Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 16   Go Down

Author Topic: DIGITAL Medium Format photography is almost as moribund???  (Read 65137 times)

theguywitha645d

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 970
Re: DIGITAL Medium Format photography is almost as moribund???
« Reply #80 on: March 03, 2013, 11:05:13 PM »

You are confusing sales with customer satisfaction. With all the complaints I hear from a whole bunch of releases from Leica, it still seems not to have dampened sales. Some people like to buy British cars too.
Logged

BernardLanguillier

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 9857
    • http://www.flickr.com/photos/bernardlanguillier/sets/
Re: DIGITAL Medium Format photography is almost as moribund???
« Reply #81 on: March 03, 2013, 11:07:02 PM »

Could it be that Ferrari is a smaller player in percentage terms in the car market than MF manufacturers in the camera market?
Ferrari may take exception to be labelled moribund.

That's an interesting example for various reasons:
1. It validates the proposition that small series companies in the high end can be very profitable (the luxury segment as a whole validates this as well),
2. But it does in fact not really validate the position that independant high end brands in competitive technological fields can remain at the forefront of technology based on their own revenues alone (even with very high prices).

Why so?

1. Ferrari is similar to Boeing in that one business line (F1/military) manages to fund to a large extend the high end technological developement of another business line (sports car/civilian planes). In the case of Ferrari, the sports car division is in fact fed with technologies both from high end (F1) and mass products (Fiat/Chrysler group). It is of course more complex than that because their involvement in F1 also serves a clear marketing purpose whose monetary value only themselves can assess.

2. When you look more into the details of the components making up the value of a car (Ferrari or VW), you'll quickly realize that a lot of that is coming from suppliers like Bosch who spread the cost of their R&D over basically all the Automotive OEMs (tens of millions of cars). This is especially true for ECU (Engine Control Units), etc...

This is even more obvious for Lamborghini whose 4x4 powertrain is directly inherited from Audi who owns them. There is no way Lamborghini could have developped by themselves the Quattro technology, even when they sell their cars 200,000+ Euros a pop. Look around, there is not a single high end sports car brand that managed to remain credible without being integrated in a larger conglomerate whose IP results from the income resulting from mass produced goods revenue.

OK, it is true that Dalsa is somehow behaving like Bosch and that their defense R&D does, to some extend, certainly contribute to the technology they are using in their MF sensors. But those are pretty small series also with arguably pretty different sets of specs/needs. I would love to be told wrong and see them come up with a live view enabled nex gen sensor performing as well as that of the D800. I mean this. But I have serious doubts about their ability to come up with the R&D/process goods.

Now, as Yair mentioned, there is certainly a market for high end backs not offering live view, but it sadly fails to attract people like myself who would otherwise have been prime candidates to be on their customers list.

So why do I not own a Phaseone/Hassy back for my - mostly - landscape needs? The main objective reasons today are:
- [Show Stopper] Lack of live view makes accurate focusing difficult in low light/near infinity,
- [Show Stopper] Price for value compared to the competition/actual needs (this is getting worse generation after generation),
- Issues with color casts when using some movement with some lenses. I know they can mostly be corrected with a second frame and software corrections,
- Concerns about the weather sealing of backs/cameras,
- [Potential show Stopper] Concerns about battery life in cold weather, various data were published but nothing super clear on this front. Just tell us how many frames it can shoot at -10C on a full battery charge with 3 sec review per image between captures.
- Weight/Bulk, particularly for long lenses,
- Doubts about the ability of Phaseone/Hassy/the whole ecosystem to remain competitive technology wise with their current low volume business model (as mentioned, I am not too concerned about their ability to stay in business).

Why would I want to own one?
- [High value] Reduced need for stitching thanks to higher native resolutions,
- [High value] Ability to work on a variety of camera platforms (tech,...),
- [High value] Typically larger viewfinders provide a nice shooting experience,
- [High value] Network of highly skilled VARs such a Capture Integration,
- Perhaps a different look, although I am being careful here as looks for landscape can be a tricky avenue,
- Probably a slightly higher DR for the latest backs (although it remains to be quantified - DxO sees the opposite),
- Availability of Leaf shutter lenses could provide some more creative options in the studio (not my main application by any means through).

You guys know what remains to be done if you want my business, come up with a 80mp back with usable live view around 10,000-12,000 US$ I will start looking at the offering very carefully. Don't forget that the D4x/3D will be even better than the D800e though.  ;)

Cheers,
Bernard
Logged
A few images online here!

