Luminous Landscape Forum
Equipment & Techniques => Medium Format / Film / Digital Backs – and Large Sensor Photography => Topic started by: Hank Keeton on October 26, 2014, 10:51:13 am
-
After many years of creatively employing my Leaf Aptus-65 on both Sinar & Hassy platforms...it appears that upgrade time will soon arrive.
I'm soliciting input:....impressions...opinions...and such......from anyone interested in sharing.
By mid-2015 I will have met my used-budget-requirements, and will be seriously engaged in shopping.
What 80-mega-pixel backs do you like....dislike.....yearn-for....avoid....etc.....?
Do you have a used-back you want to sell....or know anyone who has one?
We can share publicly...or privately (PM)...as you wish.
I'll enjoy all your responses...offered with honesty and respect.
Warm regards,
Hank
-
Hello Hank
I feel that by mid to late 2015 Phase One will announce a full frame CMOS back, 60 to 90MP. They actually may announce 2, one in the lower MP range, with greater pixel pitch, that "may" be more friendly to current tech lenses. The other back will be the new MP king, as the 180/280 are now.
This may come out earlier than later, but it seems right now that Phase is working on the new camera body with Sony to replace the DF+, for which I have no interest, as I only use the tech camera in my work. I know many many others can't wait and I am sure it will be a great solution.
Phase One has their new Alpa partnership so I am sure there will a new Phase One branded tech solution out there also, by early 2015, again as I use Arca, I have no interest here and still find that announcement rather a limiting statement by Phase One.
The next generation may even be superior to what is being seen from the current CMOS 250/150/Credo 50, and those files for my liking are excellent. The current 50MP Phase has all I really need, but the the 1:3 crop is significant to me, and current upgrades from Phase are not very financially attractive, (from a 260 to 250 or Credo 50). Actually I seem to prefer the leaf color on the Credo 50, but I don't like the non Value add warranty offerings from Leaf.
I base the above statement on the results I am seeing from my Nikon D810, which hands down preforms much better than my D800e, in overall DR recovered.
2015/16 will be exciting, however the elephant in the room is how much will the cost be, to move to the full frame CMOS Phase One backs. I also don't feel that this round of chip development will have the same access to others, like Pentax or Hasselbald, but that is just my 2 cents worth.
Paul
-
After many years of creatively employing my Leaf Aptus-65 on both Sinar & Hassy platforms...it appears that upgrade time will soon arrive.
I'm soliciting input:....impressions...opinions...and such......from anyone interested in sharing.
By mid-2015 I will have met my used-budget-requirements, and will be seriously engaged in shopping.
What 80-mega-pixel backs do you like....dislike.....yearn-for....avoid....etc.....?
Do you have a used-back you want to sell....or know anyone who has one?
We can share publicly...or privately (PM)...as you wish.
I'll enjoy all your responses...offered with honesty and respect.
Warm regards,
Hank
If I were buying today for low iso work and exposures up to 30 sec. I would get a IQ160 or a IQ180. They are superb backs with stunning image quality and are the best value today if you want a recent product that does not feel ancient. They are easy to work with. The IQ2xx backs are almost identical, they just add wifi and in the case of the new 50mp CMOS back, they add high iso and long exposure capability but with you will loose some detail compared to the 60/80mp backs and also usability with tech camera systems (the 60mp IQ160 and the IQ260 are probably the best backs ever made for tech camera use, overall). The Leaf Credo counterparts are also great alternatives.
Its best to get in contact with a dealer. They can provide a bunch of great info including raw files of different back/camera/lens combinations. I use DT in NYC (Lance/Doug). They drop by these forums from time to time. Ci also chimes in.
I would not wait for the next best thing. It could take months or years and even then it will most likely be very expensive. Prices have stabilized on used backs as of late so it is a good time to buy.
-
if Sony releases a new chip, I would expect all players to have access, which means there would be a cheap-ish V-mount version from Hassy that would fit on tech cams, a replacement for the H5D50, and probably a new cheap Pentax in due course. Hassy is sure to market updated products as dev costs are close to zero.
As for a new Phase body, I'm sure new labels can and will be stuck on to the Mamiya.
Edmund
-
if Sony releases a new chip, I would expect all players to have access, which means there would be a cheap-ish V-mount version from Hassy that would fit on tech cams, a replacement for the H5D50, and probably a new cheap Pentax in due course. Hassy is sure to market updated products as dev costs are close to zero.
As for a new Phase body, I'm sure new labels can and will be stuck on to the Mamiya.
Edmund
You may be surprised on this, or maybe not. As of the last 3 months, there as been a much closer relationship between Sony and Phase One, which is good as Sony has the technology clearly.
Paul
-
You may be surprised on this, or maybe not. As of the last 3 months, there as been a much closer relationship between Sony and Phase One, which is good as Sony has the technology clearly.
Paul
My feeling is that we all have to gain from cheapish Mf eg the $10K hassy back, while Phase wants an elitist model with $30K+ pricing. In reality, there may still be such yield issues with a big chip that sony would go for a single vendor, but i would expect them to be simply allowing Phase access to some special on chip programming like they did for Nikon on the D800 where the chip is used very differently than with the A7R. It is possible that Phase has done a deal with Nikon for access to these features.
Edmund
-
My feeling is that we all have to gain from cheapish Mf eg the $10K hassy back, while Phase wants an elitist model with $30K+ pricing.
Team Phase One offers several options between $10-$15k.
-
If I were buying today for low iso work and exposures up to 30 sec. I would get a IQ160 or a IQ180. They are superb backs with stunning image quality and are the best value today if you want a recent product that does not feel ancient. They are easy to work with. The IQ2xx backs are almost identical, they just add wifi and in the case of the new 50mp CMOS back, they add high iso and long exposure capability but with you will loose some detail compared to the 60/80mp backs and also usability with tech camera systems (the 60mp IQ160 and the IQ260 are probably the best backs ever made for tech camera use, overall). The Leaf Credo counterparts are also great alternatives.
Its best to get in contact with a dealer. They can provide a bunch of great info including raw files of different back/camera/lens combinations. I use DT in NYC (Lance/Doug). They drop by these forums from time to time. Ci also chimes in.
I would not wait for the next best thing. It could take months or years and even then it will most likely be very expensive. Prices have stabilized on used backs as of late so it is a good time to buy.
Actually as a tech user, and owner of a IQ260, I would tend to disagree that the 260/160 are the best solution.
The 160 may be a better back than the 260, as I don't really see any advantage to the 260 over the 160. I feel that the 260, can not come close to the result of a P45+ from 10 minutes out, even in the best conditions. Excessive noise and stuck pixels make the long exposure mode questionable. I have owned a P45+ and know at 50 for long exposures it can't be beaten still (in MF land). I had hoped that Phase One would continue to tweak the long exposure results from the 260 with new firmware, but I feel it's apparent any further tweaking is not going to happen the results are what they are.
The 160/260 still have issues with movements on wides, albeit not as much as the 280. But it's can be very hard to totally correct a blue sky on a 15mm shift with a 40mm Rodenstock on my 260 without a lot of work. No more work than it took to work on Guy's images (from getdpi) in his Credo 50 review. Plus there appears to be a total lack of micro lens ripple which can have a huge effect on the 260 movements, even with a retro focus Rodenstock. The huge advantage on the Credo is you can just take 3 shots, knowing that you can push the shadows as much as 2.75 stops and still have a great image that holds up at full resolution.
I have gone back to using sensor plus with my 260 at iso 400 and 200 as the results are just so much better in mixed light. I have to go vertical and stitch for a single image but it can still be printed quite large.
Tech cameras with Copol shutters are actually better suited for a CMOS back as you can push CMOS. Your copol shutter is very limited in available shutter speeds, no 1/3 or 1/2 settings. The CCD backs would benefit from these extra shutter settings, as many times just a bit more light can make the difference, where as the CMOS can easily handle the fixed shutter speeds of a copol shutter and allow for push.
I also don't see any loss of detail in the CMOS Credo or 250 files, going back to DT's testing, the 250 was superior in details as it has so much less color aliasing, along side of that amazing shadow recovery.
CCD loves light, it's just that simple, when I find conditions that work out, I get good results with the 260, and it can work OK even at iso 200 as long as you are only trying to push shutter speed faster in good light, but forget it in low light. The files are much more noisy and have much less color retention, and you won't get it back in post, it's gone. So a windy mixed lighting condition (where I tend to find myself) just is not a great solution for a 260/160 or really any CCD back as you just wont' get the shot. When you are talking to the dealer, ask for a 1 hour exposure raw file from a 260 or even a 30 minute file, and see what you think. Dealers can help here a lot as trying to rent a back is cost prohibitive for many due to insurance issues. I run a 2 person studio and I still could not get coverage from my policy to cover the rental of a 280 or 250, for 2 days.
After going through Guy's images (thanks again Guy), I have no doubt that the 250 or Credo 50 is a better solution for my shooting style and I would make the move right now if it was not a 1:3 crop, I would take it for a 1:1.
Paul
-
I feel that by mid to late 2015 Phase One will announce a full frame CMOS back, 60 to 90MP. They actually may announce 2, one in the lower MP range, with greater pixel pitch, that "may" be more friendly to current tech lenses. The other back will be the new MP king, as the 180/280 are now.
This seems unlikely to me.
I would not look for full-frame CMOS from anyone before 2016.
My bet is if/when it comes Phase One will be first to the table as they've been first in medium format to Full Frame CCD (P65+), first to 80mp (IQ180), first to USB3 (IQ1), first to live view on screen (IQ1), and first to ship a modern CMOS back (IQ250)*. But I am, of course, quite biased.
I suspect the IQ180/280 and Credo 80 will be the three kings of high-res single-shot backs for a good while to come.
-
This seems unlikely to me.
I would not look for full-frame CMOS from anyone before 2016.
My bet is if/when it comes Phase One will be first to the table as they've been first in medium format to Full Frame CCD (P65+), first to 80mp (IQ180), first to USB3 (IQ1), first to live view on screen (IQ1), and first to ship a modern CMOS back (IQ250)*. But I am, of course, quite biased.
I suspect the IQ180/280 and Credo 80 will be the three kings of high-res single-shot backs for a good while to come.
