Ideal MF system for Location/Portable Advertising

[Snook]

This is an interesting comment.

Everything that I hear is that the P45 and plus were the best selling (and most expensive) backs ever to come out of Phase. So maybe that's true -- maybe they're selling, and maybe they expect the P65+ to sell even better. Maybe they've done market research and found that most everyone that's using the P45 and P65 are tethering, and could care less about the LCD.

Maybe they've found that everyone that cares about the LCD has already bailed, and migrated to Canon or Nikon. Maybe they've found their market.

Maybe 99% of the people on this board don't make their living shooting photographs, and therefore it's hard to justify the outlay for a P65. But maybe if you were a catalogue house, on an in-house studio, or a working advertising photographer, the money even at $40k is a complete no-brainer. Maybe the majority of the readers of this board are medium format lovers, but with 35 budgets; maybe that's why the numerous complaints.

I took my truck in for service yesterday. The good ol' boy service manager saw my title, noticed I was a photographer, and then went into a long proud story about owning a 1dsIII and a D3 and a huge printer, and he blows thru wedding after wedding on his weekends, once he leaves the dealership. I must admit if I was honest, it was a bit puckering to hear him say that he was shooting the same camera as me.

So maybe Phase, Hasselblad, and even Sinar know what they're doing. Who knows? Maybe 1% of the readers of this board is the Medium Format target audience. Maybe Phase is laughing all the way to the bank, and already drawing up the 80MP back for next year, for $50k, knowing they'll sell them as fast as they can make them.

Just a thought.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=210620\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I agree with a lot of what you say but you los me when you say the catalogue house is a no brainer. Just becasue you have 40k back does not mean your clients are going to pay you anything different and the quality is "not" "better" just bigger than how can you justify that?
I know I would like to spend 40k on somehting other than another back if the one I have is just fine?
Where do you draw the line. I know in the sates things are different, bu elsewhere I think they are the same as where I live.
Saying it is a no brainer I do not understand..
Snook

[James R Russell]

This is an interesting comment.

Everything that I hear is that the P45 and plus were the best selling (and most expensive) backs ever to come out of Phase. So maybe that's true -- maybe they're selling, and maybe they expect the P65+ to sell even better. Maybe they've done market research and found that most everyone that's using the P45 and P65 are tethering, and could care less about the LCD.

Maybe they've found that everyone that cares about the LCD has already bailed, and migrated to Canon or Nikon. Maybe they've found their market.

Maybe 99% of the people on this board don't make their living shooting photographs, and therefore it's hard to justify the outlay for a P65. But maybe if you were a catalogue house, on an in-house studio, or a working advertising photographer, the money even at $40k is a complete no-brainer. Maybe the majority of the readers of this board are medium format lovers, but with 35 budgets; maybe that's why the numerous complaints.

I took my truck in for service yesterday. The good ol' boy service manager saw my title, noticed I was a photographer, and then went into a long proud story about owning a 1dsIII and a D3 and a huge printer, and he blows thru wedding after wedding on his weekends, once he leaves the dealership. I must admit if I was honest, it was a bit puckering to hear him say that he was shooting the same camera as me.

So maybe Phase, Hasselblad, and even Sinar know what they're doing. Who knows? Maybe 1% of the readers of this board is the Medium Format target audience. Maybe Phase is laughing all the way to the bank, and already drawing up the 80MP back for next year, for $50k, knowing they'll sell them as fast as they can make them.

Just a thought.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=210620\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Maybe all of this is true.  I don't know, I really shouldn't care.

I do know that when I see that video of Annie photographing the Queen with a Canon it kind of throws me.  

I mean, you'd expect the world's most famous photogrpaher would photograph the world's most famous person with a camera that wasn't owned by the service manager at a Chevy dealership.

You'd expect an 8x10, or an RZ with a huge bellows, or maybe even something that said Rolliflex, Leica or Hasselblad.

But a 1ds2 with a zoom? . . . kind of strange looking and not that it should matter because the photos were fine and I'm sure Vanity Fare and their retouching wizards got it all right.

I kind of wonder what would Avedon shoot his western series in the digital world.  A Mamiya 645 and a P45?

I don't think the behind the scenes photos would look quite right with that setup.

Still, it's strange we're using the same equipment as auto repair guys.

JR

[TMARK]

This is an interesting comment.

