Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 [2] 3 4 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Hasselblad H3D-39 not perfect ?  (Read 18583 times)
James R Russell
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 984



WWW
« Reply #20 on: April 03, 2008, 09:18:33 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
No, I don't blame Lloyd  - he's not paid for reviewing that I know of. But regardless of a reviewers intentions, reviews of a product that paint either an inaccurate or incomplete picture do not help end users determine if that product is right for them to spend $20,000 - $30,000 on. And when I see those reviews, I feel compelled to correct them because anyone who would consider that product may not consider it  for all the wrong reasons after reading that review.

These are very important purchases for many reasons, the high cost involved, the nature in which it will be used, etc. "Winging it" with regard to how much you know about a product before spending $30,000 is not a great way to spend your money, and reviews can sometimes produce the same result if they're inaccurate or incomplete, as most are.

That said, reviewing a product is very difficult, especially when you get a limited amount of time with it (and limited involvement from the manufacturer). I like reviews. I'd like to see more of them. It's more the fault of the manufacturer than the reviewer for an inaccurate review. Sometimes it's not practical, but I would send a manufacturers representative to spend the time with the reviewer while they review the product to help produce an accurate review. Even a positive review can have inaccurate information in it that may erroneously expose the one thing that is a deal breaker for someone, when it actually is not a deal breaker. And so they buy their (in reality) 2nd choice because of an error.

So, it's not about shooting the messenger, just providing the correct information that the messenger failed to convey so that buyers considering the reviewed product can make an informed decision.
Steve Hendrix
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=186720\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


Steve,

Be realistic.

Nobody that  is in the market for a medium format system is going to look at photos of a sky or a 1 bedroom house with a "ladder" attached (though in Palo Alto this is probably 1.5m) and make their fnal decision.

I actually found a lot of his comments to be unbiased and truthful, especially in regards to the market hype of "full frame" which I think really was one of the dumbest marketing moves of all time.  I also think that he is reacting to a camera that is not really Hasselblad anymore.  It's Imacon, Fuji with a little Hasselblad mix.  

Holding a v series then using an H series really isn't a Rolls vs. Bently, it's Jaguar vs. Toyota.

Maybe I'm being a traditionalist (I don't think so), but I even find it strange to see the name Hasselblad without a Zeiss lens.  Heck even Sony handicams have Zeiss lenses.

Regardless, anybody with any sense is going to compare these cameras in the genre in which they work, which is probably tethered to a computer or on a tripod, shoot a thousand files, process a thousand files, etc. etc.,  but in a way I think this guy probably did test it in the way he works, hence his reaction.

As far as the neutral settings of the hasselblad let's don't get too dreamy over this because nearly everybody's file can be set to linear where you can roll your own everything.

I do agree with you that real world reviews on these cameras are hard to come by.  A few hours or a day, tell you nothing.  Shooting with strobe in a dealers showroom tells you nothing.

Working with anxious clients and a deadline tells you a lot and it's only under that kind of pressure can I tell if a system will hold up or fall down.


JR
Logged

Dustbak
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2349


« Reply #21 on: April 03, 2008, 09:19:40 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Steve Hendrix wrote-
Having spent a very tidy sum upon a camera should it really be necessary to mess about on the PC to produce a startling image? It's time we stopped making excuses for products which are less than their manufacturers claim or explicitly imply.

Justin.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=186687\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


You are not getting the message. When you spend such an amount of money you obviously should know what you are doing. I for one would not like to be limited because the flow is already pushing me into a certain direction.

The Hasselblad file is kind of a blank file that can be pushed into any direction from a neutral starting position. The other files already have some direction on them (with the expection apparently of the Sinar). It is simply another approach which has nothing to do with the quality of the product or the end result.

What do you dislike about starting with a file that has no sharpening, linear curve (flat without contrast), etc..?

