D800 impact - Hasselblad cuts prices 22,9 %

[fotografz]

Everyone loves to play photo-psychic.

Me too

I think it is the 35mm DSLRs that have the evolutionary genes of a Dodo Bird, never mind MFD.

Little cameras are swarming at their heals like a gaggle of ninja geese ... enough nips and you bleed to death.

24 meg APSc cameras the size of Chiclets pack ... can FF be far behind? That's 36 meg in a pocket camera that can take Leica M lenses, (the next best thing to view camera optics) ... and these cams are getting their own set of AF optics.

I can see a future where there are two formats ... big formats for special niche work ... contemplative, zen experiences with photography. Or, go everywhere smallness that can shoot in any light, using any lens (if there is even a lens), and software that allows creative choice after the fact.

All the folks that will make this completely happen are in diapers right now ... and everyone who blanches at the idea will have their big brick of a Nikon/Canon 35mm DSLR bolted to their walker, or carved on their headstone.

:ROTFL:

-Marc

 

[Ben Rubinstein]

BTW Marc, I was interested in what you were saying about Hasselblad tapping into their history as Leica do, how do you see that in reality?

 

[ptomsu]

Interesting debate about something which had to happen!

Myself being an HB owner myself and really loving that camera had already several headaches over the last few months since the D800/D800E were announced.

Guess what? I still did not get my D800E which I ordered a day after it was introduced. Instead I bought a Olympus OMD - I really understand it is almost a sacrilege to mention such a camera in an MFD forum, but nevertheless I do!

Simply because this purchase completely changed my mind. I meanwhile love it! It is crazy sharp, has a perfect high ISO performance (as an ex D700 user I would say it is close to that and this is coming now from an m43 chip), it has a crazy fast AF and the world's best IBIS which makes even 600mm equivalent 35 shots real keepers. Plus perfect colors plus it has much less size an weight compared to 35 DSLR and of course even less compared to any MFD solution.

What is my point? I am almost close to cancel my D800E order as I actually do not really need the 36 MP in almost 95% of my shots, as I can print high quality large size also from the OMD files. And for the price of the D800E alone I can get a complete m43 lens lineup from 7 - 300 mm including some high speed primes and with an M adapter I can even use my M glass including my Noctilux or very much loved 1.4 / 75 which becomes then a 1,4 / 150 on the OMD, opening even more untouched territories in high IQ high ISO low light work.

Why all this in that thread? Because I realize that technology is changing our lives faster than we think and in many cases (including myself) are willing to accept. So all the discussion about MFD versus D800 / D800E becomes even more obsolete if you really watch what is already possible today with some other systems - as long as you are willing to think out of the box - whenever you include cameras like the OMD or Fuji X Pro 1 or even some of the latest Sony NEX cameras into account.

I am willing to do so and I am sure there will be much more to follow.

And I can assure you - you will not see the difference in a print up to at least 3x2m !!!!!

Stay tuned what technology will hold for you over the years to come. And try to adopt fast in order not to be in the crowd of the last remaining dinosaurs

 

[johnnygoesdigital]

>Sorry Guy to keep quoting you, but I want to add some colour<

I really feel the D800/MF argument is hyperbole because most people will never choose to own a Leica, or the D800 or Hassie and probably have never heard of Mamiya/Phase One. As far back as I can remember anyway, that's the way things have always been. Leica is the only true SF alternative [to MF] because of the glass. The segment for this gear is small and Hassie are losing out to Phase/Leaf not to Nikon, because Hassie's horrible ego is in the way of their progress. Closed systems, everyone's dream, etc. etc. From childhood I was enamoured with Hassie, but their attitude turned me off, Mamiya were there with something special.

fwiw, here's a name to end the SF/MF [D800] debate. Nick Brandt.

Nick Brandt is indeed one of the best, using a Pentax 67!

