A must read comparison

[tokengirl]

I don't understand these type of tests with photos of brick walls and whatnot. These are the kind of tests that I do when I buy a piece of used equipment to quickly make sure it's functioning correctly, not to determine if I like the equipment or not.

I just wish I could find some good photographs taken with the Pentax 645D somewhere on the web. To clarify, when I say "good photographs" I do not mean photographs that show how many pixels it has or that it is capable of auto-focusing correctly. So far most of what I am finding are photos of items one might find in their kitchen, some flower blossoms, and touristy type snapshots one might just as easily take with a point & shoot camera. Oh, and some brick walls.

Is there anyone out there using this camera to more of its full potential? Maybe some great landscapes? Some fabulous B&W conversions? Something interesting?

Yes I already checked out the Pentax 645D group on Flickr. It is greatly lacking in the "interestingness" department.

 

[Bill Caulfeild-Browne]

Lu-La has a very good video series on using C1. Better than C1's rather short offerings.
Bill

 

[Bill Caulfeild-Browne]

Still impressed with what that little M9 can produce. Fantastic lenses, little or no anti-aliasing filter and a CCD sensor are a great combination.

I agree, Kurt. I have recently made some 30 inch prints from M9 files and darned if they don't look as good as my P65+ files at a reasonable viewing distance.....

Bill

 

[David Schneider]

I just don't get the point about high iso medium format and its desirability as a feature. From my point of view, if you get some and do not loose anything I guess that would ok with me, but since there is engineering involved, and engineering is all about balancing compromises, there is usually a loss somewhere for each gain.

Bob,

When I got my Canon 5dMark2 I found out there was a whole world of possibilities when using iso's like 4,000 or higher that weren't there with my 5d. Point is as you have higher iso's, especially if you photography people or events or sports or weddings, the possibilities available to you increase.

And in the case of the 5dMK2, nothing was lost and there was nice gain in quality of images. So it probably can be done with mf.

I recognize that one camera can't do everything, but higher iso makes the mf cameras much more useful to many of us.

 

[douglasf13]

Pentax still sounds very interesting for me.
Looks like DSLR handling with MF sensor for "reasonable" price.

I still dont understand why they cant put a 35mm sized MF-style (CCD) sensor with 22MP in a Nikon/Canon/Sony DSLR body.

Why? The rather ancient sensor technology that the CCDs in these MFDBs (and the M9) are derived from is not particularly great at the pixel level. It's the lack of an AA, supporting electronics, sensor size, and very good CFAs that are probably what you're seeing as an advantage over the CMOS sensors in DSLRs. I'd rather see the opposite: a MFDB with a large EXMOR CMOS sensor in it.

 

[Jack]

Speaking of which, and while i remember to ask - Jack, can you suggest any book/e-book/dvd on tapping into C1 for real?

Sure, i am getting these videos in emails as registered C1Pro user and so on, but i sometime feel like reading a bit more, b/c every time i feel like i am missing something in there.

It's tough to learn C1 from a book. The web tutorials are fine, but they limit your interaction with the instructor and ultimately that's where they fall apart (IMHO).

The best way to learn it is to be able to interact directly with somebody teaching you that can show you all the ins and outs in a clear, concise fashion. Guy and I do offer 1-on-1 instruction, which is I think the best way to learn it, but ultimately it's not convenient for everybody depending on their geographic location. (Of course our workshops are excellent in this regard too!) The next best thing I can recommend would be one of Capture Integration's online webinar series -- Doug Peterson (Dougpetersonci on this forum) is an excellent C1 instructor :thumbs:

 

[Bob]

Bob,

When I got my Canon 5dMark2 I found out there was a whole world of possibilities when using iso's like 4,000 or higher that weren't there with my 5d. Point is as you have higher iso's, especially if you photography people or events or sports or weddings, the possibilities available to you increase.

And in the case of the 5dMK2, nothing was lost and there was nice gain in quality of images. So it probably can be done with mf.

I recognize that one camera can't do everything, but higher iso makes the mf cameras much more useful to many of us.

David,
As an ex 5D Mark II owner I disagree.
The step from 5D to mark II was an improvement, but the trade off in the 5DII produced images that had smeary color at almost all isos which grew worse with increasing sensitivity. ok, sure it allowed you to get something but at the loss of several bits of image information depth and increases in banding. Of course if what you shoot is all about low light, then it is a must for you, but for what I shoot ISO above 800 was unusable.
-bob

 

[tjv]

I thought it was an interesting read. Some parts were informative and others just speculative and / or biased. Although the Pentax is undoubtably a good camera, when I buy a camera my decision is not based solely on it's absolute performance, but also the complete system makeup and after sales support. I'm prepared to pay more for a system I can grow with and rely on. At the moment the best all around bang for the buck camera for me seems to be the (mythical) H4D-31. I suspect Phase has a product to compete at that price point now or in the works that I'm unaware of, and if it mounts on a tech cam I reckon it would also be a winner. If money were no object and I was prone to buying with my heart only, I'd buy the S2. Oh the be a poor, struggling photographer...

 

[GrahamWelland]

Looking on the bright side, any competition has to be a good thing. There was a time when the Pentax would have appealed to me but, boy, did they take their time about getting back into the market ... they missed that boat. :deadhorse:

 

[tjv]

David,
As an ex 5D Mark II owner I disagree.
The step from 5D to mark II was an improvement, but the trade off in the 5DII produced images that had smeary color at almost all isos which grew worse with increasing sensitivity. ok, sure it allowed you to get something but at the loss of several bits of image information depth and increases in banding. Of course if what you shoot is all about low light, then it is a must for you, but for what I shoot ISO above 800 was unusable.
-bob

I shoot a D700 and recently edited a friends images for an exhibition that were shot with a 5DII. The images were shot at all ISOs up to 6400. Admitting that my perspective is biased towards Nikon, I was genuinely impressed with the file quality of the Canon across the board. They certainly looked different with regards to colour rendition etc, but I think in its category the MKII punches above its weight. And in print the images looked great, which is the real test.
I'm certain others have a different opinion on the Canon files to me, and that they don't hold a candle to MF images at low ISOs, but I recount this story only because I really don't like Canon products - I have had bad experiences with many EOS cameras and would never buy another. I guess it depends on expectations and the application for which the camera is being used. For the type of photos I take to satisfy my own creative ends, I agree with Bob. I'd prefer to use his P65+!

 

[doug]

Still impressed with what that little M9 can produce. Fantastic lenses, little or no anti-aliasing filter and a CCD sensor are a great combination.

I'm :deadhorse: but I'm still there will be no R10.

 

[fotografz]

I don't understand these type of tests with photos of brick walls and whatnot. These are the kind of tests that I do when I buy a piece of used equipment to quickly make sure it's functioning correctly, not to determine if I like the equipment or not.

I just wish I could find some good photographs taken with the Pentax 645D somewhere on the web. To clarify, when I say "good photographs" I do not mean photographs that show how many pixels it has or that it is capable of auto-focusing correctly. So far most of what I am finding are photos of items one might find in their kitchen, some flower blossoms, and touristy type snapshots one might just as easily take with a point & shoot camera. Oh, and some brick walls.

Is there anyone out there using this camera to more of its full potential? Maybe some great landscapes? Some fabulous B&W conversions? Something interesting?

Yes I already checked out the Pentax 645D group on Flickr. It is greatly lacking in the "interestingness" department.

+1.

-Marc

 

[KurtKamka]

Doug, sadly I'm certain that there are many who feel the way that you do. Though only 10mp, the DMR still provides some of the most gorgeous image quality that I've seen. It's really a shame that Leica's managerial and financial issues at the time prevented the company from developing a serious replacement. IMHO, focusing on the strength of its lenses, the concept of a limited AA filter and final image quality would have attracted a passionate following. Even if Leica never came close to putting a dent to Canon or Nikon sales numbers, you have to think that there was and still is an audience for Leica R 35mm solutions. And, most would probably pay a premium to get that solution. At this point in time it's an opportunity lost.

 

[Amin]

They did the 1Ds III wrong in that comparison. For one thing, they failed to appropriately sharpen the files to compensate for the AA filter. For another, the 24-105L is not a reasonable choice to go up against the 50mm Summilux. Either of the Zeiss ZE 50mm lenses (both of which are pretty much flawless across the frame at f/8) would have made for a better comparison.

 

[tokengirl]

They did the 1Ds III wrong in that comparison. For one thing, they failed to appropriately sharpen the files to compensate for the AA filter. For another, the 24-105L is not a reasonable choice to go up against the 50mm Summilux. Either of the Zeiss ZE 50mm lenses (both of which are pretty much flawless across the frame at f/8) would have made for a better comparison.

Hell, just about any 50 mm prime would have been a better comparison than what they used.

 

[Jan Brittenson]

I'm :deadhorse: but I'm still there will be no R10.

:banghead:

 

[SergeiR]

Dunno about high ISO. I got camera for that, its called D700.. And even then - after initial test period (as i had to write article on that for russian magazine, right after D700 did make it to market) - i can use fingers to count times when i really went higher than iso400.. and even 400 would be there to just save battery in flashes.

I just think there should be specialized tools for everything. Big fan of specialization

 

[SergeiR]

PS: thanks , Jack. Unfortunately i am now living in place a bit far from AZ Used to drive to Phoenix often, to learn and for fun, when lived in Durango, but no more. But i will ponder on this

 

[doug]

.. I already checked out the Pentax 645D group on Flickr. It is greatly lacking in the "interestingness" department.

I don't think that's the camera's fault. Not saying that I could do better, but it usually takes me several months' use to learn how to get the most out of a new tool.

IMHO the Canon comparison in the LuLa link shouldn't be considered an accurate review of the camera's capabilities but it's funny to see the Canon fans' shorts get tied in knots.

 

[djonesii]

As flawed as it may be, it has me seriously saving my pennies for a Pentax.

I'm not in love with the AF-DII body that I have, and the ZD simply does not work well enough for what I want. Give me some of that speed. ( Both ISO and ergonomic ) Right now, the best deal that I have seen on a 40 mpix back is 14K. That is, 40% more than the Pentax. There is that tethering issue, but I don't tether anyway. In the long run, I think that will matter to me. There always is the eye-fi option though.

I have promised myself a year will go by living with the foibles of the ZD before I upgrade. I'm still not sure if Nikon will get squeezed out or not. I will spare you all my angst!

Dave