Everything that I hear is that the P45 and plus were the best selling (and most expensive) backs ever to come out of Phase. So maybe that's true -- maybe they're selling, and maybe they expect the P65+ to sell even better. Maybe they've done market research and found that most everyone that's using the P45 and P65 are tethering, and could care less about the LCD.

Maybe they've found that everyone that cares about the LCD has already bailed, and migrated to Canon or Nikon. Maybe they've found their market.

Maybe 99% of the people on this board don't make their living shooting photographs, and therefore it's hard to justify the outlay for a P65. But maybe if you were a catalogue house, on an in-house studio, or a working advertising photographer, the money even at $40k is a complete no-brainer. Maybe the majority of the readers of this board are medium format lovers, but with 35 budgets; maybe that's why the numerous complaints.

I took my truck in for service yesterday. The good ol' boy service manager saw my title, noticed I was a photographer, and then went into a long proud story about owning a 1dsIII and a D3 and a huge printer, and he blows thru wedding after wedding on his weekends, once he leaves the dealership. I must admit if I was honest, it was a bit puckering to hear him say that he was shooting the same camera as me.

So maybe Phase, Hasselblad, and even Sinar know what they're doing. Who knows? Maybe 1% of the readers of this board is the Medium Format target audience. Maybe Phase is laughing all the way to the bank, and already drawing up the 80MP back for next year, for $50k, knowing they'll sell them as fast as they can make them.

Just a thought.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=210620\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

You might be right.  Maybe I'm myopic, maybe us people shooters are all myopic and can't see what other photographers are up to, why they need a P65.  That being said, two people I know just shot some large campaigns for McCann Ericson.  Heavy composits of large format and 67 film scans in one case, and D2xs images in the other case.  That's right, D2xs.  These are six figure jobs.  So why blow money on MFD?

The only people who bitch about 35mm digital are beauty clients and retouchers.  I like MFD, but its getting harder to justify keeping it around when the ds3 is so close, so easy, almost cheap.  The new Nikon should be even better.  The new Sony, from what the Sony pro video product manager told me, inherits much of the know how of digital image processing from the pro line Sony video cams like the EX1 and 3.  If that is true, the new Sony with its CZ lenses may be the BOMB.  So what if you have to gaff tape the Sony logo so people stop making fun of you.  It might be a piddling $3k, full kit with CZ lenses for under $7k.

[gwhitf]

I do know that when I see that video of Annie photographing the Queen with a Canon it kind of throws me. 
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=210626\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Do not forget, Annie comes out of a documentary background. A couple of Nikons thrown around her neck, and get on the tour bus. So truth be known, she probably prefers the familiarity. She's also going for the expression, so who wants to be standing next to her when she pushes the shutter release on that P45, and nothing happens, because the back hasn't recycled yet?

I know I don't.

She goes with what works.

As does, sadly, Demarchelier. But again, just make sure and don't tell Anthony R; we don't want to burst his bubble.

[James R Russell]

Do not forget, Annie comes out of a documentary background. A couple of Nikons thrown around her neck, and get on the tour bus. So truth be known, she probably prefers the familiarity. She's also going for the expression, so who wants to be standing next to her when she pushes the shutter release on that P45, and nothing happens, because the back hasn't recycled yet?

I know I don't.

She goes with what works.

As does, sadly, Demarchelier. But again, just make sure and don't tell Anthony R; we don't want to burst his bubble.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=210634\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Once again I don't sell cameras so I shouldn't care, other than I want what I want and I guess what I want isn't  really there.

As far as the p65+ market place (the name of that camera sounds like something from the AARP), I do think there are a lot of people here and a lot of people that read this that exactly ARE the medium format market.

They're just not reaching them.

Some is the lcd, some the is iso, some is the speed of shooting, some is the cart o' rocks and some it's just a money thing.

The money thing is the most interesting, becuase I know and I think you feel the same way, I would drop 20 grand on a camera like the Rolliflex (I'm not going to call it an HY6) if I was positive it would be the only still camera I would have to buy for at least the next 10 years.

It might be, but the way the digital companies work, upgrading by the year, I don't trust that what I spend that kind of money on will be viable until then.

It's fine for 5, 6, or 7 grand if canon pushes me into a new camera but a $40,000 or $50,000 system that THEN takes $20,000 to upgrade to the next . . . that's where the problem is.

It's not the initial costs, its the fact that none of us believe the costs will ever even out.

