POLL: Will you sell your MFD gear if the D800 holds good on its promise?

[Paul Spinnler]

No. Issue is ability of glass to utilize small pixel pitch. Right now there are maybe 2 Nikon lenses that will fully utilize the D800 pitch at optimal aperture that will likely be f5.6. After f8 you won't need the AA filter version to ameliorate moire as the lens limitations will do it for you.

Second, your poll suggests MF users pay 10x for 10% more IQ -- not true. We pay more like 5x more for 2x more resolution and 2x better color and tonality; so IMHO your personal paradigm is skewed...

Thank you all for keeping this civil

Ok, I concede that the wording is unfortunate; I wanted to address those users who don't care about the price difference if they get the best quality available. However big that advantage maybe ... 10%, 20% ... 50% There are diminishing returns to money at one point if you consider image quality per dollar and some people just don't care about that.

Lastly, all this is irrelevant if the end product is printed and one can't see a difference.

I'm looking forward to LLs article where they pit the D800 against the 40MPX backs and compare printed results ...

 

[danlindberg]

I replied the third option - "I'm into tech cams..."

Surely the D800 is a nice camera and will make many happy but for me and my style of shooting it has nothing special to offer. I understand that final image quality is what most care about, but to me it is so important how my gear "feels" to get me inspired. This rarely happens with a plastic camera no matter the brand or capabilities. Coming from latest edition Canon 1Ds and 7 L lenses and switching to Alpa and Schneider is like night and day! No comparison! The way I work nowadays is more thoughtful and deliberate. At the end of the day this means in my case - fewer exposures and more keepers!
This means that if (most probably) the new D800 sensor is better in all aspects compared to my Leaf Aptus II 5 - it does not rock my boat anyway!!!!

 

[D&A]

I'm sure there are many (here and elsewhere) that are looking forward to such print comparisons. As I just recently posted in the Nikon forums here on Getdpi, to quote...

>>>"It will be interesting to see how the resulting D800e images will compare "head on" to medium format, especially to the current crop of 40MP models. No doubt the medium format manufacturers are well aware of the situation regarding competition and although it might take quite some time, I'm sure will respond by upping the ante, in making their entry level 40 MP backs (or cameras in the case of the 645D) competitive in both pricing structures, technology, and/or raising the MP level for these backs/cameras...all to increase the level of image quality output. Of course there are obvious differences between a 40MP MF backs & cameras vs. a 36MP 35mm DSLR, but those real and perceived differences are not always recognized by those who initially contemplate making a move from 35mm to MF and often only go simply by "the MP numbers". <<<

Dave (D&A)

 

[Quentin_Bargate]

Dpreview is full of threads like this, and they serve little purpose other than in reflecting the prejudices of those who start them. I don't think this was intended to be a serious debate about the respective merits of MF versus the new D800, but a thinly veiled attack on those who fit the profile of the first "poll" question, i.e. those who "...don't care about paying 10x as much for 10% more quality", - or to put it another way, rich stupid people.

My view: close the thread. start another one on with none of the prejudices that infect this thread.

Which is my last contribution to this sorry tale.

 

[fotografz]

I agree with Shashin ...

IMO, higher end photographic purchases are often reflective of a skewed passionate priority as opposed to a mark of absolute wealth ...and while it is relative to personal income, it often is funded through denial of other things, as opposed to dump-trucks of discretionary income and no sacrifice at all.

Some folks gave up long term collections of Leica M gear to fund a S2 and one or two lenses. I sold a complete collection of Hassey V gear that took me 15 years to assemble ... plus a 949 Scanner ... and poured it all back into MFD.

One major thing to take into account is age. I'd suspect buyers of higher end gear are a bit older and have amassed "photographic wealth" as opposed to just income wealth. By initial shrewd buying and selling while trading upwards over years, it is inevitable that momentum builds a bank of photo funds. I just sold my M9 and 0.95 Noctilux, replaced it with a M9P and gorgeous black paint M50/1.4 ASPH ... with a cash difference that paid for a Hensel Porty L system, two Profoto D1 AIRs, and some modifiers. I sure the hell wouldn't have even dreamed of a Noctilux when I started out. Now, being retired and battered by the initial economic downturn, I HAVE to sell to buy, and I know I'm not alone in that boat.