 

[Stefan Steib]

Peter

I think this is the main point- creativity will not bedelivered when you buy a MF system (although some seem to belive that). A good and creative photo taken with a Nex or any APS-C will already do for most if not any purposes, even larger prints. I also think that there will be a number to remember: 33 Mpix is the resolution/Filesize of 8K video which will be a standard in Homes in probably 5-8 years, This will replace distribution of about any printed matter and definitely also give the large printer/plotter industry a hard time. Add to this the retina type displays of even todays Apple products and smartphones and then you will see a trend of what people will use to watch images . Now what does it mean ? The media used today to transport large resolutions as generated with MF backs will loose their importance. The professional need for this will be reduced further. A professional system of the near future will need to have other qualities and yes I agree with Marc- this is about modularity, professional ruggedness and a service that keeps this thing going under all circumstances. These systems will not be about max. Filesize but about max. security to get the image when needed. This is the way for MF (whatever this will be in the future) to survive as a professional tool. I also agree that this may come at a cost, highend tools are always expensive. But at the moment I do not see that the Camera makers are seeing their way so clear. They try to mimic DSLR features (with few exceptions) which is wrong - I also agree on that. The 35mm DSLR´s are doomed as are the MF Mirror bodies. In a few years from now all cameras will be using EVIL concepts.

I can only hope the MF companies will understand this. If not - we will have a dramatic devellopment during the next 2-5 years. Everybody can imagine himself what this may look like.

So last sentences: yes there are also other reasons for the Hasselblad Pricecut and the D800 is only a symptom not the primary cause. Nikon (and Canon) will have the same problems to solve soon if some clever other companies will understand the logics behind this and offer products that fit that scheme.

greetings from Lindenberg
Stefan

 

[fotografz]

Interesting debate about something which had to happen!

Myself being an HB owner myself and really loving that camera had already several headaches over the last few months since the D800/D800E were announced.

Guess what? I still did not get my D800E which I ordered a day after it was introduced. Instead I bought a Olympus OMD - I really understand it is almost a sacrilege to mention such a camera in an MFD forum, but nevertheless I do!

Simply because this purchase completely changed my mind. I meanwhile love it! It is crazy sharp, has a perfect high ISO performance (as an ex D700 user I would say it is close to that and this is coming now from an m43 chip), it has a crazy fast AF and the world's best IBIS which makes even 600mm equivalent 35 shots real keepers. Plus perfect colors plus it has much less size an weight compared to 35 DSLR and of course even less compared to any MFD solution.

What is my point? I am almost close to cancel my D800E order as I actually do not really need the 36 MP in almost 95% of my shots, as I can print high quality large size also from the OMD files. And for the price of the D800E alone I can get a complete m43 lens lineup from 7 - 300 mm including some high speed primes and with an M adapter I can even use my M glass including my Noctilux or very much loved 1.4 / 75 which becomes then a 1,4 / 150 on the OMD, opening even more untouched territories in high IQ high ISO low light work.

Why all this in that thread? Because I realize that technology is changing our lives faster than we think and in many cases (including myself) are willing to accept. So all the discussion about MFD versus D800 / D800E becomes even more obsolete if you really watch what is already possible today with some other systems - as long as you are willing to think out of the box - whenever you include cameras like the OMD or Fuji X Pro 1 or even some of the latest Sony NEX cameras into account.

I am willing to do so and I am sure there will be much more to follow.

And I can assure you - you will not see the difference in a print up to at least 3x2m !!!!!

Stay tuned what technology will hold for you over the years to come. And try to adopt fast in order not to be in the crowd of the last remaining dinosaurs

This is the ninja geese nipping at 35 DSLR's heels I was talking about. It is enthusiasts that fuel anything that depends on mass production, not professionals or specialists.

I was watching the TV show "Person of Interest" the other day, and the lead actor was doing surveillance photos with one of the little cams and some telephoto lens ... not the usual 35mm DSLR. The popular movement is afoot! People want small with big performance, and these cams are getting there fast.

