Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!
Well yes, good point, but only if you could stick a Phase One back on it. oke:You mean like a Pentax 645D?
I would have thought 3 times if the DF was better, no question. Its a nice system and the glass is extremely good but it simply could not do everything easily for me but we need to remember I am a generalist and with that turf I need as much versatility as I can get from extreme wide to very long if i don't own it I can rent a 600mm F4 for incoming jets that I shoot on occasion for a client or a 16 mm fisheye. I always had a 35mm system in the background but this tips the scales and it reduces 3 complete systems into 2 which now I can build this system better with the savings from 3 and this actually helps me be more versatile in a lot of ways. Sure i would love to have all three but it also is not making sense for me at least. I also sold all my studio strobes and kept the Profoto Acute 600R battery and bought 2 Nikon SB 910 and one SB 700 with a slew of pocket wizards and now its a small bag for location gigs and when i need more i rent. Its a 20 minute drive and i can rent all the Profotos and Nikon glass even the BIG stuff I could ever hope for. So for me this is all about getting down to manageable systems and lowering my costs but keeping the gear versatility in place for anything I run into. I get a big gig than I do what almost every Pro in NY and LA do rent it and bill back what I can or raise my rate. LOLEchoing Marc's points, I'd also wager that had Phase One got a DSLR body that only even matched, let alone surpassed the abilities of ANY of the current crop of full frame 35mm DSLRs then perhaps the eagerness to change to something like the D800 would be a lot less. That's where I think that Hasselblad and Phase One in particular really need to get their act together to keep the appeal of their whole systems vs the 'good enough' perceived advantages of the D800 and whatever follows shortly no doubt from everyone else next year.
Try the AF Zeiss 24/1.8. I tried and the sold the Nex because the handling of the cameras were not for me. But that lens is a stunner it has both resolution to match the sensor and a look to make a Leica owner go weak at the knees. Sony's control over AF when video is the gem in their crown (as it should be given their experience). It can hold focus on a subject without hunting and quickly corrects in low DoF scenarios. I know the distortion here is not great to look at (it's my son and a video for granny back in the UK).>I remember the enthusiasm for the Nex 7. I have it too, but the AF glass sucks. Has still great potential with the right glass.
All right already ... I retract the "money" statement since it keeps being taken totally out of context to the original post answering a specific point of view.Not at all. Not for me at least, and I suspect not for plenty of other folk.
For me it's about focus. I have a have a cabinet groaningly full of stuff. IQ180, Phase DF, glass, Cambo, glass, M9, glass, 5DII, glass, GH2, glass, Nex7, glass, Fuji X100, Ricoh, somewhere in another home an entire Pentax DSLR system, blah blah blah.
The IQ gear is so I can get the best quality for things that really matter. The M9 is so I can get ballpark similar but with less pixels and more portability. The 5DII is for longer lenses and action. The GH2 and Nex are part of the search for great image quality in a travel or casual walkaround kit. The Fuji is for silent and very unobtrusive but still with good IQ. And the truth is, I know how to use all of it and none of it.
That much gear is simply too much stuff to be master of. How each lens works on each body at each aperture and focal length. What the files are like in PP and how best to shoot accordingly. You get the picture. And this is not even going near the stuff I've owned and sold, such as the S2.
What the D800 means is, sell it all apart from the Nex and the Fuji. Then really concentrate on getting the finest glass for the Nikon and learning every last detail of the camera and its glass.
So it's about purity of purpose. About having far less stuff that covers pretty much all the same bases, and learning that stuff in great depth.
It's not about money. It's about results. I have tested the D800 in all the territory, indoors and out, flash and natural, tilt and shift, long and short, that I've used the Canon and Phase gear for. It covers all the bases, with, to all practical intents the same (sometimes nearly as good, often much better) results.
It is a no brainer, for me, totally irrespective of cost.
All right already ... I retract the "money" statement since it keeps being taken totally out of context to the original post answering a specific point of view.
As to "purity of purpose" ... sounds like you found your Swiss Army knife for life ... I guess we'll never see a F/S ad for your D800. :ROTFL:
Personally, Nikon stuff was boring to me. Only having a Nikon would be excruciatingly boring. The cameras were boring, and the lenses were especially boring.M
About as inspirational as a brick and a stick. Gotta like what's in my hand, simple as that.
BTW, I don't agree with you at all regarding the mastery of more than one system, unless you buy and sell into different stuff every five minutes. I've been using the same basic H camera for almost seven years (different models, same basic camera/lenses), a M camera for 40 years, and my Sony now for longer than any other DSLR with no intention of moving elsewhere since I finally found a fit with a camera/sensor that doesn't require an IT degree to figure out how to PP the files, and lenses with character I prefer. The S2 is the only new boy on the block, and it's so easy to use it's already second nature.
So ... as usual, to each their own ... and I do not discount the notion of simplification if your applications allow it. I may well do the same in future as I wind down my shooting and ramp up retirement ... which is why I bought the S2 ... it is my retirement camera
-Marc
Looking on the bright side, for those that want to be in MF it is getting cheaper - and the number of people who a) own it and b) have real depth of experience using it is shrinking. Which means that from a pro perspective, soon those people will be far harder to find when clients really need that stuff. So they will hopefully be able to charge more!Marc,
I know where I stand - although I have a certain King Canute feeling right now here.
It is so nice to appreciate folks who understand us Brits ....Looking on the bright side, for those that want to be in MF it id getting cheaper - and the number of people who a) own it and b) have real depth of experience using it is shrinking. Which means that from a pro perspective, soon those people will be far harder to find when clients really need that stuff. So they will hopefully be able to charge more!
Marc,All right already ... I retract the "money" statement since it keeps being taken totally out of context to the original post answering a specific point of view.
This was more directly to my point -- we all have differing needs and desires and as such there is no single right and wrong for everybody. It's truly great to have all of these options AND the ability to explore them!So ... as usual, to each their own ... and I do not discount the notion of simplification if your applications allow it. I may well do the same in future as I wind down my shooting and ramp up retirement ...
Magic Bullet?Looking at this from another angle.....
I keep reading reports that the D800 produces images as good a the Phase gear but what I don't understand is why people are selling all their DF's and Schneider glass to buy the D800 and Nikon glass for the same net results?
Like one example above, Guys's corporate portrait looks as good as it were taken with the DF and 110LS. Why not just shoot it of the DF/110LS that you already own(d) in the first place?
Well said and true. Myself I have to have a 35mm anyway, just can't get around shooting event work without it. So having three systems tech cam, DF and a set of Sonys . I figured I would get reasonably close with the Nikon and it turns out its good enough to get by. So dumped the DF , dumped the Sony and combined both systems into the D800. I saved money and I don't have to support 3 systems. For me this is a business call and the change in the photo assignment climate. Now is the DF and it's lenses better , I think so and certainly I have real functions with the Tech cam has over both Nikon and DF. So that I want to keep and use the Nikons for other work. I need the DF I'll rent for jobs that require it. If was not for the economics I would have kept the DF in addition to the Nikon. Not sure what everyone else is doing but mine was a planned attack when the Nikon was announced. I figured it's good enough for commerce and need better grab the tech cam. Is it ideal and as good as a MF system. NO I'm cheating and not afraid to admit it. LOLLooking at this from another angle.....
I keep reading reports that the D800 produces images as good a the Phase gear but what I don't understand is why people are selling all their DF's and Schneider glass to buy the D800 and Nikon glass for the same net results?
Like one example above, Guys's corporate portrait looks as good as it were taken with the DF and 110LS. Why not just shoot it of the DF/110LS that you already own(d) in the first place?