Well, I agree that the LCD's really need to improve, but I believe the real solution is in quickly, wirelessly transferring that preview to an external device like the iPhone, P5000 or similar. Medium format backs are very small given the amount of technology that they have to fit. Granted, the D3 or 1DsMKIII have to incorporate a mirror box, viewfinder and everything else, but I still think there is a lot more room for a big screen and the associated electronics than there is in a digital back which has to fit a sensor more than double the size, along with all the electronics AND the battery to run it. The absolute maximum size for the viewfinder would be like the current 6x7 Leaf option, but that also necessitates a touchscreen. If you are not going to use a touchscreen, you are limited to rather small LCD's.

I would love for those small LCD's to have a quality that the D3 and D300 have, but the true solution is to have a compact, screen only solution for previews. That solves the problem of battery life, heat generation and the size limitations of the backs themselves. Additionally, they can be passed around to people while the photographer is free to keep shooting. In my mind, this is a more realistic and useful solution than having 4x5 inch previews on the backs themselves. Hopefully we can get slightly larger, higher resolution and more color correct previews on the backs themselves, but an option to use a truly purpose-built external device.

One day we will look back and laugh at what we used to drag around on location -- the Honda generator, the kart, the giant G5 box, the double monitors, the strapped-on espresso machine.

Let's make that day come sooner, rather than later.

I think what throws most of us (photographers) is we have to realize we're not the center of the universe. (I know I have a difficult time accepting that thought).

So . . . we look at an I-phone, I-pod and even the Canons, devices that are truly revolutionary that changed whole industries and think, if they can make a beautiful ipod touch screen for $250, or a 22mpx Canon for 7k, why can't they do that for my $40,000 (cough, cough) camera back.

What I think surprisea me more is how the information gets out. Sure there is the 50, 60 mpx press releases and the dealer blogs about tilt shift Boris lenses, but its a lot of headline, not a lot of body copy and quite honestly what we put in our hand to work, doesn't look that much different than it did 4 years ago.

I think we're waiting for that revolutionary change, much like the RED. Something that looks and functions different than anything that came before.

Now I wonder, is the RED here to stay or is it built to take a bite out of Canon, Sony and Panasonic with the thought that one of them will just buy the company?


JR

I've thought long and hard about the state of this industry. I've talked to my friends in media/publishing, AD/CD types, picture editors, painters, jewelers, video guys, film guys, internet guys etc. All people who deal with digital technology to produce images to make a living. The result: Everyone feels over saturated. Too many upgrades, too many changes too fast, too many imperfect products, too many software problems, too many hardware problems. In the lasy year or so digital (cameras, computers, printers, backs, applications, etc) seems to have transitioned from a tool that increased productivity and your ability to focus on core functions to a drag on the bottom line and efficiency. Be it the cart 'o' rocks, $43k digital backs without many viable options to hang it on, software bugs, cracking iPhone screens, shitty internet upload speeds, new computers, new OS and non-upgraded drivers, terabyte after terabyte of redundant storage, its all too much to deal with when what you need to do is produce great photos and show them to clients/potential clients.

Of interest is that the film guys who shoot with Reds or Sony EX1s are less overwhelmed because their products JUST WORK. Same with the guys and gals who shoot Canon. It just works with a minimum of fuss.

Meanwhile the best options to hang my Phase back on all suck for one reason or another. They are all servicable options, but the only one I would use out of love is the RZ. The Hy6 is close but there are still odd issues with it, such as no exif, but its getting there. But then there is SinarBron USA which is a mystery wrapped in an enigma. The software seems opaque. I don't know many people who have shot one much less own one.

Its all too much to worry about. I might get a 1ds3 and tune out of the MFD world, maybe tune back in in a few years, see if they have that LCD issue sorted. God knows the clients wouldn't know the difference.

Cheers everybody.

A spot on description for te whole industry.