This is exactly why I believe that the MFD format has to specialize more, be more of what they are, not less. Why react to 35mm DSLRs, they are doomed. I hardly use my 35mm system anymore ... it's either small or big. MFD needs to go its own way. Market the differences much more strongly.

I use a MFD because aesthetically it has its own look, but just as importantly it provides access to full movements on a view camera not just lenses with partial movements ... my H4D/60 sync's at 1/800th with ALL H lenses, and now so does the S2. Consumers and pros (like some wedding shooters), don't use studio strobes, they use speed-lights ... but many including me do use "big lights". Innovate more specialists equipment, diversify to where the difference is not only understood, it is demanded and expected.

I will not spend one more dime on 35mm DSLR gear ... I will run the wheels off my Sony A900 kit and reserve any cash for making more of my M kit, MFD, and creative lighting solutions. I'd rather have a couple of fresnel heads than a D800

-Marc

 

[fotografz]

BTW Marc, I was interested in what you were saying about Hasselblad tapping into their history as Leica do, how do you see that in reality?

It'd be pure speculation on my part Ben.

With any brand that has a long storied history, there is interest in it in a Luxury or status sense ... this is particularly true of European Brand names with a historical legacy ... myth or not.

When Japan became a financial powerhouse, demand for Leica products skyrocketed. Every US camera show had Japanese buyers with banners above their table with "We Buy Leica" ... they were not selling anything, just buying. Now it is China that's buying.

IMO, Hasselblad has not made enough of its Brand equity, which is a powerful one.

-Marc

 

[subrata1965]

This is what a few of my friends would call a "true joke." I think it's pretty damned smart and great professionally if you have the best of both worlds: A flagship DSLR and a MFDB make for a perfect complement.

Common sense to me, but otherwise Guy, you're freaking genius!

Ken, yes I agree it is common sense and at least that's the only option for many of us. As of now I'm not selling my IQ160, and my Nikon D800E is on back order.

However wouldn't you be happier if you pay $$$$$ and get everything you need in one system (high flash sync, MF / tech cam quality lenses, high ISO and AF performance)?

I'm sure that will have less burden to send your and my kids to college.

 

[kdphotography]

Ken, yes I agree it is common sense and at least that's the only option for many of us. As of now I'm not selling my IQ160, and my Nikon D800E is on back order.

However wouldn't you be happier if you pay $$$$$ and get everything you need in one system (high flash sync, MF / tech cam quality lenses, high ISO and AF performance)?

I'm sure that will have less burden to send your and my kids to college.

I think it is pretty natural to want/desire our equipment to be more and more capable in a "do-it-all" type fashion. But that's also unfair and at least in my mind unrealistic. Similarly we don't expect a high-end sports car to be a great performer off-road like a 4x4 SUV. I don't expect my cameras (at least not in this generation) to behave similarly---or rather, the melding of MFDBs to behave more like a well-heeled DSLR. And the driving force, imho, is that we pay out a large sum of money so somehow feel entitled to a system that can do it all---right or wrong, that's simply not realistic.

Sure the price of entry sucks, but I really think more like what Marc is saying about medium format (Marc, are you scared yet? :ROTFL that medium format needs to focus on what it has always done best.

For me there is also that part of me that just simply enjoys shooting medium format and medium format systems. It doesn't matter what DSLRs offer coming around the corner--it's just not medium format. Not the same feel. Not the same enjoyment. I have absolutely no love for my Canon 1DsIII, but it's just simply necessary for work. And the truth is, it wasn't so long ago I shot weddings with a Mamiya 645AF and AFD with film. No doubt that the Phase DF is better in all respects with better autofocus and a faster MFDB. It's just that DSLRs have gotten that much better and easier to use---so I grab a DSLR. But it just doesn't give me the same enjoyment in photography. If you don't enjoy it, what difference does it make?

