I don't care about any of this shit. Quantum efficiancy blah blah f____ blah. Where the rubber meets the road is what is important. If I could have had a back that produced a clean 1600 - 2000iso in 2008, when we started in motion and I lit everything with ARRI Fresnel's and HMIs, I would have kept using the backs. At the time the only option was the P65+ using sensor plus. The f__k if I was going to spend $40k for a 15mpx file for a still image, which in terms of ad production work, is an after thought. I had already sold my P30+ (same chip as the H31?) to spend copious amounts of money on Red stuff, which actually returned the investment quickly, even in the depths of the recession.
And no, I'm not excited about CMOS. I think it will be different. If it does make a clean file at 1600 - 2000iso, it re-opens the door to MF for many professional ad shooters. I think that's great.
I agree with you on most points. For video I can use medium format for most of the still work as my p30 will go to 800. The issue with me and medium format on a motion project isn't the file quality, it's the time involved we have available to shoot the stills. That's why I bought an S2.
I will be quite happy when I rid myself of most 35mm dslrs as I find them boring and old tech and not old tech in a good way.
But your right, all this white paper crap means nothing, because nobody has used the camera yet and conjecture and real world are miles apart.
The question I would ask (though I know the answer) is the people that will complain about the new medium format cameras will be from people that wouldn't buy them anyway, so who cares? I doubt seriously if the medium format companies do. Don't waste time with people that won't hire you, only go to the ones that will.
I would think that good photographers would jump up and down happy for more options, not bitch like little girls that caught their boyfriend kissing their best friend.
I think that people that bitch about medium format are basically just pissed that the prices of medium format costs what it does. There the same as RED haters in the cinema world. Either they want cameras to be a million dollars that everybody has to rent, or cost less than a cheap dinner.
To me that's the worse part, because I know the people that make, sell and service these larger than 35mm still cameras and they offer professional, honest service, not Amazon click, guess and save 4 dollars sales models.
Because they offer this service they need to be compensated, and being compensated is not a dirty word.
In your comment about the RED's mine paid for themselves 10 times over in the first year. Some was the image quality, some the usability and some was the seriousness of the service our studios provide.
I decided if I was going to go into motion I wasn't going to f__k around and I didn't buy 1 I bought 3. The two R1's dropped in price like a rock a year after i owned them and that didn't matter a whit to me, because they still work and (gasp) they present a professional production and shoot a beautiful file.
IMO
BC