-Marc

 

[johnnygoesdigital]

Paul,

I'm glad you posted this thread. I've owned the DF/ P45+, H4D/40/31. These cameras are ridiculously over priced! I also used the S2, but it too, is ridiculously over priced. It's also the ridiculous business model of these companies to render them obsolete or devalue them to price points that are insulting at best, even with so called upgrade paths. This new Nikon D800e, with no AA filter is an awesome approach to securing a market share that has left many MFD users feeling cheated. MFD is a specialized type of camera and has it's rightful place for certain applications, but for those who only print 16x20, or shoot sports, and the occasional landscape, this camera will be awesome!

Many MFD owners may balk at this new camera, but it's only because they have to justify what they paid for their MFD!

 

[Shashin]

Many MFD owners may balk at this new camera, but it's only because they have to justify what they paid for their MFD!

So now I am delusional? The great qualities I see in my work are not really there, I am just too embarrassed by what I paid to admit I am somehow wrong?

As good as any argument I can think of.

 

[Paratom]

Paul,

I'm glad you posted this thread. I've owned the DF/ P45+, H4D/40/31. These cameras are ridiculously over priced! I also used the S2, but it too, is ridiculously over priced. It's also the ridiculous business model of these companies to render them obsolete or devalue them to price points that are insulting at best, even with so called upgrade paths. This new Nikon D800e, with no AA filter is an awesome approach to securing a market share that has left many MFD users feeling cheated. MFD is a specialized type of camera and has it's rightful place for certain applications, but for those who only print 16x20, or shoot sports, and the occasional landscape, this camera will be awesome!

Many MFD owners may balk at this new camera, but it's only because they have to justify what they paid for their MFD!

To me it looks more like some (few) people want to justify why they do not use digital MF systems and balk at people who do use MF.

 

[fotografz]

Paul,

(snip) ... Many MFD owners may balk at this new camera, but it's only because they have to justify what they paid for their MFD!

Thank you for doing the thinking for me. Apparently, I am incapable of reasonable and rational decisions based on cost verses reward. I guess I need an arbitrator to be my guide.

For a person that has a bug up his bum about MFD business models, etc., you sure have bought a lot of them Could it be that you bought more camera than you could afford or needed ? No, wait, I take that back ... I don't want to tell you how to think either.

-Marc

 

[fotografz]

I'm sure there are many (here and elsewhere) that are looking forward to such print comparisons. As I just recently posted in the Nikon forums here on Getdpi, to quote...

>>>"It will be interesting to see how the resulting D800e images will compare "head on" to medium format, especially to the current crop of 40MP models. No doubt the medium format manufacturers are well aware of the situation regarding competition and although it might take quite some time, I'm sure will respond by upping the ante, in making their entry level 40 MP backs (or cameras in the case of the 645D) competitive in both pricing structures, technology, and/or raising the MP level for these backs/cameras...all to increase the level of image quality output. Of course there are obvious differences between a 40MP MF backs & cameras vs. a 36MP 35mm DSLR, but those real and perceived differences are not always recognized by those who initially contemplate making a move from 35mm to MF and often only go simply by "the MP numbers". <<<

Dave (D&A)

Yes, the 40 meg cameras could be made to be more competitive ... they could return to their roots and put a 35mm sized sensor in their cameras :ROTFL:

However, the fact still remains ... SIZE MATTERS!

All the Fairy Dust wishes and Unicorn Dreams spread across this thread and others like it won't alter the laws of physics. Wish they did, I'd be driving a $20K 700hp Porche that got 100 miles to a gallon and could haul all my lighting gear ... instead of a 7 year old Volvo SUV

-Marc

(BTW, any print shoot out has to be done by Jack and Guy ... Jack's prints are breathtaking, so I know he can get the best out of any camera).

 

[Paul Spinnler]

Dpreview is full of threads like this, and they serve little purpose other than in reflecting the prejudices of those who start them. I don't think this was intended to be a serious debate about the respective merits of MF versus the new D800, but a thinly veiled attack on those who fit the profile of the first "poll" question, i.e. those who "...don't care about paying 10x as much for 10% more quality", - or to put it another way, rich stupid people.

My view: close the thread. start another one on with none of the prejudices that infect this thread.

Which is my last contribution to this sorry tale.

Quentin, why would I want start a "thinly veiled attack" on those who fit the first poll question? Why would I want to do this? I myself fit the first question so I would have to have a split personality? Again and again I have to reiterate that I don't intend to attack anyone and again and again you feel "attacked", exclaim for censorship and closure of the thread? If you feel so uneasy, why do you bother in the first place?

Please excuse me saying this: But could it be that it is more the case that you think that I see you as a "rich enthusiast" and don't like to be seen like that? ... I don't get it and believe me that whilst posting this thread in no split-second I thought of anyone specifically and I never intended a personal attack. And please, so that that point is also out of the way: I don't hold a grudge against rich people or photo enthusiasts with hardcore gear; I myself am not too bad off and can pretty much buy myself and system I want and do it for fun.

I also in no way said that rich people are stupid. With many things in life the last 10% in quality cost way more than the first 90%. For that last drop of quality you always pay a lot, not only in high-end photography. There are people who will always want that last 10% and the first poll answer was directed towards that demographic. I believe that there are quite a few users who are quality oriented to the extent that they only want the best and that's perfectly fine, that's one specific customer segment the mfd companies cater to. You made that connection, not me. I would be more than interested in seeing your honest opinion about the new Nikon and how it will pan out for MFD if the quality is great.

To make it clear: I'm just interested in the business aspect of the high-end mfd market. I'm asking myself if there will be a point where Phase/Hassy will loose market share because of incredibly powerful consumer cameras that deliver professional quality or at least quality hitherto reserved for far more expensive outfits.

I believe that in the last years we could witness an incredible democratization of the tools and now it is possible to call oneself an "architectural photographer" with a 5D MKII and a TSE 17mm ... that's like less than 4k to start a new business. For most uses the imagery produced by the 5D will suffice, I mean 6 years ago architectural photgraphers where also shooting with P25s and never complained. (Shashin, I already hear you see it's all about the image etc. and that I confuse things here. All I'm asking is if there's a point at which the CaNikons are so good that they capture market shate from PhamiyaBlad)

So in my view a 36 MPX camera that shoots 4fps and has live view can possibly be a subsitute to a H4D-40 or IQ140 and it interests me how many people start thinking about their investments in the eye of such high-resolution cameras coming out at mere 3k.

If you look at the Nikon samples you can also see that the architectural photos are made by a Hasselblad Master ... that usually shoots with a tech cam ...

So what can I gather so far from this thread? Apparently the vast majority's opinion seems to be that the D800 cannot be compared to a medium format camera even if a compareable amount of megapixels now exists on the lower end. And apparently almost no one seems to reevaluate their mfd systems.

But the question that really is interesting now is when the first real-world comparisons will come. When we see the results compared in print. I'm looking forward to the first articles and I'm not sure if the difference will be so great as perceived now by the owners of mfd gear...

So again, there's no harm intendend and I hope that the critics of this thread could contribute constructively and not destructively.

 

[fotografz]

To me it looks more like some (few) people want to justify why they do not use digital MF systems and balk at people who do use MF.

Oh,oh ... someone has finally said what many are thinking. :ROTFL:

 

[Paratom]

....
But the question that really is interesting now is when the first real-world comparisons will come. When we see the results compared in print. I'm looking forward to the first articles and I'm not sure if the difference will be so great as perceived now by the owners of mfd gear...
...

real-world experience and results I find much more interestig than this theoretic discussion.

 

[Paul Spinnler]

Oh,oh ... someone has finally said what many are thinking. :ROTFL:

T-Streng,

so in your opinion one cannot ask mfd users the question of what they think of the new 36 MPX Nikon camera, and in addition to that, if they consider consolidating gear or regret their purchase? Can't someone ask mfd users what they think of a product that is squarely aimed at the mfd demographic with its variant D800E, without having "issues" such as "gear envy" or whatever you are refering to? Ok, I get it, some feel they way the poll answers have been formulated makes this thread aggressive, a "thinly veiled attack" or whatever. I just wanted to make a clear point by formulating directly and I'm sorry for not having consulted my college textbook about how to correctly poll without influencing the respondents.

So this being said, it would be great if people could honestly say what they think of the new camera and not discuss about the way a poll answer has been formulated ... please!

Next big round of discussions will be when either Reichmann, Dubovoy or Chambers will post comparisons with MFD kit and will say that they almost couldn't tell a difference when printing the images out. I'm can already see the firestorm on the horizon!

From what I can glean so far most mfd users in this forum are perfectly happy with their gear and don't consider the Nikon a real alternative. That's fine and actually I thought it would pan out like that.

 

[Paul Spinnler]

Paul, I think it you who is under-estimating Teledyne Dalsa. Their R&D isn't dependent on consumer level imaging, it's funded by little enterprises like NASA, major Satellite Corporations, Medical applications, and various deep-pockets Industrial/Military complexes world-wide. I'd bet what we get to see in our MFDs is old tech to them by the time it trickles down to us. Remember years ago when Seitz wanted a 160 meg sensor for their 6 X 17 pano camera? It was Dalsa they went to. BTW, Dalsa also is a leader in CMOS technology.

Will there be new advanced technology in future as you indicate ... of course. Whether it is essential technology one needs to turn ideas into photographs is another matter altogether. The notion of directly connecting tech advancements to creativity, and application of ones tools to express that creativity, is the elephant in the room few care to acknowledge. It's much easier to play engineer and equate the tools directly to results.

Will Nikon capture MFD market share? Perhaps a little. I do think they will get the user that dreams of MFD, can't afford it or can't rationalize it from a purely practical POV ... so were never really prospects anyway. I do think it will cannibalize their own category. Possible users of the flagship units will seriously re-consider if they need or would use all the speedy features @ $6, 7 or 8K, when this is there with respectable features at 1/2 the cost or less.

-Marc

Granted, you're right, shouldn't underestimate Dalsa either. I'm waiting when they finally make commercially available sensors in the 6x7 format ... they can do that!

 

[Paratom]

T-Streng,

so in your opinion one cannot ask mfd users the question of what they think of the new 36 MPX Nikon camera, and in addition to that, if they consider consolidating gear or regret their purchase? Can't someone ask mfd users what they think of a product that is squarely aimed at the mfd demographic with its variant D800E, without having "issues" such as "gear envy" or whatever you are refering to?

It would be great if people could honestly say what they think of the new camera and not discuss about the way a poll answer has been formulated ... please!

Paul,
for sure its a good and valid question. And the D800E is an interesting camera for sure. However in my opinion if one asks the question and people answer they believe the camera will be no replacement for a MFD-camera one should accept the answer and not believe that people say this just to defend/justify something.

 

[Paul Spinnler]

Yes, the 40 meg cameras could be made to be more competitive ... they could return to their roots and put a 35mm sized sensor in their cameras :ROTFL:

However, the fact still remains ... SIZE MATTERS!

All the Fairy Dust wishes and Unicorn Dreams spread across this thread and others like it won't alter the laws of physics. Wish they did, I'd be driving a $20K 700hp Porche that got 100 miles to a gallon and could haul all my lighting gear ... instead of a 7 year old Volvo SUV

-Marc

(BTW, any print shoot out has to be done by Jack and Guy ... Jack's prints are breathtaking, so I know he can get the best out of any camera).

Yes size does matter, but because you can do something it doesnt mean it is commercially viable. Right now, enough people are willing to pay 40k for a new Phase back in medium format size, because the perceived and felt advantages over 35mm seem to justify that move for enough people to make an attractive market to do business in. But at one point it may be that CaNikon is so good that the equation doesn't work out anymore.

For a long time film had beend considered the pinnacle for quality. Nothing trumps film for dynamic range, resolution etc. has been said during the 1990s and up until a few years ago. Now look at Kodak, that american icon that is no more. Maybe that will happen to medium format digital?

One could develop a 6x7 sensor if enough money would be paid to Dalsa. Why does nobody do it? Imagine an 100 MPX back the size of a 6x7 frame. Because it is not commercially viable? Or because MFD in 645 is "good enough"?

Or what about a sensor with 100 MPX in 4x5? Wouldn't that bee "fat pixels" that could create incredibly awesome image quality? Again, why does no one do it?

I think it is valid to pose the question if D800E makes a "good enough" replacement for at least entry-point MFD. I personally believe after havin seen the samples that there's still a world of difference, but that's my view and I haven't seen real-world print-outs in a shootout setting bewteen 40mpx backs and the D800E.

You're right, given equal technology, the bigger sensor will always be better.

 

[Paul Spinnler]

Paul,
for sure its a good and valid question. And the D800E is an interesting camera for sure. However in my opinion if one asks the question and people answer they believe the camera will be no replacement for a MFD-camera one should accept the answer and not believe that people say this just to defend/justify something.

T-Streng, I accept the answers. It is just that some people were attacking the thread from the start for itself and suggesting other motives by the poster that just aren't there. I answered to those posts in detail but didn't intend to expatiate to this point and degree from the beginning and thus start a contentious discussion about gear envy or whatever.

 

[Lars]

This thread is three months early.

 

[Shashin]

No, this is the pre-game show.