Re: Whatever happened to Pentax?

Michael Benveniste <mhb-offer@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:

>On Mon, 10 Mar 2008 20:44:22 +0000, Tony Polson
><docnews2011@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>
>>The Hasselblad H3D-39 uniquely satisfies a need for a 39 MP DSLR.
>>While there will only be a (relatively) small number of people who
>>need 39 MP, the camera will be profitable if those people are prepared
>>to pay a high price.
>
>>I just wondered how many people were in that position.
>
>Walk into non-photographer friend's home, and note the number of large,
>high-quality photographic prints.  Then do the same for a small or
>medium-sized business.
>
>The H3D-39 is designed to create a gallery quality 18x24" print, or a
>very good quality 27x36".  Currently, that size of print is not really
>in fa****on for homes.  In a business setting, you'll see the occasional
>founders' shot or team photograph, but even those are now more likely to
>appear on a webpage than on a wall.
>
>My _guess_ is that quite a few working pros have an occasional need to
>print at that size, but it's not enough to warrant the investment.
>Instead, they'll either look to rent an H3D or fall back to a film
>camera.  In the last year, the two 24x30" prints I've made both came out
>of my 4x5" field camera.
>
>Of course, fa****ons could change next week.  But if I was a pro, I
>wouldn't tie up my capital on that sort of bet.


An interesting analysis, Michael.  However I think the market for such
prints is vani****ngly small.  

The H3D appears popular for fa****on and advertising photography.  
39 MP is probably pretty useful for billboard size prints, and high
quality reproduction in fa****on magazines and catalogs.  I have no
idea what pro****tion of the H3D market these uses represent, however.