Steve Hendrix

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1321
    • http://www.captureintegration.com/
Re: DIGITAL Medium Format photography is almost as moribund???
« Reply #82 on: March 03, 2013, 11:15:09 PM »

If, as the dealers here continue to assert (without any evidence) that sales at Phase are booming, I'd love to hear what the excuse is for the farcical situation that their flagship products still don't have a key promoted feature working 2 years after their introduction.

Someone point me to another example of a successful company - in any industry - with the lack of budget to fix something so fundamental. Because a lack of budget is the only viable excuse for USB not to be working on the IQ backs a year ago.

One also has to wonder how good business must be when hard-sell tactics such as pouncing on unrelated threads to promote the products one sells, or unsolicited PM's to forum members to also promote one's business, are necessary.


Gerald - who are you referring to?

By the way I agree the issue with USB 3 is a glaring fail, although I don't agree that budgetary reasons have anything to do with it (IMO).


Steve Hendrix
Capture Integration
Logged
Steve Hendrix
Sales Manager, www.captureintegration.com (e-mail Me)
MFDB: Phase One/Leaf-Mamiya/Hasselblad/Leica/Sinar
TechCam: Alpa/Cambo/Arca Swiss/Sinar
Direct: 404.543.8475

theguywitha645d

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 970
Re: DIGITAL Medium Format photography is almost as moribund???
« Reply #83 on: March 03, 2013, 11:17:56 PM »

Bernard, these companies don't have to appeal to everyone. Obviously, there are some that are fine with the limited technology. There are folks still using 8x10 view cameras and making wet plates. I like the Live View in my RX-1 and I can happily live without it in my 645D. And basing a successful product line because it has the cutting-edge bells and whistles falls flat when the field is subjective. Look how people are swayed by the "rangefinder style" of the Nex 7/6 or the "DSLR style" of the OMD, when both are neither and are the same type of camera.
« Last Edit: March 03, 2013, 11:20:39 PM by theguywitha645d »
Logged

Norm37

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5
Re: DIGITAL Medium Format photography is almost as moribund???
« Reply #84 on: March 04, 2013, 01:07:40 AM »


Look around, there is not a single high end sports car brand that managed to remain credible without being integrated in a larger conglomerate whose IP results from the income resulting from mass produced goods revenue.

Cheers,
Bernard


I hope SSC North America remains credible?

http://www.sscnorthamerica.com/about-ssc.php

Norm
« Last Edit: March 04, 2013, 04:27:09 AM by Norm37 »
Logged
Norm

FredBGG

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1633
Re: DIGITAL Medium Format photography is almost as moribund???
« Reply #85 on: March 04, 2013, 01:09:49 AM »


Gerald - who are you referring to?

By the way I agree the issue with USB 3 is a glaring fail, although I don't agree that budgetary reasons have anything to do with it (IMO).


Steve Hendrix
Capture Integration

So what is the problem?

Phase One and Mamiya Leaf tout this as a feature on their websites and it still does not work.. even two years later.




« Last Edit: March 04, 2013, 01:55:55 AM by FredBGG »
Logged

ErikKaffehr

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 10122
    • Echophoto
Re: DIGITAL Medium Format photography is almost as moribund???
« Reply #86 on: March 04, 2013, 01:34:22 AM »

Hi,

I pretty much agree with Bernard.

What I would consider would be a digital back with live view on a technical camera (probably Hartblei). The Hartblei can be adopted to almost any lens (like my set of Pentax 67 lenses) and all those yield TS with Mirex adapters. 

The major issues for me is the price point of the backs and lack of live view.

Best regards
Erik




Now, as Yair mentioned, there is certainly a market for high end backs not offering live view, but it sadly fails to attract people like myself who would otherwise have been prime candidates to be on their customers list.

So why do I not own a Phaseone/Hassy back for my - mostly - landscape needs? The main objective reasons today are:
- [Show Stopper] Lack of live view makes accurate focusing difficult in low light/near infinity,
- [Show Stopper] Price for value compared to the competition/actual needs (this is getting worse generation after generation),
- Issues with color casts when using some movement with some lenses. I know they can mostly be corrected with a second frame and software corrections,
- Concerns about the weather sealing of backs/cameras,
- [Potential show Stopper] Concerns about battery life in cold weather, various data were published but nothing super clear on this front. Just tell us how many frames it can shoot at -10C on a full battery charge with 3 sec review per image between captures.
- Weight/Bulk, particularly for long lenses,
- Doubts about the ability of Phaseone/Hassy/the whole ecosystem to remain competitive technology wise with their current low volume business model (as mentioned, I am not too concerned about their ability to stay in business).

