Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1] 2 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Alpa FPS - An Enduring Camera?  (Read 4042 times)
Dave (Isle of Skye)
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1032


Don't mistake lack of talent for genius.


WWW
« on: July 05, 2013, 03:29:03 PM »
ReplyReply

I have just had a rough calculation of the total price of the camera and lenses Mark is discussing in this latest article and with the digital back and the Alpa system accessories and the lenses etc, etc, we are talking somewhere in the region of an eye watering $80,000 for this piece of exotica - so I think the answer to the question: Alpa FPS - An Enduring Camera? I think is going to be a definite yes, because if I owned something like this, then it would be locked up in a bank vault somewhere gathering dust, as I would be too frightened to ever go near it or touch it  Smiley

At least Mark hasnít had one "made out of Ebony and Titanium customized to my specifications" just yet, now doing something like that would just be being extravagant wouldn't it, wouldn't it??

Dave
« Last Edit: July 05, 2013, 03:32:06 PM by Dave (Isle of Skye) » Logged

Photography Tuition holidays on the Misty Isle of Skye
http://www.photography.info
ErikKaffehr
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 7488


WWW
« Reply #1 on: July 05, 2013, 03:51:12 PM »
ReplyReply

Hi,

I don't think the Alpa system will be an enduring design. It is a bit of very good engineering, built around the lack of live view in MFD. Once we will have decent live view the FPS will be unnecessarily complex. I also feel that the FPS would need a sliding viewfinder adapter. So I am impressed with FPS, but in my humble opinion a system like a Hartblei HCam makes a lot more sense. The Hartblei is on my shopping list (now that I have a P45+) but the FPS is not.

I don't have issues with the price, I wouldn't afford it, but if one happens to have the money to spend there is nothing wrong with spending spending on cameras.

Best regards
Erik

I have just had a rough calculation of the total price of the camera and lenses Mark is discussing in this latest article and with the digital back and the Alpa system accessories and the lenses etc, etc, we are talking somewhere in the region of an eye watering $80,000 for this piece of exotica - so I think the answer to the question: Alpa FPS - An Enduring Camera? I think is going to be a definite yes, because if I owned something like this, then it would be locked up in a bank vault somewhere gathering dust, as I would be too frightened to ever go near it or touch it  Smiley

At least Mark hasnít had one "made out of Ebony and Titanium customized to my specifications" just yet, now doing something like that would just be being extravagant wouldn't it, wouldn't it??

Dave

« Last Edit: July 05, 2013, 10:54:42 PM by ErikKaffehr » Logged

Rob C
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 12213


« Reply #2 on: July 05, 2013, 04:10:50 PM »
ReplyReply

I have just had a rough calculation of the total price of the camera and lenses Mark is discussing in this latest article and with the digital back and the Alpa system accessories and the lenses etc, etc, we are talking somewhere in the region of an eye watering $80,000 for this piece of exotica - so I think the answer to the question: Alpa FPS - An Enduring Camera? I think is going to be a definite yes, because if I owned something like this, then it would be locked up in a bank vault somewhere gathering dust, as I would be too frightened to ever go near it or touch it  Smiley

At least Mark hasnít had one "made out of Ebony and Titanium customized to my specifications" just yet, now doing something like that would just be being extravagant wouldn't it, wouldn't it??

Dave




Look at it this way, Dave: it's nice being a usual mortal too. For a start, having less precludes you from the angst of losing more. It doesn't do a whole heap for the angst of having less, but I'm sure there's a balance somewhere, could I but find it.

However, I have reached a point in life where I realise that even if I had unlimited funds to blow as I once thought that I wished, there are many things once craved that I wouldn't look at anymore, and yachts and Łber-cameras are on the list. I might still blow a bit on a set of wheels... quite fancy a modest Porsche Cayman, still.

;-)

Rob C
Logged

AFairley
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1165



« Reply #3 on: July 05, 2013, 06:20:26 PM »
ReplyReply

Rob, you are forgetting what a total babe magnet the Alpa is, far more than a mere Porsche   Grin
Logged

gerald.d
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 388


« Reply #4 on: July 05, 2013, 10:22:12 PM »
ReplyReply

Hi,

I don't think the Alpa system will be an enduring design. It is a bit of very good engineering, built around the lack of live view in MFD. Once we will have decent live view the FPS will be unnecessarily complex. I also feel that the FPS would need a sliding viewfinder adapter. So I am impressed with FPS, but in my humble opinion a system like a Hartblei HCam makes a lot more sense. The Hartblei is on my shopping list (now that I have a P45+) but the FPS is not.