Aside that, I am kind of trying to ignore the marketing BS that apparently has to accompany everything nowadays. I have not found any brand that has a perfect solution sofar or a perfect way of handling its (potential) customers. Which is naturally no excuse not to remain critical.
« Last Edit: April 03, 2008, 09:30:01 AM by Dustbak » Logged
thsinar
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2066


WWW
« Reply #22 on: April 03, 2008, 09:33:11 AM »
ReplyReply

Yes, that was Sinar's philosophy since the beginning and with our first backs, to get the files out as raw as possible, when others were sharpening or applying contrast curves. I do not criticize either approach, although sharpening before knowing the final output seems weird for me (as well as applying the same default sharpening to all kind of images): there are some who prefer to be conducted through the process, others who wish to have it more under their own control.

Thierry

Quote
The Hasselblad file is kind of a blank file that can be pushed into any direction from a neutral starting position. The other files already have some direction on them (with the expection apparently of the Sinar). It is simply another appraoch which has nothing to do with the quality of the product or the end result.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=186728\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Logged

Thierry Hagenauer
thasia_cn@yahoo.com
jecxz
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 377


WWW
« Reply #23 on: April 03, 2008, 10:08:55 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
I actually found a lot of his comments to be unbiased and truthful, especially in regards to the market hype of "full frame" which I think really was one of the dumbest marketing moves of all time.  I also think that he is reacting to a camera that is not really Hasselblad anymore.  It's Imacon, Fuji with a little Hasselblad mix. 

Holding a v series then using an H series really isn't a Rolls vs. Bently, it's Jaguar vs. Toyota.

Maybe I'm being a traditionalist (I don't think so), but I even find it strange to see the name Hasselblad without a Zeiss lens.  Heck even Sony handicams have Zeiss lenses.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=186725\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
You're right, compared to you, he's not biased.
Logged

James R Russell
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 984



WWW
« Reply #24 on: April 03, 2008, 10:21:06 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
You are not getting the message. When you spend such an amount of money you obviously should know what you are doing. I for one would not like to be limited because the flow is already pushing me into a certain direction.

The Hasselblad file is kind of a blank file that can be pushed into any direction from a neutral starting position. The other files already have some direction on them (with the expection apparently of the Sinar). It is simply another approach which has nothing to do with the quality of the product or the end result.

What do you dislike about starting with a file that has no sharpening, linear curve (flat without contrast), etc..?

Aside that, I am kind of trying to ignore the marketing BS that apparently has to accompany everything nowadays. I have not found any brand that has a perfect solution sofar or a perfect way of handling its (potential) customers. Which is naturally no excuse not to remain critical.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=186728\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


I really don't think it's the user that's missing the message, I believe it's some of the manufacturers that fail to understand how as small business people we have to weigh each expenditure seriously.

Nothing is worse than spending a lot of money on a new camera, pulling it out on a pressured job and something doesn't work, or the file is challanged or the first image on the screen is not WOW pretty, just hmm, I guess we'll fix it in post pretty.

Honestly I don't understand a lot of this announce then wait sceanrio of medium format.  I've heard the word "phocus"  (I think that's a pretty funny name for software, especially if you drop the o) for about a year, but I can't imagine being a blad owner, knowing your one full stop of iso behind the competition and also knowing your waiting  a year for "phocus" to get there.

At that point you do drop the o.

What's the deal with digital photography?   There is always a rumor or a wait and see annoucement hagning out there and if photographers have any fault it's that we actually believe it's going to come out as annouced.

If I had a nickle for every annoucement and promise followed by every firmware, software, hardware update and a dollar for every maker missed deadline, I could hang out with Brad and Angelina and spend my off time adopting kids, or cats or whatever those silly people do.

Right now on this and probably 10,000,000 other forums and blogs there are rumors of larger Leicas, square sensors, new lenses, bigger viewfinders, updated software, new software, newer backwards compatiable software, etc. etc. etc.

I've been down that road where I'm holding a $30,000 product that didn't perform anywhere close to the maker's pdf's and website described, but by the time the maker got around to even semi-addressing the first product, they had annouced 4 new products.

It didn't really piss me off that they didn't give me what I had hoped for,  it pissed me off that rather than spend ALL of their resources making it right, they just kept pumping out new stuff to keep the buzz going.

Some of the medium format makers are more guilty than others but they all do it.

So really can you blame Digital Lloyd?  BTW: What a name, I think he should step up to at least the nineties and change it to D-Boy-Lloyd or something with a better ring to it).

