You do not seem to get it, Pal.
You have to put the sensor in the film plane. Magazine back cameras have the film plane several millimeters behind the attachment point. Fixed back cameras have the film rails exactly at the film plane. No digital sensor that I know of has the sensor array on the surface where it could just be pushed up against the film rails, the all need some space which magazine back cameras allow, and fixed back cameras do not. That means with a magazine back camera all you have to do is take the film magazine off and snap on the digital back. With a magazine back camera there is no need for the camera manufacture's blessings or participation.
If Pentax chooses to make a large sensor camera (I would not call it medium format) more power to them, but no 3rd party is going to make a digital back for any of their current medium format cameras, while you could easily fit one to a 1947 Hasselblad.
--
P�l Jensen wrote:
Graywolf wrote:
It is still a matter of interchangable magazine backs. Pentax does not have one, therefore no one is building a digital back for it.
REPLY:
I doubt this. The only difference between Pentax film inserts and a film back is that the former expose the film if the back is removed. This should have no bearing on a digital sensor. And, after all, digital backs for the Pentax 645's do exist in working prototype form. I believe the reason is that Pentax do have other solution for digital MF planned and don't want to be associated with third party add-on solution which, after all, will compete with their own effords and perhaps also be at odds with their philosophy of compact MF systems made for field use. Pentax have been careful in stating their MF digital plans starting last year with announcement than they are working with Kodak for digital solutions for their MF system(s). Recently Fumio Urano, the president, stated that the camera is a 645 based DSLR to be released early next year. It seems like Pentax goes for a more integrated solution than the more ad-hoc style digital back.
The 645N and NII took customers away from high-emd Nikon and Canons, particularly in Japan where Pentax have 40% of the MF market. Pentax is a far to volume oriented manufacturer to be interested in $15 000+ digital solution that sell in very small numbers exclusively for studio settings; an area Pentax have hitherto shown no interest in. A high-end MF DSLR will have to compete with the likes of the Canon 1Ds and in order to do that I don't think basing the digital camera on a 20 year old camera body with 10 year old AF system is really going to cut it in spite of the fact that its main selling point is superior image quality. If Pentax choose the current 645 as basis, then I think they are being cheap! I believe that Pentax aim with an MF DSLR is the same as it has always been for their MF systems; taking customers away from 35mm. I'm strong disbeliever in digital backs. If they are such a good idea why does Nikon bother with the D2H when could make a digital back for the F3 instead?
P�l
-- graywolf http://graywolfphoto.com/graywolf.html
