Frank_BR: Ove Bengtson, Hasselblad Product Manager said: "… This CMOS sensor model represents a major leap forward in camera development and breaks new grounds for medium format photographers…"
It sounds almost ridiculous when someone says in 2014 that CMOS sensor is a "major leap forward in camera development". In 2000 the Canon D30 already had a CMOS sensor! That is, the sensor technology of medium format is lagged 14 years compared to other formats. The technology in the MF field develops so slowly that in 2028 Hasselblad (if it survives until then) will be bragging that its MF cameras can shoot 1080i video…
CCD has previous had the quality advantage and more dynamic range. In MF digital quality was always consideration #1 above all else. Recent generation CMOS narrowed this gap, but there was still the problem of making large CMOS chips - it was prohibitively expensive to mass produce.
The breakthrough here is in the chip fab lines and material science that increased the yields of large sensors enough that they can be priced at something the larger market will bear.
marike6: These updated 190 series look quite nice actually. I'm using a Benro CF Travel Angel now that is just great but I do occasionally miss the quick locks of my Manfrotto 3021 which are faster to set up than Gitzo style twist locks.
The only drawback of the 190 series is that most of them only supports 11 lbs considerably less than my current tripod.
The 055 series supports a little over 17 lbs. It's pretty much the 190 series beefed up a little, and thus a little more expensive. I wonder if this line is also being updated? I'm in the market for new legs and like these new locks.
VadymA: I was surprised to see how aged their equipment is; by the look it is probably from the 80's. No wonder they have to test every lens. Still koodos to Sigma for producing some nice lenses on such dated equipment.
These machines look plenty modern and in excellent condition.
Machine tool manufacturers produce in low volume and so re-use as much as they can from one generation to the next. The business end of things, the software controllers and actual tooling are where development takes place, while things like the outer casing and attachment points might be the same as it was 25 years ago because there's no need to spend an engineer's time on that.
Sad Joe: Well well, back in the early 1980's when I used to work in the camera trade (Tecno cameras) Paul Bird & I discussed the possibility of camera shutters being produced from LCD panels - so they could be switched on and off REALLY quickly - well 30 years later we have a sort of shutter arrangement via LCD - of course back then AA filters, sensors and digital were totally unknown...every idea has its day......
Sinar has had something like that for awhile now for technical cameras. About a decade ago I worked with a Sinar digital back that used an LCD shutter to allow an early form of live view.
TakePictures: What you see a lot on photo sites like dpreview are endless sequences of beautifully shot clichés (birds, bees, flowers, cats, grainy B&W portraits with shallow DOF, gloomy street shots, overprocessed HDR shots, oversaturated landscapes, etc.). I don't see too many clichés in this gallery. I guess that's the difference...
(By the way, I'm a cliché photographer myself and my greatest ambition is to shoot something more inspiring. Long way to go.)
You've got it. This isn't a competition in the typical sense of the word, but rather meant to put the spotlight on artists who are making an impact on the "higher" end of photography.
In that world, which is miles from dpreview, cliches and pretty pictures hold no cachet. Anyone can learn to make a pretty picture. It is instead about concepts and work that may be of interest to professional editors, advertising producers and gallerists.
I am an ad and editorial photographer with a number of national titles and brand campaigns. Photography has earned me a pleasant living - but I started out shooting cliches and pretty pictures too. Broaden your horizons and keep on working. Keep it interesting.
Anyone know why only 64 bit version is available?thanks
Software maintenance on legacy hardware has an overhead cost. A 32 bit computer is an old computer. 64 bit has been common for several years now.
AbrasiveReducer: Honestly, I hope it's great and sells for $49. But another thing to bear in mind is that because everything in a TS lens is adjustable, there won't be any profiles for correcting barrel, or other distortion. In other words, there won't be any auto corrections in Lightroom, Photoshop or even DxO (because everything is dependent on how the lens is adjusted). This is a problem even with Nikon and Canon PC/TS lenses, if you need everything to look straight and square.
Pt lens has a method for correcting distortion with PC lenses. I have found in real world practice that the general unshifted profile actually works quite well even with shift, at least on my Nikon 24 and 45mm.
photogalleryonline: T2.9 is that like F1.4 or f2.8 or f4, does anyone have a chart for comparing T stop to F stop?
F-stop relates to the maximum aperture, but t-stop relates to the amount of light transmitted by the lens. This is important in filmmaking because the same scene may be filmed with different lenses, and some lenses will absorb or transmit more light, thus those parts of the scene will appear brighter or darker if they were not calibrated in t-stops.
So the idea is two T2.9 lenses will transmit the same amount of light. Due to light absorption, it might naturally be 2.86 or 2.81 etc. It is of course easier to make a lens darker than brighter, so its customary to take a F/2.8 design, and add coatings until it is T2.9.
I've been a long time adobe customer and their monopolistic behavior has led to terrible customer service and absurd pricing schemes. It was a fiasco updating to 5.5, for which I paid considerably more for the upgrade than the one previously. Their CS also ignores complaints, or takes days to send pithy responses.
Frankly, the best way to hit Adobe in the wallet is the pirates. It takes an extra 5 minutes to install a well-tested trusted-source pirate version with easy step-by-step directions (and even youtube demonstration videos). And the pirates have better 'customer service' to boot!
I'd gladly keep paying Adobe, but only if the gouging ceased. And I was a customer of theirs for over a decade. But for now, I'll take the friendly pirate who likes sticking it to Adobe.
aarif: A mirrorless FF with a tweaked D3s sensor and a reliable AF system would be great news for me, not the 2.7 crop
35mm chip costs ~20 times an APS-C sensor to produce. The yields are far lower because wafer defects increase with the square of the area. There are also more processing steps in the photolithography stage of production. Replacement cost if you damage one is on the order of $1500 typically, so the part price is likely around $1200.
Brian Lund: Why the tripod mount? No tripod thread on the MFT cameras!?!
If it's for the long lenses it won't help since you still risk bending the mount, but instead of the camera it's now the adapter you ruin... I guess that's cheaper than ruining the camera though!
Most really long/heavy lenses do come with a tripod collar though.
The tripod mount helps with stabilizing the camera setup on the tripod. Yes, these cameras have 1/4-20 on their body, but even a relatively small 35mm lens makes them tip & bobble forward a bit with its added weight.
if you've ever mounted a heavy collar-less 35mm lens on a small body (like nikon's 28-70), the sagging effect is noticeable.
love_them_all: Canikon missed the opportunity to launch a new APS-c ml system before Sony and samsung. If they are serious on this market they should offer a least an FF ver for m lenses owners. The beauty of ml is the mount loyalty can be cross platform. I'm a nex owner but would not need to think twice to get a FF ml body if it is under $2-2.5k, depending on features. On the other hand if they are going to go small they should consider a 4x crop or so, laying the grounds for a format with super reach.
It makes the most practical sense to use an APS-C sensor and put it right up against the lens flange to keep the shape compact.
One reason I see that canikon would wait and see is that removing the mirror box and putting the sensor close to the lens flange requires a redesign of lenses - so they would be introducing a third lens line in addition to DX and regular 35mm. I bet on launch there is a small zoom and a pancake wide angle available.
I have an NEX-5 with a nikon adapter and all the adapter is (besides providing an F-mount) is a tube that is the same size as a Nikon mirror box, providing the necessary gap to allow full focus to infinity.
I use a similar adapter (fotodiox) to put my small nikon primes on my nex-5. It's the best combination of small size + quality + price I've found so far.
Manual aperature and manual focus with the focus peaking firmware takes some practice and isn't for everyone, but I've always valued taking my time to deliberately compose and create images.
Anyone know what the little wheel on the Rayquals at the bottom of the page is? It almost looks like a focus pulling aid for video, but google translate doesn't help :P
semorg: They are doing it wrong and he will soon be replaced as the CEO.
They need to market this first to hollywood and movie makers and use their technology in movie studios. Allowing the director and editors to place specific focus on a character, object as needed to best tell the story.
They can use this approach first to build a bit of brand recognition. Also this is where this product has the most use, IMHO. They are making photosharing more difficult in the world of instagrams and quick mobile sharing photo, and I think consumer market is not the way to go.
They will sell a few thousand units to bunch of early adopters, but all their investment and time in consumer market will end there. I just don't think they can convince enough consumers to buy these things to make the company survive in a very competitive consumer camera market.
Ha, I agree. 3D moviemaking has once again about run its course and Hollywood is always in want of some technological magic to throw its huge amounts of money at. If anything, at least it'll earn the engineers a decent salary.
Such technology eventually will trickle down as people see the possibilities, but for that initial cash you want those deep pockets that are always looking for the next big thing.