Why would I want to own one?
- [High value] Reduced need for stitching thanks to higher native resolutions,
- [High value] Ability to work on a variety of camera platforms (tech,...),
- [High value] Typically larger viewfinders provide a nice shooting experience,
- [High value] Network of highly skilled VARs such a Capture Integration,
- Perhaps a different look, although I am being careful here as looks for landscape can be a tricky avenue,
- Probably a slightly higher DR for the latest backs (although it remains to be quantified - DxO sees the opposite),
- Availability of Leaf shutter lenses could provide some more creative options in the studio (not my main application by any means through).

You guys know what remains to be done if you want my business, come up with a 80mp back with usable live view around 10,000-12,000 US$ I will start looking at the offering very carefully. Don't forget that the D4x/3D will be even better than the D800e though.  ;)

Cheers,
Bernard

jerome_m

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 671
Re: DIGITAL Medium Format photography is almost as moribund???
« Reply #87 on: March 04, 2013, 02:29:13 AM »

The major issues for me is the price point of the backs and lack of live view.

So, if I understand correctly, you don't have the money to buy a MF camera or back. How does that make you a prospective customer?

MF has always been about selling 20000$ cameras for people who have that kind of cash. When Nikon brought a 2500$ camera on the market, that business plan did not change. I am a bit under the impression that, now that the D800 is around, some photographers who never thought about buying a camera for 20000$ are suddenly frustrated that Hasselblad or Phase One do not lower their price to that level. But their business is still to sell cameras for 20000$, isn't it?
Logged

BernardLanguillier

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 9857
    • http://www.flickr.com/photos/bernardlanguillier/sets/
Re: DIGITAL Medium Format photography is almost as moribund???
« Reply #88 on: March 04, 2013, 03:07:07 AM »

So, if I understand correctly, you don't have the money to buy a MF camera or back. How does that make you a prospective customer?

MF has always been about selling 20000$ cameras for people who have that kind of cash. When Nikon brought a 2500$ camera on the market, that business plan did not change. I am a bit under the impression that, now that the D800 is around, some photographers who never thought about buying a camera for 20000$ are suddenly frustrated that Hasselblad or Phase One do not lower their price to that level. But their business is still to sell cameras for 20000$, isn't it?

In fact most companies think of their products in terms of the value they deliver to their customers.

That's where the "you don't have the money" questions is highlighting the lose-lose situation we are currently in. The real question is not whether one has the cash (or the means to get credit for the required amount), but whether it is the best way to use this amount considering the value being delivered relative to other available options.

So mentioning price as one show stopper doesn't mean that the cash is not there, just that the current value offering is not convincing relative to one's need.

Cheers,
Bernard
Logged
A few images online here!

jerome_m

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 671
Re: DIGITAL Medium Format photography is almost as moribund???
« Reply #89 on: March 04, 2013, 09:18:35 AM »

As I posted earlier, I tried an Hasselblad H3D-31 next to a D800. There is no doubt in my mind that the H3D gives better results than the D800 (sharper, better colors, etc...) on static subjects or landscape. Maybe not by much, but the H3D-31 is 7 years old. I would believe that a H5D-60 or Phase One IQ180 would simply trounce the D800.

So, quite frankly, I don't quite understand what the discussion is about. The MFs are considerably more expensive, yes. So what? I someone wants to buy one because they need the resolution or simply because they have the cash and enjoy spending it on cameras, more power to them.
Logged

theguywitha645d

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 970
Re: DIGITAL Medium Format photography is almost as moribund???
« Reply #90 on: March 04, 2013, 10:03:09 AM »

In fact most companies think of their products in terms of the value they deliver to their customers.

But if you are not one of those buying the products, you are not a customer. Wishing for things does not make you a customer either. And the MFD market certainly has customers and from the folks that have posted here and actually have purchased this equipment, they seem to think they are getting value.
Logged

theguywitha645d

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 970
Re: DIGITAL Medium Format photography is almost as moribund???
« Reply #91 on: March 04, 2013, 10:09:24 AM »

The funny thing about this entire conversation is there is actually a MFD industry and associated market. From the people who actually sell in this market, they are saying sales are good. There are certainly folks on this forum that are buying and using this equipment. Yet despite this, there are folks convinced that the market is dying. It is kind of like looking out the window and seeing a sunny day and then arguing it is raining. Arguing that someone personally does not want to buy something is not an indication something is wrong. I do not want to buy a Ferrari, but that does not mean that Ferrari's are bad cars and the sports car market is doing badly.
Logged

FredBGG

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1633
Re: DIGITAL Medium Format photography is almost as moribund???
« Reply #92 on: March 04, 2013, 12:24:17 PM »

As I posted earlier, I tried an Hasselblad H3D-31 next to a D800. There is no doubt in my mind that the H3D gives better results than the D800 (sharper, better colors, etc...) on static subjects or landscape. Maybe not by much, but the H3D-31 is 7 years old. I would believe that a H5D-60 or Phase One IQ180 would simply trounce the D800.

