brownie314: Is Nikon not aware of the current situation in the camera market? Why throw more uber high priced lenses at a market where people are willing to spend less money?
I am the market for it, a commercial photographer. I picked up the outgoing 24-70 to replace my 28-70 a few months ago during a KEH sale, and I'll say while its a good lens it's not a great lens. I've struggled with autofocus throughout its range (even with microadjustments) and the rendition quality is good but not great on a D800E. I'm not a pixel peeper type either. It basically fixed some old issues on the 28-70 which I probably could have held on to.
This new lens has more glass as you can see by the wider filter front. This may fix edge quality issues as it will crop off where a lens is at its weakest. The VR will help keep it sharp on higher resolution cameras. I think I'll hold on to my current 24-70 though, it only sees occasional use and just have to watch out for AF misses.
FocusBogus: Still not fully electronic shutters on mirrorless cameras in 2015? Sounds like a conspiracy: camera industry can sell some generations of cameras with mechanical shutters and later generations without them.
Global electronic shutter exists on feature film sony cameras, eventually it will trickle down. It's a technical challenge to implement at a yield rate that will allow for lower costs, on high resolutions (4k video camera not as hard...) Eventually though. And that will be great when it does.
exapp: Hope they fixed the performance issues with Lightroom CC, develop module is almost unusably slow.
CC version is a disaster to use and is many many time slower than LR 5.7 and that's on a current gen PC with lots of RAM and SSDs hate to see what it would be like on an old machine.
I've seen a few graphics glitches appear with the last CC update. Could be an OpenGL/CL issue. Try updating your video driver.
christom: Aerial camera? Military?
A more interesting story would be the ultimate aerial camera ever made, the one that was on the SR-71.
Now this is a camera... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/KH-9_Hexagon
Gionni Dorelli: Once I have sold my phase one system few years ago, I never looked back.I just rent them sometimes when I really have to.When do I really have to?When we need to print the photos for cosmetics and jewelry Ads for large displays to be used in luxury shopping malls and in the rare eventual case that an AD push for using one. Or for shooting "groupage" with many models.
The big draw back of these systems are that even with the highest Mp resolution, because of their slowness in Af and operation, they will give you way less keepers and most of the images will not be not tack sharp if the models are moving even so slightly. Negating most of the advantages of the high MP count.No mentioning that Schneider lenses or the Fujinon design of the Hasselblads lenses deliver a very nervous and aseptic look and bokhe.
We end up spending so much time just checking menial things like focus and flipping back and forth between candidates. It's such a huge waste of time when micrometers become significant and it takes away from the artistry
RPJG: As pointed out, you can shoot at F/22 and still have extraordinarily small DoF that a small shift in model or camera position will throw out, and it becomes more visible as pixels increase.
And of course you use AF - with high MP systems you have to rely on it. The human eye just can't resolve well enough in the viewfinder to make critical judgment. With static subjects you can use live view, but with dynamic shoots, good AF is a must. And even good AF is hit or miss.
It's a hard problem to solve. Pixel counts are honestly kind of getting in the way of making good work now. Technical issues that would've once been minor are now significant and take time away from the more important "big picture" issues.
With enough pixels you may be surprised how visible movement is at even seemingly high shutter speeds. High ISO is not these camera's specialty so it would not be unusual to keep the shutter speed down under 1/400 where movement is VERY visible. It is a common issue that is not easy to work around.
groucher: Medium format starts to gain some of the useless clutter and featureoids that bedevil smaller formats. Depressing.
internal wifi networks are quite different than an external connection - where your modem connects to the internet. Two computers connected over 802.11x moves data much faster than the common cable modem. For example, my cable connection downloads at 50mbps and uploads at 5. My internal network is moving at well over 10 times that.
As for EyeFi, it's not a great piece of equipment and I don't think you can extrapolate what it does to others.
MAGMATCICO62: Greatly overpriced. The Pentax 645D is much much cheaper with the same CMOS sensor
Until very recently, one of the D800's other advantages over MF was much better moderate and high ISO.
Mirrorless isn't shutterless yet....but soon. Once global shutter trickles down from the video market, there will be no use for leaf shutters.
Like I said, if I already had a back on a technical camera - where these backs really shine - and was looking for a handhold platform for that back, this would certainly be a step in the right direction. But investing in leaf shutter lenses and a $41k+ rig... yeesh. I don't know. It's hard to make the numbers work.
And also, due to the cost of MF rigs, they were often rented. Few photographers like to rent cameras. Lights, grip, sure. But the camera is complicated and if it goes wrong, you are SOL. Rented gear always has a little concern in that way - how has it been treated? And then also I think photographers have a connection with their cameras and lenses. When you rent them for a job, you don't get to handle it enough to really connect with it. It's not ideal.
