Used digi back pricing?

[Steve Hendrix]

"ALL" as if the actual number is way greater than 2... is it ?

AE -

I stated the manufacturers who do offer this (the number is 3, Phase One, Sinar, Hasselblad) in my post immediately preceding yours. And you are correct, neither Leica nor Pentax bother to offer it, as is their prerogative. Notably, trade in policies are maintained only by manufacturers who offer modular digital backs, as opposed to digital cameras. My point, relative to Theodoros, was that Hasselblad does have a trade in policy.


Steve Hendrix
Capture Integration

[Christoph B.]

I got my P65+ with a 645DF+ and the 80mm LS for about 7.500€... that's about 17% of the original value which is pretty low considering I recently sold my 5D mk II for about 36% of its original value after 6 years.

Honestly I wouldn't have expected that, I would have though it'd be the other way around.

I'm don't think P1 is overpriced, they are high precision instruments with a rather small consumer market - most of the photographers I know don't buy digital MF cameras, they just rent them, so it's not a high volume market to begin with and the price will remain comparatively high.

Therefore the second hand market remains relatively small - normally that would result in high second hand prices, however this market is reduced to people who want to have their own MFD without spending a lot (if they could spend a lot they might as well go for a new one). And due to the fact that digital 35mm is very advanced and comfortable with high quality results, most photographers aren't interested to additionally invest into medium format.

I guess that explains the trade in value as well...

[AlterEgo]

I'm don't think P1 is overpriced, they are high precision instruments

and what is exactly more precise in MFDB there vs for example some dSLR/dSLM high end camera ?

[AlterEgo]

the number is 3, Phase One, Sinar, Hasselblad)

interesting - why Sinar is able to stay un-acquired by P1 so far ? just curious ...

[eronald]

interesting - why Sinar is able to stay un-acquired by P1 so far ? just curious ...

Because Leica bought them. Although there was a strange moment some years ago when there was a rumor that Phase had bought Sinar.

Edmund

[AlterEgo]

Because Leica bought them. Although there was a strange moment some years ago when there was a rumor that Phase had bought Sinar.

Edmund

are you saying that Sinar is not ind. anymore ? but then it is not 3 but 2 (P1 & H) vs 2 (Leica & Ricoh) as Sinar is just a Leica's side business ?

[Christoph B.]

and what is exactly more precise in MFDB there vs for example some dSLR/dSLM high end camera ?

Well - let's put it this way: it's by far easier to build a complete camera where nothing can/should be removed than to build a removable back that lines up perfectly with other cameras and you shouldn't forget that a big sensor size means that you need a big perfect sensor. That's very hard to manufacture, smaller sensors are much easier to fabricate, that's one of the reasons why small cameras with tiny sensors are dirt cheap.

Aside from that the most important aspect of the pricing of the P1 gear is the low production volume. Think about how many Nikon and Canon DSLRs are being produced each and every day vs how many backs P1 produces.

[AlterEgo]

Well - let's put it this way: it's by far easier to build a complete camera where nothing can/should be removed than to build a removable back that lines up perfectly with other cameras

I think I read that it most often than not takes a trip to a dealer/service center to do that (align) when you change - so it is in fact a sign of less precision (that requires man hours of work to correct)... correct me if I am wrong and all MFDB users here are juggling backs/cameras just like that w/o any issues  ? vs for example stabilizing sensor in camera (IBIS) or if we want to involve man-hours of work then aligning dozens off sensor PDAF points in dSLRs to work properly where you have 3 optical paths - to OVF, to sensor, to PDAF sensor

and you shouldn't forget that a big sensor size means that you need a big perfect sensor.

that's true - the yield is naturally lower, but this is about silicone, not about MFDB being more precise...

[eronald]

are you saying that Sinar is not ind. anymore ? but then it is not 3 but 2 (P1 & H) vs 2 (Leica & Ricoh) as Sinar is just a Leica's side business ?

nod.
although the design of electronics and firmware etc are probably Jenoptik (ex Zeiss East Germany)

e.

[Christoph B.]

