What medium format, Phaseone

[BobShaw]

(enter stuff here)

The weak point of the Hasselblad H system is its raw converter "Phocus" - here comes the main advantage of Phase. Capture One is by far the best raw converter on the market. Fuji made an extremely smart (though probably VERY expensive) move to have their "small medium-format"-cameras accepted by PhaseOne to convert their raw files with Capture One). The best sensor, the greatest lenses and the most ergonomic body will NOT produce the highest quality files if the first and most important step - the raw conversion - is less than ideal.

I am really sad that Hasselblad is about to give up the H system (which is quite obvious - where is the H7D?)
(more stuff)
I know, the highest-end market is very small. This is why I do not understand why Hasselblad and PhaseOne do not MERGE to one company!

Have the moderators been sending drugs to the members?
There is someone asking what camera strap to use. Another wanting to pay $5K USD for a medium format camera to convert to IR. Someone saying that Nikon is about to go broke. Then of course there is the Coffee Corner.
Here we have a lot of bold unsupported statements from someone on their first post. Is it real?
In addition to what TechTalk said ..

Phocus is an excellent raw converter. Not only does it produce brilliant files, but it has Reproduction Mode, Scene Calibration and a History so that you can make changes to the raw files and at any time go back to any state, even to the original without loss. It supports the HNCS solution on export. It never promises to be anything other than a raw converter. At this it definitely gives the best results on Hasselblad files. it is however, not that intuitive and the User Guide does not help much. You need to read it end to end to pick up on things and then ask more questions. To get the best results you have to EXPORT out of it though to JPG or TIF. I have edited files in Phocus and then READ them in other programmes and some features like HNCS do not appear.

Capture One is by all accounts an excellent programme too. I don't use it though. I prefer the interface of other programmes and pray for a new Aperture. Phase choose for commercial reasons only not to READ Hasselblad files. Reading raw files is not difficult. It is like reading a foreign language. Understanding is more difficult. On a Mac even the Preview programme does read all raw files.  Proper conversion is another story. Does Capture One do proper raw conversion on Sony and Fuji? Maybe, but could the manufacturer do a better one? Hassellblad believes it can and even though the files can be read in say Lightroom by all accounts Phocus gives a better result.

>I am really sad that Hasselblad is about to give up the H system (which is quite obvious - where is the H7D?
Possibly. I loved my H series but it is a steam engine. Currently it gives excellent results and will probably get minor upgrades. However great a product is though at some stage nobody wants it. The last company to make buggy whips probably made excellent ones. The good news is that most MF camera manufactures have seen the writing on the wall. Phase is the notable exception.

>I do not understand why Hasselblad and PhaseOne do not MERGE to one company!
Hasselblad is currently at the largest camera store in the world the number one and number three best selling MF cameras. It is also owned by a massive company that sells cameras. As Mark Twain would say, reports of its death are greatly exaggerated I think.

[pschefz]

Hasselblad is currently at the largest camera store in the world the number one and number three best selling MF cameras. It is also owned by a massive company that sells cameras. As Mark Twain would say, reports of its death are greatly exaggerated I think.

I think the X1DII is a step in the right direction but probably too late at this point....either way, fuji is selling a ton more GFX and has much better tech...DJI is selling drones not cameras....phocus is a necessary evil for hasselblad owners....

if i had money to burn right now, i would take the X1DII over the GFX because of the central shutter....but files out of phocus or LR still would not be a real improvement over A7RIII with C1 ( i know because i have owned and/or used all systems) ....the A7RIV is the smarter investment although i doubt it will make a huge difference either.....they are all pretty amazing....
unless phase comes out with a mirrorless soon, i don't see them being able to sell their premium product much longer....

[TechTalk]

conjecture

noun: 1) the formation or expression of an opinion or theory without sufficient evidence for proof.
 
         2) an opinion or theory so formed or expressed; guess; speculation.

verb: 3) (used with object), con·jec·tured, con·jec·tur·ing. to conclude or suppose from grounds or evidence insufficient to ensure reliability.

[TechTalk]

From my (highly biased) point of view: Hassy hasn’t kept their full-frame 645 lens line up to date as resolutions have increased (look up the release dates for Hassy HC lens; you’ll be surprised), and hadn’t made many meaningful updates to the H body since the h4 (10 years ago). Hassy focus seems to be very heavily on their nice crop-medium-format X platform) so it didn’t make a lot of sense for Phase One (now an exclusively full-frame-645 company) to continue making new backs for the H platform.

