and waiting market, not updating the RZ.
JR
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=203912\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I bet once you remove all those who moved to 35, *and all those who now expect AutoFocus,* there is not a large market left at all. I think it's the manual focus which is holding that camera back. Plus there are no backs to really fit it.
(I really liked using the RZ, but many of my shots on film were simply not in focus, though I was trying my hardest.)
Developing the RZ must make even less sense when you consider that even the 645 is already too large for the available (cropped) backs.
-
James, are you sure you don't have Nostradamus somewhere hiding in your Family tree???
[span style=\'font-size:11pt;line-height:100%\']You my friend are razor sharp & scary perceptive!!!![/span]
Now, was I wrong.... these companies should listen to you/others?
I usually don't bother posting pictures, but this time I had to
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=203877\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Time for ebay?
:+}
Snook
-
Time for ebay?
:+}
Snook
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=203975\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I think the day will come when optical viewfinders will be a thing of the past.
I know to some this sounds like heresy, but it just doesn't make sense to keep looking down bent mirrors and tiny ground plastic that blacks out every-time you shoot a frame.
I've done it for years and can manually focus even my cropped contax's but it's ain't easy.
If you used the Nikon D3 and seen what detail a 900,000 pixel lcd looks like then you know that it's going to come and by then cameras will probably look a lot different than what we have today.
Now whether medium format does this is another matter, because they still can't give us a small lcd as good as the original canon 1ds, but if they don't somebody will.
So E-bay, your probably right, but all it takes is some company to revolutionize the way we shoot and display and at that point everything goes on e-bay.
Just like the 1ds vs. the original Kodak digital dslrs, someday we'll probably look back at the medium format cameras and just shake our heads that we paid $30,000 and went through so many workarounds.
I think all professional still cameras are now in between a rock and a hard place and need to decide what they are going to be.
Somewhere, somehow, they need to get past the reply that good lcds, lower costs, wi-fi, higher iso, is just not feasable.
Right now it seems all the medium format companies pretty much offer the same thing under a different logo. Some are more stable than others, some are faster, some are stronger, but all of them are working from two sensor makers and living off of some form of legacy film camera.
I am sure this will eventually change.
JR
-
I think the day will come when optical viewfinders will be a thing of the past.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=203999\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Well the technology already exists to capture first and focus later, which removes the need for any focusing at all! At the moment it is low resolution and expensive but anything is possible.
-
Well the technology already exists to capture first and focus later, which removes the need for any focusing at all! At the moment it is low resolution and expensive but anything is possible.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=204004\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Since the point of focus is a big part of the artistic process, I doubt seriously if anyone wants to shoot a bunch of fuzzy photos and decide on the focus point later.
Don't think for a moment though that any of us wouldn't like a 4x5 focusing screeen that played in real time and didn't black out. Think about it, almost like a live video feed and everytime you pressed the button for the moment, it gets tagged with a dot.
Probably by then we will have a real live feed to clients also (this may not be a positive), but then again by then we will probably be shooting one continuous segment rather than frame by frame.
JR
-
Well the technology already exists to capture first and focus later, which removes the need for any focusing at all! At the moment it is low resolution and expensive but anything is possible.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=204004\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Graham, You are right. In issue 1/2007 of "Victor" magazine by Hasselblad on pg 45 there is an article "Shoot first, focus later" (authored by Michael Hussman) does shed intersesting light on "Light field technology".
-
I think the day will come when optical viewfinders will be a thing of the past.
I know to some this sounds like heresy, but it just doesn't make sense to keep looking down bent mirrors and tiny ground plastic that blacks out every-time you shoot a frame.
I've done it for years and can manually focus even my cropped contax's but it's ain't easy.
If you used the Nikon D3 and seen what detail a 900,000 pixel lcd looks like then you know that it's going to come and by then cameras will probably look a lot different than what we have today.
Now whether medium format does this is another matter, because they still can't give us a small lcd as good as the original canon 1ds, but if they don't somebody will.
So E-bay, your probably right, but all it takes is some company to revolutionize the way we shoot and display and at that point everything goes on e-bay.
Just like the 1ds vs. the original Kodak digital dslrs, someday we'll probably look back at the medium format cameras and just shake our heads that we paid $30,000 and went through so many workarounds.
I think all professional still cameras are now in between a rock and a hard place and need to decide what they are going to be.
Somewhere, somehow, they need to get past the reply that good lcds, lower costs, wi-fi, higher iso, is just not feasable.
Right now it seems all the medium format companies pretty much offer the same thing under a different logo. Some are more stable than others, some are faster, some are stronger, but all of them are working from two sensor makers and living off of some form of legacy film camera.
I am sure this will eventually change.
JR
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=203999\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Exactly what I was thinking. I've asked in the DPreview D3 forum if anyone uses live view and noone seems to use it, can you imagine? For manufacturers but also for consumers / pros it seems very hard to think for themselves rather than to do again what has been done all the way, but then "digital". A good D3 high resolution LCD is very nice ofcourse and I'd love it on any camera, but you don't even need it for focussing, since AF is done on the sensor. So, what you aim for, you'll know it will be in focus, (OK I know, some are still using manual focus lenses and then it may come in handy, but with good AF manual lenses aren't really needed anymore.) I have done this several times with a G9 and the focus is always spot on. But then again, on a G9 the shutter delay is very laid back ) But the D3 is a good start. Any "LCD finder camera" that could shoot as fast as a D3 while using the optical viewfinder, would be perfect. I'm imagining an RZ with an "in between 6x7 high resolution LCD" that can be mounted on top of an RZ and any finder will fit: waist level or prism finders. And a digital Mamiya 7 with a 4x5 size LCD on the back, man second hand prices would suddenly go sky high again for the existing lenses and RZ bodies. And everyone would be happy. Doesn't even take that much R&D. Sensors can stay as small as they are now for now, for who cares if they are tiny, if the view is huge and precise and the files perfect? "Not that hard to imagine" ha ha.
-
I personally think that auto-focus is overrated.
Like most photographers who have been around for a long time, I moved from manual focussing to autofocus as soon as the first autofocus cameras started to appear in the market. I continued using autofocus until recently.
I was never quite happy with autofocus, but I didn't know why. I found that out of a quick burst of say, 20 to 30 frames, a good percentage of frames were... kind of not quite as focussed as I had wished, not as pin sharp, the focus being either a little forward or a little backward and a few were completely unusable. Basically when you focus on the eyes, you expect the sharpness to be there, with every eyelash absolutely pin sharp.
Well, it just wasn't, not always.
So I did a little experiment. I shot a similar 30 fast frames, with the model moving, with me moving up and down, close and far, as you do when you shoot models, at a rapid pace...but this time, I focussed manually. Immediately the percentage of pin sharp pictures increased to almost 100 per cent.
I tried it a few times, first auto-focus, then again manually, and as I become confident again with manual focus, to my surprise, I found that I could focus faster manually than automatically (locking the autofocus to frame the subject where you want it to be can waste a few milliseconds).
Now I focus exclusively manually, and I shoot as fast as the Broncolor packs can recycle. I feel so liberated and happy to go back to something that always works, gives you instant control as to where you want to place your focus, (or de-focus for that matter) it's more instinctive and in a way, it's a bit like reclaiming something that was lost with all this furore for auto this an auto that.
Try it, it may take a little practice to go back to manual, but provided you eyesight is good, I guarantee that you will be amazed at how much more productive you can become.
Edward
-
I personally think that auto-focus is overrated.
Like most photographers who have been around for a long time, I moved from manual focussing to autofocus as soon as the first autofocus cameras started to appear in the market. I continued using autofocus until recently.
I was never quite happy with autofocus, but I didn't know why. I found that out of a quick burst of say, 20 to 30 frames, a good percentage of frames were... kind of not quite as focussed as I had wished, not as pin sharp, the focus being either a little forward or a little backward and a few were completely unusable. Basically when you focus on the eyes, you expect the sharpness to be there, with every eyelash absolutely pin sharp.
Well, it just wasn't, not always.
So I did a little experiment. I shot a similar 30 fast frames, with the model moving, with me moving up and down, close and far, as you do when you shoot models, at a rapid pace...but this time, I focussed manually. Immediately the percentage of pin sharp pictures increased to almost 100 per cent.
I tried it a few times, first auto-focus, then again manually, and as I become confident again with manual focus, to my surprise, I found that I could focus faster manually than automatically (locking the autofocus to frame the subject where you want it to be can waste a few milliseconds).
Now I focus exclusively manually, and I shoot as fast as the Broncolor packs can recycle. I feel so liberated and happy to go back to something that always works, gives you instant control as to where you want to place your focus, (or de-focus for that matter) it's more instinctive and in a way, it's a bit like reclaiming something that was lost with all this furore for auto this an auto that.
Try it, it may take a little practice to go back to manual, but provided you eyesight is good, I guarantee that you will be amazed at how much more productive you can become.
Edward
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=204082\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I agree. It's funny when I never used autofocus much until I went to the Canon 1ds. Then I used it all the time and found all of my little workarounds and focus points and honestly that's just as much effort as manually focusing, maybe more.
Then with the Contax I constantly move it around from continuous focus, to single focus to manual, but after the day is done I probably shoot 85% manual focus and it frees me up in a lot of ways, especailly since you aren't trying to find something to focus on, your just composing, focusing and shooting.
At first it was difficult getting back to manual focus, but now it's just normal.
JR
-
Since the point of focus is a big part of the artistic process, I doubt seriously if anyone wants to shoot a bunch of fuzzy photos and decide on the focus point later.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=204008\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I have a feeling from your answer that you don't know what I'm referring to. I'll try and find a link later if you're interested.
-
I have a feeling from your answer that you don't know what I'm referring to. I'll try and find a link later if you're interested.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=204187\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I read the article a while back, actually glanced at the article because I found it as non interesting as those japanese websites where they have found a way to CG people and make them look "almost" real, or that guy that wrote that flicker program where you can type in "replace the lamp post with a tree" and the software magically does it.
None of this really applies to me and I hope it never does.
I'm aware that the toothpaste is out of the tube and if you think about it, just about every photograph that could ever be shot is probably out there floating on the web just ready for the next Richard Prince to copy, manipulate and change it to their heart's content, including correcting the focus.
I understand what your saying and maybe we will eventually get a camera where you can focus, light, reposition all in post, but to be blunt, it really doesn't interest me because the more we do on the back end, usually by committee, the more the photographer becomes marginalized.
For obvious reasons that not something I would not look forward to.
JR
-
On a side note, re focus, I played around with a NikonD3. The viewfinder is not as much fun as the Canon or MF, but the focus is *fast*.
Edmund