rashedahmed Posted March 11, 2012 Share Posted March 11, 2012 <p>I think Canon should move to Medium Format. It can easily buy the discontinued Bronica plant from Tamron and start it's own MF line up. What do you think of it ?</p><div></div> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tony_leinster Posted March 11, 2012 Share Posted March 11, 2012 <p>Why on earth would they want to spend huge chunks of their money on an ever diminishing market? Far more sensible to look at a mirrorless system ala Nex 7. Why do you think that Bronica factory closed in the first place? Or was this just a bit of photoshop fun for you rather than a serious thread.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rashedahmed Posted March 11, 2012 Author Share Posted March 11, 2012 <p>Tony, this is what the Tamron official press release said in 2004<strong>.</strong><br> <strong>Commack, New York, October 1, 2004 –</strong> Mr. Morio Ono, president of Tamron Co., Ltd., Ohmiya, Japan and Mr. Takashi Inoue, president of Tamron USA, Inc. announced the worldwide discontinuation of Bronica SLR cameras and accessories as of October 31, 2004. The Bronica RF645 Medium Format Rangefinder will continue to be distributed globally and Tamron USA, Inc. will offer the current rebates on that product line through 6/30/05.<br> The Tamron USA website don't have any page for Bronica RF645 also. I guess you are not informed about Bronica. I used a Bronica ETRSi for 8 long years.The photo of the attached ETRSi camera was shot by me.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nathangardner Posted March 11, 2012 Share Posted March 11, 2012 <p>It would have to be digital MF to keep up with the times, which would have the potential to create amazingly detailed images capable of massive prints, but it would be a very very limited market. A MF digital would cost several tens of thousands of dollars and very few people could afford them. With the capabilities of their 5D and 1DS series, 99.9999% of photographers would not be in the market for such a product. Maybe when the cost to produce sensors goes WAY down, this will be a possibility.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tony_leinster Posted March 11, 2012 Share Posted March 11, 2012 <p>Rashed, I am informed about Bronica having been in the trade for over 20 years. They, as your quote says, were discontinued many years ago. Again I ask what would be in it for Canon?<br> Nathan, whilst I agree that sensor costs are a factor, I would also say that, as the price of sensors reduces and the specification goes up, the market will be driven (as now with mirrorless) to more compact high IQ cameras rather than very bulky outfits like MF. I am currently looking at changing from a large Canon 1D Mk III outfit to an NEX 7, probably using adaptors to mount old Olympus OM lenses. This is possible for me now due to the big advances in sensor technology giving me much the same IQ in a 1.5 crop sensor as in my current 1.3 crop. I think this is the way the industry will go in future, not back to larger format. Feel free to disagree lol!</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andylynn Posted March 11, 2012 Share Posted March 11, 2012 <p>Why would you need Canon to buy Bronica and make MF film cameras when you could just buy a perfectly good used Bronica? Heck, for much less than they'd have to charge for new Bronicas to have the economics work out, you could get a used Hasselblad. This whole thing seems a bit silly.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rashedahmed Posted March 12, 2012 Author Share Posted March 12, 2012 <p>There are some limitations for 35mm full frame (36x24mm) sensor. Leica started S2 MF series for that reason, I presume. Hope Canon starts one. Please comment on this post if you have used MF cameras or at least know it's advantages.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave_s Posted March 12, 2012 Share Posted March 12, 2012 <p>Rashed, I think everyone (or nearly everyone) who has commented has used medium format. It would be insane for Canon to get into medium format. They have never, in 75 years, made a medium format camera. The market for medium format film cameras is zero. (Parenthetically, the retail market for any film cameras is zero.) The market for medium format digital is small, specialized, and probably pretty much staked out by the existing players.</p> <p>Leica is a special case, and not comparable to Canon. Leica products are Veblen goods, which means they don't obey rules of classical economics. Whether the S2 is making any money for them is anybody's guess. I suspect they haven't sold very many of them, but I don't know.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nathangardner Posted March 12, 2012 Share Posted March 12, 2012 <p>Also, your concept is flawed. If someone was going to take the care and spend the money to shoot MF, they sure wouldn't use a zoom. Should've put that 90mm t/s on there.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tony_leinster Posted March 12, 2012 Share Posted March 12, 2012 <p>Rashed, there may be limitations, at this moment in time, for "full frame" sensors but these are diminishing in terms of IQ so now it is becoming more to do with the advantage of square format and some advantages with DOF. Even if, as others here say, you are talking of digital MF there is no benefit whatsoever in Canon buying an obsolete factory. Oh and I have used most everything from Pentax 110 via Canon, Nikon etc 35mm, Pentax 6x7 to Horsman and Linhof 4x5 so I hope I qualify to comment on this thread? And by the way, I do like your work which is very professional and high quality.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dan_south Posted March 12, 2012 Share Posted March 12, 2012 Nice job with that camera image! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scott_ferris Posted March 12, 2012 Share Posted March 12, 2012 <p>Any interest Canon might have had in the MF market, and in consequence any R&D resources they might have devoted to it, would surely have been redirected to the video market once the 5D MkII came out and showed them how much money there was in that sector. Witness the C300 with its $15,000 price ticket, and the collection of $40,000 lenses they made to go with it.</p> <p>No, for Canon the MF market is of no interest, it is contracting, the video market is booming, I know where I'd put my money.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rashedahmed Posted March 13, 2012 Author Share Posted March 13, 2012 <p>Friends, Say Canon 1ds mark 3 is U$ 7,000 ( 21MP) and Canon MF (21MP) offers the same, which one will you pick if you are a commercial photographer ? I would surely go for the 2nd one. By the way, this post is my opinion if Canon goes for MF market. Reality may be not the same.There is nothing serious about it. </p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scott_ferris Posted March 13, 2012 Share Posted March 13, 2012 <p>For $7,000 I'd get a 5D MkIII and have $3,500 change.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andylynn Posted March 13, 2012 Share Posted March 13, 2012 <p>But what would be the point? MF digital is a small market for horrendously expensive equipment that already has several established brands in it, and if anybody who's not currently in it wants a piece they'd have huge start up costs and be far from guaranteed to make money in the medium term. It's a big risk. Canon can sell millions and millions of the cameras they make now and all they have to do is come up with a couple new sensors and lenses a year. Updated full frame sensor + AF system from the higher end camera = 5DIII, and they can sell a few billion worth of product without having to do any real work. Repeat every couple of years. That's how you make real money.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rashedahmed Posted March 13, 2012 Author Share Posted March 13, 2012 <p>Dear Andy, I am not suggesting Canon to stop their 35mm camera production and start MF. It can be a separate production line. Like Leica S2 or Pantax 645 D. In fact, Once I found in the web that Bronica MF cameras ware hand made by only 50 expert technicians. </p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
james_smith55 Posted March 13, 2012 Share Posted March 13, 2012 <blockquote> <p>I think Canon should move to Medium Format. It can easily buy the discontinued Bronica plant from Tamron and start it's own MF line up. What do you think of it?</p> </blockquote> <p>I guess you didn't see my post about my Bronica gear? I picked up an ETRS with a couple of backs, speed grip, prism finder, and a PE prime lens for less than $400. The used MF market would have to dry up considerably before it would make any sense for anyone to invest in producing new MF gear. And frankly considering all the gear from the decent manufactures Bronica to Hasselbladare is made out of solid metal I don't see their stuff disappearing any time soon. I don't see myself selling by Bronica gear ever. But when I die and my widow puts it on the market I'm pretty sure it will work just as good as the day I bought it used.</p> <p>As far as digital MF is concerned I thought Canon's strategy was to constantly put out high end DSLRs at a fraction of the price of digital MF in order to destroy that market?</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andylynn Posted March 13, 2012 Share Posted March 13, 2012 <p>Rashed, I'm not saying you're suggesting Canon stop selling other cameras. I'm saying that a company that's used to taking near-zero risks to make billions of dollars would be stupid to take a huge risk to make millions of dollars.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
john_tran14 Posted March 14, 2012 Share Posted March 14, 2012 <p>I don't think Canon would invest in the MF market now. Instead they should concentrate on competing more vigorously in the 35mm DSLR markets. They would also keep the compact and/or portable markets like G1X or Elph series because that is a big market that they are doing well.</p> <p>Usually, only when and if a company feels not able to keep competing in the current market, would seek for another market that maybe (just maybe) they can do better. For the same argument, you can think that Sony, Pany, and Oly turned to mirrorless because they feel they are losing in the mirrored cameras market. Leica keeps making rangefinders because they feel that they are still the winner in rangefinder market</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
john_tran14 Posted March 14, 2012 Share Posted March 14, 2012 <blockquote> <p>Say Canon 1ds mark 3 is U$ 7,000 ( 21MP) and Canon MF (21MP) offers the same, which one will you pick if you are a commercial photographer ? I would surely go for the 2nd one</p> </blockquote> <p>And just what Canon gets when their MF cameras take away some of their DSLR customers?</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rashedahmed Posted March 14, 2012 Author Share Posted March 14, 2012 <p>'And just what Canon gets when their MF cameras take away some of their DSLR customers?'<br> John, at the end of the day the money goes to Canon account no matter what they are selling, a 35mm or 120 DSLR.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tony_leinster Posted March 15, 2012 Share Posted March 15, 2012 <p>So why spend huge amounts of money to get what their already getting? I'm afraid you're flogging a dead horse Rashed, not one other poster here sees any sense in what you are proposing nor is it ever going to happen, maybe it's time to give up gracefully.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now