November 23, 2014, 05:37:03 PM

Author Topic: NIKON Releasing a Medium format DSLR 50MP  (Read 12659 times)

jrista

  • Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 4627
  • EOL
    • View Profile
    • Nature Photography
Re: NIKON Releasing a Medium format DSLR 50MP
« Reply #45 on: August 04, 2014, 11:24:18 AM »
If it's sub 10k, and has 3 LS primes to start, it'd sell like hot cakes.

IF it is sub 10k. Given the $7k price of the 1D X, which uses a sensor that has about half the area of a 44x33mm "small" sized medium format sensor, let alone something in the 60x40mm range, I find it highly doubtful that Canon would practically give away a MFD camera for $10k. Especially not with Canon's pricing trend lately. I also don't see the lenses being cheap by any means...it's a lot tougher to design the optics of a lens that must perform ideally from corner to corner in a much larger image circle. I agree with one of the previous comments...they would be more like Canon's Cine line of zoom lenses, which are tens of thousands of dollars each.

canon rumors FORUM

Re: NIKON Releasing a Medium format DSLR 50MP
« Reply #45 on: August 04, 2014, 11:24:18 AM »

Normalnorm

  • EOS M2
  • ****
  • Posts: 182
    • View Profile
Re: NIKON Releasing a Medium format DSLR 50MP
« Reply #46 on: August 04, 2014, 12:23:19 PM »
The only scenario I can see this working is if Nikon is ignoring the other MF players altogether and taking aim at Canon's top end customer base of wealthy hobbyists.

 The notion that there are legions of pros snapping up vast quantities of high end gear is false. Nikon is not unaware of the many converts from Canon to the D800 because of the additional resolution and the predilection to pixel peeping.

But in the end it would seem that Nikon lacks the resources to assemble a system that even matches Leica's S system much less Hasselblad and Mamiya/ Phase.

OTOH maybe this is a front for Sony' s purchase of Nikon.  :o

neuroanatomist

  • CR GEEK
  • **********
  • Posts: 14929
    • View Profile
Re: NIKON Releasing a Medium format DSLR 50MP
« Reply #47 on: August 04, 2014, 12:37:01 PM »
Nikon is not unaware of the many converts from Canon to the D800 because of the additional resolution and the predilection to pixel peeping.

Nor are they unaware of the many converts from Nikon to the 5DIII because of the lack of a true successor to the D700 and a predilection to needing a pro-level general purpose camera.

 ;)
EOS 1D X, EOS M, and lots of lenses
______________________________
Flickr | TDP Profile/Gear List

RLPhoto

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 3520
  • Gear doesn't matter, Just a Matter of Convenience.
    • View Profile
    • My Portfolio
Re: NIKON Releasing a Medium format DSLR 50MP
« Reply #48 on: August 04, 2014, 01:11:14 PM »
If it's sub 10k, and has 3 LS primes to start, it'd sell like hot cakes.

IF it is sub 10k. Given the $7k price of the 1D X, which uses a sensor that has about half the area of a 44x33mm "small" sized medium format sensor, let alone something in the 60x40mm range, I find it highly doubtful that Canon would practically give away a MFD camera for $10k. Especially not with Canon's pricing trend lately. I also don't see the lenses being cheap by any means...it's a lot tougher to design the optics of a lens that must perform ideally from corner to corner in a much larger image circle. I agree with one of the previous comments...they would be more like Canon's Cine line of zoom lenses, which are tens of thousands of dollars each.
It's relatively easy to get a Hasselblad h3DII 39 with a 80mm kit for well under 10k and around 8k. A 210mm and a 35mm LS lens will add another 5k if bought used to the price tag. MF has become much more affordable and it could soon be available again to the masses if the price trend continues. Pentax could lead the way if they released a Line of LS lenses.

