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 645Z - oh boy!

laopai

New member
Well, for us landscape shooters, I found a nice feature on 645Z: RAW level HDR.

Does it mean that I will not need to carry those GND filters and holders? That sounds sweet!
 

ErikKaffehr

Well-known member
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


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.
 

jon11

New member
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
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:)
 

fotografz

Well-known member
Have to say it, sorry but Nikon and Canon are about to die a very slow death.
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.
We should be worried about this, not celebrating it. The last thing we need in the world is another diversity snuffing monopoly.

Honestly, I think we are aiding and abetting the homogenization of the photographic experience with our relentless comparison of technical features verses what we as individuals actually need to express ourselves … both subjectively and objectively.

Personally, I do not subscribe to the "tiny bit of difference" maximum. IMO, the differences have always been glaring and obvious at every technical step along the way. Size also matters. Optics also matter. Leaf-shutter and T/S lenses matter. Service does matter. A LOT, not a little.

Business is business.
Hey Ben, isn't that the same thing the Mafia says when they kill someone?:eek:

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.
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.

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.
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?;)

So, to carry the logic further … why would anyone spend 3X+ the amount for the Pentax over the D800 or Sony A7R? In short, the whole logical judgmental process is a slippery slope that has to be applied across the board, not selectively just for the sake of argument.

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)
Well said Dave. Like a few here have already mentioned, I'm in the camp of remaining skeptical regarding CMOS.

Again, I think it is all part of making choices based on personal vision and specific needs. The drive to make all cameras into Swiss Army knives that are "Jacks of all trades and masters of none", is a bit disconcerting. "Horses for courses" is fast becoming a "Plow horse for all courses".

Oh, and one other thing … as a visual person engaged in at least trying to maintain some sense of design excellence, I'd say Pentax should fire their designers … IMHO they have managed to make a homely camera downright ugly.;)

- Marc
 

torger

Active member
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.
 

Chris Giles

New member
Where in the UK will we be able to test one of these?

Because I'll probably buy one but really wanna see how it performs before I do.
 

tsjanik

Well-known member
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:)

LOL. I have almost the same list of lenses and have the same impressions. My 300mm is the 67 M* however; not AF, but superb. I love the 400mm as well: light, sharp and good AF. I have the 600mm which is very sharp, high contrast and very little CA, but so large and heavy that it's much more difficult to use than the 400.

For those needing tethering:
http://www.ricoh-imaging.co.jp/english/products/645z/feature/05.html

Note that it includes live view output to an external monitor. Talk about a EVF!
 
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.
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.

So I guess service means different things to different people, knowing my luck I could buy a camera that's known to be faulty and use it till it's obsolete.
 

jlm

Workshop Member
OT warning:
Gary, back in the 70's my buddy was building a very competitive 240Z and i was hot-rodding my 2002 (not the tii) part of my tweak was to add the same two twin side draft mikuni carbs the datsuns used. fun times
 

jon11

New member
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.

the only leica s i have seen in my life was in grand prix of monaco. TYhe owner was old guy walking with a model and with a watch that probably costed more than my house.:)
i agree in these times paying 50k for a system, or you are top fashion a dn commercial or is not possible
 

Ed Hurst

Well-known member
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
 

fotografz

Well-known member
The "service" advantage keeps popping up here. Is the MF service better than any other service?
Mine is. :):thumbup:

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".
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?

When I was doing commercial work there was no substitute for my H4D/60 except a P1 60 meg back on a H4X camera and all leaf shutter lenses. There was no substitute for my Hasselblad Multi-Shot for critical color work. We select tools based on specific need not some homogeneous popularity contest.

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.
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.

And by the way, all medium format cameras are ugly. Except tech cameras of course. ;)
Except mine, which is beautiful :thumbs:

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.
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.

Pentax has made a wonderful camera for the many who wished for an easier, more affordable way into MFD. In that respect, it is a game changer. Personally, it means nothing to me and many others who have a system they are sucessfully working with, have the lenses they need and has the versatile features they require.

Perhaps Hasselblad and P1 should stop wasting resources on lower end stuff, and concentrate on the top dog stuff that Pentax doesn't offer, doesn't have the lenses for, and can't be used on a tech camera.

- Marc
 

D&A

Well-known member
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
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!

Dave (D&A)
 
Last edited:

D&A

Well-known member
[A)UOTE=fotografz;579478]

Perhaps Hasselblad and P1 should stop wasting resources on lower end stuff, and concentrate on the top dog stuff that Pentax doesn't offer, doesn't have the lenses for, and can't be used on a tech camera.

