Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!
i agree but it must be the compression.
anyway i suspect the cmos sensor will kill all the magic from the ccd sensor has i was used with the 645d. is sony is cmos, we will have a kind of image with great dr shadow recovery, but less capability of managing highlight especially specular. i have not seen raw samples from phase or gassy but i suspect the sony sensor will produce similar images of sony ff or apsc with just more resolution.
i have many lenses so my impression ( I'm not super pixel peeper i like sometimes less resolution but good rendering)Hi,
Yes, the Pentax samples are awful. I would suggest that vendors should post decent raw files instead of artsy images that fall apart in actual pixels view.
DigitalTransition posted some very good images from the IQ-250 (in raw) and the sensor in the P645Z would deliver similarly, as both are same Sony sensor.
I understand Pentax 645 lenses are a mixed bag, but some seems to be very good.
Best regards
Erik
Have to say it, sorry but Nikon and Canon are about to die a very slow death.
We should be worried about this, not celebrating it. The last thing we need in the world is another diversity snuffing monopoly.I'd predict that Hasselblad will be practically dead a year from now. P1 will survive as long as there are still people willing to pay that much more for a tiny bit extra. Certainly very few pro's will any more as Sony joins to shrink an already tiny market.
Hey Ben, isn't that the same thing the Mafia says when they kill someone?Business is business.
While there are a few wedding photographers that utilize MFD, (I'm one of them), the overwhelmingly vast majority do not, and wouldn't even if they had the money … these days of declining weddings and increased competition, it is getting harder to make living wage shooting weddings, let alone buy gear that few clients would care about even if you had it.I have a hard time seeing why a wedding photographer would choose a IQ250 instead of a 645Z, even if the 645Z would be the more expensive system. Some will still do of course, but l think the 645Z may become an even tougher competitor than the D800 was.
This sort of commentary seems to position "Rich People" as somehow being indiscriminate, and even stupid. Assuming those making the comment aren't rich, I'd ask who is the smart one?in my opinion the openly point at the moment are leaf shutter lenses and view camera. the rest is not worth 4 time the price. you can try to convince us as much as you want but reality is that the pentax is the best offer for many photo needs, and cost 4 times less. Anyway the world is full of rich people who like to spend their money. so p1 still will have market.
Well said Dave. Like a few here have already mentioned, I'm in the camp of remaining skeptical regarding CMOS.This is why I am cautiously optimistic about the CMOS based 645Z vs the current CCD 645D. I recall the excitement I had when the Leica M240 was annoyed with its plethora of features and new higher ISO performing CMOS sensor. Unfortunately I thought like some others some aspects of image quality were lost when compared to the previous CCD based M9. Of course trade offs when all things are considered when certain cameras are upgraded from CCD to CMOS (in my opinion and from comparative observations made).
Dave (D&A)
i have many lenses so my impression ( I'm not super pixel peeper i like sometimes less resolution but good rendering)
a 35 3,5: superb. my preferred lens. i choose this cause take 77 filter, the fa model is probably better. free ca lens, with great sharpness corner to corner
fa 55 2,8: very good lens and bokeh. great silent af
fa 75 2,8: tack sharp
a 120 macro: like the fa version but manual, bulky. superb sharpness,low ca
150 2,8: mixed bag, great rendering and contrast but a bit soft wide open, sharp stopped down. i love this lens but pixel peepers could be disappointed
200 f4: sharp tele, low ca.stopped down perfeect iq
a*300 f4: super tele
fa 300 5,6: like the 200 f4
fa 300 4: superb lens and rendering. sharp. super building. paired with the new safox and 27 point can be amazing for wildlife and sport with 3fps.
fa 400 5,6: a bit less than 300 f4 but stil i love this lens.the screw drive af is super fast, comparable to the speed of canon usm but with noise
teleconverte 1,4: i use it with all long lenses and never degrades the images, just a small lost of contrast wide open. all in all superb piece of glass
135 f4 LS: mine is a bit stiff to clock the shutter in the lens. sharpness ok all range.
45-85 f 4,5: bulky but good lens. i love it.
80-160: i love it for me great lens but super bulky.
600 f 5,6: my dream lens:9 i will buy it soon
The world works in mysterious ways... knocking on wood here, but I personally never had any electronic device (important or not) fail on me in forever. The few devices that did fail have either far exceeded their quota or were no longer even useful, like a laptop that worked for over 6 years every day. I keep backups, but never had a busted hard drive on any of my computers, since getting my first PC with a 266mhz Pentium II and whopping 4.4GB disk.The "service" advantage keeps popping up here. Is the MF service better than any other service? If so I haven't really noticed, those 1 person dealers available in this part of the world which has dealership more or less as a side income can't really provide state of the art service, they do what they can but it's only so much they can do.
i have many lenses so my impression ( I'm not super pixel peeper i like sometimes less resolution but good rendering)
a 35 3,5: superb. my preferred lens. i choose this cause take 77 filter, the fa model is probably better. free ca lens, with great sharpness corner to corner
fa 55 2,8: very good lens and bokeh. great silent af
fa 75 2,8: tack sharp
a 120 macro: like the fa version but manual, bulky. superb sharpness,low ca
150 2,8: mixed bag, great rendering and contrast but a bit soft wide open, sharp stopped down. i love this lens but pixel peepers could be disappointed
200 f4: sharp tele, low ca.stopped down perfeect iq
a*300 f4: super tele
fa 300 5,6: like the 200 f4
fa 300 4: superb lens and rendering. sharp. super building. paired with the new safox and 27 point can be amazing for wildlife and sport with 3fps.
fa 400 5,6: a bit less than 300 f4 but stil i love this lens.the screw drive af is super fast, comparable to the speed of canon usm but with noise
teleconverte 1,4: i use it with all long lenses and never degrades the images, just a small lost of contrast wide open. all in all superb piece of glass
135 f4 LS: mine is a bit stiff to clock the shutter in the lens. sharpness ok all range.
