View Single Post
  #75  
Old May 23rd 04, 01:08 AM
Q.G. de Bakker
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default ideal cameras? Omega 120 surprise convertible lens RF?

Gordon Moat wrote:

It's that digital definitely is the future. And the moment that it will

take
over in all aspects (including quality - in the "more than good enough"
bracket) is getting closer and closer.


Definitely, and it is the "more than good enough" attitude that I think

sucks.
Too many people are becoming satisfied with mediocre. Of course, I see

that in
more than just photography, so perhaps it is a reflection of current

society.

You dont seem to grasp what "more than good enough" means.
It does not (!) mean mediocre.

On the contrary. It means that there is more quality available than can be
visible in the end result. And dealing with a visible medium, that means
that you lose absolutely nothing (!) by not having it.
It would be rather silly to demand that our equipment produce more quality
than we will ever use and/or need, wouldn't it?

And this is not a new concept either. You don't use a 8x10" film camera to
take passport photos, do you? That has nothing to do with a supposed or real
recent decline in standards. It just would be foolish.

Many of the camera makers are part of public corporations, and must answer

to
their stock holders. It is unfortunate, but when the stockholders

perceptions
are that digital imaging is the best choice, that would dictate where the

money
and efforts go.


Don't forget that stockholders do not care about what it is precisely a firm
is doing. They only care about how much they will be earning. And that is
not dictated by them, but by the market, by us, the photographers.
So in the end, if we hold out to invest later in the things we wouldprefer
over the things available today (and yesterday), corporations, and
stockholders have only one aim: make sure that "later" is sooner rather than
later.
We dictate where the money and effort goes.

[...]

The consumer end drives the main photographic market, yet I think few
enthusiasts nor professionals would use the biggest selling consumer film
product: one time use cameras. I don't think medium format has ever been

much
in the general consumer view, with the possible exception of folder

cameras a
long time ago.


Well, that "long time ago" is indeed where MF has been in general consumer
use (but not just folders. there were many box-cameras too). Some might even
argue that that's where the non-general consumer use of MF belongs too: some
period in the past best forgotten.
Anyway, a few enthusiasts and/or professionals will not keep MF afloat. The
balance will not tip backwards towards film based MF again. So it's now or
never: MF manufacturers (or rather the companies making the things that plug
current MF systems into the Digido) must do all they can to prevent their
current users switching to other things in the first place.
If they don't, if people decide the new and surprisingly affordable
(compared to what integrating current MF systems into a digital workflow
costs) 10 - 14 MP class 35 mm format SLR based cameras are the thing they
want, it's curtains for MF, film and (!) digital.

I agree that this film and digital back hybrid capability is the future of

the
gear. What surprises me is that so few people know that the capability

even
exists. I see Mamiya now advertising that way, especially with their lower

cost
645, but I have not seen other companies try that direction.


Probably because MF too know that it's horrendously expensive, and that
because of that not many people will even consider the possibility.

[...] Bottom line is that these are very expensive cameras, and the

economy is
still down.


Plus, of course, it (Rollei AF) is not the only option beckoning those
people who do still have money to spend...

When someone compares a new Rollei 6008 to a less than 10 years old
used version, the cost difference is quite large. This makes them seem

like a
victim of their own rugged construction, since the gear of the past now

becomes
competition against new sales.


That phenomenon has plagued MF since... well, always.

And i don't see much of a retro market either. What "retro" product can

you
see selling anywhere?


The greatest retro market is automotive (and a few motorcycles) based on
[...]
Perhaps the reason you do not see much "retro" market is that you are not

a
consumer of those types of things. It could also be that it is more of a

US (or
North American) trend, and not very prominent in Europe.


I see.

No, the very reason why i do not see that retro market was because i was
thinking photography. Apart form a brief 35 mm RF revival (which realy has
gone again already), there simply is no retro-trend in photography.
If anything, traditional brands most associated with "the good old days" of
photography are in danger of becoming extinct. The only true, and strong,
trend in photography today is that digi-thingy.

Whether it is something i like or not, whether i would part with my beloved
MF equipment or not gladly is another matter. But that's the reality: we,
the customers, drive the market. And we drive it towards digital. And that
drive results in digital becoming better and affordable too. And at the same
time it is driving MF towards its end.

I only have a smaller view of marketing efforts in Europe, though in North
America, it seems that Mamiya are the only company that really advertises

in
many locations. Some of that is combined digital and film capability

promotion,
and some directed at the Mamiya 7 II. I rarely see Hasselblad products in

many
ads, though that could be from the financial issues they had (maybe the

buyout
could help that). With Rollei, hardly anyone knows these cameras in the

US,
except in reference to really old Rollei TLR cameras. Most of the very

sparse
Rollei ads are for P&S film and digital.


I don't think MF manufacturers should advertise more. It would do absolutely
no good. Unless...

They (MF manufacturers) should instead go banging their fists on MF digital
back manufacturer's tables, demanding they come up with more sensibly priced
products, explaining that if they don't the game's over for both (!)
manufacturers of MF equipment and the manufacturers of digital backs that
have to be hung on MF cameras.

I think many of us using medium format do so for the "bigger is better"

quality
idea behind the film area. The general knowledge of anything larger than

35 mm
just is not in the public view, and rarely in the photo enthusiasts

perception.
There are few large digital backs, though I think more could appear in the

next
few years. Whether that will be soon enough, or if some companies call it
quits, is tough to tell. I hope there is more in the future than just used
gear.


Hmm... I'd say there are more than a few large digital backs. That
(scarcity) is not the problem either.

The problem is that you can buy about 8 to 10 Kodak 14 MP SLRn cameras for
what you're expected to pay for 1 (one!) 16 MP digital back to mount behind
your MF camera.

But i'm repeating myself. ;-)