Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Will Sony Make a Digital Back?  (Read 13669 times)
FredBGG
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1651


« Reply #60 on: March 20, 2013, 06:26:59 PM »
ReplyReply

So, you are saying that companies that make cine cameras don't enter the MFD market because MFD is dead? Could it be they don't enter that market because they have another market right now. I wonder why John Deere does not make sedans? Probably the sedan market is dead.

No I am saying that some companies choose to go into niche markets, even creating new ones because they see growth and it's an addition to what they do.

Sony chose to go into very high end digital cine cameras 4K etc. However even though they are one of the largest photography companies and absorbed Minolta
they chose not to go into the MFD market because they do not see growth. The have the capability and Minolta had actually made some MF cameras in the past.
They don't see big potential because they are already working on the next generations of full frame sensors and know that the gap is getting smaller and smaller and that
the need for anything better than theor future gear is getting smaller and smaller.
Phase on the other hand only makes MFD cameras. They are committed, entrenched and "stuck" with it.
The "NEED" for MF is becoming more of a "WANT" rather than need as the quality of top of the line gear in both formats is getting beyond what is needed in the real world
for the vast majority.
Logged
EricWHiss
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2373



WWW
« Reply #61 on: March 20, 2013, 06:41:25 PM »
ReplyReply

Maybe I'm wrong, but I am guessing most people that own MF cameras and/or digital backs also own some other cameras too. The premiss that it's either a DLSR or an MFDB never made sense to me.  I would be surprised to read about a person working for a living that has only one camera.  What would happen if they had a problem with one on the job?   And for the category of buyer that does because he/she can afford it... I doubt those folks stop with just one also....  Wink

But a MFDB + DLSR does make sense.  The DSLR is there for backup and for jobs requiring AF tracking or High ISO.    Of course there are those of us (myself included) that still shoot film but that's another story.

Logged

Authorized Rolleiflex Dealer:
Find product information, download user manuals, or purchase online - Rolleiflex USA
JV
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 550


« Reply #62 on: March 20, 2013, 07:04:37 PM »
ReplyReply

...they are already working on the next generations of full frame sensors and know that the gap is getting smaller and smaller...

I also own a Fuji X-Pro1. Great camera, excellent image quality.  very enjoyable shooting experience.
Not the best camera if you want to shoot wildlife (no long lenses) or if you want to shoot sports but outside of that it will do most things and it will do them well.
The Fuji X forums are filled with people who dumped their D700 or D800 and who prefer their X-Pro1 or X100s to a D800.
Some shoot weddings with it:
http://www.briankraft.com/Blog/fuji-x100s-wedding-photography-colorado/

Just a thought, the full frame DSLR might actually be gone long before MF is gone...
Logged
FredBGG
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1651


« Reply #63 on: March 20, 2013, 07:24:32 PM »
ReplyReply

I also own a Fuji X-Pro1. Great camera, excellent image quality.  very enjoyable shooting experience.
Not the best camera if you want to shoot wildlife (no long lenses) or if you want to shoot sports but outside of that it will do most things and it will do them well.
The Fuji X forums are filled with people who dumped their D700 or D800 and who prefer their X-Pro1 or X100s to a D800.
Some shoot weddings with it:
http://www.briankraft.com/Blog/fuji-x100s-wedding-photography-colorado/

Just a thought, the full frame DSLR might actually be gone long before MF is gone...

Big difference.
The 35mm DSLR is already "morphing/mutating" into other camera types while maintaining the features of DSLR.
The D800 shoots video, stills, in camera HDR. Shoots varois sensor areas for HD video and stills. Shoots 24x36 aspect ratio and 5x4.
Shootsa SLR or Live view.

The big companies that make DSLR cameras also make mirrorless and smaller formats. The two leading MF companies make only MF and one failed terribly attempting to gert into compact mirrorless.

« Last Edit: March 20, 2013, 07:34:23 PM by FredBGG » Logged
JoeKitchen
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 659



« Reply #64 on: March 20, 2013, 07:32:49 PM »
ReplyReply

Big difference.
The 35mm DSLR is already "morphing/mutating" into other formats while maintaining the featured of DSLR.
The D800 shoots video, stills, in camera HDR. Shoots varois sensor areas for video and stills. Shoots 24x36 aspect ratio and 5x4.
Shootsa SLR or Live view.

The big companies that make DSLR cameras also make mirrorless and smaller formats. The two leading MF companies make only MF and one failed terribly attempting to gert into compact mirrorless.


Are you sure you don't work for Nikon?
Logged

Joe Kitchen
www.josephmkitchen.com

"Photography is one percent inspiration and ninety-nine percent moving furniture."  Arnold Newman
"Try not to be just better than your rivals and contemporaries, try to be better than yourself."  William Faulkner
FredBGG
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1651


« Reply #65 on: March 20, 2013, 07:41:07 PM »
ReplyReply

Luxury car comparisons keep coming up, but I don't really think that people that choose MF over DSLR does it for the same reason that someone chooses Ferrari over Toyota.

For me it was rather a choice of classic vintage car (digital view camera) instead of a Lexus (pro DSLR), as my landscape photographer's personality fits the slow all-manual workflow better. But I don't consider the camera to be a luxury item that's expensive just to make it exclusive and my peers jealous, it's just a tool that through the way it is made and sold happens to be expensive. I'd be most happy if more photographers could join in the club.

The luxury in a car is all about the owner being pampered by the comfort and luxury. MF are not luxurious in that sense. It's not a luxury carrying them around, it's not a luxury how slow they are. The person seeking luxury will most likely seek Leica and if they are also keen about fashion they'll want it in a Hermes dress.
Logged
theguywitha645d
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 970


« Reply #66 on: March 20, 2013, 07:43:44 PM »
ReplyReply

No I am saying that some companies choose to go into niche markets, even creating new ones because they see growth and it's an addition to what they do.

Sony chose to go into very high end digital cine cameras 4K etc. However even though they are one of the largest photography companies and absorbed Minolta
they chose not to go into the MFD market because they do not see growth. The have the capability and Minolta had actually made some MF cameras in the past.
They don't see big potential because they are already working on the next generations of full frame sensors and know that the gap is getting smaller and smaller and that
the need for anything better than theor future gear is getting smaller and smaller.
Phase on the other hand only makes MFD cameras. They are committed, entrenched and "stuck" with it.
The "NEED" for MF is becoming more of a "WANT" rather than need as the quality of top of the line gear in both formats is getting beyond what is needed in the real world
for the vast majority.


Fred, do you know when both Minolta and Konica made their last medium-format camera? You do know they do not have the human capital to do it today because the engineers that made those camera, and lets put the fact to the side that they were film cameras, have long since retired and most are not likely even living. This is an important factor.

Minolta or Konica Minolta would have never entered the MFD because they do not have infrastructure to make them. Nor would the risk involved to develop those would work with a company that size. Sony will not go that way either, basically for the same reason. This does not mean there is not growth in the MFD market. It just means it is not a market for Minolta/Sony.

You are forgetting one important thing in your argument, MFD like Phase are making money. It is a profitable business. They are not "stuck." They are working in their field. There is no reason for them to enter markets that do not interest them.

I understand you personally dislike, for some bizarre reason, the MFD market. But making stuff up will not change that.
« Last Edit: March 20, 2013, 07:52:44 PM by theguywitha645d » Logged
JV
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 550


« Reply #67 on: March 20, 2013, 07:49:00 PM »
ReplyReply

The two leading MF companies make only MF and one failed terribly attempting to gert into compact mirrorless.

In your head it is already a failure but that does not necessarily make it one...
Whether it will be one from a commercial point of view still remains to be seen.  
The camera only gets released next month... shortly followed by 3 new Zeiss lenses which could give the entire NEX/Lunar platform a new boost...
Logged
JohnCox123
Guest
« Reply #68 on: March 20, 2013, 08:03:04 PM »
ReplyReply

Fred, do you know when both Minolta and Konica made their last medium-format camera? You do know they do not have the human capital to do it today because the engineers that made those camera, and lets put the fact to the side that they were film cameras, have long since retired and most are not likely even living. This is an important factor.

Minolta or Konica Minolta would have never entered the MFD because they do not have infrastructure to make them. Nor would the risk involved to develop those would work with a company that size. Sony will not go that way either, basically for the same reason. This does not mean there is not growth in the MFD market. It just means it is not a market for Minolta/Sony.

You are forgetting one important thing in your argument, MFD like Phase are making money. It is a profitable business. They are not "stuck." They are working in their field. There is no reason for them to enter markets that do not interest them.

