Is buying a 55K camera justifiable... in the name of hobby?

[David K]

However, the other part of the equation is determining your personal threshold for technical mastery ... which does involve some level of mechanical aptitude and attention to detail on a far greater level than you've experienced to date with your current gear. You need a head for this type of discipline ... and many who think they do, find they do not ... in the end deciding it is just to fussy and tedious. One man's ecstasy is another man's PITA
-Marc

This is advice that we all would do well to consider. I do not think I am alone in having made the wrong choice of systems along the MF path. The features that I initially thought I wanted/needed turned out, after some time using them, to be things I didn't want to deal with, e.g. the ability to shoot multiple platforms with the same back. It's taken me many years, multiple systems and a lot of cash to figure out what's really important for me. While the cost of entry may be high... it's getting out of a wrong system that's painfully expensive. I'd encourage you to rent the system for a week or two. Many (if not most) dealers will allow you to apply the rental charge to the purchase price if you decide to buy it.

 

[Jim2]

I don't have $3M in my retirement fund either, which is why financially it's wiser to put this money into an investment, and that's what I'm struggling with. If only I have a crystal ball!

I am turning 34 this month. In a year, I would probably get about 5-10 photos that I would consider OK to print. I am still happy with my 1ds3 - and the only reason to go bigger is for better detail and the remote 'possibility' of doing bigger prints.

I have never sold my prints, maybe if I can sell them this whole thing would be a whole lot easier to justify. Do landscape photographers 'build up' their portfolio first as a hobby and one day decided they'd sell them and turn it into a serious business, opening galleries etc?

It would be a different story if I am doing this to derive an income, then it would be a no brainer to get the best possible - whether it is a phase or an 8x10 film.

 

[Guy Mancuso]

Than nothing wrong with a IQ 140 on a tech cam. I shoot the P40+ daily and I am not lacking for much. Sure a 60 mpx with a 15 mpx sensor plus back would fit me better but the 40 mpx backs are in the park and produce great images. Its about 22k for the IQ 140 than you can always upgrade later. Hell been thinking lately of selling my P40+ and getting a used P65+ than upgrade next year to the IQ. The IQ 180 is awesome but so will be the IQ 160 too. I shot every back they have including the 180 and they are all very good image wise. If you want new and want to save a few dollars than the IQ 160 is going to serve anyone very well. Something to think about.

 

[kdphotography]

I don't have $3M in my retirement fund either, which is why financially it's wiser to put this money into an investment, and that's what I'm struggling with. If only I have a crystal ball!

I am turning 34 this month. In a year, I would probably get about 5-10 photos that I would consider OK to print. I am still happy with my 1ds3 - and the only reason to go bigger is for better detail and the remote 'possibility' of doing bigger prints.

I have never sold my prints, maybe if I can sell them this whole thing would be a whole lot easier to justify. Do landscape photographers 'build up' their portfolio first as a hobby and one day decided they'd sell them and turn it into a serious business, opening galleries etc?

It would be a different story if I am doing this to derive an income, then it would be a no brainer to get the best possible - whether it is a phase or an 8x10 film.

In this situation, I think the "voice of reason" would be to test your passion. (Yes, and pretty damn scary if that voice of reason is coming from me :ROTFL I would take pause for a moment. Invest a tiny bit and go on some photo excursions---could be a workshop(s) with Jack/Guy, going out with others that have MFDBs, plan a landscape photography trip somewhere with a rental MFDB system. Spend some time to test your passion with different MFDB systems.

This is the closest you're going to get to having that crystal ball in making the right investment decision...

ken

 

[Jim2]

Than nothing wrong with a IQ 140 on a tech cam. I shoot the P40+ daily and I am not lacking for much. Sure a 60 mpx with a 15 mpx sensor plus back would fit me better but the 40 mpx backs are in the park and produce great images. Its about 22k for the IQ 140 than you can always upgrade later. Hell been thinking lately of selling my P40+ and getting a used P65+ than upgrade next year to the IQ. The IQ 180 is awesome but so will be the IQ 160 too. I shot every back they have including the 180 and they are all very good image wise. If you want new and want to save a few dollars than the IQ 160 is going to serve anyone very well. Something to think about.

Going along this line of thinking for a second....
- a used P65+ costs the same as IQ140 which would you choose.

