I look at it like this, and, as another poster on this thread suggested..Large format d back, Medium format d back, small format d back. What's different? basically size and shape. That is pretty much it. Costs should still be coming down, that is, unless these companies have been meeting for drinks and collectively holding the line on price drops. We have high quality dslr's below the 1K mark at this point. Sure, re-tooling and re-thinking costs money.
DiaAzul,
There is an old saying that i cant remember. It goes like this..If the great thinkers / doers had listened to the all the guys at their dinner parties, telling them they were nuts for even thinking of that...we'd still be eating on the floor and tossing our bones in the corner. For that matter, we might still be in the darkroom sniiffing fixer, blasting the music and dancing while we agitate.(which i still am from time to time).
What Im trying to say to you is this...please dont insult my intelligence with parenthetical remarks such as "and that isn't two posts in a forum". I am well aware of the complexity of the industrial process and the corporate thought process that is in place at the moment. People, like one of the posters above, Graeme Nattress, and others who have made posts that resemble my remarks, are out there.
Mr Nattress is involved in thinking outside of the box, that takes a certain amount of guts. Im sure he has experienced many rolls of the eyes as he has proceeded down his road. Adverse thought is important in this type of process, but, it doesn't need to be reinforced by condescending remarks.
I and perhaps, we, are talking about some sort of modular standard that a given company could realize and build flexibility into, anticipating future possibilties and parameters. It does not seem all that ridiculous to me.
What the hell, look at the size of some of these digicams...they are tiny...really tiny. And many of them produce amazing images for their size. When I look at those things and think about your suggestion that the sensor is not the only issue here...it makes me even more sure that this is possible and realistic. In fact, we are at a point where most knowledgeable folks are realizing that we dont need much more in the way of file size. processing power should naturally take a lurch at some point.
and no, Im not really talking about scads of folks sending their cameras in for sensor replacement. Im sure that there is some genius out there that could come up with an efficient system for upgrading a product line based on a well thought out ten or fifteen year plan for tech improvements based on a set of standards and pin configurations or some such. After all, lots of folks have been through sticking high tech q-tips and various gadgets into their cameras to try to clean their sensors...a user replaced module is not all that far fetched given that clumsy, sort of stone aged process. A simple back could do the trick with processors built into the camera. As I said before, two points: Pixel counts are beginning to max out to the point where we dont need bigger files for a given use, it should make sense that processing power should take a rest as well, and, prices should keep coming down.
I know one thing for sure and that is, if Leica could produce a camera that would truly live in the spirit of the family of durable, reliable cameras that they are known for, something that wouldn't be obsolete in a couple of years...which the M8 will be, they would sell a hell of lot more cameras. Same goes for the mentality of the new Hasselblad line because backwards and lateral compatability builds loyalty and sells products.
Painfully idealistic? naive? Fine, I'll accept that and wear that badge while i'm making sculptures from my mastadon bones.
Lego? Maybe I should trade in the twenty or so massive lego space stations my son has built for a new set of whitewall radials? He doesn't use them anymore because girls have taken over his brain...I cannot bring myself to throw them out, they are fairly rad, awesome even.