JR

[Snook]

You might be right.  Maybe I'm myopic, maybe us people shooters are all myopic and can't see what other photographers are up to, why they need a P65.  That being said, two people I know just shot some large campaigns for McCann Ericson.  Heavy composits of large format and 67 film scans in one case, and D2xs images in the other case.  That's right, D2xs.  These are six figure jobs.  So why blow money on MFD?

The only people who bitch about 35mm digital are beauty clients and retouchers.  I like MFD, but its getting harder to justify keeping it around when the ds3 is so close, so easy, almost cheap.  The new Nikon should be even better.  The new Sony, from what the Sony pro video product manager told me, inherits much of the know how of digital image processing from the pro line Sony video cams like the EX1 and 3.  If that is true, the new Sony with its CZ lenses may be the BOMB.  So what if you have to gaff tape the Sony logo so people stop making fun of you.  It might be a piddling $3k, full kit with CZ lenses for under $7k.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=210627\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Dude I work for McCann all the time and do Big AD jobs with them as well as many other big ad agencies here. Dittborn,Olgivy,Lowport etc..
Guys are shooting huge campaigns with 5D's!!
Talk about depressing!
After all the retouching that goes on these days...A lot of technical BS does not matter.
The only difference (for the retocuher like myself) is it is more forgiving with the higher dynamic range.
I personally have not used the 1DsMIII but can imagine if it's DR improved it should be fine for just about anything.
Unless you are shooting Gallery Art images or where you need that extra room.
Your basic magazines billboards and about all of what I do, No-one is going to notice...
 Good example...
DaveHill...:+}
He was shooting Big jobs with a friggn' 5D for a longtime as well as white lightning flash
His latest Backstage stuff is with HassleBlad and 30"cinema displays....:+}
I guess he even starting feeling bad about charging 50,000 for a campaign and doing it with a 5D..:+]
SNook

[ron203]

I do know that when I see that video of Annie photographing the Queen with a Canon it kind of throws me. 

I mean, you'd expect the world's most famous photographer would photograph the world's most famous person with a camera that wasn't owned by the service manager at a Chevy dealership.

You'd expect an 8x10, or an RZ with a huge bellows, or maybe even something that said Rolliflex, Leica or Hasselblad.

But a 1ds2 with a zoom? . . . kind of strange looking and not that it should matter because the photos were fine and I'm sure Vanity Fare and their retouching wizards got it all right.

JR
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=210626\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Hi James, I agree with you for the most part, but I think it's *great* that my clients are not too concerned with which camera I use. They look at my portfolio, at the LCD during the shoot and the final images and they go by that - as they should. Do any of you want the client telling you which camera you can use for the job?

I think it is very refreshing to see a shift in focus - where the end result is what matters most. They trust the LCD and trust the photographer. I believe that's the way it should be. Do your art directors even know which brand of camera you are using? I'm pretty sure mine don't.

re:
"As does, sadly, Demarchelier. But again, just make sure and don't tell Anthony R; we don't want to burst his bubble."

Out of curiosity, what is sad about it?

[gwhitf]

re:
"As does, sadly, Demarchelier. But again, just make sure and don't tell Anthony R; we don't want to burst his bubble."

Out of curiosity, what is sad about it?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=210651\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Some guys, you just have a picture of them working. With an old school guy like Demarchelier, you want him hunched over a film Hasselblad, or a 4x5. You just want him to be saying, "Yoo eediot -- deed you drop zee dark slide again into zee grass?", instead of saying, "Ah wee on Raw, or on JayPeggzz comprezzion seeex?"

It would be like seeing a picture of Roversi working, and he's sitting in some bad lawn chair, looking through a 5D or something.

There's just something cool about driving by an old man, mowing his yard, with one of those cyclical manual blade lawn mowers. It's like he's flipping the bird to The Future.

Some things, you just don't want to ever change.

[James R Russell]

Some guys, you just have a picture of them working. With an old school guy like Demarchelier, you want him hunched over a film Hasselblad, or a 4x5. It would be like seeing a picture of Roversi working, and he's sitting in some bad lawn chair, looking through a 5D or something.

There's just something cool about driving by an old man, mowing his yard, with one of those cyclical manual blade lawn mowers. It's like he's flipping the bird to The Future.

Some things, you just don't want to ever change.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=210656\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

If you want to see people smile, just shoot with that little leica.*

Not that it impresses, actually it does, but it looks like a film camera.  I even love you have to take the bottom off of it to change the card.

