Because most pros work in a world where the bottom line rules. Most in
the past maintained two or three systems, a 35mm and a larger format,
usually 120 based or 4x5 and if they had a need both. If the quality
from your 35mm camera replacement is close enough to what you get from
med format format replacement, then you'll dump one or the other. I'm
betting most working pro's with 35mm and 120 based systems have already
dumped their 120 film bodies and lenses, those who never had 35mm if
they needed to go digital have/are moved/moving to Hassy with digital
backs already. Pentax will sell a few D645s but not nearly the number
they project. I wish that weren't so but I can only point out that
Kodak was positioning their DCS 14n/c cameras as replacements for Medium
format more than 35mm, and the D645 will only have a 2mp advantage over
the the it's Canon competition, with the Canon having the advantage of
no crop factor with lenses designed for it, while the D645 will have a
1.3x crop factor. The Canon will also have faster lenses, always a
selling point.
Gonz wrote:
Pål Jensen wrote:
Dario wrote:
Today, digital FF is more than enough for at least 99% of the pro
market. For that reason I think of digital MF as a niche.
But these kind of arguments are absurd! It they made any kind of
sense we would still be driving Ford model T's. Kodachrome was good
enough for 99% of all 35mm outdoor shooters but still virtually all
of them switched to Velvia because it was "better". The fact is that
people will buy the best there is as long as it is within reasonable
cost/hassle constraints. Whats good enough doesn't enter the equation.
And there's a ready supply of equipment out there owned by pros ready
to make the switch over to a new 645 digital body. Why sell
everything and start over when you've got such an investment already,
not only in glass, but in the know how to use it.
Pål
--
When you're worried or in doubt,
Run in circles, (scream and shout).
- Re: Pentax DSLR future P. J. Alling
-