We still sell a lot of Certified Pre-Owned Phase One backs with Hassy mounts to people who have Hassy H bodies and lenses.

Hey Doug. You seem to have regular contact with Phase One. Perhaps you could convince them to stop being the only medium-format camera manufacturer that does not publish MTF charts for their lenses. That data is readily available online for Leica, Fuji, Pentax, Hasselblad, even old Zeiss medium-format lenses (some of which despite being decades old are still quite excellent lenses). Then we wouldn't be tempted to look to poorly written articles riddled with assertions (and nothing with an objective or technical basis) for comparisons. As many have correctly stated, MTF charts won't tell you everything about a lens, but they'll tell you quite a lot (particularly in regards to resolution and contrast). Really, I'd like to avoid anymore comparisons of lens resolution to car tires if possible.

While you're at it, maybe you could get us some clarification as to what role Schneider plays in the generational lineage of Mamiya/ Phase One/ Schneider/ Schneider Blue Ring lenses. Shutter supplier? Optical design? Consultant? Co-branding license? (a nice source of revenue for german lens makers) For instance, I can think of a 100mm macro lens that was co-developed by Pentax and Tokina which was sold as a Pentax lens for Pentax cameras, as a Tokina lens for Canon and Nikon, and as a Schneider Kreuznach lens (with a pretty blue ring) by Samsung. https://www.imaging-resource.com/lenses/samsung/100mm-f2.8-macro-schneider-d-xenon/review/  https://lens-db.com/smc-pentax-d-fa-100mm-f28-macro-2004/  https://lens-db.com/tokina-at-x-pro-macro-m100-af-100mm-f28-d-2005/

And how have the optical designs changed from one generation (or brand naming sequence) to another for the various Mamiya/ Phase One/ Schneider/ Schneider Blue Ring lenses? I ask because it all seems pretty transparent with the other manufacturers and so opaque with Phase One. Maybe you could get a definitive answer from Phase One as to "which lenses you should be buying for 150mp, and which you should be avoiding" as the link you provide purports to advise. Is a Best if Used by Date something we need for our lenses now?

I mean, we don't want to live in Fear, Uncertainty, or Doubt that our lenses are good enough for the next generation of sensors. Maybe you could get them to label lenses with the maximum sensor resolution that meets some agreed standard. Or at least get them to tell us what sensor resolution they have been designed for. I've never heard (or read) a designer of high-quality interchangeable lenses say that sensor (or film) resolution is considered a design parameter, but your linked article implies that they do. They do however provide MTF charts for people to see. (probably like showing everyone pictures of your kids for a lens designer)

Maybe a lens designer from Phase one could share with us what sensor resolution the lenses we're buying are designed for, so we will know in advance. Or perhaps they'll clarify that after considering a number of parameters (size, weight, cost, speed, image circle, focal length or zoom range, incorporation of autofocus motor(s) and/or shutter, manual focus ability, etc.) at the end of the process they're trying to get as much resolution and contrast out of their design as possible, so people will enjoy making images with them for many years, which seems more likely to me.

But most of all please, pretty please, get Phase One to release some MTF charts. Curious minds are well... curious. And I have no doubt they have much to be proud of with their lens designs, so show off a little. Show what they can do with an objective measure. Please forgive me if I don't get a tingle just by seeing the name Schneider with a blue ring around it. I love their heritage (and a lot of their past lenses), but I've seen enough blue rings not to assume too much either.  https://www.pentaxforums.com/articles/site-news/samsung-schneider-kreuznach-lenses.html  I'm happy to see that Schneider has completed their 3-year restructuring plan and are on better footing now.  https://schneiderkreuznach.com/en/company/news/press-releases/new-corporate-strategy

You know, Hasselblad used to sell a line of digital backs with interchangeable adapter plates to work with Mamiya and many other camera systems (now that was an open platform). http://www.dtgweb.com/dtg_pdfs/Hasselblad_ixpressBacks_spec.pdf

When they stopped, they announced that they wanted to focus their efforts on integrating their own system. They didn't go out and trash their competitors products as an excuse for stopping further development. Maybe they felt it was beneath their dignity or had respect for others competing in the same field. Likely it was both.

