Flutterby™! : Pixels by the Pound

Next unread comment / Catchup all unread comments User Account Info | Logout | XML/Pilot/etc versions | Long version (with comments) | Weblog archives | Site Map | | Browse Topics

Pixels by the Pound

2006-09-26 15:44:43.101311+00 by petronius 2 comments

When I worked in a hospital's AV department, we did some work with Hasselblads. They were not pretty, or even very easy to use (I never got the hang of the waist-level viewfinder), but they were the best built cameras I've ever seen. They were, after all, the cameras used on the Moon. Now the 'Blad has gone digital, with a 39 megapixel model that looks remarkably like the old silver iodide models. Each shot generates 117 megabytes of data! Don't bother with an SD card, you must be "tethered" to a MAC or PC. Probably not the one for your vacation snaps.(tip o'the hat to Gizmodo)

[ related topics: Photography Work, productivity and environment Cool Technology David Hasselhoff ]

comments in ascending chronological order (reverse):

#Comment Re: made: 2006-09-26 18:12:09.054979+00 by: markd

So how much is one of these things? (oh, and it's not MAC, but Mac - it's not an acronym)

#Comment Re: made: 2006-09-26 18:23:56.406162+00 by: Dan Lyke

The 39 megapixel model looks to be about $30k. If you're doing product shots, or probably even high end studio portraits, I'll bet that pays for itself in film (especially exposure Polaroids, if they even make 'em anymore) right fast.

There are cheaper scanning backs with those kinds of resolutions for many product shot applications, though, so really this is about studio portraits.

I would happily settle for the $7k Canon EOS 1DS Mk II 16.7 megapixel camera 'cause you wouldn't be tied down by the auxiliary computer, so it'd be a camera you can take on the street with ya.