Yeah, the damn 1Ds3 just works and it works and works and works.
Last week I shot a bigger project for a legal company. After 3 days of shooting I realized that I didn't have a backup body with me all the time. First I got angry at me but then I went like "so what". This cam never failed me once. The 1DS 2 never failed me after 3 years of heavy usage.

Now some one tell me, why should I buy the new hassy kit for about 60K?
I want it, I would love it. I have been dreaming about it for the last 2 years.
But damn, how much better will it be than my 1DS3? About 3 times better, nicer, faster?
No, no chance. So why should I buy it?

If the kit (3lenses) would cost around 35K I would buy it any minute. But there is not enough bang for the buck to justify it. My RED shows me that every day.

The canons are somewhere near 85%. They are so close to perfect that most clients won't see the difference. They dont care and also dont want to pay the difference, so why should we photographers pay it?
It's because we love the high-end quality more than our clients. We love to capture perfect pictures. We love to colorgrade like there is no tomorrow.
But at 60K a kit my love starts to fade.

Maybe we realy should wait another 2 years till the right MF cam comes out. But wait, what if they wont be around till then?
Just some thoughts.

Tim

Dear TMARK,

- There IS exif data with the Hy6!

- May I ask which software "seems opaque" and what exactly?

Thanks and best regards,
Thierry

From what I understand, it doesn't take much heat to generate a whole lot of noise. I am not certain what the "sweet spot" temperature is but this is what has been partly to blame as to why Phase has not improved on their LCD.

Agree 200%
My MFDB limit is 15,000...:+} 60,000 is quite a lot considering the 1DsMIII is 8,000
The only problem I see with the 1DsMIII is no firewire... Big error there.
I might have to wait for the MIV when they put it back...
I think the medium format back should be embarassed...
Leaf is the only one that took screen into consideration.. I think Hssleblad is following while Phase is parking trucks on theirs...:+]
Next time my client comes to my studio I say you cannot see the images in te back but you can park your hummer on my DB if you want...
I think James R's little portable screen like the epson p5000 but bigger will come into production before phase get's the lcd worked out..:+]
Snook

I had a 1DsMII, took it everywhere and NEVER had a problem. Only wit the firewire ports which is maybe why they went back to USB???

Heat?

Uh I'm not a scientist but I don't know about that one. I've shot the Canons, the Nikons and even the Phase in 105F heat all day long and didn't see any real difference in noise.

How can a 3/4" more lcd make that much of a difference.

Anyway, I don't really think it's the lcd any more or less than the previews the backs generate.

In fact I just got this strange Phase extreme newsletter where they freeze it, bake it, and drive a truck over it. so a larger lcd will cause noise? I don't know about that.

It's funny though that this conversation has been going on for years and the lcd's look pretty much the same.

Meidum format, or any professional capture device is never going to escape this issue, because the real benfiit of digial capture is knowing you have the shot.

It's also cost related. You just can't say you spent 40 grand on a back and then show a client that lcd, it's like showing them those little 2 bedroom 1 bath houses in Venice, Ca, next to a Liquor store and telling them they cost 1.2 million. They just shake their head in disbelief.

I have this little hv20 Canon camcorder with a Letus on the front and use Nikon lenses. The little flip out lcd is not what I would call beautiful, but it's so detalied that you can shoot a 50 1.2 wide open and focus on the eyes . . . either eye.

At one point, Fuji had something like that, with that medium format back they made and never sold to anyone. How hard is it do let it flip out and not cause heat, it that really is the issue.

The thing is it's eventually all about the client. Phase's client, miy client, my client's client.

If a client (customer) keeps asking for something and it never comes then they move on.

We all have ways around the lcd, sometimes using the Canon or Nikon as an electronic Polaroid, sometimes using a powerbook or that 250 lb cart o' rocks, but we're in the business of delivering, so we deliver.

Now how do you think the Red would have been received if their lcd was smaller than the hv20?