I think I read that it most often than not takes a trip to a dealer/service center to do that (align) when you change - so it is in fact a sign of less precision (that requires man hours of work to correct)... correct me if I am wrong and all MFDB users here are juggling backs/cameras just like that w/o any issues  ? vs for example stabilizing sensor in camera (IBIS) or if we want to involve man-hours of work then aligning dozens off sensor PDAF points in dSLRs to work properly where you have 3 optical paths - to OVF, to sensor, to PDAF sensor

I don't quite understand what you're getting at... which MFDB user has to bring their camera and back to a service center vor alignment after each DB-change? (Maybe there was a misunderstanding?)
Of course there can be issues if you're using a back that was retroactively adapted to another brand/camera - but a P1 back for a P1 camera is rather perfectly aligned and shouldn't cause any issues at all.

But in medium format the chance of getting it wrong is much bigger than in small format, due to the magnification and smaller DoF; a tiny discrepancy between the focus in the viewfinder and the focus on the sensor might not even be an issue with a small format camera, but with medium format it would be.

That's why I think that MF has much lower tolerances when it comes to alignment issues or general imprecisions.

that's true - the yield is naturally lower, but this is about silicone, not about MFDB being more precise...

Which is why I said "and"

Whenever you have something that can be attached and detached, it becomes a potential weak point in the whole system, that's the reason why we have quite complex camera mounts with big connector knobs instead of small, fragile little pins that can be bent or broken off. But it's not easy to get a good, stable and precise connection when it's a removable part - let alone a removable sensor which simply can not have any tolerance when it comes to its position towards the camera and the lens.
There is no 'wiggle room', it can't be off by 1/10mm, not even after the 1000th reconnection.

Simply put: it has to be more precisely built than a system, where a.) the sensor is in a fixed position and b.) a slight misalignment wouldn't matter.

[Phil Indeblanc]

Christoph, I'd like to agree with you, but I don't.

I hate to bring this up, but I have to use the watch analogy again. I know, its not smooth, but this alignment thing just rang loud in my head.  Just about any watch shop you go to will replace a battery for a japan movement watch for about $20. For a swiss brand the price is at $80-200. And both watches are replaced by the same swiss trained repair professional. OK, enough of that.

Aside from that and aside from the chip MFG hurdles, I think the dSLR's are MUCH more complex than the MFDB.  Of course, I am open to be wowed and wrong....A good example is Pentax making a profit on their MFDB camera all in one. I wonder if they would ever make a DB independent of the camera?

[Christoph B.]

Imagine a watch where you could replace the hands yourself, but it doesn't only display the date, hours, minutes and seconds, it displays milli-seconds as well. That's the equivalent of medium format vs small format.

DSLR's have been around for ages, the only thing you have to do is to put in a sensor and a CF card-slot, feed the whole camera from one battery and that's it. But that wasn't always the case, in the early days there were exchangeable backs with sensors for small format cameras- but it's much easier to just produce a compact, non-removable design, which is why most manufacturers do just that.

An as I already stated, medium format is a different beast because of the sensor size and the resulting magnification, smaller DoF etc. - if the focus is off by just a fraction you'll immediately notice and the photo will be out of focus.
With small format - not so much.

I'm not saying that small format (D)SLRs are all cheap trash, I'm just saying that the requirements and challenges for medium format are much higher.


edit: and of course changing the battery on an expensive watch (which is most likely waterproof) costs more. First of all the person who changes the battery always risks damaging the case (which is expensive to replace) and he/she has to exchange the water seals every time the battery is changed. It is a much more complicated task and takes longer too - that's why it's cheaper for a cheap watch and not so cheap for an expensive one.
After all a formula 1 race car is much more expensive than a Ford Fiesta and having someone change the oil or getting new tires will definitely be more expensive as well.

[Phil Indeblanc]

Imagine a watch where you could replace the hands yourself, but it doesn't only display the date, hours, minutes and seconds, it displays milli-seconds as well. That's the equivalent of medium format vs small format.

DSLR's have been around for ages, the only thing you have to do is to put in a sensor and a CF card-slot, feed the whole camera from one battery and that's it. But that wasn't always the case, in the early days there were exchangeable backs with sensors for small format cameras- but it's much easier to just produce a compact, non-removable design, which is why most manufacturers do just that.

An as I already stated, medium format is a different beast because of the sensor size and the resulting magnification, smaller DoF etc. - if the focus is off by just a fraction you'll immediately notice and the photo will be out of focus.
With small format - not so much.