After all D-Boy did what most people do.  He walked into a big camera store and tried the most expensive camera on the shelf and after looking at the lcd went "huh, what's this all about?"

Of course the big camera store won't have the very latest, most expensive camera with the bigger lcd, because in the medium format world walking into a traditional camera store and just picking up the latest is as likely as finding the phone number of the person that get's you into that hidden A list restauant that's buried in West Hollywood between a parking lot a plumbing company and a telecine suite.

If you go onto every medium format maker's website you'd think that buyng thier product would change your life and make you 4 inches taller, but just try to buy their product, today, right now, at the real price, not the I was the stupid guy price.

All these websites have retouched "black' cameras, all have a video showing some guy hoisting his kids in the car while he leaves the camera on the trunk of an Opel, on his way to a "big" shoot, or a celebrty photographer talking about how he could never have got the shot of Jessica Simpson  if his trusty RS_12_95S, hadn't been able to record every  pore that will be retouched off.

All of them say version whatever is NOW ready for "beta" download, but none of them show what my real world is like which is 10 nervous paying customers staring at screen hoping that photo get's them a raise, or at least doesn't get them fired.

I'm not amazed by D-boy's review, I am amazed that he actually walked into a traditional camera store and found any medium format digial camera that had a charged battery, regardless of make or vintage.



JR
Logged

BJNY
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1112


« Reply #25 on: April 03, 2008, 10:21:30 AM »
ReplyReply

ALL of us are strongly opinionated.
Logged

Guillermo
Bernd B.
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 260


« Reply #26 on: April 03, 2008, 10:23:31 AM »
ReplyReply

Having bought my H3D towards the end of 2007 I can confirm that dealing with their raw files isnīt something you learn in a day or two. I was totally frustrated during the first weeks (maybe months) and wished I had bought another LEAF back, because with my first one I got along from the very first moment. After half a year now Iīm just beginning to see the light with Flexcolor.

I accept that because my camera personally  gives me some things I donīt so easily find with the other brand, (integration, which was unique at that time, DAC ...).

When I bought my first apple computer in 2000 I didnīt expect to learn everything in a week. But I downloaded a lot of tryout versions like Indesign and Freehand and said to me: with your computer you could do all those great things. Mostly I started the program once, looked at all those tools without understanding whatever they might be good for, then closed the programm and never would open it again, except Photoshop, which was the one I would need for my profession.

So why does someone expect to understand a highly specialized tool like an H3D and its files within two hours?

There were wealthy people who bought one and sold it half a year later because there was no printed manual in the box ... For real, itīs not a product of my phantasy.

Bernd
Logged
James R Russell
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 984



WWW
« Reply #27 on: April 03, 2008, 10:31:12 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
ALL of us are strongly opinionated.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=186749\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


Of course I'm bias.  My experience is only based on what I've owned and used in the way I use it.

I can't speak for anyone else, but I do hear a lot of off the record conversation about what works and what doesn't and you'd be surprised of the number of photographers that would never go public and mention than brand x or y doesn't work because they don't want that by their name in the public domain, or they're afraid that if they do speak out they'll be put on the back of the list for repairs.

I'm not saying that happpens, because I;ve never heard of manufacturer retribution, but that doesn't mean the fear doesn't exist.

I don't care that  this stuff isn't perfect, because nothing's perfect.  I just am suprised that in the world of expensive cameras, medium format is always talking about the size of their market being small, but doesn't really seem to address how to get their product in front of a larger audience with a positive result.

Steve's right.  Digital Lloyd should have had a rep on hand to show him how to work the camera and do it in a way the camera is made.

Still, regardless of the brand of equipment I own today, if it stops working or becomes time challanged I'll change it in a heartbeat.

JR

P.S.  If it makes anyone feel any better I think the blad shoots a pretty file, especially skin tone rendering.  The camera is not my cup-o-tea, but I use cameras that require e-bay lenses, so that doesn't mean anything.  Actually, I am somewhat jealous of the H owners that they can actually walk into a store and probably buy a new lens.
« Last Edit: April 03, 2008, 10:42:11 AM by James R Russell » Logged

pprdigital
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 422


WWW
« Reply #28 on: April 03, 2008, 11:09:53 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Steve,

Be realistic.

Nobody that  is in the market for a medium format system is going to look at photos of a sky or a 1 bedroom house with a "ladder" attached (though in Palo Alto this is probably 1.5m) and make their fnal decision.
JR
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=186725\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

You'd be surprised...

Steve Hendrix
Logged

Steve Hendrix
Dustbak
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2349


« Reply #29 on: April 03, 2008, 12:42:12 PM »
ReplyReply

James,

I think we are talking about different things while being in agreement about most. I agree that the manufacturers sometimes (or a lot of times) appear to not realize that we have to earn all this stuff back and more. I have the feeling that they sometimes are quite far away from their end-customers or think we are all famous and making fortunes  

But in the case of having a 'flat file', I believe that is a chosen route with which you can agree or not but which is not an imperfection of the product or its implementation.

I agree it is crazy the announcements and than having to wait. I believe the manufacturers are not doing the MF market a favor with these but also other things. It is not just Hasselblad that is guilty of doing so as you mentioned. When I was still a Leaf customer it seemed like we were waiting forever for Capture 11 or the Windows version. Phocus is no different. I believe the Phase owners were waiting forever for version 4? etc...

I dislike the fact that we (and the manufacturers) are so depending on a dealer system that many don't like, that doesn't work in many cases. Sure it is good to have it when it works but there is no alternative which I find ridiculous and is bordering at illegal in Europe (dealers that refuse to deal with people that are not in their assigned region because they are forbidden to do so).

It is foolish not to be critical about something that is so expensive and from which we are so dependant. It is even more foolish to try to force people to shut up by means of intimidation or by putting them at a disadvantage. If that is truly happening I really hope those people will speak up and let it be known.

I am not biased, IMO, towards any product. I think the 2 brands I have used sofar both have a product that can be used very effectively. I am sure the other 2 can be used equally effective. All have their specific ins & outs which you better know to get the most out of them or to avoid disappointments. I have no more loyalty towards any brand than that brand has to me.

I will go for whatever does the job and gets me there in the cheapest and least painful or most pleasureable (is that a word?) way.
« Last Edit: April 03, 2008, 12:58:40 PM by Dustbak » Logged
eronald
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3643



WWW
« Reply #30 on: April 03, 2008, 12:53:59 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Stewart


Digital has been one large marketing exercise as far he manufacturers are concerned. Look at the position of Canon now, is their exalted status due the quality of the product or simply that they had the best sales team?
Justin.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=186723\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Canon's position is due to fact that they had a chip fab line of their own, while Nikon had to get their electronics elsewhere. So Canon could experiment at will, and market their fullframe chip. The fact that Canon had fullframe for two generations when Nikon didn't carried the market. Canon delivered, while Nikon tried to convince people that "crop-frame" was inherently superior

Edmund
« Last Edit: April 03, 2008, 01:04:38 PM by eronald » Logged

Edmund Ronald, Ph.D. 
geronimo13
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 65


« Reply #31 on: April 03, 2008, 01:13:23 PM »
ReplyReply

Hi!

My local phase one rep traded in a 3 month old h3d 39mpix for a p45+.

He earlier used a phase one p25 then switched to the h3d and his printer called him up and asked wtf he had done to the files. Earlier they didn't have to touch his files now they had to adjust all sorts of things.

Quote
I came across this review:  http://diglloyd.com/diglloyd/free/HasselbladH3D/

In short (jumping to conclusion of the article), image quality per pixel does not deliver perfection.  In particular, colored specs and lack of "pop" (liveness) to the image.

Can anyone confirm if HD3II has same issues ?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=186576\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Logged
pprdigital
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 422


WWW
« Reply #32 on: April 03, 2008, 01:24:50 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Hi!

My local phase one rep traded in a 3 month old h3d 39mpix for a p45+.

He earlier used a phase one p25 then switched to the h3d and his printer called him up and asked wtf he had done to the files. Earlier they didn't have to touch his files now they had to adjust all sorts of things.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=186810\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

His printer didn't "have" to do anything. He provided files that were apparently not print ready. It is his fault for not providing files that were properly prepared.

Wait...did you say your Phase One REP? Why would a P1 rep own a Hasselblad?