I'm smack in the middle of deciding that now. If I was a tech cam shooter all the time than the IQ in any flavor


- The difference of either of the above to IQ180 is about $17-20K - a small extra(??) considering the doubling of resolution

MPX are not everything

- If I get IQ140 (or P65+) now and upgrade, my then used IQ140 would have depreciated in value, making the upgrade more costly in the future, unless perhaps upgrade to IQ180 when they have a 100MP back - in what.... 3 years?

Certainly tougher money wise going from the 40 sensors to the bigger ones. Need to remember also upgrade programs are designed to get you to upgrade so the depreciation value on the street is different than the upgrade programs. The upgrade programs always offer less depreciation on your current gear. The basic idea here is keep you in the system.

Another idea -
- Wait for the influx of traded up P65+ to 'flood' the market (haha?) and pick them up at a much cheaper (??) price

How many P65+'s were they selling in 2008-2010?

A lot don't have those numbers but most backs wind up in education programs and rental houses. Think about this for a second Phase really does not want a lot of used backs on the market since they could lose new sales instead. Not a Phase thing overall but all manufactures do not want to flood the market with used product so they will off load them for other things. This is very normal.

I'm not sure why people would go with IQ160 over IQ180 when the difference is not that much.

On the upgrade path no doubt and for resale value the 180 will have more value so yes this is a tough call and Phase as you can see by there pricing are pushing the 180 and that will reflect in there units sold.

Tough choice!

 

[kdphotography]

I'm not sure why people would go with IQ160 over IQ180 when the difference is not that much.

Tough choice!

On a tech camera, I would be more biased towards a larger sensor, and that means P65+, IQ160, or IQ180.

The current upgrade programs make it really really really hard not to get an IQ180 if you are coming from a MFDB like the P65+. The "lateral" upgrade programs are really yet to be seen, and initial squabblings still make you squirm over just grabbing the higher IQ back for a what is a pittance :ROTFL:

It's a different story if you're not upgrading. The IQ160 is a very attractive MFDB. The field is more open as it were. And you do need to take a step back for a moment---this is sixty megapixels, still extremely high resolution beyond what most really need....

 

[Guy Mancuso]

Yes upgrading it really is a no brainer going from the 65+ to the IQ 180 since that upgrade path is pretty low in cost relative to the other upgrades. So most of the current sales and there are a ton is to the IQ 180. Buying fresh from the start adds another dimension on costs.
Here are some costs posted

IQ180: $43,990
IQ160: $36,990
IQ140: $21,990

 

[Guy Mancuso]

So a 7k difference between the 180 and 160. Thats pretty much a Alpa/Arca body and maybe a lens in there.

Seriously from just jumping into it I would recommend the IQ 160 to start. I also agree with Ken get on a workshop like ours and try this stuff and we will teach you how to use it. Nothing better than being with other Phase shooters and see how this all works. I can pretty much get a demo on any Phase product except the IQ's right now. That was NOT a sales pitch either.

 

[johnnygoesdigital]

To invest in MFD is an oxymoron! Whatever system one purchases, the camera will depreciate considerably. I've used a 40MP camera for landscapes that can easily print as big as a billboard! Phase One, offers good choices that allow for future upgrades and very attractive prices on new (40- 60 MP ) DB's. Planned obsolescence in MFD, is loathed, but expected, don't be fooled by pixel envy. It's really up to the lens to squeeze out all that beautiful resolution! Most importantly, enjoy the experience as a hobby because you might evolve as a photographer and dare I say...an artist!

 

[Guy Mancuso]

Crap I edited your post by accident reread my comments


Quote:
Originally Posted by Guy Mancuso
Than nothing wrong with a IQ 140 on a tech cam. I shoot the P40+ daily and I am not lacking for much. Sure a 60 mpx with a 15 mpx sensor plus back would fit me better but the 40 mpx backs are in the park and produce great images. Its about 22k for the IQ 140 than you can always upgrade later. Hell been thinking lately of selling my P40+ and getting a used P65+ than upgrade next year to the IQ. The IQ 180 is awesome but so will be the IQ 160 too. I shot every back they have including the 180 and they are all very good image wise. If you want new and want to save a few dollars than the IQ 160 is going to serve anyone very well. Something to think about.
Going along this line of thinking for a second....
- a used P65+ costs the same as IQ140 which would you choose.

GUY: I'm smack in the middle of deciding that now. If I was a tech cam shooter all the time than the IQ in any flavor


- The difference of either of the above to IQ180 is about $17-20K - a small extra(??) considering the doubling of resolution

GUY: MPX are not everything

- If I get IQ140 (or P65+) now and upgrade, my then used IQ140 would have depreciated in value, making the upgrade more costly in the future, unless perhaps upgrade to IQ180 when they have a 100MP back - in what.... 3 years?

