Pentax 645Z - oh boy!

[D&A]

From 3/4 upfront, it loos like a Greyhound bus from the early 50's.

But it is freacking amazing, it may well be my first DMF camera.

Eduardo

If memory serves me correctly, isn't it's grip color refered to as "sea green"? If so, it may have been an ecological and carefully considered environmentally conscious choice. This way if someone drops it in the ocean, it will blend in with the natural fauna. :ROTFL:

Dave (D&A)

 

[fotografz]

I think Mamiya ZD was too early. The key with CMOS and current technology is that you can make cameras for very wide range of use cases and make it easy to use. Thanks to D800 and other high res SLR the high res photo interest has gone up, which increases interest to take it even further, which MF can do. With structural hurdle I meant tech cams, ie detachable back from manufacturer A, body from B and lens from C.

I think a $10k or even $15k state-of-the-art back would make a real difference from a $35k back Phase One style pricing. Many consumers would still be left behind of course, but a lot of new would still be invited.

We are all making assumptions without any real factual marketing information.

How big a specialized tech camera market opportunity would be is anyone's guess. Our anecdotal opinions are somewhat myopic because of our deep personal interest in certain types of photography … which doesn't necessarily translate into a larger appeal.

Besides, $15K would be just the start … then there is the tech camera itself, and the specialized view lenses required to take advantage of a "state of the art" digital back.

Making the jump from the familiar DSLR form of a $3K Nikon D800, to use of a $20K+ tech camera is a pretty big step.

Personally, I think it will continue to move in the opposite direction … which was triggered by the D800 followed by the A7R. Smaller, more familiar cameras with expanded capabilities. All you hear is wishful speculation of a 50 meg 35mm camera. We know more resolution isn't the main driver, but that is an argument that falls on deaf ears.

- Marc

 

[bensonga]

but the pentax 645d/z is just SO ugly! I guess if you buy it for work, it'll be like the Phase DF... a pure work horse. but OMG that thing is ugly.

+1. As much as I want to like it it is puking ugly...

As I said on that other forum, I'm struggling to think of an uglier camera, but that said I'm struggling to think of a better value camera.

Whether it is ugly or not, the Pentax 645 cameras (film and digital) are some of the most comfortable cameras to hold and use that I have ever owned.

Try it, you might like it.

Gary

 

[tsjanik]

Whether it is ugly or not, the Pentax 645 cameras (film and digital) are some of the most comfortable cameras to hold and use that I have ever owned.

Try it, you might like it.

Gary

Ugly is as ugly does. The 645 D does really well.

 

[fotografz]

I tried Gary, but when I went to hold one, my hand recoiled and slapped me in the face:facesmack:

Just kidding.

Pentax should adopt the old VW slogan … "It's Ugly, But It Gets You There"

Or a new slogan:

"Beauty Is In the Hand Of The Holder" … (or is that too suggestive?)

Meh, everyone thought my H camera was ugly, but I sure liked how it handled.

- Marc

 

[hcubell]

Only to people ignorant of the economics of the camera business...

Would that be the guys running Contax, mamiya and hasselblad who either went under or in hasselblad's case almost went under making cameras and lenses to serve as platforms for phase one backs, or the guys running phase who built a $200m business selling removable digital backs?

 

[Shashin]

Would that be the guys running Contax, mamiya and hasselblad who either went under or in hasselblad's case almost went under making cameras and lenses to serve as platforms for phase one backs, or the guys running phase who built a $200m business selling removable digital backs?

You mean the new $7K 50MP CMOS Phase One back?

 

[D&A]

Whether it is ugly or not, the Pentax 645 cameras (film and digital) are some of the most comfortable cameras to hold and use that I have ever owned.

Try it, you might like it.

Gary

Right Gary! To all those who think the 645D is butt ugly, remember, beauty is only skin deep. Once that 645D hits the dance floor, she glides effortlessly across it and holding it's big butt is kinda nice . I won't even mention what happens when you get her behind closed bedroom doors after that 1st date, but let me just say she "sync's" beautifully when she "flashes" those baby blues of hers...even when you attempt to take off her classic LS lenses . She's a keeper....LOL!

Dave (D&A)

 

[bensonga]

Meh, everyone thought my H camera was ugly, but I sure liked how it handled.
- Marc

I've always liked the looks of the H cameras myself. I only wish they had made an all black H cam....now that would have been very sexy!

For sheer looks alone, the H4D-40 Stainless model was my favorite. :thumbup:

I've never actually held or used a Hassy H series camera. I hope someday I'll have that opportunity.

Gary

 

[torger]

In portrait and many other professional photography resolution has reached the good enough level. However, I think resolution is still the main
driver in landscape photography. People want to print huge and step close I guess. When I see people talk about landscape gear it's mainly lens sharpness that's the topic.

I think there are many amateur landscape photographers for each professional portrait photographer. I have seen tech camera dealers change profile to be more inviting to amateurs, which is a good change.

A tech cam is not cheap, but there are many options, Silvestri cameras with schneider lenses are not too bad. Backs is what makes it bad. Still its mainly a hobby for people with well paid daytime jobs.

 

[torger]

I've always liked the looks of the H cameras myself.

I rememver when I first saw an H camera, really really ugly I thought, like some alien space ship, but since then I've got used to it, and now I think it looks best of the MF DSLRs.

 

[KeithL]

Whether it is ugly or not, the Pentax 645 cameras (film and digital) are some of the most comfortable cameras to hold and use that I have ever owned.

Try it, you might like it.

I never hold medium format cameras ;-)

 

[docmoore]

I've always liked the looks of the H cameras myself. I only wish they had made an all black H cam....now that would have been very sexy!