45-85 f 4,5: bulky but good lens. i love it.
80-160: i love it for me great lens but super bulky.
600 f 5,6: my dream lens:9 i will buy it soon
The "service" advantage keeps popping up here. Is the MF service better than any other service? If so I haven't really noticed, those 1 person dealers available in this part of the world which has dealership more or less as a side income can't really provide state of the art service, they do what they can but it's only so much they can do.
I just think "why not buy three cameras to the price of a half P1 back, and then you can handle very long repair times, or even ditch the camera if it gets really bad, still cheaper". I think the personal service business is a thing of the past, it is a bit sad when it's all become web shopping, but that's the way it is.
P1 could continue do what they do, but not many struggling professionals would like to pay $25k extra this obsolete business model obviously costs. Industrial, institutions, luxury is the future for them, or alter their business model. Personally I actually prefer paying $25k less and not have sales persons call me all the time about upgrades.
And by the way, all medium format cameras are ugly. Except tech cameras of course.
I like diversity, and do hope P1 and Hassy find a way to not get pushed into industrial/luxury niche, and I do hope that way includes lower prices and larger sales volumes. Concerning the luxury niche a high price is an advantage, it keeps the poor people out of the game, and to be a luxury item it must be exclusive. Showing off with more expensive gear than anyone else has is still something some people like to do, it's a status thing, just like wearing expensive clothes or having an expensive car, so it will work.
Mine is. :thumbup:The "service" advantage keeps popping up here. Is the MF service better than any other service?
Why not buy 6 D800s? or 8 A7rs? Then just throw away the broken camera rather than dealing with repairs. If someone prefers a P1 for the work they do, have the lenses and options they need, and they are successful doing so, why would they want something else?I just think "why not buy three cameras to the price of a half P1 back, and then you can handle very long repair times, or even ditch the camera if it gets really bad, still cheaper".
You forgot to add the "successful photographer" to your list of that potential future for P1. I'm not sure it is the job of all camera companies to cater to the entry level or struggling professional denominator. So, one camera may fit that bill, while another fits a different one. If I were vested in a P1 60 or 80 meg system, with the lenses that I need for what and how I shoot, the advent of a faster shooting 50 meg CMOS back may be of interest as an addition that further amortizes my current system, rather than a new one that falls short in all the important areas I already determined necessary.P1 could continue do what they do, but not many struggling professionals would like to pay $25k extra this obsolete business model obviously costs. Industrial, institutions, luxury is the future for them, or alter their business model. Personally I actually prefer paying $25k less and not have sales persons call me all the time about upgrades.
Except mine, which is beautiful :thumbs:And by the way, all medium format cameras are ugly. Except tech cameras of course.
Again you make the "social argument" like that has anything to do with the subject. I wish BMW and Lexus would price their cars the same as Chevy, and Rolex the same as Citizens, and Caviar was a commodity. If some brand conscience buyer selects the more expensive choice what do you care? Personally, I like it, and they can sell the thing to whomever they wish as long as it keeps them in business and making the products I want and need to do things the way I want to, rather than being forced into joining the Borg collective.I like diversity, and do hope P1 and Hassy find a way to not get pushed into industrial/luxury niche, and I do hope that way includes lower prices and larger sales volumes. Concerning the luxury niche a high price is an advantage, it keeps the poor people out of the game, and to be a luxury item it must be exclusive. Showing off with more expensive gear than anyone else has is still something some people like to do, it's a status thing, just like wearing expensive clothes or having an expensive car, so it will work.
LOL! After so many dissertation length postings (I'm not referring to anyone but myself) regarding thoughts of the new 645Z and Ricoh/Pentax marketing and support of the 645 system, along comes a gentleman (Ed), a man of few but meaningful words about simply waiting to see if the new 645Z lives up to its "on paper" potential. Either Ed is very smart and pragmatic or he's simply too exhausted to type very much these days, having now been up countless of nights with his adorable lovely newborn. Then again maybe its a mixture of both . Well done Ed!I am very excited by what this camera looks like on paper. Buying it will depend on knowing a little more about it in practice. Looks promising though!
Ed
:deadhorse:with aòò due respect ...èrobably lenses from leica are better, and they have ls lenses...but handling in camera performance and features, the leica s is far behind pentax. the 645d and now the much better 645z are simply a k3 with a bigger sensor. tons of buttons for fast and friendly use....i tried the leica s at photo kin for more than an hours and it reminded me the canon cameras as far as ergonomics.
personally i'd like to see a comparison between 645d and leica s. in my opinion the difference in Iq will be minimal.