GUY: Certainly tougher money wise going from the 40 sensors to the bigger ones. Need to remember also upgrade programs are designed to get you to upgrade so the depreciation value on the street is different than the upgrade programs. The upgrade programs always offer less depreciation on your current gear. The basic idea here is keep you in the system.

Another idea -
- Wait for the influx of traded up P65+ to 'flood' the market (haha?) and pick them up at a much cheaper (??) price

How many P65+'s were they selling in 2008-2010?

GUY: A lot don't have those numbers but most backs wind up in education programs and rental houses. Think about this for a second Phase really does not want a lot of used backs on the market since they could lose new sales instead. Not a Phase thing overall but all manufactures do not want to flood the market with used product so they will off load them for other things. This is very normal.

I'm not sure why people would go with IQ160 over IQ180 when the difference is not that much.

GUY: On the upgrade path no doubt and for resale value the 180 will have more value so yes this is a tough call and Phase as you can see by there pricing are pushing the 180 and that will reflect in there units sold.

Tough choice!

GUY: Totally agree

BTW if you think for a second you are alone in going straight to the 180 on a fresh purchase trust me you are not alone. They are enjoying high sales right now.

 

[jlm]

and there is the aptus 12, 80 mpx, ( $12k cheaper than the IQ180) and av very nice platform with the perks of a rotatable sensor and tilting LCD (for one of the versions)

 

[dougpeterson]

To invest in MFD is an oxymoron! Whatever system one purchases, the camera will depreciate considerably.

I think most people refer to "investing" in this context (hobby spending) taking into account returns on investment beyond straight resale value of the equipment later on.

It's like saying you're going to train to climb Mount Kilimanjaro and you're investing in a good pair (or 6) of shoes and a personal trainer.

If you're going to put considerable time (the most valuable asset we have), effort, and emotion into a hobby it makes sense to place a similar (monetary) investment in equipment and training that will increase your enjoyment of the hobby either by
- increasing the maximum performance you can achieve (e.g. coming as close to that max still being on you and your skills/effort/hard-work)
- making the activity more pure/true/tactile/viscerally enjoyable (e.g. a scuba diver buying the best dive-mask for the clearest view of the wild-life)
- allowing you to spend more of your time doing the part of the activity you enjoy rather than the part of the activity you don't enjoy (e.g. renting a golf cart so you spend more time hitting balls and drinking and less time going from point A to point B)

Of course that financial investment has to be relative to your overall disposable income.

To me part of the joy of shooting landscape with a tech camera is the WAY you shoot. The slower, more methodical, more mechanical, older school, precise and tactile shooting that comes with a tech camera is part of the fun for me. As a profession it would be a point-of-question: you can't produce as many shots/day with a tech camera as a dSLR - so is the increased quality and flexibility and decreased time in front of the computer later worth it to your business? But as a hobby it's a very different question - in many ways who cares how many shots you can accomplish per day. The greater question is how good will those shots be (to you) and how much will you enjoy creating them at the time, and viewing/sharing them after the fact.

Another way of saying this is that in professional photography the capture of the image is often reduced to a means to an end - the delivery of an image to a client who will pay for it. In hobby photography the journey - the process of capturing the image - is just as important as the process.

Some hobbyists will prefer a camera which is the easiest to get an ok image. But to me that's like saying a hobby runner should forgo actually running the miles and just jump in their car and drive to the finish line. I prefer a camera which is more an extension of my body and allows me to interact with the landscape rather than just frame it up and snap a shot. I feel more involved in the making of the image with a tech camera than I do looking through a live-view on a 5DII and doing things like pan-and-stitch and focus stacking on the computer later on. Getting a great image on a tech camera is more challenging, more engaging, and is slower than with more automatic and general-purpose cameras, but that makes it very satisfying to me - the fact that it produces the best possible quality is just a bonus.

It's the same reason that when I print cyanotypes using a 160 year old recipe of chemistry and sun-power rather than use photoshop and an inkjet. It's just more enjoyable to me.

Now to be clear I am openly biased as we (Capture Integration) make our living by selling the equipment you're talking about as solutions including training/support/advice for photographers both professional and hobbyists. But my bottom line is if you have your basic needs met, have a reserve for the unforeseen, cared for your family, contributed toward the well-being of your community, and you still have money to spare then you should spend your excess in whatever way you think will bring you the most enjoyment (assuming it isn't harming others) and not worry too much about what other people think or what other people can afford.

