Pages: 1 [2] 3   Go Down

Author Topic: If Canon bought Phase One?  (Read 20901 times)

gerald.d

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 438
Re: If Canon bought Phase One?
« Reply #20 on: August 13, 2013, 03:18:52 pm »

Interesting thoughts and observations from everyone, but I can't help thinking that a the key point from the original article has been totally missed.

Quote
According to a Northlight Images tip, Canon has been “investing significantly in a major European medium format digital camera manufacturer.” This apparently due to a shrinking demand for compact cameras. Northlight goes on to say that “At the moment, there is no talk of an outright purchase, but it remains an option.”

Flip this. What's in it for Phase One to reach out to Canon for investment/partnership?

It's public knowledge that "Phase One" are developing a new MF camera. Surely it would make perfect sense that they would look to external partners for support here? I can't for one moment imagine that developing a new camera from scratch (regardless of format) would be a realistic task for a company the size of Phase One. And it's going to be a new camera - no way will they get anywhere by attempting to evolve the ancient Mamiya 645 platform.

They outsource their new sensors, they outsource their new lenses. Why would anyone assume they'd develop something as complex as a camera body internally? It would make perfect sense to approach a company such as Canon for this. On their part, Canon would of course have to invest significant time, effort, and resources to produce the camera for Phase One. Business-wise, it would be perfectly natural to have a buy-out option in an agreement of this significance.

Note what's in quotes, and ignore what's not. I strongly believe the "shrinking demand for compact cameras" is a total red herring. It makes no sense whatsoever.

Everything in quotes does though.

Logged

JoeKitchen

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5022
Re: If Canon bought Phase One?
« Reply #21 on: August 13, 2013, 06:12:31 pm »

Interesting thoughts and observations from everyone, but I can't help thinking that a the key point from the original article has been totally missed.

Flip this. What's in it for Phase One to reach out to Canon for investment/partnership?

It's public knowledge that "Phase One" are developing a new MF camera. Surely it would make perfect sense that they would look to external partners for support here? I can't for one moment imagine that developing a new camera from scratch (regardless of format) would be a realistic task for a company the size of Phase One. And it's going to be a new camera - no way will they get anywhere by attempting to evolve the ancient Mamiya 645 platform.

They outsource their new sensors, they outsource their new lenses. Why would anyone assume they'd develop something as complex as a camera body internally? It would make perfect sense to approach a company such as Canon for this. On their part, Canon would of course have to invest significant time, effort, and resources to produce the camera for Phase One. Business-wise, it would be perfectly natural to have a buy-out option in an agreement of this significance.

Note what's in quotes, and ignore what's not. I strongly believe the "shrinking demand for compact cameras" is a total red herring. It makes no sense whatsoever.

Everything in quotes does though.


Interesting idea.  Would be much easier on Phase to develop a camera with Canon. 
Logged
"Photography is one percent inspiration and ninety-nine percent

Doug Peterson

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4210
    • http://www.doug-peterson.com
Re: If Canon bought Phase One?
« Reply #22 on: August 13, 2013, 06:37:13 pm »

They outsource their new sensors, they outsource their new lenses. Why would anyone assume they'd develop something as complex as a camera body internally?

All major medium format digital backs have always used sensors produced by other companies. In contrast to a one-way relationship Phase One has worked very closely in the development of it's recent sensors. See also: IQ260 the Sensor Story. This ability to partner more directly (rather than buy off the shelf products) is one of the primary reasons Phase One now works with Dalsa rather than Kodak.

Team Phase One manufacturers their own lenses, and designed the D series lenses including the 150D (find me anyone who has anything shy of absolutely ecstatic things to say about that lens) but partner with Schneider on lens design – a great choice in my opinion as Schneider has some of the best lens designers on the planet.

Team Phase One produced the IQ and IQ2 and Credo, the three most powerful and advanced digital back lines on the market with touch screen interface, retina-grade display, native wifi review and control which is fast but still provides 100% zoom (IQ2), the first camera with UDMA7 interface, and no less than a half dozen processors fit into a self-contained chassis. I think their track record of handling complex development projects is pretty strong  ;D.