JR

I guess if people keep buying them why should phase change.
I have to tell you that I on many occasions have felt really small showing off my new P30 back and then the people go to look at the image on my camera and it looks like something from the 80's
I wish I had a picture od their faces everytime it has happened..
they almost keep looking waqiting for the image to get better...:+]
Quite embarrassing with a 16,000 camera back... not to mention the others who paid 25-30k for a p45...
Especially when they just worked with a photographer that has a nikon or a DsMIII.
does anybody know if there is a way to get or can we all write epson and ask them to make the .tif from phase visable... that might be a nice little feature..?
Again I tink some one should make a digital polaroid machine like James mock -up
I'll buy one..:+]
Snook
In any case I was sure that phase was working on it but then when they popped the p65+ out and it was the same... very dissappointing!
Hassle blad is looking better and better.
If it was not for the fan deal on the leaf I almost went with the leaf systems as it is nice to see what you are shooting. ANYTHING is better than the lcd on Phase.

The USB works better than the firewire, and it's a *lot* more reliable in my experience. IThe USB is only slow using the Mac OS X because of Apple messed up drivers. On Windows, or using Windows within OS X, the USB interface flies. (I returned 1D cameras about 10 times due to f*ed up firewire ports, but the 5Ds (I have 3 of them) have never had to be returned due to the USB port. And they have seen a TON of tethered use.)

Also, as to heat on the LCDs creating noise issues for the backs, Nikon made a camera with a very good LCD with the lowest noise of any camera on the planet, so how is heat an issue there??

Why doesn't one of the back makers just come out and say why they don't upgrade the LCDs?

This is an interesting comment.

Everything that I hear is that the P45 and plus were the best selling (and most expensive) backs ever to come out of Phase. So maybe that's true -- maybe they're selling, and maybe they expect the P65+ to sell even better. Maybe they've done market research and found that most everyone that's using the P45 and P65 are tethering, and could care less about the LCD.

Maybe they've found that everyone that cares about the LCD has already bailed, and migrated to Canon or Nikon. Maybe they've found their market.

Maybe 99% of the people on this board don't make their living shooting photographs, and therefore it's hard to justify the outlay for a P65. But maybe if you were a catalogue house, on an in-house studio, or a working advertising photographer, the money even at $40k is a complete no-brainer. Maybe the majority of the readers of this board are medium format lovers, but with 35 budgets; maybe that's why the numerous complaints.

I took my truck in for service yesterday. The good ol' boy service manager saw my title, noticed I was a photographer, and then went into a long proud story about owning a 1dsIII and a D3 and a huge printer, and he blows thru wedding after wedding on his weekends, once he leaves the dealership. I must admit if I was honest, it was a bit puckering to hear him say that he was shooting the same camera as me.

So maybe Phase, Hasselblad, and even Sinar know what they're doing. Who knows? Maybe 1% of the readers of this board is the Medium Format target audience. Maybe Phase is laughing all the way to the bank, and already drawing up the 80MP back for next year, for $50k, knowing they'll sell them as fast as they can make them.

Just a thought.

I think they have. They can't get them!

I agree with a lot of what you say but you los me when you say the catalogue house is a no brainer. Just becasue you have 40k back does not mean your clients are going to pay you anything different and the quality is "not" "better" just bigger than how can you justify that?
I know I would like to spend 40k on somehting other than another back if the one I have is just fine?
Where do you draw the line. I know in the sates things are different, bu elsewhere I think they are the same as where I live.
Saying it is a no brainer I do not understand..
Snook

Maybe all of this is true. I don't know, I really shouldn't care.

I do know that when I see that video of Annie photographing the Queen with a Canon it kind of throws me.

I mean, you'd expect the world's most famous photogrpaher would photograph the world's most famous person with a camera that wasn't owned by the service manager at a Chevy dealership.

You'd expect an 8x10, or an RZ with a huge bellows, or maybe even something that said Rolliflex, Leica or Hasselblad.

But a 1ds2 with a zoom? . . . kind of strange looking and not that it should matter because the photos were fine and I'm sure Vanity Fare and their retouching wizards got it all right.

I kind of wonder what would Avedon shoot his western series in the digital world. A Mamiya 645 and a P45?

I don't think the behind the scenes photos would look quite right with that setup.

Still, it's strange we're using the same equipment as auto repair guys.

JR

You might be right. Maybe I'm myopic, maybe us people shooters are all myopic and can't see what other photographers are up to, why they need a P65. That being said, two people I know just shot some large campaigns for McCann Ericson. Heavy composits of large format and 67 film scans in one case, and D2xs images in the other case. That's right, D2xs. These are six figure jobs. So why blow money on MFD?

The only people who bitch about 35mm digital are beauty clients and retouchers. I like MFD, but its getting harder to justify keeping it around when the ds3 is so close, so easy, almost cheap. The new Nikon should be even better. The new Sony, from what the Sony pro video product manager told me, inherits much of the know how of digital image processing from the pro line Sony video cams like the EX1 and 3. If that is true, the new Sony with its CZ lenses may be the BOMB. So what if you have to gaff tape the Sony logo so people stop making fun of you. It might be a piddling $3k, full kit with CZ lenses for under $7k.

Do not forget, Annie comes out of a documentary background. A couple of Nikons thrown around her neck, and get on the tour bus. So truth be known, she probably prefers the familiarity. She's also going for the expression, so who wants to be standing next to her when she pushes the shutter release on that P45, and nothing happens, because the back hasn't recycled yet?

I know I don't.

She goes with what works.

As does, sadly, Demarchelier. But again, just make sure and don't tell Anthony R; we don't want to burst his bubble.

Once again I don't sell cameras so I shouldn't care, other than I want what I want and I guess what I want isn't really there.

As far as the p65+ market place (the name of that camera sounds like something from the AARP), I do think there are a lot of people here and a lot of people that read this that exactly ARE the medium format market.

They're just not reaching them.

Some is the lcd, some the is iso, some is the speed of shooting, some is the cart o' rocks and some it's just a money thing.

The money thing is the most interesting, becuase I know and I think you feel the same way, I would drop 20 grand on a camera like the Rolliflex (I'm not going to call it an HY6) if I was positive it would be the only still camera I would have to buy for at least the next 10 years.

It might be, but the way the digital companies work, upgrading by the year, I don't trust that what I spend that kind of money on will be viable until then.

It's fine for 5, 6, or 7 grand if canon pushes me into a new camera but a $40,000 or $50,000 system that THEN takes $20,000 to upgrade to the next . . . that's where the problem is.

It's not the initial costs, its the fact that none of us believe the costs will ever even out.

JR

Dude I work for McCann all the time and do Big AD jobs with them as well as many other big ad agencies here. Dittborn,Olgivy,Lowport etc..
Guys are shooting huge campaigns with 5D's!!
Talk about depressing!
After all the retouching that goes on these days...A lot of technical BS does not matter.
The only difference (for the retocuher like myself) is it is more forgiving with the higher dynamic range.
I personally have not used the 1DsMIII but can imagine if it's DR improved it should be fine for just about anything.
Unless you are shooting Gallery Art images or where you need that extra room.
Your basic magazines billboards and about all of what I do, No-one is going to notice...
Good example...
DaveHill...:+}
He was shooting Big jobs with a friggn' 5D for a longtime as well as white lightning flash
His latest Backstage stuff is with HassleBlad and 30"cinema displays....:+}
I guess he even starting feeling bad about charging 50,000 for a campaign and doing it with a 5D..:+]
SNook

Hi James, I agree with you for the most part, but I think it's *great* that my clients are not too concerned with which camera I use. They look at my portfolio, at the LCD during the shoot and the final images and they go by that - as they should. Do any of you want the client telling you which camera you can use for the job?

I think it is very refreshing to see a shift in focus - where the end result is what matters most. They trust the LCD and trust the photographer. I believe that's the way it should be. Do your art directors even know which brand of camera you are using? I'm pretty sure mine don't.

re:
"As does, sadly, Demarchelier. But again, just make sure and don't tell Anthony R; we don't want to burst his bubble."

Out of curiosity, what is sad about it?

Some guys, you just have a picture of them working. With an old school guy like Demarchelier, you want him hunched over a film Hasselblad, or a 4x5. You just want him to be saying, "Yoo eediot -- deed you drop zee dark slide again into zee grass?", instead of saying, "Ah wee on Raw, or on JayPeggzz comprezzion seeex?"

It would be like seeing a picture of Roversi working, and he's sitting in some bad lawn chair, looking through a 5D or something.

There's just something cool about driving by an old man, mowing his yard, with one of those cyclical manual blade lawn mowers. It's like he's flipping the bird to The Future.

Some things, you just don't want to ever change.

If you want to see people smile, just shoot with that little leica.*

Not that it impresses, actually it does, but it looks like a film camera. I even love you have to take the bottom off of it to change the card.

Not that the camera makes the artist, its always the other way around, but using the same camera the car mechanic uses kinda bugs me.

Personally I don't really care what Annie shoots with, or who does her retouching, I just find it a little strange to see that ugly as hell zoom pointed at the Queen. When I saw that video I really thought she was just scouting locations.

JR

*the leica shoots full rez jpegs AND DNG AND the DNG will work in anything, even photoshop 7.

**not that I have anything against car mechanics***

***Actually I do have something against car mechanics, at least the ones I pay.

My clients chose me for my artistic interpretation and that they will leave knowing they have a good quality image.
But unfortunately we do not live in a fair world and people are obviosly impressed by names, who should know that better than us.
We are trying the whole time to get people to buy stuff b/c of our images..
It is just a fact that people want and are used to already looking at the back of the LCD.
I used to have a client that every time I took a picture she would actually try and grab my cmaera and look at the lcd all the time and I told her lady or not if she does it again I would smack her upside the head..
It literally drove me crazy.
Now they are always touching and pushing my 30" cinema display..:+}
I love shooting tethered and never need the LCD for that as many stated..
Snook

My clients never ask or bother what camera I use. They expect it to be good and be able to use it.

I don't think anything is totally ideal. I don't really care but just take what I can use and like to use.

I love using my DSLR's but do get bored with them sometimes, perfection (in operation that is) can be so deadly boring. The MF equipment with its sometimes nasty attitude is simply much more fun to work with. This, for me always generates images I enjoy a lot more. As long as the inconvenience doesn't get above a certain comfort level naturally.

Most clients don't see the difference when I work with 12MP (Nikon), 16MP MF or 39MF. Some do see it and some do but don't know what they are seeing. I had one lately that I did everything multishot for but the last items. I got lazy and did these single shot. These last items were immediately rejected! Frankly I don't care whether clients can see it, I can and that is enough for me.

Main reason for using MF is the fun of it. Would I still be shooting it when Nikon comes with equipment that is equal in performance? I guess I would.

annie shoots canon for probably the same reason she shot RZ with film...she is just about the LEAST technical person on the planet...so she just wanted something that just worked.....and the canons just do....with her retouching crew, she could shoot the queen with a 2 year old rebel and the final images would be amazing....

an assistant of mine mentioned when we talked about film/digital/equipment that wit the arrival of the 5D, the sewer was open....anyone could afford one and anyone could now produce files good and big enough for just about ANY job....so anyone with a 5D started calling themselves a photographer....when i lived in NY, i thought there are 1000s of photographers there and most of them pretty good and knowledgable...here in LA, i think there are actually 100.000s....and most of them have absolutely no clue and just mess up the market from the bottom.....they are the ones people turn to to shoot the small ad, the low budget shoot.....the client usually isn't very happy but did not pay that much and the next time then will go with the next guy....and they just run from anyone who mentions "usage".....

the leica myth started because all these great shooters used leica and everybody wanted to have shots just like them....nothing wrong with that at all...some people sit in a mercedes and think they are Fangio.....buying the same guitar as jimi does not make you play like jimi or if it does, does it put you in the same catgorie? there is a guy on 3rd street who plays "just like jimi...which is exactly his "problem".....

