Originally posted by Dan Rentea When you're going to make a living from high quality prints taken with medium format cameras
"When I'm going to make a living..." has nothing to do with actually image quality in print. I don't know what you are talking about, please make an effort to get out your shoes and look at the matter from an outside of "camera addicted" perspective, try to look at it from the perspective of someone outside of the camera head world.
For you to understand: I've been taking digital images to twenty years, and before that I had a Fuji film camera using 36 exposures rolls. For the decade I travelled professionally and on vacation trips, I didn't use my film camera, digital was so convenient that I stopped using my film camera, and I took digital images with compact cameras, then with the Pentax K200D, those 25 000+ images are great memories, some of them are unique. Unfortunately, I can't even print any good quality 16"x24" photos until the years I used the K5 and only when the image was capture at low ISO. This has nothing to do with professional use or not. Until now we go sold on small digital cameras that were said to be so great by marketers of Pentax, Canon, Nikon & Co. when your receive the poster print from the lab, it's a reality check, you really that 15 years of images are unusable for any enlargement other than postcard to A4 size.
---------- Post added 16-02-20 at 08:45 ----------
Originally posted by Dan Rentea my friend who has printers that costs more than two Pentax 645z cameras (Epson Sure Color P20000)
Printer is not expensive. Canon Image Pro 4000 sells for $4500 and it can produce more impressive images than throwing $4500 in more camera gear. My point is, having bought a 645D ten years ago would have proved a better use of the money than going through 3 camera + lens upgrades that cost the same. The situation is that there is much more money to be made by selling cameras upgrades versus selling printers, so the marketing effort is onto cameras and lense. Look at DPReview, no a single printer review for the last 8 years, they don't evaluate print labs either, guess why... despite DPRev (and other sites) are supposed to deal with all aspects of photography, they only chose to review products where there is the most money to be made. That also is a reality check. Think again: on the one hand the internet, youtube, on the other hand the reality check of the life of photographs after they are taken. Reality check, lets get our head out of the marketing smoke!
---------- Post added 16-02-20 at 08:56 ----------
Originally posted by Dan Rentea from a guy who charge 8000$+ for a shooting - Karl Taylor - who is a Hasselblad and Broncolor ambassador.
Yes, he's use an MF system for charging 8K, while according to others he should be using the last model XYZ from ABC brand because it's new. Karl also sell workshops because the 8K shooting days might not be very often, so obviously workshops and sponsorships help smooth out the income.
---------- Post added 16-02-20 at 09:32 ----------
Karl says it all it that video:
1) He used full frame film
2) He used 5DIII (skipped micro43, apsc et. al)
3) He uses medium format
Just confirms what I said, better spend the money of larger format than spend the money into upgrading at every successive new model from the same brand.