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!
He didn't express it as an opinion, and he didn't use the term "on it's way out". That's the problem.
Awesome news! Can you please post a 1200x1200 pixel, 100% corner crop here -- say f8 -- so I can see how much better it is than the one I tested?
It's in bright bold yellow right under the front-view photo of the AFDIII
My initial shots of my garage door, with everything squared up and parallel (physically measured, etc.) left me feeling a bit bland about the lens. The barrel distortion was rather pronounced in that circumstance as well. But then using it in the field (with what little time I've had these past many months) I find that it performs well in the way that I really shoot. 
Rounded to two sig figs from the film gate of the Mamiya 645 the figure is 1.0. The viewfinder in the 645 is very nearly, but not technically, 100.000% coverage. The extremely small difference between the mamiya viewfinder and mamiya film gate is nearly identical in proportion to the size of the sensor versus the film gate. A la "100% viewfinder coverage", or more plainly, what-you-see[without mask] is what you get. I don't think this is misleading. For any possible PRACTICAL use it is 1.0 crop. For those who are interested in technical minutia it is clearly stated on nearly every P65+ document (printed or online) what the sensor size is.
Apparently we're also trying to downplay the P30+ which is in fact 31.6MP. The resolution is very plainly stated just about anywhere technical info on the backs appear. I do agree that it would be slightly more transparent to use the exact resolution as a product name, but they seem to like using 5s with the larger size sensors and 0s or 1s with the smaller sensors. so a P20, 21, and 30 is small sensor, and 25, 45, 65 is larger sensor.
The two teams have worked closely on required specs, firmware, and future development paths (prioritizing possible features for instance). You are right that it is not the same level of integration as Hasselblad developing their own body, but it is also not the same level of closed-ness.
Yep, it's annoying. It's a compromise though as many users like to use technical or view cameras which have no electronics. If you place the battery on the body then you need an external power source which is even more annoying than having to push a button once upon boot-up (at least IMO).5) The P backs require separate battery from the camera, which is absolutely nonsens. Turn on the cam, shoot and - ohje no photo, because the back was turned off
The lens lineup for the P system is any and all lenses from the Mamiya, Contax, Hasselblad V, Pentax, RZ, Rollei 6008 lines, as well as all but the 28mm lens (and future D lenses) from the Hasselblad H line. The only lens line we are lacking is the modern AF Hy6 glass. Then in the technical/view camera world you have any and all large format lenses, most notably the digital lines from Rodenstock and Schneider. That's the benefit of an open platform approach.
Hi Dale:Yup, I would've too. Your 35 is probably better than my 35 in corners, though I've tried not to pixel-peep it too hard so I'd not go nuts.
Still, your 35mm looks like one to hold on to.
5) The P backs require separate battery from the camera, which is absolutely nonsens. Turn on the cam, shoot and - ohje no photo, because the back was turned off
"Unlike Kodak" .... isn't that the same kind of smear? You didn't offer proof the Kodak isn't doing well, but expect other's to do so when expressing their opinion. Double standard ????