Sure medium format digital is expensive, but I'm still working on convincing my kids that community college is so under-rated... :ROTFL: Actually, once you've crossed the threshhold, it's not so bad if you can keep under control in Dante's Inferno...

Seriously, though, I've been using MFDBs for nearly ten years now (Kodak 645M, P30, P45+, P65+, and IQ180). I'm quite used to having a DSLR complement to a MFDB; there's quite a difference between them. There's alot more to medium format digital than just resolution. I really don't see a any DSLR coming close to making me want to walk from medium format digital. Do I envy those with the D800/e as a complement to their MFDBs? Yeah, but I've got too much Canon glass, so I'll just slum it awhile with my 1DsIII and IQ180... :ROTFL:

 

[GrahamWelland]

...

For me there is also that part of me that just simply enjoys shooting medium format and medium format systems. It doesn't matter what DSLRs offer coming around the corner--it's just not medium format. Not the same feel. Not the same enjoyment. I have absolutely no love for my Canon 1DsIII, but it's just simply necessary for work. And the truth is, it wasn't so long ago I shot weddings with a Mamiya 645AF and AFD with film. No doubt that the Phase DF is better in all respects with better autofocus and a faster MFDB. It's just that DSLRs have gotten that much better and easier to use---so I grab a DSLR. But it just doesn't give me the same enjoyment in photography. If you don't enjoy it, what difference does it make?

:thumbs: Exactly. Shoot what you love to shoot; time's too short to go around using stuff you don't like or enjoy.

Sure medium format digital is expensive, but I'm still working on convincing my kids that community college is so under-rated... :ROTFL: Actually, once you've crossed the threshhold, it's not so bad if you can keep under control in Dante's Inferno...

Bwahahaha!! :ROTFL: If only ...

Seriously, though, I've been using MFDBs for nearly ten years now (Kodak 645M, P30, P45+, P65+, and IQ180). I'm quite used to having a DSLR complement to a MFDB; there's quite a difference between them. There's alot more to medium format digital than just resolution. I really don't see a any DSLR coming close to making me want to walk from medium format digital. Do I envy those with the D800/e as a complement to their MFDBs? Yeah, but I've got too much Canon glass, so I'll just slum it awhile with my 1DsIII and IQ180... :ROTFL:

Plus, you know that it's as certain as death & taxes that at some point in the next couple of years at most Canon will have caught up or leap frogged Nikon and the next cycle will begin. Changing out glass is a mug's game and long term is far more expensive than any camera body.

 

[tsjanik]

:thumbs: Exactly. Shoot what you love to shoot; time's too short to go around using stuff you don't like or enjoy.



Bwahahaha!! :ROTFL: If only ...



Plus, you know that it's as certain as death & taxes that at some point in the next couple of years at most Canon will have caught up or leap frogged Nikon and the next cycle will begin. Changing out glass is a mug's game and long term is far more expensive than any camera body.

+1 for that. I seem to recall some posts from several years ago, to paraphrase "Is Nikon hopelessly behind Canon?" It's likely a good time to buy Canon lenses.

 

[subrata1965]

I think it is pretty natural to want/desire our equipment to be more and more capable in a "do-it-all" type fashion. But that's also unfair and at least in my mind unrealistic. Similarly we don't expect a high-end sports car to be a great performer off-road like a 4x4 SUV. I don't expect my cameras (at least not in this generation) to behave similarly---or rather, the melding of MFDBs to behave more like a well-heeled DSLR. And the driving force, imho, is that we pay out a large sum of money so somehow feel entitled to a system that can do it all---right or wrong, that's simply not realistic.

Sure the price of entry sucks, but I really think more like what Marc is saying about medium format (Marc, are you scared yet? :ROTFL that medium format needs to focus on what it has always done best.