I'm not saying that small format (D)SLRs are all cheap trash, I'm just saying that the requirements and challenges for medium format are much higher.


edit: and of course changing the battery on an expensive watch (which is most likely waterproof) costs more. First of all the person who changes the battery always risks damaging the case (which is expensive to replace) and he/she has to exchange the water seals every time the battery is changed. It is a much more complicated task and takes longer too - that's why it's cheaper for a cheap watch and not so cheap for an expensive one.
After all a formula 1 race car is much more expensive than a Ford Fiesta and having someone change the oil or getting new tires will definitely be more expensive as well.

I have photographed with 3 different makes of MFDB backs for 10 years now, and I still default to my old 22mpxl back when it comes to purchase and upgrade thoughts. I paid a lot for it at the time..at the time when digital was sort of new in the SLR world (Canon 1Ds cost me $8500) I most likely will be going to Canon, but perhaps to Sony, maybe by the time, Nikon will have something, who knows?

Maybe Ricoh was onto something with the interchangable sensors.  Unless Fuji Honeycomb pattern, or Foveon technology is not exploited into larger mpixels, I see no major reason to upgrade as a improvement across the board. When you get rid of the Bayer, and its limitations, maybe then we can see something new in terms of pixel to pixel gains.  Look at the Light.co camera, sure it maybe noverlty in comparison at this time, but its innovative, as well as Lytro, THese are completely different an new technologies that ARE available for under $2K, they maybe matured and find the right marketing to triple the price...but there is nothing new in the MFDB except some ISO gains, LiveView improvemets.

Anyway, as long as some photographers are finding a way to get advertising dollars to pay for owning such gear in the $15-30K...my hats off to you.

If Doug or Steve would help me land such jobs that pay off this gear, I wouldn't have a problem to get in line to buy one :-)
But if you think getting a MFDB will land you such jobs...be prepared to have your a$$ handed back to you.


I have a feeling if and when I take the dive in the direction of the Sony camera, and adapt the best lens I can for my macro work, I will shake my head in regret on why I didn't do it sooner.  I have mentioned this before, but its been a while....
When I had the Kodak dSLR 14,mp camera with one of the higher resolving lenses, the quality of file was easily there (larger files was something I was looking for, but at the time Kodak backs were 16mp).
At the time I thought it was the Kodaks CCD sensor, non-AA, etc/ISO-6!,  and these did have much influence, but using the right matching lens is ever so important.

[Christoph B.]

Medium format isn't famous for gimmicky sensor- oder camera-voodoo.
The main (or rather the only) feature is it's film/sensor size.

Cameras are a lot like cars, you get very different kinds of cars for very different purposes and you'll find that the ones that have a lot of power aren't the ones with the most luxurious and most technologically advanced features. In a F1 race car you won't find a radio, but you'll find that it's a very powerful car that's perfectly suited for its job and even though it probably won't have an automatic transmission it'll cost you more than a car with an automatic transmission. And it won't be cheap to get a service done, the tires will cost you much more than normal tires..

Same goes for big trucks.

Any vey few people need those special cars themselves, most of the F1 and truck drivers don't own the cars they are driving.

But it doesn't make much sense to complain about the fact that a F1 race car is more expensive than a Ford Focus even though both have only 4 wheels and the basic functionality is the same.

[ErikKaffehr]

Hi,

Formula 1 cars depreciate very fast. After a single season they have only collectors value.

Regarding pricing, the price is always what a potential buyer is willing to pay. Dealers can probably sell at higher prices, but that means that they would buy at lower prices. I have been told, by a credible source, that at least some dealers do run extensive tests on all backs they sell and they also offer some kind of warranty. So buying from a dealer reduces risk, somewhat. Electronics are normally very reliable, if well made, but they can fail at any time. MFD repairs are very expensive.

Best regards
Erik

Medium format isn't famous for gimmicky sensor- oder camera-voodoo.
The main (or rather the only) feature is it's film/sensor size.

Cameras are a lot like cars, you get very different kinds of cars for very different purposes and you'll find that the ones that have a lot of power aren't the ones with the most luxurious and most technologically advanced features. In a F1 race car you won't find a radio, but you'll find that it's a very powerful car that's perfectly suited for its job and even though it probably won't have an automatic transmission it'll cost you more than a car with an automatic transmission. And it won't be cheap to get a service done, the tires will cost you much more than normal tires..

Same goes for big trucks.

Any vey few people need those special cars themselves, most of the F1 and truck drivers don't own the cars they are driving.

