Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 [2] 3 4 5 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Talked to Sinar dealer today  (Read 20410 times)
josayeruk
Guest
« Reply #20 on: February 17, 2007, 03:37:33 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
with hasselblads record one would think you need at least 3 bodies (one will be at the shop at all times).....
but anyway.....now i know why rental houses will simply not pick up the H3D....
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Yawn....

[a href=\"http://www.ixpress-hire.com/]http://www.ixpress-hire.com/[/url]

http://www.digitalfusion.net/

http://www.procentre.co.uk/hire_list_prices.html#hasselblad

http://pixels2go.co.nz/

http://fotocare.com/html/product.asp?gId=21&mid=22

Jo S. x
« Last Edit: February 17, 2007, 04:18:19 PM by josayeruk » Logged
pss
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 960


WWW
« Reply #21 on: February 17, 2007, 05:18:45 PM »
ReplyReply

great! so you are the guy who is happy with having your one year old system made useless by the latest version!
btw: have you heard that phase will build in software correction for mamiya's 28mm (which is actually a real full frame 28mm, also usable with film) in C1V4? i think they are doing that just to counter hass's hype....
enjoy your only full frame DMF camera!
Logged

josayeruk
Guest
« Reply #22 on: February 17, 2007, 06:01:05 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
great! so you are the guy who is happy with having your one year old system made useless by the latest version!
btw: have you heard that phase will build in software correction for mamiya's 28mm (which is actually a real full frame 28mm, also usable with film) in C1V4? i think they are doing that just to counter hass's hype....
enjoy your only full frame DMF camera!
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=101436\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I don't quite understand your comment(s).  I doubt your system is now 'useless' at all.

The whole point of the 28mm is that it is full frame on the sensor therefore no probs with  perspective / focal length - important for a wide angle lens don't you think?

Why would I possibly want to use film?

I am not really interested in what Phase is doing - what is the need for 'point scoring' on internet forums?  Am I supposed to shrink in fear at the fact Mamiya and Phase will have a corrected 28mm?  Good on them really - competition is good for the manufacturers to keep up.

I bought my system in 2006 as my first medium format digital system.  The H2D at the time made the most sense, was cheaper, came from the same sales guy and the integration makes it a better camera.

It is not hype to me, and I don't expect it is hype to the other users.

Jo S. x
Logged
pss
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 960


WWW
« Reply #23 on: February 17, 2007, 06:56:40 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
I don't quite understand your comment(s).  I doubt your system is now 'useless' at all.

The whole point of the 28mm is that it is full frame on the sensor therefore no probs with  perspective / focal length - important for a wide angle lens don't you think?

Why would I possibly want to use film?

I am not really interested in what Phase is doing - what is the need for 'point scoring' on internet forums?  Am I supposed to shrink in fear at the fact Mamiya and Phase will have a corrected 28mm?  Good on them really - competition is good for the manufacturers to keep up.

I bought my system in 2006 as my first medium format digital system.  The H2D at the time made the most sense, was cheaper, came from the same sales guy and the integration makes it a better camera.

It is not hype to me, and I don't expect it is hype to the other users.

Jo S. x
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=101441\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
same here!

what does full frame have to do with problems perspective/focal length?

a marketing based one sided re-definition of the commonly used term "full frame" falls into the hype category...people who don't read the specs will actually think they are buying a 645 sensor...which they don't...

why would you possibly want to give up the option to use film?

this is not about point scoring at all!
i was wondering if the H3D was backward compatible...which you clarified for me....
i am simply amazed about how much hass actually left their customers high and dry!
i am not a hass user, so i could not care less, but it explains some of the outrage i have witnessed  about hass's move....

again: so you are happy that you bought a system in 2006 which is completely incompatible with the system that came out later the same year....good for you...you are a dream customer!
Logged

josayeruk
Guest
« Reply #24 on: February 17, 2007, 07:04:23 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
same here!

what does full frame have to do with problems perspective/focal length?

a marketing based one sided re-definition of the commonly used term "full frame" falls into the hype category...people who don't read the specs will actually think they are buying a 645 sensor...which they don't...

why would you possibly want to give up the option to use film?

this is not about point scoring at all!
i was wondering if the H3D was backward compatible...which you clarified for me....
i am simply amazed about how much hass actually left their customers high and dry!
i am not a hass user, so i could not care less, but it explains some of the outrage i have witnessed  about hass's move....

again: so you are happy that you bought a system in 2006 which is completely incompatible with the system that came out later the same year....good for you...you are a dream customer!
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=101448\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


I give up....

It matters not that the sensor is 645, 66, 48mmxwhatever.  The fact is the 28mm has an image circle for the 39MP sensor giving a wide angle lens on a 'medium' format camera.  Thats all.

I have no use for film... ever!

My system is not incompatible either.

This is becoming a silly argument and I don't want to continue to highjack this thread which is supposed to be about the Hy6.

Jo S x.
Logged
thsinar
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2066


WWW
« Reply #25 on: February 17, 2007, 07:17:28 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
i don't think it will work that way....the Afi will be a closed system...it will have its own mount (as all leaf and phase backs do)....
the sinar backs don't have specific mounts, they use adapters....so all you have to do is get the adapter you want....
i wonder if the sinar Hy6 will ship with a special mount (without adapter)....that would make that a closed camera as well....
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=101399\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I have said and been clear in many previous posts: Sinar has an adapter plate system, making it possible to use the same back on different camera platforms by changing this adapter.

Thierry
Logged

Thierry Hagenauer
thasia_cn@yahoo.com
Henry Goh
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 574


« Reply #26 on: February 17, 2007, 07:55:41 PM »
ReplyReply

Thanks Thierry for the good info.

as an aside: For someone waiting to move into MFDB I hope the tone here does not degrade into the same dungeon as DPReview.com.  It will be such a shameful loss to many like myself.

Henry
Logged
pprdigital
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 422


WWW
« Reply #27 on: February 17, 2007, 08:04:45 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
again: so you are happy that you bought a system in 2006 which is completely incompatible with the system that came out later the same year....good for you...you are a dream customer!
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=101448\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

It is true that an H2D is not compatible with an H3D - because they are both cameras. It's the same way with buying a Canon camera. A 1DS is not compatible with a 1DS-MKII. But Canon does nothing for you. On the other hand, Hasselblad offered a very reasonable upgrade price of $2,000 to anyone who bought an H2D, who wanted to upgrade to H3D.

Steve Hendrix
PPR Digital
Logged

Steve Hendrix
Caracalla
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 156



WWW
« Reply #28 on: February 17, 2007, 08:16:54 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
It is true that an H2D is not compatible with an H3D - because they are both cameras. It's the same way with buying a Canon camera. A 1DS is not compatible with a 1DS-MKII. But Canon does nothing for you. On the other hand, Hasselblad offered a very reasonable upgrade price of $2,000 to anyone who bought an H2D, who wanted to upgrade to H3D.

Steve Hendrix
PPR Digital
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=101457\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

You are right but it is matter of convenience isn't it? and you cannot intelligently go against that.

REGARDS
Logged
hcubell
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 730


WWW
« Reply #29 on: February 18, 2007, 11:32:45 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
great! so you are the guy who is happy with having your one year old system made useless by the latest version!
btw: have you heard that phase will build in software correction for mamiya's 28mm (which is actually a real full frame 28mm, also usable with film) in C1V4? i think they are doing that just to counter hass's hype....
enjoy your only full frame DMF camera!
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=101436\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

1. Where was the announcement that C1 v.4 will provide software-based correction for the Mamiya 28mm lens?

2. Please explain the basis for your assertion that the software-based correction that Hasselblad has already implemented in a product that is actually available in the marketplace is "hype". Did you test the 28mm Hasselblad lens and assess how effective  the software correction in Flexcolor is? If not, you really ought to try it. Gratuitous opinions not backed up by a shred of experience compromise every other opinion you may have.
Logged

James Russell
Guest
« Reply #30 on: February 18, 2007, 03:36:41 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
It is true that an H2D is not compatible with an H3D - because they are both cameras. It's the same way with buying a Canon camera. A 1DS is not compatible with a 1DS-MKII. But Canon does nothing for you. On the other hand, Hasselblad offered a very reasonable upgrade price of $2,000 to anyone who bought an H2D, who wanted to upgrade to H3D.

Steve Hendrix
PPR Digital
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=101457\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


Steve,

You analogy of the H2d and H3d are somewhat correct though the 20mm lens I put on my 1ds and 1ds2 both works exactly the same or better yet just works.  

Consequently does the 28mm hasselblad lens work on an H2 and also why wouldn't anyone think that if Hasselblad offered a tilt shift option, that it also wouldn't require an upgrade to another all in one Hasselblad solution?

Still, someday, some manufacturer is going to explain why they are making us select more limited options  without mentioning that the other guy f___'s us over more than they do.

IMO medium format is shooting themselves in the foot if they continue on the all in one approach.

The pie is pretty thin already and does Hasselblad and Leaf/Sinar think they can make a camera that sells in quanity if they just limit it to their own brand of back?

The whole positive idea of a back vs. an all in one camera is the options it gives us.


JR
Logged
pprdigital
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 422


WWW
« Reply #31 on: February 18, 2007, 03:50:10 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
The pie is pretty thin already and does Hasselblad and Leaf/Sinar think they can make a camera that sells in quanity if they just limit it to their own brand of back?

The whole positive idea of a back vs. an all in one camera is the options it gives us.
JR
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=101543\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I think that depends on the quality of the product. Certainly Canon has shown it can be done. The idea of limited choices is a concern - especially when the choices cost the amount they do. But at this point, it remains an optional choice. Even with Hasselblad pouring R&D into integrated solutions, they - and all the other medium format players - still offer camera neutral digital backs.

Steve Hendrix
PPR Digital
Logged

Steve Hendrix
James Russell
Guest
« Reply #32 on: February 18, 2007, 04:03:08 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
I think that depends on the quality of the product. Certainly Canon has shown it can be done. The idea of limited choices is a concern - especially when the choices cost the amount they do. But at this point, it remains an optional choice. Even with Hasselblad pouring R&D into integrated solutions, they - and all the other medium format players - still offer camera neutral digital backs.

Steve Hendrix
PPR Digital
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=101549\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


Obviously the money, or high margins are in the back and not the camera, but there is the issue.

These things are expensive and always seem to require the next upgrade to get a decent lcd, or a fast shoot rate, or something.

It also seems that one maker gets ahead, then the other gets close then another comes up with something and the fourth maker has issues, etc. etc.

Knowing this, I wouild not want to lock myself into a camera that only used a certain back.

Obviouisly the manufacturer's see it differently.

I think they are all lucky that Contax is no more, because eventually I guess they will force us all into going with their all-in-one solution.

Still, I have doubts that any camera platform can survive forcing the larges db maker out of the equation.

JR
Logged
rainer_v
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1131


WWW
« Reply #33 on: February 18, 2007, 04:06:47 PM »
ReplyReply

i agree in jr opinion.... all mf manufactors will loose with their actual politics to exclude as many competitors as possible from their "upgrade-politic-cake". it may be a good business for two or three or four years, but its only logical that the total attraction of mf digital systems is not increased by this territorial politics of the 4 companies in the market and so its also logical that less people will be attracted to move from 35mm to 645 systems, so the overall mf market will become even more little as it is already.
its a pity and i  wish the companies would go in honest quality/ price competition and not burning their own territory with this protective politics.
« Last Edit: February 18, 2007, 04:07:24 PM by rehnniar » Logged

rainer viertlböck
architecture photographer
munich / germany

www.tangential.de
Caracalla
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 156



WWW
« Reply #34 on: February 18, 2007, 04:35:43 PM »
ReplyReply

I like what Danijela D. Karic wrote on the other thread which could be also used here, and it goes like this.

Quote
The more we talk about them with the reference to show what we consciously believe, better for all of us. Otherwise we will enter the 16th century zone and manufacturers will let us believe that The Earth is square. It is happening right now already! Manufacturers just need a number of more believers I guess to turn it in to Official statement.
« Last Edit: February 18, 2007, 04:46:14 PM by Caracalla » Logged
pss
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 960


WWW
« Reply #35 on: February 18, 2007, 08:52:05 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
1. Where was the announcement that C1 v.4 will provide software-based correction for the Mamiya 28mm lens?

2. Please explain the basis for your assertion that the software-based correction that Hasselblad has already implemented in a product that is actually available in the marketplace is "hype". Did you test the 28mm Hasselblad lens and assess how effective  the software correction in Flexcolor is? If not, you really ought to try it. Gratuitous opinions not backed up by a shred of experience compromise every other opinion you may have.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=101524\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

i read it on this forum and asked a dealer if he had heard something about that, he confirmed...nothing set in stone....nothing concrete, no official announcement....

the hype i referred to was the full frame....and generally hass's way of mamaking their product sound far and beyond everybody else's.....

if you read the thread carefully you might have noticed a certain amount of silly bickering going on....so i feel the quote is taken a little out on context...i feel it is obvious that this exchange was not be taken too seriously.....
Logged

Geoffrey
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 69


« Reply #36 on: February 18, 2007, 10:18:01 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Still, someday, some manufacturer is going to explain why they are making us select more limited options   [a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=101543\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

It's probably got something to do with the need for ever more specialized connections between lenses and sensors. Look at what Leica is doing with the M8, with micro-lenses, firmware dealing with cyan drift, etc.

It not only costs a lot to integrate a full line of lenses and sensors, but hte requirements are getting ever more critical: the days of "slap the film back on" are long gone, but our expectations haven't. We want an open system, but flawless performance.

This might not be so easy to achieve - and the manuf. are having a heck of a time figuring out whether to close the system, and aim to achieve better integration; or leave it open, and pick up not only additional responsibilities (oh, why can't my Zeiss lens be coded for the M8?), but also figure out how to get paid for providing an open system.

All this, and being chased by the high-end DSLR's from Canon et al as well. Glad I'm not in their business!

Geoff
Logged
Morgan_Moore
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2220


WWW
« Reply #37 on: February 19, 2007, 12:33:58 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
I wouild not want to lock myself into a camera that only used a certain back.

Obviouisly the manufacturer's see it differently.

[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=101555\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

My view is that my back is my film stock - I already own fifty fridges full of it and will only use it on a camera that works with it

That incrementally faster or better film becomes available is of no interest to me due to the investment I made in those fifty fridges full

This is where my outlook is diferent from the manufacturers

What blad did was different to canon ect - canon make better film than they did before but all the lenses work on the old film stock - not so hassy

Camera manufacturers used to make a living not selling film but providing the best lenses and bodies they could offer

There was still an upgrade path to keep them in business , AF , VR

Blad should be working on multipoint AF and making it fit 'kodak or fuiji' digital film

Sinar do a great back but thier own camera selection seems odd/incomplete to me

SMM
Logged

Sam Morgan Moore Cornwall
www.sammorganmoore.com -photography
James Russell
Guest
« Reply #38 on: February 19, 2007, 01:37:35 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
It's probably got something to do with the need for ever more specialized connections between lenses and sensors. Look at what Leica is doing with the M8, with micro-lenses, firmware dealing with cyan drift, etc.

It not only costs a lot to integrate a full line of lenses and sensors, but hte requirements are getting ever more critical: the days of "slap the film back on" are long gone, but our expectations haven't. We want an open system, but flawless performance.

This might not be so easy to achieve - and the manuf. are having a heck of a time figuring out whether to close the system, and aim to achieve better integration; or leave it open, and pick up not only additional responsibilities (oh, why can't my Zeiss lens be coded for the M8?), but also figure out how to get paid for providing an open system.

All this, and being chased by the high-end DSLR's from Canon et al as well. Glad I'm not in their business!

Geoff
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=101602\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]



None of this stuff is perfect and I guess it will all get better.

The thing I dislike about digital capture is all of the proprietary schemes that the manufacturers keep cooking up.  

Our wide angle will only work with our "new" camera and of course only with "our" back.

Our new camera will only work with "our" back and then the thing of open source code that isn't really universal (dng) or open file formats .mos that 3rd party convertors only read a part of the settings makes no sense to me.

Imagine Kodak making a film that only worked in Kodak cameras and in Kodak processors with Kodak chemistry.  The outcry would have been huge.

Now imaging buying that Kodak camera and being told the only way the new wide angled lens works if you buy the newest Kodak camera and only with a new Kodak film.

That's the way I see all of this and the manufacturer's can talk about specialized processing, special lens correction, etc. etc., but I think we all know the game is to get you to buy into their system and keep upgrading you in that system for your entire career.

Lecia, Sinar, Leaf and Hasselblad can talk all they want about the benifits of their closed end system, but to me all of this is silly.

My original 1ds shoots as good if not better today than it did when I first bought it.  My processor options are about unlimited and just about every lens Canon makes will fit on it and work as well with it as they did with film.

My P-30 works fine on my Contax and if I'm tired of that or want to change to a Mamiya or a V-system Phase will change the mount for a very low cost (or I think maybe free for the first 12 months).

Personally, if Leaf, Sinar or Hasselblad want to move us in thier direction of digital backs then just make a better digital back.  One with a great lcd, in camera useable jpegs, higher iso. all open source processing options, solid robust software and most importantly the ability to easily switch from camera to camera.

Spend more time writing grey balances and input settings  that more resemble film and less time thinking of some way to force me to upgrade to the next level of back, (camera included) or become locked into just one manufacturer.

Don't get me wrong I find all of this digital capture stuff amazing and the fact that I can shoot thousand of drums scans in a day is beyond what anyone thought 10 years ago.

Still, we I look back at how useable my original 1ds is and how easy it was to develope and build a workflow, I see most of these new annoucements to be a step back, rather than a step forward.

When I use my Contax my P-30 and even my A-22 I really wonder what the HY6 or new hasselblad will really give me that I don't have already, other than more cost and quite frankly more limitations.

JR
Logged
John_Black
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 263


WWW
« Reply #39 on: February 19, 2007, 03:05:50 AM »
ReplyReply

I think the MF camera & body makers need to broaden their market by offering lower price backs.  The more users they can bring in, then the R&D costs can be distributed better.  More users means more body, lens and accessory sales.  And once you're in the family, there's no getting out

I feel Mamiya was headed in the right direction with the ZD back.  It didn't have the best specs, but it was 48x36 for supposedly $9k or so.  If Phase One would take that a step further and offer a 10-12 MP 48x36 back for around $3500 (probably 12-bits & other limitations), that would make MF a real alternative to dSLRs.

We're missing that "cross-over" back that bridges dSLRs and MF prices.  I really believe a back of that nature would revolutionize (and revitalize) medium format.  Who knows, if Canon really did venture into MF, maybe it would be a good thing...  It would certainly shake things up a bit.
Logged

Pages: « 1 [2] 3 4 5 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad