Luminous Landscape Forum
Equipment & Techniques => Medium Format / Film / Digital Backs – and Large Sensor Photography => Topic started by: narikin on September 14, 2008, 12:59:07 pm
-
the amazing technology coming out in consumer level cameras, leaves me questioning when we are going to see our first real 21st century MF digital camera?
This for example:
http://www.dpreview.com/news/0809/08091202...onic_DMC_G1.asp (http://www.dpreview.com/news/0809/08091202panasonic_DMC_G1.asp)
has no more mirror - but uses continuous 'live view' in an electronic viewfinder to show exactly what the sensor sees, and will cost under $1000. So - for our many thousands in MF shouldn't we expect the same level of innovation, rather than the same 1980's design film camera with the lenses now re-branded 'digital'?
no mirror = simpler camera, no mirror box, less moving parts, lens design freedom with great wide-angle lenses instead of compromised retrofocal designs - Biogon rather than Distagon style, better tilt-shifts, etc, etc.
so where are the designers for a radically new MF camera? I want full time live view with electronic finder, and the ability to instantly zoom to 100% to check focus on any part of my image, plus multi zone AF, with Canon like levels of customisation... Hasselblad H3 and the new Rollei-Leaf or Mamiya options just don't bring us forward much from 20 years ago!
-
How are we supposed to focus manually without an optical viewfinder? LCD screens are not nearly good enough.
-
How are we supposed to focus manually without an optical viewfinder? LCD screens are not nearly good enough.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=221397\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Video has been focusing off lcd's forever and even the lower prosumer models have a quick magnifier and peaking for focus.
If you have the Nikon D3 you can tell that lcd's are not that much of a leap, if any from most optical ground glass (plastic?).
I think it won't be long until we will see some major change in cameras, probably coming from Japan.
Now they all offer some form of Live View, next they have video and I'm sure the next leap is to either bypass completely or offer the option to bypass the optical viewfinder.
I played around with the live view on the 1ds3 and it is possible to manually focus even hand held.
After all it's all relative. The Contax never has that pop in focus look, though it only takes a few minutes of working it to know when you are in focus.
I don't know if we will ever have one camera that does everything perfectly, but I do know that even with the 1ds3, that is one camera that covers a lot of territory.
Now that Canon has real competition from Sony and Nikon I think we'll see changes in leaps rather than baby steps.
JR
-
Video has been focusing off lcd's forever and even the lower prosumer models have a quick magnifier and peaking for focus.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=221399\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Irrelevant. Consumer video resolution is so low that the LCD screen can nearly match it.
How are you supposed to know if your 60 MP image is in critical focus on a 640x480 screen? Not possible.
-
Irrelevant. Consumer video resolution is so low that the LCD screen can nearly match it.
How are you supposed to know if your 60 MP image is in critical focus on a 640x480 screen? Not possible.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=221401\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I'd suggest trying it.
I have a 1ds3 in my hands right now and on live view you can manually focus with a 50mm 1.2 from across the studio.
Actually, depending on the contrast and distance there isn't that much of a difference manually focusing through the lcd than their is the optical viewfinder, other than at a distance the live view can be more accurate. If there is contrast or backlght the focus just pops on the lcd due to the contrast change.
The Nikon lcd is even more detailed and this is just the start of where these cameras can go.
If medium format had the portable live view feature of the Canons or could shoot video like the newer cameras that are coming out it would be a stop the presses moment.
JR
-
As far as I'm concerned, the Afi/Hy6 is the 21 Century first true medium format camera.
Video will never match real life, hence electronic viewfinders wll always yield inferior resolution and refresh to optical. At least in this dimension and in this millenium.
Although some people may eventually prefer electronic finders for other reasons.
Eduardo
Irrelevant. Consumer video resolution is so low that the LCD screen can nearly match it.
How are you supposed to know if your 60 MP image is in critical focus on a 640x480 screen? Not possible.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=221401\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
-
It seems that Panasonic uses the LCD viewfinders of their top of the line video cams in their new DMC G1. I really can't wait to check this one out.
No mirror slap, no noise ...