Doug Peterson (e-mail Me)
__________________

Head of Technical Services, Capture Integration
Phase One Partner of the Year
Leaf, Leica, Cambo, Arca Swiss, Canon, Apple, Profoto, Broncolor, Eizo & More

National: 877.217.9870 *| *Cell: 740.707.2183
Newsletter | RSS Feed
Buy Capture One 6 at 10% off

 

[djonesii]

To the OP

for me, as a hobbyist, I have a nice prudent reserve, save for retirement, contribute to cub scouts, and my local religious affiliation, ( does not really matter which one ) ..... due to good education and hard work, I have a surplus, some goes to home improvements, others on camping gear and such, and with what's left, it's mine to spend. Even then, I am prudent, I have to rent a studio, pay models and such .... all that said, I'm working with one of the dealers on this board to get a back that FITS MY NEEDS! I print a vanity book once a year, and some 16X20s. I can tell the difference between a D3X and my lowly ZD, if the thing worked as well as a phase, there would be no need to upgrade. However, after a year of shooting, there are just some things it does not do. So, with that surplus, I will upgrade. NB .... I shot MF film, then a really cheap DB for a year, and then upgrade, for my prudent nature a 80meg back is off the deep end, even if you do have several million laying around. However, it's still cheaper than falling off a Harley!

Dave

 

[jonoslack]

Hi Jim
Of course it's justifiable if you want it and you've got the dosh - no question.
On the other hand, if you're moving from a Canon or Nikon FF camera there is really a lot to learn.
The real reason I haven't gone to MF is that my time is limited, and I'd rather spend that limited time in taking pictures with kit I understand rather than learning how to use new kit.
On this basis, if I did decide to go MF I'd be more likely to get something like the S2, which would be familiar territory (but that's a different question).

But my caveats are all about time resources - not about money. If you want it - then go for it :salute:

 

[Jim2]

for my prudent nature a 80meg back is off the deep end, even if you do have several million laying around. However, it's still cheaper than falling off a Harley!

Dave

Dave, thanks for sharing your thoughts here. Do you mind me asking, are you currently already retired?

 

[rhsu]

Late into the post, but if it is the resultant effects that you are after (probably more likely the case) then go for it. Hobbiest or pro the only difference is the latter gets (in theory) their money back or earn income from it. The former, 100% pleasure and joy of taking photos with a beautiful conclusion to admire upon by all without worrying how to pay it off or whether it gets payed off or not!

 

[PeterA]

If one is asking the quesiton then one shouldn't.

All the answers are other people's thought bubbles reflecting (quite naturally) their own dispositions.

If what other people are using to make images really matters - then I suggest the less money spent the better.

 

[stephengilbert]

I agree with Peter, and would add that if you can't decide for yourself, asking strangers their opinions isn't the best way to make a decision. As a died in the wool gearhead, I find that I only ask for people's opinions when I'm looking for a reason to justify what I already want to do. If you've already decided to spend the money, you've come to the right place for advice.

 

[MGrayson]

I agree with Peter, and would add that if you can't decide for yourself, asking strangers their opinions isn't the best way to make a decision. As a died in the wool gearhead, I find that I only ask for people's opinions when I'm looking for a reason to justify what I already want to do.

Well, yes, asking ordinary strangers would be a bad idea, but these here are GetDPI strangers. We're special!:loco:

Matt:angel:

 

[Professional]

Well, yes, asking ordinary strangers would be a bad idea, but these here are GetDPI strangers. We're special!:loco:

Matt:angel:

Special strangers who can really make anyone spend money in a flesh, i am sure if i have $10k and ask about a medium format here on GetDPI, i will end up that i want to have $30k or more, because i will have many comments as no need to think about MF if i don't have that much or i have to buy used or even buy the cheaper option of MF and upgrade later, in fact i found out that upgrading later for me is more wasting money than buying one high end expensive, so most comments will show that with little budget i will buy something less than others and they will always talk about how amazing those new gear over the old one which i have, like saying buy a Ferrari car now model 2005 or another sports car not in Ferrari league and later buy that new Ferrari model 2012 or 2013, at 2014 when i buy Ferrari 2011/2012 people will say that Ferrari 2014/2015 is superior to Ferrari 2011 and then i will always think to upgrade which will cost me more than what i spent before.
I upgraded my H3DII-39 to H4D-60 last year, i found out that upgraded saved me a lot than i upgrade my H3D to even H4D-40/50 after one year or 2.