Not that the camera makes the artist, its always the other way around, but using the same camera the car mechanic uses kinda bugs me.  

Personally I don't really care what Annie shoots with, or who does her retouching, I just find it a little strange to see that ugly as hell zoom pointed at the Queen.  When I saw that video I really thought she was just scouting locations.

JR

*the leica shoots full rez jpegs AND DNG AND the DNG will work in anything, even photoshop 7.

**not that I have anything against car mechanics***

***Actually I do have something against car mechanics, at least the ones I pay.

[Snook]

Hi James, I agree with you for the most part, but I think it's *great* that my clients are not too concerned with which camera I use. They look at my portfolio, at the LCD during the shoot and the final images and they go by that - as they should. Do any of you want the client telling you which camera you can use for the job?

I think it is very refreshing to see a shift in focus - where the end result is what matters most. They trust the LCD and trust the photographer. I believe that's the way it should be. Do your art directors even know which brand of camera you are using? I'm pretty sure mine don't.

re:
"As does, sadly, Demarchelier. But again, just make sure and don't tell Anthony R; we don't want to burst his bubble."

Out of curiosity, what is sad about it?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=210651\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

My clients chose me for my artistic interpretation and that they will leave knowing they have a good quality image.
But unfortunately we do not live in a fair world and people are obviosly impressed by names, who should know that better than us.
We are trying the whole time to get people to buy stuff b/c of our images..
It is just a fact that people want and are used to already looking at the back of the LCD.
I used to have a client that every time I took a picture she would actually try and grab my cmaera and look at the lcd all the time and I told her lady or not if she does it again I would smack her upside the head..
It literally drove me crazy.
Now they are always touching and pushing my 30" cinema display..:+}
I love shooting tethered and never need the LCD for that as many stated..
Snook

[Dustbak]

My clients never ask or bother what camera I use. They expect it to be good and be able to use it.

I don't think anything is totally ideal. I don't really care but just take what I can use and like to use.

I love using my DSLR's but do get bored with them sometimes, perfection (in operation that is) can be so deadly boring. The MF equipment with its sometimes nasty attitude is simply much more fun to work with. This, for me always generates images I enjoy a lot more. As long as the inconvenience doesn't get above a certain comfort level naturally.

Most clients don't see the difference when I work with 12MP (Nikon), 16MP MF or 39MF. Some do see it and some do but don't know what they are seeing. I had one lately that I did everything multishot for but the last items. I got lazy and did these single shot. These last items were immediately rejected! Frankly I don't care whether clients can see it, I can and that is enough for me.

Main reason for using MF is the fun of it. Would I still be shooting it when Nikon comes with equipment that is equal in performance? I guess I would.

[pss]

annie shoots canon for probably the same reason she shot RZ with film...she is just about the LEAST technical person on the planet...so she just wanted something that just worked.....and the canons just do....with her retouching crew, she could shoot the queen with a 2 year old rebel and the final images would be amazing....

an assistant of mine mentioned when we talked about film/digital/equipment that wit the arrival of the 5D, the sewer was open....anyone could afford one and anyone could now produce files good and big enough for just about ANY job....so anyone with a 5D started calling themselves a photographer....when i lived in NY, i thought there are 1000s of photographers there and most of them pretty good and knowledgable...here in LA, i think there are actually 100.000s....and most of them have absolutely no clue and just mess up the market from the bottom.....they are the ones people turn to to shoot the small ad, the low budget shoot.....the client usually isn't very happy but did not pay that much and the next time then will go with the next guy....and they just run from anyone who mentions "usage".....

the leica myth started because all these great shooters used leica and everybody wanted to have shots just like them....nothing wrong with that at all...some people sit in a mercedes and think they are Fangio.....buying the same guitar as jimi does not make you play like jimi or if it does, does it put you in the same catgorie? there is a guy on 3rd street who plays "just like jimi...which is exactly his "problem".....

james mentioned the leica and i can say that no camera i have ever owned got that overall positive reaction....i have big hands and it look tiiiiiny....like a toy....(i have had mine sitting next to a H3 and one of the clients mentioned that "now that looks like a camera"...talking about the leica...)  but everybody knows leica....nobody owns one (but their great uncle who got them interested in art and photography and really knew a lot about it had one) and once they see the files pop up on the screen and everything looks great and you can count eyelashes, nobody asks about megapixels or resolution anymore......if they do, all you have to do is turn it into a philosophical discussion about "look", "feel"...the drawing of the lenses and they are reminded of the last time they got frustrated because aunt emma, who has no clue but a 14mpix p&s emailed them a kinda shitty looking full rez jpeg and messed up their blackberry for the rest of the day....

it really does not matter what one shoots with and avedon would probably still shoot the west with 8x10...it is still better and no canon, nikon or DMF system would provide that kind of authority.....

in a way the canons and nikons have become the "least" professional cameras because everyone who gets "serious" about photography these days has one......