Best regards
Erik


Hi Erik -

I'm struggling to understand what you're getting at here.

In what way is the FPS built around a lack of live view? If anything - with its sliding back - it's the HCam that is designed around this.

A back with live view would render the sliding back on the HCam pretty much redundant.

Kind regards,

Gerald.
Logged
gerald.d
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 388


« Reply #5 on: July 05, 2013, 10:26:23 PM »
ReplyReply

I have just had a rough calculation of the total price of the camera and lenses Mark is discussing in this latest article and with the digital back and the Alpa system accessories and the lenses etc, etc, we are talking somewhere in the region of an eye watering $80,000 for this piece of exotica - so I think the answer to the question: Alpa FPS - An Enduring Camera? I think is going to be a definite yes, because if I owned something like this, then it would be locked up in a bank vault somewhere gathering dust, as I would be too frightened to ever go near it or touch it  Smiley

...

You probably won't want to watch this then Wink

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N2N1po56z18
Logged
Rob C
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 12213


« Reply #6 on: July 06, 2013, 03:12:22 AM »
ReplyReply

Rob, you are forgetting what a total babe magnet the Alpa is, far more than a mere Porsche   Grin


Thanks - that's a healthy reminder about these things and why to avoid them: what would I do if a babe were attracted? Give her the car and/or the camera just to get rid of her? And what if babes work in pairs - lose both items? Nope, the monastic way is the best way: a bicycle and a cellphone. So far, I have no bicycle.

;-)

Rob C
Logged

ErikKaffehr
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 7488


WWW
« Reply #7 on: July 06, 2013, 03:27:17 AM »
ReplyReply

Hi,

Yes, I was aware of the inconsistency even when writing it. The way I see it an "epic design" is one that is good enough for many years. The FPS is based on the need of calibrated focusing, which is neither needed nor helpful once you have live view. A more traditional focusing ring probably is more useful, as you want the image to pop distinctly in and out of focus. It seems to me that there is an optimal focusing throw for LVMF.

An auxilary optical viewfinder is neither needed for LV, nor an auxilary mount for an iPhone.

BTW, I am shooting a P45+ on a V series Hasselblad. So I have no experience with technical cameras. Also I think that the FPS is a very elegant design, but I don't think it's epic, or  it may be epic, but for a very short epoch.

Best regards
Erik

Hi Erik -

I'm struggling to understand what you're getting at here.

In what way is the FPS built around a lack of live view? If anything - with its sliding back - it's the HCam that is designed around this.

A back with live view would render the sliding back on the HCam pretty much redundant.

Kind regards,

Gerald.
Logged

gerald.d
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 388


« Reply #8 on: July 06, 2013, 09:08:18 AM »
ReplyReply

Hi Erik -

The FPS is based on the need of calibrated focusing, which is neither needed nor helpful once you have live view.
Sorry, but I still have no idea what you mean by the above.
Quote
A more traditional focusing ring probably is more useful, as you want the image to pop distinctly in and out of focus. It seems to me that there is an optimal focusing throw for LVMF.
Nor do I understand what you mean by this.
Quote
An auxilary optical viewfinder is neither needed for LV, nor an auxilary mount for an iPhone.
This however I do understand, and I fully agree.

So when backs come out with "decent" live view, it won't really be necessary to use the (optional) viewfinder or (optional) iPhone mount on the FPS. Look at the image on the LCD of the back, and focus the lens.

Kind regards,


Gerald.

Logged
narikin
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 859


« Reply #9 on: July 06, 2013, 04:09:05 PM »
ReplyReply

I have just had a rough calculation of the total price of the camera and lenses Mark is discussing in this latest article and with the digital back and the Alpa system accessories and the lenses etc, etc, we are talking somewhere in the region of an eye watering $80,000 for this piece of exotica - so I think the answer to the question: Alpa FPS - An Enduring Camera? I think is going to be a definite yes, because if I owned something like this, then it would be locked up in a bank vault somewhere gathering dust, as I would be too frightened to ever go near it or touch it  

Well Dave, it doesn't quite work like that.  It goes more like this:

You bought a Phase back 5 or more years ago, upgraded to the IQ180  at something like $14,000 2 years ago. Now in 2013, you buy the FPS (~$9000 with grip) and if you choose it, the 50mm Rody lens, about $5500.  So that's under $15000 spent in the current year. For a working pro that's modest.

