Pantyhose Bandit: 51 megapixels. 8256 x 6192 pixels. It's $8.5K and the 36mp Nikon D800 is 3K. Is the extra $5.5K really justified by the extra 15 megapixels?
How big is big enough? A magazine centerfold is about 11 inches by 28 inches. Given that magazines do not print at a very high resolution, theres's plenty wasted pixelage on the D800. On the 645 even more pixels are wasted and the image is the wrong dimension because the 645 is 4:3. A centerfold is 11:28 which is closer to 3:2.
Billboards have the lowest resolution of all. Newspapers have pretty low resolution too due to the paper they're printed on.
This looks to me more like Ricoh trying desperately to bring out something expensive to make them more money without actually benefiting the consumer too much.
so quantify the "look" of medium format. Post some pictures showing the increased dynamic range or some other quantifiable justification for it. Not disputing the value. Just want to see some concrete data other than "the look" and "the format"
CaseyComo: Why not just be modern and crapify your photos with a computer like everyone else?
no, the point is, why pay $700 for a lens that sticks you with the "effect" when you can shoot it without the effect in the camera and add whatever you want in post processing? Anyone who knows how to use photoshop can do this after the fact and you are not stuck in that one effect you shot it with. There are reasons that nobody is using soft focus filters and vignetting devices on the camera anymore...Oh yeah, except for lens-baby stuff, lol