[Snook]

annie shoots canon for probably the same reason she shot RZ with film...she is just about the LEAST technical person on the planet...so she just wanted something that just worked.....and the canons just do....with her retouching crew, she could shoot the queen with a 2 year old rebel and the final images would be amazing....

an assistant of mine mentioned when we talked about film/digital/equipment that wit the arrival of the 5D, the sewer was open....anyone could afford one and anyone could now produce files good and big enough for just about ANY job....so anyone with a 5D started calling themselves a photographer....when i lived in NY, i thought there are 1000s of photographers there and most of them pretty good and knowledgable...here in LA, i think there are actually 100.000s....and most of them have absolutely no clue and just mess up the market from the bottom.....they are the ones people turn to to shoot the small ad, the low budget shoot.....the client usually isn't very happy but did not pay that much and the next time then will go with the next guy....and they just run from anyone who mentions "usage".....

the leica myth started because all these great shooters used leica and everybody wanted to have shots just like them....nothing wrong with that at all...some people sit in a mercedes and think they are Fangio.....buying the same guitar as jimi does not make you play like jimi or if it does, does it put you in the same catgorie? there is a guy on 3rd street who plays "just like jimi...which is exactly his "problem".....

james mentioned the leica and i can say that no camera i have ever owned got that overall positive reaction....i have big hands and it look tiiiiiny....like a toy....(i have had mine sitting next to a H3 and one of the clients mentioned that "now that looks like a camera"...talking about the leica...)  but everybody knows leica....nobody owns one (but their great uncle who got them interested in art and photography and really knew a lot about it had one) and once they see the files pop up on the screen and everything looks great and you can count eyelashes, nobody asks about megapixels or resolution anymore......if they do, all you have to do is turn it into a philosophical discussion about "look", "feel"...the drawing of the lenses and they are reminded of the last time they got frustrated because aunt emma, who has no clue but a 14mpix p&s emailed them a kinda shitty looking full rez jpeg and messed up their blackberry for the rest of the day....

it really does not matter what one shoots with and avedon would probably still shoot the west with 8x10...it is still better and no canon, nikon or DMF system would provide that kind of authority.....

in a way the canons and nikons have become the "least" professional cameras because everyone who gets "serious" about photography these days has one......
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=210669\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Hey Paul what are shooting with these days..:+}
Snook

[robert zimmerman]

an assistant of mine mentioned when we talked about film/digital/equipment that wit the arrival of the 5D, the sewer was open....anyone could afford one and anyone could now produce files good and big enough for just about ANY job....so anyone with a 5D started calling themselves a photographer....


jesus, what did a hassy 500 series and a fist full of porta cost 15 - 20 years ago? or did you have to have a special badge to buy one?
nothing a car salesman couldn't have afforded. if anything, professional cameras, lighting, computers, and and and equipment have become more difficult for a hobby photographer to afford.

as far as i'm concerned everyone on the planet can have the same perfect camera, then if my freakin firewire cable goes down or my lens locks up i can ask the nearest janitor or waitress to loan me theirs.

[rethmeier]

James,
I've found the solution for you.

"The money thing is the most interesting, becuase I know and I think you feel the same way, I would drop 20 grand on a camera like the Rolliflex (I'm not going to call it an HY6) if I was positive it would be the only still camera I would have to buy for at least the next 10 years."

If you don't want the Sinar or Leaf logo on the Hy6,all you need to dois get the viewfinder for the Rolleiflex version of the Hy6.

It's still grey though,not black.

I shoot with the Sinar Hy6 btw and love that little camera!

Keep up the good work!

Cheers,
Willem.