[TechTalk]

I have been using a Hasselblad H5D-60 with two lenses, the HC150 N and the Hc 50 II for quite a while now. I print very large, using an Epson SC-P9000 and 44" rolls of "Museo Max" print media. The H5D-60 has a large CCD sensor with 60 MPix. The CCD sensor produces for ISO's up to 200 (ideally the native lowest which is 80) an incredible richness of details, extremely smooth color transitions and outstanding sharpness. The HC lenses - especially the HC-50 II - are both of outstanding optical quality. The HC-50 is even fully opened (3.5) extremely sharp, no stopping-down needed at all. I used the H5D in very harsh conditions in Iceland and it worked just perfectly fine - as I expect it from a professional tool.

The weak point of the Hasselblad H system is its raw converter "Phocus" - here comes the main advantage of Phase. Capture One is by far the best raw converter on the market. ... The best sensor, the greatest lenses and the most ergonomic body will NOT produce the highest quality files if the first and most important step - the raw conversion - is less than ideal.

It's great to hear from you. I think everyone is pleased to hear that you're getting images from your Hasselblad that produce "an incredible richness of details, extremely smooth color transitions and outstanding sharpness" with which you create large prints from your Epson printer.

Since those RAW files need a converter to get from the camera to the printer, I'm curious as to which RAW converter you're using to get such "an incredible richness of details, extremely smooth color transitions and outstanding sharpness" in your prints. Obviously the RAW converter, along with your abilities in using it, play a big roll in getting the kind of quality you describe.

I wouldn't say that RAW conversion is "the first and most important step". The first and most important step is creating a great image with your camera. From there, it's up to you with your choice of RAW converter to create the kind of final image you find pleasing. You're clearly doing that. I'm just wondering what converter is assisting you in getting that final result.

I'm sure that Hasselblad appreciates your kind words regarding their camera and lens quality. Phase one would surely be happy with your strong endorsement and Epson as well. There are a variety of cameras, lenses, software, and printers to choose from and we all choose what works for us and makes us happy.

[TechTalk]

Finally, have you ever changed a lense on a mirrorless camera body in a storm of wind and rain? I have and I must say that I largely prefer the protection of my sensor by the mirror in front of it - so even here "mirrorless" does not equal "better" in every respect.

This is one of the easiest questions I've ever answered. Have I ever changed a lens "in a storm of wind and rain"? No! I am absolutely not changing lenses in a wind-driven rain storm! I have too much respect for my equipment and bank account to do that.

If you put a gun to my head and forced me to do that, I'd be hunched down, back to the wind, camera angled down and covering the equipment with my body and anything else handy. But I wouldn't do it voluntarily. Then again, I'm pretty fussy about protecting, as best I can, against ordinary dust getting in the camera when changing lenses.

As a final note, it isn't your mirror protecting your sensor. It's the "auxiliary shutter" in the back of your H5D body. On behalf of any interchangeable lens camera you may own, please protect the inside of the camera body. There's a lot of very sensitive stuff in there, including the mirror! (if it has a mirror)

Oh... one more thing... Don't ask to borrow my camera.

[TechTalk]

Also, I prefer a CCD sensor. It may be very limited when it comes to high ISO but at its native ISO (H5D-60 = 80) it is unmatched by ANY CMOS sensor when it comes to smoothest color transitions. The industry knows that very well - but CMOS sensors are much cheaper to produce …

Well, since you wrote "ANY" in all caps, I am very tempted to believe you. But do you have any evidence of that? A brief explanation of the technical issues that prevent a CMOS sensor from measuring light in a way that would allow it to produce color transitions that are as smooth as a CCD sensor would suffice.

[TechTalk]

I know, the highest-end market is very small. This is why I do not understand why Hasselblad and PhaseOne do not MERGE to one company! Together, they would be unbeatable. Hasselblads body and lenses, PhaseOnes backs and raw converter - "better do it quickly or you will both disappear" - that is what I am afraid of ...

You may be worrying too much. Both companies appear to be on solid footing.

Phase One's income is about 70% software sales. And given your ringing endorsement of their software, not much to worry about there. Adobe, of course, has substantial resources to put behind Lightroom as a competitor, but there seems to be plenty of room in the market for both, as well as the other free open-source and paid software options. The private equity firm, that recently aquired control of Phase One, paid 1.5 Billion Danish Kroner (about 220 million US Dollars) for the privilege, so I think they intend on keeping the doors open for a while. And I wouldn't worry about the fact that they've transitioned from being a hardware-centric to software-centric business. I don't see any indication that they want to exit their hardware business, despite however small the market may be. They've carved out their own niche in the market.  Danish business magazine on Phase One sale via Google Translate

Phase One is expecting to do almost 82 million US Dollars in worldwide sales this year and to earn about 22 million in profits. So don't lose any sleep.

Meanwhile, the DJI investment in Hasselblad seems to be paying dividends for both companies. In 2017, sales more than doubled for Hasselblad after the introduction of the X1D-50c. And the new X1D II-50c, as well as the new CFV II-50c / 907x combo, are generating a tremendous amount of pre-orders based on their sales ranking at B&H. They have rolled out steady firmware updates for the X1D making owners of that camera happier over time. H system users saw a major update in ease of use with a new interface in the H6 series along with 50, 100, and 400 MP single-shot or multi-shot versions. And now all the Hasselblad platforms H, X, and CFV share that same common user interface design, making moving from one system to another as seamless as possible.

I don't think there's ever been a better time to be a Hasselblad owner. Owners of legacy V system cameras will soon have a new digital back for their current cameras and lenses, plus the option to take that back and convert it into a unique compact mirrorless camera using new XCD lenses. If that wasn't enough choice, they can also mount their lenses from the V system on an H camera via the very nicely engineered CF adapter. The degree of integration between a V lens on an H body is impressive! Briefly, any H camera with CF adapter lets you mount vintage lenses with open aperture viewing, focusing, and metering. When you attach the CF adapter to any H body, it recognizes the adapter and automatically provides a list of lenses to select from to inform the camera which lens you're using for correct metering. Take a shot and it automatically stops down to your selected aperture. Push a lever on the adapter to reset the shutter and you're ready to go again. Film or digital capture, your choice. The adapter to allow V lenses to be used seamlessly on an H camera was part of the design process of the very first H1 camera. After decades of selling the V system, Hasselblad did not want loyal customers to have to buy all new lenses in order to use their new platform. Short term, maybe not a great business decision for a company that wants to sell new lenses. Long term, customers appreciate that kind of corporate philosophy. Years of planning and design went into developing the H1 before it was released. Hasselblad wanted the H platform to have a long life, just as the V system had that preceded it.

So basically if you have a V system, Hasselblad provides options to shoot film or digital and connect to either H cameras or XCD lenses. That's pretty good customer support for cameras and lenses made from 1957 to 2006. Oh, and you don't need any cables. Hasselblad's core philosophy has never changed. Design and build products that will provide customers with high-image quality, over many years, with as much modularity and as many options as possible. It explains a lot about brand loyalty when that loyalty from your customers is seen as being returned in kind.

OK, what about H system users? H system users have lots of options as well. Again film or digital, your choice. You can use vintage V lenses or H lenses. Your H lens options extend from 24mm to 300mm, two zoom lenses, 1.7x converter, macro converter, extension tubes, HTS 1.5 tilt/shift adapter to adapt any of 6 lenses from 24mm to 100mm into a tilt/shift lens with 1.5 x magnification (to enlarge the image circle) and giving a range of converted tilt/shift focal-lengths from 36mm to 150mm. Hasselblad offers the widest focal-length range of any medium-format DSLR camera maker as well as the broadest variety of lens accessories to extend the system capabilities. They also pioneered having automatic digital lens corrections integrated throughout a complete camera, lens, and software system to maximize image quality. Other companies have followed their leadership in total-system-integration over the years. It's also interesting to see that multi-shot capture is starting to appear in smaller format cameras now. What a difference that can make in image sharpness and quality, even in 4-shot mode. Eliminating interpolation can have quite a noticeable effect on image quality!

However, the H options don't end there. H system lens owners aren't limited to one platform. In addition to using HC/HCD lenses on an H camera, they can be mounted via the XH lens adapter to the X1D, X1D II, or even the new CFV-II / 907x combo. All with full lens shutter compatibility and autofocus (manual focus only with older H lenses). Leica S cameras have full autofocus and leaf shutter capability with your H lenses via their own H lens adapter. Even Alpa makes a lens adapter that allows full use of the H lens shutter, but with manual focus (the only medium-format lens adapter they make that allows for the built-in lens shutter to be used). If you own H lenses, you have lots of options! Of course, your H digital back can be used on a variety of view and technical cameras, including the multi-shot backs.