-
"If it aint broke, don't fix it"
-
How are you supposed to know if your 60 MP image is in critical focus on a 640x480 screen? Not possible.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=221401\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
How are you supposed to know if your 60mp (3meter by 2 meter?) image is critical focus by looking through a 645mm hole !
Not to mention the mechanical errors in alligning the chip with the mirror
The future of focus has to be a decent LCD screen and inteligent zooming of details
I was playing with live view in Exposure today with the little zoom boxes - now thats a way to focus - way better than my eye
Take the mirror away and lose its vibration and the requirement for retrofocal lenses that make wides so hard to construct
It is nearly possible to use the D3 with live view (although it is designed by dummies because it doesnt twist - so you might as well look through the finder - you cant use it to help you shoot over your head or off the floor)
The zoom function in the Live view of the D3 is amazing for tripod shooting (but pointless because the D3 is not a tripod camera)
I would love my sinar to have d3 quality live view on an Iphone size screen - or just decent quality live view at all for that matter
I want to drag my focus point anywhere on the image - even the D3 doesnt do that
And the real thing that cuts resolution is poor focus accuary 60mp out of focus does not resolve as much as 11mp in focus
Roll on a 21C camera hopefully at 1985 prices
SMM
-
As far as I'm concerned, the Afi/Hy6 is the 21 Century first true medium format camera.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=221404\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
The Hy6 is pretty 1980s as far as I am concerned - ONE FOCUS POINT
The whole thinking behind the HY6 is no step on from any other MF camera - nicely implemented maybe - but the thoughts design is 1990s
Of course the designers of the HY6 didnt actually get the chance to think - thier breif was to stuff an old rollei in a nice new box
no R+D budget for anything else
C21 design is all about the chip talking back to the camera and driving its funcitions , AF, Exposure, ISO etc
----------
I was shooting today with my D3 in a waterhousing with a 14mm - the focus kept locking onto drips on the dome port or bubbles as they floated by - losing my focus on the subject
The bottom line is I will go back to gaffer taping the focus to a hyperfocal guess - it will beat all current technology
Now why cant I tell my camera 'focus between' 2m and 5m , or 4.37m and 8.21m if I want - I know there are switches on super tele lenses -but the 14 was not a super tele last time I looked - SWITCHES ?? - thats 60s stuff
I want to write or download my own firmware setting my own specs for everything - meter wiegting, when auto ISO ramps up - whatever - thats C21
S
-
How are you supposed to know if your 60mp (3meter by 2 meter?) image is critical focus by looking through a 645mm hole !
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=221410\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Well I don't have a 60MP back, but I don't have much difficulty focusing at f2 with my WLF and 22MP back. The resolution of the optical finder is very high.
Are you really going to start fooling around with liew view mode while shooting models?
-
Well I don't have a 60MP back, but I don't have much difficulty focusing at f2 with my WLF and 22MP back. The resolution of the optical finder is very high.
Are you really going to start fooling around with liew view mode while shooting models?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=221416\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
No I want decent multipoint AF for models !
I have a great deal of difficulty manually focusing to be honest - which is strange because I rarely used AF when shooting film
My conclusion is that my eyes are good for about 16mp in a hole that size - no way 60mp
Of course currently looking through a H1 or HY6 no doubt - whacks the vieing experience of a G9 whatever
But we are rambling about the future here...
SMM
-
How are we supposed to focus manually without an optical viewfinder? LCD screens are not nearly good enough.
don't knock it till you try it ...
(just make sure it's a good screen, if an when you do)
and depending on your application, a good LCD screen
can be as good as an optical VF, if not better.
-
This for example:
http://www.dpreview.com/news/0809/08091202...onic_DMC_G1.asp (http://www.dpreview.com/news/0809/08091202panasonic_DMC_G1.asp)
has no more mirror - but uses continuous 'live view' in an electronic viewfinder to show exactly what the sensor sees, and will cost under $1000.
Just about every digicam has this and EVFs are horrible.
-
"If it aint broke, don't fix it"
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=221408\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
-
"If it aint broke, don't fix it"
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=221408\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
thats what the people who use film said.
-
thats what the people who use film said.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=221429\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Very poor analogy.
Some guys here remind me of the self-appointed prophets who predicted that by the year 2000 we would all have robots doing our work for us, and we'd be living in space. Hmmm...
(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v120/mdiederi/buildings/renders/jetsons.jpg)
-
All this is a moot point.
By the time that something like this would be designed by a MF company, Nikon/Canon/Sony/Red will long have gobbled up the MF market.
It's silly to even consider.
If you want a MF camera, just buy one today, and start shooting. My bet is that what you see on the marketplace right now is about as advanced as you're going to get. If a CCD could produce really good ASA 800 or 1600, it would already being doing by now. It's simply not going to happen. So leave this in the hands of CMOS.
If you want a George Jetson camera, just wait for Red to design it. Or Nikon. Or Canon. It's simply too expensive to do what you want, for the tiny volume of MF marketplace to justify it. You've got to have the Canon/Nikon/Sony volume to do this.
I'm just saying, my prediction is that MF Digital is now peaking. If you like what you see out there, buy one and get to work. (And buy a back-up too, so you don't get caught short). Or just keep dreaming, and shoot no photographs.
-
How are we supposed to focus manually without an optical viewfinder? LCD screens are not nearly good enough.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=221397\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
instant live view zoomed to 100% would surely be much superior to any optical screen.
press one button to 100% zoom, check focus with absolute certainty, one touch back to full screen, shoot away - voila!
-
If a CCD could produce really good ASA 800 or 1600, it would already being doing by now.
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a] (http://index.php?act=findpost&pid=221433\")
...and it is. [a href=\"http://forum.getdpi.com/forum/showthread.php?t=1683]http://forum.getdpi.com/forum/showthread.php?t=1683[/url]
-
instant live view zoomed to 100% would surely be much superior to any optical screen.
press one button to 100% zoom, check focus with absolute certainty, one touch back to full screen, shoot away - voila!
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=221436\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Great for still photography but not people.
-
All this is a moot point.
If you want a George Jetson camera, just wait for Red to design it. Or Nikon. Or Canon. It's simply too expensive to do what you want, for the tiny volume of MF marketplace to justify it. You've got to have the Canon/Nikon/Sony volume to do this.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=221433\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
To me so much of this is project/client dependent.
I have some clients with whom we do work in the George Jetson age. They review all the images on line, make retouching requests, every step is electronic and since the delivery times have gone from overnight to overminutes, the process is almost virtual.
Last week I had three projects in retouching and just fielding the requests, changes and additions made me feel like an IT guy.
Same with shooting. Who would have thought 10 years ago selects would be made on the day of the shoot, or even during the lunch break?
I have a few other clients that work very traiditiional. They want hard copy on everything, swop proofs and the files for delivery. Obviously that system takes longer and is much more expensive and for those clients if I wanted I could shoot film.
Regardless of where anything is today, we all know technology will move it forward and probably much faster than most of us want to admit.
JR
P.S. Today I am in Dallas, writing this from the pool and working my NY computer on remote desktop. I have I chat turned on and can see my wife walk through the frame. It may not be George Jetson, but it also isn't Fred Flintstone.
(http://www.russellrutherford.com/nydesktop.jpg)
-
To me so much of this is project/client dependent.
I have some clients with whom we do work in the George Jetson age. They review all the images on line, make retouching requests, every step is electronic and since the delivery times have gone from overnight to overminutes, the process is almost virtual.
Last week I had three projects in retouching and just fielding the requests, changes and additions made me feel like an IT guy.
Same with shooting. Who would have thought 10 years ago selects would be made on the day of the shoot, or even during the lunch break?
I have a few other clients that work very traiditiional. They want hard copy on everything, swop proofs and the files for delivery. Obviously that system takes longer and is much more expensive and for those clients if I wanted I could shoot film.
Regardless of where anything is today, we all know technology will move it forward and probably much faster than most of us want to admit.
JR
P.S. Today I am in Dallas, writing this from the pool and working my NY computer on remote desktop. I have I chat turned on and can see my wife walk through the frame. It may not be George Jetson, but it also isn't Fred Flintstone.
-
Great for still photography but not people.
works well for people, too ...
-
WOW James, aside from being gifted Photographer, you are Perfectionist!!!
I'm so far behind....
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=221452\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Thank you, but not really.
What I have learned is how to survive and use all of this to move forward.
Let's be realistic. This is all client dependent. If it wasn't then most of us would still be shooting film.
They want their images right, they want them now, they want them cost effective, they want everything smooth and easy and I have no issues with that because that's pretty much what we all want.
Live view focus, well it works. Do I use it, not often but I can and I can also see where it can lead to more opportunities in a single camera that can shoot video, or have even more accurate focusing.
I want medium format to survive but they seem to move at a slower pace than the dslrs and regardless of what you use, or how much you like the cameras you own, if a big gig comes in and somebody says they want ____________ you're probably going to do what it takes to give them __________.
Still, I do think a lot of this is exciting and opens up a lot of opportunity.
The downside is it's time consuming and takes a lot of investment to stay on top of the learning curve.
Regardless, in my view we are in the George Jetson age. I listen to radio from around the world, watch my favorite movies on my computer, I've approved a retouched image on an I-phone.
In Tokyo we sold an editorial gig using an Ipod touch and an Iphone as a portfolio.
I don't see this stuff as replacing the human element or human contact but more enhancing it.
Showing a portfolio on an I-pod may not be as impressive or elegant as showing a bound printed book, but it's better than showing nothing at all.
We've just completed 1/2 of the pre production on a large gig to be shot in 3 countries in Asia and at this stage all of the pre productions is by long distance.
We've sent so much information to agency, had some many back and forths on e-mail, web galleries, etc. etc. that we are now at the point we know each other.
Even with this we will still personally meet this week as nothing is better than personal face time, but the meeting won't start out cold because we already have laid the ground work.
The meeting will be reduced by 1/2 just because of the George Jetson stuff we could present.
All of this was the talk of dreams even a few years ago and it will continue to go forward.
I am camera and brand agnostic. I'll use what ever works and whatever gives me the results I believe the clients expect. Hopefully more.
Given my personal opinion I would rather see one of the smaller companies like Sinar, Leaf, Phase or Hasselblad lead the way. I think of any group they should know more about what a professional photographer needs.
Then again, they seem to have a mindset of what we are asking for today is all we need and just as the I-pod has replaced the Walkman the next cameras may replace everything we use today, but better still may open up possiblities we can't even imagine today.
Years ago when I shot my first digital job I sat in the studio and thought how the "hell am I going to show this to the client?"
I never imagined that a few years later we not only be showing the client the images on set, or on dedicated urls, but even delivering high rez imagery at the click of a zip file.
Can't wait to see what comes next.
JR
-
i have pretty much given up trying to predict what and how we will play 10 years form now....i have been digital for more then 15 years now and when i got my first digicam i had no clue how much that would change the workflow (actually i don't think i used that term then...)...
for me the camera to truly break the mold will have to be neither a DSLR or MF....that would be the first step....getting rid of all film associations....a camera that would be made with one thing in mind....digital capture and only that.....
there are so many interesting ideas that have shown up in differnt cameras over the last years and so many never really caught on.....
the biggest problem is that the companies that bring out the latest are deeply invested in their format.....nikon/canon would risk so much by putting out something NOT DSLR and the MF gang is just trying to stay alive....
i use video conferencing every day....my nieces and nephew use it every day...even my mom does....i show my printed portfolio very rarely these days.....my iphone amazes me every day.....i can shoot 800asa cleaner then any 400 film i have ever seen (at several frames/sec)....i started storing my files offline....
i could go into what i would really like to see, or what is possible or what might be......the best things i can't even imagine....the worst example:usb tether speed of the dsIII on mac.....we are still held back by amazingly ridiculous problems...every day....so i really try to enjoy what actually works TODAY.....
-
Can't wait to see what comes next.
JR
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=221458\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I think this sums up a very well written post on how it is to work in this environment today =)
Good post James.
-
If I made a list of what I would like it probably won't happen, but here goes;
1. A universal lens mount like PL for film. One that covers 35mm lenses and one for medium format where all the functions like AF, stop down, eXIF info works. If not a universal mount, then a lens mount that is interchangeable.
2. Universal mounts for the digital backs. The same Leaf or Phase back that fits on an HY6 will fit on a Contax, a Mamiya a Bronica or a Hasselblad. This would make changing cameras or backs a lot easier on the wallet.
Buying a new Rollei would be something you could move into but still have your Mamiya, Contax, Blad as backups. Also allow for the things each of these cameras do well. Maybe a Mamiya or Contax for focal plane high speed shutter work, a blad or a hy6 for faster sync.
3. Native higher iso with some kind of nd insert. The back starts at 400 or 800 iso but comes with a .3 .6 .9 insert that doesn't effect the optical view. This gives the 50 iso guys what they want and allows for more low light use.
4. High resolution lcd focus. It can also have an optical viewfinder but optical view is not all it's cracked up to be. If you look through a Canon at f 1.2 the optical view will show a lot more depth of field than the actual image will have.
The Contax doesn't pop in and out of focus, the H series blad's viewfinder has a bend to it that is not in the actual file and so on. Maybe a system like the red where you can even add different lcd's all the way up to 4x5. Also the lcds should be adjustable and not just in brightness but in color and tone so we can get closer to matching them to the computer.
5. Software that reads the file in it's native look. If you ever put a Canon file into DPP then put it into Lightroom it's like it was shot at completely different settings. If you go to the trouble to change the settings of your camera it should reflect that in the software.
6. A standard file format. Let's make it easy on ourselves. If your working in LC11 for your medium format back, LC11 should read a Canon, Nikon or Leica file. Same with C1, etc. etc. That way we can keep our workflow continuous.
7. Autofocus that works. Even the Nikon D3 which is dead on fast and accurate, the focus points are all clustered around the center. Give us the ability to move them anywhere on the frame. Better yet, how about an external focusing device, something that looks like a seconic spot meter that an assistant can focus with. You say focus on the eyes and he/she points on the eyes and it frees the photographer to frame the shot not worrying or thinking about focus.
Something like the cinema guys with a focus puller, but is more automatic and triangulates from camera to focus device to subject.
8. Forget about film formats. Film's dead. I know some people like it, some people swear by it, that's fine because film cameras cost 20 bucks and I guess Fuji will keep making film long after mankind has disappeared from the planet, but for digital film formats make no sense. Probably a chip the size of a p30 is the perfect size as long as the lenses are applicable to the format. Once again an LCD viewfinder would go a long way to changing how we look through the camera. Instead of seeing a cropped down version, we would see a real "full frame" whatever that means and if the sensor is a high enough resolution and had good noise characteristics we could just flip a switch, like on the video cameras and go from 4:3 to 2:3 and only see what we wanted to see.
9. More lenses. Maybe sub this stuff out to Sigma. It seems they can make new lenses by the hour that are fast, autofocus and come in any size, speed and mount imaginable.
The lens I need for my P30 and P21 is a 100mm to 110 mm. There just isn't any autofocus lenses in that size for digital medium format other than Hasselblad (once again whatever medium format is because as of today there are 6 sizes of sensors that are sold in the market.
In fact I need a 100 to 110 so much I'm thinking about switching the mount of my p30 to an H system since hasselblad is the only company that makes a 100 to 110 that is fast and has autofocus. (if I'm wrong on this I'm sure somebody will point it out).
10. Understand why Canon took 2/3's of the professional market. It's not just costs, its ease of buying and ease of use. You can buy a Canon anywhere in fact they are so prevalent that you could travel across the world and not worry about a backup knowing you could walk into any city, any store and buy a new one. Heck, I saw a 1ds3 for sale in Coeur d'Alene Idaho. Consequently I look at the HY6 and though I find it very interesting it is also a camera that scares me to death. What happens if someone drops your lens, or the body. Where do you rent, where do you buy? All of us have too much on the line to worry about having a backup so the only option is to double everything. Once it gets into rental in the major markets that will help, but still traveling and shooting means backups.
Doubling everything in medium format, especially for the Rollei and full lenses puts you in Snoop Dog money.
