Can we expect an "Affordable" digital back for Mamiya RB67 & RZ67?

[robert_hurd]

Does anyone have insight or rumours of "affordable" digital backs to

be created in the future for Mamiya RB67 & RZ67 cameras? (Obviously,

all digital prices will decline over time, but I am wondering if

anyone knows specifics and time estimates [e.g., a digital back for

under $3000 by 2006?].)

 

My reason for asking...with so many people selling their RB & RZ

equipment at a loss on eBay (in order to switch to digital cameras),

is MAMIYA taking steps to support its dedicated RB/ RZ users? That

seems to be happening with the 645 Mamiya, but for the RB/RZ, must we

look to 3rd party digital back manufacturers?

 

(I'll also check on the Mamiya RB/RZ forum, when the site comes back

up, and perhaps post this question there.)

 

Thanks!

[brooks short]

Now that Kodak is out of the Digital Back business I don't think we'll see an affordable 16mp chip digital back for a while. Kodak's ProBacks had come down in price to about $12,000. Leaf, Phase One etc are still asking for closetr to $20,000 or more for their comperable backs, even with the same Kodak chip.

[seb_seb]

It will surely be affordable when buyed used.

 

A few weeks ago in Paris a guy was selling his 6MP Phaseone lightphase digital back for 4 000 �.

[albert_martinez]

Robert-

 

The latest $6900 offering from Mamiya on their 645 platform would

indicate they're moving in that direction.

I too have an RZ Pro II, it's by far-the best camera I've ever owned, and would never think of giving it away on Ebay for digital.

Given what�s at stake, I doubt very much the question isn�t being addressed by Mamiya, the "d" phenomenon must be disconcerting to all medium format manufacturers.

 

Change is born out of inspiration or desperation, lets hope it�s not the later. These medium format fat cats has been resting on their laurels long enough, it�s time to reach down into those deep pockets and start touting the advantages of larger CCDs and the versatility of a dual platform. I think we�ll be OK, I can�t imagine Mamiya or Hasselblad throwing in the towel, Bronica-well that�s a different story.

 

It�s going to get very interesting in the next few years,we can only hope Mamiya steps up to the plate and delivers a home run.

 

Regards-Albert

[ellis_vener_photography]

Kodak is selling their remaining stock of Pro Backs for many thousands under the last

official price, but still nowhere near $3K.

 

2006 is a very long way away but I seriously doubt that you will see a new 11MP or

larger back at anywhere near $3K. But who knows?

[lucas_griego]

2006?!!

 

I want one by next year! Sigh...

 

Ok.. 2006 shouldn't be so bad. It's a long shot... but it'd be nice.

[larry_menzin]

There are reconditioned Kodak Pro Backs out there for $5000-6000. That is probably the best you can do for a while. If you don't mind working at ISO 100, they give great results.

[oskar_ojala]

Who knows...chips were commonly made on 4" wafers two decades ago, now many factories use 12" wafers. Also, I believe MF backs have been CCD thus far, CMOS and other, newer sensor techniques might also lower the prices. In the world of high-tech, certainly a lot is possible (and I damn well don't want to wait until I could buy a $15000 back...unless, of course, the dollar's value plummets :-)

[._._z]

Pricing is not only dependent on the higher cost of manufacture for a harder-to-make

product that is sold in tiny quantities compared to mass market digital cameras. Pricing is

dependent on competition, of which there is considerably less in the market for MF backs.

It is also dependent on manufacturers calculating pricing for the pro market, where digital

pays for itself after 'x' number of rolls.

 

Until more compelling technology makes 35mm DSLRs more directly competitive with MF

digital (which could very well happen within 5 years), or unless a bruising price war for

market share develops, digital MF back makers will probably keep their prices relatively

high in the near-to-medium term.

[randall_shafer]

I honestly doubt we will see new, affordable digital backs for any pro camera like the RZ. There's just not a big enough market and corresponding sales to make it worth development. (Which is also why existing backs are so expensive.)

 

The real bonanza is for photographers who want to shoot film, and can now buy great equipment like the RZ at bargain prices. With the market for medium format so depressed, one can get a great deal for the money and I don't see any time in the foreseeable future when any digital camera can approach the quality of 6X7 image shot on slide or B&W film.

 

Large format is even better to a certain extent, with some top quality pro cameras like the Sinar P going for under $1000.

 

Gads I love digital. It's like someone selling you a collection of fine wines for 2 cents on the dollar so they can buy cheap wine with screw caps instead of corks. ;-)

[andrew robertson]

HAH!

 

I don't think MF digital backs will ever be really that affordable. Too much of a niche

market.

[._._z]

I think we'll see it, but only after Canon <i>et al</i> come a-gunnin' after medium format

quality with more affordable bodies. By then it could be too late for MF camera

manufacturers, whose lenses and associated gear are more expensive than the more

numerous 35mm equivalent choices.

[kevin_palmer1]

If there was a big enough market for that someone like Epson could come in and make it affordable. But the market is too small. There are plenty of "affordable" 6mp backs used on eBay. You just need to do your research to see how old it is and make sure it is able to shoot untethered if that's your goal. I thought about ways to harvest multiple chips from smaller cameras to build a back but it's not worth it. I still prefer my scanned film to digital. It's really sad to open magazines these days and see the junk they publish. The digital shots are always pretty obvious. Just look at the hair and look for "video noise" and lack of detail. I'm not sure what these guys are shooting with but it's awful. I have a friend who assists a Vogue photographer and he still shoots film. So at least there is some preservation of quality. Most architecture mags still require large format film. But even my favorite mag Zink publishes a lot of crappy digital shots. For me digital is too smooth, lacks life and has issues with detail and colored noise. I prefer film grain any day. I've seen shots from the 22mp backs. IMO it still lacks detail and is overly smooth. I shoot digital and MF and both have their uses. I don't use my MF to shoot products for web based catalogs. I do use it for full body fashion shots or for printed work. Both have their places. I think a lot of photogs sold off their MF gear before realizing this. Now a bunch are buying their stuff back and shooting film again.

[todd_seligman]

<p>I just found this on you tube. I want to create this using my Sony Nex 7 on my Mamiya RB67.