* Edit - I should also mention that there's an H6X body that accepts 3rd-party digital backs and film magazines. Also, the 100c or 400c MS backs can be utilized for full-sensor width large-format 4K video recording, whether mounted on camera or off camera with a cinema rig.

And for X system and 907x users, there is an ever expanding line of great XCD lenses from 21mm to 135mm f/2.8 (with a dedicated 1.7x converter to give you a 230mm f/4.8 ) and a new phenomenal quality zoom. https://cdn.hasselblad.com/datasheets/xcd-lenses/XCD35-75-Datasheet-en.pdf  Plus, the full range of H lenses as already mentioned. Plus the ability to use those XCD lenses in a different form factor with the upcoming CFV II / 907x. For tech camera use there's Alpa or view camera use with Cambo, but unlike all the other options discussed, the tech or view camera options with X1D models require using the sensor e-shutter. Oh, and X1D cameras are TTL compatible with flashes and triggers made for Nikon.  https://www.alpa.ch/en/site/alpa-connects-to-hasselblad-x-cameras  https://www.cambo.com/en/actus-series/actus-xcd-view-camera/  Wildlife Photoraphy Review with X1D II and HC 300mm Lens

And what does DJI get from Hasselblad other than affiliation with a legendary brand? Well, they get access to Hasselblad lens and camera design expertise as well as their sensor and color science knowledge. Plus, the opportunity to integrate Hasselblad A6D aerial cameras with their drone technology or work with Hasselblad to co-develop products like their Mavic Pro 2. https://www.hasselblad.com/a6d/  https://www.dji.com/mavic-2

The Metropolitan Museum of Art in New York City (The Met) has been using Hasselblad multi-shot cameras for several years to create a digital archive of their massive collection. Hasselblad has been collaborating with The Met's Advanced Imaging Center, The Rijksmuseum and Van Gogh Museum in Amsterdam, and many other of the world's most prestigious museums to advance the state-of-the art in cultural heritage digitization and set international standards for image quality since at least 2007. But here's an interesting use that The Met made of the DJI / Hasselblad A6D collaboration for cultural heritage preservation. https://dronedj.com/2018/10/12/dji-hasselblad-met-cloisters/

To summarize this little essay, I don't think you need to worry about Hasselblad or Phase One. You know, interestingly enough, Phase One has never stopped marketing their camera and back systems as "Open Platform" even to this day. The marketing message didn't change. They just redefined what it meant. But after typing all of the above regarding the modularity, openness, and cross-platform compatibility that Hasselblad has achieved, maybe Hasselblad should be the one using that slogan.  https://www.phaseone.com/en/Photography/Open-Platform-Philosophy

[TechTalk]

DJI is selling drones not cameras

I've never flown a drone. But, I'm not completely unaware of what they are or what they can do.

A drone is either a model recreational aircraft that you fly around by remote control for fun or an aerial platform with a purpose. At DJI, a drone is a camera that you can fly.

Maybe I'll try one someday. It is a pretty cool way to capture stills and video.

[ben446]

The "small medium format" of Fuji GF or the X1D or the Pentax 645z can never ever compete with the larger sensor of a PhaseOne or the Hasselblad H5D-60 or H6D-100

Where could I find more information on this as well as sample images? (maybe X2D vs H6D 100c) I understand that 0.65x offers a larger viewfinder image, wider angles, and shallower DOF than 0.79x.  But as far as image quality and DR, what is the difference if any?  Lots of forum post imply that this topic has been covered extensively but I have searched with no luck.  I must be using the wrong terms.

[BobShaw]

Where could I find more information on this as well as sample images? (maybe X2D vs H6D 100c) I understand that 0.65x offers a larger viewfinder image, wider angles, and shallower DOF than 0.79x.  But as far as image quality and DR, what is the difference if any?  Lots of forum post imply that this topic has been covered extensively but I have searched with no luck.  I must be using the wrong terms.

