The future of digital MF

[GeorgeTelis]

Every 2-3 months there is a new release from Sony-Nikon-Canon and other dslr manufacturers introducing "new technologies". Hasselblad,P1 and leaf uses "old" sensors with exceptional results. I was curious about what the future holds for the medium format cameras-sensors.
Feel free to share your opinions 

Regards
G.Telis

[arminw]

It's really hard to tell with all the new technology , and higher reolution in smaller sensors . There is also the video part, which has taken off .... I think medium format companies have to really think hard and come up with some good news to make new buyers intersted in their products and also to justify the amount of money they charge .

[fotografz]

IMO, what MFD makers need to do is publish their own propaganda on just how much better MFD is ... even as it stands today.

They are getting nibbled to death by ducks, and losing ground to all the nonsense being touted ... the sky is falling, the sky is falling. Say it enough times, and it'll come true.

IMO, it is a load of bull comparing the Nikon D800 to a H4D/40. The D800 files look shallow and lifeless, so who cares if it's almost the same meg as a 40? Evidently, size still matters, but what we are dealing with now is an emperor's new clothes syndrome.

In the meantime it wouldn't hurt to maximize the gear we already have ... like if the rumors are true regarding a new, smaller camera from Hasselblad, I hope to God it takes the HC/HCD lenses and is priced right.

What I don't need is another $30,000 investment just to perceptually keep up with the semi-blind techno-lemmings rushing to 35mm because it is so darned inexpensive, comparatively speaking.

I'd just hate it if MFD evaporated, and I was forced to work with a type of camera that I have no affinity for using. I know it's just a tool, but ya gotta like it a little bit.

-Marc

[jeff.grant@pobox.com]

+1 I would buy MF for the aspect ratio alone. I think Marc has said in the past that most of these comparisons are done by folks who have no experience of MF. The classic was when Digilloyd spent an hour with an H3D and then declared the Canon whatever better.

[Greg]

I just wish Hasselblad had the prowess to implement such a public relations program.  As dark as they have become, it seems the department heads at Hasselblad responsible for such a program have no such interest.  And now we don't even have David Grover to fight our battles in the discussion forums.

Greg

[jeff.grant@pobox.com]

What happened to David Grover? Did I miss something?

[NickT]

There hasn't been much news around this but David has left Hasselblad, not sure if his destination is public knowledge yet so I won't share for now. He will indeed be a loss to the company and his departure will mean they have no forum presence ...

Nick-T

[KeithL]

There hasn't been much news around this but David has left Hasselblad, not sure if his destination is public knowledge yet so I won't share for now. He will indeed be a loss to the company and his departure will mean they have no forum presence ...

I'm really sorry to hear of David's departure from Hasselblad, I know the help he gave was appreciated by many, myself included. Really, Hasselblad's and our loss. Wherever he goes I'm sure his expertise will be valued. Here's wishing him all the very best for the future.

Keith

[fotografz]

Ditto on the loss of David. Best of luck to him in all he does in future.

I mentioned the following on another forum ... the MFD makers could consider a cooperative to promote the MF aesthetic ... which was a given for eons, but is being eroded by lack of many photographers ability to see it ... especially since most of what they see are words on the internet. What boggles the mind are the array of shooters buying into "almost as good" scenario. It feels like the next step in "dumbing down photography" where meg count is the primary criteria. These folks are posting pics that they tout as the next coming, and because I respect the opinion of some of them, I struggle to see what they see. So far, I have failed to discern what the heck they are talking about. I've got "old tech" H3D/31 shots that look better, with more dynamic image qualities, and so on ... the stuff I've always expected of Medium Format. It is so obviously missing in all the D800 shots I've hunted down that it makes me wonder about my own ability to judge images.

I think Leica is doing an interesting job of separating themselves from the pack. Their drive is for Image Qualities which isn't necessarily accomplished by chasing megapixels. They wisely have determined that their competition isn't Canon or Nikon ... or Phase and Hassey ... and their marketing thrust reflects that. It is inherent in providing a specific aesthetic, a look or feel that may appeal to a certain strata of photographers, coupled with relatively unique products or somewhat specialized approaches. The M camera is a range-finder, and unique, like it or not ... the S2 is relatively unique in its form factor and dual shutter ability, and will be more so IF they ever get the Leaf Shutter lenses to market. Both cameras deliver a "signature" look and feel that some see and others are blind to and decry. Their target is those that can see it and are willing to pay a premium for it.

The H platform remains unique to me because I use lights so much. It is the only AF MFD system in regular production where ALL of the lenses sync to 1/800 when using strobes, not just some focal lengths. Even IF I could see the merits of the D800 Image Qualities (which I can't), I couldn't hack falling back to 1/250 sync outdoors with a couple of 1200w/s battery packs.

Maybe I'm just joining the ranks of Luddites ... but I don't care. A bunch of techno-lemmings running off a visual cliff clutching their D800s doesn't sound very appealing to me as an artist ... it makes me want to go my own way even more than before ... LOL!

-Marc

     

[davidthescot]

I don't think we want to get too excited about the D800 prejudicing the MFD market.  I have an H4D outfit and I have just bought a D800E.  35MM digital has its role particularly where weather is an issue or long lenses are required or if weight is a problem.  There is room for both.

However I find the Nikon flimsy compared to the Hasselblad and my experience of Nikon's pro service compared to Hasselblad is not good.  Might be different if I was an photographer working for a national daily.  There is no comparison IMO between the image quality of both systems.  The Hasselblad images have beautifully rendered colours and amazing detail.  The Nikon has okay colour and very good detail.

The very high price of MFD bodies at the high end is an issue though and I cannot believe that an H4D-60 costs 4 or 5 times as much as an H4D-31 to make.