[rainer_v]

Dude I work for McCann all the time and do Big AD jobs with them as well as many other big ad agencies here. Dittborn,Olgivy,Lowport etc..
Guys are shooting huge campaigns with 5D's!!
Talk about depressing!
After all the retouching that goes on these days...A lot of technical BS does not matter.
The only difference (for the retocuher like myself) is it is more forgiving with the higher dynamic range.
I personally have not used the 1DsMIII but can imagine if it's DR improved it should be fine for just about anything.
Unless you are shooting Gallery Art images or where you need that extra room.
Your basic magazines billboards and about all of what I do, No-one is going to notice...
 Good example...
DaveHill...:+}
He was shooting Big jobs with a friggn' 5D for a longtime as well as white lightning flash
His latest Backstage stuff is with HassleBlad and 30"cinema displays....:+}
I guess he even starting feeling bad about charging 50,000 for a campaign and doing it with a 5D..:+]
SNook
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=210641\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

i shot mf mainly for the lenses , in architecture this is a completely other theme than for fashion work. i dont talk about magic "3d glowing", i talk about shift / tilt / wa stuff with lo distortion. here i have no choice, either to work with 4x5 film or to work with mf shift camera,.- the things with canons get very complicate although its possible too if someone really knows to use the 35mm cams together with solutions as the zoerk . but just to a certain point, than this 35mm thing becomes to complicate and too limiting.
although in mf still the wide end is limited, so in one of 20 shots i need it wider than my stitched 28HR takes me.
in this cases i take my 5d together with my ( selected ) sigma 12-24 lense,-  which is by far the best corrected 35mm wide lens i ever saw .
often these superwide shots are taken by the clients as eye catchers, so they are also often publicated, in this case mostly mixed with my mf stuff,- sometimes as doublespreads in magazines as well as in books. never i had any complain about quality or resolution of my 5d/sigma shots.
 ..... but as i said. i need good corrected  shift lenses whenever i can use them, so i work with mf backs and systems.   thats an easier decision in architecture than if i would shoot people,-. in this case probably i would use the canons a lot .

i will upgrade probably in some time to higher resolution, after the first few 100 beta testers will have confirmed that their new phase/hassy/leaf/sinar backs  will dcertainly not show nice centerfolds or whatever.
but honestly there is not any NEED to upgrade for higher resolution. and not any  hurry.
for me its not such bad time point now, because the need to invest a lot go digital is over for me, i already did it  and i have a very nice system and i know to use it to its limits after some years of digital. the big step was to change 4x5" to 22mp and later to 33 including lenses, cameras and so on.
i felt that i had to do this change 3 years before and i havent regretted it.
but now? i dont feel any stress about 50, 65 or xxx MP backs. thats really different to my point 3 years before. even i am not sure if i will upgrade my 5d if the 5d2 will come out. my most used lenses ( the sigma12-24 and the canon 100-400 ) are at its resolution limits ,there will not be a difference visible if i put a 17 or 22mp sensor behind them,- i dont need hi isos... so for what. maybe i will do and upgrade my back if this is possible in the future, maybe not,- but there is no stress in this decision and this is not so bad.

lets see how the mf companies will go on selling this hi-res backs, which nearly no one needs.
you can get now pretty nice p30+ a65 or e54 backs for prices which are not so far away from than the canons. i cant see how phase will get back their investment in the exclusive 65mp dalsa sensor... but lets see.
another story about lenses and about cameras ( clear that i wll work with an artec ...    ).
 in hardware for architecture shooters the evolution is in the middle and not on a similar point than the mf resolution already stays. but if i have what will work fine for me my interest is going down a lot,- i know this from me. and my e75 back has already reached this point ....

[attachment=7605:attachment]
canon 5d with sigma @12mm

[TMARK]

i shot mf mainly for the lenses , in architecture this is a completely other theme than for fashion work. i dont talk about magic "3d glowing", i talk about shift / tilt / wa stuff with lo distortion. here i have no choice, either to work with 4x5 film or to work with mf shift camera,.- the things with canons get very complicate although its possible too if someone really knows to use the 35mm cams together with solutions as the zoerk . but just to a certain point, than this 35mm thing becomes to complicate and too limiting.
although in mf still the wide end is limited, so in one of 20 shots i need it wider than my stitched 28HR takes me.
in this cases i take my 5d together with my ( selected ) sigma 12-24 lense,-  which is by far the best corrected 35mm wide lens i ever saw .
often these superwide shots are taken by the clients as eye catchers, so they are also often publicated, in this case mostly mixed with my mf stuff,- sometimes as doublespreads in magazines as well as in books. never i had any complain about quality or resolution of my 5d/sigma shots.
 ..... but as i said. i need good corrected  shift lenses whenever i can use them, so i work with mf backs and systems.   thats an easier decision in architecture than if i would shoot people,-. in this case probably i would use the canons a lot .

