Luminous Landscape Forum
Equipment & Techniques => Medium Format / Film / Digital Backs – and Large Sensor Photography => Topic started by: gerald.d on August 11, 2013, 11:46:47 am
-
http://petapixel.com/2013/08/11/fresh-rumors-suggest-canon-is-looking-seriously-at-jumping-into-medium-format/
Just keep it an open platform so I can buy the sensor for my ALPAs!
-
"If Canon bought Phase One?" ... they'd add weather sealing and a red ring to all lenses and raise the prices by 20% ;D
-
Why would they? There can't be much technology wise that they couldn't develop themselves if they wanted to and the profits would be minuscule compared to their other divisions.
I could understand if they wanted to get their hands on Capture1 as a readymade capture sopftware thats better than their own and then asset strip phase for anything useful then close it down.
::)
-
I really don't think so.
But if it were to be, I'd think that the venerable H would be a more likely target. And just think, they could then pimp out the Canon M ala H Lunar..... ;D
-
"If Canon bought Phase One?" ... they'd add weather sealing and a red ring to all lenses and raise the prices by 20% ;D
Let's hope they don't. We don't need consolidation, we need more small companies like Phase that innovate.
IMO
BC
-
my best bet is that canon buys the MF branch of Hasselblad, would be quite a bargain at this point i guess.
P1 on the other hand is doing pretty well and would let canon bleed.
just my assumption
hassy still can continue to sell rebranded sony cams
-
How common is it for Japanese companies to purchase low-volume, high-price competitors?
I would think that there is significant internal resistance to purchasing such a company (and making them the "jewel of the crown" or a marketing thing), when many employees (probably) feel that they are capable of developing the same technology and products themselves.
Sony did produce the RX-1, a product that seems to be more about establishing the brand among professional photographers (and amateurs alike), than generating profits on its own. I guess that a Canon MF product (in-house developed or not) might follow along the lines of the RX-1. On the other hand, Sony did purchase Konica Minolta countradicting my above thesis.
-h
-
On the other hand, Sony did purchase Konica Minolta countradicting my above thesis.
.. and they did invest over $640 million in Olympus (and thus became their largest shareholder).
-
God I hope not.
-
I cant see Canon buying Phase One, or it being a good thing if they did.
If they did, I would see them closing the system and changing to a CMOS sensor. Neither I find exciting, more disappointing. If you ask why would they do this? Because they would now hold all of the chips since Phase is the biggest seller of MF backs. And I am sure that they would close down Leaf, or at least make them less competitive.
If they bought the digital back devision of Hasselblad though, that I would consider to be a good thing. First, it would force Hassy to go open their system again, which would increase sales for them. (A few dealers have told me before closing the system, Hassy was the top camera system they sold in MF.) Second, Canon could easily introduce a CMOS MF back, giving competition to the Phase One CCD backs, assuming they would actually manufacture a back that could work on other platforms. Also, having this division would force them to create a MF camera, introducing much more R&D into auto-focus into MF.
Just thoughts.
-
Nothing to see here except yet another regurgitation of a rumor that has never made any sense: Canon (or Nikon) moving into a sector whose revenues and profits are vastly smaller than the high end 35mm sector that it is already in and already has the lenses, sensors etc. developed.
Consider the joke of an argument: compact camera sales are being lost to even smaller cameras that can also make phone calls, so Canon will try to compensate by moving into a sector where total revenues and profits are about one hundred times smaller.
-
My money would be on them eyeing up Hasselblad. They've seen how popular having a very high resolution product was for Nikon with the D800 and Hasselblad's latest annual report was far from glittering. How better to get involved with the very high resolution pro market than hoovering up a well known brand with an established, if not hugely successful, current product range, for not much money?
-
But what exactly would they get for their money?
Sensor technology?
No they don't have any
Lens technology?
Probably nothing they don't know how to do already as Canon are already savvy with aspherics and lo dispersion glass.
Electronics and AF?
No.
Software.
No.
Manufacturing?
No.
Market share?
No.
Brand image?
Yes, no idea of the value if its not reflected in sales.
-
No.
-
I can't see Canon doing this sort of thing, but Fujifilm buying up Hasselblad would be a different matter altogether.
-
As an owner of the Rolleiflex Hy6 Mod2 and the previous generation SINAR Hy6, I would love for CANON to help shine a light on and invest funds in this marvelous system.
Jerry Reed
-
Regardless of whether someone will buy one or not. Hasselblad should return to production DB with interchangeable mounts. (CF - 50, CF 200) Hasselblad probably do not do it...
P1 should take this concept. Extremely annoying is the search for DB each time with a different mount. V system, H system, Contax, Hy6, Mamiya.
-
Let's hope they don't. We don't need consolidation, we need more small companies like Phase that innovate.
IMO
BC
I agree with you in 100%
Money alone is not enough, really need are the right people! People with vision :) This is most needed. Now, unfortunately, there is a crisis in this area ::)
-
I can't see Canon doing this sort of thing, but Fujifilm buying up Hasselblad would be a different matter altogether.
This makes more sense as Fuji was involved with the H camera and they make the lenses and film magazines. But commercially, I'm not sure it makes sense.
-
I agree with you in 100%
Money alone is not enough, really need are the right people! People with vision :) This is most needed. Now, unfortunately, there is a crisis in this area ::)
I don't know if there is a crisis or anyone's sales figures. I do know that consolodation doesn't help any of us. Try to book airfare right now. On routes we travel regularly from a flight every 30 minutes on the major carriers now is 3 flights a day, or a stop in Cleveland.
I feel the same when any company mergers, the larger one strips out the perceived value and leaves everyone hanging.
What I know is Phase makes a good product, great file, but limited in a lot of our uses. Our business has really moved to multimedia and though I don't expect one camera to do everything, I do expect them to do more than before.
Personally, I really dislike dslr cameras. I own them, use them, fight the file, fight the look and find them boring.
I love unique cameras and my only issue with Phase and what keeps me from buying now is I'm not wild about the DF (it's good just not that unique in look), and cost vs. "my" return. It would be a camera I use 25% of the time at most and with constantly changing computers, video needs, lighting, sound (a very long list), something has to take priority.
Though I will admit that 25% of the time I'd use it would be my best photography and I love to work a deep ccd based file.
I just wish I had more time to use one.
Maybe this week.
IMO
BC
-
Interesting thoughts and observations from everyone, but I can't help thinking that a the key point from the original article has been totally missed.
According to a Northlight Images tip, Canon has been “investing significantly in a major European medium format digital camera manufacturer.” This apparently due to a shrinking demand for compact cameras. Northlight goes on to say that “At the moment, there is no talk of an outright purchase, but it remains an option.”
Flip this. What's in it for Phase One to reach out to Canon for investment/partnership?
It's public knowledge that "Phase One" are developing a new MF camera. Surely it would make perfect sense that they would look to external partners for support here? I can't for one moment imagine that developing a new camera from scratch (regardless of format) would be a realistic task for a company the size of Phase One. And it's going to be a new camera - no way will they get anywhere by attempting to evolve the ancient Mamiya 645 platform.
They outsource their new sensors, they outsource their new lenses. Why would anyone assume they'd develop something as complex as a camera body internally? It would make perfect sense to approach a company such as Canon for this. On their part, Canon would of course have to invest significant time, effort, and resources to produce the camera for Phase One. Business-wise, it would be perfectly natural to have a buy-out option in an agreement of this significance.
Note what's in quotes, and ignore what's not. I strongly believe the "shrinking demand for compact cameras" is a total red herring. It makes no sense whatsoever.
Everything in quotes does though.
-
Interesting thoughts and observations from everyone, but I can't help thinking that a the key point from the original article has been totally missed.
Flip this. What's in it for Phase One to reach out to Canon for investment/partnership?
It's public knowledge that "Phase One" are developing a new MF camera. Surely it would make perfect sense that they would look to external partners for support here? I can't for one moment imagine that developing a new camera from scratch (regardless of format) would be a realistic task for a company the size of Phase One. And it's going to be a new camera - no way will they get anywhere by attempting to evolve the ancient Mamiya 645 platform.
They outsource their new sensors, they outsource their new lenses. Why would anyone assume they'd develop something as complex as a camera body internally? It would make perfect sense to approach a company such as Canon for this. On their part, Canon would of course have to invest significant time, effort, and resources to produce the camera for Phase One. Business-wise, it would be perfectly natural to have a buy-out option in an agreement of this significance.
Note what's in quotes, and ignore what's not. I strongly believe the "shrinking demand for compact cameras" is a total red herring. It makes no sense whatsoever.
Everything in quotes does though.
Interesting idea. Would be much easier on Phase to develop a camera with Canon.
-
They outsource their new sensors, they outsource their new lenses. Why would anyone assume they'd develop something as complex as a camera body internally?
All major medium format digital backs have always used sensors produced by other companies. In contrast to a one-way relationship Phase One has worked very closely in the development of it's recent sensors. See also: IQ260 the Sensor Story (http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/iq260_story.shtml). This ability to partner more directly (rather than buy off the shelf products) is one of the primary reasons Phase One now works with Dalsa rather than Kodak.
Team Phase One manufacturers their own lenses, and designed the D series lenses including the 150D (find me anyone who has anything shy of absolutely ecstatic things to say about that lens) but partner with Schneider on lens design – a great choice in my opinion as Schneider has some of the best lens designers on the planet.
Team Phase One produced the IQ and IQ2 and Credo, the three most powerful and advanced digital back lines on the market with touch screen interface, retina-grade display, native wifi review and control which is fast but still provides 100% zoom (IQ2), the first camera with UDMA7 interface, and no less than a half dozen processors fit into a self-contained chassis. I think their track record of handling complex development projects is pretty strong ;D.
I remember the countless naysayers the months/years before Phase One released the IQ who insisted that they should work with Canon/Nikon/whomever to gain access to their LCDs. I haven't heard any of those comments since they released the IQ. Feels like a similar situation to me :).
-
To be honest, I could care less about the development of a SLR by Phase for their backs. If it was affordable, I would buy one and use for nothing more than personal work, if that.
Tech cameras are what I care about. Just thought the concept was interesting.
-
Your post simply reinforces exactly what I said, Doug.
Phase One enter into partnerships for all their products. They partner with world class lens companies to develop lenses, and world class sensor companies to develop sensors.
What makes you think it would be any different for a camera body?
-
Your post simply reinforces exactly what I said, Doug.
Phase One enter into partnerships for all their products. They partner with world class lens companies to develop lenses, and world class sensor companies to develop sensors.
What makes you think it would be any different for a camera body?
Dude, I think you hit the weak spot ;D
-
Doug,
Your not gonna win on this.
There is just too much P___s envy when it comes to medium format.
Every time medium format makes an advance there seems to be a negative chorus , i.e. Phase's tethering to an Ipad, better lcd's, touch screen etc.
Every time Apple changes a connector (how many are we into now, serial, ethernet, usb1, usb2, e sata, firewire 400, Firewire 800, thunderbolt. it's gonna be Phase's fault if their legacy backs don't have 8 connectors.
Every time the mention of sensors, lenses, cameras, there comes the notion that well . . . Phase doesn't actually go into a room and make them.
Hasselblad has caught the same heat for their association with fuji on the H, for I dunno . . . forever.
It's strange.
Most people know Sony does most of the sensor work for Nikon, Olympus, even Panasonic (who does make their own sensors) and probably a lot more.
Fuji has made some good sensors, some not so good, but they get cut a lot of slack and up to the latest Fuji, nobody was raving about a Fuji/Nikon camera.
Who makes Japanese lenses, actually what company actually "makes" any lens. I can google a lens name and I'll get 3 to 10 different answers and btw, does Apple actually make anything, but the're given credit for inventing air.
It doesn't matter, Medium format works for some, doesn't for others and that's the way it goes, though I'll bet you anything that if Phase or Hasselblad could build volume and lower their cost to the Canon Nikon level they noise would die down, then again probably not because all previous buyers would be mad that their "investment" tanked.
It's just the "I'd never own a Maserati" thing. The people that do seem pretty happy, the ones that don't like to talk down about them.
The only exception is Leica. They obviously need their sensors from Kodak (or did) they obviously needed first Imacon, then Phase to process their files, still don't have their own tethering suite, but Leica lovers let that pass.
Personally I don't want a Canon Medium format, though I will admit I looked long and hard at the Pentax and to be honest the Pentax was right with price and some usability, wrong for me on tethering and write speed.
I looked hard at the Hasselblad H5d, but I can't get a handle on how robust the software is and honestly, as I've mentioned in private e-mail, my studio's business model has changed so drastically in the last few years, that I have to really think long and hard about investing in a new medium format system, though in many ways I want to.
The real thing that keeps me from buying again (and I'm sure you don't want to hear this) is my ancient Phase backs are still so very good. The files are better than any camera I've owned, period and how old is the p30+ and p21+? A billion years?
Anyway, keep up the good fight, I'm sure you guys are doing well.
IMO
BC
-
To be honest, I could care less about the development of a SLR by Phase for their backs.
So you could care less, which means you do care to some extent. How much do you care? A little bit, or a lot? Or do you mean that you couldn't care less? [/pedant_mode] ;)
-
I like this post...
The DMF need a new wake up.
I love to see a new company enter in the DMF to make a "game changer" in this industry like the canon made with the 5d mark2 for the video industry or the blackmagic camera.
Today we have great backs with old body tecnology.
With just 2 main brands in the dmf the competition its small and slow the inovation.
I dont need much more than my h3dii 39mp i love the files but i miss good 400 or 800iso or a faster af...and maybe a 7000usd entry level base model for new dmf users
-
Hi,
High ISO seems to need CMOS. Some rumors, Phase One may be working on it. Quite probably, some of the technology MF uses is licensed from DSLR vendors. Hasselblad used to use some Minolta technology for instance.
Best reagrds
Erik
I like this post...
The DMF need a new wake up.
I love to see a new company enter in the DMF to make a "game changer" in this industry like the canon made with the 5d mark2 for the video industry or the blackmagic camera.
Today we have great backs with old body tecnology.
With just 2 main brands in the dmf the competition its small and slow the inovation.
I dont need much more than my h3dii 39mp i love the files but i miss good 400 or 800iso or a faster af...and maybe a 7000usd entry level base model for new dmf users
-
Doug,
Your not gonna win on this.
There is just too much P___s envy when it comes to medium format.
<snip>
It's just the "I'd never own a Maserati" thing. The people that do seem pretty happy, the ones that don't like to talk down about them.
<snip>
IMO
BC
Not sure if this jibe was aimed at me (in the context of the thread, it's hard to see who else you were aiming it at), but for what it's worth, I own some MF kit, and am very happy with it. Very happy indeed.
I just happen to be capable of some objectivity.
I also can't see any downsides whatsoever to Canon and Phase one partnering (in whatever shape or form) in order to produce a decent camera. Doug seems to be supporting my argument by highlighting examples of where Phase partner with Schneider to produce great lenses, and Dalsa for great sensors.
I really do find it rather surprising that the mere suggestion it might be a good thing for "Team Phase One" to partner with a company who know a thing or two about building damn good camera bodies, ends up with some folks getting so defensive about the idea.
Just why is that concept so objectionable?
-
So you could care less, which means you do care to some extent. How much do you care? A little bit, or a lot? Or do you mean that you couldn't care less? [/pedant_mode] ;)
Ok, I dont care at all. I consider SLRs to be a novelty for what I do. 8)
-
Interesting thoughts and observations from everyone, but I can't help thinking that a the key point from the original article has been totally missed.
Flip this. What's in it for Phase One to reach out to Canon for investment/partnership?
It's public knowledge that "Phase One" are developing a new MF camera. Surely it would make perfect sense that they would look to external partners for support here? I can't for one moment imagine that developing a new camera from scratch (regardless of format) would be a realistic task for a company the size of Phase One.
Team Phase One (as Doug puts it) includes Mamiya. And Mamiya have never developed a new MF camera? Sure, they are not the giants they once were, but they must still have retained significant core expertise.
Why would anyone assume they'd develop something as complex as a camera body internally? It would make perfect sense to approach a company such as Canon for this.
There is rather little difference in underlying complexity between a Canon pro DSLR and the combination of a 645DF+ and IQ260, say. The CMOS sensor accounts for most of the more impressive aspects of the Canon, like high ISO, fast frame-rates, live view and video. If Team Phase One's new MF camera-designed-from-scratch is not based around CMOS (and I don't expect it to be, despite my wishes), then I couldn't see Canon contributing an awful lot. A million AF points cluttering up the viewfinder, maybe.
Ray
-
So you could care less, which means you do care to some extent. How much do you care? A little bit, or a lot? Or do you mean that you couldn't care less? [/pedant_mode] ;)
I've lost count of the number of times I've wanted to enter [pedant_mode] on this too, Bill. But I force myself to refrain.
It's a geo-cultural thing - people say "could care less" in the US, whereas it's "couldn't care less" for us here on the other side of the pond.
The US version makes no sense, as you pointed out, but that's language for you.
Ray
-
Doug,
Your not gonna win on this.
There is just too much P___s envy when it comes to medium format.
Every time medium format makes an advance there seems to be a negative chorus , i.e. Phase's tethering to an Ipad, better lcd's, touch screen etc.
Every time Apple changes a connector (how many are we into now, serial, ethernet, usb1, usb2, e sata, firewire 400, Firewire 800, thunderbolt. it's gonna be Phase's fault if their legacy backs don't have 8 connectors.
This never made any sense to me, people complaining about stupid novelties that DSLRs add to their cameras for novice customers. Why the hell would I want to tether a camera that takes a 45 mb raw file with a USB cord? Same thing with JPEG mode. People made a big stink that Phase did not have a JPEG mode with the P series backs. What real pro shoots in JPEG mode? As a matter of fact, I prefer that there is no JPEG, since that would ensure that my files would always be raws.
I think the real problem here is that too many people are relying on the camera to do everything, in stead of pre-visualizing what you want and making it happen.
-
I agree, Joe - my D700 (I know, I know, not a D800e, and I don't shoot lighthouses in New England either) has more bells & whistles than you could shake a stick at, yet it is invariably in manual mode, sometimes AE, making the others redundant for me. I'd happily have it manual only. It has various metering options, different focus modes, and no doubt does plenty of other things I've never discovered. Whether they're 'novelties', or just 'stuff I never use' is moot, but I do look forward to a simpler camera, minus huge menu options & eleventy thousand buttons, dials & switches.
-
JPEGS for client previews. If you can get a look out of the camera that is close to your deliverables it is a huge time saver.
USB 3 tethering could be fantastic, in theory.
The "novelties" have a tendency to become innovation, like video in the 5d2. Many novelties have a place in a commercial photographer's workflow.
This never made any sense to me, people complaining about stupid novelties that DSLRs add to their cameras for novice customers. Why the hell would I want to tether a camera that takes a 45 mb raw file with a USB cord? Same thing with JPEG mode. People made a big stink that Phase did not have a JPEG mode with the P series backs. What real pro shoots in JPEG mode? As a matter of fact, I prefer that there is no JPEG, since that would ensure that my files would always be raws.
I think the real problem here is that too many people are relying on the camera to do everything, in stead of pre-visualizing what you want and making it happen.
-
This never made any sense to me, people complaining about stupid novelties that DSLRs add to their cameras for novice customers.
Yes Joe, i too don´t understand why anyone starting in photography have to study a huge dslr camera manual...the advance modes in any field (af-metering-wb-flash-etc) are starting to get insane...
I don´t understant why you have menus in the camera to fine tunning the wb color of the jpgs...shoot in raw and fine tune later!!!!
We need a novice digital camera with just a lcd for histogram, manual WB, just monocromatic, pontual metering, manual exposure and just a internal memory for 120 pictures...thats the way anyone learn photography...to wait, think, compose, meter and just take one or 2 pictures...
I love to see a new brand bring a modern digital rolleiflex twin lens, monocromatic sensor.... with a 5000usd price tag....i love it
There is a huge space to see new products in DMF industry, not just more and more MP count and war...
My wish list for the next 5 years in DMF industry.
- A digital monocrome rolleiflex twin lens
- good 400-800iso digital backs
- More affortable entry level system
- 6x7 viewfinders (the big viewfinders are my passion...)
- wireless connetion to storage in exterior (Hard Drive, or other...i am tired of compact flash in-off camera for field work)
-
Exactly. Mamiya makes/made some of the best lenses around. The RZ and 645AF were astounding with film. The 645 was, to me, a dog with digital but the newer Mamiya/Phase 645 cams are WAY WAY better than the Afd and Afd2. They really just need a better viewfinder and a better AF module. They don't need Canon for this.
Team Phase One (as Doug puts it) includes Mamiya. And Mamiya have never developed a new MF camera? Sure, they are not the giants they once were, but they must still have retained significant core expertise.
There is rather little difference in underlying complexity between a Canon pro DSLR and the combination of a 645DF+ and IQ260, say. The CMOS sensor accounts for most of the more impressive aspects of the Canon, like high ISO, fast frame-rates, live view and video. If Team Phase One's new MF camera-designed-from-scratch is not based around CMOS (and I don't expect it to be, despite my wishes), then I couldn't see Canon contributing an awful lot. A million AF points cluttering up the viewfinder, maybe.
Ray
-
I also can't see any downsides whatsoever to Canon and Phase one partnering (in whatever shape or form) in order to produce a decent camera. Doug seems to be supporting my argument by highlighting examples of where Phase partner with Schneider to produce great lenses, and Dalsa for great sensors.
I really do find it rather surprising that the mere suggestion it might be a good thing for "Team Phase One" to partner with a company who know a thing or two about building damn good camera bodies, ends up with some folks getting so defensive about the idea.
Just why is that concept so objectionable?
Gerald does have a point.
I see no evidence that they need a partner (beyond the Team Phase One family which includes a camera body manufacturer) and quite a bit of evidence that they are capable of industry leading innovation without leaving that family (see the IQ/IQ2/Credo backs which are all-in-house projects).
BUT there is no reason to feel it's automatically objectionable to partner with another company on a major project. As he points out this is already done with Schneider for lens design and I find the results excellent; the 110LS is one of my favorite lenses.
That said... Canon+Phase? No.
-
Not sure if this jibe was aimed at me (in the context of the thread, it's hard to see who else you were aiming it at), but for what it's worth, I own some MF kit, and am very happy with it. Very happy indeed.
I just happen to be capable of some objectivity.
I'm not aiming at anybody in particular.
I also understand buying specialty equipment is frustrating. (Go buy a RED, or Arri and by the time you understand what you need and want your eyes will cross).
Some things make no sense, like your mention of the Phase upgrade path, but sometimes things just are what they are and well . . .
I just find it's strange that on this forum (I don't visit many other forums) there seems to be a vocal majority that takes swipes at the higher end camera makers.
It's funny, because in the cinema world, it's the opposite. When Arri introduces a new camera nobody says it doesn't stabilize like an Iphone or says $80,000, my Sony handicam only cost $500 and doesn't need any post processing or big batteries.
That doesn't mean there isn't room for improvement, but if Phase one could make a Nikon or Canon why? That market is covered.
I'd hope they made something different.
But in camera jpegs, sure, anything but processing out a trillion files for web view.
IMO
BC
-
Phase One enter into partnerships for all their products. They partner with world class lens companies to develop lenses, and world class sensor companies to develop sensors.
Phase One does not "partner with" Mamiya for design and manufacture lenses and bodies; it now _owns_ Mamiya, so that expertise is now in-house. Surely that reduces the likelihood of it looking outside its house to a partner like Canon for lens and body design.
And at the risk of sounding snarky, if Phase One were in search of a new sensor-design partner, Canon would probably not be at the top of its list.
-
I just find it's strange that on this forum (I don't visit many other forums) there seems to be a vocal majority that takes swipes at the higher end camera makers.
It's not just this forum. Visit most photography forums and see what happens when you mention "Leica".
-
Phase One does not "partner with" Mamiya for design and manufacture lenses and bodies; it now _owns_ Mamiya, so that expertise is now in-house. Surely that reduces the likelihood of it looking outside its house to a partner like Canon for lens and body design.
You're right. They don't partner on the camera body.
Mamiya/Phase One have no track record in recent years of producing a world-class camera body.
Which is kinda the point.
-
It's not just this forum. Visit most photography forums and see what happens when you mention "Leica".
Or mention something like 'Pentax' and watch the world degenerate!