I understand you personally dislike, for some bizarre reason, the MFD market. But making stuff up will not change that.
Minolta made a TLR in the 70's, -it doesn't really count. At that point everyone was making everything. I think I have a canon watch somewhere, that doesn't mean the watch industry died in the 90's.
Logged
fredjeang2
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 786



« Reply #69 on: March 20, 2013, 08:08:34 PM »
ReplyReply

...
Are you sure you don't work for Nikon?
« Last Edit: March 20, 2013, 08:14:57 PM by fredjeang2 » Logged
FredBGG
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1651


« Reply #70 on: March 20, 2013, 08:50:11 PM »
ReplyReply

Are you sure you don't work for Nikon?

No I don't work for Nikon. Actually the D800 is my first Nikon in about 20 years. Worked with all sorts of camera.

Yashica/Contax
Hasselblad
Mamiya
Pantax
Canon
Phase One
Nikon
Fuji
Toyo 8x10
Sinar

For a full disclosure I have been sponsored by Polaroid : free 8x10 polaroid for fashion photography in exchange for being featured in their advertising and
photo credit being Polaroid by {my name}.
I have also had collaborations with Elinchrom and Manfrotto.

Logged
FredBGG
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1651


« Reply #71 on: March 20, 2013, 08:54:34 PM »
ReplyReply

In your head it is already a failure but that does not necessarily make it one...
Whether it will be one from a commercial point of view still remains to be seen.  
The camera only gets released next month... shortly followed by 3 new Zeiss lenses which could give the entire NEX/Lunar platform a new boost...

 Shocked

Are they seriously going ahead with it despite the overwhelming negative response from just about all directions...
Logged
FredBGG
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1651


« Reply #72 on: March 20, 2013, 10:33:10 PM »
ReplyReply

On a side note, I always find it amusing when someone used the phrase "good enough."  Like Canon or Nikon are good enough.  I often wonder how these same photographers would feel if a Art Buyer looked at there work and said "well, he is good enough for this assignment."  I know I would not be very proud after hearing that.  

The truth of the matter is that for the work out there that is not going to be printed very large and on a high resolution printer top of the line DSLRs are far more than good enough.
Shooting above the required quality level is a good idea. Today you can do it both with MF and 35mm DSLR. There is good enough, there is a bit better than you need and then there is overkill.

When the pure image quality of both high end 35mm DSLR and MF are more than good enough other things become more important.
Reliability, agility, speed (ready to use when needed), lens range and cost.... not to mention weather sealing etc etc.

Regarding your art director comment... well I doubt many art buyers could distinguish MFD from say a D800 of Canon 5D III unless your portfolio was printed 30x40 inches.
On the other hand the art buyer will be able to see what they are really looking for.
« Last Edit: March 20, 2013, 11:14:28 PM by FredBGG » Logged
EricWHiss
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2373



WWW
« Reply #73 on: March 20, 2013, 11:13:32 PM »
ReplyReply

Wow! Fredjeang!  That's awesome! Skills!

Logged

Authorized Rolleiflex Dealer:
Find product information, download user manuals, or purchase online - Rolleiflex USA
eronald
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3886



WWW
« Reply #74 on: March 20, 2013, 11:37:11 PM »
ReplyReply

Look at Blackmagic.
They are targeting RED's market at 10% the price, 1% the hype, and doing very well.


Edmund

Yes do look at Red! Smiley

They have a very different business model from Phase One. Prices and webshop with put-in-cart on their web, and they actually have attractive pricing as a part of their success. More of that please :-). They had very strong(?) funding by the founder Jim Jannard so they were able to take risks. I hope they manage to stay strong and profitable with the new competition coming from Canon and others.
Logged

Edmund Ronald, Ph.D. 
HarperPhotos
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1240



WWW
« Reply #75 on: March 21, 2013, 12:05:00 AM »
ReplyReply

Hello,

I was on a recee today for a TVC I am shooting the stills for next week and the camera man had this video camera I have never seen before. He told me it was a Blackmagic and he had just got it. It was so small and compact and he mentioned than it created a more film like quality than other cameras. As I have no experience with the motion side of the industry I wouldn't know but I am looking forward to Tuesday to see how the thing goes.

Cheers

Simon
Logged

Simon Harper
Harper Photographics Ltd
http://www.harperphoto.com
http://www.facebook.com/harper.photographics

Auckland, New Zealand
Petrus
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 486


« Reply #76 on: March 21, 2013, 12:40:23 AM »
ReplyReply

I also own a Fuji X-Pro1. Great camera, excellent image quality.  very enjoyable shooting experience.
Not the best camera if you want to shoot wildlife (no long lenses) or if you want to shoot sports but outside of that it will do most things and it will do them well.
The Fuji X forums are filled with people who dumped their D700 or D800 and who prefer their X-Pro1 or X100s to a D800.

