Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 ... 3 4 [5]   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Leaf AFi MF Camera ?  (Read 24809 times)
4ER5pKqRYaEbOcqv
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 5


WWW
« Reply #80 on: October 02, 2006, 01:51:20 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
There's an innovative solution: A fairly thick adapter clips to the camera body, and the film pack clips to the adapter. I assume that various adapters for various thrid-part backs could also be emplaced, allowing it to work with backs for other camera mounts.

Edmund
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=78389\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

These are the most exciting words I've read about this camera since I learned that the Sinar version would
only work with the (new) Sinar backs and the Leaf version would only work with the (new) Leaf backs.
They inspired the following speculation.
Since the thickness of the adapter may well (& possibly by design) be able to compensate for the different mount to
sensor plane distances of already existing backs made for different camera systems, the possibility for attaching
backs made last year and before seems very much brighter.  When I think about the use of film backs, especially a
6x6 film back, that tells me that the adapter has to be user removable from the camera side, if it isn't permanently affixed
to the newer backs.  It follows the ability to clip in at either orientation is on the camera side. So, it shouldn't be too
technically challenging for even a third party to manufacture adapter plates that are user attachable on both sides that
would allow existing and second hand backs for many camera systems to physically mount onto the camera in either
orientation.  Data communication is a different matter.  Even if the systems of data communication are electrically
compatible and have the software to be able to talk to each other, features that allow the camera to automatically set
the shutter speed or white balance in an unauthorized back could be locked out just like some resellers lock out feature
of some cell phones.  One might have to rely on the flash terminal to tell the back when the camera fires or on an electric
remote release (I can't imagine it being made by F&H and not having at least the potential for one) to simultaneously tell
the camera and back to make an exposure.  Hopefully a camera sold directly by F&H like an "unlocked" PDA-phone sold
directly by Palm would be able to attempt to cooperate as much as it could with anything one attached to it.  If I was Phase
One, one thing I would seriously consider is a version of this camera that would work from the very first with previous
models of Phase One backs.  Since the lack of interoperability strategy has already been employed by the other back
makers, the new camera purchase disincentive for changing brands is already in place, and I imagine their customers
would appreciate having the option to upgrade to the new camera system without the financial strain of having to upgrade
to the latest back at the same time. Being the one digital back manufacturer that has that attitude could make for
great customer relations.

It's really too bad that the digital backs and newer medium format cameras never took to some wireless form of
control communications (like, say, bluetooth for more recently manufactured stuff).  The manufacture and distribution
of software based control data interfaces between older and newer equipment would be a lot less expensive than
routing wires through adapter plates that might have to stop half-way at interface electronics for which there's almost
no room.  A wireless control data adapter (eg PDA) wouldn't even have to be part of the camera, just near it.

John
Logged
Nemo
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 276



« Reply #81 on: October 02, 2006, 03:21:31 AM »
ReplyReply

The Hy6 platform is not an open platform meaning that a camera has an "open" mount (to every lens manufacturer) and "open" back connections (to any digital back manufacturer).

I think Rollei sells the camera to digital backs manufacturers, and they adapt the body to their backs. The Leaf cameras only work with Leaf backs... This implies that we will have many "mini-Hasselblads": Leaf camera and Leaf back; Sinar camera and Sinar back; Rollei camera and Rollei back... This would be nonsense! Perhaps Hasselblad can do it, but Rollei/Sinar/Leaf don't.

The Hy6 platform must be based on a set of public specifications open to everyone, lens manufacturers and back manufacturers. I should be possible to use a Phase One back on a Leaf-branded camera, or a Leaf back on a Sinar camera, and any lens on any camera.

I hope to see this platform well-defined and really open. Potential buyers will not accept tricks. People looking for a closed platform will have Hasselblads, Mamiyas, Pentaxes... and Canons... Rollei, Sinar and Leaf cannot win in that game. They have the opportunity to offer something different.
Logged
robert zimmerman
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 223


« Reply #82 on: October 02, 2006, 04:12:58 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
The Hy6 platform must be based on a set of public specifications open to everyone, lens manufacturers and back manufacturers. I should be possible to use a Phase One back on a Leaf-branded camera, or a Leaf back on a Sinar camera, and any lens on any camera.

[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=78727\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

why? why would leaf or phase or sinar be interested in making their systems interchangeable? they have nothing to gain with interchangeability. they can only survive if they get people locked into their system and that's why they all desperately need a working camera and lens(es) to put in front of their backs and now they have it AND can even brand it. if you want the "open" thing you buy a rollei and an adapter for your back(s).

it's really, really crazy...completely, totally strange that franke & heidecke (a little german company) are obviously the ONLY camera makers in the world who are able or willing to make a standard MF camera for all digital back makers.
just think about it. all these digital back companies are jumping on the HY6 camera.
why was no one interested up until now in making a platform that will work with all backs?
franke & heidecke are freaking me out - the only weakness they have is their marketing system and so what do they do? they let leaf, sinar and phase do the marketing for them by selling this thing directly to them. that's brilliant.
even if they don't sell a single rollei branded cam they're in like flint.
sinar and leaf have already committed to the system, phase will probably follow. it'll be like selling insulin to diabetics (no offense intended), what else are they gonna do? they all just need a workable (that means as good as hassy) solution and f&h are the only ones smart enough to say "here you go.".
Logged
geesbert
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 551



WWW
« Reply #83 on: October 02, 2006, 06:49:47 AM »
ReplyReply

i think in the long run camera and backs will become one again, 15 years ago noone thought of using mamiya backs with hasselblad cameras. the situation we are now in with small back manufacturers and large camera-makers is already changing...
Logged

-------------------------
WWW.RANDLKOFER.COM
nik
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 205


WWW
« Reply #84 on: October 02, 2006, 07:21:25 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
i think in the long run camera and backs will become one again, 15 years ago noone thought of using mamiya backs with hasselblad cameras. the situation we are now in with small back manufacturers and large camera-makers is already changing...
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=78748\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


Err... Camera backs nowdays are rather different to 15 years ago, in cost and complexity. No-one thought of using different backs on different cameras because you didn't need to, every camera maker had a back for their cameras which took whatever film you wished, also, it was a lot easier and cheaper to make.
Logged
pss
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 960


WWW
« Reply #85 on: October 02, 2006, 11:30:18 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
The Hy6 platform is not an open platform meaning that a camera has an "open" mount (to every lens manufacturer) and "open" back connections (to any digital back manufacturer).

I think Rollei sells the camera to digital backs manufacturers, and they adapt the body to their backs. The Leaf cameras only work with Leaf backs... This implies that we will have many "mini-Hasselblads": Leaf camera and Leaf back; Sinar camera and Sinar back; Rollei camera and Rollei back... This would be nonsense! Perhaps Hasselblad can do it, but Rollei/Sinar/Leaf don't.

The Hy6 platform must be based on a set of public specifications open to everyone, lens manufacturers and back manufacturers. I should be possible to use a Phase One back on a Leaf-branded camera, or a Leaf back on a Sinar camera, and any lens on any camera.

I hope to see this platform well-defined and really open. Potential buyers will not accept tricks. People looking for a closed platform will have Hasselblads, Mamiyas, Pentaxes... and Canons... Rollei, Sinar and Leaf cannot win in that game. They have the opportunity to offer something different.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=78727\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

how do you expect a single camera to accept ALL lenses and ALL backs? this is just crazy! you would have to get all lens manufacturers together and get them to agree on ONE mount! this will of course never happen.....same goes for the backs!
a camera can only accept adapters to accept different lenses or backs....the Hy6 accepts the more lenses then any other system natively...maybe canon accepts that many lenses...the rollei Hy6 accepts all backs via adapters....why would the Leaf Hy6 (which is probably free with your Aptus) accept a phase back?

until we have a magically morphing intelligent camera, you will have to live with adapters to put your P45, Aptus75 and emotion75 on your ONE body?
Logged

Nemo
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 276



« Reply #86 on: October 02, 2006, 12:04:39 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
how do you expect a single camera to accept ALL lenses and ALL backs? this is just crazy!

Perhaps I have not explained my arguments clearly.

An open standard offered to all the companies of a consortium provides a particular set of specifications for the mount (the Rollei 6000 series mount is OK) and for the backs. The 4/3 standard is a good example. It is not an universal mount, but any lens manufacturer could make lenses for the 4/3 mount, because the 4/3 standard is open to any manufacturer (actually, Olympus, Panasonic/Leica and Sigma).

In the same way, a set of specifications can be established for the backs in order to allow the electronic communication with the body. This does not means all actual backs can be used with the Hy6, but any manufacturer could make a back for any of the Hy6 branded cameras.
Logged
pss
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 960


WWW
« Reply #87 on: October 02, 2006, 12:35:37 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Perhaps I have not explained my arguments clearly.

An open standard offered to all the companies of a consortium provides a particular set of specifications for the mount (the Rollei 6000 series mount is OK) and for the backs. The 4/3 standard is a good example. It is not an universal mount, but any lens manufacturer could make lenses for the 4/3 mount, because the 4/3 standard is open to any manufacturer (actually, Olympus, Panasonic/Leica and Sigma).

In the same way, a set of specifications can be established for the backs in order to allow the electronic communication with the body. This does not means all actual backs can be used with the Hy6, but any manufacturer could make a back for any of the Hy6 branded cameras.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=78786\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

so you are asking all back manufacturers to provide ONE mount for all their backs...yes i would sign that petition too...that will never happen....they can't even agree on one raw file standard...they would never let that happen, because they would never want to give you the option to switch from one to the other...they want you to upgrade from a P20 to a P30 to a P45.....if there was an open standard, you might jump ship!
but this has nothing to do with the Hy6...
about the 4/3 system: all 4/3 lenses from allmakers can be put on all cameras? i did not know that...i thought 4/3 was just a formula, like 35mm or APS...
Logged

Dustbak
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2372


« Reply #88 on: October 02, 2006, 01:31:18 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
so you are asking all back manufacturers to provide ONE mount for all their backs...yes i would sign that petition too...that will never happen....they can't even agree on one raw file standard...they would never let that happen, because they would never want to give you the option to switch from one to the other...they want you to upgrade from a P20 to a P30 to a P45.....if there was an open standard, you might jump ship!
but this has nothing to do with the Hy6...
about the 4/3 system: all 4/3 lenses from allmakers can be put on all cameras? i did not know that...i thought 4/3 was just a formula, like 35mm or APS...
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=78790\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


I think I would definitely stay with one back manufacturer when I am pleased with the back. I want 1 back that I can use with a multitude of camera systems. I don't particularly care whether it needs adapters or that it is one mount standard as long as I can use my 1 back on the different camera systems I own.
« Last Edit: October 02, 2006, 01:33:29 PM by Dustbak » Logged
Graham Mitchell
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2282



WWW
« Reply #89 on: October 02, 2006, 01:37:05 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
they would never let that happen, because they would never want to give you the option to switch from one to the other...

I don't agree. A universal back would remove a lot of doubt which is holding back medium format. So the answer is that they would do it for the success of the whole MF market. I think this is a very important point which I hope they are not too stubborn to see.

Secondly, although a customer could update a back with another brand, the reverse can happen with existing customers of other brands.

Look at PC parts. Fully interchangeable, and many companies are thriving in that environment.
Logged

Graham Mitchell - www.graham-mitchell.com
Nemo
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 276



« Reply #90 on: October 02, 2006, 01:51:27 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
about the 4/3 system: all 4/3 lenses from allmakers can be put on all cameras? i did not know that...i thought 4/3 was just a formula, like 35mm or APS...

All lenses for the 4/3 standard can be used on any 4/3 camera. For instance, a Sigma lens can be used on a Panasonic camera, and a Panasonic/Leica lens can be used on a Olympus camera. The mount and its electronic connections are under public specifications. The standard is controlled by a consortium of companies.

Quote
Look at PC parts. Fully interchangeable, and many companies are thriving in that environment.

That is the point.
Logged
pss
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 960


WWW
« Reply #91 on: October 02, 2006, 01:55:37 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
I don't agree. A universal back would remove a lot of doubt which is holding back medium format. So the answer is that they would do it for the success of the whole MF market. I think this is a very important point which I hope they are not too stubborn to see.

[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=78795\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

like i said..i am hoping as well...but we see how hasselblad approaches this...there is way too much propriatory technology involved...there are only 2 different chip makers, and 4 back manfacturers...4 different file formats...every back is triggered in a different way, at a different time...which would be the one standard everybody would agree on?
of course it would be better for us, the consumers, but neither phase nor leaf have any interest in that...their whole business model is based on return customers, people who keep upgrading within thier product line...and don't forget that sinar and imacon backs are both made by companies who also sell other products...sinar takes a more open approach with this...hasselblad..well we know about that...
Logged

eronald
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 4154



« Reply #92 on: October 02, 2006, 02:13:33 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
about the 4/3 system: all 4/3 lenses from allmakers can be put on all cameras? i did not know that...i thought 4/3 was just a formula, like 35mm or APS...
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=78790\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Yes, it's like the old 42 mm screw mount ...

Edmund
Logged
marcwilson
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 411


WWW
« Reply #93 on: October 02, 2006, 04:18:28 PM »
ReplyReply

the 4/3 system is a great one..you can now for instance use the two leica/panasonic lenses on your choice of panasonic, leica and olympus cameras without the need for adapters and with full useability...now that is choice!

..we are, however, yet to see images from the latest 10mp cameas to see how they measure up against similar dslrs such as canon 400d and nikon d80 etc.
Logged

Nemo
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 276



« Reply #94 on: October 02, 2006, 05:37:50 PM »
ReplyReply

I suppose the Hy6 is like the 4/3 standard in terms of lens compatibility: Schneider, Zeiss and maybe Leica can make lenses for this Rollei mount.

The connetion between the back and the body is a different story. An unique connections set could be easily developed for the Hy6, but the different brands seem to be inclined to "close" their branded bodies (Leaf at least).
Logged
Pages: « 1 ... 3 4 [5]   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad