If Mamiya ZD comes to the US -- would you buy one?

Yes, absolutely.  Where do I place my order?

2 (3.9%)

Yes, if the price remains comparable to prices elsewhere in the world.

4 (7.8%)

Yes, I would be interested, but would like to see it first

10 (19.6%)

Possibly, but would like to have more information and do some testing.

10 (19.6%)

Probably not,  I suspect that it might be too little too late.

8 (15.7%)

No, I don't need anything more than my Canon DSLR's give me.

3 (5.9%)

No, I already have a digital back for my Mamiya 645 and don't need another camera.

5 (9.8%)

No, I've already swithced to a different camera system.

9 (17.6%)

Total Members Voted: 48

[Let Biogons be Biogons]

A quick poll to try to gauge the potential market interest in the Mamiya ZD camera body if a way was found to bring it market it in the US.  What do you think?

[Let Biogons be Biogons]

I think it is interesting that after all the claims that the Canon DSLR's, such as the 1DsMkII are just as good as MF digital, that no one had selected the "No, I don't need anything more than my Canon DSLR's give me." poll choice.  Encouraging.

[jimgolden]

seems like if you havent made a choice then you're open to esploring it...like every ohter offering.

[Quentin]

I note the assumption that readers will inevitably be using a Canon dslr.  What about D2x users, for example?  The last Canon camera I owned was an AV1 of early 1980's vintage.

Quentin

[Let Biogons be Biogons]

I note the assumption that readers will inevitably be using a Canon dslr.  What about D2x users, for example?  The last Canon camera I owned was an AV1 of early 1980's vintage.[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=110231\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Sure.  I didn't intend the Canon choice to be exclusive.  It was just rying to pick up on a lot of disucssion over the past year or so that suggested MF was doomed and unnecessary and that the Canon 1DsMKII (and potential successors) provided irtually equialent IQ while providing much better high ISO performance, a wider choice of lenses, and faster  operation.  You could group the D2X into that, if you feel it appropriate.

[Quentin]

Sure.  I didn't intend the Canon choice to be exclusive.  It was just rying to pick up on a lot of disucssion over the past year or so that suggested MF was doomed and unnecessary and that the Canon 1DsMKII (and potential successors) provided irtually equialent IQ while providing much better high ISO performance, a wider choice of lenses, and faster  operation.  You could group the D2X into that, if you feel it appropriate.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=110247\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

"No, I don't need anything more than my Canon DSLR's give me." sounds pretty exclusive to me.  I use a Kodak 14nx as well as a ZD.  Remove the word "Canon" and its fine.  I prefer not to buy my cameras from an office equipment manufacturer, although I hear Canon do make good photocopiers.    

Quentin

[Let Biogons be Biogons]

"No, I don't need anything more than my Canon DSLR's give me." sounds pretty exclusive to me.  I use a Kodak 14nx as well as a ZD.  Remove the word "Canon" and its fine.  I prefer not to buy my cameras from an office equipment manufacturer, although I hear Canon do make good photocopiers.   
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=110291\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

As I said it was not my intent.  No real value in harping on it.  Please feel free to substitute any pro-level DSLR (DX2 or other) for Canon in that particular poll answer and respond accordingly.