I know there are finders and all sorts of accessories you can buy to boost this price, but there are many cheaper and better options than (eg) the Alpa finder. The Zeiss 35mm optical finder made for Sony RX1 for example is a good match for the 50mm in question.

Yes MF digital is a *lot of money, and most photographers would be better off with a D800 and a pair of zooms. But quite a few others just need huge files, and prefer the workflow of MF to the dSLR one.

Of course, YMMV, and that's always to be respected.

« Last Edit: July 06, 2013, 04:11:13 PM by narikin » Logged
Dave (Isle of Skye)
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1032


Don't mistake lack of talent for genius.


WWW
« Reply #10 on: July 06, 2013, 06:30:14 PM »
ReplyReply

Well Dave, it doesn't quite work like that.  

I am not criticising Mark for sharing his passion for a camera that he obviously loves and can afford to own, good luck to him I say. Neither is it envy or the fact that I could never imagine being in a position to splash that kind of cash on a camera, it is just my thoughts on the impossible situation where if I did find myself owning some exotic system like this, that I know I would not be comfortable using it out in the field, for fear of its cost. I just don't think I could get the creative juices flowing when handling something that expensive, as my mind would be stuck on its value if it got lost/stolen/damaged, rather than being able to think freely and concentrate on creating images. I would find my fear of its value a hindrance in other words.

But I suppose for people to whom such things are commonplace, then issues such as these simply do not exist, but for the rest of us (probably the vast majority of us), then using something so valuable would probably be more of a problem than a solution I think.

Dave
« Last Edit: July 06, 2013, 06:32:58 PM by Dave (Isle of Skye) » Logged

Photography Tuition holidays on the Misty Isle of Skye
http://www.photography.info
Isaac
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2828


« Reply #11 on: July 06, 2013, 07:09:37 PM »
ReplyReply

if it got lost/stolen/damaged

Insurance?
Logged
ErikKaffehr
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 7488


WWW
« Reply #12 on: July 07, 2013, 12:43:34 AM »
ReplyReply

Hi,

I don't think all pros are the same. Some have small business and some have large business, some are working full frame and some do it as side job.

I only do photography as hobby, keeping out of obligations. I would not buy in the FPS, for some reasons.

I feel the FPS is a very smart device, but I see a problem with it that it designed to solve the weakness of today's MFDBs name the limited/nonexisting live view. In a couple of years we will have CMOS based MFDBs with perfectly usable LV. The FPS will still be a good device to mount such a digital back on but many features would not be needed.

Best regards
Erik



You bought a Phase back 5 or more years ago, upgraded to the IQ180  at something like $14,000 2 years ago. Now in 2013, you buy the FPS (~$9000 with grip) and if you choose it, the 50mm Rody lens, about $5500.  So that's under $15000 spent in the current year. For a working pro that's modest.



« Last Edit: July 07, 2013, 12:48:57 AM by ErikKaffehr » Logged

gerald.d
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 388


« Reply #13 on: July 07, 2013, 04:00:11 AM »
ReplyReply

Erik -

I don't understand why you are persisting with this "it is designed to solve the weakness of today's MFDBs name the limited/nonexisting live view".

It does not make any sense whatsoever.

In fact, after you having stated it on multiple occasions now without any explanation, I'm going to go further than that.

It's utter nonsense.

The FPS is no more designed to solve any weakness regarding the lack of live view in today's MFDB's than any other tech camera.

I'm sorry, but quite frankly, I don't think you have a clue what you are talking about.

Kind regards,

Gerald.

Hi,

I don't think all pros are the same. Some have small business and some have large business, some are working full frame and some do it as side job.

I only do photography as hobby, keeping out of obligations. I would not buy in the FPS, for some reasons.

I feel the FPS is a very smart device, but I see a problem with it that it designed to solve the weakness of today's MFDBs name the limited/nonexisting live view. In a couple of years we will have CMOS based MFDBs with perfectly usable LV. The FPS will still be a good device to mount such a digital back on but many features would not be needed.