For me there is also that part of me that just simply enjoys shooting medium format and medium format systems. It doesn't matter what DSLRs offer coming around the corner--it's just not medium format. Not the same feel. Not the same enjoyment. I have absolutely no love for my Canon 1DsIII, but it's just simply necessary for work. And the truth is, it wasn't so long ago I shot weddings with a Mamiya 645AF and AFD with film. No doubt that the Phase DF is better in all respects with better autofocus and a faster MFDB. It's just that DSLRs have gotten that much better and easier to use---so I grab a DSLR. But it just doesn't give me the same enjoyment in photography. If you don't enjoy it, what difference does it make?

Sure medium format digital is expensive, but I'm still working on convincing my kids that community college is so under-rated... :ROTFL: Actually, once you've crossed the threshhold, it's not so bad if you can keep under control in Dante's Inferno...

MFDB is still lacking behind film days. At least you had ISO 400 films and long exposure capability.

Phase One IQs are still good at ISO 50-100 range only. We had long exposure in P45+, but was taken away with IQ series. I don't care whether you use Kodak or Dalsa sensor. We lost a feature that I care about and existed before. I will not surprised that if someone now suggests that I should use P45+ for long exposure / night photography.

For Landscape photography, I call MFDB "only good light camera". If the light is enough for ISO 100 shoot it, otherwise go and grab the DSLR, doesn't matter how much you hate it, just because it is not MF.

 

[kdphotography]

MFDB is still lacking behind film days. At least you had ISO 400 films and long exposure capability.

Phase One IQs are still good at ISO 50-100 range only. We had long exposure in P45+, but was taken away with IQ series. I don't care whether you use Kodak or Dalsa sensor. We lost a feature that I care about and existed before. I will not surprised that if someone now suggests that I should use P45+ for long exposure / night photography.

For Landscape photography, I call MFDB "only good light camera". If the light is enough for ISO 100 shoot it, otherwise go and grab the DSLR, doesn't matter how much you hate it, just because it is not MF.

I disagree with you regarding MFDBs "lacking behind film days." (sic) I'm doing things now that I would find difficult to do if I were to use film. Let's just say, "different horses...."

When I first bought the P65+, losing the ability my P45+ had for long exposures bothered me initially. But then I forced myself to realize how little I really utilized that one-of-a-kind ability of the P45+. And I haven't missed it at all. And although I do shoot at ISO 35-100 about 90% of the time (ISO 100 for my Canon), I don't find the IQ180 (or P65+) constrained to the lower ISO limits as you would on the P45+. I would not hesitate to bump up the ISO as needed, and that's with or without sensor+.

If we're talking events and weddings, yeah, I grab the DSLR. But for landscape (not wildlife) photography, I haven't been in a single situation where I'd willingly choose my DSLR over the IQ180. And when shooting landscapes, I'm there take in the scenery and enjoy the photography, which means Phase One. The DSLR stays at home.

 

[Nick-T]

The price drop has nothing to do with the D800.

It has everything to do with Photokina.

 

[Paratom]

MFDB is still lacking behind film days. At least you had ISO 400 films and long exposure capability.

Phase One IQs are still good at ISO 50-100 range only. We had long exposure in P45+, but was taken away with IQ series. I don't care whether you use Kodak or Dalsa sensor. We lost a feature that I care about and existed before. I will not surprised that if someone now suggests that I should use P45+ for long exposure / night photography.

For Landscape photography, I call MFDB "only good light camera". If the light is enough for ISO 100 shoot it, otherwise go and grab the DSLR, doesn't matter how much you hate it, just because it is not MF.

I cant comment on the Hassy but I do know that my Sinar 33MP was fine up to 400 ISO at least, and the S2 does fine up to 640 ISO.
But yes, when it gets dark MF is not like a handhold available light camera.

 

[fotografz]

The price drop has nothing to do with the D800.

It has everything to do with Photokina.

Oh,oh, I better start saving up NOW.

-Marc

 

[subrata1965]

I disagree with you regarding MFDBs "lacking behind film days." (sic) I'm doing things now that I would find difficult to do if I were to use film. Let's just say, "different horses...."

When I first bought the P65+, losing the ability my P45+ had for long exposures bothered me initially. But then I forced myself to realize how little I really utilized that one-of-a-kind ability of the P45+. And I haven't missed it at all. And although I do shoot at ISO 35-100 about 90% of the time (ISO 100 for my Canon), I don't find the IQ180 (or P65+) constrained to the lower ISO limits as you would on the P45+. I would not hesitate to bump up the ISO as needed, and that's with or without sensor+.

If we're talking events and weddings, yeah, I grab the DSLR. But for landscape (not wildlife) photography, I haven't been in a single situation where I'd willingly choose my DSLR over the IQ180. And when shooting landscapes, I'm there take in the scenery and enjoy the photography, which means Phase One. The DSLR stays at home.

Ken, thanks taking time to reply and provide your constructive feedback.

I’m glad that Phase One works for your all landscape situation. Unfortunately that’s not the case with me.

Apart from good light condition for which Phase One MFDBs are made for, I also love shooting in the evenings. I have growing interest in shooting after dark and into the blue light region. Not many options with the MF backs.

I love to photograph Yosemite high country and back country. I love to shoot flowing water cascades through the wilderness there. The challenge is due to long exposure in low light, many times I loose desired texture of the flowing water. Now certainly I will not face similar challenges in Death Valley or Monument Valley, however at the same time I can’t say those are one of a kind which requires higher ISO performance. As a photographer I’m asking for freedom.

Now if I want to shoot star trail over Alabama Hills, my IQ160 will be simply unusable for that.

I have tried Sensor+ while photographing Milkey Way over MCway Falls @ Big Sur. It only produced some garbage. Even if it works, it is a compromise with resolution, and not a free lunch.

IMO, Phase One DF is an “okay” DSLR body keeping in mind it’s price as compared to other bodies available in the market. Photographing with DF for landscape is also a compromise with DOF unless I do focus bracketing. Focus bracketing also doesn’t work in every situations especially when I’m photographing lots of trees / flowers in windy condition. So you probably already know many of the Phase One DF owners already sold their setup and switched to technical cameras.

Hence, IQ160 & DF doesn’t meet all of the requirements of my landscape photography. I will really envy you that it matches your style and not mine.

I understand technical camera is an option to overcome the limitation of Phase One DF, however the entire setup requires a significant additional investment and despite that it will be limited by performance of IQ DB.

I have also seen many famous landscape photographers who spent considerable time with 4x5 view cameras switched to MFDB once it offered 40MP resolution. They switched from 4x5 to MF not just because “Medium Format is Medium Format”, but to switch to high mega pixel digital photography, that time only offered by MFDB.

Here is an old article when Charles Crammer moved into MFDB.

Since Nikon came up with D800, many landscape photographers will consider it very seriously since it offers high resolution with more versatility than MFDB. I have personally seen few of the photographers to make that move already, many will do later once they get the delivery of D800 and few will never. Many will have both the system as well until either of the system meets all the requirements at a reasonable price. Majority of the photographers who cares about hard earned money will do “cost-benefit analysis” before saying “medium format is medium format” w/o doing side by side comparison. The images I have seen by MR on LL, I’m sure many photographers won’t be able to distinguish between landscape images taken with whether D800 or MFDB.

Hence I’m convinced that D800 will kick the *** of low end of MFDB for sure. However many of us will not be willing to accept this reality whatsoever the reason could be. However I just don’t want to chant “medium format is medium format” like “Hare Krishna, Hare Rama” without a reality check first.

Now Sinar started offering 25% “temporary off” as well. Will see whether anyone else joins the parade or not. Even if they don’t slash the price, I suspect they will offer deep discount / cash back / rebate during the sale process.

Instead of arguing and speculating further, probably now is the time to wait and watch.

