What's wrong with entry level is that it existed (past tense) to make it possible for aspiring pros to get into MF, and we don't need that anymore.
"Elitist"? I don't think so. Sensible!
Show of hands, all of you who have 'gone through' multiple systems before ending up with one you really like.
Hands up too all those who are still looking for a MF system to replace/complement the one you already have.
All in all, how much have you spend so far, and how does that compare to what an end-of-the-quest system would cost?
Anything spent is recoverable in whole or large part, because very little depreciation remains. Switching would incur little or no additional cost.
Maybe in absolute terms, Bronica cameras and lenses don't equal Hasselblad cameras and lenses. But I don't care. I got a Bronica to learn on. I wanted to see what I thought of MF, particularly with an interchangeable lens SLR. I find the PE lenses to be damn good. Maybe eventually I will have a Hasselblad. I know for a long time I would not have gotten one because I had no interest in square format. That might change.
I had a limited amount of money to put into acquiring MF equipment. If I pay more for each piece I get fewer pieces. The point of getting more pieces is to learn more. For around the price of a KEH BGN 500C body with back and WLF and 50, 80, and short tele C type lenses, I got 40mm, 75mm, 105mm 1:1 macro, 135mm, 150mm, and 250mm lenses, an AEIII finder, and various accessories. I would like a 50mm, and maybe a 180mm instead of the 150, the 135, or both. I'm not sure. That's a good thing.
The point is I bought the setup to learn MF, learn 645 format and figure out what I like and don't. I'm not sure the 4:3 ratio is for me. If I decide it's not and sell all my 645 stuff it will be without regret. It would also make moot the questions in my mind about whether the Pentax or Mamiya 645's would be better for me than the Bronica. I would have learned much and would recover my outlay in total or close to it. Any money I didn't recover would in my mind have been well spent.
I chose the ETR-Si partly because it was cheap, but mainly because it was more different from what I was used to than the Pentax or Mamiya 645's. I wanted to try a camera without an instant-return mirror and focal plane shutter. I wanted to see what using an SLR with leaf shutters was like.
If I had hated the mirror blackout, then I would have had a pretty good idea that the Hasselblad 500's, Bronica SQ's and GS, and RB/RZ's were likely to bother me, too.
It's a starting point. I don't know what the end-of-quest system will be, because I don't know where the quest will end. I don't want to pick one and designate it as such just because it is widely revered. I don't even know what the format will be. I don't see the need to try every camera out there; right now I'm trying to get a feel for my preferred format. Maybe I'll cut the 645 down to 3 lenses and use the money to get an SQA or GS-1 or Pentax 67, plus a couple lenses, just to compare.
Maybe after Kodachrome's gone I'll sell all my 35mm stuff and go into MF or LF, and be lxdude in name only. Or keep a little, or keep it all, including the Nikon stuff.
Everything I have has prices that have largely stabilized. There's no reason to sweat much. I can sell something and buy another like it for about the same price if I change my mind. No need to get caught up in hard and fast decisions at the outset.
Though it may sound like it, I'm not the type to buy and sell, on a never-ending quest for something "better". I choose something I like and stick to it, and only change when I think there's a good reason. I'm just speaking of possibilities. The way things are now the format and equipment options abound.