Steve Hendrix
« Last Edit: April 03, 2008, 01:25:35 PM by pprdigital » Logged

Steve Hendrix
bryanyc
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 98


« Reply #33 on: April 03, 2008, 01:25:12 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
or most pleasureable (is that a word?) way.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=186801\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

pleasurable without the e is a word though I am not sure it applies to the experience of the prospective medium format buyer (like myself)    

Good discussion though.  Things are much more complicated and expensive these days at the top end.  It is about much more than the lenses, bodies, viewfinder and usability of the cameras: it is almost as much about the software interfaces, programs and workflow.  And then about how future proof your camera and back is.  To me it is beyond daunting, its scary.

The desire to work with an aesthetically pleasing tool, of which there seemed to be so many available in the film days, has been radically reduced in the medium format world, to 3 (reflex) cameras.  The Contax, rest its soul, was an aesthetic beauty.  For me the Hasselblad is a meh, the Mamiya a meh, the HY6 has got something to it.   Plus I just love the look down abstraction of a ground glass as an option.

About the softwares: For the most part I can only read about others opinions
Logged
Sean Reginald Knight
Awaiting Authorisation
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 66


« Reply #34 on: April 03, 2008, 02:47:01 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
...I have the feeling that they sometimes are quite far away from their end-customers...

Snip

[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=186801\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Let me see: Thierry is in Thailand and Yair is in Israel. Does that tell you something?
Logged
eronald
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3643



WWW
« Reply #35 on: April 03, 2008, 02:53:55 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Let me see: Thierry is in Thailand and Yair is in Israel. Does that tell you something?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=186839\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I think we need to clone some more of those Cylons in Atlanta and send them out into the world

Edmund

PS. Been watching to much Battlestar Galactica since I discovered P2P
« Last Edit: April 03, 2008, 02:54:47 PM by eronald » Logged

Edmund Ronald, Ph.D. 
yaya
Guest
« Reply #36 on: April 03, 2008, 05:46:16 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Let me see: Thierry is in Thailand and Yair is in Israel. Does that tell you something?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=186839\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I can only speak for myself here...

I would not mind being in Israel and I do not think Israel is more "far from the end user" than let's say Cupertino or Seattle are from their end users in Berlin or in Hong-Kong, however I am based in London (and have been for the last 5.5 years) and several members (not only UK based) here can vouch for me being fairly close to them.

Regarding reviews: This is a complicated issue and at least for me personally as someone who often spends hours and days with reviewers across Europe (or in one case, spending 4 days in Whistler, Canada with Michael R.) and then leaving them with a full kit for a week or two only to find a double page spread with 1,500 words and two 4X6 images (off which one is a product shot that I provided) saying that the camera is "truly fantastic" is to say the least, frustrating.

But it is hard and not fair to only blame the mags or the reviewers or the manufacturers. Sadly, our industry is not as rich as let's say the car industry. These magazines are not selling millions of copies and their budgets are fairly limited. The reviewers themselves don't often own more than a D200 with 40X Micro-Drives, a G4 Titanium and Photoshop CS1 and they don't get to drive the reviewed Porsche to Chamonix and back so they can write about the handling or the quality of the sound system, while staying in posh chalets and dining in Michelin-starred restaurants a-la TopGear...
We do not fly business class and do not stay in 5 star hotels, we do not wear suits (OK I'll admit I have one suit that I wore ONCE at a pre-press trade-show 2 yrs ago) and an M&S sandwich is considered quality lunch in many cases.

As James (hope it's OK I picked your name James since you are one that I know and met personally) and others can testify, it can take anything from 2 weeks to 2 years to make oneself comfortable with the equipment to a level that you trust it and that you know it gets you where you want. This is not necessarily because "it is not perfect out of the box" but more likely because "it is not perfect for YOUR NEEDS out of the box".
Bare in mind that there are still many coming from film where they never had to deal with post production...they did the lighting, edited the trannies and sometimes told the lab to push or pull half a stop before handing the selects to the client. So from knowing iso, f-stop, wafer, C-stand and gels to knowing OSX, Win64, Photoshop, LR, Aperture, C1, LC, FlexColor, RAID, FW800, ICC profiles, html, CMYK and even posting on LL can sometimes get one's head (and pocket) into a never ending spin.