There are lots of comparisons. for a comparison of H6D vs X2D this is one by Karl Taylor.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l5GjcpJeKUs

i once made a spreadsheet of every Hasselblad H series camera and sensor size to pick the biggest one. Since owning an X1D I realise it was a nostalgic waste of time. Even the X1D has a sensor 1.5 times the size of 35mm.
Technology improves in 20 years so why buy an old steam engine for the sake of a slightly larger sensor? The H6D has been discontinued anyway. The image quality on these new cameras is outstanding and EVF once you get used to it trumps a larger viewfinder every time as it has full brightness even in the dark light of a studio.

A medium format DSLR is like in the song, driving around in the V8 petrol pump with the whale skin hubcaps when everyone else is moving to less archaic things. Light weight, small, no moving parts and mirrorless. Some manufacturers have realised that and some haven't.

[Doug Peterson]

Where could I find more information on this as well as sample images? (maybe X2D vs H6D 100c) I understand that 0.65x offers a larger viewfinder image, wider angles, and shallower DOF than 0.79x.  But as far as image quality and DR, what is the difference if any?  Lots of forum post imply that this topic has been covered extensively but I have searched with no luck.  I must be using the wrong terms.

This gear is sold by professional specialized dealers. The best ones have extensive raw file catalogs to exhibit the quality of various sensor+lens combinations. My company is a Phase One dealer in NYC, DC, and LA and are glad to help if Phase One is being considered (and it should be; I’m heavily biased but I think it’s pretty broadly accepted the IQ4 on an XF or XT is the highest quality most powerful camera available if you have the budget and it’s form factor and feature set fit your needs).

[Balafre]

Many would argue that you don't need photographers in 2019 either, but if you want high speed sync then leaf shutters craps all over HSS (:-)

BRAVO! Touchée !!

[JoeKitchen]

There are lots of comparisons. for a comparison of H6D vs X2D this is one by Karl Taylor.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l5GjcpJeKUs

i once made a spreadsheet of every Hasselblad H series camera and sensor size to pick the biggest one. Since owning an X1D I realise it was a nostalgic waste of time. Even the X1D has a sensor 1.5 times the size of 35mm.
Technology improves in 20 years so why buy an old steam engine for the sake of a slightly larger sensor? The H6D has been discontinued anyway. The image quality on these new cameras is outstanding and EVF once you get used to it trumps a larger viewfinder every time as it has full brightness even in the dark light of a studio.

A medium format DSLR is like in the song, driving around in the V8 petrol pump with the whale skin hubcaps when everyone else is moving to less archaic things. Light weight, small, no moving parts and mirrorless. Some manufacturers have realised that and some haven't.

Although much of this may be true, at the end of the day, in my genre, you still can't beat independent x & y movements on a technical camera.  Sure, the shift and twist lenses for DSLRs are nice, but cartesian coordinates are much easier to deal with than polar. 

Not to mention, there are many more focal lengths to choose from as well. 

Now for handheld work, mirrorless is the way to go bar none. 

[ben730]

Although much of this may be true, at the end of the day, in my genre, you still can't beat independent x & y movements on a technical camera.  Sure, the shift and twist lenses for DSLRs are nice, but cartesian coordinates are much easier to deal with than polar. 

Not to mention, there are many more focal lengths to choose from as well. 

Now for handheld work, mirrorless is the way to go bar none.

I agree!

[BernardLanguillier]

I find it interesting that some here call the gap btw P1 MF and Fuji G/Hassy X not worth the pain but the gap from FF to those a jump to medium format quality.

Those 2 gaps are in fact the same.

This is coming from a Nikon/Fuji G/P1 user… in the end my view is that the only thing that makes sense is to use Nikon or Sony FF as a main system for great image quality (DR,…), speed, versatility and P1 of H MF for a clear jump in image quality.

The small MF systems are nice… but in comparison with the other 2 they end up being compromised in both usability and image quality. They are IMHO stuck in the middle. My Fuji G system is my least used one by far. And that is despite have the best lenses in the system. I only use it in some specific landscape situations where the P1 is too heavy (XF or Arca). But the truth is that I could stitch with the Nikon as I used to with very little, if any, impact on end result. Stitched Nikon is better than single frame Fuji and if I stitch with the Fuji I can also stitch with the Nikon with a slightly longer focal length. In other words the GFX pretty much only makes sense for lazzy landscape photographers. :-)

So there is only a very small niche where it makes sense vs other options.

IMHO.

Cheers,
Bernard