Phase One and Mamiya Deals....

[johnastovall]

Phase One is pushing some interesting deals on their back for the Mamiya AFDII's

A P 45+, Mamiya AFD II, 80 mm lens, 28 mm lens all for 29,900.

There are others, "Special Packages are also available for P25+, P30+, P21+ and P20+."

[srwatters]

Let me pull out that $29,900.00 I have sitting in my wallet...

Right. I'd love to go MF digital, but not quite yet. I'll bet sometime between now and 2010 I'll be there though

[johnastovall]

Originally Posted by srwatters

Let me pull out that $29,900.00 I have sitting in my wallet...

Right. I'd love to go MF digital, but not quite yet. I'll bet sometime between now and 2010 I'll be there though

I'm wondering what they are wanting for the lower end backs as part of promotion. It also looks like the Mamiya 645AFD is becoming a standard body for bundled back and body offerings.

[johnastovall]

Here is the pricing on the other packages....

[dbphotos]

The 645ZD is $9995, a much better price than they had been in the past.

http://www.mamiya.com/products/default.asp?ID=49

I got rid of my 645 because the digital backs were just too high 2 years ago. If I ever get back into landscape shot (Yosemite, etc.) I'd seriously consider the new digital MF, but no real need for most subjects.

[Dobick]

This may not be the thread to ask this question, but I have seen other announcements for medium format digital in the past, and each time there is a rave about how great it would be to have one (I am in that same boat -- I would love to own one) The specific camera that I am thinking of is the h3d that cost more than a house 15 years ago, and everyone went crazy lusting for one.

But, those same people get all upset when camera X starts to have noise introduced into an image at iso 1600?

Looking at the specs on this camera back, as well as other MF digitals, they only seem to even be capable of ISO 400, and the lenses aren't all that fast either.

I guess my point is, what would be the point in owning one of these, if the majority of your work is not done in the studio, or landscape.

[ivgonzalez]

I have actully been considering the 645, can't beet the price, compared to a Mark III Ds for 2 grand more and twice the sensor size. Plus it comes with Adobe Lightroom.

Then when dad says he can do that with his Rebel XT, I can say oh, really?...

But really it is more of an excuse to by such a sweet camera.

[johnastovall]

Originally Posted by Dobick

This may not be the thread to ask this question, but I have seen other announcements for medium format digital in the past, and each time there is a rave about how great it would be to have one (I am in that same boat -- I would love to own one) The specific camera that I am thinking of is the h3d that cost more than a house 15 years ago, and everyone went crazy lusting for one.

But, those same people get all upset when camera X starts to have noise introduced into an image at iso 1600?

Looking at the specs on this camera back, as well as other MF digitals, they only seem to even be capable of ISO 400, and the lenses aren't all that fast either.

I guess my point is, what would be the point in owning one of these, if the majority of your work is not done in the studio, or landscape.

The point is image quality and that's what you need for product shoots, studio, landscape and architucture.

The same reason you used them for film. Look at how the Hasselbad Masters use them.

[CobyPhoto]

I will agree, I would like to own one...but I will say this too, having used this setup (not exact, but very similar) You will definintely need a computer upgrade, more hard drive space, (LOADS OF THIS) and LOTS of DVD's to archive on.

I use the 1Ds Mk II in the Studio now and I bitch about file size and archiving now. This setup will take it to a whole new level. When I shot the Mamyia RZ with the Digital Back, we had a special hard drive attached to the bottom of the camera! 20 Gigs! And it was easy to fill that thing up!

For the average shooter, this would not be a viable solution! Lots of money and even more cost on the back side trying to keep your work flow up to speed. But those time you really need extreme detail and quality, this puppy rocks. I actually conisdered a set-up similar to this before the 1Ds Mk II's that I purchased...file size and workflow issues won out, plus I have prints 40x60 in my studio that are amazing from the 1Ds Mk II and I have yet to wow a client because of image quality. (Bigger isn't always better.)

One thing I do like about the Digital backs...Man it is easy to clean the sensor! I hate doing that on my cameras now.

In a few years, I could see purchasing a set-up like this for everyday studio use...when technology moves a little further ahead etc. At the time of the Mamyia RZ Purchase, with the digital back, if you bought the Digital Back...they GAVE you the Camera! Of course, the digital back was only 32K! (Damn glad that wasn't MY money!)

CJ

[srwatters]

Originally Posted by CobyPhoto

For the average shooter, this would not be a viable solution!

I would say for the high volume shooter this might actually be quite true, but for someone like me who wants to shoot like he's still using film (I shot 51 exposures for two sets on Monday night), it's not quite the same daunting task. Granted nobody is going to call me 'average' (or even 'normal') for that matter and the only person who I need to justify my spending to is, well, me, so it make sense in my twisted logic.

Given the fact that I just spent $5K on a 35mm size body, should the MF system come down near that range, I'm in. At least as long as the wife says it's OK

[CobyPhoto]

Originally Posted by srwatters

I would say for the high volume shooter this might actually be quite true, but for someone like me who wants to shoot like he's still using film (I shot 51 exposures for two sets on Monday night), it's not quite the same daunting task. Granted nobody is going to call me 'average' (or even 'normal') for that matter and the only person who I need to justify my spending to is, well, me, so it make sense in my twisted logic.

Given the fact that I just spent $5K on a 35mm size body, should the MF system come down near that range, I'm in. At least as long as the wife says it's OK

Scott,

51 images is nothing...compared to the photographers I am talking about. I know photographers that shoot as many as 200-300 photos in the studio for a single session! Can you image the back-end post work on that with this set-up?

Oh and if they get down to 7K for a set-up like this, I will replace my 1Ds Mk II's in a flash! I will just have to upgrade computers...again! 7K compared to 30K is still a bit of a stretch thou.

Who knows, with the way things progess, it won't be that long and Medium Format Digital will be down to 10K for a rockin' set-up like this!

I will be on the band wagon then!

CJ

[srwatters]

I know it's nothing, but what I was saying is it makes sense for me and the way that I shoot. I'm (almost) never going to shoot that many images and most likely will never be a make my living from it (as a photographer). That gives me the luxury of not caring about the back end load and shooting because I love to and not because I have to.

Let's just hope that the software vendors start getting multi-core aware software out to take advantage of the 4 and 8 core machines that are within most folks budget these days. I've got a one year old 4 core Mac Pro with 2TB of online storage and that was less than $4k!

Technology marches on. Long live Moore's Law!