i will upgrade probably in some time to higher resolution, after the first few 100 beta testers will have confirmed that their new phase/hassy/leaf/sinar backs  will dcertainly not show nice centerfolds or whatever.
but honestly there is not any NEED to upgrade for higher resolution. and not any  hurry.
for me its not such bad time point now, because the need to invest a lot go digital is over for me, i already did it  and i have a very nice system and i know to use it to its limits after some years of digital. the big step was to change 4x5" to 22mp and later to 33 including lenses, cameras and so on.
i felt that i had to do this change 3 years before and i havent regretted it.
but now? i dont feel any stress about 50, 65 or xxx MP backs. thats really different to my point 3 years before. even i am not sure if i will upgrade my 5d if the 5d2 will come out. my most used lenses ( the sigma12-24 and the canon 100-400 ) are at its resolution limits ,there will not be a difference visible if i put a 17 or 22mp sensor behind them,- i dont need hi isos... so for what. maybe i will do and upgrade my back if this is possible in the future, maybe not,- but there is no stress in this decision and this is not so bad.

lets see how the mf companies will go on selling this hi-res backs, which nearly no one needs.
you can get now pretty nice p30+ a65 or e54 backs for prices which are not so far away from than the canons. i cant see how phase will get back their investment in the exclusive 65mp dalsa sensor... but lets see.
another story about lenses and about cameras ( clear that i wll work with an artec ...    ).
 in hardware for architecture shooters the evolution is in the middle and not on a similar point than the mf resolution already stays. but if i have what will work fine for me my interest is going down a lot,- i know this from me. and my e75 back has already reached this point ....

[attachment=7605:attachment]
canon 5d with sigma @12mm
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=210718\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

There will always be a need for technical cameras, which is why Sinar will be one of the surviving companies if and when there is a shakeout in the MF industry.  I am really impressed that they made the ArcTec, and I am very impressed with the Hy6.  If I were in Europe I'd bite!

Cheers Rainer!

[pss]

an assistant of mine mentioned when we talked about film/digital/equipment that wit the arrival of the 5D, the sewer was open....anyone could afford one and anyone could now produce files good and big enough for just about ANY job....so anyone with a 5D started calling themselves a photographer....
jesus, what did a hassy 500 series and a fist full of porta cost 15 - 20 years ago? or did you have to have a special badge to buy one?
nothing a car salesman couldn't have afforded. if anything, professional cameras, lighting, computers, and and and equipment have become more difficult for a hobby photographer to afford.

as far as i'm concerned everyone on the planet can have the same perfect camera, then if my freakin firewire cable goes down or my lens locks up i can ask the nearest janitor or waitress to loan me theirs.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=210705\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

itis not about the cost.....canon probably sold more 5Ds in a month then hass 500 series in its lifespan.....

[TMARK]

itis not about the cost.....canon probably sold more 5Ds in a month then hass 500 series in its lifespan.....
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=210744\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

With a Blad and fist full of Portra you had to know what you were doing. You had to use a meter. It took some time to get film back from the lab or you had to get your hands dirty developing and printing yourself.  Skills.  Then when you got the film back all that effort could be wasted if the film came back blank, or under exposed, or over exposed etc.  Again, skills that take time, dedication and practice to master.  You couldn't  start blasting away, looking at the screen to see if you have an image.  That's why the sewer opened up.  Its easy to take an image.

[James R Russell]

itis not about the cost.....canon probably sold more 5Ds in a month then hass 500 series in its lifespan.....
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=210744\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I like cameras, most of them, but the 5d is something I really could never own. I picked one up, looked through it and put it down.

Done.

I think it's just because when I started you saved for cameras, borrowed money for cameras, went in dept for cameras before you would never think about shooting a professional job with an amateur camera, under any circumstance.

I know the people that like the 5D like it a lot but I wouldn't have it.

The Canons are perplexing to me.  I absolutley love the original 1ds and will have it forever. I even still use it some, I really have never warmed to the 1ds2.  I do use it, sometimes a lot but I just don't like the color, or the file sharpness.  I can fix it in post and it's a good workable camera, but I have no bond or feeling for it whatsoever.

Given than I will buy a 1ds3 this week and if I like it I'll buy another for backup.

I don't care about the sewer rot, every industry has it in some form, so I can't blame a camera for that.   I just don't like the 5d.

JR