Best regards
Erik


Logged
john beardsworth
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2805



WWW
« Reply #14 on: July 07, 2013, 05:26:55 AM »
ReplyReply

I am not criticising Mark for sharing his passion for a camera that he obviously loves and can afford to own, good luck to him I say. Neither is it envy or the fact that I could never imagine being in a position to splash that kind of cash on a camera, it is just my thoughts on the impossible situation where if I did find myself owning some exotic system like this, that I know I would not be comfortable using it out in the field, for fear of its cost. I just don't think I could get the creative juices flowing when handling something that expensive, as my mind would be stuck on its value if it got lost/stolen/damaged, rather than being able to think freely and concentrate on creating images. I would find my fear of its value a hindrance in other words.

But I suppose for people to whom such things are commonplace, then issues such as these simply do not exist, but for the rest of us (probably the vast majority of us), then using something so valuable would probably be more of a problem than a solution I think.
I knew a guy who had a collection of ten or so Ferraris. One day he turned up in a Porsche - "I keep it for when it's raining"....
Logged

vjbelle
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 208


« Reply #15 on: July 07, 2013, 06:27:24 AM »
ReplyReply



I feel the FPS is a very smart device, but I see a problem with it that it designed to solve the weakness of today's MFDBs name the limited/nonexisting live view. In a couple of years we will have CMOS based MFDBs with perfectly usable LV. The FPS will still be a good device to mount such a digital back on but many features would not be needed.


I know that some may not agree but the LV on the current series Phase backs works pretty well and fairly fast.  Certainly not as fast as my 800e but very adequate and effective when needed. 

Victor
Logged
dchew
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 571



WWW
« Reply #16 on: July 07, 2013, 08:48:20 AM »
ReplyReply

...But I suppose for people to whom such things are commonplace, then issues such as these simply do not exist, but for the rest of us (probably the vast majority of us), then using something so valuable would probably be more of a problem than a solution I think.

Dave

Hi Dave,
Although I don't have an FPS, I do have the same back, an Alpa STC and four lenses.  I purchased most of this stuff two years ago due to a unique but temporary financial situation.  Point being if I had to do it again I would not be able to.  However, I use it all the time, travel with it, head out in the rain & snow, backpack, ski and climb with the stuff.  It may sound backwards to most, but I feel completely liberated with the technical camera approach.  Concerns about losing or damaging this equipment rarely enters my mind, although I do think twice about leaving it in my Jeep when the soft top is on. Smiley

I don't look at this camera system as a refined, pretty Ferrari.  It's more like a stripped down 911 for the track with one seat and no air conditioning.  Meant to be used and maybe even abused!  Definitely not for the pristine garage.

Dave
Logged

narikin
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 859


« Reply #17 on: July 07, 2013, 11:05:28 AM »
ReplyReply

Erik -

I don't understand why you are persisting with this "it is designed to solve the weakness of today's MFDBs name the limited/nonexisting live view".

It does not make any sense whatsoever.

In fact, after you having stated it on multiple occasions now without any explanation, I'm going to go further than that.

It's utter nonsense.

The FPS is no more designed to solve any weakness regarding the lack of live view in today's MFDB's than any other tech camera.

I'm sorry, but quite frankly, I don't think you have a clue what you are talking about.

Kind regards,

Gerald.


+1

You're barking up the wrong tree Erik.  And with respect, repeating the same phrase in different threads doesn't make it the right tree.

The FPS does not add or subtract anything to the focusing abilities of technical cameras. It's innovations change *nothing* in that regard. 
Logged
ErikKaffehr
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 7488


WWW
« Reply #18 on: July 07, 2013, 12:34:43 PM »
ReplyReply

Hi,

I am not barking. Ask yourself, will you look back in ten years, and say the FPS was an epic camera? I like the concept of the FPS, it is just that I don't think it's epic, game changing or even enduring. Let's find out in a few years.

Best regards
Erik



+1

You're barking up the wrong tree Erik.  And with respect, repeating the same phrase in different threads doesn't make it the right tree.

The FPS does not add or subtract anything to the focusing abilities of technical cameras. It's innovations change *nothing* in that regard.  
« Last Edit: July 07, 2013, 12:42:14 PM by ErikKaffehr » Logged

vjbelle
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 208


« Reply #19 on: July 07, 2013, 01:25:24 PM »
ReplyReply

Epic will be when a shutter system is incorporated into the sensor or digital back - no moving parts...... that will be really epic.

Victor
« Last Edit: July 07, 2013, 01:27:19 PM by vjbelle » Logged
Pages: [1] 2 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad