----- Original Message ----- From: "Rick Denney" Subject: Re: 645D vs Canon vs Nikon vs Hassy
> I agree, and for a couple of reasons. One is that workaday commercial > photographers often have a bunch of 645 stuff still in the cupboard. > Another is that the same number of pixels in a 36x48 sensor has more > potential than in a 24x36 sensor (I said *potential*--which means it > may not be realized in a specific implementation). Those are the > reasons often reported. As much as I like the idea of a 645D, I don't see it as being overly financially viable. The target market is 645 film photographers, and that's about it, and them only for the reason you mentioned. If they want to make money, they need to sell lenses, and the people doing that are equiping high priced Canons at the moment, so probably won't be overly interested in changing systems. However, they may do it anyway as a flagship digital to make some waves in the small format DSLR market. > > But there's a bigger reason a 645D would succeed if priced > competitively with Canon, and that is that many commercial > photographers need to use impressive looking equipment. This flies in > the face of artistic sensibilities, but many fat brides are already > outside the realm of art and just want their photographer not to look > like Uncle Harry. And Uncle Harry has a Canon 350D or a 30D, which to > the bride looks no different than the photographer's 5D or 1DsII. The big-boy Canons are probably bigger than a 645. William Robb -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
