MF... will it survive?

[stngoldberg]

I may be the only individual who finds that a Hasselblad H4D50 has much better files than a D800e.
The Hasselblad lenses (to me) are vastly superior to the Nikon/Zeiss lenses in sharpness.
The Hasselblad viewfinder is brighter enabling me to compose easier.
Stanley

 

[Theodoros Fotometria]

I may be the only individual who finds that a Hasselblad H4D50 has much better files than a D800e.
The Hasselblad lenses (to me) are vastly superior to the Nikon/Zeiss lenses in sharpness.
The Hasselblad viewfinder is brighter enabling me to compose easier.
Stanley

True Stanley, my opinion is it applies for all MFDBs, ...but :OT: !!! ...As where all, by Bill, Sashin, EH21, landscapelover, Doug, Al or Stephen at the beginning of this tread! :wtf:

 

[MaxKißler]

True Stanley, my opinion is it applies for all MFDBs, ...but :OT: !!! ...As where all, by Bill, Sashin, EH21, landscapelover, Doug, Al or Stephen at the beginning of this tread! :wtf:

I suppose they are (me aswell) already at the end of this thread while you are the one who is still at the very beginning of it...

PS: MF will survive, don't worry.

 

[Shashin]

What I don't hear is real reasoning... if people think it will survive, they should backup their opinion answering to "why it will survive" or to "what has to be done" for MF to be more appealing...

Actually, the burden of proof starts with you. You started this but offer no evidence that your hypothesis is actually true. Certainly the large-format film market is far from dead. MFD sales are still going with no real decrease. Those contradict your whole argument.

 

[darr]

Large format cameras are still in production ... look at Ebony as an example.

 

[RVB]

I may be the only individual who finds that a Hasselblad H4D50 has much better files than a D800e.
The Hasselblad lenses (to me) are vastly superior to the Nikon/Zeiss lenses in sharpness.
The Hasselblad viewfinder is brighter enabling me to compose easier.
Stanley

I have both and the Blad is still in it's own league,the D800E is excellent in it's own right and very versatile but for high end I.Q the blad is still top dog

 

[Shashin]

.As where all, by Bill, Sashin, EH21, landscapelover, Doug, Al or Stephen at the beginning of this tread! :wtf:

Sorry, but I do not have to continue participate in a thread if I don't want to. Besides, you seem to not understand my response--you have no argument.

Anyway, have fun with this.

 

[Theodoros Fotometria]

I don't mean to offend you but I suppose they are (me aswell) already at the end of this thread while you are still at the beginning...

No offense taken Max... I know that they are at the end of the thread as far as which IQ they prefer (I am too)... I never created a thread to discuss this though...:angel: I am convinced that better IQ is not enough for MF to survive (as it has happened with even larger image areas in the past - loosing to worst quality smaller areas), ...hence, I thought of discussing MF (now lost) values which I see (as Ed predicted) none to understand (at least up to now)!!! :deadhorse: May be people are posting into threads without ever care on the subject :loco: maybe they just don't read what they are commenting back to... :banghead: ...One thing is for sure, with culture like that behind MF, ....it is dead for sure!!!

 

[Stefan Steib]

I thought for some time if I shall get into this, but Theodoros is right- the question must be asked ! But it should be asked and added.....survive in the actual form ?

MF Digital arose from a transformation around 1993/4 putting chips into conventional backs to be used on existing MF bodies. We still have this base concept and this , to my understanding is the weakest point today for such a system. In the semipro range the makers (and I include Leica and Pentax into this context) have achieved higher quality of output by integrated solutions on smaller systems which now rival highend systems of the standard make. Of course an IQ180 or a H5200MS are in another league of resolution. But all the rest of usability, lens availability/variety and workflow have suffered from a lack of broad support as the base is eroding now (due to cameras like D800/E).

The value of such an entry system has risen comparably more than the performance of the highend compared to their actual stellar price points.
So it is legitimate to ask how this gap will work in the future.

I am 100% sure that a MF system as we know it today will not be available anymore in let´s say 2020. The chips will become smaller (unfortunately) and the integration of functionality will produce more electronic solutions in highly complex , more compact bodies.

It is now the task for Pro Photographers as Theodoros and all others to clearly express their interest to keep modular funktionality and the freedom to customize such a system to their needs. if this will not happen the next steps are clear : the actual hybrid systems will become fully electronic and proprietory, with no chance of user interferance. this will also be the end of viewcameras and frames as well as all other peripherals connected to this.

Closing Eyes, ears and mouth and hoping this will not happen is the wrong strategy. If Photographers want modular Pro gear they will have to fight for it and express their interest explicitely !

Thanks Theodoros for asking ! And the others should think what they can do ,so the gear they use now and they like will be available in some years of time, yes - even with improvements that will allow working pro´s to certifiy their investment to their customers price calculations.

Greetings from Germany
Stefan

 

[Guy Mancuso]

The problem here is you hit a forum where its members have been so saturated by this comparison stuff that no one is really interested anymore. I switched to a Nikon D800 from my Phase gear for personal reasons not business or image quality reasons and although its very good it's simply not MF quality and CMOS sensor never have been better than CCD till this date and not sure you will ever see the smoothness of file outside the big sensors of MF. I miss it and I have owned just about every system known and reality is you can get somewhat close but still no cigar. Outside the IQ people here just like to shoot the format and love to shoot tech cams with some of the best lenses made . It's not about the money it's about the experience and joy of working with the bigger format. These comparison constantly avoid this fact that folks just prefer to shoot the format , enjoy the best IQ and knowing they have the best image makers they can own. For many this is there hobby and frankly its a cheap hobby too compared to planes, trains , boats and automobiles . To some its dirt cheap to invest 50k and just go enjoy there art. Nothing wrong with that and a lot of folks simply just don't get that thinking at all. I teach workshops and as a Pro my gear is minimal compared to what the attendees bring or buy to go to the workshops. I'd kill to have there gear but also my hobby is golf and I spend a lot of money on that. This struggle between formats has been around for the 40 years I have held a camera in my hand and will never go away nor will the format. Instead of new many are buying used through the economical slump. Also outside of the IQ and Credo backs nothing really new has hit the market in the last 2 or 3 years so just less new product to buy right now but used no one has real numbers on but I'm close to the dealers and used business is booming, we just don't see it.

Sure MF folks need to lower costs and innovate, no question about it but so does every industry out there. Business and industries have cycles and right now many industries are in a down cycle. I worked in Aerospace for a lot of years and those cycles of aircraft purchases are all over the map but they go high at times and also drop at times.

As far as debating format and such many of us really are annoyed by it and simply not interested in hearing the same old swan song that keeps getting repeated daily. It's honestly seriously getting extremely old. Also when guys like me that been around forever and report there findings its good enough for them to listen,understand and honestly just ignore the constant debate and go out and have fun with there art.

 

[Shashin]

...but Theodoros is right- the question must be asked ! But it should be asked and added.....survive in the actual form ?

Why? We are photographers. The camera manufacturing industry is a completely different field. In fact, having worked in both, I would say photographers have a very strange view of camera manufacturing. What happens to camera development is not in our control beyond some crude economic forces--we buy cameras.

The question is absolutely irrelevant. Naturally, it would help to start with a real premise rather than a manufactured one.

 

[Theodoros Fotometria]

I thought for some time if I shall get into this, but Theodoros is right- the question must be asked ! But it should be asked and added.....survive in the actual form ?

MF Digital arose from a transformation around 1993/4 putting chips into conventional backs to be used on existing MF bodies. We still have this base concept and this , to my understanding is the weakest point today for such a system. In the semipro range the makers (and I include Leica and Pentax into this context) have achieved higher quality of output by integrated solutions on smaller systems which now rival highend systems of the standard make. Of course an IQ180 or a H5200MS are in another league of resolution. But all the rest of usability, lens availability/variety and workflow have suffered from a lack of broad support as the base is eroding now (due to cameras like D800/E).

The value of such an entry system has risen comparably more than the performance of the highend compared to their actual stellar price points.
So it is legitimate to ask how this gap will work in the future.

I am 100% sure that a MF system as we know it today will not be available anymore in let´s say 2020. The chips will become smaller (unfortunately) and the integration of functionality will produce more electronic solutions in highly complex , more compact bodies.

It is now the task for Pro Photographers as Theodoros and all others to clearly express their interest to keep modular funktionality and the freedom to customize such a system to their needs. if this will not happen the next steps are clear : the actual hybrid systems will become fully electronic and proprietory, with no chance of user interferance. this will also be the end of viewcameras and frames as well as all other peripherals connected to this.

Closing Eyes, ears and mouth and hoping this will not happen is the wrong strategy. If Photographers want modular Pro gear they will have to fight for it and express their interest explicitely !

Thanks Theodoros for asking ! And the others should think what they can do ,so the gear they use now and they like will be available in some years of time, yes - even with improvements that will allow working pro´s to certifiy their investment to their customers price calculations.

Greetings from Germany
Stefan

Thanks for the reply Stefan...:salute: I don't fully accept your prediction of things to come, but I am afraid that this is where things are heading too... in return, I think that if this is the future, maybe 2020 won't be reached at all by P1 or Hass...
Let me give you an example..., let's say that I want to upgrade my 528c with a modern "true color" multishot back, perhaps with even more resolution... don't I have to try it first? How can I be sure that the enormous investment required will be better than my 528c...? Now, I have only two choices, the Sinar Exact or the 200MS.... but Sinar doesn't make a Contax fit adapter anymore, while Hass only makes the back as a dedicated H5 project.... , besides with Exact, I have to buy another back (!!!) to use in single shot with card... Now, that's crazy... I don't want a camera with leaf shutter for art reproduction..., I want even light distribution on the paintings! ...besides, I love the Zeiss 120m for the job :thumbs: OTOH, because in Sinar they don't make a Contax adapter, I have to change for ...Mamiya for focal plane shutter and not be able to use my superior glass.... Wouldn't be easier if Hass was making the back as a CF with adapters for Contax (as they used to until 3 years ago) ? ...don't they just throw customers out of the window trying to sell a complete camera system? Aren't they inexcusable in Mamiya that they don't offer an interchangeable VF (what? MF camera without WLF? ...Jesus!) :banghead: ...All these have to change Stephen! ...all these have to change or MF has no future! :deadhorse: Clearly things where much better 4 years ago..., IMO it started to fade when they thought of taking MFDBs in part exchange and instead of returning good equipment back to the market (even of other manufacturers) and create a new wider digital MF base, instead they where (and still are) turning it to ...rubbish! :toocool: ...Let's hope they will find their senses back... :watch:

 

[tsjanik]

Given Nikon's stock plumment, you may well ask if tradional cameras will survive.

Nikon Stock Plummets 19% After Cutting Profit Forecast, Biggest Drop Since 1985

Tom

 

[Theodoros Fotometria]

Given Nikon's stock plumment, you may well ask if tradional cameras will survive.

Nikon Stock Plummets 19% After Cutting Profit Forecast, Biggest Drop Since 1985

Tom

OK Tom... I suggest you create a thread about this... meanwhile, in this thread you are... :OT: !!!! :banghead:

 

[cerett]

Guy - Extremely well said!! Thank you.

Marty

 

[Stefan Steib]

Tom´s question is not off topic I think.
Nikon and also Canon + all the other Camera Makers are facing the same kind of threat from the smartphone industry.
Highly integrated multifunctional devices take over a full market segment which is the backbone of turnaound in volume for these companies.
The sales numbers for compact cameras are dropping now since several years around 30-40 % (on the very low end even 60%) in a row.
Smartphones sales have reached e.g. 27 Mil Pieces a year compared to 3mil. (Germany alone !).
If you count in the absolute numbers, the low margins in these lowend markets and the necessary structure to support these sales channels you know that their existence is also threatened.
The new winners are companies like Samsung or other Makers of Cameras AND Smartphones who are now doing hybrid solutions like the Galaxy Cam.

The scheme is similar. The base is eroding, the volume is shrinking and the actual business modell looses the main selling proposition.

The consumer camera industry had analyzed this some time ago and came out with initiatives like MFT, proposing standardized mounts and universally usable lenses, the core idea is right , the actual result was more or less poor. But we can see on other markets (like the Blueray disc) that as soon as a standardized base is established the market can thrive and money can be earned and thus stability is reached.

If the medium format industry will not understand that now it is the time to do a proposition for a universal platform with interchangeable , modular lenses, backs and camera bodies - even with an extension and adapters for existing mechanic solutions, I fear the chance will be missed to survive as an independent industry. Hasselblad has somehow commited already that they do NOT see their future in the MF business, the whitepaper they presented at the launch of the Lunar system shows they want to become an image exploiting maker of luxury sony bodies. No matter how much you like this or not, at least it shows they have analyzed their situation and try to survive in a medium and long range.

Phase/leaf is absolutely quiet about a future concept and only says they sell better than ever before. Congrats if this is the case. But even then- how long will this be stable ?

I think a Vision is what drives ALL successful companies.
Customers want to hear those.

Please make us keen buying new stuff !

Greetings from Germany
Stefan

 

[Guy Mancuso]

Okay back to the question of innovation. From what I see without fundamental changes in sensors , size and costs than very little can be done to change simplybecause we are at the wall with CCD technology and without a significant new change they have nowhere to go or develop the current technology any further. The IQ is the latest and greatest back but its features not sensor changes. To really get to the next level of size, weight, noise levels, higher Iso , live view and features like that we only have CMOS to do that as our current technology base and we have yet to see a CMOS back but trust me its being looked at , worked on, debated and tossed around in engineering labs or Phase and Hassy would be pretty stupid if they where not. Problem is we are not flys on the wall in those meetings.

 

[Shashin]

OK Tom... I suggest you create a thread about this... meanwhile, in this thread you are... :OT: !!!! :banghead:

LOL. I thought your contention was the FF IQ was better and so impacting the MFD market. We find the company making the D800 "medium-format killer" is not doing well, but yet the sale of MFD is doing very well. That seems very on topic.

 

[Theodoros Fotometria]

LOL. I thought your contention was the FF IQ was better and so impacting the MFD market. We find the company making the D800 "medium-format killer" is not doing well, but yet the sale of MFD is doing very well. That seems very on topic.

You thought wrong... read the posts! :facesmack: I'm telling you (and some others) right from the beginning!:toocool: This is not a post trying to compare FF with MF... it's about MF losing its own values and the danger that this has for its survival... The (inevitable) improvement of DSLR IQ can of course influence things, but this (or any comparison) was never my subject... :watch: ...again, read the previous posts! :salute:

 

[Shashin]

I think a Vision is what drives ALL successful companies.
Customers want to hear those.

Please make us keen buying new stuff !

Greetings from Germany
Stefan

And this is where I think your hypothesis falls down. You are taking the need for bells and whistle which drive the low-end market is needed at the high end. As a photographer, the quality of the image is the only thing that counts for me. If I have more technology, that is great, but if not, that is fine too. I am a professional and I can get all my camera systems to work for me if it delivers the quality I need--and lets face it, how hard is exposure and focus anyway?

And this has always been true. AF, AE, motor winders, zoom lenses, auto bracketing, multi-point AF, etc always came in 35mm before it hit medium format. This technology is clearly absent in LF. Naturally, there are narrow fields where the technology is helpful, but MF was really never used in those fields and thrived.

Photography is fundamentally an art. There is an emotional, not rational, connection to it. It is not the bottom-line account type mentality that drives the creative process. Until that is factored in, you are simply not going to understand the market. Give me a well designed camera with great quality that I can control focus and exposure and I will do just fine. And personally, I want a camera I can use for a long time. The point of photography is not buying cameras--that is consumerism.