james mentioned the leica and i can say that no camera i have ever owned got that overall positive reaction....i have big hands and it look tiiiiiny....like a toy....(i have had mine sitting next to a H3 and one of the clients mentioned that "now that looks like a camera"...talking about the leica...) but everybody knows leica....nobody owns one (but their great uncle who got them interested in art and photography and really knew a lot about it had one) and once they see the files pop up on the screen and everything looks great and you can count eyelashes, nobody asks about megapixels or resolution anymore......if they do, all you have to do is turn it into a philosophical discussion about "look", "feel"...the drawing of the lenses and they are reminded of the last time they got frustrated because aunt emma, who has no clue but a 14mpix p&s emailed them a kinda shitty looking full rez jpeg and messed up their blackberry for the rest of the day....

it really does not matter what one shoots with and avedon would probably still shoot the west with 8x10...it is still better and no canon, nikon or DMF system would provide that kind of authority.....

in a way the canons and nikons have become the "least" professional cameras because everyone who gets "serious" about photography these days has one......

Hey Paul what are shooting with these days..:+}
Snook

an assistant of mine mentioned when we talked about film/digital/equipment that wit the arrival of the 5D, the sewer was open....anyone could afford one and anyone could now produce files good and big enough for just about ANY job....so anyone with a 5D started calling themselves a photographer....


jesus, what did a hassy 500 series and a fist full of porta cost 15 - 20 years ago? or did you have to have a special badge to buy one?
nothing a car salesman couldn't have afforded. if anything, professional cameras, lighting, computers, and and and equipment have become more difficult for a hobby photographer to afford.

as far as i'm concerned everyone on the planet can have the same perfect camera, then if my freakin firewire cable goes down or my lens locks up i can ask the nearest janitor or waitress to loan me theirs.

James,
I've found the solution for you.

"The money thing is the most interesting, becuase I know and I think you feel the same way, I would drop 20 grand on a camera like the Rolliflex (I'm not going to call it an HY6) if I was positive it would be the only still camera I would have to buy for at least the next 10 years."

If you don't want the Sinar or Leaf logo on the Hy6,all you need to dois get the viewfinder for the Rolleiflex version of the Hy6.

It's still grey though,not black.

I shoot with the Sinar Hy6 btw and love that little camera!

Keep up the good work!

Cheers,
Willem.

i shot mf mainly for the lenses , in architecture this is a completely other theme than for fashion work. i dont talk about magic "3d glowing", i talk about shift / tilt / wa stuff with lo distortion. here i have no choice, either to work with 4x5 film or to work with mf shift camera,.- the things with canons get very complicate although its possible too if someone really knows to use the 35mm cams together with solutions as the zoerk . but just to a certain point, than this 35mm thing becomes to complicate and too limiting.
although in mf still the wide end is limited, so in one of 20 shots i need it wider than my stitched 28HR takes me.
in this cases i take my 5d together with my ( selected ) sigma 12-24 lense,- which is by far the best corrected 35mm wide lens i ever saw .
often these superwide shots are taken by the clients as eye catchers, so they are also often publicated, in this case mostly mixed with my mf stuff,- sometimes as doublespreads in magazines as well as in books. never i had any complain about quality or resolution of my 5d/sigma shots.
..... but as i said. i need good corrected shift lenses whenever i can use them, so i work with mf backs and systems. thats an easier decision in architecture than if i would shoot people,-. in this case probably i would use the canons a lot .

i will upgrade probably in some time to higher resolution, after the first few 100 beta testers will have confirmed that their new phase/hassy/leaf/sinar backs will dcertainly not show nice centerfolds or whatever.
but honestly there is not any NEED to upgrade for higher resolution. and not any hurry.
for me its not such bad time point now, because the need to invest a lot go digital is over for me, i already did it and i have a very nice system and i know to use it to its limits after some years of digital. the big step was to change 4x5" to 22mp and later to 33 including lenses, cameras and so on.
i felt that i had to do this change 3 years before and i havent regretted it.
but now? i dont feel any stress about 50, 65 or xxx MP backs. thats really different to my point 3 years before. even i am not sure if i will upgrade my 5d if the 5d2 will come out. my most used lenses ( the sigma12-24 and the canon 100-400 ) are at its resolution limits ,there will not be a difference visible if i put a 17 or 22mp sensor behind them,- i dont need hi isos... so for what. maybe i will do and upgrade my back if this is possible in the future, maybe not,- but there is no stress in this decision and this is not so bad.