Just a thought, the full frame DSLR might actually be gone long before MF is gone...


I also have X-Pro1 (and X-E1 as a spare body) AND D4 and D800E Nikons. Those systems are so different that I can not understand how somebody would ditch DSLRs and keep Fujis for everything. Or the person is only doing "Fuji X-Pro1 type" photography and does not really need the modern DSLR functionality (fast (tracking) focus, 10 frames per sec etc). I like those Fuji cameras a lot and have done long assignments with them both for practical reasons (they weigh 80% less) and for reasons of blending in and having the right "feel" for the situation. If I could keep only one kit, it would be Nikon, as almost everything can be done with them well, with Fuji only some things can be done well. It is not about the image quality, either. I would be mostly the same with mid format cameras. It is not as much about the picture quality, but different mindset, taking less and hopefully better planned frames, slow photography. I have not shot digital MF, but it was sometimes refreshing to use 6x7 for something usually done with 135. Extra quality was one thing (difference is not as big anymore), but mostly it was the limitations which forced me to be more creative.
Logged
torger
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1377


« Reply #77 on: March 21, 2013, 02:35:05 AM »
ReplyReply

This is already done.

A lot to respond to here, I'll keep it brief. I don't believe that MF business model is the perfect balance and that pricing must be the way it is. I believe that the trade-in dealer-centric business model was created some 10-15 years ago before the 'net was big, and now when the model is dated it's very difficult to change. It's easier to find new business (industrial) where the model works than to respond to the changed environment in traditional photography. It think it will unfortunately require a new company like Red to revolutionize the business.

It's not about going from $2000 to $10 as you stated in the example, that's absurd. It's about providing attractive entry-level products at a reasonable price, i e $8000 50 megapixel 48x36mm digital back, rather than having two ultra high-end backs and boring entry-level backs that has been surpassed by DSLRs. It's about getting visible in the market-place. Sure "pop-photo" sites/magazines will write about MF, it's about having skilled marketing, knowing how to become visible. The customers are 40-something middle-age crisis men that buys this type of camera system instead of a motor cycle Smiley. I think there is an interest which you could capitalize on if you dare to take the risk.

Another aspect, when MF was new and the business model was set the pro photographers worked with film, medium format, 4x5" etc. This is no more. The new generation of photographers often haven't even used a film camera, but have used various digital compacts and DSLRs. The photography market is different, the customers are different. I don't think the current business model and product range is the best way to address these changed conditions.
« Last Edit: March 21, 2013, 02:57:57 AM by torger » Logged
FredBGG
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1651


« Reply #78 on: March 21, 2013, 02:55:56 AM »
ReplyReply

Fred, do you know when both Minolta and Konica made their last medium-format camera? You do know they do not have the human capital to do it today because the engineers that made those camera, and lets put the fact to the side that they were film cameras, have long since retired and most are not likely even living. This is an important factor.

Yes I know very well when Minolta and Konica made medium format cameras. I have a couple.

What on earth are you talking about?
Do you seriously think that the industrial giant Sony can't put together something to compete with the Mamiya DF?
"They don't have the human Capital". These are the men and women that put phase detection focus points right in the sensor.
Sony recently made a 1 billion dollar investment to increase their sensor production from 50,000 to 60,000.
They have all the resources needed to develop a camera of any format if they chose to do so.

They also happen to make theatrical 4k projection systems with lenses that project form their 3 inch imaging device.
Those are optics with an image circle of 80mm. They can produce large format lenses without any problem, not
to mention their ongoing relationship with the optical giant Zeiss.

I guess you never heard of the Contax 645? Yashica/Kyochera had never made a MF camera.
Their first model wa the Contax 645 and it remains on of the best MF bodies ever made even today.
It is utter bullshit that some kind of superior engineers are needed to design MF compared to smaller formats.
« Last Edit: March 21, 2013, 03:01:57 AM by FredBGG » Logged
torger
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1377


« Reply #79 on: March 21, 2013, 03:03:19 AM »
ReplyReply

Look at Blackmagic.
They are targeting RED's market at 10% the price, 1% the hype, and doing very well.

Yes that will be interesting to follow. A little bit too early to say how they will succeed. It's also a bit early to say how Red will succeed in the long-term. I've also got the impression that Red has over-hyped their products/technology and maybe that will strike back.
Logged
Pages: « 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad