Luminous Landscape Forum
Equipment & Techniques => Medium Format / Film / Digital Backs – and Large Sensor Photography => Topic started by: Brian Hirschfeld on April 23, 2012, 08:17:08 pm
-
In this article: http://brianhirschfeldphotography.com/2012/04/23/initial-impressions-leaf-credo-announcement/ entitled "Initial Impressions: Leaf Credo Announcement" I look at the announcement and some of the first facts about the announcement of the new Leaf Credo series of digital backs. Would love to talk about and get some impressions of the article as well as the Leaf Credo system going....
Sincerely,
Brian Hirschfeld
-
Leaf still will be producing the AFI-ii 10 and AFi-ii 12 backs which have the rotating sensor and articulating screen and ability to enter in comments and data into file EXIF from the back. All desirable features that the Credo and IQ don't have. No death blow to the platform as you write and I'm not sure why you'd write it anyhow (maybe from inexperience with the mark?). You can still get Sinar backs for the platform too, and besides one can always shoot film with the Hy6 too. If you like well designed equipment, you owe it to yourself to check it out.
-
I did note that Sinar still makes the back, and Credo certainly is indicative from the future where I was making my predictions about the future based one what we saw from them.
Don't you think it's interesting that their newest flagship MFDB doesn't support the system that they were one of they key proponents of?
That is something I would be interested in hearing some opinions of.
-
Brian - you are quite perceptive. Probably lack of a unifying strategy between the players. Considering the complexity of the enterprise perhaps no wonder.
Leaf - they need to be congratulated for their loyalty to the system, but they were also the ones who abandoned the Hy6 team already at the point of their first announcement.
Rollei/DHW - Kudos for their commitment to customer service and system continuation; it was their predecessors however who with a combination of high price and design flaws (SLX, 6006) allowed the decline of the Rollei brand. Credit for their willingness to launch a new camera with only little brand recognition and red cards for their inability to get a web site going and have a modern company.
Norddeutsche Landesbank - the ones who underestimated reasonable investment needs to rejuvenate Franke & Heidecke in the 80ies. A more generous investment would have paid dividends IMHO and the Hy6 could be one of the leading systems today.
Jenoptik - the conglomerate of greedy defense industry shareholders who had an all too passing interest in a digital medium format platform.
Sinar – perhaps the most customer service oriented part of the equation who suffered from their own financial pressures and returned more or less to their core business.
… if only DHW and Leaf could get their heads together for a Hy6ii, with some goodwill from Phase. A could see a delightful alternative to Leica (S2) and Pentax. I know I am dreaming.
-
It's clear Rollei has made some of the finest cameras but has never excelled at marketing particularly in the US. Phase + Mamiya 645 is like beauty and the beast - something that 4 generations now of camera design now could not fix. Phase + Hy6 would have been the best of the best. I'll never understand it.
My take is that since Leaf went with the Phase chassis with internal battery there was no space to work with and had to abandon their internal sensor rotation tech. This was a key thing for 6x6 cameras and maybe it didn't make sense without it. I know Leaf told me my choice was the AFi-ii 12 with the rotating sensor or the sexy screen and no rotating sensor but basically the same image quality. I'd take the AFi-ii 12 every time because the rotating sensor is that useful. So at least in several ways the AFi-ii 12 is better than the Credo.
-
Rollei and the Hy6 certainly have some of the best lenses thanks to Schneider, with autofocus (I believe) its a shame that they cannot manage to get these lenses onto a popular system with autofocus, or come up with a more marketable solution. I'd be interesting if Leaf on their part at least hat them come up with a Mamiya 645DF which took the Rollei / Schneider lenses with full electronic connection for lens and body communication as well as autofocus. Then they would at least show users of the Hy6 system that they were not forgotten. Since aside from being amazing lenses, investing in them does not come cheap, it would certainly show commitment to their customers.
-
Brian,
I think that's a bad idea. A good idea would be like Lacunapratum suggests - Phase invest in Hy6 ii.
-
I've used mine almost every day since I received it, and prior to that shot a Mamiya 645AFDiii on film and have absolutely enjoyed the experience and gotten great results. It certainly depends on what you are using it for! no generalizations!
-
It's inefficient to put 6x6 lenses on a 645 camera. They will be heavier than they need to be. It's better to build a camera that can take advantage of them. Wait! There is one.
-
There is no need for a Hy6 mk2! The camera is great already, it is just missing the digital back support.
-
There is no need for a Hy6 mk2! The camera is great already, it is just missing the digital back support.
Yes, but when will they run out of parts for repair? Are these parts still made?
-
A second version could be a tad bit more robust, and have more protection for the switches on the left side, maybe even a removable handle for travel. Isn't there a color sensor that is wanting to be hooked up? Saveable AF offset for each lens.... dreaming. Its such a wonderful platform tho.
What would really be a good thing would be some sort of alternative lens mounting. They can go on an Alpa with a Rollei shutter control, but wouldn't it be great to have some alternative platform for our (growing) stable of wonderful lenses?
-
DHW is still selling new Hy6 bodies. They also introduced two new lenses (120 and 150mm) with the 35mm still under development (according to DHW). So i do not worry about spare parts.
-
My guess is we'll see a new PhaseOne camera at photokina, and considering how long it's been in development I predict it will be very interesting indeed.
-
My guess is we'll see a new PhaseOne camera at photokina, and considering how long it's been in development I predict it will be very interesting indeed.
I really hope so.
-
It's inefficient to put 6x6 lenses on a 645 camera. They will be heavier than they need to be.
Firstly for digital, te sensor formats are going to stay at 645 or smaller (currently 54x40mm actually), so a new 6x6 format body would not help there; it would only be relevant to film users, and I see no hope of a new camera design effort solely for the sake of 6x6 format film users.
But more importantly, the fear of a weight difference is probably unfounded because most optical designs would not differ significantly between 6x6 and 645 format, except perhaps the choice of focal lengths. In most cases, lenses of a given focal length and minimum f-stop for different formats do not vary much in optical design so long as the FOV is about normal or narrower; designs change mainly when wide-angle coverage is needed. Widely used lens designs naturally deliver an image circle diameter comparable to of greater than the focal length, which is then "cropped" by the film or sensor to the needed size. So all but a few wide angle lens for a 6x6 system are already fine, and not bulkier than designs for 645 format would be.
Anyway, the image circle size is not that much different: 80mm vs 70mm: we are not talking 35mm vs APS-C here!
To get an idea of how little lens design relies on matching image circle size to the film/sensor format, it is interesting to see the specs of lenses for the Mamiya RZ67 at
http://www.mamiyaleaf.com/legacy_RZ80.asp
which is the only lens system for which I can find this data. Every lens from 65mm up covers far larger image area than even the 6x8 format that this system also supports: that 65mm wide angle lens covers 80x100mm, the 90mm normal covers 82x97mm, and so on up to 298x370mm for the 250/4. In fact every lens covers a field significantly wider than the focal length, so optically, they are all optical designs of moderately wide-angle coverage, then cropped, often massively, by the film or sensor.
-
If I'm not mistaken, the "Minimum Image Area" portion of the specification refers to the smallest area that the particular lens will image (at minimum focusing distance). My experience with RB lenses tells me that the image circles tend to be larger than one would expect for an 8x8 camera (which the RB and RZ really are...). The 90 covers 4x5, the 65 and 50 are mechanically vignetted.
erie
-
But more importantly, the fear of a weight difference is probably unfounded because most optical designs would not differ significantly between 6x6 and 645 format, except perhaps the choice of focal lengths. In most cases, lenses of a given focal length and minimum f-stop for different formats do not vary much in optical design so long as the FOV is about normal or narrower; designs change mainly when wide-angle coverage is needed. Widely used lens designs naturally deliver an image circle diameter comparable to of greater than the focal length, which is then "cropped" by the film or sensor to the needed size. So all but a few wide angle lens for a 6x6 system are already fine, and not bulkier than designs for 645 format would be.
Anyway, the image circle size is not that much different: 80mm vs 70mm: we are not talking 35mm vs APS-C here!
I agree re. the essential similarity of the optical designs. However, the actual glass often accounts for a modest fraction of the overall lens weight. Having a leaf shutter (and in the case of the Rollei lenses, also those two linear motors driving the shutter and aperture) adds considerable weight, as do differences in the barrel and bayonet diameters and materials. When I compare my Rollei HFT 80/2.8 to an M645 80/2.8, the weight difference is huge, although their glass construction is almost the same.
To get an idea of how little lens design relies on matching image circle size to the film/sensor format, it is interesting to see the specs of lenses for the Mamiya RZ67 at
http://www.mamiyaleaf.com/legacy_RZ80.asp
which is the only lens system for which I can find this data. Every lens from 65mm up covers far larger image area than even the 6x8 format that this system also supports: that 65mm wide angle lens covers 80x100mm, the 90mm normal covers 82x97mm, and so on up to 298x370mm for the 250/4. In fact every lens covers a field significantly wider than the focal length, so optically, they are all optical designs of moderately wide-angle coverage, then cropped, often massively, by the film or sensor.
Nope! I'm afraid you've seriously misinterpreted the "Area Covered" specification for all these RZ67 lenses. It's not the size of the image projected by the lens! It's the dimensions of the object which will be imaged onto 6x7 cm film when the lens is set to closest focus (bellows at full extension). There's a clue in the way that this specification follows the "Minimum Focusing Distance" and "Maximum Magnification Ratio" specs in every case.
I have specs for the M645 lenses, and they follow the same trends under these headings.
Glad I nipped that in the bud - otherwise we'd have all the Large-Formatters running to the nearest RZ67 stockist, to cannibalize their lenses!
Ray
-
If I'm not mistaken, the "Minimum Image Area" portion of the specification refers to the smallest area that the particular lens will image (at minimum focusing distance). My experience with RB lenses tells me that the image circles tend to be larger than one would expect for an 8x8 camera (which the RB and RZ really are...). The 90 covers 4x5, the 65 and 50 are mechanically vignetted.
erie
Erie - you are indeed "not mistaken" ;)
Funny how we posted the same within seconds of each other!
Ray
-
You know, I love these backs but they're just so damn expensive, honestly it's just too much. I can't see how you'd get a return on investment.
$20000 for a 40mp back? What's new to justify the money?
$10k-$12k, sure sign me up. 20k no. Just no. Stop the madness.
-
I agree re. the essential similarity of the optical designs. However, the actual glass often accounts for a modest fraction of the overall lens weight. Having a leaf shutter (and in the case of the Rollei lenses, also those two linear motors driving the shutter and aperture) adds considerable weight, as do differences in the barrel and bayonet diameters and materials.
Agreed: differences like having a leaf shutter will have a big effect, but that would be the same whether it is a LS lens for 6x6 or 645. Lens mounts will have a difference, but in fact probably make the 6x6 lenses of the same focal length shorter and lighter, because the lens mount is further from the focal plane. (Not that this helps much, because the 6x6 body is larger and heavier by more than the lenses are smaller and lighter!)
Nope! I'm afraid you've seriously misinterpreted the "Area Covered" specification for all these RZ67 lenses.
Sorry! I grabbed the wrong numbers in my hasty search of the MamiyaLeaf web-site, where these lenses are now deprecated to "Legacy Products" with less information that before ... but I do recall seeing image circle specs that show the same trend, because the basic fact is that lenses from normal to moderate telephoto tend to use roughly the same optical designs, and cover about the same angular FOV before "format cropping" by lens hoods, internal baffles, film gates, and so on. Even a true telephoto lens design consists roughly of a front part that is a lens of a less long focal length with an integrated TC (diverging lens elements) at the back, which magnifies the image circle.
I have specs for the M645 lenses, and they follow the same trends under these headings.
Can you point me to the M645 specs? It would be nice to have some concrete examples of actual products, to go with data from an old textbook on lens design that I consult.
-
Can you point me to the M645 specs? It would be nice to have some concrete examples of actual products, to go with data from an old textbook on lens design that I consult.
No problem. This was a webpage that I saved several years ago from a Mamiya source (Japan perhaps? judging by the occasionally mangled English). I've converted it into a PDF file, which you can download from my Dropbox:
M645 "N" lenses specifications (http://dl.dropbox.com/u/7418300/M645_N_lenses_SPECS_PDFfromHTML.pdf)
Anyone who's interested in the M645 lenses might want to check it out.
Ray
-
I was just going to ask for where you got those specs, thanks for posting it.
-
I don't understand the pricing, it like the Pentax 645 and the Nikon D800 never happened.
Even worse, what about this :http://www.hasselbladusastore.com/products/H4D%252d40%252d-Stainless-%28w%7B47%7D80mm-HC-lens%29.html
Can't understand. Why wil a H2 leaf guy update to this Leaf back instead of buying a H4D-40?
I will not be surprised if the Leaf has a little advantage of image quality, plus USB3 and so on, but for me even if it's true is difficult to justify that investment.
Best regards,
JAmes
-
I don't understand the pricing, it like the Pentax 645 and the Nikon D800 never happened.
Even worse, what about this :http://www.hasselbladusastore.com/products/H4D%252d40%252d-Stainless-%28w%7B47%7D80mm-HC-lens%29.html
Can't understand. Why wil a H2 leaf guy update to this Leaf back instead of buying a H4D-40?
I will not be surprised if the Leaf has a little advantage of image quality, plus USB3 and so on, but for me even if it's true is difficult to justify that investment.
Best regards,
JAmes
Pentax is honestly niche for people who had those lenses and are ardent followers of the system or so I have been told. The 645D and D800 also appeal to advanced amateurs in the same way the Hasselblad 31mp and Leaf/Mamiya 22mp do. THe Credo certainly seems better then the aptus backs.
And certainly the obvious advantage of having an open system, especially if you use technical cameras or other things like that is sort of the elephant in the room I believe.
-
Pentax is honestly niche for people who had those lenses and are ardent followers of the system or so I have been told. The 645D and D800 also appeal to advanced amateurs in the same way the Hasselblad 31mp and Leaf/Mamiya 22mp do. THe Credo certainly seems better then the aptus backs.
And certainly the obvious advantage of having an open system, especially if you use technical cameras or other things like that is sort of the elephant in the room I believe.
Thanks for the quick response.
The hasselblad listed with a lens is the H4D-40, Stainless Steel version, with a 80mm f2.8 lens. It's listed at $20,995.00 vs 19995 US$ for the leaf back only (according to the price listed on this forum).
The advanced amateur part cloud be true, but I am sure that lot's of high flying professionals will be using the D800. The idea that true professionals only use medium format is not only outdated, but harmful: It could block MF companies from getting a good handle of the market forces. In any case we are talking about the H4D-40.
Best regards,
James
-
Ray,
Thanks for the link on 645 lenses. It is a pity that it still does not have the image circle diameter measurements that I recall seeing for Mamiya's 6x7 lenses (is my memory playing tricks on me about those?), but that PDF will go into my DropBox collection too.
P. S. the best defence I have heard of for the ability of photographers to sustain the high prices, particularly of the larger 52x40 sensor options, is "share the costs with a number of your colleagues". In other words, "rent". I wonder how many professional photographers are now in a middle ground of owning Nikon or Canon gear and then renting MF for the jobs that need it, or where at least the customer demands MF, and will pay extra to cover the rental fees.
-
I believe the stainless steel version is a limited edition?
Certainly there is a certain stigma related to medium format. I definitely agree that a lot of "high-flying pro's" as you put it would not use a D800. A large part of being professional on one level is looking the part. And some may disagree but I know many working professionals who tell me that they sometimes even set up more lights and equipment then they actually use for a shoot because its impressive and what the clients want to see. So I certainly agree with you on this point.
H4D-40 / Leica S2 / Pentax 645D / PhaseOne and Leaf 40mp options (I think leaf goes 33mp and 56mp I don't exactly know) these cameras have different designs concepts and ideologies but they certainly have the technical image quality down and are inviting to a large amount of people. Certainly the large 60-80mp sensors which are more costly are a different market but these cameras I listed above are largely competing for the same market and all claim and in some cases truly do have certain advantages over each other depending on your applications.
-
I believe the stainless steel version is a limited edition?
Certainly there is a certain stigma related to medium format. I definitely agree that a lot of "high-flying pro's" as you put it would not use a D800. A large part of being professional on one level is looking the part. And some may disagree but I know many working professionals who tell me that they sometimes even set up more lights and equipment then they actually use for a shoot because its impressive and what the clients want to see. So I certainly agree with you on this point.
H4D-40 / Leica S2 / Pentax 645D / PhaseOne and Leaf 40mp options (I think leaf goes 33mp and 56mp I don't exactly know) these cameras have different designs concepts and ideologies but they certainly have the technical image quality down and are inviting to a large amount of people. Certainly the large 60-80mp sensors which are more costly are a different market but these cameras I listed above are largely competing for the same market and all claim and in some cases truly do have certain advantages over each other depending on your applications.
Hi, yes the H4D-40 SS is a limited edition, but is not less expensive. I believe you miss understood me: I wanted to say is that a lot "high-flying pro's" WILL use the D800.
My point is that the leaf back is priced at almost the same price that a Hassy with the same resolution, and a lens.
I don't understand why.
Best regards,
James
-
You don't understand why? I think it is simply marketing and trying to appeal to people by offering different things. It would certainly seem that Hasselblad would appeal to you more because you see it as getting "more" I suppose which is exactly what they are shooting for. Hasselblad is trying to get you into a system anyway so they can take a "loss" (although I honestly don't think they are) when selling you the razor and then they will get you on the blades (lenses, accessories, future upgrades). I think the razor and blade analogy is duly applicable here. Since Leaf doesn't actually make any cameras, they have less of an incentive to bundle with products from another devision of the same company, at least when Mamiya / Leaf / PhaseOne were not consolidated. Now I suspect you will start to see those types of packages coming together on sites like B&H where they sell Leaf backs with Mamiya bodies at the moment (I don't believe they include a lens).
-
To keep the comparison simpler, a Leaf Aptus-II 40MP back (same sensor as Credo?), plus Mamiya 645DF body, plus 80mm lens for $17,995:
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/823186-REG/Mamiya_020_00940B_DM_Series_40Mp_DSLR_Camera.html
Or if that is considered a discount on a soon to be superceded back, the current Hasselblad back with the same 40MP sensor, standard (non stainless steel) body but no lens, is the same $17,995:
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/674543-REG/Hasselblad_70380554_H4D_40_Medium_Format_DSLR.html
Each $1500 less than the new Leaf Credo 40MP back.
No comment for me; I just throw up the numbers for discussion.
-
The hasselblad listed with a lens is the H4D-40, Stainless Steel version, with a 80mm f2.8 lens. It's listed at $20,995.00 vs 19995 US$ for the leaf back only (according to the price listed on this forum).
The roughly equivalent-spec Aptus-II 8 with a 645DF and a 80mm/2.8 Schneider is 17,995 USD (OK it's not stainless steel...)
-
I wonder how much money would pay for the Royal edition;-) LOL
Painting does not affect the running of your car, just does not affect the operation of your camera...
Color of the car has a meaning, but what color is the hammer ???
-
Ray,
Thanks for the link on 645 lenses. It is a pity that it still does not have the image circle diameter measurements that I recall seeing for Mamiya's 6x7 lenses (is my memory playing tricks on me about those?), but that PDF will go into my DropBox collection too.
You're very welcome, BJL.