lets see how the mf companies will go on selling this hi-res backs, which nearly no one needs.
you can get now pretty nice p30+ a65 or e54 backs for prices which are not so far away from than the canons. i cant see how phase will get back their investment in the exclusive 65mp dalsa sensor... but lets see.
another story about lenses and about cameras ( clear that i wll work with an artec ... ).
in hardware for architecture shooters the evolution is in the middle and not on a similar point than the mf resolution already stays. but if i have what will work fine for me my interest is going down a lot,- i know this from me. and my e75 back has already reached this point ....

Click to view attachment
canon 5d with sigma @12mm

There will always be a need for technical cameras, which is why Sinar will be one of the surviving companies if and when there is a shakeout in the MF industry. I am really impressed that they made the ArcTec, and I am very impressed with the Hy6. If I were in Europe I'd bite!

Cheers Rainer!

itis not about the cost.....canon probably sold more 5Ds in a month then hass 500 series in its lifespan.....

With a Blad and fist full of Portra you had to know what you were doing. You had to use a meter. It took some time to get film back from the lab or you had to get your hands dirty developing and printing yourself. Skills. Then when you got the film back all that effort could be wasted if the film came back blank, or under exposed, or over exposed etc. Again, skills that take time, dedication and practice to master. You couldn't start blasting away, looking at the screen to see if you have an image. That's why the sewer opened up. Its easy to take an image.

I like cameras, most of them, but the 5d is something I really could never own. I picked one up, looked through it and put it down.

Done.

I think it's just because when I started you saved for cameras, borrowed money for cameras, went in dept for cameras before you would never think about shooting a professional job with an amateur camera, under any circumstance.

I know the people that like the 5D like it a lot but I wouldn't have it.

The Canons are perplexing to me. I absolutley love the original 1ds and will have it forever. I even still use it some, I really have never warmed to the 1ds2. I do use it, sometimes a lot but I just don't like the color, or the file sharpness. I can fix it in post and it's a good workable camera, but I have no bond or feeling for it whatsoever.

Given than I will buy a 1ds3 this week and if I like it I'll buy another for backup.

I don't care about the sewer rot, every industry has it in some form, so I can't blame a camera for that. I just don't like the 5d.

JR

Have no doubt that it is a horrid camera in terms of handling, but it does make a nice picture. I bought it along with a 1ds2 when I abandoned the Nikon ship, and it was a hard adjustment, especially coming from the Nikon bodies. Under lights the 5D looks as good as the ds2. It has less DR than the ds2. What's funny is that, to this day, I'll shoot with the 5D and feel as if everything I shot was an utter failure, until I look at the files in C1.

I wish that the Mamiya AF cams had half of the 5D's handling goodness.

I know the latest version of the Mamiya is better than the first two, but there really was no where to go but up.

JR

What's funny is that I have two of the original Mamiya AFd cams. Had one since they came out. The AFd2 is tighter and has better AF, but is still the same beast underneath. I never saw the need to get one, especially since their price used is a shocking $1800 bucks. More than your Contax, which is a fine camera, one you want to shoot. What is really bothersome is that the AFd with film was much better than with digital, much faster. I tried the AFd3/Phase cam and liked it. Much better feel in the hands, much better quality switch gear.

absolutely correct! it is hard NOT to take a technically good photo with it.....

JR,

Let us know what you think of the ds3. It doesn't "wow" like the orginal flavor 1ds, except for the viewfinder.

Ah, hah. Now we hit on the secret to success.