 

[Guy Mancuso]

Every back and cam has limitations and it's very clear the IQ 160 has a minute exposure time limitation. Given your requirements or need than I would have not recommended it. A P45 will do up to a hour but even with that back your limited to ISO 100 pretty much. The IQ 160 you can go IsO 400. But let me also include this every back be it Hassy,Phase or Leaf has some time limit on it and so does every Nikon and Canon. But the bottom line is everything is a compromise here and you need to find workarounds to get what you need. in this case myself if I had that need to go very long on occasion than maybe you should have went with a AFD III body and a film back to go long and your 160 for everything else. That is actually a cheap option. Thee things are just simple not do alls your going to hit a wall on some functionality. Hell my D800 can't do rise / fall and flat stitch and has a **** 24 PC lens that leaves that whole wide angle world pretty much worthless. This is why I have 2 systems so I can cover all my basis. Expecting one system to do it all will never happen , sorry I have tried this it don't work. You need to realize you bought one of the best sensors on the planet but it does have a time limit on it. You would run into this with Hassy and Leaf as well. There's only one back that can do one hour and Phase p45 is i believe still in production.

 

[dougpeterson]

Phase One IQs are still good at ISO 50-100 range only.

You probably think the IQ can't do higher ISO because you're combining higher ISOs with long exposure - trying to cheat the max-long-exposure. That won't work.

I routinely shoot the IQ series at 200 and 400 in full resolution and 800 and 1600 in sensor+. On occasion I'll even stretch to ISO3200 or 6400 (pushing 3200 a stop) knowing that I'll have to add contrast and likely convert to black and white in post processing. But I only do so for short exposures (e.g. for hand holding in lower light).

But mixing e.g. ISO400 or sensor+ with a long exposure will result in very poor quality (as you've noted trying to do sensor+ of the Milky Way).

I will not surprised that if someone now suggests that I should use P45+ for long exposure / night photography.

Of course they would... the right tool for the right job. If you routinely do long exposures as an essential part of your shooting style then the IQ160 is not the right tool for you.

 

[fotografz]

There have been a couple of mentions about liking what you have in hand. I think this is understated. We all have the practical junk rattling around in our heads, but when it comes right down to it, if you don't like it, it removes much of the enjoyment of doing this ... even if you got something for free.

I haven't liked any 35mm DSLR/SLR camera since Kyocera deep-sixed the Contax brand and Leica R stuff went bye-bye. After that I went through a succession of high-tech white bread Canon and Nikons DSLRs in search of something I could, uh, ... love. Most hated was the Canon 5Ds, followed by the most of the crop frame Canons and just about every Nikon. In the end, that dumb search cost as much as my MFD system. I've settled on Sony now, and while I don't give a dump for it (it's just a necessary evil to cover weddings), it's probably closer to the much missed Contax 35mm stuff than any other (probably perceptually due to the Zeiss lenses). The Sony is actually as neglected as the ugly runt from a liter of pound pups. I simply can't stand when I have to use it.

I can count on one hand cameras that solicited a visceral response and inspired use: Leica Ms, Contax 35mm, Hasselblad Vs especially the 203FE with both film and a "Fat Pixel" CFV back, and now the S2. I like my H camera a lot but can't say I love it all to pieces ... but each year I warm up to it a little more and feel very comfortable with it in hand. It rules in the studio, and that makes me VERY happy ... not to mention it is the biggest earner of the lot. I did LOVE using a Multi-Shot Hasselblad H, and may have one again ... it is so fascinating to watch it work, and the precision involved to produce files of mind boggling color fidelity, separation, and clarity.

I can totally relate to those who use a finely crafted tech camera and those little gem optics with a MFD back, Just look at one of those kits ... beautiful, simply beautiful. If I did landscape work or architectural stuff ... I'd go there in a N.Y. heart-beat ... just to get one in hand ...

Anyway ... sigh ...

-Marc