But it doesn't make much sense to complain about the fact that a F1 race car is more expensive than a Ford Focus even though both have only 4 wheels and the basic functionality is the same.

[Phil Indeblanc]

Medium format isn't famous for gimmicky sensor- oder camera-voodoo.
The main (or rather the only) feature is it's film/sensor size.

Cameras are a lot like cars, you get very different kinds of cars for very different purposes and you'll find that the ones that have a lot of power aren't the ones with the most luxurious and most technologically advanced features. In a F1 race car you won't find a radio, but you'll find that it's a very powerful car that's perfectly suited for its job and even though it probably won't have an automatic transmission it'll cost you more than a car with an automatic transmission. And it won't be cheap to get a service done, the tires will cost you much more than normal tires..

Same goes for big trucks.

Any vey few people need those special cars themselves, most of the F1 and truck drivers don't own the cars they are driving.

But it doesn't make much sense to complain about the fact that a F1 race car is more expensive than a Ford Focus even though both have only 4 wheels and the basic functionality is the same.

Yes, you can blame me for analogies...lol. this doesn't work too well either :-)

I'm not sure I'm your audience in your anecdote, but I'm familiar enough in the market as I have been watching MFDB prices for years, and been using them for a lot longer. The Foveon or Honeycomb technologies are nothing of gimmick. They are the core of technology. To put it in your context, it is a hydrogen engine. One of the main difference we talk about the difference is skin tone....Anyway.  Its nice to see prices dropping..

Credo80 for $1390
IQ160 for $9100
IQ180 for $14700
Pentax 546D in the mid $2K
Pentax 645Z in the mid $5K (Also an official $1500 drop from MFG to $6999)

Nikon is still around the corner....Whos in a rush?

[Christoph B.]

Credo80 for $1390
IQ160 for $9100
IQ180 for $14700
Pentax 546D in the mid $2K
Pentax 645Z in the mid $5K (Also an official $1500 drop from MFG to $6999)

Well maybe in America the prices drop radically, but in Europe they're aren't as low.

Here a 'new' Pentax 645D still costs about 3.500$ and the 645Z 8.400 $. Maybe you're talking about the 2nd hand market?  But that wouldn't be that much of a drop, now would it?

Perhaps this is the core of all that confusion and dissension; the huge price difference between America and Europe and the rest of the world...


You mentioned sensor stabilisation, the Light L16 Camera etc - those are gimmicks. They are the equivalent of an automatic transmission. Sure they make things easier and more comfortable - but it's not the right thing for everyone and everything and most of the time it's completely unnecessary and something else would do the job much better.

You talk about "NEW" as if it meant something. NEW doesn't get you anything but an ego boost. People who want "NEW" buy a 'new' iPhone every year just to have something new.

[Jeffery Salter]

I have photographed with 3 different makes of MFDB backs for 10 years now, and I still default to my old 22mpxl back when it comes to purchase and upgrade thoughts. I paid a lot for it at the time..at the time when digital was sort of new in the SLR world (Canon 1Ds cost me $8500) I most likely will be going to Canon, but perhaps to Sony, maybe by the time, Nikon will have something, who knows?

Anyway, as long as some photographers are finding a way to get advertising dollars to pay for owning such gear in the $15-30K...my hats off to you.

Hi Phil.  If you were not able to make money from using MFDB backs, then why did you buy them?  Was it for artistic gratification? 

I can't speak for other photographers, but I have been able to pay off my IQ260 by billing my clients in a line item.  I do a wide range of photography from advertising, corporate, commercial and magazine photography.  Here is a great resource of photographers who have successfully integrated Medium format digital photography into their business, Photographer spotlights it's nice blog written by Capture Integration filled with great workflow tips.

I know it's not about the camera or digital back when it comes to doing great photography, it's more about the eyes and mind behind the tripod.

But I have a dirty little secret...I'm blown away by the work of Gregory Crewdson who used to shoot with an 8 x 10 camera but now shoots with an IQ180 on a tech camera.  He puts a vast amount of effort on his sets and casting.  Even going to a small town and talking the freaking mayor into closing off a street.  Then while he directs  the photographer  captures it all on a MFDB. 

To sum it all up,  the value derived from using my IQ260 back in working on my art and striving  towards my aspirational goals is priceless.

Happy friday.  Let's all make some wonderful images this weekend.

[Phil Indeblanc]

Well maybe in America the prices drop radically, but in Europe they're aren't as low.

Here a 'new' Pentax 645D still costs about 3.500$ and the 645Z 8.400 $. Maybe you're talking about the 2nd hand market?  But that wouldn't be that much of a drop, now would it?

Perhaps this is the core of all that confusion and dissension; the huge price difference between America and Europe and the rest of the world...


You mentioned sensor stabilisation, the Light L16 Camera etc - those are gimmicks. They are the equivalent of an automatic transmission. Sure they make things easier and more comfortable - but it's not the right thing for everyone and everything and most of the time it's completely unnecessary and something else would do the job much better.

You talk about "NEW" as if it meant something. NEW doesn't get you anything but an ego boost. People who want "NEW" buy a 'new' iPhone every year just to have something new.

Yes, those are used.... and not specially low prices....I'm trying to stay with the thread title/"used" :-)
(But new 645z now is $6999)

Well our minimum wage here has to account/or offset for someone....Much like the entire slave population feeds the elite...., while waiters and such can actually make a living in EU :-)

Yes, I did mention that the camera is a novelty to cameras as a working tool. There was a time companies made things for the sake of innovation and doing something better, and better can often lead to new or at least improvements. What I see today is the strategy of companies maximising profit, and the grand scheme is to follow this flowchart on how to trickle down products in such a way to meet this profit bearing plan. 


___________________________

Hi Phil.  If you were not able to make money from using MFDB backs, then why did you buy them?  Was it for artistic gratification?

I can't speak for other photographers, but I have been able to pay off my IQ260 by billing my clients in a line item.  I do a wide range of photography from advertising, corporate, commercial and magazine photography.  Here is a great resource of photographers who have successfully integrated Medium format digital photography into their business, Photographer spotlights it's nice blog written by Capture Integration filled with great workflow tips.

I know it's not about the camera or digital back when it comes to doing great photography, it's more about the eyes and mind behind the tripod.

But I have a dirty little secret...I'm blown away by the work of Gregory Crewdson who used to shoot with an 8 x 10 camera but now shoots with an IQ180 on a tech camera.  He puts a vast amount of effort on his sets and casting.  Even going to a small town and talking the freaking mayor into closing off a street.  Then while he directs  the photographer  captures it all on a MFDB.

To sum it all up,  the value derived from using my IQ260 back in working on my art and striving  towards my aspirational goals is priceless.

Happy friday.  Let's all make some wonderful images this weekend.

When I got my back it was long ago, and at the time I did shoots for Vogue, Town&Country, Forbes advertisers, and it paid for itself. But these advertisers have gone inhouse mostly. I'm thinking if I was in the market now, and having a family a mortgage and such, I myself find it impossible to justify spending anything over $6000-7500 for a MFDB that will be of top quality (meaning the larger IQ280 chip/80+mp). Otherwise just work on improving yourself as a photographer.  We are in a age where the learning curve has shrunk to a point where starting photographers are doing free advert photography of some more complex stuff, but due to them wanting exposure, or the portfolio example on their website undercutting jobs with pennies to the dollar, that its almost equal to working as a sketch artist...well it will likely come closer to that with more time. One might make a better living setting up shop in Venice's touristic streets to sell of prints!?

OK, back to MFDB pricing.....

Lower pricing has to trickle down.....Does anyone think ...perhaps as companies that max out at 35mm FF , are now seeing that they have no choice to go larger in sensor size?

[Theodoros]

My believe is that for a back to "make its money back" or not, is totally irrelevant to the price of it... IMO, one should think not if the price is payed back, but rather if he adds a tool he misses or not... I mean, what if a back has payed back or not if the same jobs could have been done as well (and up to the same quality) with an alternative? Partly a reason why I've only aimed for multishot backs after my first one...

As for single shot backs, I can see a reason why one would buy a FF sensor back, but I don't see a reason for the same to get an 80mp one with respect to a 60mp one... I don't see a reason why one should buy a "crazy high ISO" MFDB with respect to another that does well up to 320 ISO since he can always use a DSLR for the same job and additionally, I don't think that one should ever buy a new MFDB, unless if new prices drop to the level that one would cash it as S/H for 65% of the respective new price as it happens with DSLRs...

By the way, I'm pretty sure that if new MFDB prices drop, S/H prices will hardly be affected at all...