Halfrack

  • Canon 7D MK II
  • *****
  • Posts: 488
    • View Profile
Re: NIKON Releasing a Medium format DSLR 50MP
« Reply #49 on: August 04, 2014, 02:26:24 PM »
It's relatively easy to get a Hasselblad h3DII 39 with a 80mm kit for well under 10k and around 8k. A 210mm and a 35mm LS lens will add another 5k if bought used to the price tag. MF has become much more affordable and it could soon be available again to the masses if the price trend continues. Pentax could lead the way if they released a Line of LS lenses.

Careful - Hasselblad has cut off services to the H3D/H3DII bodies & backs.  H4D-40's can be had for under 10K CPO - http://www.hasselbladusa.com/media/1064797/husa_cert_preowned.pdf - I'm playing with the 150mm and look to add the 35mm to the kit 80mm, toss in the 1.7x extender and it should be all I need - except for the 24mm HCD - that thing is amazingly wide!

Canon and Nikon don't have any existing glass that will do well in a MF world - well the 17/24mm TS-E lenses work really well, but that doesn't make for a system.  Between glass and the AF systems, Canon/Nikon would be better off buying Hasselblad or Phase and leaving the brands where they are.  Even resurrecting an old brand like Contax would be better than putting Canon/Nikon on the camera (Kyocera killed it in 2002).
"Me owning a lens shop is kind of like having an alcoholic bar tender." - Roger Cicala

RGF

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1295
  • How you relate to the issue, is the issue.
    • View Profile
Re: NIKON Releasing a Medium format DSLR 50MP
« Reply #50 on: August 04, 2014, 03:20:27 PM »
Could they be planning on putting their name on someone's else's hardware, a touch of unique firmware, and presto - Nikon MF camera with minimal investment and minimal risk.

klickflip

  • Canon AE-1
  • ***
  • Posts: 79
    • View Profile
Re: NIKON Releasing a Medium format DSLR 50MP
« Reply #51 on: August 04, 2014, 04:56:36 PM »
My thoughts are..

Its prime time for Nikon to do this especially if its sub 10K , Sony sensor is there and great. yes new lenses would be needed, maybe they have been working with Zeiss which have designed 100s of MF lenses or Fuji or use another manufacturers mount if they got the license and make their AF work for these lenses would be the quickest way.

Heard sony and Fuji rumours of a MF camera, but this has been hinted to be a fixed lens one..

I think and really hope that we are going to see a resurgence in MF again as digital costs come down to put us back to where we were in the 80s / 90s with the choice of cheaper Pentax, Bronica, Mamiya  and higher end Mamiya, Hassys and Fujis .

Personally I'd love Fuji to bring out their GX67 / 80,  ranges again and the Bronica ETRSI which were my favourite cameras. - We still have the Mamiya 645 in Phase one DF  & Mamiya DF645 form thesedays.

I've not seen anyone use or talk abut the Pentax ever in professional circles, I think this is due to the quirky look plus not having a leaf shutter, which is the most useful for syncing at higher speeds outdoor. Most I know use the Hassy H2D with Phase one backs.

The H3DII 39 are not the best apart from in well lit or studio environments tbh, files break up easier than 5D III files in my experience but it is a 10 year old kodak sensor I think. The older Phase P30 Dalsa sensors are still very good at iso 100 though. And the newer  IQ ones are very good.
I haven't used any of the H4/5 sensors which I've heard are much better, but phase one seems to be miles ahead in quality terms.

The sony sensor is a great step forward for more varied use / iso MF though. If someone can put it in a decent and more affordable package much like Pentax has done.. but make it an appealing camera with and or maybe optional leaf shutter with LS lenses like the Phase one/ Mamiya platform that would be a winner.
Sure Phase one are amazing but I think their premium price days are numbered.

I know the D800 has affected the 30/40 MP Hassy & phase sales. (I just wish there were L primes equivalents) I've seen colleagues buy one and lenses at 10K instead of spending 30K, yes its not quite the same but in another way its more useful.
With 90% of the quality of say a phase IQ40  but 500% more flexibility-  but thats still 50% or more quality than a 5DIII or 1DX.
It feels like what 645 film was in medium format terms many years ago, a decent step up from 35mm but not quite as much quality Larger MF 67 69 etc or 5x4 etc. And quite a small nimble camera which the 645s were.

