Pentax 645Z vs Alpa technical camera

[voidshatter]

Just did a brief comparison. RAW files available here: https://www.dropbox.com/sh/p1rbfp87ipvup0d/AAA3gG-XgOJd_sNBsOyDRmS7a?dl=0

Body	645Z	Alpa 12 STC
Wide angle	28-45mm f4.5	40mm HR
Standard prime	75mm f2.8	75mm f5.6
Total weight	3235g	2525g
Size	Huge	Compact
Tilt & Shift	No	Yes
L-bracket	Yes	Yes
Live View	Yes	Yes
Focus Peaking	Yes	No
Timelapse	Yes	No
Weather Sealed	Yes	No
Dual memory slot	Yes	No
Capture One	Not supported	Supported
RAW bits	14-bit	16-bit
Touch Screen	No	Yes
Tilt Screen	Yes	No
Image Stabilization	Yes	No
Autofocus	Yes	No
Video	Yes	No
Body made in	Philippines	Switzerland
Lens made in	Vietnam	Germany
Price	Kidney	Kidney Kidney Kidney Kidney

 

[voidshatter]

 

[voidshatter]

 

[JeRuFo]

That is quite a clear difference in resolution. And you can clearly see where the money has gone.
You do need to have a need for it though. I find the crispness of shots out of a tech cam can pose problems with certain subjects when you print smaller sizes. Prints tend to become really in your face.

With respect to color I would have to give the edge to the Pentax. Although higher resolution brings more colors, there are a lot of strange shadow colors under the mixed lighting. But that might be down to post processing.

Not quite sure what advantage a manufacturer in Europe would give me over one in Asia though.

 

[tjv]

Wow, it's really clear which one is sharper here!

 

[vjbelle]

I don't completely get the point of this. First of all you can knock off a couple of kidneys, maybe more, if you put the Rody copal 0 on an Actus. Also the Pentax is truly handicapped with the zoom lens. The Rody 40mm is widely known as one of the best wides available. If a really nice prime lens was coupled to the Pentax the differences would/could be less apparent. So this, to me, is really a story about lenses.

Victor

 

[stephengilbert]

As Mike Johnston said, "ome people enjoy testing to such a great extent that it's all they ever do." http://theonlinephotographer.typepa...apher/2015/11/an-attitude-toward-testing.html

Some posters here seem to get a great deal of pleasure from measuring one thing against another and then telling the world what they've done. No harm in it, I guess, but sometimes it gets old.

 

[GrahamWelland]

I must say that really it's like bringing a knife to a gunfight when you compare the Pentax lens to the Rodie 40HR and even more so if it had been the 32HR.

thing is though that it's also about what is the best tool for the job. Personally I think that shooting with a technical camera is the most enjoyable way of capturing images but it's not the most universal tool compared to the Pentax.

It's all about horses for courses as the saying goes.

Personally, I'm always keen to see comparisons when raw files are shared. Normally the tiny jpg files people post show nothing. In this case it's pretty clear. Regarding the colour differences, well I'm sure that you could set up a custom ICC in Capture One to get the look that you are after.

 

[jagsiva]

Not sure why you'd compare these two outside of the simple reason that you had both kits lying around.

The 28/45 is supposed to be a great lens but it not fair to compare it to a 40HR. It is also not supposed to be at its best at the long end.

 

[Geoff]

Its interesting to see for the sake of curiosity and might be useful for some fence sitters (wherever they might be!). In terms of functionality, its more apples to oranges.

 

[Bryan Stephens]

First, the lenses do make a huge difference. Coming from a tech cam shooter that had the 40HR on my Cambo, there was not much that could compete with it.

Second. It is not only a comparison of the Pentax against the Alpa but what back is the Alpa using.

Many many reviewers on the net consider the sensor in the Pentax to be one of the finest on the market (especially for the price point as you are roughly 1/3 the price of the Hasselblad and 1/5 the price of the Phase kit), but again, that is a matter of personal taste.

If you prefer to shoot with a dslr body, then the Pentax is an extremely good choice as your latitude is great considering that it is equipped with the Sony CMOS sensor (the same as in the IQ 250, 350) The one drawback is that Pentax do not have a sizable stable of lenses that can keep up with that sensor, but you can use the Hassy V lenses with an adapter.

