Ok, I fully expect this to be controversial.
And yes, I am sticking my neck pretty far out as a first-time poster on Luminous Landscape.
But I have been reading the site for months and months, and it was a key part of my research earlier this year when I decided to come back into photography and strated looking at gear.
Specifically, I spent about a decade working as a photojournalist. Then, three years ago, I branched out into pure written journalism, taking a complete break from photography. Then this year, with my journalism credentials ensured, I decided to revive my photography career, specialising in portrait photography while also doing the interviews for those pictures.
But my new role will be freelance, while all my previous roles were either in the employment of newspapers or news agencies. So, for the first time in about 15 years, I have to buy my own camera.
Now, I studied photography in the final days before film, and large and medium format cameras were a cornerstone of my training (we used Mamiya bodies for medium format, but I don't recall which brands we used for large format).
So when I decided to return to photography, I took a long hard look at medium format. I read all of the arguments - that clients take you more seriously; the unarguable fact that larger sensors provide physics with a better canvas; that slow frame rates encourage better composition.
And I was on the very verge of ordering my first Hasselblad H5D (or perhaps a H4x) with three lenses. In fact, I went to the Birmingham (UK) Camera Show for a final check and a chat with the Hasselblad reps before ordering.
Now this would have been a massive capital outlay for an unproven business plan, but I really didn't mind. I was sure I could make it work.
But then, at that show, something made me stop and think. I'm not sure whether it was the crammed interest at the Nikon and Canon stands with the relative sparcely visited Hasselblad stand or the fact that Phase One was hardly even represented - but I started wondering about R&D money.
I don't think it is up for argument that fewer professionals today use medium format than back in the days when I trained. I know many bread and butter photographers - and almost none of them use this format. So where is the money going to come from to keep pushing lenses further? Few amateurs can afford these systems.
And then another seed of doubt was sown. If the market had shrunk so much, isn't it just possible that at least one of the producers will at some point have to look very hard at the bottom line and throw in the towel, leaving fewer feeders for a smaller stock of buyers?
Now, buying a brand new system is a pretty painful thing to do. I don't want to do it more than once in 15 years. And if I can't be relatively certain that the manufacturer will be able to provide me with ever improving glass and sensors over that period, well then that is just one question mark too many.
With all this in mind then, I just ordered my D810 and a handful or prime lenses. It has been a painful decision, and I want to thank the Luminous Landscape community for all the info you have posted that helped inform my decision.
I wrote a bit more about this in my blog here:
Why I chose a Nikon D810 over a Hasselblad H5D