Pål Jensen wrote:
Kevin wrote:
Kodak 22 megapixel is what Hasselblad have been using and doing very
well with.
Now they have upped the ante a little with the release of the H2 system
and a 39 megapixel Kodak sensor.
These chips are not cheap as we all know, neither are "pro level"
camera bodies.
Other MF systems are sticking with replaceable backs and you need only
buy the
new back to be up with the latest/greatest in the megapixel race,
thereby using
the same body for years to come. The down side of this is that new
advancements
in the body pass you by.
I think whatever (slightly less than) Medium Format solution Pentax
arives at
the deciding factor, not surprisingly, be price.
Will you be able to simply fob off your 22 Megapixel 645D in favour a new
<insert MP here>
body?
At a resent Hasselblad launch I was shown the ease at which folks were
discarding their old
10Mp backs in favour of the newer 22MP and 39Mp treats.
REPLY:
But a digital back cost more than a Pentax DSLR. The back solutions
isn't very cost effective. If it was, it would have been used on
Nikons and Canons as well.
Pål
Pal,
The Nikon and Canon solutions are built on 35mm bodies, which use a
fairly different setup than MF. Most MF SLR's other than the Pentax
units are designed for interchangable backs and film transport, so the
Digital Back solution was trivial to implement. 35mm Digital started off
the same way, but as it started to come down to the mainstream market,
significant size savings appeared in fully integrated solutions. The two
markets went different ways because of differing needs as much as cost.
The multiple back solutions were simply too big on a 35mm body, while
the MF bodies were already designed to take them. Unless the Pentax
comes in at high-end 35mm-based DSLR prices, it's going to have issues
because of the lack of interchangable backs.
-Adam