The internet, being a fast moving medium, often adds fire by helping turning rumours to facts before the first C++ line is written or the first DXF file is saved.
Again this isn't unique to our industry. You will be amazed how much of it exists in industries that are far less charged with emotions, egos (not in the bad sense of egos) and outright talent compared to our industry.

This is not to remove any blame from any of the parties involved. This is more for shedding some light on the "other side" of the equation.

Sorry for the long blurb

Yair
Logged
thsinar
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2066


WWW
« Reply #37 on: April 03, 2008, 07:24:28 PM »
ReplyReply

With all due respect, this is a stupid answer!

And by the way, just 2 precisions:

- Thierry is responsible for Asia
- Yair IS NOT in Israel, but in the UK, responsible for this market (sorry for speaking for you, Yair).

And we both do not make the whole company by our own.

Best regards,
Thierry

Quote
Let me see: Thierry is in Thailand and Yair is in Israel. Does that tell you something?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=186839\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
« Last Edit: April 03, 2008, 07:25:00 PM by thsinar » Logged

Thierry Hagenauer
thasia_cn@yahoo.com
thsinar
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2066


WWW
« Reply #38 on: April 03, 2008, 07:29:42 PM »
ReplyReply

Yair,

though you are speaking only for yourself, I do fully subscribe to your words below: well said.

Thierry

Quote
I can only speak for myself here...

I would not mind being in Israel and I do not think Israel is more "far from the end user" than let's say Cupertino or Seattle are from their end users in Berlin or in Hong-Kong, however I am based in London (and have been for the last 5.5 years) and several members (not only UK based) here can vouch for me being fairly close to them.

Regarding reviews: This is a complicated issue and at least for me personally as someone who often spends hours and days with reviewers across Europe (or in one case, spending 4 days in Whistler, Canada with Michael R.) and then leaving them with a full kit for a week or two only to find a double page spread with 1,500 words and two 4X6 images (off which one is a product shot that I provided) saying that the camera is "truly fantastic" is to say the least, frustrating.

But it is hard and not fair to only blame the mags or the reviewers or the manufacturers. Sadly, our industry is not as rich as let's say the car industry. These magazines are not selling millions of copies and their budgets are fairly limited. The reviewers themselves don't often own more than a D200 with 40X Micro-Drives, a G4 Titanium and Photoshop CS1 and they don't get to drive the reviewed Porsche to Chamonix and back so they can write about the handling or the quality of the sound system, while staying in posh chalets and dining in Michelin-starred restaurants a-la TopGear...
We do not fly business class and do not stay in 5 star hotels, we do not wear suits (OK I'll admit I have one suit that I wore ONCE at a pre-press trade-show 2 yrs ago) and an M&S sandwich is considered quality lunch in many cases.

As James (hope it's OK I picked your name James since you are one that I know and met personally) and others can testify, it can take anything from 2 weeks to 2 years to make oneself comfortable with the equipment to a level that you trust it and that you know it gets you where you want. This is not necessarily because "it is not perfect out of the box" but more likely because "it is not perfect for YOUR NEEDS out of the box".
Bare in mind that there are still many coming from film where they never had to deal with post production...they did the lighting, edited the trannies and sometimes told the lab to push or pull half a stop before handing the selects to the client. So from knowing iso, f-stop, wafer, C-stand and gels to knowing OSX, Win64, Photoshop, LR, Aperture, C1, LC, FlexColor, RAID, FW800, ICC profiles, html, CMYK and even posting on LL can sometimes get one's head (and pocket) into a never ending spin.

The internet, being a fast moving medium, often adds fire by helping turning rumours to facts before the first C++ line is written or the first DXF file is saved.
Again this isn't unique to our industry. You will be amazed how much of it exists in industries that are far less charged with emotions, egos (not in the bad sense of egos) and outright talent compared to our industry.

This is not to remove any blame from any of the parties involved. This is more for shedding some light on the "other side" of the equation.

Sorry for the long blurb

Yair
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=186883\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Logged

Thierry Hagenauer
thasia_cn@yahoo.com
James R Russell
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 984



WWW
« Reply #39 on: April 03, 2008, 11:42:40 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
I can only speak for myself here...