11. How bout starting from scratch? I know a lot of people here get their knickers in a twist if someone mentions a "video" camera, but if Red can start from nothing and still be in the price range of the top end medium format cameras, why can't someone do that for stills. I keep hearing the market is small but somebody needs to tell that to Art Center, Brooks and RIT becuase they are pumping out still photographers by the zillions.
-
I would add a fast enough built in wifi transmitter, and I think we will definitely see one in less than 5 years.
If I made a list of what I would like it probably won't happen, but here goes;
1. A universal lens mount like PL for film. One that covers 35mm lenses and one for medium format where all the functions like AF, stop down, eXIF info works. If not a universal mount, then a lens mount that is interchangeable.
2. Universal mounts for the digital backs. The same Leaf or Phase back that fits on an HY6 will fit on a Contax, a Mamiya a Bronica or a Hasselblad. This would make changing cameras or backs a lot easier on the wallet.
Buying a new Rollei would be something you could move into but still have your Mamiya, Contax, Blad as backups. Also allow for the things each of these cameras do well. Maybe a Mamiya or Contax for focal plane high speed shutter work, a blad or a hy6 for faster sync.
3. Native higher iso with some kind of nd insert. The back starts at 400 or 800 iso but comes with a .3 .6 .9 insert that doesn't effect the optical view. This gives the 50 iso guys what they want and allows for more low light use.
4. High resolution lcd focus. It can also have an optical viewfinder but optical view is not all it's cracked up to be. If you look through a Canon at f 1.2 the optical view will show a lot more depth of field than the actual image will have.
The Contax doesn't pop in and out of focus, the H series blad's viewfinder has a bend to it that is not in the actual file and so on. Maybe a system like the red where you can even add different lcd's all the way up to 4x5. Also the lcds should be adjustable and not just in brightness but in color and tone so we can get closer to matching them to the computer.
5. Software that reads the file in it's native look. If you ever put a Canon file into DPP then put it into Lightroom it's like it was shot at completely different settings. If you go to the trouble to change the settings of your camera it should reflect that in the software.
6. A standard file format. Let's make it easy on ourselves. If your working in LC11 for your medium format back, LC11 should read a Canon, Nikon or Leica file. Same with C1, etc. etc. That way we can keep our workflow continuous.
7. Autofocus that works. Even the Nikon D3 which is dead on fast and accurate, the focus points are all clustered around the center. Give us the ability to move them anywhere on the frame. Better yet, how about an external focusing device, something that looks like a seconic spot meter that an assistant can focus with. You say focus on the eyes and he/she points on the eyes and it frees the photographer to frame the shot not worrying or thinking about focus.
Something like the cinema guys with a focus puller, but is more automatic and triangulates from camera to focus device to subject.
8. Forget about film formats. Film's dead. I know some people like it, some people swear by it, that's fine because film cameras cost 20 bucks and I guess Fuji will keep making film long after mankind has disappeared from the planet, but for digital film formats make no sense. Probably a chip the size of a p30 is the perfect size as long as the lenses are applicable to the format. Once again an LCD viewfinder would go a long way to changing how we look through the camera. Instead of seeing a cropped down version, we would see a real "full frame" whatever that means and if the sensor is a high enough resolution and had good noise characteristics we could just flip a switch, like on the video cameras and go from 4:3 to 2:3 and only see what we wanted to see.
9. More lenses. Maybe sub this stuff out to Sigma. It seems they can make new lenses by the hour that are fast, autofocus and come in any size, speed and mount imaginable.
The lens I need for my P30 and P21 is a 100mm to 110 mm. There just isn't any autofocus lenses in that size for digital medium format other than Hasselblad (once again whatever medium format is because as of today there are 6 sizes of sensors that are sold in the market.
In fact I need a 100 to 110 so much I'm thinking about switching the mount of my p30 to an H system since hasselblad is the only company that makes a 100 to 110 that is fast and has autofocus. (if I'm wrong on this I'm sure somebody will point it out).
