Also, 42x56mm sensors are not going to be down into the $3000 range soon. To my way of thinking using a 24x36mm sensor on a medium format camera is even worse than using a smaller sensor on a 35mm camera. I mean have you priced an ultra-wide-angle medium-format lens lately? I think most of the digital backs being used on Blads and Rolleis are mostly used for portraiture type work where you do not need wide-angle lenses and the film normal works as a great portrait lens.
I still keep thinking that something along the lines of the strange late Rollei 2000, 2002, 3000 series 35mm cameras would be the perfect basis for a film/digital camera. For those who do not remember those, they were 35mm's with a modular design similar to the Bronica ERTSi's including interchangeable backs which would solve the main problem.
--
Rob Studdert wrote:
On 5 Nov 2003 at 23:50, John Francis wrote:
Then there's the fact that the original article is light on details; the 3k could be street price, wholesale price, manufacturing price, or even just the cost to Pentax of the sensor.
Whatever it means it's pie-in-the sky pricing, I have a recent sale brochure in front of me for the Sinarback 54s and Leaf Valeo 11 backs at AU$44,000 and AU$20,545 ex tax.
See: http://www.baltronics.com.au/sinarback_prices.html
Does FF mean size of a 35mm negative, or size of a 645 negative?
I was referring to full frame sensors in both formats.
But you can't use two-year-old prices to discuss pricing in this year's (or next year's) marketplace.
Well we couldn't seem to get around it last week so if you can't beat em..
Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/ Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998
-- graywolf http://graywolfphoto.com
"You might as well accept people as they are, you are not going to be able to change them anyway."