I was not clear on my first post, I don't expect a full frame to be available until 2016, but it may announce in late 2015, but recently Phase has announced and shipped at the same time. So 2016 it is.
Paul
-
It's clearly just a commercial decision; the Sony 50MP MF chip design is now 3 years old at least, so its successor(s) are probably done.
If Nikon or Canon move to 50MP then Phase/Hassy will have to release ...
Edmund
This seems unlikely to me.
I would not look for full-frame CMOS from anyone before 2016.
My bet is if/when it comes Phase One will be first to the table as they've been first in medium format to Full Frame CCD (P65+), first to 80mp (IQ180), first to USB3 (IQ1), first to live view on screen (IQ1), and first to ship a modern CMOS back (IQ250)*. But I am, of course, quite biased.
I suspect the IQ180/280 and Credo 80 will be the three kings of high-res single-shot backs for a good while to come.
-
Thanking you...one-and-all.
Doug, my apologies. I thought you were active on the Large Format forum, where I also posted this inquiry....and there I personally invoked your name!
My intuition is reverberating around the "time-is-ripe" feelings.
Further inputs gladly received...and shopping-focus intensified!
Regards,
Hank
-
Paul, Im surprised you could not get insurance coverage. Im a one man operation and when I had to rent a RED Epic rig with Arri Ultra Prime lens set I got insurance no problem for two days (replacement cost was $275,000). My main commercial policy insures $150k worth of gear so it is not a huge policy.
I agree that for ultra long exposures the p45+ is still king from what I have seen.
Im surprised you have had issues correcting skies on a heavily shifted image with the 40mm HR-W. Ive found no issues with my IQ160 doing that.
From what I have seen so far, in decent light, the 50mp CMOS backs can't touch the 60 and 80mp CCD backs in regards to detail when using tech lenses. Of course, in low light to night conditions the 50mp CMOS pulls ahead. But again as usual, YMMV.
-
Team Phase One offers several options between $10-$15k.
Doug,
A Hassy V back with the latest CMOS sensor seems a bit cheaper -like in Japan about 1/3 price- than the Phase version. Maybe you could explain why?
Actually, I suggest we forget about this - just agree to disagree about the necessity of MF being expensive when Phase competitors Hasselblad and Pentax show every day that it doesn't need to be outrageous.
Edmund
-
(I know that I will have some responses from this) but until they can get CMOS to 16-bits per channel I am not interested. What I love about the P45+ I use is the color and I just do not trust the CMOS sensors at this point to give me that. Anyway, ISO 200 is the max that I ever need, and from what I can see from my fiancé's IQ 260, ISO 200 is very clean on that system. (However, I am getting into more resort work and clean high ISOs for night work I could see as being helpful.)
If Phase can produce a full frame CMOS back with 16-bits per channel that works well with the current line of Rodenstock lenses, that would be a hard back not to consider.
-
Doug,
A Hassy V back with the latest CMOS sensor seems a bit cheaper -like in Japan about 1/3 price- than the Phase version. Maybe you could explain why?
Actually, I suggest we forget about this - just agree to disagree about the necessity of MF being expensive when Phase competitors Hasselblad and Pentax show every day that it doesn't need to be outrageous.
Edmund
Edmund, remind me which up to date body that this hassy v back fits on that can use state of the art autofocus lenses?
Have you compared the price of the hasselblad kit that actually does autofocus vs the equivalent leaf kit?
-
Edmund, remind me which up to date body that this hassy v back fits on that can use state of the art autofocus lenses?
Have you compared the price of the hasselblad kit that actually does autofocus vs the equivalent leaf kit?
I don't think "lock in" pricing makes the users happy. Providing value is a better way.
Anyway, my question was directed to Doug - he is a dealer, as far as I know you are a photographer with no influence on pricing.
BTW, how is your "state of the art" 150mm doing?
Edmund
-
... my fiancé's IQ 260
Good job on connecting with someone who has just as much invested in camera gear as you. ;D
-
I don't think "lock in" pricing makes the users happy. Providing value is a better way.
Anyway, my question was directed to Doug - he is a dealer, as far as I know you are a photographer with no influence on pricing.
BTW, how is your "state of the art" 150mm doing?
Edmund
And this is a public forum. You want only Doug to answer, send him a PM.
Also, I forgot when you were put in charge of answering on MF users' behalf. Afterall, a person who had an MF back for a hiccup, has been lugging around a canon kit ever since and still haunting the MF forums for whatever personal reasons is the perfect spokesperson for MF shooters, right?
P.s. My 150 is probably older than me and has passed more hands than a Parisian prostitute in the Middle Ages (was cheaper though). My "state of the art" 80mm LS is giving me razor sharp images whenever I use it. What's your "state of the art" canon kit doing, besides gathering dust as you type away furiously in a forum for equipment you don't own?
-
Regarding MFDB pricing.
All discussions about it end up saying the same things. Should they be cheaper. Hell Yes! Can they be cheaper given the cost of the components? Hell yes!
But it's a Free Market Economy and if the backs did not sell at high prices or were not profitable enough for the manufacturer's (given the relationship between prices and sales volume) they would either not sell them or lower the price. To top it off not all MFDB or Medium Format Digital Manufacturer's operate using the same business model.
They are all different even though some share some similarities.
Pentax Sells their 645z through the same consumer electronics product channels as Canon and Nikon et.al. But unlike Canon and Nikon the Pentax service shines by it's absence, at least in North America.
PhaseOne prefers to work using dealers (although Leaf products are also sold in B&H) that not only sell their products but deal with the service and support. Their products are also more "open source" type and offer lot's of alternatives in regards to Camera, lens and back combinations. They are sold mostly as top of the line professional tools.
Leica works with dealer and also consumer electronic distribution channels (B&H et.al.) and is mostly a closed product (but they do offer great lens adapters for use on their S cameras and we should see more options now that Leica owns Sinar). Leicas are mostly luxury products but the S system really straddles the luxury and professional realm.
And finally Hasselblad, they also somewhat touch the luxury product realm but are mainly sold as tools for profesionals. They are also mostly a closed system although the H4X and H5X cameras open it up a lot. They work with dealers but are also sold in B&H etc.
-
Regarding MFDB pricing.
All discussions about it end up saying the same things. Should they be cheaper. Hell Yes! Can they be cheaper given the cost of the components? Hell yes!
But it's a Free Market Economy and if the backs did not sell at high prices or were not profitable enough for the manufacturer's (given the relationship between prices and sales volume) they would either not sell them or lower the price. To top it off not all MFDB or Medium Format Digital Manufacturer's operate using the same business model.
They are all different even though some share some similarities.
Pentax Sells their 645z through the same consumer electronics product channels as Canon and Nikon et.al. But unlike Canon and Nikon the Pentax service shines by it's absence, at least in North America.
PhaseOne prefers to work using dealers (although Leaf products are also sold in B&H) that not only sell their products but deal with the service and support. Their products are also more "open source" type and offer lot's of alternatives in regards to Camera, lens and back combinations. They are sold mostly as top of the line professional tools.
Leica works with dealer and also consumer electronic distribution channels (B&H et.al.) and is mostly a closed product (but they do offer great lens adapters for use on their S cameras and we should see more options now that Leica owns Sinar). Leicas are mostly luxury products but the S system really straddles the luxury and professional realm.
And finally Hasselblad, they also somewhat touch the luxury product realm but are mainly sold as tools for profesionals. They are also mostly a closed system although the H4X and H5X cameras open it up a lot. They work with dealers but are also sold in B&H etc.
Ken,
No offense but positioning Phase One as professional tools and Leica and Hasselblad mostly as luxury products is showing a fair amount of bias...
Best, Joris.
-
P.s. My 150 is probably older than me and has passed more hands than a Parisian prostitute in the Middle Ages (was cheaper though). My "state of the art" 80mm LS is giving me razor sharp images whenever I use it. What's your "state of the art" canon kit doing, besides gathering dust as you type away furiously in a forum for equipment you don't own?
Synn,
I think you've watched "The hunchback of Notre Dame" one time too many in your impressionable and formative young years :)
As for "state of the art Canon kit", that sounds about as appropriate as "fresh thousand year old egg", my 200/1.8 lens has been out of production for about 15 years, but I would bet that it beats your 150 in a catfight :)
I would really like to put my remaining MF gear back to work, but I think I will wait another year or so :)
Edmund
-
While you're at it, would you be a dear and run down to the Chanel HQ and tell them that $5 worth of scented water doesn't need to be sold at $100?
Thanks!
-
While you're at it, would you be a dear and run down to the Chanel HQ and tell them that $5 worth of scented water doesn't need to be sold at $100?
Thanks!
Synn,
On reflection, I have no problem with Phase marketing their backs at high prices - I do have a problem with claims their system is "better" than the competition.
As far as I'm concerned, as the joke goes, "It's a Sony (https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=V_DT-mg_3IA)".
BTW, I've seen worse, as ads go.
Edmund
-
Hi,
Those sixteen bits are a marketing lie. To begin with Anders Torger has dissected the Phase One raw files and they are actually 14 bit. That is a good engineering choice however, as the files have only something like 13 bits of usable data. I can try to find a reference.
According to Anders, the Hasselblad files are actually 16 bits.
Best regards
Erik
(I know that I will have some responses from this) but until they can get CMOS to 16-bits per channel I am not interested. What I love about the P45+ I use is the color and I just do not trust the CMOS sensors at this point to give me that. Anyway, ISO 200 is the max that I ever need, and from what I can see from my fiancé's IQ 260, ISO 200 is very clean on that system. (However, I am getting into more resort work and clean high ISOs for night work I could see as being helpful.)
If Phase can produce a full frame CMOS back with 16-bits per channel that works well with the current line of Rodenstock lenses, that would be a hard back not to consider.
-
Hi Ken,
You are right. Would someone sell digital backs at half the price with good enough technical support there would be a price pressure on Phase One and Hasselblad, but there is little competition except the Pentax 645z or 645d.
Ultimately, the buyer decides the price, it will be the price point that enough customers are willing to pay.
Best regards
Erik
Regarding MFDB pricing.
All discussions about it end up saying the same things. Should they be cheaper. Hell Yes! Can they be cheaper given the cost of the components? Hell yes!
