Please face the facts. Kodak is phasing out its 9 micron sensor technology except for special applications like X-rays, and its direction is more sensors using its new
TRUESENSE 6.0 micron Full Frame CCD Technology Platform.
P.S. Though a great many of us feel no need for 50MP (I am happy with about 10MP or even less, after cropping!), how do experienced users of film in 6x7 and larger format film feel that 39MP sensors compare for final image resolution? Was there any point to all those whose used low speed, low DR, high res. transparency films like Velvia in those large formats?
I know I've shot about every film made in about every format and except on rare instances a film was selected more for the look than the actual ability to render detail.
I think the look of photography is changing and uber sharp amazing detail is kind of strange looking for a lot of photography, especially people. It seems the sharper and more detailed we get the more video looking the images get.
There is obviously going to be talk about who needs 50mpx and if the new 50mpx backs only gives more detail then I don't see the point. If it really does remove moire, have better color as advertised then it might have some use.
From a marketing standpoint 50mpx makes great sense because the back makers can say it's more than twice the camera of a Canon or the upcoming Nikon.
For some situations it will be better but for nearly all situations the 50mpx camera will not be twice the camera, regardless of the marketing spin.
Not that there is anything wrong with marketing or selling new product. I sell, everyone sells, but in this instance 50mpx vs. 39 or even 31 is more spin than substance, unless the 50mpx back really does something different than what we have today.
A better look, better previews, easier to manage post production, something that is different than where we are at the moment will get more professionals attention than just more megas something.
I will admit that of the 4 back makers Hasselblad is right now at the top of their game at selling and marketing their product, especially in making good use of the Hasselblad name and heritage.
It doesn't exactly translate to the modern era, but most people won't or dont know that, any more than they care if a chevrolet is made in Australia, Michigan, or Poland.
In fact I was very surprised that Sinar and Leaf did not brand the HY6 a Rolleiflex rather than Sinar and Leaf. Not that there is anything wrong with those names, but a Rollei carries more weight at the country club than HY6 or AFI.
Though those perceptions can change and change quickly. Look at the Red digital cinema camera and to take those lessons to the HY6 and the Phase cameras If they really do offer a better system than the blad with more options, more lenses, a better price, AND market it correctly then the standards of the industry will change quickly.
Michael wrote that there is reluctance on forums for people to accept 50mpx for a varity of reasons.
I agree with some of his assement, but on the whole I think it's easy to grow weary of a lot of digital updates because putting resource to just more megapixels can get in the way of making photographs and doing business.
In fact what would move me to purchase is not megapixels but better systems to make my photographs and my way of doing business easier and faster. The problem with that is it's much easier to soundbite 50mpx than to mention workflow or lens systems.
Once again, to compare all of this to the Red, there is real substance to a product that wasn't offered before regardless of the price, the name, the heritage or the time in market. If you offer a product that an artist simply can't do without, then that is the product that will be purchased.