We've been looking at this backwards.

Instead of a better lcd, higher iso, faster shooting, maybe we should ask for more shutter lag, even crappier lcds, (even it requires a polaroid and a meter) and very minimal iso so we need at least 10,000 watts to get an image.

Let's put all the magic back behind the curtain instead of out front like we do now.

Or maybe just a digital polaroid, with only 3mpx but a 5" screen. One that is good enough to view but not good enough to reproduce and then we go back behind the curtain and do the magic.

(just kidding . . . well . . . maybe not)

JR

So it sounds like you want a Sinar 54m! I loved that back, but it was the MOST difficult thing to coax an image out of but when it finally worked it was really, really beautiful.

I wondered why rates were higher for video/motion and I realize its because the curtain is still down. Film production is hard, even for something really simple. So much collaboration and planning is required, its just fantastic.

I think the new flagship for DSLR will be the Nikon D3x or whatever it will be called.
I use a 5D and a Hy6/75LV.
I'm a bit over Canon with their not so great wides.
That new Nikon 14-24 shit's on everything else.
Not interested in the 1DS3 or the upcoming 5D2.
Nikon has listened and is now making gear that the pros want.
Cheers,
Willem.

i have some doubts.
the new 24 nikon shift looks so cheap ( in reality - the plastic still looks nice in brochures ... ) and its handling feels so impractical, i couldnt believe it when i saw it first time.
only marketing driven, not any photographic knowledge or intention behind.

And it has an electronic stop down button. Meaning you cannot use it on something like a Digiflex or other device that accepts a F mount like you can the older 85PC

Maybe its optical quality is better than the old 28mm shift making it interesting together with a D3/D700(if it fits).

Rainer,
Obviously you're not a Nikon fan.
Maybe the Nikkor 24TS is at least worth a test?
It has to be better than the 10 year old design(or more) of the Canon TSE 24.
The new 14-24 Nikkor has certainly earned it's merits.
Regards,
Willem.

Ironically, out of some of my frustration of tethering and the whole Digital Road Wreck, I (re)bought a couple of my beloved Hassie 203FE's recently, and I've started shooting color neg again. With the 203 and the meter built in, you just set it to aperture priority and shoot away, just like a point and shoot. It's a true joy. And I've got my old lenses back; those sweet Zeiss lenses.

What's even more interesting -- my local C41 pro lab will do web-quality scans, on their Noritsu scanner, of every frame of the uncut film, for the same price as making a color contact sheet. So that means, in effect, you could shoot an actual job on film, and by the next day, have your CD back with web scans on it, import to iView, make a web gallery, and have them uploaded immediately. Every frame. Not that different of a workflow, even compared to digital.

I'm going backwards, and I'm loving every minute of it. The funny part is when the make up artist will look at the back of the 203FE, and all she sees is a dark slider holder... Sweet revenge.

JR,

What do you have against mechanics and their photographic abilities?

On a technical level, I think her quality has gone down since using digital. I can spot a AL digital shot on the newstands from pretty far away. Perhaps its the look she's going for but to me it looks like crap.

But who are we to judge on which camera someone uses? If one can make beautiful photos with a canon, then great. To me, all that stands between me and my subject is a somewhat arbitrary piece of glass. When I am shooting, I think about composition, exposure, and light; not that my canon lenses are inferior to medium format.

I also find that the Nikon 24 shift feels a bit cheap, I was also a bit disappointed when I first got it in my hand.

But, I tested 2 samples against a Canon 24 ts that where handpicked the same way by an other photographer as you have done with your sigma wide.

Both the Nikon samples performed better than the canon, specially towards the edge, they where sharper and had less CA.

The 14-24 is quite good as well

Nikon have Imo the edge on the wide side and the sample variation on the lenses are not as choking as the Canon's can be.

/adam

Thanks Adam and Rainer.
As for the golden rule,I have to test those lenses myself.
Cheers,
Willem.

I like them better than I like hair stylists that become photographers, or as a friend calls them, Hairtographers.

JR