If a client insists, I will rent a MF rig. Otherwise, I'm sticking with my D800 until something else comes along. I know it, its quirks, features and am used to its handling. It's a piece of familiarity which is very useful on a production where there are many moving parts.
Hello RAW, yes indeed, I have done all that (not Vogue, but other Conde Nast publications)
DSLR's are popular in this realm, although not exclusively so, because they are light and quick. Leaf shutters have many benefits - but mirrorless also effectively works like a leaf shutter with it's high sync speed. I think this will further erode the market for MF once someone comes out with a fast and robust model.
I know a guy who shot big brand beauty ads a few years back...he was using a Canon. Utterly common on big productions.
Most clients do not care what is used. It's up to the photographer's preference. Some like the MF experience. The D800 was a big winner because it makes excellent images in a small, fast platform. I know so many people who sold their MF kits for a D800 and some lenses.
I shoot ads and occasional national editorial work. These days I see more DSLR's than MF in the business. The tipping point was the D800. For $3k you could get one and some excellent lenses for half the cost of just a back. At first, the limiting factor here was that the most commonly used Nikon and Canon lenses are built for a price point that requires some compromises ($2k is not that much), but now there are other options.
I have used MF for studio work in the past and it's great, especially on tech cameras. I think the future is in mirrorless though. There's little reason to buy this camera unless you've already got the back for your technical camera and want a handholdable platform.
marcio_napoli: DMF is a difficult animal to tame, but when you do, you're rewarded with results that always make you go "wow!!".
I admit I've never shot with a D810 (probably it's much closer to the DMF experience), but when I had my D800, whenever I opened some files, it would always go like this "oh, ok... nice...".
Today I'm shooting with a borrowed P45+. It's not "ok... nice" experience. It's simply a jaw dropping experience every single time I open a file.
Wow factor is off the charts.
I wish every 35mm shooter could experience this, so maybe we would get less of this "overpriced stuff" talk from users that never shot DMF.
The lenses have a lot to do with it. It's just a different class, the MF world. Like cars - they all have 4 wheels and go from A to B, but a kia does not ride like a luxury vehicle. A higher price point means less compromising in important areas. Nikon makes fine lenses, but they are not in the same league as schneider or rodenstock. Those are, from the user perspective, effortlessly excellent.
To some the difference in quality is not worth the difference in price. I understand - we all make those judgments everyday from clothing to food choices. To others, it does make sense. There's room for all of these.
I want a seismograph on my D800E. https://captureintegration.com/top-15-features-of-the-new-phase-one-xf-iq3/ See #1
10 minutes per file? What kind of ancient wifi is that? Even my cable modem uploads faster than that and it's only doing 5mbps.
That said, I only see a reference to wifi with capture pilot. This is not transferring an entire file, only a preview. If that's so, tethering by cable may still be required.
I shot with an H25 a few years back on a technical camera with rodenstock lenses, mounted to a camera stand. Excellent for catalog work. Nearly perfect images right out of the camera and you could spend your time adjusting composition and light - how it should be.
Yet another photography marketing site. Can they not get real investors and so go the crowdfunded route? I wouldn't invest in yet another one of these either.
Nikonparrothead: Yes it's an incremental upgrade. (And who wants to bet the next shoe to drop will be an ELB 1100 renaming for the Ranger A/S pack). Not sure if the extra 24 watts would make me want to trade in my current Quadra RX packs either. Most intriguing thing is that there's a USB port for possible future firmware upgrades.
Chrispicasso, the new RQ Adapter MK II (I bought a pair from the eBay dealer in Israel) are a vast improvement over the original one.
The most comprehensive review I've seen has been from Elinchrom-sponsored action photographer Michael Clark. He's got an overall review but the link below is a cursory comparision to the B1 (with the B2 thrown in).
I've read about users successfully replacing the Ranger battery with a lithium drop-in that a few places sell. It saves weight and increases capacity. It's not officially sanctioned by Elinchrom though and there are in fact some differences in electrical characteristics. Not sure if it's flight-legal either.
The Ranger is overdue for an update, but I bet they sell a lot more quadras. I have both and my quadra is getting more use because I rarely need the output of the Ranger.
I think equipment sales tend to follow the style of the time and a lower-power system works well with today's naturalistic look that is popular among professionals.
tex: Why are these, and others, so no knock on Elinchrom per se, so doggone expensive? Considering what cameras are and can do today, and what they cost, I don't get it.
They're very well made and the specs are excellent. They are consistent from head to head and pack to pack. My elinchroms have needed no service after nearly a decade of professional use. Just replace the batteries every few years. Should I need service in the future, I can certainly get it - not so sure about some of the Chinese brands in a few years.
My first brand of lights was cheaper but had a slight color cast that varied with power, a longer flash time and various things broke on them with use. Just not the same quality of components and build.