PENTAX 645D II

[D&A]

This Sony sensor thing reminds me of the good old days of film. Remember when you could buy a Mamiya, Hasselblad, and Pentax camera and stick the same roll of film in them?

And this is what I think is going to be really interesting to see how each manufacturer handles signal processing and color. It will fun to see where these cameras intersect and diverge.

True but optics will also play a big role in image output too. Look at the original Leica S2 and 645D...apparently same sensor yet image characteristics quite different. I attribute this more to the lenses than anything else. From what I've seen first hand of Pentax 67 lenses on the S2 via adapter, they were quite similar to those same lenses on the 645D.

Dave (D&A)

 

[bensonga]

True but optics will also play a big role in image output too. Look at the original Leica S2 and 645D...apparently same sensor yet image characteristics quite different. I attribute this more to the lenses than anything else. From what I've seen first hand of Pentax 67 lenses on the S2 via adapter, they were quite similar to those same lenses on the 645D.
Dave (D&A)

Wow...I didn't know that the 645D and Leica S2 had the same sensor. Do you have a link you could post here about that Dave?

I have got to get out there and shoot more with my 645D. With a whole arsenal of P645, P67 and Hasselblad Zeiss lenses to use on the 645D, I have no excuses.

Gary

 

[Shashin]

True but optics will also play a big role in image output too. Look at the original Leica S2 and 645D...apparently same sensor yet image characteristics quite different. I attribute this more to the lenses than anything else. From what I've seen first hand of Pentax 67 lenses on the S2 via adapter, they were quite similar to those same lenses on the 645D.

Dave (D&A)

Dave, the lenses will have some influence. But it is possible to put the same optics on all three. I would also imagine modern lenses will be closer and the companies will profile them. And to be honest, Pentax 67 lenses are not a great test. I had the 105mm for my 645D and the difference in color and contrast between that and the DFA 55mm is striking (the 645D works differently with 67 lenses and 645 lenses). I sold the 67 lens for the macro 120mm and the color is much closer to the new Pentax lens. I think if you tested those cameras with their native 120mm macros (all fine lenses), you would get a pretty good idea in the difference among cameras.

 

[Shashin]

I have a great idea. We need four East coast members: one to buy the Hasselblad, one to buy the Phase, one to buy the Pentax, and I will buy the beer. We get together and take pictures and drink beer. I am sure we will have results!

 

[alajuela]

Right now Bob mentioned too me Sony stock is not so hot right now due to many factors outside the camera side. Being aggressive they may just do something radical here.

Let's face it even if you own Phase you still want Hassy, Pentax, Leica, Sinar and Leaf in the market as a end user.

Hi

I remember reading that - what is keeping Sony Corp above water is the - Believe it or not - their insurance division. Their electronics division has yet to turn a profit in recent years. Surely the demise of "point and shot " cameras - due to cell phones is not helping.

Phil

 

[alajuela]

Maybe a red herring - but does bit depth have anything in real life to become a selling point? The IQ 250 is advertised as 16 bit.

Phil

 

[fotografz]

I'd also like to see the source of the info that the S2 and 645D used the same sensor. To my knowledge, it was the Hasselblad H4D/40 and the 645D that used the same Kodak sensor.

I have had the opportunity to use two sets of modern optics on the S2 … some of the newer HC and HCD Hasselblad lenses, and the native S and CS Leica optics.

I initially tested a H4D/40 against the S2 using the same HC and HCD lenses on both cameras.

I then sold the H4D/40 because the S2 with S lenses outperformed the Hasselblad H4D/40 (Leica claimed that the S lenses made up for the smaller sensor size of the S2 and could compete with a 50 meg sensor). IQ itself wasn't enough to swap, but the S form factor and dual shutter ability, plus full functioning H to S adapter made the Leica more attractive long term.

As far as I know, the original S2 sensor is the same one used in the newer S. The processing engine and buffer was altered to improve some performance factors.

Point is, while using other system lenses can be fun and creatively interesting … IMO, a system needs its native lenses for optimal performance. The ground up S system had this advantage going it … although the lack of S lenses initially made it less attractive, that is an issue since resolved.

- Marc

 

[Ben Rubinstein]

Can you draw that conclusion Marc or is the conclusion that the S lenses are simply superior?