I would be very excited to see more manufactured jump on sony's sensor with new camera & lens systems, and then digital will have grown up properly in my eyes :)








canon rumors FORUM

Re: NIKON Releasing a Medium format DSLR 50MP
« Reply #51 on: August 04, 2014, 04:56:36 PM »

unfocused

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 2203
    • View Profile
    • Unfocused: A photo website
Re: NIKON Releasing a Medium format DSLR 50MP
« Reply #52 on: August 04, 2014, 05:22:50 PM »
If it's sub 10k, and has 3 LS primes to start, it'd sell like hot cakes.

Please define "sell like hotcakes."

I'd love for someone who thinks this is a viable market to provide some evidence or, at a minimum, reasonably good arguments to support that contention.

In 2013 there was a Forbes interview with Leica's medium format guy. He said, "There are no industry-wide figures, but we think the core medium format market is roughly 6000 units per year – worldwide, for all brands." (Emphasis added by me)

http://www.forbes.com/sites/marcbabej/2013/05/08/how-leica-camera-is-reinventing-the-medium-format-market-on-its-own-terms/

That's not very many hotcakes.
pictures sharp. life not so much. www.unfocusedmg.com

jrista

  • Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 4627
  • EOL
    • View Profile
    • Nature Photography
Re: NIKON Releasing a Medium format DSLR 50MP
« Reply #53 on: August 04, 2014, 06:21:31 PM »
If it's sub 10k, and has 3 LS primes to start, it'd sell like hot cakes.

Please define "sell like hotcakes."

I'd love for someone who thinks this is a viable market to provide some evidence or, at a minimum, reasonably good arguments to support that contention.

In 2013 there was a Forbes interview with Leica's medium format guy. He said, "There are no industry-wide figures, but we think the core medium format market is roughly 6000 units per year – worldwide, for all brands." (Emphasis added by me)

http://www.forbes.com/sites/marcbabej/2013/05/08/how-leica-camera-is-reinventing-the-medium-format-market-on-its-own-terms/

That's not very many hotcakes.

Aye, this is similar to what I've heard. Which just emphasises the point...it's a very small pie that Canon and/or Nikon would be trying to take slices of. They would need some very competitive offerings to break into the niche.

RLPhoto

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 3520
  • Gear doesn't matter, Just a Matter of Convenience.
    • View Profile
    • My Portfolio
Re: NIKON Releasing a Medium format DSLR 50MP
« Reply #54 on: August 04, 2014, 11:49:17 PM »
If it's sub 10k, and has 3 LS primes to start, it'd sell like hot cakes.

Please define "sell like hotcakes."

I'd love for someone who thinks this is a viable market to provide some evidence or, at a minimum, reasonably good arguments to support that contention.

In 2013 there was a Forbes interview with Leica's medium format guy. He said, "There are no industry-wide figures, but we think the core medium format market is roughly 6000 units per year – worldwide, for all brands." (Emphasis added by me)

http://www.forbes.com/sites/marcbabej/2013/05/08/how-leica-camera-is-reinventing-the-medium-format-market-on-its-own-terms/

That's not very many hotcakes.

I think you forget MF was king of general portraiture in film and see no reason why it couldn't return as long as cost goes down. Weddings, editorial, fashion, etc... all medium format or LF. 35mm was for PJ's or sports shooters.

Hassy does service H3DII but not the H3D directly. Warranties are not offered on either but you can still get service as long as parts are available. (Which I was informed plenty was as the 39mp sensor was a very popular one.)

In reality, 35mm can never complete with MF as long as they have focal plane shutters. All 35mm cam's need to get on with electronic shutters or a set of LS lenses but why not just get MF then?

jrista

  • Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 4627
  • EOL
    • View Profile
    • Nature Photography
Re: NIKON Releasing a Medium format DSLR 50MP
« Reply #55 on: August 05, 2014, 12:25:43 AM »
In reality, 35mm can never complete with MF as long as they have focal plane shutters. All 35mm cam's need to get on with electronic shutters or a set of LS lenses but why not just get MF then?