I would not mind being in Israel and I do not think Israel is more "far from the end user" than let's say Cupertino or Seattle are from their end users in Berlin or in Hong-Kong, however I am based in London (and have been for the last 5.5 years) and several members (not only UK based) here can vouch for me being fairly close to them.

Regarding reviews: This is a complicated issue and at least for me personally as someone who often spends hours and days with reviewers across Europe (or in one case, spending 4 days in Whistler, Canada with Michael R.) and then leaving them with a full kit for a week or two only to find a double page spread with 1,500 words and two 4X6 images (off which one is a product shot that I provided) saying that the camera is "truly fantastic" is to say the least, frustrating.

But it is hard and not fair to only blame the mags or the reviewers or the manufacturers. Sadly, our industry is not as rich as let's say the car industry. These magazines are not selling millions of copies and their budgets are fairly limited. The reviewers themselves don't often own more than a D200 with 40X Micro-Drives, a G4 Titanium and Photoshop CS1 and they don't get to drive the reviewed Porsche to Chamonix and back so they can write about the handling or the quality of the sound system, while staying in posh chalets and dining in Michelin-starred restaurants a-la TopGear...
We do not fly business class and do not stay in 5 star hotels, we do not wear suits (OK I'll admit I have one suit that I wore ONCE at a pre-press trade-show 2 yrs ago) and an M&S sandwich is considered quality lunch in many cases.

As James (hope it's OK I picked your name James since you are one that I know and met personally) and others can testify, it can take anything from 2 weeks to 2 years to make oneself comfortable with the equipment to a level that you trust it and that you know it gets you where you want. This is not necessarily because "it is not perfect out of the box" but more likely because "it is not perfect for YOUR NEEDS out of the box".
Bare in mind that there are still many coming from film where they never had to deal with post production...they did the lighting, edited the trannies and sometimes told the lab to push or pull half a stop before handing the selects to the client. So from knowing iso, f-stop, wafer, C-stand and gels to knowing OSX, Win64, Photoshop, LR, Aperture, C1, LC, FlexColor, RAID, FW800, ICC profiles, html, CMYK and even posting on LL can sometimes get one's head (and pocket) into a never ending spin.

The internet, being a fast moving medium, often adds fire by helping turning rumours to facts before the first C++ line is written or the first DXF file is saved.
Again this isn't unique to our industry. You will be amazed how much of it exists in industries that are far less charged with emotions, egos (not in the bad sense of egos) and outright talent compared to our industry.

This is not to remove any blame from any of the parties involved. This is more for shedding some light on the "other side" of the equation.

Sorry for the long blurb

Yair
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=186883\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


Yair,

There is not a single thing you say I don't agree with.

Especially the time it takes to learn, master and work through one of these cameras and though the dslrs may be easier on the capture end, they take just as much work to make exceptional imagery on the back end, (usuall more work)  so there is no free lunch.

I also have to admit the reason you and Theirry take more heat because you come on these forums and I have a lot of respect for that.  Same with the dealers, especially the Atlanta dealers.

And I have to say up front just because I had issues with Leaf, doesn't mean it doesn't work, doesn't mean it's not vastly improved and doesn't mean that it shouldn't be considered.

As you know you can never label any of this equipment as black or white, there is always a circumstance and each day all of the companies improve, each day one company gains ground on the other and the cycle continues.

Even though Leaf and makers of mfd are small companies in comparision to Canon or Nikon you're usually selling to individuals who knows each purchase is important.

My point, if I have a point on this is I still don't think medium format gets there message out to enough potential users and does so in an easy way.

Sure you can call Steve, Dave or any good dealer and get an intelligent response but as you know you can also flip that to the next call and get anything but an intelligent response.

To me that is where the maker's website makes the difference.  Sure it needs to be visually dynamic, the cameras look exciting the sales message should be strong, but it also needs real world information and on a previous thread I mentioned the Red Camera site because it does address the complete use of the camera, the fixes, the non fixes, the issues.

That form of transparency shows that the maker is aware of the issues so consequently they should be working on it.

At least Red gives that impression.  I'll let you know after I buy one.

JR
Logged

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

Ad
Ad
Ad