But it's a Free Market Economy and if the backs did not sell at high prices or were not profitable enough for the manufacturer's (given the relationship between prices and sales volume) they would either not sell them or lower the price. To top it off not all MFDB or Medium Format Digital Manufacturer's operate using the same business model.
They are all different even though some share some similarities.
Pentax Sells their 645z through the same consumer electronics product channels as Canon and Nikon et.al. But unlike Canon and Nikon the Pentax service shines by it's absence, at least in North America.
PhaseOne prefers to work using dealers (although Leaf products are also sold in B&H) that not only sell their products but deal with the service and support. Their products are also more "open source" type and offer lot's of alternatives in regards to Camera, lens and back combinations. They are sold mostly as top of the line professional tools.
Leica works with dealer and also consumer electronic distribution channels (B&H et.al.) and is mostly a closed product (but they do offer great lens adapters for use on their S cameras and we should see more options now that Leica owns Sinar). Leicas are mostly luxury products but the S system really straddles the luxury and professional realm.
And finally Hasselblad, they also somewhat touch the luxury product realm but are mainly sold as tools for profesionals. They are also mostly a closed system although the H4X and H5X cameras open it up a lot. They work with dealers but are also sold in B&H etc.
-
It may be like cars - room for several products at different price points. And maybe price has little to do with performance, once you're in the top bracket. Frankly, I guess I'd prefer a Porsche to a Rolls Royce :)
Edmund
Hi Ken,
You are right. Would someone sell digital backs at half the price with good enough technical support there would be a price pressure on Phase One and Hasselblad, but there is little competition except the Pentax 645z or 645d.
Ultimately, the buyer decides the price, it will be the price point that enough customers are willing to pay.
Best regards
Erik
-
I do have a problem with claims their system is "better
Unfortunately for you, the majority of MF buying market disagrees with your PoV; which is why neither Hassy nor Pentax is outselling Phase+Leaf.
-
Unfortunately for you, the majority of MF buying market disagrees with your PoV; which is why neither Hassy nor Pentax is outselling Phase+Leaf.
As far as Pentax not out-selling Phaseone, I'd be very interested in the data source you are relying on to make this surprising claim?
Cheers,
Bernard
-
I believe some bloke called Doug on a forum told him.
-
I have my deepest sympathies for anyone who actually thinks Pentax is outselling phase or blad.
Pentax's camera sales; all of it, is too small that Ricoh classifies them as "others" in their financials. This is the company that did 4 downward revisions on the price of the 645D. While phase continues to maintain their existing pricing models. Even the used backs maintain their pricing and not crash once the magical pentaxes came to be.
I mean, I like how Pentax is taking MF to the masses( or not so much, when you learn what the new lenses cost), but you got to be on another level of wishful thinking if you think they are the market leaders and phase is trailing behind.
-
Pentax has several key issues with the 645z.
#1 Service/Repair. Pretty non existent in North America. Cameras need to be sent to Japan for repair. Expect to be 8-10 weeks without the camera.
#2 New Lenses are priced too high (except the 55mm). $4k-$5k. If they wish to draw more people into their system that needs to come down to $2k-$3k.
If they fix those two things I would expect the 645z to have much more of an impact in the MFD market.
-
Unfortunately for you, the majority of MF buying market disagrees with your PoV; which is why neither Hassy nor Pentax is outselling Phase+Leaf.
What does "selling more" have to do with "better"?
Put a 645Z on the table, an H5 and a Phamiya next to it, and you truly can say with a straight face that this antiquated Mamiya P.O.S. is evidently the "best" out of the three *bodies*?
Edmund
-
The original poster asked an honest question. My best honest answer is I don't think things are necessarily headed the way he thinks. In particular, there is, imho, little prospect of Phaseone, or anyone, having exclusive access to whatever MF chips is cooking up.
Sony's sensor division is, apparently, mandated to be an independent profit centre, to the extent they gave Nikon their prime 35mm chip ahead of their own manufacture. This decision can only have been on volume and the profits therefrom.
While Phase has a nice niche convincing people to pay a $28,000+ profit margin on a back, I doubt they can muster the volumes to interest Sony.
Moreover, it is very unclear that any appreciable number of shooters want back of much more than 50MP. Very few people need or want these chips. Not to say some don't, but the numbers are a small, small subset
On the other hand, it seems likely that a very high MP 35mm chip will be released next year. That will cause much sturm und drang, no doubt.
The upshot is that the older digital backs are becoming good value. If you want high MPs, get one of those.
Happy shooting.
- N.
-
Who here is talking about bodies? Why are you shifting goalposts when the discussion was about package solutions?
Can one buy the Pentax body only so that I can use my existing back on it?
When people vote with their wallets, things tend to sell more. This is not news.
-
Nick,
Lovely to hear the sweet voice of reason, so seldom heard ...
Me, watching ebay with interest :)
Edmund
The original poster asked an honest question. My best honest answer is I don't think things are necessarily headed the way he thinks. In particular, there is, imho, little prospect of Phaseone, or anyone, having exclusive access to whatever MF chips is cooking up.
Sony's sensor division is, apparently, mandated to be an independent profit centre, to the extent they gave Nikon their prime 35mm chip ahead of their own manufacture. This decision can only have been on volume and the profits therefrom.
While Phase has a nice niche convincing people to pay a $28,000+ profit margin on a back, I doubt they can muster the volumes to interest Sony.
Moreover, it is very unclear that any appreciable number of shooters want back of much more than 50MP. Very few people need or want these chips. Not to say some don't, but the numbers are a small, small subset
On the other hand, it seems likely that a very high MP 35mm chip will be released next year. That will cause much sturm und drang, no doubt.
The upshot is that the older digital backs are becoming good value. If you want high MPs, get one of those.
Happy shooting.
- N.
-
Who here is talking about bodies? Why are you shifting goalposts when the discussion was about package solutions?
Can one buy the Pentax body only so that I can use my existing back on it?
When people vote with their wallets, things tend to sell more. This is not news.
I am not sure any of them is far better. I will say PhaseOne is very good and have the best software, but not necessary is the best solution "in general".
Some times people vote with their wallets because of marketing and distribution. In the case at hand, Phase One wins at marketing hands down. They also control most of the forums and the bloggers and reviewers. Your wallet analogy implies that McDonald's is far "better" than Pret a Manger.
I hope you agree that is not a solid argument.
Best regards,
J. Duncan
A review, he works with PhaseOne and Mamiya/leaf but is far better that we normally see in "MF" reviews that tend to have a clear agenda:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7yGhKDwfD1Y
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=30TWJ8bWGmA
-
I find it laughable that "controlling the forums" leads people to spend 5 figures on a sub par product. At some point of time, they do try it first hand and see if it works for them, you know? I am talking from first hand experience here.
No, I don't see it as McDonald's. Rather, I see it as $400 acer laptop owners passing snide remarks that a MacBook has the same parts that their laptop has. The sum is larger than its parts and that is why the phase ecosystem works for more people than the alternative.
For the record, I am not saying that that Pentax or blad systems are shit. Rather, I am pointing out to the fact that phamiya works for the most number of folks because there is no other manufacturer out there that has such a broad compatibility to the backs they offer as well as a lens line up that goes from $200 to $6000, almost all of them tack sharp.
Pentax and hassy only checks some of those boxes.
-
Yes, this is the new marketing buzz: The "ecosystem", the "invisibles", the "sum is larger than the parts".
Words trotted out by Apple regularly to justify the pricing of $1000 phones that cost $250 to make.
Of course, Apple have hired the world's most expensive marketers to burn these new memes into the consumer's brains, so it is normal to see other companies now piggyback on this technique.
Edmund
No, I don't see it as McDonald's. Rather, I see it as $400 acer laptop owners passing snide remarks that a MacBook has the same parts that their laptop has. The sum is larger than its parts and that is why the phase ecosystem works for more people than the alternative.
-
Yes, this is the new marketing buzz: The "ecosystem", the "invisibles", the "sum is larger than the parts".
Words trotted out by Apple regularly to justify the pricing of $1000 phones that cost $250 to make.
Of course, Apple have hired the world's most expensive marketers to burn these new memes into the consumer's brains, so it is normal to see other companies now piggyback on this technique.
Edmund
Yes Edmund, people look at the price listing on B&H for Mamiya vs te competition, go back to the forums, listen to all the "buzzwords" and decide that all that extra cash is worth spending. That's exactly how it has worked for the thousands of people who have bought into the phamiya platform.
Don't you have it all figured out!
-
Yes Edmund, people look at the price listing on B&H for Mamiya vs te competition, go back to the forums, listen to all the "buzzwords" and decide that all that extra cash is worth spending. That's exactly how it has worked for the thousands of people who have bought into the phamiya platform.
Don't you have it all figured out!
Synn,
I believe this is the link you were looking for (http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=NavBar&A=getItemDetail&Q=&sku=1045517&is=REG&si=rev#costumerReview).
Edmund
-
Synn,
I believe this is the link you were looking for (http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=NavBar&A=getItemDetail&Q=&sku=1045517&is=REG&si=rev#costumerReview).
Edmund
perhaps.
Speaking of links, I am extremely curious to know how those ebay links are gonna magically make your currently non existent images better though. Keep me posted! ;)
-
For the record, I am not saying that that Pentax or blad systems are shit. Rather, I am pointing out to the fact that phamiya works for the most number of folks because...
Except that you are mssing just a tiny detail... the sales data facts backing up your belief... ;)
Reality can be a bitch.
Cheers,
Bernard
-
Except that you are mssing just a tiny detail... the sales data facts back uping your belief... ;)
Reality can be a bitch.
Cheers,
Bernard
Oh, "Bitch".
I thought you meant "Stitch", as that's what every other post of yours is about.
Where is your data countering my belief, sir?
It's funny how the two people with the most complaints about MF kits are the ones that don't even own one. Figures; most people who complain about the handling of Ferraris are teenagers who found their way to forums.
Carry on. ::)
-
Oh, "Bitch".
I thought you meant "Stitch", as that's what every other post of yours is about.
Where is your data countering my belief, sir?
It's funny how the two people with the most complaints about MF kits are the ones that don't even own one. Figures; most people who complain about the handling of Ferraris are teenagers who found their way to forums.
Carry on. ::)
No complains about MF here. Great cameras and great photographic options to chose from. Another invention of yours.
