The GetDPI Photography Forum

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!

PENTAX 645D II

Ed Hurst

Well-known member
Hope you're right about that zoom Tom. All the press release seems to say is that the lens will be exhibited in Feb, with market launch 'to be determined'. When it does come, I wonder how its performance will compare with the 25mm DA/DFA lenses and the 35mm A/FA lenses.
 

Jamgolf

Member
The wide angle zoom is really good news. I have been tempted to get the 25mm lens but perhaps it would be wise to wait for the zoom if they can indicate a time frame for its release.
 

Uaiomex

Member
I could not say it better than JD. Rico means rich but imagine having car named "Wealthi". In Mexico "Hacerse rico" has many funny and down very dirty sexual connotations. Believe me, Ricoh is a bad name for a camera in many spanish spoken countries. Eduardo
I believe name change applies to compact cameras only. 645 and K series remain Pentax. I thought rico means rich.
 

D&A

Well-known member
Read the latest link provided above most certainly gets one thinking about some of the possible advantages of the new model...yet at the same time that's exactly what happened when the new Leica M was announced with all its technological advances. It came down for some in how well they implemented these new features and did they add to the shooting experiences and capability of the camera and lastly and most important was the image quality improved.

To date it's been somewhat of a mixed bag in my opinion. Some good and some not so good . I'm afraid that on paper, lots of things look promising but in the long run, whether it was worth upgrading or not isn't always clear cut. Time will tell though and I want to remain positive.

One thing I'm excited about is the ultra wide angle zoom. A number of times I've thought seriously about the 25mm. It's possible this new zoom may cover thus focal length in a somewhat slower lens with possibly more distortion that the 25mm and of course at a higher price. Simply an alternative to the fixed 25mm.

Dave (D&A)
 

Shashin

Well-known member
Thanks, Gerald.

A 645D with an articulating screen and three user settings on the exposure mode dial. The drive mode/WB/etc buttons moved to the four-way controller because of the screen design. But with live view, the screen is going to be a nice feature. Makes a good place to hold cookies too.
 

Shashin

Well-known member
The holes on the prism housing are interesting. Stereo mics??? Is this going to have video? Interesting.
 

Ed Hurst

Well-known member
This is all interesting stuff! Can't wait to see files from the camera - and in particular, side-by-side comparisons with the original 645D. RAWs at base ISO and various high ISOs, including some long exposures.

Reeeeeally hope it lets us entirely turn off the dark frame behaviour for long exposures...
 

Ed Hurst

Well-known member
Any indication Will on the focal length range of that new lens? Can't see it anywhere. The product roadmap chart they produced a while ago suggested an approximate range, but would be good to know precisely.
 

bensonga

Well-known member
It's great to see that Ricoh is still committed to the 645D and I hope they sell a lot of the 645D II models. However, my biggest wish is that they would release more new and affordable lenses for the 645D. Lenses in the same price range as the 55mm SDM (ie under $2k). Not everyone wants to spend $4-5k for a lens. I'd be happy if they just sold new FA lenses here in the USA again, so we didn't have to buy used ones.

Gary
 

weinlamm

Member
I'm really eagerly about the final price... 10.000 dollar / 7.500 Euro would be a border, where guys who would prefer Phase One could think about...
I had read this price somewhere... So I'll actually pray... :rolleyes:
 

torger

Active member
Live view just rocks with manual lenses and focusing from a tripod. As a landscape shooter I could not imagine being without it. Oh well, while I have it on my DSLR I am without it on my Linhof but then I have a 20x loupe on the ground glass.

Anyway I think live view is a great addition, all us "young" photographers that never has seen an analog camera considers live view to be a natural component of any camera. With this the Pentax 645D becomes a great choice for anyone that wants "a better DSLR", ie you can upgrade from your 135 system to this and it will have about the same feature set, you don't need to sacrifice any of the key base features everyone's expecting from a current DSLR.

On the other hand if you already own the 645D and are used to work without live view there's probably little reason to upgrade. But I do think that the features a CMOS can provide will make the 645D sellable to a wider market, and that will be good for everyone interested in this system.
 

torger

Active member
Surely based on the IQ250 pricing, even $15K would be an absolute bargain for this?
I'm thinking that the 645D is aimed at a whole different customer segment than Phase One, and that there's very few that would actually choose between a Pentax and a Phase One system based on price. That is even if a Pentax would cost $5K and have the exact same image quality as the IQ250, the IQ250 would still sell well for $35K, as it gives access to the Phase One system which is so well established in some professional segments.

With the current 645D priced at $7K (it's release price was $9.5K in 2010) I would be surprised if 645D II becomes more expensive than $10K, unless they aim to run these two models in parallel for a longer period of time.

I think Pentax would fail to meet their current customers if they would price it at say $20K, and still not attract Phase One customers, so that would be a bad move.
 

f8orbust

Active member
I was pretty decent at math in school, but I'm having a tough time figuring out the error in the following equation. As far as I can tell, it's on the right hand side:
 
Top