This is just about the 50MP sensor which Kodak announced recently. I received the spec sheet today:
FWIW, the dynamic range seems to be around 11.5 stops.
I can't remember where... but I read about Phase not being sure should they use Dalsa or Kodak sensor this time..... Perhaps, that could effect the size of megapixels, maybe even the size of the sensor itself!!! Anyway there is nothing on Dalsa website yet.
Bottom line is obviously Kodak 50MP...
Anybody/any info on that?
Last edited by Natasa Stojsic; 8th July 2008 at 09:28.
We just have to wait and see what Dalsa has been working on.
I think there are several surprises still out there folks.
Similar feelings about sharing info, unless things are under NDA, then do not even bother with "teases". While I understand how Photokina is THE big event for this kind of stuff, it seems a bit outdated at this point. The two year span worked well with film based things, but the world of digital is much faster in progression by comparison. Having products ready to go is also important, rather than announcing something being thought of or planned for 1-2 years out. Personally, if a manufacturer has a new or pending product, they should be talking about is as soon as they can or are confident for release. These higher ticket items may be another issue, and should be brought into discussions as early as is practical, not to jump the other competitors as much as to give prospective buyers some time to figure out upgrade paths, compatibilities, and stuff that matters for planning. How hard would it be for Hasselblad to tell folks that the planned 645 sensor was going to work on a redesigned H2F or something? How much does Dalsa (and Leaf and Sinar) gain by not talking about a new sensor they are considering? The games usually lead to much buzz, followed by lots of letdown around this time of year. So I say dump the data on the goods now, and forget about "leaks" and timing for Photokina. Just my opinion here.
Well someone show me the money than. LOL
I just have a feeling this will be a banner year for MF.
They should come out with it now, tell the masses now now now
I'm much more excited about the Hassy announcement that they are going to share information and their direction relative to a true 645 sensor at Photokina vs. the 50MP current size. Since Phase & Hassy use the same chip, I'm sure that they will do the same.
I agree, Ray. Hasselblad was very open (yes, a term many would not associate with them for some things) in announcing that they do have some stuff in the works, that it will be a year or so off, and that they will be talking about it. Not much hidden in that. Details? Not many, but enough to work with to start asking questions about planned bodies, backs, and things. This actually gives Hassy a lot of feedback through questions and customer speculations about how to progress with some of this stuff. That all seems healthier than wondering if Sinar will stick with Dalsa or go to Kodak, or wondering if Dalsa has a bigger sensor coming or not. This info gets leaked out anyway, on purpose or other ways, so better to get it straight from the manufacturers ASAP.
Firm believer in road maps. Just give us a idea if it don't happen fine but a path to follow is better than no path at all.
Sounds like a quote, who did I steal that from.
With a small initial market, high prices and margins, a high level of competition between manufacturers trying to become the market leader and very eager dealers thrown into the mix, the whole process of acquiring a back feels very much like the process of buying an automobile (similar overall cost to the end-user). There's a host of dynamics that arise in that type of environment that are both pleasant and unpleasant.
I agree with your assessment. From a strategic perspective, the MF companies need to be thinking more about growing their entire market, not just competing with each other to be the present market leader. If the entire pie gets bigger, there is more to go around ;-)
Offering "entry level" gear at affordable prices is a great way to get folks using MF systems to start. The more backs they can sell, the more the R&D costs for new sensor development can be amortized across a larger number of units. Volume is the key. So rather than trying to "steal" market share from each other, the more successful strategy is to grow the entire market, as that translates into greater volumes for all players. The market leader thing gets sorted out by lots of things....total units sold or being used, customer service, new offerings, etc. Some may be more important than others, but in the end, the more backs/sensors they sell, the cheaper the costs for those sensors and the more money available to develop new things. Getting folks excited about an entire spectrum of gear offerings should be good business for all, but only if the new offerings can be seen to "fit" into what folks want and are willing to afford. My hope is that more folks get into MF to increase those sales and create more offerings and at more reasonable prices.
Actually if these companies don't make the deal with Dalsa, I would rather see no increase in number of pixels but substantial cut in prices... that way they would WIN financially and improve their chances and I would do that at least for a year or two!!! Not to mention, there are plenty of things to improve that bother us, number of pixels not being one of them...
Instead of arguing and making DB who holds x3 times more pixels than 1Ds MkIII, why not level the price P30+/etc. with 1Ds MkIII and let the game begin
Anyway the price of P30+/etc will drop anyway, probably not enough though!!!
