I have 500 quids (£) worth of Blad 501c/m with chrome 80 & 120 lenses and I love it. It's been lightly used & I expect it to outlive me (I'm 54). But Blad has just announced a 50mp back called the CFV-50c which, for £8700, I can stick on the back of my £500 kit and never need to buy a roll of film again. Thinks - I could sell my two film backs for, perhaps, £75 and reduce the new back to a bargain £8625.
Or perhaps not. I bought the Blad 4 years ago because I love to waste film. That's why I bought it rather than a second-hand DSLR for a similar price. So why would I want to drop the best part of 9 grand on a digital back? I just dont get it. Yet chatter on the net has decided that it's a fair to good price for what it offers.
I sort of get the H series of digital cameras, if one is either very affluent (they are £20k+) or makes a living out of commercial photography where a client 'needs' to instantly assess tethered images. But putting the price of a used luxury car onto the backside of my existing V? I don't think so. Perhaps the market will prove me wrong. Or perhaps with Blad's latest pimped-up Sony re-badged cameras and megapixel chasing numbers, people will look back on the simple, robust workhorse of the V series and think "ah - those were the days". And - for £500 - what a bargain they are.