So, quite frankly, I don't quite understand what the discussion is about. The MFs are considerably more expensive, yes. So what? I someone wants to buy one because they need the resolution or simply because they have the cash and enjoy spending it on cameras, more power to them.

D800E vs Hasselblad 40MP close crops and keep in mind that the hasselblad shot was shot closer and the face filled more of the frame
so the comparison favors the Hasselblad.



http://www.photigy.com/nikon-d800e-test-review-vs-hasselblad-h4d40-35mm-against-medium-format/
« Last Edit: March 04, 2013, 10:22:21 PM by FredBGG »
Logged

jerome_m

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 671
Re: DIGITAL Medium Format photography is almost as moribund???
« Reply #93 on: March 04, 2013, 12:38:47 PM »

I have seen that young lady already. Since you like to peep pixels, click here and there (full resolution pictures taken with a H3D-31 and a D800).
« Last Edit: March 04, 2013, 01:00:23 PM by jerome_m »
Logged

evgeny

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 495
Re: DIGITAL Medium Format photography is almost as moribund???
« Reply #94 on: March 04, 2013, 12:53:14 PM »

Fred, I think you should close a 645 lens one stop more and compare 120 macro to a 85mm (35mm format) lens.

I don't believe this MF photo is a good capture

Evgeny
Logged

FredBGG

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1633
Re: DIGITAL Medium Format photography is almost as moribund???
« Reply #95 on: March 04, 2013, 01:01:19 PM »

I have seen that young lady already. Since you like to peep pixels, click here and there (full resolution pictures taken with a H3D-31 and a D800).

Hmmm zoom lens (ultra wide 14 to 28mm 2.8 fast lens) on the D800 and a prime (28mm f 4 ) on the Hasselblad.......
« Last Edit: March 04, 2013, 01:08:58 PM by FredBGG »
Logged

FredBGG

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1633
Re: DIGITAL Medium Format photography is almost as moribund???
« Reply #96 on: March 04, 2013, 01:04:11 PM »

Iím a whisker away from buying a D800E but Fredís incessant polemic keeps putting me off.

Ridiculous  ;)
Logged

EricWHiss

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2565
    • Rolleiflex USA
Re: DIGITAL Medium Format photography is almost as moribund???
« Reply #97 on: March 04, 2013, 01:40:57 PM »

I have seen that young lady already. Since you like to peep pixels, click here and there (full resolution pictures taken with a H3D-31 and a D800).
Wow!  That's amazing!  Anyone looking at D800 should check this out first.
Logged
Authorized Rolleiflex Dealer:
Find product information, download user manuals, or purchase online - Rolleiflex USA

bcooter

  • Guest
Re: DIGITAL Medium Format photography is almost as moribund???
« Reply #98 on: March 04, 2013, 02:02:06 PM »

D800E vs Hasselblad 40MP close crops and keep in mind that the hasselblad shot was ...............


Fred,

When you shot this test, did you have the slight shutter delay set on the Hasselblad?  It has a huge mirror and even though it looks sharper in your samples, I think with the slight mirror shutter delay makes for a even sharper image.

Also when you do a test like this did you shoot any full length images?  I always test detail (which I rarely test) by shooting a horizontal framed full length adult.

I've always found that a head a shoulders image doesn't really show me as much as full length, as most cameras look very good at this distance.

One more thing, what was the light source you tested with?  Flash, HMI, daylight, tungsten.

The few times I've tested and compared cameras just for the sake of comparison I've always tried all four of these light sources because every sensor/camera/processor reacts differently.

I've found medium format, at least my phase and previous aptus backs, worked very well with tungsten, much better than my 35mm cameras.

I also test hand held and with a tripod.  Some cameras really require a tripod, some don't.

Did you shoot this test with a tripod?

IMO

BC

Logged

bcooter

  • Guest
Re: DIGITAL Medium Format photography is almost as moribund???
« Reply #99 on: March 04, 2013, 02:16:32 PM »

I doubt he shot the test.

Wow.

He's shown it so much, I'm sure he did.

Right Fred?


IMO

BC
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 16   Go Up