If I was in DB business.... I would make sure that my entry level Camera P30+/etc. would cost not more than the entry level of VISA Credit Card, which I believe is $5000.00!!! That way everybody could have a decent chance/choice!!!
And when I hear their Rep/PRs talking about how market is small..... OF COURSE IT'S SMALL, OBVIOUSLY THEY ARE SHRINKING IT!!!
Historically, (and I have no inside knowledge this is the case now, just speaking from years of marketing experience) the weakest new product to market usually knows it and tries to offset that by speaking first -- IOW if yours aint the best, get as big a head start as you can... That said, both Phase and Leaf have been inordinately silent in response to the Hassy 50MP announcement, so I suspect to hear something at least equal to and quite probably even more impressive when they do finally speak.
What that is, I have no idea, but I would say the two "biggest" deals in our current MF world would be 1) a "bigger, faster or both" back and 2) a "lower cost or entry level" back...
"Perfection is not attainable. But if we chase perfection, we can catch excellence."
I think that what you say is true from an historical perspective but, given Nikons early announcement of what appears to be a remarkable product in the D700, it might not continue to be true today. I am sure that Canon is going to respond with a new 5D replacement but that doesn't take away from the D700 in any way. They will probably both be very good and slightly different as each company plays to its market view and positioning.
I expect the same in MF. Hassy has already announced not only the 50 Mpx back but also the very clever T/S product to solve some of the problems of MFDB compared to a technical camera.
I am equally sure that Phase, Leaf, Sinar et al will be at the gates with their new thrills as well. It seems to me that we now have many choices and only our personal priorities dictate what we end up with. For instance I am not a technical camera shooter nor do I work with multiple MFDB systems (Good lord I can't afford the ONE I have!LOL) so the much more versatile Sinar system didn't get my vote over the Hassy. Anyway, the past 12 months have been a real renaissance for MF and I hope it continues. No matter what equipment we now own, competition and innovation can only be good for all of us who are part of this market.
DPReview has a news story on the new sensor. There is an "editorial" portion written up that is not part of the press release which is a discussion of the new technology baked into this sensor. Sorry I can't give the direct link but it is easy to find on the front page.
Here's how the actual delivery system works in relation to one another.
The jump from 39 to 50 meg looks more substantual than the jump from 31 to 39 meg.
Or is my math off here?
Man, I can't even print that big with my 3800
The new 4 channel technology in this Kodak chip sounds very interesting. Can't wait to see what it can do.
Last edited by fotografz; 30th July 2008 at 04:15.
If 50 meg sporting new imaging technology is the weakest news, all I can say is WOW! ... we are in for retina separating acceleration of MF developments.
I think these companies are in a new age of marketing where interest has to be pre-gauged for small scale production purposes due to olympian outside costs.
At this point of MF development I know quite a few shooters that are tapped out ... me being one of them. My lowly 39 meg will have to do for awhile unless the ecomomy picks up and business improves.
Jack and My Phase body will be here Friday on schedule which initially was announced July for deliveries when it was released to the press.
Yes, it could be that there is another larger sensor in the cooking. It could be a 56mm square sensor to fit the Hy6/Afi or just true 645.
If money is no object, I'd prefer a 56 square, but a smaller rectangle would be less expensive.
If someone would ask me and money IS object, I would be fascinated with a 4:5 ratio sensor (of course, within a revolving back). It would be like shooting with a downscaled super hi-tec Mamiya Rz!!!!
Why this format? - Well, in my years of heavy portrait studio shooting, I loved the Hassy 500Cm because the square allowed for some unintented leaning of the sitter. I never had to re-position my V camera. 4:5 ratio would allow generous sitter leaning too. One thing less to worry, now that with digital right focus is a lot more critical.
So, my vote goes for a new 45X56mm sensor. the H system gets screwed. Ho, ho,ho.
Last edited by Uaiomex; 9th July 2008 at 15:12. Reason: typo
Yes, your math is a little off, but your conclusions remain correct.
Your numbers assume that the pixels are the same size in all three cases, which is not correct (and the sensors are not exactly the same in area either).
Your values would be correct if the pixel sizes and sensor sizes were the same value for each of those image sizes. The correction is relatively minor, and if we standardize to the resolution of the 31MP print, the correct values would be:
31MP image: 21.6 x 16.2 (inches)
39MP image: 23.4 x 17.5 (inches)
50MP image: 26.5 x 19.9 (inches)
And for kicks, a hypothetical sensor of size 56mm x 42mm would compare as follows:
For 7.2 micron pixels (45MP): 25.2 x 18.9 (inches)
For 6.8 micron pixels (50MP): 26.7 x 20.0 (inches)
For 6.4 micron pixels (57MP): 28.3 x 21.3 (inches)
For 6.0 micron pixels (65MP): 30.2 x 22.7 (inches)
Last edited by David Klepacki; 9th July 2008 at 17:34.
Development shouldnt be confined to megapixel count - this is a dumb game.
Give me better autofocus, image stabilisation and data management thank you.
I couldn't agree more about the need for better usability features like autofocus and IS. However, if a manufacturer is going to properly support their ultra-wide lenses, then the additional megapixels make sense and are indeed beneficial. The perspective of these ultra-wide lenses "push" things much farther away and so more pixels are needed to resolve those "smaller" objects. For landscape shooters using such lenses, or even architectural photographers who print large enough, it can make the difference between sharp and blurred details.
Personally, I am hoping to see a 56mm wide sensor someday soon, regardless of the number of megapixels, in order to get the wider field of view that my lenses have to offer. I would rather see a 56x42 or even better a 56x45 size sensor rather than the less wide 48x48 square that is being predicted...but David, I understand your point of view....more megapixels is not required for shooting half-naked models
There is a decent rumor that Hasselblad has saved the real news for Photokina ... a 56X45 back. If the new Kodak sensor technology is employed it will be more than 50 meg. We'll just have to wait and see.
However, like Peter and others, I could care less about even more megs, or quite frankly even a true 645 sensor. I would be far more interested in multi-point AF and higher ISO performance in a 31 meg H camera to better replace a 35mm DSLR ... if I could do away with the need for a DSLR I could even afford to upgrade to a new 31 meg H3D-III/31
My second unwavering desire is for a H focal plane body. That would seal the deal and complete the H system. I personally am not interested in one ot two leaf shutter lenses, I need all of them to be leaf shutters ... however, being able to use all the same lenses on a focal plane body would further eliminate the need for a DSLR.
Are you listening Hasselbald? If you want to recruit even more sales from DSLR users bring forth the H focal plane camera body. 1/6000th shutter would be nice
(I'm hoping that if I say it enough times and loud enough it'll happen )
Hey, Marc....I am completely with your wishes on these things. If Hassy could drop a focal plane shutter body into their H3Dxx mix, that would take all the glass, adapters, and backs in that line, it would be closer to nirvana, I think. I am with you on wanting to use one set of glass, rather than have separate or special "leaf shutter" lenses for use on a focal plane body. (In reality, it is not that different, but if one has a Phase/Mamiya body, they might be doubling up on lenses to shoot leaf shutter needs. That is not any different from Hassy putting out a separate focal plane body, but the idea of being able to use their existing leaf shutter lenses on it is the way to go at this point.)
However we get there, let's just get there. And the other things you mentioned....higher ISO, multi-point AF, etc......all higher on MY list of things to start to completely replace the DSLRs. MP are enough already, but the other things are way behind.
Well Marc, I have to get equal time for Sinar. The biggest shortcoming of the Hy6 is also the lack of a focal plane shutter....
Are you listening Sinar? If you want to recruit even more sales from ALL users bring forth a Hy6 focal plane camera body. 1/8000th shutter would also be nice
Just curious, how would a true 645 digital sensor "screw" a 645 camera system? The HC 28mm would be cropped 1.1X, but all other lenses from 35mm to 300mm are full coverage 645 ... and all the 500 series Zeiss lenses from 30mm to 500mm can be used full 645. The H cameras are true 645. I shoot 120 film with one.
I am just curious as to how much a 56x56mm sensor on a Sinar or Leaf would cost. If the 33mp, sub 645 sensors are circa 36000 (with camera), how much would the 56x56 be? 50,000? 60000? Does that include undercoating and heated leather seats?
I am going to start the anti-megapixel party.
As you know I am a newbie to the Hassy system So far so good as the files are incredible. However I am with you on the need for a focal plane shutter H body! I refuse to sell my Hassy 110 2.0 as it is the best portrait lens I have ever owned (and I have a mint copy of the Contax/Zeiss 85 1.2 50 Jahre!) Sad that I cant use that, or any other FE lens on the H3DII body as it depends on the lens having a leaf shutter.
I really feel that having both Leaf capability and Focal Plane capability is a must in today's MF world. Phase/mamiya already have the focal plane capability and keep hinting they will have some leaf shutter lenses soon. When they do they will put Hassy in a competitive disadvantage which Hassy MUST respond to with a Focal Plane body.
I believe Hassy has done a great job providing things like the V to H adapter so that the investment many of their clients had made in V lenses was preserved! Good for you Hassy. Now complete the job and allow FE lenses to be used with H bodies. PLEASE!!!!!
Wouldn't it be theoretically possible to use 9m pixels in a true FF (56X42mm) in this 50MP sensor? Higher ISO and theoretically less noise, with same number and design for other data gathering and processing hardware.
Or is there a DX type of preference also in the MF cameras, as once was the case in 35mm? (Nikon simply was not able to make a FF, and had to go tyhat way in real facts).
The other question is: Who would want a 50 MP camera, while even 31MP is good enough for everything. Or isn't it?
I have tested the H3DII-31 this weekend, and still can't believe my eyes. There's so much resolution, that it hurts the eyes. Any size prints can be made (my max is 40X60cm). All other parameters like correct color, good DR, excellent 800 ISO performance are there. Excellent film like results..
That's why I wondered why one should pay twice the money for 50MP? (Note that I'm not professional photographer. I may not be fully awarw,e of professional's requirements, but can't think of any). The other problem may be the lenses, as it seemed to me..
Image from Dalyan/Turkey, to show the correct colors, especially Red's in the flag, and the greens. No retouching at all, except for histogram ajjustment to make DR less. In the background are the ancient tombs in the mountain.
Don't be greedy... just use your Contax 645 body and you've got more than most
Agree completely with your assessment of the Hassy 110 f/2 FE (as I'm sure you know). I use mine with the Mam-1 (or Son's) adapter on my Contax 645. One of these days I'll get around to comparing it with the Rollei 110 f/2 to see if there's any noticeable difference between them.
might be that hassy is licking it's wounds over the limited success of the 200 series bodies. i have one and am a happy camper.
The reason the 200 series was not a success at the time was because they charged 7000 dollars for the freaking body. Just the body. In the mid 90s. I lucked out picking mine up on ebay before they took any of the digital backs, and it was a steal. I agree that it is one of the best cameras ever made, but it was priced more than any comparable camera today. It was more expensive than even the Hy6 is today. It was priced like Alpa.
The 50MP image sensor is priced at $3500 in volume.
Well I was lucky to find a used 203FE in mint condition for $2800. It costs another $500 to have it modified for use with the digital back (CFV) and included a full CLA to assure the body met its specs. I should have it back soon and will buy the CFV II kit with the 40 CFE IF lens (i already have one) and sell the new one to reduce the pain.
For sure the 203FE and CFV II with the spectacular Hassy 110 2.0 is unbeatable for portraiture (IMHO). So after selling the 40 CFE IF for about $4K I will have invested a total of $8.5K in the 503 Digital kit and will be using the 203 as well. I will eventually pare down to just one of these bodies and for now at least I would guess the 203FE will win out.
You are absolutely right about this. Photographers had other options which worked well and the price for 200 bodies was out of bounds.
Lucky for all of us today the competition is driving prices. Companies can't get away with pricing as they once did. Just too many options for that to happen.
As I said in another thread, three cheers for capitalism! MF is, and at the volume levels, will likely remain expensive. But there are four (five if you count Rollei) chasing those few customers and we keep getting better and better products. Not cheaply but we do get them.
Will be interesting to see how Leaf and Sinar respond to the higher pixel wars, especially if Phase does have an exclusive arrangement for the 60Mpx Dalsa chip.
BTW I am a bit surprised that Sinar missed the opportunity to introduce a new focal plane integrated (not Modular) camera with a possibility to mount Rollei 6008/Hy6 optics. As I heard Zeiss has dropped the Sinaron-Hasselblad mount line of AF lenses. Even without Zeiss Sinar has all the ingredients for the success. They have a precise shutter (Sinar-M), very good AF and metering electronics (Hy6) and access to the sensors. IMO Mamiya ZD camera was not a professional product and its limitations are well known. I think that a compact modern multi -mount (Rollei + Hasselblad) camera will find acceptance.
I think the Sinar M may have a similar problem to the 203FE/205FE -- it is an interesting and capable system that is extraordinarily expensive. I am not saying it shouldn't be, but the reason that very few people are aware of it is because of its price. The 2008 SinarBron USA price list has the Sinar M at 8588. I am not sure what that includes. But to give you an idea, the list price of the AF 120/4 macro is 8156, the 180/4 is 9707, 40/4 is 12367 (!). Even the standard 80/2.8 is 6538. This is the most expensive kit I have ever seen. The lenses and body alone cost more than most digital backs, so it is no wonder that not many people have even heard of it.