If I recall, I laid my hands on a MF camera for the first time more than 30 years ago, a Rolleiflex. I then focused on 35mm for many years until I dived back into MF about 12 years ago with a Hassy H1. I then used 6x7/6x9/6x12 Horseman holders for 4x5. That was followed by a ZD MF digital camera and recently a Hassy 503cw.
Cheers,
Bernard
-
C'mon kids. Play nice. 8)
-
Speaking of links, I am extremely curious to know how those ebay links are gonna magically make your currently non existent images better though. Keep me posted! ;)
Synn,
Here is the link again. It points to the very positive 645Z user reviews at B&H (http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1045517-REG/pentax_16599_645z_digital_slr_camera.html) - every buyer review is at 5 stars.
This is a camera forum. People don't care about images, they care about gear and pixel peeping - or in your case Phase sales numbers.
;D
Edmund
-
I find it laughable that "controlling the forums" leads people to spend 5 figures on a sub par product. At some point of time, they do try it first hand and see if it works for them, you know? I am talking from first hand experience here.
No, I don't see it as McDonald's. Rather, I see it as $400 acer laptop owners passing snide remarks that a MacBook has the same parts that their laptop has. The sum is larger than its parts and that is why the phase ecosystem works for more people than the alternative.
For the record, I am not saying that that Pentax or blad systems are shit. Rather, I am pointing out to the fact that phamiya works for the most number of folks because there is no other manufacturer out there that has such a broad compatibility to the backs they offer as well as a lens line up that goes from $200 to $6000, almost all of them tack sharp.
Pentax and hassy only checks some of those boxes.
It's seem that I was unable to convey my point to you. The implication that I object was the "voting with wallet proves superior quality". The fact that a product sale more does not imply that the product is better. You did not address the issue. Here are somethings that are not relevant or do not falsify the argument:
1. The existence of quality products that sale more that lesser products (this is not the subject) .
2. The existence of quality products that are more or less expensive that lesser products.
3. The existence of better quality products that sale less than lesser products (this is relevant but it will prove my point).
As you can see, your mac example (if we accept all the premises) is either irrelevant (if mac sale more than generic PCs or Acer in particular) or will prove my point (if generic PCs or Acer in particular sale more computers than Apple sales Macs).
The other point I made is that it is true that Phase One is far better at marketing that Hasselblad, also in terms of forum presense. That's a fact and it could blur even more the idea that more sales imply a better product.
That does not prove that Phase is not better, but the idea that Phase is far better than the other because it sales more does not hold water.
I hope this time I make my point more clear, and I am sure that you will concede that this is the case that inferring better product from superior sales is a non sequitur.
Best regards,
-
Those sixteen bits are a marketing lie. To begin with Anders Torger has dissected the Phase One raw files and they are actually 14 bit. That is a good engineering choice however, as the files have only something like 13 bits of usable data. I can try to find a reference.
According to Anders, the Hasselblad files are actually 16 bits.
Erik, it's great to know that I have two more bits of noise on my Hassy than I'd have if I'd bought a P1.
Jim
-
The other point I made is that it is true that Phase One is far better at marketing that Hasselblad, also in terms of forum presense.
Yes, the H forums are closed, so one never gets to see what their workflow advantages and issues might be.
On the good side, they don't astroturf here :)
Edmund
-
It's seem that I was unable to convey my point to you. The implication that I object was the "voting with wallet proves superior quality". The fact that a product sale more does not imply that the product is better. You did not address the issue. Here are somethings that are not relevant or do not falsify the argument:
1. The existence of quality products that sale more that lesser products (this is not the subject) .
2. The existence of quality products that are more or less expensive that lesser products.
3. The existence of better quality products that sale less than lesser products (this is relevant but it will prove my point).
As you can see, your mac example (if we accept all the premises) is either irrelevant (if mac sale more than generic PCs or Acer in particular) or will prove my point (if generic PCs or Acer in particular sale more computers than Apple sales Macs).
The other point I made is that it is true that Phase One is far better at marketing that Hasselblad, also in terms of forum presense. That's a fact and it could blur even more the idea that more sales imply a better product.
That does not prove that Phase is not better, but the idea that Phase is far better than the other because it sales more does not hold water.
I hope this time I make my point more clear, and I am sure that you will concede that this is the case that inferring better product from superior sales is a non sequitur.
Best regards,
Fair enough and my point, right from the start is that at some stage of the buyer's initial research, the bullshit stops and the product had to live up to whatever hype marketing promises. For most of us, these are tools to create art and if they don't work as promised, it doesn't matter how many superlatives are showered on them.
Why did I choose a leaf? It's not because some dealer on a forum served kool-aid to me. In fact, I was pretty much set on getting a leaf even before I got to any forums. This is because when I researched during my purchase, I found that:
- the leaf backs are the ones with the best out of the box skin tones for my taste
- they offered the maximum mount options and the ability to change it to a Hasselblad mount if I wished so at some point
- the best display in the segment, which is important for someone who works untethered.
- the ability to use high shutter speeds for ambient light work and high speed flash sync with leaf shutters
- the ability to work in capture one pro
- faith in the company's long term future
- ability to use legacy lenses and high quality leaf shutter lenses as per my budget
- maximum compatibility with tech cameras, whenever I bought into one of those
Tell me if hasselblad or Pentax checks all those boxes, at any price point. I really don't care what the name on the back says. I do care what it does.
It doesn't matter how much advertising phase/leaf does. If none of those proof points where true, I wouldn't have considered my purchase. And I am pretty sure I am not the only one who did so (the fact that there are multiple phamiya dealers here doesnt matter one bit to me as I live half way across the world where they don't do busines).
I am pretty sure I am not the only one who made such a purchase decision based on the product's merits. It makes me sick to see some keyboard warriors on forums (not aimed at you, you know who they are) who can't shoot anothing worth mentioning pontificate about how they know better than those who actually use these things daily or how they know our real purchase motivations are better than we do ourselves.
This whole "phase is doing one big con" aura that some forumers show is absolutely pathetic. They don't tick all the boxes you have? Move on and get something that does. But stop telling the rest of us how we are walking around with kilos of hype in our bags and how the images we make don't exist.
Phase knows how to market an already good product? Good for them. Any company should be competent at that. Pentax and blad should fire their incompetent marketing departments, instead of blaming phase for doing their job right.
I really don't want to talk more on this topic. Such forum yapping is the domain of certain Ph.Ds who claim to have the power to think for the rest of us.
Good day.
-
Hi,
Some folks feel it is very important to have two bits of extra noise.
Best regards
Erik
Erik, it's great to know that I have two more bits of noise on my Hassy than I'd have if I'd bought a P1.
Jim
-
"Phase knows how to market an already good product? Good for them"
phase marketing sucks and the imagery they use is poor compared to Hassleblad and Leica.
And bombarding me with emails from the 'image quality professor'? Who's bright idea was that?
-
Hi,
My impression is that times are changing. We see the first generation of CMOS-based back, but they are all small sensor (44x33) mm and all use the same Sony sensor. The Sony sensor is much more integrated than the older CCD based sensors with analog digital conversion on sensor. That essentially means that Sony is much in control the analogue electronics.
It may be that Sony CMOS will be a dominant factor in MFD or they may not be. What will the acceptance be for CMOS, will customers prefer CCD over CMOS? No one knows. Will Sony produce larger sensors or will "full frame" MFD still be in the realm of CCD? Will DALSA make large CMOS? Many questions and few answers.
Best regards
Erik
After many years of creatively employing my Leaf Aptus-65 on both Sinar & Hassy platforms...it appears that upgrade time will soon arrive.
I'm soliciting input:....impressions...opinions...and such......from anyone interested in sharing.
By mid-2015 I will have met my used-budget-requirements, and will be seriously engaged in shopping.
What 80-mega-pixel backs do you like....dislike.....yearn-for....avoid....etc.....?
Do you have a used-back you want to sell....or know anyone who has one?
We can share publicly...or privately (PM)...as you wish.
I'll enjoy all your responses...offered with honesty and respect.
Warm regards,
Hank
-
Hi,
I am a bit confused by the the recent developments of high ISO in MFD. The reason that CMOS is capable of high ISO is essentially low readout noise, which is essentially a capability to pull out data in the darks. When ISO is increased, exposure will be reduced, the very low readout noise makes it possible to increase "exposure" in development and still have a good image. CMOS readout noise may be 1/4 - 1/4 of CCD readout noise. That would make it possible to push 1-2 stops extra.
But, highlight noise is just depending on exposure, because it is essentially photon statistics. If we assume electron charges/square micron is about the same on CCD as on CMOS, underexposing say two stops would give similar amount of shot noise.
One area where it would be possible to increase ISO is quantum efficiency, but CCD is not terribly bad and it has an upper limit.
Sony sensors used to have some kind of on board noise reduction, that would be helpful with high ISO, but it could as well be done off the sensor.
So I am a bit skeptical about high ISO on CMOS.
Best regards
Erik
-
Synn,
Here is the link again. It points to the very positive 645Z user reviews at B&H (http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1045517-REG/pentax_16599_645z_digital_slr_camera.html) - every buyer review is at 5 stars.
This is a camera forum. People don't care about images, they care about gear and pixel peeping - or in your case Phase sales numbers.
;D
Edmund
It seems lately the conversations on here always come back to the new almighty camera, the Pentax 645Z. Amazing how fast the D800 fell from grace. :D
I will say though that it looks like a nice camera. From those that I have spoken to who have used it, they like it. I also ran into a lifestyle/location guy that happened to have one on hand to look at a couple of weeks ago. Feels nice, looks easy to use. If you don't shoot ad work and are not bringing in those $10K+ per day jobs, the price is very attractive.
Service is still lacking though. The photographer that I ran into said that Pentax is upping their game when it comes to service, but he has not yet had any problems, so he really could not speak to how the service is. (Lets hope it is truly better for those that have invested the money.)
So if it works for you and you can create good imagery with it, who am I to criticize you.
With that said though, it still does not compare to Phase or Hassy for two main reasons.
First, it is not an open system, which means someone like me could never use it on a tech camera without giving up wide angles. That kills it for me.
Second, no leaf shutters, which greatly limits what you can do with lighting.
This week is slow, so I rented a couple of modifiers I don't use and decided to have some fun. I also decided I would do an 180 on my style, which means keeping ambient sunlight to a minimum. First image today was to create a sunrise type feel with glowing orange light streaming into my kitchen. Second image, mid-afternoon light coming into my kitchen that was a little more even. First and second images I shot at ISO 50, f/8 and 1/30s. This was just enough to light the wall across from my kitchen window, and it worked well. Also, since I was shooting faster, I had my girlfriend step in for the shots, which was nice.
Last image today was a night time moonlight feel. To get the daytime exterior light to mimic night time, I had to alter the exposure to ISO 50, f/13 (right on the cusp of diffraction) and 1/500s. (Of course there was some gelling involved to render the color correctly too.)
Having a leaf shutter that would sync at 1/500 was very helpful.
Could I have gotten it with a max 1/125s sync speed at ISO 100? I could have put a 3 stop ND filter on the lens, but I would have needed 8 times more juice going through my heads. I could have also set up the shot and waited until sunset, but I would have had to been very sure of myself since the light changes so fast at sunset. Taking time to access and readjust my strobes could have been too long and the shot would have been lost. So yes, I could have created the image below without leaf shutters, but having leaf shutters made it a lot easier.
So, if you want a camera that's easy to use, provides you with a great image, and you are not a control freak, the Pentax is great.
But if you want a camera that puts no limits on your creativity, the Pentax does not do it.
-
I am a bit confused by the the recent developments of high ISO in MFD. The reason that CMOS is capable of high ISO is essentially low readout noise, which is essentially a capability to pull out data in the darks. When ISO is increased, exposure will be reduced, the very low readout noise makes it possible to increase "exposure" in development and still have a good image. CMOS readout noise may be 1/4 - 1/4 of CCD readout noise. That would make it possible to push 1-2 stops extra.
But, highlight noise is just depending on exposure, because it is essentially photon statistics. If we assume electron charges/square micron is about the same on CCD as on CMOS, underexposing say two stops would give similar amount of shot noise.
One area where it would be possible to increase ISO is quantum efficiency, but CCD is not terribly bad and it has an upper limit.
Sony sensors used to have some kind of on board noise reduction, that would be helpful with high ISO, but it could as well be done off the sensor.
So I am a bit skeptical about high ISO on CMOS.
Minimum CCD read noise appears to be about 10 electrons: IQ180 = 13, P65+ = 12, P45+ = 8.5, M9 = 13, Leica S = 14.
Minimum CMOS read noise appears to be about 2 electrons: D4S = 1.3, D810 1.3, Sony a7R = 2.3.
So, 2 - 3 stops better for CMOS. We can talk about the possible reasons if you want to. Read noise appears to be coming down quite rapidly in CMOS.
Then there's switchable conversion gain, which you can do on CMOS. I don't know for sure about CCD, but I doubt it. That's gotten the a7S to 0.4 electrons read noise (according to my testing, a little of that may be due to raw processing -- for shame). If all CMOS cameras can get there, that would be better than 4 stops difference.
However, there is now the possibility of mixing CCD and CMOS on the same chip, which could be interesting -- for instance, on chip ADCs for CCDs.
Fundamentally, there doesn't have to be any difference in the way the light is captured between the two. The big difference is how it's read out: through a buffer (CMOS) or with a bucket brigade (CCD).
Jim
-
yes, but then there is the uniformity of the pixels to consider, ie various forms of pattern noise.
Edmund
Minimum CCD read noise appears to be about 10 electrons: IQ180 = 13, P65+ = 12, P45+ = 8.5, M9 = 13, Leica S = 14.
Minimum CMOS read noise appears to be about 2 electrons: D4S = 1.3, D810 1.3, Sony a7R = 2.3.
So, 2 - 3 stops better for CMOS. We can talk about the possible reasons if you want to. Read noise appears to be coming down quite rapidly in CMOS.
Then there's switchable conversion gain, which you can do on CMOS. I don't know for sure about CCD, but I doubt it. That's gotten the a7S to 0.4 electrons read noise (according to my testing, a little of that may be due to raw processing -- for shame). If all CMOS cameras can get there, that would be better than 4 stops difference.
However, there is now the possibility of mixing CCD and CMOS on the same chip, which could be interesting -- for instance, on chip ADCs for CCDs.
Fundamentally, there doesn't have to be any difference in the way the light is captured between the two. The big difference is how it's read out: through a buffer (CMOS) or with a bucket brigade (CCD).
Jim
-
...there is the uniformity of the pixels to consider, ie various forms of pattern noise.
Right you are. I've just begun exploring that.
http://blog.kasson.com/?p=7608
http://blog.kasson.com/?p=7638
http://blog.kasson.com/?p=7656
I will get to the CCD sensors. Do you have any opinion as to which sensor produces the uglier RN normalized for sigma?
Jim
-
Right you are. I've just begun exploring that.
http://blog.kasson.com/?p=7608
http://blog.kasson.com/?p=7638
http://blog.kasson.com/?p=7656
I will get to the CCD sensors. Do you have any opinion as to which sensor produces the uglier RN normalized for sigma?
Jim
Get the Apertus team to send you some "freshgrown" unprocessed raw files.
What is actually written into the external file is already heavily processed.
Edmund
-
Yes, this is the new marketing buzz: The "ecosystem", the "invisibles", the "sum is larger than the parts".
Words trotted out by Apple regularly to justify the pricing of $1000 phones that cost $250 to make.
Of course, Apple have hired the world's most expensive marketers to burn these new memes into the consumer's brains, so it is normal to see other companies now piggyback on this technique.
Edmund
Thats part of the game. Put high quality components inside an ugly box and add poor marketing, sub par service and support and it wont sell well. Sure a lot of folks are gonna have some fun with the product but it will be eaten alive in the marketplace by other, more savvy manufacturers and it wont be a success.
How many products are a huge success thanks in great part to awesome design / packaging and marketing / advertising? As you know the list is very long.
The Main issue people have with PhaseOne is the price, at least in this and other forums and to a lesser degree the Phamiya body. (But one can use the Phase/Leaf backs on Hasselblad H cameras from the H1 (which I have), H2 and the newer H4x and H5x so that one has a solution) The IQ1 and IQ2 backs are superb digital backs. I don't think that is in question. All discussions fall back on the price issue.
And yes, the A7R, D800/E/810 and of course the 645z take hold of those discussions. But the 645z has the edge since it uses the same sensor as the Phase/Leaf/Hassy backs. So when you compare the cameras/backs with the same 50mp CMOS MF sensor ONLY in terms of price and sensor performance of course the 645z will beat down on all.
Never mind the lens options with the Phase/Leaf and Hassy are pretty extensive specially when you add tech camera lenses. So if a photographer wants leaf shutter lenses and/or tech camera capability plus great service and support then the Pentax does not work for them. If he/she doesnt then the Pentax is definitely worth looking at. Its great to have options.
Now that said let's talk larger CMOS sensor...
-
Hi - not read the whole thread yet, but just wanted to comment on this.
A Phase One representative commented at a public event that I was at, that there would be no FF CMOS back in 2015.
Kind regards,
Gerald.
Hello Hank
I feel that by mid to late 2015 Phase One will announce a full frame CMOS back, 60 to 90MP. They actually may announce 2, one in the lower MP range, with greater pixel pitch, that "may" be more friendly to current tech lenses. The other back will be the new MP king, as the 180/280 are now.
This may come out earlier than later, but it seems right now that Phase is working on the new camera body with Sony to replace the DF+, for which I have no interest, as I only use the tech camera in my work. I know many many others can't wait and I am sure it will be a great solution.
Phase One has their new Alpa partnership so I am sure there will a new Phase One branded tech solution out there also, by early 2015, again as I use Arca, I have no interest here and still find that announcement rather a limiting statement by Phase One.
The next generation may even be superior to what is being seen from the current CMOS 250/150/Credo 50, and those files for my liking are excellent. The current 50MP Phase has all I really need, but the the 1:3 crop is significant to me, and current upgrades from Phase are not very financially attractive, (from a 260 to 250 or Credo 50). Actually I seem to prefer the leaf color on the Credo 50, but I don't like the non Value add warranty offerings from Leaf.
I base the above statement on the results I am seeing from my Nikon D810, which hands down preforms much better than my D800e, in overall DR recovered.
2015/16 will be exciting, however the elephant in the room is how much will the cost be, to move to the full frame CMOS Phase One backs. I also don't feel that this round of chip development will have the same access to others, like Pentax or Hasselbald, but that is just my 2 cents worth.
Paul
-
Ken,
Ok, I agree. Phase One customers deserve to use the worst MF body on the market because they are actually insisting on fitting a tech camera back to their film-vintage SLR body :)
You know, if I want a 50MP CMOS tech cam back, Hasselblad sell one for $10K or so (Japanese pricing). I can get that*and* a Pentax 645Z and still have $15K leftover from the price of a Phamiya, which should be more than enough to buy or rent a backup 35mm system for emergencies. And most of here do agree that a 35mm system with 39MP is a good enough backup for a 50MP MF solution.
As for "good dealers", well personal experience indicates that you can have snotty waiters at high priced restaurants and snotty dealers selling expensive cameras. Doug and Steve are nice but their qualities do not necessarily carry over magically to the rest of the Phase dealer network.
Edmund
-
Yes, the H forums are closed, so one never gets to see what their workflow advantages and issues might be.
On the good side, they don't astroturf here :)
Edmund
Edmund I think you are referring to my forum which is owned and run by me not Hasselblad.
The forum grew out of a Yahoo group I started in 2001 to help fellow (then Imacon) users. The reason is it closed is because members want it that way and it means we don't have to put up with the internet :)
-
Ken,
Ok, I agree. Phase One customers deserve to use the worst MF body on the market because they are actually insisting on fitting a tech camera back to their film-vintage SLR body :)
You know, if I want a 50MP CMOS tech cam back, Hasselblad sell one for $10K or so (Japanese pricing). I can get that*and* a Pentax 645Z and still have $15K leftover from the price of a Phamiya, which should be more than enough to buy or rent a backup 35mm system for emergencies. And most of here do agree that a 35mm system with 39MP is a good enough backup for a 50MP MF solution.
As for "good dealers", well personal experience indicates that you can have snotty waiters at high priced restaurants and snotty dealers selling expensive cameras. Doug and Steve are nice but their qualities do not necessarily carry over magically to the rest of the Phase dealer network.
Edmund
A PhaseOne/Leaf Dealer must have really done a number on you.
So far my MF Digital experience has been boringly drama free. I got the stuff it works and keeps working. I have not tinkered with anything and even got an old Hasselblad H1 and the back works with it perfectly. Did not and have not updated firmware on anything. Guess ive been lucky.
Guess the euro dealer network is not up to snuff or at least it is not consistent and experience vary wildly from dealer to dealer and customer to customer.
-
A PhaseOne/Leaf Dealer must have really done a number on you.
So far my MF Digital experience has been boringly drama free. I got the stuff it works and keeps working. I have not tinkered with anything and even got an old Hasselblad H1 and the back works with it perfectly. Did not and have not updated firmware on anything. Guess ive been lucky.
Guess the euro dealer network is not up to snuff or at least it is not consistent and experience vary wildly from dealer to dealer and customer to customer.
Truth.
I have encountered more shitty dealers for nikon than the ones I got my Leaf gear from.
It's funny, thousands of artists make amazing imagery with this "vintage film era body". Hell, some even use glorified pieces of metal otherwise known as tech cameras.
If there are those who can't manage to produce anything worthwhile with those, maybe it's time to look at themselves as the weakest link. Doesn't cost a cent to upgrade that.
-
I have encountered more shitty dealers for nikon than the ones I got my Leaf gear from.
What were your unfulfilled expectations if I may ask?
My Nikon dealer has been Amazon.co.jp and my expectation is to get a box shipped to the right address. I have had 100% succes so far. ;)
On the other hand, what did your Leaf dealer do to please you?
Cheers,
Bernard
-
Perhaps everyone just needs to agree that outside of the major centres, the Phase / Hasselblad / Leaf / Leica support and dealer network is, generally speaking, very, very patchy. We're talking about highly specialised tools and in most places there isn't enough demand to justify the specialist training and investment in product needed for dealers to do the tools justice. In the U.S., who are lucky to have CI and DT (for example) things look good. I guess the same can be said for Pro Centre in London? For those that live far away from such places, Phase One's dogmatic stance on having to deal with their dealer network is actually a real disadvantage. In my country for example, I refuse to buy anything from the Phase / Leaf "dealers". They are the absolute worst company to deal with, both in terms of service and also pricing. Hasselblad is much better represented in this regard.
In essence, when I eventually do buy my DMF back – which will hopefully be in the next four months – I will most likely import something. This is not ideal, especially because I don't have the chance to demo anything and will just have to take a punt. It's not ideal for after sales support, either.
Sorry this post took things off topic, but I guess it's been that way for around two pages of posts already?
-
+1
I entirely agree.
It's clear that CI and DT justify their markup. Others? as you say ...
Edmund
Perhaps everyone just needs to agree that outside of the major centres, the Phase / Hasselblad / Leaf / Leica support and dealer network is, generally speaking, very, very patchy. We're talking about highly specialised tools and in most places there isn't enough demand to justify the specialist training and investment in product needed for dealers to do the tools justice. In the U.S., who are lucky to have CI and DT (for example) things look good. I guess the same can be said for Pro Centre in London? For those that live far away from such places, Phase One's dogmatic stance on having to deal with their dealer network is actually a real disadvantage. In my country for example, I refuse to buy anything from the Phase / Leaf "dealers". They are the absolute worst company to deal with, both in terms of service and also pricing. Hasselblad is much better represented in this regard.
In essence, when I eventually do buy my DMF back – which will hopefully be in the next four months – I will most likely import something. This is not ideal, especially because I don't have the chance to demo anything and will just have to take a punt. It's not ideal for after sales support, either.
Sorry this post took things off topic, but I guess it's been that way for around two pages of posts already?
-
+1
I entirely agree.
It's clear that CI and DT justify their markup. Others? as you say ...
Edmund
That is a serious issue Phase has to deal with then. Pronto.
-
Hi,
That rises an interesting issue. Are MFD-s really more demanding than DSLRs? I have not bought anything except a Velbon tripod from a dealer since 1985. I don't think my P45+ is more complex than any of my Sony cameras. The manual is probably a bit better than average on the P45+.
Now, I understand that integration with technical cameras needs some advice, for instance. Something I also understand that sometimes there are firmware issues with cameras, that may need expertise to resolve. I have heard about some cameras locking up with some lenses. Many of those issues can be resolved with a Norwegian Reset.
I had little experience in dealing with dealers. One of the Phase One dealers here in Sweden is the leading mail order store in Sweden. When I bought my P45+ (used from Poland) I found out that viewfinder masks were not included. So I checked Phase One website, found that mentioned mail order house was dealer for Phase One. They were very helpful, but could not understand why I needed a view finder mask for Hasselblad. They also suggested I buy it from Hasselblad. But they referred me to another dealer, D3Image and they were promptly sent an open box package at half the price. Since that I complained about a broken sync cable, and D3image again provided excellent service, new cable in the mailbox next day).
Best regards
Erik
Ps. For people (un)fortunate enough to live outside Sweden, a Norwegian Reset is the equivalent of pulling the power plug. Just a myth of course…
What were your unfulfilled expectations if I may ask?
My Nikon dealer has been Amazon.co.jp and my expectation is to get a box shipped to the right address. I have had 100% succes so far. ;)
On the other hand, what did your Leaf dealer do to please you?
Cheers,
Bernard
-
Hi Eric:
A bit of information on the flip side:
I have worked with MFD since March of 2008. In that time I have used the P45+, 160 and now 260. I feel that there is more complexity between the DSLR's I have or have owned and the MFD backs. A few more thoughts.
1. In the US, it's very hard, if not impossible to contact Phase One directly, with either a warranty or support issue. They are based in Millville NY, however when problems arise, it's not easy to contact them. The dealer channel is the preferred route, maybe only route.
2. Each of my backs, has had issues, that needed service. To initiate this service, even though I had a value add warranty, I still needed to contact my dealer. I have used both DT and CI in the U.S.
3. My P45+, had several issue, but the most severe was the fact that it could not reach a 1 hour exposure without a controller card update. Even though I was under warranty, trust me, getting Phase One to admit to this openly was not easy. I actually needed support from 2 US dealers to get the process rolling and even then the process took 4 months to complete. Was I satisfied at the finish, yes, I was. But without dealer support to get Phase One to make the repair process possible, it would not have happened. My P45+ also needed several re-calibrations to be done, and I had to column readout errors, that had to be mapped out. So in the 3.5 years I owned it, I had at least 6 service issues.
4. My IQ160, only had 1 issue, and that was a tiling re-calibration. I was able to work with my dealer CI, to fix the issue but the back still had to back to Phase One.
5. My 260, has had one huge issue, created when I sent the back in to have the top plate replaced. The WiFi tops, on the IQ2 backs are plastic, to allow the signal to pass through. Early IQ2 backs, this plate would release over time and raise up. I also had an issue where my IQ260 would get condensation inside the LCD, especially if I used the back on a cold morning, and bright sunlight warmed the LCD. Both repairs were under the value add, and I sent in the back. When I received the 260, back from Phase One, the calibration was totally off, I could not shoot anything even at iso 50, without blowing the highlights, to total pink. I knew this was not the way the back should work and it happened right at the end of the year, in the week between Christmas and New Years. Phase One
's push back was that I was doing something wrong since I was using a "tech" camera. Of course I knew this was wrong, and I knew what the back should do, in the conditions it was being shot in. I was able to show Phase One that the same behavior happened when using a DF body and 35mm Mamiya lens, but I still had to get a lot of push into Phase One to get them to fix the issue. The fact that Phase One was blaming the "tech" camera and was implying that I didn't have any knowledge of the both the camera and process still gives me a bit of consternation.
Just think about this situation, you have a 39K back, sent in for a simple top fix. It comes back with a new top, but totally blowing out highlights, and not useable. Who are you going to call? It's not a good feeling. And shipping around a bunch of raw files is not an easy process even on high speed internet which at the time I did not have.
My 260 also has had to have one tiling re-calibration (something the P45+ did not need due to chip).
I guess my point to be made is, the backs work well, but when something does go wrong, it's a bit harder to engage in the repair process. When the "repair" comes back worse than the original condition as with my 260, then you really get a feeling of hopelessness. Having a dealer to get in the middle and make a few calls to get Phase One back on track is very important. The repairs when needed tend to me more complex than a fix to a DSLR, that goes back to Nikon or Canon. Each MFD back is unique in it's calibration, and I feel if put 2 side by side, each will shoot a bit differently. Not true with a Nikon D810. There is just more to tweak on the backs. This is how I see it. Phase One has a working model in place, but (at least in the US), it's very important to have a Phase One dealer that can get involved. I don't know how this model works in the rest of the world, i.e. Europe, Asia, etc.
Paul
-
Hi,
You story seems quite a bit similar to Anders Torger's experience with his back, except that he didn't find a good dealer.
Best regards
Erik
Hi Eric:
A bit of information on the flip side:
I have worked with MFD since March of 2008. In that time I have used the P45+, 160 and now 260. I feel that there is more complexity between the DSLR's I have or have owned and the MFD backs. A few more thoughts.
1. In the US, it's very hard, if not impossible to contact Phase One directly, with either a warranty or support issue. They are based in Millville NY, however when problems arise, it's not easy to contact them. The dealer channel is the preferred route, maybe only route.
2. Each of my backs, has had issues, that needed service. To initiate this service, even though I had a value add warranty, I still needed to contact my dealer. I have used both DT and CI in the U.S.
3. My P45+, had several issue, but the most severe was the fact that it could not reach a 1 hour exposure without a controller card update. Even though I was under warranty, trust me, getting Phase One to admit to this openly was not easy. I actually needed support from 2 US dealers to get the process rolling and even then the process took 4 months to complete. Was I satisfied at the finish, yes, I was. But without dealer support to get Phase One to make the repair process possible, it would not have happened. My P45+ also needed several re-calibrations to be done, and I had to column readout errors, that had to be mapped out. So in the 3.5 years I owned it, I had at least 6 service issues.
4. My IQ160, only had 1 issue, and that was a tiling re-calibration. I was able to work with my dealer CI, to fix the issue but the back still had to back to Phase One.
