Is it possible to enhance DR, ISO range, recycling time and sensibility on older P30 and P45 backs via firmware upgrade?
Thank you.
I can promise you the answer to this question is NO.
That's just not the way medium format works and probably never will be. It's a shame because it makes sense that such an expensive item should be a workable 10 year system rather than an 18 month to 2 year electronic item.
Something happened to the camera business. I guess the guys that made lenses and bodies started hanging out with the guys that made boom boxes and plasma TV's and the term disposable started rubbing off on them.
Had medium format gone this route of continual and affordable upgrades to one's existing back, then the buy in would be an easier decision.
Especially since the bottom has fallen out on the prices of used medium format backs. If it was available to upgrade a P45+ with a $2,500 electronic change to offer higher iso, (even at reduced file size) makes a lot more sense than trading in a perfectly good back and taking a 10 to 15 grand hit.
We've heard this for a long time from each manufacturer that to get a better lcd, or a slightly cleaner iso it takes a complete new back. Maybe for $3,000 to $6,000 dslrs that's ok, given that the buy in is much lower and it's usually easy to sell a used dslr, even in today's business climate, but for $15k to 30k for digital back it's much harder to accept a 10 to 15 grand trade in hit for an incremental upgrade.
It would also be a lot easier to invest in newer medium format if the backs would go onto multiple platform cameras and not require $2,000 mount changes. One back for an H-1, an RZ and an Contax makes more sense that being locked into one single platform. The fact that there are truck loads of RZ's and V systems just sitting on shelfs for penny's on the original dollar makes you wonder why somebody has thought of making a multi platofrm digital back a mandatory design element.
As it stands today, I think Hasselblad has the right idea on upgrades which is just keep your old camera for a backup and buy the new one at a price that is way discounted from 18 months ago.
Steve makes some good points that the p65+ has the potential to offer more than was available prior in medium format and higher iso through pixel binning and sounds like a good idea, though at 15mp it seems more marketing news than actual real world use. After all what does a p45+, p30+ or P21+ go for today? When you add in those costs to a 5d2 you wind up with a backup, two systems, high iso, high megpixels and are probably way under the costs of a the p65+.
BTW: who names these backs . . . Ford? Why is a 39mpx back called a 45, a 31 called a 30 and a 10 called a 21?
Still with medium format we always seem to be talking about potential and that's the rub with medium format, waiting on the potential. Right now the p65+ is shipping but the features are still in the works. Medium format needs to address this business model of wait and see into a package that is ready to roll out the door, with all parts intact.
The dalsa to kodak film look thing is another one that puzzles me. I'll bet you dollars to donuts that 14 months ago, Phase dealers were poo pooing the thought that a dalsa sensor is more film like. Today it's probably a mixture of repsonses.
I've owned both two Dalsa sensored backs, 3 Kodak sensor backs and they all can look like film under specific circumstances and they all can look very digital under different subject and lighting. I find more of a change in process converters or lenses than in sensors. I can say the same with cmos vs ccd, vs sony, canon and nikon. Different processing produces a different look, post production really is the key to making anything in the digital domain resemble film (even scanned film).
At this point I think if medium format is really going to differentiate itself from the higher end dslrs, the industry needs to take a giant leap, especially on the high end. Real in camera processing, much easier software, and not a slightly bigger 20% more resolution lcd but a big honking lcd that has extreme detail and an easy to use touch screen, (let's think of ipod touch here and not an ipod that has to run through a computer first).
I would mention stable and finished software, but why open that can of worms because every medium format company is still messing around with their software, except for Leaf which finally took lc10 through a 12 step program and moved it from town drunk to an almost upstanding citizen.
Though I shoot very little if anything square I might seriously consider a square Rolleiflex Hy6. Let's face it almost 645 whether it be a 1.04 crop a 1.24 crop or a 2.24 crop is still not that big in the world of previous film formats. A true 6x6 sensor would make great use of a camera that was designed for square and the available lenses would become useful. In fact when the Leaf and Sinar HY6 came out, I heard a dozen "well informed" rumors that a 6x6 sensor would be here any day. Now I guess that thought is over.
Regardless, if the sensors were really bigger then we as artists get to decide if the crop should be square, 4:3, 2:3 or even panoramic 16x9, without ever thinking about turning a camera over on it's side, rotating a back or flipping a switch.
Sure it would be expensive but if your going to drop serious coin, you might as well drop serious coin for something that is really big, has horsepower and is unique.