I remember the countless naysayers the months/years before Phase One released the IQ who insisted that they should work with Canon/Nikon/whomever to gain access to their LCDs. I haven't heard any of those comments since they released the IQ. Feels like a similar situation to me :).
« Last Edit: August 13, 2013, 06:51:59 pm by Doug Peterson »
Logged

JoeKitchen

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5022
Re: If Canon bought Phase One?
« Reply #23 on: August 13, 2013, 10:10:01 pm »

To be honest, I could care less about the development of a SLR by Phase for their backs.  If it was affordable, I would buy one and use for nothing more than personal work, if that. 

Tech cameras are what I care about.  Just thought the concept was interesting. 
Logged
"Photography is one percent inspiration and ninety-nine percent

gerald.d

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 438
Re: If Canon bought Phase One?
« Reply #24 on: August 14, 2013, 12:43:56 am »

Your post simply reinforces exactly what I said, Doug.

Phase One enter into partnerships for all their products. They partner with world class lens companies to develop lenses, and world class sensor companies to develop sensors.

What makes you think it would be any different for a camera body?

Logged

design_freak

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1128
Re: If Canon bought Phase One?
« Reply #25 on: August 14, 2013, 04:50:22 am »

Your post simply reinforces exactly what I said, Doug.

Phase One enter into partnerships for all their products. They partner with world class lens companies to develop lenses, and world class sensor companies to develop sensors.

What makes you think it would be any different for a camera body?



Dude, I think you hit the weak spot  ;D
Logged
Best regards,
DF

bcooter

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1520
Re: If Canon bought Phase One?
« Reply #26 on: August 14, 2013, 05:01:29 am »

Doug,

Your not gonna win on this.

There is just too much P___s envy when it comes to medium format.

Every time medium format makes an advance there seems to be a negative chorus , i.e. Phase's tethering to an Ipad, better lcd's, touch screen etc.

Every time Apple changes a connector (how many are we into now, serial, ethernet, usb1, usb2, e sata, firewire 400, Firewire 800, thunderbolt. it's gonna be Phase's fault if their legacy backs don't have 8 connectors.

Every time the mention of sensors, lenses, cameras, there comes the notion that well . . . Phase doesn't actually go into a room and make them.

Hasselblad has caught the same heat for their association with fuji on the H, for I dunno . . . forever.

It's strange. 

Most people know Sony does most of the sensor work for Nikon, Olympus, even Panasonic (who does make their own sensors) and probably a lot more.

Fuji has made some good sensors, some not so good, but they get cut a lot of slack and up to the latest Fuji, nobody was raving about a Fuji/Nikon camera.

Who makes Japanese lenses, actually what company actually "makes" any lens.  I can google a lens name and I'll get 3 to 10 different answers and btw, does Apple actually make anything, but the're given credit for inventing air.

It doesn't matter, Medium format works for some, doesn't for others and that's the way it goes, though I'll bet you anything that if Phase or Hasselblad could build volume and lower their cost to the Canon Nikon level they noise would die down, then again probably not because all previous buyers would be mad that their "investment" tanked.

It's just the "I'd never own a Maserati" thing. The people that do seem pretty happy, the ones that don't like to talk down about them.

The only exception is Leica.  They obviously need their sensors from Kodak (or did) they obviously needed first Imacon, then Phase to process their files, still don't have their own tethering suite, but Leica lovers let that pass.

Personally I don't want a Canon Medium format, though I will admit I looked long and hard at the Pentax and to be honest the Pentax was right with price and some usability, wrong for me on tethering and write speed.

I looked hard at the Hasselblad H5d, but I can't get a handle on how robust the software is and honestly, as I've mentioned in private e-mail, my studio's business model has changed so drastically in the last few years, that I have to really think long and hard about investing in a new medium format system, though in many ways I want to.

The real thing that keeps me from buying again (and I'm sure you don't want to hear this) is my ancient Phase backs are still so very good.  The files are better than any camera I've owned, period and how old is the p30+ and p21+?  A billion years?

Anyway, keep up the good fight, I'm sure you guys are doing well.

IMO

BC


Logged

Chairman Bill

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3352
    • flickr page
Re: If Canon bought Phase One?
« Reply #27 on: August 14, 2013, 05:03:34 am »

To be honest, I could care less about the development of a SLR by Phase for their backs.

So you could care less, which means you do care to some extent. How much do you care? A little bit, or a lot? Or do you mean that you couldn't care less? [/pedant_mode]  ;)

pedro39photo

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 111
    • PedroNunesPhoto
Re: If Canon bought Phase One?
« Reply #28 on: August 14, 2013, 06:23:30 am »

I like this post...
The DMF need a new wake up.
I love to see a new company enter in the DMF to make a "game changer" in this industry like the canon made with the 5d mark2 for the video industry or the blackmagic camera.
Today we have great backs with old body tecnology.
With just 2 main brands in the dmf the competition its small and slow the inovation.
I dont need much more than my h3dii 39mp i love the files but i miss good 400 or 800iso or a faster af...and maybe a 7000usd entry level base model for new dmf users
Logged

ErikKaffehr

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11311
    • Echophoto
Re: If Canon bought Phase One?
« Reply #29 on: August 14, 2013, 07:11:22 am »

Hi,

High ISO seems to need CMOS. Some rumors, Phase One may be working on it. Quite probably, some of the technology MF uses is licensed from DSLR vendors. Hasselblad used to use some Minolta technology for instance.

Best reagrds
Erik


I like this post...
The DMF need a new wake up.
I love to see a new company enter in the DMF to make a "game changer" in this industry like the canon made with the 5d mark2 for the video industry or the blackmagic camera.
Today we have great backs with old body tecnology.
With just 2 main brands in the dmf the competition its small and slow the inovation.
I dont need much more than my h3dii 39mp i love the files but i miss good 400 or 800iso or a faster af...and maybe a 7000usd entry level base model for new dmf users
Logged
Erik Kaffehr
 

gerald.d

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 438
Re: If Canon bought Phase One?
« Reply #30 on: August 14, 2013, 07:33:24 am »

Doug,

Your not gonna win on this.

There is just too much P___s envy when it comes to medium format.

<snip>

It's just the "I'd never own a Maserati" thing. The people that do seem pretty happy, the ones that don't like to talk down about them.

<snip>

IMO

BC

Not sure if this jibe was aimed at me (in the context of the thread, it's hard to see who else you were aiming it at), but for what it's worth, I own some MF kit, and am very happy with it. Very happy indeed.

I just happen to be capable of some objectivity.

I also can't see any downsides whatsoever to Canon and Phase one partnering (in whatever shape or form) in order to produce a decent camera. Doug seems to be supporting my argument by highlighting examples of where Phase partner with Schneider to produce great lenses, and Dalsa for great sensors.

I really do find it rather surprising that the mere suggestion it might be a good thing for "Team Phase One" to partner with a company who know a thing or two about building damn good camera bodies, ends up with some folks getting so defensive about the idea.

Just why is that concept so objectionable?

« Last Edit: August 14, 2013, 07:36:27 am by gerald.d »
Logged

JoeKitchen

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5022
Re: If Canon bought Phase One?
« Reply #31 on: August 14, 2013, 07:57:16 am »

So you could care less, which means you do care to some extent. How much do you care? A little bit, or a lot? Or do you mean that you couldn't care less? [/pedant_mode]  ;)
Ok, I dont care at all.  I consider SLRs to be a novelty for what I do.   8)
Logged
"Photography is one percent inspiration and ninety-nine percent

ondebanks

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 858
Re: If Canon bought Phase One?
« Reply #32 on: August 14, 2013, 09:04:43 am »

Interesting thoughts and observations from everyone, but I can't help thinking that a the key point from the original article has been totally missed.

Flip this. What's in it for Phase One to reach out to Canon for investment/partnership?