 

[chrismuc]

Different sensors:
Leica S2/S use Kodak 45mm x 30mm 7500 x 5000 pixel 6.0 um CCD
Pentax 645D, PhaseOne P40+/IQ140, Leaf Creo 40/Aptus II 8 use Dalsa 44mm x 33mm 7360 x 5562 pixel 6.0 um CCD

 

[fotografz]

Can you draw that conclusion Marc or is the conclusion that the S lenses are simply superior?

"Superior" is going to be subjective no matter how you look at it Ben. Leica makes that claim, but it is in the eye of the beholder in the end.

I thought the S lenses resolved better, and provided a micro contrast that had a similar look and feel to many of my Leica M lenses on a CCD M9. Other's have made a similar observation. Images shot with the S and M9 have a consistent look and feel, with the S simply being a larger file.

What is also somewhat telling is the software profile corrections on the S lens images are much less severe than any others I've used. With some S lenses there is almost no corrections applied. Big correction difference between the Hasselblad wide angles and the Leica WAs. No comparison.

However, Hasselblad's recent HC50/3.5-II was such an improvement over the lens it replaced that I'd say it challenges the superiority claim … but I haven't tested it against Leica's new 45/2.8, nor am I likely to.

The only Hasselblad lens I kept was the HC100/2.2 … which exhibits more CA than the S lenses, but the character of the 100mm is worth it … and there is nothing between the S70mm and S120 Macro … with the S macro being to slow for fast paced AF portraits … making the HC100/2.2 my default portrait lens on the S2.


- Marc

 

[RVB]

Wow...I didn't know that the 645D and Leica S2 had the same sensor. Do you have a link you could post here about that Dave?

I have got to get out there and shoot more with my 645D. With a whole arsenal of P645, P67 and Hasselblad Zeiss lenses to use on the 645D, I have no excuses.

Gary

The S2 uses the KAF-37500 and the Pentax uses the KAF-40000,the Leica is 16bit and the Pentax 14bit afaik..

Size is slightly different,45x30 vs 44x33..

Rob

 

[fotografz]

Different sensors:
Leica S2/S use Kodak 45mm x 30mm 7500 x 5000 pixel 6.0 um CCD
Pentax 645D, PhaseOne P40+/IQ140, Leaf Creo 40/Aptus II 8 use Dalsa 44mm x 33mm 7360 x 5562 pixel 6.0 um CCD

Not sure this is correct either.

A quote from reviews when the 645D was launched:

"The PENTAX 645D incorporates a high-performance CCD image sensor produced by Kodak".


To my knowledge, this was the same sensor as used in the Hasselblad H4D/40 … although what each company did with the rest of the imaging chain was surely different. Dalsa made the later P1 and Leaf sensors, and Hasselblad used a Dalsa 60 meg sensor in its H4D/60.

- Marc

 

[Nick Devlin]

Pentax USA totally killed the 645D in the US. I tried really hard to work with them, and they disappeared when I pointed out basic use issues and sought help. By comparison, Pentax's man in Canada is terrific, but that's not enough. There needs to be a clean-out at Pentax USA. They have phenomenal products that need a company worthy to bring it to market.

- N.

 

[Paul2660]

Capture Integration is a dealer for the current Pentax 645D if and when this new version is Shipped they should be able to give a good support. My only issue with the original 645D was it took almost 2 years to get to market and after waiting for a while I moved to Phase One and purchased a P45+.

My issue was service and support and CI should be able to address that also.

As many people have mentioned the other weakness was availability of good glass. One of the best lenses Pentax made (still does in Japan) was the 35FA. I owned one for years and it was a good copy. Us edit with a Zork adapter on Canon for 5 years. Finally sold it to a friend who had purchased the 645D. I should note that lens was made in Vietnam which surprised me at the time.

Hope to see this new version do well in the US.

Paul C

 

[D&A]

Dave, the lenses will have some influence. But it is possible to put the same optics on all three. I would also imagine modern lenses will be closer and the companies will profile them. And to be honest, Pentax 67 lenses are not a great test. I had the 105mm for my 645D and the difference in color and contrast between that and the DFA 55mm is striking (the 645D works differently with 67 lenses and 645 lenses). I sold the 67 lens for the macro 120mm and the color is much closer to the new Pentax lens. I think if you tested those cameras with their native 120mm macros (all fine lenses), you would get a pretty good idea in the difference among cameras.