10. Understand why Canon took 2/3's of the professional market. It's not just costs, its ease of buying and ease of use. You can buy a Canon anywhere in fact they are so prevalent that you could travel across the world and not worry about a backup knowing you could walk into any city, any store and buy a new one. Heck, I saw a 1ds3 for sale in Coeur d'Alene Idaho. Consequently I look at the HY6 and though I find it very interesting it is also a camera that scares me to death. What happens if someone drops your lens, or the body. Where do you rent, where do you buy? All of us have too much on the line to worry about having a backup so the only option is to double everything. Once it gets into rental in the major markets that will help, but still traveling and shooting means backups.
Doubling everything in medium format, especially for the Rollei and full lenses puts you in Snoop Dog money.
11. How bout starting from scratch? I know a lot of people here get their knickers in a twist if someone mentions a "video" camera, but if Red can start from nothing and still be in the price range of the top end medium format cameras, why can't someone do that for stills. I keep hearing the market is small but somebody needs to tell that to Art Center, Brooks and RIT becuase they are pumping out still photographers by the zillions.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=221588\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
-
1. A universal lens mount
Agreed
2. Universal mounts for the digital backs.
If you have a sinar back this is the case already (no bronny though which is a shame because we hve one as an ornament)
3. Native higher iso with some kind of nd insert.
Insert - 1990s thinking - just 5-5000 ISO dialable in
5 ISO - for the 20 second exposure on the beach !
4. High resolution lcd focus. Maybe a system like the red where you can even add different lcd's all the way up to 4x5.
The bigger screen shoud show the whole image plus a 100% zoom of your focus point
5. If you go to the trouble to change the settings of your camera it should reflect that in the software.
More like load your look onto the camera
6. A standard file format.
C1 does my sinar and D3
7. Autofocus that works.
Indeed
8. Forget about film formats.
Square with dialable in masking - no rotating of back or camera
9. More lenses.
More is not neccecarily good - eg I would swap most of my nikkors for a 24-100 f2 zoom
More intelligent lenses
10. HY6 ..scares me to death.
With a sinar back you get an adapter and you contax will keep you shooting as backup
11. Art Center, Brooks and RIT becuase they are pumping out still photographers by the zillions
So is falmouth college !
-------
Wifi
User defined camera functions (ISO ramping, AF travel, AF zones)
Onboard camera stablization (VR)
S
-
James, as usual you provide some great insights and ideas. A few comments on ideas I like:
3. Native higher iso with some kind of nd insert.
4. High resolution lcd focus.
8. Forget about film formats. ... Probably a chip the size of a p30 is the perfect size as long as the lenses are applicable to the format.[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=221588\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
On 3: Some compact digicams apparently "fake" high f-stop settings (over about f/8) with internal ND filters, because such high f-stops would suffer greatly from diffraction. The idea I suppose is to allow longish exposures in bright light. With removable MF backs this could be fairly easy: just clip an ND filter on in front of the sensor but behind the mirror, so that the reflex optical VF still gets all the light. But about that OVF ...
On 4: This could be interesting if formats larger than 35mm ever move beyond FF CCD technology to something that supports a "video viewfinder": two-eyed screen viewing [LCD], one-eyed peep-hole [EVF], or on a remote device [laptop? palmtop? iPhone?]). Already a 3" LCD image is slightly larger than the 56x42mm image on the ground glass of a traditional "top-down" 645 format VF, and a shade hood could deal with screen visibility in bright light, the most common complaint against rear-screen video VF's. And I am fairly sure that LCD and EVF IQ and lag will keep improving, driven by the video industry for one thing.
On 8: this could be great, if someone bites the bullet on a new intermediate format like 44x33 or 48x36 and does it right:
- a new lens mount closer to the focal plane, to facilitate new wide angle lenses.
- new lenses specifically for the format, particarly wides.
- lens adaptors to allow use of existing MF lenses. For manual focus usage at least, lenses from various existing systems could be supported.
(In fact, if the optical reflex viewfinder is eliminated, the new mount could be close enough to the focal plane to allow use of 35mm format lenses; at longer focal lengths, many 35mm format lenses have a large enough image circle for a somewhat larger format. But only a current maker of 35mm format lenses would have an incentive do that, so maybe we away a miracle from Leica.)
-
http://tinyurl.com/4oc8je (http://tinyurl.com/4oc8je)