When will medium format digital go mainstream?

[Mike_E]

So, the natural evolution of my thinking on this line of discussion is "what does this mean for people trying to make money at photography, even as a source of regular auxiliary...when the gear we use, the same gear that used to be a wall to keep most rank amateurs out, becomes more accessible to the average consumer?"

The answer goes back to people skills, excellent customer service, integrity and producing compelling, timeless images that will look great a whole helluva lot longer than whatever crap Instagram vomits up this week or next.

Just my $0.02, sorry that it's slightly off topic...

The wall is still there, but it is getting shorter. Some of the stones have eroded such as medium format gear being the lowest quality you could go for commercial, fashion work and the like. The very best small format (I guess crop sensor 35mms would be tiny format) comes close in overall quality to medium format now; the biggest difference that I see is in the lenses, the MF ones being of a longer focal length to have the same FoV give more compression which gives a different look. Pretty esoteric to most people but noticeable even so. However, as fewer and fewer people demand the "Look" of MF because of the crippling of the print industry in magazines and the like the supply of MF gear erodes along with the demand.

The price of just about everything in photography has fallen. Yes you can still pay $10K for a set of lights but you can also get a set for under a grand that will do as well when coupled with a digital camera and the post processing available today.

Sets are still up there for studios but you can use digital backgrounds if you are on the lower end of the pro spectrum.

What builds up the wall these days is the attention to detail to the work. Moms/dads/guys/gals with a camera will buy the gear but they still don't put in the work needed to get the quality from that gear. They knock the socks off of the low budget studios it's true but the guys that put out the really good work and are the best marketers aren't suffering all that much.

So as always the more things change, the more they stay the same.

 

[Solarflare]

Well, first a fun note: I have a 16 Megapixel camera. I have computed how much resolution a film medium camera has, and thats exactly the resolution of it. In this sense, I was able to buy a medium format camera for amazingly little money.

I think we can pretty much forget about sensors. They will only get cheaper and cheaper over time. And already Fuji has managed to create an APS-C sensor that still works not too badly at ISO 25600. How much more do you need ? So why do you need Full Frame ? And most likely, this will continue. I am guessing that examining the more far away future of photography doesnt involve sensors much.

So the real issue isnt sensors at all. Its the laws of optics. A certain sensor size and a certain sensor quality asks for an optics to make this useable.

The D800(E) already hits the diffraction limit at f/5.6. Future full frame cameras might, for example, be able to manage 100 Mpx. Then the diffraction limit will raise even higher, to f/4 or something.

First, this requires new glass. Only the best lenses are already at their optimal performance at f/4. So the new glass will have to be brighter.

Second, there is the depth of field trap. Going brighter, i.e. working at larger apertures, leads to smaller depth of field. Now everyone likes to have depth of field. But not all of the time. Sometimes people want everything in focus. And more importantly, if depth of field gets TOO shallow, at one point nothing will be in focus anymore.

So yeah, the Megapixel race can NOT continue. At least not with a larger sensor. So, maybe, what in fact awaits us in the future is - small sensors !

 

[The_Traveler]

So, maybe, what in fact awaits us in the future is - small sensors !

I think your post is really on target.
There is a limit, however, to the need for smaller and smaller sensors.
Once cameras get to the size where making the alterations in iso, speed, etc becomes ergonomically inefficient (like me Oly EP3) then we've sort of reached an impasse when we have more than enough quality in sensor and lens to satisfy any reasonable needs and the cameras are at an ergonomic limit, then innovation must go in a different way. Perhaps that is perfection of the multi-focal length lens or the multi-focal point lens or the modular camera.

 

[StandingBear1983]

Well if were talking about the future mainstream, the most popular phones will be very small (phone camera's), and they will become better and better, like we have with this research done recently :
DxOMark - Smartphones beat 5-year-old DSCs

Maybe i should of started this thread by not stating it only for 'mainstream', but generally about 'the future of cheaper larger sensors for the pro photographer'.

EVEN if iPhone10 will have the same quality of a Nikon D7000 in the future, the pro photographer would like a nice big quality viewfinder, and features that you can't get in a phone (in the meantime).

Back to the medium format quality, what about the D800? - it is a pretty revolutionary FF DSLR, and it actually did manage to get the closest to the medium format camera's from anything else that is out there until now...AND its much cheaper.

I think i came to the most logical conclusion that i can think of, every segment in the market today, let it be phones, compacts, FF DSLR's or medium format, will develop better and better quality...we might see DX format go extinct though if FF gets cheaper, but we might always have this space or division between the quality of each segment...like for example the best TV of the 80's, is JUNK now, and even the cheapest LCD is FAR better...so i guess its all about the advancement of Technology in the end of the day.

 

[fjrabon]

I find the Lytro novel but kind of pointless. It might become part of the mainstream soon (or not so soon) but I still find it more of a hassle than it's worth.

Does anyone else feel the same way?

I feel that way about it in its current incarnation. Im intrigued as to where it can go from there though. WIth refinement, one day focus point could become just like white balance is now with raw files.

 

[Mully]

When film was king the mainstream did not use 120 or 220 roll film cameras, photographers did.

 

[fjrabon]

When film was king the mainstream did not use 120 or 220 roll film cameras, photographers did.

I think part of the issue with this thread is different meanings of the word 'mainstream'.

I took his original comment to mean 'mainstream photographers' not 'mainstream general public that owns a camera'

full frame isn't even mainstream yet in the sense of general public that owns a camera. And due to lens prices, it probably won't ever be.

 

[Xanatizer]

If I recall from the 80's-90's, medium format film was never "mainstream", the 35mm market was?

Medium format photography was very popular from the 20's up to the 60's. Ever heard of the Kodak Brownie?

 

[minicoop1985]

I'd love to see the day when I can buy a new Hasselblad H series for less than $5k. This thread has some interesting thoughts, such as the smaller sensors. I dunno, I don't want smaller. I want something the same size as my 7D with a MF sized sensor in it that I can afford. Will that happen anytime soon? Well, no. But still.

 

[Light Guru]

I want something the same size as my 7D with a MF sized sensor in it

That's not possible. A larger sensor requires a larger mirror and thus the camera body must be deeper. Also with a bigger sensor you need lenses that will produce a larger image circle, this not only makes a lens bigger but it also requires more space between the lens and the sensor.

 

[Derrel]

The Lumnious Landscape, long a bastion of medium format digital back chest thumping and ego-stroking just tested the new 51-megapixel Pentax 645Z in JUly of 2014, and the review raises a lot of questions about the value of using medium format, with its limited lens selection, expensive lenses, lack of many zooms, and slowish handling. In simple terms, the folks at Luminous Landscape have for the most part ABANDONED their medium format backs and heavy lenses for much of their photography, and have moved more towards both mirrorless cameras and to conventional d-slr cameras over the past three years, after basically a decade of trumpeting about this MF system and then the next MF system, and then the uber-expensive MF systems that rich guys can afford.

As they point out, a decade ago, a camera as affordable at the Pentax 645Z would have been a HUGELY desirable instrument, even at $8,000 or so...but the new Nikon D800, D800e, and D810 have all made the Pentax's value and handling and carrying proposition kind of moot; you can get more lenses, more lens choices, smaller, lighter,and less-expensive cameras AND lenses, and a better-handling, faster-handling, better sealed camera from Nikon for under three grand. And the term "medium format" is NOT what medium format film is or was: it is much smaller than medium format film. 43.8mm x 32.8mm is the size of the new CMOS sensor in the new Pentax, which they list as being ,"Some 63% smaller than 645 film." Or put another way, 1.7x larger than full-frame Nikon or Canon digitial. At nearly three times the price for a body and two to five times more for lenses.

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/pentax_645z_first_impressions_review.shtml

I do not think MF digital will go mainstream, since I think fairly soon Canon and or Nikon will offer 54 or 56 megapixel cameras, along with their HUGE lens catalog and deep accessory item lists. MF digital has ALWAYS been a very,very,very small niche in the camera business, and will continue to be a small niche.

 

[minicoop1985]

I want something the same size as my 7D with a MF sized sensor in it

That's not possible. A larger sensor requires a larger mirror and thus the camera body must be deeper. Also with a bigger sensor you need lenses that will produce a larger image circle, this not only makes a lens bigger but it also requires more space between the lens and the sensor.

I was more thinking mirrorless. I don't care if it sticks out 8", I want the body to be roughly the same dimensions and as ergonomic as my 7D. Then again, a Mamiya 645 with the grip moved back would actually kinda fit that bill minus the mirrorless thing.

 

[CarlH]

Hasselblad were not selling enough Digital H series cameras so have just released a digital back for the V series
which looks like a normal film back.
here's a link to the website CFV-50c

 

[Light Guru]

Hasselblad were not selling enough Digital H series cameras so have just released a digital back for the V series
which looks like a normal film back.
here's a link to the website CFV-50c

Yes but keep in mind that it has a 1.45 crop factor compared to a full medium format sensor. And the price is still $15,500

 

[cgw]

I see far fewer Hasselblad H series rigs on shoots than just a few years ago. Now they're occasionally rented and FF Canon and Nikon are what's used more often. Pentax is just too late to the party and may prove to be a bit of a tombstone product for the category.