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!

robertwright

New member
Capture fees are still pretty common, as are equipment rental fees. When rates don't go up ya' gotta make it somewhere:)

But seriously I've always felt they reflect real value, the time of prepping files, storage, backup, archiving, balancing exposures, wb, etc. to present to clients and that rental fees reflect the suitability of the equipment to the job at hand- lower fees for dslr's and higher for mf. Calling them "rental" fees was a bit of dodge since you did not have a separate company but I think charging a fee for equipment is completely justified as separate since the creative fee is for the talent, and the usage fee is for the usage.

Oh, I don't think it'll fail. It is too good for that price. Depends on what Pentax expects of it. I know Leica had smaller expectations for the S system at first, but pretty quickly exceeded that.

I'm not sure volume is the way to salvation for photographers these days. I think maybe diversification is.

More and more volume production situations are being brought in-house by manufacturers, and now even smaller to mid-size ad agencies are looking at cataloging type work as a potential profit center because they are also being squeezed. Trust me, they do not pay their photography staff very much considering what it'd cost to use a more experienced shooter.

In past, a studio could pay the over-head with the production work and allow solicitation of higher end jobs with facilities to service that type of client.

Personally, I never shelled out very much capital for MFD equipment. When commercial work transitioned from film to digital, it was common to charge a digital capture fee as a line expense for each job. Usually the equivalent of renting the gear needed. This was actually a bargain for clients because the cost of film, processing and scanning could be $40 to $70 a shot … a 100 piece catalog could easily run them $5,000+.

On average, those fees paid for my MFD kit in about 2 years (sooner for others), then I'd upgrade, and apply the fees against that.

That business model has all but disappeared as photographers cut each other's throat to get work. Only the top shooters get away with it now or bake it into their usage fees, and often actually do just rent the gear.

It's tough out there.

- Marc
 

fotografz

Well-known member
Capture fees are still pretty common, as are equipment rental fees. When rates don't go up ya' gotta make it somewhere:)

But seriously I've always felt they reflect real value, the time of prepping files, storage, backup, archiving, balancing exposures, wb, etc. to present to clients and that rental fees reflect the suitability of the equipment to the job at hand- lower fees for dslr's and higher for mf. Calling them "rental" fees was a bit of dodge since you did not have a separate company but I think charging a fee for equipment is completely justified as separate since the creative fee is for the talent, and the usage fee is for the usage.
That's good to know. Around here it has become more difficult to get those Digital Capture Fees as the bigger studios folded and the competition became downright ferocious. I do know that many larger ad agencies still accept "digital package" line item expenses if you own the gear as opposed to renting it.

BTW, I never called them rental fees … the fees were based roughly on what it would have cost to rent comparable equipment in order to justify it to the cost consultants who's mission in life is to question every nickel and dime on an estimate.:rolleyes:

- Marc
 
Last edited:

gazwas

Active member
It would seem Pentax made a very nice camera.
But is there a complete super high quality eco system?
From what I've read (yes, now please tell me that only those who've had the thing in their hands are allowed to comment on it) - from what I've read I understand most of the glass is not up to par with P1/H. Does Pentax have the resources or the inclination to complete the system with competitive quality glass? Time will tell. I think they will not, I think they plan to be above 35mm and below P1/H.
Choose you to forget the very sub par and extremely expensive lenses Phase One make that designs date back to the late 80's and 90's. Do Phase infact make a decent wide lens?? Why do you think so many jump to tech cameras?

Oh and what about the wonderful Phamiya 645/DF, a true workhorse (sarcastic smilie).

IMO, the system is what let's the wonderful Phase backs down so I don't think you argument about the Pentax has at weight.
 

shlomi

Member
The body doesn't affect image quality very much, in a controlled environment for still objects. In a non controlled environment with fast moving objects, I would not take a P1.

Regarding the glass - for me, coming from Canon, all the Mamiya D glass was a huge improvement.
120AF seems to me one of the best macro lenses made.
80D is super sharp all over with no problems I've seen.
Pretty much the same for 45D.
35 is not great, but still better than Canon.
I don't do a lot of wide work, so I will take the word of those who say LF lenses do a better job there.

I don't know the Schneider LS lenses very well, but it seems like a consensus they are as good or better than D generation.

I don't think its fair to say Phase One lenses are sub par.
What is the par? Leica? Rosenstock HR?
I didn't say P1 lenses are the best in the world in every category, but as a lineup, it is easily in the top 5 IMO.
 
Last edited:

tsjanik

Well-known member
From what I've read (yes, now please tell me that only those who've had the thing in their hands are allowed to comment on it) - from what I've read I understand most of the glass is not up to par with P1/H. Does Pentax have the resources or the inclination to complete the system with competitive quality glass? Time will tell. I think they will not, I think they plan to be above 35mm and below P1/H.
I think at the MF level most of the lenses are good, or they wouldn't exist. Anyway here's some more reading you may find interesting. An older comparison:

Pentax 645 FA 35mm Review
 

fotografz

Well-known member
You clearly didn't meet the client who counts the pixels, or the client who compares the sharpness of your files to his previous project.

You can find plenty of strong images on instagram - that doesn't mean anyone's paid for them.
I think everyone's right here. It just depends on what and for whom you make photos to make money.

"If when you're in financial trouble you sell your MFD, I think it means you're not a pro."

This may be a bit harsh. In this dog-eat-dog financial environment the photography landscape has changed considerably for any number of hard working pros … and it is littered with the bleached bones of those who didn't adapt.

I have a close friend who's studio had 9 MFD stations working 24/7 on a large food account. He did it for years and dedicated a great deal of resources to that end. Recently at the corporate level they decided to pull it in-house, and gave him a week's notice. He'll likely replace part of that, and was smart enough to financially prepare for that eventuallity … but it will take time. Meanwhile, he has a crushing over-head to maintain. Reduction of that overhead is clearly the professional thing to do.

Our fearless, ever positive, always professional Guy Mancusio had to adapt due to life throwing up some serious road-blocks.

If no has noticed, advertising has seriously shifted to web based presentations … how much resolution do you need for a sub-one meg., sRGB image? Count those pixels.

Heck, even the wedding photography industry has been gutted by lower demand and less discriminating clients who just want something on their FB page, and rarely order income producing prints or albums anymore. Sure there are still high end weddings to be had, and I get my share … but that is a shrinking pie with a lot more "forks" digging into it.

I'm super happy about sliding into retirement … couldn't have picked a better time. Me and my Leica S2 have earned some fun:clap:
I sold all my Hasselbald gear (H4D/40 and H4D/60) and used the money to treat myself to a Lexus for my S2 to ride in:ROTFL:

Soon I can proudly call myself an amateur again:thumbs: … (except for a few long time loyal clients).

Best of luck to all those still in the fray!

- Marc
 

gazwas

Active member
The body doesn't affect image quality very much.......
It does if it stops working and freezes up. A historical search will bring up numerous cases of Phamiya wows.

Regarding the glass - for me, coming from Canon, all the Mamiya D glass was a huge improvement.
Have you never used the 17mm and especially the 24mm TS-E's? In my book two astounding Canon lenses that Phase One has nothing to touch them.

120AF seems to me one of the best macro lenses made.
80D is super sharp all over with no problems I've seen.
Pretty much the same for 45D.
Granted they are good lenses but all very old designs carried over from 80's and 90's Mamiya's, 120Macro especially.

35 is not great, but still better than Canon.
Thats a matter of opinion.

I don't do a lot of wide work, so I will take the word of those who say LF lenses do a better job there.
Trust me they are worlds better.

I don't know the Schneider LS lenses very well, but it seems like a consensus they are as good or better than D generation.
Again incorrect as it has been show by testes that often the LS versions are exactly the same lens as te D versions only with a shutter added.

I don't think its fair to say Phase One lenses are sub par.
What is the par? Leica? Rosenstock HR?
I didn't say P1 lenses are the best in the world in every category, but as a lineup, it is easily in the top 5 IMO.
Like wise I don't think is it fair to disregard Torger's opinion because he's an amateur and doesn't make money from photography. Or for that matter, for you to criticise a camera (Pentax) you know very little about based upon your inaccurate assumptions of the system you currently use?

This is not a forum for Professional photographers (over used term today) but for people who wish to share their love of PHOTOGRAPHY.
 

johnnygoesdigital

New 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. - dougpeterson


Extolling the virtues of Phase One/Leaf in a Pentax 645 thread speaks volumes to me about the new 645z. At least you never have to advertise as long as other cameras makers keep releasing new models, but we're still waiting for the new DF...aren't we?

What always starts as a new camera thread turns into a "flat earth" mentality from the usual, whose camera has to be the best. Like most in journalism, this isn't about facts anymore, but more about entertainment...like a side show carnival to create distraction.

The Pentax 645 models have something to offer many photographers at a reasonable price, what's not to love? Many cameras are enclosed systems for the specific reason they don't need tech movements or want the planned obsolescence of MFD.

Many of our customers are like this. They end up with an IQ180 or similar as a result of a "gateway" system (D800, Pentax 645, entry-level p1 back) which whets their pallets for better image quality. -dougpeterson

Doug, this seems to be a rather obvious contradiction to your above comment about getting others to try Phase One/Leaf products.

Is it possible to just have discussions about other new products without the sleazy feel of distraction or the constant comparisons to the Leica S? It's because of all this that many are intrigued about this new Pentax.
 
Last edited:

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
I think everyone's right here. It just depends on what and for whom you make photos to make money.

"If when you're in financial trouble you sell your MFD, I think it means you're not a pro."

This may be a bit harsh. In this dog-eat-dog financial environment the photography landscape has changed considerably for any number of hard working pros … and it is littered with the bleached bones of those who didn't adapt.

I have a close friend who's studio had 9 MFD stations working 24/7 on a large food account. He did it for years and dedicated a great deal of resources to that end. Recently at the corporate level they decided to pull it in-house, and gave him a week's notice. He'll likely replace part of that, and was smart enough to financially prepare for that eventuallity … but it will take time. Meanwhile, he has a crushing over-head to maintain. Reduction of that overhead is clearly the professional thing to do.

Our fearless, ever positive, always professional Guy Mancusio had to adapt due to life throwing up some serious road-blocks.

If no has noticed, advertising has seriously shifted to web based presentations … how much resolution do you need for a sub-one meg., sRGB image? Count those pixels.

Heck, even the wedding photography industry has been gutted by lower demand and less discriminating clients who just want something on their FB page, and rarely order income producing prints or albums anymore. Sure there are still high end weddings to be had, and I get my share … but that is a shrinking pie with a lot more "forks" digging into it.

I'm super happy about sliding into retirement … couldn't have picked a better time. Me and my Leica S2 have earned some fun:clap:
I sold all my Hasselbald gear (H4D/40 and H4D/60) and used the money to treat myself to a Lexus for my S2 to ride in:ROTFL:

Soon I can proudly call myself an amateur again:thumbs: … (except for a few long time loyal clients).

Best of luck to all those still in the fray!

- Marc
I'm still fighting those road blocks and there not going away anytime soon. A wife with 3 cancers is a very harsh blow to your financial situation and health insurance no matter how good you think it is than your sadly mistaken to the real reality of what gets covered and what does not. Anyway I had to divest everything that does not mean I'm any less a Pro if anything I'm a smarter better Pro that has to work magic to compete at the high level. This Pentax opens the door slightly financially and more important technology land features on it look great. So I'm keeping a close eye on it and as far as Phase and Hassy for me there out of the running, just can't afford it and no one is handing me a gift package from either one of them. So I had to move on and more importantly with no remorse. It is what is is and I accept that. It's just freaking gear and means very little in the scheme of life. I'm still a hard working Pro as I always been for 38 years, gear choices will never take that honor away from me , ever.
 

fotografz

Well-known 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. - dougpeterson


Yeah, okay... Extolling the virtues of Phase One/Leaf in a Pentax 645 thread speaks volumes to me about the new 645z. At least you never have to advertise as long as other cameras makers keep releasing new models, but we're still waiting for the new DF...aren't we?

What always starts as a new camera thread turns into a "flat earth" mentality from the the usual, whose camera has to be the best. Like most in journalism, this isn't about facts anymore, but more about entertainment...like a side show carnival to create distraction.

The Pentax 645 models have something to offer many photographers at a reasonable price, what's not to love? Many cameras are enclosed systems for the specific reason they don't need tech movements or want the planned obsolescence of MFD.

Many of our customers are like this. They end up with an IQ180 or similar as a result of a "gateway" system (D800, Pentax 645, entry-level p1 back) which whets their pallets for better image quality. -dougpeterson

Doug, this seems to be a rather obvious contradiction to your above comment about getting others to try Phase One/Leaf products.

Is it possible to just have discussions about other new products without the sleazy feel of distraction or the constant comparisons to the Leica S? It's because of all this that many are intrigued about this new Pentax.
Hmm, to be fair, Doug didn't bring up Phase One until someone else said was bad news for P1, and a bunch other's jumped on that band-wagon.

I think his responses were reasonable given that … but more importantly on GetDpi, not personally insulting.

Good luck with your new Pentax 645.

- Marc
 

shlomi

Member
I'm still fighting those road blocks and there not going away anytime soon. A wife with 3 cancers is a very harsh blow to your financial situation and health insurance no matter how good you think it is than your sadly mistaken to the real reality of what gets covered and what does not. Anyway I had to divest everything that does not mean I'm any less a Pro if anything I'm a smarter better Pro that has to work magic to compete at the high level. This Pentax opens the door slightly financially and more important technology land features on it look great. So I'm keeping a close eye on it and as far as Phase and Hassy for me there out of the running, just can't afford it and no one is handing me a gift package from either one of them. So I had to move on and more importantly with no remorse. It is what is is and I accept that. It's just freaking gear and means very little in the scheme of life. I'm still a hard working Pro as I always been for 38 years, gear choices will never take that honor away from me , ever.
I stand corrected, and certainly didn't mean this type of situation.
What I meant to say is that I surmise that most of those who downsize their equipment are those for whom the equipment is for fun rather than for work.

I believe healthcare should be a civil right provided by the government same as law enforcement, and I guess I'm always surprised to hear those stories out of America.
 

gazwas

Active member
What I meant to say is that I surmise that most of those who downsize their equipment are those for whom the equipment is for fun rather than for work.
Not sure of your line of specialisation but MFD has never had such an insignificant effect on running a professional studio as it does today in 2014.

MFD is a choice NOT a requirement of entry as it was 10 years ago. I've just had my best year since starting my studio 5 years ago and I sold my MFD equipment at the end of last year. I've raised my prices because of the workload not lowered them.......Go figure.

The Pentax opens doors to everyone (working and non working photographers) and I personally think that is wonderful. Let the flood begin!
 

shlomi

Member
Not sure of your line of specialisation but MFD has never had such an insignificant effect on running a professional studio as it does today in 2014.

MFD is a choice NOT a requirement of entry as it was 10 years ago. I've just had my best year since starting my studio 5 years ago and I sold my MFD equipment at the end of last year. I've raised my prices because of the workload not lowered them.......Go figure.

The Pentax opens doors to everyone (working and non working photographers) and I personally think that is wonderful. Let the flood begin!
Let me ask you this question one: did you sell your MFD because you were strapped for cash, or did you feel it was not the best tool for you?
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
No worries I knew you did not mean this kind of stuff but I will say as Marc mentioned a lot of Pros have downsized for many reasons. Economy is certain line of them and list clients. However with tech advances to 36 mpx it does give 35mm a huge bonus to the Pros. Depending in work we can cheat better now to get closer to MF quality. For me giving up my MF kit was devastating but at the time it was a easier drop in quality to move on to a Nikon d800e without a tremendous drop in quality. Other factors are real needs some shooters never need anything past a double truck ad or less. One big factor that no ones talk about much is the general lack in clients to just take anything handed to them under budget. Better said the quality standard has dropped to iPhones and these smartphones really did no one any favors in our business. Everyone is a shooter now in some clients minds. In the corporate world major changes have happened and external items like photography are non existent now. It's a real challenge to survive.

On health care The US sucks and I'm totally with you on it being free to its citizens. Case in point you go out of your insurance network and they charge LIST price on services. They can't even get those fees from insurance companies but they can sure rape you over coals if your out if network. I got killed here and it's simply not fair to any citizen.
 

gazwas

Active member
Let me ask you this question one: did you sell your MFD because you were strapped for cash, or did you feel it was not the best tool for you?
I loved it and the view and tech camera kit I owned but they didn't win me any work. I never got a job because I shot MFD despite the marketing rubbish you read but because of all the time and hard work I put into the shoot.

MFD became a passion/hobby and an unnecessary requirement. MFD residuals have dropped through the floor and upgrade programmes less favourable so why keep hold of an ever devaluing asset in your business if you don't need it.
 

shlomi

Member
I got killed here and it's simply not fair to any citizen.
I think it's quite intentional, and the world is looking in terror how your upper class is demolishing your middle class, and thinking when will this reach our neighborhood.

As far as the market it naturally undergoes fundamental changes as the circumstances do. The "strong image" as someone said here, obviously doesn't need a professional camera or even a professional photographer. Just look at any of the image sharing sites and you will see an amazing plethora of quality. Literally billions have become photographers overnight, and by the laws of numbers some of them ought to be good. There is no more monopoly on photography. But I find there are many industrial clients who want clean tech images, and they have no problem paying for it $1000-2000 a day. The days for $5000 per 100 image catalog are over, that's true, as it just does not make sense any longer in the current ecosystem. The market requirements are different, but I feel the market is only getting bigger. Almost any business requires online presence and that includes images. The short tail of the fancy photographers with their fancy billing has been replaced by a more practical approach.
 
Last edited:

shlomi

Member
I loved it and the view and tech camera kit I owned but they didn't win me any work. I never got a job because I shot MFD despite the marketing rubbish you read but because of all the time and hard work I put into the shoot.

MFD became a passion/hobby and an unnecessary requirement. MFD residuals have dropped through the floor and upgrade programmes less favourable so why keep hold of an ever devaluing asset in your business if you don't need it.
So your answer is that you got rid of your MFD because you felt it was not the right tool for your business. I don't argue with that, and for sure it is not necessary for every photography business. I've never read any marketing materials from any MFD firm. I've encountered some obstacles with 35mm and explored ways to improve the quality of my output. Not counting on anyone's opinions but only upon my own experimentation. I can say for sure that some of my clients come back and refer based on qualities I can deliver that others can't: colors, clarity, sharpness, pixels. I'm sure at least half of them can't tell the difference.

I can sell my MFD now, but I will get 50c on the dollar in a good scenario.
Then if I would buy a full top of the line Canon setup, it will cost me not that much less.
And the quality of my deliverables deteriorates, by much or not that is debateable, but by some for sure.
That doesn't make much sense to me.
If I'm working and MFD is right for me, then I will not sell it.
I will sell it if I am not working, or if it turns out to be not right for me.
 
Last edited:

johnnygoesdigital

New member
Hmm, to be fair, Doug didn't bring up Phase One until someone else said was bad news for P1, and a bunch other's jumped on that band-wagon.

I think his responses were reasonable given that … but more importantly on GetDpi, not personally insulting.

Good luck with your new Pentax 645.

- Marc
Nothing is meant to be personal, but it's not his first time - the tawdry biz of photography i guess, but there's a vendor forum here... isn't there?
I haven't purchased a Pentax...yet, but i am intrigued. After owning the H4D's, The DF, and Leica S, not one has my loyalty. Go film!
 
Last edited:
Top