On the other hand, if you like the versatility of being able to shoot with a DSLR or a tech cam, then the Pentax won't work, unless they come up with a way to mount it to an Actus (which to me is not quite the same thing).

Lastly, it is difficult to compare jpegs from two different processing software suites as each one uses its own algorithms to do the work.

 

[GrahamWelland]

I'm inclined to think that the back/sensor is irrelevant in this comparison due to the vast gap in lens performance.

 

[tjv]

I think this test is interesting in that in a previous thread here the 645Z with the 28-45mm zoom was compared to an 80mpx Phase back with the new, blue ring Schneider 35mm and 55mm LS. Differences in that test were pretty marginal to most peoples eyes. While this might count more as a lens test to some, what it does prove is that the 35mm and 55mm Schneider SLR lenses–at least the copies tested in the other thread–aren't especially good when compared to the Rodenstock HR offerings shown here. Differences in colour etc seem negligible to me, unless you must rely on straight out the box colour more often than not.

 

[Paul2660]

In the other thread the raw files were available for download which I did. The results were much closer 35LS and the Pentax zoom.
It would be nice to see a comparison of the 35LS and the 32HR. no movements just center shots.

As for Pentax, they are getting quite aggressive.

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1200235-REG/pentax_kb16599_645z_medium_format_dslr.html

3K overall savings. Note the value add warranty.

Paul C

 

[JeRuFo]

I think the comparison is quite just (though not fair), because people ask why you would spend so much more money on a P1 back and a tech cam while the 645z has the same sensor. This shows why.
As far as the lens comparison, both are the obvious choice with both systems. If you need a wide angle on the Pentax there isn't much better than the 28-45.

 

[dougpeterson]

I think this test is interesting in that in a previous thread here the 645Z with the 28-45mm zoom was compared to an 80mpx Phase back with the new, blue ring Schneider 35mm and 55mm LS. Differences in that test were pretty marginal to most peoples eyes. While this might count more as a lens test to some, what it does prove is that the 35mm and 55mm Schneider SLR lenses–at least the copies tested in the other thread–aren't especially good when compared to the Rodenstock HR offerings shown here. Differences in colour etc seem negligible to me, unless you must rely on straight out the box colour more often than not.

The test of the 35LS was severely hampered by being using at f/14; well beyond diffraction limit of the 80mp digital back.

It was like comparing a McLaren to a Mustang while having both tow a boat behind them.

 

[Bryan Stephens]

I think the comparison is quite just (though not fair), because people ask why you would spend so much more money on a P1 back and a tech cam while the 645z has the same sensor. This shows why.
As far as the lens comparison, both are the obvious choice with both systems. If you need a wide angle on the Pentax there isn't much better than the 28-45.

Two different tools for two different methods of photography. One excels for pure IQ for architectural and landscape work and the other is able to do that, plus studio, fashion and "street" work albeit with difference in overall IQ.

It depends on what you are using said tool for, and what your budget allows for. In the end, no matter how much you spend on your kit, if you don't have the passion or ability then it is of little use either way.

 

[kdphotography]

....
As for Pentax, they are getting quite aggressive.

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1200235-REG/pentax_kb16599_645z_medium_format_dslr.html

3K overall savings. Note the value add warranty.

Paul C

Nice kit, all in a ready to go hard side case. Pentax took notice of Phase's packaging :ROTFL:

Smart offering by Pentax, making it 'easy' putting a good base kit all together. This year has been way too expensive already---this would be a kick-*** camera to convert to full spectrum/IR. I certainly can't justify a wide spectrum or Achromatic MFDB.

ken

 

[Pradeep]

Two different tools for two different methods of photography. One excels for pure IQ for architectural and landscape work and the other is able to do that, plus studio, fashion and "street" work albeit with difference in overall IQ.

It depends on what you are using said tool for, and what your budget allows for. In the end, no matter how much you spend on your kit, if you don't have the passion or ability then it is of little use either way.

Agree.

It is impossible to do an honest and fair comparison of two camera systems that are so different fundamentally.

For general purpose shooting and versatility you cannot beat a small format 'lens on a box' camera. Most of us would be willing to compromise on IQ in such cases. Absolute best quality comes at a cost - not just in terms of money.

So in a hypothetical world, if money were no object we would still exert a certain choice, based on form factor, IQ, convenience and not least of all, shooting needs.

 

[DougDolde]

Maybe I missed it but what back was on the Alpa?