Hmm...I don't think I'd call an electronic shutter better. At least, they won't be better until they are all global shutters that instantly shift all pixels into a background per-pixel memory. Most current electronic shutters on DSLRs and Mirrorless cameras scan, so exposure isn't guaranteed to be the same from bottom to top. A global shutter would need to be high end as well...there is still row activation with a global shutter, and still that scanning. They can shift the pixel value into the pixel memory faster than a full readout, but there is still that lag. For longer exposures, that doesn't matter as much...for action photography, the lag matters. A nice high end global shutter design, the kind used in digital cinema cameras that can operate at thousands to tens of thousands of frames per second, is the kind of design I'd really want in a DSLR electronic shutter...at least then, I'd know I could use it for high speed photography and not have to worry about a slight exposure gradient across my images.

As for leaf shutters...they have their cons as well. I think the key benefit everyone wants from a leaf shutter is the ability to, at least theoretically, sync at any flash speed. At times I've read about how leaf shutters can operate at several ten thousandths of a second, and still sync. A lot of that is simply not true, at least, not in the context of DSLRs. Most DSLR-sized leaf shutter lenses sync at 1/500s, a very few have synced at 1/1000s. The only leaf shutters I know of that have synced at 1/20,000s or faster are really tiny ones in small compact cameras.

There is also the issue of inconsistent exposure. Because a leaf shutter opens in the center, flowers outward, then flowers back inward, you get less exposure at the periphery and more in the center. That effectively guarantees vignetting in every single image...additional vignetting, on top of any that might naturally occur due to lens design.

Leaf shutters, good high end ones, are also complex and costly to build, and they would have to be in each and every lens. Personally, I would rather NOT incur the additional cost of having a leaf shutter built into each and every lens I buy...I think its more cost effective to have the shutter, whatever design, elsewhere, and allow lenses to be cheaper.

As for MFD, I guess time will tell. Sensor area is the ultimate key to better image quality, but the older sensor designs used in say the Hasselblad H3D and H3D II were similar in design to Canon's current sensors. They had as many problems with shadow noise as Canon cameras...lots of it, banding, etc. The current H5D-50c still sells for $28,000 just for the camera, and it's at least a few thousand for a lens. Canon would need to compete with the H5D-50c, not the old H3D, if they wanted to break into the market. I honestly don't see Canon doing it for all that much cheaper than Hasselblad, and if they did, they would likely be taking a loss on the products just to be competitive (especially if they aren't using a 300mm wafer fab...I think there was a rumor a while back that Canon might be either migrating to a fab that does 300mm fabrication, maybe taking over some of the capacity from P&S fabs that aren't producing as many compact cameras...or maybe building a new fab, but to manufacture MFD size sensors, they would have to take capacity away from something either way).

The benefit of medium format film was the cameras were all still designed roughly the same way. A medium format SLR might have had some additional features, but there was nothing in particular that made them particularly more costly than smaller cameras...not as far as the bodies went. They didn't have the extra cost of manufacturing extremely low yield sensors that cost a fortune to make. The customer took care of paying the cost of the film. That's nothing to say of the IQ we can get from a "lowly" 35mm DSLR these days, let alone a digital medium format. It's a little unfair to compare a modern DSLR with the "cheap" 35mm film and cameras of yesteryear. Full frame DSLR image quality is now far superior, and digital medium format is again superior to FF DSLR.

RLPhoto

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 3520
  • Gear doesn't matter, Just a Matter of Convenience.
    • View Profile
    • My Portfolio
Re: NIKON Releasing a Medium format DSLR 50MP
« Reply #56 on: August 05, 2014, 01:00:25 AM »
In reality, 35mm can never complete with MF as long as they have focal plane shutters. All 35mm cam's need to get on with electronic shutters or a set of LS lenses but why not just get MF then?

Hmm...I don't think I'd call an electronic shutter better. At least, they won't be better until they are all global shutters that instantly shift all pixels into a background per-pixel memory. Most current electronic shutters on DSLRs and Mirrorless cameras scan, so exposure isn't guaranteed to be the same from bottom to top. A global shutter would need to be high end as well...there is still row activation with a global shutter, and still that scanning. They can shift the pixel value into the pixel memory faster than a full readout, but there is still that lag. For longer exposures, that doesn't matter as much...for action photography, the lag matters. A nice high end global shutter design, the kind used in digital cinema cameras that can operate at thousands to tens of thousands of frames per second, is the kind of design I'd really want in a DSLR electronic shutter...at least then, I'd know I could use it for high speed photography and not have to worry about a slight exposure gradient across my images.

As for leaf shutters...they have their cons as well. I think the key benefit everyone wants from a leaf shutter is the ability to, at least theoretically, sync at any flash speed. At times I've read about how leaf shutters can operate at several ten thousandths of a second, and still sync. A lot of that is simply not true, at least, not in the context of DSLRs. Most DSLR-sized leaf shutter lenses sync at 1/500s, a very few have synced at 1/1000s. The only leaf shutters I know of that have synced at 1/20,000s or faster are really tiny ones in small compact cameras.

There is also the issue of inconsistent exposure. Because a leaf shutter opens in the center, flowers outward, then flowers back inward, you get less exposure at the periphery and more in the center. That effectively guarantees vignetting in every single image...additional vignetting, on top of any that might naturally occur due to lens design.

Leaf shutters, good high end ones, are also complex and costly to build, and they would have to be in each and every lens. Personally, I would rather NOT incur the additional cost of having a leaf shutter built into each and every lens I buy...I think its more cost effective to have the shutter, whatever design, elsewhere, and allow lenses to be cheaper.

As for MFD, I guess time will tell. Sensor area is the ultimate key to better image quality, but the older sensor designs used in say the Hasselblad H3D and H3D II were similar in design to Canon's current sensors. They had as many problems with shadow noise as Canon cameras...lots of it, banding, etc. The current H5D-50c still sells for $28,000 just for the camera, and it's at least a few thousand for a lens. Canon would need to compete with the H5D-50c, not the old H3D, if they wanted to break into the market. I honestly don't see Canon doing it for all that much cheaper than Hasselblad, and if they did, they would likely be taking a loss on the products just to be competitive (especially if they aren't using a 300mm wafer fab...I think there was a rumor a while back that Canon might be either migrating to a fab that does 300mm fabrication, maybe taking over some of the capacity from P&S fabs that aren't producing as many compact cameras...or maybe building a new fab, but to manufacture MFD size sensors, they would have to take capacity away from something either way).

The benefit of medium format film was the cameras were all still designed roughly the same way. A medium format SLR might have had some additional features, but there was nothing in particular that made them particularly more costly than smaller cameras...not as far as the bodies went. They didn't have the extra cost of manufacturing extremely low yield sensors that cost a fortune to make. The customer took care of paying the cost of the film. That's nothing to say of the IQ we can get from a "lowly" 35mm DSLR these days, let alone a digital medium format. It's a little unfair to compare a modern DSLR with the "cheap" 35mm film and cameras of yesteryear. Full frame DSLR image quality is now far superior, and digital medium format is again superior to FF DSLR.
While a nice long response, the reality is the x100s do a fine job a super sync speeds and my H3D with its humble 80mm nails 1/800 syncs like clockwork. I saw no issues using either the x100 or LS lenses with fast triggers & lenses in good working order.

An electronic shutter like the x100 would be the best cheapest route for 35mm to move than with LS. It's a shame that I have to report than from ISO 50-200, the nearly decade old 39mp Kodak sensor whipped my 5D3 in post using both adobe CR & phocus. However, after 200 iso it's swiss cheese (pun intended.)

jrista

  • Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 4627
  • EOL
    • View Profile
    • Nature Photography
Re: NIKON Releasing a Medium format DSLR 50MP
« Reply #57 on: August 05, 2014, 01:25:08 AM »
An electronic shutter like the x100 would be the best cheapest route for 35mm to move than with LS. It's a shame that I have to report than from ISO 50-200, the nearly decade old 39mp Kodak sensor whipped my 5D3 in post using both adobe CR & phocus. However, after 200 iso it's swiss cheese (pun intended.)

Well, that's expected. The sensor is over twice as large (2.1x larger, to be exact, at 37x49mm), and both sensors have the same kind of read noise problems. Aside from a few minor improvements, like gapless microlenses, Canon's fundamental sensor tech is ALSO a decade old. Now, I don't think the IQ difference between the H3D and a D810 would be quite the same. There is still a difference, and the win probably still goes to the H3D (simply because total sensor area is always going to trump unless you have SERIOUS technology problems), but the gap is considerably smaller, since the read noise of the Kodak sensor is still five times higher than on a Sony Exmor sensor.

On the flip side, cameras with Sony's 50mp medium format Exmor are still going to walk all over even the great D810. Canon can't enter the medium format digital market with an entry that competes with the H3D. They have to start out competing with something like the H5D-50c or the Phase One IQ250. If Canon ignores their sensor performance with the 7D II, they are on the brink. I think the long-term ignorance of their sensor IQ, regardless of whether it really matters a ton or not in the end, is ultimately going to cost them customers, as it's a matter of perception. Why would any established MFD customers buy a Canon medium format that used a medium format sensor based on their own decade-old technology? MFD is all about the low ISO IQ...it always has been. They are the ultimate landscape and studio cameras. Canon wouldn't stand an ice cube's chance in hell if they released a medium format camera with their current sensor tech into the midst of the new MFD market now dominated by large format Sony Exmor sensors.

If Canon was ever to enter the MFD market, they would need to first establish that they are still a leader in sensor technology and overall image quality. I personally think Canon's IQ is great, however I pretty much live at ISO 400 and higher, so the whole dynamic range thing isn't an issue for me. I lift shadows all the time, but at those ISO settings, there is little to no banding most of the time, and what banding there is (at least in the 5D III) is a breeze to clean up with Topaz Denoise. But there is still the perception that Canon is not just losing...but that they have lost the IQ wars. If I was going to spend a couple tens of thousands of dollars buying into a medium format digital system for say my landscape photography...why would I pick Canon if they hadn't proven their IQ, which is what such a camera would be all about, was better than Pentax's, Phase One's, or Hasselblads? I mean, it's a S___-ton of money regardless...and I'd have to buy everything new anyway, since none of my existing Canon gear would be compatible anyway...so why limit myself?

Canon is currently in a lose-lose position for entering the medium format market.

canon rumors FORUM

Re: NIKON Releasing a Medium format DSLR 50MP
« Reply #57 on: August 05, 2014, 01:25:08 AM »

RLPhoto

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 3520
  • Gear doesn't matter, Just a Matter of Convenience.
    • View Profile
    • My Portfolio
Re: NIKON Releasing a Medium format DSLR 50MP
« Reply #58 on: August 05, 2014, 09:16:48 AM »
An electronic shutter like the x100 would be the best cheapest route for 35mm to move than with LS. It's a shame that I have to report than from ISO 50-200, the nearly decade old 39mp Kodak sensor whipped my 5D3 in post using both adobe CR & phocus. However, after 200 iso it's swiss cheese (pun intended.)

Well, that's expected. The sensor is over twice as large (2.1x larger, to be exact, at 37x49mm), and both sensors have the same kind of read noise problems. Aside from a few minor improvements, like gapless microlenses, Canon's fundamental sensor tech is ALSO a decade old. Now, I don't think the IQ difference between the H3D and a D810 would be quite the same. There is still a difference, and the win probably still goes to the H3D (simply because total sensor area is always going to trump unless you have SERIOUS technology problems), but the gap is considerably smaller, since the read noise of the Kodak sensor is still five times higher than on a Sony Exmor sensor.

On the flip side, cameras with Sony's 50mp medium format Exmor are still going to walk all over even the great D810. Canon can't enter the medium format digital market with an entry that competes with the H3D. They have to start out competing with something like the H5D-50c or the Phase One IQ250. If Canon ignores their sensor performance with the 7D II, they are on the brink. I think the long-term ignorance of their sensor IQ, regardless of whether it really matters a ton or not in the end, is ultimately going to cost them customers, as it's a matter of perception. Why would any established MFD customers buy a Canon medium format that used a medium format sensor based on their own decade-old technology? MFD is all about the low ISO IQ...it always has been. They are the ultimate landscape and studio cameras. Canon wouldn't stand an ice cube's chance in hell if they released a medium format camera with their current sensor tech into the midst of the new MFD market now dominated by large format Sony Exmor sensors.

If Canon was ever to enter the MFD market, they would need to first establish that they are still a leader in sensor technology and overall image quality. I personally think Canon's IQ is great, however I pretty much live at ISO 400 and higher, so the whole dynamic range thing isn't an issue for me. I lift shadows all the time, but at those ISO settings, there is little to no banding most of the time, and what banding there is (at least in the 5D III) is a breeze to clean up with Topaz Denoise. But there is still the perception that Canon is not just losing...but that they have lost the IQ wars. If I was going to spend a couple tens of thousands of dollars buying into a medium format digital system for say my landscape photography...why would I pick Canon if they hadn't proven their IQ, which is what such a camera would be all about, was better than Pentax's, Phase One's, or Hasselblads? I mean, it's a S___-ton of money regardless...and I'd have to buy everything new anyway, since none of my existing Canon gear would be compatible anyway...so why limit myself?

Canon is currently in a lose-lose position for entering the medium format market.
I think we're talking past each other here. I was just pointing out the practical uses of a cheaper MF systems especially if Nikon did release a system sub 10k with LS lenses. I really don't care if it says pentax,canon,nikon,etc... as long as that new cmos tech is used with a set of LS lenses. However if they can get electronic shutters working on 35mm cams, that gap would close significantly.

unfocused

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 2203
    • View Profile
    • Unfocused: A photo website
Re: NIKON Releasing a Medium format DSLR 50MP
« Reply #59 on: August 05, 2014, 10:15:13 AM »
If it's sub 10k, and has 3 LS primes to start, it'd sell like hot cakes.

Please define "sell like hotcakes."

I'd love for someone who thinks this is a viable market to provide some evidence or, at a minimum, reasonably good arguments to support that contention.

In 2013 there was a Forbes interview with Leica's medium format guy. He said, "There are no industry-wide figures, but we think the core medium format market is roughly 6000 units per year – worldwide, for all brands." (Emphasis added by me)

http://www.forbes.com/sites/marcbabej/2013/05/08/how-leica-camera-is-reinventing-the-medium-format-market-on-its-own-terms/

That's not very many hotcakes.

I think you forget MF was king of general portraiture in film and see no reason why it couldn't return as long as cost goes down. Weddings, editorial, fashion, etc... all medium format or LF. 35mm was for PJ's or sports shooters...

How about convenience, portability, durability, cost, flexibility to name just a few advantages of the DSLR format. I think you forget (or perhaps are too young to remember) that the only reason Medium Format was king of general portraiture in film was that 35mm film was hugely inferior to larger formats in the pre-digital days.

That's not an issue today. Medium format users were only too happy to give up their clunky, slow, inconvenient cameras for DSLRs once the quality became acceptable.

In reality, 35mm can never complete with MF as long as they have focal plane shutters. All 35mm cam's need to get on with electronic shutters or a set of LS lenses but why not just get MF then?

So, the only advantage is focal plane vs. leaf shutters? That was a big difference in the film days when most SLRs synched at 1/60th of a second. Less of a difference today and only important for a small niche of shooters.

Are you suggesting that the worldwide 6,000 unit market would magically expand on the basis of a leaf shutter? Sometimes it's better to just admit that you engaged keyboard before brain. We all do it at times, no shame in admitting it.
pictures sharp. life not so much. www.unfocusedmg.com

canon rumors FORUM

Re: NIKON Releasing a Medium format DSLR 50MP
« Reply #59 on: August 05, 2014, 10:15:13 AM »