PeterA
Well-known member
Hi Bob,
I totally agree with you regarding the relatively simplistic strategy adopted by those who 'own' the industry. Bigger fins and fatter engines - guzzling down even more megabits of processing power demanding ever more terrabits of storage capability, ignoring fundamental niceties like - umm a database that allows for users to access stored files without needing a PHD in database management :ROTFL:
in another thread I put that i was more interested in some simple technologies of far more significance to a photographer than the resolving ability to see hairs on hairs on hairs of models shot from a distance of a mile away...
what are these valuable technologies?
to add to your list - how about image stabilization ( so that resolving power can actually be used) how about multiple and accurate autofocus points ..the list could go on - see any cheap consumer DSLR body for hints..
the more I shoot digital - the more I like film - so glad I have recently reacquired an Xpan system and kept my film Leica M kit.
this MFD joke of chasing megabits and ignoring other factors is now definitely looking like a con job - I wonder when photographers will start saying .thanks but no thanks..
Regarding the Alpa and Hasselblad H series backs - the work around is using the portable hard drive ( yes expensive) to power the back - a simple cable connecting back to lens ( there is no sleep mode with Hasselblad) is all it takes. Maybe I should post a picture of how it works for me..
Cheers
pete
I totally agree with you regarding the relatively simplistic strategy adopted by those who 'own' the industry. Bigger fins and fatter engines - guzzling down even more megabits of processing power demanding ever more terrabits of storage capability, ignoring fundamental niceties like - umm a database that allows for users to access stored files without needing a PHD in database management :ROTFL:
in another thread I put that i was more interested in some simple technologies of far more significance to a photographer than the resolving ability to see hairs on hairs on hairs of models shot from a distance of a mile away...
what are these valuable technologies?
to add to your list - how about image stabilization ( so that resolving power can actually be used) how about multiple and accurate autofocus points ..the list could go on - see any cheap consumer DSLR body for hints..
the more I shoot digital - the more I like film - so glad I have recently reacquired an Xpan system and kept my film Leica M kit.
this MFD joke of chasing megabits and ignoring other factors is now definitely looking like a con job - I wonder when photographers will start saying .thanks but no thanks..
Regarding the Alpa and Hasselblad H series backs - the work around is using the portable hard drive ( yes expensive) to power the back - a simple cable connecting back to lens ( there is no sleep mode with Hasselblad) is all it takes. Maybe I should post a picture of how it works for me..
Cheers
pete
Peter,
I agree with the assessment above...however changing out a chip would not seem like that big of a deal. Really, how much different are the present backs from those of a couple of years ago. Maybe a slightly improved screen but many of the support functions for the back may not be that different. So you can hype interest with a little change of imaging chip.
Most of the chip R&D is shouldered by Kodak or Dalsa so the back manufacturers need only modest changes in architecture to accomodate the new chip. It would be nice if some forward thinking were involved as demonstrated by Apple in the PC realm. They tend to push the envelope in an effort to stay at the forward edge of the curve.
Dynamic range, signal to noise ratio, color fidelity get short shrift while the ever enlarging pixel number is tantamount to sales. Have you noticed how much bandwidth has been consumed since the new announcements in the past week on this site and others? One wonders what would happen if the back manufacturers really did something truly innovative.
Consider a back that overlayed grid lines in classic, rule of thirds, or user defined layers that would correct for axis and horizontal disymmetry on the fly. Or a hardware based capture that would allow multiple inflection points for automatic depth of field stacking. Or how about one that did more than give a historical histogram based on JPG but one in real time based on raw data with suggestions to improve dynamic range for capture.
The present paradigm is somewhat analogous to the old auto industry...add fins or a bigger engine but keep the old design structure. Although I own a H3DII back I was amused by the recent sliding back adapter. Kind of an admission of difficulty using H3D back on other platforms due to the integral battery/body situation...in fact, after seeing that I cancelled an Alpa TC order as I am unwilling to deal with multiple cables etc.
It seems that we are at a point where it would behoove us to learn how to best utilize the tools we have than to assume that what they market next week or next Photokina will change our art...or in my poor practice my therapy.
Bob