But what I find hard to deal with is the communication policy of Leaf where at least in my case I get the feeling that I am the one who has to follow up, to ask again and again and to be greatful for Leaf's efforts to send me a back without defects "as soon as they can find one"
If digtal capture has any issue, it's communication. Hasselblad, Phase and Leaf seem hard pressed to get their message out to the actual users. Sinar . . . well I don't know who owns Sinar and have seen so little real information on their product in the U.S. that it would be hard to consider it a viable brand.
Actually dslr digtial is not much better. Does anyone really know if Canon will have a newer higher mp camera, will Nikon go full frame, will Pentax ever make their reported almost mf dslr, what is the deal with the Mamiya ZD and backs? Even Leica is telling users to "wait two weeks" before they have a response. I wonder if Lecia will wait two weeks before they cash the checks they received from the M-8?
All of these companies are very good with the positive message, showing glossy samples and talikinng about better workflows, higher iso, new software, but few really get to the actual use of the cameras and the response to issues.
Issues can be time consuming, costly and very frustrating. Nothing is worse than calling a tech service rep and saying my ______ has a color cast issue and hear the response, "yea we've seen this before". Actually I take that back it is more frustrating to hear, "We haven't seen that", only to read 20 reports of the same issue online.
The thing is I know all of these companies are working hard to make good product, but sometimes I wonder how they muddle their message. I've also had issues with Leaf and though they were eventually worked out, it was a real chore for a few months. Leaf is not alone as Phase as produced some boner software upgrades and even though the Hasselblad is a much improved product, the H3d I tested had very red previews on the lcd and in the software thumnails.
When I look at the blad pdfs the lcd previews look very neutral (insert big grin).
I've written this dozen of times but all of the manufacturers would do themself a service by sitting next to a working photogrpaher for a full weeks project, from pre production to final delivery.
Watch a photographer reinstall software, test for issues and upload firmware while they try to answer 12 e-mails and take 3 phone calls.
Listen to the response from clients when you show a red lcd preview, or even a pixelated lcd preview and hear the photographer say "don't worry, it will look good on the computer". Watch the computer previews come up 40pts. green, see the room gasp and then watch the digital tech start running through the series of wb options trying to fix it.
Then take it to the 10pm to 2pm shift where 60 selects must be processed out of 4,000 raw files and at this point I think any manufacturer would learn volumes.
At some point all any of us want is a product that works and is realiable and more importantly easier to use. With digital capture we have all taken on a huge task of beocming photographer, film maker and lab and any issue, even a small one can make the difference between going to bed at midnight, or not going to bed at all.
For me the manufactuerer that is the most proactive and the most transparent will be the one that eventually succeeds.