5. My 260, has had one huge issue, created when I sent the back in to have the top plate replaced. The WiFi tops, on the IQ2 backs are plastic, to allow the signal to pass through. Early IQ2 backs, this plate would release over time and raise up. I also had an issue where my IQ260 would get condensation inside the LCD, especially if I used the back on a cold morning, and bright sunlight warmed the LCD. Both repairs were under the value add, and I sent in the back. When I received the 260, back from Phase One, the calibration was totally off, I could not shoot anything even at iso 50, without blowing the highlights, to total pink. I knew this was not the way the back should work and it happened right at the end of the year, in the week between Christmas and New Years. Phase One
's push back was that I was doing something wrong since I was using a "tech" camera. Of course I knew this was wrong, and I knew what the back should do, in the conditions it was being shot in. I was able to show Phase One that the same behavior happened when using a DF body and 35mm Mamiya lens, but I still had to get a lot of push into Phase One to get them to fix the issue. The fact that Phase One was blaming the "tech" camera and was implying that I didn't have any knowledge of the both the camera and process still gives me a bit of consternation.
Just think about this situation, you have a 39K back, sent in for a simple top fix. It comes back with a new top, but totally blowing out highlights, and not useable. Who are you going to call? It's not a good feeling. And shipping around a bunch of raw files is not an easy process even on high speed internet which at the time I did not have.
My 260 also has had to have one tiling re-calibration (something the P45+ did not need due to chip).
I guess my point to be made is, the backs work well, but when something does go wrong, it's a bit harder to engage in the repair process. When the "repair" comes back worse than the original condition as with my 260, then you really get a feeling of hopelessness. Having a dealer to get in the middle and make a few calls to get Phase One back on track is very important. The repairs when needed tend to me more complex than a fix to a DSLR, that goes back to Nikon or Canon. Each MFD back is unique in it's calibration, and I feel if put 2 side by side, each will shoot a bit differently. Not true with a Nikon D810. There is just more to tweak on the backs. This is how I see it. Phase One has a working model in place, but (at least in the US), it's very important to have a Phase One dealer that can get involved. I don't know how this model works in the rest of the world, i.e. Europe, Asia, etc.
Paul
-
Reading what you write Paul, I wonder is the lack of local support for the 645Z in the US is a real problem.
Seems like you had in total weeks if not months of downtime with your backs between the shipping back and forth to Denmark,...
I would expect the 645Z to be much closer to a D810 in terms of initial defect occurrence (meaning basically never) and in the rare case where you do have a problem, it is likely that the turn around time may not be significanylu longer even if it has to be shipped back to Japan. Plus it is so much cheaper to get a back up that downtime would in fact not even happen (either a second Z or an second hand D).
Overall, your story confirms my impression that the actual comparative downside resulting from the lack of local Pentax pro-support in the US is way over-emphasized.
I am of course aware that the Pentax doesn't offer the off camera back option and is therefore not suitable for your needs. This is more a general comment.
Cheers,
Bernard
-
Reading what you write Paul, I wonder is the lack of local support for the 645Z in the US is a real problem.
Seems like you had in total weeks if not months of downtime with your backs between the shipping back and forth to Denmark,...
I would expect the 645Z to be much closer to a D810 in terms of initial defect occurrence (meaning basically never) and in the rare case where you do have a problem, it is likely that the turn around time may not be significanylu longer even if it has to be shipped back to Japan. Plus it is so much cheaper to get a back up that downtime would in fact not even happen (either a second Z or an second hand D).
Overall, your story confirms my impression that the actual comparative downside resulting from the lack of local Pentax pro-support in the US is way over-emphasized.
I am of course aware that the Pentax doesn't offer the off camera back option and is therefore not suitable for your needs. This is more a general comment.
Cheers,
Bernard
Hi Bernard.
Actually I was never down as I had a value add warranty each time so I had a loaner back of equal or greater resolution.
I am a fan of the Value add warranty for sure. My points were hopefully to point out that the MF backs can have problems and if they do they are more than likely going to need to be serviced by Phase One. But Phase One does not have a 1-800 type service center, instead they rely on a dealer to be the interface. At least in the US.
Paul
-
Hi Bernard.
Actually I was never down as I had a value add warranty each time so I had a loaner back of equal or greater resolution.
I am a fan of the Value add warranty for sure. My points were hopefully to point out that the MF backs can have problems and if they do they are more than likely going to need to be serviced by Phase One. But Phase One does not have a 1-800 type service center, instead they rely on a dealer to be the interface. At least in the US.
I understand, thank you Paul.
So I guess that what needs to be compared is the cost of this value added warranty to the cost of back up in the Pentax world (currently 4000 US$ for a mint second hand 645D). ;)
Regards,
Bernard
-
Few photographers carry more than one medium format camera/back for emergencies.
Probably should, I have multiple of bout everything, (gut then I'm keep stuff forever and am somewhat obsessive).
But using a backup D for a Z is not the best plan if you work professionally, as the D doesn't tether, has a small buffer.
In fact If I was predisposed to own a z (I'm not) I'd just carry a 35mm cmos system and have more range, less costs and pretty much the same look as the z files.
But I'm curious, of all the proponents posting about the Z how many actually plan to buy one?
IMO
BC
-
But I'm curious, of all the proponents posting about the Z how many actually plan to buy one?
IMO
BC
J,
The strange thing is that a bunch of people here seem to own one already, as we're seeing the shots and reports.
The Z is certainly making faster inroads into this forum than the S, although there seems to be little marketing money behind it.
What was weird was this 645D prototype which was shown around under glass at trade shows for years, declared to be cancelled, then "in review", and then suddenly the completely dead Pentax system came back to life - and people started buying them and they actually worked, and a second model got made. It makes one think that Contax and Rollei could also have been revived.
Phase/Leaf could probably sell zillions of $7K backs to Contax and Rollei owners who have a cupboard full of glass, but they want to kill those systems dead in the hope that some of those owners will one day buy Mamiya. Which they won't because Mercedes drivers don't enjoy the idea of getting a Chevy.
And it does make one think that price matters, in spite of what Synn and Doug say. Is it a coincidence that the only new body is also the cheapest one at that spec by a wide margin?
Edmund
-
Just saw this. http://money.cnn.com/2014/10/30/technology/sony/index.html?hpt=hp_t2
I did not realize how bad Sony was doing; is the chip manufacturing still controlled by Sony proper, or is it a spin off now?
If it is still owned by Sony proper, it might be a stretch to think they are investing a large amount of money to develop a full 645 chip that very very few people would use.
However who knows? Maybe they will sell that devision too; it would be very valuable to say Dalsa or Truesense. (But I would prefer Dalsa, they seem to be the better innovator between the two.)
-
Just saw this. http://money.cnn.com/2014/10/30/technology/sony/index.html?hpt=hp_t2
I did not realize how bad Sony was doing; is the chip manufacturing still controlled by Sony proper, or is it a spin off now?
If it is still owned by Sony proper, it might be a stretch to think they are investing a large amount of money to develop a full 645 chip that very very few people would use.
However who knows? Maybe they will sell that devision too; it would be very valuable to say Dalsa or Truesense. (But I would prefer Dalsa, they seem to be the better innovator between the two.)
AFAIK Sony practically own the camera sensor chip market now. This division has seen huge growth, and is one of Sony's rare profit centers.
Edmund
-
"The company's Hollywood studio is in good shape, as are its imaging and finance units. "
If Sony were to stop making chips, Nikon would die a horrible death. It's a proven money maker, just doesn't make as much money as copiers.
-
And it does make one think that price matters, in spite of what ...............................
It doesn't matter to me that a camera, car, pair of shoes sells more than another one. In fact I'm less inclined to buy what everyone buys, because the world is commoditized enough already.
My point is you pontificate continually about price ... of camera, photography, photography instruction.
Actually my second point is why does a less expensive higher volume camera have anything to do with one that is higher priced and lower volume, especially when they have different business models and clientele.
Actually if I wanted that cmos sony look, I'd just buy an A7R or a D800 for a lot less and be done with it.
Personally I've always liked pentax cameras and would have bought a D had it tethered and had a larger buffer, but if I had bought one, I'd be a little ticked off that the Z tethering suite wouldn't work with the 645D because 8 grand for a 2 year old camera body isn't peanuts.
To take a page from your book, my Contax/Phase systems are better in price than the pentax, especially the D, as Phase continues to support the p series backs that fit on contax with service and software.
Obviously Pentax doesn't, so I guess costs is in the eyes of the beholder.
But my question, are you going to buy a 645Z?
IMO
BC
-
Edmund, find something you love and use it.
I think he already has?
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/fc/Computer_keyboard.gif)
::)
-
"I think he already has?" +
-
I think he already has?
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/fc/Computer_keyboard.gif)
::)
;D
E.
-
I think he already has?
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/fc/Computer_keyboard.gif)
::)
+1
-
+1
+2
-
But my question, are you going to buy a 645Z?
BC
That's the question indeed. I could (just) if I really want to. I see much more in 4:3 and square than in 3:2, and have always dislike 35mm DSLRs. An MF camera is just the right tool for me. It used to be the Mamiya 6, Fuji 690s and the Hassy V. I have yet to replicate my love of any of those systems digitaly.
The 645z is a remarkable tool in many respects, but, for $8K, I'm held back by three things:
(i) the lack of electronic first curtain shutter, bc I believe that the shutter still degrades the IQ when working at the shutter speeds common to landscape and related work that I do a lot of, even on the best tripods. Leaf shutters or EFC solve this. As it is, I fear (though have not tested) that the D810 will be the functional equal of the 645z on many shots.
(ii) The lack of LS lenses limits usability for location strobe work.I have the 75 and 135 LS lenses, but they are manual focus and require manual re-cocking bw shots - a stop-gap solution at best.
(iii) Tethering is unproven. My next camera will be used much more for studio portraiture, and stable, quick, professional tethering is a major want (this one may be checked off when we actually get to try IT2)
and
(iv) (this is a bit silly, I know) but I believe there are a couple big announcements in the near offing. These may include a mirrorless implementation of this chip, as well as the release of Sony's next-gen FF 35mm top-end chip. I neither need nor want to drop $8K a month before this happens.
As I said in the first review, the 645z is OH SO CLOSE.
