NIKON Releasing a Medium format DSLR 50MP

[jrista]

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.

Are you thinking about Schneider Kreuznach 1/1600th sync LS lenses? You do realize that those puppies cost a minimum of $6000 for a really tiny prime, and the cost goes up from there.

A lot of other leaf shutter lenses still only sync at 1/500th. It is possible to have 1/500th X-sync with a focal plane shutter (although, why the 1D X does not use one is beyond me.)

I do agree, that if we could get nice global electronic shutters in FF DSLRs, that could sync at any speed, that would be pretty nice. I think that would be the key to making medium format affordable, since the lenses wouldn't need the complexity of a leaf shutter, which definitely pushes up cost.

 

[RLPhoto]

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.

Are you thinking about Schneider Kreuznach 1/1600th sync LS lenses? You do realize that those puppies cost a minimum of $6000 for a really tiny prime, and the cost goes up from there.

A lot of other leaf shutter lenses still only sync at 1/500th. It is possible to have 1/500th X-sync with a focal plane shutter (although, why the 1D X does not use one is beyond me.)

I do agree, that if we could get nice global electronic shutters in FF DSLRs, that could sync at any speed, that would be pretty nice. I think that would be the key to making medium format affordable, since the lenses wouldn't need the complexity of a leaf shutter, which definitely pushes up cost.

I'm speaking of Leaf shutter in general with LS, not specifically with phase1. Still, my original comment that if nikon made sub 10K CMOS 645 MF system with a wide, norm, and tele prime with LS (1/500th or better) It'd drive the pricing down for the entire MF industry. If we don't need a Machine gun D4s, we have the MFD body at around the same price.

 

[Loswr]

Still, my original comment that if nikon made sub 10K CMOS 645 MF system with a wide, norm, and tele prime with LS (1/500th or better) It'd drive the pricing down for the entire MF industry. If we don't need a Machine gun D4s, we have the MFD body at around the same price.

"If."

You may think gear doesn't matter, but it matters a whole lot to the companies that manufacture it. Compare the 1D X to the 1D C – effectively equivalent production cost, one retails for thousands more. Why is that, do you think? Market size. As stated above, the entire worldwide MF market is estimated to be ~6000 cameras/year. I'd wager Nikon sells far more D4s bodies than that.

Could Nikon design and produce a sub-10K MF body? Sure...but they're already losing too much money despite their best efforts, planning to lose even more would be quite foolish, and shareholders don't generally like foolishness.

 

[RLPhoto]

Still, my original comment that if nikon made sub 10K CMOS 645 MF system with a wide, norm, and tele prime with LS (1/500th or better) It'd drive the pricing down for the entire MF industry. If we don't need a Machine gun D4s, we have the MFD body at around the same price.

"If."

You may think gear doesn't matter, but it matters a whole lot to the companies that manufacture it. Compare the 1D X to the 1D C – effectively equivalent production cost, one retails for thousands more. Why is that, do you think? Market size. As stated above, the entire worldwide MF market is estimated to be ~6000 cameras/year. I'd wager Nikon sells far more D4s bodies than that.

Could Nikon design and produce a sub-10K MF body? Sure...but they're already losing too much money despite their best efforts, planning to lose even more would be quite foolish, and shareholders don't generally like foolishness.

Sure thats a quote of 6000 cams a year from a man who works at leica? : : : I'm pretty sure mass market is not in their minds to begin with.

Even if so, that 6000 Cams @ 20k+ per body, not at sub 10k. Lets see how the 645z sales go after a year and i'm sure they will sell more than that even though on a crippled lens system. Because realistically, the sub 10k body is already being done by pentax.

 

[Loswr]

Because realistically, the sub 10k body is already being done by pentax.

Yes, it is...and I don't believe it's really any competition for the Canon and Nikon pro bodies, in terms of sales.

 

[unfocused]

Just because you quoted a hack at Leica which its MF is a joke at best when the industry is ruled by phase and Hasselblad proves your ignorance.

Wow! I was feeling a little bad, thinking my post was a little harsh, but I guess not...

Let's see: I'm ignorant because I actually took the time to try to find an estimate of the size of the Medium Format market before posting. And, let's see, while we're at it, Leica executives are hacks because other brands have a larger share of the miniscule medium format market.

Okay...

What are your figures for the size of the medium format market? Please provide a source.

The medium format debate seems to be one of those where some people adhere to dreams with a fervor that rivals most religious fundamentalists. The beauty of the debate is that, by arguing about what "could" happen in the future, adherents don't have to be troubled by little things like logic and facts.

Both Canon and Nikon could have entered the medium format market any time over the past 40 years or more. In fact, it would have made far more sense to enter that market back in the film days, when there was more demand and less investment required. Yet, they never did so.

I have a hard time seeing why either would want to invest major resources in entering a tiny niche market with a very high cost of entry, particularly when their own products have been a major reason why the market has been shrinking. But then, I'm ignorant.

 

[RLPhoto]

Because realistically, the sub 10k body is already being done by pentax.

Yes, it is...and I don't believe it's really any competition for the Canon and Nikon pro bodies, in terms of sales.

Give Pentax a line of LS primes and a few years, 35mm camera manufacturers will need a lot of incentives to attract users who will make the jump. The next gen cycle will only drop prices even futher to the point where MF will become mainstream again. it's just a matter of time.

 

[Loswr]

Because realistically, the sub 10k body is already being done by pentax.

Yes, it is...and I don't believe it's really any competition for the Canon and Nikon pro bodies, in terms of sales.

Give Pentax a line of LS primes and a few years, 35mm camera manufacturers will need a lot of incentives to attract users who will make the jump. The next gen cycle will only drop prices even futher to the point where MF will become mainstream again. it's just a matter of time.

Give them? They could have chosen to produce them, but they haven't. If only you were the CEO of Pentax...

If you were, I expect they'd already have gone under, as your grasp of business and economics is poor. 'Full frame' isn't yet mainstream, and even that's a very long way off. APS-C is mainstream, FF is a very small market segment, and MF is a minuscule niche market. "A matter of time?" It's only a matter of time before our sun will become a red dwarf and human life on earth will cease. It's an open question as to whether that or MF becoming mainstream will happen first.

 

[RLPhoto]

Because realistically, the sub 10k body is already being done by pentax.

Yes, it is...and I don't believe it's really any competition for the Canon and Nikon pro bodies, in terms of sales.

Give Pentax a line of LS primes and a few years, 35mm camera manufacturers will need a lot of incentives to attract users who will make the jump. The next gen cycle will only drop prices even futher to the point where MF will become mainstream again. it's just a matter of time.

Give them? They could have chosen to produce them, but they haven't. If only you were the CEO of Pentax...

If you were, I expect they'd already have gone under, as your grasp of business and economics is poor. 'Full frame' isn't yet mainstream, and even that's a very long way off. APS-C is mainstream, FF is a very small market segment, and MF is a minuscule niche market. "A matter of time?" It's only a matter of time before our sun will become a red dwarf and human life on earth will cease. It's an open question as to whether that or MF becoming mainstream will happen first.

Prices will go down and I can guarantee that you'll be the one eating crow in the end. You heard it here first, I say MF will return to mainsteam use as it once was before for 645 and you say it won't. Lets hope that big brain of yours doesn't cover your eyes from seeing the obvious shift the 645z really is.

 

[Loswr]

Lets hope that big brain of yours doesn't cover your eyes from seeing the obvious shift the 645z really is.

Here's what I see:

Canon EOS Rebel T3:
Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #22 in Camera & Photo

Canon 5D Mark III:
Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #569 in Camera & Photo

Pentax 645D (granted, not the Z which isn't even available on Amazon):
Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #17,780 in Camera & Photo

I don't know what you see, but I strongly recommend that you get a thorough eye exam.

 

[RLPhoto]

Lets hope that big brain of yours doesn't cover your eyes from seeing the obvious shift the 645z really is.

Here's what I see:

Canon EOS Rebel T3:
Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #22 in Camera & Photo

Canon 5D Mark III:
Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #569 in Camera & Photo

Pentax 645D (granted, not the Z which isn't even available on Amazon):
Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #17,780 in Camera & Photo

I don't know what you see, but I strongly recommend that you get a thorough eye exam.

I think you should get your head checked. MF and 35mm are two totally different beasts, and MF would be an add-on to a pro's bag. Plus, who orders a MF cam through amazon neuro? Are you neurotic?

 

[ajfotofilmagem]

If Nikon makes a new line of medium format cameras and lenses, seems like a guaranteed way to lose money.

I do not understand why Pentax took many years to launch a digital 645, and then released with a 33x44mm sensor... If the sensor is truly size 60X45mm would some buyers willing to spend $ 15,000 on a body.

 

[Loswr]

I think you should get your head checked. MF and 35mm are two totally different beasts, and MF would be an add-on to a pro's bag.

You're the one who stated, and I quote, "MF will become mainstream again. it's just a matter of time." Now you're saying it's an 'add-on' for 'pros'. Evidently, I'm not the one who needs their head examined...

 

[RLPhoto]

I think you should get your head checked. MF and 35mm are two totally different beasts, and MF would be an add-on to a pro's bag.

You're the one who stated, and I quote, "MF will become mainstream again. it's just a matter of time." Now you're saying it's an 'add-on' for 'pros'. Evidently, I'm not the one who needs their head examined...

Wait, owning a car and a truck doesn't mean their both mainstream? Just like owning both 35mm and MF but MF is now becoming affordable.
Again let's hope that large appendage growing out of your skull covering you sight by quoting sales about MF cameras from amazon!!! Lol.

Seriously neuro, this is getting ridiculous. Just no.

 

[Loswr]

I think you should get your head checked. MF and 35mm are two totally different beasts, and MF would be an add-on to a pro's bag.

You're the one who stated, and I quote, "MF will become mainstream again. it's just a matter of time." Now you're saying it's an 'add-on' for 'pros'. Evidently, I'm not the one who needs their head examined...

Wait, owning a car and a truck doesn't mean their both mainstream? Just like owning both 35mm and MF but MF is now becoming affordable.
Again let's hope that large appendage growing out of your skull covering you sight by quoting sales about MF cameras from amazon!!! Lol.

Seriously neuro, this is getting ridiculous. Just no.

Is owning a car and an 18-wheeler Mack truck mainstream? Apparently it is, according to you. Ridiculous, indeed.

 

[RLPhoto]

I think you should get your head checked. MF and 35mm are two totally different beasts, and MF would be an add-on to a pro's bag.

You're the one who stated, and I quote, "MF will become mainstream again. it's just a matter of time." Now you're saying it's an 'add-on' for 'pros'. Evidently, I'm not the one who needs their head examined...

Wait, owning a car and a truck doesn't mean their both mainstream? Just like owning both 35mm and MF but MF is now becoming affordable.
Again let's hope that large appendage growing out of your skull covering you sight by quoting sales about MF cameras from amazon!!! Lol.

Seriously neuro, this is getting ridiculous. Just no.

Is owning a car and an 18-wheeler Mack truck mainstream? Apparently it is, according to you. Ridiculous, indeed.

Look who's talking when a 1dx costs nearly the same! Lol. Very funny neuro. However doesn't change that MF will become the 18 wheeler many photogs will use for heavy work when it's more affordable. Plus I know of many blue collar people who can afford their18 wheeler and a car and they're pretty mainstream. it's not like a jet engine truck.

Still, just no neuro.

 

[Loswr]

Look who's talking when a 1dx costs nearly the same! Lol.

Canon EOS 1D X
Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #3,399 in Camera & Photo

Still far higher than any Pentax MF. Also, I certainly wouldn't characterize my purchasing behavior as mainstream.

It's good you can LOL at yourself. I hear that's healthy.

 

[RLPhoto]

Look who's talking when a 1dx costs nearly the same! Lol.

Canon EOS 1D X
Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #3,399 in Camera & Photo

Still far higher than any Pentax MF. Also, I certainly wouldn't characterize my purchasing behavior as mainstream.

It's good you can LOL at yourself. I hear that's healthy.

You must be mental pulling MF sales from amazon as only someone neurotic would believe amazon would be a measure for MF sales! XD Please seek professional help.

 

[Loswr]

Look who's talking when a 1dx costs nearly the same! Lol.

Canon EOS 1D X
Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #3,399 in Camera & Photo

Still far higher than any Pentax MF. Also, I certainly wouldn't characterize my purchasing behavior as mainstream.

It's good you can LOL at yourself. I hear that's healthy.

You must be mental pulling MF sales from amazon as only someone neurotic would believe amazon would be a measure for MF sales! XD Please seek professional help.

Obviously you missed the ~6000 units/year worldwide estimate. There are none so blind as those too foolish to see.

You should have just stuck with 'gear doesn't matter,' it was a more defensible position that trying to sound knowledgable about markets and economic realities.

 

[RLPhoto]

Look who's talking when a 1dx costs nearly the same! Lol.

Canon EOS 1D X
Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #3,399 in Camera & Photo

Still far higher than any Pentax MF. Also, I certainly wouldn't characterize my purchasing behavior as mainstream.

It's good you can LOL at yourself. I hear that's healthy.

You must be mental pulling MF sales from amazon as only someone neurotic would believe amazon would be a measure for MF sales! XD Please seek professional help.

Obviously you missed the ~6000 units/year worldwide estimate. There are none so blind as those too foolish to see.

You should have just stuck with 'gear doesn't matter,' it was a more defensible position that trying to sound knowledgable about markets and economic realities.

And I think you missed the part that it was from Leica saying so, not phase1 or hasselblad. Also, that's a quote when they were 20k+ average. Pentax alone has topped that.

You need to reread again.