Will, that's almost exactly what I did when I had the chance to perform a head to head simultaneous test between the 645D with its FA 120 645 macro vs. Both the Leica S and S2 bodies with Leica ' s own 120 "S" macro....In both close up portrait shooting as well as a few city scape distant shots. These two 120mm lenses are considered one of the best from each manufacturer. Since each camera supposedly has the similar sensors and there is no way to mount the Leica lens on the Pentax body (or visa versa), this was the closest test of the two sensors I could perform at the time.

I just haven't had the time to post the unadjusted Raws nor crops nor describe the results ( which I hope to do in the future), but I got a good sense that what differences I was seeing was mainly due to the differences in the optics.

Apparently the Pentax 120 macro was designed to go down to 1:1 and therefore performed optimally between it's closest focusing distance to mid range. It did well at infinity but one could easily see it wasn't optimized for distant subjects ( nor should it have been). The Leica lens only has a reproduction ratio of 1:2 and seemed to do best at subject distances from something just short of 1:2 till almost infinity. It seems that was Leica's intent of making it more of an all-rounder.

There was small differences of color depth and tonal response and other small things I could decern, but I was pleasantly surprised how close the results between the two cameras were with these lenses. Its no surprise though that what makes the Leica S camera such an incredable performer optically, is its S lenses. This of course comes as no surprise to anyone. Even Pentax ' s arguably best 645 lens, the 120 macro, was able to hold its own compared to the Leica 120 at closer subject d

 

[D&A]

Pentax USA totally killed the 645D in the US. I tried really hard to work with them, and they disappeared when I pointed out basic use issues and sought help. By comparison, Pentax's man in Canada is terrific, but that's not enough. There needs to be a clean-out at Pentax USA. They have phenomenal products that need a company worthy to bring it to market.

- N.

Nick, you're exactly right! I had a close working and professional relationship with Pentax USA for many years and they were outstanding in their support and in working on technical issues I might come across in both using and testing out their 35mm and medium format equipment. It even surpassed my relationship with Nikon. That was at a time up till a number of years ago when Pentax was a family owned corporation and had close control over Pentax USA.

That all changed when the merger with Hoya took place and Pentax USA was completely gutted. It was a shell of its former self and more of a clearing house than a subsidarary of Pentax Japan. Unfortunately this was just around the time of the 645D release and support for the system as you noted was virtually non existant. If the 645D was released a number of years earlier, I think we'd all would have been mostly pleased with not only support of the 645D but wider availabilty of new legacy lenses, at least here in the USA.

From what I understand, it was Pentax USA ' S call in how they supported the 645D and for whatever reason, Pentax Japan hands were tied. In other words it didn't seem the home office in Japan was inclined to intervene...Unfortunately.

Dave (D&A)

 

[Shashin]

Maybe a red herring - but does bit depth have anything in real life to become a selling point? The IQ 250 is advertised as 16 bit.

Phil

Phase does this with all their backs. Basically, they simply put in a 16-bit A/D converter regardless if the sensor can actually produce 16-bits of data. There are no true 16-bit cameras available. DxO mark scores confirm this, BTW. This is just a little bit (no pun intended) dishonest of Phase.

 

[Shashin]

Different sensors:
Leica S2/S use Kodak 45mm x 30mm 7500 x 5000 pixel 6.0 um CCD
Pentax 645D, PhaseOne P40+/IQ140, Leaf Creo 40/Aptus II 8 use Dalsa 44mm x 33mm 7360 x 5562 pixel 6.0 um CCD

But the underlying technology is not going to be different. Even if Leica puts in a 16-bit A/D converter. Leica simply seem to have bough exclusivity to the sensor.

 

[Shashin]

From what I understand, it was Pentax USA ' S call in how they supported the 645D and for whatever reason, Pentax Japanese hands were tied. In other words it didn't seem the home office in Japan was inclined to intervene...Unfortunately.

Dave (D&A)

Unfortunately, the overseas corporations are regarded as somewhat independent can can make choices over products. A number of cameras that are sold in Japan don't make it to the US. The other driver of model choice can be large retail buyers. If they don't want a particular model, it may be enough not to offer it in a region.

 

[jduncan]

"To be first" is the definition of "beating someone to the punch".

Hasselblad announced it's H4D/60 on the "Horizon". Turned out that "Horizon" was well over a year away.

- Marc

This is a great moment to infer if it was due to Phase One exclusivity on the sensor, due to lack of expertise with Dalsa Sensors (Phase one was smart and they buy leaf) or plain incompetence.

Best regards,

J. Duncan