It's public knowledge that "Phase One" are developing a new MF camera. Surely it would make perfect sense that they would look to external partners for support here? I can't for one moment imagine that developing a new camera from scratch (regardless of format) would be a realistic task for a company the size of Phase One.


Team Phase One (as Doug puts it) includes Mamiya. And Mamiya have never developed a new MF camera? Sure, they are not the giants they once were, but they must still have retained significant core expertise.

Why would anyone assume they'd develop something as complex as a camera body internally? It would make perfect sense to approach a company such as Canon for this.

There is rather little difference in underlying complexity between a Canon pro DSLR and the combination of a 645DF+ and IQ260, say. The CMOS sensor accounts for most of the more impressive aspects of the Canon, like high ISO, fast frame-rates, live view and video. If Team Phase One's new MF camera-designed-from-scratch is not based around CMOS (and I don't expect it to be, despite my wishes), then I couldn't see Canon contributing an awful lot. A million AF points cluttering up the viewfinder, maybe.

Ray

Logged

ondebanks

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 858
Re: If Canon bought Phase One?
« Reply #33 on: August 14, 2013, 09:09:30 am »

So you could care less, which means you do care to some extent. How much do you care? A little bit, or a lot? Or do you mean that you couldn't care less? [/pedant_mode]  ;)

I've lost count of the number of times I've wanted to enter [pedant_mode] on this too, Bill. But I force myself to refrain.

It's a geo-cultural thing - people say "could care less" in the US, whereas it's "couldn't care less" for us here on the other side of the pond.
The US version makes no sense, as you pointed out, but that's language for you.

Ray
Logged

JoeKitchen

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5022
Re: If Canon bought Phase One?
« Reply #34 on: August 14, 2013, 10:22:42 am »

Doug,

Your not gonna win on this.

There is just too much P___s envy when it comes to medium format.

Every time medium format makes an advance there seems to be a negative chorus , i.e. Phase's tethering to an Ipad, better lcd's, touch screen etc.

Every time Apple changes a connector (how many are we into now, serial, ethernet, usb1, usb2, e sata, firewire 400, Firewire 800, thunderbolt. it's gonna be Phase's fault if their legacy backs don't have 8 connectors.



This never made any sense to me, people complaining about stupid novelties that DSLRs add to their cameras for novice customers. Why the hell would I want to tether a camera that takes a 45 mb raw file with a USB cord?  Same thing with JPEG mode.  People made a big stink that Phase did not have a JPEG mode with the P series backs.  What real pro shoots in JPEG mode?  As a matter of fact, I prefer that there is no JPEG, since that would ensure that my files would always be raws. 

I think the real problem here is that too many people are relying on the camera to do everything, in stead of pre-visualizing what you want and making it happen. 
Logged
"Photography is one percent inspiration and ninety-nine percent

Chairman Bill

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3352
    • flickr page
Re: If Canon bought Phase One?
« Reply #35 on: August 14, 2013, 10:43:56 am »

I agree, Joe - my D700 (I know, I know, not a D800e, and I don't shoot lighthouses in New England either) has more bells & whistles than you could shake a stick at, yet it is invariably in manual mode, sometimes AE, making the others redundant for me. I'd happily have it manual only. It has various metering options, different focus modes, and no doubt does plenty of other things I've never discovered. Whether they're 'novelties', or just 'stuff I never use' is moot, but I do look forward to a simpler camera, minus huge menu options & eleventy thousand buttons, dials & switches.

TMARK

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1841
Re: If Canon bought Phase One?
« Reply #36 on: August 14, 2013, 11:04:10 am »

JPEGS for client previews.  If you can get a look out of the camera that is close to your deliverables it is a huge time saver. 

USB 3 tethering could be fantastic, in theory.

The "novelties" have a tendency to become innovation, like video in the 5d2.  Many novelties have a place in a commercial photographer's workflow. 

This never made any sense to me, people complaining about stupid novelties that DSLRs add to their cameras for novice customers. Why the hell would I want to tether a camera that takes a 45 mb raw file with a USB cord?  Same thing with JPEG mode.  People made a big stink that Phase did not have a JPEG mode with the P series backs.  What real pro shoots in JPEG mode?  As a matter of fact, I prefer that there is no JPEG, since that would ensure that my files would always be raws. 

I think the real problem here is that too many people are relying on the camera to do everything, in stead of pre-visualizing what you want and making it happen. 
Logged

pedro39photo

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 111
    • PedroNunesPhoto
Re: If Canon bought Phase One?
« Reply #37 on: August 14, 2013, 11:04:33 am »

This never made any sense to me, people complaining about stupid novelties that DSLRs add to their cameras for novice customers.  

Yes Joe, i too don´t understand why anyone starting in photography have to study a huge dslr camera manual...the advance modes in any field (af-metering-wb-flash-etc) are starting to get insane...

I don´t understant why you have menus in the camera to fine tunning the wb color of the jpgs...shoot in raw and fine tune later!!!!

We need a novice digital camera with just a lcd for histogram, manual WB, just monocromatic, pontual metering, manual exposure and just a internal memory for 120 pictures...thats the way anyone learn photography...to wait, think, compose, meter and just take one or 2 pictures...

I love to see a new brand bring a modern digital rolleiflex twin lens, monocromatic sensor.... with a 5000usd price tag....i love it
There is a huge space to see new products in DMF industry, not just more and more MP count and war...

My wish list for the next 5 years in DMF industry.

- A digital monocrome rolleiflex twin lens
- good 400-800iso digital backs
- More affortable entry level system
- 6x7 viewfinders (the big viewfinders are my passion...)
- wireless connetion to storage in exterior (Hard Drive, or other...i am tired of compact flash in-off camera for field work)


Logged

TMARK

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1841
Re: If Canon bought Phase One?
« Reply #38 on: August 14, 2013, 11:09:09 am »

Exactly.  Mamiya makes/made some of the best lenses around.  The RZ and 645AF were astounding with film.  The 645 was, to me, a dog with digital but the newer Mamiya/Phase 645 cams are WAY WAY better than the Afd and Afd2.  They really just need a better viewfinder and a better AF module.  They don't need Canon for this.

Team Phase One (as Doug puts it) includes Mamiya. And Mamiya have never developed a new MF camera? Sure, they are not the giants they once were, but they must still have retained significant core expertise.

There is rather little difference in underlying complexity between a Canon pro DSLR and the combination of a 645DF+ and IQ260, say. The CMOS sensor accounts for most of the more impressive aspects of the Canon, like high ISO, fast frame-rates, live view and video. If Team Phase One's new MF camera-designed-from-scratch is not based around CMOS (and I don't expect it to be, despite my wishes), then I couldn't see Canon contributing an awful lot. A million AF points cluttering up the viewfinder, maybe.

Ray


Logged

Doug Peterson

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4210
    • http://www.doug-peterson.com
Re: If Canon bought Phase One?
« Reply #39 on: August 14, 2013, 03:19:41 pm »

I also can't see any downsides whatsoever to Canon and Phase one partnering (in whatever shape or form) in order to produce a decent camera. Doug seems to be supporting my argument by highlighting examples of where Phase partner with Schneider to produce great lenses, and Dalsa for great sensors.

I really do find it rather surprising that the mere suggestion it might be a good thing for "Team Phase One" to partner with a company who know a thing or two about building damn good camera bodies, ends up with some folks getting so defensive about the idea.

Just why is that concept so objectionable?

Gerald does have a point.

I see no evidence that they need a partner (beyond the Team Phase One family which includes a camera body manufacturer) and quite a bit of evidence that they are capable of industry leading innovation without leaving that family (see the IQ/IQ2/Credo backs which are all-in-house projects).

BUT there is no reason to feel it's automatically objectionable to partner with another company on a major project. As he points out this is already done with Schneider for lens design and I find the results excellent; the 110LS is one of my favorite lenses.

That said... Canon+Phase? No.
Pages: 1 [2] 3   Go Up