- Marc[/QUOTE]

Marc's last paragraphs really resonates! Although I'm a user of the 645D and most of its lenses, I've had numerous long stints with the Leica S &S2 and some of its lenses and often compared not only optical output of the two systems but handling and capability of capturing images. On paper if one didn't know better, the two systems seem more like each other than different and might expect them to be sort of interchangable.

Nothing in my experience could be further than the truth. It's not only the optical prowess of the Leica lenses which are simply superb, or the availabilty of LS lenses (and yes I have used Pentax's legacy ones)...but the differences and emphasis and priorities each system places on the entire chain from image acquisition ( how the body handles in given shooting situations), to optical performance, even to in camera handling and processing of images.

In many respects the Leica justifies it's higher price point and rightly should strive for a somewhat different market than the Pentax does. In some respects it was the same way in the film SLR era. Each company, their products, and price points often targeted different markets and not in all cases but often it was justifiable based on certain performance characteristics that a core base might rely on and require for their particular applications and requirements.

That's not to say a value leader couldn't come up with products that matched the higher price point competition but their objects and goals were simply different. At the end of the day, it still comes down to the photographer and their innate knowledge and ability that ends up being the most important element in being able to capture great images.

Dave (D&A)
 

jon11

New member
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.
 

fotografz

Well-known member
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.
:deadhorse:

That's your opinion, which I fully accept as being just as valid for you, as mine is for me. Making it into some sort of verbal contest with your opinions and IQ speculations presented as absolutes is fruitless banter … especially regarding something no one has used yet.

I don't need nor want all the buttons and whistles. Don't need a larger sensor (I recently sold a FF 60 meg MFD camera system.) I do NOT want CMOS. I do not want Pentax optics. I do not need to compare anything, and don't care if others do so since it is meaningless internet babble that has little to do with my work and how I want to express myself.

Do hope Leica keeps the S simple and straightforward rather than turning it into a "fast and friendly" video game (something I also despise about Sony and most other modern "swiss army knife" digital cameras). Do need all of my lenses to be leaf-shutter able with sync to 1/1000 with strobes. Do like being able to adapt select Hasselblad H and Contax 645 lenses while keeping all of the functions fully intact.

Works for me … don't care if it doesn't for others :)

I resist the Borg, and will not be assimilated :ROTFL:

- Marc
 

torger

Active member
There is a problem with "horses for courses" when the generic all-around camera does a specific task just as good as a more specialized camera. This is what we see happening. It's not there yet, but gap is narrowing.

It may look like a nice idea to drop the "budget" Leaf line, drop the 44x33 sensor size and only do full-frame, and increase prices even more, to really focus on the top dogs, and push even harder the market message that if you're not using P1 you're not a top photographer. I think however it will be too small a segment to keep up with the complicated tech development required for a modern camera system. It's harder to make a camera these days than in the film days.

I'd rather like to see that they bring in some fresh capital and brave management and focus on growing. With a broader entry level customer base they can maintain higher development costs in the camera systems to keep bodies and backs up to date. They can still sell the high end 100+ megapixel models for very high prices to those that need and can. Having entry level lens range which only covers 44x33 could be an idea, and then increase quality and/or price on the full-frame lenses.

I think it will be hard in the future to be a company that only makes the best camera there is. To make the best, you will need to have technology developed in broader systems.
 

dougpeterson

Workshop Member
We've sold quite a few of the Credo 40 promo in the last month and I expect to sell several more before the promo ends.

If anything I think the interest/publicity/awareness of the 645z to *increase* those sales. We might lose some fraction of people for whom the 645z better fits their needs (eg high ISO at an entry-level price) but most of those people wouldn't have bought a Credo anyway. And we will (based on historical precedent and activity in the last 2 days) more than make up for it by the increase in total interest in higher-end-than-commodity cameras. Our problem is not selling a camera to someone who tries it out; our problem is getting someone who shoots e.g. a 5d3 to try something more when they assume they have the best there is or that they won't care about the difference. So we materially benifit anytime a camera raises awareness and discussion about cameras that are built for image quality. Hence sales have gone up after the d800 launch, up after the 646d, and I expect up after the 645z. And this has been true of our higher-end products and entry-level products.
 

stephengilbert

Active member
What Marc said. Aside from the apparent hostility evidenced by many posts here is the notion that cameras that don't offer the full panoply of mod cons are deficient. What I miss from when I owned Leicas was how little they did for me. They didn't require a user manual and a multi page menu to customize their functions. I have no problem with people wanting all those features; I just don't. But I don't call the people who want them names, or suggest that they're lesser photographers for wanting them.
 
Top