For sheer looks alone, the H4D-40 Stainless model was my favorite. :thumbup:

I've never actually held or used a Hassy H series camera. I hope someday I'll have that opportunity.

Gary

Gary,

New limited edition all black H4D-40 with lens is 14k....

And it is gorgeous...

Hasselblad H4D-40 Black Limited Edition Medium H-70380534-B B&H

Bob

 

[jon11]

The zoom -in feature on the 645D is both wonderful and useful as it is on pro level Nikon DSLR's. (why the D600 didn't have it, nobody can figure out). As for deleting images, regardless how many large cards I use, there are some specific applications where I must review and delete on the fly. Please respect that some individuals have certain work flow requirements and they may differ from yours.

The delete feature multi step as well as going through I think 5-6 menu pages to format a card in a camera at this level, was a unnecessary mistake in my opinion and simply emulated what is often found on Pentax 35mm DSLR's. Again a wonderful camera but a few operational features, has one wading through too many buttons to push..especially if one is shooting a fast paced event under near darkened conditions. Just simply expressing my observations in working with the 645D.

Dave (D&A)

deleting is two click, i mean 1 second more than nikon, formatting is menu row 2 sec format. how many times you use format? i mean i understand everything but this seems to me really not great problems.
you need to format a camera in totally dark? and in totally dark u need to beat the world record of fastest formatting and deleting images? just to ask.
i agree delete could be a one button solution, but i prefer to use multiple deleting so i can choose images and delete theme in batch. but formatting is really 3 sec operation.

 

[jon11]

I completely agree on what you wrote above regarding image characteristics of the 645D. It closely mirrors my experience and why I am so worried when the transition goes from CCD to CMOS and whether it remains nearly the same.

Where we differ slightly is on the menus and operation. Yes, it's good but in some cases it can be a bit of a kludge and slow and again this is in my many years of experiences. For others their opinion may be different.

Dave (D&A)

yes my differ. for me the d800 is not the same level of handling. for example the button of iso in the left side is a flaw. when you shoot at fast pace with long lens you have to move the hand that support the camera, while with the pentax position you never move the left han from the barrel and operates everything looking in the viewfinder. and i have some other complaints about nikon ergonomics. in my opinion canon has improved but is still behind. nikon is good but i prefer pentax approach.

 

[jon11]

i have pentax image transmitter for 645d.
i use it and lightroom auto import for tethering.
to transfer a full jpeg is 8 sec, a raw from the click to the import in lightroom is 15 sec.
i'm sure with the usb 3 and a better software, the current software is pretty basic, pentax can half the time.
i hope they work with adobe to create some direct tethering to lightroom using the new transmitter.

personally i prefer to send small jpeg in lightroom to have a preview of the file, i always check color and white balance with color card so jpeg shows me a pretty accurate preview.
but i agree with phase one you can have file much faster.

p.S: i tried also hot folder in capture one and it takes 13 sec for raw, 9 sec jpeg best, 6 sec jpeg low.
i need to study a bit capture one to see if for specific shots work better. how can i upload icc profile for single shooting and automatically use them for every sinlge photos i import using the ht folder

 

[johnnygoesdigital]

FYI, the Hasselblad price also includes the body. But unlike the Pentax, you can use the back on a tech camera. fotografz

Well, we know that is not completely accurate with Hasselblad backs with micro lenses. I think because there's so much comparison then Pentax is doing something right. I think price point is the most contentious debate made in MFD and again, Pentax is obviously doing something right.

 

[Uaiomex]

Re: pent!

If this model had the 50.1mp cmos Sony sensor, I'd rather pay for this than paying $8.5 for the Z. Even without lens.

C'mon Hasselblad, 2014 it's year to repent! (and ammend)
This post goes for you too Phase!

Eduardo

P.S. If you confess mea culpa, I promise we won't press any more charges. :ROTFL:

Gary,

New limited edition all black H4D-40 with lens is 14k....

And it is gorgeous...

Hasselblad H4D-40 Black Limited Edition Medium H-70380534-B B&H

Bob

 

[bensonga]

Gary,
New limited edition all black H4D-40 with lens is 14k....
And it is gorgeous...

Hasselblad H4D-40 Black Limited Edition Medium H-70380534-B B&H

Bob

Now that is a good looking camera! :clap:

I won't part with my 503CWD-16II and 645D, so a third MFD system is out of the question. And I must be jaded by MFD prices....$14k doesn't feel outrageously expensive, although $12k would be even more attractive. Hasselblad could sweenten the package by substituting the 100/2.2 for the 80/2.8. When Hasselblad substituted the CFE 40mm ED IF lens for the 80/2.8 in the 503CWD/CFV-16II package (with no increase in price), that was the clincher for me.

A complete line of superior LS lenses is certainly an area where Leica and Hasselblad have an advantage over Pentax. I don't know enough about the latest Mamiya lenses.

Gary

 

[fotografz]

FYI, the Hasselblad price also includes the body. But unlike the Pentax, you can use the back on a tech camera. fotografz

Well, we know that is not completely accurate with Hasselblad backs with micro lenses. I think because there's so much comparison then Pentax is doing something right. I think price point is the most contentious debate made in MFD and again, Pentax is obviously doing something right.

No doubt about it. $8,500 has to get anyone's attention. However, that doesn't alter the fact that you cannot use it on a tech camera, and even if you could I believe it employs the micro lenses that you have pointed out as some sort of deficiency.

FYI, Hasselblad makes six configurations of backs, only two use micro-lenses, (the 1.3X crop 40meg, and I assume the crop frame 50 CMOS). The larger sized sensors are the logical choice for tech cameras employing movements … none of which use micro-lenses. Phase and Leaf have even more.

Not that I'm against an enclosed system camera … mine is one of them

- Marc