I have a lot of M645 literature, but I've never seen image circle measurements/specs for the M645 lenses.
Mamiya might well have given image circles for the RB67 lenses, when the ProSD came out with the option of a 6x8 back. Perhaps some lenses could only cover 6x7 and they had to document which ones covered 6x8 well.
P. S. the best defence I have heard of for the ability of photographers to sustain the high prices, particularly of the larger 52x40 sensor options, is "share the costs with a number of your colleagues". In other words, "rent". I wonder how many professional photographers are now in a middle ground of owning Nikon or Canon gear and then renting MF for the jobs that need it, or where at least the customer demands MF, and will pay extra to cover the rental fees.
I'm no pro, but to me that would be a sensible approach. Alternatively, buying an older-tech, used MFD system would not cost a lot - or maybe it's just amateurs like me who do that.
Ray
-
I would personally think and rather, buying and older back like a Mamiya ZD or the lower numbered PhaseOne P's or Leaf whatevers would be better because then your into a system + you don't have to work around others schedules and share something. I like having my own things, which is why I hardly ever rent gear as well. Theres something different about it to me when I'm shooting with my gear as to when I'm shooting with something which is only mine for a little while.
-
You know, I love these backs but they're just so damn expensive, honestly it's just too much. I can't see how you'd get a return on investment.
It comes down to the business model. I'm on my 4th back and they have all paid for themselves in about a year, after that first year they become profit centres. IMO it really doesn't matter what the equipment costs as long as you can apply a business model to it, how do you think a construction company justifies the purchase of a half million dollar machine?
Nick-T
-
You know, I love these backs but they're just so damn expensive, honestly it's just too much. I can't see how you'd get a return on investment.
$20000 for a 40mp back? What's new to justify the money?
$10k-$12k, sure sign me up. 20k no. Just no. Stop the madness.
I couldn't agree more. Especially for the overwhelming majority of photographers who are unable to apply a working business model to such an outlay. Sure, there are those that can, but not a lot. At least here in Holland.
-
Part of the increased cost (maybe the majority?) of these backs is in the sensor. Die yields are much, much lower the larger a sensor you try to cut from it. I believe I've read that these larger sensors are actually smaller sensors bound together to form a larger array, which would make the electronics to read data off of them more complex too. All those costs push the ultimate retail price higher and higher.
Clearly there is a market out there for these backs, but it would be interesting to see a breakdown of how many folks are actually turning around and making increased profits after the investment, vs the serious hobbyists out there (such as myself).
-
BTW we've just created a Credo section on our User Forum (http://forum.phaseone.com/En/viewforum.php?f=45&sid=21a2a1f29d4fa84ab4ed5be7405f3df0). More people will be testing/ demo'ing the backs over the next weeks so expect some new discussions over there.
Just finished a classic car studio shoot in London with the Credo 80. We did have a laptop but the photographer's commented that with the new screen and Live View the laptop can stay in the bag. (he shoots on a Nikon D4 and an Aptus-II)
-
I believe I've read that these larger sensors are actually smaller sensors bound together to form a larger array, which would make the electronics to read data off of them more complex too. All those costs push the ultimate retail price higher and higher.
A correction, which does not effect your cost argument: the "stitching together" to make large sensors is not putting together completed, separate sensors; it is the way that large sensors are fabricated as a single piece on a single silicon wafer, but "etching" only part of the sensor at a time and then moving the wafer sideways before etching another part, and so on: about six pieces for a Dalsa 48x36mm sensor. This has to be done because the fabrication devices can only project an integrated circuit up to at most 33x26mm at once. And the precise alignment needed after moving the wafer increases failure rates substantially, and so does cause sensor prices to go up rapidly as the size goes beyond about 33x26mm. This price jump kicks in between the mainstream "APS-C" sensor cameras (cameras starting at about $500) and the full 35mm format ones (cameras starting at about $2,700, or more recently $3,000), and accelerates more at the next size up (44x33mm, cameras starting at about $10,000).
P. S. for X-rays, there are big sensor made by physically "butting" together smaller sensors, but that produces join lines than would be unacceptable in a medium format back.
-
I have a lot of M645 literature, but I've never seen image circle measurements/specs for the M645 lenses.
Mamiya might well have given image circles for the RB67 lenses, when the ProSD came out with the option of a 6x8 back. ...
I only ever recall seeing image circle data for 6x7 lenses, and I think I know why now: I have discovered in photographic forums that there are view camera users who use those Mamiya lenses adapted for use with 5"x4" format, and according to forum discussions, Mamiya 6x7 lenses from 90mm and up cover 5"x4", meaning about 150mm image circle diameter.
-
By chance I just came across this quote - while looking at a review of the Mirex T-S adapter for M645 lenses to DSLRs:
"Mamiya 645 lenses have an image circle of more than 75mm." (http://www.dyxum.com/columns/articles/lenses/Mirex/Mirex_M645-M42_TS_Adaper_review.asp)
The 645 format diagonal is 70mm, so evidently the lenses do have a spare bit of coverage.
Wow, this thread has spiralled off topic! But it's all good. :)
Ray
-
Response to a question regarding my earlier post about a potential Hy6ii and what should be changed.
Improved tracktion for aperture and shutter speed dials.
Better compatibility with AF and MF lenses for all modes of operation.
More robust handle (have seen two broken ones already).
Uniform base color (perhaps black).
Improved battery longevity.
And for the lenses
Improved autofocus mechanism for AF and AF-D lenses.
Add the S-Flektogon 35mm to the line-up.
-
The 645 format diagonal is 70mm, so evidently the lenses do have a spare bit of coverage.
Wow, this thread has spiralled off topic! But it's all good. :)
Ray
amazing the things you find on the internet :o
-
Response to a question regarding my earlier post about a potential Hy6ii and what should be changed.
...
More robust handle (have seen two broken ones already).
...
Improved battery longevity.
That is good to know regarding the handle. Mine seems pretty sturdy, but I've always wondered how structurally sound the mechanism is under the skin. I treat mine gently as it is, but will keep this in mind going forward.
As far as the battery life goes, keep in mind the Hy6 solved the biggest problem with batteries by switching to Li-Ion from the 600x series. I would like to see a better indicator of battery life, along the lines of the Canon 5D2's % meter. Getting that level of capacity would be great too, but I'd at least like better feedback about the battery's current charge level so I can plan accordingly. Right now I all too often find the camera + Leaf Afi7 just up and quitting on me in the middle of a shoot, so if I was shooting professionally I would have to be a lot more conservative with batteries than I am now.
Alas, all of these wish-list items will more than likely never come to be, but it is nice to dream. :)
-
I would like to see a better indicator of battery life, along the lines of the Canon 5D2's % meter. Getting that level of capacity would be great too, but I'd at least like better feedback about the battery's current charge level so I can plan accordingly. Right now I all too often find the camera + Leaf Afi7 just up and quitting on me in the middle of a shoot, so if I was shooting professionally I would have to be a lot more conservative with batteries than I am now.
Do you use a separate battery for the back? I find that the AFI 7 eats batteries about one per 8 gb card. The battery in the camera almost never needs changing - maybe every 5-10 times one is changed on the back. Also, when the back says the battery is really dead, the charger thinks it has about 30% left, so in a pinch, one can swap out the camera battery for the back and get a few more shots.
-
I only ever recall seeing image circle data for 6x7 lenses, and I think I know why now: I have discovered in photographic forums that there are view camera users who use those Mamiya lenses adapted for use with 5"x4" format, and according to forum discussions, Mamiya 6x7 lenses from 90mm and up cover 5"x4", meaning about 150mm image circle diameter.
Yes, and they can work quite well in that application. The 50 and 65 give me a much wider option when using my Dicomed scan back on either the RB or Sinar than any other option within my (rather limited) budget. Sure there's the 47 and 58XL's from Schneider, but they're on the expensive side.
erie