So here's another actual 645z shot, just 'cause.
- N.
-
(iv) but I believe there are a couple big announcements in the near offing. These may include a mirrorless implementation of this chip
So true, and yet, no matter how long one waits, there's always something just around the corner. For me, I'd love a mirrorless - especially if I can adapt lenses to it.
But on the other hand, it was raining cats and balls earlier today, and a Z would have been perfectly fine out in it.
-
At this point in time, the only back that I am seriously considering is the CFV-50c at 970,000 Yen.
I have the body and lenses and the Hassy V is IMHO, together with the Rolleiflex, the only MF camera with a shooting experience significantly different from a DSLR.
That combined with the possibility to use live view on a soon to be available Cambo Actus MF with one additional top Rodenstock digital LF style lens... that is starting to offer something appealing at a "reasonnable" price point.
Now, the 3 un-answered questions probably are:
- is live view really usable on the CFV-50c?
- what amount of tilt/shift can be used with CFV-50c and the Roddy 90mm HR Digaron SW?
- is the Cambo Actus MF accurate enough for perfect focusing?
The fact that these answers may be impossible to get unless I try myself are likely to kill the deal though. ;)
Cheers,
Bernard
-
Info on tethering quality should be available in due course.
I do wonder whether EFC can be added by a firmware upgrade.
Edmund
That's the question indeed. I could (just) if I really want to. I see much more in 4:3 and square than in 3:2, and have always dislike 35mm DSLRs. An MF camera is just the right tool for me. It used to be the Mamiya 6, Fuji 690s and the Hassy V. I have yet to replicate my love of any of those systems digitaly.
The 645z is a remarkable tool in many respects, but, for $8K, I'm held back by three things:
(i) the lack of electronic first curtain shutter, bc I believe that the shutter still degrades the IQ when working at the shutter speeds common to landscape and related work that I do a lot of, even on the best tripods. Leaf shutters or EFC solve this. As it is, I fear (though have not tested) that the D810 will be the functional equal of the 645z on many shots.
(ii) The lack of LS lenses limits usability for location strobe work.I have the 75 and 135 LS lenses, but they are manual focus and require manual re-cocking bw shots - a stop-gap solution at best.
(iii) Tethering is unproven. My next camera will be used much more for studio portraiture, and stable, quick, professional tethering is a major want (this one may be checked off when we actually get to try IT2)
and
(iv) (this is a bit silly, I know) but I believe there are a couple big announcements in the near offing. These may include a mirrorless implementation of this chip, as well as the release of Sony's next-gen FF 35mm top-end chip. I neither need nor want to drop $8K a month before this happens.
As I said in the first review, the 645z is OH SO CLOSE.
So here's another actual 645z shot, just 'cause.
- N.
-
Nick,
Nice picture!
I feel your analysis is point on, just some observations:
I would say that a MF back with live view works well as mirrorless camera, although an electronic viewfinder may be an advantage.
The first electronic curtain would be good on the Pentax. There is an issue I guess that a first electronic curtain needs to be synchronised with a mechanical second one. On MF DSLRs it is less important as they mostly use leaf shutters.
Leaf shutters are an advantage if short sync times are needed for electronic flash.
I am somewhat surprised that we don't have 54 MP technology on full frame 135, as the present 24 MP APS-C technology would give something like 54 MP. Things are similar on the Canon side of the cabin.
But, 46 and 54 MP is rumoured from Sony and those rumors are high probability. My guess is that Sony leaks information as a part of their marketing. Canon is also rumoured to have new technology around 50 MP. So I guess we are going to see around 50 MP cameras announced in something like six months. There are some rumours that the new chips may be of non bayer design.
It wouldn't surprise me to much if Sony would make an MFD back. They have everything need inside at hand, sensor, image processor and display technology. Ricoh could also do it, essentially just removing the camera part of the P645Z. The reason they don't make it is probably that the market is to small, and developing that market would come at significant cost.
On the other hand, the technical camera market seems to be developing, with many manufacturers building cameras and affordable high quality backs would probably be an injection of health in that business.
Best regards
Erik
That's the question indeed. I could (just) if I really want to. I see much more in 4:3 and square than in 3:2, and have always dislike 35mm DSLRs. An MF camera is just the right tool for me. It used to be the Mamiya 6, Fuji 690s and the Hassy V. I have yet to replicate my love of any of those systems digitaly.
The 645z is a remarkable tool in many respects, but, for $8K, I'm held back by three things:
(i) the lack of electronic first curtain shutter, bc I believe that the shutter still degrades the IQ when working at the shutter speeds common to landscape and related work that I do a lot of, even on the best tripods. Leaf shutters or EFC solve this. As it is, I fear (though have not tested) that the D810 will be the functional equal of the 645z on many shots.
(ii) The lack of LS lenses limits usability for location strobe work.I have the 75 and 135 LS lenses, but they are manual focus and require manual re-cocking bw shots - a stop-gap solution at best.
(iii) Tethering is unproven. My next camera will be used much more for studio portraiture, and stable, quick, professional tethering is a major want (this one may be checked off when we actually get to try IT2)
and
(iv) (this is a bit silly, I know) but I believe there are a couple big announcements in the near offing. These may include a mirrorless implementation of this chip, as well as the release of Sony's next-gen FF 35mm top-end chip. I neither need nor want to drop $8K a month before this happens.
As I said in the first review, the 645z is OH SO CLOSE.
So here's another actual 645z shot, just 'cause.
- N.
-
It wouldn't surprise me to much if Sony would make an MFD back. They have everything need inside at hand, sensor, image processor and display technology. Ricoh could also do it, essentially just removing the camera part of the P645Z. The reason they don't make it is probably that the market is to small, and developing that market would come at significant cost.
Erik,
My guess is that one key reason they don't do it is that their business model is based on the selling of a full camera system, including lenses.
The margin they make selling the 645Z at the current price point is probably fairly low.
Cheers,
Bernard
-
That's the question indeed. I could (just) if I really want to. I see much more in 4:3 and square than in 3:2, and have always dislike 35mm DSLRs. An MF camera is just the right tool for me. It used to be the Mamiya 6, Fuji 690s and the Hassy V. I have yet to replicate my love of any of those systems digitaly.
The 645z is a remarkable tool in many respects, but, for $8K, I'm held back by three things:
(i) the lack of electronic first curtain shutter, bc I believe that the shutter still degrades the IQ when working at the shutter speeds common to landscape and related work that I do a lot of, even on the best tripods. Leaf shutters or EFC solve this. As it is, I fear (though have not tested) that the D810 will be the functional equal of the 645z on many shots.
(ii) The lack of LS lenses limits usability for location strobe work.I have the 75 and 135 LS lenses, but they are manual focus and require manual re-cocking bw shots - a stop-gap solution at best.
(iii) Tethering is unproven. My next camera will be used much more for studio portraiture, and stable, quick, professional tethering is a major want (this one may be checked off when we actually get to try IT2)
and
(iv) (this is a bit silly, I know) but I believe there are a couple big announcements in the near offing. These may include a mirrorless implementation of this chip, as well as the release of Sony's next-gen FF 35mm top-end chip. I neither need nor want to drop $8K a month before this happens.
As I said in the first review, the 645z is OH SO CLOSE.
So here's another actual 645z shot, just 'cause.
- N.
Completely agree with you Nick.
-
The margin they make selling the 645Z at the current price point is probably fairly low.
Cheers,
Bernard
Isn't it simpler to assume that they make the same standard margin as they would selling any body?
And that Pentax dealers also get the standard sales margin for a camera body?
I mean, if they wanted to, they could price the 645Z at $11K instead of $10K and it wouldn't really impact the *comparative* pricepoint with reference to Phase who are at 3x the Pentax. So as *current* competition is clearly not driving their price, why not assume they have their standard margin factored in?
I would think that when you price a commodity you price with a standard margin because otherwise you create an entry point for the competition who can too easily undercut you, leading to a later price war as you need to lower your price to recover some sales. While when you price a luxury you can price as high as you want until you notice that buyers walk away in disgust.
Edmund
-
AFAIK Sony practically own the camera sensor chip market now. This division has seen huge growth, and is one of Sony's rare profit centers.
Edmund
The Imaging Division of Sony seems to be doing well, some of the other ones as well.
It is the mainly the Mobile business unit that drags everything down.
You can see the figures broken down by business unit here:
http://www.sony.net/SonyInfo/IR/financial/fr/14q2_sony.pdf
-
Though I see the appeal of a camera that combines a large CMOS sensor (meaning larger than 36x24mm) with a good EVF, eliminating the vibrations from a big reflex mirror and all that, maybe with these larger format cameras, an inexpensive first step would be offering a good accessory EVF for an existing bigger than 36x24 format SLR system.
I mean, no serious MF photographer tolerates the horrible flat lighting of a hot-shoe mounted flash, so the hot-shoe is available, right?!
P. S. The 645Z could mount an EVF to the extra tripod mount; whichever one is currently on the side, depending on whether the camera is in "landscape" or "portrait" orientation.
-
I mean, no serious MF photographer tolerates the horrible flat lighting of a hot-shoe mounted flash, so the hot-shoe is available, right?!
Nope - where would the PocketWizard or similar trigger go ?
-
Though I see the appeal of a camera that combines a large CMOS sensor (meaning larger than 36x24mm) with a good EVF, eliminating the vibrations from a big reflex mirror and all that, maybe with these larger format cameras, an inexpensive first step would be offering a good accessory EVF for an existing bigger than 36x24 format SLR system.
I've actually been wanting to try this with a feed from the HDMI port, which puts out about double the LCD res. I find the LCD margin from live-view. Not as 100% useless as the 800e, but not great at all. Not a fix for shutter-vibrations, but perhaps workable for focusing.
- N.
-
Hi,
An EVF combined with an intelligently designed camera and EFCS is pretty vibration free. Also it can have a very short reaction time. Without the EFCS the shutter needs to be closed before exposure.
The second curtain obviously also causes vibrations, but it seems to be much less of a problem.
Best regards
Erik
I've actually been wanting to try this with a feed from the HDMI port, which puts out about double the LCD res. I find the LCD margin from live-view. Not as 100% useless as the 800e, but not great at all. Not a fix for shutter-vibrations, but perhaps workable for focusing.
- N.